Raymond Of Aguilers Analysis

Many have priorly stated that history repeats itself time and time again. This can be seen throughout history but, especially so during the Crusades. This paper will discuss the parallels between the First and Fourth Crusade. We will also take a brief look at the aftermath of the Fourth Crusade and how it compares to the aftermath of the Second Crusade.

In 1095, Pope Urban II called for an army to go to the Holy Land, Jerusalem. This was what was later known as the ‘First Crusade’. A crusade is a religious war or a war mainly motivated by religion. The first crusade consisted of 10’s of thousands of European Christians on a medieval military expedition to recover the Holy Land from the Muslims. This doesn’t mean that the first crusade was just motivated by religion. Throughout this essay, I will be suggesting the main reasons of why people went on crusades and which different people went for specific reasons and why.

Robert the Monk’s history of the First Crusade, Historia Iherosolimitana (HI), was composed several years after the events it records. There is also no evidence making him an eyewitness for the anything he transcribes except for the Council of Clermont. Robert is generally accepted as a valuable source for the First Crusade as his story is based on the Gesta Francorum and he was commissioned by his abbot to offer a new more exciting account of the crusades.1 Robert’s account includes a number of themes as he describes different people the Crusaders encounter. In the history of the First Crusade, Robert the Monk uses his description of the Muslims

Fulcher of Chartres noted that during the meeting with the council of dignitaries in the city of Clermont, France Pope Urban II gave an eternal decree to all Christians that were willing fight the war.2 He promised that any Christian who died in the defense of Jerusalem would be given remission of all sins. Pope Urban II explicitly states “I grant them through the power of God.”3 By giving such a promise that all sins would be forgiven in death, Pope Urban alleviated the fear any Crusader had of being punished by God of wrongdoing. For some that alone was enough justification to go to battle. This “promise” also gives greater

The brief campaign of the thirteen-century Children’s crusade was not technically a crusade in the sense that medieval Europeans understood the term and lasted only a few months during the year 1212. It lacked Papal sanction and its participants marched without the customary indulgences granted to those engaged in warfare to defend the Faith. Uncharacteristic as it was, the Children’s Crusade was a revealing chapter in medieval history, as it exemplified the depths of crusading zeal along with the unrestrained behavior of which enthusiasm and faith are capable. The children’s crusade was nothing less than a destructive movement that preyed on those in its paths, much like the earlier crusades had done. It was during the late august of 1212, that rows of zealous children and the priest guiding them had stood on the dockside of Marseilles awaiting for a parting of the Mediterranean to permit passage to the holy land. The children marched unarmed, in some notion of converting the Muslims seems to have taken place of the usual crusaders zeal for battle.

he subject of the crusades is still a very controversial topic that spans across various time periods and has religious, social, and political implications. The first crusade started off as a widespread pilgrimage that ended as a military expedition resulting in the recapture of Jerusalem in 1099. The crusades initiated from a call from help from Alexius for the protection of Constantinople and the recovery of Anatolia. For centuries textbooks have repeated with routine regularity, that the immediate cause, of the Crusades was the Turkish conquest of the Near East, which apparently was a very real threat to Christendom, that had to be countered by military action. With this in mind, the primary purpose of this essay is to identify the various reasons that contributed to the start of the first crusade, while disproving the fact that the first Crusade was a response to a military threat. In discovering the true cause of the first crusades it is necessary to examine it from all aspects from the start to the finish.

The Crusades were a series of holy wars that began in 1095 CE. These wars were fought between Christians and Muslims to gain control over the sacred land. The Turks moved into the middle east during the early part of the 11th century CE. Most of the Turks served the Islamic armies and would invade land rapidly using combat forces. This alarmed the Greek emperor and caused him to seek out Pope Urban II and ask for mercenary troops to confront the Turks. The Pope called a council and had 300 attendees to show up. During this council, the Pope made a plea to free the Holy Land, which received an enthusiastic response. After this, Pope Urban II promptly waged war against the Muslims and took armies of Christians to Jerusalem to try and

The Crusaders had used ladders to get over the walls and massacre all of Jerusalem, until no one was left. What this account is basically saying is that the Europeans came into the city and killed everyone inside, including women and children. They killed so many people that their ankles were covered in blood. The document states that the person is religiously trained, which can be fairly assumed that means he is Christian. He was also traveling with the Crusaders, therefore under their protection.

He followed the crusading armies to Jerusalem and wrote a history of his experiences and observations. Raymond describes ways that the enemies were gruesomely killed during the battle, “Some of our men (and this was more merciful) cut off the heads of their enemies; others shot them with arrows, so that they fell from the towers.” When the Christian Crusaders attacked the Muslims at Jerusalem, “ It was necessary to pick one's way over the bodies of men and horses. However, “in the Temple of Solomon, men rode in blood up to their knees and bridle reins,” as stated by Raymond d’Aguiliers. In conclusion, Raymond relates the story about how the Pilgrims rejoiced after the battle, “How the pilgrims rejoiced and exulted and sang a new song to the Lord!” (Document A). Ibn al-Athir was an Arab historian who wrote a history of the first three Crusades. Although, he only witnessed the third Crusade. Jerusalem was attacked from the north on July, 15, 1099 by the Franks, who pillaged the area for a week. A group of Muslims barricaded themselves in the Tower of

The Crusades hold a place in the canon of Western history as valiant wars against the infidel in the East, motivated by an unparalleled pious zeal. Whilst revisions to this history have considered more mundane and ordinary motives, such as a want for land or an attempt to reinforce the Peace of God movement, there is something to be said of the religious motivations of the crusaders. The words ‘conquest’ and ‘conversion’ seem ideologically charged – with conquest being what is done by temporal rulers to physical land and people, and conversion being what is done to the spiritual self, by someone who does not have anything material to gain from the action. However, it can be argued that these lines can be blurred; I wish to present the case of conquest being religiously charged, and the idea that any subsequent conversion is of little importance. By examining the geographical targets of various crusaders, I will conclude that they were more interested in conquest than conversion: but this was not necessarily for earthly reasons alone.

This investigation attempts to answer the question, what were the successes of the Third Crusade? The question is relevant or important because it focusses on the next unit and involves religious conflicts. The subtopic that will be addressed are Islamic influences on this Crusade.

In The middle of the Eleventh Century The tranquillity of the eastern Mediterranean seemed assured for many years to come, but little did the people know what was ahead . This, thus embark us on a journey back into the First Crusade. In this paper I will be discussing the events that lead up to the first in a long line of crusades. I will also be mentioning the lives of some of the crusaders through letters that they wrote. The crusades were a time of confusion for most people, yet today we look back at them as a turning point.

Accordingly, Memoirs of the Fourth Crusade has been reviewed vigorously over the past century and central among these reviews is a genuine acceptance of Villehardouin s authenticity and accountability with respect to his

“Traitors to the Faith? Christian Mercenaries in al-Andalus and the Maghreb, c.1100-1300” is an article written by Simon Barton. An in-depth analysis of the text not only allows the reader to understand the ultimate purpose of the article, but instead, it also enables one to determine whether the purpose is achieved or not. After a brief introduction to the setting, the author introduces his thesis when he asks: “Is it credible that barely 18 months after the famous crusading victory at Las Navas Castilian warriors were taking advantage of the lull in hostilities to cross the frontier with al-Andalus in order to ally themselves with their sworn enemies, the Almohads?” Essentially, the author, Simon Barton, uses this as his thesis in an attempt

The Crusades: A Short History, written by British Historian Jonathan Riley-Smith, offers a broad overview of this part of the medieval era, but he also explores how historians have attempted to explain these events in modern terms. Riley-Smith also makes sure to note all major contributors to the Crusade movement and their personalities. Numerous scholars have wondered whether this was a political or religious mission. This helps to spark the question of why people would leave their homes and their families to risk their lives invading a land that was thousands of miles away for religious reasons. In his book, Riley-Smith makes this era come alive for the modern reader. He does