Crusader

groups” within Europe (Hansen and Curtis 387). The Christian soldiers, were called the Crusaders “who attached a cross to” their “clothes as a sign of belonging to a large, volunteer force” (Hansen and Curtis 388). The Crusaders hoped to gain control of Jerusalem, because they believed that this holy site belonged to them, even though it was also a holy site for the Muslims and the Jews. Furthermore, the Crusaders fought with enemies within Europe and looked down on the Jews. They strongly believed

England, who was the father of King Richard I, had a meeting in France with the Archbishop of Tyre Josias, who described the position of the crusaders located in Jerusalem, and the loss of the Holy Land. This persuaded them to participate in the third crusade. This meeting was where they also planned the third crusade, and decided that the French and English Crusaders would march together. They also imposed a tax, named the “Saladin Tithe”, in order to fund the crusade. This would make a person pay one-tenth

involved in charity events, such as an organization of the Boston Crusaders, it allows the organization to expand their reach by collaborating with others to fulfill their mission of Boston. The Boston crusaders also raised money by accepting donations from other organizations or individuals. This helps the organization provide funds for the young women and men who have trouble affording the tuition to become a member of the Crusader family. Other opportunities that

dedication exerted by the crusaders and the disunity between the Muslim leaders enabled the crusaders to attack when the Islamic kingdom was weak, enabling them to capture the most sought after city, Jerusalem. A key defining factor was the disunity amongst the Muslim states. After the death of Malik Shah, local warlords seized the opportunity to build up their own power bases. This therefore meant that the Muslim world was in complete chaos and the lands in which the crusaders would have to march through

mounted Turkish fighters that immediately initiated an attack intended to repel them. The crusaders in defense “fixed the points of their shields into the sand and the handles of their lances in the sand with the points set towards them” to which the Turkish fighters “were so near that they saw the lances about to enter into their bellies, they turned about and fled”. Seemingly implying the Turks fear of the crusaders was so great that they were scared to further engage in a fight and seeks to portray

I think the Crusaders behaved the way they did, because no matter what they did they could repent and ask forgiveness and all would be well. The Crusaders were relentless and would do anything with little to no regard to the enemy’s wellbeing. The Christians were very violate in their means to obtain the territory and treasure. In the first crusade the Christians were needing to obtain Jerusalem. They felt that the city needed to be in Christian hands and not in Muslims hands. The society in Europe

is really negative because in April 1204, the crusaders and Venetians stormed Constantinople, sacked the city, destroying its magnificent library, and grabbed thousands of relics that were later sold on Europe. Document states that are the crusader are negative or positive. They also state that when were some of the wars and where it was. Like one of the fights are in Constantinople in 1204, the Venetians, who had been hired to transport the crusaders, and the knights agreed to attack the Byzantine

beginning of the 11th century. The violence of this attack was bloody and horrific. The crusades were more negative than positive because there were many innocent people were killed because of their religion. In document 1 it states In Europe, crusaders sometimes turned their fury against jews, massacring entire communities. They would do this just because they were

around them, and the culture they identify with plays a major role in how they do so. Differences are apparent in the Crusader Bible and The Story of Yusuf and Zulaiha, which were made a few centuries apart in different locations. Both of these manuscripts were made to illustrate stories from their culture, and by taking the story of David and Bathsheba on Folio 41 in the Crusader Bible and comparing it to the image “Yusuf summoned by Zulaikha to Serve at a Feast” the similarities in use of space

of a ‘Greek Crusader’ and ‘Persian King’. The Greeks (except Sparta) had abolished their kingdoms and replaced them with the democratic city states. Consequently, the concept of ‘kings’ and what it meant to be ‘Greek’ had become estranged with the result that Alexander may not have been able to embody this Greek culture as the King of Macedon. The definition of ‘Crusader’ poses an issue; in hindsight its medieval connotations do not appear to be appropriate but the role ‘Greek Crusader’ can be defined