What Were Contrasting Perspectives Of Latin Christians And Muslims Regarding The First Crusade?

Alvaro Rivera Professor Rivers HISTORY 306 - 001C 03/04/24 Contrasting Perspectives and Motives on the beginning of the First Crusade What were the different perspectives of Latin Christians and Muslims regarding the First Crusade? This paper explores these contrasting perspectives during the First Crusade. I will write about what I think happened from reconciling different people in each religion. The First Crusade was a big event that happened in medieval history that started around 1095. In 1095, Pope Urban II gave a sermon at the end of the Council of Sermons. This was a call to start a holy war to reclaim Jerusalem from Muslim control. Pope Urban II was appointed to the church council in March 1995 by Byzantine emperor Alexius I. During

The four sources are Fulcher of Chartes, Robert the Monk, Baldric of Dol, and Guilbert of Nogent. Every one of these sources agreed that Pope Urban called for the holy war. His religion fired him up, he wanted to make things look good between him and the Eastern Emperor, sort issues between Christians and Muslims, and increase the power of the church in the East. He also wanted to restore the church’s authority, protect the eastern frontier, push the agenda of reforming popes, and assist the French Knights. At first I thought that he rallied people up for the First Crusade solely for religious reasons, but it turned out that it was more than that. Pope Urban planned this out so that it could help him address a variety of his goals and challenges all at once. After revealing the motives behind Pope Urban II, I will talk about Fulcher of Chartes, who was the chaplain of King Baldwin. His work offers insights into the Christian perspective. He lived in Jerusalem from 1100 to around 1127. His account is mainly about his experiences in the First Crusade and the fact that he was an

He claims that the Muslims were fighting a jihad enemy that wanted to take control of Muslim territory, and more specifically the ultimate goal of Jerusalem. He saw the First Crusade as being part of a bigger deal where Christians strategized to take over Muslim lands, like Spain and Sicily. Kitab mentions in his book, “Their desires are multiplying all the time because of what appears to them of the Muslims’ abstinence from opposing them, and their hopes are invigorated by virtue of what they see of their enemies’ contentedness with being unarmed by them until they have become convinced that the whole country will become theirs and all its people will be prisoners in their hands.” I think that he is claiming that the Christians are getting ahead of themselves and are growing more arrogant due to the lack of Muslim desire to fight back. Christians are shocked by how easily they are winning battles. They don’t seem to be slowing down in the hopes of seizing more control of the land. Shortly after the previous quote, he writes about how he hopes that God will ruin the Christian’s ideas and bring the Muslim community