The crusades failed in their chief goal : the conquest of the Holy land. They also left a bitter legacy of religious hatred behind them. In the middle east, both Christians and Muslims committed appalling atrocities in the name of religion. This is important because that means that there were negative impact on the crusades. This is important because the results of that are negative, this is because muslims and Christian never agreed on the
According to (document E) Life in the Middle Ages “ Was insecure, violence was everywhere and poverty was widespread.” The troubling experiences were so overwhelming that the Holy Roman Empire felt that it was necessary the Crusades. By promoting the crusades people would be able to focus their violence and energy to a greater cause. In addition, the
Muslims holding control of Jerusalem angered Christians. The Byzantine empire asked the Pope of the Western empire for help in taking control back. The Pope agreed and promised wealth and forgiven sins for those who fought in the war. Even though Christians completely showed their loyalty to Christ during the Crusades
The Crusades are several wars that went on between the Muslims and the Christians They fought for Jerusalem. Most of the wars took place in Jerusalem. Were the results of the Crusades more positive of negative? I think the results were more negative. One reason being the people that the Christians hired turned their backs on them.
Pope Urban II had called for the First Crusade, because he had been told that Byzantine emperor Alexius I Comnenus was needing is help. Pope Urban II called all the Christians to come and help fight for the Holy Land. Pope Urban II stated that the Christians needed to reclaim the land. He saw the faith of the Christendom trampled on and the lack of peace. He saw the many fights, people stealing, people being unjustly kept, and the many evils of the world.
Others thought of the crusades as a commercial opportunity and used it to trade and sell items as they were traveling. One more reason people went to fight in the crusades is to settle down. They went with the crusades but once they were in the Muslim
They destroyed empires. Document 4 states, “ ….the Byzantine Empire as a political unit never recovered”(unknown author 4). This relevant because this piece of evidence tells us that the Crusaders did much more damage to communities other than war. The damage of the political unit of the Byzantine’s was one of the reasons why the empire fell.
But just because the Crusades brought along a blessing does not mean that it was excusable. The results of the Crusades may have seemed very beneficial because it “increased trade, ended feudalism, and advanced civilization” as a whole (“Result of the Crusades assignment”). But the deaths and path that led to these unforeseen benefits were just unethical. Those who argue that the Crusades were more of a blessing than a shameful event are partially correct, but the better argument is that the Crusades were more of a shameful event because the ends did not justify the means. The development of the world as we know it wouldn’t be the same without the Crusades.
The Crusades were a violent series of battles that Christians fought against Muslims in order to gain back the holy land, Jerusalem. The Christians felt threatened by the intimidating rule of the Islamic Empire, and their response was the first Crusade. These attacks continued and grew unsuccessful throughout many years, and are often due to the intense bond between Christians and God, however there are other influences, like wealth and power. Some argue also that the actions committed during these events were not necessarily “barbaric”, considering the historical time period. The Crusades should be remembered as a series of attacks with a variety of motives and influences that were violent and barbaric.
In modern times, there exists a lot of confusion and misconception surrounding the Crusades. It is now time to dispel that confusion by pragmatically analyzing two texts concerning two opposite perspectives: Call to Crusade and A Muslim Perspective. In order to fully grasp the key factors behind the Crusades, one must understand the true importance and power of Christianity in Medieval Europe, how Pope Urban II justified the mission, what drew the participating Christians into joining the crusades, and the differences as well as the similarities between the two texts. After looking at the evidence in the texts, it becomes clear that religion played a very small part in the crusades; the true factors behind these tragedies were money and power.
The crusades have provided some of the most frequent arguments against the Christian faith. Some Islamic terrorists even claim that their terrorist attacks are revenge for what Christians did in the crusades. First of all, the crusades should not be referred to as the “Christian crusades.” Most of the people involved in the crusades were not truly Christians, even though they claimed to be. The name of Christ was abused, misused, and blasphemed by the actions of many of the crusaders.
In 1189 the 3rd Crusade, also known as The Kings’ Crusade, began. This was an attempt by European leaders to regain the Holy Land from Saladin. England, France, and the Roman Empire were to go against The Byzantine Empire, the Empire of Cyprus and Saladin to recapture Jerusalem. The Crusade was based mainly around Levant and Anatolia. The 3rd Crusade ended in 1192 with the Muslims still having control of Jerusalem.
I think that the leadership of The First Crusade was partly responsible for its success. From the beginning of the Crusade, there were divisions between the nine leaders, as some were supporters of the Papacy and of Alexius II (emperor of the Byzantines), whilst others opposed these leaders. The divisions between them are shown through the fact that the leaders all depart at different times to each other. However, despite the leaders doing this because of their disagreements, it had a positive effect as it ensured that no single place in Europe had to provide for the entire crusading army at one time. Early on in the Crusade at the siege of Nicaea in May 1097, the nine leaders realised that they had to work together in order for the Crusade
The Crusades were successful failures because they did not meet many of their goals, but left lasting effects. The Crusades was an attempt by the Roman Catholic Church to regain the Holy Lands from the Muslims. They believed they were fighting for god and all sins would be forgiven and defend the Byzantine Empire from the Turks. The first Crusade (1096 -1099) was successful for the Christians because they had a clear and organized religious based purpose. Crusaders the Christian armies were able to hold Jerusalem and in the process led to a massacre of Jews.
the city of Jerusalem and surrounding lands. These wars continued up to thirteenth century and were known as CRUSADES. The Turkic saljuqs had been defeated by the Byzantines at the battle of Manzikert in 1071. They then moved to Anatolia (turkey) and Constantinople (Istanbul). Responding to these events Pope Gregory - 7 in Rome said “all who are willing to defend the Christian faith … if we love god and wish to be recognized as Christians we should be filled with grief and the misfortune of this great empire … but simply to grieve is not our duty … we should lay down our lives to liberate them.”
