The Crusades Even though, Crusader States in the Holy Land were unsustainable because of political instability. Long term problems were caused by Western presence in the Outremer1 and the political situation in Europe throughout the period. In Europe, the form of political dissension among the leaders of the various crusades caused everything to fall. They were many causes to the Crusades unsustainability like, ongoing tension between the Normans and the Byzantine Empire2 which culminated in the Norman defeat at Durazzo in 1107. The other main arguments include the lack of support for Jerusalem, as well as the lack of manpower, the debatable lack of strong leadership, and to a certain extent the arrogance of the Crusaders. By contrast to …show more content…
This is because the Byzantine Empire, as the closest Christian state would have been able to provide the supplies and manpower which the Crusader polities so sorely needed. As well as these external political problems, the crusaders suffered from an almost chronic lack of support from their European parent states, as is shown by the fact that a Crusade was only arguably launched in response to one of as many as nineteen appeals between 1099 and 1186. The sustainability of the Crusader states was impossible due to these divisions, as it meant that there was not the influx of men, supplies and support necessary for their …show more content…
There were other issues with many of the Frankish leadership, as many of the Latin occupants of the Levant were arguably motivated by greed rather than any religious fervour, at least past the end of the First Crusade. It is argued that at least a partial motive for the shift in objective of the Second Crusade was greed, as Damascus was a wealthy city, and offered an arguable trade opportunity further into the East. Other than this, and perhaps more obviously; the pursuit of the conquest of Egypt was mainly due to the riches provided by the trade and land along the Nile, while the strategic and tactical benefits were negligible by comparison to potential targets in Northern Syria. This meant that the strategic thinking required for the survival of the polities was perhaps overrode by more material
I remember back to when I was a child, hearing about the First Great Crusade. A military expedition launched by the Christian states of Europe against the Saracens, to conquer the Holy Land. It had caused a great deal of social chaos in this world. I heard about how the Crusaders overran Jerusalem, creating a citywide massacre of men, women and children. It was said that the streets ran with blood.
Introduction: Provide background information on the Crusades, restate the DBQ question, state thesis with reasons. (include academic vocabulary and underline) The results of the Crusades was probably more negative than positive. In “Doc 4”, It states that “Moreover, the assault of one Christian people on another, when one of the goals of the Fourth Crusade was reunion of Greek and Latin churches, made the split between the Greek and Latin churches permanent.” The Crusades had a lot of hatred to the religions, and by 1204 the Crusaders had lost some of their appeal because the knights agreed to attack the Byzantine Capital instead.
But upon further inspection this was actually one of the most successful in history. Boniface and Clari were able to reconcile the Roman and Byzantine churches something that had been a source of contention between the two Empires for centuries. The Crusaders were also able to attain 90,000 marks in gold by raiding the city. Even though it may have not made it to the Holy Land of Jerusalem as it intended this does not mean that it ended in failure. Boniface was a leader who was able to maintain his heart and head during times of extreme stress and hopelessness.
The decision by the crusaders to continue on and capture Jerusalem was almost certainly religiously motivated. However the decision to capture Jerusalem without capturing any of the surrounding territory first wasn 't motivated by religious zeal but was motivated mainly by desperation and possibly a small amount of impatience. The reason the crusaders moved on Jerusalem without taking the surrounding area first was that "al-Afdal had seized Jerusalem from the Turks." Al Afdal was the vizier of Egypt. Given time he would be able to raise an army to reinforce the city.
Pope Urban II’s speech at Clermont in 1095 was a call to crusade given outdoors to the nobles, commoners and church leaders of the Western European Christians (the Franks). The people were moved by this speech and it changed history, launching the first crusade to capture Jerusalem from the Muslim Turks. After hearing Pope Urban II’s speech, thousands of Western European Christians were moved to embark on the dangerous journey and fight in the crusade. I believe the main reasons they were moved and persuaded to fight was; 1) they felt it was their Christian duty, 2) Pope Urban promised them absolution for their sins and 3) they felt compelled to defend Christianity, their holy land and the Eastern Christians.
The crusade lacked real funding and was not supported by the pope, but the young crusaders believed that Divine Intervention was guiding them and kept trekking towards Jerusalem. Every mistake that the crusaders made will be examined, and the ones truly at fault at
The crusades happened because of many reasons. First the Turks took over the holy lands. Then the Byzantine Emperor wanted to regain the holy land, so he called for the church 's help. Pope Urban II didn 't want to look weak, so he arranged for the first crusade. That is the cause of the crusades.
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.
In total there were eight Crusade wars which evidently meant that the Christian Europeans and Muslim world interacted frequently which helped bring upon the Renaissance. As a result of the multiple violent battles, the Christian Europeans needed to unify to help preserve the land that the Muslims were attempting to conquer. This unification of multiple Christian European groups meant that while they did eventually lose the Crusades, their united front meant that Christian Europe was at relative peace with one another which ultimately aided in the emergence of the Renaissance. The lack of internal fighting within Christian Europe also meant that their control spread further than ever before. The invasion of the Muslims during the Crusades and the need for supplies to be transported to help support war efforts for the Christians meant that transportation in Europe was steadily improving.
The results of the People’s Crusades were a disaster, with almost every soldier dying. In 1096 the first real army of knights left for Jerusalem. They first stopped by Constantinople to pledge that they would reclaim land for the Byzantine Empire, then they continued on with their journey. The next stop was Antioch, in modern day Turkey, and the crusaders began to siege the city. After a long 7 months, the city surrendered itself.
The Christian View vs. The Muslim View of the Crusades The crusades were a set of different military actions that were sanctioned by the Catholic Church and the papacy. Their intention was to recapture Holy Lands they believed were rightfully theirs from the Muslim people that had invaded it. As any attack on a large group of people would do, every major group was affected. The Christians had their own reasons and beliefs for going on these Crusades.
To clarify, the crusades were military expeditions to avoid the Ottoman Empire expansion. From the viewpoint of the Christians, the Muslims were enemies of Christ and his church. It was the crusader’s task to defeat and defend against them. Some of the crusades were successful and gained Christian states like Palestine and Syria. The Islamic states were growing rapidly and those gains reversed.
Occurring predominantly in Europe and the Middle East, the Crusades began in 1095 and officially ended in 1291 (History.com staff, 2010). This being said, the causes can be traced back to 1081 when Alexius Comnenus gained the Byzantine throne, becoming Emperor Alexius I, after years of chaos and invasions by the Seljuk Turks (History.com staff, 2010). In due time Emperor Alexius would begin to set his sights on reclaiming the Holy Land from the Muslims. Seeing that this task would require more than the Byzantine’s men, he reached out to Pope Urban II of the Roman Catholic Church asking him for troops (History.com staff, 2010). The Pope made his decision public at the 1095 Council of Clermont in Southern France where he raised the proposal for all able Western Christians to raise arms to aid the Byzantines.
The two goal outcomes were to: 1) Save the eastern Christians and 2) Take back the Holy Land, or Jerusalem. Both of these objectives were seen as doing God’s work and in spreading God’s compassion and saving the east; you guaranteed yourself a spot in heaven. The contrary was that if you refused to help, you were against God and against the church. The really unique thing about the Crusades were that the Crusaders themselves didn’t see it as warfare, but instead they believed that they were pilgrims. Direct fighting and battles weren’t condoned by the church, as they disagreed with most christian beliefs.
Crusader returning demanded foreign spices and goods causing an influx of goods coming to europe and wealth grew. Crusaders grew loyal to their military leaders, and this allowed them to grow more powerful and since the pope had not been their on their crusade people began to question the church. The church giving away indulgences for currency and promising salvation in the crusades led to even more questioning of the church. Many of the nobles that went on the crusades sold their land or died resulting in most of their land going into the hands of their kings leading them to have more power. The kings now having more power than before lead to them breaking away from the