This is my last blog. I hope you enjoy it's lack of content.
Today I learned the value of having oblivious masses reviewing my paper. According to Ms. Hanes, those void of intelligence can actually give valuable insight!
By learning this I found a new use for the ignorant masses in my dorm. Aside from having a stunning resemblence to the primate exhibits at the zoo, they can now reamy papers and give valuable feedback.
The end is coming! The end of the semester that is. No more teachers, no more books, no more stupid monkey looks.
Go Tribe!
Tuesday, May 1, 2007
Monday, April 23, 2007
Muslim faith was threatening Christianity
The church benefited a lot from the crusades. The church controlled most of the Mediterranean. It is believed that the church influenced the crusades because the Muslim faith was threatening Christianity. Being the second largest monotheistic religion at the time, the church most likely saw the Muslim faith to be threatening. The first crusade was invoked by Pope Urban II (1042-1099 A.D.) after the Council of Piacenza and the Council of Clermont. The council of Piacenza was a council where church laws and other clerical business was resolved, but most importantly the issue with Byzantine emperor Alexius I Comnenus was presented to the council. Pope Urban II then created the Council of Clermont to discuss the matters further. Byzantine emperor Alexius I Comnenus became an ally of the church when Urban II lifted his excommunication and ties between the east and west were somewhat friendly. Alexius I Comnenus asked the church for military support from the Seljuk Turks. The Seljuk Turks were a dynasty of Muslims that controlled most of the Middle East in the Abbasid Dynasty.
The Crusades were made possible by the overwhelming influence that the church had over its followers. Those of the Church either followed higher officials or used the Crusades for their own manipulation. The influence also made many consider and even commit themselves to the crusade because they believed their soul’s salvation to be far more important than their mortal life. “The people were more concerned for the health of their souls than the honor of their earthly existence.”(13) One thing you don’t see is any of the clergy go against the pope’s decision, which exemplifies the church’s power at this time.
Alfred J. Andrea. "Encyclopedia of the Crusades". Connecticut: Greenwood Press, 2003
Corliss K. Slack. "Historical Dictionary of the Crusades". Maryland: The Scarecrow Press, 2003
To be Signed by the Cross
The social and economical factors that the crusades had upon the world at the time caused misfortune, but in some cases also provided a country with great wealth. Understanding these main points on what the existence of the crusades has created and destroyed helps one understand the worlds present day condition. Many of the world’s struggles that exist today predate much of modern history. Some of them were actually formed during the crusades such as west versus east conflicts.
To be signed by the cross, or to take upon the cross meant at the time to devote oneself to The Crusades and the pope. This was considered essential to crusading. Without devoting oneself to the church, it showed that one was not crusading for the correct reasons. The problem was to try and differentiate between those who were fighting for the church, and those that were fighting for self-gain. One could easily say their fighting in the name of god when they’re looting a village. Although David Nicolle argues “the idea that Crusading was a means of escape for poor knights seeking their fortunes overseas is largely a myth.” (18)
A crusader known as Guibert of Nogent described the First Crusade as “a new path of salvation which allowed laymen to earn redemption without changing their status and becoming monks.” (7) This was the common conception that the people had for The Crusades. At its time the Crusades were a means for religious salvation. If you took up a sword for the church you’d be accepted into heaven they’d say. The modern understanding of The Crusades is that they were intended solely on the recapture of Jerusalem. With The Crusades came the acceptance and understanding of a Holy War. By proposing The Crusades the church was almost testing the extent to which society found church doctrine to be acceptable. There is clear evidence that the church’s intentions were not just ecclesiastical, but political, cultural, and social as well.
Hussey, J.M., ed. "The Cambridge Medieval History 2nd ed. Vol. 4." New York: Cambridge University Press, 1966.
Norwich, John Julius. "A Short History of Byzantium." New York: Vintage, 1988.
Sunday, April 22, 2007
Discouraging the Weak
Although Pope Urban II discouraged the old, the feeble, and all others unfit for military service to participate in the armed pilgrimage many of them did. Noncombatants can be known as women, children, persons of the clergy, and other unarmed people. This pilgrimage was advertised to the people to bring them closer to god, affirm their place in their faith’s community, and to serve as a penitential purpose. Some countries such as England announced that if one set out on three crusades and returned they would be granted a noble title. All of these advantages made many noncombatants follow the armies.
Women played a huge role in the crusades as well. They supplied soldiers with supplies by using their own funds and helped colonize the holy land. The crusades cost a fortune to participate in. It was easy for an armed knight to go from knight status to selling his armor to be infantrymen to selling his weapon to become a noncombatant pauper. The women that furnished a knight with his equipment were most likely very wealthy. Pope Urban II also declared that no women could set out on a crusade unless accompanied by brothers, husbands, or legal guardians. Arab historian Ibn al-Athir reported that in 1191 Frankish women donned armor and participated in crusading activities. Adultery was not uncommon in the camps of the crusading armies. During the siege of Antioch (1097-98) the army believed that they suffered terribly because of their sins and drove all the married and unmarried women from the camps.
Tyerman, Christopher. “The invention of the Crusades.” Toronto, Buffalo: University of Toronto Press, 1998
Walter Porges. Speculum: A Journal of Mediaeval Studies. “The Clergy, The Poor, and The Noncombatants On The First Crusade”. January 1946
Between Christians and Muslims
One of the most difficult tasks for a researcher in medieval history is to define the term Crusade. Crusade (with a capital “C”) can describe the military campaigns between Christians and Muslims in the Levant during the Abbasid Dynasty. To crusade in any other case can only mean a dedicated enthusiastic effort. In David Nicolle’s book, “Essential Histories: The Crusades”, he writes that “... the term Crusade has become synonymous with struggles against evil.”(84) The Crusades were not just events in history, but an entire time period. Throughout the duration of the Crusades, cities were built, kings were born, and new ideas were created. The Crusades influenced the time that they existed along with much of the future’s social, political, economical, scientific, military and religious achievements.
The Crusades occurred during the Abbasid Dynasty in the Levant. The Levant was the area surrounding the Fertile Crescent, and what are now the countries of Lebanon, Syria, and Jordan. This Dynasty of Middle Eastern rule lasted from 750 to 1258 A.D. The Abbasid Dynasty was a time when the Church contained the most influence in Western Europe. This is the beginning of a new era in the world where religion plays a huge part socially, economically, and politically. Ones status in society is decided just from the religion they follow. From this point on in history monotheistic religions become the source of the majorities influence.
The Levant supplied crusaders with uneasy terrain and foreign weather conditions to those of the west. The Levant is home to many diverse cultures of the Middle East. Crusades occurred mainly around the Levant and northern Mediterranean area, but it is known that Crusades also took place in the Iberian Peninsula and the Latin East. This is ironic because one of the main functions of the Crusades was to reclaim the Holy Land for Christendom.
Maalouf, Amin. "The Crusades through Arab Eyes." Translated by Jon Rothschild. New York: Schoken Books, 1984.
Nicolle, David. "Essential Histories: The Crusades." Michigan: Osprey Publishing Limited, 2001.
Friday, April 20, 2007
People’s Crusade
The First Crusade (1096-1102) was conducted in three waves and was intended by the church to help the Byzantine emperor Alexius against Turkish forces. This main objective of the church was masked by the pious idea of a “holy war” to retake Jerusalem. The First Crusade was considered the only successful crusade in the Levant. Although successful the First Crusade had many problems such as the lack of supplies, noncombatants following crusading armies, and the undisciplined army itself. The three waves of the First Crusade were the People’s Crusade of 1096, the Crusade of the Great Lords, and the Crusade of 1101. In that order were the waves dispersed.
The social and economical factors that the crusades had upon the world at the time caused misfortune, but in some cases also provided a country with great wealth. Understanding these main points on what the existence of the crusades has created and destroyed helps one understand the worlds present day condition.
Many of the world’s struggles that exist today predate much of modern history. Some of them were actually formed during the crusades such as west versus east conflicts. These scars that the world still bears from the crusades and other such calamities shows just how history can be affected. Much of the violence and animosity that was displayed in the Middle East during the crusades is again, seen in our time.
Hussey, J.M., ed. "The Cambridge Medieval History 2nd ed. Vol. 4." New York: Cambridge University Press, 1966.
Norwich, John Julius. "A Short History of Byzantium." New York: Vintage, 1988.
Maalouf, Amin. "The Crusades through Arab Eyes." Translated by Jon Rothschild. New York: Schoken Books, 1984.
Nicolle, David. "Esential Histories: The Crusades." Michigan: Osprey Publishing Limited, 2001.
Overwhelming Influence
The Crusades were made possible by the overwhelming influence that the church had over its followers. Those of the Church either followed higher officials or used the Crusades for their own manipulation. The influence also made many consider and even commit themselves to the crusade because they believed their soul’s salvation to be far more important than their mortal life. “The people were more concerned for the health of their souls than the honor of their earthly existence.”(13) One thing you don’t see is any of the clergy go against the pope’s decision, which exemplifies the church’s power at this time.
For most of the free world the Crusades was an event that affected everyone. The Crusades brought diseases to areas, began east/west relationships, spread religion, and changed the worlds definition of what a Holy War was. The 12th century renaissance was greatly impacted by Islamic civilization. Western Europeans brought back to Europe religious relics, paintings, illuminated manuscripts, exotic goods, and architectural ideas which all help develop the renaissance. The inhabitants of the Levant area above all were affected the most from the Crusades. These scars that the world still bears from the crusades and other such calamities shows just how history can be affected. Much of the violence and animosity that was displayed in the Middle East during the crusades is again, seen in our time. The Crusades made a wound in the Middle East that will never heal.
Alfred J. Andrea. "Encyclopedia of the Crusades". Connecticut: Greenwood Press, 2003
Corliss K. Slack. "Historical Dictionary of the Crusades". Maryland: The Scarecrow Press, 2003
Wednesday, April 18, 2007
Story
“Its your choice” said Dan to his professor, “should we wait out the weather, or trek on to the dig site?”
Dr. Bob, who’s the leading professor in archeology at Michigan Tech University, paid little attention to Dan.
“Well!” said Dan
“Well what!?” Dr. Bob retorted, “are you afraid of this spittle you call rain? This should clear up in no time. Besides I don’t care whether you like the weather or not.”
While Dr. Bob’s other student, Jenny, was listening to this conversation she saw in plain sight, off to her right, an altar.
“Dr. Bob, Dr. Bob!” she exclaimed, “Look over there, off the track!”
“Aha!” shouted Dr. Bob with glee, “an altar from the 4th century.”
The group of archeologists whose principle task was to write an observation on the indigenous people of South America suddenly stumbled upon an ancient sacrificial site of the Aztec people.
“Dan,” said Dr. Bob, “cite in the notes where all the stationary objects are.”
“I put on the stationery that there are only two skulls.” said Dan.
“You’re a buffoon,” replied Dr. Bob, “there’s another one too, do you know the effect your mistake could of had on this project. They’re paying for us to be here to find something significant about the Aztec people. Remember, a lot of their money depends on our research getting done early.”
“Kind of like what my principal in high school used to say,” said Jenny, “if your on time your late.”
Dan finally got done with all of the notes he was taking and went over to the altar and asked “so what is this thing anyways?”
“It was an altar,” said Dr. Bob “by which young Aztec warriors would sacrifice small rodents to Huitzilopochtli as a rite of passage to be accepted into manhood.”
“Look the altar is loose,” said Jenny, “you wouldn’t want to lose this fair antique.”
Dr. Bob, who’s the leading professor in archeology at Michigan Tech University, paid little attention to Dan.
“Well!” said Dan
“Well what!?” Dr. Bob retorted, “are you afraid of this spittle you call rain? This should clear up in no time. Besides I don’t care whether you like the weather or not.”
While Dr. Bob’s other student, Jenny, was listening to this conversation she saw in plain sight, off to her right, an altar.
“Dr. Bob, Dr. Bob!” she exclaimed, “Look over there, off the track!”
“Aha!” shouted Dr. Bob with glee, “an altar from the 4th century.”
The group of archeologists whose principle task was to write an observation on the indigenous people of South America suddenly stumbled upon an ancient sacrificial site of the Aztec people.
“Dan,” said Dr. Bob, “cite in the notes where all the stationary objects are.”
“I put on the stationery that there are only two skulls.” said Dan.
“You’re a buffoon,” replied Dr. Bob, “there’s another one too, do you know the effect your mistake could of had on this project. They’re paying for us to be here to find something significant about the Aztec people. Remember, a lot of their money depends on our research getting done early.”
“Kind of like what my principal in high school used to say,” said Jenny, “if your on time your late.”
Dan finally got done with all of the notes he was taking and went over to the altar and asked “so what is this thing anyways?”
“It was an altar,” said Dr. Bob “by which young Aztec warriors would sacrifice small rodents to Huitzilopochtli as a rite of passage to be accepted into manhood.”
“Look the altar is loose,” said Jenny, “you wouldn’t want to lose this fair antique.”
Sunday, March 18, 2007
Cutting Edge
In the last thirty years there has been a growing curiosity for the Crusades. Medieval researches have been writing different synopses of what they believed to have happened and why. This question ‘what were the Crusades?’ baffles many modern experts in Medieval History. Why is it so hard for researches to define the Crusades?
The Crusades’ chronology spans hundreds of years, which makes it very difficult to define it as if it were only a decade. Reasons of why people crusaded differed throughout the history of the Crusades. No matter what all the movies in Hollywood depict, not everyone was fighting for only one cause. The Crusades are also difficult to define because the clashing of cultures formed political, religious, and social tension that we can clearly see today.
Modern research on the Crusades is almost like comparing what you see on CNN to an illuminated manuscript about the Crusades. You can almost draw parallels to what happened nearly a thousand years ago to what is happening in Iraq today. What is supposedly a sensitive subject due to racial tension and many other factors, we don’t hear too much on the comparison of the war in Iraq to the first Crusade.
One might be inclined to refuse that two such major events are similar. History repeats itself. West meets east. Looking at the topic at hand from a very general perspective it isn’t difficult to find similarities. One can discover similarities in political, religious, or social intentions along with others. Will the out come of the War in Iraq mimic that of the Crusades’?
“History teaches everything including the future.”
Alphonse de Lamartine
Works Cited:
Alfred J. Andrea. "Encyclopedia of the Crusades". Connecticut: Greenwood Press, 2003
Helen Nicholson. "The Crusades". Connecticut: Greenwood Publishing Group, 2004
Corliss K. Slack. "Historical Dictionary of the Crusades". Maryland: The Scarecrow Press, 2003
WWWWH
The Crusades are considered by many Medieval Historians to be the Church’s uprising in influence for most of the world. From armed pilgrimages to forced conversions of countless masses the church’s influence grew in power. The Crusades were conducted by religious officials, kings, and glory seekers. The Crusades participants included mostly the poor, but the Crusades’ problems affected nearly everyone.
The Levant supplied crusaders with uneasy terrain and foreign weather conditions to those of the west. The Levant is home to many diverse cultures of the Middle East. Crusades occurred mainly around the Levant and northern Mediterranean area, but it is known that Crusades also took place in the Iberian Peninsula and the Latin East. This is ironic because one of the main functions of the Crusades was to reclaim the Holy Land for Christendom.
Defining the Crusades’ objective is extremely difficult. Reasons on why people Crusaded came from one’s financial, religious, and social concern. Some people’s greed outweighed their religious ambition and crusaded for the sole purpose of gaining wealth and social standing. Those who fought on the side of the Turks were fighting from they’re backyard and had a lot of motivation to protect their homeland. Some of those that crusaded for religious purposes were manipulated by religious figures, or even threatened. No matter what one’s reason was it had to be a very strong reason to make one travel far distances in Medieval times. Not only was a long voyage dangerous but also very expensive. Most crusading required sponsorship that came mostly from the wealthy. Even if a person didn’t have the money to crusade they would travel with the crusaders and utilize the resources of others. Such Noncombatants caused many problems in the camps of crusaders.
The Crusades occurred during the Abbasid Dynasty in the Levant. This Dynasty of Middle Eastern rule lasted from 750 to 1258 A.D. This period in medieval history was a time where the Church contained the most influence in Western Europe. This is the begging of a new era in the world where religion plays a huge part socially, economically, and politically. From this point on in history monotheistic religions become the source of the majorities influence.
The Crusades were made possible by the overwhelming influence that the church had over its followers. Those of the Church either followed higher officials or used the Crusades for their own manipulation. One thing you don’t see is any of the clergy go against the pope’s decision, which exemplifies the church’s power at this time.
For most of the free world the Crusades was an event that affected everyone. The Crusades brought diseases to areas, began east/west relationships, spread religion, and changed the worlds definition of what a Holy War was. The inhabitants of the Levant ere above all affected the most from the Crusades. The Crusades made a wound in the Middle East that will never heal.
Works Cited:
Alfred J. Andrea. "Encyclopedia of the Crusades". Connecticut: Greenwood Press, 2003
Helen Nicholson. "The Crusades". Connecticut: Greenwood Publishing Group, 2004
Corliss K. Slack. "Historical Dictionary of the Crusades". Maryland: The Scarecrow Press, 2003
Sunday, March 11, 2007
Material on the Crusades
The Crusades like all historical events was recorded by both it’s participants and non-participants. The best sources eyewitnesses that record from a secular view. Most accounts written by the clergy tend to have more religious explanation than recorded events. Robert the Monk’s writings declaring that nearly every event in the Crusades involved some sort of divine intervention shows how writing an events history affects the future. People who read these accounts started to believe that the Crusades were more than just a religious pilgrimage. They started believe that this was god’s war on earth.
Material on the Crusades varies from nearly five different languages and two different religions. This is an enormous mass of material. The reason for this is mainly because of the Crusades’ religious influence. At the time of the Crusades clergymen wrote nearly all written documents. Clergymen and the rich were the only literate people in Western Europe. Having this advantage the church can write what they want about what happened in the Crusades. This makes religious accounts on the Crusades nearly useless when looking at the Crusades’ history.
Considering that religious texts on the Crusades were perverted to portray interests of the church, one can resort to the text written in the Middle East. Though most of this text was biased against Western Europeans, it still serves as a better source than religious ones. Middle Eastern accounts also help compare other accounts and prove their legitimacy. When researching the Crusade’s it is my opinion that the researcher’s problem lies not with the amount of material that exists, but with the researcher’s ability to narrow a topic.
Sunday, February 25, 2007
Crusade for a Crusade
This post is a synopsis of Loren Rosson III's blog entitled From Soldiers of Hell to Soldiers of Christ: Exporting Violence. In the author’s post there is a great summary of the First Crusade and information about Pope Urban II's actions. In the blog are quotations from Robert the Monk such as "Rise up, then, Christian warriors: you who continually and vainly seek pretexts for war, rejoice, for you have today found a true pretext." This almost gives evidence that Pope Urban's message was a violent call to arms rather then a suggested religous pilgrimage.
This idea that Pope Urban II was just an opportunist and wanted the Holy Land for all of Christendom is not so far fetched of an idea. Urban II was presented with a really good opportunity to recapture the Holy Lands when the Byzantine emperor Alexius I called for the church’s help. Seeing that the church acted upon this opportunity is evidence that recapturing the Holy Land was on the church's agenda. Why not expand Chritendom a little?
From his persuasive speech to his calling for more troops in the Holy Land, Pope Urban II showed little characteristics of a Pope and more characteristics of a general. He threatened armies with Excommunication to fight for The Crusades. The actions of the pope are by far the most important in The Crusades invention. Pope Urban used many different reasons for The Crusades including Muslim’s unrightfully controlling the Holy Lands, Muslim’s ill treatment of Christians, and the ever so famous “God Wills It!”
Works Cited:
http://lorenrosson.blogspot.com/2006/11/from-soldiers-of-hell-to-soldiers-of.html
This idea that Pope Urban II was just an opportunist and wanted the Holy Land for all of Christendom is not so far fetched of an idea. Urban II was presented with a really good opportunity to recapture the Holy Lands when the Byzantine emperor Alexius I called for the church’s help. Seeing that the church acted upon this opportunity is evidence that recapturing the Holy Land was on the church's agenda. Why not expand Chritendom a little?
From his persuasive speech to his calling for more troops in the Holy Land, Pope Urban II showed little characteristics of a Pope and more characteristics of a general. He threatened armies with Excommunication to fight for The Crusades. The actions of the pope are by far the most important in The Crusades invention. Pope Urban used many different reasons for The Crusades including Muslim’s unrightfully controlling the Holy Lands, Muslim’s ill treatment of Christians, and the ever so famous “God Wills It!”
Works Cited:
http://lorenrosson.blogspot.com/2006/11/from-soldiers-of-hell-to-soldiers-of.html
Tuesday, February 20, 2007
Good God! What's a Crusade?
At first, one can almost laugh at the impossibility of condensing the history of The Crusades into one provocative question. After much contemplating a reader would consider the most legitimate and necessary question to be asked about The Crusades is, well, “What were The Crusades?” This question seems to be a medieval historian’s biggest problem. To define The Crusades is to nearly define hundreds of years of history! Almost every crusade had a different meaning, because not all of The Crusades had the same intentions and goals. Some define The Crusades to be a war of papal consent or as a holy war. Some define The Crusades as a trek to show ones loyalty, or a way to renew ones salvation in their faith. So what were The Crusades?
This almost subjective question has become the center of debate in medieval history. Looking from the eyes of a secular scholar one can see not only the brutality of The Crusades’ events, but also it’s religious meaning. For one to crusade did not solely mean to devour the enemy of the church in the name of god, but it also meant for one to perform a penitential act.
The definition of “crusade” by modern standards is needless to say different from when it was invented. The common knowledge of The Crusades is basically that Western European Christians went to Jerusalem, because the church wanted them to. Another person might elaborate that they saw in a movie that it also had to do with a “holy grail”. To think that tens of thousands of people made a journey from Western Europe to the Middle East to die for a cup is ridiculous.
Finally it is important to stress that The Crusades is known for mainly describing a time period in Western European history. As generic as it sounds, it makes more sense that the word describes a period rather than an idea. When asked what The Crusades were, you can now answer that it was merely a time period in the middle ages. To go into any further detail will strike argument and criticism.
Works Cited:
Alfred J. Andrea. "Encyclopedia of the Crusades". Connecticut: Greenwood Press, 2003
Helen Nicholson. "The Crusades". Connecticut: Greenwood Publishing Group, 2004
This almost subjective question has become the center of debate in medieval history. Looking from the eyes of a secular scholar one can see not only the brutality of The Crusades’ events, but also it’s religious meaning. For one to crusade did not solely mean to devour the enemy of the church in the name of god, but it also meant for one to perform a penitential act.
The definition of “crusade” by modern standards is needless to say different from when it was invented. The common knowledge of The Crusades is basically that Western European Christians went to Jerusalem, because the church wanted them to. Another person might elaborate that they saw in a movie that it also had to do with a “holy grail”. To think that tens of thousands of people made a journey from Western Europe to the Middle East to die for a cup is ridiculous.
Finally it is important to stress that The Crusades is known for mainly describing a time period in Western European history. As generic as it sounds, it makes more sense that the word describes a period rather than an idea. When asked what The Crusades were, you can now answer that it was merely a time period in the middle ages. To go into any further detail will strike argument and criticism.
Works Cited:
Alfred J. Andrea. "Encyclopedia of the Crusades". Connecticut: Greenwood Press, 2003
Helen Nicholson. "The Crusades". Connecticut: Greenwood Publishing Group, 2004
Sunday, February 18, 2007
Noncombatants
Although Pope Urban II discouraged the old, the feeble, and all others unfit for military service to participate in the armed pilgrimage many of them did. Noncombatants can be known as women, children, persons of the clergy, and other unarmed people. This pilgrimage was advertised to the people to bring them closer to god, affirm their place in their faith’s community, and to serve as a penitential purpose. Some countries such as England announced that if one set out on three crusades and returned they would be granted a noble title. All of these advantages made many noncombatants follow the armies.
Women played a huge role in the crusades. They supplied soldiers with supplies by using their own funds and helped colonize the holy land. The crusades cost a fortune to participate in. It was easy for an armed knight to go from knight status to selling his armor to be infantrymen to selling his weapon to become a noncombatant pauper. The women that furnished a knight with his equipment were most likely very wealthy. Pope Urban II also declared that no women could set out on a crusade unless accompanied by brothers, husbands, or legal guardians. Arab historian Ibn al-Athir reported that in 1191 Frankish women donned armor and participated in crusading activities. Adultery was not uncommon in the camps of the crusading armies. During the siege of Antioch (1097-98) the army believed that they suffered terribly because of their sins and drove all the married and unmarried women from the camps.
It is known that when numbers were low due to high casualties people of the clergy and children would fight to help support the armies. Clergymen that went on the crusades were generally there to make the pilgrimage to Jerusalem. After the first crusade an order of priest warriors were created known as the Knights Templar. This gave the church a different function in the crusades. At first clergymen wouldn’t participate in the crusades because the church would not permit it. Most likely the clergymen that set out with the Knights Templar were looking to claim their own estates in the holy land.
Work Cited:
-Alfred J. Andrea. "Encyclopedia of the Crusades". Connecticut: Greenwood Press, 2003
-Walter Porges. Speculum: A Journal of Mediaeval Studies. “The Clergy, The Poor, and The Noncombatants On The First Crusade”. January 1946
Friday, February 16, 2007
Peer Review
Just last week we were aassigned to evaluate each other's papers. I evaluated a paper concerning the bussiness ethics field which is quite forigen to me. We both had to meet outside the classroom do to our abscense to the previous class. After evaluating each other's paper, we both noticed many problems.
After reading the evaluation to my paper I started too fix the many problems it had. O ne of the major problems had to do with my thesis. I really didn't have much of a thesis. All I had in place of a thesis was a sentense they gave no argument or direction. This monumental problem was then resolved when I implimented a thesis and then started to make an argument on the main figures of the first crusade.
I am very glad that I participated in the peer evaluation. The evaluation helpedme notice problems that I wouldn't of caught on my own.
After reading the evaluation to my paper I started too fix the many problems it had. O ne of the major problems had to do with my thesis. I really didn't have much of a thesis. All I had in place of a thesis was a sentense they gave no argument or direction. This monumental problem was then resolved when I implimented a thesis and then started to make an argument on the main figures of the first crusade.
I am very glad that I participated in the peer evaluation. The evaluation helpedme notice problems that I wouldn't of caught on my own.
Monday, February 12, 2007
Shall we have a Jihad or a Crusade?
Jihad. Usually translated as “holy war” from Arabic, but is literally translated as “ones struggle, or strife”. Today in American society any common American would tell you that it is a Muslim’s practice of a war against infidels. In actuality a Muslim who doesn’t belong to a radical faction wouldn’t try to kill infidels based on religious doctrine. Extremists in religious factions have perverted the idea of Jihad. Despite scholarly translation, many extremists have used Jihad as a means to accomplish military goals. This controversial topic precedes modern politics, and almost was an invention of the crusades.
Crusade. Some dictionaries would have the definition “any war carried on under papal sanction”. Is this any different from a holy war? It isn’t, in fact, both “Jihad”(religious extremists definition) and Crusade reflect my definition of “warfare based of religious intentions”. The crusades were military campaigns sanctioned by the papacy to establish religious influence in the east. Once the armies of the first crusade arrived in Jerusalem they slaughtered everyone in the city. This massacre didn’t even exclude women or children. This event was considered justified to the crusading armies as invoking god’s will. Some eyewitness accounts claim the slaughter to be very brutal. No religion embraces such violence.
I cannot define the Qur’an’s definition of Jihad, I don’t think that the papacy’s crusades were just, but I do know that both can be considered evil tools in the hands of the religious extremists. Both of these words can almost be considered pious deceptions. To be promised religious salvation for violent military actions is contradictory. Almost all religions have a foundation of peace and tranquility. The crusades are just another example of how religion can be manipulated and used to start a war.
Sources:
Alfred J. Andrea. "Encyclopedia of the Crusades". Connecticut: Greenwood Press, 2003
Helen Nicholson. "The Crusades". Connecticut: Greenwood Publishing Group, 2004
Corliss K. Slack. "Historical Dictionary of the Crusades". Maryland: The Scarecrow Press, 2003
Thursday, February 8, 2007
Researching The Crusades
When researching on such vast historical topics such as the Crusades, one can sort of place him or herself in the event that they're reading about. As a child pretends about fighting dragons, a researcher imagines the 50,000 soldiers laying siege upon the walls of a fortified city. In researching my topic I, much like a pretending child, attempted to relive the events that I read. In doing so I not only discovered facts about my subject but also attempted to experience the thoughts and feelings of those that I reminisced about.
Reading about young men not much older than I leaving their families, homes, and dedicating their lives to the church has me amazed. The size of the armies that went on the crusades still makes me wonder on what that would actually look like. I can't even imagine 60,000 soldiers clad in full armor, making military formations, and flags waving in the hands of their heralds. This awesome image made me almost daydream about the Crusades.
When reading about the crusades it is not very hard to discover a tale about a brave person accomplishing a great deed. Reading such tales would put me in awe and wonder how much they actually exaggerated in the accounts. Whether or not the tales were exaggerated or actual accounts I still hold them in respect. I respect these tales because I believe that such tales of knights accomplishing great deeds are the kind of stories that we lack today.
Most of the accounts written at that time and subjected to the common people were intended to persuade you to go on the crusades. After thousands of years their effects are still present. Not in the aspect that after reading you want to pick up a sword and kill a man in the name of god, but in the motivation it gives you. After you read about a brave knight climbing a castle's wall and saving hundreds of men you have a great admiration of courage. Doing what you admire is everyone’s motto, so in a sense you almost begin to follow chivalry after reading about the crusades.
Sources:
Alfred J. Andrea. "Encyclopedia of the Crusades". Connecticut: Greenwood Press, 2003
Helen Nicholson. "The Crusades". Connecticut: Greenwood Publishing Group, 2004
Corliss K. Slack. "Historical Dictionary of the Crusades". Maryland: The Scarecrow Press, 2003
The Crusade’s Heart and Soul
In The Crusades that took place in the Levant there were many important figures. Kings, pilgrim warriors, and popes all of great importance took part in the crusades events. Considering that the events of The Crusades date from 1009-1312 and thousands of important figures can be named, I will focus on just important figures of the First Crusade. The two most important figures in the First Crusade would be the Byzantine Emperor Alexius I and Pope Urban II. Both Pope Urban II and Alexius I can be credited with the crusade’s instigation and invention.
Pope Urban II (1042-1099 A.D.) was the head clerical figure at Clermont that first preached about the “just war” in the east. This idea was meant for knights of a noble social class who were not only accustomed to war, but were prepared for the church’s task to aid Alexius I. Urban II idea was perverted by evangelist’s and people of all kinds decided to go with the crusading armies to take advantage of the chance to get an indulgence. Pope Urban II decided to grant remissions of sins for those who fought for the church. This supplied every crusading army with many noncombatants who sought their own redemption.
Urban II persuaded many of the nobles in Europe to send their armies to the Middle East. In some cases he would threaten nobles with excommunication to participate. Urban II produced funds for these armies that were meant for the Middle East. A huge misconception on The Crusades is that it was for the sole retaking of Jerusalem in the name of Christendom, but it was also for the interest of the church in expanding its powers westward. They couldn’t go further with their influence eastward till later in history. Urban II established churches in the Levant during the duration of the Crusades, which in turn expanded the church’s power.
The other major figure in implementing this violent war was the Byzantine emperor Alexius I. Alexius I was the one to give the church reason to begin The Crusades by sending a message to Pope Gregory VII that he was in need of military aid. Alexius supplied the crusading armies with safe passage and substantial reinforcements. In turn the crusading armies rid the Byzantine emperor of the Seljuk Turks that kept invading his land. In doing this crusading armies also accomplished the church’s main objective.
Alexius I lead the armies into battle in the Crusade of the Great Lords. Many of the other leaders that participated in the Crusade of the Great Lords saw Alexius I as a great ally if they were to establish principalities in the Middle East. Once principalities were established in the Levant Alexius I aided those who kept their oath to him as their liege. Had the Byzantine emperor not of reinforced the armies in the crusades many would of died and nearly nothing would have been accomplished. Alexius I also allowed armies of the later crusades to pass through his territories with safe passage.
These two figures were crucial in The Crusades existence. By combining penitential pilgrimage and “just war” pope Urban II made the Crusades a practice of Western Christianity. The Byzantine emperor Alexius I helped unite east and west Christendom with better relations. These figures ultimately shaped the Crusades beginning and future through their actions.
Sources:
Alfred J. Andrea. "Encyclopedia of the Crusades". Connecticut: Greenwood Press, 2003
Helen Nicholson. "The Crusades". Connecticut: Greenwood Publishing Group, 2004
Corliss K. Slack. "Historical Dictionary of the Crusades". Maryland: The Scarecrow Press, 2003
Pope Urban II (1042-1099 A.D.) was the head clerical figure at Clermont that first preached about the “just war” in the east. This idea was meant for knights of a noble social class who were not only accustomed to war, but were prepared for the church’s task to aid Alexius I. Urban II idea was perverted by evangelist’s and people of all kinds decided to go with the crusading armies to take advantage of the chance to get an indulgence. Pope Urban II decided to grant remissions of sins for those who fought for the church. This supplied every crusading army with many noncombatants who sought their own redemption.
Urban II persuaded many of the nobles in Europe to send their armies to the Middle East. In some cases he would threaten nobles with excommunication to participate. Urban II produced funds for these armies that were meant for the Middle East. A huge misconception on The Crusades is that it was for the sole retaking of Jerusalem in the name of Christendom, but it was also for the interest of the church in expanding its powers westward. They couldn’t go further with their influence eastward till later in history. Urban II established churches in the Levant during the duration of the Crusades, which in turn expanded the church’s power.
The other major figure in implementing this violent war was the Byzantine emperor Alexius I. Alexius I was the one to give the church reason to begin The Crusades by sending a message to Pope Gregory VII that he was in need of military aid. Alexius supplied the crusading armies with safe passage and substantial reinforcements. In turn the crusading armies rid the Byzantine emperor of the Seljuk Turks that kept invading his land. In doing this crusading armies also accomplished the church’s main objective.
Alexius I lead the armies into battle in the Crusade of the Great Lords. Many of the other leaders that participated in the Crusade of the Great Lords saw Alexius I as a great ally if they were to establish principalities in the Middle East. Once principalities were established in the Levant Alexius I aided those who kept their oath to him as their liege. Had the Byzantine emperor not of reinforced the armies in the crusades many would of died and nearly nothing would have been accomplished. Alexius I also allowed armies of the later crusades to pass through his territories with safe passage.
These two figures were crucial in The Crusades existence. By combining penitential pilgrimage and “just war” pope Urban II made the Crusades a practice of Western Christianity. The Byzantine emperor Alexius I helped unite east and west Christendom with better relations. These figures ultimately shaped the Crusades beginning and future through their actions.
Sources:
Alfred J. Andrea. "Encyclopedia of the Crusades". Connecticut: Greenwood Press, 2003
Helen Nicholson. "The Crusades". Connecticut: Greenwood Publishing Group, 2004
Corliss K. Slack. "Historical Dictionary of the Crusades". Maryland: The Scarecrow Press, 2003
Sunday, February 4, 2007
The First Crusade
The First Crusade (1096-1102) was conducted in three waves and was intended by the church to help the Byzantine emperor Alexius against Turkish forces. This main objective of the church was masked by the pious idea of a “holy war” to retake Jerusalem. The First Crusade was considered the only successful crusade in the Levant. Although successful the First Crusade had many problems such as the lack of supplies, noncombatants following crusading armies, and the undisciplined army itself. The three waves of the First Crusade were the People’s Crusade of 1096, the Crusade of the Great Lords, and the Crusade of 1101. In that order were the waves dispersed.
The first wave being the People’s Crusade of 1096 was very undersupplied and was broken into five major forces. Out of those five forces only two made it to Constantinople where those forces were either destroyed or driven back to Europe. Walter Sansavoir and Peter the Hermit led the two forces that made it to Constantinople. The other three forces were comprised of West German, French, English, and Flemish pilgrim warriors. The three other forces were mostly driven off at Hungary by the Hungarian forces that were ordered to defend the city from the crusaders. The Hungarian resistance was conducted because the two forces that made it through Hungary sack and pillaged a lot of its cities for resources. This lack of supplies caused problems even at the crusade’s start. Had the armies been efficiently supplied three other forces would have joined the first two.
After the failure of the first wave Pope Urban II began raising money for another wave that was known as the Crusade of the Great Lords. Learning from the first wave’s failure was crucial in the second wave’s success. Notable figures of the second wave consist of Duke Godfrey of Bouillon, Count Raymond of Saint-Gilles, Count Robert of Flanders, Duke Robert of Normandy, and Bohemond of Taranto. All of these figures were either brothers or sons of kings, but none themselves were kings. These figures of royalty led their armies to the Byzantine Empire where much of their armies began to pillage for lack of discipline. After taking oaths to the Byzantine emperor Alexius the European nobles combined their forces with the emperor and marched to Antioch from Nicaea. The combined forces exceeded 60,000 including noncombatants took the city of Antioch by 1098. The forces then marched to Jerusalem by 1099 and had lost over half its soldiers in the siege of Antioch. This force of just over 20,000 took the city of Jerusalem by a frontal attack in the summer of 1099. Once in the holy city the army destroyed the inhabitants of the city.
The final wave dubbed as the Crusade of 1101 was meant to reinforce the principalities that were formed in the earlier wave. This wave was conducted with more troops than its predecessor but was also met by defenses that were underestimated and over prepared for the crusaders. Pope Paschal II enforced this crusade by threatening crusade supporters with excommunication. The clergy at the time preached that joining the churches military campaign was a form of penance. All of this summed up resulted in a larger army of pilgrim warriors. This campaign that lasted only a year suffered many casualties and only gained the cities of Ankara, Haifa, and Tortosa. The shortcomings of the third wave were considered God’s punishment for their sins, but more mundane reasons were poor leadership, woeful organization, ignorance of the land, and just bad luck.
Sources:
Alfred J. Andrea. "Encyclopedia of the Crusades". Connecticut: Greenwood Press, 2003
Helen Nicholson. "The Crusades". Connecticut: Greenwood Publishing Group, 2004
Corliss K. Slack. "Historical Dictionary of the Crusades". Maryland: The Scarecrow Press, 2003
The first wave being the People’s Crusade of 1096 was very undersupplied and was broken into five major forces. Out of those five forces only two made it to Constantinople where those forces were either destroyed or driven back to Europe. Walter Sansavoir and Peter the Hermit led the two forces that made it to Constantinople. The other three forces were comprised of West German, French, English, and Flemish pilgrim warriors. The three other forces were mostly driven off at Hungary by the Hungarian forces that were ordered to defend the city from the crusaders. The Hungarian resistance was conducted because the two forces that made it through Hungary sack and pillaged a lot of its cities for resources. This lack of supplies caused problems even at the crusade’s start. Had the armies been efficiently supplied three other forces would have joined the first two.
After the failure of the first wave Pope Urban II began raising money for another wave that was known as the Crusade of the Great Lords. Learning from the first wave’s failure was crucial in the second wave’s success. Notable figures of the second wave consist of Duke Godfrey of Bouillon, Count Raymond of Saint-Gilles, Count Robert of Flanders, Duke Robert of Normandy, and Bohemond of Taranto. All of these figures were either brothers or sons of kings, but none themselves were kings. These figures of royalty led their armies to the Byzantine Empire where much of their armies began to pillage for lack of discipline. After taking oaths to the Byzantine emperor Alexius the European nobles combined their forces with the emperor and marched to Antioch from Nicaea. The combined forces exceeded 60,000 including noncombatants took the city of Antioch by 1098. The forces then marched to Jerusalem by 1099 and had lost over half its soldiers in the siege of Antioch. This force of just over 20,000 took the city of Jerusalem by a frontal attack in the summer of 1099. Once in the holy city the army destroyed the inhabitants of the city.
The final wave dubbed as the Crusade of 1101 was meant to reinforce the principalities that were formed in the earlier wave. This wave was conducted with more troops than its predecessor but was also met by defenses that were underestimated and over prepared for the crusaders. Pope Paschal II enforced this crusade by threatening crusade supporters with excommunication. The clergy at the time preached that joining the churches military campaign was a form of penance. All of this summed up resulted in a larger army of pilgrim warriors. This campaign that lasted only a year suffered many casualties and only gained the cities of Ankara, Haifa, and Tortosa. The shortcomings of the third wave were considered God’s punishment for their sins, but more mundane reasons were poor leadership, woeful organization, ignorance of the land, and just bad luck.
Sources:
Alfred J. Andrea. "Encyclopedia of the Crusades". Connecticut: Greenwood Press, 2003
Helen Nicholson. "The Crusades". Connecticut: Greenwood Publishing Group, 2004
Corliss K. Slack. "Historical Dictionary of the Crusades". Maryland: The Scarecrow Press, 2003
Thursday, January 25, 2007
The Crusades' Begining
The events of the Crusades happened during the Abbasid Dynasty (750-1258 A.D.). Most of the events involved in the crusades don't even predate 1009 A.D. First actual actions that instigated a crusade was in 1009 A.D. when Christian shrines were destroyed along with a church in Jerusalem. So when looking at the Crusade's Chronology, the starting point could be considered when Pope Gregory VII (1073-1085) promoted the idea of a war blessed by the church. This war was set upon Muslims for the most part. This idea of a "just war" was talked about for some time before Pope Gregory VII, but Pope Gregory VII was the first to promote it as a clerical figure.
Around this time when Pope Gregory VII promoted the "just war" idea, people started admiring martyrdom a lot more. Martyrdom is a concept that centers around christens beliefs. If you look at Christianity from a secular standpoint you can view that Christianity’s main belief in Jesus, is also a belief in Martyrdom. Christians believe that Jesus died for a cause. No matter what cause a person dies for it is considered martyrdom. Applying this ideal in a holy war makes dying in the war a very pious thing to do. Therefore people took up arms in the name of god as a religious test of faith.
The first crusade in the Levant, or the area surrounding Jerusalem, took the city of Jerusalem and established the four principalities of Jerusalem, Antioch, Edessa, and Tripoli. This crusade began in 1096 A.D. and ended in 1099 A.D. This three year period of bloodshed and violence was masked with many religious events. To keep soldiers in believing that the crusade was a god willed war many objects were found in Jerusalem that were considered to be divine. The Holy Lance of Antioch is considered one of these objects that was supposed to be the same spear that was used to pierce Jesus while he was on the cross. Many of these relics that were founded were taken back to Europe and worshiped. Seeing physical evidence of the Crusade sparked a lot of interest for later crusades. Not only were these soldiers conducting a favor for their church and faith, but also for themselves. The church declared that if a soldier of the church died on the battle field his sins would be forgiven. Many of these soldiers also became rich with land and power. So the advantages of being a crusader was either die and go to heaven or return to Europe with a lot of wealth and power. The church made the military cause seem very appealing.
The church benefited a lot from the crusades. The church controlled most of the Mediterranean. It is believed that the church influenced the crusades because the Muslim faith was threatening Christianity. Being the second largest monotheistic religion at the time, the church most likely saw the Muslim faith to be threatening. The first crusade was invoked by Pope Urban II (1042-1099 A.D.) after the Council of Piacenza and the Council of Clermont. The council of Piacenza was a council where church laws and other clerical business was resolved, but most importantly the issue with Byzantine emperor Alexius I Comnenus was presented to the council. Pope Urban II then created the Council of Clermont to discuss the matters further. Byzantine emperor Alexius I Comnenus became an ally of the church when Urban II lifted his excommunication and ties between the east and west were somewhat friendly. Alexius I Comnenus asked the church for military support from the Seljuk Turks. The Seljuk Turks were a dynasty of Muslims that controlled most of the Middle East in the Abbasid Dynasty.
Sources:
Helen Nicholson. "The Crusades". Connecticut: Greenwood Publishing Group, 2004
Corliss K. Slack. "Historical Dictionary of the Crusades". Maryland: The Scarecrow Press, 2003
Around this time when Pope Gregory VII promoted the "just war" idea, people started admiring martyrdom a lot more. Martyrdom is a concept that centers around christens beliefs. If you look at Christianity from a secular standpoint you can view that Christianity’s main belief in Jesus, is also a belief in Martyrdom. Christians believe that Jesus died for a cause. No matter what cause a person dies for it is considered martyrdom. Applying this ideal in a holy war makes dying in the war a very pious thing to do. Therefore people took up arms in the name of god as a religious test of faith.
The first crusade in the Levant, or the area surrounding Jerusalem, took the city of Jerusalem and established the four principalities of Jerusalem, Antioch, Edessa, and Tripoli. This crusade began in 1096 A.D. and ended in 1099 A.D. This three year period of bloodshed and violence was masked with many religious events. To keep soldiers in believing that the crusade was a god willed war many objects were found in Jerusalem that were considered to be divine. The Holy Lance of Antioch is considered one of these objects that was supposed to be the same spear that was used to pierce Jesus while he was on the cross. Many of these relics that were founded were taken back to Europe and worshiped. Seeing physical evidence of the Crusade sparked a lot of interest for later crusades. Not only were these soldiers conducting a favor for their church and faith, but also for themselves. The church declared that if a soldier of the church died on the battle field his sins would be forgiven. Many of these soldiers also became rich with land and power. So the advantages of being a crusader was either die and go to heaven or return to Europe with a lot of wealth and power. The church made the military cause seem very appealing.
The church benefited a lot from the crusades. The church controlled most of the Mediterranean. It is believed that the church influenced the crusades because the Muslim faith was threatening Christianity. Being the second largest monotheistic religion at the time, the church most likely saw the Muslim faith to be threatening. The first crusade was invoked by Pope Urban II (1042-1099 A.D.) after the Council of Piacenza and the Council of Clermont. The council of Piacenza was a council where church laws and other clerical business was resolved, but most importantly the issue with Byzantine emperor Alexius I Comnenus was presented to the council. Pope Urban II then created the Council of Clermont to discuss the matters further. Byzantine emperor Alexius I Comnenus became an ally of the church when Urban II lifted his excommunication and ties between the east and west were somewhat friendly. Alexius I Comnenus asked the church for military support from the Seljuk Turks. The Seljuk Turks were a dynasty of Muslims that controlled most of the Middle East in the Abbasid Dynasty.
Sources:
Helen Nicholson. "The Crusades". Connecticut: Greenwood Publishing Group, 2004
Corliss K. Slack. "Historical Dictionary of the Crusades". Maryland: The Scarecrow Press, 2003
Thursday, January 18, 2007
Introduction
Hello and welcome to a blog fully devoted to the research of the Crusades that took place in the Levant during the Abbasid Dynasty (750-1258 A.D). I being your Herodotus will research and publish posts on many different topics relating to the Crusades. If at any time you have the urge to comment feel free to give your opinion on any topic. Topics that I will focus on will consist of the Crusades and other events that occured in the Levant area around the Abbasid Dynesty.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
