First Crusades Dbq

The First Crusade was seen from many different points of view, and every account and reference in the source must explain where, when, and by whose interests was it written. Each participant made their own crusade, and the leaders had their own beliefs. Different views often put them at odds with one another. There were four different accounts on the First Crusade from Christians, Jews, Muslims, and Byzantines. These accounts of the First Crusade all had different interpretations because of differences in religious and cultural beliefs.

For Christians, the First Crusade was seen as enacting the will of God. It was also seen as a retaking of land they thought belonged to them. Based on the Four Accounts sources, we can see that there were

views that were apologetic but at the same time not so much. The First Crusade began when Pope Urban II got people together and delivered a speech at the Council of Clermont. The reason for the speech was because Urban heard that the “interior part of Romania had been occupied by the Turks and the Christians subdued by a ferociously destructive invasion”. Urban’s speech demonstrates that Christians believed the First Crusade was a sort of retaliation against Turkish aggression into Europe. “Urban, greatly moved by compassionate piety and by the prompting of God's love, crossed the mountains and descended into Gaul and caused a council to be assembled in Auvergne at Clermont." Moving on in Chartres account, the main focus was the Crusaders travels to Jerusalem. Jerusalem’s governor was forced to surrender in June 1099 by them. The Crusaders slaughtered hundreds of people that included men, women and even children. The Crusaders were eventually able to be victorious.
In around 1140, Solomon Bar Simson, a Jew from the German city Mainz, published his perspective of the First Crusade. This excerpt shows that the Jewish community interpreted the coming of the crusaders as a punishment from God. This was the reason for their prayers and fasting. The Jews also believed that those killed by the crusaders were martyrs for God. Solomon’s account shows that Jews viewed the crusaders as "arrogant people, a people of strange speech, a nation bitter and impetuous, Frenchmen and Germans."
Muslims were against the First Crusade and did not believe it was a positive thing.

Muslims referred to the Crusaders as “Franks”. Muslims viewed the Christian settlements as illegitimate, and believed that they were made to hurt the native population. That native population were displaced or massacred due to those settlements. Many Muslims viewed the early Christians as ruthless and barbaric people. On this source, the historian Ibn Al-Athir related the First Crusade to the Christians’ rebellions against Islam. He spoke about the Christians regaining control of Spain, along with the Norman invasion of Sicily. According to Al-Athir, the Franks were a force not to take lightly. "The power of the Franks first became apparent when in the year 478/1085-86 they invaded the territories of Islam and took Toledo and other parts of Andalusia. Then in 484/1091 they attacked and conquered the island of Sicily and turned their attention to the African coast." The reason that caused the Muslims to lose in the First Crusade was because of Kerbuqa’s failure. He led the Muslim charge and treated the Muslims "with such contempt and scorn." Because of him the Franks were not defeated due to the fact that Kerbuqa did not let the Muslims kill them when they had the

chance.
The Byzantines did not condone the First Crusade and viewed the Crusaders as overzealous fortune seekers. Anna Comnena, daughter of emperor Alexius I, disdain for the participants of the First Crusade is obvious based on the way she described them, such as "uncontrollable passion, erratic character, irresolution, greed for money." The Byzantines perspective of what caused the First Crusade is shown through Comnema. Her version was not the same views that the western Christians had in mind.
These four accounts had their own perspectives of the First Crusade and should be read as a whole to gain a broader understanding on the event. The Christian account saw the First Crusade as God’s will to stop the tide of foreign invaders. They viewed the Crusade as a just act. The Jews on the other hand thought the opposite and believed it was a punishment from God. The Muslims obviously saw it as an invasion of their lands. From the Byzantines point of view, the Crusaders were savages as well as greedy people. None of these views individually are correct as they are each bias for different reasons. If one truly wishes to have an unbiased understanding of this event, and any event in history, they must read accounts from all sides of the conflict.