Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Short note about crusades
Short note about crusades
World history 02.03 the crusades
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Reconquest and Crusade in Medieval Spain by Joseph O’ Callaghan overviews the military activity in the Iberian Peninsula from the later eleventh century through the middle of the thirteenth century. The book is not simply a survey of the Spanish reconquest however. O'Callaghan has a specific focus in writing the book. He demonstrates how the reconquest was pervasive in the lives of those in Medieval Spain, and was evolved by Crusade ideology.
In the first chapter entitled Reconquest, Holy War, and Crusade O’Callaghan tries to define what the terms in the chapter title mean. He sees “Reconquest” as being a perpetual mindset that existed among the Spanish people ever since the invasion of the muslims in 711; the land belonged to Christians
…show more content…
before the arrival of the Muslims, and they believed it should return to past status under the Visigoths. Unlike “reconquest”, he concludes “crusades” have certain characteristics associated with them such as the intervention of the Pope, and promises of indulgences for serving Christ in battle. He asserts the hispanic crusader sought the remission of sins in the same ways as did his Middle Eastern counterparts, and this was taken advantage of by the Christian Kings. They realized the value of said recruiting pitch even if every campaign of reconquest was not necessarily a crusade. In the following chapters, O’Callaghan offers evidence demonstrating how the notion of “reconquest” in Spain was changed by crusade ideology.
He claims the transformation from reconquest and crusade came about do to the opening of the Iberian Peninsula to French and Papal influences. A big step in this evolution was Pope Alexander II recognizing the sins of those fighting in the Iberian Peninsula would be remitted. This declaration illustrates one of the characteristics of “crusade” in Medieval Spain. The indulgence of sins proved to be a valuable recruiting pitch, as it lured in knights from several French and Italian groups. These knights helped evolve the reconquest with their fanaticism towards Muslims, whom Iberian Christians had grown accustomed to over the centuries. This was expanded on by following Popes like Gregory VII, Urban II, and Paschal II whose liberal usage of papal bulls showcased the equal importance of campaigns in the Middle East to those in Spain. These Pope’s not only continued to grant the remission of sins to crusaders, they also allowed for partial remission to be granted to those who donated money to the campaigns instead of serving in person. This was important as the expenses of the campaigns in Spain were not likely to be covered by booty alone; yet the Christian Kings were able to wage war with help from the papacy. In addition, the papacy allowed various spanish rulers access to “tercias” (one third of tithes used for the upkeep of the …show more content…
church) to help finance campaigns. Overall the argument presented by O’Callaghan is well supported.
He uses both Christian and Islamic sources, although admittedly the focus in on Europe and its viewpoint. I do not think this is a bad thing however, as Crusading in general is a european phenomenon. The visuals in the book were somewhat useful. I referred to the genealogical tables in the front of the book often to help keep track of monarchs as O’Callaghan chronologically describes the various military campaigns of the christian kings. I think it could be said O’Callaghan views the papacy as the driving force behind the military campaigns in Spain based on the promises of indulgences and monetary support it offered. I also think territorial greed on the part of the Christian Kings was integral as well. O’Callaghan also mentions this , but I do not think he emphasizes it as much as the religious motivations. As O'Callaghan mentions, the Christian Kings were rivals with each other as well as enemies with the Muslims, and readily allied with Muslims when practical. I think it is possible territorial greed was a bigger factor than perhaps thought of by O'Callaghan. It makes sense to me accepting papal financing and recruits from promised remission of sins would have been done whether Spanish Christian Kings had pure religious intentions or
not.
Foss explains, “What Urban needed was an enterprise, clearly virtuous in serving the ends of Christiandome… in these moments of reflection, the popes mind turned towards Jerusalem.” Urban II reflects back on the first taking of the Holy City after the defeat of the Byzantine Empire in 1071, and begins to question what his people know about the Turkish race and really the ideology of Islamic thought. Foss goes on to examine the ignorance of westerners and needed to be “reminded [by the pope] of the infamous heathens, their cruelty and hatred of Christians,” hoping this would justify the first Holy Crusade. However, Foss identifies the creativity of the Pope’s language to persuade the knights and army of the people to embark on the Holy Crusade based on the Muslims cruel actions turned onto their fellow Christians. Claiming the Muslims “Killed captives by torture…poor captives were whipped…and others were bound to the post and used as a target for arrows.” Foss examines the Popes words as an effective effort of persuasion in creating an army of crusaders to help clean “…Holy places, which are now treated with ignominy and polluted with Filthiness” and any sacrifice in Jerusalem is a “promise of a spiritual reward… and death for
Díaz del Castillo, Bernal. "The True History of the Conquest of New Spain." In Sources of Making of the West, by Katarine J. Lualdi, 269-273. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin's, 2009.
In Matthew Restall’s book The Seven Myths of the Spanish Conquest, he argues that many of the widely accepted modern beliefs about the Spanish Conquest are misguided or skewed. These myths more importantly show how dependent history is on the perspective of the one who is writing it, and how the writer perceives the events happening around them. One example, is the myth of white Spaniards going to a foreign land on the decree of a king and finding barbarous natives who are inferior to these so-called great men. Using documentation written from both sides, and taking into account the context of the time period, Restall explores the myths of the Spanish Conquest in order to frame a less romanticized, well-rounded view of what actually happened
Contrary to many commonly held notions about the first crusade, in his book, The First Crusade and the Idea of Crusading, Jonathan Riley-Smith sets out to explain how the idea of crusading thought evolved in the first crusade. In his book, Riley-Smith sets out five main arguments to show how these ideas of crusading evolved. Firstly, he argues that Pope Urban’s original message was conventional, secondly that a more positive reaction was drawn from the laity (due to the ideas surrounding Jerusalem), thirdly, that the original message of crusading had changed because of the horrible experiences of the first crusaders, fourth, that due to these experiences the crusaders developed their own concept of what a crusade was, and lastly, that these ideas were refined by (religious) writers and turned into an acceptable form of theology. Riley-Smith makes excellent points about the crusade; however, before one can delve directly into his argument, one must first understand the background surrounding the rise of the first crusade.
The First Crusade was a widely appealing armed pilgrimage, and mobilized a vast conquering force at a time when the Christian Church was moving towards centralization and greater political influence in Europe. The Church gained a wider audience more accepting of its leadership, benefitted economically, and developed its own militarily force. These outcomes, along with the Church’s documented ambition to expand and its reversal of prior teachings, support the idea that the First Crusade was a deliberate political maneuver, intended to to expand and consolidate the authority of the
The Crusades were the first tactical mission by Western Christianity in order to recapture the Muslim conquered Holy Lands. Several people have been accredited with the launch of the crusades including Peter the Hermit however it is now understood that this responsibility rested primarily with Pope Urban II . The main goal of the Crusades was the results of an appeal from Alexius II, who had pleaded for Western Volunteers help with the prevention of any further invasions. The Pope’s actions are viewed as him answering the pleas of help of another in need, fulfilling his Christian right. However, from reading the documents it is apparent that Pope Urban had ulterior motives for encouraging engagement in the war against the Turks. The documents and supporting arguments now highlight that the Pope not only sought to recruit soldiers to help but also to challenge those who had harmed the Christians community and annihilate the Muslims. He put forth the idea that failure to recapture this lands would anger God and that by participating, God would redeem them of their previous sins.in a time of deep devoutness, it is clear this would have been a huge enticement for men to engage in the battle. Whether his motives were clear or not to his people, Pope Urban’s speeches claiming that “Deus vult!” (God wills it) encouraged many Christians to participate and take the cross.
Sepúlveda, Juan Ginés de. Just War Against Barbarians. Essay. The Spanish Tradition in America. 1544.
The Crusades were one of the most prominent events in Western European history; they were not discrete and unimportant pilgrimages, but a continuous stream of marching Western armies (Crusaders) into the Muslim world, terminating in the creation and eventually the fall of the Islamic Kingdoms. The Crusades were a Holy War of Roman Christianity against Islam, but was it really a “holy war” or was it Western Europe fighting for more land and power? Through Pope Urban II and the Roman Catholic Church’s actions, their proposed motivations seem unclear, and even unchristian. Prior to the Crusades, Urban encouraged that Western Europe fight for their religion but throughout the crusades the real motivations shone though; the Crusaders were power hungry, land coveting people who fought with non Christian ideals and Morales.
For religious Muslim contemporary’s the success of the 711 invasion was attributed to the will of Allah as part of Islam’s rapid expansion. Likewise for the Christian author of the 9th century chronicle of Alfonso III the Visigoths’ defeat had been punishment for disobeying God’s commandments. To the majority of medieval men divine intervention was a valid explanation for occurrences, however even then secular minded writers appreciated more practical explanations; principally the unrest which existed within the Visigothic kingdom. The political and social problems which faced Iberia at the time are seen by many modern historians as vital to the conquest’s success.
Among some of the largest conflicts in the world stand the Crusades; a brutal conflict that lasted over 200 years and was debatably one of the largest armed religious conflicts in the history of humankind. Since this is so clearly an event of importance, historians have searched vigorously for the true answer as to why the crusades began. Ultimately, because of accusatory views on both the sides of the Christians and of the Muslims, the two groups grew in such hatred of each other that they began to act in deep discrimination of each other. Moreover, Christian motives seemed to be driven mostly by the capture of Jerusalem, the dark ages of Europe and the common-folks desperation for land, wealth, and a spot in heaven. What seems to be continually
In 1095, Pope Urban II called the first crusade. Happening between 1096 and 1099, the first crusade was both a military expedition and a mass movement of people with the simple goal of reclaiming the Holy Lands taken by the Muslims in their conquests of the Levant. The crusade ended with the capture of Jerusalem in July 1099. However, there has been much debate about whether the First Crusade can be considered an ‘armed pilgrimage’ or whether it has to be considered as a holy war. This view is complicated due to the ways in which the Crusade was presented and how the penitential nature of it changed throughout the course of the Crusade.
Preston, Paul. The Spanish Civil War: Reaction, Revolution and Revenge. New York: W.W. Norton &, 2007. Print.
In order for the crusades to begin, the Christians needed to gather an army to travel and fight the forces of Muslims. With all the power being held by monarchies at this time, the church needed to be cleaver in order to gain troops to put their lives on the line. To gain the support of these warriors and dedication of men, Pope Urban II (1088-1099) challenged those morals of men by telling them to grab their weapons and join the holy war to recover the land of Jerusalem. It was not the challenge that convinced men to take part in this war. The promise of “immediate remission of sins” attracted the men to stand up for their religion and beliefs while at the same time, promising them a trip to heaven when life comes to an end. With this statement, men instantly prepared for battle which in a very short period of time gave the church power which has been held by the monarchies. Men of rich and poor prepared for battle, some wearing ...
The rise of Islam quickly created fear and hatred in Christian Europe, which identified itself as it’s rival. European crusades were called in the eleventh century to win back the Holy Land from the Muslims, though they were only partially successful. Hostility to Islam in Europe has remained a major theme to th...
Asbridge, T. (2010). Crusades: The War for The Holy Land UK. Simon and Schuster UK Ltd.