“Deus Vult!” “Deus Vult!” This was the battle-cry of the Crusaders. Men from all tiers of Medieval Europe are bankrupting themselves to march into the East. These men saw themselves as pilgrims of the Christian God sent on a mission. To these men spreading Christianity at the cost of thousands of Christian and Muslim lives was their sponsorship by the Catholic church. The Crusaders are clearly unjust in their actions taken against the East. At the birth of the First Crusade, Pope Urban II hosted a council at Clermont. Since this gathering was requested by the Byzantine emperor, Alexius I Comnenus, for military support, the Pope answered the call. However, the Pope had no clue on how to rouse up a force that would be great enough for a direct …show more content…
The Crusaders who are sponsored by the church and moving through the Holy Land under false pretenses show how bloodthirsty and unjust they really are for the first time. “Our men hurled the heads of the killed far into the city, that they (the Turks) might be the more terrified threat” (Proach, 1). The acts that the Crusaders take against the Muslims are, in fact, more terrible than the actions Urban II preached to them. However, the Crusaders did not care as long as their promise of absolution of sins was given. In addition to that appalling act, the Crusaders feel even more impelled to use the rest of the Muslims heads parading them around like trophies. The Crusaders are obviously unjust when they are walking around the city with human heads. “They placed some of those heads on spikes and paraded them around the walls in effort to strike greater terror into the hearts of the Turkish garrison” (Proach, …show more content…
Only problem for the Crusaders was that the city was in the hands of the Muslim-Turks who now more than before hate the Crusaders. The Crusaders wanted to finish their pillage, and they wanted to kill anyone who stood in their way Jewish or Muslim, specifically, Muslims. “Once inside Jerusalem, the Crusaders went on a rampage and killed many Muslim troops as well as non-combatants” (Massacre, 1). The appalling actions of the Crusades to slaughter innocent civilians after wandering through the countryside was completely unjust. The Turkish civilians had no part in the war and offended the Crusaders in no way apart from being Muslim. Since the Crusaders have demonized all Muslims at the time, each Muslim death seemed beneficial to their cause. However, Muslims were not the only group of people targeted; the Crusaders, also, slaughtered and burned the Jews in the city. The result was one of the most bloodiest events in history: the Crusaders were reported to be heel-deep in blood of Muslims and Jews. “'Rivers of blood' flowed through the streets... . William of Tyre described the victorious Crusaders 'dripping with blood from head to foot…. The Jewish community was locked in the central synagogue and burnt alive” (Jerusalem, 1). The actions of the Crusaders are past unjust and more into inhumane. The acts taken against Muslims and Jews were unforeseeable, and to think that the church which
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
Urban and the Council of Clermont There are many accounts of that day in November, 1095. Some were written by monks, others by bishops, and even a few by warriors themselves. Historians are constantly asking, "What exactly did Pope Urban II say at the council of Clermont to persuade Christians to set forth on such a difficult venture as the Crusades?" One man, an early 12th century cleric named Fulcher of Chartres wrote perhaps the best historical chronicle of the events at Clermont and the speech of Urban II.
Historian Arnold J. Toynbee said, “Sooner of later, man has always had to decide whether he worships his own power or the power of God.” In regards to the Crusades, the popes in charge chose to worship their own power – yet they got thousands of Europeans to worship the power of God. The Crusades were a series of campaigns in which Europeans tried to take the Holy Land from the Muslims. Pope Urban II headed the First Crusade, which lasted from 1096 to 1099, after he received a request for military aid from Alexios I. Alexios I was the Byzantine ruler, and his empire was facing attacks from the Seljuk Turks. The Crusades soon overtook all aspects of European society, as the promise of salvation and wealth was too great to pass up. 31 years later,
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 first of three points is this: the crusaders fought primarily for the cause of Christ. Unlike Islam, the Christians had no well-defined concept of holy war in the middle ages. Christ had no need for an army. The word ‘crusade’ actually comes from the Latin ‘cruce signati’ which translates those signed by the cross‘’. The knights and nobles of the crusades went, not because the Pope commanded them, but out of a true necessity to liberate the lands of their savior. The thought that God would bless them with victory as He had done long ago for His people, where they not His people as well? Would God, not dispel the infidel Turks as He had scattered the Philistines long ago? Yes, these were some of the most faithful Christians you could meet. They were going to die for what they thought was God’s will. That is simply dumbfounding (Madden 2).
It is amazing how much political and military supremacy the papacy position gained when the Crusades began. The First Crusade (1096-1099) was a military expedition initiated by Pope Urban the II to regain the Holy Lands in Jerusalem from the Muslim conquest. The Pope gave a speech requesting military action against Muslim takeover to the French people of Clermont. The speech eventually propagated to other nations for further recruitment. Urban’s political and military involvement helped regain the Holy Lands and save the Christian Crusaders souls. His famous speech changed the course of history in part because its dissemination was overly successful, and assembled over 40,000 Crusaders to do the will of God. Why was Pope Urban II so victorious in recruiting people for the First Crusade, and why was his influence so important?
... rest were took in a slavery. Crusaders were killing everyone they could see, it didn't matter if a person was Muslim, Jewish or Christian. All the squares of the city of Antioch were full of dead bodies.
During The First Crusade peasants and knights alike fought for God and glory travelling east towards Jerusalem. In 1099 Christian forces reached Jerusalem and prepared for recapture. The western crusaders attacked the city and gained control of it. During the capture of Jerusalem, the crusading forces massacred not only Muslims, but Jews and even other Christians. Men women and children alike, no one was safe from these crusaders who did what they wanted. They butchered Jerusalem’s inhabitants in the streets, without care of what God might think (which is ironic considering this w...
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.
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.
God’s Battalions: The Case for the Crusades by Rodney Stark, will cause readers to question much of what they know about the Crusades, the Crusaders themselves, and the formidable Muslim forces they encountered along the way in liberation of the Holy Land. Stark gives compelling reasons for the Crusades, and argues that readers should not be too quick in following the lead of historians who cast the Crusaders in less than positive light. Stark makes his case supported by evidence that vindicates the valiant struggles of the Crusaders who accomplished the task of keeping Christianity alive through troubled times.
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.
A main cause of the Crusades was the treatment of Christian pilgrims. They were robbed, beaten, and then sold. The main group of Turks, the Seljuk Turks, were threatening and growing in power. The Byzantine Emperor, Alexus I, began to become worried and sent out an urgent plea to Pope Urban II, in Rome. He requested for Christian knights to help him fight the Turks. Pope Urban II did agree to his appeal although Byzantine Emperors and Roman Popes were longtime rivals. He also did agree with Alexus I, in fearing that the Turks were expanding. Pope Urban encouraged French and German Bishops and Nobles to also take part in this. “ An accused race has violently invaded the lands of those Christians and had depopulated them by pillage and fire.” This is when Pope Urban II called for a crusade to free the Holy Land. Urban did agree to this having some of his own motives in mind. He was hoping his power would grow in ...
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 ...