The Crusades

Please watch this Crash Course episode on the Crusades, then choose one topic listed afterwards to comment on (please post in the comments section):

  • Why did the Crusades begin?
  • What are some common misconceptions concerning the Crusades?
  • Were the Crusade a success for Europeans?
  • What have been the long term effects of the Crusades?
  • Who was the most impressive personality of the Crusades?
  • What most surprised you about the Crusades?
Advertisements

25 thoughts on “The Crusades

Add yours

  1. What most surprised me the most was that most of the people that responded to the call to crusade weren’t knights at all, they were peasants

  2. It’s amazing how one person (the pope) can inspire thousands of people do take over a city while they thought they were doing the right thing. At the end of all of the crusade it just wasted europe’s resources and destroy the Byzantine Empire. All and all it was just an EPIC FAIL!

  3. The Crusades ended up being a massive failure. They weren’t able to reclaim any of the Holy Land, nor were they able to establish any long term Christian kingdoms in the Holy Land. The chance that any long term effects were made by the Crusades were slim to nil. If anything at all they wasted a lot of Europe’s resources.

  4. wow its amazing that even though majority of the crusaders were peasants they still won the first crusade and took back the holy land. I also couldn’t believe that the pope had THAT much influence, i knew he was powerful but the fact how he could influence the whole crusade is beyond me.

  5. Odd. It seems that even after such struggles and determination, whether it be from Peasants or the Wealthy, the Crusades seemed to add up to an utter disaster. Sure, there may be positive aspects, but the ratio from positive to negative is heavily outweighed. The first crusade was won, but the following few were dominated, when soldiers were unable to adapt to the harsh environments, and their desperate sieges for wealth foiled by the a new heir to the throne. The Crusades may have a bright spot, but the rest of them are expressed with bribery, defeat, and a unsuccessful struggle for the Holy Land.

  6. The thing that surprised me most was that all in all the crusades were all a huge failure. I mean if you don’t succeed try again but I thought that if you tried so many time with a huge thing like this you would think that you you would get it right once?!

  7. I think it’s amazing how much god was involved in the crusades. And it was pretty lucky for the peasants to have found one of the spears that speared Jesus. And at least the first crusade went well…

  8. The crusades turned out to be a wast of time and resources for Europe. They did not gain any holly land and basically got no where.

  9. The first Crusade happened because the Seljuk Turks took Jerusalem (The holy land) from the Jews an Christians so Pope Urban II called the first crusade to take back Jerusalem from the Seljuk Turks. The Pope did this because he wanted to unite Europe and he figured out that the best way to get people to unite is to find a common enemy which in this case was the Seljuk Turks.

  10. In my opinion, an interesting personality would be Frederick Barbarossa, as he was the King of Germany, and was conquered by a river 😛

  11. What surprised me was that with all the resources and money that was devoted to fighting to reclaim the Holy land, the Crusades were a total failure. I found it quite interesting that the crusaders seemed to be concerned a lot about money and plundering rather than their devotion to their religion.

  12. The Crusades were not secsesfull at all, theay disnt reclaim any of the Holy Lands and were basically a massive waste of time and resources for the Europeans.

  13. What really surprised was how negatively the crusades impacted the Europeans, and instead of taking back the Holy Land, all that came out of it was a waste of resources and no positive long lasting effect.

  14. The crusades didn’t have any success at all. I can’t believe that most of the crusaders were peasants and they still managed to win the first crusade. In the end it was all just a waste of time and effort.

  15. It surprised me how much the crusades failed. They couldn’t take over Jerusalem or Zara and in there deals with venice and Alexius III they ended up the same as they started. They also failed to establish christians kingdoms in Holy land and wasted so many resources in the attempt to do so.

  16. No, the Crusades were not a success for the Europeans. The aim was to retrieve the Holy Lands, but this was not done. It was a terrible fail that caused lots of deaths and nothing positive for the Europeans.

  17. The Crusades began when the Seljuc Turks invaded and destroyed the holy cities. The Europeans then called upon the Pope to help reclaim their cities, and to continue the Christian religion.

  18. The Crusades weren’t successful at all,
    and were a waste of time and resources for the Europeans. They didn’t reclaim any of the holy lands and besides they didn’t really change anything to help the Europeans and the society but only take resources and money and try to keep making it work when they knew and everyone else knew, it wouldn’t work out.

  19. The Crusades weren’t successful at all, it was a waste of time and resources for the Europeans. They didn’t reclaim any holy land as well.

  20. It’s interesting to think about. What if the European countries DID win the crusades? What would the world look like now? What would Christianity look like?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

Create a free website or blog at WordPress.com.

Up ↑

%d bloggers like this: