“To conquer without risk is to triumph without glory. El Cid” Meaning that if there is no risk in taking over a country is taking it without glory. This connects because both of the conflicts in my essay involved glory, and risk and every risk has its rewards.This book talks about the end of the third Crusade.The Third crusade and the Reconquista compare because they are both religious wars involving the retaking of land and lead to pushes into other continents.
Historians understand that the third crusade and Reconquestia, revolve around the conflict between Christianity and Islam. Reconquestia was a crusade in itself as it was sanctioned by the Pope. “The Christian rulers represented the many campaigns of the Reconquista as re-taking Christian
…show more content…
Spanish armies had a taste for conquest. ”It has been argued that after 750 years of fighting against the "infidel," the Spanish were psychologically committed to "conquest" but needed new territories. Christopher Columbus, who set sail in 1492, who may have witnessed the Fall of Granada, may have thought that in the East (which he thought he would reach by sailing West which of course he would have done if he had not stopped on the way) he would find the legendary Prester John, and persuade him to attack the Muslim world from the East while European Christians did so from the West.[9] Instead leading the Spanish to the Americas, Columbus set in motion the Spanish conquest of what they called the New World. There, fresh from defeating the Muslims as crusaders for Christ, with "sword in one hand and Bible in the other" they "arrived like thunderbolts among the unsuspecting native population." What followed has been described as cultural genocide, "the Spanish robbed the Indians of their language, their culture and their dignity."[10] 1492 changed the history of the world.”750 years of war would leave a desire for conquest in your mouth so it is easy to see why the Spanish would want to conquer more. Spanish conquest of the new world can be seen as good and bad, depending on who you are it can be because what they did was basically genocide, it could also be classified as good because they …show more content…
“To conquer without risk is to triumph without glory. El Cid” this quote when taken into context with my events isn 't wrong it the slightest. Both conflicts involved risk and the Reconquestia involved the glory of freeing your country, and the third crusade had some glory but there was little to celebrate as Jerusalem wasn 't
The Crusades were a number of military expeditions by Europeans of the Christian faith attempting to recover the Holy Land, Jerusalem, which was then controlled by the powerful Muslim Empire. In his book People of The First Crusade, Michael Foss an independent historian tells the story of the first Crusade in vivid detail illustrating the motives behind this historic event, and what had really occurred towards the end of the eleventh century. The Christian lands of Western Europe were slowly deteriorating from invasions of the North, and the passing of corrupt laws from within the clergy and the high lords. However, these were not the only challenges those of European Christian faith had to face. Islam strengthened after the conversion of the
The first crusade was held only in order to fulfill desire of the Christians of the recapturing the center of the Christian faith-Jerusalem, which has been controlled by the Muslim nation for more than 400 years. This military campaign was followed with severe cruelty and harsh actions against Muslims which cannot be justified with anything but religious and material interest.
The Spaniards two main goals in invading, conquering and in the conquest of the Mexico region were to maintain political control over the Indians, which populated Mexico at the time and to convert the Indians to Christianity. As Vargas states in her book, Major Problems in Mexican American History, "the Spanish crown pursued its double goal of Christianization and Hispanicization, the world of the Indian was systematically destroyed through a sustained policy of military campaigns and forced labor; disease and malnutrition, which also took a toll on the native populations"(Vargas 91). The Spaniards were able to divide the indigenous people of Mexico and conquer them with the help of other ethnic groups occupying the Mexico region. In planning the conquest, the Spaniards would identify a group that would ally with them to further defeat the ethnic group in power. The collaboration of the Spaniards and the rival ethni...
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
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.
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.
Conquests: Spanish conquest of the natives was cruel and gruesome. Spanish had smaller army, but they used steel weapons and armor, guns, and alliances with other native tribes who wanted the dominant tribe to fall. Unintentionally spread deadly diseases to dwindle native population, resistance, and morale Even when natives proved to be superior to Spain, conquistadors saw the polytheistic religion of the natives, in contrast to Christianity, as incentive to conquer them.
The First Crusade from 1095 to 1099 has been seen as a successful crusade. The First Crusaders carefully planned out their attacks to help promote religion throughout the lands. As the First Crusade set the example of what a successful crusade should do, the following crusades failed to maintain control of the Holy Land. Crusades following after the First Crusade weren’t as fortunate with maintaining the Holy Land due united forces of Muslims, lack of organization, and lack of religious focus.
The Spanish Conquest was a significant expedition in the Spanish colonization of the Americas. Cortés’s fleet, crew, weapons, and horses helped him in his conquest. However that alone was not enough to defeat a larger society, and with the alliances formed by Cortés with the Tlaxcalans who hated the Aztecs helped him gain more power in his overpowering of the Aztec empire. The expedition was successful and it brought Spain many goods and riches making it very important to Spain.
From 711-1492, Christian Spaniards lived under Moorish rule until eventually, the Christian Kingdoms took over during the Reconquista. The conflicts between the Muslims and Christians created a militaristic culture in Spain that surpassed that of any other European nation. Furthermore, being trained militarily was often exclusively attributed to the nobility however, in Spain, “many young men knew these skills and used them to their advantage.” Without a doubt, recently reconquering their homeland motivated the Spanish to a basis for expansion and conquest that most other European societies were lacking. In addition, the voyages of Christopher Columbus led to discovering the New World which undoubtedly contributed to added interest in conquest. Eventually, each conquest further raised Spanish hopes for fame and
...tal struggle between two powerful faiths. Several generations of warriors would fight and die during the Crusades. These facts are obvious but there was more to them than just religious fanatics going at each over a city. The Crusades were born of Europe’s changing culture, determination to defend itself and the greed of man. All these fell into place leading Europe and the Middle East on a collision course. Maybe “Deus vult” was true, maybe God did will it.
Just as the Second Crusade began with two different figures, the mission continued to grow into an increasingly disjointed and divided project. ...
Latham, Andrew A. "Theorizing the Crusades: Identity, Institutions, and Religious War in Medieval Latin Christendom." International Studies Quarterly 55, no. 1 (March 2011): 234. Academic Search Premier, EBSCOhost (accessed March 14, 2012).
The Crusades were great military missions embarked on by the Christian nations of Europe for the purpose of rescuing the Jerusalem and the Holy Land from the hands of the Moslems. The Crusades were considered Holy Wars (1). Their main target was the Moslems not the Jews, although campaigns were also waged against pagan Slavs, Jews, Russian and Greek orthodox Christians, Mongols, Cathars, Hussites, Waldensians Old Prussians, and political enemies of the popes (2). There were many Crusades some more significant than others, but in general the Crusades was an important event in the history of Medieval Europe.