Positive And Negative Effects Of The Crusades Essay

554 Words2 Pages

Pope Urban helped the Christians against the Muslims in 1096. The Christians took back some land that was supposed to be returned back to the Byzantine Empire. After that they took Jerusalem in 1099, the people who led the crusade split up afterwards into the Kingdom of Jerusalem, Principality of Antioch, County of Tripoli, and the County of Edessa. The leaders of the crusades then established them as rulers of the states of the Holy Land.
Second Crusade: In 1144 Islamic power took over the County of Edessa, the church then called for another military siege to take back the Holy Land. Kings Louis VII of France and Conrad III of Germany led the troops into Damascus in 1145. After every army got there, the German king decided he had enough, and left. At the end of the second crusade nothing was accomplished.
Third Crusade: …show more content…

It started after Islamic leader Saladin took control of the Holy Land in 1187. The three kings Barbarossa of Germany, Philip II of France, and Richard the Lion Heart of England were all leading into the Holy Land. Unfortunately Barbarossa died on the way to the crusade, and never actually made it to the battle. They won many battles, but in the end failed to seize back the Holy Land. England’s king than started negotiating for Christian pilgrims to be able to go into the Holy Land.
Fourth Crusade: After the Third Crusade, when the failed to take back the Holy Land, Pope Innocent III could not handle the fact that they did not have control of the Holy Land. The pope then raised up an army that never actually made it to the Holy Land, because on the way there they took the Adriatic City of Zara for the city of Venice, instead of taking back the Holy Land like the pope originally wanted to do, the fourth crusade ended with the sacking and taking over of Constantinople.
Fifth

More about Positive And Negative Effects Of The Crusades Essay

Open Document