The Crusades Unjustification Essay
Unjustifying the Muslims The Crusade, or the “Holy War” was a medieval military expedition between the Europeans and the Muslims. Their main goal was to conquer the Holy Land, as it will give the conqueror prosperity. Pope Urban II was known for starting the First Crusade which begun in 1096 and lasted till 1099. Within this period of time, chaos and destruction was unavoidable. With both sides having their own schemes of conquer, this resulted to be an endless blood striving battle for control. Despite the clever tactics of the Christians, their attacks toward the Muslims were unjustified. Christians believed that the Crusades were justified because of multiple reasons. Being one of the most powerful religions back then and today, they
…show more content…
By considering the concepts above, it clearly shows that both had different intentions from its many viewing points. However, Muslims tend to show an unrighteous side towards the affects that the Christians had constructed. The Muslims indicated a strong will of unjustification towards its attacks. In 1187, Saladin once more triumphed Jerusalem and most of the Holy Land. Hearing its news, Richard the Lion Heart began the Third Crusade to vanquish the city once and for all. Arriving in 1191, he massacres and held the Muslims as prisoners. Saladin feared that his approaching plans of conquer would definitely cause his empire to collapse therefore, he offered agreements. Nonetheless, Richard stated an execution to be held for the Muslim defenders. Their agreement never worked out accordingly. (Richard) In addition, the Muslims had a better rebuttal for ruling Jerusalem. Muhammad had conquered the “Holy Land.” The Christian power was being dissolved at that time and the Muslims had a period of peace. This is significant because it explains how the Muslims came to occupy the land before the Christians had. They later came back and declared war to regain the city they thought to be theirs also intended to weaken Muslim forces. (Translation) Lastly, the Western scholars indicated bias towards the Christians leaving this unjust to the Muslims to a greater extent. They “highlighted the Christian desire to rule the Holy Lands” (Juma). This clearly proves that the Muslims were unsatisfied with this
By considering the concepts above, it clearly shows that both had different intentions from its many viewing points. However, Muslims tend to show an unrighteous side towards the affects that the Christians had constructed. The Muslims indicated a strong will of unjustification towards its attacks. In 1187, Saladin once more triumphed Jerusalem and most of the Holy Land. Hearing its news, Richard the Lion Heart began the Third Crusade to vanquish the city once and for all. Arriving in 1191, he massacres and held the Muslims as prisoners. Saladin feared that his approaching plans of conquer would definitely cause his empire to collapse therefore, he offered agreements. Nonetheless, Richard stated an execution to be held for the Muslim defenders. Their agreement never worked out accordingly. (Richard) In addition, the Muslims had a better rebuttal for ruling Jerusalem. Muhammad had conquered the “Holy Land.” The Christian power was being dissolved at that time and the Muslims had a period of peace. This is significant because it explains how the Muslims came to occupy the land before the Christians had. They later came back and declared war to regain the city they thought to be theirs also intended to weaken Muslim forces. (Translation) Lastly, the Western scholars indicated bias towards the Christians leaving this unjust to the Muslims to a greater extent. They “highlighted the Christian desire to rule the Holy Lands” (Juma). This clearly proves that the Muslims were unsatisfied with this