You are asked to compare two related extracts from the weekly readings. This comparison should be written in the form of an essay.
C. TWO ACCOUNTS OF POPE URBAN’S SPEECH AT CLERMONT
Conor O’Flynn 16325156
These two sources examine Pope Urban II’s speech in Clermont in November 1095, which went onto establish an ascendancy towards the first crusade. It fixed the boundary and launched a platform for more than a century of crusading towards the East. We can see that the speech was written in response to the Byzantine Emperor Alexius II’s ask for an army in defeating the Turkish Empire. It is clear to me that both sources by Fulcher of Chatres and Robert the Monk describe their take on what Pope Urban II said in his speech. It is evident that …show more content…
Hence, it could be fought that his edition of Urban’s speech is physically founded upon his own aspire for going on the Crusade. Robert the Monk attempts to focus his version of Urban’s speech on redemanding the holy land, instead focusing his edition on the salvage of Christians in the East. Like Fulcher, Robert the Monk states that Urban used derogatory terms to describe the Muslim population, again using “enemy” as well as “wicked race” for propaganda purposes. Urban implies that through redemanding the holy land, the Crusader’s will be satisfying God who “desires to be liberated”, in line with Robert. Robert the Monk’s edition of Urban’s speech shows for novel social manner at the time once again like Fulcher of Chatres. Robert the Monk, underlines Urban’s wish for women not to join in on the Crusade. This statement gives the impression on how women were viewed as mostly average to men all the while. Also showing the lack of duty in which women had to play in aristocracy in the …show more content…
We are told that both source one and two were written some years later, this can be seen with Fulcher of Chatres’, who's final edition of the event only finished in 1127. Yet in saying that, of the two sources Fulcher of Chatres is the only one who explains that his version is the exact word of Urban II. In any case, of the two sources Robert the Monk wrote his edition of the events some years after the event and doesn't seem to be near to Urban II or the Crusade not having physically participated in the First Crusade. In my opinion, I would analyse if Robert the Monk’s edition of events is founded from his own opinion, since as he states that his own edition is not quite the exact same as Urban II. Evidently, there was not one single grounds for those people who physically attended the Crusade for either it quest for the avoidance of sins, or for exclusive advantage. For me, it is challenging to identify one grounds as the main cause as to why Urban II called upon Christians of the West to go on the
C. TWO ACCOUNTS OF POPE URBAN’S SPEECH AT CLERMONT
Conor O’Flynn 16325156
These two sources examine Pope Urban II’s speech in Clermont in November 1095, which went onto establish an ascendancy towards the first crusade. It fixed the boundary and launched a platform for more than a century of crusading towards the East. We can see that the speech was written in response to the Byzantine Emperor Alexius II’s ask for an army in defeating the Turkish Empire. It is clear to me that both sources by Fulcher of Chatres and Robert the Monk describe their take on what Pope Urban II said in his speech. It is evident that …show more content…
Hence, it could be fought that his edition of Urban’s speech is physically founded upon his own aspire for going on the Crusade. Robert the Monk attempts to focus his version of Urban’s speech on redemanding the holy land, instead focusing his edition on the salvage of Christians in the East. Like Fulcher, Robert the Monk states that Urban used derogatory terms to describe the Muslim population, again using “enemy” as well as “wicked race” for propaganda purposes. Urban implies that through redemanding the holy land, the Crusader’s will be satisfying God who “desires to be liberated”, in line with Robert. Robert the Monk’s edition of Urban’s speech shows for novel social manner at the time once again like Fulcher of Chatres. Robert the Monk, underlines Urban’s wish for women not to join in on the Crusade. This statement gives the impression on how women were viewed as mostly average to men all the while. Also showing the lack of duty in which women had to play in aristocracy in the …show more content…
We are told that both source one and two were written some years later, this can be seen with Fulcher of Chatres’, who's final edition of the event only finished in 1127. Yet in saying that, of the two sources Fulcher of Chatres is the only one who explains that his version is the exact word of Urban II. In any case, of the two sources Robert the Monk wrote his edition of the events some years after the event and doesn't seem to be near to Urban II or the Crusade not having physically participated in the First Crusade. In my opinion, I would analyse if Robert the Monk’s edition of events is founded from his own opinion, since as he states that his own edition is not quite the exact same as Urban II. Evidently, there was not one single grounds for those people who physically attended the Crusade for either it quest for the avoidance of sins, or for exclusive advantage. For me, it is challenging to identify one grounds as the main cause as to why Urban II called upon Christians of the West to go on the