However, the motivating factors of the Pope were different to the factors, which motivated the crusaders. The tasks of the first crusade were “twofold”. Firstly, the freedom of fellow Christians, and secondly, the freeing of the Holy Land and Jerusalem, the "Mecca" of the Christian church. These aims encouraged a sense of religious passion in the early crusaders. Crusaders were certainly motivated by the benefits of church indulgence and protection, but perhaps, even at this early stage, “cynical” self-interest was a motivating factor.
Important historians have discussed who to blame the division of Fourth crusades for and “Four main primary sources have been studied over and over again in order for an accurate explanation to be given. First, …show more content…
The best example of the nature of crusading being unaffected by “cynical” self-interest is when, on the 17th of June 1147, Louis VII of France would not use his crusader army to attack the Christian city of Constantinople, in order to free it. This shows the difference between the attitudes of the second and fourth crusades, as in 1204, Constantinople was sacked by a crusader army. It has therefore been shown that, like the first crusade, religious passion was mixed with other motivating factors, including “cynical” self-interest, but that it was often the more important motivating factor for the second crusade. The call for the third crusade came after the fall of Jerusalem to Saladin. Again, it would appear that the focus of the crusade lay in religious goals, as Jerusalem had little nonreligious value, but was still of key importance in religious circles. This is represented by the call of Pope Gregory VIII, for the crusade, where he desires that the crusaders do not go for "profit or earthly glory," in much the same way as Urban II, in the first …show more content…
The nature of crusading, by this point has certainly changed, as the crusaders were to attack a Christian city, and this shows that all values of Religious passion had been throw aside. It shows how the crusaders had completely forgotten the idea of religious passion, and that “cynical” self-interest had taken over as the motivation: "I forbid you, on behalf of the Pope of Rome, to attack this city, for those are Christians and you are crusaders!" However, this was not the end of the change from religious passion, to cynical self-interest. On April 12th 1204, a crusader army attacked Constantinople. It seems that the crusaders had easily forgotten the stuff that happened in the city of Zara, which had made the crusade an “excommunicate”, and after getting the forgiveness of the Pope, the sacking of Constantinople occurred. The nature of crusading had collapsed, by this stage to the amount that "they have not spared religion, nor age, nor sex and have committed fornication and adultery in public." There can be no doubt, then, that the fourth crusade marks the point where “cynical” self-interest overtook Religious passion, as the key motivating factor for the crusades. The crusaders did not care about regaining Jerusalem, as it never even reached the city. Furthermore, The Holy Wars of the Middle Ages in Europe and the Middle East known as the Crusades
Important historians have discussed who to blame the division of Fourth crusades for and “Four main primary sources have been studied over and over again in order for an accurate explanation to be given. First, …show more content…
The best example of the nature of crusading being unaffected by “cynical” self-interest is when, on the 17th of June 1147, Louis VII of France would not use his crusader army to attack the Christian city of Constantinople, in order to free it. This shows the difference between the attitudes of the second and fourth crusades, as in 1204, Constantinople was sacked by a crusader army. It has therefore been shown that, like the first crusade, religious passion was mixed with other motivating factors, including “cynical” self-interest, but that it was often the more important motivating factor for the second crusade. The call for the third crusade came after the fall of Jerusalem to Saladin. Again, it would appear that the focus of the crusade lay in religious goals, as Jerusalem had little nonreligious value, but was still of key importance in religious circles. This is represented by the call of Pope Gregory VIII, for the crusade, where he desires that the crusaders do not go for "profit or earthly glory," in much the same way as Urban II, in the first …show more content…
The nature of crusading, by this point has certainly changed, as the crusaders were to attack a Christian city, and this shows that all values of Religious passion had been throw aside. It shows how the crusaders had completely forgotten the idea of religious passion, and that “cynical” self-interest had taken over as the motivation: "I forbid you, on behalf of the Pope of Rome, to attack this city, for those are Christians and you are crusaders!" However, this was not the end of the change from religious passion, to cynical self-interest. On April 12th 1204, a crusader army attacked Constantinople. It seems that the crusaders had easily forgotten the stuff that happened in the city of Zara, which had made the crusade an “excommunicate”, and after getting the forgiveness of the Pope, the sacking of Constantinople occurred. The nature of crusading had collapsed, by this stage to the amount that "they have not spared religion, nor age, nor sex and have committed fornication and adultery in public." There can be no doubt, then, that the fourth crusade marks the point where “cynical” self-interest overtook Religious passion, as the key motivating factor for the crusades. The crusaders did not care about regaining Jerusalem, as it never even reached the city. Furthermore, The Holy Wars of the Middle Ages in Europe and the Middle East known as the Crusades