DBQ On The Crusades
“The Crusades were a series of religious wars between Christians and Muslims started primarily to secure control of holy sites considered sacred by both groups”. In all, eight major Crusade expeditions occurred between 1096 and 1291. The bloody, violent and often ruthless conflicts propelled the status of European Christians, making them major players in the fight for land in the Middle East.
In my personal opinion I think that the results of the crusades were negative.First off, how the crusades took over jerusalem territory and some holy land.Second how they lost their territory in jerusalem.We will be talking about how the the crusades took over jerusalem and how jerusalem reacted to them taking over their territory,also we would be talking about how the muslim leader signed a treaty that let the christians freely roam around jerusalem.
Document 1 states that, The crusaders successfully took control of jerusalem and built a castle to protect the territory they won.This is important because.The crusaders could take over large chunks of the holy land since they took over jerusalem.Document 3 states that.
“The crusaders re-capture Acre and agree to a treaty with the muslim leader saladin”This is important because.When they agreed to the …show more content…
The crusaders lost control of jerusalem and most of the other land gained during the 1st crusade.This is important because,The crusades wasted all that materials for jerusalem they barely have enough to survive and build homes.For those following reasons,I think the results of the crusades were negative.I think the results of the crusades were negative because of how they captured jerusalem.After they got settled they signed a treaty with the muslim leader “saladin”which let the christians freely roam around jerusalem.After they signed the treaty with “saladin” and after they built the castle,they lost it all in a fight against the eastern side which took all their land that they earned when they took over
In my personal opinion I think that the results of the crusades were negative.First off, how the crusades took over jerusalem territory and some holy land.Second how they lost their territory in jerusalem.We will be talking about how the the crusades took over jerusalem and how jerusalem reacted to them taking over their territory,also we would be talking about how the muslim leader signed a treaty that let the christians freely roam around jerusalem.
Document 1 states that, The crusaders successfully took control of jerusalem and built a castle to protect the territory they won.This is important because.The crusaders could take over large chunks of the holy land since they took over jerusalem.Document 3 states that.
“The crusaders re-capture Acre and agree to a treaty with the muslim leader saladin”This is important because.When they agreed to the …show more content…
The crusaders lost control of jerusalem and most of the other land gained during the 1st crusade.This is important because,The crusades wasted all that materials for jerusalem they barely have enough to survive and build homes.For those following reasons,I think the results of the crusades were negative.I think the results of the crusades were negative because of how they captured jerusalem.After they got settled they signed a treaty with the muslim leader “saladin”which let the christians freely roam around jerusalem.After they signed the treaty with “saladin” and after they built the castle,they lost it all in a fight against the eastern side which took all their land that they earned when they took over