Who funded the Crusades? Watch

copycat888
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#1
Report Thread starter 1 year ago
#1
And why did Richard I participate in them?
0
reply
lumpinee
Badges: 5
Rep:
?
#2
Report 1 year ago
#2
Mossad
1
reply
Ghostmaster475
Badges: 7
Rep:
?
#3
Report 1 year ago
#3
Well as to who funded the crusade varies per crusade but since you referred to Richard I, I'm going to base my response on the third crusade. Richard I funded through a tax called the "Saladin Tithe" that was originally made by Henry II who planned to go on crusade but died, leaving the rest to his successor, Richard. Philip II who was King of France also employed the same tax but ultimately didn't gather as much money as Richard. The tax essentially striped 10% on revenue and movable property. The last ruler to participate in the third crusade was Frederick Barbarossa but I couldn't find anything specific in terms of how he gathered funds.

To answer your second question as to why Richard participated in the third crusade. No one can be sure of the complete intentions people had in the past, the best we can do is look at the evidence and guess the most likely reason, as Fredirich Nietzche says "there are no facts, only interpretations". One of the reasons could be that he felt like he needed to continue the work of his predecessor Henry II died before he could leave for crusade. Another reason (which I see as most likely) is that he saw the threat of Islam great, especially with the rise of Saladin and his control over Egypt and perhaps thought that had they remained unmatched, they would eventually reach the west and put his kingdom in threat.
1
reply
username2281157
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#4
Report 1 year ago
#4
the Rothschilds of course
0
reply
waleed99
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#5
Report 1 year ago
#5
The United States of America
0
reply
Captain Haddock
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#6
Report 1 year ago
#6
For the most part, if you were a noble who wanted to go on crusade, you'd have to pay your own way. Crusades were a largely self-funded enterprise.
2
reply
username3885726
Badges: 9
Rep:
?
#7
Report 1 year ago
#7
(Original post by copycat888)
And why did Richard I participate in them?
Richard I or Richard the Lionheart was a man who was very much into adventures. He hated England and was mostly an absent ruler, which was the case for most of the Plantagent kings as they considered their selves more French than English. The Crusades gave him an excuse to go on a dangerous battle in the name of 'holy war' and Christendom. It allowed him to escape dreary England for a while.
0
reply
Ghostmaster475
Badges: 7
Rep:
?
#8
Report 1 year ago
#8
(Original post by I just went gay)
Richard I or Richard the Lionheart was a man who was very much into adventures. He hated England and was mostly an absent ruler, which was the case for most of the Plantagent kings as they considered their selves more French than English. The Crusades gave him an excuse to go on a dangerous battle in the name of 'holy war' and Christendom. It allowed him to escape dreary England for a while.
That's completely wrong. If anything Richard felt duty to England, of protection. It's true that the Plantagenet Kings did feel more French than English and with Richard's case he did spend more time in France than in England but he still cared for his kingdom since it ultimately granted him power. The crusade was not some excuse for him to leave on some romantic adventure. He understood the threat posed by Saladin and that the aspirations of such a feared ruler could lead to Islamic attack of the west which Richard especially did not want and took the opportunity to stop Saladin before he even considers westward expansion
0
reply
Captain Haddock
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#9
Report 1 year ago
#9
(Original post by Ghostmaster475)
That's completely wrong. If anything Richard felt duty to England, of protection. It's true that the Plantagenet Kings did feel more French than English and with Richard's case he did spend more time in France than in England but he still cared for his kingdom since it ultimately granted him power. The crusade was not some excuse for him to leave on some romantic adventure. He understood the threat posed by Saladin and that the aspirations of such a feared ruler could lead to Islamic attack of the west which Richard especially did not want and took the opportunity to stop Saladin before he even considers westward expansion
No, the poster you're responding to has it pretty much right. There is scant evidence that Richard, or any other crusader for that matter, feared an attack on the West or even had reason to fear one. In fact he put his possessions at far greater risk by leaving to go on crusade than had he simply stayed, and he knew this well enough. So why did he go on crusade? Because taking up the cross was the ultimate act of virtue for any king, noble or knight, and in a period where personal piety was becoming increasingly important, the warrior classes sought to reconcile their violent profession with their spiritual values by directing their martial energy toward 'holier' goals. The loss of Jerusalem mattered to these people, not because of its strategic value, but because of its spiritual significance.
1
reply
username3885726
Badges: 9
Rep:
?
#10
Report 1 year ago
#10
(Original post by Ghostmaster475)
That's completely wrong. If anything Richard felt duty to England, of protection. It's true that the Plantagenet Kings did feel more French than English and with Richard's case he did spend more time in France than in England but he still cared for his kingdom since it ultimately granted him power. The crusade was not some excuse for him to leave on some romantic adventure. He understood the threat posed by Saladin and that the aspirations of such a feared ruler could lead to Islamic attack of the west which Richard especially did not want and took the opportunity to stop Saladin before he even considers westward expansion
It is not wrong. It is one side of looking at historical events. Richard was an absent ruler and Medieval chroniclers's writings clearly expressed this. The feeling of duty towards England was not out of love for England but partly because England was considered as part of a king's land and wealth. It was protection of property rather than protection of a country and its people.

It is very unlikely that Saladin actually posed a threat big enough to warrant of a possible Islamic invasion of the west. When the third crusades happened, Saladin was physicially weak and reaching the end of his life, hence why he lost many battles in the Third Crusades and was forced to form a truce with Richard.

Again, at this point it is also erroneous to suggest Saladin was thinking of westward expansion. He had a lot of enemies in the Muslim world and was trying to hold on to his power in the Islamic world.
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

How many uni open days have you been to/did you go to?

0 (64)
27%
1 (39)
16.46%
2 (40)
16.88%
3 (32)
13.5%
4 (16)
6.75%
5 (20)
8.44%
6 (6)
2.53%
7+ (20)
8.44%

Watched Threads

View All
Latest
My Feed