# data[].attributes.body
Third Crusade 1189-1192

# data[].attributes.body
The aspects given in the source by Albert of Aachen are contradicting the things that can be seen in the painting because the paiting shows a weigh to harmless picture of the situation and you could not imagine all the murder going on when looking at the painting
(P.)

# data[].attributes.body
I do not think the pictures shows a realistic way of this crusade, because William of Tyre described it as a bloodbath, but you can see no blood at all on the picture. They are also many alive people standing next to each other.
But looking at the background of this image, they are many people on a building/wall waving a flag.
There is smoke building up behind behind that one building, which makes it more realistic foe someone. (M.)

# data[].attributes.body
Even if I don't have any proof, I am pretty sure, that no one was spared, as earlier stated, meaning that the picture has mistakes in it, which surely weren't meant as mistakes, because there is a women with her child in the left corner of the picture, who look after their father/husband without being attacked. Also on the left side of the picture, there are many muslims, which look happy about the crusade, and even cheer, which like this, surely didn't happen as well. I mean, who in their right mind, would be happy about being attacked, murdered and annihilated by some random foes who did all this for some stupid beliefs?
(K.)

# data[].attributes.body
I do not think that the painting shows the situation correct or realistic. The painting mostly shows the conquerors, who were alive. Almost no dead people are shown and if so they are covered by other people and these is no blood seen.
The background seems more realistic because of the fires but even there you can see a bog amount of people with their hands up in the air looking like they are celebrating.

(N.)

# data[].attributes.body
The painting does not convey a realistic view of the conquest generally. Yes, in the picture is shown that muslims were murdered by christians, but there are still many who are alive (e.g. at the left of the picture) and according to the sources all muslims were dead. Also in the picture is not one sign of blood,wounds or slaughtering.
(E.)

# data[].attributes.body
- Anglo French theologian
- c. 1140 - c. 1217
- Latin name was Radulphus
- he wrote two chronicles in Latin
(L.)

# data[].attributes.body
The given source is a text written by the Archbishop of Tyre, William of Tyre, who wrote a chronicle of the history of the Kingdom of Jerusalem. It got translated from Latin into German.
William of Tyre was born in this "crusader era" and was raised in the so called "Kingdom of Jerusalem".
In this extract, he describes the crusader conquest  of  Jerusalem in a perspective from a Latin.

He decribes it as a very bad event, where many (innocent) people got killed, In the end, they could not walk without having to step over corpses. (M.)

# data[].attributes.body
According to source 15 e, the painting does not convey a realistic view of the conquest. The painting portraits the events in a way that Ralph Niger would have wanted them to be. In line 1 and 2 he states that the muslim people are getting slaughtered instead of just being pushed back, yet in the picture it looks like it is the other way around. (L.)

# data[].attributes.body
The source mentions three main groups of people, which are the Saracens, the Christians and the Heathens around the Time of the first crusade in Jerusalem. The Christian people were successful in conquering the holy city of Jerusalem and won the battle against the Saracen. Therefore they were now in control of the palace again and they started murdering the heathens.
The information given by the source is, that it did not matter of which age or gender the people were. They all received a very brutal death and basically were slaughtered by the Christians.

(P.)

# data[].attributes.body
The given source at hand is an excerpt from the book "A History of the First Crusade", written by Albert of Aachen. He talks about the conquest of Jerusalem according to him. He claims that the Christian attackers besieged Jerusalem and denied it to the rightful owners. The author states that the Christians went back to the City victoriously and started to brutally hurt the Heathens. According the author, they did not spare any age or sex.
(N.)

# data[].attributes.body
Christians are being shown as victorious heroes who served the sake of god. They're looking up proudly and happily  at the sky (at the god)  as if they are waiting their remission of sins. Their massacre and butchery against innocent Muslims (L.3/4) is not shown conspicuously. Also the destroyed buildings and the thefts (L. 6/7) of Christians  are clearly not included. This picture is clearly biased towards showing an honorable and benevolent picture of Christians after their victory, disregarding their  heartless actions ( A.)

# data[].attributes.body
Who: Ralph Niger 1140-1217
When: Siege and Capture of Jerusalem 1099 13th Century
Where: Jerusalem
Why: To crtisim the conquest of Jerusalem
Whom: (Maybe) to the Conquers of Jerusalem, to the Pope and to every believer (T.)

# data[].attributes.headline
Ali ibn al-Athir al-Jarazi                                        (the complete history)

# data[].attributes.subject
Ali ibn al-Athir al-Jarazi                                        (the complete history)

# data[].attributes.body
The source at hand is an excerpt from Ali ibn al-Athir al-Jarazi's book named Al-Kamil fi al-tarikh (the Complete History). He is a Kurdish Muslim historian, who lived from 1160 to 1233. Born in the Great Seljuq Empire, he also spent time with Saladin's army in Syria and later lived in Aleppo and Damascus.

He wrote this to give an insight to the Muslims' perspective towards the crusaders' conquest.                    There is no special target group, it is for everyone who wants to inform theirselves.

The from him explained situation happened in Jerusalem;Bagdad, where the Franks (this is what the author calls the Crusaders) killed more than 70.000 Muslims in the Al-Aqsa-mosque during Ramadan. They stayed there for a week, killed men and women and children were held captive. The most killed ones left their country just to live in this holy place, Jerusalem. The author states that the Franks robbed more than 40 silver candleholders and other immense spoils from the Dome of the Rock. Because of these things refugees went to Bagdad in ramadan and cried and begged for help. They informed the people in Bagdad about the tragedy in which the muslims were in. Even the break of their fast was a consequence because of the calamity.
(E.)

# data[].attributes.body
As earlier described, the "war" in Jerusalem was mainly one-sided. The crusaders mercilessly slaughtered many, or anyone they could find. Even if it isn't written in the source, one may assume, that no women or children were spared. This gives us an good view about the author, and how he stands to the slaughter. He doesn't pity them, he talks about, how the bloodshed in his own home, was righteous, and of the will of god, (l.5) also, that the victims had to pay, for sulling the Holy Land, with their wrong believes. (ll.5-6) Still, maybe there was an little conflict viewable in William, when he said ,,Es geschah sicherlich nach dem gerechten Urteil Gottes,...." (ll.4-5) giving of the expression, that he wanted to hide behind gods word, at least, to me it sounded like: yes of course we have to do this, because god wanted it that way. I have to admit, that this is only a small point, if it even is one, but I think, that he had some kind of remorse. Well in the end, he said that the soldiers immediately put down their weapons and stoped fighting after order came back in the town, and they had washed their hands, wore new, pure clothes and went to the holy places with pained hearts, (ll.7-10) which surely wasn't nearly the reality. (K.)

# data[].attributes.body
The text „The Conquest of Jerusalem in 1099” by Guy Lobrichon, a French historian that is concerned about the culture and religion in the Middle Ages, is about the religious aspects of the conquest of Jerusalem.
The text is about the Christian conquerors of Jerusalem and how they were influenced by monks. The Muslims were not willing to convert to Christians, so it was allowed to murder them and conquer their land. The monks called the murder a will of God, meanwhile the murders of the enemies were depicted as actual ruthless murders. The Christians were the only ones allowed to rule over Jerusalem because neither the Muslims nor the Jews wanted to convert to Christians. With that point of view, the Christians were able to join the conquest of Jerusalem with a good conscience.
The painting does not convey a realistic view, because the Christians had no conscience and killed every non-Christian they saw, they thought they would be the saviors of Jerusalem and killed everyone that was a heathen. In the painting, many Muslims were still alive.

(J.)

# data[].attributes.body
Chronicon Hierosoly mitnum (written 1125-1150), 12 books written by Albert of Aachen (died 1164) (vb)

# data[].attributes.body
The source is an excerpt of " The Complete History " and was written by Ali ibn al-Athir-Jarazi. The kurdish muslim wrote that the Christians turned against the muslims and Jerusalem and murdered over 70.000 muslims . The Christians plundered Jerusalem and stole valuable objects .The muslims, that survived , escaped from Jeusalem and reached Bagdad in Ramadan. The refugees have reported about the awful events that happened in Jerusalem.

# data[].attributes.body
Ralph Niger explains in this extract, that killing the Muslim people is not the right solution. He does think that they should leave the holy land though and he states that the crusaders should use violence if they have to defend themselves but he is concerned that the people are becoming too violent and that would not be the solution.

He also mentioned that the pope should not have claimed that all sins will be removed if people participate in the crusades because that is not what god would have wanted.
All in all, he views the crusades in a very critical way, although he does support the original idea behind it.
(L.)

# data[].attributes.body
The given source is an extract from a book written by the French historian Guy Lobrichon. His subject area is culture and religion in the middle ages. The book was published in 1998 in Sigmaringen. It is a secondary source. In this extract Guy Lobrichon takes a critical stand about the conquest of the crusaders. Guy Lobrichon says that the crusaders believed in their religion and thought it was right to fight. The Arabs should hand over the holy land because it was stolen from the Christians and they want it back. In addition the jews regretted Jesus Christ, which is why they should not have the control over the holy land neither.
(J.)

# data[].attributes.body
The source is a text from the Archbishop of Tyre William of Tyre. He wrote down the history of the Kingdom of Jerusalem in a chronicle. His text was translated from Latin to German.
The author was William of Tyre who grew up in Jerusalem and knew much about the conquest of Jerusalem.
He wrote the text after the conquest of Jerusalem. It was  described as a very bad event, talking about a mass of dead bodies  and much blood. The conquerors killed almost everyone who came into their way.

(N.)

# data[].attributes.body
It was written after the crusaders conquered Jerusalem, claiming that all inhabitants were murdered out by Christian attackers. The author wants to show the crusaders' actions from a Muslim witness perspective and is addressed to everyone who wants to inform himself about the first Crusade. According to the writer, the franks killed over 70000 Muslims in their holy mosque and plundered more than 40 silver candle-holders and other tremendous spoils. The Refugees went to Bagdad begging for help and  were sorrowfully describing how much they suffered, so that they even had to break their fasting. (A.)

# data[].attributes.body
The given source at hand is an excerpt from the historical book ''The Complete History'' , written by Ali ibn al-Athir al-Jarazi who was a Kurdish Muslim historian that was born in the Great Seljuq Empire and spent some time with Saladin's army in Syria (A.)

# data[].attributes.body
The painting concentrates rather on the heroic and religous aspects of re-taking Jerusalem for the Christians. The Crusaders are shown in their victory after - not during - the battle. They are places in the centre of the painting standing in the bright light. The focus of the painter lies clearly on the victors not on the defeated. Only few of them ly in the foreground. No blood or wounds are visible. They lie as if they only slept.

# data[].attributes.headline
Taking of Jerusalem by the Crusaders, 15th July 1099

# data[].attributes.subject
Taking of Jerusalem by the Crusaders, 15th July 1099

# data[].attributes.body
oil on canvas, by Émile Signol, 1847