Forskel mellem versioner af "Bruger:Nis Hoff/Kladde5"

Runciman antyder endda, at der ikke var nogen umiddelbar trussel fra den islamiske verden, og hævder, at "i midten af det 11. århundrede havde de kristnes lod i Palæstina sjældent været bedre".<ref>{{harvnb|Runciman|1980|p=31}}.</ref> Men Runciman hævder det kun i forbindelse med Palæstina under fatimiderne ca.&nbsp;1029–1073, ikke under seldjukkernes.<ref>{{harvnb|Runciman|1980|pp=30–31}}.</ref> Desuden er det uklart hvad der er kilden til hans generelt positive syn på de palæstinensiske kristnes lod i den senere del af det 11. århundrede, da der er meget få samtidige kristne kilder fra Palæstina i denne periode, og der findes så godt som ingen kristne kilder fra det seldjukkiske Palæstina.
 
InI oppositionmodsætning totil Runciman'sRuncimans argument,påstand andog on thegrundlag basisaf ofsamtidige contemporary Jewishjødiske [[Cairo Geniza]] documents,dokumenter assamt wellsenere asmuslimske laterberetninger Muslim accounts,hævder [[Moshe Gil]] arguesseldjukkernes thaterobring theog Seljuqbesættelse conquestaf and occupation of PalestinePalæstina (cca.&nbsp;1073–1098) wasvar aen periodperiode ofmed "slaughternedslagtninger andog vandalismvandalisme, oføkonomiske economicvanskeligheder hardship, and theog uprootingfordrivelse ofaf populationsbefolkninger".<ref>{{harvnb|Gil|1997|p=420}}; for detailsdetaljer onom theseldjukkernes Seljuqbesættelse occupationaf ofPalæstina Palestine, seese pp.&nbsp;410–420.</ref> Indeed, drawing upon earlier writersTidligere suchskribenter assåsom Ignatius ofaf Melitene, [[Michael theaf SyrianSyrien]] hadhavde recordedskrevet thatat theseldjukkerne Seljuqs subjectedunderkastede Coele-Syria and theSyrien Palestinianog coastPalestinas tokyst "cruelgrusom destructionødelæggelse andog pillageplyndring".<ref>''Chronique de Michel le Syrien'', pp.&nbsp;170–171.</ref>
 
[[Thomas Asbridge]] argueshævder, thatat thedet Firstførste Crusadekorstog wasvar Popepave Urban II2.'s attemptforsøg to expandat theudvide powerkirkens ofmagt theog church,genforene andkirkerne reunitei theRom churchesog of[[Konstantinobel]], Romesom andhavde Constantinople,været whichi hadet beenskisma in schism sincesiden 1054. Asbridge, however,giver providesimidlertid littleikke evidencemange frombeviser Urban'sud ownfra writingsUrbans toegne bolsterskrifter thistil claimat understøtte denne påstand, andog Urban'sUrbans fourfire extanteksisterende lettersbreve onom crusadingkorstog dolader notikke seemtil toat expressudtrykke suchet asådant motivemotiv. According toIfølge Asbridge, thevar spreadspredningen ofaf Islamislam wasuden unimportantbetydning becausefordi "Islam andog Christendomkristendom hadhavde coexistedlevet forsammen centuriesi inårhundreder relativei equanimityrelativ fredsommelighed".<ref>{{harvnb|Asbridge|2004|p=17}}; forom Urban's personalpersonlige motives,motiver seese pp.&nbsp;19–21.</ref> Asbridge, however,undlader failsimidlertid toat notebemærke, thatat theden recentnylige Turkishtyrkiske conquestserobringer ofi AnatoliaAnatolien andog southerndet Syriasydlige hadSyrien shatteredhavde theødelagt tenseden butanspændte relativelymen stablerelativt balancestabile ofmagtbalance, powersom that[[Det aByzantinske somewhatRige]] revivedgradvis Byzantinehavde Empireudviklet hadoverfor graduallytidligere developedislamiske withstormagter earlieri Islamicløbet powersaf overdet the10. courseog oftidlige the 10th and early 11th11. centuryårhundrede.
FollowingEfter thenederlaget defeat atved [[Malazgirtslaget ved Manzikert|Manzikert]] ini 1071, Muslimshavde hadmuslimerne takentaget halfhalvdelen ofaf thedet Byzantinebyzantinske Empire'sriges territoryterritorium, andog suchstrategisk strategicallyog andreligiøst religiouslyvigtige importantbyer citiessom as[[Antiokia]] Antiochog and Nicaea[[Nicæa]] hadvar onlyfaldet falleni tohænderne Muslims inmuslimerne thei decadeårtiet beforeop thetil [[Council of Piacenza]].<ref name="treadgold" /> Moreover, the harrowing accounts of the Turkish invasion and conquest of Anatolia recorded by such Eastern Christian chroniclers as [[John Skylitzes]], [[Michael Attaleiates]], [[Matthew of Edessa]], Michael the Syrian and others, which are summarized by Vryonis, seem to contradict Asbridge's broad picture of equanimious "coexistence" between the Christian and Muslim worlds in the second half of the 11th century.<ref name="Vryonis">{{harvnb|Vryonis|1971|pp=85–117}}.</ref>
 
Following the defeat at [[Malazgirt|Manzikert]] in 1071, Muslims had taken half of the Byzantine Empire's territory, and such strategically and religiously important cities as Antioch and Nicaea had only fallen to Muslims in the decade before the [[Council of Piacenza]].<ref name="treadgold" /> Moreover, the harrowing accounts of the Turkish invasion and conquest of Anatolia recorded by such Eastern Christian chroniclers as [[John Skylitzes]], [[Michael Attaleiates]], [[Matthew of Edessa]], Michael the Syrian and others, which are summarized by Vryonis, seem to contradict Asbridge's broad picture of equanimious "coexistence" between the Christian and Muslim worlds in the second half of the 11th century.<ref name="Vryonis">{{harvnb|Vryonis|1971|pp=85–117}}.</ref>
 
[[Thomas Madden]] represents a view almost diametrically opposed to that of Asbridge; while the crusade was certainly linked to church reform and attempts to assert papal authority, he argues that it was most importantly a pious struggle to liberate fellow Christians, who, Madden claims, "had suffered mightily at the hands of the Turks". This argument distinguishes the relatively recent violence and warfare that followed the conquests of the Turks from the general advance of Islam, the significance of which is dismissed by Runciman and Asbridge.<ref>{{harvnb|Madden|2005|p=7}}.</ref> Christopher Tyerman incorporates both arguments in his thesis; namely, that the Crusade developed out of church reform and theories of holy war as much as it was a response to conflicts with the Islamic world throughout Europe and the Middle East.<ref>{{harvnb|Tyerman|2006|pp=56–57}}.</ref> In [[Jonathan Riley-Smith]]'s view, poor harvests, overpopulation, and a pre-existing movement towards colonizing the frontier areas of Europe also contributed to the crusade; however, he also takes care to say that "most commentators then and a minority of historians now have maintained that the chief motivation was a genuine idealism".<ref>{{harvnb|Riley-Smith|2005|p=17}}.</ref>
14.955

redigeringer