Harnessing the Potential in Historiography and Popular Culture When Teaching the Crusades Dawn Marie Hayes Montclair State University, Montclair, New Jersey 1 HE CRUSADES are among the few medieval events with which most students have familiarity. However, during these days of heightened tensions in the Middle East, for many the Crusades have taken on an urgency as a distant historical phenomenon that speaks powerfully to present religious and political concerns. This helps explain why in 2005, two highly visible productions on the subject appeared for popular audiences. Ridley Scott's Kingdom of Heaven, a major motion film by Twentieth Century Fox, was released during the first half of the year.' Then, in November, the History Channel aired The Crusades: Crescent and the Cross.^ Releases such as these can be both a blessing and a curse for history teachers. They are a blessing because they will undoubtedly stoke the interest of many student viewers and engage them on some level. They can be a curse though, too, because if they miss the mark, those same students will be left with impressions that instructors will have to labor against for years to come. Over the past year, I have found that the heightened visibility of the Crusades in popular culture has presented me with a number of teachable moments. The release of these two productions against the backdrop of the current friction between the predominantly Christian West and Muslim Middle East has helped transform the Crusades in my courses from a topic of ctiriosity to one of intense interest and scrutiny. This is a relatively The History Teacher Volume 40 Number 3 May 2007 © Society for History Education 350 Dawn Marie Hayes unique situation for a medieval historian because, although the period is relevant to the modem world, most of the events covered do not have the sense of urgency that one might find in courses on more modem historical periods. For this reason, I have felt a certain amount of pressure to seize the opportunity that the early twenty-first century has offered to those of us who teach the Middle Ages. I have experimented with a number of pedagogic approaches for teaching the Crusades and would like to share the ones I have found most fruitfiil, mainly drawn from a course entitled "Medieval European Civilization," an upper-level undergraduate course which I taught in the fall 2005 term. The course covers the period in Europe's history from approximately 500-1500 CE. With the two recently-released productions in mind, I decided that while I would still work to provide students with a firm historical foundation, this time I would emphasize the historiography of the Cmsades. I believe this emphasis plays a crucial role in teaching the Cmsades to today's students and underscores that, although good history is rooted in primary source evidence, professional and amateur historians inevitably interpret those sources in different ways. In other words, historiography emphasizes that representations of history - both textual and visual - are subject to the biases of the men and women who create them. This is a fact that many students of history do not understand. Background and Contexts Important to a successfial presentation of the Cmsades is, I believe, background lectures on the birth and rise of Islam that concludes with a discussion of some of the political and economic aspects of the Muslim world on the eve of the Cmsades.-^ Although I teach in the New York City area in a university that is fortunate to serve students of diverse backgrounds, I have found that most of my students have little - if any - knowledge of Islam. So, in an attempt to provide background that will serve as a foundation for further discussions, I begin with an introduction to Islam's origins, key beliefs and practices, and its relationship with the other "People of the Book." It is by reviewing the 7* and 8* centuries, then, that I begin a discussion of tbe conflict that ultimately gives rise to the Cmsades, focusing on such events as early skirmishes with the Byzantine Empire (including the capture of Jemsalem in 638) and the conquest of the Iberian peninsula. The lectures almost without fail generate many questions and robust discussion. It is clear that students are curious about the development of Islam and are interested in separating fact from fiction. For example, I've been asked how Islam spread during its earliest days. Another question I often hear is, are there similarities between the religious beliefs of Christians, Jews, and Harnessing the Potential in Historiography and Popular Culture 351 Muslims? What is the position of women in Islam? And so on. Also important to the historical context is the political and economic landscape of the Middle East. Students need to understand that the Crusaders arrived at an important time in the region's history. It was a period of time when the previous centuries of Arab conquest had come to an end and the Turks - a people who would soon become major players in the Crusades - were building their military strength. Though earlier violence between Christians and Muslims was not unknown, the Crusades surprised the Muslim world and caught it at a time when it was unable to mount effective defenses. Over time, the region's political disunity would give way to more powerful military response - especially during the 1130s and 1140s as a number of capable Muslim leaders directed the military campaigns. Counterattacks led by Turkish dynasties signaled the rise of Turkish supremacy in the region and ultimately it would be the Turkish Mamluk sultans who would deliver the Islamic world from the Cmsaders. The economic background of the region is also important as the Muslim world controlled major trade routes that connected eastem Europe and Asia. As a result of the Crusades, westem Europeans came into direct contact with these great trade networks. Before the Cmsades, westem Europeans traded indirectly with the Muslim world via merchants in the Byzantine Empire. Knowing that they could realize greater profits by cutting the Byzantine middlemen out, many westem European traders (especially in Italy) saw the Crusades as an opportunity to directly access this trade network. By coming into direct contact with the Muslim world, westem European long-distance trade grew considerably. Europe gained access to new foods and spices, technology such as the compass, paper, and medical knowledge. Merchants who led the effort grew wealthy from the rapidly developing trading networks that now linked westem Europe and Asia. I also found it important to discuss how this increased contact changed the perspectives each had of the other. As Francesco Gabrieli has noted, both civilizations were founded on similar attitudes, including a struggle for universality that drove both sides to act fanatically.'* Another similarity was that writers from both cultures shared a tendency to misunderstand each other and, with rare exception, displayed little desire to leam. Both saw themselves as coming from superior cultures, a fact that made cross-cultural dialogue difficult at best. Two main strands of thought about Islamic society had emerged in Christian writing in the Middle Ages: Muslims were pagan idol worshippers and Mohammed was a violent, war-loving man who had led his followers into heresy.' Arabic accounts suggest that Muslims saw Christians as impious invaders of their lands. As Gabrieli points out, for Muslims the only appropriate response to the Cmsades, then, was military retaliation as directed by the Koran.* Overall, it seems there was little social or cultural 352 Dawn Marie Hayes exchange between the two sides. In short, the contact brought about by the Crusades failed to foster any sensitivity or understanding between the two cultures and, according to Gabrieli, the little exchange that did occur was usually the result of the initiative of western Europeans.^ With this foundation in place, I distribute five different first-hand accounts of the speech Pope Urban II made to call the First Crusade.** This exercise asks students to look at the documents critically, asking questions both about the motivation of the pope and of the noblemen he addressed. How did the pope try to persuade Europe's knights to embark on a long and dangerous journey? What did he assume would motivate them? How and why do the accounts differ? A follow-up exercise gets at the precarious nature of historical evidence by asking, for example, how our perception of the First Crusade might be altered if document X had not survived. Given what we know about the various authors, can we account for the different emphases in the individual documents? Or, based on what we know about medieval European society and Islamic civilization, what in these documents is accurate, what a result of misunderstandings? What is distorted or outright fabrication? These questions emphasize for students the importance of evidence and personal perspectives in the study of history. In addition to enabling me to introduce my students to the tentative nature of recorded history, the five accounts get right to the heart of the Crusaders' motivations - another issue that piques students' curiosity. I ask students to read the accounts carefully in order to understand why Urban had a tough "sell" as he attempted to persuade thousands of westem Europeans to leave the relative safety and comfort of their homes and embark on a joumey that was dangerous, costly, and from which they might not retum. Jotting down the numerous justifications Urban offered for why French and other westem European knights should take the cross and make an armed pilgrimage to Jemsalem helps students understand medieval society by revealing the wide variety of motivations operating at the end of the 11* century. I follow the analysis of the primary accounts of Urban's speech at the Council of Clermont with a PowerPoint presentation that offers a brief history of the Cmsading movement (1095-1291). It also introduces students to maps of Europe and the Middle East as well as medieval depictions of events from the Cmsades. The maps give students "the lay of the land," which is very different, of course, from what they might expect. The images, which are of beautifiil illuminations, introduce students to medieval art and give them a chance to examine the way medieval people saw events.'^ Including them provides a good opportunity to comment on technique, authorship, and medieval artistic aesthetic as well as the infiuence of Christianity on art produced during the Middle Ages. Hamessing the Potential in Historiography and Popular Culture 353 e niTo (ti«tpmr Tr tn T ttirm: qin oiunvnm- Oits fco i ftmit King Louis VII of France and Emperor Conrad III of Germany depart on the Second Crusade " aris, Bibliotheque nationale de France MS FR 2813, foi. 212' "King Louis IX of France _ Seventh Crusade " Paris, Bibliotheque nationale de France MS FR 2813, foi. 298' I focus on symbols such as the fleur-de-lis, which present an opportunity to talk about how the French perceived their kings and how the flower, sometimes interpreted as a symbol of the Trinity, established a connection between the French monarch and the Godhead itself. In the course of the twelfth century, the Capetian kings began to incorporate the fleur-de-lis into the dynasty's symbology. A sign of Christological and Marian significance, the flower began to appear on Louis VII's seals during the last quarter of the twelfth century. And at the royal abbey church of Saint-Denis in northem Paris, the tree in the Tree of Jesse window (ca. 1144) was replaced by a large representation of the flower in an effort to establish a visual link between the Capetian kings and the kings of the Old Testament. The figure of Christ at the top of the image aftirmed for the viewer the divine pedigree of the French kings. By the fifteenth century many French men and women believed that their kings were bom with the mark of the fleur-de-lis on their bodies (though during the Capetian centuries the royal birthmark was considered to be a cross). These images, along with this short historical background, demonstrate for students that the fleur-de-lis was an important ingredient in a complex recipe used to create a sacred symbology for France's kings.'" To further explain the contexts of the Cmsades, I discuss their impact on the four communities involved: westem European Christians, westem 354 Dawn Made Hayes European Jews, eastern European Christians and Muslims in the Middle East. The slides that accompany this discussion offer the opportunity to place short snippets from primary or secondary source texts on the screen, and this enables me to transition from historical context to historiography as I draw on modem authors' interpretations of the extent to which each of the communities was affected. For example, I quote on a slide a passage from Carole Hillenbrand's book. The Crusades: Islamic Perspectives. which observes that it has only been in the recent past that Muslims have taken an interest in the Cmsades and that words for the conflict were not introduced into Arabic until the 19* century.'' Yet, while acknowledging the arguments made by a number of scholars that the Cmsades had little impact on the Muslim Middle East, I introduce Thomas Madden's observation that the Cmsades may have slowed the conquest of Islam and prevented the creation of a unified Islamic state.'-1 note on another slide the impact the Cmsades had on the Jewish population - particularly the disastrous effects of the First Cmsade on the Jews of westem Europe. This also gives me an opportunity to introduce the medieval belief that the Jews were the enemies of Christ and how this belief encouraged attacks on Rhineland Jews in 1096. Part of this discussion addresses the relationship between the Jews and the Church's hierarchy. This dynamic could differ markedly from the relationship between Jews and lay Christians.'^ Finally, to conclude the background discussion, I address the question of the impact of the Cmsades on Byzantium. This is an involved discussion because to do it well means to discuss inter-Christian tensions between the Roman and Eastem Orthodox Churches as well as longstanding Orthodox Christian and Muslim conflicts. I note how the pillage and desecration of the Orthodox holy city of Constantinople by fellow Christians opened a wound which lingers in the memory of the Orthodox community. I tell them that a number of popes - including John Paul II and the currently reigning Benedict XVI - have made the mending of Roman and Orthodox differences a priority of their pontificates. I mention how some of the great relics and art of Christian history made their way to westem Europe after the Latin Christian sack of Constantinople in 1204. As for the more immediate consequences, I emphasize that as Latin Christians controlled Constantinople from 1204-1261, outlying territories broke apart into separate independent states, dealing a great blow to the Byzantine Empire from which it never recovered. The empire lived on for a time, disorganized and fragmented, making it less able to withstand attacks from various enemies, the most significant of which were those of the Ottoman Turks who ultimately brought the once great empire to an end one fateful day in 1453.1 end with a quote from George Dennis' article, "Defenders of the Christian People: Holy War in Byzantium." which concludes: Harnessing the Potential in Historiography and Popular Culture 355 Muslims believed force might be used to bring all people under the sway of Islam; Westem knights believed that they were called not only to defend but 'exalt' Christianity and that attacks on its enemies could be holy and meritorious. The Byzantines believed that war was neither good nor holy, but was evil and could be justified only in certain conditions that centered on the defense of the empire and its faith. They were convinced that they were defending Christianity itself and the Christian people, as indeed they were.''' Historiography With the brief historical background sketched, I now move the class in the direction of historiography, beginning a conversation with my students about the fundamental interpretive nature of historical knowledge. Here I draw on Giles Constable's article "The Historiography of the Cmsades" where he argues that from a westem perspective, the study of the Cmsades by historians can be divided into three main chronological phases: 1095-1599,1600-1799, and 1800-present.'' The article offers an excellent opportunity to discuss with students how historians' personal contexts can influence the way they interpret historical events. So, for example. Constable notes that since Muslim armies were a continuing threat to the safety of westem Europeans and Christianity until the sixteenth century because the Turks continued to attack at various points on the European continent, by and large the histories of the Cmsades that were written during these centuries were very pro-westem Christian and anti-Islamic. But during the second phase that spanned the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, he continues, the Cmsades receded into the distant past as Muslim armies gradually grew less threatening to Europe. Constable then subdivides the final period of Cmsade historiography into two distinct phases: (1) the nineteenth century when, overall, westem historians had a positive view of the Cmsades and (2) the twentieth century, when westem historians became more critical of the Cmsades. These twentieth-century interpretations combined various elements, seeing them as: violent manifestations of European colonialism, illustrating tension between westem and non-westem civilizations, and requiring a discussion of whether or not it was legitimate to use force to attain one's ends. In addition, interpretations of the Cmsades during much of the twentieth century were often colored by the horrors of World Wars I and II. Within this interpretive context, some historians tended to see the Cmsades as a manifestation of a new aggressive spirit in westem civilization. As Constable notes, one medievalist writing as recently as 1995 went so far as to condemn the Cmsades as "a movement of violent 356 Dawn Marie Hayes white supremacist colonialism."'* Finally, after reading quotations from a group of historians who condemned the Cmsaders, I play my students an eight-minute clip from National Public Radio whose tone is critical of the Cmsades as well.''' In general, popular works have maintained a critical to hostile view. In many of the works readily available to the general public, Cmsaders are portrayed as religious fanatics - greedy men who violently seized land from Muslims in the Middle East. Among scholars, however, the view of the Cmsades has started to shifl yet again. Some prominent historians ol the Cmsades have begun to emphasize the defensive nature of the conflicts. A number have noted that within 400 years of the birth of Islam, Muslim armies had conquered approximately two-thirds of the Christian world. The territory included the city of Jemsalem that to many European Christians was the holiest of cities and the center of the world. I end this portion of the lesson with an example of this recent approach by tuming to Thomas Madden's 1999 work, A Concise History of the Crusades: It is easy for modems to dismiss the cmsades as morally repugnant, cynically evil, or as [Sir Stephen] Runciman summed them up, "nothing more than a long act of intolerance in the name of God." Yet such judgments tell us more about the observer than the observed. They are based on uniquely modem (and, therefore, westem) values. If from the safety of our desk we are quick to condemn the medieval cmsader, we should be mindful that he would be just as quick to condemn us. Our infinitely more destmctive wars waged for the sake of political and social ideologies would, in his opinion, be lamentable wastes of human life. In both societies, the medieval and the modem, men fight for what is most dear to them. That is a fact of human nature that is not so changeable.'* Supported by this foundation in the history and historiography, students are almost ready to engage in an informed critical analysis of the Cmsades and to take on the challenge of historiographical thinking as it relates to representations of the Cmsades in current popular culture. As a final act of preparation, just after the above lectures (approximately four weeks before the final exam), I give the students a short bibliography of primary and secondary sources and ask them to read selectively within these texts. They are to use them to build on the foundation laid by the lectures and discussions. As a culminating exercise, students are required to write an exam essay in which they use both the information presented in class and their independent reading in the sources listed in the short bibliography to devise their own interpretive analysis of the films Kingdom of Heaven and Harnessing the Potential in Historiography and Popular Culture 357 Crusades: Crescent and the Cross, which they watch outside of class. By making the evaluation of these productions the focus of an exam, I am placing historiography center stage in the course. I expect students to be detailed in their analyses, exploring specific points and marshaling primary source evidence to support their critiques. I ask them to consider certain specific questions: Does the production appear to be historically accurate (in fact and in spirit)? If so, why? If not, why not? How does the movie or documentary compare with the information you have encountered in class and your readings? Are certain interpretations of the events emphasized? Do others appear to have been left out? Also, if the filmmakers appear to have taken liberties with their production, how might you explain why they've done so? Also, while 1 don't require students to address the contemporary situation in the Middle East (which is well beyond the scope of the course) in a sustained way, I do ask them to consider how concems about current events may have shaped the productions and infiuenced the intent of the filmmakers. While some of the essays I received were better written than others, much as one would expect, the majority were intriguing, with almost all demonstrating an ability to think critically about the productions. My evaluation of students' answers largely focuses on how well students supported their critiques through the use of primary and secondary material. For example, was it clear that the student had formulated his or her response based on the material presented in lectures and the guided reading done outside of class? Or did s/he simply express an opinion with little demonstration of the intellectual process that led him/her to arrive at a particular conclusion? And how rigorous was the student's reasoning in each critique s/he offered? In short, for me the ability to show the process of arriving at the answer was more important than the answer itself. Just about every one of the twenty-four students who took the exam demonstrated the ability to do what my course strategies intended: to think critically about the various historical productions that today's media produces. Almost without exception, the students felt that The History Channel's The Crusades: Crescent and the Cross was - on the whole - a fair representation of the Cmsades it covered and not biased toward any one side. Most students felt comfortable with the production and thought that it was well-done. A few commented that the interviews with historians and authors of various perspectives increased their sense of comfort. One student criticized it for not conveying the emotional power Jemsalem created for medieval Christians. Two other students accused the production of slight bias: one for the Christian side, the other for the Muslim side. It is interesting that no students criticized the production for not including more women - both as characters in the film or as academic discussants. 358 Dawn Marie Hayes Why is unclear. My guess is that the insensitivity to the absence of female characters might be explained by the fact that at the heart of the Cmsades was warfare and students intuitively understood that in the Middle Ages, warfare was dominated by men. As for their insensitivity to the lack of female commentators, students might have noted in their outside reading that recent scholarship on the Cmsades has been written mainly (though certainly not exclusively) by men and, therefore, they were not surprised to see an all-male panel. With that said, overall students found The History Channel's production to be authoritative and informative - as well as enjoyable. Not so, however, with Ridley Scott's Kingdom of Heaven. The majority of the essays were critical of the movie. A handful prefaced negative comments with declarations that the movie was "enjoyable" and "entertaining." One student confessed to being "absorbed" while watching it. A few students stated that they were concemed that since the movie's creators made claim to some degree of historical accuracy, anyone who has no background in medieval history would walk away from the film believing that they had an accurate sense of what the Cmsades were about.''* Why were these students concemed? First - and perhaps most simply - there were the historical inaccuracies conceming the age, occupation, and place of birth of the main character, Balian of Ibelin. Contrary to the way he is portrayed in the movie, Balian was a knight of at least 40 years of age whio had been bom in the Holy Land and appears to have been a devoted Christian. Balian's father (named Barisan - not Godfrey) appears in the film although he had died decades before the time setting with which the movie opens. The character of King Baldwin IV (who also had died earlier) also appears. Students were uncomfortable with this anachronistic juxtaposition of historical figures. Some students lamented the lack of religious symbols and buildings, a glaring omission in the landscape that The History Channel, some pointed out, avoided. Some noted that Queen Sibylla is portrayed unfairly. There is no evidence of a love affair with Balian and, in fact, the records suggest that she was a loyal wife. The Muslim warrior Saladin, other students argued, was portrayed more kindly than the documents suggest that he should be. Other comments were more substantial and focused on issues other than factual errors. One group of students criticized the movie for downplaying the importance of faith during a time when, they knew, religion was central to individuals and society as a whole. Related to this were the observations that more significant anachronisms were committed through suggestions that the tmly enlightened characters in the movie were what today we would call agnostics, inserting a twenty-first century secularizing bias into a film that claims to represent a period dominated by intense conviction Harnessing the Potential in Historiography and Popular Culture 359 and religiosity. Suggesting a society where Christians, Jews, and Muslims lived in harmony was distorting the facts, many said, with some criticizing the makers of the movie for mnning roughshod over the evidence fi"om the period so that they could comment on politics in the modem Middle East. And a number dismissed the movie as simply anti-Christian and antiWestem, arguing that William Monahan and Ridley Scott were blinded by modem biases that prevented them from producing a fair and balanced film. Another student concluded her essay by making a sharp distinction between the movie's entertainment and historical values. Noting that it was enjoyable on a cinematic level, she then cautioned: "Beware, film fan, for you may be deceived." It is this perception of being deliberately misled, I believe, that goes a long way in explaining why many students concluded that from a historical standpoint Crusades: Crescent and the Cross was a better production than Kingdom of Heaven. The evaluation process was a leaming experience for both the students and me. I leamed about the importance many students place on historical accuracy in film. Earlier I might have assumed that the entertainment value of a lavishly-produced movie like Kingdom of Heaven would have compensated for factual errors and anachronisms. The exercise also confirmed for me the importance of demonstrating for students the relevance of the distant past. Students, I believe, received an important lesson in the necessity of thinking critically about films and documentaries and came to realize the value of pairing primary sources and the interpretations of scholars with more widely available sources of information for historical events. Finally, they began to understand the value of historiography and how students of history must consider the historical contexts of authors and filmmakers when evaluating interpretations of the past. More generally, I was pleased with the results of my overall strategy. This approach to teaching the Cmsades can provide students with a solid historical foundation, an introduction to primary sources, and a sense of the historiography that will continue to help them understand a number of public conversations in today's world. As mentioned above, historiography encourages students to confront the fact that history is an interpretive discipline, a fact that is often misunderstood. Having been sensitized to how writers and directors have portrayed the Cmsades in popular culture, they will be wary about how the popular presentation of other historical events can be used to convey special messages. In the context of today's events in the Middle East, examining these films about the Cmsades is a particularly effective vehicle for demonstrating these lessons. They offer an excellent opportunity to vividly demonstrate to students how in various historical periods (including our own) the past colors people's views of contemporary events and how contemporary events impact people's perceptions of the past. 360 Dawn Made Hayes Notes I'd like to acknowledge my friend and colleague. Dr. Michael Whelan, for reading this article and offering valuable feedback when it was in draft form. 1. Ridley Scott, dir. Kingdom of Heaven (Twentieth Century Fox, 1995). 2. The History Channel, Crusades: Crescent and the Cross (The History Channel. 2005). 3. Students receive a lecture and view a video on the birth and rise of Christianity at the very beginning of the course. This is followed up in later weeks by shorter discussions about the distinctive qualities of medieval Christian belief and worship, the majority of which are complete by the time we reach the topic of the Crusades. 4. Francesco Gabrieli, Arab Historians of the Crusades, translated by E.J. Costello (Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1969), xi. 5. See, for example, John Tolan, Saracens: Islam and the Medieval European Imagination (New York: Columbia University Press, 2002) and Norman Daniel, Islam and the West: The Making of an Image, rev. ed. (Oxford, Eng. and Chatham, NY: Oneworld, 1993). Gabrieli's book includes selections from Arabic primary sources that contain interesting insights as well. See, for example, pages 73-84. 6. Gabrieli, Arab Historians, xv. 7. Ibid., xvii: "William of Tyre, who learnt Arabic and who wrote a history of the Orient (now lost) from Arabic sources, had no parallel in the Muslim camp." 8. Selections from these speeches may be found at Paul Halsall, ed., "Urban II (1088-1099): Speech at the Council of Clermont, 1095, Five Versions of the Speech," MedievalSourcebook, December 1997, (5 January 2005). 9. There are lovely French illuminations at http://mandragore.bnf fr. This section of the Bibliotheque nationale de France's web site is in French, but if you click on "Classement thematique," then click "Histoire," then "Histoire (Generalites)," then "Croisade," you'll come to a page where you can browse medieval illuminations of the Crusades. There are eighteen pages (clicking on the "Page" icon at the bottom of the screen will enable you to advance). You will know if there is an available image if you see a picture icon in the second column from the left. 10. For more on the sacred symbolism in Capetian kingship, sec Brigitte Bedos Rezak, "Suger and the Symbolism of Royal Power: The Seal of Louis VII" in Paula Gerson (ed.). Abbot Suger and Saint-Denis: A Symposium (New York: Metropolitan Museum of Art, 1986), 95-103; Andrew W. Lewis, Royal Succession in Capetian France: Studies on Familial Order and the State (London and Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1981); and my article, "Christian Sanctuary and Repository of France's Political Culture: The Construction of Holiness and Masculinity at the Royal Abbey of St.-Denis" in Holiness and Masculinity in Medieval Europe, edited by Patricia Cullum and Katherine Lewis (Cardiff: University of Wales Press, 2004), 127-42. 11. Carole Hillenbrand, The Crusades: Islamic Perspectives (New York: Routledge. 2000), 591-92. 12. Thomas F. Madden,/i Concise History of the Crusades {hanhara, Md.: Rowman and Littlefield, 1999), 214-15. 13. Particularly fruitful might be having students look at a variety of documents in Church, State and Jew in the Middle Ages, edited with introductions and notes by Robert Chazan (New York: Behrman House, 1980). 14. George T. Dennis, "Defenders of the Christian People: Holy War in Byzantium" in Fiamessing the Potential in Historiography and Popular Culture 361 The Crusadesfrom the Perspective of Byzantium and the Muslim World, AngeViki E. Laiou and Roy Parviz Mottahedeh, eds. (Washington, DC: Dumbarton Oaks, 2001). Available online at http://www.doaks.org/crcnts.html (5 January 2006). 15. Giles Constable, "The Historiography of the Crusades" in The Crusades from the Perspective of Byzantium and the Muslim World, Angeliki E. Laiou and Roy Parviz Mottahedeh, eds. (Washington, DC: Dumbarton Oaks, 2001). Available online at http:// www.doaks.org/crcnts.html (5 January 2006). 16. John Ward, "The First Crusade as Disaster: Apocalypticism and the Genesis of the Crusading Movement" in Medieval Studies in Honour ofAvrom Saltman, Bat-Sheva Albert, Yvonne Friedman and Simon Schwarzfuchs, eds. (Ramat-Gan: Bar-Ilan University Press, 1995), 255. 17. Mike Shuster, "The Middle East and the West: The Crusades, " National Public Radio, August 17,2004, (4 January 2006). 18. Madden, Concise History of the Crusades, 213. 19. In the 9"' screen of the "Production Notes" section of the movie's web site (http://kingdomofheavenmovie.com), there is a section that reads "[Screenwriter William] Monahan worked from primary sources, using firsthand accounts (in translation) by people who were present while history was being made, and avoiding interpretations written over the subsequent centuries."
Purchase answer to see full attachment