- To evaluate and critique the role of the papacy in the development of the crusader movement
- To develop an understanding of the political developments in Europe in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries, with a view to understand the motivations and aims of various groups of people who took part in the crusading movement
- To develop an understanding of the key political and economic developments in the Eastern Mediterranean in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries
- To analyse and compare different types of primary sources, and enhance the students' ability to critique and develop historical arguments
- To engage critically with relevant theoretical approaches and historiographical debates
The assessment for this module is:
- Oral participation/engagement (10%)
- 1500 word essay (book review)(10%)
- 3000 word source based essay or equivalent (40%)
- 3000 word essay (40%)
For information on Deadlines please visit: https://warwick.ac.uk/fac/arts/history/students/undergraduate/teaching/assessment/deadlines
18 2-hour long seminars. 4 hours of feedback and long essay preparation.
There will be no summer exam or any non-assessed written work.
Those of you who are considering linking their dissertations to this module: please feel free to discuss your ideas with me via email or in person. If you are taking the module and linking your dissertation to it, your assessment will remain the same (this is a change from previous years).
First assessment: 1500-word book review
Your review should be based on one of the following books:
Bull, Marcus, Eyewitness and Crusade Narrative : Perception and Narration in Accounts of the Second, Third and Fourth Crusades (Boydell & Brewer, 2019)
Christie, Niall, Muslims and Crusaders : Christianity's wars in the Middle East, 1095-1382, from the Islamic sources (New York: Routledge, 2020)
Edgington, Susan B., Baldwin I of Jerusalem, 1100-1118 (Abingdon: Routledge, 2019)
Hodgson, Natasha R., Katherine J. Lewis and Matthew M. Mesley (eds), Crusading and Masculinities (Abingdon: Routledge, 2019)
Horswell, Mike and Jonathan Phillips (eds), Perceptions of the Crusades from the Nineteenth to the Twenty-First Century: Engaging the Crusades Vol I (Routledge, 2018)
Jordan, William Chester , The Apple of His Eye: Converts from Islam in the Reign of Louis IX (Princeton, Princeton University Press, 2019)
Phillips, Jonathan, The Life and Legend of the Sultan Saladin (London: The Bodley Head, 2019)
Rubin, Jonathan, Learning in a Crusader City: Intellectual Activity and Intercultural Exchanges in Frankish Acre, 1191-1291 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2018)
Spacey, Beth C., The Miraculous and the Writing of Crusade Narrative (Woodbridge: Boydell, 2020)
You might find the following points useful:
- Please include the full bibliographical details of the book in the title.
- Introduce the main argument of the book. If it is a collection of articles, what are the main themes? If it is a single-author book, then you may want to introduce the author (are they a well-known historian working in this field? what else have they written? where does this book stand in relation to their former work?). What questions does the book raise?
- Situate the book within the historiography (is this a new area of research? is it a new contribution to a well-established branch within crusader studies?)
- Think about the use of primary sources by the author(s). What kind of sources were used? Were they relevant? Were they used effectively?
- What do you like/dislike about the book? What are its strengths and weaknesses?
- Don't quote huge chunks of text from the book (or from any other study).
Second Assessment: 3000-word Source Based Essay
You will be working closely with a primary source of your choice, focusing on the analysis of a question/issue of your choice (for example, ‘the depiction of the crusaders in Anna Comnena’s Alexiad’, ‘masculinity in Usamah Ibn Munqidh’s Memoirs’). You can choose one of the texts we have looked at in the seminars, alternatively you can pick a text we have not looked at (but please confirm with me first if this is what you are planning to do). You could also compare two texts on a given issue (for example, comparing Robert of Clari and Villehardouin’s views on Doge Dandolo and the Venetians). You will need to explain the context of the text(s) and also engage with other secondary material.
Third Assessment: 3000-word Essay
You can base your essay on one of the seminar questions, or formulate your own question (please feel free to check with me).
Or you can pick one of the questions below:
To what extent was social mobility possible in the Frankish Levant?
What made the military orders so popular?
Was the dissolution of the Templar Order justified?
Was the success of the First Crusade mainly due to luck?
Can we describe the crusading movement as the 'foreign policy of the papacy'?
Is it accurate to call the Muslim response to the Latin presence in the eastern Mediterranean a ‘counter-crusade’?
How did women contribute to the crusading movement?
Why was female participation in the crusades seen as problematic in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries?
How did the crusading movement affect elite male identity?
Why was there an ongoing interest in the crusading movement in the fourteenth century?
'The crusade mentality never excluded profit'. Discuss
What were the contributions of the Italian city states to the crusades?
To what extent were the military orders crucial to the survival of the Latin Kingdom of Jerusalem?
To what extent did the military orders contribute to the stability of the Latin Kingdom of Jerusalem?
In what ways did crusader castles facilitate Latin settlement in the Holy Land?
'The Franks' perilous situation in hostile territory in the Holy Land forced them to be militarily inventive'. Discuss.
Why did Louis IX's crusade fail?
Is it fair to describe the Fourth Crusade as 'the most materially focused of all the crusader campaigns to the East'?
What were the reasons behind the failure of crusading efforts in Egypt in the thirteenth century?
Is it fair to describe the Templar Order as being 'a church within a church, a state within a state'?
You can fill in this form or just enter your comments (500 words max) following the Tabula link. You will find that keeping the seminar contribution marking criteria in mind will help (scroll down the page, it's after 'written work').