Judaism and Hellenism free essay sample

In the Mediterranean and Middle East before the Common Era stood two cultures deep in their ways of living. The Greeks and Jews both held rich traditions and with their collision after the expansion of Alexander the Great’s Empire, change was on its way. For the Jews, this was a familiar sight, since they were conquered and ruled by the Egyptians and Babylonians before. These Greek and Macedonian rulers held lands far vaster than any other ruler before this time. The Jewish lands along the Eastern Mediterranean were a small nation and the Hellenistic world views held a significant impact on a people secure in their beliefs. The Jews of this time kept their identity while at the same time assimilating to a changing world. Hellenistic changes in Judaism appeared in all the key cities within the Middle East. Cities such as Alexandria, Babylon, Antioch, Ephesus, and Jerusalem held a tremendous difference in Hellenistic Judaism practices at this time. We will write a custom essay sample on Judaism and Hellenism or any similar topic specifically for you Do Not WasteYour Time HIRE WRITER Only 13.90 / page Assimilation did not occur within a day or a summer though but thru generations. For example, a Jew in the next generation Hellenized Palestine might see himself speaking Greek and thus practicing more pagan rituals. For these people assimilation did not seem so radical since it happened extremely slowly over years, but still the Jews kept their identity. The Jews kept their community and culture as one. Jews assimilated to Hellenistic ways in literature, language, historiography, philosophy, art, and religion. They did so to keep up with a changing world where Hellenism was the ascendant position in the known world. To understand Hellenization in the Middle East, one has to go back to the Persian Empire which stood before Alexander’s Empire. The Persian Empire was in place for about two hundred years and had control over a territory that included India, Ethiopia, Turkey, and all of the Middle East. From the Persian Empire, the Israelites in Palestine adopted the language called Hebrew from the Canaanites. This language was used by the Persians for administrative purposes, so the Jews used it. The language became holy. Alexander’s Conquest over the Persian Empire was the beginning of the Hellenistic age. When Alexander died in Babylon in three hundred and twenty three BC his generals separated what was the Persian Empire into two distinct parts. In Egypt, the Ptolemies took charge, and in the east from Syria the Seleucids ruled. The Ptolemies conquered Jerusalem, also known as Palestine during the time, in three hundred and twenty BC and ruled for about a hundred years. Under the Ptolemies, the Jews were not allowed to elect a king, but they still were able to choose a high priest of their own. Palestine itself was the boundary between the Ptolemies and Seleucids. In two hundred and one BC, the Seleucids conquered the Ptolemies and immediately began aggressively Hellenizing the Jews. The Seleucids stayed in power until about one hundred and forty BC when the Maccabees succeeded. Within these two Kingdoms, Greek customs spread far and wide. Trade was in full effect at this time and with it a variety of languages. The Greek language was being used by traders on the Middle Eastern Coast before Alexander even reached the shore. After Alexander’s death, Hellenism took effect on the upper classes in the Middle East. Alexander wanted his fellow Greeks to integrate and marry with the conquered people. He even allowed people of the Middle East to settle back in the home province of Greece and Macedonia. As time passed the Jews learned Greek, and preferred more Hellenistic names. For example, a boy named Joshua might now be Jason, or Mathew would now be Menelaus. Cities names also changed, examples being Akko to Ptolemais and Amorah to Ariopolis. The Jews also built gymnasiums, and participated in Olympic Games. Greek became the administrative language after Alexander. They were exceptionally talented administratively and reached every part of Jewish society. They made sure everybody paid taxes. Some Jews favored Greek education since a lot of the superior quality jobs were held by Greeks. Examples of Greek influence in Jewish writings are in the Qumran and One Enoch. When the Maccabees ruled, Greek was only spoken by the upper class. Jewish scriptures had to be rewritten in Greek for those Jews who could not understand Aramaic. Some Jews chose to admit to Hellenization because of their annoyance with the Persian Empire. The thought that some Jews rationalized this way angered the Maccabees. The Maccabees were more orthodox Jews and were displeased by the Hellenized Jews. In one hundred and seventy three BC, a Jew by name of Jesus or his Greek name Jason became high priest of Jerusalem. His name change was a case of those Jews whom were assimilating to Hellenism. Jason founded a Gymnasium where Jews could go for athletics, for intelligent discussions, and for readings of Greek texts. Two Maccabees openly opposed Jason and his gymnasium. It was the first writings in resistance to Hellenism. Two Maccabees wrote that Hellenism was a new threat to Jewish culture. Previously, alien cultures were perceived as threatening because of the temptation posed by their gods. For Two Maccabees, Hellenism involves a system of values different from orthodox worship, the values associated with the gymnasium. Two Maccabees condemns Jews who adopted these values, even as they remain loyal to Yahweh. Two Maccabees itself shows the effects of Hellenism. Two Maccabees also artfully de-emphasizes the associations of this language with the gymnasium and material culture. For example, the martyrs with their courage are called noble, a term often used in Greek texts. While the category of gentlemanliness, a distinctive Greek value, is applied to aged men who could not possibly participate in the sphere of the Greek gymnasium. Two Maccabees does not simply borrow, but rather transforms Greek customs as it intervenes them with Judaism. With the Maccabees came a revolt against Hellenistic society. They felt as though they were being suppressed religiously. There was a clear line between traditional Jews and the Hellenized ones. Also at this time, the Romans freed Egypt from Hellenized rulers. Anti- Hellenized Jews helped with propaganda such as predictions that this was going to happen. The Maccabees and gospels also showed themselves divided as Hebrews and Greeks. High priest Jason was succeeded by Menelaus in one hundred and one BC. The King of this time was Antiochus IV who persecuted Jewish customs. Antiochus IV after being embarrassed in Egypt came back to Jerusalem to find the city in chaos caused by the different Jewish sects of the city. To regain complete control Antiochus IV went to violent measures against the Jews that were not seen since the Babylonian Exile. While Jerusalem heard a rumor that Antiochus IV was killed in combat, one of the high priests collected an army and attacked the city. The priests name was Jason and once in power got he got rid of Menelaus whom was put in place by Antiochus. When Antiochus IV returned he was enraged and ordered a massacre of many Jews and put Menelaus back as the high priest. Antiochus IV slaughtered many Jews at this time, and also placed laws to help maintain control of them. With the help of Hellenized Jews, it became illegal to do certain Jewish rituals. With Hellenizers and Antiochus IV now in complete ower, he started to shift Jerusalem into a Greek Polis once again. The war between the people started again by a Jewish traditionalist named Mathias Hasmon. The Hasmonaeus were also known as the Maccabees. The man had five male children, headed by Judas Hasmon, whom was also named Judas the Maccabee. The Hasmonaeus then fled town and gained support from villages and created a group of terrorists. They went around killing rich Jews, stealing property, and raiding other villages. In one hundred sixty one BC, the Hasmons signed an alliance with Rome and ten years later the Seleucids abandoned Judah. They were remarkably successful because of the support of the Romans. In one hundred and sixty four BC, the Jews defeated the Greek general Apollonius. At this time, Antiochus IV dies while protecting his territory against the Parthians. After his death, the Hasmoneans were given amnesty, allowed back into the city and their traditions restore. In one hundred and forty two BC, Judah became independent, and Judah Maccabee became the ruler. The holiday of Hanakkah was then established to commemorate the Jews achievement in gaining self-rule. The Hasmoneans took advantage of this and attacked Hellenizers all over the city. However, conditions soon changed when the Hasmonean leaders became corrupt and secular. The kings claimed the high priesthood for themselves, were cruel to their fellow Jews, and expanded the territory for administrative purposes. The Hasmoneans also fell to Hellenization by taking such Greek names as Antiochus, Aristobulus, and Hyrcanus. The Hasmoneans benefited from the fall of the Seleucid Empire. They made their country free and increased their territory. Lysias whom was governor of Syria saw this and rounded up his army and took control over the situation. After, a series of civil wars occurred which were propelled by the Romans. Lysias in fear made another deal with the Hasmoneans and got rid of the high priest. This appears to be an extremely hypocritical situation because the Hasmoneans were doing unto others what they had revolted against. Although Jerusalem was ruled under a tyranny, the city grew considerably in size and population, becoming a center of commerce and religion. Hasmonean Jerusalem lasted only until sixty three BC, when Pompey from the Roman Empire took control of Jerusalem. The decline of the Hasmoneans was the end of Jewish rule, but Jewish pride and desire for freedom continued with struggles against Roman rule. Beginning with a series of Jewish wars with the Roman in the first and second centuries, including the Kitos War, the Great Revolt, and Bar Kokhbas rebellion. Through the rebellions, temporary self-rule was placed, but they eventually fell to the power of Rome. A Roman army under Vespasian and Titus attacked and destroyed Jerusalem, and burned Herods Temple. They then enslaved or killed a large part of the Jewish population. The Romans defeats of the Jewish revolts contributed to the Jewish Diaspora, as many Jews were sold into slavery throughout the empire. Today, we see many signs of Hellenization in the world. For example, the Bible was translated into Greek. We see archaeological evidence today in the Tomb of Absolom (a Jewish burial with inscriptions written in Greek), and in the Sepphoris Mosaic (found in the dining room of a Jewish House). These proofs show that Greek traditions, religion, literature, and many other aspects were incorporated into Jerusalem and Jewish culture. The Jewish culture refashioned its identity over and over again. A prime example would be the Greek intrusion during the Hellenistic period. During these times of change, the Jews kept close to their traditions and identity in an ever changing world.

Why The Crusades Failed

Why The Crusades Failed Introduction The crusades refer to the chain of religious wars, fought in the Levant and Asia Minor between the years 1095 and 1291. During the wars, Western European nations engaged the locals, in response to propaganda related to religious expansion.1Advertising We will write a custom essay sample on Why The Crusades Failed specifically for you for only $16.05 $11/page Learn More The first crusade was ordered by Pope Urban II, who was acting as an agent of the Roman Catholic. The aim of the crusade was to restore Christian control of the holy lands at Jerusalem and the surrounding areas.2 The cause for the crusades could be traced to the times of the Siljug-Byzantine and Arab-Byzantine wars, which ended in the conclusive defeat of Byzantine forces in 1701. After the decisive defeat, the Emperor, Alexios I appealed to Christian nations to fight the common enemy (Muslims), thus requested for their participation in the armed conflict. As a result, Pope Urban II agreed to the request, and committed western leaders to the course of reclaiming the Holy lands.3 The crusaders’ forces were made up of Catholic armies that had come in from Western Europe. However, the forces were never under the same unit of command; the different teams were commanded by different leaders.4 The first crusades were successful. However, those that followed thereafter failed, leading to the defeat of the crusaders. After the defeat, the Crusaders were forced to return to their countries. Most of the soldiers were French. Thus, they were referred as Franks. This was the name used by the Muslim fighters during the duration of the war. On the other hand, the Europeans commonly referred to the people of the Holy Lands as Saracens. The name was used in a negative manner and was used throughout the crusades and after, including the 20th century.5 The crusades were characterized by alliances, including that between Christians and Sultanate of Rum, during the time of the fifth crusade.Advertising Looking for essay on history? Let's see if we can help you! Get your first paper with 15% OFF Learn More The crusades had major economic, political and social effects on Western Europe, including the considerable weakening of the Christian-Byzantine kingdom, which was later conquered by Muslim Turks.6 The factors that led to the failure of the Crusades The failure of the crusades resulted from a number of factors, including the weakening of the rule of the leaders of the war at their home countries.7 They came to the realization that their continued stay at Middle East undermined the rule and the peace at their home countries: the authority and the powers of the leaders of the crusades were threatened at their countries.8 One of such cases was that of Richard I of England, who realized that the brother that he had left in charge of the throne at England was no longer willing to allow him, take the throne upon his return.9 As a result, the threat to the rule of the leaders of the crusaders forces resulted in their departure from the Middle East, so that they could regain their previous rule and the control of their nations. As a consequence, the forces of the Crusaders continued to weaken, which resulted in their inability to handle the fighting capacity of the Muslim forces.10 Further, the divided attention of the crusaders between focusing their attention on the war, and returning to their countries, so they could continue their activities weakened their resolve to continue the crusades. The crusades failed, as a result of the conflicts between the leaders of the different crusaders’ teams. Some of the conflicts resulted from the lack of a common center of command, while others resulted from differences in the priorities of the different leaders.Advertising We will write a custom essay sample on Why The Crusades Failed specifically for you for only $16.05 $11/page Learn More Some of the conflicts among European forces included the rivalry between Innocent IV and Fredrick II. Fredrick II believed that Innocent IV was spreading a campaign against him. At the same time of the rivalry between Fredrick II and Innocent IV, Louis IX of France was planning the seventh crusade, which was not supported by many of the other leaders. Later, Louis IX attempted to reconcile the conflict of interest between the two, to no avail, which increased the rivalry between the crusaders forces. The continued conflict of interest and the rivalry between the Crusaders’ forces weakened their combined effort, as well as well as their strategic approach to the wars. Further, the weakening resolve decreased the ability of the crusaders to match the fighting abilities of the Muslims, which led to their unexpected defeat.11 The failure of the crusades resulted from the double-crossing of the Greeks. It was considered so, after the military allies of the pope lost their tru st in the loyalty of the church. They lost faith in the church after the Greek Orthodox Church gave money to the authorities of the church, so that the church could help install Alexius to power.12 The strategy of buying the placement of Alexius to power seemed to the military allies, as an effort that went contrary to the values of the Greeks. As a result, the misunderstanding between the church and the military allies led to a continued withdrawal of the support offered by the allies of the pope. The withdrawal of the support of the allies of the Pope led to a reduction in the military capacity of the crusaders’ forces. The withdrawal of the support offered to the Crusades also resulted from the increasing incidences of corruption and political dissension among the partners in the war. With the decreasing cooperation between the different parties, towards winning the war, the Muslims were on the other hand, improving their cooperative effort and shared participation. As a r esult, the crusaders were overpowered by the increasing efforts of the Muslims, which forced them to concede defeat.Advertising Looking for essay on history? Let's see if we can help you! Get your first paper with 15% OFF Learn More The failure of the crusades was caused by the relatively few soldiers in the crusaders forces, compared to those from the Muslim side. The crusaders benefited from the superiority of their war technology and skills, which offered them an edge ahead of the Muslim forces. As a result, the first attacks were successful, but as time went on, the Muslims mastered their skills. Therefore, they were able to avoid defeat. Further, the western armies arrived in the Middle East after a long journey, which would leave them tired, weakened by diseases and also the attacks that they met on their way there. As a result, their fighting abilities would be greatly reduced by the factors mentioned, which made them not to compete with the Muslims at their optimal war capacity. Also, after conquered a certain area in the Middle East, some members of the crusaders forces would leave for their home countries. As a result, the remaining troops would have few soldiers to continue with the war, as well as t hose to ensure that the conquered areas were not reclaimed. The impact of the continual return of the Crusaders forces was worsened by the fact that the soldiers that left for their home countries would take more than decades to return, or send other soldiers to take their place in the war.13 The failure of the crusades was caused by the expensive nature of the war attempts. Some groups believed that the crusades were staged by the Europeans, so they could acquire wealth and riches. However, contrary from this view, the nations involved in the crusades scrapped, borrowed and imposed great taxes on their citizens so that they would afford sustaining the crusades. The funds raised through the increased taxation levels, and the borrowing was channeled towards paying the armies, equipping the forces and feeding the soldiers at the base. The difference between the conquest of the Middle East and other areas where they had previously captured was that the land there was not a revenue-prod ucing. Therefore, compared to their European farm lands, the Crusaders felt that they were not gaining from the captured. As a result, the home nations of the Crusaders continued to carry the burden of the war, which left them no choice, other than to accept that the crusades were not viable in the long term. Further, most of the exhaustible resources that were available to the crusaders as well as the supplies that they received from their nations started running out after years of fighting. The continued reduction of European resources discouraged some of the nations, which resulted in a continuous withdrawal of their forces from the Middle East. As a consequence, the forces left at Middle East continued weakening and reducing, which resulted in their defeat by the Muslim soldiers.14 The failure of the crusades resulted from the lack of support from the Byzantines, despite the fact that they had promised to offer the Europeans support throughout the crusading period.15 As a result , the Crusaders continued to wait for the help of the Byzantines, which led to a weaker resolve to engage in the crusades without them. Their expectation of getting help from the Byzantines was solidified by their knowledge that the Comnenus lineage of rulers had requested for the help of the pope, which marked the beginning of the Crusades.16 As a result, the lack of support from the Byzantines demoralized the crusaders, and weakened the ground they had gained in the Middle East.17 The failure of the crusades was caused by the lack of a proper channel for transporting more people from Europe to the Middle East, so that the new recruits could offer support to the soldiers that had arrived earlier.18 The European groups willing to participate in the war lacked the channel of arriving in the Middle East. In this regard, their valuable input would have helped maintain the dominion of the earlier armies, which is evident from the success of the first crusades. One example of such a fail ed attempt to transport more people to the Middle East was that led by a German youth called Nicholas in 1212.19 Nicholas announced that he had been commissioned by God to voyage to the holy land, and spread the message that he would take more people to participate in the crusades. From his campaigns about the voyage to the holy land, he gathered the following of 30,000 hopefuls who were willing to go with him to the holy land.20 However, after the leaving Cologne for the Middle East, many of the people died of disease and hunger along the way, while some were eaten by wild animals like wolves. Additionally, thieves attacked them and stole their clothing and food, leaving them without the resources to keep them going. Upon the arrival of the many hopefuls in Genoa, they were dismissed to go back to their homes as there were no ships to transport them to the Middle East.21 The impossible nature of transporting people in the Middle East stopped many groups, which could help the troops that had arrived there earlier, so that they could win the wars.22 There was another case of a group in France, which sought its way to the Middle East to participate in the crusades. The group led by Stephen comprised of more than 20,000 people. Stephen had promised that the sea would give way for the group to cross to Palestine.23 However, the seas did not give way, forcing them to seek an alternative means of transport. While at the shore, some ship owners offered to take them across to the holy land. Unfortunately, some of the ships wrecked while at sea, and those that arrived at the other side were attacked by forces ordered by Fredrick II. The travelers in the ships including the children were taken as slaves.24 This difficulty in the transportation of more people in the Middle East shows the difficulty that the Europeans experienced, when trying to increase the forces participating in the Crusades. As a result, the rate of replacing the soldiers that died and those that went back to their homeland was slow, which weakened the ability of the crusaders forces, leading to their defeat.25 The failure of the crusades was fueled by the bloody attacks of the Muslim forces, including the raid that took place after the departure of Louis. Immediately after the departure, a civil war started between the Genoese and the Venetians.26 At the same time, the Baibars took the opportunity to strike, and marched across the coast of the region, capturing different towns, previously controlled by Christians, one after another. Some of the towns captured during the raid include Antioch, Jaffa, Safad, and Caesarea.27 During the raid, many Christians and crusaders were enslaved, and others slaughtered, which greatly weakened the power of the Crusaders’ forces in areas like Antioch to an irreparable extent. The massive attack weakened the ability of the crusaders in countering Muslim forces, and also demoralized the remaining forces, which drove them towards accepting defeat. The forces of the Crusaders were also affected by a lack of communication, which resulted, partly from the unfriendly relations between the leaders of the different nations or teams. The lack of communication between the different teams was worsened by the language barriers that existed between them. Some of the teams used Latin while others used French. However, among the soldiers, the problem was worse, as most of them could not understand one another, which widened the rivalry between different teams.28 As a result, there was a prevalent lack of common resolve and unit of command, which widened their inability to counter Muslim forces. The relations between the groups were also characterized by an inherent lack of proper planning due to the rivalry between the different groups. This was with regard to the resources required and the avenues to use during the crusades.29 The failure of the Crusaders’ forces was perpetuated by the European style of fighting, as the cr usaders relied on heavy armor and large horses. They also relied on a few bowmen, which was not enough to counter the experienced fighting style of the Muslims. The Muslims, on the other hand, used camels and fast horses, which allowed them to move across the desert-war-front very fast. The Muslims also had innumerable bowmen. Therefore, they could attack the Europeans from a far distance, which increased their advantage in defeating them. The fighting strategies of the Muslims left the Crusaders helpless, whenever the Muslims decided to strike. Therefore, this shows that the fundamental war style between the Crusaders and the Muslims increased the potential of the Muslim forces, which led to the unsuccessful nature of the crusades.30 Conclusion The crusades refer to the chain of religious wars, fought between Muslim and European forces at Levant and Asian minor. The crusades started after Alexios appealed for the help of the Pope. Thus, the church could help the Byzantines at resto ring the Holy Land to Christian rule. The crusaders were made up of armies from Western Europe. The factors that led to the failure of the Crusades include the unskilled nature of the crusaders forces, which were not able to counter the war techniques of the Muslims. The failure of the crusades resulted from the rivalry that existed between the different leaders and the double-crossing of the Greeks by the church, which reduced the support offered to the crusades. The failure was caused by other factors, including the limited number of the soldiers that made up the crusaders forces, the high costs required to sustain the crusades and the lack of the support promised by the Byzantine forces. Other factors included the lack of effective transport networks in the Middle East and the bloody attacks by Muslim forces, which demoralized the crusaders. Lack of communication among the crusaders teams and the experienced fighting style of the Muslims also perpetuated the failure of the crusad es. Bibliography Bull, Marcus and Norman, Housley (eds). The Experience of Crusading Volume 1, Western Approaches. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003: 307. Cartlidge, Cherese. The Crusades: Failed Holy Wars. San Diego: Lucent Books, 2002 Constable, Giles. The Historiography of the Crusades in Angeliki E. Laiou, ed. The Crusades from the Perspective of Byzantium and the Muslim World. Washington, DC: Dumarton Oaks, 2001. 77. Edbury, Peter and Jonathan Phillips (eds). The Experience of Crusading Volume 2, Defining the Crusader Kingdom. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003: 326. Edgington, Susan and Sarah Lambert (eds). Gendering the Crusades. Cardiff: University of Wales Press, 2002. Florean, Dana. East Meets West: Cultural Confrontation and Exchange after the First Crusade. Language Intercultural Communication, 7. 2 (2007): 150–151. Folda, Jaroslav. Crusader Art in the Holy Land, From the Third Crusade to the Fall of Acre. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press , 2005. Harris, Jonathan. Byzantium and the Crusades. New York: Continuum International Publishing, 2003: 276. Hodgson, Natasha. Women, Crusading and the Holy Land in Historical Narrative. Woodbridge: Boydell, 2007. Housley, Norman. The Later Crusades, 1274-1580: From Lyons to Alcazar. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1992. James, Douglas. Christians and the First Crusade. History Review, 53 (2005): 34-38. Kagay, Donald and Andrew Villalon (eds). Crusaders, Condottieri, and Cannon: Medieval Warfare in Societies around the Mediterranean. Leiden: Brill Academic Publisher, 2003. Madden, Thomas (ed). The Crusades: The Essential Readings. New Jersey: Wiley-Blackwell, 2002. Footnotes 1 Giles Constable, The Historiography of the Crusades in Angeliki E. Laiou, ed. The Crusades from the Perspective of Byzantium and the Muslim World (Washington, DC: Dumarton Oaks, 2001), 77 2 Dana Florean, East Meets West: Cultural Confrontation and Exchange after the First Crusade. Language Intercultural Co mmunication, 7. 2 (2007): 150–151 3 Norman Housley. The Later Crusades, 1274-1580: From Lyons to Alcazar. (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1992), 75 4 Peter Edbury and Jonathan Phillips (eds), The Experience of Crusading Volume 2, Defining the Crusader Kingdom (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003), 326 5 Jonathan Harris, Byzantium and the Crusades (New York: Continuum International Publishing, 2003), 276. 6 Donald Kagay and Andrew Villalon (eds), Crusaders, Condottieri, and Cannon: Medieval Warfare in Societies around the Mediterranean (Leiden: Brill Academic Publisher, 2003), 134. 7 Peter Edbury and Jonathan Phillips (eds), The Experience of Crusading Volume 2, Defining the Crusader Kingdom (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003), 326 8 Dana Florean, East Meets West: Cultural Confrontation and Exchange after the First Crusade. Language Intercultural Communication, 7. 2 (2007): 144. 9 Ibid, 145 10 Ibid, 150 11 Giles Constable, The Historiography of the Crusade s in Angeliki E. Laiou, ed. The Crusades from the Perspective of Byzantium and the Muslim World (Washington, DC: Dumarton Oaks, 2001), 77 12 Florean Dana, East Meets West: Cultural Confrontation and Exchange after the First Crusade. Language Intercultural Communication, 7. 2 (2007): 143 13 Cherese Cartlidge. The Crusades: Failed Holy Wars. (San Diego: Lucent Books, 2002), 24 14 Natasha, Hodgson, Women, Crusading and the Holy Land in Historical Narrative. (Woodbridge: Boydell, 2007), 87. 15 Jonathan Harris, Byzantium and the Crusades (New York: Continuum International Publishing, 2003), 276. 16 Donald Kagay, and Andrew, Villalon (eds), Crusaders, Condottieri, and Cannon: Medieval Warfare in Societies around the Mediterranean (Leiden: Brill Academic Publisher, 2003), 172. 17 Thomas Madden (ed), The Crusades: The Essential Readings (New Jersey: Wiley-Blackwell, 2002), 74. 18 Douglas James, Christians and the First Crusade. History Review, 53 (2005): 34-38. 19 Natasha, Hodgson, Women, Crusading and the Holy Land in Historical Narrative. (Woodbridge: Boydell, 2007), 78. 20 Susan Edgington and Sarah Lambert (eds), Gendering the Crusades (Cardiff: University of Wales Press, 2002), 232 21 Marcus Bull, and Norman, Housley (eds), The Experience of Crusading Volume 1, Western Approaches (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003), 307 22 Jonathan Harris, Byzantium and the Crusades (New York: Continuum International Publishing, 2003), 276 23 Donald Kagay, and Andrew, Villalon (eds), Crusaders, Condottieri, and Cannon: Medieval Warfare in Societies around the Mediterranean (Leiden: Brill Academic Publisher, 2003), 172. 24 Florean Dana, East Meets West: Cultural Confrontation and Exchange after the First Crusade. Language Intercultural Communication, 7. 2 (2007): 144 25 Natasha, Hodgson, Women, Crusading and the Holy Land in Historical Narrative. (Woodbridge: Boydell, 2007), 78. 26 Thomas Madden (ed), The Crusades: The Essential Readings (New Jersey: Wiley-Blackwell, 20 02), 174. 27 Ibid, 175. 28 Donald Kagay, and Andrew, Villalon (eds), Crusaders, Condottieri, and Cannon: Medieval Warfare in Societies around the Mediterranean (Leiden: Brill Academic Publisher, 2003), 172. 29 Natasha, Hodgson, Women, Crusading and the Holy Land in Historical Narrative. (Woodbridge: Boydell, 2007), 78. 30 Natasha, Hodgson, Women, Crusading and the Holy Land in Historical Narrative. (Woodbridge: Boydell, 2007), 78.

Write an evaluation of a published macroeconomic forecast Essay

Write an evaluation of a published macroeconomic forecast - Essay Example This means that there is continuous growth in future, which is brought by the banks’ new advances made on the credits extended to customers. In the next quarter the economy is expected to perform even much better. Another contributor to the economic growth is the housing for the last more than 5 months, sales of real estates hasbeen evident. This is backed by the new modern homes that have been constructed and some which are still under construction. For example, CoreLogic Home Price Index rose by 1.1% in a year. This is according to chapter three of the (economic forecast publication r April 2014). In comparison, the housing construction and sales vary by 9%, construction rate being higher than the sales. This is a growth indicator. Manufacturing and processing sectors have added wonderful growth indicators to the economic growth. The May returns of this year are anticipated to be the highest for the last three years. This follows last years 5% growth, which is highest for the last three years now. Key assumptions here are that: the government does not take care of the borrowers where the cost of loans is very high. The government assumes that there is general growth. They don’t take care of the private sectors and individuals who bear the high cost of economic growth through coast of loans. The second assumption is the policy of selling the homes. It is more beneficial to hold investments than sales, especially real estates. This is in regard to the principle of the investment multiplier concept. The audience of this information is the potential investors, shareholders and the government agencies. Some areas have been exaggerated. Firstly, the sales of assets are lower in long term growth in GDP. Anothe r one is the high cost of loans shifted to borrowers. The borrowers are economically affected. Labor market shows a negative image compared to developments as said earlier in the US economic