In my opinion, the first crusade was the most successful crusade. It was launched by Pope Urban II in the year 1095. The stated goal of the first crusade was to capture the sacred city of Jerusalem and the Holy Land from the Muslims. The first crusade very quickly turned into a migration and conquest of territory outside of Europe.

Urban planned the departure of the crusade for August 15, 1096, the Feast of the Assumption, but months before this a number of armies made up of peasants left for Jerusalem on their own. They were led by a monk named Peter the Hermit of Amiens. Urban expected a few thousand knights, but ended up with a migration numbering up to 100,000 people, most of which were unskilled fighters, including women and children.

Leaving Europe around the appointed time in August, the armies took different paths to Constantinople and gathered outside its city walls in December 1096. The crusaders arrived in Constantinople with little food, and expected help from Alexius I. Alexius agreed to send a Byzantine army under the command of Taticius to accompany the crusaders through Asia Minor. Many crusaders died on the march through Asia due to lack of food and water, as did many horses. Sometimes the crusaders would get lucky and christians would give them gifts of food and money, but when they didn't the crusaders were forced to loot and pillage whenever the oppurtunity presented itself.

Meanwhile a plague broke out, killing even more people, including the legate Adhemar. There were now even fewer horses than before, and Muslim peasants refused to give them food. In December, the capture of Ma'arrat al-Numan took place and the first act of cannibalism by the crusaders took place. In 1099, the march to Jerusalem was renewed, leaving Bohemund behind as the first Prince of Antioch.

On May 7 the Crusaders finally reached their targeted city, Jerusalem. Many soldiers even wept upon seeing the city they had traveled so long to reach. Again, many crusaders died due to the lack of food and water in Jerusalem. The crusaders put Jerusalem through a lengthy seige. Though only 1,500 soldiers remained of the crusaders, they got hope from a priest named Peter Desiderius, who claimed to have had a divine vision instructing them to fast and then march around the city walls barefoot. Over the course of that afternoon, the crusaders almost every inhabitant of Jerusalem, leading to them taking it over completely.

The first crusade was very successful and involved the siege of Jerusalem and Antioch. Though they used some very odd methods, such as cannibalism, Christians proved to the Muslims that they were willing to make incredible sacrifices to insure the defeat of their enemies. It worked and led to a very successful siege of Jerusalem, which was the overall main goal of the first crusade. The success of a mission is goal achievement, and this is what the Christians accomplished. Christian success also served to fire up support for successive ventures. It must have been a debilitating psychological defeat for the Muslims because there are still, to this day, strong anti-Christian sentiment on the part of the Muslims that has its roots in the Crusades. The first crusade was considered very successful because even though they lost many lives in the battles, they really expressed their faith in the Christian cause and their love for God.

Our school's blogs are pretty good thanks to Mr. Lockwood so it made it pretty tough to pick out the ones that I like because they are all pretty good. But I chose some that I favored over the rest.

The first blog is a good blog because it is more than just the bare minimum. Some blogs, including mine, are five links and no actual research. This blog is different because he found as much information on the topic as he could and shared it in a way that made it very easy to understand and also very entertaining to read.

My second blog of choice was decent, but was nothing spectacular. The blog has no links, which limits the amount of information on the blog, and also has very random and jumpy thoughts. It does not blend very well and was a little tougher than the first one to read.

The third blog that I am critiquing is also a little below average. It is pretty much the bare minimum, five links and he's done. This made the blog a little difficult to read. There are also grammatical errors throughout the blog.

The fourth blog is, in my opinion, the best blog that I have read so far. His blogs are incredibly detailed and well above average. His facts are plentiful and his links are perfectly on subject.

The final blog that I have critiqued is also a very good and indepth blog. It's by a senior which means he has had a whole lot of practice on blogging thanks to Mr. Lockwood. It is incredibly detailed and from the looks of it he spent a lot of time doing the research on them. This blog and the fourth blog that I critiqued are both very good and my two favorites out of the whole school.