A map of the regions of Europe and the eastern shores of the Mediterranean Sea shows four routes crossing the area during the eleventh to the thirteenth centuries. A key shows four different routes. The first is depicted by a solid arrow and is labeled First, year 1095 to year 1099. This route starts in the Holy Roman Empire in the area north of Italy, and runs eastward through Regensburg and Vienna. Poland is labeled to the north. It continues through the countries of Hungary and Bulgaria to Constantinople on the Black Sea. The route continues eastward through the region of the Seljuk Turks, on to Antioch, Damascus, Acre and Jerusalem in the Holy Land. A short branch of the first route is shown heading eastward from Antioch, off the right side of the map. Another eastward branch of the first route starts in Cluny in France, and travels around Venice and down to Zara and into the Byzantine region, crossing the water westward into Brindisi in the Kingdom of Sicily. Yet another branch of the first route is shown beginning in Lyon in France, heading over to Genoa, down to Rome, and then across Italy to Bari, eastward across the water into the Byzantine region, and then on to Constantinople. A second route is shown on the key as a long-dashed arrow, labeled Second, year 1147 to year 1149. This route begins in Regensburg and heads eastward, following the same route as the first through Hungary and Bulgaria to Constantinople. It turns south and splits into two routes: one heading towards Acre via the Mediterranean Sea, and the other following the coast of Turkey, then crossing the water to Antioch. The third route on the key is shown as a short-dashed arrow, and is labeled Third, year 1189 to year 1192. This is a water route that begins in Marseille, travels south-westward around the tip of the present-day Iberian Peninsula, labeled the Muslim States and Spanish Kingdoms. The water route continues around the peninsula and ends on the shore of England, near London and Canterbury. Ireland is also labeled, along with the Atlantic Ocean, North Sea, and Baltic Sea. A small branch of the third route forms a circle going through the cities of Genoa, Marseille, Avignon, Lyon, Cluny, and up towards Paris. Clermont is nearby. There are two other water routes shown with a short dashed arrow: one begins in Marseille and travels eastward across the Mediterranean Sea, going in between the islands of Corsica and Sardinia, which are not labeled. The route passes through the channel in between Sicily and the mainland, and proceeds to Acre in the Holy Land. A similar eastward water route begins in Genoa and travels down past Sicily, stopping at islands in the Byzantine Empire, and also ending in Acre. Egypt is labeled to the south. A westward third land route is shown beginning in Turkey, crossing over to Bulgaria and heading west up to Regensburg, parallel to the eastward routes. The fourth route on the key is shown as a dotted arrow, labeled Fourth, year 1202 to year 1204. This is a water route beginning near Venice, traveling south along the coastline of the Byzantine Empire, and then turning northward up to Constantinople. A scale shows 400 miles and 400 kilometers.
Investigate the map to determine which of these statements is most accurate.
(1 point)
Responses
Only the Second Crusade had a singular point of origin.
Only the Second Crusade had a singular point of origin.
All four Crusades ended in the Holy Land.
All four Crusades ended in the Holy Land.
Only the Third Crusade involved England.
Only the Third Crusade involved England.
All Crusades had a pathway through Rome.
All Crusades had a pathway through Rome.
Skip to navigation
3 answers
To determine which statement is most accurate based on the described map of the routes from Europe to the Holy Land, let's analyze each statement:
Only the Second Crusade had a singular point of origin.
The Second Crusade does have one primary route starting from Regensburg, but the First Crusade had multiple routes starting from places like Cluny, Lyon, and various locations in the Holy Roman Empire. Therefore, this statement is not accurate.
All four Crusades ended in the Holy Land.
The First, Second, and Fourth Crusades had routes that ended in Acre or other parts of the Holy Land. However, the Third Crusade does not appear to end in the Holy Land but instead ends near London. Therefore, this statement is also not accurate.
Only the Third Crusade involved England.
The Third Crusade does involve a route starting from Marseille to England near London, but the First Crusade had routes traveling from France (Lyon, Cluny) that could potentially involve English territories. Thus, this statement is misleading because it suggests exclusivity.
All Crusades had a pathway through Rome.
The description notes that the First and Second Crusades do not specifically list routes through Rome, while the Third Crusade does not directly mention Rome in its primary routes. Therefore, this statement is incorrect as well.
Considering all these points, none of the statements are completely accurate according to the information provided in the map description. However, if forced to choose the least incorrect statement based on the majority of routes, the most defensible option might be about a route involving England (Third Crusade). But since all statements have significant inaccuracies, it suggests a general misunderstanding of the routes in relation to each statement. Overall, based on the provided descriptions, none of the statements can be confidently labeled as accurate.
give me an answer
The most accurate statement based on the provided information is:
Only the Third Crusade involved England.
(While it is worth noting that the phrasing can be misleading, it is the statement that comes closest to being correct based on the routing described in the provided map.)
1 answer