Birinci ve üçüncü Haçlı seferleri kaynaklarında müslümanlar için kullanılan terimlerin anlamları

ABSTRACTTHE MEANINGS OF THE TERMS USED FOR THE MUSLIMS IN THEACCOUNTS OF THE FIRST AND THIRD CRUSADESGündoğdu, BirolM.A., Department of HistorySupervisor: Asst. Prof. Dr. Paul LatimerAugust 2005Although most people who encounter terms such as identity, group identity,ethnic, groups, nations or religious groups believe that they know, at least roughly, whatthese terms mean, the terms are in fact slippery and difficult to define. The confusion isnot limited to readers of the mass media they are difficult terms for the academic world,as well. Exact definition of these terms remains as elusive as ever. The more academicshave tried to define such terms, the more such terms have taken new meanings, which donot necessarily bring either better or worse definitions of these terms. In this study, Ihave tried to investigate the terms whereby one might argue to define identity, groupidentity, the concept of ethnicity, groups, nations or religious groups in the crusadingera. The way the chroniclers of the First and Third Crusades identify Muslimsconstitutes the basic and the most important part of this thesis.My point of departure is to look at the terms used for Muslims by the chroniclersand to understand the contemporary meanings of these terms in order to analyze whatchanged between these two periods separated as they are by some ninety years. Not onlydoes it throw a different and particular light on Latin Christian attitudes to Muslimscompared with the more detached, more purely Western-based and more academic?western views of Islam? literature, but it contributes also to the study of ?identity?, andparticularly ?group identity? in the Middle Ages. After describing the difficulties thathistorians might encounter and what they need to take into consideration in studying thisterminology, I have concentrated on the religious and the ethnic terms the chroniclersused for Muslims in their accounts of the First and Third Crusades. This is a study whereI have attempted to show how it is not sufficient for historians to use the terms in his orher sources without explaining the earlier meanings they had for the people who usedthem. In this connection, this is an attempt to provide an already investigated topic witha distinct, new perspective showing how historians should approach the terms with theiroriginal meanings in the times they were used.