What are the downsides of Villehardouin's account?

In the topic below write your argument proving that I was incorrect in saying Villehardouin's account of the Fourth Crusade was the most accurate available.

In my opinion the fact that villehardouin was involved in the crusades is the biggest factor which decreases the reliablitly of his book "The Conquest of Constantiople". Villehardouin was not only involved in the crusades but was closly associated with top leaders and organisers. using this I can infer that he may have had a vested interest in the subject he was writting about as he would natuarally want to portray his "side" in a better light than the enemy. This may lead to a bias, one sided account of the event which would not be historically accuarte, therefore decreasing the reliablility of his book.
IVE HAD A GAAAAAAAAAAME!!!!!!

Villehardouins "The Conquest of Constantinople" is considered to be a strong reliable source of information because of the first hand experiences he had during the course of the crusades. Villehardouin not only was involved in the crusades but was also a member and was involved with top leaders and highly ranked officials. I can gather from this that he was strongly enthusiastic and interested in the crusades which suggests his account could be a bit one sided and biased. Furthermore because of his high status people are going to listen and instantly agree with what villehardouin puts forward so it could be argued that he deliberately used this status to decieve people, therefore making his book that little more unreliable.

THANKS!

It is indeed true that Villehardouin's Conquest of Constantinople offers a very reliable account of the events of the fourth Crusade.However overlooking this fact is several factors which can decrease the consistency of his account.
The idea of Knights in the middle ages conjured up a courageous and chivalrous person, exactly how Villehardouin would have been viewed as by the western societies. This could suggest that The Conquest of Constantinople may have been edited to agree to the western ideology; therefore not reporting the negative aspects of the war such as pillage and murder to maintain Villehardouin’s reputation as a respected knight. Describing his fellow knights on crusade in a positive way could also have benefitted Villehardouin personally if he wished to climb further in his social status.
Another reason the account may be unreliable is that because Catholic Church was such a prominent establishment in people’s lives at the time that the majority of Western society thoroughly believed in the reasons for the crusade and that the Muslim population had to be ‘Christianised’.
It is therefore unlikely that if Villehardouin had described the mass violence against the Muslim population as unfair or unjust that his book would have been accepted and disrupted. This again ties into the idea that Villehardouin may have left out the more horrific aspects of the war to make his book more popular.

Credibility is a factor which will undoubtedly have to be taken into account when a reader is reading a book, to ensure they do not take the information in at face value and instead critique the information were possible/necessary.
Taking this into account i found it relatively easy to criticize certain aspects regarding Villhardouin's works.
For instcance i know that Vill was actually present at the time of the crusades so would have seen many of the things he wrote about 1st hand, he also didn't finish compilling the book till a few years after the crusades had ended meaning he had time to carefully think about what he was writing & make sure it was as accurate as possible, this would suggest that he's work would give a highly accurate account.
However his social placing has to be taken into account, he was the Marshal of Champagne, a job he got partly because he was good at controlling a men, so of course he couldn't comment on his men acting dishonorably (which may well of happened) because it would reflect badly on him.

Their are many, many downsides and negatives towards Villehardouin's account of the fourth crusade an most of these are apparent right from the start of studying who he (Villehardouin) was. For one, Villehardouin played an active role in the physical movement of the fourth crusade, this makes the reader instinctively question the reliability behind his book, "The Conquest of Constantinople", perhaps he may not want to write about some of the negative things that happened during the fourth crusade, or he may leave things out. He would experience natural bias, thus making his account of the fourth crusade...intolerable. Cheers.

The greatest mistake made on judging the relibility of Vs account of the crusades was, the 'Popularity' factor. Yes it may be true that the text was very popular at the time but how can this test the reliability of V? In 1207 the 4th crusade had been over for 3 years and had consisted of piliging innocent, rich and CHRISTIAN cities throughout the middle east. Crusading at the time was still very popular in 1207 propably by now due to the prosperity that came with it rather than saving the Holy Land. This meant that anything negative towards crusading V would publish would not be taken seriously and may even damage his prestige. Therefore my main point is that V may have exagerated facts and created fiction to boost sales and reader range, thus challenging Mr Farndons assertions on the relibility of Vs text.

Villehardouins account is made less reliable as he played an important role in moving the fourth crusade. this would lead him to be bias as he wouldnt want to portray the crusaders as immoral and on an unworthy cause. this bias makes his book "The Conquest of Constantinople" less reliable as his experiance of the crusades would surely make his account bias.

basically the english boshed everyone an the muslims tried to chore all the malts but england stopped them. they didnt give a jank and jus got brazen.


if anyones got any spare copper let me know. my mob is 07765023866



and someone ask if i can come bak 2 7th form cos im well bored in me houseeeee... KUSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSHHHHHHHHHHTTTTTTYYYYYYYYYYYYY!
and say i will get propa good grades and wont piss about