People have to be careful with allusions to the Crusades since many of the crusaders had more worldly motives for going east rather than simply defending the faith. And they were tough, brutal men in their own right.
You are very correct!
My brother has visited many Crusader sites in the Middle East. I have helped him in getting the necessary visas for countries.
Why did they pick the middle of summer for the siege is beyond me.
Sure, many Crusaders having broken through after a long siege, lost control and dishonored their oaths. But that doesn’t take away from the fact that there still many Crusaders who took the long, dangerous journey with honorable motives.
Sir Raymond of Toulouse, after capturing Jerusalem, was asked if he wished to be crowned the ruler of Jerusalem. He turned it down, saying, “I refused to wear a crown of gold in the city where my Savior wore a crown of thorns.”
No Eastern Christians were massacred
Contrary to what is sometimes alleged, no eyewitness source refers to Crusaders killing Eastern Christians in Jerusalem, and early Eastern Christian sources (Matthew of Edessa, Anna Comnena, Michael the Syrian, etc.) make no such allegation about the Crusaders in Jerusalem. According to the Syriac Chronicle, all the Christians had already been expelled from Jerusalem before the Crusaders arrived. Presumably this would have been done by the Fatimid governor to prevent their possible collusion with the Crusaders.
The Gesta Francorum claims that on Wednesday August 9, two and a half weeks after the siege, Peter the Hermit encouraged all the "Greek and Latin priests and clerics" to make a thanksgiving procession to the Church of the Holy Sepulchre. This indicates that some Eastern Christian clergy remained in or near Jerusalem during the siege. In November 1100, when Fulcher of Chartres personally accompanied Baldwin on a visit to Jerusalem, they were greeted by both Greek and Syrian clerics and laity (Book II, 3), indicating an Eastern Christian presence in the city a year later.
Current secular scholarship on the Crusades says that this legend is false. The streets did not run with blood. The “massacre” was hugely exaggerated in the chronicles.
Does that mean the victorious Crusaders were perfect little angels.
But the first rule in historical research is to evaluate sources critically. It is common for accounts of military victories to be exaggerated.
Regarding the massacres of Jews in some times in Germany. This was mob action; the bishops did their best to protect the Jews. Socio-economic issues as well as religious issues were involved.