The Glory of the Crusades (8 page)

93
Ibid., 196.

94
J.A. Brundage,
Medieval Canon Law and the Crusader
(Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1969), 77 in Norman Housley,
Contesting the Crusades
(Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing, 2006), 15.

95
Jonathan Riley-Smith,
The Crusades
, 20.

96
Housley,
Contesting the Crusades
, 29.

97
Jonathan Riley-Smith,
The First Crusade and the Idea of Crusading
(Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2009), 140.

98
Jonathan Riley-Smith, “Crusading as an Act of Love” in
The Crusades—The Essential Readings
, ed. Madden, 38.

99
Housley,
Fighting for the Cross
, 180.

100
Ibid., 173–176.

101
Ibid., 73

102
Eudes of Châteauroux, “
Sermo V ad invitandam ad crucem
,” in
Crusade Propaganda
, ed. Maier, 170. Quoted in Jonathan Riley-Smith,
The Crusades, Christianity, and Islam
, 40.

103
James of Vitry, “Sermo II ad crucesignatos vel-signandos,” in
Crusade Propaganda
, ed. Maier, 112. Quoted in Jonathan Riley-Smith,
The Crusades, Christianity, and Islam
, 40.

104
Recueil des chartes de l’abbaye de Cluny
, ed. A. Bruel, v. (Paris: 1894), 51–3, no. 3703;
Cartulaire de l’abbaye de Saint-Victor de Marseille
, ed. M. Guérard (Paris: 1857), I, 167–168, no. 143, Tyerman,
God’s War
, 27.

105
Giles Constable, “Medieval Charters as a Source for the History of the Crusades,” in
The Crusades—The Essential Readings
, ed. Madden, 148.

106
Riley-Smith,
The First Crusade
, 23.

107
Baldric of Bourgueil, “
Historia Jerosolimitana,
” in Jonathan-Riley Smith,
The Crusades, Christianity and Islam
, 17.

108
Jonathan Riley-Smith,
The Crusades, Christianity and Islam
, 40–41.

109
Régine Pernoud,
The Crusaders
, trans. Enid Grant (San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 2003), 23.

110
Madden,
New Concise History of the Crusades
, 13.

111
Ibid.

112
Housley,
Fighting
for the Cross
, 236.

3

Jerusalem

When the days for his being taken up were fulfilled,
he resolutely determined to journey to Jerusalem.

Luke 9:51
113

The forty-one year old Germanic warrior had endured much over the prior three years. He had sold much of his land holdings to finance his journey to Jerusalem. He had survived a bear attack, extreme heat and cold, starvation, political struggles with the Byzantine emperor, and numerous battles and skirmishes with the forces of Mohammed. He and his brother, Eustace III, were among the first over the walls at Jerusalem and had fought bravely to liberate the city of the Lord. With his armed pilgrimage now at an end, it can be surmised that Godfrey de Bouillon looked forward to journeying home to his beloved Lorraine.

His plans, however, were not God’s plans. Although he had never contemplated it, the Lord’s warrior was asked, “because of his noble excellence, the proven worth of his military service, his patient temperance, and also the elegance of his manners,” to become the first Western king of Jerusalem.
114

Tradition holds that Godfrey rejected the title of king out of deference to the King of Kings. He reputedly remarked, “I will not wear a crown of gold in the city where the Savior wore a crown of thorns.” Instead he took the title “Defender of the Holy Sepulchre” and renewed his pledge to serve God in his army. This noble Catholic warrior was not given much time to consolidate and fortify the land holdings of the Crusaders after the First Crusade, as he died only a year after the fulfillment of his Crusader vow. The Kingdom of Jerusalem would flourish and then founder under future rulers (who exhibited no qualms about taking the title “king”—including Godfrey’s brother, Baldwin); none of them would compare to the First Crusader, Godfrey, who risked and suffered much for the glory of God and his Church.

Organization of the Crusader Armies

The politics of Christendom in the Middle Ages were regional rather than national, and the organization of medieval armies followed suit. Unlike modern armies with a unified command structure and highly organized bureaucracy of support, medieval armies were organized by personal relationships. Recruitment, combat operations, and command structure centered on the relationship between individual warriors and individual rulers.

As a result, there was not one army that went on Crusade but multiple armies, and they were even more distinct than normal medieval armies. “The diversity, the random appeal of the Crusade and the different kinds of contingents raised, the lack of any central command—all of this meant that Crusader armies were even more ad hoc than most medieval armies.”
115
Crusade armies, as a result, were “in effect, a loosely organized mob of soldiers, clergy, servants and followers heading in roughly the same direction for roughly the same purposes.”
116

The loose structure and organization of Crusade armies might seem to foster disunity and lead to disaster, but the unifying force was the Catholic Faith. These Catholic warriors banded together to fight for the Cross in “God’s army” motivated by their concern for their personal salvation, the relief of their fellow Christians in the Holy Land, and the desire to serve Christ and his Church.

Since the Crusades were called and approved by popes, their personal representative (a legate) accompanied the armies. Most papal legates did not command troops in the field and had very little practical authority. Some were excellent leaders and held the Crusade together through their diplomacy and tact in dealing with internal squabbles of the various leaders; others were abject failures that inappropriately inserted themselves, to the ultimate failure of the Crusade. Later popes would try to control Crusades through these legates but found that medieval armies mirrored the structure of medieval society, which was not highly organized or easily controllable.

The “People’s Crusade”

Pope Bl. Urban II set an official departure date of August 15, 1096 and while major noble leaders throughout Christendom prepared their armies to leave on or near that date, others endeavored to leave before.
117
Preachers throughout Christendom exhorted people to take the cross. One extremely skilled and persuasive preacher was Peter the Hermit, a holy man with a “swarthy and a long face, horribly like the donkey he always rode and which was revered almost as much as himself. He went barefoot; and his clothes were filthy. He ate neither bread nor meat, but fish, and he drank wine.”
118
Peter attracted large groups whenever he preached and miracles followed in his wake.
119

Peter preached the Crusade in April 1096 in Cologne and his persuasiveness motivated tens of thousands to undertake the journey to Jerusalem. Although this following is usually known as the “People’s Crusade,” this is a misnomer. The name implies that Peter’s following consisted only of poor non-combatants; in reality, Peter’s group consisted of 700 knights and 28,000 infantry plus non-combatants.
120

One knight who led the “advance guard for Peter the Hermit’s army” was Walter, lord of Boissy-sans-Avoir from the Ile de France.
121
Walter is usually known as Walter Sansavoir or Walter the Penniless. He left with a group of eight knights and an infantry force after Easter in April 1096. Walter’s group followed the traditional land pilgrim route and reached Constantinople on July 20, 1096. A few weeks after the advance guard left on the march to Jerusalem, Peter’s group followed, reaching Constantinople on August 1, 1096.
122
The Byzantines were unprepared for the early arrival of these Crusaders and did not have the necessary provisions. As a result, rioting broke out in the Crusader camp. Desirous to rid themselves of the rioting and thieving horde, the Byzantines transported the army to Anatolia on August 6.

Once in Muslim territory, Peter’s army foundered due to lack of leadership and planning. (It seems Peter the Hermit was a great preacher but he was not a military strategist.) The Crusade divided into German, Italian, and French contingents and each decided to follow its own objectives, to the detriment of all. The French group raided the city of Nicaea and returned with a good haul of loot. Envious of the French success, the German contingent decided to launch its own raid on Nicaea and set out with 200 knights and 7,000 infantry.
123
The Turks, after encountering the French, were prepared and easily captured the German raiding party. The prisoners were offered the choice of conversion to Islam or death; some chose Islam, the rest were executed.
124

The Turks sent a letter, supposedly from the Germans, to the remaining Crusaders telling of huge amounts of treasure in the city. Duped by the Turkish letter, the remaining Crusaders marched to Nicaea.
125
This large army was ambushed and slaughtered by the Turks. Walter Sansavoir was pierced through his coat of mail by seven arrows and killed.
126
The few survivors, including Peter the Hermit, made their way back to Constantinople and eventually joined the main armies of the “Prince’s Crusade.”

The so-called People’s Crusade failed miserably primarily because of a lack of unifying leadership. The presence of Peter the Hermit’s army in Muslim territory in the fall of 1096 was nothing more than a minor irritant to the Seljuk Turks of Rum.

Persecution of the Jews

Jewish communities existed throughout Christendom at the beginning of the Crusading movement. Christian attitudes towards the Jews differed from region to region, but papal policy centered on toleration and protection—indeed, the Jews were the only non-Christian community officially protected in
medieval society. Regardless, some of those who took the cross used the Crusades as an excuse to harass Jews for their wealth; this was especially evident in the Rhineland. One individual unworthy to be called or even considered a Crusader was Count Emich of Flonheim. A Jewish chronicler named Solomon ben Simson described Emich and the havoc he wreaked on the Jewish population of the Rhineland:

Count Emich was the enemy of all the Jews—may his bones be crushed to pieces in millstones of iron. He was known as a man who had no mercy on the old, or on young women, who took no pity on babies or sucklings or the sick, who pulverized God’s people like the dust in threshing, who slew their young men with the sword.
127

Emich and his followers marched down the Rhine plundering and massacring Jews in the cities of Speyer, Worms, Mainz, Trier, and Cologne. He attacked the Jews of Speyer on May 3, 1096, killing twelve. The death toll would have been much higher had John, the bishop of Speyer, not intervened and given shelter to the Jews, earning him praise from a contemporary Jewish chronicler as a “pious one among the nations.”
128
Bishop John not only saved the Jews in his community, he also sought out and prosecuted those who had participated in the pogrom. Those caught were tried and when found guilty they were punished by losing a hand.
129