Crusade for a Crusade

This post is a synopsis of Loren Rosson III's blog entitled From Soldiers of Hell to Soldiers of Christ: Exporting Violence. In the author’s post there is a great summary of the First Crusade and information about Pope Urban II's actions. In the blog are quotations from Robert the Monk such as "Rise up, then, Christian warriors: you who continually and vainly seek pretexts for war, rejoice, for you have today found a true pretext." This almost gives evidence that Pope Urban's message was a violent call to arms rather then a suggested religous pilgrimage.

This idea that Pope Urban II was just an opportunist and wanted the Holy Land for all of Christendom is not so far fetched of an idea. Urban II was presented with a really good opportunity to recapture the Holy Lands when the Byzantine emperor Alexius I called for the church’s help. Seeing that the church acted upon this opportunity is evidence that recapturing the Holy Land was on the church's agenda. Why not expand Chritendom a little?

From his persuasive speech to his calling for more troops in the Holy Land, Pope Urban II showed little characteristics of a Pope and more characteristics of a general. He threatened armies with Excommunication to fight for The Crusades. The actions of the pope are by far the most important in The Crusades invention. Pope Urban used many different reasons for The Crusades including Muslim’s unrightfully controlling the Holy Lands, Muslim’s ill treatment of Christians, and the ever so famous “God Wills It!”

Works Cited:
http://lorenrosson.blogspot.com/2006/11/from-soldiers-of-hell-to-soldiers-of.html

Good God! What's a Crusade?

At first, one can almost laugh at the impossibility of condensing the history of The Crusades into one provocative question. After much contemplating a reader would consider the most legitimate and necessary question to be asked about The Crusades is, well, “What were The Crusades?” This question seems to be a medieval historian’s biggest problem. To define The Crusades is to nearly define hundreds of years of history! Almost every crusade had a different meaning, because not all of The Crusades had the same intentions and goals. Some define The Crusades to be a war of papal consent or as a holy war. Some define The Crusades as a trek to show ones loyalty, or a way to renew ones salvation in their faith. So what were The Crusades?

This almost subjective question has become the center of debate in medieval history. Looking from the eyes of a secular scholar one can see not only the brutality of The Crusades’ events, but also it’s religious meaning. For one to crusade did not solely mean to devour the enemy of the church in the name of god, but it also meant for one to perform a penitential act.

The definition of “crusade” by modern standards is needless to say different from when it was invented. The common knowledge of The Crusades is basically that Western European Christians went to Jerusalem, because the church wanted them to. Another person might elaborate that they saw in a movie that it also had to do with a “holy grail”. To think that tens of thousands of people made a journey from Western Europe to the Middle East to die for a cup is ridiculous.

Finally it is important to stress that The Crusades is known for mainly describing a time period in Western European history. As generic as it sounds, it makes more sense that the word describes a period rather than an idea. When asked what The Crusades were, you can now answer that it was merely a time period in the middle ages. To go into any further detail will strike argument and criticism.

Works Cited:
Alfred J. Andrea. "Encyclopedia of the Crusades". Connecticut: Greenwood Press, 2003
Helen Nicholson. "The Crusades". Connecticut: Greenwood Publishing Group, 2004

Noncombatants

Although Pope Urban II discouraged the old, the feeble, and all others unfit for military service to participate in the armed pilgrimage many of them did. Noncombatants can be known as women, children, persons of the clergy, and other unarmed people. This pilgrimage was advertised to the people to bring them closer to god, affirm their place in their faith’s community, and to serve as a penitential purpose. Some countries such as England announced that if one set out on three crusades and returned they would be granted a noble title. All of these advantages made many noncombatants follow the armies.

Women played a huge role in the crusades. They supplied soldiers with supplies by using their own funds and helped colonize the holy land. The crusades cost a fortune to participate in. It was easy for an armed knight to go from knight status to selling his armor to be infantrymen to selling his weapon to become a noncombatant pauper. The women that furnished a knight with his equipment were most likely very wealthy. Pope Urban II also declared that no women could set out on a crusade unless accompanied by brothers, husbands, or legal guardians. Arab historian Ibn al-Athir reported that in 1191 Frankish women donned armor and participated in crusading activities. Adultery was not uncommon in the camps of the crusading armies. During the siege of Antioch (1097-98) the army believed that they suffered terribly because of their sins and drove all the married and unmarried women from the camps.

It is known that when numbers were low due to high casualties people of the clergy and children would fight to help support the armies. Clergymen that went on the crusades were generally there to make the pilgrimage to Jerusalem. After the first crusade an order of priest warriors were created known as the Knights Templar. This gave the church a different function in the crusades. At first clergymen wouldn’t participate in the crusades because the church would not permit it. Most likely the clergymen that set out with the Knights Templar were looking to claim their own estates in the holy land.

Work Cited:
-Alfred J. Andrea. "Encyclopedia of the Crusades". Connecticut: Greenwood Press, 2003
-Walter Porges. Speculum: A Journal of Mediaeval Studies. “The Clergy, The Poor, and The Noncombatants On The First Crusade”. January 1946

Peer Review

Just last week we were aassigned to evaluate each other's papers. I evaluated a paper concerning the bussiness ethics field which is quite forigen to me. We both had to meet outside the classroom do to our abscense to the previous class. After evaluating each other's paper, we both noticed many problems.

After reading the evaluation to my paper I started too fix the many problems it had. O ne of the major problems had to do with my thesis. I really didn't have much of a thesis. All I had in place of a thesis was a sentense they gave no argument or direction. This monumental problem was then resolved when I implimented a thesis and then started to make an argument on the main figures of the first crusade.

I am very glad that I participated in the peer evaluation. The evaluation helpedme notice problems that I wouldn't of caught on my own.

Shall we have a Jihad or a Crusade?

Jihad. Usually translated as “holy war” from Arabic, but is literally translated as “ones struggle, or strife”. Today in American society any common American would tell you that it is a Muslim’s practice of a war against infidels. In actuality a Muslim who doesn’t belong to a radical faction wouldn’t try to kill infidels based on religious doctrine. Extremists in religious factions have perverted the idea of Jihad. Despite scholarly translation, many extremists have used Jihad as a means to accomplish military goals. This controversial topic precedes modern politics, and almost was an invention of the crusades.

Crusade. Some dictionaries would have the definition “any war carried on under papal sanction”. Is this any different from a holy war? It isn’t, in fact, both “Jihad”(religious extremists definition) and Crusade reflect my definition of “warfare based of religious intentions”. The crusades were military campaigns sanctioned by the papacy to establish religious influence in the east. Once the armies of the first crusade arrived in Jerusalem they slaughtered everyone in the city. This massacre didn’t even exclude women or children. This event was considered justified to the crusading armies as invoking god’s will. Some eyewitness accounts claim the slaughter to be very brutal. No religion embraces such violence.

I cannot define the Qur’an’s definition of Jihad, I don’t think that the papacy’s crusades were just, but I do know that both can be considered evil tools in the hands of the religious extremists. Both of these words can almost be considered pious deceptions. To be promised religious salvation for violent military actions is contradictory. Almost all religions have a foundation of peace and tranquility. The crusades are just another example of how religion can be manipulated and used to start a war.

Sources:
Alfred J. Andrea. "Encyclopedia of the Crusades". Connecticut: Greenwood Press, 2003
Helen Nicholson. "The Crusades". Connecticut: Greenwood Publishing Group, 2004
Corliss K. Slack. "Historical Dictionary of the Crusades". Maryland: The Scarecrow Press, 2003

Researching The Crusades

When researching on such vast historical topics such as the Crusades, one can sort of place him or herself in the event that they're reading about. As a child pretends about fighting dragons, a researcher imagines the 50,000 soldiers laying siege upon the walls of a fortified city. In researching my topic I, much like a pretending child, attempted to relive the events that I read. In doing so I not only discovered facts about my subject but also attempted to experience the thoughts and feelings of those that I reminisced about.

Reading about young men not much older than I leaving their families, homes, and dedicating their lives to the church has me amazed. The size of the armies that went on the crusades still makes me wonder on what that would actually look like. I can't even imagine 60,000 soldiers clad in full armor, making military formations, and flags waving in the hands of their heralds. This awesome image made me almost daydream about the Crusades.

When reading about the crusades it is not very hard to discover a tale about a brave person accomplishing a great deed. Reading such tales would put me in awe and wonder how much they actually exaggerated in the accounts. Whether or not the tales were exaggerated or actual accounts I still hold them in respect. I respect these tales because I believe that such tales of knights accomplishing great deeds are the kind of stories that we lack today.

Most of the accounts written at that time and subjected to the common people were intended to persuade you to go on the crusades. After thousands of years their effects are still present. Not in the aspect that after reading you want to pick up a sword and kill a man in the name of god, but in the motivation it gives you. After you read about a brave knight climbing a castle's wall and saving hundreds of men you have a great admiration of courage. Doing what you admire is everyone’s motto, so in a sense you almost begin to follow chivalry after reading about the crusades.

Sources:
Alfred J. Andrea. "Encyclopedia of the Crusades". Connecticut: Greenwood Press, 2003
Helen Nicholson. "The Crusades". Connecticut: Greenwood Publishing Group, 2004
Corliss K. Slack. "Historical Dictionary of the Crusades". Maryland: The Scarecrow Press, 2003

The Crusade’s Heart and Soul

In The Crusades that took place in the Levant there were many important figures. Kings, pilgrim warriors, and popes all of great importance took part in the crusades events. Considering that the events of The Crusades date from 1009-1312 and thousands of important figures can be named, I will focus on just important figures of the First Crusade. The two most important figures in the First Crusade would be the Byzantine Emperor Alexius I and Pope Urban II. Both Pope Urban II and Alexius I can be credited with the crusade’s instigation and invention.

Pope Urban II (1042-1099 A.D.) was the head clerical figure at Clermont that first preached about the “just war” in the east. This idea was meant for knights of a noble social class who were not only accustomed to war, but were prepared for the church’s task to aid Alexius I. Urban II idea was perverted by evangelist’s and people of all kinds decided to go with the crusading armies to take advantage of the chance to get an indulgence. Pope Urban II decided to grant remissions of sins for those who fought for the church. This supplied every crusading army with many noncombatants who sought their own redemption.

Urban II persuaded many of the nobles in Europe to send their armies to the Middle East. In some cases he would threaten nobles with excommunication to participate. Urban II produced funds for these armies that were meant for the Middle East. A huge misconception on The Crusades is that it was for the sole retaking of Jerusalem in the name of Christendom, but it was also for the interest of the church in expanding its powers westward. They couldn’t go further with their influence eastward till later in history. Urban II established churches in the Levant during the duration of the Crusades, which in turn expanded the church’s power.

The other major figure in implementing this violent war was the Byzantine emperor Alexius I. Alexius I was the one to give the church reason to begin The Crusades by sending a message to Pope Gregory VII that he was in need of military aid. Alexius supplied the crusading armies with safe passage and substantial reinforcements. In turn the crusading armies rid the Byzantine emperor of the Seljuk Turks that kept invading his land. In doing this crusading armies also accomplished the church’s main objective.

Alexius I lead the armies into battle in the Crusade of the Great Lords. Many of the other leaders that participated in the Crusade of the Great Lords saw Alexius I as a great ally if they were to establish principalities in the Middle East. Once principalities were established in the Levant Alexius I aided those who kept their oath to him as their liege. Had the Byzantine emperor not of reinforced the armies in the crusades many would of died and nearly nothing would have been accomplished. Alexius I also allowed armies of the later crusades to pass through his territories with safe passage.

These two figures were crucial in The Crusades existence. By combining penitential pilgrimage and “just war” pope Urban II made the Crusades a practice of Western Christianity. The Byzantine emperor Alexius I helped unite east and west Christendom with better relations. These figures ultimately shaped the Crusades beginning and future through their actions.

Sources:
Alfred J. Andrea. "Encyclopedia of the Crusades". Connecticut: Greenwood Press, 2003
Helen Nicholson. "The Crusades". Connecticut: Greenwood Publishing Group, 2004
Corliss K. Slack. "Historical Dictionary of the Crusades". Maryland: The Scarecrow Press, 2003

The First Crusade

The First Crusade (1096-1102) was conducted in three waves and was intended by the church to help the Byzantine emperor Alexius against Turkish forces. This main objective of the church was masked by the pious idea of a “holy war” to retake Jerusalem. The First Crusade was considered the only successful crusade in the Levant. Although successful the First Crusade had many problems such as the lack of supplies, noncombatants following crusading armies, and the undisciplined army itself. The three waves of the First Crusade were the People’s Crusade of 1096, the Crusade of the Great Lords, and the Crusade of 1101. In that order were the waves dispersed.

The first wave being the People’s Crusade of 1096 was very undersupplied and was broken into five major forces. Out of those five forces only two made it to Constantinople where those forces were either destroyed or driven back to Europe. Walter Sansavoir and Peter the Hermit led the two forces that made it to Constantinople. The other three forces were comprised of West German, French, English, and Flemish pilgrim warriors. The three other forces were mostly driven off at Hungary by the Hungarian forces that were ordered to defend the city from the crusaders. The Hungarian resistance was conducted because the two forces that made it through Hungary sack and pillaged a lot of its cities for resources. This lack of supplies caused problems even at the crusade’s start. Had the armies been efficiently supplied three other forces would have joined the first two.

After the failure of the first wave Pope Urban II began raising money for another wave that was known as the Crusade of the Great Lords. Learning from the first wave’s failure was crucial in the second wave’s success. Notable figures of the second wave consist of Duke Godfrey of Bouillon, Count Raymond of Saint-Gilles, Count Robert of Flanders, Duke Robert of Normandy, and Bohemond of Taranto. All of these figures were either brothers or sons of kings, but none themselves were kings. These figures of royalty led their armies to the Byzantine Empire where much of their armies began to pillage for lack of discipline. After taking oaths to the Byzantine emperor Alexius the European nobles combined their forces with the emperor and marched to Antioch from Nicaea. The combined forces exceeded 60,000 including noncombatants took the city of Antioch by 1098. The forces then marched to Jerusalem by 1099 and had lost over half its soldiers in the siege of Antioch. This force of just over 20,000 took the city of Jerusalem by a frontal attack in the summer of 1099. Once in the holy city the army destroyed the inhabitants of the city.

The final wave dubbed as the Crusade of 1101 was meant to reinforce the principalities that were formed in the earlier wave. This wave was conducted with more troops than its predecessor but was also met by defenses that were underestimated and over prepared for the crusaders. Pope Paschal II enforced this crusade by threatening crusade supporters with excommunication. The clergy at the time preached that joining the churches military campaign was a form of penance. All of this summed up resulted in a larger army of pilgrim warriors. This campaign that lasted only a year suffered many casualties and only gained the cities of Ankara, Haifa, and Tortosa. The shortcomings of the third wave were considered God’s punishment for their sins, but more mundane reasons were poor leadership, woeful organization, ignorance of the land, and just bad luck.

Sources:
Alfred J. Andrea. "Encyclopedia of the Crusades". Connecticut: Greenwood Press, 2003
Helen Nicholson. "The Crusades". Connecticut: Greenwood Publishing Group, 2004
Corliss K. Slack. "Historical Dictionary of the Crusades". Maryland: The Scarecrow Press, 2003