Crusades

The Crusades (1095-1291) were a series of four major military expeditions made by Christians from western Europe seeking to free the Holy Land from Muslim domination. Several smaller crusades followed.

The crusades comprise a major chapter of Medieval History. Extending over three centuries, they attracted every social class in western Europe. Kings and commoners, barons and bishops, knights and commoners--even children--all participated in these expeditions to the eastern end of the Mediterranean. The motives of the crusaders were numerous: some sought riches; many sought adventure; most were moved by faith alone. Historians stress the central role of religious fervor, while mentionibg as well the socio-economic factors crucial in enticing larger contingents. For example, crusaders often were fulfilling their feudal obligations. There were strong links between the papal reforms, the social necessity of violence and the exploitation of this inherent revivialistic imagination of the age of the Papacy.

The crusaders derived their name from the Latin word for "cross"--crux. A crusader went to the Holy Land with a cross of cloth sewn over his breast; when he returned, he had a similar cross for his back. Originally called to repel the Islamic forces that controlled Jerusalem, the crusades evolved into a form of political decree called by the Papacy for political, social or economic reasons; In other words, a directive of war issued by the Pope to all Rome-friendly nations against forces who were hostile to the Papacy.

Background

The Byzantine Empire controlled Jerusalem until its fall in 614 to Kosrau II, ruler of the Persian Empire. The Byzantine Emperor Heraclius aimed to reconquer Jerusalem for religious reasons since Jerusalem was the center of Christianity and the home of the True Cross. This set a precedent in Christian reasoning that Jerusalem and in turn Palestine rightfully belonged to Christianity, being the center of Christian tradition and religion.

The Muslim Arabs gained control of Palestine in the seventh century. Their successful invasion and occupation of the land had not interfered with Christians rights to pilgrimage or neither did it tamper with local Christian communities or monasteries. It did however mark the beginning of Byzantine decline in the region. Palestine was traditionally an important link-up region to other, more important and wealthier nations; Egypt to the South, the Babylonians, Persians and Arabs to the east, and Macedonia and Rome to the North and West. The loss of Byzantine control in this region meant a ripple effect which caused the loss of Christian control over much of western Arabia and the emergence of the Muslims as a powerful entity at the expense of Orthodox Christianity.

In 1009 the Fatimid Caliph al-Hakim bi-Amr Allah ordered the destruction of the the Church of the Holy Sepulchre in Jerusalem, although the Byzantines were allowed to rebuild it in 1039. Although pilgrimages were largely unhindered, some Christian clergy had been killed and certain pilgrims had been heckled or murdered. It soon became clear however of the economic importance of Jerusalem as a holy site and therefore the persecution of pilgrims ceased.

First Crusade

The recently emergent Seljuks had won a great victory over the Byzantines at the Battle of Manzikert, 1071. This victory paved the way for Seljuk domination of Anatolia, making the pilgrims journey to Jerusalem all the more difficult. This concern for the pilgrims, as well as a heartfelt plea from Byzantine Emperor Manuel Comnenus for aid led to Pope Urban II to call for a holy war against the Muslims in the name of Christianity at the Council of Clermont, 1095. Although not originally intended to establish what would later be known as the Crusader States in the Levant, the movement gained wide support from aristocrat and peasant alike and thousands of Europeans prepared for the long hard march to fight the Seljuks and the other Muslim forces.

Europe in 1097; click to enlarge

Pope Urban

Pope Urban II defined and launched the crusades at the Council of Clermont in 1095. He was a reformer worried about the evils which had hindered the spiritual success of the church and its clergy and the need for a revival of religiousity. He was moved by the urgent appeal for help from Byzantine Emperor Alexius I. Urban's solution was announced on the last day of the council when the pope suddenly proclaimed the Crusade against the infidel Muslims. He called for Christian princes across Europe to launch a holy war in the Holy Land. He contrasted the sanctity of Jerusalem and the holy places with the plunder and desecration by the infidel Turks. He ecited outrage by vividly describing attacks upon the Christian pilgrims. He also noted the military threat to the fellow Christians of Byzantium. He charged Christians to take up the holy cause, promising to all those who went remission of sins and to all who died in the expedition immediate entry into heaven. Then Urban raised secular motives, talking of the feudal love of tournaments and warfare. He urged the barons to give up their fratricidal and unrighteous wars in the West for the holy war in the East. He also suggested material rewards, regarding feudal fiefdoms, land ownership, wealth, power, and prestige, all at the expense of the Arabs and Turks. He said they could be defeated very easily by the Christian forces. Pope Urban's speech ranks as one of the most influential speeches ever made: it launched the holy wars which occupied the minds and forces of western Europe for two hundred years. When he finished, his listeners shouted "Deus volt" (God wills it). This became the battle cry of the crusaders. Word spread that war against unbelief would be fused with the practice of pilgrimage to holy sites, and the pilgrims' reward would be great on earth, as in heaven. Immediately thousands pledged themselves to go on the first crusade.

Operations

The story of the first crusade from the crusaders' perspective recounts the struggles of the first wave of crusaders to reach the hinterlands of Byzantium, of Islamic Syria, and then of Jerusalem; of the terrible slaughters of Jewish populations committed by a second wave as it marched through the Rhineland ; of finding food and facing starvation; of the "miracles" associated with the alleged finding of the Holy Lance in Antioch; of the competition between European princes for leadership; and of the eventual taking of Jerusalem itself. It was an achievement to coordinate crusaders with sharply different languages, styles of leadership, and modes of fighting. That such a band even made it to Jerusalem is remarkable, and was possible, first, because of divisions within the realm of Islam, and second, because Muslims in the various provinces misinterpreted the presence of the crusading army. They seem to have regarded the Christian forces as renegades, escapees from the poverty and oppression of the "territory of war." This interpretation led to a low estimate of the threat posed to Muslim security by an army that, despite weaknesses, was motivated by a profound religious fervor.

Interpretations

Accoprding to the intrerpretation of Sir Steven Runciman, the First Crusade was like a barbarian invasion of the civilised and sophisticated Byzantine empire and ultimately brought about the ruin of Byzantine civilisation. The crusade was unwittingly triggered by the Byzantine emperor, Alexius I Comnenus, when he had sent ambassadors to the pope in 1095 to ask for mercenary soldiers to enrol in his armies. The emotive appeal made in response by Pope Urban II, however, had the effect of sending thousands of Frankish knights to Constantinople under their own leaders, quite a different outcome from what Alexius had expected. There had been long-distance intellectual disputes between Byzantium and the West in the past, but since contact between the two societies was sporadic, there was little open hostility. Now that the westerners arrived in the center of the empire in large numbers, those differences became a serious matter. Especially important, Runciman argues, was tension between the Byzantine patriarfch and the pope, and the more tolerant attitude of the Byzantines towards Muslim powers. Although Runciman lays some of the blame at the door of the Byzantine emperors who reigned after 1143, the sack of Constantinople by the Fourth Crusade in April 1204 was the culmination of the mounting dislike and suspicion that all western Christendom now felt towards the Byzantines. Ever since Runciman announced his interpretation in 1951, it has been under challenge by scholars. They say he was too uncritical in accepting the main Byzantine source, the narrative by Anna Comnena (the daughter of Emperor Alexius I), which presents Alexius I’s actions as motivated solely by superhuman charity and places the blame entirely on the crusaders, particularly on the Norman, Bohemond of Taranto. Runciman also takes at face value Anna Comnena’s descriptions of some of the crusaders as uncouth louts and this is largely the basis for belief that the two peoples were mutually estranged from the start. Scholars argue that the classicising literary genre in which Comnena wrote dictated that foreign peoples be presented as ‘barbarians’ and that this did not necessarily mean that the entire populations of the two halves of Christendom were in a constantly increasing state of mutual antipathy.

Among recent scholars, Paul Magdalino’s and Ralph-Johannes Lilie’s close studies of Byzantine policies towards the crusader states of Syria show not steadily mounting tension, but periods of animosity interspersed with co-operation and alliance. Jonathan Shepard re-examines the whole question of Byzantine involvement with the genesis of the First Crusade in two influential articles. Adopting a more critical stance towards Anna Comnena, Shepard argues that there was far more to the episode than an innocent Byzantine emperor taken aback by the turn of events and that Alexius was cleverly exploiting the situation for his own ends. While Runciman denounces Bohemond, the Norman leader, as a "villain" whose greed soured relations with the Byzantines, Shepard argues that this picture depends on an uncritical reading of Anna Comnena, who glorified her own family and vilified Bohemond mercilessly. In reality in 1096-7, Alexius viewed Bohemond as a potential tool, ally and recruit, a kind of imperial agent to oversee the re-conquest of Asia Minor.

Harris (2003) rejects the "clash of civilizations" model. He argues that trouble arose because the West misunderstoon Byzantine foreign policy. That policy was narrowly focused on three goals which the West did not accept: acceptance of the theory that the Roman inheritance had shifted from Rome to Constantinople (called translatio imperii), that the suzerainty of Byzantine emperors ought to be recognized by the West, and commitment to the security of the Oikumene (that is, the civilized, Christian world centered around Constantinople). Although the Byzantines employed many high-ranking Latins in their government, Harris finds repeated instances of Byzantine hostility toward Latins, based on deep-rooted and long-standing antipathy that was rooted in a conviction of Byzantine cultural and religious superiority, and perhaps heightened by a growing fear of Byzantium's military inferiority and political weakness.

Image and memory

Church Liturgy

Linder (2001) examines 15th-century Church liturgy designed to generate support for the war effort against the Turks and to legitimize its aims. Two types of Contra Turcos Masses were used: masses converted to this function through the addition of appropriate three core prayers and complete dedicated masses. The most popular example of the first type was the triple prayer set originally established by Clement V as a Holy Land crusade liturgy and subsequently mobilized against the Turks. The second type is represented by nine different mass formularies that were introduced after the fall of Constantinople in 1453. Most surviving liturgies are of German or French provenance, indicating extensive use not only among the front-line populations but also in areas far removed from any threat. The liturgy displays an its intense crisis rhetoric. Its predominant stance of vulnerability and defensiveness entailed aggressive mobilization and the conceptualization of the Turk as the actual, specific manifestation of the generic infidel, the competing religious Other; and the remarkable continuity - in form and in content - that linked this liturgy with its parent liturgies (mainly those of the campaigns against the pagans and the Holy Land Crusades) further accentuated these traits. The communicative function and value of this liturgy is highlighted by the concentration of the direct, unmediated communicative elements in that part of the mass that was the most accessible to the laity.

Legends

Legend and literature surrounded the Crusades with an aura of romance and grandeur, of chivalry and courage. The myth is only remotely related to reality. The countless tales of the gallant knights of the Cross glitter in hyperbole. Many stories are true about the crusaders' feats of valor. However the crusaders occupied the Holy Land only temporarily. In their major mission, the crusaders lost in the very long run.

While the Crusades achieved only temporary military success, they had a powerful impact on western Europe. The crusaders returned with a vastly widened knowledge of the world they lived in, and a willingness to explore that became a permanent part of the west Europen mindset. In religion, culture, and commerce, post-Crusades Europe was visibly affected by its prolonged encounter with another continent and another way of life.

Memory

The historical memory of the crusades has been sharply divided. The Catholic tradition in Europe looked upon them favorably, but the Protestant historians were more negative. Martin Luther once suggested that the Turks were God's instrument for punishing Christians. In recent decades a sense of western guilt is apparent, as in the 1995 BBC television series, presented by Terry Jones, which portrayed the crusades as a long, misguided war of intolerance, ignorance and barbarism against a peaceful and sophisticated Muslim world.

Knobler (2006) examines the use of the crusades as a national symbol from the 19th century to the 1910s in France, Spain, the Ottoman Empire, Ethiopia, Great Britain, Russia, and Bulgaria. Though the Enlightenment and its secular ideological successors held the crusades as an example of medieval barbarity, romantics and conservative adherents of the European ancien régimes appropriated crusading imagery for their own modern uses, altering it to fit within a modern, secular context and presenting it as a counterpoint to liberal ideas of nationalism. The English historian Edward Gibbon wrote:

"The principle of the crusades was a savage fanaticism; and the most important effects were analogous to the cause…. The belief of the Catholics was corrupted by new legends…. The active spirit of the Latins preyed on the vitals of their reason and religion…. The lives and labours of millions, which were buried in the East, would have been more profitably employed in the improvement of their native country."

Knobler (2006) explores three primary themes: memory of the crusades as it relates to debates over the generation and use of national symbols; the crusader as a romantic hero; and the Muslim recollection of the crusades as a shameful blot on the past of Christian nations. The crusades appealed to many Europeans because they reflected a morally unambiguous time, sparked romanticized images of warfare in a time of imperialist expansion, and provided heroic templates for modern "crusading" imperialist heroes.

Bibliography

• Andrea, Alfred J. Encyclopedia of the Crusades. Greenwood Press, 2003.
• Asbridge, Thomas. The First Crusade: A New History: The Roots of Conflict between Christianity and Islam (2005) excerpt and text search
• Boas, Adrian J. Jerusalem in the Time of the Crusades: Society, Landscape, and Art in the Holy City under Frankish Rule (2001) online edition
• Florean, Dana. "East Meets West: Cultural Confrontation and Exchange after the First Crusade." Language & Intercultural Communication, 2007, Vol. 7 Issue 2, pp144-151 in EBSCO
• France, John. Western Warfare in the Age of the Crusades, 1000-1300 (1999) online edition
• Harris, Jonathan. Byzantium and the Crusades. (2003). Pp. 276pp
• Hillenbrand, Carole. The Crusades, Islamic Perspectives. (2000). excerpt and text search
• Holt, P.M. The Age of the Crusades: The Near East from the Eleventh Century to 1517. (1986).
• Housley, Norman. The Later Crusades, 1274-1580: From Lyons to Alcazar (1992) online edition
• James, Douglas. "Christians and the First Crusade." History Review (Dec 2005), Issue 53; online at EBSCO
• Kagay, Donald J., and L. J. Andrew Villalon, eds. Crusaders, Condottieri, and Cannon: Medieval Warfare in Societies around the Mediterranean. (2003) online edition
• Maalouf, Amin. Crusades Through Arab Eyes (1989) excerpt and text search
• Madden, Thomas F. The New Concise History of the Crusades. (2005).
• Madden, Thomas F. ed. The Crusades: The Essential Readings (2002) ISBN 0-631-23023-8 284pp, articles by scholars
• Munro, Dana Carleton. The Kingdom of the Crusaders (1936) online edition
• Peters, Edward. Christian Society and the Crusades, 1198-1229 (1971) online edition
• Powell, James M. Anatomy of a Crusade, 1213-1221, (1986) online edition
• Queller, Donald E., and Thomas F. Madden. The Fourth Crusade: The Conquest of Constantinople (2nd ed. 1999) excerpt and text search
• Riley-Smith, Jonathan.The First Crusade and the Idea of Crusading. (1986).
• Riley-Smith, Jonathan. The Crusades: A History (2005) excerpt and text search
• Riley-Smith, Jonathan, ed. The Oxford History of the Crusades. (1995). online edition; excerpt and text search
• Riley-Smith, Jonathan, ed. The Atlas of the Crusades (1991)
• Runciman, Steven. A History of the Crusades, Volume I: The First Crusade and the Foundations of the Kingdom of Jerusalem.; Volume II: The Kingdom of Jerusalem and the Frankish East 1100-1187. and Volume III: The Kingdom of Acre and the Later Crusades (1951-53), the classic history; very hostile toward the crusaders
• Setton, Kenneth ed., A History of the Crusades. (1969-1989), the standard scholarly history in six volumes, published by the University of Wisconsin Press complete text online.

Includes: The first hundred years (1969); The later Crusades, 1189-1311 (1969); The fourteenth and fifteenth centuries (1975); The art and architecture of the crusader states (1977); The impact of the Crusades on the Near East 1985); The impact of the Crusades on Europe (1989)

• Tyerman, Christopher. God's War: A New History of the Crusades (2006)
• Tyerman, Christopher. England and the Crusades, 1095-1588. (1988). 492 pp.

Primary sources

• Shaw, M. R. B. ed.Chronicles of the Crusades (1963) online edition
• Villehardouin, Geoffrey, and Jean de Joinville. Chronicles of the Crusades ed. by Sir Frank Marzials (2007) excerpt and text search

Villehardouin's Conquest of Constantinople is a standard reference work on the Fourth Crusade; it is the first work in medieval French prose. Joinville's life of St. Louis is a classic description of the life and times of King Louis IX; it is written in Old French and is perhaps the best biography written in the Middle Ages.

External links

• Angeliki E. Laiou, The Crusades from the Perspective of Byzantium and the Muslim World, (e-book online), includes chapter on Historiography of the crusades.
• E.L. Skip Knox, The Crusades, a virtual college course through Boise State University.
• links to resources on crusades
• "All About All Crusades" by Hans Doeleman; with timeline, maps, bibliography