In 2001, President Bill Clinton gave a speech at Georgetown University in which he cited as history that:
“Those of us who come from various European lineages are not blameless. Indeed, in the First Crusade, when the Christian soldiers took Jerusalem, they first burned a synagogue with 300 Jews in it, and proceeded to kill every woman and child who was Muslim on the Temple mound. The contemporaneous descriptions of the event describe soldiers walking on the Temple mound, a holy place to Christians, with blood running up to their knees. I can tell you that that story is still being told to today in the Middle East and we are still paying for it.”[1]
President Clinton’s summary of the Crusades is reflective of the current consensus that the Crusades were the result of an “expansionist, imperialistic Christendom” that dominated and abused a “tolerant and peaceful Islam.”[2] However, the idea that the knights of the First Crusade were motivated primarily by financial gain, greed, and conquest is false as demonstrated by historical record. Rather than with self-centered, evil intentions, the crusaders who took up the cross were primarily motivated by three theological and societal factors. First and foremost, Pope Urban II’s promise that a crusading pilgrimage to Jerusalem would qualify all who undertook it for immediate and total remission of sins was of great importance to the knights who were living relatively immoral but pious lives. Second, most of Europe was aware of the steady expansion of Islam into formerly Christian territories, including Spain and Southern Italy; Crusading provided a church-ordained method to halt this expansion. Finally, Muslim rulers of Jerusalem had provided mixed support of Christian pilgrims, increased persecution of pilgrims, and desecration of the Holy Sepulcher and other holy sites in Jerusalem: all of these gave the crusaders great zeal for undertaking the journey to free the City of God. Though earthly and heavenly riches were promised, the primary motivations of the crusaders were remission of sins, the halt of the Islamic advance, and the restoration of Jerusalem as the destination of pilgrimage.
Primary Motivation 1: Remission of Sins
At the time of the First Crusade, pilgrimages were considered by many to be the “only hope” to attain complete remission of sins.[3] This belief, propagated by the priests of the time, provided the primary personal motivation for most knights and peasants who undertook the First Crusade. The common culture of knights of that era was “very violent, very sinful, and very religious.”[4] Some knights were given to “ravaging, pillaging, raping and killing” in one breath and then in the very next would go before a priest and express extravagant devotion to the church.[5] Often, the crimes committed by knights were so severe that pilgrimage was the only solution offered. This culture of violence merged seamlessly into the crusade mentality; for the first time, knights would be allowed to convert their desire to fight into a pilgrimage itself.
To harness this fervor for battle and deep piety concerning pilgrimage, Pope Urban II delivered his famous “Sermon at Clermont, 1095.” The transcript of this sermon has been handed down through many versions, but thankfully, they all carry a similar message.[6] At the heart of each version is the idea that the crusade “is God’s Work,” thereby directly linking much of the Catholic theology of the time to the crusade in order to both justify it and provide motivation for those embarking on it.[7] The central theological tenet mentioned in nearly every version of the Sermon at Clermont is the idea that “all who went on the crusade were to receive plenary indulgence or full remission of sins.”[8]
Traditionally, pilgrims were not allowed to bear arms. Therefore, Urban II’s insistence on the remission of sins via the crusade was only made possible through the reframing of the crusade as an armed pilgrimage.[9] This decisive shift accompanying Urban II’s sermon marked the entry of the military into the arena of universal forgiveness, where it had been previously prohibited.[10] The knights of Europe were already hungry for war, but with the preaching of the crusade, their passion was also driven by holy piety as described by one crusader readying himself for the journey: “The impulse of warlike fierceness roused me … therefore, I am going as a pilgrim (peregre) to Jerusalem, which is still in bondage with her sons, to secure the divine pardon that I seek for my misdeeds.”[11] To the knights, the promise that “all dire consequences of sin” could be removed and that a bypass through purgatory could be attained was a massive motivation, especially considering the general immorality of the warrior class at the time.[12] This was further exacerbated by sermons that emphasized the suffering in purgatory experienced by immoral relatives. Additionally, the knights were taught that they could assume “personal responsibility” for their relatives and that through their crusading they would be able to “intercede” on their relatives’ behalf.[13]
In line with the prevailing culture of the knights, Urban II emphasized that knights should be spending their time fighting “righteous wars” instead of “iniquitous combats.”[14] He specifically pointed out the poor conditions within Christendom and used this as a means of urging all people “rich and poor alike” to enter into the Crusade.[15] To unite the European Christians he also framed the Crusades as a fight against “the Antichrist.”[16] By framing the Crusade as a spiritual battle as much as a physical battle, the Pope smoothed the path for many to sign up. Additionally, Urban promised that any who died along the path of the Crusade would receive immediate forgiveness of sins, essentially skipping purgatory, and go straight to Heaven.[17] It is not difficult to see how pious people with grievous sins would flock to the Crusades, even without military training.
Primary Motivation 2: Islamic Expansion
One of the major provocations of the Crusades, and another one of the main reasons knights took the cross, was the massive Islamic expansion and destruction of Christian nations that occurred between 600 and 800 A.D. Circa 600 A.D., Spain, all of North Africa, the Ancient Near East, and what is modern-day Turkey were all under Christian control. However, by 900 A.D., Islam had conquered all of North Africa, Spain, the Arabian Peninsula, the Ancient Near East, Syria, Persia, Sicily, Southern Italy, Cyprus, Crete, and Malta, and was steadily encroaching on the Byzantine Empire in the east.[18] In fact, Pope Urban II mentions the attacks by the Saracens against Spain as a motivation for the First Crusade. In the minds of the people, this brought the Islamic invasion of Christendom to the doorstep of Europe.[19] In response to these conquests, Christian forces launched many attacks to reclaim their territories in the decades leading up to the Crusades. On the whole, these battles were successful and gave the future Crusaders two things: the tactical advantage of knowing one’s enemy and the boldness, courage, and fortitude that comes with shared victories.[20]
The Islamic expansion further incensed the Christian knights though an increase in persecution of Christian pilgrims. The following is a sample of Islamic attacks from 700-1000 A.D.:
“Early in the eighth century, seventy Christian pilgrims from Asia Minor were executed by the governor of Caesura, except for seven who converted to Islam. Shortly thereafter sixty pilgrims, also from Asia Minor, were crucified in Jerusalem. Late in the eighth century, Muslims attacked the Monastery of Saint Theodosius near Bethlehem, slaughtered the monks, and destroyed two nearby churches. In 796 Muslims burned to death twenty monks from the Monastery of Mar Saba. In 809 there were multiple attacks on many churches, convents, and monasteries in and around Jerusalem, involving mass rapes and murders. These attacks were renewed in 813. In 923, on Palm Sunday, a new wave of atrocities broke out; churches were destroyed, and many died.”[21]
With the imminent threat of invasion, it is not difficult to see why many of the rulers within Christendom quickly took up the cross against the Islamic invaders. With regard to outside invaders, rather than viewing themselves as separate countries, the peoples of Europe drew their identity from Christendom and the Catholic Church. Thus, attacks on one Christian nation became attacks on all Christian nations.
Although Kings were motivated by political means, knights and peasants were not. Europeans did not often join the Crusades as individuals, but as groups of people under a feudal lord: a ruler would join and then sign up many of his retinue and family.[22] Although those brought along by their lord did share concern for the safety of Christendom, many were more motivated by personal stories of the suffering that ordinary Christians like themselves were going through. It was at this form of motivation that Pope Urban II excelled. Urban II prominently featured descriptions of the persecution in his sermon at Clermont.[23] He expounded that “they have killed and captured many, and have destroyed the churches and devastated the empire,” and more graphically described the Islamic atrocities, saying,
“They circumcise the Christians, and the blood of the circumcision they either spread upon the altars or pour into the vases of the baptismal font. When they wish to torture people by a base death, they perforate their navels, and dragging forth the extremity of the intestines, bind it to a stake; then with flogging they lead the victim around until the viscera having gushed forth the victim falls prostrate upon the ground. Others they bind to a post and pierce with arrows. Others they compel to extend their necks and then, attacking them with naked swords, attempt to cut through the neck with a single blow. What shall I say of the abominable rape of the women? To speak of it is worse than to be silent.”[24]
It is not difficult to imagine the knights and peasants of Europe jumping to arms upon hearing of the extreme suffering of their fellow Christians at the hands of the Muslims. This visceral depiction of the persecution of the Christian pilgrims had great effect among the knights and peasants alike, as Urban II carried the message of the Crusade (both personally and through others) to all of Europe. So effective was the motivation of these stories that Urban II convinced thousands of warrior knights as well as tens of thousands of non-military peasants to go to war.[25]
Primary Motivation 3: Sanctity and Preservation of the Holy Land
The sermon at Clermont also contained appeals to the sanctity and preservation of the Holy Land. The primary sources of Urban II’s sermon, Robert, Baldric, and Guibert, all emphasize that Jerusalem is a holy place that has been defiled by Muslim rulers.[26] For example, the primary devastation of the Holy Sepulcher came during the rule of Hakim, from 996-1021 A.D.[27] During his reign, Hakim ordered 30,000 churches “burned or pillaged,” including the Holy Sepulcher and the tomb underneath.[28] Though the site was somewhat repaired after Hakim’s reign, this desecration remained a symbol in the minds of many Europeans. However, the final blow that sparked a desire for the re-conquest of Jerusalem occurred in 1071 A.D. at the onset of the Turkish invasion. The Turks launched a series of devastating battles against the Byzantine Empire, in which the Muslims were mostly victorious. These defeats, coupled with the re-conquest of Jerusalem between 1071 and 1073, ignited the Emperor Alexius I Comnenus of Byzantium to write to Pope Urban II asking for help to defend against the Turks and retake Jerusalem.[29]
When the Pope spoke of Jerusalem, he conjured up images of destruction. Most of Urban II’s records mention the desecration of holy places in general, but the Holy Sepulcher was given special attention.[30] It was a place of great significance because Christians could make a pilgrimage to this church and receive remission of sins; Urban II hoped to stir the hearts of the people by telling how it had been ruined.[31] That Jerusalem was home to nearly all of the stories of the gospels made its conquest and that of the Holy Sepulcher much more painful. One knight said the following about his reason for joining the Crusade:
“Considering how many are my sins and the love, clemency and mercy of Our Lord Jesus Christ, because when he was rich he became poor for our sake, I have determined to repay him in some measure for everything he has given me freely, although I am unworthy. And so I have decided to go to Jerusalem, where God was seen as man and spoke with men and to adore the place where his feet trod.”[32]
It is clear from this quote that a pious devotion to Christ was an important motivator in setting Jerusalem as the destination of the First Crusade. Additionally, it is also clear that participants understood that a pilgrimage to Jerusalem was a way of connecting with the stories of the Bible, since crusaders held an adoration of “where his [Jesus’s] feet trod.”[33] Finally, the second canon of the Council of Clermont tied the retaking of the Holy Sepulcher to the pilgrimage to Jerusalem and the remission of sins in its official statement that, “whoever for devotion only, not for honor or money, shall journey to Jerusalem to liberate the Church of God, to him shall that journey be reckoned as total penance.”[34]
Though defense of the Eastern Christian Empire was prominent in Urban II’s sermon, the knights’ charters taking up the Crusade did not emphasize this defense; it was instead “overshadowed by the attraction of Jerusalem,” being tied more closely with penance and pilgrimage than the defense of Constantinople.[35] One of the ways in which Urban II did emphasize the need to retake Jerusalem was through his statement that “this land which you inhabit … is too narrow for your large population” insinuating that the endemic poverty people were experiencing, both monetarily and agriculturally, was a result of being overcrowded.[36] He postulated that retaking Jerusalem from the “wicked race” would allow them to expand and be fruitful.[37] This promise was executed in full as the crusaders conquered the Holy Lands and set up the four Crusader Kingdoms: The Kingdom of Jerusalem, The Country of Edessa, The Principality of Antioch, and The Country of Tripoli.[38] Even though they existed for a short time, these kingdoms did provide wealth and prosperity to the knights who founded them.[39]
Conclusion
Historical evidence demonstrates that, against the common modern narrative, the First Crusade was undertaken for primarily pious reasons. First, the crusader recruitment sermons and literature placed heavy emphasis on the forgiveness of the sins of any crusader who undertook the pilgrimage to Jerusalem. Second, the crusaders embarked on a campaign to halt the Muslim advance into the Byzantine Empire and Europe. Finally, the crusaders were motivated by a desire to make Jerusalem a safe place for pilgrimage again. Though the crusaders of the First Crusade were by no means perfect, they were also not the bloodthirsty barbarians that many paint them to be.
[1] Bill Clinton, “Speech Delivered at Georgetown University,” November 7th 2001, http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/fr/567115/posts (accessed on 4/26/2017).
[2] Rodney Stark, God’s Battalions: The Case for the Crusades, (New York City, NY: Harper Collins Publishers Inc., 2009), 7.
[3] Rodney Stark, God’s Battalions: The Case for the Crusades, 88.
[4] Ibid.
[5] Ibid.
[6] Dana Carleton Munro, “The Speech of Pope Urban II. At Clermont, 1095,” The American Historical Review 11, no. 2 (January 1906): 231.
[7] Ibid., 237.
[8] Ibid., 238.
[9] H. E. J. Cowdrey, “Pope Urban II’s Preaching of the First Crusade,” History 55, no. 184 (1970): 178.
[10] Ibid.
[11] “Cartulaire de l’abbaye de Saint-Père de Chartres,” ed. M. Guérard, ii (Paris, 1840), no. xxxvi, 428-9. As quoted in H. E. J. Cowdrey, “Pope Urban II’s Preaching of the First Crusade,” History 55, no. 184 (1970): 182.
[12] Marcus Bull, “The Roots of Lay Enthusiasm for the First Crusade,” The Historical Association, (Oxford, UK Blackwell Publishers, 1993): 364.
[13] Ibid., 369.
[14] Dana Carleton Munro, “The Speech of Pope Urban II. At Clermont, 1095,” 239.
[15] Ibid., 237.
[16] Ibid., 240.
[17] Pope Urban II, “The Speech of Pope Urban II. At Clermont,” http://sourcebooks.fordham.edu/source/urban2-5vers.html (accessed 3/25/2017).
[18] Rodney Stark, God’s Battalions: The Case for the Crusades, 22.
[19] Dana Carleton Munro, “The Speech of Pope Urban II. At Clermont, 1095,” 241.
[20] Rodney Stark, God’s Battalions: The Case for the Crusades, 54.
[21] Moshe Gil, History of Palestine, 634-1099, (New York City, NY: Cambridge University Press, 1997) as cited in Rodney Stark, God’s Battalions: The Case for the Crusades, (New York City, NY: Harper Collins Publishers Inc., 2009): 86.
[22] Rodney Stark, God’s Battalions: The Case for the Crusades, 109.
[23] Pope Urban II, “The Speech of Pope Urban II. At Clermont,” http://sourcebooks.fordham.edu/source/urban2-5vers.html (accessed 3/25/2017).
[24] Ibid.
[25] Rodney Stark, God’s Battalions: The Case for the Crusades, 105.
[26] Dana Carleton Munro, “The Speech of Pope Urban II. At Clermont, 1095,” 240.
[27] Rodney Stark, God’s Battalions: The Case for the Crusades, 89-90.
[28] Ibid., 90.
[29] Ibid., 96.
[30] Dana Carleton Munro, “The Speech of Pope Urban II. At Clarmont, 1095,” 237.
[31] Ibid., 240.
[32] Quoted in Jonathan Riley-Smith, The First Crusaders, 1095-1131, (Cambridge, MA, Cambridge University Press, 1997): 72.
[33] Ibid.
[34] R. Somerville, The Councils of Urban II: I. Decreta Claromontensia (Amsterdam, 1972): 74, as quoted in Roots of Lay Enthusiasm 364.
[35] Marcus Bull, “The Roots of Lay Enthusiasm for the First Crusade,” The Historical Association, (Oxford, UK Blackwell Publishers, 1993): 365.
[36] Bruce L. Shelley, Church History in Plain Language 4th Edition, (Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson, 2013), 197.
[37] Ibid.
[38] Rodney Stark, God’s Battalions: The Case for the Crusades, 165.
[39] Rodney Stark, God’s Battalions: The Case for the Crusades, 169.
Comentários