The First Crusades Analysis

The First Crusade is often cited as one of the most damnable consequences of religious fanaticism. A careful inspection of the circumstances and outcomes, however, will reveal a resultant political restructuring of Europe under the banner of Christendom. The purpose of this investigation is to investigate Pope Urban II’s motives in initiating the First Crusade, with a particular focus on the consolidation of the Western Church’s influence in Europe. Among the primary sources that will be consulted are the letter sent by Patriach Alexios of Constantinople to Urban, and an account of Urban’s speech at Clermont. Relevant excerpts from both of these primary sources, as well as contextual evidence and a wide array of historiography, will be taken

from the documentary series Terry Jones’ Crusades. Other secondary sources include The First Crusade Origins and Impact, a compilation of works by various authors edited by Jonathan Phillips, and A History of the Crusades by Steven Runciman. The origins, purposes, values and limitations of these writings will be evaluated and considered.

Summary of Evidence

The First Crusade was a religious war, launched by Pope Urban II in 1096 against the Muslim kingdoms of the East, with the apparent goal of defending Christendom from the Muslim expansion, and establishing a Christian state in the East. Eleventh Century Europe was a collection of kingdoms that had descended from the barbarian tribes who had destroyed the Western Roman Empire. (Crusades BBC) Though these societies were regularly engaged in warfare, the obligations of the nobles were characteristically very hostile and aggressive, and so they had come to recognize the authority of the Pope (Madden).

Prior to this period, individual churches were in charge of their separate congregations, without central governance. The 11th century saw the Gregorian Reforms, which “spoke of a greater church, the church that embraced all churches and supervised and controlled every church, every churchman, and all christian souls” (Crusades BBC).

In 1073, Pope Gregory VII “had begun demanding that the [European feudal lords] bow before the power of the church, or risk the wrath of God.” The ruling class was thus faced with a conflict of moral authorities. (Crusades BBC)

In November 1095, Pope Urban II called the Council of Clermont in which he warned of the Muslim occupation of the Holy Places, and fictionalized the plight of their Christian followers, and called for their reconquest. To assist this demand, he proposed that it was only sinful to kill Christians, and that holy war was righteous.(Crusades BBC) This presented a solution to the conflict of moral authorities faced by the Christian knight.
D’Agnillo 3

The Pope was prompted to gather the Council by Alexios I Komnenos, Emperor of Byzantium and Head of the Eastern Church. He had asked Pope Urban to send a small force of professional soldiers to aid in slowing the advance of the Turks, who were new converts to Islam. Pope Urban used the newly centralized church as a “means of mass communication” (Crusades BBC) in order to recruit crusaders from the masses.

The Pope offered a strong incentive to those who would go on Crusade. He asked that the people “undertake a righteous war…under God’s direction” for “the remission of your sins, with the assurance of the imperishable glory of the kingdom of heaven” (Urban II). Holy War thus became war as a penance, absolving those who went from past and future sin, while those who turned back would be excommunicated (Crusades BBC).

The Pope had great success in raising an army, which marched in waves of hundreds of thousands towards Byzantium, on their way to the Holy Land. Alexios’ daughter, Anna described the crusader army that arrived at Constantinople as “All the barbarian tribes from beyond the Adriatic […] moving in a body through Europe towards Asia, bringing whole families with them.” (Runciman 149).

Alexios himself was suspicious of the Pope’s actions. He was “not pleased to learn that whole Frankish armies had been mobilized, with a distrust for them Franks” (Runciman 116). A disagreement over the propriety of lands to be conquered caused Alexis to steadily reduce supplies allocated to the Crusaders’ camp: first reducing fodder for their horses, then their fish and finally their bread. (Runciman 150).

The departing knights and civilians did not expect to return to Europe for some time, if at all, having been convinced that new, richer, lands would be theirs in the Holy Land. The Church proposed that the worldly belongings of of the participants should be placed under the [its] protection during their absence at war. Since whole families often left, the lands of those who died became property of the Church. (Runciman 109).

The eventual establishment of the Crusader states prompted Europeans to visit the holy site. Military orders, such as the Hospitallers and the Poor Knights of Christ and of the Temple of Solomon were formed, ostensibly to protect pilgrims on their way to Jerusalem. (Madden). These orders became important military powers in the East and “acquired castles at strategic points in the kingdom and in the northern states.” Their presence “supplemented the otherwise inadequate forces” (Madden) of the Crusader states. Being Holy orders, they were answerable to the Pope, and soon established themselves in Europe, and provided a force of professional soldiers to the papacy.

Evaluation of Sources

The 1995 BBC documentary series Crusades, presented by Terry Jones, is a principal secondary source that was consulted during this investigation.

While the documentary is regarded as generally accurate and reliable guide to the Crusades, with its presenter Terry Jones - a comedian and medieval-history enthusiast. As the documentary is produced
D’Agnillo 4

with the intent of widespread entertainment, elements of comedy and other aspects of entertaining film can, at times, cloud the message and content of the documentary. An anti-war advocate, Terry Jones’ presentation of matter so closely related to strong personal sentiments can also introduce a degree of bias in the presentation and approach taken to analyzing the events detailed in the series. However, the documentary incorporates the input and analysis of several highly-regarded medieval historians, including Jonathan Riley-Smith, Suheil Zakkar, Fikret Isiltan, David Lazenby, and Christopher Tyerman. This group of historians, all highly esteemed individuals in the field, are able to offer a balanced and likely unbiased account of what they believe to be true about the

Crusades.

Robert the Monk’s transcription of Pope Urban’s speech at Clermont, given in November 1095, is a valuable primary source. While there are several versions of Pope Urban’s speech, Robert the Monk is the only one who claims to have been at the actual speech in 1095. Even so, however, historians concede that “we can only know approximately what Pope Urban said.” (Runciman 107). It is important to note that none of the scribes claim to give accurate written accounts, and likely all of the versions were written several years later, coloured by subsequent events. However, the transcription of the speech, provides an account of the message Pope Urban used to ignite the masses at Clermont, and as such, is a valuable resource from the time for the investigation of the ignition of religious passion for the masses at Clermont.

Analysis

As stated in the BBC documentary Crusades, “Jesus’ words were a problem for all Christian knights” (Crusades BBC). The growth of the Christian Church in eleventh century Europe was hindered by the contradiction between Jesus’ teachings and the attempts to stir up war that defined the ruling class. Pope Urban offered a solution to this problem with the proposition that only killing Christians was sinful. This enabled the Pope to “build up war fever” (Crusades BBC). It also increased the Church’s compatibility with European society, and allowed Europeans to more fully accept its teachings and leadership.

The Christian Church experienced a rapid expansion in its political influence during the eleventh century. Pope Urban’s predecessor, Pope Gregory, started a “revolutionary movement” (Crusades BBC), which showed the church as an aggressively expanding political power. The Gregorian reforms, which resulted in the creation of the Monastery of Cluny, marked the start of a movement towards a more centralized Church, one that “embraced all churches, and supervised and controlled every church, churchman, and all Christian souls”. The Church was governed by, at this time, in the words of Professor Jonathan Riley-Smith, “extreme radical reformists” who ambitiously sought to expand Christendom (Crusades BBC). 

Emperor Alexio’s letter offered an opportunity for expansion in the East. Urban used it to appeal to and mobilize the masses, using it as justification for the recruitment of “his own army” (Crusades BBC). The newly centralized church provided a means to communicate

D’Agnillo 5

preachings that shifted the Christian holy war onto a “much more radical plane” (Crusades BBC). Pope Urban also offered an attractive incentive: absolution of sin for those who went on crusade. Fighting in the war was not only not sinful, but a form of penance and a path to salvation. In his speech at Clermont, Urban asks Christians to “undertake this journey for the remission of [their] sins, with the assurance of the imperishable glory of the kingdom of heaven” (Urban II). Those who returned, however, would be excommunicated. Thus, Urban instituted a new mechanism of salvation, through “sustained acts of violence” (Philips 5) in the name of the Lord.

Even Alexios was not convinced of the Pope’s motives, having expected a small, professional force. Herds of untrained, but enthusiastic, laypeople were met with general distrust and displeasure at Byzantium (Runciman 116 ), and friction between Alexios and the Crusade leaders caused him to reduce supplies to the Crusaders’ camp on several occasions (Runciman 150). Considering Urban’s response to the letter as well as Alexios’ mistrust, it appears that the Crusades were a deliberate mobilization of conquering bound for the Holy Land.

In addition to the obvious spread of influence, the Church experienced economic growth. In their absence, the “worldly belongings if the participants “were to be placed under the protection of the church. (Runciman 109). Many, expecting to never return, “gave everything to the Church” (Runciman 112). The absence of so many also provided the opportunity for the purchase of land by the Church and monasteries, which strengthened the economic foundation of the organization.

The First Crusade also resulted in the creation of a Christian military force.

The Military Orders, including the Templars and Hospitallers, were created to protect pilgrims on the route to Jerusalem, but grew into ranks of professional soldiers with a great presence in the East, answerable to the Papacy. These orders “grew rapidly and acquired castles at strategic points in the kingdom and northern states. […] They were soon established in Europe as well, they became international organizations, virtually independent, sanctioned and constantly supported by the papacy” (Madden). The Pope possessed, for the first time, a dedicated military force in Europe. These two outcomes indicate the growth of the Church’s power as a result of the First Crusade, and support the proposition that the Papacy intended it as a way for advancing its political and economic position.

Conclusion

The First Crusade was a widely appealing armed pilgrimage, and mobilized a vast conquering force at a time when the Christian Church was moving towards centralization and greater political influence in Europe. The Church gained a wider audience more accepting of its leadership, benefitted economically, and developed its own militarily force. These outcomes, along with the Church’s documented ambition to expand and its reversal of prior teachings, support the idea that the First Crusade was a deliberate political maneuver, intended to to expand and consolidate the authority of the

Church.