In the year 1096 AD, a wave of violence struck the Jewish population of the Rhineland. Pope Urban II’s call for the First Crusade prompted an unprecedented response. Christians all throughout Europe gathered to embark on the Crusade to Jerusalem in order to bring the Holy City under Christian control. One unintended consequence of this movement was the formation of a more extreme band of crusaders focused in the Rhineland who, instead of immediately departing for the Holy Land, directed a mass of violence against the major Jewish communities, who reacted in further unprecedented ways. An example of this reaction can be found in the Hebrew Chronicle of Mainz Anonymous. According to the chronicle, there once was a Jewish woman named Rachel who …show more content…
lived in the town of Mainz. In response to the horde of crusaders who had come to kill or convert every Jew they saw, she asked of her friend, “Four children have I. Have no mercy on them either, lest those uncircumcised ones come and seize them alive and raise them in their ways of error. In my children, too, shall you sanctify the Holy Name of God.” Following her instruction, her friend took a knife and killed her youngest son. Her other son, Aaron, in response to witnessing the death of his brother, cried, “Mother, mother, do not slaughter me,” and ran to hide from his mother. Rachel, after taking the knife and killing her two daughters herself, calls for Aaron; “Aaron, where are you? I will not spare you either, or have mercy on you.” Rachel precedes to drag him against his will from his hiding place for slaughter. Afterwards, she gathers the four children in her sleeves and holds them until the crusaders stumble upon her and kill her. Rachel’s story is one of extreme violence contrasted with gentle and reverent language.
She is shown as murdering her children, and specifically doing so to her youngest child by forcefully bringing him out of hiding and using him as an involuntary sacrifice. Yet, in her introduction, Rachel is described as “a distinguished young woman” who committed “pious” acts of sacrificing herself and her children for God. In such a context, the idea of righteousness is conflated with actions of violence; in murdering her child, Rachel is shown as displaying her devotion to God. Rachel’s behavior is represented as “sanctifying the name of God,” also known as committing the act of kiddush ha-shem. Her actions are described as reflective of the sacrifices a kind and righteous woman would make. Rachel’s acts of murder are written as pious acts of sacrifice, because she did so to commit kiddush ha-shem. Upon recounting her death, the author states, “It is of her that it was said: “The mother was dashed in pieces with her children.” She perished with them, as did that righteous woman who perished with her seven sons, and it is of her that it was said: “The mother of the children rejoices.”” Such language draws parallels between Rachel’s actions and the actions of a biblical woman, celebrating Rachel’s extreme reaction to the crusaders as emulating a key biblical story, and thus justifying her
response. Rachel’s case was not unique amongst the Ashkenazi Jews. The Jews responded to the violence perpetrated by the the crusaders, which manifested in both massacre and forced conversion, by committing acts of passive and active martyrdom, as well as the killing of one’s kin as to avoid their conversion. Records of these events, especially from the Jewish perspective, are limited; only three Hebrew chronicles remain. Of the surviving records, the Hebrew Chronicles, compared to the Latin Chronicles, emphasize and embellish the accounts of martyrdom to both justify the radical acts of self-martyrdom and the killing of one’s kin, and overshadow incidences of voluntary conversion. They are written in this way with the intention of constructing a counter-narrative, which presents the actions of the Jews as fulfilling the will of God, to prevailing Christian ideology during the period following the First Crusade.
The First Crusade was propelled in 1095 by Pope Urban II to recover control of the sacred city of Jerusalem and the Christian Holy Land from Muslims.
Because of the wealth and power that surrounded her family name, Rachel became the victim. If not for all the drama caused by owning much of the land and her family flaunting their fortune, the community of people ready to solve their problems or vendettas by crying witchcraft may have overlooked Rachel. Though money and power have been sought time after time, they often have their downsides. Rachel’s family and their search for wealth did not grant them happiness, but it may have been the main factor in Rachel’s death.
Foss explains, “What Urban needed was an enterprise, clearly virtuous in serving the ends of Christiandome… in these moments of reflection, the popes mind turned towards Jerusalem.” Urban II reflects back on the first taking of the Holy City after the defeat of the Byzantine Empire in 1071, and begins to question what his people know about the Turkish race and really the ideology of Islamic thought. Foss goes on to examine the ignorance of westerners and needed to be “reminded [by the pope] of the infamous heathens, their cruelty and hatred of Christians,” hoping this would justify the first Holy Crusade. However, Foss identifies the creativity of the Pope’s language to persuade the knights and army of the people to embark on the Holy Crusade based on the Muslims cruel actions turned onto their fellow Christians. Claiming the Muslims “Killed captives by torture…poor captives were whipped…and others were bound to the post and used as a target for arrows.” Foss examines the Popes words as an effective effort of persuasion in creating an army of crusaders to help clean “…Holy places, which are now treated with ignominy and polluted with Filthiness” and any sacrifice in Jerusalem is a “promise of a spiritual reward… and death for
Contrary to many commonly held notions about the first crusade, in his book, The First Crusade and the Idea of Crusading, Jonathan Riley-Smith sets out to explain how the idea of crusading thought evolved in the first crusade. In his book, Riley-Smith sets out five main arguments to show how these ideas of crusading evolved. Firstly, he argues that Pope Urban’s original message was conventional, secondly that a more positive reaction was drawn from the laity (due to the ideas surrounding Jerusalem), thirdly, that the original message of crusading had changed because of the horrible experiences of the first crusaders, fourth, that due to these experiences the crusaders developed their own concept of what a crusade was, and lastly, that these ideas were refined by (religious) writers and turned into an acceptable form of theology. Riley-Smith makes excellent points about the crusade; however, before one can delve directly into his argument, one must first understand the background surrounding the rise of the first crusade.
to give her child away for its own safety because it was the time of
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
In Lamb to the Slaughter, Mary Maloney, doting housewife pregnant with her first child, commits a heinous crime against her husband. After he tells her that he is leaving, she become distraught and strikes him in the head with a leg of lamb. Afterwards, Mary...
In 1095 Pope Urban II called all Christians to take part in what would become the world’s greatest Holy War in all of history. Urban’s called on Christians to take up arms and help fight to take the Holy Land of Jerusalem back from the accursed Muslims. During this time of war, the whole world changed. Land boundaries shifted, men gained and lost and gained power again, and bonds were forged and broken. The Crusades had a great impact on the world that will last forever.
The Crusades were the first tactical mission by Western Christianity in order to recapture the Muslim conquered Holy Lands. Several people have been accredited with the launch of the crusades including Peter the Hermit however it is now understood that this responsibility rested primarily with Pope Urban II . The main goal of the Crusades was the results of an appeal from Alexius II, who had pleaded for Western Volunteers help with the prevention of any further invasions. The Pope’s actions are viewed as him answering the pleas of help of another in need, fulfilling his Christian right. However, from reading the documents it is apparent that Pope Urban had ulterior motives for encouraging engagement in the war against the Turks. The documents and supporting arguments now highlight that the Pope not only sought to recruit soldiers to help but also to challenge those who had harmed the Christians community and annihilate the Muslims. He put forth the idea that failure to recapture this lands would anger God and that by participating, God would redeem them of their previous sins.in a time of deep devoutness, it is clear this would have been a huge enticement for men to engage in the battle. Whether his motives were clear or not to his people, Pope Urban’s speeches claiming that “Deus vult!” (God wills it) encouraged many Christians to participate and take the cross.
To cry, 'Hold, hold!' " line 41-57, Pg. 41. Here we see her summon evil spirits to thicken her blood and to turn her milk into bitter gall and then calls on them to prevent her from feeling remorse and to remove her feminity. This is very intriguing, and very interesting. We didn't even expect that an apparently strong, practical, and determined woman would act in such contradiction to her womanliness.
Among some of the largest conflicts in the world stand the Crusades; a brutal conflict that lasted over 200 years and was debatably one of the largest armed religious conflicts in the history of humankind. Since this is so clearly an event of importance, historians have searched vigorously for the true answer as to why the crusades began. Ultimately, because of accusatory views on both the sides of the Christians and of the Muslims, the two groups grew in such hatred of each other that they began to act in deep discrimination of each other. Moreover, Christian motives seemed to be driven mostly by the capture of Jerusalem, the dark ages of Europe and the common-folks desperation for land, wealth, and a spot in heaven. What seems to be continually
In 1095, Pope Urban II called the first crusade. Happening between 1096 and 1099, the first crusade was both a military expedition and a mass movement of people with the simple goal of reclaiming the Holy Lands taken by the Muslims in their conquests of the Levant. The crusade ended with the capture of Jerusalem in July 1099. However, there has been much debate about whether the First Crusade can be considered an ‘armed pilgrimage’ or whether it has to be considered as a holy war. This view is complicated due to the ways in which the Crusade was presented and how the penitential nature of it changed throughout the course of the Crusade.
In 1071, the Byzantine Army was destroyed by the Turks who also captured their emperor, which led up to the mercenary conquering Syria and Palestine, Leaving the City of Jerusalem left to be taken by more oppressive leaders. The new leaders of Jerusalem hated the Christians and committed a widespread genocide of over 3000 Christians along with destroying churches or using them as stables. But what they didn’t realize was that it would throw their economy way out of balance which is what the old leaders had realized. This genocide of the Christian people is what sparked the need for crusades and the Rise of Christian Soldiers wanting to avenge their deaths. Emperor Alexius I sent an ambassador to Pope Urban II regarding the atrocities in Jerusalem
In order for the crusades to begin, the Christians needed to gather an army to travel and fight the forces of Muslims. With all the power being held by monarchies at this time, the church needed to be cleaver in order to gain troops to put their lives on the line. To gain the support of these warriors and dedication of men, Pope Urban II (1088-1099) challenged those morals of men by telling them to grab their weapons and join the holy war to recover the land of Jerusalem. It was not the challenge that convinced men to take part in this war. The promise of “immediate remission of sins” attracted the men to stand up for their religion and beliefs while at the same time, promising them a trip to heaven when life comes to an end. With this statement, men instantly prepared for battle which in a very short period of time gave the church power which has been held by the monarchies. Men of rich and poor prepared for battle, some wearing ...
In the early medieval period, the Seljuk Turks were the dominant power in the Middle East. Their influence and empire spread like fire, spreading from India to eastern Anatolia. When the Turks reached the Byzantine Empire, trouble began to spew. The Byzantine Emperor Alexius I asked Pope Urban II for assistance in raising an army, but the Pope had plans to not only defend Byzantine, but reclaim lands captured by Muslims centuries before. What followed were a series of wars from 1096 until the 1400’s that were aimed towards reclaiming holy lands that were in Muslim hands, called the Crusades. Though the Crusades may be disguised as a religious duty, it was more of a campaign for monetary and power gain.