A. K. Chidgzey

The reality of the crusades is that they were actually pretty giant failures. Aside from being moral failures, the crusades were a bumbling mess that ended up with so many going bankrupt, some returning as conquering heroes to find their estates had been sold off and their wives married to someone else, they took all this armour and their horses but realised that that was a mistake when they were clambering through the Turkish mountain ranges, at more than point you’ve Christians fighting Christians and ultimately only held Jerusalem for less than a century. For all the cost, all the bloodshed, Jerusalem only fell from Muslim control for a very short period of time. In fact, Islamic histories treated the Crusades as a great victory.

In truth, it really did not end well for the Christians. They didn’t even start off all that well, they were beset with problems before the first crusaders even started marching. If it weren’t for all the violence and brutality the crusades would almost be a comedy.

Except there’s all that violence and brutality.

The word ‘crusade’ didn’t actually exist until the 18^th century. The crusaders recognised themselves as something different, which we’ll get to in a moment. But the word ‘crusade’ came to connote this idea of fighting for a righteous cause. At first it symbolised bravery and piety, courageousness. Even to this day the word is used to refer to a noble cause of some sort.

But then it also came to connote brutality, imperialism, self-righteousness. Which is why I don’t really like when Christian movements call themselves a crusade, it’s the sort of thing you’d think we’d want to distance ourselves from.

On the hand, the crusades have been romanticised, with some Medieval theologians describing the first crusade as the greatest miracle since the resurrection, while on the other hand, the crusades have been demonised, something critics of Christianity point to as evidence of the moral emptiness of Christianity.

Now I think the crusades were undeniably…not great. To put it mildly. But let’s actually figure what they were, what happened, and what we can learn from them.

Basically, the crusades were called with the goal of defeating the Muslims who threatened the Byzantine Empire, that is the Christian empire in the east, with Constantinople as its capital, to reunite the east and west, while maybe also demonstrating that west is best, and to return the Holy Land to the Christians, since it was conquered in the 7^th century.

Ultimately they managed to achieve these goals, but their victory didn’t really last long. And something else the crusades managed to accomplish was to unite the Muslims, who were previously divided, so the Christians were actually in a much worse position than when they began. So…great job guys!

But let’s step back a little bit and set the scene.

In early seventh century Europe, things were just starting to calm down after a few centuries of war, disunity, and trouble, since the fall of the Roman Empire. Most were slowly adopting an orthodox Christianity, the French (or the Franks) were starting to organise, the British Isles were doing well, and the Byzantine Empire was prosperous. But a new power would soon arise that would challenge all of this.

Arabia was a land forgotten by most, skipped over by the Romans and the Persians, but very quickly a new Arabian Empire would conquer large swathes of land and would become an empire larger than both the Persian and Roman Empires combined.

The rise and expansion of these Muslim powers coming out of Arabia was so rapid and so unexpected it took the world by surprise.

Up until then Arabia was populated by nomadic tribes, mostly tribal and polytheistic – meaning they believed in many gods – but there were some Jews and Christians. One of the key exports of the region was frankincense, but apart from that was largely overlooked by most of the surrounding nations.

The major city of the region was Mecca, on the west coast of Saudi Arabia. There was a merchant by the name of Muhammad who had a series of dreams and visions calling him to be a prophet and to proclaim the message he received from Gabriel. As Christianity was to Judaism, Islam would be to Christianity. Not a new religion, but an extension – an update, if you like – of those Abrahamic faiths. Except that both Judaism and Christianity were corruptions of the true message that came through the various prophets. Jesus was a prophet like Moses, and Muhammad was a prophet like Jesus.

“There is no god but Allah, and Muhammad is his prophet.” This creed was central to this burgeoning faith, the first of the five pillars.

Muhammad criticised the polytheism of the religions of Mecca, including Christianity – he perceived the doctrine of the Trinity to be polytheistic. He called for submission to the one God. The same God of Jesus, the same God of John the Baptist, of Elijah, of Solomon, of David, Moses, Joseph, Jacob, Isaac, Abraham, Noah, and Adam. Submission to Allah.

The word Islam means submission.

Muhammad was opposed by the merchants of Mecca and forced out. He took refuge at the oasis called Medina, which was the base for the first Muslim community and would become a large city. It was here that Muhammad really began his discipleship. This trek to Medina happened in 622 and is considered the beginning of the Muslim era. Muhammad raised an army and conquered Mecca.

To cut a long story short, under Muhammad and his successors, known in Arabic as the caliphs, the Muslim force spread inexorably, sweeping across Arabia, Damascus, Jerusalem, Egypt, into Persia and across north Africa, chipped away at Byzantine lands, and by the 8^th century all of Spain, the Iberian Peninsula, fell into Muslim hands. In fact, most of the early major Christian cities, the places where the great councils were held and orthodoxy was determined, were now under Muslim control. Antioch, Alexandria, Carthage, Jerusalem.

At its peak, the Umayyad Caliphate stretched from India to Spain, encompassing Persia, Arabia, North Africa, and the Holy Lands. It only took about three generations for this unexpected expansion to occur, by a people generally overlooked and ignored, from a land considered inhospitable, to become the largest empire the world had ever seen. It shook and struck fear into Europe.

Though most people had to convert to Islam, Muslims were generally pretty tolerant of the people of the book. Jews and Christians, seen as cousins of sorts, were allowed to practice their religion and remain within Muslim controlled lands, so long as they paid a tax called the jizya. Of course, it generally went better for you if you converted to Islam, so many did convert, but a Jewish or Christian presence remained, though rapidly declined following the crusades.

Back in Europe, the Byzantine Empire, which at its peak encompassed Egypt, Syria, and Turkey, was now pushed right back into Europe, barely holding on to its lands in Turkey. This fall from grace forced the pope to shift his focus from the east to the west, and in the year 800 crowned Charlemagne, who we met in the episode on Alcuin of York, as emperor of the Holy Roman Empire. Constantinople, the Byzantine capital, struggled. In 1054, the east and west split in what is called the Great Schism (not to be confused with the Papal Schism, as we discussed in an earlier episode) and its calls for help went largely ignored. Until it suited the pope to send a crusading force.

Then along comes a group of people known as the Seljuk Turks, from the northern regions of Muslim territory, founded in 1037. They managed to conquer much of Iran and Iraq, including Baghdad, and then Jerusalem in 1073, and managed to push right up into Turkey. They weren’t necessarily all that interested in Europe, but the Europeans didn’t know that and they were terrified. The great city of Constantinople was the last defence against the Muslim armies.

The Seljuk Turks would prove to be formidable foes, who posed serious threats to the crusaders coming through Turkey on their way to Jerusalem.

Pilgrimages to the Holy Land had been occurring since the fourth century, the first by a woman named Etheria, whose account of the trip essentially mythologized this sacred land and the sacred ritual of pilgrimage there. Her account was floating around into the 11^th century.

Pilgrimages were allowed following the Muslim conquest of the holy land, though some periods were harder than others, such as under the Fatimid Caliph al-Hakim bi-Amr Allah in the 10^th century who destroyed the church of the holy sepulchre. His successor rebuilt the church and allowed pilgrimages once more. But then they became especially difficult again, though not entirely illegal, when the Sejuk Turks took control.

So in 1095, the emperor of the Byzantine Empire, Alexios Komnenos, called for help. The pope, Urban II turned it into a righteous cause and following a preaching tour all over Europe, at the Council of Clermont mustered the armies of Europe to defend Constantinople and retake the holy lands.

He declared,

“Whoever for devotion alone, not to gain honour or money, goes to Jerusalem to liberate the Church of God can substitute this journey for all penance.”

He promised the full forgiveness of all sin, those that had been committed and those that would be committed. Marching on Jerusalem was a one way ticket to heaven.

And the people loved it.

“Deus lo volt” they shouted in response. “God wills it.”

This was what God wanted, what Christ had commanded.

This also the first instance of what would become an indulgence. Indulgences were a form of penance, where a penitent sinner would pay some sort of penance following a confession of sin. This could be in the form of going on a pilgrimage, spending some time in prayer and fasting, or something material like paying some money. It wasn’t the actual act that brought forgiveness, but it was a way of demonstrating the seriousness of your repentance. Of course, if you combine desperate people with powerful people and throw in a sprinkling of money, it’s pretty much guaranteed that corruption would rear its ugly head. And there were problems with the practice later on, especially in 16^th century Germany, when a monk by the name of Martin Luther started questioning the practice and basically kicked off the Protestant Reformation. There’s a straight line between indulgences and Protestantism, and the practice began here with the launch of the Crusades. Take up arms for Christ, against the Muslims, and you will receive forgiveness.

Those who answered the call would be blessed and would receive the mark of the cross. Their clothing and arms would bear the image of the cross, literally taking up their cross to follow Christ. It was a symbol of their willingness to become martyrs for the Christian faith. Hence they became known as crucesignatus, meaning “signed with the cross”.

The crusades became a holy, righteous cause, and gave the Europeans something to hope for. The continent was struggling, with internal wars and division, and this inspired them and united them. There is nothing quite like a mutual enemy, especially a heathen one, to unite ancient foes toward a common cause. There was great enthusiasm, with many seeing visions and having ecstatic experiences. Attempts to reconquer Spain had been going on for a couple of centuries by this point, and would continue for another few, but a holy war gave hope that Spain might again become Christian. Unfortunately this enthusiasm would also inspire a whole lot of unsavoury behaviour, including antisemitism through Europe – with many Jews being killed by the crusaders – the routing out of heretics in the form of the Albigensian Crusade in southern France, where a sort of neo-Gnosticism had developed, and of course the Spanish Inquisition, and of course nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition.

One fascinating event that came as a result of Pope Urban’s call to arms was the arrival on the scene of a man named Peter the Hermit. Peter somehow manages to turn up again and again as this really eccentric and quite bizarre character, a bit of a bumbling fool (though that’s probably actually a little bit harsh) and appears at most of the key events of the first crusade.

But upon hearing the call of Urban, he got a group of people together who thought, “You know what, why should we have to wait for the kings to get their act together and put together a proper, professional, resourced, properly trained, properly led army. We can do it too! And we can do it now! I’ve never picked up a sword but I reckon we can take Jerusalem by ourselves!”

And so they set off from Cologne and one of the first things they did was what has gone down in history as the Rhineland massacre. And you know that any historical event with the word massacre in it was probably not a nice time. This People’s Crusade, led by Peter the Hermit, massacred thousands of Jewish people on the road to Constantinople. So…great start to the crusades.

Just prior to all of this, those in France who wanted to join this People’s Crusade got sick of waiting and so a small group of them set off. They made it to the Byzantine border in quite good time, well ahead of Peter and the others, and those in Belgrade didn’t know what to do with these French crusaders and couldn’t house them anywhere. So they were turned outwards to pillage the local countryside. This led to some violence, and some of the crusaders were stripped of their armour. The commander in Belgrade kicked them out and to Constantinople.

So when Peter the Hermit and his band of merry anti-Semites arrived in Belgrade and saw the French armour hanging on the walls, they grew cautious. Tensions were high. And then there was some haggling over the price of some shoes at a marketplace. This then grew to a riot, which then grew to the crusaders assaulting the city and destroyed the city. They marched on, got into another fight and 10,000 of their group died, which was a quarter of their force. They finally made it Constantinople, weakened and beleaguered.

The Byzantine emperor wasn’t expecting them and didn’t know what to do with them, and was quite disappointed. This was the best western Europe could muster? This was what the pope had promised?

Despite the emperor Alexius warning Peter not to engage the Seljuk Turks, the People’s crusaders couldn’t wait for the main army to arrive, so they left and moved deeper into Turkey. The French, the Germans, and the Italians quarrelled and there was a leadership spill. Peter lost control, so he went back to Constantinople. But the rest of the unruly, ragged army started attacking the Turks in a disorganised manner.

They were butchered, wholly and completely, by the Seljuk Turks.

So the first crusade had not even set off yet, and we’ve got massacres, infighting, and lots of dead bodies. When the actual crusaders left on their journey, the local people didn’t trust them because the People’s crusade had pillaged their farms and destroyed their villages.

The crusades were going really badly, and they had not even begun yet.

The real First Crusade was led by Adhemar, the bishop of Puy-en-Velay, in Southern France, but we’ll explore that chapter next time.

The history of the crusades is really interesting, I think, despite it being an absolute tragedy.

But one quick reflection is that the crusaders were slapping the cross onto their shields and declaring that God wills it, that Christ commands the wholesale slaughter of the Muslims in the Holy Land, this is the purest example, in my mind, of blasphemy. This is literally taking the Lord’s name in vain.

Taking the Lord’s name in vain has nothing to do with swearing, or petitioning God to damn some thing or another, but about appealing to the higher authority of God himself to justify actions that he wouldn’t want.

But would it have been considered blasphemy in its time? No.

From our modern 21^st century perspective, we can look back and judge the violence, as many have done. And many have declared that the violence, imperialism, and – as I just mentioned – the blasphemy, to be complete aberrations of true Christianity. As Isis does not speak for all of Islam, the Crusaders do not speak for all of Christianity. And I do agree that the crusades were…well, bad.

But…and this by no means excuses the crusades…but the 11^th and 12^th century world was a violent world. It was a world of conquest and might. For all the bible might speak of turning the other cheek and denouncing violence, people of the high medieval period – whether they be Christan, Muslim, Zoroastrian, Norse, Pagan, whoever – existed where violence was not just tolerated, but expected. It was a brutal world.

No one really liked it…well, some might have…but that was just the reality.

Plus, the bible includes quite graphic portrayals of violence. There are some stories which I think are pretty intense and I’m just going to skip over them with my son until he’s older. The bible included these stories because they too existed within a world where might is right, but also the bible is just thoroughly human and includes lots of stories that do not paint the main characters in a great light, in fact sometimes they are condemned. But in a high medieval world of violence, where this Islamic threat is on your doorstep and has even conquered some of your lands and taken your people into slavery, and you looked at these biblical stories of violence and conquest, you would probably come to the same conclusions that the Crusaders came to, that it was your moral duty to take up arms, to bear your cross, and to march into alien lands.

The truth is that at the time, the Crusades were not just theologically acceptable, but necessary. When the Pope is telling the people that Christ is commanding this, he’s not just saying that to increase numbers, he almost certainly truly believed it. And when the people shouted back “God wills it” they genuinely believed that this is what they should do.

Now that’s not to excuse the behaviour, but just to acknowledge the fact that there are multiple forces at play and that we need to approach the Crusades with some nuance. We can say with hindsight that it was not great idea, but let’s also remember that people 1000 years from now are going to judge us for what we are doing today. And there are probably things that we are doing or not doing or are allowing that we now think are the right thing to do but people in the future will judge us for.