The Latin West, or Christendom as it is sometimes known, was
the term given to the areas of western Europe which recognized and accepted
papal authority and Latin liturgy during the High Middle Ages, this was a
territory and culture that was to extend to other regions such as the Eastern
Europe and the Iberian peninsula over the centuries.¹ The Crusades are often associated with the conquest against
Islam by Christendom between the Eleventh and Thirteenth centuries in order to
secure the Holy Land, however the Crusades by
the Latin West have come to be defined as having a wider scope by
several modern historians such as Nicholson who defines the Crusades as, ‘any
war instigated and blessed by the church for alleged religious ends.’ ² Such definitions therefore include other
conquests by members of Christendom such as Spanish Reconquista which was
blessed by Pope Alexander II.³ The Crusades in the Levant were the most important in a spiritual sense
and were highly influential in inspiring other religious conquests throughout
Christendom, and while it is these conquests that will be most central to this
discussion; the other examples of Christian Crusades will be included.
To assess whether the Crusades did occur due to any rising
self-confidence in Christendom, this discussion will consider the various
histiographical arguments regarding the motivations of the Crusaders of the
Latin West and review their accounts of the context in which the Crusades
occurred. Two main threads will be pursued in order to account for the
histiographical debate; the first case will be to argue that the Crusaders were
motivated by spiritual intentions by consulting the accounts of Jotischky,
Flori and Riley-Smith. In order to give a different perspective the works of
Duby and Bartlett will be used to present the Crusades as being economically and
territorially motivated. Jotischky has pointed out that the limited number of
medieval sources will mean analyses are usually confined to an overview of
society as opposed to detailed look into individual figures who were present
during them.⁴
The Crusades were not pursued due to impulse because even if
the Latin West was confident it needed a reason to act, in the majority of
cases preachers of the Crusade sought to utilize the circumstances and
opportunities within the Latin West and on its frontiers.⁵ The Crusaders first
conquest to seize the Levant from the Seljuq Empire who controlled it had been
launched when the Empire was fragmented due to fighting between the imperial
Sunni Muslims against the Shiite Fatmid rulers of Egypt which had weakened the
Empire politically and militarily.⁶ In the years preceding the First Crusade the
Byzantine Empire under Alexois I Komneno had been getting friendly with the
Latin West and the papacy, partially due to less concern about divided
theology.⁷ The Byzantines proved useful allies because their logistical support
and provision of regional knowledge made the task of penetrating the Levant
more effective.⁸ These combined elements of division and assistance gave the
Latin West, particularly its militant nobility the confidence to foresee a
successful conquest, which proved correct on the first attempt. The Muslim
world was able to recover though, thus enabling them to force European
colonisers off the Levant mainland by 1291; it was due to this increased growth
in Islamic strength that made Christendom less confident in another Crusader triumph
which meant the concept of militant pilgrimage was largely dropped by pragmatic
discourse by the Fourneenth century.⁹
Within Europe Crusades by secular rulers which were blessed
by the Pope such as in Eastern European regions like Prussia and Livonia proved
more enduring in Christianising and colonising territories.¹⁰ This was largely
down to superior military force which enabled them to defeat or intimidate the
people into submitting, which proved the case against the Muslims in Spain, but
also through conversion of rulers and people like the Wends who were attracted
to the notion of being part of Christendom due to the fact it was stronger,
more advanced and wealthier than their pagan society.¹¹ These conversions and
annexations were largely due to the increasing superiority and confidence the
Latin West had over the people they conquered in regards to their military
ability and strength of their church.
The Papacy had tried to initiate Crusades by men of the Latin
West as early as the Ninth century, however the Latin Church lacked the
influence required to commission such things.¹² During the Eleventh century the
papacy did find the confidence to call Crusades due to the reforms which gave
the Church more independence from secular rulers and made the Church more
organised with a hierarchical system headed by the Pope who wielded executive authority.¹³
The Church also had more influence throughout the Latin West with a network of
dioceses spread throughout it, preaching papal doctrine and making everyone
very aware that they were part of a Christian community.¹⁴ This sense of
community meant that such a call like the Crusades provided the various people
of the Latin West whether they were noble, clergy or laity with a shared goal
and sense of religious enthusiasm, granting many with the confidence to
contribute to a cause that had united people so readily.¹⁵ This was certainly
the feeling knights like Achard of Montmerle before he set out for Jerusalem, ‘I,
excited by the same intention as this great and enormous upheaval of the
Christian people wanting to go to fight for God against the pagans and Saracens.’¹⁶.
The Latin West was also highly militant, with localised wars
between secular rulers being a common feature of Eleventh century western
Europe, this was to be a continuous feature of the Latin West over the
following centuries, except now they would begin to look outwards beyond the
borders of Christendom for lands to conquer.¹⁷ The Latin West was also full of
people with expansionist ambitions, the Frankish nobility in particular had a
history of successful colonisation which gave them the confidence to believe
they would continue to acquire land, with nobles like Berengar IV of
Aragon-Catalonia giving speculative grants to potential conquerors like the
Templars in 1143 confident they would defeat the Saracens.¹⁸
This was the military force that Pope Urban II wanted to take
the cross to conquer and Christianise lands, however while he did have the
authority to give the laity of Christendom the directives to participate in a
Crusade, he could not force them to go, he had to rely on the Latin Church’s
influence and hope the laity would be obedient.¹⁹ It is clear to see by the
rise in the number of expansionist wars carried out with a papal blessing that
the Latin West was highly confident that it could enlarge its territorial
possessions and Christianise land beyond its boundaries. However it is
important to know what actually motivated the Crusading orders into fighting because
the idea that the Crusades occurred just because the Latin West was confident
is not justifiable.
The majority of the Crusades were led by secular nobles and
knights who were able to use their men and resources to fight.²⁰ These men were
very aware they were part of Christendom largely due to the widespread nature
of ecclesiastical institutions and also that most laymen had family members
within such institutions.²¹ When Urban II issued the order of a Crusade to
recapture Jerusalem at the Council of Clermont he emphasised the idea of a
united Christian community in order to arouse religious feeling and make the
laity more confident of their success as a large, militant, internationalised
force.²² Another subject Urban II appealed to was the idea of remission of sins
for participating in this militant pilgrimage, ‘If anyone prompted by piety
alone and not to earn honour or money will set out on the road to Jerusalem in
order to liberate God’s church, that journey will suffice all penance.’²³ Jotischky
believes that the promise of remission of sins was extremely engaging to laymen,
especially to confessed sinners, as it provided them with a means to seek
salvation without having to commit to a monastic lifestyle.²⁴
‘God has
established holy wars in our day, so that the order of knights and their
followers... can find a new way of attaining salvation. Now they need not
abandon secular affairs completely by choosing the monastic life, or any other
religious profession, as was once customary. Now they can to some degree win
God’s grace while pursuing their own way of life, with the freedoms and in the
dress to which they are accustomed.’²⁵
However Flori believes that many
Crusaders were not in dire need of penance, but were instead motivated by their
commitment to the Latin Church and hoped to help it expand.²⁶ The Templars were
a prime example to this commitment:
‘The knights
of Christ fight the battles of their Lord with untroubled minds, fearing
neither sin from killing the enemy nor danger in their own death, since there
is no guilt and much deserved glory in either bearing death or inflicting it
for Christ.’²⁷
The fact the Templars were popular
extremists with influential spiritual, political and financial connections
throughout the Latin West and that they were entrusted with the defence of the
Holy Land after its capture, shows that the Latin West wanted Christianity to
spread as much as possible as they are putting their confidence in a group
totally committed to the cause.²⁸ Similar methods of papal appealing and actual
motivations of salvation and commitment would be applied to the Crusades for
the Levant in the Twelfth and Thirteenth centuries, along with an appeal to
uphold social and family traditions which the Popes emphasised with stories of
sacrifices and successes their predecessors had experienced.²⁹ Despite the
eventual defeat of the Crusading Orders in the Levant, Jerusalem continued to
serve as an important destination for peaceful pilgrimages which remained
popular beyond the Fifteenth century which shows how committed the people of
the Latin West were to the idea that Jerusalem was still central to their
faith.³⁰
The idea of Crusades was also
applied to expansion in Europe with the Popes of the Twelfth and Thirteenth
centuries like Innocent III who blessed the numerous secular conquests against
pagan territories like Prussia for the purpose of Christianising the area,
which was accomplished.³¹ When looking at the rhetoric of German sources it is
clear that this was a motivation present for such conquests:
‘Assemble
yourselves and come, all you lovers of Christ and the Church, and prepare
yourselves like the men of Gaul to free Jerusalem! Our Jerusalem... has been
made a bondmaid... may He, who with his strong arm, gave triumph over his
enemies to the men of Gaul, who came from the furthermost west to the distant
east, give you will and power to subdue these inhuman pagans who are our
neighbours.’³²
Bartlett on the other hand feels
that secular rulers merely used the cross as a cover so they could expand and
create their own dynasties, he says this was a regular occurrence within Europe
and believes that many laymen saw the Crusades as a chance to seize less
overpopulated areas which the papacy is actually encouraging them to take.³³ Duby
believes that such men usually took the form of second sons who were landless
nobles due to an inheritance system that favoured the eldest son who craved the
political and social status other members of their family had by taking land or
at the very least to make a material gain.³⁴ One chronicler backs such a point
up by describing how pointless yet common the cyclical wars of conquest within
the Latin West were, ‘this land you
inhabit is everywhere shut in by the sea, is surrounded by ranges of mountains
and is overcrowded by your numbers...This is why you devour and fight one
another.’³⁵
Riley-Smith is highly critical of such
theories pointing out that few Crusaders gained lands in the conquered Levant,
especially those who lacked it in the first place and the idea that one could
profit from Crusading forget how much of an expensive venture it was, which is
one of the reasons why there were so few landless Crusaders because they lacked
the resources needed for conquest.³⁶ When people did gain material or territorial
possessions the reason were down to there being a lack of control by any
figurehead due to the fact most Crusading groups were spontaneous which gave
people the freedom to exploit the situation.³⁷ Flori feels that both
perspectives on the Crusades do contain some legitimacy; that in the Levant
some Crusaders did make physical gains but these gains were compatible with the
conquest which they had followed for spiritual reasons.³⁸ However the use of the cross by
secular rulers in expansionist actions in Europe were usually a cover to seek
worldly gains because their mission would receive more spiritual and political
assurance of success from the Pope’s blessing who saw the potential for areas
to be Christianised if they were seized by members of the Latin West.³⁹
The rising power of the Latin Church
and the secular rulers of the Western Europe definitely provided the Latin West
with a high amount of self-confidence in their military potential and
attachment to their faith which made them believe in a future for the Latin
Church and European dynasties. When they compared their society and military
against the pagan and Islamic world they were further convinced of a future for
expanding enterprises such as the Crusades. The Latin Church depended on the
militant laity of Christendom to take the Papal banner in order to allow this
expansion, a feat that was achieved by preaching the spiritual benefits of the
Crusade which did largely work in the case of conquest of the Holy Land but was
an agreement exploited by many secular rulers when they marched on lands of
little spiritual importance within Europe.
Endnotes
1. R.Bartlett, ‘The Making of Europe: Conquest,
Colonisation and Cultural Change 950-1350 (London,1993),p.5
2. H.J.Nicholson, ‘In the Crusades’ (Basingstoke,
2005),p.3
3. M.Bull, ‘Knightly Piety and the Lay Response
to the First Crusade’ (Oxford,1993), p.72-76
4. J.Jotischky, ‘Crusading and the Crusader
States’ (London,2004), p.16
5. C.Tyerman, ‘The Invention of the
Crusades’(Basingstoke,1998)
6. Jotischky, ‘Crusader’, p.39
7. Ibid.,pp.42-46
8. Ibid.,pp.42-46
9. Ibid., p.257
10. Bartlett, ‘Conquest’, pp.15-18
11. Ibid.,pp.292-295
12. D.Bachrach, ‘Religion and the Conduct of
Warc.300-1215’ (Woodbridge,2003), pp.64-66
13. Jotischky, ‘Crusader’, pp.24-28
14. Bartlett, ‘Conquest’, p.5
15. Ibid., pp.247-253
16. Cartulaires de l’abbaye de Moleme, trans. J.Laurent (Paris, 1911)
17. J.France, ‘Western Warfare in the Age of the
Crusades,1000-1300’ (New York,1999), pp.1-15
18. Bartlett, ‘Conquest’, p.90
19. Bartlett, ‘Conquest’, p.19
20. Jotischky, ‘Crusader’, p.7
21. Ibid., p.32
22. Ibid.,p.51
23. The Councils of Urban II, vol 1: Decreta Claramontenria, trans. R.Somerville (Amsterdam, 1972)
24. Jotischky, ‘Crusader’, p.31
25. Guibert of Nogent’s Gesta Dei per Francos, trans. R.Levine (Woodbridge, 1997)
26. J.Flori, ‘Ideology and motivations in the
First Crusade’, in H.J.Nicholson(eds), In
the Crusaders(Basingstoke,2005),p.26
27. Bernard of Clairvaux’s De Laude novae militae 1.3, trans. J.Leclerq and H.M. Rochais
(Rome,1963)
28. Bartlett, ‘Conquest’, pp.255-260
29. J.Phillips, ‘The Crusades 1095-1197’
(Harlow,2002), pp.64-138
30. J.Sumption, ‘Pilgrimage: An Image of Medieval
Religion’ (London,1975), p.257-302
31. Bartlett, ‘Conquest’, pp.262-264
32. Document 0f 1108:Helbig and Weinrich 1, no.19, pp.96-102
33. Bartlett, ‘Conquest’, pp.44-46
34. G.Duby, ‘The Chivalrous Society’
(London,1977),p.12
35. Robert the Monk’s Historia Iherosolimitana, RHC,
Occ.3, pp.717-882
36. J.S.C.Riley-Smith, ‘The First Crusades’
(Cambridge,1997),p.19-25
37. R.Chazan, ‘In the year 1096: The First Crusade
and the Jews (Philadelphia,1996)
38. Flori, ‘Ideology’, pp.27-29
39. Flori, ‘Ideology’, pp.27-29
No comments:
Post a Comment