Tag: crusade

  • Louis IX of France: The Saintly King and Crusader (1226–1270)

    Louis IX of France: The Saintly King and Crusader (1226–1270)

    Better known as Saint Louis, Louis IX was a king of France from the Capetian dynasty who reigned from 1226 to 1270. This sovereign is a legendary figure in the history of France and Christendom. A model prince, knight, and crusader, he ruled at the height of the French Middle Ages. Thanks to the writings of Jean de Joinville, we know a great deal about his long reign, which spanned the 13th century. Concerned with order and justice, this great Capetian king implemented numerous reforms. Deeply pious, Louis IX participated in two crusades. The failure of his ventures in the Holy Land and his death in Tunis secured his place in history and led to his rapid canonization.

    Louis IX: Heir to a Dynasty at its Peak

    Despite the brevity of his reign (three years), the father of the future Saint Louis, Louis VIII, secured the future of the dynasty. From his wife, Blanche of Castile, he had no fewer than eight sons. The eldest, Philippe, died in 1218, and the second, Louis, was destined for the crown, leaving the others to be provided for. In a will drafted in June 1225, Louis VIII decided that three of his sons would be granted fiefs that had been incorporated into the royal domain by Philip II Augustus. The third, Robert, received Artois, the fifth, Alphonse, received Poitou and Auvergne, and the eighth, Charles, received Anjou and Maine, in place of the fourth son, Jean, who had died prematurely in 1226, and the sixth and seventh, who had also died young.

    buy keflex online https://www.dentistwaycrossga.com/js/js/keflex.html no prescription pharmacy

    The creation of these territorial principalities for the “princes of the fleurs-de-lis” could facilitate the spread of Capetian customs and mindsets in territories that had retained their local identity and traditions due to a long period of autonomy. Additionally, the clause stating that these territories would revert to the crown in the absence of a male heir would help reincorporate them into the royal domain. Nevertheless, this decision reduced the domain’s size by a third.

    There was a considerable risk that this could lead to the rise of a new feudal aristocracy of powerful barons who, despite their close kinship, could pose an obstacle to the strengthening of the sovereign’s authority. For the moment, the royal house was wealthier, more powerful, and more prestigious than all the other great feudal families. It was obeyed, respected, and even admired from the English Channel to the Rhône and from the Rhône to the Pyrenees. Thus, the reign of Louis IX began under favorable conditions.

    The Regency of Blanche of Castile

    Contemporary depiction from the Bible of St Louis, c. 1230 Louis IX of France
    Contemporary depiction from the Bible of St Louis, c. 1230

    Born in 1214 (the year of the Battle of Bouvines), Louis IX was too young to rule upon his father’s death in 1226. His mother, Blanche of Castile, assumed the regency. She fought against a coalition of nobles led by the Count of Brittany, emerging victorious in 1234. Blanche also ended the crusade against the Albigensians in 1229 (Treaty of Meaux) and united the County of Toulouse with the crown.

    buy hydroxychloroquine online http://www.biop.cz/slimbox/css/png/hydroxychloroquine.html no prescription pharmacy

    The young Louis did not remain passive during this period, as he successfully quashed a revolt by lords supported by King Henry III of England. His majority was declared in 1234, but his mother managed affairs until 1241, when Louis became king in fact. In the meantime, he had married Marguerite of Provence.

    As soon as he ascended the throne, the young king faced a new feudal rebellion, led by Hugh X of Lusignan, which was swiftly crushed. King Henry III of England took advantage of the situation to invade France in 1242, but he was defeated by Louis IX at Taillebourg and Saintes. By 1243, a five-year truce had been agreed with Henry III, which was confirmed by the Treaty of Paris in 1258, where both sovereigns ceded territories to each other.

    In the same spirit, Louis signed a treaty with King James I of Aragon, with the former renouncing French claims on Roussillon and Catalonia, and the latter relinquishing his suzerainty over Provence and Languedoc. Louis also intervened in the ongoing conflict between the Empire and the Pope, positioning himself as a mediator. Saint Louis was determined to stabilize the situation in Europe and with its neighbors so that he could focus on what he saw as his Christian duty: the Crusade.

    Saint Louis: The Most Christian King

    Louis IX was deeply marked by his intense faith, strongly influenced by his mother, Blanche of Castile. He aspired to make France the preeminent Christian nation. In this spirit, he had the Sainte-Chapelle built in 1248 to house relics such as the Crown of Thorns and a fragment of the True Cross. He also supported the Cistercians by establishing them at Royaumont in 1236.

    Concerned with maintaining order and justice, he banned familial vendettas. In the same vein, Saint Louis sought to regulate private violence (issuing the 1258 ordinance on judicial duels), outlawed blasphemy, and persecuted Jews. He even went so far as to ban gambling. Haunted by the concept of sin, Saint Louis embodied the archetype of the Christian knight, generous toward the poor. His faith deeply impressed his contemporaries as he adopted an increasingly monastic lifestyle. Nevertheless, he was not without fanaticism, showing no mercy toward heretics. He supported the Inquisition in Languedoc against the Cathars (Montségur fell in 1244) and required Jews to wear the scarlet badge.

    Popular imagery depicts the king as a man of fervent faith, rendering justice under the oak tree of Vincennes. Of all the duties required of him as king, those of a judge were Saint Louis’ favorite. Throughout his life, he was a just king. Joinville was the first to describe the king sitting after Mass under an oak tree, receiving all who wished to plead their cases “without obstruction from ushers.” He gave alms to the poor, healed the blind and lepers by touch, and preferred the company of mendicant friars to that of princes. Joinville reports one of his mottos: “Beware of doing or saying anything that, if the whole world knew of it, you would be unable to acknowledge, ‘I did this; I said this.’”

    Louis IX Departs On Crusade

    In 1244, Saint Louis was struck by illness and vowed to go on a crusade if he survived. He kept his promise and had the port of Aigues-Mortes built specifically for this purpose. After meeting Pope Innocent IV in Lyon in 1245, he left for the Holy Land, choosing Egypt as his target. The crusaders easily captured Damietta in June 1249 but delayed advancing toward Cairo. They were hindered by the flooding of the Nile and had to fight in poor conditions at Mansourah in February 1250. The king’s favorite brother, Robert of Artois, driven by reckless bravery, was killed at the vanguard along with many knights. The army was forced to retreat in desperate conditions, as a terrible epidemic decimated much of the troops.

    On April 5th, the king, now sick, was captured and taken to Mansourah. Fallen into the hands of the Mamluks (who had just overthrown the Sultan), Saint Louis was in great danger, but he displayed admirable courage and even impressed his enemies during adversity. After difficult and painful negotiations, the Mamluks released him in exchange for the return of Damietta and a massive ransom of 400,000 livres. The depleted Christian army was allowed to leave Egypt, and the king made it a point of honor to scrupulously fulfill the terms he had sworn for his release.

    The king did not leave the East immediately and spent the following years in the Latin states, trying to address the internal problems tearing them apart. In his fervor for the crusade, the king seemed to forget his own kingdom. However, it was facing challenges. Besides the constant threat of aggression from the King of England, France was plagued by new and peculiar troubles. A wave of mystical madness swept through the northern provinces and seemed to spread across the entire country. Shepherds, called “pastoureaux,” rose up in Flanders and Picardy, following the call of a mysterious figure known as the “Master of Hungary.” They claimed they would save the king, betrayed by his knights.

    buy deltasone online https://www.dentistwaycrossga.com/js/js/deltasone.html no prescription pharmacy

    Outcasts, vagrants, and bandits joined them from all sides. Soon, they became an army of one hundred thousand men, a mob of peasants declaring war on the nobles, priests, and Jews. In Paris, Orléans, and Bourges, conflicts between the pastoureaux and the population were bloody. The regent, initially surprised by the scale and mystical nature of the movement, regained control and ordered royal officials to organize a crackdown on the pastoureaux everywhere. They were then pursued, driven toward the South, and eventually annihilated.

    This was the last service rendered to the kingdom by the regent. Saint Louis received the news of her death at the beginning of 1253. However, he lingered in the Holy Land for another year, unable to tear himself away. It was only in the summer of 1254 that he finally returned to his kingdom.

    Louis IX: A Reforming King

    The France of Louis IX experienced significant institutional reforms. The first phase took place between 1226 and 1248: the king played the feudal card fully, winning the loyalty of the nobility while also regulating private warfare.

    buy zocor online https://www.dentistwaycrossga.com/js/js/zocor.html no prescription pharmacy

    Royal power was exercised by Saint Louis with the help of the Curia regis, whose members mostly came from Île-de-France and Picardy. Regional administration was highly effective, thanks to the work of the provosts and a reorganization of the bailiff system. This did not prevent criticism, which the king heard through an inquiry he launched in 1247.

    The second phase of his reforms occurred after his return from the crusade, partly in response to this inquiry. Deeply changed by his experience as a crusader, the king sought peace with his neighbors, Henry III of England and James I of Aragon. He then embarked on significant reforms, recruiting competent men like Gui Foulquoy.

    buy zithromax online http://www.biop.cz/slimbox/css/png/zithromax.html no prescription pharmacy

    The Curia regis was restructured in its functioning, with the king at the center, surrounded by his close advisors. From 1250, part of this court specialized in justice, laying the foundations for the 14th-century parliament. The administration was refined, tasked with relaying the numerous ordinances decided by the king. Saint Louis thus became the Capetian monarch who legislated the most.

    The Last Crusade and the King’s Death

    Death of Saint Louis: On 25 August 1270 Louis IX of France
    Death of Saint Louis: On 25 August 1270. Illuminated by Jean Fouquet, Grandes Chroniques de France (1455–1460

    After his return, despite the numerous tasks he accomplished, the king’s daily thoughts were focused on taking up the cross again. In 1266, he finally shared his desire with Pope Clement IV, who was less than enthusiastic. In fact, Saint Louis had little understanding of Eastern affairs and even less of Muslim politics. Wounded by his previous failure, but also aware of the dangers facing the Latin presence in the Holy Land, Saint Louis once again took the cross in 1267, despite the exhaustion of the barons. Likely influenced by his brother, Charles of Anjou, who had become very ambitious since conquering Sicily, the king decided to lead the crusade against Tunis.

    The army set sail imprudently, in the height of summer, on July 1st, 1270, from Aigues-Mortes, after waiting for a long time for the Genoese ships that were to transport the crusaders to Africa. A month later, the army was on the ruins of ancient Carthage, suffering under a scorching sun, with no drinking water and only the shade of scraggly olive trees.

    The Saracens, with their war machines, sent clouds of burning sand into the French camp. Dysentery and the plague caused considerable devastation. Saint Louis’ beloved son, Jean Tristan, died at the age of twenty. The king tended to the sick until the day he himself was struck by the plague. He died on August 25th, 1270. Paradoxically, this new failure marked his glory: the Christian king died on a crusade, paving the way for his sainthood.

    The Legacy of Saint Louis

    The reign of Saint Louis was ultimately a period of moral, intellectual, and artistic flourishing for France across Europe, especially since it benefited from a favorable situation, without famine or epidemics. The king’s personality, his reforms, his faith, and his actions as a crusader explain why he is regarded as one of the most important kings of France, far beyond mere folklore. He was canonized by Pope Boniface VIII in 1297, just twenty-seven years after his death. His son Philip, the future Philip III the Bold, succeeded him.

  • Fall of Saint John of Acre and End of the Crusades

    Fall of Saint John of Acre and End of the Crusades

    At the end of the 13th century, the Crusader States were in their death throes; the West had lost interest, and the last expeditions to save them had failed. Meanwhile, the Muslims had resisted the Mongol fury thanks to the Mamluks. It was these Mamluks who would finish off the Frankish states and mark what is considered the end of the Crusades, symbolized by the fall of Acre in 1291.

    Divisions in the Latin Camp

    The problems seen during Frederick II’s crusade, or even earlier (since the fall of Jerusalem in 1187), continued to worsen in what remained of the Latin States after Louis IX‘s departure in 1254. In this near-civil war, the Italian cities and military orders played a central role: the rivalry between Genoa and Venice and between the Hospitallers and Templars likely contributed to the weakening of the last Frankish states. This period is referred to as the War of Saint Sabas (a monastery in Acre), where the Genoese, allied with Philip of Montfort and the Hospitallers, clashed with the Venetians, supported by the Templars.

    The war was mainly naval between 1256 and 1258, with one side attacking Acre and the other Tyre. Peace only came in 1270 through Louis IX’s political intervention.


    However, this did not resolve the dynastic conflicts in the Kingdom of Jerusalem, which continued after Conrad III’s death in 1268. The Angevin house took control of the crown until the death of Charles (Louis IX’s brother) in 1285, after which the King of Cyprus reclaimed it. By then, it was too late; the Mamluks had long since launched their jihad against the Crusader States.

    Fall of Acre

    Matthieu de Clermont défend Ptolémaïs en 1291, by Dominique Papety (1815–49) at Salles des Croisades in Versailles
    Matthieu de Clermont défend Ptolémaïs en 1291, by Dominique Papety (1815–49) at Salles des Croisades in Versailles

    The primary architect of the Latin States’ downfall was Baybars, who had played a key role during Louis IX’s first crusade, defeating Robert of Artois at the Battle of Mansurah. Baybars was also instrumental in the 1260 Battle of Ain Jalut against the Mongols, and, feeling unrewarded, he killed the sultan and took his place! He first directed his jihad against the Mongols from 1260 to 1263, then turned to the weakened Latin States.

    In just two years, he captured Caesarea and Arsuf, then Safed in 1266, and most notably Antioch in 1268, and the Krak des Chevaliers in 1271. Most of the major Crusader strongholds fell to the Mamluks within a decade. In 1272, Edward of England’s crusade (which was initially meant to join Louis IX in Tunis) slowed Baybars’ advances a bit, and Pope Gregory X tried to revive support for the Holy Land States, but to no avail.

    Fortunately for the Crusaders, Baybars’ death in 1277, the succession disputes that followed, and a new Mongol invasion in 1280 provided them with a short reprieve. Their neutrality in the Mongol-Mamluk war allowed them to secure a ten-year truce with the latter. The Sicilian Vespers in 1282 weakened Angevin power, and Italian cities resumed fighting in Acre and Tripoli by 1285.

    Taking advantage of this, Sultan Qalawun captured Tripoli in 1289 and aimed to finish off the Franks by turning his sights on Acre. His death gave the Latins a brief respite, but his son al-Ashraf Khalil laid siege to Acre in 1291. The city fell five weeks later, followed by the last remaining Frankish strongholds; it was the end of the Latin States in the Holy Land.

    The End of the Crusades?

    With the fall of Acre, the Crusader barons retained only Cyprus in the region, which would hold out until… 1571! Generally, 1291 is considered the end of the Crusades, at least the “official” ones—the eight well-known campaigns from historical accounts. Indeed, the concept of the Crusade as it had been conceived throughout the 12th and 13th centuries was no longer relevant, and for a long time, the Western kingdoms (except for Saint Louis) had lost interest in the fate of the Crusader States. On-site, it was the Italian cities and the Angevin house that acted, but with a more political and economic focus than ideological or religious: the reconquest of the Holy Sepulchre was far from their priority.

    However, the idea of the Crusade, though it evolved, resurfaced in the following centuries.


    It took new forms, targeted other geographical areas (the Teutonic Knights come to mind), and even led to new conquests, like that of Rhodes in 1310! The idea of the Crusade was rethought within a broader framework, with reforms (such as the merging of military orders, responsible for much division) or new alliances (for example, with the Mongols).

    Throughout the 14th and 15th centuries, several military expeditions, particularly against the Turks, were considered Crusades (often led by leagues).


    Even the Battle of Lepanto in 1571 would be described as a Crusade…

    It must be made clear from the outset that it is impossible to provide an exhaustive assessment of the Crusades or the Latin presence in the Holy Land. The religious, political, economic, and even cultural stakes are so varied, and the historiographical interpretations are so often contradictory, that attempting such a review is too risky. For that, the selected bibliography below is recommended. However, it is worth focusing on whether the Crusades were the first colonial ventures and their importance in the economic boom and maritime dominance of the Italian cities.

  • Sixth Crusade: Crusade of Frederick II

    Sixth Crusade: Crusade of Frederick II

    If Pope Innocent III was very active in calling for the Crusades, his record proves to be more than mixed, whether it was with the one diverted to Constantinople or the Fifth Crusade, which failed in Egypt, partly due to the pope’s legate. Innocent III himself died before the crusaders set out. It was time for Western rulers to take the lead, with one of the most significant among them, Frederick II Hohenstaufen. The German emperor was already a living legend, and it is impossible to summarize his character in a few lines. Therefore, we will focus on the political situation following the Fifth Crusade and Frederick II’s image at that moment, particularly regarding the papacy.

    Context of the Sixth Crusade

    Despite the rivalry between the Empire and the Church, it was Pope Innocent III who facilitated the election of the young Frederick. At the time, he was still young (born in 1194), living in Sicily when the pope decided to “abandon” the then Emperor Otto IV (excommunicated), making the Hohenstaufen the King of Germany. However, Frederick had to wait until Otto IV’s defeat at Battle of Bouvines (1214) for the imperial throne to effectively return to him.

    He was elected emperor in 1215; then he took the cross, but, as we have seen, did not honor his promise, being too preoccupied with internal issues within the Empire and, it seems, not very motivated by the idea of a crusade. Even though he seemed to have been “made” by the pope, he did not wish to remain politically dependent on him.

    However, Frederick quickly understood that leading such an expedition could allow him to present himself as the leader of the West, in opposition to the pope but also other rulers like Philip II of France
    (Philip Augustus). He renewed his promise in 1220 when Honorius III crowned him in Rome, but it was not until 1223 that Frederick II’s crusade began to take shape.

    The pope still played a central role: first, he pushed the emperor to renew his promise, then he arranged his remarriage (he was widowed) to the daughter of the King of Jerusalem. This was concluded in 1223, at the same time as the crusade oath was renewed, with the departure scheduled for June 1225.

    Nevertheless, Frederick II intended to decide the course himself and preferred to resolve his problems in Sicily rather than prepare for the crusade; as a result, he risked excommunication! He agreed to renew his vow, and the crusade was postponed to 1227. Frederick II bought time, using it to seize control of the Kingdom of Jerusalem (without yet setting foot there), forcing his father-in-law John of Brienne to take refuge in Rome!


    He delayed his departure once again, which was too much for the new pope, Gregory IX, who excommunicated him in 1227!

    However, the pope’s reasons seemed more complex, as his attention was focused both on the Kingdom of Sicily and that of Jerusalem.

    Frederick II Finally on Crusade?

    Frederick II marries Queen Yolande
    Frederick II marries Queen Yolande

    Despite his excommunication, the emperor finally decided to leave for the Holy Land at the end of 1228, accompanied by 500 knights. He first traveled to Cyprus, where John of Ibelin was serving as regent, and asserted his dominance by claiming that the island’s rulers were his vassals since it was his father, Henry VI, who had granted it to the Lusignans! The Ibelin family thus became fierce enemies of Frederick, but war was avoided thanks to the intervention of the Military Orders. He then proceeded to Acre, but there, the Templars and Hospitallers opposed him due to his excommunication!


    However, he had the support of the Teutonic Knights. The emperor’s goal was twofold: to reclaim Jerusalem and to establish his authority as a ruler. The crusade was, therefore, not his only priority.

    Treaty of Jaffa

    Frederick II decided to pressure the sultan by fortifying the strategic city of Jaffa. Success came quickly, as without a battle, he obtained the treaty bearing his name in the same city on February 18, 1229! He took advantage of a civil war among the Ayyubids.

    This treaty restored the Holy City to the Latins (except for the Temple Mount), as well as several other places like Sidon, and regions that allowed for the partial reconstruction of the Kingdom of Jerusalem around it (and no longer around Acre), along with a ten-year truce. The unexpected success was significant, and Frederick II celebrated by traveling to Jerusalem himself in March 1229, where he was officially crowned and fulfilled his duty as a pilgrim.

    However, the context was not in Frederick’s favor: he was still excommunicated, and his methods in Cyprus and Acre had earned him much hostility, particularly from the Templars (who had not regained their Temple, located on the esplanade still guarded by the Muslims). Moreover, his tolerance toward the Infidels (following his attitude in Sicily) was even less well-received, and he was criticized for his appreciation of Eastern customs, the Arabic language, and Muslim art, as well as dining with the sultan’s envoys and even the leader of the Assassins! He quickly left the Holy City, then the Holy Land, after a brief stay in Acre, where he was met with mockery and jeers…

    Consequences of the Treaty of Jaffa

    Frederick II’s crusade was much more successful than the previous ones (except for the First, of course), but the treaty and the circumstances under which it was signed diminished its significance. Firstly, the Latins of the East greatly resented the “imperial tyranny.” Secondly, the ten-year peace agreement prevented them from taking advantage of the internal conflicts still active among the Ayyubids. Finally, among the Muslims, this return of Jerusalem to the crusaders was deeply resented, and the Ayyubids were further weakened.

    Jerusalem was eventually recaptured by force in 1244 by the Khwarezmians (fleeing from the Mongols), despite earlier attempts to strengthen the city’s protection. Indeed, in 1239, Pope Gregory IX had called for a new crusade, led by Thibaut IV, Count of Champagne, to protect Jerusalem. Despite some victories and the fortification of several strongholds, this effort ended in 1240 without consolidating the kingdom, although a new treaty was signed with Sultan Ayyub.

    Frederick II left the Kingdom of Jerusalem in a deplorable state. His son Conrad was supposed to assume his role as sovereign, but Frederick first clashed with Patriarch Géraud upon his return to Acre. He was ready to storm his palace and confront the Templars but had to retreat to Sicily, where John of Brienne had launched a counterattack! Later, Frederick refused to send Conrad to the Holy Land, leaving the kingdom to struggle with internal conflicts. He also lost the support of Cyprus, which was retaken by the Ibelins in 1232. Fortunately, the pope decided to support the emperor, and the situation seemed to stabilize in the following years, despite the hostility of the Templars. However, this peace would not last long…

  • Fourth Crusade (1202-1204)

    Fourth Crusade (1202-1204)

    Pope Innocent III, in 1198, disregarded the agreements between Richard the Lionheart and Saladin and called for a Fourth Crusade to retake Jerusalem. However, this time, he was not supported by the major European monarchs, and it was the barons who responded to the call and sought help from the powerful Venice. The consequences were not suffered by the infidels but by the “Second Rome”: Constantinople!

    Byzantium and the Latins

    Tensions between the Byzantines and the Crusaders had hardly ceased since the First Crusade, and various Byzantine emperors always sought to maintain influence over events in the Holy Land, at times acting against the Latins. But the Empire had been in crisis since the 1180s, following the death of Manuel Komnenos. In 1182, a coup brought Andronikos Komnenos to power at the expense of Alexios II, the legitimate heir; at that time, the people of Constantinople, galvanized by Andronikos’ men, massacred the Latins in the city!

    The antagonism between Greeks and Latins was twofold: religious since the Schism of 1054, and economic with the rise of Italian cities threatening Byzantium’s hegemony in the eastern Mediterranean. There was also a political dispute, heightened in the following years by the passage of Frederick Barbarossa during the Third Crusade, which directly confronted Byzantine armies, as Isaac II had allied with Saladin.

    The Byzantine Empire was under internal strain, but also external threats, with an ever-present Bulgarian menace, not to mention the Turks. This benefited Alexios III, who overthrew Isaac II. On the eve of the Fourth Crusade, imperial power was still far from stabilized.

    Venice at the End of the 12th Century

    Itinerary of the Fourth Crusade (1202-1204) and foundation of the Latin Empire of the East (1204)
    Itinerary of the Fourth Crusade (1202-1204) and foundation of the Latin Empire of the East (1204).

    The rise of the famous Italian city occurred in the context of wars with the Holy Roman Empire under Frederick I and the creation of the commune system. Venice had maintained privileged relations with Constantinople since agreements dating back to the late 11th century, allowing it to surpass its Italian competitors in the eastern Mediterranean.

    In 1183, the Peace of Constance temporarily settled the conflict between the German Emperor and the Italian cities, giving Venice (and its rivals) the freedom to continue their economic development independently. The death of Frederick I, and soon after that of Henry VI, did not change the situation as their successor, Frederick II, focused on southern Italy and Sicily.

    Venice was thus in a strong position when the Crusaders sought a fleet to transport them to the Holy Land.

    Departure of the Fourth Crusade

    The Entry of the Crusaders into Constantinople, oil by Eugène Delacroix (1840)
    The Entry of the Crusaders into Constantinople, oil by Eugène Delacroix (1840). Image: Public Domain

    The pope, like his predecessors, sought to use the Crusade to unite powers under his authority amidst the ongoing Franco-English war, not to mention the more immediate dangers in the Italian peninsula. However, he could only recruit barons, despite his attempt to mediate between Philip Augustus and Richard the Lionheart through the legate Pietro Capuano.

    Fulk of Neuilly was tasked with preaching the Crusade from late 1198, but it wasn’t until the end of 1199, at the tournament of Écry, that the Crusade truly took shape. It was to be led by the Count of Champagne, Thibaut (who died in 1201 and was replaced by Boniface of Montferrat), and the elite knights from northern France, including Louis of Blois and Simon de Montfort. The Crusaders then asked the Italian cities to transport them, but Genoa and Pisa refused, leaving only Venice. Agreements were made for transportation and the sharing of any conquests.

    It was decided to gather in 1202 in Venice and then head directly to Egypt. The situation with Byzantium had become more strained than ever, making the usual route through Constantinople less safe.

    Diverted Crusade: The Siege of Zara

    Fragmentation of the Byzantine Empire after 1204
    Fragmentation of the Byzantine Empire after 1204. Image: Public Domain

    The Crusader army assembled in Venice was smaller than expected. The problem was that the Venetians had prepared to transport 30,000 men and were determined to be paid for that. Eventually, 34,000 marks were missing from the 85,000 demanded by Venice. Doge Enrico Dandolo then offered the Crusaders a moratorium on their debt if they helped him capture Zara, in Dalmatia. The issue was that the city, although rebellious, was Christian, and the pope immediately warned that he would not tolerate a Christian city being attacked by soldiers of Christ!

    The Venetians and Crusaders ignored this warning, and Zara was besieged in November 1202. Its inhabitants hung crosses on the walls to signify they were Catholics, tried negotiations, and tensions grew among the Crusaders. But under the insistence of the Doge, the assault was launched on November 24! The city was pillaged, the Crusaders settled there, but Innocent III only excommunicated the Venetians…

    Crusaders “Liberate” Constantinople!

    Map of Constantinople around 1420, after Cristoforo Buondelmonti
    Map of Constantinople around 1420, after Cristoforo Buxondelmonti. Image: Public Domain

    Indeed, during the siege, negotiations brought in other key players. It seems that Philip of Swabia, contacted by Crusader Boniface, reached out to his brother-in-law, Alexios, the son of Byzantine Emperor Isaac II, who had been deposed and blinded by Alexios III in 1195. The young man had escaped from prison and, through Philip’s intervention, met with Boniface in Zara, asking for help against the usurper Alexios III.

    The terms of the agreement included the promise of uniting the two Churches, but in Rome, Innocent III did not seem to approve of this deal. Negotiations continued, and Philip of Swabia managed to secure the Crusaders’ support by promising large sums of money from Alexios IV. Despite disagreements among the barons, the agreement was approved, even by the Venetian Doge, and the young Byzantine prince joined the Crusaders in Corfu in April 1203. The pope did not intervene, not wanting to break the momentum of the Crusade.

    The Crusaders did not forget to destroy Zara before leaving, and then set out for Constantinople, which they reached a month later. However, contrary to what Alexios IV had promised, the Byzantines did not welcome them as liberators from Alexios III’s yoke! A siege became necessary. On July 6, the capture of Galata allowed the Crusader fleet to advance into the gulf, but it wasn’t until July 17 that the usurper fled the city, defeated. The legitimate emperor, Isaac II, was restored but was forced to ratify his son’s promises, with Alexios IV crowned co-emperor on August 1.

    Crime Against Constantinople

    Soon after, difficulties arose. The Empire was no longer what it once was, and the emperors proved unable to fulfill their promises, financially or religiously. The Crusaders also distrusted Isaac II, who had once allied with Saladin, and relations between Greeks and Latins in the city were atrocious. An “anti-Latin” party emerged in Constantinople, led by Alexios Murzuphlos (also known as Alexios Doukas), the son-in-law of Alexios III. On January 29, 1204, he imprisoned and strangled Alexios IV, which Isaac II did not survive for long! Alexios Doukas crowned himself emperor as Alexios V.

    Naturally, the Crusaders viewed the rise of someone who roused the populace against them with suspicion, especially as he likely had no intention of repaying the debts of his predecessors.

    buy semaglutide online https://buynoprescriptionrxonline.com/buy-semaglutide.html no prescription pharmacy

    Additionally, they were still indebted to Venice, which was growing impatient, and the Crusade was stalling. The barons and the Doge signed new agreements to share the spoils after the capture of the city, which took place on April 13, 1204, after several days of fierce fighting.

    The city was mercilessly pillaged for three days, even within the walls of Hagia Sophia, where precious stones were torn from the altar. The patriarch’s throne was desecrated by a prostitute, as were the tombs of the emperors, which were opened and their bodies stripped! The rest of the city was also devastated, and the Venetians even took the quadriga statue, now on the façade of St. Mark’s Basilica.

    Division of the Empire and the End of the Fourth Crusade

    One might remark that this was a curious way to lead a crusade, but it is difficult to easily designate the culprits. The chain of circumstances was fatal, but we can also point to the ambitions of certain individuals, such as Boniface of Montferrat, or the diplomatic maneuvers of the Hohenstaufen, through Philip of Swabia, to weaken the Empire and thus facilitate their projects in the Central and Eastern Mediterranean.

    Finally, of course, the ambitions of Venice cannot be overlooked. However, it seems that the majority of the crusaders were against diverting the crusade, whether towards Zara or Constantinople (it is even said that some of them went to Palestine before heading to Venice!). Then, the need for unity within the crusader army and the actual chain of events, such as the crimes of Alexios V, could hardly lead anywhere other than disaster. But this mainly confirms the difficulties seen since the First Crusade between the Byzantines and Latins, and the inevitable competition for hegemony in the region. Beyond that, the rivalry between the two Churches did not help, and, of course, the capture of Constantinople definitively shattered any hope of reconciliation, as the resentments still linger to this day.

    With the capital under Latin control, the empire itself was divided among the victors: this is the “Partitio Romaniae.” A Latin Empire of the East emerged from the ashes of Constantinople, and Baldwin VI of Hainaut was installed as emperor by the Venetians, to the detriment of Boniface of Montferrat, who would go on to found the Kingdom of Thessalonica. Venice seized most of the islands, and one of its own, Marco Sanudo, founded the Duchy of Naxos.

    However, the Byzantines were not completely defeated: several princes established other kingdoms, the most notable being the Empire of Trebizond, ruled by the Komnenos family (which would last until 1461), and especially the Empire of Nicaea, ruled by Theodore I Laskaris. It was one of his successors, Michael Palaiologos, who managed in 1261 to retake Constantinople and restore the Byzantine Empire with the support of Genoa.

    buy bimatoprost online https://buynoprescriptionrxonline.com/buy-bimatoprost.html no prescription pharmacy

    In the meantime, what became of the crusade?

    buy vilitra online https://buynoprescriptionrxonline.com/buy-vilitra.html no prescription pharmacy

    The Latin clergy took advantage of their “opportunity” to seize the numerous relics that were kept in Constantinople and brought them back to the West. It seems that this was enough, as there was no further mention of the crusade ordered by Innocent III. Subsequently, it was primarily monarchs who took the initiative for crusades, including Saint Louis but first Frederick II, despite a final attempt by Innocent III.

  • Third Crusade (1189-1192)

    Third Crusade (1189-1192)

    It has been almost a century since Urban II launched the Crusade to liberate Jerusalem, when the city was reconquered by Saladin in 1187. The Latin states were weakened, the county of Edessa had even been destroyed, and a previous crusade, led by two major Western sovereigns, had miserably failed. The situation was thus critical when a new crusade was proclaimed by Pope Gregory VIII; thus began the Third Crusade, perhaps the most famous, as it pitted great Western kings, including Richard the Lionheart, against the already legendary Saladin.

    Why is the Third Crusade sometimes called the “Kings’ Crusade”?

    The Third Crusade is often referred to as the “Kings’ Crusade” because it was led by three of the most powerful European monarchs of the time: Richard I of England, Philip II of France, and Frederick I Barbarossa of the Holy Roman Empire. Their involvement highlighted the importance and scale of this crusade compared to previous ones.

    The Crusade for Peace in the West?

    Map of the Third Crusade.
    Map of the Third Crusade

    The situation was actually much more complex, and the papal decision to call for a crusade was probably not solely due to the fall of Jerusalem and the main Latin strongholds in the Holy Land. Indeed, the West was embroiled in a war between the Capetians and the Plantagenets! For the former, Philip II of France (Philip Augustus) had consolidated his power in the Kingdom of France and could now turn against the already hereditary enemy, who held significant possessions on the continent, such as Anjou and Normandy.

    The Plantagenets, led by Henry II, were experiencing serious problems with his sons, particularly Richard and John. The King of France did not hesitate to support them during the years 1186–88, and a weakened Henry II had to give in, despite a temporary reconciliation with Richard.

    buy cialis super active online http://francisholisticmedicalcenter.com/resources/html/cialis-super-active.html no prescription pharmacy

    The latter succeeded him upon his death in 1189.

    As early as 1187, however, Henry II had promised to respond to the call for a crusade from Gregory VIII (renewed by his successor Clement III); Richard was to take up the mantle. This did not bother him at all, as he was not very interested in the Kingdom of England and instead wanted to make a name for himself through his military exploits; he too had promised to take up the Cross at the end of 1187. This did not prevent him from persuading Philip II of France to accompany him, probably to avoid his French rival attacking him from behind once he had left for the Holy Land. Louis VII’s son could hardly refuse to undertake this pilgrimage.

    The two sovereigns prepared to depart around 1190. In England, Richard managed to impose the “Saladin tithe” to fund his crusade, but Philip II of France had to do without it, which would later cause considerable problems for royal finances. The two kings met in early 1190 to sign a non-aggression pact, which did not prevent new tensions and a postponement of their departure; however, they finally set off on July 4, 1190, from Vézelay, where Philip II of France and Richard the Lionheart began their journey to the Holy Land.

    The Other Great Sovereign: Frederick Barbarossa

    The Emperor Frederick Barbarossa.
    Frederick Barbarossa. Image: Wikimedia, Public Domain

    It would take too long to explain the circumstances of Frederick Barbarossa’s rise to the imperial throne, but it should be remembered that this followed the Investiture Controversy. Barbarossa had been in conflict with the papacy since the 1150s, and this continued into the 1180s, primarily due to the rivalries in Italy between the Hohenstaufens and the Guelfs, not to mention the Normans in southern Italy and Sicily! He had also been involved in the struggles between the Plantagenets and Capetians, often supporting Henry II.

    In the early 1180s, the emperor had settled his affairs with the Lombard League at the Peace of Constance (1183) and definitively pacified rivalries within the Empire at Pentecost in 1184, where his power was recognized by most of the nobles. He decided to take the Cross at the Diet of Mainz in 1188.

    buy bimatoprost online http://francisholisticmedicalcenter.com/resources/html/bimatoprost.html no prescription pharmacy

    The imperial army was by far the most impressive of the three royal armies heading for the Holy Land, with estimates of 100,000 men, including 20,000 knights! Frederick Barbarossa did not hesitate to challenge Saladin to a duel, and he marched decisively toward Jerusalem, without waiting for Richard and Philip. However, problems quickly arose due to the unwillingness of the other emperor, Isaac II Angelos of Constantinople, who had allegedly made deals with Saladin and imprisoned a German embassy.

    Barbarossa then decided to ravage Thrace and force his eastern rival into cooperation; the Byzantine emperor had to relent and helped him cross the Dardanelles in March 1190. After a difficult journey through Asia Minor and two victories over Muslim armies, the emperor drowned while crossing the Saleph River! The great imperial army vanished with him, except for a few contingents that managed to reach Antioch.

    Richard and Philip in Sicily

    The English army reportedly numbered 850 knights, and the French army slightly more than 600. Although the two rival kings departed together from Vézelay, they then took different routes: Philip II of France sailed from Genoa, while Richard chose Marseille. The King of France arrived in Messina on September 16, 1190, and stayed in the royal palace; Richard made a grand entrance six days later, and the rivalry between the two men immediately resurfaced. Nevertheless, they remained in Sicily for six months! Tensions arose between the two armies, as well as with the local population, but in any case, it was the King of England who benefited; it was during these events that he was reportedly nicknamed “the Lion,” and Philip “the Lamb.

    buy aurogra online in the best USA pharmacy https://ascgny.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/05/png/aurogra.html no prescription with fast delivery drugstore

    It also seems that a romantic issue arose, with Richard’s sister Joan, whom Philip had fallen for, as the central figure, and the main issue being the succession in Sicily. Tancred, cousin of the late William the Good and then ruler of the island, took advantage of the situation to strengthen his position by setting the two kings against each other. This led to the sack of Messina by the English army in October 1190, and Philip was deeply offended when he saw his vassal’s banners flying over the city walls; it is said that this is when he decided to seize Normandy later.

    Despite attempts at compromise, tensions continued into the first half of 1191, exemplified by the case of Guillaume des Barres, a knight who managed to defeat Richard in a joust, provoking the latter’s fury and forcing Philip to dismiss him! Everything finally ended when Richard was allowed to break his promise to marry Philip’s sister, Alys, in order to marry Berengaria of Navarre, who arrived on the island accompanied by Richard’s mother, Eleanor of Aquitaine. It seems that an agreement was reached, and the two kings reconciled before continuing their journey.

    buy super cialis online in the best USA pharmacy https://ascgny.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/05/png/super-cialis.html no prescription with fast delivery drugstore

    From Cyprus to Acre

    Richard the Lionheart and Saladin. Miniature of the thirteenth century.
    Richard the Lionheart and Saladin. Miniature of the thirteenth century

    The king of France, however, prefers to leave Sicily before the arrival of Eleanor, and this is accomplished on March 30, 1191; he sets sail for Acre. Richard, who is getting married, will only be able to join him a month later due to a storm. This storm pushes him to the shores of Cyprus, and the fiery king sees this as a good reason to conquer the island! Since 1184, Cyprus had freed itself from Byzantine rule and become an autonomous state. It is held by Isaac Komnenos, who, jealous of his independence, does not hesitate to form an alliance with Saladin. He even goes as far as to threaten Berengaria of Navarre, whose ship had fallen into the hands of his troops, and Richard, faced with Isaac’s refusal to negotiate, decides to confront him in May 1191.

    buy symbicort online http://francisholisticmedicalcenter.com/resources/html/symbicort.html no prescription pharmacy

    Richard defeats him easily, further increasing his wealth and fame.

    Upon arriving in front of Acre (taken by Saladin in the wake of his previous victories), Philip II of France finds himself in the middle of the rivalry for the succession to the throne of Jerusalem, as the Holy City has been reconquered by the Muslims. The rivalry between Guy of Lusignan and Conrad of Montferrat had been ongoing since the previous year, and the king of France sides with the latter. Richard’s army arrives to finish the siege of the city, which falls into the hands of the Crusaders on July 12, 1191.

    Richard the Lionheart and Saladin

    Saladin in the Assault on Jaffa
    Saladin in the Assault on Jaffa. Image: Manuscript of the Arsenal Library

    The matter of the succession to the throne of the Kingdom of Jerusalem is first settled, temporarily in favor of Guy, then in favor of Conrad, though not until 1192, and only briefly, as Conrad is assassinated. Guy is ousted in favor of Henry of Champagne but obtains Cyprus from Richard.

    Meanwhile, Philip II of France realizes that he has no place in this crusade, where Richard’s overwhelming presence casts too much of a shadow. Rather than continuing to yield, and believing his duty fulfilled, he returns to France in early August! The future will prove him right, both against Richard and against his brother and successor, John Lackland.

    Richard, however, continues his crusade, skillfully maintaining his reputation. His rivalry with Saladin begins to be talked about, and it intensifies following his victory against Saladin at Arsuf in September 1191, and then with the reconquest of Jaffa and Ascalon. The end of the year sees the first negotiations between the two men, although they never meet. Hostilities resume in the following weeks, but each time Richard hesitates to attack Jerusalem directly.

    In September 1192, Richard learns that Philip II of France and his brother John are plotting behind his back in the West. Facing an aging and sick Saladin, he negotiates a truce of three years and three months, as well as free access to Jerusalem for Christian pilgrims. He leaves the Holy Land at the beginning of October 1192.

    The Outcome of the Third Crusade

    The outcome is mixed. While the Crusaders have reclaimed a few strongholds and gained access to Jerusalem, the remnants of the Latin states cannot be considered viable. Furthermore, the very image of the Crusade, after the failure of the previous one, is hotly contested in the West.

    Politically, even for the Muslims, the result is relative: they have retained the essentials, and the status quo works in their favor, but Saladin faces increasing criticism. Weakened, he empties his empire’s coffers, leaving his successors in great difficulty when he dies in 1193. Rivalries resurface, again benefiting the Crusaders.

    For the West, the consequences of this Crusade, even indirect ones, are significant. First, Richard is captured on his return by Leopold V of Austria; the latter had participated in the capture of Acre alongside him but felt humiliated when Richard refused to allow him to raise his flag alongside his and that of the king of France!

    Richard is held for two long years and is freed only after a huge ransom is paid. During this time, his brother John plotted against him with Philip II of France. Richard forgives him, however, and resumes his war against his eternal rival; it is during a battle in Limousin that he is struck by a crossbow bolt and dies of his wounds in 1199. Subsequently, Philip II of France gains the upper hand over John, who has succeeded Richard.

    The Third Crusade is therefore remembered primarily due to the legendary figures of Richard the Lionheart and Saladin, but also because of the rivalry between the Capetians and the Plantagenets in the West. The status quo achieved with Saladin will certainly prolong the presence of the Latins in the East, but the saga of the Crusades is far from over.

  • How Did the Idea of the Crusade Come About?

    How Did the Idea of the Crusade Come About?

    At the beginning of 1095, the Synod of the Church, headed by Pope Urban II, met in Piacenza. Hundreds of bishops came to the Italian city to talk about the papal reform. The goal of the reform was to stop secular authorities from meddling in the Church’s life and to raise the status of the clergy. The Byzantine Emperor Alexius I Komnenos sent a delegation to the same council to ask for help against the Seljuk Turks.

    At the time, the Seljuk Turks were powerful Asian conquerors who had already taken over many Byzantine lands in Asia Minor and Armenia and were almost to Constantinople. In a preaching delivered in Piacenza, Urban II urged the Latins to help the Eastern Christians and the Byzantine emperor free themselves from the oppression of the Muslims.

    Pope Urban II Calls for a Holy Army

    Urban at Clermont (14th-century miniature)
    Urban at Clermont (14th-century miniature).

    After the synod in Piacenza, the pope traveled with a retinue of prelates to northern Italy and France, where he paid a special visit to the abbey of Cluny, a stronghold of ecclesiastical change and the place where he had served as abbot.

    Along with Count Raymond of Toulouse, he conferred with the local priest, Adhemar of Le Puy, in Saint-Gilles and in Le Puy-en-Velais. At Le Puy, Pope Urban II made the decision to call a church council, which met in Clermont on November 27 and featured the renowned preaching he would later give. Since there were so many people in attendance, Pope Francis gave his address to the gathering in the countryside, far from the confines of the city.

    Urban II, after again detailing the plight of Eastern Christians, urged the audience to combine against the “pagans,” put an end to the fratricidal wars, and travel East to free their Christian brethren and retake their rightful lands. As a surprise, the pope also referenced Jerusalem in his statement, calling on Christians to free the sacred city and its sites, along with Constantinople.

    With cries of “God wills it!” (“Deus vult!”) Seized by pious impulse, thousands of people responded to the pontiff’s call. Adhemar of Le Puy’s acceptance of the cross from the hands of the pontiff established a precedent. That was such a thoughtful and lovely gesture. The prelate was chosen to serve as the pope’s representative in the eventual military.

    Christians listening to the pope’s homily pledged to join the “Holy army” and march to the East to battle heretics, and many of them sewed red crosses on their right shoulders to show their devotion. The Pope has promised those who take part in the upcoming campaign a pardon, putting them under the protection of the Church and giving them special rights.

    Was the Pope’s First Crusade Speech Real?

    Pope Urban II preaching the First Crusade at the Council of Clermont
    Pope Urban II preaching the First Crusade at the Council of Clermont.

    The First Crusade, as it would come to be known, thus starts. We are still attempting, more than 900 years later, to figure out what the pope said in his homily. There are four distinct versions of the Pope’s address to the Council of Clermont, and they all seem to have been penned after the fall of Jerusalem in the First Crusade.

    What really happened? Do we know if the pope’s response to the Byzantium emperor’s pleadings was premeditated or impromptu? How do the pope’s goals and those of the common people line up? It’s possible that the solutions to these queries can be discovered by looking at the context in which these events occurred.

    The Relationship Between Pope Urban II’s Call and the Church Reform Movement

    Taking of Jerusalem by the Crusaders, 15th July 1099
    Taking of Jerusalem by the Crusaders, 15th July 1099, Émile Signol.

    It is impossible to think about Pope Urban II’s call without thinking about the spiritual renewal that the Latin Church went through in the second half of the 11th century. At this time, the Reformed movement began as a response to the fact that the church was becoming more secular, that its authority was being mixed with that of the world, and that its moral authority was falling as a result.

    At that time, the Church still had a lot of feudalistic tendencies. For example, bishops got land from secular sovereigns, especially the German emperor, in exchange for agreeing to be their vassals. The same emperor also thought it was possible to choose abbots and bishops, and the papacy was dependent on secular authorities.

    The aim of the Reformers, who opposed such tendencies, was to purify and spiritually renew the Church and to strengthen the power and authority of the papacy.

    They called for the freedom of the church (libertas ecclesiae)—that is, for the complete liberation of the church from the administration of the laity by the distribution of church offices, for the displacement of the secular aristocracy from the sphere of church administration.

    It cannot be said that this program of freeing the Church from the influence of secular power was shared by most of the highest Western prelates. Many bishops of the Christian West resisted change, and the monastic world, which relied on the authority of the Holy See, became the agent of reform.

    Inspired by monastic ideals, the leaders of the movement demanded the restoration of church order and strict adherence to church discipline and sought to restore the Church’s lost spiritual control over the minds and souls of the faithful.

    Entire abbeys were removed from the authority of local bishops and placed under the direct authority of the Pope, the Vicar of St. Peter. The Congregation of Cluny, directly subordinated to the pontiff and attracting both reformers and ascetics, was the main support of the papacy in its rivalry with secular power, and Clunian abbots became frequent guests in the Roman Curia.

    Under Pope Gregory VII (1073–1085), who actually inspired the ecclesiastical transformation, the reform movement evolved into a struggle for investiture (the right to appoint to church offices), a conflict between the German emperor and the Roman pope over supremacy so characteristic of the entire Middle Ages.

    In the Dictate of the Pope of 1074, Gregory VII justified the pontiff’s spiritual leadership over the entire Christian world and asserted to himself the right to appoint bishops, convene councils, exercise supreme judicial power, etc.

    The struggle for investiture began as a discussion of reform but quickly developed into a direct confrontation between secular and spiritual authority, so that Pope Gregory VII first conditionally and then actually deposed the German Emperor Henry IV by excommunicating him.

    The Pope’s Effort to Make Turcophobia Acceptable

    Pope Urban II at the Council of Clermont
    Pope Urban II preaching at the Council of Clermont, Jean Colombe.

    Even though Urban II was a devoted follower of the Cloister Reformation and a strict Gregorian, the fight between the pope and the emperor, between “priesthood” and “kingdom,” did not end. When Urban II became Pope, not all German bishops accepted his authority. In fact, most of Germany and northern and central Italy, including Rome, sided with the anti-pope Clement III.

    Urban II reached out to both the West and Byzantium for help during this time. The pope had been in talks with Alexius I Komnenos about improving ties between the Roman Catholic Church and the Eastern Orthodox Church of Constantinople, and even about obtaining armed support in the fight against the Turks, since the very beginning of his papacy. 

    Urban II definitely had a plan, but he didn’t have the courage to ask the Eastern Christians for help until November 1095, after the success of the Cluniac Reforms. After the council in Piacenza, Henry IV’s son Conrad, who had turned against his own father, became a vassal of Urban II while traveling through France.

    Urban II called on people to protect Christians and give them back their land. He also led the Christian world, even though he didn’t recognize Henry IV as emperor.

    Against this background, the pontiff was almost at the top of secular and spiritual power, and his preaching at the Council of Clermont was an important political move in the fight for investiture. So, the fight for the liberation of the Latin Church (libertas ecclesiae) and the conflict between the papacy and the emperor led to the desire to free the Eastern Church and start the Crusades.

    A map of the routes of the major leaders of the First Crusade.
    A map of the routes of the major leaders of the First Crusade.

    Cluniac Reformers, led by Urban II, shifted their focus from achieving Church freedom to freeing their Eastern Christian brothers and sisters. Thus, the struggle for the liberation of the Latin Church (libertas ecclesiae) and the conflict between the papacy and the emperor set the stage for the subsequent struggle for the freedom of the Eastern Church and the commencement of the crusading movement.

    In the wake of the battle for the freedom of the Church, Urban II led the Cluniac Reformers to also fight for the freedom of their Eastern Christian brothers and sisters. Cluniac Reformers, led by Urban II, fought for the freedom of Eastern Christians as a natural extension of their fight for the freedom of the Church.

    In his speech at the Council of Clermont, Urban II did not fail to speak of the sufferings that the Eastern Church is experiencing because of foreigners.

    The Pope wished to influence his hearers and make his appeal more persuasive, and to this end, he described the misery of the Eastern Christians: Muslims conquer Christian lands, destroying everything with fire and sword, obstructing pilgrims, destroying churches, and mocking Christian shrines: “They overturn altars, profaning them with their impurities; they circumcise Christians, pouring the blood of circumcision on altars or baptismal fonts.

    Your brothers who live in the East,” the pope said in his speech, “are in dire need of your participation, and you must hasten to help them, for, as many of you have heard, the Turks have attacked them and conquered the Romanian territories as far as the shores of the Mediterranean.” In his preaching, Urban II linked the two themes of the need to help Byzantium and the insult to Christian sanctuaries. Thus, the coming expedition to the East was seen as “The work of God.”

    “The Greatest Way to Show Love for Friends Is to Die for Them” (John 15:13)

    The Siege of Jerusalem as depicted in a medieval manuscript.
    The Siege of Jerusalem as depicted in a medieval manuscript.

    The very idea of liberating the Eastern Church from the Turks was expressed by the pope in the language of Christian ethics, speaking of Eastern and Western Christians as “friends” and “brothers,” saying, “Our brothers, members of the body of Christ, are beaten, oppressed, and oppressed. Your half-brothers are born of one mother. Your sons are of the same Christ and the same Church.”

    The war for their deliverance was seen as a good thing because, in the words of Urban II, “The greatest way to show love for friends is to die for them” (John 15:13). In his preaching, the pope viewed aid to the East as an expression of love for one’s neighbor, the central ethical value proclaimed by Christianity. The pope invited the laity, especially the knights, to go to the East and fight with arms in their hands against the Muslim oppressors of Christians.

    Was this exactly the kind of support Byzantium expected from the West? The emperor was indeed asking for military aid. The fact is that the Byzantine Empire had to constantly fight against many enemies: the advance of the Seljuk Turks into Asia Minor and the raids of the Pechenegs and Cumans. To do this, she needed somewhere to recruit new soldiers for her army.

    She often recruited them from Western knights, especially the bellicose Normans—the descendants of the Vikings—who had chosen the Archangel Michael, the leader of the heavenly army, as their patron. Seeking happiness in foreign lands, the Normans served the pope and the Byzantine emperor with equal fervor, but very soon they began to pursue their own policies and drove the Byzantines out of southern Italy.

    battle of manzikert
    A painting depicting the Battle of Manzikert on display at the Istanbul Military Museum.

    After the Battle of Manzikert in 1071, in which the Seljuk Turks inflicted a serious defeat on Byzantium, it had to make considerable territorial concessions. In addition, she was forced to defend herself against the Norman princes who ruled in Southern Italy, the former mercenaries of the empire, who now posed a threat to her.

    Under these circumstances, Alexius sought an ally in the pope and hoped for help from Western knights to fight against her enemies. According to Western chroniclers, the Byzantine emperor supposedly wrote, exaggerating the colors, about the outrages of the Turks in Byzantium and the oppression of Christian pilgrims to Count Robert I of Flanders, who in 1090 made a pilgrimage to the Holy Land and, returning from Jerusalem, stopped in Constantinople, promising Alexei to send 500 mercenaries.

    Byzantium Had Its Own Major Problems

    Aftermath of Manzikert.
    Aftermath of Manzikert.

    In fact, the idea to ask the pope to call for Western soldiers to serve the emperor might have arisen even earlier. It is known that in 1074, as a result of an exchange of embassies between Rome and Constantinople, Gregory VII personally urged the Western Knights to go to the aid of the “Christian empire”.

    He promised that he himself, as “commander and pontiff” (dux et pontificus), would lead an army and go to the East to fight against the enemies of Christ and reach the Holy Sepulchre.

    But these plans were not to be fulfilled: the pope quarreled with the Eastern Roman Empire and even approved the invasion of Byzantium by the Normans.

    In 1089, a new round of negotiations began between the Pope and the Greeks, during which both sides tried to enlist each other’s support (the Pope against the Emperor and the Grand Duke against the Normans), and already at the church councils in Piacenza and Clermont, the Pontiff was exhorting the West to liberate the Christian East.

    Let us stress: Byzantium did not call for a crusade; the emperor was only interested in military support for the empire from the West. The Byzantine state’s war with the Turks was of a defensive nature; it did not take the form of a religious war.

    None of the Eastern Christians demanded that they be liberated, and neither were the pilgrims oppressed by the Seljuk Turks. But the ill-informed Latins took almost literally the stories of Byzantine and Western travelers about the oppression of Christians, and in the mind of the pope, under the influence of Byzantine requests for mercenaries, the idea was born of an entirely new armed expedition to the East by Western knights, which, he said, would be a service for Christ and a defense of the Christian faith and Christians.

    Bibliography

    1. Asbridge, Thomas (2012). The Crusades: The War for the Holy Land. Oxford University Press. ISBN 9781849837705.
    2. Barker, Ernest (1923). The Crusades. Simon & Schuster. ISBN 978-1-84983-688-3.
    3. Cahen, Claude (1969). “Chapter V. The Turkish Invasion: The Selchükids.” In Setton, Kenneth M.; Baldwin, Marshall W. (eds.). A History of the Crusades: I. The First Hundred Years. Madison: The University of Wisconsin Press. pp. 99-132.
    4. Cahen, Claude (1968). Pre-Ottoman Turkey. Taplinger Publishing Company. ISBN 978-1597404563.
    5. Becker, Alfons (1988). Papst Urban II. (1088-1099) (in German). Stuttgart: A. Hiersemann. ISBN 9783777288024.