LIBERTY UNIVERSITY

RESEARCH PAPER JUSTIFIABLE HOMICIDE A HISTORICAL LOOK IN TO THE FIRST CRUSADE 1095 -1099

SUBMITTED TO DR. DAVID ALEXANDER AS PARTIAL REQUIREMENT OF HISTORY OF CHRISTIANITY I CHHI 520 LIBERTY BAPTIST THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY

BY DUANE M. SAUNDERS SR.

COLUMBIA, MARYLAND MARCH 2012

Table of Contents

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7.

Introduction.3 The First Crusade4 Historical Background of the Crusades...8 Role of Pope Urban II .9 Bohemond..11 World Views at the End of the First Millenium11 Conclusion.14 Bibliography..16

Introduction The Crusades consists of a set of events in history that has led to many other noteable moments in time.There are some who believe that much of what is happening in the world today, has been influenced by the Crusades. Some have posited that the results of the Crusades are at the root of the conflicts in the Middle East. How Christians view and treat Muslims and viceversa is said to have originated from what transpired during that time of historical significance. However, it must be noted that the Crusades were a set of several campaigns launched by various entities and participated in by many nationalities. It would be thus worthy to investigate each major crusade launched during this time, to determine what triggered them and what the outcome was for each; in such that the course of history that followed is somehow made clearer.

In analyzing each of the major crusades, it is interesting to learn that the results of each of the first three crusades were different. Each set of results had their own sets of implications that eventually influenced future events; but in the end, the Crusades foretell the next two millennia of Christian-Muslim conflict based in the Middle East. In this paper, particular attention will be given to the First Crusade and the personalities invovled therein. What was the largest singular impact of the Crusades on the relationship between the Muslims and Christians? This paper posits that the Crusades aided in the intensification of the hatred between Muslims and Christians, and promoted the ideals of Islamic jihad that of physical bloodshed in the name of Islam. In this sense, therefore, the First Crusade could be viewed as a situation wherein homicide was justified all in the name of the faith.

The First Crusade The First Crusade can be understood to be a religious/military expedition which spanned the years from 1096 to 1099. It was embarked upon by Western or European Christians in order to reclaim the Holy Land. In November of 1095, Pope Urban II made an soul stirring speach to the Council of Clermont in France. He stated that the Byzantine Emperor Alexios II requested his assistance to reclaim lost territories which were being taken by the Seljuks. Another reason for the Popes plea was his request to take back also the holy city of Jerusalem, which was held by Muslims.1 Urban emphasized the loss of Jerusalem to the Muslims, and it was as if the loss of Christianity at the hands of the Muslims, was too great for the Catholic Church to bear. Other historians have stated that it is a possibility that the speech and the subsequent drama by Bishop Le Puy was scripted, with the Pope meeting these bishops in confidence prior to his declaration during the Council of Clermont. The forces that started out for the Byzantine Empire were numbered to be between 60,000-100,000 men, women and children.2

One insight that may be arrived at during this point in time is that it was possible that the Pope was worried about the spread of Islam as compared to the spread of Christianity in Europe and Near Asia. Islam was spreading at a faster rate compared to Christianity, and one may speculate that the Pope, Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox Churches may have been fearful for the loss of followers and thus of the donations and aid generously given by these followers to their respective churches. In Urbans desperate plea, he may have been giving himself away he was afraid of the possibility of the whole of Christianity being conquered by the Muslims. The

1 2

Asbridge, Thomas. (2005). The First Crusade: A New History, NY: Oxford, pp. 19-21. Ibid, p. 40.

possibility of the loss of power and domain may have driven the Pope to go at such lengths to exhort the faithful of Europe to join the First Crusade. The Pope in this sense drove a wedge between the two religions as early as this time.

Joining the cause were four major armies that set out for Constantinople, led by the four princes - Hugh of Vandermois, Bohemond, Godfrey of Bouillion and Raymond. Alexios gave these armies provisions of food and shelter provided that all the lands that were to be taken away from the Seljuks and other Muslim conquerors were to be returned to the Byzantine Empire accordingly. Alexios also sent his leaders and his generals to aid the Franks in their reconquest. One crucial battle that was won was the Battle of Nicaea, which was regained by the Franks, upon which time they continued to march on to Jerusalem to fulfill the second appeal by Urban.3

The Siege of Jerusalem was said to be the bloodiest. On the 7th of June in 1099, around 12,000 men surrounded the city, and after which time the city was indeed retaken and won in the name of Christianity. However, this reconquest of Jerusalem came at a steep price. Many Muslims were slaughtered, and Jews were massacred when they sought refuge in the temples that they thought would not be burned a deadly mistake indeed. There were Muslims and Jews who were able to escape the bloodbath; this inpart was because they paid the ransom that was imposed on them by the Franks. Thereafter the Christian Kingdom of Jerusalem was established in June of 1099, to include the crusader states of Edessa and Antioch. There were some who managed to make it back, and for this they were treated with a heroes welcome. Godfrey of Bouillion was revered as a hero even after his death. The existence of the crusader states was in a

Tyerman, Christopher. (2006). Gods War: A New History of the Crusades. Boston, MA: Harvard University Press, pp. 102-105.

way able to ease the pressure on the Byzantine Empire, and brought back to them their territories in the Anatolian region.4

Historical Background of the Crusades Pope Urban was able to portray Muslims as brutal barbarians as part of his propaganda to exhort and provide resources for the Crusades. In actuality, during the centuries after the spread of Islam and the First Crusade, Christians and Muslims lived in relative harmony, and in fact, Islam proved to be the more tolerant religion as compared to Catholic Christianity. Prior to this, the Byzantine Empire had been reduced to a smaller region following its defeat to the Muslims at the Battle of Manzikert in 1071. The Byzantine Emperor, Alexios I, was then forced to appeal to the Pope for aid, but the Pope then, Pope Gregory, needed to resolve the Investiture Controversy, and thus could not come to Alexios Is aid. 5

It is also worthwhile to know, French society was one that could be described as possessing and cultivating a strong warrior class, who always sought to provide calm amidst the lawlessness prevailing then. France was a former colony of the Roman Empire, and it was the socalled barbarians who eventually settled therein and helped cause the final removal of Roman influence. These barbarians were the Visigoths, Avars, Lombards, and the Franks, from which the name France was derived. From 500 CE, they came to settle in Northeastern Gaul. In 800 CE, it was Charlemagne, a descendant of the original Frank settlers who was able to organize the

4 5

Ibid, 157-159. Asbridge, Thomas. (2005). The First Crusade: A New History, NY: Oxford, pp. 4-5.

tribes that would eventually lead to the formation of France, Italy, Germany and the other lowlying nations.6

In addition to this, the time of the First Crusade was also during the height of the Reconquista, or the retaking of the Moorish Iberian peninsula, to include Spain and Portugal. The Moors had lorded it over almost all of the Iberian peninsula beginning in the 5th century CE, with the beautiful towns of Cordoba, Toledo, Valencia and others under the Islamic Moors. A succession of weak emirs who continually decided to increase taxes in their domains contributed also to in-fighting among the Moorish people, and this made it easier for the Spanish and Portuguese leaders to facilitate the Reconquista. Slowly, the battles of the Reconquista were used by the leaders of the Church as models for the general fight against Islam, wherein the Muslims were termed as the infidels7. Even the papacy and the very authoritative Abby of Cluny declared that fighting the Muslims deserved substantial amounts of indulgence, and thus this may also have influenced the thinking of Pope Urban II. This then resulted in the repackaging of Christianity being closely linked with warfare, and eventually justifiable homicide.

Role of Pope Urban II Pope Urban II himself came from the aristocracy descended from these people, who also came from a knightly background. French medieval society then was one that was intensely devoted to the Christian faith. Ones daily activities were literally controlled by the doctrines of the Catholic Church. Thus, French society at the time of Pope Urban II was one that was
6 7

Ibid, pp. 6-7. Fletcher, Richard. (2006). Moorish Spain. Los Angeles, CA: University of California Press.

extremely spiritual in nature, where Gods power was omnipotnet and absolute. However, sin was also present everywhere. When Pope Urban II was still the Bishop of Ostia, he began cultivating warm and cordial relations with Rome, and instituted a reform movement that worked to enhance devotional awareness among Catholics. He was able to rationalize that Christian doctrines could be combined with medieval warfare, much akin to the concept of the religious jihad of the Muslims. It was now God who condoned killing ones fellow man because he was not a Christian, and that those who would give their lives for the cause would now enjoy a glorious life in Paradise. Urban was thus able to convince many noble warriors that the cause of the Crusade was more noble than anything else, and that those who were long time sinners had a shot at redemption especially if one gave up his life for the Church and its cause during the Crusade, thusly justifying the potentiality of homicide and suicide.8

Urban II was thus not only the brainchild of perhaps the entire Crusades Era, but of being able to promote Christianity within a military context. There was now a Catholic jihad of sorts yearning to wipe out all the Muslim barbarians in the Middle East and in the other territories of the Catholic Church. He was able to package the concept of love of God and war into one saleable product that was immediately embraced by both the nobility and the masses.

Bohemond

Riley-Smith, Jonathan. (2005). The First Crusade and the Idea of Crusading. New York City, NY: Continuum Books, pp. 13-15.

Bphemond I is considered as one of the most controversial figures of the First Crusade. He was initially from Otranto (Italy), and was among the first to commit his life to the Crusades, answering the impassioned plea of Pope Urban II. On the way to Antioch, Bohemond and the other First Crusade princes took an oath under the Byzantine Emperor Alexios I to return all Byzantine lands that the Crusaders are able to conquer or take back. However, after the retaking of Antioch, he did not only keep the land, but he actually began to call himself Bohemond of Antioch, in violation of the covenant with Alexios. Bohemond avered that Alexios failed to provide him with the much-needed logistics, and hence, he just had to take Antioch as his own. One of the historical outcomes of this event is that the Crusades were defined by others to be another way to name the conquest and plundering that the Europeans performed in the Middle East during this era.9

Yet there are those who posit that Bohemonds reasons for joining the Crusade are entirely self-serving. Having lost much of the land that was supposed to be his, he simply joined the Crusades as he saw the event as one providing familes with the livelihood that they need.

World Views on War at the End of the First Millenium It would be interesting to dissect the world views on war at this time, such that Urban was able to present to the public a new philosophy war and violence in the name of God for ones own personal redemption. One source of inspiration for this is Platos Laws. In it, Plato makes mention of the fact that the world is in a constant state of war, and that violence is ultimately
9

Holt, Andrew. (2005). Bohemond. Taken from: http://www.crusades-encyclopedia.com/bohemond.html

necessary for peace. Cities and states must thus be always in the thick of preparations for war. Furthermore, he goes on to state that any person or city not in agreement with the current peace treaty are to be considered as transgressors, and must be eliminated or put to death.10

Aristotle, another classical philosopher, follows on Platos ideology, stating that it is fair to wage war in order to be on equal footing with an oppressive group, but that war ought not to be waged against a group who is on less footing thus war is to be waged only in defense of the city or state, but not to overpower those who are oppressed. War from this point of view is a means to an end which is peace.

The great Roman orator Cicero also emphasizes that war is justified only as a last resort. Waging war is for the purpose of living in peace. His ideology is milder in the sense that he also recommends that those who were not as barbarous as the others should be spared. A just war is one that proceeds after a formal declaration of the same, and that reparations are also demanded from those who inflict more damage.11

The Bible is another source of violence that is condoned in the name of God. The Old Testament is rife with examples and stories of war in the name of God. Even Jesus left instructions with his disciples at the Last Supper to continue his mission on earth, but also to

10

Plato. (1980). The Laws of Plato, translated by Thomas Prangle. New York City, NY: Basic Books. Pt. 625c625d.

11

Cicero. (1913). De re republica, translated by Clinton Keyes, Cambridge, MA: University of Harvard Press, bk. III, pt. 34.

10

carry a sword while preaching, not as to instigate or perpetuate violence; but as a means to protect oneself: And he said unto them, When I sent you without purse, and scrip, and shoes, lacked ye any thing? And they said, Nothing. Then said he unto them, But now, he that hath a purse, let him take it, and likewise his scrip; and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one. For I say unto you, that this that is written must yet be accomplished in me, And he was reckoned among the transgressors: for the things concerning me have an end. And they said, Lord, behold, here are two swords. And he said unto them, It is enough.12

Even the Fathers of the Church were one in saying that killing could be justified. In his De Civitate Dei (The City of God), St. Augustine differentiates between murder and killing. Exceptions to murder are those that God commands to be slain, either by a general law, or by an express command applying to a particular person at a particular time.disobeying ones superiors is like disobeying God himself , who commands the earthly forces.13 St. Bernard likewise affirms this within the context of knighthood, stating that those knights who refuse to do battle are only concerned with their vanity. Obedience to superiors is paramount, and is on the same level as obedience to God. Knights who fight for Gods cause are righteous.14
12

The Gospel of St. Luke 22: 35-38. St. Augustine. 1998. The City of God against the Pagans. Translated by R.W. Dyson. Cambridge, UK: Universityof Cambridge Press, Bk I, ch.xxi.

13

14

St. Bernard of Clairvaux, In Praise of the New Knighthood, in The Templars, trans. Malcolm Barber and Keith Bate, Manchester Medieval Sources Series (Manchester, UK: Manchester University of Manchester Press, pp. 215-217.

11

Thus far, we have looked at sources from which medieval community would have taken their ideas of a justified war, which Raymond of Penafort (d. 1275 AD) consolidated into a number of conditions that must be satisfied for justified warfare. He held five conditions for such a war: It must be just with regard to the persons engaged in it (that is, it must be fought by laymen, since clerks cannot justly engage in war); it must be just with regard to its object (that is to say, its aim must be to redress some injury or other, whether to right or possessions or person); it must be just with regard to its cause (which means that this must be a necessary cause, and that there must be no alternative way of achieving the object, other than by recourse to arms); it must be just in intention (that is to say, the person levying it must be moved by a genuine desire for justice, not by hate or cupidity); and it must be waged on valid authority (that is to say, on the authority of the Roman Church or of a sovereign prince).15 Conclusion

Based on the information taken from historical documents on society during this era, on the theories of just war provided by the early philosophers as well as church leaders; the theory posited at the beginning of this paper is indeed confirmed. The First Crusade from the point of view of those who were involved therein was indeed justified.

Life at that time was woven around Christian beliefs. Thus to defend the Church through the command of the Church leaders was a way not only to attain indulgences and perhaps eternal
15

Keen, H. (1965). The Laws of War in the Late Middle Ages. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1965.

12

life, but also a way to become famous and perhaps affluent. Bohemond claimed Antioch for his own after he was able to conquer the city. In the siege of Jerusalem, there were reports of ransom amounts being paid by Muslims and Jews to their Christian captors in exchange for their freedom.

If one was a simple crusader who was fighting for what he believed in, then his Muslim opponent was easily seen as an infidel who deserved nothing more than death. The theory of a just war evolved from the philosophers and Church Fathers, and this was wisely and keenly observed by Pope Urban II. He used this founding theory of a just war precisely to exhort the faithful and fight to the death for the sake of Christianity. As this was faithfully followed by the Crusaders, which resulted in the killing of Muslims and other non-Christians during the First Crusade was indeed seen as justifiable homicide.

Bibliography Aristotle, (1959). Politics. Translated by H. Rackham. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Asbridge, Thomas. (2005). The First Crusade: A New History, NY: Oxford, pp. 19-21. Cicero. (1913). De re republica, translated by Clinton Keyes, Cambridge, MA: University of Harvard Press, bk. III, pt. 34.

Fletcher, Richard. (2006). Moorish Spain. Los Angeles, CA: University of California Press.

13

Holt, Andrew. (2005). Bohemond. Taken from: http://www.crusadesencyclopedia.com/bohemond.html

Keen, H. (1965). The Laws of War in the Late Middle Ages. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1965. Plato. (1980). The Laws of Plato, translated by Thomas Prangle. New York City, NY: Basic Books. Riley-Smith, Jonathan. (2005). The First Crusade and the Idea of Crusading. New York City, NY: Continuum Books.

St. Augustine. 1998. The City of God against the Pagans. Translated by R.W. Dyson. Cambridge, UK: University of Cambridge Press. St. Bernard of Clairvaux, In Praise of the New Knighthood, in The Templars, trans. Malcolm Barber and Keith Bate, Manchester Medieval Sources Series (Manchester, UK: Manchester University of Manchester Press, pp. 215-217. Tyerman, Christopher. (2006). Gods War: A New History of the Crusades. Boston, MA: Harvard University Press.

14