Crusades is the name given to the religious wars carried on during the middle ages between the Christian nations of the West and the Mohammedans. In time, however, the name came to be applied to any military expedition against heretics or enemies of the pope. The first of the regular crusades was undertaken simply to vindicate the right of Christian pilgrims to visit the Holy Sepulchre. On the conquest of Palestine, however, the object of the crusades changed, or at least enlarged, and the efforts of the subsequent crusaders were directed to the recovery of the whole land from the Saracens, who had repossessed themselves of it. From an early period in the history of the church, it was considered a pious act to make a pilgrimage to the Holy Sepulchre, and to visit the various spots which the Saviour had consecrated by his presence. When Palestine was conquered by the Arabs in the 7th century, that fierce but generous people respected the religious spirit of the pilgrims, and allowed them to build a church and a hospital in Jerusalem. Under the Fatimides of Egypt, who conquered Syria about 980 A.D., the position both of the native Christian residents and of the pilgrims became less favourable; but the subjugation of the country in 1065 by brutal hordes of Seljuk Turks from the Caucasus rendered it intolerable. These barbarians, but recently converted to Mohammedanism, were nearly as ignorant of the Koran as of the Scriptures. They hardly knew their fellow-religionists, and are said to have wreaked their vengeance on the Mussulmans of Syria as well as on the Christians. The news of their atrocities produced a deep sensation over the whole of Christendom. The first to take alarm were, naturally enough, the Byzantine monarchs. In 1073 the Greek emperor, Manuel VII., sent to supplicate the assistance of the great Pope Gregory VII. against the Turks, accompanying his petition with many expressions of profound respect for His Holiness and the Latin Church. Gregory—who beheld in the supplication of Manuel a grand opportunity for realising the Catholic unity of Christendom—cordially responded; but circumstances prevented him from ever carrying the vast designs which he entertained into execution, and the idea of a crusade died gradually away. It was, however, revived by his successor, Urban II., an able and humane man, whose sympathies were kindled by the burning zeal of Peter the Hermit, a native of Amiens, in France, who had made a pilgrimage to the Holy Land, and witnessed the cruelties perpetrated by the Turks. He was now traversing Europe, preaching everywhere to crowds in the open air, and producing the most extraordinary enthusiasm by his impassioned descriptions of how pilgrims were murdered, robbed, or beaten; how shrines and holy places were desecrated; and how nothing but greed restrained the ruffian Turks (who made the Christians pay heavy taxes for their visits to Jerusalem) from destroying the Holy Sepulchre, and extirpating every vestige of Christianity in the land. As soon as the feelings of Europe had been sufficiently heated, Urban openly took up the question. Two councils were held in 1095. At the second, held at Clermont, in France, a crusade was definitely resolved on. The pope himself delivered a stirring address to a vast multitude of clergy and laymen, and as he proceeded, the pent-up emotions of the crowd burst forth, and cries of Deus vult ('God wills it') rose simultaneously from the whole audience. 'This tumultuous cry,' says Hallam, 'which broke from the heart and lips of the assembly at Clermont, affords at once the most obvious and most certain explanation of the leading principle of the crusades.' These words, Deus vult, by the injunction of Urban, were made the war-cry of the enterprise, and every one that embarked in it wore, as a badge, the sign of the cross; hence the name Crusade (Fr. croisade, from Lat. crux, 'a cross').
First Crusade.—From all parts of Europe thousands upon thousands hurried at the summons of the pope to engage in the holy war. 'The most distant islands and savage countries,' says William of Malmesbury, 'were inspired with this ardent passion. The Welshman left his hunting, the Scotchman his fellowship with vermin, the Dane his drinking-party, the Norwegian his raw fish.' It is said that in the spring of 1096 not less than 6,000,000 souls were in motion towards Palestine. This, however, must be a huge exaggeration. What we do know positively is, that previous to the setting out of the great hosts of European chivalry, four armies—if disorderly multitudes deserve that name—amounting in all to 275,000 persons, had departed for Palestine. The first consisted of 20,000 foot, and was commanded by a Burgundian gentleman, Walter the Penniless. It marched through Hungary, but was cut to pieces by the natives of Bulgaria, only a few, among whom was Walter himself, escaping to Constantinople. The second, consisting of 40,000 men, women, and children, was led by Peter the Hermit. It followed the same route as its predecessor, and reached Constantinople greatly reduced in numbers. Here the two united, crossed the Bosphorus, and were utterly defeated by the Turks at Nicæa, the capital of Bithynia. A third expedition of a similar kind, composed of 15,000 Germans, led by a priest named Gottschalk, was dispersed with terrible slaughter in Hungary; which also proved the grave of the fourth, a horde consisting of about 200,000 wretches from France, England, Flanders, and Lorraine, who had swept along through Germany, committing horrible ravages, especially against the Jews, whom they murdered without mercy. Now, however, the real crusaders made their appearance: the gentry, the yeomanry, and the serfs of feudal Europe, under chiefs of the first rank and renown. In this, the most successful of the crusades, neither the emperor nor any of the kings of the West participated; and to this circumstance was doubtless due its more fortunate termination. Six armies appeared in the field, marching separately, and at considerable intervals of time. Their respective leaders were Godfrey of Bouillon, Duke of Lorraine; Hugh the Great, Count of Vermandois, and brother of Philippe, king of France; Robert Curthose, Duke of Normandy, the son of William the Conqueror; Count Robert of Flanders; Bohemond, Prince of Tarentum, son of the famous Guiscard, under whom was Tancred, the favourite hero of all the historians of the crusade; and lastly, Count Raymond of Toulouse. The place of rendezvous was Constantinople. The Greek emperor, Alexius, afraid that so magnificent a host—there were in all not less than 600,000 men, exclusive of women and priests—might be induced to conquer lands for themselves, cajoled all the leaders, excepting Tancred and Count Raymond, into solemnly acknowledging themselves his liegemen as long as they remained in his territory. After some time spent in feasting, the crusaders crossed into Asia Minor accompanied by the unfortunate Peter the Hermit. Here their first step was the siege and capture of Nicæa, the capital of Sultan Soliman, 24th June 1097. This monarch was also defeated by Bohemond, Tancred, and Godfrey, at Dorylæum. Baldwin, brother of Godfrey, now crossed into Mesopotamia, where he obtained the principality of Edessa. After some time, the crusaders reached Syria, and laid siege to Antioch. For seven months the city held out, and the ranks of the besiegers were fearfully thinned by famine and disease. Many even brave warriors lost heart, and began to desert. Melancholy to relate, among the deserters was the poor enthusiast who had inspired the enterprise. Peter was actually several miles on his way home when he was overtaken by the soldiers of Tancred, and brought back to undergo a public reprimand. At length, on the 3d of June 1098, Antioch was taken, and the inhabitants were massacred by the infuriated crusaders, who were in their turn besieged by an army of 200,000 Mohammedans sent by the Persian sultan. Once more famine and pestilence did their deadly work. Multitudes also deserted, and escaping over the walls, carried the news of the sad condition of the Christians back to Europe. But again victory crowned the efforts of the besieged. On the 28th June 1098 the Mohammedans were utterly routed, and the way to Jerusalem opened. It was on a bright summer morning (1099) that 40,000 crusaders, the miserable remnant of that vast array which two years before had laid siege to Nicæa, obtained their first glimpse of Jerusalem. On the 15th of July, after a siege of rather more than five weeks, the grand object of the expedition was realised. Jerusalem was delivered from the hands of the infidel. As on the occasion of all the triumphs of these first crusaders, a horrible massacre ensued. Religious enthusiasm, evoking the intensest and most strangely mingled passions, naturally led to these excesses on the part of men reared in the fiercest times of feudalism. Eight days after the capture of the city, Godfrey of Bouillon was unanimously elected king of Jerusalem. His kingdom, at first comprising little more than the mere city of Jerusalem, was gradually extended by conquest until it included the whole of Palestine. A language resembling Norman French was established, a code of feudal laws drawn up—Jerusalem was erected into a patriarchate, and Bethlehem into a bishopric. The best part of Asia Minor was restored to the Greek empire, while Bohemond became Prince of Antioch. For nearly fifty years, the three Latin principalities or kingdoms of the East—Edessa, Antioch, and Jerusalem—not only maintained themselves against the attacks of the Mohammedans of Egypt and Syria, but greatly increased in size, power, and wealth. At Jeru- salem were founded the two famous orders of the Knights Hospitallers of St John and the Knights Templars.
Second Crusade.—In 1144 the principality of Edessa was conquered by the Emir of Mosul, and the Christians slaughtered. His son, Noureddin, advanced to destroy the Latin kingdoms of Syria and Palestine. Europe once more trembled with excitement. A second crusade was preached by the famous St Bernard, abbot of Clairvaux, in Champagne; and early in 1147 two enormous armies, under the command of Louis VII., king of France, and Conrad III., emperor of Germany, marched for the Holy Land. Their united numbers were estimated at 1,200,000 fighting-men. The expedition, nevertheless, proved a total failure. The Greek emperor, Manuel Comnenus, was hostile; and through the treachery of his emissaries, the army of Conrad was all but destroyed by the Turks near Iconium, while that of Louis was wrecked in the defiles of the Pisidian Mountains. After a vain attempt to reduce Damascus, the relics of this mighty host returned to Europe.
Third Crusade.—The death-blow, however, to the kingdom of Jerusalem, and the power of the crusaders, was given, not by Noureddin, but by Salah-Eddin, commonly called Saladin, a young Kurdish chief, who had made himself sultan of Egypt, and who aspired to the suzerainty of the Mohammedan world. He invaded Palestine, took town after town, and finally, in October 1187, compelled Jerusalem itself to capitulate, after a siege of fourteen days. The news of this led to a third crusade, the chiefs of which were Frederick I. (Barbarossa), emperor of Germany; Philippe Auguste, king of France, and Richard Cœur-de-Lion, king of England. Barbarossa took the field first in the spring of 1189, but lost his life by fever caught from bathing in the Orontes. His army, much reduced, joined the forces of the other two monarchs before Acre, which important city was immediately besieged. In vain did Saladin attempt to relieve the defenders; and after a beleaguerment of twenty-three months, the place surrendered. But the crusaders were not united among themselves. Philippe soon after returned to France; and Richard, after accomplishing prodigies of valour, which excited the admiration of the Saracens, concluded a treaty with Saladin, by which 'the people of the West were to be at liberty to make pilgrimages to Jerusalem, exempt from the taxes which the Saracen princes had in former times imposed.' This, as has been previously noticed, was all that had been claimed by the first crusaders. On the 25th of October 1192, Richard set sail for Europe.
Fourth Crusade.—Crusading unfortunately now became a constituent of the papal policy; and in 1203 a fourth expedition was determined upon by Pope Innocent III., although the condition of the Christians was by no means such as to call for it. It assembled at Venice; but how entirely secular crusading had become, will be seen from the fact that the army never went to Palestine at all, but preferred to take possession of the Byzantine empire. The leader of this host of pseudo-crusaders, Baldwin, Count of Flanders, was seated on the throne of the East in 1204, and thus founded the Latin empire of Constantinople, which lasted for fifty-six years. Nothing was achieved in this crusade for the recovery of Jerusalem, but Innocent had his reward in the temporary supremacy of the papal see over the Eastern Church.
Fifth Crusade.—This was commanded by Frederick II., emperor of Germany. It began in 1228, and terminated in a treaty between that monarch and the sultan of Egypt, by which Jerusalem (with the exception of the Mosque of Omar), Jaffa, Bethlehem, and Nazareth were ceded to Frederick, who, after being crowned king of Jerusalem, returned to Europe, leaving his new possessions in a state of tranquillity. Frederick, however, who had been excommunicated by Gregory IX. for his tardiness in embarking in this crusade, was denounced in the most violent language by the same pope for having thus made terms with the infidel.
Sixth Crusade.—In 1244 the Khorasmians, driven from Tartary by Genghis Khan, burst into Syria, and made themselves masters of Jerusalem. This was made, by Pope Innocent IV., the occasion for another crusade; and in 1249 Louis IX. (St Louis) of France headed an expedition against Egypt, which was now regarded as the key of the Holy Land. The expedition was an utter failure. Louis was defeated and taken prisoner by the sultan, and obtained his liberty only on the payment of a heavy ransom.
Seventh Crusade.—This also was primarily undertaken by St Louis, but he having died at Tunis (where he had gone in the hope of baptising its king) in 1270, on his way to Palestine, Prince Edward of England, afterwards Edward I., who had originally intended to place himself under the command of St Louis, marched direct for Palestine, where his rank and reputation in arms gathered round him all who were willing to fight for the cross. Nothing of consequence, however, was accomplished; and Edward soon returned to England, the last of the crusaders. Acre, Antioch, and Tripoli still continued in the possession of the Christians, and were defended for some time by the Templars and other military knights; but in 1291 Acre capitulated, the other towns soon followed its example, and the knights were glad to quit the country, and disperse themselves over Europe in quest of new employment, leaving Palestine in the undisturbed possession of the Saracens.
Besides the great expeditions above enumerated, there were many others on a lesser scale. These, however, from the unimportance of their results, and the limited numbers engaged in them, do not call for special mention. Of the pseudo-crusades, three deserve notice for the important results that followed from them. Firstly, in 1209, there was that against the Albigenses (q.v.). Secondly, on the principle that it was binding on the servants of the church to do battle with all outside its pale, in 1230 the Teutonic knights were called on by Gregory IX. to undertake a crusade against the heathen Prussians on the shores of the Baltic. The result was the complete subjugation of the Prussians, and the establishment in their country of the Teutonic military order till its extinction at the battle of Tannenberg in 1410. Thirdly, in 1262 Urban IV., jealous of the growing power of Manfred, king of Sicily, son of the Emperor Frederick II., offered Manfred's crown to Charles of Anjou, brother of St Louis of France, and gave to this disposition the name of a crusade. A protracted war ensued, which resulted in the House of Anjou gaining the kingdom of Naples, and the House of Aragon the kingdom of Sicily. The terrible wars of the 16th century between France and Spain for supremacy in Italy were the direct consequence of this pseudo-crusade.
Effects of the Crusades.—While we cannot help deploring the enormous expenditure of human life which the crusades occasioned, it is impossible to overlook the fact that they indirectly exercised a most beneficial influence on modern society. They secured for humanity certain advantages which it is difficult to see could have been otherwise obtained. Guizot, in his Lectures on European Civilisation, endeavoured to show their design and function in the destinies of Christendom. 'To the first chroniclers,' he says, 'and consequently to the first crusaders, of whom they are but the expression, Mohammedans are objects only of hatred: it is evident that those who speak of them do not know them. The historians of the later crusades speak quite differently: it is clear that they look upon them no longer as monsters; that they have to a certain extent entered into their ideas; that they have lived with them; and that relations, and even a sort of sympathy, have been established between them.' Thus the minds of both, but particularly of the crusaders, were partly delivered from those prejudices which are the offspring of ignorance. 'A step was taken towards the enfranchisement of the human mind.' Secondly, the crusaders were brought into contact with two civilisations, richer and more advanced than their own—the Greek and the Saracenic; and it is beyond all question that they were mightily struck with the wealth and comparative refinement of the East. Thirdly, the close relationship between the chief laymen of the West and the church, occasioned by the crusades, enabled the former 'to inspect more narrowly the policy and motives of the papal court.' The result was very disastrous to that spirit of veneration and belief on which the church lives, and in many cases an extraordinary freedom of judgment and hardihood of opinion were induced—such as Europe had never before dreamed of. The immediate results of the crusades, however, went altogether to strengthen the power of the church. Through their means the popes found an easy method of ridding themselves of refractory monarchs; and by the exorbitant taxes levied in the name of the cross they practically rendered all the kingdoms of the West their tributaries. Fourthly, great social changes were brought about. A commerce between the East and West sprang up, and towns—the early homes of liberty in Europe—began to grow great and powerful. The crusades, indeed, 'gave maritime commerce the strongest impulse it had ever received.'
See Gibbon's History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire; Milman's Latin Christianity; Hallam's History of the Middle Ages; Mill's History of the Crusades; Cox's History of the Crusades; Heeren's Essay on the Influence of the Crusades; the great Recueil des Historiens des Croisades, issued by the Académie des Inscriptions; and Archer and Kingsford, The Crusades ('Nations Series,' 1894); and the articles BALDWIN, GODFREY, JERUSALEM, RICHARD I., SALADIN, WILLIAM OF TYRE, &c.