Peter in Jerusalem

When the main body of the First Crusade reached the Holy Land, Peter the Hermit joined them as a member of the council that made decisions. Peter had drummed up so much support for the Crusade that he was welcome, even though his "People's Crusade" (see the last few posts) had gone spectacularly off the rails.

In fact, Guibert of Nogent, a contemporary of the Crusade who wrote a chronicle of it, refers to Peter's status in 1098 as a "fallen star." His preaching continued, however. During the Siege of Antioch, for instance, Guibert gives Peter credit for making a stirring speech to the starving Crusaders that inspired them to leave the city and attack the larger Muslim force and achieve victory. (Part of that inspiration may have been from the discovery of the Holy Lance.)

The march to Jerusalem included besieging the town of Arqa, during which it is recorded that Peter was given responsibility as treasurer of alms.

Peter was present at Jerusalem when the Crusade captured the city, and spent some time there. According to The Alexiad, the account written by Anna Comnena of that time from the viewpoint of the reign of her father, Alexios I:

He saw many forbidden and wicked things occurring there… so he sought out the patriarch of the holy church of Jerusalem and asked why gentiles and evil men were able to pollute holy places and steal away offerings from the faithful, using the church as if a stable, beating up Christians, despoiling pilgrims through unjust fees, and inflicting on them many sufferings." The frustrated patriarch threw up his hands in exasperation: "Why do you reprimand me and disturb me in the midst of my fatherly cares? I have but the strength and power of a tiny ant when compared to those proud men. We have to redeem our lives here by regular tribute payments or else face death-dealing punishment."

Perhaps he was discouraged by what he saw in Jerusalem. In 1099 he went to Latakia (Laodicea) in Syria, and from there sailed west and home. On his way home, with Count Conon of Montaigou, a storm threatened their ship, but subsided when they prayed and promised to found a church if they survived. The two later founded Neufmoustier Abbey in Huy.

It seems he founded an Augustinian monastery in France, the Church of the Holy Sepulchre. The contemporary Albert of Aachen claims Peter died there in 1131 as its prior, but this must be a fabrication. In the records of Neufmoustier Abbey we find an entry for 8 July 1115:

...the death of Dom Pierre, of pious memory, venerable priest and hermit, who deserved to be appointed by the Lord to announce the first to the holy Cross.

We assume this is more accurate than Albert, especially since Albert had a tendency to presume things that suited him. And because Neufmoustier contains Peter's tomb (see illustration).

One item attributed to Peter that cannot be proven is that he invented the rosary, presumably as a guide for the illiterate in their prayers. Tomorrow we'll look at what history we know about the rosary.

The People's Crusade Continues

After the Rhineland Massacres, the People's Crusade continued from Cologne toward the Holy Land. Some took boats down the Danube. Some marched over land into and through Hungary, meeting up again at the Danube on the borders of the Byzantine Empire, at a town called Zemun.

A dispute over prices turned into a riot between the Crusaders and the townspeople, in which 4000 Hungarians were killed. The Crusaders crossed into Belgrade, pillaging and burning the city. Days later, at the town of Niš, its commander promised Peter the Hermit that he would provide food and an escort to Constantinople if the Crusaders would depart immediately.

This was agreed to, and all would have been well if some Germans in the group had not started a fight with some locals and set fire to a mill. The garrison of Niš came out and attacked the Crusaders, supposedly killing about 25% of the 40,000-person contingent. (The illustration shows the fighting at Niš.)

They regrouped and arrived on 12 July at Sofia, the capital of Bulgaria, where a Byzantine escort met them and led them without further incident to Constantinople on 1 August.

Emperor Alexios I, whose initial request for aid from the West motivated the Crusade, now had 30,000 extra people on his hands. He may have had news of their prior behavior. He ferried them immediately across the Bosphorus, but warning Peter not to engage the Turks until the main (and better armed) army showed up.

The group was eager to push on to the Holy Land, however, and harassed towns along the way, finally reaching the suburbs of Nicaea. A 6,000-strong contingent of Germans marched on the castle of Xerigordos and occupied it. (Xerigordos' exact location is not known. Guibert of Nogent said it was four days' journey from Nicaea.)

They were now firmly in Seljuk Turk territory, and one of the generals of Kilij Arslan laid siege to Xerigordos. The water supply was insufficient, and there are reports that the Crusaders drank their own urine and the blood of donkeys to survive. The Turks prevailed, and the occupiers of Xerigordos were forced to either convert to Islam or be killed.

I wish I could say that this was the worst of their problems, and the rest of the People's Crusade went smoothly. Unfortunately, there was more to come. See you next time.

Guibert of Nogent

Guibert of Nogent, a Benedictine  was not remarkable in his time, but his extensive writings and autobiography have more recently provided insight into daily life in the Middle Ages.

Born c.1055 to minor nobility, his was a breech birth. His family made an offering to the Virgin Mary the he would be dedicated to a religious life if he survived. Guibert's father (according to his autobiography) was violent man who died while Guibert was still young. Guibert believed his father would have broken the vow and would have tried to get Guibert to become a knight.

At the age of 12, after six years of a strict tutor for the boy, his mother retired to an abbey near saint-Germer-de-Fly. Soon after, Guibert entered the Order of Saint-Germer, studying classical works. The influence of Anselm of Bec inspired him to change his focus to theology.

The first major literary work of his was the Dei gesta per Francos ("God's deeds through the Franks"). It is a more polished version of the anonymous Gesta Francorum. His additions give us more information about the reaction to the Crusade in France.

His autobiography is also patterned after another work, the Confessions of St. Augustine. It is a lengthy work dealing with his youth and upbringing and his life in a monastery. There are references that give us insight into daily life, such as when he denigrates someone for their manner of dress:

But because there are no good things, that do not at times give occasion to some wickedness, when he was one day in a village engaged on some business or other, behold there stood before him a man in a scarlet cloak and silken hose that had the soles cut away in a damnable fashion, with hair effeminately parted in front and sweeping the tops of his shoulders looking more like a lover than a traveller.

Guibert's criticisms tell us something about attitude toward certain fashions. 

He had a skeptical view on saints:

I have indeed seen, and blush to relate, how a common boy, nearly related to a certain most renowned abbot, and squire (it was said) to some knight, died in a village hard by Beauvais .on Good Friday, two days before Easter. Then, for the sake of that sacred day whereon he had died, men began to impute a gratuitous sanctity to the dead boy. When this had been rumoured among the country-folk, all agape for something new, then forthwith oblations and waxen tapers were brought to his tomb by the villagers of all that country round. What need of more words? A monument was built over him, the pot was hedged in with a stone building, and from the very confines of Brittany there came great companies of country-folk, though without admixture of the higher sort. That most wise abbot with his religious monks, seeing this, and being enticed by the multitude of gifts that were brought, suffered the fabrication of false miracles. [Treatise on Relics]

...and on saints' relics:

Odo, Bishop of Bayeux, eagerly desired the body of St Exuperius, his predecessor, who was honoured with special worship in the town of Corbeil. He paid, therefore, the sum of one hundred pounds to the sacristan of the church which possessed these relics that he might take them for himself. But the sacristan cunningly dug up the bones of a peasant named Exuperius and brought them to the Bishop. The Bishop, not content with assertion, exacted from him an oath that these bones brought were those of Saint Exuperius. "I swear," replied the man, "that these are the bones of Exuperius: as to his sanctity I cannot swear, since many earn the title of saints are far indeed from holiness." [Treatise on Relics]

He died in 1124.

Speaking of deeds of the Franks, there should be some interesting items to glean from the aforementioned Gesta Francorum. Stay tuned.

Other Accounts of Clermont

How do we know what happened hundreds of years ago? Sometimes we have an archaeological finds that are subject to interpretation. Sometimes we have direct records, like coroner reports or exchequer accounts that we assume are straightforward. Sometimes we have histories written by contemporaries, or eyewitnesses, but even those we have to look at with a critical eye. Did the author have an agenda? Did the author have an accurate memory of the event? Did the author know how to interpret events?

For example: what did Urban actually say at Clermont on 27 November 1095 to announce the (First) Crusade? Six accounts have survived.

First, we have a letter Urban himself sent to Flanders. He says "a barbaric fury has deplorably afflicted and laid waste the churches of God in the regions of the Orient" (because he has had a request from the emperor in Constantinople for help with the Turks) and makes a passing reference to Jerusalem by saying the barbarism has "even grasped in intolerable servitude its churches and the Holy City of Christ, glorified by His passion and resurrection." Interestingly, there is no indication that this Crusade has as its main purpose taking over Jerusalem from non-Christians.

There is also the Gesta Francorum ("Deeds of the Franks"), an anonymous history written only a few years after 1095, that simply says Urban called upon people to "take up the way of the Lord" and be prepared to suffer in the undertaking. This account suggests that Urban was calling on the Franks specifically for this task, and caused the Franks to sew crosses onto the right shoulders of their garments to indicate their willingness.

Two eyewitness accounts exist. Fulcher of Chartres was a chaplain whose detailed account of the Council of Clermont (in the week preceding the announcement) gives an account in which he claims to record only things that he saw with his own eyes. He is the best (we think) account of what Urban actually said.

Robert the Monk is the other account. Robert says he was an eyewitness to Urban's speech, and he may have been: Robert has been identified as a former abbot of Saint-Remi who lived from c.1055 - 1122. Writing more than ten years after the speech, he embellishes it (compared to Fulcher's version) and makes it more dramatic. It is Robert who claims that the crowds as one shouted Deus vult ("God wills it!") at the conclusion of the announcement.

Two more accounts that do not claim to have been present exist. Guibert, the abbot of Nogent, adds his own emphasis on returning Jerusalem to Christian possession to fulfill prophecies about the Apocalypse. Baldric, the archbishop of Dol, seems to re-write the account from the Gesta Francorum and emphasize the Crusade as an appeal to chivalry. Part of Urban's focus during the Council was to reign in violence caused by Christian knights in the West.

We take what we can get from the historical record and hope we can assemble the jigsaw puzzle of historical events.

Tomorrow I'll tell you a little more about Guibert of Nogent and his very "modern" skepticism about something that scholarship definitely agrees with, no matter what people in the Middle Ages believed.