SPECIAL REPORT: Should We Be Ashamed Of the Crusades (Pt. II)

Jerrilyn Szelle Holladay treats the harassment of Pilgrims and the Destruction of the Church of the Holy Sepulcher

WICHITA, Kansas (Catholic Online) - The Islamic Empire spanned several continents from East Asia to Spain and was difficult to govern from one central location. By the beginning of the 11th century the Abbasid Caliphate had grown lax and corrupt and began to fragment.

Egypt was wrested from Abbasid control by the Fatimids. The Fatimids were Shi'a who strongly rejected the Sunni Caliphate in Baghdad. The Third Fatimid caliph in Egypt was known for atrocities against his own people, as well as against Christians. In 1009, he began a policy of persecution against Christians and ordered the destruction of all churches, including the ancient and deeply revered Church of the Holy Sepulcher.

Pilgrimage to the holy site was forbidden for over a decade. Although modern interest in pilgrimage is slight, medieval Christians were passionate about expressing their faith with their feet. Pilgrims came back with stories of abuse. Thousands never came back at all, having been killed or enslaved.

The Seljuk Turks Ravage the Anatolian Peninsula

In 1055 the Seljuk Turks conquered the Abbasid dynasty and enforced a severe form of Islam over all the lands they captured. This was bad news for all those subjugated, but especially for the dhimmi.

The Turks swarmed into the Anatolian Peninsula, the very heartland and breadbasket of the Byzantine Empire, destroying commerce and shipping, torching markets, towns and villages. They seized the harvest and the livestock, slaughtered the men, raped the women and then enslaved the women and children.

The people were impoverished, weakened and demoralized. They submitted to the Turks, who then confiscated their homes and means of livelihood. The usual jizya was supplemented by the devshirme, the submission of one or more sons conscripted to serve as Janissaries. Completely cut off from their family, never softened by marriage, these warriors fought with complete abandon. They became a formidable force, one that would later tyrannize the Sultan.

Europe Responds: The Crusades

In 1069, the new Byzantine emperor - Romanus Diogenes IV, struggled to defend his people. He was soundly defeated at the Battle of Manzikert in 1071, not only by the superior Turkish strength, but by treason among his own generals. Routed by the enemy, the emperor called to the West for help.

This battle was a turning point for Europe. True, they had centuries of chronic conflict with the Islamic Empire. Spain was still under Islamic domination. The Mediterranean islands and coastlands had never ceased to be subject to attack, plunder and the slave trade. None of this was new. But Manzikert signaled that the Emperor's defense was crumbling and could no longer protect their eastern boundary or the Holy Land. The Europeans had to take up the defense. Fortunately, the Emperor's plea came at a time when Europe was gaining strength and unity. Finally, they were able to respond to Muslim aggression.

Did the First Crusade come out of nowhere? Hardly. There were both historical and immediate reasons for the Europeans to engage the Muslims in war. The Crusades were a long overdue defensive response to centuries of antagonism.

There were eight official Crusades to the Holy Land, lead by men of high rank and great wealth. Just a few names dispels the myth that the Crusades were primarily a way to rid Europe of second sons and unemployed knights. The First Crusade, for example, was commanded by nobility including Godfrey, Duke of Lower Lorraine (almost as large as France), Raymond of Toulouse and Marquis of Provence, Duke Robert, son of William the Conqueror, and Bohemond, Norman King of Sicily.

King Louis VII of France and King Conrad of Germany led the Second Crusade. King Henry II of England planned to join the Crusade, but he died. So his heir, King Richard the Lionhearted went and nearly lost his kingdom to his younger brother John while he was away. The leaders of the Third Crusade included King Philip Augustus of France and Emperor Frederick I of Germany. The list of notaries goes on. In fact, Europe sent her best and brightest on Crusade.

Furthermore, going on Crusade was unimaginably expensive. Each noble had to provide his own armaments, his horses, money and supplies of every sort for himself and for his retinue. Knights had to pay their own way as well. Ships had to be built and paid for. In feudal times, land was the main source of revenue. Those going on Crusade often mortgaged to the hilt the family domain or whatever land they owned. Crusading often left them nearly destitute.

Did they go seeking treasure? Certainly some did. But for most Crusaders it made little sense to mortgage all of one's wealth in hand for an arduous and dangerous trek across thousands of miles on horseback and on foot after the animals died. Along the way the Crusaders died of starvation, dehydration, disease, and altercations with locals (some their own fault). Once in the Holy Land, they faced death in battle and then a long, miserable trip home, perhaps to find that their homes had been stolen in their absence. The Crusades were not a great source of enrichment for most who went.

When the first wave of Crusaders arrived, Baghdad didn't bother to send troops to help Jerusalem, because the Franks (as they were called by the Muslims) were too insignificant to warrant their attention. After the Crusaders proved themselves to be vigorous fighting men, the Muslims responded quite forcefully. They were a well-armed, fearsome and skilled fighting force, more than equal opponents of the Europeans. The war was conducted according to the customs of their day, not according to the Geneva Convention of the twentieth century. Was it bloody? Of course it was. War is always bloody. There were excesses and duplicity on both sides. Both sides also developed mutual respect for the courage and fighting ability of their opponent.

****

Jeri Holladay writes from Wichita, Kansas, where she has been Director of Adult Education at the Spiritual Life Center of the Diocese of Wichita, Associate Professor of Theology, Chairman of the Theology Department and founding Director of the Bishop Eugene Gerber Institute of Catholic Studies at Newman University. She teaches moral theology and church history.This is the second in a series she will offer to the readers of Catholic Online.

---

'Help Give every Student and Teacher FREE resources for a world-class Moral Catholic Education'

Copyright 2021 - Distributed by Catholic Online