THE INTERACTION BETWEEN MONASTICISM AND THE FIRST THREE CRUSADES 111933: For Hm Dogma of M. A. MICHIGAN ”ATE UNIVERSITY Carol Scott Lucas I963 LIBRARY Michigan State University ABSTRACT THE INTERACTION BETWEEN MONASTICISM AND THE FIRST THREE CRUSADES by Carol Scott Lucas The crusades and monasticism interacted on one another in a way that was of significant influence on the future development of each. It is the purpose of this thesis to examine the mutual influences of these two forces in the late eleventh and twelfth centuries. In order to more fully understand the role of monasticism in relation to the crusades it is necessary to be aware of the stage to which the monastic ideal had evolved by the time of the First Crusade. From anchoretic and cenobitic origins Western monasticism evidenced a tendency to become increasingly communal and to assume a wider range of social responsibilities. The First Crusade occurred during the Cluniac phase which was significant in relation to the crusades in that the Cluniac reform of Benedictine monasticism provided a larger social con- text for the operation of the monastic ideal. The Second Crusade coincided with the dominance of the Cistercian phase of monasticism and evidenced significant support from that order. The culmination of the increasing worldly involvement of monasticism was the creation of the Mendicant orders in the thirteenth century. The Franciscans and Dominicans represented a negation of the original monastic ideal in their striving to serve God by serving man. Thus, the influence of 3315 .'.'-,I- I bob- ‘5) o I "F m \»I .. .. ’ILI kh Carol Scott Lucas monasticism on the crusades varied in part according to the larger dictates of the evolving monastic ideal. The means by which the monks supported the crusades were varied. The regular clergy played a very decisive role in preaching the First and Second crusades. Abbots were particularly active preachers and the monks generally confined themselves to writing letters and propaganda. Once the crusades were set in motion the monks continued to provide assistance by supplying the crusading hosts with food and shelter. This was particularly important for the non-combatant pilgrims who went East with the armies since they were usually too poor to provide for them- selves with the result that the non-combatants could become an unruly mob if not alievated from dire straits. The crusades created a demand for ready cash which the monasteries were able to supply through mortgages and purchases of land. One of the most decisive and significant activities of the monks was in the diplomatic sphere. By minimizing friction within the crusading ranks and by negotiating with the Greeks and Moslems the monks furthered the progress of the crusades. Psychologically the regular clergy helped to maintain the religious fervor and high morale both during times of crisis and times of little pressure. They preached, prayed, lead processions, fastings, burials, and initiated reforms all for the purpose of inspiring the crusading warriors to greater belief and courage. During the twelfth century the monastic attitude toward the crusades changed. The change was due to a variety of factors but mainly to a combination of the increasingly secular nature of the crusades, the disillusionment with the idea of the crusading policy as a result of the unsuccessful outcomes, and lastly, the changing nature of the Carol Scott Lucas monastic ideal. The regular clergy reacted to the changing nature of the crusades at two different levels. Due to the practical exigencies of life in the Latin States the monks necessarily adapted themselves to the hardships by becoming more militaristic. Although there was an in- creasing number of militant monks the military life was incompatible with the monastic vows. A more satisfactory way for a man to combine the monastic and knightly ideals was to join one of the military- religious orders. The Templars and Hospitallers represented such a combination of twelfth century ideals and provided the only serious opposition to the Moslems. The second monastic reaction to the crusades took the form of a rejection and criticism of the crusading policy. The criticism manifested itself in several forms. The regular clergy were not so easily roused to preach the Third Crusade and the secular clergy dominated this aspect of the preparations. The criticism also appeared in more open forms such as written treatises and chansons. The monks shared in the new desire to convert pagans through missionary work rather than by the sword which paved the way for the mendicants and for men like Raymond Lull. Thus, monasticism and the early crusades interacted upon one another decisively. The crusading movement benefited from the various forms of monastic support. Monasticism as an ideal and as an institu- tion reacted to twelfth century crusading events both by broadening the ideal to include the military life and by rejecting militaristic con- versions in favor of missionary efforts. THE INTERACTION BETWEEN MDNASTICISM AND THE FIRST THREE CRUSADES BY Carol Scott Lucas A THESIS Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF ARTS Department of History 1963 Approved DEDICATION This study of monasticism is dedicated to Dr. Richard E. Sullivan whose knowledge and insight have deepened the author's comprehension of the subject and whose instruction has shaped the author's understanding of scholarship. ii TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCT ION O O O O O C O O O O O O O O I O O O I O O O O O 0 Chapter I. THE EVOLUTION OF MEDIEVAL MONASTICISM . . . . . . . . II. PREACHING THE CRUSADES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . III. MONASTERIES AS SHELTERS FOR CRUSADERS AND PILGRIMS . IV. MDNASTERIES AND FINANCIAL AID TO THE CRUSADES . V. THE DIPLOMATIC ACTIVITIES OF THE REGULAR CLERGY VI. MONASTIC AID TO THE MILITARY PROGRESS OF THE CRUSADES. VII. RISE OF THE MILITARY-RELIGIOUS ORDERS . . . . VIII. MODIFICATIONS OF THE MONASTIC ATTITUDE TOWARD THE CRUSADES . C O I O O O I I O O O I O O C O O O O O O CONCLUS ION O I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O C 0 0 APPENDIX A A LIST OF REGULAR CLERGY PRESENT AT THE COUNCIL OF CLERMDNT . . . . . . . . . . APPENDIX B A LIST OF REGULAR CLERGY RELATED TO THE FIRST THREE CRUSHES . C O O O O O O O O O O O 0 O O O O BIBLIOGRAPHICAL ESSAY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ALPHABETICAL BIBLIOGRAPHY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iii Page 24 49 66 80 96 109 126 139 143 145 153 165 INTRODUCTION In the year 1096 vast crowds of men and women left EurOpe traveling eastward to the birthplace of their religion. Elaborately equipped nobles and knights moved forward followed by their retainers. The ardent soldiers of Christianity were accompanied by swarms of peasants who put aside plows and the tools of their trade to travel to the Holy Land. An abundance of priests, monks, abbots, chaplains, and bishOps were found in every camp exhorting the peeple to righteousness and urging them forward in the defense of Christianity. Even women, children, and the aged rose to the occasion motivated by piety and by curiosity and followed the trail east. This heterogeneous group con- stituted the personnel of the First Crusade. The crowds moved forward not so much by an organized plan or under leadership as by religious enthusiasm. The vast majority of the crusaders did not even have an accurate idea of the time, expense or difficulties to be encountered on the journey to their destination. In fact, many were uncertain of the destination-~except for the vague sense that Jerusalem was located somewhere in the mysterious East. But ignorance of the realities of the vast enterprise upon which they were embarking was far outweighed by the spirited enthusiasm and righteous faith of the EurOpean pOpulace. The religious enthusiasm was a large factor in motivating the crusades. The idea of a holy war fought on behalf of Christianity was not new in 1096. Charlemagne had conceived of his Spanish expeditions as being holy and in the following centuries those who fought in the l [It be 6% n: p:- 2 reconquest of Spain gained Spiritual benefits as well as martyrdom in the event of death. The concept of a holy war was bigger than just a crusade for it was a war approved of by the Church and papacy and could be used against heretics, pagans or any enemy of the Church. War had become an integral part of Christian life by the eleventh century and it had a religious sanction so long as it was directed toward holy ends. The relative importance of the religious motivation in the crusades and the concept of a holy war must be evaluated by each student of the sub- ject. The presence of personal ambition, h0pe of financial gain and other more secular motivations does not mean that the majority of the early crusaders were not primarily concerned with successfully waging a holy war in defense of Christianity. Without the religious faith and fervor of the eleventh and twelfth centuries it would have been impos- sible to conceive of a crusade. Religious motives alone are not enough to explain the advent of the crusades. The movement is more fully understood when it is re- vealed in the larger context of the interaction of Western, Byzantine and Islamic civilizations. The background of the crusades must be sought in several hundred years of interplay among the civilizations. The crusading movement was a crucial stage in the evolution of the rela- tions between the civilizations since the crusades defined the position of each civilization in regard to the others and established the tone of future East-West intercourse on a militant level. The origin of Byzantine, Moslem and Western civilizations is found in the disintegrating unity of antiquity. As centralized political control receded into ineffectiveness the latent forces of regionalism within the Roman Empire gained in strength and from necessity local 3 powers assumed the various reaponsibilities of government. Although the concept of "Romania" continued to exist in the Byzantine Empire, there was actually no longer any central power comparable to the Roman Empire and thus the civilizations were relatively free to develOp along inde- pendent lines. As the individual and unique character of each emerged mutual hostility and rivalry became evident. From the standpoint of Western-Islamic relations the crusades may be considered as part of a Christian counter-offensive against the Moslems after several centuries of defensive maneuvers in the West. Even during the lifetime of Mbhammed Islamic expansion had begun, and although it was more directly aimed at the Byzantine Empire its reper- cussions were felt in the west. The Moslem expansion began in 632 and by 636 all of Syria had fallen and was followed in the next year by Jerusalem. MeSOpotamia was overrun and early in the 640's Egypt fell to the Arab conquerors. The conquest of Cyprus and Armenia was a pre- lude to the five year siege of Constantinople from 673 to 678 which failed in its ultimate goal. Byzantine rule in North Africa was finally ended in 697-698 by the Moslem conquest of Carthage. The second siege of the capital of the Byzantine Empire in 717-718 was also a failure, but it revealed the depth of penetration by the Arabs into the Empire. The Moshmuarolled into Spain in 711 and very shortly most of the peninsula had been lost to Christendom. Soon the Arabs were probing north of the Pyrenees and it seemed that Gaul would be next. But the Franks inflicted a defeat on the Moslems at the battle of Tours in 732 and this ended the threat to Gaul. The defeat of the Arabs in the West was paralled in the East by the Byzantine victory in Anatolia in 739 and the beginning of a Greek offensive which restored Byzantine control over Asia Minor. II; I E'IE‘, he as IE: as an D» C we 4 The Moslem military eXploits during the second half of the eighth century and the ninth century were less decisive and largely consisted of Sporadic border raids. The Arab forces did take Sicily in the ninth century whichxwas One factor in stimulating the West to an eventual reprisal. The Byzantine Empire began to recoup some of their losses, for example, Crete was captured in 961. The explanation of the decreasing success of the Moslem conquests is found in the size of their vast empire, the lack of a coherent political organization, and the in- ternal strife. The civil wars and internal dissensions began as early as the mid-seventh century with the disputed succession of Ali, a cousin and son-in-law of the prOphet of Islam. Thereafter, conflict never ceased to threaten Arab unity. Deepite the end of Arab unity a new power once again pushed for- ward the sword of Islam. The Seljuk Turks had become a formidable power in the East and the eleventh century witnessed a series of conquests culminating in 1071 with the battle of Manzikert which triggered an appeal of the Byzantine emperor Alexius to the pope in Rome. The eventual re3ponse was the First Crusade. Although the brunt of the Arab and Turkish aggression was borne by the Byzantine Empire the West also suffered the effects of the assaults. The conquest of Spain and Sicily and the harassment of the southern coast of France and the west coast of Italy provided an impulse for Western retaliation. The late tenth century witnessed a change of fortunes as the Moslems were eXpelled from southern France. The cities of northern Italy created a fleet with which they broke the Arab mon0poly of the Mediterranean. The Italian fleets began to ravage the north coast of Africa and the success of Pisa and Genoa culminated in fc: 5 the capture of Mahdiyah in 1087. Mahdiyah, the Moslem capital in Tunis, was strategically located and gave the Italian republics command of the western Mediterranean. The efforts of the Italians against the Moslems were supplemented by the Normans who invaded southern Italy in 1017 and who obtained a series of victories over militant Islam. Meanwhile the Christians in Spain, sometimes aided by warriors from other parts of EurOpe, began a long war of reconquest against the Moslems. By the eleventh century this effort had resulted in a recapture of a consider- able portion of northern Spain. The recovery of Italy, Sicily, and a significant portion of Spain from Moslem rule provided the West with an impulse to further the campaigns against the infidels and paved the way for the holy enterprise of 1096. The papacy was actively concerned in the Islamic-EuroPean struggle and put all of its power behind the western efforts. By the second half of the eleventh century the prestige of the papacy had reached an unpre- cedented peak due to the Cluniac inapiration and the papal reforms. The vitality and prestige of the p0pes enabled them to give significant Spiritual and ideological aid to the offensive against Islam. An ex- pression of the papal attitude is found in the eXpedition of 1087 against Mahdiyah when Pope Victor III blessed the standard of the army and promised remission of sins to all of the participants.1 Thus, in the larger context of the Islamic-European struggle from the seventh through the eleventh centuries, the crusades can be interpreted as a Western counter-attack on the Moslems. The crusades 1Cambridge Medieval History, eds. J. R. Tanner, C. W. Previte-Orton, Z. N. Brooke (Cambridge, Eng., 1926), V, 268. 6 were one aspect of the centuries old struggle between two civilizations and the only change in 1095 was that the theater of the conflict was shifted from the fringes of Eur0pe to the Moslem controlled Syria- Palestine area. Since the crusades involved not only the Islamic and Western civilizations but also the Byzantine Empire, it is necessary to examine briefly ByzantineAWestern relations prior to the crusades. The history of relations at the religious level is pertinent to the formation of a crusading policy. Eur0pe had nominally remained the religious ally of the Byzantine Empire for three centuries after an Open break had occurred with Islam. However, in 1054 a schism had occurred between the 'Greek and Roman Churches with the refusal of the Greeks to recognize the supremacy of the Western papacy. The schism and the forces behind it had the effect of undermining the religious basis of Byzantine—Western relations. The support and leadership which the papacy gave to the crusades was grounded in a complex variety of motivations. One of the primary causes of the creation of a crusading policy by Pepe Gregory VII was the schism of 1054. In 1095 the schism must have seemed a rather recent event and one which was by no means irreparable. Thus, both Gregory VII and his ideological successor Urban II may have been motivated by the hOpe of gaining recognition of the Roman see by the Greek Orthodox Church.2 The decisive defeat of the Byzantine Emperor Michael VII at Menzikert in 1071 provided the background for the request of Alexius 2A. C. Krey, I‘U'rban's Crusade--Success or Failure?" American Historical Review, L111 (1948), 235-250. Hereafter cited as Krey, with appropriate page numbers. 7 to the p0pe at Rome for military aid. The pOpe very possibly hOped that the emperor's dire straits would compel him to recognize the supremacy of Rome in return for the much needed military support. The medieval pepes always nourished the enticing dream of once again unifying Christendom under the bish0p of Rome. Although the origin of the crusades can be found in the inter- action between the Byzantine, Islamic and Western civilizations, that larger view should not eclipse the internal forces which existed in the West and which accounted for the pOpular enthusiasm with which the cru- sade policy was received. The appeal which the crusades found in the West can be explained by the fact that the crusades offered an outlet to an extremely wide variety of forces and ideologies. The movement was an expression of the medieval ideological belief that the Holy Land, as the birth place of Christianity, should be saved from the infidel and made the exclusive possession of Western Christianity. It provided a theater in which to expend the excessive and ill-Spent military energy of the west by channeling it from feudal wars into a Holy War. The desire for expanded territorial and political power found an outlet in the crusades. Pe0p1e dissatisfied with society or with their role in it believed that the crusades would lead them to better opportunities in the East. Others, motivated by the Spirit of adventurous travel or even by intellectual and cultural curiosity, were attracted to the cru- sades and thus represented one more facet of medieval EurOpe as it radiated Eastward. As was discussed earlier the medieval Spirit mani- fested an intense religious nature and that also found an outlet in the crusading movement. Each of the forces eXpressed its energy and drive as they converged into a vast movement of eastward exPansion. 8 The general role of religion in the crusades has received due consideration and there is little need for further elaboration. However, the regular clergy, with the exception of their more picturesque members like Peter the Hermit and Bernard of Clairvaux, have not been examined in relation to the crusades on any systematic basis. The present work is a study of the capacities through which the monks influenced the pro- gress of the crusading movement. Since members of the regular clergy were so actively connected with the crusades monasticism could not avoid being influenced by these militant eXpeditions and by the evolution of the Western attitude toward the crusading policy. Therefore, in addi- tion to examining the roles of the regular clergy during the crusades some suggestions have also been made concerning the influence that the crusades had on monasticism as an ideal and as an institution. The sources used consist largely of crusading chronicles written by monks, abbots, chaplains, priests, and laymen.3 The references to monastic activities are few and scattered, but enough evidence can be gathered from the chronicles to formulate a thesis concerning the interaction of monasticism and the early crusades. 3For a detailed discussion of the Sources see the bibliographical essay on p. 153. CHAPTER I THE EVOLUTION OF MEDIEVAL MONASTICISM The influence of the monks on the crusades must be considered in the larger context of the medieval monastic ideal. The monastic ideal evolved through five stages of development during the Middle Ages beginning with anchoretism and other types of hermitical life. The Benedictine, Cluniac and Cistercian reforms all constituted definite phases of monastic growth. The cycle was brought to completion in the Middle Ages with the emergence of the mendicant monks in the thirteenth century. Each of the five monastic stages evidenced a different relation- ship between monasticism and the papacy. Prior to Pope Gregory I (590-604) the papal power was ineffective as were all forms of central authority in the West due to the breakup of the Empire and the forces of chaos which predominated in the early centuries. As a result cer- tain men desired to supplement their efforts to attain a Christian life by seeking isolation from men and from the worldly imperfections of the Church. Thus the earliest forms of ascetic life took the form of with- drawal into some type of hermitage or isolation in a small community. However, the crusades came at a time when monasticism was assuming larger social responsibilities in the world and working more directly with the Church to further Christianity in the world. At the same time monasticism recognized greater papal authority and leadership. The 9 2th ‘ A GER. CD'S. for BEE thl pa 10 fact that the crusades occurred at that particular stage of monastic development was a determining factor in the character and extent of the ‘monastic influence on the crusades. Therefore, it is necessary to under- stand the historical evolution of the monastic ideal in order to fully appreciate the relationship between the crusades and the medieval monks. The ideal of medieval monasticism was renunciation of the 'self' and surrender to the Christian God.1 A life lived according to that ideal was the closest human eXpression of perfection. The monastic ideal implied no political or religious reform although admittedly it sometimes attained that end as in the case of the Cluniac reform.2 The primary concern of each monk was the fulfilment of the ideal of renunciation for the purpose of personal salvation. However, the concept of the means by which that was attained underwent a lengthy evolution during the Middle Ages. A Significant impetus was given to monasticism by the Emperor Constantine's official recognition of Christianity. In the eyes of some men the necessary result of that recognition was that the Church accepted within its own ranks the mediocre morality of the Empire and of the world.3 By their protests and their subsequent withdrawal into seclusion these perfectionists constituted the first stage of monasticism. These earliest monks, or more accurately hermits, can be understood as a protest against the worldliness of the Church. The hermits, who were 1Herbert B. Workman, The Evolution of the Monastic Ideal (London, 1927), pp. 3-4. Hereafter cited as Workman, with appr0priate page numbers. 2Workman, pp. 12-13. 3Workman, pp. 6-10. ll classified as laymen by contemporary society,4 withdrew from active participation in the Church and in the world. Although they continued to receive the sacraments and to recognize the holy nature of the Church, they felt their ideal of renunciation was superior to a life lived in society.5 From the earliest manifestation of the monastic ideal in the form of anchoretism there evolved during the fourth and fifth centuries a new interpretation of the means to achieve the perfection of the Christian life and that was cenobitism. Pachomius was one of the first cenobites and as early as the first half of the fourth century he emphasized the desirability of brining souls together as a means of attaining spiritual perfection on earth.6 Thus, the hermitical phase passed quickly and a tendency toward communal living could be seen in the late fourth century. Communal living as opposed to the anchoretic existence of the early fourth century produced a new need that was filled by the creation of a monastic rule. Pachomius created several rules and became the head of a community of nine monasteries in Egypt. One of his rules was translated into Latin by Saint Jerome, who thus introduced cenobitic monasticism into the West around 404. However, it was not until the formulation of the Benedictine Rule of 529 that one could say monas- ticism had clearly entered its second stage of development. It was under the Benedictine influence that the concept of the regular clergy 4Workman, p. 13. 5Workman, p. 11. 6Workman, pp. 87-88. III 151‘! BC t6 ti .hi pie a; 12 developed and the basic monastic vows of poverty, chastity and obedience were defined. The Benedictine Rule in the West had been anticipated in the East by the Rule of Saint Basil given in 358-364. Saint Basil limited the excesses of asceticism and enjoined ascetics to dwell in a community under obedience. The Rule of Saint Basil became the basis of Eastern monasticism and was paralleled in the West by the Benedictine Rule. The essence of the Benedictine and second phase of monasticism was inherent in the Rule. The Benedictine Rule provided a means by which men could live together Still, of course, for the purpose of perfection in renunciation. The success of the Rule and of this first monastic "order“ was due to the relative moderation of the Rule. The Benedictines were provided with ample food and clothing. Extreme austerities were not encouraged. In other words self-surrender was substituted for the earlier goal of self-conquest7 and the former was a Spirit more compatible with cenobitism than with anchoretism. For a variety of reasons the Benedictine Order was not to main- tain its moral fervor and discipline and by the ninth century many of the Benedictine houses were in a sad State of disrepair. The Order had at least one inherent source of decay and that was the aSpect of Benedictine ideology which glorified manual labor as God's work.8 Since tilling the soil was pleasing to God the communal monks doubled their vigor in the work with the result that the various Benedictine houses accumulated a Significant amount of wealth. It was the inevitable result 7Workman, p. 150. 8Workman, pp. 154-158. 13 of manual labor done with a vigorous intensity which stemmed from reli- gious motives. The Benedictine Order declined largely as a consequence of that wealth since it was antithetical to the monastic vows and the monastic ideal. Saint Benedict had, nevertheless, accomplished the second phase of monasticism and furnished monasticism.with its basic rule. Monastic life had reached a low level during the late ninth and tenth centuries. In addition to the internal decay of the Benedictine vitality there were outside factors by which monasticism was undercut in the same way that medieval society in general was adversely affected. The Norse invasions in particular, but also the Moslem and Magyar in- vasions, were destructive to medieval society and left a good many - monasteries in ruins. The low level of monasticism enabled secular princes to attack the monasteries in a variety of ways which were equally as destructive as the invasions as for example, in cases where feudal princes took over the control of monasteries for financial purposes and allowed the enrolment of monks to dwindle. During this darkest of eras in medieval society and in the Church the Cluniac congregation seems to have remained one of the few institu- tions which was relatively free of corruption. The Cluniac Order originated in 910 as an attempt to reform Benedictine monasticism.and subsequently carried monasticism through its third phase of develOpment. Cluny attained an internal strength which enabled it to endure as a stronghold of religious piety throughout the tenth and eleventh centuries. The strength of the Cluniacs was partially due to their highly cen- tralized organization and to the leadership of a series of exceptionally able abbots. The Cluniac phase of monasticism brought the monks into 14 wider worldly contacts and gave monasticism broader social implications in secular society. The merit of individual retreat was not esteemed as highly as it had been by the early Benedictines and the change was seen in the Cluniac practice of communal worship as opposed to the earlier practice of almost exclusively private prayer. In relation to the crusades the Cluniac reform had a dual significance. First, the crusades occurred at a time when monasticism had become involved in more worldly affairs than previously and had accepted increased social obli- gations. Second, Cluniac monasticism provided a model of Spiritual life which suited the needs of the Church and which was adopted by the papacy as a basis of reform. Reform of the Church did not replace renunciation as the ultimate goal of the Cluniac monks, but it did become the ideo- logical source of reform within the Church. The Cluniac ideals were adapted to the needs of the Church by a series of popes in the second half of the eleventh century. The most capable and ardent supporter of the Gregorian reform was POpe Gregory VII who gave his name to the movement. Although Gregory was never a Cluniac monk he was closely associated with the Cluniac ideals of reform.9 WOrking with Pape Alexander II from 1061 to 1073 and as Pope himself from 1073 to 1085, Gregory made reform within the Church a reality. The essential tone of his reform was to apply monastic ideals, and in par— ticular Cluniac ideals, to the whole Church. Beneath the issues of simony, celibacy, pluralism, and investiture was the basic question of the freedom of the Church which was the underlying issue of the Investi- ture Controversy. Cluny had demonstrated the efficacy of freedom from 9Workman, p. 229. 15 lay control in the ecclesiastical Sphere and this principle was applied to the Church as a whole. There was little objection to the concept of the eigenkirche or to the prOprietary church or monastery as such, but an attempt was made to define the pr0prietary rights and limit them to the secular Sphere.10 The application of the Cluniac monastic ideals to the whole Church and the simultaneous strengthening of the papacy put the Church in a position to take the leadership of the crusades in 1095. The importance of the monastic branch of the Church in this development is evident. It was the internal energy of the Cluniac congregation which contributed the ideas and the strength necessary to accomplish the crucial eleventh century papal reform and thus to enable the Church to take the leadership of the First Crusade. By that means the monks can be said to have made their first contribution to the crusading movement. The importance of the Cluniac monks in aiding the p0pe's pleas for the First Crusade can be seen in their dominance of the various roles, particularly that of preaching the crusade, which are to be dis- cussed in the succeeding chapters. It is also Significant that Cluniac contributions to the Second Crusade were noticeably less and that another monastic order, the Cistercians, dominated the contributions of the regular clergy on that crusade. Perhaps a partial explanation is found in the fact that Pape Urban II was a Cluniac monk while Pope Eugenius III of the Second Crusade was a Cistercian. Another plausible eXplanation, however, is found in the general monastic history between the First and Second Crusades. 10Gerd Tellenbach, Church, State and Christian Society at the Times of the Investiture Contest (Oxford, 1948), p. 91. 16 After the end of the First Crusade the Cluniac Order declined and at the time of the Second Crusade the Cluniacs were busily engaged in the task of internal reform. Admittedly they were concerned with reform at the end of the eleventh century also, but by 1145 the task had become much more formidable. Thus, the monks of that order had little time to aid the Second Crusade. The decay of Cluny, as in the case of Benedictines, was the result of a complex interaction of events. The Cluniacs could not avoid the accumulation of wealth and by the early twelfth century Cluniac proSperity was beginning to have a negative effect on the monks. A second source of decay can be found in the highly centralized organization of Cluny which consequently made the strength of the congregation extremely dependent upon the quality of a single person, the abbot. The abbots were of excellent calibre, as was mentioned above, during the tenth and eleventh centuries. However, under Pontius who was abbot from 1109 to 1122, the negative effects of an evil personality were felt immediately. An estimate of his character can be gained by looking at the fact that when he was deposed by Pope Calixtus II,PontiuS made war on the monastery and in order to pay his hirelings he melted down the gold and silver plate of the monks.11 The degenerate rule of Pontius made reform at Cluny a necessity. The reign of Peter the Venerable, the abbot who succeeded Pontius, was almost entirely dedicated to reform and to a revival of the original fervor and discipline of Cluny. Peter the Venerable did check the decline but not on a permanent basis. Herbert Workman has pointed out that aside from the dependency on one abbot there was another flaw in 11Workman, p. 237. deg Tm ad of at fa II 17 the centralized nature of Cluny over which Peter the Venerable had no control. That was the financial structure under which Cluny collected a tribute from all the dependent monasteries. The rising sense of nationalism created friction when, for example, the English Cluniac dependencies were required to pay an annual tribute of £600 to Cluny.12 The drain of gold which was irritating in times of peace, became intoler- able in times of war between the two countries. Thus, due to a variety of causes the abbacy of Peter the Venerable was fully occupied with his attempted reform of the Cluniac congregation. The significance of this fact is that his reign as abbot, lasting from 1122 to 1157, encompassed the years of the Second Crusade. It is reasonable to assume that his efforts to revitalize Cluny and the fact that the congregation.was in a state of disrepute contributed to their minor role in the Second Crusade. The monks who did largely dominate the Second Crusade were the Cistercians. The reason for this can again be found in the historical evolution of monasticism which witnessed the growth of the Cistercian reform in the early twelfth century in reSponse to the decadent state of Cluny. The reform was partially the result of the efforts of Robert of Champagne, who intiated it by founding the monastery at Citeaux in 1098 and then giving it complete independence from all other houses. How- ever, the real inSpiration at Citeaux came in 1112 when St. Bernard joined the monastery. Three years later he established his offshoot at Clairvaux, but his influence and inSpiration continued to be effective throughout the entire Cistercian community. The Cistercian reform, as in the case of Cluny, was basically a revival of the ancient Benedictine 12Workman, pp. 237-238. Rule IIII hog SEE C01 Th: U11 26 at bc 18 Rule.13 The Cistercians put greater emphasis on austerity of dress, ritual and architecture than the Cluniacs had ever done. They lived in isolation and were alert to keep a certain required distance from any other house. There is another point of consideration in the Cistercian reform, however, and that is the organization of the Cistercians which repre- sents the fourth stage in the evolution of the monastic ideal.14 In contrast to Cluny each Cistercian abbey was independent of the others. They did maintain a general uniformity by means of an annual conference of all the abbots held at Citeaux each September. Discipline and unity of usage were enforced at this conference. The abbot of Citeaux also had the right to visit any of the other abbeys to further carry out the unity of practices and discipline. There was an even more important innovation in Cistercian organi- zation and that was its almost complete independence from episcOpal authority and its close alliance with the papacy.15 The Cistercians bound themselves by an oath of obedience directly to the pope which was a significant step from several points of view. First, by their promise of direct obedience to the pepe the Cistercians assumed larger reSponsibilities in the world. Their aim was no longer renunciation of the worldliness of the church but rather their purpose had become to submit the world to the authority of the pope. Saint Bernard of Clairvaux typified the Cistercian Spirit in that he Spent relatively 13Workman, pp. 241-242. 14Workman, p. 243. 15 Werkman, pp. 244-245. 19 little time in the monastery and a great deal of time in travel and various religious and political missions. Thus, with the Cistercian phase monasticism assumed even broader social obligations and recognized the primacy of the pOpe as their head and guide in affairs of both the Spirit and of worldly existence. Monasticism had outlived its original ideal. The alliance between the pOpe and the Cistercians expressed it- self in the Struggle with the secular clergy who looked to the leader- ship and authority of the bishOps. Thus, the friction between the regular and secular clergy may in part explain why Pepe Eugenius III depended so heavily on the regulars to preach and recruit for the Second Crusade. A second point of Significance concerning the Cistercian-papal alliance was that "obedience" rather than "poverty" became the object of emphasis in the monastic vows.16 Over the centuries poverty as an ideal had proven impossible to attain with any hape of duration. Obedi- ence was another matter and could be developed indefinitely. It is Significant that the military orders, anticipating the Jesuits, began to develOp simultaneously with the Cistercians Since they also put great emphasis on obedience. The Cistercians were not immune from the inevitable decay which set in following each monastic revival in the West. The Cistercians fell victim to greatly amassed wealth and relaxed discipline. By the time of the Third Crusade their vitality had been sapped and they were of little consequence to that crusade. In addition, the nature of the crusades had been greatly altered by 1187 and non-combatants, including 16Workman, p. 245. 20 monks, were of little use. The members of the regular clergy who were of significance on the Third Crusade were the Templars and HOSpitallers. One of the essential elements in the military-religious orders was their emphasis on the monastic vow of obedience. Consequently it can be argued that they represent a logical development of the Cistercian of fourth period of the monastic ideal. The military orders are discussed in Chapter VII and at present it is only necessary to mention them in the context of the general evolution of monasticism. The large role of the monks in preaching the first two crusades is generally admitted but even in that traditional task the importance of the monks had conSpiculously diminished by 1187. There was no Saint Bernard or any other comparable figure willing to work on behalf of the Holy Land. Instead, laymen and the secular clergy were predominant. The archbishOp of Tyre traveled to the West with the news of Saladin's victories and asked for aid. He recruited the willing King William of Sicily, who in turn began to foster the crusade by writing to the other monarchs of Eur0pe. Once the war between Richard the Lion-heart of England and Philip Augustus of France was brought under control they took the lead in recruiting for the crusade in their reSpective countries. Frederick Barbarossa played a comparable role in the Holy Roman Empire.17 Admittedly, the kings were supported by the regular clergy in a variety of ways which are discussed in Chapter 11. However, the creation of crusading armies in 1187 was dominated by the secular powers and they in turn were interested in recruiting military power, not monks or any 17Steven Runciman, A History of the Crusades (Cambridge, Eng., 1957), III, 4-10. Hereafter cited as Runciman, with appropriate volume and page numbers. 21 other non-combatants. The only significant clerical preaching was done by bishops and cardinals who worked as papal legates. Thus, by the end of the twelfth century the role of the monks, both in preaching and in participating in the crusades, had noticeably declined and this was largely due to the changing nature of the crusades which made them predominantly military-political ventures. There was another factor involved and that was the changing nature of monasticism. The fact has been previously mentioned that by the end of the twelfth century monasticism was again in a decadent state and thus not able or willing to contribute Significantly to the Third Crusade. More important, however, were the new ideas of reform which began to appear at the end of the twelfth century and which culminated in the formation of the mendicant monks in the following century. The mendicant monks of the thirteenth century represent the fifth and final phase of medieval monasticism. By the time of the Franciscans and Dominicans the monastic ideal had undergone another evolution. As originally stated the means by which to attain Christian perfection and to serve God was to renounce the world and live in isolation. These concepts of anchoretism were modified to suit communal living and a Rule was created. After providing the inSpiration for papal reform in the eleventh century monasticism had in turn gradually recognized more and more papal authority. The emphasis on papal obedience during the twelfth century combined with the militant Spirit in the West resulted in the formation of the militant monastic orders which made their influence so widely felt on the Third Crusade. The ideal during that century taught that the way to serve God was not to renounce the world but to fight the world for God. The last stage, 22 that of the mendicant monks, gave a new twist of that same ideal. No longer was it commendable to fight the world. Instead, a monk must serve the world.18 By the thirteenth century monasticism had returned not only to the Church by recognizing papal authority but had also re- turned to the world. The mendicant monks cared nothing for retreat or seclusion, but sought their salvation by serving mankind. Thus, the cycle of the monastic ideal had been completed. In order to relate the last stage of monasticism to the crusades it is necessary to realize that the basic beliefs of the thirteenth century friars were alive in the late twelfth century even before the Third Crusade. A basic tenant of the friars was that life could best be dedicated to God through serving mankind. This ideal was seen in the congregation of the Cruciferi who were given a constitution by POpe Alexander III in 1169.19 During the twelfth century they established over two hundred houses in EurOpe and Palestine for the care of lepers. The Poor Men of Lyon, who organized themselves around Peter Waldo around 1176, provide a second example of the new Spirit.20 Peter Weldo and his followers distributed their prOperty and possessions among the poor. They Spent their lives on Special missions of preaching the word of God in the city and countryside and thus served mankind. The prevalence in the late twelfth century of the new Spirit of service to mankind which was later to manifest itself in the Franciscan and Dominican orders may have been largely behind the unenthusiastic 18Workman, pp. 271-272. 19Workman, p. 294. 20Workman, p. 293. 23 reSponse of monasticism to the Third Crusade. To serve the world in- stead of fighting it had become an essential element in the monastic Spirit even at the time of the Third Crusade. The rise of monastic criticism of the crusading policy which is discussed in the last chapter is the result of this changing ideology. Monks as well as other EurOpeans began to feel a more intelligent policy would be that of missionary work and conversion rather than the militant, conquering Spirit of the crusaders. This idea found expression in men like Saint Francis of Assisi and Raymond Lull who traveled to the East in h0pe of converting the heretics and the infidels to Christianity. It is significant, how- ever, that the initial manifestation of the more peaceful Spirit had made itself felt before the Third Crusade and therefore was a contrib- uting factor in shaping the monastic attitude toward that Crusade. The above historical sketch of the evolution of the monastic ideal and its relation to the first three crusades should form a back- ground of general understanding for the t0pic of the thesis. Against this background it is possible to view the various capacities in which monks exerted an influence on the crusades and to understand the effects which the crusades had on monasticism as an ideal and as an institution. CHAPTER II PREACHING THE CRUSADES The medieval papacy never ceased striving to realize the ideal of a united Christendom under the headship of the Roman Church. The crusading movement which Urban II inaugurated in 1095 was part of his larger policy and had as one of its primary goals the reunion of the Greek Orthodox and Roman Catholic Churches. Thus, the crusades were to prevail for over two hundred years as one of the most cherished interests of the papacy and it was natural that the clergy would provide the channel through which the pepes promoted the crusades. Pepe Urban II initiated the crusade in November of 1095 at the Council of Clermont which was attended almost entirely by the clergy. No great lay lords attended the council.1 Upon a preliminary examina- tion the absence of the great nobles from the Council of Clermont seems illogical. Since they would eventually have to be recruited as soldiers to serve in the crusading armies, one wonders why Urban did not summon them to Clermont so that they could share in-the initial enthusiasm engendered at that council. The explanation must be sought in the crusading image which Urban was trying to create in 1095. In order to understand the crusading image which was presented at Clermont it is necessary to be aware of the objectives which the pepes hoped to accomplish by means of the crusades. From the papacy 1Runciman, I, 108-109. 24 of P32 cf 11114 St' W3 It st]. P» DU QM Ik. NU. Nla «G. NE t 1!! JIQ «k 25 of Gregory VII, who formulated the initial idea of a crusade, to the papacy of Urban II, who made the crusade a reality, the prime objective of the crusading movement was the reunion of the Greek and Latin Churches under the primacy of Rome.2 The schism between the churches had occurred as recently as 1054, so in the late eleventh century the hepe of reunion still appeared to be realistic. However, the crusading objective that was popularized was the recovery of the Holy Land from the infidels. In reality the recovery of the Holy Land was only a secondary motive to the papacy. Urban heped to accomplish the reunion of the eastern and western churches by giving military aid to the Greek Empire, but in re- turn fer that he heped to gain recognition of the supremacy of the Roman See. Urban pepularized the idea of recovering the Holy Land at Clermont largely because of the unenthusiastic reSponse he experienced at the Council of Piacenza. The Council of Piacenza was held in March of 1094 and on that occasion Urban asked for military aid on behalf of Alexius.3 Urban did not stress the suffering of the Holy Land or the 2Krey, pp. 235-250; W. B. Stevenson, The Crusaders in the East (Cambridge, Eng., 1907), p. 8. Hereafter cited as Stevenson, with appropriate page numbers. 3Dana Carlton Munro, "Did the Emperor Alexius ask for aid at the Council of Piacenza, 1095?'t American Historical Review, XVII (1922), 731-733. Munro discusses the two sources of information concerning the crusading appeal at Piacenza. The standard source is Berneld of St. Blasien in the Monumenta Germaniae Historia, Scripteres, V, 462, who says that in reSponse to an appeal from delegates from ConstantinOple Urban II urged many to go forth to fight the pagans. Munro then points out a second source which supports Berneld and which is less well known. The Historia Monasterii Novi Pictaviensi written by a monk named Martin also, says Urban, guided by divine inSpiration, urged the crusade on behalf of Alexius. Neither source discusses reasons for the aid or the nature of the reSponse. Later writers begin to elaborate in more detail the dire situation of the Greek Christians, for example, Guibert of Nogent, Historia Recueil des Historiens des Croisades, Historiens I t N»: 113 5p: L‘rI th. th ES N'c fi 0c 72 we hHI