The Crusades: History, Religion, and Political Motives

Introduction: Competing Interpretations of the Crusades

There is much controversy regarding the Crusades, their purpose, and the general effect they left on society. Largely accepted as conflicts that began with the purpose of protecting the Byzantine Empire and Christianity as a whole, the Crusades took place over the course of several centuries and exerted a strong influence on religious ideologies in the Middle East. Although many individuals fought in the name of what they perceived as divine duty, a large number of people took advantage of these conflicts by exploiting believers and accumulating wealth brought from the East. In spite of their religious character, the Crusades were also meant to strengthen political and economic conditions in Europe by securing its place and influence in the Middle East.

There are mixed ideas concerning the concept of the Crusades. People in the Middle Ages regarded such conflicts as "a holy war for a holy cause directed by the hand of Providence through the offices of the Holy Pontiff — the Vicar of God on earth" (Atiya 1962, 17). Other interpretations relate the Crusades to the Western World's desire for riches presumably located in the Middle East. To a certain degree, people in the West were interested in organizing bands that would travel East for several centuries before the first Crusade actually took place. Conditions in some of Europe's most powerful countries were becoming critical as populations grew and as individuals had both the means and the motives needed to embark on a journey that would resemble the later campaigns of the Imperialist era (Atiya 1962, 18).

The fact that the Crusades were seen from different perspectives by Western Christians, Eastern Christians, and Muslims is reflected in present-day thinking expressed in Western Europe, in Orthodox European territories, and in the Middle East, respectively. As David Nicolle observes, "The historical reality of the Crusades was also more complex than the simplistic views that are still used by political, religious, and cultural leaders in both East and West" (Nicolle 2001, 7). This complexity has allowed divergences between Middle Easterners and Westerners to persist into the contemporary era, as people continue to have difficulty living together peacefully given their turbulent shared past.

Origins and Early Tensions Between Christianity and Islam

Christianity and European influences were rapidly spreading in the Middle East during the early first millennium. However, Turkish Muslims also experienced notable progress at the time and were beginning to feel that they should exercise authority over the region, as they were well aware of their numerical and political superiority over Christians. As a result, Westerners intervened by devising a system of fighting that would provide individuals who fought in the name of Christianity with indulgences — a call to arms that also appealed to those who wanted to acquire Eastern riches.

The Crusades should generally be understood as a Western Christian offensive launched in response to a growing Islamic influence in the Middle East. Even though tensions were high before these conflicts actually began, the Byzantine Empire and its Muslim neighbors managed to live in relatively peaceful conditions during the early eleventh century. These divergences grew into full-scale conflicts with the arrival of over-enthusiastic Christians from the West — individuals who are largely responsible for a war that lasted approximately two centuries.

In addition to serving as a tool meant to reduce Muslim influence in the Middle East, the Crusades also succeeded in increasing Christian influence across Europe. Christianity came to be more and more appreciated among Europeans as they acknowledged the efforts made to protect its people and its ideologies.

Pope Urban II and the Call to the First Crusade

One of the first significant Crusades was assembled in 1095 at Clermont, where a church council led by Pope Urban II preached a sermon that "called on Frankish knights to vow to march to the East with the twin aims of freeing Christians from the yoke of Islamic rule and liberating the tomb of Christ, the Holy Sepulchre in Jerusalem, from Muslim control" (Riley-Smith 1999, 1). The Pope was familiar with the thinking of the individuals to whom he preached because he came from the same social class as those he sought to influence. He therefore knew what these people wanted, what they believed in, and what they were determined to fight for.

Pope Urban II had been interested in assisting the Byzantine Empire for several years prior to 1095, but he knew he needed to reach people's hearts at a moment when they would identify with the cause and when most would be unhesitant about getting actively involved in fighting for Christianity. His sermon was likely prepared long before he presented it at Clermont, given the importance he must have attached to such a speech. The Pope subsequently organized a series of visits across France with the intention of gathering as many followers as possible.

The propositions that Pope Urban II raised in 1095 can seem downright absurd to a contemporary audience, as he urged people to leave everything behind for the purpose of fighting infidels in the Holy Land. This was surely intended as an ideological war, even though it presented opportunists with a wide range of prospects. One reason he drew attention to the riches of the Middle East was his firsthand knowledge of economic conditions in France. Similarly, he emphasized the possibility of earning indulgences through fighting in the Crusades because he recognized that religion had experienced considerable progress in recent decades and that Christians were growing increasingly anxious about their sins. Urban II was, in effect, experienced in motivating people by appealing directly to their needs and anxieties.

The fact that the First Crusade attracted tens of thousands of individuals from a variety of social backgrounds — including members of the upper classes — stands as proof of the Pope's considerable oratorical ability. The presence of wealthy individuals in the First Crusade indicates that both religion and wealth were among the principal concerns of society in the late eleventh century. Individuals who fought in later Crusades even seemed to believe that Urban II's 1095 call was overdue, and that Christians should have recognized the need to act against Muslims long before his decision to intervene.

The First Crusade: Religion, Opportunity, and Conquest

Approximately one year after Urban's first sermon, the first crusaders began organizing a general campaign that became known as the First Crusade. This Crusade lasted from 1096 to 1102 and culminated in the capture of Jerusalem on July 15, 1099 — "an achievement made all the greater for contemporaries by the catastrophic defeat by the Turks in Asia Minor two years later of the armies of a third wave of crusaders" (Riley-Smith 1999, 2).

Modern historians see the First Crusade as arising for reasons beyond religion alone. Christians controlled most of Europe and were struggling with difficult economic conditions. Pope Urban II raised awareness of the Middle East by portraying Palestine as a land flowing with milk and honey. Many who traveled east alongside the Crusaders were not motivated solely by faith; numerous individuals simply wanted to settle in the East because they were unable to cope with living conditions in Europe. These people were attracted by the prospect of a land where basic needs were presumably available to everyone, and they joined the Crusades in the hope of improving their circumstances (Atiya 1962, 19). As one scholar summarizes, "The First Crusade has come to exemplify the religious fervour that enveloped Christendom, the policies of an aggressive Papacy, and the newly spawned concept of Holy War — which was dramatically exploited by the Church in its offer of the (plenary) Indulgence" (James 2005).

Jerusalem was relatively isolated and the Muslims had limited power over the city, making it easier for the Crusaders to capture it. This conquest also represented a strategic defeat of the Muslims, as Jerusalem was a location that both sides considered important to the overall course of the conflict. Even though Crusaders were generally motivated by their religious beliefs, it was difficult for these people to think of war as anything other than a conflict fought for the possession of land and the rule of people. Moreover, Crusaders had a limited understanding of their enemies, struggling to determine whether they should classify them as barbarians or simply as pagans. Despite the varied motivations of many participants, most individuals who took part in the First Crusade were driven by their "deep ideological hatred of Islam" (France 1999, 188), even if they were unable to fully articulate their role in the broader conflict.

While people were less aware of the general purpose of the First Crusade when it occurred, understanding gradually evolved as Christians across Europe began to acknowledge the role they would play in the fight against Muslims and the effects their participation would have on both the West and the East. It was not necessarily the case that European Christians benefited materially from the Crusades; they also absorbed a great deal of knowledge that proved vital in Europe's later development. As Nicolle observes, "New technology, crops, patterns of trade, trade-goods and philosophical, medical, scientific and geographical knowledge all poured into a Western Europe eager to learn, exploit, dominate, and conquer" (Nicolle 2001, 7).

Most crusaders were likely unable to grasp the full complexity of fighting on behalf of God. Even if their mission could be justified, most failed to comprehend it completely. It is problematic to go to war regardless of the motives, but it is even more troubling to fight for a cause that one conflates with personal well-being. Participating in a Crusade primarily meant engagement in an act of self-fulfillment — the crusader would receive an indulgence and might also acquire great riches plundered from Muslim communities.

Although the Crusades began as a fight for justice against those considered infidels who threatened everything Christianity represented, these conflicts ultimately became a prolonged bloodbath. Viewing these events from a contemporary perspective makes it possible to understand that the Crusades were essentially similar to any ideological warfare throughout history. However, one's background is critical in shaping how the Crusades are perceived. While many Christians feel they should express guilt for the behavior of their ancestors, many Muslims believe they were successful in defeating the Crusaders and are unlikely to accept apologies they consider irrational (Riley-Smith 2000, 20).

Works Cited

Atiya, Aziz S. Crusade, Commerce, and Culture. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press, 1962.

France, John. Western Warfare in the Age of the Crusades, 1000–1300. London: UCL Press, 1999. Accessed 30 January 2012.

Gonzalez, Justo L. The Story of Christianity: The Early Church to the Dawn of the Reformation. Harper & Row, 1984.

James, Douglas. "Christians and the First Crusade: Douglas James Explains Why So Many in the Christian West Answered Urban II's Call to Arms Following the Council of Clermont in 1095." History Review, no. 53 (2005).

Nicolle, David. The Crusades. Osprey Publishing, 2001.

Riley-Smith, Jonathan. "Rethinking the Crusades." First Things: A Monthly Journal of Religion and Public Life, March 2000, 20.

Riley-Smith, Jonathan, ed. The Oxford History of the Crusades. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1999. Accessed 30 January 2012.

Crusade Propaganda and Ideology: Model Sermons for the Preaching of the Cross. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press, 2000.