| CRISTO RAUL.ORG ' | 
|  | MEDIEVAL HISTORY LIBRARY DOOR |  | 
|  |  | 
| CHAPTER VIII. THE
          COUNCILS OF PIACENZA AND CLERMONT
            
           The crusade was first
          proclaimed by Urban II at the Council of Clermont on November 27, 1095, So we
          must believe, unless evidence of earlier publicity is found. Some have thought
          that the pope preached the crusade earlier in the same year at the council
          which he held at Piacenza, but if this was the case, what he said failed to
          produce any widespread popular response. To be sure, contemporary writers were
          not immediately impressed by the historical significance of his November
          speech, and, as Chalandon has indicated, neither
          Raymond of Aguilers nor the anonymous author of the Gesta Francorum mentions Clermont. But, although these
          early chroniclers were eager to get on with the story of the expedition in
          which they participated, others, who attended the council, were careful not to
          neglect it. Thus Robert the Monk, when he undertook to rewrite the Gesta soon after the turn of the century, complained that
          his source did not have its proper beginning at Clermont, The glorious success
          of the crusade brought fame to the council where it originated.
   At first Urban was regarded as
          the author of the movement that began at Clermont. Bernold, writing while the
          crusade was in progress, said “the lord pope was the chief author of this
          expedition”. Writing from Antioch in 1098, the leaders asked the pope to come
          over and finish the war “which is your very own”, But Urban had said that it
          was “God's work”, that “Christ was the leader” — and so plausible did such
          propaganda seem that the success of the movement was regarded as divinely
          assured. If it was “not human but divine”, as Ekkehard said, whoever started it
          was merely an agent of the Lord. A legend, which was given a long life by the
          popular historian of the crusades, William of Tyre, indicated that Peter the
          Hermit was the divine agent who was sent to persuade the pope to initiate the
          crusade, and it was believed that he carried a letter from heaven as his
          credential. Not until the last of the nineteenth century did history finally
          discredit this legend and restore credit to the great pope who was the author
          of the plan which he proposed at Clermont.
   But how much of the proposal
          was originated by Urban II? Although it seems to have taken contemporaries by
          surprise, the crusade was so quickly accepted that it is clear the public was
          ready for it. Quite simply the author of the Gesta says
          that the crusade came when “the time was at hand” for all to take up crosses
          and follow Christ. The modern way of putting it is that the crusade was
          preceded by a long trend of thought which conditioned minds to the idea of holy
          war. Urban had only to propose carrying the holy war to the eastern
          Mediterranean to show that such a proposal had an immediate appeal to the
          popular imagination. Nevertheless it must be recognized that the scheme which
          the pope devised to put this proposal into effect was original, not so much in
          the elements of which it was composed as in the synthesis of parts which were
          known and understood. The “time” for such attention to the practical problems
          of organization did not come until a human mind capable of such planning was
          ready to apply itself to the problem of how to raise large armies to serve the
          church. Unfortunately, the antecedents of this papal plan are not evident. There
          is no mention of the crusade in any source written before Clermont that is now
          in existence.
   His idea of carrying the holy
          war against the Moslems to the eastern end of the Mediterranean (but not any
          way of implementing the idea) seems to have come to Urban from his famous
          predecessor, Gregory VII, who had proposed an expeditionary force to aid the
          Byzantine Christians in their struggle with the Selchukid Turks. Inasmuch as Urban undertook to carry out Gregory's ideas, to be
          his pedisequus, as he put it,
          it may be assumed that he felt it to be his duty to put Gregory's proposal into
          effect. He did so with the same remarkable success that he had in advancing
          the  Gregorian reform program; waging a winning struggle with Henry
          IV; and, in general, restoring to the papacy the prestige which Gregory had
          lost.
   Just two years before Gregory
          became pope in 1073, the disastrous defeat of the Byzantine army at Manzikert
          had opened up all Anatolia to the raids of nomad Turks. In the meantime,
          Byzantine rule in southern Italy had been overthrown by the Normans, and the
          imperial forces were unable to deal with the Pechenegs in the Balkans. In this
          desperate situation, the young basileus, Michael VII, disregarded the
          controversial separation of Greek and Latin churches which followed the
          so-called schism of 1054 and made an appeal to the newly chosen pope for aid.
          When an imperial embassy with a friendly letter to Gregory had been well
          received, Dominic, patriarch of Grado (who, as a Venetian, may have had
          contacts at Constantinople), was chosen to carry a favorable reply back to
          Michael. Gregory, of course, hoped to bring about a reunion of the churches
          under the recognized dominance of Rome.
   Although it is not known that
          anything was said about military aid from the west in this diplomatic exchange
          of good will, Gregory soon after proposed that some of the fideles of St. Peter should go to the help of
          the Greeks. On February 2, 1074, the pope wrote to William, count of Burgundy,
          asking him to fulfill the vow that he had taken to defend the possessions of St
          Peter, and to notify Raymond, count of St. Gilles, Amadeo, count of Savoy, and
          other fideles of St. Peter to join
          the countess Beatrice and her husband, Godfrey of Lorraine, in an expedition to
          pacify the Normans in southern Italy by a show of force, and then cross over to
          Constantinople, where the Christians “are urging us eagerly to reach out our
          hands to them in succor”. On March 1, the pope called for recruits because he
          had learned that the pagans “have been pressing hard upon the Christian empire,
          have cruelly laid waste the country almost to the walls of Constantinople and
          slaughtered like sheep many thousand Christians”. But by September 10, Gregory
          seemed to think that the urgency had passed, for he wrote William VII, duke of
          Aquitaine and count of Poitou, “the report is that the Christians beyond seas
          have, by God’s help, driven back the fierce assault of the pagans, and we are
          waiting for the counsel of divine providence as to our future course”.
   Three months later, the pope
          was no longer in doubt when he wrote to young Henry IV, king of Germany; “I
          call to your attention that the Christians beyond the sea, a great part of whom
          are being destroyed by the heathen with unheard-of slaughter and are daily
          being slain like so many sheep, have humbly sent to beg me to succor these our
          brethren in whatever ways I can, that the religion of Christ may not utterly
          perish in our time — which God forbid”.
   With exaggerated optimism,
          Gregory told the young king that 50,000 men were prepared to go “if they can
          have me for their leader”, and suggested that they might “push forward even to
          the sepulcher of the Lord”. Naively, he even asked Henry to protect the Roman
          church during his absence. December 16, the pope followed with a general call
          to fideles beyond the Alps, and at
          the same time wrote to the countess Matilda that he hoped she would accompany
          the empress Agnes, who was expected to go. But January 22, 1075, when he wrote
          to his former abbot, Hugh of Cluny, he made no mention of any expedition to aid
          Greek Christians, although he complained that they were “falling away from the
          Catholic faith”.
   When Gregory became involved
          in the desperate conflict with the western emperor, he had to give up his hopes
          of winning friends at Constantinople, and instead of helping the Greeks to
          repel Turkish invaders, the pope gave his blessing to an invasion of the empire
          by Normans, Although he had tried to check Norman aggression in southern Italy
          during the early years of his pontificate, as the letter to the count of
          Burgundy indicates, he had to reverse his policy when hard pressed by Henry IV.
          In 1080, by concessions, he induced Robert Guiscard to become his ally, and
          when the Normans prepared to invade the Balkan peninsula, Gregory gave his
          support to this buccaneering enterprise. He had excommunicated Nicephorus III
          Botaniates, who had deposed Michael in 1078, and Guiscard asserted that he
          intended to restore Michael, whose son had been betrothed to the Norman's
          daughter, to the throne. Although it was known that the real Michael was living
          in a monastery, Guiscard exhibited a Greek monk who pretended to be the deposed
          emperor. Gregory seems to have accepted this fraud, and on July 24, 1080, he
          wrote to the bishops in Apulia and Calabria that all fideles of
          St. Peter should aid Michael, “unjustly overthrown” and that all fighting men
          who went overseas with the emperor and Robert should be faithful to them, which
          obviously referred to the pretender. When Guiscard’s undertaking seemed
          successful, the pope congratulated him, while trying to impress him with the
          danger that threatened the Roman church, for Henry IV, subsidized by Byzantine
          gold, was closing in on the city of St. Peter. Alexius Comnenus, who became
          emperor in 1081 by deposing Nicephorus III, at first had asked the pope to restrain
          the Normans, but when it became clear that Gregory was a “Norman pope”, he gave
          his support to Henry IV. Thus, at Constantinople, the pope, who had once wished
          to send military aid to the empire, came to be regarded as a hated enemy.
   Thus, all Gregory’s hopes of
          ending the schism between east and west were destroyed when political necessity
          drove him into the Norman alliance. However, in 1085 the death of both Guiscard
          and his papal ally relieved the tension, and better understanding between east
          and west seemed possible. But, although the abbot of Monte Cassino, who became
          Victor III, had been in friendly correspondence with Alexius, he was too
          dependent on Norman support to do much to restore papal prestige. Not until the
          Frenchman, Odo of Lagery, became pope on March 12,
          1088, did the church have a leader capable of saving the papacy from the crisis
          into which Gregory VII had precipitated it.
   Odo, who took the name of
          Urban II, had been a pupil of Bruno, the founder of Chartreuse, at Rheims,
          where he became canon and archdeacon. Later he became a monk and prior of
          Cluny, and it was on abbot Hugh's recommendation that he entered the service of
          Gregory VII, who made him cardinal-bishop of Ostia, and sent him on the
          difficult mission of being papal legate in Germany, where he was when Gregory
          died. Odo supported Victor III, whom other reformers opposed because he was not
          a strong supporter of Gregory's reform program, and it is said that Victor
          nominated Odo as his successor. Certainly no one was better qualified to
          restore the prestige of the papacy, which had sunk so low that Bernold relates
          that only five German bishops recognized the new pope. Although the countess
          Matilda of Tuscany loyally supported the rightful pope, much of northern and
          central Italy was dominated by the partisans of Clement III, the anti-pope,
          while the Romans, who had seen their city looted by the followers of Gregory's
          Norman ally, favored the schismatics, “Guibert [Clement III], however, urged on
          by the support of the aforesaid emperor and by the instigation of the Roman
          citizens, for some time kept Urban a stranger to the church of St, Peter”. But,
          according to Bernold, Urban would not use force to obtain possession of the
          city and, except for a few months when Clement had to leave, his visits to Rome
          were clandestine and brief. During most of the first five years that he was
          pope, he found it necessary to wander about in Apulia and Calabria, where he
          was assured of Norman protection. It is not surprising, therefore, that a few
          days after being consecrated, he set out to find count Roger, Guiscard’s
          brother, most influential of the Norman chiefs, who was then completing the
          conquest of Sicily. There the pope held a conference with him at Troina.
   One topic that the pope
          brought up for consideration was the advisability of reopening diplomatic
          relations with Constantinople. Geoffrey Malaterra,
          historian of the Italian Normans, says that the pope asked the count's advice
          about accepting an invitation to a church council at Constantinople for
          consideration of the differences between the two churches. Roger urged acceptance
          but, as Malaterra tells the story, Urban was
          prevented from participating in such a meeting by the hostility of the
          anti-pope and his partisans at Rome. It seems clear, however, from evidence
          given by Walter Holtzmann that what Urban wanted to
          know was whether the count had any intention of renewing the war on Alexius,
          which had undone the efforts of Gregory VII to maintain close relations with
          the eastern church. When the pope was able to assure the basileus that there
          would be no further Norman aggression, he, not the basileus as Malaterra thought, made a move to open negotiations. He
          asked that his name be put on the diptychs at Constantinople inasmuch as it was
          not excluded by any synodal acts. Alexius, finding that this was true, induced
          a synod to grant the request, but on condition that Urban send his profession
          of faith in the customary systatic letter, and
          participate in person, or through representatives, in a council to be held at
          Constantinople eighteen months later for the purpose of settling the
          controversial issues that divided the churches. The patriarch also assured the
          pope, who had complained that Latins were not allowed to worship in their own
          fashion in the empire, that they had the same freedom as Greeks in the
          territories under Norman rule. Urban also made another friendly move at this
          time, September 1089, by removing from Alexius the excommunication which
          Gregory had imposed on Nicephorus III.
   There is no evidence to show
          that Urban ever sent a profession of faith, and he did not accept the
          invitation to discuss the union of the churches. No doubt he knew that the
          Greeks would not accept the supremacy of Rome, which the reform movement in the
          west was striving to establish. On other points of difference, the Greeks may
          have been more conciliatory, but here also the Gregorian program offered little
          hope of compromise. Urban, usually the tactful diplomat, seems to have been
          much the partisan at Bari in 1098. When the discussion held there with Greek
          churchmen of southern Italy did not go to his liking, he called upon Anselm of
          Canterbury to defend the Latin cause, and when this champion seemed to
          overwhelm the Greeks by his dialectic, Urban exulted. Such is the report of
          Eadmer, the biographer of Anselm.
   There is reason to assume that
          Urban did not wish to enter into negotiations about ecclesiastical matters in
          1089, because controversy might have marred the friendly relations that he had
          established with the Byzantine emperor. He could be well satisfied with the
          significant diplomatic victory that he had won, for he had brought about a
          reversal of Greek policy in the west. As long as the Normans were a serious
          menace to the empire, it had been imperial policy to cause trouble for them in
          Italy by subsiding Henry IV. Furthermore, as long as this alliance lasted, the
          anti-pope, Clement III, had hoped to obtain recognition at Constantinople.
          Urban had changed all this by being able to assure Alexius that the Normans
          were no longer to be feared. By obtaining the favor of the eastern emperor, the
          pope had gained an important advantage over his enemies in Italy.
   It has been asserted that
          Alexius was glad to have cordial relations with the pope because he hoped to
          get military help from the west. Later, of course, the pope did recruit large
          armies, but what military aid did the emperor hope to obtain from a pope who
          was virtually an exile in Norman Italy? It was not until later, when papal
          prestige had risen, that there was much possibility of obtaining such help.
          “The fact that Alexius had frequently asked for aid before the Council of
          Piacenza is universally admitted”. But mercenaries, not armies going forth to
          holy war, was the kind of military aid the basileus wanted. Anna Comnena says that her father did all that he could to
          collect a mercenary army by letters, and even indicates that he awaited a
          mercenary army from Rome about 1091. It is more plausible to assume that Anna’s
          statement refers to the military contingent promised to Alexius by the count of
          Flanders.
   Robert the Frisian, count of
          Flanders, went on a pilgrimage to Jerusalem about 1087 to 1090 or 1091. On his
          return trip he was received with great honor by Alexius, who apparently asked
          him to send mercenaries. Robert, binding himself by the sort of oath that Anna
          thought was customary among the Latins, pledged himself to send five hundred
          mounted warriors when he returned to Flanders. The count kept his word, and the
          contingent reached Alexius with a gift of one hundred and fifty excellent
          horses, and the emperor was able to purchase all other horses which were not
          needed by these western horsemen. It may be that the emperor wrote to the count
          of Flanders at this time, and that his letter became the basis for the
          famous epistula spuria which
          was used later for propaganda. Ekkehard, without saying when, tells us that the
          emperor wrote “not a few” letters to the pope asking aid for the defense of the
          eastern churches. Returning pilgrims, who may have been indoctrinated by
          Byzantine propaganda as well as disturbed by their own experiences, added their
          testimony to the requests made at higher levels. The pope, we may feel sure,
          was well informed about the situation in the east. Nevertheless, there is no
          evidence to show that he made any effort to send help to the emperor before the
          Council of Piacenza in 1095.
   In the meantime, as
          contemporary sources do make clear, Urban was very busy trying to combat the
          “schismatics”, and to build up papal prestige in the west. At one stage, his
          position seemed so desperate that his staunchest supporter, the countess
          Matilda, actually tried to negotiate a compromise peace with the triumphant
          German emperor, and, although more than forty years old, she married
          seventeen-year-old Welf (V) of Bavaria in order to win him over to the papal
          cause. Urban endeavored to secure the support of prominent prelates by relaxing
          the severity of the reform program in special instances, and in 1093 his
          diplomacy was successful in inducing Conrad, Henry's heir, to rebel against his
          father. By this time, as the emperor was losing support in Italy, Urban was
          able to enter Rome, where early in 1094 he secured possession of the Lateran,
          which the abbot of Vendome obtained by bribing a partisan of the anti-pope to
          surrender it. Later in 1094, Urban moved north, visiting Pisa, Pistoia, and
          Florence. “Now that he had prevailed nearly everywhere”, says Bernold, he
          issued a call for a council to meet at Piacenza early the next year, 2among the
          schismatics themselves and against them, to which he summoned bishops from
          Italy, Burgundy, France, Allemania, Bavaria, and
          other countries”. The council was in session the first week in March 1095, and
          its agenda consisted of ecclesiastical matters, chiefly of measures for the
          furtherance of the Gregorian reform program, and condemnation of the
          “schismatics”. The presence at Piacenza of important lay personages shows how
          greatly the prestige of the pope had increased, Praxeda,
          the discarded wife of Henry IV, was there to make scandalous accusations
          against her royal husband. King Philip of France sent representatives to argue
          against his excommunication for adultery which had been imposed at the Council
          of Autun the preceding year, while king Peter of Aragon became the vassal of
          the papacy and agreed to pay an annual tribute. Lastly, and most impressive of
          all, no doubt, was the embassy from Constantinople with a request from the
          emperor that the pope urge western fighting men to aid in the defense of the
          eastern church, which the pagans had almost destroyed in the regions which they
          had occupied, extending almost to the walls of Constantinople. When he
          preached outside the city in the open fields to a crowd too large for any
          church, the pope incited many to give such help, and urged those who intended
          to go to take oath that they would give faithful aid to the emperor to the best
          of their ability. It has often been suggested that this means that the pope
          preached the crusade at Piacenza, but all that Bernold says is that Urban urged
          warriors to go to aid Alexius, which was what Gregory had proposed earlier. It
          is possible, of course, that the pope had in mind much of what he proposed a
          few months later at Clermont, for it does not seem probable that he thought out
          all the ideas in his plan for the crusade in the short time between Piacenza
          and Clermont, but what Bernold reports has little or no resemblance to the
          later proposal,.
   Urban stayed at Piacenza for a
          month before moving on to Cremona, where Conrad, son of Henry IV, became a
          vassal of the papacy. After visiting other Lombard cities, Vercelli, Milan,
          Como, he arrived at Asti about June 27. A month later the papal party was at
          Valence, and, although the usually reliable Bernold says that the trip was made
          by sea, it seems more likely that Fulcher of Chartres, who went from France to
          Italy with the crusaders the next year, was right in reporting that the pope
          crossed the mountains. Urban was glad to revisit Cluny, where he had been a
          monk. When he dedicated the altar of the abbatial church in the famous
          monastery, he announced that his main reason for coming to France was to do
          honor to Cluny, and the charters and confirmations to Cluniac houses that mark
          his trail throughout southern France indicate that his desire to favor Cluny
          was not mere rhetoric. There was, in fact, much ecclesiastical business to
          justify the journey to France, where the condition of the church and papal
          influence had greatly deteriorated during the preceding centuries of disorder,
          and the Gregorian reform program and the struggle over investiture had added to
          ecclesiastical confusion. Consequently, there were many jurisdictional disputes
          that papal legates had not been able to settle but which might be adjusted by
          the personal diplomacy of Urban himself. Furthermore, the pope, as he became
          more influential, became more and more firm in urging the clergy to conform to
          the ecclesiastical reform. Urban desired to have the churchmen of France
          discuss and legislate in councils such as the one held at Piacenza, The
          business transacted is indicated by the acts of the papal chancery and local
          charters by which the itinerary has been traced. There is no reason to doubt
          Urban’s statement that he came to Gaul on ecclesiastical business.
   But Urban also said that he
          came to France with the intention of appealing for aid to the eastern
          Christians. The pope gave this explanation for his journey in his letter to the
          Flemings, which was written soon after the Council of Clermont. Fulcher,
          writing after the crusade, having recalled all the troubles of both clergy and laity
          that the pope wished to correct, goes on to say: “When he heard, too, that
          interior parts of Romania were held oppressed by the Turks, and that Christians
          were subjected to destructive and savage attacks, he was moved by compassionate
          pity; and prompted by the love of God, he descended the Alps and came into
          Gaul; in Auvergne he summoned a council to come together from all sides in a
          city called Clermont”. But there is no way for us to know how much the desire
          to send aid to eastern Christians may have influenced Urban to cross the
          mountains. Neither can it be determined when he prepared a plan for a crusade,
          so different from what he had preached at Piacenza. It can only be suggested
          that he probably found encouragement to mature his plans in southern France,
          where holy war was well understood.
   Feudal France, at this time,
          had a considerable surplus of fighting material. Young men, trained to the
          profession of arms and knowing no other, who were without prospect of
          inheriting feudal holdings, turned to robbery at home or adventure abroad. The
          church, especially in southern France, had endeavored to control feudal anarchy
          by creating the institutions known as the Peace of God and the Truce of God.
          But the mass meetings, oaths, and other means used in this eleventh-century
          peace movement were not enough to check private warfare and brigandage, and it
          was fortunate for French society that many young warriors went abroad to fight
          for booty or lands in England, Spain, and southern Italy and Sicily. That France,
          then, was an excellent recruiting ground for a crusade, we may assume Urban
          understood. But, if we can believe the writers who reported his speech later,
          he was also interested in bringing peace within Christendom by siphoning off
          many of the troublemakers in a foreign war. Many French warriors had
          participated in the reconquest in Spain, and Cluny had done much to give this
          struggle the character of a holy war. As the black monks had established their
          colonies in the territories recovered from the Moslems, they were much
          interested in extending their holdings, and by the close of the eleventh
          century, Cluny was so well established in the Christian part of the peninsula
          that almost every prelate of importance there had been taken from one of her
          houses. In her monasteries along the “French road” that went to Compostela, the
          pilgrims heard the legends, containing much propaganda for holy war, which
          provided the material for the epic poems. The monks prayed for those who went
          forth to do battle for the faith, and, in gratitude, the warriors gave a share
          of their plunder to the monasteries. At Cluny, and the Cluniac priories where
          he stopped, Urban, who was planning to send aid to Christians who were being
          attacked by Moslems in the east, found sympathetic listeners who were
          interested in the holy war in Spain.
   The small Christian kingdoms
          in northern Spain had received much aid from France in the reconquest, and
          Spanish kings had become closely connected with the noble families of southern
          France. Thus Raymond of St. Gilles, count of Toulouse, was the half-brother of
          two counts of Barcelona, and his third wife was the daughter of the king of
          Castile, Alfonso VI. This Spanish ruler had first married a daughter of the
          duke of Aquitaine, and later a daughter of the duke of Burgundy. Peter I, king
          of Aragon, whose mother was a sister of the French lord, Ebles of Roucy, married another daughter of William VIII,
          duke of Aquitaine and count of Poitou, who headed the French expedition that
          captured Barbastro in 1064, a deed which was celebrated in a chanson de geste. In 1073, Ebles of Roucy went to Spain with an army that Suger said
          was fit for a king.
   The disastrous defeat of
          Alfonso at Zallaca, in 1086, permitted the victorious Murabits (Almoravids) to advance northward again, and
          caused the Spanish Christians to send urgent appeals for help to friends and
          kinsmen beyond the Pyrenees. According to one report, Alfonso threatened to
          permit the enemy to pass through his territories into France if he did not
          receive aid. French lords, among them the duke of Burgundy, crossed into Spain
          about this time, but seem to have accomplished little in arresting the Moslem
          advance. As this had happened a few years before Urban came to France, it is
          evident that he found many who had recent first-hand knowledge of the holy war
          in Spain.
   Popes before Urban had been
          interested in the reconquest. Gregory VII had insisted that Spain was from
          ancient times subject to St. Peter in full sovereignty and “it belongs to no
          mortal, but solely to the Apostolic See”. In 1073, he announced that Ebles of Roucy had agreed that
          all conquered territory in Spain was to be held in fief of St. Peter, and he
          forbade anyone to take part in his undertaking unless this was understood.
   In his younger days, before he
          left France to serve Gregory VII, Urban, we may be sure, had learned much about
          the reconquest, especially when he was a Cluniac monk and prior. No doubt he
          had observed French interest in this peninsular war, and could have known about
          the expedition of Ebles of Roucy at first hand. Soon after becoming pope, while the papacy was in rather
          desperate straits. Urban revealed his interest in the holy war in Spain. In
          1089, he assured all who would participate in the rebuilding of the frontier
          post of Tarragona that by so doing they would secure the same help toward
          salvation as from a pilgrimage to Jerusalem or other holy places.
   The pope left Italy
          accompanied by an entourage of distinguished prelates. In addition to four
          cardinals, there were two archbishops (one of whom, Daimbert of Pisa, was to become patriarch of Jerusalem), several bishops, and John of
          Gaeta, the famous papal chancellor. Other ecclesiastical dignitaries joined
          along the way, to assist in affairs that concerned their own jurisdiction as well
          as to enjoy the opportunity of being with the pope and his influential
          associates. The party found lodging and entertainment in wealthy monasteries,
          where Urban had conferences with influential persons, ecclesiastical and lay,
          from the regions about. One is naturally inclined to assume that the pope was
          eager to sound out public opinion in regard to interest in the sufferings of
          the eastern Christians before he undertook to recruit important lay leaders for
          the expedition that he was planning to organize. Bat the sources tell only of
          ecclesiastical business, and only one bit of evidence gives a clue to any such
          effort to interest anyone in the crusade. Baldric of Dol says that after the
          pope had delivered his famous oration at Clermont, envoys from Raymond, count
          of Toulouse, appeared and announced that their lord had taken the cross. If
          this is a fact, it is clear that Raymond knew what the pope intended to do at
          Clermont, and, no doubt, had been solicited by Urban. If the count had been
          enlisted, it is very probable that others had been approached, and possibly
          recruited. Such a shrewd politician as Urban would not have ventured to launch
          his undertaking without having assurances of adequate human support, even
          though he believed it all to be “God’s work”.
   The pope was at Le Puy when he
          issued his call for the council at Clermont. Here he had opportunity to confer
          with the bishop, Adhémar of Monteil,
          who came from a noble Valentinois family. A good
          horseman, trained in the use of arms, he had defended his church from
          neighboring lords with vigor, and, according to one rumor, he had been on a
          pilgrimage to Jerusalem. Inasmuch as Urban was to make Adhémar his papal legate for the crusade some three months later, it may be assumed
          that the matter had been under discussion at Le Puy. Fliche,
          without any evidence, surmises that Adhémar proposed
          that the pope go to consult with the count of St. Gilles. At any rate, after a
          stop at the monastery of Chaise-Dieu, August 18, which seems to have been
          frequently visited by Raymond, the papal party moved rather rapidly southward
          and arrived at St. Gilles about the end of August.
   Fliche thinks it is probable that Raymond was in the vicinity of St. Gilles at
          the time of Urban’s weeklong stay at this famous monastery. In June he had
          attended the marriage of his son, Bertram, to a daughter of Odo, duke of
          Burgundy. Having recently inherited the county of Toulouse and other family
          holdings on the death of his brother, Raymond had become the greatest lord in
          southern France, as he was count of Rodez, Nimes,
          Narbonne, and Toulouse, as well as marquis of Provence. Although he had been
          excommunicated for a consanguineous marriage, and had supported simoniacal
          prelates, he had been suggested for an expedition overseas as one of the fideles of St. Peter by Gregory VII in his
          letter to the count of Burgundy, and probably the reforming papacy had found
          him as cooperative as any of the great lords of the time. He had formed
          matrimonial alliances with two rulers who were at war with the Moslems; his
          second wife was a daughter of count Roger of Sicily, and his third, who
          accompanied him on the crusade, was a daughter of king Alfonso VI of Castile.
          It has been suggested that Raymond had the very natural ambition to be chosen
          leader of the crusade, but there is no proof to indicate that the pope ever
          entertained this idea. Certainly, if the pope had desired a lay leader, he
          would have considered the count, who, as far as we know, may be regarded as the
          first crusader.
   It has also been intimated,
          again by Fliche, that Urban may have hoped to enlist
          the support of Odo, duke of Burgundy, who had fought in Spain, although the
          prospect that Philip I, king of France, might be induced to join the expedition
          could not have been seriously entertained as Philip seemed to be so enamored of Bertrada of Montfort, wife of Fulk Rechin, count of Anjou, that he was prepared to defy all
          ecclesiastical discipline. At the Council of Autun, in 1094, where Hugh of Die,
          archbishop of Lyons and papal legate, presided, the sentence of excommunication
          had been imposed on the king, who had appealed his case to the pope at
          Piacenza. Urban had reserved decision until he should be in France, hoping to
          induce the king to mend his ways. No doubt this was the matter discussed at a
          meeting between Philip and Hugh at Mozac, which is
          near Clermont, not long before the council met. The duke of Burgundy was
          present at this conference, and it is the guess of Fliche that the crusade was discussed and that Odo was so loyal to his suzerain that
          he would not support the pope's plans unless the king's adultery was condoned,
          If so, it is a most unusual example of loyalty to a king when the great lords
          of France had so little respect for Capetian weakness.
   After a leisurely journey up
          the Rhone valley, with stops for dedications, consecrations, and ecclesiastical
          affairs, the party reached Cluny about October 18, and remained at the famous
          monastery, where Urban had once been a monk, until the end of the month. It has
          been said that Cluny, which had promoted pilgrimages to Jerusalem as well as to
          Compostela, and had encouraged holy war in Spain, contributed much to the
          initiation of the crusade. But surely the pope had the very mature plan, which
          he presented at Clermont a month later, well prepared by this time. No doubt he
          asked his former abbot, Hugh, for advice, because he certainly wished to have
          the support of Cluny, but there is no evidence to show that Hugh had anything
          to do with initiating the plan that Urban was to propose. But the abbot did
          accompany the pope on his long journey through southern France, and may have
          done much to arrange the itinerary so that the papal party would be entertained
          at Cluniac houses, and the pope rewarded such hospitality by favors in the form
          of grants of privileges which often included exemption from secular control.
   By November 14, the party had
          reached Clermont, and the pope opened the council on the 18th. The
          responsibility of arranging for the entertainment of the delegates in his city
          seems to have been too much of a strain on bishop Durand, who died that night.
          The estimates of how many churchmen were there vary from one hundred and ninety
          to four hundred and three. Fulcher of Chartres and Guibert of Nogent put the figures at three hundred and ten and four
          hundred bishops and abbots, but the bull dealing with the primacy of Lyons, a
          controversial affair on which some may not have cared to be counted, was signed
          by twelve archbishops, eighty bishops, and ninety abbots. This, Chalandon thinks, may be regarded as a sort of official
          roll call of the members. In his letter to the faithful of Bologna, Urban made
          a much more extravagant claim, when he said that the plenary indulgence decreed
          at Clermont had been endorsed by nearly all the archbishops and bishops of
          Gaul.
   It was southern France, as
          Crozet has shown, that was best represented in the council; the Burgundies,
          Anjou, Poitou, Aquitaine, and Languedoc sent large delegations. On the other
          hand, there were only two bishops from the Capetian sphere of influence,
          although we have Urban’s statement that king Philip did not prevent others from
          going. William II of England did forbid his clergy to go, and only three
          bishops and one abbot represented Normandy, although it is not reported that
          duke Robert interfered in the matter. A few came from regions farther north,
          including the bishops of Toul and Metzt while an
          archbishop, two bishops, and an abbot came from Spain. The hardships and
          dangers of travel and infirmity may have prevented some prelates from attending,
          and a few sent excuses. Lambert, bishop of Arras, was kidnapped near Provins by a robber lord named Guarnier Trainel, and the pope had to threaten to
          excommunicate the offender in order to get Lambert released.
   Although the Council of
          Clermont became famous for initiating the crusade, it devoted so much of its
          time and energy to ecclesiastical business that, at first, contemporaries seem
          to have regarded it as not very different from Piacenza, or the synods at Tours
          and Nimes which came after. There were various controversial issues, some of
          long standing, that came up for decision. Thus, the archbishop of Sens, who
          took the side of the king in his efforts to keep his mistress without being
          excommunicated, would not recognize the primacy of Hugh of Die, archbishop of
          Lyons, and was suspended. But as the count of Anjou had made formal complaint
          about his wife's being, as everyone knew, the royal mistress, and as Philip
          would not promise to give her up. Urban could no longer find pretext to postpone
          action, and excommunicated the guilty pair. Nevertheless, Hugh, the king’s
          brother, did take the cross and lead a contingent on the crusade.
   The legislation passed by the
          council consisted chiefly of reform measures passed by earlier councils, with
          further definition and provision for better regulation. Only two canons can be
          regarded as having any bearing on the crusade. The first canon, which
          proclaimed the Truce of God, might be regarded as papal confirmation of the
          peace movement, which up to this time had been a matter of regional action,
          but, although he believed that the crusade would promote peace in the west, the
          pope must have realized that peace at home might make men more willing to
          enlist in an expedition which would take them far away for a long period. The
          second canon was obviously intended to stimulate recruiting, inasmuch as it
          promised plenary indulgence to all who would go to liberate the church of God
          in Jerusalem. If they were animated by devotion and not by the desire for fame
          or money, the journey (iter) would take the
          place of all penance.
   On November 27, when the
          ecclesiastical business of the council had been completed. Urban went outside
          the city to address an audience which was too large for any church. It is
          understandable that the prospect of listening to a pope and seeing so many high
          prelates had drawn many people from the neighboring region. In a letter from
          the archbishop of Rheims to Lambert, bishop of Arras, in which the papal
          summons to the council was transmitted, it was suggested that the bishop bring
          Baldwin, count of Mons, with him, and Urban wrote to the Flemings shortly after
          the council that he had urged the princes of Gaul and their followers to
          liberate the eastern Christians. From these slender bits of evidence it might
          seem that Urban made some effort to have lay lords in his audience, but later
          writers have given greatly exaggerated estimates of such attendance. Passing
          over Ekkehard’s one hundred thousand (for which a loudspeaker would seem
          necessary), we have Baldric reporting “innumerable powerful and distinguished
          laymen, proud of their knighthood ... from many regions”, Robert mentions
          bishops and lords from France and Germany, but qualifies his statement by
          adding that no lay lord qualified to be chosen leader, was there. Chalandon thinks that the failure of both Raymond of Aguilers and the author of the Gesta to
          mention Clermont indicates that this council did not seem very different from
          any of the others that Urban was holding to promote church reforms. Such vague
          references do not tell us how many of the “great multitude” that departed in
          1096 may have been the first fruits of the papal oratory. But, after all, the
          number of immediate recruits was not significant if many could be enlisted
          later, and the assembly at Clermont provided a favorable opportunity for the
          pope to give publicity to his plan. It was not to laymen but to ecclesiastics
          that Urban entrusted the task of promoting the enterprise, and immediately
          after the main address, or possibly the next day, we are told that he urged the
          bishops to proclaim the crusade in their churches, “with their whole souls and
          vigorously to preach the way to Jerusalem”. The crusade had such popular appeal
          that Urban would have conferred fame on any place where he decided to announce
          it.
   The idea caught popular
          imagination and the undertaking soon inspired an outburst of writing. The deeds
          done overseas seemed to provide the only contemporary material heroic enough
          for the chansons de geste, and the
          chronicles written about it have much of the epic spirit. Writing the history
          of the expedition was started by participants — the anonymous author of
          the Gesta Francorum (completed
          by 1101), Raymond of Aguilers, and Fulcher of
          Chartres. Of these, Fulcher is the only one who tells of what happened at
          Clermont, where it is generally assumed he was present. Three other writers,
          who were there, wrote accounts of the assembly soon after the turn of the
          century when the undertaking was known to be a glorious success, and all three,
          Baldric of Dot, Robert the Monk, and Guibert of Nogent,
          used the Gesta as their main source, endeavoring to
          rewrite the simple story of an eyewitness in the stilted Latin then regarded as
          the mark of good style. Nevertheless, all three added, what the Gesta had omitted, an account of the beginning at Clermont.
          Robert says that an abbot Bernard showed him a history (the Gesta)
          which displeased him because of its literary crudity, and because it did not
          have the beginning of the story at Clermont. He suggested that Robert, who had
          been there, should do it over, and put "a head on such acephalous
          material." The story of Clermont, as first told by these four writers, was
          to be used again and again by later chroniclers and modern historians.
   Although it is probable that
          all four were present, they relate what happened after the oration somewhat
          differently. Robert says that the emotional enthusiasm awakened by the pope
          culminated in a great shout of Deus lo volt (God wilts it),
          and Baldric recalled how many applauded by stamping on the ground, while others
          were moved to tears, and that discussion soon became animated. Then Adhémar came forward, knelt before the pope, took the vow
          to go to Jerusalem, and received the papal blessing, all of which seems so
          dramatic that it may have been prearranged. Urban then commanded all who were
          going, to obey Adhémar as their leader (dux).
          He also directed all who took the vow to go to sew cloth crosses on their
          shoulders as a symbol or badge of their profession to follow Christ, who had
          said, “If anyone wishes to come after Me, let him deny himself, take up his
          cross, and follow Me”. Fulcher says: “O how fitting it was, how pleasing to us
          all to see these crosses, beautiful, whether of silk, or woven gold, or of any
          kind of cloth, which these pilgrims, by order of pope Urban, sewed on the
          shoulders of their mantles or cassocks or tunics once they had made the vow to
          go”. To Baldric it seemed to be the mark of an honorable profession like the
          belt of knighthood. Thus Urban initiated a most effective advertising device,
          for everywhere people would want to know about these cruce signati. Finally, after the cardinal Gregory had
          led the crowd in the Confiteor, Urban dismissed his audience
          with his blessing. He had launched the crusade. What had he said to do that?
   All four chroniclers, Fulcher,
          Baldric, Robert, and Guibert, tell what they claim they had heard the pope say
          at Clermont, but, as they were trying to recall it all several years later, it
          is not surprising that their speeches differ. Chalandon suggests that what they wrote must be regarded as just rhetorical exercises;
          and medieval chroniclers, in the manner of classical historians before them,
          often made up imaginary speeches. Naturally Urban’s oration, which had
          initiated the glorious crusade, seemed famous enough to deserve the very best
          rhetorical treatment, and these writers were not inhibited by any appreciation
          of the importance of accurate reporting. In fairness to them, however, it must
          be noted that they frankly say that they are not giving the exact words of the
          pope. Furthermore, whenever they agree, as they frequently do, there is a fair
          probability that they are recalling ideas that Urban used in his speech.
   According to Munro, the pope
          seems to have made at least three speeches about the crusade. Fulcher first
          reports what must have been the pope’s inaugural address with which he opened
          the council. “When these and many other things were well disposed of, all those
          present, clergy and people alike, gave thanks to God and welcomed the advice of
          the lord pope Urban, assuring him, with a promise of fidelity, that these
          decrees of his would be kept”. He spoke of the evils in society, denounced
          simony, and urged the clergy to stay free from secular control. In short, this
          was an appeal for conciliar action on church reform, and it ended with
          insistence on the Truce of God. “Let him who has seized a bishop be considered
          excommunicate” must have sounded timely to prelates who probably knew that the
          bishop of Arras had just been kidnapped by a robber baron. Fulcher next goes on
          to the main speech, and under the heading, “the pope’s exhortation concerning
          the expedition to Jerusalem”, he says: “Since, 0 sons of God, you have promised
          the Lord to maintain peace more earnestly than heretofore in your midst, and
          faithfully to sustain the rights of Holy Church, there still remains for you,
          who are newly aroused by this divine correction, a very necessary work, in
          which you can show the strength of your good will by a further duty, God’s
          concern and your own. For you most hasten to carry aid to your brethren
          dwelling in the east, who need your help, which they have often asked”.
   The purpose of the address was
          to persuade fighting men to enlist in this holy war, and to induce the bishops
          and abbots of the council to promote the undertaking. Consequently, it seems
          clear, the pope used what he believed were convincing arguments, the sort of
          propaganda that came to be called excitatoria, and
          the ideas attributed to Urban were to be used over and over by popes and
          crusading preachers. But it must not be forgotten that the reports of the
          speech that we have were written several years later and were most certainly
          colored by what the chroniclers knew about the ideas and emotions which had
          actually inspired the great popular movement. It is possible to make some check
          on the speeches written by the chroniclers by comparing them with Urban’s
          letters to the people of Flanders and Bologna. But in the letters, as in the
          speech, there were the arguments, the propaganda by which the pope wqs trying to persuade people to take the cross, He was not
          trying to give historical causes.
   No doubt Urban began by
          appealing to the Franks, as Robert puts it, a “race chosen and loved by God”,
          whose epic hero, Charlemagne, had overthrown the kingdoms of the pagans.
          According to Fulcher, the pope asked these valorous Franks to go to the aid of
          the eastern Christians in the Byzantine empire because the Turks had “advanced
          as far into Roman territory as that part of the Mediterranean which is called
          the Arm of St. George”. Fulcher, of course, had verified this when he went on
          the crusade, but Robert, who stayed at home, also refers to the losses of the
          eastern empire. “The kingdom of the Greeks is dismembered by them [Turks] and
          deprived of territory so vast in extent that it cannot be traversed in a march
          of two months”. Although Guibert recalled only that the pope lamented the
          sufferings of the pilgrims, Baldric, who does not mention the Greeks, has the
          pope emphasize the religious unity that should exist among all Christians, who
          were all blood-brothers, “sons of the same Christ and the same church. It is
          charity to risk your lives for your brothers”. That Urban did plead for aid to
          eastern Christians, as reported by the chroniclers after the crusade, is made
          certain by the pope himself in his letter to the Flemings written soon after he
          spoke at Clermont.
   But much as Urban wished to
          aid fellow Christians in the east, he likewise intended that the crusade should
          benefit the people of the west by substituting foreign war for private warfare
          at home. As reported by the chroniclers, he was brutally frank in condemning
          internecine war and brigandage. “You, girt about with the belt of knighthood, are
          arrogant with great pride; you rage against your brothers and cut each other to
          pieces. You the oppressors of children, plunderers of widows; you, guilty of
          homicide, of sacrilege, robbers of another’s rights; you who await the pay of
          thieves for the shedding of Christian blood as vultures smell fetid corpses”.
          So Baldric reports. Robert’s version indicates a plea for peace: “Let,
          therefore, hatred depart from among you, let your quarrels end, let wars cease,
          and let all dissensions and controversies slumber”. The crusade, then, was
          intended to supplement the Truce of God which the council had already endorsed,
          and Fulcher says: “Let those who have been accustomed to make private warfare
          against the faithful, carry on to a successful conclusion a war against
          infidels, which ought to have been begun ere now. Let those who for a long time
          have been robbers now become soldiers of Christ. Let those who once fought
          brothers and relatives now fight against barbarians as they ought.”
   Was it possible to interest
          men who committed such crimes against their Christian neighbors in the
          sufferings of far-away eastern Christians? Did Urban expect to arouse western
          warriors and robbers-by such appeals to altruistic sentiments? Gregory VII, it would
          seem, had tried to arouse interest in the troubles of the Greeks by a similar
          appeal without results. But Urban went on to tell of the desecration of
          churches and holy places, perhaps knowing that injuries to sacred places or
          things seemed greater atrocities to his contemporaries than the sufferings of
          human beings. Many feudal lords had made the pilgrimage to Compostela; others
          had made the long, hard journey to Jerusalem; the count of Anjou, Fulk Nerra, had atoned for his many crimes by making the trip
          three times. Such men, who had slight regard for human life or human suffering,
          seem to have felt that it was a shame that the most sacred of all Christian
          shrines, the Holy Scpulcher, should be in the
          “defiling” hands of “infidels”.  Guibert’s report of Urban’s speech
          consists largely of a learned disquisition on the religious significance of
          Jerusalem, and Robert has the pope declaim that it “is the navel of the world;
          the land is fruitful above all other lands, like another paradise of delights”.
          In Baldric’s summary, we read that it was intolerable that the place sanctified
          by the presence of Christ should be subjected to the abominations of the
          unbelievers. Gregory VII had made a casual suggestion about going on to
          Jerusalem, but Urban preached holy war for the recovery of the holy city, which
          became the goal toward which the crusaders directed their march. Contemporary
          writers called them the “Jwrosalemites” (Hierosolymitani), who followed the way to the Holy
          Sepulcher, or the “Jerusalem route”.
   Bohemond was told that the
          crusaders appearing in Italy were going to the Lord’s Sepulcher. Urban told the
          people of Flanders that he had urged war to liberate the eastern churches and
          “the holy city of Christ, made illustrious by his passion and resurrection”. He
          wrote another letter because he was pleased to know that citizens of Bologna
          had decided to go to Jerusalem.
   To go to pray at the Holy
          Sepulcher was the best of all Christian pilgrimages. The crusaders were
          fighting pilgrims who set out to open up the route to Jerusalem, which had been
          obstructed by  the Selchukids, and to
          liberate the holy city. Previously pilgrims had not even been armed for
          defense; the milites Christi were
          pilgrims undertaking a war of offense. To liberate Jerusalem, the crusaders did
          much lighting and endured extreme hardships, and when they finally got inside
          the holy city, they all went weeping to pray in the church of the Holy
          Sepulcher. Soon after, the purpose of their journey fulfilled, most of them
          turned their faces homeward. It would seem that Urban found the pilgrimage to
          be the most effective means of sending armies to the cast. But Villey thinks that we must not fall into the error of
          believing that Jerusalem was the fundamental end of the expedition for Urban;
          the chroniclers, he suggests, made it into what it was not originally—a war for
          the Holy Sepulcher. If the pope did send crusaders to Jerusalem, as he did, in
          order to get them to aid the Greeks, it seems obvious that cither he was guilty
          of deliberately deceiving all those who went, or he was misunderstood. There is
          no reason, however, to assume that he did not have as strong a desire to
          recover Jerusalem as the men who actually did liberate it, and, after all, it
          is only conjecture that he was more interested in sending aid to Byzantium than
          in recovering the holy city.
   The pope did not neglect to
          hold out the promise of material gains which would be derived from holy war
          against the Moslems, stronger incentives to his feudal contemporaries than any
          altruistic suggestions of fighting and dying for the eastern “brethren”. In
          Baldric’s version, Urban held out the prospects of loot, which had made the
          reconquest in Spain so attractive to French warriors. “The possessions of the
          enemy will be yours, too, since you mil make spoil of his treasures”. To
          plunder, according to Robert, was added the hope of conquest: “wrest that land
          (terra sancta) from the wicked race, and subject it to yourselves, that
          land which, as the scripture says, floweth with milk
          and honey...”. Urban seemed to believe that the French needed Lebensraum for
          colonization. Their land, Robert quotes him as saying, “is too narrow for your
          large population; nor does it abound in wealth; and it furnishes scarcely
          enough food for its cultivators. Hence it is that you murder and devour one
          another”. And, of course, migration, especially of landless troublemakers,
          would relieve pressure and promote peace in the west.
   Plunder, conquest, and
          adventure were strong incentives to unemployed fighting men, but the pope
          emphasized the religious gains to be obtained in the undertaking. Unlike other
          wars, recruiting for the crusade was carried on by preaching. Urban strove to
          awaken enthusiasm for the liberation of eastern Christians and the holy places
          by urging enlistment in the holy war, which was God’s work, in which He was the
          omnipotent leader, and, according to the chroniclers, the crusaders believed
          that God was always with them, aiding them in battle, withholding such support
          when their sins demanded. Their feudal wars were sinful, but robbers could
          become soldiers of Christ by taking the cross. Guibert argues that wars for the
          protection of the church arc legitimate, and because men had become so filled
          with greed that both knights and common folk were engaged in mutual slaughter,
          God instituted this new way of salvation “in our time”. By becoming crusaders
          it was possible to obtain God’s favor without leaving the world as was
          necessary in taking the vows of a religious order, and giving up liberties or
          lay garments. Thus the pope offered the opportunity for a new kind of religious
          service, in which, without giving up their customary pursuits of fighting and
          brigandage, knights could obtain moral and spiritual rewards. The privileges
          that Urban offered were definite and precise.
   It later became customary for
          popes to grant such privileges in a bull of the crusade. But, although Eugenius
          III, in his bull for the Second Crusade, said that he was reissuing what Urban
          II had enacted for his expedition, there is no record that such regulations
          were incorporated in any bull for the First Crusade. As already indicated, one
          very important privilege is to be found in the list of canons adopted by the
          Council of Clermont, namely, that an indulgence was to be granted to all who should
          go to liberate Jerusalem, provided they were motivated not by desire for honor
          or money, but by devotion only. This was not “remission of sins”, although
          Urban used the phrase in his letter to the Flemings. It was remission of the
          penance which the church imposed for sins, as the pope makes clear in his
          letter to the faithful of Bologna, in saying that the pilgrimage would take the
          place of penance for all sins for which they would make “true and perfect
          confession”. Just what the religious value of pilgrimages had been before is
          not clear, although when Urban offered those who would rebuild Tarragona the
          same advantages that were attached to the pilgrimage to Jerusalem, it would
          seem he assumed that whatever religious gain this might be was generally
          understood. At any rate, what was granted in precise terms by the canon at
          Clermont was something more. Pope Eugenius III, in his crusading bull of 1145,
          says this form of indulgence was originated by Urban. Villey says it is the first instance of plenary indulgence to be found in canon law.
   Inasmuch as the canon
          specified that the indulgence should be granted to those who went to liberate
          the church at Jerusalem, it may be asked whether unarmed pilgrims, of whom
          there were many on the crusade, obtained full remission of all penance.
          According to Robert, the pope had said: “We do riot command or advise that the
          old, or the feeble, or those unfit for bearing arms, undertake this journey...
          For such are more of a hindrance than an aid”. In his letter to the pilgrims of
          Bologna he said that neither clerks nor monks should go without the permission
          of their bishops or abbots, and he further directed that bishops should see to
          it that priests and clerks did not go without their knowledge and approval.
          “For this journey would profit them nothing if they went without such
          permission”, writes Robert. Evidently the pope intended that the clergy should
          screen out unarmed pilgrims who were not qualified to be milites Christi.
   Urban intended that the clergy
          should have control of enlistment by requiring all recruits to take a solemn
          vow to pray at the Holy Sepulcher, and the cross was put on as the sign that
          they had taken such a vow. According to Robert, Urban proclaimed that whoever
          decided to go on the pilgrimage, after making this promise and offering himself
          “as a living sacrifice”, should “wear the sign of the Lord’s cross”. For
          Guibert, putting on the cross was somewhat similar to joining a religious
          order. “He (Urban) instituted a sign well suited to so honorable a profession
          (vow) by making the figure of the cross, the stigma of the Lord’s passion, the
          emblem of chivalry, or rather what was to be the chivalry of God”. Fulcher says
          that the cross was put on after taking “the vow to go2. In 1099, Manasses, the
          archbishop of Rheims, said, “those who have taken the vow of pilgrimage have
          put on the sign of the cross”. Urban, therefore, intended that the act of
          joining the array of the Lord should be a sort of solemn initiation, which the
          clergy could use to eliminate those who were unfit to go. That crowds of
          unarmed pilgrims followed the armies is proof that the papal injunctions were
          not carried out.
   As the way was long and beset
          with peril and hardship, and the pope knew that the initial enthusiasm, aroused
          by preaching, would not last, the vow to pray at the Holy Sepulcher was
          intended to hold the “wearers of the cross” to their task. Furthermore, the
          “sword of anathema” threatened all who became fainthearted and turned back.
          Guibert says: “He commanded that if anyone, after receiving this emblem, or
          after openly taking this vow, should shrink from his good intent through base
          change of heart, or any affection for his parents, he should be regarded as an
          outlaw forever, unless he repented and again undertook whatever of his pledge
          he had omitted”. Writing from Antioch, in 1097, Adhémar said that all wearers of the cross who had stayed home were apostates and
          should be excommunicated. In 1099, Manasses, archbishop of Rheims, urged
          Lambert, bishop of Arras, to round up all who had failed to fulfill their vows
          unless sickness or lack of means had prevented them from making the journey. In
          December of the same year, pope Paschal II wrote to the clergy of Gaul to raise
          more recruits for the aid of the crusaders in the east. Those who had put on
          the cross, he said, should be compelled to go, and all who had deserted the
          army at Antioch were to remain excommunicate until they went back to finish
          their pilgrimage. This was no idle threat as Stephen, count of Blois,
          discovered. Since he had run away from Antioch and returned home, either public
          opinion, or his wife, or both, forced him to join the crusading armies of 1101
          and complete the journey to Jerusalem. Thus, to the attractive offer of plenary
          indulgence, Urban added the vow to complete the pilgrimage, and it seems that
          violation of this vow was regarded as desertion from the militia
            Christi, to be punished with severe ecclesiastical penalty.
   For the many who died before
          reaching the Holy Sepulcher to obtain the “remission of sins”, it was generally
          believed that their souls would go to heaven. Guibert reports that Urban said,
          “We now hold out to you wars which contain the glorious reward of martyrdom”.
          Baldric quotes Urban’s exhortation thus: “... and may you deem it a beautiful
          thing to die for Christ in that city in which He died for us. But if it befall
          you to die on this side of it, be sure that to have died on the way is of equal
          value, if Christ shall find you in his army”. Fulcher’s version of Urban’s
          words is: “And if those who set out thither should lose their lives on the way
          by land, or in crossing the sea, or in fighting the pagans, their sins shall be
          remitted. This I grant to those who go, through the power vested to me by God
          ... Let those who have been hirelings at low wages now labor for an eternal
          reward”. The chroniclers are sure that this promise was fulfilled. The author
          of the Gesta said that those who
          died at Nicaea obtained martyrdom, and even the poor folk who died of famine in
          Christ’s name triumphantly assumed the mantle of the martyrs in heaven. Stephen
          of Blois wrote his wife that the souls of Christians who had been killed had
          entered the joys of paradise. From Antioch in 1098, the leaders reported that
          three thousand of their followers were dead in peace, “who without any doubt
          glory in eternal life”.  Spiritual rewards seemed certain to all who
          persevered.
   The pope offered temporal as
          well as religious privileges in his drive to win recruits to his enterprise.
          Inasmuch as the crusaders were soldiers of Christ engaged in a war sponsored by
          the church, not only were they taken under ecclesiastical protection, but the
          church also undertook to protect both their families and property so that they
          would not leave wives, children, or holdings to the uncertainties of feudal
          society. In a sense this was the Truce of God which had been approved by the
          Council of Clermont, but the pope seems to have made it especially applicable
          to crusaders for three years, or as long as they were absent. Fulcher says that
          Urban urged the clergy to enforce the Truce, and Guibert reports that Urban
          “condemned with a fearful anathema all those who dared to molest the wives,
          children, and possessions of these who were going on this journey for God”. In
          December 1099, pope Paschal II ordered that their property should be restored
          to the returning crusaders just as Urban himself had established “by synodal
          definition”. In 1122, pope Calixtus II granted such protection to crusaders,
          “just as had been done by pope Urban”. It seems clear enough that Urban
          initiated the “Privileges of the Cross”, and that it was an innovation is
          indicated by the request made by Ivo of Chartres, a famous canon lawyer, for an
          interpretation of this “new institution”, inasmuch as he was not sure that he had
          jurisdiction in a case which involved the loss of his holding by a crusader.
   What the pope was asserting
          was that the possessions of crusaders, milites Christi, were to be temporarily as exempt from secular control as the
          property of the church. Obviously this was a very considerable extension of
          ecclesiastical jurisdiction. Temporal rulers were to be deprived of the
          services and payments of vassals who enlisted in the papal armies for an
          indefinite period of service overseas. Once William the Conqueror had punished
          a vassal, than whom he knew of no better warrior, by taking away his fief
          because he went off to fight Moslems in Spain without permission. But so
          popular was this holy war that neither kings nor feudal lords seem to have made
          protest against the invasion of their feudal rights.
   Pope Urban II, then, had come
          to Clermont with a well-prepared scheme for raising an army with which to make
          holy war on the enemies of Christianity. It was a method of recruiting that
          worked so well that popes were to continue to use the same method of launching
          crusades at home as well as abroad. It does not seem reasonable to assume that
          so effective a plan had been conceived quickly, say in the period between
          Piacenza and Clermont, and it may be noted that there is no trace of it in
          anything that Gregory VII had proposed. Urban assumed responsibility for this
          new form of holy war which he was initiating. Unable to go himself, he said
          that he had appointed a churchman “in our place”. Bishop Adhémar,
          he said, was to be the leader (dux), and all who went should obey his
          legate’s commands as they would his own. There is no evidence that the pope had
          any intention of selecting a layman to head the forces he intended to recruit
          by offering religious inducements for military service. To be sure, the legate
          was a fighting bishop who marched at the head of his own contingent and led his
          men into battle. But the legate associated himself with the much larger army of
          the count of Toulouse, and it was the news that Raymond, the greatest lord in
          France, had taken the cross that gave Urban assurance that there would be a
          crusade. Perhaps Urban did not realize that his preaching and the religious
          incentives which he had proclaimed would result in a widespread popular
          movement, and it may be, as Fliche suggests, that he
          did not anticipate that Adhémar would have the
          difficult task of controlling several lay leaders. At any rate, he suggested
          that Flemings who wished to go should join Adhémar’s forces before the date of departure. That the bishop of Le Puy was regarded as
          their head was so stated by the leaders, when after Adhémar died, they wrote from Antioch asking the pope to come and finish his war. There
          can be no doubt about its being Urban’s war.
   Urban stayed in France for
          more than eight months after the Council of Clermont. The records of the
          dedications, confirmations of grants, and privileges with which he rewarded the
          monasteries where he was entertained, and the records of other matters of
          ecclesiastical business, naturally do not refer to the crusade. Other sources
          tell little more. There is, of course, the letter that the pope himself wrote
          to the Flemings not long after Clermont, and there is evidence that the pope
          preached the crusade at Limoges, where he celebrated Christmas, and at Angers
          in February. He held two more councils, and we are told that at Tours, as at
          Piacenza and Clermont, he preached in the open air. We may assume without
          authority for doing so that he urged his hearers to take the cross. As for the
          synod held at Nimes in July, the only suggestion that the crusade was
          considered is the probability that Raymond, count of Toulouse, was there.
          Nevertheless, it must be assumed that Urban used such gatherings to arouse
          enthusiasm and spread knowledge of his undertaking. Surely, as a later
          chronicler said, wherever he went he endeavored to induce men to go and free
          Jerusalem from the Turks.
   The papal party moved on into
          the Limousin after leaving Clermont on December 2, instead of going northward
          into Capetian territory. Possibly, as has been suggested, the pope assumed that
          he would not be able to promote either crusade or ecclesiastical business
          successfully where the king was excommunicate and was supported by high
          churchmen. After successful preaching at Limoges, the pope moved on to the
          pleasant city of Poitiers, where he may have found that obdurate young man,
          William IX, the troubadour, count of Poitou and duke of Aquitaine, son of the
          old Spanish campaigner Guy-Geoffrey. But, although the pope visited Poitiers twice
          and spent some time traveling through Aquitaine, there is no evidence to show
          that this early troubadour, who had little respect for the clergy, ever met the
          pope. Certainly he did not decide to atone for his sins by becoming a crusader
          till later. In fact, he seems to have deliberately waited until Raymond was
          safely on his way to the Holy Sepulcher to move in and take over Toulouse, to
          which his wife had a claim, being the daughter of the former county Raymond’s
          elder brother. Neither do we know whether Urban conferred with Fulk, count of
          Anjou, whose wife had deserted him for the king of France. However, it was at
          Angers, where he preached the crusade, that the pope commissioned Robert of Arbrissel, who later founded the Order of Fontevrault, to preach the crusade in the Loire valley. No
          doubt it was at the pope’s urging that Hélie, count
          of Maine, took the cross, and at Le Mans, Urban commissioned Gerento, abbot of St. Bénigne of
          Dijon, to promote the crusade in Normandy and England. Then, without entering
          Normandy, the pope turned southward for the council at Tours, and another visit
          in Poitiers before moving on through Aquitaine.
   During the month of April 1096
          the party visited monasteries in Aquitaine, where the pope consecrated the
          cathedral at Bordeaux on May 1. Moving on through Gascony into the lands of
          count Raymond, after a brief stop at Toulouse, where he arrived on May 7, Urban
          went northward to visit the famous Cluniac monastery of Moissac,
          where he found much interest in Jerusalem as well as the holy war in Spain.
          Returning to Toulouse he had opportunity to discuss plans for the crusade with
          count Raymond, who was present when Urban consecrated the church of St. Sernin, and it is possible that Raymond accompanied the
          pope as he traveled through Languedoc, with stops at Carcassonne and various
          monasteries. It may be that when Urban preached at Maguelonne, on June 28, he
          persuaded William of Montpellier, who was present, to take the cross. At Nimes,
          where he opened the council on July 5, he dedicated the cathedral with count
          Raymond and important prelates of the region present. In a grant made at this
          time Raymond specified that he was going to Jerusalem. Before the council ended
          on July 14, the pope was informed that the brother of the king of France would
          lead a contingent of crusader, and that Philip had repented and agreed to give
          up his mistress. Although the king’s repentance turned out to be short-lived,
          it seems certain that Urban could be satisfied that his plan for an
          expeditionary force to invade the Moslem east would be carried through. As he
          prepared to return to Italy, he sent two bishops to Genoa, where they preached
          so successfully that many prominent citizens took the cross, and the city
          prepared a fleet of thirteen vessels which eventually set sail in July 1097.
   After a second visit to the
          monastery of St. Gilles, the pope prepared to leave France, and he was crossing
          the Alps by August 15, the date that he had set for the departure of the
          crusaders. A month latter, while at Pavia, he wrote
          his letter of explanation to citizens of Bologna who were interested in the
          pilgrimage to Jerusalem. By November 1096 crusaders from France, the duke of
          Normandy and the counts of Flanders and Blois, stopped long enough to obtain
          his blessing at Lucca as they marched toward the ports on the Adriatic. The
          sight of their armies on the way to rescue the Holy Sepulcher assured Urban
          that his carefully prepared plan for the crusade was going to be carried out.
   
 
 CHAPTER IXTHE FIRST CRUSADECLERMONT TO CONSTANTINOPLE
 | 
|  |  |