77 Supplemental 1: Calling the Crusade: Myth, Memory and Legend in the Accounts of Pope Urban II’s Speech at Clermont

Two quick announcements before we start today’s episode: First, we are now on Podurama, a fantastic new app to help you organize your favorite podcasts and find great new ones. Second, Evergreen, the company that helps produce this show, is asking listeners if they could take a quick survey, which shouldn’t take more than 30 seconds to complete and will help me make more content. Both links are on our website, so do yourself a favor and check out Podurama, and do me a quick favor and take the survey. Thank you very much.

Pope Urban II’s speech on 27 November 1095 at Clermont easily ranks as one of the most important speeches in human history. His words on the field in Auvergne inspired hundreds of powerful religious leaders to fan out throughout France and beyond to raise soldiers for an unprecedented holy war, which in turn remade European society. However, we do not have a record that recounts precisely what was said. If someone at the council had written a transcription it has since been lost to history. Five of the six records of the pope’s speech were written years afterwards, some by men who were not even present at the council and whose accounts are purposefully incomplete. The sixth source was written by Urban II himself, one month afterwards, though it only references a small part of the speech.

Historians have gone to great lengths to uncover what His Holiness said on that cold November day through cross-examination of the six accounts. Further letters by the Pope and his associates shed light on the possible intentions of his call for an armed pilgrimage. What follows is an examination of the available scholarship and my own attempts at unveiling those words spoken almost a millennia ago. Particular thanks goes to Edward Peters and Fordham University for providing translations of the medieval Latin texts.

Our first text is the short letter of instruction written by Pope Urban II himself to the people of Flanders in December 1095. It reads:

“Urban, bishop, servant of the servants of God, to all the faithful, both princes and subjects, waiting in Flanders; greetings, apostolic grace, and blessings.

Your brotherhood, we believe, has long since learned from many accounts that a barbaric fury has deplorably afflicted and laid waste the churches of God in the regions of the Orient. More than this, blasphemous to say, it has even grasped in intolerable servitude its churches and the Holy City of Christ, glorified by His passion and resurrection. Grieving with pious concern at this calamity, we visited the regions of Gaul and devoted ourselves largely to urging the princes of the land and their subjects to free the churches of the East. We solemnly enjoined upon them at the council of Auvergne (the accomplishment of) such an undertaking, as a preparation for the remission of all their sins. And we have constituted our most beloved son, Adhemar, Bishop of Puy, leader of this expedition and undertaking in our stead, so that those who, perchance, may wish to undertake this journey should comply with his commands, as if they were our own, and submit fully to his loosings or bindings, as far as shall seem to belong to such an office. If, moreover, there are any of your people whom God has inspired to this vow, let them know that he [Adhemar] will set out with the aid of God on the day of the Assumption of the Blessed Mary, and that they can then attach themselves to his following.”

The Pope’s letter is instructive because of its brevity. Urban II highlighted the most important parts of his speech. He begins with a condemnation of Turkish attacks upon eastern churches and on Jerusalem itself. He declares that everyone who participates in the liberation of eastern churches would be forgiven of all sins before ending with practical information on the leadership of Adhemar and a set date of departure.

Despite its short length there is substantial depth to the message. Urban II implicitly draws upon ideas of a pan-Christian identity, something which was particularly important in the Kingdom of France due to the influence of the Peace of God and Truce of God movements. He tells the Flemish to join with the Christians of Gaul as fellow Christians. The pope further extends the Christian identity to those Eastern Orthodox who came under Turkish domination. Even if Urban II does not explicitly put eastern Christians on par with Catholics, he suggests that they are part of the same spiritual family, which he contrasts with those who commit ‘blasphemy,’ i.e. Muslims.

The inclusion of Jerusalem is central to the entire crusading mentality. First, Jerusalem was a powerful tool for recruitment. It was the Holiest of Holies, capital of the Kingdom of Israel, site of the original Temple which contained the Ark of the Covenant and the Ten Commandments. Jerusalem was where Jesus was condemned, crucified and rose again. Finally, Revelations prophesied that it would be central to the end of days, the return of Christ and the ultimate end of the world. Given Jerusalem’s prominent place in Scripture it is no wonder that the Pope would use it to rouse the faithful.

Furthermore, Jerusalem was the most important pilgrimage site in Christianity, even if it was not the most visited due to its distance and political uncertainty. While poorer individuals could visit Rome, Santiago de Compostela or nearby holy places, those who could afford to do so went to Jerusalem. When Urban II called for holy war he specifically drew upon ideas of pilgrimage. The concept of ‘holy war’ was new and not well enshrined in people’s consciousnesses, necessitating that the pope manipulate traditional ideas to create new practices. By harkening to Jerusalem he was drawing upon conceptions of pilgrimage: the trial of the long road, its dangers and suffering as a form of penance, and the arrival in Jerusalem as comparable to spiritual deliverance by God. The physical and spiritual aspects of pilgrimage synchronized more naturally than any other rite. The feeling of physical peril that travelers felt sailing through stormy seas or walking bandit-riddled roads perfectly mirrored the spiritual crisis of faith in the face of the uncertain. Similarly, the feeling of relief and triumph upon reaching a long-awaited destination aroused religious and temporal feelings. If the holy war was to be an armed pilgrimage it is natural that its end should be the same as a pilgrimage: at the holy city.

Scholars have long debated whether or not Urban II planned on Jerusalem being the endpoint of the First Crusade or whether he merely used it as a recruitment tool to raise as many soldiers as possible. Did Urban II direct crusaders to the holy city itself? Or did he merely aim to support the Byzantine Empire? Did the armed hosts march east thinking they would take Jerusalem because of what the pope had said or was that a later decision of their own making? As we shall see, the place of Jerusalem in Urban II’s speeches is crucial to understanding the mindset of the pope and of later events.

A consistent theme throughout each speech is the othering of the Turks. In his letter, Urban II refers to their actions as, “a barbaric fury [that] has deplorably afflicted and laid waste the churches of God in the regions of the Orient.” He describes their conduct as ‘blasphemous’ and ‘intolerable,’ and refers to their dominance as a ‘calamity.’ At no point does the pope call for the salvation of the Turkish people. Missionaries are not to preach, Christians not to pray, nor anyone show compassion for the Muslim Turks. The enemies of God are to be exterminated without sympathy.

The blatant disregard for the souls of others is perhaps the most remarkable shift in Christian attitudes from previous centuries. Wanton killing of Christian enemies had been done before, notably in Charlemagne’s Saxon Wars. But while political leaders might be expected to kill with abandon it was a wholly different thing for a pope to ignore the spiritual well-being of others. We’ve already discussed how Urban II arrived at this militaristic theological position. One thing we will add here is the eschatological element. As far as we know, Urban II did not preach that the end of the world was imminent. Such popular perceptions were usually dismissed as the stuff of cranks and madmen. Yet, given what the Book of Revelations says about cataclysmic wars around the former Kingdom of Israel it is natural to connect dramatic contestations between the faithful and non-believers to a potential crusade. In Revelations control of Jerusalem serves as the harbinger of apocalypse and a final battle known as Armageddon which will take place in the plain of Megiddo. Thus, the pope may have seen such a war as an integral part of the fulfillment of Scripture.

One final theme presented in the letter is the remission of all sins. The natural concern of all Christians was the salvation of their immortal soul. Normally this would be accomplished through a life of penance. According to Catholic canon if one where to die without confessing a mortal sin to a priest and atoning for it they would be damned to hell for all eternity. Professional soldiers were understandably concerned with the possibility of damnation given that they could die at any moment during a prolonged campaign, particularly one with few priests to administer to their needs. To counter these natural fears, Urban II transposed a martyr’s death on the crusaders. The pope preached that those Christians who fought and died in the holy war would be treated equally with the early Christians who willingly sacrificed their lives during times of persecution under Roman Emperors.

Our second source for the speech comes from the Gesta Francorum Hierusalem Expugnantium, in English: The Deeds of the Franks who Stormed Jerusalem. This account was written by the priest Foucher [Fulcher] of Chartres. While the entire book was not finished until 1127 or 1128 he probably transcribed Urban II’s speech in 1101. Foucher’s work is often considered the most reliable of the accounts of the First Crusade given his presence at key events and access to important people. He attended the Council of Clermont, departed Europe with the northern armies the following year and in 1100 he became chaplain to Baudouin de Boulogne, the first king of Jerusalem, until his death. These factors combined with his attention to detail mark his book as perhaps the most trustworthy of all the accounts written on the First Crusade.

His version of the speech is long enough to be credible, yet it is shorter than the versions of Baudri archbishop of Dol and Guibert de Nogent. Pre-modern chroniclers regularly altered speeches made by historical figures, if not fabricating them out of whole cloth. They did this for entertainment purposes and to tell a more cohesive narrative. Moreover, many thinkers, such as the Roman statesman Tacitus, argued that history had to serve a moral function. In his Book III he wrote, “I deem it to be the chief function of history to rescue merit from oblivion, and to hold up before evil words and evil deeds the terror of the reprobation of posterity.” Many later writers shared his vision. In a world before scientific archiving, photography, audio and video recording ‘facts’ were not the sort of thing that could be discovered with a simple Google search. Since the fact of an event often could not be proven writers focused on telling the ‘moral’ truth of the past by inventing or altering events and words to further their narrative. It is likely that Foucher did alter Urban II’s words to some extent. However, given his presence at the council, his early recounting of the event and the fact that he held the pope in high esteem and therefore did not need to change his words to make them morally good, it is probable that Foucher’s account is the most accurate transcription of the speech.

Said work is as follows:

“Most beloved brethren: Urged by necessity, I, Urban, by the permission of God chief bishop and prelate over the whole world, have come into these parts as an ambassador with a divine admonition to you, the servants of God. I hoped to find you as faithful and as zealous in the service of God as I had supposed you to be. But if there is in you any deformity or crookedness contrary to God's law, with divine help I will do my best to remove it. For God has put you as stewards over his family to minister to it. Happy indeed will you be if he finds you faithful in your stewardship. You are called shepherds; see that you do not act as hirelings. But be true shepherds, with your crooks always in your hands. Do not go to sleep, but guard on all sides the flock committed to you. For if through your carelessness or negligence a wolf carries away one of your sheep, you will surely lose the reward laid up for you with God. And after you have been bitterly scourged with remorse for your faults-, you will be fiercely overwhelmed in hell, the abode of death. For according to the gospel you are the salt of the earth [Matt. 5:13]. But if you fall short in your duty, how, it may be asked, can it be salted? O how great the need of salting! It is indeed necessary for you to correct with the salt of wisdom this foolish people which is so devoted to the pleasures of this -world, lest the Lord, when He may wish to speak to them, find them putrefied by their sins unsalted and stinking. For if He, shall find worms, that is, sins, In them, because you have been negligent in your duty, He will command them as worthless to be thrown into the abyss of unclean things. And because you cannot restore to Him His great loss, He will surely condemn you and drive you from His loving presence. But the man who applies this salt should be prudent, provident, modest, learned, peaceable, watchful, pious, just, equitable, and pure. For how can the ignorant teach others? How can the licentious make others modest? And how can the impure make others pure? If anyone hates peace, how can he make others peaceable ? Or if anyone has soiled his hands with baseness, how can he cleanse the impurities of another? We read also that if the blind lead the blind, both will fall into the ditch [Matt. 15:14]. But first correct yourselves, in order that, free from blame , you may be able to correct those who are subject to you. If you wish to be the friends of God, gladly do the things which you know will please Him. You must especially let all matters that pertain to the church be controlled by the law of the church. And be careful that simony does not take root among you, lest both those who buy and those who sell [church offices] be beaten with the scourges of the Lord through narrow streets and driven into the place of destruction and confusion. Keep the church and the clergy in all its grades entirely free from the secular power. See that the tithes that belong to God are faithfully paid from all the produce of the land; let them not be sold or withheld. If anyone seizes a bishop let him be treated as an outlaw. If anyone seizes or robs monks, or clergymen, or nuns, or their servants, or pilgrims, or merchants, let him be anathema. Let robbers and incendiaries and all their accomplices be expelled from the church and anthematized. If a man who does not give a part of his goods as alms is punished with the damnation of hell, how should he be punished who robs another of his goods? For thus it happened to the rich man in the gospel [Luke 16:19]; he was not punished because he had stolen the goods of another, but because he had not used well the things which were his.

"You have seen for a long time the great disorder in the world caused by these crimes. It is so bad in some of your provinces, I am told, and you are so weak in the administration of justice, that one can hardly go along the road by day or night without being attacked by robbers; and whether at home or abroad one is in danger of being despoiled either by force or fraud. Therefore it is necessary to reenact the truce, as it is commonly called, which was proclaimed a long time ago by our holy fathers. I exhort and demand that you, each, try hard to have the truce kept in your diocese. And if anyone shall be led by his cupidity or arrogance to break this truce, by the authority of God and with the sanction of this council he shall be anathematized."

After these and various other matters had been attended to, all who were present, clergy and people, gave thanks to God and agreed to the pope's proposition. They all faithfully promised to keep the decrees. Then the pope said that in another part of the world Christianity was suffering from a state of affairs that was worse than the one just mentioned. He continued:

"Although, O sons of God, you have promised more firmly than ever to keep the peace among yourselves and to preserve the rights of the church, there remains still an important work for you to do. Freshly quickened by the divine correction, you must apply the strength of your righteousness to another matter which concerns you as well as God. For your brethren who live in the east are in urgent need of your help, and you must hasten to give them the aid which has often been promised them. For, as the most of you have heard, the Turks and Arabs have attacked them and have conquered the territory of Romania [the Greek empire] as far west as the shore of the Mediterranean and the Hellespont, which is called the Arm of St. George. They have occupied more and more of the lands of those Christians, and have overcome them in seven battles. They have killed and captured many, and have destroyed the churches and devastated the empire. If you permit them to continue thus for awhile with impurity, the faithful of God will be much more widely attacked by them. On this account I, or rather the Lord, beseech you as Christ's heralds to publish this everywhere and to persuade all people of whatever rank, foot-soldiers and knights, poor and rich, to carry aid promptly to those Christians and to destroy that vile race from the lands of our friends. I say this to those who are present, it is meant also for those who are absent. Moreover, Christ commands it.

"All who die by the way, whether by land or by sea, or in battle against the pagans, shall have immediate remission of sins. This I grant them through the power of God with which I am invested. O what a disgrace if such a despised and base race, which worships demons, should conquer a people which has the faith of omnipotent God and is made glorious with the name of Christ! With what reproaches will the Lord overwhelm us if you do not aid those who, with us, profess the Christian religion! Let those who have been accustomed unjustly to wage private warfare against the faithful now go against the infidels and end with victory this war which should have been begun long ago. Let those who for a long time, have been robbers, now become knights. Let those who have been fighting against their brothers and relatives now fight in a proper way against the barbarians. Let those who have been serving as mercenaries for small pay now obtain the eternal reward. Let those who have been wearing themselves out in both body and soul now work for a double honor. Behold! on this side will be the sorrowful and poor, on that, the rich; on this side, the enemies of the Lord, on that, his friends. Let those who go not put off the journey, but rent their lands and collect money for their expenses; and as soon as winter is over and spring comes, let them eagerly set out on the way with God as their guide."”

A number of familiar themes emerge in Foucher’s account. Urban II promotes a pan-Christian identity, even going so far as to call Eastern Christians ‘brethren.’ He bemoans the killing of Christians and destruction of ancient and sacred churches. In doing so, Urban II again frames any military action taken against the Turks as one of defense and liberation, rather than a war of conquest. He explicitly calls for the enactment of the Truce of God during the war.

As with the letter, His Holiness declares that all who join the holy war will receive salvation upon death. What is remarkable is his theological basis for salvation. He declares that, “All who die by the way, whether by land or by sea, or in battle against the pagans, shall have immediate remission of sins. This I grant them through the power of God with which I am invested.” Urban II does not claim that all who die in a war for God are forgiven of sin; such a belief might prove incredibly dangerous if anyone who claimed to kill in God’s name would be justified. Instead, the pope declares that those who engage in this one armed pilgrimage are granted unique sanctification.

This passage, combined with others, presents a whole new theme, that of papal supremacy. Given all that we know of Urban II and his predecessors, it is obvious that he believed that the Bishop of Rome should be the supreme authority in Christendom. He declares himself, “chief bishop and prelate over the whole world,” who delivers a message from God himself. Papal supremacy was a lynchpin of his entire worldview and political strategy. Urban II needed to consolidate power within himself to crush the pretender pope Clement III. If he was Christianity’s ‘big boss’ he could more easily assert his authority over the Eastern Church. Moreover, if churches recognized the pope as their supreme leader they would be able to exercise independence from secular powers by appealing to papal protection. As it stood, bishops were not just religious figures but secular lords. As secular lords, counts, dukes, kings and emperors outranked them. But a pope? As head of the Papal States popes were sovereigns on par with other monarchs. If every church in every land recognized the pope as their chief a pope’s power potentially eclipsed any secular ruler’s.

This brings us to a new theme laid out in Foucher’s recounting: church independence from secular power. Urban II could not have been more explicit when he said, “You must especially let all matters that pertain to the church be controlled by the law of the church,” and later, “Keep the church and the clergy in all its grades entirely free from the secular power.” Furthermore, the pope repeats the Cluniac belief that independence of the church from secular authority must stem from dependence on the papacy.

Given all we know about Urban II from his activities before and after the Council of Clermont it is clear that he viewed the First Crusade as a means to cleanse both West and East. The East would be saved through the military success of armed pilgrims against a conquering foe. Meanwhile, the West would be saved when its people no longer killed each other but turned their martial efforts outward. Urban II states as much in Foucher’s account, when, after calling for the Truce of God to bring peace to France, he says, “Freshly quickened by the divine correction, you must apply the strength of your righteousness to another matter which concerns you as well as God.” He then declares, “Let those who have been accustomed unjustly to wage private warfare against the faithful now go against the infidels and end with victory this war which should have been begun long ago. Let those who for a long time, have been robbers, now become knights. Let those who have been fighting against their brothers and relatives now fight in a proper way against the barbarians. Let those who have been serving as mercenaries for small pay now obtain the eternal reward. Let those who have been wearing themselves out in both body and soul now work for a double honor.”

This brings us to the final theme in Foucher’s version of the speech: the dehumanization of Muslims. This recounting is rife with derogatory language against Turks, Arabs and Muslims. The Pope refers to Turks and Arabs as ‘infidels,’ ‘barbarians,’ and “a despised and base race, which worships demons.” He further commands the faithful, “to destroy that vile race from the lands of our friends.” These characterizations harken back to Old Testament depictions of Philistines and other peoples who God commanded the Jews to exterminate in order to conquer the Holy Land. If the pope really said these things or something similar, then it would go a long way towards explaining how the Christian soldiers could commit many of the atrocities that were to follow, acts which even the chroniclers considered heinous. Even if the pope spoke as Foucher records it would not absolve those Crusaders of their actions; yet whether or not the pope said such things is important as we seek to understand how men on a mission from God could act as they did. Did their brutality stem from papal sanction or military realities?

One important theme that is noticeably missing from Foucher’s account is Jerusalem. At no point does the Pope mention the Holy City, though he does in every other record of the speech. This is a remarkable omission, one which gives credence to the idea that the Pope originally only intended for the crusaders to aid the Byzantine Empire and retake Anatolia, but that Jerusalem became the goal later on when popular calls for its conquest led the pope to alter the mission.

The third source for the speech that we’ll be looking at is the Gesta francorum et aliorum Hierosolymytanorum, The Deeds of the Franks and other Jerusalemers. This work is often referred to simply as ‘the Gesta’ due to its popularity and subsequent influence on other accounts of the First Crusade. Historians are divided over its authorship. Conventional wisdom held that it was written by an anonymous monk who followed the army of Bohemond of Antioch. More recently, historian Nirmal Daas has argued that it was the product of four clerks working in a scriptorium.

While Foucher might have written the first account of Urban II’s speech, he only finished his book in 1127 or 1128. Comparatively, the Gesta was finished perhaps as early as 1101 or 1103 and widely distributed in northern France by 1105. This explains why the Gesta francorum et aliorum Hierosolymytanorum is known simply as “the Gesta,” rather than Foucher’s Gesta Francorum Hierusalem Expugnantium

The Gesta’s version is as follows:

“When now that time was at hand which the Lord Jesus daily points out to His faithful, especially in the Gospel, saying, "If any man would come after me, let him deny himself and take up his cross and follow me," a mighty agitation was carried on throughout all the region of Gaul. (Its tenor was) that if anyone desired to follow the Lord zealously, with a pure heart and mind, and wished faithfully to bear the cross after Him, he would no longer hesitate to take up the way to the Holy Sepulcher.

And so Urban, Pope of the Roman see, with his archbishops, bishops, abbots, and priests, set out as quickly as possible beyond the mountains and began to deliver sermons and to preach eloquently, saying: "Whoever wishes to save his soul should not hesitate humbly to take up the way of the Lord, and if he lacks sufficient money, divine mercy will give him enough." Then the apostolic lord continued, "Brethren, we ought to endure much suffering for the name of Christ - misery, poverty, nakedness, persecution, want, illness, hunger, thirst, and other (ills) of this kind, just as the Lord saith to His disciples: 'Ye must suffer much in My name,' and 'Be not ashamed to confess Me before the faces of men; verily I will give you mouth and wisdom,' and finally, 'Great is your reward in Heaven."' And when this speech had already begun to be noised abroad, little by little, through all the regions and countries of Gaul, the Franks, upon hearing such reports, forthwith caused crosses to be sewed on their right shoulders, saying that they followed with one accord the footsteps of Christ, by which they had been redeemed from the hand of hell.”

This relatively short speech is a summation of the general message rather than a full recounting. Of everything the pope said, the writer or writers of the Gesta focused on three themes: The Church of the Holy Sepulcher in Jerusalem as the ultimate goal, the remission of all sins, and Urban II’s comparison of the campaign with the act of pilgrimage. No mention is made of Turks, Muslims or even the Byzantines. It is difficult to infer authorial intent when we do not know who the author was, or even how many authors there were. However, given its rapid popularity in northern France it is likely that it was intended for a French audience. While the Gesta recounts eastern events in detail, they are in this passage of lesser import than the Christian heroism of the Franks.

Is the Gesta more reliable than Foucher’s account? Its focus on the Holy Sepulcher in Jerusalem accords with the letter written by the pope a mere month after the speech, meaning that Urban II probably did at least mention the most sacred church as an endpoint for the endeavor. Whether the pope intended for the Crusaders to conquer all the way to Jerusalem or merely to secure the route for pilgrims is debatable. Nevertheless, the letter by Urban II and the Gesta’s account heavily imply that Foucher erred by not including reference to Jerusalem.

The fourth source on Pope Urban II’s speech at the Council of Clermont is the Historia Hierosolymitana, The Jerusalem History, by Robert of Reims. We do not know exactly who Robert was, though he may have served as an abbot of Saint-Remi alongside other functions. It is possible Robert attended the Council of Clermont, though we cannot be certain. Historian Edward Peters claims that he wrote his chronicle around 1107. Robert used the Gesta for reference but his record of the speech is significantly longer.

Historians generally agree that The Jerusalem History is not as accurate as the two Gestas. Robert’s account praises the French specifically, no doubt because it was directed at a French audience. Given the tone and structure of the speech it is likely that Robert liberally embellished his account. The events described are skewed by someone writing about the Crusades after they had occurred. More than other writers he details supposed atrocities committed by Muslims, likely as a way of justifying the many tales of butchery by the Crusaders.

Robert’s version of the speech is as follows:

“Oh, race of Franks, race from across the mountains, race chosen and beloved by God, as shines forth in very many of your works set apart from all nations by the situation of your country, as well as by your Catholic faith and the honor of the holy church! To you our discourse is addressed and for you our exhortation is intended. We wish you to know what a grievous cause has led us to Your country, what peril threatening you and all the faithful has brought us.

From the confines of Jerusalem and the city of Constantinople a horrible tale has gone forth and very frequently has been brought to our ears, namely, that a race from the kingdom of the Persians, an accursed race, a race utterly alienated from God, a generation forsooth which has not directed its heart and has not entrusted its spirit to God, has invaded the lands of those Christians and has depopulated them by the sword, pillage and fire; it has led away a part of the captives into its own country, and a part it has destroyed by cruel tortures; it has either entirely destroyed the churches of God or appropriated them for the rites of its own religion. They destroy the altars, after having defiled them with their uncleanness. They circumcise the Christians, and the blood of the circumcision they either spread upon the altars or pour into the vases of the baptismal font. When they wish to torture people by a base death, they perforate their navels, and dragging forth the extremity of the intestines, bind it to a stake; then with flogging they lead the victim around until the viscera having gushed forth the victim falls prostrate upon the ground. Others they bind to a post and pierce with arrows. Others they compel to extend their necks and then, attacking them with naked swords, attempt to cut through the neck with a single blow. What shall I say of the abominable rape of the women? To speak of it is worse than to be silent. The kingdom of the Greeks is now dismembered by them and deprived of territory so vast in extent that it cannot be traversed in a march of two months. On whom therefore is the labor of avenging these wrongs and of recovering this territory incumbent, if not upon you? You, upon whom above other nations God has conferred remarkable glory in arms, great courage, bodily activity, and strength to humble the hairy scalp of those who resist you.

Let the deeds of your ancestors move you and incite your minds to manly achievements; the glory and greatness of king Charles the Great, and of his son Louis, and of your other kings, who have destroyed the kingdoms of the pagans, and have extended in these lands the territory of the holy church. Let the Holy Sepulcher of the Lord our Saviour, which is possessed by unclean nations, especially incite you, and the holy places which are now treated with ignominy and irreverently polluted with their filthiness. Oh, most valiant soldiers and descendants of invincible ancestors, be not degenerate, but recall the valor of your progenitors.

But if you are hindered by love of children, parents and wives, remember what the Lord says in the Gospel, "He that loveth father or mother more than me, is not worthy of me." "Every one that hath forsaken houses, or brethren, or sisters, or father, or mother, or wife, or children, or lands for my name's sake shall receive an hundredfold and shall inherit everlasting life." Let none of your possessions detain you, no solicitude for your family affairs, since this land which you inhabit, shut in on all sides by the seas and surrounded by the mountain peaks, is too narrow for your large population; nor does it abound in wealth; and it furnishes scarcely food enough for its cultivators. Hence it is that you murder one another, that you wage war, and that frequently you perish by mutual wounds. Let therefore hatred depart from among you, let your quarrels end, let wars cease, and let all dissensions and controversies slumber. Enter upon the road to the Holy Sepulcher; wrest that land from the wicked race, and subject it to yourselves. That land which as the Scripture says "floweth with milk and honey," was given by God into the possession of the children of Israel Jerusalem is the navel of the world; the land is fruitful above others, like another paradise of delights. This the Redeemer of the human race has made illustrious by His advent, has beautified by residence, has consecrated by suffering, has redeemed by death, has glorified by burial. This royal city, therefore, situated at the center of the world, is now held captive by His enemies, and is in subjection to those who do not know God, to the worship of the heathens. She seeks therefore and desires to be liberated, and does not cease to implore you to come to her aid. From you especially she asks succor, because, as we have already said, God has conferred upon you above all nations great glory in arms. Accordingly undertake this journey for the remission of your sins, with the assurance of the imperishable glory of the kingdom of heaven.

When Pope Urban had said these and very many similar things in his urbane discourse, he so influenced to one purpose the desires of all who were present, that they cried out, "It is the will of God! It is the will of God!" When the venerable Roman pontiff heard that, with eyes uplifted to heaven he gave thanks to God and, with his hand commanding silence, said:

Most beloved brethren, today is manifest in you what the Lord says in the Gospel, "Where two or three are gathered together in my name there am I in the midst of them." Unless the Lord God had been present in your spirits, all of you would not have uttered the same cry. For, although the cry issued from numerous mouths, yet the origin of the cry was one. Therefore I say to you that God, who implanted this in your breasts, has drawn it forth from you. Let this then be your war-cry in combats, because this word is given to you by God. When an armed attack is made upon the enemy, let this one cry be raised by all the soldiers of God: It is the will of God! It is the will of God!

And we do not command or advise that the old or feeble, or those unfit for bearing arms, undertake this journey; nor ought women to set out at all, without their husbands or brothers or legal guardians. For such are more of a hindrance than aid, more of a burden than advantage. Let the rich aid the needy; and according to their wealth, let them take with them experienced soldiers. The priests and clerks of any order are not to go without the consent of their bishop; for this journey would profit them nothing if they went without permission of these. Also, it is not fitting that laymen should enter upon the pilgrimage without the blessing of their priests.

Whoever, therefore, shall determine upon this holy pilgrimage and shall make his vow to God to that effect and shall offer himself to Him as a, living sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God, shall wear the sign of the cross of the Lord on his forehead or on his breast. When,' truly',' having fulfilled his vow he wishes to return, let him place the cross on his back between his shoulders. Such, indeed, by the twofold action will fulfill the precept of the Lord, as He commands in the Gospel, "He that taketh not his cross and followeth after me, is not worthy of me."”

Can you tell he’s trying to sell his work to French readers? The pandering is not subtle. Robert’s passages in which Urban II lauds the French for being the most glorious and valiant peoples in the world is completely at odds with prior accounts. The earlier chronicles record Urban II as denouncing the French for their regular abuse and killing of their fellows, including religious figures. He calls for the instatement of the Truce of God as a means of restraining the wanton impulses of his countrymen. In his public preaching, Urban II views the holy war as the common purpose that will remake a sinful people. Urban II takes the theological belief that if one willingly endures great suffering they can be spiritually cleansed and expands this notion from an individual to an entire people. For Urban II the primary purpose of the First Crusade was to refashion Christendom, spiritually, culturally and politically. The holy war was a means, not an end.

Urban II was a pious man but he was not stupid; surely he must have realized that the chances of its complete victory were slim. His aim was not to launch a single campaign in the east per se. Rather, his goal was to develop a crusading movement, one in which Christians engaged in continual warfare against their enemies. Urban II had witnessed such a victory in the Norman conquest of Sicily. He had read stories of the wars against Fraxinetum. Moreover, Christians in Iberia even then expanded their holdings at Muslims’ expense. In a series of letters Urban II wrote before and following the Council of Clermont he considered the war in Iberia to be on par with the First Crusade and forbid those fighting in the west from abandoning their posts to travel to Anatolia. Robert’s account gives only one line to France’s internal problems and instead spends more time praising the French. Thus, Robert’s depiction of Urban II’s attitude towards the French and the Crusade completely misses the mark. His Holiness did not call a godly people to conquer the Holy Land. He called a wicked people to willingly submit themselves to continual campaigns of suffering so that they might be redeemed through it. Robert’s account reads backwards; rather than get the perspective of a pope speaking to French clergy in 1095, the speech is tailored to France’s warrior aristocracy. Its emphasis is not on the rectification of a people or the development of a crusading spirit but on the triumphs of the military crusade that took Jerusalem. Robert’s account reads exactly like what it is: a history whose narrative purpose is to glorify French martial exploits through a combination of fact, fiction and prose.

Robert embellishes his dramatic account of the speech with a number of passages that Urban II likely did not say. Urban II probably did not single out the French for the task of the crusade, given that he aimed to draw soldiers from England, Germany, Italy and perhaps even other areas on the fringes of Christendom. It is also unlikely that the pope would lionize the martial glory of the French to an audience of clergy who had never seen a battle. These words were certainly made up by the chronicler to appeal to the warrior-aristocracy.

Another section that historians have critiqued is his insistence that the feeble do not join the crusade. It is possible that Urban II specifically called soldiers to fight in the east and may have even discouraged non-combatants. Robert’s emphasis on Urban II’s command for commoners not to join the armed pilgrimage likely stems from the later failure of the People’s Crusade. Robert may have inserted the interdiction on non-soldiers travelling east as a means of further exonerating His Holiness for the tragedy that followed. It was also common for pre-modern historians to combine multiple events into one for expediency. Robert probably knew of Urban II’s letters in late 1095 and early 1096 forbidding non-combatants from joining the war and decided to make that message a focal point of the speech. In summation, The Jerusalem History is less a recounting of the speech itself but of Urban II’s many commands for the holy war from 1095 through to its departure.

The fifth source is a text from Baudri archbishop of Dol, probably written in 1108. Like The Jerusalem History, it draws upon the Gesta, though greatly elaborates on it, as it is the single longest version of the speech. Baudri attended the Council of Clermont, a fact which has proved problematic for historians judging whether his additions were accurate representations of what the pope said. His account reads:

. . . "We have heard, most beloved brethren, and you have heard what we cannot recount without deep sorrow how, with great hurt and dire sufferings our Christian brothers, members in Christ, are scourged, oppressed, and injured in Jerusalem, in Antioch, and the other cities of the East. Your own blood brothers, your companions, your associates (for you are sons of the same Christ and the same Church) are either subjected in their inherited homes to other masters, or are driven from them, or they come as beggars among us; or, which is far worse, they are flogged and exiled as slaves for sale in their own land. Christian blood, redeemed by the blood of Christ, has been shed, and Christian flesh, akin to the flesh of Christ, has been subjected to unspeakable degradation and servitude. Everywhere in those cities there is sorrow, everywhere misery, everywhere groaning (I say it with a sigh). The churches in which divine mysteries were celebrated in olden times are now, to our sorrow, used as stables for the animals of these people! Holy men do not possess those cities; nay, base and bastard Turks hold sway over our brothers. The blessed Peter first presided as Bishop at Antioch; behold, in his own church the Gentiles have established their superstitions, and the Christian religion, which they ought rather to cherish, they have basely shut out from the hall dedicated to God! The estates given for the support of the saints and the patrimony of nobles set aside for the sustenance of the poor are subject to pagan tyranny, while cruel masters abuse for their own purposes the returns from these lands. The priesthood of God has been ground down into the dust. The sanctuary of God (unspeakable shame!) is everywhere profaned. Whatever Christians still remain in hiding are sought out with unheard of tortures.

"Of holy Jerusalem, brethren, we dare not speak, for we are exceedingly afraid and ashamed to speak of it. This very city, in which, as you all know, Christ Himself suffered for us, because our sins demanded it, has been reduced to the pollution of paganism and, I say it to our disgrace, withdrawn from the service of God. Such is the heap of reproach upon us who have so much deserved it! Who now serves the church of the Blessed Mary in the valley of Josaphat, in which church she herself was buried in body? But why do we pass over the Temple of Solomon, nay of the Lord, in which the barbarous nations placed their idols contrary to law, human and divine? Of the Lord's Sepulcher we have refrained from speaking, since some of you with your own eyes have seen to what abominations it has been given over. The Turks violently took from it the offerings which you brought there for alms in such vast amounts, and, in addition, they scoffed much and often 'at Your religion. And yet in that place (I say only what you already know) rested the Lord; there He died for us; there He was buried. How precious would be the longed for, incomparable place of the Lord's burial, even if God failed there to perform the yearly miracle! For in the days of His Passion all the lights in the Sepulcher and round about in the church, which have been extinguished, are relighted by divine command. Whose heart is so stony, brethren, that it is not touched by so great a miracle? Believe me, that man is bestial and senseless whose heart such divinely manifest grace does not move to faith! And yet the Gentiles see this in common with the Christians and are not turned from their ways! They are, indeed, afraid, but they are not converted to the faith; nor is it to be wondered at, for a blindness of mind rules over them. With what afflictions they wronged you who have returned and are now present, you yourselves know too well you who there sacrificed your substance and your blood for God.

"This, beloved brethren, we shall say, that we may have you as witness of our words. More suffering of our brethren and devastation of churches remains than we can speak of one by one, for we are oppressed by tears and groans, sighs and sobs. We weep and wail, brethren, alas, like the Psalmist, in our inmost heart! We are wretched and unhappy, and in us is that prophecy fulfilled: 'God, the nations are come into thine inheritance; thy holy temple have they defiled; they have laid Jerusalem in heaps; the dead bodies of thy servants have been given to be food for the birds of the heaven, the flesh of thy saints unto the beasts of the earth. Their blood have they shed like water round about Jerusalem, and there was none to bury them.' Woe unto us, brethren! We who have already become a reproach to our neighbors, a scoffing, and derision to them round about us, let us at least with tears condone and have compassion upon our brothers! We who are become the scorn of all peoples, and worse than all, let us bewail the most monstrous devastation of the Holy Land! This land we have deservedly called holy in which there is not even a footstep that the body or spirit of the Savior did not render glorious and blessed which embraced the holy presence of the mother of God, and the meetings of the apostles, and drank up the blood of the martyrs shed there. How blessed are the stones which crowned you Stephen, the first martyr! How happy, O, John the Baptist, the waters of the Jordan which served you in baptizing the Savior! The children of Israel, who were led out of Egypt, and who prefigured you in the crossing of the Red Sea, have taken that land, by their arms, with Jesus as leader; they have driven out the Jebusites and other inhabitants and have themselves inhabited earthly Jerusalem, the image of celestial Jerusalem.

"What are we saying? Listen and learn! You, girt about with the badge of knighthood, are arrogant with great pride; you rage against your brothers and cut each other in pieces. This is not the (true) soldiery of Christ which rends asunder the sheepfold of the Redeemer. The Holy Church has reserved a soldiery for herself to help her people, but you debase her wickedly to her hurt. Let us confess the truth, whose heralds we ought to be; truly, you are not holding to the way which leads to life. 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 do you sense battles from afar and rush to them eagerly. Verily, this is the worst way, for it is utterly removed from God! if, forsooth, you wish to be mindful of your souls, either lay down the girdle of such knighthood, or advance boldly, as knights of Christ, and rush as quickly as you can to the defense of the Eastern Church. For she it is from whom the joys of your whole salvation have come forth, who poured into your mouths the milk of divine wisdom, who set before you the holy teachings of the Gospels. We say this, brethren, that you may restrain your murderous hands from the destruction of your brothers, and in behalf of your relatives in the faith oppose yourselves to the Gentiles. Under Jesus Christ, our Leader, may you struggle for your Jerusalem, in Christian battleline, most invincible line, even more successfully than did the sons of Jacob of old - struggle, that you may assail and drive out the Turks, more execrable than the Jebusites, who are in this land, 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 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. God pays with the same shilling, whether at the first or eleventh hour. You should shudder, brethren, you should shudder at raising a violent hand against Christians; it is less wicked to brandish your sword against Saracens. It is the only warfare that is righteous, for it is charity to risk your life for your brothers. That you may not be troubled about the concerns of tomorrow, know that those who fear God want nothing, nor those who cherish Him in truth. The possessions of the enemy, too, will be yours, since you will make spoil of their treasures and return victorious to your own; or empurpled with your own blood, you will have gained everlasting glory. For such a Commander you ought to fight, for One who lacks neither might nor wealth with which to reward you.

Short is the way, little the labor, which, nevertheless, will repay you with the crown that fadeth not away. Accordingly, we speak with the authority of the prophet: 'Gird thy sword upon thy thigh O mighty one.' Gird yourselves, everyone of you, I say, and be valiant sons; for it is better for you to die in battle than to behold, the sorrows of your race and of your holy places. Let neither property nor the alluring charms of your wives entice you from going; nor let the trials that are to be borne so deter you that you remain here."

And turning to the bishops, he said, "You, brothers and fellow bishops; you, fellow priests and sharers with us in Christ, make this same announcement through the churches committed to you, and with your whole soul vigorously preach the journey to Jerusalem. When they have confessed the disgrace of their sins, do you, secure in Christ, grant them speedy pardon. Moreover, you who are to go shall have us praying for you; we shall have you fighting for God's people. It is our duty to pray, yours to fight against the Amalekites. With Moses, we shall extend unwearied hands in prayer to Heaven, while you go forth and brandish the sword, like dauntless warriors, against Amalek."

As those present were thus clearly informed by these and other words of this kind from the apostolic lord, the eyes of some were bathed in tears; some trembled, and yet others discussed the matter. However, in the presence of all at that same council, and as we looked on, the Bishop of Puy, a man of great renown and of highest ability, went to the Pope with joyful countenance and on bended knee sought and entreated blessing and permission to go. Over and above this, he won from the Pope the command that all should obey him, and that he should hold sway over all the army on behalf of the Pope, since all knew him to be a prelate of unusual energy and industry.”

Baudri’s account reads like a diatribe in a Homeric epic poem. As with Robert, Baudri’s intended audience appears to be the warrior-nobility of France, rather than educated clergy who were the ones who actually heard the pope’s speech. While the audience has shifted, Baudri retains the core message of previous accounts. In this version the pope also denounces inter-Christian violence, which he seeks to transform into a righteous movement to retake the east.

The final account is by Guibert abbot of Nogent whose book Historia quae dicitur Gesta Dei per Francos, The History That Is Called Deeds of God Done Through the Franks, was mostly finished in 1108, with final revisions made in 1111. His work drew from the Gestaand other sources. Guibert was not present at the Council of Clermont. This, combined with the lateness of his book and its peculiar style of speech has naturally led many scholars to doubt the reliability of his account. Guibert acknowledges that he was not present during the events of the First Crusade but he claims to have met with many crusaders and used their testimony to build upon the Gesta. Aside from adding new material, Guibert notably includes anti-Judaic themes in his work. He also writes on eschatology to demonstrate how the First Crusade fulfilled some Biblical prophesies.

Despite not being present at Clermont, Guibert’s record goes into great detail on the speech, and is one of the longest accounts that we have. Guibert’s version is as follows:

"If among the churches scattered about over the whole world some, because of persons or location, deserve reverence above others (for persons, I say, since greater privileges are accorded to apostolic sees; for places, indeed, since the same dignity which is accorded to persons is also shown to regal cities, such as Constantinople), we owe most to that church from which we received the grace of redemption and the source of all Christianity. If what the Lord says, namely, 'Salvation is from the Jews,' accords with the truth, and it is true that the Lord has left us Sabaoth as seed, that we may not become like Sodom and Gomorrah, and our seed is Christ, in whom is the salvation and benediction of all peoples, then, indeed, the very land and city in which He dwelt and suffered is, by witnesses of the Scriptures, holy. If this land is spoken of in the sacred writings of the prophets as the inheritance and the holy temple of God before ever the Lord walked about in it, or was revealed, what sanctity, what reverence has it not acquired since God in His majesty was there clothed in the flesh, nourished, grew up, and in bodily form there walked about, or was carried about; and, to compress in fitting brevity all that might be told in a long series of words, since there the blood of the Son of God, more holy than heaven and earth, was poured forth, and His body, its quivering members dead, rested in the tomb. What veneration do we think it deserves? If, when the Lord had but just been crucified and the city was still held by the Jews, it was called holy by the evangelist when he says, 'Many bodies of the saints that had fallen asleep were raised; and coming forth out of the tombs after His resurrection, they entered into the holy city and appeared unto many,' and by the prophet Isaiah when he says, 'It shall be His glorious sepulcher,' then, surely, with this sanctity placed upon it by God the Sanctifier Himself, no evil that may befall it can destroy it, and in the same way glory is indivisibly fixed to His Sepulcher. Most beloved brethren, if you revere the source of that holiness and you cherish these shrines which are the marks of His footprints on earth, if you seek (the way), God leading you, God fighting in your behalf, you should strive with your utmost efforts to cleanse the Holy City and the glory of the Sepulcher, now polluted by the concourse of the Gentiles, as much as is in their power.

"If in olden times the Maccabees attained to the highest praise of piety because they fought for the ceremonies and the Temple, it is also justly granted you, Christian soldiers, to defend their liberty of your country by armed endeavor. If you, likewise, consider that the abode of the holy apostles and any other saints should be striven for with such effort, why do you refuse to rescue the Cross, the Blood, the Tomb? Why do you refuse to visit them, to spend the price of your lives in rescuing them? You have thus far waged unjust wars, at one time and another; you have brandished mad weapons to your mutual destruction, for no other reason than covetousness and pride, as a result of which you have deserved eternal death and sure damnation. We now hold out to you wars which contain the glorious reward of martyrdom, which will retain that title of praise now and forever.

"Let us suppose, for the moment, that Christ was not dead and buried, and had never lived any length of time in Jerusalem. Surely, if all this were lacking, this fact alone ought still to arouse you to go to the aid of the land and city -- the fact that 'Out of Zion shall go forth the law and the word of Jehovah from Jerusalem!' If all that there is of Christian preaching has flowed from the fountain of Jerusalem, its streams, whithersoever spread out over the whole world, encircle the hearts of the Catholic multitude, that they may consider wisely what they owe such a well-watered fountain. If rivers return to the place whence they have issued only to flow forth again, according to the saying of Solomon, it ought to seem glorious to you to be able to apply a new cleansing to this place, whence it is certain that you received the cleansing of baptism and the witness of your faith.

"And you ought, furthermore, to consider with the utmost deliberation, if by your labors, God working through you, it should occur that the Mother of churches should flourish anew to the worship of Christianity, whether, perchance, He may not wish other regions of the East to be restored to the faith against the approaching time of the Antichrist. For it is clear that Antichrist is to do battle not with the Jews, not with the Gentiles; but, according to the etymology of his name, He will attack Christians. And if Antichrist finds there no Christians (just as at present when scarcely any dwell there), no one will be there to oppose him, or whom he may rightly overcome. According to Daniel and Jerome, the interpreter of Daniel, he is to fix his tents on the Mount of Olives; and it is certain, for the apostle teaches it, that he will sit at Jerusalem in the Temple of the Lord, as though he were God. And according to the same prophet, he will first kill three kings of Egypt, Africa, and Ethiopia, without doubt for their Christian faith: This, indeed, could not at all be done unless Christianity was established where now is paganism. If, therefore, you are zealous in the practice of holy battles, in order that, just as you have received the seed of knowledge of God from Jerusalem, you may in the same way restore the borrowed grace, so that through you the Catholic name may be advanced to oppose the perfidy of the Antichrist and the Antichristians then, who can not conjecture that God, who has exceeded the hope of all, will consume, in the abundance of your courage and through you as the spark, such a thicket of paganism as to include within His law Egypt, Africa, and Ethiopia, which have withdrawn from the communion of our belief? And the man of sin, the son of perdition, will find some to oppose him. Behold, the Gospel cries out, 'Jerusalem shall be trodden down by the Gentiles until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled.' 'Times of the Gentiles' can be understood in two ways: Either that they have ruled over the Christians at their pleasure, and have gladly frequented the sloughs of all baseness for the satisfaction of their lusts, and in all this have had no obstacle (for they who have everything according to their wish are said to have their time; there is that saying: 'My time is not yet come, but your time is always ready,' whence the lustful are wont to say 'you are having your time'). Or, again, 'the times of the Gentiles' are the fulness of time for those Gentiles who shall have entered secretly before Israel shall be saved. These times, most beloved brothers, will now, forsooth, be fulfilled, provided the might of the pagans be repulsed through You, with the cooperation of God. With the end of the world already near, even though the Gentiles fail to be converted to the Lord (since according to the apostle there must be a withdrawal from the faith), it is first necessary, according to their prophecy, that the Christian sway be renewed in those regions either through you, or others, whom it shall please God to send before the coming of Antichrist, so that the head of all evil, who is to occupy there the throne of the kingdom, shall find some support of the faith to fight against him.

"Consider, therefore, that the Almighty has provided you, perhaps, for this purpose, that through you He may restore Jerusalem from such debasement. Ponder, I beg you, how full of joy and delight our hearts will be when we shall see the Holy City restored with your little help, and the prophet's, nay divine, words fulfilled in our times. Let your memory be moved by what the Lord Himself says to the Church: 'I will bring thy seed from the East and gather thee from the West.' God has already brought our, seed from the East, since in a double way that region of the East has given the first beginnings of the Church to us. But from the West He will also gather it, provided He repairs the wrongs of Jerusalem through those who have begun the witness of the final faith, that is the people of the West. With God's assistance, we think this can be done through you.

"If neither the words of the Scriptures arouse you, nor our admonitions penetrate your minds, at least let the great suffering of those who desired to go to the holy places stir you up. Think of those who made the pilgrimage across the sea! Even if they were more wealthy, consider what taxes, what violence they underwent, since they were forced to make payments and tributes almost every mile, to purchase release at every gate of the city, at the entrance of the churches and temples, at every side journey from place to place: also, if any accusation whatsoever were made against them, they were compelled to purchase their release; but if they refused to pay money, the prefects of the Gentiles, according to their custom, urged them fiercely with blows. What shall we say of those who took up the journey without anything more than trust in their barren poverty, since they seemed to have nothing except their bodies to lose? They not only demanded money of them, which is not an unendurable punishment, but also examined the callouses of their heels, cutting them open and folding the skin back, lest, perchance, they had sewed something there. Their unspeakable cruelty was carried on even to the point of giving them scammony to drink until they vomited, or even burst their bowels, because they thought the wretches had swallowed gold or silver; or, horrible to say, they cut their bowels open with a sword and, spreading out the folds of the intestines, with frightful mutilation disclosed whatever nature held there in secret. Remember, I pray, the thousands who have perished vile deaths, and strive for the holy places from which the beginnings of your faith have come. Before you engage in His battles, believe without question that Christ will be your standard-bearer and inseparable forerunner."

The most excellent man concluded his oration and by the power of the blessed Peter, absolved all who vowed to go and confirmed those acts with apostolic blessing. He instituted a sign well suited to so honorable a profession by making the figure of the Cross, the stigma of the Lord's Passion, the emblem of the soldiery, or rather, of what was to be the soldiery of God. This, made of any kind of cloth, he ordered to be sewed upon the shirts, cloaks, and byrra of those who were about to go. He commanded that if anyone, after receiving this emblem, or after taking openly this vow, should shrink from his good intent through base change of heart, or any affection for his parents, he should be regarded an outlaw forever, unless he repented and again undertook whatever of his pledge he had omitted. Furthermore, the Pope 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…”

One of Guibert’s primary aim in writing his history was to improve upon the dull prose of the Gesta. For contemporary French nobles looking for a prosaic retelling of the holy war, one which has more in common with a theological tract than a story, Guibert’s account was their go-to. Not that anyone went-to Guibert’s, as his was widely unpopular then, as it is generally disregarded now, both for its overwrought literary style and its unreliability.

Guibert’s version carries many of the major themes of the previous chronicles, such as the desolation of the east, the wickedness of the non-believers who occupy the Holy Land, the calls for Christians to adhere to righteousness and take up the cross, and the imposition of the Truce of God. What makes Guibert’s work unique is the utter centrality of Jerusalem. Here, Urban II uses more words when discussing Jerusalem than he does in his entire speech in other versions. This ties into a theme unique to Guibert which is eschatology. Using Urban II as a mouthpiece, Guibert explains how the retaking of Jerusalem fulfills Biblical prophecy and draws the world closer to the end times.

What do these sources tell us about what actually happened? Even had these writings not contradicted each other we could not say with absolute certainty what the pope said, though we would be able to better guess the speech’s general intent. Our most reliable sources are the letter of Pope Urban II to the people of Flanders, Foucher’s the Gesta Francorum Hierusalem Expugnantium, and the anonymous Gesta francorum et aliorum Hierosolymytanorum, the last of which is known simply as ‘the Gesta.’ Pope Urban II’s letter probably reflects most accurately his intentions, yet given that it was written a month later and to a different audience than those who heard the speech means that those messages are not necessarily identical. Specifically, historians have focused on whether or not Urban II chose Jerusalem as an end goal from the start, or if it was briefly mentioned as a recruiting tool. Other possibilities are that popular enthusiasm for the holy city pushed him to emphasize it in his later preaching, as reflected in the letter. The final possibility is that Urban II made no mention of Jerusalem but that the leaders of the Crusader armies decided to march upon the Holy City when they believed that it was strategically possible.

Given that all the sources except one emphasize the importance of Jerusalem, it is natural to conclude that the holiest city was the crusade’s goal from the start. Unfortunately, that one source is among the most reliable. Foucher’s account focuses on the restoration of Byzantium and the retaking of eastern churches. His work does not preclude Jerusalem as a goal, the Church of the Holy Sepulcher was after all an eastern church, yet it neither focuses on it. Thus, Foucher’s account does not contradict the others, though the fact that Jerusalem is not singled out is a peculiar omission.

The final of the three most trustworthy works is the Gesta. This work makes clear that the Holy Sepulcher in Jerusalem was the final goal of the Crusade. Yet, we must be cautious when dealing with this work given that it was written after the First Crusade had ended. It is possible that this and the later accounts which borrowed from it invented the pope’s command to take Jerusalem to complete a narrative. Furthermore, the Gesta’s writers may have decided that the Pope needed to have ordered the taking of Jerusalem. How else could the crusaders justify the slaughter of so many innocents upon the taking of the city? Not to mention the many atrocities committed along the road. If the pope had only called for restoring Anatolia to the Byzantines would his remission of sins have carried over to the further goal of Jerusalem? Perhaps the writers put words into His Holiness’ mouth to justify the many massacres they witnessed.

We cannot say when Jerusalem became the penultimate purpose of the holy war. However, even if Urban II had not commanded its conquest on the field of Clermont he certainly did so shortly thereafter. What we can say about Urban II’s speech with a measure of certitude is that Urban II tried to reform the mindset of Christians by having them center their religion as the most important identity they carried. He further called upon them to aid the Byzantine Empire on the basis that the Eastern Orthodox were fellow Christians and that the sacred churches had to be saved. The pope justified violence against the Turks as a defensive measure against Muslim aggression. He further characterized the war as a war of liberation to retake territory that rightfully belonged to Christians. Finally, he justified the use of violence through a one-time grant of absolution to all who fought in the eastern campaign.

Aside from the three trustworthy sources there are the three others, which are perhaps not untrustworthy but whose date of completion and separation from events make them less reliable. These are the Historia Hierosolymitana, by Robert of Reims, a text by Baudri of Dol, and the Historia quae dicitur Gesta Dei per Francos by Guibert of Nogent. While these works are of dubious factual quality with regards to Urban II’s speech, they offer a different sort of information. The later accounts are noticeably different than the previous ones and probably reflect the religious and political realities of the time.

The earlier sources dwelt long on the suffering of Greek Christians and the necessity of Western Christian aid. The early works call the Eastern Orthodox ‘brethren’ and other familial or friendly intonations. In contrast, the later works give less attention to helping Greeks or the Byzantine Empire. This is likely because following the First Crusade the Latin Christians developed an icy, if not openly hostile relationship with the Byzantine Empire. Alexios I believed that the Levant rightfully belonged to the Eastern Roman Empire and was none too pleased at the creation of four new countries on his border. Likewise, the failure of Urban II to reconcile the Western and Eastern churches meant that religious conflict continued between the Greeks who followed Eastern Orthodoxy and the Crusaders who followed Catholicism. Thus the later chronicles give far less concern to the well-being of Greeks due to the strained relationship between the Crusaders and the empire.

A significant difference between the early and later sources is that the latter focus far more on violence. The earlier chronicles briefly mention the despoiling of churches or the plight of Anatolian Christians. In contrast, later works go into graphic detail on the many atrocities, real or imagined, by Turks against Christians. Acts of barbarism, sacrilege and cruelty become focal points of Urban II’s monologue as he rails against the iniquities of the heathens and the moral laxity of Christians for allowing such crimes to take place. This narrative shift is probably in response to the events of the First Crusade. During the holy war the Christian armies committed numerous atrocities against those they conquered. These acts were at times so vile and cruel that even the chroniclers were horrified at what their patrons had done. If these acts could not be glorified they could still be justified. Thus, those chronicles written some time after the holy war ended seek to contextualize the Crusaders’ actions as a response to Turkish atrocities, rather than acts of evil solely belonging to the Christians themselves.

The rewriting of history is nothing new. History is in a constant state of redefinition as new sources and perspectives alter existing narratives and create new ones. No sooner had the holy war departed did a war within the holy war took place. Pope, emperor, and the great Franco-Norman and Flemish lords each sought to conquer the holy war and use it to further their own aims. Even after the killing ceased the fighting continued, with ink replacing blood as the marker of power and what was holy. The chroniclers and their patrons each determined to dominate the narrative of this great event in ways that secured their power, enshrined their glorious deeds, spread their deeply-held beliefs and justified the unspeakable acts that they had committed in the name of God.