A Pilgrim's Journey: Clermont-Ferrand, France

On what was probably a crisp November morning in 1095AD, the sizeable Medieval town of Clermont played the stage for an event that would give birth to a phenomenon in European medieval history that would continue for at least the next two centuries and leave an indelible mark on the development of Western civilization forever after.  The incident in question came at the close of what otherwise had been a relatively unimportant Church council that had convened in Clermont by order of the Pope, Urban II.  The last decades of the 11^th Century had seen several such councils, mostly dealing with the doctrinal and administrative affairs arising from the Church’s recent victory over the Holy Roman emperors in the Investiture Crisis and the Cluniac Reforms.  Pope Urban himself was very much a product of these movements – his mentor had been Hildebrand himself, known to history as St Pope Gregory VII who strove with Emperor Henry IV of Germany his entire papacy to elevate Church affairs above the authority of secular powers.  Before he was elevated to the Papacy (when he was still known by his birthname, Odo of Chatillon), he had been intimately connected to the Cluniac revival streaming out of Southern and Central France, even serving as the prior for the abbey at Cluny for a time.  Although he briefly had to deal with an anti-pope, Clement, installed by the ever-troublesome Henry IV early on in his papacy, Urban was soon able to turn his attentions to affairs taking place in Christendom beyond Europe.  The Byzantine Empire, still reeling from its disastrous defeat at Manzikert in 1071, had begun to send out diplomatic feelers towards Rome at the direction of Emperor Alexios Komnenos.  While there were still considerable doctrinal and cultural issues between the Western and Eastern Churches of the time, it seemed the immediate threat of the Seljuk Turks might produce some sort of reconciliation between the two.  Urban enthusiastically embraced the possibility and, at the Council of Piacenza earlier in 1095, had given promises of aid to the Byzantine ambassadors in attendance.

            However, Urban’s vision went far beyond merely helping the Byzantines recover their recent losses – he ultimately envisioned the liberation of the birthplace of Christianity lost nearly four centuries prior to Islam at the hands of knights from the West.  While the idea was certainly a radical one for the time, it was not wholly new – Urban’s saintly predecessor Gregory had issued spiritual indulgences for knights fighting the Moors in Spain and had also wished to send warriors eastward to win back Jerusalem.  It was also novel in that it provided the knightly class of the West – a class often excluded from spiritual salvation in the rather anti-martial Cluniac vision – with a fitting and even noble role in the Kingdom of God.  With the Investiture Crisis in the past and the German Emperor relatively tamed, Urban probably felt that this was the time to make this dream a reality.  At the closing of the Council in Clermont, great throngs had gathered to seek the papal blessing – laymen of all walks of life and station were there among the clerics and other religious in a large field according to some sources.  There, Pope Urban preached to them all what would become the First Crusade.  Although Urban’s words were recorded by many different chroniclers from the time, the version of his address in Fulcher of Chartres (who is widely believed to have been personally present unlike the others):

"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 meant also for those who are absent. Moreover, Christ commands it."

With these fiery words to all of the West – noblemen and commoners, knights and monks, clerics and laymen – the Crusading phenomenon came into being amid shouts of “God wills it!” from the crowd.  The rest is, as they say, history.

            The actual city that hosted this pivotal event in history is certainly fitting in many ways.  Clermont-Ferrand is located in the Auvergne Region of South-Central France – a region dominated by what the French call the Massif Central, a large chain of low-lying mountains similar to the American Appalachians.  Clermont itself is nestled among dormant volcanic peaks that surround its skyline.

 

One of the many impressive dormant volcanos around Clermont - these would have most certainly served as a fitting back drop for Pope Urban's speech in 1095.

The volcanic nature of its environs is omnipresent – dark, igneous stone can be seen in all its architecture and hot springs have been used for thermal baths since Antiquity.  Clermont sits atop a rich and far-reaching historical legacy as well.  Roman sources place the Gallic settlement of Nemossos on the site, considered by many to be the ancient capital of the Arverni tribe that gave Julius Caesar so much grief during his famed conquest of Gaul in the last century before Christ.  The last Arverni chieftain, Vercingetorix, is something of a local hero and his visage can be found in multiple locations throughout the city today.

 

Alleged homegrown hero Vercingetorix as remembered by 19th Century Romanticism on the Place de Jaude.  Interestingly, this statue was made by Frédéric Bartholdi who is far more famous for crafting the Statue of Liberty.

After the Roman conquest, a new city was founded and named Augustonamentum after the reigning emperor at the time, Octavian Augustus.  The name Clermont didn’t appear until the 9^th Century, named for a Carolingian fort called Clarus Mons.  The Church was very active within Clermont and served as a focal point for many saints and bishops of the early Church in France – the council of 1095 was actually the second Church council to be held there, the first being in the 6^th Century.

 

Remnants of walls and foundations originally laid down sometime around the fall of the Western Roman Empire.

The oldest church in the city still present is the Notre Dame du Port, located on the edge of the old city center near what many believe to have been a gate (hence the “du Port”).  Built in the heavy Romanesque style popular in regions heavily affected by the constant warfare and Viking incursions of the 7^th-9^th Centuries, the church has a distinct fortress look to it.

 

 

 

Inside, the Spartan look is enhanced even more by the unadorned and whitewashed walls.  Sadly, this highlights another rather tragic feature of not only this church, but many within France today – the vandalism and damage suffered during more modern upheavals.  Many of the artwork both inside and out was heavily defaced primarily in the aftermath of the ferociously anti-Catholic French Revolution.

 

 

 

This damage is especially obvious in the defaced 10^th-11^th Century sculptures that sit above this church’s main doors.

 

 

However, some art did survive and the capitals of the pillars are all original to the structure, sporting intricate carvings depicting various scenes from Scripture and local mythology.

 

One of the surviving pillar capitals depicting warriors kitted out very much in the style of the 11th-12th Centuries.  Note the pointed conical helms, kite shields, and the mail coif covering the face of the figure to left. (Apologies for the image quality!)

Below, the crypt gives one a glimpse of the earliest architecture that can be seen, with a crude vault possibly dating as far back as the 6^th Century.  Enshrined within is a small statue of the Virgin and Child that has been associated with the local Christian community since the 12^th Century.  Although there are no survivng references to the Crusades, this was most likely the principle religious building at the time of Urban’s council in 1095.

 

Virgin's crypt and possibly the oldest portion of Notre Dame du Port.

Notre Dame du Port was soon eclipsed, however, by the impressive Notre Dame de l’Assomption Cathedral.  Straddling the main hill and covering the site of the old Roman forum, the Cathedral was begun around 1248 and, like many grand medieval cathedrals, was slowly added to over the next several centuries.  Built in the characteristic High Gothic style, its massive stained glass windows, delicate stonework, and soaring buttresses stand in marked contrast to its elder sister church’s thick walls and heavy pillars.  Another unique feature is the solid black color of the entire structure, as it was built almost entirely with the dark volcanic stone characteristic of the local area.

 

Again, the evidence of vandalism is strong here too – entire stained glass windows are missing and replaced with plain glass and much of the original medieval artwork inside is scrubbed away.  Thankfully, there are still a few specimens that can be seen, to include one that appears to show a crusader in mounted combat and a 14^th Century depiction of the martyrdom of St. Sebastian that possibly portrays a bow modeled after the English longbows that were causing so much grief in France at the time.  Again, sadly, there are no references to Pope Urban or the Crusades within or without. 

 

Longbow?  Perhaps ...



In fact, there seems to be very little today of the Crusades in the city that witnessed the birth of the crusading phenomenon as a whole.  The only ones I could find were small medallions in the street depicting Pope Urban alongside others depicting other local greats, Vercigetorix and Blaise Pascal, and a school named for Godfrey of Boullion.

 

A lonely and little noticed memorial to a great man and an even greater event.

Perhaps the Crusades were never a major focus of remembrance here or, like so many other places in the modern West, the memory of its involvement in the Crusading era was deemed too problematic for preservation.  Either way, visiting Clermont – while certainly a worthwhile experience in itself – can be slightly disappointing for one seeking Crusading artifacts and references.  Perhaps it’s best to simply imagine what it was like to have been among the throng that November day, surrounded by the ancient forested volcanic cones of the Massif Central, and hearing those words that set all of Christendom aflame.

To be continued … on to Tuscany!

 

Rand L. Brown II is a Founding member of Real Crusades History.  He is currently on his way to Jerusalem on pilgrimage and will be sharing the experience with RCH members and fans as he goes along.

Book Review: Steven Runciman - A History of the Crusades: Volume II The Kingdom of Jerusalem and the Frankish East, 1100-1187

For many decades Steven Runciman's overview of the Crusades was considered the definitive popular work on the subject, while Runciman himself was the go-to man for Crusades history. However, all that changed in the last forty to thirty years with the rise of better, more thorough scholarly methods (such as computer management of huge amounts of charter information through the use of random-access databases). A new generation of scholars, such as Jonathan Riley-Smith, Christopher Tyerman, Bernard Hamilton, Thomas Madden, Helen Nicholson, Jonathan Philips, etc, have revealed the Crusades to us on a far more in-depth and objective level than was ever attained by Runciman.

Runciman's work has not aged well. His sweeping generalizations and obvious biases have become painfully dated next to the groundbreaking scholarship that has come after him. Runciman was unashamedly petty in allowing his personal likes and dislikes to color his analysis. Within a few pages it's clear that Runciman deeply disliked the Crusaders and favored the Byzantines and Muslims. He attacks figures like Reynald of Chatillon as morally repugnant, meanwhile he lionizes Saladin, saying that his conquest of Jerusalem was "civilized". Runciman fails to sympathize with the thousands of Christian women and children sold into slavery by Saladin at Jerusalem; perhaps they might have disagreed that Saladin was civil. At any rate, it's not for the historian to make morally sharp judgments of character anyway, rather he should attempt to present all sides as objectively as possible, and in this respect Runciman's work is an absolute failure.

What's good about this volume is that it provides a basic, linear outline of the history of the Crusader States from 1100 to 1187. In my writing and research I have used this book as an outline for the period, though I am always deeply suspicious of Runciman's assessments that go beyond mere names and dates. I always check his work against the more current scholarship of professors like Riley-Smith, Tyerman, Philips, and others. I strongly urge all readers of this book to do the same.

"How the Crusades Saved Western Civilization" by Peter Seferian

Editor's Note:  The following is a speech written and presented by high school senior and RCH member, Peter Seferian, for his 3rd Period Communications Class.  This is a great example of the sort of work we here at RCH hope to provide scholarly support and feedback for those interested in becoming Crusades scholars.  Individuals like Peter will be the next generation of historians who will hopefully turn back the tide of modern misunderstanding about the Crusades and the medieval period in general.

How The Crusades Saved Western Civilization

 

It is evening of November 13^th, 2015. 130 people have been killed by Islamic State militants in Paris, 89 of which were gunned down at the Bataclan Theatre, while attending a performance by The Eagles of Death Metal. President Francois Hollande orders a national state of emergency and declares war on the Islamic State. Fast forward three weeks later. Fourteen people are killed at a Christmas party in San Bernadino, California. The perpetrators, a Muslim couple wielding assault rifles, who had just previously left their six-month old daughter at home, to slaughter their coworkers. Shortly after both of these atrocities, President Obama rushed to remind us not to be persuaded into thinking that events such as these “be defined as [part of] a war between America and Islam.” Adding that groups like ISIS are not Islamic and that they are merely just “thugs and killers-part of a cult of death. And account for a tiny fraction of more than a billion Muslims around the world”. Following the Charlie Hebdo attacks of last year, he even told us “not to get on our high horse and think that this is unique to some other place” and “to remember that during the Crusades and the Inquisition, people committed terrible deeds in the name of Christ.” Obama is not alone in this line of thinking. After every deplorable act of violence committed in the name of Islam, apologists in the West always claim that Islam is incompatible with this kind of behavior and that other religions, specifically Christianity, have done far worse in the past. What is their proof of this? Why, the Crusades of course. After all, the Crusades were nothing more than a series of unprovoked attacks against peaceful Muslims by angry, European bigots, right? Isn’t the reason why the Islamic world is so cross with us because of what our ancestors did hundreds of years ago? Or, is the answer to why the Crusades happened not as simple as that? We need to re-evaluate our understanding of the Crusades. To do this, we need to go back to a particular series of events in history that would eventually lead to what we know today as the Crusades.

 

            So what were the Crusades? Well, contrary to the popular belief that the Crusades were a series of religious conquests motivated by power hungry popes, whose hatred for Muslims was dwarfed only by their desire for wealth, the Crusades were actually defensive in nature. Since it’s inception, Islam was a faith founded on conquest. After the death of the prophet Muhammed, a series of caliphs (a type of warrior king in Islamic though) continued his tradition of jihad (the Islamic concept of holy war) against the unbelievers. Within a century, Muslims had conquered Persia, Egypt, and Syria, formerly ruled by Christians and Polytheists. In the following centuries, Arab Muslims would conquer Spain, invade parts of France, and sack the city of Rome. In 1095, Emperor Alexius I Comnenus, ruler of the Byzantine Empire wrote to Pope Urban II for help. The Byzantines were quickly losing their war against the Seljuk Empire and feared for their annihilation. Pope Urban called upon the lords of Europe to come together and help the Byzantines repel the Seljuks and reclaim the holy city of Jerusalem. According to leading Crusades historian Jonathan Riley-Smith of Oxford University, crusading was seen as “an act of love”. This was because thousands of men, many of whom were wealthy and owned vast swaths of land, risked their lives and possessions to come to the aid of their Christian brethren. This is not to say everyone that went on the Crusades was a saint or that Christians have never committed any atrocities of their own. Of course they have. In fact, on the way to the Holy Land during the First Crusade, a rogue continent of crusaders slaughtered a massive number of Jews living in the Rhineland. However, this was condemned by the Church and had nothing to do with the original intent of the Crusades. Regardless, you can see now that the Crusades were not a series of unprovoked attacks against peaceful Muslims, but rather a delayed response to four centuries of Islamic aggression against the West.

 

            So where does this idea of the Crusades come from? Why is it that when we think of the Crusades, we immediately think of Christian Europe and the Catholic Church calling upon their armies to conquer in the name of God? This narrative has been perpetuated ever since Sir Walter Scott published his novel, The Talisman, in 1825. In The Talisman, Scott portrays the Crusaders, such as Richard The Lionheart, as barbaric, backward, brutes, while the Muslims, specifically Saladin, as nineteenth century liberal gentlemen. Scott’s view of the Crusades was strongly influenced by his upbringing during the Enlightenment. A time in which Europeans looked back on the Crusades as an event manifested in unnecessary barbarism against a superior Eastern civilization. This sentiment was echoed by English writer, Sir Steven Runciman, in his three-volume work, A History of The Crusades, published in the 1950s. The Runciman narrative became the traditional narrative of the Crusades during the 20^th century, as it was used as the principle reference for a 1995 BBC documentary series about the Crusades, hosted by Terry Jones of Monty Python fame, and for the 2005 Hollywood feature film, Kingdom of Heaven, starring Orlando Bloom and directed by Ridley Scott. Both of these films, though wildly inaccurate, reflect the West’s current attitude towards the Crusades. The West feels a sense of immeasurable guilt for the sins of it’s past, such as colonialism and the slave trade, and blames it’s actions for the current problems of the world. While self-criticism can be a healthy endeavor, going so far as to distort history and create a false sense of moral equivalency between the West and the Islamic world, does nothing to solve our current conflict.

 

            While the West certainly has plenty of things to be ashamed of, the Crusades are not one of them. In fact, the Crusades may have saved the West. Before the Crusades, Europe was impoverished and fraught with disunity. Internal squabbles between neighboring kingdoms over land and power were commonplace. It wasn’t until the Crusades began that the lords of Europe put aside their differences in order to combat this external, alien threat. Though the Crusaders were eventually forced out of the Holy Land, it was the idea of crusading that forced the European nations to band together when threatened by the Ottoman Turks during later centuries. Had the Europeans not come together to face this threat, the values that we hold so dear, such as individual rights, freedom of religion, and freedom of speech may have been lost forever.

 

            In conclusion, the legacy of the Crusades should not be looked at as another historical atrocity, but a source of pride in European history. Those of us of European descent owe our ancestors a debt of gratitude for fighting to ensure our future. Those men were no less heroic than the men who fought for the Allies during the World War II. The negative image of the Crusades in our culture prohibits us from recognizing the true nature of the threat we face today. Islamic totalitarian regimes such as Iran and Saudi Arabia continue to be the two greatest sponsors of global terrorism on the planet. Our ignorance of history causes us to fear correctly identifying the enemy, and leads us to think of ourselves as no better than they are. We need to reject this line of thinking and champion the spirit of those that came before if we are to prevail.

04/19/16

-Peter Seferain will be attending St. Edward's University in Austin, TX, this fall and has plans to continue writing on medieval history and the Crusades.

Review for "Why Does the Heathen Rage" by J. Stephen Roberts

            If there was one word I could muster to sum up the stirring narrative contained in J. Stephen Roberts’ newest historical fiction novel Why Does the Heathen Rage, it would have to be “intimate.”  Seldom have I read a story that incorporated such a high degree of intimacy within it – intimacy with regards to the characters and their relations with each other, intimacy in its portrayal of the historical setting, and the intimacy with which the author bears to the reader the “artistic soul” at the heart of it all.

            The setting is indeed a unique one.  Taking place during the reign of King Baldwin II (formerly Baldwin of Bourcq who, as a young man, had ridden alongside his elder cousins, Godfrey of Bouillon and Baldwin of Boulogne, during the First Crusade), it covers the pivotal period during the king’s reign as he faced the ever-increasing crisis of the Ortoqid incursions under Balak ibn-Bahram into the Principality of Antioch and the County of Edessa in the 1120s.  However, this is not a dry recounting of maneuvering armies or monolithic kings and commanders.  It is a story about the people, great and small – known and unknown, who lived through these trying and (at times) desperate years of the infant Crusader States in the Levant.  This is best seen in the two characters the story mostly centers around, Baldwin’s spirited daughter Melisande and her fictitious childhood friend, Robert of Bures, now a newly minted knight of the Latin Kingdom.  The dance between these two characters alone makes this novel a must read – two children born and raised in Frankish Outremer, living under the imposing legacies of Crusading heroes whose deeds were still within living memory, and who now face the daunting prospect of having to risk and sacrifice all to ensure the dream of a Latin Jerusalem doesn’t die on their watch – all while struggling with the feelings and emotions natural to a young man and woman who may feel more for one another than mere friendship.

            In terms of historical authenticity, the intimate detail incorporated in this novel is superb.  While it is obvious that the author invested incredible amounts of scholarly research into the making of this work, he was able to infuse such details in such a manner that it avoids coming off heavy-handed or dry.  It also provides – perhaps one of the first such portrayals in medieval historical fiction – an incredibly honest look at the cultures and societies on all sides of the conflicts for the Levant – Latin Christian, Orthodox Armenian and Greek, and the Muslim Turks and Arabs.  While there are scenes of shocking brutality and violence, everything portrayed is supported by top-notch scholarly evidence and is refreshingly clear of anything remotely resembling modernist commentary or agenda.  Speaking as a military historian who specializes in the medieval period, the author’s depiction of the realities of combat in the Frankish kingdoms of the 12^th Century is quite possibly one the best I’ve ever encountered in the historical fiction genera and his climax of the Battle of Azaz in 1125 rivals those from the likes of Bernard Cornwell or one of the Shaaras.

            Overall, Why Does the Heathen Rage is an intimate story of people, great and small, who lived in what is perhaps one of the most important (and, today, controversial) periods in the history of the West.  It will enthrall, shock, inform, and inspire any reader who encounters it.  Hopefully, if we are lucky, we will see more stories like this in the future of the genera.

-Rand L. Brown II is a founder and regular contributor for RCH.  He currently studies graduate-level medieval military history and serves as Editor-in-Chief for the RCH Society Blog.

Why Does the Heathen Rage? A Novel of the Crusades by J Stephen Roberts - AVAILABLE NOW!

It's here! My novel, Why Does the Heathen Rage? has finally been released! Get a copy, and delve into the reign of King Baldwin II of Jerusalem. 

Click here to get your copy from Amazon

The Third Crusade: The Battle of Jaffa, 1192

The Third Crusade: The Battle of Jaffa Podcast on Soundcloud

After his decision not to attack Jerusalem, Richard the Lionheart returns to Acre to prepare for an assault on Beirut. But Saladin, badly losing the war, takes this opportunity to try and turn things around by seizing Jaffa. Richard immediately boards a ship and heads for Jaffa, prepared to fight Saladin with everything he's got. Join J Stephen Roberts, Rand Brown, Dr. Helena Schrader, and Dr. Stephen Donnachie for this fascinating discussion of the final military engagement of the Third Crusade!

The Third Crusade: Results and Impact

In the second segment of our final episode of the Third Crusade podcast, J Stephen Roberts is joined by historians Dr. Helena Schrader and Dr. Stephen Donnachie to discuss the results and impact of the Third Crusade. How did the Crusade change the West, the East, and how did the figures of Richard and Saladin come to loom so large in history?