Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dk4vv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T05:00:21.105Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A Hermit Goes to War: Peter and the Origins of the First Crusade

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 March 2016

E.O. Blake  and
C. Morris
E.O. Blake
Affiliation:
Southampton University
C. Morris
Affiliation:
Southampton University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Just over a century ago Heinrich Hagenmeyer published his definitive book on Peter the Hermit. It has shaped most subsequent discussions of Peter’s career, and it must be said at once that no completely new material has come to light since then. There is, however, a problem of perpetual interest posed by the divergences among twelfth-century accounts of the origins of the First Crusade. Until the advent of modern historiography, it was accepted that the expedition was provoked by an appeal from the church of Jerusalem, brought to the west by Peter the Hermit, who had visited it as a pilgrim, had seen a vision of Christ and had been entrusted by the patriarch with a letter asking for help against the oppression of the Christians there. The crusade was on this view born in the atmosphere of pilgrimage, visions and popular preaching which continued to mark its course, and is so evident in, for example, the discovery of the Holy Lance and the visions and messages which accompanied it. Peter is in some sense the embodiment of these charismatic elements, and there is no controversy about his prominence in the history of the movement. He appears as a sensationally successful preacher, who recruited and led a large contingent which left in advance of the main armies, and was cut to pieces in Asia Minor. Thereafter, he appears in the chronicles in a variety of capacities: as a runaway, and an ambassador to the Moslems, as an adviser, as an associate with the popular element among the crusaders, and finally as a guide to the sacred sites at Jerusalem. It is, however, not with these wider aspects of his career that we wish to deal in this paper, but with his special role in the summoning of the expedition. The older view was that he was its first author. Every student of the early church is familiar with militant monks and hermits. It was once believed that Peter, their spiritual descendant, was the most supremely successful of all the ascetic warmongers.

Type
Research Article
Information
Studies in Church History , Volume 22: Monks, Hermits and the Ascetic Tradition , 1985 , pp. 79 - 107
Copyright
Copyright © Ecclesiastical History Society 1985

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Hagenmeyer, [H.], Peter [der Eremite (Leipzig 1879 Google Scholar)]. French version, Le vrai et le faux sur Pierre l’Hermite (Paris 1883 Google Scholar).

2 Somerville, Robert, The Councils of Urban II, i: Decreta Claromontensia (Amsterdam 1972) pp. 74, 108, 124 Google Scholar. Letters to Flanders and Bologna in Hagenmeyer, H., Epistulae et cartae (repr Hildesheim-New York 1973 Google Scholar) no 2 and 3; to Vallombrosa in Kehr, P., Italia Pontificia III p. 89 Google Scholar no 8 (Göttingen Nachrichten 1901 p. 313). On departing crusaders, Cowdrey, H.E.J., ‘Pope Urban’s preaching of the First Crusade’, History 55 (1970) pp. 177–88 Google Scholar. Jerusalem is prominent in the acccounts of Urban’s address in Guibert [of Nogent, Gesta Dei per Francos, RHC Occ, IV]; Robert [of Reims, Historia Iherosolimitana, RHC Occ III]; and Baudri [of Bourgueil, Historia Jerosolimitana, RHC Occ IV]. It is absent from the summary of the address in Fulcher of Chartres, Historia Hierosolymitana, ed Hagenmeyer, H. (Heidelberg 1913 Google Scholar) but Fulcher makes it clear that he regarded it as the intended objective (i.33 p. 323; i 5 p. 149; ii 16 p. 428).

3 Duncalf, F., ‘The Peasants’ Crusade’, American Historical Review 26 (1920-1) pp. 440–53 Google Scholar, expressly states that ‘the first mention of Peter’s activity finds him in Berry soon after the Council of Clermont’ (p. 442), and Febvre, Y. Le, Pierre l’ermite et la croisade (Amiens 1946 Google Scholar) dismisses the story of Peter’s earlier involvement as a legend (p. 113). Peter’s pilgrimage is mentioned, but given only a small place in the emergence of the crusade, in Runciman, [S.], [A History of the Crusades vol I (Cambridge 1951)] pp. 113—4 Google Scholar, and Mayer, [H.E.], [The Crusades (Oxford 1972)] PP. 42–3 Google Scholar.

4 Charanis, P., ‘Byzantium, the west and the origins of the First Crusade’, Byzantion 19 (1949) pp. 17–36 Google Scholar; Caspar, E., Das Register Gregors VII (MGH Ep ii) II.31, pp. 165–8 Google Scholar; Erdmann, C., The Origin of the Idea of Crusade (Princeton 1977 Google Scholar).

5 Mayer, pp. 10–12 Google Scholar.

6 Robert, i.5, p. 731 Google Scholar; Guibert, ii.8, p. 142 Google Scholar. Guibert’s words ciratmire vidimus are naturally read as indicating that he had seen Peter.

7 Peter, Hagenmeyer, pp. 30–40 Google Scholar.

8 See Moore, R.I., The Birth of Popular Heresy (London 1975) pp. 31, 34 Google Scholar. Robert similarly reported that Peter ‘super ipsos praesules et abbates apice religionis efferebatur’, i.5, p. 731.

9 Hagenmeyer, , Peter pp. 46–8 Google Scholar, where however he dismisses the idea of Peter’s learning.

10 Conversely, there is good reason to think that the preaching of Robert of Arbrissel was authorised by Urban II early in 1096, but no evidence that he was actually involved in preaching the crusade. Baudri, Vita Roberti de Arbrissello ii 14 (PL 162.1050 C), printed Hagenmeyer, Peter, pp. 370–1. However, in a passage discussed later, Albert of Aachen describes Peter as ‘factus praedicator’.

11 Baudri i.8, p. 17.

12 Bernold, , Chronkon (MGH SS V p. 462 Google Scholar).

13 See Runciman, pp. 106–27 Google Scholar and Hagenmeyer, H., Chronologie de la première croisade (repr Hildesheim 1973)Google Scholar.

14 The relevant passages are printed in parallel columns in Hagenmeyer, , Peter pp. 320–329 Google Scholar.

15 Between the last event recorded in it (1119) and the date of the earliest extant MS (c. 1140–50 according to Knoch, [P.], [Studien zu Albert von Aachen (Stuttgart Beitraege zur Geschichte und Politik I, Stuttgart 1966)] pp. 28, 82 Google Scholar; 1158 according to Cahen, [C], [La Syrie du Nord à l’Époque des Croisades (Paris 1940)] p. 12 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

16 RHC Occ I bks 1–8; Knoch pp. 29–30.

17 It survives in the only MS of the Historia Belli Sacri, prefixed to the latter (RHC Occ III p. 169 seq), which is variously dated c. 1140 or c. 1130–40, and it used the Cesta Tancredi by Radulf of Caen (RHC Occ III) written 1112–1118 (Cahen pp. 9–11; Knoch p. 45).

18 Date and composition are the subject of debate, most recently by Sumberg, L.A., La chanson d’Antioche: Étude historique et litteraire. Une chronique en vers français de la première croisade par le pèlerin Richard (Paris 1968 Google Scholar) and Duparc-Quioc, Suzanne. [La Chanson d’Antioche. (Documents relatifs à l’histoire des croisades XI, 2 vols Paris 1977, 1978 Google Scholar)]. For the dates see Duparc-Quioc 2 p. 252 and for a summary of the literature on the chanson ibid p. 19.

19 The relevant excerpt is printed in Hagenmeyer, Peter p. 304 seq.

20 Annales Rosenveldenses, MGH SS XVI p. 101 (Wattenbach-Holtzmann, Deutschlands Geschichtsquellen im Mittelalter, Deutsche Kaiserzeit I pp. 596–597).

21 Albert ‘Historia Hierosolymitana’, RHC Occ IV bk 1 cap 2.

22 Ibid bk i cap 3.

23 Ibid cap 4.

24 Ibid cap 5, followed by an earthquake portending the departure of legions from diverse kingdoms, see below p. 96.

25 Ibid caps 11—16.

26 Ibid cap 13.

27 Ibid cap 14.

28 Ibid cap 15, p. 42.

29 Ibid bk 8 cap 23.

30 Duparc-Quioc 1 p. 20 verse 13.

31 Ibid 1 p. 21 verses 68–77.

32 Ibid 1 pp. 53–54.

33 Hagenmeyer, , Peter pp. 320–328 Google Scholar, under the heading Historia Belli Sacri. It is impossible within the limits of this paper to define the variants and agreements in these four sources more closely. They are discussed in detail by Knoch, pp. 32, 45–51 Google Scholar; Duparc-Quioc, 2 pp. 100–102, 148–149 Google Scholar; Hagenmeyer, , Peter pp. 53–94 Google Scholar.

34 Ibid pp. 80–81.

35 Ibid pp. 86–94.

36 Ibid pp. 52–59.

37 Ibid pp. 70–79.

38 This translation from the Greek ( Hagenmeyer, , Peter pp. 304–305 Google Scholar) is deliberately literal to capture the ambiguity of the original. The natural meaning here of ‘failing in his object’ is presumably that he did not succeed in worshipping at the Holy Sepulchre; yet his trouble with the Turks seems to have occurred only on his return journey. Cf. the translation by Sewter, [E.R.A.], The Alexiad of Anna Comnena (Penguin 1969)] p. 10 Google Scholar.

39 Hagenmeyer, , Peter pp. 79–81 Google Scholar. In Sybel’s view the tendency behind the growth of this legend was to ascribe the chief part of the papal influence on the crusade to the ascetic ideal in the person of Peter; Sybel, [Heinrich von], [Geschichte des ersten Kreuzzugs (2 ed Leipzig 1881)] p. 195 Google Scholar.

40 See below p. 97.

41 According to Albert Bk i cap 15, Peter ‘statura pusillus sed sermone et corde magnus’ explained the pilgrimage aim of the crusade to Alexius in Constantinople. Sewter, Cf., The Alexiad p. 311 Google Scholar. But that still leaves the objection that writers of crusade accounts at first hand made no comment about Peter’s special commission when they mention his name.

42 Sybel p 111, with an impressive appreciation of William’s crusade history, pp. 108–142.

43 Knoch, pp. 29–63 Google Scholar and see Appendix below.

44 For samples of the evidence see Appendix below.

45 The question is central to any analysis of Graindor’s chanson and the literature is extensive. See especially now Sumberg and the summary of literature in Duparc- Quioc 2 p. 19.

46 See Appendix below.

47 Especially the lords of Saint-Pol who held a fief in the Artois and apparently the ruffian Tafurs, Duparc-Quioc 2 pp. 229–234 and Sumberg, ‘The “Tafurs” and the First Crusade’, Medieval Studies 21 (1959) pp. 233–234.

48 Hagenmeyer, Cf., Peter pp. 108–112, 123–128 Google Scholar.

49 MGH SS VI, p. 367; ibid V, p. 464.

50 E.g. Frutolf-Ekkehard; see Appendix below.

51 Luke 21, 24; but the Vulgate distinguishes between gentes and nationes: ‘et Jerusalem calcabitur a gentibus: donee impleantur tempora nationum’.

52 MGH SS XVI, p. 101.

53 E.g. Annales Stadenses, Annales Palidenses (Poehlden), Annales Magdeburgenses, Annalista Saxo. See below, Appendix p. 107; also Knoch p. 51 n54.

54 Below, Appendix p. 107.

55 William was born about 1130, perhaps in Jerusalem, and probably spent some of his boyhood there (William of Tyre, A History of Deeds done beyond the Sea, trans Babcock, E.W. and Krey, A.C. (New York 1943) I pp. 6, 8 Google Scholar; Knoch p. 29.

56 Bk 1 cap 11; Bk 8 cap 8; Bk 8 cap 23.

57 ‘Praecursor’ is a commonly used epithet, of course, for John the Baptist, though not in the gospels, e.g. ‘praecursore enim iam functo officium praeparata via domini’ (Tertullian, Adv. Marcionem, Opp I, 18, 7, CCSL I, p. 590); ‘primum Baptista Johannes regnum caelorum praedicat ut praecursor Domini hoc honoretur privilegio (Jerome, Commentaire sur S. Matthieu I, SCR 242 p 88).

58 MGH SS V, p. 464.

59 This chronicle is best now consulted in the edition by Schmale, F.-J. and Schmale-Ott, I., Frutolj[s und] Ekkehard[s Chroniken und die Anonyme Kaiserchronik] (Freiherr vom Stein Gedaechtnis Ausgabe: Ausgewaehlte Quellen zur deutschen Geschichte des Mittelalters 15, Darmstadt 1972 Google Scholar), where the relationship between Frutolf s chronicle and the revision and continuation of it by Ekkehard has been clearly worked out and presented in the text.

60 Frutolf under the year 1096 (ibid pp. 106–108). It may suggest that the name Petrus Heremita was sometimes satirised as Petrus Hypocrita. For Ekkehard’s amendment see ibid pp. 124–126.

61 Under the year 1099, ibid p. 130, and, issued separately from the chronicle under the title ‘Hierosolymita’ ibid p. 326 seq, but only the prologue to it is here printed. For the full text see RHC Occ V pt I pp. 11, 16–21.

62 Frutolf-Ekkehard pp. 132, 142–144. The opening entry in Frutolfs 1096 annal may have given Ekkehard the cue, i.e. ‘Signum in sole’ which matches Luke 21, 25 ‘signa in sole’.

63 Ibid p. 144.

64 Hierosolymita p. 17.

65 But, interestingly, Peter was to be cited by St Bernard, with regard to the Second Crusade, as a dire warning to people against listening to anyone who, ‘amans gerere primatum inter vos’, might wish to go it alone in advance of the main expedition, Leclercq, J., ‘L’encyclique de Saint Bernard en faveur de la croisade’, RB 81 (1971) pp. 282–308 esp p. 299 Google Scholar.

66 Albert bk 1 cap 23.

67 Hierosolymita p. 21.

68 Ibid.

69 His appearances in the Gesta Francorum are oddly ambivalent. The name Petrus Heremita clearly needs no introduction, as when mentioned among the crusade leaders (p. 2) and as envoy to Kerbogah (pp. 66–67). He is not with his troops in their fatal battle, having gone to Constantinople because he could not command their obedience (p. 4). He is brought back, with William Carpentarius, to Antioch in disgrace, but his secret withdrawal is explained as due to ‘immense misery’ (p. 33). He stayed in Jerusalem when the princes rode out to do battle at Ascalon (in contrast to Albert’s story that he turned out by special request to join the army later with the holy Cross) but took a leading part in organizing the clergy at Jerusalem in processions, prayer and almsgiving. It looks as though the Anonymous silently avoids a possible criticism of the Hermit’s poor attendance record in battle. Raymond d’Aguilers also introduces Peter without comment (pp. 44, 79). But the blame for the Civetot disaster and the consequent growth in confidence of the Turks is not the fault of Peter but of Alexius (pp. 44–45); Peter is noted as having to be forced to bow to Kerbogah (p. 79) and mentioned, without explanation, as the man put in charge of the poor, clergy and lay folk, for the distribution of their half share of the tithe (p. 111).

70 Baudri still calls him Petrus quidam magnus heremita (RHC Occ IV, p. 15). But Robert the Monk ascribes the failure of his expedition to the lack of a prudent chief (and the word prudens may well, as in the Gesta Francorum carry the sense ‘proud homme’ prowess) to rule it, ‘just as every congregation of men which is not governed by a bonus auctor languishes daily if a languid head is put in charge of it’ (RHC Occ III, p. 732). Guibert used the occasion of Peter’s flight from Antioch because of the food shortage there to ridicule him in a few satirical verses on the themes of ‘the star fallen from the sky’ and ‘practise what you preached’, rebuking him for his immoderate diet and his failure to live up to the name of Hermit, (RHC Occ IV, p. 174 Google Scholar; Hagenmeyer, , Peter pp. 47, 219 Google Scholar).

71 Especially if Knoch is right in dating Albert’s prologue as early as 1100–1101 and Books 1–6 (as far as the capture of Jerusalem) soon after 1102 (p. 89).