The Church and the Attacks

            The relationship between the church and the attacks is difficult to determine, since there were several groups who were involved in the attacks in some way, and each group responded in a different manner. These groups include the official church, the main army of crusaders, the popular crusaders, and the local clergy in Germany.

            The official church teaching on the Jews was a strange mix of positive and negative. On the one hand, the Jews were viewed as those who once had revelation from God, but misunderstood it and rejected Christ. They were in a sense better than other groups (since they had the prior revelation), but they were also worse (since they rejected Jesus). And beyond this rejection, they were also the ones who were viewed as killing Jesus. On the other hand, the Jews were not to be killed, and should be protected. The Jews should be allowed to live as Jews and were not to be forced to convert. This strained mixture of attitudes worked well in times of peace and safety, but in times of trouble it broke apart, and 1096 was one of those times of trouble (Chazan European 28-29). Riley-Smith quotes the Council of Toledo, which later passed into canon law: “The holy synod orders concerning the Jews that no one be forced into belief. When God wants to show mercy he does, and when he wants to harden someone’s heart he does so (Romans 9:18). Such men are not saved against their wills, but willingly, so that the pattern of justice may be perfect” (Riley-Smith 61-62).

            Bernard of Clairvaux, writing during the Second Crusade, reflects this teaching when he says “You should not persecute the Jews, you should not slay them, you should not even put them to flight” (Katz 331). The pope apparently learned from the First Crusade because during the Second Crusader there was much greater control over the crusaders, and while there were still attacks on Jews, they were limited compared to the attacks of the First Crusade (Chazan European 173). The church desired to keep the Jews alive, even if they were only alive as second-class citizens.

            The main crusader armies kept to the official teaching for the most part. The majority of the attacks in Germany were not done by the main crusader armies, but by the popular crusaders. While the main crusader was advancing through Israel, there are no records of Jews being killed or targeted for being Jewish. The one major exception is in regards to Jerusalem itself. But even there, and most of the primary sources report massive killing of the Muslims, not of the Jews. The Jews were killed in Jerusalem, not for being Jewish, but for living in Jerusalem. And while Jews were sold into slavery, many of them were redeemed later.

            The popular crusaders in Germany were one of the main instigators behind the attacks there. They were often incited by the local burghers, who took advantage of the presence of the crusaders to attack their Jewish neighbors. Before the crusaders came, many of them said they would help the Jews, killing any who would kill them and protecting the money of the Jews. But when the crusaders came, most of the burghers took their side, abandoning the Jews. The Hebrew Chronicles claim they planned this all along, but probably many were forced by the circumstances to renegade on their promises (“Mainz Anon.” 101-102). These popular crusaders gave the Jews two choices: they could either undergo baptism or die. This was in direct violation of canon law.

            The clergy in Germany for the most part tried to defend the Jews. For example, Bishop John in Speyer rescued the Jews there and cut off the hands of some of those who attacked the Jews (“Mainz Anon.” 101). The bishop in Worms kept some of the Jews in his chambers and protected them from the first wave of attacks, but they were felled in the second wave (“Mainz Anon.” 103). However, their success in defending the Jews seems to be proportional to the strength of the crusaders: when there were many crusaders, not many Jewish lives were saved.

There were varied reasons for the defense of the Jews by the bishops. One of the main reasons is simply trying to keep to the official teaching of the church. The bishops probably realized that the crusaders were distorting the crusader ideal.  Another of the reasons was humanitarian: they did not desire bloodshed. A further practical reason was the desire to keep control: rampaging bands of crusaders is not good for civic rule.

Conclusion

            The attacks on the Jews during the First Crusade were terrible events, but they advanced from complex motivations. It cannot simply be said on the one hand that the church killed the Jews, and on the other hand it cannot be said that the church had no part in the killings. The killings were done by those who were actively opposed by the church, but who were strongly influenced by the church. One of the major lessons to be learned from this incident is the need to examine the implications of what the church is preaching. In this case, the implications of the teachings on the Jews resulted in an extreme interpretation: Kill Jews in the name of Jews. While the church should not be responsible for every extreme fanatic who takes the statements of the church to their logical conclusion (or past them), the church should be careful to examine their teachings for where they could be taken. When there is a possible extremist position, the church should be clear in their denunciation of that position.

Works Cited

Abulafia, Anna Sapir. “The Interrelationship Between the Hebrew Chronicles on the First Crusade.” Journal of Semitic Studies. 27:2 (1982): 221-240.

Blake, Ernest O, and Colin Morris. “A Hermit Goes to War: Peter and the Origins of the First Crusade.” Monks, Hermits, and the Ascetic Tradition. Ed. By W. J. Sheils. Great Britain: T. J. Press, 1985.

Chazan, Robert. European Jewry and the First Crusade. Berkeley: UC Press, 1987.

---. “The Hebrew First-Crusade Narratives and Their Intertextual Messages.” Ki Baruch Hu. Ed. By Robert Chazan, William Hallo, and Lawrence Schiffman. WinonaLake: Eisenbrauns, 1999.

“The Chronicle of Solomon bar Simson.” The Jews and the Crusaders: The Hebrew Chronicles of the First and Second Crusades. Trans. And Ed. By Shlomo Eidelberg. Madison: University of Wisconsin, 1977.

“The Chronicle of Rabbi Eliezer bar Nathan.” The Jews and the Crusaders: The Hebrew Chronicles of the First and Second Crusades. Trans. And Ed. By Shlomo Eidelberg. Madison: University of Wisconsin, 1977.

Eban, Abba. My People. New York: Random House, 1968.

Gichon, Mordechai. Carta’s Atlas of Palestine from Bethther to Tel Hai (Military History). Jerusalem: Carta, 1969). (Hebrew).

Gonzalez, Justo L. The Story of Christianity. Peabody: Prince, 1984.

Johnson, Paul. A History of the Jews. New York: Harper & Row, 1987.

Katz, Steven T. The Holocaust in Historical Context: The Holocaust and Mass Death before the Modern Age. Volume 1. New York: Oxford, 1994.

“Mainz Anonymous.” The Jews and the Crusaders: The Hebrew Chronicles of the First and Second Crusades. Trans. And Ed. By Shlomo Eidelberg. Madison: University of Wisconsin, 1977.

Medieval Sourcebook. “Albert of Aix and Ekkehard of Aura: Emico and the Slaughter of the Rhineland Jews.” www.fordham.edu/halsall/source/1096jews.html. February 11, 2006.

---. “The Siege and Capture of Jerusalem: Collected Accounts.” www.fordham.edu/halsall/source/cde-jlem.html. February 11, 2006.

---. “Urban II (1088-1099): Speech at Council of Clermont, 1095, Five Versions of the Speech.” www.fordham.edu/halsall/source/urban2-5vers.html. February 11, 2006.

Payne, Robert. The Crusades. Hertfordshire: Wordsworth, 1998.

Riley-Smith, Jonathan. “The First Crusade and the Persecution of the Jews.” Persecution and Toleration. Ed. W. J. Sheils. Great Britain: Blackwell, 1984.

Runciman, Steven. A History of the Crusades. Vol 1. Cambridge: Cambridge, 1951.

Schwarzfuchs, Simon. “Crusades.” Encyclopaedia Judaica. Vol 5. Jerusalem: Keter, 1972.

Shelley, Bruce L. “How Could Christians Do This?” Christian History. 40 (1993): 16-19.

Stevenson, William B. “The First Crusade.” The Cambridge Medieval History. Ed. By J. R. Tanner, C. W. Previte-Orton, and Z. N. Brooke. Cambridge: Cambridge, 1968. 265-299.