into the other, and both, it would seem, the work of human
hands. ... The outer harbour was rectangular, about 1,400 feet
long and 1,100 broad, and was appropriated to merchant
vessels; the inner was circular like a drinking cup, whence it
was called the Cothon, and was reserved for ships of war. It
could not be approached except through the merchant harbour,
and the entrance to this last was only 70 feet wide, and could
be closed at any time by chains. The war harbour was entirely
surrounded by quays, containing separate docks for 220 ships.
In front of each dock were two Ionic pillars of marble, so
that the whole must have presented the appearance of a
splendid circular colonnade. Right in the centre of the
harbour was an island, the headquarters of the admiral."
_R. B. Smith, Carthage and the Carthaginians, chapter 20._
COTSETI.
See SLAVERY, MEDIÆVAL AND MODERN: ENGLAND.
COTTON, Reverend John and the colony of Massachusetts Bay.
See MASSACHUSETTS: A. D. 1631-1636.
COTTON FAMINE, The.
See ENGLAND: A. D. 1861-1865.
COTTON-GIN:
Eli Whitney's invention and its effects.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1818-1821.
COTTON MANUFACTURE:
The great inventions in spinning and weaving.
"Cotton had been used in the extreme East and in the extreme
West from the earliest periods of which we have any record.
The Spaniards, on their discovery of America, found the
Mexicans clothed in cotton. ... But though the use of cotton
had been known from the earliest ages, both in India and
America, no cotton goods were imported into Europe; and in the
ancient world both rich and poor were clothed in silk, linen,
and wool. The industrious Moors introduced cotton into Spain.
Many centuries afterwards cotton was imported into Italy,
Saxony and the Low Countries. Isolated from the rest of
Europe, with little wealth, little industry, and no roads;
rent by civil commotions; the English were the last people in
Europe to introduce the manufacture of cotton goods into their
own homes. Towards the close of the 16th century, indeed,
cotton goods were occasionally mentioned in the Statute Book,
and the manufacture of the cottons of Manchester was regulated
by Acts passed in the reigns of Henry VIII., Edward VI., and
Elizabeth. But there seem to be good reasons for concluding
that Manchester cottons, in the time of the Tudors, were
woollen goods, and did not consist of cotton at all. More than
a century elapsed before any considerable trade in cotton
attracted the attention of the legislature. The woollen
manufacturers complained that people were dressing their
children in printed cottons; and Parliament was actually
persuaded to prohibit the introduction of Indian printed
calicoes. Even an Act of Parliament, however, was unable to
extinguish the growing taste for Indian cottons. ... The taste
for cotton led to the introduction of calico-printing in
London; Parliament in order to encourage the new trade, was
induced to sanction the importation of plain cotton cloths
from India under a duty. The demand, which was thus created
for calicoes, probably promoted their manufacture at home. ...
Up to the middle of the last century cotton goods were really
never made at all. The so-called cotton manufactures were a
combination of wool or linen and cotton. No Englishman had
been able to produce a cotton thread strong enough for the
warp; ... The superior skill of the Indian manufacturers
enabled them to use cotton for a warp; while clumsy
workmanship made the use of cotton as a warp unattainable at
home. In the middle of the 18th century, then, a piece of
cotton cloth in the true sense of the term, had never been
made in England. The so-called cotton goods were all made in
the cottages of the weavers. The yarn was carded by hand; it
was spun by hand; it was worked into cloth by a hand loom. ...
The operation of weaving was, however, much more rapid than
that of spinning. The weaver consumed more weft than his own
family could supply him with; and the weavers generally
experienced the greatest difficulty in obtaining sufficient
yarn. About the middle of the 18th century the ingenuity of
two persons, a father and a son, made this difference more
apparent. The shuttle had originally been thrown by the hand
from one end of the loom to the other. John Kay, a native of
Bury, by his invention of the fly-shuttle [patented in 1733],
saved the weaver from this labour. ... Robert Kay, John Kay's
son, added the drop-box, by means of which the weaver was able
'to use any one of three shuttles, each containing a different
coloured weft, without the trouble of taking them from and
replacing them in the lathe.' By means of these inventions the
productive power of each weaver was doubled. ... Carding and
roving were both slowly performed. ... The trade was in this
humble and primitive state when a series of extraordinary and
unparalleled inventions revolutionised the conditions on which
cotton had been hitherto prepared. A little more than a
century ago John Hargreaves, a poor weaver in the
neighbourhood of Blackburn, was returning home from a long
walk, in which he had been purchasing a further supply of yarn
for his loom. As he entered his cottage, his wife Jenny
accidentally upset the spindle which she was using. Hargreaves
noticed that the spindles which were now thrown into an
upright position, continued to revolve, and that the thread
was still spinning in his wife's hand. The idea immediately
occurred to him that it would be possible to connect a
considerable number of upright spindles with one wheel, and
thus multiply the productive power of each spinster. ...
Hargreaves succeeded in keeping his admirable invention secret
for a time; but the powers of his machine soon became known.
His ignorant neighbours hastily concluded that a machine,
which enabled one spinster to do the work of eight, would
throw multitudes of persons out of employment. A mob broke
into his house and destroyed his machine. Hargreaves himself
had to retire to Nottingham, where, with the friendly
assistance of another person, he was able to take out a patent
[1770] for the spinning-jenny, as the machine, in compliment
to his industrious wife, was called. The invention of the
spinning-jenny gave a new impulse to the cotton manufacture.
But the ... yarn spun by the jenny, like that which had
previously been spun by hand, was neither fine enough nor hard
enough to be employed as warp, and linen or woollen threads
had consequently to be used for this purpose.
{621}
In the very year, however, in which Hargreaves moved from
Blackburn to Nottingham, Richard Arkwright [who began life as
a barber's assistant] took out a patent [1769] for his still
more celebrated machine. ... 'After many years intense and
painful application,' he invented his memorable machine for
spinning by rollers; and laid the foundations of the gigantic
industry which has done more than any other trade to
concentrate in this country the wealth of the world. ... He
passed the thread over two pairs of rollers, one of which was
made to revolve much more rapidly than the other. The thread,
after passing the pair revolving slowly, was drawn into the
requisite tenuity by the rollers revolving at a higher
rapidity. By this simple but memorable invention Arkwright
succeeded in producing thread capable of employment as warp.
From the circumstance that the mill at which his machinery was
first erected was driven by water power, the machine received
the somewhat inappropriate name of the water frame; the thread
spun by it was usually called the water twist. Invention of
the spinning-jenny and the water frame would have been useless
if the old system of hand-carding had not been superseded by a
more efficient and more rapid process. Just as Arkwright
applied rotatory motion to spinning, so Lewis Paul introduced
revolving cylinders for carding cotton. ... This extraordinary
series of inventions placed an almost unlimited supply of yarn
at the disposal of the weaver. But the machinery, which had
thus been introduced, was still incapable of providing yarn
fit for the finer qualities of cotton cloth. ... This defect,
however, was removed by the ingenuity of Samuel Crompton, a
young weaver residing near Bolton. Crompton succeeded in
combining in one machine the various excellences 'of
Arkwright's water frame and Hargreaves' jenny.' Like the
former, his machine, which from its nature is happily called
the mule, 'has a system of rollers to reduce the roving; and
like the latter it has spindles without bobbins to give the
twist. ... The effects of Crompton's great invention may be
stated epigrammatically. ... The natives of India could spin a
pound of cotton into a thread 119 miles long.' The English
succeed in spinning the same thread to a length of 160 miles.
Yarn of the finest quality was at once at the disposal of the
weaver. ... The ingenuity of Hargreaves, Arkwright and
Crompton had been exercised to provide the weaver with yarn.
... The spinster had beaten the weaver. ... Edmund Cartwright,
a clergyman residing in Kent, happened to be staying at
Matlock in the summer of 1784, and to be thrown into the
company of some Manchester gentlemen. The conversation turned
on Arkwright's machinery, and 'one of the company observed
that, as soon as Arkwright's patent expired, so many mills
would be erected and so much cotton spun that hands would
never be found to weave it.' Cartwright replied 'that
Arkwright must then set his wits to work to invent a weaving
mill.' ... Within three years he had himself proved that the
invention was practicable by producing the power-loom.
Subsequent inventors improved the idea which Cartwright had
originated, and within fifty years from the date of his
memorable visit to Matlock there were not less than 100,000
power-looms at work in Great Britain alone. ... Other
inventions, less generally remembered, were hardly less
wonderful or less beneficial than these. ... Scheele, the
Swedish philosopher, discovered in 1774 the bleaching
properties of chlorine, or oxymuriatic acid. Berthollet, the
French chemist, conceived the idea of applying the acid to
bleaching cloth. ... In the same year in which Watt and Henry
were introducing the new acid to the bleacher, Bell, a
Scotchman, was laying the foundations of a trade in printed
calicoes. 'The old method of printing was by blocks of
sycamore.' ... This clumsy process was superseded by cylinder
printing. ... Such are the leading inventions, which made
Great Britain in less than a century the wealthiest country in
the world."
_S. Walpole, History of England from 1815, volume 1, chapter 1._
ALSO IN:
R. W. C. Taylor, Introduction to a History
of the Factory System, chapter 10.
E. Baines, History of the Cotton Manufacture in Great Britain.
A. Ure, The Cotton Manufacture of Great Britain.
COULMIERS, Battle of (1870).
See FRANCE: A. D. 1870-1871.
COUNCIL BLUFFS, The Mormons at.
See MORMONISM: A. D. 1846-1848.
COUNCIL FOR NEW ENGLAND.
See NEW ENGLAND: A. D. 1620-1623; 1621-1631; and 1635.
COUNCIL OF BLOOD, The.
See NETHERLANDS: A. D. 1567.
COUNCIL OF FIVE HUNDRED, The Athenian.
See ATHENS: B. C. 510-507.
The French.
See FRANCE: A. D. 1795 (JUNE-SEPTEMBER).
COUNCIL OF TEN, The.
See VENICE: A. D. 1032-1319.
COUNCIL OF THE ANCIENTS, The.
See FRANCE: A. D. 1795 (JUNE-SEPTEMBER).
COUNCIL, THE PRIVY.
See PRIVY COUNCIL.
COUNCILS OF THE CHURCH, General or Ecumenical.
There are seven councils admitted by both the Greek and Latin
churches as œcumenical (or ecumenical)--that is general, or
universal. The Roman Catholics recognize thirteen more, making
twenty in all--as follows:
1. The synod of apostles in Jerusalem.
2. The first Council of Nice, A. D. 325
(see NICÆA, THE FIRST COUNCIL).
3. The first Council of Constantinople, A. D. 381.
4. The first Council of Ephesus, A. D. 431.
5. The Council of Chalcedon, A. D. 451.
6. The second Council of Constantinople, A. D. 553.
7. The third Council of Constantinople, A. D. 681.
8. The second Council of Nice, A. D. 787.
9. The fourth Council of Constantinople, A. D. 869.
10. The first Lateran Council, A. D. 1123.
11. The second Lateran Council, A. D. 1139.
12. The third Lateran Council, A. D. 1179.
13. The fourth Lateran Council, A. D. 1215.
14. The first œcumenical synod of Lyon, A. D. 1245.
15. The second œcumenical synod of Lyon, A. D. 1274.
16. The Synod of Vienne in Gaul, A. D. 1311.
17. The Council of Constance,
A. D. 1414 (see PAPACY: A. D. 1414-1418).
18. The Council of Basel, A. D. 1431
(see PAPACY: A. D. 1431-1448).
19. The Council of Trent, A. D. 1545
(see PAPACY: A. D. 1537-1563).
20. The Council of the Vatican, A. D. 1869
(see PAPACY: A. D. 1869-1870).
{622}
COUNT AND DUKE, Roman.
Origin of the titles.
"The defence of the Roman empire was at length committed
[under Constantine and his successors] to eight
masters-general of the cavalry and infantry. Under their
orders thirty-five military commanders were stationed in the
provinces--three in Britain, six in Gaul, one in Spain, one in
Italy, five on the Upper and four on the Lower Danube, in Asia
eight, three in Egypt, and four in Africa. The titles of
Counts and Dukes, by which they were properly distinguished,
have obtained in modern languages so very different a sense
that the use of them may occasion some surprise. But it should
be recollected that the second of those appellations is only a
corruption of the Latin word which was indiscriminately
applied to any military chief. All these provincial generals
were therefore dukes; but no more than ten among them were
dignified with the rank of counts or companions, a title of
honour, or rather of favour, which had been recently invented
in the court of Constantine. A gold belt was the ensign which
distinguished the office of the counts and dukes."
_E. Gibbon, Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, chapter 17.
https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/25717_
"The Duke and the Count of modern Europe--what are they but
the Generals and Companions (Duces and Comites) of a Roman
province? Why or when they changed places, the Duke climbing
up into such unquestioned pre-eminence over his former
superior the Count, I know not, nor yet by what process it was
discovered that the latter was the precise equivalent of the
Scandinavian Jarl."
_T. Hodgkin, Italy and Her Invaders, book 1, chapter 3._
COUNT OF THE DOMESTICS.
In the organization of the Imperial Household, during the
later period of the Roman empire, the officers called Counts
of the Domestics "commanded the various divisions of the
household troops, known by the names of Domestici and
Protectores, and thus together replaced the Prætorian Prefect
of the earlier days of the Empire. ... Theoretically, their
duties would not greatly differ from those of a Colonel in the
Guards."
_T. Hodgkin, Italy and Her Invaders, book 1, chapter 3._
COUNT OF THE SACRED LARGESSES.
In the later Roman empire, "the Count who had charge of the
Sacred (i. e. Imperial) Bounty, should have been by his title
simply the Grand Almoner of the Empire. ... In practice,
however, the minister who took charge of the Imperial
Largesses had to find ways and means for every other form of
Imperial expenditure. ... The Count of the Sacred Largesses
was therefore in fact the Chancellor of the Exchequer of the
Empire."
_T. Hodgkin, Italy and Her Invaders, book 1, chapter 3._
COUNT OF THE SAXON SHORE.
See SAXON SHORE.
COUNT PALATINE.
See PALATINE, COUNTS.
COUNTER-REFORMATION, The.
See PAPACY: A. D. 1534-1540; 1537-1563; 1555-1603.
COUNTRY PARTY, The.
See ENGLAND; A. D. 1672-1673.
COUP D' ETAT OF LOUIS NAPOLEON, The.
See FRANCE: A. D. 1851; and 1851-1852.
COUREURS DE BOIS.
"Out of the beaver trade [in the 17th century] rose a huge
evil, baneful to the growth and the morals of Canada. All that
was most active and vigorous in the colony took to the woods,
and escaped from the control of intendants, councils and
priests, to the savage freedom of the wilderness. Not only
were the possible profits great, but, in the pursuit of them,
there was a fascinating element of adventure and danger. The
bush rangers, or coureurs de bois, were to the king an object
of horror. They defeated his plans for the increase of the
population, and shocked his native instinct of discipline and
order. Edict after edict was directed against them; and more
than once the colony presented the extraordinary spectacle of
the greater part of its young men turned into forest outlaws.
... We hear of seigniories abandoned; farms turning again into
forests; wives and children left in destitution. The exodus of
the coureurs de bois would take at times the character of an
organized movement. The famous Du Lhut is said to have made a
general combination of the young men of Canada to follow him
into the woods. Their plan was to be absent four years, in
order that the edicts against them might have time to relent.
The intendant Duchesneau reported that 800 men out of a
population of less than 10,000 souls had vanished from sight
in the immensity of a boundless wilderness. Whereupon the king
ordered that any person going into the woods without a license
should be whipped and branded for the first offence, and sent
for life to the galleys for the second. ... Under such leaders
as Du Lhut, the coureurs de bois built forts of palisades at
various points throughout the West and Northwest. They had a
post of this sort at Detroit some time before its permanent
settlement, as well as others on Lake Superior and in the
Valley of the Mississippi. They occupied them as long as it
suited their purposes, and then abandoned them to the next
comer. Michillimackinac was, however, their chief resort."
_F. Parkman, The Old Regime in Canada, chapter 17._
COURLAND, Christian conquest of.
See. LIVONIA: 12TH-13TH CENTURIES.
COURT BARON.
See MANORS.
COURT CUSTOMARY.
See MANORS.
COURT-LEET.
See MANORS,
and SAC AND SOC.
COURT OF CHANCERY.
See CHANCELLOR.
COURT OF COMMON PLEAS.
See CURIA REGIS.
COURT OF HIGH COMMISSION.
See ENGLAND: A. D. 1559;
and A. D. 1686.
COURT OF KING'S BENCH.
See CURIA REGIS.
COURT, SUPREME, of the United States.
See SUPREME COURT.
COURTRAI: A. D. 1382.
Pillaged and burned by the French.
See FLANDERS: A. D. 1382.
COURTRAI: A. D. 1646.
Siege and capture by the French.
See NETHERLANDS: A. D. 1645-1646.
COURTRAI: A. D. 1648.
Taken by the Spaniards.
See NETHERLANDS (SPANISH PROVINCES): A. D. 1647-1648.
COURTRAI: A. D. 1667.
Taken by the French.
See NETHERLANDS (THE SPANISH PROVINCES): A. D. 1667.
COURTRAI: A. D. 1668.
Ceded to France.
See NETHERLANDS (HOLLAND); A. D. 1668.
COURTRAI: A. D. 1679.
Restored to Spain.
See NIMEGUEN, THE PEACE OF.
----------COURTRAI: End----------
{623}
COURTRAI, The Battle of.
The battle of Courtrai (July 11, A. D. 1302), in which the
barons and knights of France were fearfully slaughtered by the
sturdy burghers of Flanders, was sometimes called the Day of
the Spurs, on account of the great number of gilt spurs which
was taken from the bodies of the dead and hung up by the
victors in Courtrai cathedral.
_G. W. Kitchen, History of France,
book 3, chapter 10, section 2._
See FLANDERS: A. D. 1299-1304.
COURTS OF LOVE.
See PROVENCE: A.D. 1179-1207.
COUTHON,
and the French Revolutionary Committee of Public Safety.
See FRANCE: A. D. 1793 (JUNE-OCTOBER), to 1794 (JULY).
COUTRAS, Battle of (1587).
See FRANCE: A. D. 1584-1589.
COVADONGA, Cave of.
See SPAIN: A. D. 713-737.
COVENANT, The Halfway.
See BOSTON: A. D. 1657-1669.
COVENANT, The Solemn League and.
See ENGLAND: A. D. 1643 (JULY-SEPTEMBER).
COVENANTERS.
The name given to the signers and supporters of the Scottish
National Covenant (see SCOTLAND: A. D. 1557, 1581 and 1638)
and afterwards to all who adhered to the Kirk of Scotland. The
war of Montrose with the Covenanters will be found narrated
under SCOTLAND: A. D. 1644-1645. For the story of the
persecution which they suffered under the restored Stuarts,
See SCOTLAND: A. D. 1660-1666; 1669-1679; 1679; and 1681-1689.
COVENANTS, The Scottish.
See SCOTLAND: A. D. 1557-1581; and 1638.
COWBOYS.
During the War of the American Revolution, "there was a venal
and bloody set which hung on the skirts of the British army,
well known as Cow-boys. They were plunderers and ruffians by
profession, and came to have their name from their
cattle-stealing. Some of the most cruel and disgraceful
murders and barbarities of the war were perpetrated by them.
Whenever they were caught they were hung up at once."
_C. W. Elliott, The New England History, volume 2, page 372._
See, also, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1780
(AUGUST-SEPTEMBER).
COWPENS, Battle of the (1781).
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1780-1781.
CRACOW: A. D. 1702.
Taken by Charles XII. of Sweden.
See SCANDINAVIAN STATES (SWEDEN): A. D. 1701-1707.
CRACOW: A. D. 1793-1794.
Occupied by the Russians.
Rising of the citizens.
Surrender and cession to Austria.
See POLAND: A. D. 1793-1796.
CRACOW: A. D. 1815.
Creation of the Republic.
See VIENNA, THE CONGRESS OF.
CRACOW: A. D. 1831-1846.
Occupation by the Austrians, Russians and Prussians.
Extinction of the Republic.
Annexation to Austria.
See AUSTRIA: A. D. 1815-1846.
----------CRACOW: End----------
CRADLE OF LIBERTY.
See FANEUIL HALL.
CRAFT-GUILDS.
See GUILDS, MEDIÆVAL.
CRAGIE TRACT, The.
See NEW YORK: A. D. 1786-1799.
CRAL.-KRALE.
"The princes of Servia (Ducange, Famil, Dalmaticæ, &c., c.
2-4, 9) were styled 'despots' in Greek, and Cral in their
native idiom (Ducange, Gloss. Græc., page 751). That title, the
equivalent of king, appears to be of Sclavonic origin, from
whence it has been borrowed by the Hungarians, the modern
Greeks, and even by the Turks (Leunclavius, Pandect. Turc., p.
422), who reserve the name of Padishah for the Emperor."
_E. Gibbon, Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire,
chapter 63, note.
https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/25717_
See, also,
BALKAN AND DANUBIAN STATES: A. D. 1341-1356 (SERVIA).
CRANNOGES.
See LAKE DWELLINGS.
CRANNON (KRANNON), Battle of (B. C. 322).
See GREECE: B. C. 323-322.
CRAONNE, Battle of.
See FRANCE: A. D. 1814 (JANUARY-MARCH).
CRASSUS AND THE FIRST TRIUMVIRATE.
See ROME: B. C. 78-68, to 57-52.
CRATER, Battle of the Petersburg.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1864 (JULY: VIRGINIA).
CRATERUS, AND THE WARS OF THE DIADOCHI.
See MACEDONIA: B. C. 323-316.
CRANGALLIDÆ, The.
See HIERODULI.
CRAYFORD, Battle of (A. D. 457).
The second battle fought between the Britons and the invading
Jutes, under Hengest, for the possession of southeastern
Britain.
See ENGLAND: A. D. 449-473.
CRÉCY, Battle of (1346).
See FRANCE: A. D. 1337-1360.
CREDIT MOBILIER SCANDAL.
On the meeting of the Congress of the United States in
December, 1872, attention was called by the Speaker to charges
made in the preceding canvass "that the Vice-President, the
Vice-President elect, the Secretary of the Treasury, several
Senators, the Speaker of the House, and a large number of
Representatives had been bribed, during the years 1867 and
1868, by presents of stock in a corporation known as the
Credit Mobilier [organized to contract for building the Union
Pacific Railroad] to vote and act for the benefit of the Union
Pacific Railroad Company. On his motion, an investigating
committee was appointed, L. P. Poland, of Vermont, being
chairman. The Poland Committee reported February 18th, 1873,
recommending the expulsion of Oakes Ames, of Massachusetts,
for selling to members of Congress shares of the stock of the
Credit Mobilier below their real value, with intent thereby to
influence the votes of such members,' and of James Brooks, of
New York, for receiving such stock. The House modified the
proposed expulsion into an 'absolute condemnation' of the
conduct of both members."
_A. Johnston, History of American Politics, pages 210-220._
_Report of Select Committee
(42d Congress, 3d session, H. R. report no. 77)._
ALSO IN:
_J. B. Crawford, The Credit Mobilier of America._
CREEKS.
Creek Wars.
See AMERICAN ABORIGINES: MUSKHOGEAN FAMILY;
also UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1813-1814 (AUGUST-APRIL),
and FLORIDA: A. D. 1816-1818.
CREES, The.
See AMERICAN ABORIGINES: ALGONQUIAN FAMILY.
CREFELD, Battle of.
See GERMANY: A. D. 1758.
CREMA, Siege of (1159-1160).
See ITALY: A. D. 1154-1162.
CREMONA: The Roman Colony.
Siege by the Gauls.
See ROME: B. C. 295-191.
CREMONA: A. D. 69.
Destruction by the Flavians.
See ROME: A, D. 69.
CREMONA: A. D. 1702.
Defeat of the French.
See ITALY (SAVOY AND PIEDMONT): A. D. 1701-1713.
{624}
CREOLE.
"In Europe it is very common to attach to the term Creole the
idea of a particular complexion. This is a mistake. The
designation Creole [in Spanish American regions] properly
belongs to all the natives of America born of parents who have
emigrated from the Old World, be those parents Europeans or
Africans. There are, therefore, white as well as black
Creoles. ... The term Creole is a corruption of the Spanish
word 'criollo,' which is derived from 'criar,' to create or to
foster. The Spaniards apply the term 'criollo' not merely to
the human race, but also to animals propagated in the
colonies, but of pure European blood: thus they have creole
horses, bullocks, poultry, &c."
_J. J. Von Tschudi, Travels in Peru,
chapter 5, and foot-note._
"The term Creole is commonly applied in books to the native of
a Spanish colony descended from European ancestors, while
often the popular acceptation conveys the idea of an origin
partly African. In fact, its meaning varies in different times
and regions, and in Louisiana alone has, and has had, its
broad and its close, its earlier and its later, significance.
For instance, it did not here first belong to the descendants
of Spanish, but of French settlers. But such a meaning implied
a certain excellence of origin, and so came early to include
any native of French or Spanish descent by either parent,
whose pure non-mixture with the slave race entitled him to
social rank. Much later the term was adopted by, not conceded
to, the natives of European-African, or Creole-African blood,
and is still so used among themselves. At length the spirit of
commerce availed itself of the money value of so honored a
title, and broadened its meaning to take in any creature or
thing of variety or manufacture peculiar to Louisiana, that
might become an object of sale, as Creole ponies, chickens,
cows, shoes, eggs, wagons, baskets, cabbages, etc. ... There
are no English, Scotch, Irish, Western, or Yankee Creoles,
these all being included under the distinctive term
'Americans.' ... There seems to be no more serviceable
definition of the Creoles of Louisiana or of New Orleans than
to say they are the French-speaking, native, ruling class."
_G. E. Waring, Jr., and G. W Cable,
History and Present Condition of New Orleans
(Tenth Census of the U. S., volume 19, page 218)._
CREONES, The.
See BRITAIN, CELTIC TRIBES.
CRESCENT, The Order of the.
A Turkish Order instituted in 1799 by the reforming sultan,
Selim III. Lord Nelson, after the victory of Aboukir, was the
first to receive this decoration.
CRESPY IN VALOIS, Treaty of (1544).
See FRANCE: A. D. 1532-1547.
CRETAN LABYRINTH,
See LABYRINTHS.
CRETE.
"The institutions of the Cretan state show in many points so
great a similarity to those of Sparta, that it is not
surprising if it seemed to the ancients as though either Crete
were a copy of Sparta, or Sparta of Crete. Meanwhile this
similarity may be explained, apart from intentional imitation,
by the community of nationality, which, under like conditions,
must produce like institutions. For in Crete, as in Laconia,
Dorians were the ruling people, who had subdued the old
inhabitants of the island and placed them in a position of
subordination. ... It is, however, beyond doubt that
settlements were made in Crete by the Phoenicians, and that a
large portion of the island was subject to them. In the
historical period, it is true, we no longer find them here; we
find, on the contrary, only a number of Greek states, all
moreover Dorian. Each of these consisted of a city with its
surrounding district, in which no doubt also smaller cities in
their turn were found standing in a relation of subordination
to the principal city. For that each city of the
'ninety-citied' or 'hundred-citied' isle, as Homer calls it,
formed also an independent state, will probably not be
supposed. As independent states our authorities give us reason
to recognize about seventeen. The most important of these were
in earlier times Cnossus, Gortyn and Cydonia."-
_G. Schömann, Antiquities of Greece: The State,
part 3, chapter 2._
See ASIA MINOR: THE GREEK COLONIES.
CRETE: B. C. 68-66.
The Roman Conquest.
The Romans came into collision with the Cretans during their
conflict with the Cilician pirates. The Cretans, degenerate
and half piratical themselves, had formed an alliance with the
professional buccaneers, and defeated, off Cydonia, a Roman
fleet that had been sent against the latter, B. C. 71. They
soon repented of the provocation they had offered and sent
envoys to Rome to buy peace by heavy bribes; but neither the
penitence nor the bribes prevailed. Three years passed,
however, before the proconsul, Quintus Metellus, appeared in
Crete (B. C. 68) to exact satisfaction, and two years more
were spent in overcoming the stubborn resistance of the
islanders. The taking of Cydonia cost Metellus a bloody battle
and a prolonged siege. Cnossus and other towns held out with
equal courage. In the end, however, Crete was added to the
conquered dominions of Rome. At the last of the struggle there
occurred a conflict of jurisdiction between Metellus and
Pompey, and their respective forces fought with one another on
the Cretan soil.
_T. Mommsen, History of Rome, book 5, chapter 4._
CRETE: A. D. 823.
Conquest by the Saracens.
"The reign of Al Hakem, the Ommiade Caliph of Spain, was
disturbed by continual troubles; and some theological disputes
having created a violent insurrection in the suburbs of
Cordova, about 15,000 Spanish Arabs were compelled to emigrate
in the year 815. The greater part of these desperadoes
established themselves at Alexandria, where they soon took an
active part in the civil wars of Egypt. The rebellion of
Thomas [an officer who disputed the Byzantine throne with
Michael II.], and the absence of the naval forces of the
Byzantine Empire from the Archipelago, left the island of
Crete unprotected. The Andalusian Arabs of Alexandria availed
themselves of this circumstance to invade the island, and
establish a settlement on it, in the year 823. Michael was
unable to take any measures for expelling the invaders, and an
event soon happened in Egypt which added greatly to the
strength of this Saracen colony. The victories of the
lieutenants of the Caliph Almamum compelled the remainder of
the Andalusian Arabs to quit Alexandria; so that Abou Hafs,
called by the Greeks Apochaps, joined his countrymen in Crete
with forty ships, determined to make the new settlement their
permanent home. It is said by the Byzantine writers that they
commenced their conquest of the island by destroying their
fleet, and constructing a strong fortified camp, surrounded by
an immense ditch, from which it received the name of Chandak,
now corrupted by the western nations into Candia. ... The
Saracens retained possession of Crete for 135 years."
_G. Finlay, History of the Byzantine Empire,
from 716 to 1057, book 1. chapter 3._
{625}
During the stay of these piratical Andalusian Arabs at
Alexandria, "they cut in pieces both friends and foes,
pillaged the churches and mosques, sold above 6,000 Christian
captives, and maintained their station in the capital of Egypt
till they were oppressed by the forces and presence of Almamon
himself."
_E. Gibbon, Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, chapter 52.
https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/25717_
ALSO IN:
_S. A. Dunham, History of Spain and Portugal,
book 3, chapter 1._
CRETE: A. D. 961-963.
Recovery from the Saracens.
"In the subordinate station of great domestic, or general of
the East, he [Nicephorus Phocas, afterwards emperor, on the
Byzantine throne], reduced the island of Crete, and extirpated
the nest of pirates who had so long defied, with impunity, the
majesty of the Empire. ... Seven months were consumed in the
siege of Candia; the despair of the native Cretans was
stimulated by the frequent aid of their brethren of Africa and
Spain; and, after the massy wall and double ditch had been
stormed by the Greeks, a hopeless conflict was still
maintained in the streets and houses of the city. The whole
island was subdued in the capital, and a submissive people
accepted, without resistance, the baptism of the conqueror."
_E. Gibbon, Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, chapter 52.
https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/25717_
CRETE: A. D. 1204-1205.
Acquired by the Venetians.
See BYZANTINE EMPIRE: A. D.1204-1205.
CRETE: A. D. 1645-1669.
The long siege of Candia.
Surrender to the Turks.
See TURKS: A. D. 1645-1669.
CRETE: A. D. 1715.
Complete Expulsion of the Venetians by the Turks.
See TURKS: A. D. 1714-1718.
CRETE: A. D. 1866-1868.
Unsuccessful revolt.
Struggle for independence.
Turkish concession of the Organic Regulation.
See GREECE: A. D. 1862-1881.
----------CRETE: End----------
CRETE, Party of the.--Crêtois.
See FRANCE: A. D. 1795 (APRIL).
CRIMEA, OR CRIM TARTARY:
Early history.
See TAURICA;
also BOSPORUS, CITY AND KINGDOM.
CRIMEA: 7th Century.
Conquest and occupation by the Khazars.
See KHAZARS.
CRIMEA: 12th-13th Centuries.
Genoese commercial colonies.
See GENOA: A. D. 1261-1299.
CRIMEA: 13th-14th Centuries.
The khanate to Krim.
See MONGOLS: A. D. 1238-1391.
CRIMEA: A. D. 1475.
Conquest by the Ottoman Turks.
See TURKS (THE OTTOMANS): A. D. 1451-1481.
CRIMEA: A. D. 1571.
Expedition of the Khan to Moscow.
The city stormed and sacked.
See RUSSIA: A. D. 1569-1571.
CRIMEA: A. D. 1735-1738.
Russian invasions and fruitless conquests.
See RUSSIA: A. D. 1725-1739.
CRIMEA: A. D. 1774.
The khanate declared independent of the Porte.
See TURKS: A. D. 1768-1774.
CRIMEA: A. D. 1776-1784.
The process of acquisition by Russia.
Final recognition of Russian sovereignty by the Sultan.
See TURKS: A. D. 1776-1792.
CRIMEA: A. D. 1853-1855.
War of Russia with Turkey and her allies.
Siege of Sebastopol.
See RUSSIA: A. D. 1853-1854, to 1854-1856.
----------CRIMEA: End----------
CRISIS OF 1837, The.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1835-1837.
CRISIS OF 1857.
See TARIFF LEGISLATION
(UNITED STATES): A. D. 1846-1861.
CRISSA.
Crissæan or Sacred War.
See DELPHI.
CRITTENDEN COMPROMISE, The.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA:
A. D. 1860 (DECEMBER).
CROATANS, The.
See AMERICA: A. D. 1587-1590.
CROATIA: 7th Century.
Sclavonic occupation and settlement.
See BALKAN AND DANUBIAN STATES,
7TH CENTURY (SERVIA, CROATIA, BOSNIA, ETC.)
CROATIA: A. D. 1102.
Subjection and annexation to Hungary.
See HUNGARY: A. D. 972-1114.
CROATIA: A. D. 1576.
Transferred to the Duke of Styria.
Military colonization.
See HUNGARY: A. D. 1567-1604.
----------CROATIA: End----------
CROIA, Turkish massacre at.
See GREECE: A. D. 1454-1479.
CROMLECHS.
Rude stone monuments found in many parts of the British
Islands, France, and elsewhere, usually formed by three or
more huge, rough, upright stones, with a still larger stone
lying flatly upon them. In France these are called Dolmens.
They were formerly thought to be "Druids altars," to which
notion they owe the name Cromlechs; but it is now very
generally concluded by archæologists that they were
constructed for burial chambers, and that originally, in most
cases, they were covered with mounds of earth, forming the
well known barrows, or grave mounds, or tumuli.
_L. Jewett, Grave Mounds._
ALSO IN:
_T. Wright, The Celt, the Roman and the Saxon._
_Sir J. Lubbock, Prehistoric Times, chapter 5._
See, also, AMORITES.
CROMPTON'S MULE, The invention of.
See COTTON MANUFACTURES.
CROMWELL, Oliver.
Campaigns and Protectorate.
See ENGLAND: A. D. 1644 to 1658-1660;
and IRELAND: A. D. 1649-1650.
CROMWELL, Thomas,
The suppression of the Monasteries.
See ENGLAND: A. D. 1535-1539.
CROMWELLIAN SETTLEMENT OF IRELAND.
See IRELAND: A. D. 1653.
CROMWELL'S IRONSIDES.
See ENGLAND: A. D. 1643 (MAY).
CROSS, The "True."
Its capture by the Persians and recovery by Heraclius.
See ROME: A. D. 565-628;
And JERUSALEM: A. D. 615.
CROSS KEYS, Battle of.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA:
A. D. 1862 (MAY-JUNE: VIRGINIA).
CROTON.--KROTON.
See SYBARIS.
CROTONA, Battle of (A. D. 983).
See ITALY (SOUTHERN): A. D. 800-1016.
CROWN, The iron.
See LOMBARDY, THE IRON CROWN OF.
CROWN OF INDIA, The Order of the.
An order, for women, instituted by Queen Victoria in 1878.
{626}
CROWN POINT: A. D. 1727.
Fort built by the French.
See CANADA (NEW FRANCE): A. D. 1700-1735.
CROWN POINT: A. D. 1755.
English Expedition against.
See CANADA (NEW FRANCE): A. D. 1755 (SEPTEMBER).
CROWN POINT: A. D: 1759.
Abandoned to the English by the French.
See CANADA (NEW FRANCE): A. D. 1759 (JULY-AUGUST).
CROWN POINT: A. D. 1775.
Surprise and capture by the Americans.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1775 MAY.
----------CROWN POINT: End----------
CROWS, OR UPSAROKAS, The.
See AMERICAN ABORIGINES: SIOUAN FAMILY.
CRUITHNIGH.-CRUITHNIANS.
The Irish name of the Picts and Scots of ancient Ireland and
Scotland.
See SCOTLAND: THE PICTS AND SCOTS.
CRUSADES:
Causes and introductory events.
"Like all the great movements of mankind, the Crusades must be
traced to the coincidence of many causes which influenced men
of various nations and discordant feelings, at the same period
of time, to pursue one common end with their whole heart.
Religious zeal, the fashion of pilgrimages, the spirit of
social development, the energies that lead to colonisation or
conquest, and commercial relations, only lately extended so
widely as to influence public opinion, all suddenly received a
deep wound. Every class of society felt injured and insulted,
and unity of action was created as if by a divine impulse. The
movement was facilitated by the circumstance that Europe began
to adopt habits of order just at the time when Asia was thrown
into a state of anarchy by the invasions of the Seljouk Turks.
Great numbers of pilgrims had always passed through the
Byzantine empire to visit the holy places in Palestine. We
still possess an itinerary of the road from Bordeaux to
Jerusalem, by the way of Constantinople, written in the fourth
century for the use of pilgrims. Though the disturbed and
impoverished state of Europe, after the fall of the Western
Empire, diminished the number of pilgrims, still, even in
times of the greatest anarchy, many passed annually through
the Eastern Empire to Palestine. The improvement which dawned
on the western nations during the eleventh century, and the
augmented commerce of the Italians, gave additional importance
to the pilgrimage to the East. About the year 1064, during the
reign of Constantine X., an army or caravan of seven thousand
pilgrims passed through Constantinople, led by the Archbishop
of Mentz and four bishops. They made their way through Asia
Minor, which was then under the Byzantine government; but in
the neighbourhood of Jerusalem they were attacked by the
Bedouins, and only saved from destruction by the Saracen emir
of Ramla, who hastened to their assistance. These pilgrims are
reported to have lost 3,000 of their number, without being
able to visit either the Jordan or the Dead Sea. The invasions
of the Seljouks [see TURKS (THE SELJUKS): A. D. 1073-1092]
increased the disorders in Palestine. ... In the year 1076 the
Seljouk Turks took possession of Jerusalem, and immediately
commenced harassing the pilgrims with unheard-of exactions.
The Saracens had in general viewed the pilgrims with favour,
as men engaged in fulfilling a pious duty, or pursuing lawful
gain with praiseworthy industry, and they had levied only a
reasonable toll on the pilgrims, and a moderate duty on their
merchandise; while in consideration of these imposts, they had
established guards to protect them on the roads by which they
approached the holy places. The Turks, on the contrary, acting
like mere nomads, uncertain of retaining possession of the
city, thought only of gratifying their avarice. They plundered
the rich pilgrims, and insulted the poor. The religious
feelings of the Christians were irritated, and their commerce
ruined; a cry for vengeance arose throughout all Europe, and
men's minds were fully prepared for an attempt to conquer
Palestine, when Peter the Hermit began to preach that it was a
sacred duty to deliver the tomb of Christ from the hands of
the Infidels."
_G. Finlay, History of the Byzantine and Greek
Empires, book 3, chapter 2, section 1._
CRUSADES: A. D. 1091.
The Council of Clermont.
Pope Urban II., one of two rival pontiffs then contending for
recognition by the Church, entered with great eagerness into
the movement stirred by Peter the Hermit, and gave it a
powerful impulse through his support, while obtaining for
himself, at the same time, a decisive advantage over his
competitor, by the popularity of the agitation. A great
Council was convened at Piacenza, A. D. 1094, and a second at
Clermont, in the autumn of the same year, to deliberate upon
the action to be taken. The city of Clermont could not contain
the vast multitude of bishops, clergy and laity which
assembled, and an army of many thousands was tented in the
surrounding country. To that excited congregation, at a
meeting in the great square of Clermont, Pope Urban addressed
a speech which is one of the notable utterances of History.
"He began by detailing the miseries endured by their brethren
in the Holy Land; how the plains of Palestine were desolated
by the outrageous heathen, who with the sword and the
firebrand carried wailing into the dwellings and flames into
the possessions of the faithful; how Christian wives and
daughters were defiled by pagan lust; how the altars of the
true God were desecrated, and the relics of the saints trodden
under foot. 'You,' continued the eloquent pontiff (and Urban
II. was one of the most eloquent men of the day), 'you, who
hear me, and who have received the true faith, and been
endowed by God with power, and strength, and greatness of
soul,--whose ancestors have been the prop of Christendom, and
whose kings have put a barrier against the progress of the
infidel,--I call upon you to wipe off these impurities from
the face of the earth, and lift your oppressed
fellow-Christians from the depths into which they have been
trampled.' ... The warmth of the pontiff communicated itself
to the crowd, and the enthusiasm of the people broke out
several times ere he concluded his address. He went on to
portray, not only the spiritual but the temporal advantages
that would accrue to those who took up arms in the service of
the cross. Palestine was, he said, a land flowing with milk
and honey, and precious in the sight of God, as the scene of
the grand events which had saved mankind. That land, he
promised, should be divided among them. Moreover, they should
have full pardon for all their offences, either against God or
man. 'Go, then,' he added, 'in expiation of your sins; and
go assured, that after this world shall have passed away,
imperishable glory shall be yours in the world which is to
come.' The enthusiasm was no longer to be restrained, and loud
shouts interrupted the speaker; the people exclaiming as if
with one voice, 'Dieu le veult! Dieu le veult!' ... The news
of this council spread to the remotest parts of Europe in an
incredibly short space of time. Long before the fleetest
horseman could have brought the intelligence, it was known by
the people in distant provinces; a fact which was considered
as nothing less than supernatural. But the subject was in
everybody's mouth, and the minds of men were prepared for the
result. The enthusiastic merely asserted what they wished, and
the event tallied with their prediction."
_C. Mackay, Memoirs of Extraordinary Popular
Delusions: The Crusades, (volume 2)._
ALSO IN:
_H. H. Milman, History of Latin Christianity,
book 7, chapter 6._
{627}
CRUSADES: A. D. 1094-1095,
Peter the Hermit and his appeal.
"About twenty years after the conquest of Jerusalem by the
Turks, the holy sepulchre was visited by an hermit of the name
of Peter, a native of Amiens, in the province of Picardy in
France. His resentment and sympathy were excited by his own
injuries, and the oppression of the Christian name; he mingled
his tears with those of the patriarch, and earnestly inquired,
if no hopes of relief could be entertained from the Greek
emperors of the East. The patriarch exposed the vices and
weakness of the successors of Constantine. 'I will rouse,'
exclaimed the hermit, 'the martial nations of Europe in your
cause;' and Europe was obedient to the call of the hermit. The
astonished patriarch dismissed him with epistles of credit and
complaint, and no sooner did he land at Bari, than Peter
hastened to kiss the feet of the Roman pontiff. His stature
was small, his appearance contemptible; but his eye was keen
and lively, and he possessed that vehemence of speech which
seldom fails to impart the persuasion of the soul. He was born
of a gentleman's family (for we must now adopt a modern
idiom), and his military service was under the neighbouring
counts of Boulogne, the heroes of the first crusade.
Invigorated by the approbation of the pontiff, this zealous
missionary traversed, with speed and success, the provinces of
Italy and France. His diet was abstemious, his prayers long
and fervent, and the alms which he received with one hand, he
distributed with the other; his head was bare, his feet naked,
his meagre body was wrapt in a coarse garment; he bore and
displayed a weighty crucifix; and the ass on which he rode was
sanctified in the public eye by the service of the man of God.
He preached to innumerable crowds in the churches, the
streets, and the highways. ... When he painted the sufferings
of the natives and pilgrims of Palestine, every heart was
melted to compassion; every breast glowed with indignation,
when he challenged the warriors of the age to defend their
brethren and rescue their Saviour: his ignorance of art and
language was compensated by sighs and tears, and ejaculations;
and Peter supplied the deficiency of reason by loud and
frequent appeals to Christ and his Mother, to the saints and
angels of paradise, with whom he had personally conversed. The
most perfect orator of Athens might have envied the success of
his eloquence; the rustic enthusiast inspired the passions
which he felt, and Christendom expected with impatience the
counsels and decrees of the supreme pontiff."
_E. Gibbon, Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, chapter 58.
https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/25717_
ALSO IN:
_J. C. Robertson, History of the Christian
Church, book 6, chapter 4 (volume 4)._
CRUSADES: A. D. 1096-1099.
The First Great Movement.
The first army of Crusaders to set out on the long march to
Jerusalem was a mob of men, women and children which had not
patience to wait for the organized movement of the military
leaders. They gathered in vast numbers on the banks of the
Moselle and the Meuse, in the spring of 1096, with Peter the
Hermit for their chosen chief. There were nine knights, only,
in the swarm, and but few who had horses to ride, or efficient
arms to bear, or provisions to feed upon. Knowing nothing, and
therefore fearing nothing, they marched away, through France,
Germany, Hungary and beyond, begging food where they could and
subsisting by pillage when it needed. A knight called Walter
the Penniless led the van, and Peter followed, with his second
division, by a somewhat different route. Walter escaped
serious trouble until he reached the country of the savage
Bulgarians. Peter's senseless mob provoked the just wrath of
the Hungarians by storming the small city of Semlin and
slaying 4,000 of its inhabitants. The route of both was lined
with the bones of thousands who perished of hunger, of
exposure, of disease, and by the swords of Hungarians and
Bulgarians. A third and a fourth host of like kind followed in
their wake, led by a monk, Gotschalk, a priest named Volkmar,
and a Count Emicon. These terrorized even more all the
countries through which they passed,--especially where Jews
were to be hunted and killed,--and were destroyed in Hungary
to almost the last man. Peter and Walter reached
Constantinople with 100,000 followers, it is said, even yet,
after all who had fallen by the way. Still refusing to wait
for the better appointed expeditions that were in progress,
and still appalling eastern Christendom by their lawless
barbarities, they passed into Asia Minor, and their miserable
career soon came to an end. Attacking the Turks in the city of
Nicæa,--which had become the capital of the Seljouk sultan of
Roum,--they were beaten, routed, scattered, slaughtered, until
barely 3,000 of the great host escaped. "Of the first
Crusaders," says Gibbon, "300,000 had already perished before
a single city was rescued from the infidels,--before their
graver and more noble brethren had completed the preparations
of their enterprise." Meantime the knights and princes of the
crusade had gathered their armies and were now (in the summer
of 1096) beginning to move eastward, by different routes. Not
one of the greater sovereigns of Europe had enlisted in the
undertaking. The chiefs of one armament were Godfrey de
Bouillon, duke of the Lower Lorraine, or Brabant; his
brothers, Eustace, count of Boulogne, and Baldwin; his cousin,
Baldwin de Bourg, with Baldwin, count of Hainaut, Dudon de
Contz, and other knights celebrated in the "Jerusalem
Delivered" of Tasso. This expedition followed nearly the route
of Peter the Hermit, through Hungary and Bulgaria, giving
hostages for its orderly conduct and winning the good-will of
those countries, even maddened as they were by the foregoing mobs.
{628}
Another larger following from France was led by Hugh, count of
Vermandois, brother of the king of France; Robert, duke of
Normandy, eldest son of William the Conqueror; Stephen, count
of Blois, the Conqueror's son-in-law, and Robert, count of
Flanders. These took the road into Italy, and to Bari, whence,
after spending the winter, waiting for favorable weather, they
were transported by ships to Greece, and pursued their march
to Constantinople. They were followed by a contingent from
southern Italy, under Bohemond, the Norman prince of Tarentum,
son of Robert Guiscard, and his knightly cousin, Tancred. A
fourth army, gathered in southern France by count Raymond of
Toulouse and Bishop Adhemer, the appointed legate and
representative of the pope, chose still another route, through
Lombardy, Dalmatia and Macedonia, into Thrace. On passing
through the territories of the Byzantine emperor (Alexius I.),
all the crusaders experienced his distrust, his duplicity, and
his cautious ill-will--which, under the circumstances were
natural enough. Alexius managed so well that he extorted from
each of the princes an acknowledgment of his rights of
sovereignty over the region of their expected conquests, with
an oath of fealty and homage, and he pushed them across the
Bosphorus so adroitly that no two had the opportunity to unite
their forces under the walls of Constantinople. Their first
undertaking in Asia [May and June, A. D. 1097] was the siege
of Nicæa, and they beleaguered it with an army which Gibbon
believes to have been never exceeded within the compass of a
single camp. Here, again, they were mastered by the cunning
diplomacy of the Greek emperor. When the sultan of Roum
yielded his capital, he was persuaded to surrender it to
Alexius, and the imperial banner protected it from the rage of
the discomfited crusaders. But they revenged themselves on the
Turk at Dorylæum, where he attacked them during their
subsequent march, and where he suffered a defeat which ended
all fighting in Asia Minor. Baldwin, brother of Godfrey, now
improved his opportunities by stealing away from the army,
with a few hundred knights and men, to make conquests on his
own account; with such success that he won the city of Edessa,
with a sweep of country around it, and founded a principality
which subsisted for half a century. The rest fared on, meeting
no opposition from infidel swords, but sickening and dying by
thousands, from heat and from want of water and food, until
they came to Antioch. There, the Turkish emir in command, with
a stout garrison of horse and foot, had prepared for a
stubborn defence, and he held the besiegers at bay for seven
months, while they starved in their ill-supplied camps. The
city was delivered to them by a traitor, at length, but prince
Bohemond, the crafty Norman, secured the benefit of the
treason to himself, and forced his compatriots to concede to
him the sovereignty of Antioch. The sufferings of the
crusaders did not end with the taking of the city. They
brought famine and pestilence upon themselves anew by their
greedy and sensual indulgence, and they were soon under siege
in their own turn, by a great army which the Turks had brought
against them. Death and desertion were in rivalry to thin
their wasted ranks. The survivors were in gloom and despair,
when an opportune miracle occurred to excite them afresh. A
lance, which visions and apparitions certified to be the very
spear that pierced the Redeemer's side, was found buried in a
church at Antioch. Under the stimulus of this amazing
discovery they sallied from the town and dispersed the great
army of the Turks in utter rout. Still the quarrels of the
leaders went on, and ten months more were consumed before the
remains of the Latin army advanced to Jerusalem. It was June,
A. D. 1099, when they saw the Holy City and assailed its
formidable walls. Their number was now reduced to 40,000, but
their devotion and their ardor rose to frenzy, and after a
siege of little more than a month they forced an entrance by
storm. Then they spared neither age nor sex until they had
killed all who denied the Savior of mankind--the Prince of
Peace.
_E. Gibbon, Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, chapter 58.
https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/25717_
ALSO IN:
_J. F. Michaud, History of the Crusades, book 1._
_W. Besant and E. H. Palmer, Jerusalem, chapter 6._
_C. Mills, History of the Crusades, chapter 2-6._
See also, JERUSALEM: A. D. 1099.
CRUSADES: A. D. 1099-1144.
The Latin conquests in the east.
The Kingdom of Jerusalem.
See JERUSALEM: A. D. 1099-1144.
CRUSADES: A. D. 1101-1102.
The after-wave of the first movement.
"The tales of victory brought home by the pilgrims excited the
most extravagant expectations in the minds of their auditors,
and nothing was deemed capable of resisting European valour.
The pope called upon all who had taken the cross to perform
their vow, the emperor Henry IV. had the crusade preached, in
order to gain favour with the clergy and laity. Many princes
now resolved to visit in person the new empire founded in the
East. Three great armies assembled: the first in Italy under
the archbishop of Milan, and the two counts of Blandrate; the
second in France under Hugh the Great and Stephen of Blois
[who had deserted their comrades of the first expedition at
Antioch, and] whom shame and remorse urged to perform their
vow, William, duke of Guienne and count of Poitou, who
mortgaged his territory to William Rufus of England to procure
funds, the count of Nevers, the duke of Burgundy, the bishops
of Laon and Soissons; the third in Germany, under the bishop
of Saltzburg, the aged duke Welf of Bavaria, Conrad the master
of the horse to the emperor, and many other knights and
nobles. Ida also, the margravine of Austria, declared her
resolution to share the toils and dangers of the way, and pay
her vows at the tomb of Christ. Vast numbers of women of all
ranks accompanied all these armies,--nay, in that of the duke
of Guienne, who was inferior to none in valour, but united to
it the qualities of a troubadour and glee-man, there appeared
whole troops of young women. The Italian pilgrims were the
first to arrive at Constantinople. They set out early in the
spring, and took their way through Carinthia, Hungary, and
Bulgaria. Though the excesses committed by them were great,
the emperor gave them a kind reception, and the most prudent
and friendly advice respecting their future progress. While
they abode at Constantinople, Conrad and the count of Blois,
and the duke of Burgundy, arrived, and at Whitsuntide they all
passed over, and encamped at Nicomedia."
{629}
With ignorant fatuity, and against all experienced advice, the
new Crusaders resolved to direct their march to Bag-dad and to
overthrow the caliphate. The first body which advanced was cut
to pieces by the Turks on the banks of the Halys, and only a
few thousands, out of more than one hundred thousand, are said
to have made their escape by desperate flight. The second and
third armies were met successively by the victorious Moslems,
before they had advanced so far, and were even more completely
annihilated. The latter body contained, according to the
chroniclers of the time, 150,000 pilgrims, of whom scarcely
one thousand were saved from slavery or death. The men fell
under the swords of the Turks; the women and girls, in great
numbers, finished out their days in the harems of the East.
Out of the wreck of the three vast armaments a slender column
of 10,000 men was got together after some weeks at Antioch and
led to Jerusalem (A. D. 1102). Most of these perished in
subsequent battles, and very few ever saw Europe again. "Such
was the fruitless termination of this second great movement of
the West, in which perhaps a third of a million of pilgrims
left their homes, never to revisit them."
_T. Keightley, The Crusaders, chapter 2._
ALSO IN:
_J. F. Michaud, History of the Crusades, book 4._
Crusades: A. D. 1104-1111.
Conquest of maritime cities of Syria and Palestine.
Destruction of the Library of Tripoli.
"The prosperity and the safety of Jerusalem appeared closely
connected with the conquest of the maritime cities of Syria
and Palestine; it being by them alone that it could receive
succour, or establish prompt and easy communications with the
West. The maritime nations of Europe were interested in
seconding, in this instance, the enterprises of the king of
Jerusalem. ... From the period of the first crusades, the
Pisans and the Genoese had constantly sent vessels to the seas
of the East; and their fleets had aided the Christians in
several expeditions against the Mussulmans. A Genoese fleet
had just arrived in the seas of Syria when Baldwin undertook
the siege of Ptolemaïs [Acre]. The Genoese were invited to
assist in this conquest; but as religion was not the principle
to bring them into action, they required, in return for their
assistance and their labour, that they should have a third of
the booty; they likewise stipulated to have a separate church
for themselves, and a national factory and tribunal in the
conquered city. Ptolemaïs was besieged by land and sea, and
after a bloody resistance of twenty days, the inhabitants and
the garrison proposed to surrender, and implored the clemency
of the conquerors. The city opened its gates to the
Christians, and the inhabitants prepared to depart, taking
with them whatever they deemed most valuable; but the Genoese,
at the sight of such rich booty, paid no respect to the
capitulation, and massacred without pity a disarmed and
defenceless people. ... In consequence of this victory,
several places which the Egyptians still held on the coasts of
Syria fell into the hands of the Christians." Among those was
the city of Tripoli. "Raymond, Count de St. Gilles and of
Thoulouse, one of the companions of Godfrey, after having
wandered for a long time about Asia, had died before this
place, of which he had commenced the siege. In memory of his
exploits in the first crusade, the rich territory of Tripoli
was created a county, and became the inheritance of his
family. This territory was celebrated for its productions. ...
A library established in this city, and celebrated through all
the East, contained the monuments of the ancient literature of
the Persians, the Arabians, the Egyptians, and the Greeks. A
hundred copyists were there constantly employed in
transcribing manuscripts. ... After the taking of the city, a
priest attached to Count Bernard de St. Gilles, entered the
room in which were collected a vast number of copies of the
Koran, and as he declared the library of Tripoli contained
only the impious books of Mahomet, it was given up to the
flames. ... Bibles, situated on the smiling and fertile shores
of Phoenicia, Sarepta, where St. Jerome saw still in his day
the tower of Isaiah; and Berytus, famous in the early days of
the church for its school of eloquence, shared the fate of
Tripoli, and became baronies bestowed upon Christian knights.
After these conquests, the Pisans, the Genoese, and several
warriors who had followed Baldwin in his expeditions, returned
into Europe; and the king of Jerusalem, abandoned by these
useful allies, was obliged to employ the forces which remained
in repulsing the invasions of the Saracens."
_J. F. Michaud, History of the Crusades, volume 1, book 5._
CRUSADES: A. D. 1147-1149.
The Second Great Movement.
During the reign of Fulk, the fourth king of Jerusalem, the
Latin power in Palestine and its neighboring territories began
to be seriously shaken by a vigorous Turkish prince named
Zenghi, on whom the sultan Mahmoud had conferred the
government of all the country west of the Tigris. It was the
first time since the coming of the Christians of the West that
the whole strength of Islam in that region had been so nearly
gathered into one strong hand, to be used against them, and
they felt the effect speedily, being themselves weakened by
many quarrels. In 1143 King Fulk died, leaving the crown to a
young son, Baldwin III.,--a boy of thirteen, whose mother
governed in his name. The next year Zenghi captured the
important city of Edessa, and consternation was produced by
his successes. Europe was then appealed to for help against
the advancing Turk, and the call from Jerusalem was taken up
by St. Bernard of Clairvaux, the irresistible enthusiast,
whose influence accomplished, in his time, whatever he willed
to have done. Just half a century after Peter the Hermit, St.
Bernard preached a Second Crusade, and with almost equal
effect, notwithstanding the better knowledge now possessed of
all the hardships and perils of the expedition. This time,
royalty took the lead. King Conrad of Germany commanded a
great army from that country, and another host followed King
Louis VII. from France. "Both armies marched down the Danube,
to Constantinople, in the summer of 1147. At the same moment
King Roger [of Naples], with his fleet, attacked, not the
Turks, but the Greek seaport towns of the Morea. Manuel [the
Byzantine emperor] thereupon, convinced that the large armies
were designed for the destruction of his empire in the first
place, with the greatest exertions, got together troops from
all his provinces, and entered into a half-alliance with the
Turks of Asia Minor. The mischief and ill-feeling was
increased by the lawless conduct of the German hordes; the
Greek troops attacked them more than once; whereupon numerous
voices were raised in Louis's headquarters to demand open war
against the faithless Greeks.
{630}
The kings were fully agreed not to permit this, but on
arriving in Constantinople they completely fell out, for,
while Louis made no secret of his warm friendship for Roger,
Conrad promised the Emperor of Constantinople to attack the
Normans as soon as the Crusade should be ended. This was a bad
beginning for a united campaign in the East, and moreover, at
every step eastward, new difficulties arose. The German army,
broken up into several detachments, and led without ability or
prudence, was attacked in Asia Minor by the Emir of Iconium,
and cut to pieces, all but a few hundred men. The French,
though better appointed, also suffered severe losses in that
country, but contrived nevertheless, to reach Antioch with a
very considerable force, and from thence might have carried
the project which the second Baldwin had conceived in vain,
namely, the defence of the northeastern frontier, upon which,
especially since Zenki [Zenghi] had made his appearance, the
life or death of the Christian states depended. But in vain
did Prince Raymond of Antioch try to prevail upon King Louis
to take this view, and to attack without delay the most
formidable of all their adversaries, Noureddin [son of Zenghi,
now dead]. Louis would not hear or do anything till he had
seen Jerusalem and prayed at the Holy Sepulchre. ... In
Jerusalem he [King Louis] was welcomed by Queen Melisende (now
regent, during her son's minority, after Fulco's death), with
praise and gratitude, because he had not taken part in the
distant wars of the Prince of Antioch, but had reserved his
forces for the defence of the holy city of Jerusalem. It was
now resolved to lead the army against Damascus, the only
Turkish town whose Emir had always refused to submit to either
Zenki or Noureddin. Nevertheless Noureddin instantly collected
all his available forces, to succour the besieged town." But
he was spared further exertion by the jealous disagreement of
the Christians, who began to take thought as to what should be
done with Damascus when they took it. The Syrian barons
concluded that they would prefer to leave the city in Turkish
hands, and by treacherous manœuvres they forced king Louis to
raise the siege. "The German king, long since tired of his
powerless position, returned home in the autumn of 1148, and
Louis, after much pressing, stayed a few months longer, and
reached Europe in the following spring. The whole expedition
... had been wrecked, without honour and without result, by
the most wretched personal passions, and the most narrow and
selfish policy."
_H. Von Sybel, History and Literature of the Crusades,
chapter 3._
"So ended in utter shame and ignominy the Second Crusade. The
event seemed to give the lie to the glowing promises and
prophecies of St. Bernard. So vast had been the drain of
population to feed this holy war that, in the phrase of an
eye-witness, the cities and castles were empty, and scarcely
one man was left to seven women; and now it was known that the
fathers, the husbands, the sons, or the brothers of these
miserable women would see their earthly homes no more. The cry
of anguish charged Bernard with the crime of sending them
forth on an errand in which they had done absolutely nothing
and had reaped only wretchedness and disgrace. For a time
Bernard himself was struck dumb: but he soon remembered that
he had spoken with the authority of God and his vicegerent,
and that the guilt or failure must lie at the door of the
pilgrims."
_G. W. Cox, The Crusades, chapter 5._
CRUSADES: A. D. 1187.
The loss of Jerusalem.
See JERUSALEM: A. D. 1149-1187.
CRUSADES: A. D. 1188-1192.
The Third Great Movement.
When the news reached Europe that Saladin, the redoubtable new
champion of Islam had expelled the Christians and the Cross
from Jerusalem, polluting once more the precincts of the Holy
Sepulchre, the effect produced was something not easily
understood at the present day. If we may believe historians of
the time, the pope (Urban III.) died of grief; "Christians
forgot all the ills of their own country to weep over
Jerusalem. ... Luxury was banished from cities; injuries were
forgotten and alms were given abundantly, Christians slept
upon ashes, clothed themselves in haircloth, and expiated
their disorderly lives by fasting and mortification. The
clergy set the example; the morals of the cloister were
reformed, and cardinals, condemning themselves to poverty,
promised to repair to the Holy Land, supported on charity by
the way. These pious reformations did not last long; but men's
minds were not the less prepared for a new crusade by them,
and all Europe was soon roused by the voice of Gregory VIII.,
who exhorted the faithful to assume the cross and take up
arms."
_J. F. Michaud, History of the Crusades, book 7._
"The emperor Frederic Barbarossa and the kings of France and
England assumed the cross; and the tardy magnitude of their
armaments was anticipated by the maritime states of the
Mediterranean and the ocean. The skilful and provident
Italians first embarked in the ships of Genoa, Pisa, and
Venice. They were speedily followed by the most eager pilgrims
of France, Normandy and the Western Isles. The powerful
succour of Flanders, Frise, and Denmark filled near a hundred
vessels; and the northern warriors were distinguished in the
field by a lofty stature and a ponderous battle-axe. Their
increasing multitudes could no longer be confined within the
walls of Tyre [which the Latins still held], or remain
obedient to the voice of Conrad [Marquis of Montferrat, who
had taken command of the place and repelled the attacks of
Saladin]. They pitied the misfortunes and revered the dignity
of Lusignan [the nominal king of Jerusalem, lately captive in
Saladin's hands], who was released from prison, perhaps to
divide the army of the Franks. He proposed the recovery of
Ptolemais, or Acre, thirty miles to the south of Tyre; and the
place was first invested [July, 1189] by 2,000 horse and
30,000 foot under his nominal command. I shall not expatiate
on the story of this memorable siege, which lasted near two
years, and consumed, in a narrow space, the forces of Europe
and Asia. ... At the sound of the holy trumpet the Moslems of
Egypt, Syria, Arabia, and the Oriental provinces assembled
under the servant of the prophet: his camp was pitched and
removed within a few miles of Acre; and he laboured, night and
day, for the relief of his brethren and the annoyance of the
Franks. ... In the spring of the second year, the royal fleets
of France and England cast anchor in the bay of Acre, and the
siege was more vigorously prosecuted by the youthful emulation
of the two kings, Philip Augustus and Richard Plantagenet.
{631}
After every resource had been tried, and every hope was
exhausted, the defenders of Acre submitted to their fate. ...
By the conquest of Acre the Latin powers acquired a strong
town and a convenient harbour; but the advantage was most
dearly purchased. The minister and historian of Saladin
computes, from the report of the enemy, that their numbers, at
different periods, amounted to 500,000 or 600,000; that more
than 100, 000 Christians were slain; that a far greater number
was lost by disease or shipwreck." On the reduction of Acre,
king Philip Augustus returned to France, leaving only 500
knights and 10,000 men behind him. Meantime, the old emperor,
Frederick Barbarossa, coming by the landward route, through
the country of the Greeks and Asia Minor, with a well-trained
army of 20,000 knights and 50,000 men on foot, had perished by
the way, drowned in a little Cilician torrent, and only 5,000
of his troops had reached the camp at Acre. Old as he was, (he
was seventy when he took the cross) Barbarossa might have
changed the event of the Crusade if he had reached the scene
of conflict; for he had brains with his valor and character
with his ferocity, which Richard Cœur de Lion had not. The
latter remained another year in the Holy Land; recovered
Cæsarea and Jaffa; threatened Saladin in Jerusalem seriously,
but to no avail; and stirred up more and fiercer quarrels
among the Christians than had been customary, even on the soil
which was sacred to them. In the end, a treaty was arranged
which displeased the more devout on both sides. "It was
stipulated that Jerusalem and the holy sepulchre should be
open, without tribute or vexation, to the pilgrimage of the
Latin Christians; that, after the demolition of Ascalon, they
should inclusively possess the sea-coast from Jaffa to Tyre;
that the count of Tripoli and the prince of Antioch should be
comprised in the truce; and that, during three years and three
months, all hostilities should cease. ... Richard embarked for
Europe, to seek a long captivity and a premature grave; and
the space of a few months concluded the life and glories of
Saladin."
_E. Gibbon, Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, chapter 59.
https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/25717_
"A halo of false glory surrounds the Third Crusade from the
associations which connect it with the lion-hearted king of
England. The exploits of Richard I. have stirred to enthusiasm
the dullest of chroniclers, have furnished themes for jubilant
eulogies, and have shed over his life that glamour which
cheats even sober-minded men when they read the story of his
prototype Achilleus in the tale of Troy. ... When we turn from
the picture to the reality, we shall see in this Third Crusade
an enterprise in which the fiery zeal which does something
towards redeeming the savage brutalities of Godfrey and the
first crusaders is displaced by base and sordid greed, by
intrigues utterly of the earthy, by wanton crimes from which
we might well suppose that the sun would hide away its face;
and in the leaders of this enterprise we shall see men in whom
morally there is scarcely a single quality to relieve the
monotonous blackness of their infamy; in whom, strategically,
a very little generalship comes to the aid of a blind brute
force."
_G. W. Cox, The Crusades, chapter 7._
ALSO IN:
_Mrs. W. Busk, Mediaeval Popes, Emperors, Kings
and Crusaders, book 2, chapter 12, and book 3, chapter 1-2._
CRUSADES: A. D. 1196-1197.
The Fourth Expedition.
A crusading expedition of German barons and their followers,
which went to the Holy Land, by way of Italy, in 1196, is
generally counted as the Fourth Crusade, though some writers
look upon it as a movement supplementary to the Third Crusade.
The Germans, who numbered some 40,000, do not seem to have
been welcomed by the Christians of Palestine. The latter
preferred to maintain the state of peace then prevailing; but
the new crusaders forced hostilities at once. Saladin was
dead; his brother Saphadin accepted the challenge to war with
prompt vigor and struck the first hard blow, taking Jaffa,
with great slaughter, and demolishing its fortifications. But
Saphadin was presently defeated in a battle fought between
Tyre and Sidon, and Jaffa was recovered, together with other
towns and most of the coast. But, a little later, the Germans
suffered, in their turn, a most demoralizing reverse at the
castle of Thoron, which they besieged, and were further
disturbed, in the midst of their depression, by news of the
death of their emperor, Henry VI. A great part of them,
thereupon, returned home. Those who remained, or many of them,
occupied Jaffa, where they were attacked, a few months later,
and cut to pieces.
_G. W. Cox, The Crusades, chapter 8._
CRUSADES: A. D. 1201-1203.
The Fifth Movement.-
Treachery of the Venetians.
Conquest of Constantinople.
"Every traveller returning from Syria brought a prayer for
immediate help from the survivors of the Third Crusade. It was
necessary to act at once if any portion even of the wreck of
the kingdom of Jerusalem were to be saved. Innocent the Third,
and some, at least, of the statesmen of the West were fully
alive to the progress which Islam had made since the departure
of the Western kings. In 1197, however, after five years of
weary waiting, the time seemed opportune for striking a new
blow for Christendom. Saladin, the great Sultan, had died in
1193, and his two sons were already quarreling about the
partition of his empire. The contending divisions of the Arab
Moslems were at this moment each bidding for the support of
the Christians of Syria. The other great race of Mahometans
which had threatened Europe, the Seljukian Turks, had made a
halt in their progress through Asia Minor. ... Other special
circumstances which rendered the moment favourable for a new
crusade, combined with the profound conviction of the
statesmen of the West of the danger to Christendom from the
progress of Islam, urged Western Europe to take part in the
new enterprise. The reigning Pope, Innocent III., was the
great moving spirit of the Fourth Crusade." The popular
preacher of the Crusade was found in an ignorant priest named
Fulk, of Neuilly, whose success in kindling public enthusiasm
was almost equal to that of Peter the Hermit. Vast numbers
took the cross, with Theobald, count of Champagne, Louis,
count of Blois and Chartres, Simon de Montfort, Walter of
Brienne, Baldwin, count of Flanders, Hugh of St. Pol, Geoffrey
de Villehardouin, marshal of Champagne and future historian of
the Crusade, and many other prominent knights and princes
among the leaders. The young count of Champagne was the chosen
chief; but he sickened and died and his place was taken by
Boniface, marquis of Montferrat.
{632}
It was the decision of the leaders that the expedition should
be directed in the first instance against the Moslem power in
Egypt, and that it should be conveyed to the attack of Egypt
by sea. Venice, alone, seemed to be able to furnish ships,
sailors and supplies for so great a movement, and a contract
with Venice for the service was concluded in the spring of
120l. But Venice was mercenary, unscrupulous and treacherous,
caring for nothing but commercial gains. Before the crusaders
could gather at her port for embarkation, she had betrayed
them to the Moslems. By a secret treaty with the sultan of
Egypt, the fact of which is coming more and more conclusively
to light, she had undertaken to frustrate the Crusade, and to
receive important commercial privileges at Alexandria as
compensation for her treachery. When, therefore, in the early
summer of 1202, the army of the Crusade was collected at
Venice to take ship, it encountered difficulties,
discouragements and ill-treatments which thickened daily. The
number assembled was not equal to expectation. Some had gone
by sea from Flanders; some by other routes. But Venice had
provided transport for the whole, and inflexibly demanded pay
for the whole. The money in hand was not equal to this claim.
The summer was lost in disputes and attempted compromises.
Many of the crusaders withdrew in disgust and went home. At
length, in defiance of the censures of the pope and of the
bitter opposition of many leaders and followers of the
expedition, there was a bargain struck, by the terms of which
the crusaders were to assist the Venetians in taking and
plundering the Christian city of Zara, a dreaded commercial
rival on the Dalmatian coast of the Adriatic, belonging to the
king of Hungary, himself one of the promoters of the very
crusade which was now to be turned against him. The infamous
compact was carried out. Zara was taken, and in the end it was
totally destroyed by the Venetians. In the meantime, the
doomed city was occupied by the crusading army through the
winter, while a still more perfidious plot was being formed.
Old Dandolo, the blind doge of Venice, was the master spirit
of it. He was helped by the influence of Philip, one of the
two rivals then fighting for the imperial crown in Germany and
Italy. Philip had married a daughter of Isaac II. (Angelos),
made emperor at Constantinople on the fall of the dynasty of
Comnenus, and that feeble prince had lately been dethroned by
his brother. The son and heir of Isaac, named Alexius, had
escaped from Constantinople and had made his way to Philip
imploring help. Either Philip conceived the idea, or it was
suggested to him, that the armament of the Crusade might be
employed to place the young Alexius on the throne of his
father. To the Venetians the scheme was more than acceptable.
It would frustrate the Crusade, which they had pledged
themselves to the sultan of Egypt to accomplish; it would
satisfy their ill-will towards the Byzantines, and, more
important than all else, it would give them an opportunity to
secure immeasurable advantages over their rivals in the great
trade which Constantinople held at command. The marquis of
Montferrat, commander of the Crusade, had some grievances of
his own and some ambitions of his own, which made him
favorable to the new project, and he was easily won to it. The
three influences thus combined--those of Philip, of Dandolo,
and of Montferrat--overcame all opposition. Some who opposed
were bribed, some were intimidated, some were deluded by
promises, some deserted the ranks. Pope Innocent remonstrated,
appealed and threatened in vain. The pilgrim host, "changed
from a crusading army into a filibustering expedition," set
sail from Zara in the spring of the year 1203, and was landed,
the following June, not on the shores of Egypt or Syria, but
under the walls of Constantinople. Its conquest, pillage and
brutally destructive treatment of the great city are described
in another place.
_E. Pears, The Fall of Constantinople, chapter 8-13._
ALSO IN:
_G. Finlay, History of the Byzantine and
Greek Empires, 716-1453, book 3, chapter 3._
_E. Gibbon, Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, chapter 59.
https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/25717_
See, also,
BYZANTINE EMPIRE: A. D. 1203-1204
CRUSADES: A. D. 1201-1283.
Against the heathen Sclavonians on the Baltic.
See LIVONIA: 12TH-13TH CENTURIES;
and PRUSSIA: 13TH CENTURY.
CRUSADES: A. D. 1209-1242.
Against the Albigenses.
See ALBIGENSES.
CRUSADES: A. D, 1212.
The Children's Crusade.
"The religious wars fostered and promoted vice; and the
failure of army after army was looked on as a clear
manifestation of God's wrath against the sins of the camp.
This feeling was roused to its highest pitch when, in the year
1212, certain priests--Nicolas was the name of one of these
mischievous madmen--went about France and Germany calling on
the children to perform what the fathers, through their
wickedness, had been unable to effect, promising that the sea
should be dry to enable them to march across; that the
Saracens would be miraculously stricken with a panic at the
sight of them; that God would, through the hands of children
only, whose lives were yet pure, work the recovery of the
Cross and the Sepulchre. Thousands--it is said fifty
thousand--children of both sexes responded to the call. They
listened to the impassioned preaching of the monks, believed
their lying miracles, their visions, their portents, their
references to the Scriptures, and, in spite of all that their
parents could do, rushed to take the Cross, boys and girls
together, and streamed along the roads which led to Marseilles
and Genoa, singing hymns, waving branches, replying to those
who asked whither they were going, 'We go to Jerusalem to
deliver the Holy Sepulchre,' and shouting their rallying cry,
'Lord Jesus, give us back thy Holy Cross.' They admitted
whoever came, provided he took the Cross; the infection
spread, and the children could not be restrained from joining
them in the towns and villages along their route. Their
miserable parents put them in prison; they escaped; they
forbade them to go; the children went in spite of prohibition.
They had no money, no provisions, no leaders; but the charity
of the towns they passed through supported them. At their rear
streamed the usual tail of camp followers. ... There were two
main bodies. One of these directed its way through Germany,
across the Alps, to Genoa. On the road they were robbed of all
the gifts which had been presented them; they were exposed to
heat and want, and very many either died on the march or
wandered away from the road and so became lost to sight; when
they reached Italy they dispersed about the country, seeking
food, were stripped by the villagers, and in some cases were
reduced to slavery.
{633}
Only seven thousand out of their number arrived at Genoa. Here
they stayed for some days. They looked down upon the
Mediterranean, hoping that its bright waves would divide to
let them pass. But they did not; there was no miracle wrought
in their favour; a few of noble birth were received among the
Genoese families, and have given rise to distinguished houses
of Genoa; among them is the house of Vivaldi. The rest,
disappointed and disheartened, made their way back again, and
got home at length, the girls with the loss of their virtue,
the boys with the loss of their belief, all barefooted and in
rags, laughed at by the towns they went through, and wondering
why they had ever gone at all. This was the end of the German
army. That of the French was not so fortunate, for none of
them ever got back again at all. When they arrived at
Marseilles, thinned probably by the same causes as those which
had dispersed the Germans, they found, like their brethren,
that the sea did not open a path for them, as had been
promised. Perhaps some were disheartened and went home again.
But fortune appeared to favour them. There were two worthy
merchants at Marseilles, named Hugh Ferrens, and William
Porcus, Iron Hugh and Pig William, who traded with the East,
and had in port seven ships, in which they proposed to convey
the children to Palestine. With a noble generosity they
offered to take them for nothing, all for love of religion,
and out of the pure kindness of their hearts. Of course this
offer was accepted with joy, and the seven vessels laden with
the happy little Crusaders, singing their hymns and flying
their banners, sailed out from Marseilles, bound for the East,
accompanied by William the Good and Hugh the Pious. It was not
known to the children, of course, that the chief trade of
these merchants was the lucrative business of kidnapping
Christian children for the Alexandrian market. It was so,
however, and these respectable tradesmen had never before made
so splendid a coup. Unfortunately, off the Island of St.
Peter, they encountered bad weather, and two ships went down
with all on board. What must have been the feelings of the
philanthropists, Pig William and Iron Hugh, at this
misfortune? They got, however, five ships safely to
Alexandria, and sold all their cargo, the Sultan of Cairo
buying forty of the boys, whom he brought up carefully and
apart, intending them, doubtless, for his best soldiers. A
dozen refusing to change their faith were martyred. None of
the rest ever came back. Nobody in Europe seems to have taken
much notice of this extraordinary episode."
_W. Besant and E. H. Palmer, Jerusalem, chapter 18._
ALSO IN:
_J. H. Michaud, History of the Crusades,
appendix number 28._
_G. Z. Gray, The Children's Crusade._
CRUSADE: A. D. 1212.
Against the Moors in Spain.
See SPAIN: A. D. 1146-1232.
CRUSADE: A. D. 1216-1229.
The Sixth Movement.
Frederic II. in Jerusalem.
For six years after the betrayal of the vows of the crusaders
of 1202-1204--who sacked Constantinople instead of rescuing
Jerusalem--the Christians of Palestine were protected by a
truce with Saphadin, the brother of Saladin, who had succeeded
the latter in power. Hostilities were then rashly provoked by
the always foolish Latins, and they soon found themselves
reduced to sore straits, calling upon Europe for fresh help.
Pope Innocent III. did not scruple to second their appeal. A
new crusade was preached with great earnestness, and a general
Council of the Church--the Fourth of Lateran--was convened for
the stimulation of it. "The Fifth Crusade [or the Sixth, as
more commonly numbered], the result of this resolution, was
divided in the sequel into three maritime expeditions: the
first [A. D. 1216] consisting principally of Hungarians under
their king, Andrew; the second [A. D. 1218] composed of
Germans, Italians, French and English nobles and their
followers; and the third [A. D. 1228] led by the Emperor
Frederic II. in person. ... Though the King of Hungary was
attended by the flower of a nation which, before its
conversion to Christianity, had been the scourge and terror of
Western Europe, the arms of that monarch, even aided by the
junction of numerous German crusaders under the dukes of
Austria and Bavaria, performed nothing worthy of notice: and
after a single campaign in Palestine, in which the Mussulman
territories were ineffectually ravaged, the fickle Andrew
deserted the cause and returned with his forces to Europe. His
defection did not prevent the duke of Austria, with the German
crusaders, from remaining, in concert with the King of
Jerusalem, his barons, and the knights of the three religious
orders, for the defence of Palestine; and, in the following
year, the constancy of these faithful champions of the Cross
was rewarded by the arrival of numerous reinforcements from
Germany. ... It was resolved to change the scene of warfare
from the narrow limits of the Syrian shore to the coast of
Egypt, ... and the situation of Damietta, at the mouth of the
Nile, pointed out that city as the first object of attack."
After a siege of seventeen months, during which both the
besieged and the besiegers suffered horribly, from famine and
from pestilence, Damietta was taken (A. D. 1219), Nine-tenths
of its population of 80,000 had perished. "Both during the
siege and after the capture of Damietta, the invasion of Egypt
had filled the infidels with consternation; and the alarm
which was betrayed in their counsels proved that the
crusaders, in choosing that country for the theatre of
operations, had assailed the Mussulman power in its most vital
and vulnerable point. Of the two sons of Saphadin, Coradinus
and Camel, who were now uneasily seated on the thrones of
Damascus and Cairo, the former, in despair of preserving
Jerusalem, had already demolished its fortifications; and the
brothers agreed in repeatedly offering the cession of the holy
city and of all Palestine to the Christians, upon the single
condition of their evacuating Egypt. Every object which had
been ineffectually proposed in repeated Crusades, since the
fatal battle of Tiberias, might now have been gloriously
obtained by the acceptance of these terms, and the King of
Jerusalem, the French and English leaders, and the Teutonic
knights, all eagerly desired to embrace the offer of the
Sultans. But the obstinate ambition and cupidity of the
surviving papal legate, Cardinal Pelagius, of the Italian
chieftains, and of the knights of the other two religious
orders, by holding out the rich prospect of the conquest and
plunder of Egypt, overruled every wise and temperate argument
in the Christian councils, and produced a rejection of all
compromise with the infidels.
{634}
After a winter of luxurious inaction, the legate led the
crusading host from Damietta toward Cairo (A. D. 1220)." The
expedition was as disastrous in its result as it was imbecile
in its leadership. The whole army, caught by the rising of the
Nile, was placed in so helpless a situation that it was glad
to purchase escape by the surrender of Damietta and the
evacuation of Egypt. The retreat of the greater part of these
crusaders did not end until they had reached home. Pope
Honorius III. (who had succeeded Innocent III. in 1216) strove
to shift responsibility for the failure from his wretched
legate to the Emperor Frederic II., who had thus far evaded
the fulfilment of his crusading promises and vows, being
occupied in struggles with the papacy. At length, in 1228,
Frederic embarked for Palestine with a small force, pursued by
the maledictions of the pope, who denounced him for daring to
assume the Cross while under the ban of the church, as much as
he had denounced him before for neglecting it. But the
free-thinking Hohenstauffen cared little, apparently, and went
his way, shunned scrupulously by all pious souls, including
the knights of Palestine, except those of the Teutonic order.
With the help of the latter he occupied and refortified Jaffa
and succeeded in concluding a treaty with the Sultan which
restored Jerusalem to the Christians, reserving certain rights
to the Mahometans; giving up likewise Bethlehem, Nazareth
and some other places to the Christians, and securing peace
for ten years. Frederic had married, a few years before, for
his second empress, Iolante, daughter and heiress of the
titular king of Jerusalem, John de Brienne. With the hand of
this princess, he received from her father a solemn transfer
of all his rights to that shadowy throne. He now claimed those
rights, and, entering Jerusalem, with the Teutonic knights (A.
D. 1229), he crowned himself its king. The patriarch, the
Templars and the Hospitallers refused to take part in the
ceremony; the pope denounced Frederic's advantageous treaty as
soon as he had news of it, and all that it gained for the
Christians of Palestine was thrown away by them as speedily as
possible.
_Major Procter, History of the Crusades,
chapter 5, section 2._
"No Crusader, since Godfrey de Bouillon, had effected so much
as Frederick the Second. What would he not have obtained, had
the Pope, the Patriarch and the Orders given him their hearty
cooperation?"
_T. L. Kington, History of Frederick II., chapter 8._
CRUSADES: A. D. 1238-1280.
Against the Bogomiles.
See BALKAN AND DANUBIAN STATES:
9TH-16TH CENTURIES (BOSNIA, ETC.)
CRUSADES: A. D. 1242.
The Invasion of Palestine by the Carismians.
See JERUSALEM: A. D. 1242.
CRUSADES: A. D. 1248-1254.
The Seventh Movement.
Expedition of Saint Louis to Egypt.
The Seventh Crusade was undertaken, with little aid from other
countries, by the devout and wonderfully Christian-like young
king of France, Louis IX., afterwards canonized, and known in
history as St. Louis. "He carried it out with a picked army,
furnished by the feudal chivalry and by the religious and
military orders dedicated to the service of the Holy Land. The
Isle of Cyprus was the trysting-place appointed for all the
forces of the expedition. Louis arrived there on the 12th of
September, 1248, and reckoned upon remaining there only a few
days; for it was Egypt that he was in a hurry to reach. The
Christian world was at that time of opinion that, to deliver
the Holy Land, it was necessary first of all to strike a blow
at Islamism in Egypt, wherein its chief strength resided. But
scarcely had the crusaders formed a junction in Cyprus, when
the vices of the expedition and the weaknesses of its chief
began to be manifest. Louis, unshakable in his religious zeal,
was wanting in clear ideas and fixed resolves as to the
carrying out of his design. ... He did not succeed in winning
a majority in the council of chiefs over to his opinion as to
the necessity for a speedy departure for Egypt; it was decided
to pass the winter in Cyprus. ... At last a start was made
from Cyprus in May, 1249, and, in spite of violent gales of
wind which dispersed a large number of vessels, they arrived
on the 4th of June before Damietta. ... Having become masters
of Damietta, St. Louis and the crusaders committed the same
fault there as in the Isle of Cyprus: they halted there for an
indefinite time. They were expecting fresh crusaders; and they
spent the time of expectation in quarreling over the partition
of the booty taken in the city. They made away with it, they
wasted it blindly. ... Louis saw and deplored these
irregularities, without being in a condition to stop them. At
length, on the 20th of November, 1249, after more than five
months' inactivity at Damietta, the crusaders put themselves
once more in motion, with the determination of marching upon
Babylon, that outskirt of Cairo, now called Old Cairo, which
the greater part of them, in their ignorance, mistook for the
real Babylon, and where they flattered themselves they would
find immense riches, and avenge the olden sufferings of the
Hebrew captives. The Mussulmans had found time to recover from
their first fright, and to organize, at all points, a vigorous
resistance. On the 8th of February, 1250, a battle took place
twenty leagues from Damietta, at Mansourah ('the city of
victory'), on the right bank of the Nile. ... The battle-field
was left that day to the crusaders; but they were not allowed
to occupy it as conquerors, for, three days afterwards, on the
11th of February, 1250, the camp of St. Louis was assailed by
clouds of Saracens, horse and foot, Mamelukes and Bedouins.
All surprise had vanished, the Mussulmans measured at a glance
the numbers of the Christians, and attacked them in full
assurance of success, whatever heroism they might display; and
the crusaders themselves indulged in no more self·illusion,
and thought only of defending themselves. Lack of provisions
and sickness soon rendered defence almost as impossible as
attack; every day saw the Christian camp more and more
encumbered with the famine-stricken, the dying, and the dead;
and the necessity for retreating became evident." An attempt
to negotiate with the enemy failed, because they insisted on
the surrender of the king as hostage,--which none would
concede. "On the 5th of April, 1250, the crusaders decided
upon retreating. This was the most deplorable scene of a
deplorable drama; and at the same time it was, for the king,
an occasion for displaying, in their most sublime and
attractive traits, all the virtues of the Christian. Whilst
sickness and famine were devastating the camp, Louis made
himself visitor, physician and comforter; and his presence and
his words exercised upon the worst cases a searching influence. ...
{635}
When the 5th of April, the day fixed for the retreat, had
come, Louis himself was ill and much enfeebled. He was urged
to go aboard one of the vessels which were to descend the
Nile, carrying the wounded and the most suffering; but he
refused absolutely, saying, 'I don't separate from my people
in the hour of danger.' He remained on land, and when he had
to move forward he fainted away. When he came to himself, he
was amongst the last to leave the camp. ... At four leagues
distance from the camp it had just left, the rear-guard of the
crusaders, harassed by clouds of Saracens, was obliged to
halt. Louis could no longer keep on his horse. 'He was put up
at a house,' says Joinville, 'and laid, almost dead, upon the
lap of a tradeswoman from Paris; and it was believed that he
would not last till evening.'" The king, in this condition,
with the whole wreck of his army,--only 10,000 in number
remaining to him,--were taken prisoners. Their release from
captivity was purchased a month later by the surrender of
Damietta and a ransom-payment of 500,000 livres. They made
their way to St. Jean d' Acre, in Palestine, whence many of
them returned home. But King Louis, with some of his knights
and men-at-arms--how many is not known--stayed yet in the Holy
Land for four years, striving and hoping against hope to
accomplish something for the deliverance of Jerusalem, and
expending "in small works of piety, sympathy, protection, and
care for the future of the Christian population in Asia, his
time, his strength, his pecuniary resources, and the ardor of
a soul which could not remain idly abandoned to sorrowing over
great desires unsatisfied." The good and pious but ill-guided
king returned to France in the summer of 1254, and was
received with great joy.
_F. P. Guizot, Popular History of France, chapter 17;
www.gutenberg.org/files/11952_
ALSO IN:
_Sire De Joinville, Memoirs of Saint Louis, part 2._
_J. F. Michaud, History of the Crusades, books 13-14._
Crusades: A. D. 1252.
The movement of "the Pastors."
On the arrival in France of the news of the disastrous failure
of Saint Louis's expedition to Egypt, there occurred an
outbreak of fanaticism as insensate as that of the children's
crusade of forty years before. It was said to have originated
with a Hungarian named Jacob, who began to proclaim that
Christ rejected the great ones of the earth from His service,
and that the deliverance of the Holy City must be accomplished
by the poor and humble. "Shepherds left their flocks, labourers
laid down the plough, to follow his footsteps. ... The name of
Pastors was given to these village crusaders. ... At length,
assembled to the number of more than 100,000, these
redoubtable pilgrims left Paris and divided themselves into
several troops, to repair to the coast, whence they were to
embark for the East. The city of Orleans, which happened to be
in their passage, became the theatre of frightful disorders.
The progress of their enormities at length created serious
alarm in the government and the magistracy; orders were sent
to the provinces to pursue and disperse these turbulent and
seditious bands. The most numerous assemblage of the Pastors
was fixed to take place at Bourges, where the 'master of
Hungary' [Jacob] was to perform miracles and communicate the
will of Heaven. Their arrival in that city was the signal for
murder, fire and pillage. The irritated people took up arms
and marched against these disturbers of the public peace; they
overtook them between Mortemer and Villeneuve-sur-le-Cher,
where, in spite of their numbers, they were routed, and
received the punishment due to their brigandages. Jacob had
his head cut off by the blow of an axe; many of his companions
and disciples met with death on the field of battle, or were
consigned to punishment; the remainder took to flight."
_J. F. Michaud, History of the Crusades, book 14._
Crusades: A. D. 1256-1259.
Against Eccelino di Romano.
See VERONA: A. D. 1236-1259.
Crusades: A. D. 1270-1271.
The last undertakings.
Saint Louis at Tunis.
Prince Edward in Palestine.
"For seven years after his return to France, from 1254 to
1261, Louis seemed to think no more about them [the crusades],
and there is nothing to show that he spoke of them even to his
most intimate confidants; but, in spite of his apparent
calmness, he was living, so far as they were concerned, in a
continual ferment of imagination and internal fever, even
flattering himself that some favorable circumstance would call
him back to his interrupted work. ... In 1261, Louis held, at
Paris, a Parliament, at which, without any talk of a new
crusade, measures were taken which revealed an idea of it. ...
In 1263 the crusade was openly preached. ... All objections,
all warnings, all anxieties came to nothing in the face of
Louis's fixed idea and pious passion. He started from Paris on
the 16th of March, 1270, a sick man almost already, but with
soul content, and probably the only one without misgiving in
the midst of all his comrades. It was once more at
Aigues-Mortes that he went to embark. All was as yet dark and
undecided as to the plan of the expedition. ... Steps were
taken at hap-hazard with full trust in Providence and utter
forgetfulness that Providence does not absolve men from
foresight. ... It was only in Sardinia, after four days' halt
at Cagliari, that Louis announced to the chiefs of the
crusade, assembled aboard his ship, the 'Mountjoy,' that he
was making for Tunis, and that their Christian work would
commence there. The king of Tunis (as he was then called),
Mohammed Mostanser, had for some time been talking of his
desire to become a Christian, if he could be efficiently
protected against the seditions of his subjects. Louis
welcomed with transport the prospect of Mussulman conversions.
... But on the 17th of July, when the fleet arrived before
Tunis, the admiral, Florent de Varennes, probably without the
king's orders, and with that want of reflection which was
conspicuous at each step of the enterprise, immediately took
possession of the harbor and of some Tunisian vessels as
prize, and sent word to the king 'that he had only to support
him and that the disembarkation of the troops might be
effected with perfect safety.' Thus war was commenced at the
very first moment against the Mussulman prince whom there had
been promise of seeing before long a Christian. At the end of
a fortnight, after some fight between the Tunisians and the
crusaders, so much political and military blindness produced
its natural consequences. The re-enforcements promised to
Louis by his brother Charles of Anjou, king of Sicily, had not
arrived; provisions were falling short; and the heats of an
African summer were working havoc amongst the army with such
rapidity that before long there was no time to bury the dead;
but they were cast pell-mell into the ditch which surrounded
the camp, and the air was tainted thereby.
{636}
On the 3d of August Louis was attacked by the epidemic fever."
On the 25th of August he died. His son and successor, Philip
III., held his ground before Tunis until November, when he
gladly accepted a payment of money from the Tunisian prince
for withdrawing his army. Disaster followed him. A storm
destroyed part of his fleet, with 4,000 or 5,000 men, and sunk
all the treasure he had received from the Moslems. On the
journey home through Italy his wife met with an accident which
ended her life and that of her prematurely born child. The
young king arrived at Paris, May, 1271, bringing the remains
of five of his family for burial at St. Denis: his wife, his
son, his father, his brother, and his brother-in-law,--all
victims of the fatal crusade. While France was thus burying
the last of her crusaders, Prince Edward (afterwards King
Edward I.) of England, landed in Syria at the head of a few
hundred knights and men at arms. Joined by the Templars and
Hospitallers, he had an army of 6,000 or 7,000 men, with which
he took Nazareth and made there a bloody sacrifice to the
memory of the gentle Nazarene. He did nothing more. Being
wounded by an assassin, he arranged a truce with the Sultan of
Egypt and returned home. His expedition was the last from
Europe which strove with the Moslems for the Holy Land. The
Christians of Palestine, who still held Acre and Tyre, Sidon
and a few other coast cities, were soon afterwards
overwhelmed, and the dominion of the Crescent in Syria was
undisputed any more by force of arms, though many voices cried
vainly against it. The spirit of the Crusades had expired.
_F. P. Guizot, Popular History of France, chapter 17.
www.gutenberg.org/files/11952_
ALSO IN:
_J. F. Michaud, History of the Crusades, book 15._
CRUSADES: A. D. 1291.
The end of the Christian Kingdom of Jerusalem.
See JERUSALEM: A. D. 1291.
CRUSADES: A. D. 1299.
The last campaign of the Templars.
"After the fall of Acre [A. D. 1291] the headquarters of the
Templars were established at Limisso in the island of Cyprus,
and urgent letters were sent to Europe for succour." In 1295,
James de Molay, the head of the English province, became Grand
Master, and soon after his arrival in Palestine he entered
into an alliance with Ghazan Khan, the Mongol ruler of Persia,
who had married a Christian princess of Armenia and was not
unfriendly to the Christians, as against the Mamelukes of
Egypt, with whom he was at war. The Mongol Khan invited the
Templars to join him in an expedition against the Sultan of
Egypt, and they did so in the spring of 1299, at Antioch. "An
army of 30,000 men was placed by the Mogul emperor under the
command of the Grand Master, and the combined forces moved up
the valley of the Orontes towards Damascus. In a great battle
fought at Hems, the troops of the sultans of Damascus and
Egypt were entirely defeated and pursued with great slaughter
until nightfall. Aleppo, Hems, Damascus, and all the principal
cities, surrendered to the victorious arms of the Moguls, and
the Templars once again entered Jerusalem in triumph, visited
the Holy Sepulchre and celebrated Easter on Mount Zion." The
khan sent ambassadors to Europe, offering the possession of
Palestine to the Christian powers if they would give him their
alliance and support, but none responded to the call. Ghazan
Khan fell ill and withdrew from Syria; the Templars retreated
to Cyprus once more and their military career, as the
champions of the Cross, was at an end.
_C. G. Addison, The Knights Templars, chapter 6._
ALSO IN:
_H. H. Howarth, History of the Mongols, part 3, chapter 8._
CRUSADES:
Effects and consequences of the Crusades, in Europe.
"The principle of the crusades was a savage fanaticism; and
the most important effects were analogous to the cause. Each
pilgrim was ambitious to return with his sacred spoils, the
relics of Greece and Palestine; and each relic was preceded
and followed by a train of miracles and visions. The belief of
the Catholics was corrupted by new legends, their practice by
new superstitions; and the establishment of the inquisition,
the mendicant orders of monks and friars, the last abuse of
indulgences, and the final progress of idolatry, flowed from
the baleful fountain of the holy war. The active spirit of the
Latins preyed on the vitals of their reason and religion; and
if the ninth and tenth centuries were the times of darkness,
the thirteenth and fourteenth were the age of absurdity and
fable. ... Some philosophers have applauded the propitious
influence of these holy wars, which appear to me to have
checked rather than forwarded the maturity of Europe."
_E. Gibbon, Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, chapter 61.
https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/25717_
"The crusades may be considered as material pilgrimages on an
enormous scale, and their influence upon general morality
seems to have been altogether pernicious. Those who served
under the cross would not indeed have lived very virtuously at
home; but the confidence in their own merits which the
principle of such expeditions inspired must have aggravated
the ferocity and dissoluteness of their ancient habits.
Several historians attest the depravation of morals which
existed, both among the crusaders and in the states formed out
of their conquests."
_H. Hallam, The Middle Ages, chapter 9. part 1._
"It was not possible for the crusaders to travel through so
many countries, and to behold their various customs and
institutions, without acquiring information and improvement.
Their views enlarged; their prejudices wore off; new ideas
crowded into their minds; and they must have been sensible, on
many occasions, of the rusticity of their own manners when
compared with those of a more polished people. ...
Accordingly, we discover, soon after the commencement of the
crusades, greater splendour in the courts of princes, greater
pomp in public ceremonies, a more refined taste in pleasure
and amusements, together with a more romantic spirit of
enterprise spreading gradually over Europe; and to these wild
expeditions, the effect of superstition and folly, we owe the
first gleams of light which tended to dispel barbarism and
ignorance. But the beneficial consequences of the crusades
took place slowly; their influence upon the state of property,
and, consequently, of power, in the different kingdoms of
Europe, was more immediate as well as discernible."
_W. Robertson, View of the Progress of Society
in Europe, section 1._
{637}