From 1095 to the end of the Middle Ages, the call to the Holy Land echoed across Europe as enthusiastic preachers lectured crowds upon wooden platforms, exercising all the tricks of the orator’s trade by coaxing, threatening, and promising in order to rouse up revenge upon there enemy. Preaching was the most effective way to reach the illiterate masses. Although the clergy and nobles of Europe were used to receiving letters begging aid for the Holy Land, for the most part the emotions and hopes of the mass of potential recruits could only be stirred by speaking tours. This form of propaganda was so effective that by the Second Crusade, one of the western Christendom’s most famous figures, St. Bernard of Clairvaux, was on the road to mapping
…show more content…
The Holy Land, bore the impression of Jesus’ life; Bethlehem, Nazareth, the Jordan River, the Temple Mount, and the Church of the Holy Sepulchre, which encompassed the places of Jesus’ crucifixion, burial and resurrection. The significance of Bernard’s, In the Praise of the Knighthood, was allowing the Templars to understand the full meaning of their position, which had gone beyond policing the pilgrimage routes, to defending the Holy Land. In June 1148, the Templars gathered near Acre in order to attack Damascus. A series of bad decisions caused the great army to disintegrate within five days. Blame was laid at the feet of the European kings, who were accused of ambition and stupidity for choosing to attack Damascenes. With the failure of the Second Crusade, Bernard wrote a defiant apology in defending his role in preaching and organizing the recent expedition. In Apologia for the Second Crusade, Bernard …show more content…
The perfect and final apology for any man is the testimony of his own conscience. As for myself, I take it to be a small matter to be judged by those “who call evil good, and good evil, whose darkness is light, whose light is darkness. If one or the other must be done, I would rather that men murmur against us than against God. It would be well for me if he deigns to use me for his shield… I shall not refuse to be made ignominious, so long as God’s glory is not attacked.
The Second Crusade had embittered a large number of Europeans against the whole notion of crusading, causing the Papacy and the West a major setback. Since the failure of the Second Crusades, in spite of Bernard’s justification, the attitude that God himself may not have blessed the enterprise began to gain ground. The argument that failure was due to the sinfulness of the crusaders was, however, relatively plausible and served to stifle doubts about the essentially holy aspect of the crusades. The suggested treachery of the crusaders was seen as a punishment by
The Holy Land, bore the impression of Jesus’ life; Bethlehem, Nazareth, the Jordan River, the Temple Mount, and the Church of the Holy Sepulchre, which encompassed the places of Jesus’ crucifixion, burial and resurrection. The significance of Bernard’s, In the Praise of the Knighthood, was allowing the Templars to understand the full meaning of their position, which had gone beyond policing the pilgrimage routes, to defending the Holy Land. In June 1148, the Templars gathered near Acre in order to attack Damascus. A series of bad decisions caused the great army to disintegrate within five days. Blame was laid at the feet of the European kings, who were accused of ambition and stupidity for choosing to attack Damascenes. With the failure of the Second Crusade, Bernard wrote a defiant apology in defending his role in preaching and organizing the recent expedition. In Apologia for the Second Crusade, Bernard …show more content…
The perfect and final apology for any man is the testimony of his own conscience. As for myself, I take it to be a small matter to be judged by those “who call evil good, and good evil, whose darkness is light, whose light is darkness. If one or the other must be done, I would rather that men murmur against us than against God. It would be well for me if he deigns to use me for his shield… I shall not refuse to be made ignominious, so long as God’s glory is not attacked.
The Second Crusade had embittered a large number of Europeans against the whole notion of crusading, causing the Papacy and the West a major setback. Since the failure of the Second Crusades, in spite of Bernard’s justification, the attitude that God himself may not have blessed the enterprise began to gain ground. The argument that failure was due to the sinfulness of the crusaders was, however, relatively plausible and served to stifle doubts about the essentially holy aspect of the crusades. The suggested treachery of the crusaders was seen as a punishment by