What do you know about Peter the Hermit and the People’s Crusade?!

There are many figures who played a major role in igniting the flames of the Crusades; and we cannot build a complete picture of the events without shedding light on their role.

Peter the Hermit is considered one of the most important clerical figures who continued the role of Pope Urban II in propaganda, uniting Europe under the banner of the Cross, and preparing the army of Christ.

Peter wandered throughout Europe barefoot, portraying himself as an ascetic hermit aiming to prepare an army to liberate Christ’s tomb. It is clear that his image played a role in convincing poor peasants that he spoke on their behalf, and that he was different from Pope Urban II and other clergy who addressed kings and princes.

Rhetoric as a tool of propaganda:

Peter the Hermit was a monk and a popular preacher, not one of the high-ranking churchmen or influential bishops. However, he possessed communicative abilities that enabled him to influence the common people, thus continuing the role of Pope Urban II. After the Pope proclaimed his call at Clermont in 1095 to liberate Christ’s tomb from the Muslims—whom he described as infidels—Peter began roaming the villages and towns of France, Germany, the Netherlands, and Belgium, preaching in the streets and urging the people to embark on an armed pilgrimage to the Holy Land.

Thus, Peter the Hermit introduced a new form of propaganda that complemented the methods employed by Pope Urban II. He focused on appealing to the religious emotions of the masses and offering promises of spiritual salvation and the forgiveness of sins to all who took part in the fight to liberate Christ’s tomb.

Thus, Peter the Hermit was the popular bridge that carried Pope Urban’s call from the religious and political elites to the common masses. He represented the popular and emotional face of the Crusades, in contrast to the political and military face of the nobles. For this reason, European historians described him as a charismatic figure, a saintly man who inspired the people, and a central figure in the launching of the Crusades.

In contrast, some modern historians viewed him as a populist figure who led the poor into a military disaster due to uncontrolled zeal; portraying him as ignorant and reckless, leading inexperienced mobs who ended up harming their own allies

Embarrassing kings and nobles

Another aspect of Peter the Hermit’s propaganda was his effort to embarrass kings and nobles, delivering a message that went as follows: I will gather my army from the poor peasants; if you do not participate, then you will bear the sin and the responsibility for what happens. Europe will proceed with the Crusades without you, and the poor may rise against you once they achieve victory.

As a result of this propaganda campaign, Peter the Hermit was able to mobilize tens of thousands of poor peasants, monks, women, and children. For this reason, it became known as the People’s Crusade, or the Crusade of the Poor. Peter then led his campaign through Germany, Hungary, and Bulgaria.

What is the truth about the massacres against the Jews?!

Some sources indicate that Peter the Hermit committed massacres against the Jews in 1096, whom he regarded as enemies of Christ. Film and television productions have focused on this claim due to Jewish control of production companies, in order to instill a sense of guilt in Christians over the persecution of Jews, and to push Christians to support the “Israeli” occupation and the crimes it commits as atonement for Christian persecution of Jews. It is noteworthy that the story of this campaign committing massacres against the Jews does not appear in scholarly works, but rather spread through film and television productions. There is also historical evidence that the Jews helped finance the Second Crusade, in which Peter the Hermit participated, and that they facilitated the Crusaders’ entry into Jerusalem.

However, the claim that Peter the Hermit and his campaign committed massacres against the Jews spread to such an extent that it became difficult to challenge after its dissemination in films and television series.

Alp Arslan defeats the campaign

After Peter the Hermit managed to lead his campaign to Constantinople, he held negotiations with the Byzantine emperor Alexios Komnenos, during which he convinced him to provide them with weapons, assuring him that they would be able to defeat his Seljuk enemies and protect his empire. As a result, he allowed them to pass through until they reached Nicaea.

When Peter and his campaign entered Seljuk territory in Nicaea (the capital of Sultan Alp Arslan), they began plundering villages. The Seljuks quickly responded and launched a surprise attack on the Crusaders. Peter the Hermit’s forces broke into small groups and fell into scattered ambushes.

Sultan Alp Arslan ibn Sulayman ibn Qutulmish (d. 1107) is regarded as one of the most prominent Seljuk rulers in Anatolia. He played a central role in resisting the First Crusades (1096–1099), and his historical contribution to confronting the Crusaders merits a separate study. Here, however, we will confine ourselves to his role in defeating the campaign led by Peter the Hermit.

The Muslims’ triumph in the Battle of Xerigordos

The Crusader campaign led by Peter the Hermit invaded Anatolia, where Alp Arslan employed ambushes for an extended period before finally confronting them with his army. His forces, according to most estimates, numbered no more than a thousand cavalry, yet he achieved a decisive victory over them in the Battle of Xerigordos (Kieropolis), killing tens of thousands of them.

The defeat of this campaign at the hands of the Seljuks under Alp Arslan was a great shock to Europe, revealing the need for organized military leadership. At the same time, it exposed to the Islamic world the nature of the new threat coming from the West.

European historians exaggerated in portraying the weakness of this campaign, claiming that the poor peasants were untrained and lacked sufficient weapons. However, this portrayal requires criticism, for the Byzantine emperor had supplied them with arms, his soldiers took part in the campaign, and at the very least his commanders trained many of them. Moreover, they looted a great deal of money and provisions along their way.

They fought Alp Arslan’s army for a long time and seized a wide area of Anatolia. Therefore, the campaign was not as weak as European historians depict it in order to justify the defeat.

The flight of Peter the Hermit and his return

Peter the Hermit managed to escape and return to Europe. European sources contain different accounts of his flight: some claim that he did not participate in the battle, having gone to Constantinople to ask the emperor for weapons and troops, and when he learned of the defeat, he returned to Europe; others state that he fled when he saw the signs of defeat.

However, he returned to Europe to continue his role in preaching for a new campaign, using the defeat of his expedition to stir the emotions of nobles and kings. He claimed that the poor peasants had been massacred at the hands of the Seljuks, and that the kings were obliged to avenge them.

It is clear that this time he succeeded in influencing the kings and nobles to prepare for a new campaign, which began the following year in 1097, with the full strength of Europe taking part. After the Crusaders captured Jerusalem, he returned to live in a monastery in France, where he remained until his death.

Nevertheless, the figure of Peter the Hermit continued to capture the European imagination, being featured in numerous film and television productions. Among the most notable are the series The Crusaders, an Italian-German production released in 2001; a BBC documentary episode entitled Pilgrims with Arms; the film The Great Crusaders (1957); and the British series The Crusades (1995).

It is clear that the story of this figure and the defeat of his campaign has continued to be used by the West to incite hatred against Muslims—especially the Turks—up to the present day, and to stir Christians toward vengeance and retribution, while exaggerating the weakness of the campaign despite the confirmed facts regarding its looting of large amounts of provisions and the Byzantine emperor’s supply of weapons to it.

___________________________________________

You may also like:

·       Crusaders Seek Help from the West

·      Key Stages in Liberating Jerusalem from the Crusaders

Read the article in Arabic