The Poor in Medieval Times

These fell under 2 categories, native-born and immigrants. The poor in medieval times were often the same as the urban poor in whatever time: they were those who were either totally without work or who were so chronically under-employed that they were abbreviated to relying upon charity in one form or another. Some were people who had become disenabled. Some were people whose trade betrayed them in one way or another ("gone away of business" in modern parlance). Some were born into impoverishment. Sometimes the poverty was ephemeral, the result of economic agitates or war.

The cities in general recognized aid of their own mediocre as a civic duty. The town's churches took the lead here, for the care of the poor was a historic obligation of the Catholic Church. Some cities had accomplished a dole, either permanently or to be applied in times of crisis. And the guilds themselves frequently had a treasury that could be applied to care for the sick, the unemployed, and the families of at peace guildsmen. By the late Middle Ages, such as action had get part of club regulations in a lot of cities, so that the guild acted as a relief agency for its extremities.

Cities were positions of asylum for the countryside. In wartime, the peasants of the countryside flew to the city walls for aegis. In famine they came to the cities for food. On economic crises, they came anticipating work.

Cities commonly tried to adapt such refugees, provided such adjustment did not imperil the city itself. There was a composite relation with the countryside. Some towns did jurisdiction over abutting villages and felt a particular obligation towards them, while other towns' agency ended at the city walls and so did their sense of duty. Even the most greathearted of cities, even so, found affairs when it was essential to get tough towards a flood of refugees. At such times, a city might arrange all non-native poor be booted out and the city gates close behind them. There were as well times when the city shut its gates early. This occurred on war, when a city acknowledged it would be beleaguered, and could not attempt to feed the taking flight peasant population by with its possess.

Recent Posts:

Medieval Castle Life
Medieval castles
Medieval Castles Defensive
Rooms of Medieval castles
Medieval Cavalry
Medieval Catapults
Medieval Customs
Medieval Wedding
Medieval Cures
Medieval Hospitals
Medieval Clothing
Medieval Food

God Wills It

The pious Crusaders never pinned their succeeders on mere luck. Any good chance was nothing less than the favour of God. They often claimed God and saints looked to them - assuring them their reason was holy, or yet catering battle plans for the following day. If a battle was becoming poorly, they'd pray that God would annul their chances. And if their chances were annulled -- whether through another troops or a auspicious wind - that destine was God's will.

At the siege of Antioch, a boor named Peter Bartholomew arrogated St. Andrew had looked to him. Agreeing to Peter, St. Andrew said to him that the Holy Lance, averred to have perforate Christ's side, was buried below the cathedral. A hoary piece of metal was dug, which was assured as a great countenance by God. But sceptics thought Peter had buried the metal himself. When matters were going ailing, baffled warriors called Peter a dupery. In reaction, Peter extended to stand test by fire, arrogating that God would protect him. When he came out badly burned and died, his assistants claimed it was as the watching crowd wasn't devout sufficiency.


- Introduction to the crusades history
- First Crusade 1095-1099
- Leaders of The First Crusade
- Motives and Causes of The Crusade
- Cilicia in The First Crusade
- Nicaea in The First Crusade

Nicaea in The First Crusade

The first goal was the city of Nicaea (New Iznik), the local Turkish capital, approximately 250km from Constantinople. The Emperor Alexios was very apprehensive that Nicaea be captured as it was the centre of Turkish functionings against Constantinople and the Byzantine Empire. Appropriating it would also aid the crusaders in annihilating opposition to their passage by Anatolia (modern Turkey). They went on the old Roman road, which was very outgrown, so they had to acquit the path with swords and axes. As with the Romans before them, this appropriated them to build a supply line then that food could be bestowed to the flocks at the front. At this arrange of the expedition leastways, the Byzantines were even very much abiding the crusaders. The first armies, conduced by Godfrey, Tancred, Hugh of Vermandois and Robert of Flanders, arrived at Nicaea on six May and laid beleaguering to the city. They were connected on fourteen May by Bohemond's regular army.

The Emperor had directed two Greek strategians to accompany the Crusade: Manuel Boutoumites and Tatikios - the latter was an strange character, a half-Greek and half-Arab eunuch. He was an experienced soldier and had a metal nose, having baffled his master nose in a battle. He controlled a small regular army of 2,000 Byzantine soldiers.

Matters were going well; the Turkish occupants of Nicaea were speaking to Manuel Boutoumites and negotiating terms for capitulation. Then on fifteen May, they suddenly commuted their minds and threw him out. Two caught spies broke the cause why: the local Turkish leader, Kilij Arslan, was bringing back from the East, with a big army. He would reach Nicaea the following day and signified to attack 3 hours afterward dawn (approximately 10am).

At this arrange, Raymond's army, about third of the total Crusading military force, was yet about a day's march from Nicaea, so it wasn't clear whether he'd arrive eventually. As it happened, Raymond reached dawn, just before the Turks, who came as anticipated three hours later. Kilij Arslan miscalculated the durability of the crusaders. He attacked and there was a battle, but he soon adjudicated he was outnumbered and fled.

Nicaea was at the east close of a long lake. One gate of the city opened onto the lake, the other 3 gates were saved by impressive surrounds walls, 5 kilometer long and 10 meter high. By 3 June totally the crusaders had went far, the last groups being guided and led by Robert of Normandy and Stephen of Blois. This was the first time the full crusader regular army was together in one position and it was very telling. There were believably approximately 75,000 crusaders, of whom 7,500 were rode knights and 5,000 of infantry.

They colonised in for a long besieging. The first step was to construct siege weapons, expending wood from local forests trees. The crusaders didn't at any stage bear siege weapons along with them, but assembled them on the spot from whatsoever was at hand. These browsed from simple twists such moveable shelters to protect a group of bombardment from the surrounds walls, to "mangonels", a case of catapult which could fire missiles through the city.

Once the catapults were prepare, they began on the second step, which was to counteract the spirit of the enemy. They cut off the heads of any Turks killed in the battle. Some of these they stuck on poles around the outside of the city. Others they fired into the city using their catapults. In requital, the Turks got their hands on some Christian bodies, soldiers who had abided too near from the walls and been killed by arrows men. They lowered confronting hooks down and carted the bodies into the city, then attended them on the walls to rotting - a sign of what would occur to any Christian who defended a Turk.

The crusaders constructed scaling ladders but their attempts to storm the city failed. A knight named Henry of Esch built a moveable shelter below which twenty men could approach up to the walls, with the intent of apprehending under them. The guardians threw stones down on top of it, breaking the whole building and killing all the men inner. Raymond's flocks were more successful. Their shelter - known as a 'tortoise' - brought them right to the walls, where sappers (trained miners) compassed under a division of wall and managed to break it only before nightfall. But by the following morning, the wall had been reconstructed from within.

The Crusaders didn't yet have the accomplishments to build the really big beleaguering weapons such as towers, or the heavy-duty arbalests needed to crush a wall by barrage, so the beleaguering was turning into an impasse.

The crusader's principal weapon in a siege, starving, was ineffectual because of the lake; it was about 30 kilometer long, too long to be beleaguered, then there was nothing to arrest the beleaguered Turks from acquiring supplies into the city by boat. They could survive indefinitely. The crusaders selected the only solvent was to use boats themselves. They directed a messenger to Alexios, and on this occasion he came up with the goods. Particular carts were constructed and boats were brought round the lake overland, coming on 17 June, 1097.

The following day, the crusaders coordinated a combined lake and ground attack on the city. On board the boats were cornetists and drummers, who made an tremendous noise, giving the impression that the fleet was much bigger than it really was. The beleaguered Turks accomplished that without their lifeline crosswise the lake, they could not survive. Within hours they had surrendered. The Greeks took charge, taking hold of the city and forbidding the crusaders from either despoiling or massacring the people within. The crusader leadership continued to their accord with the Emperor and turned over the city over to Byzantine ascendance.

Alexios himself now arrived personally at nearby Pelekanum and assembled with the leaders of the crusaders. He had already amazed what he wanted, the bring back of Nicaea to Byzantine hold. He got them to reincarnate their oaths to him, and ordered Tatikios to remain with the crusaders for the time being to offer tactical advice. The crusaders anticipated that he would also supply an army to companion them, but none was approaching. From here on, they were on their possess.

In the final week of June 1097 they depart from Nicaea. If they break up, they would be hospitable attack by Kilij Arslan who was all the same in the area. If they moved into one mass, they'd have great troubles getting enough food, as they were now living by scrounging and despoiling. They selected to split into two groups, one being directed by Bohemond and Raymond.

In the meantime, Kilij Arslan had been engaged negotiating a truce with his neighbors, and they combined to make a greater force to beat back the Christians.

- Motives and Causes of The Crusade
- Cilicia in The First Crusade
- Map of Christendom and its Neighbours in 11th Century
- Map of Christendom and its Neighbours in 12th Century
- Map of The Routes of the First Crusade

Leaders of The First Crusade

The First Crusade leaders included some of the greatest representatives of European knighthood. Count Raymond of Toulouse headed a lot of offers from Provence in southerly France. Godfrey of Bouillon and his brother Baldwin compelled a force of French and Germans of the Rhinelands. Normandy based Robert, William I eldest son. The Normans from Italy and Sicily were directed by Bohemond, a son of Robert Guiscard, and his nephew Tancred.

The main leaders:

- Godfrey of Bouillon
- Bohemond
- Raymond IV
- Baldwin
- Tancred


- Fulcher of Chartres
- Orderic Vitalis
- Otto of Freising
- Roger of Hoveden
- William of Newburgh

Eadmer (1066 – 1124)

Eadmer (1066 – 1124), English historian and ecclesiastical, was credibly, as his name proposes, of English, and not of Norman parentage. He got a monk in the Benedictine monastery of Christ Church, Canterbury, where he made the conversance of Anselm, at that time visiting England as abbot of Bec. The intimacy was regenerated when Anselm got archbishop of Canterbury in 1093; thenceforward Eadmer wasn't only his disciple and follower, but his friend and director, being formally charged to this location by Pope Urban II. In 1120 he was constituted to the archbishopric of St Andrews, just as the Scots wouldn't recognize the assurance of the see of Canterbury he was never blessed, and soon afterward he abject his claim to the archbishopric. His death is in general assigned to the year 1124.

Eadmer left a multitude of writings, the most authoritative of which is his Historiae novorum, a work which deals chiefly with the history of England between 1066 and 1122. Although concerned mainly with ecclesiastic affairs scholars accord in concerning the Historia as among the ablest and most of value writings of its kind. It was first edited by John Selden in 1623 and, with Eadmer's Vita Anselmi, has been edited by Martin Rule for the "Rolls Series" (London, 1884). The Vita Anselmi, first printed at Antwerp in 1551, is believably the better life of the saint. Less remarkable are Eadmer's lives of St Dunstan, St Bregwin, archbishop of Canterbury, and St Oswald, archbishop of York; these are totally printed in Henry Wharton's Anglia Sacra, part ii. (1691), where a list of Eadmer's writings will be ascertained. The holographs of most of Eadmer's acts are bore on in the depository library of Corpus Christi College, Cambridge.


- Otto of Freising
- Roger of Hoveden
- Michael Psellus (1018 – 1078)
- Florence of Worcester

Galbert of Bruges

Galbert of Bruges (1075 - 1128). A Flemish chronicler who wrote a absorbing eyewitness account of the murder of Charles the Good, count of Flanders, in 1127 and the power conflict involving the Flemish aristocracy and towners that led to the constitution of Thierry d’Alsace as count in 1128. Galbert tells us only that he was a notary in the service of the count, and thus credibly a clerk in minor orders instead of a priest or canon. He wrote his first adaptation on full tablets, then retooled and enclosed other material into his elaborated description of the events of April and May 1127, then wrote a more full general discourse of developments in Flanders in the second half of that year. With the reclamation of civil discord between February and July 1128, he compiled another diary, one that's less detailed than the first and that he left unfinished, a fact maybe arguing an former death. His history was apparently unread in the Middle Ages for want of a frequenter willing to overlook its often hostile portraiture of figures in authorisation. A manuscript, now confounded, was apparently kept at Bruges, and copies were built in the 16th and seventeenth centuries.

"The Murder, Betrayal and Assassination of the Glorious Charles, Count of Flanders" is among the most widely read books of the Middle Ages. It narrates the blackwash of Charles, Count of Flanders, and the events directing up to and abiding by the murder. Galbert was a occupant of Bruges and had assisted in the count's administration for leastwise 13 years by the time of the assassination in 1127. He was well-acquainted with Charles and many of the other doers in this drama, an eyewitness to many of the cases he relates, and exceptionally well positioned to accumulate information about other people. Galbert's chronicle adopts the form of a journal, the only one that exists from northwest Europe in the 12th century. Edited by two of the world's largest specialists on Galbert today, Jeff Rider and Alan V. Murray, this book brings collectively essays by constituted scholars who have been largely creditworthy for the radical alters in the apprehension of Galbert and his work that have occurred over the last 30 years and essays by younger scholars. The essays are written by British, Belgian, Dutch, German, Canadian, and American scholarly persons of literature and history, and are separated into four divisions - Galbert of Bruges at Work, Galbert of Bruges and the Development of Institutions, Galbert of Bruges and the Politics of Gender, and The Meanings of History. The book admits an copious bibliography of variants, translations, and studies of Galbert's account, and of works committed to the rule of Charles the Good and the Flemish Crisis of 1127-28, to the government and creations of Flanders in the age of Galbert, and to the topography and history of mediaeval Bruges.


- Marianus Scotus (1028 – 1082/1083)
- Ssu-ma Kuang (1019 – 1086)
- Michael Psellus (1018 – 1078)

Crusades Archive

Introduction to the crusades history

First Crusade 1095-1099

Second Crusade 1147-1149

The Third Crusade

Fourth Crusade 1204

Fifth Crusade (1217-1221 CE)

Sixth Crusade (1228-1229)

The Latin kingdom of Jerusalem

Summary of The Major Crusades

Chronology to the crusades

Speech of pope Urban II at Clermont 1095 (Account ...

Speech of pope Urban II at Clermont 1095 (Account ...

First crusade (successful of the main army)

The foundation of the latin kingdom

RHC, The Recueil des historiens des croisades

RHGF, Recueil des historiens des Gaules et de la F...

Zimmern Chronicle or Zimmerische Chronik


Richard Lion Heart

Arsuf Battle

Crusades Bibliography

The Failure of the Second Crusade

The Albigensian Crusade

William the Conqueror (William of England)

William of Malmesbury

William of Tyre (The Greatest crusade historians)

The Doge of Venice and the Fourth Crusade

Origin of The Crusades

The Siege of Antioch

Baldwin establishes Edessa

Egypt at the Time of the First Crusade

Syria at the Time of the First Crusade

The Crusaders in Asia Minor

Bohemond and the Capture of Antioch

The Enthusiasm of The Crusades

The Capture of Jerusalem

Results of The Crusades

Hospitalers and Templars

The Battle of Ascalon (12 August 1099)

Godfrey and The Holy Sepulcher

The Latin Kingdom and Its Neighbors

The First conflicts Between The Crusaders and The ...

The Death of Godfrey in 1100 and The Succeed of Ba...

Battle of Dorylaeum

Crusade of 1101

Albert of Aix Biography

Guibert of Nogent

Urban II Biography

Shepherds Crusade 1251

Shepherds Crusade 1320

Battle of Manzikert

Norwegian Crusade 1107-1110

Fulcher of Chartres

Orderic Vitalis

Otto of Freising

Roger of Hoveden

William of Newburgh

Council of Clermont (November 1095)

The Ninth Crusade

A History of Deeds Done Beyond The Sea

Crusades Maps:

Map of Christendom and its Neighbours in 11th Century

Map of Christendom and its Neighbours in 12th Century

Map of The Routes of the First Crusade

The Crusader States in The East

Western Europe at the time of the Second Crusade
Routes of the French and German armies in the Second Crusade