SC - Holy Feast and Holy Fast

[Siegfried Heydrich]

    No, the Crusaders that made into the history books were members of Noble
households. There were a huge number of camp followers, support personnel,
and others who went along for the ride as well. Consider the number of
administrators, servants, and teamsters that had to go along with the boss
just to make sure they all got there!
    There were irregulars like the Tafur, who were the absolute dregs of
society, seeking salvation in a crusade. These were used as urban assault
troops; the Crusaders would breach a city wall, withdraw, and let the Tafurs
loose. They had the advantage of being expendable, as well as the peculiar
fact that they wouldn't do any looting. They would, however, rape and murder
to an extraordinary degree, which relieved the Nobles of the necessity for
that. Besides, there was no glory in slaughtering civilians . . .
    There were actually several children's crusades, all of which ended up
with them being sold into slavery. It was a way for a peasant to get off the
farm and see the world, all for the glory of god, and the salvation of his
soul. In short, while there many have been other contributing motives, the
primary inspiration was religious in nature, and it covered the entire
social spectrum.
    The Crusades were not just a glorified Pennsic for the Nobles - it
touched virtually every aspect of life. An amazing amount of wealth got
shifted around because of it. Not just what was spent in the effort, or the
treasure sent back, but the inheritances that wound up being bestowed upon
those who didn't go, and never really expected to get the family fortune.
The ones who got stuck staying at home while the older brothers went off to
war . . . . And the number of wealthy widows who were remarrying.
    The social aftereffects of the Crusades make a fascinating study!

    Sieggy


> << Would the three (or more) Christian Crusades shed any light on the
>  pervasiveness of the Christian Church in medieval life?
>
>  Balthazar of Blackmoor >>
>
> Probably, although the crusaders were for the most part members of noble
> households. It does not shed any light on the food aspect that the
original
> poster queried. I did try to broach that subject a couple of times but
more
> interest has been shown in other parts of my posts. :-)
>
> Ras