Tempus MagazineONLINEVERSIONWITHCOVER

eligious disagreements. (Jones 3). Despite the
nature of the Primacy of Peter which was clearly
in the possession of the Roman Pope, the
Byzantines took it upon themselves to form their
own Church and establish an Antipope, Guibert.
For decades following this decision, the Roman
and Byzantine Empires did not have particularly
amicable relationships. While the Romans were
faced with fending off the Barbarians,
Constantinople had a conflict on their own to
deal with. The Seljuk Turks had been threatening
the Byzantines for some time, and eventually
defeated them ruthlessly at the Battle of
Manzikert in 1 071 (Jones 3). Using this as an
entryway, they then continued to sweep through
the Middle East, eventually reaching and
occupying Jerusalem, the Holy Land. In a crisis
of desperation, Byzantine Emperor Alexius I
Comnenus wrote a letter to Pope Urban II,
pleading for help with the Muslims in Jerusalem.
When Pope Urban had assembled his crowd of
the faithful, they expected the usual messages to
be conferred on - matters of Cluniac reformation
and combatting Church corruption. No one ever
expected him to suggest they answer the call
from the Byzantine Empire (Runciman 56).
Shockingly enough, historians posses no
actual transcript of this incredibly pivotal speech.
At the time, nobody had thought to write it
down. We do, however, have five versions
written by a variety of people, documented a
year or two after its occurrence. The Version of
Robert the Monk is referenced fairly commonly,
as it is believed he may have been present for the
speech (Peters 2). The Gesta version, however, was
one of the earlier ones to be written, therefore many
of the other four used it as a template for theirs. It
was written by an anonymous crusader who likely
was not a witness (Peters 5). Third, there is The
Version of Baldric of Dol. He used the Gesta
version heavily when writing his, therefore the two
are relatively similar (Peters 6). The Version of
Guibert Nogent was penned by a man who most
definitely was present for the speech. He did not
personally partake in the crusade, but was a sort of
amateur historian and very knowledgeable on the
matter (Peters 1 0). Lastly, we have the Fulcher of
Chartres, “the most reliable of sources” (Peters 1 7).
Fulcher was present for the speech and very
involved in multiple aspects of the crusades. He
had personal connections with princes, spoke to
leaders, and followed the crusaders around on their
journeys. Fulcher chronicled the entirety of the
First Crusade, including his own version of Pope
Urban II’s speech (Peters 1 7).
Though each version of Urban’s speech
differs from the other, there are several main points
that Urban makes and uses that appear in all five.
Urban exercises masterful rhetoric in his persuasion
of the crowd through five foolproof steps. In his
opening statement from Robert the Monk, Urban
appealed to the French noblemen in the crowd,
calling them a “race chosen and beloved by God”
(Peters 2). By complementing the Franks, it was
only human nature for them to have been more
inclined to listen.
4