Joining the Crusade

The participants came from different levels of society. Great lords and knights supplied mounted warriors, but armies also needed foot soldiers, archers and squires who assisted knights. Non-combatants accompanied them too. Women and children were among those who set out: not everyone who joined was a trained soldier. The popular following gathered by the preacher Peter the Hermit in 1096 shows how far enthusiasm extended beyond the military aristocracy.

Faith, forgiveness and holy places

Religion was central to medieval European life. Christians believed that sin had consequences beyond death, making forgiveness and the hope of salvation powerful concerns. Urban’s promise of spiritual reward therefore offered a strong reason to join. The expedition could be understood as an act of penance: a difficult undertaking through which participants sought to address their sins.

A pilgrimage was a religious journey to a holy place. Crusading combined that familiar idea with warfare. Jerusalem mattered because of its association with Jesus, particularly the Holy Sepulchre, believed to mark his burial and resurrection. Participants could believe that protecting Christians and recovering their holy places was service to God rather than ordinary warfare for personal advantage.

These beliefs help explain why people accepted serious risks and costs. Religious motives were not necessarily an excuse hiding a desire for wealth; they could be sincere and powerful.

Lords, relatives and the expectations of other warriors

People did not make their decisions in isolation. A knight’s livelihood could depend on serving a powerful lord. If that lord joined the crusade, the knight might feel obliged to accompany him, even though joining was formally voluntary.

Family relationships mattered too. Knights could follow fathers or brothers, travelling with people they trusted and offering one another protection. A decision made by one influential member of a household could therefore encourage several others to join.

Honour and reputation also played a part. Taking the cross meant wearing a cross on clothing as a visible sign of commitment. Among warriors, joining could bring prestige and demonstrate loyalty to their companions. Chivalry was still developing in the late eleventh century, so the expectations of fellow warriors mattered more than the elaborate ideals found in later stories about knights.

Wealth, opportunity and the cost of leaving

Some participants hoped to gain booty, land or a title. Others were attracted by adventure and the possibility of gaining honour far from home. These ambitions could exist alongside religious conviction: seeking spiritual reward did not prevent someone from also hoping for worldly success.

However, crusading was not an easy route to riches. Weapons, equipment and travel were expensive. Knights might sell land or arrange loans through monasteries to finance their departure. They risked losing wealth as well as their lives. These sacrifices make a purely financial explanation inadequate.

Merchants could profit from transporting crusaders and from eastern trade, but commercial interests were less prominent in the First Crusade than in later expeditions. They should not be treated as the main explanation for the response in 1095–96.

Understanding a mixture of motives

There was no single reason shared equally by everyone. A knight might seek forgiveness, follow his brother, feel loyalty to his lord and hope to win honour or land. An ordinary participant could also be moved by faith and the prestige of taking the cross. The strongest explanation connects religious belief with social relationships and personal ambitions, while recognising that we cannot know every individual’s private thoughts.