Joseph François Michaud - The History of the Crusades (Vol.1-3)

The king and his subjects, the great and the small vassals, mutually engaged their faith to each other. In the feudal hierarchy, every class had its privileges maintained by honour. Honour, that grand principle among knights, commanded all to repulse an injury inflicted upon a single one, and thus became, restrained within just limits, the security of public liberty.

War was the great affair in a kingdom founded by knights and barons; every one capable of bearing arms was reckoned as something in the state, and protected by the new legislation; all the rest, with the exception of the clergy, whose existence and privileges were held by divine right, were reckoned as nothing, and scarcely merited any attention from the legislators. The Assizes of Jerusalem did, indeed, deign to take notice of villains, slaves, peasants or cultivators, or captives taken in war; but they were only considered in the light of property, of which they wished to assure the enjoyment to its legitimate possessors. Those who had lost them could reclaim them as they could a falcon or a hound; the value of a falcon and a slave was the same; a war-horse was estimated at more than double the value of a peasant or a captive. The laws did not condescend to notice these unhappy classes, and left it to religion alone to protect them.

To watch over the execution of the constitutional laws of the state, and to decide in all disputes, two courts were instituted; the one presided over by the king, and composed of the nobles, was to pronounce judgment upon differences among the great vassals; the other, presided over by the viscount of Jerusalem, and formed of the principal inhabitants of each city, was to regulate the interests and the rights of the citizens and the common people. A third court was instituted, which was reserved for Oriental Christians; the judges of it were born in Syria, spoke its language, and decided according to the laws and usages of the country. Thus all the citizens of the kingdom were judged by their peers, and enjoyed the benefits of an institution which has not been despised in ages much more enlightened.

The Franks, with their warlike character, were certain to evince disdain for the slow, and often uncertain, forms of justice; they adopted, in their legislation made for the East, the ordeal by iron or fire, which had taken its birth among the nations of the North. Judicial combat was also admitted in criminal causes, and sometimes even in civil ones. Among a warlike people everything must present the image of war; every action commenced against a baron or a knight was, in his eyes, an injury—an affront—that he ought to repulse sword in hand; Christian knights were likewise persuaded that God would not allow innocence to succumb in an unequal combat, and victory appeared to them at once the triumph of human laws and divine justice.

Such dispositions still bespeak the barbarity of the most remote ages; but a great number of other laws attest the wisdom of the legislators of the Holy Land: their code contained every institution that was reasonable in the feudal system. Palestine was then blessed by the revival of wise laws created for Europe, but which Europe had forgotten amidst the anarchy of civil wars; many ameliorations made in feudal legislation in some of the states of the West, particularly in the cities of Italy, were consecrated in the new laws of Jerusalem.

It must be believed that in this circumstance religion sometimes mingled her useful inspirations with those of human sagacity; justice and humanity assumed a more sacred character in the presence of the holy tomb. As all the subjects of Godfrey were called upon to defend the cause of God, the quality of a soldier of Jesus Christ might make the dignity of man respected. If it be true that the establishment of the commons, or a second court, was the work of the Crusaders, we cannot, with truth, assert that these wars contributed nothing towards the progress of civilization. The laws which they made, and in which may be plainly seen the first glimpses of regulated liberty, were a new spectacle for Asia; they must likewise have been a subject of surprise and a means of instruction for Europe itself, where pilgrims related, on their return, the usages and customs established by the Franks in the Holy Land. This code of legislation, the best, or rather the least imperfect that had existed previous to that time, and which increased or was modified under other reigns, was deposited with great pomp in the church of the Resurrection, and took the name of the Assizes of Jerusalem, or Letters of the Holy Sepulchre.

After this ceremony, which was performed in the presence of all the pilgrims, the Latin princes then at Jerusalem returned to their own states; Baldwin to Edessa, Bohemond to his principality of Antioch, and Raymond to Laodicea, of which he had rendered himself master, and which he governed in the name of the emperor of Constantinople. Scarcely had Tancred returned to his principality when he was attacked by all the forces of the sultan of Damascus. Godfrey, accompanied by his faithful knights and a great number of pilgrims eager to fight under his command, repaired immediately into Galilee, defeated the Saracens, and pursued them to the mountains of Libanus.

As he was returning from this expedition, the emir of Cæsarea came out to meet him, and presented to him an offering of some of the fruits of Palestine. Godfrey only accepted a single cedar-apple, and almost directly fell ill. This malady, which they did not hesitate to attribute to poison, created the most serious alarm among his followers. Godfrey with great difficulty reached Jaffa, whence he was conveyed to his capital, where he died, committing to the companions of his victories the charge of the glory of religion and of the kingdom of Jerusalem. His mortal remains were deposited within the enclosure of Calvary, near to the tomb of Christ, which he had delivered by his valour. His death was mourned by the Christians, of whom he was the father and the support, and by the Mussulmans, who had often experienced his justice and his clemency. History may say of him what the holy Scripture says of Judas Maccabeus: “It was he who increased the glory of his people, when, like a giant, he put on his arms in the fight, and his sword was the protection of the whole camp.” Godfrey of Bouillon surpassed all the captains of his age in his skill in war; and if he had lived some time longer, would have merited a name among great kings. In the kingdom he founded he was constantly held up as a model for princes as well as warriors. His name still recalls the virtues of heroic times, and will live honoured amongst men as long as the remembrance of the crusades.

After the death of Godfrey great disputes arose upon the choice of his successor. The patriarch Daimbert endeavoured to avail himself of the rights conveyed by the promises of Godfrey, and claimed the throne of Jerusalem; but the barons would submit to no chief but one of their companions in arms. Garnier, count de Gray, took possession of the Tower of David, and of the other fortresses of Jerusalem, in the name of Baldwin, count of Edessa. The patriarch invoked the authority of the Church to the assistance of his cause; and as Count Garnier died suddenly, the clergy of Jerusalem attributed his death to divine justice, which the impious projects of the barons and knights had offended. Daimbert wrote to Bohemond, prince of Antioch, and conjured him to come and defend what he called the rights of the Church and the cause of God. Jerusalem was filled with agitation and trouble; but whilst they were tumultuously deliberating, deputies from Antioch came to announce that their prince had been surprised in an expedition against the Turks, and was held prisoner by the infidels. This news spread consternation and grief among the Christians, and made them more sensible of the necessity for calling Baldwin to the throne, with whose valour they were so well acquainted.