When there was not yet order, nor any Rule…
Not all stories begin in order.
This small handwritten manuscript, written at the beginning of the 18th century, looks back on the First Crusade —
a time in which many set out, burning with faith, yet without unity, without leadership.
On these pages we do not read a tale of heroes, but what came before: confusion, division, and the absence of structure.
Page by page, an image unfolds here of a world still searching — for direction, for authority… for order.
What you see here is not a typical explanatory page. Before you lies a French manuscript from the year 1705, in which an unknown author — we believe a monk — reflects on the early developments leading up to the First Crusade. A small manuscript — with a great story.
On this page, the text is revealed step by step.
Per page you will find:
– on the left: a transcription of the original Old French text
– on the right: a translation into clear, accessible English
– below: a brief interpretation and explanation
The complete text is not presented all at once, but unfolds in sections of five pages.
Between these sections, markers in time indicate how the story develops.
The manuscript consists of a total of 126 pages.
The full text is not published at once, but grows over time — page by page.
Each Friday, we continue along the path of the First Crusade —
with Godfrey of Bouillon, with Peter the Hermit,
we hear Pope Urban II, we travel to Constantinople, to Emperor Alexius…
and so on — step by step — towards the goal.
The story will continue to unfold for those who return.
Walk with us — into the First Crusade…
Author’s note: a brief summary of the history of the Holy War.
This is the beginning of the Crusade: how Godfrey of Bouillon took Jerusalem and was proclaimed king — yet refused the title.
On July 15, in the year of Our Lord 1099, on a Friday, at the very hour that Christ gave up His spirit.
After this, the kingdom was ruled by nine kings, all of French origin.
Original text (French)
Page 1.
L’origine des Turcs les Turcs étoient une nations qui habitoit ci devant
dans une isle, qui se nomoit
Sarmadia Assiatica. Est de là ils se sont retirez dans un endroit qui se nome la Marée Caspium, où cette
endroit porte encore le Nom aujourd’huy Turquestan, là ces peuples s’entretenoient seulement de ce qu’ils y eslioient. Sur tout quand ils se fesoit quelque desordre
dans…
Page 1
The Turks were a people who once lived on an island,
called Sarmadia Asiatica.
From there, they withdrew
to a region near what is called the Caspian Sea,
where that land still bears the name Turkestan.
There, these people concerned themselves only
with what they cultivated and produced.*
Especially when unrest arose
in…
Note: The English translation is accurate in content, but more strongly phrased than the original French text, which may cause a subtle nuance present in the original to be lost.
Original text (French)
Page 2.
…dans les Royaumes voisins
Ils prenoient le parti de servir en qualité de Soldats. Ils s’entretenoient seulement
du pillage qu’ils rapportoient dans leur territoire. Dans le tems de l’Empereur Otto 3. ce peuple ont esté pris à la solde par Mahomel, qui étoit Sultan Sarasin dans la Perse, dont l’on étoit en guerre contre les Babyl- loniens, qui les appella
à son secours. Sur la fin de…
Page 2
…in the neighbouring kingdoms, they chose to serve as soldiers. They lived solely from the plunder which they carried back to their own territory. In the time of Emperor Otto III,
this people was taken into service by Mahomel (Mahomet / Mohammed),
who was a Sultan and Saracen in Persia, where war was being waged against the Babylonians, who had called upon them for aid.
Towards the end of…
Explanation (Page 2)
“Mahomel” → likely a French form of Mahomet, meaning Mohammed.
It may also refer to a later Islamic ruler; the context develops further on.
Otto III reigned from 983–1002 → thus before the Crusades. The author appears to describe an early origin of Turkish soldiers in Persian service.
“Babylonians” → here likely used as a general term for peoples east of the Levant.
Page 3
…de la Campagne ils n’ont point voulu cesser ny retourner dans leur isle d’où ils étoit venu, tant que cette nation étoient esfarouchés et alterés du sang humain et la guerre ne cessa qu’aux
que le Roi de Perse et le Sultan de Babylone fut vaincu dont ils ont in-
corporé ces deux Royaumes la Perse et Babilone, dans la Syrie et la Palestine dont Jerusalem étoit de la dépen-
dance, se voyant aussi puissant…
Page 3
…after the campaign they did not wish to cease nor return to the island from which they had come, because this people had become so wild and thirsty for human blood. The war only ended when the king of Persia and the sultan of Babylon had been defeated, after which they incorporated these two kingdoms, Persia and Babylon, into Syria and Palestine, upon which Jerusalem depended.
Now, seeing themselves as so powerful…
Page 3: The author here follows a (legendary) origin story of the Turks, in which they depart from an “Asian island” → move to the region around the Caspian Sea → then fight as mercenaries → and ultimately conquer Persia and Babylon, expanding into Syria & Palestine.
This is, of course, not a historically accurate reconstruction, but rather the well-known 17th–18th century European tradition of “Turkish origin” narratives.
Page 4
Puissants ils ne se sont pas contants de cette belle conquête, ils ont encore envahi, per, dans la petite Asie, où
estoit le grand et renommé Sultan Solimans, ils lui ont pris le Royaume
de Pontume, auquel ils ont donné le nom d’Turcomanian, et la Capadoc, la Bithiniem et firent la guerre jusqu’au
regne de l’Empereur Henri. 4. et firent leur residence à Nicea l’année 1081
Page 4
Powerful as they were, they were not satisfied with this great conquest; they advanced into Asia Minor, where the great and renowned Sultan Soliman reigned; they took from him the kingdom of Pontus, to which they gave the name Turkomania, as well as Cappadocia and Bithynia, and they waged war until the time of Emperor Henry IV, establishing their residence in Nicaea in the year 1081.
Page 4: Soliman / Solimans
This refers to Suleiman ibn Qutulmish → better known as Suleiman I of Rûm, founder of the Seljuk Sultanate of Rûm.
Historically, this is accurate: he conquered parts of Asia Minor, including Nicaea.
Nicaea (Nicaea / Iznik)
Became a Turkish capital in 1081 → correctly dated.
Henry IV (Heinrich IV)
Emperor of the Holy Roman Empire (1056–1105).
The author uses him as a time marker → shortly before the First Crusade.
Pontus / Cappadocia / Bithynia
Historical regions in Asia Minor.
Turcomanian → Turcomania
A term used in older European sources for regions where Turkish nomads (Turkmen) settled.
This page therefore describes how the Turks — after their conquests in Persia/Mesopotamia — moved further towards Asia Minor under Suleiman, establishing Nicaea as their capital.
This leads historically to the situation just before the Crusade of 1096–1099.
Page 5
C’est là où Mahomet a établi une Loi à son nom, qui subsiste encore aujourd’huy et a quitté celle de Sarasin ou Greque, mais ils n’ont pas quitté leurs mauvaises inclinations Barbare et Tyranne, c’est pourquoi que les Chrétiens qui étoient sous leurs Domination avoient beaucoup à Souffrir, bien plus que quand ils étoient
Sarasin.
Dans ce tems là il arriva que dans la quantité de Pelerins qui viaggioit journellement…
Page 5
It was there that Mohammed established a law in his name, which still exists today, and through which they abandoned the former law of the Saracens or the Greeks.
But they did not abandon their evil, barbaric and tyrannical inclinations;
therefore the Christians who lived under their rule suffered greatly — even more than when they were still Saracens.
At that time, it happened that among the great number of pilgrims who travelled daily…
Page 5 – Mahomet / Mohammed
The author makes a distinction → before: “sarazin ou greque” (that is: earlier Eastern religions/cultures) → after: Islamic law (“Loi à son nom”).
Describing Islam as “established by Mohammed” is typical of the pre-Enlightenment mindset:
→ Islam = a divisive innovation → departure from the older world order
Lead-up to the pilgrims → Pierre l’Hermite → Crusade
The sentence ends with:
“among the great number of pilgrims who travelled daily…”
An introduction to:
→ pilgrims are mistreated → Europe reacts → Crusade
We are now, in terms of content, just before the First Crusade (1096).
Page 6
d’Occident à la terre Sainte
dont entre autre il s’y trouva un Religieux qui se nomoit Pierre l’Hermite, il étoit l’ermite d’Amiens, qui fit plusieurs fois le voyage de la
terre Sainte dont il vit la miserable situation où les Chrétiens étoient, entre les mains de ces Barbares. Il prit l’occasion d’en parler à Simon
Patriarche de Jerusalem et ils en tinrent une Conference, et il le pria d’avoir la bonté de lui prester la main dans cette…
Page 6
…from the West to the Holy Land. Among them was a cleric named Peter the Hermit; he was the hermit of Amiens and made several journeys to the Holy Land.
There he saw the miserable condition in which the Christians lived, in the hands of these barbarians.
He seized the opportunity to speak about this with Simon, the Patriarch of Jerusalem, and they held a conversation; in which he asked him to have the kindness to assist him in this…
Page 6 – Prelude to the First Crusade
1. Pierre l’Hermite (Peter the Hermit)
According to medieval tradition, he played an important role in:
– witnessing the misery in the Holy Land
– stirring the crusading spirit in Europe
→ initiator of the Crusade
• → The situation is severe → Christians = suffering, innocent
→ Muslims = cruel, barbaric (note: this reflects the medieval source perspective)
→ A holy man sees this
→ He cannot remain silent
→ He acts → contact → consultation → action
2. “Patriarch of Jerusalem” Here: Simon — the spiritual supporter of the Crusade.
Page 7
cette affaire, qu’il eut seulement la bonté d’en écrire au Pape, de le faire à savoir aux Princes de l’Europe que pour lui de son côté il se portoit fort d’exciter les Courones de l’Occidentet de faire une expédition contre les Turcs et de conquérir la terre Sainte.
Le Pape Urbain 2 se signala de tenir un Congré à Piacenza par l’avis de
l’Empereur Henri IV là où tous les Embassadeurs de l’Europe, même ceux de…
Page 7
In this matter… so that he only had the kindness to write about it to the Pope,
to inform him of it, and to the princes of Europe, that for his part he was prepared to call upon the crowns of the West to undertake an expedition against the Turks
and to conquer the Holy Land.
Pope Urban II resolved to hold an assembly in Piacenza, on the advice of Emperor Henry IV, to which all the ambassadors of Europe came,
even those of…
We now find ourselves at an important historical transition:
→ from Pierre the Hermit → to Pope Urban II
→ the step from spiritual signal → to political action
✅ 1. Urban II & the Council of Piacenza (March 1095)
· the situation of Christians in the East,
· the appeal of the Byzantine Emperor Alexios I for help against the Turks.
The next council — Clermont —
became the moment when the crusade was officially proclaimed.
We read:
· The “bonté” → the humility of Pierre the Hermit
· That he followed the proper path: Pope → princes
· That the Pope acted immediately
✅ 3. The crowns of the West — the term emphasizes that the project:
→ was European & Christian → not merely French, German, etc.
The symbolic value of the crusade: → one Christendom, one purpose.
Page 8
de Constantinople y ont paru, et par après à Clermont en Auvergne, là où on y tint deux Conseils tant pour tout
l’Église, que pour bien des autres chose, mais sur tout au sujet de la guerre contre ces Barbares, pour retirer la terre Sainte de leur mains.
L’on a conclu d’accorder une
indulgence plenierre à tous ceux qui s’offroient à cette entreprise, mais encore tous leurs biens et leurs personnes même sous la protection du…
…from Constantinople came there, and afterwards to Clermont in Auvergne, where
two councils were held, both for the whole
Church, and for many other matters,
but especially with regard to the war
against these Barbarians, in order to free the Holy Land from their hands.
It was decided to grant a full indulgence
to all those who offered themselves
for this undertaking, and moreover to place
their goods and their persons under the protection of…
2 Councils:
1: March 1095 in Piacenza
2: Clermont, November 1095
The moment when Pope Urban II officially proclaimed the Crusade.
Full indulgence (indulgentia plenaria):
Whoever took part to liberate Jerusalem
⇒ received forgiveness of all sins
This required:
→ going with pure intention
→ and fighting for the Holy Sepulchre
If someone went on crusade →
his family & possessions were placed under the protection of the Church
This was meant to prevent:
→ families becoming vulnerable
→ possessions being seized
Page 9
du Pape et de l’Église, et tous ceux qui étoient homme de guerre ou qui savoient manier les armes, refuseroient de mettre l’épée à la main seroient
bannie de l’Église et même
excommunié.
L’on donna ordre à tous les Évêques de
donner de prêcher dans tous les
endroits de leur Diocèse, afin d’animer le peuple à cette entreprise, et tous ceux qui auront pris la resolution de cette
expédition fussent marqué d’une Croix rouge qu’on leurs…
Page 9
…by the Pope and by the Church; and all those who were warriors or who knew how to handle weapons and refused to take up the sword, would be banished from the Church and even excommunicated.
All bishops were ordered to preach throughout every part of their diocese in order to encourage the people towards this undertaking.
And all those who decided to take part in this expedition were marked with a red cross which was…
Page 9.
The rhetoric is: the Holy Sepulchre is so important → that whoever is able to fight but refuses → acts against God Himself.
Preaching spread throughout the entire Diocese. This was carried by: bishops, priests, and popular preachers such as Pierre l’Hermite.
THE RED CROSS. The participants of the crusade received a red cross upon their clothing / mantle and/or upon the shoulder.
This was the original and only official sign of the crusader → crucesignatus = “marked with the cross.”
This is where the crusading identity emerged. This red cross became the origin of the word croisé (crusader).
Note: this reflected the scholarship of 1705. Later research revealed that the red cross was only officially granted by the Pope between 1144–1147.
Likewise: during the time of the Crusades themselves, they did not call it a “Crusade.” That name was only given much later.
Paus Urbanus II spoke of: “Iter Hierosolymitanum” — the journey to Jerusalem.
Page 10
attachée sur l’épaule, c’est par là qu’est devenu le nom de la Croissade.
L’on ne peut exprimer l’effet que ces prédicateurs ont opéré dans si peu de
tems de tous les Royaumes d’Occident le peuple y accourut à grande foule, et
receurent la marque de la croix, quelqu’un d’un vrai zele de voir et d’adorer le vrai sepulchre de Jesus
Christ, et de le retirer des mains des infidelles…
Page 10
…attached upon the shoulder; from this came the name “Crusade.”
It is impossible to describe the effect these preachers produced in such a short time throughout all the kingdoms of the West: the people came running in great crowds and received the sign of the cross.
Out of a true fire and longing
to see and venerate the true tomb of Jesus Christ
and to free it from the hands of the unbelievers…
Page 10.
C’est par là qu’est devenu le nom la Croissade.
→ This refers to the red cross-sign
→ The French word croisade comes from croix (cross)
→ The bearer = croisé
Le peuple y accourut à grande foule = the call of Urbanus II unleashed a mass movement.
Again: this is not how people spoke about it in 1097 — this terminology only emerged around the 13th century.
Page 11
d’autres par curiosité, d’autres par séculantise, et de paresse pour être exanter du travail et de paier leur dettes qu’ils avoit fait dans leur libertinage et debauche, c’est là ils prenoient leur préteste jus’qua aux femmes et les
enfans qu’ils ne voulurent pas être exempt de ce voyage et hors du nombre de la croisade. Enfin que l’armée qui
s’avoit assemblé de tous l’occident comme dit de grand historiens, Wilhelin Malmesburg
Page 11
…others out of curiosity, others out of worldliness, or out of laziness, to be exempt from labour and to escape the debts they had accumulated through their debauchery and excess. They seized upon every pretext,
to the point that they would not even
leave women and children behind from this journey, but counted them among the numbers of the crusade. In short, the army that gathered from all the West, as great historians say, among them William of Malmesbury…
Page 11.
William of Malmesbury → he († c. 1143) was an important English chronicler. His work is one of the great Latin sources describing the Crusades.
That the writer refers to him
→ shows that he bases his account upon respected tradition
→ or at least seeks to connect it to recognised authority.
Note:
It is exceptional that a school/semi-monastic manuscript explicitly cites a specific historian!
This means that the writer was not a thoughtless reteller, but someone who understood that written authority matters.
Page 12
Malmesbourg qui l’a vu et qui étoit de ce tems là fait le nombre de 5 millions d’âmes à porter les Armes. Mais le malheur étoit qu’ il y avoit un très grand désordre dans tous ces différentes
nations, chacun vouloit être maître.
1º qu’il n’y avoit personne pour commander l’armée en chef, chaque seigneur qui avoit pris la marque de la
croix étoit pour lui seul et faisoit avec ses gens tout ce…
Page 12.
William of Malmesbury, who witnessed it
and who belonged to that time, says that the number of five million souls was able to bear arms.
But the misfortune was that there was great
disorder among all these different nations, for each man wanted to be master.
1º There was no one who commanded the army
as a whole; each lord who had taken the cross
acted for himself and did with his men whatever he wished…
Page 12. During the early First Crusade, there was no supreme commander, but several leaders:
• Godfrey of Bouillon
• Raymond of Toulouse
• Bohemond
• Tancred
• Robert of Normandy
etc.
→ each had his own troops
→ there was no central command
This gives the manuscript historical accuracy.
Page 13
ce qu’il jugeoît à propos, quoique la plus grande autorité avoit été donnée en
mains de GottFroi de Bouillon, mais il n’avoit pas le commandement en Chef, mais seulement comme premier
Conseiller de guerre.
2ºme étoit que l’on ne s’entreparloit pas l’un et l’autre comment ou quand l’on commencerout la guerre contre les Turcs, mais chacun faisoit comme bon lui sembloit à la garde de Dieu.“
Page 13
“…what he considered good, although the highest authority had been placed in the hands of Godfrey of Bouillon, yet he did not hold supreme command; he was merely regarded as the first
counsellor of war.
The second point was that they did not consult one another about how or when they should begin the war against the Turks; rather, each man did what seemed right to him, under the protection of God.”
Page 13.
Godfrey of Bouillon
Here, something very interesting is being said → he possessed the highest authority, but not supreme command.
Historically, this is correct: there was no official supreme commander. Godfrey was regarded as primus inter pares — “first among equals.” His prestige was immense, yet he did not possess absolute power.
He is described here as premier conseiller de guerre — “first counsellor of war.” In other words, he is portrayed as:
→ a moral leader
→ not a military dictator.
Godfrey is therefore presented as humble, pious, and serving rather than ruling.
Later chronicles would portray him almost as a saint, and this manuscript fits well within that tradition.
“…they did not speak together about how or when they would begin…” → this is a very accurate characterization of the early Crusade.
→ the leaders were rivals
→ planning was lacking
→ faith outweighed logistics
→ yet everything progressed “under the protection of God”
→ despite human shortcomings.
Likewise: “chacun faisoit comme bon lui sembloit à la garde de Dieu.”
→ each man did as he thought best
→ trusting in God
→ acting freely, yet beneath God’s protection.
Page 14
Sans savoir ce qu’il avoit de soin de faire, ou de s’allier avec les autres. 5ᵉᵐᵉ. Ils savoient qu’ils seroient obligez de passer sur le territoire étranger, et que l’on ne s’étoit pas précautioné comme, et où l’on pourroit avoir des vivres, pour l’entretien des troupes: mais ils ont laissé venir les affaires jusqu’à la dernière extrémité.
C’étoit une très grande faute qui a causé une si mauvaise conséquence. Avant que de…
Page 14
Without knowing what they were to do, or how they were to unite themselves with the others. 5th. They knew that they would be forced to travel through foreign lands, and that no provision had been made concerning how or where food and supplies could be obtained for the maintenance of the troops; yet matters were allowed to continue to the very extreme.
This was a very great mistake, one that had terrible consequences. Before one…
Page 14
Here it is explained that little to no precautionary measures had been taken, due to a lack of experience.
This was the First Crusade. They were travelling through unknown lands — for the very first time. In other words: piety alone is not enough; wisdom and foresight are also required.
It is a warning: God may guide you — but He does not cook your meals for you → Holy goals also require worldly wisdom.