Peter's Failure as Leader
But where was Peter? Losing all authority among the Crusaders he went back, before the battle of Nicea, to Constantinople and turned the batteries of his abusive eloquence on those he had lately commanded. He called them robbers and brigands, and said that their sins shut them out of the Holy Land. In this he follows the sad habit of all, or almost all, of those who lead their followers into trouble. It is probable that he had at this moment led three hundred thousand to death. It may be that his conscience troubled him a little, though in general the fanatic is superior to such pangs. At any rate Peter calmed himself by the consideration that his army was chiefly a rascally crowd. This was the final proof that he was not of the stuff of which leaders are made. The verdict of the historian is just: "He had neither the prudence, the coolness,
nor the firmness of the commander." He could rouse but not control. He could preach, but could not conserve the results of his preaching. Hereafter we shall see him as a preacher chiefly or in kindred work. Others supply true leadership.
Later Leadership Wiser
Those who lingered at home, when the armies of Peter the Hermit and Walter the Penniless started for Jerusalem, may have been of the wiser sort, and certainly seemed to have profited by the calamities of their brethren, both in the matter of preparation and in the treatment of the nations through which they passed. The first army was led by enthusiasm almost wholly. The second had true military leadership.
Christianity Coalesces With Military Spirit
Defects of Crusading Christianity
Europe Callous as to Losses
It is interesting to observe how the two great dominant forces, Christianity and the military spirit, co-operated, and even coalesced, yet allowed neither to govern in its proper sphere. The early Crusaders had piety enough to hold them to the march, notwithstanding the awful trail of death. They did not have enough to prevent their behaving on the way more like devils than Christians. They had sufficient military spirit to make them willing to fight, but not enough to make adequate preparation. The Christianity of that time had devotional but not humanizing power. It carried along faith,
obedience to ceremonial, abundant prayers, personal humility; but it had little restraint for passion whether corporal or revengeful. Its hand was powerless to restrain fury or prevent or relieve misery "The knight before the battle was as devout as the bishop; the bishop in the battle as ferocious as the knight."[5] Little better fate availed the women when Christians prevailed than when Turks won the day. Whatever mourning there was for individuals, the failure to win the Holy City appears to have given more sorrow to Europe than the death of three hundred thousand men.