The Impact of the Crusades 121
abbot and prior of St geneviève in paris, to the canons of Bourges, to the abbots
of St Jean de vignes in Soissons and in valsecret, and to the dean of Soissons that
they had done nothing to prevent Jews living in the territories of the countess of
Champagne from being harassed.101
Honorius III’s successors continued to make pronouncements about Jews in
the context of the crusades. Although the crusaders on the Fifth Crusade achieved
brief military success at damietta, the Muslim Ayyubids were ultimately victorious
and the crusading army was defeated.102 Nevertheless, attempts to regain the
Holy Land continued and gregory IX reiterated earlier statements about cru-
sading Jews and money-lending,103 in particular addressing the French clergy and
ordering the French bishops to ensure they remit usury to crusaders.104 In letters
to the bishop of Chichester, the bishop-elect of valence (who was in England
at the time), and the abbot of the monastery of St Augustine in Canterbury, he
referred to the ‘burdensome and immoderate usury’ which he believed Jews were
exacting.105 In other letters he informed the archbishop of Sens and the bishop of
Senlis that he had called on Louis IX to send the profits of Jewish usury to aid the
Latin Empire,106 and he told the abbot of Joigny to investigate the possibility that
the king of Navarre had used money extorted from Jews to fund his new crusade
to the Near East.107
Yet gregory was not only concerned with problems arising from Jewish–Christian
financial interaction, but again with the protection of Jewish communities. In par-
ticular he was concerned about the fallout for the Jews from the ‘Barons’ Crusade’,
issuing two letters to the archbishop of Bordeaux, the bishops of Saintes, Angoulême,
and poitiers, and to the king of France, all concerned with protecting Jews from
crusaders taking part in this campaign.108 It seems that in response to these letters,
which complained about massacres perpetrated locally by crusaders, the Council
of tours (1236) decreed that no crusader or other Christian should kill or flog
101 Honorius III, ‘Cum olim nobilis’, Grayzel, Vol. 1, p.144; Simonsohn, p.102; ‘dilecta in Christo’,
Grayzel, Vol. 1, pp.150–2; Simonsohn, pp.106–7.
102 James powell, Anatomy of a Crusade 1213–1221 (philadelphia, 1986), pp.175–91.
103 gregory IX, ‘Ardenti desiderio aspirantes’ (21 October 1228), Grayzel, Vol. 1, p.180; Simonsohn,
pp.126–8; ‘rachel suum videns’, Grayzel, Vol. 1, p.216; Simonsohn, pp.152–3; ‘pravorum molestiis
eum’, Grayzel, Vol. 1, p.218; Simonsohn, pp.153–4; ‘Ex parte karissimi’ (22 March 1238), Grayzel, Vol.
1 , pp.234–6; Simonsohn, pp.168–9; ‘Ex parte karissmi’ (29 November 1238), Grayzel, Vol. 1, p.236;
Simonsohn, pp.169–70; ‘Cum karissimo in’ (10 december 1238), Grayzel, Vol. 1, p.238; Simonsohn,
p.170.
104 gregory IX, ‘Ardenti desiderio aspirantes’, Grayzel, Vol. 1, p.180; Simonsohn, pp.126–8;
‘p ravorum molestiis eum’, Grayzel, Vol. 1, p.218; Simonsohn, pp.153–4.
105 gregory IX, ‘dilectus filius magister’ (5 January 1237), Grayzel, Vol. 1, pp.230–2; Simonsohn,
pp.165–7. The phrase is ‘super immoderato gravamine usurarum’, see gregory IX, ‘dilectus filius
magister’, Grayzel, Vol. 1, p.232; Simonsohn, p.166. gregory took the side of a certain cleric, robert of
glove, against the archbishop of Canterbury. The pope was worried that the archbishop had refused
to accept letters sent from the curia which complained about the ‘burdensome and immoderate usury’
which Jews were extorting from crusaders.
106 gregory IX, ‘Ex parte karissimi’, Grayzel, Vol. 1, pp.234–6; Simonsohn, pp.168–9; ‘Cum karissimo
in’, Grayzel, Vol. 1, p.238; Simonsohn, p.170.
107 gregory IX, ‘Ex parte karissimi’, Grayzel, Vol. 1, p.236; Simonsohn, pp.169–70.
108 gregory IX, ‘Lachrymabilem Judeorum in’, Grayzel, Vol. 1, pp.226–8; Simonsohn, pp.163–4;
‘Lachrymabilem Judeorum in’, Grayzel, Vol. 1, pp.228–30; Simonsohn, p.165.