- During the First Crusade (1095–99) the Franks cannibalized the Muslim dead at the city of Ma`arra. More than a dozen narrative sources describe this act, but with significant differences in detail. Through an examination of the different accounts and of the probable historical, biblical, and literary models used to shape them, this article suggests that cannibalism was in part a product of necessity but also that the crusaders used it as a tool of psychological warfare. Their status as God’s warriors and their project of holy war both justified and inspired such tactics. The article thus questions the direction of current scholarship, which sees the First Crusade as a result of ordinary medieval practices of warfare and piety, rather than as an unprecedented event as disconcerting to medieval sensibilities as to modern ones.
- Anna Comnena attributes acts of cannibalism, baby eating to be specific, to the People’s Crusade.
- Cannibalism at Ma’arra is definitely confirmed case we have. The Gesta Francorum and Raymond of Aguilers, both of whom were present at the siege, make mention of it in passing. Fulcher of Chartres also claims it happened but his account differs and he wasn’t present at the siege. The Gesta says: some cut the flesh of dead bodies into strips and cooked them for eating.
- Peter Tudebode says basically the same.
- Raymond’s account is a bit longer but amounts to mostly the same thing. Raymond adds in that the cannibalism was fairly public and that it caused much disgust with some people.
- Albert of Aix remarked that “the Christians did not shrink from eating not only killed Turks or Saracens, but even creeping dogs” (Albert of Aachen (2007). Historia Hierosolimitana: History of the Journey to Jerusalem. Translated by Susan B. Edgington. Clarendon. p. 375).