# Childrens Crusade **URL:** \ **Category:** Cecil's Columns/Staff Reports\ **Created:** [November 28, 2011, 3:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/childrens-crusade/604348 "2011-11-28T15:49:47Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![sam6ann](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/3d9bf3/32.png) [@sam6ann](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sam6ann)\ **Post date:** [November 28, 2011, 3:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/childrens-crusade/604348/1 "2011-11-28T15:49:47Z")
One of my students used your posting as a source for their term paper, in a college course labeled Crusades and Jihad’s. After following the students citations I decided to look at some of his non-scholarly sources. As a suggestion to all students using this website, do not use it if you would like a good mark. As for the posting, while your information was slightly correct about the German crusade, for the most part it was wrong. The childrens crusade never happend and “pueri” a latin word, was translated wrongly. “pueri” means boys in a condescending poor way. It was meant for poor bands of wandering people in Europe. The Catholic church at the time did not want to call them poor so they called them boys. There are no actual sources that state that the childrens crusade is factual. However, there are many non-authoritative sources like Steven Runciman’s accounts called “A History of the Crusades,” which all three volumes were written between 1951 to 1954. Thank You ---
**Author:** ![Mithras](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/f04885/32.png) [@Mithras](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mithras)\ **Post date:** [November 28, 2011, 5:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/childrens-crusade/604348/2 "2011-11-28T17:00:05Z")
Original article: [http://www.straightdope.com/columns/read/2503/is-the-childrens-crusade-fact-or-fable](http://www.straightdope.com/columns/read/2503/is-the-childrens-crusade-fact-or-fable) I’m confused. Are you saying there was no crusade at all or just that the idea of the German crusade being composed of children is wrong? It sounds like you’re arguing the latter, which is addressed in the column: > [@](#): > > Were they actually children, though? Doubtful. Scholars argue that in medieval Latin the word puer, child or boy, could also be applied to a young man, especially if he was landless or otherwise of low standing–and folks with nothing to lose are always up for a little adventure. ---
**Author:** ![Irishman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/b487fb/32.png) [@Irishman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Irishman)\ **Post date:** [November 28, 2011, 5:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/childrens-crusade/604348/3 "2011-11-28T17:27:45Z")
I fail to see how Cecil’s description varies significantly from the wiki article. > **[Children's Crusade](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Children%27s_crusade)** > > The Children's Crusade was a failed popular crusade by European Christians to establish a second Latin Kingdom of Jerusalem in the Holy Land, said to have taken place in 1212. Although it is called The Children's Crusade, it never received the papal approval from Pope Innocent III to be an actual Crusade. The traditional narrative is likely conflated from a mix of factual and mythical events, which include the preaching of visions by a French boy and a German boy, an intention to peacefully con... In what way is Cecil wrong? ---
**Author:** ![ftg](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ftg/32/2801_2.png) [@ftg](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ftg)\ **Post date:** [November 28, 2011, 7:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/childrens-crusade/604348/4 "2011-11-28T19:35:02Z")
**sam6ann** : An explanation as to what’s going on here. You posted a very sloppy nitpick. Which means in turns others are going to nitpick your post. If you want your position to be considered definitive, you should be a lot more careful in the future. E.g., note that Cecil didn’t _translate_ “puer”, he was focusing on noting that the term might not have just applied to children. Something you really shouldn’t have a problem with. ---
**Author:** ![Senegoid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/senegoid/32/6606_2.png) [@Senegoid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Senegoid)\ **Post date:** [November 28, 2011, 8:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/childrens-crusade/604348/5 "2011-11-28T20:58:53Z")
Maybe we could clarify, then, what **sam6ann** ’s complaint really is, or perhaps _ought_ to be: Not that Straight Dope is necessarily a bad source for a college level paper, but that the student apparently just didn’t read or interpret Cecil’s article carefully. ---
**Author:** ![qazwart](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/q/5fc32e/32.png) [@qazwart](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/qazwart)\ **Post date:** [November 28, 2011, 9:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/childrens-crusade/604348/6 "2011-11-28T21:19:53Z")
> [@](#): > > As a suggestion to all students using this website, do not use it if you would like a good mark. You mean don’t take a newspaper column that has a slight sardonic tongue-in-cheek tone, which publishes no footnotes, and has a author that [may or may not](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=104556) exist as a primary source for a class research paper? Hmmm… That sounds like a pretty good idea to me. Now, where do you stand on using Wikipedia? After all, that’s full of scholarly [citations](http://xkcd.com/978/)! ---
**Author:** ![elfkin477](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/a9a28c/32.png) [@elfkin477](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elfkin477)\ **Post date:** [November 29, 2011, 12:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/childrens-crusade/604348/7 "2011-11-29T00:09:29Z")
> [@Senegoid](#): > > Maybe we could clarify, then, what **sam6ann** ’s complaint really is, or perhaps _ought_ to be: Not that Straight Dope is necessarily a bad source for a college level paper, but that the student apparently just didn’t read or interpret Cecil’s article carefully. The SD is necessarily a bad source for a college level paper. It is just a hair more valid a source as citing a conversation between a couple of seemingly smart strangers on the subway. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [November 29, 2011, 12:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/childrens-crusade/604348/8 "2011-11-29T00:34:13Z")
> [@elfkin477](#): > > The SD is necessarily a bad source for a college level paper. It is just a hair more valid a source as citing a conversation between a couple of seemingly smart strangers on the subway. Are you referring to the column, the message board, or both? ---
**Author:** ![sam6ann](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/3d9bf3/32.png) [@sam6ann](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sam6ann)\ **Post date:** [November 29, 2011, 12:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/childrens-crusade/604348/9 "2011-11-29T00:48:42Z")
I suggest using the citations and footnotes they use, Wiki is a great starting point but try to read the sources they used for a larger grasp of understanding. Also, there was no childrens crusade. If you fully read wiki whcih mostly cites Peter Raedts, it states multiple time that there was no crusade. My issue is not with this forum but with college level students using it for an upper level college course. Also, Cecil’s comments about the folk tale version from Steven Runciman’s account is correct which I believe I addressed. Once again though, there was no children’s crusade. ---
**Author:** ![gamerunknown](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/6bbea6/32.png) [@gamerunknown](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gamerunknown)\ **Post date:** [November 29, 2011, 12:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/childrens-crusade/604348/10 "2011-11-29T00:51:47Z")
Some of the articles Cecil writes are cited. There is a bigger problem regarding how citations lead back to poorly researched work and print Encyclopedias often contain glaring factual errors (apart from omissions) that only an expert in a field can pick up. That’s why a dialectic is actually useful. I wouldn’t personally cite either Straight Dope or Wikipedia in a paper, but if an article is cited and I can find some information (even just an abstract that confirms my hypothesis) I’ll throw it in. I’ve had a source from Wikipedia that I could have written 1000 words on the back of end up at an out of date publication that my university wasn’t subscribed to. I eventually made the tough decision not to throw it in. Anyway, I wouldn’t be too hard on your student. It’s refreshing to obtain a novel view on things, just encourage them to critically evaluate sources for things like relevance of sources cited and place of publication (i.e is it peer reviewed, has the author bothered to edit or publish clarifications/rebuttals in the face of new evidence or criticisms). I’d agree with ftg too: while new members are welcome, especially ones that have knowledge of fields that could ead to impoving articles, it is best to be consistent if one is going to be critical (jihad’s and childrens for example). I know grammar isn’t a substantive issue when the clarity of intention isn’t obscured, but it kinda demonstrates that revisions and editing are important (like with wikipedia!). ---
**Author:** ![Measure\_for\_Measure](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/measure_for_measure/32/557_2.png) [@Measure\_for\_Measure](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Measure_for_Measure)\ **Post date:** [November 29, 2011, 6:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/childrens-crusade/604348/11 "2011-11-29T06:58:08Z")
I dunno, I haven’t seen any strong evidence against the German story. “pueri” does in fact mean boys, but it also means “young man of low social standing”. Why not both? As far as I can tell Cecil characterized the underlying uncertainty reasonably well. > [@Cecil Adams](#): > > The situation was a little different in Germany, where it appears there really was a children’s crusade of sorts–that is, the participants were actually bound for Jerusalem, at least in their minds. Numerous chronicles suggest that bands of young people arose in several different locales and headed south along the Rhine, at some point merging under the leadership of a fellow named Nicholas. Were they actually children, though? Doubtful. Scholars argue that in medieval Latin the word puer, child or boy, could also be applied to a young man, especially if he was landless or otherwise of low standing–and folks with nothing to lose are always up for a little adventure. It sounds to me like there was in fact a Children’s Crusade – but that it wasn’t necessarily made up mostly of children. It was certainly a fiasco – though whether we should believe the account of the monk who claimed they were sold into slavery is another matter. I think Cecil is a fine source for young budding scholars, _but like all sources, he should be read with some care_. ---
**Author:** ![Irishman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/b487fb/32.png) [@Irishman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Irishman)\ **Post date:** [November 29, 2011, 4:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/childrens-crusade/604348/12 "2011-11-29T16:40:44Z")
> [@sam6ann](#): > > Also, there was no childrens crusade. If you fully read wiki whcih mostly cites Peter Raedts, it states multiple time that there was no crusade. Nonsense. > [@](#): > > The **Children’s Crusade** is the name given to a variety of fictional and factual events which happened in 1212 that combine some or all of these elements: visions by a French or German boy; an intention to peacefully convert Muslims in the Holy Land to Christianity; bands of children marching to Italy; and children being sold into slavery. > A study published in 1977 cast doubt on the existence of these events and many historians now believe that they were not (or not primarily) children but multiple bands of “wandering poor” in Germany and France, some of whom tried to reach the Holy Land and others who never intended to do so. > [@](#): > > According to more recent research there seem to have actually been two movements of people (of all ages) in 1212 in Germany and France. > [@](#): > > In the first movement, Nicholas, a shepherd from the Rhineland in Germany and possessed of an extraordinary power of speech, tried to lead a group across the Alps and into Italy in the early spring of 1212. Nicholas promised that the sea would dry up before them and allow his followers to cross into the Holy Land. Rather than believing he could somehow fight the Saracens, however, he claimed that the Moslem kingdoms would be defeated when their citizens converted to Christianity. His disciples went off to preach the call for the “Crusade” across the German lands, and they amassed in Cologne after a few weeks. Splitting into two groups, the crowds took different roads through Switzerland. Two out of every three people on this ghastly journey died, while many others returned to their homes. About 7,000 arrived in Genoa in late August. They immediately marched to the harbor, expecting the sea to divide before them; when it did not many became bitterly disappointed. Underlining added for emphasis. There’s more, but that makes the point. So wikipedia states that there were multiple bands of wandering people who were trying to reach the Holy Lands to convert Muslims peacefully. Ergo, by that definition, a Crusade happened. Now it was not a crusade of “children” per se, but a Crusade did occur. If you’re going to complain about accuracy, you should be accurate yourself. ---
**Author:** ![sam6ann](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/3d9bf3/32.png) [@sam6ann](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sam6ann)\ **Post date:** [November 29, 2011, 9:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/childrens-crusade/604348/13 "2011-11-29T21:15:38Z")
A crusade has to be called by a pope by definition, so if you would ike complete accuracy than there was no crusade because the pope did not call children to a crusade in 1212. If you actually read Peter Raedts paper, which mind you is 30 pages or so, you would see that a clearly explain that a children’s crusade during that time period was impossible. These so called children crusaders were just vagabonds wandering Europe, and yes some did travel towards the Holty Land in hope of being saved as the popes and preist during these times preached. The actual story of the “children’s crusade” is just folk lore passed on and wasn’t even written about until years after anyone who was alive during the time had died. If you would like to belief in the story that fine but I and as my class is considered it is just a fairy tale like snow white. Once again, I wouldn’t reccomend using this forum for a paper that could have the potential to be published. No university would publish it with their name, not because the information is wrong but because anyone can comment, and their are no citations nor original sources. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [November 29, 2011, 9:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/childrens-crusade/604348/14 "2011-11-29T21:29:57Z")
> [@sam6ann](#): > > Once again, I wouldn’t reccomend using this forum for a paper that could have the potential to be published. No university would publish it with their name, not because the information is wrong but because anyone can comment, and their are no citations nor original sources. But your student _didn’t_ use this forum for his paper-he used the column written by Cecil Adams, which is an entirely different entity. ---
**Author:** ![sam6ann](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/3d9bf3/32.png) [@sam6ann](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sam6ann)\ **Post date:** [November 30, 2011, 1:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/childrens-crusade/604348/15 "2011-11-30T01:01:26Z")
Yes, but once again there are no citations or source information in this article. If it was to be published that would be called plagiarism, so no i still will not accept it. It does not mean it will affect his grade greatly but now he knows for future reference. ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [November 30, 2011, 2:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/childrens-crusade/604348/16 "2011-11-30T02:38:44Z")
For a real challenge, assign them a research paper on the caloric content of semen. ---
**Author:** ![Measure\_for\_Measure](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/measure_for_measure/32/557_2.png) [@Measure\_for\_Measure](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Measure_for_Measure)\ **Post date:** [November 30, 2011, 2:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/childrens-crusade/604348/17 "2011-11-30T02:41:04Z")
It is not common practice to insert full citations in journalistic pieces: you simply cite the author. At least that’s the way they do it at the New York Times and the Wall Street Journal. Plagerism is representing someone else’s research as one’s own, which is something else entirely. That said, scholarly works are expected to include footnotes and a reference section. There is some debate on this matter. In the Fall 2009 issue of _The Journal of the History of Childhood and Youth_, “Rite de Passage? The Children’s Crusade and Medieval Childhood”, Gary Dickson presents this abstract: > [@Gary Dickson](#): > > One of the most extraordinary and memorable episodes of the crusading era, the Children’s Crusade (1212) was medieval Europe’s first youth movement. Young people (pueri), shepherds and peasants primarily, took part in a futile venture to regain the Holy Land and the True Cross. Contrary to the views of a revisionist historian, youths did indeed compose the core group of this popular crusade revival, although at a later stage adults—men, women, young mothers, the elderly—joined it as well. This paper argues that one possible way of interpreting the Children’s Crusade is according to the schema laid down in the anthropological classic Les rites de passage (1908) by the French ethnographer and folklorist Arnold van Gennep. The Children’s Crusade exemplifies the problem of coming of age in the Middle Ages, especially for peasant youths, who lacked access to the rituals of knighthood available to the chivalric aristocracy. I have not read that article and do not know how the author substantiates his claims. But I’ve yet to come across a relevant historical specialist who characterizes the Children’s Crusade as entirely fictional. Article, available for purchase: [http://muse.jhu.edu/login?uri=/journals/journal\_of\_the\_history\_of\_youth\_and\_childhood/v002/2.3.dickson.html](http://muse.jhu.edu/login?uri=/journals/journal_of_the_history_of_youth_and_childhood/v002/2.3.dickson.html) Peter Raedts’ 1977 work is available for $20 here: > **[The children's crusade of 1212](https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/0304418177900264)** > > The touching story of innocent children setting out to recover the Holy Sepulchre but suffering a tragic fate was becoming a popular legend within hal… FWIW, here is the characterization in _The Encyclopedia of World History_, 6th ed., 2001 : > [@](#): > > **1212**. The so-called **Children’s Crusade** , preached by the lad Stephen of Vendome and by Nicholas of Cologne in Germany. Stephen’s contingent reached Marseilles and was sold into slavery. Nicholas’s company was turned back. The whole episode is supposed to have been the origin of the story of the Pied Piper. Cecil was more skeptical of the French account. ---
**Author:** ![sam6ann](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/3d9bf3/32.png) [@sam6ann](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sam6ann)\ **Post date:** [November 30, 2011, 3:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/childrens-crusade/604348/18 "2011-11-30T03:11:39Z")
I would accept all of those sources, and great job researching them and finding them. The New York times is a journalistic approach and has different rules. For a potential historical article footnotes are essential though. As for the plagiarism, when I look at his sources and I see this website and article I then read what it says, after that I want to see the sources that they used. Since there were none then its hard to judge the liability. Although this is a great website for information and I believe they have experts in different fields, it’s just not a great academic source. Now as for the historians who have specialized in medieval history, and specifically Crusades, I believe it is fictional ( with a PhD in the matter). I also now some colleagues that agree, while not all do. ---
**Author:** ![levdrakon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/49beb7/32.png) [@levdrakon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/levdrakon)\ **Post date:** [November 30, 2011, 3:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/childrens-crusade/604348/19 "2011-11-30T03:26:49Z")
> [@sam6ann](#): > > One of my students used your posting as a source for their term paper, in a college course labeled Crusades and Jihad’s. After following the students citations I decided to look at some of his non-scholarly sources. As a suggestion to all students using this website, do not use it if you would like a good mark. \ When you say “posting” does that mean you aren’t aware the “posting” is just the online version of a real weekly newspaper column, [The Straight Dope](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Straight_Dope)? From Wikipedia: > [@](#): > > The Straight Dope is a popular question-and-answer newspaper column published in the Chicago Reader, syndicated in thirty newspapers in the United States and Canada,[2] as well as being available and archived at the Straight Dope website. Are your students allowed to use regular newspaper columns as non-scholarly sources? If so, Cecil Adam’s column qualifies, in my opinion. ---
**Author:** ![IvoryTowerDenizen](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ivorytowerdenizen/32/17937_2.png) [@IvoryTowerDenizen](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/IvoryTowerDenizen)\ **Post date:** [November 30, 2011, 3:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/childrens-crusade/604348/20 "2011-11-30T03:35:05Z")
> [@sam6ann](#): > > I would accept all of those sources, and great job researching them and finding them. The New York times is a journalistic approach and has different rules. For a potential historical article footnotes are essential though. > > As for the plagiarism, when I look at his sources and I see this website and article I then read what it says, after that I want to see the sources that they used. Since there were none then its hard to judge the liability. > > Although this is a great website for information and I believe they have experts in different fields, it’s just not a great academic source. > > Now as for the historians who have specialized in medieval history, and specifically Crusades, I believe it is fictional ( with a PhD in the matter). I also now some colleagues that agree, while not all do. No one here is suggesting this site, or Cecil’s columns, should be used for academic research. I’m not sure what you expect anyone here to do to prevent your students using this site inappropriately. In my classes we spend a large amount time going over types of sources, their utility and appropriateness to the discipline. I think many students struggle with it as they learn. [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/childrens-crusade/604348.md?page=2)