Analyzes the causes of the anti-Jewish violence of the First Crusade. The spiritual revival and rapid growth of the 10th-11th centuries led both to Church reform and the Crusades, an attempt to direct feudal violence against the enemies of the Church. Under the impact of popular frenzy and loss of control by the papacy, the traditional Church doctrine of both denigration and toleration of the Jews broke down. The crusading bands' ideological motivation is reflected in contemporary Hebrew chronicles and in two Christian accounts. Discusses the Jewish response of martyrdom in preference to conversion. Contends that 1096 was not a turning-point - the destroyed communities were quickly resettled, and in later Crusades anti-Jewish excesses were prevented by the Church. The massacres indicated a change in Christian attitudes, including the view of Jews as enemies of Christendom, ritual murder accusations, and the demand for the Jews' total destruction or conversion. The appendix (pp. 223-297) contains an English translation of the texts of the two chronicles.

Based on two extant Jewish sources describing the pogroms in the Rhineland in 1096, the Mainz Anonymous and the Solomon bar Simson Chronicle, narrates the history of the massacre of Jews by the Crusaders and by burghers who joined them, in Mainz, Worms, Köln, and Speyer. The Pope, who conceived the Crusade, did not call for the massacre of Jews, nor did the secular authorities approve of it; it was Count Emicho's army that unleashed the murders. Clergymen and imperial officials, as well as some burghers, tried to protect the Jews, not always successfully. The revulsion toward Christianity, the readiness for martyrdom evinced by the Rhineland Jews, the mass suicides, and even the murder of their families by Jews themselves only incited the Crusaders to greater excesses. Despite the brutality of the massacres of 1096, the bulk of Ashkenazic Jewry survived them unharmed. Although later Jewish literature sometimes praised the Jews' behavior during the First Crusade, this pattern was not repeated in other disasters which befell European Jewry.

Examines three medieval Jewish accounts of the First Crusade massacres in the Rhine area: the "Mainz Anonymous, " the "Solomon bar Simson Chronicle, " and the "Eliezer bar Nathan Chronicle." Discerns five voices or perspectives in these narratives due to the fact that the "Solomon bar Simson Chronicle" is a compilation of several prior compositions. Suggests that the narratives were composed in order to provide important time-bound information (the course of events, apology of the Jews - both those who chose martyrdom and those who converted, etc.), as well as to address critical timeless issues (including guidance for the future, theodicy, "Kiddush Hashem, " etc.). Believes that the data provided by the two early narratives - the "Mainz Anonymous" and the Speyer-Worms-Mainz unit of the "Solomon bar Simson Chronicle" - are historically reliable, while the other narratives are less reliable. Concludes that the combination of time-bound and timeless concerns reflects an innovative style of historical writing and new views on the relationship between God, humanity, and history.