The Crusades and the Near East
Page 34
suggests that the emperor had granted land beyond Antioch to Bohemond to create an ‘outpost against Islam’.
9 RM 725: ‘quidam etenim abbas nomine Bernardus, litterarum scientia et morum probitate præditus, ostendit mihi unam historiam secundum hanc materiam, sed ei admodum displicebat, partim quia initium suum, quod in Clari Montis concilio constituum fuit, non habebat, partim quia series tam pulchræ materiei inculta jacebat, et litteralium compositio dictionum inculta vacillabat. Præcepit igitur mihi ut, qui Clari Montis concilio interfui, acephalæ materiei caput præponerem et lecturis eam accuratiori stilo componerem’; BD 10: ‘sed nescio quis compilator, nomine suppresso, 182
W E S T E R N O P I N I O N O F T H E B Y Z A N T I N E E M P I R E
libellum super hac re nimis rusticanum ediderat; veritatem tamen texuerat, sed propter inurbanitatem codicis, nobilis materia viluerat; et simpliciores etiam inculta et incompta lectio confestim a se avocabat’; GN 79: ‘Erat siquidem eadem Historia, sed verbis contexta plus equo simplicibus et quae multotiens grammaticae naturas excederet lectoremque vapidi insipiditate sermonis sepius exanimare valeret.’
10 See Jonathan Riley-Smith, The First Crusade and the Idea of Crusading, London: Athlone, 1986, pp. 135–52, esp. pp. 149–52, for a discussion of the nature of the
‘improvements’ made by these authors.
11 FC 215: ‘ego vero Fulcherus Carnotensis capellanus ipius Balduini eram’.
12 FC 64–70.
13 Guibert of Nogent , Monodiae, Edmond-Rene Labande (ed.), Paris: Belles Lettres, 1981; Guibert of Nogent, Quo Ordine Sermo Fieri Debeat, R.B.C. Huygens (ed.), CCCM 127, pp. 7–9, 47–63; Guibert of Nogent, De Bucella Iudae Data et de Verite Dominici Corporis, R.B.C. Huygens (ed.), CCCM 127, pp. 9–13, 65–77; Guibert of Nogent, De Sanctis et eorum Pigneribus, R.B.C. Huygens (ed.), CCCM 127, pp. 13–16, 79–109. See Huygens, ‘Introduction’, in GN 1, n. 1, for the use of Dei Gesta per Francos rather than Gesta Dei per Francos.
14 Guibert, Monodiae, I.iv.25, I.xiv.99, I.xv.107.
15 GN 51–2.
16 Isidori Hispalensis Episcopi Etymologiarum sive Originum, Libri XX, W.M. Lindsay (ed.), Scriptorum Classicorum Bibliotheca Oxoniensis, Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1985
[1911], I.xli.1: ‘Apud veteres enim nemo conscribebat historiam, nisi is qui interfuisset, et ea quae conscribenda essent vidisset. Melius enim oculis quae fiunt deprehendimus, quam quae auditione colligimus [Indeed, among the ancients, nobody wrote history, except him who had taken part, and had seen that which was to be written].’ See also Horace quoted in GN 166: ‘segnius irritent animos demissa per aurem, quam quae sunt oculis subiecta fidelibus [What has been thrust into the ears stirs the mind more slowly than those things which have appeared before reliable eyes]’.
17 GN 166.
18 GN 78: ‘Quae autem addiderim, aut ab his qui videre didicerim aut per me ipsum agnoverim’.
19 GN 166: ‘tamen quis historiographos, quis eos qui sanctorum Vitas edidere ambigat non solum quae obtutibus, sed ea scripsisse quae aliorum hauserant intellecta relatibus?
Si namque verax, ut legitur, quidam et quod vidit et audivit, hoc testatur, autentica proculdubio vera dicentium narratio, ubi videre non suppetit, comprobatur.’
20 For the letter of Alexios to Robert, see Heinrich Hagenmeyer (ed.), Epistulae et Chartae ad historiam primi belli sacri spectantes (reprint), Hildesheim: G. Olms, 1973
[1901], pp. 129–36. Although the integrity of this letter as it has survived has been much queried, Guibert was apparently convinced of its authenticity. For the arguments against its authenticity, see Einar Joransen, ‘The Problem of the Spurious Letter of Emperor Alexios to the Count of Flanders’, American Historical Review 55.4, 1950, 811–32.
21 For the death of Godfrey, GN 317; for the 1101 expedition, GN 312–13.
22 GN 108, 109–10.
23 GN 106.
24 GN 158. For Guibert’s use of the term ‘ gregarii milites’, see C. Kostick, The Language of ordo in the Early Histories of the First Crusade, unpublished Ph.D. thesis, Trinity College Dublin, 2005, p. 164.
25 GN 135: ‘inertissimos hominum Grecos’.
26 GN 142.
27 GN 90–1: ‘Ipsi plane homines, pro aeris et coeli cui innati sunt puritate, cum sint levioris corpulentiae, et idcirco alacrioris ingenii’; Isidore of Seville, Etymologiarum, 9.2.105: ‘Secundum diversitatem enim coeli et facies hominum, et colores, et 183
L É A N N Í C H L É I R I G H
corporum quantitates, et animorum diversitates existunt. Inde Romanos graves, Graecos leves, Afros versipelles, Gallos natura feroces atque acriores ingenio pervidemus, quod natura climatum facit.’
28 It is likely that Guibert is here referring to the Eastern tradition of oekumene, a form of religious debate. See Steven Runciman, The Eastern Schism, Oxford: Clarendon, 1971 [1955], p. 4; GN 90.
29 GN 91.
30 GN 89: ‘Orientalium autem fides cum semper nutabunda constiterit et rerum molitione novarum mutabilis et vagabunda fuerit, semper a regula verae credulitatis exorbitans, ab antiquorum Patrum auctoritate descivit.’
31 GN 111: ‘Si inter aecclesias toto orbe diffusas aliae pre aliis reverentiam pro personis locisque merentur – pro personis inquam, dum apostolicis sedibus privilegia maiora traduntur, pro locis vero, dum regiis urbibus eadem quae personis dignitatis, uti est civitas Constantinopolitana, prebetur; illi potissimum Ecclesiae deberemus, ex qua gratiam redemptionis, et totius originem Christianitatis accepimus.
32 GN 93: ‘nemo ad presbiterium provehatur nisi primo coniugium sortiatur’.
33 GN 93: ‘idem dictum non de eo qui habeat et utatur sed de eo qui habuerit habitamque dimiserit constantissime Occidentalis aecclesiae auctorite firmetur’.
34 Pseudo-Udalrici Epistola de Continentia Clericorum, Lothar von Heinemann (ed.), MGH Libelli de Lite Imperatorum et Pontificum, Hanover: Impensis Bibliopolii Hahniani, 1891, I.256 line 22; A.L. Barstow, Married Priests and the Reforming Papacy: The Eleventh Century Debates, New York: E. Mellen Press, 1982, pp. 107, 115, 116.
35 Barstow, Married Priests and the Reforming Papacy, pp. 115–16.
36 GN 92: ‘hunc dampnationi suae adiecerunt cumulum ut claudicare perhibeant, inflicta ei propriae naturae inequalitate, deum’.
37 GN 92: ‘quid de Spiritu sancto dicturi sunt qui adhuc eum secundum reliquias hereseos Arianae minorem Patre et Filio prophana mente contendunt?’.
38 GN 90–1.
39 GN 90: ‘Omnium hereseon catalogi perlegantur, libri antiquorum scripti adversus hereticos recenseantur, mirabor si preter Orientem et Affricam vix aliqui sub Latino orbe cernentur.’ See also GN 90–1, Book I, lines 142–7, 149–61. For the opinion that the East was the origin of all heresy, see Liutprand of Cremona, Legatio ad Imperatorem Constantinopolitanum, Paolo Chiesa (ed.), Liudprandi Cremonensis Opera Omnia, in CCCM 156, Turnholt: Brepols, 1998, p. 196, lines 341–3.
40 GN 92: ‘At quoniam offendiculum ponit deus coram his qui voluntarie peccant, terra eorum ipsos sui habitatores evomuit, dum primo fiunt a noticia verae credulitatis exortes ac merito deinde a iure omnis suae terrenae possessionis extorres. Dum enim a Trinitatis fide desciscunt ut adhuc sordescant qui in sordibus sunt, paulatim usque ad extrema suscipiendae gentilitatis detrimenta venerunt et procedente pena peccati, alienigenis irruentibus etiam solum patriae amiserunt aut, si quempiam ibidem remanere contigit, externis indigenae sese sub tributi reddibitionibus subdiderunt.’
41 GN 92.
42 GF 5; GN 128.
43 GN 135: ‘Is ergo illustrius viri casus maximam sequentium procerum fortitudini enervationem intulit; idem namque facere quod ab isto exigebat seu vi seu clam seu precario ceteros coegit principis fraudulenti astutia.’
44 GF 12: ‘Certe indigni sumus, atque iustum nobis uidetur nullatenus ei sacramentum iurare.’
45 GN 142: ‘“Et certe si nobis”, inquiunt, “nullus incumberet timor futurorum, id solum, quod per Greculos istos, omnium inertissimos, iurare cogeremur, nobis esset sempiterne pudendum: plane eos dic
turos minime ambigimus quia, velimus nolimus, ipsorum imperio parverimus”.’
184
W E S T E R N O P I N I O N O F T H E B Y Z A N T I N E E M P I R E
46 GN 141–2: ‘Tunc Alexis perfidus, qui olim contra Turcos auxiliorum putabatur avidus, aceritate rancoris infrenduit et qua fraude tot militias, sibi ut putabat ingruentes, turpi precipitaret exitio sepe revolvit.’
47 GF 7; GN 152.
48 GF 63–4.
49 GN 230: ‘quia perisse audierat quos non minori quam Turcos invidentia execrebatur’.
50 GN 313: ‘Qui, cum maiestatis suae passim personaret testis ambitio, Constantinopolim venit, cum perfidissimo hominum Alexi tiranno colloquium habuit. Cuius proditor ille nequissimus adventum, antequam regia comes isdem digrederetur ab urbe, Turcis per epistolas detulit: “Ecce”, inquit, “e Franciis pinguissimae ad vos progredientur oves, quae minus provido tamen pastore reguntur”. Quid plura? omes tirannici principis fines excesserat, Turcorum ei exercitus repente obvius astat, vires hominis adventicias incompositasque debilitans dispergit, predatur et superat.’ See note 5 above for contemporary commentators who also blamed the Byzantines for the failure of this expedition.
51 GN 314.
52 GF 6, 10, 12.
53 GN 93, 104, 128, 129, 130, 141, 142, 143, 144, 152, 153, 182.
54 GN 130, 135.
55 GN 105: ‘ipse imperator non ex legitima purpuram successione susceperit’.
56 GN 105.
57 GN 105.
58 GN 104: ‘edicto celebri’.
59 GN 105: ‘Qui ergo dampnaverit ultro sua, iam querere merito cogitur aliena.’
60 GN 104.
61 GN 129–30: ‘At perfidus imperator, territus audito clarissimi ducis adventu, detulit ei reverentiam sed nimis extortitiam.’
62 GN 105.
63 Marc Carriere, ‘Pour en finir avec les Gesta Francorum:
une réflexion
historiographique sur l’état des rapports entre Grecs et Latins au début du XIIe siècle et sur l’apport nouveau d’Albert d’Aix’, Crusades 7, 2008, 13–34, esp. 21, asserts that the anti-Byzantine rhetoric of Guibert cannot be traced solely to the anonymous Gesta Francorum.
64 D.C. Munro, ‘The Speech of Pope Urban II at Clermont 1095’, American Historical Review 11, 1905, 230–42.
65 Alfons Becker, Papst Urban II (1088–99) Teil 2: Der Papst, die griecische Christenheit und der Kreuzzug, Stuttgart: Hiersemann, 1988, pp. 108–27, 177–205.
66 A.C. Krey, ‘Urban’s Crusade – Success or Failure?,’ American Historical Review 58, 1948, 235–50, esp. 236–7.
67 Hagenmeyer, Epistulae et Chartae, pp. 161–5.
68 OV VI.68–71.
69 GN 138.
70 R.J. Lilie, Byzantium and the Crusader States, Oxford: Clarendon, 1993, pp. 75–82.
71 Walther Holtzmann, ‘Zur Geschichte des Investiturstreites 2. Bohemond von Antiochien un Alexios I’, Neues Archives der Gesellschaft für ältere deutsche Geschichtskunde 1, 1935, 270–83, esp. 280–2, suggested a date of September 1106
for the composition of the letter, assuming that it was written prior to the attack at Dyrrachium. Rowe, ‘Paschal II, Bohemond of Antioch and the Byzantine Empire’, 165–202, proposed a later date of 1108.
72 Holtzmann, ‘Zur Geschichte des Investiturstreites 2’, 281: ‘ut quam sanguinolentis minibus, horrendis scleribus, quam seva proditione dominum suum de inperio eiciendo honorem illum adeptus est, sileamus, ex quo in cathedra pestilentiae sedit’.
185
L É A N N Í C H L É I R I G H
73 Holtzmann, ‘Zur Geschichte des Investiturstreites 2’, 280–1: ‘ad scismata et heresies et diversas traditions removendas, quae in ecclesiae in ecclesia de processione sancti
[spiritus], de baptismate, de sacrificio, de coniugio in sacris ordinaibus [existent]’.
74 Holtzmann, ‘Zur Geschichte des Investiturstreites 2’, 282. See also pp. 275–9 for a discussion of the identity of this Iohannes.
75 Holtzmann, ‘Zur Geschichte des Investiturstreites 2’, p. 281: ‘universali ecclesiae et apostolicae universalitatem, quantum in ipso fuit, e suis abstulit, unde eum et suos a Romana ecclesiae dissentire manifestum est’.
76 As Hagenmeyer notes, the name ‘Fulcherus’ appears on three twelfth-century witness lists on charters from the Latin Kingdom of Jerusalem. The toponym ‘Carnotensis’
does not appear alongside the name, however, and this ‘Fulcherus’ cannot therefore be satisfactorily identified as Fulcher of Chartres. FC 2.
77 FC 687; FC 771.
78 FC 153, 215, 330. Fulcher does not appear in the register, Dignitaires de l’Eglise de Notre Dame de Chartres, Lucien Merlet and René Merlet (eds), Archives du Diocèse de Chartres 5, Chartres: C. Métais, 1900, and it is not certain that he was ever a canon of that cathedral. See Verena Epp, Fucher von Chartres, Dusseldorf: Droste Verlag, 1990, p. 25 for speculation as to the influence of Ivo of Chartres on Fulcher; FC 360.
79 FC 203–15: ‘ego vero Fulcherus Carnotensis capellanus ipius Balduini eram’.
80 See above, p. 165 for Guibert’s use of the Historia Hierosoloymitana.
81 FC 115, n. 1.
82 Hagenmeyer, Epistolae et Chartae, pp. 138–40.
83 FC 176–7: ‘O quanta civitas nobilis et decora! quot monasteria quot palatia, sunt in ea, opere miro fabrefacta! quot etiam in plateis vel vicis opera ad spectandum mirabilia!
taedium est magnum recitare quanta sit ill bonorum omnium opulentia, auri scilicet, argenti, palliorum multiformium sanctorumque reliquiarum.’
84 FC 175: ‘timebat enim ne forte aliquod damnum ei machineramur’.
85 FC 178: ‘erat enim omnibus hoc necesse, ut sic cum imperatore amicitiam consoliderant, sine cuius consilio et auxilio nostrum iter nequivimus expedire, neque illi, qui nos erant subsecuturi eodem tramite’.
86 FC 155; GF 138–40; GN 135.
87 FC 179: ‘Quibus ideo praebuit ipse imperator de nummismatibus suis et de panniis sericis quantum placuit; et de equis et de pecunia, qua nimis indigebant ad tantum iter explendum’.
88 FC 185: ‘sciendum quia quamdiu Nicaeam urbem circumsedimus, navigio marino, concessu imperator adlatus est nobis victus ad emendum’.
89 FC 188: ‘urbem cum iam vi et ingenio valde esset coercita’. See F.R. Ryan (tr.), H.S.
Fink (ed.), Fulcher of Chartres: A History of the Expedition to Jerusalem 1095–1127, Knoxville: University of Tennessee Press, 1969, pp. 37, 83, n. 1.
90 FC 188: ‘quapropter pecunia illa tota retenta, iussit imperator de auro suo et argento atque palliis proceribus nostris dari; peditibus quoque distribui fecit de nummis suis aenis, quos vocant tartarones’.
91 See Hagenmeyer, Epistolae et Chartae, pp. 161–5.
92 RA 245–6; AA 310–13; GF 35; GN 182–4; BD 44–5.
93 FC 608: ‘Subsequenter enim mortui sunt: Paschalis papa mense Ianuario, Balduinus, res Hierosolymorum, mense Aprili, necnon uxor eius in Sicilia, quam dereliquerat.
Hierosolymis etiam patriarch Arnulfus, imperator quoque Constantinopolitanus Alexis et alii quamplures proceres in mundo.’
94 FC 521: ‘erat quidem imperator Constantinopolitanus, Alexios nomine, genti nostrae tunc valde contrarius et Hierosolymam peregrinantibus vel fraude clandestina vel violentia manifesta tam per terram quam per mare perturbator et tyrannus’.
95 FC 130–1: ‘confratribus vestris in Orientali plaga conversantibus’; FC 134: 186
W E S T E R N O P I N I O N O F T H E B Y Z A N T I N E E M P I R E
‘Christicolis’; FC 135–6; FC 136: ‘gentem omnipotentis Dei fide praeditam et Christi nomine fulgidam, eos . . . qui professione Christiana censentur, sicut et vos’.
96 FC 221: ‘heu! quam multos de Christianis, Graecis, Syris, Armenis qui in urbe conversabantur, Turci rabie permoti occidebant’.
97 FC 278: ‘Christiani, qui inibi conversabantur comperirent, Graeci videlicet et Syrii’; FC 368.
98 See note 95 above.
98 FC 163–4.
100 FC 3.
101 Epp, Fulcher von Chartres, p. 25; Michael Foss, People of the First Crusade, London: Arcade Publishing, 1997, p. 50; Edward Peters, The First Crusade: The Chronicle of Fulcher of Chartres and Other Source Material (2nd edn), Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1998 [1971], p. 46; Peter Lock, The Routledge Companion to the Crusades, Oxford, 2006, p. 236; Jean Richard, The Crusades c.1071–c.1291, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999, p. 21; Riley-Smith, The First Crusade and the Idea of Crusading, p. 15.
102 See n. 78.
103 For the doubts as to Ivo’s presence at the Council of Clermont, see Rolf Sprandel, Ivo von Chartres und seine Stellung in der Kirchengeschichte, Stuttgart: Hiersemann, 1962, p. 178, n.8.
104 Hagenmeyer, Epistulae et Chartae, pp. 136–7.
105 FC 116: ‘tamen veraci, dignum ducens memoriae commendandum, prout valui, et oculis meis in ipso itinere perspexi, diligenter digessi’.
106 FC 153: ‘Quod ego ipse Fulcherius Carnotensis, cum caeteris peregrinis iens, postea, sicut oculis vidi, diligenter et sollicite in memoriam posteris college.’
107 FC 818–19: ‘Non crederem cuiquam tot esse prodigia, nisi sumpta ipse oculis meis ponderavissem.’
108 Where he was not present at the events he has described, Fulcher mentioned having questioned eyewitnesses on a number of occasions. See Y.N. Harari, ‘Eyewitnessing in Accounts of the First Crusade: The Gesta Francorum and Other Contemporary Narratives’, Crusades 3, 2004, 77–100, at 81–2.