The Crusades: The Authoritative History of the War for the Holy Land (81 page)

Albert of Aachen, p. 514. Murray,
The Crusader Kingdom of Jerusalem
, pp. 81–93; B. Hamilton,
The Latin Church in the Crusader States. The Secular Church
(1980), pp. 52–5.

William of Tyre, p. 454; Fulcher of Chartres, p. 353.

On the foundation of the Latin Church in Palestine and relations between the patriarch and king of Jerusalem see: Hamilton,
The Latin Church in the Crusader States
, pp. 52–85; K.-P. Kirstein,
Die lateinischen Patriarchen von Jerusalem
(Berlin, 2002). On the Jerusalemite True Cross see: A. V. Murray, ‘“Mighty against the enemies of Christ”: The relic of the True Cross in the armies of the kingdom of Jerusalem’,
The Crusades and Their Sources: Essays Presented to Bernard Hamilton
, ed. J. France and W. G. Zajac (Aldershot, 1998), pp. 217–37.

Fulcher of Chartres, pp. 387–8, 460–61; J. Wilkinson (trans.),
Jerusalem Pilgrimage 1099–1185
(London, 1988), pp. 100–101; Albert of Aachen, p. 664. A northern-French cleric, Fulcher of Chartres began the First Crusade in the company of Count Stephen of Blois-Chartres, but later gravitated to Baldwin of Boulogne’s contingent, becoming his chaplain. Fulcher accompanied Baldwin to Edessa and then, with him, relocated to Jerusalem in 1100, remaining resident in the Holy City for the next three decades. In the earliest years of the twelfth century, Fulcher composed a history of the First Crusade (based, in part, upon the
Gesta Francorum
). He later extended his account to cover events in Outremer between 1100 and 1127, at which point his chronicle came to an abrupt end. As the work of a well-informed witness, Fulcher’s
Historia
is an invaluable source. V. Epp,
Fulcher von Chartres: Studien zur Geschichtsschreibung des ersten Kreuzzuges
(Düsseldorf, 1990).

Fulcher of Chartres, pp. 397, 403. On Outremer’s relations with the Italian mercantile communities see: M.L. Favreau-Lilie,
Die Italiener im Heiligen Land vom ersten Kreuzzug bis zum Tode Heinrichs von Champagne (1098–1197)
(Amsterdam, 1989).

In 1103, Muslim Acre was saved from an earlier Frankish siege by the timely arrival of a Fatimid fleet. It is possible that the Genoese may have carried out some ill-disciplined pillaging after Acre’s fall in 1104.

This incident was recorded in Latin and Muslim sources: Albert of Aachen, pp. 808–10; Ibn al-Qalanisi, pp. 108–10.

On the relationship between the Jerusalemite crown and the Frankish aristocracy see: Murray,
The Crusader Kingdom of Jerusalem
, pp. 97–114; S. Tibble,
Monarchy and Lordships in the Latin Kingdom of Jerusalem 1099–1291
(Oxford, 1989).

Fulcher of Chartres, pp. 407–24; Albert of Aachen, pp. 580–82. On the first Battle of Ramla and the two campaigns that followed in 1102 and 1105 see: R. C. Smail,
Crusading Warfare 1097–1193
(Cambridge, 1956), pp. 175–7; M. Brett, ‘The battles of Ramla (1099–1105)’,
Egypt and Syria in the Fatimid, Ayyubid and Mamluk Eras
, ed. U. Vermeulen and D. De Smet (Leuven, 1995), pp. 17–39. On Fatimid warfare see: B. J. Beshir, ‘Fatimid military organization’,
Der Islam,
vol. 55 (1978), pp. 37–56; W. J. Hamblin, ‘The Fatimid navy during the early crusades: 1099–1124’,
American Neptune
, vol. 46 (1986), pp. 77–83.

William of Malmesbury, p. 467; Fulcher of Chartres, p. 446; Albert of Aachen, p. 644.

A Muslim pilgrim from Iberia, Ibn Jubayr, journeyed through the Terre de Sueth seventy years later and bore witness to the fact that the cooperative Latin–Muslim agrarian exploitation of this fertile region continued, seemingly unaffected by the war brewing between Saladin and the kingdom of Jerusalem. Ibn Jubayr described how ‘the cultivation of the valley is divided between the Franks and the Muslims…They apportion crops equally, and their animals are mingled together, yet no wrong takes place between them.’ Ibn Jubayr,
The Travels of Ibn Jubayr
, trans. R. J. C. Broadhurst (London, 1952), p. 315.

Matthew of Edessa, p. 192. On the early history of Frankish Antioch see: Asbridge,
The Creation of the Principality of Antioch
, pp. 47–58.

Ibn al-Qalanisi, p. 61; Ralph of Caen, p. 712; Smail,
Crusading Warfare
, pp. 177–8, no. 6.

Ralph of Caen, pp. 713–14. A Norman priest who joined Bohemond’s 1107–08 crusade and then settled in the principality of Antioch, Ralph of Caen wrote a history of the First Crusade and the crusader states toc. 1106. His account focused upon the careers of Bohemond and Tancred. For an introduction to Ralph’s account see: B. S. Bachrach and D. S. Bachrach (trans.),
The Gesta Tancredi of Ralph of Caen
(Aldershot, 2005), pp. 1–17.

Albert of Aachen, p. 702; Ralph of Caen, pp. 714–15; Asbridge,
The Creation of the Principality of Antioch
, pp. 57–65.

Anna Comnena, vol. 3, p. 51. To date, the standard work of Bohemond’s venture is: J. G. Rowe, ‘Paschal II, Bohemund of Antioch and the Byzantine empire’,
Bulletin of the John Rylands Library
, vol. 49 (1966), pp. 165–202. Rowe’s arguments are ripe for revision. See also: Yewdale,
Bohemond I
, pp. 106–31.

It is possible that Tancred fought alongside Ridwan of Aleppo in a second conflict against Chavli of Mosul and Baldwin of Edessa in 1109. Ibn al-Athir, vol. 1, p. 141; Asbridge,
The Creation of the Principality of Antioch
, pp. 112–14.

Albert of Aachen, pp. 782, 786, 794–6; Asbridge,
The Creation of the Principality of Antioch
, pp. 114–21. On the early history of the Latin Church in northern Syria and the ecclesiastical dispute between Antioch and Jerusalem see: Hamilton,
The Latin Church in the Crusader States
, pp. 18–51; J. G. Rowe, ‘The Papacy and the Ecclesiastical Province of Tyre 1110–1187’,
Bulletin of John Rylands Library
, vol. 43 (1962), pp. 160–89; Asbridge,
The Creation of the Principality of Antioch
, pp. 195–213.

Contemporaries were aware of the obstacle presented by the Belus Hills, with one Latin eyewitness, Walter the Chancellor (p. 79), commenting on the protection afforded to Antioch by the ‘mountains [and] crags’, but modern historians have largely ignored the significance of the Belus Hills. Being of such limited altitude, they rarely appear on maps of the region. I stumbled (almost literally) upon the range when travelling through this beautiful, yet rugged, area on foot, an experience which led me to re-evaluate the impact of this topographic feature upon Antiochene history. P. Deschamps, ‘Le défense du comté de Tripoli et de la principauté d’Antioche’,
Les Châteaux des Croisés en Terre Sainte
, vol. 3 (Paris, 1973), pp. 59–60; Asbridge,
The Creation of the Principality of Antioch
, p. 50; T. Asbridge, ‘The significance and causes of the battle of the Field of Blood’,
Journal of Medieval History
, vol. 23. 4 (1997), pp. 301–16.

Matthew of Edessa, p. 212; T. Asbridge, ‘The “crusader” community at Antioch: The impact of interaction with Byzantium and Islam’,
Transactions of the Royal Historical Society
, 6th series, vol. 9 (1999), pp. 305–25; Asbridge,
The Creation of the Principality of Antioch
, pp. 65–7, 134–9.

Fulcher of Chartres, p. 426; Runciman,
A History of the Crusades
, vol. 2, p. 126; Smail,
Crusading Warfare
, p. 125; Richard,
The Crusades,
p. 135; Ibn al-Qalanisi, p. 137.

On the Assassins see: M. G. S. Hodgson,
The Secret Order of the Assassins
(The Hague, 1955); B. Lewis,
The Assassins
(London, 1967); B. Lewis, ‘The Isma‘ilites and the Assassins’,
A History of the Crusades
, ed. K. M. Setton, vol. 1, 2nd edn (Madison, 1969), pp. 99–132; F. Daftary,
The Isma‘ilis: Their History and Doctrines
(Cambridge, 1990).

Smail,
Crusading Warfare
, pp. 143–8, 178–9; Asbridge,
The Creation of the Principality of Antioch
, pp. 70–73.

Albert of Aachen, pp. 866–8. In the midst of his bout of illness in early 1117 King Baldwin’s ability to dominate Palestine’s Frankish aristocracy was curbed. Having failed to produce an heir, Baldwin was all but compelled by the Latin nobility to repudiate his third wife Adelaide (the widowed mother of the young count of Sicily, Roger II) on grounds of bigamy, in order to avoid the prospect of a Sicilian ruler acceding to the Jerusalemite throne. Murray,
The Crusader Kingdom of Jerusalem
, pp. 115–17.

Kemal al-Din, p. 617; C. Hillenbrand, ‘The career of Najm al-Din Il-Ghazi’,
Der Islam
, vol. 58 (1981), pp. 250–92. King Baldwin II came to power in Jerusalem in 1118 only after a disputed succession in which Baldwin I’s brother Eustace of Boulogne was an alternative candidate. H. E. Mayer, ‘The Succession of Baldwin II of Jerusalem: English Impact on the East’,
Dumbarton Oaks Papers
, vol. 39 (1985), pp. 139–47; A. Murray, ‘Dynastic Continuity or Dynastic Change? The Accession of Baldwin II and the Nobility of the Kingdom of Jerusalem’,
Medieval Prosopography
, vol. 13 (1992), pp. 1–27; A. Murray, ‘Baldwin II and his Nobles: Baronial Faction and Dissent in the Kingdom of Jerusalem, 1118–1134’,
Nottingham Medieval Studies
, vol. 38 (1994), pp. 60–85.

Walter the Chancellor, pp. 88, 108; Ibn al-Qalanisi, pp. 160–61; Smail,
Crusading Warfare
, pp. 179–81.

Walter the Chancellor, p. 78; Asbridge, ‘The significance and causes of the battle of the Field of Blood’, pp. 301–16. There may have been some truth to the accusations of sexual impropriety–even his supporter Walter the Chancellor hinted at this misdemeanour–but otherwise, Roger seems to have ruled, unchallenged, as a legitimate prince in his own right. The notion that he had unlawfully deprived Bohemond II of his inheritance was probably disseminated posthumously, both to account for the offender’s death and to validate the young prince-designate’s position. Unfortunately for Roger, the slur stuck and ever since he has generally been painted as an ill-fated, grasping regent. On attitudes towards Roger’s status and moral probity see: Asbridge,
The Creation of the Principality of Antioch
, pp. 139–43; T. Asbridge and S.E. Edgington (trans.),
Walter the Chancellor’s The Antiochene Wars
(Aldershot, 1999), pp. 12–26.

Murray,
The Crusader Kingdom of Jerusalem
, pp. 135–46; H. E. Mayer, ‘Jérusalem et Antioche au temps de Baudoin II’,
Comptes-rendus de l’Académie des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres, Nov.–Déc. 1980
(Paris, 1980); T. Asbridge, ‘Alice of Antioch: a case study of female power in the twelfth century’,
The Experience of Crusading 2: Defining the Crusader Kingdom
, ed. P. W. Edbury and J. P. Phillips (Cambridge, 2003), pp. 29–47.

‘
Liber ad milites Templi de laude novae militiae
’,
Sancti Bernardi Opera
, vol. 3, ed. J. Leclercq and H. M. Rochais (Rome, 1963), pp. 205–39. For a collection of primary sources relating to the Templars translated into English see: M. Barber and K. Bate (trans.),
The Templars: Selected Sources Translated and Annotated
(Manchester, 2002). On the history of Templars and Hospitallers see: M. Barber,
The New Knighthood. A History of the Order of the Templars
(Cambridge, 1994); H. Nicholson,
The Knights Templar
(London, 2001); J. S. C. Riley-Smith,
The Knights of St John in Jerusalem and Cyprus, 1050–1310
(London, 1967); H. Nicholson,
The Knights Hospitaller
(Woodbridge, 2001); A. Forey,
The Military Orders. From the Twelfth to the Early Fourteenth Centuries
(London, 1992). On castles in the crusader states during the twelfth century see: Smail,
Crusading Warfare
, pp. 204–50; H. Kennedy,
Crusader Castles
(Cambridge, 1994); R. Ellenblum, ‘Three generations of Frankish castle-building in the Latin kingdom of Jerusalem’,
Autour de la Première Croisade
, ed. M. Balard (Paris, 1996), pp. 517–51.

Lilie,
Byzantium and the Crusader States
, pp. 109–41; Harris,
Byzantium and the Crusades
, pp. 74–92.

William of Tyre, p. 656; H. E. Mayer, ‘The Concordat of Nablus’,
Journal of Ecclesiastical History
, vol. 33 (1982), pp. 531–43. On Outremer’s relations with western Europe in the period see: J. P. Phillips,
Defenders of the Holy Land. Relations between the Latin West and East, 1119–87
(Oxford, 1996). On the progress and consequences of the dispute between King Fulk and Queen Melisende see: H. E. Mayer, ‘Studies in the History of Queen Melisende of Jerusalem’,
Dumbarton Oaks Papers
, vol. 26 (1972), pp. 93–183; H. E. Mayer, ‘Angevins
versus
Normans: The New Men of King Fulk of Jerusalem’,
Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society
, vol. 133 (1989), pp. 1–25; H. E. Mayer, ‘The Wheel of Fortune: Seignorial Vicissitudes under Kings Fulk and Baldwin III of Jerusalem’,
Speculum
, vol. 65 (1990), pp. 860–77; B. Hamilton, ‘Women in the Crusader States. The Queens of Jerusalem (1100–1190)’,
Medieval Women
, ed. D. Baker (
Studies in Church History
,
Subsidia
, 1) (1978), pp. 143–74; J. S. C. Riley-Smith, ‘King Fulk of Jerusalem and “the Sultan of Babylon”’,
Montjoie: Studies in Crusade History in Honour of Hans Eberhard Mayer
, ed. B. Z. Kedar, J. S. C. Riley-Smith and R. Hiestand (Aldershot, 1997), pp. 55–66.