Crusades 9781032109411, 9781003217824

Citation preview

Crusades Volume 20, 2021

Crusades Edited

Benjamin

by Phillips

Z. Kedar Jonathan ,

and Iris

with Nikolaos G. Chrissis

Shagrir

Editorial Board

Benjamin Z. Kedar (Editor; Hebrew University, Jerusalem, Israel) Jonathan Phillips (Editor; Royal Holloway, University ofLondon, U.K.) Iris Shagrir (Editor; Open University ofIsrael) Nikolaos G. Chrissis (Associate and Bulletin Editor; Democritus University ofThrace, Greece) Torben Kjersgaard Nielsen (Reviews Editor; Aalborg University, Denmark) Denys Pringle (Archaeology Editor; University of Cardiff, U.K.) Michel Balard (University ofParis I, France) Jessalynn Bird (St Mary's College, Notre Dame, U.S.A.) Karl Borchardt (University of Würzburg/Monumenta Germaniae Historica, Germany) Peter Edbury (University of Cardiff, U.K.) Jaroslav Folda

(University ofNorth Carolina, U.S.A.) (University ofHamburg, Germany)

Stefan Heidemann

Carole Hillenbrand (University ofEdinburgh, U.K.) Kurt. Villads Jensen (Stockholm University, Sweden) Thomas F. Madden (Saint Louis University, U.S.A.)

(University of Cardiff, U.K.) (University ofStrasbourg, France)

Helen Nicholson Catherine Otten

(Institut de France) Carol Sweetenham (Royal Holloway,

†Jean Richard

University of London/University of Warwick, U.K.)

François-Olivier Touati (Université François-Rabelais de Tours, France)

Crusades Volume 20, 2021

First published 2021 by Routledge 2 Park Square, Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon OX14 4RN and by Routledge 605 Third Avenue, New York, NY 10158 Routledge is an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group, an informa business © 2021 by the Society for the Study of the Crusades and the Latin East All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or utilized in any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter invented, including photocopying and recording, or in any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publishers. Trademark notice: Product or corporate names may be trademarks or registered trademarks, and are used only for identification and explanation without intent to infringe. British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data A catalog record has been requested for this book ISBN: 978-1-032-10941-1 (hbk) ISBN: 978-1-003-21782-4 (ebk) Typeset in Times New Roman by N2productions

Contents Abbreviations

vii

ARTICLES Farewell Message from the

Founding Editor1

Itineraria Terrae Sanctae minora III: Some 3 Frankish Jerusalem

Early Twelfth-Century

"Esteemed brothers, comrades of mine...":

Constructing the Piety

Guides to

and

Pugnacity of the Military Orders through Battle Rhetoric Jerusalem

as

the

Travelling City of God: Henry

of Albano and the

of the Third Crusade

"Because of incest which Two Third Crusade

65

Preaching 83

one

of the two of them committed": A Letter about

Participants from the

Archivo Catedralicio de Toledo

Interpreters in Franco-Muslim Negotiations

Conceptualizing the

131

Crusade in Outremer: Uses and Purposes of the Word

"Crusade" in the Old French Continuation of William of Tyre

The Emergence of the Way of the Cross in Jerusalem Thirteenth Centuries

during the

151

Twelfth and 165

Pergamene due-trecentesche della Certosa di Calci rogate in Levante A Vocation Receptive to Outside Influences: Doctors, Medicine in

121

Lusignan and

Venetian

Cyprus,

185

Hospitals and

1191-1570

201

The Crusade and its Fronts in French Period to 2020

Bernard Hamilton

Martyrdom,

Essay Prize:

Historiography

A Paragon of

from the Interwar 227

Support? Ela of Salisbury,

and the Ideals of Sponsoring Crusade

Review Article

on

The Restoration

Claudio Alessandri

247

of the Nativity Church

in Bethlehem, ed. 267

REVIEWS

History of the Dukes ofNormandy and the Kings ofEngland by the

Anonymous ofBéthune,

trans.

Webster (Nicholas Morton)

by Janet Shirley,

historical notes

by Paul

277

Jane Gilbert, Simon Gaunt and William Burgwinkle, Medieval French

Literary Culture Abroad (Peter Edbury)

Hilary Rhodes, The

Crown and the Cross:

279

Burgundy,

France and the

Crusades (1095-1223) (Nicholas Morton)

282

Simon de Montfort (c. 1170-1218). Le croisé, Martin Aurell,

Gregory

son lignage et son temps, ed. and Laurent Macé (Laurence W. Marvin) Lippiatt

J. Michael Jefferson, The Templar Estates in Lincolnshire, 1185-1565: Agriculture and Economy. (Rory MacLellan) Processus contra menée par

Magdalena

Templarios in France.

la commission pontificale

Satora (Helen J. Nicholson)

(1309—1311), ed.

Alexandra Kaar, Wirtschaft, Krieg und Seelenheil. Papst Martin V., Kaiser Sigismund und das Handelsverbot gegen die Hussiten in Böhmen

(Norman Housley) no. 41

286

Procès-verbaux de la procédure à Paris

Loïc Chollet, Les Sarrasins du Nord. Une histoire de la croisade balte par la littérature (xiie—xve siècles). (Christoph T. Maier)

Bulletin

284

of the SSCLE

288

290

292 295

Crusades: Guidelines for the Submission of Papers

325

Membership

327

Information

Abbreviations AA

AOL Autour

Cart Hosp

Cart St Sép

Cart Tem

CCCM Chartes Josaphat

Clermont

Crusade Sources

CS

CSEL FC GF GN

Albert of Aachen, Historia Ierosolimitana. History of the Journey to Jerusalem, ed. and trans. Susan B. Edgington (Oxford, 2007) Archives de l’Orient latin Autour de la Première Croisade. Actes du colloque de la Society for the Study of the Crusades and the Latin East: Clermont-Ferrand, 22–25 juin 1995, ed. Michel Balard (Paris, 1996) Cartulaire général de l’ordre des Hospitaliers de Saint-Jean de Jérusalem, 1100–1310, ed. Joseph Delaville Le Roulx. 4 vols. (Paris, 1884–1906) Le Cartulaire du chapitre du Saint-Sépulcre de Jérusalem, ed. Geneviève Bresc-Bautier, Documents relatifs à l’histoire des croisades 15 (Paris, 1984) Cartulaire général de l’ordre du Temple 1119?–1150. Recueil des chartes et des bulles relatives à l’ordre du Temple, ed. Guigue A.M.J.A., (marquis) d’Albon (Paris, 1913) Corpus Christianorum. Continuatio Mediaevalis Chartes de la Terre Sainte provenant de l’abbaye de NotreDame de Josaphat, ed. Henri F. Delaborde, Bibliothèque des Écoles françaises d’Athènes et de Rome 19 (Paris, 1880) From Clermont to Jerusalem: The Crusades and Crusader Societies 1095–1500. Selected Proceedings of the International Medieval Congress, University of Leeds, 10–13 July 1995, ed. Alan V. Murray. International Medieval Research 3 (Turnhout, 1998) The Crusades and their Sources: Essays Presented to Bernard Hamilton, ed. John France and William G. Zajac (Aldershot, 1998) Crusade and Settlement: Papers read at the First Conference of the Society for the Study of the Crusades and the Latin East and Presented to R. C. Smail, ed. Peter W. Edbury (Cardiff, 1985) Corpus Scriptorum Ecclesiasticorum Latinorum Fulcher of Chartres, Historia Hierosolymitana (1095–1127), ed. Heinrich Hagenmeyer (Heidelberg, 1913) Gesta Francorum et aliorum Hierosolimitanorum, ed. and trans. Rosalind M. T. Hill and Roger Mynors (London, 1962) Guibert of Nogent, Dei gesta per Francos, ed. Robert B. C. Huygens, CCCM 127A (Turnhout, 1996) vii

viii

Horns Mansi. Concilia Mayer, Urkunden MGH SRG SS MO, 1 MO, 2 MO, 3 MO, 4 MO, 5 MO, 6/1

MO, 6/2

Montjoie

Outremer

PG PL PPTS Pringle, Churches RHC Darm Lois Oc Or RHGF

ABBREVIATIONS

The Horns of Hattin, ed. Benjamin Z. Kedar (Jerusalem and London, 1992) Giovanni D. Mansi, Sacrorum conciliorum nova et amplissima collectio Die Urkunden der lateinischen Könige von Jerusalem, ed. Hans E. Mayer, 4 vols. (Hanover, 2010) Monumenta Germaniae Historica Scriptores Rerum Germanicarum Scriptores (in Folio) The Military Orders: Fighting for the Faith and Caring for the Sick, ed. Malcolm Barber (Aldershot, 1994) The Military Orders, vol. 2: Welfare and Warfare, ed. Helen Nicholson (Aldershot, 1998) The Military Orders, vol. 3: History and Heritage, ed. Victor Mallia-Milanes (Aldershot, 2008) The Military Orders, vol. 4: On Land and by Sea, ed. Judi Upton-Ward (Aldershot, 2008) The Military Orders, vol. 5: Politics and Power, ed. Peter W. Edbury (Farnham, 2012) The Military Orders, Volume 6.1: Culture and Contact in the Mediterranean World, ed. Jochen Schenk and Mike Carr (London and New York, 2017) The Military Orders, Volume 6.2: Culture and Contact in Western and Northern Europe, ed. Jochen Schenk and Mike Carr (London and New York, 2017) Montjoie: Studies in Crusade History in Honour of Hans Eberhard Mayer, ed. Benjamin Z. Kedar, Jonathan RileySmith and Rudolf Hiestand (Aldershot, 1997) Outremer. Studies in the History of the Crusading Kingdom of Jerusalem Presented to Joshua Prawer, ed. Benjamin Z. Kedar, Hans E. Mayer and Raymond C. Smail (Jerusalem, 1982) Patrologia Graeca Patrologia Latina Palestine Pilgrims’ Text Society Library Denys Pringle, The Churches of the Crusader Kingdom of Jerusalem: A Corpus, 4 vols. (Cambridge, 1993–2009) Recueil des Historiens des Croisades Documents arméniens Les assises de Jérusalem Historiens occidentaux Historiens orientaux Recueil des Historiens des Gaules et de la France

ABBREVIATIONS

RIS NS RM ROL RRH RRH Add RS Setton, Crusades WT

ix

Rerum Italicarum Scriptores New Series The Historia Iherosolimitana of Robert the Monk, ed. Damien Kempf and Marcus G. Bull (Woodbridge, 2013) Revue de l’Orient latin Reinhold Röhricht, comp., Regesta regni hierosolymitani (Innsbruck, 1893) Reinhold Röhricht, comp., Additamentum (Innsbruck, 1904) Rolls Series A History of the Crusades, general editor Kenneth M. Setton, 2nd edn., 6 vols. (Madison, 1969–89) William of Tyre, Chronicon, ed. Robert B. C. Huygens, with Hans E. Mayer and Gerhard Rösch, CCCM 63–63A (Turnhout, 1986)

Farewell Message from the Founding Editor The Society for the Study of the Crusades and the Latin East (SSCLE), founded in 1980, amounted to a re-establishment of the Société de l’Orient latin, created in 1875. As Jean Richard, SSCLE’s first president put it, the Société was the work of one man, Paul Riant, and ceased to exist after his death in 1888. But several historians who had been members of the Société – Hagenmeyer, Desimoni, Khitrowo, Kohler, Mas-Latrie, Röhricht, Schefer, Schlumberger, Vogüé and others – took upon themselves to realize one of Riant’s unattained goals and started, in 1893, to publish the Revue de l’Orient latin. The journal, which printed studies as well as editions of relatively short texts, ceased publication after volume 12 (1911).1 During its first twenty years, SSCLE published an annual Bulletin, listing publications by members, work in progress, fieldwork planned or undertaken, and so on. It also held conferences once in four years: Cardiff (1983), Jerusalem and Haifa (1987), Syracuse, NY (1991), Clermont-Ferrand (1995), Jerusalem and Haifa (1999). Some time after having become SSCLE’s third president at the Clermont-Ferrand conference I began to explore the possibility of launching a journal dedicated to the history of the crusades, which – like the Revue de l’Orient latin – would publish studies and editions of texts. When I asked SSCLE officers and committee members for their opinion on this issue, reactions varied “from enthusiastic support to different shades of scepticism”;2 for instance, Jonathan Riley-Smith (JRS) wrote: “A journal – I have always been sceptical […] If such a journal was launched it would naturally have my full support.”3 Consequently, two publishers were approached, and the terms proposed by John Smedley of Ashgate, a great friend of the SSCLE, were found preferable. At this stage JRS offered to co-edit the journal with me and I gladly accepted; Helen Nicholson agreed to serve as associate editor. We decided to call the journal, simply, Crusades. The first volume appeared in 2002. May I add that it was largely due to e-mail that – as JRS once put it – two elderly editors, separated by thousands of miles from each other, were able to work together efficiently. In 2008 JRS asked to be relieved of editing the journal and Jonathan Phillips agreed to replace him, but JRS acceded to our request to stay on board as “backseat” editor. Now, having co-edited twenty volumes, it is my turn to take the back seat; henceforth, Jonathan Phillips and Iris Shagrir will occupy the front seats. I wish them success in all future endeavours. 1

See Jean Richard, “The Société de l’Orient latin Described by its Founder,” trans. Norman Housley, Bulletin of the Society for the Study of the Crusades and the Latin East 4 (1984), 19–22. 2 See BZK to Cathérine Otten, Michael Markowski and Jonathan Phillips, 11 February 1998, in the file “Launching the journal Crusades,” to be deposited among my papers in the National Library of Israel. 3 JRS to BZK, 13 December 1997 (in the same file). 1

2

BENJAMIN Z. KEDAR

May I use this opportunity to express my heartfelt thanks to the archaeology editor Denys Pringle, the associate editors Helen Nicholson, Michael Evans, Jonathan Phillips, William J. Purkis, Nikolaos G. Chrissis and Iris Shagrir, the reviews editors Christoph T. Maier and Torben Kjersgaard Nielsen, and the bulletin editors Karl Borchardt, François-Olivier Touati and Nikolaos G. Chrissis. They, as well as the very many readers who agreed to review the articles submitted, and – last but not least – the articles’ authors, rendered Crusades a major actor in our field. May it continue to flourish! Benjamin Z. Kedar

Itineraria Terrae Sanctae minora III: Some Early Twelfth-Century Guides to Frankish Jerusalem Denys Pringle Cardiff University [email protected]

Abstract This article presents new editions of four short guides to Jerusalem and the holy places and their environs, written around the time of the First Crusade: De Situ urbis Ierusalem, Qualiter sita est civitas Ierusalem, Hec sunt loca que habetur iuxta Hierusalem, and the five different versions of Descriptio Ierusalem. The texts are discussed within the context of an evolving tradition of Holy Land geographical descriptions and guides, which had begun in the fourth century and experienced an accelerated phase of development at the time when the Holy City returned once more to Christian hands.

Introduction In 1865, Titus Tobler published an edition of a short anonymous guide to Jerusalem dating from around the time of the First Crusade, which he named Innominatus I.1 In his discussion of the text, he remarked on its general similarity to the early fourth-century guide known as the Bordeaux Itinerary (Itinerarium Burdigalense). The borrowings from the earlier text, which include a number of direct quotations, were also highlighted in 1988 by the late John Wilkinson in a book of translations of twelfth-century pilgrim guides.2 More recently, in the context of a detailed study analysing the relationship of Innominatus I to two chronicles of the First Crusade with which it is often associated, the Gesta Francorum and Peter Tudebode’s De Hiersolymitano itinere, Jesse Keskiaho has been able to demonstrate that the common linking of the guide with these chronicle texts is not fortuitous, but rather the continuation of an association that seems already to have existed between

I am most grateful to the staff of the various libraries who responded so helpfully and efficiently to my queries and requests for images of the MSS presented in this article, as well as to the readers who commented on an earlier draft. 1 Titus Tobler, ed., Theoderici Libellus de locis sanctis editus circa a.d. 1172, cui accedunt breviores aliquot descriptiones Terrae Sanctae (St Gallen and Paris, 1865), 113–18, 238–47. 2 John Wilkinson, with Joyce Hill and W. F. Ryan, Jerusalem Pilgrimage 1099–1185, Hakluyt Society, series 2, 167 (London, 1988), 4–6. 3

4

DENYS PRINGLE

Innominatus I and an earlier chronicle from which both the Gesta Francorum and De Hiersolymitano itinere were developed.3 As Wilkinson noticed, a more general family resemblance, though without direct quotations, may also be detected between the Bordeaux Itinerary and some other early twelfth-century pilgrim guides. It appears, in effect, that, despite being already nearly eight centuries old by the time of the First Crusade, this guide – along with others from the later fourth to eighth centuries – was still considered sufficiently relevant to be quarried for information by the compilers of early twelfth-century guides, despite the dramatic changes to Jerusalem’s townscape that had occurred during the intervening period. These new guides were in their turn to generate further families of guides, updating, revising and expanding on the earlier texts wherever necessary. The purpose of the present article is to present new editions and discussion of a number of short pilgrimage guides and itineraries dating, like Innominatus I, from around the time of the capture of Jerusalem by the First Crusade and the periods immediately preceding and following it. In the case of Innominatus I itself, the new critical edition by Keskiaho provides a sound basis for further discussion and comparison. In a number of other cases, however, new editions have long been overdue, not least because the existing ones are often based on no more than a single manuscript. Although the following discussion of the texts is presented in a roughly chronological order, since the period over which they were produced was relatively narrow and their dating often imprecise, in places I have opted for an order that best serves to illustrate how a series of texts may have developed, rather than one that is strictly chronological. The need for such flexibility is illustrated in the case of the Descriptio Ierusalem, where the filiation and chronology of the texts do not always appear to be precisely in step with one another. A general comparison between the content and structure of the various texts illustrating their possible relationship to one another and to the fourth-century Bordeaux pilgrim’s description of Jerusalem is set out in Table 1.

The Bordeaux Itinerary (ad 333) The Itinerarium Burdigalense sets out a detailed itinerary, mostly by road, followed by an unnamed writer and his companions when travelling on pilgrimage from Bordeaux to Jerusalem through Constantinople and returning to Milan in ad 333.4 In the central section, the writer presents a description of the holy places of Jerusalem 3

Jesse Keskiaho, “On the Transmission of Peter Tudebode’s De Hierosolymitano itinere and Related Chronicles, with a Critical Edition of Descriptio sanctorum locorum Hierusalem,” Revue d’histoire des textes 10 (2015): 69–102. 4 Itinerarium Burdigalense, ed. P. Geyer and O. Cuntz, Itineraria et alia geographica, CCSL 175 (Turnhout, 1965), 1–26. For a translation with commentary, see John Wilkinson, Egeria’s Travels to the Holy Land, rev. ed. (Jerusalem and Warminster, 1981), 153–63.

Temple area: Solomon’s chamber Zechariah’s slaying Stone where Jews lament House of Hezekiah

(see below)

(Mount Sion) House of Caiaphas Flagellation

Pilate’s Praetorium

Siloam Pool

Mount Sion House of Caiaphas Flagellation column David’s palace Synagogue

Pilate’s Praetorium

Innominatus I (1099–c. 1105)

Temple area: Solomon’s cavern Pinacle Solomon’s palace Cisterns Zechariah’s slaying Statues of Hadrian Rock where Jews lament House of Hezekiah

Sheep-pool and Bethesda pool

Bordeaux Itinerary (333)

(see below)

(see below)

Templum Domini: Presentation Jesus’ footprint Jacob’s dream and altar (continues below)

Enter by David’s Gate

Descriptio Ierusalem B and C (1099–c. 1110)

(see below)

(see below)

Templum Domini: Altar on rock Jesus’ presentation and teaching

Enter by David’s Gate

Gates of Jerusalem

De Situ urbis (1100–5)

(see below)

(see below)

(see below)

Enter by David’s Gate

Mount Joy

Qualiter sita (1100–5)

(see below)

(see below)

(see below)

Enter by David’s Gate

Descriptio Ierusalem A and D (1099–c. 1120)

Table 1: Comparison of the structural layouts of some early Crusader guides to Jerusalem and the Bordeaux Itinerary

Hospital/church of St. John

(see below)

Templum Domini (cont.): Templum Domini: Former location of Cave (Holy of Holies): Aaron’s rod, tablets of annunciation to law, gold candelabra, Zechariah, pardoning Ark of Covenant. of adulteress Confessio (cave): pardoning of adulteress, annunciation to Zechariah

Church where Helena found the Cross, being built

(see below)

Templum Domini: Presentation

Altar of St. Mary

(see below)

St. Mary Latin

Holy Sepulchre: Rotunda Tomb Calvary/Golgotha

(see below)

De Situ urbis (1100–5)

(see below)

Holy Sepulchre complex: Golgotha/Calvary Tomb Constantine’s church Centre of world Prison

Holy Sepulchre complex: Golgotha Tomb Constantine’s church Baptistery

Descriptio Ierusalem B and C (1099–c. 1110)

St. Mary Latin: her house and where the Three Marys stood before the Cross

Innominatus I (1099–c. 1105)

Bordeaux Itinerary (333)

Descriptio Ierusalem A and D (1099–c. 1120)

St. Mary Latin St. Mary Magdalene

Hospital/church of St. John

Place where St. Helena found the Cross

Templum Domini: Templum Domini: Cave containing Presentation tabernacle, Aaron’s Confessio (cave): where rod, head of Zechariah Jesus slept, Ark of son of Barachiah, Covenant, Aaron’s Jacob’s altar, tablets of rod, tablets of law, law, Ark of Covenant, manna, candelabra manna Annunciation to Golden lamp Zechariah

Porta Speciosa

Place where St. Helena found the Cross

St. Mary Latin

Holy Sepulchre complex: Holy Sepulchre complex: Rotunda Centre of world Tomb Prison, flagellation, Centre of world stripping, crowning Calvary/Golgotha with thorns Prison Calvary/Golgotha Column (of flagellation)

Qualiter sita (1100–5)

Tomb of Isaiah

(see above)

Tombs of Isaiah and Hezekiah

Mount of Olives: Teaching of apostles and Constantine’s church (Pater Noster) Transfiguration

Mount of Olives: Ascension Pater Noster

Valley of Jehoshaphat: Mary’s tomb Gethsemane: Jesus’ arrest

Valley of Jehoshaphat: Mary’s tomb Last Judgement Gethsemane: Jesus’ arrest Palm tree

Valley of Jehoshaphat: Jesus’ arrest Palm tree

(see below)

[Gethsemane:] Jesus’ prayer (see below)

Sheep-pool

(see below)

(see below)

(see below)

Sheel-pool

Sheep-pool

Mount of Olives: Ascension Pater Noster

Valley of Jehoshaphat: Church and tomb of St. Mary Gethsemane: Jesus’ prayer, arrest

(see below)

Mount of Olives: Ascension Pater Noster

Valley of Jehoshaphat: Mary’s tomb Gethsemane: Jesus’ arrest, prayer

(see below)

St. Mary Magdalene

Sheel-pool

St. Anne

Sheep-pool

Porta Principalis

St. Mary (Cradle of Christ)

St. Anne

St. Anne

Temple of Solomon

Porta Aurea

St. Mary (Cradle of Christ)

Solomon’s Palace

Descriptio Ierusalem A and D (1099–c. 1120)

Temple of Solomon

St. Mary (Cradle of Christ)

Qualiter sita (1100–5)

Temple of Solomon

De Situ urbis (1100–5) Porta Speciosa/Aurea

Descriptio Ierusalem B and C (1099–c. 1110)

Porticus Speciosa

Innominatus I (1099–c. 1105)

Mount of Olives (mention Mount of Olives: of gate to) Pater Noster Ascension

Bordeaux Itinerary (333)

(see below)

(Transjordan:) Elijah’s hillock Mt Sinai

(Transjordan:) Elijah’s hillock

(see below) Mount Sion: Mary’s Dormition Last Supper Galilee Pentecost Doubting of Thomas

Mount Sion: Solomon’s church Last Supper Pentecost Mary’s Dormition and burial in Jehoshaphat

(see below)

Bethany: Rasing of Lazarus Church of St. Mary Magdalene

Descriptio Ierusalem A and D (1099–c. 1120)

Sea of Galilee

(see below)

Bethany: Tomb of Lazarus

Qualiter sita (1100–5)

(see below) St. Mary of Mount Sion: Post-resurrection appearances Last supper Pentecost St. Stephen’s chapel

(see below)

(see below)

(see below)

De Situ urbis (1100–5)

Mt Tabor Mount Sion: Mary’s Dormition and burial in Jehoshaphat Last Supper Pentecost

(see below)

River Jordan: Baptism

River Jordan: Baptism

Jericho Sycamore of Zaccheus Elisha’s spring

Jericho: Sycamore of Zaccheus Elisha’s spring House of Rahab Etc.

Bethany: Raising of Lazarus

Gethsemane: Jesus’ prayer Bethphage

Descriptio Ierusalem B and C (1099–c. 1110)

Dead Sea

Bethany: Tomb of Lazarus

Innominatus I (1099–c. 1105)

Bethany: Tomb of Lazarus

Bordeaux Itinerary (333)

Rachel’s tomb

Bordeaux Itinerary (333)

Sychar: Jacob’s well [Bethel:] Jacob’s struggle with angel

Sichem: Joseph’s tomb and farm

Siloam Pool

Innominatus I (1099–c. 1105)

Hospital

St. Mary Latin

Holy Sepulchre complex: Tomb Centre of world Prison, flagellation column, division of clothing, crowning with thorns Calvary/Golgotha Place where St. Helena found the Cross Altar of Mary and Mary Magdalene

St. Stephen’s martyrdom to north of city

Akeldama Peter’s tears Galilee Siloam Pool

Descriptio Ierusalem B and C (1099–c. 1110) Akeldama St. Peter at Cock-crow Siloam Pool

De Situ urbis (1100–5)

Qualiter sita (1100–5) Peter’s tears Siloam Pool Akeldama

Descriptio Ierusalem A and D (1099–c. 1120)

Bethlehem: Ch. of Nativity Crib

Innominatus I (1099–c. 1105)

Hebron: Tekoa [Hebron]: Tombs of patriarchs and Tombs of patriarchs and wives wives Mountain of Abraham’s sacrifice of Isaac

Terebinth (Mamre): Constantine’s church

Philip’s fountain at Bethasora

Bethlehem: Constantine’s ch. of Nativity Tombs of Jesse, David, Solomon, etc.

Bordeaux Itinerary (333)

De Situ urbis (1100–5)

Mount of Olives: Chapel of Ascension Church of Pater Noster

Gethsemane: Cave-church of Judas’s betrayal Chapel where Jesus prayed

St. Mary in Jehoshaphat Tomb of St. Mary

Bethlehem: Bethlehem: Crib Ch. of St. Mary Well of Star Cave of Nativity Table where Mary and Table where Mary and Magi ate Magi ate Innocents Well of the Star Tombs of Jerome, Paula Tombs of Paula, and Eustochium Eustochium, Jerome Innocents

Descriptio Ierusalem B and C (1099–c. 1110) (see below)

Qualiter sita (1100–5)

Hebron: Tombs of patriarchs and wives

Bethlehem: Crib Well of Star Table where Mary and Magi ate Bath, bed Innocents Tomb of Jerome

Descriptio Ierusalem A and D (1099–c. 1120)

Bordeaux Itinerary (333)

Innominatus I (1099–c. 1105)

Quarantine

Quarantine

Dead Sea

Jericho River Jordan: Ch. of St. John Baptist (Greek) Baptism Dead Sea

Bethany Tomb of Lazarus Church of St. Mary Magdalene

Bethphage:

De Situ urbis (1100–5)

Jericho River Jordan

Descriptio Ierusalem B and C (1099–c. 1110)

St. Stephen’s martyrdom

Akeldama Siloam Pool Peter’s tears

Mount Sion: Dormition of St. Mary

Bethlehem: Nativity Well of the Star

Quarantine River Jordan

Qualiter sita (1100–5)

Mt Tabor Nazareth Sea of Galilee Tabgha

Jericho Quarantine

River Jordan

Descriptio Ierusalem A and D (1099–c. 1120)

12

DENYS PRINGLE

as they would have appeared less than a decade after the adoption of Christianity as the official religion of the eastern Roman Empire, when Constantine’s churches at the Holy Sepulchre, the Mount of Olives (that later known as the Pater Noster), Bethlehem and the oak or terebinth of Mamre (Rāmat al-Khalīl) had only recently been completed. Many of the other structures mentioned in the text, however, most notably the Temple, lay in ruins and it is unclear exactly what, for example, pilgrims would have been shown to represent the remains of the house of Caiaphas and David’s palace on Mount Sion or Pilate’s Praetorium closer to Golgotha. The Bordeaux pilgrim’s tour of the city begins at the Temple, where he describes first the pools on its northern side before entering the precinct to pick out amongst the ruins such features as the pinnacle where Christ was tempted, Solomon’s supposed palace below it, the blood-stained paving before the altar where Zechariah son of Barachiah was slain, and the pierced rock which Jews came to each year to anoint and lament over. He then proceeds by way of the Siloam Pool to Mount Sion, mentioning there the house of Caiaphas, the column of the Flagellation, the remains of David’s palace and one remaining synagogue. From there he heads towards the north or Nāblus gate (porta Neapolitana) and, leaving the Praetorium to the right, arrives at Golgotha, where he describes the Lord’s tomb, Constantine’s new church and the baptistery. Next comes the valley of Jehoshaphat (Iosafath), containing the place of Judas’s betrayal, the palm tree from which children took palm fronds on Christ’s entry into Jerusalem, and further down the valley the rock-cut tombs supposed to be those of Isaiah and Hezekiah. He then ascends the Mount of Olives to Constantine’s new church (later known as the Pater Noster) at the place where Jesus had taught the apostles and the nearby hillock, identified at that time as the place of the Christ’s Transfiguration but by the end of the century as that of the Ascension. From there he continues east to Bethany, Jericho and the River Jordan. Returning again to Jerusalem, the pilgrim then sets out on a second excursion leading south past Rachel’s tomb to Constantine’s new church in Bethlehem, the spring near Bayt Sūr (Bethasora) where Philip baptized the Ethiopian eunuch, the terebinth or oak at Mamre, where another new church had recently been built, and the tombs of the Patriarchs in Hebron.

Innominatus I – Descriptio sanctorum locorum Hierusalem (c. 1105) The text that Tobler called Innominatus I is often found in association with chronicles of the First Crusade, in particular the anonymous Gesta Francorum and Peter Tudebode’s De Hiersolymitano itinere, both most likely derived from a chronicle written between 1099 and c. 1106.5 Tobler based his edition on three manuscripts, but without distinguishing which elements came from which.6 Another edition by 5

Keskiaho, “Transmission,” 69. British Library (BL), MS Arundel Lat. 326, fols. 56–57; BL, MS Titus D. III, fol. 73; Montpellier, Bibliothèque Universitaire Historique de Médecine, MS 142 lat, fol. 67; ed. Tobler, Theoderici 6

ITINERARIA TERRAE SANCTAE MINORA III

13

Roger Mynors with a translation by Rosalind Hill was published as an appendix to an edition of the Gesta Francorum in 1962.7 This was based on a single Vatican manuscript,8 with some minor alternative readings provided from other sources;9 however, this offers an incomplete version of the text.10 Keskiaho’s fuller version, which he refers to as Descriptio sanctorum locorum Hierusalem, appeared in 2015 and is based on what he has identified as the earliest versions of the text.11 Innominatus I follows very closely the Jerusalem tour established in the Bordeaux Itinerary, to the extent of quoting from it verbatim in places; however, it also makes some changes to the order for visiting the sites, besides including some more up-to-date information. Even so, a number of anachronisms remain from the fourth-century source, including the passage about the Jews visiting the Temple rock, which since the late seventh century had been enclosed within the Qubbat al-Sakhra, and a reference to Constantine’s church of the Holy Sepulchre, which had been destroyed in 1009. Like the Bordeaux pilgrim, Innominatus I begins at the Temple and proceeds to Mount Sion before describing the church of the Holy Sepulchre. He also mentions the Praetorium between Sion and Golgotha, but mistakenly places it “at the Neapolis Gate” (ad portam Neapolitanam), rather than “to the right as one goes to the Neapolis Gate” (euntibus ad portam Neapolitanam ad partem dextram).12 This was evidently the gate facing north towards Nāblus (Neapolis), rather than a gate in the south wall as some scholars have argued.13 Two new traditions mentioned in the text are the association with Golgotha/Calvary of the burial of Adam and of Abraham’s sacrifice of Isaac. After the Holy Sepulchre complex, Innominatus I departs from the Bordeaux pilgrim’s itinerary and, after mentioning St. Mary Latin, a Carolingian Benedictine house re-established south of the Holy Sepulchre by Amalfitans in the mid eleventh century,14 returns to the Temple area to mention Jesus’ presentation in the Templum Domini, Solomon’s Temple (al-Aqṣā mosque), Libellus, 113–18; reprinted with Italian translation by Sabino de Sandoli, Itinera Hierosolymitama Crucesignatorum (saec. xii–xiii), 4 vols., Studium Biblicum Franciscanum, Collectio Maior 24 (Jerusalem, 1978–84), 3:1–5; trans. Aubrey Stewart, Anonymous Pilgrims, I–VIII (11th and 12th Centuries), PPTS 6 (London, 1894), 1–5. 7 GF, 98–101. An alternative translation, highlighting passages from the Bordeaux Itinerary, is also provided by Wilkinson, Jerusalem Pilgrimage, 87–89. 8 Vatican, Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana (BAV), MS Reg. lat. 572 (12c.), fols. 64v–66v. 9 Vatican, BAV, Reg. lat., 641 (12c.); Escorial, Real biblioteca, D.III.11 (12c.); Cambridge, Gonville and Caius College Library, MS 162/83 (14c.), fols. 139–140r. 10 Keskiaho, “Transmission,” 84. 11 Keskiaho, “Transmission,” 98–102. 12 Itinerarium Burdigalense, ed. Geyer and Cuntz, Itineraria et alia geographica, CCSL 175:16–17. 13 Klaus Bieberstein, “Die Porta Neapolitana, die Nea Maria und die Nea Sophia in der Neapolis von Jerusalem,” Zeitschrift des Deutschen Palästina-Vereins 105 (1989): 110–22; Klaus Bieberstein and Hanswulf Bloedhorn, Grundzüge der Baugeschichte vom Chalkolithikum bis zur Frühzeit der osmanischen Herrschaft, 3 vols., Beihefte zum Tübinger Atlas des Vorderen Orients, series B, no. 100 (Wiesbaden, 1994), 2:245, 271; cf. Hans Eberhard Mayer, “Die porta nova de Belcayra im Jerusalem der Kreuzfahrer,” Zeitschrift des Deutschen Palästina-Vereins 119 (2003): 183–90. 14 See Pringle, Churches, 3:236–37.

14

DENYS PRINGLE

the Porticus Speciosa that separated them, and the Sheep-pool. The term Porticus Speciosa appears to be a confusion of the Beautiful Gate (porta speciosa) where Peter cured the lame man (Acts 3. 1–10) and Solomon’s portico (porticus … quae appellatur Salomonis) mentioned in the next verse (Acts 3.11). He then resumes the Bordeaux pilgrim’s itinerary to the Mount of Olives and valley of Jehoshaphat, albeit in a different order, mentioning at the former the Pater Noster and Ascension respectively rather than the Teaching and Transfiguration, and including at the latter the tomb of the Virgin Mary and Jesus’ prayers in Gethsemane. Like the Bordeaux pilgrim, Innominatus I continues east to Bethany, Jericho and the River Jordan, but then returns to Mount Sion and the Pool of Siloam, which the Bordeaux pilgrim had described earlier. After this Innominatus I follows the earlier pilgrim’s itinerary to Bethlehem and Hebron, albeit omitting Philip’s fountain and Abraham’s oak at Mamre. Both Titus Tobler and Reinhold Röhricht dated Innominatus I to c. 1098,15 though Wilkinson opted for a date of 1101–4, after the fall of Jerusalem in July 1099, on account of its mention of the Temple.16 His argument is not conclusive, however, since much of what the text says about the Temple is taken from the Bordeaux Itinerary and the parts in the Innominatus that appear to refer, albeit obliquely, to the Aqṣā mosque (Templum Salomonis), the Dome of the Rock (Templum Domini) and the arcade (porticus, or qanāṭir) between them (Maqām al-Nabī) could equally well apply to the period before the Crusader conquest, when those structures would have been clearly visible to non-Muslims from the Mount of Olives. The expression Templum Domini does not, in any case, imply that the building had yet been made into a church, as the same expression denoting the Lord’s Temple occurs some 70 times in the Vulgate version of the Old Testament as well as in Luke 1.9. Innominatus I therefore seems likely to have been an existing guide, whose association with the Gesta Francorum and Tudebode serves as a terminus ante quem for its initial composition but which, as Keskiaho has shown, evolved along with the chronicle texts to which it was subsquently linked between the years 1098 and 1105.

De Situ Urbis Ierusalem et de locis sanctis infra ipsam urbem sive circumiacentibus (c. 1100–1105) A short description of the city of Jerusalem and the holy places in and round about it was first published in 1860 by Melchior de Vogüé on the basis of a single twelfthcentury manuscript in the Bibliothèque nationale in Paris (P).17 The same codex also 15 Titus Tobler, Bibliographia Geographica Palaestinae (Leipzig, 1867), 13; Reinhold Röhricht, Bibliotheca Geographica Palaestinae (Berlin, 1890), 28–29, no, 69; 16 Wilkinson, Jerusalem Pilgrimage, 4. 17 Paris, Bibliothèque nationale de France (BnF), MS Latin 5129, fols. 70ra–71ra; Melchior de Vogüé, Les Églises de la Terre Sainte (Paris, 1860; repr. Toronto, 1973), 412–14, cf. 408–9.

ITINERARIA TERRAE SANCTAE MINORA III

15

contains another somewhat longer description of the Holy Land, entitled Descriptio locorum circa Hierusalem adiacentium, which de Vogüé also published, placing it immediately after De Situ Urbis as though the two texts formed part of the same work.18 In the manuscript, however, these texts not only appear in the reverse order to that in which de Vogüé presents them, but are also separated by other works, indicating that, apart from certain aspects of their subject matter, there is no direct connection between them. Indeed, as de Vogüé himself suspected, the Descriptio is now generally recognized as belonging to the group of descriptions of the Holy Land associated with Rorgo Fretellus of Antioch (c. 1137), though whether or not he was actually its author remains unclear.19 Nonetheless, Röhricht listed both of de Vogüé’s texts together as two parts of a single item in his bibliography of Holy Land geography20 and de Vogüé’s combined edition has also been reprinted with a parallel Italian translation by Sabino de Sandoli21 and translated into English by James Rose Macpherson.22 John Wilkinson was also misled into placing his translations of both texts together, despite recognizing that they were probably separate works.23 In preparing his edition, de Vogüé also referred to some other descriptions of Jerusalem found in other manuscripts and included additional material from one of them in a series of footnotes.24 This text, however, is simply a version of Innominatus I, while the others include a thirteenth-century French version of the same text25 and two examples of the description of the Holy Land given in the Rothelin version of the Old French continuation of William of Tyre’s chronicle.26 Of the alternative manuscript versions of de Situ Urbis suggested by Röhricht, one is simply a French version of Innominatus VII27 and another a different text

18

Paris, BnF, MS Latin 5129, fols. 54va–65rb; de Vogüé, Églises, 414–33. See Petrus Cornelius Boeren, Rorgo Fretellus et sa description de la Terre Sainte: Histoire et édition du texte, (Amsterdam, 1980), xxxi; Paolo Trovato, “Sulla genealogia e la cronologia di alcuni testi di età crociata: Rorgo Fretellus e dintorni (l’alte Compendium, Eugesippus, Innominatus VI o pseudo-Beda, la Descriptio locorum circa Hierusalem adiacentium),” Annali Online di Ferrara – Lettere 1 (2012): 247–68, at 255–65. 20 Röhricht, Bibliotheca Geographica, 35–36, no. 86; cf. Tobler, Bibliographia Geographica, 14–15. 21 De Sandoli, Itinera, 2:73–117. 22 Fetellus, trans. James Rose Macpherson, PPTS 5 (London, 1896), 1–7 23 Wilkinson, Jerusalem Pilgrimage, 177–80, cf. 11, 352–53. 24 Paris, BnF, MS Latin 5135A, fols. 37v–39r; cf. de Vogüé, Églises, 409 n.1. 25 French: Paris, BnF, MS Fr. 24208–9 (Fonds de la Sorbonne, 385 and 387), fol. 1ra–1vb; cf. Röhricht, Bibliotheca, 28, no. 69; Peter W. Edbury, “The French Translation of William of Tyre’s Historia: The Manuscript Tradition,” Crusades 6 (2007): 69–105, at 76, 96 (F51); repr. in idem, Law and History in the Latin East (Farnham, 2014), ch. viii. 26 Paris, BnF, MS Fr. 22495 (formerly Fonds de la Sorbonne, 383); MS Fr. 22496–7 (formerly Fonds de la Vallière, 10); cf. Edbury, “French Translation,” 76, 97 (F61–62). 27 London, MS Royal 13 A XIV, fols. 277r–278v; see Denys Pringle, “Itineraria Terrae Sanctae minora [I]: Innominatus VII and its Variants,” Crusades 17 (2018): 39–89. 19

16

DENYS PRINGLE

altogether.28 The other two, however, in Brussels and London, are indeed of de Situ Urbis. Three surviving manuscripts of this text may therefore be identified: B L P

Brussels, KBR, MS 9823–34, fols. 57ra–58va. 1164– London, British Library, MS Harley 3113, fols. 126ra–127rb. 1125/75 Paris, Bibliothèque nationale de France, MS Latin 5129, fols. 1151/53– 70ra–71ra

The British Library text of de Situ Urbis (L) comes at the end of a volume of works by Augustine produced in the area of northern France and the Low Countries sometime in the second or third quarter of the twelfth century.29 The other version identified by Röhricht is found in a twelfth-century volume in the KBR in Brussels (B).30 This contains an assortment of works, including the chronicle of Fulcher of Chartres (fols. 59r–123r) and a celebrated colour map of Jerusalem (fol. 157r)31 as well as, like P, the Crusading chronicle of Robert the Monk (fols. 2r–57r), a list of the popes, cardinals and deacons of Rome and their churches with an account of the Lateran and its sanctuaries (fols. 142r–146r), an account of the miracles occurring at the time of St. Heribert of Cologne (d. 1021) (fols. 146r–147r), a verse history of Muḥammad by Hildebert of Le Mans (c. 1055–1133) (fols. 148v–156v) and the Descriptio locorum circa Hierusalem adiacentium (fols. 127r–139v). As in P, the latter is presented in B quite independently of de Situ Urbis and is followed by a short chronicle of the reign of Baldwin I (fols. 138v–139v) and lists of the bishops and patriarchs of Jerusalem and the rulers of the Holy Land down to present times (fols. 139v–140v). One other item in P (fols. 71–86) that is not found in B is de Via Hierosolimitana of Gilo of Paris.32 As de Vogüé indicated, the inclusion of Patriarch Fulcher (1146–57), King Baldwin III (1144–62) and Count Raymond II of Tripoli (1151–87) in the lists of prelates and rulers found in P suggests a date – or strictly speaking a terminus post quem – of 1151/57 for its production.33 The same argument also applies to B, which contains the same lists. In the case of P, however, this date-range may be narrowed 28 London, BL, MS Additions 8927, fol. 235 (recte 135?) (Epistola fratris B. de Aqua Bella de Saracenis, Mamolino duce, victis); cf. List of Additions made to the Collections in the British Museum in the Year 1832 (London, 1834), 3. 29 London, BL, MS Harley 3113, fols. 126ra–127rb; cf. Humphrey Wanley et al., A Catalogue of the Harleian Manuscripts in the British Museum, 4 vols. (London, 1808–12; repr. New York, 1973), 3:4. There is also a full description in the British Library’s online catalogue of illuminated MSS. 30 Brussels, KBR, MS 9823–34, fols. 57ra–58va; cf. Joseph Van den Gheyn, Catalogue des manuscrits de la Bibliothèque royale de Belgique 2 (Brussels, 1927), 295–97, no. 7431 (9823–34); Roger Calcoen, Inventaire des manuscrits scientifiques de la Bibliothèque royale Albert Ier, 3 vols. (Brussels, 1965–75), 2:61, no. 257 (9823–34). 31 Kenneth Nebenzahl, Maps of the Bible Lands: Images of Terra Sancta through Two Millennia (London, 1986), 32, fig. 9. 32 See The Historia Vie Hierosolimitane of Gilo of Paris, ed. C. W. Grocock and J. E. Siberry, Oxford Medieval Texts (Oxford, 1997), xxxix–xl. 33 De Vogüé, Églises, 408–9.

ITINERARIA TERRAE SANCTAE MINORA III

17

to 1151/53, as the original list of popes seems to have ended with Eugenius III (1145–53) and to have been subsequently extended in a different hand.34 The terminus post quem for B, however, must be placed a little later, as it also contains the text of a letter from Aimery, patriarch of Antioch, to King Louis VII of France, dated 1164, announcing Nūr al-Dīn’s capture of Ḥārim (fols. 125v–126v).35 The list of pontiffs (fol. 141r–141v) also appears to have been extended in a different hand, though from a scanned monochrome microfilm it is hard to tell whether the additions begin with Hadrian IV (1154–59), Alexander III (1159–81) or Urban III (1185–87). The texts of de Situ Urbis found in B, L and P are remarkably consistent, such variations as there are being mostly the result of slight differences in the use of scribal conventions, word order or spelling. The particularly high correlation between texts in B and P also appears to reflect the general similarity between the two codices that has already been noted by other scholars, supporting the likelihood that both were products of the abbey of Saint-Amand-les-Eaux.36 The description of Jerusalem and the places around it is set out in de Situ Urbis in a form that could quite easily have served as a guide or itinerary; but it is also clearly a personal account. At the beginning, for example, the author states, “We entered the Holy City through David’s Gate,” and comments that the Tower of David lay on the right-hand side “as we entered” (nobis introentibus) (para. 1). A little later he also remarks that the Lord’s Sepulchre lay on the left “as we go to the Temple” (nobis euntibus ad Templum) (3). After this the text becomes less personal, though the mention of the sweetness and coldness of the water from the Well of the Star in Bethlehem (10) and of Greek monks in the monastery of St. John the Baptist beside the Jordan (14) are very possibly personal recollections. Despite this, however, it is also clear that the text draws on earlier sources, including the Bordeaux Itinerary, as is apparent from the beginning, where instead of heading directly, as one might expect, from David’s Gate to the Holy Sepulchre the writer takes us first to the Temple (2), before returning to the Holy Sepulchre and the nearby churches of St. Helena/Holy Cross, St. Mary Latin and the hospital and church of St. John (3–4); but the account then moves back again to the Templum Domini, Palatium Salomonis, St. Anne’s church and the Sheep-pool (5–7). Thereafter the itinerary becomes somewhat idiosyncratic (see Table 1), and, instead of proceeding like Innominatus I and most other texts of this period through the east gate to the Mount of Olives and Jericho, it moves directly to Mount Sion (8), the sites around it (9) and Bethlehem (10–11), before then returning to the valley of 34 Charles Samaran and Robert Marichal, Catalogue des manuscrits en écriture latine portant des indications de date ou de copiste 2: Bibliothèque nationale, Fonds latin (Paris, 1962), 261, pl. lxxv; The Historia Iherosolimitana of Robert the Monk, ed. D. Kempf and Marcus H. Bull (Woodbridge, 2013), lii–liii. 35 Cf. GN, 36–37, 71; cf. PL 201:1403–7; RRH, 106, no. 405. 36 See GN, 37, 71; André Boutemy, “Le recueil poétique du manuscrit latin 5129 de la Bibliothèque nationale de Paris,” Scriptorium 2 (1948): 47–55, at 53–54.

18

DENYS PRINGLE

Jehoshaphat (12), the Mount of Olives (13) and the way east from there to Jericho and the River Jordan (13–15). De Vogüé dated the text of de Situ Urbis to no later than 1130,37 while Röhricht followed Tobler in dating it and the Descriptio to c. 1150.38 Wilkinson argued that it was probably written before 1114, “at which date the rock in the centre of the Temple of the Lord was paved over,” but suggested that it could have dated from around the time of Saewulf (1102–3).39 This second suggestion seems very plausible. The altar that the author saw standing on the rock in the Templum Domini is likely to have been set up at the time of Duke Godfrey, when canons were installed in the newly converted church. Building work on the new sanctuary was recorded in 1101 in an inscription seen by the pilgrim Theoderic in 1172.40 The date when the exposed rock was paved over could therefore have taken place well before 1114. Other pointers to an early twelfth-century date for de Situ are the pilgrims’ entrance into Jerusalem by David’s Gate rather than St. Stephen’s, which it states was rarely opened (1). Saewulf had also entered Jerusalem by this gate,41 but by the middle of the twelfth century pilgrimage guides were identifying St. Stephen’s Gate as the principal entry point for pilgrims coming from Jaffa or Acre, a change reflected in the archaeological evidence for a progressive refurbishment and strengthening of St. Stephen’s Gate beginning around 1115.42 The description of the church of the Holy Sepulchre as a rotunda with four doors facing east and Calvary lying outside it (3),43 as well as the reference to the great church (magna ecclesia) where St. Helena found the cross as being under construction (4) also suggest a date within the first decade of the twelfth century,44 while the references to other churches and chapels such as St. Anne’s, the Pater Noster, the Ascension and those in Bethany and Gethsemane are also consistent with the accounts of them given by Saewulf in 1102–3.

Qualiter sita est civitas Ierusalem (c. 1100–05) This short guide occupies two sides of a single folio at the end of the Crusade chronicle of Baldric of Bourgueil in a thirteenth-century volume possibly originating 37

De Vogüé, Églises, 408–9. Tobler, Bibliographia Geographica Palaestinae, 14; Röhricht, Bibliotheca Geographica Palaestinae, 35. 39 Jerusalem Pilgrimage, 11, 352. 40 R. B. C. Huygens, ed., Peregrinationes tres, CCCM 139 (Turnhout, 1994), 26–27, 161–62; Pringle, Churches 3: 400–401. 41 Huygens, Peregrinationes tres, CCCM 139:64. 42 Pringle, Churches, 3:306–10. 43 See Pringle, Churches, 3:12–18, figs 1b–2. 44 On the chapel of St. Helena, see Pringle, Churches, 3:44–46. Abbot Daniel mentions the existence of a “small church” in 1106–8 (trans. W. F. Ryan, in Wilkinson, Jerusalem Pilgrimage, 131), but it is uncertain whether he was referring to the cave-chapel of the Invention of the Cross, which dates from the eleventh century, or the larger chapel dedicated to St. Helena referred to here. 38

ITINERARIA TERRAE SANCTAE MINORA III

19

in the region of Champagne and now in the Bibliothèque nationale de France.45 An edition of it, published by Titus Tobler and Augustus Molinier in 1879,46 was reprinted with an Italian translation by de Sandoli in 1978 and translated into English by Wilkinson in 1988.47 The guide begins with an exhortation similar to that given by Innominatus I, advising anyone wanting to go to Jerusalem to direct their path towards the east and thus, with God’s guidance, reach the holy city. It is one of very few guides, however, to mention Mountjoy (mons Gaudii), from which pilgrims aproaching Jerusalem would catch their first sight of the city (para. 1).48 Although it locates this a mile west of the city, it should evidently be identified as the ridge known as Raʾs al-Mashārif, which lies to the north just south of the point at which the road from Nāblus was joined by another road from the north-west, coming from Jaffa via Ramla-Lydda.49 Another point of difference from the Bordeaux Itinerary, Innominatus I and de Situ is that the guide takes the pilgrim from David’s Gate straight to the church of the Holy Sepulchre rather than to the Temple, though it is possible that the church’s appellation Templum sancti Sepulchri preserves a trace of the earlier textual tradition (2). There it describes the rotunda, the aedicule containing the Tomb of Christ, Calvary-Golgotha and the sites associated with the Passion, as well as mentioning St. Mary Latin and the place where Helena found the Cross. The Temple area is entered through the Porta Speciosa (4), the “Beautiful Gate” of Acts 3.1–10, which is here to be identified as the principal west gate (Bāb al-Silsila), in contrast to Innominatus I, who, as mentioned, appears to have confused the Porta Speciosa with Solomon’s portico (porticus Salomomis) of Acts 3.11. Inside the Templum Domini it identifies the cave beneath the Rock as the Holy of Holies, containing the objects associated with it as described in Hebrews 9.3–5. It seems unlikely that any of these relics actually remained, as another contemporary source states explicitly that they did not, having been removed by Nehemiah (or more correctly Jeremiah).50 The itinerary then proceeds, like Innominatus I, to the Sheep45 BnF, MS Arsenal, 1161 (formerly 102), fols. 46ra–48vb. On the MS, see Henry Martin, Catalogue des Manuscrits de la Bibliothèque de l’Arsenal, 9 vols., Catalogue général des Manuscrits des Bibliothèques publiques de France (Paris, 1885–95), 2:315; Steven Biddlecombe, ed., The Historia Ierosolimitana of Baldric of Bourgueil (Woodbridge, 2014), xcii. I am most grateful to Dr Biddlecombe for his noble assistance in obtaining an image of this MS while convalescing from a bout of coronavirus (COVID–19). 46 Titus Tobler and Augustus Molinier (eds.), Itinera Hierosolymitana et Descriptiones Terrae Sanctae Bellis Sacris Anteriora 1, Publications de la Société de l’Orient Latin, Série géographique 1 (Geneva, 1879), lii–liv, 344–49. 47 De Sandoli, Itinera, 1:1–5; Wilkinson, Jerusalem Pilgrimage, 4–6, 90–91, 350. 48 Others include: Abbot Daniel 9, trans. W. F. Ryan in Wilkinson, Jerusalem Pilgrimage, 127; and Theoderic 41, ed. Huygens, Peregrinationes tres, CCCM 139:186. 49 See Benjamin Z. Kedar, “Jerusalem’s two Montes Gaudii,” in Crusader Landscapes in the Medieval Levant: The Archaeology and History of the Latin East, ed. Micaela Sinibaldi, Kevin Lewis, Balázs Major and Jennifer A. Thompson (Cardiff, 2016), 3–19; Denys Pringle and Benjamin Z. Kedar, “The Site of the House of St Mary of Mountjoy, near Jerusalem,” Revue biblique (forthcoming). 50 See below Descriptio Ierusalem, groups B and C, para. 3.3; cf. 2 Macc. 2.4–8.

20

DENYS PRINGLE

pool, the valley of Jehoshaphat, the Mount of Olives, Bethany and the Jordan (5), following which there are brief accounts of Bethlehem (6), Mount Sion and the site of St. Stephen’s martyrdom outside the north gate of the city (7). The text ends somewhat unexpectedly for such a seemingly impersonal account with the words: Et ita constructe sunt omnes orationes in Ierusalem et ego testis qui vidi et hunc parvissimum titulum scripsi. And thus are arranged all the places of prayer in Jerusalem and I am the witness who saw and have written this very short account.

It seems therefore that, although anonymous, it is after all the record of a personal pilgrimage, albeit one very likely based on an existing text. The mention of the church of St. Mary Latin and the description of the interior of the Dome of the Rock led Tobler and Molinier to propose a date for the text after 1099,51 though Röhricht suggested one around 1095.52 Wilkinson, noting the text’s similarity to Innominatus I, suggested that it belonged to the same period, which he put at 1099–1103, explaining the difference in the order in which sites are described as reflecting the order in which the writer visited them.53 The association of the text with Baldric of Bourgueil’s chronicle, which Steven Biddlecombe has shown was writtten c. 1105,54 is unfortunately of little help in dating it, as unlike Innominatus I and the Gesta Francorum, the two texts are found together in only one manuscript; indeed, in another manuscript the chronicle appears with a different Jerusalem itinerary altogether, that of a pilgrim from Piacenza who travelled c. 570.55 A date around 1100–05, however, seems entirely plausible.

Hec sunt loca que habetur iuxta Hierusalem digna commemoratione (Mid to Late Eleventh Century) This brief description of Jerusalem and the sites immmediately around it survives in a manuscript in the Diocesan Archives in Trier that formerly belonged to the library of the abbey of St. Peter and St. Paul at Abdinghof in Paderborn (Westphalia), a Benedictine house founded in 1015.56 The volume contains an assortment 51

Tobler and Molinier, Itinera Hierosolymitana, lii–liv. Röhricht, Bibliotheca Geographica Palaestinae, 20, no. 42. 53 Wilkinson, Jerusalem Pilgrimage, 6, 350. 54 Biddlecombe, Historia Ierosolimitana, ix, xxiv–xxx. 55 Zizterzienserstift Zwettl, Bibliothek, Codex 310, fols. 73v–81v; Biddlecombe, Historia Ierosolimitana, lxxxviii. On the text, see Antonini Placentini Itinerarium, ed. P. Geyer, Itineraria et alia geographica, CCSL 175:127–74; trans. John Wilkinson, Jerusalem Pilgrims before the Crusades (Warminster, 1977), 6–7, 78–89. 56 Trier, Bistumsarchiv (formerly Dombibliothek), MS 95.93, fol. 61r–61v (formerly of SS Petri et Pauli in Abdinghof, Paderborn, fol. 62a–62b). 52

ITINERARIA TERRAE SANCTAE MINORA III

21

of texts written in different hands between the eleventh and twelfth centuries, including a number of fourth- to eleventh-century saints’ lives and letters by Pope Gregory VII (1073–85) and the emperor Henry IV (1056–1106).57 An edition and Italian translation of the text were published by de Sandoli in 1980, and an English translation of de Sandoli’s Latin text by John Wilkinson in 1988.58 Unfortunately none of these versions is reliable, because of errors in the Latin transcription. The description appears to be that of a personal journey, though it is presented in a manner that could also have served as a guide, or as a “virtual” pilgrimage for readers at home in the West. Thus the writer uses phrases such as, “Now let us go up to the Mount of Olives” (para. 2) and “Let us return to the west side of the valley of Jehoshaphat” (4). The tour begins in Gethsemane at the place of Jesus’ prayer and the tomb of the Virgin, and moves down the valley to the sites where St. Stephen and St. James the Less were martyred and the Siloam Pool. From there we are led up the Mount of Olives to Bethphage and the places of the Lord’s Prayer and Ascension and so on to Bethany. We are then taken back by way of the church of St. Peter’s Tears (ecclesia Petri ad Lacrimas) to the church of St. Mary on Mount Sion, held to be the first in Christendom, where the writer lists the holy places but without giving any clue as to what actually remained of them.59 We then enter the city and go to the Lord’s Sepulchre, which is described as enclosed by a church (templum) similar to that built by Charlemagne in Aachen, except that it had only a single tower and was open to the sky above the tomb.60 We are then led into the courtyard to the east to the sites associated with the Passion, including Christ’s prison, the place where he awaited his trial, the place where his clothes were divided, Calvary where he was crucified and Abraham was to have sacrificed Isaac, and the place beside it where Adam lived and was buried. The final section is somewhat curt and garbled, simply mentioning to the east the Sheep-pool, the Temple of Solomon and Temple of the Lord. Röhricht proposed a twelfth-century date for the guide and de Sandoli one before 1142, on the grounds that the court east of the Holy Sepulchre’s rotunda was still an open space.61 Wilkinson, on the other hand, argued for a date between 1102 and 1106, the reason for the terminal date being that the chapel of the Invention of the Cross, mentioned by Abbot Daniel in 1106–8, had not yet been rebuilt;62 however, he gives no explanation for assigning it a terminus post quem of 1102. In fact there are a number of reasons for thinking that the text is more likely to date from the eleventh century. 57 Heinrich Volbert Sauerland, Catalogus descriptivus Codicum Manuscriptorum Ecclesiae Cathedralis Treverensis, handwritten (Trier, 1890–91), fols. 133r–138r. 58 De Sandoli, Itinera, 2:153–57; Wilkinson, Jerusalem Pilgrimage, 117–19, cf. 7, 350. 59 Cf. Wilkinson, Jerusalem Pilgrimage, 46–50; Pringle, Churches, 3:262–63. 60 The Palatine chapel in Aachen consisted of an octagonal rotunda, capped by a lantern, and a towered west-work: see Kenneth J. Conant, Carolingian and Romanesque Architecture, 2nd ed. (Harmondsworth, 1966), 46–51, figs. 6–10. 61 Röhricht, Bibliotheca Geographica Palaestinae, 45, no. 110; de Sandoli, Itinera, 2:153. 62 Wilkinson, Jerusalem Pilgrimage, 7, 350.

22

DENYS PRINGLE

As de Sandoli pointed out, the account of the Holy Sepulchre (paras. 5–6) describes its form before the start of the construction of the new choir in the 1140s; however, the reconstruction of the rotunda and courtyard, demolished in 1009, had already been achieved by 1047, when they were described by the Persian traveller Nāṣir-ī Khusraw.63 The description of the ruined state of Constantine’s basilica on the site of the finding of the Cross and the steps linking it to the courtyard also appear to indicate a date before the later eleventh century, when part of the basilica’s foundations were uncovered and the chapel of the Invention of the Cross was built inside an excavated cistern; it was certainly before the visit of the writer of de Situ Urbis Ierusalem, who records (para. 4) the adjoining new chapel of St. Helena as being under construction.64 The reference to a stone cross of the same shape and size at that used for the Crucifixion (6) recalls Egeria’s description of such a cross above Calvary in the late fourth century.65 It seems unlikely that such a feature would have survived the destruction of 1009; but even if the writer of Hec sunt loca actually saw it, rather than simply borrowing the reference from Egeria, it is not mentioned by any Frankish pilgrims after 1099. The implication that Mount Sion lay outside the city (para. 5) could also suggest a date after the realignment and reconstruction of the southern city wall in 1033.66 The lack of any mention of the church of St. Mary Latin – or indeed of any Latin establishments or clergy in Jerusalem – could also indicate a date for this text before c. 1071, by which time the two Amalfitan Benedictine houses and their associated hospital had been established beside the Holy Sepulchre.67 Indeed, for information about the place of the Ascension (2) the pilgrim appears to have depended on “wise men of the Greeks living in Jerusalem” (sapientes Grecorum Hierusalem manentium), rather than Latins. The reference to St. Lazarus becoming a bishop in Cyprus (3) also reflects the Greek tradition, not the Latin one, in which he sailed further west with Mary Magdalene to become eventually bishop of Marseilles.68 The location of St. Stephen’s martyrdom in the valley of Jehoshaphat (1) may also perhaps reflect an Orthodox or at least an early tradition. It remains uncertain whether the laconic treatment of the Temple area was due to a failure to enter it or to other reasons. 63

Nasir-i Khusraw’s Book of Travels, ed. and trans. Wheeler M. Thackston, Bibliotheca Iranica 6 (Costa Mesa, CA, 2001), 47–48. 64 Pringle, Churches, 3:44–45. 65 Itinerarium Egeriae, ed. A. Franceschini and R. Weber, in Geyer and Cuntz, Itineraria et alia geographica, CCSL 175:27–90, at 68–84, 86; Wilkinson, Egeria’s Travels, 74–76, 87, 124–29, 132–40, 142, Charles Coüasnon, The Church of the Holy Sepulchre, Jerusalem, The Schweich Lectures 1972 (London, 1974), 50–53, pls. vii–xi, xv, xvii. 66 Denys Pringle, “Town Defences in the Crusader Kingdom of Jerusalem,” in The Medieval City under Siege, ed. I. A. Corfis and M. Wolfe (Woodbridge, 1995), 69–121, at 79; repr. in Denys Pringle, Fortification and Settlement in Crusader Palestine (Aldershot, 2000), ch. i. 67 Pringle, Churches, 3:192–93, 236–37, 253. 68 Rabanus Maurus, De Vita Beatæ Mariæ Magdalenæ 36–50, PL 112:1492–1508; Denys Pringle, Pilgrimage to Jerusalem and the Holy Land, 1187–1291, Crusade Texts in Translation 23 (Farnham, 2012), 232, 344.

ITINERARIA TERRAE SANCTAE MINORA III

23

The history of the manuscript and the author’s reference to Aachen therefore suggest that he was himself German, very possibly from Paderborn, and writing sometime in the mid to late eleventh century.

Descriptio Ierusalem (1099–c. 1120) This family of texts is initially characterized by all examples having the same – or almost the same – incipit: In occidentale parte est introitus Iherusalem iuxta turrem David. At least seventeen texts have been identified. They can be divided into five groups on the basis of: whether or not they are preceded or followed by an account of the relics to be seen in Constantinople; whether David’s Gate is correctly described as being on the west or incorrectly on the east; whether the tour inside the walls of Jerusalem begins at the Holy Sepulchre or at the Templum Domini; and whether or not there is an explicit recording the capture of Jerusalem by the First Crusade on 15 July 1099. The definition of the groups according to these criteria is shown in Table 2.

Table 2. Characteristics serving to define Groups A–E of Descriptio Ierusalem Group

A B C D E *

Relics of David’s Tour Explicit Relics of Constantinople Gate starting at mentioning Constantinople beforehand located on HS or TD* 1099 afterwards Yes West HS No West TD Yes Yes West TD Yes West HS Yes East HS Yes

HS = Holy Sepulchre; TD = Templum Domini

Despite having a similar incipit, the texts have no consistent title, if any at all. Röhricht, who identified fifteen texts, not all of them correctly, selected the name de Situ Hierusalem from one of them, a fourteenth-century text;69 however, this particular text, although related to the others, is actually a much expanded version, which forms the central portion of the account of the pilgrimage undertaken by Saewulf in 1102–3.70 The name chosen here, Descriptio Ierusalem, occurs in the 69

Röhricht, Bibliotheca Geographica Palaestinae, 63, no. 157. London, Lambeth Palace, MS 144, fols. 117–19; corresponding to Saewulf, ed. Huygens, Peregrinationes tres, CCCM 139:64–75. The text begins as Saewulf, but then jumps to the entry into Jerusalem: “Inc(ipit) certa relatio de situ Ierusalem. Introitus civitatis Ierusalem est ad occidentem sub 70

24

DENYS PRINGLE

Vatican manuscript (Vo) presented in Group A below and in that from Gonville and Caius College, Cambridge (Cg), presented in Group E. It should be noted that in the discussion and editions below the same paragraphnumbering system is followed for all groups of the Descriptio Ierusalem in order to facilitate comparison between the different versions. This accounts for the discontinuity in the numbering sequence that occurs in some places. Group A (1099–c. 1120) The defining characteristics of this group are that the description of Jerusalem is preceded by a detailed account of the relics to be seen in Constantinople and is not followed by the explicit mentioning the capture of Jerusalem by the First Crusade. In other respects, including the entry through David’s Gate on the west and the precedence given to the Holy Sepulchre, it is similar to Group D, though somewhat briefer. Similarities may also be noted with Qualiter sita, although, whereas after Bethany Qualiter sita continues eastwards to the River Jordan before doubling back to Bethlehem, Mount Sion and the sites around Mount Sion, Descriptio A returns to Mount Sion and proceeds from there to Bethlehem, the River Jordan, Jericho and Mount Quarantine. Group A is represented by the following two manuscripts: Od Oxford, Bodleian Library, MS Digby 112, fols. 28v–29r.71 Vo Vatican, Biblioteca Apostolicana Vaticana (BAV), MS Ottoboniana latina 169, fol. 67r.

Early 12c. Early 13c.

The Vatican text (Vo), including the description of relics in Constantinople, was published in an article by Silvio Mercati in 1936 and was later reprinted in a collection of his papers in 1970.72 Mercati noted that the description of Constantinople was probably translated from an original in Greek and argued that the text was the work of an English pilgrim. In 1976, however, a more comprehensive study of the text arce David regis, per portam que vocatur porta David. Primum eundum est ad ecclesiam sancti Sepulchri, que martyrium vocatur.” It ends on the return journey (cf. Saewulf, ibid.,75), where the copyist appears to have lost interest: “Acras est civitas fortissima que Accaron vocatur. Deinde Sur et Sebete que Tyris (Tyrns?) et Sydon, et postea Iubelet. Deinde Barut et sic Tartusa, quam dux Reimundus possedit. Postea Gibel ubi sunt montes Gelboe et cetera.” Cf. H.J. Todd, A Catalogue of the Archiepiscopal Manuscripts in the Library at Lambeth Palace (London, 1812), no. 144; Montague Rhodes James, A Descriptive Catalogue of the Manuscripts in the Library of Lambeth Palace: The Medieval Manuscripts (Cambridge, 1932). 71 W. D. Macray, Bodleian Library Quarto Catalogues IX: Digby Manuscripts (Oxford, 1883), 125, nos. 112.3–4; repr. with addenda by R. W. Hunt and A. G. Watson (Oxford, 1999), 60. 72 Silvio Giuseppe Mercati, “Santuari e reliquie costantinopolitane secondo il codice Ottoboniano latino 169 prima della conquista latina (1204),” Rendiconti della Pontificia Accademia Romana di Archeologia 12 (1936): 133–56; repr. idem, Collectanea Byzantina, 2 vols., Università di Roma, Istituto di Studi bizantini e neoellenici (Bari, 1970), 2:464–89. A translation of the part relating to Jerusalem appears in Wilkinson, Jerusalem Pilgrimage, 92–93; cf. ibid., 6, 350.

ITINERARIA TERRAE SANCTAE MINORA III

25

was undertaken by Krijnie Ciggaar, making use of an earlier manuscript now in Oxford (Od) but probably originating in Winchester. In his article he included an edition of the whole text, noting differences from Mercati’s edition.73 As far as the description of Jerusalem alone is concerned, this reveals few differences from Mercati’s text and none of any significance when compared with the Vatican manuscript itself. For the purposes of the present article I have therefore prepared a new edition of the Vatican manuscript, correcting the errors in Mercati’s edition but omitting the section relating to Constantinople. For a complete edition of the whole text readers should refer to Ciggaar’s article. Ciggaar identified the description of the relics in Constantinople as having been written originally in Greek sometime between 1063 and 1081 and then translated into Latin somewhere in England between 1089 and 1096. He also argued that the translator was likely to have been the writer of the Latin description of Jerusalem, suggesting that the lack of the explicit mentioning the fall of Jerusalem that is found in other versions of the text would seem to indicate a date for its composition before 1099.74 Other factors, however, suggest that the description dates from after the fall of Jerusalem. One is the close similarity of the Group A texts to the Group D ones, whose explicit dates them after 1099. Both of these groups also appear to reflect a more developed itinerary than that reflected in Group B, which also has the 1099 explicit but follows a format closer to the Bordeaux Itinerary, Innominatus I and de Situ Urbis in beginning the Jerusalem tour at the Templum Domini rather than the Holy Sepulchre. Other factors suggesting a date after 1099 include the mention of St. Anne’s church (para. 4.1), first attested by Saewulf in 1102–3,75 and the description of the Temple area in terms which imply that it was accessible to Christians. The terminus ante quem for Group A, as for all versions of the Descriptio in which there is no specific contradictory evidence, may be placed around 1120, by which time the principal gate of entry to Jerusalem for pilgrims arriving from Acre and Jaffa was St. Stephen’s Gate on the north, rather than David’s Gate on the west.76 Groups B and C Group B differs from the other versions of the Descriptio in making the Holy Sepulchre the first place to be visited on entering through David’s Gate. These texts also conclude with an explicit referring to the start of the First Crusade in 1096 and the capture of Jerusalem in 1099. This is followed by an account of the relics in the imperial chapel in Constantinople. Group C is similar as far as the description of Jerusalem is concerned, but omits the account of the relics. Groups B and C are represented by the following manuscripts: 73 Krijne N. Ciggaar, “Une Description de Constantinople traduite par un pèlerin anglais,” Revue des Études byzantines 34 (1976): 211–67. 74 Ciggaar, “Description de Constantinople,” 216–32, 238–42. 75 Ed. Huygens, Peregrinationes tres, CCCM 139:68–69; Pringle, Churches, 3:142–43. 76 Pringle, Churches, 3:306–9.

26

DENYS PRINGLE

Cu Cambridge, University Library, MS Mm. v. 29, fols. Group B 12c. 155v–156r.77 Lc London, British Library, Bibl. Cotton, MS Claudius Group B Early 12c. A IV, fol. 192.78 Group C 15c. Ls London, British Library, MS Sloane 3548, fol. 6r–6v. An edition of the section concerning Constantinople was published by Paul Riant in 1878 on the basis of manuscripts Cu and Lc. He suggested dating the text around 1150, but without offering any explanation.79 In 1984, de Sandoli published a full edition of Lc with an Italian translation, basing it on a Latin transcription made by Fr. Antonio Domingues de Sousa Costa.80 He suggested dating the text, somewhat improbably, to the thirteenth century sometime before 1239. The third manuscript, Ls, represents a fifteenth-century copy of the description of Jerusalem alone, omitting the part relating to Constantinople. It appears in a volume of miscellaneous texts dating between the fourteenth and eighteenth centuries. Although the text is anonymous, in Cu it is prefaced by a short exhortation in verse to the reader by the scribe who wrote it, inserting his name, Ernulf, above the line so as not to disrupt the metre. Exora Christum, qui librum legeris istum: ut det scriptori, Ernulfo quicquid debetur honori. Implore Christ, you who read this book, to grant the writer (Ernulf) whatever honour he is due.

The order of the Descriptio in Groups B and C is quite different to that in the other groups, in that it begins, like the Bordeaux pilgrim, Innominatus I and de Situ Urbis, at the Temple (Templum Domini). It thus appears likely to reflect an earlier form of the guide than the other Descriptio groups, although this does not necessarily mean that it achieved its final form before them. In fact, like de Situ, its description of the Templum Domini falls into two parts. The first concerns traditions associated with the area above the rock, such as the presentation of Jesus, his footprint and Jacob’s dream and altar, while the second deals with associations below the rock, such as the objects contained in the Holy of Holies, Jesus’ pardoning of the adulteress and the annunciation made to Zechariah of the birth of John the Baptist. In the Group B and C versions of the Descriptio, the second part of the description of the Temple 77 A Catalogue of the Manuscripts preserved in the Library of the University of Cambridge, 5 vols. + index (Cambridge, 1856–67), 4:338–39 (358*–59*). 78 Röhricht, Bibliotheca Geographica Palaestinae, 64, no. 171. 79 Paul Édouard Didier Riant, Exuviæ Sacræ Constantinopolitanæ: fasciculus documentorum ecclesiasticorum, ad Byzantina lipsana in Occidentem sæculo XIIIo translata, spectantium, & Historiam Quarti Belli Sacri Imperiique Gallo-Græci illustrantium, 2 vols. (Geneva, 1877–78), 2:211–12. 80 De Sandoli, Itinera, 4:369–73.

ITINERARIA TERRAE SANCTAE MINORA III

27

follows immediately after the first, whereas in de Situ the two parts are separated by the section describing the Holy Sepulchre and adjacent churches. The section relating to the Holy Sepulchre in Groups B and C appears instead after Mount Sion and its associated sites. In other respects the subject matter is broadly similar. Group D The versions represented by Group D are similar to those of Group A, but without the preceding account of Constantinople and with the addition of the explicit recording the capture of Jerusalem. Group D is represented by the following manuscripts: Ce Cambridge, Emmanuel College, MS 143 (II.2.18/CMA 16), fol. 128.81 Oc Oxford, Corpus Christi, MS 32, fols. 90vb–91rb.82 U Uppsala, Universitetsbibliothek, MS C204, fols. 63v–64r.83 Vp Vatican, Biblioteca Apostolicana Vaticana, MS Palatina latina 927, fol. 217v. W Wolfenbüttel, MS Cod. Guelf. 131 Gud. Lat., fols. 19v–20v.84 Y New Haven, Yale University Library, MS Beinecke MS 481.77, single folio.85 Z Zeitz, Dombibliothek (unable to trace).86

Early 12c. Late 13c. Late 15c. 12c. 12c. Early 12c.

Although the structure and content of the Group D texts are generally similar to those of Group A, some texts are more expansive. Apart from W and Z, which 81

Montague Rhodes James, The Western Manuscripts in the Library of Emmanuel College: A Descriptive Catalogue (Cambridge, 1904), 116, no. 143.3. I am most grateful to the College Librarian, Dr Helen Carron, for providing me with a clear image of the MS and to the Master and Fellows for permission to make use of it. 82 Henry O. Coxe, Catalogus Codicum MSS. qui in Collegiis Aulisque Oxoniensibus hodie adservantur, 2 vols. (Oxford, 1852), 2 (Corpus): 10, no. 32.18; R. M. Thomson, A Descriptive Catalogue of the Medieval Manuscripts of Corpus Christi College, Oxford: Western Manuscripts (Woodbridge, 2011), 10–12. 83 Margarete Andersson-Schmitt and Monica Hedlund, Mittelalterliche Handschriften der Universitätsbibliothek Uppsala: Katalog über die C-Sammlung 3, Acta Bibliothecae R. Universitatis Upsaliensis 26.3 (Stockholm, 1990), 21. 84 Denys Pringle, “A Twelfth-Century Itinerary from Hungary to the Holy Land and Othmar’s Vision of the Holy Fire,” in Bridge of Civilizations: The Near East and Europe, c. 1100–1300, ed. Peter Edbury, Denys Pringle and Balázs Major (Oxford, 2019), 281–96; cf. Franz Köhler and Gustav Milchsack, Die Gudischen Handschriften, Die Handschriften der Herzoglichen Bibliothek zu Wolfenbüttel, ed. Otto von Heinemann, vol. 4 (Wolfenbüttel, 1913), 154, no. 4435.4. 85 Lisa Fagin Davis, “A Twelfth-Century Pilgrims’ Guide to the Holy Land: Beinecke MS 481.77,” Yale University Library Gazette 65/1–2 (1990): 11–19; Iris Shagrir, “The Guide of MS Beinecke 481.77 and the Intertwining of Christian, Jewish and Muslim Traditions in Twelfth-Century Jerusalem,” Crusades 10 (2011): 1–22. 86 Ed. Johan Georg Eccard, Corpus Historicum Medii Ævi, 2 vols. (Leipzig, 1723), 2:1346–48; ed. Pringle, “Twelfth-Century Itinerary,” 295–96.

28

DENYS PRINGLE

are virtually identical, there is also a high incidence of minor variations between them. WZ and Oc (c. 570 words) are more than double the length of Vp (c. 245 words), with the lengths of the other texts, including those of Group A, lying between these two extremes. The two longer texts also share some exclusive points of resemblance. These include: the description of the split rock of Calvary as petra fixa (para. 2.2), as opposed to fissa (Vo), cissa (YCe) or scissa (Vp), and the mention of the triple portals in front of the doors of the Templum Domini (3.1) and the place of the annunciation of the birth of John the Baptist (3.6). There is also a certain degree of similarity between Y and Ce, for example in the use of the word cissa (2.2) and in their mentioning – like WZ and Oc, but unlike Vp and U – of the church of St. Mary Latin, the Hospital (2.5) and Jesus’ presentation in the Temple (3.2). It is difficult, however, to discern any clear pattern of filiation between the texts of Group D. It is not unlikely, in any case, that when copying such a brief and anonymous text copyists would have felt freer to make alterations and to expand or abbreviate depending on whatever purpose the copy was intended to serve, whether as a complement to a longer text or group of texts, or simply as a space-filler or as a scholastic exercise. Other fillers accompanying some of these texts include short religious verses (Ce, Vp) and in one case an inventory of the contents of a bishop’s kitchen (W). In Y the description of Jerusalem occupies a single unbound folio and may quite possibly have been intended for taking on a journey. In both W and Z, the Descriptio Ierusalem represents the final section of a longer text describing the overland journey between Hungary and Jerusalem, passing through Constantinople. The same itinerary is also found in an earlier version, dating from the 1050s–80s, when the border between the Byzantine empire and the Fatimid caliphate lay between Tarṭūs and Tripoli.87 In that version the itinerary ends not with the Descriptio but with a much briefer personal account of the Holy Fire and the sites in and around Jerusalem written by a pilgrim named Othmar; but, whereas Othmar had evidently travelled overland all the way, the version in W and Z that includes the Descriptio also contains an alternative itinerary by sea covering the section of the journey between Constantinople and Acre. On this evidence, the version of the Descriptio found in W and Z could only have been incorporated into the itinerary after May 1104, when Acre fell to the Franks, thereafter replacing Jaffa as the principal port for pilgrims travelling to Jerusalem. The date of composition of the version of the Descriptio in W and Z, however, could have been any time after 1099 on the basis of its internal evidence and its explicit, while its terminus ante quem would be c. 1120, by which time the principal gate of entry to Jerusalem for pilgrims coming from Acre was St. Stephen’s Gate on the north, rather than David’s Gate on the west.88 The same date range of 1099–c. 1120 would also apply to Y, Ce, Vp and U. 87

This version is found in the Bayerische Staatsbibliothek (BSB), Munich, MS Clm 629, fols. 19r–23v. 88 For parallel editions and a discussion of both versions of the itinerary, see Pringle, “TwelfthCentury Itinerary.”

ITINERARIA TERRAE SANCTAE MINORA III

29

The only version containing indications of a later date is Oc. This mentions a church at Rachel’s Tomb (7.2), most likely corresponding with the vaulted building over the tomb first mentioned by al-Idrīsī in 1154; its identification as a church confirms that this was a Christian building.89 The location of the Praetorium a stone’s throw from the church of Mount Sion (6.2) may also possibly reflect the building of the chapel of the Saviour between the church and the city wall that is first mentioned by John of Würzburg and Innominatus VII around 1165, though the same area was already being identified as the Pavement or Lithostrotos from c. 1137.90 On this evidence a date around 1150–60 may be suggested for the version of the Descriptio Ierusalem found in Oc. That the writer of the version in Oc had actually visted and seen the sites that he describes is attested by his closing words: B(ernard)us, sancta loca prenominata o(mnia), servus Dei, tam per medio anime sue et patris sui, quam per medio parentum atque benefactorum suorum, Deo auxiliante et sancta Mari[a] intercedente, circuivit. B(ernard),91 servant of God, visited all the holy places named above, as much by means of his own spirit and his father as by those of his relations and benefactors, with the help of God and the intercession of St. Mary.

Two others versions (Y and U respectively) end with doxologies, though whether or not these relate to an actual pilgrimage journey planned or completed is less certain. Quod Dominus bened(ica)t. May the Lord give his blessing. Qui orent pro nobis ut vivamus per omnia secula seculorum. Amen. May they [the apostles] pray for us that we may live for ever and ever, Amen.

Group E This group is distinguished from the others by the initial error of locating David’s Gate on the east rather than the west side of Jerusalem: Ab oriente est introitus Ierusalem per portam David. It is represented by the following manuscripts: Cg Cambridge, Gonville and Caius College Library, MS 151, fol. 109r.92

89

13c.

Pringle, Churches, 2:176–78. Pringle, Churches, 3:365–72; idem, “Itineraria Terrae Sanctae minora [I],” 44–46, 48, 62 (para. 4.6); John of Würzburg, ed. Huygens, Peregrinationes tres, CCCM 139:115–16. 91 Or possibly Benedict. 92 Montague Rhodes James, A Descriptive Catalogue of the Manuscripts in the Library of Gonville and Caius College, 2 vols. (Cambridge, 1907–8), 1:173, no. 151. I am most grateful to the College 90

30

DENYS PRINGLE

13c. Ch Cheltenham, formerly in Sir Thomas Phillipps’s Library, MS 16588. Current whereabouts unknown.93 12c. Lr London, British Library, Royal MS 6 A. I, fols. 134–5.94 Oa Oxford, Bodleian Library, MS Ashmole 1280, part V, fol. 107r–v.95 13c. Apart from the erroneous incipit and some minor variations in copying, Cg is almost identical to Ce in group D, another Cambridge manuscript. In para. 3 there is even the same mistake, Dominus for Domini. The only major differences are two omissions due to haplography, one in Cg (et … et in para. 7.1) and one in Ce (porta … porta in para. 4.1), and another passage omitted from Ce, which is found, however, in two other group D manuscripts, Oc and Y (Super … diabolo in para. 8). This suggests that although both Ce and Cg were descended from the same source, neither was descended directly from the other. The initial error in the incipit also suggests that group E as a whole is likely to be an offshoot from a manuscript related to group D, beginning in the early twelfth century. The Oxford manuscript (Oa) is similar to Cg but with some differences. It omits the references to St. Mary Latin and the Hospital (para. 2.5) and to the martyrdom of St. Stephen (para. 7.3), as well as the final section concerning the fall of Jerusalem. In other places, however, its treatment of the subjects covered by Cg is more expansive, although in most cases the expansions are more stylistic than material. Examples of additional material include information about the Templum Domini copied either from Peter the Deacon (1137) or his source (paras. 3–4),96 a fuller description of the contents of the Holy of Holies based on Hebrews 9.2–5 (para. 3.4), and the unusual location of Cain’s murder of Abel between the Mount of Olives and Jericho (para. 5.5). It is difficult to tell for certain what the precise relationship was between Cg and Oa. If we are correct, however, in assuming that the initial error of changing Ab occidente to Ab oriente (para. 1) occurred only once, between Ce and Cg, then Oa should logically be regarded as descended from Cg. In favour of this conclusion are the considerations that Oa does not appear to be any more similar to any of Librarian, Mark Stratham, for providing me with a clear image of the MS and to the Master and Fellows for permission to make use of it. 93 [Thomas Phillipps] Catalogus Librorum Manuscriptorum in Bibliotheca D. Thomæ Phillipps, Bart. a.d. 1837 (Middle Hill, Worcs., 1837), 321, no. 16588. On the dispersal of the Phillipps Library, see A. N. L. Munby, The Dispersal of the Phillipps Library, Phillipps Studies 5 (Cambridge, 1960); Toby Burrows, “Manuscripts of Sir Thomas Phillipps in North American Institutions,” Manuscript Studies 1.2 (2016): 307–27 (art. 9). 94 George F. Warner and Julius P. Gibson, British Museum: Catalogue of Western Manuscripts in the Old Royal and King’s Collections, 4 vols. (London, 1921), 1:126–27; cf. Ciggaar, “Description de Constantinople,” 240. 95 William Henry Black, A Descriptive, Analytical and Critical Catalogue of the Manuscripts bequeathed unto the University of Oxford by Elias Ashmole, Esq., m.d., f.r.s. (Oxford, 1945), cols. 1033–39, no. 1280. 96 Peter the Deacon, Liber de Locis Sanctis, ed. R. Weber, “Appendix ad Itinerarium Egeriae,” in Geyer and Cuntz, Itineraria et alia geographica, CCSL 175:91–103, at 95 (sections C.3–4).

ITINERARIA TERRAE SANCTAE MINORA III

31

the other texts in groups A–D than it is to Cg and that the origin of the additional material that it contains does not appear to be derived from any of them. If the mistaken copying of oriente for occidente occurred independently more than once, however, then other explanations would be possible. Unfortunately it has not been possible to consult two of the manuscripts in this group, in the case of Ch because it is currently missing and in that of Lr because of the temporary closure of the British Library collections due to the Covid–19 pandemic. Published descriptions of and quotations from the latter, however, suggest that it may be very similar to Oa, albeit having the explicit that Oa lacks: Idus Iulii capta est Ierusalem a Latinis. Eodem die divisio apostolorum.97

The Texts In the following texts, standard contractions have been expanded where it is clear from the contraction sign or the grammatical sense what the missing letters would have been. Where the contraction sign is ambiguous, the suggested expansion is enclosed in (rounded brackets). Accidental omissions are included between , accidental inclusions between {wavy brackets}, and lacunae due to loss or damage between [square brackets]. The division of the texts into numbered paragraphs and sub-sections is an editorial addition, intended to assist general reference as well as cross-reference between different versions of the same text. As mentioned above in relation to the Descriptio Ierusalem, this may sometimes result in discontinuity in the numbering sequence, where differing versions of the same text present the same or similar material in a different order.

97

Warner and Gibson, British Museum: Catalogue of Western Manuscripts in the Old Royal and King’s Collections, 1:126–27.

32

DENYS PRINGLE

De Situ Urbis Ierusalem (c. 1100–05) B = Brussels, Bibliothèque Royale Albert Ier, MS 9823–34, fols. 57ra–58va (1164– ). L = London, BL, MS Harley 3113, fols. 126ra–127rb (1125/75). P = Paris, BnF, MS Latin 5129, fols. 70ra–71ra (1151/3–). V = ed. M. de Vogüé, Églises, 412–14 (based on P). De situ urbis Ierusalem et de locis sanctis infra ipsam urbem sive circumiacentibus.i 1. Ierusalemii civitas sita est in montana Iudee in provintia Palestine et habet quatuoriii introitus: ab oriente, ab occidente, a meridie et ab aquilone. Ab oriente est porta per quam descenditur in vallem Iosaphat et per quam itur in montem Oliveti et ad flumen Iordanis. Ab occidente est porta David, que respicit contra mare et contra Ascalonem. A meridie est porta que vocatur de monte Syon, per quam exitur apud sanctam Mariam de monte Syon. Ab aquilone est porta que vocatur porta sancti Stephani, eo quod sit deforis lapidatus, et raro aperitur. Per portam namque David introivimus in sanctam civitatem, habens ad dexteram turrem David, satis prope nobis introeuntibus. Turris vero David a parte occidentali est sita et eminet super omnem civitatem. 2. Templum vero Domini1 est contra solis ortum [B57rb] in [L126rb] inferiori parte civitatis super vallem Iosaphat. Et habet quatuoriv introitus: ab oriente, ab occidente, a meridie et ab aquilone. Maxima quoque rupis est in medio eius, ubi est altare. Et ibi fuit Dominus a parentibus suis oblatus et a sancto Symeone receptus. Et ibi ascendebat, quando predicabat populo. 3. Sepulchrum vero Domini2 est infra civitatem, paululum ad sinistram nobis euntibus ad Templum. Ecclesiav Sepulchri rotunda est satis pulchre fabricata, et habet quatuorvi portas, que aperiuntur contra solis ortum. [P70rb] Sepulchrum vero Domini est in medio eius, satis bene munitum et decenter ordinatum. Deforis etiam a parte orientali est Calvarie locus, ubi fuit Dominus crucifixus, et ibi ascenditur per sedecim gradus. Et ibi est magna rupis, ubi crux Christi fuit erecta. Subterius est Golgota,vii ubi sanguis Christi per medium petre deorsum stillavit. Et ibi est altare in honore sancte Dei genitricis. 4. Deforis quoqueviii contra ortum solis est locus ubi beata Helena Sanctam Crucem invenit, et ibi edificatur magna ecclesia.3 Ex alia parte contra horam sextam est hospitiumix pauperum et infirmorum et ecclesia sancti Iohannis Baptiste.4 Et prope est sancta Maria

1

Pringle, Churches, 3:397–417. Pringle, Churches, 3:6–72. 3 The chapel of St. Helena, then under construction beside the chapel of the Holy Cross: see Pringle, Churches, 3:15, 44–45, fig. 6, pls. ix–x. 4 Pringle, Churches, 3:192–207. 2

i

De situ … circumiacentibus BP] lacking from L. Ierusalem BP] Iherusalem L. iii quatuor BP] quattuor L. iv quatuor BP] quattuor L. v Ecclesia BP] Aecclesia L. vi quatuor BP] .iiiior. L. vii Golgota LP] Golgata B. viii quoque BLP] quo V. ix hospitium P] hospicium BL. ii

ITINERARIA TERRAE SANCTAE MINORA III

33

Latina.5 In ecclesia vero predicta beati Iohannis est ydria lapidea, in qua fecit Dominus vinum de aqua. 5. Tem[B57va]plum Domini, ut diximus, omnium ecclesiarum excellit pulchritudinem.6 Et ibi est alia ydria marmorea, ubi similiter in Chana Galilee fecit de aqua vinum. Et infra rupim, que est in medio Templi, descenditur per gradus ubi fuerunt olim sancta sanctorum. Et ibi orabat Zacharias, quando angelus Gabriel [L126va] annuntiavit ei beatum Iohannem Baptistam nasciturum.7 Ibique est locus ubi Dominus sedebat, quando Pharisei adduxerunt ei mulierem in adulterio deprehensam.8 6. A parte quoque meridiana est Palatium Salomonis. Contra solis ortum a parte predicti palatii est ecclesia sancte Marie,9 ubi descenditur per multos gradus. Ibique est cunabulum Salvatoris et balneum eius, et grabatum genitricis eius. [P70va] 7. Ad sinistram partem Templi extra muros ipsius est ecclesia sancte Anne,10 que fuit mater matris Christi. Et deforis dicitur esse Probatica Piscina. 8. Non longe extra muros civitatis a parte meridiana est ecclesia que dicitur sancta Maria de monte Syon,11 ubi beatissima migravit a corpore. Et in ipsa est locus qui Galilea vocatur, ubi post resurrectionem Christus apparuit suis discipulis, ubi tunc non erat Thomas. Et in predicta ecclesia a parte orientalix est locus ubi, post octo dies, ianuis clausis, iterum apparuit suis discipulis, [B57vb] quando et Thomas aderat, dicens: Pax vobis, et ostendit eis manus et latus, palpandumque prebuit, sicut narrat evangelicusxi sermo. Et desuper ascenditur per gradus ubi cenam fecit cum suis apostolis,xii et ibi est eadem mensa super quam cenavit. Et ibi carnem suam et sanguinem suum in remissionem peccatorum eis dedit ad comedendum. Ibique Spiritus Sanctus die Pentecostes apostolos illuminavit. In sinistra vero parte est ecclesia sancti Stephani, ubi fuit sepultus a Iohanne patriarcha, postquam adductus est de Cafargamala.12 [L126vb] 9. Et deorsum montis est Acheldemach, hoc est ager sanguinis, ubi est sepultura peregrinorum. Ex alia parte montis in descensu eiusdem est ecclesia sancti Petri, ubi gallo canente flevit amare peccatum negationis. Deorsum quoque est fons, qui vocatur natatoria Syloe, ubi Domino iubente cecus natus illuminatus est. Et civitas Ierusalem preter hanc non habet aquam vivam. [P70vb] 10. Bethleem civitas David duas magnas leugas abest ab Ierusalemxiii contra horam nonam. Et ibi est ecclesia sancte Marie satis pulchre fabricata.13 Et intus est cripta, ubi 5

Pringle, Churches, 3:236–53. Pringle, Churches, 3:397–417. 7 Luke 1.8–20. 8 John 8.1–11. 9 On the chapel of St. Mary (Masjid Mahd ʿIsa, Miḥrāb Maryam) beside al-Aqṣā Mosque, see Pringle, Churches, 3:311–14. 10 The church of St. Anne already existed by the time of Saewulf’s visit in 1102–3: ed. Huygens, Peregrinationes tres, CCCM 139:68–69; cf. Pringle, Churches, 3:142–56. 11 Pringle, Churches, 3:261–86. 12 The relics of St. Stephen are also mentioned by Saewulf, while Theoderic later placed them in the sacristy on the north side of the sanctuary (ed. Huygens, Peregrinationes tres, CCCM 139:71, 169; Pringle, Churches, 3:263, 266, 372). 13 Pringle, Churches, 1:137–56. 6

x

orientali LP] orientis B. evangelicus] eūgłicus B, eugłicus LP. xii suis apostolis BP] apostolis suis L. xiii Ierusalem BP] Iherusalem L. xi

34

DENYS PRINGLE

beatissima virgo Maria peperit Salvatorem mundi, et ibi est presepe, ubi Christus positus est. Et ante criptam est mensa marmorea, super [B58ra] quam Dei genitrix cum tribus regibus comedit.14 Et ante eandem criptam est puteus existens dulcis et frigide aque, in quem dicitur stella cecidisse, que adduxit tres magos usque ad introitum ipsius cripte. 11. Exeuntibus autem de ecclesia, prope portam sunt due cripte, una superior et altera inferior. In superiori iacet beatissima Paula, ad cuius pedes iacet eius filia, scilicet sacratissima virgo Eustochium. Descenditur vero ad inferiorem criptam per multos gradus, et ibi est sepulchrum in quo iacet sacratissimum corpus beatissimi Ieronimixiv doctoris eximii. Hec est Bethleem ubi et in omnibus finibus eius Herodes infantes crudeliter occidi iussit. 12. Ecclesiaxv sancte Marie,15 que dicitur in valle Iosaphat, est inter Ierusalemxvi et montem Oliveti vallis medio, et ibi est sepulchrum sancte Marie genitricis Dei, [L127ra] ubi beatus Iohannes apostolus eius sacratissimum sepelivit corpus.xvii Extra ipsam ecclesiam est locus, qui vocatur Gessemani, ubi est cripta,16 ubi Iudas Dominum Iudeis tradidit. Et a parte dextera, quantum est iactusxviii lapidis, est oratorium,17 ubi oravit ad Patrem hora passionis sue, et factus est sudor eius sicut gutte sanguinis [P71ra] decurrentis in terram, et angelus apparuit ei, confortans eum. 13. In summitate eiusdem montis est ora[B58rb]torium,18 ubi Dominus ascendit in celum. Prope est alia ecclesia, ubi fecit Dominus Pater Noster.19 Iuxta est Bethfage, olim viculus sacerdotum. Contra horam tertiam quasi miliario uno est Bethania, ubi Salvator resuscitavit Lazarum, et ibi est sepulchrum eius. Ibique est ecclesia sancte Marie Magdalene, que fuit olim domus Symonis leprosi, ubi dimisit ei Dominus peccata sua.20 14. Flumen vero Iordanis longe distat ab Ierusalemxix quasi miliaria .xx.xx satis habens asperum iter. Iericoxxi autem duas leugas abest a Iordane. Iordanis vero ab aquilonari parte veniens currit contra meridiem. Prope Iordanem est ecclesia sancti Iohannis Baptiste,21 ubi sunt monachi Greci Deo servientes ferme viginti. Ultra flumen est Arabia. 15. Non longe etiam ab ipso loco, ubi Dominus baptizatus est, est mare Mortuum, ubi deficit flumen Iordanis. Ibique fuerunt quatuorxxii civitates, Sodoma et Gomorra, Adame et Seboim,xxiii que olim perierunt iusto Dei iudicio. Mare Mortuum ideo vocatur, quia nichil 14 Cf. “Appendix ad Itinerarium Egeriae,” P1, ed. R. Weber, in Geyer and Cuntz, Itineraria et alia geographica, CCSL 175:97; Saewulf, ed. Huygens, Peregrinationes tres, CCCM 139:72. 15 Pringle, Churches, 3:287–306. 16 Pringle, Churches, 3:98–103. 17 Saewulf (1102–3) calls this an oraculum: ed. Huygens, Peregrinationes tres, CCCM 139:69; Pringle, Churches, 3:358–65. 18 Pringle, Churches, 3:73–88. 19 Pringle, Churches, 3:117–24. 20 Pringle, Churches, 1:122–37. 21 Pringle, Churches, 2:240–44. xiv

Ieronimi BP] Iheronimi L. Ecclesia B] Aecclesia L, Æcclesia P. xvi Ierusalem BP] Iherusalem L. xvii sepelivit corpus LP] corpus sepelivit B. xviii est iactus BP] iactus est L. xix Ierusalem BP] Iherusalem L. xx .xx. LP] viginti B. xxi Ierico P] Iericho B, Iherico L. xxii quatuor BP] .iiiior. L. xxiii Seboim PL] Seboym B. xv

ITINERARIA TERRAE SANCTAE MINORA III

35

potest in eo vivere, sed neque piscis natare nec vivere, nec aliqua creatura potest potare, et si ali[L127rb]qua volucris super ipsum mare volaverit, ilico cadens moritur. Et vocatur etiam mare illud flumenxxiv diaboli. 16. Mons quoquexxv ubi Dominus ieiunavit .xl.xxvi di[B58va]ebus et .xl.xxvii noctibus longe est a Iericoxxviii quasi tribus miliariis.

xxiv

flumen BLP] fluvium V. Mons quoque BLP] Monsque V. xxvi .xl. P] quadraginta B, .xla. L. xxvii .xl. P] quadraginta B, .xla. L. xxviii Ierico P] Iericho B. Iherico L. xxv

36

DENYS PRINGLE

Qualiter sita est civitas Ierusalem (c. 1100–05) P = Paris, BnF, MS Arsenal 1161 (olim 102), fol. 48ra–48vb (13c.). TM = ed. Tobler and Molinier, Itinera Hierosolymitana, 1:347–9. Qualiter sita est civitas Ierusalem Descriptio locorum sanctorum 1. In nomine Domini nostri Iesu Christi. Quicumque ad Ierusalem civitatem sanctam ire voluerit, semper ad solis ortum intendat, et sic, Deo ductore, ad sanctam Ierusalem veniet. Ab occidentali vero parte Mons Gaudii conspicitur conspicuus, a quo monte unum miliarium usque ad civitatem.22 Ad introitum vero civitatis Turris David habetur fortis. 2. Templum vero sancti Sepulchri est rotundum et super sanctum Sepulchrum in summitate templi foramen rotundum. In medio vero templi [48rb] est Sepulchrum Domini nostri Iesu Christi, similiter rotundum de foris. Intus autem quadratum invenitur. In introitu vero est porta australis, in occidentali vero parte alia, et ad meridiem porta alia. Per australem vero portam intrant homines et per aliam portam Sepulchri, que sola est, intratur intus, et per portam meridianam exeunt supra iam dicti homines. 3. In orientali parte est medius mundus. Inde non longe ad orientem est Mons Calvarie, in quo Dominus crucifixus est. Sub quo monte est Golgotha. A quo monte est longe Sepulchrum quantum potest homo iacere petram pugnalem. Ad sinistram Montis Calvarie est carcer, et prope carcerem ad sinistram partem columpna, in qua est ligatus. Contra meridiem a sancto Sepulchro sancta Maria Latina. A monte vero Calvarie est locus ad orientem ubi sancta Helena invenit Crucem Domini. 4. Inde ad orientem est Porta Speciosa,xxix que ducit ad Templum Domini.23 Quod Templum est rotundum, trinas habens portas24 et in circuitu atrium valde conspicuum. In quo Templo in medio est templum non manufactum,25 idxxx est tabernaculum, et virga Aaron, et caput Zacharie filii Barachie,26 et altare quod Iacob edificavit Domino,27 et due tabule testamenti, et archa federis Domini, et manna unde pascebantur filii Israel in deserto, con[46va]dita esse creduntur.28 Et in summitate Templi est lampada aurea pendens.29 A Templo vero Domini contra meridiem est Templum Salomonis. 22 This Mountjoy (mons Gaudii) was evidently north of Jerusalem, where the road from Nāblus, joined by that from Ramla-Lydda to the north-west, crossed the ridge of Raʾs al-Mashārif and pilgrims caught their first sight of the city: see Kedar, “Jerusalem’s two Montes Gaudii”; Pringle and Kedar, “The Site of the House of St. Mary of Mountjoy.” 23 The Porta Speciosa (cf. Acts 3.1–10) is here identified as the main west gate to the Temple area, today Bāb al-Silsila. 24 This reference to “triple doors” appears to confirm the existence of three-bayed porticos before each of the four doors of the building by the early twelfth century: see Pringle, Churches, 3:411. Compare also below Descriptio Ierusalem (group D), para. 3.1. 25 The templum non manufactum was the cave below the rock, supposedly representing the Holy of Holies. 26 Cf. 2 Chron. 24.20–22; Matt. 23.35. 27 Cf. Gen. 28.18–22. 28 The contents of the Holy of Holies are here as described in Hebr. 9.2–5. 29 Peter the Deacon describes this as a golden lamp, containing blood that Jesus shed when on the Cross (Liber de Locis Sanctis, ed. R. Weber, in Geyer and Cuntz, Itineraria et alia geographica, CCSL 175:95). Albert of Aachen identifies it as a golden vessel (vas), some 200 marks in weight, which some

xxix xxx

Speciosa] followed by est P. id P] recte ibi or ubi?

ITINERARIA TERRAE SANCTAE MINORA III

37

5. Ad orientem a Templo Domini extra portam atrii Probatica Piscina, quinque porticus habens.30 Inde ad exitum civitatis contra orientem est vallis Iosaphat, ubi est ecclesia et venerabile sepulchrum sanctissime et venerabilis Marie,31 et ortus Gethsemani, ubi Dominus oravit cum discipulis suis et ubi condiscipulo suo Iuda traditore est traditus. Inde ad orientem est mons Oliveti, unde Dominus celos ascendit et ubi discipulis suis Pater Noster scripsit. A monte vero Oliveti uno miliari‹o› est monumentum unde Dominus quatriduanum32 suscitavit Lazarum. Inde etiam ad orientem ultra leugas sex est locus ubi Dominus ieiunavit diebus .xl. et ubi a diabolo est temptatus, non superatus. A quo monte usque ad flumen Iordanis sex miliaria sunt. 6. A Ierusalem vero contra meridiem ultra quattuorxxxi miliaria est Bellehem, civitas David, in qua Christus natus, et puteus super quem stella descendit, que magos duxit ad puerum adorandum. 7. Extra portam Ierusalem contra meridiem prope est mons Syon, ubi sancta Maria de mundo migravit. Inde non longe est [48vb] Acheldemac, hoc est ager sanguinis. Inde etiam ad meridiem non longe est natatoria Siloe. Sub monte prope menia civitatis, ibi est locus ubi sanctus Petrus ploravit postquam Christum negavit. Contra septentrionem extra portam civitatis est locus ubi sanctus Stephanus fuitxxxii lapidatus. Et ita constructe sunt omnes orationes in Ierusalem et ego testis qui vidi et hunc parvissimum titulum scripsi. Explicit feliciter.

held to be the golden incense burner of the Temple (cf. Hebr. 9.4), others a vessel containing manna or the Lord’s blood; he adds that like the contents of the natural cave below the rock it was not among the treasures carried off by Tancred when he pillaged the Temple in 1099 (Historia Ierosolimitana: History of the Journey to Jerusalem, 6.23–25, ed. and trans. Susan B. Edgington, Oxford Medieval Texts (Oxford, 2007), 432–35; cf. Pringle, Churches, 3:400–401). 30 Cf. John 5.2. 31 Pringle, Churches, 3:287–306. 32 Quatriduanus means “(dead) for four days.” Cf. John 11.39: “Dicit ei Martha soror eius, qui mortuus fuerat: Domine, iam foetet, quatriduanus est enim.” xxxi xxxii

quattuor P] quatuor TM. fuit P] est TM.

38

DENYS PRINGLE

Hec sunt loca que habentur iuxta Hierusalem (late eleventh century) T = Trier, Bistumsarchiv (olim Dombibliothek), MS 95.93, fol. 61ra–61v (11/12c.). S = de Sandoli, Itinera, 2:153–57. Hec sunt loca que habentur iuxta Hierusalem commemoratione digna. 1. Vallis Iosaphath. Superior pars vallis Iosaphat continet locum in quo fuitxxxiii villa Iethsemani, in qua Ihesus tempore passionis, relictis discipulis, oravit ad Patrem. Iuxta hunc locum in descensu vallis Iosaphath est sepulcrum beate Virginis Marie.33 Hinc nonxxxiv quantum est iactus lapidis est locus in valle scilicet Iosaphath, ubi Iudei lapidaverunt Stephanum.34 Iuxta locum huius martyrii, beatus Iacobus,xxxv frater Domini, de muro precipitatus in vallem pertica fullonumxxxvi est interremptus.35 Hic iuxta sunt natatoria Siloe, per quexxxvii Christus gloriosa signa fecit. Hec sancta loca sunt in valle Iosaphath et adhuc plura. 2. Modo ascendamus ad montem Oliveti, in cuius pede est vallis Iosaphath. In ipso monte, non penitus in cacumine sed a latere versus meridiem, est Bethphage, quondam viculus sacerdotum,36 ubi Dominus Ihesus discipulos suos appropinquante passione misit in castellum postxxxviii asinum et pullum. In ipso autem cacumine montis est locus venerandus,xxxix lapidis signo ostensus, ubi Dominus Ihesus postxl dulcia colloquia sua et discipulorumxli celos ascendit. In circuitu lapidis huius dicunt sapientes Grecorum Hierusalem manentium terram veneratione et osculo Christianorum dignam, eo quod lacrimis discipulorum sitxlii irrigata propter absentiam corporis Christi et ideo quia ibi stabant aspicientes in celum quando audierunt vocem hanc: Viri Galilei, quid statis, et cetera. Hec loca sancta sunt in monte [61rb] Oliveti, et adhuc plura.

33

See Pringle, Churches, 3:287–306. The location of the stoning of St. Stephen in the Kidron valley seems to reflect a tradition dating from before 1099. The biblical account (Acts 7.58) does not indicate outside which gate the martyrdom occurred, but by the twelfth century most Latin accounts were locating it outside the north gate, near the church to which Stephen’s relics had been translated on 15 May 439 (see Wilkinson, Jerusalem Pilgrims, 162; Pringle, Churches, 3:372–79). This is where de Situ (para 1), Qualiter (para. 7) and the Descriptio Ierusalem (para 4.3) place it, though Innominatus II (c. 1165–c. 1175) refers to both traditions (see Denys Pringle, “Itineraria Terrae Sanctae minora II: Innominati II–V and VIII,” Crusades 19 (2020): 57–108, at 78, 86, paras 4 and 12.4). 35 Cf. Pringle, Churches, 3:185. 36 Bethphage erat viculus sacerdotum in monte Oliveti: Bede, Expositio in Lucae Evangelium 79 (ch. 19), ed. J. A. Giles, Venerabilis Bedæ Commentaria in Scripturas Sacras 5, The Complete Works of Venerable Bede 11 (London, 1844), 283; cf. Jerome, Epistulae 108.12, ed. I. Hilberg, CSEL 55 (ViennaLeipzig, 1912), 320 (villam sacerdotalium maxillarum). 34

xxxiii

fuit T] sunt S. non T] in S. xxxv Iacobus T] missing from S. xxxvi fullonum T] fullonis S. xxxvii sunt … per que T] est … per quem S. xxxviii post T] propter S. xxxix venerandus T] venerandi S. xl post T] per S. xli et discipulorum T] ad discipulos S. xlii sit T] fuit S. xxxiv

ITINERARIA TERRAE SANCTAE MINORA III

39

3. Hinc non est nisi miliare unum usque ad Bethaniam, castellum Marie et Marthe versus orientem, ubi adhuc venerabile sepulcrum Lazari, quem Dominus resuscitavit, a fidelibus multis queritur et videtur.xliii Sed et hoc nolo vos ignorare, quod idem Lazarus mirabiliter resuscitatus posteaxliv in insula Cipri extitit episcopus.37 4. Revertamurxlv ad occidentale latus vallis Iosaphath. In occidentali latere vallis est mons Syon et civitas Hierusalem. In ascensu montis Sion est templum, quod vocatur ecclesia Petri ad lacrimas,38 quia sancte mulieres venientes a monumento dicuntur ibidem eum invenisse flentem amare, quando preceptum eis fuerat ut irent dicere discipulis et Petro quod surrexisset Dominus. Ipsum vero cacumen montis vocatur Sion et ibi exstructa est ecclesia in honorem Domini et sancte Genetricis sue,39 que dicitur primitiva inxlvi Christianitate. Ibi cenavit Dominus cum discipulis. Ibi lavit pedes eorum. Ibi erat asilum apostolorum post resurrect(ione) Domini propter metum Iudeorum. Ibi descendit Spriritus Sanctus in igne super discipulos. Ibi composuerunt simbolum. Ibi etiam beata Maria migravit ex hoc seculo. Locus iste multum dilectus fuit a Domino ante nativitatem suam per potentiam et miracula sue divinitatis et post nativitatem per presentiamxlvii sui sacri corporis, cuius rei testem habemus David,xlviii si historialiter intellegere volumus. Dicit enim: Diligit Dominus portas Syon super o(mnia) t(abernacula) I(acob).40 5. Modo ingrediamus ipsam civitatem. Ibi est sepulcrum pro nobis crucifixi, supra quod edificatum est templum in modum illius templi quod edificatum est Aquisgrani beate Marie a Karolo Magno,41 excepto quod Hierosolimitanum templum unius est turris et illa eadem turris supra sepulcrum desuper aperta. 6. Modo exeamus de templo in [61v] parte aquilonis versus orientem. Ecce carcer in quem Dominus positus fuerat et iuxta ostium carceri versus meridiem locus ubi Dominus tractus de carcere sedebat, expectans cum custodibus carceris adventum Pilati cum Iudeis ad tribunal. Hic iuxta sunt gradus per quos est ascensusxlix ad templum, quondam pulchrum sed modol [de]structum, ubi inventum fuit lignum sancte Crucis.42 Iuxta hos gradus stat crux lapidea ad mensuram et for[mam]li crucis, quam Dominus portavit et quam Iudei Simonem Cirenensem

37

According to Orthodox tradition, after being brought back to life Lazarus fled to Cyprus and was later ordained bishop of Kition (Larnaka) by Paul and Barnabas: see Lazarus Georgiou, “Saint Lazarus in the East through the Scriptures and Tradition,” in Charalampos G. Chotzakoglou, Church of Saint Lazarus in Larnaka (Nicosia, 2004), 11–17. 38 See Pringle, Churches, 3:346–49. 39 See Pringle, Churches, 3:261–87. 40 Ps. 86.2. 41 For Charlemagne’s Palatine Chapel in Aachen, see above, p. 21 n. 60. 42 Templum here refers to the basilica of Constantine, which lay east of the courtyard and was destroyed in 1009. xliii

videtur T] Iudeis S. postea T] propterea S. xlv Revertamur T] Revertamus S. xlvi in T] inter S. xlvii presentiam T] potentiam S. xlviii David T] discipulos S. xlix ascensus] followed by est deleted. l sed modo T] fuit S. li et for[mam] T] missing from S. xliv

40

DENYS PRINGLE

portare fecerunt.43 Iuxta hanc crucem est c[a]pellula, ubi divisum est vestimentum et ubi super vestem missa est sors. Hic iuxta est locus ubi habita[vit] Adam usque ad mortem. Hic prope est locus Calvarie, ubi Dominus est crucifixus et ubi quondam Abraham immolavit Isaac. Ad pedem collis loci Calvarie est altare, in eodem loco ubi sep[ultus] fuit Adam. 7. In civitate ipsa versus montem Oliveti est templum. Probatica piscina. Iuxta Templum vero Salemonis versus aquilonem est Templum Domini.

43 The steps and the stone cross recall Egeria’s description of the chapel of the Cross above the rock of Calvary, situated in the south-west corner of the courtyard between the rotunda and the basilica of Constantine and accessible from the latter’s south aisle: see Itinerarium Egeriae, 24.7, 24.11, 25.1, 25.6, 25.8–9, 25.11, 27.2–3, 27.6, 30.1, 31.4, 35.2, 36.3–5, 37.1–8, 39.1–2, 40.2, 43.8, ed. Franceschini and Weber, in Geyer and Cuntz, Itineraria et alia geographica, CCSL 175:68–84, 86; Wilkinson, Egeria’s Travels, 74–76, 87, 124–29, 132–40, 142, Coüasnon, Church of the Holy Sepulchre, 50–53, pls. vii–xi, xv, xvii.

ITINERARIA TERRAE SANCTAE MINORA III

41

Descriptio Ierusalem (Group A) Vo = Vatican, Biblioteca Apostolicana Vaticana, MS Ottoboniana latina 169, fol. 67ra–rb (early 13c.). M = ed. S. G. Mercati, Rendiconti della Pontificia Accademia Romana di Archeologia 12 (1936): 133–56. Modo descriptio Ierusalem talis est. 1. In occidentali parte est introitus Ierusalem iuxta turrem David. 2.1 Infra civitatem est sepulchrum Domini, in capite cuius deforis est mundi medium. Inde ex parte septentrionali carcer Domini, iuxta ligatio, flagellatio, coronatio, despoliatio. Ibique vestimenta sua fuerunt divisa. Mons Calvarie.lii 2.2 Subtus Golgotha, ubi sanguis Domini cecidit per petram fissam. Super quem montem est locus in quo sancta Helena crucem Domini invenit. 3.1 Subterius in orientali parte est Templum Domini, in quo sunt .iiiior. introitus: ab oriente, ab occidente, ab aquilone, ab austro, 3.4 ubi etiam, ut dicunt, fuit archa Domini. Ibique sunt tabule testamenti et vii. candelabra aurea, et virga Aaron,44 3.6 et cubiculum, ubi archangelus Gabriel apparuit Zacharie prophete.45 4.1 Ibi de prope est Porta Speciosa46 versus vallem Iosaphat. Ex altera parte iuxta Templum versus meridiem est Templum Salomonis, ad cuius caput est cunabulum Domini, lectumque genetricis eius.47 4.2 Et ex altera parte Templi Domini est ecclesia beate Anne,48 matris Marie, Domini matris, iuxta quamliii est Probatica Piscina. 5.1 Extra civitatem est vallis Iosaphat, ubi ecclesia est in qua sancta Maria ab apostolis fuit sepulta.49 [67rb] 5.2 Ibidem est locus Gethsemani, ubi Iudas Iudeis Ihesum tradidit. Ibi est locus prope ubi oravit Dominus noster, 5.3 deinde mons Oliveti, ubi Dominus ascendit in celum et scripsit: Pater Noster. 5.4 Inde in orientali parte est Bethania, ubi Dominus resuscitavit Lazarum. 6.1 Mons Syon est in australi parte civitatis, ubi migravit sancta Maria et ubi cenavit Dominus cum discipulis suis, et ubi dedit apostolis Spritum Sanctum in die Pentecostes. 6.2 Supterliv quem montem est Acheldemach et ex altera parte versus orientem est natatoria Siloe. 7.1 Bethleem est in australi parte civitatis .ii. leugas, ubi Dominus natus fuit. Ibique est presepium, ubi Dominus natus fuit et positus, et mensa ad quam beata Maria cum tribus regibus Deum requirentibus comedit, balneum eius, lectus, ubi etiam, ut dicunt, sunt .cxliiiior. milia ab Herode occisi. 8. In orientali etiam parte est flumen Iordanis .x. leugas longe a civitate. In illa via est Iericho, iuxta quam est Quarantana, ubi Dominus ieiunavit .xl. dies. 44

Cf. Hebr. 9.2–5. Not Zechariah the prophet but Zechariah, the father of John the Baptist (Luke 1.5–23). 46 The Beautiful Gate (Porta Speciosa) is more usually identified as Bāb al-Silsila on the west, the east gate being the Golden Gate (Porta Aurea). 47 St. Mary’s chapel (Masjid Mahd ʿĪsa, Miḥrāb Maryam) beside al-Aqṣā Mosque, see Pringle, Churches, 3:311–14 48 Pringle, Churches, 3:142–56. 49 Pringle, Churches, 3:287–306. 45

lii liii liv

Calvarie] corrected from Calcarie Vo. iuxta quam Vo] iuxtaque M. Supter Vo] suptus M.

42

DENYS PRINGLE

Descriptio Ierusalem (Groups B and C) Edition based on: Cu = Cambridge: University Library, MS MM. V. 29, fols. 156v–157r (formerly 155v–156r) (12c.) (group B). With additional readings noted from: Lc = London, BL: Bibl. Cotton MS, Claudius A IV, fol. 192 (early 12c.) (group B). Ls = London, BL: Sloane MS 3548, fols. 6r–6v (14–15c.) (group C). S = ed. S. de Sandoli, Itinera, 4:370–75 (after Lc). R = ed. P. E. D. Riant, Exuviae Sacrae Constantinopolitanae, 2:211–12 (after CuLc). Exora Christum, qui librum legeris istum: ut det scriptori Ernulfo, quicquid debetur honori.lv Notum sit omnibus fidelibus statutum civitatis Ierusalem sic esse dispositum. 1. Ab occidente est introitus Ierusalemlvi per portam David. 3.1 Ab oriente est Templum Domini, in quo sunt quatuorlvii introitus:lviii ab oriente, ab occidente,lix a meridie, ab aquilone. 3.2 Et ibi est presentatiolx Domini a matre et sancto Simeone.lxi Et ibi est passus Domini, quando abscondit se a Iudeis et abiit elxii Templo.50 3.3 Et ibi est evigilatio Iacob per angelum, qui Iacob ibidem edificavit primum altare, super quod infudit oleum.51 3.4 Et ibi dicuntur dudum fuisse virga Aaron, et due tabule testamenti, et septemlxiii candelabra aurea, et archa federis Domini.52 Sed Neemiaslxiv sacerdos, propter futuram civitatis destructionem, abstulit inde et recondidit in fovea quadam in vallelxv Ebron.53 3.6 In eodem templo est quidam locus inter orientem et meridiem, [Ls6v] contra tertiam,lxvi qui vocatur confessio Domini datalxvii apostolis.54 Et ibi, ut aiunt, liberavit

50

Cf. John 8.59. Cf. Gen. 28.18–22. 52 Cf. Hebr. 9.2–5. 53 According to 2 Macc. 2.4–8, it was Jeremiah (Hieremias) who hid the tabernacle and ark in a cave on the mountain from which Moses had seen the promised land, though Nehemiah is mentioned in v.13. 54 The cave below the rock, whose entrance is on the south-east. 51

lv

Exora … honori Cu] omitted from LcLs. Ierusalem] added above line in Lc. lvii quatuor Cu] .iiiior. Lc, iiii. Ls. lviii introitus] added in margin in Lc. lix ab occidente] added in margin in Lc. lx presentatio CuLs] presentacio Lc. lxi Simeone CuLc] Symeone Ls. lxii e CuLcLs] a S. lxiii septem CuLc] vii. Ls. lxiv Neemias CuLc] Neemyas Ls. lxv valle CuLs] vale Lc. lxvi contra tertiam CuLs] contra terciam Lc, i.e. the direction of the sun at tierce, around 9 a.m. lxvii data CuLcLs] elata S. lvi

ITINERARIA TERRAE SANCTAE MINORA III

43

Dominus Chananeamlxviii in adulterio deprehensam.55 Et ibidem fuit annuntiatio Zacharie ab angelo quodlxix haberet filium.56 4.1 Ante templum, hautlxx longe a templo contra meridiem, est ecclesia sancte Marie, in qua suntlxxi cunabulum Christi et cumqualxxii marmorea in qua balneatus fuit.57 Sub templo supradicto est Porta Aurea,58 per quam Dominus intravit sedens super asinam. 4.2 A sinistra parte eiusdem Templi est ecclesia sancte Anne,59 que fuit mater matris Domini. Et ibidem est Probatica Piscina.lxxiii (4.3 see below) 5.1 Postea vallis Iosaphat extralxxiv civitatem, ubi sancta Maria sepulta fuit ab apostolis. 5.2 Ibilxxv vero est Iezemani, ubi Dominus captus fuit. 5.3 Superius autem est mons Oliveti, unde Dominus ascendit in celum, et ibidem iuxtalxxvi fecit Pater Noster. 5.2 Et suptuslxxvii in colle montis est locus ubi ter oravit in nocte sudans sanguinem, et ille locus est in honore Salvatoris. 5.4 A Monte Oliveti contra tertiam est Betphage, ubi Dominus ascendit super asinam. Postlxxviii in eadem parte est Bethania, ubi Dominus Lazarumlxxix resuscitavit. 6.1 A civitate contra meridiem est mons Sion, in quolxxx sancta Maria iacuitlxxxi infirma et migravit a seculo, unde eam apostoli detulerunt in Iosaphat. Lavit etiam ibi Dominus pedes discipulorum et ibi cenavit cum eis. Et ibidem Spiritus Sanctus in eos descendit. 6.2 Subtus vero Syonlxxxii prope est Acheldemac,lxxxiii id est sepultura peregrinorum, et ex altera parte est Syon,lxxxiv ubi gallus cantavit et Petrus penituit et flevit amare. 6.1 Et ibidem desuper est Galilea, ubi Dominus discipulis apparuit. 6.2 Subtus est natatoria Siloe, ubi Dominus cecum illuminavit. 4.3 Ab aquilone extra Ierusalem sanctus Stephanus lapidatus fuit.

55

John 8.3 refers to her simply as mulierem in adulterio deprehensam. The mulier Chananaea, on the other hand, was cured of a demon (Mark 15.21–28). 56 Cf. Luke 1.11–20. 57 The chapel of St. Mary (Masjid Mahd ʿIsa, Miḥrāb Maryam) beside al-Aqṣā Mosque, see Pringle, Churches, 3:311–14. 58 Cf. Pringle, Churches, 3:103–9. 59 Cf. Pringle, Churches, 3:142–56. lxviii

Chananeam Cu] Cananeam LcLs. quod CuLcLs] qui S. lxx haut CuLc] at Ls. lxxi sunt CuLc] super S. lxxii et cumqua] et cumqua sunt Cu, et conca changed from et c(um) qua Lc, et conqua Ls, est una conqua S. lxxiii piscina CuLc] pastina (parsnip?) or a little more plausibly pastura or pascua Ls. lxxiv extra CuLs] extra extra Lc. lxxv Ibi CuLc] Ibidem Ls. lxxvi iuxta Cu] iuxta ubi LcLs. lxxvii suptus Cu] subtus LcLs. lxxviii post CuLs] primo Lc. lxxix Dominus Lazarum] Lazarum added above Dominus Cu, Lazarum Dominus LcLs. lxxx quo LcLs] qua Cu. lxxxi sancta Maria iacuit CuLc] iacuit sancta Maria Ls. lxxxii Syon CuLs] Sion Lc. lxxxiii Acheldemac CuLc] Acheldemach Ls. lxxxiv est Syon CuLc] Syon est Ls. lxix

44

DENYS PRINGLE

2.1 Infra vero civitatem Ierusalem est sepulchrumlxxxv Domini in lapide incisum et lapis revolutus ante hostium.lxxxvi Foris in capite ipsius sepulchrilxxxvii est compassus medii orbis, ut dicunt. Et ultra est carcer Domini, deinde bendatio oculorum, et flagellatio ad columpnam, et [C157r] vestimentorum divisio, et coronatio de spinis. Deinde mons Calvarie, ubi Christus crucifixus fuit. 2.2 Subtus est Golgatha,lxxxviii ubi sanguis eius defluxit per scissam petram. Et super hunc montem est locus ubi sancta Helenalxxxix crucem Domini queri fecit et invenit. 2.4 Paulo ante sepulchrumxc est altare ubi mater Domini et soror eius et Magdalene cum aromatibus venerunt ad monumentum.60 2.5 Deinde ante sepulchrumxci non longe est sancta Maria, que Latina dicitur,61 ubi filius matrem discipulo et discipulum matri commendavit, et ubi ipsa, dum filius crucifigebatur, doluit, flevit, capillos pre tristicia dirupit.xcii Deinde ante sepulchrum est hospitale, id est domus pauperum.62 7.1 In Bethleem, quatuor milibusxciii a civitate semotam, natus fuit Christus. Et ibi est presepe ubi positus fuit, et puteus ubi stella requievit, et tabula in qua tres magixciv requirentes Dominum comederunt, et .c.xl.iiii. miliaxcv Innocentum, et sepulturaxcvi sancti Ieronimi, et Paulaxcvii et Eustochium.xcviii 8. Flumen Iordanis longe est ab Ierusalem decemxcix leugas, et a flumine .iiiior. milibus est ortus Abraham et inc orto Iericho, et ab orto contra tertiamci est flumen diabolorum, ubi Sodoma et Gomorra subverse sunt. Et ab orto versus occidentem est Quadragenaria, ubi Dominus ieiunavit. Ibidem est Mons Excelsus, ubi diabolus Dominum temptavit. In millesimo nonagesimo sextocii anno ab incarnatione Domini ante Pascha incepit iter Ierusalem. In millesimo nonagesimo nonociii anno ab incarnatio Domini IDUS IULII civitas Ierusalem capta fuit. Eodem die Divisio Apostolorum.

60

This altar is mentioned in de Situ Urbis and Qualiter Sita but not in the other versions of Descriptio Ierusalem. Saewulf mentions a “church” of St. Mary, where Jesus’ body was anointed, but notes that some held that Mary Magdalene encountered the risen Christ at the “compass,” here mentioned above (ed. Huygens, Peregrinationes tres, CCCM 139:66). 61 Pringle, Churches, 3:236–52. 62 Pringle, Churches, 3:192–207. lxxxv

sepulchrum CuLc] sepulcrum Ls. hostium CuLc] ostium Ls. lxxxvii sepulchri CuLc] sepulcri Ls. lxxxviii Golgatha CuLc] Galgotha Ls. lxxxix Helena CuLc] Elena Ls. xc sepulchrum CuLc] sepulcrum Ls. xci sepulchrum CuLc] sepulcrum Ls. xcii pre tristicia dirupit CuLc] disrupit tristitia Ls. xciii quatuor milibus Cu] .iiiior. milibus, corrected from .iiiior. militibus Lc., .iiii. miliaribus Ls. xciv qua tres magi] followed by qua tres magi Cu. xcv .c.xl.iiii. milia CuLs] .c.xl.iiiior. milia Lc. xcvi sepultura CuLc] sepulcre S. xcvii Paula LcLs] Pauli Cu. xcviii Eustochium CuLc] Eustachium, et Ls. xcix decem Cu] .x. LcLs. c in LcLs] omitted in Cu. ci contra tertiam Cu] contra terticam Lc, versus occidentem Ls. cii millesimo nonagesimo sexto CuLc] m°.lxxxx°.vi°. Ls. ciii millesimo nonagesimo nono Lc] nono omitted in Cu, m°.lxxxx°.ix°. Ls. lxxxvi

ITINERARIA TERRAE SANCTAE MINORA III

45

Haeciv sunt reliquiecv que apud Constantinopolim in capella imperatoris monstrantur. Crux dominica et eiusdem crucis tria frusta. Clavis quo crucifixus est in cruce Dominus. Corona de spinis qua coronatus est. Sudarium quod fuit super caput eius et lintheum quo precinctus fuit quando lavit pedes discipulorum. Collarium ferreum, quo astrictum fuit collum eius dum flagellaretur ad columnam ligatus. Harundo qua percussum est caput eius. Pera dominica et littere quas in eadem scripsit Dominus, que pera cum litteris consignata est signo imperatoris in capsula aurea. Et in alia capsula est mantile, quod visui Domini applicatum ymaginemcvi vultus eius retinet. Pelvis marmorea in qua lavit pedes discipulorum. Monstratur etiam cristallina fiala, in qua, ut dicunt, de sanguine Domini habetur. Lancea qua latus eius perforatum est. Lapis qui suppositus fuit capiti eius in sepulchro. De vestimento Domini. Sandalia genitricis Domini et zonacvii eius ibidem. Caput sancti Pauli apostoli. Caput sancti Iacobi apostoli cum brachio eiusdem. Caput sancti Andree. Capus sancti Thome. Caput sancti Luce evangeliste.cviii Caput sancti Mathei. Manus sancti Iohannis baptiste dextera cum brachio. Manus sancti Stephani prothomartyris.cix Caput sancti Simeonis. In ecclesia sancti Iohannis Baptiste occipitium capitis eius et caput sancti Zacharie patris eius. In ecclesia sancti Georgii et brachium eiusdem cum manu dextera. In ecclesia sancte Sophie sanguis sancti Pantaleonis cum lacte mixtus. In ecclesia Apostolorum passus sancti Petri in mar(mor)e pario, et sepultura sancti Constantini imperatoris et sancte Helenecx matris eius et aliorum imperatorum. Purpurea clamis qua indutus fuit Christus. Lignum quod fuit sub pedibus eius pendentis in cruce. Sotulares Christi. Os femoris sancti Gregorii et unum os sancte Marie Egiptiace. Brachium sancti Stradii.63 Caput sancti Martini. Caput sancti Basilii et os pectoris sancti Iohannis Baptiste. Capita sanctorum Cosme et Damiani. Capita sanctorum Stephani et Theodoricxi martir(um). Brachium sancti Diomedis.cxii Brachium sancti Fortunati. Brachium sancti Quiriaci martir(is). Caput sancti Pantaleonis martiris.cxiii

63 St. Eustasius. The Oxford MS mentions immediately after Holy Apostles the reliquiae sancti Eustachii martyiris et sociis suis in a small chapel in the cisterna Bona (Oxford, Bodleian Library, MS Digby 112, fol. 26r; ed. Ciggaar, “Description de Constantinople,” 258). civ

Hae Lc] Hec Cu. reliquie CuLcLs] relliquie R. cvi ymaginem Cu] imaginem Lc. cvii zona Lc] zonam Cu, dona S. cviii Caput sancti Andree … Luce evangeliste Cu] added in margin in Lc and reinserted by R in the wrong place. cix prothomartyris Cu] prothomartiris Lc. cx Helene Cu] Elene Lc. cxi Theodori Cu] sancti Theodori Lc. cxii Diomedis Lc] Diomedi Cu. cxiii Pantaleonis martiris Cu] Pantleonis Lc. cv

46

DENYS PRINGLE

Descriptio Ierusalem (Group D) WZ (1104–c. 1120)

Oc (c. 1150–60)

Y (1099–c. 1120)

O = Oxford, Corpus Christi Y = New Haven: Yale W = Wolfenbuttel, College, MS 32, fols. University Library, Herzoglichen 90vb–91rb (late 13c.). Beinecke MS 481.77 Bibliothek, Cod. Guelf. (early 12c.). 131 Gudiani Latini, D = Ed. L. F. Davis, Yale fols. 19r–20v (12c.). University Library Z = Zeitz, Cathedral Gazette 65.1–2 (1990), library MS (12c.), ed. 11–19. J. G. Eccard, Corpus S = Ed. I. Shagrir, Historicum Medii Crusades 10 (2011): Æevi, 2 vols. (Leipzig, 1–22. 1723), 2:1345–48. De Ierosolima.

1. Ab occidente introitus 1. Ab occidente est introitus 1. Ab occidente est introitus Ierusalem per portam David. Ierusalem per portam David. Ierusalem per portam David.

2.1 Intra civitatem est Sepulchrum Domini. In capite foris est medium mundi.64 Ultra in Iordanecxiv est carcer, et ubi alapas illi dedit, et ubi Dominus genua flexit et ligatio et flagellatio, et ubi despoliatuscxv fuit, et pretorium ubi coronatus fuit corona spinea, et mons Calvarie in quo crucifixus fuit. 2.2 Subterius est [20r] Golgatha, ubi sanguis Domini cecidit per petra‹m› fixam. Super quem montem locus ubi Helena sanctamcxvii crucem invenit.

64

2. Intra civitatem est Sepulcrum Domini. Foris in capite ipsius est medium mundi. Ultra est carcer, ligatio, flagellatio et ubi dispoliatus fuit, et pretorium ubi coronatus fuit corona spinea. Mons Calvarie est locus ibi iuxta in quo crucifixus fuit.

2. Intra ci(vi)tate‹m› est Sepulchrum Domini. Foris in capite ipsius est medium mundi. Ultra est carcer, ligacio, flagella{la}cio, locus ubi coronatus fuit, vestimenta divisa, mons Calvarie ubi fuit crucifixus.

2.2 Subterius est Golgatha, ubi sanguis Domini per petram fixam cecidit. Super quem montem est locus ubi sancta Elena regina sanctam crucem invenit.

2.2 Subtus est Golgatha, ubi sanguis Domini cecidit per petram cissam. Super quem monte‹m› invenit sancta Elena crucem Domini.

Here the centre of the world is placed in the courtyard outside the apse, as it was when Saewulf saw it (ed. Huygens, Peregrinationes tres, CCCM 139:66).

ITINERARIA TERRAE SANCTAE MINORA III

Ce (1099–c. 1120)

Vp (1099-c. 1120)

47

U (1099–c. 1120)

U = Uppsala, UniversitetsCe = Cambridge, Emmanuel Vp = Vatican, Biblioteca bibliotek, MS C204, College, MS 14,3 fol. Apostolicana fols. 63v–64r (late 128 (early 12c.). Vaticana: MS Palatina 15c.). latina 927, fol. 217v (12c.).

Qualiter constitutum sit sepulchrum Domini in Hyerusalem et cetera loca.

Nota.

1. Ab occidente est introitus Iherusalem per portam David.

1. Ab occidente est introitus urbis per portam David.

1. Ab occidente est introitus Ierusalem per portam David.

2.1 Intra civitatem est Sepulchrum Domini. Foris in capite ipsius est medium mundi. Ultra est carcer, ligatio, flagellatio ubi coronatus fuit, vestimenta divisa. Mons Calvarie locus iusta in quo crucifixus fuit.

2. Intra civitatem est sepulchrum Domini, in cuius capite est medium mundi. Ultra carcer, ligatio, flagellatio ubi coronatus fuit, despoliatus et vestimenta divisa. Mons Calvarie locus est iuxta urbem, in quo crucifixus fuit.

2.1 Intus intra civitatem est Sepulchrum. Deforis in (r)etro est medium mundi. Ultra est carcer, ligatio et flagellatio ubi coronatus fuit depo(s)itus, despoliatus, vestimenta divisa. Mons Calvarie locus ubi crucifixuscxvi fuit.

2.2 Subtus est Golgatha, ubi sanguis Domini cecidit super petram cissam. Super quem montem est locus ubi sancta Elena crucem Domini invenit.

2.2 Subter Golgotha, ubi sanguis cecidit super petram scissam. Supra quem montem est locus ubi Elena crucem invenit.

2.2 Superius est Galga(tha), ubi sanguis Domini cecidit et fidit petram. Iuxta hunc locum est locus ubi sancta Helena crucem invenit.

cxiv cxv cxvi cxvii

Iordane] Iordanem Z, recte oriente or possibly gardino/iardino? despoliatus] despilatus W, Pilatus Z. crucifixus] followed by est deleted. sanctam] scanctam W, s. Z.

48

2.3 Ibi deforis ubi milites vestimenta eius diviserunt. Ibi est sudarium eius. 2.5 Ibi prope est ecclesia sancti Iohannis Hospitalis Dei, ubi infirmi peregrini percottidie iacent, et ecclesia sancte Marie Magdalene et sancte Marie Latine.65

3.1 Ab oriente Templumcxviii Domini, quod Salomon fecit, in quo sunt quatuor introitus: ab oriente, ab occidente, a meridie, ab aquilone. Ab oriente porte tres, ab occidente porte tres, a meridie porte tres, ab aquilone porte tres.66 3.2 Ibi intus est altare sancti Symeonis, ubi Dominus a matre fuit presentatus.cxix

DENYS PRINGLE

2.3 Ibi deforis est ubi milites vestimenta diviserunt. 2.5 Hic prope est sancta Maria Latina. Iuxta est domus in qua peregrini et infirmi per cotidie iacent. Et ibi deforis ostenditur ubi sancta Maria deflebat filium suum pendentem in cruce.

3.1 Ab oriente est Templum Domini, quod Salomon fecit, in quo sunt quatuor introitus: ab oriente, ab occidente, a meridie, ab aquilone. Ab oriente porte .iii., ab occidente porte .iii., a meridie porte .iii., ab aquilone porte .iii. 3.2 Ibi deintus est presentatio Domini a matre et ibi suscepit Simeon Christum in ulnas suas et dixit: Nunc dimittis, etc.67 Et ibi super rupem apparent vestigia pedum Domini 3.3 et ibi vidit Iacob scalam per quam angeli ascendebant et descendebant.68 3.4 Subterius in confessione, 3.4 In Templum subterius ubi aliquamdiu dormiv(it), est in confessione. Ibi ibi dicitur fuisse archa aliquamdiu Christum federis, in qua fuerunt virga pausasse dicitur. Et ibi est Aaron et tabule testamenti sancta sanctorum. Et ibi et de manna Domini et .vii. dicitur fuisse archa federis candelabra aurea.69 Domini, in qua fuerunt virga et tabule testamenti et .vii. candelabra aurea.

2.5 Huic prope est sancta Maria Latina. Iusta est hospitale.

3.1 Ab oriente est Templum Domini, in quo sunt iiiior introitus: ab oriente, ab occidente, a meridie, ab aquilone.

3.2 Ibi est presentacio Domini.

3.3 (see 3.5 below)

3.4 Ibi fuit archa federis Domini, et due tabule testamenti, et virga Aaron, et septem candelabra aurea, et confessio apostolorum.

65 Saewulf calls these two churches respectively S. Maria Parva and S. Maria Latina, the former served by Latin nuns, the latter by monks (ed. Huygens, Peregrinationes tres, CCCM 139:67). On all three houses, see Pringle, Churches, 3:192–217, 236–61. 66 The reference in WZ and Oc to “triple doors” reflects Qualiter sita (para. 4) and like it seems to confirm the existence of three-bayed porticos before each of the four doors in the early twelfth century: see Pringle, Churches, 3:411. 67 Luke 2.29. 68 Cf. Gen. 28.10–22. 69 The contents of the Holy of Holies as described in Hebr. 9.2–5.

ITINERARIA TERRAE SANCTAE MINORA III

49

2.5 Hinc prope est sancta Maria Latina. Iusta est domus Domini in qua iacent infirmi.

3.1 Ab orientali parte est Templum Domini, quod Salomon fecit, in quo sunt .iiiior. introitus: ab oriente, ab occidente, a meridie, ab aquilone.

3.1 Subterius est ab occidente Te‹m›plum Domini, quod Salomon fecit significationem, in quo quattuor introitus sunt, ab oriente, ab occidente, a meridie, ab aquilone.

3.1 Ab oriente est Templum Domini et domus Salomonis. Iuxta Templum sunt quatuor introitus: ab occidente, ab oriente et meridie et aquilone.

3.2 (see 3.6 below)

3.3 Et in medio Templo est lapis ubi Iacob vidit scalam. 3.4 Ibi sunt arca federis Domini et tabule testamenti et virga Aaron et septem candelabra aurea.

cxviii cxix

3.4 Et ibi sunt archa federis Domini et tabule testamenti et virga Aaron et vii. candelabra aurea.

templum] templi WZ. presentatus W] praesentatis Z.

3.4 Et ibi est spelunca, ubi angelus Zacharie apparuit, et ec(iam) dicitur esse archa federis Domini.

50

DENYS PRINGLE

3.5 (see 3.3 above)

3.5 Et ibi Iacob dormivitcxx et hic Iacobus fuit mactatus.70

3.6 Ibi sanctus Iohannes fuit nuntiatus.cxxi

3.6 Et ibi angelus Zakarie apparuit. Ibique sanctus Iohannes nunciatus fuit.71

4.1 A meridie est Porta Speciosa,72 unde Dominus intravit in Ramis Palmarum, quando sedebat supra pullum asine. Subterius est Templum Salomonis.73 In angulo muri civitatis est cunabulum Domini et lectum genitriciscxxii Dei et balneum eius.74 Subterius in muro civitatiscxxiii ab oriente est porta, que dicitur Principa‹lis›, per quam Dominus ad passionem ductus fuit.75 4.2 Ex alia parte ab aquilone est Probatica Piscina, .v. porticus habens, que dicitur Bethsaida.

4.1 A meridie est Porta Sponsa.76 Subterius est Templum Salomonis. In angulo muri civitatis est cunabulum Christi et balneum eius et lectus genitricis eius. Sub Templo Domini ab oriente in muro civitatis est Porta Aurea, per quam Dominus intravit in ramis palmarum.

4.1 In angulo civitatis est cunabulum Christi et balneum et lectum sue genitricis. Sub Templo Domini est Porta Aurea, per qua‹m› Dominus intravit cu‹m› ramis palmarum.

4.2 In vi[91ra]cinia Templi est sancta Anna,77 mater Dei genitricis. Iuxta est Probatica Piscina.

4.2 A sinistra{m} parte est ecclesiacxxiv Sanctæ Annæ et Probatica Piscina. Superius est Sanctæ Marie Macdalenæ.cxxv 78 4.3 Extra civitate‹m› ab aquilone fuit lapidatus sanctus Stephanus.

4.3 (see 7.3 below)

70 St. James the Less was martyred by being thrown from the Temple and bludgeoned with a fuller’s club (Eusebius, Historia Ecclesiastica 1.23.1–8, Loeb 1:168–75; Jerome, de Viris Illustribus 11, PL 23:613; cf. Pringle, Churches, 3:182–83). 71 Cf. Luke 5–25. 72 The east gate, or Golden Gate (Bāb al-Raḥma), facing the Mount of Olives. The Beautiful Gate (Porta Speciosa) was later more usually identified with Bāb al-Silsila on the west. 73 Al-Aqṣā mosque. 74 In the chapel of St. Mary (Masjid Mahd ʿĪsa, Miḥrāb Maryam): see Pringle, Churches, 3:311–14. 75 Perhaps the Jehoshaphat Gate (Bāb Sitti Maryam), through which Jesus would have been brought after his arrest in Gethsemane, although this may be simply a second reference to the Golden Gate (cf. Oc). 76 The Promised Gate or Gate of Paradise, evidenty a mistake for Speciosa. As in WZ, the two gates referred to (Porta Sponsa and Porta Aurea) appear to be the same gate. 77 See Pringle, Churches, 3:142–56. 78 On the Jacobite cathedral of St. Mary Magdalene, see Pringle, Churches, 3:327–35.

ITINERARIA TERRAE SANCTAE MINORA III

3.5 (see 3.3 above)

3.6 Et ibi est presentatio Domini a matre, et ibi dicitur esse passus Dominus, et ibi est sancta sanctorum.

3.6 (see 3.4 above)

4.1 A meridie est Porta Aurea, per quam Dominus intravit cum ramis palmarum quando sedebat super pullum asine.

4.1 Ab oriente Porta Speciosa. Sub Templo Salomonis est cunabulum eius et lectum genitricis Dei et balneum eius.

4.1 A meridie est Porta Speciosa. Sub Templo Salomonis est cunabulum Christi.

4.2 A sinistra parte est ecclesia sancte Anne, matris sancte Marie, et Probatica Piscina.

4.2 et ex alia parte Probatica Piscina

4.2 Et in sinistra parte est Probatica Piscina.

4.3 (see 7.3 below)

cxx

dormivit] dormuitt D. nuntiatus W] nunciatus Z. cxxii genitricis W] genetricis Z. cxxiii civitatis] civitate WZ. cxxiv ecclesia] ecclesie Y. cxxv Sanctæ Marie Macdalenæ] sanctae maria maedalenae D, Sancta Maria Macdalena S. Marie added above line in Y. cxxi

51

52

DENYS PRINGLE

5.1 Ab oriente est vallis Iosaphat, in qua sancta Dei genitrix ab apostolis sepulta fuit.79 5.2 Ibi deforis est villa, que dicitur Gethsemani, ubi Iuda Iudeis Salvatorem tradidit. Exinde noncxxvi longe, scilicet quantus est iactus lapidis, ubi oravit.80

5.3 Superius est mons Oliveti, unde Dominus in celum ascendit et ibi fecit ‹Pater› Noster.82 5.4 Subterius ex alia parte est Bethania, ubi Dominus Lazarum resuscitavit. Ibi est ecclesia,83 ubi Magdalena pedes Ihesu cum lacrimis lavit et capillis tersit.

79

5.1 Foris a civitate est Iosaphat, in qua sancta Dei genitrix ab apostolis sepulta fuit. 5.2 Ibidem Gessemani, ubi Iudas Iudeis Salvatorem tradidit. Et ibi est Cedron et Campus Floridus, ubi eratcxxvii iudicium.81 Et inde non longe, id est quantus iactus est lapidis, ubi Deus ante passionem oravit. 5.3 Superius est Mons Oliveti unde Dominus in celum ascendit, et ibi prope fecit Pater Noster. 5.4 Subterius est Bethania, ubi Dominus Lazarum resuscitavit.

5.1 Extra civitate‹m› ab oriente est vallis Iosaphat, ubi sancta Maria sepulta fuit ab{a} apostoli‹s›. 5.2 Ibi est Iessemani, ubi Iudas Christum tradidit. Prope est locus ubicxxviii oravit Christus.

5.3 Superius est mons Oliveti, ubi Dominus ascendit in celum. Ibi fecit Pater Noster. 5.4 Subtus est Bethania, ubi Dominus suscitavit Lazarum.

See Pringle, Churches, 3:287–306. See Pringle, Churches, 3:98–103, 358–65. 81 An allusion to the Last Judgement, cf. Joel 2.12: Consurgant et ascendant gentes in vallem Iosaphat, quia ibi sedebo ut iudicem omnes gentes in circuitu. However, thirteenth-century pilgrims place the Campus Floridus (Field of Flowers) between Jerusalem and Bethlehem: see Pringle, Pilgrimage, 141, 171, 178, 221, 222, 232, 339. 82 Matt. 6.9–13. 83 This church would have been the east church, dating originally from the sixth century. The west church over the tomb of Lazarus was only built after 1138. See Pringle, Churches, 1:122–37. 80

ITINERARIA TERRAE SANCTAE MINORA III

53

5.1 Extra hanc civitatem vallis est Iosaphat, in qua sancta Dei genitrix sepulta fuit ab apostolis. 5.2 Ibidem Getsemani, ubi Iudas Iudeis Salvatorem tradidit. Et ibi prope est locus, ubi oravit Christus.

5.1 Foris a civitate est vallis Iosaphat, in qua Dei genitrix sepulta fuit ab apostolis.

5.1 Foris civitate est vallis Iosaphat, in qua sancta Dei genitrix sepulta ab apostolis.

5.2 Ibidem et Iethsemani, ubi Iudas Iudeis Salvatorem tradidit. Hinc locus ubi oravit Christus.

5.2 Ibidem sequitur Iezemani, ubi Iudas Ihesum tradidit. Hinc est locus ubi Christus oravit.

5.3 Superius est Mons Oliveti, unde Dominus ascendit in celum, et ibi fecit Pater Noster. 5.4 Subtus est Bethania, ubi Dominus suscitavit Lazarum.

5.3 Subterius est Mons Oliveti, ubi Dominus ascendit in celum, et ibi fecit Pater Noster. 5.4 Subterius est Bethania, ubi Dominus suscitavit Lazarum.

5.3 Superius est Mons Oliveti, undecxxix Deus ascendit in celum, et ibi fecit Pater Noster. [64r] 5.4 Ex alia parte est Bethania, ubi Christus resuscitavit Lazarum.

cxxvi cxxvii cxxviii cxxix

non W] in Z. erat] recte erit. ubi] followed by Iudas Christum Y. unde] or possibly ubi.

54

DENYS PRINGLE

6.1 A meridie est mons Syon, ubi sancta Maria migravit. Ibi est locus, ubi Dominus lavit pedes discipulorum. Ibi est Galilea, ubi discipulis post resurrectionem apparuit et tabula in qua cum eis cenavit. Et ibi Spiritum Sanctum super apostolos in die Pentecostecxxx misit. Et ibi est ecclesia sancti Thome apostoli, ubi dixit: Nisi videro in manibus eius figuram clavorum, non credam.84 Et ibi Dominus ei apparuit.85 6.2 Subterius est Galli cantus, [20v] ubi Petro Dominus peccata dimisit.86 Ibi prope est natatoria Siloe. Ex alia parte est Acheldemac, sepultura peregrinorum.87

84

6.1 A meridie est mons Sion, ubi sancta Maria migravit et ubi Dominus pedes discipulorum lavit, et tabula in qua Dominus cum eis cenavit. Et ibi est Galilea, ubi discipulis post resurectionem apparuit et ostentit Thome manus et latus. Et ibi repleti sunt Spiritu Sancto in die Pentecosten

6.1 A meridie est [m]ons Syon, ubi migravit sancta Maria. Ibi est tabu[la], ubi Dominus cenavit cum discipulis et lavit pedes eorum, et ibi est Galilea ubi Dominus aparuit discipulis.cxxxi Ibi venit Spiritus Sanctus super eos in die Pentecosten.

6.2 Et non longe ab ecclesia,cxxxii id est quantus est iactus lapidis, est pretorium ubi Dominus iudicatus fuit et ubi Petrus flevit amare.88 Subterius est Gallicantu, ubi Dominus Petro peccata dimisit.89 Ibi prope estcxxxiii Natatorie Siloe. Ex alia parte est ager Acholdemach, sepultura peregrinorum.

6.2 Subtus natatoria Syloe, Acheldemac.

John 20.25. All these sites, including the “church” of St. Thomas, lay within the church of St. Mary of Mount Sion: see Pringle, Churches, 3:261–87. 86 Pringle, Churches, 3:346–49. 87 Pringle, Churches, 3:222–28. 88 Luke 22.62; cf. Matt. 26.75. 89 There is some confusion here, as most texts associate Peter’s denial with the Praetorium and his tears with St. Peter of the Cock-crow (in Gallicantu). The location of the Praetorium outside the church of Mount Sion indicates a date around 1160, when the chapel of St. Saviour was built between the main church and the city wall (see Pringle, Churches, 3:346–49, 365–72). 85

ITINERARIA TERRAE SANCTAE MINORA III

55

6.1 A meridie est mons Sion, in quo migravit sancta Maria, et ibi est Galilea, ubi Dominus apparuit discipulis, et ibi est tabula, in qua cum eis cenavit, et ibi venit Spiritus Sanctus super illos in die Pentecosten.

6.1 Mons Syon a meridie. Ibi migravit sancta Maria, et ibi est Galilea, ubi cenavit cum discipulis suis, et ibi dedit Spiritum Sanctum super apostolos in Pentecosten.

6.1 Iuxta Ierusalem est Mons Syon, ubi migravit sancta Maria. Ibi est Galilea, ubi Dominus cenavit cum discipulis suis. Et ibidem est locus ubi discipuli acceperunt Spiritum Sanctum.

6.2 Ex alia parte est spelunca, ubi ploravit Petrus post gallicantum. Subtus est natatoria Siloe, ubi Dominus illuminavit cecus. [verso] Ex alia parte est Acheldemac sepultura peregrinorum, hoc est ager sanguinis.

6.2 Ex alia parte Acheldemach, sepultura peregrinorum, et ex alia parte natatoria Syloe.

6.2 A meridie est Acheldamach, id est sepultura peregrinorum. Ex alia parte est spelunca ubi ploravit Petrus. Subtus montem sunt natatoria Siloee.

cxxx

Pentecoste W] Pentecostes Z. discipulis] added above line Y. cxxxii ecclesia] followed by idem. cxxxiii est] recte sunt. cxxxi

56

DENYS PRINGLE

7.1 Bethleemcxxxiv est longe ab Iherusalemcxxxv .ii. leugas. Ibi Dominus natus fuit, et puteus ubi stella cecidit. Ibi .cxl. quatuor milia martyres, qui ab Herode interfecti fuerunt. Ibi deforis est tabula, in qua sancta Dei genitrix cum tribus magis Dominum querentibus comedit.90

7.1 Bethleem longe est hinc. Id estcxxxvi ubi Dominus natus fuit, et presepe ubi Dominus positus fuit, et puteus super quem stella requievit, et tabula in qua sancta Maria cum tribus regibus commedit, et balneum eius. Et ibi passi sunt .xl.iiiior.m. Innocentes ab Herode rege, et ibi fuit Christus circumcisus. 7.2 Et non longe ‹a› Bethleem est ecclesia in sinistra parte, ubi Rachel sepulta fuit.91 7.3 Extra Ierusalem est ecclesia, ubi sanctus Stephanus lapidatus fuit.93

8. De Iherusalem ad flumen Iordanis .x. leugas. De Ihericho autem ad unam leugam mons excelsus conspicitur, ubi Dominus a diabolo fuit temptatus. Subterius est ubi ieiunavit .xl. diebus et .xl. noctibus.94

90

8. De Ierusalem ad flumen Iordanis .xl. stadia. In orto Abrahe est Ierico. Desuper est Quarentena, ubi Dominus ieiunavit .xl. diebus et .xl. noctibus. Superius est mons excelsus, ubi Dominus a diabolo temptatus est.

7.1 Betleem longe abcxxxvii Ierusalem duas leugas, ubi natus fuit Christus, et presepe ubi positus fuit, et puteus ubi stela requievit,cxxxviii et tabula ubi reges comederunt.cxxxix [Et ibi centum quadraginta .iiiior. milia martyre]s et sanctus Ieronimus iacent.

7.2 De Ierusalem ad sanctum Abraam .x. leu[gas]. [verso] Ibi iacent Abraam, Ysaac et Iacob, Sarra, Rebecca, Lia et Iosep.92 7.3 (see 4.3 above)

8. De Ierusalem ad flumen Iordanis x. leugas. In orto Abrae est Iericho. Superius est Qu[arant]ena, ubi Dominus ieunavit .xl. diebus et .xl. noctibus. Superius est mons excelsus,cxl ubi Dominus a diabolo temptatus fuit.

Pringle, Churches, 1:137–56. A domed structure built over Rachel’s tomb is first mentioned by al-Idrīsī in 1154 (Géographie d’Édrisi, trans. P. Amédée Jaubert, 2 vols., Recueil de voyages et de mémoires publié par la Société de Géographie 5–6 (Paris, 1836–40), 1:343; Guy Le Strange, Palestine under the Moslems (London, 1890), 299). This text appears to confirm that it was a Christian addition: see Pringle, Churches, 2:176–78. 92 On the church in Hebron, see Pringle, Churches, 1:224–39. 93 See Pringle, Churches, 3:372–79. 94 On the chapels on the Mount of Temptation, see Pringle, Churches, 1:252–58. 91

ITINERARIA TERRAE SANCTAE MINORA III

7.1 Bethleem longe est .ii. legas, ubi Dominus natus fuit ‹et› in presepe positus fuit, et puteus ubi stella requievit, et tabula in qua sancta Maria cum tribus regibus Dominum querentibus commedit, et balneum. Et ibi est sanctus Ieronimus et centum quadraginta .iiiior. milia martyres, qui interfecti fuerant ab Herode.

7.1 Bethleem hinc sex miliaria distat, ubi Dominus natus fuit. Et ibi est presepium. Et ibi est tabula in qua beata Maria cum tribus regibus comedit, balneum et lectum. Et ibi est puteus. Ibique sunt .c.xl. iiiior. ‹milia› martyres, qui interfecti sunt ab Herode.

57

7.1 Bethleem longe a Ierhusalem miliaria quinque, ubi Dominus natus fuit. Ibi est presepe. Ibi est tabula, ubi Dei genitrix cum tribus regibus Dominum inquirentibus comedit. Ibi est balneum Christi, et ibi fuerunt Innocentes interfecti et sepulti, qui ab Herode fuerunt interfecti.

7.3 Extra Ierusalem ab aquilone fuit lapidatus sanctus Stephanus. 8. De Ierusalem ad flumen Iordanis .x. legas. In orto Abraham est Iericho. De super est Quarantena, ubi Dominus ieunavit .xl. diebus et .xl. noctibus.

cxxxiv

8. De Ierhusalem usque ad flumen Jordanis, ubi Dominus baptizatus est a Johanne, sunt miliaria xxiiii. In eadem via est Jerico. A sinistra parte est desertum, ubi Dominus ieiunavit xl diebus et xl noctibus. Hinc mons excelsus est valde.

Bethleem W] Bethlehem Z. ab Iherusalem W] ad Ierusalem Z. cxxxvi id est] the abbreviation .i. may perhaps have been part of a distance, such as .ii. leugas, that was subsequently miscopied. cxxxvii ab] ad Y. cxxxviii requievit] requiens D. cxxxix comederunt] comedens Y. cxl excelsus] excelsum Y. cxxxv

58

DENYS PRINGLE

9. De Ierusalem ad montem Tabor dies iii. Ibi est transfiguracio Domini. Hinc Nazaret duas leugas, ubi Dominus nunciatus fuit [per] angelum atque nutritus. Mare Galilea hinc longe .v. leugas. Prope est locus ubi Dominus saciavit v milia ho(m)i(n)umcxli de v panibus et duobus piscibus.95

Idus Iulii fuit introitus sancte civitatis, quando Dominus liberavit eam de potestate Saragenorum et misit in manibus Christianorum. eodem die divisio Apostolorum.96

Anno ab incarnatione Domini .mo.lxxxo.ixo. iduscxliii Iulii [91rb] fuit introitus Ierusalem, quando Dominus liberavit eam de manibus Saracenorum et tradidit Christianis. Eodem die Divisio Apostolorum. B(ernard)us,cxliv sancta loca prenominata o(mnia), servus Dei, tam per medio anime sue et patris sui, quam per medio parentum atque benefactorum suorum, Deo auxiliante et sancta Mari[a] intercedente, circuivit.

95 96

Tabgha, see Pringle, Churches, 2:334–39. 15 July (1099).

Quod Dominus bened(ica)t.cxlii Idus Iulii capta est civitas sancta Ierusalem ‹a› Franci‹s›. Eodem die Divisio Apostolorum.

ITINERARIA TERRAE SANCTAE MINORA III

Deo gratias. Amen. Idus Iulii introitus Ierusalem sancte civitatis, quam Dominus liberavit de manibus paganorum et tradidit in manibus Christianorum. Eodem die divisio apostolorum.

Idus Iulii captus est civitas Ierhusalem a Christicolis et eo die divisio fuit apostolorum.

Qui orent pro nobis ut vivamus per omnia secula seculorum. Amen.

cxli cxlii cxliii cxliv

hominum] homines DS. bened(ica)t] benedit D, benedi‹xi›t S. .mo.lxxxo.ixo. idus] recte .mo.lxxxxo.ixo. idus. B(ernard)us] B’ Oc; or possibly B(enedict)us.

59

60

DENYS PRINGLE

Descriptio Ierusalem (Group E) (after 1099–c. 1120) Cg Cambridge, Gonville and Caius College, MS 151-201, fol. 109r (13c.).

Oa Oxford, Bodleian Library, MS Ashmole 1280, part V, fols. 107r–v (13c.).

Hec est descriptio Iehrusalem et eorum que De sita Ierusalem. circa eam sunt. 1. Ab oriente est introitus Ierusalem per portam David.

1. Ab oriente est introitus Ierusalem per portam David.

2.1 Non longe infra civitatem est sepulcrum Domini. Foris in capite ecclesie est medium mundi. Ultra non longe est carcer. Ibique prope est ligatio. Ibique est flagellatio. Ibique est spinea corona coronatus. Ibique spoliatus et vestimenta eius divisa. Ibique in ipso ordine est Mons Calvarie, ubi crucifixus fuit Dominus. 2.2 Subter est Golgatha, ubi sanguis Domini 2.2 Subtus est Golgocha, ubi sanguis cecidit per petram scissam. Secus Montiscxlv cecidit supra petram fissam. Super quem montem est locus ubi sancta Helena crucem Calvarie est locus, ubi sancta Helena invenit Domini invenit. crucem Domini. 2.5 Illic prope est sancta Maria Latina. Iuxta domus Domini, in qua iacent infirmi.97 2.1 Intra civitatem est sepulcrum Domini. Foris in capite ipsius est medietas mundi. Ultra est carcer, ligacio atque flagellacio, ubi coronatus fuit et vestimenta divisa. Mons Calvarie locus iuxta, in quo crucifixus fuit.

3.1 Ab orientali parte est Templum Domini, quod Salom(on) fecit, in quo sunt iiiior introitus: ab oriente, ab occidente, a meridie, ab aquilone.

97

3.198 Subterius contra orientem ex alia parte civitatis est Templum Domini, quod Salomon fecit, quatuor portas habens, prima ab oriente, secunda ab occidente, tercia ad meridiem, quarta ab aquilone, que habent significationes quatuor partium mundi, deforis quatuor99 ang(u)los habens. Per unum quemque ang(u)lum duodecimcxlvi passus voluitur.

The Hospital of St. John. Apart from the description of the contents of the Holy of Holies (3.4) and Jesus’ words to the woman caught in adultery (3.6), paras. 3–4 represent a summarized version of what appears in Peter the Deacon (1137), Liber de Locis Sanctis, ed. R. Weber, in Geyer and Cuntz, Itineraria et alia geographica, CCSL 175:95 (sections C.3–4). 99 More correctly octo, as in Peter the Deacon, ibid., 95 (C3). 98

cxlv cxlvi

montis Oa] recte montem. duodecim] duodescim Oa.

ITINERARIA TERRAE SANCTAE MINORA III

3.4 Ibi est archa Domini federis, et tabule testamenti, et virga Aaron, et vii candelabra aurea, et ibi est presentacio Domini a matre, et ibi dicitur esse passus Dominus, et ibi est sancta sanctorum.

61

3.4 In medio Templi est saxum magnum, circumdatum parietibus, in quo ab uno latere est tabernaculum, ubi est archa federis Domini et virga Aaron et due tabule testamenti et septem candelabra aurea,100 sicut dixit beatus Paulus apostolus, et mensa et propositio panum, aureum habenscxlvii turibulum, et archa testamenti, in qua urna aurea habens manna, supraque erat Cherubin glorie.101 3.6 Ab alio latere est tabernaculum apertum, per quod omnes ingrediuntur, ubi Dominus intrabat. Ibi sacrificabat Zacharias quando annunciatus fuit beatus Iohannes. Ibi est lectus ubi Dominus iacebat et ibi dixit mulieri: Ubi sunt qui te accusabant?102 Et ibi scripsit in terra: Siquis sine peccato est, mittat in eam lapidem.103 3.7 Super saxum in medio Templi pendet ampulla aurea in qua est sanguis Christi, cum petra scissa.104 Extra Templum est locus ubi Zacharias filius Barachie interfectus fuit contra meridiem.

4.1 Non longe est Templum Salomonis. Subtus est cunabulum Christi et balneum eius et lectus genetricis eius. Subtus Templum Domini est Porta Speciosa, in qua Dominus intravit quando sedit super pullum asine et ibi dixit beatus [107v] Petrus paralitico: Surge, ambula.105 4.2 A sinistra parte est ecclesia sancte Anne 4.2 Contra aquilonem est ecclesia sancte matris sancte Marie et Probatica Piscina. Anne, ubi beata Maria tribus annis nutrita fuit. Et ibi non longe est Probatica Piscina.

4.1 A meridie est Porta Speciosa. In medio muro civitatis est cunabulum Christi et balneum eius et lectum genitricis Dei. Sub Templo Domini est Porta Aurea, per quam Dominus introivit cum ramis palmarum, quando sedebat super pullum asine.

100 The passage “In medio Templi … candelabra aurea” also appears in Lr (see Ciggaar, “Description de Constantinople,” 240). 101 The contents of the Holy of Holies are described here as in Paul’s letter to the Hebrews 9.2–5. 102 John 8.10. 103 Cf. John 8.7. 104 Understood to mean that the vessel contained Christ’s blood “(shed) when the rock was split,” rather than blood “with the split rock.” Cf. Peter the Deacon, in Geyer and Cuntz, Itineraria et alia geographica, CCSL 175:95 (C3): “Super saxum in medio templi pendet candela aurea, in qua est sanguis Christi, qui per petram scissam descendit.” On this lamp, see also Qualiter sita est civitas above (para. 4 and footnote). 105 Cf. Acts 3.6. cxlvii

habens] followed by tabernaculum Oa.

62

DENYS PRINGLE

5.1 Extra civitatem est vallis Iosaphat, in qua sancta Dei genitrix sepulta fuit ab apostolis. 5.2 Ibidem est Iessemani, ubi Iudas Iudeis Salvatorem tradidit. Ibi prope est ubi Christus oravit. 5.3 Subtercxlviii est mons Oliveti, unde Dominus ascendit in celum, et ibi fecit Pater Noster. 5.4 Subtus est Bethania, ubi Dominus suscitavit Lazarum.

6.1 A meridie est mons Syon, ubi migravit sancta Maria. Et ibi est Galilea, ubi Dominus aparuit discupulis suis, et ibi lavit pedes eorum, et ibi est tabula in qua cum eis cenavit, et ibi venit Spiritus Sanctus super illos in die Pentecosten. 6.2 Ex alia parte est spelunca, ubi sanctus Petrus ploravit post galicantum. Subtus est Natatoria Syloe, ubi Dominus illuminavit cecum. Ex alia parte Acheldemac, sepultura peregrinorum, hoc est ager sanguinis.

106

5.1 Foris civitatem contra orientem est vallis Iosaphat, in qua sancta Dei genitrix sepulta fuit ab apostolis. 5.2 Ibidem est Gethsemani, ubi Iudas Salvatorem Iudeis tradidit. Et inde non longe, scilicet quantum iactus lapidis, est locus ubi oravit. 5.3 Superius est mons Oliveti, unde Dominus ascendit in celum, et ibi Pater Noster fecit. 5.4 Subterius Bethania, ubi Dominus resuscitavit Lazarum. 5.5 Per illum montem itur ad Iordanem et in ipsa via est locus ubi Cain occidit Abel.106 In planicie est Iherico et ortus Abrahe. Contra aquilonem montis est ubi Dominus ieunavit quadraginta diebus. Iordanis longe est a Ierico milibus .v. 6.1 Mons Syon a meridie Ierusalem, ubi migravit sancta Maria. Ibi est Galilea, ubi Dominus primus apparuit, et ibi est mensa, qua cum discipulis suis cenavit, et ibi dedit Sanctum Spiritum discipulis in die Pentecostes. 6.2 Subterius est Gallicantus,cxlix ubi Petro Dominus peccata dimisit, et non longe inde estcl Natatoria Syloe. Ex alia parte est Acheldemach, sepultura peregrinorum.

John of Würzburg, c. 1165 (ed. Huygens, Peregrinationes tres, CCCM 139:103), following Rorgo Fretellus (Count Rodrigo version, c. 1137: cf. Paris, BnF, MS latin, 18018, fol. 107vb), locates Cain’s murder of Abel in the territory of Damascus, while Innominatus II (c. 1165–75) places it near Hebron (Pringle, “Itineraria Terrae Sanctae minora II,” 89, para 19.2). cxlviii

Subter] recte superius, cf. Ce. Gallicantus] Gallicanustus Oa. est] followed by natori Oa.

cxlix cl

ITINERARIA TERRAE SANCTAE MINORA III

7.1 Belleem est longe duabuscli leugis, ubi Dominus natus fuit, et presepe ubi Dominus fuit positus, et puteus ubi stella requievit, et tabula ubi sancta Maria cum tribus regibus Deum querentibus comedit, etclii .c.x.l iiiior milia Innocentes qui interfecti fuerunt ab Herode.

7.1 Bethleem longe est ab Ierusalem duas leucas, ubi Dominus natus fuit, et presepe ubi fuit positus, et puteus, ubi stella apparuit, et ibi centum .xl. quatuor milia martyres ab Herode interfecti fuerunt. Et ibi est tabula, in qua sancta Maria cumcliii tribus magis requirentibus comedit, et ibi est balneum eius.

7.3 Extra civitatem Ierusalem ab aquilone fuit lapidatus prothomartyrcliv Steffanus. 8. De Ierusalem ad flumen Iordanis .x. leugaus. In orto Abraham est Ierico. Desuper est Quadratena ubi Dominus ieiunavit .xl. diebus et .x.l. noctibus. Super est mons excelsus, ubi Dominus temptatus fuit a diabolo.clv

8. De Ierusalem ad flumen Iordanis .xi. leucas. De Ierico autem ad duas leucas mons excelsus conspicitur, ubi Dominum diabolus temptavit.

Idus ‹Iulii› fuit introitus in Ierusalem sancta civitate, quando Dominus liberavit eam de manibus paganorum et tradidit eam in manibus Christianorum.clvi Eodem die Divisio Apostolorum. In millesimo nonagesimo sextoclvii anno ab incarnatione Domini ante Pascha incepit iter. Et in millesimo nonogesimo nono anno ab incarnatione Domini idus Iulii civitas Ierusalem capta fuit.

cli

duabus] changed from duobus Cg. et] followed in Ce by balneum. Et ibi est sanctus Ieronimus et … cliii cum] followed by ma Oa. cliv prothomartyr] martyr added above line Cg. clv Super … diabolo] lacking from Ce, but present in Oc and Y. clvi Christianorum] Ce ends here. clvii sexto] added above line Cg. clii

63

“Esteemed brothers, comrades of mine…”: Constructing the Piety and Pugnacity of the Military Orders through Battle Rhetoric Connor C. Wilson Lancaster University [email protected]

Abstract The purpose of this article is to outline the phenomenon of battle rhetoric in medieval historical writing within the context of the crusading movement. It explores several examples of this narrative convention which involve members of the military orders, specifically the Templars and Hospitallers, from two contemporary historical narratives: the Itinerarium Peregrinorum et Gesta Regis Ricardi and the Libellus de expugnatione Terrae Sanctae per Saladinum. In doing so, it will display the dynamic nature of battle rhetoric in this period and argue that the unique characteristics of the military orders made them ideal subjects for material that sought to engage with contemporary ideas of spirituality, virtue and the practice of violence. Furthermore, this article argues that the battle rhetoric of the Libellus de expugnatione Terrae Sanctae per Saladinum, examined in comparison with other contemporary crusade orations, provides evidence that this text was produced in a monastic, specifically Cistercian, environment.

Medieval pre-battle speeches were a significant feature of historical writing, which followed a number of classical rhetorical models.1 However, medieval authors did not simply copy examples of ancient orations into their own works.2 When The basis of this article was a paper entitled “The Representation of the Military Orders in ThirteenthCentury Battle Rhetoric,” presented at a panel on crusading, chaired by Bernard Hamilton for “The Military Orders: Piety, Pugnacity and Property, 7th International Conference” (St. John’s Gate, London, 7–10 September 2017). 1 For the influence of classical rhetoric upon medieval historiography see Richard W. Southern, “Aspects of the European Tradition of Historical Writing: I. The Classical Tradition from Einhard to Geoffrey of Monmouth,” Transactions of the Royal Historical Society, 5th ser., 20 (1970): 173–96. John O. Ward, “Classical Rhetoric and the Writing of History in Medieval and Renaissance Culture,” in European History and Its Historians, ed. Frank McGregor and Neil Wright (Adelaide, 1977), 1–10. John O. Ward, “Some Principles of Rhetorical Historiography in the Twelfth Century,” in Classical Rhetoric and Medieval Historiography, ed. E. Breisach, Studies in Medieval Culture 19 (Kalamazoo, 1985), 103–66; L. D. Reynolds, ed., Texts and Transmission: A Survey of the Latin Classics (Oxford, 1983), 98–112, 332–34. 2 John Bliese, “The Courage of the Normans – A Comparative Study of Battle Rhetoric,” Nottingham Medieval Studies 35 (1991): 2 n. 7–9. Cf. William of Poitiers, Histoire de Guillaume le Conquérant, ed. and trans. Raymond Foreville (Paris, 1952), pp. xxxix, 184 n. 1. Beryl Smalley, Historians in the Middle Ages (London, 1974), 20. 65

66

CONNOR C. WILSON

crafting speeches, medieval authors were far more imaginative than has hitherto been acknowledged. Rather than verbatim reports of actual harangues, medieval battle orations are best understood as purposeful rhetorical inventions, carefully crafted by their authors. Medieval understandings of truth accommodated such invented speeches, distinguishing them from simple fabrication. However, oration authors worked within a rhetorical tradition which demanded plausibility and verisimilitude.3 While often containing non-hortatory content, such as orders from commanders to soldiers, most of the content of these speeches is hortatory, comprising a variety of motivational appeals that seek to encourage the soldiers being addressed. These motivational appeals have been described by John Bliese as “largely interchangeable.”4 Although battle orations often include recognizable tropes and recurring themes, these were not deployed unthinkingly and often imparted only a portion of an oration’s meaning, which is otherwise communicated through classical and scriptural references, exegesis, and other methods which require further contextualization and analysis. Rather than simply presenting “plausible” motivations for combatants or providing a direct window into the psychology of medieval soldiery, battle orations were opportunities for authors to reinforce the wider themes of their narratives, present moral-didactic lessons and, at climactic moments, to explore ideas of virtue, justice and faith through direct speech.5 That these often highly literary speeches should be understood as such, rather than reflecting the words of actual commanders, has been previously challenged in reference to elements of seemingly pragmatic instruction.6 A notable example drawn from a crusading context is found in a speech delivered by Baldwin I at the battle of Ramla (1101), reported by Fulcher of Chartres, which concludes with a warning against flight, because of the distance to the crusaders’ homelands.7 This “don’t flee” topos, while perhaps reflecting the influence of Vegetius’s De Re Militari on the futility of flight to preserve soldiers’ lives, is not unique to Fulcher’s account, and there is no evidence that this, rather than any other trope, reflected Baldwin’s words, if any address actually occurred. The notion is not given any particular emphasis, appearing as almost a coda to an address otherwise concerned with salvation. A similar instance in Albert of Aachen’s account of the First Crusade 3 Ruth Morse, Truth and Convention in the Middle Ages (Cambridge, 1991), 7. Matthew Kempshall, Rhetoric and the Writing of History, 400–1500 (Manchester, 2011), 350–427. David S. Bachrach, “Conforming with the Rhetorical Tradition of Plausibility: Clerical Representation of Battlefield Orations against Muslims, 1080–1170,” The International History Review 26/1 (2004): 2–3. 4 John Bliese, “Aelred of Rievaulx’s Rhetoric and Morale at the Battle of the Standard, 1138,” Albion, 20/4 (1988): 546. 5 A detailed study of battle orations in the context of the twelfth-century crusading movement is the subject of Connor Wilson, The Battle Rhetoric of Crusade and Holy War, c. 1099–c. 1222 (Abingdon, forthcoming). 6 John F. Benton, “‘Nostre Franceis n’unt talent de fuir’: The Song of Roland and the Enculturation of a Warrior Class,” Olifant 6 (1979): 237–58. John Bliese “When Knightly Courage May Fail: Battle Orations in Medieval Europe,” The Historian 53/3 (1991): 503. 7 FC, pp. 411–12.

BATTLE RHETORIC OF THE MILITARY ORDERS

67

is likewise preceded by a much lengthier appeal to Christian unity and brotherhood on the battlefield.8 In both instances useless flight is set against, and subordinate to, the physical or spiritual victory that will result from standing firm against the foe. The rhetorical guidance available to monks and clerics crafting battle rhetoric in the early twelfth century accommodated the intercalation of seemingly contradictory motivational appeals, provided all such material was deemed appropriate (aptus). This essential ingredient of inventio, the discovery or construction of arguments that served to make texts convincing, accounts for injunctions against flight from battle in the far-flung, hostile environment the earliest crusaders had traversed. The possible presence of crusade veterans amongst the audiences of crusade narratives would have heightened the need for verisimilar material. The risk of even a well-constructed, “truthful” account of a battle having its credibility shattered by first-hand familiarity is betrayed by a marginal note in the manuscript of De expugnatione Lyxbonensi, that admits a battle speech by the English warband’s leader, Hervey of Glanville, was not his actual words.9 Yet the notion that invented events or speech could carry figurative or even spiritual truths, and were far from simple fabrication, had been accepted since Augustine, who stressed the need for discerning figurative truth by way of indirect signification, in order to circumvent the challenges to gaining direct knowledge in a postlapsarian world.10 The early crusading movement provides an excellent avenue into battle rhetoric. In this period, the boundaries and definitions of spiritual warfare, holy war and holy warriors were shifting, and authors were rethinking ideas of just war, pilgrimage and penance, which came together conceptually in the crusade. Marcus Bull has commented that prior to 1100 western Europe had not developed an active or innovative historiographical culture, yet the proliferation of texts written within a few decades of the First Crusade illustrates the ability of the Latin historiographical tradition to respond to such events.11 One such respondent, Guibert of Nogent, made a sharp contrast between the spiritually meritorious campaigns of the First Crusade with “needless wars” in the West, wherein soldiers were driven by pride and cupidity, which “merited eternal death and definite damnation.”12 Such accounts from the First Crusade seemed to exert great influence upon Bernard of Clairvaux, who like Guibert drew upon the example of Judas Maccabeus in his treatise on the fledgling Order of the Temple

8 9

AA, 4.41, pp. 312–14. Charles W. David, ed., The Conquest of Lisbon: De Expugnatione Lyxbonensi (New York, 2001),

104. 10 Henry Brown, trans., Seventeen Short Treatises of S. Augustine, Bishop of Hippo (Oxford, 1847), 447–50; Kempshall, Rhetoric, 383–88. 11 Marcus G. Bull, “The Historiographical Construction of a Northern French First Crusade,” in The Haskins Society Journal 25: 2013 Studies in Medieval History, ed. Laura L. Gathagan and William North (Woodbridge, 2015), 37–38. Richard W. Southern, History and Historians: Selected Papers of R. W. Southern, ed. Robert J. Bartlett (Oxford, 2004), 11–85. 12 GN, pp. 112–13 (my translation).

68

CONNOR C. WILSON

Liber ad milites templi de laude novae militiae.13 Bernard presented the Templars as a reformed, sanctified knighthood, who safely fought “the battles of their Lord, fearing neither sin if they smite the enemy, nor danger at their own death; since to inflict death or die for Christ is no sin,” while at the same time claiming that secular knights fought for “no purpose except death or sin.” Bernard’s criticisms of “the old knighthood” were not all spiritual. He insisted knightly culture drove men to “unreasonable flashes of anger, the thirst for empty glory or the hankering after some earthly possession.”14 Nevertheless, it has been argued that despite the austere lifestyle of the military orders, those knights who became members would not have had to change their priorities significantly. Despite the rhetoric of St. Bernard and others who stressed that the “new knighthood” was the very opposite of the old, the members of the military orders were admired not only because of their harsh discipline but because they were perceived as embodying many of the military virtues so valued by secular chivalry.15 Like the wider context of crusading ideology, the evolution of the military orders in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries reflects the development of ideas about warfare, and the spiritual status of those who took part in it. The nature of the military orders, who took vows typical of contemporary monasticism yet nevertheless engaged in warfare, makes them a unique and valuable avenue through which to examine battle rhetoric. For this purpose the battle rhetoric of two Latin prose narratives which took their final forms in the early thirteenth century and concern the military orders will be explored here. The works in question are the Itinerarium peregrinorum et gesta regis Ricardi16 and the Libellus de expugnatione Terrae Sanctae per Saladinum.17 The origins and nature of these texts merit some comment.18 While the Rolls Series edition identifies the Itinerarium as being written by Richard, canon of the Holy Trinity London, and the Libellus was once attributed to the Cistercian chronicler Ralph, who was abbot at Coggeshall in Essex from 1207 to 1218, 13

Nicholas E. Morton, “The Defence of the Holy Land and the Memory of the Maccabees,” Journal of Medieval History 36 (2010): 283. 14 Bernard of Clairvaux, Treatises III, Cistercian Fathers Series: Number Nineteen, trans. Daniel O’Donovan, (Kalamazoo MI, 1977), 132–34. 15 Helen Nicholson, Templars, Hospitallers and Teutonic Knights: Images of the Military Orders, 1128– 1291 (London, 1993), 35–40. According to the vernacular poet turned Cluniac monk Guiot de Provins, while by no means without their flaws, the Templars were seen to be a wall against the Turks, renowned for never fleeing in battle: Guiot of Provins, “La Bible,” in Les oeuvres de Guiot de Provins, poète lyrique et satirique, ed. John Orr (Manchester, 1915), lines 1709–88. 16 Richard de Templo, The Itinerarium Peregrinorum et Gesta Regis Ricardi, ed. W. Stubbs, 2 vols,, RS 38 (London, 1864–65), 1:264 [hereafter Itinerarium]. Translations from: Helen Nicholson, trans., The Chronicle of the Third Crusade: A Translation of the Itinerarium Peregrinorum et Gesta Regis Richardi (Aldershot, 1997). 17 Text and translations from Keagan Brewer and James H. Kane, eds., The Conquest of the Holy Land by Ṣalāḥ al-Dīn: A Critical Edition and Translation of the Anonymous Libellus de expugnatione Terrae Sanctae per Saladinum (Abingdon, 2019) [hereafter Libellus]. 18 For the most recent at length discussion of the authorship, manuscripts and previous editions of Libellus, see Brewer and Kane, The Conquest of the Holy Land, 9–105.

BATTLE RHETORIC OF THE MILITARY ORDERS

69

both texts have complex histories. By far the lengthier of the two accounts, the Itinerarium has long been recognized as a composite work.19 In the introduction to his 1962 edition of the early part of the Itinerarium, Hans Mayer argued convincingly for the distinction between the longer compilation text (dubbed IP2), which included material from Ralph of Diceto, Roger of Howden, and a Latin translation of Ambroise’s Estoire de la Guerre Sainte, from the so called IP1 based on the manuscript of Jacques Bongars or the G manuscript.20 It was this text, which contained only part of Book 1, that seemed to have circulated separately before being utilized by a later compiler. Concerning the author, Helen Nicholson has posited that the most likely conclusion is that IP1, which was not itself entirely original, was written by an English crusader perhaps in the crusade camp between August 1191 and September 1192.21 While the text called IP2 was once attributed to the poet Geoffrey of Vinsauf, both Stubbs and Mayer argued for the author’s identification with Richard de Templo, an Augustinian canon of Holy Trinity, Aldgate, in London and prior from 1222 to c. 1250.22 He was identified as such by the author of the extant Libellus, who recommended the Itinerarium as further reading.23 Although both Stubbs and Mayer proposed that Richard de Templo had at one time been a member of the Knights Templar, the theory of a Templar origin to the Itinerarium has been disputed by Hannes Möhring and Helen Nicholson on the basis of inaccuracies or omissions of information which would have been of tremendous importance to members of the order.24 The dating of the Itinerarium is likewise a thorny problem. While IP2 drew upon many sources which would have been circulating by the late 1190s, most notably Amboise’s Estoire25 as well as IP1, which is thought to have been compiled early in that decade, most hold to a dating around 1217–20,26 and not after 1222, the terminus post quem of the Libellus. As well as being far shorter than the Itinerarium, a mere fifty-three pages by the pagination of the Rolls Series edition,27 the focus in the Libellus is on the events of 19

Nicholson, Chronicle, 6–14. Hans E. Mayer, Das Itinerarium Peregrinorum. Eine zeitgenössische englische Chronik zum dritten Kreuzzug in ursprünglicher Gestalt (Stuttgart, 1962), 1–44. 21 Nicholson, Chronicle, 9–10. 22 Mayer, Das Itinerarium, 89–106. Itinerarium, pp. xl–lxix. 23 Brewer and Kane, The Conquest of the Holy Land, 236. 24 Hannes Möhring, “Eine Chronik aus der Zeit des Dritten Kreuzzugs: das sogenannte Itinerarium peregrinorum 1,” Innsbrucker historische Studien 5 (1982): 149–62. Nicholson, The Chronicle of the Third Crusade, 7–8, 164–65. 25 Ambroise, The History of the Holy War: Ambroise’s Estoire de la Guerre Sainte, ed. Marianne Ailes and Malcolm Barber, trans. Marianne Ailes, 2 vols. (Woodbridge, 2003), 2:2. 26 Mayer, Das Itinerarium, 105–6. The most recent and detailed examination of the origins of IP1 has been undertaken by Helen J. Nicholson, “The Construction of a Primary Source: The Creation of Itinerarium Peregrinorum 1,” Cahiers de recherches médiévales et humanistes / Journal of Medieval and Humanistic Studies 37 (2019): 143–65. I would like to thank Professor Nicholson for allowing me to consult the article prior to its publication. 27 The other editions of the text are Edmond Martène and Ursin Durand, eds., Veterum scriptorum et monumentorum historicorum, dogmaticorum, moralium, amplissima collectio, 9 vols. (Paris, 1724–33) 20

70

CONNOR C. WILSON

1187 and the fall of the kingdom of Jerusalem. Although the Libellus was drawn upon by Ralph of Coggeshall for his Chronicon Anglicanum,28 in particular for information on the disasters of 1187, the argument that Ralph was the author of the Libellus, first proposed by John Bale (c. 1495–1563), was recognized as a misattribution by William Stubbs and is now widely discredited, despite occasional contemporary repetition.29 However, the Libellus being found alongside the Chronicon in two early thirteenth-century manuscripts provides an insight into the relationship between the texts. That these two manuscripts, as well as a third one, not containing Ralph’s work, were produced around the time Ralph was writing at Coggeshall Abbey has been demonstrated by James Willoughby.30 Evidence from manuscript study as well as textual analysis has also gone a long way towards establishing that the extant Libellus is the production of two separate redactors, in part reflected by the narrative of Libellus being divided into two uneven parts.31 The first and longer part, from the rhetorical opening lamenting the disasters and suffering borne by the Christians of the East, to the loss of the Holy Sepulchre, is a linguistically rich account of the kingdom’s collapse with a clear authorial voice, recognized by readers from William Stubbs to contemporary historians. It is this first part that contains all the instances of pre-battle rhetoric under discussion. The second part of the text, roughly a third of the total length of the Libellus, seems largely borrowed from the rubrics of the Itinerarium. Crucially, Willoughby has highlighted that the earliest extant manuscript of the Libellus32 changes hand and ink at precisely this point, as well as emphasizing other small orthographical differences.33 The extant Libellus could not have been completed before 24 October 1222 when Richard de Templo’s election as prior of Holy Trinity was confirmed, a title mentioned by the Libellus continuator. However, based on palaeographical and narrative evidence, James Kane has argued that the first part of the Libellus did exist prior to this date as a standalone account of the loss of Jerusalem, possibly being known in some form by Ralph of Coggeshall in the 1190s, with Ralph perhaps being the Libellus’s continuator, as suggested by Willoughby. This being the case, notwithstanding their many differences, the Itinerarium and the Libellus are not 5:547–82; Hans Prutz, ed., Quellenbeiträge zur Geschichte der Kreuzzüge (Danzig, 1876), 2:1–103. 28 Ralph of Coggeshall, Radulphi de Coggeshall Chronicon anglicanum, De expugnatione Terrae Sanctae libellus; Thomas Agnellus De morte et sepultura Henrici regis Angliae junioris; Gesta Fulconis filii Warini; Excerpta ex Otiis imperialibus Gervasii Tilebutiensis, ed. Joseph Stephenson, RS 66 (London, 1875). 29 Guy N. Hartcher, “Coggeshall Abbey: The First Hundred Years,” Journal of Religious History 12 (1982): 125–39. Itinerarium, p. lv. D. N. Bell, An Index of Authors and Works in Cistercian Libraries in Great Britain (Kalamazoo, MI, 1991), 119. 30 James Willoughby, “A Templar Chronicle of the Third Crusade: Origin and Transmission,” Medium Aevum 81 (2012): 126–34. 31 Brewer and Kane identify three distinct sections, with the third part being comprised of two independently circulating letters: Brewer and Kane, The Conquest of the Holy Land, 2. 32 British Library, Cotton MS Cleopatra B.I. 33 Itinerarium, p. lvi. Willoughby, “A Templar Chronicle,” 127.

BATTLE RHETORIC OF THE MILITARY ORDERS

71

without points of correspondence. Both were likely originally drafted during or soon after the time of the Third Crusade but did not reach their “final” form until the early 1220s. The original authors are difficult to identify but each places enough emphasis on the positive actions of the Templars and Hospitallers to have given rise to theories of Templar origins.34 While there is little evidence for this, Kane has highlighted in the Libellus’s description of the battle of the Spring of Cresson, on 1 May 1187, an extended metaphor involving the burial of the Christian dead inspired by a well-known exegesis on the Song of Songs where martyrs were likened to flowers, which may indicate a Cistercian background to the author.35 The below examination of the battle rhetoric of the Libellus lends serious weight to this possibility. However, it is first helpful to provide some further context. In the second half of the twelfth and in the early thirteenth century, even as battle rhetoric would increasingly be produced by clerical authors of significant station who often orbited royal courts,36 the Cistercian Order would display a great deal of interest in, and enthusiasm for, the production of historical narratives which featured battle rhetoric. Extended exhortations, which collated imagery of graphic violence with pronounced notions of holy war, justice and virtue, were a part of Aelred of Rievaulx’s Relatio de Standardo and the more widely circulated Genealogia regum Anglorum, as well as being central to Peter of Vaux-de-Cernay’s Historia Albigensis.37 Likewise, the anonymous author of the Historia Peregrinorum,38 an account of the Third Crusade focusing on the exploits of Frederick I Barbarossa, has been argued to be from the Cistercian abbey of Salmansweiler, an attribution based on the provenance of the only surviving manuscript that dates from the early thirteenth century. Loud has posited a dating of before 1200, because the text does not mention the death of Henry VI, while Basnage believed other pieces of information within the narrative implied a production date of c. 1194.39 Relying heavily on the Historia de expeditione Friderici Imperatoris, the Historia Peregrinorum nevertheless adds and extends instances of hortatory direct speech, which serve 34

James H. Kane, “Wolf’s Hair, Exposed Digits, and Muslim Holy Men: the Libellus de expugnatione Terrae Sanctae per Saladinum and the Conte of Ernoul,” Viator 47/2 (2016): 97. Willoughby, “A Templar Chronicle,” 126–27, 131. 35 Song of Songs 1:5. John Dobree Dalgairns, Lives of the English Saints: St. Aelred, Abbot of Rievaux (London, 1845), 144. Libellus, 120. Kane, “Wolf’s Hair,” 107–8. On the Song of Songs and Cistercian monasticism see Jean Leclercq, Monks and Love in Twelfth-Century France: PsychoHistorical Essays (Oxford, 1979). 36 Michael Staunton, The Historians of Angevin England (Oxford, 2017), 25. 37 Aelred of Rievaulx, The “Relatio de Standardo” of St. Aelred, Abbot of Rievaulx in Chronicles of the Reigns of Stephen, Henry II and Richard I, vol. 3, ed. Richard Howlett, RS 82 (London, 1886), 185–99. Aelred of Rievaulx, Genealogia regum Anglorum, PL 195:721. Pascal Guébin and Ernest Lyon, eds., Petri Vallium Sarnaii monachi Historia Albigensis, 3 vols. (Paris, 1926–39), 1:268, 2:152. 38 A. Chroust, ed., Quellen zur Geschichte des Kreuzzuges Kaiser Friedrichs I (Berlin, 1928), 116–72. 39 Ibid., lxxxvi; Graham A. Loud, trans., The Crusade of Frederick Barbarossa: The History of the Expedition of the Emperor Frederick and Related Texts (Farnham, 2010), 21–22; Jacques Basnage, ed., Thesaurus monumentorum ecclesiasticorum et historicorum, sive Henrici Canisii lectiones antiquae, vol. 3/2 (Antwerp, 1725), 498.

72

CONNOR C. WILSON

in part to lionize Frederick Barbarossa and Frederick VI, duke of Swabia, at the climactic battle of Iconium on 18 May 1190.40 The influence of Cistercian ideas of crusading upon this speech is made all the more evident by the description of the cross as salutifere crucis signaculum. This appeal to the salvific, life-giving cross, while not a uniquely Cistercian notion, is found in no other crusading battle orations,41 but recalls the words of Nicholas of Clairvaux, describing cross as a signum salutis,42 as well as those of Pope Eugenius III, who referred specifically to the badge of the crusaders as the signum vivificae crucis.43 Purkis has argued that such phrasing marks a notable shift in crusade theology away from imitatio Christi, towards the cross as signum vitae, promoted by Bernard of Clairvaux and echoed by followers such as Nicholas of Clairvaux and Bernard Paganelli (Eugenius III).44 Cistercian interest in historical writings that contained direct speech and dealt with a close interplay of devotional spirituality and physical violence is perhaps logical by reason that many of their recruits were former soldiers.45 While the use of war as allegory was common across Western monasticism, many monastic texts appear to have been imbued with lessons for a lay audience. Moreover, the evidence of monastic engagement with lay culture in the twelfth and early thirteenth centuries is well documented. Although not himself a Cistercian, Orderic Vitalis provides illustrative examples of both such points. Firstly, in a clear instance of writing beyond his simple monastic purposes, he crafts two pre-battle speeches before the skirmish at Bourgthéroulde in 1124 which focus more than most examples of Latin battle rhetoric on lay themes of loyalty and duty to a secular lord, in this case Henry I of England. Nevertheless, Orderic still manages to insert a lesson on the folly of knightly pride. Secondly, there is Orderic’s famous description of the monastic site at Maule, a dependant of Saint-Evroul, and its relationship to local arms-bearers, with knights often visiting to discuss “practical as well as speculative matters” with the monks.46 Furthermore, examples of monastic writing which call upon monks to display “knightly” virtues are unexceptional.47 An excellent example, from a specifically Cistercian context, is a sermon by Aelred of Rievaulx which bears a striking resemblance to battle rhetoric.48 Moreover, the Cistercians seemingly had 40

Cf. Chroust, Quellen, 84–85, 168–69. The relic of the True Cross is called vivifice crucis lignum salutare: WT 11.32, p. 498. 42 Nicholas of Clairvaux, ‘Epistolae in persona S. Bernardi’, PL 182:672, no. 467. 43 Eugenius III, ‘Epistolae’, PL 166:1203. 44 William Purkis, Crusading Spirituality in the Holy Land and Iberia (Woodbridge, 2008), 92–93. 45 For details on one such “robber knight,” and his status as conversus in the Cistercian Order, see Constance Berman, “The Life of Pons de Léras: Knights and Conversion to Religious Life in the Twelfth Century,” Church History and Religious Culture 88/2 (2008): 119–37. 46 Orderic Vitalis, The Ecclesiastical History of Orderic Vitalis, ed. and trans. Marjorie Chibnall, 6 vols. (Oxford, 1969–80), 3:204–7, 6:349–51. 47 Katherine Allen Smith, War and the Making of Monastic Culture (Woodbridge, 2001), 57, 166–76. 48 Aelred of Rievaulx, Sermon 23, PL, 195:340–41: “Behold, today our king, that captain of ours, is coming to see us with his entire army. Let us contemplate, to the best of our ability, all those in his battle line, how beautiful they are, and how well-ordered; let us long for their fellowship, but first let us not flee 41

BATTLE RHETORIC OF THE MILITARY ORDERS

73

a fondness for stories of knights who had been strong and brave, but also humble and obedient, thus displaying how good knights could be good monks.49 Likely incepted as texts during or shortly after the events of the Third Crusade, and revised and reconstructed around the 1220s, the stories in the Itinerarium peregrinorum et gesta regis Ricardi and the Libellus were therefore being shaped around highpoints of crusading enthusiasm. The three decades between the end of the Third Crusade and Richard de Templo’s promotion to prior would be marked by a flurry of crusading and papal activity of tremendous importance to the practice of holy war. These included two large-scale expeditions, each dramatically unsuccessful in their own way, intent on recovering Jerusalem in 1202–4 and 1213–21; the Albigensian Crusade (1209–29); the popular movements of 1212, often called the Children’s Crusade; and the Fourth Lateran Council in 1215. With regard to the English origins of the Itinerarium and the Libellus, Nicholson has also drawn attention to the political shift in England between the end of the Third Crusade and the early 1220s, a period that saw the dramatic loss of English possessions in France, civil war and a minority monarch. Under these circumstances, English elites perhaps reminisced about the exploits of the famed warrior-king Richard I.50 The Itinerarium contains six instances where direct speech is employed in a hortatory fashion. While most of these speeches were delivered by Richard I, this is not exclusively the case. These orations are spread throughout the narrative, often at key engagements such as at Arsuf on 7 September 1191, and at Jaffa on 8 August 1192.51 In contrast, the three instances of battle rhetoric in the Libellus take place in its earliest chapters which are concerned with a Muslim attack on Nazareth and the battle at the Springs of Cresson. While a short call for bravery in the name of Christ is given to a citizen of Nazareth, more substantial are the pre-battle speeches given by the Master of the Templars Gerard de Ridefort and the Master of the Hospital Roger de Moulins. Of the two, it is the Master of the Templars who takes priority: My dearest brothers and fellow soldiers, you have always withstood these deceitful and fallen ones; you have exacted vengeance on them; you have always had victory over them. Therefore, gird yourselves, and stand firm in the Lord’s battle, and remember your fathers, the Maccabees, whose duty of fighting for the Church, for the religion, [and] for the inheritance of the Crucified One you have now taken upon yourselves for a long time. But know that your fathers were victors everywhere not so much by numbers or in arms,

from the toil that was theirs. The fight is indeed a desperate one, but the thought of eternal reward should make us rejoice. We do not lack support in this battle. All around us are the angels and archangels. Let us look at that captain of ours, standing in the vanguard of his troops, and hear how he exhorts his knights. ‘In this world,’ he says, ‘you shall face persecution.’ (John 16:33).” Translation from Theodore Berkeley and M. Basil Pennington, Aelred of Rievaulx: The Liturgical Sermons: The First Clairvaux Collection (Kalamazoo, MI, 2001), 356. 49 Martha G. Newman, The Boundaries of Charity: Cistercian Culture and Ecclesiastical Reform, 1098–1180 (Stanford, CA, 1996), 24–25. 50 Nicholson, Chronicle, 11–12. 51 Itinerarium, 69, 104, 207, 268, 274, 407, 416–17.

74

CONNOR C. WILSON

as through faith, and justice, and observance of God’s commands, since it is not difficult to triumph either with many [men] or few when victory is from heaven.52

Following an enthusiastic response to his oration from the assembled warriors, Roger begins his oration: Dearest brothers, and friends always, do not be afraid of these growling dogs who flourish today [but] will tomorrow be cast into a pool of fire and brimstone. You, however, are a chosen generation, a holy nation, a purchased people.53 You are eternal, because you are going to reign with the Eternal One. Therefore, do not fear or tremble, but remember Abraham, who pursued and struck down the four kings with 300 servants, and seized the spoils. Melchizedek, king of Salem, came to meet him as he was returning from the slaughter of the four kings, offering bread and wine, and gave a blessing. Look: having overcome the four capital vices in the power of the Trinity, the king of Salem, namely the King of Justice, the true priest Jesus Christ, will come to meet you too, offering the bread of eternal satiety and the wine of perpetual redemption. Furthermore, he will pour out [his] blessing so that you may no longer be enslaved by the pleasures of the flesh.54

While the case for Templar authorship of the Libellus relied on the priority given to the Templars over the Hospitallers in the narrative,55 not only is Roger de Moulins’ exhortation longer, it is arguably of greater significance. In the immediate context, the Libellus claims that these exhortations were effective at rousing the fighting spirits of the Christian soldiers. Both orations employ several of the commonly recurring rhetorical topoi identified by John Bliese as being common to battle orations of this period;56 nevertheless the central themes of these orations differ considerably. Despite the subsequent defeat suffered at Cresson and the response of Gerard’s audience that they were prepared to die for Christ, the Master of the Templar’s 52 Libellus, 114–15 (where also the translation): “Fratres dilectissimi et commilitones mei, uos semper istis uanis et caducis restitistis, uindictam ex eis exegistis, de ipsis semper uictoriam habuistis. Accingite ergo uos et state in prelio domini et memores estote patrum uestrorum Machabeorum quorum uicem bellandi pro ecclesia, pro lege, pro hereditate crucifixi iam dudum subistis. Scitote uero patres uestros non tam multitudine, apparatu armato, quam fide et iusticia, et obseruatione mandatorum dei, uictores ubique fuisse, quia non est difficile uel in multis uel in paucis uincere, quando uictoria e celo est.” 53 1 Peter 2:9. 54 Libellus, 114–17 (where also the translation): “Fratres karissimi et semper amici ne terreamini ab hiis canibus rugientibus qui hodie florent, cras quoque in stagnum ignis et sulphuris mittentur. Vos autem estis genus electum, gens sancta, populus adquisitionis; uos estis eterni quia cum eterno regnaturi. Ergo ne timeatis neque paueatis, sed mementote Abraham, qui cum .CCC. uernaculis quatuor reges persecutus est atque percussit et predam excussit, cui reuertenti a cede .IIII. regum occurrit rex Salem Melchisedech offerens panem et uinum atque benedictionem dedit. Ecce et uobis .IIII. uiciis capitalibus in uirtute trinitatis superatis occurret rex Salem id est rex iusticie uerus sacerdos Iesus Christus offerens panem satietatis eterne, et uinum redemptionis perpetue, insuper et benedictionem infundet, ut amodo uoluptatibus carnis non seruiatis.” 55 Willoughby, “A Templar Chronicle,” 126. 56 Bliese, “Courage of the Normans,” 3–4.

BATTLE RHETORIC OF THE MILITARY ORDERS

75

oration is more typical of the genre, stoking courage through appeals to a tradition of victory wherein his brothers have always taken vengeance (uindictam) upon their enemies. The place of vengeance in the crusading movement has been treated by Suzanna Throop who has demonstrated the link between notions of vengeance and justice. While political development in the twelfth century resulted in an understanding of vengeance as being legitimately expressed by fewer and fewer arms-bearers, it could have both negative and positive aspects. In this instance the ecclesiastical direction of violence by the military orders in defence of the kingdom of Jerusalem naturally qualified them for the latter category.57 Gerard also reminds his comrades that the long tradition of victory, which they are a part of, has come down to them from the age of the Old Testament, and is not predicated upon arms or numbers.58 Instead this tradition is reliant upon faith and obedience to God, since victory, Gerard concludes, comes from heaven. This formulation of what has been called the “tradition of victory” topos differs from the norm in that it relies not upon notions of racial or national achievement of direct ancestors (as in the case in Walter Espec’s famous harangue in Aelred’s Relatio, for example),59 but on an inheritance of spiritual achievement which came down from the world of Scripture. This spiritual inheritance is closely associated with the heritage of Christ, which is not only employed as part of Gerard’s oration, but is stated early in the Libellus narrative as having been mistreated by the disunited Latin nobility of the East.60 In contrast to Gerard’s call to victory in the immediacy, Roger’s speech begins with a demand for courage, which relies upon a greater chronological scope. There is, according to the Hospitaller Master, no reason to fear the enemies because although they flourish today, they are assured of damnation in future. Rather than victory, sanctity and redemption from sin dominate the harangue. Roger’s speech in particular displays that far from merely being included to enliven the narratives in which they are found or, as they were understood by Bliese, as being a collection of the motivators believed to be most effective at raising morale, battle rhetoric was a chance for authors to present or reinforce the central themes or ideas of their work through direct speech at climactic moments. Specifically, the focus of Roger’s speech on sin and salvation is reflected by a much wider concern with these ideas found throughout the Libellus. In one illustrative example, the author of the Libellus conflates the physical enemy of the military orders with the great spiritual adversary. The invading enemy are thus “imitating their father, namely the Devil,

57

Susanna Throop, Crusading as an Act of Vengeance, 1095–1216 (Farnham, 2011), 4, 49, 112–13. The latter issue no doubt a continual concern for those fighting in the Latin East. 59 Aelred, Relatio, 186. 60 Libellus, 112; Baldric of Bourgueil, The Historia Ierosolimitana of Baldric of Bourgueil, ed. Steven Biddlecombe (Woodbridge, 2014), 109. See also Steven Biddlecombe, “Baldric of Bourgueil and the Familia Christi,” in Writing the Early Crusades, Text, Transmission and Memory, ed. Damien Kempf and Marcus Bull (Woodbridge, 2014), 9–23. 58

76

CONNOR C. WILSON

who slaughters those whom he discovers resting in the bed of the flesh and sleeping in their sins, and drags [them] with him into the pit of damnation.”61 The members of the military orders present at Cresson are delineated in the narrative of the Libellus by the details of these orations. Notably both commanders begin their harangues by addressing their audience as brothers (fratres). This perhaps rather obvious point actually distinguishes these orations from many other examples of twelfth- and early thirteenth-century battle rhetoric. Additionally, when this kind of identification is used early in a harangue, for example in the battle rhetoric of Baldric of Bourgueil’s account of the First Crusade, it is done so as part of a wider set of familial language intended to provoke the audience to a desire for vengeance, as well as self-sacrificial unity.62 The desperate need for unity among Christians in support of the kingdom of Jerusalem, or rather the lack of unity that led to its downfall, is expressed in an early instance of exegetical detail in the Libellus, wherein Saladin decides upon his attack at a moment of Christian disunity, “knowing that every kingdom divided shall be made desolate.”63 These two orations are further distinguished from other contemporary examples by the fact that they are delivered before a defeat for the Christian forces. Setting aside instances of paralleled opposing speeches, there are only a handful of examples from the twelfth and thirteenth century where this occurs. Where such speeches are encountered, the content is notably different, for example the speech which Walter the Chancellor puts into the mouth of Roger of Salerno in his account of the battle of Ager Sanguinus in 1119 contains no direct promise of victory through divine aid,64 which is likewise the case in Gerard’s oration. However, as has been discussed, Gerard’s speech is far from irreligious, although it alludes to a victory which does not materialize, distinguishing his words from those of Roger. It is Roger’s harangue which signals towards a future, spiritual victory, and his importance as a character within the Libellus is further reinforced by the lengths the text goes to in praising and eulogizing him, lamenting: “Oh, the grief! They slaughtered a father of orphans, a guardian and visitor of the sick, a dispenser of alms, a victor over his own flesh and vices, a steward of the forerunner of the Lord, a friend of God and of the saints.”65 Like the Master of the Hospital, the members of the military orders battling at Cresson are praised for their dedication to Christ. Their willingness to lay down their lives, attaining the crown of martyrdom fighting for the inheritance of Christ, contrasts them with the squabbling nobility of the Latin East who have neglected 61

Libellus, 112–13: “patrem illorum scilicet diabolum imitantes, qui quos in stratu carnis repperit quiescentes, et in peccatis suis dormientes, iugulat, et secum in foueam dampnationis trahit.” 62 Throop, Crusading as an Act of Vengeance, 50. 63 Libellus, 113. Matthew 12.25. Mark 3.25. 64 Walter the Chancellor, Bella Antiochena, ed. Heinrich Hagenmeyer (Innsbruck, 1896), 92–93. 65 Libellus, 122–23: “Proh dolor, patrem orphanorum, susceptorem et uisitatorem infirmorum, elemosinarum largitorem, sue carnis et uiciorum uictorem, precursoris domini dispensatorem, dei et sanctorum amicum occiderunt.”

BATTLE RHETORIC OF THE MILITARY ORDERS

77

this inheritance. Through their sin and infighting those whom the Libellus blamed for the loss of the kingdom are made foil to the pious, unified, and ultimately spiritually vindicated, brothers of the Temple and the Hospital who perished side by side. Furthermore, through its emphasis on sin, salvation and the imperilled heritage of Christ, the Libellus displays how authors of historical narratives could effectively utilize direct speech battle orations at climactic moments, not as mere rhetorical decoration, but in order to reinforce important notions of faith, justice and the practice of violence. Having noted the Cistercian interest in battle rhetoric in the second half of the twelfth century, a close examination of the battle rhetoric of the Libellus reveals much to support the notion of Cistercian influence upon what Willoughby has identified as the first part of the text. Firstly, the appeal of Gerard to be “mindful of your forefathers,” who had fought for the hereditate crucifixi, and are identified as the heroic Maccabees, echoes not only the writings of Bernard of Clairvaux, but also in the heavily Cistercian-influenced writings issued by the papacy in the mid- to late twelfth century including Celestine II’s Milites Templi (1144) and Adrian IV’s Quantum strenui (1157).66 This form of an appeal to predecessors is also distinct from the usual examples of this notion found in battle rhetoric in this period, where the notion of literal as opposed to spiritual forefathers, and a need to emulate or exceed their achievement was a prominent one. Additionally, the attempt in Cistercian writings to identify the professed religious members of the military orders as the true successors of Christ, as opposed to transient crusaders, has been forcefully demonstrated by William Purkis.67 This distinction between the transitory role of the crusader and the continual profession of the military orders is reinforced further in Roger de Moulins’s exhortation, which culminates in a promised meeting with the true priest, Christ, as opposed to the Old Testament Melchizedek, who will provide them with the bread of “eternal satiety,” and the wine of “perpetual redemption.”68 Even more striking is the response to Gerard’s exhortation, wherein the audience all with one voice (omnes uno ore) declare: “We are indeed ready and prepared to suffer death for Christ, who by his precious death redeemed us, knowing that, whether we live or die, we are always victors in the name of Jesus!”69 This powerful confirmation of the exhortation reinforces not only the Christ-like position the military orders profess to be taking up, but in crafting this reply from the words of Romans 14.8 the author of the Libellus provides an exegetically rich message. Significantly, this passage forms part of an extended call by Paul for Christian unity, 66

Rudolf Hiestand, Vorarbeiten zum Oriens Pontificus I. Papsturkunden für Templer und Johanniter. Archivberichte und Texte (Göttingen, 1972), 215, no. 8; RHGF, 15:681–82. Miriam Rita Tessera, “The Use of the Bible in Twelfth-Century Papal Letters to Outremer,” in The Uses of the Bible in Crusader Sources, ed. Elizabeth Lapina and Nicholas Morton (Leiden, 2017), 197–99. 67 Purkis, Crusading Spirituality, 86–119. 68 Libellus, 116. 69 Libellus, 114–15: “Nos quidem prompti et parati sumus pro Christo mortem subire qui morte sua preciosa nos redemit, hoc scientes siue uiuimus siue morimur in nomine Iesu semper esse victores.”

78

CONNOR C. WILSON

preceding his assertion that Christ died and rose to be lord of all, and that judging or despising fellow Christians is meaningless when all will be judged by Christ.70 Coupled with the readiness to embrace death this statement is a verbal fulfilment of the injunction, which in other sources was explicitly identified with the military orders, prescribed by John 15.13.71 Moreover, Romans 14.8 was also the same passage Bernard of Clairvaux presents as almost the mantra of the Templars: Therefore, knights, go forth confidently, and with a stalwart heart drive back the foes of the Christ’s cross, certain that neither death nor life is able to separate you from the love of God which is in Jesus Christ, repeating in every danger: “Whether we live or die, we are the Lord’s.”72

Other echoes of the Liber ad milites templi de laude novae militiae, specifically in its utilization of the Maccabees as exempla, are also present in the battle rhetoric of the Libellus, for example the argument against numbers as a deciding factor in military engagements.73 Considering the possibility of Cistercian origin further: there is much in the Libellus to suggest that the author was an eyewitness to the events being described, and this would seem to be somewhat at odds with a Cistercian origin of the narrative.74 Yet conversely there is some evidence which points towards a certain geographical or chronological distance from those events on his part. For example, unlike IP1, the Libellus misattributes the Templar office of Marshal.75 As with the Libellus, the battle rhetoric of the Itinerarium reflects the wider narrative’s focus of the text, in this case on the heroic deeds of the crusaders, and of Richard I in particular. However, one instance of battle rhetoric concerns the actions of the Hospitallers. The Itinerarium describes an incident during the battle of Arsuf in which the continually harried rearguard, consisting chiefly of Hospitallers, broke ranks to engage the enemy, after a request to Richard to advance by the Master of 70

Romans 14: 8–10: “sive enim vivimus Domino vivimus sive morimur Domino morimur sive ergo vivimus sive morimur Domini sumus in hoc enim Christus et mortuus est et revixit ut et mortuorum et vivorum dominetur tu autem quid iudicas fratrem tuum aut tu quare spernis fratrem tuum omnes enim stabimus ante tribunal Dei…”. 71 Purkis, Crusading Spirituality, 106–8. 72 Liber ad milites Templi de laude novae militiae, in S. Bernardi opera, vol. 3: Tractatus et opuscula, ed. Jean Leclercq and H. M. Rochais (Rome, 1963), 214–15: “Securi igitur procedite milites, et intrepido animo inimicos crucis Christi propellite, certi quia neque mors, neque vita poterunt vos separare a caritate Dei, quæ est in Christo Jesu, illud sane vobiscum in omni periculo replicantes: sive vivimus, sive morimur Domini sumus.” Translation from Nicholson, “Depictions of the Military Orders,” 102–3. 73 Liber ad milites Templi de laude novae militiae, 221. Libellus, 212. 74 Brewer and Kane discuss this Cistercian connection at greater length: Brewer and Kane, Conquest of the Holy Land, 47–50. 75 Helen Nicholson, “‘Martyrum collegio sociandus haberet’: Depictions of the Military Orders’ Martyrs in the Holy Land, 1187–1291,” in Crusading and Warfare in the Middle Ages: Realities and Representations. Essays in Honour of John France, ed. Simon John and Nicholas Morton (Farnham, 2014), 108–9.

BATTLE RHETORIC OF THE MILITARY ORDERS

79

the Hospitallers had been denied. Shamed by their inaction, the soldiers supposedly urged each other towards this rash charge saying: Why don’t we give rein to our horses and charge them? Alas! Alas! We shall deserve to be criticised forever as idle cowards. Did anyone ever before have anything like this happen to them? Never before have unbelievers inflicted such shame and dishonour on such a great army. Unless we quickly defend ourselves and charge them, we will have eternal disgrace. In fact, the longer we delay before acting the greater it will be.76

Despite the eventual victory at Arsuf, the Itinerarium laments the reckless charge this exhortation supposedly provoked. In contrast to the Templars and Hospitallers addressed at Cresson in the Libellus, at Arsuf the exhortation that urged the Hospitallers into combat was concerned entirely with reputation. Although a concern for the social standing of their order would have been natural77 (indeed Ambroise has Gerard de Ridefort express worry over the reputation of the Templars in his refusal to flee from the battle that would be his death),78 the Itinerarium presents the Hospitallers as sharing the preoccupations around honour and reputation (and more specifically the fear of being known as a coward) that would have been well understood by professional arms-bearers of the day.79 Strikingly, the two knights who were supposedly the first to break rank were the Marshal of the Hospital, a senior officer of considerable responsibility, and a seasoned knight in the service of King Richard, Baldwin de Carron. This rashness, unlike the pugnacity of the military orders in the Libellus, was undesirable because it threatened the unity of the crusaders and contravened the strategy supposedly decided before the battle began.80 In relating this event to the sin of the soldiers,81 the author of the Itinerarium encompasses this incident within a commonplace explanatory framework of crusading present in a number of earlier crusading narratives.82 This is exemplified earlier in the Itinerarium itself when a Frankish soldier exhorts the Latin Christian army, saying: “What power can overcome it, what great number can resist it? God can do nothing for us nor our adversaries! Our own valour will win us this victory.”83 This blasphemous, prideful declaration of course precedes a terrible defeat. Richard de Templo thus drew together material depicting disaster, a most prominent theme in IP1,84 with 76

Itinerarium, 268. Translation from Nicholson, Chronicle, 252. Nicholson, Images of the Military Orders, 102–4. 78 Ambroise, The History of the Holy War, 1:3024. 79 A comparison of battle orations from Latin chronicles and the Song of Roland has highlighted how the avoidance of shame is a far more prominent theme of the latter. John Bliese, “Fighting Spirit and Literary Genre: A Comparison of Battle Exhortations in the ‘Song of Roland’ and in the Chronicles of the Central Middle Ages,” Neuphilologische Mitteilungen 94/4 (1995): 422–23. 80 Itinerarium, 268–69. 81 Ibid. 82 See, for example, FC, pp. 443–441, 562. 83 Itinerarium, 69. Translation from Nicholson, Chronicle, 78. 84 Nicholson, “The Construction of a Primary Source.” 77

80

CONNOR C. WILSON

instances such as that of the reckless Hospitaller charge at Arsuf, from Ambroise,85 in the construction of the Itinerarium Peregrinorum et Gesta Regis Ricardi. Such interpretations of combat with prominent didactic purposes were of course not limited to the Itinerarium. A clear example of this didacticism is presented in Aelred of Rievaulx’s Relatio. While Walter Espec’s speech to the pious AngloNormans barely involved appeals to martial ideals, indeed it made clear that victory does not come from strength but from God,86 a counter-oration delivered by one of David I’s, ultimately defeated, Galwegian soldiers contains nothing but boastful declarations of their martial abilities.87 While previous commentary on the Relatio has emphasized the difference between David I’s own Norman soldiers and the “barbaric” Gallovidian Scots,88 Aelred actually depicts the Galwegians as being involved, through their squabbling with the nobles in David’s army over the place of honour on the field, in the wider preoccupations of professional arms-bearers. While the idea that “men in victory boast of their own virtues more than glorifying God”89 was presented as transgressive and inviting of disaster and defeat, in numerous instances of battle rhetoric this framework is far from absolute or unnuanced. The numerous instances of calls for, and praise of, courage and other martial virtues in battle rhetoric display this to good effect. Indeed, the development of virtues, including virtues directly relating to warfare, lay behind God’s use of “the enemy” in order to test the faithful, a notion expressed in Job 9.24.90 Peter the Chanter (d. 1197) took this even further, describing enemies as a necessity, because “those who have no enemies will have no victory.”91 Despite their ultimate defeat, this test was evidently passed by those members of the military orders in the Libellus who perished at Cresson, and, despite their eventual victory, it was evidently failed by those Hospitallers at Arsuf who disrupted the unity of the Christian army through a reckless charge, motivated by their own pride and lack of discipline.

85

Ambroise, The History of the Holy War, 1:6395–6402. Aelred, Relatio, 185. 87 Aelred, Relatio, 190: “Nobis certe sunt latera ferra, pectus aereum, mens timoris vacua, quorum nec pedes fugam, nec umquam vulnus terga sensere. Quid Gallis apud Cliderhau profuere loricae? Nunquid, non inermes isti, ut dicunt, illos et loricas proicere et negligere galeas et scuta relinquere coegerunt? Videat igitur prudentia vestra, o rex, quale sit in his habere fiduciam, que in necessitate magis sunt oneri quam consolationi. Nos apud Cliderhou de loricatis victoriam reportavimus: nos hodie et istos animi virtute pro scuto utentes, lanceis prosternemus.” 88 William Aird, “Sweet Civility and Barbarous Rudeness: A View from the Frontier. Abbot Ailred of Rievaulx and the Scots,” in Imagining Frontiers, Contesting Identities, ed. Steven G. Ellis and Lud’a Klusáková (Pisa, 2007), 64. 89 FC, p. 562. Translation from Fulcher of Chartres, A History of the Expedition to Jerusalem 1095– 1127, ed. Harold S. Fink, trans. Frances Rita Ryan (Knoxville, TN, 1969), 204. 90 “The earth is given into the hand of the wicked, he covereth the face of the judges thereof: and if it be not he, who is it then?” 91 British Library, Royal 10 AXVI, f.49v: “Inimici sunt necessarii, quia qui inimicos non habet victoria caret.” 86

BATTLE RHETORIC OF THE MILITARY ORDERS

81

The battle rhetoric of the Libellus and the Itinerarium present contrasting and arguably conflicting images of the military orders. A close analysis of the contextualized language of battle rhetoric within these narratives reveals that, far from being largely interchangeable, such orations could be highly dependent upon circumstance, audience and speaker. It is also evident that, rather than merely being present to provide rhetorical dressing to a prose narrative, battle orations were ideal opportunities for authors to stress the most significant themes of their works. Through direct speech these chronicles placed ideas of faith, justice and virtue in the context of holy war at the forefront of soldiers’ minds. While these harangues were almost invariably rhetorical inventions rather than reports of actual speeches, the widespread and historically attested notion, and perhaps even expectation, of a pre-battle harangue would have been well understood by a medieval audience. Moreover, oration authors worked within a historical tradition heavily influenced by classical rhetoric. This rhetorical tradition demanded, especially in the case of sermocinatio, that the invented speech given to a character had to be in language appropriate to their character and standing.92 Furthermore, that rhetorical invention had to be plausible, verisimilar and appropriate to the circumstances in which it was deployed.93 As orators and audience, members of the military orders provided the authors in question with suitable figures to present: on the one hand as professed religious committed to triumphing over their enemies, yet even more determined to triumph over sin and, on the other hand, as soldiers who were as concerned with the conventions of reputation and honour as any other warrior of their day. Moreover, understanding battle rhetoric within the framework of both comparable speeches and contemporary writing on ideas of violence, justice, righteousness and piety in war, may provide further insights into the nature and purposes of a number of medieval narrative histories. In this instance, a close examination of the battle rhetoric of the Libellus lends serious weight to the notion of a Cistercian origin of, or heavy influence upon, what has been defined by Willoughby and Kane as the first part of the text. This evidence, while circumstantial, is extensive and becomes all the more convincing when set alongside other examples of what have been recognized as Cistercian ideas, literary motifs and harangues. This builds upon other textual evidence that displays the role of the Cistercians in the preservation and transmission of this comparatively short yet rhetorically rich narrative.94 A narrative which, like the professed religious warriors it praises, sought to blend serious spirituality with violent reality.

92 93 94

24–50.

Rhetorica ad Herennium, trans. Harry Caplan (Cambridge, MA, 1954), 367, 395, 399. Ibid., 187. Willoughby, “A Templar Chronicle,” 130–31. Brewer and Kane, The Conquest of the Holy Land,

Jerusalem as the Travelling City of God: Henry of Albano and the Preaching of the Third Crusade Alexander Marx Universität Heidelberg [email protected]

Abstract This article examines Henry of Albano’s De peregrinante civitate Dei and its conception of Jerusalem; this conception encompasses crusade and theology building upon the four senses of Scripture and the Corpus Christi. Within this text, the paper focuses on treatise XIII, the so-called “crusading treatise,” discussing the purpose and outlook it develops for the Third Crusade, an event triggered by the loss of both the True Cross and Jerusalem in 1187. However, for a sound analysis of the complex notions surrounding Jerusalem, one has to consider the crusading treatise’s relationship with other parts of the work; these help us to understand better Henry’s reading of the events of 1187. As this endeavour demonstrates, the other parts offer elaboration on, and explanation of, motifs present but not exegetically elucidated in the crusading treatise. This leads to an investigation of eschatological elements in Henry’s work, especially those concerned with heaven’s gates and the fulfilment of prophecy. It then considers how these apocalyptic beliefs might have unfolded on the eve of the crusade, being deeply rooted in the conjunction of the earthly and the heavenly Jerusalem.

On 4 July 1187, the forces of the Frankish kingdom of Jerusalem met Saladin’s army at the Horns of Hattin and suffered a devastating defeat. The Muslims captured the relic of the True Cross, an object understood as a manifestation of God’s protection and the Christians’ elect status.1 This relic, discovered in 1099, was believed to be (a portion of) the cross on which Christ had been crucified. And catastrophe did not stop: on 2 October of the same year Saladin conquered I would like to thank my PhD advisor Philippe Buc for his numerous comments on my work. I am also grateful to Nikolas Jaspert and David d’Avray, whose remarks, during my time in Heidelberg and London respectively, were of great value to my research. My thanks also to Helen Birkett and Jessalynn Bird who commented on earlier versions of this article. Finally, I am grateful to the Österreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften for their generous funding that made this research possible (recipient of a DOC fellowship). 1 On the events see Christopher J. Tyerman, God’s War: A New History of the Crusades (London, 2007), 366–74; John France, Hattin (Oxford, 2015), 64–104. On the cross as a battle-standard see Alan Murray, “‘Mighty against the Enemies of Christ’: The Relic of the True Cross in the Armies of the Kingdom of Jerusalem,” in Crusade Sources, 217–38. On the cross relic(s) see also Nikolas Jaspert, “The True Cross of Jerusalem in the Latin West: Mediterranean Connections and Institutional Agency,” in Visual Constructs of Jerusalem, ed. Bianca Kühnel and Galit Noga-Banai (Turnhout, 2014), 207–22. 83

84

ALEXANDER MARX

Jerusalem – the most holy city, the place of Christ’s Passion and crucifixion, and in Christian hands since its conquest in 1099. The first letters to describe events at Hattin reached the Latin West in October 1187, prompting immense trauma.2 Some chroniclers even suggest that Pope Urban III died of shock on hearing the terrible news.3 Within days, his successor Gregory VIII issued the encyclical Audita tremendi, calling the whole of Christendom to a new crusade.4 At the time, some future crusade preachers were at the papal court, including the English cleric and Paris master Peter of Blois (c. 1135–1210) as well as the Cistercian and cardinalbishop Henry of Albano (c. 1135–1189).5 This article is devoted to Henry, who left us some letters and his main work De peregrinante civitate Dei (On the travelling City of God), a monumental opus on Jerusalem, that contains a significant section on the theological classification of the events of 1187, treatise XIII, the so-called “crusading treatise.”6 The article will explore Henry’s conception of Jerusalem and how it intersects with the crusade, relating in particular to its preaching in 1187–88, the context in which this work took its final shape. This is not the place for a complete analysis of Henry’s lengthy work, but this article will cover the following issues:7 First, it will consider how the crusading treatise explains the events of 1187 by deploying numerous theological concepts 2

The news arrived at some point early in 1188, but the exact date is unknown. See Helen Birkett, “News in the Middle Ages: News, Communications, and the Launch of the Third Crusade in 1187– 1188,” Viator 49/3 (2018): 23–61. 3 See, e.g., Alberic of Trois-Fontaines, Chronica, ed. Georg Heinrich Pertz, MGH SS 23:748; Roger of Howden, Chronica, ed. William Stubbs (London, 1869), 2:322; cf. Sylvia Schein, Gateway to the Heavenly City. Crusader Jerusalem and the Catholic West, 1099–1187 (Aldershot, 2005), 162. 4 Cited in Historia de Expeditione Friderici Imperatoris, in Quellen zur Geschichte des Kreuzzuges Kaiser Friedrichs I, ed. Anton Chroust, MGH SS rer. Germ. N.S. 5 (Berlin, 1928), 6–10. On the different versions see Thomas W. Smith, “Audita Tremendi and the Call for the Third Crusade Reconsidered, 1187–1188,” Viator 49/3 (2018): 63–101 (78 for the version cited). 5 On Peter see Alexander Marx, “The Passio Raginaldi of Peter of Blois: Martyrdom and Eschatology in the Preaching of the Third Crusade,” Viator 50/3 (2019): 197–232; John Cotts, “The Exegesis of Violence in the Crusade Writings of Ralph Niger and Peter of Blois,” in The Uses of the Bible in Crusader Sources, ed. Elizabeth Lapina and Nicholas Morton (Leiden, 2017), 273–94; John Cotts, The Clerical Dilemma: Peter of Blois and Literate Culture in the Twelfth Century (Washington, DC, 2009), passim, esp. 218–30. 6 Henry of Albano, De peregrinante civitate Dei, [hereafter DPCD] PL 204:251–402 (350–61 for the crusading treatise); preserved in the manuscript Troyes, Bibliothèque Municipale, MS 509, fols. 93v–177v (150r–156r for the crusading treatise). For discussions of the work see Christopher J. Tyerman, How to Plan a Crusade: Reason and Religious War in the High Middle Ages (London, 2015), 114–18; Penny J. Cole, The Preaching of the Crusades to the Holy Land, 1095 – 1270 (Cambridge MA, 1991), 65–71; Jean Flori, Prêcher la croisade. XIe – XIIIe siècle. Communication et propagande (Paris, 2012), 157–62; Jay Rubenstein, Nebuchadnezzar’s Dream: The Crusades, Apocalyptic Prophecy, and the End of History (Oxford, 2019), 176–78; Yves Congar, “Eglise et Cité de Dieu chez quelques auteurs cisterciens à l’époque des Croisades: en particulier dans le De Peregrinante Civitate Dei d’Henri d’Albano,” in Mélanges offerts à Etienne Gilson de l’Académie française, ed. Callistus Edie (Toronto, 1959), 173–202. 7 For a more extensive analysis, comparing Henry with other preachers of the Third Crusade, see Alexander Marx, “Die Predigt des Dritten Kreuzzuges (1187–92). Religiöse Gewalt im Schatten der Exegese” (PhD thesis, University of Vienna, 2019), passim, esp. 49–55, 283–333, 376–79.

JERUSALEM AS THE TRAVELLING CITY OF GOD

85

and biblical lines elaborated upon elsewhere in his opus. The article uses the other treatises to decipher and to interpret the crusading treatise, demonstrating that a complex theological discourse is spun around the loss of both the cross and Jerusalem. This examination will point to the relationship between the crusading treatise and the work’s other parts, although for reasons of space it cannot exhaustively decode this entanglement.8 This essay is therefore concerned with the interplay between theology and crusading spirituality, a subject which has become an essential matter to crusade studies.9 Particular mention should be made of Sylvia Schein’s seminal study of crusader Jerusalem and its relationship with its heavenly counterpart, a book that includes a chapter on reactions to the events of 1187.10 Henry of Albano was a Cistercian monk who entered Clairvaux in his youth, soon after the death of Bernard of Clairvaux (c. 1090–1153). He later became abbot of Hautecombe (1160–76) as well as of Clairvaux itself (1176–79).11 During the latter abbacy, he preached against heresy in southern France (1178), and participated in the Third Lateran Council (1179). He was also involved in the preaching and organization of the Eastern crusade of 1179 as one of his letters testifies.12 He became cardinal-bishop of Albano in 1179 and papal legate in 1181, intensifying his efforts against heretics in Southern France.13 During the papacies of Lucius III (1181–85) and Urban III (1185–87), he spent most of his time at the curia as numerous papal charters reveal.14 Henry was, therefore, an important figure and one of the Third Crusade’s major preachers; before Gregory VIII’s election in October 1187, the papal office 8

For more data on these cohesions, beyond the textual analyses, see Appendices II and III below. See recent work like Philippe Buc, Holy War, Martyrdom, and Terror: Christianity, Violence, and the West (Philadelphia, 2015), 64–111; Cecilia Gaposchkin, Invisible Weapons. Liturgy and the Making of Crusade Ideology (Ithaca, 2017); Christian Hofreiter, Making Sense of Old Testament Genocide: Christian Interpretations of Herem Passages (Oxford, 2018); Jessalynn L. Bird, “Preaching the Crusades and the Liturgical Year: The Palm Sunday Sermons,” Essays in Medieval Studies 30 (2014): 11–36; Jessalynn L. Bird, “Rogations, Litanies, and Crusade Preaching: The Liturgical Front in the Late Twelfth and Early Thirteenth Centuries,” in Papacy, Crusade, and Christian-Muslim Relations, ed. Jessalynn L. Bird (Amsterdam, 2018), 155–93. 10 Schein, Gateway, 159–87. Schein focuses on Jerusalem’s loss. On the reaction to Hattin and the loss of the cross see Penny J. Cole, “Christian Perceptions of the Battle of Hattin (583/1187),” Al-Masāq 6 (1993): 9–39. 11 Henry sometimes appears with one of these attributions. He is also labelled Henry of Marcy, signifying his origin. Cf. Yves Congar, “Henri de Marcy, abbé de Clairvaux, cardinal-éveque d’Albano et légat pontifical,” Analecta monastica 5 (1958): 1–90. 12 Henry of Albano, Ep.1, PL 204:215–16. On this crusade see Jonathan Phillips, Defenders of the Holy Land: Relations between the Latin East and the West, 1119–1187 (Oxford, 1996), 240–42. 13 On Henry’s involvement in the anti-heretical expeditions see Beverly Mayne Kienzle, Cistercians, Heresy and Crusade in Occitania, 1145–1229: Preaching in the Lord’s Vineyard (Woodbridge, 2001), 109–34; Congar, “Henri de Marcy,” 12–41. On contemporary activities in Paris see Jessalynn L. Bird, “Paris Masters and the Justification of the Albigensian Crusade,” Crusades 6 (2007): 117–55. 14 In total, 38 times with Lucius III, 40 times with Urban III, and twice with Gregory VIII. See Lucius III, Epistolae, PL 201:1160–1374; Urban III, Epistolae, PL 202:1332–1523; Gregory VIII, Epistolae, PL 202:1545, 1548. See also Congar, “Henri de Marcy,” 41. 9

86

ALEXANDER MARX

had been offered to Henry, but he declined.15 Instead, he was sent to France and Germany to preach the crusade as papal legate, a role in which the chronicles report he distinguished himself.16 He supervised the Curia Christi, held in Mainz on 27 March 1188, where Frederick Barbarossa took the cross, together with many others.17 Henry died before the venture’s departure in January 1189; his body was translated to Clairvaux, and buried between Bernard of Clairvaux and Saint Malachy, a fact that reveals his contemporary significance.18 Scholars have not paid much attention to Henry. His involvement in the preaching of the crusade is well known, but nobody has published a close analysis of his work. An article by Yves Congar dealing with Henry’s conception of the civitas Dei, as presented in his main work, is far from exhaustive.19 Crusade scholars have mostly confined themselves to mentioning Henry briefly, or citing one passage from the “crusading treatise,” while neglecting the rest of the text.20 A full analysis, however, is definitely desirable, since he conceived of it as one whole, containing both a call for the crusade and a more theological discussion of Jerusalem as the civitas Dei. Congar asserted that “L’image dominante est tellement, pour Henri, celle de la croisade, qu’il s’en sert pour expliquer certaines exigences de la Cité de Dieu […]”.21 One cannot understand Henry’s motivation to preach the crusade without studying the complex theological notions that underpinned his concept of Jerusalem. Contrariwise, one should not focus on his theology alone: The crusade is part of this work or even its purpose and fulfilment.

15

See Alberic of Trois-Fontaines, Chronica, ed. Pertz, MGH SS 23:860–61; Epistolae Cantuarienses, ed. William Stubbs, 2 vols. (London, 1865), 2:108; cf. Congar, “Henri de Marcy,” 43; Cole, Preaching, 66. 16 See, e.g., Gestorum Treverorum Continuatio, MGH SS 24:388; Chronica Andrensis, MGH SS 24:719; Continuatio Zwetlensis Altera, MGH SS 9:543; Annales Colonienses Maximi, MGH SS 17:793; Caesarius of Heisterbach, Dialogus Miraculorum 4.79, ed. Nikolaus Nösges (Turnhout, 2009), 872–74. On the preaching tour see Ina Friedländer, Die päpstlichen Legaten in Deutschland und Italien am Ende des XII. Jahrhunderts (1181–1198) (Berlin, 1928), 39–45. 17 See Henry of Albano, Ep.32, PL 204:250; Historia de Expeditione, ed. Chroust, 14–15; Historia Peregrinorum, in Quellen zur Geschichte des Kreuzzuges Kaiser Friedrichs I., ed. Chroust, 122–26. See also Josef Fleckenstein, “Friedrich Barbarossa und das Rittertum. Zur Bedeutung der großen Mainzer Hoftage von 1184 und 1188,” in Festschrift für Hermann Heimpel zum 70. Geburtstag (Göttingen, 1972), 2:1023–41. Henry brags that numerous people have taken the cross from him. Henry of Albano, DPCD 13, PL 204:357. 18 On his life see Congar, “Eglise,” 181–82; Congar, “Henri de Marcy”; Cassandra Elizabeth Chideock, “Henry of Marcy, Heresy and the Crusade, 1177–1189” (PhD thesis, University of Cambridge, 2001), 30–50. 19 Congar, “Eglise,” 173–202; cf. Congar, “Henri de Marcy,” 77–90. See also Chideock, “Henry of Marcy,” passim, who deals with Henry’s ideas about legitimate force and just cause. 20 See, e.g., Buc, Holy War, 260–61; Anne Bysted, The Crusade Indulgence: Spiritual Rewards and the Theology of the Crusades, c. 1095–1216 (Leiden, 2015), 258–60; Jaspert, “The True Cross,” 211; Valmar Cramer, “Kreuzpredigt und Kreuzzugsgedanken von Bernhard von Clairvaux bis Humbert von Romans,” Das Heilige Land 1 (1939): 79–88. 21 Congar, “Eglise,” 200; in agreement Chideock, “Henry of Marcy,” 19.

JERUSALEM AS THE TRAVELLING CITY OF GOD

87

The Question of Composition, Audience, and Purpose Two versions of De peregrinante civitate Dei may be distinguished: (a) The text as it is published in the Patrologia Latina (a reprint of the 1660 edition by Bertrand Tissier);22 (b) the (as far as I am aware) sole surviving manuscript, which comes from Clairvaux (and dates to the thirteenth century).23 The two versions do very much overlap, but differences exist here and there. Tissier must have used another manuscript for his edition, still extant in the seventeenth century. Hence, both versions are valuable for studying Henry’s work; I shall cite both, and I shall remark if there are any deviations.24 Neither of the two versions identifies the work with any label of genre; nor did scholars, who called it a “treatise” – a meaningless appellation which leaves the question of the work’s nature unresolved. Both versions betray that we are dealing with chapters of a single project, including the crusading treatise. There is one Prologue and one address at its beginning: to the monks of Clairvaux.25 At the very least we can say that Henry’s work is a rich collection of material on the holy city. It could thus have served as a source for reading, studying, or preaching on Jerusalem.26 On the basis of the information Henry provides, it is clear that the crusading treatise was written after spring 1188, either in the summer or autumn.27 By then the situation was as follows: numerous people had taken the cross, but an early departure was threatened by renewed conflicts between multiple rulers.28 The treatise somehow tried to counter this situation or rather called its addressees, the monks of Clairvaux, to counter it, to secure the crusade’s successful formation. 22

Bibliotheca Patrum Cisterciensium, ed. Bertrand Tissier, 8 vols. (Bonnefont, 1660), 3:1–69. Troyes BM 509, fols. 93v–177v; cf. Congar, “Henri de Marcy,” 43. For the history of its conservation, see André Vernet, La bibliothèque de l’Abbaye de Clairvaux du XIIe au XVIIIe siècle, 2 vols. (Paris, 1979), 1:461–62, 665, 708, 857. It also contains the Dialogus by Petrus Alfonsi (fols. 1r–57v) and the Liber de cardinalibus Christi operibus by Ernald of Bonneval (fols. 58r–93v). 24 If there are no remarks, the two versions coincide. As to quotations, I cite the Patrologia Latina, refer to both versions in the footnote, and note deviations in square brackets, using the following symbols: (a) “>< compatienti] et condolere, imo ipsam vim doloris non minus quam ipsum quod patitur membrum, sentire, si vera sumus membra, debemus.” Henry of Albano, DPCD 13, PL 204:351–52; Troyes BM 509, fol. 150v. 59 On the explanation of peccatis nostris exigentibus see Schein, Gateway, 170–74; Gaposchkin, Invisible Weapons, 194, 208–19. On divine signa see Henry of Albano, DPCD 1, PL 204:261; Congar,

94

ALEXANDER MARX

martyrdom: If one member of the body suffers, the other members must suffer too. Only this makes them real members (vera sumus membra).60 This passage is significantly mirrored in treatise I where Henry sketches the four senses of Scripture and explains them with regard to Jerusalem, already referring to the terrestrial city’s ruins (ruina terrenae Jerusalem), whereas the other three senses hint at a threefold decline of the church (triplicem Ecclesiae casum) – exactly the same argument as in the crusading treatise, yet offering a more elaborate discussion of the four senses.61 Henry conceived of the physical Jerusalem as a part of Christ’s Body or even as its semiotic core by reason of its visibility. It was a place on which the Christians must keep an eye in order to recognize the signs sent by God, in order to understand the twists of Salvation History, and, not least, in order to pursue their own salvation. A few lines later, Henry examines the meaning of Christ’s crucifixion, relating it to the events in the Holy Land, especially to the loss of the True Cross. He concludes: The divine will’s impenetrable sublimity intended to give certain visible holy places to the Christians, with which those men who strive for visible things, who have not been able to progress to the invisible Holies of Holies, seeing them openly, would be able to build for themselves a ladder to the invisible ones [cf. Gen. 28.12]. […] One understands these holies, if one understands for one’s own sake the Lord’s Cross and the Sepulchre. These were not only presented to the Christians in this last age, but have been foreseen and prophesied many times and in many ways in previous ages by the patriarchs and the prophets. Among these, Isaiah says: His Sepulchre will be in glory [Is. 11.10]. And elsewhere: I will glorify the place of my feet [Is. 60.13].62

The holy places thus serve as guides toward their invisible equivalents. Henry describes here a particular group of Christians who strive for visible things (visibilium sectatores), and would be able to progress to the invisible things once they see the places in the Holy Land (intuentes, scalam sibi ad invisibilia facerent).63 He is “Eglise,” 200. On divine agency in the crusades see now Beth C. Spacey, The Miraculous and the Writing of Crusade Narrative (Woodbridge, 2020). 60 Cf. Henry of Albano, DPCD 13, PL 204:360. See also Historia Peregrinorum, ed. Chroust, 123, quoting a crusade sermon by bishop Henry of Strasburg. 61 Henry of Albano, DPCD 1, PL 204:259. The passage reads: “Quod manifeste cernimus in Threnis Jeremiae, quos quadruplici distinguens alphabeto, unum ad ruinam terrenae Jerusalem, reliqua ad triplicem Ecclesiae casum direxisse videtur.” After this follow references to Jerusalem’s earlier conquests (Persian, Greek, Roman). 62 “Sed voluit divini consilii inscrutabilis altitudo, quaedam visibilia sancta Christianis conferre, quae visibilium sectatores, qui ad invisibilia Sancta sanctorum non conscenderunt, visibiliter intuentes, scalam sibi ad invisibilia facerent. […] Sancta haec intelligit, quisquis se intelligit crucem Domini et sepulcrum. Haec non solum ultima hac aetate sunt Christianis exhibita, sed praecedentibus aetatibus multifarie multisque modis a patriarchis [Troyes 509: + et prophetis] praevisa sunt et prophetata. E quibus unus Isaias sic ait: Erit sepulcrum ejus gloriosum. Et alibi: Locum, ait, pedum meorum glorificabo.” Henry of Albano, DPCD 13, PL 204:353; Troyes BM 509, fol. 151r–v. 63 The impetus points clearly towards the holy places. Yet, Henry designates in more general terms “visible things” which may include the cross and other relics.

JERUSALEM AS THE TRAVELLING CITY OF GOD

95

obviously referring to laymen, lacking the virtues of monks and in need of the help of “ladders” which the Holy Land offered.64 The passage is mirrored in treatise I: when speaking of signing people with the cross, he emphasizes the necessity of ladders to heaven (the cross being such) as long as they are caught in the terrestrial existence (with reference to Job 7.1 and 2 Cor. 5.6).65 It is furthermore echoed in treatise II, using almost identical words for the group of visibilia sectantes, those imperfecti who shall orbit earthly Jerusalem in order to find God.66 Circling the city (circumire civitatem) may remind us of the large procession of the First Crusaders after they arrived before Jerusalem – perhaps a conscious allusion.67 Visible places thus signify hidden places. Every effort to resolve the sinful state of the Christian community was, therefore, tied to the physical-historical locations as they existed in the Holy Land – a notion that Henry exemplifies, in the passage cited, with the desirable contemplation of these places, here, the Holy Sepulchre and the True Cross.68 This is based on Scripture. He quotes two verses from Isaiah; the one recalls the Holy Land’s sanctification via Christ’s physical presence as in Ps. 131.7.69 Turning to the Ordinary Gloss, it betrays again a very similar idea: The contemplation of the Holy Sepulchre serves the purpose of recognizing Christ.70 Henry’s emphasis on contemplation transmits a classical monastic idea to the realm of the crusade: The (lay) crusaders practised it according to their spiritual skills;

64 On such notions in Bernard of Clairvaux’s writings see Schein, Gateway, 129–30; Kristin Skottki, “‘Until the Full Number of Gentiles Has Come In’: Exegesis and Prophecy in St. Bernard’s CrusadeRelated Writings,” in Uses of the Bible, ed. Lapina and Morton, 248–51. The image of a ladder comes from Gen. 28.12, where Jacob sees in a dream the angels descending from and ascending to heaven. 65 Henry of Albano, DPCD 1, PL 204:261–62; Troyes BM 509, fol. 98r–v. The passage reads: “Quia quandiu sumus in corpore, peregrinamur a Domino, et quandiu militia est hominis super terram, visibilium signorum scala ad invisibilia necesse habemus uti, secundum quod Apostolus ait: Invisibilia Dei per ea quae facta sunt intellecta conspiciuntur a creatura mundi.” For discussions of this passage, see Marx, “Die Predigt,” 204–5, 327–28; Giles Constable, “The Cross of the Crusaders,” in Crusaders and Crusading in the Twelfth Century (Farnham, 2008), 62–64. See also Henry of Albano, DPCD 6, PL 204:302–3; 7, PL 204:305. 66 Henry of Albano, DPCD 2, PL 204:267. It reads: “Inde est, quod imperfectos et adhuc visibilia sectantes videmus exteriora fortius operari, ac duriora sustinere perfectis, quoniam qui minoratur actu, percipiet sapientiam; nec debent filii sponsi lugere, quandiu cum ipsis est sponsus. Lugeant et circumeant civitatem, qui quaerunt, et non inveniunt eum.” 67 See Gaposchkin, Invisible Weapons, 118–21; Kristin Skottki, “Vom ‘Schrecken Gottes’ zur Bluttaufe. Gewalt und Visionen auf dem Ersten Kreuzzug nach dem Zeugnis des Raimund d’Aguilers,” in Gewalterfahrung und Prophetie, ed. Peter Buschel and Christoph Marx (Vienna, 2013), 474, 481–84. 68 For this interconnectivity in Henry’s work, see also Cramer, “Kreuzpredigt,” 81; Flori, Prêcher, 159. On the Sepulchre see also Henry of Albano, DPCD 6, PL 204:300–301; 12, PL 204:344. 69 Is. 11.10; 60.13. The first is a typical verse in eschatological prophecies. Cf. Schein, Gateway, 147. On Is. 11.10 see also Cole, Preaching, 50; Gaposchkin, Invisible Weapons, 149, 153. 70 Glossa Ordinaria, 4:145–46 says: “Nonne tibi venerabilius videtur sepulchrum domini? Quod quotiescunque ingredimur, toties iacere in syndone cernimus Salvatorem.” This gloss is absent in the electronic edition. Glossa ordinaria (Is. 11), in Glossae, ed. Morard, consultation 12/07/2021 (URL: http://gloss-e.irht.cnrs.fr/php/editions_chapitre.php?livre=../sources/editions/GLOSS-liber33. xml&chapitre=33_11).

96

ALEXANDER MARX

they physically and spiritually engaged with the holy places.71 The Christians’ physical presence in the Holy Land was requisite to pursue salvation, to proceed from the visible to the invisible world, thus, from the terrestrial to the heavenly Jerusalem.72 One way to achieve this was martyrdom, a desirable fate, according to Henry, if one intends to be a proper member of Christ’s Body.73 Whereas martyrdom was essentially the goal of an individual, this may have comprised a collective eschatological dimension, a topic that I shall address in the last section. This section demonstrated that the ideas within the crusading treatise are echoed in the other parts of Henry’s work, forming an interrelated structure. The crusading treatise uses the causality of the four senses of Scripture which treatise I provides; it also interprets the events of 1187 based on the theological nexus between earth and heaven, established in treatises I and II. What exactly the crusading treatise proposes and what meaning inheres in particular terms and concepts thus becomes clearer thanks to a consideration of other treatises, a methodological path we shall pursue in the following sections. This exploration also reveals that the earthly Jerusalem resonates throughout the work. Exegetical meaning is ascribed to the earthly city, often informed by its biblical past.74 This is a recurrent phenomenon in Henry’s work, notably in treatises V, VI, and VII; these shall be investigated subsequently. This phenomenon betrays the significant equation between history and Salvation History; the latter naturally includes not only things in the past, but also those to come, as predicted in (biblical) prophecies.

Knocking at the Gates of Heaven The city gates are a recurring theme. In general, architectural elements feature prominently both when treating allegorical concepts in exegesis and when imagining built structures, be it in the earthly or the heavenly city. By nature, one entered the (heavenly) city through its gates; this allowed one to conceive of different measures or objects as doorways that brought one closer to God. Such “gates” (Latin: portae; ostia; ianuae) could be used as a metaphor; for example, baptism was sometimes described as a gateway to Christianity or to salvation.75 But, the motif could also designate bridges between heaven and earth such as the monastery or terrestrial

71

Such transmissions of monastic concepts had already happened when Benedictine chroniclers were busy with shaping the memory of the First Crusade. See Gaposchkin, Invisible Weapons, 34–35; William Purkis, Crusading Spirituality in the Holy Land and Iberia, c. 1095–c. 1187 (Woodbridge, 2008), 12–58. 72 See Congar, “Eglise,” 198; Schein, Gateway, 123, 130, 190–92. 73 Henry of Albano, DPCD 13, PL 204:351–52, 358, 360. 74 See Buc, Holy War, 64–111; Hofreiter, Making Sense, 168–70, 189–94, 247–51; Cotts, “The Exegesis,” 279. 75 See Jean Daniélou, Sacramentum futuri: études sur les origines de la typologie biblique (Paris, 1950), 233–45. Cf. e.g. Henry of Albano, DPCD 6, PL 204:300.

JERUSALEM AS THE TRAVELLING CITY OF GOD

97

Jerusalem.76 Even if the allegorical sense was dominant, this is still evocative, because it consciously spatializes theological concepts and locates them within the “landscape of salvation.”77 While Christianity’s rich metaphorical language offered many ways to talk about salvation, the choice to do so with the help of such spatial categories is meaningful and, we may assume, a conscious decision. Many biblical references evoke the doors to heaven (for example, Ps. 86.2 or Lam. 1.4), but the most important support in contemporary crusade-related thinking was drawn from Ezekiel, who frequently sketches the porta orientalis, the Eastern gate (Ez. 10.19; 11.1; 40.23) that will open at the End of Days (Ez. 44.1–3). The motif is developed at great length in Henry’s work, and he grants the terrestrial Jerusalem a role in this architectural ensemble. Treatise V in particular is concerned with the gates to the celestial city, and at the end, Henry discusses the sacraments: I consider those four principal gates as the eminent sacraments of God; they offer different entries and exits to different types of humans just as to certain citizens of his city, according to their diverse offices. Therefore, some enter the city from the east in order to stay, some exit from the west in order to migrate. And since the world leads a double spearhead against the soldiers of Christ – one that deludes in order to deceive and one that terrifies in order to crush – our City’s most vigorous and most warlike soldiers do not cease from departing, destined to fight their enemies. […] The gate from the east is thus the sacrament of baptism, through which one enters the city, whose citizen – whoever enters righteously – is received. It is rightly called the Eastern gate, since the East first visited this world through this gate from above [cf. Lk. 1.78], at the time when the heavens were opened, after the Lord, whose name is East, had been baptized in the river Jordan […].78

Henry ties “the gates” to both the sacraments and the crusade, speaking of the milites Christi who come from the west (ab occidente exeunt) in order to enter through the eastern portal. The city in Palestine sets the scene, since Christ’s incarnation (he came through this gate) as well as his baptism in the River Jordan draw attention to the eastern location. We will see below almost identical wording in the crusading

76 On the conception of the monastery see, e.g., Congar, “Eglise,” 175–78; Schein, Gateway, 128– 30, 190. On the terrestrial Jerusalem see, e.g., Gaposchkin, Invisible Weapons, 35. 77 Bruun, “Bernard of Clairvaux and the Landscape of Salvation,” 249–78. 78 “Has principales portas quatuor existimo praecipua Dei sacramenta, per quae diversa hominum genera velut quidam ipsius civitatis cives, secundum varia officia diversos habent exitus et ingressus. Quidam enim intrant civitatem ab oriente ad commorandum, quidam ab occidente exeunt ad transmigrandum. Et quia duplicem aciem producit mundus contra milites Christi, blandiens ut decipiat, terrens ut frangat: exire non cessent [Troyes 509: >< cessant] strenuissimi et ad bella doctissimi nostrae civitatis milites contra adversarios suos dimicaturi. […] Porta igitur ab oriente sacramentum est baptismatis, per quod in civitatem intratur, et ipsius civis, quisquis recte intrat, ascribitur. Bene autem porta haec dicitur orientalis, vel quia primo per hanc visitavit mundum Oriens ex alto, cum baptizato in Jordane Domino, cui nomen est Oriens aperti sunt coeli […].” Henry of Albano, DPCD 5, PL 204:296; Troyes BM 509, fol. 117v.

98

ALEXANDER MARX

treatise.79 Henry outlines two types of enemies, associated with spiritual and physical warfare: opponents who try to deceive (false Christians, heretics) and those who attempt to destroy (the Muslims with their inherent military and political power).80 These correspond to the spiritual and the physical Jerusalem respectively. It seems that Christ’s enemies intend to barricade entry points to heaven – a notion we shall re-encounter below in the crusading treatise. A few lines down, Henry ties his argument to Ezekiel’s vision: “Zion is called watching, since one watches through these gates, which are still closed [cf. Ez. 44.2], no longer via the shadows of figures [i.e., the Old Covenant], but via the truth of the sacraments the glory of one’s future beatitude.”81 The gates are a vehicle to call for a proper administration of the sacraments, since they offer rapprochement to God: One can get a grasp of the heavenly city or rather of one’s future beatitude, even with the doors still closed – this refers to Ez. 44 (per quasdam portas, adhuc tamen clausas, futurae suae beatitudinis gloriam speculatur).82 The motif of a doorway evokes the notion of a built city, as does the use of civitas throughout the work; all this directs attention towards the earthly Jerusalem.83 Linking the Eastern gate to the sacraments and thus to the liturgy involves another dimension: While it was possible to conceive of Jerusalem itself as an Eastern gate, the eastern entry to the historical city, coming from the Mount of Olives, was also meaningful, commemorating Christ’s own entry and celebrated annually on Palm Sunday. Concurrently, the characteristic palm branches were a trophy or souvenir for pilgrims and crusaders who visited Jerusalem.84 Whereas these discussions remain in a largely liturgical and theological register throughout treatise V, the crusading treatise locates them in 1187, demonstrating its intersection with the rest of the work: Although we observe those glorious things already the clearer the more we come near to them, including the twelve gates touching the [heavenly] thresholds [cf. Rev. 21.12],

79 See also Henry of Albano, DPCD 2, PL 204:266. He further elaborates on the sacrament of baptism in DPCD 6, PL 204:300–302. Contemporary accounts see the Jordan River as both the spiritual entry into the church (via baptism) and the literal gateway to the city in Palestine. See, e.g., Bernard of Clairvaux, De laude novae militiae, in Sämtliche Werke, ed. Gerhard Winkler, 10 vols. (Innsbruck, 1990–99), 1:298; Peter of Blois, Sermo 19, PL 207:616; Sermo 32, PL 207:655; Lucius III, Ep.182, PL 201:1312. 80 On the relationship of spiritual and physical warfare see also Henry of Albano, DPCD 9, PL 204:323–25. On the intertwinement of spiritual and physical enemies see Buc, Holy War, 91–105; Tolan, Saracens, 43–50; Gaposchkin, Invisible Weapons, 61–64, 142. 81 “Sion enim speculatio dicitur, quia jam non figurarum umbris [Troyes 509: + obscuratur], sed per sacramentorum veritatem velut per quasdam portas, adhuc tamen clausas, futurae suae beatitudinis gloriam speculatur.” Henry of Albano, DPCD 5, PL 204:297–98; Troyes BM 509, fol. 118v. 82 See also Henry of Albano, DPCD 5, PL 204:295, where he calls his audience to knock at heaven’s doors, to procure that they open. On Zion, related to contemplation and the visio Dei, see also DPCD 6, PL 204:298–99. 83 See Henry of Albano, DPCD (Prologue), PL 204:254. 84 Bird, “Preaching the Crusades,” 19; Constable, “The Cross of the Crusaders,” 61.

JERUSALEM AS THE TRAVELLING CITY OF GOD

99

we still strive to enter via the city of the Lord. As we have learned, these glorious things have been gloriously foreseen [cf. Ps. 86.3] by David and by many kings, and predicted by the prophets about his city. […] what one sees is incomparably more powerful than the rumour which one hears. Does it not suffice anymore to say with the Prophet: Just as we have heard, so we shall see [Ps. 47.9], but what we already see is much greater than what we have heard about the Lord’s city. […] We learn that the gates of glory are not so much closed as barricaded. This gate of light, whose glory we saw so delightfully until recently, this Eastern gate, I say, through which the East had used to illuminate his city from above [i.e., Christ’s incarnation; cf. Lk. 1.78], has eventually hidden the rays of its light.85

These are the very first words of the crusading treatise. Henry explicitly identifies the earthly city as the Eastern gate that brings one to heaven, before he explains the loss of Jerusalem.86 Ez. 44.1–3 says that the doors are closed until the Apocalypse: This is present in the passage from treatise V, discussed above. But here, Henry claims that they were open – until recently (paulo ante), an allusion to Jerusalem’s conquest and hence the disrupted order. With reference to Ez. 44, the Cistercian asserts that the gates are now not so much closed but obstructed (portae non tam clausae, quam obstructae). They are held by the Muslims who prevent the Christians from entering through the eastern portal, that is, through the terrestrial Jerusalem, into the heavenly kingdom. Henry believes that the gates had already been open, even though Ezekiel says that they will only open at the End of Times – the prophecy has been realized. The legate evokes the fulfilment of further Old Testament prophecies, specifically Ps. 47.9 and Ps. 86.3, whose glorious predictions (gloriosa) had already been “the more visible the closer” they came (tanto jam clarius, quanto vicinius).87 He formulates a state that had existed in the terrestrial Jerusalem, established by its

85

“Cum gloriosa quae gloriose de civitate Domini a David praevisa et a multis regibus et prophetis praedicta et praefigurata noscuntur, tanto jam clarius, quanto vicinius speculamur; et duodecimae portae limina attingentes per eam [Troyes 509: + iam iamque] intrare contendimus […] incomparabiliter majus est quod videtur quam rumor qui auditur, nec jam cum Propheta dicere sufficit: Sicut audivimus, sic vidimus; sed longe ampliora quam audivimus de civitate Domini jam videmus. […] Portae gloriae non tam clausae, quam obstructae reperiuntur. Ipsa denique porta lucis, cujus gloriam paulo ante tam delectabiliter speculabamur; illa, inquam, orientalis porta, per quam civitatem suam illustrare consueverat oriens ex alto, radios suae lucis abscondit.” Henry of Albano, DPCD 13, PL 204:350–51; Troyes BM 509, fol. 150r-v. 86 For the passage on Jerusalem’s conquest see Henry of Albano, DPCD 13, PL 204:351–52. See the discussion in the section “Reacting to the Loss of Jerusalem.” On the connection of Christ’s incarnation and light, conceiving of him as sol, see DPCD 12, PL 204:344, 349, immediately preceding the crusading treatise. 87 The passage, including Ps. 47.9, is mirrored at the beginning of treatise IV. It reads: “Multi reges et prophetae voluerunt videre quae nos videmus, et non viderunt, et audire quae nos audimus et non audierunt. Quidam autem concupierunt videre, sicut dicit Dominus de Abraham: Viderunt et gavisi sunt. Ex his David fuisse credendus est, qui de seipso protestatur in Psalmo dicens: Sicut audivimus, sic vidimus in civitate Dei nostri, Deus fundavit eam in aeternum.” Henry of Albano, DPCD 4, PL 204:283. Ps. 47.9, referring to heaven’s gates, reappears in DPCD 5, PL 204:296; 6, PL 204:304; see also 14, PL 204:365.

100

ALEXANDER MARX

conquest in 1099.88 This coincides with ideas present in the chronicles of the First Crusade: Several of them characterize the earthly city as a gateway to the heavenly kingdom; Albert of Aachen for example. Likewise, a letter which the crusade’s leaders sent in 1098 asked Urban II to open for them “the doors of both Jerusalems” – that is, the earthly and the heavenly.89 As Cecilia Gaposchkin has recently demonstrated, the notion of the city as a celestial gateway had a firm place in the liturgy of Latin Jerusalem. The liturgy drew on Rev. 21.25 which expresses in the last moment in the history of salvation that the celestial doorways stand finally open.90 And Henry reassures, in the passage cited, that the twelve gates from Rev. 21, belonging to the heavenly Jerusalem, reached already the celestial thresholds (duodecimae portae limina attingentes).91 The conquest in 1099 was an extraordinary providential act that opened the gates of heaven. In 1187, according to Henry, the gates remained open. Ezekiel’s prophecy had indeed been fulfilled with the First Crusade – but the gates had to be cleared from obstacles.92 Ps. 86 is essential to Henry’s work.93 Its third verse “Gloriosa dicta sunt de te, civitas Dei” makes clear that the “glorious things” (gloriosa) already observable, given in the very first words of the crusading treatise, are not some kind of commonplace, but refer to exegetically inscribed meaning of a fulfilled prophecy. Henry devotes the entire treatise VII to the element gloria, in exegesis of Ps. 86, offering explanations for the crusading treatise’s assertions. The transition from treatise VI to VII joins Ps. 47.9 with Ps. 86.3, in analogy to the crusading treatise: Therefore, we shall now enter the city, together with the prophet, and we shall hear from him as well as with him what he has both heard and seen inside. [end treatise VI; beginning treatise VII] Glorious things have been foretold about you, City of God [Ps. 86.3]. Among these, it seems to us that strength, beauty, and utility of the city of the Lord of virtues are already plainly present, just as the prophet described them and just as the Holy Ghost revealed them via the prophet.94 88

He does not refer explicitly to 1099, but this is the most plausible possibility, since many contemporaries regarded it as an apocalyptic fulfilment of prophecy. See, e.g., Buc, Holy War, 74–77, 258–61, 278–84. 89 AA, 438; Die Kreuzzugsbriefe aus den Jahren 1088–1100, ed. Heinrich Hagenmeyer (Innsbruck, 1901), no.16, 164; cf. Gaposchkin, Invisible Weapons, 35; Tamminen, Crusade Preaching, 75. 90 Gaposchkin, Invisible Weapons, 154, 267, 281. See also Amnon Linder, “‘Like Purest Gold Resplendent’: The Fiftieth Anniversary of the Liberation of Jerusalem,” Crusades 8 (2009): 31–51. 91 This incorporates several senses of Scripture: (a) he identifies explicitly the earthly city; (b) the twelve gates are a motif from Rev. 21 and thus anagogical; (c) limina, in Medieval Latin, may refer to the church as liturgical and transcendental space. See the entries for limen in Dictionary of Medieval Latin from British Sources, ed. Richard K. Ashdowne and David R. Howlett (Oxford, 2018); Mediae latinitatis lexicon minus, ed. Jan Frederik Niermeyer and Co van de Kieft (Leiden, 2002). 92 Henry characterized the Muslim conquest as temporary (temporalem casum); God would return it, once the Christians have followed his and Henry’s call. Henry of Albano, DPCD 13, PL 204:351–52. See the section “Reacting to the Loss of Jerusalem.” 93 Cf. Congar, “Eglise,” 182–83; Congar, “Henri de Marcy,” 56; Chideock, “Henry of Marcy,” 13. 94 “Jam ergo cum propheta in civitatem intrantes, quid intus audierit quid viderit [Troyes 509: >< videret], ab ipso pariter et cum ipso audiamus. [ch.6/ch.7] Gloriosa dicta sunt de te, civitas Dei. Ex his

JERUSALEM AS THE TRAVELLING CITY OF GOD

101

Prophecy has been fulfilled, but, as it seems, only in part (denominating particular elements), whereas the crusading treatise stated that “the glorious things” had already been visible, implying a stronger and more complete fulfilment, thus closer to the end of history. The end of treatise VII also betrays that the ultimate glory will only be revealed in the future (revelabitur gloria), associating its revelation with the Last Judgment.95 The crusading treatise, however, made its assertions in the present. As treatise VII explains, gloria designates the eschatological state of Christian being (meaning heaven and salvation), and therefore it seems most logical for Henry to end this treatise with a vision of the End of Times, related to a moral discourse, the sacraments, penance, and once again to the motif of the gates (especially the twelve gates from Rev. 21, also given in the crusading treatise). These gates will be closed to the damned, but open for those to be saved (portae claudendae damnandis, aperiendae salvandis).96 A few lines above, Henry explains that “the gates of glory will be those at which our city shall be praised so wonderfully and so magnificently, not only by its children, not only by the man [i.e., Christ], but also by its enemies.”97 The gates of glory (portae gloriae): exactly the same term Henry uses in the crusading treatise, being those now obstructed by the enemies. Henry conceived of the earthly Jerusalem between 1099 and 1187 as a kind of apocalyptic state which offered a remarkable possibility to return to heaven. The notion of such a state has been suggested by Jay Rubenstein, referring to the second generation of the First Crusade chroniclers, writing around a decade after the expedition ended.98 On the basis of Henry’s crusading treatise, it is possible to extend this idea up to 1187.99 The argument in treatises V and VII, however, was less apocalyptic: the gates were closed. This seems to reflect the state of the Christian community in Europe – in terrestrial exile, on pilgrimage (the civitas peregrinans) – where they lacked such an extraordinary opportunity. The journey to the East represented thus not only a chance to earn salvation but quite literally a way back to God – thanks to identifying the terrestrial city as the Eastern gate from Ezekiel. The Holy Land was not an ordinary part of the terrestrial world, but it appeared as an intermediary stage that brought one closer to the celestial kingdom quae dicta sunt, civitatis Domini virtutum firmitatem, decorem et commoditatem Propheta describente, imo per Prophetam Spiritu sancto revelante, manifeste jam comprehendisse videmur.” Henry of Albano, DPCD 6–7, PL 204:304–5; Troyes BM 509, fols. 122v–123r. 95 Henry of Albano, DPCD 7, PL 204:311. 96 Henry of Albano, DPCD 7, PL 204:311. 97 “Portae gloriae erunt [Troyes 509: >< erant] illae, in quibus non solum a filiis, non solum a viro, sed et ab hostibus tam mirifice, tam gloriose civitas nostra laudabitur.” Henry of Albano, DPCD 7, PL 204:310; Troyes BM 509, fol. 126v. 98 Jay Rubenstein, “Lambert of Saint-Omer and the Apocalyptic First Crusade,” in Remembering the Crusades: Myth, Image, and Identity, ed. Nicholas L. Paul and Suzanne M. Yeager (Baltimore, 2012), 73–75, 85–88; Jay Rubenstein, “Crusade and Apocalypse: History and the Last Days,” Quaestiones medii aevi novae 21 (2016): 177–85; see also Gaposchkin, Invisible Weapons, 148–56. 99 See also Marx, “Die Predigt,” 545–58.

102

ALEXANDER MARX

and offered an opportunity to return. This is a pre-eminent eschatological idea and brings us to the last topic under discussion. This section again demonstrated the relevance of the other parts of De peregrinante civitate Dei to any consideration of the crusading treatise. It shows how ideas developed in treatises V and VII are applied in the crusading treatise to the situation of 1187, sometimes using identical phrases. Our understanding of the terms and concepts present in the crusading treatise, circling around the gates to heaven and the Christians’ eschatological glory, would not be the same without analysing the information that treatises V and VII hold. They provide a source for explanation and elaboration, both for readers in Henry’s time and for us today.

Travelling to the Heavenly Jerusalem: The Crusade as Eschatological Journey The interconnectivity of the different Jerusalems is eschatological in nature; the crusader strives to overcome the imperfect state of terrestrial existence, eager to return to heaven and secure a place on the right side at the Last Judgement – thanks to the crusade’s remission of sins.100 The eschatological scenario rested on a spatial structure, reflecting the belief that the Apocalypse would take place in Jerusalem.101 The twelfth-century phenomenon of historicizing the concept of the civitas Dei supported locating the End of Times in the city in Palestine, and Henry’s work is a prominent example of this.102 Given the relationship with its heavenly counterpart, it is a possibility a priori that a journey to Palestine was eschatological in both nature and outlook – as it seems to have been present in particular on the First Crusade, with its successful conquest of Jerusalem.103 Yet, most scholars do not consider the Third Crusade to be eschatological, an understandable opinion given that research has focused on chronicles that lack any eschatology similar to that found in the narratives of the First Crusade.104 The sermons of the Third Crusade, however, provide us with another angle, presenting (eschatological) expectations before their

100

Bysted, Indulgence, passim, esp. 222–30, 289. Schein, Gateway, 145–57; Rubenstein, “Crusade and Apocalypse,” 172–75. This localization is omnipresent in the Bible (e.g., John’s Revelation or the Old Testament prophets). 102 Congar, “Eglise,” 188; Hans-Werner Goetz, “Die Rezeption der augustinischen civitas-Lehre in der Geschichtstheologie des 12. Jahrhunderts,” in Vorstellungsgeschichte. Gesammelte Schriften zu Wahrnehmungen, Deutungen und Vorstellungen im Mittelalter, ed. Anna Aurast et al. (Bochum, 2007), 109–11. 103 Buc, Holy War, 74–77, 258–61, 278–84; Buc, “Crusade and Eschatology: Holy War fostered and inhibited,” Mitteilungen des Instituts für Österreichische Geschichtsforschung 125 (2017): 304–39; Schein, Gateway, 118–19, 149–50; Rubenstein, “Lambert of Saint-Omer,” 69–98; Rubenstein, “Crusade and Apocalypse,” 159–88; Jean Flori, L’islam et la fin des temps. L’interprétation prophétique des invasions musulmanes dans la chrétienté médiévale (Paris, 2007), 282–347. 104 Yet, the chronicles contain some eschatological features which have mostly been overlooked. See, e.g., Roger of Howden, Chronica, 3:75–86; already acknowledged in Flori, L’islam, 306–12; Schein, Gateway, 155–57, 169–70. See also Rubenstein, Nebuchadnezzar’s Dream. 101

JERUSALEM AS THE TRAVELLING CITY OF GOD

103

disappointment with the failure of the crusade.105 The question to be examined is whether Henry displays eschatological expectations for the upcoming crusade and, if so, what was their nature?106 Henry’s treatise is an especially valuable source for such an inquiry, since he died before the expedition departed: He did not have any chance to revise eschatological elements in the text after the crusade’s failure as probably often happened in such a situation.107 Nevertheless, one cannot exclude that copyists erased eschatological elements from Henry’s work; I shall discuss some examples where this seems to be the case. A section in treatise I of De peregrinante civitate Dei may evidence such a modification, when the Holy Land’s nature and borders are sketched: And the Lord has chosen you [i.e., the Christians] today so that you may be to him his exceptional people, just as he told you. And you shall keep all his commandments, and he shall make you superior to all other people which he had created [Deut. 26.18–19]. In the same way: Every place, where your feet will tread upon, shall be yours. Your territory shall be from the desert, to the Lebanon, to the great River Euphrates, and to the Western sea [Deut. 11.24].108

The privileged status of the chosen people who own this particular land displays a literal exegesis that was typical of the time and characteristic in the context of the crusades. The Holy Land is the Christians’ heritage, being the very spot where the feet of God’s elect people would walk.109 This reminds us of a familiar notion: The places in the Levant were holy, since Christ had stood there (Ps. 131.7).110 Being part of the Corpus Christi, the Christians followed in his footsteps.

105

Such disappointments, rooted in a crusade’s failure and causing changes in outlook, have been discussed in the cases of Bernard of Clairvaux, Gerhoch of Reichersberg, and Otto of Freising. See Buc, “Crusade and Eschatology,” 332–33; Rubenstein, Nebuchadnezzar’s Dream, 129–30, 135–39, 146–49; Hans-Dietrich Kahl, “Crusade Eschatology as Seen by St. Bernard in the Years 1146 to 1148,” in The Second Crusade and the Cistercians, ed. Michael Gervers (New York, 1992), 39–40. 106 On eschatological expectations in the Third Crusade’s preaching see Marx, “Die Predigt,” 519–76; Marx, “The Passio Raginaldi,” 216–24. On eschatological elements in crusade sermons see Cole, Preaching, 195–200; Tamminen, Crusade Preaching, 74–89; Lydia M. Walker, “Living in the Penultimate Age: Apocalyptic Thought in James of Vitry’s ad status Sermons,” in Uses of the Bible, ed. Lapina and Morton, 298–315. 107 For this strategy around the year 1000 see Richard Allen Landes, “The Fear of an Apocalyptic Year 1000: Augustinian Historiography, Medieval and Modern,” Speculum 75 (2000): 97–145, at 105; Richard Allen Landes, Heaven on Earth: The Varieties of the Millennial Experience (Oxford, 2011), 64–67. 108 “Et Dominus elegit te hodie, ut sis ei populus peculiaris, sicut locutus est tibi, et custodias omnia praecepta illius; et faciat te excelsiorem cunctis gentibus quas creavit. Item: Omnis locus quem calcaverit pes vester, vester erit. A deserto, et a Libano, et a flumine magno Euphrate usque ad mare occidentale erunt termini vestri.” Henry of Albano, DPCD 1, PL 204:256. 109 Bird, “Rogations,” 170; Hofreiter, Making Sense, 169–70; Nicholas Morton, Encountering Islam on the First Crusade (Cambridge, 2016), 226–33. 110 Cf. BL Add 24145, fol. 77r; Jaspert, “‘Wo seine Füße standen’,” 172–85. See also Henry of Albano, DPCD 11, PL 204:335.

104

ALEXANDER MARX

Henry says that God would make his elect people superior to all others. The passage, as cited, is given in the Patrologia Latina. The manuscript, however, looks different: And the Lord has chosen you today so that you may be to him his exceptional people and he shall make you superior to all other people [Deut. 26.18–19], and you shall rule those who are now stronger and more numerous than you [Deut. 11.23], from the desert, to the Lebanon, to the great River Euphrates, and to the Western sea shall be your territory [Deut. 11.24].111

That God’s chosen people shall rule over all the gentiles is rendered in the future tense (possidebitis). These gentiles are currently superior to them, formulated in the present tense (maiores et fortiores vobis sunt).112 This passage – absent in the Patrologia Latina – betrays pagan (i.e. Muslim) superiority in the Holy Land, obviously reflecting the political developments of the late twelfth century, while it articulates an (eschatological) vision of victory over the gentiles.113 The reason for omitting this passage in another manuscript, the basis for the Patrologia Latina, may have been its eschatological nature, likely prompted by changed circumstances, when the manuscript was copied. This is one example where imminent eschatological expectations have been removed, producing a distortion of the text’s outlook, in accordance with Richard Landes’ argument. In many other cases, we might not be able to recognize such deletions.114 Yet, the text as it survives in both the Patrologia Latina and the manuscript provides us with further eschatological material. The manuscript holds at least two further examples of such elements which are absent in the Patrologia Latina version, betraying not only that the latter was based on another manuscript, but also that Henry’s original text expressed eschatological beliefs which at least one later copyist decided to eliminate. Such textual intrusions – even though partly concerned only with single words – show us that these elements were expressive and loaded with meaning. The opening of the crusading treatise asserted that it was “already” possible to enter heaven’s gates located in terrestrial Jerusalem (per eam iam iamque intrare contendimus).115 The double “iam iamque,” absent in the 111 “Et Dominus elegit te hodie, ut sis ei populus peculiaris, et faciat te excelsiorem cunctis gentibus, et possidebitis eas que maiores et fortiores vobis sunt, a deserto et libano et a flumine magno Euphrate usque ad mare occidentale erunt termini vestri.” Troyes BM 509, fol. 95v. 112 This is mirrored in the crusading treatise, with reference to the First Crusade. Henry of Albano, DPCD 13, PL 204:359. 113 The notion of such a final victory over paganism is given throughout biblical prophecies. See Flori, L’islam, 288; Skottki, “Vom ‘Schrecken Gottes’ zur Bluttaufe,” 475–79; Hans-Dietrich Kahl, “‘… Auszujäten von der Erde die Feinde des Christennamens …’ Der Plan zum ‘Wendenkreuzzug’ von 1147 als Umsetzung sibyllinischer Eschatologie,” Jahrbuch für die Geschichte Mittel- und Ostdeutschlands 39 (1990): 133–60. 114 Landes, “The Fear,” 105; Landes, Heaven on Earth, 64–67. See also Rubenstein, Nebuchadnezzar’s Dream, 121–22. 115 Troyes BM 509, fol. 150r–v.

JERUSALEM AS THE TRAVELLING CITY OF GOD

105

Patrologia Latina, suggests an imminence of the subject at stake and apocalyptic beliefs as they were already expressed during the First Crusade, as demonstrated by Philippe Buc.116 A significant passage in treatise VII, examined in the previous section, declared prophetically that the gates of glory will be venerated, a phrase switched into the past tense in the manuscript: “the gates of glory were those” venerated (portae gloriae erant illae).117 As Matthew Gabriele has argued, such verb tense changes of prophetic predictions are meaningful: They imply eschatological fulfilment.118 Together with the example from treatise I, at least three instances exist in the manuscript version that are likely closer to Henry’s original text and to the apocalyptic mood on the eve of the Third Crusade. The manuscript apparently provides us with a version of Henry’s text that has not gone through the process of modification in hindsight; the copy was perhaps forgotten on some dusty library shelf – luckily for us. Treatise VII broadly develops the eschatological gloria, thus putting a deeply eschatological theme at centre stage.119 It distinguishes between the heavenly glory (given in Ps. 86) and a terrestrial distortion presenting ancient Rome as an example. The Christians, destined for true glory, are Christ’s heirs and they were thus able to gain liberty (libertas) from Rome and achieve sovereignty (dominatio) – obviously alluding to the Constantinian shift.120 Henry drafts here a vision of Christian rule, corresponding to the passage from treatise I: Christ’s soldiers shall be superior to pagans (gentes), kings (reges), emperors (imperatores), and demons (daemonia) – the citizens of Christ’s city (suae civitatis cives) will reign with him (conregnare).121 Treatise VII elaborates on pagans as Feindbild, delivering meaning for such a group and placing them in a binary contrast to God’s elect people.122 The treatise comprises an eschatological narrative, bearing on a historical process running from liberty from Rome, to domination over pagans, to a vision of the Last Judgment – the time of ultimate glory. The crusading treatise, however, declared that this moment had already arrived.123 Treatises I and VII share the themes of the Christians as Christ’s heirs, the Feindbild of pagans, and an eschatological dimension; we shall see now how these themes are developed in the crusading treatise.

116

Buc, “Crusade and Eschatology,” 310, 334. Troyes BM 509, fol. 126v. 118 Matthew Gabriele, “From Prophecy to Apocalypse: The Verb Tenses of Jerusalem in Robert the Monk’s Historia of the First Crusade,” Journal of Medieval History 42 (2016): 304–16, at 308. 119 See also Appendices I and III below for the omnipresence of this motif. 120 Henry of Albano, DPCD 7, PL 204:305–8. Constantine is explicitly mentioned on other occasions. See DPCD 10, PL 204:327; 13, PL 204:359. 121 Henry of Albano, DPCD 7, PL 204:309. 122 On notions of the enemy in the Third Crusade’s preaching see Marx, “Constructing and Denying the Enemy,” 47–68. See also Henry of Albano, DPCD 9, PL 204:323–325. On medieval interpretations of Old Testament passages, related to pagans and violence, see Hofreiter, Making Sense, 57–197, esp. 167–94. 123 Henry of Albano, DPCD 13, PL 204:350–51. See the section “Knocking at the Gates of Heaven.” 117

106

ALEXANDER MARX

When describing the events of 1187, Henry characterizes his own days as the last age (ultima haec aetas).124 This may designate more generally the age of the Church, but it could also imply the belief that the End of Days was near. The same sentence speaks of the fulfilment of Old Testament prophecy – and this was not the only occasion we find Henry asserting such an outcome.125 A fulfilled prophecy: what could be more eschatological? Furthermore, the same passage is concerned with contemplating the holy places, signalling that the End of Times was believed to be at hand.126 Then, people were drawn to Jerusalem to be as close to heaven as possible as if their location would influence the verdict on them at the Last Judgment.127 Prophetic realization is a thread that pervades Henry’s work. Some lines after having proclaimed that the last age has come, Henry presents his ultimate vision about the crusade as the journey at the End of Days: And it is unjustly proclaimed by Mahomet’s people that he has triumphed not only over the Christians but also over Christ. However, these events did not happen because Mahomet was able to do them, but because Christ willed them. Christ intended to provide the Christians with an occasion to exhibit zeal for the glory of their Lord, an occasion to avenge the injury done to the Father, and an occasion to rescue our own heritage. Behold, now is the acceptable time [2 Cor. 6.2], when it shall be revealed who passed probation, when the Lord shall decide who are his people – who are to him the faithful, who the impious, who are the false sons, and who his own [sons]. The faithful soldiers will follow their king accordingly. They will rather expose themselves unwaveringly to their enemies for their king, and they will bravely kill the evildoers for him than save their lives halfheartedly in flight and inflict ignominy upon their king.128

The passage comprises two strands: (1) Henry explains the events of 1187, insisting that these did not happen because of the Muslims’ strength but because of Christ’s will, meant to provide the 124

Henry of Albano, DPCD 13, PL 204:353. Henry of Albano, DPCD 1, PL 204:256; 4, PL 204:283; 5, PL 204:297–98; 13, PL 204:350–51. See the discussion in the section “Knocking at the Gates of Heaven”; see also Appendices II and III below. 126 Henry of Albano, DPCD 13, PL 204:353. See the discussion in the section “Reacting to the Loss of Jerusalem.” 127 Several contemporaries tell us about pilgrims who were buried before the gates of Jerusalem or created piles of stones to mark their place for the Last Judgment. See, e.g., Otto of Freising, Chronica 8.18, ed. Adolf Hofmeister (Darmstadt, 2011), 622; John of Würzburg, Descriptio terrae sanctae, in R. B. C. Huygens, ed., Peregrinationes tres, CCCM 139 (Turnhout, 1994), 109–10. 128 “[…] et non solum de Christianis, sed et de Christo triumphasse Machometus a suis inique praedicetur. Non enim haec acta sunt, quia Machometus potuit, sed quia Christus voluit, volens dare Christianis occasionem zelandi Domini sui gloriam, vindicandi Patris injuriam et haereditatem propriam vendicandi. Ecce enim tempus acceptabile, quo probati manifesti fiant [Troyes 509: >< fiunt]; quo probet Dominus, qui sint ejus; qui sint ei fideles, qui perfidi; qui filii alieni, qui proprii. Fideles siquidem milites suum regem sequentur, pro suo se rege hostibus incunctanter objicient, malentes pro eo fortiter occumbere, quam segniter fugiendo vitam sibi conferre, ignominiam suo regi inferre.” Henry of Albano, DPCD 13, PL 204:355; Troyes BM 509, fol. 152v. 125

JERUSALEM AS THE TRAVELLING CITY OF GOD

107

Christians with an opportunity to exhibit zeal, to avenge an injury, and to claim their heritage (haereditas propria); evidence for the literal exegesis of earning the Holy Land as during the times of the Old Covenant.129 The Holy Land, therefore, appears as God’s testing ground dedicated to communicating with Christians. They must be vigilant to recognize his signs; they must always keep an eye on the east. Likewise, this deprives the Muslims of any agency in the theatre of salvation having achieved nothing on their own; they are puppets in God’s plan.130 (2) The passage is focused on the approaching Judgement Day: Now is the “acceptable time” (tempus acceptabile), when Christ will judge the just and the impious.131 Christ will decide who are his sons and who the false ones, alluding to the Muslims as the illegitimate sons of Hagar.132 Henry’s expressions leave no doubt that he believed the Apocalypse to be just around the corner – and he, as a papal legate and a soldier of Christ, might have influenced many others with this opinion.133 The tempus acceptabile or sometimes annum acceptum appears on several occasions in the Bible; it represents prophetic fulfilment and holy war.134 The Glossa Ordinaria, commenting on 2 Cor. 6.2, establishes that this phrase designates the End of Days. Directly above the biblical text, it comments that (a) this is how it is formulated in “the prophecy” (ponit prophetiam) and (b) this is the time when the sick mortals will get the healing medicine (quo morbis mortalibus salubris medicina infunditur). Furthermore, it puts in the margins that the tempus acceptabile means that “salvation is granted immediately on the death of the believer.”135 Such immediate salvation pertained 129 Buc, Holy War, 260–61. See also Bernard of Clairvaux, Ep. 363, ed. Winkler, 3:652–654; discussed by Bysted, The Crusade Indulgence, 242. 130 See Marx, “Constructing and Denying the Enemy,” 65–68. 131 Cf. Bernard of Clairvaux, Ep.363, ed. Winkler, 3:650. Bernard begins this crusade letter with the same expression. See Bysted, The Crusade Indulgence, 236–43, who discusses the concept of tempus acceptabile with regard to penance and the remission of sin. See also Skottki, “‘Until the Full Number of Gentiles Has Come In’,” 252, who, examining Bernard, already recognized the phrase’s eschatological dimension. 132 Cf. Buc, Holy War, 281; Morton, Encountering Islam, 15–16. See also Henry of Albano, DPCD 7, PL 204:308, where he identifies the Christians as filii and cohaeredes, while the pagan Romans, characterized as alieni, serve his argument as a good example for pagan superstition and vainglory. 133 Cf. BL Add 24145, fol. 77v. This is Henry’s letter to Barbarossa, in which he attributes traits of the Last World Emperor to his addressee. Cf. Rubenstein, Nebuchadnezzar’s Dream, 43–48, 179, 193–201; Flori, L’islam, 302–306; Hannes Möhring, Der Weltkaiser der Endzeit. Entstehung, Wandel und Wirkung einer tausendjährigen Weissagung (Stuttgart, 2000), passim, esp. 174. 134 2 Cor. 6.2 (tempus acceptabile); Lk. 4.18–19 (annum Domini acceptum); Jes. 61.2 (annum placabilis); Lev. 25.10 (annum quinquagesimum); discussed by Bysted, The Crusade Indulgence, 237–38. 135 “[…] statim in obitu fidelis salus datur.” Glossa Ordinaria, 6:399–400; cf. Glossa ordinaria (2 Cor. 6), in Glossae, ed. Morard, consultation 12/07/2021 (URL: http://gloss-e.irht.cnrs.fr/php/editions_ chapitre.php?livre=../sources/editions/GLOSS-liber62.xml&chapitre=62_6). 2 Cor. 6.2 is also among the verses which Humbert of Romans lists for crusade preaching: Humbert of Romans, De predicatione crucis, ed. Valentin Portnykh, CCCM 279 (Turnhout, 2018), 117.

108

ALEXANDER MARX

only to martyrs as they emerged both on crusade and within the apocalyptic spectacle.136 The end of Henry’s passage addresses the role of the Christians within the eschatological scenario. As Philippe Buc has noted, John’s Revelation left the question of human agency open and thus allowed preachers to appeal to their audiences to take action and to be part of the eschatological drama.137 This is what Henry is doing here: The faithful soldiers shall follow their king to war, either seeking martyrdom or killing his enemies. The images evoke Rev. 19 where Christ leads the eschatological forces into battle, riding on a white horse with a sword emerging from his mouth.138 A few lines down, Henry declares that God shall finish what he has already begun to do “in us” (consumma, Deus, hoc quod jam coepisti operari in nobis).139 This is likely a reference to the apocalyptic window, as it were, that had opened with the First Crusade. Now God shall finish history but with the help of the crusaders; thus, God operates “in us” or “through us.”140 The Christians could and should participate in the eschatological turmoil. Their actions, foreshadowing the Last Judgment, can be understood as partial fulfilment of the eschatological prophecy.141 The crusade was part of this prophecy and the Holy Land the stage for these ultimate events. Henry’s Epistola 32 – addressed to the German nobility to incite them to take the cross – reveals that these apocalyptic ideas resonated beyond the monastic audience of De peregrinante civitate Dei.142 One reads in this letter: Thanks to your and others’ service, who have been chosen for this purpose, Christ shall triumph over the hostility of the barbarian nation – beneficially for us and gloriously for himself. See, now is the acceptable time; behold, now is the day of salvation [2 Cor. 6.2], if only the soldiers of Christ shall not delay in putting on the weapons of light, the

136

See esp. Rev. 6.10–11; 17.6. On the causality of crusade, martyrdom, and eschatology see Buc, Holy War, 105–11, 167–73. On martyrdom in the crusades see also Tamminen, Crusade Preaching, 108–201, 283; Jean Flori, “Mort et martyre des guerriers vers 1100. L’exemple de la première croisade,” Cahiers de civilisation médiévale 34/134 (1991): 121–39. 137 Buc, Holy War, 75. 138 In the lines that follow, Henry evokes this notion two more times. Henry of Albano, DPCD 13, PL 204:356–57; see also Ep.32, PL 204:249. 139 Henry of Albano, DPCD 13, PL 204:357. 140 On ideas of providential human agency see Buc, Holy War, 253–61; Gerd Althoff, “Selig sind, die Verfolgung ausüben”: Päpste und Gewalt im Hochmittelalter (Darmstadt, 2013), 135–36, 139–40, 146. 141 See Buc, Holy War, 75–76, 278–84. Buc formulated this concept for the First Crusade’s aftermath, when people realized that the Apocalypse itself was not yet coming. However, since the prophecy was partially fulfilled – so goes the logic – it could not be far anymore. 142 Cramer characterizes this letter as a written crusade sermon (“geschriebene Kreuzpredigt”), comparable to Bernard’s letters. Cramer, “Kreuzpredigt,” 74; cf. Flori, Prêcher, 162. The first letter after Gregory VIII’s election (Oct. 1187) was already a call to the German clergy to preach the crusade (Gregory VIII, Ep.1, PL 202:1537–38).

JERUSALEM AS THE TRAVELLING CITY OF GOD

109

shield of faith, and the helmet of salvation [cf. Eph. 6], rejecting the works of darkness, to avenge the injury done to the Cross.143

The letter reminds of both the passage just discussed and the passage from treatise I, where Henry formulated an eschatological vision of victory over the gentiles, related to the Holy Land’s borders.144 There are several linguistic consistencies between his notions in De peregrinante civitate Dei, addressed to a monastic audience, and his crusading letter to the German nobility: (1) the tempus acceptabile, (2) the victory over the pagans, rendered in the future tense, (3) the milites Christi,145 and (4) revenge for the injury done to the cross. The letter displays that these notions found their way to the laity.146 And it is devoted to an eschatological vision: it discusses the tempus acceptabile (2 Cor. 6.2) which it classifies as the day of salvation (dies salutis), while identifying both as happening right now (nunc). And, of course, also the final victory over the pagans is eschatological, here related to rejecting the works of darkness (abicientes opera tenebrarum) – a clear reference to where the Muslims were imagined to stand in this salvific struggle.147 At the beginning of the same letter, the legate uses the eschatological passages from Matt. 27 to describe the events of 1187, evoking a trembling earth (like the papal encyclical), a fading sun, and the dead emerging from their graves and marching to Jerusalem.148 Henry presented to the German nobility, perhaps even read aloud like a sermon, an eschatological vision of the planned crusade – a journey to the End of Days and to heavenly Jerusalem. This section added another example of how the crusading treatise is echoed in other parts of De peregrinante civitate Dei. It highlighted the connections between treatise I, treatise VII, and the crusading treatise that all evoke the Holy Land as the Christians’ natural heritage, the identification of a pagan enemy, and several eschatological themes. The last of these, explained in treatises I and VII (as well as in treatise V, discussed in the previous section), generates a sense of urgency in the crusading treatise, turning a theological examination of the End of Times into 143

“[…] per obsequium vestrum et aliorum quos ad hoc eligere dignatus fuerit, nobis salubriter et sibi gloriose de barbare nationis hostilitate triumphet. Ecce nunc tempus acceptabile, ecce nunc dies salutis, in quibus utinam milites Christi abicientes opera tenebrarum et ad vindicandam crucis iniuriam, indui non differant arma lucis, loricam fidei et salutis galeam assumentes.” Henry of Albano, Ep. 32, ed. Chroust, 12; cf. BL Add 24145, fol. 78r. 144 Henry of Albano, DPCD 1, PL 204:256; Troyes BM 509, fol. 95v. See the discussion above. 145 Cf. Henry of Albano, DPCD 5, PL 204:296; 13, PL 204:360. On this concept see Carl Erdmann, Die Entstehung des Kreuzzugsgedankens (Stuttgart, 1935); Adolf Harnack, Militia Christi. Die christliche Religion und der Soldatenstand in den ersten drei Jahrhunderten (Tübingen, 1905). 146 This is strengthened by the fact that the letter is quoted in a crusade chronicle, indicating its application and distribution. Its distribution is also evidenced by its survival in another manuscript, in a completely different context. See BL Add 24145, fol. 78r. 147 Cf. Henry of Albano, DPCD 2, PL 204:264; 4, PL 204:283, 290. 148 Henry of Albano, Ep.32, ed. Chroust, 11. He uses the same verse in the crusading treatise, including strong eschatological references, here centred around Christ’s Second Coming and the completion of his Passion. See Henry of Albano, DPCD 13, PL 204:354.

110

ALEXANDER MARX

a warning about its imminence, prompted by historical events, and inscribed in the course of Salvation History.

Conclusion This article has examined Henry of Albano’s conception of Jerusalem in his De peregrinante civitate Dei, a work that represents a powerful example of how significantly ideas of crusading were intertwined with theological ideas and biblical verses. These verses were used to describe, to explain and to imagine historical events and places, in particular those of the Holy Land. Henry weaves together the four senses of Scripture, that is, the four Jerusalems: the capture of the earthly city in 1187 manifested the capture of the spiritual one, caused by the sins of the Christian people (formulated via peccatis nostris exigentibus). The earthly guise was a tool of communication and a testing ground for an almighty God who sent messages (signa) to his elect people, in order to provide them with an opportunity for salvation. Besides investigating several thematic strands, this article considered the architecture of De peregrinante civitate Dei and how the crusading treatise intersects with the other parts. It demonstrated how the manifold cohesions between various sections help us to understand better the crusading treatise. The latter uses numerous terms and concepts whose meaning is explained in the other treatises; these offered material for further reading, for thought, and for preaching on the events of 1187. Just as we may use the other parts to decipher the crusading treatise, it seems that Henry’s contemporaries were supposed to do the same. This makes his work a unique tool, located at the intersection of history and exegetical discourse, and ultimately aiming for a broad (lay) audience related to crusade recruitment. The crusading treatise’s presence within the work followed a sophisticated plan which, given its elaboration, must have developed already before 1187, but the unexpected fall of Jerusalem granted historical urgency to matters that might have remained largely theological (and monastic) before. The section “Reacting to the Loss of Jerusalem” examined connections with treatises I and II, revolving around the four senses of Scripture and the “ladders” linking earth and heaven. The section “Knocking at the Gates of Heaven” revealed significant echoes in the treatises V and VII regarding the gates to heaven (specifically the Eastern gate) and eschatological Christian glory in fulfilment of Ps. 86. The section “Travelling to the Heavenly Jerusalem” pointed out such connections with treatises I and VII, dealing with the Holy Land as the Christians’ heritage, the Feindbild of pagans, and the inherent apocalyptic dimensions of these ideas. This analysis suggests that Henry conceived of strong ties between the earthly and the heavenly world. Terrestrial markers, such as the places in the Holy Land, may work as signifiers for their celestial equivalents, they are “ladders” (Gen. 28.12), while Henry entwines the destiny of God’s chosen people with the Holy

JERUSALEM AS THE TRAVELLING CITY OF GOD

111

Land spaces via the Corpus Christi. The legate saw the crusade as a literal journey back to God: One travelled to the city in Palestine and then ascended to the celestial Jerusalem. The Holy Land, therefore, represented an intermediary stage between heaven and earth, a space that is eschatological in its very nature. Henry utters bold statements that he believes the Apocalypse to be just around the corner; he asserts numerous times the fulfilment of (Old Testament) prophecy, in particular Ps. 47.9, Ps. 86.3, and Ez. 44.1–3. He considers the crusade to be a journey whose destination is the End of Times, characterized as the tempus acceptabile, emphasizing that the “Eastern Gate” to heaven stood open since the First Crusade. It seems then that the crusade was not only a journey through space but also through time, rooted in the notion that celestial timelessness always ran in parallel to terrestrial existence; this allowed one to conceive of ways to bridge the two. A comparison with Henry’s letters reveals that those apocalyptic thoughts found their way to the laity – sometimes even with the very same expressions as those used in his main work. According to Henry of Albano, papal legate and one of the principal preachers of the Third Crusade, the gates to heaven were open in the Holy Land, and God awaited the return of his elect.

112

ALEXANDER MARX

Appendix I Henry of Albano, De peregrinante civitate Dei, Treatise XIII This appendix sketches the structure and major features of Henry’s crusading treatise. This should allow the reader to retrace the article’s argument, since the discussion is centered on themes, rather than follow the treatise’s structure. Due to the thematic richness, however, not all of its many elements can be covered in this summary. The page numbers in brackets are those of the Patrologia Latina (vol. 204). (1) The treatise starts by asserting the fulfilment of Old Testament prophecies (Ps. 47.9 and Ps. 86.3), associated with (already present) eschatological gloria and the motif of the gates to Jerusalem, understand heaven, from Ez. 44–46 and Rev. 21.12; Henry proclaims that the Eastern gate to heaven stood already open, a state disrupted now by the city’s conquest; he then explains its loss as signifying the loss of the spiritual Jerusalem, related to Christian sinfulness, the Corpus Christi, and desirable martyrdom (cols. 351–52). (2) Henry jumps to the Temple, the Maccabees, and Antiochus Epiphanes, dealing with issues of purity and pollution; he expounds the nature of the holy places as ladders to the heavenly world, naming here the True Cross and the Holy Sepulchre (using Is. 11.10); he suggests again the fulfilment of prophecy, since these places have been conquered (cols. 352–53). (3) He jumps now to the True Cross, comparing its capture to the loss of the Ark of the Covenant (cf. 1 Sam. 4.17–18) – this is a significant change in focus (first, he discussed only Jerusalem, now only the cross); he elaborates on the idea of a new crucifixion by the pagans, associating them with the Jews and evoking eschatological references, he even asserts that the Second Coming has already taken place (cols. 353–54). (4) He explains then the events’ cause, being a tool of communication between God and the Christians, his elect people: God created an opportunity for the Christians to gain salvation; Henry emphasizes that the events had not been the Muslims’ achievement, connected to several eschatological references (e.g., the tempus acceptabile), he uses eventually also the classical peccatis nostris exigentibus (cols. 355–56). (5) The legate praises the enormous collective effort of Christian society for penance and confession, they bear the cross and follow Christ into battle (Matt. 16.24); thanks to God’s intervention, they see (the opportunity for) salvation in the midst of the earth (ecce, te operante, salutem in medio terrae) (col. 357). (6) He recalls the successful preaching activity of himself and his colleagues, which prompted numerous people to take the cross (among them Frederick Barbarossa, Henry II, and Philip Augustus); he characterizes the (upcoming) crusaders as coelestis regis vexilliferi (cols. 357–58).

JERUSALEM AS THE TRAVELLING CITY OF GOD

113

(7) In a sudden turning point in Henry’s narrative he discusses the devil and his corpus diaboli, to which Saladin and the Muslims belong (identified as membra and satellites), he recalls again the loss of both cross and Holy Sepulchre; he quotes then a fictitious speech by the devil and his servants, who ponder on plans for how to counter the power of the cross (the speech focuses on the cross, including its history with Helena and Heraclius, also evoking eschatological references) (cols. 358–59). (8) The devil calls his servants (encompassing Jews and false Christians) to fan out throughout Europe and to stir up conflicts; this was meant to provide an explanation for the renewed quarrels within Latin Christendom as the year 1188 progressed; after the devil’s speech, Henry warns his audience that they must counter these efforts (they must edocere from these experiences, a term that suggests preaching) (col. 359). (9) Henry reproaches the renewed inner-Christian conflicts (summer and autumn of 1188). Since many people have already taken the cross, he describes them as a war of ‘cross against cross’ (crux adversus crucem), and a war within the Corpus Christi: its membra have suffered recently in the East, now the Corpus suffers from its own membra in the West (Christum nuper in Oriente passum in membris suis; sed nunc in Occidente detestabilius patitur a membris suis) (cols. 359–60). (10) This results in a call for martyrdom (related to milites Christi and vexilliferi crucis) (col. 360). (11) This is succeeded by a comparison of Judas (i.e., Christians) and Pilate (i.e., Saladin, Muslims), concluding that what Judas did was much worse, since he was Christ’s friend and disciple; Henry addresses his audience: they must do their duty, otherwise they will earn the same doom as Judas (he suggests the potential loss of their elect status as happened to the Jews, given that the symbol of this status, the cross, has been captured); the treatise ends by threatening with damnation all those who do not fulfil their crusading vow (col. 361).

114

ALEXANDER MARX

Appendix II Composition and Structure of De peregrinante civitate Dei

Title (PL)

Keywords1

Short abstract

Prologue

Praefatio auctoris ad Augustine; building Claraevallenses Jerusalem (Ps. 121); civitas peregrinans; Corpus Christi; Feindbild gentiles; fulfilment of prophecies; Laetare Jerusalem; Ps. 86

Introduction to the contents, in dependence on Augustine’s De civitate Dei, including an eschatological perspective; this is preceded by some personal remarks (Henry’s life as monk outside the monastery); the work’s purpose and genre are not discussed

Treatise I

De praeparatione materiae civitatis Dei

A discussion of the four senses of Scripture, including the earthly Jerusalem, examining the meaning of divine signs as ladders between heaven and earth; otherwise many topics are mentioned on which other treatises elaborate

Augustine; building Jerusalem; civitas peregrinans; contemplatio; dialectics OT and NT;2 earthly Jerusalem; eschatological victory over gentiles; Exodus; four senses of Scripture; fulfilment of prophecies and Christ’s advents; gates; gloria; Holy Land as heritage; Imitatio Christi; Ps. 86; relation SW and PW;3 sacraments; scala coeli (Gen. 28); signing with the cross (Ex. 12 and Ez. 9)

JERUSALEM AS THE TRAVELLING CITY OF GOD

115

Title (PL)

Keywords1

Short abstract

Treatise II

De caractere, titulo et testimonio, quibus cives suos Christus insigniri voluit

Augustine; building Jerusalem; Christians as haeredes Christi; Corpus Christi; dialectics OT and NT; earthly Jerusalem (Christ’s incarnation); gloria; Last Judgment; signing with the cross (Matt. 16.24)

A discussion of the signa referring to the civitas Dei, especially as to the relationship of and fulfillment between OT and NT; examining “relics” of these signa, including the cross to be signed with and the civitas on earth; involving also a discussion of sin in dependence on human free will

Treatise III

De testimonio quod sancta Trinitas perhibet amicis: Qui hic distinguuntur a filiis, et ministris

Christians as haeredes Christi; contemplatio; gloria; Imitatio Christi; Laetare Jerusalem

A portrayal of the Trinity, which serves the amici (i.e., monks) as a source of virtue and contemplation in their embodiment of the heavenly Jerusalem

Treatise IV

De fundamento civitatis Dei

Augustine; building Jerusalem; contemplatio; Exodus; Feindbild gentiles; fulfilment of prophecies; Laetare Jerusalem; Last Judgment; martyrdom; Ps. 47.9; Ps. 86; penance; sacraments

A discussion of the foundations of the civitas Dei, focused on the process of “building Jerusalem” in exegesis of Ps. 86; including also the Augustinian dichotomy of Jerusalem and Babylon

Treatise V

De portis civitatis Dei

Augustine; building Jerusalem; Christians as haeredes Christi; Corpus Christi; dialectics OT and NT; earthly Jerusalem; Eastern gate and Christ’s incarnation; Exodus; Feindbild gentiles; fulfilment of prophecies; gates; gloria; militia Christi; Ps. 47.9; Ps. 86; relation SW and PW; river Jordan; sacraments

A rich discussion of the entries into the heavenly city, related to the earthly Jerusalem and the sacraments; elaborating on different ways to salvation united in the Corpus Christi

116

ALEXANDER MARX

Title (PL)

Keywords1

Short abstract

Treatise VI

De nomine civitatis Dei

Augustine; civitas peregrinans; contemplatio; Corpus Christi; earthly Jerusalem; Eastern gate; Exodus; gates; gloria; Imitatio Christi; Laetare Jerusalem; Last Judgment; Ps. 47.9; sacraments

A discussion of the different names of the civitas Dei (including, e.g., Zion or visio pacis); related also to its different states according to the progress of Salvation History; succeeded by an essay on the sacraments of baptism and the Eucharist

Treatise VII

De libertate, dominatione, et gloria civitatis Dei

Augustine; Christians as haeredes Christi; earthly Jerusalem; Feindbild gentiles; fulfilment of prophecies; gates; gloria; Imitatio Christi; Last Judgment; penance; Ps. 86; sacraments; signing with the cross

An examination of gloria (Ps. 86), designating heaven and salvation; gloria represents an essential feature of Christian existence, from which result libertas and dominatio (of others, explicitly pagans); concluded by a preview of the Last Judgment, providing thus a sketch of Salvation History

Treatise VIII

De gloria apostolorum

Augustine; building Jerusalem; Christians as haeredes Christi; contemplatio; fulfilment of prophecies; gates; gloria; heretics; Last Judgment; martyrdom

A portrayal of the papal office, its spiritual foundations, and the ideal of Vita Apostolica

Treatise IX

De cathedra Petri iterum

contemplatio; dialectics OT and NT; Feindbild gentiles; gates; heretics; relation SW and PW; virga (e.g., as virga ferrea)

A discussion of typological fulfilment between OT and NT, focused on the cathedra Petri and warfare against OT gentiles

JERUSALEM AS THE TRAVELLING CITY OF GOD

117

Title (PL)

Keywords1

Short abstract

Treatise X

De tribus praelatorum ordinibus, et cleri supra populum exaltatione

cross; dialectics OT and NT; Feindbild gentiles; gates; gloria; Imitatio Christi; Last Judgment; sacraments

An outline of the three orders of clerics (primates, bishops, archbishops), their duties, and their relationship to the laity

Treatise XI

De porta duodecima civitatis Dei, beata virgine deipara

building Jerusalem; civitas peregrinans; Corpus Christi; cross; dialectics OT and NT; Eastern gate and Christ’s incarnation; gates; gloria; heretics; Holy Land (Ex. 3.5); penance

The motif of the twelve gates from Rev. 21.12 provides a basis to discuss Mary, identifying her as one “gate”; related to an argument on the role of benedictions and the growth of the church (in analogy to “building Jerusalem”)

Treatise XII

De gloria portae duodecimae virginis Mariae

building Jerusalem; contemplatio; Corpus Christi; dialectics OT and NT; Exodus; four senses of Scripture; gates; gloria; Laetare Jerusalem; Last Judgment; Ps. 86; virga (e.g., as virga ferrea)

A rich discussion of the motif of virga (related to Moses with the Exodus from Egypt, Mary, and the judging God using the virga ferrea; also identified as virga pastoralis and correctionis, linking it to moral reform); succeeded by a second part dealing with Christ’s incarnation, Mary, and the symbolic number twelve

118

ALEXANDER MARX

Title (PL)

Keywords1

Short abstract

Treatise XIII

Digressio, qua lamentatur auctor Jerusalem ab infidelibus captam

contemplatio; Corpus Christi; dialectics OT and NT; earthly Jerusalem; Eastern gate and Christ’s incarnation; eschatological victory over gentiles; falsi fratres; Feindbild gentiles; four senses of Scripture; fulfilment of prophecies; gates; gloria; Holy Land as heritage; Imitatio Christi; Last Judgment; martyrdom; Matt. 16.24; militia Christi; penance; Ps. 47.9; relation SW and PW; river Jordan; scala coeli (Gen. 28); signing with the cross; virga (e.g., as the cross and the virga ferrea)

A reaction to and theological reading of 1187’s events, see Appendix I; according to the information provided, it was written in the heat of crusade preparations in summer or autumn 1188

Treatise XIV

De significatione Septuagesimae, et de iis in quae ea leguntur

contemplatio; Exodus; gloria; martyrdom; penance; Ps. 47.9

Liturgical explanations related to the Lenten Season

Treatise XV

De significatione Sexagesimae, et de iis quae in ea leguntur

Corpus Christi; cross; falsi fratres; Feindbild gentiles; martyrdom; sacraments

Liturgical explanations related to the Lenten Season

Treatise XVI

De Quinquagesima, et de iis quae in ea leguntur in ecclesia

cross; Exodus; Feindbild Liturgical explanations related to the Lenten gentiles; gloria; Season martyrdom

Treatise XVII

De Quadragesima, et de iis quae in ea leguntur in ecclesia

Christians as haeredes Christi; civitas peregrinans; contemplatio; Corpus Christi; gloria; martyrdom; sacraments

Liturgical explanations related to the Lenten Season

contemplatio; Exodus; Laetare Jerusalem; penance; river Jordan

Liturgical explanations related to the Lenten Season, in particular Laetare Jerusalem

Treatise XVIII Recapitulatio praedictorum, de Septuagesima, etc.

JERUSALEM AS THE TRAVELLING CITY OF GOD

119

Notes 1 The keywords do not claim to represent a complete list. They are informed by the crusading treatise, in order to demonstrate that the motifs it uses appear in other treatises. The abstracts, however, are meant as a representative outline of each chapter, revealing that there are sometimes stronger and sometimes weaker cohesions with the crusading treatise. 2 dialectics OT and NT = dialectics Old Testament (Covenant) and New Testament (Covenant). 3 relation SW and PW = relationship of spiritual warfare and physical warfare.

120

ALEXANDER MARX

Appendix III Cohesions between the Crusading Treatise and Other Treatises

Motifs present in the crusading treatise XIII

Elaborated on in the following treatises

Also present in the following treatises

Four senses of Scripture

I

XII

Earthly Jerusalem (explicitly) I, V, VI, VII

II

civitas peregrinans

Prologue, I, VI

XI, XVII

Building Jerusalem

Prologue, I, IV

II, V, VIII, XI, XII

Corpus Christi

Prologue, V, VI

II, XI, XII, XV, XVII

Sacraments

I, V, VI

IV, VII, X, XV, XVII

Eastern gate (porta orientalis)

V

VI, XI

Gates (mostly portae)

V, VI, VII, XI

I, VIII, IX, X, XII

scala coeli (Gen. 28)

I

contemplatio

I, IV, VI

III, VIII, IX, XII, XIV, XVII, XVIII

Fulfilment of (eschatological) Prologue, I, IV, V, VII prophecies

VIII

Typological fulfilment of Old I, II, V, IX Testament/ Covenant in New Testament/ Covenant

X, XI

Ps. 47.9

IV, V

VI, XIV

Ps. 86.1–3

Prologue, I, IV, V, VII

XII

gloria (related to Ps. 86.3 and Jerusalem, designating heaven and salvation)

I, V, VII

II, III, VI, VIII, X, XI, XII, XIV, XVI, XVII

Last Judgment

VI, VII, XII

II, IV, VIII, X

Feindbild gentiles

IV, VII, IX

Prologue, I, V, X, XV, XVI

Holy Land as heritage, Christians as Christ’s heirs

I, II, VII

III, V, VIII, XVII

Relationship of spiritual and physical warfare

I, V, IX

virga (both as the True Cross XII and the Apocalyptic virga ferrea)

IX

Exodus (either the act itself or specifically Ex. 12)

IV, V, XII, XIV

I, VI, XVI, XVIII

Signing with the cross

I, II, VII

“Because of incest which one of the two of them committed”: A Letter about Two Third Crusade Participants from the Archivo Catedralicio de Toledo Kyle C. Lincoln Norwich University, Vermont [email protected]

Abstract A letter preserved in the cathedral archives of Toledo describes the case of two poor and penitent crusaders, who had been sent to Castile to crusade in the 1190s. Although very little is known about the two men, this study attempts to contextualize their crusading activity within contemporary events in order to provide an additional, if minor, point of detail that can enrich the larger narrative of crusading in the period. In doing so, it also demonstrates the close ties between Rome, Iberia, and the crusading world in the second half of the twelfth century, as well as offering a specific and poignant example of penitential crusading in the same era.

There is a common teaching aphorism that pre-modern peoples most often were born and died within twenty-five miles of the same place. For that same reason, it may well be that, despite ecclesiastical censures and secular punishments, incest might have been the most common “accidental” or “unavoidable” crime in the Middle Ages.1 Over the course of the long twelfth century (c. 1050–1215), cases of incest appear more frequently in preserved records, either because they were more regularly recognized or more frequently prosecuted in twelfth-century canon law.2 1 Taking the seven generations proviso from canon law and speculating that two offspring survive to reproduce – a smallish but not unreasonable postulate – produces 64 descendent offspring from one individual ancestor. Because two ancestors are necessary for reproduction, this increases the number of descendants to 128 in a single generation, and inter-generational marriages appear to have been not uncommon in the medieval period. As a result, prohibitions of intercourse and/or marriage within seven degrees of consanguinity and four degrees of compaternity (i.e., having a godparent in common) was a marked severity imposed by canon legal collections in the long twelfth century and probably represented a considerable burden for small medieval settlements: Elizabeth Archibald, Incest and the Medieval Imagination (New York, 2001), 11, 28. As William North has noted about the work of Bonizo of Sutri, medieval legal thinkers recognized that knowledge of wrongdoing was key to determining whether incest had been committed: William L. North, “Bonsai of the Consanguinities: Cultivation and Control of Incest Regulation in the Works of Bonizo of Sutri,” Early Medieval Europe 23/4 (2015): 478–99. 2 Burchard of Worms’s canon law collection dedicated a whole book to incest and marriage law: Burchard von Worms, Decretorum Libri XX, rev. ed. Gérard Fransen and Theo Kölzer (Darmstadt, 1992), 107R–111R. In Gratian’s first recension of the Decretum, the word incest already appears more

121

122

KYLE C. LINCOLN

Given such an extensive body of literature, incest as a crime likely became harder to commit deliberately without extensive effort, either to receive a dispensation – a common tactic for the high nobility – or to skirt the law via some form of deception.3 For that reason, it presents an interesting intersection between canon legal records and the penance applied to those who fell foul of clerical jurists. This short case study examines the record of one such case and connects the sentence imposed to the growth of the crusading movement in the long twelfth century. In the third year of his pontificate, Clement III sent a letter to Archbishop Gonzalo Pérez of Toledo, via his notary Master Michael, to inform him of a lamentable case;4 this missive is the key testimony for the present study. The letter (catalogued by modern archivists as Archivo Catedralicio Toledano O.11.A.14)5 is now preserved in the pergaminos section of loose documents in the cathedral archive of Toledo and is in excellent shape: the lead bull from Clement III is still intact, the hand is crisp and legible, and there is very little water damage and only a single worm hole. In the text, Clement informs the Archbishop of Toledo that two poor men, Michael and Iacobus, had come to the papal curia with a most pathetic story: the two men were headed out for the Third Crusade, were robbed on the way, and were now unable to reach the Latin East because they lacked the resources to do so. Having narrated their plight, Clement’s chancery added one key detail that provides the link between these two men and the crime of incest. The two men had taken the cross not because of some great stir of devotion, but because one – we are never told which – had committed incest and they both had “committed excesses” to help in the performance of the act. Being no longer able to fulfill their vow to than twenty times across more than fifteen entries: Gratian, Concordia discordantium canonum seu Decretum, ed. Anders Winroth et al. (https://gratian.org/first-recension-working-edition), D.26 d.p.c.4; D.27 c.9; D.83 c.1; C.3 q.4 c.4; C.6 q.1 c.17; C.23 q.5 c.45; C.27 q.1 c.14; C.27 q.1 c.17; C.27 q.1 d.p.c.43; C.32 q.7 d.p.c.18; C.35; C.35 q.2/3 c.7; C.35 q.2/3 c.10; C.35 q.7 d.a.c.1; C.35 q.7 c.1; C26 q.1 d.p.c.2. The wide array of citations from Gratian indicates that the question contained many internal factors that would influence any decision; Larson, citing a case that certainly made use of Gratian, noted that Alexander III had instructed that “particular circumstances of the sin and sinner must be taken into account: ‘But concerning adultery or incest, penance ought to imposed for them in accord with what the sin itself and the nature of the sinner demand’.” Atria Larson, Master of Penance: Gratian and the Development of Penitential Thought and Law in the Twelfth Century (Washington, DC, 2014), 453. 3 On the practice of dispensations, see Theresa Earenfight, Queenship in Medieval Europe (New York, 2013), 174–76. 4 Nicholas M. Haring, “‘Liber de dulia et latria’ of Master Michael, Papal Notary,” Mediaeval Studies 33 (1971): 188–200. Haring did not seem to know that Clement had, two-and-a-half years earlier, recommended Michael for a prebend at Toledo: Archivo Catedralicio de Toledo, A.12.A.1.21. Maleczek does not include Michael in his prosopography of the curia, save in a footnote where he merely cites Haring’s work and notes that he existed: Werner Maleczek, Papst und Kardinalskolleg von 1191 bis 1216. Die Kardinäle unter Coelestin III. und Innocenz III. (Vienna, 1984), 77 n. 95. 5 No formal printed catalogue exists of Toledo’s archives, but the archive itself has two editions of a fichero, an annotated card catalogue, which guides researchers. No copy of it has been published. When this article was first submitted, there had been no formal edition of this letter, but while the article was in its final revisions, the first new volume of the Papsturkunden in Spanien series in nearly a century appeared, presenting papal contents from Castile, including this text: Daniel Berger, Klaus Herbers and Thorsten Schlauwitz, eds., Papsturkunden in Spanien: III. Kastilien (Berlin, 2020), 486–87.

A LETTER ABOUT TWO THIRD CRUSADE PARTICIPANTS

123

fight in the Holy Land, their penance was commuted so that they could journey to Iberia, to complete their vows by fighting in Castile contra sarracenos. Despite the questions that Clement’s letter leaves unanswered (Where were the men from? How did one aid the other in committing incest? Was theirs a conspiracy to hide the incestuousness of the relationship? Did one play lookout?), the preservation of such a letter provides a practical example of penance as punishment. The particular penance of crusading was not, it should be noted, exclusive to cases of incest – the Second Lateran Council’s eighteenth canon made a year in Jerusalem or Spain the penalty for arsonists (1139) and Innocent III enjoined three years on the knights that killed Bishop Conrad of Würzburg – but the example of Clement’s letter is nonetheless interesting as a case study.6 We know, too, that the spiritual rewards for those who had confessed a grave sin and received a penance had that penance commuted and satisfied if they took up the cross for Jerusalem or one of the other theaters included in the wider crusading movement. The importance of this letter is that it provides a candid and specific example of two otherwiseunknown common men who joined the Third Crusade. The penance for the two men, journeying on crusade, appears to have coincided with the drive for the Third Crusade.7 Their names are not suggestive of any particular locality, nor is any hint of their origins preserved on the dorse of the document.8 The letter notes that they were robbed on the way (in via direpti), a fact which indicates that they were journeying to Jerusalem on a route that went near Rome by foot or hoof rather than by sea.9 The fact that they were sent to Iberia provides two contextual clues: first, that Iberia was closer to their origin point than Jerusalem, which suggests that they were from a region north or northwest from Rome; second, that they did not have substantial family resources to draw from in order to support the completion of their vows. I would argue that these two facts signal that they were from one of the urbanizing settlements in northern Italy, Provence, or Langue d’Oc, where a substantial number of burghers – who had not yet reached the elite levels of wealth and notoriety available to the more successful merchant republics like Venice, Amalfi, Pisa, or Genoa – were exposed to crusade 6 Gerald Tanner, ed. and trans., Decrees of the Ecumenical Councils, 2 vols. (Washington, DC, 1990), 1:201; Larson, Master of Penance, 478. It is worth noting that Innocent III later stated that a certain W., who came from the diocese of Lincoln, had been given a crusading penance – but claimed that he could not complete it because of his poverty – in the narratio of a letter remanding the man and his penance back to the jurisdiction of an Augustinian prior in the diocese: Kenneth Pennington, “Introduction to the Courts,” in The History of Courts and Procedure in Medieval Canon Law, ed. Wilfried Hartmann and Kenneth Pennington (Washington, DC, 2016), 19. 7 On the chronology of the Third Crusade and the coincidence of these departures: Jonathan RileySmith, The Crusades, 3rd ed. (New York, 2013), 107–19. 8 Archivo Catedralicio de Toledo, O.11.A.1.14, dorse. The contents of the dorse read: “Toletanis archiepiscopo pro Jacobo et Michaele laicisque.” 9 Richard’s sea-borne expedition was not unique in crusading history, but it was one of the largest naval expeditions yet mounted. It seems unlikely that the two men would have been robbed at sea without papal comment about piracy, which suggests that they were on foot and journeying to a departure point which was on a path which could lead to Rome: Riley-Smith, The Crusades, 107–19.

124

KYLE C. LINCOLN

preaching.10 Effectively, Jacobus and Michael represent the social station of the vast, often-unnamed and understudied mass of crusaders who were frequently at the frontlines but whose presence is missing from noble and clerical narratives of crusading. Although this is mere speculation, I think it fits with the broader recruitment patterns of the Third Crusade and is the most likely place of origin for the men. Beyond these basic observations, there are two other contextual questions that need to be answered: where and how did they serve their vows and why were they referred to the direction of the archbishop of Toledo? The answer to both questions is almost certainly connected to the role played at the curia by Cardinal Hyacinth Bobone, the resident “Iberian expert” among the Sacred College; whether he himself was in charge of drafting the letter is unknowable.11 The specific solutions to both of these puzzles requires a deeper dive into the contemporary context. The Iberian theatre had played a role in the development of the crusading movement, as is well-known, and was frequently a viable option for crusaders wanting to fulfill their vows. As is often noted, the assistance by Anglo-Norman, Flemish and Rhenish crusaders at Lisbon, and by the Genoese at Almeria in the 1140s, shows the frequent convergence of campaigns to the Holy Land and in Iberia.12 Germanic crusaders, too, participated in the Algarve campaigns in 1189, which suggests that, at the time of the Third Crusade, there was some ultramontane interest in campaigning in Iberia.13 None of this information is necessarily new, since William Purkis, Patrick O’Banion, and Nicholas Paul have demonstrated the frequency with which Iberian crusading aligned (somewhat) neatly with the experience of crusaders elsewhere.14 The fact remains, however, that sending 10 On the social conditions of Languedoc in the period, see John Hine Mundy, Society and Government at Toulouse in the Age of the Cathars (Toronto, 1997). The supposition that the two men were from Languedoc or Provence is merely speculation, but I think it not unsound as a postulate. 11 On Hyacinth Bobone’s role as a legate to Iberia, see Damian J. Smith, “The Iberian Legations of Cardinal Hyacinth Bobone,” in Pope Celestine III: Diplomat and Pastor, ed. John Doran and Damian Smith (Farnham, 2008), 84–115. 12 Joseph O’Callaghan, Reconquest and Crusade in Medieval Spain (Philadelphia, 2003). 13 On the chronicles that survey these campaigns see Dana Cushing, De Itinere Navali: A German Third Crusader’s Chronicle of his Voyage and the Siege of Almohad Silves 1189 ad / Muwahid Xelb, 585 ah (N.p., Antimony Media, 2014). On the wars in the Algarve as part of the larger network of holy wars in southern Iberia in the late twelfth century: O’Callaghan, Reconquest and Crusade in Medieval Spain, 58–60. 14 William Purkis, Crusading Spirituality in the Holy Land and Iberia, c. 1095–1187 (Rochester, NY, 2008), 139–78; Nicholas Paul, To Follow in Their Footsteps: The Crusades and Family Memory in the High Middle Ages (Ithaca NY, 2012), 207–94; Patrick O’Banion, “What has Iberia to do with Jerusalem? Crusade and the Spanish Route to the Holy Land in the Twelfth Century,” Journal of Medieval History 34 (2008): 383–95. There is some debate about how closely and how quickly the experiences of crusading in the Iberian theatre became aligned in the period, but in the region of CastileLeón, specifically, Ayala Martínez has shown that the reign of Alfonso VII realized a considerable push in this direction by the late 1130s, but this had its roots in the previous generation: Carlos de Ayala Martínez, “On the Origins of Crusading in the Peninsula: The Reign of Alfonso VI (1065–1109),” Imago Temporis Medium Aevum 7 (2013): 240–65, esp. 250–64; Carlos de Ayala Martínez, “Obispos, Guerra Santa, y Cruzada en los reinos de León y Castilla (s.XII),” in Cristianos y Musulmanes en la Peninsula

A LETTER ABOUT TWO THIRD CRUSADE PARTICIPANTS

125

Michael and Jacobus to Toledo was a specific and (one would think) deliberate choice by the papal curia. The question remains, however, why to Castile? In 1190, three of the five Christian kings in Iberia were long-reigning: Sancho VI of Navarre had ruled from Pamplona since 1150; Alfonso VIII of Castile had been king (albeit with a rocky minority and regency) since 1158; Alfonso II had ruled as Count of Barcelona and King of Aragon since 1164.15 Of these three kings, only Sancho VI lacked a signal victory against al-Andalus, in part, no doubt, because his path was blocked by both his Aragonese and Castilian cousins, as well as the independent Azagra lords of Albarracín.16 The kings of León and Portugal were not as established in the period – Alfonso IX of León had his kingship constitutionally limited at Valladolid in 1188, and Sancho I had been king for five years and was engaged in a precarious defense of Silves from 1189 to 1191, when it was lost to the Almohads.17 Effectively, this meant that Aragon and Castile were the only kingdoms in which the two penitent men might be able to fulfill their crusading vows. At the time, however, overlapping alliances between five of the Iberian kingdoms started to appear, according to Joseph O’Callaghan, maneuvering in an attempt to prevent Castile dominating the other five kingdoms – perhaps even in a renewal of the Castilian imperial scheme of the first half of the twelfth century.18 However, Castile was then bound by the terms of a truce with the Almohads, which was broken four years later by a subsequent archbishop of Toledo’s famous raid on Sevilla.19 Castile, therefore, seems to have been an isolated power in 1190, relative Ibérica. La guerra, la frontera y la convivencia, ed. Miguel Ángel Ladero Quesada et al. (Avila, 2009), 235–52. 15 O’Callaghan, Reconquest and Crusade in Medieval Spain, 50–77; Peter Linehan, Spain, 1157– 1300: A Partible Inheritance (New York, 2007), 1–36. 16 Albarracín and its status as an independent lordship has yet to receive the kind of extensive treatment that its history merits, but the works of Mons Dolader, Canellas López, and Fuertes Doñate are an important start to updating Almagra Basch’s work: Miguel Ángel Motis Dolader, “El señorío cristiano de Albarracín. De los Azagra hasta su incorporación a la Corona de Aragón,” Comarca de la Sierra de Albarracín (Zaragoza, 2008): 97–106; Carlos Fuertes Doñate, “La guerra como articulación de la sociedad. La frontera de Albarracín en los siglos XII y XIII,” Roda de Fortuna: Revista Electônica sobre Antiguedade e Medievo 3, no.1–1 (2014): 503–15; Ángel Canellas López, “Cancilleria señorial de Albarracín (1170–1294) (Tafel XIV–XX),” in Congrès de la Commission internationale de diplomatique, ed. G. Silagi (Munich, 1984), 517–57; Martín Almagro Basch, Historia de Albarracín y su sierra: El señorio soberano de Albarracín bajo los Azagra (Teruel, 1959). 17 O’Callaghan, Reconquest and Crusade in Medieval Spain, 57–58. 18 O’Callaghan, Reconquest and Crusade in Medieval Spain, 59. The speculation about Castile’s imperial ambition in the period is my own, but it is informed by the work of Ayala Martinez, Sirantoine, and Fernández Conde on the subject, albeit examining different periods: Carlos de Ayala Martínez, “Empire and Crusade under Fernando III,” in The Sword and the Cross: Castile-León in the Era of Fernando III, ed. Edward L. Holt and Teresa Witcombe (Leiden, 2020), 15–43; Hélène Sirantoine, Imperator Hispaniae: les idéologies impériales dans le royaume de León (IXe–XIIe siècles) (Madrid, 2012); Francisco Javier Fernández Conde, “La construcción teórica del poder en la primera edad media.” in El reino de Hispania (siglos VIII–XII): Teoría y practices del poder, ed. Francisco Javier Fernández Conde, José María Mínguez, and Ermelindo Portela (Madrid, 2019), 107–31. 19 Kyle C. Lincoln, “Beating Swords into Croziers: Warrior Bishops in the Kingdom of Castile, c. 1158–1214,” Journal of Medieval History 44/1 (2018): 92–97.

126

KYLE C. LINCOLN

to previous eras, and it seems unlikely that the choice would have come without a specific, local impetus. There are two factors to suggest that service in Castile was a direct result of the fama of Archbishop Gonzalo Pérez of Toledo. First, his archiepiscopate produced considerable political and administrative results, although his tenure as archbishop usually receives only the most laconic of mentions.20 From his election in 1182 until his death a decade later, Gonzalo was a stabilizing force in peninsular politics during an age of rapid Castilian expansion.21 Of particular importance in this vein were the growth and solidification of the diocese of Cuenca and the establishment of the diocese of Plasencia in Leonese Extremadura, the former under direct Toledan jurisdiction and the latter nominally subject to Compostela but politically in Toledo’s orbit.22 Both of these were frontier dioceses, and would have guarded Toledo’s own precarious position over the Tajo, which explains the interest of the archbishops in ensuring their good governance. Second, Gonzalo appears – probably with the backing of Cardinal Hyacinth Bobone, who had twice gone to Iberia on legation – to have been one of the major advocates for the privileges laid out in the 1188 letter, Cum pro peccatis, which extended nearly all of the major crusading privileges to Iberians crusading on their home front.23 As O’Callaghan has noted, it was Archbishop Gonzalo who tried to organize a meeting between the clergies of León and Castile to formulate an agreement to allow a major campaign, but it came to little effect.24 Effectively, Gonzalo Pérez had both the experience and dedication to crusading that were necessary to ensure that when, not if, a crusade happened, both of the two penitents would take part. There is an alternative possibility, too, which might present a kind of workaround in light of the ongoing truce (c. 1190–94) between Castile and the Almohads: military service independent of “national” political affiliations. In addition to the extensive heritage of independent ta’ifa lordships in al-Andalus, there were several examples 20 Linehan, for example, was pleased to note that Gonzalo Pérez existed but was compelled to say little else: Linehan, History and the Historians, 313. 21 Juan Francisco Rivera Recio, La Iglesia de Toledo en el siglo XII (1086–1208), 2 vols. (Rome, 1966), 1:200–2; Andreas Holndonner, Kommunikation – Jurisdiktion – Integration: Das Papsttum und das Erzbistum Toledo im 12. Jahrhundert (ca. 1085–ca. 1185), Abhandlungen der Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Göttingen 31 (Berlin, 2014), 567. 22 On this expansion in the reign of Alfonso VIII: Jose Manuel Nieto Soria, “La fundación del Obispado de Cuenca (1177–1183). Consideraciones político-eclesiásticas,” Hispania Sacra 34/69 (1982): 111–30; Bonifacio Palacios Martín, “Alfonso VIII y su política de frontera en Extremadura: la creación de diócesis de Plasencia,” En la España medieval 15 (1992): 77–96. 23 Rivera Recio edited most of this bull but relegated it to a footnote: Juan Francisco Rivera Recio, La Iglesia de Toledo, 222, n.74. I concur with O’Callaghan’s analysis regarding the contents and importance of the bull (O’Callaghan, Reconquest and Crusade in Medieval Spain, 57–58), but I think that Gonzalo’s later actions in favor of a campaign based on this privilege suggests his involvement as a local lobbying effort. Smith’s comments (Damian J. Smith, “The Papacy, the Spanish Kingdoms and Las Navas de Tolosa,” Anuario de Historia de la Iglesia 20 (2011): 160–62) have nuanced my thinking on the importance of Cum pro peccatis, but have contributed more to underline its importance as a part of the larger papal view of the Third Crusade in Iberia, about which we have both written. 24 O’Callaghan, Reconquest and Crusade in Medieval Spain, 58.

A LETTER ABOUT TWO THIRD CRUSADE PARTICIPANTS

127

of independent counties in Christian Iberia, as well.25 In the long twelfth century, the example of Rodrigo Díaz de Bivar stands out most recognizably, but Gerardo sem Pavor witnessed comparable success in Évora and the Alentajo region.26 Moreover, the lordship of Albarracín – politically independent, but ecclesiastically subject to Toledo – demonstrated that the frontier territories in Iberia could be a place to make considerable fortunes.27 Beyond even these examples, the raiding activities of the towns on the frontier – most famously, those of the men of Ávila – could have been construed as crusading activities (and accompanied by crusading vows), provided there was episcopal sanction and the targets were non-Christian.28 The military orders, too, presented an opportunity for engaging as one of the auxiliary troops in one of their larger efforts, although full membership was likely too long a commitment for Michael and Iacobus.29 Even if none of these options is positively linked with the two men making their way to Iberia to fulfill their crusade vows, the existence of so many options demonstrates clearly the validity of the Iter per Hispaniam in the late twelfth century. It is regrettable that we cannot tie Jacobus and Michael to any campaign or region in late twelfth-century Iberia. However, the existence of such a letter does reveal two key facts about crusading in the period, both of which enrich our understanding of the complexities of that all-encompassing phenomenon. First, it is another specific instance of penance as a key motivator for – and in this case, legal reasoning that compelled – the taking of a crusader’s vow among the long twelfth century’s “middling sorts.”30 It suggests that, far from being ignorant of or unwilling to accept precepts about marriage and consanguinity, parish priests were implementing the theological and canonical innovations of Paris and Bologna, which were working their ways out of the schools and into the local parishes via councils, legates, and epistles. Second, it demonstrates very clearly that the Iberian 25

Of course, the circumstances that fostered a tai’fa kingdom were quite different: Hugh Kennedy, Muslim Spain and Portugal: A Political History of Al-Andalus (New York, 1996), 130–54. Miguel D. Gómez also treats this, examining the interplay between both the Christian and Muslim wouldbe-warlords, in his paper: “E vino un oso: The royal life and strange death of Sancho Fernández de León” (presented at the 55th annual Midwest Medieval History Conference, Middle Tennessee State University, October 21–22, 2016; publication forthcoming). 26 Armando de Sousa Pereira, Geraldo Sem Pavor: um guerreiro de fronteira entre cristãos e muçulmanos c. 1162–1176 (Porto, 2008); Richard Fletcher, The Quest for El Cid (New York, 1989). 27 On the peculiar position of Albarracín in the period, see above, note 16. 28 On the campaigns undertaken by the “men of Ávila,” see James F. Powers, A Society Organized for War: The Iberian Municipal Militias in the Central Middle Ages, 1000–1284 (Berkeley CA, 1987), 22–37. 29 Conedera has noted the particular closeness between Alfonso VIII’s royal administration, the high clergy of Castile, and the Iberian military orders: Sam Zeno Conedera, S.J., “A Wall and a Shield: Alfonso VIII and the Military Orders,” in King Alfonso VIII: Government, Family, and War, ed. Miguel D. Gómez, Kyle C. Lincoln, and Damian J. Smith (New York, 2019), 102–17. 30 Teofilo Ruiz has noted that the transition between concentrating pious bequests and providing for a wide variety of penitential giving occurred during these same years in Castile among the “middling sorts”: Teofilo F. Ruiz, From Heaven to Earth: The Reordering of Castilian Society, 1150–1350 (Princeton NJ, 2004), 21–26, 110–32.

128

KYLE C. LINCOLN

frontiers were deeply connected to the crusading theaters in the Latin East and along the Baltic Sea, since the legal equivalence expressed in the case of Michael and Jacobus made plain that their vows could and should be fulfilled in Iberia. In both cases, these conclusions are not a new intervention by this study, but they do provide another specific and local instance of the connection between various parts of Christendom.

A LETTER ABOUT TWO THIRD CRUSADE PARTICIPANTS

129

Appendix “Veniente ad praesentiam nostram” Archivo Catedralicio de Toledo, O.11.A.1.14. 7 July 1190, Lateran Palace Clement III’s letter to Archbishop Gonzalo Pérez of Toledo on the case of two penitential crusaders robbed on their way to the Holy Land and the crimes that compelled them to crusade. Translated Text Bishop Clement, servant of the servants of God, to his venerable brother [Gonzalo] Toledan archbishop, greetings and apostolic blessing. Coming to our presence, Michael and Jacobus, lay paupers, with a teary-eyed tale, they showed that, when they had placed upon themselves the cross, they set out for Jerusalem. Robbed on the way, through great lack of wealth they are not able to fulfill their vow. Because you and the other church prelates have received through our beloved son Master Michael, our notary, our letters about such things, we wish that you should direct these crusaders against those selfsame Saracens in Spain in supplement of their vow or that you should order or instruct that they not postpone to send whatever they have of their own things (if any) to support the Christians. Because of incest which one of the two of them committed and because of the excesses of either one of them, you should enjoin an appropriate penance to them. Given at the Lateran, VII Ides of July, the third year of our pontificate.

Interpreters in Franco-Muslim Negotiations William S. Murrell Vanderbilt University [email protected]

Abstract When the Franks invaded the eastern Mediterranean in the late eleventh century, they not only encountered peoples of different religions, cultures, and political regimes – they encountered peoples of different tongues. As a result, interpreters were vital in every conceivable arena of Muslim-Frankish interaction, including diplomacy, where language – even more than religion or politics – was the fundamental barrier to peace between rulers. Yet, despite their central role in the history of Muslim-Frankish diplomacy, interpreters are peripheral in the historiography. Modern historians, with a few recent exceptions, have shown little interest in uncovering the identities and roles of these often-invisible historical actors. This article is an attempt to move the interpreter-envoy from the periphery of crusader diplomacy (and historiography) to his rightful place in the center. I focus my arguments on the role of interpreter-envoys during the Third Crusade, a moment with particularly rich sources on Muslim-Frankish diplomacy in both Latin and Arabic. In the first sections of the article, I explore the question of identity: who typically functioned as diplomatic interpreters in the Third Crusade. In the final section, I explore the question of agency: how these interpreters were implicated in Muslim-Frankish diplomacy.

Introduction: Diplomatic Interpreters in Medieval and Modern Historiography On June 17, 1191, in what would be the final weeks of a near two-year Frankish siege of Acre, Richard I of England requested a face-to-face meeting with Saladin. His request was denied. Saladin explained to Richard’s envoy: Kings do not meet unless an agreement has been reached. It is not good for them to fight after meeting and eating together. If he wants this, an agreement must be settled before it can happen. We must have an interpreter we can trust to act between us, who can make each of us understand what the other says. Let the envoy be our mutual interpreter. If we come to an agreement, the meeting can happen later, God willing.1

1 Bahā’ al-Dīn b. Shaddād, Al-nawādir al-sultāniyya wa’l-maḥāsin al-Yūsufiyya, ed. Jamāl al-Dīn al-Shayyāl, Sīrat Ṣalāḥ al-Dīn: “al-sīra al-Yūsufiyya” (Cairo, 1964), 163. English translation: Bahā’ al-Dīn b. Shaddād, Al-nawādir al-sultāniyya wa’l-maḥāsin al-Yūsufiyya [The Rare and Excellent History of Saladin], trans. D. S. Richards (Aldershot, 2001), 153. Unless otherwise stated, all English translations of Ibn Shaddād are from Richards.

131

132

WILLIAM S. MURRELL

On November 8, after a victory at Arsuf and as the Frankish armies neared Jerusalem, Richard once again requested a face-to-face meeting with Saladin. Once again, he was denied with a familiar rationale from the sultan: “I do not understand your language and you do not understand mine. Someone to interpret for us both, one whom you trust and I trust, is essential, so let that interpreter be an envoy until something is settled… .”2 In these initial diplomatic exchanges, Saladin insisted that Richard conform to the customary procedure for diplomatic negotiations in the medieval eastern Mediterranean – namely that polyglot envoys function as the chief intermediaries between sovereigns.3 While Richard was accustomed to diplomatic negotiations occurring between sovereigns face-to-face, he found that diplomacy worked differently in the Near East. Saladin’s recommendation to let the “interpreter [tarjumān] be an envoy [rasūl]” reminds us that in the medieval eastern Mediterranean there was often no difference functionally between an interpreter4 and an envoy. Thus, when we find interpreters [A: tarjumān; L: interpres] in the medieval sources, we should not be surprised to see them functioning as diplomatic envoys; and when we find envoys [A: rasūl; L: nuntius], we should not be surprised to see them functioning as linguistic intermediaries. Contrary to our modern conception of diplomatic interpreters who mechanically translate for rulers and diplomats while standing by their side, diplomatic interpreters of the medieval Mediterranean were often granted the freedom to engage in negotiation with the enemy and sometimes at great distances from the rulers they were “interpreting” for. As a result, the success or failure of diplomatic efforts often depended not on the negotiating skills of kings and sultans, but rather on the linguistic skills of interpreter-envoys. The problem for us today is that, despite their central role in the history of Muslim-Frankish diplomacy, interpreters are peripheral in the historiography. Modern historians, with a few recent exceptions, have shown little interest in uncovering the identities and roles of these often invisible historical actors.5 For 2

Bahā’ al-Dīn b. Shaddād, Nawādir, 201; trans. Richards, 193. See Yvonne Friedman, “Peacemaking: Perceptions and Practices in the Medieval Latin East,” in The Crusades and the Near East, ed. Conor Kostick (London, 2011), 229–57, at 238; and Michael Köhler, Alliances and Treaties between Frankish and Muslim Rulers in the Middle East: Cross-Cultural Diplomacy in the Period of the Crusades, trans. Peter Malcolm Holt, ed. Konrad Hirschler (Leiden, 2013), 303. 4 While medieval writers in Latin, Old French, and Arabic all used one word (L: interpres; OF: drugemen; A: tarjumān) to refer to those engaged in both oral and textual translation, in this study, I reserve the term “interpreter” to denote individuals engaged in the act of oral translation and the term “translator” for individuals engaged in the act of written translation. This (somewhat artificial) distinction is meant to remind us of the significant differences between oral translation and written translation – and more broadly, the significant differences between oral and written communication. 5 Two recent exceptions include Kevin James Lewis, “Medieval Diglossia: The Diversity of the Latin Christian Encounter with the Written and Spoken Arabic in the ‘Crusader’ County of Tripoli,” Al-Masāq: Journal of the Medieval Mediterranean 27 (2015): 119–152; and K. A. Tuley, “A Century of Communication and Acclimatization: Interpreters and Intermediaries in the Kingdom of Jerusalem,” 3

INTERPRETERS IN FRANCO-MUSLIM NEGOTIATIONS

133

example, while much work has been done on crusader diplomacy, few scholars have offered serious commentary on the role of interpreters and translators in diplomatic exchanges between Franks and Muslims in the eastern Mediterranean.6 The same could be said for the copious literature on crusading warfare, which all but ignores the role of interpreters in war.7 This scholarly neglect is rooted in the fact that these shadowy figures are ever-present in medieval diplomacy and warfare, yet conspicuously absent in most narrative and documentary sources.8 When they appear in the texts, they are usually mentioned in passing and are often discussed at length only if they act treacherously.9 In addition to the real problem of sources, the modern neglect of the figure of the interpreter is rooted in two problematic scholarly assumptions about medieval diplomacy. The first premise is that most diplomatic interpreters in the crusader period were local Arabic-speaking Christians. And the second is that interpreters were peripheral figures in Muslim-Frankish diplomacy – there, but relatively in East Meets West in the Middle Ages and Early Modern Times Transcultural Experiences in the Premodern World, ed. Albrecht Classen (Berlin, 2013), 311–39. For an earlier (and very brief) survey of the role of dragomans in the Latin East, see Laura Minervini, “Les contacts entre indigènes et croisés dans l’Orient latin: le rôle des drogmans,” in Romania Arabica: Festschrift für Reinhold Kontzi zum 70. Geburtstag, ed. Jens Lüdtke, Jens and Reinhold Kontzi (Tübingen, 1996), 57–62. 6 For example, prominent studies of crusader diplomacy by Michael Köhler, P. M. Holt, and Hadia Dajani-Shakeel, while occasionally mentioning interpreters in passing, spend little time reflecting on the role these intermediaries played in diplomacy. See Köhler, Alliances and Treaties between Frankish and Muslim Rulers in the Middle East; P. M. Holt, Early Mamluk Diplomacy, 1260–1290: Treaties of Baybars and Qalāwūn with Christian Rulers (Leiden, 1995); and Hadia Dajani-Shakeel, “Diplomatic Relations between Muslim and Frankish Rulers, 1097–1153 a.d.” in Crusaders and Muslims in TwelfthCentury Syria, ed. Maya Shatzmiller (Leiden, 1993), 190–215. 7 For examples, see R. C. Smail, Crusading Warfare, 1097–1193 (Cambridge, 1956); John France, Victory in the East: A Military History of the First Crusade (Cambridge, 1994); idem, Western Warfare in the Age of the Crusades, 1000–1300 (Ithaca, 1999); and David Nicolle, Crusader Warfare (London, 2007). 8 As a result, this study will be “archeological” in nature – mining the relevant primary source material in Latin and Arabic for mentions of interpreters and descriptions of their practices. Though some might prefer a more critical approach to the sources, there are at least three good reasons for a straightforward reading of the narrative sources. First, there are enough primary source accounts of Third Crusade diplomacy from both Frankish and Ayyubid perspectives to help historians evaluate the reliability of particular narrative accounts for discrete events and encounters. Second, the fact that interpreters are usually mentioned in passing and often not mentioned at all (even when we know from another source that an interpreter was in fact present) gives us confidence that their presence in a given diplomatic encounter is not serving some literary or partisan function. Third, even if it turned out that some of these mentions were less than historical, they still provide valuable insight into the identities and functions of interpreters in this period. Whether or not a particular narrative account tells us exactly “what really happened” in a given interaction involving an interpreter, we can know that the interpreter in the text represents a plausible (or even predictable) interpreter identity and that their role in diplomatic negotiations would be what contemporary readers would expect from a diplomatic interpreter in the period. 9 Niketas Choniates recounts the chilling fate of a duplicitous court interpreter named Aaron Isaakios of Corinth. When Emperor Manuel became aware of Aaron’s double-dealing, he ordered that his tongue be cut out: Niketas Choniates, O City of Byzantium: Annals of Niketas Choniatēs, trans. Harry J. Magoulias (Detroit, 1984), 83.

134

WILLIAM S. MURRELL

insignificant compared to monarchs, warriors, and other power brokers. Both are understandable assumptions, yet neither of them holds up when we take a closer look at the sources. This article is an attempt to move the interpreter-envoy from the periphery of crusader diplomacy (and historiography) to his rightful place in the center. It is an attempt to uncover the identities of interpreter-envoys and highlight their agency in war and diplomacy in the medieval eastern Mediterranean. In this article, I will focus my arguments on the role of interpreter-envoys during the Third Crusade, a moment with particularly rich sources on Muslim-Frankish diplomacy in both Latin and Arabic. In the first sections of the article, I will explore the question of identity (who typically functioned as diplomatic interpreters in the Third Crusade); and in the last section, I will explore the question of agency (how these interpreters were implicated in Muslim-Frankish diplomacy).

Franks as Diplomatic Interpreters After repeatedly being denied an audience with Saladin, Richard finally accepted that diplomatic negotiations with the Ayyubids would have to be conducted through intermediaries. So he chose his interpreter-envoy carefully.10 On November 9, Humphrey IV of Toron (1160s–1190s), a young Syrian-born Frankish noble, was granted an audience with Saladin. As Richard’s envoy, he proposed a settlement where Richard and al-‘Ādil (Saladin’s brother) would divide the lands of the Syrian littoral, and Latin priests and monks would manage the Christian holy sites in Jerusalem. In return, Richard would end his military campaign and seal the agreement by offering his sister, Joanne, in marriage to al-‘Ādil. To make matters more complicated, Humphrey was not the only Frankish envoy negotiating with Saladin. Earlier that day, Reynald of Sidon (1130s–1202), a powerful Syrian-born Frankish noble who represented the interests of Conrad of Montferrat, had also been granted an audience with the sultan. As Conrad’s envoy, Reynald had attempted to persuade Saladin to negotiate an exclusive peace treaty with Conrad – with the promise, according to Ibn Shaddād, that Conrad and the Franco-Syrian nobility would turn against Richard and “show open hostility” to crusaders from the West.11 Two days later, Saladin met with the emirs of the region and sought their counsel on the two offers.12 According to Ibn Shaddād, the emirs preferred Richard’s offer, so Saladin requested a meeting with Humphrey to discuss 10 According to Ibn Shaddād, Richard “fully appreciated its significance and realised that he could only achieve any aim by adapting to what would satisfy the sultan”: Bahā’ al-Dīn b. Shaddād, Nawādir, 201; trans. Richards, 194. 11 Bahā’ al-Dīn b. Shaddād, Nawādir, 202–04; trans. Richards, 194–95. 12 Though Ibn Shaddād claims that Saladin took neither Frankish proposal seriously, Saladin’s meeting with his emirs and his continued negotiations with both Frankish contingents suggest that he was serious about finding a diplomatic end to the conflict. Considering that it was Ibn Shaddād’s goal to boost Saladin’s jihad credentials, it should not surprise us that he consistently claims that Saladin’s preference was for war, not peace. Bahā’ al-Dīn b. Shaddād, Nawādir, 203.

INTERPRETERS IN FRANCO-MUSLIM NEGOTIATIONS

135

further the details of a possible marriage between al-‘Ādil and Richard’s sister. At the same time, Reynald continued his negotiations with al-‘Ādil. Ibn Shaddād writes, “On occasions the lord of Sidon went riding with al-‘Ādil, observing the Franks as the Muslims engaged them in battle.” The effect of these very public negotiations, according to Ibn Shaddād, was that Richard’s contingent “redoubled their efforts in search of peace, fearing that the marquis would ally himself with the Muslims…”13 Though these complex negotiations have often been framed as a contest between two brilliant military strategists and negotiators – Saladin and Richard – they were as much about the intermediaries as they were about the rulers. Unable to persuade Saladin to negotiate face-to-face, Richard had to rely on interpreterenvoys to conduct negotiations with the enemy. That Richard and Conrad, both newcomers to the Levant, would have chosen Syrian-born Franks to act as their chief intermediaries with Saladin and al-‘Ādil is not surprising. However, though moving and mediating between Islamicate and Latinate languages and cultures may seem like a natural role for a Syrian-born Frank, Humphrey and Reynald have long been considered exceptional. Why? Because the common assumption is that very few Franks learned Arabic and that they were typically reliant on local Syrian Christian interpreters in diplomatic negotiations with Muslims.14 For example, on Reynald’s Arabic skills – much lauded by Ibn Shaddād – one scholar has recently argued, “By drawing attention to Reynald’s talents, it is implied that he was an exception and that most Franks in the East could not speak the language, at least not fluently.”15 This line of reasoning echoes an older argument from Joshua Prawer about language-learning among Franks: “A knowledge of Arabic does not seem to have been very common … Not only was there a need for interpreters, but the special attention in the sources, Western and Eastern, to men who spoke Arabic is symptomatic.”16 As a result, according to Carole Hillenbrand, “It seems likely that the Franks used local dragomans (interpreters) for official encounters at a high level with Muslim princes and generals. These dragomans were often local Oriental Christians who must have mastered a number of languages.”17 The only problem with this widely accepted thesis is that local Syrian interpreters are very difficult to find in the sources; and when we do occasionally find them, they are usually bilingual Syrian scribes employed in local administration – not in

13

Bahā’ al-Dīn b. Shaddād, Nawādir, 204; trans. Richards, 196. See Joshua Prawer, The Latin Kingdom of Jerusalem: European Colonialism in the Middle Ages (London, 1972), 369; and Carole Hillenbrand, The Crusades: Islamic Perspectives (New York, 2000), 333. For a more optimistic take on the language situation in the Levant, see Hussein M. Attiya, “Knowledge of Arabic in the Crusader States in the Twelfth and Thirteenth Centuries,” Journal of Medieval History 25 (1999): 203–13. 15 Lewis, “Medieval Diglossia,” 123. 16 Prawer, The Latin Kingdom of Jerusalem, 522. 17 Hillenbrand, The Crusades: Islamic Perspectives, 333. 14

136

WILLIAM S. MURRELL

high-level diplomacy.18 On the other hand, Franks – especially Syrian-born Franks – frequently appear in the sources as interpreter-envoys in diplomatic contexts. While it is entirely possible that the apparent prevalence of Frankish (and to a lesser extent Muslim) interpreters in the extant sources is an optical illusion and simply reflects the fact that we are relying on Latin Christian and Muslim sources, it is still worth revisiting the question and asking how exceptional Syrian-born Frankish interpreters were. What are we to make of their apparent prominence in MuslimFrankish diplomacy in the latter half of the twelfth century? Using Humphrey and Reynald as test cases, I will explore three related questions. First, why were Humphrey and Reynald chosen as Richard’s and Conrad’s chief interpreters and diplomatic envoys in the Third Crusade? Second, is there “special attention” in the sources to their linguistic skills which would suggest that they were exceptional figures in the period? Third, were they really that exceptional historically? Why Humphrey and Reynald? Concerning the first question, it is clear that Humphrey’s and Reynald’s roles as interpreters were in part contingent on their knowledge of Arabic. However, it is also clear that neither figure was chosen merely for his linguistic skills. In fact, as members of two of the most prominent and powerful baronial families in the Frankish Levant – the Lords of Toron and the Lords of Sidon – Humphrey and (especially) Reynald would probably have been involved in Third Crusade diplomatic negotiations whether or not they knew Arabic. Considering the intrigues and factions within the Frankish contingent in the 1180s and 1190s, one might say that Humphrey’s and Reynald’s involvement in the negotiations with Saladin had less to do with their linguistic skills and more to do with their personal and political stakes in the Third Crusade. The conflict between Humphrey and Reynald was rooted in the succession crisis of the Kingdom of Jerusalem.19 On the untimely deaths of Baldwin IV in 1185 and Baldwin V in 1186, many prominent nobles (including Reynald of Sidon) attempted to crown Humphrey king, for he was married to Baldwin IV’s younger sister, Isabelle. Surprisingly, Humphrey refused the crown and supported the claims of Guy of Lusignan, who was married to Isabelle’s half-sister, Sybilla. In 1190, the same barons who had attempted to crown him king (led by Balian of Ibelin and Reynald of Sidon) forced Humphrey to divorce Isabelle – so that she might be

18 For examples, see Ernst Strehlke, Tabulae ordinis Theutonici (Berlin, 1869), 15–16, no. 16; and Cart Hosp nos. 2925 and 3213. For discussions on the role of indigenous scribes in local administration, see Benjamin Kedar, “The Subjected Muslims of the Frankish Levant,” in Muslims Under Latin Rule, 1100–1300, ed. James M. Powell (Princeton, 1990), 157–58; and Jonathan Riley-Smith, “Some Lesser Officials in Latin Syria,” The English Historical Review 87 (1972): 1–26, at 23. 19 The complex local politics are outlined in great detail in Jonathan Riley-Smith’s The Feudal Nobility and the Kingdom of Jerusalem, 1174–1277 (London, 1973), 101–20.

INTERPRETERS IN FRANCO-MUSLIM NEGOTIATIONS

137

married to Conrad of Montferrat, who the barons believed would provide a more suitable contender for the throne. It is in this context that we have to consider Humphrey’s and Reynald’s roles as competing Frankish negotiators with the Ayyubids in the early 1190s. Neither Humphrey nor Reynald was a disinterested actor, nor were they employed as interpreters merely because they spoke Arabic. On the contrary, they were both deeply implicated in the local politics of the Frankish Levant, something which in turn affected the international politics of the Third Crusade. Reynald, who had supported the kingship of Conrad from the beginning, was invested in negotiating a settlement with Saladin that would secure Conrad’s rights to the throne. Humphrey, on the other hand, who had lost his wife to Conrad and been betrayed by the Franco-Syrian nobility, offered his services to Richard when he arrived in 1191, as the foreign monarch represented a powerful counter-faction to Conrad and the local Frankish nobility. “Special Attention” in the Sources? If their deep involvement in the politics of the period provides a compelling rationale for why Humphrey and Reynald served as interpreter-envoys in the Third Crusade (which de-emphasizes the importance of their language skills), there is still the question of the supposed emphasis in the sources. Do the texts give “special attention” to Humphrey’s and Reynald’s linguistic skills? The short answer is no. First, consider Humphrey. As a prominent noble, both politically and personally involved in the succession crisis of the 1180s and ’90s, Humphrey appears frequently in the chronicle of William of Tyre and his various continuators. And yet none of these works mentions Humphrey’s linguistic abilities or his role as an interpreter for Richard in the Third Crusade. Furthermore, neither the Itinerarium Peregrinorum nor Ambroise’s Estoire de la Guerre Sainte, which both recount the Third Crusade from the perspective of Richard’s faction, mention Humphrey’s role as an interpreter and diplomatic envoy for Richard. The primary interest of these sources in reference to Humphrey is the attempted coronation in 1186 and the forced divorce of 1190.20 The same observation can be made about Reynald of Sidon – namely that the relevant Western sources make no mention of Reynald’s role as an interpreter in the Third Crusade. The Itinerarium Peregrinorum and Ambroise do describe Reynald’s role as Conrad’s envoy to Saladin, but neither source explicitly refers to Reynald’s language skills or his role as a linguistic intermediary.21 Reynald is discussed in

20 See La Continuation de Guillaume de Tyr (1184–1197), ed. Margaret Ruth Morgan (Paris, 1982), 34, 105–106; and Itinerarium Peregrinorum et Gesta Regis Ricardi, ed. William Stubbs (London, 1864), 96–97, book 1, ch. 46, and 119–20, book 1, ch. 63. 21 See Itinerarium Peregrinorum, 337, book 5, ch. 24; and Ambroise, The History of the Holy War: Ambroise’s Estoire de la Guerre Sainte, ed. Marianne Ailes (Woodbridge, 2003), lines 8690–93.

138

WILLIAM S. MURRELL

these pro-Richard chronicles not as an exceptionally gifted linguist but rather as an exceptionally treacherous negotiator. Our knowledge of both Humphrey’s and Reynald’s language skills comes solely from Arabic sources, and even here it is difficult to argue that these writers make much of these Franco-Syrian Arabic-speakers. For example, Humphrey is mentioned seven times in Ibn Shaddād, all but one instance referring to his role as Richard’s interpreter and envoy.22 In these passages, Ibn Shaddād places no emphasis on Humphrey’s linguistic skills that would suggest he was an exceptional figure. He is mentioned straightforwardly as an interpreter-envoy for Richard with no further comment: “During this day al-‘Ādil met with the accursed king of England and the son of Humphrey acted as their interpreter [tarjumān].”23 And “The evening of this same day the king of England’s envoy [rasūl] arrived, namely, the son of Humphrey, one of their nobles…”24 If anything, Humphrey is exceptional and worth naming not because of his Arabic skills but because of his status as a prominent Frankish noble.25 Humphrey also makes several appearances in ‘Imād ad-Dīn’s chronicle. Just one passage briefly covers his role as Richard’s interpreter, while the rest are concerned with his capture and release in 1187 and his marriage woes in 1190.26 Reynald receives more attention in the Arabic sources than Humphrey, presumably due to his complex relationship with Saladin, although it remains questionable whether the treatment suggests that he was exceptional in his knowledge of Arabic. For example, though Ibn al-Athīr and ‘Imād ad-Dīn mention Reynald’s role in negotiations with Saladin – a role which implied a knowledge of Arabic – only Ibn Shaddād’s account explicitly claims that Reynald spoke Arabic.27 Ibn Shaddād writes of Reynald, “He was one of the Frankish nobles and one of their wise heads who knew Arabic and had some familiarity with histories and Hadith collections. I heard that he kept a Muslim who read to him and explained things… He was an excellent conversationalist and cultured in his talk.”28 Here, Ibn Shaddād refers to Reynald as one Frankish noble – among others like Humphrey – who knew Arabic. Though he is clearly impressed with Reynald’s Arabic skills, what Ibn Shaddād finds exceptional is the Frankish baron’s apparent interest in Islam 22

Bahā’ al-Dīn b. Shaddād, Nawādir, 77, 182, 187, 202, 204, 205, 234; trans. Richards, 74, 173, 179, 194, 196, 198, 231. 23 Bahā’ al-Dīn b. Shaddād, Nawādir, 182; trans. Richards, 173. Here Humphrey IV is referred to as the “son of Humphrey” [ibn Humfrī] because his father and grandfather were both named Humphrey. 24 Bahā’ al-Dīn b. Shaddād, Nawādir, 202; trans. Richards, 194. 25 Ibn Shaddād’s perception of his prominence as a Frankish noble certainly stemmed from the reputation of his grandfather, Humphrey II, who also had close dealings with Saladin as constable of Jerusalem. 26 On his work as an interpreter, see ‘Imād ad-Dīn, Conquête de la Syrie et de la Palestine par Saladin: (Al-fatḥ al-qussī fī l-fatḥ al-qudsī), trans. Henri Massé (Paris, 1972), 340; for other mentions, see ibid., 27, 31, 97, 105–7, 304–5. 27 See ‘Imād ad-Dīn, Conquête de la Syrie, trans. Massé, 159–62; and Ibn al-Athīr, al-Kāmil fī al-tārīkh, ed. Carl Tornberg, 14 vols. (Leiden, 1851–76; repr. Beirut, 1967), 12:27–28. 28 Bahā’ al-Dīn b. Shaddād, Nawādir, 97–98; trans. Richards, 90–91.

INTERPRETERS IN FRANCO-MUSLIM NEGOTIATIONS

139

and his familiarity with Hadith and Islamic history. Ibn Shaddād’s praise of Reynald should be situated in the context of the other Arabic chronicles which mention Reynald’s role as an envoy with no further commentary. These Arabic sources should be considered along with the Latin and Old French sources which make no comment on Reynald’s Arabic skills or his role as an interpreter-envoy. If anything, what is noteworthy about Humphrey and Reynald is how little attention the sources – Eastern and Western – give to their remarkable linguistic skills and their role as diplomatic interpreters in the late twelfth century. How Exceptional were Humphrey and Reynald? If Humphrey and Reynald, contrary to Prawer’s claims, were considered rather unexceptional by medieval historians, how should modern historians assess the uniqueness of these figures – as Syrian-born Franks who spoke Arabic and functioned as diplomatic interpreters? It is clear that interpreters – regardless of ethnicity or religion – are always exceptional historical figures. The ability to skillfully mediate high-stakes negotiations across linguistic, political, and religious divides is unique in any historical period – even those where functional bilingualism may have been commonplace. In this sense of the word, Reynald and Humphrey (and the other interpreters discussed in this article) are exceptional figures. However, when most scholars label Reynald and Humphrey “exceptional,” they are referring to their being Frankish translators because it was assumed that Franks did not (and could not) do this kind of work. It is this claim of exceptionalism that I am challenging here. One comprehensive way of answering this question might be to compile a prosopographical database of Frankish interpreters mentioned in the narrative sources – both Western and Eastern. Such a database would be valuable but is beyond the scope of this study. Perhaps a more focused way to address this question is to look at the family trees of the lords of Toron and Sidon to see how exceptional Humphrey and Reynald were in their own families. Though we know little about Humphrey’s father, Humphrey III (who appears to have died relatively young), we do have sources on Humphrey’s grandfather, Humphrey II (1117–79). As the constable of the Kingdom of Jerusalem for nearly three decades (1152/3–79),29 Humphrey II was frequently involved in diplomatic negotiations with Muslims. William of Tyre writes of an interesting encounter on the battlefield in 1150 when Humphrey engaged in ad hoc negotiations with the envoy of a “very powerful Turkish noble who was bound to the constable in a fraternal alliance [fraterno foedere junctus erat].”30 If William’s portrayal of the exchange (which likely came from Humphrey’s report) is at all accurate, then it seems that this battlefield exchange was unmediated and probably took place in 29

For more on the grand officers of the Kingdom of Jerusalem, see John La Monte, Feudal Monarchy in the Latin Kingdom of Jerusalem, 1100 to 1291 (Cambridge, MA, 1932), 114–18, 252–53. 30 WT 17.17. English translation: William of Tyre, A History of Deeds Done Beyond the Sea, trans. Emily Atwater Babcock and August C. Krey, 2 vols. (New York, 1943), 2:211–12.

140

WILLIAM S. MURRELL

Arabic (or possibly Turkish).31 In 1175, Humphrey was also involved in negotiating a truce between Raymond of Tripoli and Saladin. Looking back on these negotiations several years later, William recognized that allowing Saladin to unite Syria and Egypt would ultimately prove detrimental for the Franks, and he blamed the negotiator – Humphrey – who was “too closely associated in the bonds of friendship with Saladin.”32 Though William never explicitly claims that Humphrey II was an Arabic-speaker, Humphrey’s frequent role as a mediator in diplomatic negotiations with Muslims neatly fits the mold of the interpreter-envoy described by Ibn Shaddād and exemplified by Humphrey’s grandson several decades later.33 One might wonder if Richard selected young Humphrey IV as an envoy to Saladin in part because of his grandfather’s ties with the sultan. In Reynald’s family, at least two other family members also functioned as interpreter-envoys. In 1167, Reynald’s cousin, Hugh of Caesarea (1130s–1168/74), was sent by King Amaury to the Fatimid caliph in order to renew a treaty. One of the most striking aspects of this diplomatic exchange was that Hugh, negotiating from a position of strength in 1167, convinced the caliph to ratify the treaty by extending his bare hand – a gesture of peace-making that was decidedly Western and scandalously foreign to the Muslim caliph and his court.34 As seems to have been his habit, William makes no explicit comment about Hugh’s linguistic abilities, but judging from his account of the negotiations, it appears that Hugh was very likely an able Arabic-speaker whose negotiations with the Fatimids were unmediated by an auxiliary interpreter.35 Hugh’s linguistic prowess is further confirmed by the fact that when he was in captivity with the Muslims later that year, he was enlisted 31 I raise the possibility of Turkish because scholars often uncritically assume that Muslim Seljuk nobles in Syria spoke Arabic. Of course, some did, but the mother tongue of the ruling Seljuks was Turkish, and the language of Seljuk administration was Persian. See Claude Cahen, The Formation of Turkey (Harlow, 2001), 140–41; and Rustam Shukurov, “Harem Christianity: The Byzantine Identity of Seljuk Princes,” in The Seljuks of Anatolia: Court and Society in the Medieval Middle East, ed. A. C. S. Peacock and Sara Nur Yildiz (London, 2013), 129–30. 32 WT 21.8; trans. Babcock and Krey, 2:410. 33 One curious piece of evidence that further links Humphrey II with Saladin is found in the Itinerarium Peregrinorum, which claims that in his youth Saladin “went as a candidate for knighthood to Enfrid [Humphrey II of Toron, or Tibnin] … and received a belt of knighthood from him in accordance with the rite of the Franks”: Itinerarium Peregrinorum, 9, book 1, ch. 3. English translation: The Chronicle of the Third Crusade: A Translation of the Itinerarium Peregrinorum et Gesta Regis Ricardi, trans. Helen J. Nicholson (Aldershot, 1997), 27. This fantastic and unsupported claim, which is given little credence by Saladin’s modern biographers, may tell us more about Humphrey than it does about Saladin, namely, that decades after his death, Humphrey II was widely-known as the kind of Frankish noble who might enlist a Kurdish-Muslim warrior in his retinue. 34 For more on this incident, see Yvonne Friedman, “Gestures of Conciliation: Peacemaking Endeavors in the Latin East,” in In Laudem Hierosolymitani: Studies in Crusades and Medieval Culture in Honour of Benjamin Z. Kedar, ed. Iris Shagrir, Ronnie Ellenblum, and Jonathan Riley-Smith, Crusades Subsidia 1 (Aldershot, 2007), 31–48, at 36–38. 35 For a similar assessment of Hugh’s linguistic abilities, see Tuley, “A Century of Communication and Acclimatization,” 327; and Yvonne Friedman, Encounter between Enemies: Captivity and Ransom in the Latin Kingdom of Jerusalem (Leiden, 2002), 118.

INTERPRETERS IN FRANCO-MUSLIM NEGOTIATIONS

141

by his captors to negotiate on their behalf with the Franks.36 If Hugh had not died an untimely death in the early 1170s, it seems likely that he would also have been involved in the diplomatic negotiations of the Third Crusade alongside his cousin, Reynald. This line of Syrian-born Frankish nobles who were deeply involved in diplomacy with Muslims did not stop with Hugh and Reynald.37 In the early thirteenth century, Reynald’s son, Balian of Sidon, functioned as Frederick II’s chief envoy to al-Kāmil and played a crucial role in the Treaty of Jaffa in 1229.38 A similar lineage of diplomatic envoys can be traced for the powerful Ibelin family as well. We know, for example, that Balian of Ibelin (c. 1143–93) personally negotiated the surrender of Jerusalem to Saladin in 1187, and we know that he was involved (along with Humphrey) in negotiating the Treaty of Jaffa in 1192. However, unlike his contemporaries Reynald and Humphrey, Balian does not appear to have spoken Arabic.39 It turns out, however, that his grandson did. We learn from Joinville that Balian’s grandson, Baldwin of Ibelin (d. 1267), “knew the Saracen language well” and interpreted for Joinville when he was a fellowcaptive in Egypt during Louis IX’s crusade.40 Thus, it does not seem that lords of Toron and Sidon were exceptional in producing Arabic-speaking Frankish nobles. More importantly, Humphrey and Reynald were by no means isolated cases of interpreter-envoys – for in their own family trees we find grandfathers, cousins, sons, and grandsons fulfilling similar diplomatic roles throughout the (late) twelfth and (early) thirteenth centuries. Contrary to current assumptions about languagelearning among the Franks in Syria, our evidence suggests that, at least for the Frankish ruling elite, a knowledge of Arabic was by no means exceptional. In fact, it may have been essential for several generations of Syrian-born nobles whose enemies were also their close neighbors.41 36

WT 19.29; trans. Babcock and Krey, 2:339–40. In the immediate aftermath of the siege of Alexandria, Hugh and Arnulf of Turbessel may well have encountered Saladin who was briefly a prisoner of the Franks. WT 19.30, pp. 906–907. (My thanks to Professor Jonathan Phillips for raising this point.) 38 L’estoire de Eracles empereur et la conqueste de la terre d’Outremer in RHC Oc 2:111; see also Thomas C. Van Cleve, “The Crusade of Frederick II,” in Setton, Crusades, 2:453–54. 39 Ibn al-Athīr, al-Kāmil, 11:548–49; Bahā’ al-Dīn b. Shaddād, Nawādir, 234. Köhler places Balian of Ibelin in company with Reynald of Sidon and Humphrey IV of Toron as Arabic-speaking Franks employed as envoys and interpreters; however, the evidence does not support this attractive hypothesis. See Köhler, Alliances and Treaties between Frankish and Muslim Rulers in the Middle East, 303. To the contrary, Ibn Shaddād notes that Balian used a dragoman in a private conversation between the two of them – evidence that all but eliminates the possibility that Balian was an able Arabic-speaker: RHC Or 3:21, 346; trans. Richards, 26. 40 Jean de Joinville, Histoire de Saint Louis, ed. Natalis de Wailly (Paris, 1868), 125, ch. 70. English translation: John of Joinville, Joinville and Villehardouin: Chronicles of the Crusades, trans. Caroline Smith (London, 2008), 233. 41 Of course, this claim has potentially significant implications for our understanding of nature of Franco-Syrian society in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries. It is beyond the scope of this article, but I explore this question at some length in William Murrell, “Dragomans and Crusaders: The Role of Translators and Translation in the Medieval Eastern Mediterranean, 1098–1291” (PhD diss., Vanderbilt University, 2018); see Introduction, Chapter 1, and Conclusion. 37

142

WILLIAM S. MURRELL

Language-Learning among the Franks How did Frankish settlers (especially those of the second and third generations) learn Arabic? Though we know very little about language-learning in the period, two modes of contact stand out as likely: cohabitation and captivity. We know, for example, that a number of Frankish settlers (many of whom were single men) intermarried with local Christians and Muslim converts.42 At least some of these Franks learned the language of their spouses; but perhaps more importantly, some of the children of these mixed marriages acquired both their mother’s and their father’s tongues. We have no concrete evidence of interpreters coming from mixed Franco-Syrian families, but the contemporary Byzantine world offers evidence of interpreters coming from Greco-Turkish families.43 Another site of language-learning which produced diplomatic interpreters was captivity.44 Taken from their homes in raids or captured in war, captives were forced to live in a foreign land amongst people of a foreign tongue for months, even years at a time. In a region where warfare was constant and captives were regularly used as diplomatic bargaining chips, thousands of Frankish and Muslim captives spent lengthy periods living with the enemy – enough time for at least some to learn the language. Some (usually high-ranking nobles) were ransomed. Others were exchanged. And many became slaves. The population of Frankish captives in Arab hands grew in the second half of the twelfth century, as the jihad against the Franks gained momentum with the successful conquests of Saladin in the 1170s and ’80s. Frankish captivity reached a peak in 1187 at the Battle of Hattin when Saladin captured nearly the entire Frankish army and numerous Frankish nobles, including Humphrey. It is difficult to estimate the number of Franks captured at Hattin, as Muslim sources offer substantially larger figures than Latin sources. However, even if the lowest total found in the narrative sources – 12,000 – is an exaggeration, this figure would still suggest an unprecedented number of Frankish captives in the hands of Muslim rulers.45 42

Fulcher of Chartres famously claims, “Some [Franks] have taken wives not merely of their own people, but Syrians, or Armenians, or even Saracens who have received the grace of Baptism.” FC III, 37.5. English translation: Fulcher of Chartres, A History of the Expedition to Jerusalem, 1095–1127, trans. Frances Rita Ryan and Harold S. Fink (Knoxville, TN, 1969; repr. New York, 1973), 271–72. On this topic, see Natasha Hodgson, “Conflict and Cohabitation: Marriage and Diplomacy between Latins and Cilician Armenians, c. 1097–1253,” in The Crusades and the Near East, 83–106. 43 See Anna Komnene, The Alexiad, trans. E. R. A. Sewter, ed. Peter Frankopan (London, 2009), 303–4, book 11, ch. 2. 44 The most important work on captivity (and language-learning in captivity) in the Frankish period is Friedman, Encounter between Enemies. For a discussion on the link between captivity and language-learning in the early modern Mediterranean, see John Gallagher, “Language‐learning, Orality, and Multilingualism in Early Modern Anglophone Narratives of Mediterranean Captivity.” Renaissance Studies 33 (2019): 639–61. 45 ‘Imād ad-Dīn estimates 100,000, while Latin sources say 12,000. So large was the number of Frankish prisoners entering the slave market, one Muslim chronicler observes, that the price for slaves in Syria plummeted in the years after Hattin. See Friedman, Encounter Between Enemies, 44, 86 n. 59.

INTERPRETERS IN FRANCO-MUSLIM NEGOTIATIONS

143

The difficulty with this attractive theory of the captive-turned-interpreter, which has been argued persuasively by Yvonne Friedman, is that we have a very small number of concrete examples of interpreters who acquired linguistic skills in captivity. If we look to Byzantium, more such figures emerge. For example, during the First Crusade, we find a Byzantine interpreter named Rodomerus “who having been captured by the Turks long ago and having lived with them for a considerable time, was himself not unacquainted with their language.”46 In the 1160s, we find an interpreter, named Aaron Isaakios of Corinth, whom we met earlier, “who had mastered the Latin tongue when he was carried off captive to Sicily.”47 What was unique about polyglot captives is that they could be used as interpreters by their coreligionists after their ransom – or by their captors while in captivity. This seems to have been the case with Arnulf of Turbessel, who in 1167, as a prisoner of the Fatimids, was sent to Jerusalem to negotiate a treaty with the Franks. Arnulf’s language skills are not discussed explicitly in the sources, but Yvonne Friedman suspects that Arnulf was one of many Frankish nobles who learned the language of the enemy in captivity.48 For example, Bohemond I of Antioch spent three years in captivity in Seljuk Anatolia (1100–3); Baldwin II of Jerusalem had two stints in Muslim captivity, one for five years (1104–8) and another for 16 months (1123–24); Raymond III of Tripoli was held captive in Aleppo for nine years (1164–73); and Reynald of Chatillon was in Aleppan captivity for fifteen years (1161–76). While the conditions of their captivity are unknown, some (if not all) of these nobles may well have learned at least some Arabic (and/or Turkish). Nonetheless, for all of the years these Frankish nobles spent in captivity, we have no explicit evidence that any of them acquired Arabic in this time and used their linguistic skills in diplomacy – with one possible exception. This brings us back to Humphrey IV and the question of language – namely, where and when did he learn Arabic? Could he have learned the language in his season of captivity after Hattin? While this theory is attractive, his time in captivity was relatively short – just under two years (July 1187–May 1189) – and the circumstances of his captivity are unclear from the sources. Humphrey was quite young (probably in his mid-twenties)49 when called upon by Richard in 1191 to be his envoy to Saladin, so it is difficult to imagine that Humphrey’s brief time in captivity could have adequately prepared him for his role as a skilled diplomatic interpreter. Though our knowledge of his childhood and adolescence is limited, we can identify several opportunities for Humphrey to have learned (or at least have been exposed to) Arabic before his captivity in 1187. The lordship of Toron, situated in the mountains of southern Lebanon between Damascus and Tyre, was on the 46

Anna Komnene, The Alexiad, trans. Sewter, ed. Frankopan, 303, book 11, ch. 2. Niketas Choniates, O City, trans. Magoulias, 83. 48 Friedman, Encounter Between Enemies, 118. 49 We do not know Humphrey’s exact date of birth, but we do know that when he was betrothed to Isabella in 1180 he was probably a young teenager since William of Tyre observes that “young Humphrey… had now reached man’s estate.” WT 22.5; trans. Babcock and Krey, 2:451–52. 47

144

WILLIAM S. MURRELL

frontier of Latin and Muslim Syria. According to Ibn Jubayr, who traveled through the region in the early 1180s, merchant caravans traveling from Damascus to Tyre customarily stopped at the fortress of Toron (Tibnīn) to pay taxes. Additionally, as a frontier zone, much of the cultivable land was held as a condominium (AR: munāṣafa), which meant that the lords of Toron were in frequent contact with their Muslim neighbors with whom they divided the produce of their borderlands.50 While the certainty of contact between the lords of Toron and their Muslim neighbors does not make language-learning inevitable, it is clear that the milieu in which Humphrey grew up was one where Muslims and Franks were in close proximity. Caffaro of Genoa recounts an interesting story from the same frontier region a generation earlier (1140) where the Muslim lord of Margat and Renaud le Mazoir, the Frankish lord of (neighboring) Banyas,51 struck a truce – and developed a friendship. The lord of Margat would visit Renaud in Banyas and the two would go to the public bath, walk in the gardens outside the city, and engage in drinking bouts.52 Whether this Renaud and the lord of Margat learned each other’s language is unclear. But one can imagine social interactions like these between neighboring lords as a plausible context for Humphrey not only to have learned Arabic in his teens or early twenties but also to have observed the procedures and protocols of Muslim courts. In the case of Reynald, it is possible that he gained the language from his Arabicspeaking employees. In an old French continuation of William of Tyre, there is a story about an Arabic scribe in Reynald’s entourage, named Belheis, who betrayed Reynald and helped Saladin capture Beaufort (Shaqif Arnun) in 1189.53 Ibn Shaddād does not mention Belheis by name in his account of Saladin’s siege of Shaqif Arnun, but, as we saw earlier, he does remark that Reynald employed a Muslim who read to him the Hadith and other Arabic texts.54 Whether or not this individual mentioned by Ibn Shaddād and Belheis are the same person, it is clear that Reynald had literate Arabic-speakers in his household who could have tutored him in Arabic. Though he had been betrayed by Belheis, Reynald apparently continued to keep local Arabicspeakers in his entourage. Ibn Shaddād reports that during the negotiations of 1192, Reynald sent his servant [ghulām] Yusuf as his envoy to Saladin.55 It is unclear if Yusuf was a Muslim or a local Christian, but he must have been a trusted member of Reynald’s entourage to have been sent on such an important diplomatic mission. While employing locals in his entourage does not necessarily mean that Reynald learned Arabic from them, this practice put the Frankish noble in close proximity 50

Ibn Jubayr, The Travels of Ibn Jubayr, ed. William Wright and M. J. de Goeje (Leyden, 1907),

301. 51 Banyas was in the same frontier region as Toron and by the late 1170s was held by the lords of Toron. See WT 22.5. 52 Caffaro, De liberatione civitatum Orientis, in RHC Oc 5:67. English translation: Caffaro, Genoa and the Twelfth-Century Crusades, trans. Martin Hall and Jonathan Phillips (London, 2016), 115. 53 L’estoire de Eracles in RHC Oc 2:111. 54 Bahā’ al-Dīn b. Shaddād, Nawādir, 97. 55 Bahā’ al-Dīn b. Shaddād, Nawādir, 206–8.

INTERPRETERS IN FRANCO-MUSLIM NEGOTIATIONS

145

with Arabic-speakers, who, if they didn’t teach him, may have helped him to hone his Arabic skills.

Muslims as Diplomatic Interpreters After a winter of back-and-forth negotiations (and little fighting), al-‘Ādil wrote to Saladin in Jerusalem in March 1192 informing him of recent developments which he had learned during a meeting with Humphrey. Also present at the meeting was al-‘Ādil’s chamberlain (ḥājib), Abu Bakr al-‘Ādili. Though Humphrey spoke with al-‘Ādil on behalf of Richard, it was Abu Bakr who had negotiated the new settlement with Richard: that both parties would keep the lands they presently held and that the Muslims would keep the Dome of the Rock while Jerusalem would be shared.56 Though Ibn Shaddād does not explicitly state that Abu Bakr knew French, his role as al-‘Ādil’s envoy to Richard mirrors that of Humphrey and Reynald in their diplomatic missions to al-‘Ādil and Saladin. Like his Frankish counterparts, Abu Bakr was probably a polyglot envoy sent by al-‘Ādil to negotiate on his behalf with Richard.57 After months of negotiations, Abu Bakr had developed a friendly relationship with Richard similar to that between Humphrey and Saladin. For example, when Richard sought for a renewal of the peace talks with Saladin a few months later, he asked specifically for Abu Bakr, “with whom he was on very friendly terms.” Ibn Shaddād also notes that Abu Bakr, though sometimes traveling with a larger entourage, claimed to have had a “private talk” with Richard in the course of their back-and-forth negotiations at the close of the Third Crusade.58 Of course, an unnamed interpreter could have been present for those private talks between Richard and Abu Bakr, but this would have been a departure from the normal diplomatic practice in the period where envoys effectively functioned as their own interpreters. Another key member of al-‘Ādil’s entourage who had close dealings with Richard and seems to have functioned as an interpreter-envoy was al-‘Ādil’s secretary [kātib], al-Ṣanī‘at ibn al-Naḥāl. Like Abu Bakr, al-Ṣanī‘at was sent as an envoy to Richard to discuss among other things the proposed marriage between al-‘Ādil and Richard’s sister.59 While we know little about al-Ṣanī‘at beyond 56

Bahā’ al-Dīn b. Shaddād, Nawādir, 205–6. Both Friedman and Köhler argue that the procedure described by Ibn Shaddād was the dominant model for diplomatic negotiations in the medieval eastern Mediterranean; and it is this model that we see operating in negotiations between Richard and Saladin in 1191–92. See Friedman, “Peacemaking: Perceptions and Practices in the Medieval Latin East,” 238; and Köhler, Alliances and Treaties between Frankish and Muslim Rulers in the Middle East, 303. 58 The Arabic literally says that Abu Bakr was “alone with” [infirad bihi] Richard when he reportedly made his counter proposal for Saladin: Bahā’ al-Dīn b. Shaddād, Nawādir, 231–32; trans. Richards, 228. 59 Bahā’ al-Dīn b. Shaddād, Nawādir, 193, 196; trans. Richards, 185, 188. See also ‘Imād ad-Dīn, Conquête de la Syrie, trans. Massé, 353. 57

146

WILLIAM S. MURRELL

his role as al-‘Ādil’s secretary [kātib] and envoy [rasūl], we do learn from Ibn al-‘Adīm that al-Ṣanī‘at was a recent convert (from Christianity), who had joined al-‘Ādil’s court during his time as governor of Aleppo (1183–86).60 Though one imagines that every Muslim ruler who had frequent diplomatic interaction with the Franks in the crusader period must have employed a small pool of highly trusted and highly skilled interpreter-envoys, it is quite unusual to uncover the identity of two such individuals in the same court. The fact that both of these diplomatic interpreters were Muslims once again forces us to confront the question of identity and the common assumption that local Christians were the primary labor force in diplomatic translation. While it is not insignificant that al-Ṣanī‘at had been a Syrian Christian prior to his conversion to Islam, we may wonder what role his conversion played in earning the trust of al-‘Ādil. It is possible that his conversion was inconsequential to his promotion, but one might also argue that al-Ṣanī‘at’s conversion likely opened up his career opportunities in al-‘Ādil’s court, first in Aleppo, then in greater Syria during the Third Crusade.61 If the prevailing scholarly skepticism about language-learning among Muslims in the crusader period pushes us to see Abu Bakr and al-Ṣanī‘at as exceptional figures,62 the existing evidence does not. While there is a great deal more material for Franks learning Arabic than there is for Muslims learning French, it is striking that instances of Muslims learning “Frankish” are more substantial than our evidence of local Christians doing so. Whether as spies, soldiers, or diplomats, at least a small segment of Muslims in Syria needed to learn European languages in order to act as linguistic intermediaries in war and diplomacy.63 I am not arguing that local Christians were not involved in diplomacy, but the evidence of their involvement is sparse. In fact, our sources offer only four possible instances of 60

See Ibn al-‘Adim, Zubdat al-halab, ed. S. Dahan, 3 vols. (Damascus, 1954), 3:75. Another interesting question raised by al-Ṣanī‘at is that of literacy. As a secretary [kātib], he would have been tasked with drafting diplomatic correspondence. Should we imagine that al-Ṣanī‘at was not only fluent in French but literate in Latin and was tasked with drafting diplomatic correspondence for Richard during the Third Crusade negotiations? It is difficult to come to any firm conclusions based on the available evidence; however, even if it turns out that al-Ṣanī‘at was not literate in Latin, someone else in al-Adil’s entourage must have been. Konrad Hirschler’s important work on the Ashrafīya library in Damascus, which it turns out contained Latin and Old French texts, has opened up new discussions about Latin literacy in medieval Syria. See Konrad Hirschler, Medieval Damascus: Plurality and Diversity in an Arabic Library: the Ashrafīya Library Catalogue (Edinburgh, 2016); and Gabriele Giannini and Laura Minervini, “The Old French Texts of the Damascus Qubba,” in The Damascus Fragments: Towards a History of the Qubbat al-khazna Corpus of Manuscripts and Documents, ed. Arianna D‘Ottone Rambach, Konrad Hirschler, and Ronny Vollandt (Beirut, 2020), 331–62. 62 This dominant perspective can be summarized by Hillenbrand: “The Islamic sources suggest that very few Muslims were concerned to learn the languages of the Crusaders. In fact, although there is some awareness of their ethnic diversity on the part of the Muslim chroniclers… there seems to be no perception that there was more than one ‘Frankish language.’” Hillenbrand, The Crusades: Islamic Perspectives, 331. 63 For examples of Muslim polyglots leveraging their linguistic skills on the battlefield or as spies, see Ibn al-Qalanisi, Dhayl tarikh Dimashq, ed. H. F. Amedroz (Leiden, 1908), 332; Itinerarium Peregrinorum, 91–92, book 1 chapter 41; Ibn al-Athīr, al-Kāmil, 12:32–33. 61

INTERPRETERS IN FRANCO-MUSLIM NEGOTIATIONS

147

local Christians acting as interpreter-envoys during the Third Crusade. Two of these references explicitly identify a local Christian as the diplomatic intermediary;64 one is unclear about whether the interpreter is a local Christian or a Muslim;65 and the fourth is unclear about whether the interpreter/spy is a local Christian or a Syrianborn Frank.66

Interpreters as Peace-makers The shocking news of Conrad’s assassination in April combined with news of unrest in England prompted Richard to make one final push for Jerusalem in the summer of 1192. In July, the Frankish armies reached Beit Nuba, but after much deliberation, Richard chose to withdraw rather than risk having his supply line to the coast compromised. With both sides depleted from another summer of fighting, Richard asked to renew talks with Abu Bakr.67 After back-and-forth negotiations, Richard and Saladin finally reached a three-year truce – without ever having met face-to-face. This final stage of diplomatic negotiations between Saladin and Richard involved two crucial components – written treaties and oral oaths of ratification. Interpreter-envoys were central in both. On September 1, Saladin’s envoy delivered a written treaty to Richard in Jaffa outlining the following terms: Saladin would keep Jerusalem but allow Christian pilgrims to visit the city and its holy places; the Franks would keep their holdings on the coast from Tyre to Jaffa; and Ascalon’s fortifications were to be demolished. Sick and bed-ridden, Richard delegated the task of reviewing the written treaty to Henry of Champagne (Conrad’s recent replacement as Latin ruler of Jerusalem), Balian of Ibelin, and other prominent members of the Franco-Syrian nobility and the military orders. After approving the treaty and swearing oaths of ratification, a Frankish delegation, led by Balian and Humphrey, traveled to Saladin’s camp in Ramla where they witnessed Saladin’s oath of ratification and those of his chief emirs in the region.68 Diplomatic Oaths Diplomatic oaths – which carried political and religious significance for both Christians and Muslims – were a crucial part of eastern Mediterranean diplomacy both before and after the Third Crusade.69 According to Friedman, oaths were 64

See Ibn al-Athīr, al-Kāmil, 11:398–99; and Bahā’ al-Dīn b. Shaddād, Nawādir, 223. Bahā’ al-Dīn b. Shaddād, Nawādir, 206. 66 Itinerarium Peregrinorum, 383–85, book 6, chapter 3; Ambroise, The History of the Holy War, line 10239. 67 Bahā’ al-Dīn b. Shaddād, Nawādir, 231. 68 Bahā’ al-Dīn b. Shaddād, Nawādir, 233–35. 69 Though little documentary evidence survives from the twelfth century, we know that from the earliest days of Frankish-Muslim war and diplomacy, peacemaking involved both written treaties and spoken oaths of ratification. For early examples, see FC 2.41.3, p. 532; and Ibn al-Qalanisi, Dhayl 65

148

WILLIAM S. MURRELL

“probably more binding than the written contract” because the oath-takers publicly agreed to abrogate the central tenets of their religion if they failed to honor the treaty.70 The stakes were high in this crucial final stage of diplomatic negotiations; and this process could not be completed without an interpreter. It is unclear from the extant sources how exactly the oaths of ratification were administered in September of 1192. We know that interpreter-envoys (Humphrey and Abu Bakr) were involved, but we are dependent on evidence from other diplomatic negotiations for clues into the nature of this involvement. For example, during the Seventh Crusade, Nicholas of Acre served as an interpreter and envoy for Louis IX as he negotiated the terms of peace with the Mamluks in 1250. His primary role in the negotiations was to ensure that the Muslim sovereigns swore (Arabic/Islamic) oaths of ratification that were comparable to the (French/Christian) oath that Louis was asked to swear. Joinville writes that Nicholas, “who knew the Saracen language,” confirmed to Louis that the Muslim emirs “could not swear a more powerful oath according to their law.”71 When Hugh of Caesarea (Reynald’s cousin) was negotiating with the Fatimids in 1167, he not only negotiated a written treaty to bring back to Jerusalem, but stayed to administer an oath of ratification to the caliph. William of Tyre reports that the caliph repeated “almost syllable by syllable [eisdem pene sillabis sequens], the words of Hugh as he dictated the formula of the treaty …”72 From these two examples, we can deduce two plausible roles for our interpreter-envoys in the Third Crusade: verifying the content of the oaths of ratification – to ensure both their linguistic and conceptual equivalence with the oath recited by the enemy ruler; and dictating the actual words of the oath and witnessing the real-time utterance by the foreign ruler or his representative.

tarikh Dimishq, 190. For a detailed discussion on the significance of oath-taking in Christian-Muslim diplomacy in the western Mediterranean context, see Belen Vicens, “Swearing by God: Muslim OathTaking in Late Medieval and Early Modern Christian Iberia,” Medieval Encounters 20 (2014): 117–51. 70 Friedman, “Peacemaking: Perceptions and Practices in the Medieval Latin East,” 247. 71 See Jean de Joinville, Histoire de Saint Louis, 127–28, ch. 71; trans. Smith, 234–35. 72 WT 19.19; trans. Babcock and Krey, 2:321. William does not specify the language of the oath. I would argue that the caliph repeated the oath in his own language (Arabic), as seems to have been the diplomatic custom. However, Köhler hypothesizes, based on the fact that the caliph repeated “syllable by syllable,” that perhaps Hugh dictated the oath to the caliph in French or Latin. See Köhler, Alliances and Treaties between Frankish and Muslim Rulers in the Middle East, 305.

INTERPRETERS IN FRANCO-MUSLIM NEGOTIATIONS

149

Written Treaties Oaths of ratification were inextricably linked to written treaties.73 In fact, the contents of these oaths were often recorded in an appendix to the written treaty.74 In the case of the Third Crusade, it was the delivery of a written treaty by Saladin’s envoy that set into motion the final stages of peace-making in September of 1192. This document, which no longer survives, raises several tantalizing questions about translation. For example, did Saladin send an Arabic treaty to Richard’s camp in Jaffa and assume it would be translated by Richard’s translators – or did he send a Latin translation of the Arabic original (or perhaps both documents)? Also, who would have been tasked to read and translate these written treaties? Should we imagine our interpreter-envoys (Humphrey and Abu Bakr) in this role – or should we imagine an entirely different cast of characters (those unnamed polyglot scribes) involved in this fateful work of textual translation? In the specific case of Richard and Saladin, we do know that al-Ṣanī‘at was not only an envoy but a scribe [kātib] in al-‘Ādil’s court, which raises the possibility that he could both negotiate with Richard in French and draft diplomatic treaties in Latin. Whether al-Ṣanī‘at is unique in functioning as an envoy and a scribe is unclear, but we do know that in general both Frankish and Muslim courts kept a cadre of polyglot scribes who could translate both outgoing and incoming diplomatic correspondence.75 This would certainly mean that Frankish courts had translators of Arabic, and Islamic courts had translators of Latin; but considering the wide variety of languages in play in the medieval eastern Mediterranean, it is probable that both Frankish and Muslim chanceries also employed translators of Greek and even Persian.76

73 To date, the most detailed and insightful analysis of written treaties in this period is Benjamin Z. Kedar, “Religion in Catholic-Muslim Correspondence and Treaties,” in Diplomatics in the Eastern Mediterranean 1000–1500, ed. Alexander D. Beihammer, Maria G. Parani and Christopher D. Schabel (Leiden, 2008), 407–21, at 416–19. 74 For example, al-Qalqashandi provides the text of a 1283 treaty between the Mamluks and the Latin kingdom of Jerusalem, as well as the texts of the oaths of ratification that were uttered by al-Mansur Qalawun and the Frankish envoys in his multi-volume chancery guide, Al-Qalqashandi, Ṣubḥ al-a‘shā fi sinā‘at al-inshā, ed. Muhammad ‘Abd al-Rasūl Ibrāhīm, 14 vols. (Cairo, 1913–20), 13:311–14. English translation: see Holt, Early Mamluk Diplomacy, 1260–1290, 73–91. 75 For example, according to Ibn al-Furāt, Baybars traveled with a translator who knew “the Frankish script [qalam al-faranjī].” And on the Frankish side, even the military orders employed Arabic scribes to translate diplomatic correspondence and treaties. See Ibn al-Furāt, Ayyubids, Mamlukes and Crusaders: Selections from the Tārīkh al-duwal wa’l-Mulūk of Ibn al-Furāt in Two Volumes: The Text, ed. and trans. U. Lyons, M. C. Lyons, and Jonathan Riley-Smith (Cambridge, 1971), 1:139 and 2:110; and Ibn Nazif al-Ḥamawī, Al-ta’rikh al-Mansuri, ed. Abū-’l-ʻĪd Dūdū (Damascus, 1982), 203 and 261. 76 For example, in 1248, an envoy of the Mongols delivered a letter to King Henry of Cyprus written in Persian. According to Eudes de Chateauroux, the Frankish king “had a translation made word for word”: see Peter Jackson, The Seventh Crusade, 1248–1254: Sources and Documents (Aldershot, 2007), 76.

150

WILLIAM S. MURRELL

Conclusion: The Centrality of Diplomatic Interpreters On October 9, 1192, just a month after the Treaty of Jaffa, Richard left Syria, never to return again. Five months later, in March of 1193, Saladin died of a fever. Richard’s departure and Saladin’s death ensured that the military and political contest between these two rulers would forever be remembered as the defining moments in their respective careers as warriors and rulers. Perhaps this is why it is easy to forget that this legendary rivalry never involved a face-to-face meeting between the English king and the Ayyubid sultan. Every single interaction in this famous episode of Muslim–Christian contact was mediated by an interpreter-envoy. In many ways, the story of Third Crusade diplomacy is just as much about Richard’s dealings with Abu Bakr and al-‘Ādil as about the English king’s legendary relationship with Saladin. Similarly, the fate of the Latin Kingdom of Jerusalem had as much to do with Humphrey’s and Reynald’s competing efforts to strike a deal with Saladin as it had to do with the content of Richard’s and Conrad’s peace proposals. In other words, these negotiations were less about the messages sent from the top and more about the messengers working on the ground. Interpreters in the crusader period were crucial in virtually every stage of war and diplomacy. From preparations for war (as spies and guides) to open military conflict (as soldiers and interrogators) to peace negotiations (as envoys and scribes), interpreters fulfilled a wide variety of roles and responsibilities. That they are often absent (or at least buried) in the medieval sources should not deter us from asking questions about their identity and their agency in this period. Whether they were interpreting for two rulers who were face to face or negotiating on behalf of one ruler before another, these seemingly peripheral figures were literally at the center of the action in Muslim-Frankish diplomacy in the age of the crusades.

Conceptualizing the Crusade in Outremer: Uses and Purposes of the Word “Crusade” in the Old French Continuation of William of Tyre Benjamin Weber Stockholm University / University of Toulouse [email protected]

Abstract The Old French continuation of William of Tyre’s chronicle contains six occurrences of the word croisee or croiserie, according to the manuscripts, which can be translated as “crusade.” The hypothesis can be made that croisee was the word used in the earliest texts in Outremer French, while croiserie, used in Anglo-Norman and Île-de-France French, slowly came to dominate. Both are anyhow considered as equivalent by the scribes. The study of their meanings led to distinguish one occurrence, used in a different part of the continuation, from the other five, all situated in a section covering the period 1184–1247, written as a single unit by a single author. The significance of these last five occurrences provides a single coherent conceptualization of the crusade, which fits perfectly the purpose that can be ascribed to the writing of this text: suggesting to the audience, possibly King Louis IX of France, a view of the Holy Land’s recent history compatible with the rights of Outremer’s aristocracy.

“Words are not conceived anymore in an illusory manner as simple instruments. They are launched like projections, explosions, vibrations, machines, flavours.”1 According to Roland Barthes, literature draws its strength from the huge power of words. They are indeed able to represent the fundamentally irreducible diversity of reality by operating through classification, by bringing together elements of this diversity into a single significance. Every utterance of a word is a complex operation of conceptualization, because it connects the phenomenon it designates with all the other phenomena associated with this word in the addressee’s mind. Using a specific term forms a cluster of meanings that makes it possible to comprehend the world by bridging its diversity. This of course is even truer in the case of historyThis paper was written at Stockholm University within the scope of a Marie Skłodowska-Curie individual Fellowship (grant agreement n°642384). I am grateful to Peter Edbury for providing me precious information on the manuscripts and for the many comments on this paper before its publication. 1 “Les mots ne sont plus conçus illusoirement comme de simples instruments, ils sont lancés comme des projections, des explosions, des vibrations, des machineries, des saveurs”: Roland Barthes, “Leçon Inaugurale,” in Roland Barthes. Oeuvres Complètes, ed. Eric Marty, 5 vols. (Paris, 2002), 5:427–46, at 435. The English translation is from Richard Howard, “Lecture in Inauguration of the Chair of Literary Semiology, Collège de France, January 7, 1977,” October 8 (1979): 3–16, at 7. 151

152

BENJAMIN WEBER

writing, for language presents the unique possibility of approaching past events. The meaning proposed by the linguistic choice cannot be challenged by other interpretations resulting from a direct contact with reality.2 Naming an expedition “crusade” in a historical account puts it immediately in a specific category, different from the classes of “pilgrimage,” “holy war,” or “passage.” It offers and induces a certain understanding of it which, indirectly but very persuasively, affects the audience’s behavior in similar situations. Studying the uses of “crusade” in texts produced in the Latin East can thus provide an insight into how contemporaries perceived, and/or wanted their addressee to perceive, the military expeditions that had given birth to their homeland and were still an essential aspect of its existence. As in all medieval documents, “crusade” was quite uncommon in the texts written in Outremer. To my knowledge, it is only used in the Old French Continuation of William of Tyre, and particularly, as we shall see, in one specific part of it, the so-called “Colbert Fontainebleau continuation” for the period 1184–1247. This sets the limits of our study: this article does not provide an overall view of how the crusade was conceived in Outremer, among all social groups, from the end of the eleventh to the fifteenth century. But this rarity is also an indication of its importance. The author of this continuation chose to use such an unusual word because he felt that the other, more traditional, terms were inappropriate to express what he wanted to say. The fact that this choice was probably unconscious does not diminish the significance of its study: some realities were to be called “crusade,” others were not, and the understanding of the limits between these categories reveals a certain conception of the crusade, which had very practical political consequences. The presentation of the occurrences of “crusade” and of their place in the Old French Continuation of William of Tyre sets the basis for a study of the form of the word and its peculiar meaning. This in turn allows some consideration of the purposes for using such a word, which can be extended to the entire act of writing this continuation to William of Tyre’s chronicle.

Six Occurrences Six words can be translated as “crusade” in the continuation of William of Tyre as published in the Recueil des Historiens des Croisades.3 2

Reinhart Koselleck,”Social History and Conceptual History,” in idem, The Practice of Conceptual History. Timing, History, Spacing Concepts, trans. Todd S. Presner et al. (Stanford, 2002), 20–37; M. Lynne Murphy and Roberta Piazza, “Linguistic Semantic and Historical Semantic,” in Asymmetrical Concepts after Reinhart Koselleck, ed. Kay Junge and Krilii Postoutenko (London, 2011), 51–80. 3 L’estoire de Eracles Empereur et la conqueste de la terre d’Outremer; c’est la continuation de l’estoire de Guillaume, arcevesque de Sur, in RHC Oc 2:1–481. In this article, I follow the now customary use of referring to the manuscripts according to the list of Jaroslav Folda, “Manuscripts of the History of Outremer by William of Tyre: a Handlist,” Scriptorium 27/1 (1973): 90–95. I have been able to consult the following manuscripts: Paris, Bibliothèque nationale de France (BnF), ms. Français 781 (=F19); St-Omer, Bibliothèque Municipale, ms. 722 (=F20); Paris, Bibliothèque de l’Arsenal, ms.

CONCEPTUALIZING THE CRUSADE IN OUTREMER

153

(1) Describing the departure of Andrew II of Hungary for the Fifth Crusade in 1218, the chronicle states: Le premier haut home de cele croiserie qui passa fu le roi de Honguerie (“The first great man of this crusade who travelled was the king of Hungary”).4 (2) Mentioning the Fourth Lateran Council in 1215, the text specifies that: Et fu lors establie la croisee, et envoia li pape par tous ses sarmoneors por preescher la croie (“And the crusade was decreed there, and the pope sent his preachers everywhere to preach the cross”).5 (3) After a quick digression on the barons’ revolt against King John of England, the narration comes back to the crusade: Retorner nos covient a parler de la croisee (“We must return to speaking about the crusade”).6 (4) In front of Damietta in 1219, the king of Jerusalem, John of Brienne, and the papal legate, Pelagius, argued over the command of the army and the possession of the conquered lands. The legate claimed it, car il diseit que les movement et le fait avoit esté fait par l’Iglise et par la croisee (“because he said that the [troops’] movements and the fact [the conquest] had been done by the Church and the crusade”).7 (5) In 1231, Balian of Sidon was sent as spokesman of the barons of Outremer to the imperial lieutenant, Riccardo Filangieri. He began his speech with a reminder of the history of the Holy Land: Quant ceste terre fu conquise, ele ne fu par nul chef seignor, ains fu conquise par croisee et par esmuete de pelerins et de gent assembleisse (“When this land was conquered, it was not done by any lord, but by a crusade and by the departure of pilgrims and gathered people”).8 (6) The account of the Barons’ Crusade in 1239 is introduced by: Encelui tens avint que une grant croisié se mut dou roiaume de France por passer en Surie (“At this time, a great crusade set out from the kingdom of France to go to Syria”).9 Such a list is, however, entirely artificial. None of the existing forty-eight manuscripts of the Old French Continuation of William of Tyre contains all these occurrences. A 4797 (=F26); London, British Library, Yates Thomson ms. 12 (=F38); Paris, BnF, ms. Français 9086 (=F50); Paris, BnF, ms. Français 24208 (=F51), BnF, ms. Français 2634 (=F57); BnF, ms. Français 2825 (=F58); Boulogne-sur-Mer, Bibliothèque Municipale, ms. 142 (=F69); Florence, Biblioteca Medicea Laurenziana, Plu LXI 10 (=F70); Paris, BnF, ms. Français 2628 (=F73); BnF, ms. Français 2631 (=F74); BnF, ms. Français 9082 (=F77). Peter Edbury kindly provided me information on Paris, BnF, ms. Français 9086 (=F50); Leningrad, M. E. Saltykov-Shchedrin, State Public Library, ms fr. f° v. IV. 5 (=F71); Lyon, Bibliothèque Municipale, ms. 828 (=F72); Paris, BnF, ms. français 9084 (=F78). 4 L’estoire de Eracles, in RHC Oc 2:310. F19, F20, F26, F38, F51, F58, F69, F71, F72, F74, F77, F78 give croiserie. F50 gives croisie. F70 gives croisiee. 5 L’estoire de Eracles, in RHC Oc 2:319. F57 gives croiserie. F73 gives croisee. 6 L’estoire de Eracles, in RHC Oc 2:321. F57 gives croiserie. F73 gives croisee. 7 L’estoire de Eracles, in RHC Oc 2:343. F57 gives croiserie. F73 gives croisee. 8 L’estoire de Eracles, in RHC Oc 2:389. F57, F69, F70, F71, F72, F74, F77, F78 give croiserie. F73 gives croisee. 9 L’estoire de Eracles, in RHC Oc 2:413. F57, F69, F71, F72, F74, F77, F78 give croiserie. F73 gives croisee. F70 gives croisiee.

154

BENJAMIN WEBER

brief summary of the history of how this composite work came about is necessary in order to understand their actual distribution.10 William of Tyre’s Latin chronicle is one of the most detailed accounts of the history of the Holy Land from the rise of Islam to 1184. It was written in the kingdom of Jerusalem shortly after this date and was translated into French in the mid 1220s probably in Île-de-France. This work was then continued by placing after it the last part of an independent chronicle, the so-called Ernoul-Bernard chronicle, which told the history of the Crusader States from 1099 to 1231 and was probably composed, in its final form, in northern France at the beginning of the 1230s. This text – translation and continuation to 1231 – was again extended in various ways. Some manuscripts simply added an account of the events from 1232 to 1261, called the Rothelin Continuation, probably written in the entourage of Louis IX before his death (1270). Others modified and extended the Ernoul-Bernard chronicle and continued it up to 1247; they were made in Acre, probably around 1250. The final part of this later work, covering the years 1229– 47, was often copied in manuscripts already containing the classical “short” version of Ernoul-Bernard. Most of them were later continued after 1247, mainly using the Annales de Terre sainte, up to 1277 for the latest. To sum up, occurrence (1) is situated in the Ernoul-Bernard chronicle. It can be found in the manuscripts containing this text alone, as well as in all manuscript using the original Ernoul-Bernard as a continuation for William of Tyre’s chronicle.11 Occurrences (2) to (6) belong to the revised version of Ernoul-Bernard and its continuation to 1247. Following the nineteenth-century editors, this work is often divided in two parts: the “Colbert-Fontainebleau continuation,” which extends Ernoul-Bernard to cover the period 1184–1232, and the first part of the “Acre continuation” for the following years (1232–47). Recent research considers it as a single piece, wholly written by a single author. The quite frequent use of “crusade” with a homogenous meaning throughout the text confirms this view of a single 10

Peter Edbury, “Ernoul, Eracles and the Collapse of the Kingdom of Jerusalem,” in The French of Outremer: Communities and Communications in the Crusading Mediterranean, ed. Laura Morreale and Nicholas Paul (Fordham, 2018), 44–67, contains a clear up-to-date exposition of this question at pages 44–46. See also M. Ruth Morgan, The Chronicle of Ernoul and the Continuations of William of Tyre (Oxford, 1973); Peter Edbury, “The French Translation of William of Tyre’s Historia: the Manuscript Tradition,” Crusades 6 (2007): 69–105; idem, “New Perspectives on the Old French Continuations of William of Tyre,” Crusades 9 (2010): 107–13; Massimiliano Gaggero, “La Chronique d’Ernoul: problèmes et méthode d’édition,” Perspectives médiévales 34 (2012) [http://peme.revues.org/1608]; Anna Maria di Fabrizio, “Saggio per una definizione del francese di Oltremare: edizione critica della Continuazione di Acri dell’Historia di Guglielmo di Tiro, con uno studio linguistico e storico” (PhD diss., Università degli studi di Padova/Ecole Pratique des Hautes Etudes, 2013), 6–23; Philip Handyside, “L’Estoire d’Eracles in Outremer,” in The French of Outremer, 68–85; Peter Edbury, “Continuing the Continuation. Eracles, 1248–1270,” in The Templars, the Hospitallers and the Crusades: Essays in Hommage to Alan Forey, ed. Helen Nicholson and Jochen Burgtorf (Abingdon, 2020), 82–93. Some minor aspects of this tradition, unimportant for our topic, have been omitted. 11 For example: Ernoul-Bernard alone: F20, fol. 81v. Continuation of William of Tyre: F50, fol. 422r; F 38, fol. 204v. Ed. Louis de Mas Latrie, Chronique d’Ernoul et de Bernard le Trésorier (Paris, 1871), 410.

CONCEPTUALIZING THE CRUSADE IN OUTREMER

155

work: we shall call it “revised continuation” for the sake of clarity.12 This version is nowadays preserved in two manuscripts, which are the only ones containing all the occurrences (2) to (6).13 As mentioned above, several others bring together the original Ernoul-Bernard text, and thus occurrence (1), and the years 1232–47 of the “revised continuation,” thus occurrences (5) and (6).14 Before investigating the meaning of these occurrences and what they reveal regarding the conceptualization of the crusade, we shall examine the different forms of the word, and what they can reveal about its uses in Outremer.

Different Forms I have translated by “crusade” two different words: croisee and croiserie. With only one exception (F70), all the manuscripts I’ve consulted use the same form for all the occurrences. This seems to indicate that medieval scribes considered one as a translation of the other and chose a single word to use throughout their text. Such a choice raises two questions. Which form can be considered as the “original” one and which was the translation? To which scripta15 of Old French did each of them belong? Any answer to these questions remains hypothetical, because most of the surviving manuscripts are later copies of thirteenth-century texts, which might or might not reproduce the lexical peculiarities of the original; and because the location where the manuscripts were copied is very rarely certain and scribes with distinct linguistic habits might have worked in far-away scriptoria, particularly in Outremer. Some elements can lead to some hypotheses however. Croiserie is, by far, the most common form: it was obviously the word in use when most of the manuscripts were copied, from the 1270s onward. However, it is also to 12 It covers pages 6–435 of the RHC Oc 2. Di Fabrizio, “Saggio per una definizione del francese di Oltremare,” 17; Edbury, “Ernoul, Eracles and the Collapse of the Kingdom of Jerusalem,” 45; Edbury, “Continuing the Continuation,” 85–86. 13 F73, fols. 302v, 303r, 308r, 313r, 318r, 323r; F57, fols. 379r, 380r, 386r, 392r, 398v, 404v. The text was nonetheless quite widely diffused: Massimilano Gaggero, “Succès et tradition manuscrite: les redactions longues de l’Eracles,” in Atti del XXVIII Congresso internazionale di linguistica e filologia romanza, ed. Roberto Antonelli, Martin Glessgen, and Paul Videsott (Strasbourg, 2018), 185–97. 14 For example, F69, fols. 331r, 342r–v, 349r; F 70, fols. 316v, 326v, 331v. The text of this last manuscript covering the years 1184–1247 is published in Kasser-Antton Helou, “Étude et édition de l’Estoire d’Outremer d’après le manuscrit Firenze, Biblioteca Medicea Laurenziana Plutea LXI.10, f°274–336” (PhD diss., Université Paris Sorbonne, 2017), 215–317. 15 Scripta refers to a form of a written language containing graphical, grammatical, and lexical variants that can be ascribed to a specific geographical area. It must be used instead of “dialect,” which designates the language spoken in a region, which probably had some influence on the scripta but in a way impossible to determine by historians. Inter-comprehension was high between all the Old French scriptae. This was probably not the case between the dialects. Serge Lusignan, “Langue française et société du XIIIe au XVe siècle,” in Nouvelle histoire de la langue française, ed. Jacques Chaurand (Paris, 1999), 100–9; idem, La langue des rois au Moyen Âge. Le français en France et en Angleterre (Paris, 2004), 62–68.

156

BENJAMIN WEBER

be found in older manuscripts, made in the West before 1250 – such as F38 or F20.16 Croisee (or croisie/croisee which we must consider as equivalent) is to be found in only two manuscripts. One (F73) is the oldest surviving illuminated manuscript from Acre at the end of the 1250s.17 The other (F50) was made in Acre, probably in the third quarter of the thirteenth century, copying an earlier manuscript which only contained the Ernoul-Bernard continuation up to 1231. It is always hazardous to draw conclusions from so few occurrences and to depend on ex-silentio arguments – the fact of not-finding a word in a specific set of manuscripts. The use of croisee seems, however, restricted to the earlier Eastern manuscripts whereas croiserie was used in Western manuscripts throughout the period and in the East from the 1270s onward. I would propose the hypothesis that croisee was the form used in Outremer French up to the 1270s and was progressively replaced by croiserie. Croisee is very uncommon in medieval French with the meaning of “crusade.” It is unattested in Anglo-Norman and only to be found in texts from the late fifteenth century in Flanders, Burgundy or Brittany.18 On the other hand, the first part of the Chanson de la croisade des Albigeois (composed in 1212–13) twice uses croseia/ crosea, together with crozada, the most common form in Occitan.19 Since the language of its anonymous author includes several instances of French influence, it is possible that these two occurrences were adopted from a now lost (southern?) French form of croisee, past participle of the common verb “croiser” and thus an exact translation from the Castillian cruzada or the Occitan crozada. The lexicon of the Outremer French scripta is characterized by a great number of words borrowed from other widely spoken languages of the Latin East, Occitan and Italian mostly, and, to a lesser degree, Greek and Arabic.20 Could croisee be considered as one of 16 F20 is considered very close to the first text of Ernoul-Bernard: Gaggero, “La Chronique d’Ernoul”; Philip Handyside, The Old French William of Tyre (Leiden, 2015), 115. 17 A different hand added a continuation to F73 at the end of the 1270s: Edbury, “Continuing the Continuation,” 84. 18 Frédéric Godefroy, Dictionnaire de l’ancienne langue française et de tous ses dialectes du IX au XVe siècle, vol. 2 (Paris, 1883), 378c–379a; Französisches etymologisches Wörterbuch, 2:1375; ToblerLommatzsch Altfranzösisches Wörterbuch, 2:1077; Henri Moisy, Glossaire comparatif anglo-normand (Caen, 1886), 246; on-line Anglo-Norman dictionary: www.anglo-norman.net (consulted 11 November 2020). 19 Laisse 66, v. 9 and 115, v. 31: Eugène Martin-Chabot, ed., La Chanson de la croisade albigeoise (Paris, 1976), vol. 3, 1. Eliza Ghil, “Crozada: Avatars of a religious term in thirteenth century poetry,” Tenso 10/2 (1995): 99–109. Dictionnaire de l’Occitan Médiéval en Ligne: http://www.dom-en-ligne.de/ (consulted 11 November 2020). 20 Laura Minervini, “Le français dans l’Orient latin (XIIIe–XIVe siècles). Eléments pour la caractérisation d’une scripta du Levant,” Revue de linguistique romane 74 (2010): 119–98; eadem, “What we Know and Don’t Yet Know about Outremer French,” in The French of Outremer, 15–29; di Fabrizio, “Saggio per una definizione del francese di Oltremare”; Helou, “Étude et édition de l’Estoire d’Outremer,” 145–64. On linguistic contacts: Laura Minervini, “La variation lexicale en fonction du contact linguistique: le français dans l’Orient latin,” in La régionalité lexicale du français au Moyen Âge, ed. Martin Glessgen and David Trotter (Strasbourg, 2016), 195–206; and Laura Minervini, “Dinamiche del contatto linguistico nell’Oriente Latino,” in Francofonie Medievali. Lingue et letterature galloromanze fuori di Francia (sec. XII–XV), ed. Anna Maria Babbi et Chiara Concina (Verona, 2016), 323–37. More generally on loanwords, Martin Haspelmath, “Lexical Borrowing: Concepts and Issues,”

CONCEPTUALIZING THE CRUSADE IN OUTREMER

157

these loanwords, borrowed from a “peripherical” French scripta or from Occitan? Occurrences from such an early date are too few to draw any specific conclusions. It can be considered, in any case, as another proof of the composite nature of the vocabulary of Outremer French. On the other hand, croiserie is attested in Anglo-Norman French since the 1220s – with a slightly different meaning, as we shall see.21 In the 1270s, it had become common in Île-de-France and Anglo-Norman French with the meaning of “military expedition to the East,” as testified by Primat’s Roman des Roys or Walter of Bibbesworth’s Pleinte pur la croiserie en Terre sainte.22 It is thus logical to encounter croiserie in texts produced and/or copied in northern France from the 1230s onward. Thanks to the prestige of Île-de-France French, to the working of French copyists in the Acre scriptorium, and to the fact that most of the exemplars made in Acre were probably addressed to Western readers,23 croiserie would have become dominant in Outremer at the end of the 1260s or beginning of the 1270s. Croisee might not have been completely forgotten, however. The fourteenth-century unique manuscript of Philip of Novara’s chronicle of the years 1232–42 includes several passages copied from the continuation of William of Tyre. One of them contains occurrence (6) with the form cruisee.24 We have no evidence indicating when this paragraph was added to the original text, written in the early 1240s. It is also impossible to know how much the scribe who copied the manuscript in 1343 considered it as a valid word. We can assume, however, that cruisee was then still considered as relatively understandable for a scribe to copy it without feeling the need to translate it into the more common croiserie. F70, probably the last manuscript copied in Acre before the fall of the city in 1291, is, to my knowledge, the only one using both words for “crusade”: occurrences (1) and (6) read croisiee while (5) is croiserie.25 The so-called Acre scriptorium was an assemblage of different workshops, working simultaneously from unbound codices in order to fulfill quickly the orders of passing pilgrims. This is particularly visible in F70, which contains passages copied from different in Loanwords in the World’s Languages: A Comparative Handbook, ed. Martin Haspelmath and Uri Tadmor (Berlin, 2009), 35–54 21 See below and note 29. 22 Paris, Bibliothèque Sainte-Geneviève, ms. 782, fol. 230v, 266v, 293r, 316v, ed. Jules Viard, Les grandes Chroniques de France, 5 vols. (Paris, 1920–28), 5:77, 6:9, 168, 317. Walter of Bibbesworth, La pleinte par entre mis sire Henry de Lacy et sire Wauter de Bybelesworthe pur la croiserie en la Terre seinte, ed. T. Wright and J. O. Haliwell, Reliquiae Antiquae. Scraps from Ancient Manuscripts, Illustrating Chiefly Early English Literature and the English Language, 2 vols. (London, 1845), 1:134. Other fourteenth-century references for croiserie are given in Godefroy, Dictionnaire de l’ancienne langue française, 2:378b; Französisches etymologisches Wörterbuch, 2:1375; Tobler-Lommatzsch Altfranzösisches Wörterbuch, 2:1076; on-line anglo-norman dictionary: www.anglo-norman.net/D/ croiserie (consulted 11 November 2020). 23 Edbury, “The French Translation of William of Tyre’s Historia.” 24 Philip of Novara, Guerra di Federico II in Oriente (1223–1232), ed. Silvio Melani (Naples, 1994), 210. Gaggero, “Succès et tradition manuscrite.” 25 F70, fols. 316v, 326v, 331v, ed. Helou, “Étude et édition de l’Estoire d’Outremer,” 286, 301, 309.

158

BENJAMIN WEBER

previous manuscripts’ traditions.26 The different forms of “crusade” used in the text confirm this composite character. However, except for its very ending which was made in Italy, the same copyist wrote the entire codex. He probably understood both forms and considered them as interchangeable and equally valid. A similar attitude cannot be found in the other manuscripts produced in Acre’s scriptorium, which use “croiserie” throughout.27 Was the copyist of F70 of Eastern origin and thus more likely to understand croisee? Or was he simply less careful in doing his work and copied unthinkingly different versions? And was the addressee of this copy, possibly of Italian origin, bothered by this use of a specifically Outremer word? It is impossible to answer these questions, based on too many hypotheses, but the simultaneous use of different forms in a late 1280s manuscript in Acre as well as the use of cruisee in Cyprus in 1343 tend to confirm the hypothesis that croisee was an Outremer form, progressively replaced by croiserie.

Different Meanings Even if “crusade” was borrowed in Outremer French, the transmission of a word seldom goes together with an exact transposition of its meaning. On the contrary, each mention reorganizes the conceptualization process and thus provides a more or less renewed understanding of it.28 In the Chanson de la croisade des Albigeois, crusade referred to the Albigensian Crusade; this was obviously not the case in Outremer. The six occurrences of the word in the Old French Continuation cover two different meanings, which fit remarkably with the previously discussed divisions of this book. In the Ernoul-Bernard chronicle, completed in France in the late 1230s, “crusade” does not refer to a military expedition. Le premier haut home de cele croiserie qui passa… (“The first great man of this crusade who travelled…”): the “crusade” and the “passage” were two different movements, and Andrew II belonged to the “crusade” before passing to the East. “Crusade” bears here the meaning of “ceremony of taking the cross” or “movement of preaching the cross,” very much like in the contemporaneous verse biography of William Marshal written around 1225–26:

26 Edbury, “The French Translation of William of Tyre’s Historia”; Helou, “Étude et édition de l’Estoire d’Outremer,” 37–38. 27 F69, F71, F72, F73 and F78. Unless of course all these surviving manuscripts were copied from an original only using the form croiserie. 28 Brian Joseph, “Lexical Diffusion and Regular Transmission of Language Change in SocioHistorical Context,” in The Handbook of Historical Sociolinguistics, ed. Juan Manuel Hernández Campoy and Juan Camilo Conde Silvestre (Oxford, 2012), 408–26.

CONCEPTUALIZING THE CRUSADE IN OUTREMER

159

lors fu si granz la croiserie qu’en France ne en Normendie […] n’out home qui quidast vale[i]r qui ne meïst en nochaleir femme e enfanz por sei croisier the crusade was so great that, in France or in Normandy […], there was no man with some worth who did not abandon his wife and children to take the cross29

Such occurrence can be translated as “crusade” because the meaning of the word later evolved toward that of an armed expedition and because polysemy is an important factor for understanding the functioning of concepts. But it actually meant “action of taking/preaching the cross.” The use of cross-related vocabulary to designate the crusaders, the preaching campaigns, or the vow ceremony was well established in the beginning of the thirteenth century, thanks to papal canonists’ efforts to give a precise juridical definition of the crusader status using the word “crux.”30 The linguistic process at stake in these occurrences is different from what happens when calling an expedition a “crusade.” It is much more descriptive – people were actually marked with or were distributing crosses – and most of all it refers to a legally defined situation. The word aims at an accurate designation of reality by referring to its legal status, rather than an overall understanding of it by association with others in a single category. To put it concisely, it is more a technical term than a concept. Such meaning remains perceptible in the later uses and one could hesitate in translating occurrences (2) and (3). If considered together, however, the five occurrences of the “revised version” propose a particularly homogeneous meaning of “crusade” as an armed expedition to the East. The use of the word is not exclusive and other terms, more traditional, are much more frequent. Pelerinage or muete appear around 30 times in the entire continuation, voie 70 times, and passage almost 80.31 The Fourth Crusade as well as the expeditions led by Frederick II or Saint Louis are never called “crusade” and the Fifth Crusade or the Barons’ Crusade is labelled as such only once. The word “crusade” is only employed in 29 Paul Meyer (ed.), Histoire de Guillaume le Maréchal, comte de Striguil et de Pembroke, régent d’Angleterre de 1216 à 1219, 2 vols. (Paris, 1841), 1:264–65 (vv. 7331–7339). The truncated verses are a list of different regions. 30 David Trotter, Medieval French Literature and the Crusades, 1100–1300 (Geneva, 1988), 58–66; Michael Markowski, “Crucesignatus. Its Origins and Early Usage,” Journal of Medieval History 10/2 (1984): 157–65; Walter Cosgrove, “Crucesignatus: A Refinement or Merely One More Term among Many?”, in The Crusades: Medieval Worlds in Conflict, ed. Thomas Madden (Farnham, 2010), 95–107. On the legal definition of the crusade: Michel Villey, La Croisade. Essai sur la formation d’une théorie juridique (Caen, 1942), 119–26, 141–58; Christopher Tyerman, The Invention of the Crusades (Toronto, 1998), 30–41, 76–83. 31 These counts are made with the searchable text tool of the Internet Archive edition of Eracles. They cannot be considered as accurate and do not take the precise context into consideration. They are only used as a comparative value for the scarcity of “crusade.”

160

BENJAMIN WEBER

very specific contexts. Which image of a crusade is drawn by these uses? In the “revised continuation,” a crusade is a papal enterprise, promoted during a council with the backing of the entirety of Christendom. On the field, the crusade acts together with the Church, as Pelagius states: the conquests in Egypt were made “by the Church and the crusade,” not by the king of Jerusalem nor by any other Western ruler. Indeed, as an emanation of the papacy, the crusade is not led by a single lord. Balian of Sidon explicitly mentions it in his idealized description of the First Crusade: it was only made up of “gathered pilgrims and people” who chose their first leader by electing Godfrey of Bouillon. The 1239 Barons’ Crusade fits entirely these criteria: launched by Gregory IX’s appeal and wide preaching and carried out by high-ranking aristocrats with no single leader, apparently only moved by the desire to use their swords for the defense of the True Faith and the Holy Land.32 The fact that this expedition achieved very little was apparently not a barrier to exalt it as an archetype of a crusade, comparable to the mythicized First Crusade, or the Fifth Crusade if it had not been spoiled by individual quarrels between Pelagius and John of Brienne. Although situated in very different contexts, these five occurrences build a coherent picture of a crusade: summoned by the papacy, formed of various aristocratic contingents, unsubordinated to any single lay ruler, protecting the realm of Jerusalem – in Egypt or Palestine. It is interesting to note that occurrence (1), which did not fit into this meaning, was not reused in the narration of the departure of Andrew of Hungary to the Fifth Crusade. The other five are the linguistic expression – probably unconscious – of a specific conceptualization of what a crusade should be according to the author of the “revised continuation.”

Coherent Purpose and Implications This author remains anonymous but a close examination of his text provides information on the chronological and social context of its writing, which helps us understand the meaning of this conceptualization.33 The last event mentioned by the text is a Turkmen revolt dated 1247: the text was probably not written very long afterwards. The kingdom of Jerusalem was in a complicated political situation at that time. Since the death of Baldwin V in 1185, it had never been ruled by any direct male heir. All the kings had been consorts or regents, as husbands or fathers of Isabelle of Jerusalem, Marie of Montferrat, or Isabelle II. This situation favored an important interest in law among Palestinian nobility and an acute sense of aristocratic rights and legal resistance against possible royal exactions.34 Such 32

Michael Lower, The Barons’ Crusade. A Call to Arms and Its Consequences (Philadelphia, 2005). This paragraph is mostly based on Edbury, “Ernoul, Eracles and the Collapse of the Kingdom of Jerusalem”; di Fabrizio, “Saggio per una definizione del francese di Oltremare,” 12–28; Helou, “Étude et édition de l’Estoire d’Outremer,” 10–25. 34 Jonathan Riley-Smith, The Feudal Nobility and the Kingdom of Jerusalem, 1174–1277 (London, 1973). 33

CONCEPTUALIZING THE CRUSADE IN OUTREMER

161

sensibility sharpened with the marriage of Isabelle II and Frederick II in 1225 and the birth of their son, Conrad, three years later, who remained a minor until 1243 and never went to the East in person. The crusade led by the emperor in 1228–29 and the subsequent conflict between the baronial party of the Ibelins and the imperial lieutenant, Riccardo Filangieri, exacerbated the fear of the high nobility that they would be dispossessed of their rights over the lands of Outremer. But it also favored an imperial party, who tried to take advantage of this imperial government and was active at least until the early 1250s.35 Considering the chaotic attitude of the papacy toward the emperor, made of successive excommunications, reconciliations and depositions, both parties frequently appealed to the pope, as a referee who could be used to enforce or thwart imperial pretentions. The “revised continuation” was written in the entourage of these high-ranking nobles. It is strongly interested in, and particularly well documented on, military matters, the political questions around the kingship of Jerusalem in Outremer as in the West, and the quarrels and alliances among the main aristocratic families. If compared to the original Ernoul-Bernard chronicle, it insists on the royal party’s responsibility for the disaster of Hattin and the loss of Jerusalem. It is more favorable to John of Brienne, and thus even more incriminating against Pelagius for the failure of the Fifth Crusade. It is anti-imperial but its criticism remains weighted and strictly political, insisting on the legal aspects of the eviction of John of Brienne by the emperor – while Ernoul-Bernard attributed it to a love affair incited by the devil – or adding the justification of the emperor’s illness for his refusal to depart to the East in 1227. On the other hand, while being in favor of the barons, the text is not openly pro-Ibelin: the regency of John of Ibelin in Cyprus is sharply criticized and the account of the siege of the Ibelin stronghold of Beirut by the imperial troops is quite balanced. It seems entirely reasonable to follow Peter Edbury’s assumption: the “revised continuation” was written in the immediate circle of the baronial conciliatory party, once led by Balian Grenier, lord of Sidon (d.1240), and Odo of Montbeliard (d.1247). Both were among the most prominent lords of the kingdom of Jerusalem, related to the powerful house of the Ibelin and the royal lineage. Both were supporters of the rights of Frederick II and Conrad as late as the 1240s, but eventually became strong opponents of the imperial policy when it came against the privilege of local aristocracy. Both were among the most distinguished jurists of their time, often discussing the rights of the aristocracy and its relation with the monarchy.36 Historiographical production was just another way to express these themes. Gabrielle Spiegel has proposed that the rise of French prose historiography at the beginning of the thirteenth century was an answer to the declining status of Flemish aristocracy in search of “a usable past, capable of redeeming a cause that has been

35 36

Ibid., 159–228; Philip of Novara, Guerra di Federico II, 10–36. Riley-Smith, The Feudal Nobility, 22–3, 123, 166–67, 172–73, 319.

162

BENJAMIN WEBER

lost, in ideological if not actual political terms.”37 The “revised continuation” seems to be driven by a similar “attempt to control the subject matter of history and the voices on the past as an instrument of domination over the collective memory of feudal society.”38 It proposed a framework to reflect on the respective rights of the nobility, the kings of Jerusalem and the Western rulers, and seek elements in the “truth” of the past to legitimize the present positions. As such, the primary audience of this work was the aristocracy of the kingdom: the text conveyed a sense of unity among it and proposed a specific interpretation of its cause. It might not have been the only addressee however. The oldest illuminated manuscript of the translation of William of Tyre without continuation (F5) was made in the entourage of King Louis IX in the late 1240s. Kasser-Anton Helou has discovered that most manuscripts of the continuation bore an acronym formed by the decorated puzzle initials throughout the translation of William of Tyre and its first continuation to 1232. Its longest form, only present in F70, spells Ludovicus Rex Francorum b[eati] Dei. A shorter original acronym, probably spelling Ludovicus Rex Francorum (B) was probably included in the translation of William of Tyre, and then reproduced, sometimes inadvertently, by later copyists with alteration or extensions.39 It thus seems that a majority of the copies of the first continuation derive from an original presented to the king. One of the main continuations after 1229, the Rothelin continuation, was also obviously linked to the royal court. Louis IX, whose interest in history as a political tool is well known,40 seems to have played an important role in the various phases of the continuation of William of Tyre, as addressee and/or commissioner. It is thus tempting to link the composition of the “revised continuation,” which ends in 1247 immediately before the preparations of the French crusade, to the king’s presence in Acre between 1250 and 1254. Several manuscripts were produced during this stay, in order to exalt the royal figure as in the Arsenal-Bible,41 or to invite him to respect local customs as in Philip of Novara’s Livre en forme de plait.42 The “revised continuation” could also 37 Gabrielle Spiegel, Romancing the Past. The Rise of Vernacular Prose Historiography in Thirteenth-Century France (Berkeley, 1993), 1. Pierre Courroux, L’écriture de l’histoire dans les chroniques françaises (XIIe–XVe siècle) (Paris, 2016), 234, comments on and qualifies this position. 38 Gabrielle Spiegel, “Medieval Canon Formation and the Rise of Royal Historiography in Old French Prose,” in The Past as Text. The Theory and Practice of Medieval Historiography (Baltimore, 1997), 195–212, at 198–99. Similar conclusions in Riley-Smith, The Feudal Nobility, 136–42. 39 Helou, “Étude et édition de l’Estoire d’Outremer,” 115–27. The last letter of the acronym opens the paragraph on the death of Amaury of Lusignan in 1208: F70, fol. 316v = RHC Oc 2:305. The precise meaning of the “B” is problematic, since “beatus” is ordinarily used for dead people which is incompatible with the fact that some manuscripts bearing it were written prior to 1270. 40 Jacques Le Goff, Saint Louis (Paris, 1996), 566–70; Bernard Guénée, Comment on écrit l’histoire au XIIIe siècle. Primat et le Roman au Roys (Paris, 2016), 25–27, 86–88. 41 Jaroslav Folda, Crusader Art in the Holy Land from the Third Crusade to the Fall of Acre, 1187–1291 (Cambridge, 2005), 283–96; Pierre Nobel, La Bible d’Acre. Genèse et exode (Besançon, 2006), XII–XIII. Jens Wollesen, Acre or Cyprus? A New Approach to the Crusader Painting Around 1300 (Berlin, 2014), raises doubt about this usually admitted attribution. 42 Philip of Novara, Le livre de forme de plait, ed. Peter Edbury (Nicosia, 2009), 22–23, 26.

CONCEPTUALIZING THE CRUSADE IN OUTREMER

163

have been written to provide the French king with an understanding of the political situation compatible with the one of the local nobility. The meanings of “crusade” in the continuation of William of Tyre fit perfectly with a reading of this text as an instrument to discuss with the king of France the position of a local aristocracy motivated by a threat of decline. Insisting on papal support for a rightful crusade went together with an explicit disqualification of the expedition of Frederick II, Louis IX’s archenemy. The emperor’s journey had gained back Jerusalem – which the French king was unable to achieve – but ended in a quite sharp confrontation with the barons of Outremer over the nomination of an imperial lieutenant and the respect of their aristocratic rights. Discrediting it served both the royal and baronial interests. But it was also a clever reminder of the fact that Louis was bound to the pope’s higher authority. After occupying Damietta, the king of France had considered himself legitimate lord of the city and never intended to bring it under the jurisdiction of the king of Jerusalem, Frederick II’s son.43 Such an attitude probably aroused anxiety among the aristocracy of Outremer about the royal intentions if he was to conquer lands in Palestine. John of Joinville, who was related to the Outremer nobility by his cousin, Eschive of Montbeliard, sister of Odo of Montbeliard and wife of Balian of Ibelin, mentions a dispute between the king and the barons which broke out immediately after the conquest of Damietta. The king was accused by the legate and patriarch of Jerusalem, Robert of Nantes, of having distributed the spoils of the conquest regardless of the customs of the kingdom.44 In the “revised continuation,” “crusade” occurs about a strikingly similar episode, the argument between another king and another legate over a similar question of the spoils of the same city. The word is used again in the famous speech of Balian of Sidon which recalled that all the kings, including the emperor, had sworn to respect the customary laws of the kingdom (the assises), particularly those protecting the aristocracy against royal arbitrary decisions. One of the few reconstructed direct-speech discourses of the chronicle is attributed to a leading member of the commissioners’ circle. It had a wide perspective as an exposition of the kingdom’s political principles according to its aristocracy.45 It could function as a warning toward the king of France to respect the customs attributed to the most legitimate expeditions, the only ones worth of being called “crusade.” The last occurrence proposed a recent concrete model of crusade: one which had never followed any independent political goal nor tried to impose any novelties to the government of the kingdom of Jerusalem.

The conceptualization of the crusade in the “revised continuation” can thus be understood as that of the aristocracy of Outremer fearing that the ambitions of 43

Jean Richard, “La fondation d’une église latine en Orient par saint Louis: Damiette,” Bibliothèque de l’Ecole des Chartes 120 (1954): 39–54. 44 Jean de Joinville, Vie de Saint Louis, ed. Jacques Monfrin (Paris, 1998), 74, 80–83. 45 Riley-Smith, The Feudal Nobility, 136, 176; Philip of Novara, Guerra di Federico II, 28–29.

164

BENJAMIN WEBER

Louis IX might come into conflict with their customary rights. Even if the assumption of the king of France as addressee is erroneous, if the work was only meant to be read by local nobility, the image of the crusade drawn by the occurrences of the word fitted perfectly the aristocracy’s ideals and political goals. Occurrence (1), situated in a different text – the Ernoul-Bernard chronicle – written in a different context, has a different meaning. The five remaining occurrences elaborate an archetypical image of a crusade which served as an advice for any Western ruler if he wanted his expedition to be truly useful to the Holy Land and a warning if he was to follow a different path. Two of them occur in a context of serious dispute (between Pelagius and John of Brienne, and the aristocracy and Riccardo Filangieri), which confirms the combative nature of the word, promoting one vision of the crusade over another. Once again, this does not mean that the author of the “revised continuation” consciously chose the word in order to convey his political message. On the contrary, having this political position in mind provoked a peculiar conceptualization of what a crusade was – or should be – which manifested itself with the use of a specific vocabulary. The threat perceived by the aristocracy of Outremer against its political positions induced a reflection on the crusade, which had lexical consequences. A word was borrowed, its meaning was transformed, and it was employed in a particularly significant text, a historiographical account summing up the barons’ legal positions, possibly addressed to the main crusading leader of the time, Louis IX of France. As proposed by Roland Barthes, a single word was “launched as projections and explosions.” Historians unfortunately lack any source to study the “vibrations” it induced, the “machines” it engaged or the “flavours” it provoked. But reconstructing the purposes of its use makes it possible to consider the text itself as a political instrument, even if the cause it promoted proved, ultimately, to be a lost one.

The Emergence of the Way of the Cross in Jerusalem during the Twelfth and Thirteenth Centuries Netta Amir The Hebrew University of Jerusalem [email protected]

Abstract The route commonly known as the Way of the Cross has been one of Jerusalem’s most prominent axes for around 700 years. Due to its spatial, narrative and devotional features, as well as the historical circumstances under which it evolved, the Way of the Cross constitutes a unique phenomenon in the city’s devotional sphere. The present article addresses the earliest history of this religious axis and spatial practice, focusing on the period spanning the twelfth to the late thirteenth century. It discusses the dynamics of Christian devotion contingent upon a combination of phenomena and changing circumstances and points to the innovative features of the Way of the Cross within the Jerusalemite pilgrimage routine.

Introduction In 1288/9 Riccoldo of Monte Croce, a Dominican friar and missionary, made his pilgrimage to Jerusalem.1 Like many pilgrims before him, he walked along the city’s streets and visited its holy sites, recalling the biblical narrative while contemplating the architectural spaces and geographical landmarks in which he stood. While his account tells of sacred sites known from earlier pilgrimage reports and guides, it also functions as an early testimony to the existence of a new and unique holy space. This space is known today as the Way of the Cross or Via Dolorosa.2 The present article addresses the formation process which led to the early appearance of the Way of the Cross, attested in Riccoldo’s account, and points to the innovative features of the Way of the Cross within the Jerusalemite network of holy sites. The Way of the Cross has been the most prominent axis of Christian Jerusalem for the past ca.700 years. Its changing constellations and its standardization into a fourteen-station program were the subjects of a small number of scholarly works 1 For Riccoldo’s account see Denys Pringle, Pilgrimage to Jerusalem and the Holy Land, 1187– 1291, Crusade Texts in Translation 23 (Farnham, 2012), 55–57; René Kappler, ed. and trans., Riccoldo de Monte Croce, Pérégrination en Terre Sainte et au Proche Orient (Paris, 1997). For an earlier edition, see Johann C. M. Laurent, ed., Peregrinatores medii aevi quatuor: Burchardus de Monte Sion, Ricoldus de Monte Crucis, Odoricus de Foro Julii, Wilbrandus de Oldenborg (Leipzig, 1864), 101–41. 2 Riccoldo’s testimony is described as such, for example, in Herbert Thurston, The Stations of the Cross: An Account of their History and Devotional Purpose (London, 1906), 21.

165

166

NETTA AMIR

during the past century. The studies by Herbert Thurston (1906) and Albert Storme (1973) offer the most comprehensive accounts of the changing forms of the route, from its early appearances up to the early twentieth century.3 Subsequent studies, such as the works by Sandro Sticca (1993) Amédée Teetaert (2004) and Mitzi Kirkland-Ives (2009), focused on the development of the devotional practice of the Stations of the Cross in the West while addressing the Jerusalemite sphere to a limited degree.4 When addressing the emergence of the Way of the Cross in Jerusalem, the abovementioned studies considered mainly the role of the Franciscan Order in implementing and nurturing the route. Indeed, the establishment of the Franciscans in Jerusalem during the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries is considered to be the main context for the formation of the Way of the Cross. There is general scholarly consensus that the Way of the Cross had become a relatively stable part of the ever-evolving pilgrimage circuit of Jerusalem by the late-fourteenth century, some fifty years after the Franciscans were given the role of Custodians of the Holy Land by Pope Clement VI.5 However, scholars are aware of pre-fourteenth century sources which may provide direct and indirect evidence for the existence of such a pilgrimage route and information about its early stages of development, although they do not discuss them at length. Nor are these sources presented as central to grasping the essence of the Way of the Cross and its formation process.6

3 Thurston, The Stations of the Cross; Albert Storme, La Voie Douloureuse (Jerusalem, 1973). See also: Louis-Hugues Vincent and Félix-Marie Abel, Jérusalem: Recherches de topographie, d’archéologie et d’histoire: Jérusalem Nouvelle, 2 vols. (Paris, 1922), 2:610–39. 4 Sandro Sticca, “The Via Crucis: Its Historical, Spiritual and Devotional Context,” Mediaevalia 15 (1993): 93–196; Amédée Teetaert, Saggio storico sulla devozione alla Via Crucis: evocazione e rappresentazione degli episodi e dei luoghi della Passione di Cristo: saggi introduttivi (Ponzano Monferrato, 2004), 65–138; Mitzi Kirkland-Ives, “Alternate Routes: Variation in Early Modern Stational Devotions,” Viator 40 (2009): 249–70. 5 On the official establishment of Franciscan authority in Jerusalem, see Girolamo Golubovich, Biblioteca bio-bibliografica della Terra Santa e dell’Oriente francescano, 5 vols. (Florence, 1923), 4:1–73. Recently, the popular narrative of the Franciscans’ settlement in Jerusalem was challenged and reexamined by Beatrice Saletti, I Francescani in Terrasanta (1291–1517) (Padua, 2016). For the initial establishment of the Franciscan processions in the Church of the Holy Sepulcher and in Mount Zion, see Augusto Facchini, Le processioni praticate dai frati minori nei santuari di Terra Santa: Studio storicoliturgico (Jerusalem, 1986), 1–19, 91–102. A Franciscan influence on the formation of the Way of the Cross is noted in the above-cited works (notes 3 and 4 above) as well as in popular sources. Recently, Valentina Covaci investigated several aspects of the evolving route under Franciscan guidance as part of her study of the rituals of the Franciscans in Jerusalem during the Mamluk period: Valentina Covaci, “The Franciscan Via Crucis in Late Medieval Jerusalem,” in “Between Traditions: The Franciscans of Mount Sion and their Rituals (1330–1517)” (PhD thesis, University of Amsterdam, 2016), 113–40. For a recent study on the theological and ideological concepts which formed part of the Franciscan establishment in Jerusalem, see Marianne Ritsema van Eck, The Holy Land in Observant Franciscan Texts (c. 1480–1650): Theology, Travel, and Territoriality (Leiden, 2019). 6 For example, while addressing the emergence of the Way of the Cross, Thurston very briefly cites pilgrims’ accounts from the late twelfth century that may provide evidence for the early development of such a pilgrimage route, as well as late thirteenth-century reports. However, he does not discuss them in depth: Thurston, The Stations of the Cross, 20–21.

THE EMERGENCE OF THE WAY OF THE CROSS IN JERUSALEM

167

The present article will discuss the coincidence of phenomena and circumstances that fostered the early appearance of the Way of the Cross in Jerusalem. It will be argued that the time span stretching between the early twelfth and late thirteenth centuries was foundational for the formation of the route.

Narration of City Space The Way of the Cross in Jerusalem is a narrative space associated with Christ’s painful journey to Calvary, his crucifixion and his burial.7 All along its history, this route marked an east–west axis leading from north of the Temple Mount to the Church of the Holy Sepulchre, and consisted of landmarks associated with events that are believed to have taken place on Good Friday, beginning with the condemnation of Christ and culminating in his burial. The Way of the Cross is one of many spaces in Jerusalem where narrative traditions and physical space intersect. Nonetheless, it is clearly distinguishable from Jerusalem’s other narrative spaces by the temporal boundaries of the narrative with which it is associated, by the physical space chosen for its localization, and by the practice required for its activation/narration. The latter may confirm the association between the first two, narrative and the physical space. The narrative with which the Way of the Cross is associated consists of multiple sequences, mediated by the movements of Christ within the city. For its narration in situ, the Way of the Cross requires that people move along it in a sequential fashion while recalling the traditions associated with points along the route. These three factors – narrative, space and practice – were instrumental in the emergence of such a narrative space. In other words, the route emerged with both the localization of the relevant narrative traditions in Jerusalem’s city space, that is, the establishment of sacred landmarks, and the promotion of a designated devotional practice, which enables one to move from one landmark to the next in accordance with the linear progression of the narrative. In its narrowest sense, a Way of the Cross is a path identified with the scriptural events of Good Friday. Yet there are multiple ways to reconstruct the Passion narrative in Jerusalem. In this article, the “emergence” of the Way of the Cross will be considered in light of the emergence of a particular context for the narration of the Passion narrative: that of the pilgrimage circuit.

7 The term narrative space may refer to various theoretical categories of the nature of narratives. In the present article, space is understood as a narrative space in that it functions as both a context and as a container for text. For this and other uses of the term, see Marie-Laure Ryan, “Space,” in The Living Handbook of Narratology (Hamburg, 2010): http://www.lhn.uni-hamburg.de/article/space [accessed 18 March 2021]. A similar use of the term is found in: Annette Hoffmann and Gerhard Wolf, “Preface,” in Jerusalem as Narrative Space / Erzählraum Jerusalem, ed. Annette Hoffmann and Gerhard Wolf (Leiden, 2012), xi–xiii.

168

NETTA AMIR

The late thirteenth-century account of Riccoldo of Monte Croce, noted above, is significant in that it appears to introduce a novel feature that is absent from pilgrimage accounts which predate his. As against “fragmented encounters” with the Passion narrative, in which the pilgrim stumbles across multiple Passion-related traditions but disregards the linear progression of the scriptural events, Riccoldo presents a pilgrimage circuit that allows the pilgrim to follow the narrative in a linear fashion. Significantly, we learn for the first time that a pilgrim may walk from the site of the trial all the way to the Church of the Holy Sepulchre while recognizing the way as “that which Christ walked while carrying his cross.” On approaching the site of the trial, Riccoldo writes: We found the house of Herod and near by the house of Pilate […] Going up along the road that Christ walked carrying His cross, we found the place where Christ said “Daughters of Jerusalem, do not weep for me!” They show there the place where Our Lady fainted while following her Son carrying the cross; and they show the place and the memorial where He fell. There beside the way they show the house of Judas […] There they show the place where Christ halted with the cross and rested a short while, exhausted […] where he met Simon of Cyrene coming from the house in the country to carry Jesus’ cross […] Ascending, however, by the way straight ahead where Christ went up […] Helena tested the Lord’s cross […] From there we entered the church of the Sepulchre […] we found in the place where the Lord was crucified the place where the wood of the cross was fixed in the stone.8

The route described in this account recalls the following sequence of events: after being condemned by Pilate, Jesus met the women of Jerusalem and thereafter his mother. Next, he fell and met Simon of Cyrene, who helped him carry the cross. From there, he continued to Calvary, was crucified, anointed and buried. As Riccoldo moves through the city’s space he attends to landmarks that are identified with Christ’s experiences along the way, as well as to the way itself, which he clearly marks as “the road Christ walked while carrying his cross.” Thus, Riccoldo signals that the various landmarks are to be perceived as a narrative unit.9 Traditions extrinsic to the narrative of Good Friday are recalled as either “beside the way” or “by the way,” thus maintaining the continuity of the route.10

8 Kappler, Riccoldo, 66–68: “Adscendentes autem invenimus domum Herodis et ibi prope domum Pilati … Adscendentes autem per viam per quam adscendit Christus baiulans sibi crucem, invenimus locum ubi Christus dixit filie Iherusalem nolite flere super me. Ibi ostendunt locum tramortitionis Domine cum sequeretur filium portantem crucem, et ostendunt locum et memoriale ubi corruit. Ibi iuxta viam ostendunt domum Iude … Ibi ostendunt locum ubi sustitit Christus cum cruce et fessus quievit paululum … ubi occurrerunt Symoni Cirreneo venienti de villa ut tolleret crucem Ihesu … Adscendentes autem per viam in directum ubi ascendit Christus … Elena probavit et discrevit crucem Domini … Inde procedentes intravimus in ecclesiam sepulcri … in loco ubi crucifixus est Dominus, invenimus locum ubi in saxo fixum est lignum crucis.” Translation by Pringle, Pilgrimage, 372–73. 9 Kappler, Riccoldo, 66: “viam per quam adscendit Christus baiulans sibi crucem …”. 10 Ibid.: “iuxta viam.”

THE EMERGENCE OF THE WAY OF THE CROSS IN JERUSALEM

169

I wish to suggest that the pilgrimage experience of Riccoldo of Monte Croce ought to be read in the context of other, related practices observed along the history of Jerusalem. Specifically, I refer to devotional practices that stimulated the reenactment of the Passion narrative in Jerusalem. As a home to sacred sites associated with events from the life and death of Christ and the saints, Jerusalem was a natural place for the development of a mobile form of worship that enabled believers to reenact a linear sequence of events within the city. As attested in sources from the fourth century onward, this facet of the city space became evident on feast days, when processions traversed the city, moving from one holy site to the next.11 That is, linear sequences of biblical events were marked by liturgical processions. The Passion narrative on the feast day of Good Friday serves as a good example. Various constellations of Good Friday processions allowed the reconstruction of the Passion narrative in Jerusalem from the fourth to the eleventh century.12 Their survey reveals two different frameworks. In one, the narrative is reconstructed in Jerusalem’s city space, while in the other the reconstruction takes place largely within the Church of the Holy Sepulchre. John Baldovin treats the first type of framework in his investigations of urban worship. He contends that changes in the Good Friday procession during the first centuries of Christian rule in Jerusalem illustrate the emergence of a certain pattern in the development of the Jerusalem stational liturgy, namely, a process of historicization or narration, during which the city’s space assumes a larger role in the mimetic processional act.13 Evidence for the early appearance of such a worship practice can be found in the pilgrimage account of Egeria (381–84), where we learn that on the eve of Good Friday a procession was led from the site of the Ascension, located at the peak of the Mount of Olives, down to Gethsemane.14 After reaching Gethsemane and reading the biblical passage describing Christ’s arrest in the garden, the procession entered the city on the morning of Good Friday and crossed it to reach Calvary, the site of the crucifixion.15 The last stage of the procession ─ from Gethsemane and its surroundings to Mount Calvary ─ could be interpreted as a mimetic devotional act, reenacting the movement of Christ from the site of his arrest to the site of his crucifixion. However, this early form of the Good Friday procession is an 11

John Baldovin characterizes processions through the city space of Jerusalem as mimetic acts, reenacting historical events in their authentic historical locations: John F. Baldovin, The Urban Character of Christian Worship: The Origins, Development, and Meaning of Stational Liturgy (Rome, 1987), 104, 230. 12 For a detailed overview of the liturgy on Good Friday throughout the Byzantine period, see Sebastià Janeras, Le Vendredi-Saint dans la tradition liturgique byzantine: Structure et histoire de ses offices, Studia Anselmiana 99, Analecta Liturgica 12 (Rome, 1988). 13 “Baldovin, The Urban Character, 98–100. 14 Just before daybreak, between Thursday and the morning of Good Friday: Otto Prinz, ed., Itinerarium Egeriae (Heidelberg, 1960), 44–45. 15 Ibid. For a more detailed assessment of the growing role played by the holy sites in the liturgy of Jerusalem in the late fourth century and onward, see Stéphane Verhelst, “The Liturgy of Jerusalem in the Byzantine Period,” in Christians and Christianity in the Holy Land: From the Origins to the Latin Kingdoms, ed. Ora Limor and Guy G. Stroumsa (Jerusalem, 2006), 421–62, at 428–29, 440–41.

170

NETTA AMIR

incomplete historical mimesis, as the biblical passages describing the trial of Christ before Pilate were read at Mount Calvary and not at a designated site of the trial.16 It ought to be mentioned that at the time of Egeria’s visit to Jerusalem, there was no extant shrine associated with the site of the trial before Pilate.17 As Baldovin has pointed out, a Good Friday procession that further historicizes the city space is attested not long after Egeria’s account, in two early-to- mid-fifthcentury texts, known as the Armenian Lectionary manuscripts J and P.18 According to Armenian Lectionary J, after arriving at Gethsemane, the procession continued to the court of the high priest on Mount Zion, and only afterwards continued to Calvary, thus further historicizing the procession and the city space.19 According to Armenian Lectionary P, which scholars believe to be the later version of the two, further development took place as a visit to the site of the trial was added to the processional route.20 A second constellation for reconstructing the narrative of Good Friday allows a significant part of the narration to take place within the Church of the Holy Sepulchre. This framework probably emerged following the riots of the late tenth and early eleventh century, during which the Passion shrines on Mount Zion were damaged21 and the Church of the Holy Sepulchre was demolished.22 By the mid-eleventh century, once the Church of the Holy Sepulchre was reconstructed, Passion-related events were associated with its eastern oratories, near Calvary and 16

Prinz, Itinerarium, 45. As confirmed by the Bordeaux Pilgrim (333), the only possible site of the trial was in ruins: Paul Geyer, ed., Itinera Hierosolymitana: Saeculi IV–VIII, CSEL 39 (1893), 22. 18 Jerusalem, St. James Convent, MS Jérusalem 121 (J); Paris, Bibliothèque Nationale de France, MS Paris 44 (P); transcribed, translated and compared in: Athanase [now Charles] Renoux, ed. and trans., Le codex Arménien Jérusalem 121: Édition comparée du texte et de deux autres manuscrits, Patrologia Orientalis 36 (Turnhout, 1971). 19 Baldovin, The Urban Character, 96. For the guidelines of this procession see Renoux, Le codex, 277–81. 20 Renoux, Le codex, 277–81. See also Gabriel Bertonière, The Historical Development of the Easter Vigil and Related Services in the Greek Church (Rome, 1972), 97. As confirmed by the Pilgrim of Piacenza, at this time a shrine associated with the trial was located along the Tyropoeon Valley, to the West of the Temple Mount: Paul Geyer, ed., Itineraria et alia geographica, CCSL 175 (Turnhout, 1965), 175. 21 The site of the trial was localized on Mount Zion as of the seventh century. In the late tenth century, the Church of Zion was burnt down. During the next century, it is thought to have suffered further damage on a number of occasions. See Pringle, Churches, 3:262–63; Joshua Prawer, “The Settlement of the Latins in Jerusalem,” Speculum 27 (1952): 491–92. The riots of the late tenth century probably led to the dispersal of the Passion relics, preserved on Mount Zion since the early Byzantine period. A number of sources confirm the transition of the Crown of Thorns and other relics to the Church of the Virgin of the Pharos, within the imperial palace in Constantinople: Holger A. Klein, “The Crown of His Kingdom: Imperial Ideology, Palace Ritual, and the Relics of Christ’s Passion,” in Saints and Sacred Matter: The Cult of Relics in Byzantium and Beyond, ed. Cynthia J. Hahn and Holger A. Klein (Washington DC, 2015), 203–4. See also: Chiara Mercuri, Corona di Cristo corona di re: La monarchia francese e la corona di spine nel Medioevo (Rome, 2004), 48–49. 22 Caliph Al-Ḥākim’s campaign likely damaged the contemporary Passion landmarks on Mount Zion as well. See Pringle, Churches, 3:262–63; Prawer, “The Settlement,” 491–92. 17

THE EMERGENCE OF THE WAY OF THE CROSS IN JERUSALEM

171

to the east of the portico.23 It has been suggested that the erection of designated Passion-related chapels within the limits of the Church was a contemporaneous attempt to compensate for the deplorable conditions and lack of accessibility to the corresponding sites on Mount Zion.24 As Bianca Kühnel and Robert Ousterhout have noted, different spaces in the Church assumed different functions while worshippers reconstructed the Passion narrative on Good Friday.25 The crusader conquest of Jerusalem on 15 July 1099 is known to have had an effect on the orchestration of ritual practice in the city.26 One might ask to what extent the Good Friday narrative was re-enacted in liturgical form following the crusader conquest. We may not know for certain which liturgical practice the crusaders encountered when they reached Jerusalem. The Typikon of the Anastasis, MS Hagios Stauros 43 (copied in 1122) is a liturgical manuscript which follows the Byzantine rite and contains the services of Holy Week, Pascha and Bright Week.27 The Typikon supposedly instructs liturgical processions to be held in the city space, including a walk from Gethsemane to a Site of the Trial, as well as processional practices within the Church of the Holy Sepulchre, matching the arrangement of the reconstructed church.28 However, it is debatable to what extent the Typikon reflects the liturgical practices that actually took place at the time.29 While there is evidence that some of the liturgical instructions in the Typikon which relate to other feast days were followed, the implementation of other such instructions

23

Bianca Kühnel, “Productive Destruction: The Holy Sepulchre after 1009,” in Konfliktbewältigung vor 1000 Jahren: Die Zerstörung der Grabeskirche in Jerusalem im Jahre 1009, ed. Ralph J. Lilie (Berlin, 2010), 35–37. See also Robert Ousterhout, “Rebuilding the Temple: Constantine Monomachus and the Holy Sepulchre,” Journal of the Society of Architectural Historians 48 (1989): 66–78. 24 See reference in Kühnel, “Productive Destruction,” 37–38, n. 3. The new Passion-related chapels in the reconstructed church are associated with the Flagellation, the division of the garments and crowning with the Crown of Thorns: ibid. 25 Kühnel, “Productive Destruction,” 38; Ousterhout, “Rebuilding the Temple,” 78. Both Ousterhout and Kühnel refer to a liturgical practice which is attested in the copy of The Typikon of the Anastasis of 1122: Athanasios Papadopoulos-Kerameos, ed., “Typikon tēs en Iērosolymois Ēkklesias,” in Analekta Ierosolymitikēs Stachyologias, 5 vols. (St. Petersburg, 1894), 2:144–47, after Kühnel, “Productive Destruction,” 38, n. 3–4; Ousterhout, “Rebuilding the Temple,” 78 n. 48. For a recent study that questions the direct effect of Al-Hakim’s destruction on the configuration of liturgical practice in Jerusalem, see Daniel Galadza, “La distruzione del Santo Sepolcro (1009): la tradizione cultuale gerosolimitana privata degli spazi rituali,” in Una città tra terra e cielo. Gerusalemme: le religioni – le chiese, ed. Cesare Alzati and Luciano Vaccaro (Varese, 2014), 265–88. 26 On the re-affirmation and configuration of Jerusalem’s liturgical space following the crusader conquest see, for example, the test cases presented in: Amnon Linder, “The Liturgy of the Liberation of Jerusalem,” Mediaeval Studies 52 (1990): 110–31; Iris Shagrir, “Adventus in Jerusalem: The Palm Sunday Celebration in Latin Jerusalem,” Journal of Medieval History 41 (2015): 1–20. 27 Published in Papadopoulos-Kerameus, Analekta Ierosolymitikēs Stachyologias. This work has been partly translated into Latin in Donatus Baldi, Enchiridion locorum sanctorum: Documenta S. Evangelii loca respicienta (Jerusalem, 1982), 649–52. 28 Baldovin, The Urban Character, 81. 29 Daniel Galadza, “Sources for the Study of Liturgy in Post-Byzantine Jerusalem (638–1187 ce),” Dumbarton Oaks Papers 67 (2013): 75–76, 90; Bertonière, The Historical Development, 12–14, 49–50.

172

NETTA AMIR

remains unconfirmed.30 This uncertainty mainly concerns the secondary role of the eastern clergies in the church, about which we learn from the account of the pilgrim Daniel (1106–8). As Daniel Galadza suggests when referring to liturgical practices taking place within the church: “Had the church not been appropriated by the Latin hierarchy accompanying the First Crusade in 1099, forcing the Greeks to play a secondary role in services at the Holy Sepulchre, the Orthodox Patriarchate of Jerusalem would likely have served Holy Week and Easter at the Anastasis in 1122 using the Typikon of the Anastasis.”31 While we are not sure which local practice the Latins encountered, we do know about the liturgical tradition they eventually established in Jerusalem. The twelfthcentury maturation of the Latin liturgy of Jerusalem shows no sign that any special thought was given to the liturgical reenactment of the Passion narrative which transcended previous practices, either within the Church or outside of it. And, as one may grasp from Sebastián Salvadó’s (2011) close examination of the twelfthcentury Jerusalem Ordinal Rome, Bib. Vat., Barb. Lat. 659, it is even possible that the above-mentioned Byzantine rite purportedly practiced in the church may have been reduced in scope.32 Unlike the elaborate activity which the Latins cultivated on other feast days, such as Palm Sunday or the Saturday of Light, it seems that Good Friday was commemorated in a less mimetic fashion.33 Salvadó notes that, on Good Friday, the True Cross was taken to Mount Calvary, but no liturgy accompanied it and no attention was given to the Passion-related elements located at the eastern

30 There are close parallels between the pilgrim accounts and the instructions in the Typikon when it comes to activities involving the Holy Fire: Bertonière, The Historical Development, 48–50. However, the sources are silent as to the Good Friday celebrations. 31 Galadza, “Sources for the Study of Liturgy,” 90. This opinion is offered also by Bertonière. According to him, inconsistencies between the Typikon’s instructions and the descriptions of both Abbot Daniel and Fulcher of Chartres lead to the conclusion that the Typikon might have been drawn up in the hope of an eventual restoration of the Orthodox Patriarchate and thus was not necessarily exercised: Bertonière, The Historical Development, 49–50. Johannes Pahlitzsch, in contrast, seems quite certain that the Typikon attests to the actual practices that took place in Frankish Jerusalem. In his view, the Typikon teaches us of the authority and practice of the eastern clergies in Latin Jerusalem: Johannes Pahlitzsch, “The Greek Orthodox Church in the First Kingdom of Jerusalem (1099–1187),” in Patterns of the Past, Prospects for the Future: The Christian Heritage in the Holy City, ed. Charles T. Hummel, Kevork Hintlian and Ulf Carmesund (London, 1999), 202–6. 32 In her study of the liturgical manuscripts of the Latin Kingdom, Cristina Dondi presents the Jerusalem Ordinal contained in Bib. Vat., Barb. Lat. 659 as the most complete ordinal surviving from this period. It presents the offices for the liturgical year and detailed information on ritual performances and other liturgical activities: Cristina Dondi, The Liturgy of the Canons Regular of the Holy Sepulchre of Jerusalem: A Study and a Catalogue of the Manuscript Sources (Turnhout, 2004), 64–65. This ordinal is transcribed and analyzed in Sebastián E. Salvadó, “The Liturgy of the Holy Sepulchre and the Templar Rite; Edition and Analysis of the Jerusalem Ordinal (Rome, Bib. Vat., Barb. Lat. 659) with a Comparative Study of the Acre Breviary (Paris, Bib. Nat., MS. Latin 10478)” (PhD thesis, Stanford University, 2011). 33 Salvadó, “The Liturgy,” 239–40. See, for example, the elaborate orchestration of the Palm Sunday procession under Latin hands during the twelfth century as presented and analyzed in: Shagrir, “Adventus in Jerusalem.”

THE EMERGENCE OF THE WAY OF THE CROSS IN JERUSALEM

173

apses.34 Thus, only a minor portion of the Passion narrative seems to have been reenacted by the Latins. Against this background, the reconstruction of the narrative of Good Friday as depicted in the account of Riccoldo of Monte Croce can be seen as a re-narration of the city’s space. In other words, the narrative of Good Friday was once again reconstructed within the city space. However, there were considerable differences between the practical context in which the city space of Jerusalem was historicized before the eleventh century and that in which the Way of the Cross was experienced by Riccoldo in the thirteenth century. In the former, as we have seen, the space was historicized on a feast day, with the patriarch leading a liturgical procession through it marking a linear sequence of events. In the latter, narration took place at any time of the year as part of the pilgrimage circuit of Jerusalem. This framework for the reenactment of the Passion narrative in Jerusalem is unique. Notably, Riccoldo of Monte Croce foretold what would become the basic framework for the narration of the Passion in Jerusalem some one hundred years after his visit. As of the late fourteenth century, under Franciscan guidance, the Way of the Cross had become a designated pilgrimage route, forming part of what would commonly be known as “the circuit.”35 Later on, the route also gradually assumed liturgical features, absent from Riccoldo’s account.36

From the New Root to the New Route The aforementioned implementation of the route may never have taken place had it not been for preceding phases of development rooted in the twelfth century, following the crusader conquest of Jerusalem. It is at this time that a number of phases in the emergence of the route unfolded. One which will be addressed here is the localization of a site of the trial to the north of the Temple Mount. The crusader conquest was followed by a multiplicity of activities within the city. At times, the Latins re-established pre-crusader loca sancta and preserved the traditions that had been associated with them in pre-Crusader times, while in other instances, they constructed new sites, thereby introducing different traditions into 34

Salvadó, “The Liturgy,” 153–54, 237, 583–84: MS 659, fols.71r–73r. Nonetheless, on Sundays during the Lent season, the processions led to the eastern oratories of the Church, an area associated with the events of the Passion. However, these processions did not mark Calvary as their focal point: ibid., 232. 35 References to “the circuit” are found in the sources as of the late fourteenth century. See, for example, in the account by Leonardo Frescobaldi (1384): Guglielmo Manzi, ed., Viaggio di Lionardo di Niccolò Frescobaldi Fiorentino in Egitto e in Terra Santa, con un discorso dell’Editore sopra il Commercio degl’Italiano nel secolo XIV (Rome, 1818; repr. Cambridge, 2012), 143. For more on “the circuit,” see Covaci, “The Franciscan Via Crucis,” 132–33. In this context, the route of Christ’s walk to Calvary was followed in reverse, beginning at the courtyard of the Church of the Holy Sepulchre and ending in northeastern Jerusalem. 36 Covaci, “The Franciscan Via Crucis,” 134.

174

NETTA AMIR

the city space or allowing two or more sites to be associated with one narrative tradition.37 In terms of the pilgrimage circuit, a new site is not necessarily a new physical construction. Written sources such as pilgrimage accounts, liturgical books, chronicles and maps show us how certain traditions were expanded, others were neglected and new ones emerged. They teach us about the changing iconography of Jerusalem’s holy sites and about their changing symbolism as well.38 Within the ambiguous evolution of the holy map of Jerusalem under Frankish rule we find the case of the sites of the trial. Pilgrimage accounts as well as other texts inform us that, following the crusader conquest, the narrative of Christ’s trial before Pilate was associated with two areas of Jerusalem: to the north of the Temple Mount, alongside Jehoshaphat Street; and on Mount Zion.39 First and foremost, both sites denote the return of the narrative tradition of the trial to the city’s space after a period in which it had most probably been recalled largely within the limits of the Church of the Holy Sepulchre. It is the former, the northern site, which will eventually mark the starting point for Riccoldo’s walk along the Way of the Cross. According to the Gospels, Christ was tried before Pontius Pilate, and thereafter, was led out to be crucified.40 The end of this trial signals the beginning of Christ’s walk to Calvary. Of course, any designated site of the trial has always had the potential to become the starting point of a pilgrimage route leading to Calvary, one that deliberately follows in the footsteps of Christ’s excruciating walk. However, of the various sites of the trial that appeared throughout the history of Jerusalem, it is the above-noted one, located to the north of the Temple Mount, which eventually became a point of departure for such a pilgrimage route. 37

The different types of building projects include the repurposing of sites never before physically attended by Christians, new construction, renovation of buildings, and more. See examples in Denys Pringle’s comprehensive work on the crusader churches of Jerusalem: Pringle, Churches, 3:6–72, 132– 37, 358–65, 367–417. 38 For a discussion of symbolic and iconographic change see, for example, Joshua Prawer, “Jerusalem in the Jewish and Christian Perspectives of the Early Middle Ages,” Settimane di Studio del Centro italiano di studi sull’alto Medioevo 26 (Spoleto, 1980): 765–67. Symbolic and iconographic features of Jerusalem’s holy sites during this period may be inferred from the liturgical practices in particular sites as well. See, for example, the case studied in Iris Shagrir, “The Visitatio Sepulchri in the Latin Church of the Holy Sepulchre in Jerusalem,” Al-Masāq 22 (2010): 57–77. For other examples in the writings of pilgrims, see Robert Ousterhout, “The Memory of Jerusalem: Text, Architecture and the Craft of Thought,” in Jerusalem as Narrative Space, 139–54. 39 An early indication of the northern site appears in the guide written by an anonymous German author, in Sabino de Sandoli, ed., Itinera Hierosolymitana Crucesignatorum (saec. XII–XIII), 4 vols., Studium Biblicum Franciscanum, Collectio Maior 24 (Jerusalem, 1978–84), 2:156. For an early indication of the site on Mount Zion, see Petrus C. Boeren, ed., Rorgo Fretellus de Nazareth et sa Description de la Terre Sainte: Histoire et édition du texte (Amsterdam, 1980), 60. See also the recent discussion of the dating of Fretellus’ text: Paulo Trovato, “Sulla genealogia e la cronologia di alcuni testi di età crociata: Rorgo Fretellus e dintorni (l’alte Compendium, Eugesippus, l’Innominatus VI o pseudoBeda, la Descriptio locorum circa Hierusalem adiacentium),” Annali Online di Ferrara 1 (2012): 247– 68. The different possible localizations of the site of the trial on Mount Zion, either in the northern aisle of the Church of Zion or in the chapel of St. Saviour, north of the church, are discussed in Denys Pringle, “Itineraria Terrae Sanctae minora: Innominatus VII and its Variants,” Crusades 17 (2018): 44. 40 Matthew 27.11–26; Mark 15.1–16; Luke 23.1–25; John 18.1–28 and 19.1–17.

THE EMERGENCE OF THE WAY OF THE CROSS IN JERUSALEM

175

Examining the basic characteristics of both the site on Mount Zion and the northern site in the context of the arrangement of Jerusalem’s network of holy sites following the crusader conquest, it seems that some differentiation is in order. The site on Mount Zion clearly marks an augmentation or continuation of a pre-crusader tradition. This site, alongside other Passion-related landmarks, was localized on Mount Zion prior to and during the early Muslim period.41 Correspondingly, with the re-localization of a site of the trial on Mount Zion came the re-establishment of a compilation of narrative-related sites, all of which were clearly an inheritance from pre-crusader times. By contrast, the northern site of the trial most probably exemplifies the emergence of a twelfth-century site on virgin ground. This location does not correspond in full to any site originating in the early Muslim period or earlier.42 Moreover, a survey of the landmarks in its immediate surroundings seems to indicate that the northern site of the trial facilitates the creation of a contemporaneous grouping of Passion-related landmarks. Thus, it seems that all of the Passion-related landmarks in northeastern Jerusalem are twelfth-century initiatives.43 This grouping of Passion-related landmarks includes narrative traditions such as the imprisonment of Christ and one version of the legend of the holy wood. The former tradition, that of incarceration, is referred to by pilgrims as an event taking place prior to the trial of Christ before Pilate.44 It is known to have been localized on Mount Zion in pre-crusader times but appears to the north of the Temple Mount only following the crusader conquest.45 The latter tradition, that of the legend of the holy wood, points to a pool as being the last location of the wood prior to the time of Christ’s condemnation. According to this legend, after the trial of Christ before Pilate, the wood of the cross was drawn out of the pool and made into a cross

41

Pringle, Churches, 3:261–62. The different possible locations of the site of the trial during the Byzantine and early Muslim periods are discussed in a number of studies. See, for example, Maurice Halbwachs, La topographie légendaire des Évangiles en Terre Sainte: Étude de mémoire collective (Paris, 1941), 94–99. 42 Scholars offer different possible locations for the Byzantine site of the trial. For an interpretation suggesting that the location of the northern site of the trial during the twelfth century could be identical to that of the site mentioned in sources of the Byzantine period, see Halbwachs, La topographie légendaire, 98. 43 It has been suggested that the Templar Order promoted the localization of the site of the trial north of the Temple Mount. See, for example, Andrew Jotischky, “The Franciscan Return to the Holy Land (1333) and Mt Zion,” in The Crusader World, ed. Adrian J. Boas (Abingdon, 2016), 245. In a recent study, Denys Pringle suggests that it was the canons of the Templum Domini who promoted the Passion sites in northeastern Jerusalem rather than the Templars, noting that the canons of the Templum Domini mistakenly became “Templars” due to a miscopying of the guide Innominatus II: Denys Pringle, “Itineraria Terrae Sanctae Minora II: Innominati II–V and VIII,” Crusades 19 (2020): 57–108, at 61. 44 See for example, in the guide by an anonymous German author: De Sandoli, Itinera, 2:156. 45 The Gospels imply that Jesus was imprisoned after his encounter with Caiaphas/Annas and before his trial before Pilate: Matthew 26.57–75; Mark 14.53–73; Luke 22.54–62; John. 18.12–28. A parallel site of the prison is localized on Mount Zion during the twelfth century, as part of the revival of Passion-related localizations on the Mount: Pringle, Churches, 3:365.

176

NETTA AMIR

that Christ carried and on which he was later crucified.46 This narrative tradition is known from Latin texts dating from the mid-eleventh century. It was localized in the Sheep Pool, not far from the approximate location of the northern site of the trial, during the twelfth century.47 Other localizations of Passion-related traditions in the vicinity of the northern site which follow are of special interest as they refer to Christ’s movement toward Calvary. These include, for example, the Sorrowful Gate in the northwestern wall of the Temple Mount, through which Christ passed on his way to Calvary.48 Previous studies had suggested the possibility that a designated route connecting the northern Passion sites had existed in the late twelfth century, before 1187.49 However, while descriptions of Jerusalem up to 1187 draw attention to the various components of the aforementioned grouping of Passion-related landmarks, there is no concrete evidence indicating that the different landmarks were seen or experienced as stops along an unbroken route. The idea of an uninterrupted pilgrimage route, then, seems not to have been realized at this time. Nevertheless, the northern site marks the establishment of a creative core around which the narrative of the Passion is to be discovered anew. Hence, it functions as a vital element in the evolution of the Way of the Cross. The development of the grouping of Passion-related landmarks in the interval between the loss of Jerusalem to the Ayyubids in 1187 and the initial realization of the route in 1288/9 is striking when set alongside the setback which the Jerusalem pilgrimage experience suffered during this time. With the Ayyubid conquest came the stripping away of Latin identity and the conversion of several sites, both of which resulted in a reduction of pilgrimage space.50 In addition, following the 46

Nicole Fallon, “The Cross as Tree: The Wood of the Cross Legends in Middle English and Latin Texts in Medieval England” (PhD thesis, University of Toronto, 2009), 18–19. 47 For the appearance and early development of this legend see ibid., and Angelique M. L. Prangsma-Hajenius, La Légende du bois de la Croix dans la littérature française médiévale (Assen, 1995), 55. See also Barbara Baert, A Heritage of Holy Wood: The Legend of the True Cross in Text and Image (Leiden, 2004), 289–92. Evidence for this localization is found in the writings of an anonymous pilgrim (1170): “Innominatus II,” in Theodorici Libellus de Locis Sanctis, ed. Titus Tobler (Paris, 1865), 123–24. See also in Pringle, “Itineraria Terrae Sanctae Minora II.” 48 See the Chronicle of Ernoul and Bernard the Treasurer: Louis de Mas-Latrie, ed., Chronique d’Ernoul et de Bernard le Trésorier (Paris, 1871), 206. For the dating of the description found within Ernoul’s chronicle, see Pringle, Pilgrimage, 31–32 n. 73. 49 Vincent and Abel, Jérusalem, 612–14; John Wilkinson, Joyce Hill and William F. Ryan, eds. and trans., Jerusalem Pilgrimage 1099–1185 (London, 1988), 130; Pringle, Churches, 3:73–77. 50 ‘Imad ad-Din al-Isfahani (d. 1201), Saladin’s secretary, describes the re-consecration of the Templum Domini as a Muslim shrine, see ‘Imad ad-Din al-Isfahani, Conquête de la Syrie et de la Palestine par Saladin, trans. H. Massé, Documents relatifs à l’histoire des croisades 10 (Paris, 1972), 54–7, 60. On the events leading to the relocation of the Latin communities and the reduction of pilgrimage space following the Ayyubid conquest, see Beatrice Saletti and Fabio Romanini, I Pelrinages Communes, i Pardouns de Acre e la crisi del regno crociato: Storia e testi (Ferrara, 2012), 18–24, 35–42, 73–81. Some churches were handed over to the Eastern Church communities. On Eastern Christian communities in Ayyubid Jerusalem and their protection of the holy sites see Lucy-Anne Hunt, “Eastern Christian Art and Culture in the Ayyubid and Early Mamluk Periods: Cultural Convergence between

THE EMERGENCE OF THE WAY OF THE CROSS IN JERUSALEM

177

treaty of 1192, which allowed the Latins access to Jerusalem and to install two Latin-Christian priests and two deacons in the Church of the Holy Sepulchre, Latin pilgrims encountered changing restrictions on their movement into and within the city. Under such conditions, much of the city’s space was unreachable for long periods of time.51 It would seem that also during the brief Frankish rule of 1229–44 there were difficulties in rejuvenating the city as a pilgrim destination, on account of intra-Latin disagreements, Jerusalem’s physical state and security problems.52 Further impediments to the rehabilitation of pilgrimage practice in Jerusalem appeared in 1244, when Jerusalem was raided violently by the Khwarizmian Turks. This raid brought to an end Frankish rule over Jerusalem.53 The effects of the changing pilgrimage conditions can be encapsulated in one word: reduction. The incessant political flux resulted in fewer worship sites, less movement within the city space and seemingly little possibility to construct a stable pilgrimage route. This decline took different forms at different points throughout the century and, as a whole, robbed the pilgrimage experience of its stability and continuity.54 Indications of a northern site of the trial do not appear in the few pilgrimage accounts which are known from the first half of the thirteenth century. Such hints begin to emerge however in the first decades of the Mamluk rule (as of 1260). Interestingly, they do not merely introduce the site of the trial, but rather present it alongside landmarks which are not known from accounts dating to the twelfth century (pre–1187).55 Nonetheless, some of the pre–1187 components are missing Jerusalem, Greater Syria and Egypt,” in Ayyubid Jerusalem: The Holy City in Context, 1187–1250, ed. Robert Hillenbrand and Sylvia Auld (London, 2009), 327–29. 51 For an example of the highly restricted movement of pilgrims within Jerusalem see the account of Wilbrand of Oldenburg (1211–12) in Laurent, Peregrinatores, 162–91. 52 The contraction of pilgrimage is attested in a letter, sent by Gerold of Lausanne, Patriarch of Jerusalem, to Pope Gregory IX (March, 1229): Malcolm Barber and Keith Bate, trans., Letters from the East: Crusaders, Pilgrims and Settlers in the 12th and 13th Centuries, Crusade Texts in Translation 18 (Burlington VT, 2010), 131–32; Hillenbrand, Ayyubid Jerusalem, 11. On papal attitudes towards pilgrimage to Jerusalem in the thirteenth century, see Diana Webb, Pilgrims and Pilgrimage in the Medieval West, International Library of Historical Studies 12 (London, 2000), 86–87. Adrian Boas, however, mentions archeological evidence for a minor commercial revival during this period: Adrian J. Boas, “Return to the Holy City: Historical and Archaeological Sources on the Frankish Presence in Jerusalem between 1229 and 1244,” in Tell it in Gath: Studies in the History and Archaeology of Israel: Essays in Honor of Aren M. Maeir on the Occasion of his Sixtieth Birthday, ed. Itzhaq Shai, Jeffrey R. Chadwick et al. (Münster, 2018), 1028–50. Insecurity is attested, for example, in the Patriarch’s letter to Pope Gregory IX: Barber and Bate, Letters from the East, 132. 53 Pringle, Churches, 3:32. 54 There was, however, a constant flow of pilgrims arriving at the ports throughout most of the thirteenth century. Consider David Jacoby, “Ports of Pilgrimage to the Holy Land, Eleventh–Fourteenth Century: Jaffa, Acre, Alexandria,” in The Holy Portolano: The Sacred Geography of Navigation in the Middle Ages = Le Portulan sacré: la géographie religieuse de la navigation au Moyen Age, ed. Michele Bacci and Martin Rohde (Berlin, 2014), 51–72. 55 Burchard of Mount Zion (1274–85) also mentions the Gate of Judgment. See Laurent, Peregrinatores, 74; Philip of Savona (1285–89) mentions a church dedicated to St. Mary of the Spasm. See Wilhelm A. Neumann, “Descriptio Terrae Sanctae,” Oesterreichische Vierteljahresschrift für Katholische Theologie 11 (1872): 52–53.

178

NETTA AMIR

from the later descriptions.56 Ultimately we learn from the pilgrimage account of Riccoldo of Monte Croce in 1288/9 that an overwhelming assembly of landmarks and a path running between them are perceived as one narrative unit – a route which leads from the site of the trial to the Church of the Holy Sepulchre. One might ask what might account for the constancy ─ or the revival ─ of the idea of the northern grouping of Passion-related landmarks. We shall now turn to a preliminary consideration of this question.

Reconstructing the Passion during the Twelfth and Thirteenth Centuries In an effort to reach a clearer understanding of the initial implementation of the Way of the Cross in the late thirteenth century, I shall examine its meaning and function in a devotional context. It has already been pointed out that the Way of the Cross is, among other things, a framework for narration, which allows pilgrims to re-enact the Passion’s narrative while moving along their pilgrimage route. This new form of narration is interpreted here as a possible Jerusalemite expression of a devotional framework that developed in the West between the eleventh and the thirteenth centuries. Scholars agree that changing trends in Western Christian thought and devotional attitude were instrumental in constructing the pilgrimage experience in Jerusalem. That is, as the focus and form of devotion shifted in the West, so did attitudes toward Jerusalem, its sites and the way in which it was experienced by Western pilgrims. The imprint that theological focus might have made on the plan of the Holy Map of Jerusalem is demonstrated, for example, in Sylvia Schein’s research on pilgrimage experiences in twelfth-century Jerusalem, which, according to Schein, shifted as the result of an increased devotional focus on the humanity of Christ.57 In another study, Ora Limor discussed the “Marianization” of the pilgrimage circuit during the Late Middle Ages, in light of the rising cult of the Virgin Mary in the Medieval West.58 A number of stages in the history of the Way of the Cross have been investigated in this context in previous research as well.59 However, a far more 56

Such as the Sorrowful Gate. Sylvia Schein, Gateway to the Heavenly City: Crusader Jerusalem and the Catholic West (1099– 1187) (Aldershot, 2005), 63–90. On a shift in the pilgrims’ experience in the same historical context, see Ousterhout, “The Memory,” 147, with reference to Mary Carruthers, The Craft of Thought: Meditation, Rhetoric, and the Making of Images, 400–1200 (Cambridge, 1998), 42. 58 Ora Limor, “Mary in Jerusalem: An Imaginary Map,” in Visual Constructs of Jerusalem, ed. Bianca Kühnel, Galit Noga-Banai and Hanna Vorholt (Turnhout, 2015), 17–22. See also Yamit RachmanSchrire, “A Voyage to the Land of Mirrors: Felix Fabri’s Narration of the Virgin Mary’s Pilgrimages as a Model for Late Medieval Mendicant Piety,” Journal of Medieval History 46 (2020): 596–620. 59 For a relatively recent study which hints at the possible influence of Western devotional trends of the twelfth and thirteenth centuries on the Jerusalemite emergence of the Way of the Cross, see Sticca, “The Via Crucis,” 107–11. Sticca presents the Passion-devotion trends of the twelfth and thirteenth centuries briefly, within a general survey of related devotional trends that evolve in the West from the early days of Christianity up to the formation of the fourteen-station program. Such trends probably 57

THE EMERGENCE OF THE WAY OF THE CROSS IN JERUSALEM

179

detailed inquiry as to the implications of devotional attitude on the early stages of the development of the Jerusalemite route seems warranted. The interval between the late eleventh century and the mid-thirteenth century is known to have been a crucial time in the establishment of Christian thought, as well as a period of flux in many aspects of both secular and religious life in the West. An influential starting point in this trend was in the writings of the Benedictine monk and philosopher Anselm of Canterbury (d. 1109). In his Cur Deus Homo? he emphasized the significance of Christ’s humanity by stressing that the redemptive act was the ultimate display of his human nature.60 It is within this line of thought that the suffering of Christ, as an expression of his humanity, started to receive increasing devotional attention. This coincided with formative debates about Christian thought and purpose taking place as of the eleventh century and up to the thirteenth century.61 These debates revolved around the soul of the individual believer and his personal relationship with God. They resulted in shifts toward more personalized forms of devotion, penance and sacrament, less dependent on clergy as in earlier times.62 Within these frameworks of devotion, the ideal of imitating and following Christ in his humanity took a central place,63 and the suffering of Christ, as an expression of his humanity, attracted increasing devotional attention. A desire and a question, set forth in the influential prayers and meditations of Anselm of Canterbury, may be seen as prompting a devotional practice which evolves extensively between the eleventh and the thirteenth centuries. As expressed in several of Anselm’s prayers, a highly individualistic soul desires to identify with the suffering Christ, but has trouble doing so. It asks what to say, what to do and where to go in order to achieve its aim, and points to Mary, mother of Christ, as one who experienced what any believer strives to experience.64 These questions were addressed by various Christian thinkers, and their creative compositions were offered to the pious as devotional tools. Subsequently, the twelfth century witnessed a burst of intense, innovative and highly personalized meditative texts exploring the Passion. We may note two main phases in the evolution of the devotional practice: influenced the various formations of the Way of the Cross in Jerusalem. While this correspondence is suggested by Sticca, Jerusalem and the Jerusalemite practice of the Way of the Cross are not the focus of his study. 60 Eamon Duffy, The Stripping of the Altars: Traditional Religion in England, 1400–1580 (New Haven CT, 1992), 235; Rachel Fulton, From Judgment to Passion: Devotion to Christ and the Virgin Mary, 800–1200 (New York, 2002), 190. At this period, the focus on the suffering of Christ on the cross contrasted with the greater attention granted to the image of Christ as the triumphant warlord and righteous judge, which highly characterized Christian devotion beforehand. On this contrast see Fulton, From Judgment to Passion, 160–70. 61 Giles Constable refers to the High Middle Ages as a time of restructuring, when reformers paid special attention to Christian spirituality and practice: Giles Constable, The Reformation of the Twelfth Century (Cambridge, 1996), 4–5. 62 Ibid., 261–66. 63 Ibid., 281–86. 64 For example, see Benedicta Ward, trans., The Prayers and Meditations of Saint Anselm (Harmondsworth, 1973), 95–96.

180

NETTA AMIR

in the first stage, manifested mostly in twelfth-century devotional compositions, the moment of the crucifixion was spotlighted, as was the Marian experience under the cross. In the second stage, manifested mostly in mid to late-thirteenth-century compositions and onward, the meditative practice was enriched and offered greater intimacy with Christ, especially through an elaboration of the Passion narrative. This expansion engaged with Christ’s suffering not only on the cross but also on his walk to Calvary. Among the most influential writers was the Cistercian intellectual Aelred of Rievaulx (d. 1167). In addition to composing numerous meditations on the Passion, Aelred introduced the influential concept of threefold meditation, the first of which is dedicated to the mental recreation of biblical events.65 Another prominent writer was Bernard of Clairvaux (d. 1153), who played an important role in mobilizing the senses into personal devotion to the suffering Christ.66 Bernard’s influential sermons emphasized the importance of compassion with Mary as a model.67 He depicts the believer as one that is unable to feel compassion for the Passion and turns to Mary for guidance.68 Thus, Christ’s mother became a powerful mediator, who intercedes between the believer’s desire to participate as much as he can in Christ’s suffering, and the experience of doing so. Through Mary, believers hoped to arrive at both a clearer “vision” of, and a sense of empathy towards, Christ’s suffering.69 At this point in time, the mediating Mary is primarily one who stands under the Cross. That is, the devotional focus is on the crucified Christ rather than on Christ’s suffering on his way to Calvary.70 The mid-thirteenth century witnessed a significant change in the mental reconstruction of the Passion as new meditative texts grew more ambitious, 65 In the two following stages of the meditation the practitioner is advised to ponder on the implications of Christ’s life for himself, and thereafter to contemplate on death, judgment, hell and heaven: John Ayto and Alexandra Barratt, eds., Aelred of Rievaulx’s De Institutione Inclusarum: Two English Versions (London, 1984), xi–xiii. 66 Sermon 20, 43, and the Sermon of Holy Thursday: Thomas Bestul, Texts of the Passion: Latin Devotional Literature and Medieval Society (Philadelphia, 1996), 38. 67 See, for example, in his Liber de Passione Christi et doloribus et planctibus Matris eius: Henri Barré, “Le ‘Planctus Mariae’ attribué à saint Bernard,” Revue d’Ascétique et de Mystique 28 (1952): 243–66. See also Bernard of Clairvaux’s Dominica infra octavam Assumptionis Beatae Virginis Mariae sermo: PL 182: 1133–42. For more on Bernard and the Planctus Mariae: Sandro Sticca, The Planctus Mariae in the Dramatic Tradition of the Middle Ages (Athens, 1988), 102–8. 68 This enhancement is exemplified in the works of other twelfth-century writers, such as the De laudibus Beatae Mariae Virginis of Ernald of Chartres (c. 1160): Otto G. von Simson, “Compassion and Co-redemption in Roger van der Weyden’s Descent from the Cross,” Art Bulletin 35 (1952): 9–16, at 12. 69 On the changing characteristics of Mary under the cross, see Miri Rubin, Mother of God: A History of the Virgin Mary (New Haven CT, 2009), 243–49. On the inclusion of Mary’s lament under the cross (Planctus Mariae) in Passion Plays and meditations as of the mid-twelfth century see Sandro Sticca, The Latin Passion Play: Its Origins and Development (Albany, NY, 1970), 173–74. On the theme of Mary lamenting in later centuries, most notably in Franciscan piety, see Sticca, The Planctus Mariae, 96–97. 70 Von Simson, “Compassion,” 11. Cf. Sticca, The Planctus Mariae, 102–8, and Sarah McNamer’s discussion on the rise of empathetic emotion in the devotional context: Sarah McNamer, Affective Meditation and the Invention of Medieval Compassion (Philadelphia, 2010).

THE EMERGENCE OF THE WAY OF THE CROSS IN JERUSALEM

181

challenging and enhancing imaginative thought. In the process, texts no longer only considered Christ’s suffering on the cross but also his suffering on the way to Calvary.71 The Franciscan philosopher Bonaventure (d. 1274) was largely responsible for this shift. He took the genre of gospel meditations further, and so opened the door to a new kind of devotional literature.72 Meditations grew more ambitious, challenging and enhancing imaginative thought in a way that would facilitate the encounter with Christ’s humanity, and lead to the ultimate experience of unity. In order to help believers experience the suffering of Christ to the fullest, Bonaventure introduced texts which present Christ’s suffering both at the time of his crucifixion and on the way leading to the site of the crucifixion.73 The most famous composition inspired by Bonaventure is the Meditationes Vitae Christi, one which used to be attributed to him. It contains an emphasis on narrative action as the narrating voice leads the meditator from one sequence to the next, up to the moment of the crucifixion, thereby creating imaginative engagement.74 The two stages presented above reflect a gradual reconstruction of the Passion narrative. In the first stage, which spanned from the end of the eleventh to the twelfth centuries, believers received tools for imagining Christ at the time of his crucifixion. In the second stage, which took place around the mid-thirteenth century, the faithful were afforded a more concrete image of Christ’s suffering by being taught to meditate on his hardships on the cross as well those he experienced on the way to it. In both stages, Mary, mother of Christ, figures prominently in a “vision” of the suffering Christ and the rise of empathetic emotion. The increasing attention given to individual devotion in the West, as well as the gradual evolution of the meditative practice, could have preconditioned the emergence of the pilgrimage route in Jerusalem. What springs to mind, of course, 71 Bestul, Texts, 150. For more on this transformation, see, for example, Michelle Karnes, Imagination, Meditation and Cognition in the Middle Ages (Chicago, 2011), 31. 72 Karnes, Imagination, 113. Bonaventure’s Franciscan education stands at the base of his work. Reaching full empathy with the Lord was an ideal that developed particularly within mendicant monastic streams such as the Franciscan Order. In the writings of Francis of Assisi (d. 1226) the contemplative state of mind stood at the center of religious practice, and was perceived as the ultimate way of reaching this ideal: Giles Constable, Three Studies in Medieval Religious and Social Thought: The Interpretation of Mary and Martha, the Ideal of the Imitation of Christ, the Orders of Society (Cambridge, 1995), 193. 73 Bestul, Texts, 47. This can be seen in Bonaventure’s Vitis Mystica: “O Lord Jesus, I see You with the eyes of my mind, the only way now possible to me, tied with the rough rope, dragged like a bandit …”: José de Vinck, ed. and trans., The Works of Bonaventure: Cardinal, Seraphic Doctor, and Saint, 5 vols. (Paterson NJ, 1960–70), 1:158, after Karnes, Imagination, 135. 74 The Meditationes vitae Christi (MVC) has been attributed to Bonaventure himself, with some correlation to the attributions found in medieval copies of the text. However, it is now accepted that the MVC was influenced by Bonaventure rather than written by him. On the dating, authorship and distribution of the Meditationes vitae Christi, see Mary Stallings-Taney, ed., Meditaciones vite Christi olim S. Bonaventurae attributae, CCCM 153 (Turnhout, 1997), ix–xi; Sarah McNamer, “The Origins of the Meditationes vitae Christi,” Speculum 84 (2009): 905–55; Peter Toth and Dávid Falvay, “New Light on the Date and Authorship of the Meditationes vitae Christi,” in Devotional Culture in Late Medieval England and Europe: Diverse Imaginations of Christ’s Life, ed. Stephen Kelly and Ryan Perry (Turnhout, 2014), 17–105.

182

NETTA AMIR

is that the Way of the Cross in Jerusalem parallels the above-mentioned idea of Passion devotion, at the center of which stands the individual and his personal desire to relate to the suffering Christ by way of private piety. Not unlike meditative practice, the pilgrimage route permits, beyond the bounds of an official liturgical context and unrestrained by the liturgical calendar, the tracing of the path that Christ walked at his time of suffering. The gradual localization of narrative traditions which manifest Mary’s sorrows before the suffering Christ in Jerusalem points to at least a degree of correspondence between the evolution of the meditative practice in the West and the narration of the Passion in Jerusalem’s city space. The meditative reconstruction of Christ’s Passion accentuates Mary’s experiences, including her visual interactions with Christ at the time of his suffering. Two such points of interaction are indicated in Jerusalem: a site from which the crucifixion of Christ was viewed and in which Mary expressed empathy toward the suffering Christ, and a site at which she encountered Christ on his way to Calvary. Parallel events are contextualized in two stages in the physical space of Jerusalem. Early twelfth-century sources suggest that Mary’s sorrow was localized within the Church of St. Mary the Latin, in the close surroundings of Calvary. There Mary is said to have stood during the crucifixion.75 While early twelfth-century sources speak of the Church of St. Mary the Latin as being associated with Mary’s sorrow at the time of Christ’s crucifixion, a late twelfth-century source links the nearby Church of St. Mary the Great to her, or possibly to Mary Magdalene’s suffering at the time of Christ’s walk to Calvary. We are told that a landmark within the Church of St. Mary the Great “is said to be dedicated to Blessed Mary because she was said to have been sent there at our Saviour’s command, while he was being tortured on the way to his sufferings.”76 Interestingly, Christ’s walk to Calvary is punctuated in these accounts by mention of Mary not being able to “see” the events taking place along the way. In other words, the key eyewitness to the events of the Passion and the prime mediator between the believers and the biblical events is distanced, in the late twelfth century, from the Way of the Cross.

75

The texts strongly suggest that this localization was influenced by a non-Latin tradition, for example Saewulf (1101–3), in R. B. C. Huygens, ed., Peregrinationes tres: Saewulf, John of Würzburg, Theodericus, CCCM 139 (Turnhout, 1994), 67. Unlike Saewulf, the Abbot Daniel (1106–8) associates the event with the Greek Church of Mary located in the Spoudaioi (“the zealous ones”) monastery: Wilkinson, Jerusalem Pilgrimage, 130; Pringle, Churches, 3:315. 76 “[Qui locus] idcirco beate Marie dicatus esse dicitur, quia, dum salvator noster ad passionem ductus male tractaretur, ipsius iussu in eodem loco cenaculo quodam, quod tunc ibidem erat”: Huygens, Peregrinationes tres, 158; Wilkinson, Jerusalem Pilgrimage, 288. Since Theoderich speaks of the Church of St. Mary the Great, it is possible that he is referring to Mary Magdalene, to whom this church was dedicated. Theoderich tells of yet another landmark associated with the sorrows of Mary, mother of Christ, in the Church of St. Mary the Latin, where she tore her hair during the crucifixion of her son: Huygens, Peregrinationes tres, 158.

THE EMERGENCE OF THE WAY OF THE CROSS IN JERUSALEM

183

Late thirteenth-century sources refer to a church in Jerusalem that is associated with the encounter of Mary and Christ on his way to Calvary.77 As noted above, a grouping of Passion-related landmarks existed in Jerusalem by the late twelfth century. However, no source from that time tells us that the different sites were experienced as stops along an unbroken route. Alongside the localization of Mary’s encounter with Christ on his way to Calvary we encounter a significant change. For the first time, the compilation of Passion-related landmarks as well as the path that runs between them are understood to form a continuous route that is conscientiously followed by pilgrims and is identified as the road upon which Christ travelled while carrying his cross.78

Conclusion The emergence of the Way of the Cross marks the establishment of a new framework for narration in Jerusalem’s city space. Among multiform phenomena that may have contributed over time to its early configuration, two have been presented here. The first is the creation of a new physical core from which the reconstruction of the Passion narrative would advance, namely, the localization of a site of the trial north of the Temple Mount and the gradual accumulation of Passion-related sites in its immediate surroundings; the second is the development of a devotional notion that ultimately calls for an elaborate reconstruction of Christ’s torments en route to Calvary. The ambiguous formation-process of the Way of the Cross in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries re-emphasizes Jerusalem’s pivotal role in generating fundamental notions of “holy space.” Tracing this development shows that new religious space evolves through sensitive and dynamic processes. It raises questions regarding the possible impact of political and religious transitions on the physical configuration of Jerusalem’s holy spaces and on the devotional practices associated with them.

77 Neumann, “Descriptio,” 52–53; De Sandoli, Itinera, 4:356. The seemingly sudden appearance of this church in post-1244 pilgrimage accounts is intriguing. It is very unlikely that the church would have been constructed under Muslim rule, whether Ayyubid or Mamluk. Denys Pringle observes that it was most probably constructed between 1229 and 1244, when Jerusalem was under Frankish control. However, there is no direct evidence for its construction. For more conjecture on this matter, see Pringle, Churches, 3:319–20. 78 As confirmed by Riccoldo of Monte Croce: Kappler, Riccoldo, 66.

Pergamene due-trecentesche della Certosa di Calci rogate in Levante Bruno Figliuolo Università di Udine [email protected]

Abstract The rich archival collection of the Pisan Charterhouse at Calci preserves over 3,000 parchments, many of which concern Pisan trade. Discussed here are eight documents concerning the activity of Pisan merchants in the Levant and in Byzantine territories, especially in Acre, Cyprus and Alexandria. Six deeds are from the thirteenth century, of which five predate the Fall of Acre. Two other documents from the early fourteenth century were drawn up in Crimea (Soldaia), and were recently published by Francesca Pucci Donati. The documents provide evidence on the composition of the Tuscan urban merchant class, which is represented in the documents by wealthy and influential members of the local nobility, as well as by members of the lower class. The documents also demonstrate the scope of their trading activities. The merchants travelled widely and had purview over large areas. Especially noteworthy is the fact that the same merchants frequented the emporia of Romania as well as those of the Middle East and Egypt, often linking them together and even going beyond Constantinople to the Black Sea. Finally, the documents provide interesting information on the goods exchanged in these transactions and the currencies used in this wide-ranging trade.

L’Archivio della Certosa di Calci (= ACC), comprendente, oltre a quello della Certosa vera e propria, anche quelli del cenobio benedettino di S. Gorgonio sull’isola della Gorgona e della sua dipendenza pisana di S. Vito, che le furono aggregati nel 1425, dopo il breve trasferimento a Pisa, avvenuto in due riprese, a seguito di provvedimenti di soppressione di enti ecclesiastici, nel corso del XIX secolo, riprese presto posto nella sede storica, periferica e non facilmente raggiungibile, dove è conservato tuttora. Per questa ragione, forse, esso non risulta oggi molto frequentato dagli studiosi, nonostante la sua notevole importanza storica; né, a ben guardare, sembra lo sia stato neanche in passato. Si dispone in verità di un inventario analitico a stampa, che ne illustra i singoli fondi,1 e le sue pergamene più antiche, quelle che giungono fino all’anno 1200, sono state Desidero preliminarmente ringraziare Vilma Tirotta, del Museo della Certosa, per avermi fornito le fotografie di tutte le pergamene qui edite e per avermi trasmesso le misure di esse; e l’amico Ignazio Del Punta per aver analizzato dietro mia richiesta gli inventari delle medesime pergamene custoditi presso l’Archivio di Stato di Pisa e avermi comunicato la segnatura di quelle rogate in località del Levante. 1 Luigina Carratori, Inventario dell’Archivio della Certosa di Calci (Ospedaletto, 1990), dove, a pp. XI–XXII, si trovano anche cenni sulle vicende storiche del patrimonio documentario. 185

186

BRUNO FIGLIUOLO

pubblicate nell’ambito di un grosso e ambizioso progetto di edizione di tutte le pergamene pisane fino alla fine del XII secolo, brillantemente condotto a termine sotto la direzione di Silio Pietro Paolo Scalfati una quindicina di anni fa.2 Le carte due, tre e quattrocentesche, però, sono state assai poco studiate, anche se si tratta di un fondo assai ricco (esse in totale ammontano a 3,307, la maggior parte delle quali ricadono appunto entro quei tre secoli). Si dispone però, relativamente a esse, di alcuni volumi manoscritti di regesti ed elenchi, custoditi presso l’Archivio di Stato di Pisa (= ASP) e redatti dagli archivisti e studiosi che nel corso dell’Ottocento, dal momento della seconda soppressione della Certosa (1866), le presero in carico e che ne forniscono i primi elementi di individuazione, ponendosi accanto al cosiddetto “Universale”: un enorme volume, ovviamente anch’esso manoscritto, contenente brevi notizie di esse, conservato invece in Certosa e redatto nel corso della prima metà del XVII secolo.3 Si tratta, in particolare, dei lunghi e articolati regesti di Clemente Lupi, che giungono fino al 1275 (ASP, Carte Lupi, Fonti, 1) e che accompagnano il vero e proprio inventario generale offerto nel 1876 dal medesimo studioso; del più sommario inventario, preceduto da un rapporto al Ministro della Pubblica Istruzione, approntato qualche anno prima (1871) da Cesare Guasti; e dal supplemento a entrambi, fatica di Leopoldo Tanfani Centofanti del 1896, allegato ai precedenti, sotto la medesima segnatura (ASP, Miscellanea Manoscritti, 18). Di molte delle pergamene, infine, si può disporre della relativa trascrizione, custodita sempre in ACC ed effettuata sullo scorcio del Settecento dal benemerito priore Giuseppe Alfonso Maggi (1764–97).4 Si segnalano, all’interno di questa ricca messe di carte, alcuni atti ancora inediti (7 per la precisione) rogati in località del Levante, e segnatamente ad Acri, Cipro e Alessandria d’Egitto, i quali vanno ad aggiungersi al manipolo di documenti già noti ed editi per merito soprattutto di Louis de Mas-Latrie, di Giuseppe Müller, di Catherine Otten-Froux e di chi scrive, sempre relativamente alle relazioni commerciali tra Pisa e quella vasta area geografica e commerciale.5 Due altri, infine, stipulati a Soldaia, sul Mar Nero, sono stati recentissimamente pubblicati 2

Carte dell’Archivio della Certosa di Calci, 1 (999–1099); 2 (1100–1150), a cura di Silio P. P. Scalfati (Roma, rispettivamente 1977 e 1971); Carte dell’Archivio della Certosa di Calci (1151–1200), a cura di Maria Luisa Orlandi (Pisa, 2002). 3 Carratori, Inventario, 171–72. 4 Su tutti questi strumenti di corredo, cfr. ibid., 4–5 and 172–73. 5 Confrontane l’elenco analitico in Bruno Figliuolo, “Carte pisane due-trecentesche inedite relative al Levante,” Nuova Rivista Storica 100/2 (2016): 677–93, in particolare a 677–78, cui è da aggiungerne una del 1277, indisponibile per la consultazione al momento dell’edizione di quel contributo e pubblicata più tardi, sempre a cura di chi scrive: “Nuovi documenti relativi al Levante nel Medioevo,” in Incorrupta Monumenta Ecclesiam defendunt. Studi offerti a mons. Sergio Pagano, prefetto dell’Archivio Segreto Vaticano, a cura di Andreas Gottsmann, Pierantonio Piatti, Andreas E. Rehberg, 4 vols. in 5, Archivio Segreto Vaticano (Città del Vaticano, 2018), I/1, 607–16, n. I, p. 613. Cfr. pure Bruno Figliuolo, “Lo spazio economico e commerciale pisano nel Trecento: dalla battaglia della Meloria alla conquista fiorentina (1284–1406),” nel suo Alle origini del mercato nazionale. Strutture economiche e spazi commerciali nell’Italia medievale (Udine, 2020), 135–225, a 151–54. Il lavoro di de Mas Latrie è citato più avanti (nota 7), come pure quelli di Müller (nota 9) e della Otten-Froux (note 10 e 19).

PERGAMENE DUE-TRECENTESCHE

187

da Francesca Pucci Donati.6 Disponiamo in definitiva oggi, sull’argomento, comprendendo ovviamente nel computo anche le carte che qui si pubblicano, di 68 documenti in originale, tutti editi: 31 da Catherine Otten-Froux, 15 da Giuseppe Müller (il quale ne ristampa anche alcuni ciprioti, 6 per l’esattezza, già pubblicati da Louis de Mas-Latrie),7 20 da chi scrive e 2 da Francesca Pucci Donati. All’interno di molti di questi atti, naturalmente, si trova notizia di altre stipule pregresse, relative alle medesime transazioni, o rinvio ad altre carte superstiti sul medesimo argomento. E menzioni di altri mercanti pisani in affari a Laiazzo o a Cipro, troviamo com’è ovvio nei ricchi cartolari notarili genovesi, anch’essi editi.8 Le pergamene qui pubblicate offrono parecchi elementi nuovi, relativi sia a operatori di cui facciamo ora conoscenza sia a nomi già noti nel panorama del commercio mediterraneo, in questo secondo caso allargandone e precisandone il raggio d’azione e in molti casi ben legandosi a rogiti già editi che descrivano quei percorsi e quei fenomeni. Seguiamo ora l’ordine cronologico delle nuove testimonianze: il 3 febbraio del 1258, con atto rogato a Messina, Cerbone fu Albertino, di Pisa, riceve in commenda da Perrone Russo di Messina 20 once d’oro. Due anni e mezzo più tardi, il 24 agosto del 1260, sempre con atto rogato a Messina, quest’ultimo nomina proprio procuratore, allo scopo di recuperare il denaro investito, un altro mercante pisano: Bartolomeo del fu Parasone. Costui riceve allora ad Acri, da Cerbone, 120 bisanti saracenati al peso di Acri, più altri 15 “pro lucro,” equivalenti alle 20 once d’oro da lui dovute. Nel frattempo, però, Cerbone, con rogito stipulato ad Acri il 6 ottobre del 1260, aveva dato mandato a due suoi emissari e concittadini, Leonardo notaio e Luparello fu Enrico, di consegnare a suo nome a Perrone, a Messina, quanto gli doveva. Bartolomeo, perciò, si impegna formalmente a restituire a Cerbone il denaro ricevuto in affidamento, in caso Perrone fosse già stato pagato da altri. E in effetti, il 23 maggio 1261, a Messina, Bartolomeo versa la somma dovuta a Perrone nelle mani di Leonardo notaio, che la riceve in assenza di Luparello dalla città, impegnandosi per iscritto con Bartolomeo a consegnarla a Perrone.9 Alcuni mesi più tardi, però, fatto ritorno ad Acri, il 4 febbraio del 1262 Bartolomeo restituisce a Cerbone tutta la somma ricevuta, certo

6 Francesca Pucci Donati, “Due inedite pergamene pisane duecentesche rogate a Soldaia,” Nuova Rivista Storica 105/2 (2021): 603–12. 7 Per un esame analitico delle carte cipriote edite da Louis de Mas-Latrie, Histoire de l’île de Chipre sous le règne des princes de la maison de Lusignan, 3 vols. (Paris, 1852), e riprese dal Müller (cit. nella nota 9), che nel suo lavoro ne aggiunse delle altre, unitamente ad alcuni documenti rogati ad Acri, cfr. Figliuolo, “Carte pisane,” 678. 8 Per Laiazzo, cfr. Laura Balletto, Notai genovesi in Oltremare. Atti rogati a Laiazzo da Federico di Piazzalunga (1274) e Pietro di Bargone (1277, 1279) (Genova 1989), ad indicem. Le presenze pisane nella documentazione notarile genovese rogata a Cipro sono segnalate in maniera analitica in Figliuolo, “Lo spazio economico e commerciale pisano,” 155, nota 33. 9 Cfr. infra, n. 1A. Il Leonardo notaio è forse lo stesso che roga, sempre a Messina, l’atto del 6 marzo 1271 edito in Giuseppe Müller, Documenti sulle relazioni delle città toscane coll’Oriente cristiano e coi Turchi fino all’anno MDXXXI (Firenze, 1879), n. LXXI/A, p. 101.

188

BRUNO FIGLIUOLO

perché nel frattempo Perrone ne era tornato in possesso per altra via, ricevendola probabilmente dalle mani di Luparello.10 Trovano qui piena conferma e corroborazione le nostre conoscenze circa le fitte relazioni che intercorrevano in quel secolo tra i mercanti pisani e quelli messinesi e che vedevano gli operatori delle due città muoversi con assiduità tra il grande emporio siciliano e Acri, spesso costituendo insieme società commerciali.11 Bartolomeo de Parisone torna protagonista un paio d’anni più tardi, in una carta assai interessante, che si affianca alle molte altre testimonianze di quegli anni relative a una presenza assai fitta dei Pisani a Laiazzo, porto sito in Asia Minore, oggi in territorio turco, allora in quello che si definiva regno di Armenia, da essi frequentatissimo;12 carta, si diceva, interessante anzitutto perché documenta la presenza in città di un insediamento pisano organizzato sotto un proprio visconte, che si affiancava a uno genovese. Nel 1264, dunque, Bartolomeo consegna in quella città panni di Alessandria, zucchero, stagno e mastice per il notevole valore di 1941 bisanti saracenati di Siria a Giraldo de Massese, Pisano anch’egli. L’atto è stipulato alla presenza di Giacomo di Morella, visconte dei Pisani in Armenia, come si accennava, davanti ai magazzini degli Ospedalieri di S. Giovanni. Ulteriore elemento di interesse della carta, è che essa è un raro originale, rogato da un professionista locale, Giacomo Mettifoco, che vi si definisce notaio del Sacro Palazzo.13 Giacomo di Morella, mercante anch’egli, compare ancora nel 1269, in un atto rogato ad Acri, tra i soci di un’impresa commerciale programmata per Tunisi.14 Il 2 gennaio del 1273, ad Acri, Giovanni Bellucci fu Bonaccorsio Bellucci, Pisano residente a Costantinopoli, formalizza a beneficio della moglie Filippa, figlia di Giovanni Pelliccia fu Martino, pure residente nella città sul Bosforo, la consueta donazione nuziale prevista nella normativa pisana, in questa circostanza stabilita nella misura di 100 bisanti.15 Qualche anno più tardi, il 4 settembre del 10

Tutta la vicenda è narrata per sommi capi nel documento edito infra, n. 1. Tra i testi del rogito è il notaio Ubaldo fu Corso di Peccioli, che stipulerà ad Acri l’atto del 12 ottobre 1272 pubblicato in Müller, Documenti sulle relazioni, n. LXXI/B, p. 102, quello del 2 gennaio 1273 edito più avanti, sotto il n. 3, e un altro del 2 settembre 1285, rogato a Damietta: cfr. Catherine Otten-Froux, “Les Pisans en Egypte et à Acre dans la seconde moitié du XIIIe siècle,” Bollettino Storico Pisano 52 (1983): 163–90. 11 Tali relazioni sono state recentemente prese in esame da chi scrive sia sul versante pisano che su quello messinese: cfr. Bruno Figliuolo, “La proiezione mediterranea del traffico commerciale messinese nel XIII e XIV secolo,” e “Lo spazio economico e commerciale pisano,” entrambi in idem, Alle origini del mercato nazionale, rispettivamente 75–89 (con un paio di imprecisioni dovute all’erronea datazione delle carte negli strumenti di corredo dell’ACC) e 135–225, in particolare a 151–58. 12 Basta scorrere l’indice dei nomi del volume di Laura Balletto, Notai genovesi in Oltremare, per imbattersi in numerosissimi operatori pisani attivi nella città nel corso degli anni Settanta del XIII secolo. 13 Cfr. infra, n. 2, del 17 agosto 1264. Sulla presenza dell’ordine nella città, dipendente dalla comanderia di Armenia, cfr. Jonathan Riley-Smith, The Knights Hospitallers in the Levant, c. 1070– 1309 (Londra, 2012), sub voce “Armenia.” 14 Müller, Documenti sulle relazioni, n. LXXI/A, p. 101, notizia di atto del 11 aprile 1269 inserta in un rogito del 6 marzo 1271. 15 I costituti della legge e dell’uso di Pisa. Sec. XII, a cura di Paola Vignoli (Roma, 2003), capitoli XXII–XXVII del Constitutum legis, pp. 59–71, sulla legislazione matrimoniale pisana dell’epoca. Più

PERGAMENE DUE-TRECENTESCHE

189

1277, Giovanni si trova a Soldaia, al capezzale di Gherardo fu Bonagiunta Sinibaldi, un mercante in generale residente ad Ania, un porto presso Efeso molto frequentato dai Pisani. Giovanni risulta nella circostanza debitore in solido di Gherardo, con la cui famiglia egli appare in rapporti stretti, che presto non saranno solo di affari. Sua figlia Agnese, infatti, sposerà qualche anno dopo Baialardo di Bonagiunta, fratello di Gherardo e suo esecutore testamentario,16 portandogli in dote 1000 bisanti saracenati di Acri. Baialardo, a sua volta, d’accordo col suocero, con atto rogato ad Acri, il 6 maggio del 1281, fissa contestualmente il valore del proprio dono nuziale, o “antefatto,” per l’importo di 100 bisanti.17 Baialardo morirà dieci anni più tardi: il 7 ottobre del 1291, a Limassol, egli detterà infatti il proprio testamento. Dall’atto emerge come egli conducesse le proprie numerose attività commerciali in parte in società con alcuni parenti, tra i quali il suocero, Giovanni Bellucci, e i cognati, Giacomo e Bellucco, coprendo tutto lo spazio da Alessandria a Costantinopoli alla Provenza. Con il suocero traffica in pepe; con Matteo Murscio ha costituito una società per commerciare con Alessandria; con Bernarduccio Senese è in affari per fargli recapitare in Provenza, sulla nave del Veneziano Pietro Contarini e sotto nome del Pisano Benvenuto Grasso (che, come subito vedremo, compare come teste in una stipula formalizzata ad Alessandria nel 1306), cera e galla.18 Baialardo dovette morire non molto più tardi. L’anno successivo, dal testo di un rogito del 2 ottobre 1292 sempre vergato a Limassol, veniamo infatti a sapere che i suoi esecutori testamentari non erano ancora riusciti a ottemperare del tutto alle sue ultime volontà.19 Al rogito acritano del 1273 nel quale Giovanni Bellucci formalizza il proprio dono nuziale alla moglie, è presente come teste Giorgio fu Morone, che pure in particolare, cfr. il c. XXVI, pp. 67–68 (De donationibus propter nuptias, dette altresì De antefactis). 16 Pucci Donati, “Due inedite pergamene.” Esse sono relative al testamento di Gherardo e alla nomina, otto giorni più tardi, il 12 settembre, da parte di Baialardo, che era presente al capezzale del fratello, di propri fidecommissari. 17 Cfr. infra, n. 4. Roga l’atto il notaio Bonaccorso fu Periccioli, che troviamo a lungo attivo ad Acri: cfr. Otten-Froux, Les Pisans en Egypte, n. IV, p. 176, con ulteriori indicazioni sugli altri atti da lui rogati. Nel contributo della studiosa francese, sotto il n. VII, p. 180, è edita l’unica carta custodita in ACC pubblicata integralmente, con qualche lieve imperfezione, la mancanza di segni di divisione tra le righe della pergamena e del contenuto del verso, dove si trova un regesto seicentesco, con indicazione del luogo e dell’anno della datazione, e tracce quasi evanide di una notazione coeva (“Ista est […] de Guido Bizarra”). 18 Cfr. infra, n. 5. Nel documento sono menzionati anche, tra i suoi soci d’affari, Giacomo Salmuli e Lando Grasso fu Guidone. Sui Salmuli e sui Grasso o Grassi, entrambe famiglie popolari e di mercanti, cfr. Emilio Cristiani, Nobiltà e popolo nel Comune di Pisa. Dalle origini del podestariato alla signoria di Donoratico (Napoli, 1962), rispettivamente 471–72 e 459–60. Su Benvenuto Grasso, cfr. pure la nota successiva. 19 Catherine Otten-Froux, “Documents inédits sur les Pisans en Romanie aux XIIIe–XIVe siècles,” in Michel Balard, Angeliki E. Laiou, Catherine Otten-Froux, Les Italiens à Byzance. Édition et présentation de documents (Paris, 1987), 153–91, n. 5, p. 171, del 2 ottobre 1293. In quest’atto e nel precedente (n. 4, p. 170), compare anche Benvenuto Grasso, il quale è protagonista anche di un rogito del 3 settembre 1293, Limassol, edito in Müller, Documenti sulle relazioni, n. LXXIV/A, p. 109, stipulato dal notaio Giovanni del fu Paolo Tolomei di Pisa, lo stesso che verga l’atto da me qui edito sotto il n. 5.

190

BRUNO FIGLIUOLO

incontriamo menzionato qualche anno più tardi, nel già citato testamento di Gherardo fu Bonagiunta Sinibaldi, il quale lo testimonia a sé collegato in una società commerciale. Le due ultime carte che qui si pubblicano sono due originali esemplati ad Alessandria entrambi il 27 settembre 1306 per due diversi protagonisti intervenuti al medesimo negozio. Quel giorno, sotto il portico del fondaco dei Pisani in città ma davanti a un notaio veneziano (Franceso del fu Fioravante sarto), Pietro di Guglielmo di Barcellona rilascia quietanza a Puccio di Parisone, Pisano, per 475 carlini da quello dovutigli in ottemperanza a un atto rogato a Pisa il 28 giugno di quello stesso anno, per 500 fiorini da Pietro depositati a Pisa, presso il banco di Bonagiunta Scarso, a nome però di Puccio.20 Nello stesso momento, Bolgarino di Federico e Nino Sciorta, Pisani, a nome di Puccio Sciorta, anch’egli cittadino pisano, rilasciano analoga quietanza a Pietro di Guglielmo di Barcellona per 210 carlini, dovuti da esso Guglielmo e da Puccio di Parisone a Puccio Sciorta in base al medesimo atto del 28 giugno precedente appena menzionato.21 Non tutti i particolari della transazione finanziaria e commerciale negoziata allora da più parti, come si vede, sono esplicitati, ma sembra notevole che un mercante catalano depositi una grossa cifra presso un banco pisano, ed entri in affari con operatori locali per svolgere traffici che si concluderanno ad Alessandria, dove si troveranno presenti nello stesso momento parecchi di questi operatori. Bonagiunta Scarso è un mercante di notevoli mezzi, spesso assorbito anche dall’impegno politico;22 gli Sciorta sono una famiglia popolare, dedita al commercio anche oltremare ma alcuni membri della quale, Nino compreso, del pari si dedicarono alla pubblica amministrazione.23 I documenti qui raccolti, in definitiva, arricchiscono il nostro quadro di conoscenze sul commercio pisano nel Levante tra la seconda metà del Duecento e i primi anni del Trecento, mostrandoci in attività parecchi operatori di cui non avevamo in precedenza notizia ma soprattutto svelandone l’ampio raggio d’azione e la notevolissima mobilità. Li vediamo infatti con sempre maggior nitore trafficare con Messina, Laiazzo, Aina, Costantinopoli, fino a Soldaia e agli empori sul Mar Nero da un lato e a Cipro, Damietta ed Alessandria dall’altro, spostandosi da un approdo all’altro e trattando merci anche assai diverse, su di un ventaglio che va dalle materie prime agli articoli tessili, alle spezie e ai prodotti alimentari.

20

Cfr. infra, n. 6. Cfr. infra, n. 7. 22 Merci e mercanti pisani a Firenze e fiorentini a Pisa nei registri doganali trecenteschi, a cura di Bruno Figliuolo e Antonella Giuliani (Roma, 2020), in specie a 132 e 172–73. 23 Cristiani, Nobiltà e popolo nel Comune di Pisa, 475–76. 21

PERGAMENE DUE-TRECENTESCHE

191

1 1262, febbraio 4, Acri Originale [A]: ACC, Diplomatico. Pergamena di mm. 380×257, in buono stato di conservazione. Al verso un breve regesto di mano moderna, con l’indicazione dell’anno della data e il numero relativo alla segnatura data alle pergamene nel corso del XVII secolo: “762.” In nomine Patris et Filii et Spiritus Sancti, amen. Per presens publicum instrumentum pateat universis tam presentibus quam futuris quod dominus Bartholomeus, | filius quondam Parasoni, legitimus procurator domini Peroni Russi, civis Messane, prout de ipsa procuratione patet publico instrumento manu Bonavite de Perfecto, | regii publici notarii civitatis Messane, confecto sub anno Domini millesimo ducentesimo sexagesimo, XXIIII die mensis Augusti tertie indictionis, regnante domino Manfredo | illustri rege Sicilie anno tercio et a me Benencasa notario publico viso et lecto procuratorio nomine pro eo, receperit et habuerit a Cerbonio quondam | Albertini bisantios centum viginti saracenatos auri ad rectum pondus Acconis in solutione et pagamento et satisfactione illarum unciarum viginti | ponderis generalis et pro eis unciis dicti auri quas ipse Cerbonius a dicto Perono recepit in accomendatione ad negotiandum nomine societatis | et mercationis de capitali suo, prout de ipsa accomendatione patet publico instrumento manu Mathei de Ricco, publici notarii Messane, confecto apud Messanam | sub anno incarnationis Domini millesimo ducentesimo quinquagesimo octavo, tertia die mensis Februarii p[rime] indictionis, regnante predicto domino Manfredo excellentissimo rege | Sicilie anno primo et per suprascriptum Bonavitam notarium exemplato et in publicam formam redacto sub anno incarnationis Domini millesimo ducentesimo sexagesimo, | XXXI mensis Augusti tertie indictionis, regnante predicto domino Manfredo excellentissimo rege Sicilie anno tertio et a me Benincasa notario publico ipso exemplo | viso et lecto, convenerit etiam et promiserit ipsi Cerbonio quod si appareret ipsum Peronum recepisse et habuisse per se vel per aliquam personam suprascriptas uncias | viginti dicti auri in totum vel pro parte vel quicquam de ipsis unciis a Leonardo notario et Luparello quondam Henrici vel aliquo eorum vel alia quacumque persona | solvente pro dicto Cerbonio vel eius nomine per se et suos heredes aut successores integre ipsas uncias vel id totum eisdem Leonardo et Luparello vel uni eorum | recipienti pro ipso Cerbonio vel eius heredi, velut in publico instrumento inde manu mea Benincase notarii publici apud Accon confecto sub anno Dominice incar|nationis millesimo ducentesimo sexagesimo primo, indictione quarta, sexto mensis Octubris. Cumque dicto Perono de dictis unciis viginti auri apud Messanam | solutum et satisfactum fuerit, propter quod ipse Bartholomeus eidem Perono dictos bisantios saracinatos auri non solvit, ut dicebant, prefatus Bartholomeus | coram me Benincasa notario publico et subscriptis testibus suprascripto Cerbonio suprascriptos bisantios centum viginti saracenatos auri et insuper alios bisantios quindecim | saracinatos auri pro lucro restituit, reddidit atque solvit. Qui Cerbonius per sollempnem stipulationem convenit et promisit predicto Bartholomeo per se et heredes et successores suos | predictum Bartholomeum et eius heredes et bona de predictis bisantiis centum viginti saracinatos auri a predicto Perono et eius heredibus et ab omni alia persona et loco indempnes et in|dempnia conservare cum omnibus suis et eius heredibus expensis in iudicio et extra, sub pena dupli suprascripte pecunie eidem Bartholomeo ab ipso Cerbonio sollemp|niter conventa et promissa, se suosque heredes et bona sua omnia habita et habenda ipsi Bartholomeo et eius heredibus proinde obligando. Et renuntiavit omni | iuri, legi et constitutioni, auxilio et defensioni quo vel quibus se tueri vel iuvare aut liberare posset a predictis vel aliquo predictorum et presertim a pena pre|fata.

192

BRUNO FIGLIUOLO

Preterea, hoc est actum et expressum inter eos, quod si appareret quandocumque de predictis bisantiis centum viginti saracenatos auri in toto vel pro | parte fore satisfactum et solutum predictis Leonardo et Luparelloa vel uni eorum vel cuicumque alieb persone nomine dicti Cerbonii, et pro eo id integre ipse Cer|bonius per se et heredes seu successores suos eidem Bartholomeo vel suo heredi aut suo certo nuntio vel cui ipse preceperit restituet atque solvet statim ad ipsius | Bartholomei requisitionem et eius heredis seu certi nuntii et mandatum, sub pena predicta et sub obligatione omnium bonorum eius. Actum Accon, in porticu | domorum filiorum quondam Gerardi drapperii, apud rugam Pisanam, presentibus domino Astacio milite et Iohanne Biondo quondam Ruberti burgensis Messane et | Ubalto notario quondam Corsi et Iacobo de Campo quondam Lanfranci de Campo et aliis testibus ad hec rogatis. Dominice incarnationis anno secundum cursum Pisanorum millesimo ducentesimo sexagesimo secundo, indictione quinta, pridie Nonas Februarii.| (S) Ego Benencasa quondam Leonardi Cascinensis filius, domini Frederigi invictissimi Romanorum imperatoris iudex | et notarius hiis interfui et hanc inde cartam rogatus scripsi atque firmavi.

1A 1261, maggio 23, Messina Originale [A]: ACC, Diplomatico. Pergamena di mm. 249×245, in discreto stato di conservazione. Un largo foro pregiudica la lettura di alcune parole. Al verso la data, un breve regesto, di mano moderna, e il numero “584,” relativo alla segnatura data alle pergamene nel corso del XVII secolo. In nomine Domini, amen. Ex hoc publico instrumento sit omnibus manifestum quod Bartholomeus Para|soni quondam Parasoni, Pisanus, coram me Viviano iudice et notario et testibus infrascriptis, protestatus est notario Leonardo | Pisano, presenti et audienti, quod paratus erat solvere sibi bisancios centum viginti saracenatos de Acon | pro parte et nomine Cherbonis Pisani, illos videlicet bisantios quos idem Cherbonus dedit eidem Bartholomeo | ut ipsos bisancios solveret et daret Luparello Pisano vel, si Luparellus non esset presens, dicto Leonardo notario | pro parte et nomine ipsius Cherbonis, si forte de ipsa pecunia debita ab eodem Cerbone Perrono R[usso] de Messana | esset satisfactum. Cum dictus Luparellus sit absens a Messana et dictus Perronus dicat sibi de predicta pecunia non | esset satisfactum, hoc salvo quod dictus notarius Leonardus primo det sibi fideiuxsoriam cautionem idoneam | et instrumentum sibi inde faciat, silicet si aliquo tempore appareret dictum Perronum fuisse solutum | de dicto debito vel dictus Cherbonus eundem Bartholomeum de predictis exinde molestaret, conserva[ret eum] in|dempnem suis sumptibus et expensis et ei reficere omnia dampna et expensas ei factas et [faciendas] in curia | et extra; et de predictis omnibus et singulis dictum notarium Leonardum requisivit et dictam p[ecuniam coram eodem] | obstendit, dicens se paratum ei solvere dictam pecuniam pro parte ipsius Cherbonis s[uprascripti et eius heredib]us | supradictis, et cautelam predictam ideo potebat, ut dixit, a dicto notario Leonardo, quia di[cebat se] dubitaret | Peronem Russum predictum solutum a b

Leopardo in A. Alie corregge alii in A.

PERGAMENE DUE-TRECENTESCHE

193

esse vel non, hanc cartam et omnia predicta me suprascriptum notarium dictus Bartholomeus | scribere rogavit. Actum Messane, ante logiam Pisanorum, presentibus Guidone de R[ao] quondam Bur|gundii, Iacobo quondam Henrigi, Iohanne quondam Bononconti, Guilelmo Rugerii, Bonaiunta Guerreschi et Iohanne | quondam Iacobi Roggii, Pisanis, testibus ad hec rogatis et specialiter vocatis. Dominice vero incarnationis | anno Domini millesimo ducentesimo sexagesimo se[cu]ndo, indictione quarta, decimo Kalendas Iunii, secundum | cursum Pisanorum.| (S) Ego Vivianus filius Bonacorsi Viviani de Buctii, Pisanus civis, domini imperatoris iudex et notarius, | prefactis omnibus interfui et de mandato eius scripsi atque firmavi et dedi.

2 1264, agosto 17, Laiazzo Originale [A]: ACC, Diplomatico. Pergamena di mm. 170×155, in buono stato di conservazione. Al verso la notazione del luogo e dell’anno della data, un regesto di mano del XVII secolo e l’indicazione del vecchio numero di archiviazione seicentesco: “772.” In nomine Domini, amen. Ego Giraldus de Masese confiteor me habuisse et re|cepisse a te Bartolomeo de Parisono quondam tot pannos de Alexandria, | zucharum, stagnum et mastica, que omnia ascendunt in summa bisancios | mille noningentos quadraginta unum sarracenatos Syrie ad bonum et iustum pon|dus Syrie, et de quibus bisanciis erat instrumentum scriptum manu Benenca|sse notarii Pisani, ut dicimus. Ab renunciando excepcioni non habiturarum et non | recepturarum rerum et omni excepcioni sive bisanciorum. Quos bisancios | de cetero per me vel heredes meos seu aliquam personam pro me non fiet | Accio requisicio seu molestia tibi vel heredibus tuis vel bona tua in | iudicio vel extra. Et volo et iubeo instrumentum dicte accusationis esse cassum, | irritum et vacuum et nullius valoris. Alioquin, si contra facerem in predictis, | dupli de quanto et quociens contra facerem tibi stipulanti promitto, cre|dito propterea de dampnis et expensis tuo solo verbo, sine testibus et iura|mento et omni alia demum probacione. Et pro predictis omnibus et singulis observan|dis omnia bona mea habita et habenda tibi pignori obligo. Hoc ac|tum in presencia Iacobi de Morella, vicecomitisc Pisanorum | in Armenia. Actum in Aacio, ante magasenos hospitalis Sancti Iohannis, | millesimo ducentesimo sexagesimo quarto, indictione VII, circa vesperas, die XVII | Augusti, testes Canellus de Cayrono, Opicinus de Canpo et Iacobus Rubeus.| (S) Ego Iacobus Metifocus notarius Sacri Palatii rogatus scripsi.

c

Vicecomitis corr. consulis espunto in A.

194

BRUNO FIGLIUOLO

3 1273, gennaio 2, Acri Originale [A]: ACC, Diplomatico. Pergamena di mm. 260×230, in discreto stato di conservazione. Al verso un breve regesto coevo (“Donatio propter nuptias facta domine Phylippe”) e un altro di mano seicentesca, con la data dell’anno e il numero “837,” che indica la segnatura data alle pergamene in quel secolo. In eterni Dei nomine, amen. Clareat omnibus manifeste quod Iohannes Belluccus quondam Bonacorsi Bellucci de | Costantinopoli fecit domine Phylippe uxori sue et filie Iohannis Pelliccie quondam Martini Pelliccie de Costantinopoli do|naccionem propter nubtias et nomine antefacti in bonis et de bonis et super bonis suis omnibus de yperperis centum auri ad rectum | pondus de Costantinopoli, secundum consuetudinem civitatis et constituti Pisarum. Pro quibus dictus Iohannes Bellucchus obligavit et in | pigniore posuit eidem domine Phylippe sue uxori omnia bona sua mobilia et inmobilia que nunc habet et est | de cetero habiturus sub condictione, sicut mosd est de antefactis de viro ad uxorem, secundum morem et consuetudinem ci[vitatis] | Pisarum. Quam vero donationem propter nubtias et pingnoris obligationem et omnia suprascripta, dictus Iohannes Bellucchus | per stipulationem convenit et promisit suprascripte domine Phylippe sue uxori ad penam dupli estimationis suprascripti antefacti toto tempore fir|mam et ratam habere et tenere et eam in totum neque in partem aliquam ei non retollere nec diminuere et eam ei et | eius heredibus defendere et disbrigare ab omni persona et loco cum omnibus suis suorumque heredum expensis; ali|oquin predictam penam et danpna omnia et expensas omnes que inde fierent eidem domine Phylippe sue uxo|ri dare et resarcire promisit, obligando se et suos heredes et bona sua omnia dicte domine Phylippe sue | uxori et suis heredibus. Pro qua donatione propter nubtias et nomine antefacti dictus Iohannes Bellucchus confessus est | in veritate non spe future numerationis et receptionis se recepisse et apud se habere a dicto Iohanne Pe|lliccia patre suo dicte domine Phylippe sue uxoris pro sua dote et nomine sue dotis et pro ea in dotem tem|pore contracti matrimonii inter eos yperpera quingenta boni auri ad rectum pondus Constantinopolis, inde ab | ea interrogante. Renuncians exceptioni querele et non solute dotis, de quibus se bene quietum et pa|gatum vocavit. Actum Accon, in domo que fuit Benencase notarii, que est in ruga Sancti Michaelis, territorii Pisani Communis, presentibus Marignano quondam Moronis, Bellando Mellonis, Iacobo Bargia|cchia et Iohanne quondam Gualterii, Pisanis, testibus ad hec rogatis. Dominice incarnationis anno millesimo du|centesimo septuagesimo tertio, indictione prima, quarto Nonas Ianuarii.| (S) Ego Ubaldus quondam Corsi de Peccioli, imperiali auctoritate nota|rius, omnibus suprascriptis interfui et rogatus hanc inde cartam scripsi | et firmavi.

d

Mos aggiunto in margine inferiore in A.

PERGAMENE DUE-TRECENTESCHE

195

4 1281, maggio 8, Acri Originale [A]: ACC, Diplomatico. Pergamena di mm. 350×x240, in cattivo stato di conservazione, per via di un foro e di un largo strappo lungo il margine inferiore destro che pregiudicano la lettura di parecchie parole. Al verso la data con indicazione dell’anno e un breve regesto di mano del XVII secolo; il numero di archiviazione della carta, espresso in quattro cifre, risulta illeggibile. In eterni Dei nomine, amen. Universis presentem paginam inspecturis pateat evidenter quod Baialardus, | filius quondam Bonaiuncte, propter nuptias et nomine antefacti Agnetis uxoris ipsius et filie Iohannis Bel|lucci, in bonis et de bonis ipsius Baialardi donavit ipsi Iohanni Bellucco, recipienti pro ipsa Agnete | filia sua, bizantios centum saracenatos auri ad pondus Accon. Pro quibus et infrascripta dote, suprascriptus | Baialardus obligavit et pignori posuit dicto Iohanni, recipienti pro dicta Agnete filia sua, uxore | ipsius Baialardi, omnia bona sua ipsius Baialardi mobilia et inmobilia et se movensia, que omnia | aliquo modo habet et est inde antea habiturus, cum omni iure et ratione et actione et proprietate et pertinen|tiis eorum. Tali condiccione et pacto inter eos apponens, videlicet quod, si dictus Baialardus decesserit ante quam | [dicta] Agnes uxor eius et heredes ipsius Baialardi vel alia persona pro eis non dederint et non solverint | predicte Agneti uxori eius vel eius heredibus sive cui vel quibus ipsa preceperit dictos bizantios centum | saracenatos auri ad pondus Accon pro antefacto et infrascriptam dotem infra tredecim menses proximos et | completos a die obitus suprascripti Baialardi computandis, que ex tunc inde antea liceat eidem Agneti vel eius | [heredi]bus et cui vel quibus dederit vel dederint, ipsum pignus v[end]ere et alienare et pignorare et sibi re|tinere et quicquid inde facere voluerit vel voluerint, absque ulla contradictione vel m[ol]estia a[li]c[uius] persone | [vel] loci [et] si nulla condictio ibi foret appositam. Pro qua donatione propter nuptias et nomine antefacti | et pignoris obligatione et predictis et singulis predictorum dictus Baialardus, interrogatus a predicto Iohanne | Bellucco patre predicte Agnetis uxoris prefati Baialardi, confessus est se recepisse et apud se habere | ab eo pro dote et in dotem et nomine dotis ipsius Agnetis bizantios mille saracenatos auri ad pondus | Accon. Renuntiando exceptioni et querele predicte dotis non habite, non recepte et non numerate. De qua dote | prefatus Baialardus se bene solutum et pacatum vocavit. Et sollempni stipulatione dictus Baialardus con|venit et promisit dicto Iohanni Bellucco, stipulanti pro dicta Agnete filia sua, uxore prefati Baialardi, quod de ipso | pigniore et omnibus predictis et singulis predictorum et eorum occasione non imbrigabit vel molestabit neque per placitum | vel alio modo fatigabite ipsam Agnetem vel eius heredes aut quibus dederit vel heredes sui dederint ullo tempore | aliquo modo vel iure sed predictum pignus et omnia predicta et singula defendet et disbrigabit et auctorizabit. | Et actor et defensor et disbrigator inde eis erit ab omni persona et loco imbriganti vel litem indef | moventi vel facienti qualibet ratione vel causa cum suis omnibus suorumque heredum ex[pen]sis curie […] | advocationi et omnibus aliis expensis. Alioquin penam duppli extimationis dicti pig[noris] […] | qual(is) tunc inde facta fuerit et omnes expensas que inde fierent dicto Iohanni [Bellucco, stipulante] pro dicta Agnete [filia] | sua, dare et componere promisit et convenit, obligando inde se et suos heredes et bona sua omnia presentia et f[utura] | dicto Iohanni Bellucco, recipienti

e f

Modo fatigabit corregge fatigabit modo in A. Segue mo superfluo in A.

196

BRUNO FIGLIUOLO

pro dicta filia sua et eius heredibus. Renuntiando omni iuri et auxilio et de[fensione et] | exceptionibus et constitutionibus et lege et usibus et omnibus aliis quibus se et predictis vel aliquo predictorum quoqu[omodo] | vel iure tueri vel iuvare posset et nominatim a pena predicta. Actum Accon, in ecclesia Sancti Petri Pisanorum, pre[sentibus] | presbitero Benedicto de Apulia, ut ipse dicit, et Marignano de Casassi quondam Pipini et Betto Cattano quondam […] | Cattani, testibus ad hec rogatis. Anno ab incarnatione Domini secundum cursum Pisanorum millesimo ducentesimo oc[tuagesimo] secundo, indictione nona, octavo Idus Maii.| Coram quibus testibus, testibus ad hec rogatis et vocatis, post dictum instrumentum dotale roga[tum], | Baialardus iterum interrogatus a suprascripto Iohanne Bellucco confessus est se recepisse et apud se habere ab eo, [dante] | et solvente pro dote et nomine dotis prefate Agnetis filie ipsius Iohannis et uxoris prefati Baialardi, predictos | bizantios mille saracenatos auri ad pondus Accon, ut supra dictum est; et eodem modo renunciavit exceptioni | et querele predicte dotis non habite, non recepte et non numerate. Actum in suprascripto loco, anno, indictione et die predictis.| (S) Ego Bonaccursus filius quondam Periccioli, apostolice sedis notarius publicus, | predictis interfui et hec rogatus scripsi et in hanc publicam formam r[ede]gi.

5 1291, ottobre 7, Limassol Originale [A]: ACC, Diplomatico. Pergamena di mm. 549×200, in cattivo stato di conservazione, a causa di un largo strappo lungo il margine superiore destro che pregiudica la lettura di parecchie parole delle prime sette righe del rogito. Al verso un regesto di mano del XVII secolo. In Dei nomine, amen. Cum testamentum sit test[… …] | ego Baialardus quondam Bonaiuncte Pisano, burge[nsis] […] | humane fragilitatis casum, ne ab intestato deceda[m], […] | vultimas voluntates usque hodie a me facta, scripta […] meum suppremum testamentu[m] […] | […] cupationem facere concupivi et per ipsum mee suppreme [… …]m proferre sententiam et posteris insin[… …]. | Et ad memoriam et veritatem de bonis meis, meis h[eredibus …] quod Iohannes Bellucchus, socer meus, habet de bonis meis in | bizantiis bizantios duomilia saracenatos auri. Et Bellucchus, filius [suprascripti Iohannis, de] bonis meis in societate infra henticam suam bizantios triamilia saracenatos. Et | in alia parte, extra henticam, cantaria quotuordecim et rotulos undecim et dimidium piperis, extimatum bizantios centum septuaginta quodlibet cantario. | Et Iacobus, alter filius suprascripti Iohannis, de bonis meis habet infra henticam suam bizantios mille ducentos octuaginta saracenatos. Et Matheus Murscius, Pisanus | mercator, de meis bonis habet bizantios septingentos quadraginta octo saracenatos capitalis et lucrum michi contingens de lucro quod ipse fecit in presenti via|dio de Alexandria, de quo presentialiter est reversus. Et Iacobus Salmuli de Pisis tenetur michi dare bizantios trescentos saracenatos. Et Landus | Grassus tenetur michi dare bizantios ducentos nonaginta quatuor saracenatos. Et Bernarduccius Senensis habuit a me in societate infra henticam | suam bizantios trescentos capitalis et quos ipse michi dare tenetur. Et Ferrans Galgani et Filippus cancellarius habent de bonis meis in societate bizantios | quingentos triginta et quos ipsi michi dare tenentur de summa bizantiorum sexcentorum quos a me habuerunt in societate. Et infrascripti tenentur michi | dare infrascriptam quantitatem bizantiorum

PERGAMENE DUE-TRECENTESCHE

197

saracenatorum, videlicet: Compagnus de Gostantinopoli bizantios trescentos saracenatos; Petrus Galleco bizantios centum quinquaginta saracenatos; | Iohannes Bonagiunte bizantios sexcentos saracenatos; et Guido Martini de Gostantinopoli bizantios centum septuaginta saracenatos; Iacobus Pius de Gostantinopoli bizantios centum | viginti septem saracenatos. Et habeo in capsa mea, que est in hac domo habitationis mee, in pecunia bizantios quingentos saracenatos et florinos auri octuaginta | quatuor. Et omnes ioiellas, saponem et tappeta que et quas habuit a me Gerardinus nepos meus, que valuerunt et sunt valencie bizantiorum mille | quingentorum, Bartholomeo germano meo iudico et relinquo et ea habuit et ab eo peti vel exigi non possint. Et habui a Belluccho suprascripto, de hen|tica sua suprascriptorum bizantiorum trium milium, bizantios quadringentos nonaginta quinque saracenatos. E[t m] isi de meo proprio Bernarduccio Senensi in Provincia, | in navi Petri Gontarini de Veneciis, ceram et gallas valentie bizantiorum saracenatorum quingentorum vigintiquinque; et que cera et galle fuerunt honerate in dicta navi nomine Benvenuti Grassi. Et habui et recepi a Iohanne Belluccho suprascripto, dante pro Iacobo Salmuli suprascripto, bizantios nonaginta quinque saracenatos. Et dico et confiteor | quod in pipero suprascriptus Gerardinus nepos meus habet de sua pecunia bizantios centum quinquaginta saracenatos. Et volo dari dame Agneti, uxori mee, de bonis meis | bizantios mille saracenatos sue dotis et bizantios centum saracenatos sui antefacti pacifice et quiete. Et si ipsa dama Agnes innupta permanserit et lectum meum caste et hone|ste custodierit, sit iste casu nunc filiarum mearum una cum Iohanne suprascripto eius patre. Et que ipsa in predictis faciat quod voluerit suprascriptus Iohannes. Et que si nupserit, habeat | predictas rationes suas dotis et antefacti de bonis meis; et pannos suos et ioiellas suas omnes. Et dico quod Benvenutus Grassus habet de bonis meis bizantios centum | tredecim, cui dare ego teneor pro naulo bizantios viginti quinque et karatos quinque saracenatos. Iudico filiabus quondam Peregrini Bonaiunte videlicet cuilibet earum bizantios ducentos | saracenatos; et una volo quod succedat alteri decedenti innupte. Et iudico Bonaiunte quondam suprascripti Peregrini bizantios ducentos saracenatos. Et iudico filiabus Bartholomei generi | mei, que sunt tres, videlicet cuilibet earum, bizantios trescentos saracenatos. Et iudico Erini filio quondam Gallisiani bizantios centum saracenatos. Et iudico Gerardino nepoti meo | suprascripto bizantios ducentos saracenatos. Et iudico Baialardo quondam Peregrini bizantios ducentos saracenatos. Et iudico pauperibus Pisanis qui sunt Ianue carcerati bizantios centum | saracenatos. Et iudico pro redemptione captivorum christianorum qui captivi detinentur a Sarracenis bizantios centum saracenatos. Ita quod, pro unoquoque predictorum captivorum pro eius redemp|tione dentur unus vel tres bizantios, tantum ad arbitrium fideicommissariorum meorum. Et iudico Communi Pisano, pro satisfactione taliarum siquid inde retinui, bizantios decem saracenatos.g Et iudico | fratribus minoribus conventus Nimocii pro missis canendis pro anime mee remedio et salute iudico bizantios decem saracenatos. Et fratribus minoribus de Soldania iudico | bizantios decem saracenatos. Et iudico Opere ecclesie Sancti Petri Pisanorum de Gostantinopoli bizantios decem saracenatos. Et Opere ecclesie Sancti Petri de Aina bizantios decem saracenatos. Et corpus meum, si | de hac me mori contigerit infirmitate, apud ecclesiam Sancti Francisci fratrum minorum iubeo sepelliri. Et die obitus mei pro expensis funeris mei iudico bizantios triginta | saracenatos. Et iudico bizantios quinquaginta dandos pauperibus et miserabilibus personis pro animarum remedio et salute illorum a quibus aliquid inlicite habui vel extorsi, | si qua habui vel in aliquo teneor, alioquin sint pro anime mee [remedi]o et salute. Et pretium omnium pannorum mei dorsi silicet iudico et dare volo | fideicommissarios et distributores predictorum meorum ii diciorum et legatorum relinquo, et esse volo suprascriptos Iohannem

g

Bizantios decem saracenatos aggiunto in margine inferiore in A.

198

BRUNO FIGLIUOLO

et damam Agnetem et Benvenutum Grassum, | quorum et cuiusque eorum fidei et legalitati predicta committo. Quibus et cuique eorum do plenam bailiam et potestatem accipiendi de bonis meis pro predictis meis iudi|ciis et legatis dandis et solvendis. In omnibus aliis bonis meis mobilibus et immobilibus, iuribus, nominibus et rationibus, Marocciam, Zabellonem et Iovannam, | filias meas legitimas, equa lance michi heredes instituo et una alteri succedat decedenti sine filiis legittimis. Quibus filiabus meis tutores | et curatores suprascriptos Iohannem Bellucchum et Benvenutum Grassum et damam Agnetem relinquo. Quibus tutoribus et curatoribus do et concedo plenam bailiam et liberam | potestatem et auctoritatem dandi, mictendi et concedendi de bonis et rebus et de pecunia predictarum filiarum mearum in societate maris et terre quibuscumque per|sonis eis vel alicui eorum videbitur ad omnem risicum et fortunam, et omnem casum dictarum filiarum mearum et ea portare et mictere in quibuscumque partibus | seu locis ad risicum dictorum bonorum. Que omnia volo fieri et observari, dari et prestari predictis modo et forma ab omni herede meo etiam ab intestato et fidei|com[missari …] si predicta non valent et tenent seu non valerent iure testamenti seu directo volo ea valere et tenere et valeant iure codicillorum et cuiusque | vultime voluntatis et constituti Pisani et omni iure quo melius valere possunt, quia sic michi placet. Et hec est mea vultima voluntas. Et istud | solum volo valere et firmitatis robur obtinere et nulla alia. Et in tali ordine ego Baialardus infrascriptum Iohannem notarium scribere rogavi.| Actum Nimocio, in domoh Peregrini Zubellecti, presentibus Marignano Metonis, Simone dicto Filicteria, Lando Grasso quondam Guidonis, | Matheo Murscio quondam Guilielmi et Bindo Orradini, testibus ad hec rogatis. Dominice incarnationis anno millesimo ducentesimo nonagesimo | secundo, indictione quinta, Nonas Octubris secundum cursum Pisanorum.| (S) Ego Iohannes filius quondam Pauli Tholomei domini Fixia, Dei gratia serenissimi Romanorum imperatoris auctoritate notarius, predictis omnibus inter|fui et hanc inde cartam rogatus rogavi, scripsi atque firmavi et meum nomen et singnum apponendo in publicam formam | redegi.

6 1306, settembre 27, Alessandria Originale [A]: ACC, Diplomatico, erroneamente datato 19 settembre. Pergamena di mm. 362×195, in discreto stato di conservazione. Al verso regesto coevo: “Carta di messer Pero Guglielmo de Barzalona de fine de bisancii 400 Pucio Parasoni”; una notazione del XVII secolo, con indicazione dell’anno della data e un breve regesto; e indicazione novecentesca della data completa, errata nel giorno. (S) In nomine Domini, amen. Anno nativitatis eiusdem millesimo trecentesimo septimo, mensis Septembris die quarto | exeunte, indictione quinta, Alexandria, sub porticu fontici Pisanorum, presentibus Guito Carleti, Benvenuto Grasso, | Federico de Rau, Nino Sorta, civibus Pisarum, Thoma Marcheti de Barzalona, testibus ad hec vocatis et rogatis | et aliis. Petrus Guillelmi de Barzalona per se et suos heredes fecerunt Puzio de Pariscione, civii | et mercatori Pisarum, refutacionem, finem, remisionem et pactum de ulterius non petendo eum de debito carle|norum auri quadrigentorum et septuaginta quinque contemptorum in una h i

In domo ripetuto in A. Civis in A.

PERGAMENE DUE-TRECENTESCHE

199

instrumenti carta manu Peracalducii filii | quondam magistri Antonii de Mari notarius facta millesimo trecentesimo septimo, die vicessimo octavo iunii quinte in|dictionis, secundum cursum regni; quos quidem charlenos dictus Puzius de Parisone dicto Petro dare debebat pro | florenos auri quingentos, quos dictus Petrus Guillelmi deposuerat Pisis ad banchum Bonizonte Scar|si et dictus Bonizonta Pisis dicti Puzii Pariscioni nomine dederat et solverat, quam et de omni iure | et accione et de omnibus et singulis ad que ipse Puzius Pariscioni dicto Petro Guillelmi tenebatur seu teneri | poterat nomine et occasione alicuius quantitatis pecunie aut alicuius debiti naulizacionis seu occasione | alicuius promissionis vel obligacionis sibi ab ipso Puzio hactenus facte aut alicuius alterius instrumenti vel scrip|ture sive aliqua alia ratione vel causa usque ad presentem diem, et hec vel quare confessus et contemptus fuit | dictus Petrus ab ipso Puzio Pariscionis tam dictos charlenos auri quadrigentos et septuaginta | quinque habuisse et recepisse, quam quicquid dictus Puzius alio modo aliquo sibi dare tenebatur, et quare | integre solutum est predictum Petrum et satisfactum de omni debito et re et de omnibus et singulis | ad que dictus Puzius hactenus tenebatur ex aliquo instrumento vel scriptura sive ex aliqua alia ratione vel causa, | exceptione sibi non data et non soluta predicte quantitatis charlinorum quadrigentorum et septuaginta quinque | et non soluti et non dati totius eius ad que dictus Puzius dicto Petro hactenus tenebatur, ut dictum est; | omnino renuntians et volens atque mandans omnem instrumentum et scripturam in quibus appareret dictum | Puzium fuisse hactenus predicto Petro obligatum occasione aliqua ex nunc vanam et cassam esse | et inefficacem et cancellatam, nec non absolvens et liberans eum et suos heredes et bonos per acep|tillacionem et aquilianam stipullacionem legitime interpositam et promittens per se et suos heredes | dicto Puzio pro se et suis heredibus stipulans litem vel controversiam ei vel suis heredibus | aut questionem aliquam ullo tempore non inf(eret) predictorum occasione per se vel per alium sed pre|dicta omnia et singula firma et rata habere et tenere et non contrafacere vel venire per se vel | per alium aliqua ratione vel causa, de iure vel de facto, sub pena dupli totius eius quod | peteret predicto Puzio stipullanti in singulis capitulis huius contractus in solidum promissit, cum re|fectione dampnorum et expensis litis et extra et obligatione omnium bonorum suorum. Et pena soluta | vel non predicta omnia et singula firma perdurent.| Ego Franciscus, filius quondam Floravantis sartoris de Veneciis, imperiali auctoritate et nunc | domini consulis Venetiani Alexandria notarius et capellanus, predictis omnibus interfui, rogatus scripsi, | complevi et roboravi.

7 1306, settembre 27, Alessandria Originale [A]: ACC, Diplomatico. Pergamena di mm. 325×186, in discreto stato di conservazione. Al verso un regesto coevo (“Carta di fine di Pucciarello di Parazoni Isciorta e di Bulgarino Federici che […] Piero”) e una nota novecentesca con indicazione della datazione completa dell’atto. (S) In nomine Domini, amen. Anno nativitatis eiusdem millesimo trecentesimo septimo, mense Septembris | die quarto exeunte, indictione quinta, Alexandria, sub porticu fontici Pisanorum, presentibus | Guito Charleti, Benvenuto Grasso, Federico de Rau, civibus Pisarum, Thoma Marcheti | de Barzalona, testibus ad hec vocatis et rogatis et aliis. Bolgarinus Federici et Ninus | Sorte, cives Pisarum, nomine Puzii Sorte, civis earundem Pisarum et dicti

200

BRUNO FIGLIUOLO

Puzii heredibus, fecerunt Petro | Guillelmi de Barzalona et suis heredibus refuctacionem, finem, pactum et remissionem de ulterius non petendo | charlenos auri ducentos et decem contemptos in una instrumenti carta manuj Peracalduzii, filii | quondam magistri Antonii de Mari notarii, facta millesimo trecentesimo septimo, die vicessimo octavo iunii, | quinta indictione secundum cursum regni; quibus charlenis auri Puzius Parisioni erat dicto Puzio Sorte | per dictum instrumentum obligatus et de omni iure et actione et de omnibus et singulis ad que pro predictis | charlenis dictus Petrus Guillelmi vel Puzius Parisioni dicto Puzio Sorte tenebatur seu teneri | poterat nomine et occasione predictorum charlenorum ducentorum et decem; et hec ideo quare confessi et | contempti fuerunt dicti Bolgarinus Federici et Ninus Sorte ab ipsis Petro Guillelmi et Puzio | Parisioni predictis nomine dicti Puzii Sorte dictos charlenos auri habuisse et recepisse, exceptione sibi | non data et non soluta predicte quantitatis charlinorum nomine dicti Puzii Sorte omnino renuntiantes et | volentes atque mandantes dictum instrumentum in quok apparet dictos Petrum Guillelmi et Puzium Pari|sioni de dictis charlenis auri ducentis et decem dicto Puzio Sorte esse obligatos vanum et | cassum esse et inefficacem et cancellatum, nec non absolventes et liberantes eosdem et suos heredes et | bonos per acceptillationem et aquilianam stipullationem legitime interpositam et promitentes predicti Bolgarinus | Federici et Ninus Sorte per se et suis heredibus suo proprio nomine se obligantes dictis Petro Guil|lielmi et Puzio Parasioni pro se et suis heredibus stipullantes quod dictus Puzius Sorte vel ipsi dicti | Puzii Sorte nomine seu alius loco eiusdem Puzii Sorte litem vel controversiam eis vel suis | heredibus non inf(erent) ullo tempore predictorum charlinorum occasione sed predictus Puzius Sorte predicta omnia firma | et rata habebit et tenebit et non contrafaciet vel veniet per se vel per alium aliqua ratione | vel causa, de iure vel de facto, sub pena dupli totius quid peteret predictis Petro Guillelmi | et Puzio Parasioni, stipullantes per predictos Bolgarinum et Ninum, solvendos in singulis capitulis | huius contractus in solidum promisserunt, cum reffectione dampnorum et expensis litis et extra et obligatione | omnium bonorum suorum. Et pena soluta vel non predicta omnia et singula firma perdurent.| Ego Franciscus, filius quondam Floravantis sartoris de Veneciis, imperiali auctoritate et nunc domini | consulis venetiani Alexandria notarius et capellanus, predictis omnibus interfui, rogatus scripsi, complevi et | roboravi.

j k

Manu ripetuto in A. In quibus in A.

A Vocation Receptive to Outside Influences: Doctors, Hospitals and Medicine in Lusignan and Venetian Cyprus, 1191–1570 Nicholas Coureas Cyprus Research Centre [email protected]

Abstract In this article the presence and activities of doctors in Cyprus throughout the Lusignan and Venetian periods and the extent to which these were influenced by Western Europe, the Latin East and the Muslim world will be assessed and evaluated. The records for the presence of doctors are diverse, and include papal documents, the proceedings of provincial synods of the Latin Church, Venetian and Genoese notarial deeds of the thirteenth to the fifteenth centuries, legal texts, chronicles, and royal fiscal records. Despite this diversity of records, the information they provide presents imbalances. Considerable information is available on the different types of doctors active on the island, including veterinary surgeons, and less on the hospitals and how they functioned, or on the practice of medicine itself, even though some valuable items of information are found concerning these last two areas. In terms of ethnic and cultural origins it is clear from the available information that, even if most of the doctors recorded are of Western origin, Jewish and Muslim doctors were held in high regard, despite the injunctions of the island’s Latin Church against visiting doctors who were not of the Christian faith.

Introduction Cyprus, a Byzantine province that seceded in 1184 under the rebel ruler and selfproclaimed emperor Isaac Komnenos, was conquered by King Richard I of England in 1191 during the Third Crusade. He first sold Cyprus to the Templars, who after several months returned it following a rebellion by the Cypriots, and in 1192 he sold the island once more to Guy de Lusignan, the dispossessed king of Jerusalem. The Roman Catholic dynasty that Guy established ruled Cyprus for nearly 300 years but by the late fifteenth century it had been weakened on account of wars with the Genoese and the Mamluks, economic decline and increasing debt to Genoa, Venice and the Hospitallers. This facilitated the Venetian takeover of Cyprus in 1473 after the death of King James II. Venice exercised effective control of Cyprus through the late king’s widow Queen Catherine Corner, herself a Venetian noblewoman. Fearful of the growing power of the Ottomans, in 1489 Venice compelled Queen Catherine to abdicate, exercising direct rule until the Ottoman conquest of Cyprus in 1570. During the nearly four centuries of Lusignan and Venetian rule, the island’s 201

202

NICHOLAS COUREAS

medical practices were influenced by those of Western Europe, the Latin East and the Muslim World, but not Byzantium. The sources for doctors and the practice of medicine in Latin Cyprus consist of notarial deeds, chronicles, papal tax-collectors’ reports, the regulations passed at the diocesan and provincial councils of the Latin Church of Cyprus, and law codices, notably the assizes of the Court of Burgesses of Cyprus. Information exists mostly on the doctors themselves, their places of origin and whether they were medici, physici or chirurgi, rather than on medical practice, case histories, the types of treatment available and to what extent these were – or were at least considered to be – effective. In addition, paleopathology, medical analysis of excavated ancient and medieval bones, refuse and stools, has seen notable advances in the discovery of illnesses, chronic disorders and surgical interventions in Latin Syria at this period. The examination of bones from cemeteries, lost villages and forts of the crusader period has increased knowledge of illnesses and medical practices current at the time.1 In Cyprus, paleopathological studies have been more limited. In 2002–4, a total of 209 human skeletal remains were excavated in the sites of two churches with attached cemeteries in the Old City of Nicosia, and their biological profile was recorded. The burials excavated date from the late eleventh or early twelfth century to the fifteenth. Of this number, 113 skeletons were recovered in an anatomical position and 57 were commingled. The most frequent pathological injuries recorded, especially in females, were abnormalities associated with osteoporosis. Osteosclerotic injuries were recorded in the knee and ankle areas and periostitis on the lower long bones quite frequently, while a few head fractures were also attested. Infant and child mortality in Cyprus was relatively high when compared to that of a seventh-century Italian population and a Croatian population of the fourteenth to sixteenth centuries. The infant and child mortality recorded from one Cypriot cemetery was 53 percent, from the second 33.3 percent, while the corresponding figure for the Italian and Croatian populations was 21.7 percent and 21.3 percent respectively.2 One hypothesis for the increased infant mortality rate in Cyprus is immigration. The island experienced considerable immigration of Latins and Syrians from Outremer in the late thirteenth century and from Cilician Armenia in the fourteenth century, a historical fact that strengthens this hypothesis. Many of the refugees arriving in Cyprus were destitute and unable to feed themselves and their families, which increased the rate of infant mortality, at least for a few years following their arrival. The presence of a genetically diverse incoming population was also 1

Piers D. Mitchell, Medicine in the Crusades: Warfare, Wounds and the Medieval Surgeon (Cambridge, 2004), 108–23. 2 Popi Chrysostomou and Yiannis Violaris, “A Multidisciplinary Approach for the Study of the 11th–15th Century ad Human Skeletal Remains from Palaion Demarcheion, Nicosia, Cyprus,” in Medicine and Healing in the Ancient Mediterranean World, ed. Demetrios Michaelides (Oxford and Philadelphia, 2014), 226–27.

DOCTORS, HOSPITALS AND MEDICINE IN LATIN CYPRUS

203

confirmed by the analysis of 47 samples on a mitochondrial and Y-chromosome level. Out of these samples, 32 had DNA extracted from them successfully and 16 yielded enough data to be assigned in a mitochondrial haplotype. These samples support the analysis of an incoming European population. Some of the skeletons exhibited injuries normally found in cases of thalassaemia, confirming the existence of this hereditary disease as far back as medieval times. Today one in seven Cypriots is a carrier of Beta-Thalassaemia. This examination of skeletal remains in Nicosia, limited in scope, underlines the potential value of more extensive applications of paleopathology in the future and their utility in assessing the validity of the historical record.3 Nevertheless, the sources provide information on doctors in Famagusta and Nicosia, their origins, the existence of hospitals in various cities of Cyprus, and the legal framework in which doctors and veterinary surgeons practised their professions. Furthermore, they show that medical practice in Cyprus was influenced by that current in Western Europe, and that Jewish and Muslim doctors were held in high esteem. There are no references to doctors in Cyprus originating from Byzantium, however, while references to Jewish and Muslim doctors are mostly general, referring to specific individuals in a just few cases. Greek doctors originating from among the island’s Greek population are mentioned only from the fifteenth century onwards.

Cypriot Medical Personnel in the Thirteenth and Fourteenth Centuries Practically all the information on medical personnel resident in Cyprus originates from deeds drawn up by Genoese and Venetian notaries from the end of the thirteenth century to the later fourteenth century. The doctors appearing in these deeds all originate from overseas, but Jewish doctors are documented in Cyprus from as early as the early eleventh century to the Venetian period. Around 1007, Moses, a famous Jewish doctor resident in Cyprus, was summoned to Constantinople by the Byzantine Emperor Basil II to offer his expert advice on how the date of Easter should be calculated, a matter of disagreement among scholars at the imperial court.4 Yet individual doctors mentioned in the notarial deeds from 1296 onwards were western European, particularly Italian. General practitioners were described as medici. In most cases they learned the patient’s medical record, took their pulse, examined patients’ urine and recommended changes in diet, medicines or even blood-letting. Some could operate or heal open wounds and a certain number of them bore the title of magister on account of medical studies completed in European universities or other centres for the study of medicine.5 3

Chrysostomou and Violaris, “A Multidisciplinary Approach,” 228. Tassos Papacostas, “A Tenth-Century Inscription from Syngrasis, Cyprus,” Byzantine and Modern Greek Studies 26 (2002): 44. 5 Mitchell, Medicine in the Crusades, 11–12. 4

204

NICHOLAS COUREAS

The fisici, most of whom seem to have been clergymen who were well educated in the natural sciences, pharmaceutics, and the liberal arts, came from continental universities, particularly Bologna. The third type of doctor recorded in the notarial deeds, the cirurgus, corresponded to the present-day surgeon. Although it existed in earlier times, this designation is recorded more frequently from the thirteenth century onwards. There was a common perception that cirurgi were less learned than the fisici, some of whom despised the surgeon’s craft as being a form of manual labour. While surgery during the twelfth and early thirteenth centuries was taught by the method of apprenticeship, it became a subject of study at various European universities in the late thirteenth century. Surgeons based in Cyprus in the late thirteenth and early fourteenth centuries sometimes bore the title of magister. Among other things they bandaged wounds, mended broken limbs, and operated by use of specialized medical instruments.6 Two additional categories related to the practice of medicine are recorded in Cyprus. The barberi had limited education acquired by apprenticeship; they practised blood-letting and simple surgical operations. They too appear more often in the thirteenth century, when doctors performed blood-letting less frequently. The second category were the apothecaries, also named speciarii in Cypriot notarial deeds. Corresponding to the modern pharmacists, they prepared medicines on doctors’ instructions and sold them to customers (although it must be noted that the term speciarius can also mean spice-sellers, who in Lusignan Cyprus sold spices from overseas along with other groceries). Like the barberi, they appear more frequently during the thirteenth century when doctors gradually ceased to prepare medicines. References to barberi and apothecaries or speciarii are less frequent than the better-educated fisici and medici. Nevertheless, apothecaries and barberi had establishments in all the major towns of the Latin East, such as Tyre, Antioch, Acre and Famagusta.7 All these categories are recorded in the deeds of Genoese and Venetian notaries in Cyprus. The Genoese deeds consist of the five published volumes of Lamberto di Sambuceto and Giovanni da Rocha. The former worked in Famagusta in 1296– 1307 and the latter in 1308–10. The Venetian deeds consist of the two published volumes of Nicola de Boateriis, who worked in Famagusta in 1360–62 and the priest Simeone, who officiated in the church of San Giacomo dell’ Orio and worked 6 Mitchell, Medicine in the Crusades, 12 and 32; Michel Balard, William Duba and Chris Schabel, eds., Actes de Famagouste du notaire génois Lamberto di Sambuceto (décembre 1299–septembre 1300) (Nicosia, 2012), 199–201 (no. 189), 225–26 (no. 213), 271–76 (no. 253) and 319–20 (no. 301) for references to cirurgi; Romeo Pavoni, ed., Notai Genovesi in Oltremare: Atti rogati a Cipro da Lamberto di Sambuceto (Gennaio–Agosto 1302), Collana Storica di Fonti e Studi (henceforth CSFS) 49 (Genoa, 1987), 107 (no. 81) and 251–52 (no. 208) for references to fisici. 7 Mitchell, Medicine in the Crusades, 12–13 and 32; Nancy G. Siraisi, Medieval and Early Renaissance Medicine: An Introduction to Knowledge and Practice (Chicago and London, 1990), 146– 47; Balard, Duba and Schabel, Actes de Famagouste, 59–60 (no. 47), 159–60 (no. 150), 161 (no. 153), 184–88 (nos. 176–78) and 204–5 (nos. 192–93) for references to barberii; ibid., 159–60 (no. 150), 162–64 (nos. 154–56) and 226–35 (nos. 214–220) for references to speciarii.

DOCTORS, HOSPITALS AND MEDICINE IN LATIN CYPRUS

205

in Famagusta in 1362–71. The medical personnel who appear in these deeds are generally recorded as executors or witnesses. The large sums of money often involved indicate that they were summoned as important and respected members of the community. It is worth examining a selection of such deeds and the participation of the various types of medical personnel mentioned in these agreements. Prominent among the doctors were the brothers Theodore and Thomas. Theodore, a medicus by profession and member of the Knights Templar, had lent the count of Emprenza in Spain 16,350 French tournois; his brother Thomas, a fisicus by profession, acknowledged its repayment in a notarial act of December 1300. These doctors had wealth to match their exalted connections, and this reference to Theodore shows that the Templars employed their own doctor in Famagusta. Thomas is mentioned in several other notarial deeds, including one where he is recorded, on 10 February 1301, as having advanced 279 white bezants’ worth of wheat to the Genoese Giacomo de Rocha. The latter undertook to sell the grain in the kingdom of Cilician Armenia and to repay the capital and profits due to Thomas, which he did on 27 March 1301.8 Albertus de Crema was another fisicus recorded as a witness in several notarial deeds, including an agreement to form a commercial association, of which one member donated his ship, named ‘Ocellum’ and valued at 400 white bezants, for the association’s activities. Master John de Novaira, also a fisicus, is recorded in two notarial deeds as a witness to commercial transactions, one of which involved members of the aristocratic Genoese Grimaldi and da Volta families.9 Most of the medical personnel recorded in the notarial deeds of Lamberto di Sambuceto were designated as chirurgici or surgeons. The Genoese surgeon Giacomo, probably identical to Giacomo de Asti, is mentioned four times in deeds prepared between 25 July and 20 September 1300, three times as a witness and once when appointing a procurator to recover money lent for a business venture. One of these surgeons, the Genoese Giacomo de Fassano, is recorded variously in several notarial deeds drawn up between the years 1299 and 1302 as a testator, a witness, a procurator, a creditor and a debtor. In one of them, dated February 1302, he is recorded as having borrowed 530 white bezants from the Venetian Ugo Bellamare in order to undertake a maritime trading venture in Constantinople and the Black Sea region.10 The chirurgicus named Recuperatus is recorded as a witness 8 Valeria Polonio, ed., Notai Genovesi in Oltremare: Atti rogati a Cipro da Lamberto di Sambuceto (3 luglio 1300–3 agosto 1301), CSFS 31 (Genoa, 1982), 170–71 (no. 148), 177–78 (no. 154), 253–54 (nos. 217 and 217a). 9 Pavoni, Notai (1987), 70–71 (no. 49), 194–95 (no. 164) and 251–52 (no. 208); Romeo Pavoni, ed., Notai Genovesi in Oltremare: Atti rogati a Cipro da Lamberto di Sambuceto (6 Luglio–27 Ottobre 1301), CSFS 32 (Genoa, 1982), 26–28 (nos. 20–21), 72–73 (no. 53), 171–72 (no. 136) and 188–89 (no. 151). 10 Michel Balard, ed., Notai Genovesi in Oltremare: Atti rogati a Cipro da Lamberto di Sambuceto (11 Ottobre 1296–23 Giugno 1299), CSFS 39 (Genoa, 1983), 143–44 (no. 120); Pavoni, Notai (1982), 162–63 (no. 128a); Polonio, Notai (1982), 350–51 (no. 292) and 354–55 (no. 295); Pavoni, Notai (1987), 76–77 (no. 55) and 85–86 (no. 62).

206

NICHOLAS COUREAS

in four notarial deeds of January–February 1301, while his colleague Enrico de Rezo is recorded in no less than seven notarial deeds in 1301–2. In two of them he witnessed the loans of 14,252 white bezants and of 14,098 white bezants by Rolando de Rivalto, a representative of the major banking house of Pietro Diani from Piacenza in Italy, to traders shipping goods from Famagusta to Marseilles. The other five notarial deeds recording Enrico de Rezo, all from 1302, likewise involved the grant of loans.11 The notarial deeds of Giovanni da Rocha record the chirurgicus Simon de Cucurno on four occasions. In two deeds, dated 27 and 29 January 1310, he appears as a borrower, committing to return the loans within around six weeks, following his arrival in Genoa on board the galley of Giacomo de Valenza. Two other deeds of 21 and 25 January 1310 record Simon as a witness to the manumission of slaves.12 Overall, the medical personnel of Famagusta appear in the late thirteenth- and early fourteenth-century notarial deeds as affluent, socially elevated and well-travelled. Besides their medical practices, they engaged in commercial ventures, witnessed legal agreements and were able in at least one instance to advance very large sums of money to nobles outside Cyprus, such as the count of Emprenza. The diplomatic career of the Franciscan doctor Matthew illustrates the connections and important activities of medical practitioners outside their professional capacity. In 1286 Matthew became the bishop of Famagusta, as well as the personal physician to King Henry II of Cyprus, who had been crowned a year earlier and who greatly favoured the Franciscan order. When in 1286 King Henry went to Acre, to attend the formal surrender of its citadel by the French garrison to the municipal authorities, Matthew went with him and confirmed the agreement between the king and the French garrison with his seal. King Henry sent Matthew on a diplomatic mission to Genoa, possibly in 1288 when a treaty was negotiated with the Genoese Benedetto Zaccaria. The excellent relations between the Genoese and the Franciscans explain the appointment of Matthew for the task. As the bishop of Famagusta, moreover, Matthew performed diplomatic missions for the papacy. Pope Nicholas IV instructed him in a letter of May 1290 to allow the consanguineous marriage of King Henry II’s sister Margaret and Thoros, son of the late King Leo II of Armenia. He also instructed him in this letter to grant a similar dispensation so that “one of the sons of the late King Hugh of Cyprus could wed a daughter of the king of Armenia,” without, however, naming specific persons. Matthew left Cyprus for Rome in 1292, where he died in the following year.13 11 Balard, Duba and Schabel, Actes de Famagouste, 199–201 (no. 189), 225–26 (no. 213), 271–76 (no. 253) and 319–20 (no. 301); Polonio, Notai (1982), 232–33 (no. 197), 250–51 (no. 214), 260–62 (nos. 222–23) and 291–93 (nos. 246–47); Pavoni, Notai (1987), 287 (no. 239a), 306 (no. 256) and 329–33 (nos. 276–78). 12 Michel Balard, ed., Notai Genovesi in Oltremare: Atti rogati a Cipro da Lamberto di Sambuceto (31 Marzo 130 19 Luglio 1305, 4 Gennaio–12 Luglio 1307) e Giovanni de Rocha (3 Agosto 1308–14 Marzo 1310), CSFS 43 (Genoa, 1984), 339–40 (no. 48), 350–51 (no. 59), 368–69 (no. 74) and 370–71 (no. 76) (de Rocha). 13 Nicholas Coureas, The Latin Church in Cyprus, 1195–1312 (Aldershot, 1997), 235–39.

DOCTORS, HOSPITALS AND MEDICINE IN LATIN CYPRUS

207

Guido of Bagnolo, the physician of King Peter I of Cyprus, was likewise employed as a counsellor and a diplomat. The library he collected (moved in 1368 from Cyprus to Venice and known through the inventory prepared in 1380) contains thirty-eight medical manuscripts, many translated from Arabic and including seven works of Galen and one of Hippocrates. Moreover, Guido’s interests were not limited to medical treatises, for the library included three works on geometry, seven on astronomy including Ptolemy’s Almagest, and twelve philosophical works by Aristotle, John of Damascus, Avicenna and Averroes, and others. Even if the collection underwent some changes following its arrival in Venice, it nonetheless testifies to his wide-ranging interests.14 The doctors recorded in the notarial deeds of Nicola de Boateriis are all designated fisici, a term which by this time seems to encompass all categories of doctors. One of them, Alexander de Ambrosiis from Pisa, is mentioned in eight notarial deeds recording the purchase, sale and manumission of slaves, the appointment and substitution of procurators, and the safekeeping of valuable objects bequeathed in wills. A second doctor mentioned, Isaac, is of special interest as he is the first Jewish doctor recorded as resident of Famagusta during the Lusignan period. A former resident of Candia, he is mentioned as living in Famagusta in a notarial deed dated 7 December 1361, when he undertook to repay Rabbi Sambatio, described in the deed as “Sambatio sacerdote iudeo,” 112 Cretan hyperpera in exchange for leather goods. Apparently, there was a significant Jewish community in Venetian Crete at this period, with prominent physicians among them.15 A number of notarial deeds also record speciarii. One speciarius, Nasimbene, is recorded in several contracts involving the sale, purchase and manumission of slaves belonging to him, as a procurator, as a witness and as the executor of a will. These mentions indicate that like the fisici and other kinds of doctors, the speciarii were wealthy and respected members of the community, summoned on occasion to act in legal capacities outside their own profession. This was also the case of the speciarius Bartolomeo de Garopellis, alias Grapelli. He and his wife are recorded in notarial acts as purchasers of slaves and he is also mentioned as a shop-owner in the ruga mercatorum, the commercial thoroughfare of Famagusta.16 The deeds of the priest Simeone frequently record fisici and speciarii as witnesses and inheritors. In a will of April 1363, the Venetian merchant Bernabus 14 Peter Edbury, “Franks,” and Gilles Grivaud, “Literature,” both in Cyprus: Society and Culture 1191–1374, ed. Angel Nicolaou-Konnari and Christopher Schabel (Leiden, 2005), 75 and 228, 235–36 respectively. 15 Antonio Lombardo, ed., Nicola de Boateriis, notaio in Famagosta e Venezia (1355–1365) (Venice, 1973), 84–86 (nos. 80–81), 125–26 (no. 126), 128–29 (no. 129), 138–42 (nos. 141–42), 149–50 (no. 150), 186–87 (no. 173), 189–90 (no. 176) and 192–93 (no. 179); Joshua Starr, “Jewish Life on Crete under the Rule of Venice,” Proceedings of the American Academy for Jewish Research 12 (1942): 59–114, esp. 91. 16 Lombardo, Nicola de Boateriis, 58–59 (no. 53), 70–71 (no. 66), 87–88 (no. 83), 90–92 (nos. 86–87), 107–8 (no. 104), 118–19 (no. 117), 125–26 (no. 126), 129–30 (no. 130), 153–54 (no. 153), 168–70 (nos. 160–61), 172–73 (no. 164), 188–89 (no. 175) and 193–95 (nos. 180–81).

208

NICHOLAS COUREAS

Barbo bequeathed six ducats and eight bezants towards maintaining a hospitale for pilgrims on their way to the Holy Land. The medieval Latin word hospitale can mean either hospital or hostel, so it is possible but not certain that pilgrims had a hospital in Famagusta. Another bequest made in April 1363 by the Venetian merchant Antonio Bartolomei, stricken by the plague, left ten bezants apiece to his doctors. The fisicus Alexander of Pisa and the speciarius Nasimbene, probably the person mentioned above or a namesake, are recorded in several notarial deeds, mainly as witnesses. In one deed, however, Alexander of Pisa is recorded as selling a Tatar slave to the prior of the Carmelite house in Famagusta. Nasimbene, moreover, is recorded in one deed as appointing a procurator for the recovery of some goods and on other occasions as buying or selling slaves. He is also mentioned as a beneficiary and as one of the executors of the will of the Genoese merchant and burgess of Famagusta Giovanni de Benedicto.17 As apothecaries, speciarii like Nasimbene had many opportunities to earn the trust of well-connected wealthy customers who frequented their shops. In the mid-fourteenth century we have the first record of a Greek doctor in Cyprus, though probably not a native of the island. “Cosmas from Athens, the so-called doctor,” is recorded as the administrator of the estate of the nobleman Walter of Brienne.18

The Practice of Medicine as Reflected in Legal Records Medical practice is reflected in the promulgations of the diocesan and provincial synods of the Latin Church of Cyprus. Unlike the sources discussed above, they allude to Muslim and Jewish doctors who were active in Cyprus and treated Christian patients. Statutes issued by Hugh of Fagiano, the Latin archbishop of Nicosia in 1252–57, strictly prohibited Christians from visiting, taking medicine or even advice from Jewish or Muslim physicians. The reason given was that to do so would be an affront to the Christian faith, given that Jews and Muslims avoided Christian physicians.19 The prohibition seems to indicate, however, that Christians favoured Jewish and Muslim physicians, perhaps instigating complaints by Christian physicians to the archbishop. In 1283, Archbishop Ranulf of Nicosia promulgated new ecclesiastical statutes, several of which concerned the practice of medicine. The eighth canon stated that if someone fell ill, a priest should be summoned before the doctor because bodily illnesses, as Christ told the cripple he had cured, often stem from sins (John 5:14). 17

Catherine Otten-Froux, “Un notaire Vénitien à Famagouste au XIVe siècle. Les actes de Simeone, prêtre de San Giacono dell’ Orio (1362–1371),” Thesaurismata 33 (2003): 48–51 (nos. 7–8), 54–55 (nos. 13–14), 69 (no. 46), 71–72 (nos. 57–58), 72 (no. 62), 73 (no. 66), 75 (no. 73), 77 (no. 86), 88 (no. 133), 96–97 (nos. 167–68), 97 (no. 170), 98–101 (no. 175) and 105–106 (no. 182). 18 Angel Nicolaou-Konnari, “Greeks,” in Cyprus: Society and Culture 1191–1374, ed. Angel Nicolaou-Konnari and Christopher Schabel (Leiden, 2005), 54. 19 Christopher Schabel, trans., The Synodicum Nicosiense and other Documents of the Latin Church of Cyprus, 1196–1373 (Nicosia, 2001), 96–97 (A.XIV).

DOCTORS, HOSPITALS AND MEDICINE IN LATIN CYPRUS

209

The doctor could be summoned after the priest had administered the sacrament of the Eucharist to the patient. If, moreover, he wished to apply any ointment he could only apply the oleo infirmorum and no other ointment. The ninth canon stated that if a doctor was called first, he should urge the patient to summon a priest and confess his sins, or else the doctor would be excommunicated. The tenth canon, inspired by Canon 22 of the Fourth Lateran Council of 1215, reiterated Archbishop Hugh’s prohibition discussed above while adding that, since the soul is more important than the body, a doctor could not prescribe treatment beneficial to the body but harmful to the soul. This canon specifically prohibited Christian patients from seeking treatment by Jewish or Muslim doctors, who could not be involved with the care of Christian souls. A final reference to medical matters in the statutes of the Latin Church of Cyprus appears under Archbishop John del Conti in 1320, mentioning Michael of Antio, described as a professor in the art of medicine, who witnessed these regulations.20 It is clear that the rulings regarding medical practice by diocesan and provincial synods in the thirteenth century aimed at preventing Christians from seeking the advice of Muslim and Jewish doctors, and ensuring that even Christian doctors played a secondary role in relation to priests. It is impossible to know to what extent these regulations were implemented and obeyed. Looking at the wider context, one observes that thirteenth-century church councils held in Treves in 1227 and Albi in 1254 condemned the treatment of Christian patients by Jewish doctors. Provençal legislation of 1306 stated that Jewish doctors might prevent Christian patients from receiving the last sacraments, a concern repeated at the fourteenth-century church councils of Avignon in 1341 and of Barcelona, held in c. 1350. The council of Valladolid in 1322 and that of Salamanca in 1335 went as far as to accuse Jewish and Muslim doctors of killing Christians “under the guise of medicine, surgery or apothecary.”21 Besides, it must be remembered that the prominence of Jews in the medical profession, in Europe and the Middle East, was then a recent development. Only from the eleventh century and more so from the twelfth did the number of Jewish doctors increase in the Islamic world. Arabic, the language of science at that time, was their language, affording them indirect access to Greek medical words in Arabic translation. As Shatzmiller has pointed out, “Jews compensated for their lack of a genuine Hebrew medical tradition by relying on their brethren in the Moslem world who had already entered the world of medicine.” Jews migrating from Muslim lands to Western Europe brought their knowledge with them. Such migrants, prominent among them being Judah ben Saul ibn Tibbon from Granada, 20 Schabel, Synodicum, 130–33 (B. 10) and 234–35; Conciliorum Oecumenicorum Generaliumque Decreta, eds. Giuseppe Alberigo and Alberto Melloni, 2 vols. (Turnhout, 2013), vol. II/1, 178–79 (no. 22); Christopher Schabel, “Religion,” in Cyprus: Society and Culture 1191–1374, ed. Angel NicolaouKonnari and Christopher Schabel (Leiden, 2005), 162–63. 21 Nicholas Coureas, “The Reception of Arabic Medicine on Latin Cyprus, 1200–1570,” Egypt and Syria in the Fatimid, Ayyubid and Mamluk Eras, vol. 6, ed. Urbain Vermeulen and Kristof D’ Hulster (Leuven, 2010), Orientalia Lovaniensia Analecta, no. 183: 221–22.

210

NICHOLAS COUREAS

used their knowledge of Arabic during the later twelfth century to translate philosophical and scientific works into Hebrew, thereby making the medical works translated accessible to the Jews of Western Europe.22 The only specific reference to a Muslim practising medicine in Cyprus concerns a captive named Husam al-Din Abū Al-Fadhail. According to the Muslim historian al-Aynī, whose account is also found with minor differences in the writings of Abū al-Mahasin ibn-Taghrībirdī, both writing in the fifteenth century, Husam was born in 1233 and was allegedly captured by the “people of the Mountain,” perhaps an oblique reference to the Assassins. Subsequently sold to the Franks, he became a physician in Cyprus. It was reported that when the king fell ill Husam treated him. Prior to his recovery, the king had promised Husam that were he to recover, he would grant Husam his freedom and send him back to Muslim territory. Tragically, Husam himself fell ill with diarrhoea and died a few days after the king’s recovery, in 1270.23 If this story is true, the king was Hugh III (1267–84), who apparently ignored the ecclesiastical ban on recourse to non-Christian physicians. The Assizes of the Court of Burgesses of the Kingdom of Jerusalem is a collection of secular, not ecclesiastical, statutes, initially compiled in French c. 1251 by a clerk of the Court of Burgesses of Acre and translated into colloquial Cypriot Greek in the fourteenth century. It contains articles on the practice of medicine and veterinary surgery. One concerns persons charged with assault and inflicting an open wound. In such cases a doctor would be summoned to examine the wound. If he declared it not dangerous, a day for the hearing of the case would be determined. If he declared the wound dangerous, the assailant would be arrested and detained until a decision was made. If the assailant and the victim were not reconciled and the former found guilty, his penalty would be hand amputation.24 Medical negligence also attracted the attention of medieval legislators. Thus, if a doctor undertook to treat a wounded slave, having made an agreement and accepted payment from the slave’s owner, and then caused the slave’s death by malpractice, the court would order remuneration of the slave’s value and expulsion from the city where the surgery was performed.25 Likewise, if the slave had a boil in a dangerous place, and the doctor should have placed on it soft objects so as to tenderize and mature it, but instead placed warm and dry things upon it, causing the malady to spread inwards and the slave to die, the doctor was obliged to pay for him. If the slave suffered a head injury, or in his hand muscles, or some other dangerous place, and should one or two days have passed before the doctor changed his dressings, and had he placed things 22

Joseph Shatzmiller, Jews, Medicine and Medieval Society (London, 1994), 10–13. Tahar Mansouri, ed. and trans., Chypre dans les sources arabes médiévales (Nicosia, 2001), 83. 24 David Jacoby, “The fonde of Crusader Acre and its Tariff: Some New Considerations,” in Dei gesta per Francos: Crusade Studies in Honour of Jean Richard, ed. Michel Balard, Benjamin Z. Kedar and Jonathan Riley-Smith (Aldershot, 2001), 227–28 and 278, n. 5; The Assizes of the Lusignan Kingdom of Cyprus, trans. Nicholas Coureas (Nicosia, 2002) (henceforth Assizes), 18–19, Codex One, 127 (§118), Codex Two, 294 (§115). 25 Assizes, Codex One, 180 (§225); Codex Two, 348 (§223). 23

DOCTORS, HOSPITALS AND MEDICINE IN LATIN CYPRUS

211

upon it which were so hot as to cause the loss of the hand or thigh muscles, and the wound to become gangrenous, or else this happened because it was neglected and not treated daily, and so he died, the doctor was obliged to pay whatever the slave had cost. The law on medical negligence, however, was not completely one-sided. If the doctor proved through trustworthy witnesses that the person in his care slept with a woman, drank wine, or ate unsuitable food failing to follow the doctor’s prescriptions, the law decreed that even if the doctor had not treated him properly he was not obliged to pay anything for him. This chapter, as Susan Edgington has observed, also shows that doctors were expected to practise according to the prevailing theories and to offer advice on the diet a patient should follow.26 If, however, the doctor failed to instruct the patient to abstain from certain foods and drinks or to avoid the company of women, but the patient did these to excess and thereby died, the law decreed that the doctor had to pay his value. The doctor was expected to prescribe a diet and prohibit harmful behaviour, lest he should bear the blame himself. But should some mishap have befallen the doctor in the process of treatment, were he to be taken captive by Muslims, fallen ill, or suffered some other danger preventing him from treating a patient, who eventually died, in such cases he would not be required to make good for any loss. If, moreover, a doctor maltreated a free man or woman as described above, and they consequently died, the law decreed that this doctor should be hanged and his property confiscated, unless he had taken anything from the deceased, in which case it should be given back to the family.27 Likewise, if a doctor treated a male or female slave for a broken arm or foot, promising to cure them properly and even making an oath to that effect, but treated them so badly with his plasters, leaving them maimed for life, the law decreed that he had to pay the slave’s full cost. If the doctor could not pay in full, the slave would remain with his master and the doctor would compensate for the slave’s devaluation. Indeed, if the maimed patient happened to be Christian (i.e. free), the law decreed that the doctor should lose his hand and suffer no further harm, other than return anything which he might have unlawfully taken from the patient.28 The above rulings on medical negligence were grounded in Roman law, one of the three sources of law for the Assizes of the Burgess Court, along with the canon law of the Roman Catholic Church and Germanic customary law. Roman law considered a slave to be an instrumentum vocale, a talking thing. Therefore, a doctor responsible for a slave’s death or maiming only had to pay his market value, or for his devaluation. Indeed, the concept that a doctor causing a slave’s death by malpractice had to pay the owner the value of the deceased slave is grounded specifically in a law passed during the time of the Roman republic and named the 26 Assizes, Codex One, 180–81 (§225), Codex Two, 348–49 (§223); Susan B. Edgington, “Medicine and Surgery in the Livre des Assises de la Cour des Bourgeois de Jérusalem,” Al-Masāq 17 (2005): 88–89. 27 Assizes, Codex One, 181 (§225), Codex Two, 349 (§223). 28 Assizes, Codex One, 181–82 (§225), Codex Two, 349 (§223).

212

NICHOLAS COUREAS

Lex Aquileia. This law dealt with damages caused to goods, including slaves.29 Were the inflicted a free person, the doctor had to pay with his own life and property if he had caused the patient’s death, and to lose his hand if he had maimed him. This principle was constant in all cases of medical negligence. The lengthy ruling from the Assizes of the Burgess Court discussed in the following paragraphs illustrates the principle expressed above. In addition, it describes doctors’ prescriptions for various illnesses, along with the medical and surgical practices doctors were expected to follow according to the laws of Lusignan Cyprus. Detailed are the procedures and examinations, and in whose presence they are to be performed, when doctors coming from overseas wished to practise medicine in Cyprus. The section on procedures is of particular historical interest, reporting straightforwardly the traditions not only of the Latin East but of the Muslim world, as shall be explained below. If a doctor was paid to care for a slave sick with an upset stomach and gave him laxatives or hot substances, causing his liver to become rotten affecting his stomach and his intestines, failing to administer drying and cold substances as he should have, by law the doctor had to give a similar slave or else his price. If a slave was ill with fever and the doctor cut his veins before the right time, drew too much blood and worsened the patient’s condition to the point that he was driven insane and died, the doctor had to pay the slave’s worth. If a doctor who treated a slave suffering from extreme cold, foolishly cut his veins because he did not know how to diagnose his urine, causing the patient to develop a dry cough and lose his voice, causing his chest to dry up due to the cold and the open veins and eventually die, he would have to pay the master the slave’s value.30 If a slave suffered from dropsy, and a doctor rubbed his stomach on the place of the illness, and did not properly draw out the abdominal fluids, causing the slave to lose the use of his tongue and die, the doctor had to replace the slave. If a slave was ill with daily bouts of fever and cold, and a doctor treated him with a purgative or medicament, but administered the potion in the early evening or at midnight with so much scammony that the patient died soon after due to vomiting all his innards, his lungs and his liver, or because the medicine was given in such way as not pass through the stomach, then the doctor had to offer the owner due payment. If a slave was sick in his anal passage and a doctor gave him a powder or a strong herbal drink, causing his death, or else used an extremely hot iron, intending to cauterize the source of the trouble but doing it improperly, burnt the head of the patient’s intestine in such way that prevented him from performing natural functions and caused him to die, he had to pay the slave’s value. It is noteworthy that dropsy was considered practically incurable at the time. According to Usama ibn Munqidh, a twelfth-century Muslim noble from Shaizar whose memoirs are a valuable historical source, Yuhanna ibn 29

Adam M. Bishop, “Les Assises de la Cour des Bourgeois de Jérusalem, la question de leurs sources,” in Autour des Assises de Jérusalem, ed. Jérôme Devard and Bernard Ribémont (Paris, 2018), 117–25. 30 Assizes, Codex One, 183–84 (§227), Codex Two, 350–51 (§225).

DOCTORS, HOSPITALS AND MEDICINE IN LATIN CYPRUS

213

Butlan, a famous Christian doctor practising in eleventh-century Antioch and the author of various medical treatises, maintained that there was no efficacious cure for this illness.31 Doctors who failed to cure slaves who eventually died, had to pay their value only if they had accepted a fee. For example, if a doctor agreed to treat a slave sick with leprosy or a similar illness, on condition that when healed the doctor would receive half of the sale price when the slave was sold, but failed to cure him and the slave died, the doctor did not have to pay the owner anything since he had already forfeited payment for his labour. If, however, the doctor had treated in such manner a free man or woman he would be hanged, and all his possessions would go to the sovereign. Prior to his hanging he would be paraded around the town holding a urinal in his hand to discourage others from evildoing. All cases of medical negligence had to be witnessed by at least two persons before the doctors were found guilty. Should the doctor deny the charges, the witnesses had to swear on the Gospels that they saw him maltreat the patient, who died on account of such medicines, rather than due to some other condition, and that they had heard the patient state before death that his insides were disturbed. A doctor found guilty would pay for the slave, or would be hanged if the deceased was a Christian. The fact that doctors could not be convicted on unsupported testimony afforded some legal protection and explains, at least partly, why practitioners of medicine were prepared to practise a profession that potentially had very harsh penalties for failure.32 It is noteworthy that the Assizes do not prescribe a penalty for a doctor who had caused the death of free Jewish or Muslim patients. Even if, as stated above, Jews and Muslims only visited doctors of their own faith, it is nonetheless surprising that the law did not provide for such cases. Foreign doctors in Cyprus could treat Christians according to the provisions of the law, but the relevant provisions never referred to doctors treating non-Christian patients. The law defined a foreign doctor as one coming from across the sea or from a Muslim country, clearly a phrasing from the time when the Latins held parts of Syria and Palestine, for in the case of Cyprus all foreign doctors would have to cross the sea. The Assizes stipulated that a foreign doctor should not treat a Christian unless the patient was first examined by the best doctors of the country, and with the bishop present. Once approved, a foreign doctor would receive from the bishop licence to practise medicine in the city. If the doctor’s skills were found deficient, he had to leave the city by royal and bishop’s orders. If a doctor practised medicine without permission, the court was to have him seized and paraded around outside the city by law and according to the assizes of Jerusalem.33 31

Assizes, Codex One, 184 (§227), Codex Two, 351–52 (§225); Svetlana Bliznyuk, “I medici e la loro arte negli stati crociati d’Oriente,” in Oriente e Occidente tra Medioevo ed Età Moderna, ed. Laura Balletto (Acqui Terme, 1997), 92. 32 Assizes, Codex One, 185 (§227), Codex Two, 352–53 (§225); Edgington, “Medicine and Surgery,” 90. 33 Assizes, Codex One, 185 (§227), Codex Two, 353 (§225).

214

NICHOLAS COUREAS

The fact that even in secular legislation the bishop had to be present during the examination of the doctor from overseas and to give him written permission before he could practise underscores the importance of the Latin Church in the legal procedures involving the practice of medicine. But it also evokes another tradition, that of the muhtasib in Muslim lands, the mathesep as he is referred to in the legislation of the Latin East. This official, responsible for enforcing fair trade in the markets and public morality, was also under obligation to ensure the maintenance of standards in various crafts and professions, including medicine. This is apparent from the recently translated Book of the Islamic Market Inspector. The author of the original, Al-Shayzari, lived in Syria during the twelfth century and wrote the work for Saladin (1169–93). His work included chapters on phlebotomists, cuppers, apothecaries, physicians, oculists, bone-setters and surgeons. The chapter on physicians outlines their required level of knowledge and their obligation to take the Hippocratic oath in the presence of the muhtasib, who then examined them on Galen and a book written by Hunayn ibn Ishaq. Furthermore, the muhtasib had to ensure that the physicians wishing to practise medicine had a complete set of medical instruments. The muhtasib also examined oculists, bone-setters and surgeons on their knowledge of books relevant to their profession and on anatomy. Clearly the regulations in the Assizes on examining doctors and compelling them to take an oath are based on similar practices in Muslim lands.34

Veterinary Surgery, Practice and Legal Framework The Assizes of the Court of Burgesses contain articles on the practice and liabilities of veterinary surgery in Cyprus, with the focus of attention on penalties imposed if the practitioner failed to cure the sick animal, which died or was maimed in consequence. From the relevant legislation it is clear that those undertaking to heal animals were blacksmiths by profession, who nonetheless seemed to have also been entrusted with the treatment of sick animals. The relevant legislation stated that should a person, whether a knight or a burgess, send his beast to a blacksmith for it to be shod or healed, and the latter treated it so badly that it was maimed, or died, then if the owner of the horse was a liegeman, the blacksmith should give him 50 bezants for having killed his horse. If it were a mule or a bullock, he should give him 40 bezants, or 20 according to the second extant Greek manuscript, with the following proviso: the animal that had been killed or maimed should be kept by the blacksmith along with its hide. If the owner of the dead or maimed animal was not a liegeman but a knight or a burgess, the blacksmith had to compensate him with a similar beast, or with its value on 34

Edgington, “Medicine and Surgery,” 91–92; Ghada Karmi, “State Control of the Physicians in the Middle Ages: An Islamic Model,” in The Town and State Physician in Europe from the Middle Ages to the Enlightenment, ed. Andrew W. Russell, Wölfenbutteler Forschungen 17 (Wolfenbüttel, 1981), 74–77.

DOCTORS, HOSPITALS AND MEDICINE IN LATIN CYPRUS

215

the day it was brought for treatment. If the blacksmith shoeing the horse maimed it, causing water to enter the body as a result of the nailing, for this wound the blacksmith had to pay the animal’s worth.35 Likewise, if a blacksmith caused a horse to lose its eyesight while attempting to remove claws from the eyes, the blacksmith had to provide a comparable animal or its price. If while attempting to cauterize a horse the blacksmith wounded or killed it, he had to make amends for it. With regard to any malpractice by a blacksmith treating an animal, the law decreed that artisans of whatever art or craft who caused damage to something belonging to another should compensate for the damage. Whereas no specific penalties are prescribed it is reasonable to assume that the blacksmith at fault would have to pay either the animal’s value in the case of death or its depreciation value in the case of injuring it. It is noteworthy, moreover, that the social status of the animal’s owner determined the compensation, for liegemen received more than simple knights or burgesses.36 The regulations of the Order of the Templars afford additional information on veterinary practice. The Templar Rule tells of a wealthy Cypriot who sent his sick horse to the Templar house to be cured. The prior, however, used the cured horse in hunting expeditions to catch hares, in which the horse eventually died from a wound. The feckless prior then went to Acre, to implore the order’s general assembly for clemency. Despite differences of opinion, it was decided to expel him from the order and he narrowly escaped imprisonment for his grave offence, given that horses were valuable animals in peace and war, for knights and nobles customarily rode and fought on horseback.37

Valetudinarian Establishments in Cyprus The ambiguous meaning of the Latin term hospitale makes it difficult to determine whether establishments in Cyprus described as such were hospitals or simply hostels, but it can be asserted that hospitals were to be found in Nicosia and in the principal port city, Famagusta. A letter of Pope Honorius III from 1216 provides the first reference to a hospital in Lusignan Cyprus. The letter provides a list of the daughter-houses of the Greek monastery of St. Theodosius in Palestine, stating that this monastery had several dependent churches with hospitals attached in Jerusalem, Jaffa, Jubail and Ascalon. In the Latin kingdom of Jerusalem such hospitals, often attached to a church, were located in places frequented by pilgrims. The church of St. Nicholas was the daughter house in Nicosia of the Greek monastery of St. Theodosius and the hospital attached had its own orchard.38 35

Assizes, Codex One, 182 (§226), Codex Two, 349–50 (§225). Assizes, Codex One, 182–183 (§226), Codex Two, 350 (§225). 37 Judith Upton-Ward, trans., The Rule of the Templars: The French Text of the Order of the Knights Templar (Woodbridge, 1992), 156, no. 606. 38 Jean Richard, “Hospitals and Hospital Congregations in the Latin Kingdom of Jerusalem during 36

216

NICHOLAS COUREAS

The abovementioned Genoese and Venetian notarial deeds drawn up in Famagusta during the late thirteenth and fourteenth centuries refer to one or possibly two hospitals in the city, dedicated to St. Anthony. The earliest such deed of Lamberto di Sambuceto is dated to 27 December 1296 and refers to a Genoese hospital dedicated to St Anthony. The description of the hospital as Genoese is perhaps erroneous, for all subsequent notarial acts referring to the hospital of St. Anthony in Famagusta describe it as belonging to the Order of St. Anthony of Vienne, which was established at La Motte-aux-Bois in France at the end of the eleventh century, and assumed its abovementioned name from the fourteenth century onwards. The monks of this order dedicated themselves to the care of the sick, especially those suffering from gangrene. They followed the Rule of St. Augustine and secured recognition as an independent monastic order from Pope Innocent IV in 1247. Pope Boniface VIII upgraded the order’s mother-house to an abbey in 1297.39 In a second deed of Lamberto di Sambuceto, dated 24 October 1300, a monk of this order, Theobald of Vienne, absolved Symeon, a priest of the church of St. Marina of Tortosa, from the penalty of excommunication, probably for an illicit visit to Tortosa in violation of the papal embargo of 1292 decreed after the fall of Latin Syria to the Muslims. Symeon then expressed his intent to join the order for life. It is noteworthy that this order in Famagusta received numerous bequests from Genoese. Information on the possible location of the hospital of the Order of St. Anthony of Vienne is recorded in several notarial deeds. A deed of 8 June 1300 describes its location as being circa litus maris, i.e. close to the shoreline. On the basis of this information, Camille Enlart likewise placed the hospital on the shoreline of Famagusta. It must be pointed out, however, that the document in question refers to a hospitale without stating specifically that it was attached to the Order of St. Anthony of Vienne, leaving open the possibility, albeit slight, that it refers to the hostel of the Hospitaller knights of St. John in Famagusta.40 Two notarial deeds, one of 31 March 1300 recording the sale of a Muslim slave and another of 25 April 1300 recording the receipt of goods from a caulker, for which the recipients promised to make payment over the next three months, allude to commercial transactions concluded either in front of or opposite the hospital. A deed of October 1296 records the conclusion of a commercial transaction “at the abode of the hospital where Bocchino de Claro was in residence,” the merchant in question being a member of the Florentine banking house of Bardi. Furthermore, a deed of 1299 recording the transportation of cotton from Aleppo to Barcelona via Famagusta was signed “in the square or forecourt of the hospital of Famagusta.” A the First Period of the Latin Conquest,” in idem, Croisés, missionnaires et voyageurs (London, 1983), no. II, 91. 39 Balard, Notai (1983), 33–34 (no. 24); Michel Balard, “Les Génois dans le royaume médiéval de Chypre,” in idem, La Méditerranée médiévale (Paris, 2006), 143; Adalbert Mischlewski, “Antoniusorden, Antoniter,” in Lexikon des Mittelalters, 10 vols. (Munich and Zurich, 1980–99), 1: cols. 734–35. 40 Polonio, Notai (1982), 70–71 (no. 61); Balard, Duba and Schabel, Actes de Famagouste, no. 138; Camille Enlart, Gothic Art and the Renaissance in Cyprus, trans. David Hunt (London, 1987), 288–90.

DOCTORS, HOSPITALS AND MEDICINE IN LATIN CYPRUS

217

notarial deed of 5 May 1302 recording a dowry contract describes the hospital as being near the fish market, also suggesting a location by the coast.41 This hospital, or both hospitals if the allusion to a distinct and homonymous Genoese hospital is not mistaken, received several bequests. On 19 January 1301 the Genoese merchant Januinus Ralla bequeathed one bezant and in August 1301 the Genoese merchant Paganus de Fellino bequeathed five bezants. In the notarial act of 27 December 1296 referring to a Genoese hospital of St. Anthony, the merchant Nicholas Balneo, a resident of the port of Laiazzo, bequeathed eleven bezants to the hospital; while in July 1300 the Genoese merchant Nicholas de Raynaldo bequeathed it 25 bezants. The Genoese merchant Ansaldo de Sexto bequeathed the hospital, or a workshop attached to it, two bezants in his will dated 26 April 1302. The heavily Genoese bias of these bequests, all from the notarial acts of a Genoese notary, do not necessarily indicate that only Genoese gave donations to the hospital of St. Anthony; other records may have not survived. Some deeds of the Venetian notary Nicola de Boateriis record bequests in the second half of the fourteenth century. Bartolomeo Gritti, a Venetian resident of Famagusta, bequeathed 50 bezants to the “monastirium Sancti Antonii ordinis heremitorum,” that is, the Order of St. Anthony of Vienne, on 29 July 1361, expressing his desire to be buried on its grounds. This particular deed is proof that the order and its hospital continued functioning in Famagusta well into the fourteenth century.42 The Hospitaller Order of St. John of Jerusalem founded a large hospital in Limassol in 1297 “at no moderate expense,” as the documentation states. This hospital was transferred to Rhodes in 1309. A letter of Pope Boniface VIII from January 1297 to the Latin clergy in general urged them to offer generous financial subventions to the Hospitallers so that they could equip the recently constructed hospital at Limassol for assisting the sick and the poor. This hospital was built to meet the needs of the wave of refugees fleeing to Cyprus in 1291 after the Mamluk capture of Acre and Tyre. The construction must have burdened Hospitaller finances considerably, hence the papal appeal. Yet one wonders why this hospital was built in Limassol when most refugees settled in Famagusta. A possible explanation is that the Hospitallers had more land in Limassol, and could build a hospital there without incurring the extra expense of buying land for its construction.43 The ambiguity regarding the meaning of hospitale is not particular to Cyprus. In discussing the Hospitallers’ medical tradition, Anthony Luttrell noted the terminological confusion between the poor, the sick and the sick poor in Hospitaller 41 Balard, Duba and Schabel, Actes de Famagouste, 101–2 (no. 91) and 121–22 (no. 111); Balard, Notai (1983), 13–15 (no. 10) and 177–78 (no. 150); Pavoni, Notai (1987), 302–3 (no. 253). 42 Polonio, Notai (1982), no. 22; Pavoni, Notai (1982), 59–62 (no. 46); Balard, Notai (1983), 33–34 (no. 24); Pavoni, Notai (1987), 219–23 (no. 185); Lombardo, Nicola de Boateriis, 179–82 (no. 168). 43 Mitchell, Medicine and the Crusades, 61–85; Anthony Luttrell, The Town of Rhodes 1306–1356 (Rhodes, 2003), 75 and 99–100; Cart Hosp, 3: no. 4336; Anthony Luttrell, “The Hospitallers’ Medical Tradition: 1291–1530,” in idem, The Hospitaller State on Rhodes and its Western Provinces, 1306–1462 (Aldershot, 1999), no. X, 68 n. 29; Nicholas Coureas, “The Provision of Charity and Hospital Care on Latin Cyprus,” Epeterida Kentrou Epistemonikon Ereunon (henceforth EKEE) 27 (2001): 42–43.

218

NICHOLAS COUREAS

statutes. A statute of 1357 regarding the Hospitaller hospital in Rhodes stated that its purpose was to serve pilgrims and the ‘poor sick’, and Niccolò da Martoni observed in 1395 that this hospital had beds for pilgrims and the sick. In 1298 a hospice was founded at Niederweisel in Hesse, Germany with specific reference to the poor sick and to pilgrims. But the hospital of Triquetaille in France, founded by the local archbishop and then granted to the Hospitallers, was no longer functioning as a hospital after 1338 but was simply feeding two paupers and granting weekly alms. The Hospitaller hospice in Naples is recorded in 1373 as catering to paupers, but with a medicus present to care for the sick. In around 1408 the prior of Toulouse founded a hospital in a former Templar house there serving the sick, the poor and the pilgrims bound for Santiago. Around 1445 the prior of Navarre founded a large hospice for the sick and the poor at Puente de la Reina, likewise on the route to Santiago. These examples show that, in Rhodes and in Europe as well as in Cyprus, hospitals and hospices could have the dual purpose of ministering to both the unwell and the indigent.44 The Cypriot crown maintained its own valetudinarian establishment in Cyprus. The impetus, as with the Hospitallers, was the arrival of refugees from the Holy Land, especially after 1291. Deeds of Lamberto di Sambuceto from 1300–1 and a letter of Pope John XXII of 30 June 1333 refer to a royal hospital in Nicosia. Bernard Faxit, a merchant from Narbonne, bequeathed a sum to the royal hospital in Nicosia, dedicated to St. Julian, on 5 December 1300. This hospital perhaps came under royal ownership in the early fourteenth century, for in the thirteenth century a homonymous hospital in Nicosia belonged to the Roman Catholic Order of the Cruciferi, that had received its rule under Pope Alexander IV. The thirteenthcentury bulls of Pope Gregory IX and Pope Clement IV recognized the hospitals of the Holy Spirit in Acre and of St. Julian in Nicosia as being under the jurisdiction of this order. The Cruciferi, moreover, had hospitals in parts of Latin Greece, the Cyclades, Crete, Euboea and Constantinople.45 In 1310–11, during the trial of the Templars, one of the non-Templar witnesses, Brother Francis, is described as the prior of St. Julian of Nicosia of the Holy Cross, and so the royal takeover must have been temporary. In the accounts of the papal collectors for the years 1357–63, the prior of St. Julian is recorded as having paid 13 bezants in triennial tenths, the paltry sum perhaps denoting the poverty of this establishment, dedicated to healing the sick. The priory is mentioned once again in the accounts of the papal collectors in the period from November 1362 to October 1365, this time however, contributing the respectable sum of 78 bezants in triennial tenths. On 8 September 1350, moreover, Bartholomew de Cassica, the prior of St. Julian, was granted papal permission to travel to the Holy Land to visit the Holy Sepulchre, as well as a papal absolution at the point of death. The priory of St. Julian is also recorded by Stephen de Lusignan in both his accounts and in his 44

Luttrell, “The Hospitallers’ Medical Tradition,” 64, 69, 75–77 and 79. Polonio, Notai (1982), 162–67 (no. 145); Charles Perrat and Jean Richard, eds., Bullarium Cyprium, vol. 3 (Nicosia, 2012), 148, no. r-489. 45

DOCTORS, HOSPITALS AND MEDICINE IN LATIN CYPRUS

219

later one, the Description, he described the Crucifers of the priory of St. Julian as dressed in blue and always holding a small silver cross in one hand.46 The hospital in Nicosia that was royal from the outset was the one built under King Hugh IV, dedicated along with its chapel to the Virgin Mary and recorded in the abovementioned letter of Pope John XXII dated 30 June 1333, which relieved the hospital from the jurisdiction of the Latin archbishops of Nicosia. The deeds of Lamberto di Sambuceto also provide references to royal hospitals in Famagusta. A deed of 23 June 1301 refers to a loan transaction agreed at the royal hospital of Famagusta, in which Bernardo de Sangidra de Beerci acknowledged the receipt of 50 white bezants, promising the lender Pietro Gimberto de Beerci to repay him upon request. Furthermore, a certain Theodore witnessing an agreement between the Hospitallers and a Montpellerin merchant is referred to as “a clerk of the hospital in Famagusta,” although whether this was the royal hospital is unclear. Another witness to a commercial transaction concluded in Famagusta on 2 August 1301, Constantine son of Basil, is described as a resident of the area “by the hospital of his royal highness.”47 The Flanci constituted a Roman Catholic fraternity, in many respects obscure, that according to the will of the Narbonnese merchant Bernard Faixit dated 5 December 1300 had its own churches for men and women belonging to this fraternity, while in Famagusta it possessed a church with a hospital attached. Faixit bequeathed 13 white bezants to this establishment. The Order of St. Lazarus, dedicated to the treatment of lepers appears to have had a branch in Cyprus as well. Three deeds of Lamberto di Sambuceto record bequests to the Order of St. Lazarus in Nicosia. Two Genoese residents of Famagusta, Pellegrinus Calegarius and Nicolaus de Camezana, each bequeathed two bezants to the lepers of Famagusta in 1301, with one will referring explicitly to “the lepers of St. Lazarus in Famagusta.” A reference to the house of the Order of St. Lazarus in Nicosia in the will of Bernard Faixit records how he bequeathed two bezants to the lepers of Famagusta and a further three “to the infirm of St. Lazarus.”48 Keeping in mind the ambiguity of the term hospitale, we also note St. Stephen, an establishment mentioned in a letter of Pope John XXII dated 1 August 1328. The letter states that the Genoese Stephen Draperius had founded a “hospitale” in 46

Anne Gilmour-Bryson, ed., The Trial of the Templars in Cyprus: A Complete English Edition (Leiden, 1998), 428–29; Jean Richard, “Les comptes du collecteur de la chambre apostolique dans le royaume de Chypre (1357–1363),” EKEE 13–16 (1984–87): 29 and n. 32; idem., “La levée des décimes sur l’eglise latine de Chypre,” EKEE 25 (1999): 13 and 16; Wipertus Rudt de Collenberg, “Les grâces papales, autres que les dispenses matrimoniales, accordées à Chypre de 1305 à 1378,” EKEE 8 (1975–77): 240; Stephen de Lusignan, Chorograffia et breve historia universale dell’ isola di Cipro … (Bologna, 1573; repr. Nicosia, 2004), fol. 15r; idem., Description de toute l’ isle de Chypre (Paris, 1580; repr. Nicosia, 2004), fpl. 89r. 47 Polonio, Notai (1982), 501–2 (no. 420); Pavoni, Notai (1982), 5–6 (no. 6) and 40–41 (no. 32). 48 Polonio, Notai (1982), nos. 145 and 415; Richard, “Hospitals,” 98; Peter Edbury, “Famagusta in 1300,” in idem, Kingdoms of the Crusaders from Jerusalem to Cyprus (Aldershot, 1999), no. XVI, 344 and 350, n. 57.

220

NICHOLAS COUREAS

Famagusta endowed with sufficient funds for assisting pilgrims on their way to the Holy Places, as well as for the needs of other poor persons. The pope granted Stephen permission to build a chapel dedicated to St. Stephen and a cemetery for the burial of the poor, the pilgrims and the brothers serving there. The grant of enough funds for those serving the chapel was assigned to the judgement of the Latin bishop of Famagusta in a manner permitting him and his successors to nominate the rector of the chapel. This establishment is also mentioned by Niccolo de Martoni during his visit to Cyprus in 1394. He describes it as being in a poor condition, something perhaps attributable to the economic decline of Famagusta following the Genoese invasion of 1373 and their occupation of the town until 1464. Camille Enlart observed that its dedicatory inscription, including the year of its foundation 1323, was transported to Larnaca along with other building materials. It is currently located in the Cyprus Museum in Nicosia.49 Two new hospitals were founded in Famagusta later in the fourteenth century. The Florentine widow Sophia de Archangelo built a hospital dedicated to Our Lady of Mount Zion in the Holy Land sometime before 26 July 1363, when Pope Urban V authorized the gathering of funds for the hospital from Cyprus, Florence and Venice at her request. This hospital would serve the needs of poor pilgrims. On 28 May 1366, the same pope authorized her to publicize the papal approval for collectors to solicit funds for this hospital over the next five years in Cyprus, Crete, Florence, Venice and Padua. In this manner she could raise 1,252 florins still needed to pay the Mamluk sultan for the purchase of the land, as well as for the upkeep of the pilgrims. On 25 July 1370, Pope Urban V asked the Latin archbishop of Nicosia to take up to 1,000 florins from the sums given by people towards the restitution of illicitly acquired goods, in order to support poor pilgrims bound for the Holy Land and to pay outstanding sums needed for the purchase of houses, lands and vines pertaining to the Hospital of Mount Zion. The pope’s appeal appears to have elicited an enthusiastic response. Therefore, on 18 August 1370 the archbishop of Nicosia granted Sophia and other Christians permission to construct hospitals in Famagusta, Crete, Venice and Padua for the needs of impecunious pilgrims. 50 The second hospital was established in Famagusta in the late fourteenth century by the wealthy Syrian merchant Joseph Zaphet, who founded a church dedicated to St. Catherine with a small hospital attached. He had made his wealth from trading between Cyprus and Western Europe, particularly from his business with the merchants of Barcelona. In his will of October 1381, the canons of the cathedral of Genoa were entrusted with maintaining the church and its hospital. An inventory drawn up in May 1452 by the Genoese notary Antonio Foglietta shows that this

49

Perrat and Richard, Bullarium Cyprium, 3: 113–14, r-344 and 118, r-364; Claude Delaval Cobham, trans., Excerpta Cypria: Materials for a History of Cyprus (Cambridge, 1908), 23; Enlart, Gothic Art, 42, n. 14 and 218–19. 50 Perrat and Richard, Bullarium Cyprium, 3: 382, v-57, 401, v-146, 417, v-206 and 425, v-239.

DOCTORS, HOSPITALS AND MEDICINE IN LATIN CYPRUS

221

hospital was small, with only eight beds; its location and the reasons for preparing the inventory are unknown.51

Medicine in Cyprus in the Later Lusignan and Venetian Periods Among the indications on the practice of medicine in Cyprus in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries, especially noteworthy is the esteem shown towards Jewish and Muslim doctors, regardless of the prohibitions of the Latin Church. The Italian doctor Legno do Bologna is described as a fisicus, resident of Famagusta and member of the town’s governing council. He suffered from eyesight problems from 1446 onwards. Apparently, because his condition could not be cured in Cyprus, he took a four-month leave from his work in 1448, during the captaincy of the Genoese commander Baliano de Porta, to go to Damascus for treatment. He was indeed cured in Damascus and returned to Famagusta.52 The Knights Hospitaller, based in Rhodes from 1309 to 1522, sought a doctor from Cyprus in the mid-fifteenth century. On 14 June 1451, Grand Master Jean de Lastic instructed Louis de Manhac, the Hospitaller preceptor in Cyprus, to encourage an unnamed doctor in Cyprus, over whom there had been many discussions in the Council of the Hospitaller Order, to come to Rhodes and take up a position in the order’s large new hospital under construction at that time. He was to offer this doctor the same pay and conditions enjoyed by the other doctors working for the order in Rhodes. If, moreover, he did not wish to sign a long-term contract of employment, he could work there for at least one year and then decide on his future plans.53 Another prominent doctor and pharmacist of the mid-fifteenth century was Thomas Bibi, originating from a wealthy family of “White Genoese,” the term denoting Eastern Christians who were subjects of Genoa and enjoyed certain privileges and legal exemptions. Bibi’s family originated from Latin Syria and he is described as a magister, doctor speciarie arcium et medicine. He held a fief from King John II of Cyprus and had rented lands attached to it to some mansionarii or tenants who had fallen behind in paying their rent, to the point where they owed him large sums of money. In consequence, he appealed through his procurator and the Genoese magistrates in Cyprus before the royal court, asking the king to 51

Catherine Otten-Froux, “Riches et pauvres en ville: Le cas de Famagouste (XIIIe–XVe siècles),” in Richi e Poveri nella Società dell’ Oriente Grecolatino, ed. Chrysa Maltezou (Venice, 1998), 344 and 347; Catherine Otten-Froux, “Notes sur quelques monuments de Famagouste à la fin du Moyen Age,” in Mosaic. Festschrift for A. H. S. Megaw, British School of Athens Studies 8, ed. J. Herrin, M. Mullett and C. Otten-Froux (London, 2001), 145–46. 52 Silvana Fossati-Raiteri, ed., Genova e Cipro, L’inchiesta su Pietro de Marco capitano di Genova in Famagosta (1448–1449), CSFS 41 (Genoa, 1984), 11–14 (nos. 13–14), 15 (no. 16) and 192–93 (no. 277[6]). 53 Karl Borchardt, Anthony Luttrell and Ekhard Schöffler, eds., Documents concerning Cyprus from the Hospitallers’ Rhodian Archives: 1409–1459 (Nicosia, 2011), lxxx and 384–85 (no. 281).

222

NICHOLAS COUREAS

dispense justice and ensure that he received the outstanding payments, which went back many years. Also recorded in this period was the doctor Peter Brion, who held a high position in the court of Queen Charlotte.54 The first record of a Cypriot doctor from among the island’s Greek population practising in Cyprus also dates to the fifteenth century. Shortly before the calamitous battle of Khirokitia in 1426, which resulted in King Janus being captured by the invading Mamluks and released only on payment of a huge ransom, one of the persons chosen to go to Famagusta and meet the son of Seth, a Muslim attempting to reconcile the Cypriots and the Mamluk sultan, was the king’s physician John Synglitikos, a member of one of the four recorded noble families of Greek origin in this period. This physician, also mentioned in the chronicle of Florio Bustron, is perhaps identical to the burgess “mestre Johan Singritico,” recorded in 1423 in an anonymous set of accounts probably composed for private use, given the closeness of the dates, although a namesake cannot be ruled out.55 Two more doctors mentioned at the end of the Lusignan period were the Frenchman Eschive Barthélemy, the doctor of King James II, and the Venetian Gabriel Gentile, the doctor and close councillor of the king’s Venetian wife Catherine Corner who outlived her husband and reigned a further sixteen years, from 1473 to 1489. The sixteenth-century chronicler Florio Bustron states that Gabriel Gentile possessed the casalia of Patriki, St. Theodore, Paleometocho, Clavdia, Chito and Dora. Eschive Barthélemy, described as a surgeon, secured a royal exemption from payment of the annual tax of 200 bezants normally payable on his incomes from the casale of Kataliontas according to a document of the royal finance office or secrète dated 25 November 1468. King James II also exempted him from payment of the annual tax of 25 ducats payable partly in cash and partly in wheat out of his incomes from the same village. Following the king’s death and the failure of the conspiracy of his erstwhile and chiefly Catalan officers against Queen Catherine Corner, the Venetians arrested Eschive Barthélemy as a suspect, keeping him in custody but releasing him on finding no incriminating evidence against him. Less fortunate was Gabriel Gentile, murdered after King James II’s death by the Catalan conspirators in November 1473, thereby paying with his life for the esteem in which the queen held him.56 54

Bliznyuk, “I medici,” 96; George Hill, A History of Cyprus, 4 vols. (Cambridge, 1940–52), 3:

505–7. 55 Leontios Makhairas, Recital concerning the Sweet Land of Cyprus entitled ‘Chronicle’, ed. and trans. Richard M. Dawkins, 2 vols. (Oxford, 1932), 1: §665; “Chronique d’Amadi,” in Chroniques d’Amadi et Strambaldi, René de Mas Latrie, ed., 2 vols. (Paris, 1891–93), 1: 503; Nicholas Coureas and Peter Edbury, trans., The Chronicle of Amadi Translated from the Italian (Nicosia, 2015), §1056; Florio Bustron, “Chronique de l’île de Chypre,” ed. René de Mas Latrie, in Collection des documents inédits sur l’histoire de France: Mélanges historiques, V (Paris, 1886), 360; “Appendice: Le compte de 1423,” in Documents chypriotes des Archives du Vatican (XIVe et XVe siècles), ed. Jean Richard (Paris, 1962), 30. 56 Bustron, “Chronique,” 421 and 438–39; George Boustronios, A Narrative of the Chronicle of Cyprus 1456–1489, trans, Nicholas Coureas (Nicosia, 2005), §§25, 30, 153–55, 157, 160 and 216; Jean Richard, ed., Le livre des remembrances de la secrète du royaume de Chypre (1468–1469) (Nicosia, 1983), 42 (no. 86).

DOCTORS, HOSPITALS AND MEDICINE IN LATIN CYPRUS

223

The de Nores family, originating from Latin Syria and recorded in Cyprus from the thirteenth century onwards, included the doctor Balian de Nores. He studied medicine in France, whither he fled after participating in the unsuccessful plot to assassinate King James II in 1470. He returned to Cyprus shortly before May 1474 and practised medicine there until he died in 1528. Louis Podocataro, a member of a noble family of Greek origin that gained prominence in Venetian Cyprus, is mentioned as a doctor in a Genoese document of 31 January 1480. It is noteworthy that these two Greek doctors hailed from the four prominent Greek families that had embraced the Latin rite to secure entry into the nobility and were wealthy enough to finance their training. They were probably trained in medicine at the University of Padua, where, following the establishment in 1393 of a scholarship fund by the admiral of Cyprus Peter de Caffrano providing four scholarships per annum for Cypriot applicants, students from Cyprus had the opportunity to study medicine, law, literature and fine arts. A third Greek doctor in receipt of an annual salary from King James II was the physician Dimitri Sgouropoulos, recorded in 1468 as receiving 40 modii of wheat, 90 modii of pulses, 40 measures of wine and 500 white bezants from the royal treasury.57 The Venetians acknowledged the shortage of doctors and took steps to remedy the situation once Cyprus came under direct Venetian rule in 1489. In January 1490 the Venetian lieutenant of Cyprus and his advisers received the request of Cypriot nobles and burgesses for a Cypriot doctor named John de Rames, resident in Italy, who was teaching at the University of Padua, to be employed in Cyprus and paid with public funds. The petitioners called attention to the dearth of doctors, pointing out that Alvise Sudan, an excellent Cypriot doctor, could not satisfy alone the demand for public medical service. They emphasized that the second doctor in the public service, master Bartholomew de Faenza, was practising only in Famagusta. The petitioners also requested an annual salary of 200 Venetian ducats for John de Rames, on the basis that his predecessor, Jeronimo de Paenzo, had received an annual salary of 150 Venetian ducats, with an additional sum in kind, in wheat and wine. The lieutenant and his advisers approved the request in May 1490. The issue of de Rames’s salary then went to Venice, where on 16 August 1491 the doge and his councillors approved the pay rise for the doctor, who had threatened to leave Cyprus on account of his insufficient salary. John de Rames’s annual salary was duly increased from 150 Venetian ducats to 2.000 white bezants, which amounted to 200 Venetian ducats. The Venetian authorities paid the salaries of all three doctors mentioned above, but it is unclear whether they practised medicine throughout 57

Boustronios, Narrative, §§ 95 and 273; Bustron, “Chronique,” 421, 426, 429 and 432; Svetlana Bliznyuk, ed., Die Genueser auf Zypern: Ende 14. und im 15. Jahrhundert, Studien und Texte zur Byzantinistik 6 (Frankfurt am Main, 2005), no. 93; Benjamin Arbel, “The Cypriot Nobility from the Fourteenth to the Sixteenth Century: A New Interpretation,” in Latins and Greeks in the Eastern Mediterranean after 1204, ed. Benjamin Arbel, Bernard Hamilton, and David Jacoby (London, 1989), 187–88; Agamemnon Tselikas, “He Diatheke tou Petro de Caffrano kai hoi praxeis epiloges Kyprion phoiteton gia to panepistemio tes Padovas (1393, 1436–1569),” EKEE 17 (1987–1988): 261–62; Richard, Livre des remembrances, 57 (no. 119).

224

NICHOLAS COUREAS

Cyprus or just in Nicosia and Famagusta. Christopher Fürer who visited Cyprus in 1566, mentioned a Flemish physician practising medicine in Famagusta.58 Jewish doctors, present on the island even before the beginning of Latin rule, are documented up to the end of the Venetian period. The Italian Jew Elias of Pesaro, who visited Cyprus on his way to the Holy Land and stayed there on account of the plague that hit Syria and Palestine, wrote a detailed description of Famagusta in Hebrew in October 1563. The inaccuracies of various editions and translations of his letter, including Claude Delaval Cobham’s translation into English, have been discussed by George Hill and more recently by Benjamin Arbel. Therefore, Cobham’s translation must be treated with reserve, especially regarding references to currencies. With this caveat in mind, Elias’s description of Jewish doctors in Famagusta is nonetheless worth mentioning. He states that Jews practising medicine in Famagusta are fortunate, for the Greeks hold them in high regard. While ordinary people paid non-Jewish doctors 200 zucchini and Venetian officials paid a monthly sum of one Venetian gazetta per patient, totalling 120 quattrini a year, the Jewish doctors in Famagusta, one of Portuguese and the other of Greek origin, earned more. Jewish doctors were also allowed to wear a black hat with only a small yellow circle to distinguish them from Christians, whereas all other Jews, as in Venice, had to wear a yellow head covering.59 Arabic medicine was also valued in Venetian Cyprus. The Venetians exhibited great interest in the Arabic books on medicine bequeathed by a Syrian doctor named George to the Coptic monastery of St. Macarius, north of Nicosia. In a letter of 25 May 1539, the Council of Ten deemed these books valuable for the promotion of medical science as well as the diffusion of the Arabic language. It urged the Venetian authorities in Cyprus to find in Nicosia, Famagusta, or elsewhere, someone proficient in Arabic and able to impart the knowledge stored in the books to those who wish to learn. Thus, the books can be used to preserve and utilize the medical knowledge for the public good in Cyprus and Venice, and alleviate the high costs of training doctors. It authorized the local administration to grant this person an annual salary of up to 20 ducats for two years, which could be extended indefinitely if his services were found sufficiently beneficial to justify this.60

58 Louis de Mas Latrie, ed., “Documents nouveaux servant de preuves à l’histoire de Chypre sous le règne des princes de la maison de Lusignan,” in Collection des documents inédits: Mélanges historiques, IV (1882), 539–41 and 555–57; idem, Histoire de l’île de Chypre sous le règne des princes de la maison de Lusignan, 3 vols. (Paris, 1852–61), 3:490–91 para. 16 and p. 491 n. 1; Gilles Grivaud, “Echapper à la pauvreté en Chypre vénitienne,” in Richi e Poveri nella Società dell’ Oriente Grecolatino, ed. Chrysa Maltezou (Venice, 1998), 364; Cobham, Excerpta Cypria, 78. 59 Cobham, Excerpta Cypria, 76; Hill, History, 3: 802 and n. 1 for a corrected reading, 1075 and n. 1; Benjamin Arbel, “Elijah of Pesaro’s Description of Famagusta (1563),” in idem, Studies on Venetian Cyprus (Nicosia, 2017), 223–24. 60 Aikaterini Aristeidou, ed., Anekdota engrapha tes kypriakes historias apo to kratiko arkheio tes Venetias, 4 vols. (Venice, 1990–2003), 4: 271–74 (no. 137).

DOCTORS, HOSPITALS AND MEDICINE IN LATIN CYPRUS

225

Conclusion In conclusion, one can state that medicine in Cyprus was highly receptive to external influences, from Western Europe, from the Latin East, and from the Muslim world. Despite the strong presence of Western and particularly Italian doctors on the island and the support they enjoyed from the local Latin Church, Muslim and Jewish doctors were welcome and highly esteemed throughout the Lusignan and Venetian periods. One feature worth noting is the apparent absence of influences from the former Byzantine period of Cypriot history; the one doctor mentioned as practising in tenth-century Byzantine Cyprus was Jewish. Doctors from among the island’s Greek population appear only from the fourteenth century onwards. It is apparent from the sources that doctors were well-connected and respected members of the community, regardless of ethnic background, and at times were acquainted with and trusted by the kings themselves, although one should remember that it was the wealthiest and best-connected doctors who were most likely to be mentioned in the various types of extant sources. However, despite the presence of doctors from varied religious and ethnic backgrounds, there was nonetheless a shortage of doctors on the island, something the Venetians attempted to remedy.

The Crusade and its Fronts in French Historiography from the Interwar Period to 2020 Philippe Josserand Université de Nantes [email protected]

Abstract The crusade and its representations have had – and partly continue to have – a very peculiar role in French history. They gave rise to a brilliant historiography dating back to the Ancien Régime, which developed in the nineteenth century in particular. This tradition has somehow been interrupted since the interwar period, even according to leading French specialists, who have spoken of an “eclipse.” Apart from Michel Balard in 2000, no one has attempted to explain this reality and account for its causes. However, studying the crusade and its fronts in French historiography from René Grousset to the present is important. It provides an opportunity to reveal what remains a lively national academic tradition, as well as to better understand different conceptions of the crusade itself. Furthermore, it especially explores how the question should be addressed today, by avoiding the ongoing debate between “pluralists” and “traditionalists,” and instead favoring a dynamic conception that pays systematic attention to the various theatres and their relative impact, as well as the different shifts in meaning these issues have undergone throughout the longue durée.

Crusade is a word that has been greatly misused in history. Our contemporaries still ascribe various and sometimes contradictory meanings to the term,1 and, while they have refrained from the most outrageous uses, historians have also joined the polemics surrounding it. What exactly is the crusade? The ambiguity of the notion has prompted passionate debates.2 Pretending to provide a final and immediate answer would be quite reckless, yet it also strikes me as irresponsible to simply avoid defining the topic for lack of academic consensus, or to refuse doing so, as Étienne Delaruelle proposed in 1970 in his review of Francesco Cognasso’s Storia delle crociate.3 Providing definitions in history is never in vain – Marc Bloch This article was translated by Arby Gharibian. I am very grateful to Alain Demurger, Xavier Hélary, Camille Rouxpetel, and Benjamin Weber for their assistance and comments, and I would like to extend special thanks to Benjamin Kedar for both our productive exchanges and the idea to publish in English – which he convinced me to do – in an effort to attract more readers to the French historiography of the crusade. 1 Alain Demurger, Croisades et croisés au Moyen Âge (Paris, 2006), 9. 2 Ibid., 7; Benjamin Weber, Lutter contre les Turcs. Les formes nouvelles de la croisade pontificale au xve siècle (Rome, 2013), 1. 3 Étienne Delaruelle, “Francesco Cognasso, Storia delle crociate (1967),” Cahiers de civilisation médiévale 14 (1971): 176: “One ultimately appreciates the wisdom of the author, who refuses to provide 227

228

PHILIPPE JOSSERAND

pointed out its necessity and complexity4 – and while incapable of saying ex abrupto what the crusade is, I will offer a brief reminder of how academic research has envisioned it over the last half century. To my mind, it is an essential condition for analyzing the rarely studied question of how the crusade and its various fronts have been represented in the French historiography from the interwar period to the present.5 Examining the writing of history – which I endeavored to do for the Templars, and Jacques de Molay in particular6 – is essential. As a medievalist, I am a reader of Marc Bloch, and have therefore always tried to remain connected to the contemporary moment, outside of which the historian cannot position himself,7 no more so than he could during Bloch’s time.8 While discussing French authors – and opening up to other francophone authors – I will not be doing so in my own language, aware that its primacy in the history of the crusades, as elsewhere, belongs to the past, but also that forgetting it in favor of English is detrimental to understanding numerous problems. Today, French research in the historiography of the crusades is at best second, if not secondary, to the Anglo-Saxon one. It has undergone an “eclipse” since the second half of the twentieth century, which Jean Flori, Michel Balard, and Alain Demurger – its most eminent representatives at the turn of the millennium – did not fail to emphasize.9 Many advances have occurred beyond its confines, chiefly in the English-speaking world, in which two groups – “traditionalists” and “pluralists”10 – opposed one another with respect to the very definition of the crusade, keeping in mind, of course, that it was the latter who christened the former.11 The first group views the crusade based on its original destination, seeing it as a military expedition to liberate the Christians of the East and, more importantly, to recapture Jerusalem. The second group presents an opposing and broader vision that includes the a definition of the crusade (p. 111); he prefers approaching the phenomenon in its full scope and multiple dimensions, both spiritual and economic, without imposing any theory whatsoever on the reader.” 4 Marc Bloch, Apologie pour l’histoire ou métier d’historien (Paris, [1949] 19645), 2; The Historian’s Craft, trans. Peter Putnam (New York, 1961), 22. The best French edition is that of 1993: Apologie pour l’histoire ou métier d’historien: édition critique préparée par Étienne Bloch (Paris, [1993] 2018), with a preface by Jacques Le Goff. 5 Michel Balard, “L’historiographie des croisades en France au xxe siècle,” in La présence latine en Orient au Moyen Âge, ed. Ghislain Brunel (Paris, 2000), 11–26. This article reappeared in expanded form in Michel Balard, “L’historiographie des croisades au xxe siècle (France, Allemagne et Italie),” Revue historique 302 (2000): 973–99. 6 Philippe Josserand, Jacques de Molay. Le dernier grand-maître des Templiers (Paris, 2019), 14–19, 239–43. 7 Philippe Josserand, “Le Temple, les ordres militaires et la croisade entre le Moyen Âge et l’aujourd’hui,” 4 vols. (unpublished Habilitation à diriger des recherches, Université Lyon-2, 2019), here vol. 1: “Chemins de recherche: l’histoire, l’ordre et le chaos,” 7, forthcoming from Dépaysage (La Roche-sur-Yon, 2021). 8 Bloch, The Historian’s Craft, 38, 44. 9 Jean Flori, Pierre l’Ermite et la première croisade (Paris, 1999), 9; Balard, “L’historiographie des croisades en France,” 10–13; Demurger, Croisades et croisés, 371. 10 Michel Balard, Les Latins en Orient, xie–xve siècle (Paris, 2006), 22–25. 11 Alain Demurger, La croisade au Moyen Âge. Idée et pratiques (Paris, 1998), 111.

FRENCH HISTORIOGRAPHY: INTERWAR PERIOD TO 2020

229

historical development of the concept, which has prompted the most radical among them to consider any holy war waged to defend the interests of the Latin Church as a crusade.12 The famous conflict crystallized around the two major figures of Hans Eberhard Mayer and Jonathan Riley-Smith.13 In 1993 Riley-Smith summarized the issues involved in the confrontation, and proclaimed that his side had won.14 The “pluralists” have the numbers,15 although their victory is not as obvious as some at the turn of the twentieth and twenty-first centuries suggested.16 As proof, Giles Constable, who in the 1950s wrote a study that established the broader conception of the crusade,17 expressed his reluctance to be classified with the “pluralists”;18 he considered the binary opposition to be problematic, and proposed expanding it by identifying two additional trends: the “popularists,” attuned to the crowd movements associated with the crusade, and the “generalists,” who likened it simply to a holy war.19 I do not concur with this new partition, but it does reveal some of the limits of the debate between “traditionalists” and “pluralists,” which has been increasingly contested since the beginning of the twenty-first century. In a historiographical landscape dominated by Anglophones, does French research still have something to contribute? One can certainly imagine so, for with respect to the approach to the crusade and its various fronts, postwar France has participated more extensively in the debate than is believed, both outside my country and within it. 12

Jean Flori, “Pour une redéfinition de la croisade,” Cahiers de civilisation médiévale 47 (2004): 329–50, here 330. 13 It should be pointed out that Riley-Smith, in his “The Crusading Movement and Historians,” which appeared in The Oxford Illustrated History of the Crusades, ed. Jonathan Riley-Smith (Oxford 1995), 9, argues against Hans Eberhard Mayer (Geschichte der Kreuzzüge [Stuttgart, (1965) 200510]), and traces “the pluralist definition” back to his own book What Were the Crusades? (London, 1977), although the first edition did not include – despite the notion clearly being there – the term “pluralists,” unlike the later edition from 1992. 14 Jonathan Riley-Smith, “History, the Crusades and the Latin East, 1095–1204: A Personal View,” in Crusaders and Muslims in Twelfth-Century Syria, ed. Maya Shatzmiller (Leiden, 1993), 1–17, here 9–10: “Attempts to define crusades have led to a heated debate between the purists, particularly Professor Hans Mayer, who maintain that there could only have been one genuine type of crusade, that launched to Jerusalem or in aid to the Holy Land, and those who argue that crusading found full expression in other theatres of war as well. It is the party for pluriformity which has won the day.” 15 Flori, “Pour une redéfinition de la croisade,” 330. 16 Christopher Tyerman, The Debate on the Crusades (Manchester, 2011), 223–24. This was emphasized also by the editors of Crusades 11 (2012), “A Note to Our Readers,” p. ix. 17 Giles Constable, “The Second Crusade as Seen by Contemporaries,” Traditio 9 (1953): 213–79, reprinted in idem, Crusaders and Crusading in the Twelfth Century (Farnham, 2008), 229–300. 18 Giles Constable, “The Historiography of the Crusades,” in The Crusades from the Perspective of Byzantium and the Muslim World, ed. Angeliki Laiou and Roy Parviz Mottahedeh (Washington DC, 2001), 1–22, reappearing in an expanded version in Constable, Crusaders and Crusading, 19: “I have myself been counted among the pluralists owing to my article showing that contemporaries regarded the expeditions against the Wends and against the Muslims on the Iberian peninsula as part of the Second Crusade, but I am reluctant to exclude the ‘popular’ crusades or to deny that at least a spiritual orientation towards Jerusalem was an essential aspect of crusading.” 19 Ibid., 19–22. The four categories defined in this way were repeated and accepted by Jonathan Riley-Smith, What Were the Crusades? (London, 20023).

230

PHILIPPE JOSSERAND

*

*

*

The French historiography long served as a matrix in studies of the crusades. Without going back further than the nineteenth century, it is strongly represented in the great Histoire des croisades inaugurated by Joseph-François Michaud in 1811, the Recueil des historiens des croisades, active between 1841 and 1906, and the Société de l’Orient Latin, created in 1875 by Count Paul Riant, who published its Archives (1881 and 1884) as well as the Revue de l’Orient latin (1893–1911). Exploring the meaning of the crusade is therefore nothing new, and while “pluralist” and “traditionalist” movements emerged in the 1970s, the differences in approach opposing them were older. The Anglo-Saxon historiography made much of this contrast, but it is not the first to have explored it, for beginning in the mid-twentieth century research in French sought to free itself from the grip of René Grousset, and did so thanks to two authors whose contributions have been somewhat forgotten today, Michel Villey and Paul Rousset. Dating back to the Ancien Régime, and broadly developed during the nineteenth century,20 the historiography of the crusades reached an indisputable peak in France with Grousset (1885–1952). A specialist on Asia and curator at the Louvre and later the Musée Guimet, he directed the Musée Cernuschi from 1933 onward, and in the ensuing years wrote a monumental history of the crusades and of the kingdom of Jerusalem in three volumes;21 as Jean Richard stated in his introduction to the most recent edition, it is “a major book,” “admirably written,” in short “a classic, one that we cannot neglect to read, even when more recent works – and there are many – have renewed the state of our knowledge.”22 The book was subject to criticism in its time, by John La Monte in particular,23 and even more so after the Second World War, as the author, who was steeped in colonial prejudices, used the crusades to justify France’s supposed civilizing mission; Hans Eberhard Mayer, for instance, denounced the “ugly head” of this “chauvinism” in 1981.24 The book’s ending left no doubt regarding Grousset’s ideological vision, which concluded with the loss of Acre, and beyond that of the islet of Ruad south of Tortosa, “by way of [which], in 1914, the ‘Franks’ were to set foot again in Syria.”25 This passage, which reappeared 20

Jean Richard, “De Jean-Baptiste Mailly à Joseph-François Michaud: un moment de l’historiographie des croisades (1774–1841),” Crusades 1 (2002): 1–12; Balard, “L’historiographie des croisades en France,” 13–14; and Karl Borchardt, “Die Monumenta Germaniae Historica und die Kreuzzüge,” in Vorträge und Veranstaltungen zum 200-jährigen Bestehen der MGH vom 27. bis 29. Juni 2019, ed. Martina Hartmann and Horst Zimmerhackl (Wiesbaden, 2020), 91–101, here 97: “Im 19. Jahrhundert war Kreuzzugsforschung ein französisches, mindestens aber ein französischsprachiges Thema.” 21 René Grousset, Histoire des croisades et du royaume franc de Jérusalem, 3 vols. (Paris, [1934– 36] 2006). 22 Richard, “Préface,” in Grousset, Histoire des croisades, 1:13. 23 Tyerman, The Debate, 156–57. 24 Hans Eberhard Mayer, “America and the Crusades,” Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society 125 (1981): 38–45, here 41. 25 Grousset, Histoire des croisades, 3:747.

FRENCH HISTORIOGRAPHY: INTERWAR PERIOD TO 2020

231

in 1939 to close L’épopée des croisades, and was extended to also glorify England,26 “bears the stamp of its time.”27 For the author, as for many of his contemporaries, the crusades represented the “first European colonization”: such was the title he chose to conclude a synthetic essay published on Les croisades during the second quarter of 1944 in the famous “Que sais-je?” collection.28 With two long chapters representing two thirds of the book,29 Frankish Syria remained prominent, although for the first time Grousset discussed, in addition to “the catastrophe of 1291,” the island of Cyprus under the Lusignans, the Armenian Kingdom of Cilicia, the Latin Empire of Constantinople, the Principality of Morea, and the Duchy of Athens, leading into Greece during the Italian period, as well as the “arrière-croisades” (Later Crusades) from Nicopolis to Lepanto.30 The crusade remained connected to the East, but broke free of Syria, which was in the process of shaking French colonial domination, and chronologically extended beyond the thirteenth century into the Late Middle Ages and the Early Modern period. The Second World War brought notable advances in the French-language historiography of the crusades. This occurred independently of Grousset – who joined the Académie française in the aftermath of the war31 – and beyond his areas of focus. Canon Étienne Delaruelle (1904–71) endeavored to analyze the notion of crusade,32 and two dissertations appeared not too far apart: the first, which was defended at the University of Caen in 1942, was the work of the French jurist Michel Villey (1914–88), and the second, defended in Geneva in 1944, was that of the Swiss historian Paul Rousset (1911–82).33 These two works did not have the impact during their time that they deserved. While Flori positioned himself in this tradition, paying fine tribute to Rousset in 1999, the latter was largely ignored by specialists of the crusade.34 Like Delaruelle, and even more so Paul 26 René Grousset, L’épopée des croisades (Paris, [1939] 1967), 339; The Epic of the Crusades, trans. Noel Lindsay (London, [1939] 1970), 267: “It was by way of the islet of Ruad that six centuries later, in 1914, the ‘Franks’ were to set foot again in Syria, going on, four years later, to deliver Tripoli, Beirut, and Tyre, the city of Raymond of Saint-Gilles, the city of John of Ibelin, the city of Philip de Montfort. As to Jerusalem, it was to be ‘reoccupied’ on December 9, 1917 by the descendants of King Richard, under the command of Marshal Allenby.” 27 Richard, “Préface,” 1:11. 28 René Grousset, Les croisades (Paris, [1944] 19645), 124–26. 29 Ibid., 18–80. 30 Ibid., 81–123. 31 Claude Cahen, Orient et Occident au temps des croisades (Paris, 1983), 6, pointed out with cruel irony that “not too long ago ‘good’ crusades resulted in the author being welcomed under the Cupola [of the French Academy].” 32 Étienne Delaruelle, “Essai sur la formation de l’idée de croisade,” Bulletin de la littérature ecclésiastique publié par l’Institut catholique de Toulouse 42 (1941): 24–45, 86–103; ibid. 45 (1944): 13–46, 73–90; ibid. 54 (1953): 226–39; and ibid. 55 (1954): 50–63, appearing posthumously in Étienne Delaruelle, L’idée de croisade au Moyen Âge (Turin, 1980). 33 Michel Villey, La croisade. Essai sur la formation d’une théorie juridique (Paris, 1942); Paul Rousset, Les origines et les caractères de la première croisade (Neuchâtel, 1945). 34 Jean Flori, “Paul Rousset, historien de la croisade et pionnier de l’histoire des mentalités,” Medievalismo. Boletín de la Sociedad Española de Estudios Medievales 9 (1999): 179–90, here 182.

232

PHILIPPE JOSSERAND

Alphandéry (1875–1932), whose writings would be published and developed by Alphonse Dupront (1905–90) during the 1950s,35 the Swiss historian believed that the crusade could be defined solely on the basis of contemporary mentalities: the adventure occurred in the Orient, but its origins were “internal to medieval society,” and “came from a background of thoughts, tastes, passions, and ideals specific to the Christians of the time.”36 This appeal to a collective, general, and somewhat abstract psychology, which risked reflecting the viewpoint of clergymen in particular, earned Rousset a great deal of criticism, including from the Belgian historian Charles Verlinden, who in comparing the two authors spared Villey and his book, “which was still too little-known due to the war.”37 The French jurist met with a warmer reception among other medievalists.38 The law contributed to history by separating the crusade from the holy war, of which it was a “special type” – as “a particular organization imposed by custom” sanctioned by “actual legal rules”39 which, from the thirteenth century onward, expanded beyond the Latin East.40 Attentive especially to the thought of Hostiensis41 a quarter-century before James Brundage,42 Villey made the crusade – in pioneering fashion – into an institution, one that revealed “a tradition common to all wars, which firstly in the East, and later in an imposing number of other battlefields, imitated the First Crusade.”43 In 1942, he even proposed in the future to analyze the crusade “in the late Middle Ages” he knew so well.44 He did not do so, being engaged with other research, and as he was not followed in France, it was Jonathan Riley-Smith who best seized upon the novelty of his work, counting it, along with the dissertations of Carl Erdmann and Claude Cahen,45 among the “three seminal works” written 35 Paul Alphandéry and Alphonse Dupront, La chrétienté et l’idée de croisade, 2 vols. (Paris, 1954–59 [1995]). There are nevertheless substantial differences between the two authors at times, as emphasized by Benjamin Kedar in particular, “Emicho of Flonheim and the Apocalyptic Motif in the 1096 Massacres: Between Paul Alphandéry and Alphonse Dupront,” in Conflict and Religious Conversation in Latin Christendom: Studies in Honour of Ora Limor, ed. Israel Yuval and Ram BenShalom (Turnhout, 2014), 87–97. 36 Rousset, Les origines et les caractères, 197. 37 Charles Verlinden, “Paul Rousset, Les origines et les caractères de la première croisade (1945),” Revue belge de philologie et d’histoire 26 (1948): 220–25, here 220. 38 Françoise Lehoux and Jean-François Lemarignier, “Michel Villey, La croisade. Essai sur la formation d’une théorie juridique (1942),” Revue d’histoire de l’Église de France 116 (1943): 295–96, and Bibliothèque de l’École des chartes 105 (1944): 235–37. 39 Villey, La croisade, 263–64. 40 Ibid., 186–262. As the title suggests, the second part is devoted to “the extension of the crusade.” 41 Ibid., 243–62, esp. 256–62, where “the legal theory of the crusade” is attributed to him. 42 James Brundage, Medieval Canon Law and the Crusader (Madison, 1969). 43 Villey, La croisade, 264. 44 Ibid., 267: “If others do not do so, and if circumstances afford us the possibility, we will undertake this [further] study, for our effort would remain incomplete if, taking advantage of an exceptionally favorable example, we do not analyze the crusade, from its birth to its life and death, as a legal institution.” 45 Carl Erdmann, Die Entstehung des Kreuzzugsgedankens (Stuttgart, 1935); Claude Cahen, La Syrie du Nord à l‘époque des croisades et la principauté franque d’Antioche (Paris, 1940).

FRENCH HISTORIOGRAPHY: INTERWAR PERIOD TO 2020

233

in the mid-twentieth century on the history of the crusades.46 The door was now slightly ajar, as it were; the “pluralists” would enthusiastically throw it wide open in the 1970s.47 In terms of the crusade, neither Villey’s nor Rousset’s work met with immediate recognition. Their potential, which is certainly distinct, was nonetheless real. The two researchers and Steven Runciman, the leading British specialist of the time,48 returned to the topic in September 1955 during the 10th International Congress of the Historical Sciences held in Rome,49 while in France Grousset remained the dominant reference despite his premature death. Without going so far as Cahen, who deemed the broad diffusion of his Histoire des croisades “regrettable,”50 it betrays a “stable and rather unadventurous framework,” as Riley-Smith aptly put it,51 one that the Anglo-Saxon historiography would be the first to leave behind in the ensuing decades. *

*

*

After the mid-twentieth century, France lost “the preeminent role that it once possessed” in the historiography of the crusades.52 In 2000, Balard offered a reminder that the rejection of colonialism, for which Frankish expansion could be seen as a prefiguration, “discouraged researchers from pursuing avenues considered improper.”53 Like Flori, I believe that this was probably more the case “in France than elsewhere, due to its colonial past and the convulsions resulting from a poorly conducted decolonization.”54 Whatever the case may be, it was firstly in English that new studies and issues would henceforth be expressed,55 despite the fact that Richard – who was close to Grousset, long served as a professor at the University of Dijon, and until recently, was the doyen of the Académie des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres – was seen in the 1950s as one of the leading specialists in the field.56

46

Riley-Smith, “History, the Crusades and the Latin East,” 1. Riley-Smith, What Were the Crusades?, passim. 48 Steven Runciman, A History of the Crusades, 3 vols. (Cambridge, 1951–54). 49 Paul Rousset, “L’idée de croisade chez les chroniqueurs d’Occident,” and Michel Villey, “L’idée de croisade chez les juristes du Moyen Âge,” in Relazioni del X Congresso internazionale di scienze storiche (Rome, September 4–11, 1955) (Florence, 1955), 3:547–63, 3:565–94. 50 Cahen, Orient et Occident, 257 n. 3. 51 Riley-Smith, “History, the Crusades and the Latin East,” 1. 52 Flori, Pierre l’Ermite, 9. 53 Balard, “L’historiographie des croisades en France,” 12–13. 54 Flori, Pierre l’Ermite, 14. 55 Demurger, Croisades et croisés, 371. 56 Riley-Smith, “History, the Crusades and the Latin East,” 2; Dei gesta per Francos: Études sur les croisades dédiées à Jean Richard – Crusade Studies in Honour of Jean Richard, ed. Michel Balard, Benjamin Z. Kedar and Jonathan Riley-Smith (Aldershot, 2001), here the introduction in particular (ix–x); De la Bourgogne à l’Orient. Mélanges offerts à Monsieur le Doyen Jean Richard, ed. Jacques Meissonnier (Dijon, 2020). 47

234

PHILIPPE JOSSERAND

In France, the avenues opened by Villey – which encouraged extending the crusade to fronts other than the Holy Land – were not followed, and in keeping with Grousset’s work, the phenomenon remained intrinsically linked to the East. The epic was no longer appropriate in the mid-twentieth century, and research made a priority of studying the Latin states that grew out of Western expansion. Syria, longer under French mandate, was the first one examined: just before the Second World War, Cahen (1909–91) had worked on the Principality of Antioch as part of his dissertation,57 and during the war Richard (1921–2021) dedicated his thesis at the École Pratique des Hautes Études to the County of Tripoli.58 The County of Edessa, whose fleeting existence is little documented, was not given a synthetic approach until 1988,59 but Richard published a study in 1953 on the Kingdom of Jerusalem – simultaneously political, institutional, economic, and social – that has not yet been superseded,60 engaging in useful dialogue with the one by Joshua Prawer, translated from Hebrew into French in 1969.61 In addition to the Levant, French research also focused on the Latin states that emerged from the Third and Fourth Crusades. Richard proved very early on to be an expert on the Kingdom of Cyprus under Lusignan rule – a half-century before producing his brilliant historical synthesis in 200662 – with his exploration of numerous aspects and his publication of multiple articles and documentary materials.63 For Greece, which was wrested from the Byzantines in 1204, Jean Longnon (1887–1979) worked on the Latin Empire of Constantinople and Antoine Bon (1901–72) on the Principality of Morea, with a primary focus on historical geography;64 the vast insular domains of Romania were studied by Freddy Thiriet (1921–86) for Venice, and by Balard (born 1936) for Genoa.65 Closely connected to the Latins, Armenia was not forgotten, and was analyzed well beyond its solely political aspects, for the period between the eleventh and fourteenth centuries, by Claude Mutafian and Gérard 57

Cahen, La Syrie du Nord. Jean Richard, Le comté de Tripoli sous la dynastie toulousaine (1102–1187) (Paris, 1945). 59 Monique Amouroux-Mourad, Le comté d’Édesse (1098–1150) (Paris, 1988). 60 Jean Richard, Le royaume latin de Jérusalem (Paris, 1953). 61 Joshua Prawer, Histoire du royaume latin de Jérusalem, 2 vols. (Paris, [1969] 2001). Other Israeli authors entered since then a profound dialogue with French historians, such as E. Sivan, L’Islam et la croisade. Idéologie et propagande dans les réactions musulmanes aux croisades (Paris, 1968) and D. Jacoby, La féodalité en Grèce médiévale. Les “Assises de Romanie”: sources, application et diffusion (Paris and The Hague, 1971). Both were disciples of Prawer and of a French scholar, Cahen for the former and Lemerle for the latter. 62 Jean Richard, “Chypre sous les Lusignans. Introduction historique,” in L’art gothique en Chypre, ed. Jean-Bernard de Vaivre and Philippe Plagnieux (Paris, 2006), 59–88. 63 Jean Richard, Chypre sous les Lusignans. Documents chypriotes des archives du Vatican (xive– e xv siècles) (Paris, 1962). 64 Jean Longnon, L’empire latin de Constantinople et la principauté de Morée (Paris, 1949); Antoine Bon, La Morée franque: recherches historiques, topographiques et archéologiques sur la principauté d’Achaïe (1205–1430), 2 vols. (Paris, 1969). 65 Freddy Thiriet, La Romanie vénitienne au Moyen Âge. Le développement et l’exploitation du domaine colonial vénitien (xii–xve siècles) (Paris, 1959); Michel Balard, La Romanie génoise (xiie– début du xve siècle), 2 vols. (Rome, 1978). 58

FRENCH HISTORIOGRAPHY: INTERWAR PERIOD TO 2020

235

Dédéyan (both born in 1942).66 Contacts and exchanges took pride of place in a number of these works. Latin expansion was no longer considered a precedent for modern colonization. According to the perspective that was also adopted by Cahen, based on study of the Muslim world,67 emphasis was placed on the cultural, social, and even economic and religious symbiosis that occurred in conquered territories. In France, the religious and military aspects of the crusade were not explored as they were in England, while French specialists, perhaps more sensitive due to a bad colonial conscience, favored exchanges in particular. In developing this approach as part of a series of conferences in the late 1980s that he led with Alain Ducellier (1934–2018), Balard explored the reciprocal influence between the two worlds in contact,68 and, as he clearly reminded us in 2000, “the history of Western expansion in the Middle Ages subsequently became a problem of acculturation.”69 In forty years the French historiography of the crusades, which is still centered on the East, has renewed itself more than is commonly thought, although it did not open up a great deal on other fronts. For Riley-Smith, who theorized it in 1977,70 the extension of the phenomenon was already “in the air in the early 1950s”71 thanks to Constable’s work on contemporary perceptions of the Second Crusade, in which the Baltic and the Iberian Peninsula were related to the Holy Land.72 French-language specialists forgot Villey’s intuitions and remained “traditionalists” in opposition to the “pluralists.” Nevertheless, as experts on the East during the central Middle Ages, some of them shifted their focus later in time or elsewhere in space. In the 1970s, Rousset took an interest in the “late avatars” of the crusade, from Catherine of Siena to Oliver Cromwell,73 embracing over the temps long an ideology to which he devoted his last and posthumously published book.74 In this work he touched upon a “crusade myth,” for which Alphonse Dupront became the specialist with

66 Claude Mutafian, La Cilicie au carrefour des empires, 2 vols. (Paris, 1988); Gérard Dédéyan, “Les pouvoirs arméniens dans le Proche-Orient médiéval (1068–1144),” 5 vols. (PhD diss., Université de Paris-1, 1990), published as Les Arméniens entre Grecs, Musulmans et Croisés. Étude sur les pouvoirs arméniens dans le Proche-Orient méditerranéen (1068–1150), 2 vols. (Lisbon, 2003). 67 Cahen, Orient et Occident. 68 État et colonisation au Moyen Âge et à la Renaissance, ed. Michel Balard (Lyon, 1989); Coloniser au Moyen Âge. Méthodes d’expansion et techniques de domination en Méditerranée du xie au xvie siècle, ed. Michel Balard and Alain Ducellier (Paris, 1995); Le partage du monde. Échanges et colonisation dans la Méditerranée médiévale, ed. Michel Balard and Alain Ducellier (Paris, 1997). 69 Balard, “L’historiographie des croisades en France,” 25. 70 Riley-Smith, What Were the Crusades? 71 Jonathan Riley-Smith, The Crusades: A History (London, [1987] 20143), 9. 72 Constable, “The Second Crusade as Seen by Contemporaries.” 73 Paul Rousset, “Sainte Catherine de Sienne et le problème de la croisade,” Revue suisse d’histoire 25 (1975): 499–513; idem, “Le cardinal Matthieu Schiner ou la nostalgie de la croisade,” in Mélanges offerts à André Donnet pour son 65e anniversaire (Sion, 1978), 327–38; idem, “Un huguenot propose une croisade: le projet de François de La Noue (1580–1585),” Revue d’histoire ecclésiastique suisse 72 (1978): 333–44; idem, “La croisade puritaine de Cromwell,” Revue suisse d’histoire 28 (1978): 15–28. 74 Paul Rousset, Histoire d’une idéologie. La croisade (Lausanne, 1983).

236

PHILIPPE JOSSERAND

his dissertation in 1956, but published posthumously only forty years later.75 Faithful to an early chronology, Flori explored beyond the East without denying its “highly eminent spiritual value,” relating other fronts to it, especially the Iberian Peninsula.76 However, in France this expansion remained even more tentative in space than in time, with the exception of the fight against the Albigensians, in which there had long been talk of a crusade for polemical and political reasons,77 but with no connection to the Holy Land even in the most sound works undertaken as part of the Cahiers de Fanjeaux, or by the pioneers of the renewed study of Catharism.78 Aside from the East, it was often simply a matter of “deviations” and, after 1291, of “arrière-croisades.” For French-language specialists the crusades remained attached to the Holy Land during the second half of the twentieth century. This was very clearly demonstrated by the “Documents relatifs à l’histoire des croisades” published by the Académie des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres since 1946, via its growing orientation toward the Muslim world.79 This is also reflected in historical syntheses written during the period. While Cécile Morrisson (born 1940) and Henri Platelle (1921–2011) ventured a little beyond the East and after the year 1291,80 other authors did not do so,81 including those who were fine experts on the topic. Richard’s Histoire des croisades published in 1996 keeps to “the Frankish Holy Land,”82 and while this remarkable scholar had previously been pleased by Kenneth Setton’s multi-faceted undertaking in the United States entitled A History of the Crusades – and included recent developments on the late Middle Ages in his L’esprit des croisades83 – his highly anticipated synthesis adhered to the same limits that Rousset had imposed in his own work forty years earlier.84 75

Alphonse Dupront, “Le mythe de croisade. Essai de sociologie religieuse” (PhD diss., Université de Paris, 1956), published as Le mythe de croisade, 4 vols. (Paris, 1997). 76 Jean Flori, “Réforme, reconquista, croisade. L’idée de reconquête dans la correspondance pontificale d’Alexandre II à Urbain II,” Cahiers de civilisation médiévale 40 (1997): 317–35. 77 Pierre Belperron, La croisade contre les Albigeois et l’union du Languedoc à la France (Paris, 1942); Michel Roquebert, L’épopée cathare, 5 vols. ([Toulouse, 1970–98] Paris, 2007–08). 78 Paix de Dieu et guerre sainte en Languedoc au xiiie siècle, Cahiers de Fanjeaux 4 (Toulouse, 1969); Monique Zerner, La croisade albigeoise (Paris, 1979); eadem, “Le negotium pacis et fidei ou l’affaire de paix et de foi: une désignation de la croisade albigeoise à revoir,” in Prêcher la paix et discipliner la société. Italie, France, Angleterre (xiiie–xve siècle), ed. Rosa Maria Dessì (Turnhout, 2005), 63–102. 79 While the first two volumes show a broad perspective – Onze poèmes de Rutebeuf concernant la croisade, ed. Julia Bastin and Edmond Faral (Paris, 1946), and Henri de Valenciennes, Histoire de l’empereur Henri de Constantinople, ed. Jean Longnon (Paris, 1948) – of the twenty-one published since, only one took an interest in a subject outside of the Holy Land and the Eastern Muslim world: La chronique attribuée au connétable Smbat, ed. Gérard Dédéyan (Paris, 1980). 80 Cécile Morrisson, Les croisades (Paris, 1969); Henri Platelle, Les croisades (Paris, 1994). The extension is nevertheless presented from the perspective of “deviations” and “arrière-croisades.” 81 Régine Pernoud, Les croisades (Paris, 1960); Georges Tate, L’Orient des croisades (Paris, 1991). 82 Jean Richard, Histoire des croisades (Paris, 1996). 83 Jean Richard, “Une ‘Histoire des croisades’ collective,” Journal des Savants (1957): 119–31 [echoing the first volume of A History of the Crusades, ed. Kenneth Setton (Philadelphia, 1955)]; Jean Richard, L’esprit des croisades (Paris, [1969] 2000), 17–19. 84 Paul Rousset, Histoire des croisades (Paris, 1957).

FRENCH HISTORIOGRAPHY: INTERWAR PERIOD TO 2020

237

French-language research on the crusades was highly productive from the 1950s to the late twentieth century, but did not change its paradigm a great deal: its area essentially remained limited to the East, and it was only through the prism of myth that it included, on the margins, periods after the fourteenth century. Richard’s work reflects this. While the historian of the crusade, probably the most advanced and prolific of his generation, did not find an academic following, he opened up to other historiographical traditions: four volumes of his articles were collected in the United Kingdom between 1976 and 1992,85 helping to sustain an Anglo-Saxon research that – between the time of Runciman and that of Riley-Smith, Bernard Hamilton and Christopher Tyerman – radically transformed and emerged as the global leader. *

*

*

Possessing its own journal, Crusades, since 2002, the Society for the Study of the Crusades and the Latin East (SSCLE), which was created in 1980, is emblematic of this new primacy. French historians were present from the outset, beginning with Richard, although their academic impact diminished. As I indicated above, Flori, Balard, and Alain Demurger (born 1939) noted this at the turn of the millennium, with a few nuances. The latter two attempted to remedy it, each in their own way. As colleagues at University of Paris-1, and accustomed to working together,86 they neither had the same career nor the same institutional exposure – with the latter not seeking it at all – but through their example they both worked to make French research part of the game once again, thereby serving as guides for the two ensuing generations. A specialist on Genoa, and familiar with the history of contacts and commerce, Balard emerged in France in the late twentieth century as the primary authority on the crusade. He was active in the SSCLE, over which he was one of only two Frenchmen to preside, along with Richard. In 1996 he published the ClermontFerrand conference that the institution had held one year earlier to commemorate the ninth centennial of Pope Urban II’s call,87 finding material for a first historiographical essay on the topic.88 In a period of virulent debates between “pluralists” and “traditionalists,” Balard never fully explained what the crusade 85 Jean Richard, Orient et Occident au Moyen Âge: contacts et relations (xiie–xve siècles) (London, 1976); idem, Les relations entre Orient et Occident au Moyen Âge. Études et documents (London, 1977); idem, Croisés, missionnaires et voyageurs: les perspectives orientales du monde latin médiéval (London, 1983); idem, Croisades et États latins d’Orient. Points de vue et documents (Aldershot, 1992). 86 Michel Balard, “Alain Demurger, une carrière à l’ombre des ordres militaires,” in Élites et ordres militaires au Moyen Âge. Rencontre autour d’Alain Demurger, ed. Philippe Josserand, Luís Filipe Oliveira and Damien Carraz (Madrid, 2015), 11–15. 87 Autour de la Première Croisade. Actes du colloque de la Society for the Study of the Crusades and the Latin East (Clermont-Ferrand, June 1995), ed. Michel Balard (Paris, 1996). 88 Michel Balard, “Croisades et Orient latin: un bilan des recherches,” Cahiers de recherches médiévales 1 (1996): 7–13.

238

PHILIPPE JOSSERAND

represented for him. In 1988, he defined it in a small encyclopedia as “an armed pilgrimage whose goal is to deliver the Holy Sepulchre”89; he used the phrase again in 2005, in a book on an entirely different scale, in which he indicated that for him it was valid for “at least two centuries.”90 In the meantime, in the mid–1990s, he sponsored the French adaptation of Riley-Smith’s Atlas of the Crusades, as well as the new edition of the work of Alphandéry and Dupront, trying to pursue an impossible synthesis on the grounds that everyone saw the crusade as “the crucible for the unity of the Christian West.”91 Was there not some awkwardness amid all this? Called upon in 2002 to specify his definition for the Dictionnaire du Moyen Âge, Balard adopted a “pluralist” point of view, indicating that other fronts such as the Baltic, or the West itself with expeditions against heretics, could be added to the East, on which his presentation remained focused,92 as was the case one year earlier in the reference work Croisades et Orient latin (xie–xive siècle), in which the topic was studied in very traditional fashion.93 The French historiography at the turn of the millennium did not fully rally behind this “pluralism,” which for lack of a better term I will refer to as lukewarm, since eminent specialists such as Richard and Flori continued to espouse a traditional position, with the latter defining the crusade as a “a holy war whose objective is the recapture of the Holy Sites of Jerusalem by Christians.”94 The advances made by Anglophone research nevertheless called for integration. I emphasized this at the turn of the millennium while working on the Iberian Peninsula, where I was careful to connect crusade and Reconquista,95 although, generally, it was Demurger who first moved beyond the opposition between “traditionalists” and “pluralists” in France. He came to the crusade via the history of the Templars, for which he had emerged as a major specialist;96 in 1998

89

Michel Balard, Les croisades (Paris, 1988), 9. Balard, Les Latins en Orient, 27: “an armed pilgrimage whose goal is to deliver the Holy Sepulchre in Jerusalem.” 91 Jonathan Riley-Smith, The Atlas of the Crusades (London, 1990), French trans. Camille Cantoni: Atlas des croisades (Paris, 1996), with an introduction by Michel Balard; Paul Alphandéry and Alphonse Dupront, La chrétienté et l’idée de croisade (Paris, 1995), with a postscript by Balard, here 588. 92 Michel Balard, “Croisades,” in Dictionnaire du Moyen Âge, ed. Claude Gauvard, Alain de Libera, and Michel Zink (Paris, 2002), 371. 93 Michel Balard, Croisades et Orient latin, xie–xive siècle (Paris, 2001). The crusades of the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries are briefly discussed (166–69), opening after Varna in 1444 onto the following question: “can we still speak of a crusade?” The other fronts, which were presented in a little more detail, were approached from the traditional angle of “deviations” (237–44). 94 Jean Richard, “La croisade, l’évolution des conceptions et des stratégies,” in From Clermont to Jerusalem. The Crusades and Crusader Societies, 1095–1500, ed. Alan Murray (Turnhout, 1998), 3–25; Flori, “Pour une redéfinition de la croisade,” 349. 95 Philippe Josserand, “Église et pouvoir dans la péninsule Ibérique. Les ordres militaires dans le royaume de Castille (1252–1369),” 3 vols. (PhD diss., Université de Nantes, 2000), 2:622–30; published under the same title in Madrid, 2004, 586–93; idem, “Croisade et reconquête dans le royaume de Castille au xiie siècle. Éléments pour une réflexion,” in L’expansion occidentale (xie–xve siècles). Formes et conséquences. Actes du 33e Congrès de la SHMES (Madrid, May 23–26, 2002) (Paris, 2003), 75–85. 96 Alain Demurger, Vie et mort de l’ordre du Temple, 1118–1314 (Paris, 1985). 90

FRENCH HISTORIOGRAPHY: INTERWAR PERIOD TO 2020

239

he devoted a short essay on the topic that went relatively unnoticed,97 which he developed into a broader book in 2006,98 as he had done for his preferred military order.99 These two remarkable works distinguish between the idea and the practices of the crusade, and call for analyzing them “from a dynamic perspective.”100 While the author aligned himself with the “traditionalists,”101 he understood that the antagonism with the “pluralists” was not irremediable, for as the latter had shown, the crusade after the twelfth century “lived its own life, transformed, broadened, developed, and became debased,”102 although until the late Middle Ages and beyond it never forgot Jerusalem, regardless of the fronts involved.103 Demurger’s call to give the crusade a dynamic definition was not sufficiently heard in France or abroad. In 2012, as part of a comparative reflection on writing the history of the crusades in the East and the West, Abbès Zouache did not make the least mention of him:104 in thirty rather unequal pages, he never cited an author whose conceptions were lauded by both Flori and Balard.105 Demurger did not inspire a following, but one could say that he had an impact on the work of the ensuing two generations of French-language researchers, possibly influenced by their reading of his open “traditionalism.” The East during the time of the crusades attracted more French scholars in the first decades of the twenty-first century than it had done for a long time. Our knowledge of the topic expanded with heightened interest in non-Latin Christian and Islamic sources, for which Anne-Marie Eddé and Gérard Dédéyan set an example in the late 1990s.106 Working on the anthropology of contacts, and revealing symbioses that had previously remained ignored, the most seminal French-language works, like Anglophone studies, saw the Latin expansion in terms of acculturation. François-Olivier Touati and John Tolan opened the way in 2001,107 and were followed by younger colleagues such as Zouache, Pierre-Vincent Claverie, and Marie-Anna Chevalier, who rethought old 97

Alain Demurger, La croisade au Moyen Âge. Idée et pratiques (Paris, 1998). Demurger, Croisades et croisés. 99 Alain Demurger, Les Templiers. Une chevalerie chrétienne au Moyen Âge (Paris, 2005). 100 Demurger, La croisade au Moyen Âge, 7, 112; idem, Croisades et croisés, 11, 334. 101 Demurger, La croisade au Moyen Âge, 112; idem, Croisades et croisés, 330. 102 Demurger, La croisade au Moyen Âge, 20. 103 Ibid., 20, 104, and 113–14; Demurger, Croisades et croisés, 57, 335. 104 Abbès Zouache, “Écrire l’histoire des croisades, aujourd’hui, en Orient et en Occident,” in Construire la Méditerranée, penser les transferts culturels. Approches historiographiques et perspectives de recherche, ed. Rania Abdellatif, Yassir Benhima, Daniel König and Élisabeth Ruchaud (Munich, 2012), 120–47. 105 Jean Flori, La croix, la tiare et l’épée. La croisade confisquée (Paris, 2010), 57, 269, which proposes “an evolutionist perspective on the crusade”; Balard, “Alain Demurger, une carrière à l’ombre des ordres militaires,” 15. 106 Anne-Marie Eddé, “Saint Louis et la Septième Croisade vus par les auteurs arabes,” Cahiers de recherches médiévales 1 (1996): 65–92; Gérard Dédéyan, “Les colophons de manuscrits arméniens comme sources pour l’histoire des croisades,” in The Crusades and their Sources: Essays Presented to Bernard Hamilton, ed. John France and William Zajac (Aldershot, 1998), 89–110. 107 François-Olivier Touati, “Recherches sur l’histoire de Saint-Lazare de Jérusalem. OrientOccident (xiie–xiiie siècles)” (unpublished Habilitation à diriger des recherches, Université de Paris-1, 98

240

PHILIPPE JOSSERAND

fields such as the history of war and military orders.108 The movement continued during the 2010s, and while I cannot provide an exhaustive account, mentioning the innovative approaches of Camille Rouxpetel, Florian Besson, and Simon Dorso – the work of the latter still in progress, and engaging with archaeology – underscores the richness of French research, which is often conducted in collaboration, both in Jerusalem and elsewhere.109 Beyond the Levant, the Latin states born at the turn of the twelfth and thirteenth centuries also continued to prove attractive, such as Cyprus, where Gilles Grivaud took over from Richard,110 and Greece, which was notably studied by Isabelle Ortega.111 French-language research for other fronts of the crusade, such as in the West, is less present in comparison to the Anglophone historiography and the nationally rooted traditions of the Iberian Peninsula and Central and Northern Europe. On the fight against heretics and enemies of the Church – insufficiently related to Jean-Louis Biget’s innovative reflections112 – the work of the Centre d’Études Cathares, which is traditional in approach,113 struggles to equal that of Mark Pegg, Rebecca Rist, Robert Moore, or Antonio Sennis,114 who are more inclined – especially the former – to make comparisons with the East. Daniel Baloup, who was associated with the Centre d’Études Cathares,115 has

2001); John Tolan, “Les Sarrasins. L’islam dans l’imagination européenne au Moyen Âge” (Habilitation à diriger des recherches, EHESS, 2001), published under the same title in Paris, 2003. 108 Abbès Zouache, Armées et combats en Syrie de la première croisade à la mort de Nûr al-Dîn. Analyse comparée des chroniques latines et arabes (Damascus, 2008); Pierre-Vincent Claverie, L’ordre du Temple en Terre sainte et à Chypre au xiiie siècle, 3 vols. (Nicosia, 2005); idem, L’Ordre du Temple dans l’Orient des croisades (Brussels, 2014); Marie-Anna Chevalier, Les ordres religieux-militaires en Arménie cilicienne. Templiers, hospitaliers, teutoniques et Arméniens à l’époque des croisades (Paris, 2009). 109 Camille Rouxpetel, L’Occident au miroir de l’Orient latin. Cilicie, Syrie, Palestine et Égypte e (xii –xive siècle) (Rome, 2015); Florian Besson, “Les barons de la chrétienté orientale. Pratiques du pouvoir et cultures politiques en Orient latin (1097–1229)” (unpublished PhD diss., Université de Paris-4, 2017); Simon Dorso, “Templiers et Hospitaliers dans la Galilée du xiiie siècle. Stratégies d’implantation et d’administration dans un territoire en sursis,” in Ordres militaires et territorialité au Moyen Âge entre Orient et Occident, ed. Marie-Anna Chevalier (Paris, 2020), 49–83. 110 Gilles Grivaud, “Grecs et Francs dans le royaume de Chypre (1191–1474): les voies de l’acculturation” (unpublished Habilitation à diriger des recherches, Université de Paris-1, 2001); Gilles Grivaud, ed., “France de Chypre (1192–1474),” Cahiers du Centre d’études chypriotes 43 (2013): 329–522. 111 Isabelle Ortega, Les lignages nobiliaires dans la Morée latine (xiiie–xve siècles). Permanences et mutations (Turnhout, 2012). 112 Jean-Louis Biget, Église, dissidences et société dans l’Occitanie médiévale (Lyon, 2020). 113 La croisade albigeoise. Actes du colloque du Centre d’Études Cathares (Carcassonne, octobre 4–6, 2002), ed. Michel Roquebert (Carcassonne, 2004). 114 Mark Pegg, A Most Holy War: The Albigensian Crusade and the Battle for Christendom (Oxford, 2008); Rebecca Rist, The Papacy and the Crusade in Europe, 1198–1245 (London, 2009); Robert Moore, The War on Heresy: Faith and Power in Medieval Europe (London, 2012), French trans. Julien Théry: Hérétiques. Résistances et répression dans l’Occident médiéval (Paris, 2017); Cathars in Question, ed. Antonio Sennis (York and Woodbridge, 2016). 115 Daniel Baloup, “La croisade albigeoise dans les chroniques léonaises et castillanes du xiiie siècle,” in La croisade albigeoise. Actes du colloque du Centre d’Études Cathares, 91–107.

FRENCH HISTORIOGRAPHY: INTERWAR PERIOD TO 2020

241

touched more on the crusade in the Iberian Peninsula,116 to which I also devoted myself both individually and in collaboration with him in 2006.117 French-language historians are even less numerous in the Baltic for linguistic reasons, despite the engagement of the young Swiss researcher Loïc Chollet,118 who echoes the work of Danielle Buschinger and Mathieu Olivier, the recent translators of the Chronique rimée de Livonie119 and longstanding actors, like Sylvain Gouguenheim, in the field of Teutonic history.120 Beyond the East, it is in the field of the Late Crusades that French research has made the largest contributions in the last twenty years. At the turn of the twentieth and twenty-first centuries, when Jacques Paviot finally engaged with the topic, French-language authors were marginalized – despite the precedents of Joseph Delaville Le Roulx and Nicolas Iorga121 – and the Anglophone historiography totally dominated the field, especially with Norman Housley;122 Paviot’s masterwork on Burgundy and the East published in 2003123 was answered

116 Daniel Baloup, “Reconquête et croisade dans la Chronica Adefonsi Imperatoris (v. 1150),” Cahiers de linguistique et de civilisation hispaniques médiévales 25 (2002): 453–80; Daniel Baloup, “Guerre sainte et violences religieuses dans les royaumes occidentaux de la péninsule Ibérique au Moyen Âge,” in Religions, pouvoir et violence, ed. Michel Bertrand and Patrick Cabanel (Toulouse, 2004), 15–32; Daniel Baloup, “L’affrontement contre les musulmans dans les chroniques léonaises et castillanes (ixe–xve siècle). Caractères et enjeux du récit historique,” in El mundo de los conquistadores, ed. Martín Ríos Saloma (Madrid, 2015), 39–51. 117 Josserand, “Croisade et reconquête dans le royaume de Castille au xiie siècle”; Daniel Baloup and Philippe Josserand, “Du Jourdain au Tage. Les croisades de Terre sainte dans les chroniques de l’Occident hispanique (fin xie–milieu xiiie siècle),” in Regards croisés sur la guerre sainte. Guerre, religion et idéologie dans l’espace méditerranéen latin (xie–xiiie siècle), ed. Daniel Baloup and Philippe Josserand (Toulouse, 2006), 277–304; Philippe Josserand, “Les croisades de Terre sainte et les ordres militaires dans les chroniques royales castillano-léonaises (milieu xie–milieu xiiie siècle),” in Christlicher Norden – Muslimischer Süden. Ansprüche und Wirklichkeiten von Christen, Juden und Muslimen auf der Iberischen Halbinsel im Hoch- und Spätmittelalter, ed. Matthias Tischler and Alexander Fidora (Münster, 2011), 433–43; Philippe Josserand, “Cruzada, idea de,” in Diccionario de historia medieval de la Península Ibérica, ed. Georges Martin (Madrid, forthcoming). 118 Loïc Chollet, “Les Sarrasins du Nord: une histoire littéraire de la croisade balte” (PhD diss., Université de Neuchâtel, 2017), published as Les Sarrasins du Nord. Une histoire de la croisade balte par la littérature (xiie–xve siècle) (Neuchâtel, 2019). 119 Chronique rimée de Livonie, ed. and French trans. Danielle Buschinger and Mathieu Olivier (Paris, 2019). 120 Danielle Buschinger and Mathieu Olivier, Les chevaliers teutoniques (Paris, 2009); Sylvain Gouguenheim, Les chevaliers teutoniques (Paris, 2009). 121 Joseph Delaville Le Roulx, La France en Orient au xive siècle. Expéditions du maréchal Boucicaut (Paris, 1886); Nicolas Iorga, Philippe de Mézières (1327–1405) et la croisade au xive siècle (Paris, 1896). 122 Norman Housley, The Italian Crusades: The Papal-Angevin Alliance and the Crusades against Christian Lay Powers, 1254–1343 (Oxford, 1982); idem, The Avignon Papacy and the Crusades, 1305– 1378 (Oxford, 1986); idem, The Later Crusades, 1274–1580: From Lyons to Alcazar (Oxford, 1992); idem, ed., Crusading in the Fifteenth Century: Message and Impact (Basingstoke, 2004). 123 Jacques Paviot, Les ducs de Bourgogne, la croisade et l’Orient (fin xive–xve siècle) (Paris, 2003). The author’s strong interest in the topic was later demonstrated by the publication of a volume of “Documents relatifs à l’histoire des croisades,” entitled Projets de croisade (v. 1290–v. 1330) (Paris, 2008).

242

PHILIPPE JOSSERAND

ten years later by that of Benjamin Weber on the papal struggle against the Turks.124 In the meantime, Baloup obtained funding from the Agence Nationale de la Recherche in 2007 for a project on the “Later Crusades,”125 which enabled the organization of ten conferences in the late 2000s,126 and gave rise in the ensuing decade to a series in the “Méridiennes” collection of the Presses universitaires du Midi in Toulouse. Paviot and Weber were associated with the endeavor, and, although the latter had just edited a recent volume on the crusades in Africa,127 the delay in publishing the proceedings, some of which still remain unpublished,128 did not produce the expected dynamic. In addition to articles solicited from foreign researchers, the series naturally offers contributions of great interest by French historians, including medievalists such as Olivier Marin and Dan Mureşan, and even more so modernists such as Emmanuelle Pujeau, Anne Brogini, and Pierre Couhault, who are in line with the re-reading of the crusade during the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries initiated by Géraud Poumarède in 2004.129 The project’s lack of definition – connected to a refusal to distinguish between crusade and holy war and even simple religious conflicts – proved harmful to the endeavor, and in the published volumes the crusade very often sits side by side with many other military undertakings.130 In terms of the crusade, French-language historical research has produced a great deal in the last quarter-century. Is it fair to say, as Zouache has done, that it “is

124

Weber, Lutter contre les Turcs. Active from 2007 to 2010, this triennial program was entitled “Les Croisades tardives. Conflits interconfessionnels et sentiments identitaires à la fin du Moyen Âge en Europe (ANR–06-CONF–020).” 126 The inaugural conference, held at the initiative of Daniel Baloup and Benoît Joudiou in Toulouse on 22–23 March 2007, was entitled “Les croisades tardives (xive–xvie siècles). Bilan historiographique et état de la recherche,” and included fifteen presenters. 127 Croisades en Afrique. Les expéditions occidentales à destination du continent africain (xiiie– e xvi siècle), ed. Benjamin Weber (Toulouse, 2019). 128 Six volumes from the series have been published to date, with the most recent and innovative work cited in the preceding footnote not being connected to a particular conference. The other books were also published in Toulouse by the Presses universitaires du Midi, with delays of five to seven years aside from one exception. Here I will only indicate the year of publication: Les projets de croisade. Géostratégie et diplomatie européenne du xive au xviie siècle, ed. Jacques Paviot (2014); La noblesse et la croisade à la fin du Moyen Âge, ed. Martin Nejedlý and Jaroslav Svátek (2009); Histoires et mémoires des croisades à la fin du Moyen Âge, ed. Martin Nejedlý and Jaroslav Svátek (2015); Partir en croisade à la fin du Moyen Âge. Financement et logistique, ed. Daniel Baloup and Manuel Sánchez Martínez (2015); La guerra de Granada en su contexto internacional, ed. Daniel Baloup and Raúl González Arévalo (2017). Three meetings remain unpublished, of which the first, which was historiographical in aim, would have been essential for the series and its related information. 129 Géraud Poumarède, Pour en finir avec la croisade. Mythes et réalités de la lutte contre les Turcs aux xvie et xviie siècles (Paris, 2004). 130 In 2020, Baloup abandoned the management of this collection, which has since been entrusted to the duo of Joudiou and Weber. A volume overseen by Stefan Stantchev is being prepared on economic war, and others should follow, no longer connected to a particular academic meeting. I would like to thank Benjamin Weber, who will no doubt put the crusade at the center of the publications in Toulouse, for this information. 125

FRENCH HISTORIOGRAPHY: INTERWAR PERIOD TO 2020

243

now inundated beneath the flow of (often high-quality) publications in English”?131 It is of course smaller in volume, but no different in value, and unlike my colleague, I believe it is all the more capable of re-emerging given that around 2010, when he formulated his judgment, it had already been in a phase of recovery for twenty years, which the most recent decade has further consolidated.132 The figures who for a very long time embodied the French historiography in the field have passed away, like Jean Richard, or retired, like Michel Balard; if it is no longer diffused abroad – and sometimes not much in my own country – I believe this is due, in addition to increased academic competition, to a problem stemming from the definition of the crusade, with which I think it is important to conclude. *

*

*

Defining is crucial in history. Yet as Marc Bloch, who always strove to do so with the greatest care, already observed during the Second World War the historian seldom defines. He might well consider this an unnecessary precaution, if he were borrowing from a usage which was itself strictly defined. Since such is not the case, almost his only guide, even in the use of his key words, is personal instinct. He arbitrarily expands, restricts, distorts the meanings – without warning his reader; without always fully realizing it himself. What of the ‘feudalisms’ throughout the world from China to the Greece of the beautifully greaved Achaeans? For the most part, they bear scarcely any resemblance to each other. That is because nearly every historian understands the word as they please.133

French-language research on the crusade directly illustrates this, and does so more today than in the past. Its actors are not all careful readers of Marc Bloch, unlike Touati – one of the best informed, and until recently Secretary for the SSCLE – who in 2007 published a fine book on the relations between the great medievalist and England.134 Like my colleague, and through him our shared model, I have a taste for the Anglophone and especially the British historiography, of whose impact in shaping me I was reminded in London.135 If it is so firmly established today, I believe that is because it has worked toward defining its subject since the 1970s, unlike the French and other traditions, which are nevertheless just as erudite in the details. Stimulated by Riley-Smith, English-speaking researchers joined the debate. “Pluralists” and “traditionalists” put forth their opposing arguments and, following Constable, “generalists” and “popularists” (who for me combine the most radical 131

Zouache, “Écrire l’histoire des croisades,” 123. Balard, “L’historiographie des croisades en France,” 12; Balard, “L’historiographie des croisades au xxe siècle,” 975. 133 Bloch, The Historian’s Craft, 175. 134 François-Olivier Touati, Marc Bloch et l’Angleterre (Paris, 2007). 135 Philippe Josserand, “Frontier Conflict, Military Cost and Culture: the Master of Santiago and the Islamic Border in Mid-Fourteenth-Century Spain,” in MO, 6/2, 29–45, here 30. 132

244

PHILIPPE JOSSERAND

of the former and latter groups) further added to the controversy. The French historiography surprisingly kept away from the question of what the crusade is. From Grousset to Richard, its central figures – with the exception of Villey – can be seen as “traditionalists.” The “pluralists,” who were in accord with the overall evolution of the field, began to emerge in the 1990s, although in France they never truly asserted themselves as such, nor did the illustrious example of Balard, probably the most avowed of them. Indeterminacy prevailed, and with it – and more seriously – a genuine lack of definition for the crusade. The situation even turned into an aporia in the early twenty-first century. What to think of a “pluralist” stance such as that of Zouache, who discusses the crusades only on the scale of the Eastern Mediterranean, and even more narrowly that of the Levant?136 What of Baloup who – because it would be “dangerous to enclose oneself in typologies that are all the less workable because they divide specialists” – opens the foreword to each of the volumes in the series on the late crusades of which he is the general editor by indicating that “it is actually not always a matter of crusades because we have chosen to discuss all forms of armed interfaith confrontation”?137 Would it be a profession of “generalist” faith, melding crusade and religious struggle?138 As Marc Bloch emphasized, a clear danger of “such careful definitions is that they only further limitations,”139 although refusing to lay out one’s subject – eluding and refusing to choose, in order to ultimately discuss everything – is not an appropriate attitude for historians. While it had the merit of opening the debate, I do not think that the definition of the crusade proposed in the 1970s by Riley-Smith is entirely acceptable, but like him, I believe that the phenomenon can – and even must – be defined. The crusade cannot be equated with holy war, and all the more so cannot embrace all conflicts claiming religious causes. For all that, it is not univocal, necessarily connected to Jerusalem alone. In the 1940s, Villey was the first to show, using a legal basis, the concept’s malleability, which the “pluralists” of the next generation turned to their advantage. The crusade was not the same in 1100, 1300, or 1500, and because Demurger was able to subtly observe this and identify its consequences, he stressed as early as 1998 that it could not be defined “without taking a dynamic into account.”140 I fully support this approach, which is still not widely shared. The idea can reconcile “pluralists” and “traditionalists” – except the most radical among them – whose analyses are not destined to oppose one another. It also emphasizes the essential aspect of armed pilgrimage centered around Jerusalem, considered commendable as such, but also includes the fact that the movement – due to its very success, and 136

Zouache, “Écrire l’histoire des croisades.” Daniel Baloup, “Avant-propos,” in La noblesse et la croisade à la fin du Moyen Âge, and in La guerra de Granada en su contexto internacional, 7. 138 A similar criticism can be directed at the much debated work of Philippe Buc, Holy War, Martyrdom, and Terror: Christianity, Violence, and the West (Philadelphia, 2015); French trans. Jacques Dalarun, Guerre sainte, martyre et terreur. Les formes chrétiennes de la violence en Occident (Paris, 2017), which incidentally offers otherwise important insights. 139 Bloch, The Historian’s Craft, 21. 140 Demurger, La croisade au Moyen Âge, 112. 137

FRENCH HISTORIOGRAPHY: INTERWAR PERIOD TO 2020

245

sanctioned by the creation of the Latin states – was sustained by a whole tradition of holy war against the enemies of the Christian faith, opening onto many expansions within the European field. Finally, and quite to the contrary, it does not prevent the establishment of hierarchies, themselves evolving, between the different fronts. These hierarchies were not based on an alleged special moral value, which no one today would reasonably ascribe to one particular undertaking rather than another, but instead on the view taken by the women and men of the period. With regard to both the crusade and other areas, comparing in no way entails likening, identifying, or confusing. Despite the assurances of Villey – who, based on law, posited a “deeprooted identity” and “the equivalence of various crusades” regardless of where they developed141 – I believe, like Demurger, that contemporaries knew quite well how to distinguish them when needed. With humor and a little provocation toward the most extreme “pluralists,” he believed that medieval opinion could easily tell “the difference between Jerusalem and bear hunting in the swamps of Lithuania.”142 It is the historian’s task, indisputably more difficult, to distinguish between and connect the crusades by remaining attentive to spaces and temporalities. It is only at this price that the study of the crusade can legitimately proceed. Thanks to Demurger, the French historiography recognized this before others, and while it did not do so uniformly, this is, in my opinion, not the least of its merits. The path ahead is no doubt arduous, although my colleague – concerned that everyone be able to advance as best as possible – provided helpful guidance when concluding his reflection, by extending an invitation to pay special attention to the vocabulary of the time: peregrinatio, which was intended to defend or recover Jerusalem, was opposed by negotium, directed toward other fronts.143 Unfortunately – or perhaps fortunately – nothing is simple, and in 1306 the last Grand Master of the Templars, Jacques de Molay – whom Demurger understood admirably well144 – referred to the crusade that he enjoined Pope Clement V to launch to re-establish the Latins in the Holy Land as a “negotium,” simultaneously “pium et laudabile, valde bonum et utile.”145 Marc Bloch had already warned in the 1940s that [to] reproduce or copy the terminology of the past might, at first sight, seem a rather safe course. In application, however, it would encounter manifold difficulties. In the first place, changes in things do not by any means always entail similar changes in their names […] At any rate, in order to do justice to the facts themselves, we are here forced to substitute for the language of the past a nomenclature which, if it is not strictly invented, is at least changed and shifted.146

141 142 143 144 145 146

Villey, La croisade, 246. Demurger, La croisade au Moyen Âge, 114. Ibid, 112–13; Demurger, Croisades et croisés, 332–33. Alain Demurger, Jacques de Molay. Le crépuscule des Templiers (Paris, [2002] 2014). Paviot, Projets de croisade (v. 1290–v. 1330), 185; Josserand, Jacques de Molay, 158. Bloch, The Historian’s Craft, 159–60.

246

PHILIPPE JOSSERAND

Was he thinking of the crusade? He did not let that come across or use the word, whose origins and pitfalls Weber has traced over the last ten years.147 I like to think so, and in any event we are not done with the crusade, whose political history itself, dating back several centuries, has been taken up anew in France, especially thanks to Xavier Hélary.148 Research written in the French language has indeed helped – and I hope will continue to help – improve study the crusade, even though many other historiographies, beginning with the one produced in English, are also indispensable for doing so.

147 Benjamin Weber, “Nouveau mot ou nouvelle réalité? Le terme cruciata et son utilisation dans les textes pontificaux,” in La papauté et les croisades, ed. Michel Balard (Farnham, 2011), 11–26; Benjamin Weber, “El término ‘cruzada’ y sus usos en la Edad Media. La asimilación lingüística como proceso de legitimación,” in Orígenes y desarrollo de la guerra santa en la Península Ibérica. Palabras e imágenes para una legitimación (siglos x-xiv), ed. Carlos de Ayala Martínez, Patrick Henriet, and Santiago Palacios Ontalva (Madrid, 2016), 221–34. See also Benjamin Weber’s contribution in the present volume: “Conceptualizing the Crusade in Outremer: Uses and Purposes of the Word ‘Crusade’ in the Old French Continuation of William of Tyre,” Crusades 20 (2021): 151–64. 148 Xavier Hélary, “Les rois de France et la croisade. De la croisade de Tunis à la chute d’Acre (1270–1291),” Annuaire-Bulletin de la Société d’histoire de France. Année 2005 (2007): 21–104; idem, “Le ‘dégoût’ de la noblesse française à l’égard de la croisade à la fin du xiiie siècle,” in La noblesse et la croisade à la fin du Moyen Âge, 17–30; idem, La dernière croisade. Saint Louis à Tunis (1270) (Paris, 2016).

Bernard Hamilton Essay Prize A Paragon of Support? Ela of Salisbury, Martyrdom, and the Ideals of Sponsoring Crusade Gordon M. Reynolds University of Edinburgh [email protected]

Abstract This article explores women’s support for crusaders as a contemporary feminine ideal within medieval holy war. Divided into two parts, it discusses the thirteenth-century noblewoman Ela of Salisbury as a case study. The first section examines Ela’s portrayal within Matthew Paris’ chronicles and her supposed belief in her own salvation following the martyrdom of her son William II Longespée during the Seventh Crusade. The second section investigates the interactions between the historical Ela and her son within the context of his crusades, as well as contemporary expectations of women’s sponsorship of the movement. It becomes apparent that Ela consistently worked to enable William II’s pilgrimages and was eager to display herself as a model patron of crusade.

Introduction Since Jonathan Riley-Smith’s seminal work in the 1990s, scholars have been keen to adopt his concepts of a “family enterprise” with respect to crusade.1 It is accepted that a person who wished to embark on an iter to the Holy Land, or any other theatre of crusade, would have been reliant on the support of their family, lord, religious I owe a great debt to Emma Trivett, Tamsin Prideaux and Anna Brow for reading early drafts of this article and offering invaluable advice. Additional thanks are due to the staff of Wiltshire and Swindon Archives and Dorset History Centre for assisting in finding numerous original charters. I am also grateful to the reviewers for their comments and insights. Any mistakes that remain are my own. 1 See Jonathan Riley-Smith, “Family Traditions and Participation in the Second Crusade,” in The Second Crusade and the Cistercians, ed. Michael Gervers (New York, 1992), 101–8; Jonathan RileySmith, The First Crusaders, 1095–1131 (Cambridge, 1997). For works that incorporate his concepts, see especially Nicholas L. Paul, To Follow in Their Footsteps: The Crusades and Family Memory in the High Middle Ages (Ithaca, NY, 2012), 55–89; Nicholas L. Paul and Jochen G. Schenk, “Family Memory and the Crusades,” in Remembering the Crusades and Crusading, ed. Megan Cassidy-Welch (London, 2016), 173–86; Danielle E. A. Park, Papal Protection and the Crusader: Flanders, Champagne, and the Kingdom of France 1095–1222 (Woodbridge, 2018), 1. 247

248

GORDON M. REYNOLDS

houses and more. Many crusaders were initially conditioned to take part because of the inspiration or pressure of dynastic and regional traditions.2 Historians who have considered how crusading was privately funded and promoted have shown that noblewomen were key facilitators, routinely highlighting women’s custodianship of property and donations toward crusaders and the military orders.3 There is little doubt that noblewomen’s efforts to aid holy war through prayer, processions and religious reform were also aspects of crusade support and were viewed by contemporaries as such.4 By the thirteenth century, the ideological framework of crusading encouraged specific groups in society to support and not personally participate in campaigns. This applied to those considered a moral or logistical hindrance to holy warfare: women, children, elderly and infirm men, and clerics.5 The pontificate of Innocent III (1198–1216) was particularly instrumental in shaping this. His encyclical Quia maior of 1213 called for recruits for the Fifth Crusade, but it also incentivized support from the West. Innocent offered indulgences to those, notably women, who made donations toward a man’s (vir) expenses or participated in prayer 2 See generally Simon Lloyd, English Society and the Crusade, 1216–1307 (Oxford, 1988), 108–9; Paul, To Follow in Their Footsteps; Riley-Smith, “Family Traditions and Participation in the Second Crusade,” 101–8. 3 Danielle E. A. Park, “The Power of Crusaders’ Wives in Narrative and Diplomatic Sources, c. 1096–1149,” The Reading Medievalist 1/2 (2014): 18–31; Christopher Tyerman, England and the Crusades, 1095–1588 (Chicago, 1988), 196–201; James M. Powell, “The Role of Women in the Fifth Crusade,” in Horns, 294–313, at 296–97; Christine Dernbecher, Deus et virum suum diligens. Zur rolle und Bedeutung der Frau im Umfeld der Kreuzzüge (St. Ingbert, 2003), 27–52; Penelope A. Adair, “‘Ego et mea uxor…’: Countess Clemence and her Role in the Comital Family and in Flanders (1092–1133)” (unpublished PhD thesis, University of California, 1993); Thérèse de Hemptinne, “Les épouses de croisés et pèlerins flamands aux XIe et XIIe siècles: l’example des comtesses de Flandre Clémence et Sibylle,” in Autour, 83–95; Park, Papal Protection and the Crusader; Kathrine A. LoPrete, Adela of Blois, Countess and Lord (c. 1067–1137) (Dublin, 2007), 101–17; David Herlihy, “Land, Family and Women in Continental Europe, 701–1200,” Traditio 18/18 (1962): 89–120, at 113; Jochen Schenk, Templar Families: Landowning Families and the Order of the Temple in France, c. 1120–1307 (Cambridge, 2012), 203–49; Jürgen Sarnowsky, “Gender-Aspekte in der Geschichte der geistlichen Ritterorden,” in Lebendige Sozialgeschichte, Gedenkschrift für Peter Borowsky, ed. Rainer Hering (Wiesbaden, 2003), 168–88; Myra M. Bom, Women in the Military Orders of the Crusades (New York, 2012); Hospitaller Women in the Middle Ages, ed. Anthony Luttrell and Helen J. Nicholson (Aldershot, 2006). Regarding women’s ability to inhibit crusaders, see James A. Brundage, “The Crusader’s Wife: A Canonistic Quandary,” Studia Gratiana 12 (1967): 425–41; James A. Brundage, “The Crusader’s Wife Revisited,” Studia Gratiana 14 (1967): 243–51. 4 Christoph T. Maier, “Mass, the Eucharist and the Cross: Innocent III and the Relocation of the Crusade,” in Pope Innocent III and His World, ed. John C. Moore (Aldershot, 1999), 351–60; Christoph T. Maier, “Crisis, Liturgy and Crusade in the Twelfth and Thirteenth Centuries,” Journal of Ecclesiastical History 48/4 (1997): 628–67; Iris Shagrir and Cecilia Gaposchkin, “Liturgy and Devotion in the Crusader States: Introduction,” Journal of Medieval History 43/4 (2017): 359–66; Anne E. Lester, “A Shared Imitation: Cistercian Convents and Crusader Families in Thirteenth-Century Champagne,” Journal of Medieval History 35/4 (2009): 353–70. 5 Michael Lower, The Barons’ Crusade, A Call to Arms and its Consequences (Philadelphia, 2005), 13–36; Christoph T. Maier, Preaching the Crusades: Mendicant Friars and the Cross in the Thirteenth Century (Cambridge, 1994), 135–40; Penny J. Cole, The Preaching of the Crusades to the Holy Land, 1095–1270 (Cambridge, 1991), 160–65.

ELA OF SALISBURY AND THE IDEALS OF SPONSORING CRUSADE

249

and liturgical events that entreated divine intervention.6 By offering the spiritual rewards of crusading to those who supported the movement, while firmly gendering participation on campaign as a masculine pursuit, Innocent and his successors cemented the notion that women’s ideal role in crusade lay in sponsoring warriors or praying.7 Though many women personally went on crusading expeditions, an aspect of their participation that has received much scrutiny, this was largely discouraged by the papacy.8 For the majority of women living in the West, supporting from their homelands was the most typical means of engaging with crusade. The performance of ideals and identities within medieval crusade has been of especial interest to scholars over the last decade. Studies have particularly centred on ideals regarding masculinity.9 It has been demonstrated that martial crusaders performed their undertaking not only to express piety, but also to perform knightly masculinity and contribute to family or regional traditions and identity. There is room to expand on this body of literature however, with examinations of gendered crusade ideals that were not centred on the battlefield. Miikka Tamminen’s work 6

“Quia Maior,” in Studien zum Register Innocenz’ III, ed. Georgine Tangl (Weimar, 1929), 88–97, at 92: “Eis autem, qui non in personis propriis illuc accesserint, sed in suis dumtaxat expensis iuxta facultatem et qualitatem suam viros idoneos destinarint, et illis similiter, qui licet in alienis expensis, in propriis tamen personis accesserint, plenam suorum concedimus veniam peccatorum.” The following is my translation (and all other translations are my own except where stated otherwise): “those who do not fulfill these characteristics [as warriors] but who, at their own expense, send men of appropriate quality and standing, or similarly those who rely on others expenses and go in another’s stead, we grant a full pardon of their sins.” 7 Constance M. Rousseau, “Home Front and Battlefield: The Gendering of Papal Crusading Policy (1095–1221),” in Gendering the Crusades, ed. Susan Edgington and Sarah Lambert (Cardiff, 2001), 31–44. See also Thomas W. Smith, “How to Craft a Crusade Call: Pope Innocent III and Quia Maior (1213),” Institute of Historical Research 92/255 (2019): 2–23 at 20–21. 8 There is a large corpus on this topic; see particularly Natasha R. Hodgson, Women, Crusading and the Holy Land in Historical Narrative (Woodbridge, 2007); Christoph T. Maier, “The Roles of Women in the Crusade Movement: A Survey,” Journal of Medieval History 30/1 (2004): 61–82, at 61–69; Bodo Hechelhammer, “Frauen auf dem Kreuzzug,” in Die Kreuzzüge: Kein Krieg ist Heilig, ed. Hans-Jürgen Kotzur, Brigitte Klein and Winfried Wilhelmy (Mainz am Rhein, 2004), 205–11; Keren Caspi-Reisfeld, “Women Warriors During the Crusades, 1095–1254,” in Gendering the Crusades, ed. Edgington and Lambert, 94–107; Rasa Mazeika, “‘Nowhere was the Fragility of their Sex Apparent’: Women Warriors in the Baltic Crusade Chronicles,” in Clermont, 229–48; Helen J. Nicholson, “Women on the Third Crusade,” Journal of Medieval History 23/4 (1997): 335–49; Charity C. Willard, “Isabel of Portugal and the Fifteenth-Century Burgundian Crusade,” in Journeys toward God: Pilgrimage and Crusade, ed. Barbara N. Sargent-Baur (Kalamazoo, 1992), 205–14; Megan McLaughlin, “The Woman Warrior: Gender, Warfare and Society in Medieval Europe,” Women’s Studies 17/1 (1990): 193–209; Régine Pernoud, La Femme au temps des Croisades (Paris, 1990); Benjamin Z. Kedar, “The Passenger List of a Crusader Ship, 1250: Towards the History of the Popular Element on the Seventh Crusade,” Studi Medievali 13/1 (1972): 267–79. See also Niall Christie, “Fighting Women in the Crusading Period through Muslim Eyes,” in Crusading and Masculinities, ed. Natasha R. Hodgson, Katherine J. Lewis, and Matthew M. Mesley (London, 2019), 183–95; Jeson Ng, “Women of the Crusades: The Constructedness of the Female Other, 1100–1200,” Al-Masāq 31/3 (2019): 303–22. 9 Paul, To Follow in Their Footsteps, 165–70; Paul and Schenk, “Family Memory and the Crusades,” 173–86; Miikka Tamminen, Crusade Preaching and the Ideal Crusader (Turnhout, 2018); Megan Cassidy-Welch, War and Memory at the Time of the Fifth Crusade (Philadelphia, 2019); Crusading and Masculinities, ed. Hodgson, Lewis, and Mesley.

250

GORDON M. REYNOLDS

is one exception that has made very useful observations in this latter regard.10 But little has been done to determine whether medieval individuals considered women’s involvement in the support or sponsorship of crusade as a display of a feminine crusade identity that was distinct from that of the martial crusader, not just ancillary to it. This article explores the latter subject through a case study of the textual and historical figure of Ela of Salisbury (d. 1261). Ela’s life and career as a countess of Salisbury, sheriff of Wiltshire, and later abbess of the Nunnery of Lacock (also Wiltshire) have all received deserved attention.11 One aspect of her life that has been overlooked by historians, however, is her association with crusade. Matthew Paris (d. 1259), the chronicler and monk of St. Albans Abbey and contemporary of Ela, attributed a prophetic dream to her in which she saw her son William II Longespée being raised to heaven after dying on crusade at the Battle of al-Mansurah in 1250. Ela is portrayed as believing that William’s martyrdom heralded her own salvation. This anecdote has not gone unnoticed, yet no scholar has investigated the wider significance of Matthew’s portrayal of Ela and her beliefs.12 On examining Ela’s surviving charters, the importance of Matthew’s comments are brought into focus: this evidence indicates that she repeatedly enabled her son’s pilgrimages in ways that broadly fit the model of support promoted by the papacy.13 This case provides a unique opportunity to examine a noblewoman’s performance of crusade sponsorship in England and a contemporary perception of her activity.

10 Miikka Tamminen, “Crusading in the Margins? Women and Children in the Crusade Model Sermons of the Thirteenth Century,” in Religious Participation in Ancient and Medieval Societies: Rituals, Interaction and Identity, ed. Sari Katajala-Peltomaa and Ville Vuolanto (Rome, 2013), 145–58. 11 Louise J. Wilkinson, “Women as Sheriffs in Early Thirteenth-Century England,” in English Government in the Thirteenth Century, ed. Adrian Jobson (Woodbridge, 2004), 111–24, esp. 119–24; Christine Owens, “Noblewomen and Political Activity,” in Women in Medieval Western European Culture, ed. Linda E. Mitchell (London, 1999), 209–19; Megan McLaughlin, “Looking for Medieval Women: An Interim Report on the Project ‘Women’s Religious Life and Communities, a.d. 500–1500’,” Medieval Prosopography 8/1 (1987): 61–91, esp. 71–74; Valerie G. Spear, Leadership in Medieval English Nunneries (Woodbridge, 2005), 31, 61, 94; Women of the English Nobility and Gentry, 1066– 1500, ed. Jennifer Ward (Manchester, 1995), 105, no. 88, 115, no. 99, 152, no. 121, and 200–201, nos. 145–46; Margaret W. Labarge, A Medieval Miscellany (Ottawa, 1997), 68–72; William L. Bowles and John G. Nichols, Annals and Antiquities of Lacock Abbey in the County of Wilts; with Memorials of the Foundress Ela Countess of Salisbury, and of the Earls of Salisbury of the Houses of Sarisbury and Longespe (London, 1835). 12 Bowles and Nichols, Annals and Antiquities of Lacock Abbey, 255–56; Tyerman, England and the Crusades, 403, n. 90; Simon Lloyd, “William Longespee II: The Making of an English Hero – Part I,” Nottingham Medieval Studies 35 (1991): 41–69, at 57–58; Labarge, A Medieval Miscellany, 68–72. 13 Lloyd and Hunt noted that Ela approved of William’s crusade, but no more. See Simon Lloyd and Tony Hunt, “William Longespee II: The Making of an English Crusading Hero – Part II,” Nottingham Medieval Studies 36 (1992): 79–125, at 87.

ELA OF SALISBURY AND THE IDEALS OF SPONSORING CRUSADE

251

Ela and the Chronicles of Matthew Paris The Seventh Crusade (1248–54) was a renewed effort by Latin Christendom to wrest control of Jerusalem. Led by King Louis IX of France, the crusade was directed at Egypt with the intention of crippling the Ayyubid power base. During their march on Cairo, the crusaders travelled along the bank of the Damietta branch of the Nile delta. By February of 1250 the army halted on the north bank of the river opposite the town of Mansurah where the Ayyubid army was encamped. Under enigmatic circumstances King Louis’s brother, Count Robert of Artois, led a vanguard into the town, resulting in a street battle in which he and the vast majority of those with him were killed.14 William II Longespée and his contingent of English knights were among the casualties. This moment was ultimately the downfall of the whole crusade and as such, it attracted much comment from contemporaries.15 Matthew Paris was one such writer, who narrated these events in three of his works; Historia Anglorum, Chronica Majora, and Abbreviatio Chronicorum Angliae.16 Both the Chronica and the Abbreviatio report that on the night before the battle, the abbess of Lacock, Ela of Salisbury, was asleep in her convent and had a dream.17 The Chronica described the dream as follows: [A] certain knight is raised into cloudless heaven along with all his arms around him. She knew the device on his shield; stupefied, she asked who is ascending, carried by angels to such glory, whose belongings she knew, and the response came in a clear and articulate voice: “William, your son.”18

The Abbreviatio gives the following description of Ela’s dream: [I]n the night preceding [the battle] his mother, the abbess of a place known as Lacock [and] countess of Salisbury, saw the aforesaid William raised into cloudless heaven, wearing full armour, whose arms she knew well…19 14

The Seventh Crusade, 1244–1254, ed. Peter Jackson (Farnham, 2009), 72–73. Christopher Tyerman, The World of the Crusades (New Haven, 2019), 276–80. 16 For more on these works, see Bjorn Weiler, “Matthew Paris on the Writing of History,” Journal of Medieval History 35 (2009): 254–78. 17 The Historia narrates the battle but omits any mention of Ela: see Matthew Paris, Historia Anglorum and Abbreviatio Chronicorum, ed. Frederick Madden, 3 vols. (London, 1866–69), 3:83–84. In Matthew Paris’ Flores Historiarum, in a hand other than Matthew’s, the Abbreviatio’s version of events was replicated: Flores Historiarum Vol. II a.d. 1067–a.d. 1264, ed. Henry R. Luard (London, 1890), 364, n. 2. 18 Matthew Paris, Chronica Majora, ed. Henry R. Luard, 7 vols. (London, 1872–83), 5:153–54: “… quod caelo aperto susceptus est quidam miles omnibus armis redimitus. Cujus clipeum cum per picturam cognovisset, stupefacta sciscitabatur, quisnam esset ipse qui ascendens ab angelis ad tantam suscipiebatur gloriam, cujus noverat spolia; et responsum fuerat voce manifesta et articulata, ‘Willelmus filius tuus.’” I have translated spolia as “belongings.” Spolia typically means “spoils” or “booty,” but in this context I believe Matthew was referring to the equipment that William carried, like his recognizable shield. 19 Matthew Paris, Historia Anglorum and Abbreviatio Chronicorum, 3:313: “… videbatur in nocte 15

252

GORDON M. REYNOLDS

Matthew’s depiction draws upon models that his contemporaries would have recognized from the language of crusade preachers who emphasized the heavenly rewards that awaited recruits if they died as milites Chrisi.20 Indeed, such an image could have felt applicable to many who died in the Holy Land. This idealizing seems intentional given Matthew’s subsequent portrayal of Ela’s reaction. Six months after the vision, Ela was informed that her son had indeed been killed in the battle and that the date coincided with the night she had the dream.21 In his Chronica, Matthew put the following words in Ela’s mouth: “O my Lord Jesus Christ, I thank you for willing that from my unworthy sinner’s body such a son should be produced, who has been worthy of being wreathed with the crown of martyrdom. I hope that by this assistance I will soon be moved more quickly to the heights of the heavenly kingdom.” Afterwards, when those who had related the news, who had been silent for a long time through fear, saw and heard this, they did not praise this woman’s womanliness but rather her steadfastness. They were amazed that, despite her wifely and motherly tenderness, she did not utter words of mournful complaint but instead, she eagerly preferred to exult in spiritual joy.22

The Abbreviatio offers the following version of Ela’s prayer: And on that day, battling in vain for Christ against the infidel, this glorious martyr was beheaded. Once she understood the day this had occurred, she remembered the vision, and responded by quickly raising her hands in thanks to God, crying out: “I, your servant, give you thanks Lord, that from my sinning flesh such [a person] was born who has anticipated the destruction of your enemies.”23

Matthew’s language in these extracts portrays William as the archetypal crusading martyr and Ela as a model grieving, but thankful, mother. In the Chronica, however, praecedenti matri suae, abbatissae scilicet de Lacoc, quondam comitissae Saresbiriensi, quod dictus Willelmus, aperto coelo, elevates est totaliter armatus, cujus armature bene novit…”. 20 Jessalynn Bird, “Preaching and Crusading Memory,” in Remembering the Crusades and Crusading, ed. Cassidy-Welch, 14–33, at 28. See also Jessalynn Bird, “James of Vitry’s Sermons to Pilgrims,” Essays in Medieval Studies 25 (2008): 81–113, at 87. 21 Matthew Paris, Historia Anglorum and Abbreviatio Chronicorum, 3:313. Ela would have heard of her son’s death sometime before 27 September 1250, when William’s will was enacted, see Calendar of Close Rolls, Henry III – Edward I, 1227–1302, 19 vols. (London, 1902–75), 6:329. 22 Matthew Paris, Chronica Majora, 5:173: “‘O domine mi Jesu Christe, gratias tibi ago, qui de corpore mei, indignae peccatricis, talem ac tantum voluisti filium procreari, quem tam manifesti martyrii corona dignatus es redimire. Spero utique, quod ipsius patrocinio citius ad culmen caelestis patriae promovebor.’ Haec autem postquam hujuscemodi rumorum relatores, qui diu prae timore tacuerant, viderent et audirent, non muliebrem in muliere laudantes constantiam, in ipsa mirabantur matronalem et maternam pietatem, in verba lugubris querimoniae non resolvi, immo potius spirituali gaudio alacriter exultare.” 23 Matthew Paris, Historia Anglorum and Abbreviatio Chronicorum, 3:313: “et addentes qua die in frusta, proelians contra infideles pro Christo, martir gloriosus detruncatur. At illa comperiens diem et visionem memoratam rei gestae respondere, elevatis manibus gratias egit Deo vultu alacri, dicens, ‘Gratias refero tibi ego ancilla tua, Domine, quod de carne mea peccatrice talem nasci praecepisti tuorum hostium expugnatorem’.”

ELA OF SALISBURY AND THE IDEALS OF SPONSORING CRUSADE

253

Matthew goes so far as to state that Ela believed that she would spiritually benefit from her family’s sacrifice. This is an atypical and significant observation. Although in the Abbreviatio’s text she praises God for having given birth to a martyr, this work, as the name suggests, is an abbreviated version of Matthew’s writing. He certainly suggested in both texts that Ela’s association was cause for joy. The figure of a mother as a device for idealizing crusade or confirming martyrdom was not uncommon within the work of contemporary insular writers. Gerald of Wales, for instance, stated that when Baldwin of Forde, the archbishop of Canterbury, was touring Wales and preaching the Third Crusade in 1188, an aged mother gave thanks when her son assumed the cross: “dearest Lord Jesus Christ, I give you my innermost thanks, for judging my son worthy to be accepted into your service.”24 Likewise, the Brevis Ordinacio de Predicacione Sancte Crucis, a text written sometime in the decades following 1209 and thought to be a preaching manual of English origin, described a fictitious scene of crusading martyrdom for preachers to use for didactic purposes.25 The author employs an unnamed mother who, upon hearing of her son’s death on crusade, “praised God that he had had such regard for her that she gave birth to such a son who was pleasing [placabilis]” to the Lord.26 Perhaps Matthew had the Brevis Ordinacio in mind, or a similar source, when he wrote his text. Mothers who advised or enabled their sons to take the cross are not unusual in wider medieval literature surrounding crusade.27 Nevertheless, the belief that a son’s death on crusade would spiritually redeem a parent is not often represented in the literature of the period.28 Ela was portrayed in a role that Colin Morris has called “visionary insurance,” that is, as proof that the deceased died in the appropriate state of mind and spiritual penance to be considered a martyr.29 The guarantor was often someone close to the deceased. Verification that a crusader had died in such a state of devotion was considered crucial because, rather than passively giving up their lives for their faith, crusaders’ deaths often occurred while fighting.30 Matthew’s ability to convincingly 24 Gerald of Wales, Giraldi Cambrensis Opera, ed. John S. Brewer, James G. Dimock, and George F. Warner, 8 vols. (London, 1861–91), 6:113: “Gratias tibi, carissime Domine Christe Jhesu, intimas ago, quod talem mihi filium quem tuo dignareris obsequio parere concessisti.” 25 Christoph T. Maier, “Brevis Ordinacio de Predicacione Sancte Crucis: Edition, Translation and Commentary,” Crusades 18 (2019): 25–65, at 27–29. 26 Maier, “Brevis Ordinacio de Predicacione Sancte Crucis,” 56: “Hoc audito a matre ipsorum, ipsa laudavit Deum, quod ipse ita respexerat eam, quod ipsa filium talem peperit, qui ei fuit placabilis” (translation: ibid., 57). On the identity of the crusader and his brother, see ibid., 56, n. h; Tamminen, Crusade Preaching and the Ideal Crusader, 192–93. 27 Hodgson, Women, Crusading and the Holy Land in Historical Narrative, 162–63. 28 Cf. discussions of Hartmann von Aue’s poetry: Paul, To Follow in Their Footsteps, 3; William E. Jackson, “Poet, Woman, and Crusade in Songs of Marcabru, Guiot de Dijon, and Albrecht von Johansdorf,” Mediaevalia 22 (1999): 265–89, at 267. 29 Colin Morris, “Martyrs on the Field of Battle Before and During the First Crusade,” in Martyrs and Martyrologies, ed. Diana Wood (Oxford, 1993), 93–104, at 103. 30 Beth C. Spacey, “Martyrdom as Masculinity in the Itinerarium Peregrinorum et Gesta Regis Ricardi,” in Crusading and Masculinities, ed. Hodgson, Lewis, and Mesley, 222–36, at 223; Caroline

254

GORDON M. REYNOLDS

employ a visionary guarantor for William II’s martyrdom would have been made easier given the holy visions that had previously been ascribed to the Longespée family. Roger of Wendover’s Flores Historiarum claimed that the Virgin Mary had appeared to Ela’s husband, William I Longespée (d. 1226), when he was caught in a severe storm at sea.31 Matthew was the continuator of the Flores Historiarum, and so we can be certain that he was aware of this story and the credence it lent to his own narrative. Confirming William’s martyrdom was not Matthew Paris’ sole objective, however. Simon Lloyd and Tony Hunt convincingly argued that Matthew was attempting to portray William as an English national hero. Matthew was particularly intent on laying the blame for the crusaders’ defeat at Mansurah at the door of Robert of Artois and the French contingent.32 Ela’s vision and prayer also seem to have played a part in this anti-French agenda. In the Chronica Majora, Matthew titled the relevant chapter: “Regarding the magnanimity of Ela, the abbess and countess of Lacock.”33 This passage begins with a supposed interaction in which a group of French nobles at the papal court rebuked the pope following the battle, saying that “[Christendom’s] faith is weakened, the Holy Land is in crisis, and the Christian religion is diminished.”34 Ela is then immediately shown in juxtaposition with her positive outlook, her piety unshaken. By contrasting the two, Ela’s actions highlight the superiority of crusade support in England similarly to William’s portrayal as the superior martial crusader. Ela’s depiction as an idealized crusade supporter included highly gendered language, typical of much of Matthew’s writing.35 He emphasized that, although Ela was feminine, it was not her “womanliness” (muliebrem), but her calmness that was lauded.36 Similarly, it was in spite of Ela’s “wifely and motherly tenderness” Smith, “Martyrdom and Crusading in the Thirteenth Century: Remembering the Dead of Louis IX’s Crusades,” Al-Masāq 15 (2003): 189–96, at 190. 31 Roger of Wendover, Rogeri de Wendover liber qui dicitur Flores Historiarum ab anno domini MCLIV annoque Henrici Anglorum Regis Secundi Primo, ed. Henry G. Hewlett, 3 vols. (Cambridge, 1886–89), 2:288: “et juxta cereum stantem viderunt puellam quandam nimia pulchritudine decoratam, quae lumen cerei, quod nocturnas tenebras illustrabat, a ventorum pluviarum que irruentium rabie conservaret praeclarum ex hac quoque caelestis visione claritatis tam comes ipse quam nautae omnes securitate concepta, divinum sibi adesse auxilium confidebant” (“and like a candle they saw a girl standing, adorned exceedingly beautifully, who lit up the night’s darkness, it was clear to the earl and all the sailors that by this heavenly vision they would be protected from harm, they were confident of divine help”). For a wider discussion on Matthew Paris’ use of prophecy and visions, see Bjorn Weiler, “History, Prophecy and the Apocalypse in the Chronicles of Matthew Paris,” English Historical Review 133/561 (2018): 253–83. 32 Lloyd and Hunt, “William Longespee II – Part I,” 57; Lloyd, “William Longespee II – Part I,” 44. 33 Matthew Paris, Chronica Majora, 5:172: “De magnanimitate abbatissae et comitissae de Acoc, Hela [nomine].” 34 Matthew Paris, Chronica Majora, 5:173: “fide vacillante, Terra Sancta patet discrimini; minorataque religione Christiana.” 35 Rebecca Reader, “Matthew Paris and Women,” in Thirteenth-Century England VII, ed. Michael Prestwich, Richard Britnell and Robin Frame (Woodbridge, 1999), 153–59. 36 Matthew Paris, Chronica Majora, 5:173.

ELA OF SALISBURY AND THE IDEALS OF SPONSORING CRUSADE

255

(matronalem et maternam pietatem), that she rejoiced in her son’s martyrdom.37 Matthew was careful to assure his readers that Ela’s joyous reaction at the news of her son’s death was neither un-befitting nor a callous abandonment of any parental feeling. Rather, Ela displayed a unique appreciation for her son’s sacrifice: an attitude to which other women with crusade associations could aspire. Ela’s uniqueness is reinforced in the Chronica by the messengers’ astonishment at her joy, and in the Abbreviatio by the actions of those close to Ela who knew of William’s fate and concealed the news, presumably fearing a negative reaction.38 The interplay between Ela’s femininity and pious reaction to her son’s martyrdom is reminiscent of medieval concepts of the relationship between the Virgin Mary and Christ. At the time of William’s death, Ela had been widowed since 1226 and had become the abbess of a nunnery at Lacock. As a noblewoman, a mother, and a widow who chose a chaste life by entering the cloister rather than remarrying, Ela conformed to an ecclesiastical ideal for aristocratic laywomen and Matthew appears to have been conscious of this.39 Matthew purposefully used an individual who was an exemplar of feminine devotion in order to represent another feminine ideal, that of an unswerving crusade supporter. Ela’s vision was portrayed by two later medieval sources, illustrating that Matthew’s accounts provoked interest. The so-called Book of Lacock, Lacock Abbey’s chronicle, and Nicholas Trevet’s Annals recounted the event but not the thanksgiving prayer that Matthew described.40 Both these works were produced in the early fourteenth century, long after Matthew’s death.41 The similarity between Nicholas Trevet’s version and the Abbreviatio’s language in particular, indicates that the latter was Nicholas’ source. The Book of Lacock appears to have only briefly mentioned that the vision took place, although the original manuscript of the Book of Lacock is badly damaged and the section that mentioned Ela’s vision is now lost.42 All later transcripts by William Dugdale as well as Bowles and Nichols are based upon a late-sixteenth-century copy.43 37

The word pietatem may also be rendered, literally, as “piety,” but I think Matthew Paris used the word in the sense given above; see Matthew Paris, Chronica Majora, 5:173. 38 Matthew Paris, Historia Anglorum and Abbreviatio Chronicorum, 3:313: “Elapso autem dimidio anno sequente, cum omnes qui casum sciebant et diu celabant” (“half a year had elapsed after [the dream], and all that time those who knew the cause kept it secret”). 39 James A. Brundage, “Widows and Remarriage: Moral Conflicts and Their Resolution in Classical Canon Law,” in Wife and Widow in Medieval England, ed. Sue S. Walker (Ann Arbor, 1993), 17–31, esp. 24–26; Cordelia Beattie, Medieval Single Women: The Politics of Social Classification in Late Medieval England (Oxford, 2007), 21–24. 40 Bowles and Nichols, Annals and Antiquities of Lacock Abbey, app, p. ii; Nicholas Trevet, Annales Sex Regum Angliae, Qui Comitibus Andegavensibus Originem Traxerunt, ed. Thomas Hog (London, 1845), 237. 41 Lacock Abbey Charters, ed. Kenneth H. Rogers (Devizes, 1979), 2; Ruth J. Dean, “Nicholas Trevet, Historian,” in Medieval Learning and Literature: Essays Presented to Richard William Hunt, ed. Jonathan J. G. Alexander and Margaret T. Gibson (Oxford, 1976), 328–52, at 331–35. 42 London, The British Library, Cotton MS Vitellius A VIII, ff. 128v–130v. 43 Monasticon Anglicanum, ed. William Dugdale, 6 vols. (London, 1814–30), 6: part I, 501–2; Bowles and Nichols, Annals and Antiquities of Lacock Abbey, 374.

256

GORDON M. REYNOLDS

Despite the deficiencies of these other sources regarding Ela, Matthew Paris’ focus on a pro-crusade female visionary was not totally without precedent amongst commentators on holy war. Writing around 1215, the famed theologian and preacher Jacques de Vitry described a similar scene.44 Jacques claimed in his vita of Mary of Oignies that she had had a vision of the Albigensian Crusades before they began, in which she saw crosses descending on crusaders and “holy angels rejoicing and carrying the souls of those who had been killed immediately to the supernal joys without purgatory.”45 Jacques wrote the vita within an overtly crusading context: he was preaching the Fifth Crusade at the time and he dedicated the work to Fulk de Marseilles, a Bishop of Toulouse ousted by Cathars.46 Mary’s background has some parallels with Ela. Mary came from a wealthy family in Nivelles in modern-day Belgium and, after marriage, she and her husband turned to a chaste semireligious life of piety. She was an early Beguine and lived with a community of devout women in the Brabant-Liège region until her death in 1213.47 Although Jacques and Mary knew each other (unlike Matthew and Ela), here too we see a devout woman from the elite being used to confirm the righteousness of crusade, albeit in this case against Cathar heretics.48 Though other sources lauded women who supported or endorsed crusade, and indeed some of those who were praised were mothers, it is not wholly clear why Matthew specifically used Ela to confirm William’s martyrdom. It is also unclear why he attributed such beliefs to her regarding salvation through another’s crusade – an element of his anecdote that appears to be unique. Ela’s relationship with her son was framed much like that of a sponsor and crusade-proxy, though Matthew never said as much.49 The parental relationship between the two seems to have been paramount.

44 For the dating of the composition of the vita, see Anneke B. Mulder-Bakker, “General Introduction,” in Mary of Oignies: Mother of Salvation, ed. and trans. Anneke B. Mulder-Bakker, Margot H. King, Hugh Feiss, Brenda Bolton, and Suzan Folkerts (Turnhout, 2006), 3–4. 45 Translation by Margot H. King, “The Life of Mary of Oignies by James of Vitry,” in Mary of Oignies: Mother of Salvation, 33–127, at book II, 107, v. 82. For the Latin original, see Iacobus de Vitriaco and Thomas Cantipratensis, Vita Marie de Oegnies; Supplementum, ed. Robert B. C. Huygens (Turnhout, 2012), book II, 134, v. 82: “vidit sanctos angelos gratulantes et interfectorum animas absque aliquo purgatorio ad superna gaudia deferentes.” My sincere thanks to Prof. Iris Shagrir for showing me the latter source. 46 John W. Coakley, Women, Men, and Spiritual Power: Female Saints and their Male Collaborators (New York, 2006), 70; Bird, “Preaching and Crusading Memory,” 25; King, “The Life of Mary of Oignies,” 36. 47 Mulder-Bakker, “General Introduction,” 11. 48 For their relationship, see especially Jennifer N. Brown, “The Chaste Erotics of Marie d’Oignies and Jacques de Vitry,” Journal of the History of Sexuality 19/1 (2010): 74–93; Cassidy-Welch, War and Memory, 127–29. 49 Gavin Fort, “Suffering Another’s Sin: Proxy Penance in the Thirteenth Century,” Journal of Medieval History 44/2 (2018): 202–30; Christopher Tyerman, God’s War: A New History of the Crusades (Cambridge MA, 2006), 613–14.

ELA OF SALISBURY AND THE IDEALS OF SPONSORING CRUSADE

257

Family traditions of crusade were certainly considered highly prestigious.50 In 1252, Pope Innocent IV even sent a decretal to England which stated that women would be granted full indulgences if their husbands became crusaders.51 It is not impossible that Matthew’s narrative, which probably predates Innocent’s decretal, was embellishing similar beliefs that were circulating in England. Yet why was it that Matthew had William’s mother confirm his martyrdom and receive salvation rather than, say, Idonea de Camville, William’s wife? Matthew appears to have been creating a model feminine crusade supporter but in order to determine why Ela was the subject, her historical attitudes and support for her son’s crusades must be examined.

The Historical Ela: A Supporter of Crusade To begin unpacking Ela of Salisbury’s interactions with crusade and the reasoning for Matthew Paris’ focus on her, some details regarding Ela’s religious life are worth noting. She was undoubtedly a devout and keen patron of religious houses.52 In 1227, Ela re-founded the Carthusian Charterhouse of Hinton (Wiltshire), a house her husband had founded on land that turned out to be unfit for purpose.53 In 1229, she founded a house of Augustinian canonesses in Lacock, later entering the house as abbess in 1239.54 She also maintained strong ties with Bradenstoke Priory, a house founded by her great-grandfather Walter “le Eurus.”55 Ela’s husband, son, and grandson all patronized the latter, perhaps at her request.56 One of her son’s grants to Bradenstoke was made “at the instance of his mother.”57 Ela’s piety was even remarked upon by the dean of Salisbury, William de Waude, after seeing her 50

Paul and Schenk, “Family Memory and the Crusades,” 178–79. Les Registres d’Innocent IV, ed. Élie Berger, 4 vols. (Paris, 1881–1921), 3:111, no. 5980; Elizabeth Siberry, Criticism of Crusading 1095–1274 (Oxford, 1985), 46. 52 For more on the medieval nobility’s display of piety through patronage, see David Crouch, The English Aristocracy 1070–1272: A Social Transformation (New Haven, 2011), 230–33; Amy Livingstone, Out of Love for My Kin: Aristocratic Family Life in the Lands of the Loire, 1000–1200 (Ithaca, 2010), 189–92. 53 Monasticon Anglicanum, ed. Dugdale, 6: part I, 5, no. 1. For a translation of this charter see Women of the English Nobility and Gentry, ed, Ward, 200–201, no. 145. 54 Lacock Abbey Charters, ed. Rogers, 10, no. 1. See also Jennifer C. Ward, “Ela, suo jure countess of Salisbury,” in Oxford Dictionary of National Biography: https://doi.org/10.1093/ref:odnb/47205 (accessed 31 March 2021). 55 The Cartulary of Bradenstoke Priory, ed. Vera C. M. London (Devizes, 1979), 1; 100, no. 304; 143, no. 482; Calendar of the Charter Rolls Preserved in the Public Record Office, ed. Charles Crump, W. R. Cunningham, Maxwell Lyte, Alfred Stamp, and R. D. Trimmer, 6 vols. (London, 1903–20), 1:221. 56 For William I’s grants, see The Cartulary of Bradenstoke Priory, 143, no. 481; 113, no. 359 (see also, 114–15, no. 365); 95, no. 278. For William II’s grants, see ibid., 114, no. 360. For the latter’s confirmations of his parents’ gifts, see ibid., 99–100, nos. 301–2 and 169, no. 568. For William III’s grants, see ibid., 114–15, nos. 364 and 367. 57 The Cartulary of Bradenstoke Priory, 100, no. 303. For Ela’s grants, see ibid., 99, no. 301 and 100, no. 302. 51

258

GORDON M. REYNOLDS

lay one of the foundation stones of the new cathedral of Salisbury in 1220: “a woman of praiseworthy virtues, as she was greatly God-fearing.”58 There are strong indications that Ela was consistently exposed to crusade rhetoric in a variety of ways and that she was eager for her associations to be known, perhaps by attending crusade preaching events in person. Accomplished preachers toured England in 1227, supposedly inciting more than forty thousand men and women to take the cross.59 One of those tasked with the job was a friend of Ela’s, Edmund of Abingdon (d. 1240), the treasurer of Salisbury Cathedral from 1223 to 1228.60 The very year of the preaching tour, he witnessed a charter in which Ela made grants to Bradenstoke Priory and another in which she re-founded Hinton.61 Edmund was also present when the rector of Lacock church agreed to the foundation of Lacock Abbey in 1229, and even witnessed a confirmation of Ela’s foundation in 1230.62 In his later life Edmund became archbishop of Canterbury and was subsequently canonized, giving contemporaries reason to reflect on his career and friendship with Ela. An anonymous hagiographer of Edmund, the French “Pontigny writer,” recounted some telling stories. This commentator worked in the second half of the thirteenth century and based his vita on a now lost source that Clifford Lawrence argues was a member of Edmund’s entourage or certainly a person well connected in Salisbury.63 The “Pontigny writer” noted Ela’s friendship, remarking that William I Longespée had been convinced by Ela to consult with Edmund on spiritual matters.64 The author also claimed that Ela once fell ill and Edmund saved her life by sending her relics of St. Thomas Becket.65 Dominica Legge even postulated that

58

William de Waude, “Historia Translationis Veteris Ecclesiae Beatae Mariae Sarum ad Novum,” in Vetus Registrum Sarisberiense alias dictum Registrum S. Osmundi Episcopi, ed. William H. R. Jones, 2 vols. (London, 1883–84), 2:3–124, at 13: “quartum vero lapidem, Comes Sarum, Willielmus Longaspata, qui tunc aderat; quantum, Ela de Viteri, comitissa de Sarum … mulier quidem laude digna, quia timore Domini plena.” 59 Roger of Wendover, Flores Historiarum, 2:323: “ut ex solo Anglorum regno plusquam quadraginta millia proborum hominum, praeter senes et mulieres, profecti referantur.” 60 The Life of St. Edmund by Matthew Paris, ed. Clifford H. Lawrence (Stroud, 1996; repr. 1999), 41–42; English Episcopal Acta, 18, Salisbury 1078–1217, ed. Brian R. Kemp (Oxford, 1999), lxxxi. 61 The Cartulary of Bradenstoke Priory, 143–44, no. 482; Monasticon Anglicanum, ed. Dugdale, 6: part I, 5, no. 1: “magistro Edmundo de Abendon thesaurario Sarr.” For a translation of this charter, see Women of the English Nobility and Gentry, ed. Ward, 200–201, no. 145. 62 Lacock Abbey Charters, ed. Rogers, 18–19, no. 30 and 10–11, no. 4. 63 The Life of St. Edmund by Matthew Paris, ed. Lawrence, 58. 64 “Vita Beati Edmundi Cantuariensis Archiepiscopi et Confessoris,” in Thesaurus Novus Anecdotorum, ed. Edmond Martène and Ursin Durand, 5 vols. (Paris, 1717), 3:1775–1826, at 1791: “Hunc induxit praefata nobilis uxor ejus, ut beati viri sequeretur consilium” (“He was induced by his said noble wife, to follow the counsel of the blessed man [Edmund]”). 65 “Vita Beati Edmundi Cantuariensis Archiepiscopi et Confessoris,” 1788–89: “Postmodum misit ei reliquias, scilicet de sanguine beati Thomae martyris : quo accepto, statim curate est mulier” (“Afterwards he sent her relics, including blood of Saint Thomas the martyr, which, when accepted, cured the woman at once”). See also Labarge, A Medieval Miscellany, 69, 71.

ELA OF SALISBURY AND THE IDEALS OF SPONSORING CRUSADE

259

Edmund’s book Merure de Seinte Eglise was written for Ela or the nuns of Lacock, as numerous manuscripts are addressed to an anonymous nun or nuns.66 Ela almost certainly heard the crusade sermons of such a close friend, which were given at a time when preachers laboured the importance of the laity’s financial donations and prayer as well as the indulgences they would earn in turn.67 Such a well-known friendship perhaps indicates that Ela was anxious for her associations with preachers to be seen, thus generating a reputation as a supporter of crusade. It is worth pointing out that one of the crusade preachers who toured England in 1235 was also a treasurer of Salisbury Cathedral; given their proximity, Ela may have known this man as well.68 Ela made more overt statements of her interest in crusade ideology. This is intimated by her dedication of Lacock Abbey to St. Bernard of Clairvaux.69 The latter helped popularize the Cistercian Order, which Ela hoped in vain for Lacock to join.70 However, a major aspect of St. Bernard’s career lay in promoting the Templar Order and crusade preaching, notably during the Second Crusade – elements of the saint’s life that Ela must have been aware of.71 Her dedication suggests more than a passing interest in his teachings. Whatever the effects St. Bernard’s rhetoric had on her, Ela wanted her foundation, and by extension herself, to be intimately associated with all aspects of his theology. Like many nobles Ela had familial ties to holy war, which may have conditioned her to develop an interest in crusade. Her father’s cousin, William Marshal Earl of Pembroke (d. 1219), had been to the East in 1184 and was close to Ela’s family in his youth, serving as a household knight for her grandfather, Earl Patrick of Salisbury.72 Her marital family had more significant connections: the older half-brother of Ela’s husband was none other than King Richard I “the Lionheart” of England, perhaps the most celebrated crusader of the age.73 The family connection to Richard was made all the more pronounced by William II Longespée’s endeavours on the Seventh Crusade. By the end of the thirteenth century, the latter’s death had become 66

Mary Dominica Legge, Anglo-Norman in the Cloisters: The Influence of the Orders upon AngloNorman Literature (Edinburgh, 1950), 96. 67 Maier, Preaching the Crusades, 139. 68 Matthew Paris, Chronica Majora, 3:312: “thesaurarius ecclesiae Saresberiensis.” 69 Lacock Abbey Charters, ed. Rogers, 10, no. 1. For Latin original see William G. Clark-Maxwell, “The Earliest Charters of the Abbey of Lacock,” in The Wiltshire Archaeological and Natural History Magazine vol. 35, 1907–1908 (Devizes, 1908), 191–209, at App. C., 200, no. 1: “beate Marie et Sancto Bernardo.” 70 Sally Thompson, Women Religious: The Founding of English Nunneries after the Norman Conquest (Oxford, 1991), 112. 71 For an explanation on Bernard’s attitude to crusade and on his fame as a preacher, see, respectively, Gillian R. Evans, Bernard of Clairvaux (Oxford, 2000), 16–17, and 168–71; and Giles Constable, “The Second Crusade as seen by Contemporaries,” Traditio 9 (1953): 213–79, at 244–48. 72 David Crouch, William Marshal, 3rd ed. (Abingdon, 2016), 39–41. 73 For William I Longespée’s parentage, see Paul C. Reed, “Countess Ida, Mother of William Longespée, Illegitimate son of Henry II,” The American Genealogist 77/306 (2002): 137–49; Raymond W. Phair, “William Longespée, Ralph Bigod, and Countess Ida,” The American Genealogist 77/308 (2002): 279–81.

260

GORDON M. REYNOLDS

renowned and was being associated with the adventures of his uncle in song, poetry and art, albeit erroneously.74 Nevertheless, it is more than plausible that Richard served as some inspiration for those in the Longespée family, both men and women, to further holy war.75 Ela may have routinely been reminded of the necessity of crusade during her lifetime and her part in it: her “spiritual obligation.”76 Our first indication that Ela began actively supporting crusade comes from her interactions with her son William II Longespée during the Barons’ Crusade (1239–41). In February 1236, Ela and William were organizing land transactions, in which she gave him the necessary resources to go to the East. These deals were part of a settlement in which William was invested with his patrimony as Ela transitioned into her role as a nun. On 12 February William promised to gift the manor of Bishopstrow to Lacock Abbey and make exchanges with the Priory of Bradenstoke in order to obtain all the lands they held in Hatherop, as well as negotiate with Sir Ralph Bloet, the co-patron, for his share in the advowson of Lacock.77 In exchange for William’s compliance, Ela promised her son that she would give him all the lands and rights that she still personally held.78 Crucially, she did not have to become a nun; this was a timed choice. She could have lived on as a laywoman and enjoyed her property, as is evident from a statement in the charter between Ela and William; the agreements would be upheld “whether [Ela] enter religion or not.”79 By June 1236, William assumed the cross in a long-planned ceremony alongside Richard Earl of Cornwall, Geoffrey de Lucy, Richard Siward, Gilbert Marshal earl of Pembroke, John le Scot earl of Chester, and other knights.80 A month later another charter was drawn up between Ela and William in which he confirmed that he had received all his mother’s lands and had in exchange given to Lacock: property in Hatherop, and in Chitterne, and the advowson of St. Mary’s in Shrewton.81 This transmission of power from mother to son cannot have occurred in isolation from William’s contemplation, and later pledge, to go on crusade.

74 Lloyd and Hunt, “William Longespee II – Part II,” 99; Richard Coer de Lyon, ed. Peter Larkin (Kalamazoo, 2015), 130, l. 4869. For a discussion of the latter’s blend of historical narrative and chivalric romance, see John Finlayson, “‘Richard, Coer de Lyon’: Romance, History or Something in Between?”, Studies in Philology 87/2 (1990): 156–80, at 179–80. 75 For more on this, see Caroline Smith, Crusading in the Age of Joinville (London, 2006), 171–74. 76 Erin L. Jordan, Women, Power, and Religious Patronage in the Middle Ages (New York, 2006), 88. 77 Lacock Abbey Charters, ed. Rogers, 11–12, no. 9. The chirograph of this agreement has survived and it states the date “duodecimo die febi”: see London, The National Archives, MS. E 40/8877. 78 Lacock Abbey Charters, ed. Rogers, 11–12, no. 9. 79 Lacock Abbey Charters, ed. Rogers, 13, no. 12. For the Latin original, see Clark-Maxwell, “The Earliest Charters of the Abbey of Lacock,” App. C., 204, no. 10: “utrum religionem subierit necne.” 80 Matthew Paris, Chronica Majora, 3:368–69: “comes Saresberiensis, G[alfridus] de Lucy, frater ejus, Ricardus Siuard, et multi alii nobiles.” For a full list of later additions to this contingent, see Lower, The Barons’ Crusade, 45. 81 Lacock Abbey Charters, ed. Rogers, 12–13, no. 12; Clark-Maxwell, “The Earliest Charters of the Abbey of Lacock,” 194.

ELA OF SALISBURY AND THE IDEALS OF SPONSORING CRUSADE

261

Ela entered Lacock Abbey as her son embarked for the East, which may have been a sign of her support for holy war, in a spiritual sense. The house had already been running for nearly ten years since Ela founded it, under one Wymarca as prioress.82 It was not unusual for a noblewoman to found a nunnery or enter religion as a form of security and as a shared display of devotion alongside crusading kinsmen.83 Gundreda, wife of Roger de Glanville, entered the nunnery of Bungay (Suffolk) at the time of her husband’s death on the Third Crusade.84 Similarities may also be drawn between Ela’s example and that of Elizabeth of Thuringia/ Hungary (d. 1231). Elizabeth’s husband died while travelling to the East to crusade in 1227, and she reacted to the news by taking up a life of charity, building hospitals and caring for the poor, for which she was canonized in 1235.85 Ela’s motivations for entering religion are not recorded, but the parallel contexts of her choice and those of other women intimately connected to crusade illustrate that there was a probable link between her son’s crusade and this event. Prior to departure, aristocratic crusaders typically made donations or confirmations of land and rights to religious houses to affirm relations and receive the clergy’s prayers.86 This would have been a great comfort in an age of such strong religious belief. However, there is reason to treat crusaders’ gifts of “alms” to religious houses with some scepticism. It is probable that, given the Church’s negative views of usury, such gifts concealed hidden cash payments or credit.87 For instance, close to Ela’s home, the bishop of Salisbury, Roger Poore, was compelled to stipulate in 1223 that all clerics within his see needed his permission before entering into contracts with crusaders.88 This may allude to anxieties over clerics leasing or purchasing unprofitable land from crucesignati, or provoking lawsuits. No document directly states that Ela of Salisbury gave money to her son for his crusades. Despite this silence, there is evidence that while Ela was abbess of Lacock, reciprocal gifts were exchanged between her and her son in a fashion similar to other religious houses’ transactions with crusaders. Though not necessarily in the spirit of supportive caritas, liquidating assets was a pragmatic and necessary means of supporting cash-hungry crusaders. 82

Thompson, Women Religious, 170. Lester, “A Shared Imitation,” 356–57. 84 Thompson, Women Religious, 176. 85 For the testimony at her canonization hearing and a study of her life, see The Life and Afterlife of St. Elizabeth of Hungary, trans. and ed. Kenneth B. Wolf (Oxford, 2011). 86 Tyerman, England and the Crusades, 198–99. 87 Riley-Smith, The First Crusaders, 116; Tyerman, England and the Crusades, 198–99, 209; Lloyd, English Society and the Crusade, 159. Cf. Constance B. Bouchard, Holy Entrepreneurs, Cistercians, Knights and Economic Exchange in Twelfth-Century Burgundy (Ithaca, 1991), 75–79; Barbara H. Rosenwein, To Be the Neighbor of Saint Peter: The Social Meaning of Cluny’s Property, 909–1049 (Ithaca, 1989), 37. 88 Charters and Documents Illustrating the History of the Cathedral, City, and Diocese of Salisbury in the Twelfth and Thirteenth Centuries, ed. William R. Jones and William D. MacRay (London, 1891), 151. 83

262

GORDON M. REYNOLDS

Such activity is evident prior to William’s departure on the Barons’ Crusade. In a charter dated 1236–37 William granted Wymarca, then the prioress of Lacock, the manor of Chitterne excepting the knights’ fees belonging to it, “as long as Ela countess of Salisbury, who shall have taken the habit of religion there, shall live.”89 After Ela’s death, the land was to revert to William, otherwise a fine of £100, as well as legal costs, was forfeit. This is again part of Ela’s preparations to take the habit, but not without securities. It is plausible – and highly likely given the expectation of William’s future control of the land – that Ela ensured that some funds were given to William upfront. This is especially likely as it was stated in a later charter that the lands were to be held by Ela personally “whether she remains in the religious order or not, for the support of her livelihood.”90 Likewise, while arrangements were underway to send William abroad, Ela inherited a moiety of the manor of Heddington (Wiltshire) in October 1236. William allowed his mother to gift the manor to Lacock for the upkeep of the nuns and later confirmed the gift, all while he was a crucesignatus.91 By receiving gifts in alms, Lacock Abbey could develop. Meanwhile, Ela could potentially give William liquid capital as separate “gifts” that required no documentation. Such donations toward crusade would, in theory, earn her indulgences. It is probable that Ela gave William money because of his need for funds at the time. When Ela relinquished custody of the county of Wiltshire and Salisbury Castle, amongst her other secular offices, the Crown did not invest William with them. Between 1237–38, he unsuccessfully brought a case against the Crown claiming the right to both.92 To complicate matters, in February 1238 Pope Gregory IX ordered the English crusaders, and William personally, not to leave the realm on pain of losing their crusade indulgence, as there was fear of an impending uprising against King Henry III.93 This delayed William’s departure by 89

Lacock Abbey Charters, ed. Rogers, 68, no. 262. For the Latin original, see the older cartulary of Lacock: London, British Library, MS 88973, fol. 11r: “diu Ela comitissa Sar[um] que habitu religionis ibidum suscepit vixit.” 90 Lacock Abbey Charters, ed. Rogers, 69, no. 263. For the Latin original, see Clark-Maxwell, “The Earliest Charters of the Abbey of Lacock,” App. C, 208, no. 17: “quam diu vixerit seu religionem subierit necne ad sustentacionem victus sui.” 91 Lacock Abbey Charters, ed. Rogers, 14, nos. 14–15; 15, no. 17. 92 Bracton’s Note Book. A Collection of Cases Decided in the King’s Courts during the Reign of Henry the Third, ed. Frederic W. Maitland, 3 vols. (London, 1887), 3:248–49, no. 1235. 93 The full Latin text of the order as sent to Simon de Montfort is printed in Les Registres de Grégoire IX, ed. Lucien Auvray, 4 vols. (Paris, 1896–1955), 2:897, no. 4094: “significant se regis Angliae litteras recepise, ex quibus apparebat timeri ne regno Angliae, undique hostium insidiis circumadato […] iter in Terre predicte subsidium nequaquam arripiat, donex mandatum apostolicum speciale super hox receperit; alioquin indulgentia crucesignatis in concilio generali concessa se noverit cariturum” (“as indicated in the letters received from the king of England concerning his apparent fear for the kingdom of England, treacherous enemies close in from every direction…. None may depart in aid of said [Holy] Land while this apostolic mandate is in force, otherwise be it known that you will lose the crusade indulgences granted by the general council”). The editor states that the identical order was sent to Richard of Cornwall (ibid., no. 4095) and William II Longespée (ibid., no. 4096). For context, see Nikolaos G. Chrissis, “A Diversion That Never Was: Thibaut IV of Champagne, Richard of Cornwall

ELA OF SALISBURY AND THE IDEALS OF SPONSORING CRUSADE

263

two years.94 William did not pledge any property at this time, nor did he make any grants to Lacock or any other religious institution that can be dated between 1238 and 1240. Alienating more land may have created a financially untenable situation on return. This is in contrast to Jean de Joinville, a participant and chronicler of the Seventh Crusade, who was forced to pledge large amounts of his land because, by his own admission, his mother withheld her marriage portion.95 Like William, Joinville had a young family and his patrimony was not fully established. As William was not compelled to mortgage property, it is quite possible that the transactions with Ela were a funding arrangement. After having returned from the Barons’ Crusade, William II Longespée took a second crusade vow in 1247, following King Louis IX’s example.96 This time William was to lead the English contingent in the expedition. Given his increased costs in this position of leadership, the preparations surrounding this venture are more transparent than his first. Matthew Paris commented that William left with “saddle bags full of money” and this does not seem to be an exaggeration.97 Pope Innocent IV allocated William 2,000 marks of crusade monies collected in England.98 King Henry III granted him 100 pounds of silver for his journey and granted him a licence to lease four of his manors for four years.99 William granted certain rights and privileges to the burgesses of Poole in 1248 in return for 70 marks.100 King Henry even allocated William another hundred pounds in June 1249, presumably to offset money he had loaned or taken from his personal coffers.101 Though Ela had invested her son with much of his patrimony by this point, there is some evidence that she was again involved in preparing William for his journey. In a charter dated between 1239 and 1250, Ela satisfied a debt of fifty marks, that William had incurred, by transferring rents and property to the creditor.102 Whether and Pope Gregory IX’s Crusading Plans for Constantinople, 1235–1239,” Crusades 9 (2010): 123–45, at 140. My thanks to Dr. Nikolaos Chrissis for showing me this article. 94 Lower, The Barons’ Crusade, 134 and 148. 95 Smith, Crusading in the Age of Joinville, 174. 96 Matthew Paris, Chronica Majora, 4:188 and 629. 97 Matthew Paris, Historia Anglorum and Abbreviatio Chronicorum, 3:55: “Verumtamen idem W[illelmus] cito postea clitellas suas electo replens numismate, adjunctis sibi aliis nobilibus, iter arripuit Jerosolimitanum.” 98 Les Registres d’Innocent IV, ed. Berger, 1:563, nos. 3723–24, 2:68–70 nos. 4474, 4484. Matthew Paris claimed William received half as much; see Matthew Paris, Chronica Majora, 4:636: “Consimilique cautela Willelmus Longa-spata edoctus mille marcas et amplius de cruce signatis sub praetextu peregrinationis suae” (“similarly, security was made for William Long-sword to receive a thousand marks and more for the crusaders under his protection for the pilgrimage”). 99 Calendar of Patent Rolls, Henry III–Edward I, 1216–1301, 9 vols. (London, 1893–1913), at Henry III, 4:19. The manors were “Audiburn, Ambresbury, Trobragge and Caneford”: see ibid., 25. 100 Dorchester, Dorset History Centre, MS DC-PL/A/1/1/1. 101 Calendar of Liberate Rolls, Henry III–Edward I, 1226–72, 6 vols. (London, 1917–64), at Henry III, 3:239. 102 The remuneration that Ela received for her grants to the creditor, Nicholas of Hedinton, is described in the following manner: “Nicholas has discharged Ela for fifty marks against William Lungesp”; see Lacock Abbey Charters, ed. Rogers, 103, no. 417. For the Latin original, see the older

264

GORDON M. REYNOLDS

this was to cover money loaned for his crusades is hard to say, but considering he was a crucesignatus between 1236 and 1242, and again between 1247 and 1250, the probability is high. Sometime between 1247 and 1249, William confirmed all the grants Ela had ever made to Lacock.103 Again, this could have been done in return for some of Lacock’s liquid capital. William also transferred more lands in Chitterne to Ela and the nuns of Lacock sometime between 1247 and 1248.104 This added to his previous grants of land from the area which were lucrative, accumulating ten pounds annually in rents by 1245.105 A dispute arose regarding this latter gift of lands in Chitterne which, ironically, highlights the distinct probability that Ela had promised financial support in return. Though William’s charter gifted the lands to Ela and Lacock, he appears to not have made good on his promise. In June 1249, Ela and her son opposed one another in court concerning five carucates of the land. William was forced to formally recognize that he had gifted these lands to Ela and the nuns “in pure and perpetual alms,” rather than for some remuneration.106 A possible reading of this event is that Ela had promised payment, but the money was not forthcoming, so William withheld the property. However, this dispute is not evidence that Ela had abandoned her son. The nunnery at Lacock was fairly modest at this time and Ela had already given up all her secular resources and rights.107 She may have hoped to have the necessary funds, but the profits of the abbey fell short, and so she wanted to begin claiming the rents on the lands promised before paying the undisclosed fee. Seemingly, it was important to Ela to maintain a display of largesse and shared family interest in crusade which she, as the family matriarch, blessed. Such behaviour of course included spiritual benefits for herself, but it also conformed to a societal expectation. Crusade encyclicals of the thirteenth century, such as Quia maior, may have prioritized financial donations, but they also encouraged participation in liturgical procession and prayer. Ela conformed to this ideal as well and, as an abbess, was able to engage the nuns of Lacock. Following the court case over the lands in Chitterne, possibly as a form of reconciliation, Ela accepted William and his descendants into all spiritual benefits and prayers of the nuns of Lacock in perpetuity.108 Ela further displayed her approval of William’s endeavour by offering her benediction. cartulary of Lacock: London, British Library, MS 88973, f.26v: “Nicholas aquietavit dictam Elam abatissa et conventu de Lacok Christi(?) dominum Willimum Lungesp de quinquaginta marci argentem.” 103 Lacock Abbey Charters, ed. Rogers, 15, no. 18A. 104 Clark-Maxwell, “The Earliest Charters of the Abbey of Lacock,” App. C, 209, no. 20; Lacock Abbey Charters, ed. Rogers, 69–70, no. 267. This deed was confirmed in the Charter Rolls by 1248, see Calendar of the Charter Rolls, ed. Crump, Cunningham, Lyte et al., 1:332. 105 Lacock Abbey Charters, ed. Rogers, 77, no. 301. 106 Clark-Maxwell, “The Earliest Charters of the Abbey of Lacock,” App. C, 209, no. 21: “in puram et perpetuam elemosinam.” 107 For an examination of the development of Lacock Abbey, see “The Abbey of Lacock,” in A History of Wiltshire, ed. R. B. Pugh and Elizabeth Crittall (Oxford, 1956), 3:303–16, at 303–4. 108 Clark-Maxwell, “The Earliest Charters of the Abbey of Lacock,” App. C, 209, no. 21: “Et eadem abbatissa recepit predictum Willelmum et heredes suos in singulis beneficiis et oracionibus que

ELA OF SALISBURY AND THE IDEALS OF SPONSORING CRUSADE

265

Matthew Paris commented: “William, having obtained the permission and blessing of his mother, the noble and holy abbess of Lacock, led all the crusaders from the kingdom of England.”109 Ela’s sanction of William’s second crusade, now as an abbess, would have been perceived as a powerful form of support. Moreover, this rare instance of a woman sanctioning an individual’s crusade would have further associated Ela with the fortunes of the departing crusaders. Parallels may be drawn between this and Hildegard von Bingen’s blessing of Philip of Alsace before he undertook crusade between 1176 and 1177.110 Ela’s actions highlight her pious reputation and desire to be seen as such. A final avenue to display and celebrate family associations with crusade lay in commemoration.111 Here, however, our evidence falls short. Lloyd and Hunt noted that prayers organized for William II by his kin are conspicuously absent from the remembrance days of any of the family benefactions. In all likelihood, William II would have been included in Lacock’s remembrances and Ela certainly promised him as much. However, the Book of Lacock is so badly damaged that this is impossible to verify. Ela and William may have intended that they share a lasting connection through their burial, however. Before leaving England in 1249, William asked that his body be entombed in Lacock Abbey.112 As Ela was already the abbess, we might speculate that she was planning the same for her burial; when she did die in 1261, she was buried in the abbey’s church and her grave slab is still visible, though now resting in the cloister.113 Whether they intended a shared space of commemoration or not, it was not to be. After William’s death in battle, his bones, according to Matthew Paris, “were carried by messengers to Acre, and reverently entombed in the Church of the Holy Cross.”114

Conclusions The Ela of Salisbury described by Matthew Paris was a pious and dutiful mother, utterly focused on the heavenly rewards that awaited the crusader she enabled, and indeed herself. Matthew was eager to assert that William II Longespée was de cetero fient in ecclesia sua predicta in perpetuum” (“and the same abbess received the said William and his heirs into all benefits and prayers that would be made in her church in perpetuity”). 109 Matthew Paris, Chronica Majora, 5:76: “Willelmus igitur cum licentia et benedictione matris suae nobilis ac sanctae abbatissae de Acoc, dux omnium cruce signatorum de regno Angliae.” 110 Miriam R. Tessera, “Philip Count of Flanders and Hildegard of Bingen: Crusading against the Saracens or Crusading against Deadly Sin?”, in Gendering the Crusades, ed. Edgington and Lambert, 77–93, at 84. 111 Anne E. Lester, “What Remains: Women, Relics, and Remembrance in the Aftermath of the Fourth Crusade,” Journal of Medieval History 40/3 (2014): 311–28. 112 Lacock Abbey Charters, ed. Rogers, 78, no. 305. 113 Bowles and Nichols, Annals and Antiquities of Lacock Abbey, 345. 114 Matthew Paris, Chronica Majora, 5:342: “et ossa secum dicti Willelmi nuntii deferentes, Acon pervenerunt. Et ossa memorata in ecclesia Sanctae Crucis veneranter tumularunt.” For a description of this church, see Pringle, Churches, 4:35–40, no. 361.

266

GORDON M. REYNOLDS

the archetypal English crusading martyr and, for Matthew, creating this masculine model necessitated creating a model feminine crusade supporter in accompaniment. Matthew perceived that there was an ideal in England regarding women’s support for crusade, or he wished to create one. His writing intimates that those who conformed to this ideal complemented family endeavours and were spiritually rewarded. This article has considered crusade as a context for seemingly routine or unrelated transactions between mother and son. Without Matthew Paris’ comments, Ela might not, at first sight, appear to the modern historian as a clear crusade supporter. Yet, by reading Ela’s actions through the prism of her son’s crusading career, there appears to have been numerous links and these were clear to Matthew. The historical Ela consistently and pragmatically attempted to display her support in a manner that contemporaries considered befitting of a noblewoman. Her case provides a tantalizing hint at a crusading ideal that women could have aspired to. By performing within the ideal feminine sphere of holy war, in supportive roles away from the battlefield, Ela of Salisbury was able to construct her own, and diversify her family’s, crusading identity. Crusade was a “family enterprise” and, by studying the behaviour of the kinfolk of crucesignati, we may better understand the variable ways in which medieval people demonstrated their affinity with holy war, as well as the breadth of crusading culture.

Review Article Jaroslav Folda University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill

The Restoration of the Nativity Church in Bethlehem, ed. Claudio Alessandri. London: CRC Press, Taylor & Francis Group, 2020. Pp. 460. ISBN: 9781138488991 (hbk), 9781351023269 (e-book). Last given a significant restoration in 1842, the Church of the Nativity that could be seen in the early 2000s was, according to the Introduction written by C. Alessandri, “a result of a long period of neglect.” This was “due to a paralyzing set of regulations, known as the status quo, established in 1852 and later confirmed by the Treaties of Paris (1856), Berlin (1878), and Versailles (1919). The status quo defined the respective rights of the three religious Communities, the Greek Orthodox, the Franciscan Custody of the Holy Land and the Armenian Orthodox Patriarchate, that still have the management of the church.” A program of conservation and restoration for the whole Church was finally made possible by improved relations among the three religious communities, and by the engagement of the Palestinian National Authority as a mediating institution. The [Palestinian] Presidential Committee for the Restoration of the Nativity Church, originally called into being by a decree of President Mahmoud Abbas in 2008, was fully established in 2009 with the blessing of the three aforementioned ecclesiastical organizations responsible for the Church of the Nativity, and given a mandate to carry out a scientific restoration program of the Holy Church. Funds for this program have been continually raised by the Palestinian Presidential Committee from an array of sources.1 In due course, a program was formulated with input from an impressive Scientific Consortium team of experts (appointed in 2010), including engineers, architects, restorers, experts in the material analysis of architectural structure and building materials, and archaeologists, along with Michele Bacci as the art historical consultant. Their task was to make a new, thorough survey of the building 1

According to a June 2016 pamphlet from the Presidential Committee, there were to that point 25 project contributors. This list includes the following: The State of Palestine, the Republic of Hungary, Mr. Saeed Tawfiq Khoury-CCC, The Palestine Investment Bank, the Republic of France, The Russian Federation, The Holy See-Vatican, The Palestinian Investment Fund, The Palestinian Commercial Bank, The Bank of Palestine, the Republic of Greece, Mr. Alberto Kassis – Chile, Mr. José Said – Chile, the Russian Orthodox Patriarchate, the Kingdom of Spain, the Pontifical Mission, the Armenian Orthodox Patriarchate, the Republic of Italy, the Federal Republic of Germany, the Kingdom of Morocco, the Republic of Poland, the Paltel Group – Palestine, the Turkish Cooperation – TIKA, the Arab Fund for Economic and Social Development, Belgium. (This list is sorted in respective order of the committed contribution date.) 267

268

JAROSLAV FOLDA

with the purpose of assessing the most urgent repairs to be done and to work out a comprehensive restoration project plan. The main restoration contract to do the work was given to Piacenti S.p.A., Prato/Italy, who employed over 100 experts. The work on site started in 2013 and this book discusses its progress up to 2020 as reported by over twenty different authors in ten different chapters. During this time Palestine became a full member of UNESCO in 2011, and the Bethlehem complex was added to the World Heritage List in June 2012. In July 2019, the World Heritage Committee decided to remove the Church of the Nativity and the Pilgrimage Route (Bethlehem) from the endangered list of World Heritage sites. Starting in 2013, the work of the restoration and conservation proceeded in several phases. These phases are listed in the Introduction on pp. 4 and 5. An immense amount of essential work has been done successfully as reported in this book.2 But there are future phases listed that remain to be done as well;3 and there is some additional important work on the building that is not listed as yet.4 The book’s aim is stated in the Introduction by the editor: “The purpose of this book is only to accompany the reader along a path that began in distant 2009 and is now approaching a conclusion, or at least what has always [been] considered a fundamental goal.” What the reader will find is a series of chapters written in English by many different authors, most with several co-authors. Most chapters begin with an art historical or archaeological discussion. What follows are descriptive summarizations of the work experiences, some described in considerable detail, carried out in the last decade throughout the church in a coordinated and interactive manner. The written texts are accompanied by copious numbers of documentary photos, drawings, plans, charts, and diagrams in each chapter. By this means the book aims to provide, through the description of the restoration analysis and interventions using data collected on site, along with the photographic documentation, a more comprehensive and organic knowledge of the church as a whole in its restoration and conservation. Among the many contributions of this important book to our knowledge of the Church of the Nativity, it is important to recognize that new archaeological investigations along with the extensive conservation and restoration work made it possible to resolve certain questions about the church raised in past scholarly discussions regarding its history. Prior to the publication of this book, Michele Bacci published his important history of the church using results of the project 2

The main phases were: Phase I: 2013: organization of the worksite; 2013–15: restoration of the roof and windows. Phase II: 2014–15: doors of narthex and basilica; 2014–17: narthex. Phase III: 2014–17: external facades; 2014–16: plastering; 2015–16: wall mosaics; 2015–16: architraves. Phase IV: 2016– present: columns and paints; 2017: lighting and smoke-detection system; 2018–present: floor mosaics. 3 Future phases will include: remaining columns and paints; remaining floor mosaics; stone floor; and seismic reinforcements of the north and south corners, and the south wall. 4 No indication is given yet for work on the important Grotto holy site, that is, the cave grotto itself, with its altars, mosaics and other decorations. Also, no indication is given for restoration/conservation of the fresco paintings in the Franciscan chapel at the base of the northern belltower, that is, in bay 5 at the northern end of the narthex of the church.

REVIEW ARTICLE

269

in a timely manner in 2017;5 in the present volume he expands this history, as the extensive restoration and conservation work has revealed certain new finds and information about the church and its decoration. Some examples are given from each of the nine report sections of this publication in my discussion below. The reader should be advised that the published documentation in this book is very important but sometimes difficult to access. First, the editor points out in the introduction that the bibliographical presentation of the documentation varies from chapter to chapter. An editorial decision was made to leave it to the authors to provide the bibliographic references as they saw fit; no editorial attempt was made to standardize this process or the stylistic form of the citations from chapter to chapter. As a result there is much variation, some references are incomplete and difficult to identify, and the reader should be informed of the following. Most chapters have bibliographical “References” at the end of their text, and the page numbers for finding these “References” are found in the table of contents (pp. v–x). Some chapters also have endnotes (chapters 4, 5, 6, 7, 9). These notes are usually indicated in the text with tiny superscript numbers, easily missed. The locations of the endnotes appear at the end of the appropriate sub-texts, but can be difficult to find. Specifically: the notes for chapter 4 appear on p. 235; the note for chapter 5, on p. 270; the notes for chapter 6, on pp. 294–95; the note for chapter 7, on p. 305; the notes for chapter 9, on pp. 426–28. Second, unfortunately there is no bibliography at the end of the book, listing all publications cited fully with a standardized format. Many of the citations in the references and endnotes are incomplete. Third, there is an index, but it is brief and focused on special terms, and does not include authors’ names, or place names, or refer to most published works. There are, however, references in the index to standards and technical documents such as: ABAQUSE, BS EN, EMC, EN, ISO, NTC, prEN, REACH, TAC, Technical Document CNR DT, UNI and UNI EN documents, and so on, which are not otherwise explained. It would have been very useful for the editor to have provided a table explaining what these standards and technical documents are, as well as full citations for how and where to find their published texts. Fourth, and finally, this book is well documented with many photos of the church and its decoration, and many drawings, graphs, plans, tables and charts, and maps as needed in each section. Unfortunately some of these illustrations are very small and/or not sharply in focus. In some few cases they have been so reduced in size that it is not possible to read the captions and numbers on the original plans/drawings/tables. Given the high quality of the plans, the exquisite engineering drawings reproduced, and the valuable documentary photographs provided (most in color), this diminutive size issue is unfortunate. I estimate that in the first three chapters alone there are 260 photos, drawings, tables, graphs and maps (up to p. 152), with a similar density through the remaining seven chapters to p. 440. Given the huge amount of visual documentation, it is unfortunate 5

Michele Bacci, The Mystic Cave: A History of the Nativity Church in Bethlehem (Brno and Rome, 2017).

270

JAROSLAV FOLDA

that there is no list of illustrations to consult to assist the reader with finding visual material of importance. If the publisher were to consider a second edition of this important book, or if an updated edition of this book might be published in the future with reports on additional work after 2019, perhaps these problems with the documentation could be fixed. The main body of the book starts with chapter 2, in which responsibilities for the site of the Church and preparations for the restoration and conservation work are explained. The organization of the team operations is broken down into three parts. First, there is the Palestinian Presidential Committee which provided oversight management and supervision. Most importantly it is this committee which has been responsible for the massive ongoing work of fund-raising to pay for the phases of this project. The impressive success of their efforts, with the donors listed in note 1 above, has made this unique project possible. Second, the C.D.G. (Community Development Group) consisting of local Palestinian engineers has provided on-site management for the Italian company, Piacenti, S.p.A and its subcontractors, contracted to carry out the various phases of work on the Church of the Nativity. As the editor points out, the supply of materials, equipment and tools was a major challenge for this project at this site, since most of what was needed for the restoration work was not available in Palestine. Importation of high-quality materials from Europe was a constant need. The somewhat invisible but very substantial practical challenges and considerations of scheduling, procurement, and storage on site have been successfully managed to make the work documented in chapters 3 to 9 possible. Chapters 3 and 4 make up half of the book (pp. 23–256). They deal with the analysis, repair and restoration of the roof, walls and windows of the church in chapter 3, and the mosaic decoration on the walls of the nave and transepts surviving from the 1160s in chapter 4. The roof and window repair and restoration was the sine qua non first phase of this project to reestablish the structural integrity of the building. The text and documentation for chapter 3, therefore, primarily deals with extensive technical analysis of the roof and walls, including detailed discussion of the roof trusses, the types of wood used, the lead roof itself, and the specialized scaffolding required to carry out the repair and replacements to the roof and replacement of all the nave windows. This essential work has now eliminated the water leakage and subsequent damage and decay which has plagued the church since the nineteenth century. The general reader will perhaps find the historical analysis (pp. 23–25) and the archaeological analysis (pp. 95–104) of great interest in this chapter. The historical introduction includes a summary of the little-known history of the church after the crusader period. The archaeological discussion provides an introduction to the “archaeology of architecture” methodology used for this building, an approach introduced already in an earlier article by M. Bacci and G. A. Fichera in 2013.6 6

M. Bacci, G. A. Fichera, et al., “Historical and Archaeological Analysis of the Church of the Nativity,” Journal of Cultural Heritage 13 (2012): 5–26.

REVIEW ARTICLE

271

Because of the work on the church combining archaeology and restoration, certain new facts could be established about the Church of the Nativity with regard to its early history. Even though it is recognized to be the only Early Byzantine church still standing in its original form in the Holy Land, it is now possible to conclude that the construction of this basilica replaced the structure from the Constantinian period, and dates back to the mid-sixth century. To quote Fichera, it is “the result of a major construction project undertaken by Justinian and perhaps completed in the decades following his reign” (p. 96). The original stone used for the construction of these walls is called Malaki, cut in perfectly squared blocks of large dimensions and set with a very thin whitish lime mortar. The wooden roof covered with lead sheeting has had to be partly replaced and repaired in the fifteenth, seventeenth and nineteenth centuries. The new ventilated lead-covered and wooden roofing achieved in this project is impressively designed to protect the interior decorations and maximize the stability of the church in the seismically active zone in which Bethlehem is located. This chapter closes with a sixteen-page presentation of the user manual and maintenance schedule needed to take care of the building going forward. Chapter 4 deals with the extensive surviving fragments of the original mosaic decoration program put up in the 1160s under the joint sponsorship of King Amalric of Jerusalem, the Byzantine Emperor Manuel Komnenos, and Ralph, the Latin archbishop of Bethlehem. The archaeological survey has found tiny fresco fragments that seem to have been put up by the crusaders well before the execution of the mosaic program that covered the entire church interior in the nave and transepts. No trace of the mosaic program from the Justinianic period, known only from textual references, was found. Detailed reporting on the careful chemical analysis and cleaning of the individual tesserae in the surviving fragments shows that the crusaders appear to have reused some tesserae from that earlier period (see pp. 193–214). No tesserae were found that had been manufactured in the West. M. Bacci’s discussion of the mosaics here basically complements the discussion in his book, The Mystic Cave (pp. 136–98), but his presentation here, along with the overall program he describes, gives more attention to the techniques and materials, e.g., the tesserae size, color, type of material, settings, tessellation, and so on. Analysis, accompanied by excellent documentary photos, shows that the mosaics of the 1160s were carried out by several teams or workshops which can be differentiated by the sizes of the tesserae, the bedding mortar, the tessellation of the tesserae, the execution of figurative design details, and so on. Essential for the study of these mosaics was the complete photogrammetrical survey carried out to enable the Piacenti specialists to proceed with the cleaning of the mosaics. As described in the text: “the multidisciplinary project team in charge of cleaning the mosaics required a very detailed survey, accurately and realistically reproducing the entire decoration to be restored” (p. 216). There can be no doubt that the dramatic revelation of the color and brilliance of these high-quality mosaics newly cleaned is the most stunning result to the viewer, whether scholar, pilgrim or tourist visitor, in

272

JAROSLAV FOLDA

contrast to the way they looked – dark and almost indecipherable from the dirt and soot, and the dirty water that had leaked down on them – prior to the excellent work of these expert restorers and conservators! The importance of these mosaics done in the crusader period is indicated by the fact that this program in the Church of the Nativity in Bethlehem was apparently the largest and most ambitious decorative project to have been done in the Latin kingdom of Jerusalem, carried out under royal/imperial/ecclesiastical patronage by master mosaicists, to create work of the highest quality. Besides the wall mosaics, new archaeological investigations of the floor mosaics were carried out in five locations in the church (pp. 235–56). Important new findings shed light on the site before and during the period of the Constantinian building, and on the fact that the Justinianic church was built directly on the Constantinian mosaic floor levels after the walls of the previous structure had been eliminated. Further findings can be expected as this archaeological work will be ongoing (p. 252). Chapter 5 describes how the loss of the marble slabs which covered the internal masonry walls in the Justinianic period, and which were removed over the years, caused the walls to be covered with a white translucent plaster in the nineteenth century. These plasters were seriously and extensively degraded by water leakage. Starting in 2014 they have been carefully investigated and surveyed thermographically to discover any wall decoration hidden underneath. One dramatic find was an additional angel in the clerestory found under the plaster (p. 229, and see fig. 4.6.3, p. 231) along with black tesserae mosaic borders hidden under the plaster along the top zone above the striding angels. Following this painstaking survey, the plasters were carefully restored, painted to provide a homogenous color, and in those special areas like the apse where decoration existed, retouched (cf. Fig. 5.3.6). Besides the enormous program of wall mosaics in the Church of the Nativity, the crusaders apparently initiated some wall painting long before the 1160s. In chapter 6 the new finds of tiny fragments on the eastern wall of the south transept are illustrated (figs. 6.1.1 and 6.1.2). But the most important surviving paintings are found on the columns of the nave and south aisle (fig. 6.1.6) where thirty large icons (2 m × 0.75 m) were painted directly on the stone surfaces. The unusual technique is identified as oil paint applied directly on the stone (p. 280). These paintings were, however, periodically maintained with the use of “petroleum and wax mixtures” (p. 288) to brighten the colors under candle smoke and dust.7 The icons were done by a variety of anonymous painters, starting with an icon of the Virgin and Child Glykophilousa which is dated 1130. The discussion by M. Bacci here expands and complements his rather brief discussion in The Mystic Cave (pp. 130–36), which was apparently written before the cleaning and restoration of these 7

Bacci, The Mystic Cave, 131, n. 48, points out the confusion over the technique, now clarified by the restorations.

REVIEW ARTICLE

273

icons had been completed. Attention is given to inscriptions in several languages found on these icons, and a complete corpus of the inscriptions is noted to be a current desideratum. (One such project underway is being conducted by Estelle Ingrand-Varenne from the CESCM at the University of Poitiers.) Despite attempts to clean these paintings in 1946 and 1976, they were quickly covered again by a thick layer of dirt caused by the oxidation of old varnish, and deposits of soot from candle smoke obscuring the original colors. As icons, these paintings differ from those found on Byzantine or crusader panels by the regular use of deep blue grounds (of the kind found in wall painting) and the lack of gold grounds. Gold color is created with the use of orpiment, e.g. for haloes; the only gold leaf found on these icons appears to be on the crown of St. Olaf. In chapter 7 the archaeological examination of the church’s exterior walls is discussed. Although very brief, the importance of this examination is evident because all of the interior walls of the church are covered with plaster. The examinations report on the high quality of the masonry work, fully expected due to imperial sponsorship. The discussion covers the construction material, type of preparation and refinement of the elements, installation and size of the stones, type of binder and the tools used. The walls are characterized by perfectly squared large ashlars. Fig. 7.2.6 shows a photo of part of the south wall after restoration, where the original wall surface condition has been reinstated. One of the most interesting reports is found in Chapter 8, where there is extensive analysis and discussion of the wooden architraves above the columns in the church. The architraves are made up of three Lebanon cedar wood beams usually spanning three columns. Dendrochronological analysis on these wooden elements carried out in 2010 indicated a dating to c. 600, +/− 70 years. This finding suggests they are elements coeval with the construction of the church in the sixth century. As a result this would place them “together with the wooden tie beams of Hagia Sophia in Constantinople, among the most antique wooden elements in the Mediterranean area” (p. 312). These architraves are also important because they preserve handsome decorative carvings in the intrados between columns and on their sides. These decorations include rosettes, interlacing scrolls, rinceaux and globular motifs, and laurel wreath and cross designs (pp. 315–16). They form what Bacci calls “a repertory of forms which was rooted in the traditions of the Christian Near East,”8 also found in manuscript painting and in the wall mosaics here at Bethlehem. Because of the complex nature of the wood, the varying conditions and decay of the wood, and the challenge of what interventions to make in light of past interventions, there is extensive discussion of the restoration problems faced (pp. 316–52) with many detailed analytical drawings and documentary photos. The particular case of the “corners” at the eastern juncture of the bema with the transepts and the weaknesses discovered with those architraves and columns is given special attention. (pp. 340–49). 8

Ibid., 76.

274

JAROSLAV FOLDA

Chapter 9 dealing with the narthex is the third largest in the book (pp. 353–428) and it is important for three main reasons. First, there is the archaeological analysis of the five-bay narthex inside the western/main facade of the church, and its complex history, along with new archaeological analysis of the vaults and soundings in the flooring. Second, there is a full on-site material survey of the interior of the narthex with detailed testing results of four of the five bays. Only the northern bay with a chapel controlled by the Franciscans is excluded. Third and finally, the Armenian door in the second bay, at the entrance to the nave of the church, is fully discussed with its beautiful carved wood panels facing the interior of the narthex. We learn important things from each of these three discussions and reports. The vaults are clearly attributed to the crusader period and the evidence also indicates that there was a wooden roof prior to that time. The detailed analysis of the material survey enables the team to understand the deformation of the facade/narthex area and to create a major steel structural intervention over the central three bays of the narthex which has the result of preserving the crusader vaults in situ. M. Bacci then presents a detailed analysis and interpretation of the Armenian wooden carved panels on the inner door from 1227, including discussion of their inscriptions in Armenian and Arabic, which expands on his presentation in the 2017 book.9 This includes clarification of the Armenian restorations done on this door in 1621 with the support of a lady named Alic whose name appears on incised beams installed at that time. The final chapter, chapter 10, outlines the program and equipment planned for the monitoring system needed to maintain the building following its restoration with all the interventions completed. This program and the equipment will be expensive and the staff – expert, qualified personnel – needed to carry out the inspections and evaluations must be appointed and trained. The importance of having these systems operative and ongoing, including of course the fire and micro-climate detection system, is obvious and critically important in light of the disastrous fire which the cathedral of Notre Dame in Paris suffered in April of 2019, despite its fire detection system. This book will take its place as a fundamental reference for understanding the Church of the Nativity in Bethlehem. The selected examples of important points about the church given above are only a sample of what the reader will find. In sum, this book provides the most important and up-to-date analysis, documentation, and discussion of the historical and archaeological investigations about the Church of the Nativity, and the technical analyses, evaluations, and the interventions to restore and conserve the building, work done over the past decade and now mostly complete. What remains to be done can hopefully be funded and carried out in the next few years. But this volume is a monument to the remarkable achievements of Piacenti S.p.A, and the C.D.G. under the aegis of the Palestinian Presidential Committee with the cooperation of the three ecclesiastical authorities.

9

Ibid., 107–110.

REVIEW ARTICLE

275

In closing, we are reminded of the significance of this holy place and this church by these verses recorded by the twelfth-century pilgrim, John of Würzburg, referring to what he saw in gold mosaic letters at the place of the Nativity: Angelicae lumen virtutis et eius acumen Hic natus vere deus est de virgine matre10 The light which angels contemplate, The perfectness they emulate, This One True God is brought to birth By Virgin Mother here on earth.11

10 John of Würzburg, lines 166–167, in R. B. C. Huygens, ed., Peregrinationes tres (Turnhout, 1994), 85. 11 John of Würzburg, in John Wilkinson, ed. and trans., Jerusalem Pilgrimage (London, 1988), 272.

REVIEWS History of the Dukes of Normandy and the Kings of England by the Anonymous of Béthune, trans. by Janet Shirley, historical notes by Paul Webster (Crusade Texts in Translation), Abingdon: Routledge, 2021. Pp xxi, 231. ISBN 978 1 138 74349 6. The History of the Dukes of Normandy and the Kings of England offers a general history of the Norman and northern French world spanning from the Viking raids of the ninth century through to the events of 1220. Chronologically, the last event it mentions is the translation of St. Thomas Becket’s relics to Canterbury in July of that year in the presence of the papal legate. Within this range it offers a detailed narrative, focusing on matters that were of perennial interest to the northern French aristocracy (principally: warfare, dynastic affairs, and regional political history). Like several recent additions to the widely renowned “Crusade Texts in Translation” series, crusading does not form the main focus of the narrative, but nonetheless accounts of crusading expeditions, the Latin Empire of Constantinople, and occasionally the doings of the Templars and Hospitallers in France and England, appear as the chronicle unfolds. Notably, this is the first English translation of this source (a point which makes this an especially welcome addition for students) and it was created using the critical edition produced by Francisque Michel back in 1840. The translation is admirably equipped with detailed notes, a well-crafted introduction and appendices (listing the works that have correctly and incorrectly been attributed to the Anonymous of Béthune). Significantly, the History of the Dukes of Normandy was originally written in Old French and, as such, it is one of the earliest histories to be written in the vernacular. Others include the chronicles by Ernoul, describing the collapse of the crusader states (post 1187), or Robert of Clari’s history of the Fourth Crusade. Little is known about the History’s author. He is generally referred to as the “Anonymous of Béthune” and he seems to have been associated with the counts of Béthune. The author is also generally accredited with writing another contemporary work: the Chronique des rois de France. These points aside, it is difficult to learn much more about him, not least because so much of this history borrows heavily from earlier works, thereby making it difficult to know if we are hearing his views or those of an earlier author. Dudo of St. Quentin’s history of the Normans is a case in point and provides much of the content for the History’s early section. It is natural to ask why the “Anonymous” would have written a history of this kind, or perhaps – to rephrase the question – why his patrons, the counts of Béthune, would have wanted the Anonymous to write this chronicle. This question receives focused attention in the introduction, with some speculation that the History reflects the shared aspirations of the northern French aristocracy, but in reality this issue remains something of a mystery. The notion however that the History represents 277

278

REVIEWS

a northern French reaction to the rising authority of the Capetian kings of France is rejected, following the arguments offered on this point by Gregory Fedorenko. In terms of content, and like so many histories of this kind, the History is of particular interest in its descriptions of events that fall at the very end of its chronological range. As the introduction points out, its discussion on the turbulent final years of King John’s reign and the French invasion of 1216 warrant especially close attention. These matters are described “blow-by-blow” and contain many asides and points of interest not found elsewhere. The History’s descriptions of warfare, both on land and at sea, are also very detailed. Regarding the history of the crusades, this work provides little new information. The accounts offered on the main crusading expeditions are brief and contain few details or stories that cannot be found elsewhere. Perhaps the most notable aspect of the History in this regard is its references – normally brief – to news arriving in northern France and Flanders from the Latin Empire of Constantinople (such as reports of the death of Emperor Henry of Constantinople in 1216); hints that speak of an ongoing exchange of news between the two. Having said this, the History does provide a fascinating insight into the way in which crusading (and the memory of crusading) was woven into the broader dynastic histories of this era and, as such, it provides clues as to the significance apportioned to crusading by the aristocracies of northern France, as well as to those aspects of crusading which they thought most important. Consequently, this work represents a significant addition to the growing corpus of translated material available both for the crusading movement and also for the history of northern France and the British Isles. Notably, Thomas Bisson’s Chronography of Robert of Torigni was published only a few months ago and so – taken together – these translations represent a substantial advance. Sadly, however, this will also be the last translation by Janet Shirley who passed away in 2017. Janet is widely known for her many contributions to scholarship on the medieval period. These include many translations of important sources, the earliest being A Parisian Journal, 1405–1449: Translated from the Anonymous Journal d’un bourgeois de Paris (1968). Among historians of the crusades, she is perhaps best known for her earlier contributions to this series including Crusader Syria in the Thirteenth Century (1999), The Song of the Cathar Wars (2000), and The Capture of Alexandria (2001). Cumulatively these represent an invaluable resource for historians, and I remember first reading them as an undergraduate. This present work offers a tribute to Janet Shirley’s substantial achievements in its opening pages. In this way, the History of the Dukes of Normandy and the Kings of England is a worthy addition to this series, serving to draw an important source to the attention of a much wider audience. Nicholas Morton Nottingham Trent University

REVIEWS

279

Jane Gilbert, Simon Gaunt and William Burgwinkle, Medieval French Literary Culture Abroad (Oxford Studies in Medieval Literature and Culture). Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2020. Pp. x, 290. ISBN 978 0 19 883245 4. This is an ambitious study which seeks to understand and contextualize the fact that beginning in the twelfth century French literary culture flourished well beyond the borders of present-day France and in communities in which the langue d’oïl would only have been spoken by a minority of the population. Whereas it is often acknowledged that many of the earliest manifestations of “French literature” came from elsewhere and were widely disseminated outside France, the authors go further and seek to develop a perspective that questions the traditional view that would position this literary culture largely in relation to France itself. They therefore reject the older view that adopts, often implicitly and sometimes explicitly, a retrospective Franco-centric perspective whereby medieval French literary culture originates in France and emanates outward to other parts of Europe and beyond, and they set aside assumptions about core and periphery that in the past have often underpinned evaluations of medieval texts in French. This leads them to a consideration of the French literary culture in, on the one hand, Flanders and the British Isles, and, on the other, Italy and the Latin East, bearing in mind that, as is well known, in the thirteenth century the most common form of written French was Picard, followed by Norman and then Champenois, and not the French of Paris or the Ile-de-France which only came to prominence after the middle of that century. The Norman Conquest of England, the economic strength of what is now northern and eastern France, and the role of Champagne, Flanders and the Picard region in crusading all contributed to these developments. This literary culture, whether in France or beyond, was necessarily an elite culture of knights, nobles, merchants and other educated people, and it spread through the same channels – trade, intermarriage, crusading or travel for other purposes – which reflected the networking that characterized the society of that age. The authors discuss a carefully chosen selection of texts and manuscripts to illustrate their arguments. Indeed, this study represents one outcome from their AHRC-funded research project (database: http://www.medievalfrancophone.ac.uk/) which examines in particular the Roman d’Alexandre, Guiron le Courtois, the Histoire ancienne jusqu’à César, the prose Lancelot and associated texts, the prose Tristan and the Roman de Troie. Here they also consider the pioneering twelfth-century work, Gaimar’s Estoire des Engleis, and the fourteenth-century history by Pierre de Langtoft along with other material found in the London: BL. Royal MS 20 A II, and they focus our attention on the Italian Rusticiaus de Pise and the Fleming Jean de la Mote. The texts and manuscripts are well chosen and serve to illustrate the dynamics of cultural networking and literary exchange through the transference of ideas, the copying and movement of manuscripts and the development of textual traditions. Along the way they make valuable points such as drawing attention to the large number of langue d’oïl manuscripts copied in Italy and reminding us that French literary

280

REVIEWS

culture in Italy continued long after the advent of the celebrated fourteenth-century Italian-language writers. Readers of this journal will of course be particularly interested in how all this ties in with crusading and the Latin East. The authors quote with evident approval the remark by the thirteenth-century historian, Martin da Canale: “Lengue franceise cort parmi le monde” and suggest that, as someone working in Venice, his choice of French may indicate an affinity with the Latin East as much as with France. On the Latin East itself, they have chosen not to concentrate attention on any of the writings composed there, but instead on the four extant manuscripts believed to have been copied in Acre of the Histoire ancienne jusqu’à César. (Only the Old French William of Tyre has more extant French-language manuscripts from the East.) This text was composed in Flanders in the second decade of the thirteenth century and was originally intended to continue to the time of writing and extol the importance of Flanders as the culmination of world history. In the form in which it is transmitted to posterity it is a huge compilation of biblical and pagan history. The Acre manuscripts, all of which belong to the period after c. 1260, are among the earliest and the most lavishly illustrated. The authors make the point that the reasons for its appeal to a readership in Acre would not necessarily have been the same as for a readership in Flanders, and that in the latter part of the thirteenth century a readership in Acre would have found resonances with their own precarious and often violent circumstances in the stories of ancient empires and their rulers. In building a picture of the French-language culture in Acre in the late thirteenth century, the authors identify the prose Tristan – another work that reflects the tensions of contemporary circumstances – as the source for some of the celebrations marking the coronation of Henry II in 1286 and note the possibility that the earliest surviving manuscript with this text (Paris: BnF. MS fr. 750) may have been produced in Acre. They also endorse Fabio Zinelli’s argument that one group of manuscripts containing Brunetto Latini’s Tresor was derived from an exemplar copied in Acre and Zinelli’s contention that material from the Latin East had a bearing on French literary culture in Italy. Indeed, the authors have done well to draw the importance of Zinelli’s work on both Brunetto and the Histoire ancienne to the attention of anglophone scholars. There is much in this study that is persuasive, and its scope and approach are such that it should set an agenda for future scholarship. However, on occasion they overstate their case. For example, we are told that in the Holy Land in the later thirteenth century “Language and texts – and the vision of past, present, and future they purveyed – were one of the main instruments of the network on which the Latin Kingdom depended for its fragile survival” (p. 29). A repeated theme is the idea that, despite its precarious position, Acre was a centre for intercultural networking. It might equally be possible to argue that the existence of a vibrant book trade can be taken as evidence that almost until 1291 contemporaries did not conceive Acre’s demise as inevitable and that historians are blinded by hindsight.

REVIEWS

281

It is also unfortunate that, at least in the sections discussing the Latin East, the authors let themselves down in the detail. They endorse, rightly in my view, Hugo Buchthal and Jaroslav Folda’s identification of a group of manuscripts as being the products of an Acre atelier, but it is odd that there is no mention anywhere that this attribution was challenged by both David Jacoby, whose scholarship is rightly lauded, and Jens Wollesen. The idea put forward by these scholars that some at least of these manuscripts were produced on Cyprus gets a passing mention (p. 204 n. 23) but without any attempt to consider the implications. King Henry II of Cyprus fares badly. The statement “Henry, a Lusignan, reigned in Jerusalem 1285–1306 and again 1306–24. He was also king of Cyprus (r.1285–1324), …” (p. 125, n. 5) can only be described as slovenly. Worse still is the summary of his reign at p. 204: “In 1287, the new king of Jerusalem, Henry II of Lusignan, visited the city of Acre, capital of the Latin Kingdom since 1187, to celebrate his coronation. He had been able to take the title after the death of Charles of Anjou in 1285, who had contested Henry’s claim while defending his own. … while he was successful in wrenching the Kingdom back from the Neapolitan Angevins and modernizing it by instituting a judicial system and by working in the vernacular (French and Italian) rather than Latin for official documents, he was deposed through the efforts of one of his brothers (Amalric, with the aid of the Templars, in 1306 – just months before their own abolition in 1307), after having killed another brother (Guy, in 1303) who had conspired against him. He returned to power in 1310 after the fall of Acre, just in time to take revenge on the conspirators and oversee the dismantling of the Templars’ holdings in 1313, the result of the edict of dissolution by Philip IV … .” It is difficult to know where to start. The dates in the first sentence should be 1286 and 1191. Henry’s relations with the Angevins, the supposed modernization, the killing of Guy and the king of France’s edict are all wrong. There is no space here to discuss them further. Among other points, I will single out the following. Gautier de Montbéliard, who appears as a patron of Robert of Boron, was a far better known and more substantial figure than the reference to him at p. 69 would seem to suggest. The authors should have said that the letter supposedly written by Queen Joanna of Naples to Hugh IV of Cyprus that is included in the Pierre de Langtoft manuscript mentioned earlier in this review exists in other versions, and that in the version published by Jorga in the nineteenth century (ROL, 3, 1895) it was composed by Hugh and addressed to Joanna. Philip of Novara’s story of reading romances at the siege of Damietta is in his legal treatise, not his memoirs. To speak of Frederick II’s “coronation in 1229 as king of Jerusalem” (p. 140) is wrong: it was a crown wearing ceremony. I would want to take issue with their discussion of the Gestes des Chiprois as a universal history, and there are also mistakes in their information on the Eracles manuscripts. For example, the Vatican: MS Pal. Lat. 1963 is not an Acre manuscript (p. 144 n. 55). Finally, there has to be serious doubts as to the authenticity of the documents supposedly relating to the Third Crusade (p. 130) which are only known to scholars through the 1987 sale catalogue of a leading London auction house.

282

REVIEWS

Having checked the catalogue, I find that before coming into the vendor’s family’s possession they had passed through the hands of Courtois, the notorious nineteenthcentury forger of such material, and they appear to bear all his hallmarks. Peter Edbury Cardiff University Hilary Rhodes, The Crown and the Cross: Burgundy, France and the Crusades (1095–1223) (Outremer: Studies in the Crusades and the Latin East 9). Turnhout: Brepols, 2020. Pp. 263 ISBN 978 2 503 58684 7. The past few years have witnessed the publication of several regional histories of the crusading movement. Recent examples include Paula Hailstone’s Recalcitrant Crusaders, exploring Sicily and Southern Italy’s relations with the crusader states during the twelfth century, or Timothy Guard’s Chivalry, Kingship and Crusade, covering English crusading in the fourteenth century. To these might be added regional histories of the military orders, for example Elena Bellomo’s The Templar Order in North-West Italy. Studies of this kind are often extremely illuminating, in part because they demonstrate regional variations in crusading commitment and spirituality, but also because they often bring to light little-known sources or offer insights into specific questions pertinent to the region under discussion. This present volume, The Crown and the Cross: Burgundy, France, and the Crusades, 1095–1223 by Hilary Rhodes, represents a new regional crusading history, focusing on Burgundy (both the duchy and the county) and examining its involvement in holy warfare from the so-called “proto crusades” of the eleventh century through to the Albigensian Crusade. Structurally, this work is essentially chronological in its progression albeit with substantial asides focused on areas of thematic interest. As Rhodes explains, the dukes and counts of Burgundy had a rather inconsistent relationship with the crusading movement. In the case of the dukes of Burgundy, in the years before the First Crusade, Duke Odo led an army to support Alfonso VI of Castile-León in 1086–87, but he did not participate in the First Crusade. In fact, Rhodes argues that Odo was actually conspicuous for his lack of support for this latter expedition. Subsequently, he was persuaded to join the 1101 crusade and he died during the campaign. Later dukes were equally uneven in their commitment. Odo II did not participate in the Second Crusade, but his son Hugh III went on pilgrimage to Jerusalem in 1171. Hugh also famously refused to marry Sibylla, daughter of Amalric I of Jerusalem, thereby turning down the opportunity to become successor to the throne of Jerusalem. Hugh then participated in the Third Crusade, becoming leader of the French contingent, during which he had a rather tense relationship with Richard I of England. He died in the kingdom of Jerusalem in 1192. His son Odo III then refused to become leader of the Fourth Crusade but was rather more enthusiastic about participating in the Albigensian Crusade.

282

REVIEWS

Having checked the catalogue, I find that before coming into the vendor’s family’s possession they had passed through the hands of Courtois, the notorious nineteenthcentury forger of such material, and they appear to bear all his hallmarks. Peter Edbury Cardiff University Hilary Rhodes, The Crown and the Cross: Burgundy, France and the Crusades (1095–1223) (Outremer: Studies in the Crusades and the Latin East 9). Turnhout: Brepols, 2020. Pp. 263 ISBN 978 2 503 58684 7. The past few years have witnessed the publication of several regional histories of the crusading movement. Recent examples include Paula Hailstone’s Recalcitrant Crusaders, exploring Sicily and Southern Italy’s relations with the crusader states during the twelfth century, or Timothy Guard’s Chivalry, Kingship and Crusade, covering English crusading in the fourteenth century. To these might be added regional histories of the military orders, for example Elena Bellomo’s The Templar Order in North-West Italy. Studies of this kind are often extremely illuminating, in part because they demonstrate regional variations in crusading commitment and spirituality, but also because they often bring to light little-known sources or offer insights into specific questions pertinent to the region under discussion. This present volume, The Crown and the Cross: Burgundy, France, and the Crusades, 1095–1223 by Hilary Rhodes, represents a new regional crusading history, focusing on Burgundy (both the duchy and the county) and examining its involvement in holy warfare from the so-called “proto crusades” of the eleventh century through to the Albigensian Crusade. Structurally, this work is essentially chronological in its progression albeit with substantial asides focused on areas of thematic interest. As Rhodes explains, the dukes and counts of Burgundy had a rather inconsistent relationship with the crusading movement. In the case of the dukes of Burgundy, in the years before the First Crusade, Duke Odo led an army to support Alfonso VI of Castile-León in 1086–87, but he did not participate in the First Crusade. In fact, Rhodes argues that Odo was actually conspicuous for his lack of support for this latter expedition. Subsequently, he was persuaded to join the 1101 crusade and he died during the campaign. Later dukes were equally uneven in their commitment. Odo II did not participate in the Second Crusade, but his son Hugh III went on pilgrimage to Jerusalem in 1171. Hugh also famously refused to marry Sibylla, daughter of Amalric I of Jerusalem, thereby turning down the opportunity to become successor to the throne of Jerusalem. Hugh then participated in the Third Crusade, becoming leader of the French contingent, during which he had a rather tense relationship with Richard I of England. He died in the kingdom of Jerusalem in 1192. His son Odo III then refused to become leader of the Fourth Crusade but was rather more enthusiastic about participating in the Albigensian Crusade.

REVIEWS

283

Rhodes’ explanation for the dukes’ haphazard approach to crusading is that for much of this period their policies were closely aligned to those of the reigning monarch and that, when they did go on crusade, there was normally a strong political incentive for them to do so. This does not necessarily negate the possibility of other motives, including pious objectives, but Rhodes nonetheless offers this as an organizing principle shaping much of their crusading policy. It is natural to ask, therefore, why Odo II did not join Louis VII on the Second Crusade, but on this question it seems the sources shed little light. The dukes of Burgundy naturally reflect only one aspect of Burgundian crusading and Rhodes also recreates the counts of Burgundy’s exploits as well as those of other nobles, churchmen and crusaders from the region (often revealed through the charter evidence). There is also some discussion on the involvement of Citeaux and Cluny, with particular attention given to the longstanding question of Cluny’s involvement in the launch of the First Crusade. Here, Rhodes’ view tallies with the current trend to caption Cluny as only tangentially connected to the crusade – part of the broader developments taking place in Western Christendom which moulded the idea of the crusade but not closely involved in the management of the campaign itself. In other respects, however, Cluny and Citeaux only make sporadic appearances in this study, which focuses far more on the region’s secular lords. Among a range of further insights on issues of longstanding scholarly interest, Rhodes also discusses the relationship between Hugh III of Burgundy and Richard I of England during the Third Crusade. As the leader of the French contingent, Hugh dealt with Richard directly and his actions helped shape the crusade’s military and political development. The narrative offered here is that the two men made a sincere effort to work together following the departure of Philip II from the crusade and his return to France, and there was a phase where they co-operated reasonably effectively. The sticking point seems to have been a running disagreement over their differing strategies for reconquering Jerusalem. Richard wanted to put in more groundwork, building up Christian control in neighbouring regions and he was unwilling to take too many risks when advancing on Jerusalem itself; Hugh by contrast was readier to press home the attack on Jerusalem. The ensuing disagreement ultimately proved insoluble and was only exacerbated by other areas of disagreement. Taken overall, this is a closely argued and well researched monograph that opens up an important regional history. The decision to explore a region whose rulers manifested only a sporadic interest in crusading makes it especially interesting because it can be very natural for scholars to focus on regions where the crusading traditions – and often therefore the surviving evidence – is strongest (although having said this Hailstone has just published a study on the “recalcitrant” Norman Crusaders of Sicily and Southern Italy so this is not wholly unprecedented.) [Editorial note: Paula Z. Hailstone, Recalcitrant Crusaders? The Relationship Between Southern Italy and Sicily, Crusading and Crusading States, c. 1060–1198

284

REVIEWS

was reviewed by Andrew Buck in Crusades 19 (2020): 158–60]. The inclusion of a list of Burgundian crusaders during this time frame will also be appreciated by scholars, especially those with prosopographical interests. Rhodes’ reflections on some of the key debates pertinent to Burgundy’s crusading history are also worthy of attention and she frequently offers a fresh perspective or revisions to standing orthodoxies. Nicholas Morton Nottingham Trent University Simon de Montfort (c. 1170–1218). Le croisé, son lignage et son temps, ed. Martin Aurell, Gregory Lippiatt and Laurent Macé (Histoires de famille. La Parenté au Moyen Age 21). Turnhout: Brepols, 2020. Pp. 286. ISBN 978 2 503 58224 5. The papers in this collection stem from a conference held at Poitiers in May 2018 marking the 800th anniversary of the elder Simon de Montfort’s death at the siege of Toulouse in June 1218. Its subtitle accurately encapsulates the width and breadth of the contents. Simon de Montfort the elder, or Simon V, is less the centre of the constellation but merely the brightest star – and perhaps not even that – sharing the glory or infamy with his sons Amaury, Guy and Simon VI, and the Montfort family more generally. While some of the articles are quite specialized, all cover essential and neglected aspects of the Albigensian Crusade, the careers of Simon V and his sons, his family, and the thirteenth century. The three editors provide a remarkably symmetrical collection. Exactly half of the contributions are in French, the other half in English. Its three sections each contain four chapters, not including the bookend introduction in English by Lippiatt and the conclusion in French by Aurell. The first section, “Simon et la croisade Albigeoise,” contains a survey of Simon V’s career in Languedoc (JeanLouis Biget); an analysis and comparison of the Statute of Pamiers with other thirteenth-century documents (Gregory Lippiatt); Simon’s relationship with the king of Aragon, Peter II (Martin Alvira); and the impact and importance of Simon’s guardianship of Peter’s heir, James I (Damian Smith). Section II, “Simon: le baron, ses hommes et ses représentations,” includes the history of Simon V’s tortured relationships with the earldom of Leicester and King John (Nicholas Vincent); the evolution of the seals Simon V used (Laurent Macé); the course of the Albigensian Crusade after Simon V’s death (Daniel Power); and a discussion of Amaury V and his family’s interactions with the Capetian house (Lindy Grant). Section III, “Le Lignage de Simon et sa culture,” concentrates on the impact Simon V’s example and memory may have had on Simon VI’s actions (Sophie Ambler); a dissection of Simon VI’s dismal career as seneschal of Gascony (Amicie du Rausas); the reasons why Simon VI took over the honour of Chester in 1264 (Rodolphe Billaud); and the Montfort family’s patronage of heraldic symbols and literature in the thirteenth century (Catalina Girbea).

284

REVIEWS

was reviewed by Andrew Buck in Crusades 19 (2020): 158–60]. The inclusion of a list of Burgundian crusaders during this time frame will also be appreciated by scholars, especially those with prosopographical interests. Rhodes’ reflections on some of the key debates pertinent to Burgundy’s crusading history are also worthy of attention and she frequently offers a fresh perspective or revisions to standing orthodoxies. Nicholas Morton Nottingham Trent University Simon de Montfort (c. 1170–1218). Le croisé, son lignage et son temps, ed. Martin Aurell, Gregory Lippiatt and Laurent Macé (Histoires de famille. La Parenté au Moyen Age 21). Turnhout: Brepols, 2020. Pp. 286. ISBN 978 2 503 58224 5. The papers in this collection stem from a conference held at Poitiers in May 2018 marking the 800th anniversary of the elder Simon de Montfort’s death at the siege of Toulouse in June 1218. Its subtitle accurately encapsulates the width and breadth of the contents. Simon de Montfort the elder, or Simon V, is less the centre of the constellation but merely the brightest star – and perhaps not even that – sharing the glory or infamy with his sons Amaury, Guy and Simon VI, and the Montfort family more generally. While some of the articles are quite specialized, all cover essential and neglected aspects of the Albigensian Crusade, the careers of Simon V and his sons, his family, and the thirteenth century. The three editors provide a remarkably symmetrical collection. Exactly half of the contributions are in French, the other half in English. Its three sections each contain four chapters, not including the bookend introduction in English by Lippiatt and the conclusion in French by Aurell. The first section, “Simon et la croisade Albigeoise,” contains a survey of Simon V’s career in Languedoc (JeanLouis Biget); an analysis and comparison of the Statute of Pamiers with other thirteenth-century documents (Gregory Lippiatt); Simon’s relationship with the king of Aragon, Peter II (Martin Alvira); and the impact and importance of Simon’s guardianship of Peter’s heir, James I (Damian Smith). Section II, “Simon: le baron, ses hommes et ses représentations,” includes the history of Simon V’s tortured relationships with the earldom of Leicester and King John (Nicholas Vincent); the evolution of the seals Simon V used (Laurent Macé); the course of the Albigensian Crusade after Simon V’s death (Daniel Power); and a discussion of Amaury V and his family’s interactions with the Capetian house (Lindy Grant). Section III, “Le Lignage de Simon et sa culture,” concentrates on the impact Simon V’s example and memory may have had on Simon VI’s actions (Sophie Ambler); a dissection of Simon VI’s dismal career as seneschal of Gascony (Amicie du Rausas); the reasons why Simon VI took over the honour of Chester in 1264 (Rodolphe Billaud); and the Montfort family’s patronage of heraldic symbols and literature in the thirteenth century (Catalina Girbea).

REVIEWS

285

According to Lippiatt’s introduction, the contributors were encouraged to move beyond “emotional approaches” to offer a “cooler assessment of the man [Simon V] and his importance” (pp. 14, 15). These chapters succeed in that goal while simultaneously providing analysis and context for an ambitious family which jockeyed for position and status on the continent, in England, and through its members’ participation in several crusades. Lippiatt reminds us that the current view of Simon V as a religious zealot, “butcher,” and destroyer of Occitan exceptionalism is really a product of the Enlightenment, since for centuries after his death he was held up as a paragon of Christian virtue and honourable conduct. Aurell’s conclusion discusses the continuing and always politicized binary controversies over Simon’s reputation among modern scholars. As he explains, holding the conference in Poitiers rather than Languedoc was done deliberately to ensure it would be “cool and neutral.” All the papers deserve more analysis than a short review can accomplish but I make special mention of four. Lippiatt’s article on the Statutes of Pamiers stands out for its comparative nature. He argues that the Statutes were more than simply a conqueror’s code foisted on a subject population. By comparing the Statutes to other law codes of the thirteenth century, among them Magna Carta, the Golden Bull of Hungary, the Livre au roi and the Assizes of Antioch, he places the Statutes in the context of an immensely rich era in the formation and codification of law. Damian Smith raises a number of interesting issues and points, among them that Peter II never seemed overly concerned that his son and heir, James, was in Simon de Montfort’s guardianship even on the day of the king’s death at the battle of Muret in 1213. In fact, Smith argues, contrary to the cruel retention of a young innocent as hostage, Simon’s guardianship counterintuitively served James and the Aragonese monarchy quite well in the long run. Simon’s reluctance to release James after Muret galvanized noble loyalty to the Aragonese monarchy and united the Aragonese nobility in seeking James’ return. Papal intervention eventually did the trick but, again ironically, the papal legate helped set up a good regency government upon which James could later build. Simon V’s death in 1218 drained the vitriol from Aragonese involvement in the north for those who sought revenge against him for killing their king at Muret. Daniel Power draws our attention to the continued war in Languedoc after Simon V’s death. Without question, events of the war after 1218 have been neglected by modern scholars. Power suggests this is mainly due to the availability and quality of the source material. Two of the main sources, Peter of Vaux-deCernay and the anonymous Chanson, came to an end soon after the hero/villain Simon V’s death, perhaps because the drama had seemingly lost its lead actor. Remaining sources that discuss the ongoing crusade are scattered geographically, chronologically, and in subject matter. The war itself continued quite hot, however, amid Amaury’s fruitless attempts to contain the rebellion against his administration and leading to his brother Guy’s death while attempting to recapture Castelnaudary in 1220.

286

REVIEWS

Sophie Ambler assesses the impact Simon the elder had on his son, Simon VI. Using Nicholas Paul’s To Follow in their Footsteps as an analytical model, she argues that Simon VI consciously imitated the behavior of his father, a man who had died before his son reached adolescence. While a father’s influence on a son might seem self-evident, she proves her case by charter evidence and Simon’s seals, which appear to be conscious imitations of his father’s actions and behavior. Plus, she maintains, Peter of Vaux-de-Cernay’s account provided a blueprint of decisive leadership, Christian conduct, and family solidarity for Simon VI as he pursued his own ambitions in England. Laurence W. Marvin Berry College J. Michael Jefferson, The Templar Estates in Lincolnshire, 1185–1565: Agriculture and Economy. Woodbridge: Boydell Press, 2020. Pp. xii, 349. ISBN 978 1 78327 557 1 The military orders were among the richest ecclesiastical landholders of medieval England. Both the Templars and Hospitallers had a wide network of lands and property across the kingdom. Their history in England’s counties has led to many regional studies, though most have been antiquarian, non-academic, or brief, and often did little more than summarise the relevant information from the three of the main sources for the Templars’ holdings in England (the Templars’ 1185 inquest, the Hospitallers’ 1338 survey, and the Valor ecclesiasticus). This volume, derived from the author’s PhD thesis at the University of Nottingham, is the first monograph-length study of the Templars’ property throughout an English county to deeply engage with the material. The volume offers an economic analysis of the Templar estates in Lincolnshire, which, along with Yorkshire, was home to the greatest concentration of Templar lands in England. It examines their management under the Templars, the royal keepers, their eventual Hospitaller inheritors, and the initial generations of laymen that received the lands from the crown after the Reformation. Jefferson argues that the Templars were generally at the forefront of then-modern agricultural practices. The book’s nine core chapters are arranged chronologically, beginning with the first record of the Templars’ lands in England, their 1185 inquest into their property there. The bulk of the volume, Chapters Two through Six, focus on the fourteenth century and examine the accounts of the royal keepers who administered the Templars’ lands following their arrest in 1308, discussing what they reveal about Templar preceptories, their agriculture, livestock, and staffing. As they are largely unpublished, these accounts have not received as much attention as they deserve, with Helen Nicholson being the only other scholar to make such extensive use of them. Jefferson argues that the royal keepers were likely to have managed the preceptories according to the Templars’ pre-existing systems, at least in the first few

286

REVIEWS

Sophie Ambler assesses the impact Simon the elder had on his son, Simon VI. Using Nicholas Paul’s To Follow in their Footsteps as an analytical model, she argues that Simon VI consciously imitated the behavior of his father, a man who had died before his son reached adolescence. While a father’s influence on a son might seem self-evident, she proves her case by charter evidence and Simon’s seals, which appear to be conscious imitations of his father’s actions and behavior. Plus, she maintains, Peter of Vaux-de-Cernay’s account provided a blueprint of decisive leadership, Christian conduct, and family solidarity for Simon VI as he pursued his own ambitions in England. Laurence W. Marvin Berry College J. Michael Jefferson, The Templar Estates in Lincolnshire, 1185–1565: Agriculture and Economy. Woodbridge: Boydell Press, 2020. Pp. xii, 349. ISBN 978 1 78327 557 1 The military orders were among the richest ecclesiastical landholders of medieval England. Both the Templars and Hospitallers had a wide network of lands and property across the kingdom. Their history in England’s counties has led to many regional studies, though most have been antiquarian, non-academic, or brief, and often did little more than summarise the relevant information from the three of the main sources for the Templars’ holdings in England (the Templars’ 1185 inquest, the Hospitallers’ 1338 survey, and the Valor ecclesiasticus). This volume, derived from the author’s PhD thesis at the University of Nottingham, is the first monograph-length study of the Templars’ property throughout an English county to deeply engage with the material. The volume offers an economic analysis of the Templar estates in Lincolnshire, which, along with Yorkshire, was home to the greatest concentration of Templar lands in England. It examines their management under the Templars, the royal keepers, their eventual Hospitaller inheritors, and the initial generations of laymen that received the lands from the crown after the Reformation. Jefferson argues that the Templars were generally at the forefront of then-modern agricultural practices. The book’s nine core chapters are arranged chronologically, beginning with the first record of the Templars’ lands in England, their 1185 inquest into their property there. The bulk of the volume, Chapters Two through Six, focus on the fourteenth century and examine the accounts of the royal keepers who administered the Templars’ lands following their arrest in 1308, discussing what they reveal about Templar preceptories, their agriculture, livestock, and staffing. As they are largely unpublished, these accounts have not received as much attention as they deserve, with Helen Nicholson being the only other scholar to make such extensive use of them. Jefferson argues that the royal keepers were likely to have managed the preceptories according to the Templars’ pre-existing systems, at least in the first few

REVIEWS

287

years before they took to asset-stripping, and so their accounts are the best surviving sources for Templar landholding practices on the eve of the order’s dissolution. All four chapters show how the royal keepers soon sold seed, animals, and equipment in order to turn a quick profit but thereby harming the long-term finances of the estate. The remaining three chapters examine first the arduous transfer of the Templars’ Lincolnshire lands to the Hospitallers, whom Clement V designated as the order’s inheritors in 1312. Jefferson lays out the often-underplayed political context of this transfer, with Edward II attempting to hold onto these lands to shore up his weak finances. This is followed by a chapter on the Hospitallers’ survey of their property in 1338 and one discussing their appearance in the 1535 Valor ecclesiasticus and the early history of these lands following the order’s dissolution in England. Extensive appendices, primarily of the unpublished keepers’ accounts, allow the reader to follow the calculations made in the text. These appendices demonstrate the depth of research and analysis in the volume, something that serves as its greatest strength (this is a genuinely comprehensive study of the order’s Lincolnshire estates and landholding), but also an occasional weakness, as the level of detail in the text can sometimes threaten to obscure the argument. Some of this information may have been better placed in footnotes or could have been made clearer by placing the tables or maps illustrating the evidence in the main text, rather than being relegated to the appendices (e.g. the listing of mills by region on p. 36 would have benefitted from sitting beside Map 9 which shows the location of the order’s mills). It does feel odd for such a detailed economic study to have no tables or figures in the text as an aid to the reader. The footnotes could also benefit from closer proofreading for the paperback edition. The discussion in Chapter Eight, which examines the Hospitallers’ 1338 survey of their English properties, presents an odd view of the survey’s creation, claiming that it was prompted by the outbreak of the Hundred Years War and the resulting royal demands upon the English Hospitallers’ finances. In fact, this was part of a general survey of the entire order commanded by Benedict XII, though only those for the Priories of England and of Provence survive today. Christie Majoros’s thesis on the function of Hospitaller preceptories in Britain and Ireland would have been a useful comparison, particularly for the volume’s discussion of Templar preceptories and the Hospitaller 1338 survey. Despite these limitations, this volume represents an important step forward in the study of the military orders on the “home front” of crusading. Its focus on agriculture and economy helps expand the existing scholarship on the military orders in England, a topic that has often been dominated by political accounts or focused on the pivotal events of the Templar trials and the Reformation. The publication of the keepers’ accounts for Lincolnshire highlights the value of these sources and will hopefully encourage the creation of editions of the accounts for elsewhere in England. Its specialised focus means that it will be more suited to graduate students and historians than undergraduates. Beyond those interested in the military orders specifically, the volume would also be relevant to scholars and graduate students of

288

REVIEWS

medieval religious or economic history, particularly landholding and agricultural practices. Rory MacLellan Historic Royal Palaces Processus contra Templarios in France. Procès-verbaux de la procédure menée par la commission pontificale à Paris (1309–1311), ed. Magdalena Satora, 2 vols. (Later Medieval Europe 21). Leiden and Boston: Brill, 2020. Pp. xxvi, xi, 1314. ISBN 978 90 04 34397 9. This is a new edition of the Templar testimonies presented to the pontifical commission at Paris between 1309 and 1311, produced to modern editorial standards. It is based on both of the surviving manuscripts, Paris: Bibliothèque nationale MS Latin 11796, which formed the basis of Jules Michelet’s edition of 1841–51, and Vatican: ASV Armarium D 206, with reference to some additional information in Paris: Bibliothèque nationale Baluze 395. This edition at last resolves any remaining uncertainty over the status of the Vatican manuscript of these Templar testimonies, which was not available to Michelet in 1841–51. In 2015 Alain Demurger noted in his study La Persécution des Templiers (p. 357) that both the Paris and the Vatican manuscripts are original transcripts of the testimonies. With the assistance of funding from the National Science Centre of Poland, Dr. Magdalena Satora has now drawn the two versions of the testimonies together into a single critical edition for scholarly use. This is an edition only of the testimonies presented to the pontifical commission of 1309–11; it does not include new editions of the two other manuscripts which Michelet published to follow it (vol. 2 of Michelet’s edition, pp. 275–515): the interrogations at Paris in October 1307, and the inquisition at Mas-Deu in the diocese of Elne, which are not in Vatican ASV Arm. D 206. The edition and associated material are presented in two attractively produced volumes: volume 1 comprises an introduction to the edition and the edition itself with critical apparatus, while volume 2, which is essentially an appendix to the main work, comprises two annexes (the text of the oath taken by the Templars before giving their testimonies and a list of the Templars who gave evidence to the papal commission), a bibliography, and indices of persons, places and subjects. The introduction to volume 1 describes the manuscripts, explaining that the Vatican manuscript now lacks fifteen of its original ninety-six membranes, so that the testimonies given from 18 February 1311 to the first part of 19 March 1311 are lost. Some membranes have also suffered water damage, but the bulk of the manuscript is intact and legible. It provides no additional testimonies and does not change our understanding of the testimonies but does provide better readings of some names. Satora sets out the shortcomings of Michelet’s edition of the Paris pontifical proceedings: it is based on only one manuscript, there is no critical apparatus except

288

REVIEWS

medieval religious or economic history, particularly landholding and agricultural practices. Rory MacLellan Historic Royal Palaces Processus contra Templarios in France. Procès-verbaux de la procédure menée par la commission pontificale à Paris (1309–1311), ed. Magdalena Satora, 2 vols. (Later Medieval Europe 21). Leiden and Boston: Brill, 2020. Pp. xxvi, xi, 1314. ISBN 978 90 04 34397 9. This is a new edition of the Templar testimonies presented to the pontifical commission at Paris between 1309 and 1311, produced to modern editorial standards. It is based on both of the surviving manuscripts, Paris: Bibliothèque nationale MS Latin 11796, which formed the basis of Jules Michelet’s edition of 1841–51, and Vatican: ASV Armarium D 206, with reference to some additional information in Paris: Bibliothèque nationale Baluze 395. This edition at last resolves any remaining uncertainty over the status of the Vatican manuscript of these Templar testimonies, which was not available to Michelet in 1841–51. In 2015 Alain Demurger noted in his study La Persécution des Templiers (p. 357) that both the Paris and the Vatican manuscripts are original transcripts of the testimonies. With the assistance of funding from the National Science Centre of Poland, Dr. Magdalena Satora has now drawn the two versions of the testimonies together into a single critical edition for scholarly use. This is an edition only of the testimonies presented to the pontifical commission of 1309–11; it does not include new editions of the two other manuscripts which Michelet published to follow it (vol. 2 of Michelet’s edition, pp. 275–515): the interrogations at Paris in October 1307, and the inquisition at Mas-Deu in the diocese of Elne, which are not in Vatican ASV Arm. D 206. The edition and associated material are presented in two attractively produced volumes: volume 1 comprises an introduction to the edition and the edition itself with critical apparatus, while volume 2, which is essentially an appendix to the main work, comprises two annexes (the text of the oath taken by the Templars before giving their testimonies and a list of the Templars who gave evidence to the papal commission), a bibliography, and indices of persons, places and subjects. The introduction to volume 1 describes the manuscripts, explaining that the Vatican manuscript now lacks fifteen of its original ninety-six membranes, so that the testimonies given from 18 February 1311 to the first part of 19 March 1311 are lost. Some membranes have also suffered water damage, but the bulk of the manuscript is intact and legible. It provides no additional testimonies and does not change our understanding of the testimonies but does provide better readings of some names. Satora sets out the shortcomings of Michelet’s edition of the Paris pontifical proceedings: it is based on only one manuscript, there is no critical apparatus except

REVIEWS

289

for an index which does not cross-reference between entries for one individual with several cognomina, and there are many errors, some of which can only be corrected through a comparison of both manuscripts. She considers how far the information in the Templars’ testimonies can be used as evidence for the Templar Order, given that the testimonies were given under the fear of torture, and argues that the extensive details about the Templars’ lives in the order must be valuable to scholars. Yet this fails to acknowledge the crux of the problem. Given the circumstances of the interrogation – as analysed, for example, in the research by Sean Field and by Thomas Krämer cited here – we may question how much of the information given is an accurate picture of the actual activities of the order and how much was effectively invented by or for the inquisitors. Some of this material is true, and some is not – but we can never know which is which. Nevertheless, these testimonies allow us to see how a papal commission investigating heresy in the early fourteenth century went about its business and the problems it encountered, and give us information about the names and places of origin of many Templars. Like Michelet’s edition, the edition of the text is presented with the abbreviations silently resolved, but unlike his edition there are notes identifying non-Templars and Templars whose testimonies do not appear, and variant readings are noted throughout. Each day’s business in this new edition is cross-referenced to the corresponding section of Michelet’s edition and to any other edition in which it has been published. The date of each testimony is in the running headers, allowing readers to see immediately when each testimony was presented. This new edition is much more informative, attractive to the eye and easier to use than Michelet’s edition. But the main question that Templar scholars will want to ask is: how does the content of this edition differ from Michelet’s edition? The critical apparatus reveals that Michelet’s edition includes many small errors in the transcription of names and numbers. Many are minor differences, such as replacing “i” with “y,” but some are more significant. So, for example: Michelet read dictus where the manuscripts have des (p. 124), Suete where the manuscripts have Sivre (p. 134), divi for Doni or Dompni (p. 138), Gladio for Glodio (p. 139), Bernardus Castri for Bernardus Cast (p. 140), Gafel for Grisel (p. 140), Barbot for Barlot or Barlet (p. 142), Raynardi for Maynardi (p. 143), Sanctis for Seis and Porche for Perche (p. 153), Luier for Liner or Limer (p. 155), Verce for Vie (p. 156), Deysimonce for d’Eysmonte or D’Oysimont (p. 158), Landevilla for Londenvilla or Lodenvilla and Evrei for Cruci (p. 180), Vineis for Vivris or Vivres and Lavione for l’Amone or l’Eumone (p. 190), VIII for VIIII (p. 449), Laugonia for la Hugonia (p. 677), XXVII for XXVI (p. 921), and so on. Having the correct cognomen of each Templar and the correct number of years that he had been in the Order is obviously vital to those studying Templar prosopography and their family relations in wider society. The list of Templars and the index (in volume 2) enable readers to establish which individuals had several cognomina, so that (for example) we can now see that Brother Robert de Saint-Just was also called Robert de Beauvais or Robert de Pantaléon, locations where he had held office in the order: this was not clear in Michelet’s volumes.

290

REVIEWS

The list of Templars in annex 2 is not intended to duplicate Alain Demurger’s prosopographical catalogue Le Peuple Templier, 1307–1312 (2019), which also takes into account the corrected cognomina. Unlike Demurger’s catalogue it is in order of first name (overcoming the problem of some brothers having more than one cognomen) and lists only the Templars who gave testimony to the papal commission; so the list in annex 2 does not, for example, include Robert de SaintJust, whose testimony survives only in a summary of a copy sent to the inquisitors in England – although he is listed in the index. Scholars should bear in mind that neither list claims to be a complete list of French Templars. For example, the Templar soror at Payns, recorded with her serving maid in the accounts produced by the royal custodian of Payns commandery for 1307–9, was not arrested or interrogated, so avoids being listed in either. Nevertheless, combined with the index, the list in annex 2 is a useful tool which enables readers to find at a glance the key information about each Templar who gave evidence to the commission. These two volumes represent a substantial work of scholarship which will make this body of evidence much more accessible to scholars of the Templars. My own students will lament the lack of an English translation, but perhaps that could be a future project for them. Helen J. Nicholson Cardiff University Loïc Chollet, Les Sarrasins du Nord. Une histoire de la croisade balte par la littérature (xiie–xve siècles). Neuchâtel: Éditions Alphil-Presses universitaires suisses, 2019. Pp. 543. ISBN 978 2 88930 282 6. The study of late medieval crusade literature has recently experienced an unprecedented boost with Lee Manion’s Narrating the Crusades (2014), Stefan Vander Elst’s The Knight, the Cross, and the Song (2017) and Marsia Glavez’s The Subject of Crusade (2020). While these books are firmly couched in the discipline of literary studies, Loïc Chollet chose a distinctly historical approach in his Les Sarrasins du Nord. Unusually for a first book and the published version of a PhD thesis, Chollet’s study takes an almost encyclopaedic approach to the history of the Baltic crusades. His lead questions, as presented in the introduction, already point towards a comprehensive treatment (p. 36): (i) What did western European writers know about the Baltic world and the religious conflict developing there? (ii) How did they react to the conquests and missionary activities in these faraway lands? (iii) How did direct and indirect witnesses shape the emerging perceptions of the Baltic world in Western texts? (iv) To what extent have these perceptions influenced the representation of the eastern European frontier? Chollet investigates these questions on a vast chronological scale, beginning with the high medieval prehistory of the Baltic conquests of the twelfth century and finishing with the consolidation of the Ordensstaat in the course of the fifteenth. His main

290

REVIEWS

The list of Templars in annex 2 is not intended to duplicate Alain Demurger’s prosopographical catalogue Le Peuple Templier, 1307–1312 (2019), which also takes into account the corrected cognomina. Unlike Demurger’s catalogue it is in order of first name (overcoming the problem of some brothers having more than one cognomen) and lists only the Templars who gave testimony to the papal commission; so the list in annex 2 does not, for example, include Robert de SaintJust, whose testimony survives only in a summary of a copy sent to the inquisitors in England – although he is listed in the index. Scholars should bear in mind that neither list claims to be a complete list of French Templars. For example, the Templar soror at Payns, recorded with her serving maid in the accounts produced by the royal custodian of Payns commandery for 1307–9, was not arrested or interrogated, so avoids being listed in either. Nevertheless, combined with the index, the list in annex 2 is a useful tool which enables readers to find at a glance the key information about each Templar who gave evidence to the commission. These two volumes represent a substantial work of scholarship which will make this body of evidence much more accessible to scholars of the Templars. My own students will lament the lack of an English translation, but perhaps that could be a future project for them. Helen J. Nicholson Cardiff University Loïc Chollet, Les Sarrasins du Nord. Une histoire de la croisade balte par la littérature (xiie–xve siècles). Neuchâtel: Éditions Alphil-Presses universitaires suisses, 2019. Pp. 543. ISBN 978 2 88930 282 6. The study of late medieval crusade literature has recently experienced an unprecedented boost with Lee Manion’s Narrating the Crusades (2014), Stefan Vander Elst’s The Knight, the Cross, and the Song (2017) and Marsia Glavez’s The Subject of Crusade (2020). While these books are firmly couched in the discipline of literary studies, Loïc Chollet chose a distinctly historical approach in his Les Sarrasins du Nord. Unusually for a first book and the published version of a PhD thesis, Chollet’s study takes an almost encyclopaedic approach to the history of the Baltic crusades. His lead questions, as presented in the introduction, already point towards a comprehensive treatment (p. 36): (i) What did western European writers know about the Baltic world and the religious conflict developing there? (ii) How did they react to the conquests and missionary activities in these faraway lands? (iii) How did direct and indirect witnesses shape the emerging perceptions of the Baltic world in Western texts? (iv) To what extent have these perceptions influenced the representation of the eastern European frontier? Chollet investigates these questions on a vast chronological scale, beginning with the high medieval prehistory of the Baltic conquests of the twelfth century and finishing with the consolidation of the Ordensstaat in the course of the fifteenth. His main

REVIEWS

291

focus, however, lies on what he calls the “imaginaire de la croisade balte,” i.e. the representations and the mental pictures of the Baltic crusade in texts of the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries originating in the French and English kingdoms (p. 16f). The diverse medley of texts studied by Chollet includes letters, chronicles, lyrics and romances by authors such as Guillaume de Machaut, Jean de Mandeville, Geoffrey Chaucer, Philippe de Mézières, Jacques d’Esch, Hugues and Guillebert de Lannoy, Gilles de Bouvier, Antoine de la Sale, Jean d’Arras or Jean d’Outremeuse. The first two chapters serve as an introduction to the history of the Baltic crusade and to the main themes discussed in the remainder of the book. The expansion of Christian Europe along the Baltic Sea opened up discussions about conflicts between crusade and mission, conquest and integration, lay and ecclesiastical powers, and brought forth a kaleidoscope of images of the world beyond the Christian–pagan frontier. By the end of the thirteenth century, the world of the Baltic had already changed, having become a constituent element of the borderlands of Christian Europe, a land of opportunity for settlers and traders, of adventure and honour for mainly aristocratic crusaders, and of salvation and promise for all those implanting Christian culture in a non-Christian world. It is this mixture of mental, military and salvific challenges which attracted so many people to the Baltic in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries and caused many writers to comment on this exceptionally vibrant corner of late medieval Europe. In the ensuing six chapters, Chollet explores a number of topics through the lens of the aforementioned authors’ writings: the aristocratic world of the reyse, the problem of converting the pagans, the protracted conflict with the Lithuanians, the last crusading efforts in the Baltic, and the confrontations with foreign landscapes and pagan cultures. Through close reading of individual passages and by comparing them with the writings of other contemporary commentators, Chollet presents a fresh picture of the discourses which accompanied the activities in the Baltic and which shaped the perception of these activities elsewhere. For example, he points out the persistence of traditional images of the pagans, the alleged proximity and frequent comparison of other non-Christian opponents of Christianity (hence Les Sarrasins du Nord), the often moralizing undercurrents of Baltic tales as well as the at times overboard celebration of chivalric heroism. The main merit of Chollet’s book is re-telling the history of the Baltic crusades from the multi-perspectivity which his sources offer. There is little that is altogether new or entirely unexpected. But the reader comes away with a rich polyphonic experience, having discovered many new aspects of a well-known story. Chollet has done a great favour to historians by systematically calling upon literary texts to answer the kind of questions historical scholarship has developed about the Baltic crusades. His knowledge is impressive, not only as concerns the vast number of secondary studies in many different European languages which are cited in the footnotes. Chollet also has an admirable command of late medieval texts generally, including the ones outside the immediate focus of his investigation. All this contributes towards the rich, encyclopaedic character of his study. But

292

REVIEWS

one wonders whether, in his ambition to present a comprehensive picture within the received parameters of historical scholarship of the Baltic crusades, Chollet perhaps went a little too far at times. What is missing is an in-depth discussion of the character and intention of the texts Chollet principally relies on. This is not to say that historical studies using literary tests must delve into specialist discussions about genre, text construction and poetic structure. But it is at times worth taking into account characteristics of the text as a whole when interpreting individual passages. For assessing the value of individual texts as historical sources and for exploring their impact on the contemporary late medieval discourses, contextualizing the main source texts in their historical settings would have been helpful and informative. It is to be hoped that Sarrasins du Nord will act as a jumping board encouraging others to further explore the rich fruits which can be harvested for the study of the crusades by transcending traditional borders between academic disciplines. Chollet has done an excellent job in showing how much potential late medieval literary texts harbour for answering the kind of questions crusade historians are interested in. Christoph T. Maier University of Zurich Alexandra Kaar, Wirtschaft, Krieg und Seelenheil. Papst Martin V., Kaiser Sigismund und das Handelsverbot gegen die Hussiten in Böhmen, Vienna and Cologne: Böhlau Verlag, 2020. Pp. 387. ISBN 978 3 205 20940 9. The subject of this impressive monograph is the trade embargo which the Church imposed on the Hussites in conjunction with the series of crusades directed against them between 1420 and 1436. Kaar’s study is the first to examine the embargo and its consequences in detail, and she is so thorough in approach and sure-footed in judgement that I suspect her work will become definitive. She is strongly influenced by Stefan Stantchev’s recent monograph on the papal embargo on trade with the Muslims in the Mediterranean, Spiritual Rationality. Papal Embargo as Cultural Practice (Oxford, 2014), as well as by the views of Philippe Buc, her Vienna PhD supervisor, on symbolism, communication and the nature of medieval government. But crucial to the book’s success is Kaar’s mastery of the Czech and German sources, including those of many town archives: thirteen of these are listed in notes 323–24. Kaar views the embargo as possessing two distinct though interlocking goals. The first she describes as “instrumental,” that is weakening the Hussites by denying them any goods (not simply war material) imported from Catholic lands. The second, less straightforward, goal was the “symbolic-communicative process” of cutting the heretics off from contact with Catholics, primarily to prevent their toxic beliefs from spreading. Following two bulky chapters examining issues of historiography, methodology and background, the core of the book consists of two

292

REVIEWS

one wonders whether, in his ambition to present a comprehensive picture within the received parameters of historical scholarship of the Baltic crusades, Chollet perhaps went a little too far at times. What is missing is an in-depth discussion of the character and intention of the texts Chollet principally relies on. This is not to say that historical studies using literary tests must delve into specialist discussions about genre, text construction and poetic structure. But it is at times worth taking into account characteristics of the text as a whole when interpreting individual passages. For assessing the value of individual texts as historical sources and for exploring their impact on the contemporary late medieval discourses, contextualizing the main source texts in their historical settings would have been helpful and informative. It is to be hoped that Sarrasins du Nord will act as a jumping board encouraging others to further explore the rich fruits which can be harvested for the study of the crusades by transcending traditional borders between academic disciplines. Chollet has done an excellent job in showing how much potential late medieval literary texts harbour for answering the kind of questions crusade historians are interested in. Christoph T. Maier University of Zurich Alexandra Kaar, Wirtschaft, Krieg und Seelenheil. Papst Martin V., Kaiser Sigismund und das Handelsverbot gegen die Hussiten in Böhmen, Vienna and Cologne: Böhlau Verlag, 2020. Pp. 387. ISBN 978 3 205 20940 9. The subject of this impressive monograph is the trade embargo which the Church imposed on the Hussites in conjunction with the series of crusades directed against them between 1420 and 1436. Kaar’s study is the first to examine the embargo and its consequences in detail, and she is so thorough in approach and sure-footed in judgement that I suspect her work will become definitive. She is strongly influenced by Stefan Stantchev’s recent monograph on the papal embargo on trade with the Muslims in the Mediterranean, Spiritual Rationality. Papal Embargo as Cultural Practice (Oxford, 2014), as well as by the views of Philippe Buc, her Vienna PhD supervisor, on symbolism, communication and the nature of medieval government. But crucial to the book’s success is Kaar’s mastery of the Czech and German sources, including those of many town archives: thirteen of these are listed in notes 323–24. Kaar views the embargo as possessing two distinct though interlocking goals. The first she describes as “instrumental,” that is weakening the Hussites by denying them any goods (not simply war material) imported from Catholic lands. The second, less straightforward, goal was the “symbolic-communicative process” of cutting the heretics off from contact with Catholics, primarily to prevent their toxic beliefs from spreading. Following two bulky chapters examining issues of historiography, methodology and background, the core of the book consists of two

REVIEWS

293

chapters looking at each goal in turn. They are helpfully divided into sections and sub-sections and the argument, though dense, is never less than clear. On “instrumentality,” Kaar makes a very strong case for the ineffectiveness of the embargo. Bohemia was so dependent on imported salt that a rigorously enforced embargo had the potential to bring the country to its knees in months. But there are no more than a handful of instances that show the Hussites even suffering inconvenience, and on those occasions shortages might have resulted from factors other than the embargo, above all the insecure trading conditions. Most strikingly, the Hussites never lacked for military equipment. Sulphur and saltpetre, guns and rifles, entered Bohemia from Poland, Lusatia, and the south German cities, especially Nuremberg. There were many reasons why, in this sense at least, the embargo failed. Smuggling and evasion were rampant. From her work in town archives Kaar derives a series of engaging micro-studies about traders who were imprisoned by the authorities, on those occasions when the latter did not turn a blind eye. But a full embargo was impracticable in any case. Among Kaar’s useful maps is one of international trade routes (p. 48) which by itself affords a good idea of the massive restructuring that would have been necessary fully to isolate Bohemia. And within Bohemia there were many Catholic towns. They were exempt from the embargo, and their merchants were ideally placed to act as middlemen, forwarding goods to the Hussites in communities with which they had existing trade links. Kaar concludes that Prague’s position in international trade may have suffered a setback, and that Pilsen, Eger and Budweis appear to have benefited, while the staple exchange of grain for salt was “apparently all but unaffected.” That this failure was keenly felt by the authorities is clear from the efforts made by Sigismund and other crusade leaders to give the embargo a sharper cutting edge, but in a short chapter on the practice of lordship Kaar emphasizes that, throughout the embargo, its enforcement hinged on a process of give and take that was characteristic of late medieval government. The elites in towns like Nuremberg and Olomouc were past masters at promising much and delivering little; or, at least, delivering what suited their own needs. In a fine piece of analysis, Kaar shows that an impressively detailed decree about the embargo that Sigismund dispatched to Zittau in 1422 was almost certainly a response to a request from its town council, and gave them what they wanted in terms of their trading objectives. Such concessions reconciled towns like Zittau, Nuremberg and Olomouc to an embargo which, even though it was only partially implemented, still inflicted harm on their revenues. But Kaar stresses that instrumentality was only one goal, and no less important was the salvation of believers. Traders who ate and drank with condemned heretics were placing their souls in peril; as baptized Catholics they were aware of this and concerned by it. She warns against casting the continuation of trade throughout the war as “an idyllic atmosphere of religious tolerance.” It was accompanied by expulsion and killing on the part of both camps. The Hussite raids into neighbouring German lands created a siege mentality that made the job of crusade preachers

294

REVIEWS

easier and rendered it imperative for towns like Nuremberg and Olomouc to invest much energy into defending their reputations against charges of collaboration with the enemies of the faith. And rulers like Sigismund, Albrecht of Austria and Wladislaw II Jagiello, under fire for not responding forcefully enough to the Hussites, found it helpful to restate their commitment to the embargo. So, in both military and political terms, embargo became intertwined with crusade. At the end of her study Kaar quotes the judgement of Walter Brandmüller that the renewal of the embargo at the council of Pavia-Siena in 1423 was “nothing more than formulaic,” a measure of despair. This, she concludes with conviction, is to understate the importance of cultural practice and the sway it held in the self-image of elites, whether clerical or lay. Her book confirms the importance of moving away from a narrow focus on the effectiveness of embargos and studying them in conjunction with crusade as a way of defining, as well as defending, the Catholic community. Norman Housley University of Leicester

Society for the Study of the Crusades and the Latin East

(SSCLE) Bulletin No. 41, 2021

Contents i.

Editorial

298

ii.

Message from the President

299

iii.

Practical information

300

iv.

List of abbreviations

301

1.

Recent publications

302

2.

Recently completed theses

309

3.

Papers read by members of the Society and others

309

4.

Forthcoming publications

311

5.

Work in progress

317

6.

Theses in progress

319

7.

Fieldwork planned

8.

News of interest to members:

9.

or

undertaken recently

a) Conferences and seminars

319

b) Other news

319

c) Bernard Hamilton Essay Prize

321

Members' Members'queries queries

321

10. Financial statement 11.

319

Officers of the

Society

Guidelines for Submission of Papers

321

323 325

Society for the Study of the Crusades

Editorial

Society for the Study of the Crusades and the Latin help make the society's members, old and new, aware of each other's work and publications, fostering connections between them. The Bulletin provides a concise record of The main aim of the Bulletin of the East is to

the research carried out in different aspects of our field. This includes a wealth of themes, topics, approaches, and activities, in a variety of disciplines which collectively make up

history, literature, archaeology, art history, anthropology, law, theology, etc. forgetting, of course, more and more interdisciplinary research. The entries in the following pages are a testament to the strength and breadth of crusade studies across many countries and languages. As we are going through the second year of the pandemic, there are still numerous and manifold disruptions to our research, teaching, and academic events; but many of these challenges are now met with creative solutions, along with the hope that the worst might crusade studies:

–

without

be behind

we will soon be able to resume the full range of our activities. There has of workshops, seminars, conferences, etc. online, as necessity has given a further boost to the 'digital turn' in our field. Although the SSCLE Conference had to be

been

us

and

plethora

a

postponed

digital event promoting the research of doctoral students and Early place this summer, to be followed by our long-anticipated meeting in London in 2022. Furthermore, we are happy that we were able to overcome the delays of previous years so that the Crusades journal and the SSCLE Bulletin for 2021 can come out in a timely manner again. The rich contents of the present Bulletin prove that the output of the Society's members has been outstanding despite the difficulties. I would like to take this opportunity to remind you to submit your information for the Bulletin by sending the completed form with the once

more, a

Career Researchers took

relevant information to the SSCLE Treasurer(s) and/or the Bulletin Editor,

use our

prefer

website to sign

to

up

do).

and

renew your

even

when

memberships (which many of our members

I remind you that our main mailing list Group. If you are not already on it, please

now

you now

operates via the corresponding Google

sscle-mailinglist+subscribe@ googlegroups.com ) in order

interest from the SSCLE.

join (by sending

an

email to:

to make sure that you receive messages of

Many thanks to all of you for providing the core information that makes up the Bulletin, through the forms you submit. Please continue doing so, preferably in electronic format (MSWord, etc.), which makes the task of collating and transferring the information much easier. It is also greatly appreciated when you follow the format and style of references used in the Bulletin (please consult the latest volume when possible). I would also like to warmly thank Dr Danielle Park, who, for another year and in addition to her regular duties as SSCLE Treasurer, assisted in the preparation of the Bulletin. Alert readers with a good memory might have noticed that I'm writing yet another editorial, despite my 'promise' that the previous one would be the last! I am afraid I miscalulated both the timing of the postponed elections for the SSCLE Committee and the lengthy publication procedure. Nevertheless, a new committee was elected shortly before this Bulletin went to print. There is no harm, then, in repeating my thanks to all of you for

your collaboration over the past five years and my best wishes to my successor, Danielle Park, for every success in her new role.

Nikolaos G. Chrissis

Outgoing Bulletin Editor

Society for the Study

of the Crusades

Message from the President Dear Fellow Members, This is my final letter to you as president of the SSCLE. The election process is now well and will have been concluded, no doubt successfully, when you read these lines.

underway

writing to you the results are not yet in, but I am completely confident that newly elected president and committee our society will be in capable hands and can look forward to continued development and expansion in all its activities. It has been a great pleasure for me to be able to contribute to the society in my roles on the SSCLE committee for the past thirteen years, and most recently as its president. I would like to take this opportunity to thank all of those I have served alongside. The committee meetings and online discussions have always been congenial and always with the best interest of our society at the forefront. I take this opportunity to express my warm thanks to the members of the outgoing committee, some of whom will continue to serve in various capacities in the new committee Professor François-Olivier Touati who has fulfilled the role of secretary, and to whom I am personally grateful for suggesting that I take on the role I have fulfilled over the past few years, Professor Jonathan Phillips, the Postgraduate and Conference Secretary, who has undertaken the enormous task of organising and keeping our quadrennial conference on track in the impossible conditions of the past year, Dr Nikolaos Chrissis who took on the task of Bulletin Editor but in reality has fulfilled a much more substantial role, our very capable Treasurer, Dr Danielle Park who has kept us financially healthy, and our webmaster, Dr Kyle Lincoln who has revamped our webpage. I am deeply in debt to you all for your support and wish you and those members who will fulfil At the time of

under the

–

Coordinator

positions

on

the newly elected committee all the best.

emerge from the difficulties of the past year there is much to look forward to. I wish all our members continued health and productivity and I reiterate the statement in my As

we

previous capacity.

letter to you that I will

always

be

pleased

to

help

and support the SSCLE in any

With very best wishes, Adrian Boas

Outgoing President of the

SSCLE

Practical information Dr Simon Parsons is the Treasurer of the SSCLE. If you have any queries concerning your subscriptions and payments, please contact her at the following address: Dr Simon Parsons, 43 Wathen Road, Leamington Spa, CV32 5UY, UK; sscle123@ gmail.com The Bulletin Editor would like to remind you that, in order to avoid delays, he needs .

to have information for the Bulletin each year at an

early date, usually by May. Please,

conform the presentation of your information with the typographic model of this Bulletin. if possible Use the style of the last Bulletin in the presentation of your activities and –

–

publications. The best is to send them in attached document (via email), when you subscribe. The address of the Bulletin Editor is: Dr Danielle Park, Department of History, School of Humanities, Royal Holloway, University of London, Egham, Surrey, TW20 OEX, UK; danielle.park.2007@ alumni.rhul.ac.uk.

provide bibliographical data. In order to make the useful for you, it would be helpful if those members who edit proceedings or essay volumes could let the Bulletin Editor know not only about their own papers but also on the other papers in such volumes. You are encouraged to supply any information via email. Dr Kyle C. Lincoln is webmaster for the official website of the SSCLE (https://I want to thank all members who

Bulletin

more

societyforthestudyofthecrusadesandthelatineast.wildapricot.org/). There you will be able to news about the SSCLE and its publications as well as bibliographical data and other

find

information of interest to members.

Our journal entitled Crusades, now n° 20, 2021, allows the Society to publish articles and texts; encourages research in neglected subfields; invites a number of authors to deal with a specific problem within a comparative framework; initiates and reports on joint programmes; and offers reviews of books and articles. Editors: Benjamin Z. Kedar, Jonathan

Phillips

and Iris

Shagrir;

Associate Editor:

Nikolaos G. Chrissis; Reviews Editor: Torben Kjersgaard Nielsen; Archaeology Editor: Denys R. Pringle. Colleagues may submit papers for consideration to either Professor Jonathan

Phillips

or

Professor Iris

back of this booklet. The journal includes

a

Shagrir.

Information

on

the

style

sheet

can

be found in the

section of book reviews. In order to facilitate the Reviews Editor's

work, could members please ask their publishers to send copies to: Professor Torben Kjersgaard Nielsen, Reviews Editor, Crusades, Dpt. of Politics and Society, Aalborg University, Fibigerstraede 1, 02, 9220 Aalborg N, DENMARK; tkn@ dps.aau.dk. Please note that Crusades reviews books concerned with any aspect(s) of the history of the crusades and the crusade movement, the

military

orders and the Latin settlements in the Eastern

Mediterranean, but not books which fall outside this range. Current subscription fees are as follows: Membership and Bulletin of the Society: Single £10, $ 12 or €12; Student £6, $7 or €7; Joint membership £15, $19 or €18 (for two members sharing the same household); Membership and the journal Crusades, including the Bulletin: please add to your subscription fees: £25, $31 or €29 for a hard copy, OR £15, $19 or €18 for an electronic copy of the journal. If a member wishes to or

€41.

purchase back issues

of Crusades, each back issue costs £35, $43

The cost of the journal to institutions and non-members is £115, US$140. Cheques in these currencies should be made payable to SSCLE. For information

other forms of payment contact the treasurer.

Those members who do not subscribe to the Bulletin Editor.

journal

on

will receive the Bulletin from the

List of abbreviations Crusading and Archaeology Crusading and Archaeology. Some Archaeological Approaches to the Crusades, ed. Vardit R. ShottenHallel and Rosie Weetch, Crusades – Subsidia 14, London and New York, Routledge, 2021 [2020]. De la Bourgogne á l’Orient De la Bourgogne á l’Orient: Mélanges offerts à Monsieur le Doyen Jean Richard, ed. Jacques Meissonnier, Mémoires de l’Académie des sciences, arts et belles-lettres de Dijon 148, Dijon, Académie des sciences, arts et belles-lettres de Dijon, 2020. ICMS (following the year) International Congress on Medieval Studies, Kalamazoo, USA. IMC (following the year) International Medieval Congress, Leeds, UK. MO7 The Military Orders, Volume VII: Piety, Pugnacity and Property, ed. Nicholas Morton, London and New York, Routledge, 2019. Remembering the Crusades Remembering the Crusades in Medieval Texts and Songs, ed. Andrew D. Buck and Thomas W. Smith, Cardiff, The University of Wales Press, 2019 [= special issue of The Journal of Religious History, Literature and Cultures 5:2 (2019)]. SSCLE 9 Odense Diversity of Crusading, Ninth Quadrennial Conference of the SSCLE, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark, 27 June–1 July 2016. Templars, Hospitallers and Crusades The Templars, the Hospitallers and the Essays in Homage to Alan J. Forey, ed. Helen Nicholson and Jochen Burgtorf, London and New York, Routledge, 2020.

Crusades.

publications

1. Recent

BALLETTO Laura ,

"

Ianuensis

non

" ,

Brevi note

su

Antonio Pallavicino,

vescovo

di Chio (1450-1470) ", in 141 162

nascitur sed fit". Studi per Dino Puncuh , Genova 2019 , I , pp.

-

(Quaderni della Società Ligure di Storia Patria, 7); "Geo Pistarino (1917-2018) a cent'anni dalla nascita e a dieci anni dalla morte. La valorizzazione del territorio alessandrinomonferriono

negli studi e nell'attività di promotore culturale di Geo Pistarino", in Rivista di archeologiaper le province di Alessandria eAsti 127 (2018), pp. 3-21; "Geronimo di Ventimiglia: da notaio palatino a membro del Collegio notarile genovese", in Intemelion. Cultura e territorio 25-26 (2019-2020), pp. 5-51; (per Appendice documentaria: http://www.intemelion.it/testi/geronimo.pdf); "Un medico genovese tra Famagosta e Chio nel storia arte

secondo Quattrocento: Barnaba Treinazio", inAtti della Società Ligure di Storia Patria, serie 60 [134] (2020), pp. 69-126.

nuova

Buck , Andrew, (ed. with T.W. Smith ), Remembering the Crusades in Medieval Texts and Songs ( Cardiff : The University of Wales Press , 2019 ) (160 pages); 'William of Tyre,

Femininity,

and the Problem of the Antiochene Princesses', Journal

History 70:4 (2019), 731-49; '"Weighed by such

of Ecclesiastical

great calamity, they were cleansed for their sins" Remembering the Siege and Capture of Antioch', The Journal of Religious History, Literature and Cultures 5:2 (2019), 1-16 (16 pp.). Published simultaneously in Remembering the Crusades; 'Castles and the Frontier: Theorising the Borders of the a

Principality of Antioch in the Twelfth Century", Viator 50:2 (2021 for 2019), 79-108 (30pp.); 'Women in the Principality of Antioch: Power, Status, and Social Agency", Haskins Society Journal 31 (2020 for 2019), 95-132 (38 pp.); 'Settlement, Identity, and Memory in the Latin East: An Examination of the Term "Crusader States"', English Historical Review 135:573 (2020), 271-302; 'A True History of Deeds Done beyond the Sea? William of Tyre and the Principality of Antioch', in P. Coss, C. Dennis, M. Julian-Jones, and A. Silvestri (eds.), Episcopal Power and Personality in Medieval Europe, 900-1480 (Turnhout: Brepols, 2020), pp. 245-63; 'The Military Orders and the Principality of Antioch: A Help or a Hindrance?', in MO7, pp. 285-95.

BORCHARDT, Karl , Documents

Concerning

Central

Europe from

the

Hospital's

Rhodian

Archives, 1314-1428 The Military Religious Orders (London-New York Routledge 2021 ), xxxii + 455 pp.; "Die Johanniterkommende Posen auf dem Konstanzer Konzil 1417", in Studies on the Military Orders, Prussia, and Urban history. Essays in Honour of Roman Czaja on the Occasion of His Sixtieth Birthday, Beiträge zur Ritterordens-, Preußen- und ,

,

,

Städteforschung. Festschriftfür Roman Czaja zum 60. Geburtstag, edited by/herausgegeben Jürgen Sarnowsky, Krzysztof Kwiatkowski, Hubert Houben, László Pósán, Attila Bárány (Debrecen, Hungary in Medieval Europe Research Group, 2020), pp. 145-159; "Die Erhebungen zum Reichsfürsten für den Deutschmeister 1494 und für den Johannitermeister 1548", in Von Hamburg nach Java. Studien zur mittelalterlichen, neuen und digitalen Geschichte.Festschrift zu Ehren von Jürgen Sarnowsky, hg. Jochen Burgtorf, Christian Hoffahrt und Sebastian Kubon, Nova Mediaevalia. Quellen und Studien zum europäischen Mittelalter 18 (Göttingen, V&R Unipress, 2020), pp. 427-442; "Der Johanniter Heinrich von Castell (1312-1348). Notizen zur Prosopographie geistlicher Ritterorden", in Pro pana profesora Libora Jana k životnímu jubileu, hg. Bronislav Chocholáč, JiříMalíř, Lukáš Reitinger, Martin Wihoda (Brno, Matice moravská, 2020), pp. 609-619; "Die Monumenta Germaniae Historica und die Kreuzzüge", in Quellenforschung im 21. Jahrhundert. Vorträge der Veranstaltungen zum 200-jährigen Bestehen der MGH vom 27. bis 29. Juni 2019, hgg. von

Martina Hartmann und Horst Zimmerhackl unter Mitarbeit Monumenta Germaniae Historica Schriften 75 (Wiesbaden,

von

Anna Claudia Nierhoff, 91-101.

Harassowitz, 2020), pp.

Hospitaller agricultural activities in the Latin East Templars, Hospitallers and Crusades pp. 94 101 ; (with Elisabeth Yehuda and Edna J. Stern ) "Viticulture in the Latin Kingdom of Jerusalem in the Light of Historical and Archaeological Evidence", Journal ofMediterranean Archaeology 33.1 (2020): 55-78; "The Carmel of Prosper of the Holy Spirit, reports and letters, 16311653", Cathedra 176 (2021): 25-48 [in Hebrew]. CHRISSIS Nikolaos G. Western aggression and Greco-Latin interaction: A view from Greece ", in F. Hinz and J. Meyer-Hamme (eds.), Controversial Histories: Current Views on the Crusades (London and New York : Routledge 2020 [2021 ]), pp. 42 44 ; "Broken brotherhood: Schism and Crusades in Greek-Latin Relations", in N. Giantsi and S. Flogaitis (eds.), The Presence and Contribution of the (Eastern) Roman Empire in the Formation of Europe (Athens: EPLO, 2019), pp. 115-150; [Review of:] Norman Housley (ed.), Knighthoods of Christ: Essays on the History of the Crusades and the Knights Templar, Presented to Malcolm Barber (London and New York: Routledge; first published 2007; republished as e-book, 2017), in Byzantina Symmeikta 30 (2020), pp. 431-444 [in Greek]. CHRIST Georg Weights, Measures, Monies: Venetian Trade in Mamluk Alexandria within an Imperial Framework ", in Merchants, Measures and Money Understanding Technologies ofEarly Trade in a Comparative Perspective ed. by Lorenz Rahmstorf Gojko Barjamovic and Nicola Ialongo Weight and Value 2 (Kiel : Wachholtz 2021 ), pp. 207 223 ; "The Sultans and the Sea: Mamluk Coastal Defence, Dormant Navy and Delegation of Maritime Policing (14th and Early 15th Centuries)", in The Mamluk Sultanate from the Perspective ofRegional and World History: Economic, Social and Cultural Development in an Era of Increasing International Interaction and Competition, ed. by Stephan Conermann and Reuven Amitai, Mamluk Studies 17 (Göttingen: V&R unipress, Bonn University Press, 2019), pp. 215-256; (ed. with Franz-Julius Morche), Cultures ofEmpire: Rethinking Venetian Rule 1400-1700. Essays in Honour of Benjamin Arbel, The Medieval Mediterranean 122 (Leiden: Brill, 2020); (with Franz-Julius Morche), "Introduction", in Cultures of Empire, pp. 1-38; "Settling Accounts with the Sultan: Cortesia, Zemechia and Venetian Fiscality in Fifteenth-Century Alexandria", in Trajectories ofState Formation across Fifteenth-Century Islamic West-Asia: Eurasian Parallels, Connections and Divergences, ed. by Jo van Steenbergen, Rulers & Elites 18 (Leiden: Brill, 2020), pp. 319-351, open access https://doi-org.manchester.idm.oclc.org/10.1163/9789004431317_012 accessed 03/07/2020 15:19:45; (ed. with Philipp Robinson Roessner), History and Economic Life: A Student's Guide to Approaching Economic and Social History Sources, Routledge Guides to Using Historical Sources (London: Routledge, 2020); "4. How to Read Economic History Sources Qualitatively – Source Analysis", in History and Economic Life, pp. 103-123; "5. Origins of Capitalism I: Transcultural Trade or Pepper Travelling from India to England", in History and Economic Life, pp. 127-140; (with Nuno Palma, Edmond Smith, and Aashish Velkar), "3. How to read economic history sources quantitatively", in History and Economic Life, pp. 81-102; (with Roberto Zaugg et al.) "Italien in der Globalgeschichte: Ein Forum – L'italia nella storia globale. Un forum", SZG/RSH/RSS 70, no. 2 (2020): 237-282. CHRISTIE Niall Muslims and Crusaders: Christianity's Wars in the Middle East, 1095-1382, from the Islamic Sources 2nd Ed., Seminar Studies in History (Abingdon : Routledge 2020 ; BRONSTEIN, Judith

"

,

Some observations

on

prior to the fall of Acre in 1291 ". in

-

,

"

,

,

-

,

"

,

,

,

,

,

,

-

,

,

,

,

,

lxv + 242 pages).

DRAGNEA , Mihai ,

(ed. with Annemarie Sorescu-Marinković

,

Thede Kahl ,

Blagovest

Njagulov, Donald L. Dyer, and Angelo Costanzo ) The Romance-Speaking Balkans Language and the Politics of Identity (Leiden : Brill , 2021 ), 260 pp; Christian Identity Formation Across the Elbe in the Tenth and Eleventh Centuries (Peter Lang: New York, 2021), 122

pp; The Wendish Crusade, 1147: The

Development of Crusading Ideology

in the

Twelfth

Century (London: Routledge, 2019), 76 pp; "Crusade and Colonization in the Wendish Territories in the Early Twelfth Century: An Analysis of the So-called Magdeburg Letter of 1108". Mediaevalia 42 (2021): 41-61; "The Cult of St. Olaf in the Latin and Greek Churches

Between the Eleventh and Twelfth Centuries", Hiperboreea, 7/2 (2020): 145-167; "Verbal and Non-Verbal Communication Between Germans and Wends in the Second Half of the

Century", Journal of the Institute ofLatvian History, 2/110 (2019): 5-33; "The Saxon expeditions against the Wends and the foundation of Magdeburg during Otto I's reign", The Romanian Journal for Baltic and Nordic Studies, 11/2 (2019): 7-34. Dźwigala Bartłomiej Constantine, Helena and Heraclius in the Latin Kingdom Jerusalem", Journal of Ecclesiastical History 72 / 1 ( 2021 ), 18 35 ; "The Discovery of the True Cross in Jerusalem in 1099: Evidence and Reconsideration", Przegląd Historyczny [Historical Tenth

"

,

,

-

Review] 110/1 (2020), 25-40.

Famagusta and the Lusignan Kingdom of Cyprus, 1192-1374 in Gilles Grivaud Angel Nicolaou-Konnari and Chris Schabel (eds), Famagusta 2: History and Society (Brepols : Turnhout 2020 ), pp. 19 33 ; 'Une version génoise de l'histoire chypriote (v. 1250-1320): le Codex Cocharelli", in De la Bourgogne à l'Orient, pp. 547-55. EDBURY, Peter

'

'

.

,

-

,

EDGINGTON , Susan B.

Capture of Acre, 1104, and Baldwin I's Conquest of the Littoral ', City ed. John France (Leiden : Brill 2018 ), 13 29 ; 'A Rough Guide to the Holy Land: Pilgrims' Use of the Mount Zion Library in the Fifteenth Century', in Communicating the Middle Ages: Essays in Honour of Sophia Menache, ed. Iris Shagrir, Benjamin Kedar, Michel Balard (Abingdon: Routledge, 2018), 157-168; Baldwin I ofJerusalem, 1100-1118 (Abingdon: Routledge, 2019), xvi+204 pp.; 'Emasculating the Enemy: Wicher the Swabian's fight with the Saracen Giant", in Crusade and Masculinities, ed. Natasha Hodgson, Katherine Lewis, Matthew Mesley (Abingdon: Routledge, 2019), 165-182; Baldric of Bourgueil, 'History of the Jerusalemites': A Translation of the Historia Ierosolimitana, with intro. by Steven Biddlecombe (Woodbridge: Boydell, 2020), xiv+210 pp. FOLDA Jaroslav Crusader Sculpture at Nazareth: Some Reconsiderations ," in The Basilica of the Annunciation in Nazareth: Where the Word Became Flesh eds. Einat Segal Assaf Pinkus and Gil Fishhof Berlin/Boston : De Gruyter 2020 pp. 17 37 ; "Crusader Gothic: Artistic Imitation, Interactions, and Transfer," in Transferts Culturels/Cultural Transfers: '

,

The

in Acre and its Falls: Studies in the History ofa Crusader

,

,

-

"

,

,

,

,

,

France et Orient Latin

Ingrand-Varenne,

,

aux XIIe

Paris:

-

,

et XIIIe

Siecles, eds. Martin Aurell, Marissa Galvez, Estelle Classiques Garmier, 2021, pp. 23-60.

('Byzantium and Constantinopoli, Capitula Bizanţului, Romanian translation of Constantinople: Capital of Byzantium by Miliai Moroiu (Bucharest: Baroque Books and Arts, 2020); Konstantinopolis: Bizans 'ın Başkenti, Turkish translation of Constantinople: Capital of Byzantium by Tevabil Alkaç HARRIS, Jonathan, 'Bizancio y los Estados latinos de Oriente, 1148-1187" the Latin East, 1148-1187') Desperta Ferro 58 (March , 2020 ), 12 17 ; -

,

(Istanbul: Alfa, 2020).

HESLOP Michael , Villehardouin's castle of Grand '

,

Magne (Megali Maini):

a

re-assessment

of the evidence for its location ," in: Crusading and Archaeology pp. 183 244 ; 'Prelude to a Gazetteer of Place-Names in the Countryside of Rhodes 1306-1423: Evidence from -

,

Unpublished Documents", Crusades 18 (2019), pp. 165-192; 'A Gazetteer of place-names in the countryside of Rhodes 1306-1423' in Medieval Greece; Encounters between Latins, Greeks and Others in the Dodecanese and the Mani (Abingdon: Routledge, 2020), pp.

286-331; Medieval Greece: Encounters between Latins, Greeks and Others in the Dodecanese (Abingdon: Routledge, 2020), pp. xix + 347.

and the Mani

HINZ Felix (ed. with Meyer-Hamme , Johannes ), Controversial Histories. Current Views on the Crusades (Engaging the Crusades, vol. 3 ), London / New York : Routledge 2020 , 140 ,

,

pages.

Canterbury and Jerusalem, England and the Holy Land, c. publ. 2019 ): 153 172 HOSTEN J. De Tempeliers in de Lage Landen Horizon : Antwerpen 2020 523 p. Jaspert Nikolas Movilidad y religiosidad medieval en los reinos peninsulares, Alemania y HODGES-KLUCK Katherine, L. , 1150-1220 ," Viator 49 1 ( 2018

"

,

.

-

,

,

.

,

,

,

,

,

Granada : Editorial Universidad de Granada 2020 , 368 pages; Die Reconquista. Christen und Muslime auf der Iberischen Halbinsel (711-1492), München: C.H. Beck 2019, 128 pages; Objetos jerosolimitanos actantes transmediterráneos i transculturales, in: Imago

Palestina

,

–

& mirabilia. Les formes del prodigi

a la Mediterrània medieval / The Ways of Wonder in the Medieval Mediterranean / Las formas del prodigio en el Mediterraneo medieval, ed. by

Anna Orriols, Jordi Cerdà, Joan Duran-Porta, Bellaterra 2020, p. 215-236; Los canónigos regulares y la "tras-locación" de lugares santos en la sociedad medieval, in: Œuvrer pour le

saint. Moines, chanoines etfrères dans la péninsule Ibérique au Mayen Âge, ed. by Amélie de las Heras, Florian Gallon, and Nicolas Pluchot (Collection de la Casa de Velázquez, 176)

Madrid 2019, p. 141-154; The Crown of Aragon and the Mamluk Sultanate: Entanglements of Mediterranean Politics and Piety, in: The Mamluk Sultanate from the Perspective of Regional and World History. Economic, Social and Cultural Development in an Era of International Interaction and

Increasing

Competition,

ed.

by Reuven Amitai

and

Stephan

Conermann (Mamluk Studies 17), Göttingen 2019, p. 309-344; Kreuzzüge und adlige Kreuzzugsvorstellungen zur Zeit Markgraf Bernhards von Baden, in: Ritter – Landespatron –

Jugendidol. Markgraf Bernhard

II.

von

Baden, ed. by Martin Stingl and Wolfgang

Zimmermann, Karlsruhe 2019, p. 10-28; Mobility, Mediation and Transculturation in the Medieval Mediterranean: Migrating Mercenaries and the Challenges of Mixing, in:

Engaging Transculturality: Concepts, Key Terms,

Case Studies, ed.

by

Laila Abu-Er-Rub,

Christiane Brosius, Sebastian Meurer, Diamantis Panagiotopoulos, and Susan Richter, Abingdon-New York 2019, p. 136-152; El testament d'Alfons I d'Aragó i les negociacions

eclesiàstiques del regne llatí de Jerusalem, in: Tractats i negociacions els regnes peninsulars i l'Ándalus (segle XI-1213), ed. by Maria Teresa Ferrer i Mallol and Manuel Riu i Riu (Memòries de la Secció Històrico-Arqueològica 106), amb les institucions

diplomàtiques

en

Barcelona 2018, p. 9-18; Crusade, Reconquest and the Muslims: The Islamic World at the Fourth Lateran Council, in: The Fourth Lateran Council. Institutional Reform and Spiritual

Renewal, ed. by Gert Melville and Johannes Helmrath,Affalterbach 2018, p. 255-272. KANGAS Sini , ,

In

"

The Image of Warrior Bishops in the Northern Tradition of the Crusades ". War in Medieval East, Central Europe and Scandinavia ed. Radoslaw

Christianity and

,

Kotecki , Carsten Selch Jensen and

Stephen

Bennett Amsterdam .

University

Press 2021 ,

57 73 ; "Biblical Allusions as Markers of Social Hierarchy in the Twelfth- and ThirteenthCentury Sources of the Crusades". In Transcultural Approaches to the Bible: Exegesis and -

Historical

Writing

Worlds, ed. Matthias M. Tischler ja Patrick Marschner.

in the Medieval

Transcultural Medieval Studies 2, Brepols 2021, 92-118. Kedar ,

Benjamin Z. (with Trovato ,

Jerosolimitane," Storie

Paolo ): "New

,

Perspectives on Tractatus de

locis et statu

Linguaggi 4 2 (2018 ), 1 32 ; "Le miracle du Feu sacré à Jérusalem: des origines a la suppression papale," in De la Bourgogne à l'Orient, 519-529; sancte terre

e

.

-

"Revisiting the Strange Genesis of a Technique: Radiocarbon Dating of Frankish Mortar," in Crusading and Archaeology, 37-47. KRAHENBUHL Kevin S. Teaching for the pursuit of truth in a post-truth world ', The Clearing House: A Journal of Educational Strategies, Issues, and Ideas 94 1 (2021 ): 31 37 ; 'In class discussions, slow and steady wins'. Educational leadership 77.7 (April 2020), 28-32; 'The problem with the expanding horizons model for history curricula', Phi Delta Kappan 100.6 (February 2019): 20-26. (Acceptance Rate: 10%) (Available online at https://www.kappanonline.org/problem-expanding-horizons-model-history-curricula-krahenbuhl/) LOUD Graham Pergamene scelte della badia di Cava, 1097-1200 ( Centra europeo di studi normanni Ariano Irpino 2021 ), 404 pp. Transforming the Early Medieval World: Studies in Honour of Ian N. Wood. Ed. by N. Kıvılcım Yavuz and Richard Broome (Leeds: Kısmet Press, 2016) Transforming the Early Medieval World: Studies in Honour of Ian N. Wood. Ed. by N. Kıvılcım Yavuz and Richard Broome (Leeds: Kısmet Press, 201; 'The nobility of Norman Italy, c. 1085-1127', in The Normans in the Mediterranean. Comparative Studies in the Process of Conquest,ed. Emily A. Winkler and Liam Fitzgerald, with Andrew Small (Brepols 2021), pp. 139-161; 'The posthumous reputation of Abbot Peter of Cava', in Medioevo mediterraneo: incontri, scambi e confronti. Studi in onore di Salvatore Fodale, ed. Patrizia Sardina, Daniela Santoro, Maria Antonetta Russo and Marcello Pacifico (University '

,

,

-

.

,

,

,

,

of Palermo 2021), pp. 421-435.

MITCHELL , Piers D "

,

(with S. Sabin H.-Y. Yeh A.G. Pluskowski C. Clamer and K. Bos ) ,

Estimating molecular preservation of the

,

,

metagenomic analyses sediments from two medieval cities ," Philosophical Transactions of the Royal 375 (2020 ) 20190576. Investigates the population of medieval Riga during the

of latrine

Society

,

B

intestinal microbiome via

Baltic crusades.

MARX , Alexander,' Constructing and

denying the enemy: Cistercian approaches to preaching the Third Crusade (1187-92) in: Citeaux-Commentarii cistercienses 70 ( 2019 ), pp. 47 69 '

-

.

Die Lage der Muslime unter christlicher Herrschaft ," in: Deutsches Erforschung des Mittelalters 76 (2020 ), 177 183 ; "Traditions and Expectations

MÖHRING , Hannes , Archiv für

"

-

in the Medieval Western Christian World," in: Prognostication in the Medieval World. A Handbook, eds. M. Heiduk, K. Herbers and H.- Chr. Lehner, Vol. 1, Berlin/Boston 2021, 269-283. MORTON Nicholas , (author) The Crusader States and their neighbours: a military history, 1099—1187 ( Oxford University Press , 2020 ); (editor), The Military Orders VII: Piety, ,

Pugnacity and Property (Routledge, 2019); 'The Crusades to the Eastern Mediterranean, 1095-1291', Christian—Muslim Relations: Volume 15, thematic essays (Brill, 2020), 281306; 'Risking battle: the Antiochene frontier, 1100—1164', Cahiers de Recherches médiévales et humanistes, 37 (2019), 189-210. MUSSARA Antonio , Francesco, i Minori e la Terrasanta Monsagrati (LU), La Vela, 2002 («Peregrinantes ill mundo», 2), pp. 385 ; Il grande racconto delle crociate (con Franco ,

,

Cardini), Bologna, il Mulino, 2019, pp. 522; Gli Italiani e le crociate, Roma, Istituto per l'Oriente "C.A. Nallino", 2019 (Collana didattica, 6), pp. 192; Cultures and Practices of Coexistence from the Thirteenth

Through

the Seventeenth Centuries. Multi-Ethnic Cities in

the Mediterranean World, Volume 1, edited by M Folin and A. Musarra, New York-London, Routledge, 2021; "Nuove spigolature genovesi. Quattro docmnenti sul mancato ritorno

του Kέντρου Eπιστημονικών a Cipro di Giacomo I di Lusignano (1383)", in Eπετηρíδα Eρευνών [Cyprus Research Centre Annual Review] 39 (2019), pp. 191-216; "The

Role of

Famagusta in Genoese Maritime Routes between the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Centuries",

in Famagusta Maritima: Mariners, Merchants, Pilgrims and Mercenaries, International Conference (Padova, 21 novembre 2017), ed. M.J.K. Walsh, Leiden, Brill, 2019 (Brill's

Studies in Maritime History, 7), pp. 130-143; Review of Michel Balard, Laura Balletto, and Catherine Otten-Froux, Genes et l'Outre-mer: Actes notariés rédigés à Chypre par le notaire "Antonius Folieta" (1445-1458) (Sources et Études de l'Histoire de Chypre 75),

Nicosia, Centre de recherche scientifique de Chypre, 2016, pp. 586. in Speculum 94/4 (2019), pp. 1117-1119; Review of Miikka Tamminen, Crusade Preaching and the Ideal Crusader, Turnhout, Brepols, 2018, in Cahiers de civilisation médiévale 62 (247/3) (2019), pp. 319-321.

NICHOLSON , Helen,

Peregrinorum

The Construction of

'

Primary

a

Source. The Creation of Itinerarium

1 ', Cahiers de recherches médiévales et humanistes / Journal ofMedieval and

Humanistic Studies, 37 (2019 ), 143 65 ; 'The Surveys and Accounts of the Templars' estates in England and Wales (1308-13)', in Crusading Europe: Essays in Honour of Christopher -

Tyerman,

ed. G. E. M.

Lippiatt and Jessalynn L. Bird,

Outremer: Studies in the Crusades

and the Latin East, 8 (Turnhout: Brepols, 2019), pp. 181-209; 'The Military Orders', in A Companion to Chivalry, ed. Robert Jones and Peter Coss (Woodbridge: Boydell Press,

2019), pp. 69-84; 'Defending Jerusalem: Sybil of Jerusalem as a military leader', Medieval Warfare Magazine, 9.4 (Oct/Nov 2019), 6-13; 'Introduction' in MO7, pp. 1-4; 'Negotiation

Templars'

and conflict: the

Hospitallers'

and

relations with diocesan

bishops

in Britain and

Ireland', in Authority and Power in the Medieval Church c. 1000-1500, ed. Thomas W. Smith, Europa Sacra 24 (Turnhout: Brepols, 2020), pp. 371-389; (ed. with Jochen Burgtorf) The Templars, the Hospitallers and the Crusades: Essays in Homage to Alan J. Forey, The

Military Religious Orders: History, Sources, and Memory 2 (Abingdon: Routledge, 2020); 'What the Hospitaller said to the Bishop', in Templars, Hospitallers and Crusades, pp. 21526; 'Queen Sybil of Jerusalem as a military leader", in Von Hamburg nach Java. Studien zur mittelalterlichen, neuen und digitalen Geschichte zu Ehren von Jürgen Sarnowsky, ed. Jochen Burgtorf, Christian Hoffart and Sebastian Kubon (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2020), pp. 265-76; 'The Hospitallers in Medieval Britain", in Studies on the Military Orders, Prussia, and Urban History: Essays in Honour of Roman Czaja on the Occasion of His Sixtieth Birthday / Beiträge zur Ritterordens-, Preußen- und Städteforschung. Festschriftfür Roman Czaja zum 60. Geburtstag, ed. Jürgen Sarnowsky, Krzysztof Kwiatkowski, Hubert Houben, László Pósán and Attila Bárány (Debrecen: University of Debrecen, 2020), pp. 41-55.

PARK, Danielle ,

'

Wax

Kings

and

Apron Strings:

The

Gendering

of

King

Baldwin III and

Queen Melisende and the 1152 Civil War ", in Gewalt, Krieg und Gender im Mittelalter ed. A. Fößel (Peter Lang 2020 ), 215 236 (Open Access). ,

-

,

PATTERSON , Linda From 'Chanson de geste' to Epic Chronicle. Medieval Occitan Poetry of War , by Gérard Gouiran, translated from the original French and edited by Linda M. ,

Paterson ,

Routledge : Variorum Collected Studies, Abingdon and

New York, 2020 , 236 pp.

PRINGLE , R. Denys , La Description de la Terre Sainte de Belardo d'Ascoli (vers 1165-87) ", in De la Bourgogne à l'Orient pp. 465 75 ISBN: 978-2-9573638-0-3 ; "Itineraria Terrae "

-

,

.

Sanctae Minora II: Innominati II-V and VIII", Crusades 19 (2020), 57-108. ISBN: 9780-368-63273-1 (lib), 978-1-003-11859-6 (ebk); "Scandinavian Pilgrims and the Churches

Holy Land in the Twelfth and Thirteenth Centuries", in Tracing the Jerusalem Code, The Holy City, Christian Cultures in Medieval Scandinavia (ca. 1100-1536), ed. Kristin B. Aavitsland and Line M. Bonde (De Gruyter: Berlin, 2021), pp. 198-217. ISBN: 978-3-11-063485-3 (hb), 978-3-11-063943-8 (pdf), 978-3-11-063627-7 (epub). DOI: 10.1515/9783110639438-012. Open access; "The Fortifications of Edessa in Medieval Latin of the

vol.

I:

Sources". in From Edessa to Urfa: The

(Oxford: Archaeopress, (e-Pdf). Ricerche

Tonghini

"

,

2021

,

ed. Cristina

Sergio La casa dei Templari ad Anagni in Atti del XXXVIII Convegno di Templari ", a cura della L.A.R.T.I., Convegno virtuale 2020, Tuscania : Penne e

SAMMARCO

Papiri

Fortification of the Citadel,

2021), pp. 50-56. ISBN 978-1-78969-756-8; 978-1-78969-757-5 ,

,

.

SCHABEL , Chris , (with G. Grivaud and A. Nicolaou-Konnari ) Famagusta: Volume II. History and Society, Turnhout : Brepols , 2020 (= Mediterranean Nexus 8); "The Church of

Famagusta,"

in G. Grivaud, A. Nicolaou-Konnari, and C. Schabel, eds., Famagusta. Volume

II: History and Society, Turnhout: Brepols, 2020, pp. 297-362; "Géraud de Veyrines, Bishop of Paphos, and the Defense of the Kingdom of Armenia in the 1320s," Perspectives on Culture

3 (30) (2020), pp. 81-103; (with A.C. Dincă) "The Cistercian Mission in Transylvania," Frankokratia 2 (2021), pp. 1-32; (with G. Saint-Guillain) "Discovering a Hospitaller Order in Frankish Greece: The Order of St James in the Principality of Achaia," Frankokratia 2

(2021), 63-108.

SIBERRY, Elizabeth , Tales ofthe Crusaders: Remembering the Crusades in Britain (Routledge : , 2021 ), 127pp.; 'Saint Louis: A Crusader king and saint for Victorian and First

Abingdon

Making of Crusade Heroes and Villains eds. M. (Routledge: Abingdon, 2021), pp. 95-112. SMITH Thomas W., (ed.) Authority and Power in the Medieval Church, c.1000-c.1500 (Turnhout : Brepols 2020 ), 409 pp.; (ed. with Andrew D. Buck) Remembering the Crusades in Medieval Texts and Songs (Cardiff: University of Wales Press, 2019), xii + 119pp; "First Crusade Letters and Medieval Monastic Scribal Cultures", Journal ofEcclesiastical History

World War Britain and Ireland', in The Horswell and K. Skottki ,

,

71 (2020), 484-501; "Audita tremendi and the Call for the Third Crusade Reconsidered, 1187-1188", Viator 49.3 (2020 for 2018), 63-101; "Framing the Narrative of the First Crusade: The Letter

given

at Laodicea in

September 1099",

Journal

of Religious History,

Literature and Culture 5 (2019), 17-33; "How to Craft a Crusade Call: Pope Innocent III and Quia maior (1213)", Historical Research 92 (2019), 2-23; "The Dynamism of a

Encyclical: Pope Honorius III and lustus Dominus (1223)", Deutsches Archiv für Erforschung des Mittelalters 74 (2018), 111-42; "The Interface between Papal Authority and Heresy: The Legates of Honorius III in Languedoc, 1216-1227", in Authority and Power in the Medieval Church, c.1000-c.1500, ed. T.W. Smith (Turnhout: Brepols, 2020), Crusade

pp. 135-44; "Conciliar Influence on Ad liberandam", in The Fourth Lateran Council and the Crusade Movement: The Impact of the Council of 1215 on Latin Christendom and the

East, ed. J.L. Bird and D.J. Smith (Turnhout: Brepols, 2018), pp. 219-39; "Preambles to Crusading: The Arengae of Crusade Letters issued by Innocent III and Honorius III", in Papacy, Crusade and Christian-Muslim Relations, ed. J.L. Bird (Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press, 2018), pp. 63-78. SPENCER

,

Stephen

,

Emotions in

a

Crusading Context,

1095-1291 ( Oxford : Oxford

University Press , 2019 ), 296 pp.; 'Feelings of Betrayal and Echoes of the First Crusade in Odo of Deuil's De Profectione Ludovici VII in Orientem', Historical Research 92/258

(2019), 657-79; 'Fear, Fortitude and Masculinity in William of Malmesbury's Retelling of

the First Crusade and the Establishment of the Latin East', Journal of Religious History, Literature and Culture 5/2 (2019), special issue: Remembering the Crusades, 35-50. STAPEL R. J., Medieval Authorship and Cultural Exchange in the Late Fifteenth ,

Century:

The

of the Teutonic Order (Abingdon/New York : Routledge 2021 ); 'Preußen Und Die Frühe Verbreitung Der "Jüngeren Hochmeisterchronik". Kulturelle Verbindungen Utrecht Chronicle

,

Königsberg Und Mergentheim (Um 1480-1530)',

Zwischen Utrecht,

in

Schriftlichkeit Im

Preußenland, ed. by M.-L. Hecktmann and J. Sarnowsky, Tagungsberichte Der Historischen Kommission Für Ost- Und Westpreußische Landesforschung, 30 (Osnabrück: Fibre, 2020), pp. 211-31.

SWEETENHAM Carol , 2000 Cows and 4000 '

,

Pigs

at One

Sitting:

was

the Gesta Francorum

Written to be Performed in Latin?' The Medieval Chronicle 13 (Brill : 2020 ) 266 288 -

.

Kreuzzug (1217-1221) im Kontext der Kreuzzugsbewegung ', in: Der Sultan und der Heilige: Islamisch—Christliche Perspectiven auf die Begegnung des hl. Franziskus mit Sultan al-Kamil (1219—2019) ed. Amir Dziri Angelica Hilsebein Mouhanad Khorchide and Bernd Schmies (Münster : Aschendorff 2021 ), 41 94 TSURTSUMIA Mamuka The Crusaders as allies a view from Georgia ," in Controversial Histories: Current Views on the Crusades eds. Felix Hinz and Johannes Meyer-Hamme (London and New York : Routledge 2021 ), pp. 94 96 ; "The Art of War in Georgia in the Eleventh Century and the War with Byzantium," in War in Eleventh-Century Byzantium, eds. Georgios Theotokis and Marek Meško (London and New York: Routledge, 2021), pp. TEBRUCK, Stefan , Der Fünfte '

,

,

,

,

,

-

.

"

–

,

,

,

-

,

218-238.

Filip The Horoscope of Emperor Baldwin II of Courtenay. Political and Dynamics in Latin-Byzantine Constantinople The Medieval Mediterranean, Brill Leiden 2018 300p; 'Latin Emperors and Serbian Queens. Genealogical and Geopolitical Explorations in the Post-1204 Byzantine World', in: Frankokratia 1 (2020) VAN TRICHT ,

,

Sociocultural ,

,

,

,

56-107.

and Benjamin The journey of the word Crusade: from holy to oppressive again", The Conversation January 2020 : https://theconversation.com/the-journeyof-the-word-crusade-from-holy-to-oppressive-and-back-again-132124 ; "Damiette 1220. la cinquième croisade et l'Apocalypse Arabe de Pierre dans leur contexte nilotique", in Médiévales 79.2 (2020), pp. 69-90; "L'empereur d'Ethiopie et le roi des Juifs. Circulation et interpretations d'un récit historique entre Orient et Occident. VIe-XVe siècles", in I. Bueno et C. Rouxpetel (eds), Les récits historiques entre Orient et Occident (XI-XVe siècle), Rome, WEBER ,

"

...

,

back

,

Ecole Française de Rome, 2019, pp. 23-49. 2. Recently completed theses DŹWIGALA

,

Bartłomiej

"

,

Sukcesja

i

inauguracja władzy

w

łacińskim

Królestwie

[Succession and inauguration of a ruler in the Latin Kingdom of Jerusalem 1099-1118] (PhD in History, Cardinal Stefan Wyszyński University in Warsaw, Poland, Institute of History, 2015 Supervisor : Prof. Marek Kazimierz Barański ). Jerozolimskim 1099-1118

"

.

Predigt des Dritten Kreuzzuges (1187-92). Religiöse Gewalt im Schatten der Exegese [The reaching of the Third Crusade (1187-92). Religious violence in the shadow of exegesis] (PhD, University of Vienna, 2019 Supervisor : Philippe Buc ).

MARX

,

Alexander,

"

Die

"

.

3. Papers read by members of the

Society

and others

BRONSTEIN Judith Food and Food Habits in the Crusader Context, 1095-1291 in Bread and Wine Food in History": The 43 Annual Conference of the Historical Society of '

,

,

,

–

Israel, 17/3/2020 (Univ. of Haifa online conference); El rol del refectorio y la conida ,

religiosidad

en

y los Hospitalarios, in "Ordenes Militares y Religiosidad en el Occidente Medieval y el Oriente Latino (siglos XII -1/ 2 XVI). Ideología, Memoria y Cultura Material" (Military Order and Religiosity in the Medieval West and in the Latin East la

de los

Templarios

(XII-mid XVI centuries), 14-15/4/2021 (Univ. of Castilla-La Mancha, online conference).

CHRISSIS Nikolaos G. , Invited respondent to papers by Angeliki Papageorgiou, "Ties of blood, bids for power: Usurpation attempts during the reign of John II Komnenos" and Vlada Stanković, "From Christ the Savior to the Virgin Mary the Savior of the ,

World: Sebastokrator Isaac and His Place Within the First Purple-Born Generation of the Komnenoi", at International Workshop on "Isaac Comnenus Porphyrogenitus: Walking the

12th-century Byzantium and Beyond" (Odense, Denmark 5-6 March 2020 ). CHRIST, Georg, Int. Conf Schrifttragende Medien und ihre Funktionen in Nord- und Mittelitalien, 1250-1350. Intermedialität der Objekte paper: "Literacy, Governance and Bureaucracy: Venetian Capitularies in the 14th Century", Aachen/Zoom, Feb 2021; Séminaire Méditerranée médiévale org. Dominique Valérian, Damien Coulon, Ingrid Line in

,

.

,

Houssaye Michienzi, Univ. Paris I Sorbonne, paper: "Diversités ou convergences des normes ? Commerce transrégional, relations internationales et le problème du ius mercatorum en Méditerranée orientale", Paris, planned for March and postponed to Dec 2020; The Haifa Centre for Mediterranean History, colloquium (chair) "The Agency of Climatic and Environmental Factors in Mediterranean History", public lecture: "Portuguese

ships in India and rotting pepper in Alexandria? A self-fulfilling news crisis? (1503-1505)", Haifa Jan 2020; International Workshop Weights and Merchants. The Technology of Early Trade, paper: "Sifting, weighing, packing – micro mechanics of the pepper trade in Mamluk Tübingen, May 2019;

Alexandria"

School of Mamluk Studies, int. conference, paper: Empire?", Tokyo, June

"'Alexander of Our Time': Was Venice Part of the Mamluk Islamic 2019

(teleparticipation).

CHRISTIE , Niall , Nov 2020

University Women's

"

Lessons from the Past: The Black Death and Covid-19 ," "Exploring Islam's Contribution

Club of Vancouver, Canada ; Jul 2020

Battuta," VAHMSconnections Lecture Series, Vancouver Asian Heritage Society, Vancouver, Canada. Video available on the Internet at: https://explorasian.org/vahmscormections-exploring-islams-contribution-to-asia-with-ibn-battuta/ EDGINGTON Susan B. Guarding against Poison on Crusade: The Advice of Guido da and the Vigevano Experience of Lord Edward of England at Acre ', at The Latin East in the 13th Century' conference University of Haifa 1 Feb 2018 ; 'Guido of Vigevano's Rules of Health for an Old Man going on Crusade', at GCMS, University of Reading, 1 March 2018; 'Baldwin I, king of Jerusalem, 1100-1118 Key Questions and (a few) Answers' at the IHR London, 11 Feb. 2019; Keynote Lecture 'Women and War: Power, Gender and Representation' conference, Lisbon, 6 Dec. 2019. GEORGIOU Constantinos The Medieval Kingdom of Cyprus and the Crusades ", Mila mou Istorika (Podcast series), Bank of Cyprus Cultural Foundation 31 July 2020 HARRIS Jonathan May 2021 : Byzantium and the Crusades ', Richmond and Twickenham to Asia with Ibn

Month

.

'

,

,

'

,

.

,

–

"

,

,

.

,

'

,

,

Historical Association (online).

HODGES-KLUCK , Katherine, L. Contextualizing the Apocryphal Tale of Thomas Becket's Parentage ," for the Thomas Becket: Life, Death, and Legacy Conference, April 28-30 , 2021 "

,

.

KRUEGER, Juergen , (with Dorothee Heinzelmann, Cologne ) The Saint John in Jerusalem, or: Muristan Revisited ", IMC 2019 "

Beginnings

of the Order of

.

MARX Alexander ,

" ,

Stephen Langton as

a

crusade

preacher: Applying discourse analysis

to

( International Medieval Sermon Studies Society, Virtual Research Workshop Feb 2021 ); "Preaching the Third Crusade: The loss of Jerusalem as a fulfillment of prophecy" (The Loss of Jerusalem Reactions, Memory and Afterlife in the West, 1187-1500, online, sermons

"

,

.

–

April

2021); "Martin of Leon c.1130-1203): Crusade

preaching

between

Spain

and the

Holy Land" (Conference of the International Medieval

Sermon Studies

2021)

Society, online, July

July 2019 (session 1616: New Approaches to the Third Crusade II) : A Alone: Queen Queen Sybil of Jerusalem between Hattin and Acre, 1187-1189 ", IMC 2019 ; 11 October 2019: 'Queen Sybil of Jerusalem and the Third Crusade", Graduate Centre for Medieval Studies seminar, University of Reading; 16 October 2019: 'The Hospitallers in medieval Britain: champions, churches and charity", 2019 Jonathan Riley-Smith Memorial Lecture for the St John Historical Society, St John's Gate, Clerkenwell, London; 15 November 2019: 'The Trial of the Templars in Britain and Ireland", at the conference 'Gli Ordini di Terrasanta: questioni aperte, nuove acquisizioni (XII-XVI secolo)", Perugia, Italy, NICHOLSON , Helen 4

'

,

14-15 November 2019.

SCHABEL , Chris ,

"

Ordo and

Basilii ," at the conference

"

Táγμα, Apples

and

Oranges?

The Ordines Sancti Benedicti et

Orthodox and Latin Monasticism in the Eastern Mediterranean

13th-16th. C. ," National Hellenic Research Foundation, Institute of Historical Research, Athens , 1-2 October 2020 (online). 4.

Forthcoming publications

BALLETTO , Laura

" ,

Economie et

commerce en

Chypre pendant la période génoise ", in Famagusta. History and Society

Grivaud G. Nicolaou-Konnari A. and Schabel Ch. (eds.), I, Turnhout 2021 (Mediterranean Nexus, 8). ,

,

,

,

BRONSTEIN, Judith (ed. with Gil Fishhof and Vardit Shotten-Hallel ) Settlement and Crusade in the 13th Century: Multidisciplinary Studies of the Latin East", Crusades Subsidia "

,

-

(Routledge ); "Everyday Life in the Kingdom of Jerusalem", in Cambridge History of the Crusades, ed. Jonathan Phillips (Cambridge University Press).

BUCK , Andrew D. , (ed. with T.W. Smith ), Chronicle, Crusade, and the Latin East; Essays m Honour of Susan B. Edgington , Outremer. Studies in the Crusades and the Latin East

(Turnhout : Brepols

,

2021 / 2 )

(160,000 words); 'Remembering

Baldwin I: The Secundum

historiae Hierosolimitanae partem and Literary Responses to the Jerusalemite Monarchy in Twelfth-Century France", in Chronicle, Crusade, and the Latin East (8,500 words); 'William of

Tyre:

Translated Extracts', in G. Barrett, D. Thomas, et al (eds), Christian-

Muslim Relations, Primary Sources 600-1500 (London: Bloomsbury, 2022) (1,400 words); 'Antioch, the Crusades, and the West c.1097-c.1200: Between Memory and Reality', in L.

Ní Chlérigh and N. R. Hodgson (eds), Sources for the Crusades: Textual Traditions and Literary Influences (Abingdon: Routledge, 2021/2) (17,500 words); 'Relations between the Crusader States and Byzantium', in A. Holt (ed.), Religion and World Civilizations: How Faith Shaped Societiesfrom Antiquity to the Present (Santa Barbara: ABC-Clio, 2021) (1,100 words); 'The Byzantine-Crusader Split at the Siege of Antioch (1098)', ibid. (1,100 words) (In Press); 'Remembering Outremer in the West: The Secundum Historiae Iherosolimitane Partem and the Crisis of Crusading in Mid-Twelfth-Century France', Speculum (21,342 words) (under review in jounial). CARTER Leo M. Fall of Constantinople (1453) ', in Religion and World Civilizations: How Faith Shaped Societies from Antiquity to the Present ed. by Andrew Holt ( Santa Barbara, '

,

,

,

CA : ABC-CLIO ).

Tearing Christ's seamless tunic? The 'Eastern Schism' and crusades against the Greeks in the thirteenth century ", in P. Srodecki and N. Kersken (eds.), The Expansion ofthe Faith: Crusading on the Frontiers ofLatin Christendom in the High Middle Ages (Brepols : Tumhout, forthcoming 2021 / 2022 ); "Gregory IX and the Greek East", in D. CHRISSIS , Nikolaos G. ,

"

Smith and C. Egger (eds.), Pope Gregory IX (1227-1241): Power andAuthority (Amsterdam: University Press, forthcoming 2022); "Frankish Greece", in J. Phillips et al.

Amsterdam

(eds.), The Cambridge History of the Crusades (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, forthcoming); (with Marie-Hélène Blanchet) "Accusations of Heresy between East and West", in R. Flower (ed.), The Cambridge Companion to Christian Heresy (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, forthcoming). CHRIST Georg Was there Economic Decline in Mamluk Egypt in the Late Middle Ages? Demographic Shock, Transforming Industries, and Move to a Knowledge Economy ", 108 / 2? (in print, 2021 ): 35 Vierteljahrschrift für Sozial- und Wirtschaftsgeschichte VSWG pp.; (with Patrick Sänger and Mike Carr), Military Diasporas: Defending, Shaping, and Connecting Power in the Euromediterraneanfrom the Antiquity to the Early Modern Period, London: Routledge; (with Anna Katharina Weltert), "The Cold Winter Expedition of 1511: Autonomy and Heteronomy of the Swiss Military During the Transalpine Campaigns", in Military Diasporas; (with C. Casson), A Cultural History of Business, vol. 2: Middle Ages 800-1450. London: Bloomsbury; "Der Mittelmeerraum 1200-1500", in Handbuch globale Handelsräume und Handelsrouten von der Antike bis zur Gegenwart, ed. by Markus A Denzel and Mark Häberlein, Stuttgart: UTB, 35 pp. CHRISTIE Niall Journal Article: "Reflections on Editing Kitab al-Jihad of 'Ali ibn Tahir al-Sulami (d. 500/1106)", Journal of Islamic Manuscripts expected 2021 ; Book Chapter: "

,

,

,

,

,

"'Ali ibn Tahir al-Sulami, Kitab al-Jihad," in Medieval Muslim Historians and the Franks in the Levant, Vol. 2, ed. Alex Mallett (Leiden: E.J. Brill), expected 2021; Primary Source Extract: "'Ali ibn Tahir al-Sulami (1039 or 1040-1106), Kitab al-Jihad," in

Relations: A Reader, ed. David Thomas and Alex Mallett (London: Bloomsbury Academic), expected 2022; Encyclopaedia Articles: "Crusades" and (with David Morray) "Muslim-Crusader Relations," in The Routledge Medieval Encyclopedia Online, ed. Josef

Christian-Muslim

(Abingdon: Routledge), publication date TBA. Stephen The Predicaments of Aimery de Lusignan: Baronial Factionalism Consolidation of Power in the Kingdoms of Jerusalem and Cyprus, 1197-1205 ', in

Meri et al.

DONNACHIE , and the

'

,

Judith Bronstein , Gil Fishhof , and Vardit Shotten-Hallel , eds., Settlement and Crusade in the Thirteenth Century: Multidisciplinary Studies of the Latin East (Routledge 2021 ). ,

Constructions of Christian Identity in the Northern Periphery: The

Sawley Twelfth-Century England ", The Journal ofEcclesiastical History (2021 ). EDBURY Peter 'Legal Procedure in the Latin East' for J.P. Phillips et al. (eds), Cambridge History of the Crusades ; 'Ramla: The Crusader town and lordship (1099-1268)' for a volume on Ramla edited by Denys Pringle (Archaeopress, 2021); (with Schabel, Chris) 'The Papacy and Peter I of Cyprus'; 'Medieval legal treatises in the Langue d'Oil'; 'Jerusalem and Cyprus: the Kingdoms of the Crusaders and the Military Orders'; 'The Colbert-Fontainebleau Continuation of William of Tyre, 1184-1247: Structure and Composition'; 'History at Acre: c.1230-1291'; 'The Nobility of Cyprus and their Rural Residences'. EDGINGTON Susan B. Guarding against Poison on Crusade: The Advice of Guido da Vigevano and the Experience of Lord Edward of England at Acre ', for a festschrift Exploring Outremer vol. 1 ; 'Harlots, Heroines or Harridans: Who Were the Women on the First Crusade?', in proceedings of 'Women and War' conference, ed. Maria Dávila and Ana Maria Rodrigues, Cambridge, 2021?; 'Echoes of the Iliad: The Trojan War in Latin Epics of the First Crusade', Sources for the Crusades: Textual Tradition and Literary Influences, ed. Léan Ní Chléirigh and Natasha Hodgson, Routledge, n.d.; A chapter, 'Josephus and the First DRAGNEA Mihai ,

World Map in ,

"

,

,

'

,

,

,

Crusade' for The Use and Reception ofJosephus in the Western Medieval World title), ed. Paul Hilliard and Karen Kletter, for Brill, n.d.

(working

Ralph-Johannes Der Deutsche Orden und der Fall Akkons 1291. Der Umzug des Haupthauses nach Venedig und die Folgen", in Quellen und Studien zur Geschichte des Deutschen Ordens; (Vorträge der Tagung der Internationalen Historischen Kommission zur Erforschung des Deutschen Ordens in Venedig 2018) Weimar FAVREAU-LILIE , Marie-Luise & LILIE ,

"

,

,

VDG,

ca

2021

,

.

Virgin and Child Hodegetria from St. Catherine's Byzantine or Crusader? ," 20 typed pages, c. 7,000 words, article for the Erica Dodd Festschrift volume, ed. Marcus Milwright; publication expected: 2021; "The Crusader Templum Domini: Fact and Fiction," for the symposium volume, ed. Joan Branham: "Marking the Sacred: The Temple Mount/Haram al-Sharif in Jerusalem," to mark the Centennial of the Providence College: to be published by the Penn State Press, 5,500 words, 19 illustrations; publication expected: 2021. GEORGIOU Constantinos Enhancing the preachers' message: Animal metaphors and in the Crusade sermons of the Parisian Masters, 1300-1352 ," in Crusades and symbolism Nature eds. J. Bird and E. Lapina HARRIS Jonathan Byzantium and the Latin States C.1095-C.1198/1204 in The Cambridge History of the Crusades, vol 1: Sources, Conquest and Settlement ed. Marcus Bull and Thomas Madden ( Cambridge University Press ); 'The Fall of Constantinople", in Oxford Handbook on History and International Relations, ed. M. Bukovansky et al., Oxford Handbooks on International Relations (Oxford University Press); 'The Byzantine Empire and the Levant in the Late Middle Ages', in The Cambridge History of International Law. Volume V: International Law in Medieval Europe, ed. Ryan Greenwood and Adam J. Kosto (Cambridge University Press); (trans. with Georgios Chatzelis), Byzantine Sources for the Crusades, 1095-1204, Crusade Texts in Translation (Abingdon and New York: Routledge); Byzantium and the Crusades, third edition (London and New York: Bloomsbury); (ed.) New Oxford Illustrated History of the Crusades (Oxford University Press); 'Refugees and international networks after the fall of Constantinople (1453-1475)', English Historical FOLDA , Jaroslav,

Monastery

"

Two Icons of the

on Mount

Sinai:

"

,

,

.

,

'

'

,

,

,

Review (2022).

HESLOP, Michael ,

'

The defences of middle

Byzantium

in Greece (7th-12th centuries): the

flight safety in town, country side and islands .' Joint plenary paper with Nikos Kontogiannis in the Proceedings of the 46th Spring Symposium of Byzantine Studies University to

,

Routledge (Abingdon, 2021); 'The Hospitallers Dodecanese Islands before and during the 1522 Siege of Rhodes: Help or Hindrance?' in: The 1522 Siege ofRhodes: Causes, Course and Consequences ed. Simon Phillips, Routledge (Abingdon, 2022). JASPERT Nikolas Eroberung – Rückeroberung Glaubenskampf Gotteskrieg. Die Levante und die Iberische Halbinsel im Vergleich ," in: Herrschaft über fremde Völker und Reiche. Formen, Ziele und Probleme der Eroberungspolitik im Mittelalter ed. by Hermann Kamp (Vorträge und Forschungen). Ostfildern : Thorbecke 2021 ; "Conversion to Islam in of

Birmingham

23-25 March 2013 ,

,

"

,

,

–

–

,

the Late Medieval Mediterranean and the Decisions of Anselm of Turmeda, alias 'Abdallāh at-Tarǧumān'," in: Choosing my Religion. Religious Options and Alternatives in Late

Medieval and Early Modern

Christianity, ed. by Sita Steckel and Matthias Pohlig; "Military Expatriation to Muslim Lands: Aragonese Christian Mercenaries as Trans-Imperial Subjects in the Late Middle Ages," in: Military Diasporas, ed. by Georg Christ; "Pilgrimage Networks in 12th-century North-Eastern Iberia: The Role of the Military Orders," in Ordens militares,

identidade

mudança (VIII encontro

e

sobre ordens miltares), ed.

by Isabel

Cristina Ferreira

Fernandes, Palmela 2021; "Penitencia y apocalipsis en tiempos de la Primera Cruzada: Una investigación documental," in: Memoria y fuentes de la guerra santa peninsular (ss X-XV), ed.

by Carlos

de

Ayala Martínez.

KRAHENBUHL Kevin S. ( 2021 ). Building Effective Learning Environments: A Framework that Merges the Best of Old and New Practices New York, NY : Routledge (Available in ,

.

April, 2021;

,

Teaching:

.

Varied Conceptions and their

implications for priorities, practices, and learning. Charlotte, NC: Information Age Press. (Forthcoming). (with Carter, J.L.). Signature thinking: The keys to classroom creativity and learning. New York, NY: Routledge. (Forthcoming, 2022). LOUD Graham The Social World of the Abbey of Cava, c. 1020-1300 (book for Boydell: publication November 2021 ); 'Frederick II and the Crusade', in The Cambridge History of the Crusades, ed. Andrew Jotischky, Thomas Madden and Jonathan Phillips (Cambridge U.P., 2022?); 'The Kingdom of Sicily from Roger II to the Sicilian Vespers, c. 1100-1282', in Debating the Middle Ages, ii, c. 1050- c. 1450, ed. Stephen Mossman (Manchester U.P., 2021); 'The Abbey of Cava and the Bishops of Capaccio: an early thirteenth-century Canon Law Dispute from Southern Italy", in Canon Law in the Long Twelfth Century (c. 10731234). Essaysfor Anne Duggan, ed. Travis Baker (Brepols 2022); 'Victors and vanquished in Norman Italy', in Victors and Vanquished in the Euro-Mediterranean. Cultures of War in the Middle Ages, ed. Johannes Pahlitzsch and Jörg Rogge (Mainz University Press, 2021?); 'Crusade and holy war in the chronicle of Arnold of Lübeck', in Medieval Ecclesiastical History and Culture in Central Europe: Texts and Contexts, ed. Thomas McCarthy and Christine Meek (University of Amsterdam Press, 2022?). MAIER CHRISTOPH T. When was the first history of the crusades written? ", in: The Crusades: History and Memory. Proceedings of the Ninth Quadrennial Conference of the Society for the Study of the Crusades and the Latin East, Odense, 27 June 1 July 2016, Vol. 2 eds. K. V. Jensen and T. K. Nielsen Outremer 12 ( Turnhout : Brepols 2021 ); "Crusaders and Jews: the York massacre of 1190 re-visited", Anglo Norman Studies XLV: Proceedings ofthe Battle Conference 2021 (Volume 45), ed. Stephen D. Church (Woodbridge: Boydell & Brewer, 2022); "Crusade Propaganda and Attacks against Jews: A Breakdown of Communication?", Journal of Medieval History 48 (2022); "Historiography of the Crusades", Cambridge History of the Crusades, eds. J. Phillips, M. Bull et al., Cambridge; Cambridge University Truth and

,

"

,

,

,

,

,

Press.

MARX Alexander ,

"

,

The Passio

Raginaldi

of Peter of Blois.

Martyrdom

and

eschatology

in the preaching of the Third Crusade ". In: Viator. Medieval and Renaissance studies 50 / 3 (forthcoming); (with Gerd Micheluzzi and Kristina Kogler), "Narrare: Reflexionen über die ,

Anwendung

von

Erzähltheorie auf das Mittelalter". In: Narrare – Producere – Ordinare.

Zugänge zum Mittelalter, ed. Matthias Meyer (series agora, Praesens) (Vienna, forthcoming), pp. 9-23; "Jerusalem as the Travelling City of God: Henry of Albano and the Preaching of the Third Crusade". In; Crusades 20 (forthcoming 2021). MORTON Nicholas Arena of Empires: The Mongol Invasions into the Near East (Basic Books ) anticipated 2021

Neue

,

,

.

MUSARRA Antonio , ,

"

Da Antonio di Padova

a

Fidenzio da Padova. Le crociate, i Minori e la Archeologia Storia

Terrasanta nel XIII secolo ", in La basilica di Sant 'Antonio in Padova.

Arte Musica 2 voll., a cura di Luciano Bertazzo e Girolamo Zampieri, Roma, L'«Erma» di Bretschneider, 2021 (Chiese monumentali padovane, 6), vol. 1, pp. 299-319; "I molti orizzonti di un manoscritto "mediterraneo". Il codice "Cocharelli" tra Acri, Cipro e Genova", .

in Il codice Cocharelli: il manoscritto

e

il suo contesto,

a cura

di Chiara Concina

e

Francesca

[ISSN: 2465-2326] [2021]; Gli ultimi crociati. Templari e francescani tra crociata e missione (XII-XIV secc.), Roma, Salerno editrice [2021]; "L'incontro tra Francesco e il sultano nelle fonti crociate", in 800 years from the Pilgrimage of Peace of Fabbri, in «Medioevi»

Holy Land, Celebrations and Conventions (Jerusalem,

Saint Francis in the

30 Sept. 2019-6

Oct. 2019) [2021]; "Una «translatio» francescana dei Luoghi Santi? Il presepe di Greccio, la Passione de La Verna, il Perdono d'Assisi", in 800 years from the Pilgrimage of Peace [2021]; "L'incontro tra Francesco e il sultano nelle fonti del Duecento", in Dalle crociate al

dialogo.

San Francesco

e

Federico II sulle vie della Pace, IX Giornate federiciane (Oria, Evangelisti, Dopo Francesco, nitre il mito.

24-25 ottobre 2019) [2021]; Review of: Paolo I frati Minori fra Terra Santa ed Europa (XIII-XV

secolo), Roma, Viella, 2020, pp. 296, in

Studi francescani [2021].

Helen The Knights Templar a book for ARC Humanities Press's 'Past Imperfect' series, forthcoming 2021; 'The trial of the Templars in Britain and Ireland', in The Templars: The Rise, Fall and Legacy of a Military Religious Order, ed. Jochen Burgtorf, Shlomo Lotan, and Enric Mallorquí-Ruscalleda (London: Routledge), pp. 209-233, forthcoming spring 2021. PERRA Photeine V. Homines dicte insule sunt Greci et fidem grecam tenent: A prosopographical contribution to Greek-Hospitaller relations ", Byzantiaka 36 (2020); NICHOLSON

,

,

,

"

,

,

"Women and Power in the South-eastern Mediterranean, 13th—15th centuries: A historical overview reflected through the numismatic evidence", Mésogeios 37 (2020).

PRINGLE , R. DENYS , (with Ergün Laflı and Maurizio Buora ) Four Frankish Gravestones from Medieval Ephesus ", Anatolian Studies 71 (2021 ), 171 84 ; (ed. with Andrew Petersen) "

-

Ramla, City ofMuslim Palestine, 715-1917: Studies in History, Archaeology andArchitecture (Archaeopress: Oxford, 2021), including chapters on "The Christian Buildings of Ramla",

"Pilgrims'

Graffiti of the Fifteenth to Seventeenth Centuries in the Franciscan

Hospice

in

Ramla", and "Sites in the Crusader Lordships of Ramla, Lydda and Mirabel"; "Itineraria Terrae Sanctae minora III: Some Early Twelfth-century Guides to Frankish Jerusalem", Crusades 20 (2021); "Churches in the Crusader Kingdom", in The Cambridge History ofthe Crusades, vol. 1: Sources, Conquest and Settlement, ed. Marcus Bull and Andrew Jotischky (Cambridge University Press: Cambridge); (with Benjamin Z. Kedar) "The Site of the House of St Mary of Mountjoy, near Jerusalem", Revue biblique (2021).

(with G. Grivaud ) Latin Cyprus under the Lusignans ," in J. Philipps The ed., Cambridge History of the Crusades Cambridge : Cambridge University Press 2022 ca. 29pp.; (with Peter Edbury) "The Papacy and King Peter I of Cyprus," in A.D. Beihammer and A. Nicolaou-Konnari, eds., Knighthood, Crusades, and Diplomacy in the Eastern Mediterranean in the Time of King Peter I of Cyprus, Brepols: Turnhout, 2022, ca. 70pp.; "The Diocese of Olena, the Dominican Church of Holy Wisdom, and the Cathedral of Andravida, Capital of the Principality of Achaia," Frankokratia 2 (2021), ca. 25 pp.; "Tolerating the Greeks? Augustinian Hermits on the Filioque from the Black Death to the Great Schism," in M.W. Dunne and S. Gottlöber, eds., Toleration and Concepts of Otherness in Medieval Philosophy, Turnhout: Brepols, 2022, ca. 25pp; (with W.O. Duba) "A Documentary History of St Theodore Abbey," in M. Olympios and C. Schabel, eds. A Cistercian Nunnery in the Latin East: The History and Archaeology of St Theodore Abbey, Nicosia, Cyprus, Brepols: Turnhout, 2022, ca. 50 pp.; "Piracy on the Side: A Genoese SCHABEL , Chris ,

"

,

,

,

,

Armada in the Eastern Mediterranean, 1383," in G. Saint-Guillain, ed., Individus, piraterie, représailles et contrebande en Méditerranée orientale et Adriatique (XIIe—XVe siècle), ca.

10pp.; "Archbishop B and the Latin Province of Larissa, 1206/07-1224/32,"

ca.

20pp.;

"Bishop George Hominisdei (†1360/61), Itinerant Armenian in the Latin Church and Chaplain to the Ban of Bosnia, the Count of Korykos, and the Cardinal of Nicosia," ca. 15pp.; "The Village of Psimolofou in the Fourteenth Century," ca. 15pp. SIBERRY Elizabeth Knightly memories – Remembering and Reinventing the Military Orders in Britain (Routledge 2023 ) [book]; 'Memorials to crusaders: the use of crusade imagery in First World War memorials in Britain' in The Legacy of the Crusades, eds. K. Jensen and T. Nielsen (Brepols: Turnhout, 2021). SMITH Thomas, W. (ed. and trans. with Susan B. Edgington ) The Gesta Francorum Ierusalem expugnantium traditionally attributed to "Bartolf of Nangis (all chapters edited and translated, forthcoming); The Letters from the First Crusade (Woodbridge : The Boydell Press under contract for 2023 ; 91,763 words written); (ed. with Andrew D. Buck) Chronicle, Crusade, and the Latin East: Essays in Honour of Susan B. Edgington (Turnhout: Brepols, under contract, forthcoming 2022); (ed. with Minoru Ozawa and Georg Strack Communicating Papal Authority in the Middle Ages (Abingdon: Routledge, under contract, forthcoming 2022); "Not Sharing the Holy Land: Attitudes towards Sacred Space in Papal Crusade Calls, 1095-1234" (journal article, submitted, 13,884 words); "Papacy and Crusade", in The New Cambridge History of Britain: 2. ed. P. Crooks (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, under contract, forthcoming) (8,000 words); (with Adam Franklin-Lyons and Chris Given-Wilson) "The Speed and Physical Distribution of Medieval in the Middle Ages, ed. H. Birkett (forthcoming, submitted to editor) (17,209 News", inNews words); "The Letters of Pope Paschal II regarding the First Crusade: The Liberation of the ,

,

,

,

,

"

,

Eastern Church

versus

Christocentric Devotion", in Medieval Ecclesiastical History and McCarthy, C. Meek, and P. Healy

Culture in Central Europe: Texts and Contexts, ed. T.J.H.

(Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press, submitted, forthcoming 2022) (9,996 words); Manuscripts of the Gesta Francorum, Albert of Aachen, and Fulcher of Chartres", in Chronicle, Crusade, and the Latin East: Essays in Honour of Susan B. Edgington, ed. A.D. Buck and T.W. Smith (Turnhout: Brepols, forthcoming 2022) (c. 8,000 words); "Papal Communication and the Fifth Crusade, 1217-1221", in Communicating PapalAuthority in the Middle Ages, ed. M. Ozawa, T.W. Smith and G. Strack (Abingdon: Routledge, under contract, forthcoming 2022) (8,024 words); "The Charters of the Fifth Crusade Revisited", in Settlement and Crusade in the Thirteenth Century: Multidisciplinary Studies of the Latin "New

East, ed. J. Bronstein, G. Fishhof and V. Shotten-Hallel

2021) (4,961 words).

(Abingdon: Routledge,

in press

July

SPENCER Stephen The Third Crusade in Historiographical Perspective', History Compass (forthcoming 2021); 'Albert of Aachen, the Gesta Francorum, and the Fall of Antioch: A Reflection on the Textual Independence of Albert's Historic Ierosolimitana ', in Chronicle, Crusade, and the Latin East: Essays in Honour ofSusan B. Edgington ed. Thomas W. Smith and Andrew D. Buck ( Turnhout : Brepols, forthcoming 2022 ). STANTCHEV Stefan The Canon Law on Trade with Infidels (ca. 1200 ca. 1600) ," in John D. Haskell and Pamela Slotte eds., Christianity and Public International Law ( Cambridge University Press 2021 ). Coming out in May 2021. Sweetenham Carol When the Saints Go Marching In: The Memory of the Miraculous in the Sources for the First Crusade ". Forthcoming in Crusades Subsidia; '"Por ce qu'i mielz l'rentendent qui ne sunt letree": Translating the Story of the First Crusade.' Forthcoming in proceedings of the 2018 Haifa conference, The Latin East in the 13th Century: Institutions, ,

,

,

"

-

,

,

,

,

'

,

,

Settlements and Material Culture. TEBRUCK, Stefan ,

Aufbruch

und Heimkehr.

Jerusalempilger

und

Kreuzfahrer

aus dem

thüringisch-sächsischen Raum (1100-1300) c. 560 pages, forthcoming in 2022 in "Vortrage Forschungen, Sonderbände," ed. by Konstanzer Arbeitskreis für mittelalterliche Geschichte (publisher: Jan Thorbecke, Ostfildern); 'Kreuzzug, Predigt und Seelsorge. Die Kreuzfahrer-Erzählungen in den Exempla des Caesarius von Heisterbach', length: 43.807 characters, forthcoming in 2022. VAN TRICHT Filip Who Murdered Archbishop William of Rouen (+1217)? The Valley of Philippi under Latin Rule (1204-circa 1224/25) ', in: JÖB 70 (2020 ) 305 334 ; The Duchy of Philippopolis (1204-1236/37?). A Latin Border Principality in a Byzantine (Greek/ Bulgarian) Milieu', in: Crusades (2022). WEBER Benjamin When and where did the word 'crusade' appear in the Middle Ages? And Why? in T.K. Nielsen et K.V. Jensen (eds.), The Crusades: History and Memory. Proceedings of the Ninth Conference of the Society for the Study of the Crusades and the Latin East, Odense, 27 June – 1 July 2016 Turnhout : Brepols 2021 ,

und

'

,

,

'

-

"

,

,

"

,

,

.

5. Work in progress BRONSTEIN Judith Research ,

,

1095-1291 ; La

Religiosidad

Project (PI):

Food and Food Habits in the Crusader Context, en las órdenes militares. Member of research

de la comida

project: "Ordenes Militares y Religiosidad en el Occidente Medieval y el Oriente Latino (siglos XII-1/2 XVI). Ideología, Memoria y Cultura Material" (Military Order and Religiosity in the Medieval West and in the Latin East (XII-mid XVI centuries). PI: Prof. Raquel Torres Jiménez, Prof. Jesús Manuel Molero García. University of Castilla-La Mancha, Spain. BUCK Andrew is working on a single authored monograph, provisionally entited : Creating Outremer: William of Tyre and the Writing ofHistory in Twelfth-Century Jerusalem CHRISSIS Nikolaos G. Crusades against the Byzantines ", in M. Carr Gianluca Raccagni and N. Chrissis (eds.). Crusading against Christians in the Middle Ages (London : Palgrave Macmillan in progress); "Crusades against Christians, 1200-1500", in J. Harris (ed.), The New Oxford Illustrated History of the Crusades (Oxford: Oxford University Press, in ,

,

.

"

,

,

,

,

,

progress).

Georg Connecting Empire and Sea Born State: Venice, the Sea and Mamluk Egypt (14th Century); From Venice to Malacca: Rogue Emporia, Long-Distance Trade, and Empire CHRISTIE Niall Article on Muslim women political leaders in the crusading period; Article on the representation of the land of the Franks in Muslim folk literature DRAGNEA Mihai Short-term research project in Slovakia in 2021 ( Comenius University, Faculty of Arts, Department of Slovak History ): "Hippomancy in the Baltic Region: Desacralization of the Pomeranian Sacred Horses in the Twelfth Century"; Short-term research project in Denmark in 2021 (University of Copenhagen, Faculty of Theology): "German-Danish Colonization in Pomerania and Rügen during the second half of the twelfth century". DŹWIGALA Bartłomiej Printing, liturgy and crusade in early modern Mazovia"; "Palm Sunday and Easter 1118 in the Latin Kingdom of Jerusalem: dynastic crisis, liturgical celebrations and sacred topography". EDBURY Peter (with Massimiliano Gaggero ) The Chronique d'Ernoul and the ColbertFontainebleau Continuation of William of Tyre (Brill – to be submitted in 2021 ); King Hugh III of Cyprus: Politics in the Latin East, 1254-1291 (for Routledge 'Rulers of the CHRIST,

,

.

,

,

.

,

,

"

,

,

,

,

Latin East' Series). EDGINGTON

,

Susan B. , (with Thomas Smith) An edition and translation of the Gesta Expugnantium ('Bartolf of Nangis).

Francorum Ierusalem

FAVREAU-LILIE , Marie-Luise & LILIE zeit der

Kreuzzüge (book).

,

Ralph-Johannes

,

Italien und der islamische Orient zur

Figural Art in the Holy Land: 1099-1291 ," for The Cambridge History of project eds. Marcus bull Andrew Jotischky Jonathan Phillips Cambridge : Cambridge University Press 11,500 words. Deadline: 2022 KEDAR Benjamin Z. Cultural history of the kingdom of Jerusalem FOLDA , Jaroslav,

"

Crusader

the Crusades

,

,

,

.

,

,

.

.

,

KRUEGER, Juergen , (with Dorothee Heinzelmann and Michael Heinzelmann) The Muristan, Hospital of the Hospitallers in Jerusalem (research finished, manuscript in progress); The

Coenaculum and Tomb of David. History and Archaeology (research finished, manuscript in progress).

gold,

LEONARD , Robert D. Jr. , Imitation Venetian ducats, cut Crusader Crusader period

lead tokens of the

.

English

LOUD Graham , An ,

and his continuators

translation of the Montecassino Chronicle of Leo Marsicanus

.

MAIER Christoph T. [with Nicole Bériou (Paris)] Sermones contra hereticos. Sermons preached for the fight against heretics by Philip the Chancellor and Eudes of Châteauroux from the years 1226 and 1231 (Oxford Medieval Texts). MARX Alexander (with Nicholas Jaspert ), Postdoc-project dealing with Martin of León as a crusade preacher between Spain and the Holy Land (Erwin-Schrödinger-Stipendium of the Austrian Science Fund (FWF) [J 4576-G], affiliated at the University of Heidelberg ). MUSARRA Antonio La crociata. L'idea, la storia, il mito Bologna, il Mulino [2022 ]. NICHOLSON Helen The Knights Templars' English and Welsh Estates, 1308-13, transcription and analysis of the inventories and accounts of the Templars' properties in England and Wales during the trial of the Templars (documents at Kew, The National Archives of the UK) as described in bulletin no. 29 ; Sybil ofJerusalem : a book for Routledge's 'Rulers of the ,

,

,

,

,

,

,

,

,

–

Latin East' series:

described in Bulletin

as

no.

37; Women and the Crusades,

a

trade book for

University Press: as described in Bulletin no. 37. PARK Danielle Monograph on Fulk and Melisende of Jerusalem for Rulers of the Latin East (described in previous bulletins); Article on Fulk and Melisende's political partnership PATTERSON Linda Still engaged in an online edition and translation of the Siège d'Antioche, Oxford ,

,

.

,

,

with Simon Parsons, Carol Sweetenham, and Lauren Mulholland

.

PRINGLE R. Denys , English translation (with notes and introduction) of Peregrinationes Tres: Saewulf Iohannes Wirzburgensis, Theodericus, ed. R. B. C. Huygens , for Corpus ,

Christianorum in Translation.

SCHABEL Chris (with M. Olympios ) A Cistercian Nunnery in the Latin East: The History ofSt Theodore Abbey, Nicosia, Cyprus, for Brepols' series Mediterranean ,

,

and Archaeology

Nexus; Bullarium Cyprium 1316—1378; Bullarium Hellenicum 1227-1261; The Church of Paphos in the Latin Period (with T. Owens) The Letters of Philippe de Mézières in Arsenal 499 ; Updated RRH, papal letters 1243-1261. SPENCER Stephen A Leverhulme ECF project entitled 'Information Dissemination and Contested Memory: The Third Crusade, 1187-1300', at King's College London; a collection of essays, co-edited with Andrew Buck and James Kane, provisionally entitled Crusade Settlement, and Historical Writing in the Latin East and Latin West STANTCHEV; Stefan Venice and the Ottoman Empire, 1381-1517 monograph; Economic Warfare and the Crusades, edited book. SWEETENHAM Carol Translation of the Swan Knight texts of the Old French Crusade Cycle; ,

,

,

.

,

,

,

,

Edition, translation and study of the Anglo-Norman poem known as the Siège d'Antioche jointly with Linda Paterson, Simon Parsons and Lauren Mulholland; Kings Across the Sea: a study of images of kingship in the Latin East as part of the Rulers of the Latin East series. TEBRUCK, Stefan Crusaders' Charters in ,

Germany (12th to 13th centuries) Latin texts with Buchgesellschaft, Darmstadt. This book .

German translation. Publisher: Wissenschaftliche

published in 2023 Filip Henry of Constantinople, Emperor of the Romans (1177-1216) (a biography of the second Latin emperor Henry of Flanders/Hainaut); 'The anonymous ekphrasis of imperial ξυλοκονταριαὶ: Manuel I Komnenos or Henry of Flanders? Byzantine art and literature in Latin Constantinople' (article).

will be

.

VAN TRICHT

'

'

,

,

6. Theses in progress

Kingdom of Holy Land, Byzantium and the Crusade During the Late Thirteenth to Late Fifteenth Centuries ," PhD, Royal Holloway, University of London supervised by Professors Andrew Jotischky and Jonathan Phillips. RÖSCH Fabian Grundlagen, Rahmenbedingungen und Regularien zur Herstellung von CARTER Leo ,

England

"

,

Interest in the Dioceses of Winchester and Chichester of the

Support

for the

of the

,

"

,

,Sicherheit'zwischen Christen und Nichtchristen, Lateinern und Nichtlateinern in den Kreuzfahrerherrschaften(12. bis 14. Jahrhundert) ["Foundations, conditions and regulations for creating 'security' between Christians and non-Christians, Latins and non-Latins in the Crusader states (12th to 14th centuries)"]. PhD, University of Gießen, supervised by Prof. Stefan Tebruck. This doctoral thesis is part of the Sub-Project in the 'Sonderforschungsbereich' of the 'Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft' (SFB/TRR 138) "Dynamiken der Sicherheit "

in historischer Perspektive" ["Dynamics of 'security' in historical perspective"]. To be published in 2021/22; publisher: Didymos-Verlag, Affalterbach. TISCHER Roman Bishops, abbots and clerics as crusaders in the Holy Roman Empire (11th to 13th centuries). Comparative studies on social, economic, political and spiritual aspects of crusading in the clergy ." PhD, University of Gießen supervised by Prof. Stefan Tebruck (Start date: August 2020). "

,

,

,

7. Fieldwork planned

or

undertaken recently

CARLSSON, Christer, Ail archaeological investigation of Aslackby Templar Preceptoiy in Lincolnshire, England. The aim is to locate the various medieval structures, including the long-lost Templar round church. MUSARRA, Antonio, Italian participation in the Crusades; Preparatory study of the complex of the Holy Sepulchre in Jerusalem aimed at the start of archaeological investigations; Reform, crusade and Italian communal autonomies.

STANTCHEV, Stefan, Archivio di Stato di Venezia, 2019, 2022. 8. News of interest to members

a) Conferences and seminars b) Other information The

Crusading

Masculinities Network (#crusmasc) was instigated by Natasha Hodgson, Mesley after a workshop on the same theme held in Zürich in

Katharine Lewis and Matthew

March/April 2016,

which

was

part-funded by the

SSCLE. It seeks to

bring together scholars

from the fields of the

variety

more

gender history

and crusader studies, in order to examine and highlight were represented in the context of the crusades. For

of masculinities which

information

see our

website

Natasha.Hodgson@ ntu.ac.uk ;

https://crusadingmasculinities.wordpress.com/ or contact or mm.mesley@ gmail.com.

Katherine.Lewis@ huddersfield.ac.uk

interdisciplinary regional fostering

Northern Network for the

Study

of the Crusades (NNSC). The Network

provides

an

hub for scholars at all stages of their career with a view to

institutional interaction and collaboration,

history http://nnscrusades.wordpress.com or contact Dr Jason T. Roche on [email protected];.uk Steering Committee: Natasha Hodgson – Nottingham Trent University ; Kathryn Hurlock – Manchester Metropolitan University ; Damien Kempf – University of Liverpool ; Alex Metcalfe Lancaster University ; Nic Morton Nottingham Trent University ; Alan Murray University of Leeds ; Jason T. Roche Manchester Metropolitan University. Jonathan Riley-Smith's Regesta Revised (RRR) database [ ]. This project aims to compile a calendar of all the charters, other legal or formal documents and letters that were composed between 1098 and 1291 in the Latin kingdoms of Jerusalem and Cyprus, the principality of Antioch and the counties of Edessa and Tripoli or were addressed to individuals in those settlements. The new calendar is based on Reinhold Röhricht's Regesta Regni Hierosolymitani (1893-1904). Every RRR entry has been carefully rechecked against the latest or best edition of the original document and has been redrafted and rendered in English. The RRR database is also fuller than the original, as many newly discovered documents have been added, and all the protocols of the rulers of the settlements and references to all eleemosynary grants were included. This resource will be of the greatest importance for scholars as well as a tool to introduce students to the valuable range of material from the Latin East. It currently contains 2457 entries ranging from 1098 the

study

cross-

and announcements, and promoting sharing of the crusades and all its related fields of investigation. For more news

of the

information

–

–

–

–

Röhrichts http://www.crusades-regesta.com/

to 1244.

New book series at Peter Lang: "Christianity and Conversion in Scandinavia and the Baltic Region, c. 800-1600", edited by Mihai DRAGNEA. This is a single-blind peer reviewed series which

provides

an

opportunity

for scholars to

publish high-quality

studies

on

the

culture, society and economy of Scandinavia and the Baltic region under the influence of Christianity. It welcomes submissions in various formats, including monographs, edited volumes, conference proceedings, and short form publications between 30,000 to 50,000 words (Peter Lang Prompts) on subjects related to: Christian kingship, Christian and pagan identity, cultural encounters, otherness, barbarians, missionary strategy, canonical aspects of missionary work, forced conversion, clerical involvement in warfare, military orders, Holy War, martyrdom, sacralisation of a landscape, pilgrimage, shrines of gods, relics of saints, icons, and war banners, pagan war rituals, diet and fashion, rural area and the concept of town life, intragroup and intergroup relations, linguistic interactions, narratives gesta episcoporum, saga studies, colonization, ethnography, mental geographies, political relations, dynastic marital alliances, media and communication, trade, exploration, mappae mundi, art history, architecture, numismatics, and all archaeological sub-disciplines. More details at

https://www.peterlang.com/view/serial/CCSB

Dźwigala, Bartlomiej, would like to invite members of SSCLE to submit articles English. French. German or Italian to an academic journal of the Institute of History at Card. Stefan

Wyszyński University in Warsaw entitled: Saeculum Christianum. If any questions, please contact via e-mail b.dzwigala @uksw.edu.pl ; bartlomiej.dzwigala @ gmail.com More details at: https://czasopisma.uksw.edu.pl/index.php/sc/index .

.

c) Annual Bernard Hamilton Essay Prize In honour of the former

president

and current honorary

Bernard Hamilton, and in recognition of his of young scholars, the SSCLE will award

enormous

an

president

of the SSCLE, Professor

contribution to the

annual essay

prize.

society and support

The Rules The essay should be on any aspect of history, art or otherwise relating to Crusader studies.

period

history

or

archaeology

of the Crusader

student, or an individual who is within two years of receiving their eligible to enter the competition. The essay, excluding references and bibliography must not normally exceed 6,000 words and must conform with the editorial requirements of the SSCLE journal Crusades (available on the SSCLE webpage and in the Bulletin/Journal). Essays submitted elsewhere for competitions or publication will not be eligible for the prize. The essays must be submitted as electronic copies as an e-mail attachment, to Dr William Purkis and Dr Anna Gutgarts (email: w.j.purkis @ bham.ac.uk and anna.gutgarts@mail. huji.ac.il), the SSCLE Postgraduate Officers, by 31 December. Essays should be accompanied by details of the author's name, address (including email address), institutional affiliation and degree registration.

Any

current doctoral

doctorate is

The Decision The essays will be read by a jury consisting of SSCLE and the editors of Crusades. The jury

panel

reserves

the

right not to

award

a

a

panel

prize

drawn from the Committee of the

in any

particular year.

The jury decision will be announced in April. The decision of the

jury

is final.

The winner of the essay competition will have their paper put forward to Crusades where, subject to the normal procedures of satisfactory reports from two anonymous external referees (and, if required, the chance to modify, amend or improve the it will be published under the title 'Bernard Hamilton Essay Prize'. Names of prize winners will be 9. Members’

posted on the

piece on their advice),

SSCLE webpage and announced in the Bulletin.

queries

CHRIST, Georg: David Bryan Cook ([email protected] ) is interested in material embassies to Egypt in the 1290s.

on

Venetian

Nicholas MORTON is the co-editor of two book series and he would be interested to hear

submitting proposals for either. They are: 1. Rulers of the Latin Phillips) ; 2. The Military Religious Orders: Memory (Routledge, co-editor Professor Jochen Burgtorf).

from members interested in

co-editor Professor Jonathan

(Routledge, History – Sources East

–

10. Financial Statement 2021 (28 July 2020–1 July 2021)

light of the Covid 19 pandemic, from a financial perspective this was a quiet year for the society. Members will note that the financial statement covers slightly less than the usual 12 month period. This reflects the publication date of the 2021 Crusades volume. The main points of interest are as follows: The Society's finances are largely unchanged from last year, although there has been a decrease in our outgoings. In light of the pandemic, we have not funded any conferences this In

UK

sterling

accounts

Account Balances 28 July 2020 Total Income

Subscriptions Interest Total

(£)

US dollar accounts

($)

Euro accounts

(€)

£16,390.69

$5,577.48

€12,188.57

£6,408.74 £6,397.14

$72.47

€961.45

$72.47

€961.45

£11.60

Expenditure

£7,056.38

Postage

£14.48

Refunds

£41.00

PayPal fees. Zoom charges Soc Gen charges Wild Apricot subscription

and

€145.00

£2,281.29 £751.61

Journal (all orders)

£3,968.00

Account Balances 1 July 2021

£15,743.05

$5,649.95

€13,005.02

year, although we have held over funds to support the conference mentioned in the previous financial statement. This year the society funded the premium Zoom licence for the SSCLE ECR online conference held in were

postponed

summer

2021, and the SSCLE also covered the PayPal fees

SSCLE 2020 conference (£2000 in total). In addition, our main outgoings the orders for the Crusades journals in hardback and ebook, and the Wild Apricot

for the

subscription for the SSCLE website. In terms of membership, in 2020 we had 307 fully paid up members, subscriptions were still open for 2021 at the time of writing but it is very likely that we will maintain – if not slightly exceed this number of members. As of 1 July 2021 our incoming fluids are slightly lower, which reflects the decrease in journal orders in 2020; compared to the 2019 volume, member requests for the 2020 journal decreased by 81 orders. It is worth noting that the number of 2021 journal orders have recovered to an extent (currently at an increase of 35 orders compared to the 2020 order) but not yet at the level of 2019. The Society closed the Société Générate account after the bank imposed annual charges of €145 and we have now transferred the remaining funds to the UK euro account. I would like to take this opportunity to thank Michel Balard once again for managing the Société Générale account and for his many services to the SSCLE. May I also offer my thanks to Nicholas Morton and Michael Carr for continuing to receive and forward the Société Générale correspondence long after their respective terms as treasurer, particularly as the pandemic prevented us from updating the treasurer's contact details. This will be my final financial statement for the SSCLE. It was my pleasure to serve as treasurer for the past two years. I would like once again to express my gratitude both to my –

assistant Simon Parsons and also to the SSCLE members for their support and courtesy.

Respectfully submitted, Outgoing Treasurer

Danielle Park,

11. Officers of the

Society (2020-2021)

President: Professor Adrian Boas.

Honorary Presidents: Professor Jean Richard†. Professor Benjamin Z. Kedar, Professor Michel Balard.

Secretary: Professor François-Olivier Touati. Conference Secretary: Professor Jonathan Phillips. Editor of the Bulletin: Dr Nikolaos G. Chrissis. Officer for Postgraduate Members: Professor Jonathan Phillips. Treasurer: Dr Danielle Park. Assistant Treasurer: Dr Simon Parsons. Webmaster: Dr Kyle C. Lincoln.

Crusades: Guidelines for the Submission of Papers The editors ask contributors to adhere to the following guidelines. Failure to do so will result in the article being returned to the author for amendment, or may result in its having to be excluded from the volume. 1. Submissions. Submissions should be sent

as

email attachments to

one

of the editors

(contact details below). Papers should be formatted using MS Word, double-spaced and with wide margins. Times New Roman (12 pt) is preferred. Remember to include your name and contact details (both postal and email addresses) on your paper. If the author is not a native speaker of English it is their responsibility to have the text checked over and polished by a native speaker prior to submission. 2. Peer Review. All submissions will be peer reviewed. The manuscript will be scrutinized by the editors and sent to at least one outside reader. Decision on acceptance

rejection of the submitted article will normally be made by the editors after two rounds of revision. or

3.

Length. Normally, the maximum length of articles should not exceed 6,000 words, including notes. The editors reserve the right to edit papers that exceed these limits.

not

Normally, notes should be REFERENCE ONLY and placed at the end of the Number paper. continuously. 4. Notes.

Style sheet. Please use the most recent Speculum style sheet (see: http://www.medievalacademy.org/?page=stylesheet). This sets out the format to be used for notes. Please note that this is not necessarily the same format as has been used by other edited volumes on the crusades and/or the Military Orders. Failure to follow the Speculum format will result in accepted articles being returned to the author for amendment. In the main body of the paper you may adhere to either British or American spelling, but it must be consistent throughout the article. 5.

6.

Language. Papers will be published in English, French, German, Italian and Spanish.

7. Abbreviations. Please

use

the abbreviation list

on

pp. vii-ix of this journal.

8. Diagrams and Maps should be referred to as figures and photographs as plates. Please keep illustrations to the essential minimum, since it will be possible to include only a limited number. All illustrations must be supplied by the contributor in cameraready copy, and free from all copyright restrictions. 9. Italics. Words to be

should be underlined.

printed in italics should be italicised if possible. Failing this they

10. Capitals. Please take every care to ensure consistency in your use of capitals and lower-case letters. Use initial capitals to distinguish the general from the specific (for

example, "the

count of Flanders" but "Count

Summary

of Article. Contributors will be

11.

Philip

required to provide a 250 words summary accompanied by the author's email to be in English, regardless of the language of the

of their paper at the start of each article. This will be

address. The summary of the paper is main article.

of Flanders").

Submission

ofpapers to

either

of the

editors:

Professor Jonathan Phillips Professor Iris Shagrir Department of History Department of History, Philosophy and Royal Holloway, University of London Judaic Studies Egham, Surrey, TW20 0EX, The Open University of Israel England, UK 1 University Rd., POB 808, Raanana, j.p.phillips@ rhul.ac.uk Israel 4353701 irissh@ openu.ac.il

Society for the Study of the Crusades and the Latin East Membership Information

Study of the Crusades and the Latin East is to being done in the field of crusading history, and to contact members who share research interests through the information in the Society's Bulletin. There are more than 300 members from 41 countries. The Society also organizes a major international conference every four years, as well as sections on crusading history at other conferences where appropriate. The

primary

function of the

Society

for the

enable members to learn about current work

The committee of the SSCLE consists of: Prof. Jonathan Phillips, President Prof. Benjamin Z. Kedar and Prof. Michel Balard, Honorary Presidents Dr Nikolaos Chrissis, Secretary Dr Simon Parsons, Treasurer

Dr William Purkis and Dr Anna

Gutgarts, Officersfor Postgraduate Members

Dr Danielle Park, Bulletin Editor Dr Kyle C. Lincoln, Website

Current subscription fees are as follows: Membership and Bulletin of the Society:

Single

£10, $12 or €12;

Student £6, $7 or €7; Joint membership £15, $19 or €18 (for two members sharing the same household); Membership and the journal Crusades, including the Bulletin: please add to your subscription fees: £25, $31 or €29 for a hard copy, OR £15, $19 or €18 for an electronic

copy of the

journal;

If a member wishes to or

€41.

The cost of the

journal to

purchase back issues

of Crusades, each back issue costs £35, $43

institutions and non-members is £115, US$140.