Muslims in Medieval Italy: The Colony at Lucera 0739105124, 0739114840

Citation preview

_

—

=

Sa

—_

=

—

Lu

CC)

Lit

—

THE COLONY AT LUCERA

JULIE ANNE TAYLOR

Muslims in Medieval Italy

rea

rege

Fp NL RRR

a

A

ART ln Pa SCREEN,

RE

rE.

be

SS

~eo een see

Muslims in Medieval Italy The Colony at Lucera

Julie Anne Taylor

IG

> LEXINGTON BOOKS A division of

ROWMAN

& LITTLEFIELD PUBLISHERS, INC.

we — P S oe

Lanham °Boulder « New York + Toranto * Oxford

ora SLL E CC i E o

es est Wana wee qo r AoA e

smprnsencsnmecmmaureasll

~~

LEXINGTON BOOKS A division of Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc.

A wholly owned subsidiary of The Rowman & Littlefield Publishing Group, Inc. 4501 Forbes Boulevard, Suite 200 Lanham, MD 20706 PO Box 317 Oxford OX2 9RU, UK

Copyright © 2003 by Lexington Books First paperback edition 2005

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without the prior permission of the publisher.

British Library Cataloguing in Publication Information Available

The hardback edition of this book was previously cataloged by the Library of Congress as follows: Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Library of Congress Control Number: 2003108903 ISBN 0-7391-0512-4 (cloth : alk paper) ISBN 0-7391-1484-0 (pbk : alk paper) Printed in the United States of America

i a NE!

ee en RT

Cane Oe Eee

7

i

RT

III

SD NN IR

IT

AEE

TT

2a

Dedicato @Nicdla’

00. tote ee 0h be Sic 19ene

tags.

MET er

neem

Contents List of Abbreviations List of Maps

Acknowledgments Introduction l

Muslims in Italy prior to the Thirteenth Century

2

The Creation of a Muslim Colony in Apulia

3

Muslim Status, Religious Practice, and Culture

4

The Administration of the Muslim Community

5

Muslim Occupations

6

Lucera under Manfred

i

Angevin Lucera

8

The Fall of Muslim Lucera

9

Conclusion

173

Bibliography Index

245

About the Author

Zo}

List of Abbreviations

ALT.

Acta imperii inedita saeculi XIII. Urkunden und Briefe zur Geschichte des Kaiserreichs und des Konigreichs Sicilien

A.S.P.

Archivio storico pugliese

A.S.P.N

Archivio storico per le provincie napoletane

ASS.

Archivio storico siciliano

BAS.

Biblioteca arabo-sicula ossia raccolta di testi arabici che toccano la geografia, la storia, la biografia e la bibliografia della Sicilia

C.D.C.

Codex diplomaticus cavensis

C.D.B.

Codice diplomatico barese

C.D.RC.

Codice diplomatico del regno di Carlo I. e II. d'Angio dal 1265 al 1309

C.D.P.

Codice diplomatico pugliese

C.D.S.

Codice diplomatico salernitano del secolo XIII

D.S.S.S.

Documenti per servire alla storia di Sicilia

D.T.R.V.

Documenti tratti dai Registri Vaticani

E.A.

L'état angevin. Pouvoir, culture et société entre XIIle et XIVe siécle. Actes du colloque international organisé par l'American Academy in Rome

FCOE

Foggia e la Capitanata nel Quaternus Excadenciarum di Federico II di Svevia

Abbreviations

Historia

diplomatica _ Friderici

constitutiones, privilegia, mandata,

Secundi,

sive

instrumenta quae

supersunt istius imperatoris et filiorum etus Lucera sotto la dominazione angioina Monumenta Germaniae Historica Monumenta Germaniae Historica. Scriptores

I pitt antichi documenti originali del comune di Lucera

(1232-1496)

R.P.R.

Regesta pontificum romanorum ab condita ecclesia ad annum post Christum natum MCXC VII

R.C.A.

Registri della cancelleria angioina

R.LS.

Rerum Italicarum Scriptores

S.M.S.

Storia dei musulmani di Sicilia

Se aa ~ earn ae719PARE Y In the Val di Mazara, Muslims ultimately comprised the majority of the population. The Italian peninsula also came under the eyes of early Muslim venturers.° Calabrian cities and towns such as Tropea, Santa Severina,

and Amantea were taken during the ninth century.’ The Cronaca di Tres Tabernae states that Catanzaro was founded by the strategus Flagizio after Muslim advances had left parts of Calabria in ruins. 5 The Muslim presence on the mainland was feltas far north as Rome when Saint Peter’s Basilica was sacked in 846.” In Apulia, Lucera was not the first city to be inhabited by Muslims, although the circumstances of the ninth century were clearly very different. Bari, only 130 kilometers south of Lucera, was captured by the Berber soldier Khalfun in the midninth century, and it remained

under Muslim

rule for over twenty

years. 10 When Emperor Louis II organized men from various parts of the kingdom to combat Muslims in southern Italy in 866, he chose Lucera as the rendezvous point, probably because of its strategic location.'' The early successes of Muslim conquerors in Apulia would be short-lived, but Sicily would remain a part of the dar al-Islam until the Norman invasion of the eleventh century. Scholars such as Michele Amari, Salvatore Cusa, Umberto Rizzitano, and Jeremy Jolins have made valuable contributions to the history of Muslims in Sicily.’ ? In addition to the Arabic sources collected and published by Amari in his Biblioteca arabo-sicula, coins, ceramics, epigraphs, and the ruins of houses and other structures testify to the pe: riod of Muslim dominance and to their later subjugation on the island. bs Given the amount of material available on Lucera which merits presentation, an exposition of the history of Muslims in Sicily before and during the Norman period will not be included here. The provision of some background to the earlier periods is both relevant and necessary, however,

The arrival of the Normans marks the beginning of the decline of Islam in Sicily.’ vsTheir conquest of the island took about thirty years, starting in 1061.! > During the upheaval, large numbers of Muslims, particularly the Muslim elite and intellectuals, fled to North Africa. The crown, churches, and other landlords in Sicily sometimes profited from such flight and from the expulsions which took place. The bishop of Agrigento, for example, purchased many casalia from Muslims eXpelled from the island during the second half of the twelfth century.

Muslims in Italy prior to the Thirteenth Century

3

Many Muslims who remained under Norman rule in Sicily were displaced from their lands by Christians, and such demographic shifts did not always take place naturally or peacefully. Some communities were subjected to violent attacks. Social tensions worsened through competition for resources manifested in 1161. The Chronicon of Romualdus Salernitanus states that Ruggero Schiavo instigated Lombard settlers to attack Muslims that year: “Roggerius autem Sclavo simul cum Lombardis cepit seditionem in Sicilia excitare, terram de demanio regis invadere et Sarracenos ubicumque invenire poterat trucidare.”"" Assaults on Muslims during the baronial uprising of 1161 were also described by Hugo Falcandus. He wrote that the Lombards of Butera, Piazza Armerina, and other towns “ . . . made unprovoked attacks on nearby places, and massacred both those (Muslims) who lived alongside the Christians in various towns as well as those who owned their estates, forming distinct communities.”!® The few people who managed to escape sought refuge in Muslim towns in southern Sicily.’ A consequence of the Norman invasion for the Muslim population was that most rural Sicilian Muslims eventually found themselves reduced to the servile status of villains under Christian overlords.”° Whereas many villains were tied to the lands they worked, others, paying taxes, were not.”! Villains could be transferred from one owner to another, and Muslims were often exchanged along with properties. In February 1131, for instance, King Roger II donated to the abbey of the Santissima Trinita of Cava the church of the Arcangelo Michele in Sicily along with its lands and villains, both Christian and Muslim.” Aiming to control and Christianize the large Muslim population of western Sicily, the Norman King William II lent his support to the abbey of Monreale which was endowed with large stretches of land in the Val di Mazara. Monreale became the most powerful monastic landowner in twelfth-century western Sicily. The lands of Monreale’s archdiocese came to span over 1,200 square kilometers, including Corleone, lato, Calatrasi, and Battelaro.7?> Thousands of Muslims found themselves living or working in areas under the jurisdiction of Monreale’s archbishop. The sponsoring of Monreale was part of a process whereby Sicily was gradually Latinized. Despite the enormous influence of the

abbey, many of the Muslims who did convert to Christianity adopted the Greek Orthodox faith with which they were more familiar.” The names of villains contained in the registers of taxes, rents, and other financial information kept by landlords in Norman Sicily indicate that

Muslim peasants converted to the Greek Orthodox faith.”

4

Chapter One

Numerous Muslims steadfastly resisted conversion altogether. During the conquest under Roger I, the sites of ancient abandoned settlements in the rocky areas of western Sicily were repopulated by Muslims.2° Some Muslims left lands controlled by Christian landowners, including the crown, only to be forced to return later, either out of economic or political necessity.7” In one case, in order to return to the lands of San Giovanni degli Eremiti at Mezzoiuso, three brothers, registered

villains, had to swear upon the Qur’an to obey the abbot, and they had to promise to pay the jizya and the canon’® As late as the thirteenth century, Muslim communities in western Sicily, particularly in the mountainous areas of Iato and Entella, were still operating with a great degree of autonomy. Despite its increasing subjugation, the Muslim population constituted a force with which all who wished to rule the Sicilian kingdom would have to contend.

The Muslim Community and the Struggle to Control Sicily during the Minority of Frederick II During the minority of Frederick II, the Muslim community was courted by political aspirants like Markward of Anweiler who aspired to gain control over the island. Before her death on 27 November 1198, Frederick’s mother Constance made her young son a ward of Pope Innocent III, renouncing Frederick’s claims to the empire.” In an effort to

rid the Kingdom of Sicily of the German influence which her husband Henry VI had introduced, she ordered the expulsion of German officials, including Markward, a long-term Hohenstaufen agent. Markward returned later, claiming the regency of Sicily.” Backed by Philip of Swabia, Henry’s brother, who had been elected by the German princes in place of Frederick, Markward arrived in Trapani in October 1199. He won the support of many Muslims as well as Christians. His campaign grew to challenge papal interests with respect to the island. By late November, Pope Innocent was so concerned about the threat which Markward posed that he wrote to the nobles, counts,

barons, and other men of Sicily, alleging that Markward and his followers endangered the lives of Christians and the kingdom itself.°! In his letter, the pope expressed concern about the appeal Markward had to the Sicilian Muslims and about the Muslim role in the offensive, writing, “Jn ipso namque ingressu suo quibusdam Sarracenis confederatus eorum sibi contra regem et christianos convocavit auxilium et ut eorum animos ad stragem nostrorum amplius excitaret et sitim augeret eorum,

atts ta sac dad ete uh dnd nda cs thd ih ia ae nar ddeme ra

Muslims in Italy prior to the Thirteenth Century

5

iam ipsorum fauces christiano sanguine cruentavit et mulieres christianas captas per violentiam eorum exposuit voluntati.” On November twenty fourth, Innocent declared a crusade against Markward, offering an indulgence to potential crusaders.*” Polemics put forth by the papacy targeted Markward’s association with the Muslims of Sicily. He was referred to as another Saladin and as a friend of infidels. Innocent condemned Markward’s associations, but in December he himself made an appeal to the Muslim community, urging its mem-

bers to remain Markward as a timately betray friend, assuring

loyal to Frederick.’ The pope attempted to portray false ally of the Muslim population, one who would uland oppress them. Innocent presented himself as a Muslims that the Apostolic See desired to improve their

condition. His promise of good faith, at least in the short term, was ap-

parently sincere; he had expressed similar intentions in a separate letter to the nobles and other men of the realm: “Zicet enim Sarracenos si in fidelitate predicti regis permanserint diligere ac manutenere velimus et bonas eis consuetudines adaugere, sustinere tamen nec volumus nec debemus et cum Marcovaldo regni excidium machinentur.”?> The pope’s appeal convinced few people in the Muslim community to support his cause. In March 1200, papal armies arrived in Sicily to fight against Markward and his forces, which included Muslims. Four

months later, the archbishop Anselmo of Naples announced a major victory for the papal and imperial army. - Recognizing that securing the loyalty of the Muslim population was still critical, Innocent told the familiares of the king around October 1200 that there ought to be peace with the Muslims as long as they did not support the king’s enemies: “ .. volumus et mandamus ut si Saraceni sufficientem prestiterint cautionem quod inimicis regis de cetero non adhereant et in ejus fidelitate ac obsequio firmi et stabiles perserverent, pace cum ipsis integre reformata, eos in gratiam pietatis regie revocetis.’

The gains made by papal forces near Monreale that summer were short-lived. The following year, Markward Successfully besieged Palermo, and he took hold of young Frederick.° ’ Sicily remained largely in Markward’s hands until he died of an illness in 1202. After Markward’s demise, the papacy continued to monitor the alliances and movements of the Muslim population. In September 1206, Innocent wrote to the archadius (the gadi) and to all the gaieti (ga’ids) and Muslims of Sicily to urge them to persist in their loyalty to Frederick.?” The pope specifically addressed the qa ‘ids of Entella, Platani, lato, and Celso since sizeable Muslim communities inhabited those places. Some were historic Muslim strongholds; Platani had been named by Gioffredo Malaterra as

6

Chapter One

a Muslim center during the Norman conquest.” In his letter, Innocent told the Muslims that they would be repaid for their faithfulness to the crown. By promising to respect the territorial interests of the Church and by agreeing to return properties which had been seized by previous rulers, a Guelf aspirant to the throne, Otto of Brunswick, won the Aah of Innocent III who crowned him emperor on 4 October 1209. March of that year, Otto had written to Innocent to affirm his good Ae on matters such as the election of bishops, the fight against heresy, and the defense of Church territory.’ ? Soon after his coronation, however, Otto broke his word. His aggressive conduct on the mainland andiin Sicily prompted Innocent to excommunicate him in November 1210.4 Allied with powerful men in Sicily and in possession of well- fortified mountain castra, Muslims offered their support to Otto in 1211. still, Otto was not in a position to maintain control over the island. With the backing of the pope and the king of France, Philip Augustus, Frederick was elected king by the German princes in December 1212. The French defeated Otto’s forces and those of King John of England at the Battle of Bouvines in 1214.”

Conflicts in Sicily and the Deportations to Lucera The unrest and disorder which had characterized Frederick’s minority continued during his absence from the regno and after his return to Italy in the 1220s. Symptoms of discord and restlessness manifested themselves in Sicily’s cities as well as in more remote areas. As early as January 1211, Frederick voiced his displeasure with what he viewed as

disobedience and unfaithfulness on the part of Muslims who fell under Monreale’s jurisdiction. ° As stated, since the second half of the twelfth century, Monreale had been the largest Christian landlord in western Sicily, and Muslim populations at places such as lato and Celso had worked as villains on the monastery’s lands.”’ Frederick complained that Muslims had been perfidious and rebellious, shirking their responsibilities to the monastery despite his orders. Empowering the archbishop with the authority to seize such villains and their possessions, Frederick affirmed the royal commitment to an institution which had a critical role in maintaining a Christian presence in the region.” The defense of the rights of Monreale became a matter of policy for Frederick in Sicily, part of a larger plan to impose order on the island and to uphold the tradition of his Norman ancestors. In a letter,to the

Muslims in Italy prior to the Thirteenth Century

7

archbishop of Monreale of July 1220, Frederick recalled the “time of turbulence” when Muslims as well as Christians had seized lands and other properties belonging to Monreale.’” He restored and confirmed all rights and possessions pertaining to it. Monreale’s holdings were extensive. Castles and churches were among the properties mentioned.”” To improve security in the lands around Monreale, Frederick encouraged Christians to reside there. In the spring of 1211, Christians who held vineyards and other properties in the tenimentum of Monreale were ordered to take up residence.” The properties of those who refused to comply became subject to confiscation. Frederick reaffirmed the rights of Monreale again in March 1221; addressing the prelates, counts, barons, and other men in the Kingdom of Sicily, he declared

that the church of Monreale was entitled to claim possession of any villains which rightfully belonged to it.” In 1221 the emperor confirmed privileges such as fishing rights for Monreale.>> The physical and economic dislocation of the Muslims in Sicily continued during Frederick’s reign. Many Muslims left the oppressive environments in which they increasingly found themselves, moving to lato and Entella where, as noted, Muslim communities operated with

relative autonomy. Ample archaeological evidence of a Muslim presence at those sites has been recovered. A house from the Hohenstaufen period with a small courtyard used as a kitchen and equipped with an oven for apparent domestic use was found at Monte lato.’ A number of houses at Iato which were apparently built during the same period were hastily constructed, pointing to the site’s role as a refuge.” The Monreale Survey confirmed the habitation of a number of sites on nearby Monte Maranfusa.”° At Entella, there are burial sites which date between the mid-eleventh and the mid-thirteenth centuries.°’ The orientation of the bodies toward the qibla indicates that the burials were Islamic.> A hammam at Entella, presumably of Islamic origin, is considered by archaeologists to be from the twelfth or early thirteenth century.

Frederick’s return to Italy from Germany in 1220s did not reduce tensions between Muslims and Christians. Probably during the early 1220s, after taking possession of the church at Agrigento as well as its belltower and other properties, Muslims prevented Christians from using those facilities even to perform sacraments such as baptisms.” A group of Muslims actually held the city’s bishop, Urso, prisoner at Guastanella for fourteen months.°' He regained his freedom only after his captors received a ransom payment. :

8

Chapter One

At lato, the leader of the Muslim community, Muhammad ibn ‘Abbad, went so far in his assertion of autonomy as to produce his own coins.” The emperor must have viewed Ibn ‘Abbad’s actions as an affront to his sovereignty. He called for an assault on the rebel leader’s camp in 1222. Arabic sources indicate that Ibn ‘Abbad was based at Entella, but when he fought against Frederick II during the summer of 1222 he was at Iato.™ Orders and confirmations of privileges were issued by the emperor “in castris in obsidione Jati” while he was fighting against “Mirabettus.”” The documents span from 17 June until 18 August 1222. Located at a key point between Palermo and Entella, lato was specifi:

cally mentioned as the Muslim stronghold in the Annales siculi”’ Samples of Ibn ‘Abbad’s coins were found at Iato by a team of archaeologists from the University of Zurich.”

Written during the first half of the thirteenth century by the Syrian Abu ’l-Fada‘il Muhammad

ibn ‘Ali ibn ‘Abd al-‘Aziz, known as al-

Hamawi, once the secretary of the Ayyubid prince al-Hafiz, the Ta’rikh al-mansuri provides some information on Ibn ‘Abbad’s personal background.” According to al-Hamawi, Ibn ‘Abbad was not a native Sicilian; he had gone to Sicily as an adolescent.’? In part by winning the support of Ibn Fakhir, the head of the community, Ibn ‘Abbad rose to a position of leadership.”! He married Ibn Fakhir’s daughter. Ibn ‘Abbad’s influence ultimately spread beyond the mountains to the plains.” Ibn ‘Abbad’s successful organization of an independent and autonomous society is revealed by his issue of the coins mentioned. Both coins minted from scratch and defaced denari which had been issued by Frederick II circulated within the Muslim community.” The former type of coin had the Islamic profession of faith and the name of the rebel leader as legends.” The length of time that it took Frederick to defeat Ibn ‘Abbad and the naming of the rebel leader in official documents demonstrate how

real a challenge the Muslim rebellion was. Judging from the dates of the documents which were drawn up while the siege was under way, the assault on Jato lasted about two months. The Ja’rikh al-mansuri de-

sae EN

C

scribes a much longer siege of eight months.’> The Muslim opposition was of such proportions that a large imperial army had to be deployed

to the area. Both the Ta 'rikh al-mansuri and the Annales siculi agree on this point. The estimate in the former source that 60,000 foot soldiers and 2,000 horses went with the emperor was probably an overstatement, though.”° The Annales siculi does not offer a numerical estimate, re-

he, een e ge e eee a -

Muslims in Italy prior to the Thirteenth Century

9

porting only that, “. . . dominus Fridericus imperator ivit cum magno exercitu super Saracenos Jacii...” Recounted in the Ta’rikh al-mansuri, the details of Ibn ‘Abbad’s

legendary surrender and its aftermath merit retelling though they may be fictional. According to al-Hamawi, the assault made against Ibn ‘Abbad by imperial forces was so fierce that at a certain point men in the Muslim camp began to break ranks.’® Some men who were charged with the defense of the walls of the Muslim settlement decided that one of them ought to go to Ibn ‘Abbad to tell him that they no longer wanted to continue resisting.” When he received the news, Ibn ‘Abbad was incredulous. He called the men together to confirm that what the messenger had said was true. They did not deny it, so desperate had the circumstances become. Ibn ‘Abbad ordered them to return to their posts. Once they had gone, he lashed out in rage against the messenger, killing him. When the news of the murder later reached them, the men decided to take matters into their own hands. They set out for Frederick’s camp. Upon reaching it, they offered the emperor entry into the Muslim settlement. Under those circumstances, the son of the gadi decided to approach Ibn ‘Abbad to urge him to consider surrendering. Ibn ‘Abbad was still opposed to capitulating, but the next morning at dawn he went to Frederick along with the gadi. Frederick granted an audience, and Ibn ‘Abbad was led inside his tent. In Frederick’s eyes, the rebel leader was

guilty of treason. His insurgency had forced Frederick to expend substantial resources. The emperor moved. He kicked Ibn ‘Abbad, leaving him with a lacerated side.” Frederick had him executed soon after their encounter. The Annales siculi states that Frederick had “Benaveth”

hanged at Palermo.” According to the Ta’rikh al-mansuri, the rebel leader was killed a week after Frederick had rejected his plea for mercy. His sons were dragged behind horses.” The defeat and death of Ibn ‘Abbad did not put an end to the Muslim rebellion. According to the Ta’rikh al-mansuri, Muslims under the leadership of some members of Ibn ‘Abbad’s family maintained control of certain rocky areas.” Among the remaining Muslim leaders was the ga’id Marzuq. : Marzuq outwitted Frederick to win a small victory. After promising to hand over the Muslim settlements to the emperor’s men, the ga’id had all 115 people sent by Frederick ambushed and massacred,” An alternative version of the events surrounding Ibn ‘Abbad’s defeat is given in al-Rawd al-mi'tar fi khabar al-agtar (The perfumed garden of information on places), a geographical dictionary.® Begun in

10

Chapter One

the late thirteenth century, this work was probably composed over several centuries by different al-Himyari family members. : According to it, in the year 616 (between 1219 and 1220 A.D.) Ibn ‘Abbad made an

agreement with Frederick II whereby, in exchange for his personal safety and the right to keep his possessions and treasures, he would put an end to his resistance. The rebel leader was to have been allowed to go by boat to North Africa. In order to be sure that Frederick would honor the pact made with her father, Ibn ‘Abbad’s daughter decided that she would hold their base which, according to the author, was at Entella. She resolved to continue the Muslim rebellion should Frederick not live up to the agreement. Her name is not provided by the account.*® The suspicions of the rebel leader’s daughter proved to be justified. Ibn ‘Abbad never reached North Africa. While at sea, imperial soldiers

pushed him overboard, drowning him.®? All his possessions were taken to the emperor. When the news of the murder reached her, Ibn ‘Abbad’s

daughter along with other Muslim warriors became determined never to submit to Frederick. In 619 (between 1222 and 1223) she wrote to the emperor, telling him that she was weary and that her health was declin-

ing. She promised him that if he were to send 300 of his knights to their fortress at night, she would allow them to enter the Muslim settlement.” If his men could take the fortress, she would surrender to him,

and his troubles would at last be ended. Frederick fell for the trap. His men went to her camp. As instructed, they reached it during the night. The daughter of Ibn ‘Abbad opened the gate to the castle, but she had no intention of betraying her followers. Like Marzuq’s men, the Muslims of Entella were lying in wait. All 300 of Frederick’s knights were massacred. When the emperor arrived after daybreak, he found the heads of his men hanging from the parapet. AlRawd al-mi'tar tells how, despite Frederick’s planning and superior forces, he never succeeded in taking Ibn ‘Abbad’s daughter alive. She

ultimately took her own life by poisoning herself.” The same story about Ibn ‘Abbad’s surrender and the rebellion

which continued under the leadership of his daughter was briefly recounted in another Arabic source, the Kitab al-Mughrib fi hula 'lMaghrib published in 1910 by Bernhard Moritz in the Centenario della nascita di Michele Amari.” Though attributed to Abu ’!-Hasan ‘Ali ibn Musa, the Kitab al-Mughrib was completed over the course of more than a century (from 1135 until 1243) by ‘Abd al-Malik ibn Sa‘id and his descendents, of whom Abu ’I-Hasan ‘Ali ibn Musa was one.”? Like

al-Rawd al-mi'‘tar, the Kitab al-Mughrib states that Ibn ‘Abbad was

based at Entella. The author of the latter source added a few different

Muslims in Italy prior to the Thirteenth Century

1]

descriptive points to the basic story. For instance, he noted that many Muslims had joined Ibn ‘Abbad’s movement, but they were outnumbered by imperial forces, and no Muslim ruler came to their aid.” Whether the story about Ibn ‘Abbad’s daughter is entirely fictitious or has elements of truth, the Muslim rebellion against Frederick in western Sicily definitely did continue after Ibn ‘Abbad’s death. Indeed, the Muslims proved to be more formidable opponents than Frederick had probably ever imagined. The emperor remained determined to crush the opposition. He sent another military force to Sicily in 1223.”° The Sicilian expedition followed shortly after an exhausting campaign in Molise. Among the magnates who were called to serve were Ruggero d’ Aquila, Giacomo da San Severino, and Tommaso da Caserta.”° Monies were collected throughout the kingdom to pay the knights and servientes sent to fight.” The Land of Montecassino contributed 300 gold ounces.”® The offensive of 1223 made inroads into, but did not destroy, the Muslim resistance. In July that year, the emperor wrote to Bishop Conrad of Hildesheim to announce his success in uprooting Muslims from their mountain strongholds.” Hinting at the difficulty of the operation, Frederick described the places which the Muslims had seized as the “heights of mountains” and “impregnable areas.” Despite the tone of his letter, the victory was not conclusive.'°° A fter witnessing the deporta-

tion of their brethren to a distant and unfamiliar location, many Muslims were even more desperate and determined not to surrender. The first known deportations to Lucera, reported by Riccardo di San Germano, took place in 1223, although population transfers may have actually begun even earlier, possibly after the two-month siege of lato during the summer of 1222.'°' Martin noted in Le cartulaire de S. Matteo di Sculgola that the mention of a “civitas maura” in a document of 1221 could be the earliest known reference to Muslim Lucera, al-

though he offered an alternative plausible explanation that the description may have been inserted when the document was transcribed in 1225.'" At least some of the Muslims who were forced to capitulate during the second campaign seem to have avoided being transferred to Lucera by returning to work on the lands of Monreale. Although social unrest involving Muslims is known to have troubled Agrigento during the 1220s and Muslims were probably deported from Agrigento during that decade, the hub of resistance and a primary site from which people were forcibly deported in 1223 was Iato. Citing Amari, Egidi maintained that Frederick transferred Muslims mainly from Agrigento to Lucera.'” So did Martin and Errico Cuozzo who

12

Chapter One

asserted that the transfers to Apulia which took place between 1224 and 1225 involved the Muslims of Agrigento.’ % They Suggested that the

relocation of the Muslims of lato occurred later, in 1246.'° > Similarly, Antonino Ragona divided the Muslim island rebellion into two phases, one occurring between 1223 and 1225 involving the Muslim population of Agrigento and another taking place at Iato and Entella between the years 1243 and 1246. 16 Since the imperial registers identify Iato as a site of conflict in the early 1220s, during that time at least some deportations presumably took place from that location. According to the Annales siculi, Frederick II sent an army to Jerba n 1223.'°’ Thomas Van Cleve linked the invasion of Jerba to the Sicilian island rebellion,, Suggesting that allies of the Sicilian rebels may have resided there.'° ® Although there is no documentary evidence of collaboration between the islanders, the hypothesis is interesting. In 1224 the unrest in Sicily dominated the political agenda. In March, Frederick told Pope Honorius III that he would commit 100 galleys and fifty usseria to the ongoing preparations to recover the Holy Land, but he himself would be delayed in Sicily in order to await the surrender of the Muslim rebels.'!°? The marescalcus of Catania whom Frederick had appointed to organize effortsiinSicily had by then made headway in his dealings with Muslim leaders.'!° Frederick feared that if he were to leave the island, the progress made would be undone, and

Muslims would take the opportunity to gather their crops. Evidently, the Muslim community had been compelled to nepotiate a surrender because it had been cut off from its food supplies. ' The terms of the ne-

gotiations between Muslim leaders and royal officials are not known. Therefore, no evidence exists that Muslims were offered the choice of converting to Christianity or being deported, as Christoph Maier suggested. The negotiations may have secured the right of some Muslims to stay in Sicily under the condition that they descended from their strongholds. An unknown Cistercian monk from Santa Maria di Ferrara wrote that the Muslims who capitulated in 1224 were forced to live in the plains of Lucera, but according to the Annales siculi, they were made to

stay in the flatlands of Sicily: “... dominus Fridericus imperator misil exercitum magnum super Saracenos Siciliae, qui remanserunt in montanis, et magnum guastum semper annuatim faciebat super illos, usquequo descenderunt cum magno opprobrio, et fecit illos morari in plano Siciliae, in casalibus.”"

Addressing the church officials and people of Friesland, Oliver of Paderborn made reference to a triumph over the Muslims in Sicily dut-

Muslims in Italy prior to the Thirteenth Century

13

ing the summer of 1224,''* Oliver presented the victory as one of several steps forward which were being made by Christians in the negotium crucis, Since in September 1224 the emperor collected additional funds from the land of the church of Montecassino “pro facto Sarracenorum Sicilie,” all the Muslim rebels had evidently not been de-

feated.''? In 1224 money was also raised in Cefalu.''® The following year, barons and knights from the kingdom were called on again to address the “disorder” caused by Muslims in Sicily.’ fa long-lasting victory was finally won by Frederick’s forces in 1225.''8 Additional conflicts were not reported for almost two decades. The emperor celebrated the Christmas of 1225 not far from Lucera in the city of Troia.!!?

The Response of Muslims in the Dar al-Islam The relocation of Sicilian Muslims to the mainland took place over a period of over twenty years, but by the end of the 1220s entire Muslim villages on the island had already been depopulated. An interesting though not entirely reliable account of the period is provided by the Ta’rikh al-mansuri. According to it, between 1229 and 1230, a Sicilian

Muslim named Ahmad ibn Abi ’l-Qasim, having witnessed the devastation wrecked on Muslim settlements in western Sicily, managed to gain an audience with Sultan al-Kamil of Egypt to whom he recounted the atrocities suffered by Muslims in Sicily. He asked al-Kamil to intervene, not by sending armed men or weapons to the island, but through diplomacy. 20 Ahmad wanted him to convince Frederick to allow the deportees to return to their homes, or if that were impossible, to permit them to relocate to Egypt. Although his claim that 170,000 Muslims had been deported to Apulia and just as many had been killed must be an exaggeration, Ahmad’s assertion that many people in Sicily had been torn from their homes and deprived of their possessions is probably true.'*! The killing of large numbers of Muslims is also conceivable. The chronicler named the following centers of Muslim resistance: Gallo, Cinisi, lato, and Entella. Gallo was apparently abandoned as its inhabitants left to find shelter at higher altitudes. According to the Ta rikthal-mansuri, al-Kamil actually wrote to Frederick about the matter.

Given the long-established and friendly ties which existed between Frederick and al-Kamil, an appeal for aid through diplomatic channels would have been the most sensible approach for someone in Ahmad’s circumstances. During the reign of William II, Muslims in Sicily had

14

Chapter One

made an appeal to Saladin, but they had sought military, not diplomatic, intervention.'~ Ahmad’s visit came on the heels of Frederick’s negotiations with al-Kamil for the surrender of Jerusalem. The sultan was probably already aware that Frederick had transferred the Sicilian Muslims to Apulia. It cannot be confirmed whether or not al-Kamil wrote to Frederick regarding the Muslim community at Lucera. Certainly, he would not have been motivated to step in by any prospect of financial or territorial gain. In any case, Frederick’s program of deporting Muslims from Sicily was not halted; transfers to Apulia occurred as late as the 1240s, and no records of large numbers of people leaving Lucera for either Sicily or Egypt exist. On the contrary, Frederick tightened restricé ; ; 134 tions on Muslim movements outside the colony in 1239, There were Muslims who managed to avoid the deportations and emigrate from Sicily, either with the consent of or by eluding royal officials. A certain Abu ‘Abd Allah Muhammad ibn Abi Bakr ibn ‘Abd alRazzak who is believed to have been born in Sicily in 1224, for example, later studied and became a well-known religious figure in Egypt.'”° The flight of learned and wealthy Muslims from Sicily is a phenomenon recorded in Arabic sources as early as the eleventh century when the island first came to be dominated by the Normans. '7° The author of the Ta ‘rikh al-mansuri described Ahmad as a pilgrim. Despite the turbulent social conditions leading up to the deportations, some Muslims may have continued to observe the hajj. Ahmad was a man of a certain social standing in the Muslim community which would explain why he had the resources to go; he was described in the Ta’rikh

al-mansuri as a shaykh of Gallo.'?’ The making of the pilgrimage, one of the five pillars or obligations of the Islamic faith, seems to have been denied to Muslims at Lucera. A few members of the elite may have received special permission to go, but there are no records of the hajj being made from the colony. Diplomatic considerations probably did influence Frederick to some extent when he decided to deport and resettle rather than to expel or massacre the Muslims in his realm. Prominent figures from Muslim countries later visited Lucera. During Frederick’s reign, the nephew of the king of Tunis, ‘Abd al-‘Aziz, sojourned near the city. Under Freder-

ick’s son Manfred, an ambassador of Sultan Baybars of Egypt went to Lucera.'*® The economic and military considerations which also appear

to have informed Frederick’s decision to create the colony are examined in another chapter. ‘Abd al-‘Aziz came to the Kingdom of Sicily from Tunis in 1236. His presence within the kingdom compounded already existing tensions

Muslims in Italy prior to the Thirteenth Century

15

between the crown and the papacy. Pope Gregory IX was convinced that ‘Abd al-‘Aziz had come to Italy in order to be baptized in Rome.'”” Writing to Frederick in June 1236, Gregory charged that ‘Abd al-‘Aziz

was being detained in the kingdom against his will, and he ordered Frederick to release him.'*° The dispute between the emperor and the papacy over ‘Abd al-‘Aziz continued for several years. In 1238 the crown responded defensively to charges that he was being prevented from going to Rome, asserting that ‘Abd al-‘Aziz had not come to Italy to be baptized, but because his life was in danger.'>’ ‘Abd al-‘Aziz had even been asked if he wanted to be baptized, but he did not, the defense insisted. If he were to wish to become a Christian, Frederick would be pleased. Since ‘Abd al-‘Aziz was described in the crown’s statement as

being free to travel throughout Apulia, it is likely that he visited the Muslims at Lucera at least once. The papacy evidently was not swayed by the crown’s defense because Frederick’s alleged detention of ‘Abd al-‘Aziz was among the charges made when the emperor was excommunicated in 1239.'° The probability of a visit to the colony by ‘Abd al-‘Aziz increases in the light of the fact that he stayed in Capitanata during at least part of his sojourn in the regno. The justiciar of that region, Riccardo di Montefusculo, saw to the provision of a list of items for him in December 1239. Frederick ordered that official to provide a number of things, explaining that he wished to assist the nephew of the “illustrious king of Tunis.” In addition to a horse and garment made of scarlet cloth, ‘Abd al-‘Aziz received a mattress and a blanket or coverlet made of zendato. Six gold ounces were set aside for provisioning his three scutifers,7 Other prominent men from Muslim countries may have paid visits to the colony. Messengers of the sultan of Egypt who had been sent to meet with Frederick went to the kingdom in 1239. The secretus of Messina was ordered to honor the messengers by providing them with horses and other necessities. Ultimately, the men were destined for Apulia.'*4 The city of Foggia, eighteen kilometers southeast of Lucera, was increasingly used as a base by the emperor during the second half of his reign, as will be seen later. The objective of visits to the kingdom by Muslim ambassadors would not have been to check on conditions at the colony, of course, but calls on the city are not unimaginable given the proximity of Foggia to the Muslim settlement. Muslim rulers were definitely aware of the existence of a Muslim colony in southern Italy. A number of Arabic works make reference to the colony or to the events surrounding its creation. In Nur al-Din ‘Ali ibn Musa ibn Sa‘id’s Mukhtasar jughrafiya, Lucera is mentioned as

16

Chapter One

part of a series of descriptions of different geographic areas. The peculiarity of Lucera’s being inhabited predominantly by Muslims is communicated in a concise and matter-of-fact manner. The city is described as the place “where the emperor settled the Muslims whom he had driven out of Sicily,”!?> By retelling the events surrounding the deportations from Sicily, the Maghrebian historian Ibn Khaldun provided one of the most descriptive Arabic accounts of the circumstances leading up to the foundation of Muslim Lucera. Ibn Khaldun’s family had immigrated to Tunis while Abu Zakariyya was in power, and Ibn Khaldun was born there.'*° It

must be kept in mind that, although Ibn Khaldun was well-acquainted with both European politics and the affairs of Muslim societies, he was writing during the fourteenth century. al Ibn Khaldun recounted that the Sultan Abu Zakariyya, through an

agreement with the “prince of the island,” made sure that Muslims living inSicily had civil rights, perhaps on a level equal to that of Christians.'°® The grandson of Abu Hafs ‘Umar, a key supporter of the Almohad Mahdi Ibn Tumart, Abu Zakariyya was the founder of the Hafsid dynasty in Ifriqiya. '>? Ibn Khaldun asserted that the deterioration of Muslim-Christian relations in Sicily began when Christians learned that Abu Zakariyya had died. They began assaulting Muslims, forcing them to flee to the island’s castella and rocky crags. The Muslim refugees organized themselves under the leadership of a member of the Banu ‘Abs, a tribe of Northern Arabian provenance. “The tyrant of Sicily,”

presumably Frederick II given the context, intervened at that point, seizing the Muslim strongholds and forcing the rebels to descend. He then imposed the drastic measure of deporting Muslims from the island.'* Ibn Khaldun’s report is questionable on a number of points. His dating of the events just described after the death of Abu Zakariyya in 1249 is obviously inaccurate. The first deportations began more than two decades earlier. Frederick himself died in 1250, and no deportations are known to have been carried out by his successors. More importantly, Ibn Khaldun exaggerated in assigning such a significant intermediary role to the amir. Abu Zakariyya was in contact with Frederick II to whom, starting in 1239, he paid tribute each year,!*! Nevertheless, the

deportations to Lucera began before he took power in Ifriqiya, and they continued afterwards. Whether true or not, the claim that a pact was drawn up between the Sicilian crown and a foreign Muslim leader to establish the rights of Muslims living within the regno is significant. Both Ibn Khaldun’s record and the Ta’rikh al-mansuri give the impression that Muslim leaders were not only aware of but also concerned

EES IEEG COTE NL REP Aree arne

Muslims in Italy prior to the Thirteenth Century

17

about the basic welfare of Muslims living in the dar al-harb, to the extent that they used diplomatic channels to secure their welfare.!4?

Muslim Life in Sicily after the First Deportations and the Renewal of the Muslim Rebellion The Muslim settlements around Ahmad’s home in western Sicily may have been dismantled, but Muslims continued to work and live on the

island until the final known deportations in the 1240s, and in isolated cases perhaps even afterwards. In November 1239, detailed preparations were made by royal officials for the Muslims working in the castles at Syracuse and Lentini so that they would receive shares of grain, barley, cheese, wine, and other provisions. 43 Tn October 1239; Frederick began

pushing for the relocation of Muslims to Palermo.'“* Muslims were not to be made to move by force, but rather to be swayed by good words. oe Their presence was needed to strengthen the mansiones of Seralcadi, a district of Palermo which had previously been populated by Muslims. !46 Frederick may have intended the Muslim reoccupation of the district to

be temporary; Ferdinando Maurici hypothesized that Frederick’s plan to encourage Muslims to go to the Palermitan area may have been part of a larger scheme to deport them eventually to the mainland." ” Development plans for the Muslims at Seralcadi evidently had some success because on 16 December 1239 Frederick commended his justiciar: “De Saracenis autem Seralcadii quos pro beneplacito nostro inducis ut habitationes suas reforment in melius, placet nobis et tuum inde studium commendamus.”'*® There are signs that conditions for the Muslims who remained on the island after 1225, even those who were not involved in resistance movements, continued to deteriorate. Toward the end of the 1230s, a

number of Muslim shepherds who had been raising |herds owned by the crown found themselves unable to pay their taxes. ‘* A large amount of money was due. The gabella may have been exorbitant. Frederick responded by ordering his justiciar in western Sicily to seize their goods. If the value of the seized property proved insufficient, then the men themselves were to be forced to labor for the crown.'*” The harsh punishment meted out to the shepherds was designed to discourage others from taking on financial obligations which they might not later have the means to meet: “ ... in exemplo eorum ceteri doceantur non debere a curia nostra cabellas recipere quas solvere sine difficultate non possint.”

18

Chapter One

The steady worsening of social and economic conditions for Muslims must have been what inspired the revival of the rebellion which occurred two decades after the first deportations. During the summer of

1243, people organized themselves in the rough, mountainous parts of Sicily which gave them a defensive advantage.'”| The Annales siculi reported their taking Iato and either Licata or Entella.'°* Ernesto Pontieri, editor of the revised edition of the Annales siculi, asserted that the

Muslims went to Licata, the southern coastal city in the province of Caltanisetta, rather than to Entella.!°? Amari, by contrast, maintained that

Entella was the site in question.'*4 Licata had been a Muslim stronghold during the Norman conquest of Sicily.!°° The Latin place name used in the Annales siculi, Alicata, would suggest that Licata was indeed the site. Written Arabic and archaeological sources indicate that Entella was also an important center of the Muslim resistance at some point. According to the Annales siculi, Riccardo, the count of Caserta, following Frederick’s orders, expelled in 1245 all Muslims from Sicily, sending them on to Lucera.!°° There are, however, references to con-

flicts taking place in 1246 between Muslims and imperial forces. In August 1246, Frederick addressed a letter to the Muslim rebels, criticizing

them for being obstinate in wickedness and for defying his authority.'° He did not attempt to mask his indignation and anger; he threatened

retaliation should they not descend from their strongholds within the month: “Et sic dum temeritatis vesania vos efficit in nequitia pertinaces, non solum ex hoc offendimur, sed ad ulciscendum que ausu temerario contra majestatem nostram illicite perpetrastis et adhuc non desinitis perpetrare, non irrationabiliter provocamur,”'*8 A month earlier, in July 1246, Frederick had written from Naples to

the future Alfonso X, son of King Fernando III of Castile, to announce that the Muslims who had gone into the mountains in rebellion had re-

turned to level ground and surrendered.'>? A complete surrender did not take place until the early autumn, however. In his letter to Alfonso, Fre-

derick did not mention that the deportations to Apulia were again under way, but Alfonso would have already known that the Muslim rebels were destined for the colony. In 1240 his brother had visited the emperor at Foggia, not far from Lucera, remaining at the royal court until

1245,'°

Frederick spent part of November 1246 at Lucera.'®’ That same month, he told Ezzelino da Romano that the resistance of the Muslims in Sicily had finally been brought to an end,'® The finality of the victory is supported by the archaeological record, Hans Peter Isler reported

enNN ET R Fe

Muslims in Italy prior to the Thirteenth Century

19

that a coin dating from the yeat 1246 was found at lato, but no later coins have been discovered. |” In his letter to Ezzelino, Frederick described the Muslims as being of a different faith and “integrity of devotion.” Having defied his authority, they had to be punished for their “insolence.” Clashes with the island rebels had extended over a period of more than twenty years. He went on in his letter to boast that the Muslims had been terrified when faced with imperial power and had been unable to resist. They had begged for mercy: “ . . . Saracenos prefatos tanquam timore nostre potentie perterritos, nec fortune Cesaree volentes ulterius, quin potius non valentes obsistere, nuperrime noveris descendisse, solam benignitatis auguste misericordiam implorantes.”'™ The forced removal of Muslims and the Black Death which struck Sicily during the fourteenth century dramatically reduced the population in western Sicily. In studying a sample area which once had formed a part of Monreale’s territories, the archaeologists of the Monreale Survey discovered that only one out of thirteen sites which had been inhabited during the thirteenth century continued to be occupied during the fourteenth and fifteenth.’ The zone chosen for the survey had been a center of the Muslim resistance.’ The devasting impact which the Black Death had in Sicily during the fourteenth century helps to explain why the sites in question were not reinhabited.

The Impact of the Deportations on Sicily According to Maurici, the deportations resulted in an “irreparable loss” to Sicilian agriculture and technical knowledge.” The removal of a large part of the Muslim labor force from Sicily by 1240 did not completely immobilize Sicilian grain production, however. During the famine of 1240, Frederick shipped large quantities of Sicilian grain to Tunis. It is important to remember that economic troubles in Sicily during and after the late thirteenth century were not due exclusively to the loss of the Muslim population. The War of the Sicilian Vespers strained resources. Stephan Epstein noted that a high number of settlements were abandoned between 1280 and 1340.'® As indicated, the island’s population suffered further during the fourteenth century as a result of the plague.’ Despite the early hardships of the bishop and the Christian community at Agrigento, local clerics lamented the removal of Muslim villains from the area as a despoiling of their property. From a legal standpoint,

20

Chapter One

their views were of course legitimate since villains were defined as property. To compensate the church of Agrigento for the losses which it had incurred as a result of the Muslim uprisings and the subsequent deportations, the vicar general in Sicily and Calabria, Rufino da Piacenza, granted revenues stemming from the Jews and from the dyeing industry of Agrigento to the city’s bishop in November 1255. '70 The late date for this document shows that the removal of the Muslim population from Sicily had long-lasting negative effects. The indemnity offered by the vicar general was not a novel method of providing recompense or favor to a church. In 1211 Frederick conceded rights over all the Jews of Palermo and the dyeing industry to the archbishop-elect and to the Palermitan church and canons.’ | Similarly, the Jews and tinctoriam of Cosenza in Calabria were conceded to the archbishop of that city by the emperor in March (212:'"" Higher taxes were typically levied on non-Christians, so having the right to exact revenues from Jewish communities was attractive to churches. Since the Jews of Sicily had never organized themselves in opposition to the crown, Frederick left their community undisturbed during the deportations of Muslims to the mainland. He even supported Jewish immigration to the island. As Abulafia has noted, the welcoming of Jewish immigrants skilled in cultivating a variety of plants and trees was part of a concerted effort to revitalize and diversify the Sicilian economy. |3 According to a letter of 28 November 1239, Jews had recently settled in Palermo, and Frederick was in favor of their presence in the area. An imperial letter to Oberto Fallamonaco, the secretus of Palermo, stated: “Et quia intelleximus quod quidam de judeis qui nuper ad habitandum Panormum venerunt, volunt facere dactulitum nostrum Panormi fructificare, cum exinde sint instructi, mandamus tibi quod ordines cum eisdem ut ad hoc faciendum intendant, etiam si de jure curie nostre quod debent eis proinde aliquid debeas relaxare.”"" Jewish settlers who had come to Palermo from North Africa were even given permission by Frederick to have their own synagogue, separate from the one which already existed for the Palermitan Jewish community.'” > An independent synagogue may have been requested by the immigrants because of differences in custom or practice between them and the Sicilian Jews.'”° A new building was not to be constructed, though. Similar restrictions against building fhhouses of worship were often imposed on the dhimmi of Muslim lands. Frederick’s projects for revitalizing the Sicilian economy were designed to increase his own income. When he leased royal date palm groves to North African Jews in December 1239, he demanded in return

Muslims in Italy prior to the Thirteenth Century

21

one half of their harvests.'”® In addition to dates, Jews raised henna and indigo in Sicily.!”” Frederick also promoted products like sugar. In 1239 he issued instructions that Riccardo Filangieri should find two men who knew how to make sugar so that they could come to Palermo to manufacture it and to teach others to do the same.'®? Another policy adopted by the emperor to improve the economy was to increase the island's trade, particularly at Messina and Palermo. To that end, he granted special privileges to Pisan merchants.'®! To further redress the damages caused by the removal of the Muslim population from Sicily, Christians were moved to the island even before the deportations were complete. Men who had been displaced by, or suffered losses because of, conflicts in Lombardy were brought to Sicily, particularly to Corleone. They brought with them their families and even their animals.'®” Facilitated by Roger I’s marriage to Adelaide of Vasto in 1087, immigration to Sicily from northern Italy had begun during the Norman period. Under Frederick II, a number of new settlements were created. In 1239 casalia were established between Agrigento and Sciacca, around Burgimill (today Menfi), and between Agrigento

and

Licata.'®

In addition,

lands

were

distributed

to new

inhabitants at Trapani.'®4 Despite resettlement efforts, many areas which had been badly affected by the deportations remained sparsely inhabited for years. lato appears to have been largely uninhabited until the late fifteenth century.’ Demographic growth on the island after the

thirteenth century was greater in eastern than in western Sicily.'®° A consequence of the removal of the Muslim population was that the process whereby language and culture in Sicily were being steadily Latinized gained new impetus. Under the Norman King Roger II, Arabic had been regularly used along with Greek and Latin by the administration.'®” Latin was the dominant administrative language in Sicily during the reigns of William I and William II, though the latter read and wrote Arabic according to Ibn Jubayr. 8 Frederick II issued a Greek edition of his Constitutions of Melfi, but Latin was the primary language used by notaries and scribes during his reign. |? Despite the increased use of Latin, monasteries like San Salvatore of Messina continued to produce Greek manuscripts in Sicily during the thirteenth century, as did monastic institutions in Calabria.'”° Perhaps the last document to be written in both Latin and in Arabic during the Hohenstaufen period was issued in January 1242 by Oberto Fallamonaco with respect to the boundaries of a tenement of the hospital of San Lorenzo in Sicily.'! For the most part, Fallamonaco’s Arabic

22

Chapter One

was grammatically correct, but as Amari noted, it was not meticulous. ~ The issuing of an Arabic version of the diploma suggests that

Muslims were still living in the province of Palermo in the early 1240s.'®? While the use of Arabic declined, Judeo-Arabic, that is, Arabic written with Hebrew characters, continued to be used by Jews in

Sicily for another two centuries. '°*Jews appear to have spoken Arabic until the late fifteenth century when they were forced to leave the island by the Crown of Aragon. wi Coins with Arabic legends were minted during the minority of Frederick II, but they were eliminated later in his reign. '°© Tari minted at Messina and Amalfi and a coin from Palermo bear the emperor's name in Arabic.'?” Issued between 1197 and 1209, a silver coin studied by Franco D’ Angelo has the following legend in Arabic: “King Frederick the Powerful.”!”8 “Frederick King of Sicily” appears on other coins.!”” According to Ghislaine Noyé, one effect of the unrest and later removal of the Muslim population from Sicily was the disappearance of ceramics in the “siculo- maghrebino” style. a Noyé has noted that that sort of pottery had been produced in Sicily since the late Muslim period?! D’ Angelo’s studies of Islamic pottery made in Sicily before the thirteenth century have led him to suggest that there had been an “affinita di rapporti tra produzione siciliana e produzione nord africana di una portata cosi pio da far rientrare la cultura di quest’epoca in un unicum geografico.’ ? During the first half of the thirteenth century, Sicilian pottery evolved with increasing independence from North Africa” The deportations put an end to the production of Islamic pottery on the island.7"*

Notes 1. “Annales Casinenses a. 1000-1212,” M.G.H.S., ed. Georgius Heinricus

Pertz, vol. 19 (Hannovera, 1866) 314. 2. For the Muslim conquest of Sicily, see Michele Amari, S.M.S., eds. Gior-

gio Levi Della Vida and Carlo Alfonso Nallino, 2nd ed., vol. 1 (Catania: Romeo Prampolini, 1933) 387-491; Umberto Rizzitano, Storia e cultura nella Sicilia saracena (Palermo: Flaccovio Editore, 1975) 75-83; Ferdinando Maurici, Breve

storia degli arabi in Sicilia (Palermo: Flaccovio Editore, 1995) 37-58; Filippo Burgarella, “L’egemonia dell’impero greco sul meridione,” L’/talia bizantina dall’esarcato di Ravenna al tema di Sicilia, eds. André Guillou and Filippo Burgarella (Torino: UTET Libreria, 1988) 336-344.

e

Muslims in Italy prior to the Thirteenth Century

23

3. Maurici, Breve storia 12. 4. Studies on the history of Sicily under Byzantine rule include André Guillou, “La Sicilia bizantina,” L’'/talia bizantina dall’esarcato di Ravenna al tema

di Sicilia, eds. André Guillou and Filippo Burgarella (Torino: UTET Libreria, 1988) 41-44; Ferdinando Maurici, “Sicilia bizantina. Gli insediamenti del pal-

ermitano,” A.S.S. 20 (1994): 27-93; for the Byzantines in mainland Italy, see Vera von Falkenhausen, “I bizantini in Italia,” / bizantini in Italia, ed. Giovanni Pugliese Carratelli (Milano: Libri Scheiwiller, 1982) 3-136; Vera von Falkenhausen, La dominazione bizantina nell’Italia meridionale dal IX all’XI secolo

(Bari: Ecumenica Editrice, 1978); Jules Gay, L’Italia meridionale e |’impero bizantino dall’avvento di Basilio I alla resa di Bari ai Normanni, 867-1071 (Firenze: Libreria della Voce, 1917); André Guillou, Cu/ture et société en Italie

byzantine (VIe-Xle s.) (London: Variorum Reprints, 1978). 5. Maurici, Breve storia 65. 6. Maria Giovanna Stasolla, “Gli arabi nella peninsola italiana,” Testimonianze degli arabi in Italia, 10 December 1987 Roma (Roma: Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei, 1988) 77-94. 7. Stasolla, “Gli arabi” 83. 8. Erich Caspar, “Die Chronik von Tres Tabernae in Calabrien,” Quellen

und Forschungen aus Italienischen Archiven und Bibliotheken 10 (1907): 3637; Falkenhausen, La dominazione 149.

9. Francesco Gabrieli, “Islam in the Mediterranean World,” The Legacy of

Islam, eds. Joseph Schacht and Clifford Edmund Bosworth, 2nd ed. (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1974) 78; Stasolla, “Gli arabi” 85-86. 10. Giosué Musca, “Saraceni e bizantini,” Storia della Puglia, ed. Giosué Musca, vol. | (Bari: Mario Adda Editore, 1987) 163. Musca noted that a mosque was built at Bari by the Emir al-Mufarraj ibn Sallam (853-856): 164; Stasolla, “Gli arabi” 86-89; See also Musca’s L 'emirato di Bari, 847-871 (Bari:

Dedalo Litostampa, 1964). 11. Pasquale Corsi, “Lucera tra longobardi e bizantini (sec. VII-XI),” Lucera tra tardoantico e altomedioevo. Atti del 18° convegno sulla storia del cristianesimo in Puglia, 26 maggio 1984 Lucera (Lucera: C. Catapano, 1987) 92. 12. See Amari, S.M.S.; ] diplomi greci ed arabi di Sicilia, ed. Salvatore Cusa (1868-1882 Kéln: Béhlau, 1982); Umberto Rizzitano, La cultura araba nella Sicilia saracena (Vicenza: Edistampa, 1962); Rizzitano, Storia; Jeremy Johns, “The Muslims of Norman Sicily, c. 1060-c.1194,” diss., U of Oxford, 1983. 13. B.A.S., ed. and trans. Michele Amari, 2nd rev. ed., ed. Umberto Rizzitano, 3 vols. (Palermo: Accademia Nazionale di Scienze Lettere e Arti, 1997).

14. For the history of Muslims under Norman rule in Sicily, see Johns, “The Muslims.” Muslim culture during the Norman period is examined by Rizzitano in Storia 267-289. 15. Maurici recounted the Norman conquest of the island in Breve storia 107-125. See also Salvatore Tramontana, “La monarchia normanna e sveva,”

24

Chapter One

Storia d'Italia. Il Mezzogiorno dai bizantini a Federico II (Torino: UTET, 1983) 519-542; Paolo Delogu, J normanni in Italia. Cronache della conquista e

del regno (Napoli: Liguori Editore, 1984) 67-85. 16. Le pit antiche carte dell’Archivio Capitolare di Agrigento (10921282), ed. Paolo Collura, vol. 25 of D.S.S.S. (Palermo: U. Manfredi Editore, 1960) 61. The document is dated between 1154 and 1171. 17. Romualdus Salernitanus, “Chronicon,” R./.S., vol. 7, pt. 1, ed. Carlo Alberto Garufi, new ed. (Citta di Castello: S. Lapi, 1914) 248; see also Donald Matthew, / normanni in Italia (Bari: Editori Laterza, 1997) 257.

18. Hugo Falcandus, The History of the Tyrants of Sicily, trans. Graham Loud and Thomas Wiedemann (Manchester: Manchester UP, 1998) 121.

19. Hugo Falcandus, The History 122. 20. See Annliese Nef, “Conquétes et reconquétes médiévales: la Sicile normande est-elle une terre de réduction en servitude généralisée?” Mélanges de |'Ecole Francaise de Rome (Moyen Age) 112-2 (2000): 579-607. 21. Jeremy Johns, “Entella nelle fonti arabe,” Alla ricerca di Entella, ed. Giuseppe Nenci (Pisa: Scuola Normale Superiore di Pisa, 1993) 68.

22. Rogerii Il, Regis Diplomata Latina, ed. Carlrichard Brihl, vol. 2, pt. 1 of Codex diplomaticus Regni Siciliae, \st ser. (K6In: Bohlau, 1987) 45-48, no.

16. 23. Johns, “Entella” 68; Jeremy Johns, “Monreale Survey. L’insediamento umano nell’alto Belice dall’eta paleolitica al 1250 d.c.,” Giornate internazionali di studi sull’Area Elima, Atti. vol. 1, 19-22 settembre 1991 Gibellina (Pisa and Gibellina: Scuola Normale Superiore and Comune di Gibellina, 1992) 407; Franco D’Angelo, “Corleone dai musulmani del XII ai lombardi del XIII secolo,” A.S.S., 4th ser., 20 (1994): 17.

24. Jeremy Johns, “‘Palace Saracens’: The Court of Roger II and the Conversion of Muslims in Norman Sicily,” Muslim Communities under Christian Rule in the Medieval West: Spain and Sicily Conference, the Oxford Centre for Islamic Studies, Oxford, 26 February 1997.

25. Jeremy Johns, “The Greek Church and the Conversion of Muslims in Norman Sicily?” Byzantinische Forschungen 21 (1995): 144. 26. Jeremy Johns, “Nota sugli insediamenti ruprestri musulmani nel territorio di S. Maria di Monreale nel dodicesimo secolo,” La Sicilia rupestre nel contesto della civilta mediterranee. Atti del sesto convegno internazionale di studio sulla civilta rupestre medioevale nel Mezzogiorno d'Italia, ed, Cosimo Damiano Fonseca (Galatina: Congedo Editore, 1986) 233. 27. For the flight of Muslim villains from the crown’s lands during the Norman period, see D’ Angelo, “Corleone” 19.

28. Jeremy Johns, “The Boys from Mezzoiuso: Muslim jizya-payers in Christian Sicily,” ts., unpublished article, 2002; Cf. / diplomi greci, vol. 1, pt. |, 111-112, no, IV.

29. Joseph Clayton, Pope Innocent Ill and His Times (Milwaukee: Bruce Publishing Co., 1941) 77.

Muslims in Italy prior to the Thirteenth Century

25

30. Thomas Curtis Van Cleve, The Emperor Frederick II of Hohenstaufen, Immutator Mundi (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1972) 39-40; Van Cleve maintained that Markward was motivated more by a sense of duty and accountability to the wishes of Frederick’s father than by a thirst for personal gain: Thomas Van Cleve, Markward of Anweiler and the Sicilian Regency: A Study of Hohenstaufen Policy in Sicily during the Minority of Frederick I] (Princeton: Princeton UP, 1937) 205. 31. H.D.F.S., ed. Jean Louis Alphonse Huillard-Bréholles, vol. 1, pt. 1 (Paris, 1852) 35-37.

32. Jane Sayers, Jnnocent III: Leader of Europe, Longman, 1994) 182.

1198-1216 (London:

33. Van Cleve, Markward 97; Sayers, Innocent 182.

34. H.D.F.S., vol. 1, pt. 1, 37-40. 35. H.D.F-.S., vol. 1, pt. 1, 35-37.

36. H.D.F-S., vol. 1, pt. 1, 46-49. 37. H.D.F-S., vol. 1, pt. 1, 57-58 (58). 38. Van Cleve, Markward 188.

39. H.D.F-S., vol. 1, pt. 1, 118-120. 40. Gioffredo Malaterra, “De rebus gestis Rogerii Calabriae et Sicilae Comitis et Roberti Guiscardi Ducis fratris eius,” R./.S., ed. Ernesto Pontieri, new ed., vol. 5, pt. 1-1 (Bologna: Nicola Zanichelli, 1927) 88. 41. Sayers, Innocent 62-63.

42. Archivio segreto Vaticano, eds. Terzo Natalini, Sergio Pagano, and Aldo Martini (Firenze: Nardini Editore, 1991) 95, tav. XXVI.

43. Sayers, /Jnnocent 63. 44. “Annales colonienses maximi,” M.G.H.S., vol. 17 (Hannovera, 1861)

825. 45. Sayers, Innocent 64, 86. 46. H.D.F:S., vol. 1, pt. 1, 184; A.L./., ed. Eduard August Winkelmann, vol. 1 (Innsbruck: Wagner’schen Universitats-Buchhandlung, 1880) 93-94, no. 107.

This letter was issued on 15 January 1211. 47. The archdiocese of Monreale was established between 1174 and 1182: Ferdinando Maurici, L 'emirato sulle montagne. Note per una storia della resistenza musulmana in Sicilia nell’eta di Federico II di Svevia (Palermo: Centro di Documentazione e Ricerca per la Sicilia Antica “Paolo Orsi,” 1987) 32-33;

A.1.1,, vol. 1, 93-94, no. 107. 48. A.1./., vol. 1, 93-94, no. 107. 49. H.D.F-S., vol. 1, pt. 2, 800-801. 50. H.D.F-.S., vol. 1, pt. 2, 800-801. 51. ALL, vol. 1, 94-95 (94), no. 108. 52. H.D.F-.S., 53. H.D.F-.S., 54. Emil Ribi eta sveva,” Sicilia

vol. 2, pt. 1, 149-152. vol. 2, pt. 1, 219. and Hans Peter Isler, “Monte lato. Un cortiletto con cucina di archeologica 66-67-68 (1988): 61, 64.

26

Chapter One

55. Isler, Monte lato. Guida archeologica 25.

56. 57. 4th ser. 58.

Johns, “Monreale Survey” 415-416. Guglielmino, “Entella” 372-373; Cf. Giuseppe Nenci, “Entella,” 4.S.S,, 14-15 (1988-1989): 288-289. Guglielmino, “Entella” 373; for Islamic burial practices, see Timothy

Insoll, The Archaeology of Islam (Oxford: Blackwell Publishers, 1999) 166-200, esp. 168-169. 59. Alessandro Corretti, “Una dimora medievale da Entella e il suo Hammam,” Tunisia Sicilia. Incontro di due culture, ed. Gabriella D’ Agostino (Palermo: Arti Grafiche Siciliane, 1995) 36. 60. Le pit antiche carte 158-159, no. 78; Johns, “Monte Guastanella. Un

insediamento musulmano nell’ Agrigento.” Sicilia archeologica 51 (1983)” 34. Maurici estimated that these events occurred between 1220 and 1221: Maurici,

L'emirato 38. Johns, by contrast, suggested that they took place in the early 1230s. For the kidnapping of the bishop, see also IIluminato Peri, Uomini, cittae campagne in Sicilia dall’X] al XIII secolo (Bari: Editori Laterza, 1978) 123. 61. Le pit antiche carte 155-171 (158-159), no. 78. 62. Le piu antiche carte 155-171 (166), no. 78.

63. Taking the Almoravid title amir al-muslimin, the rebel leader Ibn Abbad issued coins with Arabic legends in the early 1220s. Franco d’Angelo, “La monetazione di Muhammed ibn Abbad emiro ribelle a Federico II di Sicilia,” Studi magrebini 7 (1975): 149-153. Cf. Philip Grierson and Lucia Travaini, Medieval European Coinage, 14 Italy III (South Italy, Sicily, Sardinia) (Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 1998) 183-184.

64. The account of the rebellion in a/-Rawd al-mi'tar fi khabar al-aqtar states that Ibn Abbad was based at Entella: Evariste Lévi-Provengal, “Un héroine de la résistance musulmane en Sicilie au début de XIlle siécle,” Oriente Moderno 34 (1954): 286. 65. H.D.F.S., vol. 2, pt. 1, 255-257 through H.D.F.S., vol. 2, pt. 1, 265.

66. H.D.F.S., vol. 2, pt. 1, 255-257 through H.D.F-.S., vol. 2, pt. 1, 265; Carlrichard Briihl, “L’itinerario italiano dell’imperatore, 1220-1250,” Federico Il e le citta italiane, eds. Pierre Toubert and Agostino Paravicini Bagliani (Palermo: Sellerio Editore, 1994) 44. 67. “Annales siculi,” R./.S., ed. Ernesto Pontieri, new ed., vol. 5, pt. 1-8 (Bologna: Nicola Zanichelli, 1927) 117. This source states that Frederick’s army went to Jato in 1221.

68. D’Angelo, “La monetazione” 151; D'Angelo, though, suggested that the mint was at Entella:

D’ Angelo, “La monetazione” 150. Ibn Abbad’s coins have

been found in various places in western Sicily. For the results of excavations at Monte lato, see Hans Peter Isler, Monte lato. Guida archeologica.

feNe od O

69. The Ta’rikh al-mansuri was actually based on an earlier composition which al-Hamawi also wrote: Michele Amari, “Prefazione,” B.A.S., vol. 1, XCVII; Johns, “Entella” 90; Francesco Gabrieli, “Federico Il e la cultura musulmana,” Rivista storica italiana 64 (1952): 7. After al-Hamawi

fell into

NET cm emer my RR OI NR ta A R enpee ee

—

Muslims in Italy prior to the Thirteenth Century

27

disfavor, he came into the service of al-Mansur Ibrahim at Hims (Emesa): Michele Amari, “Prefazione,” XCVII; Johns, “Entella” 90. 70. al-Hamawi, “at-Ta’rih al-mansuri,” B.A.S., vol. 2, 401. 71. al-Hamawi, “at-Ta’rih al-mansuri” 401. 72. al-Hamawi, “at-Ta’rih al-mansuri” 401. 73. Franco D’Angelo, “La circolazione della moneta minuta fatimita,” Tunisia Sicilia. Incontro di due culture, ed. Gabriella D’ Agostino (Palermo: Arti

Grafiche Siciliane, 1995) 66. 74. D’ Angelo, “La circolazione” 66. 75. al-Hamawi, “at-Ta’rih al-mansuri” 401. 76. al-Hamawi, “at-Ta’rih al-mansuri” 401; “Annales siculi” 117.

77. “Annales siculi” 117. 78. al-Hamawi, “at-Ta’rih al-mansuri” 401. 79. al-Hamawi, “at-Ta’rih al-mansuri” 401. 80. al-Hamawi, “at-Ta’rih al-mansuri” 402.

81. “Annales siculi” 117. Riccardo di San Germano reported that Frederick triumphed in Sicily over Mirabetto in 1222: Riccardo di San Germano, “Chronica,” R./.S., ed. Carlo Alberto Garufi, new ed., vol. 7, pt. 2 (Bologna: Nicola Zanichelli, 1937) 102, 103. 82. al-Hamawi, “at-Ta’rih al-mansuri” 402. 83. al-Hamawi, “at-Ta’rih al-mansuri” 402. 84. al-Hamawi, “at-Ta’rih al-mansuri” 402. 85. al-Hamawi, “at-Ta’rih al-mansuri” 402. 86. Johns, “Entella” 85; Lévi-Provencal, “Un héroine” 283-288; Tadeusz

Lewicki, “Ibn ‘Abd al-Mun'im al-Himyari,” Encyclopaedia of Islam, eds. Bernard Lewis, et al., vol. 3 (Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1971) 675. 87. Johns, “Entella” 87.

88. Lévi-Provengal, “Un héroine” 286. 89. Lévi-Provengal, “Un héroine” 286. 90. Lévi-Provengal, “Un héroine” 286-287. 91. Lévi-Provengal, “Un héroine” 288.

92. “Ibn Sa‘id’s Beschreibung von Sicilien,” ed. Bernhard Moritz, Scritti per il centenario della nascita di Michele Amari, vol. | of D.S.S.S. (Palermo:

Stabilimento Tipografico Virzi, 1910) 292-305. 93. Johns, “Entella” 88-89. 94. “Entella nelle fonti arabe,” ed. Jeremy Johns, Alla ricerca di Entella,

ed. Giuseppe Nenci (Pisa: Scuola Normale Superiore di Pisa, 1993) 88. 95. Riccardo di San Germano, “Chronica” 109. 96. Riccardo di San Germano, “Chronica” 109.

97. Riccardo di San Germano, “Chronica” 110. 98. Riccardo di San Germano, “Chronica” 110. 99. H.D.F-S., vol. 2, pt. 1, 393-394. 100. Riccardo di San Germano, “Chronica” 109. 101. Riccardo di San Germano, “Chronica” 109.

Chapter One

28

102. Le cartulaire de S. Matteo di Sculgola en Capitanate (Registro d’istrumenti di S. Maria del Gualdo), vol. 30, pt. 2 of C.D.P. (Bari: Societa di Storia Patria per la Puglia, 1987) 447-452, no. 259 (452, note 4).

103. Egidi, “La colonia,” A.S.P.N. 36 (1911): 604. 104. Jean-Marie Martin and Errico Cuozzo, Federico II. Le tre capitali del

Regno.

Palermo-Foggia-Napoli

(Napoli:

Istituto

Italiano

per

gli Studi

Filosofici, 1995) 23. 105. Martin and Cuozzo, Federico 23.

106. Antonino Ragona, “La ceramica delle ultime maestranze musulmane agrigentine,” Tunisia Sicilia. Incontro di due culture, ed. Gabriella D’ Agostino (Palermo: Arti Grafiche Siciliane, 1995) 75. 107. “Annales siculi” 117. 108. Van Cleve, The Emperor 152-153. David Abulafia also asserted that Jerba had a history of giving assistance to the Sicilian Muslims: Abulafia, Frederick II, a Medieval Emperor (London: Penguin Press, 1988) 146. 109. H.D.F-.S., vol. 2, pt. 1, 409-413; 4.1.7, vol. 1, 237-240 (238), no. 261. 110. H.D.F-S., vol. 2, pt. 1, 409-413; A../., vol. 1, 237-240 (238), no. 261. 111. Cf. Ignotus monachus S. Mariae de Ferraria, “Chronica,” Monumenti Storici. Cronache, ed. Georgius Heinricus Pertz, Ist ser. (Naples, 1888) 38. 112. Maier, “Crusade” 344. 113. Ignotus monachus S. Mariae de Ferraria, “Chronica” 38; “Annales

siculi” 117, 114. Oliver of Paderborn, “Brief an die Geistlichkeit Frieslands iiber den gunstigen Fortgang der Kreuzzugsbewegungen,” Die Schriften des Kolner Domscholasters, spdteren Bischofs von Paderborn und Kardinal-Bischofs von S. Sabina, ed. Hermann Hoogeweg, vol. 202 of Bibliothek des Litterarischen Vereins in Stuttgart (Tibingen, 1894) 315-316. 115. Riccardo di San Germano, “Chronica” 113. 116. H.D.F-.S., vol. 2, pt. 2, 918-921.

117. Riccardo di San Germano, “Chronica” 120. Offensives against Muslims were launched elsewhere in Europe that same year. James | of Aragon attacked the Muslim community at Valencia, though his effort achieved little more than the payment of an annual tribute: Robert Burns, Medieval Colonialism: Postcrusade Exploitation of Islamic Valencia (Princeton: Princeton UP, 1975) 5; Valencia was brought under his control between 1232 and 1245: Norman

Housley, The Later Crusades:

From Lyons to Alcazar,

1274-1580 (Ox-

ford: Oxford UP, 1992) 267.

118. Albericus, Monachus Trium Fontium, “Chronica,” ed. Paul SchefferBoichorst, M.G.H.S., 119. Riccardo di 120. al-Hamawi, 121. al-Hamawi, 122. al-Hamawi,

vol. 23 (Hannovera, 1874) 916. San Germano, “Chronica” 128. “at-Ta’rih al-mansuri” 416. “at-Ta’rih al-mansuri” 416. “at-Ta’rih al-mansuri” 416.

Muslims in Italy prior to the Thirteenth Century

29

123. Ali ibn Abi Bakr al-Harawi, “Kitab al-isarat fi ma‘rifat az-ziyarat,” B.A.S., vol. 1, 111; Jeremy Johns, The Royal Diwan, ts., unpublished book,

chapter nine, 2001. 124. H.D.F-S., vol. 5, pt. 1, 626-627. 125. Amari, S.M.S., vol. 3, pt. 3, 758. 126. Amari, S.M.S., vol. 3, pt. 3, 734.

127. Johns has suggested that Ahmad may have been from present-day Pizzo di Gallo not far from the Rocca d’Entella: Johns, “Entella” 95, note 229.

128. Abu ’1-Fida, “Kitab al-muhtasar fi ahbar al-basar,” B.A.S., vol. 2, 527;

Edgar Blochet, “Les relations diplomatiques des Hohenstaufen avec les sultans d’ Egypt,” Revue historique 80 (1902): 64. 129. R.P.R., ed. August Potthast, vol. 1 (Berolinum, 1873-1875) 866-867, no. 10198. 130. H.D.F-S., vol. 4, pt. 2, 872; R.P.R., vol. 1, 866-867, no. 10198. 131. Matthew Paris, Cronica maiora, ed. Felix Liebermann, M.G.H.S., vol. 28 (1888; Stuttgart: Hiersemann, 1964) 156. 132. Matthew Paris, Cronica maiora 149.

133. H.D.F-S., vol. 5, pt. 1, 626. 134. H.D.F-S., vol. 5, pt. 1, 433.

135. Nur al-Din Ali ibn Musa ibn Sa‘id, “Muhtasar al-gugrafiyah,” B.A.S., vol. 1, 184. 136. Muhammad Talbi, “Ibn Khaldun,” The Encyclopaedia of Islam, eds.

Bernard Lewis, et al., new ed., vol. 3 (Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1971) 825. 137. Yves Lacoste, Jbn Khaldun: The Birth of History and the Past of the Third World, trans. David Macey (London: Vovso, 1984) 13. 138. Ibn Khaldun, “Kitab al-‘ibar,” B.A.S., vol. 2, 597.

139. Evariste Lévi-Provencal, “Abu Hafs ‘Umar,” The Encyclopaedia of Islam, new ed., vol. 1 (Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1960) 121; H.R. Idris, “Hafsids,” The

Encyclopaedia of Islam, new ed., vol. 3 (1971) 66. 140. Ibn Khaldun, “Kitab al-‘ibar” 597-598. 141. Idris, “Hafsids” 66 142. For an analysis of the Islamic conceptions of the dar al-Islam and the

dar al-harb, see Giorgio Vercellin, /stituzioni del mondo musulmano (Torino: Giulio Einaudi Editore, 1996) 25-29. 143. H.D.F-S,, vol. 5, pt. 1, 509-511. 144. H.D.F-S., vol. 5, pt. 1, 426-427. 145. H.D.F-S., vol. 5, pt. 1, 426-427. 146. H.D.F-S,, vol. 5, pt. 1, 426-427. 147. Maurici, L 'emirato 47-48.

148. 149. 150. 151.

H.D.F-S., H.D.F-S., H.D.F.S., “Annales

vol. 5, pt. 1, 595-597. vol. 5, pt. 1, 504-506. vol. 5, pt. 1, 504-506. siculi” 118.

30

Chapter One

152. “Annales siculi” 118: “ . . . omnes Saraceni de Sicilia, tanquam rebelles, ascenderunt in montana, et ceperunt Jatum et Alicatam.” 153. “Annales siculi” 118, note 5. 154. Amari, S.M.S., vol. 3, pt. 2, 630; “Entella nelle fonti latine medievali,”

ed. Maria Giovanna Canzanella, Alla ricerca di Entella, ed. Giuseppe Nenci, (Pisa: Scuola Normale Superiore di Pisa, 1993) 56. 155. Gioffredo Malaterra, “De rebus” 88. 156. “Annales siculi” 119. 157. H.D.F-S., vol. 6, pt. 1, 456-457.

158. H.D.F‘S., vol. 6, pt. 1, 456-457. 159. A.LL, vol. 1, 339, no. 387. 160. Riccardo di San Germano, “Chronica” 205; H.D.F.S., vol. 5, pt. 2, 991; H.D.F-.S., vol. 6, pt. 1, 340-342. 161. H.D.F-S., vol. 6, pt. 1, 465; H.D.F.S., vol. 6, pt. 1, 466-467.

162. 163. 164. 165.

H_D.F-.S., vol. 6, pt. 1, 471-472. Isler, Monte lato. Guida archeologica 25. H.D.F.S., vol. 6, pt. 1, 471-472 (472). Johns, “Monreale Survey” 416.

166. Johns, “Monreale Survey” 407. 167. Maurici, L 'emirato 51.

168. Stephan Epstein, An /sland for Itself; Economic Development and Social Change in Late Medieval Sicily (Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 1992) 55. 169. Epstein, An Island 55. 170. Le piu antiche carte, 154-155, no. 77. This grant was also intended to compensate for “ .. . alia gravamina, quibus tam dictus Fridericus, quam officiales sui supradictam Ecclesiam vexaverunt.” 171. H.D.F:S., vol. 1, pt. 1, 182-184; Catalogo ragionato dei diplomi esis-

tenti nel tabulario della Cattedrale di Palermo, ed. Vincenzo Mortillaro (Palermo, 1842) 52-53, no. 39. In April 1215, Frederick restored these privileges: H.D.F-S., vol. 1, pt. 2, 372-373; Catalogo ragionato dei diplomi 58-59, no. 45: “ ... restituimus ipsi archiepiscopo atque ecclesie Panormitane et canonicis ejus

omnes Judeos et tinctam cum omnibus eorum proventibus .. .” A year earlier, he had not included them with the privileges granted to the new archbishop Berardo: Cesare Colafemmina, “Federico II e gli ebrei,” Federico I] e L’Italia. Percorsi, luoghi, segni e strumenti (Roma: Edizioni De Luca-Editalia, 1995) 71.

172. H.D.F.S., vol. 1, pt. 1, 206-207. 173. David Abulafia, “Ethnic Variety and Its Implications: Frederick II’s

Relations with Jews and Muslims,” /ntellectual Life at the Court of Frederick I! Hohenstaufen, ed. William Tronzo, Studies in the History of Art 44 (Washington D.C.: National Gallery of Art, 1994): 218; for Jews moving to Palermo, see Peri, Uomini 137.

174. H.D.F-S., vol. 5, pt. 1, 535-536. 175. H.D.F.S., vol, 5, pt. 1, 571-574. 176, Abulafia, “Ethnic Variety” 218.

\

SEC CR PPP YUA RAC tay POLE RESO EI P SO DE NETI G

Muslims in Italy prior to the Thirteenth Century

31

177. Frederick Mathewson Denny, An Jntroduction to Islam (New York: Macmillan Publishing Co., 1985) 128. 178. H.D.F-S., vol. 5, pt. 1, 571-574. 179. H.D.F.S., vol. 5, pt. 1, 571-574. 180. H.D.F-S., vol. 5, pt. 1, 571-574. 181. H.D.F-.S,, vol. 4, pt. 1, 464. 182. H.D.F-.S., vol. 5, pt. 1, 128-131; H.D.F.S., vol. 6, pt. 2, 695-697. 183. Giuseppe Bellafiore, “Sulle nuove fondazioni urbane nel regno di Sicilia in eta sveva,” A.S.S. 21-22 (1995-1996): 68; H.D.F.S., vol. 5, pt. 1, 504-

506. 184. H.D.F-.S., vol. 5, pt. 2, 668-669. 185. Peri, Vomini 135: “Il vasto territorio di Giato rimase scoperto o quasi di abitati e di culture finché nel tardo secolo XV non fu aperto ai greco-albanesi in cerca di nuova patria.” 186. Epstein, An Island 73. 187. For Norman coinage, see Lucia Travaini, La monetazione nell'Italia normanna (Roma: Istituto Storico Italiano per il Medioevo, 1995). 188. Ibn Jubayr, “Rihlat al-Kinani,” B.A.S. 120. 189. For the use of Greek during the Hohenstaufen period, see Francesco Magistrale, “La cultura scritta latina e greca. Libri, documenti, iscrizioni,” Federico II. Immagine e potere, eds. Maria Stella Cald Mariani and Raffaella Cassano (Venezia: Marsilio Editori, 1995) 137-141. 190. Guglielmo Cavallo, “La cultura italo-greca nella produzione libraria,” I bizantini in Italia, ed. Giovanni Pugliese Carratelli (Milano: Libri Scheiwiller,

1982) 581. 191. Le pitt antiche carte, 120-126, no. 63. 192. Amari, S.M.S., vol. 3, pt. 2, 628, note 1. 193. Amari, S.M.S., vol. 3, pt. 2, 627. 194. Benedetto Rocco, “Un documento giudeo-arabo a Trapani nel sec. XV,” Sicilia archeologica 51 (1983): 67. 195. Rocco, “Un documento” 67.

196. Coins with Arabic legends which were issued by Norman and Hohenstaufen rulers are described by Grierson and Travaini in Medieval European Coinage 436-444. 197, Lucia Travaini, “Le monete sveve con leggende arabe nel regno di Sicilia,” Rivista italiana di numismatica e scienze affini 88 (1986): 133. 198. Franco D'Angelo, “Nota su due monete inedite della minore eta di Federico II re di Sicilia,” Sicilia archeologiva 46-47 (1981): 129-130 (129). 199. Travaini, “Le monete” 133.

200. Ghislaine Noyé, “La ceramica dipinta invetriata, la protomaiolica ed i luoghi di produzione in Capitanata nei secoli XII e XIII. Problemi di metodologia e prospettive di ricerca,” La Capitanata nella storia del Mezzogiorno medievale, 105.

201. Noyé, “La ceramica dipinta” 105-106.

| Chapter One

32

201. Noyé, “La ceramica dipinta” 105-106. 202. Franco D’Angelo, “La ceramica della Sicilia medievale ed i suo; ta

di San bee porti con la ceramica islamica,” La ceramica medievale Maggiore in Napoli. Atti del convegno, eds. Maria Vittoria Fontana and Gio.

vanna Ventrone Vassallo, vol. 2, 25-27 giugno 1980 Napoli (Napoli: Istituty Universitario Orientale, 1984) 484.

203. D’Angelo, “La ceramica della Sicilia” 485. 204. D’Angelo, “La ceramica della Sicilia” 486.

BOM

pee

, mca

IE

are AEE 0 arp

gape eI

Tcc ana beh! capesatsa sédaaniad is: em

ase

|

|

Chapter Two

The Creation of a

Muslim Colony in Apulia Lucera prior to and at the Time of the Transfers The city which Frederick chose as the site for the Muslim colony had been strategically important since at least the Roman era. Livy reported that when rumors circulated that the Samnites were besieging Luceria, the Romans had been quick to come to the city’s aid.’ Lucera’s security brought reassurance to the rest of the region.” In 314 B.C., Rome sent 2,500 colonists to Lucera.’ The city was the site of a colony of military veterans during the reign of Augustus and under Caracalla as well. Among the inscriptions which have been recovered is one from a vet-

eran of Legio VI Valeria Victrix.* Numerous Roman artifacts have been found at Lucera, the most fa-

mous among them being the Venus, a white marble statue of the goddess found in the area around the amphitheater.* Conducted between the years 1995 and 1997 by the University of Bari, excavations in Lucerine territory at San Giusto, about ten kilometers southeast of Lucera, re-

vealed the remains of a Roman villa oriented during the fourth and fifth centuries toward wine production.° The villa was probably built during

Chapter Two

34

the first century A.D.’ Extensions were made to it as late as the sixth century. Aerial photographs have revealed other Roman villas not far from San Giusto, such as the villa at Masseria Montaratro about ten

kilometers away.* During the Roman era, Lucera’s land was used extensively to cultivate vines.? Baths were built in the city, and the territory

was serviced by a system of roads.'* The Roman roads which linked

ianseaed ia Hi ciniaa tainl ater p

Lucera to Siponto and Troia enhanced Lucera’s economy and its strategic role in the region. There is evidence that Lucera was encompassed

by walls as early as the Roman period." Human settlements at Lucera existed well before the Roman era. From the Neolithic village of Ripa Tetta, excavated in the 1980s by an international team of archaeologists, have survived the remains of habitations and ceramics decorated with incisions and impressions.” As the Muslim colonists did centuries later, the society at Ripa Tetta farmed

wheat and barley and kept domesticated animals.'? Sheep, oxen, and pigs were among the animal raised.'* Neolithic remains have also been found inside Lucera’s medieval fortress.'* As aerial photographs have

shown, the Tavoliere had a high number of Neolithic settlements."° An enormous paleochristian complex was one of the discoveries

made during the excavations at San Giusto.'’ Perhaps falling under the jurisdiction of either the bishop of Lucera or of Aecae (today Troia), the churches at San Giusto appear to have served as a focal point for Christians outside the main city.'* The size of the complex suggests that San Giusto may have even had its own bishop.”” The first documentary evidence of a diocese at Lucera consists of two fifth-century letters written by Pope Gelasius I.” Before the Lombard invasion, the Tavoliere was

seyedii inp secp niente se s

home to a high concentration of Apulian dioceses.”' In addition to Lucera,

there

were

six others:

Siponto,

Salpi, Canosa,

Aecae,

Car-

meianum, and Ordona.” In his Historia Langobardorum, Paul the Deacon twice described Lucera as an opulent Apulian city, once when recounting that the Byzantine emperor Constans II destroyed it during an offensive against the Lombards in 663.” One aim behind the assault apparently had been to

disable the city in order to open access to Siponto and the Adriatic." Lucera recovered quickly. The city remained a Lombard stronghold into

the ninth century.” In 835 Lucera was identified as having a Lombard gastald,”” During the later half of the ninth century, the Byzantines began to wrest cities and territories from Lombard control, among them Lucera.

The city came under the jurisdiction of a Byzantine provincial governor

Mh

RRO CNR ON AS LLAN EI NOE AMI DD EP DORNE IO e On AI am

The Creation of a Muslim Colony in Apulia

35

called a catapan. In the late tenth century, Lucera, Ascoli, and Lesina

were all under the control of the catapan Calociro Delfina.” As confirmed by a bull of Pope John XIV issued on 6 December 983, the bishop of Lucera was a suffragan of the archbishop of

Benevento.” Probably made in the early thirteenth century, the bronze doors of the cathedral of Benevento portray in relief the bishop of Lucera along with over twenty other bishops under the jurisdiction of

Benevento.” Having suffered damages during the bombing raids of the Second World War, the doors are now stored in the Biblioteca Capito-

lare of Benevento.” As Herbert Bloch noted, all of the twenty-four bishops were depicted as making a blessing in the Greek fashion, holding up their right hands.’’ Some Greek rites are known to have been used in Apulian churches during the thirteenth century.” Monasteries were major landholders at Lucera during the Middle Ages. The monastery of San Vincenzo al Volturno owned the church of San Martino since at least the ninth century and the cella of San Giovanni of Lucera which is mentioned in tenth-century documentation.” Since at least the early ninth century, the abbey of the Santissima Trinita of Cava dei Tirreni possessed the church and monastery of San Giacomo near the city of Lucera. San Giacomo grew through land donations and acquisitions between the ninth and eleventh centuries. In 821 a man named Aldemarius conceded property to the deacon and prior of

San Giacomo, Arnaldo.” In January 910, San Giacomo’s abbot, Franco, purchased vines in the vicinity of Lucera.* Land near the church was donated to the abbot in October 1038. The abbey retained rights to the church of San Giacomo even after Muslims were settled at Lucera.”” The materials in archive of the Santissima Trinita of Cava dei Tirreni are particularly useful for reconstructing Lucera’s urban layout and economy before the establishment of the Muslim colony. In 1024 a husband and wife sold a store of victuals, probably wheat, located near the

platea publica, the main piazza, of the city.* Among the documents which make reference to the city’s walls is one dated 1013 regarding the sale of a house.” Frederick II therefore chose a city which already had some form of defenses for the Muslim colony. Giovanni Villani portrayed Lucera at the time of the foundation of

the Muslim colony as “una antica citta diserta.”” Similarly, Egidi wrote that when Frederick came to the area around Lucera, he found it

“stremata e vuota di abitanti.’*' He theorized that since Lucera’s population size had been negligible before the transfers, the area had been

unprofitable for the crown.” Egidi concluded that Frederick must have

36

Chapter Two

been motivated by the prospect of financial gain when he transferred the Muslims to the mainland.” Economic considerations do appear to have influenced Frederick’s decision to create the colony, but the city of Lucera was not depopulated.

The presence of a sizeable Christian community at Lucera in the early thirteenth century is suggested by monastic and papal records and correspondence. Prior to the transfer of the Sicilian Muslim population to Lucera, Pope Honorius III intervened several times in the affairs of the Lucerine church. In his letters written between 1218 and 1222, there is no mention of the transfer of Muslims to Lucera. It is possible that they had not yet been settled in the city. The pope and Lucera’s clerics may have not yet been aware of Frederick’s plans or they may have de-

cided not to oppose them. The papacy did communicate with the bishop of Lucera without mentioning the Muslim inhabitants or the impact of their presence on Christian life in the city even after the deportations are known to have been under way, however.

Honorius’ letters were concerned with religious and administrative matters, none of which were unusual. In June 1218 the pope instructed Lucera’s bishop and others to investigate the life and reported miracles of a hermit named Giovanni, prior of the convent of Santa Maria de

Gualdo.” The following year, Honorius ordered the bishop, along with his counterpart from Dragonara, to confirm the election of the abbot of San Giovanni in Lamis in the diocese of Siponto.* In 1219 or 1220 the office of bishop at Lucera became vacant, and elections were held for a

successor. Writing on behalf of the “sons” of the Lucerine chapter in July 1220, Honorius ordered the bishop of Dragonara and others to confirm the election.“© He complained that he had written to the archbishop of Benevento several times, but the latter had neglected to confirm the

bishop. In January 1221 the pope wrote again to Archbishop Ruggero regarding the transfer of the bishop of Massalubrense in Campania, Alberto, to the Lucerine church,*” Honorius ordered the archbishop to absolve Alberto from the care of the church of Massalubrense, explaining that the Lucerine bishopric had been without a leader for a long time. Two

months

later, Honorius

addressed the question of Alberto’s as-

signment again. He wrote to the clergy and people of the city because they had been reluctant to receive Alberto. Lucera’s bishop was elected in 1222, one year before the first

documented transfer of Muslims to Lucera.”? Since the churchman was

unable to go in person to the Holy See, the pope gave permission to other bishops to consecrate him at Lucera. Honorius wrote that the con-

secration would be permissible under the condition that the election of@

The Creation of a Muslim Colony in Apulia

37

suitable and literate person had been made according to the canons and confirmed by rite afterwards. The accounts of some medieval chroniclers, though admittedly not always reliable, also indicate that Lucera’s population was not sparse when the city was chosen as the site for the Muslim colony. The author of the Vie de Grégoire LX asserted that the Christian community in the city had once numbered in the thousands.” In his Kitab al-Ibar, Ibn Khaldun wrote that Frederick settled the Sicilian Muslims at Lucera, “a

populous land of those provinces.””! The Foundation of the Muslim Colony In making the decision to relocate Muslims within his kingdom, Frederick was primarily concerned with establishing social and political order in Sicily. The removing and relocating of rebels was not an uncommon practice during the Middle Ages. Frederick’s Norman ancestors transferred resisters to their conquest from Bugiamo, near Agrigento, to

Scribla in Calabria in 1064.* Frederick himself employed the option of transferring his opponents not only when dealing with the Muslims of Sicily, but also in response to the challenge posed to him by Lombard rebels in the north; some of the latter actually found themselves trans-

ported to places not far from Lucera in the lands of Capitanata.” Prominent men from Capitanata were assigned prisoners. Frederick’s willingness to impose harsh measures such as population transfers was shown by his treatment of the inhabitants of Celano in 1223. Not long after Pope Honorius III had crowned him emperor on

22 November 1220, Frederick set out to dismantle the power built up by local magnates and monasteries during his absence. One of the first steps he took was to annul the privileges and property titles which had been granted during the previous thirty years. Castles and other fortifications built after the death of King William Il were to be either destroyed or given over to the crown.” Those who possessed property titles were to submit them for scrutiny.” The emperor's efforts to assert his authority were severely obstructed by the count of Celano and Molise, Tommaso. Although Frederick was able to wrest control over the castles of Boiano and Roccamandolfi from the count, thereby freeing the way between Sulmona and Capitanata, a final solution to the conflict between the two men was only achieved through papal mediation. Although Frederick gained Celano and Ovindoli through the deal,

38

Chapter Two

he did not later honor his promise to yield the county of Molise to Tommaso’s wife.*’ The opposition posed to Frederick by the population of Celano was so great that Frederick had to lay siege to the city. His siege began in

late March and lasted well into April 1223. According to Riccardo di San Germano, Frederick ordered that the population of the city be dis-

persed in various parts of the kingdom.” The inhabitants of Celano were allegedly gathered together once more in 1224, but only to be sent on to Sicily.” From there, they may have been transferred to Malta."

Frederick attempted to obliterate the memory of the city of Celano by renaming it Cesarea.” The relocation of rebels was not uncommon, but when juxtaposed

with the approaches to reconquest taken by Christian rulers in other parts of Europe, the emperor's policy with respect to the Sicilian Muslims stands out as unique. His project differs fundamentally in its intent from the dislocation and expulsion policies adopted by Castilian rulers such as Fernando I during the reconquest of the Iberian Peninsula, for example.” The creation of a Muslim homeland at Lucera indicates that Frederick’s aim was not just to subdue but to preserve the Muslim population in his realm, even though he may have hoped for its eventual conversion to Christianity and assimilation. Geographically, Lucera was an ideal location in which to put the Muslim rebels of Sicily. The land is relatively flat, though there are three hills at Lucera: Monte Albano, Monte Sacro, and Monte Belvedere. As Giuliano Volpe noted, the Tavoliere has the largest area of pianura in peninsular Italy—about 3,000 square kilometers.“ Mountains, the Apennines and the Gargano, to the west and to the east of Lucera respectively, are visible with the naked eye, but the area immediately surrounding Lucera does not offer hard-to-reach, rocky high points similar to those at Entella and lato. Lucera was also geographically suitable for the Muslim colony because of its inland location forty-eight kilometers from the sea. No major waterways link Lucera to the Adriatic. Near the city there are only two streams: the Salsola which runs to the west and north of Lucera nearing it at about one kilometer away to the west and the Vulgano which flows over five kilometers away to the south of the city.” Contact between the colonists and the Muslim world obviously would have been limited.

Admittedly, other fairly level inland sites within the kingdom could have been found. Frederick singled out the city of Lucera because of its location within the region of Apulia. As many historians have noted, Frederick demonstrated a particular affinity for that region during his

The Creation of a Muslim Colony in Apulia

39

lifetime. During the second half of his reign, he spent sixty percent of his time in the kingdom within Apulia.” By contrast, he did not visit the island of Sicily at all, and the frequency of his visits to Melfi declined

sharply.” As Carlrichard Brith! observed in his study of Frederick’s itinerary, the nearby city of Foggia in Capitanata was graced with both frequent and lengthy imperial visits during the 1240s.* Frederick’s wife, Elizabeth of England, died at Foggia in December 1241.” The establishment of the Lucerine colony was part of a much larger build-up in Apulia, particularly in Capitanata. Frederick visited the nearby city of Foggia for the first time in 1221, and he had a palace

erected there two years later.” More Hohenstaufen domus were built in Capitanata than in any other region of the kingdom.” Of the twentyeight domus accounted for in Apulia, twenty-two are located in the

Tavoliere.” Great men of the realm like Pier della Vigna and Giovanni Moro also had homes and properties in Capitanata, particularly at Fog-

gia.” In May 1240, Frederick arranged to have cows and sheep brought to Capitanata so that when his household visited, the herds and flocks

would be available to it.” Although years of deforestation has changed the landscape of Capi-

tanata, during the thirteenth century both Lucera and Troia had forests.’° Forests offered not only wood, but also opportunities for hunting. Today only one percent of the land surface of the Tavoliere is covered by woods, though the percentage is higher for other parts of northern

Apulia.”° Temperatures in the Tavoliere may have been slightly lower in the 1200s than they are at present, but they were still conducive for cultivating wheat and barley. The average annual temperature in the Tavoliere today is 16°C.” The city probably received a greater amount of rainfall during the Middle Ages. A trend toward a dryer, warmer cli-

mate in northern Apulia appears to have begun before the thirteenth century. Nowadays, the area receives an annual rainfall of less than 500 mm.”

The Tavoliere has been an important region for transhumance at least since the Roman period.” The location which Frederick chose for the Muslim colony also had a reputation for high-quality grain, oil, and wine. The profits to be made from the grain trade are known to have appealed to the emperor. Once a viable economy had been built, Freder-

ick’s colony became the source of lucrative tax revenues. A more tenuous explanation for Frederick’s choice of Lucera stems from the emperor’s well-known emulation of Augustus under whom Lucera was home to a sizeable colony of military veterans." Frederick’s modeling himself after Augustus is a topic which has enjoyed the atten-

40

Chapter Two

tion of a number of historians, among them Ernst Kantorowicz and Abulafia. The evidence is documentary, numismatic, and archaeological. The Augustan model is known to have influenced Frederick when he founded or recast settlements and cities, giving them names such as

Augusta, Cesarea, and Aquila." When the work on Frederick’s palace at Foggia began in 1223, the emperor had the following statement engraved in the stone of the palace: Sic Caesar fieri iussit opus istum Protomagister Bartholomeus sic construxit illud Hoc fieri iussit Fredericus Caesar ut urbs sit Fogia regalis sedes inclita imperialis.”

An epigraph on the portal of Lucera’s enormous first-century amphitheater reveals that the monument was erected by Marcus Vecilius

Campus to honor Augustus and the colony.” Until about seventy years ago, the monument was buried. Directed by Renato Bartoccini, excavations of the amphitheater began in 1932.“ Since the amphitheater was not included among the important structures and buildings drawn by Rocco del Preite on his map of Lucera in 1690, it was apparently not visible in the late seventeenth century.’ If the portal inscription could still be seen in the 1220s and Frederick knew that Lucera had been a colony under the Roman emperor, his selection of Lucera rather than another Apulian city or town as the site for his own colony may have been a form of imitation. Frederick probably saw the city of Lucera for the first time in February 1221 during his sojourn in the nearby cities of Foggia and Troia. At the time of his confrontation with the Muslim rebels at Iato the following year, he may have already had Lucera in mind as a potential destination point for his opponents. The suppression of the Muslim rebellions in Sicily and the subsequent transfer of thousands of islanders over a distance of more than 800 kilometers to Lucera was obviously an enormous undertaking for the emperor. The reports of medieval chroniclers vary with respect to the size of the Muslim population sent to Lucera. A monk from Santa

hpE ORO RIOD EE OFmar on RE

Maria di Ferrara recounted that more than 15,000 Muslims were transferred to Lucera."’ Whereas in his Chronica Maiora Matthew Paris ¢s-

timated that the Lucerine Muslim population numbered 60,000, he cited half that number in the Abbreviatio Cronicorum Angliae.” According t0 al-Hamawi, 170,000 persons were transferred to the mainland from Sic-

ily.” A note in a medieval Bible from Bovino states that Lucera’s popu-

T AO aOA ENA

The Creation of a Muslim Colony in Apulia

41

lation was around 80,000 when the colony was dismantled by Charles

i

Modern historians have also disagreed on Lucera’s population size. Kantorowicz suggested that the deported Sicilian population numbered about 16,000.” Egidi asserted that probably no more than 35,000 or

40,000 people ever lived in the city.” By contrast, Amari judged that many more were resettled in Apulia, an estimated 50,000-60,000 persons.

More

recently,

Abulafia

estimated

that between

15,000

and

30,000 Muslims may have been sent on from Sicily.” Considering the number of people who are known to have been sold into slavery in 1300, between 15,000 and 20,000 people is probably a reasonable estimate of the colony’s population. Frederick made agreements with the existing owners of property in Capitanata, including magnates and monasteries as far away as Cava dei Tirreni, in order to define which lands the Muslims would cultivate and

under what conditions. Some landowners lost properties with the foundation of the colony, and Frederick compensated them with lands elsewhere.” The major monastic landowners at Lucera before and after the colony’s foundation were Santa Sofia of Benevento, the Santissima Trinita of Venosa, Santa Maria of Montevergine, and the Santissima Trinita of Cava dei Tirreni. Lucera’s church was described as possess-

ing terrae laboratoriae in 1294." Throughout the almost eight decades of Muslim habitation in Capitanata, the Lucerine church continued to own properties. The emperor secured the right of Muslims to farm designated areas under the condition that they paid a special tax to their landlords: the terragium. Calculated for lands brought under cultivation, the terragium was typically the only levy which local property owners could impose on Muslim farmers. Records of the established changes in land owner-

ship and rights were deposited in Lucera’s castle.” The arrangements made by Frederick II when he founded the colony were later honored by

Angevin rulers.” As time passed, in addition to permitting farmers to cultivate crops, Christian landowners rented out gardens and orchards to wealthy Muslims. Contracts between monastic landowners and non-Christian populations in the kingdom were not uncommon. At the same time as the abbey at Cava dei Tirreni was beginning to enter into agreements with the Muslims of Lucera, it was leasing its properties on the other side of the peninsula to the Jews of Salerno.” In April 1223, for example, the

abbey of the Santissima Trinita leased property, land, and a house lo-

cated in Salerno’s Jewish quarter to two brothers.” In a similar contract

42

Chapter Two

of March 1254, the monastery leased a house with a well and some land, both located in the Jewish quarter, to a Jewish man named

Melicello.” The settlement of thousands of Muslims from Sicily at Lucera provoked an exodus of Christians, but a number of people remained. In

1236, Frederick told Pope Gregory IX that the Lucerine Muslims were instructed by the examples of their Christian neighbors.'® Christians were mentioned along with Muslims in the Statutum de reparatione castrorum as being available to carry out repairs on castles in the 1240s.'*’ The Angevin king Charles I increased the Christian presence at Lucera by bringing Provengal settlers to the city. Christians are known to have leased lands near Lucera from monasteries during the

1290s.'" During a period of Inquisitorial activity in southern Italy, Charles II issued a letter expressing his concern that Christians cera were abandoning their faith under the “perfidious” influence Muslims. While the accusation that Muslims and Jews caused tians to commit apostasy was often part of the polemics put forth

at Luof the Chrisby the

Inquisition, Charles’ reference to “nonnulle christiane persone in dicta

terra Luceria habitantes”’ clearly testifies to a Christian presence as late

as 1294,'°

Other Places of Muslim Settlement

Muslims settled not only in Lucera, but in other parts of southern Italy as well. As early as the first decade after the foundation of the colony, Muslims appear to have spread out to live and farm in areas surround-

ing the city. A certain member of the community of Lucera who was mentioned in the Angevin Registers, Ulman Zamarra, for example, may have once lived at the locale not far from Lucera which bears the same

name.'“ The Angevin Registers contain repeated references to Muslims living at Stornara,'” Stornara is located forty-four kilometers southeast of Lucera. Muslims abandoned the casale of Stornara during the rebellion in 1269, but they were later made to return.'® Muslim habitation of

that casale may have begun during the reign of Frederick II, but whereas Muslims were specifically mentioned as a potential labor source for work needed on castles at Lucera during the 1240s, Muslim labor was not considered for an imperial domus at Stornara which was listed in the Statutum de reparatione castrorum as needing repairs."

Muslims also lived in Castelluccio dei Sauri, twenty-six kilometers southeast of Lucera,'“ At Girifalco, the Muslim settlement grew larg¢

TD UR BEN ACY gO AE Ra NE EER GA A ba

The Creation of a Muslim Colony in Apulia

43

enough to sustain a small merchant class.” When in the 1240s the domus at Girifalco needed repairs, Muslims from the casale of San Giacomo, at a distance of approximately five and one-half kilometers from Lucera, were named along with the men of Sasso Caveoso as being able to work on it: “Domus Girofalci reparari potest per homines Sassi

Cariosi de Manta et per Sarracenos casalis sancti Iacobi.”'"° Strangely, the domus of Girifalco was listed in the Statutum de reparatione castrorum in the category of castles and domus in the Land of Otranto which needed repairs. In the light of the proposed involvement of the Muslims of San Giacomo and given that Girifalco was located in Capitanata, such a categorization would appear to be an error. Another “domus Girofalci” was listed for the region of Capitanata, but for that domus Muslims were not mentioned as potential laborers, nor was any-

one from Lucera.""' Instead, men from Tufara in Molise were among those cited. Tracing Muslim settlements based on place names can be tricky. Several settlements in various parts of the kingdom bore names which were derivatives of the term sarracenus. Names like Casal Monte Saraceno and Castel Saraceno led Pietro Egidi to believe that Muslims lived

at those sites.''? Casal Monte Saraceno is located in Capitanata and very well could have been inhabited by Muslims. Castel Saraceno is much farther south, in Basilicata. Both names are suggestive, and Egidi’s the-

ory cannot be ruled out. Nevertheless, it should be kept in mind that sarracenus was a fairly common Christian name on the Italian penin-

sula during the Middle Ages, and derivatives of sarracenus were sometimes used as the names of sites. Some historians have written in error that one of the destination points for the Muslims deportees was the city of Nocera in Campania. This confusion derives from the not infrequent spelling of Lucera as Nuceria in medieval sources. The Annales siculi states, for example, that Muslims were sent in 1245 to “Noceriam in Apulia.”'” The fact that the city of Nocera is known today as Nocera dei Pagani has contributed further to the mistaken assumption that Nocera was once a resettlement point for the Sicilian Muslims. Amari competently addressed and clarified the matter in his Storia dei musulmani di Sicilia, but nev-

ertheless some contemporary authors, even historians such as Aziz Ahmad whose Islamic Sicily relied heavily on Amari’s work, have con-

tinued to cite Nocera as a relocation point for the Muslims of Sicily.'"*

Chapter Two

as

The Difficult Early Years Despite Frederick’s planning, the Muslim settlers in Apulia were faced with innumerable hardships, among them an acute shortage of housing and building materials. Some structures at Lucera, abandoned by Christians fleeing the area at the time of the transfers, became available for

appropriation by the new settlers. Still, the dearth of housing was so serious that at least some colonists had to forage in order to acquire basic building materials. In 1232, Muslims took the nearby church of San Pietro in Bagno apart, carrying away loads of wood and stones for their new buildings in the city. This incident provoked an understandably angry response from Pope Gregory IX who wrote to Frederick to de-

mand repairs to the church and a return of stolen properties.'"” Almost

three decades

later, in November

1260, Muslim

forays

made against churches again vexed the papacy. From Rome, Pope Alexander IV was in communication with the bishop of Melfi, Risandus, and the prior of the Dominicans of Barletta, Eustasius, regarding the church of San Leonardo of Lama Volaria. The church was in a state

of near ruin, in part because of an assault made against it by the Mus-

lims of Lucera.''® Since the church was located in the diocese of Siponto, the culprits had ventured some distance to reach it. The colonists were not the only ones to blame, though. Some priors had neglected their responsibility of looking after the church. Alexander remedied the situation by placing San Leonardo under the Teutonic Order, “uniting”

it to the order.''’ An appeal for repairs to the building like the one Gregory IX had made to Frederick I] would have been futile; hostilities were too great in 1260 between Alexander and Frederick’s son Manfred. With the periodic arrival of large numbers of displaced involuntary immigrants requiring shelter and at least initial support, meeting basic needs in the community at Lucera was probably a continual challenge for both Muslim leaders and royal officials. Most likely, Muslims worked with Christian functionaries to decide where new arrivals could

live and farm or carry out their trades. A sizeable portion of community taxes were probably directed toward the needs of new settlers. Many » Sicilians would not have arrived at Lucera completely destitute, though nothing is known about what kind of allowances were made for their selling or preparing their goods and properties before leaving the island.

Isler attributed the scarcity of materials found among the ruins of medieval houses at Iato to the probability that the deportees were able to

take their possessions with them.''* The complete abandonment of holdings by some deportees is not unimaginable, though, particularly if they

erm er ee

ee e

be

The Creation of a Muslim Colony in Apulia

45

had been involved in rebellions or social disturbances. Confiscations of property and/or looting by Frederick’s soldiers could also explain the meager archaeological findings. Testimony to the difficulties and suffering experienced by the people transferred to Lucera are the known efforts by some to return to Sicily. Muslim merchants were allowed to travel outside Capitanata for reasons of commerce. In 1239 individuals from Lucera and Girifalco tried unsuccessfully to cross over to Sicily while on business in

Calabria.'” The distance between the toe of the peninsula and the island is only about three kilometers. Sicily can be seen with the naked eye from Calabria. The temptation to attempt the crossing must have been irresistible. Muslims were still living in Sicily in 1239. The merchants may have hoped to make contact with some of them. They were intercepted. On 16 December 1239, Frederick commended the secretus of

Messina for impeding people from passing to the island. He emphasized that no Muslims should go to Sicily. Furthermore, Muslims doing business in Calabria were not to be allowed to remain or to establish resi-

dences in that region.'” Just nine days after issuing his communication to the secretus of Messina, on Christmas day, Frederick told his justiciars and officials

that Muslims living in places other than Lucera must be forced to go to

the colony.’ In addition to preventing people from returning to Sicily, the limiting of Muslims to Lucera would have facilitated the collection of taxes and the organization of projects which required Muslim labor or services. Analogously, checks on the movements of subjugated Muslim populations were later implemented in medieval Aragon. Muslims in various parts of Valencia, for example, were forbidden to relocate

their homes and properties by 1362.'” A consequence of the new restrictions was diminished contact between Muslims and Christians, although the two groups continued to interact and trade. Christians lived not only in the towns surrounding Lucera, but also in the city itself, as shown. Muslims were prohibited from traveling freely within the kingdom, but they could work and live far from the colony if they were needed to farm certain lands or if their skills were required for royal projects. Muslim carpenters, arms makers, iron workers, and animal keepers were involved in projects in Melfi and

Canosa.'” Under controlled conditions, Muslim merchants were probably still allowed to travel on business. During the Angevin period, Mus-

lims traded in Salerno and San Severo.'** Important to any discussion of the effects which the creation of the Muslim settlement had on the city of Lucera and its surroundings is the

46

Chapter Two

work of the French scholar, Martin. Martin has asserted that the unnatu-

ral transfer of such a large population to Capitanata created problems of regional overpopulation, and the strain was only worsened when labor and materials were demanded for the construction of the Hohenstaufen

castle.'* While acknowledging sources which point to the health of Lucera’s economy during the later Angevin period, Martin asserted that

the forced settlement of such a large group of people overtaxed the resources of the area. With the Christian inhabitants of the nearby casalia being forced to abandon their holdings, the “demographic overload” caused by the Muslim presence compounded the tensions which would have otherwise been generated by the introduction of such a diverse

religious and cultural group.’ The studies of Catherine Delano Smith

OE eS Pe Ty e A aEL a#

lend support to Martin’s theory that the region became overpopulated. She estimated that the high population density of the thirteenth-century

Tavoliere was matched only during the late nineteenth century.'” Martin’s idea that the colony’s foundation harmfully disrupted the existing regional demography and balance of resources is supported by incidents such as the taking of materials from the church at San Pietro in Bagno, an occurrence which Martin in fact cited to support his argument. Local monastic property holdings which were vacant and available for lease in the 1280s and 1290s suggest that Christians had aban-

doned the area.'” The monastery of the Santissima Trinita of Venosa leased the vacant ecclesia (church) of Santa Maria of Plantiliano, along with its vineyards and gardens, to the Muslim miles Riccardo of Lucera,

for example.'” The state of disuse of Christian churches and other properties around Lucera during the thirteenth century is best explained by the upset which the population transfers from Sicily caused. Of course, the abandonment of settlements and churches also occurred in places far from and without links to the Muslim settlement. Demographic shifts took place as a result of the imposition of Hohenstaufen rule. In January 1224, the church of Santa Maria was run-down and in disuse, prompting the bishop of Canne to allow it to be assumed, in exchange for the payment of a yearly census, by the Hospitallers of Saint John at Barletta.” The poor state of the church was described as having been caused by “the numerous dangers of the wars.” Displacement was one result of the papal invasion of the kingdom and the subsequent uprisings and reprisals which that invasion sparked. The acts of retribution, including heavy punitive taxes, which were imposed on Hohenstaufen supporters when Charles | took over the kingdom in 1266 caused further shifts t occur.

TCHOON O P EPR CR

The Creation of a Muslim Colony in Apulia

47

Although the foundation of the Muslim colony appears to have negatively impacted Christian settlements and holdings surrounding Lucera, it is important to note that Christian towns and cities not far from Lucera, particularly Foggia, became or remained vibrant urban centers during the thirteenth century. Muslim merchants sold and exchanged wares with the Christian inhabitants of those cities. Under Charles II, a few wealthy Muslims from Lucera even possessed houses

in Foggia and Troia.'”' Social and commercial exchanges occurred, but as long as the colony existed tensions stemming from the need to compete for resources as well as from religious and cultural differences

were present.

The Construction of the Hohenstaufen Castle

The Lucerine colony was important to both Hohenstaufen and Angevin military planning because of its strategic location at the crossing of several important roads. As noted, since Roman times roads have linked Lucera with Aecae (Troia) to the south and with Siponto to the east. Egidi asserted that the barons of the towns and cities near Lucera in the thirteenth century were treacherous and unreliable, a statement which is

given credence by the widespread uprisings which took place in Capi-

tanata when papal forces invaded the kingdom in 1229.'” One of Frederick’s intentions behind founding the colony at Lucera appears to have been to enhance regional security. Frederick’s ordering the building of a castle at Lucera, undoubtedly using the labor of the Muslim colonists, points to his intention to make

the city a military stronghold. The near impenetrability of Lucera’s de-

fenses during the late Hohenstaufen period was illustrated by Nicolaus de Jamsilla’s account of the taking of the city by Frederick’s son Man-

fred in 1254. Arriving at the gates only to find them closed, Manfred realized that his only access to the city was a drainage canal underneath the gates. As he prepared to crawl into the canal, the Muslims of the city opened the city gates from within. Manfred entered Lucera, taking

the royal palace.'” It is impossible to state with precision the exact years in which the Hohenstaufen castle at Lucera was under construction. Riccardo di San Germano made a terse reference to the fortification of Lucera by Frederick II in 1233, but the chronicler may not have necessarily been alluding to the erection of the castle. As mentioned, Lucera had been a walled city since the Roman times. Riccardo could have been referring

48

Chapter Two

to a strengthening of the defensive walls. If the construction of the castle did begin in 1233, it would have coincided with another major building project in Apulia: the building of the cathedral at Altamura.

After examining the frequency and dates of Frederick’s visits to Lucera, Haseloff reached the conclusion that the castle had probably not

been completed before 1235.'* He suggested that it may have been finished during Frederick’s absence from the kingdom, between 1235 and 1240. Pasquale Natella and Paolo Peduto estimated that the castle was built between 1233 and 1235.’ By contrast, Ghislaine Noyé asserted

that the Hohenstaufen palace was built between 1223 and 1225." If Noyé is correct, the building of Lucera’s castle was under way shortly

after construction began on the palace at Foggia. Given that the population transfers to Lucera began in the early 1220s, the later dates provided by Haseloff, Natella, and Peduto for the construction project seem more likely. In any case, Lucera’s castle had been completed by the 1240s when Lucera appeared on a list along with other places which

had castles or imperial domus in need of repair.’ Two important pieces of information were provided by the list. First, two castles at Lucera, one old and the other new, were mentioned as requiring attention. Secondly, both Christians and Muslims from the city were described as being able to carry out the necessary repairs: “Castra Lucerie vetus et novum possunt reparari per Christianos et Sarracenos Lucerie.” Haseloff suggested that the “old castle” referred to in the Statutum de reparatione castrorum had probably been built before the foundation

of the Muslim colony.’ Conceivably of Norman origin, the structure is no longer standing. No trace of it remains. Egidi cast doubt on the reliability of the reference to the old castle, suggesting that Angevin scribes

may have inserted changes.'” Unfortunately, only some of the castle built by Frederick II has survived to the present day. The Angevin fortress which was constructed around it in the 1270s remains in fair condition. Parts of the castrum which no longer exist were depicted in the eighteenth-century drawings of Jean Louis Desprez.'* Sketches published by Giambattista D’Amelj

in 1861 portray arches and colonnades.'*' Built on a regional high point, Monte Albano, the Hohenstaufen castle functioned both as a defensive fortification and a palace. Frederick saw to its beautification in the 1240s. In the spring of 1240, he arranged for the delivery to Lucera of marble statues from Naples.” Two years later, two bronze figures from Santa Maria in Grottaferrata were brought to the colony." In all likelihood, the bronze pieces, one shaped

The Creation of a Muslim Colony in Apulia

49

as a man and the other depicting a cow, were placed inside Lucera’s castle. Gold, silver, and precious stones were kept inside the palatium, but

Lucera was never home to the imperial mint, as D’Amelj suggested.' The misconception that there was a mint at Lucera was recently re-

peated by Gary Radke in his article “The Palaces of Frederick II.”"** The numismatists Philip Grierson and Lucia Travaini have disproved the

notion that a mint existed at Lucera during the thirteenth century.'”° They did note that between the years 1459 and 1462, a period of up-

heaval, coins may have been minted in the city.'*’ Under the Angevin kings Charles I and II, Lucera continued to play an integral role in the crown’s defensive strategy. Charles I had a fortress built at Lucera during the 1270s. Statistics compiled by Eduard Sthamer reveal that, during the Angevin period, Lucera’s castle had a staff which was larger than those of other castles, palaces, or domus in

Capitanata.'* The superior size of Lucera’s fortress staff is examined in chapter seven.

The Papacy’s Reaction to the Creation of Muslim Lucera Considering the crusade and reconquest movements and ideologies cur-

rent at the time of the foundation of Muslim Lucera and the location of the colony only 240 kilometers from Rome, early papal criticism of the settlement was surprisingly limited. The papacy probably recognized that the removal and relocation of the Sicilian rebels was necessary for the stability of Frederick’s realm. After the fall of Damietta in 1221, there was keen interest in Rome in freeing up Frederick’s energies from the conflicts in Sicily so that he could go on crusade to the Holy Land. Another explanation for Honorius’ restraint is that he may have interpreted the isolation of the Muslims in Apulia as a step toward eventually eliminating their presence in Italy altogether. Indeed, from a historical perspective, the transfer of the Muslim community to Lucera can be interpreted as such a step. Any plans which the papacy may have had to launch missionary campaigns at Lucera were shelved for a decade after the colony was first established, although in the years surrounding the foundation of the Apulian colony, a number of mendicant preaching operations backed by the papacy were under way among Muslims elsewhere. In June 1225, two Dominican friars who had been sent to evangelize in the kingdom of Morocco were empowered by Pope Honorius to baptize new con-

50

Chapter Two

verts, to preach, to prescribe penances, and to declare excommunica-

tions.'? Concessions were made to both Dominicans and Franciscans working in the Regnum Miramolini in October of that year. The friars were authorized to preach, to baptize Muslims, and to reconcile apos-

tates to the Church.’ According to The Annals of Ulster, five friars had been martyred in 1220 under “Miramolinus,” the king of Morocco." Al-Mustansir was the Almohad caliph in 1220. Only about a decade after the colony’s foundation did the papacy begin to push for the conversion of the Muslim colonists. By that time, Frederick had already secured, albeit as an excommunicate, the Chris-

tian possession of Jerusalem through a treaty with Sultan al-Kamil of Egypt. Relations between the crown and the papacy were slowly improving after a period of intense conflict. In 1233 Gregory [X wrote to Frederick to request that Dominican friars be allowed to visit Lucera to preach among its inhabitants. The emperor not only agreed, but expressed enthusiasm for the plan.'* Gregory seems to have had confidence in the potential effectiveness of the preaching campaign because

the Muslims already understood Italian.'” In addition to seeking Frederick’s support for missions among Muslims in the Kingdom of Sicily, Pope Gregory urged the emperor to take steps to arrest the spread of heresy in his lands. Dominican friars targeted a number of Italian cities for preaching campaigns in the early 1230s. In 1231 Gregory wrote to Frederick about heresy in the king-

dom, particularly at Naples and Aversa.’ Frederick responded by assuring him that great care would be taken to eradicate the threat.'® The people of Naples were instructed by the pope to listen to and support

the Dominican friars in their city in October that year.’ Gregory also sought to eliminate completely the use of Greek rites in Italy. Concerned about the use of a non-Latin baptismal rite by some Greeks, he

wrote to the archbishop of Bari in February 1232. With the ultimate aim of imposing a uniform baptismal rite, the pope urged the archbishop to send Greek representatives to Rome.’ The church at Lucera, though clearly operating under difficult citcumstances, was functional when Gregory made his proposal to send Dominican preachers among the Muslims. Abulafia’s assertion that the bishop of Lucera had been forced to flee when Muslims were settled in

the city is mistaken.'* References to a bishop and other functionaries at Lucera in the archives of San Leonardo di Siponto, Santa Maria di Tremiti, and elsewhere demonstrate that Lucera’s diocese survived the

first decade after the initial deportations.'” Only a year after approaching the emperor regarding mendicant preaching at Lucera, Gregory him-

The Creation of a Muslim Colony in Apulia

51

self wrote to the city’s bishop. His letter did not even mention the local Muslim population, but rather charged the bishop with an unrelated task: he was to take action against the abbot of the monastery of Tremiti who had bound some of his fellow monks with irons, among other seri-

ous offenses.'® Whether or not the Dominicans actually went to Lucera and what success they may have had is not known. Since the issue of converting Muslims from the colony was raised again by Pope Gregory in 1236, the efforts of the mendicants do not seem to have borne much fruit. In his second approach to the emperor, the pope did not solicit Frederick’s cooperation, but rather leveled complaints and accusations against him.

Frederick responded by defending his project, asserting that the transfer of the Sicilian Muslims to Apulia had actually favored the Christian cause. The emperor described how with difficulty he had removed the Muslims from the mountains of Sicily. As a result, the island had be-

come accessible to more Christians. The resettled Muslim community was living in the midst of Christians who provided an instructive example.'*

In his response to the pope, Frederick went on to suggest that in their condition of servitude at Lucera, Muslims would come to envy the liberty enjoyed by Christians. By this, the emperor may have only intended to say that the inferior social status of the Lucerine Muslims would cause them to envy their Christian neighbors and desire to embrace Christianity. His statement could have another very significant implication: Muslims may have had the option of obtaining their freedom by converting to Christianity. Although they were not slaves, Muslims in the kingdom were, from a legal standpoint, not free. They were

defined as servi camerae. They and everything they owned technically belong to Frederick. Frederick’s defense of Lucera in 1236 included a claim that one third of the colony’s inhabitants had already become Christians. The emperor asserted that the remainder would soon follow. Although his hope for the eventual conversion of the colonists may have been sincere, it is highly improbable that as many as one third of the Muslims would have converted within a little over a decade of the colony’s crea-

tion.'? Although converts to Christianity during the reign of Charles II are known to have been excused from paying the donum, disadvantageous economic consequences for conversions may have dissuaded Muslims at Lucera from converting under Frederick II. In fourteenth-century Spain, many Mudejars appear to have been discouraged from becoming

52

Chapter Two

Christians because of the crown’s practice of confiscating the properties of converts after their deaths, thus depriving the children of former Muslims of their inheritances.'” No evidence of a similar practice exists in the Italian context, but it is not unimaginable that Muslim converts to Christianity and/or their descendants would have faced financial losses,

Since Muslims were considered to be the crown’s property, conversions to Christianity might have been dimly viewed by Frederick II because they resulted in reductions in royal assets. With regard to the Jews of Vienna who had a legal status which was similar to that of the Muslim colonists, Frederick declared in 1238 that the baptism of potential Jew-

ish converts to Christianity should be delayed for a period of three days

so that the sincerity of their conversions could be ascertained." He ruled that the possessions of converts to Christianity would be subject

to confiscation.'® Frederick’s relations with the mendicant orders in his realm worsened dramatically at the end of the 1230s, as did his relations with the papacy. The organization of further missionizing at Lucera was rendered impracticable. According to Riccardo di San Germano, the emperor had all but two friars expelled from the kingdom in November

1240.'% The historian Giulia Barone has argued that a number of mendicants, particularly those native to the kingdom, probably remained despite this order.'” In any case, tensions between Frederick and the friars continued well into the 1240s. The nadir of their relations could arguably be pinpointed to the year 1245. After Pope Innocent deposed

Frederick, the mendicants received instructions to preach against the

emperor.'® Islam, Lucera, and Frederick’s Relationship with the Papacy The often antipathetic relationship between Frederick II and the papacy has been discussed and analyzed at length by historians. An exhaustive treatment of the subject would not be possible or appropriate here, though some examination of papal-Hohenstaufen relations is necessary in order to understand better the circumstances behind important decisions and policies made by Frederick and various popes with respect to Lucera. When Frederick agreed to allow Dominican friars to preach to the colonists, for example, he did so despite the fact that his kingdom was still recovering from the aftermath of the papal invasions of the regno only a few years earlier.

The Creation of a Muslim Colony in Apulia

53

Under the leadership of John of Brienne and others, the descent of papal armies on southern Italy took place while Frederick was away on crusade. Although the papal campaign was not a crusade, the assault

was partly funded by tithes levied by the papacy.'® Frederick was warned by a number of his allies in Italy about the gains of enemy

forces and the betrayal of some Italian cities and towns.'” Many important cities in Capitanata, including Foggia and Troia, rebelled against the emperor. According to Matthew Paris, the inhabitants of San Severo even went so far as to rise up against and kill a royal official, Paolo di Logoteta.'”' Once the emperor was able to regain control over southern Italy, he severely punished those who had rebelled against him, both individually and collectively. He ordered fines, imprisonments, seizures of property, and the destruction of urban defenses. His unsparing treatment of rebel cities prompted Pope Gregory to intervene. Gregory asked the emperor to show mercy, but punitive

measures continued to be implemented for some years.'” Frederick’s successful negotiations with al-Kamil brought Jerusalem into Christian hands, but his crusade had never been recognized by the papacy. Frederick had gone to the Levant as an excommunicate. Gregory remained unwilling to be reconciled after his return, and peace between them was not made until 1230 when the Treaty of San Ger-

mano was forged. Frederick agreed then that the Church in his kingdom would be independent and free from royal interference, and Gregory lifted the ban of excommunication.'” Nevertheless, the pope did not address Frederick as the king of Jerusalem until August 1231.'” Frederick’s granting the pope’s request to allow the Dominicans to proselytize among the Muslims of Lucera in 1233 must be seen as part of a larger attempt to stabilize relations with Rome. He may have genuinely desired the conversion of the Muslims colonists to Christianity. His letter to Gregory suggests this. Yet, his actions would demonstrate that his priorities were firmly based on military and economic considerations. In 1233 he called for the demolition of the walls of the city of Troia whereas he supported Lucera by strengthening its fortifications: “Tunc jussu Imperatoris Lucerium civitas Sarracenorum firmatur. Troie menia diruuntur.”’'” In its polemics against Frederick, the papacy often targeted his relations with Muslims. Attempts were made to discredit him by portraying him as being more sympathetic to Islam than to Christianity. He was accused of committing sexual sins involving Muslims; rumors circu-

lated that he kept Muslim women as concubines.'”* His association with Muslims figured regularly in the polemic writings of papal supporters

54

Chapter Two

such as Cardinal Ranieri da Viterbo.'” When recounting the death of Marcellino d’Arezzo, a pontifical legate and bishop, the cardinal described how Muslims had sought to have Marcellino dragged behind horses, and he asserted that Muslims were ultimately responsible for his death.'” In 1236 the papacy leveled the accusation against Frederick that the stones of church buildings in the kingdom had been removed in order to construct “Agarenorum gymnasia.”’'”? Gregory IX’s reference to gymnasia suggests that a Qur’anic school, perhaps more than one, may have been established at Lucera, a suggestion which will be considered later. The charge may have derived from memories of the vandalism wrought by Muslims against the church of San Pietro in Bagno four years earlier.

Lucera’s cathedral was in a dilapidated state by the late 1230s, but it is unclear whether any stones or other building materials it to construct other buildings. At least some churches pear to have stopped functioning as such when the became predominantly Muslim; at some point, church

were taken from at Lucera do apcity’s population bells were taken

down and deposited inside Lucera’s castle." The storage of church property in the castle suggests that Frederick and his successors viewed the habitation of the city by Muslims as temporary. Items could have been, but were not, distributed to churches and monasteries elsewhere.

Papal hostility toward Frederick cannot be divorced from political and military developments within and outside the peninsula. The papacy strongly opposed the imperial campaigns planned and executed against Lombard territories during the middle and late 1230s. John Philip Lomax has suggested that the threat which Pope Gregory made in February 1236 to excommunicate Frederick may have actually been an attempt to dissuade the emperor from a planned offensive in northern Italy.'*' Frederick ignored papal protests against his campaigns in Lombardy. In turn, the pope vociferously condemned the emperor, focusing on his connections with Muslims as well as other issues. Accusations made by the papacy and its supporters did not go unanswered. Writing to Gregory IX in September 1236, Frederick refuted a number of allegations, including the charge that many of the kingdom’s churches had been despoiled by royal officials. He denied that churches and ecclesiastical prelates in his realm were disadvantaged. When

around 1238 the Church charged Frederick with despoiling churches and monasteries in Italy, including Monreale, the crown responded by

pointing to the havoc wreaked by the Sicilian Muslims on Monreale and by reminding the pope that Frederick had been the one who had inter-

vened

to resolve the situation."* The

imperial

defense essentially

The Creation of a Muslim Colony in Apulia

55

blamed Muslims for any losses which the church of Monreale had suffered, noting that the destruction caused by them had been on such a scale that few Christians remained in some areas. Frederick had expelled the Muslims with great labor and expense, bringing an end to the social unrest.' The tone of the crown’s rebuttal gives the impression that most Muslims had been removed from the lands around Monreale by 1238. Matthew Paris included in his chronicle the evasive imperial response given to the charge that churches in the Kingdom of Sicily were being profaned and destroyed: nothing was known about this unless the accusation referred to the church at Lucera. If that were to be the case, the church there had deteriorated over time. Frederick took no responsibility for its state. He was, in fact, in favor of it being rebuilt.'"* No specific mention of any negative impact which the Muslim population may have had on the Lucerine church was made in either the accusation or the imperial response. Frederick’s recognition that the Lucerine church was crumbling, but still evidently standing in some form in 1238, is significant. The building had not been appropriated for use as a mosque or for any other purpose. Frederick probably did wish to see restorations made to the church at Lucera, but with a local population which was predominantly Muslim and a pressing list of other matters which needed attention, he would not call for repairs to be made until he issued his last will and testament over a decade after his dispute with the pope. By singling out the Lucerine church for renovation before his death, Frederick seems to

have implicitly taken responsibility for its dilapidated condition. At no point, however, did he make any reference to his transfer of Muslims to the city, nor did he express remorse. His will simply states, “Jtem statuimus ut ecclesie Lucerie et Sore et si que alie lese sunt per officiales nostros, reficiantur et restituantur.”' The construction of Muslim buildings or defenses at the expense of Christian ones became a recurrent theme in the Curia’s attacks on Frederick. In June 1239, Gregory IX alleged that the emperor destroyed Christian buildings and used the materials to build the “walls of Baby-

lon.”'* According to the Vie de Grégoire LX, Frederick wrecked buildings at Barletta which belonged to the Hospitallers and the Templars,

and then he used their stones to construct Lucera’s palace.'”’ It is difficult to prove or disprove such an allegation given the limited documentation available on the construction of the Hohenstaufen palatium. The

author’s charge that Frederick had his palace erected on the site of Lucera’s cathedral is false.'"** The cathedral was still standing in November

Chapter Two

56

1303 when Pope Benedict XI commented on its unsuitability, noting its

small size and bad location.'” When Pope Gregory IX excommunicated not mention the Muslims of Lucera. Gregory the regno had been profaned and destroyed. seizing and imprisoning clerics. As noted,

Frederick in 1239, he did asserted that churches in Frederick was accused of among the other reasons

given for the excommunication was ‘Abd al-‘Aziz’s alleged detainment. The pope declared: “ . . . excommunicamus et anathematizamus eundem, pro eo quod nepotem regis Tunicii, venientem ad ecclesiam Romanam pro suscipiendo baptismatis sacramento, detinet nec venire per-

misit.”'” At the Council of Lyons in 1245, criticism of Frederick’s support for Muslims in general and for the Muslim colony in particular was raised as part of a larger effort to portray him as a heretic. Ironically, Frederick’s laws against heretics were important reference points for the papacy even after the emperor's death; Innocent IV sought to enforce the observance of Frederick’s legislation against heretics in July

1254, for example.’ In his book The Medieval Papacy, Geoffrey Barraclough asserted that the conflict with Frederick was what truly motivated Innocent IV to call the council.'” The emphasis placed by Innocent on Frederick’s wrongdoings at the gathering supports Barraclough’s conclusion. The planning of King Louis IX’s crusade to

Egypt was another issue addressed at Lyons.'” Frederick’s procurator, Thaddeus of Suessa, was present to refute

the charges made against the emperor at the council, but he could not prevent Innocent from deposing Frederick. At the council, the emperor was accused of having sexual relations with Muslim women."™ In addition, he was charged with having created a large fortified Muslim city within Christian territory, clearly a reference to his foundation of the Lucerine colony: “... civitatem quandam in christanitate construxerat novam, fortem et magnam, quam Sarracenis populaverit communitam, ipsorum utens, sed pocius abutens ritibus et supersticione, spreto chris-

tianorum consilio et religione ...”'” In Apulia as a whole, Frederick II did not adopt policies which were beneficial to Muslims but injurious to Christians. The emperor sup-

ported a number of churches and monasteries in that region during his reign. In 1223, for example, he confirmed the privileges enjoyed by the cathedral at Bari.'* During the 1230s, he undertook a costly building project to erect a cathedral at Altamura. More examples can be cited for

religious institutions located in other parts of the kingdom. The monastery of Santa Sofia of Benevento was permitted the use of woods, pas-

The Creation of a Muslim Colony in Apulia

57

tures, and water in Apulia at Fiorentino in 1223, for example.'” The hostilities which existed between the emperor and the Church and Frederick’s support for a Muslim colony at Lucera should not distort the fact that he supported Christian practice in Apulia.

Notes 1. Livy, Livy with an English translation, trans. B.O. Foster, vol. 4, book 9 (1926; Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard UP, 1963) 166.

2. Meluta Miroslav Marin, “Un angolo della Daunia anteriormente al petiodo federiciano: Teanum Apulum, Luceria, Arpi,” Federico II e Fiorentino, ed. Maria Stella Cald Mariani, Atti del primo convegno di studi medioevali della Capitanata, 23-24 giugno 1984 (Galatina: Congedo Editore, 1985) 60. 3. Livy, Livy, vol. 4, book 9, 260-261. 4, Marin, “Un angolo” 60. 5. For Roman artifacts recovered at Lucera, see Ettore De Juliis, “Documenti archeologici del Museo Civico di Lucera,” La Capitanata. Rassegna di vita e di studi della Provincia di Foggia 10 (1972): 38-52. He described the Venere on page 45. 6. Volpe, San Giusto. Guida 59-60; Volpe, Biffino, and Pietropaolo, “La

villa” 201-202. 7. Volpe, San 8. Volpe, San 9. Bradford, Quarterly Review

Giusto. Guida 59. Giusto. Guida 63. “The Apulia Expedition: An Interim Report,” Antiquity: A of Archaeology 94 (1950): 90.

10. Dionisio Morlacco, “Pozzi, cisterne e spacci per la sete di Lucera,”

A.S.P. 44 (1991): 163; Bradford, “The Apulia Expedition” 90-91, 11. Marina Mazzei and Enzo Lippolis, “Dall’ellenizzazione all’eta tardorepubblicana,” La Daunia antica, ed. Marina Mazzei (Milano: Electa Editrice,

1984) 201, 204.

12. Carlo Tozzi, “Contributo alla conoscenza del villaggio neolitico di Ripa Tetta (Lucera),” Atti del 6° Convegno sulla Preistoria-Protostoria-Storia della Daunia, eds. Benito Mundi e Armando Gravina, vol. 1, 14-16 dicembre 1984 San Severo (San Severo: Amministrazione Comunale di San Severo, 1984) 12-

14, 13. Tozzi, “Contributo” 16. 14. Tozzi, “Contributo” 17. 15. Nunzio Tomaiuoli, “La fortezza di Lucera. Indagini e scavi dall’800 ad oggi,” Miscellanea di Storia Lucerina I]. Atti del III° Convegno di studi storici

(Lucera: Centro Regionale Servizi Culturale Educativi, 1989) 112. 16. Geraint Dyfed Barri Jones,” The Neolithic Settlements

of the Tavoliere,” Apulia. Neolithic Settlement in the Tavoliere, ed. Geraint Dyfed Barri Jones, vol. 1 (London: Society of Antiquaries of London, 1987) 27; Alessandra Manfredini, “Programma di ricerche preistoriche e paleoambientali nel

58

Chapter Two

Tavoliere,”

Atti del 2° convegno

sulla

Preistoria-Protostoria-Storia

della

Daunia, 28-30 novembre 1980 San Severo (San Severo: Civica Amminstrazione, 1982) 79. 17. For the excavations, see Volpe, Biffino, and Pietropaolo, “La villa” 163. 18. Volpe, San Giusto. Guida 82. 19. Volpe, San Giusto. Guida 46, 82.

20. Italia pontificia sive repertorium privilegiorum et litterarum a romanis pontificibus ante annum MCLXXXXVIII Italiae ecclesiis monasteriis civitatibus singulisque personis concessorum, ed. Walter Holtzmann, vol. 9 (Berolinum: Weidmannos, 1962) 155-156, nos. 1-2; Giorgio Otranto, “Due epistole di papa Gelasio I (492-496) sulla comunita cristiana di Lucera,” Vetera Christianorum 14 (1977): 123-137. 21. Jean-Marie Martin and Ghislaine Noyé, “Guerra, fortificazioni e habitat nell’ Italia meridionale dal V al X secolo,” La Capitanata 11. 22. Martin and Noyé, “Guerra” 11. 23. Paul the Deacon, Storia dei longobardi, trans. Massimo Felisatti, ed. Roberto Cassanelli, book 5 (Milano: Electa, 1985) 224-225; The second refer-

ence is in book 2, p. 88. 24. D’Angela, “Dall’era costantiniana ai longobardi,” La Daunia antica,

357. 25. Corsi, “‘Lucera tra longobardi” 84. 26. Falkenhausen, La dominazione 55. 27. Corsi, ‘“Lucera tra longobardi” 86; Cf. Falkenhausen, La dominazione

55. 28. Italia Pontificia, vol. 9, 56, no. 17.

29. Herbert Bloch, Monte Cassino in the Middle Ages, vol. 1 (Roma: Edizioni di Storia e Letteratura, 1986) 613, 622, 625. On the bronze doors, the bishop

of Tertiveri, not far from Lucera, was portrayed: Bloch, Monte Cassino 623. During the late thirteenth century, a Muslim inhabitant of Lucera named ‘Abd al-‘Aziz 30. 31. 32.

held extensive lands at Tertiveri: C.D.S.L., no. 206. Bloch, Monte Cassino 613. Bloch, Monte Cassino 617. Le pergamene del Duomo di Bari (952-1264), ed. Giambattista Nitto de

Rossi and Francesco Nitti di Vito, vol. 1 of C.D.B. (Bari, 1897) no. 95.

33. Pasquale Corsi, “I monasteri benedittini della Capitanata settentrionale,” Insediamenti benedettini in Puglia, ed. Maria Stella Cald Mariani, vol. | (Galatina: Congedo Editore, 1981) 60. Vol.

34. C.D.C., eds. Michele Morcaldi, Mauro Schiani, and Sylvano de Stefano, 1 (Napoli, 1873) 11-12, no. XI. 35. C_D.C.,, vol. 1, 160-161, no. CXXVI. 36. C.D.C.,, vol. 6, 91-93, no. CMXXXIIL. 37. R.C.A., vol. 36, Additiones ad Reg. 117, 98, no. 22. 38. C_D.C., vol. 5, 84-85, no. DCCLVIII. 39. C._D.C,, vol. 4, 226-227, no. DCLX VIII (227).

The Creation of a Muslim Colony in Apulia

59

40. Giovanni Villani, /storie Fiorentine, vol. 2 (Milano, 1802) chap. XIV,

71; Ernst Kantorowicz also stated that Lucera was somewhat depopulated during the Hohenstaufen period. He provided no citation to back this assertion: Ernst Kantorowicz, Federico II, Imperatore, trans. Gianni Pilone Colombo (1927; Milano: Aldo Garzanti Editore, 1976) 115. 41. Egidi, “La colonia,” A.S.P.N. 36 (1911): 604: “Quando, dopo il 1220,

Federico II prese reale possesso del regno di Sicilia, trove questa parte della Puglia stremata e vuota di abitanti...” 42. Egidi, “La colonia,” 4.S.P.N. 36 (1911): 605. 43. Egidi, “La colonia,” 4.S.P.N. 36 (1911): 605. 44. D.T.R.V., ed. Domenico Vendola, vol. 1 (Trani: Vecchi & C. Editori, 1940) 89-90, no. 94. 45. D.T.R.V., vol. 1, 96, no. 103. 46. D.T.R.V., vol. 1, 108-109, no. 116. 47. D.T.R.V., vol. 1, 111-112, no. 122.

48. D.T.R.V., vol. 1, 114, no. 124. 49. D.T.R.V., vol. 1, 119, no. 131. 50. “Vie de Grégoire IX,” Le Liber Censuum de |'Eglise Romaine, vol. 2

(Paris: Albert Fontemoing, Editeur, 1905) 31.

51. Ibn Khaldun, “Kitab al-‘ibar” 598. 52. Maurici, L ‘emirato 28. 53. H.D.F-.S., vol. 5, pt. 1, 606-623. Lombard rebels were entrusted to the

care of barons in various regions of the kingdom. 54. Kantorowicz, Federico 104; Van Cleve, The Emperor 142; Franco Porsia, “Il periodo svevo,” Storia della Puglia, ed. Giosué Musca, vol. 1 (Bari: Adda Editore, 1987) 261.

55. Kantorowicz, Federico 101. 56. Eduard Sthamer, L'amministrazione dei castelli nel Regno di Sicilia

sotto Federico Il e Carlo I d’Angio, trans. Francesco Panarelli (Bari: Mario Adda Editore, 1995) 7. 57. Sthamer, L’amministrazione 7.

58. H.D.F-.S., vol. 2, pt. 1, 352-353 through H.D.F.S., vol. 2, pt. 1, 356; Brihl, “L’itinerario” 59. Riccardo di 60. Riccardo di 61. Riccardo di 62. Riccardo di

44. San San San San

Germano, Germano, Germano, Germano,

“Chronica” “Chronica” “Chronica” “‘Chronica”

112-113. 112-113. 113. 108, 109.

63. Joseph O'Callaghan, “The Mudejars of Castile and Portugal in the Twelfth and Thirteenth Centuries,” Muslims under Latin Rule 1100-1300, ed.

James Powell (Princeton: Princeton UP, 1990) 13-14. In the region of Valencia, by contrast, reconquered Muslim communities were left largely in place by James I.

64. Giuliano Volpe, La Daunia nell’eta della romanizzazione. Paesaggio agrario, produzione, scambi (Bari: Edipuglia, 1990) 16. Detailed studies of the geographic characteristics of the Tavoliere were made and presented by Cath-

60

Chapter Two

nena RT Ren en AmrHECo

erine Delano Smith in “The Neolithic Environment of the Tavoliere,” Apulia,

Neolithic Settlement in the Tavoliere, ed. Geraint Dyfed Barri Jones, vol, (London: Society of Antiquaries of London, 1987) 5-6.

65. Lucera, Carta d'Italia, foglio 163 I SE, ser. M891, ed. 1 (Istituto Geografico Militare, 1957). 66. Briihl, “L’itinerario” 39.

67. Brihl, “L’itinerario” 45. 68. Brihl, “L’itinerario” 45.

OE NP +S

69. H.D.F-.S., vol. 6, pt. 1, 15. 70. Giuseppe de Troia, “Il contesto storico-giuridico,” F.C.Q.E. (Fasano; Schena Editore, 1994) 20.

71. Pasquale Corsi, “Federico II e la Capitanata,” La Capitanata 32-33 (1995-1996): 25. 72. Corsi, “Federico II e la Capitanata” 25.

73. For properties which had once been owned by Pier della Vigna, see F.C.Q.E. 154-155. 74. H.D.F.S., vol. 5, pt. 2, 943-944. 75. R.C.A., vol. 9, 70, no. 16; vol. 9, 70-71, no. 17; vol. 9, 72, no. 23.

76. Volpe, La Daunia 23. Volpe’s chapter “Il quadro geografico” in Daunia contains a good description of the geographic characteristics and vegetation of the Tavoliere: Volpe, La Daunia 13-25.

77. Volpe, La Daunia 24. 78. Volpe, La Daunia 25.

79. Pasquale Di Cicco, “La transumanza e gli antichi tratturi del Tavoliere,” Profili della Daunia antica. II ciclo di conferenze sulle piu recenti campagne di scavo, 2-30 maggio 1986 Foggia (Foggia: Regione Puglia, 1986) 205. 80. Lippolis, Enzo and Marina Mazzei, “L’eta imperiale,” La Daunia antica, ed. Marina Mazzei (Milano: Electa Editrice, 1984) 253. 81. Kantorowicz, Federico 656. 82. de Troia, “Il contesto” 20.

83. Giambattista Gifuni, Lucera augustea (Urbino: Stabilimento Ti pografico Editore Urbinate, 1939) 17; Gifuni, Lucera 9; for a descriptive list of forty-four epigraphs found at Lucera, see Maria Balice, “Iscrizioni Latini di Lucera,” A.S.P. 34 (1981): 3-39. 84. Gifuni, Lucera 8.

85. Rocco del Preite, Breve [8].

OY RE he A PL ioaPO ear Ae PE na me

86. Ignotus monachus S. Mariae de Ferraria, “Chronica” 38.

87. Matthew

Paris, Cronica maiora

351; Matthew

Paris, Abbreviatlo

Cronicorum Angliae, M.G.H.S., ed. Felix Liebermann, vol. 28 (1888; Stuttgat Hiersemann, 1963) 453. 88. al-Hamawi, “at-Ta’rih al-mansuri” 416. 89. Le due bibbie di Bovino ora Codici Vaticani Latini 10510-10511 ¢ le loro note storiche, ed, Marco Vattasso (Roma: Tipografia Vaticana, 1900) 40:

ditaatr Rapa rts atee brama atene aad eaiee et }eOnp pai yes ai pan rien mun capc wo

The Creation of a Muslim Colony in Apulia

61

90. Kantorowicz, Federico 115. 91. Egidi, “La colonia,” A.S.P.N. 36 (1911): 623. 92. Abulafia, “Monarchs” 235; David Abulafia, “La caduta di Lucera Sara-

cenorum,” Per /a storia del Mezzogiorno medievale e moderno. Studi in memoria di Jole Mazzoleni, vol. 1 (Roma: Ministero per i beni culturali e ambientali,

1998) 172. 93. C._D.S.L., no. 306. 94. C_D.S.L., nos. 34, 35, 37, 38, 75, 107, 132, 229a. 95. C.D.S.L., no. 306.

96. C_D.S.L., nos. 54, 79, 306. 97. C.D.S., ed. Carlo Carucci, vol. 1 (Subiaco: Tipografia dei Monasteri, 1931) 143-145, no, LXIX. 98. C_DS., vol. 1, 143-145, no. LXIX. 99. C._D.S., vol. 1, 270-272, no. CXLVII. For another example of a lease, see Archivio della Santissima Trinita di Cava dei Tirreni, An. LIX, N. 30. Year

1288. 100. H.D.F:S., vol. 4, pt. 2, 828-832.

101. A././., vol. 1, 768-780, no. 1005. 102. C.D.S.L., no. 39. 103. C._D.S.L., no. 99. 104. C.D.S.L., no. 469; Pasquale Corsi, “Federico II e Fiorentino fra storia e

leggenda,” Federico I] e Fiorentino. Atti del primo convegno di studi medioevali della Capitanata, 23-24 giugno 1984, ed. Maria Stella Calo Mariani (Galatina: Congedo Editore, 1985) 27. Ulman is mentioned in this document issued in the

year 1301, after the colony had been dismantled. 105. R.C.A., vol. 3, 119, no. 150; vol. 11, 17, no. 53.

106. R.C.A., vol. 3, 119, no. 150. 107. A././., vol. 1, 768-780, no. 1005. 108. R.C.A., vol. 12, reg. 63, 93, no. 340. 109. For the Muslims of Girifalco, see H.D.F.S. vol. 5, pt. 1, 588-592.

110. A././., vol. 1, 768-780 (775), no. 1005. 111. A.L1., vol. 1, 768-780 (772), no. 1005. 112. Egidi, “La colonia,” A.S.P.N. 36 (1911): 609. 113. “Annales siculi” 498. 114. Aziz Ahmad, A History of Islamic Sicily (Edinburgh: Edinburgh UP, 1975) 84, 115. H.D.F.S., vol. 4, pt. 1, 405-406; Pope Gregory IX, Les registres de Grégoire IX, ed. Lucien Auvray, 2nd ser., vol. 1 (Paris, 1896) col. 577, no. 978.

116. Regesto di S. Leonardo di Siponto, ed. F. Camobreco (Roma: E. Loescher & Co., 1913) 129-130, no. 194; Le pergamene di Barletta del Reale Archivio di Napoli (1075-1309), ed. Riccardo Filangieri di Candida, vol. 10 of C.D.B. (Bari: Commissione Provinciale di Archeologia e Storia Patria, 1927) 145-146, no. 102.

117, Alexander wrote to the magister and members of the order four days later, on 26 November 1260: D.7.R.V., ed. Domenico Vendola, vol. 1 (Trani:

~~.

62

~

Chapter Two

Vecchi & Co., 1940) 276-277, no. 351; Pope Alexander IV, Les registres D'Aj.

exandre IV, eds. Charles Germaine Marie Bourel de La Ronciere, et al., ond ser., vol. 3 (Paris: E. De Boccard, 1953) 129, no. 3200. 118. Isler, Monte lato. Guida archeologica 25.

119. H.D.F-.S., vol. 5, pt. 1, 588-592 (590). 120. H.D.F.S., vol. 5, pt. 1, 588-592 (590). 121. H.D.F-.S., vol. 5, pt. 1, 626-627. 122. John Boswell, The Royal Treasure: Muslim Communities under the Crown of Aragon in the Fourteenth Century (New Haven: Yale UP, 1977) 300. 123. H.D.F-S., vol. 5, pt. 2, 764. 124. C._D.S.L., nos. 185, 286. 125. Martin, “La colonie” 805, 808.

126. Martin wrote about a “surcharge démographique brutale.” Martin, “La colonie” 805. 127. Catherine Delano Smith, Daunia vetus. Terra, vita e mutamenti sulle coste del Tavoliere (Foggia: Amministrazione Provinciale di Capitanata, 1978) 54.

nOAITCSCN im ree Rect tect YEN NLS Gree RAR A RO ELS TTR POOL CE AC OT e N BO NN pe

128. Martin, “La colonie” 806.

129. C._D.S.L., no. 35. 130. Codice diplomatico barlettano, ed. Salvatore Santeramo, vol. 1 (Barletta: Premiato Stabilimento Tipografico G. Bellisanti, 1924) 46, no. 16. 131. C.D.S.L., no. 157; C._D.S.L., no. 562. 132. Egidi, “La colonia,” A.S.P.N. 36 (1911): 604. James Powell also sug-

Same ne |mane crn e

gested that Frederick, faced with the presence of “unruly northern barons,” may have established his settlement at Lucera in order to achieve greater security in the region: Powell, “The Papacy” 194, 133. Nicolaus de Jamsilla, “Historia de rebus gestis Friderici II Imperatoris,” ed. Ludovicus Antonius Muratorius, R./.S., vol. 8 (Mediolanum, 1726) cols. 530-532; Haseloff, Architettura, vol. 1, 104. 134. Haseloff, Architettura, vol. 1, 107. 135. Pasquale Natella and Paolo Peduto, “Rocca Ianula, Lucera, Castel del Monte: Un problema occidentale,” Palladio. Rivista di storia dell'architettura, new ser., 22 (1972): 33.

136. Noyé, “La ceramica dipinta” 117. 137. A.L.L, vol. 1, 768-780 (771), no. 1005. 138. Haseloff, Architettura, vol. 1, 105. 139. Egidi, “La colonia,” A.S.P.N. 36 (1911): 647, note 3.

140. The drawings of Desprez were published by Arthur Haseloff: Haseloff, Architettura, vol. 1, 215.

141. D’Amelj, Storia, Tavole. 142. H.D.F:S., vol. 5, pt. 2, 912. 143. Riccardo di San Germano, “Chronica” 216; Raffaele Licinio, Castelli

medievali. Puglia e Basilicata dai normanni a Federico II e Carlo I d’Angié (Bari: Edizioni Dedalo, 1994) 155,

144. Nicolaus de Jamsilla, “Historia,” col. 533C; D’Amelj, Storia 191.

‘S SL AB Se BL aT DAD REE Red RAR oA RP MES, IE Ls TES POE SUR PAP PRS Pe te AOE RCE oSN AA ER AR BIP P BEA

The Creation of a Muslim Colony in Apulia

63

145. Gary Radke, “The Palaces of Frederick II,” /ntellectual Life at the

Court of Frederick II Hohenstaufen, ed. William Tronzo (Washington D.C-.: National Gallery of Art, 1994) 184. 146. Grierson and Travaini, Medieval European Coinage 29-30. 147. Grierson and Travaini, Medieval European Coinage 30. 148. Sthamer, L ‘amministrazione 63. The palace at Foggia was not included in Sthamer's list. 149. R.P.R., vol. 1, 640, no. 7429.

150. R.P.R., vol. 1, 645, no. 7490. 151. The Annals of Ulster, eds. Padraig Bambury and Stephen Beechinor (Cork:

Corpus

of

Electronic

Texts

(G:E:L.T,),

1997),

, 267 of The Annals of Ulster, 21 of the web site. 152. H.D.F.S., vol. 4, pt. 1, 452 and 457-458.

153. 154. 155. 156.

H.D.F-S., vol. 4, pt. 1, 452. H.D.F-.S., vol. 3, 268-269. H.D.F.S., vol. 3, 268-269. R.P.R., vol. 1, 757, no. 8826.

157. Le pergamene del Duomo di Bari, no. 95. 158. Abulafia, Frederick, 146; Abulafia, “Ethnic Variety” 217. In the latter,

Abulafia stated, “ . . . (Frederick) expelled the Christian population of Lucera, even including the bishop, and turned Lucera into a garrison town.” 159. Regesto di S. Leonardo di Siponto, 117-119, no. 182; Codice diplomatico del monastero benedettino di S. Maria di Tremiti (1005-1237), ed. Armando Petrucci (Roma: Istituto Storico Italiano per il Medio Evo, 1960), pt. 3, 341-343, no. 129, 345-346, no. 132 and 354-358, no. 138.

160. Codice diplomatico del monastero 341-343, no. 129; Pope Gregory IX, Les registres, vol. 1, cols. 937-938, no. 1699. 161. H.D.F.S., vol. 4, pt. 2, 828-832.

162. Kantorowicz asserted that Frederick did not desire the conversion of Lucera’s Muslims to Christianity at all. He viewed Frederick’s concession of a visit by Dominican friars to Lucera as the result of tense relations and pressures between Frederick and the pope: Kantorowicz, Federico 116. 163. Boswell, The Royal Treasure 378.

164. The Jews of Germany were considered to belong to the camera: Gavin

Langmuir, “‘Judei Nostri’ and the Beginning of Capetian Legislation,” Traditio: Studies in Ancient and Medieval History, Thought and Religion 16 (1960): 206. 165. Colafemmina, “Federico II e gli ebrei” 71. 166. Riccardo di San Germano, “Chronica” 207. 167. Giulia Barone, “La propaganda antiimperiale nell’Italia federiciana.

L’azione degli Ordini Mendicanti,” Federico II e le citta italiane, eds. Pierre Toubert and Agostino Paravicini Bagliani (Palermo: Sellerio Editore, 1994)

284-285. 168. Clifford Hugh Lawrence, The Friars: The Impact of the Early Mendicant Movement on Western Society (London: Longman, 1994) 186-187.

64

Chapter Two

169. Abulafia, Frederick 196.

170. Van Cleve, The Emperor 212.

171, Matthew Paris, Cronica maiora 155; Cf. Riccardo di San Germano, “Chronica” 161. 172. D.T.R.V., vol. 1, 150-151, no, 173; H.D.F.S., vol. 3, 244-247. Greg.

ory’s appeal was issued on 15 October 1230. 173. Abulafia, Frederick, 200. 174. Jonathan Riley-Smith, The Feudal Nobility and the Kingdom of Jerusalem, 1174-1277 (London: MacMillan Press, 1973) 200.

175. Riccardo di San Germano, Chronica 184; Haseloff, Architettura, vol. 1, 104; the people of Troia also had to pay 3,400 gold ounces to have their fellow citizens who had been taken hostage released: H.D.F.S., vol. 4, pt. 2, 780-

783. 176. 177. 178. 179.

Matthew Paris, Cronica maiora 147 and 244 (years 1238 and 1244). Maier, “Crusade” 347. Kantorowicz, Federico 655; Marcellino d’ Arezzo was hanged. H.D.F-.S., vol. 4, pt. 2, 905-913 (906); Epistolae saeculi XIII e regestis

pontificum romanorum, ed. Carolus Rodenberg, M.G.H., ed. Georgius Heinricus Pertz, vol. 1 (Berolinum, 1883) 597, no. 700.

180. C.D.S.L., no. 392. 181. John Philip Lomax, “Frederick II, his Saracens, and the Papacy,” Medieval Christian Perceptions of Islam: A Book of Essays, ed. John Victor Tolan (New York: Garland Publishers, 1996) 185. 182. Matthew Paris, Cronica maiora 154; H.D.F-.S., vol. 5, pt. 1, 249-258

(250-251). 183. H.D.F-.S., vol. 5, pt. 1, 249-258 (251). 184. Matthew Paris, Cronica maiora 156.

185. 186. 187. 188. 189.

H.D.F-.S., vol. 6, pt. 2, 805-810 (807). H.D.F-.S., vol. 5, pt. 1, 327-340 (335). “Vie de Grégoire IX” 30-31. “Vie de Grégoire IX” 31. C_D.S.L., no. 611.

190. Matthew Paris, Cronica maiora 149,

191. R.P.R., vol. 2, 1270-1271, no. 15448. 192. Geoffrey Barraclough, The Medieval Papacy (1968; London: Thames and Hudson, 1992) 135. 193. Norman Housley, “The Thirteenth-Century Crusades,” The New Cam-

bridge Medieval History, vol. 5, ed. David Abulafia (Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 2000) 579; Joseph Strayer, “The Crusades of Louis IX,” A History of the Crusades, ed. Kenneth Setton, vol. 2 (Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1969) 487-518 (490). 194. Matthew Paris, Cronica maiora 259. 195. Matthew Paris, Cronica maiora 259. 196. Le pergamene del Duomo di Bari, no. 89.

197. A.LL, vol. 1, 233-235, no. 257.

The Creation of a Muslim Colony in Apulia

194. Matthew Paris, Cronica maiora 259. 195. Matthew Paris, Cronica maiora 259.

196. Le pergamene del Duomo di Bari, no. 89. 197. A.L'L, vol. 1, 233-235, no. 257.

65

e S

pe

ee ee ee ee ne eee

Chapter Three

Muslim Status, Religious Practice, and Culture The Status of Muslims in the Kingdom Like subjugated Muslim populations in medieval Aragon, the Lucerines were considered the king’s property. They and their possessions belonged to the crown. Both Muslims and Jews were defined as servi camerae.' Muslims were protected because they were the property of the crown and because their right to live in Christendom was sanctioned by canon law. In the Constitutions of Melfi, Frederick defended the

right of Jews and Muslims to protection.’ Similarly, in late July 1295, the Angevin king Charles II issued a letter drafted by Andrea da Ravello to all the Muslims of Lucera, affirming that he did not want them to be unjustly disturbed.’ After he destroyed the Muslim colony and sold its inhabitants into slavery five years later, he justified his decision in religious terms, asserting that the Muslims had posed a threat to the spiritual well-being of Christians in the region. Although religious concerns do appear to have influenced him strongly, the move had to be legitimized.

Chapter Three

68

Parallels can be drawn between the treatment of the Muslims of Lucera and the treatment of the dhimmi of Muslim lands. The Lucerine colonists paid the jizya. The Arabic term for this tax on the dhimmi was actually transliterated into Latin, appearing as gisia in Hohenstaufen

and Angevin documents. Johns, unlike Amari, believes that Muslims in Sicily may have paid the jizya to Norman rulers.’ Like the Lucerine colonists, Muslims in Norman Sicily had a protected status. Some of the restrictions intended for the ahl al-kitab living in Muslim lands were not applied to the Lucerine colonists. Of course, restrictions were also sometimes overlooked in Muslim lands. Public religious displays were evidently permitted at Lucera. Since a mosque is known to have been founded in the city, the prohibition against building new places of worship appears not to have been imposed by Frederick on the colonists. Similarly, Jews living in Trani had their own place of worship. A Hebrew dedicatory inscription studied by Cesare Colafemmina testifies to the construction of a synagogue at Trani during Frederick’s reign.’ As noted, however, Jewish immigrants to Palermo were not al-

lowed by the emperor to construct a new synagogue. Following the precedent established by the Fourth Lateran Council in 1215, Frederick called for distinguishing clothing for Jews in 1221 when

he issued his Assizes from Messina.° In addition, Jewish men

were to wear beards.’ There is no evidence that Muslims were required to wear a particular dress during either the Hohenstaufen or the Angevin periods, though. No declarations or renewals of dress-code laws or

orders regarding their enforcement have survived. The demands of the Fourth Lateran Council were to have applied to both Jews and Muslims.* The council’s aim to prevent carnal relations between Christians and the men and women of different religions was stated in its decree: it happens sometimes through error that Christians mingle with the women

of Jews and Saracens, and, on the other hand, Jews and

Saracens mingle with those of the Christians. Therefore, that such ruinous commingling through error of this kind may not serve as a

LEO IN ELD GEL REE EE LE PR OE ee LIE LO SALA ES DET NEL TT ct ET AA PIO AA 3 LR AO PI RE 7 Go NRA a hee _ be Te ns eT al ae PE Ac Se Rite POL L E

refuge for further excesses, we decree that such people of both sexes (that is, Jews and Saracens) in every Christian province and at all times be distinguished in public from other people by a difference of dress ”

Only during the early 1290s, a period of renewed inquisitorial activ-

ity in the kingdom, were accusations of intermingling between Christians and Muslims at Lucera seriously raised. Nevertheless, the impos!-

|

Muslim Status, Religious Practice, and Culture

69

tion of distinguishing dress at Lucera was evidently not viewed as a realistic solution to the problem. In addition to paying taxes, Lucerine Muslims were obliged to perform services for the crown. They had to contribute their labor to royal building projects, and they were called upon to serve in wars. Muslims could be transferred, essentially forced, upon the orders of the crown to farm royal lands outside Lucera. They were not technically slaves, however. The crown made a distinction between servi and sclavi.

Free Muslims and Slaves

A number of Muslims who did not form a part of the Apulian community lived or traded in Italy either as slaves or free merchants. Similarly, Christian slaves lived in North Africa. For two Muslims who found themselves laboring as slaves in Barletta, the prospect of reaching a large Muslim community just a few-days journey to the north must have seemed their only hope. In 1274 they staged an escape from their owners, the Templars, fleeing to Lucera where they were embraced, or at

least allowed to remain, by their fellow Muslims. The knights, of course, were indignant, and they demanded the return of the men. The king intervened on their behalf. The matter, in fact, was not difficult to settle. If the Muslims were not of Lucerine origin, but were slaves

brought from lands beyond the sea, then they belonged to the knights as

their slaves.'° The main issue at stake in this situation was obviously one of property rights, yet the terminology used also raises questions about how servitude and slavery may have been defined and differentiated by the king. In the Angevin Registers, the Muslims of Lucera were repeatedly referred to as the servi of the king. They were not labeled his sclavi or slaves, as were the unfortunate pair who fled from Barletta. From a legal standpoint, in any case, the Muslims of Lucera were considered to be the king’s property, an interpretation which has parallels in the context of reconquered Spain. As John Boswell noted, the Mudejars in the

lands of Aragon were defined as the king’s possessions, as his treasure. In the Fueros of Aragon, Muslims were described as belonging to the king unless they were slaves imported by lords from territories which did not fall under royal jurisdiction.'' The view of Muslims as royal property in the Kingdom of Sicily was brought to bear by the son of Charles I, Charles II. Deciding to dismantle the colony in 1300, he sold the Muslims and their goods, depositing the proceeds of the sales into

70

Chapter Three

his coffers. Once sold, the Muslims became the sclavi of their new

owners." Numerous Muslims lived as slaves in the kingdom. Many were acquired through raids and then sold to individuals or orders such as the Templars. Likewise, forays were made by both Muslim and Christian

pirates on Italian merchant ships and coastal cities for booty and slaves. Piracy was so serious a threat that patrols of the Adriatic were often organized. In the spring of 1274, four galleys from the kingdom were

armed to guard and defend the coasts of Apulia and Abruzzo.” In 1276 galleys responsible for monitoring the Sicilian coast helped to patrol

against Catalan pirates in the waters off Pantelleria."* Muslim slaves for whom owners could not be found in the kingdom appear to have devolved to the crown. In 1269 three female Muslim slaves were sent on to the royal camera since their “patronus seu

domini” could not be located.'* The king reimbursed the portulani of Gaeta for the expenses which they had incurred in detaining the women. The rebellion at Lucera was under way when this matter arose, but since the women were sclavi and not fugitives from the Apulian colony, they would probably not have been sent to Lucera anyway.

Religion and Culture at Lucera The Muslim community at Lucera appears to have adhered closely to Islamic practices and to have enjoyed a high degree of religious freedom. One Arabic source from the late thirteenth century mentioned that, during the reign of Frederick’s son Manfred, an ambassador of Sultan

Baybars I of Egypt visited Lucera.'* The envoy was favorably impressed both by Manfred and by the overall condition of Muslims at Lucera,

noting that they continued to observe Friday prayers.'’ According to Ibn Jubayr, Muslims living in Palermo during the reign of William II did not gather on Fridays because the khutbah was prohibited, but the khutbah was permitted on annual feast days.'* Baybars’ ambassador found that Islamic rites were observed publicly at Lucera. He also noted that there were prominent Muslim men in Manfred’s court.'” Most of the thirteenth-century documentation on Lucera is concerned with the city’s economy, administration, and justice. The absence of internal records for the Muslim community unfortunately makes the task of reconstructing religious life in the city difficult. There are no medieval books or documents in Arabic in the collections of the the Archivio Capitolare of the cathedral or in the Biblioteca Comunale.

Muslim Status, Religious Practice, and Culture

71

Locally, even Latin documents from the thirteenth century were lost or destroyed. The Archivio Capitolare contains only two parchments dated prior to the fourteenth century. They were drawn up in 1066 and 1155.” Only one thirteenth-century document issued from Foggia is housed in Lucera’s Biblioteca Comunale.” It does not make reference to Lucera’s Muslim inhabitants. Evidence of the observance of Islamic practices must therefore be culled from the writings of Muslim historians outside the kingdom and from the Hohenstaufen and Angevin Registers. The latter were generally not concerned with such matters, however. As noted, the Ta’rikh al-mansuri described Ahmad as a pilgrim,

suggesting that some Sicilian Muslims made the hajj. The Muslims of Lucera were probably not permitted to make the pilgrimage, although it is possible that a few members of the elite may have done so. Practices such as the keeping of Ramadan were probably observed. Muslims in Norman Sicily are known to have kept Ramadan.” Salat or prayer is a cornerstone of Islamic practice. In addition to praying five times daily and participating in Friday prayers, the Muslims at Lucera probably performed the tahajjud, nocturnal prayers. The focal point of the community was the masjid or mosque. Despite prohibitions against eating pork, Muslims are known to have raised some pigs locally because those animals were seized after the colony was dismantled.” Muslims did sell animals to Christians, but it is reasonable to assume that pork, though haram, was included in the

diets of some members of the Muslim community. Wine appears to have been both made and drunk by the colonists. Charles IT complained that it was illegally sold in Lucera’s castle, asserting that both Christians and Muslims commonly sold it.“ Among the discarded possessions on a list of items left behind by Muslims who had been temporarily relocated to the Land of Otranto in 1301 was “barile I parvus pro deferendo vino.” Analogously, Muslims in medieval Valencia are known to have owned vineyards and to have frequented wine shops.”° Gathering from its name, on the “ruga Balney” at Lucera there may

have been a public bath.” As noted, archaeologists found the remains of a medieval hammam at Entella.“ The use of a hammam by Muslims at Lucera appears likely. In addition to washing their faces and hands before prayer as prescribed by the Qur’an, Muslims remove hadath (pollu-

tion) when necessary by bathing.” As nasia” Jubayr ing the

mentioned, Pope Gregory IX’s reference to “Agarenorum gymsuggests that a Qur’anic school may have existed at Lucera. Ibn noted that mosques served as Qur’anic schools in Palermo durreign of William II. The Muslim community at Lucera, having

72

Chapter Three

suffered a “brain drain” with the exodus of intellectuals from Sicily and limited in its contacts with the Muslim world, was nevertheless not ina

position to make a lasting contribution to Muslim theology or scholar.

erp se ne~s

ship.?' Members of the Muslim elite did enjoy a high degree of literacy as late as the Angevin period, however. Among those who were allowed to convert to Christianity when the colony was assaulted in 1300 was a Muslim doctor.” In 1308, Bartolomeo da Capua, in Charles II’s name, made special arrangements so that the physician could travel freely throughout the kingdom with his books and other possessions without being subjected to tolls.”? The convert still spoke Arabic; Bartolomeo referred to his “arabicum idioma.” How and where the doctor was trained are not clear. The most important medical school in the kingdom during the thirteenth century was at Salerno. Another literate Muslim was the knight Riccardo who rose to prominence during the reign of Charles I. He once served as a witness to the resolution of a property dispute involving Christian parties. Signing his name to the document as Abu ‘Abd Allah while noting that among the Christians he was known as Riccardo, the knight described himself as a member of the tribe Quraysh, the tribe of the Prophet Muhammad.”™ The fact that Riccardo was allowed to be a witness in sucha case suggests that the guidelines established by the Church for the subjugation of Muslims living in Europe were occasionally overlooked. Leases and other arrangements which affected one Muslim and one Christian party generally required exclusively Christian witnesses, however. For an agreement whereby the Muslim knight ‘Abd al-‘Aziz held an expanse of uninhabited and uncultivated lands in lease from the monastery of Santa Sofia of Benevento in 1298, for example, all the

witnesses were Christians.”° The document to which Riccardo bore witness is instructive with respect to the religiosity and the cultural orientation of Muslims living in the colony during the Angevin period. The knight’s acknowledged

tribal affiliation and his competency in Arabic point to the conservation of Islamic traditions and of a written culture among Lucera’s inhabitants. As the language of the Qur’an, the Arabic language is considered to be sacred by Muslims, and so it is not surprising that the people of Lucera would have conserved a knowledge of it.”

Giorgio Levi della Vida analyzed the document containing Ric

cardo’s signature in the early 1920s. He concluded that Riccardo’s At bic was correct and well-written.” Riccardo’s apparent level of literacy can be appreciated when compared with that of Muslims raised within

the dar al-Islam during the Middle Ages. In his studies of the Call?

f

' ;

H

? i

i

| }

Muslim Status, Religious Practice, and Culture

73

Geniza, Shelomo Dov Goitein noted that many low-level Muslim merchants and craftsmen could sign their names to documents but were actually unable to write and even to read cursive script, having learned the

alphabet by copying from books.” The signatures of such persons are readily identifiable. The study of writing was undertaken primarily by members of the Muslim upper and middle classes. Physicians, scholars, merchants, and civil servants learned both to read and write cursive

script.” The society at Lucera included a class of literate persons.

Names and Religious Identity Judging from the many sources in which the Arabic appear in their Latinized forms, most Muslims from monly known by their Arabic names. Even as late who acted as messengers for the captain of Lucera spoke both languages were known by their Arabic and Christians alike. They bore names like Zufar,

names of Muslims Lucera were comas 1299, Muslims and who probably names to Muslims ‘Umar, and ‘Uth-

man.” Many Muslims took Latin names. As noted, the Lucerine knight Riccardo was known by a Christian name to Angevin officials and by an Arabic name to the Muslim community. Among the Muslims taken prisoner during the rebellion at Lucera were men named Leone and Giovanni.*’ Two Muslims held at Troia were known as Giordano and Giovanni.” Among the Lucerine leopard keepers employed in 1280 were Muslims named Matteo, Ruggero, and Pasquale.” In the medieval Mediterranean, name changes or the use of more than one name by individuals within minority populations and/or societies which had been

subjugated by people of a different culture were not uncommon. As Thomas Burman noted, both phenomena occurred among the Mozarabs

in Muslim Spain.“ The use of the term sarracenus along with or as a person’s name can be deceptive since it did not always indicate religious affiliation. The name Sarracenus, or its Italian equivalent Saraceno, was and still is a name found among Christians in Italy. It predates the establishment of the Muslim colony in Apulia. The name appears in medieval sources with both the single- and double-r spellings. In 1226 a certain Saracenus who was a Christian deacon and canon served as a witness to a lease of property made by the bishop of Salpi.” The name Sarracenus was recorded in the lists of mutuatores from both Florence and Gaeta during the reign of Charles I.“ A merchant from the Tuscan city of Lucca in

74

Chapter Three

the 1290s was named Federico Saraceno.“’ In some instances, the name was borne by Jews. A Jewish woman from Bari bore the name Saracena before she converted to Christianity and changed her name to Sum-

mata.” Fortunately for researchers, a person’s religious identity is usually easily discernible from the context of the document in which he or she is mentioned.

Exchange and Conflict with Muslims in the Mediterranean Diplomatic and Scholarly Exchange in Arabic under Frederick Il and Charles I Under Frederick II, diplomacy with Muslim countries and other matters demanding knowledge of the Arabic language were largely dealt with by men

such as Master Theodore,

Michael

Scot, and Oberto Falla-

monaco. Originally from Antioch, Theodore was in the employ of Fre-

derick by 1238.” Referred to as philosophus by Frederick II, Theodore both wrote in Arabic to foreign sovereigns and occasionally visited foreign lands.” In February 1240, he was charged with the task of composing a letter in Arabic to the king of Tunis. Two royal envoys took Theo-

dore’s letter with them when they visited the North African country.” In addition to Theodore, Frederick employed Michael Scot who apparently

knew both Arabic and Hebrew.” Scot is known to have collaborated in Naples with the Jewish scholar Ya’aqov ben Abbamari Anatoli, a phy-

sician from Provence who was also an accomplished translator.” Of the men involved in diplomatic activities for the crown, Fallamonaco is of particular interest because he appears to have been a Muslim or an Arab Christian from Sicily.“ Possessing knowledge of Arabic, Latin, and Greek, he was in Frederick’s service by 1239, holding the

office of secretus of Palermo.” Due at least in part to his language skills, he was sent to Tunis in 1240.5 According to the Annales siculi, the following year he went to Morocco.” In 1244 he was reported 10

have visited a Muslim prince in Spain.** Fallamonaco’s self-description as the son of a certain “Abderrachmen” (‘Abd al-Rahman) in a private act of 1238 suggests that he was a Muslim or an Arab Christian.” Giovanni Nuti’s recent biography of Fallamonaco, published in the Dizionario biografico degli italiani, mentioned but downplayed Fallamonaco’s possible Muslim origins, suggesting that he may have learned

aeOC LP td! ey

Muslim Status, Religious Practice, and Culture

75

Arabic in the 1240s and indicating his probable birth place as Genova.” Nuti made a convincing argument, but Fallamonaco’s self-identification in the act of 1238 would have to be discredited before Fallamonaco could be cast with certainty as a Genoese Christian. Muslims served Frederick as translators and tutors. A Sicilian Muslim was reported to have accompanied Frederick during his crusade and

to have tutored the emperor in logic." A certain ‘Abd Allah who was referred to as being a servant of the camera was sent to learn to read and

write “licteras Saracenicas” in 1239.° The reference to him as a servant of the camera suggests that he was either a Sicilian Muslim or a Muslim from Lucera. Frederick cultivated relations with Muslim rulers, most notably with al-Kamil of Egypt. Ibn Wasil recounted that Frederick “loved” Muslims, explaining that the emperor’s sentiment was probably due to his experience living in Sicily where there was a large Muslim population.” Muslim observers of Frederick during the latter’s visit to the Levant concluded that the emperor was not a sincere believer in Christianity.“ Of course, there is evidence to the contrary, such as Frederick’s visit to the shrine of Elizabeth of Thuringia in May 1236.° The emperor’s respectful approach toward Islam may reflect more on his diplomatic skills than on his personal religiosity. Through his negotiations with al-Kamil, Jerusalem came under Christian control. Medieval popes also often maintained diplomatic ties with Muslim rulers though they frequently adopted a bellicose stance toward Muslim people. Some of the correspondence has survived to the present day. Stored in the Archivio Segreto Vaticano is, for example, the caliph ‘Umar al-Murtada's

letter to Pope Innocent IV dated 10 June 1250." Frederick’s exchanges with the Muslim world went beyond pragmatic negotiations on economic and political matters. As is well known,

he directed a number of scientific and philosophical queries to Muslim scholars and their patrons. His Sicilian Questions, queries on metaphysics which he sent to Abu Muhammad al-Rashid, the Almohad Caliph, and the answers which were given by Abu Muhammad ‘Abd al-Haqq ibn Sab’in of Ceuta have survived.” To al-Kamil of Egypt, Frederick posed questions on optics which were answered by the Muslim scholar Shihab al-Din Ahmad ibn Idrisi al-Qarafi.® The sultan further indulged Frederick by sending the mathematician al-‘Alam Qaysar, known as alHanafi, to him.” Frederick’s mathematical inquisitiveness led him to seek out the renowned the Jewish scholar Yehudah ben Solomon haCohen from Toledo who stayed at the emperor’s court.”

76

Chapter Three

Whether or not Frederick really corrected Theodore’s translation of Moamyn’s De scientia venandi per aves from Arabic into Latin during the siege of Faenza in 1240 and 1241, he appears to have known at least

some Arabic.”' The reports of Frederick’s trip to Jerusalem, where the emperor is said to have conversed with Muslims in Arabic, suggest that he had at least a limited knowledge of the language. Like Frederick, Charles of Anjou employed translators so that Arabic works could be rendered in Latin. The Angevin king was particularly interested in the translation of medical texts. The Muslims of Lucera were not involved in the translation activities, though. The Muslim doctor at Lucera mentioned above who was proficient in Arabic and who could possibly have studied at the medical school in Salerno was

not identified as a participant in any translation project.” Some translations were accomplished by Jews; in 1278, for example, a certain Faraj

ben Solomon translated De passionibus aurium for the king.” From Lucera in October 1280, Charles ordered his treasurers to allow Faraj to

look for a book in Arabic containing medical terms which was in the treasury in Naples inside Castel dell’Ovo.” In addition to having texts translated, the king sponsored the illumination of a medical dictionary. He paid a friar from Montecassino named Giovanni to paint in miniature the figures of two books “de expositionibus vocabulorum seu si-

nonimorum simplicis medicine” in Naples.” The Jewish scholar Mosé da Palermo was in the service of the

Angevin crown by the spring of 1270.” He was charged with translating books from Arabic into Latin.’”’ At Salerno, Mosé worked with Matteo Scillato.”* Christian scholars also translated and edited. In the early 1280s, Charles sent Giovanni da Pagani to the capital to correct translations which had been made of books from Arabic into Latin.” Giovanni was well-compensated for his work; he received twelve tari per day. Another skilled translator, Robert de Miaux, also accepted charges from

the crown.”° Charles I does not appear to have utilized the Lucerine Muslims as ambassadors to Muslim rulers. The crusade in which he participated was not based on negotiation. Organized by Louis [IX of France, the campaign against Tunisia was an enormous failure. Jacques Le Goff asserted that Tunisia may have been targeted not because Charles influ-

enced Louis’ decision but rather so that Tunisian territory could be used as a base during other military campaigns."' The son of Abu Zakariyy® Abu ‘Abd Allah Muhammad, having taken the title al-Mustansir bi’llab, was in power when Louis’ forces reached Tunis."? He successfully

Muslim Status, Religious Practice, and Culture

77

fended off the aggressors.” Disease broke out among French forces as they awaited a back-up from Charles I. Louis IX and his son Jean Tristan were among the people who lost their lives.“ Charles reached the army on the day of his brother’s death, 25 August 1270, but the French

forewent the campaign.” Charles did manage to secure the payment of the tribute. He regularly sent Christian ambassadors, often trusted officials in Sicily, to Tunis to collect it.“ In 1272 the king sent ambassadors accompanied by armed galleys for that purpose.” A man named Philip Saladino was appointed in 1275 as one of the nuntii to receive the tribute, but apart from

his surname, there is no indication that Philip was a Muslim.

Ties between Lucera and the Islands of Malta and Pantelleria

Strategically situated 300 kilometers from the coast of North Africa and ninety kilometers from Sicily, Malta was conquered by Muslims from Sicily during the second half of the ninth century.” As late as the thirteenth century, Muslims comprised the majority of Malta’s population. In 1241, Muslim households numbered 681 whereas there were only forty-seven Christian households and twenty-five Jewish ones.” Many Muslims were villains. Those who were responsible to the royal court consigned a quarter of their victuals to the crown every year.”' In Gozo, Christian households outnumbered Muslim ones, though not by much;

there were 203 Christian familia, 155 Muslim households, and eight

Jewish ones.” Ibn Khaldun reported that around the year 1249 Frederick went to Malta and drove out the Muslims there, sending them to Lucera.” The date assigned by Ibn Khaldun to such an event may be incorrect, but deportations from the island occurred at some point. Muslims had definitely been expelled from both Malta and Gozo by 1271 since that year under Charles | the inhabitants of the islands were allowed to hold, in exchange for the payment of an annual census, “quasdam possessions . .

. in territoriis et insulis de possessionibus quondam Sarracenorum, de ipsis insulis eiectorum.”™ There is evidence of a Maltese presence in Capitanata, though it is limited and largely based on names. Riccardo Maltese (Maltesius), a knight at Lucera during the Angevin period, appears to have had Maltese origins.” A leopard keeper named Maltesius held properties in

oy

Chapter Three

78

Troia and Civitate. Probably of Maltese provenance, he lived near, not in, Lucera.” Like Malta, Pantelleria had a sizeable Muslim population.” Under the Angevins, the Muslim community of Pantelleria was organized as

Atme gen RC RENN rene mrt Ane pew Aon

an universitas; a document dated 27 September 1270 refers to a tribute paid by the “universitate Saracenorum insule Pantallarie.”™ Camillo Minieri Riccio noted that during the spring of 1276 three Muslims from the universitas of Pantelleria went to Naples to hand over a gift of sil-

ver.” Six went to the capital to pay the annual tribute in October. A consignment of funds to the crown was similarly made at Venosa on another occasion by Muslims, including at least one man from Lucera,

who were described as “nuntii” or messengers.'’' From Lucera, Muslim nuntii also periodically delivered funds. Perhaps because of their linguistic and military skills, Muslims from Lucera served in official capacities in Pantelleria. For most of the 1270s, the Lucerine knight Leone was the captain of Pantelleria.'” As

captain, he received a share of the tribute and other sources of in-

come.'” Other Muslims were appointed to positions like notary public." Due to the closeness of Pantelleria to Sicily, Christian Sicilians were also often appointed to handle affairs in Pantelleria. In the late

1270s, Nicola de Caro da Trapani replaced Leone as captain.'* The procurator of Pantelleria in the 1270s was also from Trapani.'” Whereas Muslims were removed from Lucera in 1300, Muslims contin-

ued to inhabit Pantelleria until the late fifteenth century.'”

edidshe p ee ee ee pum shen a 2a raceme n e e e

Notes

1. Vincenzo D’Alessandro wrote a good article on the subject of servi: “Servi e liberi,” Uomo e ambiente nel Mezzogiorno normanno-svevo. Atti delle ottave giornate normanno-sveve, ed. Giosué Musca, 20-23 ottobre 1987 Bari

(Bari: Edizioni Dedalo, 1989) 293-317. 2. Die Konstitutionen Friedrichs II. von Hohenstaufen fiir Sein Kénigreich Sizilien, eds. Hermann Conrad, Thea von der Lieck-Buyken, and Wolfgang Wagner (KGIn: Bohlau, 1973) 28.

3. C.DS.L., no. 168. 4. Johns, The Royal, chapter two.

5. Colafemmina, “Federico II e gli ebrei” 70. The synagogue was built in 1247, 6. Riccardo di San Germano, “Chronica” 96.

Muslim Status, Religious Practice, and Culture

719

7. Riccardo di San Germano, “Chronica” 96.

8. Marshall Baldwin, Christianity through the Thirteenth Century (New York: Harper and Row, 1970) 322 (Canon 68). 9. Powell, “The Papacy” 191; Baldwin, Christianity 322 (Canon 68) (Baldwin’s Translation). 10. R.C.A., vol. 11, 55, no. 143. 11. Boswell, The Royal Treasure 30. 12. C.D.S.L., no. 760. 13. R.C.A., vol. 11, reg. 59, 207, no. 93. 14. R.C.A., vol. 14, reg. 74, 81, no. 113. 15. R.C.A., vol. 2, reg. 8, 143, no. 551. 16. Abu °l-Fida, “Kitab al-muhtasir” 106-107.

17. Abu *l-Fida, “Kitab al-muhtasir” 107. 18. Ibn Jubayr, “Rihlat al-Kinani” 130. 19. Abu ’1-Fida, “Kitab al-muhtasir” 107.

20. Archivio Capitolare della Cattedrale di Lucera, nos. Al and A2. 21. P.A.D., no. 1. 22. Ibn Jubayr, “Rihlat al-Kinani” 121.

23. C._D.S.L., no. 743. 24. C.D.S.L., no. 306. 25. C.D.S.L., no. 456.

26. 27. 28. 29.

Burns, Medieval Colonialism 42. C.D.S.L., no. 520; C.D.S.L., no. 640. Corretti, “Una dimora” 36. Denny, An Introduction 103.

30. Ibn Jubayr, “Rihlat al-Kinani” 130 31. The contribution made by Muslims in Sicily to scholarship and culture is obviously too great a topic to be addressed here. Just some of the many publi-

cations on this subject are: Bianca Maria Alfieri, “Arte araba in Italia,” Testimonianze degli Arabi in Italia, \0 dicembre 1987 Roma (Roma: Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei, 1988) 95-127; Andrea Borruso, “Poesia araba in Sicilia,” Testimonianze degli arabi in Italia, 10 dicembre 1987 Roma (Roma: Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei, 1988) 35-56; Giovanna Ventrone Vassallo, “La Sicilia islamica e postislamica dal IV/X al VII/XIII secolo,” Eredita dell’Islam: arte islamica in Italia, ed. Giovanni Curatola (Milano: Amilcare Pizzi, 1993) 183-

212; 32. C.D.S.L., no. 777.

33. C._D.S.L., no. 777. 34. Giorgio Levi della Vida, “La sottoscrizione araba di Riccardo di Lucera,” Rivista degli studi orientali 10 (1923-1925) 288-289. 35. C.D.S.L., no. 229a.

36. For the role of the Arabic language in Islam, see Shelomo Dov Goitein, Studies in Islamic History and Institutions (1966; Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1968) 7-8. 37. della Vida, “La sottoscrizione” 292,

Chapter Three

80

38. Goitein, Studies 243-244. 39. Goitein, Studies 244.

40. C._D.S.L., no. 246. 41, R.CA,, vol. 2, reg. 8, 58, no. 207.

42. R.C.A., vol. 2, reg. 8, 30, no. 100. 43. R.C.A., vol. 24, reg. 102, 137, no. 39; for Matthew’s later imprisonment and release, see C.D.S.L., no. 82. 44, Thomas Burman, Religious Polemic and the Intellectual History of the Mozarabs, c. 1050-1200 (Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1994) 28-29. 45. Le pergamene di Barletta. Archivio Capitolare (897-1285), ed. Francesco Nitti di Vito, vol. 8 of C.D.B. (Bari: Commissione provinciale di archeologia e storia patria, 1914) 290-292, no. 232. 46. R.C.A., vol. 14, reg. 76, 189, no. 313; R.C.A., vol. 14, reg. 76, 154-155, no. 138. 47. R.C.A., vol. 38, reg. 30, 44, no. 167.

48. Le pergamene di S. Nicola di Bari. Periodo angioino (1266-1309), ed. Francesco Nitti di Vito, vol. 13 of C.D.B. (Trani: V. Vecchi, 1936) 175-77, no.

116. 49. Charles Burnett, “Master Theodore, Frederick II’s Philosopher,” Fede-

rico Il e le nuove culture. Atti del XXXI convegno storico internazionale, 9-12 ottobre 1994 (Spoleto: Centro Italiano di Studi sull’ AltoMedioevo, 1995) 230,

234. 50. Burnett, “Master” 227; Van Cleve, The Emperor 310; he is referred to

as philosophus in H.D.F.S., vol. 5, pt. 2, 750-751. 51. H.D.F.S., vol. 5, pt. 2, 745.

52. Van Cleve, The Emperor 306; Charles Haskins, Studies in the History of Mediaeval Science (1924; New York: Frederick Ungar Publishing Co., 1960) 245. 53. Colafemmina, “Federico II e gli ebrei” 72-73; Van Cleve, The Emperor 313; Haskins, Studies 251.

54. Johns has concluded that Fallamonaco was probably an Arab Christian: Johns, The Royal, chapter nine.

55. Giovanni Nuti, “Oberto Fallamonica,” Dizionario Biografico degli Italiani 44 (Roma: Istituto della Enciclopedia Italiana, 1994): 455-456 (455). 56. H.D.F‘S., vol. 5, pt. 2, 966-967, 57. “Annales siculi” 118: “Obertus de Fallamonaca de mandato domini imperatoris ivit apud Maroccum.” 58. Nuti, “Oberto” 456,

59. Le piu antiche carte 121. 60. Nuti, “Oberto” 455-456, 61. Amari, Storia, vol. 3, pt. 3, 720.

62. H.D.F‘S., vol. 5, pt. 1, 602-603 (603). 63. Abu ’l-Fida, “Kitab al-muhtasir” 104.

64. False Husayn al-Yafi‘i, “Kitab gami at-tawarih,” B.A.S., vol. 2, 631.

Muslim Status, Religious Practice, and Culture

65. 66. 67. 68.

8]

Van Cleve, The Emperor 386. Archivio segreto Vaticano 104, tav. XXXVIII. Burnett, “Master” 253. Burnett, “Master” 252.

69. al-Hamawi, “at-Ta’rih al-mansuri” 410-411; Kantorowicz, Federico

307.

70. Antonino De Stefano, La cultura alla corte di Federico II Imperatore, new ed. (Bologna: Nicola Zanichelli Editore, 1950) 54; his stay at the court is mentioned by Colafemmina in “Federico II e gli ebrei” 72. 71. De Stefano, La cultura 43.

72. C.D.S.L., no. 777. 73. Jean Dunbabin, Charles | of Anjou: Power, Kingship and State-Making in Thirteenth-Century Europe (London: Longman, 1998) 223; a biography of Faraj ben Solomon was published in the Encyclopaedia Judaica: Samuel Miller, “Faraj (Moses) ben Solomon da Agrigento,” Encyclopaedia Judaica, vol. 6 (Je-

rusalem: Keter Publishing Co., 1971) 1179. 74. R.C.A., vol. 25, reg. 108, 154, no. 35. 75. R.C.A., vol. 25, reg. 108, 155, no. 38.

76. Stefano Arieti, “Mosé da Palermo e le traduzioni dei trattati di mascalcia di Ippocrate Indiano,” Gli ebrei in Sicilia dal Tardoantico al Medioevo. Studi in onore di Mons. Benedetto Rocco, ed. Nicold Bucaria (Palermo: Flaccovio Editorie, 1998) 57. 77. R.C.A., vol. 16, reg. 78, 41, no. 131. 78. R.C.A., vol. 16, reg. 78, 76-77, no. 286. 79. R.C.A., vol. 25, reg. 105, 86, no. 18.

80. R.C.A., vol. 25, reg. 105, 86-87, no. 19. 81. Jacques Le Goff, San Luigi (Torino: Giulio Einaudi Editore, 1996) 233. 82. Idris, “Hafsids” 66.

83. Robert Mantran and Charles De La Ronciére, “Africa Opens up to the Old Worlds,” The Cambridge Illustrated History of the Middle Ages 1250-1520, vol. 3, trans. Sarah Hanbury Tenison, ed. Robert Fossier (1986; Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 1998) 357. 84. Le Goff, San Luigi 237; Housley, “The Thirteenth-Century Crusades” 583. 85. Elizabeth Hallam, Capetian France 987-1328 (London: Longman, 1980) 223. 86. R.C.A., vol. 9, reg. 42, 29, no. 39; R.C.A., vol. 10, reg. 48, 190-191, no.

709. 87. R.C.A., vol. 9, reg. 42, 29, no. 39. 88. R.C.A., vol. 13, reg. 70, 68, no. 114.

89. Anthony Luttrell, “Approaches to Medieval Malta,” Medieval Malta: Studies on Malta before the Knights, ed. Anthony Luttrell (London: British School at Rome, 1975) 26.

Chapter Three

82

90. Uomini 91. 92. 93. 94. 95. 96.

A..1, vol. 1, 713-715 (714), no. 938; Luttrell, “Approaches” 38; Peri, 154. A.LL, vol. 1, 713-715 (713), no. 938. A.1.1., vol. 1, 713-715 (714), no. 938. Ibn Khaldun, “Kitab al ‘ibr,” 212-213. R.C.A., vol. 6, reg. 22, 213, no. 1135. C_.D.S.L., no. 30. F.C.Q.E. 113, 115, 395.

~

97. The Muslim presence in Pantelleria has been examined by Henri Bresc:

Henri Bresc, “Pantelleria entre |’ Islam et la Chretiente,” Politique et société en

Sicile, XIle-XVe siécles (Hampshire: Variorum, 1990) 105-127. 98. R.C.A., vol. 5, reg. 20, 270, no. 304.

99. R.C.A., vol. 14, reg. 74, 69-70, no. 26. 100. R.C.A., vol. 14, reg. 74, 73, no. 53. 101. R.C.A., vol. 17, reg. 79, 139-140, no. 362.

102. R.C.A., vol. 5, reg. 15, 35, no. 155. There is a typographical error in

the R.C.A., rendering his name inaccurately as Lonus; R.C.A., vol. 13, reg. 69, 19, no. 98; R.C.A., vol. 25, reg. 103, 52, no. 236; Bresc, “Pantelleria” 106. 103. R.C.A., vol. 19, reg. 82, 198-199, no. 307. 104. R.C.A., vol. 14, reg. 73, 27, no. 141.

105. R.C.A., vol. 19, reg. 82, 198-199, no. 307. 106. R.C.A., vol. 5, reg. 20, 270, no. 304; it was incorrectly recorded that he was from Trani in R.C.A., vol. 14, reg. 74, 81, no. 112. 107. Bresc, “Pantelleria” 105.

t ‘ Fi 1

i

i 3

| f4

Chapter Four

The Administration of the

Muslim Community Muslim Lucera became one of the most, if not the most, populous cities in Capitanata. Nevertheless, when Frederick II called for a general colloquium to be held at Foggia during the spring of 1240, only Siponto, Troia, Civitate, and Monte Sant’Angelo were among the cities in Capitanata invited to send representatives.’ Pasquale Corsi has suggested that Frederick may have aimed to produce new constitutions.’ Lucera’s Christian population may have been reduced by that point to numbers too small to justify its participation. The religious affiliation of Lucera’s other inhabitants would have excluded them from the colloquium. From a legal standpoint, the Muslims were servants of the camera, not free subjects. Due to its unique economic and political status, Muslim Lu-

cera was not included in the Quaternus excadenciarum Capitinate. Although they were excluded from political gatherings which involved Christian cities, the Lucerine Muslims were granted a great degree of autonomy in running their internal affairs. Muslim qadis (judges) handled the resolution of conflicts involving exclusively Muslim parties. The lack of records of Christian interference in such matters is the most convincing proof that Muslim judicial autonomy was re-

84

Chapter Four

spected. The dhimmi of Muslim lands were typically granted a similar

degree of independence in administering justice and making decisions within their communities. Colonists who committed offenses which affected Christians came under the jurisdiction of the captain of Lucera, Serious matters were brought to the attention of the king who issued instructions on how to

respond to the captain or to the justiciar of Capitanata. Unlike other cit. ies in Capitanata, Lucera did not always fall under the jurisdiction of the justiciar because of its status. Nevertheless, that official intervened regularly throughout the Angevin period not only to administer justice, but also to see to financial and other matters. He often assisted with taxation. In 1294 Charles II ordered the justiciar to obligate Lucera along with other cities and towns to guard local roads.’ Prior to the 1290s, the offices of the justiciar of Capitanata and captain of Lucera were held by the same individual. Not long after the suppression of the Muslim rebellion, the knight Jean de Conflans was appointed justiciar of Monte Sant’Angelo and Capitanata as well as captain of Lucera.* The two offices remained combined throughout most, if not all, of the 1270s. In January 1278, the knight Guillaume de

Séte was replaced by Guy d’Allemagne as the holder of those posts.’ For the late 1280s, there is also evidence that the positions of regional justiciar and captain of the city of Lucera were held by the same person.° During the summer of 1289, the offices of justiciar and captain

arn tes Nec ro

were separated since “sarcina divisa levius tolleratur ...°” The Christian knight Henri de Gérard became the captain of Lucera.' Pierre d’Allamagny was the justiciar.” All Muslims were instructed to obey Henri in July."* The separation of the two offices may have not initially functioned well; shortly after the division was made, in mid-September 1289, a single person, the knight Angelo Faraoni da Gaeta, was ap-

Rt CR N R

pointed to hold both posts," During the reign of Charles II, the offices of captain of Lucera and jesticiar of Capitanata were largely separate. Lucera’s captain was Ie sponsible for governing the city, although the justiciar did concern himself on numerous occasions with Lucerine affairs. In 1294 Charles Il told the justiciar of Capitanata that he wanted Lucera to remain outside his jurisdiction: “ . . . serra Lucerie, que per capitaneum regitur, eX

clusa a tua jurisdictione restare volumes , , .”

The captain of Lucera was assisted in local administrative record

keeping by a notary of acts,'’ Christian administrative records were kept in Latin whereas documents concerning the internal matters of the

1pe SN PRE pen BO eeAILigoe PHAO =

The Administration of the Muslim Community

85

community were most likely written in Arabic. In May 1291, Robert d’Artois appointed a Christian named Leone da Monteleone to the position of notary. Among the Muslim notaries was a man named Fertay who is known to have lost his house when the city was assaulted on Angevin orders in 1300."* The local Christian administration also included an assessor."* In January 1295, the king appointed a judge from Naples to that position.'® During the Angevin period, there were syndics in the city who acted as proctors of the captain.” In addition to regional and city officials, members of the royal family and nobles who possessed special privileges with regard to Lucera’s land and resources also often exercised power over the colony. Some were granted political authority outright. Charles of Salerno, the lord of Monte Sant’Angelo, helped to enforce the will of his father in Capitanata."* To Jean de Montfort, the camerarius of the Kingdom of Sicily, were entrusted the custody and the administration of Lucera during the reign of Charles II.’ He had jurisdiction over the Muslims of Stornara in the 1270s, and the people of Lucera were under orders to obey him and his officials.” Substantial revenues from Lucera were earmarked for Jean, among them monies from the gabella and the subventio gener-

alis.”' In 1299 arrangements were made so that 1,000 gold ounces from the gabella of Lucera’s baiulatio and the city’s subventio generalis could be used to pay his gagia and the expenses of his knights and

crossbowmen.” Just a month prior to destroying the colony, Charles II instructed the Muslims of Lucera to obey Jean and the officials appointed by the count in the land of Lucera. Jean was responsible for the “gubernationem et curam regiminis.”” Service at Lucera became a springboard to higher positions for Christian officials. After serving as the city’s captain, Henri de Gérard became the maestro razionale of the royal court.”* Perhaps because of his experience working in the Muslim colony, Henri continued to be

called upon when matters of concern to the crown arose with respect to Lucera. During the 1290s, he sometimes returned to the city in an official capacity.” In 1296 he was authorized to appoint Lucera’s new cap-

tain,” As indicated, the Muslim community had its own gadis to make decisions and to settle internal disputes. A reference made in the Angevin Registers to a “bishop of the Saracens” was probably intended for Lu-

cera’s gadi.” In a letter of 1236 to Pope Gregory IX, Frederick II noted that the leaders of the Muslims were called alchadi: “adeo quod pri-

mates ipsorum qui Alchadi dicuntur ..

.”** When Pope Innocent wrote

86

Chapter Four

to Muslims in various parts of Sicily in 1206 to encourage them to remain loyal to Frederick, he addressed his letter to “Archadio et univer-

sis Gaietis Antelle, Platane, Jaci, Celsi et omnibus Gaietis et Sarracenis per Siciliam constitutes .. .”” Alchadius was the qadi. The gaieti were leaders in the community, the qa ‘ids. The ga'ids sometimes acted as intermediaries between the crown and the Muslim community. The ga’id of Palermo appears to have had a

role in procuring eunuchs for the crown.” Given his involvement, the eunuchs may have been Muslims.”' Ibn Jubayr observed that the Norman king William II employed Muslim eunuchs in Sicily, although most of them did not express their Islamic beliefs openly.” At Lucera, the leaders of the Muslim community cooperated with Christian officials in finding men to do the labor required to build the Angevin fortress. In September 1275, the Muslim knights Riccardo and Leone of Lucera, as well as the ga’id Mahdi and another man received a royal order to provide “. . . magistros fabricatores, operarios, manipu-

los et personas alias necessaries . . . ” for the work on the castle.” Three years later, Mahdi and Riccardo were responsible for supplying

manual laborers. As learned members of the community, the fagih may have also been in leadership positions which facilitated the execution of similar requests. Egidi suggested that the Lucerine fichini addressed by Charles I in a letter of May 1274 may have been fagih. In that letter, Charles requested that workers be recruited for the fortress.** A few Muslim ga’ids were appointed to positions of trust by Charles J. Between 1271 and 1272, an individual named Giovanni Gay-

tus was the custos of the royal camera at Lucera.*® He was succeeded by Riccardo Gaytus who held the position for the better part of the years

between 1273 and 1283.” The Riccardo in question is not to be mistaken for the Muslim soldier and knight named Riccardo who was mentioned along with the custos in an order of April 1273. Riccardo Gaytus was ordered to give bows and arrows stored in the camera to Riccardo

the knight for the Muslims archers assigned to fight in Achaea.” Taxation and Land Distribution The jizya is the tax imposed on the ahi al-kitab, or people of the book, living in Muslims lands. Christians, Jews, and Zoroastrians have traditionally been considered the ah! al-kitab. Frederick forced his Muslim

and Jewish subjects to pay the jizya along with other taxes.” In Decem

| ,

|

The Administration of the Muslim Community

87

ber 1239, Frederick II wrote to the secretus of Palermo, Oberto Falla-

monaco, regarding the exaction of the jizya, along with other imposts, from Jews staying in Palermo: “Super eo insuper quod eadem tua capitula continebant te statuisse recipi a judeis ipsis morantibus in Panormo pro gisia annis singulis ad opus curie nostre tarenos quatringentos, pro vino tarenos centum et quinquaginta, et pro cultellis

tarenos quinquaginta... As mentioned, one of the standard taxes levied on the Muslims of

Lucera was the terragium. Although the kharaj and the terragium appear to be similar, the terragium was not a version of the Islamic kha-

raj. Frederick II imposed the ferragium on many people regardless of their faith. In order to assign a value to lands, the terragium potentially due or due in fact from various properties in Capitanata which had apparently never been inhabited by Muslims were recorded in the Quaternus excadenciarum Capitinate.“' Records exist for Troia, Castelluccio dei Sauri, Montecorvino, and Tufara, among other places. A tax equiva-

lent to about one tenth of the harvest, the terragium was calculated based on the quantity of grain sown.” The crown was a beneficiary of the tax when the lands being cultivated belonged to it. Under the Angevins, both Muslims and Christians paid the terragium to Christian landowners. The farmers who owed the tax in October 1278 to the chapter of the church of San Sabino di Canosa for lands situated in the tenements of Canosa and San Eustasius were undoubtedly Christians.“ Of the taxes imposed on the Muslim colonists, the closest equivalent to the kharaj was the canon terrarum. It, along with the jizya, was abolished by Charles II when the Muslim colony was destroyed.” The high number of cases of tax evasion by Muslims suggests that many farmers found the terragium difficult to pay. Christian landlords, particularly monasteries, controlled most of Lucera’s farmland. Gener-

ally, the Angevin king upheld the arrangements first made by Frederick II, siding with the party whose rights under those arrangements had been violated. On 12 June 1276, for example, the justiciar of Capitanata was ordered to defend lands owned by the monastery Santa Maria of

Montevergine which had been unlawfully occupied by Muslims.*’ The farmers had to pay the ferragium due.“ When problems arose with respect to the terrae laboratoriae owned by the same monastery at Lucera

a few years later, the “peaceful possession” of those properties by the

monastery was called for by the crown.” Charles II did not make major changes to Frederick’s scheme of land ownership and use around Lucera. Violations occurred throughout his reign. In defense of the monastery Santa Sofia of Benevento,

Chapter Four

88

Charles II ordered in January 1290 that Muslim farmers who were cy]. tivating the monastery’s terrae laboratoriae in Lucerine territory and who refused to pay the terragium be forced to do so.” Around the same time, some of the colonists were remiss in paying the terragium due to the monastery of Santa Maria of Montevergine.”’ During the summer of 1294, the bishop of Lucera complained that Muslims were bringing some areas under cultivation without his permission. They were handing over to him not what would really be due in produce from these lands but what they themselves decided upon. The king sided with the

bishop.” Many landowners were dissatisfied with the arrangement whereby Muslims paid taxes in exchange for the right to use their lands, not only because of abuses, but also because they evidently they viewed the terragium as inadequate compensation. In 1292 some Christian property owners attempted to impede entry to their lands. The justiciar of Capitanata was ordered to force them to respect the arrangement since the Muslims did not have a sufficient amount of land from which to live reasonably.” Muslim shepherds as well as farmers were repeatedly obstructed by disgruntled landlords. In 1294 Christian barons attempted to prevent Muslims from cultivating and pasturing their animals on the tenements and territories adjacent to the city. The Muslims had used those lands and waters “ab antiquo.” Upholding precedent, Charles II took their side. He ordered both the justiciar and the city captain to make sure that Muslims were not prevented from using the lands.™ Rather than impeding access to their properties, some land owners tried to extort money from the colonists. In 1291 Robert d’ Artois reprimanded the owners of lands in Montecorvino, Fiorentino, and Casalnuovo for imposing unauthorized additional burdens on Muslim farmers. Robert affirmed that the arrangement made by Frederick II still had bearing, stating “ . . . per quodam imperatorem Fredericum condita terra ipsa, per eundem imperatore extitit eisdem hominibus immune concessum

ut de territoriis

prestarent

solummodo

vicinorum

terragia pro

locorum,

eisdem

ventis

ad cultum,

territoriorum

ipsorum

dominis et patronis ...”* Muslim landholders did, on rare occasions, attempt to impede Christians from using lands. Not long after ‘Abd al-‘Aziz was granted

land at Tertiveri in 1296, he tried to prevent the Templars who held the casale of Alberona and the men of the latter locale from pasturing their

animals on the tenements lying between Tertiveri and Alberona.~ He even seized and refused to return some of their pigs. Charles II ordered

The Administration of the Muslim Community

89

‘Abd al-‘Aziz not to prevent the Templars and the inhabitants of the casale from pasturing their animals where they had customarily done so. Contention arose for similar reasons between Hajjaj and the Templars of Barletta almost two years later when Hajjaj tried to block them from making use of certain pasture lands near the casale of Alberona.”’ Charles II responded by ordering the captain of Lucera not to allow Hajjaj to disturb them. The Templars made complaints against ‘Abd al-‘Aziz, but at some

point they may have trespassed on his property. The land boundaries were not clearly distinguished. ‘Abd al-‘Aziz sought the demarcation of

his tenements from other properties with stones or other markers.” Nevertheless, the unclear division of the tenements around Tertiveri generated problems years later.” Some displacement of the Christian population must have resulted from provisions which stated that lands held by Muslims could not be inhabited by Christians. When the Muslim ‘Abd al-‘Aziz was granted, as a reward for his services, land at Tertiveri in 1296, for example, it

was established that no Christians could live there while the property was in his possession.” The number of Christians who were inconvenienced by this measure is not known. The competition for land and resources sometimes led to disputes between Muslims and the inhabitants of neighboring cities. In March 1291, Robert d’Artois ordered the captain of Lucera to look into accusations made by the constable of Foggia and his nephew that the Muslim knight ‘Abd al-‘Aziz, certain of members of Hajjaj’s household, and the camerarius Remforciatus had unduly disturbed their feudal land near

Foggia." Of course, conflicts did not develop strictly along religious lines. In the mid-1270s, the justiciar of Capitanata was ordered by the crown to prevent the lord and knight of the land of Fiorentino, Pierre de Marmorat, from disturbing the monastery of Santa Sofia of Benevento which possessed the church and casale of San Salvatore near Lucera.” During the summer of 1294, the bishop of Lucera had trouble with a

Christian magnate, Giovanni da Barletta. Giovanni had taken possession by force of the chapel San Eligius, and he had refused to return it. The captain of Lucera rather than the justiciar of Capitanata stepped in to resolve the matter. He called the two parties together, prepared to return the property to the bishop after a clarification of the facts.” The Muslims of Lucera occasionally shared grievances with Christian communities against Christian magnates. The universitas of Lucera together with the Christian communities of Salpi and Tresanti objected in 1291 to the claims of Rinaldo Galardo and Carlo da Lagonessa.™

Chapter Four

90

Muslims sometimes trespassed not to farm but in order to acquire basic materials such as wood or to poach animals. One Muslim who apparently had the right to cut wood at Montecorvino was fatally as. saulted by a forester in early February of 1293.° That winter, some colonists had been illegally chopping and carrying away wood from Montecorvino to use for burning or building.” The king ordered the captain of Lucera to restrain Muslims from cutting wood where they were not by custom entitled to do so.” Pierre d’Angicourt, the architect employed by Charles I for the construction of Lucera’s fortress, had received special rights to the land of Montecorvino. During the reign of Charles II, Pierre repeatedly came into conflict with Muslims over re-

sources such as water and wood.” A number of Muslims also disturbed the procurators and custodians of the forest of Troia by carrying off

animals.” The subventio generalis was a primary tax levied on the community at Lucera. It was also imposed on Christian communities in the kingdom. For each region, a cedula containing the names of the places taxed along with the amounts was prepared for the Angevin records. The cedula for 1294, when funds were desperately needed to fund the War of the Sicilian Vespers, reported the following:

Table 4.1 Subventio Generalis Levied in Capitanata in 1294 Place

Subventio Generalis Due Gold ounces

Tari

Grana

Ascoli Corneto

101 115

15 7

10 9

Foggia

125

5

13

San Giovanni Rotondo

131

14

1]

Vieste

206

5

15

Lucera

495

—~

19

Source: C.D.S.L., no. 135.

The Administration of the Muslim Community Subventio Generalis

91

Levied in Capitanata in 1294

Ascoli

Corneto Foggia

San Giovanni Rotondo Vieste

[Leese

Lucera

[Seeeets

As Egidi noted, only the above six places, out of 150 communities

which were taxed, were expected to pay more than 100 gold ounces.” The burden on Lucera was more than twice that placed on Vieste and many times greater than all other cities and towns in Capitanata. Lucera alone was to supply roughly one sixth of the total funds (2,950 ounces, twenty-two fari, and fourteen grana) raised in the region.” Precise population figures are not available, but the existence of a large Lucerine population would not in itself entirely explain the greater tax burden placed on the city. The discrepancy was due at least in part to the fact that Muslims were taxed at a higher rate. Levies on Lucera were so burdensome that, in late June 1294,

Charles II remitted one half of the subventio generalis due, directing the

justiciar of Capitanata and the erarius not to exact the whole amount.” Nevertheless, in 1298 the subventio generalis expected from Capitanata remained unchanged at the original amount, as did the amounts due

from other communities in Capitanata.” In the spring of 1275, the justiciar of Capitanata had to force Muslims living in Stornara and Castelluccio to pay the subventiones, “sicut ipsi consueverunt tempore quondam Frederici Imperatoris.”” The collection of taxes was handled by a variety of officials. The captain of Lucera was typically in charge of collecting the subventio

generalis during the reign of Charles II.’* Gathered by collectores, the funds were handed over by the captain to the justiciar of Capitanata.”® Sometimes the justiciar oversaw the collection, but normally the harvesting of taxes was the responsibility of the captain. In June 1295, Charles II gave specific instructions to the justiciar and the erarius not to obstruct Lucera’s captain in the collection of the one third of the sub-

ventio generalis which was due from the city.”

92

Chapter Four

Muslims were permitted to elect their own extimatores to evaluate local agricultural production for tax purposes.” In a letter of 25 July 1300, Charles complained that the Muslims had elected extimatores who purposely underestimated local grain and barley production thereby undermining the royal tax of one tari per salma of grain sown: “Nunc vero Sarraceni predicte terre Lucerie in fraudem iurium dicte nostre Curie eligunt extimatores ex eis... magnam summam frumenti vel ordei seminati extimant minimam.”” In addition to the jizya, terragium, and the subventio generalis, the Muslims of Lucera paid the gabella, an excise tax.” The gabella was also exacted from Christians in the kingdom. During the reign of Fre-

derick II, the gabella was levied on Muslims in Sicily." A gabellarius (sometimes also called a gabellotus) was responsible for collecting the gabella tax from the baiulatio of Lucera under the Angevins.” He also

sold the crown’s larius often paid leopard keepers, man named Urso

salt.” Upon the instructions of the crown, the gabelindividuals working in the colony, including Muslim with revenues from the gabella.“ Under Charles I, a Rufolo da Ravello was the gabellarius.* He was con-

ceded the Lucerine baiulatio, and the Muslims of Lucera were under orders to obey him.” The crown called upon Urso to supply its barley to the justiciar of Capitanata when needed to feed animals involved in

construction projects.” Numerous knights were granted tax exemptions as rewards for their military services. On 18 November

1277, Charles I excused Musa, a

Muslim knight from Lucera who had led Muslim soldiers in Durazzo,

from paying taxes. Charles II conceded tax immunity to Musa’s son who was also a knight.” In January 1293, the king declared that two Muslims, the sons of a knight named al-Khadidja, were to be immune from “omnibus terragiis, gisiis, carnagiis, coretis necnon exactionibus,

collectis, talliis, et oneribus aliis que pro tempore in terra pred(i)c(i)a. . . imponuntur.”” Over five years later, ‘Abd al-‘Aziz was granted exemption by the king from a variety of levies and burdens to which he

would have been otherwise subject as a Muslim. Charles declared that the knight was not to be held accountable for the “. . . singulis collectis,

exactionibus, mutuis aliisque oneribus publicis, in dicta terra Luceraé impositis per Curiam et de cetero imponendis, nec non iuribus carnagil, yesie, carragii ceterisque aliis gravaminibus ...”' The carnagium appears to have been a tax on meat sales which was also imposed on Christians.” The carragium was an obligatory cartage service which is

known to have also been imposed in Anjou. Among the individuals told

The Administration of the Muslim Community

93

to respect ‘Abd al-‘Aziz’s immunity from taxation in the spring of 1298 were the collectores, all men of Lucera, baiuli, judges, magistri iurati, and the captains, justiciars, and secreti serving in Capitanata.”

The concessions granted to Muslim knights sometimes included exemptions from providing obligatory loans. Compulsory loans were demanded from many wealthy Muslims, particularly during the reign of Charles II which was plagued by financial difficulties. Taxation was such a lucrative source of income that the privilege of exacting certain levies at Lucera was sometimes conceded as a reward or privilege to nobles. The Christian knight Gille de Montereau received revenues from Lucera.™ Milone da Galati was conceded the land of Stornara by Charles I in the early 1270s, gaining the right to exact one half of an augustale from each Muslim household during each new indiction.” When Milone attempted to levy more, Charles of Salerno came to the defense of the colonists. Taxation was to occur within defined parameters. In December 1276, Charles ordered the justiciar to make sure that

only the standard tax of one half of an augustale was collected.” Milone had other interests around Lucera, such as the lands at San Gia-

como which he held in lease from the abbey of Santissima Trinita of

Cava.” Since they were described as terrae laboratoriae, Milone was probably able to collect the terragium tax from the people who worked them.

Rights over the gabella of Lucera’s baiulatio and other taxes were on occasion sold or conceded to individuals. In March 1273, an order

was issued for the sale of that gabella.” As indicated, a share of Lucera’s tax revenues went toward the gagia of Jean de Montfort in the 1290s. Sometimes Jean’s own procuratores handled the tax gathering.” Whereas in 1294 the justiciar of Capitanata was to exact the subventio generalis from all other parts of the region, the procuratores of Jean de

Montfort handled the levying of that tax on the Lucerines.'” Nobles and officials with property around Lucera also benefited from the harvests of their lands. For some crown officials working in Naples and elsewhere, the lands which they possessed at Lucera were a valuable source of grain. During a period of famine, the helmerius and servant of the king, Bonaventure, was conceded the right to ship grain in 1291 from his massarius in the pertainings of Lucera to his home in

Naples.'*' Whereas Muslim Lucera was the most lucrative source of tax revenue for the crown in Capitanata during the reign of Charles II, the

quantity of grain and barley cultivated on the royal massarii at Lucera was comparable to the amounts grown elsewhere. The following figures were recorded for the year 1296:

94

Chapter Four

Table 4.2 Salmae of Barley and Grain Cultivated on the Royal Massarii in Capitanata in 1296

29 30 32 27 22.5

36 30 26 22 23

Bissilletum Calaggio Salsiborgo Foggia Lucera Source: C.S.D.L., no. 200.

Salmae of Barley and Grain Cultivated on the Royal Massarii_ in Capitanata in 1296

Bissilletum

Calaggio

Salsiborgo

Foggia

Lucera

@ Barley & Grain

Barley and grain were evidently grown at Lucera in almost eau amounts; whereas a total of 137 salmae of barley were SOW? es

royal massarii, only three and one half more salmae of gran an sown, that is, 140.5 salmae. The combined quantities of ba ade ; grain for the year 1296 amounted to 277.5 salmae of which ai Iné massarii contributed only 16.4 percent. It is important t . e ever, that while Lucera and Bissilletum were listed separate'y, in was described in a concession of property made in 1381 as bene nd at cerine territory.'” Muslims are known to have farmed lands nea a distance from the colony.

The Administration of the Muslim Community

95

In addition to taxes, the crown imposed profit-making schemes on Muslim Lucera such as monopolies on salt and other products. Similar economic policies and restrictions applied to Christian communities. Subversion of the unpopular salt monopoly was not uncommon at Lu-

cera. A number of Muslims sold the substance illegally." They were not the only culprits. Christians from Barletta, Melfi, Venosa, and As-

coli also trafficked in salt.'* To the chagrin of Charles II, both Muslims and Christians violated the crown’s restrictions on wine sales by selling

it in Lucera’s castle.'” Funds were raised from road tolls around the colony, as in other areas:' Special toll gatherers and street custodians were responsible for exacting money from travelers.'” Above and beyond the standard imposts and taxes, the Lucerine community paid special dona to the crown to help pay the costs of the War of the Sicilian Vespers. During the summer of 1293, the donum from Lucera was used to pay certain horsemen and infantrymen stationed in Capitanata.'* In February 1299, the donum was exacted from the colonists “in subsidium expensarum presentis guerre ...”'® In March 1299, a Muslim campsor named ‘Abd Allah handed over to the crown fifty gold ounces which had been collected at Lucera.''® Giuseppe Saraceno furnished another installment from the city totaling twenty-one ounces and ten tari in October of that same year.''' In June, eighty-four ounces and seven and one-half tari were paid to the crown by the captain of Lucera, again through ‘Abd Allah.’ Tax monies collected from the colonists helped to pay for local projects and for the city’s administration. During the 1230s and 1270s, funds went toward the construction of Lucera’s castle and fortress. Money raised outside Capitanata also had to be diverted to Lucera to pay for the project. Tax revenues from Lucera were often used to pay the salaries of officials and other people working in the city. In September 1291, Charles II ordered that funds from baiulatio of Lucera be used

to pay the castellan, chaplain, and servants of the castle.'"” To summarize, the Muslims of Lucera were required to pay various taxes, including the ferragium, jizya, canon terrarum, and subventio generalis. The tax burden on the colony was heavier than the burdens shouldered by Christian communities. Frequently, Muslims attempted to evade taxes. Conflicts occurred between them and Christian landowners in the region over taxes and land use. The crown sometimes rewarded Muslims for military service by making them exempt from paying taxes.

Chapter Four

96

Notes

SA A PM R S

1. H.D.FS, vol. 5, pt. 2, 793-795; H.D.F.S., vol. 5, pt. 2, 795. 196, H.D.F-.S., vol. 5, pt. 2, 796-798; Corsi, “F ederico II e la Capitanata” 2],

2. Corsi, “Federico e la Capitanata” 25.

3. C.D.S.L., no. 120. 4. RCA, vol. 3, reg. 12, 19-20, no. 126. 5. R.C.A.,, vol. 18, reg. 80, 260, no. 557. 6. C.D.S.L., nos. 11 and 12.

7.C.D.S.L., no. 13. 8. C.D.S.L., no. 13.

9. C.D.S.L., no. 13. 10. C.D.S.L., no. 14. 11. C.D.S.L., no. 28. 12. C._D.S.L., no. 120.

n BOener

13. C._D.S.L., nos. 66-67; C.D.S.L., no. 147. 14. C_D.S.L., no. $20.

15. C.D.S.L., no. 146. 16. C.D.S.L., no. 146.

17. C.D.S.L., no. 243. 18. C.D.S.L., no. 162. 19. He is referred to as the camerarius in C.D.S.L., no. 128.

20. 21. 22. 23.

C.D.S.L., C.D.S.L., C.D.S.L., C_D.S.L.,

no. no. no, no.

UA NPM POP Pi Ge A*

167. 128; C.D.S.L., no. 267. 257-258. 300.

24. C.D.S.L., no. 208.

n on et a

25. C.D.S.L., no. 173, 26. C.D.S.L., no, 204. 27. R.C.A., vol. 32, reg. 15, 257, no. 583.

28. H.D.F-.S., vol. 4, pt. 2, 828-832 (831). 29. H.D.F-.S., vol. 1, pt. 1, 118-120.

30. H.D.F'S., vol. 5, pt. 1, 440-442.

sciltan

31. Citing Amari, Egidi asserted that the eunuchs were probably not a 36

or Lucerine Muslims but rather black servants: Egidi, “La colonia,” AS.F™ (1911): 638.

32. Ibn Jubayr, “Rihlat al-Kinani” 119. 33. RCA, vol. 13, reg. 70, 50, no. 40, 34. R.C.A., vol. 19, reg, 82, 140, no. 135,

35. Egidi, “La colonia,” 4.5, P.N, 36 (1911); 616-617. 36. R.C.A., vol. 7, reg, 28, 141, no, 221,

37. R.C.A,, vol, 10, reg, 48, 27-28, no, 101; R.C.A., vol. 26, Te8-

no. 125, 38. R.C.A.,, vol, 10, reg, 48, 27-28, no, 101, 39. H.D.F-S,, vol. 5, pt, 1, 627-628: CDS L., no, 190.

112,11

The Administration of the Muslim Community

97

40, H.D.F.S., vol. 5, pt. 1, 571-574 (572-573). 41. F.C.0.E. 95, 97, 99, 103, 105, 107, 109, 123, 225, 241, 249, 271, 313. 42. For an explanation of how the terragium was calculated, see de Troia,

F.C.Q.E. 93, note 2. Calculations based on information given for the imposition of the ferragium in the Quaternus excadenciarum Capitinate generally support de Troia’s conclusion. See, for example, cases in the city of Troia: F.C.Q.E. 97,

103. 43. C.D.S.L., no. 264. 44. R.C.A., vol. 21, reg. 89, 117, no. 139.

45. C.D.S.L., no. 611. 46. C.D.S.L., no. 39. 47. R.C.A., vol. 13, reg. 72, 262, no. 236. 48. R.C.A., vol. 13, reg. 72, 262, no. 236. 49. R.C.A., vol. 22, reg. 92, 62, no. 280.

50. C._D.S.L., no. 37. 51. CD.S.L., no. 38. 52. C.D.S.L., no. 107. 53. C.D.S.L., no. 79. 54. C.D.S.L., no. 113.

55. 56. 57. 58. 59.

C.D.S.L., C.D.S.L., C.D.S.L., C.D.S.L., C.D.S.L.,

no. no. no. no. no.

54. 211. 220¢. 216. 233.

60. C.D.S.L., no. 206.

61. C.D.S.L., no. 59. 62. R.C.A., vol. 12, reg. 68, 236, no. 257. 63. C.D.S.L., no. 106. 64. C_D.S.L., no. 55.

65. C.D.S.L., no. 90. 66. C.D.S.L., no. 92. 67. C.D.S.L., no. 92.

68. C._D.S.L., no. 109. 69. C.D.S.L., no, 77. 70. C.D.S.L., no. 135.

71. C.D.S.L., no. 135. 72. C.D.S.L., no. 118. 73. C.D.S.L., no. 221. There is a typographical error in the C.D.S.L. for this document, rendering the year incorrectly as 1290. 74. R.C.A., vol. 12, reg. 63, 93, no. 340.

75. C.D.S.L., no. 72; C.D.S.L., no, 236. 76. C.D.S.L., no. 72. For collectores, see C.D.S.L., no. 148. 77. C.D.S.L., no. 164. 78. C.D.S.L., no. 306.

79. C.D.S.L., no. 306.

98

Chapter Four

80. For taxation under the Angevins, see Jean-Marie Martin, “Fi“ISCalité gy

économie étatique dans le royaume angevin de Sicile a la fin du x IIe sidcle » E.A. (Rome: Ecole Francaise de Rome and Istituto Storico Italiano per il Medio Evo, 1998) 601-648. 81. H.D.F-S., vol. 5, pt. 1, 504-506. 82. C.D.S.L., no. 114. 83. C._D.S.L., no. 149. 84. R.C.A., vol. 24, reg. 102, 137, no. 39. 85. R.C.A., vol. 23, reg. 98, 311, no. 242. 86. R.C.A., vol. 23, reg. 97, 189, no. 65. 87. R.C.A., vol. 22, reg. 93, 150-151, no. 211. 88. R.CA., vol. 18, reg. 80, 258, no. 549. 89. C.D.S.L., no. 29. 90. C._D.S.L., no. 88. 91.C_D.S.L., no. 190. 92. For taxes on meat sales paid by Christians, see P.A.D., no. 48; Rivoire, “Lucera” 203.

ster IN URE TOS CAR AOC “te nata ren roene enor Yao me wan wren aant

93. C.D.S.L., no. 190.

94. C.D.S.L., no. 159. 95. 96. 97. 98.

R.C.A., R.C.A., R.C.A., R.CA.,

vol. vol. vol. vol.

14, 14, 11, 10,

reg. reg. reg. reg.

74, 74, 51, 48,

85, no. 134. 85, no. 134. 17, no. 51. 9, no. 31.

99. C.D.S.L., no. 134. Cf. C.D.S.L., no. 212. 100. C.D.S.L., no. 134. 101. C.D.S.L., no. 60. 102. P.A.D., no. 31. 103. C._D.S.L., no. 149. 104. C.D.S.L., no. 149. 105. C.D.S.L., no. 306.

|

|

106. C._D.S.L., no. 81. 107.C._D.S.L., no. 81.

108. C._D.S.L., no. 96. 109. CD. S.L., no. 243. 110. C.D.S.L., no. 247.

111. CD.S.L., no. 274. 112. C_D.S.L., no. 293.

113. C.D.S.L., no. 71.

|

|

|

|

Chapter Five

Muslim Occupations Farmers

Most of Lucera’s Muslims earned their living as farmers. The type of wheat grown in Capitanata, triticum durum, was particularly desirable as a food stuff and item of trade because it could be stored for long periods.' To bolster agriculture, in December 1239 Frederick arranged for the provision of 1,000 oxen to the Muslim inhabitants of the city, ordering that in the event that so many were not available from the herds of the crown, royal money was to be used to purchase others. This concession was not an act of generosity, but a business venture. He insisted

that the names of all Muslims receiving animals be recorded. In the same order, Frederick went on to instruct his official, the justiciar of Capitanata, to receive from the Muslims of Lucera two taxes: the jizya and canon.”

The cultivation of wheat, barley, legumes, grapes, and other fruits was common in Lucera as in most of Capitanata during the 1200s.’ Such products were recorded in the Quaternus excadenciarum Capitinate as being grown in places like Troia, Tufara, and Siponto.* Lucera’s

100

Chapter Five

grain was considered to be of very high quality during the Angevin period.* Charles II arranged for three stone mills to be brought to Lucera

during the summer of 1292.°

Fruit trees were carefully tended by the colonists who sold their produce at stands within the city.’ Muslims also kept bees for their honey.® Lucera’s wine, prized for its high quality, was exported as far north as Rome.” It was also sold inside Lucera’s castle and at least one tavern within the city. Some houses at Lucera were probably equ ipped with mills for pressing olives, as houses sometimes were in Lesina.”

Shepherds and Animal Keepers Muslims pastured and kept animals during both the Hohenstaufen and Angevin periods. The main types of animals bred for consumption and sale in the colony were sheep and cows.'' Some goats, chicken, and pigs were also raised.'* Other animals kept at Lucera included horses, asses, mules, and other beasts of burden which were used in farming and as transportation.’ A number of colonists kept their animals in stalls built near their homes.'* Under Frederick II, shepherds were required to hand over sheep to the crown each year.'°

Many hectares of land around Lucera were available and suitable for pasturing. The 120 oxen used to haul stones, lime, and sand while the Angevin fortress was under construction in 1277 grazed in the pastures in the vicinity of Lucera.'° Overuse sometimes created problems. The intense heat of the summer of 1280, combined with the overburden-

ing of local pasture land by the animals needed for the construction project, caused a temporary upset in the balance of natural resources.'’ The magister massarius of Capitanata, Nicola Peregrini da Salpi, lamented that he was unable to supply a sufficient quantity of barley for the animals. Forage from the crown’s own stores had to be tapped.'® Lucera, along with the island of Malta, was chosen by Frederick II as a spot for the raising of wild animals, particularly leopards, by Muslim keepers.” More than one professional leopard keeper sometimes resided in the colony.”” In an order of 21 November 1239 the number was not specified, but there must have been at least two since the plural

form of the Latin word /eoparderius was used.”' Leopard keepers were looked after well by the crown. In March 1240, the emperor ordered the paying of the leopard keeper Palmerio’s expenses as well as those of his scutiferus and two horses.” Since Palmerio was described as having

been sent to Lucera in order to train a leopard belonging to the crown, he was presumably not a local Muslim. He may have been a Christian

||

ne

Muslim Occupations

101

or a Muslim from Malta. A man named Maltisius, perhaps a native of Malta, appears to have worked as a leopard keeper in other parts of Capitanata. He held a vineyard in Troia and properties at Civitate.” The Angevins continued Frederick’s practice of employing Muslims to raise leopards.” Not long after the Lucerine colonists succumbed to Angevin forces in 1269, Charles was attending to the leop-

ard-keeping enterprise in Apulia by arranging for provisions.” Salem, a Muslim knight, had requested supplies of meatin order to feed leopards

and other animals.”° The references to leopard keeping in the Angevin Registers are numerous. In October 1280, as many as six Muslim leopard keepers were working at Lucera. The gabellarius of the baiulatio of Lucera, Urso

Rufolo da Ravello, paid them and provided money for their clothing and

animal food.”’ Sometimes the justiciar of Capitanata was responsible for providing their wages. From Benevento in September 1288, Robert d’Artois ordered the justiciar, Raimond Carbonel, to pay a Lucerine leopard keeper named Leonardo his wages for the previous four months at a rate of one gold ounce per month.” For reasons which are unclear, a leopard keeper from Lucera named Matteo was confined in fetters at Castellammare di Stabia. He was released during the summer of 1292.” The son of Charles II, Philip, possessed his own leopard which in the

autumn of 1296 was placed with others held in captivity at Lucera.*° North Africa and Malta were the centers of the animal trade during both the Hohenstaufen and Angevin periods. Proceeds from grain sales in “Barbaria” were used by Frederick to purchase leopards in 1239.*! In April 1273, the camerarius of Malta and Gozo, Roberto Cafaro, was instructed to have leopards captured in the “customary places.” The beasts were to be transported to the royal court.” In 1277 a Lucerine Muslim named Donadeus was sent, apparently from Malta in the light of the order to the camerarius of that island, to purchase four leopards

from the parts of Barbaria. The camerarius provided Donadeus with the necessary funds.’? Three years earlier, the same Donadeus had cooperated with the magister camerarius of the islands of Malta and Gozo in a separate acquisition of leopards.’ On that occasion, the camerarius had been instructed to buy six “beautiful and agile” wild leopards and then to have the animals delivered to the crown through Donadeus. Donadeus was evidently not residing in Malta at the time. Falcons are known to have been kept and used for hunting in the region of Apulia during the reign of Frederick II. Frederick’s passion for falconry is well-known. He arranged for the translation of Moamin, an Arabic text on falconry, while he was writing De arte venandi cum avibus.*> Charles I also supported falconry in Apulia.”® He instructed

102

Chapter Five

the secretus to pay the expenses of falconers working in that region in

May 1270.”’ The secretus also paid for their food. Both Muslims and

Christians were employed by the Angevins to work with falcons.” In November 1275, a Christian named Riccardo de Luca da Barletta was the praepositus of the falconers, the falcon keepers or tenders, and the Muslims.”’ One of the places where the birds were captured was Monte Sant’Angelo, northeast of Lucera.” Falconry was also practiced elsewhere in the kingdom, including the Terra di Lavoro (Campania)."! Frederick II’s development plans for Capitanata included the introduction of camels to the region. They must have appeared to be the ideal beasts of burden for the hot Apulian climate. Eight camels were

assigned to Capitanata’s justiciar by Paolino da Malta in 1239.” Malta

was an important breeding ground for camels. Frederick mentioned one female and two male camels being kept on the island for that purpose.” If the request made by Giovanni Moro in 1240 that eighteen saddles for camels and 200 saddles for beasts of burden be made at Lucera is any indication, Frederick’s project for bringing camels to Capitanata was a success.’ Camel keepers were working in Melfi, Canosa, and Lucera that same year.” Frederick brought camels with him when he went to Verona in 1245.*° Why camels were eventually eliminated on the Italian peninsula is unclear. Timothy Insoll noted that in Spain and Hungary camels were introduced during periods of Muslim domination but under later Christian rule apparently not bred and utilized, at least in part, for symbolic rather than pragmatic reasons.*’ Frederick had brought them to southern Italy, but camels may have nevertheless been

eliminated from the kingdom later because they were negatively associated with the Muslim world.

Soldiers and Knights Muslim Lucera was a valuable military resource for both the Hohenstaufen and the Angevins, not only as a regional stronghold, but also as a source of well-trained soldiers, archers, and crossbowmen. The deployment of Muslims for military purposes was not unparalleled. Norman kings had used Muslims as infantry and light cavalry.”* In medieval Valencia, the Mudejars were employed in a military capacity, serving as crossbowmen and lancers and producing weapons.” Elena Lourie has demonstrated that Muslims from Valencia served as crossbowmen in

1285 during the military effort at Gerona.” The Lucerine colonists, in

addition to fighting, manufactured arms, particularly bows and arrows, and they produced tents. The city of Lucera itself was a stronghold in

Muslim Occupations

103

northern Apulia during the Middle Ages. Frederick II and Charles | bolstered its defenses by constructing a castle and fortress in which were stored munitions. The Muslims of Lucera comprised a key component of Frederick’s forces during his campaigns in northern Italy. The chronicler Riccardo di San Germano reported that 10,000 Muslims were sent by the emperor to Ravenna in August 1237.*' Riccardo’s figure is clearly exaggerated, but the estimated number of participants recorded in the Annales veronenses for Frederick’s northern campaign is similarly high. Seven thousand Muslim archers from Apulia were said to have arrived near

Mantua in September 1237 to assist the emperor.” A few thousand Muslim soldiers ultimately may have gathered to fight for the Angevins in an offensive, but Muslim forces as large as 7,000 or 10,000 were not assembled. Muslim contingents rarely exceeded 1,000 or 2,000 men. The Muslim knight Riccardo was once instructed to procure 1,000 armed men for service, but the number of Lucerine men typically drafted at one time was usually much smaller.’ Of course, the figures cited in individual orders often represent only part of the total number of men who were involved in a particular military campaign. Even when the numbers of multiple orders are added together, though, the totals still remain smaller than those attributed to the

Hohenstaufen campaigns. At first glance, Frederick would appear to have employed more Muslims for military service than did his Angevin successors, but the chroniclers of the Hohenstaufen period often inflated figures. The numbers available for deployments made by Charles I and II are cited in the pay schedules and orders of the Angevin Registers which are generally more reliable. The estimates of Muslim involvement in Frederick’s military campaigns may be excessively high, but the significant role which Muslims played in the emperor’s army is confirmed by a number of sources. Matthew Paris noted that Muslim stipendiarii were among those who accompanied Frederick in his offensive against his Milanese enemies in 1237.” Albertus Miliolus, describing the imperial offensive against the Milanese and the Brescians, reported that the emperor had many Muslims in his army.”° Salimbene recorded that when Frederick besieged Montichiari in 1237 he had with him many Muslims in his army.*° Muslims formed part of the forces which advanced against the Milanese in September 1239.*’ Many villas in northern Italy were destroyed during that offensive. Muslim soldiers appear to have formed, at least on occasion, part of the emperor’s core defensive group. In November 1237, during the campaign against the Milanese, Frederick sent his populares to Cre-

104

Chapter Five

mona after crossing the River Oglio in Lombardy, but he himself went to Soncino, taking with him a group of Muslims and his knights.** Most Muslims did combat on foot, but many were trained to fight on horseback. In addition to bows and arrows, Muslim archers often carried knives.” Knives made of iron and other arms were found during an excavation at Lucera’s castle in 1964.” Detailed Angevin records of the Muslim role in the army have survived, allowing historians to examine aspects of military organization such as recruitment, the chain of command, salaries, and rewards. The recruitment of Muslim soldiers was carried out by influential military

men from the community and/or by local Christian officials such as the justiciar of Capitanata. During the spring of 1279, the justiciar of Capitanata chose the top fifty-three Muslim archers from Lucera to go to

Durazzo.°' The men had to be approved by a Muslim named Ibrahim

who was to be their captain.” Muslim soldiers typically fell under the immediate command of Muslim captains who in turn reported to Christians. In 1273 Ibrahim was the captain ofa Muslim armed force going to the parts of Achaea in western Greece.” The Muslim knight Riccardo led a contingent destined for Romania that spring.” * Sometimes Riccardo cooperated with the justiciar of Capitanata in assembling Muslim archers for Angevin campaigns. In September 1275, he and the justiciar gathered together 100 archers from the colony along with their bows.” The archers went to the parts of Durazzo where they apparently served under a Christian, the captain of Durazzo and Albania, Guillaume Bernard.” The Byzan-

tine army occupied vineyards at Durazzo in late September 1275, but Angevin forces did not lose their hold on the city.”’The Muslim archers completed their three-month tour. Like their Christian counterparts, Muslim soldiers were paid.” The fifty archers who spent July and August of 1274 in Romania were each paid fifteen gold tareni per month.” In January 1293, during the War of the Sicilian Vespers, Charles II made special arrangements to pay nine skilled Muslim soldiers in his service. Each received ten gold grana per

day. The baiuli of Lucera furnished the funds.” Military service was the main avenue of social mobility for Muslims at Lucera. Elite military families acquired land and wealth. Conversion to Christianity was not a prerequisite for career advancement. A well-known reference to the decorating of Muslim knights was made in a letter issued by Robert d’Artois in 1291: “fecerimus in nostra Curia militari cingulo decorari, et velimus proterea ipsorum cuilibet militarem robbam curialiter exhibere.”"”

Muslim Occupations

105

Many Muslim knights were rewarded by being granted immunity from taxation. Charles I conceded the privilege of exemption from taxes to the knight Musa in November 1277.” Musa was excused from pay-

ing taxes like the jizya and the canon. ™ In addition, in exchange for providing military service to the crown, he received an annual income of thirty gold ounces from the baiulatio of Lucera.” Similar tax exemptions were granted to Muslims who fought in the Vespers War.”° A few members of the Muslim military elite owned property, even outside Lucera. The knight ‘Abd al-‘Aziz owned a vineyard in the vicinity of San Severo.” In September 1289, he was described as staying in Foggia.”® Hajjaj owned at least one house in Foggia, and he had houses in Troia as well. When his house in Foggia was wrongfully occupied,

the king ordered in 1295 that it be given back to either Hajjaj’s messen-

ger or to a procurator.” Over a month after that order was issued, Charles had to intervene again because the property had still not been returned. He ordered that the houses (plural this time) at Foggia be returned either to Hajjaj or to ‘Abd al-‘Aziz on his behalf.’ Hajjaj’s

houses in Troia were located “in platea publica.”*| The most prominent Muslim miles during the reign of Charles II was ‘Abd al-‘Aziz. His wealth included silver, jewels, pearls, and garments.” In late July 1296, Charles granted the tenement of Tertiveri to

‘Abd al-‘Aziz.” The land at Tertiveri and circumstances similar to those Christian nobles. He was required to to offer liege homage and to swear

was conceded to him under terms used when fiefs were granted to provide military service.** He had an oath of fidelity.** He was for-

mally invested.” In a document issued in September, ‘Abd al-‘Aziz was

referred to as the “dominus” of Tertiveri.*’ Among those who served as witnesses to the concession of Tertiveri was Giovanni Pipino who, just over four years later, would play a leading role in the destruction of the Lucerine colony. In addition to holding land at Tertiveri, ‘Abd al-‘Aziz had lands near Lucera such as the fruit-bearing garden which he held in lease from the abbey in Cava dei Tirenni in 1294. For the property, he paid annually the census, a rent. In addition, ‘Abd al-‘Aziz had to provide two pounds of good wax for each of the five years he held the land. os After making the most attractive offer for another piece of property belonging to the Santissima Trinita di Cava, he entered into a five-year contract to lease the tenement of the church of San Giacomo from the monastery in 1298. In exchange for the tenement, ‘Abd al-‘Aziz had to pay five gold ounces per year. The royal judge and the public notary of Troia, along with others, witnessed the transaction.’

106

Chapter Five

Angevin expansion into Albania during the reign of Charles | was possible in part because of Muslim involvement. Lucera is located only about 240 kilometers northwest of Brindisi which was the main port of debarkation. Charles had claimed rights in Albania as Manfred’s successor as early as 1267 when the Treaty of Viterbo was drawn up.”

During the winter of 1271, Angevin forces took Durazzo.” Within a

year, Charles began using the title “king of Albania,” a title which was later recognized by the king of Serbia and the tsar of Bulgaria.” In 1273 Muslim as well as Christian contingents were ferried across the Adriatic. The Lucerine knight Riccardo was ordered to report to Brindisi on 30 April 1273.” Officials from the Land of Bari and the Land of Otranto assisted with finding lodging and other necessities for him and his men before they departed.” Since Riccardo had an organizational role in the fortress project (he recruited and supervised Muslim workers), his son Hajjaj was assigned to the construction site for the duration of his absence.”° Both equestrian archers and foot soldiers went to Romania with the fleet in 1273.°’ Armed Christian barons also reported to Brindisi where they were inspected before disembarking.” The counts, skippers, and mariners who participated fell under the immediate command of the admiral of the Kingdom of Sicily, Philip de Toucy.” Philip had the authority to give security to former traitors, including the barons, magnates, and universitates of Romania who wanted to come over to the Angevin side.” Years later, during the reign of Charles II, debitores from Lucera would have to furnish Philip with grain, although the nature of the arrangement is not entirely clear.'”’

Muslim leaders from Lucera were tapped for service throughout the 1270s. They used their positions and language skills to organize Muslim recruits. In April 1273, a Lucerine Muslim named Leone was appointed

captain of the Muslim forces in Durazzo.'? A month later, Musa replaced Leone as the commander of 200 Muslims stationed “in the parts of Romania." The ambitions of Charles of Anjou in the East directly threatened Michael VIII Palaeologus who responded by forging alliances with

Pope Gregory X.'“ Michael sought to discourage the pope from supporting Charles with respect to the Balkans by entering into negotia-

tions on a matter of great concern to the papacy: the reunification of the Greek and Latin Churches.'’ Gregory saw the realization of this longterm objective in 1274 at the Second Council of Lyons.’ The warming of relations between the Church in Rome and the

Greek emperor meant that plans for military campaigns against Byzantine territories had to be suspended. Charles of Anjou nevertheless con-

Muslim Occupations

107

tinued to send Muslim and Christian military forces eastward to Albania. The Muslim knight Salem, a seasoned military officer, led 300 Lu-

cerine men—archers and lancers—to the Adriatic port city Vloré in southern Albania in 1275.'°’ In September of that year, Ibrahim became captain of the Muslims in Durazzo, replacing Musa.'” The campaigns of the 1270s put the resources of the Muslim community under strain. While soldiers were needed, labor was simultaneously required for the construction of the Angevin fortress at Lucera. On 13 September 1277, Charles ordered the justiciar of Capitanata to find, along with the Muslim Riccardo, 200 Muslim archers for military

service.” Although he was still working on the fortress project, Riccardo left for a tour of duty. By the winter of 1278, he was back on site, responsible for supplying 200 manual laborers for the construction work. Despite the opportunities for social mobility which a military career could offer, not all Muslims welcomed the opportunity to serve. Five

Muslims who had been sent to Durazzo deserted.''' They were caught and imprisoned in the castle at Bari until, through the intervention of their captain Musa, they were released and sent back to their posts.'” Even in the light of such incidents, Runciman’s statement that the Mus-

lims who were sent to Albania “were apt to show more sympathy with the Albanians than with the government” is misleading.''’ Military service involved the risk of injury, even death. Cases of desertion are simi-

larly known to have occurred during the War of the Sicilian Vespers.'"

Many Muslims had obligations to fulfill at Lucera, like farming, which made military service a great burden. The crown sometimes took into consideration their needs. On 23 June 1296, Charles II ordered that Muslims from Lucera not be forced to go to Jean de Montfort “ad guerram,” but rather be permitted to attend to the custody of the land and to the gathering of the harvest.'° After Pope Gregory X died at Arezzo on 10 January 1276, the pace of the Angevin military build-up quickened. In the late 1270s, Musa and the justiciar of Capitanata selected Muslim archers, both equestrian and

infantry, to go to Durazzo.''® The recruits served under Musa’s command.''’ He and other Muslim captains reported to Jean d’Aubecourt who was the captain of Durazzo in the late 1270s.'"® On 19 April 1279, Charles I ordered that fifty-three of the best Muslim archers from Lucera be chosen by the justiciar of Capitanata, Guy

d’Allemagne, to go to Durazzo.'’” As usual in the recruitment process, the counsel of Muslim military leaders was solicited. Ibrahim had to approve the justiciar’s choices.'"° Orders were issued so that Ibrahim could take four horses with him while crossing from Brindisi to

108

Chapter Five

Durazzo.’”' Ibrahim served in Durazzo again in the early 1280s as did a man from Lucera named Pietro Cristiano.'”” Identified in one source as “de... terra Lucerie Sarracenorum,” Pietro was probably a convert to Christianity from Islam.'?? He could have been a Christian resident of the city.

The demand for Muslim carpenters and smiths needed to build war machines in Albania was so great during the summer of 1280 that it threatened to deplete the skilled labor pool required for the fortress. In June 1280, the king ordered the justiciars of Capitanata and the Land of Bari to send sixty Muslim archers as well as carpenters, masons, stone-

cutters, and smiths to Albania.’ The archers were to report to Hugues le Rousseau de Sully at Berat in south-central Albania.'”’ Faced with a labor shortage at Lucera, Charles decided to give priority to his construction project; men who were not working on the fortress were to go

to Albania.'*© Work was under way on the towers which required carpentry skills.'”’ The justiciar of Capitanata sent the artisans he could find, along with their tools, to the vice-admiral Simon de Beauvoir and

to the engineer Jean de Tulle who were organizing the military buildup.'”* The artisans received fifteen grana of gold per day as compensation. In the autumn of that same year, 200 archers from Lucera were sent

to Vloré.'”? They filled the ranks of Hugues’ army.'*° During the first week of November, the king ordered that 300 Muslim crossbowmen under Riccardo’s command report to Brindisi at the end of that

month.'”*! By early December, the archers were already in place in

Durazzo.” During the same period as many as 300 crossbowmen,

probably all of them Christians, left Bari to join Hugues’ army in Ro-

mania.’

Riccardo and his men remained in Durazzo into the spring.’

They assisted with the unsuccessful siege of the castle of Berat.’” Angevin forces were repulsed by the Byzantine army.'*° Charles had greater diplomatic than military success in 1281. He

forged alliances with the son of the former Latin emperor of Constantinople, Baldwin II of Courtenay, an enemy of Michael VIII Palaeologus, as well as with Philip of France and with Venice.'*’ Simon de Brie, consecrated in March 1281 as Pope Martin IV, was an avid supporter of Charles’ political and military ambitions.'’* Through his negotiations with Gregory X, Michael had succeeded only in postponing the formation of a papal-Angevin alliance against his empire. Even crusading to the Holy Land took a back seat to strategic planning against the Byzantines during Martin’s papacy. As Norman Housley noted, the backing of the Angevins by both Martin and his successor

Muslim Occupations

109

Honorius IV “meant that crusading against the Byzantines, or the rebels of Sicily, enjoyed priority over crusades to Palestine.”’”” During the summer of 1281, 150 Muslim archers were sent to Hugues in Romania.’ The following spring, the justiciar of the Land of

Otranto was under pressure to send galleys and ships to Durazzo.'*’ The king told the justiciar of the Land of Bari to have 4,000 iron shovels made that spring. The shovels were to be shipped from Trani to Romania. Had the outbreak of the War of the Sicilian Vespers not forced Charles I to divert his military resources, the history of Byzantium might have been dramatically different. Muslim and Christian soldiers had to be transferred to Sicily and Calabria to fight the island’s rebels and the Aragonese.'*’ Some of the same Muslim commanders who had been integral to Angevin campaigns in the East were made responsible for organizing Muslim forces during the Vespers War.'“* The causes, development, and conclusion of the war are well-known, though histo-

rians may not agree on some details.'** Rather than recount the war’s history here, I will focus on Muslim involvement. The deployment of Muslim fighters began almost immediately after the outbreak of fighting in Sicily. In June 1282, the king ordered that 100 horses from Calabria and Apulia be procured for the 100 Muslim horsemen who would go to Sicily with the royal army.'“° Five hundred foot soldiers from Lucera were recruited that same month.'*” In preparation for battle, Charles ordered Riccardo to have 60,000 arrows made at Lucera on 12 November 1282. The justiciar of Capitanata, Giovanni Mansella da Salerno, sent the arrows to the army.'“8

The Aragonese carried the conflict into the region of Calabria in February 1283.'*” The Muslim knight Leone commanded Muslim soldiers at Nicotera in Calabria in the 1280s.'° From Nicotera on 27 April 1283, the prince of Salerno ordered Musa to recruit Muslim archers for

the army.’ Charles needed 600 archers and lancers.'* During the spring of 1283, the Vespers War was well under way, but Muslim sol-

diers were still being sent to Durazzo.’ As the fighting for Sicily dragged on, the deployment of Muslim contingents to Albania had to be sharply curtailed. In July 1283, again from Nicotera, Charles of Salerno called on Berard de Saint-Georges, the justiciar of Capitanata, to send 100 horses

for the Muslim archers in the army.'™ The prince of Salerno appointed three men as captains of the Muslim forces being sent to the siege of

Scalea in May 1284: Musa, Sulayman, and Salem.'** They led 500 soldiers on foot and 100 archers on horseback.'*®

110

Chapter Five

In April 1284, two months prior to being taken hostage off the coast of Naples by Aragonese forces led by Ruggero di Lauria, Charles of Salerno instructed the justiciar of Capitanata to recruit Muslim archers and crossbowmen from Lucera who were needed to fight in the Vespers

War.'*’ The men were to present themselves to Robert d’Artois on 8 May 1284. They would serve under the immediate command of the

Muslim knight Riccardo who was made captain on 12 May 1284.'* As many as 300 Muslims, perhaps more, were recruited by the justiciar.'” Five hundred Muslim foot soldiers were mentioned in an order of 13 May.'™ In a separate order, the prince arranged for the making of bows for the archers, and he issued instructions for the transport to the army

of war machines stored inside Lucera’s castle.'*! Charles I died at Foggia on 7 January 1285 without seeing his son’s release. The kingdom came under the regency of two men: Robert d’Artois and Cardinal Gerardo Bianchi who had been appointed papal

legate to the Kingdom of Sicily by Pope Martin IV.'” The prince was released only after several years had passed and under the condition that his sons Robert and Louis be held in his place.” One significant development which occurred during the regency was the elevation of the Muslim knight Riccardo to the position of captain of the city. Charles of Salerno was crowned King of Sicily in Rome on 29 May 1289 by Pope Nicholas IV.'“ As king, he continued to employ Muslim archers on foot and on horseback to fight in battles, and he used Muslims to manufacture tents, crossbows, and other weapons.” During the summer of 1289, the Christian captain of Lucera, Henri de Gérard, re-

cruited Muslim archers to fight in the Vespers War.'® Twenty-five mounted archers and 200 archers on foot were enlisted.'’ The Lucerines also assisted with the guarding of the coastal areas along the Adriatic, particularly near Manfredonia.'® In the spring of 1296, they were kept in a state of readiness in case Manfredonia needed defending, though the king forbade their being sent there unless absolutely neces-

sary.” During the summer of 1296, garrisons which were probably composed of a majority of Christians were stationed in the castles of Lucera, Manfredonia, and Monte Sant’Angelo.'””

In addition to serving the crown, Muslims were employed by individuals. The tyrant Ezzelino da Romano, an ally of Frederick II, employed Muslims, most likely of Lucerine provenance. Describing Ezzelino

as

“perfidious,”

the

anti-Hohenstaufen

Chronicon

Marchiae

Tarvisinae et Lombardiae told of Ezzelino’s binding in jail and handing over a prominent man from Padua, Giordano Forzaté, to be guarded by

Muslims in 1237. Described as the founder of the monastery of Saint Benedict, Giordano was highly respected by the Paduans for his honesty

Muslim Occupations

111

and knowledge.'”' The use of Muslim watchmen was specifically mentioned in recounting the offenses surrounding Ezzelino’s takeover of Padua to add to the portrayal of Ezzelino as a sacrilegious villain. His crimes against the Paduans were not forgotten by Dante Alighieri; he placed Ezzelino in hell, immersed in a river of boiling blood up to his eyes: “Jo vidi gente sotto infino al ciglio; e ‘l gran centauro disse: “E’ son tiranni che dier nel sangue e ne l'aver di piglio.” '” Another instance in which an individual employed Muslims from Lucera occurred during the summer of 1294. An exile of Benevento, the judge Pietro Spitaneta, returned to that city in a spirit of vengeance, bringing with him 1,000 Muslims from Lucera along with other follow-

ers.'’’ With flags unfurled and trumpets sounding, they entered Benevento at dawn. Members of the band stole animals.' Charles II was furious when he learned about the matter. The king sternly admonished Lucera’s captain for not having prevented the Muslims from going. To summarize, although the Muslims of Lucera did not comprise

the majority of the Hohenstaufen or Angevin armies, they were extensively involved in military operations. In addition to fighting and making arms, they contributed special war dona. In keeping with guidelines established by the Church for the separation of Muslims and Christians and also for expediency, Muslims evidently trained at Lucera and then fought alongside their coreligionists in contingents commanded by Muslim captains. The contingents were, however, part of a larger army which was comprised primarily of Christians. Muslims were compen-

sated for their services as Christians were.

Merchants and Shopkeepers Frederick’s determination to see Lucera develop and prosper was shown

by his implementation of economic policies which were of benefit to the city’s inhabitants. In 1234 he named Lucera as the site for one of seven annual fairs which were to take place in the kingdom.'”° Beginning on the feast of Saint John the Baptist, the fair was to last eight days. The emperor also granted permission to Lucera’s Muslims to circulate in southern Italy for reasons of commerce.'”’ Throughout Apulia, Calabria, Principato, the Land of Benevento, and the Terra di Lavoro,

the colonists were privileged to buy, sell, and bring goods back to Lucera without having to pay the “ius plateatici, dohane seu passagii” typically levied. Even after Frederick forbade Muslims to live far from the settlement in 1239, he probably continued to support their trading

112

Chapter Five

activities. By enhancing Lucera’s economy and the ability of its inhabitants to pay taxes, commerce between the colonists and the people of other communities was ultimately in the sovereign’s own interest. The Angevin Registers contain a number of references to Muslim merchants doing business outside Capitanata. Like the Muslims of Lucera, Jews from Trani, about ninety-four kilometers southeast of Lucera, were encouraged by the crown to engage in mercantile activities. Frederick appears to have supported the commercial endeavors of Jews and Muslims because as servi camerae they paid more taxes than did Christians. In 1231 Frederick backed Jewish traders from Trani who were to purchase silk for the royal court in various parts of the regno, including Calabria where silk production had been an important industry since the Byzantine period.'” The documents of the Cairo Geniza show that Jewish people produced and traded in silk throughout the Mediterranean.'” In mid-September 1231, Frederick appears to have withdrawn at least some of the privileges which he had previously granted to the Muslim merchants from his colony, informing officials in Trani and Barletta that Muslims should pay the “iura fundici et dohane” just like Christian merchants.'*° Frederick’s reference to “omnes Sarraceni de regno”’ indicates that the mandate applied to Muslims from the realm, not to foreign Muslim traders. Frederick’s order was not a complete reversal of his earlier concessions. Only the ius dohane was specifically reimposed. Since only officials in Trani and Barletta were addressed, Muslims may have remained exempt in other regions. Barletta and Trani were both port cities and competitive trading centers. Barletta is only about eight kilometers from Capitanata. Although Trani is farther away, Muslim traders were probably represented in its markets as well. Under Charles II, merchants from Lucera traveled up to 104 kilome-

ters across the peninsula to sell their goods to Christians at Salerno.'*' They also did business in the forum of nearby San Severo.'™ Permission was required for Muslims to stay for extended periods outside Lucera; on 24 June 1297, Charles wrote to the captain of Lucera, Baudoin Tristan, to inform him that two Muslims from Lucera, Sulayman and Abu Qara, were to be permitted a time-limited stay in the area of Melfi.”

Christians and Muslims entered into not only land dealings, but also money-lending agreements. A merchant from Naples, Francesco Pel-

lipario, lent money to the knight Hajjaj.'** As collateral, Hajjaj consigned articles of silver. The exchange came to the king’s attention because when Hajjaj tried to give back the money, Francesco refused to return the silver, asserting that substantial interest had since accumu-

Muslim Occupations

113

lated. Since usury was outlawed in the kingdom, Charles II took

Hajjaj’s side.'*° Trade was also conducted locally, of course. Home to perhaps 15,000 people, the city of Lucera was dotted with fruit stands and the shops of butchers, bakers, and artisans.'*° People gathered weekly to exchange their goods and produce in the city’s market, and they met for conversation and refreshment at the local tavern.'*” As one is today, during the thirteenth century an open-air market was held in a piazza of the city."

Artisans and Craftsmen

Lucera’s skilled and diversified class of craftsmen included smiths who worked iron and silver, carpenters, tentmakers, and tailors who sewed

garments of cotton and panni imported from Florence.'® Lucera’s artisans prepared hides and fashioned arms.'” A medieval iron helmet was among the items recovered during excavations inside the fortress grounds at Lucera, though it cannot be said with certainty whether it was manufactured by one of the Muslim colonists.'”' Bows were carved from bone and horns, perhaps of antler. |”

Skilled artisans were highly valued for the services which they rendered to the crown. Care was taken to meet the material needs of such persons. On 21 February 1240, arrangements were made to pay the magistri sarraceni and others, including carpenters and arms manufacturers, laboring in Melfi, Canosa, and Lucera. The Muslims were to receive payments for themselves, their apprentices, scuterii, and equitaturi.”°

The colonists manufactured saddles for camels and other beasts in large quantities during the reign of Frederick II.'"* Leather preparation and metalwork had been crafts practiced by Muslims in Sicily.'* As shown by the Cairo Geniza, leatherwork was a well-established trade in Egypt and other parts of the medieval Mediterranean.'”° Many of the trades which were practiced by the Muslim colonists

are known to have also been practiced by Christians in other towns and cities in Capitanata. In the Quaternus excadenciarum Capitinate, references were made to blacksmiths and combmakers from Foggia, cobblers

at Siponto, and carpenters from Monte Sant’Angelo.'”” Wooden combs from the medieval period which were found at Lucera are currently on display in Lucera’s Museo Giuseppe Fiorelli. The combs may have been acquired by the colonists via trade with Foggia, or they could have been manufactured locally. Combs carved from ivory and bone were

114

Chapter Five

recovered during the 1964 excavation of Lucera’s castle as were fragments of combs made of mother of pearl.'”* Lucera’s artisans manufactured arms for Muslims as well as Christians. The scale of weapons manufacture in the city is indicated by an order dated 12 November 1282 in which the Muslim knight Riccardo

was ordered to have 60,000 arrows made at Lucera for the army.'” The value placed on Muslim military expertise and craftsmanship is made plain in Charles’ letter to the justiciar of the Land of Bari and other officials in January 1301, after the colony had been dismantled and the process of selling the Muslims and their possessions was well under way. Charles ordered that Muslim “armaturarios seu factores armorum, factores etiam balistarum, arcuum, temptoriorum, budarum,

coriorum

rubeorum

et cossinorum,

magistros muratores,

magistros

bardarios et magistros carpentarios” be sent to Naples.” Skilled men who had already been sold were to be bought back.””'

As mentioned, Muslims sewed and repaired tents.”” In November 1298 tents were sent to Lucera to be repaired by local magistri”” That

same month, the king ordered that a total of five experts be sent from Lucera to Naples “pro faciendis . . . tentoriis.’* Tentmaking was a lucrative business for artisans. A single tent was worth as much as forty gold ounces.” Excavations have uncovered both locally produced and imported pottery. The types of ceramics found inside Lucera’s fortress during an excavation conducted by Geraint Dyfed Barri Jones and David and Ruth Whitehouse inside the fortress compound. near the west wall of the

Hohenstaufen castle included maiolica and imported Chinese porcelain.” The abundant remains of maiolica found at Lucera attest to the popularity of this type of pottery during the thirteenth century.” Among the Chinese pottery was a section of a small porcelain bowl,

probably produced during the thirteenth century, which is considered by David Whitehouse and Basil Gray of the British Museum to be of the Ying-ch’ ing or Ch’ing-pai type.” Several examples of ceramics recovered from Lucera’s castle bear striking similarities to the pottery produced previously by Muslims in Sicily.“ Small jugs made with filters which are now housed in Lucera’s museum are generally believed to have been shaped by Muslim artisans.”'° The filter of a Sicilian jug found at Castellammare di Palermo which has been attributed to a Muslim potter closely resembles the filters of the Lucerine jugs.”"' A similar filter from the Norman period was found at Monte Iato.”'* Fragments of medieval ceramic vases

made with filters have been found at Entella.2”

Muslim Occupations

115

Lucera has not yet been identified with certainty as the origin of the thirteenth-century bacini presently housed in the Museo Nazionale di San Matteo in Pisa, but a number of pieces are considered to be from southern Italy. The thirteenth-century bacini may have been produced by Christians on the peninsula who imitated the traditional style. The western Sicilian origins of at least some Pisan bacini have been sug-

gested by clay analyses.”'* Fragments of pottery found at Entella are comparable

to

bacini

used

to decorate

eleventh-century

Pisan

churches.” Whether or not Muslim potters from Lucera made bacini has yet to be established.

Civil Servants and Crown Employees In addition to the political and religious leadership roles which they had within their community, Muslims served as foremen in public works projects, military recruiters, notaries, and intermediaries between Christian officials and the Muslim community.’"° Men such as the notary ‘Uthman sometimes served the Christian captains of Lucera as nuntii or messengers, making consignments of money and other items.”'’ ‘Abd Allah was a campsor or moneychanger.”"* A certain Abu Sa‘id from Lucera received a gagia for his services as court dwarf during the reign

of Charles 1.7”? As early as the 1230s, the Lucerine Muslims were described by

Pope Gregory IX as being able to understand Italian. The ability of Muslim leaders to speak Arabic and their familiarity with the Muslim community nevertheless put them in an ideal position to recruit Muslim workers.” Individuals from the colony were relied upon by the crown to coordinate projects. Frequently, the Muslims who held civil posts were also military men. Although the career of the Muslim knight Riccardo reached heights which were unobtainable for most of the colonists, his example shows

how military and civil service could overlap. Riccardo appears to have come into the service of the crown within a few years of Lucera’s surrender in 1269. By the early 1270s, he held the rank of knight, and he was the magister iuratus of Lucera.””' As magister iuratus, Riccardo

provided counsel to the newly appointed custodian of the forests of Lucera and Troia, the Christian Pierre de Verberie.’” In a military capac-

ity, he served as a captain in Albania.” He also helped with the execution of the construction of the Angevin fortress. Under Robert d’ Artois, Riccardo had a role in the administration of the subventio generalis at

Lucera.”* He was elevated to the position of captain of the city. In a

116

Chapter Five

communication to the captain of Lucera, Henri de Gérard, dated 5 July 1289, Riccardo was described as Henri’s predecessor.” The knight was apparently the only Muslim who ever held that office. Riccardo fell from grace in 1289 when an investigation against him

was launched in the summer.”° He was accused of committing crimes against the king’s property, individuals, and the universitas of Lucera.” “People came before the captain of Lucera to declare their grievances.”78 Charles II ordered that Riccardo’s property be subject to seizure.”” His money, jewelry, and horses were delivered to the king.” Among his possessions was a large tent which Charles was interested in obtaining for his army.”*' The king, heavily in debt and in need of funds for the War of the Sicilian Vespers, may have pushed the corruption case against Riccardo in order to obtain the wealth which Riccardo had accumulated. Profits from the sale of grain, including Riccardo’s, in August 1289 went to pay Hugues le Rousseau de Sully, the captain of the war effort in Calabria, and the stipendiarii who were with him.” In a document regarding grain sales dated 9 August 1289, Riccardo was described as having died not long before.”’? Riccardo had held in lease from the monastery of the Santissima Trinita of Venosa the church of Santa Maria de Plantiliano along with its vineyards, gardens,

and olive groves.”* Since he died before the lease expired, the church was returned to the monastery.”*° One of Riccardo’s sons, Hajjaj, who was also a knight, was imprisoned. The king did not call for his release from Castel dell’Ovo in Naples until July 1294.”° Two of his sons had to be held in his place inside the castle at Melfi.”’ ‘Abd al-‘Aziz later arranged for them to be freed and entrusted to him.?** In 1296 Charles II arranged for the restitution of Riccardo’s S property to Hajjaj, and he put Jean de Montfort in charge of the matter.” Of note is that Riccardo’s possessions did not automatically revert to the crown after his death. Although legally Riccardo was a servus and therefore the property of the crown, his heirs had inheritance rights. With charges of corruption or other crimes, the king had to justify confiscating property. Eleven years after attacking Riccardo, Charles Il would make blanket accusations against the entire Muslim community. By charging that Muslims posed a threat to Christianity in the region, he would set the stage for large-scale property seizures.

Muslim Occupations

117

Servants In addition to working in the various trades already described, Muslims

were employed as crown servants. the request of two royal servi, the certain Ibn Abi I-Shawgq also from ing the provision of expenses and

During the reign of Frederick II, at “archadius” (qadi) of Lucera and a Lucera, an order was issued regardclothing to servant boys and female

servants at Lucera on 10 November 1239.“° The servants were to be given various items of clothing, some of them made from linen cloth. Payments were to be made through “Benbuscheuky” who seems to have functioned as the local treasurer or as an intermediary between royal officials and Muslims at Lucera.”"’ Apparently African, perhaps non-Muslim, slaves could also be found in the service of the royal household, if not specifically in the palatium of Lucera than elsewhere in the kingdom. According to Robert Mantran and Charles De La Ronciére, black slaves began arriving in Sicily during the thirteenth century.”” In 1239 Frederick II ordered the secretus of Palermo to select a group of young men to be trained as horn-playing musicians for his court.” Up to five could be purchased by the secretus if a sufficient number of suitable persons were not already available. The young men, referred to as sclavi nigri, were to be given instruments of silver.”“* After learning to play the trumpet and the tubecta, they were to be sent to Frederick. They were at no point referred to as Saracens, and their designation as sclavi rather than servi indicates that they did not have the same legal status as the Lucerine Muslims. As slaves, they may have enjoyed less personal freedom than did the colonists did on a day-to-day basis.

Notes

1. Antonio Muscio and Costantina Altobella, “Natura vergine e spazio coltivato,” Capitanata medievale, ed. Maria Stella Cald Mariani (Foggia: Claudio Grenzi Editore, 1998) 60, 66.

2. H.D.F.S., vol. 5, pt. 1, 627-628. 3. As André Guillou demonstrated, the same products were characteristic of Apulian agriculture during the Byzantine period: André Guillou, “L’ambiente. Geografia e ‘habitat’,” L'/talia bizantina dall’esarcato di Ravenna al tema di

Sicilia, eds. André Guillou and Filippo Burgarella (Torino: UTET Libreria, 1988) 160, 4. F.C.Q.E. 99, 239, and 299.

118

Chapter Five

5. C.D.S.L., no. 347 6. C.D.S.L., no. 81. 7. C.D.S.L., no. 640.

8. C.D.S.L., no. 640. 9. R.C.A., vol. 15, reg. 77, 3, no. 14. 10. F.C.Q.E. 317. 11. C.D.S.L., no. 421. 12. C.D.S.L., nos. 421 and 638-639.

13. CD.S.L., no. 426. 14. C.D.S.L., no. 640.

15. ALL, vol. 1, 715, no. 940. 16. R.C.A., vol. 16, reg. 78, 70, no. 269. Cf. R.C.A., vol. 19, reg. 82, 139, no. 133. 17. R.C.A., vol. 23, reg. 98, 311, no. 242. 18. R.C.A., vol. 23, reg. 98, 311, no. 242.

19. 20. 21. 22. 23.

H.D.F-.S., H.D.F.S., H.D.F.S., H.D.F-S., F.C.Q.E.

24. 25. 26. 27. 28.

C.D.S.L., no. 10. R.C.A., vol. 3, reg. 12, 51, no. 300. R.C.A., vol. 3, reg. 12, 51, no. 300. R.C.A., vol. 24, reg. 102, 137, no. 39, C.D.S.L., no. 10.

29. 30. 31. sent-day

vol. vol. vol. vol. 113,

5, pt. 1, 524-525. 5, pt. 1, 524-525. 5, pt. 1, 524-525. 5, pt. 2, 817-818. 115, 395.

C.D.S.L., no. 82. C.DIS.E., no: 215: H.D.F-S., vol. 5, pt. 1, 524-525. Barbaria included Tripolitania (preLibya), Tunisia, Algeria, and Morocco: Georges Yver, “Al-Maghrib,”

Encyclopaedia of Islam, vol. 5 (Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1986) 1183. 32. R.C.A., vol. 10, reg. 48, 53, no. 187. 33. R.C.A., vol. 16, reg. 78, 117, no. 380.

34. R.C.A., vol. 11, reg. 57, 163-164, no. 358. 35. Baudouin van den Abeele, “Federico II falconiere. I] destino del ‘De

arte venandi cum avibus’,” Federico II, Immagine e potere, eds. Maria Stella Calé Mariani and Raffaella Cassano (Venezia: Marsilio Editori, 1995) 382. 36. R.C.A., vol. 3, reg. 12, 51, no. 299. 37. R.CA., vol. 5, reg. 15, 37, no. 163. 38. R.C.A., vol. 17, reg. 79, 79, no. 145, 39. R.C.A., vol. 13, reg. 71, 185, no. 38. 40. R.C.A., vol. 26, reg. 112, 203, no. 705. 41. R.C.A., vol. 22, reg. 93, 108, no. 41. 42. H.D.F-.S., vol. 5, pt. 1, 524-525, 43. H.D.F.S., vol. 5, pt. 1, 524-525, 44. H.D.F‘S., vol. 5, pt. 2, 891.

Muslim Occupations

119

45. H.D.F-S., vol. 5, pt. 2, 764. 46. Haskins, Studies 255. 47. Insoll, The Archaeology 103-104. 48. Maurici, Breve storia 131. 49, Robert Burns, “Muslims” 85-86.

50. Elena Lourie, “Anatomy of Ambivalence: Muslims under the Crown of Aragon in the Late Thirteenth Century,” Crusade and Colonisation: Muslims, Christians and Jews in Medieval Aragon (Hampshire: Gower Publishing Group, 1990) 73. 51. Riccardo di San Germano, “Chronica” 195. 52. “Annales veronenses,” M.G.H.S., ed. Georgius Heinricus Pertz, vol. 19 (Hannovera, 1866) 10. 53. R.C.A., vol. 26, reg. 112, 153, no. 316. 54. Matthew Paris, Cronica maiora 139; Van Cleve asserted that Matthew

Paris’ account of Frederick’s campaign against the Milanese is not entirely reliable: Van Cleve, The Emperor 553.

55. Albertus Miliolus Notarius Reginus, “Liber de temporibus et aetatibus et cronica imperatorum,” ed. Oswaldus Holder-Egger, M.G.H.S., vol. 31 (Hannovera: Impensis Bibliopolii Hahniani 1903) 512. 56. Salimbene de Adam, Cronica, ed. Giuseppe Scalia, vol. 1, vol. CKXV

A of Corpus Christianorum (Turnholti: Brepols, 1998) 136. 57. H.D.F.S., vol. 5, pt. 1, 385-386. 58. H.D.F-S., vol. 5, pt. 1, 131. 59. R.C.A., vol. 18, reg. 80, 250-251, no. 534. 60. 61. 62. 63. 64. 65.

Whitehouse, “Ceramiche” 172. R.C.A., vol. 20, reg. 86, 220, no. 569. R.C.A., vol. 20, reg. 86, 220, no. 569. R.C.A., vol. 10, reg. 48, 29, no. 105. R.C.A., vol. 10, reg. 48, 50, no. 174. R.C.A., vol. 12, reg. 68, 239, no. 269; R.C.A., vol. 13, reg. 70, 55, no.

Oy. 66. R.C.A., vol. 12, reg. 68, 239, no. 269. 67. R.C.A., vol. 12, reg. 68, 203-204, no. 89.

68. R.C.A., vol. 13, reg. 70, 55, no. 57. 69. See, for example, R.C.A., vol. 29, reg. 5, 41, no. 57. 70. R.C.A., vol. 12, reg. 63, 86, no. 308.

71. C.DS:L., no. 87. 72. C.D.S.L., no. 58.

73. 74. 75. 76. 77. 78. 79.

R.C.A., vol. 18, reg. 80, 258, no. 549. R.C.A., vol. 18, reg. 80, 258, no. 549. C._D.S.L., no. 49. C.D.S.L., no. 189. C._D.S.L., no. 394. C.D.S.L., no. 34. C.D.S.L., no. 157,

Chapter Five

120

80. C.D.S.L., no. 162. 81. C.D.S.L., no. 562.

82. C.D.S.L., no. 443. 83. C._D.S.L., no. 206. 84. C.D.S.L., nos. 206 and 214.

85. C.D.S.L., no. 214. 86. C.D.S.L., no. 214. 87. C.D.S.L., no. 211.

88. C_D.S.L., no. 214. 89. C.D.S.L., nos. 132 and 34. 90. C._D.S.L., no. 220d. 91. Alain Ducellier, “Albania, Serbia and Bulgaria,” The New Cambridge Medieval History, vol. 5, ed. David Abulafia (Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 2000)

793.

92. Emile Léonard, Gli angioini di Napoli, trans. Renato Liguori (1954;

Varese: dall’Oglio, 1967) 127; Michael Angold, “Byzantium in Exile,” The New Cambridge Medieval History, vol. 5, ed. David Abulafia (Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 2000) 564.

93. Steven Runciman, The Sicilian Vespers: A History of the Mediterranean World in the Later Thirteenth Century (1958; London: Cambridge UP, 1995) 146; Nuovi studi angioini, ed. Gennaro Monti (Trani: Vecchi e C. Editori,

1937) tium?” Sarah bridge

565; Catherine Asdracha and Spiros Asdrachs, “A reprieve for ByzanThe Cambridge Illustrated History of the Middle Ages 1250-1520, trans. Hanbury Tenison, ed. Robert Fossier, vol. 3 (1998; Cambridge: CamUP, 1986) 197.

94. R.C.A., vol. 10, reg. 48, 50, no. 174.

95. R.C.A., vol. 10, reg. 48, 28, no. 104. 96. R.C.A., vol. 10, reg. 48, 48-49, no. 170. 97. R.C.A., vol. 10, reg. 48, 62, no. 230. 98. R.C.A., vol. 10, reg. 48, 79, no. 297. 99. R.C.A., vol. 10, reg. 48, 43, no. 147. 100. R.C.A., vol. 10, reg. 48, 48, no. 167.

101. C.D.S.L., no, 277. 102. R.C.A., vol. 10, reg. 48, 61, no. 228; R.C.A., vol. 10, 61-62, reg. 48, no.

229. 103. R.C.A., vol. 10, reg. 48, 80, no. 305. 104. Angold, “Byzantium” 564. 105. Asdracha and Asdrachs, “A reprieve” 197-198. Cf. Deno Geanakoplos,

“Byzantium and the Crusades, 1261-1354,” A History of the Crusades, ed. Kenneth Setton, vol. 3, ed. Harry Hazard (Madison: U of Wisconsin Press, 1975) 37. 106. Asdracha and Asdrachs, “A reprieve” 198.

107. R.C.A., vol. 12, reg. 63, 92, no. 330; R.C.A., vol. 12, reg. 63, 111, 1

424; Cf. R.C.A., vol. 12, Additiones ad Reg. 54, 276-277, no. 17. 108. R.C.A., vol. 13, reg. 70, 55, no. 58,

109, R.CA., vol. 18, reg. 80, 250-251, no. 534.

Muslim Occupations

121

110. R.C.A., vol. 18, reg. 82, 140, no. 135. 111, R.C.A., vol. 11, reg. 59, 197, no. 61.

112. 113. 114. 115. 116. 117. 118. 119. 120.

RCA,, vol. 11, reg. 59, Runciman, The Sicilian C.D.S.L., no. 193. C.D.S.L., no. 196. R.C.A., vol. 20, reg. 86, R.C.A., vol. 20, reg. 86, R.CA., vol. 20, reg. 86, R.C.A., vol. 20, reg. 86, R.C.A., vol. 20, reg. 86,

121. RCA., vol. 21, reg.

122. R.C.A., vol. 25, reg. 123. R.C.A., vol. 25, reg.

124. R.C.A., vol. 22, reg.

197, no. 61. Vespers 146-147.

161-162, no. 418. 161-162, no. 418. 220, no. 569. 220, no. 569. 220, no. 569. 87, 44, no. 169. 104, 74-75, no. 14. 104, 74-75, no. 14. 93, 171, no. 289; Cf. R.C.A., vol. 22, reg. 93, 148-

149, no. 203. 125. R.C.A., vol. 22, reg. 92, 64, no. 289. 126. R.C.A., vol. 22, Reg. 93, 148-149, no. 203. 127. R.C.A., vol. 23, reg. 95, 133-134, no. 190.

128. This reference to the post of vice admiral in 1280 demonstrates that that position was not created after the Vespers War, as previously believed.

Giuseppe Galasso asserted that the office of vice admiral developed after the Vespers: Giuseppe Galasso, // Regno di Napoli. Il Mezzogiorno angioino e aragonese (1266-1494) (Torino: UTET, 1992) 323. 129. R.C.A., vol. 25, reg. 103, 9-10, no. 36; R.C.A., vol. 24, reg. 100, 65, no. 317; R.C.A., vol. 24, reg. 100, 65, no. 319. 130. R.C.A., 317; R.C.A., vol. 131. R.CA., 132. R.C.A.,

vol. 25, 24, reg. vol. 24, vol. 25,

reg. 100, reg. reg.

103, 9-10, no. 36; R.C.A., vol. 24, reg. 100, 65, no. 65, no. 319. 100, 67, no. 327. 103, 19, no. 65.

133. R.C.A., vol. 24, reg. 100, 79-80, no. 363. 134. R.C.A., vol. 25, reg. 104, 72, no. 9. 135. R.C.A., vol. 25, reg. 104, 72, no. 9.

136. Malcolm Barber, “Western Attitudes to Frankish Greece in the Thirteenth Century,” Latins and Greeks in the Eastern Mediterranean after 1204, eds. Benjamin Arbel, Bernard Hamilton, and David Jacoby (London: Frank Cass, 1989) 121. ; 137. Asdracha and Asdrachs, “A reprieve” 198.

138. Asdracha and Asdrachs, “A reprieve” 198. 139. Housley, “The Thirteenth-Century Crusades” 585. 140. 141. 142. 143.

R.C.A., RCA., R.CA,, RCA.,

vol. 25, reg.103, 59, no. 271. vol. 25, reg. 106, 113, no. 116. vol. 25, reg. 106, 108, no. 91. vol. 25, reg. 107, 131, no. 54; C.D.S., vol. 2, 137-138, no.

XXXI and 140, no. XXXIV.

NN

TI,

SOD

tc

A

eas

Chapter Five

122

143. R.C.A., vol. 25, reg. 107, 131, no. 54; C.D.S., vol. 2, 137-138, no. XXXI and 140, no. XXXIV.

144, Musa and Riccardo are two such commanders. 145. Some of the books which address the topic of the Sicilian Vespers are: Runciman, The Sicilian Vespers; C.D.S., vol. 2; Housley, The Later Crusades 239-241; Abulafia, The Western 74, 76, 79-80, 84-88, 111-112; Dunbabin,

Charles 70, 102, 105-107, 113; Michele Amari, History of the War of the Sicilian Vespers, ed. Earl of Ellesmere (London, 1850); Antonino Franchi, / Vespri Siciliani e le relazioni tra Roma e Bisanzio (1984; Assisi: Porziuncola, 1997). 146. R.C.A., vol. 25, reg. 107, 131, no. 54.

147. R.C.A., vol. 25, reg. 106, 103-104, no. 60. 148. R.C.A., vol. 26, reg. 111, 55, no. 46. 149. Housley, The Later Crusades 239. 150. 151. 152. 153. 154. 155. 156. 157.

R.C.A., R.C.A., R.C.A., R.C.A., R.C.A., R.C.A., R.C.A., R.C.A.,

vol. vol. vol. vol. vol. vol. vol. vol.

27, 26, 26, 26, 26, 27, 27, 27,

pt. 1, reg. 116, 107, no. reg. 112, 121, no. 160. reg. 112, 110, no. 125. reg. 112, 128, no. 194. reg. 112, 143, no. 264. pt. 1, reg. 119, 355, no. pt. 1, reg. 119, 355, no. pt. 1, reg. 115, 85, no.

72.

690. 690. 550; for the capture of Charles

of Salerno, see Giuseppe Galasso, // Regno 90. 158. R.C.A., vol. 27, pt. 1, reg. 119, 351-352, no. 667. 159. R.C.A., vol. 27, pt. 1, reg. 116, 107, no. 72. 160. R.C.A., vol. 27, pt. 2, reg. 120, 448, no. 544. 161. For the making of bows, see R.C.A., vol. 27, pt. 1, reg. 119, 333-334,

no. 538; for the transport of war machines, see R.C.A., vol. 27, pt. 1, reg. 119, 312, no. 383; R.C.A., vol. 27, pt. 1, reg. 119, 345, no. 625. 162. Peter Herde, “Bianchi Gerardo,” Dizionario biografico degli italiani,

vol. 10 (Roma: Istituto della Enciclopedia Italiana, 1968) 99; Housley, The Later Crusades 240.

163. Romolo Caggese, Roberto d'Angio e i suoi tempi, vol. 1 (Firenze: R. Bemporad & Figlio Editori, 1922) 3-4. 164. 165. 166. 167. 168.

R.P.R., vol. 2, 1852. C.D.S.L., nos. 226a, 227, 429, 447. C.D.S.L., no. 20. C.D.S.L., no. 20. C.D.S.L., no. 160.

169. C.D.S.L., no. 184.

170. C.D.S.L., no. 210. 171. Chronicon Marchiae Tarvisinae et Lombardiae, R.1.S., vol. 8, pt. 3 (Citta di Castello: S. Lapi, 1916) 12.

172, Dante Alighieri, Commedia, ed. Anna Maria Chiavacci Leonardi, vol. 1 (Milano: Arnoldo Mondadori Editore, 1991) 377-379. Ezzelino is mentioned

in verses 109-110 (p. 378).

Muslim Occupations

123

173. C.D.S.L., no. 130; C.D.S.L., no. 131.

174. 175. 176. 462-463. 177.

C.D.S.L., no. 130. C.D.S.L., no. 131. Riccardo di San Germano, “Chronica” 187; H.D.F.S., vol. 4, pt. 1, A.LL, vol. 1, 606, no. 763.

178. A.LL., vol. 1, 614, no. 785; André Guillou, “Production and Profits in

the Byzantine Province of Italy (Tenth to Eleventh Centuries): An Expanding Society,” Dumbarton Oaks Papers 28 (1974): 93-95. 179. Goitein, Studies 261. 180. A../., vol. 1, 619, no. 792.

181. C.D.S.L., no. 185. 182. C.D.S.L., no. 286. 183. C.D.S.L., no. 220a.

184. C.D.S.L., no. 165. 185. Islamic law includes the doctrine of riba, a condemnation of usury.

186. C.D.S.L., no. 640 and Appendix no. IV. This document was issued during the later Angevin period, but it is probable that a comparable level of

economic development was reached during the Hohenstaufen period as well. 187. C.D.S.L., no. 640; C.D.S.L., no. 653. 188. C_D.S.L., no. 653.

189. C.D.S.L., no. 10, 220b, 456. 190. C.D.S.L., no. 447. 191. The helmet is on display as part of the medieval collection in Lucera’s museum. 192. R.C.A., vol. 27, pt. 1, reg. 116, 107, no. 72; R.C.A., vol. 10, reg. 49,

252-253, no. 205; R.C.A., vol. 12, reg. 68, 239, no. 269.

193. H.D.F-.S., vol. 5, pt. 2, 764. 194. H.D.F-S., vol. 5, pt. 2, 891. 195. Maurici, Breve storia 77, 88. 196. Goitein, Studies 257.

197. A Foggian blacksmith named Balianus is referred to on page 169 of F.C.Q.E.; Roberto the comb-maker (pectinarius) is mentioned on page 175; for the cobbler from Siponto, Mercurio,

see p. 291; carpenters

from Monte

Sant’ Angelo are referred to on p. 307. 198. Whitehouse, ““Ceramiche” 172. 199. R.C.A., vol. 26, reg. 111, 55, no. 46.

200. C_D.S.L., no. 447. 201. C.D.S.L., no. 447. 202. R.C.A., vol. 5, reg. 15, 13, no. 73.

203. C.D.S.L., no. 226a. 204. C.D.S.L., no. 227. 205. R.C.A., vol. 26, reg. 110, 14, no. 94. 206. Whitehouse, “Ceramiche” 172. For the excavation, see Geraint Dyfed

Barri Jones, “Excavations

in 1964,” Apulia. Neolithic Settlement in the

Chapter Five

124

207. Whitehouse, ““Ceramiche” 172. 208. Whitehouse, “Ceramiche” 172.

209. Noyé, “La ceramica dipinta” 127.

210. Caterina Anna Maria Laganara Fabiano, “Cultura materiale. La produzione fittile medievale in Capitanata,” Capitanata medievale, ed. Maria Stella Cald Mariani (Foggia: Claudio Grenzi Editore, 1998) 230.

211. See the photographs of the Sicilian brocca published in Franco D’Angelo’s article “Ceramiche musulmane dell’XI e XII secolo rinvenute nell’area del Castellammare di Palermo,” Sicilia Archeologica 51 (1983): 87; for more on

ceramics at Lucera, see Franco D’Angelo, “Ceramica e vetro,” Uomo e ambiente nel Mezzogiorno normanno-svevo. Atti delle octave giornate normannosveve, ed. Giosué Musca, 20-23 ottobre 1987 Bari (Bari: Dedalo, 1989) 273291, esp. 279-286; Whitehouse, ““Ceramiche” 171-178.

212. D’ Angelo, “La ceramica della Sicilia” 483. 213. Ghizolfi, “Primi risultati dello studio della ceramica medievale di Entella,” Giornate internazionali di studi sull’Area Elima. Atti, vol. 1, 19-22 settembre 1991 Gibellina (Gibellina: Centro Studi e Documentazione sull’Area Elima, 1992) 364. 214. Alessandra Molinari, “La ceramica dei secoli X-XIII nella Sicilia

occidentale. Alcuni problemi di interpretazione storica,” Giornate internazionali di studi sull'’Area Elima. Atti, vol. 2, 19-22 settembre 1991 Gibellina (Gibellina: Centro Studi e Documentazione sull’ Area Elima, 1992) 505. 215. Ghizolfi, “Primi risultati” 363-364; for Pisan bacini, see Graziella Berti, Liana Tongiorgi, and Ezio Tongiorgi, Le ceramiche medievali delle chiese di Pisa (Pisa: Museo San Matteo, 1981). 216. R.C.A., vol. 12, reg. 68, 239, no. 269; R.C.A., vol. 13, reg. 70, 55, no. 57; C.D.S.L., no. 520; R.C.A., vol. 19, reg. 82, 140, no. 135. 217. C.D.S.L., no. 246. 218. C.D.S.L., no. 247. 219. R.C.A., vol. 10, 276, no. 49. 220. H.D.F-.S., vol. 4, pt. 1, 452. 221. R.CA., vol. 9, reg. 44, 72, no. 23. 222. R.C.A., vol. 9, reg. 44, 72, no. 23. 223. R.C.A., vol. 10, reg. 49, 235, no. 104. 224. C.D.S.L., no. 7: 225. €:D.S.£., no. 15: 226. C.D.S.L., no. 15; C._D.S.L., no. 17; C.D.S.L., no. 18. 227. C.D.S.L., no. 18. 228. C.D.S.L., no. 18. 229. C.D.S.L., no. 18. 230. C.D.S.L., no. 22. 231. C.D.S.L., no. 19. 232. C.D.S.L., no. 23.

233. C.D.S.L., no. 23. 234. C._D.S.L., no. 35.

Muslim Occupations

233. 234. 235. 236. 237. 238. 239.

C.D.S.L., C.D.S.L., C.D.S.L., C.D.S.L., C.D.S.L., C.D.S.L., C.D.S.L.,

no. no. no. no. no. no. no.

125

23. 35. 35. 125. 126. 152. 176.

240. H.D.F.S., vol. 5, pt. 1, 486-487. Egidi suggested that Benbuscheuky may have been a rough transliteration of “ben abu schihnaki”: Egidi, “La colonia,” A.S.P.N. 36 (1911): 615. 241. H.D.F-.S., vol. 5, pt. I, 486-487. 242. Mantran and De La Ronciére, “Africa” 382. 243. H.D.F.S., vol. 5, pt. 1, 535-536. 244. H.D.F-S., vol. 5, pt. 1, 535-536. Silver instruments are mentioned in

H.D.F-S., vol. 5, pt. 2, 676-677.

|

| |

9.

et

ances gaits

eens,

A

SR:

SR

PERRIS

ES

SRR

SRY OT PRR

DAF ARAN RAS EIR:

RH

wm

’

a

4

aan

)

-

fe

€

‘

{

3 ?

i

,

‘

.

2

|

Chapter Six

Lucera under Manfred Giovanni Moro and Papal Plans to Subvert the Hohenstaufen As a came grew aulae

young servant in the household of Frederick II, Giovanni Moro to the attention of the emperor because of his industry.’ When he to maturity, he was appointed custos of the camera, secretorum particeps, and praepositus by the emperor. > The privileges en-

joyed by Giovanni and the position of influence which he attained in

Frederick’s court are illustrated by the manner in which he was referred

to in a number of royal documents and by his involvement in the issuing of others. Writing from Lucera in 1240, Frederick described Giovanni

as “de camera nostra,” and he instructed Riccardo da Bisaccia to carry out Giovanni’s orders.’ The emperor also saw to the payment of |500 gold ounces due to Giovanni from Nicola Saraceno da Giovenazzo." During Frederick’s reign, Giovanni became one of the leading men of Capitanata. He held a house in Foggia in the platea magna, the large piazza, which had once belonged to Lord Palmerio da Corvo.* Also at Foggia, Giovanni had a garden near the church of the Holy Sepulchre, again once belonging to Palmerio; a number of houses in the Foggian suburbium of San Pietro; several vineyards; and other lands.°

128

Chapter Six

Giovanni Moro’s religious and ethnic identity have been disputed

by historians. Van Cleve described him as a Muslim.’ By contrast, Antonino De Stefano suggested that Giovanni may have been a convert to Christianity from Islam.*® Egidi thought that he was “un nero o un berbero musulmano.’” The limited evidence available suggests that

Giovanni was a black African Muslim who converted to Christianity during the reign of Frederick II. In the writings of Nicolaus de Jamsilla and the letters of Innocent IV, Giovanni was not identified as a Muslim, suggesting that a conversion had taken place. Only one source, the

Annales Placentini Gibellini refers to Giovanni as Saracen."

Nicolaus de Jamsilla used the term niger to describe Giovanni. A less reliable piece of evidence that Giovanni may have been African is a medieval bust of a man with African features recovered from Lucera’s

castle.'' Given his influential position at Lucera and de Jamsilla’s de-

scription, Giovanni would appear to be the most likely model for such a bust. Whether Giovanni’s mother, referred to as an ancilla by de Jamsilla, had been transferred from Sicily to Lucera or had been acquired through the slave trade is uncertain.'? Black African Muslims had migrated to Sicily prior to the Norman conquest. Ibn Hawgqal mentioned a Gate of Sudan at Palermo.'* Black Muslim slaves are known to have served William II." During Frederick’s lifetime, Giovanni Moro was part of a number of arrangements affecting Muslims and Lucera.'* After the death of the emperor, Giovanni was confirmed as magister and praepositus of the

royal camera, and he was put in charge of Lucera.'® In a letter dated 19 September 1253 to the abbot and convent of the Cistercian abbey Casanuova, Pope Innocent IV described Giovanni as the camerarius of Frederick’s son Conrad and as his “fautor manifestus.”"’ According to de Jamsilla, when Manfred took control of Lucera in 1254, he found Gio-

vanni’s camera inside the royal palace.'* A number of treasures, including gold, silver, gems, and arms, were recovered from that and other rooms. In Innocent’s letter of 1253, Moro was not given as Giovanni’s surname as it was in royal documents. Innocent referred to him as “Johan-

nes dictus Morus” or “Giovanni called the Moor.” Giovanni was the

focus of the letter because he had allegedly disturbed the abbot and monastery of Casanuova with respect to its grange called Luceria, The diocese concerned was identified as Penne in the present-day province

of Pescara in Abruzzo. The camerarius had forced the monastery 0 enter into a contract with him whereby it was obliged to pay money to him each year for the property. The pope intervened to declare the con: tract void, emphasizing that the monastery had been unduly put.under

Lucera under Manfred

129

pressure: “... vos, per metum et potentiam dicti camerarii, quibus non

poteratis resistere, utpote qui omnia bona vestra sub potestate dicti Conradi habetis, coacti estis ab ipso Johanne grangiam predictam sub certo recipere redditu eidem annis singulis persolvendo.” The precarious conditions in the realm after Conrad died in May 1254 spurred Giovanni to make a radical and irreversible decision. To protect his interests in southern Italy, he abandoned the Hohenstaufen cause and staked his fortunes with his long-term adversary, the pope. Now calling him “fidelis noster,” Pope Innocent [V wrote to Giovanni on 3 November 1254 to confirm a number of properties which had once been conceded to Giovanni by Frederick’s son Conrad, making a point of noting that the papal confirmation was being made in spite of the fact that Conrad had previously been under a sentence of excommunication.” Innocent himself had excommunicated Conrad in February 1254. The pope’s letter provides a sense of how Giovanni’s wealth and influence in southern Italy had grown under Conrad; his properties included pastures, woods, cultivated and uncultivated lands, and waters. Among the properties which he held were the castrum of Calatabiano in the province of Catania and that of Biccari in the province of Foggia. Innocent’s concession of those interests guaranteed him Giovanni’s loyalty. In return, Giovanni was to provide military support “for the de-

fense of the kingdom” when needed. Giovanni became part of the ongoing papal effort to establish power in southern Italy at the expense of Frederick’s remaining heirs, particularly Manfred. Six days after making the concessions sought by Giovanni, on 9 November 1254, Innocent issued a letter to all the Christian faithful ex-

plaining Giovanni’s change of heart and his new devotion to the Church. The pope declared that Giovanni had been forgiven for all injuries and offenses committed in the past. He now came under the Church’s protection. No one was to injure or disturb him or his household, either in person or in property.” A little over two weeks later, on 17 November 1254, Innocent took

another step to strengthen his alliance with Giovanni. He confirmed Giovanni’s position as camerariatus in the kingdom. Innocent pardoned Giovanni for all the offenses which had been previously committed against the Church.” In addition to reinforcing the ties between the two men, the confirmation of Giovanni’s office by the pope would, by its very assumption of the papal right to take such a step, further help to

legitimize the pope’s position. Innocent made the most of his opportunity, writing to Giovanni: “‘Hinc est, quod cum regnum Sicilie cum omnibus districtibus et pertinentiis suis ad apostolicam sedem plene.perti-

130

Chapter Six

neat sitque ad eius dominium totaliter devolutum, nos, volentes te in illo prerogativa beneficiorum efferre, officium camerariatus ipsius regni . . . tibi de fratrum nostrorum consilio et assensu auctoritate apostolica confirmamus ...” Giovanni’s dealings with Innocent IV constituted treason in the eyes of the Hohenstaufen. Even after his negotiations with the Curia, according to de Jamsilla, Giovanni made an unsuccessful attempt to approach Manfred, sending messengers to the latter at Lucera.” Manfred knew about the double-crossing, so he was ill-disposed toward Giovanni. Giovanni decided to avoid Lucera, at least at momentarily. He proceeded to Acerenza which had become his stronghold.” For years Giovanni had been in a position of authority at Lucera. He had attracted a number of Muslim followers who traveled with him. Some who were staying with Giovanni at Acerenza, aware of his treachery, killed him. Giovanni’s body was dismembered, and his head brought to Lucera to be hung at the Foggian Gate as a warning to anyone else who might consider similar subversive acts.”°

Manfred’s Conflict with the Papacy and Charles of Anjou In the light of his negotiations with the papacy, Giovanni may be considered a traitor, but Manfred himself had also sought to come to terms with Pope Innocent IV even before Conrad’s death. In 1251 Manfred was ruling in southern Italy in the absence of his brother who, as the legitimate son of Frederick II, had inherited the regno. Manfred approached Innocent’s legate in the Kingdom of Sicily during the summer

of 1251.?’ Conrad did not arrive in the realm until early 1252. Four months after Conrad’s death in May 1254, Innocent made Manfred vicar in southern Italy, not including Sicily, Abruzzo, and the Terra di Lavoro.” In addition, the pope acknowledged Manfred as the prince of Taranto. The political developments in the kingdom following Conrad’s death have been studied by historians such as Edouard Jordan, Enrico

Pispisa, and Norman Housley.”’ That well-known history will not be presented again here. Instead, the ways in which the Muslims of Lucera were affected by and used for the purpose of propaganda by the papacy while Manfred was in power will be addressed. Manfred’s relationship with the papacy deteriorated dramatically

after a bloody incident took place in October 1254. After allegedly receiving insults, Manfred killed a papal auxiliary in the kingdom, Borello d’Anglona.’' The Annales Placentini Gibellini states that Man-

Lucera under Manfred

131

fred fled to Lucera after meeting with his brother Frederick of An-

tioch.”? Manfred was welcomed by the colonists who opened the gates

of the city for him.” He quickly assumed control over Lucera’s palace,” It may have been around that time that Manfred had a seal made

which depicted him seated on a throne.” He evidently never issued any coins from the city.*® When Rinaldo dei Conti di Segni was elected pope as Alexander IV in Naples on 16 December 1254, Manfred may have hoped that his relations with Rome would improve. He sent messengers to Alexander, but

the pope refused to enter into any serious negotiations.’ The slaying of Borello remained a sore point. Alexander called attention to the incident five months after it had occurred when he excommunicated Manfred in March 1255.”* The pope’s hostility toward Manfred did not stem solely from the murder, however. Alexander did not want to see Hohenstaufen rule continue in Sicily. Although Manfred’s young nephew Conradin had been entrusted to the papacy by his father, Alexander rejected his role as guardian.” He may have remembered the dishonoring of the conditions under which Innocent III, another member of the Conti di

Segni family, had agreed to be the ward of the young Frederick of Hohenstaufen decades earlier. In October 1255, the young son of King Henry III of England, Edmund, was invested with the kingdom.” Negotiations for Edmund’s investiture had been under way for some time. Henry first accepted the Sicilian throne for Edmund in 1254 after attempts to recruit Richard of Cornwall had failed.*’ Citing the negotiations of 1256 for a possible marriage alliance between the English crown and the Cyprian Lusignans, Simon Lloyd suggested that Henry’s ambitions extended beyond Sicily. His ultimate aim seems to have been to establish Plantagenet

influence in the eastern Mediterranean.”

Preparations for a crusade against Manfred and the Lucerine Muslims were launched in the spring. In May 1255, Alexander issued the crusade bull Pia Matris in which he denounced the Muslims for having

aided Manfred, an enemy of the Church.” Matthew Paris reported that

in 1255 the pope sent Cardinal Ottaviano degli Ubaldini with an army of 60,000 armed soldiers to destroy Lucera, which was still Manfred’s base.’ Despite the demands of organizing such an operation, that May Alexander also saw to the promotion of a crusade against Muslims in Africa.’ The papal army sent to Apulia against Manfred was sizeable, but Hohenstaufen forces managed nevertheless to repulse it. The conflict dealt a severe blow to the social and economic stability of both Foggia

132

Chapter Six

and Lucera. People were forced to flee their homes in the countryside, and hunger struck the region.”° The crusade against Manfred and his allies at Lucera was preached in England in 1255. Emphasis was placed on Manfred’s ties to Muslims, but many people were nevertheless reluctant to support it. The English monk from St. Albans, Matthew Paris, commented that people wondered how the same indulgence granted for combating “infidels” could be conceded for fighting Christians.*” During the conflict and general instability of the 1250s the church at Lucera appears to have been in crisis. On 3 August 1255, Pope Alexander instructed that Alferius, once the dean of the monastery of Santa Sofia of Benevento, be placed in authority over the Lucerine church.” The pope noted that the church of Lucera had been vacant for over eight

years.”” Alferius had already been sent to Lucera by the bishop-elect of Benevento. What is interesting and noteworthy about the pope’s letter is that he was able to interfere in the affairs of the Lucerine diocese at all in 1255, considering the tensions between him and Manfred and in the

light of the fact that Lucera was a Hohenstaufen stronghold. Mixed support among the nobility and economic complications ultimately forced Henry III to abandon the scheme to takeover the Kingdom of Sicily. Without the economic and military backing of a foreign power, Alexander was unable to stop Manfred. In August 1258, Manfred was crowned king of Sicily at Palermo, as his father had been over sixty years earlier.” In 1261 Manfred was at the height of his power. As previously mentioned, in that year, according to Abu ’I-Fida, he received an ambassa-

dor from Sultan Baybars of Egypt.°' Despite Manfred’s

success in

building alliances with the rulers of other kingdoms and empires, the new pope, Urban IV, like his predecessor Alexander, was unwilling to make peace. A recurrent complaint of Urban’s was that Manfred maintained a military presence in Tuscany and the March of Ancona.” Urban’s distress over Manfred’s position on the peninsula was probably aggravated by Manfred’s refusal to allow the bishops selected by the

pope to assume their positions in the lands under his control.” This refusal might explain in part the long vacancy in the office of bishop at Lucera. On 26 April 1262, Urban wrote to James I of Aragon in order to discourage him from allowing his son Peter to marry Manfred’s daugh-

ter Constance. Urban claimed that Manfred was guilty of many intolerable offenses, among them mistreating churches. As could be expected,

Manfred’s ties to the Muslims of Lucera were mentioned.” Despite the pope’s appeal, the marriage took place that year.

Lucera under Manfred

133

Aware of Urban’s aim and his influence, Manfred continued to

make overtures in the hope of reaching some sort of agreement. During the summer of 1262, he commissioned some of his men to negotiate with the pope, but they were unable to make any progress.°> With Edmund out of the running, Urban was courting another candidate for the Sicilian kingship, Charles of Anjou, the brother of King Louis IX of France. Overtures had first been made to Charles in the early 1250s.°° Initially, Louis had been hesitant to endorse the pope’s plan for his brother.”’ He had been concerned about its ethics. Nevertheless, talks were under way between a papal representative and the French by the

early spring of 1262. In June 1263, Urban made a number of concessions to Charles in

order to secure his support for the undertaking in Sicily.°? The pope granted a tenth of all Church income from the kingdom of France and the county of Provence to Charles for a period of three years. To win popular support for the campaign, the cross was preached not only against Manfred but also against the Muslims of Lucera in France as well as in Lombardy, Tuscany, the March of Ancona, and the lands bordering on the Kingdom of Sicily.” Those taking the cross against Manfred and the Muslims received the same indulgences, privileges, and immunities as participants in crusades to the Holy Land. From Orvieto on 3 May 1264, Urban instructed prelates and other Officials to pay a tenth of all ecclesiastical income to Charles for three years since he would be defending the Church against Manfred. To convince them of the worthiness of the cause, the pope attempted to construe an image of Manfred as a menace who threatened the Church and Christians. Manfred’s links to the Muslims of Lucera were, predictably, raised. Urban wrote that Manfred had entered into “alliances of malice with the Saracens of Lucera.” With their help, he had set about the takeover of the kingdom. The pope evoked images of war and

conquest designed to evoke fear.”

To present Manfred as a danger to society and to win support, Urban frequently described Manfred’s army as being made up of “Saracens and infidels.” Following in Alexander’s footsteps, he called for a crusade against Manfred as well as the inhabitants of Lucera, as Mus-

lims and as Manfred’s supporters, in 1264.” As Maier observed, the

model for Urban’s crusade bull was Pia Matris, which had been issued by Alexander.” When he ordered Cardinal Simon de Brie to preach and encourage the preaching of the cross against Manfred, the Muslims of Lucera, and Manfred’s other followers, Urban highlighted Manfred’s alliances with the Lucerine colonists in order to cast Manfred as an en-

134

Chapter Six

emy. He stated that Manfred “ . . . contra eandem ecclesiam, associatis sibi Sarracenis Lucerie, insurrexit.””

Among the crimes which Urban enumerated in his letter to the cardinal was Manfred’s deployment of forces in the March of Ancona and Tuscany. Urban made reference to Manfred’s use of Muslim soldiers to add to the sense that the Church was in peril. He wrote, “... non solum in predictam Marchiam, sed et in Patrimonium beati Petri in Tuscia suos satellites, tam Theutonicos quam abhominabiles Sarracenos et alios iniquitates sue ministros, immisit, sicque nos undique circumse-

pire nititur et iam pro viribus circumsepsit ... — During the summer of 1264, the organization of a military campaign against Manfred was the pope’s top priority. He wrote a flurry of letters to clerics and others in various parts of Italy in order to enlist their support. On 15 July 1264, Urban addressed Ottobuono, the cardinal deacon of Sant’Adriano, instructing him to preach the cross in Perugia, Todi,

and Assisi so that “ . . . contra Manfredum et Sarracenos predictos eorumque complices et fautores tamquam contra ipsius hostes fidei signum crucis assumant ... °°’ Ottobuono was also to select other suitable men to preach in those places. Men who helped to defeat Manfred were to receive indulgences. On the same day he wrote to Ottobuono, Urban appealed to the potestas, captain, counsel, and commune of Perugia to help the Church.

He informed them that Ottobuono was being sent to them.” The alliance of the Muslims of Lucera with Manfred was given center stage in a grave, nearly apocalyptic, portrayal of the threat posed to the Church: “Ecce legis Machometice professores sponsam Christi ecclesiam et fidem catholicam in ipsarum fundamento invadere ac concutere non pavescunt, dum e regni Sicilie finibus erumpentes, ipsius ecclesie patrimonium violenter ingressi...”

Urban told the perugini that the Church intended to expel “the noxious pest,” but that it required their help to do so. The presence of both the Muslims of Lucera and “infidels” in Manfred’s army helped Urban to justify not only a crusade, but also excommunications. On 20 July 1264, he launched an attack on several of Manfred’s supporters, declaring the excommunications of Giovanni de Marerio, Pandolfo d’Alabro

and others unless they, putting an end to their support for Manfred,, Presented themselves before him within a designated period of time.” Ur-

ban alleged that they had introduced an army of Muslims and other “infidels” into the lands of the Church. He accused them of directing forces “against the Catholic faithful.” To dissuade people from even considering offering help to Manfred, Urban threatened excommunica-

tions. On 1 August 1264, he declared anyone who aided Manfred ex-

Lucera under Manfred

135

communicated and anathematized.”” No assistance was to be provided in any form, including food, horses, or arms. The presence of Muslims in Manfred’s army was paradoxically convenient for Urban in that it made it easier for him to justify imposing punitive measures against Hohenstaufen supporters. Into the late summer, preparations for a crusade continued. To attract men from Tuscany and the duchy of Spoleto, Urban conceded the indulgence and the privileges of crusaders to those willing to help the Church.”' By early September 1264, Cardinal Simon de Brie had fixed the terms whereby Charles would be invested with the Sicilian crown, but many more provisions, both military and economic, had to be made before the actual invasion of the kingdom could be realized.” Urban died in October 1264 before seeing the outcome of his planning and labors. To Clement IV fell the task of executing the plan. On 20 March 1265, just over a month after being consecrated pope, Clement called for the preaching of a crusade against Manfred and his Muslim supporters.” Assaults were also planned against Muslims in other parts of the Mediterranean. On March twenty sixth, the pope made ar-

pa for the preaching of the cross against Muslims in Spain and rica. Clement used many of the same strategies which had been employed by his predecessors in order to mobilize people against Manfred. He told the count of Poitou that because of Manfred many inhabitants of the Sicilian kingdom had been massacred. Churches had been occupied, and prelates had been captured and sent into exile. Clement drew attention to Manfred’s association with the Muslims of Lucera. He wrote that first to the March and then to the Patrimony of Saint Peter Manfred had sent Muslim soldiers. The pope appealed to the count to commute his crusade vow to aid the Holy Land in favor of the Sicilian cause.” On 10 July 1265, Clement wrote to the priors of the Dominicans and to the guardians of the Franciscans throughout the March of Ancona, instructing them to preach the cross against Manfred.” Those who took the cross were promised indulgences.

Notes

1. Nicolaus de Jamsilla, “Historia,” col. 522; for an analysis of de Jamsilla

as a chronicler, see Salvatore Tramontana, “I cronisti e il senso della politica e della storia alla corte sveva di Sicilia,” A.S.S., ser. IV, 21-22 (1995-1996) 16-17. 2. Nicolaus de Jamsilla, “Historia,” col. 522.

136

Chapter Six

3. H.D.F-S., vol. 5, pt. 2, 882-883. 4. H.D.F-.S., vol. 5, pt. 2, 882-883. Saraceno is clearly Nicola’s last name

rather than an indication of his religious identity. 5. F.C.O.E. 154. 6. F.C.Q.E. 195, 199, 205, 214.

7. Van Cleve, The Emperor 305. Kantorowicz described Giovanni as the “gran camerlengo di Sicilia”: Kantorowicz, Federico 673. 8. De Stefano, La cultura 89.

9. Egidi, “La colonia,” A.S.P.N. 36 (1911): 613.

10. “Annales placentini gibellini, a. 1012-1317,” M4G.H'S., ed. George Pertz, vol. 18 (Hannovera, 1863) 507.

11. The bust is on display in Lucera’s Museo Civico Giuseppe Fiorelli. 12. Nicolaus de Jamsilla, “Historia,” col. 522. 13. Ibn Hawaal, “Kitab al-masalik wa’l-mamalik,” B.A.S., vol. 1, 20. Cf. Ibn Hawgal, Configuration de la terre (Kitab Surat al-ard), trans. J.H. Kramers and Gaston Wiet, vol. 1 (Beyrouth: Commission Internationale pour la traduc-

tion des Chefs-d’(Euvre, 1964) 121. 14. Ibn Jubayr, “Rihlat al-Kinani” 119.

15. H.D.F.S., vol. 5, pt. 1, 486-487; H.D.F.S., vol. 5, pt. 1, 602-603; H.D.F-S., vol. 5, pt. 2, 764; H.D.F-.S., vol. 5, pt. 2, 891. 16. Nicolaus de Jamsilla, “Historia,” col. 522. 17. Pope Innocent IV, Les registres d’Innocent IV, ed. Elie Berger, 2nd ser., vol. 3 (Paris: Ernest Thorin, Editeur, 1897) 318, no. 6997; Epistolae saeculi, vol. 3, 197, no. 230. 18. Nicolaus de Jamsilla, “Historia,” col. 533.

19. Nicolaus de Jamsilla, “Historia,” col. 533. 20. Epistolae saeculi, vol. 3, 301, no. 329. 21. Runciman, The Sicilian Vespers 30.

22. Epistolae saeculi, vol. 3, 305, no. 335. 23. Epistolae saeculi, vol. 3, 310-311, no. 342. 24. Nicolaus de Jamsilla, “Historia,” col. 542. 25. Nicolaus de Jamsilla, “Historia,” col. 542.

26. The Foggian Gate is still an important entry point to the city of Lucera. 27. Beverly Berg, “Manfred of Sicily and Urban IV: Negotiations of 1262,” Mediaeval Studies 55 (1993): 113. 28. Enrico Pispisa, // regno di Manfredi. (Messina: Editrice Sicania, 1991) 21. 29. Berg, “Manfred” 113.

Proposte

di interpretazione

: 30. Jordan, Edouard, Les origines de la domination angevine en Italie, 2

vols. (1909; New York: B. Franklin, 1960); Pispisa, // regno; Norman Housley; The Italian Crusades:

The Papal-Angevin Alliance and the Crusades agains!

Christian Lay Powers, 1254-1343 (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1982).

31. “Annales placentini gibellini” 507. 32. “Annales placentini gibellini” 507. 33. Nicolaus de Jamsilla, “Historia,” cols. 531.

Lucera under Manfred

137

34. Nicolaus de Jamsilla, “Historia,” cols. 53 1-532.

35. Grierson and Travaini, Medieval European 191. 36. Grierson and Travaini, Medieval European 191. 37. Nicolaus de Jamsilla, “Historia,” cols. 543-544. 38. ALL, vol. 2, 726-729, no. 1044.

39. Thérése Boespflug, “Alessandro IV,” Dizionario storico del papato, trans. Francesco Saba Sardi, ed. Philippe Levillain (1994; Milano: R.C.S. Libri & Grandi Opere, 1996) 29.

40. Historia diplomatica Regni Siciliae inde ab anno 1250 ad annum 1266, ed. Bartholomeus Capasso (Naples, 1874) 102-104, no. 210; Edmund was of course Henry’s son, not his brother, as Maier wrote: Maier, “Crusade” 348. For

Edmund’s investiture, see Simon Lloyd, English Society and the Crusade 12161307 (Oxford: Oxford UP, 1988) 224. 41. Lloyd, English 14, 15. 42. Lloyd, English 225-226. 43. Maier, “Crusade” 348; Annales de Burton, A.D. 1004-1263, Rerum britannicarum medii aevi scriptores, Rolls Series 36, Annales monastici, ed. Henry Richards Luard, vol. 1. (1864; Vaduz: Kraus Reprint Ltd., 1963) 352-353. 44, Matthew Paris, Cronica maiora 351. 45. Les registres D’Alexandre IV, vol. 1, 142, no. 483; Cf. Les registres D’Alexandre IV, vol. 1, 260-261, no. 873.

46. Muscio and Altobella described a period of “crisis” for Apulian agriculture after the conflicts of the mid-thirteenth century: Muscio and Altobella, “Natura vergine” 68. 47. Matthew Paris, Cronica maiora 354; Maier, “Crusade” 349. 48. Les registres D'Alexandre IV, vol. 1, 208, no. 684. 49. Les registres D’Alexandre IV, vol. 1, 208, no. 684.

50. Pispisa, // regno 23; Frederick was crowned King of Sicily in May 1198: Briihl, “Federico II” 17. 51. Abu ’l-Fida, “Kitab al-muhtasir” 106-107.

52. Berg, “Manfred” 126. 53. Berg, “Manfred” 119. 54. Pope Urban IV, Les registres d'Urbain IV (1261-1264), eds. MM. Léon Dorez and Jean Guiraud, 2nd ser., vol. 2 (Paris: Ancienne Librairie Thorin & Fils, 1901) 29-31, no. 94.

55. 56. 57. 58.

Berg, “Manfred” 111. Lloyd, English 222. Berg, “Manfred” 120. Berg, “Manfred” 119.

59. Pope Urban IV, Les registres, vol. 2, 125-126, no. 272.

60. Pope Urban IV, Les registres, vol. 2, 125-126, no. 272. 61. Pope Urban IV, Les registres, vol. 2, 390-393, no. 804. 62. Pope Urban IV, Les registres, vol. 2, 413-414, no. 859; Pope Urban IV, =)registres, vol. 4, 75, no. 2992; Pope Urban IV, Les registres, vol. 4, 74, no.

990,

138

Chapter Six

63. Maier, “Crusade” 350. 64. Maier, “Crusade” 350.

65. Pope Urban IV, Les registres, vol. 2, 306-307, no. 633 (307). 66. Pope Urban IV, Les registres, vol. 2, 306-307, no. 633 (307).

67. Pope Urban IV, Les registres, vol. 2, 414-415, no. 860. 68. Pope Urban IV, Les registres, vol. 2, 413-414, no. 859. 69. Pope Urban IV, Les registres, vol. 4, 74, no. 2990. 70. Pope Urban IV, Les registres, vol. 4, 75, no. 2992.

71. Pope Urban IV, Les registres, vol. 4, 75, no. 2991. 72. Berg, “Manfred” 134. _ 73. Pope Clement IV, Les registres de Clément IV (1265-1268), ed. M. Edouard Jordan (Paris: Thorin & Fils, Editeurs, 1893-1945) 451, no. 1444; Thesaurus novus anecdotorum, eds. Edmond Marténe and Ursino Durand (Lutetiae Parisiorum, 1717) vol. 2, cols. 70-73. 74. Pope Clement IV, Les registres 4-6, no. 15. 75. D.T.R.V., vol. 1, 282, no. 358; Pope Clement IV, Les registres 318-319, no. 817. 76. R.P.R., vol. 2, 1558-1559, no. 19252; Pope Clement IV, Les registres

500, no. 1751.

Chapter Seven

Angevin Lucera The Imposition of Angevin Rule Charles of Anjou received from the pope full and free license to enter the Kingdom of Sicily and to take possession of it in August 1265.' The taking of Sicily was not a reasonable possibility at that time, however. More funds had to be raised. Just a few days after giving Charles license, Pope Clement wrote to King Louis of France to recount the difficulties which Charles was facing for the Sicilian affair and to appeal for monetary aid.’ Clement himself had already borrowed money from Florentine merchants in order to help the count.’ This was not Clement’s first appeal to Louis; the pope had asked the king to confer aid upon his brother more than a month earlier.’ After arduous preparations, the plan was almost ready to be put into

action by the autumn of 1265. In September from Perugia, describing Manfred as the “persecutor” of the Church, Clement placed under his

protection all of Charles’ lands and the lands of those who were preparing to fight with him against Manfred and the Lucerine Muslims so that the Angevins and their followers could depart without worry. Anyone who disturbed the lands or persons of the combatants would be subject to excommunication.’ By mid-October, soldiers in the service of the papacy were beginning to mobilize. Clement ordered that all persons who opposed the passing of the militia through Lombardy be deprived of their beneficia, high offices, offices, honors, fiefs, and all other things which were held from the churches.° The pope presented Charles as the defender of the

140

Chapter Seven

Church, and he put the mission in grandiose terms: “ .. . Cum de transmontanis partibus, in quibus contra Manfredum quondam principem Tarentinum, et Sarracenos Lucerie, crucem predicari facimus, magna militia veniat in auxilium carissimi in Christo filii nostri Caroli, regis

Sicilie illustris, causam non tam propriam Christiani populi prosequentis ...”

quam

ecclesie et totius

Members of the mendicant orders and churchmen drummed up support for the campaign by preaching against Manfred. In early November 1265, Clement ordered the archbishops of Bourges, Narbonne, Sens, and Rouen as well as the prior of the Dominicans and the minister of the Franciscans, among others, to urge people to war against Manfred.’

In the late winter of 1266, the pope directed the bishop of Aubaine, the legate of the Apostolic See, to preach the cross against Manfred and Manfred’s supporters in the lands under his jurisdiction. He called attention in his letter not just to the hardships experienced by the churches, but also to those endured by the people of the Kingdom of Sicily. He made note that Manfred was supported by the Muslims of Lucera. Charles of Anjou was, by contrast, the “rex catholicus” under whom both the churches and people of the kingdom would be treated well: “... non solum ipsius regni liberationi viriliter et potenter intenderet, sed et favorabiliter predictas ipsius regni foveret ecclesias, et

incolas eosdem humane tractaret.”* Charles defeated Manfred in the Battle of Benevento on 26 February 1266. poaba Malaspina reported that 10,000 Muslims had fought for Manfred.'° Even prior to that victory, Charles had been crowned in

Rome along with his wife Beatrice.'' With Manfred’s fall, Lucera came under Angevin rule along with the rest of the kingdom.

Lucera’s Surrender

The gains made by the Angevins, particularly the victory over Manfred at Benevento, were recounted by Pope Clement in a letter sent to Otto-

buono in the early spring. Manfred had been killed, and his wife and children were being held within the confines of the castle at Trani. Moreover, the persons, property, and the city of Lucera itself had been made subject to Charles. Giving the cardinal a general update, Clement also reported that Charles had attacked San Germano which had been

fortified with Muslim soldiers.’ In mid-May 1266, Clement wrote to a number of cardinals to ask their advice regarding a few questions posed to him by Charles, among them how to proceed with respect to the Muslims of Lucera. = > Evi-

Angevin Lucera

141

dently, neither he nor Charles had decided to eliminate the Muslim col-

ony in the event of an Angevin victory. The pope’s solicitation of the cardinals demonstrates that the threat which the papacy had been determined to eradicate was Manfred. Manfred’s association with the

Muslims of Lucera had been targeted primarily for the purpose of propaganda. Andrew of Hungary reported the terms of Lucera’s surrender in 1266. He recorded that Charles forced the Muslims to destroy the city’s defenses but allowed them to continue practicing Islam.'* Andrew asserted that Charles received gold and silver from the colonists, a claim

which is confirmed by other sources. The issue of lucrative tributes would later be the target of criticism by Eudes of Chateauroux. In a crusade sermon against Lucera written in 1268 or 1269, Eudes asserted that the Muslims of Lucera had blinded Christians with money.’* In another sermon, he lamented that the colonists had not been forced to leave the

peninsula earlier, suggesting that an interest in profits and in potentially exploiting the Muslims was the reason why they had been allowed to stay when the city first came into Angevin hands.'® The lenient treatment of the Muslims of Lucera was also lamented in a poem by a Genoese poet and merchant named Calega Panzano." In his study of the poem, Vincenzo de Bartholomaeis upheld the belief that the piece was written between April and May 1268 prior to the defeat of Frederick’s grandson Conradin. Clearly, the poem was written before Charles laid siege to Lucera in 1269. Panzano contrasted the clemency shown to the Lucerines with Charles’ bellicose attitude towards many Christians. Calling them “dogs,” Panzano wrote that the Muslims of

Lucera were free to loudly proclaim the prophet’s name, a liberty which he clearly opposed:

Grecs ni Latins non pot ab lui trobar Trega ni paz; mas li can descrezen De Nucheira l’agron a lur talen; E podon be: “Bafumet!” aut cridar, Qar jes de Dieu ni de sancta Maria No iamostier, que non o suffriria

L’Apostolis, q’a mes en gran balanz La fe de Dieu; don sui meravillanz."®

Although the Lucerines were allowed to practice their religion, the early years of Angevin rule constituted a painful transitional period for the population at Lucera. Muslims who had fled north to Abruzzo during the conflicts of 1266 were reluctant to return to the city. Charles had

142

Chapter Seven

to call upon his barons for help in uprooting them.’? The heavy taxes imposed on the colony caused economic hardship for many and fueled resentment. Some Christian cities which had rebelled against the Angevins in 1266 did not fare as well as Lucera, perhaps because they were viewed as less economically or militarily significant. The uprising by the Sicilian port city Augusta which had a majority Christian population was violently crushed, for example. Like the colony at Lucera, Augusta had been founded by Frederick II, and its inhabitants were loyal to the Hohenstaufen. Throughout the kingdom, Charles confiscated and reassigned the properties which had once belonged to Manfred and his sup-

porters.”” Since Christian barons and monasteries were the primary landowners around Lucera, the shift to Angevin rule did not dramatically change

the established distribution of land. Property rights were largely upheld. The profitability of regional agriculture was recognized by Angevin rulers who carefully monitored levels of grain production, shipments, and sales.” The forests of Lucera and Troia were placed under the care of the castellan of Troia, a Christian named Pierre de Verberie.”” Under

Charles I, the colony continued to have an important military role. Andrew of Hungary’s assertion that Lucera’s walls, towers, and other defenses were destroyed is false.

Conradin’s Arrival in the Kingdom and the Rebellion at Lucera Many cities in Italy continued to harbor sympathy for the Hohenstaufen dynasty even after the Angevin conquest. When the news spread that Frederick’s grandson Conradin had come to Italy in 1267 to claim the throne, the kingdom was once again thrown into turmoil. Assaults were made against Angevin sympathizers in various parts of the kingdom, often with disastrous and costly results. The lands of Angevin support-

ers in Aidone, Sicily were burned.” Of the many who had been forced to flee Aidone, only some would return many years later. The repercussions of the pillaging and havoc wrecked in the kingdom would trouble the Angevins for years. After going back to their homes, the people of Aidone could not afford to pay their taxes. Charles agreed to reduce the number of gold ounces due each year for a four-year period.” His concession was made almost nine years after the Battle of Tagliacozzo. The famine, disease, and death which plagued Sicily because of the conflicts in 1268 was reported by Bartolomeo da Neocastro. His ac-

Angevin Lucera

143

count is confirmed by a number of other sources, including the Angevin Registers. Bartolomeo described the grim conditions as follows: “... invalescente guerra, validae, et ineffabiles caristiae, mortes et pestilentiae surgunt in Siculos, et quamplura ex locis ipsis desolationes passa sunt. In nemoribus et desertis locis, fame vel compulsi proeliis, homines moriuntur; deficiunt sepulturis in locis ipsis cadavera; rapinae in divites, mortes et insidiae parantur in miseros.”” The Lucerines staged a full-scale rebellion against the Angevins to which the papacy responded quickly and forcefully. Clement IV instructed Cardinal Rodolfo Grosparmi to preach a crusade against the Muslim colony in February that year.”° As Maier observed, it was the first crusade called specifically against Lucera.”’ Just as Frederick Il had looked to the powerful and wealthy monastery of Montecassino for support against the Muslim rebels of Sicily, Clement IV sought the backing of the monastery’s abbot for a campaign against Lucera.” The pope put two men, Rodolfo Grosparmi and Eudes of Chateauroux, in charge of drumming up support for a crusade against the Muslim city.” The cardinal of Tusculum, Eudes had been charged in 1245 with preaching in France in support of Louis IX’s crusade to Egypt.”° He had also delivered the sermon at Charles’ coronation in Rome in 1266.*' Between 1268 and 1269, Eudes wrote three powerful sermons against the Muslims of Lucera, all of which were transcribed and studied by Christoph Maier.” It is not known where or precisely when Eudes delivered the sermons. In his crusade sermons, Eudes of Chateauroux made accusations

similar to those levelled decades earlier against the Muslims fighting for Frederick Il. He charged the Lucerine Muslims with abducting married Christian women, robbing women of their virginity, and forcing women into concubinage: “ .. . virgines deflorabant et Christianis suas uxores auferebant, sibi eas infelici concubinio coniungentes ...” Such charges were designed to play on Christian fears of a violent destruction

and profanation of Christian society by Muslims. In order to incite people against the colony, Eudes also wrote about the alarming possibility of an alliance between the Lucerines and foreign Muslim powers, writing, “O Christe, vox sanguinis filiorum tuorum, id est Christianorum,

quem fuderunt impii Sarraceni et patres eorum et ad hoc adhuc parati sunt et etiam introducere Sarracenos transmarinos, excitet te ad vindicationem et move non tam terram sed et celum expelle eos destrue ...””* A crusade against Conradin was called in 1268.” Charles of Anjou and his men took vows to go on crusade against the Muslim colony

while at Viterbo for Easter that year.”° Guillaume de Villehardouin was appointed to command the forces in the offensive against Lucera.”’

144

Chapter Seven

Launched in May, the first assault failed because the troops had to be redirected mid-siege. Conradin had reached Rome. Guelf forces defeated Conradin’s men at the Battle of Tagliacozzo

on 23 August 1268. Conradin was taken captive and later executed by the Angevins in the market square at Naples.”* In October that year, Charles ordered the justiciar of Monte Sant’Angelo and Capitanata, Gérard de Moylans, to seize the sons and daughters of the “traitors,” that is, Christians in northern Apulia who had participated in the uprisings. The officer was to put under guard and record the names of all persons taken.’ Despite such dramatic developments, the Muslims at Lucera refused to surrender to the Angevin king. Having gained access to Lucera’s castle, they were armed.“

Charles called on numerous cities in the kingdom for men and money to put down the uprising at Lucera. He even made demands on

communities as far away as Amalfi.“’ In an order to the justiciar of Principato, the king mandated that one man from every hearth, along with a servant and one horse, be sent to fight the Lucerine Muslims.’ Barons and crossbowmen were summoned to a camp set up near Lucera, and the construction of ballista and catapults was arranged.” Supplies were brought to his army by ship as well as by land.“ The extent of the operation is known not only through the numerous instructions and pay orders; when archaeologists from Oxford went to Apulia in 1949, they found the remains of a medieval military camp outside the city, a camp which was surely built during the long siege of Lucera in 1269. While the uprising was in full swing, bands of Muslim rebels traveled to areas quite far from the colony, leaving behind them a beaten and scorched path. The king had to reduce the collecta due from the casale of Boiano where few people had remained after an attack by Muslims.*° A raid made on Ariano Irpino in 1268 or 1269 was men-

tioned by Eudes of Chateauroux in one of his sermons.” Assaults by the Lucerines caused the inhabitants of a settlement at San Eleuterio to flee

their homes.** Only after Angevin forces had later secured the area did they askfor and receive permission from the king to return to their settlement.”” The lands closest to Lucera were hit hard. The vicar general in Tuscany, Jean Britault de Nangis, held lands in Capitanata near the city which were left “impoverished” and semipopulated after assaults by the colonists.” Angevin sympathizers who fell into the hands of the Lucerines were

not treated with leniency. Perhaps as a warning, Muslims mutilated the left hand and nose of a woman of Capitanata, Paschasia, who aided the king.”' Charles later ordered that she and her family members not be

Angevin Lucera

145

made to pay a number of taxes, grateful as he was to persons who “for

the exaltation of our name . . . do not avoid subjecting even their own persons to grave dangers.” The punishments which were meted out by the crown to Hohenstaufen supporters in the kingdom were similarly harsh. Several rebels from various parts of the peninsula met gruesome fates. While the siege of Lucera was still under way, Charles ordered that the eyes of a captured insurrectionary, Matteo da Vallone, be extracted.” Matteo was later dragged and hanged within his native city of Salerno.” The orders issued by Charles I during the siege of Lucera were pragmatic in nature. They were not designed to generate support or to serve as a rallying cry. When the king used derogatory language, he usually focused not on the religious identity of the colonists, but on the fact that they were rebels or traitors. They were his enemies not because they were “infidels,” but because they were guilty of treason. Regularly,

Charles called them “proditores.”** The Christians who had supported Conradin had been referred to with the same term.” The writing of damning rhetoric against the colonists as Muslims was largely left to churchmen like Eudes of Chateauroux. During the winter of 1269, there were skirmishes between Angevin forces and the Lucerine Muslims at Foggia where Angevin soldiers had gathered. A certain Giovanni Malabranca lost a horse during a conflict with Muslims at that city.°° The Angevin army remained there into the spring.” At Lucera the colonists managed to stave off Angevin forces

for months. Conscription was stepped up throughout the kingdom. On 16 February 1269, Charles instructed his justiciars to oblige one man from each household to fight against the Muslims of Lucera or, alternatively, to contribute one augustale to the military effort.** Households located in lands which had rebelled in favor of Conradin were required to pay extra—two augustales each.” Nobles such as Andrea da Capua were drawn into the campaign.” They received monetary compensation for their expenses. The king ordered the justiciar of the Terra di Lavoro and the county of Molise to command all counts, barons, and fief hold-

ers owing service to the crown to come to the army prepared with horses and arms.°' Less affluent men were to bring what they could, even spades and pickaxes. A gathering was scheduled at Troia fifteen days after Easter.” Prisoners were taken and exchanged by both sides during the conflict. In March 1269, arrangements were made to exchange two Muslim

prisoners held at Troia for three Christian hostages detained at Lucera.”” Captured Muslims were also transferred northeast to the Gargano and to other areas. On 28 April 1269, the castellan of Monte Sant’Angelo was

146

Chapter Seven

instructed to receive and to guard carefully three Muslim prisoners: Liwan, Muta, and Giovanni.™ Even the son of the ga ‘id Ibrahim was held

for a period at Monte Sant’ Angelo.” Charles made a strategic decision to cut off all food supplies to Lucera. Animals and foodstuffs within a thirty-mile radius were removed.” Sheep belonging to the monastery of San Giovanni “de Gualdo” were poached by the colonists, only to be confiscated later by Angevin soldiers. The monastery appealed to the crown for the restitution of its animals during the summer of 1269.°’ Food became so scarce that, according to Saba Malaspina, the Lucerines resorted to eating grass. In a letter to the justiciar of Capitanata dated 14 March 1269, Charles lamented that Muslims were still able to acquire animals by going to remote places. They may have stolen or secretly purchased food from Christians. The king ordered the justiciar to check whether there were still animals near Lucera. Any found were to be seized. Local people were to help enforce the interdict; the king ordered that the universitates have passes and other places surveyed day and night. People were to seize and to detain Muslims in transit as well as their foodstuffs.” Problems with provisioning also troubled the Angevin army. In March 1269, Charles ordered the magister iuratus of Barletta not to allow grain and barley to be extracted from that city either by sea or by land, unless the products were destined for Foggia to be sold for the army’s use.” A number of towns and cities in southern Italy were forced to send grain to the army. Naturally, larger cities like Melfi had to give more. In the early spring, Melfi is recorded as having to supply 250 salmae whereas smaller towns like San Felice were expected to give only fifty salmae.”! Towns and cities, many experiencing grain shortages themselves, resisted the king’s demands. The universitas of Corato was unable to provide its quota of grain.” Charles had no choice but to cut the amount due from Corato in half, postponing the consignment of the rest. The people of Matera never did send the provisions demanded from them. Almost two years later, to avoid paying punitive levies, they appealed directly to the king, citing the distance of their own city from Lucera. Charles spared them the penalty. The city of Naples was excused from sending fodder to the army, possibly for the same reason. Military preparations mounted during the late spring and summer of

1269. On May eleventh, Charles ordered the justiciar of the Land of Bari to have purchased or made 500 lances for men on horseback and another 500 for men on foot for the army at Lucera.” The same justiciar

|5ial

Angevin Lucera

147

had to send a number of materials in preparation for a siege, including hemp, rope, chamois leather, and iron.” One hundred carpenters from the Land of Bari went to the army, and they were paid for their expenses.”” Wall builders and persons skilled in brick making from Barletta and Trani were also called.” the castrum of San Giacomo near Lucera became the Angevin base.” On 17 July 1269, Charles wrote to the magister iuratus of Melfi, ordering him to send six carpenters along with their tools and grindstones for sharpening to San Giacomo “pro laborandis operibus Curie.” The high costs of the operation forced Charles to ask the Church for a moratorium on his payment of the census. Pope Clement had died in late November 1268, and a successor had not yet been chosen. In June

1269, the king therefore appealed to the College of Cardinals.*” He owed 8,000 gold ounces, but given the task of suppressing the rebels, he had no choice but to delay making payment until later that year. Low on food and under siege, the Muslims surrendered before the end of August 1269. As the Chronicon Marchiae Tarvisinae et Lombardiae noted, hunger was a key factor behind their surrender: “Anno Domini 1269, post longam obsidionem rex Karolus obtinuit Nuceriam rebellantem. Nam, deficientibus victualibus, Saraceni, attenuati fame, civitatem et se ipsos regis dominio tradiderunt.”* The takeover was not without bloodshed. John of Tayster, a monk of Bury St. Edmund’s, reported that 3,000 Lucerine Muslims were slain

in 1269. The Chronicon Marchiae Tarvisinae et Lombardiae stated that Christians who had joined the Muslims during the rebellion were put to death.” To the custodian of the mountain passes of the Terra di Lavoro and Abruzzo, Charles boasted that the Muslims of Lucera “.. . ligatis in gula corrigiis, prostrati ad terram, colla ipsorum nostro jugo submiserint. Immediately after the surrender, controls on people wishing to leave the kingdom were imposed.** Soldiers rounded up arms at Lucera which had been seized from the castle. Weapons were redeposited inside the fortification under the watchful eye of Christian castellans, and inventories were prepared.®* The king arranged for the transport of items to the castle, and he filled it to the hilt with armed men.°

The Aftermath of the Rebellion

Having suppressed the rebellion and having crushed any hopes of a Hohenstaufen resurgence by putting Conradin to death, Charles accepted the Muslim pledges of obedience. He issued a statement defining

148

Chapter Seven

the status of Muslims in the realm. They were his servi, and their property belonged to him and to his heirs. The king did not try to obstruct the observance of Islam in the city. He explicitly ordered his officials not to subject the Muslims to laws other than their own.” Such concessions of religious freedom and internal autonomy were similar in principle to the allowances which had been made by Frederick II and other Christian rulers when dealing with subjugated Muslim populations. Reconquered Muslim communities in the lands of Aragon, for example, were often allowed to continue observing their religion and laws, at least during the thirteenth century.”’ Given the seriousness of the resistance at Lucera and the damage which the rebellion had caused, though, Charles can been viewed as having acted with some

moderation in 1269. The colony was left intact. Jean Dunbabin’s assertions that the Muslim rebellion against Charles “caused this famous community to lose its right to live as a body” and that most “of the men were resettled around Naples” are ungrounded.” Nor is there any evidence that Muslims were denied the right to convert to Christianity so that they could be later used as soldiers.”' Charles’ decision not to expel the Muslims from the kingdom in 1269 should be understood in the light of the social and political context of the late 1260s. The rebellion of the Lucerine Muslims came at a time when the sultan Baybars was systematically taking over the possessions of the crusader states, including Antioch, which came into

Muslim hands in 1268.” Charles planned to assist his brother Louis IX who had made public his plans to go on another crusade in March 1267.” The serious social and economic problems which were rampant throughout the Kingdom of Sicily also demanded Charles’ attention. The recent upheaval, not just at Lucera but in many other cities, had dealt a severe blow to the financial and general stability of the realm. The king had been busy trying to resolve problems of famine in Italy

even before the rebellion was crushed.” The idea of expelling Lucera’s farmers and destroying a potential tax base did not make much sense. The king’s decision not to dismantle the settlement testifies to Lucera’s value for the crown and to Charles’ own interest in stabilizing the kingdom as quickly as possible.

Giambattista Gifuni linked Charles’ tolerant approach toward the defeated Lucerine Muslims to their military value, asserting that the king “ ... riconosceva |’importanza di questa colonia di prodi guerrieri cosi da volerne fare, seguendo l’esempio degli Svevi, un vigoroso pun-

tello per il suo Regnum.” The king did have an ambitious political agenda. The reputation of the Lucerine Muslims as skilled warriors had only been confirmed by the Muslim rebellion. A desire to preserve a

Angevin Lucera

149

military resource could have indeed been a factor if and when Charles contemplated dismantling the colony at the time of the insurrection.

Gifuni stated that political considerations had greater importance for the king than religious ones, but given Charles’ plans to go on crusade, that assertion may be mistaken.” Charles demanded heavy monetary payments from the colonists. So burdensome were the levies that they were unable to raise all the funds. In February 1270, the king ordered the justiciar of Capitanata to collect 2,000 ounces of gold from the Muslims, only half of what he had origi-

nally hoped to receive from them.” He remitted the rest. Despite such reductions, the tax burden remained cumbersome. Many sought to escape the circumstances by leaving the city. In 1270 orders were issued to the justiciars of the Land of Otranto, the Land of Bari, and Basilicata

that all Muslim fugitives be forced to go back to the colony.” Nevertheless, Muslims continued to try to resettle in other parts of the kingdom,

including the island of Sicily.” In September 1271, the king issued a general order to his justiciars, much like the one which had been issued by Frederick in 1239: all Muslims must be sent back to Capitanata.'”” Muslim flight continued for many years. Muslims left in the hope of bettering their economic situations and/or avoiding doing the manual labor required for the construction of the Angevin fortress. Charles repeatedly told his officials to force those who had left to return.'°' On 21 September 1275, the justiciars of the regno were ordered to make all

Muslims who had left the colony without permission go back.'” In 1276 orders prohibiting Muslims from sojourning outside Lucera were reissued." A number of Muslims had established themselves in Calabria. On 15 February 1276, the barons and fief holders of that region were ordered to force the Muslims staying on their lands, along

with their family members and goods, to return to Lucera.'™ On that occasion, the Muslim fugitives were apparently farmers, not merchants. They had probably migrated southward in search of tax relief just as in Norman Sicily Muslims are known to have fled royal lands for those of magnates and churches. Many Christians who did not enjoy complete freedom of movement also attempted to relocate during the 1270s. The vassalli of the knight Giacomo da Ripa, for example, abandoned their

settlement.'”° Like the Lucerine Muslims, many Christians who had rebelled in favor of Conradin were penalized financially. A document dated 28 May 1268 reveals that the community of Corato was forced to make monetary payments because it had rebelled.'°° By December 1268, the number of hearths in that city had declined. Charles seized and kept or redistributed the wealth and property of many of his opponents.'°’ A

150

Chapter Seven

number of people from Trani had rebelled, and they were punished by having their properties confiscated.'* After Conradin’s defeat, French knights and lords were granted extensive properties in Apulia, some of which had been taken from the defeated supporters of the Hoheneae * Knights from Provence were among the main beneficiar-

s.|'° The king’s son, Charles of Salerno, was conceded properties in carter Apulia, including lands in Lesina and the territories of Monte Sant’ Angelo.''! Christian communities and individuals who had failed to provide assistance during the siege of Lucera were punished with heavy fines. In December 1270, the justiciar of Principato was instructed to force people at Trevico to pay 200 gold ounces for having failed to deliver fod-

der.''* The community of Frigento had to pay 114 gold ounces for the same reason.' The men of Minori were to come up with 100 augustales since no one from the 100 hearths in their community had joined the army at Lucera.''* Even as late as 1286, some communities were still paying for not having met their obligations during the rebellion. In January of that year, the people of Ostuni in Apulia were allowed to postpone paying a punitive levy, but only for four months. oi In addition to taxing the Lucerine Muslims, not long after suppressing the rebellion, Charles instituted measures designed to increase agricultural production. The justiciar of Capitanata was ordered to send 204 Muslim men and just as many women to perform services or labors in

the massarii of the crown.''® The colonists were probably destined for massarii within Capitanata. In 1270 the king told the magistri massarii of Capitanata, Basilicata, and the Land of Bari to increase the cultiva-

tion of his lands.'"”

There is some evidence that groups of Muslims from Lucera occasionally caused small-scale disturbances after the rebellion was suppressed, but no major uprisings took place again. In August 1278, San Severo’s inhabitants appealed to the king for greater protection against

the colonists. San Severo is located only about twenty kilometers from Lucera. When its inhabitants asserted that they were being harassed by their Muslim neighbors, Charles ordered the justiciar of Capitanata to

take steps to prevent such abuses from happening." An isolated incident of banditry occurred eight years later; in March 1286, merchants from Montecorvino and Casale Andriaco appealed for a return of goods which they had had to abandon because of a Muslim incursion. ~ Most of the precedents established by Frederick II with respect to landownership and use at Lucera continued to be upheld by Charles I.

In February 1275, the vice cancellarius of the kingdom sent Angelo della Marra along with the cleric Jean des Essards to find and bring to

Angevin Lucera

15]

the royal court written materials stored inside the castles of Lucera and

Canosa which documented the exchanges made between Frederick II and lords and churches. He wanted records of the alienationes, or transfers of property ownership,

the rents, the decisions

made

against

churches and private persons, and all registers and quaterni of the col-

lecta from Frederick’s reign to be retrieved.'”” The Angevins would refer to those documents when disputes arose.

The Staff of Lucera’s Castle and Fortress

In 1269 the castle at Lucera was by far the most heavily manned site in Capitanata. The figures recorded in November that year reveal that the crown had inundated Lucera with personnel:

7.1 Number of Castellans, Gatekeepers, and Servientes at Sites in

Capitanata in 1269 Location

Rocca Sant’Agata Monte Sant’ Angelo Lucera Bovino Troia Ordona Pantano (palace)

Number of Castellans Number of Servientes

1 castellan 1 castellan 2 castellans 1 gatekeeper 1 gatekeeper 1 gatekeeper 1 gatekeeper

Source: R.C.A., vol. 3, reg. 12, 74-75, no. 443.

20 20 100 0 0 0 0

ee

152

ik

Chapter Seven Number of Castellans, Gatekeepers, and Servientes Sites in Capitanata in 1269

at

Rocca Sant'Agata Monte Sant'Angelo Lucera

[i

Bovino Troia

Ordona

{

Pantano

{|

Predominantly Christian, the paid staff of Lucera’s castle in 1269 was five times greater than that of any other fortification in Capitanata. Twice the number of castellans were employed at Lucera. Moreover, the number of men in the colony’s castle exceeded that of any castle in the Land of Bari, including the strategic port fortifications at Trani and Bari.'*' In fact, the combined personnel of the two Apulian port cities did not match the number of men assigned to Lucera.'”* The servientes (sergeants) of castles were not domestic servants. They played an im-

portant role in guarding fortifications.'? The staff at Lucera was steadily reduced in the following decades. In 1303 after the destruction of the Muslim colony, the number of people employed was smaller than ever before. Within a decade of suppressing the Muslim rebellion, Charles I cut the number of servientes at Lucera’s castle. The decrease was made despite the fact that in the 1270s the king had erected an enormous fortress compound around the Hohenstaufen castle. In February 1278 only sixty men were employed there, though the number of staff still exceeded the numbers of other fortifications, palaces, and royal domus in Capitanata.'** The elimination of forty paid sergeants at Lucera appears

to have been possible because as many as 100 people from Provence had been transferred to the site. Of note is the fact that whereas in 1269 no chaplain was on the payroll at Lucera, by 1278 one was.'”” Charles | increased the Christian presence at Lucera, but he did not fund a military build-up in Capitanata as a whole during the 1270s. The number of servientes employed at Rocca Sant’ Agata and the castle of Monte Sant’Angelo in 1278 remained steady at twenty servientes per site.'° Two domus which were not mentioned in the document of 1269

appear in the report of 1278, but they were simply royal residences, not

Angevin Lucera

153

fortifications. Each was staffed by a single keeper. Bovino was listed in the report of 1269, but not in that of 1278. The building and staffing of the fortress at Lucera evidently had the twofold purpose of enhancing a strategic military base and of bringing greater stability to the inhabitants of northern Apulia. The steady diminution of the staff assigned to Lucera’s castle after 1269 suggests that, although during the early Angevin period security at Lucera was deemed a concern, the city gradually came to be viewed as stable. Under Charles II, the staff assigned to Lucera’s fortification was reduced by another ten persons.'”” A royal order issued in July 1289 mentioned one castellan, forty servientes guarding the old castle, and ten servientes

assigned to the fortress gate.” The castrum vetus was the structure originally built by Frederick II. The figures for February 1296 were similar: forty servientes surveying the castle and ten on guard at the gate, in addition to the castellan.'”” By the summer of 1298, the fortress staff had been reduced even further. In addition to the castellan, there were only twenty-five servientes and eight men in charge of guarding the gate.’ The elimination of seventeen posts is explained by the negligibility of local security risks at that time. The number of staff at the fortification remained constant in 1299."*' After the removal of Muslims from the city, Charles II did not change the number of persons assigned to man the fortress right away.’ No changes in the number of employees were recorded in No-

vember 1300. By 1303 Muslims had long been removed from Lucera. The number of men assigned to guard the city’s fortress that year was lower than it had been in over thirty years, perhaps lower than ever before. One castellan and fifteen servientes protected the fortress in 1303 whereas only four men were assigned to the gate.'”? A cut was possible in 1303 for two reasons. First, the removal of Muslims from the city had diminished the need for an armed Christian presence at the site. Secondly, since the

Treaty of Caltabellotta had been forged the previous year, fewer staff persons were needed to coordinate the storage and safeguard of muni-

tions for the War of the Sicilian Vespers.

Chapter Seven

154

Number of Servientes Assigned to Lucera's Castle and the Fortress, Not Including the Castellan(s)

Servientes

10 1265

1270

1275

1280

1285

1290

1295

1300

1305

Year

The Settlement of Christians from Provence at Lucera

After subduing the Muslim rebellion, Charles I clearly hoped life would resume its normal functions. He did put into action an elaborate new plan. He organized the settlement of Christian colonists at Lucera. As mentioned, Christians had been well established in the city before it was chosen by Frederick II as the destination for the Muslims of Sicily. The diocese of Lucera continued to operate even after the arrival of the Muslims, but the local Christian population suffered both displacement and general decline. The bishop of Lucera was depicted in the Angevin Registers as living in a state of impoverishment in 1296,'"* Whether Charles I really intended to Christianize Lucera or simply

calculated that increasing the Christian presence would minimize the

risk of another uprising, he went to great lengths to bring settlers to the city, granting oxen and land for farming to persons who were willing to relocate.'* In the mid-1270s, the bishop of Sisteron and others helped to coordinate efforts by contacting men in Provence who, along with

their families, might move to Apulia.'?® Church officials were employed

in financial and other capacities by the Angevins. Given that Lucera had

Angevin Lucera

155

a majority Muslim population, the bishop’s involvement could nevertheless be an indication that the recruitment of settlers involved an appeal to the Christian missionary impulse. There are a number of documents which demonstrate that economic incentives were offered to

potential colonists, but there is no evidence that appeals were made on religious grounds, however. Most of the Christian settlers who went to Lucera came from Provence.'’’ The justiciar of Capitanata was responsible for receiving

them.'* The king launched a major building project in order to expand the castle erected earlier by Frederick II. Bricks and other materials were hauled to Lucera from various cities in southern Italy in order to build the walls of a large fortress. If set in a straight line, the brick walls which were built under Charles I would extend a distance of roughly 800 meters. Inside this bastion, about 128 houses were built to accom-

modate the Christian settlers.'°? In his article “Le fortificazioni angioine nella Capitanata,” Nunzio Tomaiuoli emphasized the military function of the fortress, but he did not consider the role of the community of men, women, and children

which came to live within its walls.'“° He associated the visible remains of dwellings within the fortress compound with soldiers’ quarters without mentioning that numerous civilians also lived there.'*' In the light of the fact that most of the Provengal settlers were not military personnel, the statement that“... nella fortezza. . . il tutto era organizzato sui ritmi di una caserma militare” would be an exaggeration.“ Had Charles’ aim been solely to fortify the castle, manning it with soldiers would have sufficed. A list compiled in November 1277 of seventy-five persons who had come from Provence mentioned numerous

women and children.'*’ In fact, twenty-nine of the seventy-five people

were female. At least one settler convinced his mother to relocate with

the family.'“* During the winter of 1276 two brothers, Guillaume de la Tour and Jean de la Carevigne, along with others, moved their households inside the fortress.'** The justiciar of Basilicata was ordered in January to pay the settlers the money due to them lest they leave the settlement. © Between built.

1277 and 1278, twenty-four new houses were

The relocation of entire families to Lucera reveals the king’s intent to establish a permanent Christian community at Lucera, one which

would reproduce itself. The Provengal colony was primarily agrarian. The “novi habitatores . . . fortelicie” cultivated vines and gardens as

well as grain.'“® The area inside the fortress was frequented by Muslims, At least limited commercial exchanges between members of the

two communities took place there.'”

156

Chapter Seven

People were still being recruited in Provence in the late 1270s. The seneschal of Provence was ordered to find and send 100 families to Lucera in 1279. To allure prospective settlers, he was to assure them that the land at Lucera was fertile, that there were abundant woods and waters, and that they would enjoy special immunities and privileges with

respect to such resources.'”°

In order to have a self-contained Christian community within the fortress, a suitable chapel was needed. In 1270 Charles ordered that money be used to purchase decorations for the chapel which already existed inside Lucera’s castle. Three gold ounces from a levy on hearths

were to be given to the chaplain, Giovanni.'*' The construction of a new

chapel was later arranged. It was almost finished in the late 1270s. In August 1279, the justiciar of the Land of Bari was charged with purchasing planks of either elm or ash which would be used for making the chapel’s doors and windows.'” The justiciar of Capitanata was told in December 1279 to bring the construction of the building swiftly to completion, but work on it was still being carried out the following year.” Colored glass from the Terra di Lavoro was delivered in 1280 for the windows, as it would be for the panes of the chapel of the castle at Bari.’ The fortress captain, Yvon de Levé, received the shipments of glass.'*° In the early 1280s, the chaplain of the old castle of Lucera was Richard de Saint-Denis.'*° Referred to as the hostiarius, he was paid for his services.'°’ The fortress remained a focal point for Christian practice at Lucera even after the Provencal population had declined in num-

bers.’ In August 1294, the chaplain and another cleric were assigned antler from the treasury stored inside Lucera’s castle.’ The divine sacraments were celebrated in the fortress in 1296.'° The newly formed community was troubled by a low level of criminality, particularly theft. The transitional period in which the fortress was under construction saw the highest number of infractions. While staying at Lucera, the priest Giovanni da Barletta was robbed of a horse and two asses. The knight Geoffroy de Bois Guillaume, the praepositus of the work on the fortress, was held responsible. He was ordered to

return the animals.'*' In the spring of 1279, some French inhabitants of

the fortress stole the horses of the expensores of the works on the fortress walls and cistern.' On one occasion, a Christian at Lucera was killed under dubious circumstances, apparently by a Muslim. The murder of the French sergeant at Lucera in 1274 brought a heavy fine of 100 gold ounces upon the whole community. In addition, the Lucerines were obliged to repair

a cistern inside the castle.'® The strain which this sentence caused for

Angevin Lucera

157

the universitas was so great that the Muslim community appealed to the king for leniency. He responded by instructing his justiciar to desist, at least until further notice, from demanding labor for the cistern.!™ Fortress officials were responsible for the administration of justice within the compound. Since such officials had jurisdiction over the Provencal immigrants, Muslims were generally not appointed to those

offices. After Yvon de Levé, the knight Guillaume de Grollet served as the fortress captain.'® In the early 1280s, the position was held by a man named Guillaume de Malassis.'® The procurator, or fiscal officer, of the inhabitants of the fortress during the reign of Charles I was a certain Tonino Saraceno, possibly a convert to Christianity from Islam.'®’ He may have been chosen for that position because of his ability to act as an intermediary between the Christian immigrants and the Muslims. Tonino handled financial matters which affected members of the Provencal community. When some Christian settlers died without legitimate heirs in 1279, for example, he made arrangements for the oxen

which they had left behind.'® The Provengal population waned after the death of Charles I. Some of the Provencal immigrants probably returned to their homeland while others evidently relocated to other parts of Apulia. A migration seems to have taken place at some point from Lucera to the towns of Faeto and Celle in Capitanata where the influence and perseverance of FrancoProvencal language and culture are evident.” Both Rivoire and Gifuni

concluded that Provencal settlers left Lucera for the Valle del Celone.'”” Michele Melillo has presented a theory that the present-day populations of Faeto and Celle are descended primarily from Provengal soldiers and their families who were rewarded with land after helping to defeat the Lucerine rebels in 1269.'”' Given the evidence, a migration from Lucera appears equally, if not more, likely.

The Construction of the Angevin Fortress The building of the Angevin fortress was meticulously documented by the German historian Eduard Sthamer.'” The materials published by Sthamer offer insight into the crown’s early plans for the colony and the Strategic role which Lucera played in the kingdom. Of massive proportions, the complex was a costly investment for the Angevin king, requir-

ing about a decade to complete.'” The fortress walls built during the reign of Charles I came to encompass roughly 47,000 square meters. In addition to the walls, bi and houses, a courtyard, towers, and a plumbing system were built.’

158

Chapter Seven

water-filled moat was dug around the fortification.'” People crossed over the moat by way of a bridge built before the entrance of the for-

tress.'"° The complex was designed with both the comfort and auton-

omy of the settlers, and of course the king, in mind. Cisterns within the

compound stored rainwater which was replenished by conduits.'”” Each house was linked to an aquaeductus made of wood which fed into the cisterns.'* Conduits underground were built with materials such as lime.'” As justiciar, Pierre de Souville helped to arrange the expansion

of the plumbing system in 1280.'*° Funds to pay for the materials and labor needed for the fortress came not only from Lucera and Capitanata but also from other cities and regions in southern Italy. In August 1274, the king ordered that the proceeds from the terragium, canon terrarum, and jizya levied at Lucera be used by the justiciar of Capitanata to supply barley to feed the

horses used to haul carts laden with stones.'*' In the late 1270s, a special collecta was raised at Lucera to pay for the castle’s cistern.” The monies were procured by a Christian official, Stefano Sorrentino da

Vico.'® Artisans from the Terra di Lavoro who went to Lucera to make paving tiles in the spring of 1276 were paid one month’s wages and expenses by the justiciar of their region.'™* In the autumn of 1271, the secreti of Principato, the Terra di Lavoro, and Abruzzo were busy pur-

chasing and transferring to Lucera as many as seventy oxen for the construction work.'** Communities outside Lucera also had to supply building materials. Charles ordered officials in the Land of Bari to fur-

nish lime and stones.'*° Bricks were transported from Fiorentino to the

construction site.'*” The outlay of money and resources for the fortress was enormous. In July 1275, money was sent to the praepositus of the work on the fortress, Geoffroy de Bois Guillaume, to pay for the construction of houses and other projects. Two hundred and fifty ounces were sent the fol-

lowing February for the work on the moat.'*’ A year later, the justiciar

of Capitanata was to furnish Geoffroy with 400 gold ounces for the ongoing construction work.'”° These are only a fraction of the many expenditures made. Despite the weight of the investment, problems arose inside the fortress as a result of poor construction. As early as August 1274, a cistern required repairs costing thirty gold ounces.'?' Houses and other structures had to be fixed.” A document dated 7 March 1278 mentions

eleven homes which had been wrecked by winds.'” In anger the king

wrote to the justiciar of Capitanata in late December, asserting that the negligence and fraud of the masters and poor work were to blame for

the shabby state of some fortress houses, Resolved that the responsible

Angevin Lucera

159

parties should be made to pay, the king ordered his official to exact from the individuals involved the entire quantity of money which had been originally given to them by the crown for the project. Each ruined

house was to be either rebuilt or repaired.'™ Unforeseen problems also arose for which no one was to blame. Large numbers of pigeons contaminated rain water during the summer of 1280. The maintenance of clean, potable water in the cisterns was obviously a serious matter. On the crown’s orders, people seized and

killed the birds.'””

Lucera’s inhabitants were responsible for the upkeep of the Angevin fortress as well as the castle built by Frederick II. In May 1296, Charles II wrote to the justiciar of Capitanata regarding repairs to the old castle. He noted that the necessary work could be carried out by both Christians and Muslims from the land of Lucera. Four people chosen from both religious groups were to inspect the castle along with the justiciar. A man who was esteemed highly by Christians and Muslims or by the justiciar himself was to receive the monies collected for the project.'”° The most important men who worked on the construction of the fortress complex were the renowned Angevin architect Pierre d’Angicourt and the engineer Jean de Tulle who was referred to in many documents of the 1270s as the iunior capitaneus (assistant captain) of the fortress

of Lucera.'”’ The most highly esteemed architect during the reign of Charles I, Pierre was involved in numerous projects throughout the regno.'”* He continued to be influential in Apulia as the lord of Montecorvino even after the completion of the fortress at Lucera.'” Riccardo da Foggia and Pierre d’Angicourt were the protomagistri (chief masters) of the work at Lucera.”” Both men were paid by the crown for their work. In 1273 Riccardo received one gold tarenus and five grana per day for his expenses.””’ This amount was increased the following spring to one and one-half tareni per day because a period of famine had made his pay inadequate.’” In addition to being compensated for his work at Lucera and in other parts of the kingdom, Pierre received from the king special rights, as indicated, over the land of Montecorvino west of Lucera.”” Geoffroy de Bois Guillaume, as noted, was the praepositus of the work on the fortress in 1275. By March of the following year, he had been promoted to the position of captain of the castle.“ He and the stipendiarii on horseback as well as the servientes on foot who stayed with him at Lucera received the gagia.”” The Angevins appointed Christians almost exclusively to serve as castellans. A provisor saw to the supervision and provisioning of Lucera’s castle, along with other fortifications in Capitanata and in Basili-

160

Chapter Seven

cata.’ The justiciar of Capitanata attended to the provision of the castellan’s wages which in 1294 were as high as four gold ounces per month.” An important castle official was the custos—the custodian or keeper of the camera. As noted, during the reign of Charles I, that position appears to have been held by a Muslim. Leaders of the Muslim community cooperated with Christian officials in finding men to do the labor required to build the fortress.”” The knight Riccardo was responsible for finding manual laborers to work on the fortress in the early 1280s.’” Mahdi was likewise charged with supplying manual laborers.”"° In addition to working on construction projects at Lucera, the colonists had to do labor elsewhere. In October 1278, Riccardo and Leone selected fifty Lucerine laborers for the work on the castle at Melfi. To Melfi the Lucerine community also sent fifty asses along with their conductores." Since Riccardo served as a foreman in the building project at Lucera when he was not deployed on military missions, when trouble arose with Muslim workers, he was responsible for intervening. On one

occasion, the magistri Sarraceni who were responsible for making bricks for a well inside the compound not only did not make the bricks but refused to give back the funds with which they had been provided to do so. Riccardo forced them to return the money.” The supply of skilled labor available in Capitanata was inadequate for the fortress project. As a result, artisans were sought in various parts of the kingdom. Brickmakers came from Abruzzo, Principato, and the

Land of Benevento.” French carpenters and wall builders worked on the walls.’'* In November 1273, six artisans from the Terra di Lavoro who specialized making glass windows were called to Lucera.”"> Artisans from that region were also hired to make tiles.”"° Skilled workers received wages. The men charged with building houses for the settlers received economic compensation for their la-

bor.””” In the late 1270s, builders, carpenters, and stonecutters received a daily pay of twelve, and later fifteen, grana.”"* Unskilled manual laborers received less: first five and then seven grana per day.””? French wall builders were reasonably compensated, receiving one gold ounce per month.” No deductions were made from their pay for designated holidays or for days missed due to serious illness.”' The receptores and expensores fiscalis pecunie paid the wages or expenses of men working on the project.” Abandonment by workers of the site without permission became a frequent occurrence, which suggests that working conditions were arduous and the financial compensation insufficient for many. In August 1274, the king ordered that brickmakers who had left the site be seized

Angevin Lucera

161

and led back to Lucera in chains. Worse, their wives and children were

to be bound with irons and brought to the city to labor on the project. The chains were not to be removed from them even after they had resumed their work at Lucera. To punish the men from Principato, the Land of Benevento, and Abruzzo further, Charles ordered that they not be given money for their expenses, only bread and water: “ . . . mandamus quatinus predictos magistros sub vinculis ferreis in ipso opere laborari faciatis, non dando eis aliquas expensas nisi tantum panem et aquam in pena... a The shackling of the men calls to mind the issue of slave labor, although they were not slaves. The limitation of their freedom was a form of punishment for their disobedience and their failing to execute the services for which they were responsible. Certain specialized skills were needed for brickmaking. As magistri, they had an obligation to provide their services the crown. Slavery did exist in the medieval kingdom, but slaves were not men-

tioned as constituting a significant part of the work force in any of the documents on the fortress because the slave population was not large enough tc meet the needs of a project on such a scale. A large slave class, such as the one which had existed during the Roman era, did not exist during the thirteenth century. Monumental constructions were built primarily by Christians and, in Lucera’s case, by both Christians and Muslims who, though they had no choice but to labor on such projects for little compensation, were not technically slaves. Despite the use of punitive measures against fugitives, the flight of workers remained a problem for the crown throughout the construction project. In the late 1270s, the labor shortage problem was compounded by the execution of other construction projects at a number of sites in the regno, including Brindisi, Barletta, Manfredonia, and Melfi.” In August 1278, responding to a complaint from the assistant captain of the fortress that men frequently left the work site at Lucera without li-

cense, the king ordered that such individuals be seized and then forced to work in fetters for one half of their normal wages. Moreover, he or-

dered Jean de Tulle to monitor the quality of the work being carried out. Men who came late or left early were to receive reduced pay.” On 8 December 1278, the justiciar of Capitanata was ordered to seize and send to the fortress the brickmakers who “furtive et inlicentiati ab ipsis operibus recesserunt ...””° Thejusticiars of Abruzzo and Basilicata also had to track down men. Wall builders from Lanciano and a brickmaker from Potenza had to be seized.”’ The justiciar of Abruzzo was told to lay hold of the wives, families, and property of the men from Lanciano if the men themselves could not be found.’ .When

162

Chapter Seven

a brickmaker named Ruggero who had fled from Lucera was sent back, the expensor of the work on the fortress refused to readmit him. After the crown intervened, Ruggero was sent once again to Lucera in March 1279 where he was forced to labor in fetters.”” Magistri from the Terra di Lavoro abandoned the work site in the spring of 1279.7°° The flight of workers continued during the spring and summer of 1280.””! The labor demanded from Lucera’s inhabitants in order to build the fortress likewise impelled many Muslims to leave. Muslim labor was so critical to the construction of the fortress that at one point Charles complained that emigration from the city was causing delays in the project: “|. . Sarracenos Lucerie, servos nostros, dimittentes proprium incolatum in diversis terris Capitanate cum eorum familiis commorari, et ob

hoc opus nostrum Lucerie retardatur quia laboratores et alii operarii inveniri non possunt ...””°? Even men in positions of authority, such as Pierre d’ Angicourt and

Riccardo da Foggia, had to request permission before they could leave the construction site. When Charles discovered in June 1274 that the two had respectively gone to Barletta and Foggia without the consent of the justiciar of Capitanata, he angrily informed them that they were in no way to leave Lucera without permission. Furthermore, he told them that their pay would be cut for the days which they had missed.’”

The Function of the Castle

The Muslim rebellion of 1269 did not change the castle’s function as a depository for armor and weaponry. Breast plates, iron mesh, helmets,

iron caps, and blades were among the items kept there in 1270.2" Inven-

tories were made and careful records were kept of items stored in Lucera’s castle as in other fortifications.”° At least some of the treasury was kept under guard inside Lucera’s castle; during the summer of 1294, Charles II ordered the captain of Lucera to assign antler stored “in

thesauro castri Lucerie” to the chaplain and others.“° Lead from Calabrian mines was kept inside the castle.”’ In April 1282, the king tapped into the lead deposit since it was needed for the windows of the

church and refectory of Santa Maria della Vittoria.“* According to Riccardo Filangieri, the castle of Lucera was one of the earliest depositories for Angevin archival materials.’ As noted, Hohenstaufen registers

were kept at Lucera.””° In 1286 Robert d’Artois issued an order to the castellan of Lucera regarding the bringing of /ibri from the castle.”"' Lucera’s castle also functioned as a prison. A number of Christians, including men from Foggia, were imprisoned there. A man named

Angevin Lucera

163

Pietro Mainardo and the notary Giovanni da Foggia were detained in the castle.” In May 1294, Charles II ordered the release of a man

named Giacomo da Gifoni.””? The nature of Giacomo’s crime is not known. He was evidently a wealthy individual since he had to pay 500

gold ounces before being released.” Probably for security reasons, Muslim detainees were usually transferred to castles far from the colony. In 1289 the castellan of Castel dell’Ovo in Naples was ordered to receive a number of Muslim captives, among whom was “Ibrahim, the brother of the bishop of the Saracens of Lucera.”””’ The “bishop” mentioned was probably Lucera’s gadi. Despite his brother’s position at Lucera, Ibrahim would not be freed for almost a decade; Bartolomeo da Capua drafted a letter to the

castellan at Naples calling for Ibrahim’s release in November 1298.7“ Tomaioli asserted that during the Angevin period the Hohenstaufen castle ceased functioning as a palace and began functioning as a cas-

trum."’ This statement is somewhat misleading since during the reign

of Frederick II Lucera’s castle, like other castles in the kingdom, actu-

ally had a double function: it was both a defensive fortification and a residence during royal visits to the city. It functioned as both a palatium and a castrum. One of the consequences of the double function was the use of both the labels castrum and palatium to describe the structure during the Middle Ages. The vast majority of references in official documents during both the Hohenstaufen and Angevin periods call the monument a castrum, however. Some documents clearly indicate that

the terms castrum and palatium were interchangeable, referring to structure as “palatium seu castrum.”™* The fortress complex built during the 1270s by Charles I was also

occasionally referred to as the castrum.’” Generally, the fortress was referred to as such with the Latin term fortelitia. Charles |and members

of his household lodged in a domus inside the Angevin fortress near the palatium; the king’s residence was described as being “‘in fortelicia castri nostri Lucerie iuxta palatium.’”*> The original palatium was therefore, at least for a period, not utilized as a residence by the Angevin

king to the same extent as it presumably had been by Frederick II.”*!

Tomaioli’s statement is therefore partly true. The construction of the Angevin fortress and the settlement of Provencal families within it demonstrates that Charles I intended to re-

introduce a Christian presence at Lucera. The king remained committed to the building project over many years even though it became an enormous burden not only for the local population, but for communities outside the region as well. In addition to being a step toward the Christi-

164

Chapter Seven

anization of Lucera, the creation of the fortress compound was an investment in a city of established strategic and military significance.

Notes 1. R.P.R., vol. 2, 2. R.P.R., vol. 2, 3. Pope Clement 4. Pope Clement

1563, no. 19318. 1563, no. 19321. IV, Les registres 454, no. 1460. IV, Les registres 324, no. 831.

5. C.D.R.C., ed. Giuseppe Del Giudice, vol. 1 (Napoli: Stamperia della R.

Universita, 1863-1902) 49, no. XV; Pope Clement IV, Les registres 456, no. 1472. The latter is a summary. 6. Pope Clement IV, Les registres 41, no. 164.

7. Pope Clement IV, Les registres 65, no. 240. 8. Pope Clement IV, Les registres 77-78, no. 297. 9. Porsia, “II periodo” 272; Dunbabin, Charles 4. 10. Saba Malaspina, “Rerum sicularum historia,” R./.S., ed. Ludovicus Antonius Muratorius, vol. 8 (Mediolanum, 1726) col. 826.

11. The coronation was held on 6 January 1266: Dunbabin, Charles 4. 12. D.T.R.V., vol. 1, 358, no. 463; Pope Clement IV, Les registres 375, no.

1035. 13. C._D.R.C., vol. 1, 141-143, no. XLVII; Pope Clement IV, Les registres

379, no. 1057. 14. Andrew of Hungary, “Descriptio victoriae a Karolo Provinciae comite reportatae,” M.G.H.S., vol. 26 (Hannovera, 1885) 559-580 (580).

15. “Crusade and Rhetoric against the Muslim Colony of Lucera: Eudes of ° Chateauroux’s Sermones de Rebellione Sarracenorum Lucherie in Apulia,” ed. Christoph Maier, Journal of Medieval History 21 (1995): sermon 1, 378, lines

84-86. 16. “Crusade and Rhetoric,” sermon 2, 380-381, lines 69-76. 17. Poesie provenzali storiche relative all’Italia, vol. 2, ed. Vincenzo de

Bartholomaeis (Roma: Istituto Storico Italiano per il Medio Evo, 1931) 250. A short biography of Panzano is on page LXXXVIII. 18. Poesie provenzali 254-255. 19. R.C.A., vol. 1, 19, no. 49. 20. Errico Cuozzo, “Modelli di gestione del potere nel Regno di Sicilia. La ‘restaurazione’ della prima eta angioina,” E.A. 522-526. 21. C._D.S.L., nos. 54, 79, 113, 306. 22. R.C.A., vol. 9, 70, no. 16; vol. 9, 70-71, no. 17; vol. 9, 72, no. 23. 23. R.C.A., vol. 15, reg. 77, 25-26, no. 108. 18 July 1277.

24. R.C.A., vol. 15, reg. 77, 25-26, no. 108. 25. Bartholomeo da Neocastro, Historia sicula, ed. Giuseppe Paladino (Bologna: Nicola Zanichelli, 1922) 7. 26. Housley, The Italian Crusades 19; Maier, “Crusade” 351.

Angevin Lucera

165

27. Maier, “Crusade” 351. 28. Maier, “Crusade” 351.

29. Maier, “Crusade” 351.

30. Housley, “The Thirteenth-Century Crusades” 579; Strayer, “The Crusades of Louis IX” 490. 31. Maier, “Crusade” 354, note 59. 32. Maier, “Crusade” 354. 33. “Crusade and Rhetoric,” sermon 2, 380, lines 63-64. 34. “Crusade and Rhetoric,” sermon 1, 379, lines 103-107.

35. J. Elisabeth Siberry, “Il movimento delle crociate dal 1198 al 1270,” Federico II e il mondo mediterraneo (Palermo: Sellerio Editore, 1994) 216. 36. Maier, “Crusade” 352.

37. Maier, “Crusade” 352. 38. He was beheaded on 29 October 1268. 39. R.C.A., vol. 1, reg. 6, 229, no. 155. 40. .C.A., vol. 3, reg. 13, 122, no. 165. 41. RCA., vol. 4, 33-34, no. 195. Communities in the Terra di Lavoro

which were unable to send men to aid Charles in the siege of Lucera were required to pay one augustale per month: R.C.A., vol. 1, 195, no. 18. 42. RC.A,, vol. 1, 209, no. 104. 43. CD.R.C., vol. 3, 50-51, no. XX; C.D.R.C., vol. 3, 63-65, no. XXVI.

44. R.C.A,, vol. 1, 243, no. 225. 45. Bradford, “The Apulia Expedition” 91. Bradford suggested that the camp may have been erected by Charles II in 1300. The documentary evidence on the destruction of the Muslim colony that year does not support the theory that a siege-camp was built outside the city. 46. 47. 48. 49. 50. 51.

R.C.A., vol. 2, 291-292, Additiones ad Reg. 7, no. 82. “Crusade and Rhetoric,” sermon 1, 378, lines 91-94. RC.A., vol. 2, reg. 8, 88-89, no. 324. R.C.A., vol. 5, reg. 16, 132, no. 135. R.C.A., vol. 1, reg. 6, 233, no. 166. R.C.A., vol. 2, reg. 8, 200, no. 768. Since the order was issued to offi-

cials in Capitanata under whose jurisdiction the woman fell, she resided in the area, 52. R.C.A., vol. 1, reg. 7, 314, no. 22. 53. R.C.A., vol. 1, reg. 7, 314, no. 22.

54. Among the many examples are: R.C.A., vol. 1, reg. 6, 203, no. 22; R.C.A., vol. 1, reg. 6, 233, no. 166; R.C.A., vol. 1, reg. 6, 252-253, no. 237; R.CA., vol. 2, reg. 8, 24, no. 79; R.C.A., vol. 2, reg. 8, 28, no. 95. 55. R.C.A., vol. 1, reg. 6, 229, no. 155; R.C.A., vol. 1, reg. 6, 259, no. 257. 56. 57. 58. 59. 60.

R.C.A., R.C.A., R.C.A., R.C.A., R.C.A.,

vol. vol. vol. vol. vol.

1, reg. 6, 264, no. 272. 2, reg. 8, 28, no. 95. 1, 194, nos. 16-17; Cuozzo, “Modelli” 534. 2, Additiones ad Reg. 7, 291, no. 77. 2, reg. 8, 24, no. 79.

166

Chapter Seven

61. R.C.A., vol. 1, reg. 6, 201, no. 16. 62. R.C.A., vol. 1, reg. 6, 201, no. 16. 63. R.C.A., vol. 2, reg. 8, 30, no. 100.

64. R.C.A., vol. 2, reg. 8, 58, no. 207. Another document which concerns a

Muslim prisoner in the castle at Monte Sant’Angelo is R.C.A., vol. 2, reg. 8, 167, no. 656. 65. R.C.A., vol. 1, reg. 6, 297-298, no. 422; R.C.A., vol. 2, reg. 8, 182-183, no. 722. 66. C.D.R.C,, vol. 3, 37-39, no. XV; R.C.A., vol. 1, reg. 6, 233-234, no. 167.

Other documents refer to a prohibited zone of forty miles: R.C.A., vol. 2, 109, no. 404; R.C.A., vol. 2, 144, no. 552. 67. R.C.A., vol. 2, reg. 8, 109, no. 404. . Saba Malaspina, “Rerum sicularum historia,” col. 858. . R.C.A., vol. 1, reg. 6, 233-234, no. 167. . R.C.A., vol. 2, reg. 8, 28, no. 95. . R.CA., vol. 1, reg. 6, 220, no. 127. ._ R.C.A., vol. 1, reg. 6, 256-257, no. 249. . RCA., vol. 6, reg. 22, 104-105, no. 449. . RCA, vol. 3, reg. 12, 5, no. 7. .RCA,, vol. 1, reg. 6, 252, no. 234. . R.C.A., vol. 1, reg. 6, 252-253, no. 237. . R.C.A., vol. 1, reg. 6, 253, no. 238. . R.C.A., vol. 1, reg. 6, 250-251, no. 229. . R.C.A., vol. 1, reg. 6, 252-253, no. 237.

80. R.C.A., vol. 2, reg. 8, 100, no. 368. 81. Chronicon Marchiae Tarvisinae et Lombardiae 60. 82. Iohannes de Tayster, “Annales,” A.G.H.S., vol. 28, ed. Felix Liebermann (Stuttgart: Anton Hiersemann, 1963) 591. 83. Chronicon Marchiae Tarvisinae et Lombardiae 60. 84. R.C.A., vol. 2, reg. 8, 156, no. 606. 85. R.C.A., vol. 2, reg. 8, 156, no. 606.

86. R.C.A., vol. 3, reg. 13, 122, no. 165. 87. R.C.A., vol. 3, reg. 8, 180, no. 711.

88. C._D.R.C., vol. 3, 127-29, no. LXXV. 89. Boswell, The Royal Treasure 261-262. 90. Dunbabin, Charles 153; Runciman’s assertion that in 1269 the Muslims “were merely scattered by families round the King’s dominions . . . ” is also

mistaken: Runciman, The Sicilian Vespers 124, Dunbabin later referred to their “forced removal from Lucera”: Dunbabin, Charles 172.

91. Dunbabin, Charles 153: “ . . . they were not permitted to convert to

Christianity because this would have freed them from the necessity of a military career.”

92. Housley, “The Thirteenth-Century Crusades” 582. 93. Le Goff, San Luigi 232. 94. R.C.A., vol. 1, 193-194, no. 12,

Angevin Lucera

167

95. Giambattista Gifuni, Origini del ferragosto lucerino (Lucera: T. Pesce Editore, 1932) 3-4. Gifuni was not specifically referring to the events of 1269. 96. Gifuni, Origini 4. 97. R.C.A,, vol. 3, reg. 13, 120, no. 155. 98. R.C.A., vol. 4, reg. 14, 57, no. 366. 99. RC.A., vol. 7, reg. 27, 110, no. 92. 100. R.C.A., vol. 7, reg. 27, 110; no. 92.

101. Muslims were permitted to live and/or work at specific locations outside Lucera, such as in Stornara: R.C.A., vol. 3, 119, no. 150; vol. 11, 17, no. 53.

102. R.C.A., vol. 12, reg. 68, 190-191, no. 5. 103. R.C.A., vol. 13, reg. 72, 290, no. 319.

104. R.C.A., vol. 13, reg. 72, 215, no. 90. 105. R.C.A., vol. XIV, reg. 76, 181, no. 284. 106. / documenti storici di Corato (1046-1327), ed. Giovanni Beltrani, vol.

9, pt. 1 of C.D.B. (Bari: Commissione Provinciale di Archeologia e Storia Patria, 1923) 111-112, no. XCIX and 110, no. XCVIII. 107. R.C.A., vol. 1, reg. 6, 273, no. 313. 108. R.C.A., vol. 1, reg. 6, 231-232, no. 165.

109. Raffaele Licinio, “I periodi angioino ed aragonese,” Storia della Puglia, vol. 1 (Bari: Mario Adda Editore, 1987) 278-279. 110, Cuozzo, “Modelli” 527.

111. Licinio, “I periodi” 279. 112. 113. 114. 115. 116. 117. 118. 119. 120. 121. 122.

R.C.A., vol. 7, reg. 24, 44, no. 192. RCA, vol. 8, reg. 40, 300, no. 64. R.CA., vol. 4, reg. 14, 31, no. 181. R.C.A., vol. 28, reg. 4, 108, no. 31. R.C.A., vol. 3, reg. 12, 20, no. 130. R.C.A., vol. 5, 96, no. 407. R.C.A., vol. 18, reg. 80, 331, no. 658. C.D.S.L., no. 2. R.C.A., vol. 12, reg. 66, 177, no. 56. R.C.A., vol. 3, reg. 12, 74-75, no. 443. R.C.A., vol. 3, reg. 12, 74-75, no. 443. At Trani there were one castel-

lan and 20 servientes. Bari’s fortress was staffed by one castellan and 15 servientes, 123. C.D.S.L., no. 6. 124. R.C.A., vol. 19, reg. 82, 164-165, no. 233. 125. R.C.A., vol. 19, reg. 82, 164-165, no. 233.

126. R.C.A., vol. 19, reg. 82, 164-165, No. 233. 127. C.D.S.L., no. 21.

128. C.D.S.L., no. 21. 129. 130. 131. 132.

C.D.S.L., C.D.S.L., C.D.S.L., C.D.S.L.,

no. no. no. no.

172. 222. 273. 403a.

168

Chapter Seven

133. 134. 135. 136.

C.D.S.L., no. 742. C.D.S.L, no. 174. R.C.A., vol. 18, 274, no. 580; R.C.A., vol. 18, 305, no. 623. R.C.A., vol. 12, reg. 64, 149, no. 12.

137. Among the many relevant documents are: R.C.A., vol. 12, 149, no. 12; 238, no. 267; R.C.A., vol. 18, 249, no. 531; R.C.A., vol. 19, 34, no. 127; R.C.A., vol. 19, 242, no. 440. 138. R.C.A., vol. 14, reg. 76, 176, no. 267; Cf. R.C.A., vol. 14, reg. 76, 180, no. 279. 139. Egidi, “La colonia,” A.S.P.N. 36 (1911): 651. 140. Nunzio Tomaiuoli, “Le fortificazioni angioine nella Capitanata,” Puglia Daunia | (1993): 24: “Se la vita all’interno della citta murata pulsava di rapporti sociali, economici, religiosi, ecc., nella fortezza, invece, il tutto era organizzato sui ritmi di una caserma militare.” 141. Tomaiuoli, “Le fortificazioni” 23. 142. Tomaiuoli, “Le fortificazioni” 24. 143. R.C.A., vol. 19, reg. 81, 34, no. 127. 144. R.C.A., vol. 19, reg. 81, 34, no. 127. 145. R.C.A., vol. 13, reg. 72, 204, no. 22. 146. R.C.A., vol. 13, reg. 72, 204, no. 26.

147. R.C.A., vol. 19, reg. 82, 92-93, no. 64; R.C.A., vol. 18, reg. 80, 260, no. 558. 148. R.C.A., vol. 12, reg. 63, 92, no, 331. 149. R.C.A., vol. 12, reg. 63, 95, no. 351; R.C.A., vol. 12, reg. 63, 96, no.

353; R.C.A., vol. 12, reg. 63, 150-151, no. 21. 150. 151. 152. 153.

R.C.A., R.CA., R.C.A., R.C.A.,

vol. vol. vol. vol.

20, reg. 86, 127, no. 252. 3, reg. 12, 19, no. 121; R.C.A., vol. 7, reg. 24, 36, no. 150. 20, reg. 86, 198, no. 530. 22, reg. 92, 55, no. 259.

154. 155. 156. 157. 158. 159. 160. 161.

R.C.A., vol. 22, reg. 93, 95, no. R.C.A., vol. 22, reg. 93, 95, no. R.C.A., vol. 27, pt. 2, reg. 120, R.C.A., vol. 27, pt. 2, reg. 120, C.D.S.L., no. 187. C.D.S.L., no. 129. C.D.S.L., no. 187. RCA, vol. 14, reg. 74, 95, no.

4. 4. 386, no. 64. 386, no. 64.

165.

162. R.C.A., vol. 21, reg. 88, 66-67, no. 52; R.C.A., vol. 21, reg. 88, 67, n°. 53. 163. R.C.A., vol. 12, reg. 63, 90, no. 323. 164. R.C.A., vol. 12, reg. 63, 90, no. 323. 165. R.C.A., vol. 25, reg. 106, 102, no. 53.

166. R.C.A., vol. 25, reg. 103, 27, no. 122; R.C.A., vol. 25, reg. 103, 50, n0-

224. 167. R.C.A., vol. 23, reg. 97, 198-199, no. 82.

Angevin Lucera

169

168. R.C.A., vol. 23, reg. 97, 198-199, no. 82. 169. Dieter Kattenbusch published a detailed study of the dialects in Das Frankoprovenzalische

in .Siiditalien:

Studien zur synchronischen

und dia-

chronischen Dialektologie (Tubingen: Gunter Narr, 1982). 170. Rivoire, “Lucera” 181; Gifuni, Origini 5.

171. Michele Melillo, “I francoprovenzali di Capitanata” Storia e cultura dei francoprovenzali di Celle e Faeto, ed. Armistizio Matteo Melillo (Manfredonia: Atlantica, 1978) 86-87. 172. Dokumente 10-132. Documents from Sthamer’s collection were incorporated into / registri della cancelleria angioina. 173. See Haseloff’s dating of the various phases of construction: Haseloff, Archittetura, vol. 1, 142. 174. R.C.A., vol. 25, reg. 107, 136, no. 82.

175. R.C.A., vol. 18, reg. 80, 317-318, no. 642. 176. R.C.A., vol. 18, reg. 80, 317-318, no. 642.

177. R.C.A., vol. 22, reg. 93, 145-146, no. 192. 178. R.C.A., vol. 22, reg. 93, 145-146, no. 192. 179. R.C.A., vol. 22, reg. 93, 145-146, no. 192.

180. R.C.A., vol. 22, reg. 93, 145-146, no. 192. 181. RCA, vol. 11, reg. 59, 245-246, no. 218. 182. R.C.A., vol. 21, Additiones ad Reg. 89, 270, no. 118. 183. R.C.A., vol. 21, Additiones ad Reg. 89, 270, no. 118. 184. RC.A., vol. 13, reg. 72, 239-240, no. 158. 185. R.C.A., vol. 7, reg. 27, 102-103, no. 59; R.C.A., vol. 7, reg. 29, 173, no.

15. 186. R.C.A., vol. 5, 121, no. 93. 187. R.C.A., vol. 11, reg. 51, 19-20, no. 60; R.C.A., vol. 11, reg. 59, 198, no.

63. Cf. Jean-Marie Martin, “Fiorentino au début du XIlIle siécle d’aprés la documentation écrite,” Federico I] e Fiorentino. Atti del Primo Convegno di Studi Medioevali della Capitanata, 23-24 giugno 1984, ed. Maria Stella Calé Mariani (Galatina: Congedo Editore, 1985) 3; Jean-Marie Martin, “Habitat e

strutture difensive in Capitanata. II contributo delle fonti scritte,” La Capitanata, 76; Martin, “Fiorentino: L’apporto della documentazione scritta medievale,” La Capitanata nella storia del Mezzogiorno medievale (Bari: Editrice Tipogratfica, 1991) 176. 188. R.C.A., vol. 12, reg. 63, 120, no. 458. 189. R.C.A., vol. 14, reg. 73, 17, no. 98. 190. R.C.A., vol. 14, reg. 76, 174, no, 255. 191. RCA, vol. 11, reg. 59, 245, no. 215.

192. R.C.A., vol. 18, reg. 80, 270, no. 570. 193. 194. 195. 196.

R.C.A., vol. 18, reg. 80, 278-279, no. 586. R.C.A., vol. 20, reg. 86, 152, no. 373. R.C.A., vol. 23, reg. 98, 296, no. 175. C.D.S.L., no. 182.

Chapter Seven

170

197. For Jean’s office title, see for example R.C.A., vol. 21, reg. 89, 110, no,

117. 198. See, for example, R.C.A., vol. 22, reg. 93, 172, no. 293; R.C.A., vol.

22, reg. 93, 159-160, no. 245.

no.

no.

no.

199, 200. 201. 202. 203. 204. 205. 206. 702. 207. 208. 209. 316. 210. 211: 212. 213. 214. 151. ZID: 216.

See Egidi’s R.C.A., vol. R.CA., vol. R.C.A., vol.

notes to C.D.S.L., no. 92.

11, reg. 59, 245, no. 215. 11, reg. 57, 135, no. 219. 11, reg. 59, 226-227, no. 154. C.D.S.L., no. 109. R.C.A., vol. 14, reg. 75, 109, no. 20. R.C.A., vol. 14, reg. 75, 109, no. 20. R.C.A., vol. 25, reg. 108, 165, no. 109; R.C.A., vol. 26, reg. 112, 203,

C.D.S.L., no. 117. R.C.A., vol. 13, reg. 70, 50, no. 40. R.C.A., vol. 23, reg. 98, 294, no. 164; R.C.A., vol. 26, reg. 112, 153,

R.C.A., R.C.A., R.C.A., R.C.A., RC.A.,

vol. vol. vol. vol. vol.

19, 21, 19, 11, 11,

R.C.A., vol. 11, R.C.A., vol. 13, .RCA., vol. 12, .RCA,., vol. 21, .RCA., vol. 21, . RCA., vol. 11, ._RCA., vol. 11, .R.CA., vol. 11,

reg. reg. reg. reg. reg.

82, 88, 82, 59, 57,

140, no. 135. 56, no. 8. 179, no. 266. 245-246, no. 218. 135-136, no. 222; R.C.A., vol. 11, reg. 59, 225,

reg. 51, 13, no. 34.

reg. 72, 239-240, no. 158. reg. 63, 96, no. 353. Additiones ad Reg. 89, 263, no. 81. Additiones ad Reg. 89, 263, no. 81. reg. 59, 228, no. 160. reg. 59, 228, no. 160. reg. 57, 135, no. 219; R.C.A., vol. 11, reg. 57, 135-136,

no.

.RCA., . RCA, . RCA., .RCA., . R.C.A.,

vol. vol. vol. vol. vol.

11, reg. 59, 245-246, no. 218. 21, Additiones ad Reg. 89, 280, no. 195. 19, reg. 82, 242, no. 443. 20, reg. 86, 151, no. 371. 20, reg. 86, 80, no. 18; R.C.A., vol. 20, reg. 86, 164-165,

no.

. RCA., vol 20, reg. 86, 80, no. 18. _RCA., vol. 20, reg. 86, 168-169, no. 447. . R.CA., vol. 20, reg. 86, 115, no. 171.

no.

231. R.C.A., vol. 22, reg. 93, 109-110, no. 151; R.C.A., vol. 22, reg. 93, 155, no. 226. 232. R.C.A., vol. 11, reg. 51, 17, no. 53. 233. R.C.A., vol. 11, reg. 59, 231, no. 172.

44; R.C.A., vol. 22, reg. 93, 133;

Angevin Lucera

171

234. R.C.A., vol. 5, reg. 15, 76, no. 329.

235. C.D.S.L., no. 220. This document was issued by Charles II, but records were kept by Charles I as well. 236. C.D.S.L., no. 129. 237. R.CA., vol. 21, reg. 89, 132, no. 191; R.C.A., vol. 21, Additiones ad Reg. 89, 285-286, no. 235.

238. R.C.A., vol. 25, reg. 106, 103, no. 57. 239. Riccardo Filangieri, “Introduzione,” Gli atti perduti della cancelleria

angioina, ed. Carlo De Lellis, vol. 1, pt. 1 (Roma: Istituto Storico Italiano per il Medioevo, 1939) VI. 240. Sthamer, L ’amministrazione 27.

241. C.D.S.L., no. 9. 242. R.C.A., vol. 26, reg. 112, 164, no. 409; R.C.A., vol. 26, reg. 112, 170-

171, no. 456. 243. C.D.S.L., no. 101. 244. C.D.S.L., no. 101. 245. R.C.A., vol. 32, reg. 15, 257, no. 583. 246. C.D.S.L., no. 229. Since in this document Ibrahim was described as

having been held “/ongo tempore” in the castle, he can be assumed to be the same person who was imprisoned in 1289. 247. Nunzio Tomaiuoli, Bell ‘Italia. Viaggio nel paese delle meraviglie, Cf.

Nunzio Tomaiuoli, “Il ‘palatium’ di Lucera,” Federico II: immagine e potere, eds. Maria Stella Cald Mariani and Raffaella Cassano (Venezia: Marsilio Edi-

tori, 1995) 239. 248. R.C.A., vol. 10, reg. 48, 48-49, no. 170.

249. Today, Lucera’s residents generally refer to the fortification as the castello. 250. R.C.A., vol. 19, reg. 82, 98, no. 70; in another document, the domus is

described as “prope palatium”: R.C.A., vol. 19, reg. 82, 99, no. 71. 251. R.C.A., vol. 19, reg. 82, 92-93, no. 64; R.C.A., vol. 19, reg. 82, 98, no.

70.

(7

o

'

:

,

2

*

t

‘

3

“

‘

= i

ts

7

nN

-

oF 9 oe

.

3

{

"

\ den

7

v

. S

veg

4

2 4 1

i me .

‘ at

- be

‘

7

7

x

ae .

3

‘

se

i

, 2

“

es

‘

t ve WU

n

é

“

Be

r

e

a

‘ Po) -

ye Ye a ~ ;

Chapter Eight

The Fall of Muslim Lucera The Mendicant Preaching Campaigns of the 1290s Neither the fall of Tripoli in 1289 nor the loss of Acre in 1291 mobilized Charles II to go on crusade. Instead, from 1289 through the early 1290s, the king of Sicily launched a different attack: the persecution of

Jewish people living within his lands. Jews were expelled from Anjou and Maine, and persecutions were launched against Jewish communities in the Kingdom of Sicily.’ People were forced to convert to Christianity en masse. In a sale of property to the abbey of Cava dei Tirreni made in 1294, the rabbi of Salerno was referred to as a Christian named Capu-

ano Cristiano.? As would occur in 1300 when Muslim Lucera was destroyed, an attempt was made to obliterate the memory of Salerno’s Jewish quarter. A record of another acquisition made by the same mon1297 stated that the former Judaica was being called the Ruga a ova, Dominican friars led the persecution of Jews which took place in southern Italy during the late 1280s and early 1290s. Bartholomeo da Aquila, a Dominican inquisitor, and Giacomo da Chieti were appointed by the Apostolic See to combat heresy in the kingdom.’ In late 1292, the inquisitor Giovanni da San Martino, along with his fellow friar Gug-

174

Chapter Eight

lielmo da Tocco, reported to Charles that some Jews who were allegedly guilty of harboring and aiding heretics had fled to and were staying at Lucera.° The refugees may have assisted apostates from Christianity or relapsed Jewish converts. Charles ordered Lucera’s captain to have the Jews seized and handed over to the inquisitors.° The fact that they had fled to Lucera as opposed to another city suggests that the colony was perceived by religious minorities as a comparatively safe environment. The pair of Muslim slaves who had fled to Lucera from Barletta

also evidently believed that they would find better conditions in the colony. Accused of heresy, a few Christians at Lucera were pursued by in-

quisitors during the early 1290s. The goods of a certain Pietro da Milano were seized. The money from Pietro’s properties was later used to pay the wages of officials at Lucera.’ Muslims were soon singled out by the Dominicans as well. In February 1294, Charles II told the captain of Lucera to provide assistance to Ramon Llull who was planning to go to

the colony to speak with Muslims about the Christian faith.” Llull is well-known for having organized and delivered compulsory sermons to both Muslim and Jewish communities in Spain.” In May 1294, he was

preparing to preach to Muslims staying in Castel dell’Ovo in Naples."° Some Muslims from Lucera were held captive there.'' Muslims from North Africa who had been arrested for piracy or other offenses may have also been prisoners. Prior to Llull’s visit, on at least one occasion,

conversion to Christianity appears to have secured the release of Muslims from prison. In March 1284, Bartolomeo da Capua issued instructions to the castellan of the castle of Melfi to free some Muslim prison-

ers who had become Christians.”

Whether or not Llull himself went to the colony, a member of the

Dominican Order, Giovanni da San Martino, was at Lucera just a few months after the king made contact with the city’s captain, investigating those Christians who were alleged to have apostatized in favor of Islam. The protonotary Bartolomeo da Capua penned a communication in the king’s name to Lucera’s captain. He instructed the captain to have a public proclamation made declaring that Christians who were falling away from the faith should present themselves before Giovanni within a set period of time. Penitents would be shown mercy. A number of Christians were accused of worshipping according to the Islamic faith. Bartolomeo wrote that some Christians “ .. . communicantes cum Sarracenis eisdem, ipsorum perfidiam in iniuriam divini nominis prosecuntur et colunt.”"’

Most of the people accused of falling away from Christianity were probably relapsed Muslim converts to Christianity. It is possible that

The Fall of Muslim Lucera

175

some were Christians who had converted to Islam. Contact between Christians and Muslims living at Lucera was apparently fairly common. Numerically dominant, Muslims might have exercised a certain hegemonic influence within the city. Although potential converts to Islam

would have had to worry about paying high taxes, the conspicuous wealth of certain members of the Muslim elite might have been reassuring to those who feared financial ruin. In addition to bringing Christians “back into the fold,” the friars appear to have won some new converts during their campaigns in southern Italy. During the summer of 1294, Charles II referred to“... novos christianos habitantes in diversis partibus Capitinate ...” who

had been granted immunity from paying the donum.'* Converts may

have also been excused from other levies. Since the forced conversion of Jews took place around the same time, former Jews would have been among the new Christians. The fairly common use of Christian names by Muslims prohibits the construction of a conversion curve based on

the adoption of Christian names.'° The missionary and inquisitorial activities of the friars generated tensions in Capitanata which remained well after they had gone. In 1295

conflict between Muslims and Christians in and around Lucera was on the rise. Two Muslim merchants returning to Lucera after a business trip in Salerno were robbed of twenty-five gold ounces worth of merchandise while in the territory of Troia. On March fifth, the king wrote to the justiciar of Capitanata, insisting that he find the perpetrators and force them to give back the goods or their monetary equivalent. If the justiciar could not find the guilty parties, then the men and the universitas of Troia were to pay the amount stolen.'® In July 1295, Charles lamented that “nonnulli de partibus illis eorum vicini et alii circumguaque morantes, in Sarracenos eisdem . . . persecutionis iniuste stimu-

los dirigentes, variis eos in personis et bonis, ubicumque compariunt, vexant iniuriis, contumeliis lacerant et depredationibus ac oppressionibus aliis male tractant...”"” Over a year after the assault on the merchants, the justiciar of Capitanata had still not resolved the case. The crown ordered the captain of Lucera to go to Troia to investigate the matter and to proceed against

the guilty parties, if found.'* Jean de Montfort was put in charge of investigating and administering justice. In the king’s name, Bartolomeo

da Capua insisted on the basic right of Muslims to security within the kingdom. His letter reflects a familiarity with canon law concerning

Muslims and Jews living within Christendom. Muslims ought to be defended, he argued, as long as they do not persecute Christians or create disturbances: “ . . . ipsi perfidi per iustum cultum nostri presidii defendi

176

Chapter Eight

debeant, dum tamen non persequantur christicolas nec committant aliquod turbolentum tumultum ...”" Despite Bartolomeo’s defense, incidents of violence against Muslims reoccurred. In March 1300, merchants trading in San Severo were assaulted, apparently without provocation, by locals. The king reacted angrily to this incident, ordering the justiciar of Capitanata to look into the matter and to punish those involved.”” Notwithstanding such problems, Muslims remained numerically dominant at Lucera throughout the 1290s. Shortly after supporting the Inquisition and the missionizing of Dominican friars at Lucera, Charles made another effort to promote Christianity in the city. He began granting much-needed financial support to the local church. The friars had not succeeded in stopping the steady deterioration of Christian life at Lucera. The converts which they had won appear to have been resettled outside the city. By the mid1290s, the bishop was unable to live decently, having survived for years without a regular income. Similarly, as Robert Burns found, the bishop of Segorbe suffered from a lack of funds during the thirteenth century since that part of Valencia was inhabited predominantly by Muslims who were exempt from paying the tithe.”' In 1296 Bartolomeo da Capua made reference to Lucera’s Muslim population when recounting the bleak conditions faced by the cleric writing, “... inter Arabes positus and nullius aut modice apud eos subventionis presidia sentiens,

quinimmo alias in ecclesiasticorum reddituum perceptione famescens, miserabilem vitam ducit.”” To remedy the situation, the king decided to allot one tenth of royal revenues from the land of Lucera each year to the bishop and church.” Charles was making a strong commitment to the original church at Lucera, his debts and war costs notwithstanding. Difficulties for the church continued nevertheless. In 1299 Lucera’s bishop Aymardus had to appeal to the king because the city’s captains were remiss in paying the tenth due.” In addition to supporting the church financially, Charles tried to strengthen the authority of the local bishop. In 1299 he ordered all present and future captains of Lucera to help the city’s bishop to exercise jurisdiction over the clerics who fell under him.” The bishop was, despite the obvious difficulties, still entitled to oversee priests in his diocese. It is clear from the steps taken by Charles II in the 1290s that he

was intent on restoring the church at Lucera. His support of the activities of mendicant preachers and inquisitors at Lucera and his financial backing of the Lucerine diocese demonstrate that he aimed to

The Fall of Muslim Lucera

177

strengthen the local Christian presence. The interests of the crown prompted Bartolomeo da Capua to defend the Muslims in 1296, but only four years later Charles would launch his own attack on the community. The value of its members as slaves would be estimated in gold ounces, and they would be presented for sale on the slave market. The king would justify his decision by explaining his responsibility to promote Christianity in the region. He would strip away the right of Mus-

lims to be safeguarded under Church law by accusing them of having committed “horrendous” and “hateful” acts which were inimical to Christianity.”®

The Destruction of the Muslim Colony Almost two months before the assault on Muslim Lucera, Charles took

a step toward the implementation of his plan to destroy the colony. He declared that converts to Christianity would be exempt from a number of taxes and burdens. He explained his desire to see the growth of the Christian faith and an increase in the number of Christians.”’ Six years had passed since the conversion of Muslims in the kingdom had been a matter of royal attention. The king’s offer does not appear to have enticed many to convert. It was certainly not a clear warning about the events which would soon follow. The fall of Muslim Lucera was remembered in an historical note of a medieval Bible from Bovino, now stored in the Vatican Library. The note states: Lucera, which is located in Apulia, was seized and

desolated in the time of the the most glorious Lord Charles II,

King of Jerusalem and Sicily; and an infinite multitude of Saracens—around eighty thousand—were expelled from

Lucera and the exiles sent throughout many parts of Apulia.”

The size of Lucera’s population was grossly overestimated in this account, but other information is accurate. Charles made the decision to dismantle the colony, and Muslims were seized and sent to established points in the kingdom. Their relocation outside Lucera was only temporary, though. Communities were given the responsibility of attending to the basic needs of persons sent to them only until arrangements could be made for the sale of the Muslims as slaves. From the outset, royal Officials and mendicant friars made careful records of the whole opera-

178

Chapter Eight

tion, including inventories of animals and grain stores left abandoned in the city. The king’s economic interest in the project is clear. Muslim Lucera was dismantled within a matter of months. Charged with the execution of the affair, Giovanni Pipino, the count of Altamura, had the Muslims quickly removed from the city. They were sent

as far away as the Land of Bari and the Land of Otranto.” The king’s plan was to make money by selling the inhabitants of the city as slaves, but numerous people were slain by Giovanni and his men in what would later be plainly referred to as “strages.””” Most of the local population was overwhelmed by the mounted and armed force which descended upon it, but some people fought back. Giovanni sustained losses when he took over the city, particularly to his horses. In September 1300, the king granted 200 gold ounces to him as

compensation.*' Some residents were able to hide grain stores and other assets which suggests that either they had anticipated problems or that the strike did not immobilize all parts of the city at once.. Several months after the assault, in January 1301, the king promised one tenth of any recovered victuals to any person, whether Muslim or Christian, who would help to locate them.” Charles intended to repopulate the city with Christians, but he did not prevent destruction and pillaging from taking place. The mosque was demolished, and no distinctively Islamic architecture exists today. The burning of thirteenth-century records probably occurred during the mayhem. There were no royal orders calling for the wrecking of archival materials, although it is possible that persons may have purposely destroyed parchments in order to obliterate the memory of the Muslim settlement. Giovanni and his men managed to apprehend most of Lucera’s inhabitants, but a number of people succeeded in escaping. They went into hiding. In January 1301, the king ordered the rector of Benevento, along with the men of that city, to help the Palermitan friar Tadeo find Muslims who, while furtively passing through and near Benevento, had

been seized and held by the local residents, including churchmen.” The prior of the Hospitallers in Palermo, Tadeo, helped to track down numerous other fugitives in Benevento.** Despite the odds against them, a

number of people managed to remain at large. Almost a year after the attack on the colony, many had still not been found. By July 1301, the

king was becoming anxious. He offered to give one third of any fugitives recovered and their possessions to whomever would locate them. Charles forbade anyone to harm the captured inhabitants of Lucera as they made their way under escort to resettlement points. He threatened to impose heavy financial penalties on assailants. His mandate

The Fall of Muslim Lucera

179

nevertheless did not curb the blood lust which was unleashed by the dismantling of the colony and the placing of its inhabitants in a such a vulnerable position. Not even the presence of a Christian appointee dissuaded a group of men from Corneto and other towns from descending

upon a group of Muslims en route to Venosa.”° They slew 150 people, and they stole animals and other possessions. As shown, symptoms of underlying hostilities between Muslims and Christians in Capitanata had manifested themselves prior to August 1300. The fierce attacks on Muslim captives following the abolition of the colony are additional evidence that many Christians in southern Italy harbored deep-seated feelings of animosity toward Muslims. Pasquale Corsi concluded that Christian hostilities toward the colonists derived in part from resentment of their achievements in business and

trade.”’ Indeed, as mentioned, just months before the destruction of the colony in 1300, Muslim merchants who had gone to San Severo to sell their wares in the forum had been assaulted.”* In addition to envy and bitterness over real or perceived wrongs, the ill will which many Christians harbored toward Muslims stemmed from religious prejudice. AntiMuslim sentiment had grown during the 1290s as a result of the campaign waged to convert Jewish and Muslim “infidels” to Christianity. Resettled at a distance from Lucera, Muslims were prohibited from approaching the city or gathering outside the places designated for their occupation in groups of more than ten people.’? Funds were allotted to feed them at the temporary relocation points so that local communities

would not have to bear all the costs.“ The makeshift holding areas were typically empty buildings or barns which had little or no furniture. The besieged Lucerines were not allowed to take many possessions with them, so the comforts were few. They slept on leather sacks with torn blankets or on the floor.*’ Once Muslims had been moved out to be sold on the slave market, officials took inventory of what little remained. The lists which have survived expose the bleakness of the holding places,” Muslims were robbed and assaulted while staying at the relocation

centers.*’ Some were abducted. Many were killed.** Such acts were of serious concern to the crown since they impinged on royal rights and diminished potential profits. In the winter of 1301, Bartolomeo da Capua lamented that in various parts of Apulia thieves and plunderers “contra predictos Sarracenos cedes et alia facinora diversa commiserint, ac multos de Sarracenis ipsis nec non quamplura de ipsorum bonis occupaverint et furtive subtraxerint ...°* The stealing of abandoned goods from Lucera distressed crown officials from the start. Jean de Montfort collaborated with the crown in

180

Chapter Eight

recovering stolen properties.“° He was one of the few individuals who possessed keys to storage areas inside Lucera’ s castle during the months following the dismantling of the colony.‘” The guards of mountain passes were alerted and other measures were taken to catch thieves, but animals and movable goods were hauled off by Christians to Abruzzo, Principato, and other regions.” In the spring of 1301, the crown protested to the prelates in Apulia that clerics had taken a substantial amount of the spoils which had once belonged to the Muslims of Lu-

cera.’” Almost ten months after the colony came under attack, probably as a result of the commotion, many roads were unsafe.” The king had to increase the powers of his justiciar in the region during the summer of 1301.° Charles welcomed the administrative skills of both churchmen and mendicant friars in dismantling the colony. Clerics had long had a role in Angevin administration and finance. For periods under both Charles I and II, chaplains served as treasurers (thesaurarii camerae).”” Ecclesias-

tical prelates were the first persons to be addressed in the king’ s.letter of 22 August 1300 establishing the authority of Giovanni Pipino.” Receiving monetary compensation for their efforts, friars helped to account for the animals, possessions, and victuals of the Muslims. The bishop of Lucera, Aymardus, and the Muslim miles ‘Abd al-‘Aziz further aided efforts to recover grain stores and other resources by serving as intermediaries between Muslim groups and royal officials.” The vital role played by clerics and friars in dismantling Muslim Lucera suggests that they were involved in organizing the project at an early stage. The king is known to have consulted church officials before expelling the Jews from Anjou and Maine.” Paid by the crown, friars from the Order of Hermits stayed at Lucera after the dismantling of the colony |to carry out tasks like compiling inventories and making other records.”’ The treasurer of the church of San Nicola in Bari, Pietro d’Angeriaco, was appointed to sell the Mus-

lims and their goods in the Land of Bari.°* He also worked on itemizing

and selling animals which had been seized.” The bishop of Rapolla helped the crown to find and recover stolen properties.” The process of sorting and utilizing Lucera’s resources was so demanding that even communities fairly distant from Lucera were drawn in. Universitates in Molise and the Terra di Lavoro, for example, were obligated to provide the mules needed to transport grain and barley

from Lucera to Naples, Salerno, and Montoro.*' Within months, large quantities of Lucera’s wheat and barley had been diverted to the capital and to Salerno where people had been suffering from famine.” The

The Fall of Muslim Lucera

181

procurator of the fisc, Bernard d’ Avignon, stayed at Lucera for a period to manage affairs.”

As indicated, some members of the Muslim community assisted church and crown officials. In view of his services, ‘Abd al-‘Aziz was rewarded payments of twelve gold ounces per year for his lifetime.” He was paid not by the justiciar of Capitanata or by the captain of Lucera but rather by the secreti of Principato and the Terra di Lavoro. A Mus-

lim named Gaetano also came to the fore as a collaborator in the process of examining and accounting for properties at Lucera. As late as June 1301, Gaetano was referred to as both a sarracenus and a servus,

suggesting that he had not yet converted to Christianity.” This individual probably cooperated with the crown so as to preserve the lives of his family members as well as his own. During the summer of 1301, Gaetano’s wife, sons, and other relatives had still not been sold on the slave market. In the light of his services, the king ordered that they not be disturbed. Despite the aid which they provided to the crown, wealthy and privileged Muslims such as ‘Abd al-‘Aziz were deprived of their belongings. ‘Abd al-‘ Aziz took steps to preserve his fortune by requesting permission to sell his vineyard in the area of San Severo in October 1300.” After the city was occupied, Muslims were not allowed to sell their animals and other possessions. Officials even mistakenly confiscated a mare purchased by a friar before the attack on Lucera because they thought that he had acquired it afterwards.” ‘Abd al-‘Aziz was allowed to sell the vineyard, but only after he converted to Christianity did the king order that his confiscated animals, silver, garments, and

other possessions be returned.” At first, only ‘Abd al-‘Aziz’s money

was to be withheld, but just a few days after calling forthe restitutions, Charles told his men not to give back the silver either.” A few months later, in April, the king had a change of heart. He ordered that up to

eighty gold ounces worth of silver be given, to the heirs of ‘Abd al‘Aziz, who by that time had passed away.” Anything beyond that amount had to be kept for the royal coffers. In June, Charles had to change the concession to ‘Abd al-‘Aziz’s heirs to eighty ounces worth of the knight’s worked gold because none of his silver was left.”” The treatment meted out to ‘Abd al-‘Aziz and his family demonstrates that even after converting to Christianity the knights and other beleaguered inhabitants of Lucera were not immediately afforded rights truly com-

parable to those enjoyed by Christians after August 1300. The retention of ‘Abd al-‘Aziz’s money, gold, and silver indicates that the king’s financial interests were given precedence.

182

Chapter Eight

Conversion and compliance enabled ‘Abd al-‘Aziz to save his family. Given a protected status, forty males and sixty females related to the knight were transferred to Foggia.” Many other Muslims were also temporarily relocated there. In October 1300, orders to remove Muslims from that city were in the works so Charles cautioned the Foggians and officials in Capitanata not to disturb ‘Abd al-‘Aziz’s people unless they were specifically mentioned in such orders.” In January the king ordered that five relatives of ‘Abd al-‘Aziz who were being held at Bar-

letta be handed over to the knight.” Other converts also managed to

negotiate the freeing of their family members. In February 1301, the king intervened directly to save the mother of a certain Perrot, formerly known as Murzugq, by instructing the dean of Capua, Bartolomeo, and the knight Simon de Marsais to free her.”° Only certain well-connected members of the Muslim elite and highly skilled individuals were permitted to become free Christians. Converts were sometimes referred to in the Angevin Registers as “neofidi” or neophytes.”” Even though he already had a Christian first name, Riccardo Maltese was baptized as Philip.” A Muslim physician from Lucera was baptized as Giovanni Cristiano and then allowed to

travel in various parts of the kingdom.” Within a month of the dismantling of the colony, the king arranged for the freeing of the miles Hajjaj who had been taken to Castel Capuano.*° Hajjaj took the name Giovanni.*' In December 1300, the king arranged the return to Hajjaj of a

house located in Troia and a vineyard in the lands of Foggia.” The knight’s houses in Troia’s piazza were not given back, however.” They were kept by the judge Riccardo da Troia who also acquired a number

of male and female slaves from Lucera.™

For most Muslims, not even conversion to Christianity could win

them their freedom. During the winter of 1301, the justiciar of Abruzzo appealed to the king for guidance as to what to do with some Lucerines who had converted immediately prior to being captured. He was told that converts should be sent with Muslim captives to Naples.®* Their transfer to the capital suggests that the captives were going to be sold. Charles and his officials may have believed that Muslims who had sincerely wanted to convert would have done so in June 1300 when the

king had promised tax exemptions to converts. In any case, the decision not to free the captives was in keeping with papal policy on the manumission of converted slaves. The position of Pope Gregory IX on the issue had been made known in July 1237 when he wrote to the patriarch of Jerusalem and the masters of three military orders regarding the conversion of Muslim slaves to Christianity in the Holy Land.® Although he insisted that converts should not be impeded from practicing Christi-

The Fall of Muslim Lucera

183

anity, Gregory did not advocate the liberation of converted slaves. As Benjamin Kedar noted, the pope took a similar stance in a later communication to the archbishop of Majorca. Gregory wrote that slaves who received baptism could still be sold by their owners.” Many Muslims, including children, were sold within the kingdom,

probably to work as domestic servants. Sales occurred in various places,

including the Land of Otranto and the Land of Bari.’ On 13 December

1300, the king announced that three men were commissioned to oversee the seizure and sale of Muslims staying in Melfi, Venosa, and other

parts of Basilicata. The possessions of the Muslims were also to be sold. The appointees were Americo de Sus, Guido de Tabia, and Gilberto de Saltano. Muslims could be retained as property within the regno or they could be exported. All were to be traded: “tam mares quam feminas, tam etiam magnos quam parvos ...”””

Some Christians did offer assistance to Muslims during the turmoil. The monastery of Santa Sofia of Benevento provided refuge to a Muslim knight named Salem until its abbot was specifically ordered to hand him and his possessions over to Tadeo in January.”” Some people were purchased under conditions which suggest that they may have later been set free. The cantor of the church of Troia paid one gold ounce so that two adult converts to Christianity and one six-month-old baby would be released to him during the winter of 1301, a sum which was much less

than what the crown was demanding for similar sales.”' There is no in-

dication that the cantor was being compensated for any services rendered to the crown. Charles’ letter to his justiciar in the Land of Otranto dated 6 February 1301 specified the prices at which the Muslims were sold.” Men were priced at two gold ounces, but artisans were sold for three. Women and children could be purchased for one ounce. Elderly, dis-

abled, and sickly persons were not spared despite their conditions and despite the difficulty royal officials had in selling them.” The medical doctor Nicola da Corneto purchased a twelve-year-old boy narned Marzuq who later managed to escape.” For some, the opportune moment to flee would not come for years. Both male and female fugitives were sought during the summer of 1304, for example.” As late as 1315, indi-

viduals were still escaping.” From port cities such as Trani and Naples, slaves were sent to Sicily

and other destinations.”’ Henri Bresc found that documents from the first decade of the fourteenth century dealing with Muslim slaves at Palermo cited five individuals from Lucera.” At Palermo in late 1308, as Charles Verlinden noted,

a Muslim man paid a sum for a female

slave who had converted to Christianity and who had been described in

184

Chapter Eight

a document drafted three days before the transaction as white and “olim Saracenam et de genere Saracenorum de Nucera.””” He may have intended to free her. Soon after destroying the Muslim settlement, Charles imposed

compensatory levies on the communities near Lucera in order to recover lost tax revenues. The levy of 1,200 gold ounces was presented in purely financial terms as serving “ ... pro restauratione collecte ac

aliorum iurium Lucerie ...”'°° Obvious parallels are to be drawn with the taxes which Charles exacted from Christians in Anjou and Maine when he expelled the Jews from those areas eleven years earlier.'”' As William Chester Jordan noted, King Edward I of England also exacted a

tax from his Christian subjects when he forced Jews to leave Gascony and England in 1290.'” Charles II argued that his Christian subjects had an obligation to help him bear the costs of eradicating Muslims and Jews since they were a threat to the well-being of Christians. In the case of the expulsion of the Jews from Anjou and Maine, the king explained in his expulsion order that levies on Christians were necessary “as recompense for the profit which we lose through the aforesaid expulsions.” The Jews were accused of subverting the Christian faithful and depriving Christians of their goods through usury.'”” As noted, after the dismantling of the Apulian colony, Muslims continued to be referred to as servi, but increasingly a different term

was used: sclavi.'* The sale of the Lucerines to private owners necessitated the adoption of term sclavus, indicating the change in the social and legal status of those purchased. Muslims who became victims of violent crime while staying at relocation points in various parts of Apulia during the winter of 1301 were still referred to as servi.’ They had not yet been sold or selected for retention by the crown as slaves. ‘Abd al-‘Aziz, perhaps because the crown did not intend to use or sell him as a slave, was referred to as the servus of the royal camera in a document drafted by Bartolomeo da Capua on 22 October 1300 and in

other documents issued after the destruction of the colony.'® A good example of how the identifying terminology was applied is provided by a communication which was written by Bartolomeo da Capua to the justiciar of Capitanata on 3 November 1309 in which he referred to “duos sclavos de servis olim Lucerie.”'*’ For his own purposes in 1301, the king retained some people whom he called “sclavi nostri” instead of “servi nostri.’ A lot has been written on the motives behind the abolition of Mus-

lim Lucera. In 19Q1, citing the hostile polemic against Muslims put forth by Charles II in diplomas issued in January 1302, Rivoire concluded that religious fervor played a major role in the colony’s destruc-

The Fall of Muslim Lucera

185

tion.’ Thirteen years later, a much different interpretation was offered by Egidi who theorized that Charles’ treatment of the Muslims was the result of a desire to confiscate their goods and to profit from the sale of their persons.''° Not long afterwards, Egidi’s interpretation of the king’s motives was challenged by Gifuni in his Origini del ferragosto lu-

cerino, published in 1932. Pointing to Egidi’s adherence to the “scuola economico-giuridica,” Gifuni argued that he minimized the role of religious factors in Charles’ decision to bring an end to the colony." Gifuni maintained that Charles was primarily moved by religious concerns.''” More recently, Abulafia has taken a stance similar to Rivoire’s and Gifuni’s. Abulafia has drawn important parallels between the actions taken by Charles with respect to the Muslims of Lucera and his

treatment of the Jews of Anjou, Maine, and southern Italy.'* Pointing to the king’s rhetoric against Muslims and noting the religiosity of both Charles and his family, Abulafia has suggested that Charles may have sought “an easy triumph over Islam” by destroying the Muslim settlement. Undoubtedly, both religious and economic concerns influenced the king’s decision. What is clear is that the issue at hand in 1300 was not one of maintaining political or regional stability, as it had been earlier

for Frederick II when the emperor had to decide the fate of the Muslims of Sicily. After their rebellion against Charles I, the Muslims of Lucera

had not posed any serious organized opposition to royal authority. As noted, in the years prior to the destruction of the colony, the number of people assigned to guard Lucera’s fortress had actually declined. Though troubling, the tensions which existed between the colonists and their Christian neighbors were not extreme enough to necessitate the removal of the Muslim population. The tensions did mean that the local climate was ripe for such a move. The colony at Lucera was not destroyed because it had ceased to be

economically or militarily valuable. The city was still an important grain supplier. On 2 May 1299, Charles had commanded the captain of Lucera, Baudoin Tristan, to purchase 400 salmae of grain and to have it

hauled to Naples.'’* An earlier order for the same amount of grain had

proved to be insufficient. In March 1300, only five months before the destruction of the Muslim settlement, arrangements had been made with respect to the enlistment of 500 Muslim archers to fight in the War of the Sicilian Vespers.''® Lucera, like other cities in the kingdom, peri-

odically contributed special dona toward Charles’ war costs. As late as July 1300, the community had made a payment of that type.''” If the king of Naples always desired to rid his lands of Muslims, his delay in

186

Chapter Eight

doing so until 1300 may be explained by the economic importance the community at Lucera had for the crown. Charles’ primary motivation for destroying the colony appears to have been religious, but Egidi’s theory that Charles looked to Lucera

for quick profits is viable. Although there was a risk of incurring longterm economic losses, the prospect of selling Lucera’s inhabitants and their possessions promised a windfall sum. When he ordered the dis-

mantling of the colony in 1300, Charles was still in the midst of fighting the War of the Sicilian Vespers. He needed money for his war costs and for payments toward the settlement of his many debts to the bankers of Florence. The records of his financial woes are numerous. In September 1289, he had to pay 100 gold ounces to a member of the Florentine banking establishment, the Societa dei Mozzi, Andrea Spillato."* During the 1290s, the justiciar of Capitanata, like other officials in the regno, was strapped for cash. In 1294 he was unable to pay the wages of the

castellans

and

servants

in Manfredonia,

Lucera,

and

Monte

Sant’Angelo.'’’ Charles instructed him to borrow money, if necessary. In February 1295, economic problems pushed Charles to reduce allowances stemming from Apulian sources to a number of nobles and officials, but he ordered that men who received revenues from Lucera, like Jean de Montfort, were not to see reductions. '”°

In the years immediately prior to the signing of the Treaty of Caltabellotta in 1302, the Angevin prospects for winning the war against Frederick III] were uncertain. After a short-lived victory at Catania, Charles’ son Philip was taken captive in Sicily by the future king of Trinacria in 1299. By the time of Charles’ order to dismantle the colony the following year, he was behind in major payments to key figures in the war; he had to use allotments of the grain seized from Lucera and

profits from grain sales to make almost immediate disbursements to the admiral of the kingdoms of Sicily and Aragon, Ruggero di Lauria; Robert, the duke of Calabria; and the Florentine bankers who were fi-

nancing his war effort with loans.'”! While funneling a considerable amount of new money into the war and to his creditors, Charles realized a long-term desire: the elimination

of the “infidel” from his lands. The nephew of Louis IX of France, Saint Louis, who was canonized only three years before the assault on Lucera, he was keenly aware of his family’s history when it came to religious matters.'"” King Louis had been not only an avid crusader, but also a supporter of mendicant activities against Muslims and Jews; he was the only European monarch to carry out Pope Gregory [X’s order to collect copies of the Talmud for scrutiny by the Dominican and Fran-

The Fall of Muslim Lucera

187

ciscan orders. The mendicant attack on the Talmud resulted in a mass

burning of Jewish books in Paris in 1242.'”

Charles II is known to have pushed the Church to declare his uncle a saint, and he may have modeled himself after Louis when it came to policies toward non-Christian groups. Caroline Bruzelius suggested that Charles’ actions with regard to Jews in Anjou and Maine and the Mus-

lims of Lucera mirrored Louis’ “rejection of heterodoxy.”'™ In his momentous letter of 24 August 1300 calling for the creation of a Christian city at Lucera, Charles invoked the orthodoxy of his ancestors: Si nostrorum erga Deum devotio predecessorum actenditur, si quam

catholici fuerint, et quam vehementes fidei ortodosse cultores in consideracionem adducitur, non erit umquam ambiguum quin nos, ex tam sollemni origine, ac tam fideli tantorum procerum Stirpite derivate, pro cunctis mentis nostre desiderabilibus incrementum catholice fidei anxie cupiamus.

Charging that the Muslims of Lucera had “‘derogated” the Christian

faith, the king explained in this letter both his desire and his duty to promote Christianity. He ordered the swift demolition of the mosque and the erection of a new cathedral which, like the cathedral of James I’s newly reconquered city of Valencia, would be dedicated to the Vir-

gin Mary.'° In subsequent letters, Charles provided further justifications for his decision to destroy the colony at Lucera by accusing the Muslims of having “a rebellious spirit” and “preconceived wickedness.”’”’ Their removal from Lucera was necessary, he maintained, in order to protect

the Christian faithful.'"* He asserted that the Muslims had profaned the land, and he maintained that he wanted to restore Christianity to the

city.” The king’s successors would also recall the destruction of the colony in religious terms. Put in charge of Lucera’s government by Robert the Wise, Charles, the duke of Calabria, recalled in 1323 the

elimination of the “Saracen enemies of the Christian faith.”'”° In the light of his expulsion of the Jews from Anjou and Maine, Charles’ statements against Muslims cannot be easily dismissed as mere rhetoric. The king of Naples clearly saw himself as a champion of Christianity during a time when the rights of both Muslims and Jews to live within Christendom were being challenged.'*' Unlike his father and uncle, Charles had not gone on crusade. He must have viewed the aboli-

tion of Muslim Lucera as a contribution to the Christian cause. News of the destruction of the colony was received with approval and gratification by Pope Boniface VIII, who in a letter of June 1302 to Lucera’s

188

Chapter Eight

bishop Stefano, noted that the “insana Machometti doctrina” had previ-

ously been observed in the city.'” Rebuilding a Christian City The resettlement of Lucera by Christians began almost immediately after Muslims had been removed from the city. To lure settlers, Charles

offered houses, land, and exemptions from a variety of taxes.'”’ The city was defined as part of the royal demense.'* Pope Boniface VIII noted in late February 1301 that Charles had designated the city for habitation by the faithful and that to it “non modica eorum confluxisse multitudo dignoscitur.”'”° Primary among the people urged to settle at Lucera were Calabrian refugees who had been displaced during the upheaval caused by the war. Charles had demonstrated for many years a commitment to stabilizing internal social conditions and to helping those people. Even when he had been forced in 1295 by financial difficulties to reduce disbursements to various nobles and officials, he had continued to support the allotment of four gold ounces per year to each refugee.'*° Disabled persons, many probably victims of the war, also received economic support. Prior to the opening of Lucera to mass Christian settlement, Calabrians had resettled in many parts of the kingdom, including Capitanata.'** After the removal of Muslims from Lucera, Charles set dead-

lines within which refugees were to relocate to the city. Many Calabrians strongly opposed relocating. After all, the war had been going on for so long that people had put down roots and rebuilt their lives elsewhere. One man lamented that he had been living in Sorrento since his childhood, and he had married a local woman.'”” He along with numerous others was excused from going to the city.'“° Others were allowed to postpone moving to Lucera in order to meet certain responsibilities

where they were, such as gathering the harvest.'*' Contrary to some ac-

counts, the city was not repopulated by throngs of exiled Christian Lucerines who had been waiting to return.'*? Some Catalans settled at Lucera, as did people from various parts of southern Italy.'”’ During the first years after the removal of Muslims from the city, a flurry of concessions and transactions took place. Land and other properties came into new hands. Nevertheless, the king sought to uphold the rights of monasteries with claims in the area. When the monastery of San Lorenzo of Aversa charged that royal officials had taken away its

The Fall of Muslim Lucera

189

lands at Lucera, he ordered an investigation of the matter. He called for

a return of the holdings, if necessary.'”* Despite the conflicts which used to arise between landlords and Muslim farmers, Charles II decided not to change the arrangement whereby property owners had to permit farmers to cultivate their lands

in exchange for payment of the terragium.'** He mandated that the local church and ecclesiastics, important landholders during the fourteenth century, reserve for their own use only enough land to sustain themselves and their animals.'*° They had to allow Christian farmers to grow crops on their other lands. Most new arrivals took up farming and other agricultural pursuits, continuing the traditional cultivation of products like wheat, barley, and grapes. Since local farming had been disrupted during the upheaval, other communities in Capitanata had to sell grain to the settlers during the summer of 1301.'*’ As shown by the crown’s order issued in the spring of that same year requiring that beasts of burden be brought to

Lucera to carry away loads of grain destined for Naples and Salerno, production had not been completely paralyzed, however.'*® On 22 August 1301, the king issued a diploma in which he enumerated both privileges and stipulations for the new inhabitants of Lucera.” The diploma reveals his strategy for repopulating the city. To make sure that a permanent settlement would take root at Lucera, Charles bound people to ten-year agreements. Houses were granted under the condition that they be inhabited for a full decade. The properties of individuals who left Lucera prematurely devolved to the crown. Exemptions from paying taxes like the gabella were valid for one decade. In subsequent years, Charles made other concessions in order to attract and retain settlers. On 13 April 1306, he conceded to the inhabi-

tants of Lucera the right to be tried only before the city’s captain.’ The royal court would hear appeals. That same day he granted a large amount of land to the people of Lucera as well as to anyone who would relocate to the city within eight months. The land conceded was sufficient for the seeding of 2,000 salmae of grain. People could use and farm it as they wished without paying the terragium or the census. The only stipulation which was made was that no one could sell his share for ten years. During the early transitional years, many nobles delayed moving to Lucera despite the fact that their properties in the city were conceded under the condition that they or their representatives physically took up residence. In late February 1304, Charles threatened to annul his concessions.'” Later trading in spices and silks in the city indicates that the

190

Chapter Eight

king’s plan to attract a wealthy class eventually had some degree of

success, however.'* The person who gained the most from the upheaval and transition of 1300, aside from the king himself, was the man who had been responsible for carrying out the destruction of the Muslim settlement: Giovanni Pipino. On 24 August 1300, Charles told Giovanni that he could pick

out one of the best houses in the land of Lucera for himself.’ Among

the properties awarded to Giovanni at Lucera was a large house with

towers which had once belonged to the Muslim knight Riccardo.’®

Charles also conceded to Giovanni and his heirs an annual payment of 100 gold ounces.’ Giovanni himself conceded properties to individuals. To Giovanni Minutolo he granted a house described as having once belonged to a Muslim.'”’ In addition to property, Giovanni acquired a position of political power at Lucera. Although he may be viewed as a soldier of fortune, Giovanni was undeniably a religious man. He attributed his successful conquest of the city to the favor of Saint Bartholomew. During the takeover of Lucera, the main struggle evidently occurred on the day of that saint.’ To render honor to him, Giovanni founded a Benedictine monastery at Lucera, only one of many Christian institutions which were established in the area during the initial years of reconstruction and Christian settlement.'*? Charles II also honored Bartholomew. In 1302 he declared that

a fair surrounding the saint’s feast day would be held in the city each year. Another person who profited from the dismantling of the Muslim settlement was Jean de Montfort. Charles gave to him a house at Troia

which had formerly belonged to Hajjaj.'°' After Hajjaj’s conversion to

Christianity and Jean’s death, the house was returned to the former by

the king, along with a vineyard in the outskirts of Foggia.’ Hajjaj was able to enjoy full rights over the properties. They could be passed on to his heirs, whether male or female, after his demise.'® Modest financial

aid in the form of annual stipends was provided to a few converts. On 28 October 1300, Charles II ordered the secreti of Principato and the Terra di Lavoro to provide Pietro, a convert from Lucera who had once been known as Marzugq, four gold ounces each year.'™ Stipends were also granted to Riccardo Maltese and Hajjaj after they had converted. : Partial restitutions of property and concessions of aid were made, but Muslim converts to Christianity did not regain their former positions of political and economic influence. Buildings were reoccupied and built ex novo by Christian settlers throughout the city. A friar named Paolo organized the foundation of a hospital." Building materials were in such demand that stones eal-

ea

The Fall of Muslim Lucera

191

marked for the hospital were stolen.'*’ During the winter of 1303, two of the city’s inhabitants, desiring to build on their land, complained that the magister iuratus was preventing them from doing so. Charles intervened on their behalf.'® As they had in reconquered Valencia, the Franciscan, Dominican,

and Augustinian Orders presented themselves for the task of Christianizing the area.’ Charles granted houses at Lucera to the Franciscans.'”° On 21 October 1300, he ordered that the bells stored in Lucera’s castle be brought out and given to the orders and to the city’s bishop for the Christian buildings which were under construction and for the cathedral.'"' The bells may have been stowed away since the Muslims were first settled at Lucera under Frederick II. In ordering this symbolic restoration, Charles may have felt that he had at last fulfilled his duty to the Church and to his forebears. The churches built in the city during the fourteenth century, such as the church of San Francesco, appear to have been executed not by French but by local artisans.'” The most significant construction was the new cathedral.'”’ Metal stored in the fortress was allocated for casting a bell specifically for the cathedral in November 1301.'" In 1304 stones and wood were hauled to the city from Biccari to be used in the building process.'”” The marble columns and stones of old churches, presumably churches which had decayed while.the city was inhabited by Muslims, were set aside for the building.’ Wood destined ultimately for Lucera was shipped by sea to the port of Manfredonia in 1309.'”” Oxen and buffalo were sent by Apulian monasteries that same year to help with hauling, as were beasts of burden which had once belonged to the Templars.’ The cathedral built at Lucera was one of the most important con-

structions of the king’s reign. In November 1303, Pope Benedict XI rewarded Charles’ abolition of the Muslim colony and his construction of a new cathedral by authorizing the king to present to Lucera’s bishop candidates who might be suitable to hold the offices of archdeacon, deacon, and cantor.” Bruzelius noted that overall Charles II sponsored more church building projects than his father had. He lent support to ambitious undertakings such as the construction of the cathedral at Naples and the Neapolitan church of San Domenico.'® His building projects may be a sign of greater religious devotion, but it must be remembered that Charles I had had the expense of conquering the kingdom, and he had built Lucera’s fortress. Charles II concerned himself even with the detailed process of furnishing Lucera’s cathedral. In late February

1303, he contacted the

procurator of the fisc and the castellan of Lucera regarding the donation

192

of a number of articles.

Chapter Eight

A wooden crucifix, books for celebrating the

mass and other offices, cloth made of materials such as linen and mus-

lin, and copes were among the items to be given to a messenger of the bishop. In addition, two trunks in which the possessions of the church could be kept, leather sufficient for covering the altar, and two basins

were to be consigned.*!

Even prior to the fourteenth century, Lucera was closely tied to the cult of the Virgin Mary. As stated, Charles made a financial commitment to help sustain the Lucerine church over four years before destroying the Muslim settlement, seeking to bring honor to the Virgin Mary by whose name, he noted, that church was distinguished.” When the colony was dismantled in 1300, he renamed the entire city Civitas

Sancte Marie. Luceria was not used again regularly in official docu-

ments until the reign of Joanna II." During the reign of Alfonso of Aragon, Lucera was sometimes called Civitas Sancte Marie, but usually it was referred to as Luceria.'** Luceria Christianorum was used ina number of fifteenth-century sources, emphasizing the Christian charac-

ter of the city while retaining its original name.'*”

The king’s descendents continued to support the church at Lucera. Charles of Calabria again honored Mary by approving in 1322 the holding of a six-day fair in August surrounding the feast of the Assumption.'*© Today the patroness of the city, Santissima Maria Assunta, is honored on the fifteenth and on the sixteenth of every August at Lucera. In October 1325, the duke of Calabria encouraged Pope John XXII to proceed toward the beatification of the Lucerine bishop Agostino.” Robert the Wise promoted the education of the Lucerine clergy by permitting a canon of Lucera’s cathedral to study canon law in Naples for five years while still receiving a stipend.'** Both Robert and Joanna II guaranteed the church an economic base by requiring that 130 gold ounces from levies raised in the city be given to the chapter of the cathedral each year.’ Royal support enabled the Lucerine church to recover from the poor state in which it had been during the thirteenth century. Misappropriations of funds and other problems occurred, but the church was not impoverished during the fourteenth century. In February 1333, Pope John XXII had to order the bishop of Civitate to reprimand persons who were stealing money which belonged to Lucera’s church.'®” Five years later,

the Lucerine bishop, Ruggero, accused the prior and monastery of San Giovanni in Piano of taking funds.'?’ Tensions between the bishop of Civitate and the Lucerines ran high during the early fifteenth century. Attacks on him made by the latter prompted the inhabitants of San

Severo to accuse them of slander.'”

The Fall of Muslim Lucera

193

As Charles’ successors followed in his footsteps with respect to the church at Lucera, they adhered to the precedents which he had set for

the treatment of the city’s inhabitants. Robert the Wise honored the

many concessions made by his father when he became king in 1309. Since over a decade had passed since Charles had issued his diploma of 1301, Robert confirmed Lucera’s privileges in April 1314.'” He subsequently placed his son, Charles of Calabria, in charge of the city. The

duke was issuing documents with respect to Lucera by 1318.'* Robert and his wife Sancia reassumed charge of the city when their son died of fever in 1328.’ Robert’s successors, Joanna I and Louis of Taranto,

confirmed Lucera’s privileges in 1352.'” Joanna II and René of Anjou also upheld the privileges, and they continued to consider Lucera part of

the royal demesne.! The inhabitants of Lucera were permitted to dispose of their properties as they wished after the ten-year moratorium established by Charles II ended. In 1323 an inhabitant of Lucera who was originally from Catania sold the houses which he owned for sixty-one gold ounces to a

man named Bartolomeo Fossaceca.'” In August of the following year, a man named Nicola da Ursia sold various houses to another inhabitant of

Lucera.'” When the knight Landolfo da Grottaminarda was unable to pay the 100 gold ounces bequeathed by his wife to the monastery of Montevergine in early 1340s, he gave instead, among other properties, the houses which he possessed at Lucera and a garden located near the city’s walls.” Although sales occurred, people did not abandon the city in large numbers. During the fourteenth century, the crown encouraged economic growth at Lucera by allowing fairs to be held. In 1302 Charles II declared that an annual fair would take place in the city surrounding the

feast of Saint Bartholomew.””' Fairs associated with the feast of All Saints were held during the reign of Robert the Wise.” As indicated, in 1322 Charles of Calabria granted permission to Lucera's inhabitants to

hold a fair during the days surrounding the feast of the Assumption.”

Almost two years later, he changed the month in which the fair would be held so that it would correspond with the feast of the Annuncia-

tion.” Lucera continued to be an important site for fairs in the kingdom during the Aragonese period.”” Although arrangements were made so that Christians could farm local lands as Muslims had during the previous century, grain production fell during the reign of Robert the Wise. In the late 1330s, famine hit Lucera and its surroundings as well as other parts of the kingdom. Conditions became so grave during the summer of 1339 that the king had to intervene. He instructed the captain of Lucera, Foggia, and Termoli to

194

Chapter Eight

take account of and then distribute supplies of grain and legumes in the city. Food which was not given to the hungry was to be put in stor-

age.” Since food distribution was still centralized during the spring of 1341, grain supplies were evidently barely sufficient to meet the needs

of the population.””” When analyzing the impact which the removal of the Muslim population from Lucera may have had on city’s agriculture

and economy, it is important to remember the extent of the famine. Other cities in Italy also suffered from severe food shortages in 1339, The loss of Muslim farmers probably contributed to, but was not the

sole cause of, the privation at Lucera. Robert’s reign also saw the deterioration of social order. Strongmen caused major disturbances during the late 1330s. During the summer of 1337, the men of a knight from Salerno named Matteo Manselle went

about Lucera armed, disrupting the peace and threatening the syndics. Queen Sancia had to order the captain and royal vicar of Lucera, Fog-

gia, and Termoli to disarm them.”” Conflict at Barletta between the rival Pipino and Della Marra families intensified in 1338 to the extent that Robert had to intercede.”'° While Lucera was coping with food shortages in 1340, Pietro Pipino, the count of Vico and the grandson of Giovanni Pipino, entered the city with armed and mounted men, threatening the captain and others.”'' Robert wrote that “enormous excesses”

were committed in the city.7’” The ambitions of powerful individuals and families repeatedly created problems for the crown in various parts of the regno during and after Robert’s reign.”'? The powerful and wealthy prince of Taranto, Raimondello Del Balzo Orsini, even planned a revolt against King Ladislao in 1406, but he died before carrying it out.

Alfonso of Aragon became king in 1442. During his reign, despite the instability of the previous century, Lucera was one of the most densely populated cities in northern Apulia. In 1447 there were 908 hearths at Lucera, more than at Foggia, San Severo, Manfredonia, or Monte Sant’Angelo. Aragonese records reported the following for tax purposes:

The Fall of Muslim Lucera

195

Table 8.1 Number of Hearths in Cities in Capitanata in 1447

City

Number of Hearths

Lucera

908

Manfredonia San Severo Foggia

719 711 415

Monte Sant’ Angelo

394

Source: Fonti aragonesi, vol. 4, 71-72, 76-77.

Hearths of Number

Lucera

Manfredonia

San Severo

Foggia

~ Monte Sant'Angelo

Clty

Less than 150 years after the destruction of the Muslim colony, Lucera was one of the most important cities in northern Apulia. Under the Aragonese tax system, the city’s inhabitants paid taxes like the residents

of other towns and cities.”'* As in other parts of the Tavoliere, land at

Lucera was devoted increasingly to pasturing during Alfonso’s reign.”!°

Alberto Grohmann attributed Lucera’s economic success primarily to its location, noting that the city benefited from its proximity to Foggia and to the pathways of transhumance.”'’ While Jews are known to have lived at Lucera during the Aragonese period and Slavs and Albanians Ts Sian to the city, the Muslim community did not reestablish itself.

Chapter Eight

196

Notes 1. William Chester Jordan and Joshua Starr have studied the treatment of

Jews during Charles’ reign: William Chester Jordan, The French Monarchy and the Jews. From Philip Augustus to the Last Capetians (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1989) 181-182; Joshua Starr, “The mass conversion of Jews in Southern Italy (1290-1293),” Speculum: A Journal of Mediaeval Studies

21 (1946): 203-211. The topic still merits further examination by medievalists. 2. Archivio della Santissima Trinita di Cava dei Tirreni, An. LX, N, 29, Year 1294. 3. Archivio della Santissima Trinita di Cava dei Tirreni, An. LX, N. 90.

Year 1297. Cf. An. LX, N. 87. Year 1297. 4. R.C.A., vol. 32, reg. 11, 66-67, no. 48; R.C.A., vol. 38, reg. 30, 25-26, no. 90; R.C.A., vol. 40, reg. 37, 72-73, no. 19; R.C.A., vol. 32, reg. 11, 66-67, no.

48. $. C’DS:E.,.no. 85: 6. C.D.S.L., no. 85.

7. C.D.S.L., no. 48. 8. C_D.S.L., no. 98.

9. Benjamin Kedar, Crusade and Mission: European Approaches toward the Muslims (Princeton: Princeton UP, 1984) 196.

10. C.D.S.L., no. 100. 11. R.C.A., vol. 32, reg. 15, 257, no. 583; C.D.S.L., no. 229. 12. R.C.A., vol. 27, pt. 1, reg. 119, 330, no. 511. 13. C.D.S-£., no. 99.

14.C.D.S.L., no. 121.

15. For studies of conversions to Islam in the Middle Ages based on the adoption of Arabic names and the Bulliet curve, see Bulliet, Conversion. 16. C.D.S.L., no. 156; C.D.S.L., no. 185, 17. C.D.S.L., no. 169. 18. CD.S.L., no. 185,

19. C.D.S.L., no. 185. 20. C.D.S.L., no. 286. 21. Burns, Medieval Colonialism 191.

22. C.D.S.L., no. 174. 23. C.D.S.L., no. 174; C.D.S.L., no. 175. 24. C.D.S.L., no. 271. 25. 26. 27. 28.

C.D.S.L., no. 272. C.D.S.L., no. 342. C.D.S.L., no. 294. Le due Bibbie 40.

29. C.D.S.L., nos. 344, 456. 30. C._D.S.L., no. 698. 31. CD.S.L., no. 339. 32. C.D. S.L., no. 433.

33. C.D.S.L., no. 437.

The Fall of Muslim Lucera

197

33. C.D.S.L., no. 437. 34. C.D.S.L., no. 761. 35. C.D.S.L., no. 569. 36. C.D.S.L., no. 349, 37. Pasquale Corsi, “Aspetti di vita quotidiana nelle carte di Lucera del secolo XIII,” Miscellanea di storia lucerina II. Atti del III convegno di studi storici (Lucera: Centro Regionale Servizi Culturale Educativi, 1989) 54-55.

38. 39. 40. 41.

C.D.S.L., C.D.S.L., C.D.S.L., C.D.S.L.,

no. no. no. no.

286. 327. Cf. no. 385. 425. 456.

42. C.D.S.L., no. 456. 43. C._D.S.L., no. 472; C.D.S.L., no. 473.

44. C.D.S.L., no. 473. 45. C.D.S.L., no. 472.

46. 47. 48. 49. 50.

C.D.S.L., C.D.S.L., C.D.S.L., C_D.S.L., C.D.S.L.,

no. no. no. no. no.

386. 392. 409. 499. 518.

51. C.D.S.L., no. 518; C.D.S.L., no. 603.

52. Anna Maria Voci, “La cappella di corte dei primi sovrani angioini di Napoli,” E.A. 450-451. 53. C.D.S.L., no. 316a.

54. C.D.S.L., no. 347, 348, 384, 401, 431, 437. 55. C.D.S.L., no. 356.

56. Church, State, and Jew in the Middle Ages, ed. Robert Chazan (New York: Behrman House, 1980) 316. 57. C.D.S.L., no. 401.

58. Le pergamene di S. Nicola di Bari, nos. 95, 109, 111, 112.

59. C.D.S.L., no. 426. 60. C.D.S.L., no. 442.

61. C.D.S.L., no. 400. 62. C.D.S.L., no. 400. 63. C_D.S.L., no. 415. 64. C.D.S.L., no. 397.

65. C.D.S.L., no. 536. 66. C.D.S.L., no. 536.

67. C.D.S.L., no. 394. 68. C_D.S.L., no. 675.

69. C.D.S.L., no. 443. 70. C.D.S.L., no. 446. 71. C.D.S.L., no. 505,

72. C.D.S.L., no. 523. 73. C.D.S.L., no. 396.

198

Chapter Eight

75. C.D.S.L., no. 447. 76. C.D.S.L., no. 459.

77. C.D.S.L., no. 496; C.D.S.L., no. 747. 78. C.D.S.L., no. 398. 79. C.D.S.L., no. 777. 80. C.D.S.L., no. 332. 81. C.D.S.L., no. 562.

82. C._D.S.L., no. 418. 83. C.D.S.L., no. 625. 84. C.D.S.L., no. 625; C.D.S.L., no. 716.

85. C.D.S.L., no. 460. 86. Kedar, Crusade 147. Cf. Jonathan Riley-Smith, The Feudal Nobility 6263. 87. Kedar, Crusade 149. 88. C.D.S.L., no. 466.

89. 90. 91. 92.

C.D.S.L., C.D.S.L., C.D.S.L., C.D.S.L.,

no. no. no. no.

417. 438. 440. 456.

93. C._D.S.L., no. 475; C.D.S.L., no. 548. 94. C.D.S.L., no. 457.

95. C._D.S.L., no. 760. 96. C._D.S.L., no. 788. 97. C._D.S.L., no. 448a; C.D.S.L., no. 430; C.D.S.L., no. 481. 98. Henri Bresc, Un monde méditerranéen. Economie et société en Sicile

1300-1450, vol. 1 (Rome: Ecole Frangaise de Rome, 1986) 440. 99. Charles Verlinden, L 'esclavage dans |'Europe médiévale, vol. 2 (Ghent: De Tempel, 1977) 156. 100. C.D.S.L., no. 441a. 101. Julie Taylor, “Luceria Sarracenorum. Una colonia musulmana nell’ Europa medievale,” A.S.P. 52 (1999): 241. 102. Jordan, The French 182, 185. 103. Church, State, and Jew 314-317.

104. C_D.S.L., no. 727. Incidentally, like sarracenus, the word sclavus was sometimes used as 105. C.D.S.L., 106. C.D.S.L., 107. C.D.S.L., 108. C.D.S.L.,

a surname by Christians in southern Italy. no. 473. no. 394. no. 784. no. 435.

109. Rivoire, “Lucera” 181.

110. 111. 112. 113.

Egidi, “La colonia,” A.S.P.N. 39 (1914): 697. Gifuni, Origini 6-7. Gifuni, Origini 7. For Charles II’s treatment of Jews, see also David Abulafia, “L’ eta

sveva € angioina,” L 'ebraismo dell'Italia meridionale peninsulare dalle corigini

The Fall of Muslim Lucera

199

al 1541. Atti del convegno internazionale di studio Potenza-Venosa, eds. Co-

simo Damiano Fonseca, et al., 20-24 settembre 1992 (Galatina: Congedo Editore, 1996) 69-78. 114. Abulafia, “Monarchs” 243.

115. 116. 117. 118. 119. 120. 121.

C.D.S.L., C.D.S.L., C.D.S.L., C.D.S.L., C.D.S.L., C.D.S.L., C.D.S.L.,

no. 252. no. 289. nos, 234, 244. no. 27. no. 102. no. 151. nos. 329, 355, 357, 388.

122. For the canonization of Louis IX, see Le Goff, San Luigi 242-245. 123. Church, State, and Jew 221-5, 229. 124. Caroline Bruzelius, “Charles I, Charles II, and the Development of an

Angevin Style in the Kingdom of Sicily,” £.A. 113. 125. C_D.S.E., no. 318.

126. C.D.S.L., no. 318; Robert Burns, The Crusader Kingdom of Valencia: Reconstruction on a Thirteenth-Century Frontier (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard UP, 1967) 18-19; Until a separate cathedral was built at Valencia, Christians

worshipped in the mosque which they had appropriated for Christian use. 127. C.D.S.L., no. 342. 128. C.D.S.L., no. 342.

129. C.D.S.L, nos. 318 and 323. 130. Archivio Capitolare della Cattedrale di Lucera, no. B6. 131. Cohen, The Friars.

132. His satisfaction regarding the turn of events is revealed in C.D.S.L., nos. 470, 680a. The destruction of Lucera coincided with the first Jubilee year which had been declared on 22 February 1300 by Boniface: Archivio segreto Vaticano 116, Tav. XLVIII. The Jubilee is held every 100 years. Bishop Aymardus was transferred to Salpi in 1302: C_D.S.L., no. 680a. 133. C.D.S.L., no. 611. 134. C.D.S.L., no. 788a. 135. C_D.S.L., no. 470. 136. C.D.S.L., no. 151. 137/CD:S.L., no: U5): 138. C._D.S.L., no. 573.

139. C.D.S.L., no. 565. 140. C_D.S.L., nos. 541, 542, 543, 544, 565, 575, 582, 585, 588. 141, C_D.S.L., nos. 601 and 602. 142. P. Gabriele Guastamacchia, // Bel San Francesco. La Chiesa del Pa-

dre Maestro (Lucera: Tipografia Editrice C. Catapano, 1973) 5: “Primo penSiero del re Carlo II d'Angio . . . fu quello di attendere immediatamente alla ricostruzione spirituale della citta, che si veniva rapidamente ripopolando con

l'arrivo dei lucerini in esilio e di altri accorsi da ogni parte del regno.”

200

Chapter Eight

ricostruzione spirituale della citta, che si veniva rapidamente ripopolando con l'arrivo dei lucerini in esilio e di altri accorsi da ogni parte del regno.” 143. C._D.S.L., no. 503; Valentino da Acerenza was living at Lucera in

1324: Regesto delle pergamene, Abbazia di Montevergine, vol. 4, 152, no, 3080. 144. 145. 146. 147.

C.D.S.L., C.D.S.L., C.D.S.L., C._D.S.L.,

no. no. no. no.

583. 611. 611. 561.

148. C._D.S.L., no. 494, note. 149. C_D.S.L., no. 611; See also Rivoire, “Lucera” 182-183.

150. C._D.S.L., no. 768. 151. C.D.S.L., no. 769. 152. P.A.D., no. 3. 153. P.A.D., no. 13.

154. C.D.S.L., no. 319. 155. C_D.S.L., no. 640. 156. C.D.S.L., nos. 410 and 411.

157. C.D.S.L., no. 319a. 158. C.D.S.L., no. 698. 159. Monasticon Italiae, eds. Giovanni Lunardi, Herbert Houben, and Giovanni Spinelli, vol. 3 (Cesena: Badia di Santa Maria del Monte, 1986) 66, no. 162; C._D.S.L., no. 478a; C.D.S.L., no. 698. In addition to financing that monas-

tery, Giovanni may have also contributed economically to the building of the church of San Pietro a Maiella in Naples: Bruzelius, “Charles” 101. 160. C.D.S.L., no. 686. 161. C_D.S.L., no. 395. 162. C.D.S.L., no. 418. 163. C.D.S.L., no. 418. 164. C._D.S.L., no. 398. 165. C.D.S.L., no. 398. 166. C.D.S.L., no. 721. 167. C.D.S.L., no. 722. 168. C._D.S.L., no. 727.

169. Burns, The Crusader Kingdom 197-212. The Order of Hermits of Saint Augustine arrived in Valencia later than the Franciscans and Dominicans

since their order was founded in 1256: Burns, The Crusader Kingdom 209. The Valencian context is very different, of course, since the friars arrived to preach primarily to a dominant Muslim population which had come under Aragonese rule.

170. C.D.S.L., no. 470. 171. C.D.S.L., no. 392. 172. Bruzelius, “Charles”

104-105, 114. The fourteenth-century churches

which are still standing at Lucera are identified on map three in the appendix. 173. C.D.S.E., no. 757.

|

The Fall of Muslim Lucera

201

177. C.D.S.L., no. 783.

178. C.D.S.L., no. 779; For the attack launched by Philip the Fair on the Order of the Temple, see Anne Gilmour-Bryson, The Trial of the Templars in the Papal State and the Abruzzi (Citta del Vaticano: Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, 1982).

179. C.D.S.L., no. 611; Voci, “La cappella” 457. 180. Bruzelius, “Charles” 100. 181. CD.S.L., no. 729. 182. C.D.S.L., no. 174, Bartholomew da Capua drafted this document.

183. P.A.D., p. XXV. 184. Fonti aragonesi, ed. Catello Salvati, vol. 4 (Napoli: Accademia Pontaniana, 1964) 87, 98. 185. Jregestri dell’archivio, Abbazia di Montecassino, vol. 3, no. 858. Year

1466. 186. C.D.S.L., no. 79Sa. 187. Caggese, Roberto 272. 188. Rivoire, “Lucera” 185; Archivio Capitolare della Cattedrale di Lucera, no. D1.

189. L.S.D.A., nos. VIII, XXXVIII. 190, L.S.D.A., no. X. 191. L.S.D.A., no. XIV.

192. | regestri dell’archivio, Abbazia di Montecassino, vol. 3, no. 741. 193. C.D.S.L., no. 787. 194. C_D.S.L., no. 790a.

195. For Charles’ death, see Galasso, // Regno 143-144. 196. P.A.D., no. 29. 197. L.S.D.A., nos. XLII, XLV, XLVIII.

198. Regesto delle pergamene, Abbazia di Montevergine, vol. 4, 143, no. 3052. 199. Regesto delle pergamene, Abbazia di Montevergine, vol. 4, 152, no. 3080,

200. Regesto delle pergamene, Abbazia di Montevergine, vol. 4, 261, no. 22. 201. C.D.S.L., no. 686. 202. P.A.D., no. 13. 203. P.A.D., no. 15; C.D.S.L., no, 795a (a summary). 204. P.A.D., no. 16.

205. Alberto Grohmann, Le fiere del Regno di Napoli in eta aragonese

(Naples; Istituto Italiano per gli Studi Storici, 1969) 138. 206. P.A.D., no. 23 207. P.A.D., no. 24.

208. John Larner, Italy in the Age of Dante and Petrarch (1980; Essex:

Longman Group Limited, 1985) 256, 209. P.A.D., no. 22.

202

Chapter Eight

210. Romolo Caggese, “Giovanni Pipino conte d’Altamura,” Studi di storia

napoletana in onore di Michelangelo Schipa (Napoli: ITEA, 1926) 150. 211. C.D.S.L., no. 827. For Giovanni’s descendents, see Caggese, “Giovanni” 144-145. 212. C.D.S.L., no. 827. 213. Licinio, “I periodi” 288. 214. Licinio, “I periodi” 292. 215. Fonti aragonesi, vol. 4, 71-72, 76-77.

216. Licinio, “I periodi” 293. 217. Grohmann, Le fiere 138. 218. Cesare Colafemmina, “Slavi e albanesi a Lucera nei secoli XV-XVI,”

Miscellanea di storia lucerina. Atti del I e I] convegno di studi storici (Lucera: Centro Regionale Servizi Culturali Educativi, 1987) 95-106.

Chapter Nine

Conclusion A number of Muslims were living in southern Italy years after they had been forced to abandon their homes. Riccardo Bevere noted that in

1302 Charles II permitted the establishment of 200 Muslim hearths in the land of Civitate.' The king imposed on them restrictions which were similar to those designed for the dhimmi of Muslim lands; they were not

to construct mosques or issue the call to prayer. Just nine years later, at the Council of Vienna, Pope Clement V would urge Christian rulers to forbid the Muslim call to prayer in their lands.’ Unfortunately, apart

from the above information, nothing more is known about the community.

As late as 1314, Muslim craftsmen were still being assigned to Work on projects in the kingdom.’ The Muslim population was still large enough in 1328 that Charles’ son, Robert the Wise, ordered his officials to track down Muslim men left living in southern Italy in order to exact money from them for the defense of the kingdom.“ Since he did not refer to them as servants or slaves, they had either not been sold on

the Slave market or they had been freed by their owners, perhaps after being ransomed by other Muslims. Like the people who had settled at Civitate, they were evidently Sarraceni liberi. Some may have once

204

Chapter Nine

been members of the Muslim elite who had been allowed to convert to Christianity during the turmoil of 1300. After the danger had passed, such persons could have begun to identify themselves again more openly as Muslims. By comparison, Colafemmina has suggested that the Jews who are known to have lived at Lucera during the Aragonese period were the descendents of Jews who had been forced to convert to Christianity during the 1290s. He theorized that the converts may have continued to observe Jewish practices in secret.” Among the officials ordered to search out Muslims in 1328 was the captain of Lucera, or rather the City of Santa Maria. Evidently, at least a few Muslims had remained or had found their way back to Lucera despite early Angevin efforts to keep them away from the city. In 1336 Robert the Wise issued a letter to officials in the kingdom calling for the protection of Muslims from disturbance and injury so that “ipsi sub alarum nostrarum umbra queant pacifice vivere.”® In its appeal to the basic canonical rights of Muslims to protection, Robert’s letter harkens back to Bartolomeo’s defense of the Muslims in 1296. The renewed tolerance on the part of the crown was perhaps possible because the majority of Muslims and all physical manifestations of Islam had been uprooted. Nevertheless, the fact that the king had to defend Muslims from abuse indicates that prejudice against them was still widespread among the population over three decades after the dismantling of the settlement. The archaeological record for the Lucerine Muslims after 1300 is lacking. Housed in Lucera’s museum, a plaster copy of an Arabic epigraph dated 1348 has been associated with the Lucerines, but Michelangelo Lanci concluded that it is actually of Egyptian provenance.’ How the epigraph reached Lucera is unclear. The original was evidently at some point sent to the Museo Nazionale d’Arte Orientale in Rome, but that museum has no record of it. Predictably, no fourteenth-century examples of jugs, plates, or other pottery similar to those produced by the Muslim colonists have been recovered in excavations at Lucera. The talents of Muslim weapon makers and craftmen were not completely lost because, as noted, Charles II retained many of them for the crown,

but they evidently worked on projects outside Lucera, and their creations are not easily identifiable. Whereas Lucera had for years been a source of Muslim soldiers, archers, crossbowmen, tentmakers and leop-

ard keepers, after 1300 those professions and trades were no longer significant in the city. Compensatory levies were imposed for a while, but in the long term the crown lost a lucrative source of tax revenue. As shown, the Muslims had paid a tax burden which was much heavier than the ones shouldered

Conclusion

205

by neighboring cities and towns. Taxes which were particular to Mus-

lims, such as the jizya, could not be reintroduced. During the Aragonese period, Lucera paid more taxes overall than did nearby cities, but that

was simply because there were more hearths at Lucera. The burden per household was not greater. The liquidation of the assets at Lucera did solve Charles’ financial problems. In 1302 he was still arranging loans for military purposes from Florentine banking societies such as the Bardi and the Peruzzi.° Money from the compensatory levies imposed on the communities surrounding Lucera had to be used to meet various obligations. In January 1301, some of the levies went to pay a debt of 400 gold ounces which had been incurred by Robert, the duke of Calabria, to a Florentine bank-

ing society.” Raimond Bérenger received an allowance from the same source to counterbalance his lost revenues; he was granted 600 gold ounces—one half of the total actually due to him.'° Four gold ounces had to be given each year from the levies to two brothers until the lands which they had lost during the War of the Sicilian Vespers could be replaced by the crown.'' Jean de Montfort and his troops were conceded a hefty annual payment of 2,000 gold ounces, some of which came from the levies.'” The creation of religious homogeneity did not resolve the tensions and conflicts which arose from the need to compete for resources. Most farmland continued to be held by a limited number of landlords. As noted, to make sure that Christian farmers were treated as well as the

Muslims had been, Charles ordered property owners such as the church to allow farmers to cultivate their lands in exchange for payment of the terragium.' Thus, while the crown did grant land to many settlers, the conditions under which many Christians farmed were similar to those experienced by Muslims. They had to pay for the right to cultivate land

owned by another party because they themselves did not have enough land from which to live. Overall, Christian farmers did pay fewer taxes, though. While food had to be sold in 1301 to the people who had resettled Lucera because of the disruption which had occurred in farming, the city gradually became self-sufficient. As stated, the famine which struck

the city in 1339 affected many other places in the kingdom as well, so it should not be viewed as proof that efforts to revitalize Lucera had failed. During the second half of the fourteenth century, the impact of the removal of Muslims is difficult to estimate because of the spread of the plague in southern Italy. As shown, by the mid-fifteenth century, Lucera’s population and economy were stable.

eee

206

Chapter Nine

Agitation by magnates was a serious problem in Capitanata during the reign of Robert the Wise. The abolition of the Muslim settlement was not the cause of the deterioration of social order, though." If there had been a Muslim retinue loyal to the king at Lucera, the disturbances which occurred in Capitanata in the late 1330s might have been prevented, but while Charles I and II had deployed Muslims against the Sicilian rebels, the Lucerine Muslims had not been integral to the maintenance of domestic social order during their reigns. The reduction in the number of people assigned to guard Lucera’s fortress in the early fourteenth century actually suggests that the removal of the Muslim colonists had diminished the crown’s security concerns somewhat. Importantly, the disturbances caused by powerful magnates during Robert’s kingship affected many parts of the realm, not just northern Apulia. The Muslims of Lucera did not leave a great cultural patrimony. No distinctively Islamic architecture has survived in the city. No medieval documents, literature, or poetry in Arabic are present in the collections of the local archives. Nevertheless, the history of Muslim Lucera is important for what it tells us about the status of Muslims living in Christendom; the degree to which Muslims were able to preserve their religion, language, and culture; the trades and expertise of members of the Lucerine community; and the nature of relations between the Muslims

of Lucera and Christians. The Lucerine colonists, like other Muslims and Jews living in Christendom, had a protected status under canon law. As long as they did not pose a threat to Christians, they were to be allowed to live in peace. Defining them as servi camerae, both Hohenstaufen and Ange-

vin rulers considered the Muslims of Lucera to be royal property. Islamic guidelines for the treatment of Jews and Christians living under Muslim rule influenced how the Muslims of Lucera were treated by the crown. Like the dhimmi, the colonists were made to pay the jizya. As were Muslims in the Palermo described by Ibn Jubayr, Muslims at Lucera were allowed a degree of religious freedom and autonomy in running their internal affairs. The focal point of the Lucerine community was the mosque. Within it, a Qur’anic school may have operated. Muslims are known to have observed Friday prayers, and they presumably kept Ramadan. At least some of the colonists do appear to have ignored dietary guidelines, however, by consuming prohibited foods and beverages such as pork and wine. The opportunities which were available to certain members of the Muslim elite class at Lucera, such as knighthood and the freedom to

acquire property outside the colony, demonstrate that calls for the sub-

Conclusion

207

jugation and separation of Muslims such as those made at the Fourth Lateran Council were not entirely heeded. The crown valued the mili-

tary and other services provided by Muslims, and it rewarded them accordingly. Notwithstanding their privileges, even wealthy Muslims were defined as servi camerae. Most Muslims were farmers, but a diversified economy developed at Lucera. Muslims raised animals, opened shops and taverns, and trained as soldiers. Artisans worked with metals, clay, and cloth. The Muslims of Lucera were instrumental to the execution of ambitious building projects. They served the crown at court and, in a few cases, in important offices such as the office of captain of Pantelleria. In the literate class which existed at Lucera were physicians. For economic as well as religious reasons, tensions existed between the Lucerine Muslims and Christians in the kingdom. A number of Christian landowners were reluctant to comply with the crown’s arrangement whereby Muslim farmers used their lands in exchange for payment of the terragium. Many Muslims were also dissatisfied with the arrangement. With limited resources and a heavy tax burden, some resorted to tax evasion and poaching. To better their economic conditions and to avoid doing the labor demanded for the crown’s construction projects, others fled. The transfer of Sicily’s Muslim population to Lucera adversely affected many of the city’s Christian inhabitants. The arrival of the Sicilians appears to have placed local resources under strain. Due to overcrowding and presumably for religious reasons, many Christians relocated. Although some remained, Christian life in the city fell into decline. In the 1290s, there was still a bishop at Lucera, but he was liv-

ing in poverty. Conflicts occurred between the Muslim colonists and Christians, but there is also evidence of cooperation and collaboration between them. Some Christians apparently joined Muslims in rebelling against Charles | at Lucera in 1268 and 1269. Christians and Muslims engaged in commerce. During the reign of Charles II, both Muslims and Christians at Lucera were responsible for the maintenance of the fortress complex. Although they generally served under the immediate command of other Muslims, the Lucerines fought with Christians in both Hohenstaufen and Angevin military campaigns. In creating Muslim Lucera, Frederick evidently intended to preserve the Muslim population. He probably did not intend for them to have a permanent presence in the kingdom, however. Although he did not call for the colony’s destruction in his last will and testament, his call in that

document for the rebuilding and restoration of the church at Lucera im-

208

Chapter Nine

plies that he wanted Christianity to be reestablished in the city. Evidence that Muslim numeric dominance was viewed as a temporary state of affairs is the storage for decades at Lucera of church bells which could have been donated to churches elsewhere in the diocese. Frederick may have hoped that through the gradual conversion of Muslims Lucera would have become again a Christian city. Had his relationship with the papacy not deteriorated, it is possible that he may have allowed mendicant friars to revisit the city in order to proselytize among its inhabitants. Although Charles I, evidently motivated primarily by the prospect of receiving lucrative tax revenues, allowed Muslims to stay at Lucera even after they had rebelled against him, he went to great lengths in the 1270s to bring Christian settlers to the city. The presence of the Proven¢al immigrants helped to stabilize Lucera, though they were not lured to Apulia solely to enhance local security. As noted, entire families were urged to relocate so that the Christian community would propagate itself. In the costly fortress compound which he built for them, Charles built a new chapel which was administered by a paid chaplain. The Angevin king was endeavoring to reestablish gradually Christianity at Lucera.

The planning of a crusade against Muslims outside the kingdom appears to have twice been a factor which worked in favor of Muslims within it, once during the early 1220s when Frederick II was responding to the Muslim uprisings in Sicily and again in 1269 when Charles I had

to suppress the rebellion at Lucera. When he abolished the Muslim colony during the summer of 1300, Charles II was not responding to an uprising or other social disturbance. Having never been on crusade, he was fulfilling an obligation felt by many medieval Christian monarchs: combatting the “infidel.” In the late thirteenth century, more than one European monarch

strategized ways to generate revenues while eliminating non-Christians from his lands. Thirteen years before the Muslims of Lucera were sold into slavery, Muslims on the island of Minorca had been enslaved on

orders of the Aragonese king Alfonso II. Like Charles II, Alfonso had had the responsibility of meeting heavy economic debts.'* In Medieval Jewry in Northern France, Robert Chazan asserted that Charles’ expul-

sion of the Jews from Anjou and Maine “reflected basically the same

desperate need for funds that had animated the related expulsion from

Gascony ...” ordered by King Edward I of England.'® By the time of Lucera’s destruction, the crusading movement had been under way for over two centuries.'’ Papal correspondence on the Lucerine Muslims after August 1300 reveals a view of Islam as. an in-

Conclusion

209

tolerable sect. For his actions against the Muslims of Lucera, Charles II received praise from both Popes Boniface VIII and Benedict XI. There was an evident willingness on the part of the papacy to disregard canonical provisions for Muslims and Jews when charges were made against them. The demand for religious uniformity in Christendom grew

in part during the thirteenth century as a result of the activities of the mendicant orders who targeted Muslim and Jewish communities for missionizing. The Christian population supported the violent dismantling of Muslim Lucera. Antipathy toward Muslims was so strongly felt in the kingdom in 1308 that Charles II expressed concern that the convert Giovanni Cristiano, a physician, might be unduly taxed and harassed while traveling because he spoke Arabic. '8 In the end, the usefulness of the Muslim

community

at Lucera to the sovereign was

not

enough to counterbalance the growing desire for and pursuit of a united Christendom.

Notes 1. Riccardo Bevere, “Ancora sulla causa della distruzione della colonia saracena di Lucera.” A.S.P.N. 60 (1935): 225-226.

2. Boswell, The Royal Treasure 262. 3. |documenti storici di Corato, 271-272, no. CCXLVI.

4.C.D.S.L., no. 804 5. Cesare Colafemmina, “Ebrei a Lucera nei secoli XV-XVI,” Della Capi-

fanata e del Mezzogiorno. Studi per Pasquale Soccio, ed. Antonio Motta (Manduria: Piero Lacaita Editore, 1987) 29. Colafemmina has included transcriptions of six documents which refer to Jews at Lucera which were issued between 1492 and 1526. 6. C.D.S.L., no. 818. 7. Michelangelo Lanci, Trattato delle sepolcrali iscrizioni in Cufica Tamurea e Nischia lettera da’Maomettani operate (Lucca, 1840) 176; Cf. Nikita Elisséeff, D.S. Rice, and Gaston Wiet, eds. Répertoire chronologique

a évigraphie arabe, vol. 6 (Le Caire: Imprimerie

D’Archéologie Orientale, 1964) 54-55, no. 6072; 8. Caggese, Roberto 17. 9.C.D.S.L., no. 441a. 10.C.D.S.L., no. 441a.

ll. 12. 13. 14, 15.

CD.S.L., no. 532. C.DS.L., no. 387; C.D.S.L., no. 414. C._D.S.L., no. 611. Licinio, “I periodi” 288. Lourie, “Anatomy” 3-4, 6.

de L’Institut Francaise

Chapter Nine

210

16. Robert Chazan, Medieval Jewry in Northern France: A Political and Social. History (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins UP, 1973) 184-185. 17. Jonathan Riley-Smith, The Crusades: A Short History (New Haven: Yale UP, 1987). 18, C_D.S:L., no. 777.

ee

Ne ear

ee

ee

ee

=

So: