Armies of Heaven (54 page)

14
The details come mainly from AA 1, 29, pp. 54–59, largely confirmed by Frutolf and EA, as cited previously. We can place the survivors with Hugh because AA mentions the presence of Drogo and Clarembald with Hugh the Great in Constantinople in AA 2, 7, pp. 72–73.

15
FC 1, 6, 3, pp. 154–156;
Alexiad
10, 7, pp. 313–314; GN 1, 19, p. 135. Anna says that almost all of Hugh's ships save his own were destroyed; Guibert describes the passage as “smooth sailing.” The sources are more or less in agreement that Hugh passage as “smooth sailing.” The sources are more or less in agreement that Hugh was placed in captivity.

16
FC 1, 5, 12, p. 153, and 1, 6, 13, p. 163. The best introduction to Fulcher is Verena Epp,
Fulcher von Chartres: Studien zur Geschichtsscreibung des ersten Kreuz-zuges
(Düsseldorf, Germany: Droste, 1990). Fulcher observes on 1, 6, 12, that the knights could expect a hundredfold return.

17
FC 1, 7, 1–3, pp. 163–166. The dates for the Franks' visit to Lucca and Rome as given in Hagenmeyer,
Chronologie
(October 25 and October 28) are highly speculative.

18
FC 1, 7, 4–5, pp. 166–168. Bohemond's sermon was discussed in Chapter 1. It is possible that Anna Comnena describes the capture of one of Robert's followers in
Alexiad
10, 8, pp. 315–318. The name she gives is “Prebentzas.” Anna uses the incident mainly to tell an amusing story about how belligerent Latin priests were. The translator's suggestion that Prebentzas was Richard of the Principate has little merit.

19
GF, pp. 7–9; HBS, 7–8, p. 177; AA 2, 14, pp. 82–83. France (1994), p. 107, estimates that Bohemond averaged around four kilometers a day, over one-half and in some cases almost one-third of what other leaders were able to achieve, even though Bohemond was traveling through territories with which he was well familiar.

20
The richest, and in many cases only, source for Godfrey's early activity is AA, in this case 2, 1–4, pp. 60–67.

21
AA 2, 5–10, pp. 68–77.

22
Hill and Hill (1962), pp. 33–40; Riley-Smith (1997), p. 119.

23
On the “celebrities” in Raymond's army, see Hill and Hill (1962), p. 35. Raymond mentions his ordination in RA, p. 108: “I was promoted to the priesthood during the journey of God.”

24
RA, pp. 36–38. The number forty has obvious biblical connotations and should not be read too literally.

25
RA, pp. 39–41. Anna Comnena confirms that it was Alexius's policy to shadow the crusaders and occasionally skirmish with them:
Alexiad
10, 5, pp. 310–311.

26
Frederic Duncalf, “The Peasants' Crusade,”
American Historical Review
26 (1921): 440–453 (which, despite the title, argues against the idea of the first wave of crusaders being a “popular” army); Riley-Smith (1986), pp. 50–52. See also the comments of France (1994), p. 95: “But if Peter's army was much more than a mere rabble of poor men, it also lacked leadership.... The failure of the People's Crusade was a failure of authority.”

27
FC 1, 7, 1–5, p. 168–172.

1
Alexiad
10, 5, pp. 308–309. Warren Treadgold gives a concise account of Alexius's career and character, and his response to the First Crusade, in
A History of the Byzantine State and Society
(Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1997), pp. 612–637.

2
Alexiad
10, 5–6, pp. 309–312; 11, 6, p. 349; 10, 8, pp. 317–318.

3
AA 1, 15, pp. 28–31; GF, pp. 2–3;
A lexiad
10, 6, p. 311.

4
The list of relics comes from the possibly spurious letter of Alexius to Count Robert discussed in the notes to Chapter 2. See Hagenmeyer,
Epistulae
1, p. 134. The commentary on the pilgrims' behavior is GF, p. 3. AA 1, 15, pp. 30–31, does not mention any problematic behavior on the part of Peter's army, observing simply that
after five days it crossed the Straits of St. George. Flori (1999), pp. 285–286, following AA, suggests that Peter crossed the Bosphorus of his own accord, not under duress.

5
BB 1, 9, p. 18; Flori (1999), pp. 297–299; France (1994), p. 95.

6
The quotations are from BB 1, 9, p. 18, with details drawn from GF, pp. 2–4; and AA 1, 15–17, pp. 30–39. GF is more critical of the crusaders. AA notes neither the bad behavior nor the cultural conflicts within the army. He also says that the Franks and the Romans were making the raids and that the “Teutons” therefore decided to march inland. GF says that the Germans and the Italians (Alamanni and Lombards) broke away from the Franks because of the Franks' arrogance.

7
AA does not name the castle but says (1, 16, pp. 32–33) that it was three miles from Nicea. GF, p. 3, says that the pilgrims entered Nicea and marched for four days before attacking the castle called “Exrogorgos,” which lay beyond Nicea.
Alexiad
10, 6, pp. 311–312.

8
The anonymous source is, of course, GF, p. 4, who says as well that the leader of the Germans agreed to betray the city. AA does not specify the length of the siege; it is possible to read his account and conclude that it lasted only a day. AA 1, 18, pp. 36–37, also mentions Peter's motive for going to Constantinople. GF, p. 4, says that Peter left the army because he couldn't control it. The thirst imagery in GF, pp. 3–4, is very likely built from stock images of siege warfare since GF does not seem to have been terribly well informed about Peter's armies.

9
AA 1, 18–19, pp. 36–39. GF, p. 4, does not describe the Franks as organizing an attack; Kilij-Arslan's armies simply caught them unaware.
Alexiad
10, 6, p. 312, tells the unlikely story (but no doubt highly entertaining for Anna's audience) that Kilij-Arslan dispatched spies into the Franks' camp to spread the rumor that the Germans had discovered great plunder; at the mention of the word “money,” the Franks marched out of Civitot without a plan.

10
The description of Turkish battle tactics here is taken from a miracle story of St. Léonard of Noblat involving Bohemond:
Vita et miracula S. Leonardi
, in AASS
, Nov.
6, 3, p. 161, supplemented by comments from FC 1, 11, 6, pp. 194–195. The miracle story was probably based on sermons preached by Bohemond in 1106: Nicholas L. Paul, “A Warlord's Wisdom: Literacy and Propaganda at the Time of the First Crusade,”
Speculum
85 (2010), 534–566 (pp. 557–558). The specifics of the battle come from AA 1, 20–21, pp. 40–43. I have attempted to be somewhat more sympathetic to the decisions of Walter and the rest of the army than most modern (and medieval accounts). For example, Asbridge (2004), p. 102, describes the pilgrims' action in attacking the Turks as “a perilously risky operation against a largely untested enemy, endangering the entire first wave of the crusade for little or no reason.”

11
AA 1, 22, pp. 42–45. He estimates the number of pilgrims in the tower at 3,000.
Alexiad
10, 6, pp. 312–313. GF, pp. 4–5, provides stock images of siege warfare, including the unlikely detail of a priest killed in the battle while performing mass.

12
Alexiad
6, 10, p. 313; GF, p. 5; AA 1, 22, pp. 42–45. AA 5, 3, pp. 342–343; and RA, p. 55, mention the rumors about the Turcopoles' lineage. The decapitated bodies in p. 55, mention the rumors about the Turcopoles' lineage. The decapitated bodies in Nicomedia are noted by FC 1, 9, 5, p. 180, and will be discussed in the next chapter.

13
AA 2, 10, pp. 74–77;
Alexiad
10, 9, pp. 320–323. Anna Comnena places these skirmishes during the Easter season. She also seems to conflate these battles with ones that occurred a little over two weeks after Christmas.

14
The analysis here is based on
Alexiad
10, 6, p. 311. Anna Comnena states her belief there and at 10, 9, p. 319, that some of the crusaders, particularly Bohemond, were mainly interested in taking over Constantinople. The latter passage describes Alexius's attempt to break crusader communications.

15
AA2, 13–14, pp. 78–83;
Alexiad
10, 9, pp. 320–323, recalling that Anna appears to conflate several events here and moves these events, which happened January 13–19 to Easter. She also says that Godfrey gave in to Alexius's demands the next day and thus does not mention the subsequent plundering. GF, pp. 6–7, follows in general outline the events presented here.

16
AA 2, 14–15, pp. 82–85. AA suggests that Alexius learned of Bohemond's legation only after Bohemond's representatives had made their proposal to Godfrey.

17
AA 2, 16, pp. 84–87;
Alexiad
10, 9–10, pp. 323–326. Anna associates the “peasant incident” with another army, but it is unclear which one she has in mind. She also places it after the soldiers have sworn the oaths. Given the degree of uncertainty, I have felt entitled to a little chronological freedom in my use of the anecdote.

18
Alexiad
10, 9, p. 323, and 10, 11, p. 328 (in reference to Bohemond's oath).

19
AA 2, 16, pp. 84–87; GF, pp. 11–12 (again, as in the previous note, in reference to Bohemond's oath); Hagenmeyer,
Epistulae
4, p. 138. On the oaths, J. H. Pryor, “The Oath of the Leaders of the First Crusade to the Emperor Alexius Comnenus: Fealty, Homage,”
Parergon
2 (1984): 111–141, argues that the leaders took oaths of vassalage but not homage. Jonathan Shepard, “When Greek Meets Greek: Alexius Comnenus and Bohemond in 1097–8,”
Byzantine and Modern Greek Studies
12 (1988): 185–277 (pp. 227–237), suggests that Bohemond at least did perform liege homage to Alexius, accepting the emperor as his exclusive lord. Of course, we ought to be cautious in attributing too much precision to these ideas. The potential existed for cross-cultural miscommunication between Greeks and Latins, and ideas about vassalage and homage were very much in flux at this time in the Latin world. This was demonstrated famously by Susan Reynolds,
Fiefs and Vassals: The Medieval Evidence Reinterpreted
(Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, 1994). Reynolds discusses Godfrey's oath on p. 405, though she treats the vocabulary with excessive caution since she mistakenly dates the composition of AA's history to 1119. See also the judicious comments by Flori (1999), pp. 109–112.

20
AA 2, 16–17, pp. 86–89.

21
Alexiad
, 13, 10, p. 422. On Bohemond's facility with Greek, see Shepard, “When Greek Meets Greek,” pp. 251–258.

22
Alexiad
10, 11, pp. 327–328.

23
Alexiad
10, 11, p. 329; GF, pp. 11–12; PT, p. 43, n.
v
, and p. 48; RC 10, p. 612. The Norman historiographical tradition on this point is extremely confused. I have previously attempted to sort out the details in Rubenstein (2004), pp. 194–196. The earliest version of the story, in brief, is likely the promise concerning lands “in Romania,” as it appears in some manuscripts of the “Tudebode” chronicle and in RC. I am generally in accord with the analysis of Jean Flori,
Bohémond d'Antioche, Chevalier d'Aventure
(Paris: Payot, 2007), pp. 105–112. The arguments of Shepard, “When Greek Meets Greek,” demonstrating that Bohemond struck an alliance with Alexius seem compelling, though, as already noted, I would be reluctant to frame an argument in terms of “liege homage.”

24
GF, pp. 13–14; RC 11, p. 612.

25
RA, pp. 41–42, is the key source for these events. On the oaths, see Hill and Hill (1962), p. 51. More generally, on the character of oath-taking in Occitania, see Frederic L. Cheyette,
Ermengard of Narbonne and the World of the Troubadours
(Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 2001), pp. 187–198.
Alexiad
10, 11, pp. 329–330, describes the attention showered on Raymond by Alexius, though as noted elsewhere (Shepard, “When Greek Meets Greek,” p. 205), Anna exaggerates the warmth of their relationship.

26
GN 3, 4, p. 143, presents a defense of why Bohemond took the oath. I have paraphrased it here.

1
FC 1, 9, 1–3, pp. 176–179. The observation about the statues coming to life is from a crusade chronicle written one hundred years later by a knight named Robert of Clari, describing sculptures at the Hippodrome: Robert of Clari,
The Conquest of Constantinople
, trans. Edgar Holmes McNeal (New York: Columbia University Press, 1936), pp. 109–110.

2
FC 1, 9, 5, p. 180; BN 6, p. 494. BN clarifies that the bodies belonged to followers of Peter the Hermit. GF, pp. 13–14, describes the three-day stay at Nicomedia while the roads were cleared.

3
AA 2, 22, pp. 92–96; 2, 23, pp. 96–97; 2, 32, pp. 114–115 (the last passage being about the lake). The most detailed contemporary description of the city is RA, pp. about the lake). The most detailed contemporary description of the city is RA, pp. 142–143. See also Hagenmeyer,
Epistulae
4, p. 139. My description draws heavily from France (1994), pp. 143–144.

4
AA 2, 21, pp. 94–95, and 2, 25, pp. 102–103; France (1994), pp. 159–160.

5
Alexiad
11, 2, pp. 336–337; AA 25–26, pp. 103–107; GF, p. 15; GN 3, 8, p. 150 (part of a poem celebrating martyrdom).

6
See the diagram in France (1994), p. 123, and the description on pp. 160–161. The two essential accounts are RA, p. 43, who gives a fine sense of the chaos of the soldiers arriving at the city and then immediately entering into battle; and GF,
pp. 14–15. The sermon is in AA 2, 27, pp. 106–107. Anna's comment is at
Alexiad
11, 1, p. 334.