Armies of Heaven (56 page)

1
Hagenmeyer,
Epistulae
4, p. 140.

2
The descriptions of the battle here, drawn heavily on France (1994), pp. 170–185. AA 2, 38, pp. 128–129; and RtM 3, 7, p. 759, say that the division happened because of supply problems. GF, p. 18, says that the armies divided because of darkness. RC 20, pp. 620–621, mentions both possibilities. FC 1, 11, 5, pp. 193–194, admits that he simply doesn't know why it happened.

3
FC 1, 11, 1–5, pp. 189–194; GF, p. 20. The somewhat boastful cry for help is in GF, p. 19.

4
The name Dorylaeum is from
Alexiad
11, 3, p. 341, named after an ancient nearby city. GF, pp. 18–19; AA, 2, 39, pp. 130–131; FC 1, 11, 6, pp. 194–195.

5
GF, pp. 19–20. See also GN, 3, 10, p. 154.

6
RtM 3, 10, p. 761; FC 1, 11, 8–10, pp. 195–197; GN 3, 10, p. 157. Fulcher places Adhémar at this scene of mass penance and confession—apparently an error since Adhémar was with Raymond and arrived at the second phase of the battle, as de-Adhémar was with Raymond and arrived at the second phase of the battle, as described in the next paragraph.

7
FC 1, 12, 2, pp. 197–198; Hagenmeyer
Epistulae
8, p. 145, and (for the final quote) 12, p. 154; GF, pp. 19–20. RtM 3, 15, p. 764, gives a brief hint that not everyone in the army was sure that these dead qualified as martyrs.
Epistulae
8 does as well.

8
RA, pp. 45–46; HBS 27, pp. 182–183;
Chronica monasterii Casinensis
, MGH SS 34, p. 480. FC 1, 12, 4, p. 198, says that the Turks fled for three days, with no one but God in pursuit. RA says that bodies were found for two days of the march, whereas HBS says it was for three days. See also Riley-Smith (1986), pp. 104–106, who notes that these saints were more closely associated with the East. Hence the crusaders probably learned to venerate them on the march. See also Erdmann,
Origin
, pp. 275–281; and Rousset, pp. 92–93.

9
The fantasy of Kilij-Arslan's retreat appears in GF, p. 22; most chroniclers follow GF's lead. The theological reading given here of Dorylaeum comes from RtM, 3, 14–15, pp. 763–764. In chap. 14 RtM imagines the Franks singing the same song
as the Israelites did upon crossing the Red Sea. In chap. 15 he gives an exegetical reading to the verses quoted here (Isa. 60:15–16).

10
BB 1, 17, p. 23, makes this observation about Saracens, Jews, and heretics. We know these eastern Christian groups and their role in the crusade story much better today thanks to the work of Christopher MacEvitt,
The Crusades and the Christian World of the East: Rough Tolerance
(Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2008). About the path of the army, including times and distances, see France (1994), pp. 185–190, who suggests important revisions to Hagenmeyer's
Chronologie
.

11
AA 3, 1–2, pp. 138–141; discussed more briefly in GF, p. 23.

12
AA 3, 4, pp. 142–145; GN 7, 12, pp. 286–287. GN says 15,000 men deserted his service. We must assume some significant exaggeration, as is usually the case with medieval chroniclers and their numbers, but the numbers must have been substantial. On the chronology of the attack, see the following the note.

13
RA, p. 46; GF, pp. 26–27. Hagenmeyer, in his
Chronologie
, places the bear attack and the illness around August 1 and 5, respectively, before the armies divide. I am following AA in placing the bear attack afterward. The date of Raymond's illness is nearly completely guesswork.

14
This account is based primarily on RC 34–36, pp. 630–632. See also the RC translation by Bachrach and Bachrach, p. 58, on the reconstruction of lost material from the manuscript.

15
Based primarily on AA 3, 8–10, pp. 150–155 (the source of the long quote); supplemented by RC 37–39, pp. 632–634; and GF, pp. 24–25. The best analysis of these events is MacEvitt,
Rough Tolerance
, pp. 55–58.

16
Matthew of Edessa 2, 110, pp. 164–165, and 2, 124, pp. 173–174. Matthew is the only source for this legend. It is worth remembering in this context that Edessa was the city where Baldwin would eventually rule as count, making him likely the original source for the legend. Matthew also mentions on p. 164 that Godfrey was a descendant of Roman emperors.

17
The Pirates were Belgian in the sense that they hailed from towns within the old Roman province of Gallia Belgica. AA 3, 11–13, pp. 154–159.

18
AA 3, 14, pp. 158–161.

19
AA 3, 15, pp. 160–163; RC 41–42, pp. 636–637. AA says that Tancred attacked the city, but RC, Tancred's biographer, seems better informed on this point.

20
AA 3, 16–17, pp. 162–167; RC, 44, p. 639. RC describes the peace as a
naenia
, which is a nursery song. The Latin reads “
Qui habet, habet; qui perdidit, perdidit
,” which means literally “He who has, has; he who lost, lost.” My translation seems true to the spirit of the original. The list of castles conquered by Tancred appears in AA 3, 26, pp. 180–181; n. 58 notes previous attempts to identify these castles. To me they seem to preserve the echo of soldierly insults hurled at Tancred by AA's Lotharingian sources.

21
AA3, 27, pp. 180–183. AA mentions that another knight died of the same disease in the same place.

22
FC 2, 12, 1, p. 416. AA 3, 17, pp. 164–167, tells how the Armenian Pakrad (or Bagrat) enticed Baldwin to Syria. FC 1, 16, 2–4, pp. 205–209, gives details of Baldwin's departure from the army. See also MacEvitt,
Rough Tolerance
, pp. 58–60.

23
RA, p. 46.

1
AA 3, 32, pp. 190–191, describes the walls; on 3, 36, pp. 196–197, he says there were 360 towers. GF, p. 77, sets the figure at 450 and adds that the city contained 360 monasteries. Raymond's description of Antioch, which contains many of these details, at RA, p. 48, says that there were three mountains rather than four around Antioch. GF, pp. 76–77, sets the figure at four. See also FC, 1, 15, 2, p. 217; France (1994), pp. 222–225; and Asbridge (2004), pp. 158–160.

2
Acts 11:19–30 describes the founding of the church at Antioch.

3
GF, pp. 26–27. S. Loutchitskaja tries to identify the historical realities behind some of the exotic names used by Frankish chroniclers in crusade histories in “Barbarae Nationes: Les peoples musulmans dans les chroniques de la Première Croisade,” in
Autour de la Croisade
, pp. 99–107. Following Ducange, Loutchitskaja (p. 105) identifies the
Publicani
as Paulicians, an early heresy that emphasized Christ's humanity over his divinity.

4
RA, pp. 46–47; AA3, 35, pp. 192–195. GF, p. 28, observes simply that the Turks fell into panic and took flight, leaving much plunder for the Franks.

5
RA, pp. 48–49; Caffaro 3, pp. 49–50; GF, pp. 28–29 (who suggests that the Turks stayed in the city for two weeks out of simple fear). Caffaro places the port seventeen miles from Antioch. The best description of the Franks' implementation of their strategy is France (1994), pp. 197–267 (on the Bridge of Boats, p. 229).

6
The emotive language is from BB 2, 9, p. 41. See also GF, p. 29; and GN 4, 13, pp. 188–189.

7
Details of the conflict (and the expression “Christ's most powerful athlete”) come from GF, p. 29; and RA, p. 41. GN 4, 3, p. 171, praises the cunning of the ambush. A similar strategy of false retreat and sudden ambush was employed most famously by William the Conqueror at Hastings. As already noted, it was a standard battle practice of the Turks, too.

8
GF, p. 29; RtM 4, 3, p. 777.

9
OV 2, 4, pp. 320–323, for Waltheof's execution. Orderic notes earlier (pp. 314–315) that beheading was the punishment in England for traitors. Chibnall adds (n. 1) that under Norman law forfeiture and imprisonment sufficed. When King William was presented with the head of another traitor, Earl Edwin of Mercia, he ordered the
proditores
(traitors) who brought it to him to leave the country: OV, 2, 4, pp. 258–259.

10
GN 4, 13, p. 189; FC 1, 15, 10, p. 221; HBS 54, p. 193.

11
BB 2, 9, p. 41. Robert's sunnier account of the decapitations appears at RtM 4, 2–3, pp. 776–777. He describes the woman's death at 4, 1, pp. 775–776. GN 4, 3, p. 172, discusses the same scenes and, like Baudry connects the woman's death to anger at the executions. GN describes Adhémar's offer at 7, 23, pp. 311–312.

12
WT 4, 23, pp. 266–267.

13
WM 4, 362, pp. 634–635. WM is the only historian to directly report cannibalism at Antioch, perhaps because cannibalism there was overshadowed by more spectacular and widespread examples from later in the crusade.

14
France (1994), pp. 229–232; GF, p. 30.

15
RA, p. 49 (and p. 55); RC 58, p. 649; FC 1, 15, 11–12, pp. 221–222, and 1, 16, 1–2, pp. 224–226; RtM 4, 4, p. 777.

16
FC 1, 15, 13–14, pp. 222–223, and 1, 16, 4, pp. 226–227; AA 3, 57, pp. 228–229.

17
RA, pp. 49 and 52; GF, pp. 31–32, though the story is preserved more fully in PT, pp. 66–67; AA 3, 51–52, pp. 218–221. Anselm of Ribemont says that Bohemond took 700 knights and “a few foot soldiers” and adds that they enjoyed a great victory over 12,000 Turks, led by “the king of Galipia,” Hagenmeyer,
Epistulae
, 15, p. 158. RA, p. 49, says that Bohemond could raise only 150 knights. In this case as in most others, numbers are a matter of making educated guesses.

18
I am privileging here the account of RA, p. 51; to be compared to GF, p. 32.

19
RA, p. 54; FC 1, 15, 16, p. 224; Apoc. 6:12; Matthew of Edessa 2, 116, p. 168; RC 56, p. 648. RC places these celestial phenomena after the crusaders were victorious in another battle on February 9. But because no one else reports similar activity at this time, and because chronology was, for RC and many medieval observers, an inexact science, it is likely that he misremembers or misdates these events.

20
I am basing this account primarily on what RA reports (pp. 68–69, thus far). The earliest manuscript of Raymond's history begins this section in all capitals with the words THE DISCOVERY BEGINS and reads very much like a legal brief—a rough Latin translation of Peter's testimony (taken in June 1098) about his experiences with Andrew. It can be compared to GF, pp. 57–58/Tudebode, p. 101. The GF account is somewhat garbled, as I have discussed in Rubenstein (2004), pp. 192–193. The most detailed treatment of Peter's visions is France (2004).

21
The Andrew legend was already translated into many languages at the time of the crusade. See Robert Boening, ed. and trans.,
The Acts of Andrew in the Country of the Cannibals: Translations from the Greek, Latin, and Old English
(New York: Routledge, 1991).

22
RA, pp. 69–70.

23
GF, p. 33; RA, p. 54. I am following the chronology of Hagenmeyer,
Chronologie,
here, though admittedly details are hazy.

24
GF, p. 34; PT, p. 69; BB, 2, 12, pp. 43–44; RtM 4, 12, pp. 781–782. The detail about the latrine comes from RC 60, pp. 650–651. RC's version of the desertion is markedly different. He does not mention Peter the Hermit. Instead, William plans to desert with Guy the Red, an important French noble. When Bohemond learns
of their plans, he threatens to convert their tents into latrines. I am taking some liberty in assuming that he did so. Flori (1999), pp. 482–492, suggests ingeniously that Peter never attempted to desert but rather that in circulating copies of GF later, Bohemond inserted Peter's name in place of Guy's out of fear of offending the Capetians, with whom Bohemond was negotiating a marriage on his own behalf. As Flori rightly points out, the sources describing Peter's desertion all grow from a single text, but I have elected to follow them (and presume that Guy deserted on another occasion). AA 4, 37, pp. 304–305, places William's final desertion much later in the siege.

25
GN 4, 8, pp. 179–180.

1
The best primary source account of Baldwin's activity in Syria is AA (quoted here at 3, 18, pp. 166–167). FC 1, 14, 4–15, pp. 208–215, is very brief (despite being an eyewitness and a political player in these events). On this all-but-lost period of conquest, see Christopher MacEvitt,
The Crusades and the Christian World of the East: Rough Tolerance
(Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2008), pp. 58–63.

2
My overview of Edessan history owes its existence almost entirely to MacEvitt,
Rough Tolerance
, esp. pp. 65–68. On the economy of Edessa, see Monique Amouroux-Mourad,
Le Comté d'Edesse, 1098–1150
(Paris: Librairie Orientaliste Paul Geuthner, 1988), pp. 131–135. The terms of T‘oros's offer are not entirely clear: Compare AA3, 19, 168–169, to FC 1, 14, 6, p. 210. Matthew of Edessa, 2, 117, pp. 168–169, is vague.

3
FC 1, 14, 7–11, pp. 210–212; AA 3, 19–20, pp. 168–171. AA uses the word “senator.” Because he seems to have enjoyed especially good sources, I have elected to read his decision as growing out of the perceptions of Baldwin and his followers. AA also says that Baldwin had two hundred knights, not eighty. I am following FC here because, although laconic on most points, he is more trustworthy on such fine points of detail, having been present at these particular events.

4
FC 1, 14, 12, pp. 212–213; AA3, 20–21, pp. 168–173.

5
The adoption ceremony is described at AA3, 21, pp. 170–171; and GN 3, 14, pp. 163–164.