Armies of Heaven (57 page)

6
This is the version of AA3, 22–24, pp. 172–174. FC 1, 14, 13, pp. 213–214, places the uprising two weeks after the adoption. A briefer but broadly similar version of this story appears in GN 3, 14, p. 164, which describes T‘oros's death as a noble sacrifice to save Baldwin.

7
Matthew of Edessa 2, 118, pp. 169–170; MacEvitt,
Rough Tolerance
, pp. 68–70.

8
FC 1, 13–14, pp. 213–215; AA3, 24, pp. 176–177.

9
MacEvitt,
Rough Tolerance
, provides the best treatment of Baldwin's activity, esp. pp. 70–73. On the advantages brought to the crusade by Baldwin, see France (1994), pp. 132–133, 194–195, and 259–261.

1
GF, pp. 34–35.

2
Alexiad
11, 4, p. 343. RA, pp. 55–56, tells of Tetigus's withdrawal and his offer of cities to Bohemond. On these maneuvers, see Jonathan Shepard, “When Greek Meets Greek: Alexius Comnenus and Bohemond in 1097–8,”
Byzantine and Modern Greek Studies
12 (1988): 262–275.

3
The story of Hilary appears only in HBS 47, p. 190, a text that, as I have argued elsewhere, preserves certain battlefield legend and campfire lore better than other apparently older chronicles like GF and PT. France (1994), pp. 198–199, nicely outlines the complexities of Syrian politics in 1096–1097.

4
GF, pp. 35–36; AA 3, 61, pp. 234–235; RA, pp. 56–57 (who says that the army looked almost three times bigger than it was). See also the commentary of France (1994), pp. 245–246.

5
RA, p. 57. GF, p. 36, describes the formation of six divisions. On the numbers of the army, see France (1994), p. 246. Although France's reconstruction of the details of the battle is, on the whole, superb, I cannot agree with his suggestion (pp. 247–248) that the Franks crossed the bridge before the battle. His argument overvalues the evidence of RC, 56, p. 648, written several years after the fact. RC did visit the battlefield when he was serving Tancred at Antioch, and he visited a grave near the Iron Bridge, but these facts make him no more able to reconstruct a battle narrative than anyone who visits a war site today. Based on the evidence of RA, who says that the knights traveled “two leagues” from camp before waiting to confront the Turks, and GF, p. 37, who says that the Franks eventually pursued the Turks all the way to the Iron Bridge, the reconstruction presented here seems more likely. It also seems unlikely that the seven hundred Frankish knights could have secretly crossed the Iron Bridge, even at night, unobserved.

6
In this description, I have followed the romanticizing instincts of GF, pp. 36–37, with detail from RA, p. 57.

7
HBS 50, p. 191.

8
RA, p. 58; AA 3, 62, pp. 236–239; GF, pp. 37–38; RC 56, p. 648.

9
BB 2, 17, p. 51; and RtM 4, 16, p. 784, both imply that the crusaders were trying to intimidate the Egyptians with the heads. AA 2, 28, pp. 108–111. About these Frankish-Egyptian negotiations, see Michael A Köhler, “Al-Afdal und Jerusalem—was versprach sich Ägypten vom ersten Kreuzzug?”
Saeculum
37 (1986): 228–239.

10
RtM 5, 2, pp. 792–793. More coherent versions of the diplomatic missions appear in other sources listed in the next note. The wish to keep the purpose of these negotiations vague was equally true for both Christian and Muslim sides. See
Hillenbrand (1999), pp. 44–45 and 84–85, n. 29. See also France (1994), pp. 251–253.

11
See AA 3, 59, p. 230; GN 4, 13, p. 189, and 7, 3, pp. 271–272; Hagenmeyer,
Epistulae
15, p. 160, and 10, pp. 149 and 151. See also GF, pp. 37–38; BB 2, 7, p. 51; RA, p. 58; HBS 48, pp. 189–190; and PT, p. 72.

12
These details come from RtM 5, 1, p. 791.

13
Asbridge (2004), p. 194, oddly translates “Mahomerie” as “Blessed Mary.” I am presuming the Egyptian ambassadors accompanied Bohemond because as of May 9 they were at the port preparing to leave, as will become clear. On the decision to build the tower, see France (1994), pp. 231–232.

14
Based on AA 3, 63, pp. 238–41; and GF, p. 40. GF is, of course, the pro-Bohemond account; AA cannot resist the opportunity to criticize the Norman leader. RA, p. 59, puts the number of dead at three hundred.

15
RA, p. 60, provides the detail about the gates being locked. Yaghi-Siyan thus told his soldiers, “Conquer or die.” In the 110th
laisse
of
Roland
, the poet observes that many mistake the moment of Roland's death for the beginning of the Last Judgment because of the great number of signs that accompany it.

16
BB 2, 17, pp. 50–51; GN 7, 11, p. 284; RtM 4, 20, pp. 786–787; AA 3, 65, pp. 244–245. It is notable that all of the writers who worked with GF report this incident, though GF does not. I have suggested elsewhere—Rubenstein (2004), p. 189, and nn. 53 and 54—that the story probably appeared in a now-lost rendition of GF. and nn. 53 and 54—that the story probably appeared in a now-lost rendition of GF.

17
GF, p. 41. The image of bodies not falling appears in RtM 4, 19, p. 786. The description brings to mind William of Poitiers's observation about the English at Hastings that their battle formation was so dense that there was hardly room for the dead to fall: WP 2, 19, p. 130. See also Sweetenham's note in her translation of RtM, p. 132, n. 42, about a similar image in Lucan. On the river battle more generally, see RtM 4, 21, pp. 787–788; RA, p. 61; and FC 1, 16, 8, p. 229. The reference made here is to Apoc. 16:4.

18
GF, p. 42; RtM 4, 21, p. 788; RA, p. 61. GF first tells the number of the dead and then reveals a few lines later the method used for counting them.

19
BB 2, 17, p. 51. GN, 4, 14, p. 193, comments on the tendency of the Saracens to bury their dead with treasure; as does RtM 4, 22, p. 788, where he also comments on the shame of the deed. It is possible that Robert means only that the Christians shamed the Saracens, but the other reading (that it was a shameful deed) seems more likely. See also GF, p. 42.

20
PT, pp. 79–81; HBS 56, p. 194. The dialogue here follows the HBS version of the story.

21
HBS 35, p. 186. See also HBS 60, p. 195.

22
AA 5, 1, pp. 338–339, is the only source to describe the patriarch being suspended over the walls. The patriarch's feet were not, as common folklore has it, beaten with iron rods while he hung there—e.g., Asbridge (2004), p. 168—the result of a mistranslation of AA, who says simply that the patriarch's feet were injured by
being placed in chains. AA does not specify at what point in the siege this torture occurred.

23
HBS 35, p. 186, and 60, p. 195, with the note about the floors in 61, p. 195. The “temples” he describes as
oracula
.

24
RA, p. 129; WT 6, 23, p. 339. He is elaborating on AA 5, 1, pp. 338–339, which also mentions the “blinding” of the painted figures. A similar passage appears in EA 3, p. 13.

25
HBS 61, p. 195.

1
RtM 5, 5, p. 794. GP, whose poetic history closely follows Robert's, repeats this information in similar terms: GP 5 (2), ll. 411–460, pp. 126–129. Robert elsewhere describes Saracens simply as “rabid dogs” (
canes rabidos
): RtM 6, 8, p. 809. The lament occurs at RtM 5, 7, p. 795. See Riley-Smith (1997), pp. 88–89 and 224.

2
The second letter of Anselm of Ribemont, in Hagenmeyer,
Epistulae
15, p. 159, written in July 1098, after the Franks defeated Kerbogah.

3
GN 7, 22, pp. 308–309.

4
On the three-week siege, see FC 1, 19, 2, pp. 242–243; and Matthew of Edessa 2, 119, p. 170.

5
RtM 4, 1, p. 775.

6
AA 4, 12–14, pp. 266–271, provides most of these details. His account is flawed because Bohemond belongs near the center of the story and one of AA's obvious historical goals is to downplay the Norman leader's contribution to the crusade. RA, p. 64, mentions some of the early desertions.

7
GF, pp. 44–45. The quip is from RtM 5, 10, p. 798.

8
GF, p. 45; AA 4, 15, pp. 270–271. The number 400,000 is used in a speech by Adhémar in RC 64, p. 653, as is the pronouncement about the dangers of abandoning Antioch. This incident is well served by two detailed recent treatments: Robert Levine, “The Pious Traitor: Rhetorical Reinventions of the Fall of Antioch,”
Mittellateinishces Jahrbuch
33 (1998): 59–80; and Rebecca L. Slitt, “Justifying Cross-Cultural Friendship: Bohemond, Firuz, and the Fall of Antioch,”
Viator: Medieval and Renaissance Studies
38 (2007): 339–349. I do not pretend here to resolve the question of whether Pirrus/Firuz was Armenian or Turkish, but see France (1994), pp. 257–264; Asbridge (2004), pp. 200–211; and Hillenbrand (1999), p. 57.

9
AA 4, 16, pp. 272–273, tells the hostage story; his information is somewhat garbled because he appears to confuse Pirrus with another Turkish convert who later took the name “Bohemond.” RC 62, p. 652, tells of the harsh taxes (see also RC 57, p. 649). GF, p. 44, says bribery—the preferred explanation of GN 5, 2, p. 201.

10
BB 2, 19, pp. 53, and, more generally, 52–54. On this topic, see especially Slitt, “Justifying Cross-Cultural Friendship.” GF, p. 44, speaks of the “closest friendship” between the two. See also RtM 5, 10, p. 798.

11
RtM 5, 8–9, pp. 796–798. The “jargon” necessary to interpret these visions grows out of the Eucharistic debate, still ongoing in the twelfth century. “Holy traitor” is the phrase of RC 66, p. 654. FC 1, 17, 1–5, pp. 230–232, also argues for a divine inspiration but more straightforwardly says that Jesus appeared three times to Pirrus and commanded him to hand over the city.

12
GF, pp. 45–46. On Stephen's departure, see GF, p. 63; RA, p. 77; and FC 1, 17, 5, pp. 232–233. See also France (1994), pp. 269–270.

13
AA 4, 16, pp. 272–275; GF, pp. 45–46.

14
AA 17–19, pp. 274–279; GF, p. 46; RA, p. 64.

15
AA 4, 21, pp. 278–280; GF, p. 47; RC 70, p. 657; RA, p. 65; GF, p. 46; BB 2, 20–21, pp. 56–57.

16
GF, pp. 46–47. That he writes this scene partly in the first person has traditionally formed a key component of the argument that the anonymous author was a warrior. It would not have been unexpected on the crusade, however, to find a cleric in the midst of battle.

17
FC 1, 17, 5, p. 233; BB 2, 21, pp. 56–57; AA 4, 23, pp. 282–283; GF, p. 47.

18
GF, pp. 47–48; RA, p. 65; AA 4, 23, pp. 282–283. FC observes that the commoners searched for goods but that the knights stayed focused on killing Turks: FC 1, 17, 7, pp. 234–235.

19
France (1994), pp. 264–265; AA 4, 22, pp. 280–281.

20
AA 4, 23, pp. 282–285; RtM 6, 2, p. 805.

21
GN 5, 6, p. 206, presents this argument, in the same place describing Adhémar's instructions about shaving; Caffaro 5, pp. 52–53.

22
RA, p. 66. For the description of Yaghi-Siyan's flight, I have drawn on Raymond as well as AA 4, 26, pp. 286–287; and GF, pp. 47–48.

1
“Instituit nostro tempore prelia sancta deus, ut ordo equestris et vulgus ober-rans, qui vetustae paganitatis exemplo in mutuas versabantur cedes, novum rep-perirent salutis promerendae genus”: GN, preface, p. 87. See Chapter 3.

2
France (1994), pp. 355–356, makes essentially this case. He points toward the 1057 conquest of Melitene as an example of how the Turks lived according to similar rules. See also Kaspar Elm, “Die Eroberung Jerusalems in Jahre 1099. Ihre Darstel-lung, Beurteilung und Deutung in den Quellen zur Geschichte des Ersten Kreuz-zugs,” in
Jerusalem in Hoch-und Spätmittelalter: Konflikte und Konfliktbewältigung, Vorstellung and Vergegenwärtungen
, ed. Dieter Bauer, Klaus Herbers, and Nikolas Jaspert (Frankfurt, Germany: Campus, 2001), pp. 31–54. Kedar (2004) offers an effective critique of this argument, esp. pp. 67–72.

3
OV, 2, 3, pp. 92–93, following Chibnall's translation and Anglicized spelling.

4
William of Jumièges,
Gesta Normanorum
, 2, 5, 16, pp. 36–39. The Latin leaves unclear whether they burned it down deliberately after the battle or whether they
set fire to it during the course of the conflict. My thanks to Dominique Barthélemy for this reference.

5
These events are described in
Les miracles de saint Benoit écrits par Adrevald, Aimoin, André, Raoul Tortaire, et Hugues de Sainte Marie moines de Fleury,
ed. E. De Certain (Paris: Libraire de la Société de l'Histoire de France, 1858) 5, 1–4, pp. 192–198. Discussed in Thomas Head, “The Judgment of God: Andrew of Fleury's Account of the Peace League of Bourges,” in
The Peace of God: Social Violence and Religious Response Around the Year 1000
, ed. Thomas Head and Richard Landes (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1992), pp. 219–238; and Dominique Barthélemy,
L'An mil et la paix de Dieu: La France chrétienne et féodale, 980–1060
(Paris: Fayard, 1999), pp. 404–416.

6
Les miracles de saint Benoit
5, 4, pp. 197–198. Tomas Mastnak,
Crusading Peace: Christendom, the Muslim World, and Western Political Order
(Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 2002), pp. 11–13.

7
Andrew makes the comparison in
Les miracles de Saint Benoit
5, 4, p. 197. The incident occurs in Judg. 19–21. My description tends to downplay the true horror of the scene. After the concubine had been repeatedly raped throughout the night, her husband reclaimed her and then cut her body into twelve pieces, sending each piece to a different tribe and demanding justice for the crime.