Page View
Baldwin, M. W. (ed.) / Volume I: The first hundred years
(1969)
IX: The First Crusade: Constantinople to Antioch, pp. 280-[307]
PDF (10.6 MB)
Page 280
IX THE FIRST CRUSADE: CONSTANTINOPLE TO ANTIOCH The journeys of the crusaders through the Balkan peninsula gave the emperor Alexius time to plan his policy toward their leaders when the armies should arrive at Constantinople. However little he might have wanted an expedition of the type that was coming, he could see that, if they were carefully directed, the crusaders could be of great advantage to his empire, which he not unreasonably regarded as the main bulwark of Christendom. But they must be handled delicately. In 1096 the empire was enjoying a lull in the Turkish wars. Alexius had not yet been able to win back much territory, except along the coasts of the Sea of Mar mara and the Aegean. But the emir Chaka of Smyrna (tzmir), the most menacing of the empire's enemies, had been murdered in 1092 by his son-in-law, the Selchükid Kilij (or Kilich) Arsian, at the emperor's instigation. Kilij Arsian himself, established at Nicaea and calling himself sultan. (Arabic, sul.tãn), was alarmed by the growing power of the Danishmendid dynasty farther to the The story of the crusaders' march across Anatolia is covered by the same Latin sources as for the previous chapter and by Anna Comnena. As the crusade moved eastward, Armenian sources are more important, in particular, Matthew of Edessa (extracts in Armenian, with a not always accurate French translation, in RHC, Arm., I, and a full translation of the Chronique byE. Dulaurier, Paris, 1858). Matthew wrote before 1140. He hated the Byzantines, about whom his information is copious but inaccurate. He is more objective about the Franks, and seems to have obtained information from some Frankish soldiers. About his own city and compatriots he is reliable. Of Jacobite sources, Michael the Syrian, patriarch of Antioch, who wrote at the end of the twelfth century, provides a little information (Chronique de Michelle Syrien, ed. and tr. J. B. Chabot, 4 vols., Paris, 1899—1910). Bar-Hebraeus copies from him, and he is supplemented by an anonymous chronicle of which only the first portions have been properly edited (A. S. Tritton and H. A. R. Gibb, "The First and Second Crusades from an Anonymous Syriac Chronicle," Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society, 1933, pp. 69—lol, 273—305). Arabic sources are of negligible importance until the crusade reaches Antioch. The same secondary sources are valuable as in the preceding chapter, with the addition of articles by J. Laurent on the Armenians, notably, "Des Grecs aux croisés: étude sur l'histoire d'1desse," Byzantion, I (iiz), 367—449, and "Les Arméniens de Cilicie," Mélanges Schlum berger, I (Paris, 1924), 159—i 68. The military history of the march across Anatolia is covered in C. W. C. Oman, History of the Art of War in the Middle Ages (2nd ed., 2 vols., London, 1924), an.d F. Lot, L'Art militaire et les arm.ées du moyen dge, 2 vols. (Paris, 1946). z8o
Copyright 1969 The Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved. Use of this material falling outside the purview of "fair use" requires the permission of the University of Wisconsin Press. To buy the paperback book, see: http://www.wisc.edu/wisconsinpress/books/1732.htm