Online Encyclopedia
Search over 40,000 articles from the original, classic Encyclopedia Britannica, 11th Edition.
I2I0
Online EncyclopediaEncyclopedia Home :: I27-INV
del.icio.us it!
|
I2I0 .
See also:Hugh (III. of See also:Cyprus and)
I. of See also:Jerusalem,
1269-1284.
See also: The ages were not dark in which See also:Christianity could gather itself together in a See also:common cause, and carry the See also:flag of its faith to the See also:grave of its Redeemer; nor can we but give thanks for their memory, even if for us See also:religion is of the spirit, and Jerusalem in the See also:heart of every man who believes in See also:Christ.
I. See also:Chronicles and Narratives of the Crusades—(1) Collections. The authorities for the Crusades have been collected in See also:Bongars, Gesta Dei per Francos (See also:Hanover, 1611) (incomplete); See also:Michaud, Bibliotheque See also:des croisades (See also:Paris, 1829) (containing See also:translations of select passages in the authorities) ; the Recueil des historiens des croisades, published by the Academie des See also:Inscriptions (Paris, 1841 onwards) (the best See also:general collection, containing many of the Latin, See also:Greek, Arabic and Armenian authorities, and also the See also:text of the assizes; but sometimes poorly edited and still incomplete); and the publications of the Societe de l'Orient Latin (founded in 1875), especially the Archives, of which two volumes were published in 1881 and 1884, and the volumes of the Revue, published yearly from 1893 to 1902, and containing not only new texts, but articles and reviews of books which are of great service. (2) Particular authorities. The Crusades—a See also:movement which engaged all Europe and brought the East into contact with the See also:West—must necessarily be studied not only in the Latin authorities of Europe and of See also:Palestine, but also in See also:Byzantine, Armenian and Arabic writers. There are thus some four or five different points of view to be considered.
The First Crusade, far more than any other, became the theme of a multitude of writings, whose different degrees of value it is all-important to distinguish. Until about 184o the authority followed for its See also:history was naturally the great See also:work of See also: His view of the value of Albert of Aix, and his account of the First Crusade, have been generally followed (Kugler alone having attempted, to some extent, to rehabilitate Albert of Aix) ; and thus von Sybel's work may be said to See also:mark a revolution in the history of the First Crusade, when its legendary features were stripped away, and its real progress was first properly discovered. Taking the Western authorities for the First Crusade separately,one may See also:divide them, in the See also:light of von Sybel's work, into four kinds—the accounts of See also:eye-witnesses; later compilations based on these accounts; semi-legendary and legendary narratives; and lastly, in a class by itself, the " History " of William of Tyre, who is rather a scientific historian than a chronicler. (a) The three See also:chief eye-witnesses are the See also:anonymous author of the Gesta Francorum, See also:Raymund of Agiles, and Fulcher. The anonymous author of the Gesta (see Hagenmeyer's edition, See also:Heidelberg, 189o) was a See also:Norman of See also:South See also:Italy, who followed See also:Bohemund, and accordingly depicts the progress of the First Crusade from a Norman point of view. He was a layman, marching and fighting in the ranks; and thus he is additionally valuable as representing the See also:opinion of the See also:ordinary crusader. Finally he was an eye-witness throughout, and absolutely contemporary, in the sense that he wrote his account of each great event practically at the See also:time of the event. He is the See also:primary authority for the First Crusade. Raymund of Agiles, a Provencal clerk and a follower of Raymund of See also:Toulouse, writes his flistoria Francorum qui ceperunt Jerusalem from the Provencal point of view. He gives an ecclesiastic's account of the First Crusade, and is specially full on the spiritualistic phenomena which accompanied and followed the finding of the See also:Holy See also:Lance. His See also:book might almost be called the " Visions of Peter See also:Bartholomew and others," and it is written in the See also:plain See also:matter-of-fact manner of See also:Defoe's narratives. He too was an eye-witness throughout, and thoroughly honest; and his account ranks second to the Gesta. Fulcher of See also:Chartres originally followed See also:Robert of See also:Normandy, but in See also:October 1097 he joined See also:Baldwin of See also:Lorraine in his expedition to See also:Edessa, and afterwards followed his fortunes. His Historia Hierosolymitana, which extends to 1127, and embraces not only the history of the First Crusade, but also that of the See also:foundation of the kingdom of Jerusalem, is written on the whole from a Lotharingian point of view, and is thus a natural See also:complement to the accounts of the Anonymus and Raymund. His account of the First Crusade itself is poor (he was absent at Edessa during its course), but otherwise he is an excellent authority. A kindly old See also:pedant, Fulcher interlards his history with much discourse on See also:geography, See also:zoology and sacred history. Besides these three chief eye-witnesses we may also mention the Annales Genuenses by the Genoese See also:consul Caffarus,l and the Annales See also:Pisani of Bernardus Marago, useful as giving the See also:mercantile and See also:Italian See also:side of the Crusade; the Hierosolymita of Ekkehard, the See also:German See also: The basis of this growth is partly the See also:story-telling See also:instinct innate in all men, which loves to heighten an effect, sharpen a point or increase a contrast—the instinct which breathes in Icelandic sagas like that of Burnt Njal; partly the instinct of idolization, if it may be so called, which leads to the perversion into impossible greatness of an approved See also:character, and has created, in this instance, the legendary figures of Peter the Hermit and See also:Godfrey of See also:Bouillon (q .v.) ; partly the religious impulse, which counted nothing wonderful in a holy See also:war, and imported miraculous elements even into the sober pages of the Gesta. These instincts and impulses would be at work already among the soldiers during the Crusade, producing a saga all the more readily, as there were poets in the See also:camp; for we know that a certain See also:Richard, who joined the First Crusade, sang its exploits in See also:verse, while still more famous is the princely See also:troubadour, William of See also:Aquitaine, who joined the Crusade of 11o0. If we are to follow von Sybel rather than Kugler, this saga of the First Crusade found one of its earliest expressions (c. 1120) in the See also:prose work of Albert of Aix (Historia Hierosolymitana)—genuine saga in its
1 His somewhat legendary See also:treatise, De liberatione civitatum Orientis, was only composed about 1155.
2 There is also an Inventaire critique of these letters by the See also:comte de Riant (Paris, 188o).
inconsistencies, its errors of See also:chronology and See also:topography, its poetical See also:colour, and its living descriptions of battles. Kugler, however, regards Albert as a copyist, somewhat in the manner of Tudebod, of an unknown writer of value, who belonged to the Lotharingian ranks during the Crusade, and settled in the kingdom of Jerusalem afterwards (see Kugler, Albert von Aachen, See also:Stuttgart, 1885).1 In the Chanson des chetifs and the Chanson d'Antioche the legend of the Crusades more certainly finds its expression. The former, composed at See also:Antioch about 1130, contained an idolization of the Hermit : the latter is a poem written about 118o by Graindor of See also:Douai, who used as his basis the verses of the crusader Richard (see the edition of P. Paris, 1848).. It shows the growth of the legend that Graindor regards the See also:vision of the Hermit as responsible for the Crusade, and makes the Crusade led by him precede, and indeed occasion by its failure, the See also:meeting at Clermont (which is dated in May instead of See also:November). Into the legendary overgrowth of the First Crusade we cannot here enter any further2; but it is perhaps See also:worth while to mention that the See also:French legend of the Third Crusade equally perverted the truth; making Richard I. return See also:home in disgrace, while See also: Paris, L'Estoire de la guerre sainte, Paris, 1897; Introduction). (d) William of Tyre is the scientific historian and rationalizer, See also:weaving into a harmonious account, which was followed by historians for centuries, the sober accounts of eye-witnesses and the picturesque details of the saga—with somewhat of a See also:bias towards the latter in regard to the First Crusade. He was a native of See also:Pales-tine, See also:born about 1130, and educated in the West. On his return he was happy in winning the good opinion of Amalric I.; he was made first See also:canon and then See also:archdeacon of Tyre, and See also:tutor of the future Baldwin IV. (1170); while on Baldwin's See also:accession he became See also:chancellor of the kingdom and archbishop of Tyre (1174–1175). He was a man often employed on See also:missions and negotiations, and as chancellor he had in his care the archives of the kingdom. His See also:temper was naturally that of a See also:trimmer; and he had thus many qualifications for the writing of well-informed and unbiassed history. He knew Greek and Arabic; and he was well acquainted with the affairs of See also:Constantinople, to which he went at least twice on See also:political business, and with the history of the See also:Mahommedan See also:powers, on which he had written a work (now lost) at the command of Amalric. It was Amalric also who set him to write the history of the Crusades which we still possess (in twenty-two books, with a fragment of a twentythird)—the Historic rerum in partibus transmarsnis gestarum. He wrote the book at different times between 1170 and 1183, when it abruptly ends, and its author as abruptly disappears from sight. The book falls into two parts, the first (books i.-xv.) derivative, the second (books xvi.-See also:xxiii.) original. In the second See also:part he had his own knowledge of events and the information of his contemporaries as his source: in the first he used the same authorities which we still possess—the Gesta, Fulcher, and Albert of Aix—in somewhat of an eclectic spirit, choosing now here, now there, according as he could best weave a pleasant narrative, but not according to any real See also:critical principle. His book thus begins to be a real authority only from the date of the Second Crusade onwards; but the perfection of his See also:form (for he is one of the greatest stylists of the middle ages) and the See also:prestige of his position conspired to make his book the one authority for the whole history of the first See also:century of the Crusades. Nor was he (apart from his reception of legendary elements into his narrative) unworthy of the See also:honour in which he was held; for he is really a great historian, in the form of his matter and in hisconception of his subject—diligent, impartial, well-informed and interesting, if somewhat rhetorical in style and vague in chronology. [During the middle ages his work was current in a French See also:translation, known as the Chronique d'outremer, or the Livre or See also:Roman d'Eracles (so called from the reference at the beginning to the See also:emperor See also:Heraclius). This translation also contained a continuation by various hands down to 1277; while besides the continuation embedded in the Livre d'Eracles, there are See also:separate continuations, of the nature of independent works, by Ernoul and See also:Bernard the Treasurer. These latter See also:cover the See also:period from 1183 to 1228; and of the two Ernoul's account seems primary, while that of Bernard is in lame part a mere copy of Ernoul. But the whole subject of the continuators of William of Tyre is dubious.] To the Western authorities for the First Crusade must be added the Eastern—Byzantine, Arabic and Armenian. Of these the Byzantine authority, the Alexiad of See also:Anna Comnena, is most important, partly from the position of the authoress, partly from the many points of contact between the Byzantine See also:empire and the crusaders. Anna's narrative both furnishes a useful corrective of 1 Von Sybel's view must be modified by that of Kugler, to which a See also:scholar like Hagenmeyer has to some extent given his See also:adhesion (cf. his edition of the Gesta, pp. 62-68). Hagenmeyer inclines to believe in an original author, distinct from Albert the copyist; and he thinks that this original author (whether or no he was See also:present during the Crusade) used the Gesta and also Fulcher, though he had probably also " eigene Notizen and Aufzeichnungen." $ See Pigonneau, Le See also:Cycle de la croisade, &c. (Paris, 1877) ; and Haaenmeyer, Peter der Eremite (See also:Leipzig, 1879). the prejudiced Western accounts of Alexius, and serves to bring Bohemund forward into his proper prominence. The Armenian view of the First Crusade and of Baldwin's principality of Edessa is presented in the Armenian See also:Chronicle of See also:Matthew of Edessa. There is little in Arabic bearing on the First Crusade: the Arabic authorities only begin to be of value with the rise of the atabegs of See also:Mosul (c. 1127). But Kemal-ud-din's History of See also:Aleppo (composed in the 13th century) contains some details on the history of the First Crusade; and the See also:Vie d'Ousama (the autobiography of a sheik at Caesarea in See also:northern See also:Syria, edited and paraphrased by See also:Derenbourg in the Publications de l'Ecole des langues orientales mantes) presents the point of view of an Arab whose life covered the first century of the Crusades (1o95–1188).
For the Second Crusade the primary authority in the West is the work of See also:Odo de Deuil, De prof ectione Ludovici VII regis Francorum in Orientem. Odo was a monk attached by See also:Suger to See also: Generally speaking the Arabic writings are See also:late in point of date, and See also:cold and jejune in style; while it must also be remembered that they are set religious works written to defend See also:Islam. On the other hand they are generally written by men of affairs—See also:governors, secretaries or ambassadors; and a fatalistic temper leads their authors to a certain impartial recording of everything, good or evil, which seems of moment. The Third Crusade was narrated in the West from very different points of view by Anglo-Norman, French and German authorities. The primary Anglo-Norman authority is the Carmen Ambrosii, or, as it is called by M. Gaston Paris, L'Estoire de la guerre sainte. This is an octosyllabic poem in French verse, written by Ambroise, a Norman See also:trouvere who followed Richard I. to the Holy See also:Land. The poem first came to be known by scholars about 1873, and has been edited by M. Gaston Paris (Paris, 1897). The Ilinerarium Peregrinorum, a work in ornate Latin prose, is (except for the first book) a translation of the Carmen masquerading under the See also:guise of an independent work. There seems no doubt that it is a piece of plagiary, and that its writer, Richard, " canon of the Holy Trinity " in See also:London, stands to the Carmen as Tudebod to the Gesta, or Albert of Aix to his supposed original. The Third Crusade is also described from the See also:English point of view by all contemporary writers of history in See also:England, e.g. See also:Ralph of Coggeshall, who used information gained from crusaders, and William of See also:Newburgh, who had See also:access to a work by Richard I.'s See also:chaplain Anselm, which is now lost.' The French side is presented in See also:Rigord's Gesta See also:Philippi See also:Augusti and in the Gesta (an abridgment and continuation of Rigord) and the Philippeis of William the See also:Breton. The two French writers represent Richard as a faithless See also:vassal: in the German writers—Tagino, See also:dean of See also:Passau, who wrote a Descriptio of See also:Barbarossa's Crusade (1189–1190) ; and Ansbert, an See also:Austrian clerk, who wrote De expeditione Friderici Imperatoris (1187–1196)—Richard appears rather as a See also:monster of See also:pride and arrogance. From the Arabic point of view the life of Richard's See also:rival, Saladin, is described by Beha-ud-din, a high See also:official under Saladin, who writes a See also:panegyric on his See also:master, some-what confused in chronology and partial in its sympathies, but nevertheless of great value. The various continuations of William of Tyre above mentioned represent the opinion of the native Franks (which is hostile to Richard I.) ; while in Nicetas, who wrote a history of the Eastern empire from 1118 to 1206, we have a Byzantine authority who, as See also:Professor See also:Bury remarks, " differs from Anna and Cinnamus in his See also:tone towards the crusaders, to whom he is surprisingly See also:fair." For the See also:Fourth Crusade the primary authority is See also:Villehardouin's La Conqulte de Constantinople, an official See also:apology for the diversion of the Crusade written by one of its leaders, and concealing the arcana under an See also:appearance of See also:frank naivete. His work is usefully supplemented by the narrative (La Prise de Constantinople) of On the bibliography of the Second Crusade see Kugler, Studien zur Geschichte des zweiten Kreuzzuges (Stuttgart, 1866). 4 Of these writers see See also:Archer's Crusade of Richard I., Appendix (in Nutt's See also:series of Histories from Contemporary Writers). Robert de Clary, a See also:knight from See also:Picardy, who presents the non-official view of the Crusade, as it appeared to an ordinary soldier. The Xpovutov raw iv 'p. avl¢ (composed in Greek verse some time after 1300, apparently by an author of mixed Frankish and Greek parentage, and translated into French at an See also:early date under the See also:title " The Book of the See also:Conquest of Constantinople and the Empire of See also:Rumania ") narrates in a See also:prologue the events of the Fourth (as indeed also of the First) Crusade. The Chronicle of the Morea (as this work is generally called) is written from the Frankish point of view, in spite of its Greek verse; and the Byzantine point of view must be sought in Nicetas.1 The history of the later Crusades, from the Fifth to the Eighth, enters into the continuations of William of Tyre above mentioned; while the Historia orientalis of Jacques de Vitry, who had taken part in the Fifth Crusade, and died in 1240, embraces the history of events till 1218 (the third book being a later addition). The Secreta fidelium Crucis of See also:Marino Sanudo, a history of the Crusades written by a Venetian See also:noble between 1306 and 1321, is also of value, particularly for the Crusade of See also:Frederick II. The See also:minor authorities for the Fifth Crusade have been collected by Rohricht, in the publications of the Societe de l'Orient Latin for 1879 and 1882; the ten valuable letters of See also:Oliver, See also:bishop of See also:Paderborn, and the Historia Damiettina, based on these letters, have also been edited by Rohricht in the Westdeutsche Zeitschrift See also:fur Geschichte and Kunst (1891). The See also:Sixth Crusade, that of Frederick II., is described in the chronicle of Richard of See also:San Germano, a See also:notary of the emperor, and in other Western authorities, e.g. See also:Roger of See also:Wendover. For the Crusades of St Louis' the chief authorities are See also:Joinville's life of his master (whom he accompanied to See also:Egypt on the Seventh Crusade), and de Nangis' Gesta Ludovici regis. Several works were written on the See also:capture of See also:Acre in 1291, especially the Excidium urbis Acconensis, a treatise which emerges to throw light, after many years of darkness, on the last See also:hours of the kingdom. The See also:Oriental point of view for the 13th century appears in Jelaleddin's history of the Ayyubite sultans of Egypt, written towards the end of the 13th century; in Magrizi's history of Egypt, written in the middle of the 15th century; and in the compendium of the history of the human See also:race by See also:Abulfeda (t1332) ; while the omniscient Abulfaragius (whom Rey calls the Eastern St See also: Additional information and CommentsThere are no comments yet for this article.
» Add information or comments to this article.
Please link directly to this article:
Highlight the code below, right click, and select "copy." Then paste it into your website, email, or other HTML. Site content, images, and layout Copyright © 2006 - Net Industries, worldwide. |
|
|
[back] I292 |
[next] I35 |