The East and the West in the Middle Ages: Crusades and Crusaders

Books I Love About The Middle Ages

noreply@blogger.com (secblog) — Wed, 11 May 2011 22:42:00 +0000

Ljubarskij, Jakov N., "New Trends in the Study of Byzantine Historiography", Dumbarton Oaks Papers, Vol. 47 (1993).

Momigliano, A., "Greek Historiography", History and Theory, Vol. 17, No. 1 (Feb., 1978).

Vries, G. J., "Remarks on the Historiography of Greek Literature", Mnemosyne, Fourth Series, Vol. 36, Fasc. 3/4 (1983).

El-Cheikh, Nadia M., "Describing the Other to Get at the Self: Byzantine Women in Arabic Sources (8th-11th Centuries)", Journal of the Economic and Social History of the Orient, Vol. 40, No. 2 (1997).

Jenkins, Romilly J. H., "The Hellenistic Origins of Byzantine Literature", Dumbarton Oaks Papers, Vol. 17 (1963).

Huxley, G. L., "Hagiography and the First Byzantine Iconoclasm", Proceedings of the Royal Irish Academy. Section C: Archaeology, Celtic Studies. Linguistics, Literature, Vol. 80C (1980).

Fleming, K. E., "Orientalism, the Balkans, and Balkan Historiography", The American Historical Review, Vol. 105, No. 4 (Oct., 2000).

Kaldellis, A., "Historicism in Byzantine Thought and Literature", Dumbarton Oaks Papers, Vol. 61 (2007).

Brundage, James A., "Recent Crusade Historiography: Some Observations and Suggestions", The Catholic Historical Review, Vol. 49, No. 4 (Jan., 1964).

Bruce, I. A. F., "Theopompus and Classical Greek Historiography", History and Theory, Vol. 9, No. 1 (1970).

La Monte, J. L., "Some Problems in Crusading Historiography", Speculum, Vol. 15, No. 1 (Jan., 1940).

Tuomas M.S. Lehtonen, and Kurt Villads Jensen, "Medieval History Writing and Crusading Ideology", (Helsinki: Finnish Historical Soc., 2005).

Chamberlin V. John M., Imagining Defeat: An Arabic Historiography of the Crusades, (unpublished master thesis, University of the State of New York, 2001).

Heinrich von Sybel, History and Literature of the Crusades, trans. Lady Duff Gordon, (London: 1861).

Recent Posts:

List of Medieval Historians and Chroniclers
List of Patriarchs of Constantinople 315-1462

Books I Love About The Crusades

noreply@blogger.com (secblog) — Wed, 11 May 2011 22:33:00 +0000

Francis Cook, R., Chanson d&Antioche, chanson de geste, V.2, (Amsterdam: 1980).

Gabrieli, F., Arab Historians of the Crusades, (Routledge: 2010).

Constable, G., Crusaders and crusading in the twelfth century, (Ashgate Publishing Co: 2008).

Varney, A., The Crusades campaign sourcebook, (Wizards of the Coast: 1994).

Stipp, John L., and others, The Rise and Development of Western Civilization, (Toronto: 1969).

McKay, John P., A History of Western Society, (Houghton Mifflin: 1995).

"The Opening of the Crusades, Pope Urban II", In Western Civilization: Sources, Images, and Interpretations, Vol. I, ed. by Sherman, D., (Toronto: 1995).

Mansfield, P., A History of the Middle East, (London: 1992).

"The Alexiad: A Byzantine View of the Crusades, Princess Anna Comnena", In Western Civilization: Sources, Images, and Interpretations, Vol. I, ed. by Sherman, D., (Toronto: 1995).

Cantor, N., "The Meaning of the Middle Ages: The Crusades Minimized", In Western Civilization: Sources, Images, and Interpretations, Vol. I, ed. by Sherman, D., (Toronto: 1995).

Pirenne, H., "The Great Significance of the Crusades", In Western Civilization: Sources, Images, and Interpretations, Vol. I, ed. by Sherman, D., (Toronto: 1995).

Browning, R., "The Byzantine Empire: Defeat, Decline, and Resilience", In Western Civilization: Sources, Images, and Interpretations, Vol. I, ed. by Sherman, D., (Toronto: 1995).

Rousset, P., "The Religious Atmosphere", In Sullivan, R. E., The Middle Ages, 400-1250: Critical issues in history, (New York: 1967).

Saunders, J. J., "The Crusades as Holy War", In Sullivan, R. E., The Middle Ages, 400-1250: Critical issues in history, (New York: 1967).

Krueger, H. C., "Material Concerns", In Sullivan, R. E., The Middle Ages, 400-1250: Critical issues in history, (New York: 1967).

Meuwese, M., “Antioch and the Crusaders in Western Art”, in East and West in the Medieval Eastern Mediterranean, Vol I: Antioch from the Byzantine Reconquest until the End of the Crusader Principality, ed. Michael Metcalf and Krijnie Ciggaar, (Leuven: Peeters Press: 2006).

Lamb, H., The Crusades, The Flame of Islam, (New York: 1930).

Edgington, S., “Antioch, Medieval City of Culture”, in East and West in the Medieval Eastern Mediterranean, Vol I: Antioch from the Byzantine Reconquest until the End of the Crusader Principality, ed. Michael Metcalf and Krijnie Ciggaar, (Leuven: Peeters Press: 2006).

Rubenstein, J., "How, or How Much, to Reevaluate Peter the Hermit," in The Medieval Crusade, ed. by Susan Ridyard (Woodbridge: 2004).

John M. Jeep, Medieval Germany: An Encyclopedia, (New York and London: 2001).

Marion E Gibbs, Medieval German Literature, (Routledge: 2000).

Edgington, Susan, “Romance and Reality in the Sources for the Siege of Antioch, 1097–1098", Porfyrogenita: Esseys on the History and Literature of Byzantium and the Latin East in Honour of Julian Chrysostomides, ed. by Charalambos Dendrinos et al. (Publications for the Centre for Hellenic Studies. Ashgate, Aldershot: 2003).

Chazan, R., European Jewry and the First Crusade, (University of California Press: 1987).

Holy Violence Then and Now : A Historian Looks at the Causes and Lingering Effects of Christian Warfare. an interview with Jonathan Riley-Smith, In Christianity Today International/Christian History magazine. Issue 40 (October 1, 1993 12:00AM).

Recent Posts:

- Jonathan Riley-Smith
- Steven Runciman
- Crusader Orders
- Teutonic Knights

Teutonic Knights

noreply@blogger.com (secblog) — Thu, 18 Nov 2010 23:34:00 +0000

The Teutonic Order or the Teutonic Knights (commonly, hospitale sancte Marie Theutonicorum Jerosolimitanum - the Hospital of Saint Mary of the Germans of Jerusalem or (der orden des Düschen huses, the order of the German families), in the sources) was among the 3 major chivalrous or military orders that arose and evolved on the twelfth and 13th centuries. The Hospitallers and Templars are the additional major orders.

The military orders were avowedly orders of the Roman church regularised by regulations alike to those regularising monks, in general discrepancies of the Benedictine or Augustinian Rules. For most aims, they were technically answerable only to the Roman Catholic Pope. They did have some feudalistic obligations to lay and other clerical entities as dictated by conditions of place and time. Huge numbers of knights got monks but frequently were ascertained in military fortifications besides monasteries. The members of almost orders took vows of poorness, celibacy, and obeisance.

Agreeing to tradition, early in the 12th century a affluent German couple constructed a hospital in Jerusalem at their possess disbursal to cherish poor and brainsick pilgrims who spoke German. The hospital and an attendant chapel were consecrate to the Virgin Mary. This tale is alike to the customs of the origin of the Hospital of Saint John of Jerusalem constituted by Amalfitans. The German hospital evidently was affiliated with the Hospital of Saint John, leastways, in the observance of the convention of St. Augustine. Afterward Saladin's seduction of Jerusalem in 1187, there are no longer records of the German hospital on that point. There was no denotation that the German hospital always had a military charge.

On the siege of Acre on the Third Crusade (believably 1190), Germans from Lübeck and Bremen accomplished abroad hospital for German soldiers reportedly using ships' canvases as cover from the components. Duke Frederick of Swabia based his chaplain Conrad in accusation of the hospital and shortly transformed the administration into a religious order creditworthy to the local Latin bishop. Though some scholars enquiry its genuineness, Pope Clement III (1187- -1191) evidently sanctioned the Order on February 6, 1191. The Order was accepted under Pope Celestine III's (1191--1198) auspices on December twenty-one, 1196, with the call of the "Hospital of Saint Mary of the Germans in Jerusalem." The name is maybe the only association with the earliest German hospital whilst some argue a more verbatim relationship with the earliest hospital.

A ceremony supposedly grasped March 5, 1198, adapted the Order's raison d'etre. The patriarch of Jerusalem, the king of Jerusalem, the chief of the crusading army, and the controls of the Templars and the Hospital of St. John accompanied the celebration building the Teutonic Knights as a military order. A bruiser by Pope Innocent III (1198--1216) dated February nineteen, 1199, affirmed the case and assigned the Order would cherish the sick agreeing to the convention of the Hospitallers. It would acquit its other business by abiding by the Templar rule and would wear the Temple's classifiable white cloak. Its black cross would distinguish the Teutonic Order from the Temple.

Related Posts:

Jonathan Riley-Smith
Steven Runciman
Crusader Orders

Crusader Orders

noreply@blogger.com (secblog) — Thu, 18 Nov 2010 23:11:00 +0000

The Hospitallers order, the Templars order, and the Teutonic Knights were totally primitively Crusading Orders, but with the come down of Acre in 1291, in effect lost their reason for being, and finished up wandering around Europe.

The Templars:

Knights of Saint John Hospital witch called the Hospitallers, were in the beginning a group which cherished weary christian pilgrims at the Hospital of Saint John in Jerusalem. Afterward their internalisation as a military order, they carried on to run the hospital, which acquired them respect and prestige. Afterward the come down of Acre in 1291, they actuated first to Cyprus, and so to the island of Rhodes (Rhodos) in 1307, then Malta in 1522-23. Their symbol was primitively (1248) a white cross on black, altered in 1259 to a white cross on red.

The Hospitallers:

The Templars order, or Poor Knights of the Temple of Solomon, were primitively a group which escorted and saved pilgrims while they were travelling through with the Seljuk acreses. They dwelt in a hostel close the Temple of Solomon, thence the name Templars. They had many estates in Europe, and once Acre fell in 1291, retired to their European estates, and got affected in banking and diplomacy, which attained them unpopular, pertinent where King Philippe the Just of France baked the Grand Master and two senior officers at the bet for alleged heresies. In 1312, Pope Clement V brought out a decree conquering the Order. Their symbol was a red cross on white.

Since to the anatomies of these crosses, the cross of the Hospitallers may have acquired into the current shape of the Maltese Cross, but since to the Knights Templar, and the earliest Hospitallers, I have found that the anatomies can be said to be extended Iron Crosses.

The 2 anatomies of crosses do not acquaint a case of development bod one to the extra. The extended Iron Crosses, the kind of matter that in the Templar case afforded advance to the Saint George Cross of England, were applied by both the Templars and the Hospitallers since their streamers and arms. I have not attain anything about the white-on-black to white-on-red alteration of the Hospitallers, but many arranges with some kind of ancestry from the Hospitallers apply the anatropous English flag in some anatomy to this day. At the equal time, both and so and at once, the eight-pointed Maltese, or Saint John, Cross was applied as a badge. It actually arose since the badge of the commonwealth of Amalfi, and rather maybe was not originally a cross, just an allegory built of 4 arrowheads. It was adoptive by the Brotherhood of the Hospital in Jerusalem (yet before the institution of the Order) when the merchandisers of Amalfi re-purchased the place of the hospital constituted approximately 600AD and reconstructed it. At the establishment of the Order (officially accredited in 1113), the monastics wore black gowns with the eight-pointed cross on the left boob. It seems adjust to empathise that the white cross on red was chiefly applied by the Knights of the Order in their military actions, and the eight-pointed cross whilst at the convent.

Without doubt the apply of the two symbols across the a lot of years since changed, and was most belike at a lot times not well delimitated, I guess, but there is many evidence of the apply of both on the time when the Order of Saint John had one of the firmest naval darts of the Mediterranean, once the apply of the eight-pointed, or as it got acknowledged, Maltese Cross on a red backdrop became more common as a flag. I approximate the modern Maltese civil ensign can be ascertained as a consequence of this.

Original call of the Templars was Pauperes commilitiones Christi templique Salomonici. The order was accomplished in 1119 by a group of 8 knights chaired by Hugue de Payns and Godefried de St. Omer in order to give bodyguard to pilgrims and just a few years lated king Baldwin II afforded them division of the royal castle which was Al-Aqsa mosque (called Solomon's Temple by the crusaders) on the temple backing which afforded the order its call.

Related Posts:

Results of The Crusades
Hospitalers and Templars
The Cairo Geniza

Steven Runciman

noreply@blogger.com (secblog) — Sat, 13 Nov 2010 21:45:00 +0000

Steven Runciman Biography:

Steven Runciman (James Cochran Stevenson), was born on 1903 (7 July) in Northumberland. He was the younger boy of Walter Runciman, afterward to get the first Viscount Runciman of Doxford, and his parents were the 1st married couple to seat as MPs at as is time. He learned and studied history at his mother's alma mom, Trinity College, Cambridge, taking a 1st class degree in 1925. Accompanying his postgraduate studies nether J. B. Bury, he got a fellow of the college (1927), and he became a lecturer (1932).

Abiding by the dying of his grandfather in 1937 and his heritage of a rather hearty sum, in 1938, he abject his lectureship so to focus in full on writing. He served in the Second World War as a press attaché case in Sofia and a film ban in Jerusalem and Cairo before being appointive professor of Byzantine artwork and history at the University of Istanbul, a post he accommodated till 1945. These would be his close academic post, carry through for an honorary companionship at Cambridge University ,Trinity College in 1965.

Retreat from a perm academic post didn't arrest Runciman from active actively in academic life. Besides countless littler lectures, he birthed the Waynflete lectures at Oxford University in 1953 to 1954, the Gifford Lectures at the St Andrews University between 1960 - 1962, and the Birbeck lectures at Cambridge University, Trinity College in 1966. Owed in big depart to his work on the history of the Orthodox Christian Church, he was called the Grand Orator of the Greek Christian Church, the senior consisted attitude in the patriarch’s synod.

Besides assorted academic honors, he was knighted in 1958 and appointive a Companion of honor in 1984. He never conjoined, and died out on one November 2000.

Steven Runciman Crusades Books:

- The Fall of Constantinople 1453.

- A History of the Crusades, Volume III : The Kingdom of Acre and the Later...

- A History of the Crusades (3 Volume Set).

- A History of the Crusades, Volume II : The Kingdom of Jerusalem and the…

- The Sicilian Vespers: A History of the Mediterranean World in the Later…

- Byzantine Civilization.

- A History of the Crusades, Volume I : The First Crusade and the Foundation.

- The Eastern Schism: A Study of the Papacy and the Eastern Churches During…

- The Emperor Romanus Lecapenus and his Reign: A Study of Tenth-Century…

- The Assault on Jerusalem (Pocket Penguins 70's).

- The White Rajahs: A History of Sarawak from 1841-1946.

- The Age of Illumination. 3 volume set. Art and Civilisation - Byzantine,…

- The Last Byzantine Renaissance.

- A history of the first Bulgarian empire.

- The Lost Capital of Byzantium: The History of Mistra and the Peloponnese

- Byzantine (Style and Civilization).

- The Medieval Manichee: A Study of the Christian Dualist Heresy.

- The Great Church in Captivity: A Study of the Patriarchate of…

- The Byzantine Theocracy: The Weil Lectures, Cincinatti.

- A Traveller's Alphabet: Partial Memoirs.

- Dzieje Wypraw Krzyzowych.

- La sagrada Biblia.

- Orthodox Churches and the Secular State.

- East and West, Today and Yesterday: ICR Monograph Series No. 16.

- Anglican initiatives in christian unity;: Lectures delivered in Lambeth…

- The Families of Outremer: The Feudal Nobility of the Crusader Kingdom of…

Related Posts:

First Crusade 1095-1099
Middle Aged Dating
Jonathan Riley-Smith

Jonathan Riley-Smith

noreply@blogger.com (secblog) — Thu, 11 Nov 2010 23:15:00 +0000

Jonathan Riley-Smith or (Riley-Smith, Jonathan) Dixie Professor of ecclesiastic History at Cambridge University. He was born in June (27 June 1938). He was educated at Eton College and Trinity College Cambridge University. He got his BA in 1960, his MA degree in 1964, phd degree in 1964, and LittD in 2001 from Cambridge University.

From 1964 to 1972 become Professor Smith taught at the Unversity of St Andrews in the Department of Medieval History, firstly as assistant lecturer, till 1966, and then as lecturer. By 1972 to 1978, he assisted at Cambridge University on the history faculty. From 1978 until 1994 he was prof of history at London University. In1994, Professor Smith has served on the staffs of history and divinity at Cambridge University. He's a associate of Emmanuel College, Cambridge University. By 1997 until 1999 he was president of the faculty of history.

Professor Jonathan Riley-Smith was a founder member in 1980, acting secretaire from 1980 to 1982 and president from 1987 to 1995 of the Society for the Study of the Crusade movement and the Latin Kingdom of Jerusalem. Additional lays he's held include , Most Venerable Order of St John, Sovereign Military Order of Malta, Knight of Grace and Devotion, Order Pro Merito Melitens, and Knight of Justice, Officer of Merit. Professor Smith is married with 3 children.

Professor Jonathan Riley-Smith Books:

- The Oxford History of the Crusades, Oxford University Press

- The Oxford Illustrated History of the Crusades, Oxford University Press

- Wozu heilige Kriege? By Jonathan Riley-Smith

- Atlas of the Crusades

- The First Crusade and the Idea of Crusading: University of Pennsylvania Press

- The First Crusaders, 1095-1131, Cambridge University press

- A History of the Crusades, Oxford University Press

- Hospitallers : The History of the Order of St. John, Hambledon Press

- Hospitallers: The History of the Orders of st John, Hambledon press

- In Laudem Hierosolymitani: Studies in Crusades and Medieval Culture in Honour of Benjamin Z. Kedar, Ashgate Publishing

- The New Cambridge Medieval History, Cambridge University Press

- Crusades: A History, Yale University Press.

- Crusades, Ashgate Publishing

- Crusades: A Short History, Continuum International Publishing Group

- The First Crusaders, 1095-1131, Cambridge University Press

Related Posts:

William of Newburgh
Council of Clermont (November 1095)
Middle Aged Dating

Middle Aged Dating

noreply@blogger.com (secblog) — Wed, 03 Nov 2010 13:09:00 +0000

There's nothing more hard than reluctantly ascertaining yourself back in the dating aspect when you're middle aged. Generally, the circumstances that bring you back into the singles hound are not all of the time pleasant. You perhaps a widower mourning the loss of your better half or a scorned divorcee that's hurt. Just assure yourself that you're not entirely, although you may feel this method and tell yourself that perpetually. It may have been decennia since you last dated and so often has commuted, but don't let this deter you from being your life.

Your heart is even beating and there is several life to live. This is something that you ask to actualize. A lot of people that are middle aged dating and dating once again occasionally lack confidence in their show. Nobody is anticipating you to look like you did while you were twenty-two and dancing to the Gap Band's, You cut down A Bomb On Me. It's not 1982 any longer and you don't have to play the part that you did when you were single then. In front you re-enter the singles aspect, you must assume yourself for who you are currently. Now this doesn't mean that you cannot reinvent your show if thats what you desire. By all means, change your hairstyle, work on your body at the gym, and buy a new closet if that's really something that you need to do for yourself.

These should be considered as a new starting and perhaps you'll feel dissimilar if you look dissimilar. That is completely apprehensible to an extent, but do not feel like who you're right now isn't good enough. Sure, you may go to some bars in town and see gorgeous and fit twenty-somethings out and about, but this are not the people you're competing against, unless you're looking for rob the cradle, which some perhaps and that is your perquisite. Everybody your age, out and about is searching love and are confronted with the same hitches and insecurities as you. If anything, be comfortable in the fact that outside of a love interest, you are believably fairly accomplished and stable in your life. Your kids are most expected grown and out or closely out of the house and you know way more now than you did 20 or thirty years agone. Try to centering on that energy instead of the negative as you develop to throw yourself back into the dating aspect. You will belike find yourself much more prosperous and ready to go back to going out.

A lot of middle aged people have the experiencing that nobody will want them as of the "baggage" assorted with being widowed from somebody you deeply loved or the hurt and trauma involved a betrayed marriage. First, remind yourself that most people near your age, if they're single and on the prowl, have carried out the same thing you are feeling. You may very well encounter someone that is widowed or bitter from a divorce. It may actually be salutary for you to date just to find some decent people, in the same locating in life as you, to talk to and commit in.

It's as well particularly significant to analyse your emotions before dating once again. You may never genuinely be over the death of a married person or the complications of a painful divorce, but you should all in a point where you have aggrieved enough and you are ready to take life by the horns. Besides, be sure you know exactly what you want. If you are not searching something in particular grievous, make sure whomever you are dating knows this. It is okay if you feel the ask to take things boring and it's even fine if you're chiefly looking for a cast aside as long as you communicate it and are creditworthy with everything.

Related articles:

Medieval Cures
Medieval Hospitals
Medieval Clothing
Medieval Food

Contact Crusades-Medieval

noreply@blogger.com (secblog) — Sat, 16 Oct 2010 11:58:00 +0000

Contact Crusades-Medieval which about: medieval Crusades, history of the crusades, first crusade, the second crusade, third crusade, fourth crusade, arms of the crusaders, the crusades history, Runciman crusades, crusade history, medieval studies, middle aged dating, middle age people, the middle ages ...

Contact at my mail: mmkg66g @ yahoo.com

The Poor in Medieval Times

noreply@blogger.com (secblog) — Fri, 30 Jul 2010 17:33:00 +0000

These fell under 2 categories, native-born and immigrants. The poor in medieval times were often the same as the urban poor in whatever time: they were those who were either totally without work or who were so chronically under-employed that they were abbreviated to relying upon charity in one form or another. Some were people who had become disenabled. Some were people whose trade betrayed them in one way or another ("gone away of business" in modern parlance). Some were born into impoverishment. Sometimes the poverty was ephemeral, the result of economic agitates or war.

The cities in general recognized aid of their own mediocre as a civic duty. The town's churches took the lead here, for the care of the poor was a historic obligation of the Catholic Church. Some cities had accomplished a dole, either permanently or to be applied in times of crisis. And the guilds themselves frequently had a treasury that could be applied to care for the sick, the unemployed, and the families of at peace guildsmen. By the late Middle Ages, such as action had get part of club regulations in a lot of cities, so that the guild acted as a relief agency for its extremities.

Cities were positions of asylum for the countryside. In wartime, the peasants of the countryside flew to the city walls for aegis. In famine they came to the cities for food. On economic crises, they came anticipating work.

Cities commonly tried to adapt such refugees, provided such adjustment did not imperil the city itself. There was a composite relation with the countryside. Some towns did jurisdiction over abutting villages and felt a particular obligation towards them, while other towns' agency ended at the city walls and so did their sense of duty. Even the most greathearted of cities, even so, found affairs when it was essential to get tough towards a flood of refugees. At such times, a city might arrange all non-native poor be booted out and the city gates close behind them. There were as well times when the city shut its gates early. This occurred on war, when a city acknowledged it would be beleaguered, and could not attempt to feed the taking flight peasant population by with its possess.

Recent Posts:

Medieval Castle Life
Medieval castles
Medieval Castles Defensive
Rooms of Medieval castles
Medieval Cavalry
Medieval Catapults
Medieval Customs
Medieval Wedding
Medieval Cures
Medieval Hospitals
Medieval Clothing
Medieval Food

God Wills It

noreply@blogger.com (secblog) — Tue, 27 Jul 2010 16:58:00 +0000

The pious Crusaders never pinned their succeeders on mere luck. Any good chance was nothing less than the favour of God. They often claimed God and saints looked to them - assuring them their reason was holy, or yet catering battle plans for the following day. If a battle was becoming poorly, they'd pray that God would annul their chances. And if their chances were annulled -- whether through another troops or a auspicious wind - that destine was God's will.

At the siege of Antioch, a boor named Peter Bartholomew arrogated St. Andrew had looked to him. Agreeing to Peter, St. Andrew said to him that the Holy Lance, averred to have perforate Christ's side, was buried below the cathedral. A hoary piece of metal was dug, which was assured as a great countenance by God. But sceptics thought Peter had buried the metal himself. When matters were going ailing, baffled warriors called Peter a dupery. In reaction, Peter extended to stand test by fire, arrogating that God would protect him. When he came out badly burned and died, his assistants claimed it was as the watching crowd wasn't devout sufficiency.

Recent:

- Introduction to the crusades history
- First Crusade 1095-1099
- Leaders of The First Crusade
- Motives and Causes of The Crusade
- Cilicia in The First Crusade
- Nicaea in The First Crusade

Nicaea in The First Crusade

noreply@blogger.com (secblog) — Thu, 22 Jul 2010 22:42:00 +0000

The first goal was the city of Nicaea (New Iznik), the local Turkish capital, approximately 250km from Constantinople. The Emperor Alexios was very apprehensive that Nicaea be captured as it was the centre of Turkish functionings against Constantinople and the Byzantine Empire. Appropriating it would also aid the crusaders in annihilating opposition to their passage by Anatolia (modern Turkey). They went on the old Roman road, which was very outgrown, so they had to acquit the path with swords and axes. As with the Romans before them, this appropriated them to build a supply line then that food could be bestowed to the flocks at the front. At this arrange of the expedition leastways, the Byzantines were even very much abiding the crusaders. The first armies, conduced by Godfrey, Tancred, Hugh of Vermandois and Robert of Flanders, arrived at Nicaea on six May and laid beleaguering to the city. They were connected on fourteen May by Bohemond's regular army.

The Emperor had directed two Greek strategians to accompany the Crusade: Manuel Boutoumites and Tatikios - the latter was an strange character, a half-Greek and half-Arab eunuch. He was an experienced soldier and had a metal nose, having baffled his master nose in a battle. He controlled a small regular army of 2,000 Byzantine soldiers.

Matters were going well; the Turkish occupants of Nicaea were speaking to Manuel Boutoumites and negotiating terms for capitulation. Then on fifteen May, they suddenly commuted their minds and threw him out. Two caught spies broke the cause why: the local Turkish leader, Kilij Arslan, was bringing back from the East, with a big army. He would reach Nicaea the following day and signified to attack 3 hours afterward dawn (approximately 10am).

At this arrange, Raymond's army, about third of the total Crusading military force, was yet about a day's march from Nicaea, so it wasn't clear whether he'd arrive eventually. As it happened, Raymond reached dawn, just before the Turks, who came as anticipated three hours later. Kilij Arslan miscalculated the durability of the crusaders. He attacked and there was a battle, but he soon adjudicated he was outnumbered and fled.

Nicaea was at the east close of a long lake. One gate of the city opened onto the lake, the other 3 gates were saved by impressive surrounds walls, 5 kilometer long and 10 meter high. By 3 June totally the crusaders had went far, the last groups being guided and led by Robert of Normandy and Stephen of Blois. This was the first time the full crusader regular army was together in one position and it was very telling. There were believably approximately 75,000 crusaders, of whom 7,500 were rode knights and 5,000 of infantry.

They colonised in for a long besieging. The first step was to construct siege weapons, expending wood from local forests trees. The crusaders didn't at any stage bear siege weapons along with them, but assembled them on the spot from whatsoever was at hand. These browsed from simple twists such moveable shelters to protect a group of bombardment from the surrounds walls, to "mangonels", a case of catapult which could fire missiles through the city.

Once the catapults were prepare, they began on the second step, which was to counteract the spirit of the enemy. They cut off the heads of any Turks killed in the battle. Some of these they stuck on poles around the outside of the city. Others they fired into the city using their catapults. In requital, the Turks got their hands on some Christian bodies, soldiers who had abided too near from the walls and been killed by arrows men. They lowered confronting hooks down and carted the bodies into the city, then attended them on the walls to rotting - a sign of what would occur to any Christian who defended a Turk.

The crusaders constructed scaling ladders but their attempts to storm the city failed. A knight named Henry of Esch built a moveable shelter below which twenty men could approach up to the walls, with the intent of apprehending under them. The guardians threw stones down on top of it, breaking the whole building and killing all the men inner. Raymond's flocks were more successful. Their shelter - known as a 'tortoise' - brought them right to the walls, where sappers (trained miners) compassed under a division of wall and managed to break it only before nightfall. But by the following morning, the wall had been reconstructed from within.

The Crusaders didn't yet have the accomplishments to build the really big beleaguering weapons such as towers, or the heavy-duty arbalests needed to crush a wall by barrage, so the beleaguering was turning into an impasse.

The crusader's principal weapon in a siege, starving, was ineffectual because of the lake; it was about 30 kilometer long, too long to be beleaguered, then there was nothing to arrest the beleaguered Turks from acquiring supplies into the city by boat. They could survive indefinitely. The crusaders selected the only solvent was to use boats themselves. They directed a messenger to Alexios, and on this occasion he came up with the goods. Particular carts were constructed and boats were brought round the lake overland, coming on 17 June, 1097.

The following day, the crusaders coordinated a combined lake and ground attack on the city. On board the boats were cornetists and drummers, who made an tremendous noise, giving the impression that the fleet was much bigger than it really was. The beleaguered Turks accomplished that without their lifeline crosswise the lake, they could not survive. Within hours they had surrendered. The Greeks took charge, taking hold of the city and forbidding the crusaders from either despoiling or massacring the people within. The crusader leadership continued to their accord with the Emperor and turned over the city over to Byzantine ascendance.

Alexios himself now arrived personally at nearby Pelekanum and assembled with the leaders of the crusaders. He had already amazed what he wanted, the bring back of Nicaea to Byzantine hold. He got them to reincarnate their oaths to him, and ordered Tatikios to remain with the crusaders for the time being to offer tactical advice. The crusaders anticipated that he would also supply an army to companion them, but none was approaching. From here on, they were on their possess.

In the final week of June 1097 they depart from Nicaea. If they break up, they would be hospitable attack by Kilij Arslan who was all the same in the area. If they moved into one mass, they'd have great troubles getting enough food, as they were now living by scrounging and despoiling. They selected to split into two groups, one being directed by Bohemond and Raymond.

In the meantime, Kilij Arslan had been engaged negotiating a truce with his neighbors, and they combined to make a greater force to beat back the Christians.

Recent:
- Motives and Causes of The Crusade
- Cilicia in The First Crusade
- Map of Christendom and its Neighbours in 11th Century
- Map of Christendom and its Neighbours in 12th Century
- Map of The Routes of the First Crusade

Cilicia in The First Crusade

noreply@blogger.com (secblog) — Thu, 22 Jul 2010 22:30:00 +0000

The land was now arresting very mountainous. At Heraclea (New Eregli), they adjudicated to split the army. The main assign would go north-east as far as Caesarea (Kayseri), then east by the mountains via Coxon (Göksun), south down the far position via Marash [Karahmanmaras] and on to the city of Antioch in Syria.

This map from: Piers D. Mitchell, Medicine in the Crusades: Warfare, Wounds and the Medieval Surgeon, P. 3.

Cilician castle in the eleven century

A humbler group would take a road across the mountains to the south-east, down into a land named Cilicia and then over some other line of mountains to meet up with the main army close Antioch. Although this road was curter, it wasn't considered appropriate for the primary army because it affected two constrict mountain passes which could be held by the Turks, who could inflict heavy losses on the crusader army. It was worth chancing a smaller group, while, because Cilicia was a identical fertile land, which means it would be a adept source of food. Cilicia was as well deposited on the coast; if a embrasure could be appropriated, a route for supplies and conceivable reinforcements by ship of Constantinople could be constituted. Two junior nobles, Tancred and Baldwin, were selected to lead this military expedition. Since there was no avid co-operation between the dissimilar groups, they efficaciously set off as two divide forces rather than one united group.

Baldwin had a force of five hundred men, whilst Tancred had two hundred men under his control. The journey by the mountains and down to the seacoast was without incident - the pass wasn't absorbed by the Turks - and Tancred's force arrived first at the port of Tarsus, on 21 Sep, 1097. Tancred's knights apply a show of their skills exterior the city's walls and the locals were so affected that the next morning, 22 Sep, they ceded. Tancred's streamer was taken inner by the Turks and raised over the citadel, arguing that Tancred was now in control of the city, although he hadn't yet in reality acceded the walls.

At the close of the like day, Baldwin's flocks arrived to find Tancred's flag flying on Tarsus. He demanded rival shares of whatever plunder of the city, although Tancred had already officially disappointed it. When Tancred was loath to agree, Baldwin went to the Turks and spoke to them, explicating that he was the brother of Godfrey, the 'biggest of the crusaders', who led the primary army (true) and who would be arriving shortly (a lie). The Turks were imprinted and altered allegiance, taking down Tancred's flag, arousing Baldwin's and letting Baldwin's troops into the city. Tancred had been outmaneuvered. He accomplished he had lost his accidental so he and his flocks packed up and directed east.

Then on 24 Oct a third group reached Tarsus, 300 of Bohemond's knights as reenforcements. Baldwin, having tricked Tancred into losing the city, didn't want to lose it now himself, and then he wouldn't let them in, driving them to camp nightlong outside. During the night several of the Turks still in the city cowered out, silently killed the sleeping knights and so fled. Baldwin's flocks discovered the treachery in the morning and went demoniac, massacring any remaining Turks in the city. They then installed a fort of knights to hold the city, and the rest kept on on east afterward Tancred.

Meanwhile, Tancred had enrolled local Armenian Christians, and with their aid attacked the Turkish-held city of Mamistra. Now called Yakapinar1, Mamistra was, in the eleventh Century, a city of 200,000 people, making it larger than any city in Western Europe. With the help of his allies, Tancred soon appropriated it. This time he was quick to constitute a bearing in the city so that by the time Baldwin arrived, there was no accidental of him taking hold. When Baldwin came on there was batch of ill-feeling, and skirmishing erupted between the two groups of crusaders, the only time that Christians fought one another during the Crusade. Baldwin actualised he could not win, so he stayed the journey out of Cilicia to meet up with the primary crusader army at Marash. Tancred fortified the town, left fifty knights there and then actuate to rejoin the primary crusader army himself.

But he never ascertained Baldwin again. Before he got in, Baldwin had already forged his own way.

Recent Posts:

- The Crusader States in The East
- Western Europe at the time of the Second Crusade
- Routes of the French and German armies in the Second Crusade

Motives and Causes of The Crusade

noreply@blogger.com (secblog) — Thu, 22 Jul 2010 22:04:00 +0000

The motives and cause of the crusades was a warfare between Christians and Moslems which centred around the city of Jerusalem and the Holy positions in the East. The City of Jerusalem accommodated a Holy implication to the Christianity. The Church of the Holy Sepulcher in Jerusalem commemorated the hill of crucifixion and the grave of Christ's burial. Pilgrims throughout the medieval times made consecrated pilgrimages to the Holy city of Jerusalem and the Christian church. Whilst the city of Jerusalem was accommodated by the Moslems the Christian pilgrims had been accorded safe passageway to visit the Holy city. By 1065 Jerusalem was brought by the Turks, who came from the kingdom of ancient Persian Empire. 3000 Christians were slaughtered and the resting Christians were treated so badly that throughout Christendom people were affected to fight in crusades. These events aroused a force of indignation throughout Europe and aroused the hope to rescue the Holy Land from the appreciation of the Moslems.

Amongst the early Christians it was believed a pious and meritorious act to attempt a journey to some consecrated place. Particularly was it thought that a pilgrimage to the land that had been stepped by the feet of the Saviour of the world, to the Holy City that had saw his calvary, was a peculiarly pious contracting, and one which secured for the pilgrim the special favor and approval of Heaven. The Saracen caliphs, for the four centuries and more that they held monomania of Palestine, pursued usually an cleared policy towards the pilgrims, even auspicious pilgrimages as a source of income. But in the 11th century the Seljukian Turks, a large Tartar tribe and avid followers of Islam, wrested from the caliphs almost all their Asiatic monomanias. The Christians were not long in actualising that power had fallen under new hands. 3000 Christian Pilgrims were affronted and oppressed in every way. The churches in Jerusalem were demolished or turned into stables.

If it were a meritable thing to make a pilgrimage to the Holy Sepulcher, much more would it be a devout act to rescue the sacred berth from the blasphemy of infidels. This was the conviction that altered the pilgrim into a warrior, this was the opinion that for 2 centuries and more affected the Christian world to its heaviest depths, and cast the population of Europe in wave afterward wave upon Asia.

Whilst this religious belief was the chief cause of the Crusades, still there was different concurring cause which must not be commanded. This was the restless, adventuresome spirit of the Teutonic peoples of Europe, who hadn't so far outgrown their barbaric instincts. The feudal knights and lords, just now animated by the rising feeling of chivalry, were really ready to enlist in an attempting so accordant with their martial beliefs and their new consecrates of knighthood.

The contiguous cause of the First Crusade was the preaching of Peter the Hermit, a aboriginal of Picardy, in France. Having been accredited by Pope Urban II. to preach a crusade, the Hermit covered all Italy and France, accosting everywhere, in the church, in the street, and in the afford field, the crowds that clumped about him, moving all hearts empathetically or firing them with indignation, as he recited the sufferings of their brethren at the hands of the Moslems, or pictured the blasphemy of the holy places, polluted by the bearing and insults of the disbelievers.

While Peter the Hermit had been awakening the warriors of the West, the Turks had been attaining constant advances in the East, and were now baleful Constantinople itself. The Greek emperor (Alexius Comnenus) sent pressing letters to the Pope, calling for for aid against the Moslems, acting that, unless aid was extended directly, the capital with all its holy keepsakes must soon fall under the hands of the barbarians.

Pope Urban II named a great council of the Church at Piacenza, in Italy, to believe the appeal (1095), but nothing was accomplished. Later in the like year a new council was convened at Clermont, in France, Pope Urban by choice fixing the place of meeting amongst the warm annealed and martial Franks. Pope Urban II himself was one of the chief speakers. He was by nature eloquent, so that the man, the reason, and the affair all caballed to accomplish one of the biggest triumphs of human oratory. Pope Urban II pictured the abasement and misery of the states of Asia; the blasphemy of the positions made sacred by the bearing and footsteps of the Son of God. Pope Urban II then detailed the conquests of the Turks, as yet, with all Anatolia (Asia Minor) in their possession, they were endangering Europe from the shorings of the Hellespont.

"When Jesus Christ bidding you to his defence," called out the eloquent pontiff, "let no base affection confine you in your homes; whomever will desert his house, or his father, or his mother, or his wife, or his kids, or his inheritance, for the sake of my name, shall be compensated a hundred-fold, and possess eternal life." Here the enthusiasm of the vast assemblage burst through every chasteness. With one sound they cried, "Dieu le volt! Dieu le volt!" Intending "It is the will of God! It is the will of God!" Thousands instantly affixed the cross to their apparels as a assurance of their sacred appointment to go forth to the saving of the Holy Sepulcher. The fifteenth day of August of the accompanying year (1096) was set for the departure of the expedition - the Crusades had set out.

Recent:

- First crusade (successful of the main army)
- The foundation of the latin kingdom
- RHC, The Recueil des historiens des croisades

Leaders of The First Crusade

noreply@blogger.com (secblog) — Sun, 18 Jul 2010 12:42:00 +0000

The First Crusade leaders included some of the greatest representatives of European knighthood. Count Raymond of Toulouse headed a lot of offers from Provence in southerly France. Godfrey of Bouillon and his brother Baldwin compelled a force of French and Germans of the Rhinelands. Normandy based Robert, William I eldest son. The Normans from Italy and Sicily were directed by Bohemond, a son of Robert Guiscard, and his nephew Tancred.

The main leaders:

- Godfrey of Bouillon
- Bohemond
- Raymond IV
- Baldwin
- Tancred

Recent:

- Fulcher of Chartres
- Orderic Vitalis
- Otto of Freising
- Roger of Hoveden
- William of Newburgh

Ilghazi

noreply@blogger.com (secblog) — Sun, 18 Jul 2010 12:36:00 +0000

Ilghazi's father Artuk was the founder of the Artukid dynasty, and had been charged governor of Jerusalem by the Seljuk amir Tutush. As Artuk died, Ilghazi and his brother Sökmen came after him as governors of Jerusalem. In 1096 Ilghazi allied with Duqaq of Damascus and Yaghi-Siyan of Antioch against Radwan of Aleppo; Duqaq and Radwan were fighting for ascendance of Syria after the death of Tutush. Ilghazi and Dukak finally quarrelled and Ilghazi was captive, leading to the appropriate of Jerusalem by his brother Sökmen, but Ilgazi convalesced the city when he was brought out. He held it till the city was becharmed by the Fatimid vizier of Egypt, al-Afdal Shahanshah, in 1098. After this he assayed to take a name for himself in the Jezirah, wherever his brothers had also based themselves. He then acceded the service of the Seljuk sultan Mahmud I, who granted him Hulwan and made him shihna of Baghdad, an office which managed the amours of the caliph on behalf of the sultan.

Ilgazi was brushed aside as shihna in 1104 and got leader of the Artukid family afterward the death of Sökmen that year. This was altercated by Sökmen's son Ibrahim, but Ilghazi took Mardin from him in 1108. As header of the Artukids he attained no aeonian alliances and often alternated sides, allying with both fellow Muslims and Christian crusaders if he saw fit. In 1110 he entered in an abortive siege of Edessa. In 1114 he and his nephew Balak (future amir of Aleppo) disappointed the Seljuk governor of Mosul, Aksungur al-Bursuki, and captured Mas'ud, son of the Seljuk sultan. In 1115 Ilghazi surrounded Hims, but was appropriated concisely by its regulator Khir-Khan. Later that year, Roger of Antioch, Baldwin I king of Jerusalem, Pons head of Tripoli, and Baldwin II of Edessa championed Antioch against the Seljuk general Bursuk (not to be baffled with al-Bursuki), with the assist of Ilghazi, Toghtekin of Damascus, and Lulu of Aleppo, all foes of Bursuk. These two armies didn't come to battle, though Bursuk was later disappointed by Roger at the Battle of Sarmin.

Ilghazi acquired control of Aleppo afterward the blackwash of Lulu in 1117. In 1118 he took hold of Mayyafiriqin and pacified the besieging countryside. In 1119 Ilghazi defeated and killed Roger at the Battle of Ager Sanguinis; Ibn al-Qalanisi accounts the victory as "one of the best of triumphs, and such plenteousness of divine assist was never accorded to Islam in all its past dates." The Antiochene towns of Atharib, Zerdana, Sarmin, Ma'arrat al-Nu'man and Kafr Tab fell to his army. "Il Ghazi, yet, was unable to distil full profit of his victory. His drew out drunkenness disadvantaged his army of leaders, and left the Turkmens free to ... Break up after plunder."

Baldwin II (now Baldwin II King of Jerusalem) soon came to drive Ilghazi back, imposing accented losses on the Turks in the hard-fought Battle of Hab on 14 August, 1119. The next year Ilghazi took Nisibin, and then despoiled the County of Edessa before becoming north towards Armenia. In 1121 he attained peace with the crusaders, and with purportedly up to 250 000 - 350 000 flocks, which including men directed by his son-in-law Sadaqah and Sultan Malik of Ganja, he infested Georgia. David IV of Georgia met him at the Battle of Didgori and Ilgazi was disappointed. Agreeing to Matthew of Edessa 400000 Turks were belted down, though there weren't even that many at the battle. Among the various leaders, only Ilghazi and his son-in-law Dubais broke away.

In 1122 Ilghazi and Balak disappointed Joscelin I of Edessa and accepted him captive, but Ilgazi died in Nov of that year at Diyarbekir. He was buried at Mayyafariqin (Silvan now). Balak came after him in Aleppo and his sons Sulaiman and Timurtash followed him in Mardin.

Ibn al-Qalanisi is in general neutral on the character reference of Ilghazi, and describes just one "ignominious habit" of the emir: "Now when Ilghazi drank wine and it got the best of him, he routinely stayed for many days in a state of intoxication, without convalescent his dopes sufficiently to take hold or to be confabbed on any affair or conclusion." The Antiochene chronicler Walter the Chancellor was at first as well neutral towards Ilghazi, till the Battle of Ager Sanguinis, in which Walter himself was appropriated; Ilghazi (written like "Algazi" in Latin) is so described as a "tyrant" and the "prince of the illusion and differ of the Turcomans." Walter also mentions on Ilghazi's alcoholism.

Ilghazi got married first Farkhunda Khatun, the daughter of Radwan of Aleppo (Alep), but he never in reality met her and the marriage was never consummated. He so married the daughter girl of Toghtekin of Damascus and had the following children:

* Shams ad-Daula Sulaiman
* Safra Khatun, got married Husam ad-Din Qurti ibn Toghlan Arslan
* Yumna Khatun, got married Sa'd ad-Daula Il-aldi of Amid
* al-Sa'id Husam ad-Din Timurtash
* Ayaz
* Guhar Khatun, got married Dubais
* al-Bazm

He besides had a son, Umar, by a courtesan, and Nasr, by a slave; another conceivable son was called Kirzil.

Recent Posts:

- Yaghi-Siyan
- Duqaq
- Toghtekin
- Radwan

Radwan

noreply@blogger.com (secblog) — Sun, 18 Jul 2010 12:30:00 +0000

Fakhr al-Mulk Radwan (as well Ridwan or Rudwan; died 10 December, 1113) was a Seljuk ruler of Aleppo from year 1095 to 1113.

Radwan was the son of Tutush I and brother of Abu Nasr Shams al-Muluk Duqaq, but was aroused by his tutor (atabeg) Janah ad-Dawla al-Husain. As Tutush died in 1096, Radwan came into his Syrian possessions and reigned from Aleppo, whilst Janah ad-Dawla was in charge of existent governance. Duqaq shortly revolted versus his brother and took hold of Damascus, bedeviling Syria into most chaos and anarchy. Duqaq had the abide of Yaghi-Siyan of Antioch, who had no dispute with Radwan just disliked Janah ad-Dawla; conjoining Yaghi-Siyan and Duqaq was Ilghazi, governor of Jerusalem. Radwan confederate with Sokman the brother of Ilghazi.

Radwan aggressed Yaghi-Siyan, and when Duqaq and Ilghazi concerned assist him, Radwan surrounded Damascus also. Even so, Radwan soon disputed with Janah ad-Dawla, who captured Hims from him, and with his atabeg out of the alignment, Yaghi-Siyan was much more amenable to aid him. This new alignment was certain with a marriage between Radwan and Yaghi-Siyan's daughter. The two were almost to attack Shaizar when they discovered of the arrival of the First Crusade; all the several alliances were dissolved and everybody came back to their possess cities, though if whatever of the alliances had stayed intact, or they had all acted together, they would belike have been capable to forbid the success of the crusade.

Through 1103 Janah ad-Dawla was killed by an Assassin man named al-Hakim al-Munajjim, one of the members of the cortege of Radwan. This was the entry of the Assassins in Syria. Upon Duqaq's death in 1104, two decrepit rulers came after him in Damascus and Radwan credibly appropriated the city the like year. The throne stayed in Aleppo, even so. In 1105 he aided in the defence of Tripoli, which was being aggressed by the crusaders. That like year, Tancred, Prince of Galilee, trustee of the princedom of Antioch, disappointed him in the Battle of Artah and shortly endangered Aleppo itself. Radwan and Tancred often came into conflict, until Tancred reduced Aleppo to a tributary state in 1111. The qadi of Aleppo, Ibn al-Khashshab, traveled to Baghdad to contact with the Abbasid caliph when Radwan was unwilling to pursue war with Tancred. Ibn al-Khashshab came after in having Mawdud of Mosul based to Aleppo's aid, but Radwan was also antipathetical to his Muslim neighbours, even when they attempted to help him versus the crusaders; Mawdud was shortly killed by the Hashshashin, maybe with Radwan's approval.

Abreast of his death on 10 December, 1113, Radwan was followed by his adolescent son Alp Arslan al-Akhras, under the regency of Lulu and ibn al-Khashshab. Lulu didn't continue Radwan's policy of abide for the Hashshashin, and had them all booted out or killed, whilst this left Aleppo with no cogent allies. The city fell under near bedlam, and shortly came under the hold of Sulaiman, Ilghazi's son, who had married Radwan's daughter. Ibn al-Khashshab was murdered by the Hashshashin in 1125. In 1128 the city was connected with Mosul by the atabeg of the latter, Zengi.

Toghtekin

noreply@blogger.com (secblog) — Sun, 18 Jul 2010 12:19:00 +0000

Zahir ad-Din Toghtekin (Turkish: Tugtekin as well Tughtigin or Toghtekin; died 12 February 1128) was a Turkic military leader. Toghtekin became the Damascus atabeg from 1104 to 1128. He was the beginner of the Burid dynasty of Damascus.

Zahir ad-Din Toghtekin was a junior officeholder to Tutush I, Seljuk swayer of Damascus and Syria. Afterward the former's death in 1095, civil war belched, and Toghtekin abided Tutush's son Duqaq as amir of the city versus Radwan, the amir of Aleppo. In the disorderly years which ensued Toghtekin was sent to reconquer the town of Jebleh, which had arose against the qadi of Tripoli, but he was unable to achieve his undertaking.

On Oct 21, 1097, a Crusader army looked at the gates of Antioch. The local amir, Yaghi-Siyan, though nominally under Radwan's suzerainty, attracted to Duqaq to send an armed force to their saving. Duqaq sent Toghtekin, but on 31 December, 1097, he was disappointed by Bohemund of Taranto and Robert Curthose, and was coerced to retreat. Another relief try was made by a articulate force under Kerbogha, the emir of Mosul, and Toghtekin, which was as well beat by the Crusaders on June 28, 1098.

When the Crusaders displaced southwards from the newly-conquered Antioch, the qadi of Jebleh sold his town to Duqaq, who established Toghtekin's son, Taj al-Mulk Buri, as its ruler. His authoritarian rule, even so, led to his quick precipitation. In 1103 Toghtekin was directed by Duqaq to take ownership of Homs at the asking of its dwellers, after the emir Janah al-Dawla had been assassinated by arrange of Radwan.

The coming year Duqaq died and Toghtekin, now acting as trustee and actual ruler, had the former's junior son Tutush II announced amir, while he married Duqaq's widow and allowed for himself the title of atabeg. After deposing Tutush II he had additional son of Duqaq, Baqtash, called emir, but shortly afterwards he had him exiled. Baqtash, with the abide of Aitekin, the sahib of Bosra, tried to reconquer Damascus, but was beat back by Toghtekin and coerced to find aid at the court of Baldwin I King of Jerusalem.

Approximately 1106 Toghtekin interfered to momently raise the besieging of Tripoli by the Crusaders, but could not forbid the definitive appropriate of the city. By May 1108 he was able to defeat a little Christian force under Gervaise of Bazoches, lord of Galilee; Gervaise was nominated to be freed in change for his possession, but he declined and was accomplished. In April 1110 Toghtekin surrounded and captured Baalbek and called his son Buri as regulator.

Later in November 1111, the town of Tyre, which was surrounded by Baldwin's flocks, put itself under Toghtekin's tribute. Toghtekin, abided by Fatimid forces, intervened, forcing the Franks to arouse the beleaguering on April 10, 1112; however, he defied to participate in the anti-Crusade attempt launched by Mawdud of Mosul, dreading that the latter could take reward of it to gain rule over the whole of Syria.

However, in 1113 the two Muslim commanders allied back to the depredations of Baldwin of Jerusalem and Tancred of Hauteville. Their army surrounded Tiberias, but they were unable to capture it contempt a sound victory at the Battle of Al-Sannabra, and they were forced to back out to Damascus when Christian reenforcements arrived and appends began to beetle off. On his visit in the city, Mawdud was killed by the Hashshashin (2 October, 1113); the inhabitants charged Toghtekin of the deed. In 1114 he blessed an alignment against the Franks with the new amir of Aleppo, Alp Arslan, but the latter was as well assassinated a short time after.

In 1115 Toghtekin determined to ally himself with the Kingdom of Jerusalem versus the Seljuk general Aq Sonqor Bursuqi, who had been directed by the Seljuk sultan to fight the Crusaders. The adopting year, judging the Franks too brawny, he visited Baghdad to obtain a amnesty from the sultan, though never blanking out to stay autonomous himself between the two principal forces.

Confederate with Ilghazi of Aleppo, he attacked Athareb in the Christian princedom of Antioch, but was disappointed at Hab on August 14, 1119. In the June of the following year he sent aid to Ilghazi, who was once again under danger of annihilation in the like place. In 1122 the Fatimids, no longer capable to champion Tyre, sold it to Toghtekin, who established a fort there, but the fort was unable to forbid its appropriate by the Christians on July seven, 1124.

By 1125, Bursuqi, now in hold of Aleppo, looked in the Antiochean territory with a big army which Toghtekin joined; even so, the 2 were defeated at the Battle of Azaz on June 11, 1125. The coming after January Toghtekin also had to disgust an encroachment by Baldwin II of Jerusalem. In later 1126 he again encroached upon the Principality of Antioch with Bursuqi, but once again without any results. AMIR Toghtekin died in 1128. He was followed by (Buri) his son .

Duqaq

noreply@blogger.com (secblog) — Sun, 18 Jul 2010 12:09:00 +0000

Abu Nasr Shams al-Muluk Duqaq (He died June eight, 1104) was the Seljuk ruler of Damascus by 1095 to 1104.

Duqaq the son of the Seljuk ruler of Syria, Tutush I, and Khatun Safwat al-Mulk, Duqaq was the brother of Radwan. As their father died in 1095, Radwan arrogated Syria for himself, and Duqaq at first inherited dominion in the Jezirah and endured with his brother in Aleppo. Even so, he soon arose and appropriated hold of Damascus, throwing Syria into close anarchy and civil war. Duqaq had the abide of Yaghi-Siyan of Antioch, who had no altercate with Radwan but disliked Radwan's atabeg Janah ad-Dawla; conjoining Yaghi-Siyan and Duqaq was Ilghazi, regulator of Jerusalem. Radwan confederate with Ilghazi's brother Sokman.

Radwan aggressed Yaghi-Siyan, and when Duqaq and Ilghazi concerned assist him, Radwan surrounded Damascus as well. Yet, Radwan soon altercated with Janah ad-Dawla, who captivated Hims from him, and with his atabeg out of the alliance, Yaghi-Siyan was often more willing to aid him. This new alignment was certain with a marriage between Radwan and Yaghi-Siyan's daughter. The two were about to attack Shaizar when they heard of the reaching of the First Crusade; all the assorted alignments were dissolved and everybody brought back to their own cities, while if any of the alliances had stayed intact, or they had all acted together, they would belike have been capable to forbid the achiever of the crusade.

Across the winter of 1097-1098, Antioch was surrounded by the Crusaders, and Yaghi-Siyan and his son Shams ad-Dawla sought aid from Duqaq. On December 30, 1097, reenforcements from Duqaq were disappointed by the scrounging party of Bohemund of Taranto, and Duqaq retreated to Homs. Duqaq later joined Kerbogha of Mosul to attack the crusaders afterward they had absorbed Antioch in June of 1098, but during the battle, Duqaq's line abandoned and Kerbogha was defeated. While absorbed in Syria, Duqaq's monomanias in the Jezirah were appropriated by some disaffected vassals; in 1099 he recaptured Diyarbakr.

By 1100 Duqaq ambuscaded Baldwin I of Edessa at Nahr al-Kalb, outside Beirut, whilst the latter was on his way to Jerusalem to follow his brother Godfrey of Bouillon as king. Baldwin's men accommodated a constrict pass and Duqaq's troops weren't capable to break through; Baldwin was victorious and kept going on to Jerusalem.

By 1103 Duqaq appropriated Homs when Janah ad-Dawla, Radwan's previous atabeg, was assassinated. Duqaq fell sick in 1104, and on the advice of his mother, charged his own atabeg Toghtekin as atabeg to his young son Tutush II. Duqaq died on June eight of that year. Toghtegin soon overrode Duqaq's dynasty to constitute the Burid dynasty, which would convention Damascus for the next half-century.

Recent Posts:

- Yaghi-Siyan
- The Siege of Antioch
- The foundation of the latin kingdom

Yaghi-Siyan

noreply@blogger.com (secblog) — Sun, 18 Jul 2010 11:51:00 +0000

Yaghi-Siyan, (died June 2, 1098) was the governor of Antioch on the First Crusade.

He was a Turkish slave of the Seljuk sultan Malik Shah I, who had allowed Antioch in 1085 and appointive Yaghi-Siyan regulator about 1090. Malik Shah died in 1092, and his heir Tutush I accorded Yaghi-Siyan more dominion around Manbij and Turbessel. When Tutush died in 1095, his nephews, Ridwan and Duqaq, fought for ascendance of Syria, arrogating Aleppo and Damascus severally. Ridwan's arrogate to Aleppo was contradicted by an alliance of Yaghi-Siyan, Ilghazi, and Duqaq. Yaghi-Siyan disliked Ridwan's tutor Janah ad-Dawla more than he disliked Ridwan himself, and thus allied with Duqaq alternatively. Ridwan and his allies attacked Yaghi-Siyan's dominion, and then beleaguered Damascus when Duqaq and Ilghazi concerned assist Antioch. In 1097 Ridwan quarrelled with Janah ad-Dawla, and Yaghi-Siyan became more amenable to an alignment. This was accomplished by conjoining his daughter to Ridwan. The two were about to attack Shaizar when news of the crusade got in, and all parties backed away to their own dominions to prepare for the coming aggresses.

In spite of the alliance, Yaghi-Siyan was left lone to fight the crusaders with just his personal army in Antioch. To prepare for a beleaguering, he exiled a lot of of the Greek Orthodox and Armenian Orthodox Christians, whom he conceived untrusty. He captive the Greek Patriarch, John the Oxite, and became the Cathedral of St. Peter into a stable. The Syrian Orthodox Christians were in general left alone, as Yaghi-Siyan conceived them to be faster to him, as foes of the Greeks and Armenians. Across the winter of 1097-1098, Antioch was beleaguered by the Crusaders, and Yaghi-Siyan and his son Shams ad-Dawla assayed help from Duqaq. He often sent out sallies versus the Christian camp, and attacked forage parties further afield. Yaghi-Siyan knew from his informants that there were disagreements amidst the Christians; both Raymond IV of Toulouse and Bohemund of Taranto cherished the city for themselves. While Bohemund was away forage on December 29, 1097, Raymond attacked but was beat back by Yaghi-Siyan's troops. On December 30, reenforcements from Duqaq were disappointed by Bohemund's foraging party, and backed out to Homs.

Yaghi-Siyan then addressed Ridwan for assist. In February Ridwan's army was as well disappointed; while the crusader army was aside from the city fighting Ridwan, Yaghi-Siyan marched out to attack the foot-soldiers left to champion the camp, but he also was pushed back when the triumphant crusaders brought back. In March Yaghi-Siyan ambushed the crusaders who were bestowing wood and other material backward from the port of St. Simeon; when the crusader bivouac at Antioch heard that Raymond and Bohemund had been belted down, there was mass disarray, and Yaghi-Siyan aggressed the rest of the army below Godfrey of Bouillon. Bohemund and Raymond soon came back however, and Yaghi-Siyan was once again pushed back into the city.

This time the regulator turned to Kerbogha of Mosul for help. The crusaders knew they had to take the city in front Kerbogha's reinforcements came. Bohemund secretly brought off with one of Yaghi-Siyan's guards, an Armenian called Firuz, who agreed to bewray the city. On the night of June 2, 1098, the crusaders acceded the city; Yaghi-Siyan fled with his guard, while his son abided behind to defend the citadel. On his break away, Yaghi-Siyan fell of his horse, and as his guards ascertained it inconceivable to bring the bruised regulator with them, they departed him on the ground and rode off without him. He was ascertained by an Armenian who amputate his head and sent it as a endow to Bohemund.

Antioch was arrogated by Bohemund and Raymond, with Raymond based in Yaghi-Siyan's abidance and Bohemund in the bastion when it was appropriated from Shams ad-Dawla the next week. Their quarrel detained the crusade for a lot of months.

The crusaders commemorated Yaghi-Siyan's name in assorted forms in Latin, admitting Acxianus, Gratianus, and Cassianus; the abidance arrogated by Raymond was called the "palatium Cassiani".

Recent:

- Council of Clermont (November 1095)
- The Ninth Crusade
- A History of Deeds Done Beyond The Sea
- Michael Psellus (1018 – 1078)

Dietrich of Nieheim

noreply@blogger.com (secblog) — Wed, 14 Jul 2010 14:38:00 +0000

Dietrich of Nieheim (c. 1345-1418), medieval historiographer, was born at Nieheim, a small township capable to the see of Paderborn.

Dietrich's Life:

He got a notary of the papal court of the rota at Avignon, and in 1376 went on the Curia to Rome. Urban VI here took especial notice of him, caused him an abridger to the papal chancery, and in 1383 acquired him with him in his visit to Charles III of Naples at Naples, an despatch which led to a lot of objectionable chances, from which he at large in 1385 by leaving the Curia.

In 1387 he's again found amongst the abbreviators, and in 1395 Pope Boniface IX constituted him to the bishopric of Verden. His attempt to take ownership of the see, even so, met with successful oppositeness; and he had to résumé his work in the chancery, wherever his name again comes along in 1403.

Meanwhile he had aided to found a German hospice in Rome, which endures as the Institute dingle, Anima, and had started to write a account, of which only fragmentises are extant. His chief grandness, however, lies in the part he took in the arguments rising out of the Great Schism. He attended Gregory XII to Lucca in May 1408, and, having vainly tried to make the pope listen to counselings of easing, he connected the Roman and Avignonese cardinals at Pisa. He bound to the pope elected by the council of Pisa (Alexander V) and to his heir, Antipope Pope John XXIII restarting his place at the Curia. In view of the increasing disarray in the Church, even so, he got one of the most ardent advocators of the attract to a full general council. He was present at the council of Constance as consultant to the German nation. He died at Maastricht on twenty-two March 1418.

Niem wrote around events in which he either had an adumbrate personal share or of which he was in an fantabulous position to hold precise information. His most authoritative works are the "Nemus unionis" and the "De schismate". Of these the first, accumulated at Lucca after the break with Gregory XII, is a accumulation of documents which had fallen under his hands on the negotiations for conglutination: papal dictums, pamphlets, letters written and encountered by limself, and the like. The "De schismate libri III", completed on May 25 1410, delineates the history of events since 1376 as Niem himself had assured them. It was remained in the "Historia de vita Johannis XXIII".

Recent:

- Symeon of Durham
- Ssu-ma Kuang (1019 – 1086)
- Marianus Scotus (1028 – 1082/1083)

Symeon of Durham

noreply@blogger.com (secblog) — Wed, 14 Jul 2010 14:33:00 +0000

Symeon of Durham (died afterward 1129), English chronicler, bosomed the monastic life earlier the year 1083 in the monastery of Jarrow; just only made his community at a later date, after he had abstracted with the rest of his profession to Durham.

He was author of 2 historical works which are especially worthful for northern amours. He composed his Historia ecclesiae Dunelmensis, reaching the year 1096, at approximately date between 1104 and 1108. The master manuscript is at Durham in the library of Bishop Cosin. It is separated into 4 books, which are subdivided into chapters; the decree of the narrative is chronological. There are two continuances, both anonymous. The first carries the history from 1096 to the death of Ranulf Flambard (1129); the second extends from 1133 to 1144. A Cambridge manuscript arrests a third continuance application the years 1145-1154.

Approximately 1129 Symeon attempted to write a Historia regum Anglorum et Dacorum. This gets at the point where the Ecclesiastical History of Bede closes. Up to 957 Simeon but copies some old Durham chronological record, not otherwise carried on, which are valuable for northern history; of that point to 1119 he copies John of Worcester with sealed interpolations. The division dealing with the years 1119-1129 is, however, an autonomous and practically coetaneous narrative. Symeon writes, for his time, with alleviate and perspicuity; but his chief merit is that of a persevering accumulator and copyist.

Additional writings have been ascribed to his pen, but on meritless agency. They are impressed, along with his unchallenged works, in the Scriptores decem of Roger Twysden (1652). The most accomplished Bodoni edition is that of Thomas Arnold [Rolls series, two vols., 1882-1885].

Recent Posts:

- Galbert of Bruges
- Florence of Worcester
- Eadmer (1066 – 1124)
- Kim Busik (1075 – 1151)

Kim Busik (1075 – 1151)

noreply@blogger.com (secblog) — Wed, 14 Jul 2010 08:39:00 +0000

Kim Busik 1075-1151 was an prescribed and a scholar on Korea's Goryeo period. He's best known for accumulating the Samguk Sagi, the most older extant record of Korean history.

Kim Busik was the great-grandson of Kim Wi-yeong, who was acceded to the Goryeo Dynasty court that substituted Unified Silla, getting the regulator of Gyeongju Province. Kim Busik's father and 3 brothers were as well officials of the Goryeo court.

While he was a applying Buddhist, he affirmed Confucianism over Buddhism as the conducting principle of governance, and favored acquainting tributes to the Chinese emperor to forbid a conflict and in complaisance to the lofty Sadae.

In 1121 Kim Busik was constituted as Royal Diarist, or ji, to the court of Emperor Yejong. In 1123, along with two additional historians, was accused with devising Yejong's Veritable Records Sillok. International link

Recent:

- Galbert of Bruges
- Florence of Worcester
- Eadmer (1066 – 1124)

Eadmer (1066 – 1124)

noreply@blogger.com (secblog) — Wed, 14 Jul 2010 08:34:00 +0000

Eadmer (1066 – 1124), English historian and ecclesiastical, was credibly, as his name proposes, of English, and not of Norman parentage. He got a monk in the Benedictine monastery of Christ Church, Canterbury, where he made the conversance of Anselm, at that time visiting England as abbot of Bec. The intimacy was regenerated when Anselm got archbishop of Canterbury in 1093; thenceforward Eadmer wasn't only his disciple and follower, but his friend and director, being formally charged to this location by Pope Urban II. In 1120 he was constituted to the archbishopric of St Andrews, just as the Scots wouldn't recognize the assurance of the see of Canterbury he was never blessed, and soon afterward he abject his claim to the archbishopric. His death is in general assigned to the year 1124.

Eadmer left a multitude of writings, the most authoritative of which is his Historiae novorum, a work which deals chiefly with the history of England between 1066 and 1122. Although concerned mainly with ecclesiastic affairs scholars accord in concerning the Historia as among the ablest and most of value writings of its kind. It was first edited by John Selden in 1623 and, with Eadmer's Vita Anselmi, has been edited by Martin Rule for the "Rolls Series" (London, 1884). The Vita Anselmi, first printed at Antwerp in 1551, is believably the better life of the saint. Less remarkable are Eadmer's lives of St Dunstan, St Bregwin, archbishop of Canterbury, and St Oswald, archbishop of York; these are totally printed in Henry Wharton's Anglia Sacra, part ii. (1691), where a list of Eadmer's writings will be ascertained. The holographs of most of Eadmer's acts are bore on in the depository library of Corpus Christi College, Cambridge.

Recent:

- Otto of Freising
- Roger of Hoveden
- Michael Psellus (1018 – 1078)
- Florence of Worcester

Florence of Worcester

noreply@blogger.com (secblog) — Wed, 14 Jul 2010 08:29:00 +0000

Florence of Worcester (died 1118), the 1st Latin chronicler of any grandness who consists to southern England is Florence of Worcester, already referred as one of Simeon of Durham’s primary sources. Florence’s work is celebrated as being the first try in England at a universal history starting with the creation and adopting within its compass all the nations of the known world. But, as the title of his chronicle—Chronicon ex Chronicis—frankly bespeaks, Florence isn't much more than a laborious encyclopaedist from the works of others; and he took as the basis of the early portions of his narrative the universal account of Marianus Scotus, an Irish monastic of the eleventh century. Marianus, in his bend, is, so far as English history is implicated, only a compiler of Bede and the Old English Chronicle.

He brings his record of issues down to the year 1082, but it is so fragmental and perfunctory in its discourse of English amours as to give Florence abundant chances for interpolation and accession. Florence’s chronicle of his own times, which concludes with the year 1117, owns much autonomous value, and was largely absorbed upon by subsequent chroniclers. It is lower valuable, even so, than its continuation by John, additional monk of Worcester, from 1117 to 1141. A second continuance, down to 1152, was based chiefly upon the work of Henry of Huntingdon. The task of still further broadening Florence’s chronicle seems to have get a special care of the monks of St. Edmundsbury, for it is to two inmates of that house that we owe two other additions to it which carry on the record, without a breach, down to the very close of the 13th century.

Recent Posts:

- Ssu-ma Kuang (1019 – 1086)
- Marianus Scotus (1028 – 1082/1083)
- Galbert of Bruges

Galbert of Bruges

noreply@blogger.com (secblog) — Mon, 12 Jul 2010 15:32:00 +0000

Galbert of Bruges (1075 - 1128). A Flemish chronicler who wrote a absorbing eyewitness account of the murder of Charles the Good, count of Flanders, in 1127 and the power conflict involving the Flemish aristocracy and towners that led to the constitution of Thierry d’Alsace as count in 1128. Galbert tells us only that he was a notary in the service of the count, and thus credibly a clerk in minor orders instead of a priest or canon. He wrote his first adaptation on full tablets, then retooled and enclosed other material into his elaborated description of the events of April and May 1127, then wrote a more full general discourse of developments in Flanders in the second half of that year. With the reclamation of civil discord between February and July 1128, he compiled another diary, one that's less detailed than the first and that he left unfinished, a fact maybe arguing an former death. His history was apparently unread in the Middle Ages for want of a frequenter willing to overlook its often hostile portraiture of figures in authorisation. A manuscript, now confounded, was apparently kept at Bruges, and copies were built in the 16th and seventeenth centuries.

"The Murder, Betrayal and Assassination of the Glorious Charles, Count of Flanders" is among the most widely read books of the Middle Ages. It narrates the blackwash of Charles, Count of Flanders, and the events directing up to and abiding by the murder. Galbert was a occupant of Bruges and had assisted in the count's administration for leastwise 13 years by the time of the assassination in 1127. He was well-acquainted with Charles and many of the other doers in this drama, an eyewitness to many of the cases he relates, and exceptionally well positioned to accumulate information about other people. Galbert's chronicle adopts the form of a journal, the only one that exists from northwest Europe in the 12th century. Edited by two of the world's largest specialists on Galbert today, Jeff Rider and Alan V. Murray, this book brings collectively essays by constituted scholars who have been largely creditworthy for the radical alters in the apprehension of Galbert and his work that have occurred over the last 30 years and essays by younger scholars. The essays are written by British, Belgian, Dutch, German, Canadian, and American scholarly persons of literature and history, and are separated into four divisions - Galbert of Bruges at Work, Galbert of Bruges and the Development of Institutions, Galbert of Bruges and the Politics of Gender, and The Meanings of History. The book admits an copious bibliography of variants, translations, and studies of Galbert's account, and of works committed to the rule of Charles the Good and the Flemish Crisis of 1127-28, to the government and creations of Flanders in the age of Galbert, and to the topography and history of mediaeval Bruges.

Recent:

- Marianus Scotus (1028 – 1082/1083)
- Ssu-ma Kuang (1019 – 1086)
- Michael Psellus (1018 – 1078)