The Kingdom of Jerusalem and the other Crusader states, with
Moslem states (in shades of green) in 1135 during the reign of
Melisende.
Within fifty years of its capture, Jerusalem, the most prestigious
city in Christendom, was ruled by a woman. Queen Melisende’s
powerful and charismatic personality cast its influence across the
Levant for over two decades—a remarkable achievement in the most
war-torn environment in Christendom and in such a male-dominated age.
Broadly speaking, medieval women were characterized as either sinful
temptresses, heiresses to the legacy of Eve, or simply lacking the
physical strength to govern. Biblical authority indicated women were
subject to the authority of their husbands. Melisende came to the
throne of Jerusalem through a complex combination of personal
determination and circumstance. At first glance, however, the
possibility of any woman wielding authority in the Levant seems
remote.
THE EARLY FRANKISH RULERS OF JERUSALEM
As we have seen, the first Frankish ruler of Jerusalem, Godfrey of
Bouillon, refused to call himself king in Christ’s city and
modestly took the title of Advocate of the Holy Sepulchre. He died
just over a year later, to be succeeded by his more pragmatic
brother, Baldwin of Boulogne, who was crowned king in November 1100.
Thus began the royal line, headed by one of the great warrior leaders
of the First Crusade. King Baldwin I had to expand and consolidate
his lands in the face of fierce Muslim opposition. He also needed to
establish a dynasty, his first wife having died during the terrible
crossing of Asia Minor. And so, in 1098 he married the Armenian
noblewoman Arda, partly in an attempt to forge closer links with the
indigenous Christians of northern Syria. Arda traveled south to be
installed as queen of Jerusalem but within six years, Baldwin—whose
wars had made him desperately short of cash—cast her aside to seek
a wealthier bride. Arda fled to Constantinople where she is said to
have lost her queenly dignity and become a common prostitute.
Flagrantly ignoring the fact that Arda was still alive, the king then
married the wealthy, but late-middle-aged, Adelaide of Sicily. Once
he had spent all her money, Baldwin callously repudiated this queen
too and sent her home: apparently the king regarded women as useful
sources of financial and political advancement but little else, and
in not providing an heir, he had failed in the most vital
responsibility of a medieval monarch.
At the time of his death Baldwin I’s closest male relative had
returned to Europe. By chance, however, the king’s cousin, also
named Baldwin—and, at that time, count of Edessa—was in
Jerusalem. Rather than suffer a long interregnum, the nobility agreed
he should be crowned and his family soon came south to start a new
life in the holy city. Fourteen grim months as a captive of the
Muslims in 1123–24 did little to deter Baldwin II from an
aggressive military policy and he fought numerous campaigns across
the Levant. His Armenian wife, Morphia, bore him four
daughters—Melisende, Alice, Hodierna, and Yveta—before she died
in 1126. Once again there was no immediate male heir. Circumstances
required that an outsider be brought in to marry the eldest princess
and become king, although, as we shall see, first Baldwin, and then
Melisende, were utterly determined to protect the standing of their
own bloodline.4 Transforming this desire into a reality lies at the
heart of this episode and in the course of the struggle Melisende
challenged and, in her lifetime at least, overturned women’s
conventional role as passive and politically inferior to men.
As (often) a child heiress, then a bride, a mother, and finally a
widow, women could carry or create the royal line of succession. For
every ruling house the maintenance of a dynasty was a matter of the
utmost priority; a woman could, therefore, through the various stages
of her life, hold or transmit something of inestimable value. By
bearing children a woman could derive glory and hold a special place
in a ruling family. To convert that into genuine day-to-day influence
and to overcome the strictures of churchmen was, for the majority of
medieval noblewomen and queens, impossible. Elsewhere in
twelfth-century Europe, several women—such as Matilda of
England—attempted to become rulers, but their efforts almost
invariably failed and were not repeated for centuries. For Melisende
the boundaries imposed by her sex were there to be broken.
THE DEATH OF KING BALDWIN II AND THE SUCCESSION OF FULK AND
MELISENDE
In August 1131 King Baldwin II marched into Jerusalem after
settling a rebellion in northern Syria. Within a week of his return,
however, the king was struck down by a serious illness and his
condition rapidly deteriorated. Baldwin realized that his last days
were at hand and he asked to be carried the three hundred meters from
the royal palace in the Temple of Solomon to the palace of the
patriarch of Jerusalem in the Holy Sepulchre.
The head of the Catholic Church in Jerusalem occupied a series of
spacious apartments connected to the uppermost part of the rotunda of
the Holy Sepulchre. Baldwin could hardly be closer to the core of the
Christian faith—the place where Jesus had been buried and had risen
again. It was on a quest to free the Lord’s tomb from Muslim hands
that Baldwin had set out on the First Crusade and fought and suffered
during the three thousand long miles from his homeland in Boulogne to
the holy city. Thirty-three years later he was one of the few
surviving veterans of the crusade and it was wholly apposite that he
chose to die at the place of greatest spiritual resonance for
Christian pilgrims.
As his strength faded Baldwin summoned his eldest daughter, the
slender, dark-haired Melisende, his son-in-law, Count Fulk V of
Anjou, and their son, a two-year-old also named Baldwin. For
Melisende it must have been an intensely poignant moment as she
witnessed the loss of her remaining parent and the change in her
status from princess to queen. Fulk had waited for this time since
his arrival in the Holy Land three years earlier. The nobles of
Jerusalem had unanimously chosen him to marry Melisende because he
was a man of considerable military experience and the head of one of
the most important families in western Europe. He was also known to
the Franks from an earlier pilgrimage to the Levant when he stayed
with the newly founded Order of Knights Templar. When Baldwin passed
away, Fulk believed that he would become king of Jerusalem.
As his time drew near, Baldwin had one final, maverick decision to
hand down. It was an act that would have profound consequences for
Melisende, Fulk, and the future of the kingdom of Jerusalem. Baldwin
summoned the patriarch and various senior nobles to join his family
at his bedside. In front of these witnesses the ailing monarch
formally resigned the crown and then—and here lay the twist—he
committed the kingdom not to Fulk alone, but to the care of Melisende
and the infant Baldwin as well. In other words, he decreed that
Jerusalem would be ruled by a triumvirate, not just by one man.
The majority of people in the room murmured their assent—for one
individual, however, years of planning and anticipation were in utter
ruins. As he heard the pronouncement Fulk must have felt shaken to
the core—a mixture of horror and fury; yet at such a solemn moment
he could hardly give vent to his true emotions. He had relinquished
his position as count of Anjou in order to rule Jerusalem in his own
right. He had not surrendered his old life in France to share power
with anyone, not even his own wife. Now he had been cornered and
confronted with—potentially—the demolition of his sole authority.
As a piece of political drama this deathbed scene was an episode
of the highest order. Who could resist the dying command of a hero of
the First Crusade, the anointed king of Jerusalem? Baldwin had sent a
startlingly clear signal that it was his bloodline—carried in the
person of Melisende—and not Fulk’s, that lay at the heart and
soul of the kingdom. Baldwin did not, under any circumstances, wish
to see the lands that he had fought so hard for absorbed into Fulk’s
Angevin Empire. Yet it was precisely because Baldwin’s line had to
be transmitted through a woman, with all the disadvantages that this
carried in medieval society, that he had needed to stage such a coup
de théâtre. Fulk was important as a provider of military leadership
and to father children, but Baldwin plainly wished to limit his
influence and to ensure that Melisende held power as well. Much
depended on how Melisende herself handled this legacy.
Some women may
have simply acquiesced to their husband’s wishes—as the Church
recommended they should—in which case Baldwin’s decree would have
become a hollow and worthless act. There were numerous cases of
female regents being bullied aside by the political and military
muscle of men who sought power for themselves. The dying king knew
his daughter well, though; Melisende had the strength of character to
uphold her position to the full and as the years unfolded her
uncompromising political skills showed her father’s faith in her to
be entirely justified.
It is difficult not to feel some sympathy for Fulk. There was no
record of any overt tension between Baldwin and his son-in-law in the
three years before the king died; in fact, William of Tyre recorded
quite the opposite. Fulk is reported to have “devotedly fulfilled
all the duties of a son . . . and in deference to the lord king he
proved he was not lacking in those qualities which ordinarily win
friends.” Yet Orderic Vitalis, who wrote within a decade of these
events, offered a different perspective and observed that Fulk had
“exercised authority undisturbed as [Baldwin’s] son-in-law and
heir throughout the realm during the [last] year of the old king’s
life.” Fulk would have been able to stamp his influence on the
royal household, and the arrival of a number of Angevin newcomers may
have perturbed Baldwin. While the presence of extra warriors was
always welcome in the Holy Land, such men would need lands and titles
for themselves—which could only come at the expense of the
indigenous nobility: those who had grown strong in supporting King
Baldwin. The invitation to Fulk was the first time that such a
powerful western lord had been asked to settle in the Levant; almost
certainly the king had underestimated the wider effects of his being
there.
While the nobility of Jerusalem had universally endorsed the
choice of Fulk as ruler, evidently they had now reconsidered; some
may have feared that he would cast Melisende aside. After all, his
father, Fulk le Réchin, had, in spite of his nickname, married four,
possibly five times, and Fulk himself had an adult son, Elias, from
his first marriage. At the time of his father’s negotiations to wed
Melisende, Elias had been expected to succeed to the county of Perche
in northern France, but had since been cheated out of this by his
father-in-law. Could the next king of Jerusalem lever his own son
into the line of succession in the East?
After Baldwin had revealed his final wishes he removed himself
from any further controversy when he donned a monk’s cowl and took
vows of holy orders. Like many nobles of the time he chose to end his
life as a cleric and forsook the secular world to be closer to God.
On August 21, 1131, the king died. He was buried near his
predecessors in the Church of the Holy Sepulchre at the foot of Mount
Calvary, the place of Christ’s Crucifixion.
Within a month Fulk, Melisende, and the young Baldwin were
crowned. The coronations of Baldwin I and Baldwin II had taken place
at the Church of the Holy Nativity in Bethlehem, but the 1131
ceremony was moved to the focal point of the kingdom, the Holy
Sepulchre—an early indication that Fulk wanted to change direction.
The court officials chose September 14, the day of the Exaltation of
the Holy Cross, a commemoration of the discovery of the relic of the
True Cross, as an auspicious and appropriate day for the occasion.
The coronation was a great public event, designed to cement in the
minds of everyone who witnessed it the beginning of a new period of
divinely sanctioned rule. In a society without means of mass
communication, such carefully staged displays were vital
opportunities to reinforce notions of power and splendor. Detailed
descriptions of thirteenth-century coronations allow us to
reconstruct the events of 1131 with some confidence; we also have the
evidence of an early twelfth-century coronation oath. The minutely
calculated ceremonial emphasized the royal dignity, the position of
the senior nobility, especially the great officers of state, as well
as the authority of the Church. Many parts of the ritual can be
traced back to the settlers’ homelands and dated from the age of
Charlemagne, giving them further gravitas by the weight of tradition.
Once the coronation date had been announced the preparations
began. The nobility of Jerusalem traveled to the capital to take part
in the ceremony, as did representatives from Antioch, Tripoli, and
Edessa. Bishops, abbots, and all the other churchmen of the realm
also started to assemble. A more exotic touch was added by the
presence of an embassy from Fatimid Egypt; serious political turmoil
prompted the new vizier, Kutayfat, to seek a truce with the
Christians and his envoys carried a beautiful gift, a carved ivory
tau or staff, to advance their cause. Most of the annual pilgrim
visitors were still in the Holy Land and they must have been
delighted to witness an event of such importance. As the great day
approached, people were drawn toward the holy city to watch or take
part in the coronation; Jerusalem must have been overflowing with
visitors staying with friends, fellow religious groups, or in the
many hostels.
On September 14 Fulk and Melisende dressed in the royal palace,
assisted, as ever, by their servants. They wore special robes,
beautifully embroidered dalmatics—wide-sleeved tunics, open at the
sides—and stoles. The family assembled in the Temple complex at the
entrance to the royal palace where the marshal and the constable
awaited them with horses and the royal standard. This was a square of
white cloth with a cross at each corner and one in the center to
represent the wounds of Christ. Fulk and Melisende mounted their
horses, specially caparisoned for the event, and the chamberlain
pointed the way forward with the royal sword. Behind the couple came
the seneschal carrying the scepter and the constable holding the
standard. Given the scale of the entourage it is likely that the
procession went along Temple Street, one of the wider thoroughfares
of the city—perhaps seven meters across, rather than the two to
three meters of most byways. Temple Street ascends gently uphill for
about three hundred meters until a small dogleg moves onto David
Street. The way was thronged with cheering spectators crammed in
doorways, leaning from windows, standing in front of shops and up on
the flat roofs of the houses. The route was decorated with highly
colored banners and a swell of noise and anticipation rolled ahead of
the approaching party. After another couple of hundred meters the
procession turned right onto Patriarch Street and moved alongside the
western wall of the Hospital of Saint John before turning right into
the courtyard in front of the Holy Sepulchre itself. The street plan
of this district of Jerusalem is barely changed today and many of the
buildings that rise either side of these roads are crusader in
origin. Almost claustrophobic, and often in heavy shadow because of
the narrow streets, the area has a truly medieval feel.
The absence
of traffic, the bustle of people buying and selling; the slower, less
certain pace of strangers visiting holy sites; the smells of cooking
food and exotic spices, and the mounds of brightly colored
merchandise provide the modern tourist with some echoes of the
crusader age. Fulk and Melisende dismounted at the courtyard of the
Holy Sepulchre. The constable handed the royal standard to the
marshal and took the horses’ bridles. Standing in the doorway of
the church, waiting to welcome the royal couple, was Patriarch
William I of Jerusalem, accompanied by his senior churchmen and the
Eastern Christian religious hierarchy, all wearing their finest
robes. The party moved from daylight into the holy of holies, the
candlelit rotunda that contained Christ’s tomb. The building in
place today was (as we will see later) the product of a
reconstruction program initiated by Fulk and Melisende soon after
their coronation, but in September 1131 the Sepulchre area was
already laid out in a basic circular shape. As the candles flickered
and incense wafted through the air, everyone knelt in worship and the
patriarch led prayers for a successful reign. William then asked Fulk
and Melisende to take the coronation oath. No previous rulers of
Jerusalem had been designated joint monarchs in the way that Baldwin
II had prescribed, but given Fulk’s and Melisende’s status—and
the events that followed—we should assume that they both took the
same oath. The infant Baldwin must also have been present, but for
obvious reasons only as a witness.
The text of the twelfth-century coronation oath has survived and
in this case probably resembled these words: “I, Melisende [or
Fulk] promise, in the presence of God and his angels, from this day
and henceforth, to conserve law, justice and peace for the Holy
Church of God in Jerusalem and for my subjects.” They also agreed
to seek the advice of the best churchmen of the land where needed.
After swearing the oaths the king and queen promised to maintain and
defend the crown. William then kissed the couple, turned to the
clerics, nobles, and visitors who packed into the church and asked
them to confirm that Fulk and Melisende were the lawful heirs to the
throne. Three times he asked the question and on the third, a shout
of “Oill!” (Yes!) echoed around the building. A further
acclamation came through the open doors of the church from those
unable to squeeze inside, then everyone sang the hymn “Te Deum
Laudamus.”
Another solemn procession then entered the rotunda. Senior nobles
had taken the royal crowns out of the treasury of the Holy Sepulchre
and carried them forward. The king and queen sat in their choir
stalls near the altar and Mass was said. William proclaimed a
blessing and began to anoint them. This was one of the most crucial
elements of the coronation ritual; the blessing of kings and queens
with consecrated oil set them apart from all other laymen. Dukes and
counts made oaths and received insignia, but royalty were the only
secular people anointed in such a way. The patriarch, holding a horn
that contained holy oil, dipped his fingers into it and then touched
the head and shoulders of Fulk and Melisende. They now had divine
sanction. Next Patriarch William moved on to the symbols of office;
given that a joint coronation was unprecedented, either a duplicate
of each object had to be found or, more likely, they were given to
Fulk alone. A ring, to symbolize loyalty, was put on the king’s
finger and he was girded with a sword to indicate justice and the
duty of defense. Then he was crowned, given a scepter in his right
hand to signify the punishment of sinners and an orb in his left to
show dominion. At this point, Melisende must have been crowned queen.
The two monarchs turned to the senior churchmen present, said,
“Long live the king/queen in prosperity,” and kissed all of them
before turning to their thrones. The Mass ended with Communion. The
patriarch blessed the royal standard and gave it to the constable.
One wonders what was running through the minds of Fulk and Melisende.
In some ways, both must have felt elated by the sense of occasion,
their being the center of attention, the bellow of acclaim from the
audience, the special ritual of anointing and the placing of the
crowns upon their heads. Fulk must have been conscious of his
elevation: from the ranks of the senior nobility as count of Anjou he
had now reached the very top echelon, that exclusive level of
royalty. Exactly how unwilling he was to share this with Melisende
would soon become evident. Nothing from his experiences in western
Europe would have prepared him for an equal division of authority
with a woman; indeed he almost certainly believed that his wife
should obey him in all things. The day secured Fulk’s handhold on
royal status, but he resolved to ignore the element of joint rule
that lay at the heart of the ceremony and he began to exercise power
in the way he felt to be appropriate and his due.
Melisende too had moved to the highest rank of secular life;
perhaps she felt some trepidation—even as a joint ruler she was
doing something almost unprecedented in living memory. The only
comparable case had been that of Queen Urraca of Castile and León
(1109–26) and she had used a male companion to help govern without
a husband. Whether Melisende knew much about Urraca’s experiences
is unclear. At the very least she could rely on a core group of her
father’s nobles with whom she had grown up and who were likely to
be loyal to Baldwin’s memory.
The king and queen stepped out from the Holy Sepulchre into the
sharp light of day to receive the cheers of the crowds outside. They
retraced their steps back to the Templum Domini (today the al-Aqsa
Mosque) where they laid their crowns on the altar to commemorate the
presentation of Jesus to Simeon in the temple. This was the last
solemn act of the day. Now the nobility of Jerusalem served a
splendid celebratory banquet—singing, storytelling, and dancing
rounded off one of the landmark events in the history of Jerusalem:
the inauguration of a new and experimental phase for the royal
dynasty.
Christian and Muslim conflict throughout history, with a few Heretics on the way...
Showing posts with label Biography. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Biography. Show all posts
Wednesday, October 26, 2016
Thursday, March 10, 2016
Crusader Commanders - Peter II of Aragon against Simon de Montfort
Las Navas de Tolosa
The victory of La Navas de Tolosa was the result of a
carefully prepared campaign, intended to recover the initiative held by the
Almohad Caliph Muhammad since the Christian defeat at Alarcos in 1185. A
crusade was preached with considerable success, for despite the fighting
between Léon and Portugal, whose rulers played no part, troops gathered from
all over Spain. They included those of the religious orders, the King of
Navarre - although he came late - and many French crusaders. So large was the
army that, as it gathered outside Toledo, enormous sums of money had to be
minted for its support and there were great difficulties over feeding it, as
Alfonso VIII of Castille admitted in his letter proclaiming the victory.
On 20 June the army, led by Alfonso VIII of Castile and
Peter II of Aragon, left Toledo and seized Malagon and Calatrava. At this
point, all but 130 French knights abandoned the crusade, although Sancho VII of
Navarre then arrived with 200 knights. Encouraged by this desertion, the Muslim
army left Jaén and moved to the foot of the Losa canyon. Topography now
dictated events. The Islamic army effectively blocked this narrow pass and a
vigorous debate ensued in the Christian camp, quite comparable to that before
Hattin. However, a shepherd told them of a narrow defile by which they could
descend, and this they followed, their vanguard debouching into the plain of
the Mesa del Rey to the west of the Muslim advance guard. Both sides spent the
whole of 15 July preparing. The Christians planned an attack, while the
Almohads took up a defensive position on the slopes opposite them. The battle
on 16 July was a confused affair, with the Christian army making a series of
attacks with infantry and cavalry over the rocky slopes seamed with ravines,
until a final cavalry charge broke the enemy.
Battle of Muret - September 12, 1213: in which the French nobleman Simon IV de Montfort defeated Raymond VI of Toulouse and King Pedro II of Aragon in a major battle of the Albigensian Crusade against the Cathars. Peter's death - a famous crusader who had faced the Muslims in Spain-was detrimental to the Cathar cause.
The next year saw Peter II, one of the victors of Las Navas
de Tolosa, in battle against Simon de Montfort at Muret on 13 September. The
battle arose as a consequence of Simon's ambition, supported by the Church, to
forge a principality in southern France at the expense of the Count of Toulouse
and other southern leaders who had been declared heretical. Peter, deeply
opposed to such a creation, raised a great army and joined Raymond of Toulouse
at Muret. The men of Toulouse besieged the city, while the Spanish army
established a camp in the hills to the west of the River Saudrune, about 3km
away. The reasons for this dispersion of force are not in the least clear, but it
was fatal. Simon de Montfort led his army into Muret in an effort to relieve
the city, but his position seemed hopeless, because he only had about 800
knights against an estimated 1,400-1,500 in the allied force, which also had
huge numbers of infantry.
The allied army then debated what to do. The Count of
Toulouse wanted to continue the siege, for Muret was not a strong place. He
seems to have assumed that this would force Simon's army into a sally, and
suggested that the Spanish should fortify their camp so that they could shoot
down Simon's desperate cavalry with crossbows, before emerging to crush a
weakened enemy. But the Aragonese were offended by this proposal, perhaps
overconfident after the victory of Las Navas de Tolosa, and they urged an
immediate attack. This took the form of a mounted assault on Muret through the
Toulouse Gate, which was left open, perhaps to facilitate negotiations that the
clergy were conducting. It is possible that this was a ploy by Simon to draw in
enemy forces but, if so, it was a great risk and the southerners all but seized
the town before retiring to eat lunch. Simon de Montfort then led his forces
out of the open gate to confront the southern army, which had taken up station
about 2.5km northwest of Muret between the Saudrune and the Pesquiès marsh, a
position in which they should, given their numbers, have been invulnerable.
They were drawn up in two lines, each of three divisions, and King Peter
insisted on taking his place at the head of one of these, dressed only as a
simple knight. They appear to have left all of their infantry in the camp, a
kilometre to their rear, suggesting that they intended to fight a mounted
battle on the open plain. Simon marched his men out of the city, divided them
into three squadrons, and sent the first two hurtling into the mass of the
enemy army, focusing their effort on King Peter. As they struck the southern
army they became enveloped in it; Simon moved forward and to the right, crossed
the marsh and took the enemy in the left flank, causing a panic which was
intensified when Peter II was killed; "when the rest saw this they thought
themselves lost and fled away".
The sources are quite clear on the reasons for this
disaster: the southern army was poorly organized, while Simon formed his
squadrons in close order. James I had no doubt as to the causes of his father's
defeat: "And thereon they [the French] came out to fight in a body. On my
father's side the men did not know how to range for the battle, nor how to move
together; every baron fought by himself and against the order of war. Thus
through bad order, through our sins and through those from Muret fighting
desperately since they found no mercy at my father's hands, the battle was
lost." As Simon's army struck the Aragonese, the knights of Toulouse
rushed up with no idea of what was going on and "paying heed to neither
count nor king". It seems as if the forces between the marsh and the river
had not expected an attack and had little time to prepare when it materialized.
It is not clear that anyone was in command of the allied army, which had
dispersed its strength dangerously. A substantial force, including many
cavalry, had tried to get into the Toulouse Gate and seems to have played no
part in later events: a massive infantry force was left to do nothing, a
kilometre behind the fighting. Once battle was joined, King Peter - imprudently
positioned like Frederick I at Legnano - was unable to direct events. By
contrast, Simon was very much in command and judged his moment to launch his
reserve. His force was small, but it was the kernel of the crusader army and
many of its members had been fighting together for a long time. It had the
qualities of a highly cohesive force and fought as such against an uncertain
and virtually leaderless enemy.
Crusader Commanders - James I of Aragon (1213-76)
James I of Aragon's Knights Marching to Fight the Moors, fresco, 13th century.
There were many successful warriors, notably William the
Conqueror, but the greatest commander within this period was undoubtedly
Richard I. Richard took risks as a matter of policy and it was this which
endeared him to his own generation. He too sought advice, but in the end he had
the personality to impose himself on others and the skill to recognize military
opportunities. At Gisors, he moved quickly to inflict a severe defeat upon
Philip Augustus, although he later admitted that his counsellors had been
against the risk. During the Third Crusade he managed to control a very
disparate army and to adapt to conditions in the East. He also had a keen
strategic grasp: he threw a network of alliances around Philip Augustus, while
in the Holy Land he wanted, above all, to strike at Saladin's real heartland,
Egypt. But whereas we have only an external picture of Richard, one notable
commander of the age, James I of Aragon (1213-76), has left us a personal
memoir which is worth examining for the insight that it provides into the mind
of a medieval commander.
James was only five in 1213 when he was captured after the
Battle of Muret, in which his father was killed, and, throughout his long
minority, relations with his important vassals were difficult; in Aragon, he
had to face open noble defiance and in Barcelona he was not fully recognized
until 1228. He first came to prominence in the successful expedition to
Mallorca of 1229. This was a Catalan project, and it was their church and
nobility who took the initiative to create the army and fleet that sailed on 5
September 1229 - the Aragonese did not participate. James was not allowed to
land until a bridgehead had been secured, and when he involved himself in a
skirmish he was reproved by the nobles. On 12 September, the main Muslim force
came to battle at Santa Ponza. James, in his memoirs, presents himself as being
in charge. However, he admits that the nobles made their own decisions and that
he could not control the Catalan infantry, who in the end joined them. However,
the king acquitted himself well in what seems to have been a confused battle, apparently
winning it with a charge uphill. This gallantry, and the death of the
influential Moncada brothers, enabled James to take a more active role in the
siege of Mallorca, when he stayed in the dangerous camp with his personal
following, wielding a crossbow in the final assault. He makes much of the
decision of many of the Muslims of the interior to submit to him personally;
this probably simplified supply and thereby raised his prestige in the army.
However, when the Mallorcans wanted to surrender on terms, the council of nobles
rejected the idea against the king's wishes, because they wanted revenge for
the loss of their compatriots. After the fall of the city on the night of 30-31
December, they imposed their own division of the spoils upon him. James was not
the prime mover in the Mallorcan campaign, and others dominated it, but he was
an opportunist who skillfully exploited every chance that it provided to
enhance his reputation.
The Mallorca campaign gave James great prestige, and by June
1233 he was in a position to support the Aragonese attack on the kingdom of
Valencia. In 1234, the border between Christian and Muslim lay just north of
Peñiscola, which at first resisted his attacks. The assault on Burriana was a
vital phase of the campaign. James presents this as the opening of a grand
strategy to seize Valencia, but this was post facto rationalization. The
initiative to attack Burriana came from the Aragonese nobles, and James was
drawn into it because he feared that the greatest of them might establish
themselves as independent powers. The garrison was determined and the city
strong, forcing James to deploy a wide range of machinery. Mining was attempted
and throwing- machines used, but the greatest effort was put into an elaborate
siege-tower. A road of logs was laid for it and, under the cover of mantlets,
iron rings were driven into the ground on the edge of the ditch in front of the
city, so that it could be drawn up on ropes by men moving away from the enemy
fire. The tower was intended to dominate the defences with firepower, but it
was shattered by enemy throwing-machines. James's main problem was to hold
together the barons of Aragon in the enterprise. A vital element in this was
the provision of supplies, which he achieved by floating an enormous loan of
60,000 sols, guaranteed by the Orders of the Hospital and Temple. With this sum
he was able to pay ships to bring food and subsidize the nobles. Ultimately
they insisted, against his wishes, on allowing Burriana to surrender on terms.
The surrender of Burriana was not immediately followed up,
because James had preoccupations elsewhere, and it was the Aragonese nobles who
pressed on to force the capitulation of Peñiscola and Morello. But James worked
hard to interest the Catalans in the attack on Valencia, and a joint meeting of
the Cortès of Aragon and Barcelona in October 1235 agreed to it.
In 1236, the campaign entered its decisive phase when James
attacked Puig de Cebolla, 3km inland and only 17km north of Valencia. Because
of earlier defeats, Zayyan ben Mardanis, ruler of Valencia, had dismantled this
hilltop fortress. James re-fortified the place, attracting further
reinforcements to his 2,000 foot and 130 horse, and repulsed enemy attacks.
Although James reports successful raiding, supplies ran low and he was forced
go to Tortosa to borrow 60,000 sols; in his absence, his forces repulsed an
attack from Valencia. James took an active part in raiding and supervised the
transport of horses from Burriana for those who had lost them in the fighting.
But the real crisis came when his commander at Puig died, because the Aragonese
barons urged him to abandon the place. James refused and ostentatiously went to
Puig with his wife and family, and took a public oath never to abandon it. This
show of determination brought about the surrender of a number of local enemy
forts, notably Paterna, which was less than 10km northwest of Valencia, and an
offer of tribute from Zayyan which emboldened James to lay siege to Valencia in
April 1238.
This was a major city with a strong garrison, although it
was probably not as large as the 10,000 suggested by James. He had only 200
knights, 150 Almogavars and 1,000 foot. At the start of the siege, his
Almogavars and camp followers, acting without orders, were ambushed in the
suburb of Rucafa and had to be rescued. But the boldness of his action and the
prospect of rich prizes soon brought reinforcements pouring in. James had
encamped between Valencia and its port, and he persisted with this as his point
of attack, despite being urged to move to the Boatella Gate by the Archbishop
of Narbonne. He argued that there was no gate at this point from which the
enemy could sally, that there were no towers and so the wall was vulnerable,
and that they would in any case need to prevent the garrison communicating with
the sea, a point emphasized when galleys from Tunis appeared but then sailed
off, having been unable to land. James also sent a force to seize Silla to the
south, isolating Valencia.
The panoply of siege warfare was brought against the city,
but the key factors that influenced the garrison were the lack of aid from
Tunisia, which was much distracted by internal problems, and the lack of food,
because the Christians had attacked early in the year before the harvest could
be laid in. Even so, the city hung on until Zayyan came to terms for a
surrender which spared the citizens' lives on 28 September. James accepted the
surrender terms in secret and merely announced them to his barons as a way of
underscoring his success.
The Chronicle of James I is self-serving and often at pains
to conceal the truth, but it reveals the problems and skills of a commander.
First and foremost, he had to persuade, both in the conventional sense and by
exposing his body to risk, by leading from the front. James's problems were
particularly acute because of the independence of the barons and cities that
was fostered by his long minority. Successful war was essential to the
stability of his regime: his bravery and skill were a powerful incentive to
follow him and they were reinforced by a flair for the dramatic, as in the oath
of Puig. But the fruits of success were the most powerful incentive - James
gave out far more land after the fall of Valencia than he had acquired. Like
most kings he had wide interests, especially north of the Pyrenees, but
internal pressures in Aragon and Barcelona drove him first towards Mallorca and
then to Valencia. Once involved, he showed remarkable persistence and a clear
awareness of the difficulties of the Almohad Empire in North Africa, then in a
state of dissolution.
James was far too preoccupied with his diverse interests to
pursue consistent strategies. He claimed credit for devising a plan of attack
on Valencia, but this was effectively dictated by the political and natural geography
of Spain, and the gradual process of nibbling, fortress by fortress, by the
episodic nature of medieval warfare. Much of the early fighting was entirely in
the hands of Aragonese nobles. The Christian outpost of Teruel was 100km from
the coast, but it commands the upper valley of the Guadalaviar which flows down
to Valencia and is close to the valley of the Mijares, at whose mouth stands
Burriana; hence it served as a base for raids. Morella, which James was at
pains to control once it fell, was the only Muslim fortress that could
checkmate it. But James played a major role at Burriana and at a crucial stage
seized the initiative at Puig, where he demonstrated great persistence. He was
keenly aware of the importance of naval support and worked hard to persuade
Barcelona to join the attack on Valencia. Once Valencia was besieged, he
recognized that the key to sustaining the siege was supply, and Catalan ships
guaranteed this to the extent that his army was lavishly supplied even with
"apothecaries from Montpellier and Lerida". The failure of the
Tunisian fleet to land at Valencia or to cause serious damage in his rear at
Peñiscola was largely due to their fear of Catalan sea-power.
In the field, James had a clear view of military realities.
He made great efforts to control his troops properly: he was well aware that
the loose order of his father's army at Muret had caused the disaster. Above
all, he trusted his own household men and rewarded them, for they were the core
of his army. He was careful about intelligence. Like all commanders, he was
keen to keep order in his army and to establish the laws of the camp. The first
such record of such a code that has survived to us is that of Frederick
Barbarossa, drawn up in 1158, but such codes seem to have been an ancient
institution, perhaps deriving from household laws. One of the most elaborate
and stringent of such codes is that of the Templars. At Valencia, James's
policy was skilfully adjusted to his means, and he caused the maximum
disruption to the city at the minimum risk to himself. Only when his army had
been swollen by news of his success did he allow forces to go south of the
river to attack the Boatella Gate, where he was wounded in the fighting.
James deserves his soubriquet, "the Conqueror". It
was a very real tribute to him, because the nature of medieval armies meant
that conquest in the military sense was peculiarly difficult. In his conquests
there is a strong element of consent, albeit constrained. The Muslims of the
Mallorcan countryside came to terms with him in return for recognition of their
rights, and such agreements were frequent in the Valencia campaign. If we leave
aside for the moment the Latin East and the German frontier, conquest in the
simple military sense was difficult within the settled lands of western Europe.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)






