THE STRUGGLE FOR THE CONQUEST OF ANTIOCH (1097-1098): MUSLIM AND CHRISTIAN PERSPECTIVES OF A CRITICAL BATTLE DURING THE FIRST CRUSADE A Thesis Submitted to the Faculty of the Medieval and Renaissance Studies Program at Hanover College In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Bachelor of Arts by Mersadi’s Dā Curtsinger Fall Term 2016 Advisor: J. Michael Raley, Ph.D. APPROVAL SHEET THE STRUGGLE FOR THE CONQUEST OF ANTIOCH (1097-1098): MUSLIM AND CHRISTIAN PERSPECTIVES OF A CRITICAL BATTLE DURING THE FIRST CRUSADE by Mersadi’s Dā Curtsinger Read and Approved by: __________________________________________(Advisor) J. Michael Raley, Ph.D., Assistant Professor, Medieval and Renaissance Studies Program and Chair, Department of History ___________December 14, 2016______________________ Date ii Copyright © 2016 Mersadi’s Curtsinger All Rights Reserved. iii TABLE OF CONTENTS TITLE PAGE . .i APPROVAL SHEET . .ii COPYRIGHT PAGE . iii TABLE OF CONTENTS . .iv LIST OF FIGURES . v ABSTRACT . vi I. INTRODUCTION . 1 II. THE SOURCES . .5 II.1. Muslim Sources for the Battle of Antioch . .5 II.2. Crusader Sources for the Battle of Antioch . .7 II.3. The Byzantine Source for the Battle of Antioch . .12 III. THE FIRST SIEGE OF ANTIOCH . .12 III.1. The City of Antioch . .. .12 III.2. The Journey to Antioch . .15 III.3. The Fear of Yaghi Siyān . .20 III.4. The Crusaders Arrive and the Battle Begins . .23 III.5. The Death of Yaghi Siyān. .28 IV. THE SECOND SIEGE OF ANTIOCH . .. .29 IV.1. The Arrival of Kerbogha’s Army at Antioch. 30 IV.2. Kerbogha and His Mother Have a Frank Discussion . .. .31 IV.3. The Second Siege of Antioch Begins . 36 IV.4. Dilemmas Facing the Muslim and Crusader Armies. .38 IV.5. The Finding of the Holy Lance . .. .42 IV.6. The Muslim Response to the Holy Lance . .. .47 IV.7. Embassy of Peter the Hermit to Kerbogha . .48 IV.8. A Crusader Victory: End of the Second Siege of Antioch . .. .52 IV.9. A True Victory for the Crusaders? . 54 V. CONCLUSION . 56 SELECT BIBLIOGRAPHY . .59 iv LIST OF FIGURES FIGURE 1: Approach to Antioch from Aleppo (1836) by W. H. Bartlett . 13 FIGURE 2: Map of the First Crusade Showing the Routes of the Various Armies and Their Leaders . .. .16 FIGURE 3: The First Crusade: The March from Constantinople to Antioch . .. 18 FIGURE 4: Map of Antioch . 24 FIGURE 5: 15th Century Detail of a Medieval Miniature of the Siege of Antioch (by Jean Colombe) from Sébastien Mamerot’s,Les Passages d’Outremer (ca. 1472-1475). .27 FIGURE 6: Modern Day Citadel of Antioch . 37 FIGURE 7: 15th Century Detail of a Medieval Miniature of the Discovery of the Holy Lance (by Jean Colombe) from Sébastien Mamerot’s,Les Passages d’Outremer (ca. 1472-1475). .45 v ABSTRACT This thesis focuses on the Muslim and Christian perspectives of the Battles of Antioch during the First Crusade. It begins with the call for a crusade by Pope Urban II in A.D. 1095, and then proceeds to discuss the route to Antioch, the two sieges of the city, the difficulties encountered by both the Christian crusaders and their Muslim opponents, and more. In addition to the accounts of the sieges, three important narratives are critically examined in this work: (1) an alleged confrontation between the Muslim leader, Kerbogha, and his mother over his decision to fight the crusaders; (2) an embassy led by Peter the Hermit to Kerbogha that attempted unsuccessfully to negotiate a dignified exit for the crusaders; and (3) the French mystic Peter Bartholomew’s visions and their relation to the discovery of the Holy Lance and the subsequent crusader victory. These stories, as well as the accounts of the sieges, are told through the perspectives of Muslim and Christian chroniclers to provide a more direct and more nuanced analysis of these events. In particular, this thesis focuses upon Muslim and Christian chroniclers’ attempts to explain what to them, at least, was clearly the inexplicable: how the malnourished and exhausted crusaders fighting for their Christian God had somehow managed to rout a far superior Muslim fighting in the name of Allah to take and subsequently hold the city of Antioch, enabling them later to recapture Jerusalem. vi I. Introduction Pope Urban II’s sermon at the Council of Clermont in 1095 calling for Christians of Europe to recapture Jerusalem in the name of God brought forth a widespread response from people of all social ranks.1 These included princeps (princes or leaders), minors (petty knights, castellans, and lords), the populus (the poor and laborers), and, lastly, the clergy.2 The following excerpt from Urban’s letter provides instructions on how the Christian community could join this cause: Your brotherhood, we believe, has long since learned from many accounts that a barbaric fury has deplorably afflicted and laid waste the churches of God in the regions of the Orient. More than this, blasphemous to say, it has even grasped in intolerable servitude its churches and the Holy City of Christ, glorified by his passion and resurrection. Grieving with pious concern at this calamity, we visited the regions of Gaul and devoted ourselves largely to urging the princes of the land and their subjects to free the churches of the East. We solemnly enjoined upon them at the council of Auvergne (the accomplishment of) such an undertaking, as a preparation for the remission of all their sins. And we have constituted our most beloved son, Adhemar [sic], Bishop of Puy, leader of this expedition and undertaking in our stead, so that those who, perchance, may wish to undertake this journey should comply [w]ith his commands, as if they were their own, and submit fully to his loosings or bindings, as far as shall seem to belong to such an office. If, moreover, there are any of your people whom God has inspired to this vow, let them know that he [Adhemar] will set out with the aid of God on the day of the Assumption of the Blessed Mary, and that they can then attach themselves to his following.3 1 Thomas F. Madden, The Concise History of the Crusades (Maryland: Rowman and Littlefield, 2013), 1. 2 Riley-Smith, Jonathan, The First Crusade and the Idea of Crusading (Great Britain: Anthlone Press, 1986), 74-75. 3 Urban II, “Letter of Instruction to the Crusaders,” in The First Crusade: The Accounts of Eyewitnesses and Participants, edited and translated by August C. Krey (Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1921), 42-43. 1 2 In his letter of instruction for those who would go on crusade, Pope Urban II is calling for the relief of the Christians in Jerusalem. In his sermon at the Council of Clermont earlier that same year, the Pope had claimed that the Muslims were spreading their faith rapidly into their territory and turning Christian churches into mosques or destroying them, and presumably pressuring Christians in those regions to convert to Islam. By sending Adhémar, Bishop of Puy, as his papal legate and leader of this holy journey to Jerusalem, he hoped that those who had been forcibly converted would come back to the Christian faith and that the spread of Islam would be stopped. Of course, a successful crusade would also greatly enhance the status of the papacy. As Thomas Asbridge observed, “Launched as it was just as Urban began to stabilise [sic] his power-base in central Italy, the campaign must be seen as an attempt to consolidate papal empowerment and expand Rome’s sphere of influence.”4 Urban had other motives as well, for by choosing to go this route, the pontiff sought not only to unite and purify Western Christendom and, in the process, redirect the violence so common among the nobility of Europe towards the Muslims, but he also hoped to enhance the prestige of the Roman papacy with the Greek Church at Constantinople and the Levantine Church in Asia Minor, Syria, and Palestine. The crusade itself pitted the Christians against the Muslims for the control of Jerusalem. Many of those who heeded this call for a crusade were nobility. They were, after all, the ones most able to afford the supplies (food, water, armor, weapons, mounts, etc.) in order to make the tedious journey to Jerusalem. On the other hand, those of the labor classes who were strong in their faith also traveled to the Holy Land. The journey was dangerous and arduous, however. By the time that the groups of crusaders arrived at Constantinople, only those with hope and faith in their God and with a determination to fulfill their oaths were left for the journey on to Jerusalem. 4 Thomas S. Asbridge, The First Crusade: A New History (London: Free Press, 2004), 19-21. 3 As the leaders embarked upon their route to reach their final destination, they captured critical objectives along the way. These included Nicaea, Edessa, and, especially, Antioch. Their plan was to besiege and capture Antioch before taking the cities down the coastline in route to Jerusalem. However, even as the besiegers of Antioch successfully gained possession of the city (by bribing a guard, scaling the city walls, and besieging the Muslims inside of Antioch’s citadel), they soon found themselves the besieged as the Muslim leader Kerbogha and his large relief army encircled Antioch, trapping the crusaders inside. At this critical moment, the true power struggle for control of Antioch began. Not surprisingly, Christian and Arab historians have perceived this battle from greatly different perspectives. Whereas Muslim historians such as Ibn al-Athīr, Ibn al-Qalānisi, and Ibn Taghribirdi tended to place the blame on the Muslim leaders for the loss of Antioch, Christian historians, in stark contrast, gave thanks to divine intervention for the miraculous victory eventually bestowed upon them.