Leadership on Crusade: Military Excellence, Physical Action and Gender in the Twelfth-Century Chronicles of the First Crusade and the Latin Kingdom of Jerusalem

Abstract

It is hardly surprising that in the chronicles of the First Crusade (1096–1099) and in the Chronicon of William of Tyre, accounts propagating Christian warfare, impressiveness, authority and command stem from military actions blessed by God. In the depictions, the position of being a leader is constructed and maintained by a public display of martial ability, by deeds rather than by words. The sources certainly describe aristocratic warriors influencing their peers or larger mixed audiences by speech, but in these cases too, to be successful, the grasp on command normally requires that physical effort follows the communications. The narratives equate physical action with the motives, values and beliefs of the first crusaders. The initiative aimed at achieving leadership is often described approvingly, but the sources also criticize the leaders for manipulative behaviour and unwillingness to cooperate with each other. The judgement of the sources depends on authorial agenda and dynastic rivalries: the leaders of the First Crusade, here especially Bohemond of Taranto (c. 1054–1111), Tancred of Hauteville (c. 1078–1112) and the successors of Godfrey of Bouillon (c. 1060–1100), understood the relation between written history and the claim on power and actively contributed to the production of the heroic image of the first crusaders, that is, the highlighting of their own alleged excellence as leaders. For these three leaders, a cultural legacy, whether initiated during their lifetime or posthumously, was crucial to creating a lasting image of effective leadership. The case of Peter the Hermit, a preacher from Amiens with a supposedly low social background, is different. The fact that chroniclers and composers of chansons included a figure without military expertise and verifiable support from kin and allies among the leaders of the First Crusade, albeit in a controversial manner, bears evidence in itself of his recognition by medieval audiences. Leadership is a gendered talent in the twelfth-century chronicles. The close relation between command and military action on the one hand, and the categorical exclusion of women from the field of battle on the other, discouraged depictions of female leadership in the crusading context. As a result, women were excluded from the leadership of the First Crusade, and references to female authority did not appear in the sources until several decades later in an altered context, with Queen Melisende of Jerusalem (c. 1105–1161) being the clearest example. In her case, too, gender formed a barrier to action and leadership. William of Tyre’s description of her reign is ambivalent, while her sister Alice’s (c. 1110—after 1151) claim to the regency of Antioch is portrayed negatively. This article compares the models and qualities of the leaders of the First Crusade in medieval sources. The first section considers modern definitions of imposing (charismatic) authority and ties the discussion to the overarching theme of exploring medieval crusader leadership. The second part examines the examples of the leaders of Antioch and Jerusalem and their cultural legacy in the chronicles.