Crusades Volume 16, 2017 Published by ROUTLEDGE for the Society for the Study of the Crusades and the Latin East Offprint from Crusades Vol. 16 (2017). © by the Society for the Study of the Crusades and the Latin East ou tle Abstract © Copyrighted material A Crusader Lineage from Spain to the Throne of Jerusalem: The Lusignans Clément de Vasselot de Régné Université de Nantes clement.de-vasselot-de-regne@etu.univ-nantes.fr Lusignan is a well-known name in crusades history for it is associated with the fall of presence of the Jerusalem and the loss of a major part of the kingdom. Nevertheless, the pr Lusignans in the history of the crusades cannot be reduced educed to the part played by Guy and by the dynasty born of his brother Aimery who succeeded him on the thr throne of Cyprus. To understand why Guy became king of Jerusalem, it is important to rrecognize the roots of his family’s engagement in the crusades two, and perhaps before him. We can haps four, generations befor ns to Spain, in the First and Second Crusades and an see their participation in expeditions involvement in the county of Tripoli wheree the family was linked to the comital house and could stake a claim to the inheritance. These elements help to shed new light on the bar baronial struggle at Baldwin IV’s court and on the conflict between Guy and Count Raymond of Tripoli. strengthen ripoli. Besides, during the few months Guy was king, he made use of his family to str his position therein. After the Battle of Hattin, the Lusignans tried to recover from this disaster, in part through ough the writings of Peter of Blois, but mainly through the heroic actions Geoffr This article will also showcase of a further member of the family,, the newly arrived Geoffrey. the involvement of other Lusignan generations of France and England during the crusades and set out why they deserve to be called “a crusader lineage.” Introduction The Lusignans were a minor family of Poitevin landowners who stepped into the limelight with the wedding in 11180 between Guy of Lusignan and Sibylla, sister of King Baldwin IV of Jerusalem. By 1186 this had brought Guy the crown of later, with the disaster of Hattin, he lost his liberty, Jerusalem, but eight months lat his capital, the bulk of his military forces and his kingdom. The vast majority of explained this failure by the rivalry between two parties earlier historians have explaine at the court of Jerusalem. The first would have been the “poulains,” the local nobles, supposedly possessed of a better understanding of the situation and open to negotiation with Saladin. The other group was the “crusader” party, with recent The present research was carried out in the context of my PhD at the Centre de Recherches en Histoire Internationale et Atlantique, Université de Nantes, PRES Université Nantes, Angers, Le Mans. 95 ro ut led ge .c ro ut led ge .co m ro ut led ge .co m ro ut led ge .co m ro ut led ge .co m ro ut led ge .co m ro ut led ge .co m ro ut led ge .co m ro ut led ge .co m dg e. co m ou tle 96 © Copyrighted material CLÉMENT DE VASSELOT DE RÉGNÉ arrivals from the West seeking to fight at all cost against “the pagans” and whose impetuous nature was primarily responsible for the catastrophe. By this line of reasoning Guy of Lusignan, as a Poitevin, would have been more susceptible to the aggressive arguments of the crusading party as against the skilful diplomacy of the Poulains. This very Manichean vision was imposed upon us by the dominant primary sources, although Edbury has skilfully broken down this simple binary and provided us with a much more nuanced picture of the situation.1 The best historian of the kingdom of Jerusalem, and the most widely-read and used by scholars, was William of Tyre, who died in 1186. Another chronicle goes by the name of Ernoul, who was the squire of Balian of Ibelin, a staunch opponent of Guy of Lusignan. Ernoul’s work is therefore a vituperative condemnation of Guy’s politics and a powerful charge against him. That said, many points of analysis that scholars have made on the basis of Ernoul do not match other elements we can find by studying less well-known sources, including the family history of the Lusignans. This study begins by considering who the Lusignans were and reviewing their relationship with the crusades before Guy of Lusignan. This will better inform our understanding of Guy’ss actions and the way he tried to redeem himself and his kingdom after his defeat. The Roots of Lusignan Involvement in Jerusalem century, the Lusignans were a castellan family At the beginning of the eleventh century in Poitou and perhaps Saintonge Saintonge. Their strength allowed one of them, Hugh IV, to fight his lord, Duke William V of Aquitaine.2 Despite their limited importance, they engaged successfully with the Holy See. Between 1025 and 1031, Bishop Isembert I of Poitiers obtained from Pope John XIX a papal bull confirming the privileges of Hugh IV’ss foundation, Our Lady of Lusignan. Hugh was called spirituali filio in summo Domino. Domino.3 This is the only known occurrence of this appellation but the expression spirituali filio is used in earlier papal documents addressed to some Carolingian kings and Ottonian emperors, such as Louis II, Charles the Bald, Carloman, Otto I, and Henry II.4 So, why did the pope use this appellation when addressing the relatively minor lord of Lusignan? Could the influence of the bishop Supporting the Gregorian Reform ro ut led ge .c ro ut led ge .co m ro ut led ge .co m ro ut led ge .co m ro ut led ge .co m ro ut led ge .co m ro ut led ge .co m ro ut led ge .co m 1 Peter W. Edbury, “Propaganda and Faction in the Kingdom of Jerusalem: The Background to Hattin,” in Crusaders and Muslims in Twelfth-Century Syria, ed. Maya Shatzmiller (Leiden, 1993), 173–89. 2 Le “Conventum” (vers 1030): un précurseur aquitain des premières épopées, ed. and trans. George Beech, Yves Chauvin and Georges Pon (Geneva, 1995). 3 Chartes de l´abbaye de Nouaillé de 678 à 1200, ed. Pierre de Montsabert (Poitiers, 1936), 174–76. 4 Caesar Baronius, Annales Ecclesiastici, 14:146; Epistolae Karolini aevi, ed. Erich Caspar, MGH Ep, 42–43, 145, 318; Pontificum Romanorum Vitae II, ed. Johann M. Watterich (Leipzig, 1862), 681–83; Oberösterreichisches Urkundenbuch, weltlicher Teil (540–1399), 2 vols. (Vienna, 1856), 2:77–78. ro ut led ge .co m dg e. co m ou tle © Copyrighted material A CRUSADER LINEAGE: THE LUSIGNANS 97 of Poitiers and of the king of France have been so strong that it resulted in a very close relationship between the papacy and the House of Lusignan as the appellation implies? In 1032–33, one year after Hugh IV’s death, in his letter to the Poitevin nobility, Pope John XIX addressed Hugh IV’s sons, Hugh and Rorgon, who were living in the castle of Lusignan.5 No family of this region and this rank could pride itself on similar attention. The new lord, Hugh V, was given the epithet “the Pious” by the Chronicle of Saint-Maixent which stresses the point that he agreed to be separated from his wife, Almodis of La Marche, on the grounds of consanguinity.6 There are some suggestions that he consented to this not with a view to divorce but rather to be obedient to the Church’s precepts.7 In 1079, when Hugh VI of Lusignan evicted his cousin, the canon Hugh, from his estate of Couhé, Pope Gregory VII took this to heart and wrote to the bishop of Poitiers. We learn that, although the castrum of Couhé was under the protection of the Holy See, Hugh of Couhé was considered by the pope as nostri fidelis et filii. While Hugh VI was threatened with excommunication, he was nevertheless regarded as a special servant of the papacy.8 In 1110, 110, 10, a letter from Pope Paschal II to Hugh VI called him fidelis beati Petri.9 As Riley-Smith has shown, this wording was used by the papal chancellery to designate strong supporters of the Gregorian Reform in southern Aquitaine, Languedoc and Burgundy. Burgundy 10 Hugh VI was the most northerly lord of this network in Aquitaine and he was probably drawn into it for three reasons: first, because of the involvement of his father, Hugh the Pious; secondly, thanks to the close links between the family and the papacy, unique in Poitou at the time; and thirdly,, since his mother, Almodis of La Marche later married Pons, count of Toulouse oulouse and then Ramon-Berenguer I, count of Barcelona, Hugh VI was linked to the southern French nobility by his half-brother Raymond IV of Toulouse, another fidelis beati Petri.11 The Lusignans were, therefore, a well-known family with long-established connections with the papacy which helps to explain their involvement in the fight against Christendom’s enemies. ro ut led ge .c ro ut led ge .co m ro ut led ge .co m ro ut led ge .co m ro ut led ge .co m ro ut led ge .co m ro ut led ge .co m 5 Cartulaire de l’abbaye royale r de Saint-Jean d’Angély, ed. Georges Musset, Archives historiques de la Saintonge et de l’Aunis 30 (Saintes, 1901) 1901), 32–33. 6 La Chronique de Saint-Maixent (751– (751–1140), trans. Jean Verdon (Paris, 1979), 133–35. 7 See: Clément de Vasselot, “La famille de Lusignan de Hugues le Veneur à Hugues VIII (Xe siècle–1164), Domination châtelaine, hiérarchisation et ascension des lignages” (Postgraduate dissertation [M2], ENS de L Lyon & Université de Poitiers, 2014), 147–49. Summed up also in Clément de Vasselot, “L’Ascension des Lusignan: les réseaux d’une famille seigneuriale,” Cahiers de Civilisation médiévale 230 (2015): 134–35. 8 PL 148:537. 9 Chartes et documents pour servir à l’histoire de l’abbaye de Saint-Maixent, ed. Alfred Richard, 2 vols. (Poitiers, 1886), 1:260. 10 Jonathan Riley-Smith, The First Crusaders, 1095–1131 (Cambridge, 1997), 43–46. 11 About the networks created by the numerous marriages and children of Almodis, see de Vasselot “L’Ascension des Lusignan,” 132–33. ro ut led ge .co m ro ut led ge .co m dg e. co m ou tle 98 © Copyrighted material CLÉMENT DE VASSELOT DE RÉGNÉ Fighting against Christendom’s Enemies: The Lusignans’ Iberian Campaigns The first Lusignan who fought Muslims would have also been the first linked with the papacy. In his Dictionary of the Families of Poitou,, Beauchet-Filleau mentioned an expedition to Iberia by Hugh IV around 1020 but the primary source for this information has disappeared.12 It is possible that Hugh was part of the 1018 campaign led by the Norman lord Roger of Tosny who reached Barcelona to help the countess Ermessinde of Carcassonne against the emir of Dénia.13 In 1087, Hugh VI of Lusignan was an important member of an expedition that was aiming to rescue King Alfonso VI of Castile who had been crushed at the Battle of Sagrajas by the Almoravid sultan Yusuf. Before departure, Hugh made an important donation to the abbey of Nouaillé which was a propitiatory gift confirmed by the bishop of Poitiers and the duke of Aquitaine.14 Hugh was the most obvious person to be in charge of a force from Aquitaine, so it is very probable that he was the commander.15 The other leaders were Hugh’ss half-brother half-brother, Count Raymond IV of Toulouse, and Duke Odo I of Burgundy who later took part in the First Crusade.16 All of them are called fideles beati Petri by the pope and took part in this network.17 During the campaign, however,, they failed to rescue Alfonso VI and only took a small castle in the vicinity of Tudela.18 So, in fact, these fideles beati Petri did not help the king of Castile but instead the king of Navarre, Sancho Ramírez. The latter became the papacy’s main supporter in the Iberian peninsula when he replaced the Visigothic rite with the Roman one and promoted Cluniac reform in the monasteries of Navarre.19 The Lusignans’ next major involvement in Iberia came after 1211 when Muhammad al-Nasir,, the fourth Almohad caliph, crossed the Straits of Gibraltar Gibraltar, stormed the castle of Salvatierra and gathered troops to fight against the kings of Castile and Aragon. Aware of the threat, Archbishop Rodrigo Jiménez obtained a crusade bull from Pope Innocent III. He preached the crusade in France, Italy and Germany and gathered around 50,000 crusaders who met at Toledo in May 1212. Amongst them, accompanied by a Poitevin force, was Hugh IX of Lusignan who ro ut led ge .c ro ut led ge .co m ro ut led ge .co m ro ut led ge .co m ro ut led ge .co m ro ut led ge .co m ro ut led ge .co m 12 Henri Beauchet-Filleau and Christian de Chergé, Dictionnaire historique et généalogique des familles du Poitou, Poitou 2 vols. (Poitiers, 1840–54), 2:321. 13 Adhémar de Chabannes, Chronique, trans. Yves Chauvin and Georges Pon (Turnhout, 2003), 270; and Martin Aurell, Les Noces du comte: mariage et pouvoir en Catalogne (785–1213) (Paris, 1995), 56. 14 Chartes de l´abbaye de Nouaillé de 678 à 1200, ed. de Montsabert, 248–50. 15 Prosper Boissonnade, “Les Relations des ducs d’Aquitaine, comtes de Poitiers avec les États chrétiens d’Aragon et de Navarre,” Bulletin de la Société des Antiquaires de l’Ouest, ser. 3, 10 (1934– 35): 282. 16 Marcelin Defourneaux, Les Français en Espagne au XIe et XIIe siècles (Paris, 1949), 144. 17 Riley-Smith, The First Crusaders, 46. 18 La Chronique de Saint-Maixent (751–1140), trans. Verdon, 149. 19 Philippe Sénac, La frontière et les hommes, VIIIe–XIIe siècle: le peuplement musulman au nord de l’Èbre et les débuts de la reconquête aragonaise (Paris, 2000). ro ut led ge .co m ro ut led ge .co m dg e. co m ou tle © Copyrighted material A CRUSADER LINEAGE: THE LUSIGNANS 99 had already fought in the Holy Land during the Third Crusade.20 He took part in the siege and capture of the castles of Malagón and Calatrava but there was conflict between the Iberians and the French crusaders who wanted to slaughter the Moors. Soon after the fall of Calatrava the French crusaders decided they had fulfilled their crusading vows and returned home; in consequence they did not take part in the Battle of Las Navas de Tolosa.21 In addition to the episodes outlined above, there may have been a family tradition of pilgrimage. Hugh, son of Albuin, cousin of Hugh IV of Lusignan and guardian of his sons Hugh V and Rorgon during their minority, was probably a pilgrim to the Holy Land as he was called Hugh of Jerusalem in charters from 1031.22 We know that Hugh VI of Lusignan was part of William Aquitaine’s crusade illiam of Aquitaine’ expedition of 1101–3, 101–3, but some scholars such as Riley-Smith think he embarked upon the First Crusade.23 On reviewing the evidence this article supports this idea. Between 1096 and 1103, Hugh VI disappears from the ducal charters and the Poitevin sources although he was usually present in ducal charters before and after these dates. Moreover, in 1099, at the consecration of the church of La Chaise by the viscount of Thouars, all of the Poitevin nobility were present, including Hugh’s wife Aldearde of Thouars (the viscount’s sister), with the exception of the lord of Lusignan himself.24 Furthermore, two sources actually place Hugh VI of Lusignan on the First Crusade: the Provençal Canso d’Antioca noted his presence at the siege of Antioch – but the same source also mentioned the viscount of Thouars who was, of course, in Poitou so we cannot consider this very reliable.25 The other testimony is from the Historia de Hierosolimitano itinere, by Civray’s priest, Peter Tudebode, osolimitano itin who should have known the Lusignan house well. He wrote that Reynald, seneschal of Hugh VI, died during the siege of Jerusalem.26 If his seneschal were present, it Going to Jerusalem ro ut led ge .c ro ut led ge .co m ro ut led ge .co m ro ut led ge .co m ro ut led ge .co m ro ut led ge .co m 20 Béatrice Leroy, La bataille de Las Navas de Tolosa, 16 juillet 1212 (Clermont-Ferrand, 2012), 52–53. 21 Javier Gorosterratzu Gorosterratzu, Don Rodrigo Jímenez de Rada, gran estadista, escritor y prelado (Pamplona, 1925), 93; and Rodrigo Jímenez de Rada, Historia de rebus Hispanie sive Historia gothica, trans. Juan Fernandez Valverde (Madrid, 1989), 8:6. 22 Chartes de l´abbaye de Nouaillé de 678 à 1200, ed. de Montsabert, 291–92. On Hugh of Jerusalem and the confusion between him and Hugh VI of Lusignan, see Clément de Vasselot, “Un réseau seigneurial salin: implantation et arborescence des Saint-Maixent de l’Aunis à Lusignan (Xe–XIIe siècle),” Aux Sources Sour du pouvoir, ed. Sylvain Gouguenheim (Paris, 2017), 252. 23 Riley-Smith, Riley The First Crusaders, 95–96. 24 Cartulaires du Bas-Poitou (département de la Vendée), ed. Paul Marchegay (Les RochesBaritaud, 1877), 1877 20–23. 25 The Canso d’Antioca: An Occitan Epic Chronicle of the First Crusade, ed. and trans. Carol Sweetenham and Linda M. Paterson (Aldershot, 2003), 230–31 and 358. Also mentioned in the Historia et Gesta Ducis Godefridi, ed. Paul Riant, RHC Oc, 5:483, but this text was compiled in the fifteenth century and is not very reliable. 26 Peter Tudebode, Historia de Hierosolymitano itinere, ed. John H. Hill and Laurita L. Hill (Paris, 1977), 135. ro ut led ge .co m ro ut led ge .co m ro ut led ge .co m dg e. co m ou tle 100 © Copyrighted material CLÉMENT DE VASSELOT DE RÉGNÉ seems very plausible that his lord was there also. Moreover, one of the principal figures on the crusade was Raymond IV of Toulouse, Hugh’s half-brother, and a man who had fought alongside Hugh in Navarre. Raymond’s army included the children of eleven fideles beati Petri from across the fideles families of southern France.27 It would be logical that Hugh VI took part in the crusade as a fidelis and as Raymond’s brother. Hugh VI reappears in the sources after the Battle of Heraclea on 5 September 1101, when the army constituted by the forces of his suzerain Duke William IX and his brother Raymond IV,, who had linked up with him at Constantinople, was defeated by the Turks. The two commanders decided to separate and Hugh VI followed his brother, which could well confirm his presence in his brother’s army since the beginning of the expedition.28 On the way,, there was another attack and Hugh was separated from his brother. They reached Tarsus arsus and went to Antioch where they met up with Count Raymond again.29 Their force then captured Tortosa with the help of the Genoese but Raymond decided to halt.30 Hugh and the rest of the army,, now with King Baldwin I of Jerusalem, Duke William IX, and the counts of Blois and of Burgundy gundy went on to Jerusalem to celebrate Easter. After that, William IX, Herbert of Thouars and the Poitevins sailed home.31 Hugh VI, however,, remained in Jerusalem with King Baldwin.32 He was next in Jaffa with Stephen of Blois, probably prior to returning to Poitou, when Baldwin gathered troops to fight an Egyptian army at Ramla. The two lords decided to help the king but the battle was a terrible defeat.33 According to Bartolf of Nangis, Stephen and Hugh were beheaded.34 This, however, cannot be true in the case of Hugh because he reappears in Poitevin charters from 13 June 1104, and lived until 1110.35 1 A Stranglehold on a Kingdom The Second Crusade was preached before the king of France and French nobility at Vézelay Louis VII was duke of Aquitaine by right of his zelay on 31 March 1146. 1 A Crusader Lineage ro ut led ge .c ro ut led ge .co m ro ut led ge .co m ro ut led ge .co m ro ut led ge .co m ro ut led ge .co m ro ut led ge .co m 27 Jonathan Riley-Smit Riley-Smith, “The Crusading Heritage of Guy and Aimery of Lusignan,” Cyprus and the Crusades Crusades, ed. Nicholas Coureas and Jonathan Riley-Smith (Nicosia, 1995), 31–45. 28 Bartolf de Nangi Nangis, Gesta Francorum Iherusalem expugnantium, RHC Oc, 3:531–532. 29 Ibid., 532. 30 William of Tyre, Historia rerum in partibus transmarinis gestarum. L’estoire de Eracles empereur et la conqueste de la terr terre d’Outremer, ed. Arthur Beugnot and A. Langlois, RHC Oc, 1:428–29. 31 FC, 428–37. 32 AA, 591. 33 FC, 437–44. 34 Bartolf de Nangis, Gesta Francorum Iherusalem expugnantium, RHC Oc, 3:532–34. 35 Chartes de l´abbaye de Nouaillé de 678 à 1200, ed. de Montsabert, 292–94; La Chronique de Saint-Maixent (751–1140), trans. Verdon, 183. ro ut led ge .co m ro ut led ge .co m dg e. co m ou tle © Copyrighted material A CRUSADER LINEAGE: THE LUSIGNANS 101 wife, Eleanor, so the Poitevin barons were also at Vézelay.36 There is some doubt about the identity of the Lusignan who was here, took the cross and participated in the crusade.37 Some scholars wrote that it was Hugh VII.38 But, on the one hand, Hugh VII was always nicknamed “the Brown” and his last appearance is in a charter from 1144.39 On the other hand, his son Hugh VIII had appeared in his father’s charters since 1112 but began to appear alone from 1147 147 onwards, and he was always called “Hugh of Lusignan,” which is how Suger listed the one who took the cross at Vézelay.40 It seems that Hugh VII died around 1145 145 and that the Lusignan who took part in the Second Crusade was Hugh VIII, grandson of the crusader Hugh VI. Moreover, Hugh VIII had married Bourgogne gogne of Rancon, daughter of Geoffrey of Rancon who was the commander of the vanguard of Louis VII’s crusading army at the battle of Mont Cadmus on 6 January 1148.41 Fourteen years later, in 1163, Hugh VIII of Lusignan and the count of Angoulême’s brother, Geoffrey frey Martel, made a pilgrimage to Jerusalem. They went with the first important English contingent to the Holy Land. On the way back, they helped the count of Tripoli to defeat Nur ad-Din at the Batt Battle of the Bocquée, an event probably represented on the paintings at Cressac’s Templar commandery in the county of Angoulême.42 The following year, Nur ad-Din struck back by besieging the castle of Harim. Hugh VIII, who was still in Antioch, joined Prince Bohemond III, Raymond of Tripoli, ripoli, and Byzantine and Armenian commanders to attack the Muslims. The Battle of Harim proved a disastrous defeat for the Christian coalition and Hugh VIII was taken captive and sent to Aleppo.43 Two letters from the patriarch of Antioch and the master of the Knights Hospitaller in Jerusalem related the defeat to King Louis and explained that Hugh was held prisoner in Aleppo.44 It captivity.45 On the contrary, he seems to have is frequently written that he died in captivity married again in the county of Tripoli where, in a charter from 1168, he, his wife Dulcia, and their daughter Almodis confirmed a gift made by the lord Bertrand Milon, Dulcia’ss brother, to the Hospitallers at Montpelerin.46 Hugh became a figure ro ut led ge .c ro ut led ge .co m ro ut led ge .co m ro ut led ge .co m ro ut led ge .co m ro ut led ge .co m 36 Suger, Histoire du roi Louis VII VII, ed. Auguste Molinier, Vie de Louis le Gros par Suger suivie de l’Histoire du roi oi Louis VII (Paris, 1887), 158–59. 37 Ibid., 159. 38 Riley-Smith, The First Crusaders, 191. 39 Paris, Archives Nati Nationales, T110, 216–1. 40 Cartulaire de l’a Cartulair l’abbaye de Saint-Cybard, ed. Paul Lefrancq (Angoulême, 1930), 127–28. 41 Ibid., 128; Virginia G. Berry, “The Second Crusade,” in Setton, Crusades, 1:499. 42 WT W 19.8, p. 873; Nikita Elisséeff, Nur ad-Din: un grand prince musulman de Syrie au temps des croisades (511–569h./1118–1174), (51 3 vols. (Damascus, 1967) 2:574. 43 WT 19.9, p. 875. 44 RHGF, 16:61–62; PL 155:13. 45 Sidney Painter, “The Lords of Lusignan in the Eleventh and Twelfth Centuries,” Speculum 32 (1957): 41; Riley-Smith, The First Crusaders, 191; Jacques Duguet, Familles et châteaux dans le comté de Poitiers (Poitou, Aunis, Saintonge) du XIe siècle au XIIIe siècle (Rochefort, 2009), 130; Philip D. Handyside, The Old French William of Tyre (Leiden, 2015), 72. 46 Cart Hosp, 4:249. ro ut led ge .co m ro ut led ge .co m ro ut led ge .co m dg e. co m ou tle 102 © Copyrighted material CLÉMENT DE VASSELOT DE RÉGNÉ of some fame in the Holy Land as even Ernoul, not exactly a Lusignan supporter, wrote “Don on parla de se prouece par toute Crestiienté, qui si boins chevaliers fu.”47 Poitevin Rebellion and Overseas Fortune In 1168, there was a Poitevin rebellion against King Henry II in which Geoffrey, Aimery and Guy of Lusignan took part. In the course of this uprising the king destroyed the castle of Lusignan.48 In retaliation, the royal commander, Count Patrick of Salisbury was killed by Guy in a Poitevin ambush.49 This was an act of treason, aggravated by the fact that Patrick was on his way home from a pilgrimage, unarmed and stabbed in the back.50 The following year,, Hugh the Brown (who is not given a number),51 Hugh VIII’s eldest child and father of Hugh IX, died. He was also the older brother of Geoffrey, Guy and Aimery.. However, at his burial, only his mother, Bourgogne, and his cousins, Simon and William illiam of Lezay, Lezay and Geoffrey were present.52 Two years later, in 1171, Hugh VIII came back to Poitou and made a gift to the abbey of the Châtelliers.53 But all his sons except Geoffrey disappear from Geof the sources record only to surface again in the Holy Land during the next decade (Aimery,, Guy and two other brothers, as we will see).54 It was usual for murderers and important rebels to go to Jerusalem on pilgrimage to expiate their crimes.55 Roger of Howden states that on account of the aforementioned murder Guy was banished from Aquitaine and took the cross.56 In the case of the Lusignan brothers, it is possible that they were sent to manage their father’s lands in Tripoli after he returned to Poitou. The return of Hugh VIII, who was always faithful to Henry II, may well explain both the quick rebuilding of the castle and, from this period, the faithfulness of the main Lusignan branch (Hugh IX and Ralph) compared to the turbulent behaviour of the younger branches (Geoffrey, house of Lezay).57 (Geof 47 Chronique onique d’Ernoul et de Bernard Bernar le Trésorier, ed. Louis de Mas-Latrie (Paris, 1871), 60. 48 Robert de Torigny, origny, Chronique Chronique, ed. Léopold Delisle, 2 vols. (Rouen, 1873), 2:4; John of Salisbury, The Letters of John of Salisbury: The Later Letters (1 (1163–1180), ed. W. J. Millor and Christopher N. L. Brooke (Oxford, 1979), 602. 49 Roger of Howden, Chronica, ed. William Stubbs, 4 vols., RS 51 (London, 1868), 1:274. 50 Marie-Aline de Mascureau, “Les Lusignan ou l’insurrection des grands féodaux du duché d’Aquitaine entre 11154 et 1242” (Postgraduate dissertation [M2], Université de Poitiers, 2000), 45–46. 51 Several members of the Lusignan family were called “Hugh the Brown” (see Fig. 4). 52 Cartulair Cartulaire et chartes de l’abbaye de l’Absie, ed. Bélisaire Ledain (Poitiers, 1895), 132. 53 Cartulair Cartulaire de l´abbaye royale de Notre-Dame des Châtelliers, ed. Louis Duval (Niort, 1872), 80–81. 54 A charter from Count Richard is witnessed by Guy of Lusignan but there are very serious doubts about its authenticit authenticity. See Layettes du trésor des chartes, ed. Alexandre Teulet, 5 vols. (Paris, 1863), 1:114–15. Furthermore, Guy of Lusignan is named along with Geoffrey in a list of rebel barons against Henry II in 1173 in the Gesta regis Henrici secundi, ed. William Stubbs, RS, 2 vols. (London, 1867), 1:46. This testimony is not very reliable because logically, if Guy had stayed in Poitou, Henry would have taken vengeance against him. 55 de Mascureau, “Les Lusignan,” 45–47. 56 Roger of Howden, Chronica, ed. Stubbs, 1:274. de Mascureau, “Les Lusignan,” 142. 57 ro ut led ge .c ro ut led ge .co m ro ut led ge .co m ro ut led ge .co m ro ut led ge .co m ro ut led ge .co m ro ut led ge .co m ro ut led ge .co m ro ut led ge .co m dg e. co m ou tle dg e .co ge .co ut le dg led ge .co ro ro ut ge .co m ge . ro ut co m co led ge . ut led ge ro m .co 103 ro m ut le dg 58 59 60 e. co m m ut led led John of Ibelin, Le Livre des Assises, ed. Peter W. Edbury (Leiden, 2003), 684. WT 10.19, 19.8, pp. 477, 873. WT 10.19, p. 477. m ro ut e. co m led .c ge © Copyrighted material A CRUSADER LINEAGE: THE LUSIGNANS ro ut The lawful heirs of the count of Tripoli. ro Fig. 1 led In the Holy Land, Aimery of Lusignan was captured and redeemed in 11174 by the king of Jerusalem. According to John of Ibelin, he was a poor varlet at this time.58 But John of Ibelin is not a relia reliable source because he wrote a century after the facts and he belonged to a family hostile to the Lusignans. In fact, we should think that the Lusignans had very good reasons to seek their fortune in the Near East, notably because they had, as we already said, lands belonging to their father. They were a well-known crusading family and, in his contemporary History, yre described Hugh VI and Hugh VIII’s endeavours to defend the William of Tyre Holy Land.59 Furthermore, they were cousins of Count Raymond III of Tripoli and, as long as he had no child, they were also among his lawful heirs as the princes of Antioch, because both lineages descended through Almodis de la Marche (see Fig. 1). This was well-known in the kingdom of Jerusalem at this time and William of Tyre takes care to mention that the grandfather of Aimery and Guy, Hugh VI, and the founding count of Tripoli, Raymond IV, were brothers.60 Yet Raymond III was captured at Harim and remained a prisoner until early 1174. At this point it is interesting to note that Hugh VIII named the daughter he had in the Holy Land ut ro m ou tle 104 Fig. 2 © Copyrighted material CLÉMENT DE VASSELOT DE RÉGNÉ Hugh VIII, his descendants and the county of Tripoli. Almodis, an unusual choice for the Lusignan family but a decision that could show Hugh VIII contemplated taking over the county if Raymond died in captivity or without an heir (see Fig. 2).61 Ransomed in 1174, Aimery of Lusignan appears in a royal charter dated 13 December.62 At the same time, another brother brother, Peter, who probably travelled out alongside him, was with the count of Tripoli.63 It seems plausible that the ransom paid by the king of Jerusalem attracted Aimery to his service, not least because his other brothers remained in the county of Tripoli. Indeed, the following year, King Baldwin had Aimery marry Eschiva, daughter of Baldwin of Ibelin, lord of Ramla.64 Ernoul repeats a rumour that Aimery also became the lover of Agnes of Courtenay, mother of King Baldwin IV and because of this influence he was appointed constable of Jerusalem.65 Yet, in 1177, William of Montferrat, husband of Sibylla, heiress of the kingdom, died. Baldwin tried to marry his sister to the duke of Bur Burgundy. According to Ernoul, she fell in love with Baldwin of Ramla and would have married him had he not been taken prisoner. While poor Baldwin was trying to gather his ransom, Aimery used his intimate relationship with Agnes 61 62 63 64 65 Cart Hosp, 4:249. Ibid., 321. Ibid., 319–20. Ibid., 336. Chronique d’Ernoul et de Bernard le Trésorier, ed. de Mas-Latrie, 59. ro ut led ge .c ro ut led ge .co m ro ut led ge .co m ro ut led ge .co m ro ut led ge .co m ro ut led ge .co m ro ut led ge .co m ro ut led ge .co m ro ut led ge .co m dg e. co m ou tle © Copyrighted material A CRUSADER LINEAGE: THE LUSIGNANS 105 to praise his brother Guy, to collect him from Poitou and to get him married to Sibylla.66 There are some major problems with this account. First, we saw that Guy left Poitou because of Patrick of Salisbury’s murder so he was probably already in the county of Tripoli at this time. This is more logical because Aimery would not have had the time to praise his brother, go to Poitou and back and marry him off before Baldwin of Ramla returned from a diplomatic mission in Constantinople (1180). Moreover, William of Tyre provides a different explanation for the rapidity of the marriage. According to him, it was because Baldwin IV was afraid of being dethroned by the prince of Antioch and the count of Tripoli ripoli who came to Jerusalem on pilgrimage.67 This needs some analysis: first, there was no time to go to Poitou if the decision of the king came so suddenly although there were ongoing negotiations with the duke of Burgundy; Outremer. gundy; this also means that Guy was already in Outremer Secondly, even though Aimery had certainly helped to encourage the decision, it was quite logical to choose Guy. As we saw,, he was a kinsmen of the prince and the count. He could aspire to their inheritance so he had the rank to marry Sibylla. He also had prestige thanks to his crusader ancestors and becau because of his interests in Tripoli’s inheritance; he was concerned to protect King Baldwin against Count Raymond. But William of Tyre, Sibylla’s yre, who favoured the count, disapproved of Sibylla’ choice. He hated the Courtenays, Agnes and Joscelin, he was contemptuous of their ally Guy, and had the greatest admiration for their opponent Raymond. Smail has shown how reading William of Tyre yre and Ernoul without considering their respective political stances has influenced scholars’ vision of the loss of Jerusalem.68 Guy’s appointment further divided the kingdom between the two parties. As noted earlier, scholars have usually set up a “poulain” party with Count Raymond, Prince Bohemond and the Ibelins, who strove to remain close to the throne by marriage ties. They opposed the party of crusaders and recent arrivals in Jerusalem sister, Agnes, the mother of with Joscelin of Courtenay, seneschal of Jerusalem, his sister Aimery, Patriarch Eraclius, the master of the Templars, King Baldwin, the constable Aimery Gerard of Ridefort and Reynald Reynald, the prince of Antioch.69 In reality, however, this binary does not work; it is more accurate to describe it as division between those who had the power in Jerusalem and the barons separate from the king, against whom Baldwin feared losing his crown.70 ro ut led ge .c ro ut led ge .co m ro ut led ge .co m ro ut led ge .co m ro ut led ge .co m ro ut led ge .co m ro ut led ge .co m ro ut led ge .co m 66 Ibid., 57–60. 67 WT 22.1, p. 1007. 68 Raymond C. Smail, “The Predicaments of Guy of Lusignan, 1183–87,” in Outremer, 159–76, at 162–64. Peter W. Edbury and John G. Rowe, William of Tyre, Historian of the Latin East (Cambridge, 1988), 17–18. Edbury, “Propaganda and Faction,” 174–76. 69 Marshall W. Baldwin, Raymond III of Tripolis and the Fall of Jerusalem (1140–1187) (Princeton, 1936), 35–45. His interpretation has been heavily criticized by Smail, “The Predicaments of Guy of Lusignan,” 160–61, and Edbury, “Propaganda and Faction,” 173–76. 70 WT 22.1, p. 1007. ro ut led ge .co m dg e. co m ou tle 106 © Copyrighted material CLÉMENT DE VASSELOT DE RÉGNÉ Guy married Sibylla on 20 April 1180.71 He became count of Jaffa and Ascalon, which was the title used by the heirs of Jerusalem’s crown.72 From 1 March 1181 to 1183, Guy witnessed five charters of King Baldwin with his brother Aimery. In illiam 1183, the king’s illness meant that Guy became the regent of the kingdom. William of Tyre stated that Baldwin took a lot of precautions to avoid the loss of his crown and that the kingdom’s barons were discontented with this choice.73 When Guy later become king of Jerusalem, his only known charter before the Battle of Hattin was a confirmation of the marriage between William of Valence, another very little-known Lusignan brother, and Beatrice of Courtenay, daughter of oron, Châteauneuf the seneschal Joscelin. William became lord of the castles of Toron, and Cabor, which Joscelin had acquired, thanks to Guy, from Humphrey of Toron.74 Thus, the brother of the king became the guardian of several important castles on the northern frontier of the kingdom. But these were also castles which separated the county of Tripoli from the lordship of Tiberias which comprised the two main estates of Count Raymond. Guy was reinforcing his position in his kingdom which, through carefully constructed marriage ties and family connections, was becoming a Lusignan kingdom (see Fig. 3). Guy’s Misfortune Unfortunately for Guy,, the Battle of Hattin quickly brought his reign to an end, but the roots of this disaster can be traced back to the beginning of his authority over the kingdom. When he was named regent, the first challenge he had to face te invasion by Saladin in 1183. The strategy adopted was quite was an immediate traditional: namely, gathering troops near the enemy, maintaining control over the water sources and remaining on the defensive. William of Tyre echoes the critical attitude of the barons and the army army.75 Smail, however, points to the way that al-Qādi al-Fāḏil, Imād al-Dīn and Bahāʼ al-Dīn all suggest that Saladin wanted to trigger a battle with the Franks, but was unable to do so because of their strong defensive position. It is probable that the decision not to engage Saladin was made by Guy and the nobility, but it was the former who bore the brunt of subsequent discontent.76 Because of this decision he became very unpopular and was seen as an incompetent man. The prince, the count, Reynald of Sidon, Baldwin of Ramla and Balian of Ibelin exploited this unpopularity to engineer Guy’s dismissal from the regency and exclusion from the throne by King Baldwin IV thanks to the coronation of 71 Ibid. 72 Benedict of Peterborough [= Roger of Howden], Gesta regis Henrici secundi Benedicti abbatis, ed. William Stubbs, 2 vols., RS 49 (London, 1867), 1:343. See also S. Tibble, Monarchy and Lordships in the Latin Kingdom of Jerusalem, 1099–1291 (Oxford, 1991), 38–40, 50–51. 73 WT 22.26, p. 1049. See also Bernard Hamilton, The Leper King and His Heirs: Baldwin IV and the Crusader Kingdom of Jerusalem (Cambridge, 2000), 189. 74 Mayer, Urkunden, 2:801–3, no. 475. 75 WT 22.30, p. 1057. Smail, “The Predicaments of Guy of Lusignan,” 165–71. 76 ro ut led ge .c ro ut led ge .co m ro ut led ge .co m ro ut led ge .co m ro ut led ge .co m ro ut led ge .co m ro ut led ge .co m ro ut led ge .co m ro ut led ge .co m dg e. co m ou tle © Copyrighted material A CRUSADER LINEAGE: THE LUSIGNANS Fig. 3 The integration of the Lusignans in the family network of the Latin East. 107 his nephew, Baldwin V.77 A number of political checks were imposed on Guy around this time in spite of his heading up a successful strategy strategy.78 According to the Christian writers he was responsible for a failure to engage with Saladin and the barons used this scenario to outmanoeuvre Guy.79 The winner of the situation was Count Raymond who replaced Guy as regent.80 Nevertheless, when Baldwin IV and then Baldwin V died, Sibylla and his party succeeded in crowning Guy as king of Jerusalem, and Raymond of Tripoli rebelled and allied himself with Saladin against the new king until they made peace.81 It is almost ost certain that this experience affected Guy when he came to decide on a course of action in 11187. Scholars have noticed very similar beginnings in the campaigns of 1183 and 11187.82 In 1183, Guy took the correct decision but paid a high political price for this. Four years later, he was the king and he could not afford ford to make another mistake so he decided to ignore Count Raymond’s advice. Indeed, Raymond was the main challenger to his crown, a rebel until a few months earlier and an ally of Saladin, and he counselled the king to adopt the same strategy 77 78 79 80 81 82 ro ut led ge .c ro ut led ge .co m ro ut led ge .co m ro ut led ge .co m ro ut led ge .co m ro ut led ge .co m ro ut led ge .co m ro ut led ge .co m WT 22.30, p. 1058; Hamilton, The Leper King, 205-10. Chronique d’Ernoul et de Bernard le Trésorier, ed. de Mas-Latrie, 116–17. Edbury, “Propaganda and Faction,” 178. Smail, “The Predicaments of Guy of Lusignan,” 172–73. Chronique d’Ernoul et de Bernard le Trésorier, ed. de Mas-Latrie, 131–35. René Grousset, Histoire des croisades, tome II: l’équilibre (Paris, 1935; repr. 1991), 728. ro ut led ge .co m dg e. co m ou tle 108 © Copyrighted material CLÉMENT DE VASSELOT DE RÉGNÉ that had nearly caused his ruin.83 On the one hand, it was normal that the new king needed to assert himself given the political divisions in the kingdom and on the other hand, it was quite understandable that some accused Raymond of giving deliberately misleading advice and that King Guy believed them.84 The Loss of a Crown and Failure of a Dream After the disaster of Hattin the image of an incompetent Guy is less sustainable. At first, because a majority of the barons had been killed or captured at Hattin, and Raymond of Tripoli died soon afterwards, there was no opposition in the kingdom and everybody recognized Guy and Sibylla as king and queen of Jerusalem.85 The Continuation of William of Tyre stated that Conrad of Montferrat was recognized as lord of that city to defend it while the king was in prison.86 Indeed, while Ernoul and other of William Tyre’s continuators give us the illiam of Tyre’ baronial explanation for the fall of the kingdom, we can discern the Lusignan point of view through a text from the cleric Peter of Blois. Emissary of Henry II of England, he was sent to Rome to talk with the pope. He was profoundly shocked by the fall of spirituality, Jerusalem and wrote various texts that discussed conversion, personal spirituality as well as a call for a new crusade.87 Around 11188, he wrote the Passio Reginaldi which is the story of Reynald of Châtillon, former prince of Antioch, beheaded by Saladin after Hattin.88 At first, this text was followed by a call to a bishop to preach the crusade and it was intended to help the archbishop of Canterbury on Peter of Blois’s return to England.89 Soon afterwards though, Peter went on crusade with the English army and he modified his text mainly because he met Aimery of Lusignan who had been captured with Reynald and Guy Guy, and from whom Peter was able to affirm that his Passio was a faith faithful account of the events.90 As a consequence, we should consider the text of the Passio as the Lusignan point of view on the disaster Redemption for the Disaster at Hattin ro ut led ge .c ro ut led ge .co m ro ut led ge .co m ro ut led ge .co m ro ut led ge .co m ro ut led ge .co m ro ut led ge .co m 83 On the battle of Hattin, see Benjamin Z. Kedar, “The Battle of Hattin Revisited,” in Horns, 190–207; Zvi Gal, “Saladin’s Dome of Victory at the Horns of Hattin,” ibid., 213–15. 84 Chronique d’Ernoul et de Bernar Bernard le Trésorier, ed. de Mas-Latrie, 158–61. 85 The Chr Chronicle of the Third Crusade: The Itinerarium Peregrinorum et Gesta Regis Ricardi, trans. Helen J. Nicholson (Aldershot, 1997), 69. 86 La Continuation de Guillaume de Tyr (1184–1197), ed. Margaret Ruth Morgan (Paris, 1982), 89. 87 Egbert Türk, Pierre de Blois, ambitions et remords sous les Plantagenêts (Turnhout, 2006), 210–12. 88 Peter of Blois, Petri Blesensis tractatus duo, Passio Raginaldi principis Antiochie, Conquestio de dilatione vie Ierosolimitane, ed. R. B. C. Huygens (Turnhout, 2002). 89 Türk, Pierre de Blois, 212–13. 90 Peter of Blois, Petri Blesensis tractatus duo, ed. Huygens, 51. R. W. Southern, “Peter of Blois and the Third Crusade,” in Studies in Medieval History presented to R. H. C. Davis, ed. H. Mayr-Harting and R. I. Moore (London, 1985), 215–17. John D. Cotts, The Clerical Dilemma: Peter of Blois and Literate Culture in the Twelfth Century (Washington, 2009), 228–30. ro ut led ge .co m ro ut led ge .co m dg e. co m ou tle © Copyrighted material A CRUSADER LINEAGE: THE LUSIGNANS 109 of Hattin and as a way found by Aimery to spread a favourable version of the event across Christendom. Peter of Blois’s account was a huge compilation of biblical quotations which aimed to identify Reynald of Châtillon with the Biblical Jonathan in his fighting and with Jesus Christ in his passion. He shows how Reynald underwent a progressive conversion that made him a real Soldier of Christ and later a Martyr of Christ by exalting his purity of heart, his humility,, his voluntary poverty, and his attachment to penitence. Reynald was an intrepid hero who sacrificed his life with an extraordinary inary confession of faith which led to his death at the hands of Saladin. He was, therefore, the opposite of the indifferent ferent barons of Europe who do not care about Holy Land.91 For true crusaders, material concerns should have no importance compared to those of a spiritual nature.92 From the perspective of this text, Hattin becomes something different from a simple military disaster disaster. It was an act of divine grace which showed the way forward for Christians through the example of the new saints, the new martyrs. Christendom is summoned to gather itself against Saladin who is called the Antichrist, a tyrant and a minister of Satan. People were urged to follow in the footsteps of the martyrs of Hattin to recover Jerusalem and defeat Saladin’s army. This text could be interpreted as a Lusignan manifesto after Guy and Aimery’s liberation because it was consistent with what they did. In Antioch and later in Tripoli, Guy and Aimery gathered forces (around 600 knights) to attempt to reconquer the kingdom.93 When they came to T Tyre, Conrad of Montferrat refused them entrance. All chroniclers except for Ernoul, who abstains from comment, stressed the treacherous behaviour of the marquis and accused him of greed.94 Ambroise and the Itinerarium report that, because the Pisans in Tyre refused to betray the king and rebelled against Conrad, they were thrown out of the city by his men.95 Rather than fight against Conrad and thereby further divide the feeble forces of leave Tyre and besiege Acre.96 This was the expected the kingdom, Guy choose to lea behaviour from a Christian soldier ready to die as Peter of Blois depicts him in his Passio.. Conrad of Montferrat appears in those chronicles as a treacherous, selfish city. By contrast, Guy had become man who wanted only to be the master of his city humble thanks to his defeat, as well as courageous, and he had not hesitated to ro ut led ge .c ro ut led ge .co m ro ut led ge .co m ro ut led ge .co m ro ut led ge .co m ro ut led ge .co m ro ut led ge .co m 91 Peter of Blois, Petri Blesensis tractatus duo, ed. Huygens, 64. 92 Michel Markowski, “Peter of Blois and the conception of the Third Crusade,” in Horns, 264. 93 La Continuation de Guillaume de T Tyr, ed. Morgan, 88–89; The Chronicle of the Third Crusade, trans. Nicholson, 69. 94 La Continuation de Guillaume de Tyr, ed. Morgan, 89; The Chronicle of the Third Crusade, trans. Nicholson, 69; Ambroise, L’Estoire de la guerre sainte: The History of the Holy War, ed. Marianne Ailes and Malcolm Barber (Woodbridge, 2003), vv. 2706–7, 2718, 2723. 95 Ambroise, L’Estoire de la guerre sainte, ed. Ailes and Barber, vv. 2732–35; The Chronicle of the Third Crusade, trans. Nicholson, 69–70. 96 Ambroise, L’Estoire de la guerre sainte, ed. Ailes and Barber, vv. 2737–81; The Chronicle of the Third Crusade, trans. Nicholson, 70. ro ut led ge .co m ro ut led ge .co m dg e. co m ou tle 110 © Copyrighted material CLÉMENT DE VASSELOT DE RÉGNÉ besiege Acre which was a very strong place. His only thought was to recover the Holy Land.97 At Antioch, Guy and Aimery found their brother Geoffrey whom they had left behind in Poitou. He seems to have had problems similar to those experienced by his brothers. In 1188, during a revolt, Geoffrey frey of Lusignan killed a close friend of Count Richard of Poitou. To o keep his life, he had to take the cross and go to the Holy Land.98 He arrived in timee to bring support to his brother and to the kingdom. This good timing immediately gained him the favour of Guy’s army.99 He came perhaps with his younger nephew, Ralph of Exoudun, Hugh the Brown’s Brown’ son, who is mentioned by Ralph of Diceto as taking part in the siege of Acre.100 Geoffrey is presented in contemporary sources like a real hero, behaving with skill and bravery in the Holy Land.101 According to the chroniclers of the Third Crusade, he became very popular and was seen as burning to avenge his brother’s brother defeat and to fight for the Christian cause.102 From the first engagement of the siege of Acre, he won fame in defending the army.103 On 4 October 1190, King Guy attacked Geoffrey, who was in charge cked the Saracens but was defeated. When Geof of defending the crusader camp, saw this he came to fight and save his brother. His arrival triggered a change of momentum and the crusaders eventually triumphed.104 On 11 November,, the besieged made a sortie but Geoffrey, with the Knights Geof Templar emplar and other knights, succeeded in repulsing them and killing forty men.105 On 15 November,, a part of the crusader army who were bringing back supplies became separated from the crusader camp as the Muslims took position on the bridge of Da’uq. Geoffrey and five other knights charged onto the bridge, killed A New Hero: Geoffrey of Lusignan ro ut led ge .c ro ut led ge .co m ro ut led ge .co m ro ut led ge .co m ro ut led ge .co m ro ut led ge .co m 97 La Continuation de Guillaume de T Tyr, ed. Morgan, 89. For the siege of Acre, see J. D. Hosler, The Siege of Acre, e, 1189–91 (London, 2017). 98 Ralph of Diceto, Ymagines historiarum, ed. William Stubbs, Radulfi de Diceto decani Lundoniensis opera historica: The Historical Works of Master Ralph de Diceto, Dean of London, 2 vols., RS 68 (London, 1876), 2:54–55. 99 La Continuation de Guillaume de Tyr, ed. Morgan, 88. 100 Ralph of Diceto, Ymagines historiarum, 2:80. 101 Geoffrey’s strength had already been noticed in France as is reported bby Guillaume le Breton, Philippide Philippide, Oeuvres, ed. Henri-François Delaborde, 2 vols. (Paris, 1885), 73, and by Jean le Long, Ex Joannis Iperii chronico chr Sythiensi Sancti-Bertin, ed. Léopold Delisle, RHGF 23:596. 102 Jacques de Vitry, Histoire orientale, ed. and trans. Jean Donnadieu (Turnhout, 2008), 446; The Chronicle of the Third Crusade, trans. Nicholson, 69. 103 Ambroise, L’Estoire de la guerre sainte, ed. Ailes and Barber, vv. 2830–33; Alberic of TroisFontaines, Ex chronico Alberici Trium-Fontium monachi, ed. Léopold Delisle, RHGF 18:751. 104 Jacques de Vitry, Histoire orientale, ed. and trans. Donnadieu, 450; The Chronicle of the Third Crusade, trans. Nicholson, 81. 105 Roger of Howden, Gesta regis Henrici secundi, ed. William Stubbs, 2 vols., RS 49 (London, 1867), 2:144. ro ut led ge .co m ro ut led ge .co m ro ut led ge .co m dg e. co m ou tle © Copyrighted material A CRUSADER LINEAGE: THE LUSIGNANS 111 more than thirty men and opened the way to the other troops.106 On 1 July 1191, Geoffrey halted an assault on the camp killing more than ten Saracens with his axe and took numerous prisoners; his actions were compared to the heroes of old, Roland and his friend Oliver.107 After Sibylla and her children died at the end of August 1190, Guy’s position became quite ambiguous.108 He was the crowned king of Jerusalem but henceforth his claim was weakened because Conrad of Montferrat, who had secured the support of King Philip of France during the latter’s stay in the East, married Isabella, the sister of Sibylla, on 24 November 1190.109 Guy appealed to Richard the Lionheart who decided to back his formerly rebellious vassal. It is plausible that Richard had experienced so many problems with the Lusignan brothers in Poitou that he preferred they should stay in the Holy Land, especially as he had good relationships with the new lords of Lusignan, Guy and Geoffrey’s Geoffrey’ nephews: Hugh IX, who came on crusade with him, and Ralph, whom he made count of Eu in 1191.110 Finally an agreement was reached between Conrad and Guy, although in some senses, the winner in all this was Geoffrey.. He became count of Jaffa Jaf and Ascalon, the customary title of the heirs of the kingdom. The agreement of 27 July 1190 stated that Conrad would keep Tyre, yre, Sidon and Beirut and that he would became king if Guy died before him. Guy,, however, remained king for the present and the devolution of the counties to Geoffrey allowed him to use his brother’s popularity in the army.111 The heroic image of Geoffrey was the best argument to Geof keep the kingdom under a Lusignan king. Aimery, Aimery however, was less prominent, although still a powerful office-holder. Between 31 January 1191 and 13 October 1192, Geoffrey,, titled count of Jaffa, and Aimery, as constable, witnessed three charters of their brother Guy.112 The Crown own is Lost but the Crusade Continues ro ut led ge .c ro ut led ge .co m ro ut led ge .co m ro ut led ge .co m ro ut led ge .co m ro ut led ge .co m Nevertheless, in April 1192 King Richard received such bad news from England regarding the administration of the kingdom by his brother John that he decided to go home. Given the strong baronial opposition to Guy’s power, he appointed Conrad of Montferrat as king. Before arriving in Holy Land, Richard had conquered ro ut led ge .co m 106 De Expugnatione terrae sanctae per Saladinum, libellus libellus, ed. Joseph Stevenson (London, 1875), 255–56; Ambroise, L’Estoire de la guerre sainte, ed. Ailes and Barber, vv. 4061–79; The Chronicle of the Third Crusade, Crusade trans. Nicholson, 120. 107 The Chronicle of the Third Crusade, trans. Nicholson, 206. 108 Ibid., 102; Ambroise, L’Estoire de la guerre sainte, ed. Ailes and Barber, vv. 3891–902. 109 Ambroise, L’Estoire de la guerre sainte, ed. Ailes and Barber, vv. 1701–31. 110 Ibid., v. 4989–95; Cartulaire de l’abbaye de Saint-Michel du Tréport, ed. Pierre Lafleur de Kermaingant (Paris, 1880), 88–90. 111 The Chronicle of the Third Crusade, trans. Nicholson, 22; Ambroise, L’Estoire de la guerre sainte, ed. Ailes and Barber, vv. 5033–59. 112 Mayer, Urkunden, 2.825–35, nos. 485–86, 488. ro ut led ge .co m ro ut led ge .co m dg e. co m ou tle 112 © Copyrighted material CLÉMENT DE VASSELOT DE RÉGNÉ Cyprus, and Guy played a part in this conquest.113 Richard sold the island to the Knights Templar for 100,000 bezants but, on the one hand, they paid only 40,000 bezants and, on the other hand, they had serious difficulties in administrating it, which led to an uprising on 4 April 1192.114 As compensation for the loss of the kingdom of Jerusalem, Guy repaid the 40,000 bezants to the Templars and took possession of Cyprus. There is no evidence that he paid the remaining 60,000 bezants to Richard – something which led John Gillingham to the conclusion that Richard gave the island to Guy.115 It was the end of the Lusignan dream in Palestine. Geoffrey was not interested in keeping his counties without remaining heir to the kingdom and he chose to return to Poitou.116 Aimery had to give up his office of constable and went to join Guy who gave him the office of constable of Cyprus while he also succeeded Geoffrey in the counties.117 When Guy died on Cyprus, in April 1194, the lordship of the island was offered fered to Geoffrey but as he had returned to Poitou, he did not want to come back to the East.118 Thus we can see that Geoffrey’s heroic image gave him preference over his brother Aimery and it was only thanks to the former’s refusal that Aimery became ruler of Cyprus (and the ancestor of the Lusignan kings who ruled this island down to 1489). That said, Guy, who had been considered a weak and incompetent man, succeeded in establishing a strong government on Cyprus, an achievement cast in even better light by recent failures to rule the island on the part of English and then Templar administrators.119 Wee saw at the start of this article how the Lusignans had been engaged in the crusading movement from its earliest days. This involvement would continue beyond Guy, Geoffrey and Aimery’s generation; indeed, Hugh IX and his brother Ralph of Exoudun were in Richard the Lionheart’s Lionheart’ army on the Third Crusade. Wee also saw that Hugh IX took part in the crusade against the Almohads in 1212. He returned to the East for the Fifth Crusade and died in 1219 at Damietta.120 His son, Hugh X, took the cross in 1245.121 Like his father, he would die in Damietta, ro ut led ge .c ro ut led ge .co m ro ut led ge .co m ro ut led ge .co m ro ut led ge .co m ro ut led ge .co m 113 Peter W. Edbury, “Crusaders and Pilgrims: The Conquest of Cyprus in 1191,” in Byzantine Medieval Cyprus,, ed. Demetria Papanikola-Bakirtzis (Nicosia, 1998), 27–34 27–34. 114 Peter W. Edbury Edbury, The Kingdom of Cyprus and the Crusades, 1191–1374 (Cambridge, 1991), 28. 115 John Gillingham Gillingham, Richard I (London, 1999), 196–97. 116 Wipertus Hugo Rudt de Collenber Collenberg, Les Lusignan de Chypre (Nicosia, 1980), 94; Edbury, The Kingdom of Cyprus and the Crusades Crusades, 29; Gilles Grivaud, “Les Lusignan et leur gouvernance du royaume de Chypre (XIIe–XIV (XIIe–XIVe siècles),” in Europäische Governance im Spätmittelalter, Heinrich VII von Luxembur Luxemburg und die großen Dynastien Europas, ed. Michel Pauly (Luxembourg, 2010), 361–62. 117 La Continuation de Guillaume de Tyr, ed. Morgan, 159. 118 Ibid., 161. 119 Smail, “The Predicaments of Guy of Lusignan,” 164; Edbury, The Kingdom of Cyprus and the Crusades Crusades, 29; Jean Richard, “Les révoltes chypriotes de 1191–1192 et les inféodations de Guy de Lusignan,” Montjoie, 123–28. 120 Chartes et documents pour servir à l’histoire de l’abbaye de Saint-Maixent, ed. Richard, 2:38–39; and Bernard Itier, Chronique, ed. Jean-Loup Lemaître (Paris, 1998), 59. 121 Jean de Joinville, Vie de saint Louis, trans. Jacques Monfrin (Paris, 2010), 54–55; Les registres d’Innocent IV, ed. Elie Berger, 4 vols. (Paris, 1897), 1:564; Recueil des documents de l’abbaye de Fontaine-le-comte (XIIe–XIIIe siècles), ed. Georges Pon (Poitiers, 1982), 82–86. ro ut led ge .co m ro ut led ge .co m ro ut led ge .co m dg e. co m ou tle © Copyrighted material A CRUSADER LINEAGE: THE LUSIGNANS 113 thirty years later, on 5 June 1249.122 In 1247, his son, Guy of Lusignan, lord of Cognac, took the cross.123 His elder brother, Hugh XI, also took part in the Seventh Crusade, in the contingent of Alphonse of Poitiers.124 He died on the crusade and his service was taken up by his brother Guy.125 In 1250, William of Valence took the cross with the king of England and other English lords.126 He finally went on crusade with Prince Edward in 1270.127 His nephew, Hugh XII, took the cross in 1267, also participated in the Eighth Crusade in the French contingent and died in Tunis.128 William of Valence perhaps wanted to crusade in the 1290s but as he was too old, it was probably his son, Aymer of Valence, who went (see Fig. 4).129 Most astonishing of all is that there is no mention in the sources of any contacts between the members bers of the two branches of the Lusignan family after Guy’s death. The Lusignans of Poitou continued to involve themselves in crusading expeditions but without any apparent link to their cousins on Cyprus. To o conclude, the Lusignans were not weak foreign knights ignorant of the realities of Palestine when Aimery and Guy became important personali personalities in the politics of the Latin kingdom. The participation ipation of this family in the crusades was evident since the beginning of the movement and was preceded by familial involvement in warfare against Muslims in the Iberian peninsula. Aimery and Guy are seen as the heirs of a glorious name in the Latin chronicles of William of Tyre and Ernoul. They are linked to the most powerful families of the Latin East, and they could aspire to be heirs of the count of Tripoli and the prince of Antioch. They pursued a policy which relied on using familial connections, especially through their brothers, to strengthen their position in the kingdom. By these means, they tried to reproduce in Palestine the way they had built up their family’s power in Poitou. Guy’s traumatic experiences In the event, political opposition in the kingdom and Guy’ IV’s reign led quickly to the disaster of Hattin. towards the end of King Baldwin IV’ Then Guy and the whole family tried to redeem themselves by creating an image as crusading Christians, motivated primarily by spiritual ideals, determined to fight Conclusion ro ut led ge .c ro ut led ge .co m ro ut led ge .co m ro ut led ge .co m ro ut led ge .co m ro ut led ge .co m ro ut led ge .co m 122 Matthew Paris, Chronica Majora, ed. Henry R. Luard, 7 vols., RS 57 (London, 1880), 5:88. 123 Les registres registr d’Innocent IV, IV ed. Berger, 1:616. 124 Cartulaire Cartulair des comtes de la Marche et d’Angoulême, ed. Georges Thomas (Angoulême, 1934), 33–36. 125 Gaël Chenard, “L’Administration d’Alphonse de Poitiers en Poitou et en Saintonge (1241– 1271),” 4 vols. (PhD thesis, Université de Poitiers, 2014), 2:76–77. 126 Matthew Paris, Chronica Majora, ed. Luard, 5:101. 127 Huw Ridgeway, “William de Valence and his ‘familiares’, 1247–72,” Historical Research 158 (1992): 245. 128 Chenard, “L’Administration d’Alphonse de Poitiers,” 1:100; Les olim ou registres des arrêts rendus par la cour du roi, ed. Jacques C. Beugnot, 4 vols. (Paris, 1839), 1:854–55. 129 Nobility and Kingship in Medieval England: The Earls and Edward I, 1272–1307, ed. Andrew M. Spencer (Cambridge, 2013), 225. ro ut led ge .co m ro ut led ge .co m dg e. co m ou tle 114 © Copyrighted material CLÉMENT DE VASSELOT DE RÉGNÉ The Lusignans, a major crusading dynasty. to reconquer Christian lands, and as heroic fighters, most notably, in the case of Geoffrey of Lusignan. Although they tried to exploit this iconic figure by giving him the position of heir to the kingdom, they failed to maintain their power. This triggered a major family break-up. One branch went to Cyprus with Guy Guy, and after him Aimery,, effectively ruling the island to the point where it could later take again the crown of Jerusalem. The other branch became important in Poitou and in England but without ceasing to be participants in the crusades. Guy’s misfortunes should not obscure the ef efforts of others in the family. We should recognize the role played by the wider Lusignan family during the age of the crusades, a commitment that spanned over two centuries – and one that means they should be acknowledged as a major crusading dynasty dynasty. Fig. 4 ro ut led ge .c ro ut led ge .co m ro ut led ge .co m ro ut led ge .co m ro ut led ge .co m ro ut led ge .co m ro ut led ge .co m ro ut led ge .co m ro ut led ge .co m dg e. co m