L A U NIVERSIDAD COMO C ORPORACIÓN DE M ARCA R EGISTRADA

Despite the silence from Burgundian leaders, there was certainly interest in the crusade in the wider society and laity of Burgundy. As noted, neither the duke himself nor any immediate members of his family took the cross in 1095–96, nor did any prominent ducal vassals. The crusader known as ‘Robert the Burgundian’ was closely associated with the counts of Anjou and spent most of his life as an Angevin castellan, although by blood he was the brother of William I,

quadragesima, venit Andegavim papa Romanus Urbanus et ammonuit gentem nostrum et irent Jerusalem expugnaturi gentilem populum qui civitatem illam et totam terram christianorum usque Constantinopolim occupaverant. Tunc in septuagesima dedicata est ecclesia sancti Nicholai ab ipso papa et corpus avunculi mei G. translatum de capitulo in eamdem ecclesiam’. Fulk and Bertrade’s son, Fulk V of Anjou, would later become king of Jerusalem (r. 1131–43) and Fulk seems to have supported those of his knights who did wish to travel to the Holy Land. See also Nicholas L. Paul, ‘The Chronicle of Fulk le Réchin: A Reassessment’, in Haskins Society Journal 18: Studies in Medieval History, 2006, ed. by Stephen Morillo and Diane Korngiebel (Woodbridge: The Boydell Press, 2007), 19–35 (esp. pp. 28–30).

28 _{OV, V, p. 111.} 29 _{OV, V, p. 281.}

79

count of Nevers and grandfather of the 1101 crusader William II of Nevers.30 _{Thus we are} obliged to focus primarily on those hailing from the comital lands. Two examples from the cartulary of Cluny have received attention: first, the 1096 pledge of the brothers Bernard and Odo, probably vassals of Rainald II of Mâcon and Burgundy, that ‘for the remission of our sins, setting out with all the others on the journey to Jerusalem, we have made over for 100 solidi [. . .] a manor known as Busart, which we were holding in the county of Mâcon [. . .] We are making this arrangement on the condition that if, in the course of the pilgrimage we are undertaking, because we are mortal and may be taken by death, the manor, in its entirety, may remain under the control of St Peter and the monastery of Cluny, which is under the reverend father Hugh’.31

The other example is that of Achard, castellan of Montmerle (Montmerle-sur-Saône, dep. Ain, arr. Bourg-en-Bresse), testifying that he is ‘excited by the same intention as this great and enormous upheaval of the Christian people wanting to go to fight for God against the pagans and the Saracens, and, to enable this to take place, and desiring to go there [Jerusalem] armed, I have made an agreement of this kind with lord Hugh, venerable abbot of Cluny, and his monks’.32 Achard is likely the single most famous of all Burgundian First Crusaders, as he appears in a broad selection of sources and has some attention paid to his exploits (and heroic death). His charter is also dated precisely: 12 April 1096, less than five months after Clermont, which

30 _{W. Scott Jessee, Robert the Burgundian and the Counts of Anjou c.1025-1098 (Washington D.C.: Catholic}

University of America Press, 2000), pp. 18–20.

31 _{RCAC, V, act 3712, p. 59: ‘Notum sit omnibus in gremio sanctæ matris ecclesiæ consistentibus, futuris et}

presentibus, quod nos Bernardus et Oddo, fratres, pro peccatorum nostrorum remissione, cum cæteris in expedicione Hierosolimam proficiscentes, mansum unum, quem habebamus in comitatu Matisconensi, in villa Flagiaco, Busart cognominatum, cum omnibus ad ipsum mansum pertinentibus […] Hoc autem ea conditione fecimus, ut si in hac peregrinatione quam aggredimur, ut sunt humana, morte preventi fuerimus, mansus ipse cum omni integritate in Sancti Petri et Cluniacensis monasterii, cui preest reverendus pater Hugo, perpetua maneat dominacione.’ Trans. by Jonathan Phillips, The Crusades: 1095-1197 (Harlow: Longman, 1992), p. 166.

32 _{RCAC, V, act 3703, pp. 51–53: ‘Notum sit fidelibus Christi presentibus et futuris, quod ego Acardus, miles, de}

castro quod vocant Montem Merulum, filius autem Wicardi, qui et ipse dictus est de Monte Merulo, ego, inquam, Acardus, in hac tam multa et permaxima excitatione vel expeditione christiani populi decertantis ire in Iherusalem, ad belligerandum contra paganos et Sarracenos pro Deo, et ipse tali intentione permotus, cupiensque illo ire armatus, facio conventionem hujusmodi cum domno Hugone, abbate venerabili Cluniacensi, et cum monachis ejus.’ Trans. by Phillips, The Crusades: 1095-1197, p. 167.

80

reflects how swiftly crusading fervour had spread across France. A less-publicised act in the Cluny cartulary is that of Ebrolda, widow of a crusader, making a donation around 1100: ‘Let those who read this charter know that I, Ebrolda, who was wife of Berengar who went to Jerusalem and died there [. . .] after his death gave twelve denarii to St Peter of Cluny’.33 She then became a nun at the Cluniac convent of Marcigny (dep. Saône-et-Loire, arr. Charolles).34

Participation among the Burgundian nobility is, however, thinly documented for the period of 1096–99. None of the chroniclers record any Burgundian crusader by name (with the exception of the anecdote of Achard of Montmerle’s death, mentioned in Robert, Peter,

Raymond, and the Gesta) or even make a note of Burgundians present among the other factions. During the siege of Antioch, Raymond of Aguilers noted that ‘among the auxiliary group were the Count of Flanders and some Provençals, a name applied to all those from Burgundy, Auvergne, Gascony, and Gothia. I call to your attention that all others in our army are called Franks, but the enemy makes no distinction and uses Franks for all’.35 _{This is a useful critical} difference. If the Burgundians were not ‘Franks,’ as would surely be the case for crusaders from northern France or ducal Capetian Burgundy, they were more likely part of a linguistically and culturally distinct southern French contingent and to hail from the old kingdom of Burgundy, presently in comital territory. However, ‘Provençal’ as a catch-all term for men from a variety of regions still does not offer much specificity. It is not until Albert of Aachen that we find a

reference to ‘Burgundienses’ alongside Normans, Bretons, and Germans, dated July 1097.36

33 _{RCAC, V, act 3804, p. 152: ‘Sciant qui istam cartam legerint, quod ego Ebrolda, que fuit uxor Berengarii qui in}

Jerusalem perexit et qui ibi defunctus est [. . .] post obitum dedit Sancto Petro de Cluniaco xii denarius’.

34 _{Riley-Smith, First Crusade and the Idea of Crusading, p. 123.}

35 _{Raymond of Aguilers, p. 244: ‘Erat autem inter eos qui profecti fuerunt ad propiscum fugae et clamoris causas,}

Flandrensis comes et cum eo quidam Provinciales: namque omnes de Burgundia et Alvernia, et Gasconia, et Gothi, Provinciales appellantur, ceteri vero Francigenae; et hoc in exercitu, inter hostes autem omnes Francigenae dicebantur’. Trans. by Hill and Hill, p. 34.

81

The question remains as to whether these were ducal or comital Burgundians, an

identification difficult within Albert as he persistently confuses the two regions and the ranks of their leaders.37 His Historia is also a unique case, as while most First Crusade chroniclers share information so closely as to essentially replicate each other, Albert seems to have been entirely unaware of them and hence his account can be read in independent corroboration (or conflict) with these sources.38 _{While Albert was a geographically German chronicler, he was close enough} to French centres of influence to be well aware of their doings; Aachen also lies just a hundred miles north of Bouillon, homeland of Godfrey, first Christian ruler of Jerusalem (1099–1100).39 This has led to speculation that the Historia was written as a hagiography for Godfrey and the new dynasty, but Albert’s modern translator, Susan Edgington, believes that a thorough reading of the work does not support that assertion. Albert emerges remarkably even-handedly for all parties, constructing his text more as a straightforwardly secular history than a theological sermon or model of classical allusion.40 _{He was certainly well-informed and prolific, as the} Historia is by far the longest of any crusade source and covers both the 1096–99 and 1101

expeditions in detail, but like any other medieval chronicler, he is not to be trusted uncritically. Albert provided a roster of participants at the siege of Nicaea (14 May–19 June 1097), under the command of Adhémar of Le Puy. This included Hugh of Vermandois, Achard of Montmerle, Gilbert of Traves (dep. Haute-Saône, arr. Vesoul), ‘one of the princes of Burgundy’, and Oliver of Jussey (dep. Haute-Saône, arr. Vesoul), ‘a bold and aggressive soldier’.41 Gilbert of Traves and Oliver of Jussey were surely part of the same Burgundian contingent, as Traves

37 _{AA, p. 633.}

38 _{Edgington, ‘Introduction’ in AA, p. xxxvi.}

39 _{See Alan V. Murray, ‘The Title of Godfrey of Bouillon as Ruler of Jerusalem’, in The Franks in Outremer:}

Studies in the Latin Principalities of Palestine and Syria, 1099-1187, ed. by Alan V. Murray (Farnham: Ashgate, 2015), 163–78.

40 _{Edgington, ‘Introduction’ in AA, pp. xxx-xxxv.}

41 _{AA, pp. 100–01: ‘Giselbertus de Treua, unus de principus Burgundie, Oliuerus de castro Iussi, miles audax et}

82

and Jussey are less than twenty miles apart. Men from Montmerle-sur-Saône could also form part of this, especially as Achard had given a charter at Cluny, and we later find him fighting (and dying) with Gilbert of Traves in June 1099.42 The Gesta Francorum places him under the command of Raymond of Toulouse when this occurred:43

At dawn a hundred knights set out from the army of Raymond, count of St Gilles. They included Raymond Pilet, Achard of Montmerle, and William of Sabran, and they rode confidently toward the port. Then thirty of our knights got separated from the others, and fell in with seven hundred Arabs, Turks, and Saracens from the army of the amir. The Christian knights attacked them bravely, but they were such a mighty force that they surrounded our men and killed Achard of Montmerle and some poor foot-soldiers.44 However, the Gesta earlier referred to Achard departing France with the Flemish and Norman leaders, at which time he was not attached to Raymond: ‘Our second army came through the Dalmatian lands, and it was led by Raymond, count of Saint Gilles, and the bishop of Le Puy. The third came by way of the old Roman road. In this band were Bohemond and Richard of the Principality, Robert count of Flanders, Robert the Norman, Hugh the Great, Everard of Puiset, Achard of Montmerle, and many others’.45 Achard was evidently important enough to warrant mention with these other leaders, as Raymond of Aguilers eulogised him as ‘a noble young man and a well-known knight’.46 It may also be the case that Achard’s heroic death in battle gave him a retroactive importance to the chroniclers, and thus they made sure to note his presence. He is

42 _{AA, pp. 408–10: ‘Gisilbertus de Treua et Achart de Montmerla, fortes Christianorum duces et uiri nobiles, illic}

post plurimum certaminis detruncati corruerunt’.

43 _{We discussed in chapter 1 the relationships between Raymond and the Burgundians, due to shared experiences in}

Iberia and the marriage of Raymond’s son to Odo’s daughter, which could be some reason for this affiliation.

44 _{Gesta Francorum, pp. 88–89: ‘Summo autem diliculo, exierunt centum milites de exercitu Raimundi, comitis}

Sancti Egidii, Raimundus Piletus et Achardus de Mommellou, et Willelmus de Sabra, et ibant cum fiducia ad portum. Diuiserunt denique se triginta milites ex nostris ab aliis, et inuenerunt septingentos Arabes et Turcos ac Saracenos de exercitu ammirauisi. Quos inuaserunt fortiter Christi milites, sed tam magna fuit uirtus illorum super nostros, ut undique circumcingerent illos. Et occiderunt Achardum de Mommellou, et pauperes homines pedites’.

45 _{Gesta Francorum, p. 5: ‘Secunda uero pars intrauit in Sclauiniae partes, scilicet comes de Sancto Egidio}

Raimundus et Podiensis episcopus. Tertia autem pars per antiquam Romae uiam uenit. In hac parte fuerunt Boamundus, et Richardus de Principatu, Rotbertus comes Flandrensis, Rotbertus Nortmannus, Hugo Magnus, Eurardus de Puisatio, Achardus de Monte Merloi […] et alii plures’.

83

also lauded for bravery in the Chanson d’Antioche, where as we saw in the introduction, he and Oliver of Jussey are the only Burgundian crusaders specifically named.

In contrast to Achard and Gilbert’s fate, Oliver seems to have survived longer, as he appeared alongside Robert of Normandy, Robert of Flanders, Gerard of Quierzy, and Rainald of Toul as commanders in the battle of Ascalon (12 August 1099) that secured Christian control of the Holy Land.47 _{Since Haute-Saône is located in the Franche-Comté area of Burgundy, this is a} strong indicator that Gilbert and Oliver (and probably Achard) were in fact comital Burgundians. They could have been attached first to Adhémar of Le Puy and then, after his death in summer 1098, to Raymond of Toulouse, or they could have, with less likelihood, travelled with their own lord: Rainald II, count of Mâcon and Burgundy (who is discussed in the following section.) Next, Albert reported on a man named Welf, ‘an outstanding soldier who came from the realm of Burgundy’, holding the city of Adana (in Anatolia) and playing a crucial role in its capture:

For this Welf had gone ahead with the others who were separated from the army. Tancred, finding the gates closed and knowing that a Christian leader occupied the city, sent messengers under safe conduct and begged to be admitted for the sake of hospitality, and for food to be shared with him by fair buying and selling. Welf listened to his pleas and ordered the city to be opened, Tancred to be brought in with his men, and all the necessities of life to be served to them.48

However, Albert then referred to this Welf as ‘Welf of Boulogne,’ raising the question as to whether he was once more confusing individuals, conflating titles, or simply mixing up Burgundy and Boulogne.49 Welf is listed as being from the ‘regnum’ of Burgundy; this could point toward an origin in the historical kingdom of Burgundy, either Upper Burgundy (the

47 _{AA, p. 463. See also Guibert of Nogent, Gesta Dei per Francos, p. 139.}

48 _{AA, pp. 154–55: ‘Obtinuit enim hanc ciuitatem quidam Welfo, ortus de regno Burgundie, miles egregius, qui}

eiectis et attritis Turcis urbem possederat […] Tancradus portas inueniens clausas et principem Christianum urbem possidere intelligens, missis nunciis sub fide data intromitti hospitandi gratia precatur, et alimenta iusta uenditione et emptione sibi impertiri’.

49 _{AA, pp. 190–91: ‘… cum sociis Artesia receptis, Tancrado, Welfone Buloniense, a maritimis cum uniuersis}

Gallorum sociis relatiis’. Runciman followed Albert’s initial lead, describing this individual simply as a

‘Burgundian knight called Welf’, and does not mention either Boulogne or the rival commander of Adana, Ursinus. See Steven Runciman, The First Crusade (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1980), p. 114.

84

county/Franche-Comté region) or Lower Burgundy (anywhere in southern France from Lyon to Marseille). William of Tyre later identified this individual as ‘Guelf’ from the ‘Burgundian nation’,50 _{and in the Gesta Tancredi, Ralph of Caen gave an Armenian named Ursinus as the} commander of the city of Adana, rather than any party called Welf. The Germanic name ‘Welf’ was common for comital Burgundy, and was the dynastic name of the kings of Burgundy in the tenth and eleventh centuries.51 _{As we have found other comital Burgundians present at the same} time, it seems likely on balance that Welf was indeed Burgundian. However, since this anecdote is associated with Tancred of Sicily, and Tancred’s biographer Ralph reported Adana to have been held by a different man entirely, it demonstrates the drawbacks of Albert’s account existing separately from other crusade chronicles. Ralph devoted an entire chapter to Ursinus, which is a more substantial testament than a passing and contradictory mention.52 A Burgundian named Welf may certainly have been present, but cannot be unquestioningly assigned command.

Other participants for 1096–99 remain elusive. Guy of Thiers (dep. Puy-de-Dôme, arr. Thiers), count of Chalon-sur-Saône, appears in the cartulary of Paray-le-Monial ‘volens

Hierosolimam proficisci’ and making arrangements ‘pro remissione peccatorum meorum’;53 this document does not have a date, though he has been assigned to the First Crusade.54 It is also

50 _{William of Tyre, Chronicon, 2 vols, ed. by R.B.C. Huygens (Turnhout: Brepols, 1986), I,p. 224: ‘Ad quam}

perveniens non est permissus introire: obtinuerat enim eamdem civitatem quidam Guelfo, natione Burgundio, qui cum aliis a maiore divisus exercitu…’ Trans. in William of Tyre, A History of Deeds Done Beyond the Sea, 2 vols, trans. by Emily Atwater Babcock and August C. Krey (New York: Columbia University Press, 1943), I, p. 181: ‘When [Tancred] arrived there, he was not permitted to enter. For a certain Guelf of the Burgundian nation had seized that city [Adana]. He with others had separated from the main army and drawn a great throng of people to his standard’. See Peter W. Edbury and John Gordon Rowe, William of Tyre: Historian of the Latin East (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1988); Benjamin Z. Kedar, ‘Some New Light on the Composition Process of William of Tyre’s Historia’, in Deeds Done Beyond the Sea: Essays on William of Tyre, Cyprus and the Military Orders Presented to Peter Edbury, ed. by Susan B. Edgington and Helen J. Nicholson, (Farnham: Ashgate, 2014), 3–11.

51 _{Bouchard, ‘Burgundy and Provence, 879-1032’, pp. 339–40.} 52 _{See Ralph of Caen, Gesta Tancredi, pp. 63–65.}

53 _{U. Chevalier, Chartularium prioratys Beatae Mariae de paredo monachorum (Montbéliard, 1891), pp. 107–8.} 54 _{‘Guy of Thiers’, in A Database of Crusaders to the Holy Land, 1095-1149 (University of Leeds; University of}

85

possible that Walter of Couches, bishop of Chalon, went with him.55 _{But overall, the presence of} a mere half-dozen identifiable Burgundian crusaders for 1096–99 (Bernard and Odo of Mâcon, Achard of Montmerle, Gilbert of Traves, Oliver of Jussey, Welf of Burgundy, Guy of Thiers), with even fewer locatable in the chronicles (Achard of Montmerle is the only one to warrant broad attention), does not point to a large or memorable number of participants. There is always the possibility that enough were present to warrant Albert’s description of ‘Burgundians’ among the other national factions, but if so, they were largely unrecorded, and possessed no figures of a sufficient profile to attract notice or comment. It also seems to be the case that those who went were essentially freelancers, and thus fairly mobile among the crusading army, as Achard, Gilbert, and Oliver served with Adhémar of Le Puy and then Raymond of Toulouse, as well as other commanders. The fact that Bernard and Odo, Achard, and Guy of Thiers all had to make private arrangements to finance their journeys may support this hypothesis.

In sum, the scant record of Burgundian involvement in the First Crusade proper is a striking counterpoint to any idea that all regions of France joined up at once; while French response was vast, it nonetheless was not universal. The presence of Cluny and its connection to Urban II did not account for any positive effect on recruitment, and due to Odo I’s conflict with it, may have functioned as an active negative. Nor did Urban, despite his broad itinerary across the rest of France, express a particular interest in targeting Burgundy – perhaps taking into account Odo’s alliance with the embattled Capetian monarchy, and thus treating Burgundy the same as the other royal territories he avoided. This could also indicate a strengthening of ducal authority after the turbulence of Capetian Burgundy’s establishment under Duke Robert I in 1032. Considering the fact that all our noted crusaders are from the county, Odo’s vassals seem