Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-8bhkd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T07:50:20.195Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The ransom of high-ranking captives, tributary relationships and the practice of diplomacy in northern Syria 442-522/1050-1128

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 December 2021

JAMES WILSON Open the ORCID record for JAMES WILSON [Opens in a new window]
JAMES WILSON*
Affiliation:
Queen Mary, University of London jamesdavidwilson1990@gmail.com
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This article examines how the introduction of western European crusaders and settlers to northern Syria from 490/1097 onwards impacted upon two important mechanisms of regional diplomacy; the ransom of prominent political prisoners and tributary relationships. Discussion begins with a comparison of the capture and ransom of high-ranking captives in northern Syria between 442-522/1050-1128, where it is argued that the establishment of the crusader states led to an increase in both the rate at which prisoners of elite status were ransomed and the financial sums involved in these interactions. This is followed by a reassessment of the various peace treaties, tributary arrangements and condominia or munāṣafa agreements concluded between the rulers of Antioch and Aleppo during the late fifth/eleventh and early sixth/twelfth centuries. Ultimately, this article seeks to place key features of northern Syrian diplomacy from the early crusading period within the context of regional norms in the decades preceding the crusaders’ arrival.

Keywords

Syria—politicsCrusadesSeljūqs/SeljuqsFāṭimid/Fatimid CaliphateByzantine EmpireAntiochAleppoMirdāsid dynastydiplomacy
Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society , Volume 32 , Issue 3 , July 2022 , pp. 635 - 669
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of The Royal Asiatic Society

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

†

The original version of this article was published with an error in the title. A notice detailing this has been published and the error rectified in the online and print PDF and HTML copies.

*

I would like to thank Dr Thomas Asbridge for his help and advice in preparing this article, in addition to the anonymous reviewers for their insightful comments.

References

1 Yūsuf Qi̊zoğlu Sibṭ b. al-Jawzī, Miʾrāt al-zamān fī taʾrīkh al-aʿyān, (ed.) Kāmil S. Al-Jabouri, volumes I–XXIII (Beirut, 2013), XIII, p. 54. Sibṭ b. al-Jawzī's account of this Byzantine embassy in 466/1074 has much in common with a letter reportedly sent by the Byzantine Emperor Romanos I to the ʿAbbāsid Caliph al-Rāḍī in 326/938, which contained a message written in Greek with golden ink supplemented by an Arabic translation written in silver. See Al-Qāḍī al-Rashīd al-Zubayr, Kitāb al-dhakāʾir wa-l-tuḥaf, (ed.) Muḥammad Ḥamīdāllah (Kuwait, 1959), pp. 60-61. This earlier example has been used to support claims that there was an Arabic department in the Byzantine chancery, see Alexander D. Beihammer, ‘Strategies of Diplomacy and Ambassadors in Byzantine-Muslim Relations of the Tenth and Eleventh Centuries’, in Ambassades et ambassadeurs au couer de l'activité diplomatique Rome-Occident medieval-Byzance VIIe s. avant J.-C.-XIIe s. ap. J-C, (eds.) Audrey Becker and Nicholas Droucourt (Metz, 2012), pp. 371-400, 387-400; Kresten, Otto, ‘Zur Chrysographie in den Auslandsschreiben der byzantischen Kaiser’, Römische historische Mitteilungen 40 (1998), pp. 139-186, 157-160Google Scholar. For more information about the preparation and use of golden inks in eighth/fourteenth century Syria, see Raggetti, Lucia, ‘Inks as Instruments of Writing Ibn al-Ǧazarī's Book on the Art of Penmanship’, Journal of Islamic Manuscripts 10 (2019), pp. 201-239CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

2 For the Marwānid dynasty, the Byzantine eastern frontier prior to the First Crusade and Arabic speaking diplomats in the Byzantine world, see Carole Hillenbrand, ‘Marwānids’ in Encyclopaedia of Islam, Second Edition, (eds.) Peri Bearman, Thierry Bianquis, Clifford E. Bosworth, Emeri van Donzel, Wolfhart P. Heinrichs (2012) (first accessed online: 19 August 2020); Holmes, Catherine, ‘Byzantium's Eastern Frontier in the Tenth and Eleventh Centuries’, in Medieval Frontiers: Concepts and Practices, (eds.) Abulafia, David and Berend, Nora (Aldershot, 2002), pp. 83-105Google Scholar; Haldon, John F. and Kennedy, Hugh, ‘The Arab–Byzantine Frontier in the Eighth and Ninth Centuries: Military Organisation and Society in the Borderlands’, in Arab-Byzantine Relations in Early Islamic Times, (ed.) Bonner, Michael (London, 2004), pp. 81-115Google Scholar; Beihammer, Alexander D., ‘Muslim Rulers Visiting the Imperial City: Building Alliances and Personal Networks between Constantinople and the Eastern Borderlands (Fourth/Tenth–Fifth/Eleventh Century)’, al-Masāq 24, 2 (2012), pp. 157-177, 175-177CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Droucourt, Nicholas, ‘Arabic-speaking Ambassadors in the Byzantine Empire (from the Ninth to Eleventh Centuries)’, in Ambassadors, Artists, Theologians Byzantine Relations with the Near East from the Ninth to the Thirteenth Centuries, (eds.) Chitwood, Zachary and Pahlitzsch, Johannes (Mainz, 2019), pp. 57-69Google Scholar.

3 Cahen, Claude, La Syrie du nord à l’époque des croisades et la Principauté Franque d'Antioche (Paris, 1940)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Zakkar, Suhayl, The Emirate of Aleppo 1004-1094 (Beirut, 1971)Google Scholar; Thierry Bianquis, Damas et la Syrie sous la domination Fatimide, vols. I and II (Damascus, 1986-9); El-Azhari, Taef K., The Saljūqs of Syria During the Crusades 463-549 A. H./1070-1154 A. D. (Berlin, 1997)Google Scholar; Hillenbrand, Carole, The Crusades: Islamic Perspectives (Edinburgh, 1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Cobb, Paul M., The Race for Paradise: An Islamic History of the Crusades (Oxford, 2014)Google Scholar; Heidemann, Stefan, Die Renaissance der Städte in Nordsyrien und Nordmesopotamien (Leiden, 2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Peacock, Andrew C. S., The Great Seljuk Empire (Edinburgh, 2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Brett, Michael, The Fatimid Empire (Edinburgh, 2017), pp. 181-232CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Halm, Heinz, Die Kalifen von Kairo: Die Fatimiden in Ägypten 973-1074 (Munich, 2003)Google Scholar; Halm, Heinz, Kalifen und Assassinen: Ägypten und der Vordere Orient zur Zeit der ersten Kreuzzüge 1074-1171 (Munich, 2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; David Bramoullé, ‘Les villes maritimes fatimides en Méditerranée orientale (969-1171)’, Histoire urbaine 19, 2 (2007), pp. 93-116; Bramoullé, David, Les Fatimides et la mer 909-1171 (Leiden, 2019)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Asbridge, Thomas S., The Creation of the Principality of Antioch 1098-1130 (Woodbridge, 2000)Google Scholar; Azat Bozoyan, ‘Armenian Political Revival in Cilicia’, in Armenian Cilicia, (eds.) Richard Hovannisian and Simon Payaslian (California, 2008), pp. 67-78; Gérard Dédéyan, ‘The Founding and Coalescence of the Rubenian Principality, 1073-1129’, in Armenian Cilicia, (eds.) Richard Hovannisian and Simon Payaslian (California, 2008), pp. 79-92; MacEvitt, Christopher, The Crusades and the Christian World of the East: Rough Tolerance (Philadelphia, 2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Beihammer, Alexander D., Byzantium and the emergence of Muslim-Turkish Anatolia CA 1040-1130 (Abingdon, 2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

4 Köhler, Michael A., Allianzen und Verträge zwischen fränkischen und islamischen Herrschern im Vorderen Orient (Berlin, 2015), pp. 1-72Google Scholar; Michael A. Köhler, Alliances and Treaties between Frankish and Muslim Rulers in the Middle East (Leiden, 2013), pp. 7-127; Yehoshua Frenkel, ‘Muslim responses to the Frankish Dominion in the Near East, 1098-1291’, in The Crusades and the Near East Cultural Histories, (ed.) Conor Kostick (Abingdon, 2011), pp. 27-54; Yvonne Friedman, ‘Peacemaking: Perceptions and Practices in the Medieval Latin East’, in The Crusades and the Near East: Cultural Histories, (ed.) Conor Kostick (Abingdon, 2011), pp. 229-257; Nikita Elisséeff, ‘The Reaction of the Syrian Muslims after the foundation of the First Latin Kingdom of Jerusalem’, in The Crusades: The Essential Readings, (ed.) Thomas F. Madden (Oxford, 2002), pp. 221-233; Hadia Dajani-Shakeel, ‘Diplomatic Relations between Muslim and Frankish Rulers 1097-1153 A.D.’, in Crusaders and Muslims in Twelfth-Century Syria, (ed.) Maya Shatzmiller (Leiden, 1993), pp. 190-215; Thomas S. Asbridge, ‘The “Crusader” community at Antioch: The Impact of Interaction with Byzantium and Islam’, Transactions of the Royal Historical Society 6, 10 (1999), pp. 305-325; Asbridge, Creation, pp. 47-62, 65-67, 69-91.

5 All the monetary figures discussed in this article are subject to methodological issues outlined by Friedman concerning the changing values of the circulating currencies throughout this period, the risk that the quoted figures were literary tropes and potential discrepancies between the numbers quoted in the chronicles and the amounts that were actually paid. Although Friedman's research focused on captives and the figures involved in ransom payments, similar caution should also be applied to the figures provided for tributary arrangements in the source material, see Friedman, Yvonne, Encounter between Enemies: Captivity and Ransom in the Latin Kingdom of Jerusalem (Leiden, 2002), pp. 148-155CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

6 There are numerous Arabic terms employed by the chroniclers to designate the monetary payments involved in the release of prisoners from captivity. In addition to ransom “fidaʾ”, the terms to offer “badhala”, to purchase “ishtara” and to settle “ishtaqarra” are employed by the medieval Arabic chroniclers whilst describing the ransom of prisoners.

7 For a summary of the examples discussed in this article of the capture and ransom of prominent political and military captives in Syria between 442-522/1050-1128, see Table 1.

8 There is a broad range of historical research focussing on Byzantine diplomacy with Muslim rulers and their participation in the exchange, ransom and enslavement of captives: Xavier de Planhol, ‘Lamas-Ṣū’, in Encyclopaedia of Islam, Second Edition, (eds.) Peri Bearman, Thierry Bianquis, Clifford E. Bosworth, Emeri van Donzel, Wolfhart P. Heinrichs (2012) (first accessed online: 19 August 2020); Hugh Kennedy, ‘Byzantine-Arab diplomacy in the Near East from the Islamic conquests to the mid-eleventh century’, in Byzantine diplomacy, (eds.) Jonathan Shepard and Simon Franklin (Aldershot, 1992), pp. 133-143; Cutler, Anthony, ‘Gifts and Gift Exchange as Aspects of the Byzantine, Arab, and Related Economies’, Dumbarton Oaks Papers 55 (2001), pp. 247-278CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Rotman, Youval, Byzantine Slavery and the Mediterranean World, translation Todd, Jane Marie (Cambridge, MA, 2009), pp. 27-57Google Scholar; ʿAbd al-ʿAzīz M. A. Ramaḍān, ‘The treatment of Arab Prisoners of War in Byzantium 9th–10th Centuries’, Annales Islamologiques 43 (2009), pp. 155-194; Wierzbiński, Szymon, ‘Prospective gain or actual cost? Arab civilian and military captives in the light of Byzantine narrative sources and military manuals from the 10th century’, Studia Ceranea 8 (2018), pp. 253–283CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

9 Friedman, Encounter between Enemies, pp. 33-54. See, also, Yaacov Lev, ‘Prisoners of War During the Fatimid-Ayyubid Wars with the Crusaders’, in Tolerance and Intolerance: Social Conflict in the Age of the Crusades, (eds.) Michael Gervers and James M. Powell (Syracuse, 2001), pp. 11–27; Philippe Goridis, Gefangen im Heiligen Land Verarbeitung und Bewältigung christlicher Gefangenschaft zur Zeit der Kreuzzüge (Ostfildern, 2015).

10 Hillenbrand, Crusades, pp. 552-556.

11 Carole Hillenbrand, ‘What's in a name? Tughtegin: “the Minister of the Antichrist”?’, in Fortresses of the Intellect: Ismaili and Other Islamic Studies in Honour of Farhad Daftary, (ed.) Omar Alí-de-Unzaga (London, 2011), pp. 459-471. Morton and Mallett have also analysed Walter the Chancellor's account of his time in captivity under Il-Ghāzī (d. 516/1122) and Ṭughtegīn following the battle of the Field of Blood in 513/1119: see Nicholas Morton, ‘Walter the Chancellor on Ilghazi and Tughtakin: a prisoner's perspective’, Journal of Medieval History 44, 2 (2018), pp. 170-186; Alex Mallett, ‘The “Other” in the Crusading Period: Walter the Chancellor's Presentation of Najm al-Dīn Il-Ghāzī’, Al-Masāq 22, 2 (2010), pp. 113-128.

12 Asbridge, Thomas, ‘How the Crusades could have been won: King Baldwin II of Jerusalem's campaigns against Aleppo 1124-5 and Damascus 1129’, Journal of Medieval Military History 11 (2013), pp. 73-93Google Scholar.

13 Ramaḍān, ‘The treatment of Arab Prisoners’, pp. 155-194; Wierzbiński, ‘Prospective gain or actual cost?’, pp. 253–283.

14 Ibn al-Jawzī and Sibṭ b. al-Jawzī reported the ransom figure as 1,500,000 dīnārs, in addition to an annual tribute of 360,000 dīnārs and the surrender of key settlements on Byzantium's eastern frontier. Bar Habraeus (d. 685/1286), who claimed that his account was influenced by two unspecified manuscripts, one in Arabic and one in Persian, gave a different ransom figure of 10,000 dīnārs, but corroborated Ibn-Jawzī and Sibṭ b. al-Jawzī by noting that Romanos also committed to pay the same yearly tribute of 360,000 dīnārs and surrender the same settlements. ʿAbd al-Raḥmān Ibn al-Jawzī, al-Muntaẓam fī taʾrīkh al-mulūk waʾl-umam, (ed.) Muḥammad A. Ata et al. (Beirut, 1992), XVI, pp. 125-126; Sibṭ b. al-Jawzī, Miʾrāt al-zamān, XII, p. 484; Bar Habraeus, The Chronography of Gregory Abul Taraj Commonly Known as Bar Hebraeus, (trans.) Ernest A. Wallis Budge, vol. I (London, 1932), p. 222; Abū Yaʾlā Ibn al-Qalānisī, Dhayl taʾrīkh Dimashq, (ed.) Suhayl Zakkar (Damascus, 1983), pp. 167-168; Muḥammad b. ʿAlī al-ʿAẓīmī, Taʾrīkh ḥalab, (ed.) Ibrāhīm Zaʾrur (Damascus, 1984), p. 348; ʿIzz al-Dīn ʿAlī Ibn al-Athīr, al-Kāmil fi'l taʾrīkh, (ed.) Carolus J. Tornberg, vols. I–XII (Beirut, 1965-7), X, pp. 65-68; Michael the Syrian, The Syriac Chronicle of Michael Rabo (the Great): a universal history from the Creation (trans.) Matti Moosa (Teaneck, 2014), pp. 610-611; Matthew of Edessa, Armenia and the Crusades, tenth to twelfth centuries: the chronicle of Matthew of Edessa, translation Ara E. Dostourian (Larnham, 1993), pp. 133-136. For more on the battle of Manzikert and the ransom of the Byzantine Emperor Romanos Diogenes IV, see Hillenbrand, Carole, Turkish Myth and Symbol: The Battle of Manzikert (Edinburgh, 2007)Google Scholar; Cheynet, Jean-Claude, ‘Manzikert: un désastre militaire?’, Byzantion 50 (1980), pp. 410-438Google Scholar; Speros Vryonis, ‘The Greek and the Arabic sources on the eight-day captivity of the emperor Romanus IV in the camp of the Sultan Alp Arslān after the battle of Manzikert’, in Novum Milennium. Studies on Byzantine history and culture dedicated to Paul Speck, (eds.) Claudia Sode and Sarolta Takács (Aldershot 2000), pp. 439-450.

15 The figure given for Isaac Komnenos's ransom was 20,000 nomismata. Isaac Komnenos, who whilst serving as Dux of Antioch, was captured after leading a sortie from the town against Türkmen forces. The ransom was reportedly paid by the inhabitants of Antioch. Some corroboration can be found in Sibṭ b. al-Jawzī's chronicle, who made note of a Türkmen attack on Antioch in 467/1075 and a payment of 20,000 dīnārs to the Türkmen by the inhabitants of the town, but made no reference to the capture and ransom of Isaac Komnenos. No figure is provided for Roussel de Bailliol, although the accounts of this latter episode by Alexios's daughter Anna Komnene and Nikephoros Byrennios make it clear that the agreed upon figure was not paid in full. See Nikephoros Byrennios, Nicephori Byrennii Historiarum libri quattuor translation Paul Gautier (Brussels, 1975), pp. 186-188, 204-206; Anna Komnene, The Alexiad, translation E. R. A. Sewter, (rev.) Peter Frankopan (London, 2009), pp. 10-15, 262; Sibṭ b. al-Jawzī, Miʾrāt al-zamān, XIII, pp. 72-73; Cécile Morrisson and Jean-Claude Cheynet, ‘Prices and Wages in the Byzantine World’, in The Economic History of Byzantium: From the Seventh through the Fifteenth Century, (ed.) Angeliki E. Laiou (Washington D.C., 2002), pp. 815-878, 845; Beihammer, Byzantium, pp. 207-215. For more detail on the various Türkmen groups operating in Anatolia during the latter half of the fifth/eleventh century and their relationship with the Byzantines and Seljūqs, see Alexander Beihammer, ‘Patterns of Turkish Migration and Expansion in Byzantine Asia Minor in the 11th and 12th Centuries’, in Migration Histories of the Medieval Afroeurasion Transition Zone, (eds.) Johannes Preiser-Kapeller, Lucian Reinfandt and Yannis Stouraitis (Leiden, 2020), pp. 166-192; Andrew C. S. Peacock, ‘From the Balkhān-Kūhīyān to the Nāwakīya: Nomadic Politics and the Foundation of Seljūq Rule in Anatolia’, in Nomad Aristocracies in a World of Empires, (ed.) Jürgen Paul (Wiesbaden, 2013), pp. 55-80; Beihammer, Byzantium, pp. 49-303; Peacock, Seljuk Empire, pp. 22-32.

16 Ibn al-Athīr, al-Kāmil fi'l taʾrīkh, X, p. 28. See, also, Alexander Beihammer, ‘Changing Strategies and Ideological Concepts in Byzantine-Arab Relations in the Eleventh and Twelfth Centuries’, in Ambassadors, Artists, Theologians Byzantine Relations with the Near East from the Ninth to the Thirteenth Centuries, (eds.) Zachary Chitwood and Johannes Pahlitzsch (Mainz, 2019), pp. 85-100, 86-87.

17 Simeonova, Liliana, ‘In the depths of tenth-century Byzantine ceremonial: the treatment of Arab prisoners of war at imperial banquets’, Byzantine and Modern Greek Studies 22 (1998), pp. 75-104CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Beihammer, ‘Muslim Rulers Visiting the Imperial City’, pp. 157-177. As Kosto has detailed, in the Middle ages there was a distinction between captives, typically detained during or following military engagements, and hostages, who were often depicted as being “given” to their captors, “even when compulsion is evident”. See Adam Kosto, Hostages in the Middle Ages (Oxford, 2012), pp. 1-23, 114-121, 166-170; Adam Kosto, ‘Hostages during the First Century of the Crusades’, Medieval Encounters 9, 1 (2003), pp. 3-31. In the medieval Arabic historiography, a distinction is usually drawn between a “captive” (asīr) and a “hostage” (rahīna).

18 Yaḥyā b. Saʿīd al-Anṭākī, Tāʾrīkh al-Anṭākī, (ed.) Umar A. Tadmuri (Tripoli, 1990), p. 322.

19 Sibṭ b. al-Jawzī, Miʾrāt al-zamān, XII, pp. 449-450.

20 This included a battle at Artāḥ in 454/1062, two skirmishes during Romanos Diogenes IV's 461/1068-9 campaign into northern Syria, another minor engagement at Maʿrrat Miṣrīn in 463/1071 and direct Mirdāsid attacks upon the town of Antioch and the surrounding area in 457/1064-5, 462/1070 and 469/1076-7. Al-ʿAẓīmī, Taʾrīkh ḥalab, pp. 347-348; Sibṭ b. al-Jawzī, Miʾrāt al-zamān, XII, pp. 398-399, 461-462, 481-485, XIII, p. 105; Kamāl al-Dīn Ibn al-ʿAdīm, Zubdat al-ḥalab fī taʾrīkh ḥalab, (ed.) Sami Dahan, volume I-III (Damascus, 1951-4), I, pp. 286-287, 296, II, p. 13-14, 24-27, 56; Michael Attaleiates, The History, transdlation Anthony Kaldellis and Dimitris Krallis (Cambridge, MA, 2012), pp. 275-303; Matthew of Edessa, Armenia and the Crusades, pp. 132-136.

21 Tāj al-Dīn Ibn Muyassar, Akhbār Miṣr, (ed.) Ayman F. Sayyid (Cairo, 1981), pp. 13-14; Taqī al-Dīn al-Maqrīzī, Ittiʾāẓ al-ḥunafāʾ bi-akhbār al-aʾimma al-fātimiyyīn al-khulafāʾ, (ed.) Muḥammad H. M. Ahmad, vols. II-III (Cairo, 1996), II, pp. 227-231.

22 Al-Maqrīzī, Ittiʾāẓ al-ḥunafāʾ, pp. 227-231.

23 Al-ʿAẓīmī, Taʾrīkh ḥalab, p. 343; Ibn al-ʿAdīm, Zubdat al-ḥalab, I, pp. 274; al-Maqrīzī, Ittiʾāẓ al-ḥunafāʾ, II, p. 235.

24 Rifq, the Fāṭimid commander of the 441/1049 campaign was captured and taken to Aleppo, but subsequently died from injuries sustained during the expedition. Al-ʿAẓīmī, Taʾrīkh ḥalab, pp. 338-340; Sibṭ b. al-Jawzī, Miʾrāt al-zamān, XII, pp. 232-233; Ibn al-ʿAdīm, Zubdat al-ḥalab, I, pp. 251-260, 263-266; Ibn Muyassar, Akhbār Miṣr, pp. 6-7, 9-10; al-Maqrīzī, Ittiʾāẓ al-ḥunafāʾ, II, pp. 201-202, 208-210. For more detail, see Zakkar, Emirate, pp. 131-137, 141-148.

25 Al-ʿAẓīmī, Taʾrīkh ḥalab, p. 344; Ibn al-Qalānisī, Dhayl taʾrīkh Dimashq, pp. 150-151; Ibn al-Athīr, al-Kāmil fi'l taʾrīkh, X, p. 12; Sibṭ b. al-Jawzī, Miʾrāt al-zamān, XII, pp. 377-379; Ibn al-ʿAdīm, Zubdat al-ḥalab, I, pp. 276-280; Ibn Muyassar, Akhbār Miṣr, pp. 21-22; al-Maqrīzī, Ittiʾāẓ al-ḥunafāʾ, II, pp. 259-261.

26 Between the years 460-8/1067-76 Egypt was plunged into an extended period of civil war, after which the Fāṭimids prioritised expanding their influence into the Red Sea region and retaining control of the key mercantile hubs of Acre, Tyre and Tripoli along the Palestinian coastline. See Bramoullé, ‘Les villes maritimes fatimides’, pp. 93-116; David Bramoullé, ‘The Fatimids and the Red Sea (969-1171)’, in Navigated Spaces, Connected Places, (eds.) Dionisius Agius, John Cooper, Athena Trakadas and Chiara Zazzaro (Oxford, 2012), pp.127-136; Brett, Fatimid Empire, pp. 181-232.

27 Sibṭ b. al-Jawzī, Miʾrāt al-zamān, XIII, pp. 66-67, 72; Ibn Muyassar, Akhbār Miṣr, p. 41; al-Maqrīzī, Ittiʾāẓ al-ḥunafāʾ, II, p. 314. See, also, Beihammer, Byzantium, pp. 185-188.

28 Ibn al-Qalānisī, Dhayl taʾrīkh Dimashq, p. 192; al-ʿAẓīmī, Taʾrīkh Ḥalab, p. 353; Ibn al-Athīr, al-Kāmil fi'l taʾrīkh, X, pp. 139-141; Sibṭ b. al-Jawzī, Miʾrāt al-zamān, XIII, p. 165; Ibn al-ʿAdīm, Zubdat al-ḥalab, II, pp. 91-92.

29 Ibn al-Qalānisī, Dhayl taʾrīkh Dimashq, pp. 194-195, 211-212; al-ʿAẓīmī, Taʾrīkh Ḥalab, pp. 353-354; Ibn al-Athīr, al-Kāmil fi'l taʾrīkh, X, pp. 147-148, 244-245; Sibṭ b. al-Jawzī, Miʾrāt al-zamān, XIII, pp. 182, 235-236; Ibn al-ʿAdīm, Zubdat al-ḥalab, II, pp. 96-98, 118-119.

30 Peacock, Seljuk Empire, pp. 68-71, 126-132, 228-235; Lambton, Ann K. S., ‘The Internal Structure of the Saljuq Empire’ in, The Cambridge History of Iran, vol. V: The Saljuq and Mongol Periods, (ed.) Boyle, John A. (Cambridge, 1968), pp. 203-282, 218Google Scholar; Hillenbrand, The Crusades, pp. 33-42, 515-516, 518-521; Heidemann, Die Renaissance der Städte, pp. 310-315; Nicolle, David, Arms and Armour of the Crusading Era, 1050-1350: Islam, Eastern Europe and Asia (London, 1999), II, p. 102Google Scholar.

31 Ibn al-Qalānisī, Dhayl taʾrīkh Dimashq, pp. 182-183; ʿAlī ibn al-Ḥasan Ibn ʿAsākir, Taʾrikh madīnat Dimashq, (ed.) ʿUbyad Gh. Al-ʿAmrawī, volumes I-LXXX (Beirut, 1995-8), VII, pp. 348-349; Ibn al-Athīr, al-Kāmil fi'l taʾrīkh, X, p. 111; Sibṭ b. al-Jawzī, Miʾrāt al-zamān, XIII, pp. 119-120; Aḥmad b. Muḥammad Ibn Khallikān, Kitāb Wafāyāt al-aʾ yān wa anbā abnā al-zamān, (ed.) Iḥsān Abbas (Beirut, 1997), I, p. 195.

32 Ibn al-Qalānisī, Dhayl taʾrīkh Dimashq, pp. 207-208; al-ʿAẓīmī, Taʾrīkh ḥalab, p. 356; Ibn al-Athīr, al-Kāmil fi'l taʾrīkh, X, pp. 232-233; Sibṭ b. al-Jawzī, Miʾrāt al-zamān, XIII, p. 226; Ibn al-ʿAdīm, Zubdat al-ḥalab, II, pp. 110-113; Matthew of Edessa, Armenia and the Crusades, pp. 161-162.

33 There are various different versions of the events following this battle. According to Ibn al-ʿAdīm, Aqsunqur was briefly kept alive as a captive, whilst Buzān and Kerbogha managed to escape the battlefield and attempt an unsuccessful defence of Aleppo. Most of the other Arabic sources agree that Tutush killed Aqsunqur on the battlefield and according to Ibn Wāṣil, Tutush brought his decapitated head with him to Aleppo. Ibn al-Athīr, al-Kāmil fi'l taʾrīkh, X, pp. 232-234; Sibṭ b. al-Jawzī, Miʾrāt al-zamān, XIII, p. 226; Kamāl al-Dīn Ibn al-ʿAdīm, Bughyat al-ṭalab fī tāʾrīkh ḥalab, (ed.) Suhayl Zakkar (Beirut, 1988), IV, pp. 1956-7; Ibn al-ʿAdīm, Zubdat al-ḥalab, II, p. 118; Jamāl al-Dīn Ibn Wāṣil, Mufarrij al-kurūb fī akhbār banī Ayyūb, edited by Jamāl El-Shayyal (Cairo, 1953), vol. 1, p. 26.

34 Sibṭ b. al-Jawzī is the only source who stated that Tutush “flung” Buzan's head over the walls of Edessa during the siege. Sibṭ b. al-Jawzī, Miʾrāt al-zamān, XIII, p. 226. Ibn al-ʿAdīm claimed that Zengī employed a similar tactic during an unsuccessful siege of Homs in 524/530. Ibn al-ʿAdīm, Bughyat al-ṭalab, VIII, p. 3847.

35 The alliance between Aqsunqur, Buzān and Berkyaruq against Tutush in the aftermath of Malik Shāh's death in 485/1092 is discussed below in reference to Kerbogha. For Atsiz's ties to Malik Shāh, see El-Azhari, Saljūqs, pp. 34-50; Beihammer, Byzantium, pp. 179-88; Peacock, Seljuk Empire, pp. 61-64, 128-129.

36 For more detail on the nomadic Türkmen tribal group, the Nāwakīya, see Peacock, ‘From the Balkhān-Kūhīyān to the Nāwakīya’, pp. 64-76; Beihammer, Byzantium, pp. 183, 205.

37 Ibn al-Qalānisī, Dhayl taʾrīkh Dimashq, pp. 174-175, 181-183; Ibn ʿAsākir, Taʾrikh madīnat Dimashq, VII, pp. 348-349.

38 Ibn al-Athīr claimed that Berkyaruq simply ordered the release of Kerbogha without a prisoner exchange, but Ibn al-ʿAdīm (d. 660/1262) wrote that Berkyaruq released Ṭughtegīn and “a group of people…from among the entourage of Tāj al-Dawla (Tutush)”, in exchange for “Kerbogha and a group of people with him”. Ibn al-Athīr, al-Kāmil fi'l taʾrīkh, X, pp. 232-233, 258; Ibn al-ʿAdīm, Zubdat al-ḥalab, II, pp. 110-113, 121-122.

39 Ibn al-Athīr, al-Kāmil fi'l taʾrīkh, X, p. 258.

40 This was partly a consequence of the political and social milieus Usāma b. Munqidh inhabited in the course of a career which saw him pass through the court of nearly every single major Muslim power in the near east, see R. Stephen Humphreys, ‘Munḳidh’, in Encyclopaedia of Islam: Second Edition, (eds.) Peri Bearman, Thierry Bianquis, Clifford E. Bosworth, Emeri van Donzel, Wolfhart P. Heinrichs (2012) (first accessed online: 10 July 2017); Cobb, Paul, Usama Ibn Munqidh: Warrior-Poet of the Age of the Crusades (London, 2005)Google Scholar.

41 Ibn al-Athīr is the only Arabic historian who provides details of the settlement that enabled Bohemond's release. Ibn al-Qalānisī, Dhayl taʾrīkh Dimashq, pp. 223-224; al-ʿAẓīmī, Taʾrīkh ḥalab, p. 360; Ibn al-Athīr, al-Kāmil fi'l taʾrīkh, X, pp. 300, 345; Sibṭ b. al-Jawzī, Miʾrāt al-zamān, XIII, pp. 269-270; Ibn al-ʿAdīm, Zubdat al-ḥalab, II, pp. 145-146; Ralph of Caen, ‘Gesta Tancredi in Expeditione Hierosolymitana’, in Recueil des historiens des croisades, Historiens occidentaux, volume III (Paris, 1866), pp. 704-705, 712; Ralph of Caen, The Gesta Tancredi of Ralph of Caen, edited and translated by Bernard S. Bachrach and David S. Bachrach (Farnham, 2005), pp. 156-157, 167; Albert of Aachen, Historia Hierosolymitana, translation Susan B. Edgington (Oxford, 2007), pp. 524-527; Fulcher of Chartres, Fulcheri carnoetensis, Historia Hierosolymitana, (ed.) Heinrich Hagenmeyer (Heidelberg, 1913), pp. 343-349, 457-460; Fulcher of Chartres, A History of the expedition to Jerusalem, edited and translated by F. R. Ryan and H. S. Fink (New York, 1973), pp. 134-136, 175; Michael the Syrian, The Syriac Chronicle, p. 622; Bar Habraeus, Chronography, p. 237.

42 According to Morrisson and Cheynet, one dīnār was roughly equivalent to one Byzantine nomisma prior to 485/1092, see Morrisson and Cheynet, ‘Prices and Wages in the Byzantine World’, pp. 816-817.

43 Matthew of Edessa, Armenia and the Crusades, pp. 191-192.

44 Michael the Syrian, The Syriac Chronicle, p. 710; Bar Habraeus, Chronography, p. 305; Friedman, Encounter between Enemies, pp. 151-160.

45 Michael the Syrian asserted that “people” from Tell Bāshir offered themselves as hostages for Joscelyn, and that the hostages later escaped, meaning that Joscelyn ultimately paid no ransom. The Anonymous Syriac Chronicle wrote that Joscelyn's initial ransom was set at 12,000 dīnārs, which required 12 hostages, who the author also claimed escaped. Usāma b. Munqidh, stated that Joscelyn was released without paying a ransom in exchange for an alliance against the rulers of Antioch and Aleppo. Usāma b. Munqidh b. ʿAlī, Lubāb al-Ādāb, (ed.) Aḥmed M. Shākir (Beirut, 1935), pp. 133-134; Ibn al-Athīr, al-Kāmil fi'l taʾrīkh, X, p. 460; Michael the Syrian, The Syriac Chronicle, pp. 626-627, 638-639; Anonymous Syriac Chronicle, pt. 1: ‘The First and Second Crusades from an Anonymous Syriac Chronicle’, translation A. S. Tritton and Hamilton A. R. Gibb, Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society 65 (1933), pp. 69-101, 80-82; Ralph of Caen, ‘Gesta Tancredi in Expeditione Hierosolymitana’, pp. 710-11; Ralph of Caen, The Gesta Tancredi of Ralph of Caen, pp. 164-6; Albert of Aachen, Historia Hierosolymitana, pp. 750-755; Fulcher of Chartres, Fulcheri carnoetensis, Historia Hierosolymitana, pp. 468-481; Fulcher of Chartres, A History of the expedition to Jerusalem, pp. 177-181; Matthew of Edessa, Armenia and the Crusades, p. 201.

46 Ibn al-ʿAdīm, Zubdat al-ḥalab, II, pp. 147-148.

47 Usāma b. Munqidh b. ʿAlī, Kitāb al-Iʾtibār, (ed.) Phillip K. Hitti (Princeton, 1930), pp. 65-67; Usāma b. Munqidh, The Book of Contemplation Islam and the Crusades, translation Paul M. Cobb (London, 2008), pp. 77-79. Ibn al-Athīr reported that another Arab ruler of Aleppo and Mosul, Shraf al-Dawla Muslim b. Quraysh of the ʿUqaylid dynasty, sent a racing horse to the Seljūq Sultan Malik Shāh as part of a diplomatic charm offensive in 477/1084. Ibn al-Athīr, al-Kāmil fi'l taʾrīkh, X, pp. 136-137.

48 Ibn al-Qalānisī, Dhayl taʾrīkh Dimashq, p. 274.

49 Al-ʿAẓīmī, Taʾrīkh ḥalab, p. 361; Ibn al-ʿAdīm, Zubdat al-ḥalab, II, pp. 145-146. For more detail on Ibn al-Mawṣul's career, see Sibṭ b. al-Jawzī, Miʾrāt al-zamān, XIII, p. 427.

50 Another similar example occurred in 524-5/1130-1, when Zenkī (d. 541/1146) took Sawinj (d. 528/1134), son of Būrī (d. 526/1132), the ruler of Damascus captive, and demanded a payment of 50,000 dīnārs to release him. Although Būrī reportedly agreed to pay this sum, the two parties later negotiated a prisoner exchange. Ibn al-Qalānisī, Dhayl taʾrīkh Dimashq, pp. 361-362, 367; al-ʿAẓīmī, Taʾrīkh ḥalab, pp. 383-384; Ibn al-ʿAdīm, Zubdat al-ḥalab, II, pp. 246-249.

51 Friedman, Encounter between Enemies, pp. 148-157.

52 Friedman, Encounter between Enemies, pp. 75-81.

53 Although Köhler has discussed Baldwin II's release in detail, he attributed it to the specific political conditions in Syria following the death of Tutush in 488/1095, rather than a broader feature of Syrian diplomatic practices throughout the late fifth/eleventh and early sixth/twelfth centuries. See Köhler, Alliances and Treaties, pp. 59-66.

54 Ibn al-Athīr, al-Kāmil fi'l taʾrīkh, X, pp. 373-375.

55 Asbridge, Creation, pp. 112-114.

56 At first, Ibn al-Athīr claimed that Baldwin paid a ransom of 35 dīnārs in addition to releasing 160 Muslim captives in the aftermath of the battle. This figure is probably an error. 35,000 dīnārs would be closer to the regional norms for a person of his stature, and be more consistent with the figures quoted in the Syriac and Armenian sources discussed below. Ibn al-Athīr, al-Kāmil fi'l taʾrīkh, X, p. 375.

57 Ibn al-Athīr, al-Kāmil fi'l taʾrīkh, X, pp. 460, 464-466.

58 For more detail on the broad definitions of khidma in the medieval Islamic world, see Michael Chamberlain, Knowledge and Social Power in Medieval Damascus (Cambridge, 1994), pp. 116-118. For khidma in a Seljūq context, see Peacock, Seljuk Empire, p. 158; Paul, Jürgen, ‘Khidma in the Social History of Pre-Mongol Iran’, Journal of Economic and Social History of the Orient 57 (2014), pp. 392-422, 408-411CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

59 Michael the Syrian claimed that Jawlī initially wanted a ransom of 70,000 dīnārs for Baldwin, but ultimately accepted 30,000 dīnārs in addition to Joscelyn as a hostage, before later releasing Joscelyn without receiving further payment. Michael the Syrian also partially corroborated Ibn al-Athīr's account by describing alliances between Riḍwān and Tancred against Jawlī and Josceyln, and the defeat of the latter coalition in battle. Matthew of Edessa also mentioned the sum of “30,000 dahekans”, and whilst Usāma b. Munqidh corroborated Ibn al-Athīr's assertion that the Banū ʿUqayl were involved in negotiating Baldwin's release in 502/1108, he wrote that Jawlī decided to grant Baldwin his freedom without a ransom payment, despite initially contemplating demanding a ransom of 100,000 dīnārs. Michael the Syrian, The Syriac Chronicle, pp. 626-627, 638-639; Matthew of Edessa, Armenia and the Crusades, pp. 193, 201; Anonymous Syriac Chronicle, ‘The First and Second Crusades’, p. 81; Usāma b. Munqidh, Lubāb al-Ādāb, pp. 133-134; Fulcher of Chartres, Fulcheri carnoetensis, Historia Hierosolymitana, pp. 468-481; Fulcher of Chartres, A History of the expedition to Jerusalem, pp. 177-81; William of Tyre, Willelmi Tyremsos archiepiscopi Chronicon, (ed.) Robert B. C. Huygens, Corpus Christianorum Continuatio Mediaevalis 63-63a (Turnhout, 1986), 63: pp. 506-507; William of Tyre, William of Tyre a history of deeds done beyond the sea, edited and translated by Emily A. Babcock and August C. Krey (New York, 1976), II, pp. 474-475. See Kosto, ‘Hostages during the First Century of the Crusades’, pp. 17-21; Kosto, Hostages in the Middle Ages, pp. 114-121, 166-170. For more detail on the Banū ʿUqayl of Qalʿat Jaʿbar, see Heidemann, Stefan, ‘Arab nomads and the Seljūq military’, in Shifts and Drifts in Nomad-Sedentary Relations, (eds.) Stefan Leder and Bernard Streck (Weisbaden, 2005), pp. 289-305, 296-297Google Scholar; Heidemann, Die Renaissance der Städte, pp. 266-270.

60 For more discussion on the relationship between Antioch, Edessa and the ‘co-fraternity’ of the Franks at this juncture, see Asbridge, Creation, pp. 104-111; Christopher MacEvitt, The Crusades and the Christian World of the East: Rough Tolerance (Philadelphia, 2008), pp. 56-57, 86.

61 Ibn al-Athīr, al-Kāmil fi'l taʾrīkh, X, pp. 422-424.

62 Ibn al-Qalānisī, Dhayl taʾrīkh Dimashq, p. 330; al-ʿAẓīmī, Taʾrīkh ḥalab, p. 372; Ibn al-Athīr, al-Kāmil fi'l taʾrīkh, X, p. 593; Sibṭ b. al-Jawzī, Miʾrāt al-zamān, XIII, p. 427; Ibn al-ʿAdīm, Zubdat al-ḥalab, II, pp. 205-206; Fulcher of Chartres, Fulcheri carnoetensis, Historia Hierosolymitana, pp. 651-653; Fulcher of Chartres, A History of the expedition to Jerusalem, p. 237; Matthew of Edessa, Armenia and the Crusades, pp. 228-229.

63 Ibn al-Qalānisī, Dhayl taʾrīkh Dimashq, p. 333; al-ʿAẓīmī, Taʾrīkh ḥalab, pp. 371-372; Ibn al-Athīr, al-Kāmil fi'l taʾrīkh, X, p. 614; Sibṭ b. al-Jawzī, Miʾrāt al-zamān, XIII, pp. 427-428; Ibn al-ʿAdīm, Zubdat al-ḥalab, II, pp. 210-212; Fulcher of Chartres, Fulcheri carnoetensis, Historia Hierosolymitana, pp. 676-690; Fulcher of Chartres, A History of the expedition to Jerusalem, pp. 248-255.

64 Ibn al-Qalānisī, Dhayl taʾrīkh Dimashq, p. 332; al-ʿAẓīmī, Taʾrīkh ḥalab, p. 372; Ibn al-Athīr, al-Kāmil fi'l taʾrīkh, X, p. 614; Sibṭ b. al-Jawzī, Miʾrāt al-zamān, XIII, pp. 427-428; Ibn al-ʿAdīm, Zubdat al-ḥalab, II, pp. 210-212, 217; Fulcher of Chartres, Fulcheri carnoetensis, Historia Hierosolymitana, pp. 690-693; Fulcher of Chartres, A History of the expedition to Jerusalem, pp. 252-255.

65 Al-ʿAẓīmī, Taʾrīkh ḥalab, p. 374; Usāma b. Munqidh b.ʿAlī, Kitāb al-Iʾtibār, pp. 120-121; Ibn al-ʿAdīm, Zubdat al-ḥalab, II, pp. 221-222; Fulcher of Chartres, Fulcheri carnoetensis, Historia Hierosolymitana, pp. 749-756; Fulcher of Chartres, A History of the expedition to Jerusalem, pp. 272-275; William of Tyre, Chronicon, 63: 569-570, 603-606; William of Tyre, A history of deeds, II, pp. 21-22; Michael the Syrian, The Syriac Chronicle, pp. 635-636, 643; Matthew of Edessa, Armenia and the Crusades, pp. 232-233.

66 For more information on the circumstances surrounding Baldwin II's release, and his subsequent siege of Aleppo, see Asbridge, ‘How the Crusades could have been won’, pp. 77-81: Kosto, ‘Hostages during the First Century of the Crusades’, pp. 17-21; Kosto, Hostages in the Middle Ages, pp. 114-121, 166-170; Jordan, Erin L., ‘Hostage, Sister, Abbess: The Life of Ivetta of Jerusalem’, Medieval Prosopography 32 (2017), pp. 66-86Google Scholar.

67 This would make the total ransom figure 100,000 dīnārs. Ibn al-ʿAdīm's account is partially supported by William of Tyre, who asserted that Baldwin “paid his ransom” with an unspecified “large sum of money” which was “collected in part” from the “spoils” gained from a victory over Aqsunqur al-Bursuqī's forces at the battle of ʿAzāz in 519/1125. Ibn al-ʿAdīm, Zubdat al-ḥalab, II, pp. 230-231; Fulcher of Chartres, Fulcheri carnoetensis, Historia Hierosolymitana, pp. 770-1; Fulcher of Chartres, A History of the expedition to Jerusalem, p. 281; William of Tyre, Chronicon, 63: 603-606; William of Tyre, A history of deeds II, p. 25; Kosto, Hostages in the Middle Ages, p. 167.

68 Yvonne Friedman, ‘Gestures of conciliation: Peacemaking Endeavors in the Latin East’, in In laudem Hierosolymitani: Studies in Crusades and Medieval Culture In Honour of Benjamin Z. Kedar, (eds.) Iris Shagrir, Ronnie Ellenblum and Jonathan Riley-Smith (Aldershot, 2007), pp. 31-48. The only comparable example in this period was the ransom of Roussel de Bailliol in the late fifth/eleventh century discussed above, as Alexios Komnenos only paid part of the required amount upfront.

69 Ibn al-Athīr, al-Kāmil fi'l taʾrīkh, X, pp. 102-103.

70 Ayāz b. Il-Ghāzī, was subsequently killed during the 509/1115 campaign into the region by the sultan's army. It is not clear if this was the same son of Il-Ghāzī who had been used as a hostage by Aqsunqur al-Bursuqī earlier that same year. Ibn al-Qalānisī, Dhayl taʾrīkh Dimashq, p. 305; Ibn al-Athīr, al-Kāmil fi'l taʾrīkh, X, pp. 503-504; Sibṭ b. al-Jawzī, Miʾrāt al-zamān, XII, p. 354.

71 It is not clear what happened to the unnamed Frankish prisoner after the refusal of the initial offer. Ibn al-Athīr, al-Kāmil fi'l taʾrīkh, X, p. 344.

72 Hillenbrand and Morton have discussed Ṭughtegīn's treatment of captives in detail, see Hillenbrand, ‘What's in a name? Tughtegin’, pp. 459-471; Morton, ‘Walter the Chancellor on Ilghazi and Tughtakin’, pp. 179-185.

73 Ibn al-Qalānisī, Dhayl taʾrīkh Dimashq, pp. 257-258; Ibn al-Athīr, al-Kāmil fi'l taʾrīkh, X, p. 467; Sibṭ b. al-Jawzī, Miʾrāt al-zamān, XIII, pp. 317-318.

74 Nāsir al-Dīn Muhammad Ibn al-Furāt, Taʾrīkh al-duwal wa'l mulūk, edited and translated Ursula Lyons and Malcolm C. Lyons as Ayyubids, Mamlukes and Crusaders (Cambridge, 1971), I, pp. 45-46; Hillenbrand, Crusades, p. 552. The Latin chronicler Albert of Aachen was the earliest source to report in detail on Ṭughtegīn's brutal killing of Gervase. Albert of Aachen, Historia Hierosolymitana, pp. 768-771.

75 Walter the Chancellor, Galterii Cancelarii bella antiochena, (ed.) Heinrich Hagenmeyer (Innsbruck, 1896), pp. 107-109; Walter the Chancellor, Walter the Chancellor's The Antiochene Wars: A Translation and Commentary, edited and translated by Thomas Asbridge and Susan B. Edgington (Brookfield VT, 1999), pp. 159-161.

76 Ibn al-ʿAdīm, Zubdat al-ḥalab, II, pp. 192-193.

77 Ibn al-Qalānisī, Dhayl taʾrīkh Dimashq, pp. 481-482; Ibn al-Athīr, al-Kāmil fi'l taʾrīkh, XI, p. 155; Ibn al-ʿAdīm, Zubdat al-ḥalab, II, p. 311; Matthew of Edessa, Armenia and the Crusades, pp. 258, 270.

78 Matthew of Edessa, Armenia and the Crusades, pp. 137-139.

79 According to various sources, Philaretos converted to Islam in around 478/1085, see Ibn al-Athīr, al-Kāmil fi'l taʾrīkh, X, pp. 138-139; Sibṭ b. al-Jawzī, Miʾrāt al-zamān, XIII, p. 131; Anna Komnene, Alexiad, pp. 169-170; Matthew of Edessa, Armenia and the Crusades, pp. 152-153; Michael the Syrian, The Syriac Chronicle, p. 676. For more detail on Philaretos's career, see Yarnley, C. J., ‘Philaretos: Armenian Bandit or Byzantine General?’, Revue des études arméniennes 9 (1972), pp. 331–353Google Scholar; Beihammer, Alexander D., ‘Defection across the Border of Islam and Christianity: Apostasy and Cross-Cultural Interaction in Byzantine-Seljuk Relations’, Speculum 86 (2011), pp. 597-651CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Beihammer, Byzantium, pp. 285-295.

80 Usāma b. Munqidh, Kitāb al-Iʾtibār, p. 120; Usāma b. Munqidh, The Book of Contemplation, pp. 131-132.

81 Türkmen groups were not an official component of the Seljūq military structure. For the distinction between Türkmen groups and the Seljūq military, see David Durand-Guédy, ‘Goodbye to the Türkmen? The Military Role of Nomads in Iran after the Saljuq Conquest’, in Nomadic Military Power: Iran and the Adjacent Areas in the Islamic Period, (eds.) Kurt Franz and Wolfgang Holzwarth (Wiesbaden, 2015), pp. 107-136; Peacock, Seljuk Empire, pp. 221-225.

82 Sibṭ b. al-Jawzī, Miʾrāt al-zamān, XII, p. 254.

83 Türkmen raiders targeted northern Syria in the years 457/1064-5, 460/1067-8, 461/1069-70, 467/1075 and 472/1079, see al-ʿAẓīmī, Taʾrīkh ḥalab, pp. 345-346; Sibṭ b. al-Jawzī, Miʾrāt al-zamān, XII, p. 345, XII, pp. 72-73, 120; Ibn al-ʿAdīm, Zubdat al-ḥalab, I, pp. 294-297, II, p. 9, 11-13, 16, 56, 67; Matthew of Edessa, Armenia and the Crusades, p. 125, 143-144; Michael Attaleiates, The History, pp. 173-174, 215-219. See also: Zakkar, Emirate, pp. 166-168; Beihammer, Byzantium, pp. 110-111, 117-121, 144, 186-188.

84 Any Türkmen raiding of the areas surrounding Aleppo and Damascus therefore risked alienating potential allies. Türkmen groups did conduct raids in the region of Aleppo during the 505/1111 campaign ordered by the Sultan Muḥammad (r. 498-512/1105-18) and in Antiochene territory in the aftermath of the battle of the Field of Blood in 513/1119. For more detail on the frontiers of the Principality of Antioch in the sixth/twelfth century, see Asbridge, Creation, pp. 47-62, 65-67, 69-91; Asbridge, ‘The ‘Crusader’ community at Antioch’, pp. 305-325; Thomas S. Asbridge, ‘The significance and causes of the battle of the Field of Blood’, Journal of Medieval History 24, 3 (1997), pp. 301-316; Andrew D. Buck, The Principality of Antioch and its frontiers in the twelfth century (Woodbridge, 2017), pp. 1-20, 164-88; Andrew D. Buck, ‘The Castle and Lordship of Ḥarīm and the Frankish-Muslim Frontier of Northern Syria in the Twelfth Century’, al-Masāq 28, 2 (2016), pp. 113-131.

85 Friedman, Encounter between Enemies, pp. 147-160.

86 Asbridge, Creation, pp. 47-62, 65-67, 69-91; Asbridge, ‘The ‘Crusader’ community at Antioch’, pp. 305-325; Köhler, Alliances and Treaties, pp. 59-126, 312-320.

87 Friedman has identified over 100 treaties that were negotiated in the near 200-year history of the Latin east. Friedman, ‘Peacemaking: Perceptions and Practices in the Medieval Latin East’, pp. 229-257; Yvonne Friedman, ‘How to end Holy War: Negotiations and peace treaties between Muslims and crusaders in the Latin East’, Common Knowledge 21, 1 (2014), pp. 83-103; Frenkel, ‘Muslim responses to the Frankish Dominion in the Near East, 1098-1291’, pp. 27-54; Dajani-Shakeel, ‘Diplomatic Relations between Muslim and Frankish Rulers’, pp. 190-215; Elisséeff, ‘The Reaction of the Syrian Muslims’, pp. 221-233.

88 A literal translation of “māl” would be money or funds. There is no uniform terminology for tributary relationships in the Arabic sources and they were often negotiated as a component part of peace treaties, although terms such as “treaty money” (māl al-hudna) or “the decided upon money” (al-māl al-muqarrar) were utilised in the medieval Arabic historiography.

89 In relation to the crusader studies, the term condominia was applied by Köhler to “munāṣafa” agreements. The term “munāṣafa” is typically translated as the practice of reciprocal property-sharing between two co-owners. See Köhler, Alliances and Treaties, pp. 312-320; M. A. Köhler, ‘Munāṣafa’ in Encyclopaedia of Islam, Second Edition, (eds.) Peri Bearman, Thierry Bianquis, Clifford E. Bosworth, Emeri van Donzel, Wolfhart P. Heinrichs (2012) (first accessed online: 19 March 2019).

90 For more information on the legal, cultural and theological basis on which Muslim and Latin Christian rulers approached the process of peace-making during the crusading period, see Yvonne Friedman, ‘Learning the religious concepts of the Other Muslim-Christian treaties in the Latin East’, in Religion and Peace: Historical Aspects, (ed.) Yvonne Friedman (London, 2017), pp. 67-83; Yehoshua Frenkel, ‘Islam as a peacemaking religion: Self-image, medieval theory, and practice’, in Religion and Peace: Historical Aspects, (ed.) Yvonne Friedman (London, 2017), pp. 84-97; Betty Binysh, ‘Making peace with “God's enemies” The Muslim dilemma of treaty-making with Christians in the medieval Levant’, in Religion and Peace: Historical Aspects, (ed.) Yvonne Friedman (London, 2017), pp. 98-114; Benham, J., Peacemaking in the Middle Ages: Principles and practice (Manchester, 2011)Google Scholar.

91 It should be noted that Köhler convincingly argued that condominia or munāṣafa agreements were imported to the Levant as a consequence of the crusades. Köhler, Alliances and Treaties, pp. 316-320.

92 The most obvious example is the relationship between Ṭughtegīn of Damascus and the Fāṭimids in the early sixth/twelfth century, see Köhler, Alliances and Treaties, pp. 88-90, 105-106; Brett, Fatimid Empire, pp. 233-236, 240-245, 256-257, 259.

93 There are divergent views on the chronology surrounding the decline of Fāṭimid and Byzantine power in the region, with the Seljūq Sultan Alp Arslān's campaign against Aleppo in 463/1071 seen as highly important in the work of Brett and Beihammer. For more detailed discussion, see Brett, Fatimid Empire, pp. 197-206; Beihammer, Byzantium, pp. 133-198, 244-265; James D. Wilson, ‘Diplomacy, warfare and conquest: the political world of bilad al-sham prior to and during the early Crusading period 442-522/1050-1128’ (unpublished Ph.D. thesis, Queen Mary University of London, 2019), pp. 56-115.

94 Richard Fletcher, ‘Reconquest and Crusade in Spain c. 1050–1150’, Transactions of the Royal Historical Society 5, 37 (1987), pp. 31–47; Eduardo Manzano Moreno, ‘Christian-Muslim Frontier in Al-Andalus: Idea and Reality’, in The Arab Influence in Medieval Europe, (eds.) Dionisius Agius & Richard Hitchcock (Reading, 1994), pp. 83–99; O‘Callaghan, Joseph F., A History of Medieval Spain (London, 1975), pp. 130-134, 193-214Google Scholar; Wasserstein, David, The Rise and Fall of the Party-Kings: Politics and Society in Islamic Spain 1002-1086 (Princeton, NJ, 1985)Google Scholar; Fletcher, Richard A., Moorish Spain (London, 1992), pp. 79-130Google Scholar; Kennedy, Hugh, Muslim Spain and Portugal: a political history of al-Andalus (Harlow, 1996), pp. 130-154Google Scholar; Cobb, The Race for Paradise, pp. 60-65.

95 As Heidemann has outlined, the collapse of the ʿAbbāsid Empire in the fourth/tenth century resulted in the decline in value of the silver dirham to a “debased copperish coin with no regulated finance or weight” of comparable value to anonymous Byzantine copper coins that were imported into northern Syria between 359-485/970-1092. This resulted in payments involving silver dirhams being “transacted by weighing the coins”. Yaḥyā al-Anṭākī stated that the terms of the negotiated settlement stipulated that 60 dirhams would equate to one piece of gold, which corresponds with the conversion rate of 50-67 Byzantine copper coins per gold dīnār outlined by Heidemann. This would roughly equate to 8,333 gold dīnārs per year, a number close to the “8,000 pieces of gold” provided by Ibn al-ʿAdīm in his account of the agreement. See al-Anṭākī, Tāʾrīkh al-Anṭākī, p. 422; Ibn al-ʿAdīm, Zubdat al-ḥalab, I, p. 247; Heidemann, Die Renaissance der Städte, pp. 355-435, 446-447; Stefan Heidemann, ‘Numismatics’, in The New Cambridge History of Islam Volume I, (ed.) Chase Robinson (Cambridge, 2010), pp. 648-779, 661.

96 al-Anṭākī, Tāʾrīkh al-Anṭākī, p. 435; Ibn al-ʿAdīm, Zubdat al-ḥalab, I, p. 262-263, 268.

97 Ibn al-ʿAdīm, Zubdat al-ḥalab, I, p. 267; al-Maqrīzī, Ittiʾāẓ al-ḥunafāʾ, II, p. 213. According to Heidemann, the Fāṭimid dinār was the dominant currency of exchange for large transactions in northern Syria throughout the fifth/eleventh century up to the Seljūq conquest. Heidemann, Die Renaissance der Städte, pp. 369-435, 446-447.

98 Sibṭ b. al-Jawzī, Miʾrāt al-zamān, XII, pp. 449-450.

99 Beihammer, Byzantium, pp. 53, 57-61.

100 Fletcher, ‘Reconquest and Crusade’, pp. 31–47; Fletcher, Moorish Spain, pp. 79-130; Kennedy, Muslim Spain and Portugal, pp. 130-154.

101 Sibṭ b. al-Jawzī, Miʾrāt al-zamān, XII, pp. 398-9; Ibn al-ʿAdīm, Zubdat al-ḥalab, I, pp. 286-287.

102 Sibṭ b. al-Jawzī, Miʾrāt al-zamān, XIII, p. 105; Ibn al-ʿAdīm, Zubdat al-ḥalab, I, p. 296, II, pp. 14-15, 56.

103 Al-ʿAẓīmī, Taʾrīkh ḥalab, p. 352. Only Sibṭ b. al-Jawzī mentioned the terms of the treaty: Sibṭ b. al-Jawzī, Miʾrāt al-zamān, XIII, p. 139.

104 Ibn al-ʿAdīm, Zubdat al-ḥalab, II, pp. 95, 105.

105 Köhler, Alliances and treaties, pp. 59-126, 312-320; Asbridge, Creation, pp. 49-50, 90-91; Asbridge, ‘The ‘Crusader’ Community at Antioch’, pp. 318-319, 321-324.

106 Ibn al-ʿAdīm, Zubdat al-ḥalab fī taʾrīkh ḥalab, II, p. 148.

107 ʿIzz al-Dīn Ibn Shaddād, al-Aʿlāq al-khaṭīra fī dhikr umarāʾ al-Shām wa-l-Jazīra, I/1, (trans.) Dominique Sourdel, La description d'Alep d'Ibn Šaddād (Damascus, 1953), pp. 40-41; Köhler, Alliances and treaties, p. 64.

108 Ibn al-Qalānisī, Dhayl taʾrīkh Dimashq, p. 251.

109 Asbridge, Creation, pp. 65-66.

110 Ibn al-Athīr, al-Kāmil fi'l taʾrīkh, X, p. 482.

111 An earlier date is given by Michael the Syrian, who claimed that Riḍwān of Aleppo paid the Franks 32,000 dīnārs in 500/1106. This would correspond chronologically with Ibn al-Qalānisī's reference to a peace treaty in the same year. However, when we consider that Michael made no reference to the later agreements, it is difficult to place too much credence in this entry. Michael the Syrian, The Syriac Chronicle, p. 639.

112 Ibn al-Qalānisī, Dhayl taʾrīkh Dimashq, pp. 292-293.

113 Ibn al-ʿAdīm, Zubdat al-ḥalab, II, p. 163.

114 Ibn al-ʿAdīm, Zubdat al-ḥalab, II, p. 169.

115 Köhler, Alliances and treaties, pp. 64-64, 67-68, 102-103; Asbridge, Creation, p. 65.

116 Köhler, Alliances and treaties, 312-320; Köhler, ‘Munāṣafa’, in Encyclopaedia of Islam, Second Edition. On a related note, Heidemann conducted a detailed study of references within the chronicle of Ibn al-Qalānisī to “al-fissa”. Heidemann suggested “al-fissa” was derived from the middle Latin term “fossa”, and referred to as a specific component of the tributary payments made by Damascus to the Frankish Kingdom of Jerusalem between the years 526-49/1132-54. Stefan Heidemann, ‘Financing the tribute to the Kingdom of Jerusalem: An urban tax in Damascus’, Bulletin of SOAS 70, 1 (2007), pp. 117-142.

117 Ibn al-Qalānisī, Dhayl taʾrīkh Dimashq, pp. 263-264; Köhler, Alliances and treaties, pp. 86-90; El-Azhari, Saljūqs, pp. 171-229.

118 Ibn al-Qalānisī, Dhayl taʾrīkh Dimashq, pp. 264-265.

119 Ibn al-Qalānisī, Dhayl taʾrīkh Dimashq, pp. 277-278.

120 Ibn al-Athīr, al-Kāmil fi'l taʾrīkh, X, pp. 542-543.

121 Ibn al-ʿAdīm, Zubdat al-ḥalab, II, p. 179.

122 Al-ʿAẓīmī only mentioned a vague “peace treaty”, the detail is provided by Ibn al-ʿAdīm. Al-ʿAẓīmī, Taʾrīkh ḥalab, p. 368; Ibn al-ʿAdīm, Zubdat al-ḥalab, II, p. 181.

123 Ibn al-Qalānisī, Dhayl taʾrīkh Dimashq, p. 322; al-ʿAẓīmī, Taʾrīkh ḥalab, p. 370; Ibn al-ʿAdīm, Zubdat al-ḥalab, II, p. 196.

124 Asbridge, Creation, pp. 81-82.

125 Köhler referred to the sharing by halves of taxes of several border region between Antioch and Aleppo in his entry on munāṣafa in the Encyclopaedia of Islam. See Köhler, Alliances and treaties, pp. 111-115; Köhler, “Munāṣafa” in Encyclopaedia of Islam, Second Edition.

126 Ibn al-ʿAdīm, Zubdat al-ḥalab, II, p. 199.

127 Ibn al-Qalānisī, Dhayl taʾrīkh Dimashq, p. 331; al-ʿAẓīmī, Taʾrīkh ḥalab, p. 372; Ibn al-Athīr, al-Kāmil fi'l taʾrīkh, X, p. 610; Ibn al-ʿAdīm, Zubdat al-ḥalab, II, p. 210.

128 Köhler, Alliances and treaties, p. 112.

129 For detailed analysis of Baldwin II's siege of Aleppo in 518/1124-5 and the vulnerability of Aleppo at this time, see Asbridge, ‘How the Crusades could have been won’, pp. 73-93.

130 Al-ʿAẓīmī, Taʾrīkh ḥalab, p. 375; Ibn al-ʿAdīm, Zubdat al-ḥalab, II, pp. 231-232.

131 Ibn al-ʿAdīm, Zubdat al-ḥalab, II, pp. 231-232.

132 Ibn al-Qalānisī, Dhayl taʾrīkh Dimashq, pp. 301-303; al-ʿAẓīmī, Taʾrīkh ḥalab, p. 366; Ibn al-Athīr, al-Kāmil fi'l taʾrīkh, X, p. 499; Sibṭ b. al-Jawzī, Miʾrāt al-zamān, XIII, p. 347-348; Ibn al-ʿAdīm, Zubdat al-ḥalab, II, p. 164, 168-171. The use of the common formulaic qualifier of “it is said” in most of these sources indicated that they were not certain of the veracity of the information.

133 Ibn al-ʿAdīm, Bughyat al-ṭalab, IV, p. 1956.

134 With the exceptions of the aftermaths of the defeats suffered by Antiochene forces at Harran in 497/1104 and the battle of the Field of Blood in 513/1119, the rulers of Antioch enjoyed a dominant military and diplomatic relationship with Aleppo. For more detail, see Asbridge, Creation, pp. 47-62, 65-67, 69-91; Asbridge, ‘The ‘Crusader’ community at Antioch’, pp. 305-325; Asbridge, ‘The significance and causes of the battle of the Field of Blood’, pp. 73-93.