COPYRIGHT

All content on this blog is protected by copyright.
Content used elsewhere without attribution constitutes theft of intellectual property and will be prosecuted.
Showing posts with label Baldwin of Ramla. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Baldwin of Ramla. Show all posts

Wednesday, October 4, 2023

House of Ibelin: Baldwin of Ramla

 Although historically he would be overshadowed by his younger brother Balian, Baldwin of Ramla was the more prominent of the surviving Ibelin brothers at Hugh's death. He succeeded to his maternal barony at her death and his father's smaller lordship at his brother's death. He was exceptionally ambitious and hoped to gain a crown by marriage. In the end, however, his very pride reduced him to landless poverty. In many ways, Baldwin of Ibelin was a quintessential medieval nobleman with many of the virtues and weakness of the feudal elites in the age of chivalry.

 

Baldwin, Barisan’s second son, was only 5 years old when his father died. [1] His mother remarried the same year, taking the powerful Manassas of Hierges – a close adherent of Queen Melisende – as her second husband. The marriage aroused the ire of Hugh d’Ibelin because, according to William of Tyre, it removed the wealth and prestige of the barony of Ramla from his command. Since Helvis’ second marriage would hardly have impinged on Hugh’s claim to Ramla had he been Helvis’ son, the issue at stake was control of Baldwin, the young heir. Hugh had expected to benefit from the resources of Ramla and Mirabel until Baldwin came of age in 1160. Helvis’ marriage removed Baldwin from his control and denied him access to the revenues of Ramla and Mirabel. This caused Hugh to turn against Queen Melisende and support her son Baldwin III in their domestic power struggle.

When Baldwin III outmanoeuvered his mother and became the sole monarch two years later, Manassas of Hierges was sent into exile, never to return. Helvis of Ramla, however, remained in the Kingdom of Jerusalem and in possession of her fief and her son Baldwin. In 1156, at just 11 years of age, Baldwin was married to Richildis of Bethsan, a maiden of noble birth but not an heiress.[2] In 1158, when Baldwin was still two years short of his majority, his mother died, and his brother Hugh at last became his guardian. In 1160, Baldwin turned 15 and so reached legal maturity.

Baldwin (usually referred to by his title of Ramla in the chronicles) first emerges as an important figure for his contribution to the Battle of Montgisard. Based on the most recent analysis of the battle, the Franks manoeuvered Saladin onto swampy terrain, where the Sultan’s superior numbers could not be brought to bear. This effective use of the topography was possible because the army of Jerusalem was ‘led by a local lord, who knew the terrain better than anybody else on the battlefield’.[3] Despite what numerous modern commentators have alleged, that ‘local lord’ was not Reynald de Châtillon, a Western adventurer who had spent most of the previous fifteen years in a Saracen prison and before that had been Prince of Antioch in the North. It was the nobleman in whose lordship the battle was fought and the man who led the vanguard: Baldwin d’Ibelin.

Meanwhile, after the birth of two daughters, Baldwin separated from his first wife, Richildis, sometime before 1175 when he married Elizabeth Gotman, the widow of Hugh of Caesarea. Elizabeth died childless in 1179, leaving Baldwin free to marry again when the heir apparent, Baldwin IV’s sister Princess Sibylla, became a 20-year-old widow with an infant son. While the High Court of Jerusalem sent to France for a suitable husband, Ramla courted Princess Sibylla directly with the apparent ambition of becoming king-consort.

According to the contemporary chronicle written by a client of the Ibelin family (Ernoul), Princess Sibylla was not disinclined to Ramla’s suit. Unfortunately for Ramla, he was taken captive by the Saracens in June 1179. Saladin demanded the outrageous ransom of 200,000 gold bezants, or twice what was paid for Baldwin II in 1123. The size of the ransom demand, which could never have been raised from Baldwin’s small lordship, suggests that Salah al-Din viewed Baldwin was the next king and  expected the entire kingdom to pay the ransom — as was customary for a captive king.

Ramla’s hopes of gaining a crown through marriage, however, were crushed by Sibylla’s hasty marriage to Guy de Lusignan. Ramla had every reason to be disappointed (not to say outraged) by these developments, particularly because Guy was in no way his equal in terms of status or experience. Ramla’s feelings would have been further complicated by the fact that Guy was the younger brother of his son-in-law; Baldwin’s eldest daughter Eschiva had been married prior to 1180 to Aimery de Lusignan. To add insult to injury, Baldwin IV raised his new brother-in-law Guy to Count of Jaffa and Ascalon, thereby effectively demoting Baldwin from tenant-in-chief to ‘rear vassal’. Most insulting of all, it made Baldwin a vassal of the very man who had just stolen the heiress he’d courted. 

There can be little doubt that this embittered the proud Baldwin of Ramla, but it did not make him a rebel. On at least three occasions between 1180 and Baldwin IV’s death in 1185, Ramla dutifully mustered with his knights when summoned by the king. Indeed, he played a prominent role, with his brother Balian, in defeating the Saracen forces attempting to take the springs at Tubanie in 1183. As long as Baldwin IV and his son Baldwin V ruled, Ramla accepted his fate. He married one last time, Maria of Beirut, by whom he had his only son Thomas after 1181.

The elevation of Guy de Lusignan to the crown in the coup d’etat of 1186, however, proved too much for Ramla to bear. Rather than do homage to Guy de Lusignan, Ramla took the dramatic and unusual step of renouncing his lands and titles in favour of his infant son. ‘It was an extraordinary thing to do. It meant giving up his inheritance, jeopardizing the future of his heirs and abdicating the political and social standing that he, his father and elder brother had nurtured for the past three-quarters of a century’.[4] Baldwin took service with the Prince of Antioch, but he disappears from the historical record after his departure from the Kingdom of Jerusalem in 1186.

A man who took such a dramatic step was clearly a man of strong emotions. His hatred and resentment of Guy de Lusignan must have been enormous. More baffling, however, is that his outraged pride was more important to him than power and wealth. Equally notable, if less obvious, is that he was a singularly callous husband and father. He had discarded the mother of his two daughters for no better reason than the chance of a better marriage, and he abandoned his third wife and only son to the dubious mercy of Guy de Lusignan. To be sure, he nominally left his wife and son in the care of his younger brother Balian, but this was legally dubious. A vassal who refuses homage forfeits his fief to his overlord, in this case to none other than Guy de Lusignan. It is a forgotten measure of Lusignan’s chivalry (or his intelligent appreciation of how precarious his situation was) that he took no action to seize Ramla and Mirabel from Balian d’Ibelin, but instead allowed him to control both until Hattin obliterated all the baronies of the kingdom. Baldwin, meanwhile, had earned the obscurity to which his pride had condemned him.


[1] For the dates of birth of Baldwin and Balian, I have followed Hans Eberhard Mayer’s essay ‘Carving up Crusaders: The Early Ibelins and Ramlas’, in Hans Eberhard Mayer, Kings and Lords in the Latin Kingdom of Jerusalem (Farnham: Ashgate, 1994), XV, 101-118.

[2] Arab sources allege that, in this same year, Baldwin (a child of eleven) was responsible for oppressing Muslim tenants in villages near Nablus, causing forty families to emigrate to Muslim-held Syria. Since Baldwin was neither of age nor ever in possession of the lordship of Nablus, this account is  confused. The Lord of Nablus in this period was Philip of Nablus, later, Master of the Templars. Nablus did not pass to the Ibelins until 1177 when it was part of Maria Comnena’s dower. From 1177-1187, it was held by Balian, never by Baldwin d’Ibelin. The ‘oppression’ allegedly consisted of forcing Muslims to work on Friday. Many Muslim villagers refused to emigrate, showing that hostility to the Christian lord was by no means as great or widespread as the emigrants later alleged.

[3] Michael Ehrlich, ‘Saint Catherine’s Day Miracle — the Battle of Montgisard’, Journal of Medieval Military History, Vol. XI (Woodbridge: Boydell Press, 2013): 105.

[4] Peter Edbury, John of Ibelin and the Kingdom of Jerusalem (Woodbridge: Boydell Press, 1997), 12.

 

Dr. Helena P. Schrader is also the author of six books set in the Holy Land in the Era of the Crusades. Baldwin of Ramla is a major character in Balian d'Ibelin, and Defender of Jerusalem.

                         


           Buy Now!                                                  Buy Now!                                                    Buy Now!
 

          Buy Now!                                               Buy Now!                                                      Buy Now!

 

For more about the Ibelins and the world they lived in read:

 

Friday, September 8, 2017

Guy de Lusignan: Part I – A Parvenu Adventurer



Guy de Lusignan in Ridley Scott's Film "The Kingdom of Heaven"

Guy de Lusignan has the distinction of being the man who lost the Kingdom of Jerusalem by leading the Christian army to an unnecessary but utterly devastating defeat at the Battle of Hattin in 1187.  Such noted modern historians such as Malcolm Barber, Bernard Hamilton and W.B. Bartlett argue Lusignan’s disastrous decision to abandon the Springs of Sephoria and march to the relief of the garrison of Tiberius in July 1187 can be explained by the fact that he was criticized for not taking the offense in the campaign of 1183.  Guy, they argue, was in a difficult psychological position and had every reason to doubt the Count of Tripoli’s loyalty. They generally portray Guy more as a victim of circumstances rather than the cause of disaster.  Guy’s contemporaries saw it differently. 

So who has the right of it? In two essays, I will examine Guy de Lusignan’s biography, starting with his years as a parvenu adventurer.

Guy de Lusignan usually enters history books with his marriage to Sibylla of Jerusalem, King Amalric’s first-born child and older sister too King Baldwin IV. But this may be a mistake.

In the spring of 1168, the Earl of Salisbury was escorting Queen Eleanor of England to Poitiers with a small escort when the party was ambushed by “the Lusignans.” The Lusignans had recently been dispossessed of their lands for rebelling against Eleanor, Duchess of Aquitaine. They hoped by capturing Eleanor to gain a bargaining chip for the restoration of their fortunes. The Earl of Salisbury turned over his own horse, which was stronger and faster, to Eleanor so she could escape, but while he was remounting he was fatally pierced from behind by a lance. Salisbury’s nephew William Marshal (later famous as tutor of the Henry the Young King, Earl of Pembroke and Regent of England) was in Salisbury’s entourage.  According to the 13th century biography of William Marshal, commissioned by his eldest son and based on the accounts of many of Marshal’s contemporaries, this ambush was led by Guy de Lusignan and his brother Geoffrey. Some sources claim that Guy himself wielded the murderous lance.  Allegedly, this act made Guy persona non grata in the courts of the Plantagenets and induced him to seek his fortune in Outremer. Maybe, but there was a gap of some 12 years, so maybe not.

Nevertheless, when considering Guy de Lusignan’s later reputation, it is important to remember that he was accused of a profoundly unchivalrous murder by contemporaries — before he ever set foot in the Kingdom of Jerusalem.


A Blow from Behind -- Here with a Sword

Guy appears to have arrived in Jerusalem in late 1179 or early 1180 at the invitation of his elder brother Aimery. Older brother Aimery was making a career in Jerusalem, according to some, by sleeping with the Queen Mother, Agnes de Courtenay. At the time Guy arrived in the Holy Land, Baldwin IV was king — and clearly dying of leprosy. Since it was also clear that Baldwin IV would not sire heirs of his body, his sister Sibylla was his heir apparent. Sibylla herself was thus a young (20 year old) widow. There were rumors, however, that she had pledged herself to the Baron of Ramla and Mirabel. The rumors were widespread enough for Salah-ad-Din to demand a king’s ransom when Ramla was taken captive on the Litani in 1179 (apparently in anticipation of Ramla becoming King of Jerusalem) — and for the Byzantine Emperor to pay that exorbitant ransom (since Ramla could not possibly pay it from his own resources) in anticipation of the same event.

But suddenly at Easter of 1180, Sibylla married not Ramla (who was on his way back from Constantinople) but the virtually unknown and landless Guy de Lusignan.  The wedding was concluded in a hasty ceremony lacking preparation and pomp. According to the most reliable contemporary source, the Archbishop of Tyre (who was also Chancellor at the time and so an “insider,”) Baldwin rushed his sister into the marriage with the obscure, landless and discredited Guy because the Prince of Antioch, the Count of Tripoli and the Baron of Ramla were planning to depose him and place Ramla on the throne as Sibylla’s consort. 

Allegedly a Depiction of a Royal Wedding in Jerusalem

Perhaps. But there is no other evidence of Tripoli and Antioch's disloyalty. Furthermore, Ramla’s hopes of marrying Sibylla had been known for a long time — and all the way to Damascus and Constantinople. Why did that marriage suddenly seem threatening to Baldwin IV?

Another contemporary source, the now lost chronicle of Ernoul, suggests another reason for the hasty and unsuitable (for there is no way the third son of a Poitevin baron could be considered a suitable match for the heiress of Jerusalem) marriage: that Guy had seduced Sibylla. Aside from the fact that this had happened more than once in history, the greatest evidence for a love match is Sibylla’s steadfast — almost hysterical — attachment to Guy, as we shall see.  Meanwhile, however, the marriage alienated not only the jilted Baron of Ramla, but the Count of Tripoli as well. In short, it was not a very wise political move and thus hard to explain as a political decision.  Last but not least, even the Archbishop of Tyre admits the King soon regretted the decision. All these factors point to Ernoul’s explanation of a seduction, a scandal and an attempt to “put things right” by a King who was devoted to his sister.

Guy was named Count of Jaffa and Ascalon and appears to have been accepted by the Barons of Jerusalem as a fait accompli that could no longer be changed — until, in September 1183, King Baldwin became so ill that he named his brother-in-law Guy regent.  As such, Guy took command of the Christian forces during Salah-ad-Din’s fourth invasion of the Kingdom. What happened next is obscure. Although Saladin managed to burn some monasteries and there were some bitterly fought skirmishes, ultimately the Saracens were forced to withdraw; an apparent Christian victory (and certainly better than what happened four years later, the next time Guy was in command!)

Yet something more must have happened on this campaign because just two months later, when word reached Jerusalem that the vital castle of Kerak was besieged by Saladin, the barons of Jerusalem “unanimously” refused to follow Guy. They flat out refused to come to the relief of an important border fortress in which both royal princesses (Sibylla and Isabella), the Queen Mother and the Dowager Queen were all trapped (because of a wedding) until Guy was stripped of the regency. 

That is an incredibly strong statement.  The fact that the historical record is too patchy to enable us to explain it does not negate the importance of the event. The collective barons of Outremer were not dolts, cowards or fools.  They had accepted Guy’s command two months earlier. Even Tripoli and Ramla, who both detested him, had mustered under Guy’s command to face Salah-ad-Din in September, putting the welfare of the kingdom ahead of their personal feelings. But two months later even men who had previously shown no particular animosity toward Lusignan refused to accept his leadership. King Baldwin had no choice but to take back the reins of government, command of his army and have his nephew crowned as co-king. The latter was to reassure the barons that even if he died in the near term (as he expected), they would not have to pay homage to Guy.

After Kerak had been successfully relieved, Baldwin IV sought desperately to have his sister’s marriage to Guy annulled. This had nothing to do with personal grievances against Guy (although he had those too); it was necessary in order to find a long-term solution to the succession crisis. His nephew was a sickly boy, and the kingdom needed a vigorous and militarily competent leader. Baldwin’s efforts to replace the discredited Guy were thwarted by Sibylla, who refused to consider a divorce — something she is hardly likely to have done, if the marriage had been political in the first place. Sybilla ws successful: Baldwin IV died before his sister’s marriage to Guy was annulled, paving the way for the next step in Guy’s career: the usurpation of the throne.

Guy’s story will be continued next week on Sept. 15.

Dr. Helena P. Schrader holds a PhD in History.
She is the Chief Editor of the Real Crusades History Blog.
She is an award-winning novelist and author of numerous books both fiction and non-fiction. Her three-part biography of Balian d'Ibelin won a total of 14 literary accolades. Her most recent release is a novel about the founding of the crusader Kingdom of Cyprus. You can find out more at: http://crusaderkingdoms.com


Guy is a major character in award-winning "Defender of Jerusalem" and "Envoy of Jerusalem." 




                                                             

                                                           Buy Now!