Portal de Periódicos da CAPES

The Genoese Predicament: Christian–Muslim Communication in the Annales Ianuenses ( c. 1099–1293)

2023; Routledge; Volume: 34; Issue: 3 Linguagem: Inglês

10.1080/09596410.2023.2261250

1469-9311

Daniel G. König,

Medieval Literature and History

ABSTRACTBuilding on research that presents Jews and Muslims as an integral part of Genoese history, this article analyses the development of Genoese–Muslim interaction in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries to understand the challenges of interreligious communication in the pre-modern Mediterranean. It treats the Annals of Genoa as a collective psychogramme that provides insight into the commune’s shifting attitudes towards Muslims. While acknowledging the Annals’ obvious biases, the article argues that the multiple authors of this work of historiography faithfully depicted the problems encountered by the Genoese in their communication with Muslim interlocutors from the perspective of those in power. Consequently, the Annals allow us to trace how Genoa established cooperative relations with Muslim-ruled North Africa in the wake of the First Crusade and how it successfully weathered turbulences caused by political shifts in the Mediterranean of the late twelfth and early thirteenth century. The Annals suggest that the destabilization of the western Mediterranean and intensifying inner-Christian strife began to jeopardize Genoese communication with Muslim-ruled societies in the 1230s. During the remainder of the thirteenth century, it seems, the commune was torn between different loyalties and thus unable to pursue a coherent communicative approach to Muslim-ruled societies.KEYWORDS: Christian–Muslim relationscommunicationcrusadesGenoainterreligious relationstransmediterranean trade Disclosure StatementNo potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).Notes1 Jehel, Les Génois; Jehel, L’Italie et le Maghreb, 38–43, 58–69; Balard, ‘L’empire génois’; Balard, ‘Genoese Expansion’; and Valérian, ‘Gênes, l’Afrique et l’Orient’.2 See, e.g. Jehel, ‘Jews and Muslims’; Amitai, ‘Diplomacy’.3 Imperiale di Sant’Angelo, Caffaro; Holder-Egger, ‘Vorrede’; Caro, ‘Zur Kritik’; Vito, ‘Le glorie di Genova’; Dotson, ‘Genoese Civic Annals’; Dotson, ‘Caffaro’; Hall and Phillips, ‘Introduction’; and Haug, Annales Ianuenses.4 Arnaldi, ‘Caffaro’; Petti Balbi, ‘Caffaro’; and Airaldi and Mallett, ‘Caffaro of Genoa’.5 Annales Ianuenses, vol. 1, 3.6 Airaldi, ‘Nasello, Oberto’.7 Bezzina, ‘Ogerio, Pane’.8 Filangieri, ‘Marchisio Scriba’.9 Nuti, ‘Doria, Iacopo’.10 Overview on the authors in Annales Ianuenses, vol. 1, XXXI–XXXII; ibid., vol. 3, XIV–XVII; and ibid., vol. 4, XI–CXII.11 Ibid., vol. 1, a. 1101, 10, 12.12 Ibid., 12.13 Ibid., 10.14 Jehel, L’Italie et le Maghreb, 13–36; Metcalfe, Muslims of Medieval Italy, 4–69; Kreutz, Before the Normans, 18–101; Pryor, Geography, Technology, and War, 102–8; and Jäckh, ‘848: Decision’.15 Jehel, L’Italie et le Maghreb, 28–31. See König, Arabic-Islamic Views, 290, for the Arabic-Islamic documentation. Also see Liutprandus Cremonensis, ‘Antapodosis’, lib. IV, cap. V, 105.16 Bruce, ‘Politics of Violence and Trade’; Cowdrey, ‘Mahdia Campaign’.17 Caffaro, ‘De liberatione’, 99–100.18 Annales Ianuenses, vol. 1, a. 1101, 10: ‘interficiendus ille quidem per uindictam est, qui legi Dei contrarius est et legem suam destruere pugnat; si interfectus est, legi Dei contrarium non est; quia Deus: “michi uindictam et ego retribuam; percutiam, et ego sanabo, et non est qui de manu mea possit eruere.” ideoque petimus, ut terram beati Petri nobis reddatis, et dimittemus uos incolumes cum personis et rebus uestris recedere, quod si non feceritis Dominus percutiet uos suo gladio, et iuste interfecti eritis.’ Cf. Liber Deuteronomii, cap. 32, v. 35: ‘mea est ultio et ego retribuam’; ibid., v. 39: ‘percutiam et ego sanabo et non est qui de manu mea possit eruere.’19 Annales Ianuenses, vol. 1, a. 1146, 33–5; ibid., a. 1147, 35: ‘et ceperunt Almariam bellando et Sarracenos uincendo et interficiendo (…)’; and ibid., a. 1148, 36.20 Ibid., a. 1154, 39: ‘Sarracenos detruncando et interficiendo pro eorum superbia, fere omnes interfecti fuerunt.’ With regard to its grammar, the sentence does not define exactly whether it was the Almohads or the Genoese who were almost all killed. The ensuing Almohad reaction of sending the Genoese ship back to Genoa via Sardinia suggests that the Genoese crew of one single ship were not able to defend themselves against the crews of nine Almohad ships, especially since Caffaro describes this incident as one of the calamities that befell Genoa in this year (p. 40).21 For the peace treaty, extant in its Latin version, see de Sacy, ‘Pièces diplomatiques’, 3–5. It is not mentioned in the Annals, cf. Annales Ianuenses, vol. 1, a. 1149, 36.22 Annales Ianuenses, vol. 1, a. 1101, 9–10: ‘domini, uos qui estis magistri et doctores Christiane legis, quare precipitis uestratibus ut nos interficiant et terram nostram tollant, cum in lege uestra scriptum sit ut aliquis non interficiat aliquem formam Dei uestri habentem, uel rem suam tollat et si uerum est, quod in lege uestra scriptum sit hoc, et nos formam Dei uestri habemus, ergo contra legem facitis.’23 Ibid., a. 1154, 39.24 We have no other evidence for what this peace treaty actually implied aside from two notarial documents testifying to the commercial activity of Genoese merchants in Tunis and Tripolis in 1155 and 1157. See de Mas Latrie, Traités de paix, vol. 1, cap. IV, doc. I, 106: ‘Georgii Sana eunte Tunisim et redeunte inde’ (2 September 1155); ibid.: ‘debet ire laboratum Tripolim’ (6 June 1157).25 Annales Ianuenses, vol. 1, a. 1161, 61.26 Ibid., 62; de Mas Latrie, Traités de paix, vol. 1, 108.27 Note, however, that, in 1167, ‘Saracen ships’ encountered a Genoese fleet about to engage in combat with a Pisan fleet and fled helter-skelter. See Annales Ianuenses, vol 1, a. 1167, 202.28 Ibid., a. 1162, 67.29 Ibid., a. 1165, 186: ‘apparuit nauis Pisanorum de Buzea rediens, quam ceperant;’ ibid., a. 1172, 255: ‘ceperant nauim nostram que de Buzea uenerat (…).’30 Annales Ianuenses, vol. 2, a. 1177, 11: ‘consules Rubeum de Volta legatum ad Salahadinum regem Egypti miserunt, cum quo pacem fìrmauit.’31 Röhricht, ‘Zur Geschichte’, 576; Wagendorfer, ‘(Teil-)Überlieferung des Saladin-Briefs’, 582–4.32 Thomsen, Burchards Bericht.33 Annales Ianuenses, vol. 2, a. 1179, 13; Menache, ‘Papal Attempts’, 238–240.34 However, see Valérian, ‘Gênes, l’Afrique et l’Orient’, 837, who believes that trade was interrupted during the Third Crusade.35 Annales Ianuenses, vol. 2, a. 1187, 23–4.36 Ibid., a. 1188, 29.37 Ibid., a. 1189, 30: ‘transfretauit ad succursum terrae Suriae (…).’38 Ibid., a. 1188, 26: ‘ad regem Maiorice, cum quo ad honorem lanuensis urbis pacem usque ad annos xx firmauit, sicut in instrumentis latinis et sarracenicis litteris inde confectis redactum est (…).’ The treaties of 1181 and 1188 are edited in de Sacy, ‘Pièces diplomatiques’, 7–13 (a. 1181), 14–18 (a. 1188).39 Annales Ianuenses, vol. 2, a. 1191, 38: ‘misit Angelotum Vicecomiten legatum ad regem Maioricae (…).’40 Ibid., a. 1194, 49: ‘dum nauis quedam ditissima lanuensium de Septa Alexandriam properaret, Pisani cum nauibus suis et cursalibus portus Bonifacii (…) eam persequendo ceperunt.’41 Ibid., 50: ‘Ianuenses cum exercitu suo uersus Cathanensium ciuitatem, que reddiderat se et impugnabatur a Sarracenis et exercitu reginae uxoris quondam regis Tanclerii tenuerunt, et Sarracenorum exercitum inde eiecerunt de campo et fugauerunt.’42 Menache, ‘Papal Attempts’, 243–4.43 Annales Ianuenses, vol. 2, a. 1212, 124–5.44 Ibid., a. 1219, 154.45 Ibid., a. 1223, 192.46 Ibid., a. 1221, 178–9.47 Ibid., a. 1204, 92.48 Ibid., a. 1211, 118.49 Ibid., a. 1223, 192.50 Identified as Abū al-ʿAlāʾ by Pattison, ‘Trade’, 93. He cannot be identified with the Almohad caliph Abū al-ʿUlā al-Maʾmūn (r. 624–630/1227–1232), since Ibn Khaldūn claims that he died in Shaʿbān 620/September 1223. See Ibn Khaldūn, Tārīkh, vol. 6, 377–9, here: 378, who writes the name as Abū al-ʿUlā; see also Ibn Khaldoun, Histoire, vol. 2, 292–5, here: 295.51 Annales Ianuenses, vol. 2, a. 1223, 189–92. See Jehel, Les Génois, 55, 63–5; Epstein, Genoa, 112–13; Pattison, ‘Trade’, 59–61.52 Annales Ianuenses, vol. 3, a. 1231, 56–7; Jehel, Les Génois, 68; Pattison, ‘Trade’, 62.53 Annales Ianuenses, vol. 3, a. 1231, 57.54 Ibid., a. 1233, 68.55 On the Calcurini, see Claverie, ‘Pour en finir’, who identifies them as natives of Collioure employed by the lord of Roussillon. Epstein, Genoa, 122–3, regards the Calcurini as ‘Christian mercenaries’ fighting on behalf of the ‘king of Morocco’. This is partly confirmed by Jehel, Les Génois, 68, who inserts the affair of Ceuta into its North African context, but also accepts the Annals’ claim that the Calcurini presented themselves as crusaders.56 Annales Ianuenses, vol. 3, a. 1234–1235, 72–4.57 Ibid., a. 1235, 74–6.58 See Pattison, ‘Trade’, 61–8, for an engagement with both Latin and Arabic sources on the event.59 Annales Ianuenses, vol. 3, a. 1242, 124.60 Ibid., a. 1232, 62–6.61 Tolan, ‘Ramon de Penyafort’s Responses’, 172–3, 184.62 Annales Ianuenses, vol. 3, a. 1238, 88–9063 Ibid., a. 1240, 98.64 Ibid., a. 1241, 104.65 Ibid., 104, 118.66 Ibid., a. 1243, 148.67 Ibid., a. 1244, 153: ‘omnes autem qui audiebant et uiderant hec, dicebant: ecce guerram habemus cum domino imperatore et cum omnibus gentibus, et de nouo guerram incipimus cum domino papa; necesse habemus Saracenorum nel Iudeorum auxilium implorare quousque guerram facimus omnibus christianis.’68 Ibid., 151.69 Ibid., a. 1245, 161–2.70 Ibid., a. 1246, 168.71 Ibid., a. 1248, 178; Historia diplomatica Friderici Secundi, vol. 6,1, 465–7; Jackson, Seventh Crusade, 42–5 (docs. 26–7).72 Annales Ianuenses, vol. 3, a. 1249, 187.73 Ibid., vol. 4, a. 1266, 90.74 Ibid., a. 1264, 58: ‘in quibus preliis magna multitudo Sarracenorum gladio periit, et eciam quam plures christiani fuerunt occisi.’75 Ibid., a. 1254, 14–16; ibid., a. 1266, 86; ibid., a. 1269, 114–15.76 Ibid., a. 1265, 76–7.77 Ibid., a. 1267, 102–3, 113–14; Sternfeld, Ludwigs des Heiligen Kreuzzug, 115–16. Interpreting this as a political move into the anti-Staufen camp seems more plausible than suggesting with Jehel, Les Génois, 73, 77–82, that the crusade of 1270 underscores the religious dimension of Genoese politics.78 Ibn Khaldūn, Tārīkh, vol. 6, 425–6; König, ‘1270: Ibn Ḫaldūn’.79 Pryor, ‘Maritime Republics’, 437; Mitterauer and Morrissey, Pisa, 194–203.80 Sternfeld, Ludwigs des Heiligen Kreuzzug, 178–85, 205–6, 215–18, 220–36; Lower, Tunis Crusade, 144–73; and Jehel, Les Génois, 82–3.81 Jehel, Les Génois, 83, points to evidence suggesting that the commune reckoned with an expedition to Syria. The point made here is that the commune of Genoa, by providing the transport vessels, must have been informed about the decision to go to Tunis immediately after it had been communicated to the fleet and not only when the troops had already arrived in Carthage and begun fighting.82 Annales Ianuenses, vol. 4, a. 1270, 133–4: ‘qua ex causa omnibus patuit predictum exercitum ad partes Tunexim declinasse, quod quidem postquam fuit in Ianua nunciatum, doluit Ianuensis ciuitas uehementer ac admiratione commoti sunt uniuersi. erat enim omnium sapientium comunis intentio quod regis Francorum et cruce signatorum exercitus transfretare deberent pro subsidio Terre Sancte et recuperatione dominice sepulture quam in christianorum obprobrium ad quos hereditario iure spectat, irreuerenter detinent Sarraceni. et hec fuit causa doloris, quia nedum sapientibus sed quasi omnibus poterat esse notum quod in partibus Tunexim nichil uel quasi nichil profìcere poterai iam dictus exercitus nec eciam laudabilem sortiri effectum, sicut eciam postea aparuit ex euentu.’83 Ibid., 134.84 Ibid., 133.85 Ibid., 132: ‘erat enim regis intentio ipsos mercatores Ianuenses qui antea erant Tunexim non propterea offendere set saluare, credens et existimans quod non Ianuensium set aliorum conscilio Tunexim iam dictus diuertisset exercitus credens et existimans quod non Ianuensium set aliorum conscilio Tunexim iam dictus diuertisset exercitus.’86 Ibid., 135: ‘Ianuensibus uero illas, quas eisdem debebat, peccunie quantitates ad certum terminum se soluturum spopondit.’ Compare de Sacy, ‘Mémoire sur le traité’, 467–71; de Mas Latrie, Traités, vol. 2, 93–6; with ‘Traité de commerce conclu pour dix ans entre Tunis et la République de Gênes 1250’, ed. de Mas Latrie, in Traités, vol. 2, 118–21.87 Annales Ianuenses, vol. 4, a. 1270, 136–7. See also Epstein, Genoa, 156–7; Jehel, Les Génois, 85–8. For a wider view on tensions with Charles of Anjou, see Pryor, ‘Maritime Republics’, 438.88 Annales Ianuenses, vol. 4, a. 1264, 65–6; ibid., 1267, 107–8.89 Ibid.,vol. 5, a. 1281, 16–17.90 Jehel, Les Génois, 63–5, 84–5; Jehel, ‘Gênes et Tunis’; and Jehel, ‘Une ambassade génoise’.91 Annales Ianuenses, vol. 5, a. 1286, 72–73.92 Ibid., a. 1292, 141: ‘Sarraceni dicti loci Ianuenses iuuabant pro posse, tandem pactis interuenientibus dederunt Pisanis doblas mille auri, et eos dimiserunt in pace (…).’93 Ibid., a. 1281, 17.94 Ibid., a. 1287, 81.95 Ibid., a. 1292, 147: ‘rex Castelle obsedit per terram et mare locum qui dicitur Tariffa quem Sarraceni tenebant (…).’96 Ibid., a. 1286, 72: ‘Benedictus in gulfo Tunexim applicans inuenit ibi sagiteam unam nomine Leopardum, quam in fugam ponens fecit ferire ad terram. homines existentes in ea fuerunt per Sarracenos capti et in carceribus positi, sagiteam uero habuit dictus B[enedictus].’97 Ibid., a. 1289, 95.98 Ibid., 96: ‘in qua iuit missaticus pro comuni Albertus Spinula, que constitit ad armandum cum solidis dicti missatici libras (…) atque in eadem portauit dictos Sarracenos qui euaserant de dieta uani cum omnibus mercibus suis; et qui peteret a soldano iam dicto Ianuenses per eum detentos relaxari, qui etiam narraret eidem qualiter sapientes Ianue de captione diete nauis uniuersaliter doluerunt.’ See Amari, Nuovi ricordi, 13–19 (doc. III); Holt, Early Mamluk Diplomacy, 142–3.99 Annales Ianuenses, vol. 5, a. 1291, 128: ‘Benedictus Zacharias eius frater in seruitium don Sancii regis Castelle in Ispaniam contra Sarracenos ducere debebat (…).’100 Ibid., a. 1292, 147.101 Ibid., 143.102 Ibid., vol. 1, a. 1161, 62: ‘litteras suas’; ibid., vol. 3, a. 1234, 73: ‘Remedius Ianue potestas, receptis litteris a soldano Septe (…).’103 Ibid., vol. 1, a. 1101, 9–10.104 Ibid., 11.105 Ibid.106 Ibid., a. 1146, 34.107 Ibid., a. 1154, 39–40.108 Ibid., a. 1161, 61–2; ibid., vol. 2, a. 1177, 11; and ibid., a. 1188, 26.109 Ibid., a. 1223, 189–92.110 Ibid., vol. 3, a. 1231, 56–7.111 Ibid., a. 1234, 72–4, here: 73.112 Ibid., 74.113 Ibid., vol. 4, a. 1270, 132.114 Ibid., vol. 5, a. 1286, 72–3.115 Ibid., vol. 1, a. 1165, 185: ‘Rodoano de Mauro’; ibid., a. 1167, 201: ‘Rodoano de Mauro’; ibid., a. 1175, 205: ‘Rodoanus consul’; ibid., vol. 2, a. 1176, 9: ‘Rodoano de Mauro’; ibid., a. 1188, 30: ‘Rodoanus de Mauro’. Would ‘Maurinus Rodoani’, mentioned in ibid., a. 1186, 20, then be the ‘little Moor of Riḍwān’? But note that the name is also borne by other Genoese even earlier, i.e. before intensive diplomatic and commercial relations were established: ibid., a. 1146, 33; ibid., a. 1150, 36: ‘Rodoanus’; and ibid., a. 1161, 60: ‘Rodoanus Guillelmi Mauroni filius’. In an Arabic treaty of 1188 Rodoanus de Moro is transcribed ‘Riṭwān Dimūrū’. His assumed ‘Moorish’ origin is thus not acknowledged. See de Sacy, ‘Pièces diplomatiques’, 8.116 Tolan, ‘Ramon de Penyafort’s Responses’; Jehel, Les Génois, 65, 395–412.117 Annales Ianuenses, vol. 5, a. 1283, 33.118 Caffaro, ‘De liberatione’, 99: ‘a seruitute Turchorum et Sarracenorum liberate fuerunt.’; ibid., 103: ‘ad infernales penas in societate Machometi miserunt.’; ibid., 115: ‘comedendo, potando, sicuti mos Sarracenorum est.’119 König, ‘621: Isidore of Seville’.120 Annales Ianuenses, vol. 1, a. 1167, 202: ‘galee .x. Sarracenorum’; ibid., vol. 2, a. 1177–78, 11: ‘Sarraceni Sicilie’; ibid., a. 1194, 50: ‘Sarracenorum exercitum’; ibid., vol. 3, a. 1245, 161: ‘quibusdem Saracenis’; ibid., 163: ‘nuncium Miramolini’; ibid., vol. 4, a. 1264, 58: ‘Sarracenos Yspanie, auxiliantibus Sarracenos Barbaris et aliis Sarracenis de Garbo et barbaria (…)’; ibid., vol. 5, a. 1281, 17: ‘quidam Sarracenus qui Constantinam ciuitatem tenebat.’121 Ibid., vol. 1, a. 1154, 39.122 Ibid., a. 1161, 62.123 Ibid., a. 1146, 34.124 Ibid., a. 1161, 61.125 Ibid., vol. 2, a. 1177–78, 11; ibid., a. 1187, 23.126 Ibid., a. 1188, 26.127 Ibid., a. 1219, 154.128 Ibid., a. 1223, 189.129 Ibid., 192.130 Ibid., vol. 3, a. 1234–35, 74.131 Ibid., vol. 4, a. 1264, 58.132 Ibid., vol. 2, a. 1221, 179: ‘que tanto labore tantaque sanguinis effusione a paganorum spurcitiis fuerat liberata (…).’133 Jehel, Les Génois, 70, speaks of the Ceuta affair as ‘charnière entre une phase marocaine et une phase ifriqiyenne de cette politique (…). Le désordre occasionné par l’effondrement almohade se serait prolongé jusqu’en 1235, incitant les Génois à se replier de leurs anciennes positions de Salé et Ceuta vers Bougie et Tunis.’ This is questioned by Pattison, ‘Trade’, 69.134 See footnote 67.135 Petti Balbi, ‘Federico II e Genova’, 79–93.136 Lupprian, Beziehungen, 15–45; Hettinger, Beziehungen; Maillard, Les papes, 45–130; and König, ‘Phase’.137 Jehel, Les Génois, 83–4, also notes these contradictory attitudes, but tends to regard the depiction of Genoese enthusiasm in battle as an exaggeration of the annalist.138 Amitai, ‘Diplomacy’.139 Jehel, Les Génois, 78: ‘depuis Mahdiya et Almeria, les Génois n’ont pas cessé d’être au premier plan des combats pour la foi, non seulement en assurant le transport des troupes, mais en participant directement aux opérations’.140 Epstein, Genoa, 143; Valérian, ‘Gênes’, 828, 835.141 This does not rule out, however, the possibility that the Genoese were actively involved in crusading affairs and the affairs of the Latin East. See Mack, ‘Genoa and the Crusades’, 471–95.142 Al-ʿUmarī, Condizioni, 11 (Arabic), 19 (Italian); al-ʿUmarī, Masālik al-abṣār, vol. 2, 155: ‘wa-ahl Janwa ṣulḥ maʿa salāṭīninā wa-lahum taraddud ilā Miṣr wa-l-Shām fī al-tijārāt wa-man ẓafarū bihi min aʿdāyihim min ahl dīnihim akhadhū mālahu wa-qatalūhu fa-ammā in kāna min al-muslimīn fa-innahum idhā akhadhū mālahu abqūhu wa-bāʿūhu wa-li-hādhā li-al-Janawiyya lā yurfaʿ al-bāb lahum raʾsan wa-lā yabsuṭ lahum īnāsan (…).’Additional informationFundingThis work was supported by the DFG-AHRC-project ‘Interreligious Communication in and between the Latin-Christian and the Arabic-Islamic Sphere: Macro-theories and Micro-settings,’ led by Daniel G. König (Universität Konstanz) and Theresa Jäckh (University of Durham/Tübingen), under Grant 468400917 (DFG) and AH/W010909/1 (AHRC).