Free A History of the Crusades-Vol 2 by Steven Runciman Page A

reconquered.
Hitherto the Normans had been hampered by lack of sea-power. But the Byzantine
navy was now concentrated far away in the Adriatic; and Tancred was able to
purchase the aid of a Pisan squadron. The price that Pisa demanded was a street
in Antioch, and a quarter in Lattakieh, with a church and a godown. Petzeas,
who had succeeded Cantacuzenus as Byzantine commander there, was powerless to
offer resistance. Lattakieh was finally incorporated into the Antiochene
principality in the spring of 1108. Next year Tancred extended his dominion
farther to the south, taking Jabala, Buluniyas and the castle of Marqab from
the dissolving dominions of the Banu Ammar.
     
    1109: Tancred at
the Height of his Power
    Thus, when Bohemond surrendered to the Emperor and
signed away his independence, Tancred was reaching the height of his power and
was in no way disposed to obey the imperial decree. From the Taurus to the
Jezireh and central Syria his was the chief authority. He was ruler of Antioch
and Edessa, only their regent, it is true; but Prince Bohemond now lived
discredited in Italy and would never return to the East, and Count Baldwin
languished in Turkish captivity, from which Tancred would make no effort to
rescue him. The Prince of Aleppo was his virtual vassal and none of the
neighbouring emirs would venture to attack him. And he had triumphantly defied
the heir of the Caesars at Constantinople. When the Emperor’s ambassadors came
to Antioch to remind him of his uncle’s engagements, he dismissed them with arrogance.
He was, as he said, Ninus the great Assyrian, a giant whom no man could resist.
    But arrogance has its limitations. For all his
brilliance, Tancred was distrusted and disliked. It was by his own Crusading
colleagues that his power was challenged and checked.
     
     
    CHAPTER IV
    TOULOUSE AND
TRIPOLI
     
    ‘ The glory of
Lebanon shall come unto thee.’ ISAIAH LX, 13
     
    Of all the princes that set out in 1096 for the
First Crusade, Raymond, Count of Toulouse, had been the wealthiest and the most
distinguished, the man whom many expected to be named as leader of the
movement. Five years later he was among the least considered of the Crusaders.
His troubles were of his own making. Though he was no greedier and no more
ambitious than most of his colleagues, his vanity made his faults too clearly
visible. His policy of loyalty to the Emperor Alexius was genuinely based on a sense
of honour and a far-sighted statesmanship, but to his fellow-Franks it seemed a
treacherous ruse, and it won him small advantage; for the Emperor soon
discovered him to be an incompetent friend. His followers respected his piety;
but he had no authority over them. They had forced his hand over the march to
Jerusalem during the First Crusade; and the disasters of 1101 showed how little
fitted he was to direct an expedition. His lowest humiliation had come when he
was taken prisoner by his young colleague Tancred. Though Tancred’s action,
breaking the rules of hospitality and honour, outraged public opinion, Raymond
only obtained release on signing away any claims to northern Syria and
incidentally destroying the basis of his agreement with the Emperor. But he had
the virtue of tenacity. He had vowed to remain in the East. He would keep his
vow and would still carve for himself a principality.
     
    The Banu Ammar
of Tripoli
    There was one area that must be conquered by
the Christians if their establishments in the East were to survive. A band of
Moslem emirates separated the Franks of Antioch and Edessa from their brothers
in Jerusalem. Of these emirates the most considerable was that of the Banu
Ammar of Tripoli. The head of the family, the qadi Fakhr al-Mulk Abu Ali,
was a man of peace. Though his army was small he ruled a wealthy district, and
by a skilful if inconsistent attitude of appeasement towards all his neighbours
he maintained a precarious independence, relying in the last resort upon the
strength of his fortress-capital,