Godfrey of Bouillon

Please help support the mission of New Advent and get the full contents of this website as an instant download. Includes the Catholic Encyclopedia, Church Fathers, Summa, Bible and more — all for only $19.99...

Duke of Lower Lorraine and first King ofJerusalem, son of Eustache II, Count of Boulogne, and of Ida, daughter of Godfrey the Bearded, Duke of Lower Lorraine; b. probably at Boulogne-sur-Mer, 1060; d. atJerusalem, 18 July, 1100 (according to a thirteenth-century chronicler, he was born at Baisy, in Brabant; see Haigneré, Mémoires lus à la Sorbonne, Paris, 1868, 213). The history of his early years has been distorted by legend, according to which he slew with his own hand the anti-king Rodolphe at the battle of Moelsen (1080), and was first to enterRome after it had been besieged byHenry IV (1084). What appearscertain is that he was chosen to succeed his uncle Godfrey the Hunchback, Duke of Lower Lorraine, who was assassinated in 1076. ButHenry IV took Lorraine, leaving to Godfrey only the marquessate ofAntwerp. As a vassal of theGerman Empire Godfrey took sides with the army ofHenry IV in theWar of the Investitures and followed the emperor on his expedition toItaly againstGregory VII (1080-1084). In the interval he was compelled to return in order to defend his possessions which had been attacked by the Count ofNamur, and about 1089Henry IV restored to him the legacy of Godfrey the Hunchback by creating him Duke of Lower Lorraine. The new duke's authority was extremely weak when opposed to thefeudal power which had developed in the vicinity. At this time the whole north ofFrance was aroused by the letter ofUrban II, who besought the nobility ofFlanders to go on theCrusade. Godfrey was among the first to take the cross, together with his two brothers, Eustache and Baldwin (1096). To procure resources he sold or pledged many of his estates. Many nobles at once arrayed themselves under his banner, and about 15 August, 1096, he departed at the head of 10,000knights and 30,000 foot soldiers. His army was composed of Walloons and Flemings. "Born at the frontier of the two nations and himself speaking both languages", he served as the link between them, and by his authority appeased the quarrels provoked by their national self-esteem (Otto of Freisingen, Mon. Germ. Hist.: Script., XX, 250).

Thecrusaders reached the valley of the Danube and in September, 1096, arrived at Tollenburch (Tulin, west ofVienna), on the frontier ofHungary, where they learned of the disaster that had befallen the followers of Peter theHermit. Before enteringHungary Godfrey negotiated with King Coloman for a free passage through his dominions. He himself met the king, who welcomed him warmly, but took Godfrey's brother Baldwin as a hostage, together with his wife. During the march throughHungary (October, 1096) the strictest disciplines prevailed among thecrusaders, to whom the inhabitants furnished provisions in abundance. After crossing the Save, the army entered the territory of theByzantine Empire. At Belgrade Godfrey received a letter from the Emperor Alexius I (Comnenus), promising him assistance if thecrusaders would refrain fromviolence. At Nish and at Sterniz (Sofia), they found abundant provisions and presents from the emperor. After a halt of eight days at Philippopolis (26 Nov.-3 Dec.) the army approached Adrianople (8 December) and marched towards the Hellespont. Here occurred the first conflict between thecrusaders and the imperial government. According toAlbert of Aix, Godfrey, learning that the emperor held in captivity Hugues, a prince ofFrance, demanded the latter's freedom, and on the emperor's refusal pillaged the neighborhood of Salabria (Selymbria). As a matter of fact, the French prince was not aprisoner, but Godfrey and his army arrived before Constantinople (23 Dec., 1096) in a hostile mood, and closely watched by the imperial troops. Warned against the emperor, Godfrey kept away from the imperial palace.

However, during theChristmas festivities, he consented to cross the Golden Horn, and went into camp at Pera (29 Dec.). The chief desire of Alexius was to prevent the junction of Godfrey's army with that of Bohemond, leader of the Normans ofItaly; Alexius had hoped to induce Godfrey to swear fealty to him and then to remove his army toAsia. Throughout the winter Godfrey resisted the imperial demands. At last, 2 April, 1097 (the date given by Anna Comnena is preferable to 13 January given byAlbert of Aix; see Chalandon, "Alexis Comnène", 179), on the approach of Bohemond, the emperor decided to act, and cut off the supplies of thecrusaders. Several combats ensued, and, despite the contrary assertion ofAlbert of Aix, Godfrey must have been defeated. Anna Comnena states that he then consented to do homage to the emperor, promising to restore him any former imperial possessions which he might wrest from the infidels. Some days later theLorraine army was conveyed to Pelekan on the Gulf ofNicomedia, and at the end of April all the leaders of thecrusade were reunited. Godfrey appears to have acted as peacemaker, and he induced Raymond IV, of St-Gilles, Count ofToulouse, to swear fealty to the emperor. Far from directing thecrusade, he appears to have taken an obscure part in the siege of Nicæa and the battle of Dorylæum (1 July, 1097).

During the crossing ofAsia Minor he was seriously wounded while hunting. At the siege of Antioch he consented to obey the orders of Bohemond, and after the capture of the city he had to give up the castle which his followers had taken (July, 1098). On the way to Jerusalem. while others quarrelled, Godfrey marched towardsEdessa, where his brother, Baldwin, had just established himself. He returned from this expedition in October, 1098, and before entering Antioch, with only twelveknights, put to flight one hundred and fiftyTurks. According to the tradition repeated by Guibert de Nogent (Gesta, VII, 11), he had, with a stroke of the sword, hewn aTurkish horseman through the middle so that his body fell in two equal halves. Having returned toAntioch, he took part, together with Robert Courte-Heuse, Duke of Normandy, in the council of arbitration assembled to reconcile Bohemond and Raymond of St-Gilles. After 23 November, 1098, a number of thecrusaders left Antioch with Raymond, but Godfrey of Bouillon and Robert, Count ofFlanders, began to march onJerusalem only at the end of February, 1099. After besieging Gibel they rejoined the main army before Arka (12 March), were at Tripoli (13 May), Beirut (19 May), Cæsarea (30 May), and reachedJerusalem on 7 June.

Godfrey and his army took an active part in the siege of the Holy City. His camp was pitched to the westward. On 15 July, 1099, about nine in the morning, Godfrey and his brother Eustache placed a movable tower against the walls and were the first to enter the city. During the ensuing massacre ofMussulmans, Godfrey, thinking only of hisvow, stripped himself of his arms, and, barefooted and in his under-garments, made the rounds of the ramparts, and then went topray at the Holy Sepulchre. Thecrusaders were soon intent on providing a new king for the conquest. Severalbishops offered the crown to Raymond of St-Gilles, who refused, declaring "that the title of king seemed to him out of place in that city" (Raimond de Aguilers, Histor. Occid. des Crois., III, 301). Robert Courte-Heuse being urged declined in like manner. All refused to accept the burden which the new royalty must prove. Finally, Godfrey, being unanimously elected, accepted "for thelove ofChrist" (22 July). According to the chronicles of those times, he refused to wear the crown "through respect for Him who had beencrowned in that place with the Crown of Thorns". Indeed, he seems never to have borne the title of king (which only appears under his successor), and to have been content with that ofDuke andAdvocate of the Holy Sepulchre.

It may be that he acted in this manner through respect for theclergy, who regarded the new conquest as theproperty of allChristendom, and some of whom were averse to the election of a king (Raimond de Aguilers, Hist. Occid. Crois., III, 295). Godfrey seems to have always considered himself the protector of theChurch. Not only did he make so many donations thatWilliam of Tyre despairs of enumerating them, not only did he cede a fourth ofJaffa (Joppa), the city ofJerusalem, and the tower ofDavid to the patriarch Daimbert, but he consented, as did Bohemond, to receive investiture from the patriarch (William of Tyre, Historia, IX, XV). Godfrey displayed great energy in meeting the many difficulties which threatened the new State, but he was destined to succumb to sickness. On 12 August, 1099, having rallied thecrusading forces, he gained a victory atAscalon, thus preserving Palestine fromEgyptian invasion.

Assisted by thePisans, he rebuilt the city ofJaffa, which became a port of arrival forcrusaders. He signed a treaty of alliance with theVenetian fleet, agreeing to besiege Acre, but was attacked by the plague at Cæsarea, 10 June. After a short stay at thehospital which he had founded atJaffa, he returned to Jerusalem, where he died on 18 July, having named his brother Baldwin as his successor. He wasburied in the church of the Holy Sepulchre.

Thetomb of Godfrey was destroyed in 1808, but at that time a large sword, said to have been his, was still shown. Legend soon laid claim to him; in the contemporary accounts of theFirst Crusade (Gesta Francorum, Raimond de Aguilers, Foucher de Chartres, Anna Comnena, etc.), he is portrayed as the perfect type of aChristian knight. Tall of stature, with pleasing countenance, and with so courteous a manner "that he seemed more amonk than aknight" (Robert the Monk, Hist. Occid. Crois., III, 731), in the hour of danger he showed admirablecourage. As azealousChristian, he was among the first to take the cross, accomplished hisvow without the slightest deviation, and at great personal cost accepted the defence of the new conquest. Such is Godfrey as he appears in actual history. In the chronicle ofAlbert of Aix (d. 1120, edit. Hist. Occid. Crois., IV), the author already exhibits a tendency to put the figure of Godfrey in the foreground and to attribute to him, to a certain extent, the direction of thecrusade.Albert of Aix and Guibert de Nogent attribute to Godfrey exploits of an epic character (Guibert de Nogent, Gesta, VII, 11). When, in the thirteenth century, Jean d'Ibelin and Philip ofNovara edited the "Assises" ofJerusalem, they referred to Godfrey as a law-making king, and attributed to him a code, the "Letters of the Holy Sepulchre", which never existed. Indeed, at that time, and perhaps as early as the twelfth century, Godfrey of Bouillon had become, like Roland and Arthur, a hero of thechansons de geste. Thetrouvères provided him with a mythical origin, making him a descendant of the legendary "King of the Swan", whose feats he is made to repeat, and, after relating the events of his childhood, continued his adventures to the taking ofJerusalem. UnderPhilip Augustus, Graindor ofDouai reconstructed the works of a certain Richard the Pilgrim, and composed a complete history of thiscrusade: (1) "Elioxe", ed. Todd (Baltimore, 1889); (2) "Beatrix", ed. Hippeau (Paris, 1868); (3) "Antioche", ed. P.Paris (Paris, 1848); (4) "Jérusalem", ed. Hippeau (Paris, 1868); see L. Gautier, "Bibliographie des chansons de gestes" (Paris, 1897). In the fourteenth century, all these poems were collected under the title of "Roman du chevalier au Cygne" (ed. de Reiffenberg,Brussels, 1846-59).

CONTACT US |ADVERTISE WITH NEW ADVENT