Byzantine Negotiations during the First Crusade, part 3: The Action Starts now!

Now that Emperor Alexios has one crusader out of the way, what will he face next? Two of the most aggressive and wily leaders of the entire armed pilgrimage!

Background on the next two (Godfrey de Bouillon and Bohemond di Taranto)

The next two to arrive were arguably going to be the most difficult to negotiate with since they are not only infamous rouges, but skilled and savvy politicians on their own right.

Godfrey of Bouillon was a highly successful Duke from Lorraine (encompassing territory that is now modern-day Belgium and the Netherlands), which was contested ground between the Kingdom of France and the German Holy Roman Empire.  Thus, it was a battleground duchy not only between two higher political entities, but also people groups, with constant clashes and skirmishes in the area since the borders were so undefined.  Godfrey therefore is used to a life full of conflict, which differed from Prince Hugh’s more pampered life as a prince. 

Bohemond of Taranto (in modern day Southern Italy), although arguably one of the poorest of the Crusaders and having numerically the smallest army made up for these shortcomings by having the most experienced army that saw action all throughout the eastern Mediterranean.  Bohemond spoke fluent Greek, fought against Alexios before in previous Italo-Norman invasions of the Balkans (yes Bohemond and Alexios fought against each other in battle before), and had an intimate knowledge of literal Byzantine Politics through his extensive experiences and contacts in various wars around the Eastern Mediterranean.

While these two crusaders differed greatly from one another, they share things in common: being tough as nails, wily politicians, high ambitions, and hell bent on going eastwards. 

Now this is where the weirdness starts…

What happened on the way to Constantinople was not clear (as the sources seem to contradict each other) but what was clear was that both Godfrey and Bohemond were in the Balkans at around the same time. Many sources indicated that they may even had a correspondence going on during this time but that was not clear as well.

What was clear is that Godfrey was the one that arrived in Constantinople second after count Hugh.  However once Godfrey arrived, he did a few strange actions.  Even before any negotiation was attempted, Godfrey just camped his massive army in front of Constantinople in an apparent show of force.

This went on for quite some time, until Alexios sent Hugh of Vermandois and other Latins in his employ to try and convinced him to come to Constantinople to talk.

What happed next is a (very) simplified explanation of what happened next: Sending Hugh did not work and Godfrey essentially insulted Hugh as being an Imperial lacky and kept his army in battle formations.  In response, Alexios suddenly revoked the blanket license granted to Godfrey’s army to buy supplies and stopped giving them other support which led to Godfrey’s army facing dwindling supplies. With this prospect, Godfrey had to make a choice on what to do next, and suddenly attacked and pillaged the outskirts of Constantinople.

The Imperial Army fought back and ultimately won but had heavy casualties on both sides.

With dwindling supplies and the increasingly desperate situation of starvation approaching, Godfrey decided to negotiate in order to avoid what is turning into an increasingly lose-lose situation and do something to improve the situation.

So in order to start the negotiation, as per custom, hostages were exchanged.  Alexios actually gave not only Godfrey gifts but also a hostage: The Imperial Heir John Komnenos, the future Emperor John II. With this in place Godfrey met personally with the Emperor and decided to negotiate. The result was clear: in this situation Godfrey swore to the standard oaths all Latins contractors/mercenaries swore (the same one Count Hugh swore to Alexios) and was even given an Imperial salary for months (something that Hugh did not get).

Godfrey then was ferried over to Asia minor to join Hugh’s army in Asia minor. What happened in the negotiations were not very clear due to conflicting records, but what was clear is that Godfrey swore the oath, got many gifts, a salary, and was resupplied for the rest of the journey.

So, what happened and why did Godfrey, a Duke who is infamously aggressive and warlike agree to the terms of the Emperor and became an “Imperial Lacky” that he disparaged Count Hugh for being?  The answer lies in a concept called BATNA.

BATNA is an acronym for “Best Alternative to a Negotiated Agreement” and the key to understanding the situation lies in this concept.  While it might have been fascinating to listen in to any surviving transcripts of the exact negotiation that happened during this time, unfortunately recording devices were not invented yet and nobody knows what happened during this one-on-one meeting.

What was recorded were acts of aggression that Geoffrey publicly displayed and enacted, the exchange of hostages, the commission of an Imperial salary, and a public declaration of the stand oath that Latins swear to the Roman Emperor. 

While we do not the details and nuances of what exactly happened, we can infer via BATNA the motivations of each party and how they could have come to such an agreement.   

For Godfrey the BATNA was to essentially go find some other way to the holy land (but in disgrace and with more difficulty) if he cannot pass the toll both that is Constantinople, or simply to pack up and go home. While Godfrey could do this, he preferred not to and tried to get as much as he could out of the situation.  In fact for someone who had literally walked thousands of miles, moving forward was better than any other alternative.  Both sides knew this, and both sides attempted to go into a ZOPA territory (a Zone of Possible Agreement). Again, while it was not clear what took place during the negotiation, the following could be discerned: Godfrey was in previous contact with Bohemond (who was for whatever reason taking his time in the Balkans) and there could be the possibility of an agreement with Bohemond that they could join forces and attack Constantinople instead and dethrone the emperor.

With prospects of dwindling food supplies, Godfrey decided to negotiate since time was not on his side, he did not speak any Greek, and he suffered casualties attacking Imperial territory in an attempt to gain supplies. Theoretically he could have leaked information about Bohemond’s (supposed) plan to Alexios and see if he could get a better offer. Godfrey managed to get many concessions from Alexios, including an official imperial salary as well as restoration of supplies, gifts, transportation to Asia Minor and support for the campaign.  Whatever the case an agreement was created and Geoffrey got as much as he could from this negotiation.

Lessons from Godfrey

If we were to look at the differences in negotiation between Hugh and Godfrey, it is apparent that not only were they vastly different people with different personalities, but also required different approaches when it comes to negotiation. However, one important lesson to be learned from this stark contrast is the significance of understanding each party's perspective and catering to their desires during a negotiation.

For example, if we are to look at Hugh, Hugh was the younger brother of the King of France and seemed to be pampered by this experience. On the other hand, Godfrey was Duke of Lorraine, a contested territory between France and Germany who no doubt saw a lot of conflict and intrigue simply maintaining his position. Alexios simply could not use the same tactics on such a different personality. Out of all the leaders on this crusade, Godfrey was the only army to attack Imperial Territory and was no doubt the most aggressive leader to negotiate with so far. But one thing that we can discern from this is that the negotiation started even before talking face to face, and it is important to know not only your own position, but the position of the other side as well.

Another lesson that could be learned from this round of negotiation is that some difficult personalities that are more aggressive require aggression in kind. When negotiating with this type of personality not only is background and character important, but also payment in kind as well as knowing who has the advantage when it comes to time. Godfrey simply had less time than Alexios in the negotiations simply because he was leading an army on the march and armies march on their stomaches; Alexios in comparison has a massive empire under his control and could simply walk to his (well defended and supplied) storehouses at any time.

Both sides knew this, which is why Godfrey camped out in a show of force outside the Capital city to begin with—no doubt to get more concessions out of Alexios. Which Alexios promptly responded in kind by cutting off Godfrey’s supplies, which reduced Godfrey’s time even more, it became apparent after Godfrey initiated the said lose-lose situation that while Alexios is in a negative situation, Godfrey is in an even worse position as he was running out of food, time, and leadership capital. It was in the interest of both sides to negotiate a more productive path forward.

What we in the modern day can learn from this is that aggressive people require aggression in kind in order to temper the playing field and to always look at the position and mentality of the other side.  If you take a look at the actions of Alexios, while he could have wiped out Godfrey at any time, he chose not to since it was better to have them fight his enemies (the Turks) than have them fight the Empire. 

One thing to remember in this phase is that just because you are in a bad position yourself does not meant the other side is in a better position. Fawning and keeling over is NOT a good negotiation tactic; sometimes strength is needed in order to get a better outcome. However just because someone is an “enemy” now does not mean that they are an enemy later. Sometimes it is important to extend a metaphorical olive branch in order to move forward with negotiations, even if the olive branch is lending your own son and heir as a hostage.

Timing is everything and one must possess a keen awareness on a macro level that goes beyond each individual tactic. One thing that is also apparent from this set of negotiations is that negotiations started even BEFORE the two men spoke to each other face to face. The fact that there was a show of force, that led to a revocation of trade, which lead to a skirmish shows that what you do BEFORE talking with someone is just as important (sometimes even more so) than sitting down and talking with them.

While looking at Godfrey, it was apparent that he knew that his time horizon was shorter than Alexios and needed as much leverage as he could (“I need to make a deal now or face starvation!”). While Godfrey’s goal was to probably cross into Anatolia as an independent lord, he knew that doing was pretty much impossible, and he needed supplies and support in such an inhospitable, alien territory with enemies he has never fought against before and a completely different environment compared to his native land (just compare Belgium to Southern Turkey right down to language, food, customs, and even weather).

What can be learned from Godfrey is that in some cases (especially if you are at a massive disadvantage) it might be a good idea to start the “negotiations” even before meeting in order to create as much leverage as you can even before sitting down for the “actual” negotiation itself. However, the biggest mistake the Godfrey made is that he overplayed his aggression to the point that his army was starving.

Again, the old adage “know thyself.” What can be learned from this negotiation that patience is indeed a virtue, and negotiations often begin long before any physical meetings take place; negotiation often takes place via the actions taken place and enacted even before a word is even spoken. There are many lessons that could be learned from this episode and much can be used for future negotiations.

Bohemond of Taranto

The next up to negotiate with the Emperor was Bohemond of Taranto, an infamous rouge and arguably the most difficult one to deal with. Bohemond apparently not only spoke fluent Greek but had intimate knowledge of the politics of the region in both Christian and Muslim circles and already even had allies amongst several power brokers within the Empire itself, for example, his half-brother Guy was serving Alexios (who defected years ago in a previous war).

Bohemond also of course spoke (Norman) French, Latin, and Italian, and was an astute political animal when it comes to knowledge of the goings on in of various realms. His lieutenant, his nephew Tancred, apparently even spoke Arabic. His sudden appearance in Constantinople after a long delay could be interpreted in various ways. After spending more than six months going across the Balkans (which is much too slow for a journey for that short of a distance) he suddenly sped towards Constantinople and went straight to Alexios. 

We do not know why he had a sudden change of temperament but some have speculated that that he felt like he not only is running out of time trying to find more allies in a potential coup, but also lost his biggest potential co-conspirator that potentially already leaked his plan.  

While we may never know what his change of heat is, some scholars and historians speculated that he could better his position under loyalty to the emperor.  The Emperor is no fool and has a track record of enriching various previous former enemies in the past (evidenced by the Empire’s habits of employing Normans (such as Bohemond’s half-brother Guy) who switched sides during a losing war over a decade ago.  Alexios did not discriminate and was an equal opportunity employer, religion nor race mattered not and he was known to take in not only fellow (schismatic) Christians such as the Latins, but also Islamic Turkish nomads, if it made sense for him to do so, despite all fighting him decades ago.   

Whatever the reason, upon arriving to Constantinople, Bohemond proclaimed that he has always supported Alexios in his call to arms and was willing to swear an oath to him. However, he did try to squeeze a few things out of the deal, such as being proclaimed as the leader of the Latin army by Alexios, and for the position of Great Domestic of the East, an Imperial title that will give him absolute authority in Anatolia should it all be recaptured.  Just imagine having absolute authority in a land mass comprising most of modern-day Turkey!  

While surprised by this sudden turn of events Alexios then simply answered “The time for that has not come yet; but by your energy and reputation and above all by your fidelity it will come ere long.” (Alexiad p189) Essentially a vague and noncommittal answer, and then led him to a room full of treasure, probably gesturing something along the lines of “hint-hint.” Bohemond then promptly swore the oath and from that time onwards (until later in the campaign) worked with Alexios to the point of helping Alexios with future negotiations with the other Latin leaders.

Takeaways from Bohemond

Out of all the negotiations between the Crusades leaders and Alexios, I found the one between Bohemond and Alexios to be not only the most interesting and educational one, but also one that we all can learn the most from. One note of interest is that Bohemond was the only one of the Crusades leaders to speak Greek and had no need for an interpreter in order to personally, negotiate with the emperor.

The fact that Bohemond even knew what “Great Domestic of the East” even was speaks volumes about not only his intimate knowledge of the politics of the region in general but intimate knowledge of his “opponent” as well to get as much possible out of the negotiation.

Bohemond’s BATNA

Bohemond clearly knows that his BATNA of simply returning home to Italy (where he was disinherited by his family and was working as a mercenary) is nowhere near his potential reward submitting to the Emperor and finding new opportunities in the east; Bohemond clearly knows that there is a power vacuum in Anatolia that is worth taking advantage of that the other, “fresh off the boat” Europeans did not even realize.

Intimate knowledge counts

There is a lesson to be learned from all of this intimate knowledge—the more you know the more interesting the negotiation. Case in point: knowing the language needed to negotiate without an interpreter is a VERY important leverage point to have, having first-hand experience in the area always trumps wealth and power, and sometimes it is not the number of resources you have, but rather making the most out of what you have.

It is also worth noting that opponents are never set-in stone, just because one day someone is your enemy does not mean that someday you will be taking an oath and work under the same person. One more aspect that could be discerned is when you do not want to give a promise, sometimes it is better to leave a vague answer and deflect, just like Alexios’ answer and distraction. Just like other general advice in life, do not burn bridges down and keep avenues of relationships open and do not keep any promises you cannot keep.

However as will be shown by the next article is that while an agreement was made, Alexios still did not fully trust Bohemond and had many “insurance policies” against him just in case as a part of the future negotiation.  Just because a deal is made now does not mean that it can be “reinterpreted” later.  They might have one goal right now, but as the saying goes, “the only constant is change.”