Gone Medieval - The Normans in Italy: From Pilgrims to Conquerors

Episode Date: August 6, 2024

Say Norman Conquests; think 1066 and William the Conqueror. But the massive success of the English conquest often overshadows the several other conquests across Europe which the Normans executed very successfully. Dr. Eleanor Janega is joined by Dr. Levi Roach to consider how the Normans fared in 11th century Italy, how the papacy forced a rethink of war strategy and how stories of religious conflict are often used to gain territory and power. Gone Medieval is presented by Dr. Eleanor Janega and edited by Ella Blaxill. The producers are Joseph Knight and Rob Weinberg. The senior producer is Anne-Marie Luff.Gone Medieval is a History Hit podcast.Don’t miss Dr. Eleanor Janega’s forthcoming series on the Normans on the History Hit TV channel. Enjoy unlimited access to award-winning original TV documentaries that are released weekly and AD-FREE podcasts. Sign up HERE for 50% off your first 3 months using code ‘MEDIEVAL’: https://historyhit.com/subscriptionYou can take part in our listener survey here: https://www.surveymonkey.co.uk/r/6FFT7MK Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

From long-loss Viking ships and kings buried in unexpected places to tales of murder, power, faith, and the lives of ordinary people across medieval Europe and beyond. Join me, Matt Lewis, Dr. Eleanor Jarniger, and some of the world's leading historians as we bring history's most fascinating stories to life, only on history hit. With your subscription, you'll unlock hundreds of hours of exclusive documentaries

with a brand-new release every week exploring everything from the ancient world, to World War II. Just visit historyhit.com forward slash subscribe. Hello, I'm Dr. Eleanorianaga and welcome to Gone Medieval from History Hit, the podcast that delves into the greatest millennium in human history. We uncover the greatest mysteries, the gobsmacking details, and the latest groundbreaking research from the Vikings to the Normans, from kings to popes, to the Crusades. We delve into the rebellions, plots,

and murders that tell us who we really were and how we got here. When we talk about the Norman conquests, it's easy to forget that there's a plural there. After all, both the date 1066 and the name William the conqueror loom large in the anglophone consciousness. And that's fair. Taking over a neighboring kingdom and irrevocably changing the language, political structure, and even the architectural vernacular is an impressive feat. But the massive success of the English conquest often overshadows the several other attempted and successful conquests across Europe and even into Africa in the Middle East, which the

Normans pulled off. I'm Dr. Eleanor Yonaga. And today, on Gone Medieval from History Hit, I am joined by returning champion Dr. Levi-Roch to chat about the Norman conquests of southern Italy. We'll consider how the war game changes when the papacy is involved, how stories of religious conflict are often used as excuses to gain territory and power, and find out why a Norman with a newly acquired bit of territory is kind of like a banker with a new car. Just trust me on this one. Levi, a huge welcome back to Gone Medieval. The very best place to start is probably when the Normans

actually arrive in the Italian lands. What does Italy look like in the 11th century? I mean, if we can even use the term Italy. Yeah, so we are really talking here about southern Italy, and that's quite important in a way in that there's a long history of an Italian kingdom going back to a Lombard kingdom that's fairly centralized in the northern half of Italy. But southern Italy has been complicated, shall we say, for some time. And so it is a very fragmented political scene. There are significant parts of the southern half of the peninsula that are in Byzantine hands, so the hands of the Eastern Roman emperors, and bits of that have been held on to for a very long time, indeed, going back to Justinian. So there's longstanding presence there, but equally, there is an Islamic

Emirate in Sicily, occasionally reaching over to the mainland. And then there are a series of Lombard principalities that owe their origins to the Lombards in the early Middle Ages, but it's always been autonomous, often de facto, sometimes de Ure as well. And so we're much further away from the Lombard bases of power in Pavia in the north. So these are polities with longstanding traditions of independence placed on places like Capua Salerno and Benevento. And they tend to be relatively small-scale principalities. So they're independent players of Lombard descent, broadly speaking, a kind of proto-Italian or romance language. Crucially, there's bits of Greek still being spoken as well, particularly in some of those Byzantine areas. So these are areas that were, of course,

colonized by ancient Greek. So it's also very diverse linguistically. culturally, politically. And what makes the Normans get down there in the first place? It's a fairly long way from Northern France. It is a long way from Normandy. And I think one of the things we need to have in the back of our minds, of course, is that the Normans weren't really in origin Normans, but Northman. So they were well aware that their origins lay outside of the Duchy of Normandy, although by the time we're talking about they are largely Francophone and culturally French or Northern French. So I think that's one part of the the puzzle for a start is the Normans have come to Normandy from somewhere, and it's not as big a

leap for them to go somewhere else. But it still is a long way, and it's not the obvious first place to go. This isn't conquer in Maine or Brittany or things like that, or indeed even England. So what it seems to be is that the original contacts with Italy, and a number of our sources attest to these, came by means of pilgrimage. Of course, this is a period in the late 10th into the 11th centuries where pilgrimage is becoming more popular and particularly pilgrimage to the Holy Land. and one of the natural routes is partially or fully by sea for which southern Italy is a natural staging post. Other important places, of course, though, are a place like Rome as a center for pilgrimage, which is not very far from these parts of southern Italy, and a number of the early Normans are there,

at least partially, at the request of the Pope or supporting his desires. And then another crucial piece of the puzzle is Monte Gargano, which is, of course, a important pilgrimage site for the Archangel Michael. And this is important because Montegargano in southern Italy was a common staging post to the Holy Land for a start. People often stop off on their way to or from, but also a common extension of a pilgrimage to Rome. And from a specifically Norman standpoint, we have really quite good evidence for Norman interest in the cult of the archangel from an early day. So famously Monsal, being this great Norman monastery, strongly evocative of their dedication to the cult of the Archangel, which across Europe's becoming more popular anyway, but again, particularly Normandy's

a bit of a front runner here, if you will. So there's a good reason why a Norman might be doubly likely to want to go to Monte Gargano. And so that seems to be the kind of constellation that first brings southern Italy into the Norman orbit, is that we have various forms of pilgrims using it as a staging post or going specifically to southern Italy and back to Normandy. So there's then a set of contacts between these places. And it's out of those, then, really that moves towards settlement and more permanent present seem to arise. So one of our best sources here is Amatus of Monte Cassino writing in the kind of 1070s, perhaps about 1080 or so, about the origins of the Normans there. And he says the very first group to be employed as mercenaries

were actually coming back from the Holy Land. And they stop off at Salerno, and there's an attack, in fact, from the Amarit in Sicily, so a hostile Muslim attack, and they're able to play off of the confessional angle there as well. Come on, help some fellow Christians. And of course they say, sure, but we have no arms. They say, don't worry, we'll give you the weapons. We just need the manpower. And they defeat them wonderfully. And then they get asked, please don't go.

We need you to stay. And they say, no, no, no, but we promise to go back home. But tell you what, we'll tell some of our friends and family. I promise we'll send someone else after us. And of course, that's what they do. And it's all garbed up in myth. But the colonel there, there might be some guys coming to or from the Holy Land who stop off at a Lombard principality and decide to help out against a common foe that they see in the,

Islamic Emirate in Sicily, is entirely plausible. So far, so pious. This is a bunch of just wonderful guys who are either doing things for the papacy or doing correct Christian things. But do all of our sources have these kind of accounts, or is there a contrast in terms of how people talk about their arrival? Well, there's, of course, very different perspectives on this. Amatus is writing very much from a Norman perspective, and most of our detailed narratives are pro-norman, if you will, written by Normans or for Norman groups, Amatis doesn't seem to be Norman himself, but is very much part of the powers that be

in the new duchy that's been created by the 1070s and 80s. But they're looking back very teleologically. This is the great foundation story of something that's wonderful now. It's like if you've looked at Normandy's own foundation, someone like Dudo of Saint-Cantan, you're celebrating the creation of something

after it exists, but projecting it all back into the past. What's quite clear is that for other people, this is just frankly a pain in the arts. So if you're Byzantine, they are happy when the Normans are serving them loyally, which is some of the time, but much of the time they're not. So when it's good, when it's bad, if you're looking at Muslim sources, they don't have a lot to say for the very early years, but again, the Normans, once they do appear, are just a problem. But also for the Lombard princes, initially, they're the ones who are keen on the Normans, and they want to kind of leverage them. But once the Normans become enough of a presence, they start realizing the Normans aren't really interested in helping the Lombard princes.

they're not really interested in helping the Byzantines. They're interested in helping number one, the Normans. And so pretty quickly this becomes clear to everyone, but by then it's almost too late. They've been able to leverage this very divided political scene, where particularly as mercenaries, which is how they're coming in, you go to whoever's paying, you can fight for this guy one time, the other side, the other time, it's kind of perfect.

A little bit of mayhem is what you need to get wedged in there. And then once they're wedged in, they start bulking larger and larger. And that's when we also start seeing the Pope's change. change their tune. By the 1040s, 1050s, the popes decide, hey, these guys, guess what, that they're not just interested in helping us. They're interested in helping themselves. We start seeing the German emperors, what would be later the Holy Roman emperors, getting upset because they have a residual claim to southern Italy, but again, they just don't want somebody big and powerful. They're happy with it, divided and calm. But as soon as it's

clear, the Normans are becoming top dog in southern Italy, the papacy doesn't like this, the emperor doesn't like this, the Byzantines don't like it. And so all the Germans, of those sources tend towards being hostile to the Normans, though often with some grudging respect as well. So one of the great sources for them from the other side is Anna Komena, who writes from a very Byzantine perspective and sees these people as not very trustworthy and all the other things, but also hugely admires their ferocity and their success in battle. So you always also get this tinged with an acknowledgement that they have these great achievements, but we'd really rather they didn't, frankly.

Okay. So they've got these great achievements. And a surprise, the Normans are very good at fighting. And, you know, actually one of the things that I find most interesting about Normans is exactly what you said, how good they are at propaganda, right? Their ability to really write themselves a history that will make you sit up and notice. But how do they go from being some pilgrims or just some petty mercenaries who are kind of hanging around the joint to actually conquering territory and staying? So the crucial thing there is both skill and luck. So it's a combination of political skill in playing off those different factions. They come in originally primarily on the Lombard side, and that remains one of their major employers. But pretty soon they're also being hired as mercenaries by the Byzantines. And crucially, the Byzantines and the Lombards in this power constellation, occasionally, yes, are teaming up against the Islamic Emirate. But really, confessional divides aren't very big here. And there's a difference between the Lombards being Latin right Christians, i.e. what we later call Catholics and the Byzantines being Greek, right. So it's messy. And they're not always and quite often enemies. So from very early on, the Normans are happily going to whoever's

going to pay them more or wherever they see better prospects. They're also then able to use the fact that there are a series of revolts in the Byzantine Empire, particularly in Byzantine, southern Italy, in 1017 to 18. That's one of the first times we have independent reports of Norman activity, and they're on the side of the rebels, again in the 1040s. But as I say, they're also then finding other routes in. So in 1038, they're part of a Byzantine force that goes to Sicily. that also includes bits of Lombards. So, again, someone's paying us to do stuff. And crucially, then, it's in 10-4-2 that they seem to have enough of them,

powerful enough, and this is in the context of the second revolt against the Byzantines, to decide, no, we're going to go it alone. Because that revolt was originally, as it were, a Lombard, in inverted commas, revolt against Byzantine authority. But then they decided, no, no, no, we're not doing this for the Lombard princes. Some of them will remain our allies, but actually we're doing this for us, crucially. And that's when they name one of the ones. of their group, William Iron Arm, their leader. Because not hitherto, they've come as many different

groups. And this is probably the biggest number. They've settled at Aversa, so they've got a permanent base there, but they don't have a single leader. They don't need it. Because again, they're being hired by external people who tell them where to go and what to do. But this is the point where they say, no, this is for our show. It's combined with a parceling up of large parts of southern in Italy. So it's a kind of agreement in which 12 major figures are given lands of their own. Many of these are in territories they don't yet control. So it's classic parceling up things you plan to conquer rather than all have. But it's the starting place of saying, we have a plan. We want something bigger and we're doing it crucially for ourselves. And so that's kind of when

we can talk about a Norman polity or something like that evolving. I mean, and that's just such Norman behavior, though, isn't it? looks rather a lot like exactly the same thing that went on in England. I mean, you can say what you wish about, you know, 1066 being one glorious push. But really, it's a series of things that involves parceling up a lot of land and moving a lot of guys over in much the same way. Yeah, or even a stronger parallel perhaps is what happens not purely in England, but what happens in the years after 1066 in the Welsh marches or things like that, in the sense that it's something that doesn't have a single mind directing it, in a sense, the Norman Conquest, although there are some

strong parallels is kind of awed in comparison to other Norman conquests, including of Normandy itself, in that there does genuinely seem to have one guy who wanted to get something done and actually gets it done, whereas this is a lot of guys wanting something for themselves, and slowly finding their way to a leadership and an accommodation and things like that, but really all of them are out, not for the Normans, but for themselves. They've gone to southern Italy because they see better prospects there than Normandy. One of the things probably pushing them is the 1030s and 40s, when William the Conquer, of course, is a young lad in Normandy and the political situation is a mess. It seems to be kind of one of those things that's been one of the push

factors, but they're really out there to win land and territory for themselves, and they're all trying to do it and all trying to one up themselves. And this is one of the things that at points slows them down, because they're all competing with one another, but also in a weird way, plays in their favor at times as well, in a sense that there is this competitive game amongst them. They're all keen to win greater glories. And so this does. encourage a degree of boldness perhaps and brazenness that you wouldn't otherwise have seen. So who are these guys then? We've got a bunch of random Normans over here.

We've got William Iron Arm, which, gosh, you know, you don't want that guy showing up. This is just like foreshadowing, right? He sounds like a wrestler or something like that. But who are the other major players who show up in Italy? So the key players really are the Hoteville brothers end up being the ones who run the show there. So these are a set of brothers and half-brothers. So they're the sons of William de Houtville, who is a low-level aristocrat from the contantan.

So he's, in Norman terms, really a relative nothing, but who has a huge number of sons. And so it does seem to be a classic situation of not very good prospects in Normandy with part of the inheritance, but an awareness that they might be able to do something daring if the opportunity presents itself. And so crucially, initially, and William Iron Arm is the eldest, of these brothers. They, older brothers, all moved to southern Italy. And once William dies, then the leadership passes to his half-brothers. So it ends up starting to form itself into a dynasty. And eventually then the leadership passes to this chap called Robert Giesgard, who ends up becoming

most famous of all. He's actually the elder of the two younger half-brothers. I know this is all getting rather complicated. But the crucial thing being here is a younger half-brother, therefore, of William. and he inherits then power and control in the 1050s. So once the Normans are much more established, he's then relatively younger and he's able to reap some of these rewards. But it's a slow process, really, for the Houghtville family, because they've not come in as high-level nobles. Most of the people doing this are not high-level nobles. Otherwise, why would you leave Normandy? They've gone there because they're not big shots in Normandy.

And so they're establishing themselves, but it takes a lot more to establish yourself as a leader of people who back at home, you're the equal to or indeed possibly less wealthy then or less influential than. And so that's one of the other growing pains of this new polity is they're having to construct it with relatively few men. Far fewer Normans go to southern Italy than go to England. They're doing it without a clear leadership in the early stages. And even once that leadership's there, it's contested. There's not a complete consensus that these people have these right. So it takes a good few generations till this all beds in. And that's one of the reasons why Norman conquest of Italy arguably begins at around 1,000, but is completed in the 1090s in terms of then when Sicily's finally taken. So it's multiple generations. And even

if we limit ourselves to kind of active conquest, 1040s to 1090s, it is really a much, much bigger span. But again, I think that's where it's much more like what you see with Norman penetration into Wales or into Ireland. And again, those are more similar to southern Italy as well and they're politically divided too. You can't just knock out one empire, one capital and take everything over. Great. You've got Apulia, what about Calabria, what about Sicily? There's multiple different Lombard princes for a start, and they don't all agree all the time. So you've really got to be knocking out five, six different political players, and you've got to do this one by one in a landscape that also doesn't really help that much. That again, it's much more like a Wales than like in

England, a mountainous landscape. They're also having to learn naval warfare, which is another kind of thing for the Normans that classically as Vikings, they've been good at this, but in Normandy, they've not been doing it for a good few generations. And that's the other. And And suddenly they're besieging Bari, and it's a real problem because the Byzantines know their way around a boat. And so the Normans kind of have to relearn naval warfare. And it's one of the things that later Panagira celebrate when they take Bari, which it kind of seals their conquests of the Byzantine areas. But the biggest, most impressed thing is we managed to blockade the city. We managed to do things with boats, guys.

We didn't just do things with horses. We did it, guys. We are back. We're so back. I absolutely love that for them, this kind of coming back around to your rootsness of it. I got to say several generations of immigrant. And, you know, when you try to learn things again, yeah, you know, relatable, relatable stuff from the Normans here. But, okay, of course, they're back on the boats.

They are playing a really successful game of Lombard Wackamol. But then you start coming up against larger entities such as the papacy as a result of this, right? Because, you know, as you were mentioning, it's really cute when there's like one or two kingdoms. but then when there's rather a lot of Normans in your backyard, the papacy's not particularly happy about this, are they? Yes, precisely. The papacy doesn't have large landed assets at any point in the Middle Ages. So the interest always is in having pliable people who will support you,

but ideally not too powerful. If you've got to have an emperor, preferably north of the Alps, preferably well inclined to you. If you've got to have people in southern Italy, again, preferably Latin right Christians, so that's why they're initially quite keen. let's support the Lombards, let's support the Normans, but not too powerful, not overshadowing you, not upsetting institutions that you're closely allied with. And that's really where we see the tone change. So in the 1017, 1018, that first rebellion against the Byzantine, the papacy is very much

on the side of the Normans and really does seem to be keen on them. But that's changing, crucially, over the kind of 1050s is really the tipping point. This is the point at which they're starting to carve out significant tracts of land to become one of the major players. And the Lombard princes now are no longer seeing them as helping us against the Byzantines and or the Islamic Emirate, but actually competing with us because that's precisely what they're doing. And then they need their own allies. And so it's in that context that famously Benevento becomes, as it were, what would at least later be termed a papal thief, but is granted at least nominally to the papacy is a way of

securing papal support. So let's get the Pope on side. He's another person we can use to leverage, maybe get some troops, but also get a bit of spiritual firepower and all the rest that comes. comes with it and the political reach. And so this is the beginning really of the big anti-Norman alliance that ends up forming against these early settlements. And so it's this that then crystallizes into the Battle of Chivitate in 10-5-3, which is the closest, if you will, to the Battle of Hastings in southern Italy. There's no complete equivalent because you can't just defeat one guy as we've

established. So it's not that kind of swift conquest. But this is the one big battle, which if the Normans lose, it's quite possibly the end of their polity. And this is something, again, we see with these kinds of settlements of Normans and of others in other places. So, Norman polities are briefly set up in Iberia, in Asia Minor under the Byzantines and things like that. So there's a lot of Norman settlements that never actually get off the ground. Italy maybe looks like it could be about to go that way. And we probably wouldn't be having this podcast now if they had, because it would have been an interesting, oh, they tried to do something interesting for 20 years and it all fell apart, even a bit less than 20 years, never really got off the ground.

Never going to work, really, was it? So what ends up happening there, though, is that the popes then are getting increasingly aggravated. And so they end up creating alliance with multiple Lombard princes, papal forces themselves, not very large in terms of that, that standard again for the medieval papes, as you'll know, but then crucially also imperial support and also getting Byzantine support as well in terms of this. So you've suddenly got actually everybody, barring the Islamic Emirate, allied against the Normans. The troops don't materialize in the numbers they'd ideally like

as when you're trying to balance multiple different groups and so on, but there's no doubt that the troops then end up pinning the Normans down at Chivitate in 10-5-3 are superior to the Norman forces. And so this is a classic role of the dice, again medieval generals, again famously, typically not actually liking big battles unless you've got to risk, but Norman backs to the wall, and it's a case of we have to win this. There is no other option. And so there is this, decisive battle, and crucially for the future of the Norman settlement there, the Normans win absolutely decisively, and they end up capturing the Pope, and that basically is the end for this alliance. There's efforts to rejuvenate bits of this, mostly people will remain hostile to them,

but the idea that, oh, it'll be easy, let's just get the band back together, we can beat them. It's failed completely once. It never materializes in that way again. And in future years, put very simply, relations with the papacy then end up going very much up and down. So at times, very positive at times negative, almost as the inverse then to their relations. Typically, if the popes are getting on well with the emperors, they're getting on badly with the Normans and vice versa. And it can be either that's occasion that whoever typically is the greater threat from their perspective, they'll ally with the other. During the investiture contest, famously, Normans are back. They're cool again. We've always liked the Normans. Please help us against Henry

the fourth. He's a bastard. And that's where, when famously, Normans in fact, take Rome and sack Rome. But in the name of a reform pope, who's not very happy with the Roman aristocracy anyway. But so that ends up being the concessions. But yeah, those are the big enemies who do, and it's 10-5-3, and that build up from kind of 10-49 onwards where we start seeing eyes are open, everyone realizes the Normans aren't a joke anymore. After 10-5-3, they're definitely not a joke anymore, but they're part of the political landscape.

Everyone also now realizes they're too well-enrenched to get rid of, so we're now working with them and when we need to against them. So it's kind of like the not just Rome is worth a mass, you know, Rome is worth a light-sacking here and there, I suppose. Exactly. Exactly. And it is then in the years after that, there's initially quite a bit of hostility, but once the Rapprochma comes in and Archdeacon Hildebrand, the later Gregory the Seventh, the great reformer, was actually instrumental in this, one of the things then the popes are able to use them for,

of course, which they're quite interested in, is pointing them towards Sicily. Hey, guys, there's some Muslims here in Italy. Look over there. You go get them. Don't get us. Everyone will be happy. And so one of the things that ends up sealing the eventual rapprochma is, and these are the Accords of Melfies, is having the Pope, say, formally investing the Normans, who, again, because the Hopeville family has kind of created a duchy of themselves and are desperately in need, therefore, of a degree of legitimation. The Pope acknowledges them formally as dukes of this new polity, but also grants them in the process, Sicily, which they don't really have at all right now. In fact, they don't have any of Sicily. But as a kind of grant in prospect is an olive branch,

and clearly indicating where the Normans want to go, but also that's in papal interest, you know. Stop messing with Monte Cassino. We like Montecino. We like Monty. Monte Cassino, look south, look to Sicily. And who are we sending down to Sicily? You've already mentioned Robert Guiscard. Is this kind of one of the guys that the Pope is turning around to face south? So crucially, yes, Robert is somebody with the Pope wants to be facing off against ideally Muslims and or Byzantines, but not facing northwards, not creating problems with Monte

Casino, as this might have. And Montecino is one of the real centres that's annoying them in terms of for the papacy, that are a nice old papal ally, venerable monastery, just leave the point. four chaps B. Giscard is the big player, and he's the one who is nominally in charge of these Norman domains, but it is still, in a sense, quite nominally. And the crucial other players is his younger full brother, Roger. And they're the kind of pair that drive this forward. And one of the early disagreements they have is, in fact, overland, because they're there, they don't have much of it, they need to conquer it. And it's, of course, in Robert's interest to keep as much power as he can

to himself. And Roger is there to get his own land, not just to help Big Brother. I mean, that's not why I've come here. And it's actually replaying a problem that Robert himself came. Robert himself first rocked up in the south and said to Drogo, his elder half-brother, hey, I'm here. Want to give me some land? And Drogo? I said, yeah, that's nice. No. Win some for yourself. Come back to me when you've got some of your own, basically, it's the message he said. And this then replays once more actually when Robert himself's in charge is then his young brother saying, well, where's my land? Well, huh. But the expedient they end up settling upon is actually saying, hey, look, we'll give you and give you main control over crucially parts of collaboration.

of all Sicily. And the great thing for Robert Guiscard there is we don't have Sicily yet. I'm happy to give this away because it ain't mine, really. I'm not losing anything here. If Roger can go off and conquer Sicily for himself, he can have it. And then Roger's happy, and I'm happy, because he holds it from me. And so that ends up being what really works is he's given those very southern and western domains are always foreseen as Rogers. And so the initial settlement is he's given some lands that they do already have, but it's adjacent to there. So heading down into Calabria and Sicily. And that's his job, whereas it's, Robert's job to mop up Apulia, and that's where he ends up setting up shop is his main

center of operations. So that's how it's proceeding. That's, again, another reason why this takes quite so long. They've got multiple opponents, and they're often having to fight multiple fronts with relatively few men. So it's not infrequently the case that in, say, the 1060s, is that Rogers off campaigning in the West and that Roberts campaigning in the East. And so with relatively small forces, often taking quite a few years to make headway. And the conquest of Sicily, for example, only really starts making quick progress once Robert's finished with Bari. So once he's finished with Byzantine, suddenly, hey, we can move everything over. But even then, there's distractions. By the 1080s, Robert decides, hey, I quite fancy invading the Balkans

and a bit of Greece over there. I can see Byzantine lands on a nice day from here. Let's cross the Adriatic. And so he's doing this while Rogers, you know, still halfway through trying to conquer Sicily. So they're trying to take every opportunity they're offered. But as a result, it does end up being piecemeal, slow, and gradual. And Roger, as then, there's this other big figure. And it's actually from Roger that the future line is then descended, that end up becoming the eventual kings of Sicily, as the polity eventually becomes,

that then lasts all the way to the Italian resurgimento in the 19th century. So the polity that emerges out of this is, in that sense, really Roger's creation, even more than his brothers. But it controls all of their lands. So it's the younger line, ends up inheriting also within Apulia. Calabria and Sicily, and then creating out of that in the 1130s, the kingdom of Sicily. How do we get to this point? Because it's not like they show up, as you've already mentioned. You know, you've got Robert over here in the east. We've got Roger in the West.

But it's not like the Muslims like, oh, okay, well, that's fine. I'm going to leave this incredibly well-connected island where I can control trade in the Mediterranean. I can get down to Africa at any moment. I can get over to, you know, the Holy Land. I can just be moving back and forth. these aren't a bunch of people who are just going to up and leave, right? It seems like this is a kind of piecemeal process. It absolutely is, and it's something that's taking advantage of the fact that the Islamic Emirate there is largely autonomous. So it's under loose fatomid oversight, but the fatomids aren't too concerned.

They start getting a bit concerned when the Normans, in the 12th century, start taking bits of North Africa. That's a little bit different. But even then they're initially okay with it. So in that sense, it's not the Bial and not. But obviously for the Emirate itself, yes, this is not something they want to have happen. And the Normans get very lucky in two respects in terms of their enemies. So the first is we've mentioned the Byzantines already, but the crucial context here is not only are there some internal revolts in Byzantine, southern Italy they exploit.

But in the 1070s, the Byzantine polity, as you don't listen to know, starts to just implode because of the Seljuk Turks who've taken all of their heartlands in Asia Minor. It's all hands on deck. Everybody's worrying about whether or not Byzantium's going to fall. And nobody really cares about Southern Italy, frankly. the lowest on the pecking order, and this is a problem that goes all through, and ultimately, arguably, helps launch the first crusade. The Byzantines, really, at this crucial moment, when the Romans are really kicking into gear, the Byzantines' priorities are completely elsewhere. They get something similar with the Emirate, that there is a division politically, internally within it,

and there ends up becoming two different emirs playing off of one another, and they're in fact invited over. And again, this is the classic Norman thing, as you'll be aware as well, that again, We see at times with some of the Welsh princes, crucially we see it in Ireland. That's how they get their toehold in Ireland with Dermot MacMurkada. So it's a very similar situation to that of one of the ones saying, oh, well, you know, I dislike this guy more actually right now, or I think I can leverage you to become emir. And they're going to say, yeah, absolutely, we'll help you. They're able to use that to get their initial toehold.

By the later aspects of the conquest, they are fighting by then a unified Emirate, such as it is. But by then, in a sense, it's too late. and real turning point there, their initial progress in Sicily is slow, but once they've taken all of Calabria and Apulian Campania, which are their kind of core areas on the mainland, then they do have this relatively secure base, and there are times in the kind of 1070s, 1080s where they're able to put most or all their resources towards it, and then they tend to make pretty rapid progress until then they have a distraction or a vault or something else on the mainland. So you've mentioned briefly that the Normans here are kind of playing

various Muslim groups off against each other. What's interaction like on the frontiers as they're continually attempting to make a continuous Sicilian kingdom? I mean, is it always that everyone is out for blood or are there ever any times when people are getting along a bit better? On a daily basis, people seem to be getting along perfectly well much of the time. I mean, I think most of the Norman lords are out for money rather than blood. And I think that's the crucial thing for them is that they're happy to use papal and premature, doubtless some of them, some of the times are, being motivated by religion, but it's quite clear that from very early on in Sicily clear,

they're not going to be getting rid of all the Muslims, they're not going to be rocking the boat, they're not going to be getting rid of the Greek-right Christians, and frankly, they all certainly couldn't have if they wanted to. They're a tiny minority initially. They land in money. This is not the Reformation playing out or something like that. Confessional conflicts are really low down their list of priorities. So it's probably for them more something they can play up with the Pope or with some of their own bishops, where appropriate, galvanize a bit of support. daily basis, no, they continue trading very heavily with Ifrakia, with the North African province, because that's the traditional trading base for Sicily. Crucially, the North African

coastline is closer to Sicily than Rome. So in terms of, you know, the future of it, up until Norman conquest, it looks like it's going to be African, as it were, in that sense, and I'm looking towards North Africa. So they have no desire to change all of that in any really substantial way. So that's how they're really managing these things. And particularly in Sicily, it's very much a multi-ethnic, multilingual polity. It's not modern, true multiculturalism. They're not just loving everybody. It's not, you know, a bunch of hippies. They absolutely do prefer, as their main advisors, Latin, right, Christians. And over the length of time, this does eventually edge over into some really pretty violent and nasty repression. But this is, yeah, hundreds of

years down the lines, crucially. In the early phase, accommodation is the name of the game. They're issuing documents in Arabic, in Greek, and in Latin. and doing so for really quite some time. So well into the 12th century, they're receiving all these kinds of documents, things like that. They have advisors who are of Islamic backgrounds. They typically have to have converted to then be prominent at court, but there are a number of Islamic converts who are fluent in Arabic and so on.

And, of course, this is a line that famously then becomes that, once they marry into that of the emperors of Frederick II and others and things like that. So we do end up and having rulers there who are then themselves capable of speaking at least some Arabic. But this early stage, we're probably talking more fluency in a kind of remounce dialect of proto-French for the very earliest, but largely speaking, southern Italian dialects and probably Greek, but quite possibly for some of their main Sicilian ones, then some Arabic as well. So that's the other crucial thing there is, is there is this strong element of pragmatic accommodation, maybe it would be the best way to put it. They know that politically it's not expedient to rock the boat here, and they're not pushing a kind of big ideological. agenda other than one of conquest and control. I mean, I suppose if what you want is a Norman kingdom,

what you want is Normans who control a kingdom. I mean, at this point, if what you want to do is get paid, who cares who's paying it, right? Yeah, and I think also it lacks a bit of the cultural edge. We see a bit with the Norman conquest, where that's been justified as punishment on the English and where there's almost a complete change of the ruling elite. Instead, the Norman's just adding one additional layer

to the ruling elite of southern Italy. And this has happened before the Byzantines have come, in, the Lombards have come in. It's a process that's happened before what happened again, the Islamic Emirate. So it's adding another layer to the cake, but it's not trying to get rid of that previous layer. And again, the simple nature of the conquest, the numbers of Normans, the way they're having to affect, it means that they couldn't if they wanted to, but frankly, there's no evidence they want to. So they're actively marrying in. So Robert famously marries Sikagaita, who is a princess, a Lombard princess. And he makes his children with her,

who is his second wife, his heirs, not his children with his first Norman wife. So I think that's a really strong signal that this is accommodation. I don't think I'm culturally superior to the Lombard princes. I, in fact, want a piece of what they've got. I want to be their equals and to earn the kind of position they have. But by the time that Robert successfully gets a Sicilian kingdom, by the time we've got a nice Lombard queen and significantly a Lombard heirs, you've already mentioned they suddenly start eyeing up more of the Byzantine lands to the east, yes.

Is this just, you know, a case of Robert saying seems that that Byzantium is very distracted by Seljuks and taking what he can get? Or is it just sort of like, we're definitely mad at Byzantium thing? What makes us get in boats and go east after we've suddenly already got a pretty significant kingdom? So I think it is that he's whetted his appetite. And one of the things that is certainly very similar to what we're seeing in England, but also, yeah, in Wales and Ireland, is I think there was this sense of ambition amongst the Normans. And the more they got, the more they wanted. I mean, perhaps a bit like modern capitalists or things like that. People who run big companies and drive Audies, they always want another one. And that's the way to be kind of imagining the Normans. They see Byzantium and they see maybe a few more Audies and they think, going to get me some of those. No, but I mean, you're right. The other thing is Byzantium is imploding, really quite dramatically. So now's the time to strike. There are a number of sources, both Byzantine and Norman, that suggest that Robert had as one of his greatest ambitions was to overthrow the Byzantine Empire and make himself emperor. Now, I think he would have always known this was a long shot. But given how successful he'd been and his family had come from nothing to what he had, it wasn't completely insane.

When he lands initially in 10-8-1, they have notable successes. They're defeating Alexios, the Byzantine Emperor, in open battle repeatedly. they're winning sieges of major cities like Diracchion. So although the odds were always in a kind of cool, Calcad manner against them, it's by no means impossible. It was going to be then or never, frankly. And so I think it was one of those ones of,

I'm maybe going to kick myself if I don't do this. Another thing that may well have been motivating that in the longer term as well is the big problem with marrying Sikagaita and making his sons with her, his heirs, is he has an elder son from his first wife, Bohemont, who goes on to become the famous crusader. And he's not well happy being, effectively disinherited. I mean, people normally aren't. So he goes over with robber. And one of the

things that's been speculated may have been the ambition here is, if not necessarily, really take the whole Byzantine Empire. That's probably only a best case. And I'm more realistic would have been to extend your polity into that kind of zone of the Adriatic and perhaps create a kingdom, either independent one, or maybe a sub-polity, a duchy or county to be held from his younger brothers. But for Bohemond, so Bohemot doesn't create problems back at home because otherwise he will. And frankly, he does end up doing so because they don't end up getting that one. So that's the other thing that may well be driving this. But I do think probably for him, he is thinking, why not they're weak?

I'm strong right now. Strike wellie. Ironsoat. I mean, fair enough. It doesn't seem like they get this Audi. But, you know, they, I don't know, put a significant down payment on it, I suppose. It's one way of looking at it. They come close to it.

And I think it's also probably a matter of bragging rights and other things like this, that He sees this and he thinks, you know, I've come from nothing to controlling half of Italy. Why not Byzantine Empire? And crucially, he does know well of the political problems in Byzantium, not only from southern Italy, but there are Norman mercenary groups that have been setting themselves up as independent polities in Asia Minor, one of which has even besieged the Byzantine Emperor. In recent times, Normans have actually besieged Constant Opa from the opposite side. So he's well aware that if you get the right moment, if you get a bit lucky, Byzantium is simultaneously very strong. and very weak. There's a drawing to a close here. I've got a couple more questions for you, but I'm saving some big existential ones for you for the end.

One of them being, what would you say is kind of the legacy of the Norman rule in southern Italy and Sicily, more particularly? If we were going to say that there's something that the Normans bring to it, is there anything? Or are they just the new guys who are doing the same thing? This is a part of the world that is

traditionally fairly fractuous, as you've already said. We've got a lot of smaller kingdoms. We've got a kind of geography which lends itself to smaller bits. But are the Normans really bringing anything new? So I think if you're a peasant, if you're 90% of the population, frankly, no. It's a new boss, same crap job. If you're high up, it does change things. It means there's newer aristocrats coming in, a stronger cultural orientation towards France, new cruel names like Robert are coming to town, Roger, things like that. So the names the Hotevilles use are quite distinctive because pretty rapidly they're speaking southern Italian dialects. And certainly by the second half of the 12th century, they're no longer largely francophone. Though they do keep up the

French speaking for some time, and they're known to prefer in the 12th century, often French-speaking advisors. But still, ultimately, it's more perhaps symbolic politics of flagging up these old allegiances and these traditional dynastic names. So we get kind of that, which is distinctive. But I think probably the big thing is that political unification that most of southern Italy after them is unified politically. It isn't before. And although when they, their dynasty dies out, so this Sicilian kingdom survives under the rule of others, famously an Anjavan branch and things like that later on, but crucially the

kingdom, the structure itself does survive. So I think that's a real change they bring in. And another really crucial one is in terms of that kind of cultural orientation, also religious orientation, that conquest of Sicily, although it was not initially religiously motivated. It means Sicily goes on to become part of the Latin West rather than becoming Orthodox Christian, which is actually most of the Christians there when they conquered are Greek-right, not Latin, that they're a very small minority, and also crucially not Muslim. It's entirely conceivable that it ends up being much more like a place like Malta in terms of that, or other islands in the Mediterranean, some of which remained

largely Muslim, or at least partially so, with significant Arabic dialects and things like that. So all of that could have been in the future. And it's not snuffed out overnight because the repression comes in later, but you don't get the repression without the Latin Christian regime in the first place. So I'm not sure it's a glorious legacy, but certainly an important one in terms of the fact that we think of Sicily as Europe rather than North Africa. I guess that's absolutely true because there are such cultural changes to cement us as saying, oh yeah, this is part of the global north now. When you look at it on a map, this is something that I always bring up to people. people are quite surprised because I think that Sicily is so embedded in our heads now as part of this

quite Catholic way of looking at the world, you would be surprised because you can see Africa on a clear day from so. It's much much closer to Africa than it is to Rome. So in terms of that, there's no reason why this should be looking towards Rome and looking northward for trade or other things. And it doesn't initially. It takes time to bring it to that. So yeah, I think you could say that one of the Norman's great gifts to Sicily has been the Eurovision Song Contest. You know, and what a gift to receive as well, absolutely. Levi, I think that's all we've got time for for the day. Thank you very much for bringing into my life this new way of talking about Audi's

and Conquest. I'm going to steal that forever. It's always a pleasure to have you stop by. Thank you so much. Thanks for having me on. Thank you so much for listening. And thank you to Levi for joining me once again. This has been gone medieval from history hit.

And if you want to know more about the Normans, you can check out. our explainer on the origins of the Normans, or our episode on Emma of Normandy and her influence on England. As always, a friendly reminder to please rate, review, and follow the podcast if you haven't already done so. It helps other people to find it. If you'd like to suggest an episode, you can always drop us a line at Gone Medieval at HistoryHit.com. Otherwise, my co-host, Matt Lewis will be back on the Gone Medieval Throne this Friday, and I'll see you again next Tuesday. Until next time.