Fulcher's Turks After Religion: Analysis

After religion, Fulcher characterizes the people of the near-east based on heritage and political ties. Fulcher defines the Turks as “a Persian people” and the editor of A History of the Expedition to Jerusalem, Harold Fink, specifies that they are “Seljuk Turkish nomads” (Fulcher 66, 80). The Turks are governed by the Atabeg of Damascus, which is clear from the way Fulcher describes the Turkish army as the Atabeg’s Turks (Fulcher 266). Thus, the Turks are defined by their religion as Muslims, their heritage as Persians, and their connection to the Atabeg of Damascus. While characterization of the Turks is straightforward, the Saracens are more complicated. The context in which Fulcher describes the Muslim enemy of the Franks as Saracens
Again, Fulcher’s specific word choice can be used to infer the relationship between the races. There is an instance during the battle of Jerusalem where Fulcher describes the men of Count Raymond realizing that the Saracens were fleeing by jumping off the wall. He describes the men “p6ursuing and slaying their wicked enemies without cessation” and then notes that “Some of the latter, Arabs as well as Ethiopians, fled into the Tower of David” (Fulcher 121). Since “latter” is used to reference the Saracen enemies, this illustrates a connection between Saracens, Arabs, and Ethiopians. Fink strengthens the connection in a footnote, where he states that “Fulcher refers elsewhere to Ethiopians in Egyptian service…He distinguished between them and men of Arabic ancestry” (Fulcher 121). Hence, there is a definitive connection between the Ethiopians and Egyptian authority. Indeed, since anyone under Egyptian authority is a Saracen, these particular Ethiopians are Saracens. Furthermore, this clarifies the difference that Fulcher sees between Ethiopians and Arabs. The Babylonians attack on Joppa also provides information on the heritage of the Saracens. Fulcher claims that Babylonians with an Arab or Ethiopian infantry attacked the city, then later refers to the same besiegers as Saracens (Fulcher 241). Fink illuminates the connection between the Babylonians and the
In two instances, Fulcher refers to the groups in succession. He states that “the Turks and the Saracens discovered” the Franks, as well as stating that “both the Turks and Saracens” saw their chance to attack during the siege of Tyre (Fulcher 137, 264). In both of these cases, it would be unusual and counterintuitive for “Turks” and “Saracens” to refer to the same population or for one to be a subset of the other. This distinction is further shown when Fulcher describes the king of Damascus referring to the Muslim army as “his Turks and the Saracens” (Fulcher 266). The lack of a possessive pronoun in front of “Saracen” illustrates that the Saracen army held no allegiance to Damascus. This is a logical assessment given that the Caliph of Cairo governed the Saracens. Fulcher’s opposing descriptions of treatment to Saracens and Turks further implies that Fulcher and his fellow Franks saw and acted on differences between the two opposing groups. While the Franks pursue and kill both the Turks and Saracens on many occasions, Fulcher depicts a more intense use of force with the Saracens and a higher propensity for compromise with the Turks.