* This article was written during my tenure of a Marie Curie Research Fellowship at the University of Birmingham. I would like to thank Ruth Macrides for her valuable remarks while this article was still in the making and Paul Magdalino, who made important critical comments, especially with regard to political prophecy.

1 On the alliance between Byzantium and Saladin, see Brand, C., ‘The Byzantines and Saladin, 1185-1192: Opponents of the Third Crusade’, Speculum 37 (1962) 67–181CrossRefGoogle Scholar; idem, Byzantium Confronts the West (Cambridge, MA 1968) 177-8; Möhring, H., Saladin und der dritte Kreuzzug: Aiyubidische Strategie und Diplomatie im Vergleich vornehmlich der arabischen mit den lateinischen Quellen (Wiesbaden 1980) 171–88Google Scholar; Lilie, R.-J., ‘Noch einmal zu dem Thema “Byzanz und die Kreuzfahrerstaaten“’, Varia 1 (= Poikila Byzantina, 4) (Bonn 1984) 142–63Google Scholar. Lilie disagrees with Möhring's view of the alliance as a relatively minor development in international politics at the time of the Third Crusade, while he considers Brand's view of the alliance as ‘a cornerstone’ of Byzantine foreign policy in the period 1185–92 an overstatement of the case. Magdalino, Cf. P., ‘Isaac II, Saladin and Venice’, in The Expansion of the Orthodox World, ed. Shepard, Jonathan (Aldershot, forthcoming)Google Scholar, who underscores the importance of this alliance for Byzantium during Isaac H's reign. On the participation of Frederick Barbarossa in the Third Crusade, see Johnson, E., ‘The Crusades of Frederick Barbarossa and Henry VI’, in A History of the Crusades, II, gen. ed. Setton, K., volume ed. Wolff, R.L. and Hazard, H.W. (Madison and London 1969) 87–122Google Scholar.

2 On the conflict between Byzantium and Frederick I Barbarossa at the time of the Third Crusade see Zimmert, K., ‘Der deutsch-byzantinische Konflikt vom Juli 1189 bis Februar 1190’, BZ 12 (1903) 42–77Google Scholar; idem, 'Der Frieden zu Adrianopel (Februar 1190)', BZ 11 (1902) 303-20, 689-91; Brand, , Byzantium Confronts the West, 176–87Google Scholar; Harris, J., Byzantium and the Crusades (London 2003) 132–43Google Scholar.

3 Lilie, R.-J., Byzantium and the Crusader States, 1096-1204, trans. Morris, J.C. and Ridings, J. (Oxford 1993) 232–9Google Scholar. Lilie has pointed to the fact that the alliance fuelled anti-Byzantine propaganda in the West.

4 Brand, , ‘The Byzantines and Saladin’. The Western and Islamic sources on the alliance are: (1) the anonymous letter from the East, in Magnus of Reichersberg, Chronica collecta a Magno presbytero-1195, ed. Wattenbach, W., MGH SS, XVII (Hanover 1861) 511–12Google Scholar. (2) Conrad of Montferrat's letter (20 September 1188) to Archbishop Baldwin of Canterbury, in Roger of Wendover, Liber qui dicitur Flores historiarum, I, ed. Hewlett, H.G., Rolls Series (London 1886) 153–4Google Scholar. (3) the report of a French embassy to Isaac II Angelos in the autumn of 1188, in Benedict of Peterborough, Gesta regis Henrici, II, ed. Stubbs, W., Rolls Series (London 1867) 51–3Google Scholar. An amended version of the same letter is found in Ralph of Diceto, Opera historica, II, ed. Stubbs, W., Rolls Series (London 1876) 58–60Google Scholar. (4) Abd al-Rahman ibn Isma'il (Abu Shamah), Le Livre des deux jardins: Histoire des deux règnes, celui de Nou ed-Dín et celui de Salah ed-Dín, ed. and trans. A.-C. Barbier de Meynard, Recueil des historiens des croisades: historiens orientaux, IV (Paris 1898) 389, 437-8, 471-2, 508-9. (5) Shaddad, Baha'al-Din Ibn, The Rare and Excellent History of Saladin, trans. Richards, D.S. (Aldershot 2002) 121–2, 201-2Google Scholar.

5 Nicetae Choniatae Orationes et Epistulae, ed. van Dieten, J.-L. (Berlin and New York 1973) 85–101Google Scholar. An English summary is presented here in the appendix. For a German translation of the speech see Kaisertaten und Menschenschicksale im Spiegel der schönen Rede: Reden und Briefe des Niketas Choniates, trans. F. Grabler (Graz 1966) 174–81. E. Miller translated into Latin two brief parts of the speech which he regarded as relevant to the Third Crusade. See Recueil des historiens des croisades: historiens grecs, ed. and trans. Miller, E., II (Paris 1875), 458–60Google Scholar.

6 Max Bachmann saw in the speech the planning of an expedition against Frederick Barbarossa. Franz Grabler observed that the hostile attitude to Frederick in the orations contrasts starkly to the complimentary one in the History and suggested that in the speech Choniates concealed his real opinion of Frederick by articulating his attack on him through the use of numerous scriptural citations. Indeed, paragraph XXIV of the oration (translated below) is replete with biblical quotes. Most recently, Jonathan Harris noted again the different portrayal of Frederick in the speech and in the historical work. See Bachmann, M., Die Rede des Johannes Syropulos an den Kaiser Isaak II. Angelos (1185-1195) (Munich 1935) 67Google Scholar, n. 2; F. Grabler, ‘Niketas Choniates als Redner’ JÖBG, 11/12 (1962/3) 74-6; Harris, J., Byzantium and the Crusades (London 2003) 137Google Scholar.

7 Quellen zur Geschichte des Kreuzzuges Kaiser Friedrichs I, ed. A. Chroust (= MGH. Scriptores rerum Germanicarum. Nova series, V) (Berlin 1928) 1-115 (hereafter Ansbert).

8 For Choniates's cursus honorum, see van Dieten, J.-L., Niketas Choniates: Erläuterungen zu den Reden und Briefen nebst einer Biographie (Berlin and New York 1971) 21–51CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

9 The title of his Epiphany speech of 1190 in praise of Isaac calls Choniates ‘secretary to the Logothete’. van Dieten [Niketas Choniates: Erläuterungen, 31-2) hypothesizes that Choniates may have served as secretary to his long-time friend, the Logothete of the Drome Demetrios Tornikes.

10 Niketas Choniates authored nine imperial orations for Isaac II Angelos, Alexios III Angelos, and the first emperor of Nicaea, Theodore I Laskaris (1204-21). All these orations have been published in Nicetae Choniatae Orationes et Epistulae, ed. J.-L. van Dieten.

11 On Choniates as a critic see Magdalino, P., ‘Aspects of twelfth-century Byzantine Kaiserkritik’, Speculum 58 (1983) 326–46CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Choniates appears to have written the bulk of his History during the reign of Alexios III Angelos. Subsequently he furnished his History with a continuation, extending the period covered to 1208, and made revisions to the prior text, often adding passages critical of Byzantine society. Cf. Nicetae Choniatae Historia, ed. J.-L. van Dieten (Berlin and New York 1975) XCIII (van Dieten's preface).

12 Nicetae Choniatae Historia, 301. Cf. ibid., 568.

13 Ibid., 53-4. In the passage that immediately follows, Choniates describes the amorous escapades of Manuel I. Further on in his History (ibid., 460–1), he criticizes Empress Euphrosyne, the ambitious and adulterous wife of Alexios III Angelos, for dressing herself up in splendid attire with gems. He likened the imperial throne during Alexios Ill's reign to a courtesan heavily made up with cosmetics (ibid., 499).

14 Ibid., 382 ff. Further on in his History (ibid., 395), Choniates followed up on Conrad's exploits in the Holy Land.

15 Ibid., 642.

16 Ibid., 66. As Choniates was not yet born at the time of the Second Crusade, he appears to have picked up a story reflecting the crusader point of view from Latins living in Constantinople. He himself admits (ibid., 588) that he had a Venetian friend resident in Constantinople who gave him refuge in his house in 1204 while the Frankish crusaders were pillaging and plundering the city.

17 Ibid., 416, trans. Magoulias, H. as O City of Byzantium: Annals of Niketas Choniates (Detroit 1984) 228–9Google Scholar.

18 On the career of the Logothete of the Drome John Doukas Kamateros (whom Choniates calls John Doukas) see Polemis, D., The Doukai: A Contribution to Byzantine Prosopography (London 1968) 127–30Google Scholar. On Andronikos Kantakouzenos, probably identical with the tax official of the theme of Mylassa and Melanoudion in 1175, see Nicol, D., The Byzantine Family of Kantakouzenos (Cantacuzenus) ca. 1100-1460 (Washington 1986) 8Google Scholar.

19 Nicetae Choniatae Historia, 402. Choniates wrote: ‘As soon as Frederick passed inside the Roman borders he announced his presence to the Emperor […] Once again, the logothete was dispatched, together with Andronikos Kantakouzenos, to facilitate the king's passage. But through ignorance of their obligations and their unmanliness (for it is our duty to honor truth as being more important and precious than our own dear friends), they provoked the king's anger against the Romans and induced the emperor to look upon the king as an enemy’ (trans. Magoulias in O City of Byzantium, 211). Cf. Ansbert, 15-17.

20 Nicetae Choniatae Historia, 409.42-410.48. A thirteenth-century chronicle traditionally attributed to Theodore Skoutariotes contains a paraphrase of this passage. See Mεσαιωνική] βιβλιoθήκ η, ed. K. Sathas, VII (Venice 1892; repr. Hildesheim and New York 1972) 393. Choniates appears to have been well informed about Saladin's reconquest of the Holy Land. He knew, for example, about Saladin's merciful treatment of the captured Christian population after his conquest of Jerusalem in 1187. See Nicetae Choniatae Historia, 576.

21 Magnus of Reichersberg, Chronica collecta, MGH SS, XVII, 512; Ansbert, 54.12-55.21. Cf. Lilie, Byzantium and the Crusader States, 235.

22 Ansbert, 39.

23 Jus Graecoromanum, ed. P. and I. Zepos, I (Athens 1931; repr. Aalen 1962), Coll. IV, Nov. XC, 455. Cf. Dölger, F., Regesten der Kaiserurkunden des oströmischen Reiches, II: Regesten von 1025-1204 (Munich 1925), no. 1590CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

24 Ansbert, 8-49. This embassy sent by Saladin seems to have finalized the terms of the alliance. Cf. Dölger, Regesten, no. 1591. Brand (‘The Byzantines and Saladin’, 173–4) thinks that it is unclear whether the terms of the alliance were set in 1188 or in the summer of 1189.

25 Baha'al-Din Ibn Shaddad, Rare and Excellent History, 121. Abd al-Rahman ibn Isma'il (Abu Shamah), Le Livre des deux jardins, 471–2. This religious embassy may have accompanied the secular one.

26 Baha'al-Din Ibn Shaddad, Rare and Excellent History. The fifteenth-century chronicle of Al-Aini explicitly mentions that the Byzantine embassy informed Saladin of Isaac's solid commitment to opposing Frederick. See Al-Aini, , in Imperator Vasilii Bolgaroboitsa, trans. Rozen, Viktor (St Petersburg 1883; repr. London 1972) 207Google Scholar. Cf. F. Dölger, Regesten, no. 1593. Dölger erroneously dates this embassy to June/July 1189.

27 Baha'al-Din Ibn Shaddad, Rare and Excellent History, 121-2. Cf. F. Dölger, Regesten, no. 1601.

28 Nicetae Cboniatae Historia, 403.82-404.13. On the career of the Protostrator Manuel Kamytzes and future rebel against the regime of Alexios III Angelos, see Varzos, K., ͑H Γενεαλoγíα τῶν Koμνηνῶν, II (Thessaloniki 1984) 690–713Google Scholar.

29 Ansbert confirms the hostility of the Byzantine patriarch. According to him, Dositheos declared that those Byzantines guilty of murdering ten people would have their sins absolved if they killed fifty crusaders. See Ansbert, 49.2-10. Choniates digresses to describe the unusual career of Patriarch Dositheos (Nicetae Choniatae Historia, 405.14-408.90). A Venetian by birth and a former Orthodox monk in the Constantinopolitan monastery of Studion, he became Patriarch of Jerusalem upon the death of the saintly Leontios of Jerusalem. Dositheos had once prophesied to Isaac his elevation to the imperial office and for this reason enjoyed a special position of trust with the emperor. In 1189 Isaac orchestrated the transfer of Dositheos from the patriarchate of Jerusalem to that of Constantinople, even though the canons prohibited such transfers. Dositheos was made patriarch in February 1189, but after nine days he had to resign because of synodal opposition to his uncanonical election. Then Isaac made patriarch a certain monk Leontios, who passed away after only seven months in office. After his death, Dositheos was reinstalled as Patriarch of Constantinople in late August or September 1189. On the chronology of his patriarchate, see Grumel, V., Les Regestes des actes du Patriarcat de Constantinople, I: Les actes des patriarches, Fasc. 3: Les regestes de 1043 ä 1208 (Bucharest 1947) 180–1Google Scholar. On Dositheos as a prophet see P. Magdalino, ‘Une prophétie inédite des environs de l'an 965 attribuée a Léon le Philosophe (ms Karakallou 14, f. 253^r-254^r)’, TM 14 (2002) (=Mélanges Gilbert Dagron) 401-2. The motif of a conqueror of Constantinople, though a Muslim one, who would enter through the Xylokerkos city gate (located next to the Golden Gate), is found in the interpolated Greek version of the popular seventh-century apocalypse of Pseudo-Methodios. See Lolos, A., Die Apokalypse des Ps.-Methodios (Meisenheim am Glan 1976) 122–3Google Scholar; Aerts, W.J. and Kortekaas, G.A.A., Die Apokalypse des Pseudo-Methodios: Die ältesten griechischen und lateinischen Übersetzungen (Louvain 1998) 172Google Scholar.

30 The likely beginning date of Dositheos's term in office as Orthodox Patriarch of Jerusalem emerges from the fact that Leontios of Jerusalem (his predecessor according to Choniates) died on 14 May 1185. See Tsougarakis, D., The Life of Leontios of Jerusalem (Leiden 1993), 7, 210CrossRefGoogle Scholar. The election of Dositheos must have followed shortly thereafter. In any case, in his official letter of resignation from the patriarchate of Constantinople in September 1191, Dositheos mentioned that he had become Patriarch of Jerusalem before Saladin's conquest of the city on 2 October 1187. See σταχυoλoγíας, ed. A. Papadopoulos-Kerameus, II (St Petersburg 1893; repr. Brussels 1963) 368. During the twelfth century the Orthodox patriarchs of Jerusalem resided in Constantinople in the monastery of ta Steirou. Cf. Tsougarakis, The Life of Leontios of Jerusalem, 211.

31 Brand, ‘Byzantium and Saladin’, 170 and n. 7, with further bibliography. Writing not long after 1203, the anonymous author of the saint's life of Leontios of Jerusalem, Orthodox Patriarch of Jerusalem (1176-85), reports the strict restrictions and hostility that Leontios faced during his pilgrimage to Latin-held Jerusalem in 1177-8 as well as his friendly exchange of letters with Saladin. See Tsougarakis, , The Life of Leontios of Jerusalem, 5–6, 13-18, 134-7Google Scholar.

32 Nicetae Choniatae Historia, 410.55-57, trans. Magoulias as O City of Byzantium, 225.

33 Ansbert, 48.31-.49.17.

34 Brand, Byzantium Confronts the West, 182-3, without any evidence.

35 Nicetae Choniatae Historia, 410.49-54. Ansbert, too, speaks of a peace proposal by Isaac at the time of the arrival of the German hostages (October 26). Yet Frederick regarded this offer as a trap and felt offended by the breach of diplomatic code in Isaac's letter, which did not call him Roman emperor. Further on in his account, Ansbert refers to a continual exchange of correspondence between Isaac and Frederick in the autumn of 1189. Cf. Ansbert, 49.10-51.18.

36 Ansbert, 40-3, where the letter is quoted verbatim.

37 Ansbert, 57.32-58.11, esp. 58, 11. 9-10: nuntii Greet imperatoris cum denuntiatione belli ad propria sunt remissi.

38 Ansbert, 60.21-32. According to Ansbert, Isaac made up with Frederick after many changes of opinion and exchanges of letters (post multas tergiversationum et litter arum ambages).

39 On this rhetorical practice at the twelfth-century court see Magdalino, P., The Empire of Manuel Komnenos, 1143-1180 (Cambridge 1993) 248CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

40 Nicetae Cboniatae Orationes et Epistulae, 85.17-21. Robert Browning hypothesized that the holder of the office of Master of the Rhetors between 1186 and 1189 was Basil Pediadites (later appointed as metropolitan of Kerkyra), although more research is needed to establish this with certainty. See Browning, R., ‘The Patriarchal School at Constantinople in the twelfth century’, Byzantion 33 (1963) 21Google Scholar.

41 In February 1186 Choniates had composed the official wedding address on the marriage of Isaac II Angelos and Margaret of Hungary and in 1187 he had addressed to the Patriarch of Constantinople a speech lauding Isaac Angelos for his campaign against the Cumans. See Nicetae Choniatae Orationes et Epistulae, 6-12, 35-44. Cf. van Dieten, Niketas Choniates: Erläuterungen, 65-79, 87-96.

42 , ed. S. Lampros, II (Athens 1880; repr. Groningen 1968) 208-58. The speech has been dated to the summer of 1187 by Bachmann, Die Rede des Johannes Syropulos, 108.

43 Menander Rhetor, ed. Russell, D. and Wilson, N. (Oxford 1981) 76–96Google Scholar; Aphthonii Progymnasmata, ed. Rabe, H. (Leipzig 1926), 21–7Google Scholar; Hermogenis Opera, ed. Rabe, H. (Leipzig 1913) 14–18Google Scholar.

44 These motifs are found in the imperial orations of John Syropoulos (delivered between 1188 and 1192) and Michael Choniates, Niketas's brother (delivered in 1187). See Bachmann, Die Rede des Johannes Syropulos, 13.2ff; Michael Choniates, in , II 209.15-19, 227.4-9, 234.20-235.2, 236.5-28.

45 Nicetae Choniatae Historia, 366-7. Choniates's tendency to criticize Isaac in the History through the language and imagery used in his own imperial panegyrics has been noticed by R. Macrides, ‘From the Komnenoi to the Palaiologoi: imperial models in decline and exile’, New Constantines: The Rhythm of Imperial Renewal in Byzantium, 4th-13th Centuries, ed. Magdalino, P. (Aldershot 1994) 277–9Google Scholar.

46 All references to the Old Testament are given according to the Greek Septuagint.

47 Nisaea was a plain in Media celebrated for its horses. Cf. Herodotus, 3.106, and R. Hanslik, ‘Nisaia’, in Paulys Realencyclopädie der classichen Altertumswissenschaft, 17/1 (Stuttgart 1936), 710-13.

48 Nicetae Choniatae Historia, 56. Van Dieten, Niketas Choniates: Erläuterungen, 119, has spotted this curious case of literal borrowing. On his deathbed near Antioch, John Komnenos (the Byzantine emperor whom Choniates portrayed most positively in his History) is reported to have said to his troops that he would have led them to Jerusalem had not death cut short his plans for reconquest of the Holy Land.

49 Angold, M., The Byzantine Empire, 1025-1204: A Political History, 2nd edn (London 1997) 186–9, 216-17Google Scholar.

50 B. Hamilton, ‘Manuel I Comnenus and Baldwin IV of Jerusalem’, Kαθηγήτρια: Essays Presented to Joan Hussey, ed. J. Chrysostomides (Camberley 1988), 353-75; Magdalino, The Empire of Manuel I Komnenos, 95-8.

51 Magnus of Reichersberg, MGH SS, XVII, 511, is our only source on Andronikos I's proposal. The report of the French embassy to Constantinople in the autumn of 1188 (Benedict of Peterborough, Gesta regis Henrici, II, 52) also speaks of Saladin's promise to cede the Holy Land to Byzantium. Cf. Brand, ‘The Byzantines and Saladin’, 168-169; Lilie, Byzantium and the Crusader States, 230-1.

52 In 1192 Saladin rejected Isaac's demand that the churches of Jerusalem be again transferred into the hands of Orthodox priests. See Baha'al-Din Ibn Shaddad, Rare and Excellent History, 201-2. Cf. Brand, ‘Byzantium and Saladin’, 178.

53 See Alexander, P., The Byzantine Apocalyptic Tradition (Berkeley 1985) 151–92, esp. 161-4CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

54 Nicetae Choniatae Historia, 408.87-90.

55 Ibid., 432-3. The context in which Choniates mentions the prophecy indicates that Dositheos had issued it before 1191. Cf. Magdalino, ‘Une prophétie inédite’, 402. The relationship between prophecy and Isaac's alliance with Saladin is discussed in a forthcoming article by Magdalino (see n. 1), which the author kindly made available to me before publication. My interpretation of Choniates's Epiphany speech of 1190 differs from Magdalino's in regarding it as a window into the views of the author rather than as official source on political prophecy. The convergence of three factors has led me to this opinion: Choniates's attitude to Frederick in his History, his close involvement in the Byzantine—German conflict in 1190, and the hortatory language of the most crucial paragraph of his speech.

56 ‘Covering the leopard skin with lion hide’ seems to be a proverbial expression. See Leutsch, E. and Schneidewin, F., Corpus paroemiograpborum graecorum, II (Göttingen 1851; repr. Hildesheim 1958) 216Google Scholar, nn. 16-17, where it is said that the leopard symbolizes cunning, while the lion symbolizes bravery.

57 According to a Byzantine belief attested in the tenth-century Suda lexicon, chameleons could adopt every skin colour but white. See Adler, A., Suidae lexicon, IV (Leipzig 1935) 784Google Scholar.

58 This is the tyrant-slaying sword with which Isaac had killed the assassin sent to him by Andronikos I. Cf. Nicetae Choniatae Historia, 341-2.

59 Eridanus is a mythical river in the West, where Phaethon's fiery chariot fell after having been brought down by Zeus. Eridanus was usually identified as the rivers Po or Rhone. Cf. Paulys Real-Encyclopädie der classischen Altertumswissenschaft, VI (Stuttgart 1909) 446-7. However it is most likely that Choniates meant the Rhine river, as he mentions that the Germans inhabit the area next to it. It is noteworthy that he calls the river ͐Eϱιδανóς (a spelling of the name of the river unknown to me from other Greek texts) instead of the usual ͐Hριδανóς.

60 Magdalino, The Empire of Manuel 1 Komnenos, 83-95.

61 Ansbert, 51.

62 See the letter of Bishop Dietpold of Passau, in Magnus of Reichersberg, Chronica collecta, MGH SS, XVII, 510.20-7.

63 Brand, C., ‘A Byzantine plan for the Fourth Crusade’, Speculum 43 (1968) 462–75CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

64 Angelov, D., ‘Late Byzantine imperial panegyric as advice literature,’ in Rhetoric in Byzantium, ed. Jeffreys, E. (Aldershot 2003) 55–72Google Scholar.

65 I.e. Emperor Andronikos I Komnenos (1183-1185)

66 The second tyrant must be Andronikos I's son John, as Choniates specifies that ‘he fell and was crushed together with the one who planted him.’ The third tyrant was the rebel Alexios Branas, who usurped the imperial office, besieged Constantinople and was defeated with great difficulty. Cf. Nicetae Choniatae Historia, 356, 376-88.

67 Choniates refers here to the destruction of the Norman fleet that had tried to sail away to Sicily after the Byzantine recapture of Thessalonike in 1185. Cf. Nicetae Choniatae Historia, 362-3.

68 The reference is to the defeat of the Normans at Demetritzes in 1185 and the subsequent recapture of Thessalonike. Cf. Nicetae Choniatae Historia, 357-9.

69 Choniates refers to the rebellion of the Bulgarian brothers Peter and Asan. Cf. Nicetae Choniatae Historia, 369 ff. See Wolff, Robert Lee, ‘The “Second Bulgarian Empire”: Its Origin and History to 1204’, Speculum 24 (1949) 167–206CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

70 In the summer of 1189 Isaac Angelos led a campaign, without much success, to Philadelphia to squash the rebellion of Theodore Mangaphas (Morotheodoros) supported by the Turks. Cf. Nicetae Choniatae Historia, 399-400.