750 William of Rubruck
simplest explanation for any problem was the best expla-
nation. He did not see the need to reconcile God’s power
with human reason; this meant that much of the work
attempting that by the scholastics was fruitless. As a nom-
inalist, he believed that abstract terms were merely names
that did not exist in reality. Contrary to much of Scholas-
tic thought and Thomas AQUINASin particular, Ockham
believed that only revelation and personal experience led
to GOD. Reason was of little use. He also questioned the
concept of transubstantiation in the Eucharist, believing
that the matter of the bread and wine was not changed
into the body and blood of Christ. William argued against
papal supremacy and the assumption that secular govern-
ments could tax ecclesiastical property. All these ideas and
questions were of great importance in the intellectual
world of the later Middle Ages and RENAISSANCE.
See alsoLOGIC;MARSILIUS OFPADUA; NOMINALISM;
REALISM;SPIRITUALFRANCISCANS.
Further reading:William of Ockham, A Letter to the
Friars Minor and Writings,ed. Arthur Stephen McGrade
and John Kilcullen (Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press, 1995); William of Ockham, Ockham: Philosophical
Writings, ed. and trans. Philotheus Boehner (London:
Nelson, 1957); Marilyn McCord Adams, William Ockham,
2 vols. (Notre Dame, Ind.: University of Notre Dame
Press, 1987); Katherine H. Tachau, Vision and Certitude in
the Age of Ockham: Optics, Epistemology, and the Founda-
tions of Semantics, 1250–1345(Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1988).
William of Rubruck (Rubruquis, Willem van Ruys-
broeck)(ca. 1215–ca. 1270/95)Franciscan, traveler
William was probably born between 1210 and 1215 in
Rubruck near Cassel in FLANDERS. In addition to his native
fluency in Flemish, he was fluent in French and had a
passable knowledge of LATIN. he apparently did not have
had much education but proved himself an excellent
observer. In 1253 he was sent by King LOUISIX to seekout
the Mongol khan and explore the possibilities for convert-
ing the MONGOLS to Christianity. He traveled through
CONSTANTINOPLEand left ACREin April of 1253. Encoun-
tering the Mongols first near the Volga River, he proceeded
to Karakorum, their capital, to see the khan Möngke. He
stayed there until May 1254. He began the journey back by
passing the Caspian Sea, then south through ARMENIAinto
southern ANATOLIA; he arrived at CYPRUSto track down
Louis IX, whom he was not able to see until 1257.
William was disappointed because he failed to con-
vert many Mongols and was not optimistic about the
future chances for their conversion. Perceiving that Mon-
gol westward expansion was not imminent, he concen-
trated in his description of his travel on Buddhism,
geography, shamanic religions, and culture. The extent of
influence of his original report of his travels was not
clear. He died sometime after 1270.
See alsoCUMANS; JOHN OFPLANOCARPINI; MARCO
POLO.
Further reading:Willem van Ruysbroeck, The Mis-
sion of Friar William of Rubruck: His Journey to the Court
of the Great Khan Möngke, 1253–1255,trans. Peter Jack-
son (London: Hakluyt Society, 1990); Christopher Daw-
son, The Mongol Mission: Narratives and Letters of the
Franciscan Missionaries in Mongolia and China in the Thir-
teenth and Fourteenth Centuries(New York: Sheed and
Ward, 1966).William of Tyre(ca. 1130–1185/90)archbishop, histo-
rian of the crusaders
William was probably the son of a noble French or Italian
family and was born about 1130 in SYRIAor PALESTINE.He
studied in Europe at PARISbetween 1145 and 1161 and at
BOLOGNAbetween 1161 and 1165. He returned home to be
appointed as archdeacon of TYREin 1167 with the condi-
tion that he write a history of the current king of
Jerusalem, Amalric I (r. 1162–73/74). In 1170 he became a
tutor to the young future king, BALDWINIV. After the Bald-
win’s accession in 1173/74, William was made chancellor
of the Kingdom of JERUSALEM on 1174 and then arch-
bishop of Tyre in 1175. William traveled to CONSTANTINO-
PLEand Europe on several occasions to seek military help
for the kingdom, now under attack by a revived and better
organized onslaught by the local Muslim rulers, and to
attend the Third Lateran Council in 1178/79. He was
employed by Pope ALEXANDERIII as a papal representative.
At the council he managed to gain marginally greater con-
trol over the MILITARY ORDERSfor the local authorities. He
was known for his abilities in Greek, Latin, and Arabic.HISTORIES
In the 1170s William had turned more to writing and had
become the chief authority for the history of the eastern
Mediterranean and the Latin kingdom between 614 and
1184, especially from 1147. His General History of the
Crusades and the Kingdom of Jerusalem was written
between 1169 and 1173. Later translated into French and
widely circulated, it consisted of 23 volumes and was
carefully based on earlier sources, documents, and
William’s personal experiences in the politics and govern-
ment of the church and the kingdom. He also wrote an
account of the Third Lateran Council of 1179 and a His-
tory of the Eastern Kings,which survived only in frag-
ments. He failed in his attempt to be made the patriarch
of Jerusalem in 1183 and retired to Rome, where he fin-
ished his histories and died between 1185 and 1190.
See also FULCHER OF CHARTRES;LATIN STATES IN
GREECE.
Further reading:William of Tyre, A History of Deeds
Done beyond the Sea,trans. Emily A. Babcock and A. C.
Krey, 2 vols. (New York: Columbia University Press, 1943);
P. W. Edbury, William of Tyre, Historian of the Latin East
(Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1988); Margaret
Ruth Morgan, The Chronicle of Ernoul and the Continuations
of William of Tyre(Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1973).