The Baybars

by Dr Salah Zaimeche, BMHC

‘The principal figure in the latter part of the thirteenth century,’ says Paton, ‘is that of the renowned Sultan Daher (Zaheer), commonly called Bibars, who was a man of tall stature, black hair, and blue eyes, one of them having a little speck in it. His voice was strong, his body muscular, and his activity amazing, not only in the camp and field, but in the cabinet; for he never allowed a despatch to be twenty-four hours received, without being answered. He was not of a generous nature like Saladin, but was a very strict Moslem, being an enemy alike of music and of wine. Most of his time was passed in Syria; and history records his great victories, not only over the Christians remaining in that country, but over a still more formidable enemy, the Tartars; who, under Hulagu, swept like a torrent over the country.’ 1 This remarkable situation of slave boys eventually growing into rulers, and holding power for centuries is unique to Islam. The 19th century governor, scholar, Sir William Muir, outlines this. He writes:

‘We search in vain for a parallel in the history of the world. Slaves have risen on their masters and become for the moment dominant. But for a community of purchased bondsmen, maintained and multiplied by a continuous stream of slaves bought, like themselves and by themselves, from Asiatic salesmen; such a community ruling at will over a rich country with outlying lands, — the slave of to-day the Sovereign of to-morrow, — the entire governing body of the same slavish race; that such a state of things should hold good for two centuries and a half, might at first sight seem incredible. But it is the simple truth of the Mameluk dynasty during the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries.

A remarkable feature of the Mameluks was that while they held together as a single people, they were divided into many factions each with a leader or patron at its head. A Mameluk would attach himself with rigid faithfulness to the Sultan or Emir who had bought him; and would devote himself with zeal to his patron’s party, and to his family long years even after he had passed away, and even to generations following.
It should be noticed also that the Mameluks were often highly educated. They were brought up in the school both of war and peace; while yet young, they were sometimes proficient in philosophy, divinity and science, as well as in chivalry and arms; and were thus well qualified for high office and command.

Many who founded charitable pious and literary endowments, schools and colleges for Medicine, Philosophy, Art and Science, and Orphan homes; some who left behind them monuments of their age in beautiful buildings…’ 2

The Mamluk rise began under the Ayyubid sultan of Egypt al-Salih Ayub in his wars against his family relatives. It was during these wars that the Bahri regiment, to which Baybars would eventually belong, grew in power. 3 During those battles not only did the numbers of the Bahri fighters increase, their military ability became also recognised. 4 Thus al-Salih took great care as soon as he became crown prince to build up a special force consisting solely of carefully chosen Turkish slaves who would become only loyal to him. He began to execution of this strategy as early as 1229-1230 while he was deputising in Egypt during the absence of his father in Syria. 5 Consequently, there took place a constant strive to bring into Egypt young men from the far north eastern corners of the land. One of the suppliers of young men for the Egyptian crown was the Qipchak tribe to which Baybars belonged. This tribe had been displaced by the Mongols. It was during a military expedition by the local ruler in whose land the Qipchaqs had found refuge that Baybars was captured alongside others. He was ten aged 14. 6

It is needless here to go through the rest of the early biography of Baybars as space constraints, most particularly, do not allow this. Thus, straight to the first great military campaign in which Baybars distinguished himself. This was at the time of the so-called 7th crusade (1249-1250,) led by the French King, Louis IX, St Louis.

Following a successful landing, and easy occupation of Damietta, the French army marched from Damietta towards Cairo. On the 8th of February 1250, after secretly crossing a ford which an Egyptian Copt has revealed to them, the French cavalry surprised the Muslim army in its camp, and annihilated it, even killing its leading general. The French hunted down the fleeing Muslims, attacking impetuously, spreading fear and terror. 7 The French rushed into Al-Mansurah in order to finish off what was left of the disbanded Muslim army. The French cavalry was led by the King’s brother, Robert of Artois, who was determined to capture al-Mansurah and finish off the Egyptian army. 8 In al-Mansurah, however, Robert came up against the Bahriyya and Jamdariyya Mamluk formations who had not been seized by the general panic. 9 The ablest of the Mamluks, Baybars, took control of the situation. He stationed his men at crucial points within the town itself, then let the Frankish cavalry come pouring through the open gate. 10 When the French knights with the Templars close behind them swept up the very walls of the citadel, the Mamluks rushed out from the side streets, and attacked them. 11 The crusaders were not able to deploy their heavy cavalry in the narrow alleys, and the Mamluks cut them to pieces. 12 The Templars were all but for five of them slaughtered; Robert of Artois barricaded himself and his bodyguards in a house, but the Egyptians soon burst in and slaughtered them all. 13 The French assault turned into retreat, which resulted in considerable losses. Then, in a bold strike, the Mamluks, led by Baybars, attacked and completed the French rout, killing and capturing thousands, including the King himself. This resounding Mamluk victory guaranteed the survival of the state, which subsequently legitimised Mamluk sovereignty over Egypt. 14

Things evolved dramatically on both the Muslim and Christian side in the ensuing years. On the Muslim-Mamluk side, the new Sultan, Turan Shah, who had become the new king after his father’s (Ayub) death, had greatly aggrieved his Mamluk emirs. Instead of recognition of their great role in the victory at Al-Mansurah, he sought to disband them, and even have their leaders eliminated. When the Bahris, Khowaiter explains, realised that their position was undermined, the leaders began to think of measures to protect themselves. 15 The only step they could take was to remove him at the earliest opportunity before he consolidated his position. 16 Thus, on Monday, two days before the end of Muharram 648 H (2nd May 1250) a party of Bahris attacked with Baybars, as usual, delivering the first blow. 17 Turan Shah was killed, and Baybars earned at once the respect and admiration of his comrades. 18 The Bahris were now reinstated to their former position and, under their leader Farid Eddin Aktay, and his second in command Baybars, their importance grew. 19

In order to replace the slain ruler, the leading Mamluks chose one of themselves, the Emir Aibak, to be head of the Administration. He contented himself at first to govern in the name of Ayub’s widow (Shajarat al-Durr). The Caliph of Bagdad, however, objected to a female reigning even in name, and so Aibak married the widow. 20 Aibak however, realized that he had truly no command over Egypt as long as the Bahris, who obeyed their own leader, Aktay, retained their status. 21 Aibak was now convinced of the importance of Aktay, and sought to dispose of him quickly, but he was well aware of the Bahris’ military capability, and that he could not defeat them in open warfare. 22 So he resolved on the murder of Farid Aktay, the latter, against the advise of Baybars, replied to Aibak’s invitation at the Citadel, where he was lured before he was murdered. 23 The Bahris, now led by Baybars, rose in rebellion. They were defeated. Many were slain and cast into prison; the rest, amongst whom was Baybars, fled to Al-Nasir the prince of Damascus, in Syria, and eventually to Kerak. 24 Aibak was now undisputed Sultan, recognised as such by all the Powers around. 25 However, the ‘intriguer of the period’ says Paton, was Shajarat al Durr. 26 She was a woman of great talent, managed to rule Egypt with an absolute sway and acted quite independently of her husband, who was not in her political confidence. She had compelled him to divorce another wife, who was the mother of his favourite son; but having refused to tell him where she kept the treasures of her former husband, he resolved to try and get her out of the palace. 27 This occasioned a matrimonial rupture, and Aibak resided separately from her. She persuaded to return, which he did, and she had him murdered by five assassins. 28 Soon though, she was herself brought before the mother of the young prince, the son of Aibak, and beaten so violently with the slippers and clogs of the women that she died next day. 29 Aibak’s minor son was now raised by the Emirs to the titular Sultanate, and Kuttuz a distinguished Mamluk of Khwarizmian birth, was persuaded to assume the role of Vicegerent. 30

On the Crusader side, following his release after the payment of a ransom, Louis IX began reorganising Christian military power. Lebanese historians tell us that the Christian Arab, Maronites, had the privilege to be the only ones to welcome the King on his visit to Acre in 1250. 31 The Maronites rushed to put at his service between twenty and twenty five thousand fighters. 32 The French king also built alliance with another, fiercer, anti-Muslim ally: the Mongols.

In order to cement the alliance, a number of Christian envoys were sent to the Mongols by Louis and the Popes. 33 These envoys were mainly Franciscan and Dominican missionaries. 34 In 1253, Louis sent the Franciscan William of Rubrouck to the Mongols. 35 Rubrouck was then sent to meet the great leader himself, Mangu Khan further to the east. 36 The aim was to invade the Muslim world from the east.

In 1258, Hulagu crossed Persia and attacked Baghdad. The Mongols had already slaughtered millions in the east by the time they reached the capital of the Caliphate, Baghdad, in early 1258. 37 On 30th January, 1258, Hulagu opened a massive bombardment with his mangonels against the capital. Within three days, the defences of Baghdad were in ruins. On 5th February, the Mongols mounted a long stretch of the walls. 38 For a week, the Mongol army waited on the walls, no soldier entering the city. 39 Understandably, on their arrival, the Mongols favoured Christianity. 40

As they came out of the city walls they were slaughtered en masse. 41 The whole Muslim population, between 800,000 and one million, was entirely exterminated. 42 800,000 of the inhabitants, Arnold says, were brought out in batches from the city to be massacred, and the greater part of the city itself was destroyed by fire. 43

Following Baghdad, the Mongols moved in the direction of Syria. On 20th January, 1260, the Mongols took Aleppo by assault. One hundred thousand young women and children were taken as slaves, the rest of the population was systematically exterminated. 44 Malik al-Nassir, the ruler of Damascus, abandoned the city and fled. 45 Damascus gave in without a fight. 46 The Tartars, being opposed to the Muslims and Mameluk Sultans, had the Christians for their allies; and, ‘If I may be allowed a digression from Cairo to Damascus,’ says Paton, ‘it is curious to see what efforts were made by these Tartars to keep the Christians in good humour, and how haughty and insolent the latter became after receiving a diploma of protection from the Tartar prince. Wine was drunk publicly during the days of Ramadan, and spilt at the doors of the Mosques.’ 47

Hulagu himself treated the complaints of the Muslims with contempt; and the other Tartar General, Kitbuqa, used to go into the Christian churches. 48

Following the devastation of Iraq and Syria, only Egypt was left. The fall of Cairo would represent the end of Islamic power. A Mongol embassy of forty was sent by Hulagu to Cairo, with a letter, declaring:

‘God had raised the house of Genghis Khan, and whoever resisted had been wiped out. The glory of our armies is invincible. If you do not submit, and do not bring tribute in person to my camp, prepare for war.’ 49

Cairo was, however, under Mamluk rule. Even more, the position of the Mamluks there had been reinforced by the unexpected and welcome return of Baybars from Syria.

Kuttuz, who had by this time cast the titular Sultan aside and himself assumed the throne, summoned a council and by their advice put Hulagu’s embassy to death. 50 Then, at the Council, which included Kuttuz, Baybars, the Turkish general Nassir Eddin, as well as the princes of Irbil and Acca, they decided to go to war. Kuttuz then declared:
‘Well then, we will go to war; victorious or losers, we would have done our duty, and the Muslim nation will not call us cowards.’ 51

When they approached the Mongol army, Kuttuz reminded his generals of the many populations that had been slaughtered by the Mongols; that they must free Syria and save Islam, and that if they failed in their duty, God would inflict his retribution. The generals were in tears, and vowed to do their utmost to defeat the enemy. 52 As the fighting began, Kuttuz shouted: ‘Oh God, give your servant Kuttuz victory over the Mongols!’

Barron d’Ohsson sums up the battle:

‘Kuttuz led the charge in person, pushing through Mongol ranks, encouraging his army to follow suite. The left wing of the Mamluk army that had first weakened, inspired by its leaders, rallied to fight. The Mongols began to lose ground, especially after the loss of many of their leaders. Kitbugha himself was killed in the fighting by a certain Djemal Eddin Accoush. A Mongol division that had remained entrenched in a neighbouring hill was cut to pieces. Baybars himself led the chase of the fleeing Mongols, only allowing a small number to get away with their lives. Some hid in the surrounding thick vegetation. Kuttuz ordered the place to be set alight; all the Mongols hidden there expired. The victory secure, Kuttuz dismounted his horse, and prayed two rakaas (prostrations) to thank God.’ 53

The Mamluks had just crushed the Mongol army, and more than that, had just saved the land of Islam. 54 One of Kitbuqa’s lieutenants gathered the remnants of the Mongol army and fled north to Armenian territory, where he was received and soon re-equipped for further campaigns. 55

Following up their victory, the Egyptians drove the Mongols out of Syria, and pursued them beyond Emessa. Kuttuz, thus master of the country, re-appointed the former Governors throughout Syria, on receiving oath of fealty, to their several posts. 56 For his signal service, Kuttuz had led Baybars to expect Aleppo; but, suspicion aroused of dangerous ambition on Baybars’ part, he gave that leading capital to another. Baybars upon this, dreading the fate that might befall him at Cairo, resolved to anticipate the danger. 57 It ought to be reminded how Baybars’ friend, Farid Aktay had been murdered by Aibak, Kuttuz’s superior. On the return journey, while Kuttuz was on the hunting-field alone, he was slain by Baybars. Baybars was forthwith saluted Sultan, and entered Cairo with the acclamations of the people. 58

After his triumphal reception at the capital, Baybars made ample amends for whatever excesses he may have before committed in company with his Bahrite brethren. In 1261, in the year following his enthronement, Baybars conceived the design of re-establishing the Abbasid Caliphate which, two or three years before, had been swept away and the whole Abbasid house destroyed by Hulagu at Bagdad. 59 He required his throne to be thus strengthened against the jealousies of former comrades, as well as against efforts of the Shiites to restore the Fatimid dynasty. 60 A Caliph of the Sunni Orthodox faith would put an end to such intrigue, and confer legitimacy upon the Crown. Hearing, therefore, that an Abbasid still survived the massacre, Baybars had him brought in triumph from Syria to Cairo. 61 At his approach, the Sultan with his Court went forth in State to meet him, while even the Jews and Christians carrying the Law and Gospel followed in his train. 62 He was then installed as Caliph, Baybars and the officers of State swearing fealty to him; while he in turn conferred on Baybars the sovereign title. At public worship, after the established ritual of reading the Qur’an and invocation of blessing on the Prophet and on the lineage of Abbas, the Caliph offered prayer for the welfare of the Sultan. 63

Some weeks passed, and the royal party, having witnessed a festive combat on the Nile, assembled in a garden outside Cairo where the Caliph invested Baybars with a robe of honour and the glittering badge of Imperial State. 64 He then presented him with a pompous patent, in which was enforced at great length the duty of warring for the faith and other obligations which now devolved upon him. Then with sound of trumpet and shouts of joy from the crowds around, the procession wended its way through the carpeted streets, back to the Citadel, — the Sultan in front, next the Caliph and Vizier on horseback, while the rest followed on foot; a scene, we are told, impossible to describe. 65 As the caliph was returning east, he was slain by the Mongols following a battle with the latter. 66

The Mongol threat persisted until the 14th century, but the scale of their defeat at Ain Jalut was such that it showed they were not invincible. 67 Baybars was at this time aware of the threat of the Mongols, whose empire under the new leader, Abagha, extended from the Oxus to the Indian Ocean. 68 This led to Baybars establishing friendly relations with Abagha’s enemy, Berke. Berke, the ninth ruler of the Golden Horde, based in the north, was the first Mongol ruler to convert to Islam. 69 Baybars also built friendly relations with the Byzantine Emperor, who was now recovering from the 4th Crusade and the terrible calamities inflicted on Constantinople by the Papal Court. 70 So friendly were the communications, that the Emperor built a mosque for the Muslims at his capital; and obtained from Baybars a Melchite Patriarch for those of that persuasion in his realm. 71 Baybars busied himself also with envoys to Spain, Naples, and the Seljuks of Asia Minor; wherever, in fact, he might gain support against the Mongols. 72 The Mongols based in Iran remained hostile to Islam, and were great allies of the crusaders. In Baybars, though, Islam had now one of the greatest leaders it ever had: resilient, decisive, brave, and with great military skills. 73

Through the major part of the late 1260s and the 1270s, without relapse, Baybars led many campaigns against the Crusader-Armenian-Mongol alliance. 74 These campaigns are depicted in the works of contemporaries such as Ibn Abd al-Zahir, 75 Ibn al-Furat, 76 and also by the scholar-fighter Abu’l Fida. 77 In 1263, Baybars took Karak, followed two years later by his victorious captures of Caesarea and Arsuf from the Hospitallers. 78

In the spring of 1266 A.D., Bohemund of Antioch having, with both Orders of Knights, attacked Hims, Baybars sent a force to relieve it; and then, with all the troops at his command, set out upon his third campaign. He visited Jerusalem, and at Hebron gave gifts to the guardians of the grave of Abraham, forbidding them, at the same time, to allow Christian pilgrims to visit it. 79 Then he crossed the Jordan by a bridge lately built by him, a little above the Dead Sea, and advanced from thence to Ain-Jalut and the Lake of Tiberias. The Egyptian forces, after the relief of Hims, having devastated the Crusaders’ lands from north to south, were now assembled before Safed, a hill fortress beyond Tiberias. Here Baybars pressed forward the siege with his usual zeal and devotion, labouring himself at the bombardment, and assiduously attending the sick and wounded. 80 Naphtha was discharged into the fortress, and the fighting was fierce and bloody. After three weeks thus passed, an amnesty was granted, allowing the garrison to pass out empty-handed. They were nevertheless all beheaded — some two thousand Templars and others — on a neighbouring hill. 81 The reason for this is that the prisoners carried arms and valuables away with them, or that some Muslims were found imprisoned in the citadel. 82 Two years later, Baybars captured Jaffa. 83 That same year, 1268, he captured Antioch, a city which had kept close alliance with the Mongols; there, it is held, Baybars put the whole garrison, 16,000, to death as retribution. 84 Baybars took a break to make his pilgrimage to Makkah, and then, on his return, in the summer of 1269, he marched north to Syria to check Mongol attacks. 85 Baybars did not forget the Ismaili danger in his effort to finish them once and for all. 86 Baybars’ repeated attempts to suppress the kingdom of Armenia were, however, thwarted by the Mongols. 87 In 1270-1 a combined force of Templars, Knight Hospitallers, and papal troops managed to drive back Baybars from Acre, and to march on Nazareth, which was pillaged, and all Muslims there slain. 88 Baybars’ last action was in Asia Minor, where he defeated a Mongol army at Albistan, in 1277, the year he died. 89

‘Baybars,’ Burns says, ‘had revived the concept of jihad… When he died in Damascus in 1277, he had virtually written the obituary for the Crusader presence.’ 90

Baybars left a legacy not only as a great general but also as a great state builder. By wise administration, he succeeded in establishing his popularity and power both at home and abroad. He lightened the taxes, which had made his predecessor’s reign unpopular; gained confidence by judicious measures and the fair advancement of his Mamluks; and conciliated Syria by the prompt recognition and friendly treatment of the local Governors. 91 Damascus alone stood out; but there too the Emirs were gained over and the recalcitrant governor carried a prisoner to Cairo. He fostered public works, beautified the mosques, established religious endowments, improved canals, harbours and fortifications, and added to the security of the kingdom by a swift post between Damascus and the capital. 92

‘There can be no doubt, that at that period a firm belief in Islamism was associated with a much more exemplary life than we afterwards find recorded,’ says Paton. ‘In fact, the life of Baybars seems to have been almost entirely divided between religious exercises and the duties of the camp, the only amusement in which he indulged being hunting. He was also the constructor of one of the largest mosques in Cairo, situated to the north of the town. He himself selected the spot, saying, ” I cannot find a better place for religion, than that on which I used to divert myself with jousting.” 93

It was built in the year 1266, and the marbles with which it was paved were for the most part taken from Jaffa, which had recently been evacuated by the Franks. 94 Baybars had also shown the way. His successors would finish the crusader presence only less than two decades after him. The last crusader stronghold, Acre, fell in 1291.

The city, Muir remarks, fell (strange to say) on the same day, and same hour of the day, as a hundred years before it had been captured from the Muslims. 95 A few escaped by ship. A thousand fled for the moment into a fortified place, but in the end all met their fate, and not a soul survived. So ended the great Crusade. By the command of the Sultan, the churches and fortifications of the Latin cities were demolished; but the Holy Sepulchre remained open to some devout and defenceless pilgrims; and (as Gibbon finishes the sad story) ‘a mournful and solitary silence prevailed along the coast which had so long resounded with the World’s Debate.” 96

Reading List

  • Abu Shama: Kitab al-Rawdatayn; ed. M.H. M. Ahmad; 2 vols; Cairo; 1954.
  • Abu Shama: Kitab al-Rawdatayn; In (RHC Or); vols iv-v.
  • Abu Shama; Tarajim rijal al-qarnayn al-sadis wa’l sabi’, Cairo, 1947 (repr. Beirut 1974).
  • A.I. Akram: Khalid Ibn Al-Waleed; Maktabah; Publishers and Distributors; Birmingham; England; 2004.
  • T.A. Archer: The Crusades; T. Fisher Unwin; London; 1894.
  • T.W. Arnold: The Preaching of Islam; Lahore: Sb. M. Ashraf, 1961.
  • A.S. Atiya: Crusade, Commerce and Culture; Oxford University Press; London; 1962.
  • A.S. Atiya: The Crusade in the Later Middle Ages; Methuen; London; 1938.
  • A.S. Atiya: The Crusade of Nicopolis; Methuen & co. Ltd; London; 1934.
  • F. Babinger: Mehmed the Conqueror; tr. from German by R. Manheim; ed by W.C. Hickman, Bollingen Series, Princeton University Press, 1978.
  • Baibars al-Mansuri: Zubdat al-Fikra fi Tarikh al-Hifra; Vol IX; Cairo University Library; Ms; 24-8; Photographic copy of British Museum Or. Ms.Add. 23325, fol 187 vo; al-Tuhfa al-Mulukiya fi a-Daula at-Turkiya; Cairo University Library; Ms; 24-29; Photographic copy of Austrian National Library; Flugel; Ms; 904; fol. 64 ro.
  • Al-Baladhuri: Kitab Futuh al Buldan, published by M. J. de Goeje, Leiden, 1866.
  • Al-Baladhuri: Kitab Futuh al-Buldan; tr by P.K. Hitti as The Origins of the Islamic State; Columbia University; New York; 1916.
  • Beha Eddin: Al-Nawadir al-Sultaniyya, ed J. El-Shayyal; Cairo; 1964.
  • Beha Eddin: The Life of Saladin; London, Palestine Pilgrim’s Text Society, 1897.
  • C. Bouamrane-L. Gardet: Panorama de la Pensee Islamique, Sindbad; Paris; 1984. Pp. 252-66.
  • R. Burns: Damascus, A History; Routledge; London; 2005.
  • A.J. Butler: The Arab Conquest of Egypt, Oxford 1902.
  • C.R. Conder: The Latin Kingdom of Jerusalem; The Committee of the Palestine Exploration Fund; London; 1897.
  • Y. Courbage, P. Fargues: Chretiens et Juifs Dans L’Islam Arabe et Turc, Payot, Paris, 1997;
  • G.W. Cox: The Crusades; Longmans; London; 1874.
  • J. Curtin: The Mongols; A History; Greenwood Press Publishers; Westport; 1907.
  • J. Davenport: An Apology for Mohammed and the Koran; J. Davy; London; 1869.
  • De Toulouse a Tripoli, Colloque held between 6 and 8 December, 1995, University of Toulouse; AMAM, Toulouse, 1997.
  • F.M. Donner: The Early Islamic Conquests, Princeton University Press; 1981.
  • M. Doukas: Historia Byzantina; ed. By I. Bekker (Corpus Scriptorum Historia Byzantinae;) Bonn 1834.
  • Doukas: Decline and Fall of Byzantium to the Ottoman Turks; Wayne State University Press; 1975.
  • W. Durant: The Age of Faith, Simon and Shuster, New York; 6th printing; 1950.
  • P. W. Edbury: The Conquest of Jerusalem and the Third Crusade, Scolar Press, 1996.
  • N. Elisseeff: Nur al-Din: Un Grand Prince Musulman de Syrie au Temps des Croisades; Damascus; 1967.
  • Encyclopaedia of Islam, Leyden; Brill.
  • Epistolae Innocenti III (ref as Inn. Ep): Ed. Baluze, 1683, Publ J. Migne in Patrologia Latina, vols 214-217, Paris 1855.
  • M. Erbstosser: The Crusades; David and Charles; New ton Abbot; first published in Leipzig; 1978.
  • Extraits de l’Histoire des Patriarches d’Alexandrie Relatifs au Siege de Damiette; tr. E. Blochet, ROL. XI (1908).
  • I.R. and L. L al-Faruqi: The Cultural Atlas of Islam; Mc Millan Publishing Company New York, 1986.
  • R. Finucane: Soldiers of the Faith; J.M. Dent and Sons Ltd; London, 1983.
  • F. Gabrieli: Muhammad and the Conquests of Islam; World University Library, London; 1968.
  • F. Gabrieli: Arab Historians of the Crusades; Routledge and Keegan Paul; 1969.
  • E. Gibbon: The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire; vol 5; ed. W. Smith; London, 1858. (see also vol 7: Methuen and Co; London; 1920.)
  • E. Gibbon: The Crusades; Alex Murray and Son; London; 1869.
  • S.J. Joseph Gill: Byzantium and the Papacy 1198-1400; Rutgers University Press; New Jersey; 1979;
  • J.B. Glubb: The Life and Times of Muhammad; Hodder and Stoughton, London; 1970.
  • E.A. Grosvenor: Constantinople; Little Brown Company; Boston; 1900.
  • The History of the Maritime Wars of the Turks; tr. from the Turkish of Haji Khalifah; by J. Mitchell; The Oriental Translation Fund; London; 1831; preface; p. v.
  • P.M. Holt: Three Biographies of Al-Zahir Baybars; in Medieval Historical Writing in the Christian and Islamic Worlds; School of Oriental and African Studies; University of London; London; 1982; pp. 19-29; at p. 20.
  • Ibn al-Athir: Tarikh al-Dawla Al-Atabakiyya; ed. A. A. Tulaymat; Cairo; 1963.
  • Ibn al-Athir: Kitab al-Kamil; ed K.J. Tornberg; 12 vols; Leiden; 1851-72.
  • Ibn al-Qalanisi: Dayl Tarikh Dimashk; ed. H.F. Amedroz; Leiden; 1908.
  • Ibn al-Qalanisi: The Damascus Chronicle of the Crusades, tr. of Ibn al-Qalanisi. H.A.R. Gibb; London, Luzac and Co, Ltd, 1932.
  • Ibn Shaddad: Al-Nawadir al-Sultaniyya, ed J. El-Shayyal; Cairo; 1964.
  • Imad Eddin al-Isfahani: Sana al-Barq al-Shami; summarised by al-Bundari; ed. F. al-Nabarawi; Cairo; 1979.
  • Imad Eddin al-Isfahani: Al Fath al-Qusi fi ‘l Fath al-Qudusi; Landberg Ed; Leiden; 1888.
  • Ibn Taghribirdi: Al-Nujum al-Zahira fi Muluk Misr wal Qahira; Cairo; 1938.
  • Ibn Wasil: Mufarrij al-Kurub fi Akhbar Bani Ayyub; Ed. G. Shayyal, S.Ashur, and H. Rabi’; 4 vols; Cairo.
  • Baron Mac-Guckin de Slane: Ibn Khallikan’s Biographical Dictionary (4 vols, quarto, Paris, 1842-171.
  • Ibn Abd al-Zahir: Al-Rawd al-Zahir fi Sirat al-Malik al-Zahir; ed. A.A. Khuwayter; Ryad; 1976. Partial ed and tr. F. Sadeque: Baybars I of Egypt; Dacca; 1956.
  • T. Al-Ismail: The Life of Muhammad; Taha Publishers; London; 1988.
  • Abd Al-Rahman Al-Jabarti’s History of Egypt: Ajaib al-Athar fi’l Trajim wa’l Akhbar; edited by T. Philipp and M. Perlmann; 2 vols; Verlag; 1994; p. 2.
  • W.E. Kaegi: Byzantium and the Early Islamic Conquests; Cambridge University Press; 1992.
  • Kemal Eddin: Zubdat al-Halab fi Ta’arikh Halab; tr. as Histoire d’Alep de Kamal Ad-Din by E. Blochet; in Revue de L’Orient Latin (ROL); Vols 3-6; 1896 to 1899.
  • Kemal Eddin: Zubdat al-Halab fi Ta’arikh Halab; Sami Dahhan’s edition, II, Damascus, 1954.
  • Abd al-Aziz al-Khowaiter: Al-Rawd al-Zahir fi sirat al-Malik al-Zahir; Ryad; 1976.
  • A. Khowaiter: Baibars the First; The Green Mountain Press; London; 1978.
  • K.M. Khaalid; A. Hamid Eliva: Men and Women Around the Messenger; tr into English by M. M. Gemeiah et al; dar al-Manarah; Al-Mansurah; Egypt; 2003.
  • A. De Lamartine: History of Turkey; in 3 vols; D. Appleton & Company; New York; 1855; vol 2.
  • J.H. Lamonte: Crusade and Jihad: in N.A. Faris ed: The Arab Heritage, Princeton University Press, 1944; pp 159-98.
  • S. Lane Poole: Saladin and the Fall of the Kingdom of Jerusalem; Beirut; Khayats; 1964.
  • G. Le Bon: La Civilisation des Arabes, Syracuse; 1884.
  • U. and M.C. Lyons: Ayyubids, Mamluks and Crusaders, selection from the Tarikh al-Duwal wal Muluk of Ibn al-Furat; 2 vols, W. Heffer and Sons Ltd, Cambridge, 1971.
  • Al-Maqrizi, Ahmad Ibn Ali: Al-Mawaiz wa Alitibar fi Dhikr al-Khitat wa-Al-Athar. Edited by Ahmed Ali al-Mulaiji. 3 Vols. Beirut: Dar al Urfan; 1959.
  • Al-Maqrizi: Kitab al-Khitat, ed. Bulaq; partial French tr. by U. Bouriant and P. Casanova, Description Topographique et Historique de l’Egypte, Paris, 1895-1900; Cairo, 1906-20.
  • Al-Makrizi (Al-Maqrizi): Kitab al-Suluk, translated as Histoire de l’Egypte de Makrizi by E. Blochet; Revue de l’Orient Latin; vols viii-xi; Paris.
  • Al-Makrizi: Al-Suluk fi Ma’rifat Duwal al-Muluk; tr. M. Quatremere as Histoire des Sultans Mamluks de l’Egypte; Paris; 1845.
  • Al-Makrizi: Kitab al-Suluk; tr. R.J.C. Broadhurst as History of Ayyubids and Mamluks; Boston; 1980.
  • W. Muir: The Mamluke or Slave Dynasty of Egypt; 1260-1517; London; Smith, Elder & Co; London; 1896.
  • S. Ockley: History of the Saracens; George Bell and Sons; London; 1890.
  • Baron G. d’Ohsson: Histoire des Mongols: La Haye et Amsterdam; 1834.
  • A.A. Paton: History of the Egyptian Revolution; From the Mamelukes to the Death of Mohammed Ali; 2nd edition; London; Trubner &Co; 1870.
  • H.U. Rahman: A Chronology of Islamic History: 570-1000 CE; Mansell Publishing Limited; London; 1989.
  • Receuil des Historiens des Croisades; Historiens Orientaux; in 4 vols; Imprimerie Nationale; Paris; 1841 ff.
  • S. Runciman: A History of the Crusades, in 3 vols; Cambridge University Press, 1962.
  • S. Runciman: The Fall of Constantinople 1453; Cambridge University Press; 1965.
  • J.J. Saunders: Aspects of the Crusades; University of Canterbury Publishing; Canterbury; 1962.
  • J.J. Saunders: The History of the Mongol Conquests; Routlege & Kegan Paul; London; 1971.
  • S.P. Scott: History of the Moorish Empire; in 3 vols; The John Lippincott Company; Philadelphia; 1904.
  • K. M. Setton: A History of the Crusades; K.M. Setton ed; The University of Wisconsin Press; 1975; vol 3.
  • Sibt al-Jawzi: Al-Muntazam Fi Tarikh Al-Muluk Wa’l Umam; X; Hyderabad; 1940; VIII/ 2.
  • Sibt al-Jawzi: Mir’at al-Zaman; Partial edition by Jewett; Chicago; 1907.
  • E. Siwan: La Genese de la Contre Croisade; Journal Asiatique; 254 (1966) pp. 199-204.
  • V. Slessarev: Prester Jean: The Letters and the Legend; 1959.
  • B. Spuler: History of the Mongols; London, Routledge& Kegan Paul, 1972.
  • B. Spuler: The Muslim World: The Mongol Period; tr. by F.R. C. Bagley; Leyden; Brill; 1960.
  • B. Spuler: Die Mongolen und das Christentum, in Internationale Kirchichte Zeitschrift; Bern; 28; 1938; pp. 156-75.
  • W.B. Stevenson: The Crusaders in the East; Cambridge University Press; 1907.
  • A.N. Stratos: Byzantium in the Seventh Century; tr by H.T. Hionides; Hakkert Publisher; Amsterdam; 1972.
  • Al-Sulami: Un Traite Damasquin du debut du XIIem siecle, ed E. Siwan, Journal Asiatique, 1966.
  • Al-Tabari: Tarikh al-Umum wal Muluk; ed De Goeje; Leyden 1879-1901;
  • Al-Tabari: Tarikh al-Umum wal Muluk; Cairo; 1939.
  • The History of Tabari, vol xiii, tr and annotated by G.H.A. Juynboll, State University of New York Press, 1989.
  • Al-Tabari: Chronique; tr to Fr by H. Zotenberg; Paris; Imprimerie Imperiale; 1874 ff.
  • Al-Tabari: Chronique; tr by M.H. Zotenberg; New ed Rev by M. Hamade; Ed al-Bustane; Paris; 2002.
  • Al-Tabari: The History of al-Tabari (Tarikh al-Rusul wa’l Muluk;) tr. by M. Fishbein; State University of New York Press; 1997.
  • A.D. Taha: The Muslim Conquest and Settlement of North Africa and Spain; Routledge; London; 1989.
  • P. Thorau: The Lion of Egypt; tr into English by P.M. Holt; Longman; London; 1987.
  • A.S. Tritton tr. with notes by H.A.R. Gibb: The first and second Crusades from an Anonymous Syriac Chronicle; Journal of The Royal Asiatic Society (JRAS) 1933; pp 69-101.
  • The First and second crusades from an Anonymous Syriac chronicle: tr. by A.S. Tritton and notes by A.H. R. Gibb: JRAS: Part two: April. pp 273-305.
  • Notes:

    1. A.A. Paton: History of the Egyptian Revolution; From the Mamelukes to the Death of Mohammed Ali; 2nd edition; London; Trubner &Co; 1870; vol 1; p. 47.[/ef]

      Baybars was a Mameluk, i.e originally a slave, purchased at an early age who eventually rose to become one of the greatest soldiers, commanders and rulers of Islam. 97On the life of Baybars, see: A. Khowaiter: Baibars the First; The Green Mountain Press; London;1978.
      P. Thorau: The Lion of Egypt; tr into English by P.M. Holt; Longman; London; 1987.

    2. W. Muir: The Mamluke or Slave Dynasty of Egypt; 1260-1517; London; Smith, Elder & Co; London; 1896; p. Appendix; pp. 215-20.
    3. Al-Maqrizi: Kitab al-Suluk li Ma’rifat Duwal al-Muluk; Cairo; 1936; Part of which was translated into French by M. Quatremere as Histoire des Sultans Mamlouks d’Egypte; Paris; 1837; vol 1 (Cairo ed); pp. 240; 300; 340.
    4. A. Khowaiter: op cit; p. 5.
    5. Al-Maqrizi: Kitab al-Suluk); op cit; pp. 225; 240.
    6. Ibn Taghribirdi: Al-Nujum al-Zahira fi Muluk Misr wal Qahira; Cairo; 1938; vol VII.
    7. P. Thorau: The Lion of Egypt: op cit; p. 34.
    8. S. Runciman: A History; op cit; p. 266.
    9. P Thorau: The Lion of Egypt; op cit; p. 34.
    10. S. Runciman: A History; op cit; p. 267.
    11. Ibid.
    12. P. Thorau: The Lion of Egypt; op cit; p. 34.
    13. S. Runciman: A History; op cit; p. 267.
    14. P. Thorau: The Lion; pp. 34-5.
    15. A. Khowaiter: Baibars the First; op cit; p. 10.
    16. Ibid.
    17. Abu’l Fida: Al-Mukhtasar fi Akhbar al-Bashar; Istanbul; 1286 H; : vol iii; p. 190.
    18. A. Khowaiter: Baibars the First; op cit; p. 10.
    19. Ibid.
    20. W. Muir: The Mamluke; op cit; p. 10.
    21. A. Khowaiter: Baibars the First; op cit; p. 12.
    22. Ibid; p. 13.
    23. Ibid.
    24. W. Muir: The Mamluke; op cit; p. 10.
    25. Ibid.
    26. A.A. Paton: History of the Egyptian Revolution; op cit; vol 1; p. 46.
    27. Ibid.
    28. Ibid; p. 46.
    29. Ibid; p. 47.
    30. W. Muir: The Mamluke; op cit; p. 10.
    31. A. Hoteit: Les Communautes de Tripoli et les Croises; in De Toulouse; op cit; pp. 41-58; p. 56.
    32. Ibid.
    33. Innocent IV: Statuta capitulorum generalium ordinis Cisterciensis, ed. J. Canivez, Vol II, Louvain, 1934, ad. ann.1245, & 28, p. 294. in J. Richard: La Papaute et les Missions d’Orient; op cit; p.66.
    34. C. Cahen: Orient et Occident au Temps des Croisades, Aubier Montaigne, 1983; p. 200.
    35. William of Rubrouck, Envoye de Saint Louis, Voyage dans l’Empire Mongol (1253-1255), Payot, Paris; 1985.
    36. C.R. Conder: The Latin Kingdom of Jerusalem; op cit; p. 372.
    37. E.G. Browne: Literary History of Persia, op cit; p.439.
    38. J. Glubb: A Short History; op cit; p.207.
    39. Ibid.
    40. Y. Courbage, P. Fargues: Chretiens et Juifs dans l’Islam Arabe et Turc, Payot, Paris, 1997; p. 29.
    41. Ibn Tagri-Birdi: Al-Nujum al-Zahirah; op cit; vol 3; in Baron. G. d’Ohsson: Histoire des Mongols: La Haye et Amsterdam; 1834; p. 259.
    42. 800, 000 people according to H.H. Howorth: History of the Mongols, London, 1927 in Y. Courbage and Fargues: Chretiens; op cit; p. 29.
    43. Thomas W. Arnold: Muslim Civilisation during the Abbasid Period; in The Cambridge Medieval History, Vol IV; op cit; pp 274-98; at p.279.
    44. J. Glubb: A Short History; op cit; 207.
    45. Ibid.
    46. J.J. Saunders: A History; op cit; p. 182.
    47. A.A. Paton: History of the Egyptian Revolution; op cit; p. 47.
    48. Ibid.
    49. G. D’Ohsson: Histoire; vol 3; note 2; p. 332.
    50. W. Muir: The Mamluke; op cit; p. 10.
    51. G. D’Ohson: Histoire; op cit; 332.
    52. Ibid; p. 338.
    53. Ibid; p. 339.
    54. See Al-Maqrizi: Al-Suluk fi Ma’rifat Duwal al-Muluk; tr. M. Qatremere as Histoire des sultans Mamluks de l’Egypte; Paris; 1845; vol I; pt. 1; pp. 98; 104.
    55. J. Richard: The Crusades c.1071-c.1291; Cambridge University Press; Tr from the French; 1999; p. 415.
    56. W. Muir: The Mamluke; op cit; p. 11.
    57. Ibid.
    58. Ibid.
    59. Ibid; p. 15.
    60. Ibid.
    61. Ibid.
    62. Ibid.
    63. Ibid.
    64. Ibid; p. 16.
    65. Ibid.
    66. A. Khowaiter: Baibars; op cit; pp. 35-6.
    67. J.J. Saunders: Aspects of the Crusades; op cit; p.64.
    68. W. Muir: The Mamluke; op cit; p. 18.
    69. Berke, after the death of Baybars, was for three years (1277-80) the titular sultan of the Bahri Mamluk state of Egypt.
    70. W. Muir: The Mamluke; op cit; p. 18.
    71. Ibid.
    72. Ibid; p. 19.
    73. See Ibn al-Furat: Tarikh al-Duwal wal Muluk; ed M.F. El-Shayyal; unpublished Ph.d., University of Edinburgh; 1986. A. A. Khowaiter: Baibars the First; op cit.
    74. Baron G. d’Ohsson: Histoire des Mongols; op cit; pp. 458-500.
    75. Ibn Abd al-Zahir: Al-Rawd al-Zahir fi sirat al-malik al-Zahir; ed A. A. Al-Khuwaiter; Ryad; 1976.
    76. U. and M.C. Lyons: Ayyubids, Mamluks and Crusaders, selection from the Tarikh al-Duwal wal Muluk of Ibn al-Furat; 2 vols, W. Heffer and Sons Ltd, Cambridge, 1971.
    77. J. Reiske: Abilfedae Annales Moslemici, Lat. Ex. Ar. Fecit. J. J. Reiske; Leipzig; 1754; Arabic text published in 1789.
      Abu’l Fida in Receuil des historiens des croisades, Historiens Orientaux; Vol 1; Paris; 1872; pp. 1-186.
    78. P. K. Hitti: History; op cit; p. 656.
    79. W. Muir: The Mamluke; op cit; p. 22.
    80. Ibid.
    81. Ibid.
    82. Ibid.
    83. Al-Maqrizi: Al-Suluk; Tr Qatremere; op cit; vol I; pt. 2; pp. 29-30.
    84. Ibid; pp. 52-4.
    85. W.B. Stevenson: The Crusaders; op cit; p. 344.
    86. Ibid; p. 345.
    87. B. Spuler: The Muslim World: op cit; p. 27.
    88. C.R. Conder: The Latin Kingdom. op cit; p. 391.
    89. J. Glubb: A Short History; op cit; p.213.
    90. R. Burns: Damascus, A History; Routledge; London; 2005; pp. 198-9.
    91. W. Muir: The Mamluke; op cit; p. 14.
    92. Ibid.
    93. A.A. Paton: History of the Egyptian Revolution; op cit; p. 48.
    94. Ibid.
    95. W. Muir: The Mamluke; op cit; p. xxx.
    96. Ibid.