A Summary of the Crusades – Part Three (1194-1291)

by Dr Salah Zaimeche, BMHC

Just before he died, Salah Eddin crowned his life achievements with the common error of passing on the leadership of the Muslim world to his heirs. Just before he expired, he had his officers and high officials swear allegiance to his children and his successors. 1 To each child he assigned a certain portion of the Muslim land. 2 His sons, Al-Afdal, Al-Aziz, and Ez-Zahir, became lords of Damascus, Egypt, and Aleppo. His brother, Al-Adel, ruled at Kerak, and his great-nephews, Shirkuh and Al-Mansur, at Emesa and Hamah. But this arrangement did not long subsist, and the result was nearly fatal to the Muslim world.

Just a few years after Salah Eddin’s death, the Muslim realm found itself in the same state of chaos and divisions, as it was a century before when the crusaders first arrived. Salah Eddin’s Ayyubid successors failed to follow on the impetus he gave them to eliminate the crusaders. 3 Worse even, following his death, and that of his brother, the unity of the Muslim world again broke into a series of infighting kingdoms and principalities. The Ayyubid princes spent their energies fighting each other and capturing territory from each other rather than fighting the Franks. 4 The Ayyubids, unlike Nur Eddin and Salah Eddin, were not interested in Jihad either, rather, their policies allowed the continued survival of the Crusaders states. 5 They were,’ according to Cahen, ‘incapable of doing anything but amuse themselves.’ 6

To make things even worse, the close of the twelfth century had been extremely destructive for the East. Egypt was devastated by famine, and the consequent pestilence spread into Syria, so that all the lands from the Euphrates to the Nile were ‘filled with mourning and desolation,’ and to make things much worse, the following year a terrible earthquake ruined almost all the cities of Palestine, with the exception of Jerusalem. 7

It was in the midst of these upheavals that early in the 13th century, in 1204 a new crusade was launched. It occurred whilst the Ayyubids were fighting each other, and the land was stricken with chaos and mal-administration. Fortunately for the Muslim world, as to be seen further on, this crusade was diverted against the Byzantines. A smaller force, however, passed through the Straits of Gibraltar, and under the leadership of Reginald de Dampierre reached Palestine in 1203. Some plundering raids were followed by concessions on the part of Al-Adel, who surrendered Nazareth and concluded peace. 8

The focus of the 1204 crusade, made mainly of Venetians and Frenchmen, was, however, Constantinople. It is crucial here to explain, briefly, why Byzantium was seen as the priority before the Muslim world. The conquest of Constantinople and the destruction of the Byzantine, Greek, Empire, were part of a grandiose Western scheme that was already centuries old before 1204, and that still remains in our very day, in the 21st century. It highlights the main divisions between the Eastern (Greek Orthodox) and Western (Catholic/Latin) Churches. Since the earliest times, Runciman explains, Eastern and Western Christendom had been drifting apart in theology, in liturgical usage and in ecclesiastical theory and practice. But the most central disagreement was in the ecclesiastical sphere. Did the Bishop of Rome enjoy an honorary primacy or an absolute supremacy in the Church? The Byzantines held firmly the view that the Pope in Rome was the senior but not the supreme member of the Church. 9

By capturing Byzantium, Westerners also sought to have a much nearer physical proximity to the Muslim world, and then find it easier to annihilate it. 10 As Donavan explains, the Christian plan was that, with a well-ordered Catholic state established on the Bosphorus as a base of operations, the crusaders would be in a better position to invade Palestine directly. 11 When the strategic value of the conquest of Constantinople in relation to the Holy Land was pointed to him, Pope Innocent responded by granting the crusade indulgences to the participants in it. 12

Therefore, when the opportunity presented itself in 1204, following Byzantine internal conflict and rivalry for power, the Crusaders did not miss their chance. 13 Now, the opportunity of invading the Muslim world directly once Byzantium was brought into the Catholic fold would secure lasting victory. 14 The destruction of Byzantine power and Constantinople began with the crusaders coming across a Muslim Mosque in the city, which they began by burning to the ground. 15 Then, as the fire raged, and as the Greeks rose in anger, there began the destruction of the great city. The crusaders entered homes, shops and churches, and took whatever caught their fancy. Everywhere looting and destruction progressed unabated. The devastation was on such a scale that St Sophia suffered on that occasion more damage than the Turks would inflict upon it in 1453. 16 Thousands of Greeks were murdered; rape was widespread and generalised. Palaces and homes were looted. 17 Libraries were ransacked, and precious manuscripts were ruined or lost; museums as well as churches and homes were burnt down; great works of literature were lost forever, and thousands of art masterpieces were stolen, mutilated or destroyed. The Byzantine Empire would never recover from the blow. 18

A decade or so later, at the Lateran Council, which met in November, 1215, and had been summoned over two years previously, four hundred and twelve bishops were present, including the Latin patriarchs of Jerusalem and Constantinople. Through Pope Innocent’s influence the project of a new Crusade was adopted, and preached with vigour most notably by James de Vitry, the future bishop of Acre and historian of the Holy Land, and the English Cardinal, Robert de Curzon, who would eventually die in Egypt in 1218. The main leaders who took the Cross were Andrew, King of Hungary; Leopold, Duke of Austria; William, Count of Holland; and the English Earl Ranulf of Chester. 19 This invasion of Egypt was prompted by the fresh realisation that the centre of Islamic power, following the fall of Fatimid power, had now shifted from Syria to Egypt. 20 Salah Eddin’s brother, al-Adil, was still sultan of Egypt when this Fifth Crusade began to arrive in 1218 on the Nile Delta. 21 Damietta was well fortified with towers and walls, and protected by the river and a moat. In mid-stream rose an immense tower of great strength, which helped defeat the crusaders early assaults. In September, the papal legate, Cardinal Pelagius, reached the camp. A little later there came many French and English knights, but winter was now coming on, the camp was flooded, provisions destroyed, and many ships lost. 22 With the spring, however, the Crusaders renewed their efforts; by crossing the river on February 5th, they secured a better position for the attack, and then prepared their engines for an assault. Meantime Al-Adil had been succeeded by his son, Al-Kamil. The new Sultan was in such despair that he considered a hasty escape to Yemen; but on receiving reinforcements from Syria, he made a fierce, though unsuccessful, attack on the Christian camp. 23 In the end, seized by panic, and seeking to protect his kingdom, Al-Kamil offered to exchange Damietta for Jerusalem, the original objective of the Crusade. 24 The crusaders were also offered the piece of the ‘True Cross,’ the release of all the Christian prisoners in Egypt and Syria, and many other concessions in exchange for the crusader evacuation of Egypt. 25 The pope’s legate, Pelagius, had, however, set his heart on capturing Cairo, and refused the deal. 26 Pelagius was also convinced of some prophecy works written Arabic, the most important of which was written by a 9th century Persian doctor. 27 According to this Prophecy the Christians would conquer the whole of Egypt as far as Aswan on the border with Christian Nubia. 28

In July 1221, Pelagius and his army advanced southwards into the Egyptian Delta in the direction of Cairo. By then, the Muslim armies of Syria had reached Egypt, and soon they began to harass the crusaders. 29 In August, the crusader advance was blocked, and their ships cut off from reaching them, many being captured or sunk. 30 The crusaders decided to retreat back to Damietta at night. By the morning, however, their main body on the shore was cut off from the river and from the ships which carried most of the provisions. 31 Then, to make matters worse for them, the season of the annual rise of the Nile had come, and the Egyptian population cut the dykes. Soon the crusaders found themselves surrounded by swirling waters, about to drown. 32 Hard pressed the crusaders sent envoys to al-Kamil, who thought it best not to press his advantage unduly, and offered them generous terms instead of finishing them off in view of their precarious situation. 33 After inter-changes of messages, a treaty was signed on 30th of August 1221. 34 Al-Kamil rescued the Franks and provided them with food and other supplies on the sole condition that they peacefully evacuate the country. 35

In 1228 Frederick II of Sicily went on the crusades, officially known as the sixth, although many more than six had already taken place. The Emperor Frederick, who, by this marriage became lord of Palestine, was certainly the greatest king, and in some respects also the most remarkable man of his time. 36 He was not only a ruler but was also a poet, and lover of art and all intellectual pursuits, and spoke many languages: German, Italian, Greek, Latin, and Arabic. He was remembered best as the enemy of the papacy, and was rumoured to reject everything religious. 37 When Frederick arrived in Palestine, still fearful for his realm, and hardly concerned with jihad or any other consideration of the sort, the Ayyubid Sultan, al-Kamil, concluded a treaty with Frederick, which in the words of Muslim chroniclers was a supplication on the part of the Muslim ruler. 38 In such a treaty, al-Kamil surrendered the whole of Jerusalem, except the Mosque of Omar, the keys of which were to stay with the Muslims, but Christians under certain circumstances could enter it for prayer; and the treaty further restored Bethlehem, Jaffa and Nazareth to the Crusaders. 39 The Muslims reacted in horror at the deal. 40 The Church and the Papacy, likewise, reacted with horror at the peaceful end of the crusade. Gerold the Patriarch of Jerusalem wrote a letter condemning it as a betrayal of religion and the Church, whilst Pope Gregory had already described it as a monstrous reconciliation of Christ and Belial. 41

Al-Kamil was not the only Ayyubid who sold out Jerusalem and other territories for the sake of his own realm; other Ayyubid rulers did the same. 42 Weak Ayyubid rule was soon compounded by the greatest threat now facing the Islamic realm: the Mongols’ invasion, which was taking place at the same time. This devastating invasion and its impact are seen in great length in the outline of Islamic history for the period. Suffice to say that in the three years of such an invasion, the Muslim world experienced such devastation as has never been seen in history before. As a rule of Mongol conquest, once the garrison was conquered, the Mongols massacred the surviving soldiers, destroyed the city walls and took a levy of men. 43 The population was divided up among the soldiers to be killed, with the exception of women and children to be enslaved. 44 According to Bulliet and Petrushvskii, 747,000 Muslims were slaughtered at Nishapur and 1.6 million at Herat. 45 In Merw, The Mongols butchered 700,000 persons, 46 only eighty craftsmen were spared. The total slaughter there is in fact put by Browne at 1.3 million. 47 Ibn al-Athir, who was living through those events, wrote:

‘The report comprises the story of a… terrible, gigantic disaster such as had never happened before… It may well be that the world from now until its end… will not experience the like of it again…’ 48

Whilst the Mongols were unleashing death and destruction in the eastern realm, further west, Muslim armies, as had now become customary, were busy fighting each other. 49 At the death of Al-Adil on August 31, 1218, his son Al-Kamil had succeeded him at Cairo, with the title of Sultan and some kind of supremacy over his brothers who ruled in the various cities of Syria. 50 His sudden death at the beginning of 1238 was the signal for general warfare amongst the Ayyubid princes of Syria. Eventually Es-Salih Ayub, al-Kamil’s eldest son, became lord of Damascus; with the support of his cousin Dawud, he invaded Egypt and overthrew his brother Al-Adil, in May, 1240. 51 But the new Sultan soon quarrelled with his powerful kinsman Dawud. 52 In words, rather than fighting the crusaders, Ayyubid princes quarrelled over towns and cities, involving their armies in ceaseless fratricidal wars. Ayyubid rulers also allied themselves to the crusaders against other Muslims, the Mamluks of Egypt, who constituted the main force there, and their Khwarizmian Turkish allies, in particular. 53 This was the case when in 1244 there was formed an alliance of crusaders and the Ayyubid sultans of Damascus and Hims against the Turks and their Egyptian allies at the Battle of Ghaza in October 1244. 54 The Battle of 1244 was furiously waged, and thirty thousand crusaders and their Muslim allies were killed; only the patriarch and the Prince of Tyre escaped with thirty three Templars, twenty six Hospitallers, and three Teutonic Knights. 55

In 1248 there began the 7th crusade led by the French King Louis IX. Following a successful landing, and easy occupation of Damietta. For six months the army lay in or near Damietta, until the remainder of the fleet under the king’s brother, the Count of Poitiers, could arrive from Syria. 56 This was not till October 1249, and then a council determined to waste no time in attacking Alexandria, but to push on boldly for Cairo itself. The French army then marched from Damietta towards Cairo. On 8th 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. 57 The French rushed into Al-Mansurah, led by the King’s brother, Robert of Artois, who was determined to capture al-Mansurah and finish off the Egyptian army. 58 In al-Mansurah, however, Robert came up against the Bahriyya and Jamdariyya Mamluk, led by Baybars, and which were well organised and trained for combat. 59 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. 60 Then, in a bold strike, in the Spring of the same year, 1250, the Mamluks attacked and completed the French rout, killing and capturing thousands, including the King himself. 61

Louis IX was released after payment of a ransom. Following his release, he reorganised Christian military power. Lebanese historians relate that the Christian Arab, Maronites. 62 The Maronites rushed to put at his service between twenty and twenty five thousand fighters. 63 Louis, and the pope, also formed an alliance with the Mongols, who were thought to be the ally who could help crush the Muslim common foe by an attack from the rear. 64

There was a crucial factor that brought the Mongols in direct alliance with the Christians: Christianity, as a faith, held a great place amongst Mongol beliefs. 65 Simeon, a Nestorian monk, surnamed Rabban (Master) Ata (Father), had a great influence on the Grand Khan, Ogtai, and was in correspondence with Pope Innocent IV. 66 Simeon lived in Armenia and Tabriz, where he built many churches despite the local inhabitants’ hostility, and he baptised many Mongols. 67 Alongside him was the Armenian Hethum (Hethoum) who also found great support amongst the Mongol rulers. 68 Moreover many amongst the Mongol leadership, such as Hulagu, who was to take Baghdad in 1258, and his general Kitbuka (Kitbuqa and other spellings) had affinities with Nestorian Christianity. 69 In fact the wives of Mangu (Mongke), Kubilai and Hulagu, all of them Christians, played the leading part in the favours shown by the Mongols to the Christians. 70 The Church hierarchy in Rome was aware of this and therefore worked very hard to stimulate the zeal of these Christian wives. 71 There were also Christian soldiers employed as archers, or sailors, and also adventurers in the Mongol court. 72

Following many exchanges of embassies between the Christians and Mongols, 73 in 1258, Hulagu crossed Persia and attacked Baghdad. 74 The Mongols had already slaughtered millions in the east by the time they reached the capital of the Caliphate, Baghdad, in early 1258. 75 Once the Mongols took the city, the general massacre of the population began. As they came out of the city walls the people were slaughtered en masse. 76 The whole Muslim population, between 800,000 and one million, was entirely exterminated. 77 800,000 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. 78

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. 79 Malik al-Nassir, the ruler of Damascus, abandoned the city and fled. 80 Damascus gave in without a fight, and at its taking, three Christian leaders (the Mongol commander Kitbuqa, the King of Armenia and the Frankish Count Bohemund VI of Antioch) rode through the streets and forced the Muslim population to bow to the cross. 81

Following the capture of Iraq and Syria, only Egypt was left. The fall of Cairo would mean 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.’ 82

Cairo was, however, under Mamluk rule. In response to Hulagu’s summons, the Mamluks first decapitated his envoys. Then, at their leaders’ meeting, which included Kuttuz and Baybars, the Turkish general Nassir Eddin, as well as the princes of Irbil and Acca, they decided to go to war. 83 This culminated in the Battle of Ain Jalut in September 1260, which resulted in a resounding Muslim success. 84 The Mamluks, thus, not only crushed the Mongol army, they saved the whole land of Islam. 85

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. The defeat also convinced many Mongols that ‘heaven was fighting for Islam and that it would be prudent to submit to Allah.’ 86 The Mongols based in Iran, however, remained hostile to Islam, and were great allies of the crusaders. In Baybars, who had become the new sultan in 1260, however, Islam had now one of the greatest leaders it ever had: resilient, decisive, brave, and with great military skills. 87 Through the major part of the late 1260s and the 1270s, without relapse, Baybars led many campaigns against the Crusader-Armenian-Mongol alliance. 88 These campaigns are depicted in the works of contemporaries such as Ibn Abd al-Zahir, 89 Ibn al-Furat, 90 and also by the scholar-fighter Abu’l Fida. 91 Baybars’ last action was in Asia Minor, where he defeated a Mongol army at Albistan, in 1277, the year he died. 92

With his example, Baybars had shown the way. Qalawun his successor mounted more attacks, and then, when he died in 1290, he left to his successor, al-Ashraf Khallil, the task of capturing the last Crusader stronghold, Acre, in May 1291. 93 After the fall of Acre the other crusader towns surrendered, and the kingdom of the Crusaders was ended. 94

Select Reading List

  • Abu’l Fida in Receuil des Historiens des Croisades, Historiens Orientaux; Vol 1; Paris; 1872; pp. 1-186.
  • T.A. Archer: The Crusades; T. Fisher Unwin; London; 1894.
  • E.G. Browne: Literary History of Persia; Cambridge University Press; 1929; 3 Vols; Vol 2.
  • R.W. Bulliet: The Patricians of Nishapur; A Study of Islamic Medieval Social History; Cambridge; mass; 1972.
  • J.P. Donavan: Pelagius and the Fifth Crusade; University of Pennsylvania Press; 1950.
  • Epistolae Innocenti III (ref as Inn. Ep): Ed. Baluze, 1683, Publ J. Migne in Patrologia Latina, vols 214-217, Paris 1855; Lib VIII; ep. 69; May 25, 1205.
  • J.M. Fiey: Chretiens Syriaques sous les Mongols; Louvain; 1975.
  • H.H. Howorth: History of the Mongols, London, 1927.
  • R.S. Humphreys: From Saladin to the Mongols; State University of New York Press Albany.
  • R.S. Humphreys: Legitimacy and instability in Islam, in the Jihad and its Times, ed. Dajani Shakeel and R.A. Messier, Ann Arbor, 1991.
  • Ibn Abd al-Zahir: Al-Rawd al-Zahir fi sirat al-malik al-Zahir; ed A. A. Al-Khuwaiter; Ryad; 1976.
  • Ibn al-Furat: Tarikh al-Duwal wal Muluk; ed M.F. El-Shayyal; unpublished Ph.d., University of Edinburgh; 1986.
  • Ibn Iyas: Bada’t al-Zuhur fi Waqai al-Duhur; (Bulaq; 1311 H); vol I.
  • Ibn Wasil: Mufarrij al-Kurub fi Akhbar bani Ayyub; Ed. G. Shayyal, S.Ashur, and H. Rabi’; 4 vols; Cairo; II.
  • Innocent IV: Statuta capitulorum generalium ordinis Cisterciensis, ed. J. Canivez, Vol II, Louvain, 1934, ad. ann.1245, & 28.
  • Sir T.C. Jackson: Byzantine and Romanesque Architecture; 2 Vols; Cambridge University Press; 2 Vols. I.
  • 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: 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.
  • St Martin; Brosset etc in W. Heyd: Histoire du commerce du Levant; Leipzig; 1885-6; reedit; Amsterdam 1967; Vol II.
  • H.E. Mayer: The Crusades; tr. J. Gillingham; Oxford University Press; 1972.
  • C. Mills: History of the Crusades; 2 vols; Longman; London; 1821; vol 2.
  • Baron G. d’Ohsson: Histoire des Mongols; La Haye et Amsterdam; 1834; Vol 3.
  • I.P. Petrushvskii: The Socio economic Conditions of Iran under the Il-Khans; In Cambridge History of Iran; v; Cambridge; 1968; pp. 483-537.
  • J. Reiske: Abilfedae Annales Moslemici, Lat. Ex. Ar. Fecit. J. J. Reiske; Leipzig; 1754; Arabic text published in 1789.
  • Jean Richard: La Papaute et les Missions d’Orient au Moyen Age; Ecole Francaise de Rome; Palais Farnese; 1977.
  • Sibt al-Jawzi: Al-Muntazam fi tarikh al-muluk wa’l umam; X; Hyderabad; 1940; VIII/ 2.
  • B. Spuler: History of the Mongols; London, Routledge& Kegan Paul, 1972.
  • P. Thorau: The Lion of Egypt: tr by P.M. Holt; Longman; London; 1992.
  • G. de Villehardouin: Constantinople Sous les Empereurs Francais; Paris, 1657.
  • G. de Villehardouin: Constantinople Sous les Empereurs Francais; Societe de l’Histoire de France; Paris; 1838;
  • G. De Villehardouin: La Conquete de Constantinople; De Wailly ed; Paris; 1872.

Notes:

  1. R.S. Humphreys: From Saladin to the Mongols; State University of New York Press Albany; 1977; p.57.
  2. Ibn Wasil: Mufarrij al-Kurub fi Akhbar bani Ayyub; Ed. G. Shayyal, S.Ashur, and H. Rabi’; 4 vols; Cairo; II; 172-3.
  3. J.H. Lamonte: Crusade and Jihad: in N.A. Faris ed: The Arab Heritage, Princeton University Press, 1944; pp. 159-98; at p.183.
  4. R.S. Humphreys: Legitimacy and instability in Islam, in the Jihad and its times, ed. Dajani Shakeel and R.A. Messier, Ann Arbor, 1991; pp. 10-11.
  5. Ibid.
  6. C. Cahen: Ayyubids; Encyclopaedia of Islam; Leiden; Second Edition; Brill; 2003.
  7. T.A. Archer: The Crusades; T. Fisher Unwin; London; 1894; p. 372.
  8. Ibid; p. 371.
  9. S. Runciman: The Fall of Constantinople; 1453; Cambridge University Press; 1965; pp. 7-8.
  10. G. de Villehardouin: Constantinople Sous les Empereurs Francais; Paris, 1657.
    G. de Villeharouin: Constantinople Sous les Empereurs Francais; Societe de l’Histoire de Francee; Paris; 1838;
    G. de Villehardouin: La Conquete de Constantinople; De Wailly ed; Paris; 1872.
  11. J.P. Donavan: Pelagius and the Fifth Crusade; University of Pennsylvania Press; 1950; p. 7.
  12. Epistolae Innocenti III (ref as Inn. Ep): Ed. Baluze, 1683, Publ J. Migne in Patrologia Latina, vols 214-217, Paris 1855; Lib VIII; ep. 69; May 25, 1205.
  13. C. Mills: History of the Crusades; 2 vols; Longman; London; 1821; vol 2; p. 111.
  14. G. Villehardouin: Constantinople, 1657; op cit; 67-74.
    H.E. Mayer: The Crusades; tr. J. Gillingham; Oxford University Press; 1972; p. 187.
  15. W. Durant: The Age of Faith, Simon and Shuster; New York; 1950; p. 604.
  16. Sir T.C. Jackson: Byzantine and Romanesque Architecture; 2 Vols; Cambridge University Press; 2 Vols. I; p. 101.
  17. C. Mills: History of the Crusades; op cit; vol 2; p. 133.
  18. W. Durant: The Age of Faith, op cit; p.605.
  19. T.A. Archer: The Crusades; op cit; p. 374.
  20. P.K. Hitti: History; op cit; pp. 653-4.
  21. W.B. Stevenson: The Crusades in the East; Cambridge University Press; 1907; p. 304.
  22. T.A. Archer: The Crusades; op cit; p. 376.
  23. Ibid.
  24. J. Glubb: A Short History of the Arab Peoples; Hodder and Stoughton, 1969; p.185.
  25. C. Mills: History; op cit; p. 185.
  26. J. Glubb: A Short History; op cit; p.185.
  27. H.E. Mayer: The Crusades; tr. J. Gillingham; Oxford University Press; 1972; p. 215.
  28. Ibid.
  29. Ibn Khalikan: Wafayat (De Slane); iii; p. 488. W.B. Stevenson: The Crusaders; op cit; p 306.
  30. Ibid.
  31. Ibid.
  32. J. Glubb: A Short History; op cit; p.185.
  33. Ibn Wasil: Mufarrij al-Kurub fi Akhbar bani Ayyub; text Ms Paris Ar. 1702; p. 209. There is also a three volume edition of the work by al-Shayyal; Cairo 1954-62.
  34. For the fifth crusade, and al-Kamil granting free passage to the crusaders, see: Ibn Iyas: Bada’t al-Zuhur fi Waqai al-Duhur; (Bulaq; 1311 H); vol I; pp. 79-80. Ibn Khaldun: Kitab al-Ibar; op cit; vol v; pp. 349-50; Ibn Khallikan: Wafayat al-Iyan; op cit; vol ii; pp. 451.
  35. J. Glubb: A Short History; op cit; p.185.
  36. T.A. Archer: The Crusades; op cit; p. 379.
  37. Ibid.
  38. See Ibn al-Athir: Kamil; op cit; vol xii; p. 315.G.W. Cox: The Crusades; op cit; p. 189.
  39. G.W. Cox: The Crusades; op cit; p. 189.
  40. Sibt al-Jawzi: Al-Muntazam fi tarikh al-muluk wa’l umam; X; Hyderabad; 1940; VIII/ 2; p. 653.
  41. T.A. Archer: The Crusades; op cit; p. 383.
  42. Sibt ibn al Jawzi; p. 601.
  43. B.F. Manz: The Rule of the Infidels: The Mongols and the Islamic World; Cambridge History of Islam; University of Cambridge; 2011; Vol 3; p. 132.
  44. Ibid.
  45. R.W. Bulliet: The Patricians of Nishapur; A Study of Islamic Medieval Social History; Cambridge; mass; 1972; pp. 9-10; I.P. Petrushvskii: The Socio economic Conditions of Iran under the Il-Khans; In Cambridge History of Iran; v; Cambridge; 1968; pp. 483-537; p. 485.
  46. Ibn al-Athir; in J. J. Saunders: The History; op cit; p. 60.
  47. E.G. Browne: Literary History of Persia; Cambridge University Press; 1929; 3 Vols; Vol 2; p. 439.
  48. Ibn al-Athir: Kamil; op cit; xii; pp. 233-4.
  49. J. Glubb: A Short History; op cit; p.201.
  50. T.A. Archer: The Crusades; op cit; p. 385.
  51. Ibid.
  52. Ibid.
  53. G.W. Cox: The Crusades; op cit; p. 195.
  54. Sibt al-Jawzi; Al-Muntazam;VIII/2; op cit; pp.746-7.
  55. C.R. Conder: The Latin Kingdom; of Jerusalem; The Committee of the Palestine Exploration Fund; London; 1897; p. 318.
  56. T.A. Archer: The Crusades; op cit; p. 395.
  57. P. Thorau: The Lion of Egypt: tr by P.M. Holt; Longman; London; 1992; p. 34.
  58. S. Runciman: A History of the Crusades; Cambridge University Press, 1962; vol ii; p. 266.
  59. P Thorau: The Lion of Egypt; op cit; p. 34.
  60. S. Runciman: A History; op cit; p. 267.
  61. O. Thorau: The Lion; op cit; pp. 34-5.
  62. A. Hoteit: Les Communautes de Tripoli et les Croises; in De Toulouse; op cit; pp. 41-58; p. 56.
  63. Ibid.
  64. B. Spuler: History of the Mongols; London, Routledge& Kegan Paul, 1972; p.1.
  65. Ibid; p. 2.
  66. S. Giami: Genuinae relations inter Sedem Apostolicam etc… Roma; 1902.
  67. J.M. Fiey: Chretiens Syriaques sous les Mongols; Louvain; 1975; p. 7.
  68. St Martin; Brosset etc in W. Heyd: Histoire du commerce du Levant; Leipzig; 1885-6; reedit; Amsterdam 1967; Vol II; p. 67.
  69. B Spuler: Les Mongols dans l’Histoire, Payot, Paris, 1961.
  70. Hayton, Saint Martin Brosset quoted in W. Heyd: Histoire du Commerce; op cit; vol II; p. 66.
  71. Jean Richard: La Papaute et les Missions d’Orient au Moyen Age; Ecole Francaise de Rome; Palais Farnese; 1977; p. 104.
  72. Ibid.
  73. 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.
  74. C.R. Conder: The Latin Kingdom; op cit; p. 381.
  75. See Baron G. d’Ohsson: Histoire des Mongols; La Haye et Amsterdam; 1834; Vol 3; p. 207 ff.
  76. Ibn Tagri-Birdi: Al-Nujum al-Zahirah; op cit; vol 3; in Baron. G. d’Ohsson: Histoire; p. 259.
  77. 800, 000 people according to H.H. Howorth: History of the Mongols, London, 1927 in Y. Courbage and Fargues: Chretiens; op cit; p. 29.
  78. Sir Thomas W. Arnold: Muslim Civilisation during the Abbasid Period; in The Cambridge Medieval History, Vol IV; op cit; pp 274-98; at p.279.
  79. J.B. Glubb: A Short history; op cit; 207.
  80. Ibid.
  81. J.J. Saunders: A History; op cit; p. 182.
  82. G. D’Ohsson: Histoire; vol 3; note 2; p. 332.
  83. Ibid.
  84. Ibid; p. 339. A.A. Khowaiter: Baibars the First; The Green Mountain Press; London; 1978; pp.20-3.
  85. 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.
  86. J.J. Saunders: Aspects of the Crusades; op cit; p.64.
    • 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.
  87. Baron G. d’Ohsson: Histoire des Mongols; op cit; pp. 458-500.
  88. Ibn Abd al-Zahir: Al-Rawd al-Zahir fi sirat al-malik al-Zahir; ed A. A. Al-Khuwaiter; Ryad; 1976.
  89. 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.
    • 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.
  90. J. Glubb: A Short History; op cit; p.213.
  91. See account by Abu’l Fida who took part in the siege in vol 4 of his Mukhtasar Tarikh al-Bashar; Maqrizi: Al-Suluk; (tr. Qatremere); vol 2; prt 3; pp. 125-9; J.H. Lamonte: Crusade; op cit; p.195.
  92. J.H. Lamonte: Crusade; op cit; p.195.