by Dr Salah Zaimeche, BMHC
The Muslim capture of Edessa spread consternation in Europe. 1 The fall of Edessa was seen as a strong rebuke to the princes of the West, who, as Otto of Freisingen complains, ‘Were wasting their strength in internecine slaughter whilst the very existence of the Holy Land was threatened by the pagans.’ 2
The news of the fall of Edessa was brought by some Armenian bishops to Pope Eugenius at Viterbo. Although the pope’s letters to the French king, Louis VII., and the nobles of France, and his renewal of the old privileges granted to Crusaders by Pope Urban II (wh launched the first crusade) played their part in stirring the faithful to take the Cross, again, it was St Bernard, who played the leading role in mobilizing the crowds. He promised ‘absolution and a heavenly reward’ to all those who took up the cross. 3 Even the rulers were stirred into action by his preaching. In the spring of 1146 a great council was held at Vezelay, in France, where King Louis took the cross from Bernard’s hands. Bernard, it is said, by his oratory, ‘so moved his hearers, that he had to tear up his own robes in order to satisfy their demand for crosses.’ 4 Hundreds of thousands responded to the call, so many, according to a contemporary, it left the cities and castles of Europe empty, and scarcely one man for seven women. 5
After they left Western Europe, the multitude soon arrived at Dorylaeum, where the first crusade had defeated Qilij Arslan; this time the German Emperor, Conrad’s, army meeting a large Turkish force was so badly defeated that hardly any one Christian in ten survived. 6 The French King’s army was severely tested, too, being constantly attacked by Turkish archers on its march. Two days beyond Laodicea, the French met a greater disaster at a pass following a Turkish attack that caused them terrible loss, and that nearly claimed the life of the French King himself. 7 The remnants of the armies reached Palestine considerably reduced in numbers.
At the crusaders’ council, it was decided that Damascus was the objective. For many leading crusaders, the capture of Damascus would split the Muslim world between the Muslims of Egypt and Africa and those of Syria and the East. 8 This would constitute a major strategic accomplishment. The armies, which advanced on Damascus were led by three rulers: the French King: Louis, Emperor Conrad of Germany, and the local crusader King, Baldwin. 9 From the place of muster at Tiberias the host, with the ‘Holy Cross’ at its head, marched across Jordan; first went the barons of the land under King Baldwin, next the French, and last the Germans. 10 Unable to meet this large force, the Muslims in Damascus, retreated within the city walls and allowed the crusaders to establish themselves in the orchards, and the latter soon began to besiege the city. 11 Confident in their victory, the crusaders were already speculating on who amongst their leaders would be appointed as Count of Damascus. 12 The mud wall that surrounded the famous gardens of Damascus offered no obstacle to the advance of such an army. But the thick orchards with their narrow footpaths, and their growth of fruit and herbage, formed a far better protection to the city. Everywhere through the length and breadth of this vast stretch of green and trees the ambushed Muslims opposed the invaders’ progress; or ambushed in lofty buildings, which ‘here and there rose up like stone islands out of a sea of green,’ shot down their arrows from above. 13 At last, after ferocious fighting, the crusaders managed to remove the Muslims from the woods. However the Christians, wearied out with heat and thirst, made for the river, only to find a fresh Muslim army drawn up against them. 14 Nur Eddin Zangi had kept sending reinforcements into the city through the north, and the defenders were, thus, able to organise sorties, which claimed innumerable lives amongst the besiegers. 15 In the end their strength considerably diminished and Muslim vigour renewed, the Crusaders conceded the failure of their attack. Retreated was soon sounded. The retreat, however, soon turned into rout as Turkish horsemen riding behind the crusaders inflicted terrible losses on the fleeing men. The stench of the dead polluted the plains for many months after according to contemporary chroniclers. 16
The attack on Damascus had not just failed, it had also proved to the Muslims, and to the Damascenes (who had passed a peace treaty with the crusaders prior to the siege), most particularly, that the Franks could not be trusted. 17 Following this fiasco, the two Western sovereigns, Louis and Conrad, left the East back for home in 1148. 18
The miserable termination of the Second Crusade, Archer remarks, excited in Western Europe a feeling of humiliation and anger, which targeted most particularly St Bernard who was the prime mover in the enterprise. 19 To Bernard himself the disaster came as the bitterest of blows:
‘He (the Lord) has not spared His people; He has not spared even His own name, and the gentiles say: `Where is their God?’ We promised success, and behold desolation!’ 20
“We have fallen on evil days,” he writes, “in which the Lord, provoked by our sins, has judged the world, with justice indeed, but not with His wonted mercy. . . . The sons of the Church have been overthrown in the desert, slain with the sword, or destroyed by famine. We promised good things, and behold disorder! The judgments of the Lord are righteous, but this one is an abyss so deep that I must call him blessed who is not scandalized therein.” 21
The Muslims success on the other hand owed in great measure to a new spirit that had been lacking in the earlier stages of the crusades: the spirit of jihad. Jihad had become a rallying cry for the Muslims, and the alliance between the religious classes and the military leadership had now grown in strength. 22 The Muslims also had a new leader who epitomised this spirit, a great leader, under whom they could unite: Nur Eddin Zangi.
‘In the Sultan of Aleppo (Nur Eddin Zangi), as in the general (Shirquh), who had risen through his favour,’ Cox notes, ‘we have a man to whom the chronicles of the time and of later ages delighted to ascribe the magnanimity and simplicity of Omar.’ 23
Nur-Eddin’s career at war and peace, of all the rulers and leaders of Islam, came the nearest to that of the first four Caliphs in probity and religious commitment. Nur Eddin believed in Jihad as the weapon for resistance, and like Baybars decades later, he was a strict upholder of public morals. 24 The army of Nur Eddin included religious men, who were actually prepared to fight in the ranks. 25 Also in the ranks were prayer leaders, Qur’an’s readers, preachers, and judges, who enhanced the religious dimension of the military conflict. 26 Nur Eddin also kept cast iron discipline amongst his troops. 27 With all this, he combined good strategic skills knowing when and how to strike. Nur Eddin was, indeed, an exceptional military leader, always leading from the front. He maintained constant pressure of the crusaders allowing them little opportunity to coalesce against him. Following his success at Damascus, in 1148, he followed by many other victories 28 He defeated the crusaders at Bagras or Yagra, to the north of Antioch. After he was joined by the troops of Damascus, he laid siege to the castle of Anab, not far from Sarmin. 29 On 30th of June 1149, attacked by the forces of Raymond of Antioch, Nur Eddin crushed them, and took a great number of prisoners. 30 Nur Eddin made gains in the districts neighbouring Aleppo, and Ezaz, his first objective, was captured after a long siege on 15th July 1150. 31 In October-November he besieged Tell Khalid and defeated a crusader relieving force near Tell Bashir; Tell Bashir itself fell to him after a series of attacks in July 1151. 32
Despite the Muslim victories, the conflict raged on. Crusader ranks were replenished by constant reinforcements from Europe, witness the arrival in 1153 of new Flemish forces under Theodoric, coming to reinforce Antioch. 33 Christian strength was also heightened by the rising importance of the military orders, which in this period, under Nur Eddin, and subsequently under Salah Eddin grew into a more formidable armed force. The crusader army was no longer a mass of uncouth fighting crowds, but a highly organised and above all highly committed force made of two main forces, the Hospitallers and the Templars, and to lesser extent the Teutonic Knights. The credit of the conception of an order of knights sworn to ‘the service of the Cross,’ Archer explains, belongs to Hugh of Payen, the founder of the Templars. 34 But the priority of rank must be given to the Hospitallers, who trace their origin to a more ancient institution, established for a different purpose: the founding of a hospice for the poor. The Templars, although they were from the beginning an order of knights, owed their institution, as did the Hospitallers, to a charitable purpose. The commander of the city of Jerusalem was Hospitaller of the order, and had to provide for the safe conduct and care of pilgrims. The knights never dress in rich or too visible garments, and rarely wash themselves. The organisation of the Hospitallers, or the Knights of the Hospital of St. John of Jerusalem, was in its general features similar to that of the Templars, and comprised knights, chaplains, and serving brothers, together with a body of Turcoples.
Both orders played a prominent part in the failed siege of Damascus during the Second Crusade, and in the succeeding years the two orders were the mainstay of the Crusader Kingdom. To their care were entrusted some of the most important of the frontier fortresses. Both orders fought side by side in many campaigns. The Hospitallers were King Amalric’s chief support in his Egyptian campaign in 1168, and a few years earlier, in 1163, the Templars of Tripoli, under their English preceptor, Gilbert de Lacy, played a leading part in the battle with Nur Eddin. In the convulsed days that preceded the Third Crusade the masters of the two orders appear as the leaders of the party that strongly favoured active warfare with Salah Eddin. During that Crusade the Templars were the leading supporters of Richard the Lion-Heart.
In addition to the two great orders there grew up about the time of the Third Crusade another order, which, from the nationality of its founders, was known as the Teutonic. In their military organisation the Teutonic knights followed the rule of the Temple, but in their religious life they adopted, like the Hospitallers, the rule of St. Augustine. 35
Whilst the crusaders showed considerable strength, the Muslims, likewise, had been, as mentioned above, reinforced by the new spirit of jihad, the uniting strength of the faith, and were also ably led by their great sultan, Nur Eddin Zangi. Nur Eddin also had under his command the able and loyal Kurdish general, Shirquh, and his nephew Salah Eddin, a leadership united by the chief desire ‘to rid the land of the infidels.’ 36 Before he lent his full attention to Fatimid Egypt, itself threatened by crusader greed, Nur Eddin spent the years 1165-6 grinding into Christian territory, attacking fortresses on the eastern slopes of the Lebanon, whilst Shirquh busied himself destroying the Templars’ defences south of Amman. 37 This diverted Frankish attentions about his real aim, which was to counter them in Egypt. At one point, Crusaders and Fatimids signed a pact, which put Egypt directly under Crusader protectorate for the first time in the history of the crusades. 38 The crusader-Fatimid coalition managed to force Shirquh out of Egypt on two occasions, before in January 1169 he attacked the crusaders with devastating consequences, forcing them to retreat, and making a triumphal entry in Cairo. 39
In 1171 the Fatimid Caliph died. The mass of the Egyptian population hardly mourned the end of Fatimid rule, although there were a few sporadic revolts in favour of the Fatimid house. One of these involved the Christians, who brought a crusade from Sicily, which failed to take Alexandria. 40 Now, the religious schism between the Sunnite and Shi’ite caliphs, which had considerably contributed to the success of the Christians in their earlier conquests, was ended, and Christendom was now confronted with a technically united Islam. 41
Following the death of Shirquh, his nephew, Salah Eddin became governor of Egypt, representing Nur Eddin. Nur-Eddin himself was soon to die, in 1174, legating to his successor, and for the first time since the arrival of the crusaders, a united and vast stretch of Muslim territory from Egypt to Damascus, bringing large Muslim populations together in the fight to repulse the Franks.
Salah Eddin (d. 1193):
Under Salah Eddin, and just as under Nur Eddin, the Muslim armies were now regularly accompanied by the `ulama’ who read them and preached to them. Salah Eddin himself was personally and publicly committed to jihad. 42 The call for Jihad was extremely powerful in uniting the Muslims at war as in peace. 43 Jihad was also an expression of the yearning for Jerusalem, especially as the Muslims had to suffer the pain and humiliation of seeing it in Christian hands with mosques and Muslim shrines turned into churches or secular buildings, 44 often sullied with pigs and excrement. Salah Eddin had himself, during a serious illness, pledged that he would devote himself to recovering Jerusalem whatever the cost, an illness, which according to his biographer, Imad Eddin, was sent by God to Salah Eddin ‘to wake him from the sleep of forgetfulness.’ 45
The road to Jerusalem passed by the Battle of Hattin. This battle came as a result of the crusader chief, Reynald (Reginald) of Chatillon’s, attack on a Muslim caravan. Reginald of Chatillon, ignoring the truce with the Muslims, swooped down on the caravan on its way through his lordship of Kerak. This attack caused many dead and prisoners amongst Muslims, including Salah Eddin’s sister. Salah Eddin, infuriated, swore to kill Reginald with his own hand, 46 which he would eventually do after the Battle of Hattin. The taking of the caravan resulted in the break of the truce that had hitherto held between the two sides. 47 According to a Frank chronicler: “The taking of this caravan was the ruin of Jerusalem.” 48
The Battle of Hattin was fought on the 4th of July 1187. In the battle, Salah Eddin was joined by his son, al-Afdal, and also by his nephew, Taqi Al-Din, who both played extremely important parts. 49 During the battle, Salah Eddin’s strategy and tactic split the crusaders’ cavalry from the infantry, and dealt with them separately. In a clean sweep, the Muslims crushed the vast Christian army and its formidable knights. 50 As a result of this defeat, only 200 of the knights and foot-soldiers escaped together with the Count, Raymond of Tripoli, the Lord Bailan, and Reynald of Sidon. 51 Amongst the prisoners was the king, the Master of the Temple, and many other barons and knights. 52 As he had vowed, Salah Eddin struck the head of Reynald of Chatillon, and then had all the Knight Templars and Hospitallers slain. The lives of the countless others he spared. At the Horns of Hattin, Runciman concludes, the greatest army that the crusaders had ever assembled was annihilated, and the victor was now the ruler of the united Muslim world. 53
The great battle of Hattin was the death-blow to the Crusader kingdom of Jerusalem. In one stroke it had lost the chief of its leaders and the majority of its defenders; Raymond of Tripoli, it was true, escaped from the battle, but only to die of despair fifteen days later at Tyre; of the other great lords Balian alone was alive and free. 54 In such a situation, the Christians seemed powerless to resist the victorious Muslims. Within little over two months, Salah Eddin had secured almost every stronghold of importance from Beirut to Ascalon. A few scattered fortresses, such as Safed and Kerak by the Dead Sea, held out till next year; and Ascalon fell on the 5th of September. 55 By the end of the Summer of 1187, only Tyre, Tripoli and Antioch were remaining seaports in Christian hands. 56
Of the great cities still remained in Christian hands-Tyre in the north and Jerusalem in the south. The safety of the former was due to Conrad of Montferrat, the defence of the Holy City was the work of Balian of Ibelin and the Patriarch Heraclius. 57
On 2 October 1187, after a short siege, Jerusalem surrendered to the Muslims; that was nearly a century after it was first taken from them. Salah Eddin’s terms were accepted, says a learned Christian, `with gratitude and lamentation”; perhaps some learned Christians compared these events of 1187 with those of 1099. 58 No massacre or violence were perpetrated, the entry of Salah Eddin more ‘(peaceful) like that of Omar Ibn al-Khattab in 638 rather than (murderous) like that of Godfrey (in 1099).’ 59 According to a contemporary account, it was held that:
‘After every effort had been made to purchase the relief of the poorer Christians, after a tax had been levied in every street, and the King of England’s treasures at the Hospital thrown into the common fund, there yet remained a large number for whom no ransom could be paid, and who were thus doomed to perpetual slavery or death. In pity for their sad condition, Saladin’s gallant brother Al-Adel went to the Sultan, and, reminding him how the city had been conquered by his help, begged to have a thousand slaves for his portion of the spoil. Salah Eddin inquired for what purpose he desired them. “To do with them as I will,” was the reply. They were accordingly handed over to Al-Adel, who promptly set them free. Then came the patriarch making a like request, and received seven hundred. After him Balian of Ibelin was granted five hundred more. Then said Salah Eddin: “My brother has made his alms; the patriarch and Balian have made theirs. Now would I make mine also.” Accordingly at his bidding all the aged folk in the city were liberated: “This was the alms that Saladin made of poor folk without number.” 60
The news of the fall of Jerusalem struck the hearts of Christendom. It was in the time of the papacy of Urban II that Jerusalem was taken from the Muslims, and it was in the time of Urban III that it was retaken by the Muslims. Pope Urban III who was at Ferrara died of grief when he heard the news. 61 The new pope, Clement III, sent his messengers to all the great men of Christendom- emperors, kings, counts, and marquises- and to the knights and sergeants telling them that ‘He would take upon himself and acquit before God all the sins of those who would bear the sign of the cross to go to recover the Promised Land provided that they had confessed and were truly penitent.’ 62
He also announced that he would grant the tithe to all those who wished to have it so that they might do God’s service. 63 And so was launched the third crusade in 1189.
First to take the Cross in November, 1187, was Richard, known as the Lion-Heart, then Count of Poitou; two months later, on January 21, 1188, the kings of France and England were reconciled by the Archbishop of Tyre, and both received the cross at his hands; their example was quickly followed by the Count of Flanders. 64 The three princes agreed that white, red, and green crosses should be the badges of their respective followers. 65
Acre, a coastal town, was in Muslim hands, and was the focus of attack of the incoming crusaders. When he heard the news that the emperor of Germany, the king of France and the king of England and all the high barons overseas were coming against him, Salah Eddin had Acre strongly garrisoned and fortified in every way necessary, pledging to support the town in case of Christian attack. 66 Acre was soon besieged by land and sea by huge Christian armies. The Muslim garrison resisted fiercely aware that Salah Eddin’s army was in the field helping them. Salah Eddin made repeated attempts to relieve the city, seeking to draw out the Christians in his direction. 67 Although he inflicted great losses on his foes, he failed in his main aim to relieve the city. In 1191, after a two year siege, Acre was retaken by the crusaders; and Richard of England, devious and greedy, 68 had 2700 chained Muslims beheaded, sending a signal by this to Salah Eddin as `a hint to hurry’ to meet his terms in paying the prisoners’ ransom. 69
Acre remained one of the rare exploits of the third crusade, which eventually failed in its aim to recapture Jerusalem. Its two leaders, the French king and Richard fell out with each other; both eventually withdrawing back to their countries. 70
Salah Eddin died on Wednesday, the 4th of March, 1193, at the age of fifty-five. He was buried the same day in the garden house in the Citadel of Damascus, at the hour of the asr prayer. The sword which he had carried through the Holy War was laid beside him.
“He had given away everything, and the money for the burial had to be borrowed, even to the straw for the bricks that made the grave. The ceremony was as simple as a pauper’s funeral. A striped cloth covered the undistinguished bier. No poet was allowed to sing a dirge, no preacher to make oration. When the multitude, who thronged about the gate, saw the bier, a great wailing went up, and so distraught were the people that they could not form the words of prayer, but only cried and groaned. All eyes were wet, and there were few that did not weep aloud. Then every man went home and shut his door, and the empty silent streets bore witness to a great sorrow.’ 71
The physician Abd-el-Latif wrote, that to his knowledge this was the only instance of a King’s death that was truly mourned by the people. The secret of Salah Eddin’s power lay in the love of his subjects. What others sought to attain by fear, by severity, or by majesty, he accomplished by kindness. Gentleness was the dominant trait of his character. 72 He never used or allowed scurrilous language. He kept his own tongue, even in great provocation, under rigid control, and his pen was no less disciplined: he was never known to write a bitter word to a Muslim. 73 On Mondays and Thursdays he sat on the judgment seat, with the Kadis and jurisconsults, in the court of law, and administered justice to all comers. He claimed and allowed no privileges before the court, and if a man had a suit against one of the royal princes, or even against the Sultan himself, they had to appear before the Kadi like any ordinary defendant and submit to the law. But if Saladin won the case, he would clothe the defeated suitor in a robe of honour, pay his expenses, and send him away happy and astonished. From such a judge ‘people could not fear sternness. Yet in the war for the Faith he could be stern, almost implacable…’ But it was not always so. It is related how a Frank prisoner was brought trembling before Salah Eddin, and then cried out, “Before I saw his face I was sore afraid, but now that I have seen him I know he will do me no harm.” He went off a free man. 74
There is the moving story of the woman who came from the Crusaders’ camp at Acre seeking her baby, who had been carried off by the Muslim soldiers. The pickets let her pass and led her to the Sultan, to whom she had appealed, — ‘for he is very merciful,’ they said. Salah Eddin was touched by her anguish; the tears ran down in his eyes; and he had the camp searched till the little girl was safely restored to her mother, and both were led back to the enemy’s lines. 75
Great men often leave behind much less great inheritors. Soon after the death of Salah Eddin, under the rule of his brothers and sons, members of the Ayyubid dynasty, the Muslim world returned to its usual divisions and civil wars. It was precisely at this dramatic juncture that a new foe coming from the East, the Mongols, descended on the Muslim world to join force with the crusaders.
Select Reading List
- Abu Shama: Kitab al-Rawdatayn; ed. M.H. M. Ahmad; 2 vols; Cairo; 1954.
- T.A. Archer: The Crusades; T. Fisher Unwin; London; 1894.
- R. Burns: Damascus, A History; Routledge; London; 2005.
- N. Elisseeff: Nur al-Din: Un Grand Prince Musulman de Syrie au temps des croisades; Damascus; 2 vols; 1967.
- Ibn al-Athir: Kamil; op cit; in Receuil des Historiens des Croisades (Historiens Orientaux); Paris; 1967 ed; vol I.
- Ibn Al-Qalanisi: Dayl Tarikh Dimashq, Damascus, 1983.
- Imad Eddin al-Isfahani: Al Fath al-Qusi fi ‘l fath al-Qudusi; Landberg Ed; Leiden; 1888.
- P.W. Edbury: The Conquest of Jerusalem and the Third Crusade, Scolar Press, 1996.
- Kemal Eddin: Zubdat al-Halab fi Ta’arikh Halab; tr. into Fr. as Histoire d’Alep; with additional notes by E. Blochet; Ernest Leroux; Paris; 1900.
- 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; G.P. Putnam’s Sons; London; 1898.
- R. Payne: The Crusades; Wordsworth Editions; 1986.
- Saint Bernard in R.H.C. Davis: A History of Medieval Europe; Longman; London; second edition; 1988.
- W.B. Stevenson: The Crusades in the East; Cambridge University Press; 1907.
- William of Tyre: A History of Deeds Done Beyond the Sea; 2 Vols; tr. and ed. by E. Babcock and A.C. Krey; New York; Columbia University Press; 1943; repr. 1976.
- R. Burns: Damascus, A History; Routledge; London; 2005; p. 152. ↩
- T.A. Archer: The Crusades; T. Fisher Unwin; London; 1894; p. 201. ↩
- R. Payne: The Crusades; Wordsworth Editions; 1986; p. 156. ↩
- T.A. Archer: The Crusades; op cit; p. 210. ↩
- G.W. Cox: The Crusades; Longmans; London; 1874; p. 93. ↩
- W. Durant: The Age of Faith; Simon and Shuster, New York; 6th printing; 1950; p. 595. ↩
- R. Payne: The Crusades; Wordsworth Editions; London; 1994; pp. 157-8. ↩
- N. Elisseeff: Nur Ad Din, Un Grand Prince Musulman de Syrie au temps des croisades; Damascus; 1967, p. 417. ↩
- R. Burns: Damascus, A History; op cit; p. 153. ↩
- T.A. Archer: The Crusades; op cit; p. 217. ↩
- Ibn Al-Qalanisi: Dayl Tarikh Dimashq, Damascus, 1983. ↩
- R. Burns: Damascus, A History; op cit; p. 153. ↩
- T.A. Archer: The Crusades; op cit; p. 218. ↩
- Ibid. ↩
- S. Runciman: A History of the Crusades; Cambridge University Press, 1962; vol ii; p. 282. ↩
- Ibid; p. 284. ↩
- R. Finucane: Soldiers of the Faith; J.M. Dent and Sons Ltd; London, 1983; p. 23. ↩
- W. Durant: The Age of Faith; op cit; p. 595. ↩
- T.A. Archer: The Crusades; op cit; p. 220. ↩
- St Bernard in R.H.C. Davis: A History of Medieval Europe; Longman; London; second edition; 1988; p. 277. ↩
- T.A. Archer: The Crusades; T. Fisher Unwin; London; 1894; p. 220. ↩
- C. Hillenbrand: The Crusades, Muslim Perspective; Edinburgh, 1999t; p.131. ↩
- G.W. Cox: The Crusades; op cit; p.100. ↩
- Ibn al-Athir: Kamil; XI; op cit; p. 73. ↩
- N. Elisseeff: Nur al-Din: Un Grand Prince Musulman de Syrie au temps des croisades; Damascus; 1967; Vol 3; p. 735. ↩
- C. Hillenbrand: The Crusades, op cit; p.120. ↩
- Ibid; p.113. ↩
- Abu Shama: Kitab al-Rawdatayn; ed. M.H. M. Ahmad; 2 vols; Cairo; 1954; p. 55. ↩
- Ibn al-Athir: Kamil; op cit; in Receuil des Historiens des Croisades (Historiens Orientaux); Paris; 1967 ed; vol I; p. 476. ↩
- Kemal Eddin: Zubdat al-Halab fi Ta’arikh Halab; tr into Fr as Histoire d’Alep; with additional notes by E. Blochet; Ernest Leroux; Paris; 1900; p. 13.. ↩
- Kemal Eddin: Zubdat; (Blochet); op cit; p. 16. ↩
- Ibid. ↩
- C.R. Conder: The Latin Kingdom of Jerusalem; The Committee of the Palestine Exploration Fund; London; 1897; p. 115. ↩
- T.A. Archer: The Crusades; op cit; p.169. ↩
- Ibid; pp.169-87. ↩
- J.H. Lamonte: Crusade and Jihad: in N.A. Faris ed: The Arab Heritage, Princeton University Press, 1944; pp 159-98; p.171. ↩
- William of Tyre: A History of Deeds Done Beyond the Sea; 2 Vols; tr and ed by E. Babcock and A.C. Krey; New York; Columbia University Press; 1943; repr 1976; xix, ii; pp. 901-2. ↩
- A.S. Atiya: Crusade, Commerce and Culture; Oxford University Press; London; 1962; p. 74. ↩
- W.B. Stevenson: The Crusades in the East; Cambridge University Press; 1907; p.194. ↩
- J.H. Lamonte: Crusade and Jihad: op cit; pp 159-98; at p.176. ↩
- Ibid. ↩
- C. Hillenbrand: The Crusades, op cit; p.191. ↩
- W.M. Watt: Muslim Christian Encounters; op cit; p.81. ↩
- C. Hillenbrand: The Crusades, op cit; p.150. ↩
- Abu Shama: Kitab al-rawdatayn; ed. M.H. M. Ahmad; 2 vols; Cairo; 1954.; II; p. 65. ↩
- W. Durant: The Age of Faith; op cit; p. 597. ↩
- Ibid. ↩
- T.A. Archer: The Crusades; op cit; p. 273. ↩
- See: S. Runciman: A History; op cit; vol ii; pp. 456-60; and appendix pp. 486-91 for details on the battle, although Runciman, understandably stresses the Crusader valiant fighting. ↩
- Imad Eddin al-Isfahani: Al Fath al-Qusi fi ‘l fath al-Qudusi; Landberg Ed; Leiden; 1888. I. F. Gabrieli: Arab Historians of the Crusades; London; Routledge; 1957; pp. 132. ↩
- P.W. Edbury: The Conquest of Jerusalem and the Third Crusade, Scolar Press, 1996; p.161. ↩
- Ibid; p. 47. ↩
- S. Runciman: A History; op cit; vol ii; p. 460. ↩
- T.A. Archer: The Crusades; op cit; p. 274. ↩
- Ibid. ↩
- A.S .Atiya: Crusade, Commerce and Culture; Oxford University Press; London; 1962; p. 80. ↩
- T.A. Archer: The Crusades; op cit; p. 274. ↩
- W. Durant: The Age of Faith, op cit; p. 598. ↩
- C.R. Conder: The Latin Kingdom; op cit; p. 156.7. ↩
- T.A. Archer: The Crusades; op cit; pp. 279-80. ↩
- P.W. Edbury: The Conquest; op cit; p. 47. ↩
- Ibid; p. 75. ↩
- Ibid. ↩
- T.A. Archer: The Crusades; op cit; p. 307. ↩
- Ibid. ↩
- P.W. Edbury: The Conquest; op cit; p. 76. ↩
- Ibid; p. 95. ↩
- Ibid; p. 97. ↩
- W. Durant: The Age of Faith; op cit; p. 599. ↩
- W.B. Stevenson: The Crusades; op cit; pp. 273 ff. ↩
- S. Lane-Poole: Saladin and the Fall of the Kingdom of Jerusalem; G.P. Putnam’s Sons; London; 1898; p. 366. ↩
- Ibid; p. 367. ↩
- Ibid; p. 369. ↩
- Ibid; p. 371. ↩
- Ibid. ↩