58 pages • 1 hour read
Contemporary sources critique Saladin for permitting the Franks to take refuge in Tyre as he reconquered cities in Syria and Palestine. This decision was a “serious political and military error” (204) because Jerusalem’s conquest became a rallying cry for another Crusade that could use Tyre as a base. Saladin’s men wondered, “What was the use of piling up conquests if there was no guarantee that a fresh invasion could be effectively discouraged?” (205). Saladin made another grave error when he released Guy of Lusignan from captivity in 1188. Guy soon besieged Acre and “received wave after wave of reinforcements” (205) from the West. Europe’s leading monarchs, including the German king, Frederick Barbarossa, launched the Third Crusade while this battle raged.
Barbarossa, however, died of a heart attack while swimming in an Anatolian stream, thus disintegrating the German contingent. Other Crusaders, however, arrived under the leadership of the French king, Philip IV Augustus, and the English monarch, Richard I the Lionhearted. Acre was at a stalemate. The Arab sources describe the latter as brave and a strong combatant. He was also “flighty” and of few “scruples” (209). Richard wanted to meet Saladin, but this meeting never happened, though the two exchanged numerous letters.
Richard planned a “final assault” (209) on Acre, which was blockaded and racked by famine. The Crusaders took the city in July 1191, much to Saladin’s disappointment. Richard had his captives killed, in contrast to Saladin’s mercy at Jerusalem. Their forces continued to skirmish, as Richard headed south, and Saladin worked to contain the Franj: “It was the darkest moment of his career” (211).
Richard appealed to Saladin’s brother, al-‘Adil, in September for a resolution. The King of France had already returned home, but the English king refused to relinquish his claim to Jerusalem, demanded control over lands to the west of the Jordan River, and demanded the return of the relic of the True Cross. Saladin refused these demands, noting the significant bargaining chip he had in the True Cross. Within a few days Richard sent a new proposal: He would marry his sister to al-‘Adil and the two would live in Jerusalem. Richard would put his coastal lands under his sister’s command while Saladin would give his brother command of his coastal territories, Frankish and Muslim captives would be freed, and the new couple would become protectors of the True Cross.
Saladin’s brother worked to convince him to accept this new proposal, but the sultan believed it to be a treacherous deception. Meanwhile, Richard’s enraged sister reportedly returned home in disgust. Indeed, Richard hoped Saladin’s refusal would generate discord with his brother. Saladin also entered negotiations with Conrad, the Frankish ruler of Tyre, who distrusted Richard. Saladin’s strategy increased “diplomatic pressure on Richard” (213).
Richard grew tired, homesick, and was losing interest by the summer of 1192. He prepared to return to Europe, especially since discord grew among his knights who were displeased that he failed to besiege Jerusalem. The Third Crusade broke down. Richard signed a five-year truce with Saladin that gave up Ascalon, but allowed the Crusaders to maintain power over the coastal lands from Trye to Jaffa. The peace also acknowledged Saladin’s suzerainty over Jerusalem and other Muslim lands. Richard departed from the Holy Land, leaving Saladin in triumph: “From now on, they [the Franks] would control not genuine states, but mere settlements” (215).
Saladin lost some credibility with his emirs over the affairs of the Third Crusade, but ended his life peacefully in Damascus. He died in March 1193 and was buried in the Damascene palace gardens.
Civil war plagued Saladin’s empire, as strife set in soon after his death. His brother al-‘Adil proved victorious when he took Damascus from Saladin’s inept son in July 1196, and by 1202 he was the “uncontested master of the Ayyubid Empire” (219). He proved a more capable administrator than his predecessor and the Muslim world experienced peace and prosperity under his governance. He concluded the jihad against the Franks, since the Ayyubids controlled Jerusalem, and promoted “coexistence” (219). He entered a commercial alliance with the Venetians, Europe’s leading maritime power in the late Middle Ages, which gave them access to prosperous Egyptian ports and discouraged them from enjoining others in new crusading efforts. Venice, unbeknownst to the Ayyubids, had already agreed to help finance and transport new Crusaders who planned to target Egypt before moving to Jerusalem.
This Fourth Crusade, however, went completely off course and led to the sack of Zara, in Croatia, and multiple Crusader attacks on Constantinople, the expulsion of the Byzantine rulers, and the creation of a short-lived Latin Empire. This affair benefitted the Ayyubids because no western Crusaders arrived to help the Syrian Franks reconquer Jerusalem. Indeed, the Franj in the east were content with the peaceful coexistence that al-‘Adil fostered. The West had other plans. The Fifth Crusade, launched in 1218, besieged the Egyptian city of Damietta. The citadel fell to the Crusaders despite the city’s extraordinary defenses. Al-‘Adil died shortly after and “the inevitable debilitating struggle for succession erupted” (224). For example, some emirs in Cairo tried to depose al-Kāmil, the new sultan, while he dealt with the siege at Damietta.
The sultan raced back to his capital to crush the revolt, but his absence allowed the Franks to surround Damietta. The new sultan offered to give up Jerusalem, the True Cross, and more if the Crusaders would leave Egypt, but they rejected his proposal at the direction of a Spanish cardinal in command of the campaign, Pelagius, who was “a fanatical advocate of holy war” (225). He wanted to seize all of Egypt but depended on Frederick II Hohenstaufen, Holy Roman Emperor and King of Sicily. Frederick did not arrive for eight years and in the meantime built cordial relations with the Ayyubid court. Frederick spoke Arabic, was well-acquainted with Islam, and highly influenced by eastern culture because he was reared in Sicily. The Crusaders also became mired in mud due to the Nile’s annual flood, asked for peace, and left Damietta.
Al-Kāmil even offered Jerusalem to Frederick II for strategic political reasons. His brother al-Mu’azam, with whom he quarreled, governed it. More significantly, the sultan worried about the rising Mongol threat and believed that a Frankish Kingdom of Jerusalem would create a protective zone between Egypt and these steppe horsemen. Frederick was also politically motivated to take possession of this city rather than religiously motivated. The Pope had recently excommunicated him, and by taking Jerusalem, Frederick would “strengthen his position” (227) in his feud with the papacy.
Political circumstances swiftly changed when Frederick arrived in 1228. Al-Mu’azam was dead, and his incompetent son took his place. Al-Kāmil sought Syria, Palestine, and Egypt’s reunification rather than foster the Frankish buffer-zone. Frederick and Al-Kāmil therefore created a minor conflict to save face and reached a treaty within a few weeks. Frederick got Jerusalem and some other coastal territories but agreed that Muslim quarters within the city would remain. The Damascenes reacted violently to the sultan’s treaty, which they saw as treasonous.
Al-Kāmil’s nephew, Al-Nāsir, declared war, but his uncle succeeded in reinstituting suzerainty over the city. Al-Nāsir went on to reconquer Jerusalem, but only destroyed some fortifications before retreating. When his uncle died and a new war broke out among the Ayyubids, he even sought an alliance with the Franks against his rivals: “In 1243 he officially recognized their right to Jerusalem in an effort to pacify the Occidentals, even offering to withdraw the Muslim religious leaders from Haram al-Sharīf [the Temple Mount, where al-Aqsa mosque stands]” (231).
Maalouf contrasts Saladin and the English monarch, Richard I the Lionhearted, in Part 5 to emphasize the former’s mercy and the latter’s brutality, thereby highlighting the relevance of The Links Between Crusade History and Contemporary Politics. Maalouf again asserts that the Islamic world was not the aggressor and that the Crusaders were not heroic figures. Richard appears as a barbaric and self-absorbed king, influenced by the medieval cult of chivalry that emphasized military triumph as manly.
When Richard conquered Acre, for example, Saladin tried to negotiate for the release of captives to no avail: “[W]hen Saladin wanted to avoid being burdened with prisoners, he released them, whereas Richard preferred to have them killed” (210). The Franks massacred the women and children of Acre alongside the men. Richard was, in contrast to Saladin, unable to maintain his men’s loyalty and dedication. His knights deserted as he delayed any reconquest of Jerusalem, and negotiations with Saladin broke down. He finally gave up and went home in 1192. He does not appear as a “lionhearted” heroic figure in Maalouf’s treatment; instead, Maalouf presents Richard as childish, selfish, and cruel.
The Context of Inter-Muslim Political Turmoil became important once again when Saladin died in 1193, but within a few years his brother al-‘Adil proved a steady hand and reunited the Ayyubid Empire, building on Saladin’s foundation. His successor, Al-Kāmil, is juxtaposed with the European ruler, Frederick II, in a similar manner to Maalouf’s juxtaposition of Saladin and Richard I. However, this comparison is different because Frederick II is one of the few European rulers viewed favorably. Maalouf contrasts him with earlier Crusaders who were religious fanatics. Frederick II, instead, had a greater understanding of, and respect for, Islam because he was born in Sicily where Muslim influences were strong. He was largely uninterested in Crusading and friendly with Al-Kāmil and his courtiers:
The two monarchs exchanged letters in which they discussed the logic of Aristotle, the immortality of the soul, and the genesis of the universe […] The sultan was more than a little content to discover an enlightened Western leader who, like himself, understood the futility of these endless religious wars (227).
He stands in stark contrast to Richard I’s barbarity and to the early Crusaders’ violent hostility toward Islam. Indeed, it is Frederick’s closeness to Islam that “enlightened” him, in Maalouf’s view, again countering modern Western misconceptions about the Islamic world as backward and brutal. The West, Maalouf implies, can learn much from the Muslim world.
Plus, gain access to 8,800+ more expert-written Study Guides.
Including features:
By Amin Maalouf