‘Epistolae Cantuarienses’, Chronicles and Memorials of the Reign of Richard I, ed. W. Stubbs, vol. 2, Rolls Series 88 (London, 1865), p. 347.
Baha al-Din, pp. 164–5; Imad al-Din, p. 330; Ibn al-Athir, vol. 2, p. 390; Lyons and Jackson, Saladin, pp. 331–3.
Howden, Chronica, vol. 3, pp. 127, 130–31; Howden, Gesta, vol. 2, pp. 187, 189; Ambroise, pp. 87–9; Itinerarium Peregrinorum, pp. 240–43; La Continuation de Guillaume de Tyr, pp. 127–9; ‘Historia de expeditione Friderici Imperatoris’, p. 99; R. Grousset, Histoire des Croisades, 3 vols (Paris, 1936), vol. 3, pp. 61–2; Gillingham, Richard I, pp. 166–71.
Richard also had the significant advantage of enjoying close relations with the leaders of the two main Military Orders. Robert of Sablé, who was appointed to the vacant post of master of the Templars in 1191, was one of the Lionheart’s leading vassals from the Sarthe valley and had served as one of five fleet commanders during the journey to the Levant. Garnier of Nablus, who was elected as Hospitaller master in late 1189 or early 1190, was the former prior of England and grand commander of France. He travelled to the Near East with Richard’s contingent.
Smail, Crusading Warfare, p. 163; Gillingham, Richard I, p. 174; J. F. Verbruggen, The Art of Warfare in Western Europe during the Middle Ages (Woodbridge, 1997), pp. 232–9; Ambroise, pp. 91–2.
Ambroise, p. 92.
Baha al-Din, p. 170; Ambroise, p. 93.
Ambroise, p. 94; Baha al-Din, p. 170.
Ambroise, p. 96; Itinerarium Peregrinorum, pp. 253, 258–9; Baha al-Din, p. 171.
Ambroise, p. 97; Baha al-Din, pp. 171–2.
Baha al-Din, pp. 172–3; Ambroise, p. 98; Lyons and Jackson, Saladin, p. 336.
Ambroise, pp. 99–107; Itinerarium Peregrinorum, pp. 260–80; Howden, Chronica, vol. 3, pp. 130–33; Baha al-Din, pp. 174–6; Imad al-Din, p. 344.
Ambroise, pp. 100–101, 103.
Itinerarium Peregrinorum, p. 264; Howden, Chronica, vol. 3, p. 131; Baha al-Din, p. 175.
Itinerarium Peregrinorum, pp. 268–9; Ambroise, p. 104.
Itinerarium Peregrinorum, p. 270; Howden, Chronica, vol. 3, pp. 129–31. Richard authored another letter on that same day (this time addressed generally to the people of his realm) which had even less to say about the battle, commenting simply that ‘as we were nearing Arsuf Saladin came swooping down upon us’.
Itinerarium Peregrinorum, pp. 274–7; Ambroise, pp. 107–9. Richard I described James of Avesnes as the ‘best of men whose merits had made him dear to the whole army’ and as the ‘pillar’ of the crusade (Howden, Chronica, vol. 3, pp. 129–31). Ambroise recalled the circumstances of James’ death, noting that ‘there were some who did not come to his rescue, which gave rise to much talk; this was one of the barons of France, they said, the count of Dreux, he and his men. I have heard so many speak ill of this that the history cannot deny it.’ Unfortunately, no further explanation was offered of Robert of Dreux’s failure to help James.
Flori, Richard the Lionheart, pp. 137–8. Many historians have expressed similar views, suggesting that Richard actively sought battle at Arsuf. These include: Gillingham (Richard I, pp. 173–8) who acknowledged that his account of Arsuf was based on Ambroise’s testimony and described the battle as the ‘height of Richard’s fame’, characterising the king’s handling of the encounter as ‘masterful’ Verbruggen (The Art of Warfare, p. 232) who described Arsuf as ‘the last great triumph of the Christians in the Near East’ and S. Runciman (‘The kingdom of Acre and the later crusades’, A History of the Crusades, vol. 3 (Cambridge, 1954), p. 57) who applauded the Lionheart’s ‘superb generalship’. Tyerman (God’s War, pp. 458–9) downplayed the importance of the battle, but nonetheless maintained that Richard wanted to engage Saladin in combat and launch a heavy cavalry charge. Others, like J. P. Phillips (The Crusades 1095–1197 (London, 2002), pp. 146, 151), praised Richard’s ‘brilliant generalship at Arsuf’, while ignoring the question of whether or not the king deliberately sought battle. Smail (Crusading Warfare, p. 163) did describe Arsuf as a natural event that was merely part of the process of a fighting march, but still believed that Richard had planned the crusader charge (pp. 128–9).
Baha al-Din, pp. 175–7; Lyons and Jackson, Saladin, pp. 338–9.
Baha al-Din, p. 178; Lyons and Jackson, Saladin, pp. 338–42.
Itinerarium Peregrinorum, p. 284; Ambroise, p. 114. There can be little doubt that Richard was contemplating an Egyptian campaign from that autumn onwards, as letters to the Genoese dating from October 1191 refer to plans to ‘hasten with all our forces into Egypt’ the following summer ‘for the advantage’ of the Holy Land. Codice Diplomatico della repubblica di Genova, vol. 3, pp. 19–21. Richard showed a deft diplomatic touch in managing to curry the support of the Genoese, while still maintaining the backing of his established allies, the Pisans. Favreau-Lilie, Die Italiener im Heiligen Land, pp. 288–93.
Itinerarium Peregrinorum, p. 293; Ambroise, pp. 118–19; Gillingham, ‘Richard I and the Science of War’, pp. 89–90; D. Pringle, ‘Templar castles between Jaffa and Jerusalem’, The Military Orders, vol. 2, ed. H. Nicholson (Aldershot, 1998), pp. 89–109.
Baha al-Din, p. 179.
Baha al-Din, pp. 185–8; Imad al-Din, pp. 349–51. Gillingham, Richard I, pp. 183–5; Lyons and Jackson, Saladin, pp. 342–3. The Old French Continuation of William of Tyre (La Continuation de Guillaume de Tyr, p. 151) mentioned the proposed union between al-Adil and Joanne, but this text (also known as the Lyon Eracles) originated in the mid-thirteenth century. The reason for Joanne’s refusal is unclear. Baha al-Din recorded that she flew into a rage when Richard finally presented his plan to her. Imad al-Din, however, believed that she had been willing to enter into such a union, but had been compelled to refuse by the Latin clergy.
Baha al-Din, pp. 193–5; Imad al-Din, pp. 353–4; Ibn al-Athir, vol. 2, p. 392; Itinerarium Peregrinorum, p. 296; Ambroise, p. 120. Imad al-Din saw Richard’s approaches as duplicitous. Baha al-Din, meanwhile, argued that Saladin’s real ‘aim was to undermine the peace talks’. He recorded a personal conversation in which the sultan emphasised that peace would not end the danger to Islam. Predicting the collapse of Muslim unity after his death and a resurgence in Frankish power, Saladin apparently stated: ‘Our best course is to keep on with the jihad until we expel them from the coast or die ourselves.’ Baha al-Din concluded that ‘this was his own view and it was only against his will that he was persuaded to make peace’. However, this was probably propaganda designed to maintain Saladin’s image as an undefeated mujahid.
Baha al-Din, pp. 194–6.
Ambroise, pp. 123–4; Itinerarium Peregrinorum, p. 304.
Itinerarium Peregrinorum, p. 305; Ambroise, p. 126; Mayer, The Crusades, p. 148; Gillingham, Richard I, p. 191; Phillips, The Crusades, p. 151.
Ambroise, p. 126; Ibn al-Athir, vol. 2, p. 394.
Itinerarium Peregrinorum, p. 323; D. Pringle, ‘King Richard I and the walls of Ascalon’, Palestine Exploration Quarterly, vol. 116 (1984), pp. 133–47.
Baha al-Din, p. 200.
La Continuation de Guillaume de Tyr, p. 141. Richard certainly struggled to clear himself of blame and suspicion, his guilt being widely reported in the courts of Europe. Eventually his supporters devised a solution that exonerated the Lionheart–producing a letter in 1195, purportedly from the Old Man Sinan himself (but almost certainly a forgery), affirming that the Assassins had acted because of a historic grudge against the marquis. Gillingham, Richard I, pp. 199–201.
Itinerarium Peregrinorum, p. 359; Ambroise, p. 153.
Baha al-Din, pp. 199–202; Lyons and Jackson, Saladin, pp. 346–8.
Ambroise, p. 153.
Itinerarium Peregrinorum, p. 390; Baha al-Din, pp. 208–9.
Baha al-Din, pp. 209–12.
Ambroise, pp. 163–5; Itinerarium Peregrinorum, pp. 379–82.
Itinerarium Peregrinorum, p. 393; Ambroise, p. 172. Many Latin Christian contemporaries were dismayed by this second retreat. Eyewitnesses, like Ambrois
e, clearly acknowledged that it was King Richard who foiled the attempt to besiege Jerusalem. Back in the West, however, other chroniclers presented a different version of events, exculpating the Lionheart of blame. Roger of Howden (Chronica, vol. 3, p. 183) actually recorded that Richard had been determined to capture the Holy City, but was stymied by the French, who were reluctant to participate because the king of France had ordered them to return to Europe. Ralph of Coggeshall (pp. 38–40), meanwhile, affirmed that Richard had been about to lead the army on to Jerusalem when Hugh of Burgundy, the Templars and the French refused to fight, fearing that Philip Augustus would be angry with them if they helped the Angevin king capture the Holy City. Ralph added that it was discovered later that Hugh had shamefully entered into a secret alliance with Saladin. Ironically, the notion that the French had foiled the Lionheart’s attempts to conquer Jerusalem stuck and, by the mid-thirteenth century, had become embedded in popular memory. Gillingham, Richard I, pp. 208–10; Lyons and Jackson, Saladin, pp. 353–4. M. Markowski (‘Richard the Lionheart: Bad king, bad crusader’, Journal of Medieval History, vol. 23 (1997), pp. 351–65) criticised Richard’s conduct during the Third Crusade, branding him ‘a failure as a crusade leader’, but on rather different grounds–namely that ‘any good crusade leader should have done what the army expected’ by launching an assault on Jerusalem whether it was militarily viable or not.
Itinerarium Peregrinorum, p. 422; Baha al-Din, pp. 223, 225–6. The most influential of the Lionheart’s new allies were: al-Mashtub–the Kurdish emir who had served Saladin since 1169, commanded Acre’s garrison in 1191 and recently (and perhaps deliberately) had been released by Richard; and another of Saladin’s field commanders, Badr al-Din Dildirim al-Yaruqi. Both served as mediators and negotiators through the summer of 1192.
Baha al-Din, p. 231; Imad al-Din, pp. 388–91. On the consequences of this accord see: J. H. Niermann, ‘Levantine peace following the Third Crusade: a new dimension in Frankish-Muslim relations’, Muslim World, vol. 65 (1975), pp. 107–18.
Baha al-Din, pp. 235, 239, 243.
Hillenbrand, The Crusades: Islamic Perspectives, p. 195; Ibn al-Athir, vol. 2, pp. 408–9. See also: Lyons and Jackson, Saladin, pp. 361–74; Möhring, Saladin: The Sultan and his Times, pp. 88–104.
On Richard I’s later career see: Gillingham, Richard I, pp. 222–348. On the legends surrounding Richard’s life see: B. B. Broughton, The Legends of King Richard I (The Hague, 1966).
PART IV: THE STRUGGLE FOR SURVIVAL
Morris, Papal Monarchy, pp. 358–86, 452–62, 478–89; B. Z. Kedar, Crusade and Mission. European Approaches towards the Muslims (Princeton, 1984); R. I. Moore, The Formation of a Persecuting Society. Power and Deviance in Western Europe, 950–1250, 2nd edn (Oxford, 2007); M. D. Lambert, Medieval Heresy: Popular Movements from the Gregorian Reform to the Reformation, 3rd edn (Oxford, 2002); C. H. Lawrence, The Friars: The Impact of the Early Mendicant Movement on Western Society (London, 1994).
H. Roscher, Innocenz III und die Kreuzzüge (Göttingen, 1969); H. Tillman, Pope Innocent III (Amsterdam, 1980); J. Sayers, Innocent III: Leader of Europe (London, 1994); B. Bolton, Innocent III: Studies on Papal Authority and Pastoral Care (Aldershot, 1995); J. C. Moore, Pope Innocent III: To Root Up and to Plant (Leiden, 2003); J. M. Powell (ed.), Pope Innocent III: Vicar of Christ or Lord of the World? (Washington, DC, 1994); Morris, Papal Monarchy, pp. 417–51. Henry VI died before he could participate in a planned crusade to the Holy Land. Nonetheless, a number of German crusaders did fight in the Near East in 1197–8. C. Naumann, Die Kreuzzug Kaiser Heinrichs VI (Frankfurt, 1994).
Innocent III, Die Register Innocenz’ III, ed. O. Hageneder and A. Haidaicher, vol. 1 (Graz, 1964), p. 503.
M. Angold, ‘The road to 1204: the Byzantine background to the Fourth Crusade’, Journal of Medieval History, vol. 25 (1999), pp. 257–68; M. Angold, The Fourth Crusade: Event and Context (Harlow, 2003); C. M. Brand, ‘The Fourth Crusade: Some recent interpretations’, Mediaevalia et Humanistica, vol. 12 (1984), pp. 33–45. Harris, Byzantium and the Crusades, pp. 145–62; J. Pryor, ‘The Venetian fleet for the Fourth Crusade and the diversion of the crusade to Constantinople’, The Experience of Crusading: Western Approaches, ed. M. Bull and N. Housley (Cambridge, 2003), pp. 103–23; D. Queller and T. F. Madden, The Fourth Crusade: The Conquest of Constantinople, 1201–1204, 2nd edn (Philadelphia, 1997).
J. R. Strayer, The Albigensian Crusades (Ann Arbor, 1992); M. D. Costen, The Cathars and the Albigensian Crusade (Manchester, 1997); M. Barber, The Cathars: Dualist Heretics in Languedoc in the High Middle Ages (London, 2000); G. Dickson, The Children’s Crusade: Medieval History, Modern Mythistory (Basingstoke, 2008).
J. M. Powell, Anatomy of a Crusade 1213–1221 (Philadelphia, 1986), pp. 1–50.
James of Vitry, Lettres, ed. R. B. C. Huygens (Leiden, 1960), pp. 73–4, 82; James of Vitry, ‘Historia Orientalis’, Libri duo quorum prior Orientalis…inscribitur, ed. F. Moschus (Farnborough, 1971), pp. 1–258; James of Vitry, Historia Occidentalis, ed. J. Hinnebusch (Freiburg, 1972); C. Maier, Crusade Propaganda and Ideology: Model Sermons for the Preaching of the Cross (Cambridge, 2000).
On the crusader states in the first half of the thirteenth century see: Mayer, The Crusades, pp. 239–59; J. S. C. Riley-Smith, The Feudal Nobility and the Kingdom of Jerusalem, 1174–1277 (London, 1973); P. W. Edbury, John of Ibelin and the Kingdom of Jerusalem (Woodbridge, 1997); Cahen, La Syrie du Nord, pp. 579–652.
On the Ayyubid world after Saladin see: Holt, The Age of the Crusades, pp. 60–66; Hillenbrand, The Crusades: Islamic Perspectives, pp. 195–225; R. S. Humphreys, From Saladin to the Mongols: The Ayyubids of Damascus 1193–1260 (Albany, 1977); R. S. Humphreys, ‘Ayyubids, Mamluks and the Latin East in the thirteenth century’, Mamluk Studies Review, vol. 2 (1998), pp. 1–18; E. Sivan, ‘Notes sur la situation des Chrétiens à l’époque Ayyubide’, Revue de l’Histoire des Religions, vol. 172 (1967), pp. 117–30; A.-M. Eddé, La principauté ayyoubide d’Alep (579/1183–658/1260) (Stuttgart, 1999).
In broad terms, the common pattern through all three orders was to have a division between full knights, who were expected to have between three and four horses; sergeants, the less well-equipped subordinates to knights; and priest-brothers, the ordained clerics not involved in fighting, who were responsible for overseeing the spiritual wellbeing of the brother knights. It was also usually possible to enter orders on a temporary basis for set period, such as one year. A. Forey, ‘The Military Orders, 1120–1312’, The Oxford Illustrated History of the Crusades, ed. J. S. C. Riley-Smith (Oxford, 1995), pp. 184–216; J. Upton-Ward (trans.), The Rule of the Templars (Woodbridge, 1992).
P. Deschamps, ‘Le Crac des Chevaliers’, Les Châteaux des Croisés en Terre Sainte, vol. 1 (Paris, 1934); Kennedy, Crusader Castles, pp. 98–179; C. Marshall, Warfare in the Latin East, 1192–1291 (Cambridge, 1992).
James of Vitry, Lettres, pp. 87–8; D. Jacoby, ‘Aspects of everyday life in Frankish Acre’, Crusades, vol. 4 (2005), pp. 73–105; D. Abulafia, ‘The role of trade in Muslim–Christian contact during the Middle Ages’, Arab Influence in Medieval Europe, ed. D. A. Agius and R. Hitchcock (Reading, 1994), pp. 1–24; D. Abulafia, ‘Trade and crusade, 1050–1250’, Cross-cultural Convergences in the Crusader Period, ed. M. Goodich, S. Menache and S. Schein (New York, 1995), pp. 1–20.
D. Abulafia, Frederick II: A Medieval Emperor (London, 1988); W. Stürner, Friedrich II, 2 vols (Darmstadt, 1994–2000).
James of Vitry, Lettres, p. 102. On the Fifth Crusade see: Powell, Anatomy of a Crusade, pp. 51–204; J. Donavan, Pelagius and the Fifth Crusade (Philadelphia, 1950); T. C. Van Cleve, ‘The Fifth Crusade’, A History of the Crusades, vol. 2, ed. K. M. Setton (Madison, 1969), pp. 377–428.
Oliver of Paderborn, ‘The Capture of Damietta’, Christian Society and the Crusades 1198–1229, ed. E. Peters, trans. J. J. Gavigan (Philadelphia, 1971), pp. 65, 70, 88.
Mayer, The Crusades, p. 223; Oliver of Paderborn, p. 72; James of Vitry, Lettres, p. 116.
James of Vitry, Lettres, p. 118.
Oliver of Paderborn, p. 88.
J. M. Powell, ‘San Francesco d’Assisi e la Quinta Crociata: Una Missione di Pace’, Schede Medievali, vol. 4 (1983), pp. 69–77; Powell, Anatomy of a Crusade, pp. 178–9.
Powell, Anatomy of a Crusade, pp. 195–204.
Abulafia, Frederick II, pp. 251–89; F. Gabrieli, ‘Frederick II and Muslim culture’, East and West (1958), pp. 53–61; J. M. Powell, ‘Frederick II and the Muslims: The Makings of a Historiographical Tradition’, Iberia and the Mediterranean World of the Middle Ages, ed. L. J. Simon (Leiden, 1995), pp. 261–9.
Abulafia, Frederick II, pp. 148–201; T. C. Van Cleve, ‘The Crusade of Frederick II’, A History of the Crusades, vol. 2, ed. K. M. Setton (Madison, 1969), pp. 429–62; R. Hiestand, ‘Friedrich II. und der Kreuzzug’, Friedrich II: Tagung des Deutschen Historischen Instituts in Rom im Gedenkjahr 1994, ed. A. Esch and N. Kamp (Tübingen, 1996), pp. 128–49; L. Ross, ‘Frederick II: Tyrant or benefactor of the Latin East?’, Al-Masaq, vol. 15 (2003), pp. 149–59.
H. Kluger, Hochmeister Hermann von Salza und Kaiser Friedrich II (Marburg, 1987).
Ibn Wasil, Arab Historians of the Crusades, trans. F. Gabrieli (London, 1969), p. 270. Sibt ibn al-Jauzi (pp. 273–5) described an outpouring of grief thus: ‘news of the loss of Jerusalem spread to Damascus, and disaster struck the lands of Islam. It was so great a tragedy that public ceremonies of mourning were instituted.’ Roger of Wendover, Flores Historiarum, ed. H. G. Hewlett, 3 vols, Rolls Series 84 (London, 1887), vol. 2, p. 368.
Matthew Paris, Chronica Majora, ed. H. R. Luard, 7 vols, Rolls Series 57 (London, 1872–83), vol. 3, pp. 179–80. On the authenticity of this letter see: J. M. Powell, ‘Patriarch Gerold and Frederick II: The Matthew Paris letter’, Journal of Medieval History, vol. 25 (1999), pp. 19–26. Philip of Novara, Mémoires, ed. C. Kohler (Paris, 1913), p. 25; B. Weiler, ‘Frederick II, Gregory IX and the liberation of the Holy Land, 1230–9’, Studies in Church History, vol. 36 (2000), pp. 192–206.
The Crusades: The Authoritative History of the War for the Holy Land Page 77