COPYRIGHT

All content on this blog is protected by copyright.
Content used elsewhere without attribution constitutes theft of intellectual property and will be prosecuted.

Saturday, September 27, 2025

The Third Crusade - Part II

The fall of Acre and the withdrawal of Philip II of France brought the Third Crusade to a new stage -- one dominated by the English King Richard I. 


On August 22, 1191 a crusader army composed of roughly 20,000 fighting men of which 1,200 were knights set out from Acre along the coastal road heading for Jerusalem via Jaffa under the overall command of Richard of England. Although the crusaders were marching through what had been the heart of the Kingdom of Jerusalem, the region had been overrun by Saladin’s forces four years earlier and the inhabitants had been slaughtered, enslaved or driven off. No Saracen settlers had been sent to replace them. The fields lay fallow, the gardens left to go to seed, and the vineyards had been broken down. In short, the army was dependent on provisioning by sea. On the other hand, the horses had ample pasturage and water was plentiful since wells and aqueducts were still functioning. Furthermore, the fleet sailed down the coast keeping pace with the army, carrying food, fodder, supplies, munitions and also offering medical facilities for the wounded.  

The latter was important because the Sultan’s forces controlled the interior and could move and deploy at will. This meant that the crusaders had to advance in battle formation, prepared to fight every foot of the way. Richard adopted the standard tactic of the Franks, the ‘fighting box,’ anchoring his formation on the sea, placing his baggage immediately beside the coast, the knights east/left of the baggage and the infantry on the landward flank of the formation, where they could protect the vulnerable horses. The entire formation advanced at the pace of the infantry.

Richard’s objective was to reach Jaffa, where he hoped to establish a defensible stronghold for the assault on Jerusalem. He had no interest in a full-scale battle with Saladin. Saladin, on the other hand, needed to avenge the slain of Acre and prevent the Franks from gaining control of another coastal city where they could entrench themselves. He wanted to engage the Franks while they were in the open so he could bring his superior numbers to bear. His reputation was at stake.

Richard maintained rigid discipline throughout the march, and despite daily provocation and harassment by Turkish mounted archers, the army made slow but steady progress down the coast. Arab sources report that the Franks kept marching despite having as many as ten arrows embedded in their shields or armor. The Franks, furthermore, had enough troops to regularly rotate between the exposed Eastern flank and the protected Western flank. They passed through the ruins of Caesarea 1 September 1191 and were a day’s march from Arsuf six days later.

On September 7, however, Saracen forces massed in such numbers that the crusaders knew they were about to face the onslaught. Richard gave strict orders for the knights not to charge the enemy unless he had personally given the order; his order was to be communicated by trumpet signals. The Sultan, commanding an army roughly twice that of the crusaders, ordered the attack at 9 am, after the Franks had been marching for several hours in the summer heat. He ordered massed infantry attacks for the first time, which pressed in to engage the crusader infantry, inflicting significant casualties. However, these failed to halt the advance.

By noon, the leading crusader units had reached the well-watered orchards north of Arsuf. The Saracens began focusing their attacks on the rearguard formed by the Hospitallers. Casualties among the horses mounted dangerously, and the Master of the Hospital rode forward to Richard requesting permission to attack before all his horses were slaughtered. Richard refused. Returning to the rear, the Master found that his men were pressed so hard that they were marching backwards. Again, the Master rode forward to beg Richard for permission to launch a counterattack. Richard again said ‘no’.

Before the Hospitaller Master could return to the rearguard, the Marshal of the Hospital broke out of the line with the cry of ‘St. George’, lead a Hospitaller charge. This was rapidly reinforced by the knights of Champagne, marching immediately beside the Hospitallers. Richard sounded the trumpet signal, and along the entire line the infantry stepped aside to allow the knights through the infantry screen.

The pro-Richard Itinerarium (and many modern commentators) make much of the fact that the attack was not initiated by Richard and suggest that it was somehow ‘mistimed’ as a result. The eye-witness account of Baha al-Din, on the other hand, describes the Frankish charge as ‘simultaneous’ — showing just how rapidly the Hospitallers had been reinforced — and also calling it superbly timed and well-coordinated. Certainly, claims that Richard might have won a decisive victory here are misleading. With the Saracens in control of the interior of the country, there was no way to pin them down and annihilate them. The only army that might have been annihilated in this engagement was Richard’s since he had his back to the sea.

Significantly, at the moment of the Hospitaller attack many mounted Turkish archers had dismounted to improve their aim. Apparently, after two weeks of failing to provoke a charge, they assumed the Franks would not charge. Equally important, Richard was with the van. In any battle, there are moments with a junior commander close to the action senses opportunity that a distant senior commander cannot. The fact that the charge was initiated by the experienced and disciplined Hospitaller marshal, not some rash young crusader, suggests a rational decision based on calculated risks. The marshal didn’t have time to send to Richard for permission — and did not want to risk another ‘no’ either. He made a command decision, hoping and expecting to be reinforced. His instincts proved correct.

The Hospitaller charge, rapidly reinforced by the rest of the cavalry, achieved the maximum results possible in the situation. While Frankish/crusader casualties were light, the knights inflicted bruising casualties on the enemy that seriously wounded Saracen morale. Ibn Shaddad, who personally fought in the battle, speaks of a ‘complete rout’, while Ibn al-Athir says the Sultan’s forces came close to being destroyed.  Most important, Saladin’s aura of invincibility acquired at Hattin was shattered. Respect for Frankish military potency was restored. Although Saladin successfully rallied his troops, the crusaders were able to complete the rest of their march to Jaffa without significant opposition. Thereafter, Saladin avoided all direct military confrontation with Richard the Lionhearted.

At Jaffa, Richard focused on rebuilding the broken defensive infrastructure of the city and along the route to Jerusalem. While this made strategic sense and testifies to Richard’s grasp of the essential requirements of a successful campaign, it was slow work. Unsurprisingly, Richard made his first diplomatic overtures to Saladin during this time. Like any good general, Richard recognized that it would be madness to fight, if he could obtain his objectives through negotiations.

The political objectives of the Third Crusade were crystal clear: the restoration of Christian rule over the Holy Land. The later was defined roughly as the land in which Christ had lived and died, most especially the site of his execution, burial and resurrection: Jerusalem. Saladin’s political objective was to defend the status quo: Muslim control over the territory coveted by the crusaders. There was no common ground between these two positions. As long as both sides believed they could win, the pressure for compromise was insufficient to allow for a diplomatic solution.

Richard’s problem was that time was running out. The autumn rains had started, and since Saladin burned and destroyed as he retreated toward Jerusalem, the crusaders were camping out in the open. More important, Saladin was known to have garrisoned Jerusalem strongly, yet still had the resources to maintain a substantial field army. Any attempt to besiege Jerusalem exposed the crusaders to the risk of between trapped between these two forces. Furthermore, victory was nearly as dangerous as defeat because the crusaders did not have enough men to prevent Saladin’s army from severing their lines of communication and supply to the sea. Such circumstances induced the Templars, Hospitallers and local barons to advise against an assault or siege. In an assembly of all crusaders, their reasoning persuaded a majority to vote for withdrawal to the coast. Yet this decision shattered the morale and cohesion of the army.

The crusade had been called and men had taken the cross in order to recapture Jerusalem. If that goal was unobtainable, why stay? From this point on, the bickering between factions became pronounced. Large numbers of men drifted back to ‘the flesh pots’ of Acre, while the French increasingly refused to recognize Richard’s leadership.

With what troops he had, Richard re-occupied Ascalon and rebuilt the defences there. By summer, however, popular pressure forced Richard to make a second approach on Jerusalem — with the same result. Meanwhile, Richard had learned that his brother was trying to usurp the English crown with the help of Philip II. Richard realized he must return home. His objective in the Holy Land switched to leaving the Kingdom of Jerusalem in a defensible state. Richard identified the recapture Sidon and Beirut to establish continuous Frankish control of the coast from Jaffa to Latakia as the most strategic use of available resources.

Before he could carry out his plan, however, Saladin struck.  At the end of July 1192, word reached Richard that Jaffa was under attack. With his household of just fifty-five knights and roughly 2,000 Italian archers, Richard sailed in a half-dozen ships in an attempt to stiffen garrison morale long enough for a larger force under the command of the King of Jerusalem to advance down the coastal road to Jaffa’s relief. On arrival, Saracen banners flew from the towers of the town, and Richard thought he’d come too late — until a swimmer flung himself from the citadel into the water and swam out to inform Richard that the citadel was still in Frankish hands. Richard immediately ordered his ships to beach themselves on the shore and, despite thousands of Saracen troops camped at the base of the city walls, Richard led an amphibious assault. The King of England was the first to go ashore with a weapon in each hand. He fought his way through the Saracens on the beach to an unlocked (!) postern gate and led his small force into the city. Within hours, his men had control of the city; the enemy had been too busy celebrating their victory and sleeping off their excesses to realize what hit them.

The ease of this victory is best explained by the fact that Saladin with most of his cavalry was elsewhere. On learning of Richard’s arrival in Jaffa, Saladin returned and at dawn on 5 August attacked Richard’s meager troops. These were camping in front of the city because no one had yet had the time to clear away the corpses (of both sides) rotting inside. Nearly caught off-guard, Richard’s men defended themselves, some of them half-naked, kneeling behind their shields, while the crossbowmen took turns firing. Eventually a dozen nags were rounded up, and Richard led a ‘charge’ of twelve knights against the thousands of horsemen in Saladin’s surrounding army. This astonishing feat is described by the Arab chronicler Baha al-Din based on eye-witness reports. He writes: ‘It was reported to me that the King of England took his lance that day and galloped from the far right wing to the far left and nobody challenged him. The Sultan was enraged, turned his back on the fighting and went to Yazur in high dudgeon.’[i]

Saladin’s abortive attempt to retake Jaffa proved to be the diplomatic turning point. Within less than a month, on 2 September, Richard and Saladin signed a three-year and eight-month truce. Neither side was content with the results. Both remained committed to continuing the fight. Yet both sides had reached the end of their resources for the moment. Imad al-Din, eloquent as always, puts the following words into the mouth of Saladin’s advisors: ‘Look too at the state of the country, ruined and trampled underfoot, at your subjects, beaten down and confused, at your armies, exhausted and sick, at your horses, neglected and ruined. … If they fail to get their truce they will devote all their energies to strengthening and consolidating their position; they will face death with high courage … and for love of their Faith will refuse to submit to humiliation.… During peacetime we shall prepare for war and shall renew the means of striking a blow with point and blade.’[ii] Baha al-Din notes that when the Frankish lords Humphrey of Toron and Balian d’Ibelin went to the Sultan’s camp to conclude the truce they were ‘received with great honor and respect’ adding ‘Both sides were overwhelmed with such joy and delight as only God can measure.’[iii]

As pilgrims had always done, the men of the Third Crusade returned to the West. Richard of Lionheart was one of the last to depart, taking ship on 10 October. He left behind a fragile and vulnerable kingdom that hardly seemed likely to survive beyond the end of the truce. In fact, it lasted ninety-nine years.



[i] Baha al-Din Ibn Shaddad. The Rare and Excellent History of Saladin translated by D.S. Richards. [Aldershot: Ashgate, 2002] 225-226.

[ii] Imad ad-Din. The Conquest of the Holy City. Translated by Francesco Gabrieli in Arab Historians of the Crusades. [Berkeley: University of California Press, 1957] 234.

[iii] Baha al-Din Ibn Shaddad. The Rare and Excellent History of Saladin translated by D.S. Richards. [Aldershot: Ashgate, 2002] 28.

 

The bulk of this entry is an excerpt from Dr. Schrader's comprehensive study of the crusader states.

 
The Third Crusade is described from the perspective of the Franks in Outremer (rather than the crusaders) Envoy of Jerusalem
 

 
 Altogether, Dr. Helena P. Schrader is the author of six books set in the Holy Land in the Era of the Crusades.

                         


           Buy Now!                                                  Buy Now!                                                    Buy Now!
 

          Buy Now!                                               Buy Now!                                                      Buy Now!

"The Tale of the English Templar" is a fictional work that depicts the destruction of the Knight's Templar. 



An escaped Templar, an intrepid, old crusader, and a discarded bride
embark on a quest for justice in the face of tyranny. 
 

"St. Louis Knight" is a novel set against the backdrop of the Seventh Crusade and St. Louis' sojourn in the Holy  Land. A Templar novice and King Louis are the central characters. 
It is now available in audiobook as well as paperback and ebook.

 
 A crusader in search of faith --
A lame lady in search of revenge --
And a King who would be saint.

St. Louis' Knight takes you to the Holy Land in the 13th century, and a world filled with knights, nobles, prophets -- and assassins. 
(Available in Audiobook)

 

 

Saturday, September 20, 2025

The Third Crusade - Part I

  The fall of Jerusalem sent shock waves through Europe. Pope Urban III allegedly died of grief on hearing the news. His successor Gregory VIII issued a call to crusade just nine days later in a papal bull that blamed the catastrophe on the sins of all Christians and summoned everyone to acts of penance and contrition. One of the first nobleman to ‘take the cross’ was Richard Plantagenet, Count of Poitou, followed within months by his father King Henry II of England, King Philip II of France, and the Holy Roman Emperor Frederick ‘Barbarossa.’

Below is the first in two entries describing what happened in what later became known as "The Third Crusade"

 

Due primarily to hostilities between the Plantagenets and Capets, the German crusade got underway first, in May 1189. It was composed of an estimated 12,000 foot and 3,000 knights, most of whom travelled with the Emperor overland, although smaller contingents traveled independently by sea. Barbarossa’s army was highly disciplined and prepared to pay for provisions but encountered difficulties as soon as it crossed into Byzantine territory. However, the new Emperor, Isaac II Angelus, had signed an agreement with Saladin including a promise to obstruct the passage of crusaders headed for the Holy Land. As a result, Barbarossa’s force found no markets for provisioning and met with repeated harassment from ‘bandits’ and ‘brigands,’ probably in the pay of Constantinople. Barbarossa brushed aside the ineffective attempts to stop him, forced Isaac to provide transportation across the Dardanelles, and crossed into Muslim controlled territory on 22 April 1190.

On 18 May Barbarossa decisively defeated a Turkish army at the Battle of Iconium. The German crusaders then occupied Konya, the capital of the Seljuk Sultanate of Rum, where they replenished supplies and replaced significant equine casualties. The truce negotiated with the Turks allowed free passage through the rest of the sultanate. On 30 May, the army crossed back into Christian territory, entering Cilician Armenia, where it met with hospitality and support for the first time. One of the most important modern historians of the crusades, Christopher Tyreman, claims that Barbarossa’s performance upto this point was ‘one of the most remarkable feats of western arms in crusading history.’[i]

Yet it was all undone by a single accident. On 10 June 1190, Frederick Barbarossa drowned while crossing the River Saleph. It is unclear if he had a heart attack while riding through the icy water, or if he was, as one account claimed, caught in a whirlpool. Whatever happened, his death triggered the almost complete disintegration of his host. Most of the crusaders turned back. Only a small contingent under his son Frederick of Swabia reached Antioch and eventually the siege at Acre, where many of the remainder died.

Meanwhile, the death of Henry II of England on 6 July 1189, paved the way for an uneasy peace between France and England. Philip II was at best a reluctant crusader and did not yet have a well-organized and centralized bureaucracy comparable to that of the Plantagenets. Although he attempted to raise extra funding through a special tax, resistance was considerable. Philip proved unwilling or unable to enforce collection, and ultimately raised only a modest host. However, a number of his powerful barons (e.g. the Duke of Burgundy, the Counts of Flanders and Champagne and others recruited and paid for substantial contingents. In consequence, the French host probably equaled that of Barbarossa, e.g. 15,000 men.

Richard of Poitou, now King of England, on the other hand was totally dedicated to the crusade. Contemporaries claim that crusading fever swept England fueled by what is described as love of God, hope for remission of sins — and respect for the king. The latter should not be underestimated. Richard also proved remarkably inventive in raising funds to finance his great expedition. In addition to the ‘Saladin Tax’ — which he vigorously collected, he engaged in practices which are nowadays considered unsavory, such as selling offices. In the twelfth century, however, royal offices were always instruments of patronage, and payment for them in one form or another was expected not exceptional. More scandalous in the eyes of his contemporaries was the sale of properties from the royal domain because it diminished royal revenue in the long term. Yet Richard successfully increased exchequer receipts for the year 1190 by two to three times the norm.

Richard’s focus on being well-financed and his organizational talent for raising funds served his soldiers well. For a start, it enabled Richard to build a fleet to transport his army by sea, avoiding the grueling two-thousand-mile march that had depleted crusading armies in the past. Furthermore, this fleet was key to maintaining lines of supply throughout the entire crusade and enabled two decisive amphibious operations.

After wintering in Sicily, the French (also travelling by sea but in chartered vessels) sailed on 30 March 1191 for Acre, arriving without incident April 20. Richard’s fleet of 209 ships sailed ten days later and immediately ran into violent storms that scattered it. Richard diverted to Cyprus, which he captured from a self-proclaimed and unpopular despot, before proceeding to Acre, which he reached 8 June.

The arrival of the French and English forces decisively tipped the balance of forces in favor of the besiegers. While French and English fleets blockaded Acre by sea, the kings deployed large siege engines against the city. The crusaders were at last numerous enough to hold off Saladin’s forces while engaging in assaults on the city. The Saracen garrison rapidly recognized that surrender might be unavoidable and opened negotiations. The initial crusader demands for the return of all prisoners and all coastal cities were unrealistic and rejected. However, eventually, the Franks were talked down to the terms agreed upon on 12 July 1191, namely 1) the restoration of the True Cross, 2) the release of 2,700 prisoners and 3) payment of 200,000 dinars. The garrison also provided 2,700 hostages (fighting men, not women and children) to stand surety for the fulfillment of the terms.[ii]  Significantly, the deal was made with the garrison at Acre, not Saladin. When the Sultan learned of them, he was allegedly ‘distressed’ but felt honor-bound to uphold them.

At this point, Philip II concluded he had fulfilled his crusading vows and promptly sailed back to France — to the shock and scorn of the entire crusading host, including his own subjects. French command passed to the Duke of Burgundy — the same man who had been betrothed to Sibylla of Jerusalem in 1179/1180 but reneged on his promise. Meanwhile, Saladin failed to deliver, twice. Richard made the strategic decision to execute all the hostages in plain view of Saladin’s army. Although by the standards of the day, Richard had the right to do what he did, his action still shocked contemporaries and has blackened his name ever since. Historians have pointed out that Richard could ill afford to leave sufficient troops in Acre to guard nearly 3,000 prisoners. Others note that he needed to signal strength and determination to Saladin. Often overlooked, the Lyon Continuation of Tyre reports that the principle reason the Franks had agreed to the surrender terms in the first place had been because ‘they were keen for the Christians to be released from Saracen captivity.’[iii] As a result, when Saladin failed to deliver either the cross or the prisoners, the common troops were outraged and rebellious. Namely, ‘when King Richard saw the people weeping and lamenting because Saladin had deceived them, he had great pity and wanted to calm those who were in such great distress.’[iv] Read: he feared his own authority could be undermined and he might lose control of his army. Tragically, it was prisoners on both sides that paid the price. Saladin retaliated by slaughtering those prisoners who fell into his hands in the days following this massacre.

Next week, the story of the Third Crusade continues. 
 
Meanwhile, the Third Crusade is described from the perspective of the Franks in Outremer (rather than the crusaders) Envoy of Jerusalem
 

 
 Altogether, Dr. Helena P. Schrader is the author of six books set in the Holy Land in the Era of the Crusades.

                         


           Buy Now!                                                  Buy Now!                                                    Buy Now!
 

          Buy Now!                                               Buy Now!                                                      Buy Now!

 

Note: The bulk of this entry is an excerpt from Dr. Schrader's comprehensive non-fiction study of the crusader states.

 [i]Tyreman, Christopher. The World of the Crusades: An Illustrated History. [New Haven: Yale University Press, 2019] 210.

[ii] The exact number of hostages and prisoners to be released is not certain as different accounts given different numbers. This number is the figure deemed most reasonable based on conditions in Acre and the size of the respective forces.

[iii] Anonymous, The Old French Continuation of William of Tyre translated by Peter Edbury as ‘The Conquest of Jerusalem and the Third Crusade’ (Crusades Texts in Translation) [Aldershot: Ashgate, 1998] chapter 105, 107.

[iv] Old French Continuation of Tyre, chpt. 105, 108.