The Economy of the Crusader States: Technological and Intellectual Exchange

  It was not only commodities and manufactured goods that moved between East and West in the era of the crusades; ideas and technology were also exchanged. Contrary to common belief, this exchange was two-way and it benefited both sides, particularly in the field of medicine.

While Islamic culture undoubtedly experienced a significant flourishing in the centuries immediately preceding the crusades, Western Europe was not trapped in some ‘dark age’. On the contrary, Europe enjoyed noteworthy technological and intellectual advancement in the centuries preceding the First Crusade. Professor Rodney Stark claims: ‘The so-called Dark Ages were a period of profound enlightenment in both the material and intellectual spheres, which when combined with Christian doctrines of moral equality, created a whole new world based on political, economic, and personal freedom’.[i]

While Stark may be overstating the case, there is no doubt that the learning of the Greeks and Romans was not lost to Western Europe in the years after the fall of Rome but was preserved and translated in centres of learning across Europe. Furthermore, before the First Crusade, the first Western university had been founded; several others followed it in the next century. These were not schools of theology comparable to Islam’s madrassas, but institutions dedicated to scientific inquiry. These Western institutions practised critical peer review and were protected by the concept of academic freedom. Other advances of the pre-crusades era were polyphonic music and the invention of the organ and the violin. Clocks, compasses and eyeglasses were other innovations that made their appearance in the West during the crusading era — without input from the Muslim world.

Yet the most profound Western developments in the centuries before the First Crusade were those practical innovations that enabled agricultural productivity to expand to the point where generations of peasants no longer lived on the brink of starvation. The development of a horse-collar for ploughs enabled the introduction of horsepower in agriculture. Horses could plow at twice the speed of oxen, doubling production. Indeed, they made it possible to cultivate more land. Combined with new ploughs that turned the earth — rather than merely scratching the surface of it —the productivity of the land increased dramatically. Peasants were able to move beyond subsistence agriculture to cash crops. Except in periods of exceptional natural or political disruption, they had enough nutritious food to reach their full genetic potential.

Other practical Western inventions in the centuries before the First Crusade were brakes on wagons and swivel axles, both radical innovations at the time. When combined with the development of the horse-collar and the breeding of larger, stronger horses, these enabled the transport of heavy cargoes over land. This was a boon to trade and helped develop the interior, however, heavy transport vehicles also made a significant contribution to warfare by enabling the transportation of siege engines, for example. Indeed, heavy transportation wagons with teams of four or more horses and large siege engines were just two of the technological innovations brought from the West to the Near East rapidly adopted by the crusaders’ Muslim opponents.

Throughout the ages, military technology and tactics have been characterised by rapid innovation, imitation and adaptation. In the context of the crusades, the Franks adopted the surcoat and mounted archers (turcopoles), while the Saracens adopted heavy siege equipment and heavy (lance-bearing) cavalry. In military architecture, useful features in castle construction introduced by either party were almost immediately copied by the other. In his outstanding examination of crusader castles, however, Ellenblum demonstrates that it was the crusaders who first made significant advances in military architecture with the introduction of key features such as thicker, higher and concentric walls, posterns, vaulted chambers in the ‘safe-zones’, and massive storage to withstand lengthy sieges.[ii] However, the Mamluks learned fast, and later Muslim castles were equal to those of the crusaders.

Nevertheless, the West benefitted enormously, both technologically and intellectually, from exposure to the Muslim East via the crusader states. The most modern means for making paper, for example, was taken back to Europe by clerics who learned about the process in the Latin East. Likewise, the means for making high-quality glass, which the glassmakers of the Levant had already mastered before the arrival of the crusaders, was introduced in Venice in 1277, giving Venice a competitive edge in that sector that lasted to the eighteenth century.

Overall, when assessing which party benefitted most from contact with the other, we should not automatically assume that the culture more open to adaptation was the weaker or more backward. For example, despite the superiority of European naval architecture, the Arabs could not imitate it because they lacked high-quality shipwrights. The chimneys built in the Holy Land by the Franks fell into disrepair and subsequently disappeared from local architecture after the departure of the Franks, not because chimneys were useless or old-fashioned, but due to the inertia of ‘tradition’.

An important factor impacting the direction of technology transfer was the environment. The Franks, not their Arab and Turkish opponents, were living in a new environment, which meant they needed to adapt, not the other way around. Significantly, that new environment was one with extremes of heat unknown in their homelands, an environment that was more arid, less forested and more densely populated. It would have been absurd — and stupid — to cling to traditions and technologies unsuited to the Mediterranean, no matter how well-suited those technologies were for, say, agriculture in Scotland or fighting in Prussia. 

The adoption of surcoats is an excellent example of this. In the intense heat of the Syrian summer, wearing a loose cloth garment over one's armour made sense. That the Franks rapidly did so, and – even more surprising – that it became fashionable across Western Europe is not evidence of the inferiority of previous forms of dress. The surcoat had a function that was related directly to the physical environment in the Near East. Its later evolution into a means of showing off one's arms and affinity had nothing to do with Arab/Turkish superiority but rather with Western customs of chivalry.

Similarly, the prevalence of stone structures across the Middle East in an era when most construction in Western Europe was still wooden was not the result of a higher level of civilization in the Arab world. Instead, it was a function of the scarcity of wood in the Near East. To this day, archaeologists can date crusades-era buildings based on the exceptionally high standards of Frankish masonry and the chimneys. 

On the other hand, although Western European ploughs were undoubtedly more sophisticated than the ploughs in use in the Holy Land and had contributed considerably to rising standards of living and higher levels of nutrition among the poor in Europe, they were unsuitable for use in the Middle East. Consequently, Frankish settlers abandoned a higher level of technology unsuited to the environment in favour of an ‘old-fashioned’ technology that did less environmental damage to a fragile ecosystem. 

Adaptation from West to East, on the other hand, was inhibited not only by the fact that the environment remained the same for Muslims but also by Muslim presumptions of superiority. The Muslims viewed Franks as fundamentally backwards because they were ‘blasphemers worshipping God incorrectly … or as idolaters worshipping cross-shaped idols’.[iii] In the extreme, they shared the attitude expressed by Bahr al-Fava’id, who wrote: ‘Anyone who believes that his God came out of a woman’s privates is quite mad; he should not be spoken to, and he has neither intelligence nor faith’.[iv]

It is to the Franks’ credit that regardless of what they thought of Islam as a religion, they did not dismiss its adherents as madmen or idiots. Because of this willingness to separate religion from science and art, the Franks proved remarkably adept at adapting to their new environment and developing a unique hybrid culture.

There is no better example of this than the impact of Arab medicine on the West. Recent scholarship demonstrates that ‘medical practice in the armies of the First Crusade was comparable with Byzantine and Islamic practice, both in terms of practical treatment and also the theory behind the origins of disease’.[v] In short, before the establishment of the crusader states, ‘Saracens and Christians shared the same conceptual framework for medical science, which they [both] inherited from the classical world’.[vi]

However, in the subsequent 200 years, during which the Franks lived amidst Eastern cultures, medicine evolved rapidly. In this period, after the establishment of the crusader states, scholars can trace new influences on Western medicine from the Latin East. The most significant medical innovation to travel from the crusader states to Europe was undoubtedly the concept of an institution staffed by medical professionals (not monks or nuns) and dedicated to curing — not just caring for — the sick and injured, i.e., a hospital. Yet, while the Franks may have learned about hospitals from Muslims, the latter had learned about hospitals from the Byzantines, making this an example of a ‘melting pot’ innovation.

Likewise, while the regulation of medical practice and practitioners appears to be one aspect of medicine in which Franks learned from the natives of Outremer, the natives in question were not necessarily Muslims.[vii] Scholars believe that as many as two-thirds of the medical practitioners in Egypt, for example, were Christians or Jews. In Syria, Christians, Jews, Samaritans and Zoroastrians all practised medicine. Many of the most famous crusader-era physicians, such as Abu Sulayman Dawud, who treated Baldwin IV for his leprosy, and Ibn Butlan, a leading medical theoretician and author of medical texts, were Orthodox Christians. When contemporary accounts refer to ‘Saracen’ or ‘Eastern’ doctors, they did not necessarily mean Muslim doctors. The bulk of the medical personnel employed by the Franks were Jews, Jacobites or other Orthodox Christians. In short, the apparent preference for ‘Muslim medicine’ attributed to the Franks by many modern writers is based on a misunderstanding of the primary sources.

Scholars have identified several specific examples demonstrating that the ‘exchange of medical knowledge was a two-way phenomenon’.[viii] Based on extensive research of both texts and archaeological finds, Osteoarchaeologist Piers D. Mitchell concludes that: ‘The evidence … does not support the widely held view that Frankish practitioners from Europe were ignorant and technically inferior to those who learnt their medicine in the East’.[ix]

What was happening in Outremer was that highly trained and dedicated medical practitioners of different religions — Orthodox and Latin Christians, Jews, Shia and Sunni Muslims — lived and worked closely with one another. Those without bigotry were willing and anxious to learn from their colleagues, regardless of religious background. They exchanged experiences, techniques, theory and practice. Under Frankish rule, Antioch blossomed into a major centre for the translation and writing of medical texts as well as the study and development of medical theory. Medicine in Outremer is a textbook example of intellectual exchange between different cultures and traditions, stimulating an advancement in knowledge for all.

---

[i] Rodney Stark, The Victory of Reason: How Christianity Led to Freedom, Capitalism, and Western Success (New York: Random House, 2005), 68.

[ii] Ronnie Ellenblum, Crusader Castles and Modern Histories (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007), 231-257, 299-301. 

[iii] Niall Christie, Muslims and Crusaders: Christianity’s Wars in the Middle East, 1095-1382, from the Islamic Sources (London: Routledge, 2014), 78.

[iv] See note 11, Christie, Muslims and Crusaders, 77-78.

[v] Piers D. Mitchell, Medicine in the Crusades: Warfare, Wounds and the Medieval Surgeon (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004), 216.

[vi] Susan B. Edington, ‘Oriental and Occidental Medicine in the Crusader States’, in The Crusades and the Near East: Cultural Histories, ed. Conor Kostick (London: Routledge, 2011), 189.

[vii] See note 14, Edington, ‘Oriental and Occidental Medicine in the Crusader States’, 205.

[viii] See note 13, Mitchell, Medicine in the Crusades, 217.

[ix] See note 13, Mitchell, Medicine in the Crusades, 239.

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

Order now!

Dr. Helena P. Schrader is also 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 Economy of the Crusader States: Trade

  Without doubt, trade was the main engine of economic prosperity in the crusader states. It is easy to conclude, as many historians have written, that geography dictated this development. That ignores the fact that before and after Frankish rule, the coastal ports were provincial backwaters with little role in the international carrying trade. In the pre- and post-crusades eras, Constantinople and Alexandria – not Acre, Tyre or Famagusta – were the principal trading hubs of the Eastern Mediterranean.

 

Under the Franks, in contrast, trade flourished on a scale unknown under the Arabs or the Turks. Three factors can best explain the blossoming of trade during the era of the crusades: (1) the overall economic revival of the region under the Franks, which included a growing permanent and transient population (pilgrims, crusaders), (2) the development of new industries (e.g., sugar, wine, religious tourism, glass, icons, books), and (3) Christian dominance of the waterways, making trade across the Mediterranean comparatively safe for Western merchants. Together, these factors sparked a commercial ‘revolution’ that peaked during the crusader era and subsided afterwards. Furthermore, while the principal beneficiaries of this commercial revolution were the crusader states, a revival of trade was felt across the Mediterranean. This was simply because ships of this period needed to make several stops for water and provisioning when travelling long distances.

Before looking more closely at the components of this trade, it is necessary to stress that the ‘safety’ of shipping in this era was relative rather than absolute. To be sure, from roughly 1123, when the Venetians destroyed a large Fatimid fleet until the rise of the Ottomans, the Mediterranean was dominated by Western naval power. In the twelfth century, the combination of Byzantine, Sicilian and Italian naval power protected Europe’s merchant shipping. In later centuries, the Italians (particularly Venice) and the Hospitallers (Knights of Rhodes and Malta) provided this protection. However, rivalries between the various maritime states also led to periodic naval warfare. Although diminished, Egyptian fleets were likewise active from time to time and proved capable of preying upon Christian merchant shipping. Furthermore, the Venetians were more likely to attack the ships of their Christian rivals (as they had attacked Zara and Constantinople on land) than Muslim shipping. Finally, pirates were never eliminated. While the Mediterranean was not ‘safe’ in the modern sense of the word, it had become sufficiently safe by the standards of the day — with ample profits — to enable trade to grow at exponential rates.

In turn, trade sparked significant advances in naval architecture and a reorientation of production across the region. At the end of the eleventh century, ships were small, single-decked, with at most two-masts, and had steering oars instead of central rudders. By the time Acre fell to the Mamluks, three-masted ships with multiple decks and central rudders were standard. Meanwhile, the economies of the Mediterranean basin shifted their focus away from pure domestic demand towards production for export. Within half a century, trade had become so significant and lucrative that economies began to specialise in sectors in which they held a comparative advantage.  

Yet while it is easy to see why trade between the Christian states on the littoral of the Mediterranean flourished after the establishment of the crusader states, the more surprising development was the dramatic expansion of trade with the Muslim world — and beyond. Exposure to the ‘luxuries of the orient’ sparked demand for those products in the West. Suddenly spices, pharmaceuticals (such as opium), gold, ivory, incense, silk, and other exotic products such as Chinese porcelain, could be purchased in Christian ports.

To be sure, the most adventurous Western merchants had not hesitated to do business in Arab ports, chiefly in Alexandria, before the establishment of the crusader states. Nevertheless, the sheer explosion in trade after the establishment of Frankish control of the ports of the Levant is itself evidence that most Western Christian merchants of this period were more comfortable trading through Christian ports. This was so much the case that Acre came to rival or possibly briefly eclipsed Alexandria as the most vital trading hub in the eastern Mediterranean. The preference of Christian merchants for Christian ports is understandable. Christian merchants enjoyed substantial privileges in the crusader states, and they felt protected in a way impossible in Muslim countries, where they were highly vulnerable to sudden shifts in policy. The crusader states provided merchants with a base in the Middle East, a foothold where they felt safe and from which they could cautiously explore and exploit opportunities further inland.

For Muslim merchants, trade with the West was lucrative enough to justify the comparatively low risk of venturing — usually only for a few days at a time — into Christian-controlled territory. Muslim trade was aided by Islamic teachings of the era that explicitly condoned trade with ‘the enemy’, provided ‘war materials’ were not among the items sold. Thus, Muslim merchants were prohibited from selling weapons, armour, slaves and horses to the Christian West but were otherwise free to trade.

Trade was profitable not only for those engaged in it but for the states through which it passed. Both Christians and Muslims taxed the goods exported, imported and transited through their territories. These taxes and duties were so crucial to the revenue of the rulers that Christian and Muslim alike became increasingly reluctant to disrupt trade through warfare. Indeed, hostilities were sometimes carried out without any impact on trade. The Iberian Muslim traveller, Ibn Jubayr, noted while travelling to Mecca via the Kingdom of Jerusalem in 1184:

‘Muslim and Christian … armies may meet … and yet Muslim and Christian travellers come and go … without interference. [Even while Saladin was attacking Kerak] the caravans still passed successively from Egypt to Damascus, going through the land of the Franks without impediment from them. In the same way, the Muslims continuously journeyed from Damascus to Acre [through Frankish territory unharmed]… . The soldiers … engage themselves in their war, while the civilians are at peace’.[i]

The trade routes that converged on the ports of the crusader states in the twelfth century reached all the way to China, India, Siberia and Ethiopia. Siberia sent ermine, marten, otter, beaver and wild cat hides to be worked and sold in the long ‘Street of the Furriers’ in Jerusalem. Ethiopia sent gold, ivory and incense. From India and China came opium, jade, pearls, porcelain, silk and spices such as pepper, cinnamon and ginger. In addition, ship inventories and customs documents attest to trade in perfume, musk, myrrh, balm, aloe, gum and senna. The Arabian Peninsula provided marble and enameled pottery, while Egypt was a source of cotton and flax. Syria sent carpets, textiles, cotton, and damascened copper and steel weapons — despite the religious prohibitions on selling weapons to the ‘enemy’. From Western Europe came timber, iron and scrap iron, silver, copper, amber and wool.

Notably, many of the products from the West, such as timber and iron, contributed to Muslim military capability. In consequence, there were sporadic attempts by various popes in the fourteenth century to prohibit the sale of these commodities to Muslim customers. But the greed of merchants always triumphed over their sense of solidarity with Christianity. Even more reprehensibly, the West was a major source of slaves for the slave- markets of the Muslim world. The Italian merchant states specialised in transshipping human beings from the pagan wilds of northeastern Europe and from Constantinople via the crusader states to the Muslim states. Many of those slaves would later become Mamluks and contribute to the downfall of Frankish rule.

In addition to the export items produced in the crusader states, the Frankish ports became large warehousing and transshipment centres for goods in transit between regions beyond the borders of the crusader states. Here goods were collected and stored, enabling a rationalization of transport. For example, a camel caravan from India might bring hundreds of different products in small quantities. These were then stored in Acre until sufficient quantities of each product had been collected to justify a shipment to the West. This reduced freight costs and improved profit margins.

While trade brought revenue to the political elites in both East and West who taxed the import, export, and transshipment of goods, as well as the ships that anchored and the caravans that passed through the gates of the cities, the merchants themselves made the largest profits. In the crusader states, trade was dominated by the Italian city-states. Much has been written about their role in the Latin East economy, yet their contribution remains highly controversial. Some historians, such as Joshua Prawer, argue that too many privileges and monopolies were granted to the Italian maritime powers, resulting in lost income to the crown and a stifling of a native or Frankish merchant class. Other historians, such as Jonathan Riley-Smith, counter that the networks, experience and overall competence of the established Italian mercantile states fostered a faster growth of trade than would otherwise have been possible. In this sense, he suggests their activities contributed substantially to the crusader states’ overall economic prosperity, therefore benefitting all.

There can be little doubt that whatever benefits accrued to the crusader states were a by-product rather than the goal of the Italians. Where commercial interests collided with crusader interests, the Italians routinely sacrificed the welfare of the crusades and the crusader states for their own profits and benefits. This was seen most vividly in the so-called Fourth Crusade and the ‘War’ of St. Sabas. Ultimately, regardless of the economic gains of the Italian mercantile presence in the Latin East, it had become a political liability by the mid-thirteenth century. Intensifying rivalries contributed to the growing fragmentation within Frankish society, seriously undermining the viability of the crusader states on the mainland of the Levant. In Cyprus, too, it was the Genoese and Venetians — not the Turks — that ultimately destroyed the Lusignan dynasty and, with it, the independent Latin kingdom. 

 

---

[i] Ibn Jubayr quoted in Yehoshua Frankel, ‘Muslim Responses to the Frankish Dominion of the Near East, 1098-1291’ in The Crusades and the Near East: Cultural Histories, ed. Conor Kostick (London: Routledge, 2011), 43.

 

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

Order now!

Dr. Helena P. Schrader is also 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 Economy of the Crusader States: Industry and Manufacturing

 The Crusader States possessed an advanced and sophisticated industrial sector. Agro-processing played an important role, while other industries grew out of the tourist trade and the region’s religious significance. Many of these industries — at least those we know about today — entailed the production of high-margin luxury products.

The revival of agriculture in the Levant led to a revival in agro-processing as well, and the most crucial agro-industry of the crusader kingdoms was a relatively new development: sugar. Prior to the arrival of the Franks, preparation of a primitive sweetener from sugar cane was conducted only at the household level. It was the Franks who transformed sugar production into an extensive and highly lucrative industry. The driving force behind this development may have been the importance of sugar as an ingredient for the medicines of this period. Both the Hospitallers and Teutonic Knights were active producing and refining sugar not for export but for use in their hospitals.

Sugar production was capital intensive. It required investment in both plantation-style production and refining. Highly sophisticated irrigation networks were needed that could both feed and starve specific fields successively to ensure a constant and regulated flow of ripe sugar to water-powered factories. Because sugar cannot be transported far after harvesting without losing its sweetness, the Franks built numerous factories close to the cane fields along the coast and in the Jordan Valley. When the Franks took control of Cyprus, they introduced large-scale sugar manufacturing to Cyprus. In both Jerusalem and Cyprus, the investment paid off handsomely. The West had an insatiable demand for this luxury product, and profit margins were high, making sugar one of the most profitable industries of the crusader states.

Another agro-based industry was wine. Wine production was widespread across the crusader states from Antioch and Latakia down the entire coast, in the region around Jerusalem, and Cyprus. Written records describe pruning methods facilitating the production of three crop yields from a single vine per year. Travellers to the Holy Land in this period attest to the high quality of the wines produced in the crusader states, particularly around Bethlehem. Cypriot wines were even more coveted.

Olive-oil manufacturing is another ancient Near East industry that continued and intensified under the Franks. Despite nearly ubiquitous oil production throughout the crusader states, most was consumed domestically rather than exported. This may be, in part, because oil was an essential ingredient of a more lucrative export, namely soap. Soap was known to have been produced in Tripoli, Nablus and Acre on the mainland and in Paphos in Cyprus. Soap is a major product of Nablus until this day.

Another cluster of agro-industries was based on livestock, namely tanning and the production of leather goods. Once tanned, the leather could be fashioned into a variety of products. These were popular because leather was one of the few comparatively flexible waterproof materials available in this era. For example, leather was used for footwear (shoes and boots), gloves, bags and purses, cloaks, saddles and other tack, but also for book covers and parchment.

Pottery has been produced across the Eastern Mediterranean since prehistoric times. In the Crusades era, high-quality pottery was produced in the Byzantine Empire and in Syria and Egypt. While higher quality wares were imported (Chinese porcelain has been recorded among the imports), the domestic pottery production in the mainland crusader states served everyday purposes and was a ‘consumable’ of comparatively low value. These objects were made of buff or red-coloured clay, and some were decorated with red or brown designs on a pale background. One popular variant of cooking pots and pans was glazed on the inside to prevent food from sticking, the medieval equivalent of Teflon. The Franks introduced pottery production to Cyprus, and from 1220 onwards, kilns operated in Paphos, Lapithos and near Famagusta. Over time, the quality of Cypriot pottery increased and developed distinctive characteristics. Cypriot pottery was glazed and adopted motifs and images drawn from the romances of the period.

Glass manufacturing is another ancient industry that continued under the Franks. Jewish sources indicate that much glass manufacturing was in Jewish hands, but there is no indication that the Jews had a monopoly on this lucrative business. Contemporary accounts testify to the high quality of crusader-era glass, which was extremely transparent.

Window glass was either round panes or plate glass and could be clear or stained. Fragments of dark and light purple, blue, turquoise, dark and light green, yellow and brown stained glass have been found. Colourless glass painted with decoration has also been recovered.

Glass was blown to create various vessels, including lamps, bottles, bowls, jars, cups and goblets. Some of the lamps were blue or greenish blue, and some had glass handles of a different colour. Bottles with long necks and a decorated, flaring rim appear to have been quite popular with the Franks, possibly for perfume. Cups, beakers and goblets, all for drinking wine, were also produced in significant numbers, some in light-blue and light-green glass. Beirut, on the other hand, was famous for its ruby-red glass.

Glass in this period might also be etched or cut to create decorations. Some vessels were inscribed with names, sayings, warnings or blessings. Other forms of decoration were ‘prunting’, small protrusions of glass applied to the exterior surface that presumably made it easier to hold — perhaps for chilled wines and sherbets which caused exterior water condensation in hot weather. More elaborate and expensive decoration consisted of enamel decorations on the finished glass object. The production of enameled glass was recorded in Acre. The most common decorations popular with the Franks were heraldic devices, flowers and plants, animals, birds and mythological beasts.

Textile production was both diverse and plentiful. Despite its fragility, thousands of textile fragments from the crusader era have been discovered, including silk, cotton, linen, felt and wool, as well as cloth woven from goat and camel hair. Many fragments are composed of hybrid fabrics, i.e., material woven together from a warp of one kind of yarn and weft of another, e.g., silk woven with wool, linen or cotton. Written sources also refer to taffeta, buckram and satin as well.

There is documentary evidence that some 4,000 silk weavers settled and worked in the County of Tripoli. Other hubs of silk weaving were Tyre, Gaza and Ascalon. Tyre was famous for its white silk. Beirut exported silk and cotton textiles, and cotton was grown around Acre, Tiberias and Ramla, presumably for use in local manufacturing. The dyeing industry was closely associated with the textile industry and was mainly in Jewish hands.

In Cyprus, sources note the production of samite and camlets for export to both east and west. Perhaps most intriguing of all are references to a hybrid fabric produced by weaving silk with strands of gold. This valuable luxury good was known as ‘siqlatin’, that is ‘silk-Latin’ — presumably because it was manufactured for Latin Christian (Frankish) customers or because it was produced in the Latin (crusader) states.

Except for iron mines near Beirut, the Kingdom of Jerusalem did not have significant metal deposits. Nevertheless, metalworking was an important domestic industry based on imports of raw material from outside the region. It ranged from essential, utilitarian tools to weapons and works of art. A unique but nevertheless low-grade form of metalwork common in the Kingdom of Jerusalem was the production of cheap amulets and trinkets as souvenirs for pilgrims and ampullae to collect holy water and holy oil as keepsakes.

On the other hand, examples of high-quality metalwork from the Kingdom of Jerusalem include brass bowls and plates with detailed engravings, as well as organ pipes and church bells found in Bethlehem. More common, however, were religious souvenirs for the wealthiest class of pilgrims: the nobility and princes of the church. These often took the form of reliquaries in gold and silver, often studded with jewels or embellished with enamel. The gold and silversmiths of the crusader states also produced processional crosses and bishop’s crosiers.

In the thirteenth century, Acre became a centre for producing and exporting high-quality composite crossbows. The design of these bows came from the Muslim East, but the Muslim ban against the export of weapons to non-Muslims severely inhibited direct exports to the Latin East, much less Western Europe. However, the necessary raw materials for these effective weapons (glue and horn) could be imported by the Latin East from Damascus, a major weapons manufacturing centre. This enabled Acre’s weapons workshops to develop a near-monopoly on the production of these weapons.

An export even more unique or representative of the Kingdoms of Jerusalem and Cyprus were icons. Icons had a long tradition in Orthodox Christianity, but it was not until the crusader era that they became fashionable with Latin patrons. The Franks of Outremer developed a taste for icons and contributed to the demand already generated by the local Orthodox population for these decorative and devotional objects. Icon artists mass-produced popular images – such as St. George and the dragon and the Virgin with Christ – for sale as finished products, as well as creating half-finished products that could be modified by the insertion of customised features such as a name or coat-of-arms. When commissioned, the local artists also created original works of art with distinctive features.

Another exceptional and decidedly ‘upmarket’ product of the crusader kingdoms was books — commercially produced books. Many visitors to the Holy Land purchased and returned with manuscripts manufactured in Jerusalem, Acre and, later, Cyprus. As with icons, historians believe popular texts were mass-produced; that is, fashionable works were copied and stored in anticipation of a sale.

Because the largest cost factor in books was illumination, mass-produced books had little or no illumination whatsoever. Such books were affordable objects for the middle classes, such as merchants, lawyers and simple knights of modest means. Only rarely did a wealthy secular or ecclesiastical patron commission a work with extensive illumination. While illuminated pieces were rare, they were more highly treasured and, therefore, better preserved, while the more common, mass-produced unillustrated copies have been mostly lost.

Finally, the crusader kingdoms had an important regional monopoly that extended across an array of economic sectors but was most pronounced in craft industries with a decorative component — e.g. pottery, glass, metal- or leather-working and icons or manuscripts. Namely, the production of objects with Christian motifs. These might be as simple as the popular fish motif on pottery plates and beakers or crosses on candlesticks and cutlery. Christian symbols could also be etched, sewn, drawn or branded onto objects designed for daily use, such as a belt buckle, scarf or bodice, saddle or pair of shoes. Yet, they could just as easily be worked into such luxury items as jewelry. Christians of this period were on the whole conventionally devout and unashamed to express it symbolically. Objects with Christian motifs were popular throughout this period with the entire Christian community of the Middle East. In the case of Christians still living under Muslim rule, Christian symbols were forbidden in public and could not be produced locally, making products from the Latin East that could be concealed even more coveted.

 

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

Order now!

Dr. Helena P. Schrader is also 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!