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

Monday, July 25, 2022

Survival and Defiance

 Jerusalem had fallen. The king and the bulk of his barons were in captivity. Tens of thousands of Christians had been enslaved and only one city in the former Kingdom of Jerusalem, Tyre, remained in Frankish hands. The County of Tripoli and the Principality of Antioch also still held out. But for how long? The loss of Jerusalem had killed a pope and already set in motion a new crusade, but it would take a year or more for the armies of the West to reach the Levant. In the meantime, the surviving Franks and their native allies had to contrive to survive. And they did.


Saladin’s focus turned to the last city in the former Kingdom of Jerusalem still in Frankish hands: Tyre. The survivors of Hattin, as well as Ibelin with what knights had survived the siege of Jerusalem, were concentrated here under the command of the dynamic Conrad de Montferrat. Montferrat, a brother of Queen Sibylla’s first husband, had arrived off Acre shortly after it surrendered to Saladin. Although totally oblivious of the catastrophe that had befallen the kingdom, he learned of it from the pilot that met his ship. Rather than landing in Arab-held Acre, he sailed for Tyre. Here he found the garrison demoralized and contemplating surrender. He rallied the citizens and defied Saladin, who moved on to easier pickings, but after the surrender of Jerusalem in October 1187, Saladin returned and laid siege to Tyre.

The city was located on an island connected to the mainland by a narrow causeway on which were three, successively higher walls. It was unassailable by sea due to the rocks in the surrounding waters. Despite a number of attempts to force surrender, Tyre held. By the end of December, Saladin’s army had been in the field eight months. Sated with conquests and loot but cold, wet and homesick, it started to disintegrate. After a ruse resulted in the loss of several Saracen ships, Saladin withdrew, leaving Tyre in Frankish hands at the start of 1188.

At the start of the next campaign season, Saladin turned his attention to the two remaining crusader states: Tripoli and Antioch. Tripoli was saved by the timely arrival a fleet of sixty Sicilian ships loaded with crusaders. Saladin had no desire to tangle with such a large, fresh and motivated force and continued up the coast. He destroyed Tortosa 3 July 1188, and subsequently took Valania, Jabala, Latakia, and the castles of Saone, Darbsak and Baghras. Panicked, Prince Bohemond offered Saladin an eight-month truce including a clause to surrender Antioch if no assistance arrived within that time. Saladin, who had no desire to waste time and troops on besieging a city as formidable as Antioch, agreed.

If Saladin thought the Franks were beaten, however, he was wrong. On 3 June 1189, Frankish troops from Tyre took to the field in an attempt to re-take Sidon. If successful, the operation would have extended Frankish control in the direction of the County of Tripoli and enabled Sidon to be used as a base for the re-capture of the more important port of Beirut. Regaining control of Sidon and Beirut would have re-established continuous Frankish control of the coastline of the northern Levant. In addition, firm Frankish control of the region between Tyre and Sidon would have enabled cultivation of the coastal plain. This was important in order to support the population of Tyre, which was flooded with refugees from the rest of the kingdom. Within ten days, however, it was evident that the balance of forces still overwhelmingly favored the Saracens, and the Franks withdrew to Tyre. Although not a success, the incident is poignant evidence of the fighting spirit of the men of Outremer.

Meanwhile, Saladin had released Guy de Lusignan after the latter swore never to take up arms against Muslims again and promised to go ‘across the sea.’ Instead of keeping his word, Lusignan went to Antioch and in the summer of 1189 returned to his lost kingdom with a force of perhaps seven hundred knights and nine thousand foot-soldiers. After being refused admittance to Tyre by Conrad de Montferrat, who argued Guy had lost his crown when he lost his kingdom, Guy’s small army continued down the coast to lay siege to Acre.

This important port had once been the economic heart of the kingdom, but the Christian population had been expelled after surrendering to Saladin in July 1187. It was now heavily garrisoned with Egyptian troops fiercely loyal to Saladin. Because Acre was located deep inside Saracen held territory, a Frankish siege of Acre required continuous re-provisioning and reinforcements by sea. Furthermore, Saladin quickly brought up troops to besiege the besiegers.

The ensuing siege lasted two full years and cost tens of thousands of Christian lives. According to the Itinerarium Peregrinorum et Gesta Regis Ricardi, one of the most important contemporary accounts, the siege cost Christendom the Patriarch of Jerusalem, six archbishops, twelve bishops, forty counts, and five hundred barons. While there are no reliable sources for the number of commoners lost, one contemporary observer claimed 75% of the participants died, another that ‘more than half’ never went home. In either case, tens of thousands of ordinary people -- fighting men, clergy and camp followers -- were lost in the siege of Acre.

Furthermore, although both sides repeatedly launched assaults against the other, all were ultimately defeated at high cost. Between these major battles, small scale skirmishing occurred on an almost daily basis, causing continuous attrition. Ultimately, however, disease, deprivation, and unsanitary conditions accounted for the lion’s share of the casualties. In short, the history of the Siege of Acre is a grim tale of stalemate reminiscent of the horrible trench warfare of WWI and ultimately just as senseless. Except for possibly distracting Saladin from renewed assaults on Tyre, Tripoli and Antioch, it served no military purpose.

The siege also ended the reign and life of Queen Sibylla. She died of an unnamed illness along with her two surviving children. Since Guy de Lusignan ruled only by right of his wife, Sibylla’s death destroyed the last shreds of Guy’s legitimacy. The barons of Jerusalem promptly recognized Sibylla’s sister Isabella as the rightful heir to the throne. Isabella, however, was still married to the man who had betrayed them in 1186: Humphrey de Toron. Under no circumstances were the surviving barons prepared to do homage to Humphrey de Toron. Furthermore, having been tricked once by Sibylla’s promises to divorce and remarry, the lords of Outremer insisted on Isabella divorcing Humphrey and marrying their candidate, Conrad de Montferrat, before they would do homage.

Despite the outraged polemics and histrionic language of some of the chronicles, which insist on speaking of an ‘abduction’ worse than that of Helen of Troy, the facts are remarkably straight forward and undisputed. In mid-November 1190, Isabella was removed from the tent she shared with Humphrey de Toron at the siege camp of Acre against her will. She was not, however, taken and raped by Conrad. Instead, she was sequestered and protected by the senior French cleric, the Bishop of Beauvais, while a church court was convened to rule on the validity of her marriage to Humphrey. The case hinged on the important theological principle of consent. Humphrey claimed that Isabella had consented to the marriage, but when challenged by a witness to the wedding he ‘said nothing’ and backed down. It was further proved that Isabella was only eleven at the time of her marriage to Humphrey, making her below the legal age for consent. This meant whether she had consented as a child or not, the marriage was invalid. The court ruled exactly this and the marriage was dissolved. Isabella agreed to marry Conrad de Montferrat and following the wedding ceremony the barons of Jerusalem did homage to her as their queen.

Chronicles hostile to Montferrat allege rampant corruption, vile motives on the part of the barons and Isabella’s mother, and dismiss eighteen-year-old Isabella because ‘a woman’s opinion changes very easily’ and girls are ‘easily taught to do what is morally wrong.’[i] Modern historians and novelists are apt to focus on the melodrama of a young woman dragged from the bed of ‘the man she loved’ in order to marry a man picked by others. Either way, the allegations of base motives are unfounded in fact and the portrayal of Isabella is one of a helpless pawn. In fact, Isabella was given a clear and simple choice: she could re-marry Humphrey or she could have the crown of Jerusalem. Isabella chose the crown — despite the fact that her kingdom consisted of exactly one city and a miserable and beleaguered siege camp on the day she made her choice.


[i] Itinerarium, chpt. 63, 124.

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

Dr. Helena P. Schrader is also the author of six books set in the Holy Land in the Era of the Crusades. The situation in the Holy Land after the fall of Jerusalem is the subject of Envoy of Jerusalem, which also describes the Third Crusade.


           Buy Now!                                                  Buy Now!                                                    Buy Now!

          Buy Now!                                               Buy Now!                                                      Buy Now!

Monday, July 18, 2022

Siege and Surrender of Jerusalem 1187

 Returning to a chronological review of the history of the crusader states, I look today at the siege and surrender of Jerusalem following the Christian defeat at the Battle of Hattin.


 In the aftermath of Hattin, Jerusalem was flooded with refugees from the surrounding countryside and other parts of the kingdom. As many as 60,000 people are believed to have taken refuge there in the weeks following Hattin, bringing the total population to approximately 80,000. Accounts speak of people having to camp in the streets because there were no available lodgings. According to eye-witness accounts, there were 50 women and children for every man, and only two knights in the entire city.

While still outside Ascalon, Saladin asked Jerusalem to send a delegation to discuss surrender. Significantly, this delegation was composed of ‘burgesses’ and represented the people of Jerusalem, not the government or nobles. Noting that ‘Jerusalem was the house of God’, Saladin offered extremely generous terms: if no reinforcements arrived by Pentecost of the following year, the burgesses were to surrender the city in exchange for being allowed to depart with all their movable goods. The burgesses rejected these terms saying: ‘they would never surrender that city where God had shed His blood for them’.[i] Infuriated by their intransigence, Saladin vowed to initiate a bloodbath when he took the city.

Among those in the city were Queen Sibylla and the Dowager Queen Maria Comnena. The latter was Balian d’Ibelin’s wife, and the baron obtained a safe-conduct from Saladin to escort her and their four young children out of the city. The terms of the safe-conduct required him go unarmed and remain only a single night. On his arrival, however, Ibelin was besieged by the population, who begged him to remain in the city to organize the defense. The Patriarch absolved Ibelin of his oath to Saladin, and Ibelin informed the sultan of his situation. Saladin had no interest in a Byzantine princess being caught up in what promised to be a bitter siege and sent some of his Mamluks to escort Maria Comnena from Jerusalem to Frankish held Tripoli. Saladin also allowed Queen Sibylla to join her captive husband at Nablus. With no thought for her kingdom, her subjects or her God, Sibylla rushed to her husband’s side, putting the ruling queen of Jerusalem voluntarily in Saracen hands. This is perhaps the best evidence that her marriage to Guy was one of passion not political convenience.  

On 20 September 1187, Saladin’s army encamped around Jerusalem. For the next four days, the fighting was so bitter that the Arab chronicler Imad ad-Din fabricated ‘70,000 Frankish troops, both swordsmen and archers’[ii] to justify the failure of Saladin’s forces to overwhelm the defenders. The more reliable historian Ibn al-Athir makes no claims about the number of defenders but acknowledges: ‘Then began the fiercest struggle imaginable; each side looked on the fight as an absolute religious obligation.’[iii] He also reports that the Frankish knights made sorties in which they inflicted serious casualties. Another account claims that at least one such sortie drove the attackers all the way back to their camp.

On 25 September, Saladin redeployed his army against the northwest corner of the city. He employed sappers to undermine the walls, protecting them with artillery and cavalry so they could work unhindered. On 29 September a segment of the wall roughly 30 meters long collapsed. At this point the city was no longer defensible, although one last sortie out of the Golden Gate appears to have been aimed at capturing or killing Saladin, who was camped on the Mount of Olives. This sortie was rapidly driven back into the city.

On the following day, Ibelin sought terms. Saladin dismissed the proposal out of hand; one did not surrender a city already held. Ibelin countered that if he and his men had no hope of surrender, they would kill all the Muslim prisoners, the women and children, and then destroy the Holy Sites before sallying forth to seek a martyr’s death. Saladin was undoubtedly moved by the threat to the Holy Sites, which he had tried to protect by offering generous terms before the start of the siege.  He agreed to consult with his emirs about the offer, and after lengthy negotiations Ibelin secured a surrender. This gave those trapped in the city forty days to raise a ransom with which to buy their release.

The ransom was set at ten dinars per man, five per woman, and two per child. While this was ‘peanuts’ to the wealthy, for the poor and the masses of refugees who had already lost everything, such a ransom was simply impossible. Wages in this period ranged from between two and thirty-eight dinar per year.[iv] How was a widow with several children supposed to find nine, eleven or thirteen dinar? Ibelin had recognized the problem immediately and haggling over a lump-sum payment for the poor had drawn out the negotiations. Ibelin ultimately negotiated Saladin down from a demand of 100,000 dinar for the entire population to a lump sum of 30,000 dinar for 8,000 paupers, while the rest paid their own ransoms.

Ibelin had miscalculated. When the forty days were up, there were still roughly 24,000 inhabitants unable to make the payment. Only 8,000 were covered by the 30,000 dinars Ibelin had promised — funds paid, incidentally, by the Knights Hospitaller from money deposited with them by Henry II of England. This left 16,000 paupers with no ransom. Ibelin and the Patriarch offered to stand surety, while an effort was made to raise the necessary ransoms from abroad. Saladin turned them down, although as a gift he released one thousand poor without a ransom. Nevertheless, roughly 15,000 Christians could not be ransomed and went into slavery. Their fate is best described by Imad ad-Din in the following chilling passage:


Women and children…were quickly divided up among us, bringing a smile to Muslim faces at their lamentations. How many well-guarded women were profaned, how many queens were ruled, and miserly women forced to yield themselves, and women who had been kept hidden stripped of their modesty, and serious women made ridiculous, and women kept private now set in public, and free women occupied, and precious ones used for hard work, and pretty things put to the test, and virgins dishonoured and proud women deflowered…and  untamed ones tamed, and happy ones made to weep![v]

[i] The Old French Continuation of William of Tyre. Chpt. 49, 55.

[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] 154.

[iii] Ibn al-Athir, The Perfect History. Translated by Francesco Gabrieli in Arab Historians of the Crusades. [Berkeley: University of California Press, 1957] 140.

[iv] These figures are very rough and involve multiple assumptions about exchange rates. Nevertheless, they represent the best attempt to estimate wages and cost of living in the Latin East undertaken by leading crusades archaeologist Professor Adrian Boas of the Hebrew University in Jerusalem. See: Boas, Adrian. Domestic Settings: Sources on Domestic Architecture and Day-to-Day Activities in the Crusader States [Leiden: Brill, 2010] 228.

[v] Imad ad-Din, 163.

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

Dr. Helena P. Schrader is also the author of six books set in the Holy Land in the Era of the Crusades. The siege of Jerusalem is described in detail in Defender of Jerusalem.


           Buy Now!                                                  Buy Now!                                                    Buy Now!

          Buy Now!                                               Buy Now!                                                      Buy Now!