The battle lasted all day. The Christians were initially successful, forcing Taqi al-Din on the Muslim right into a strategic retreat which Saladin misread, so that he weakened the centre by sending additional troops to support him. The consequent Frankish attack caused considerable panic; the Muslim chroniclers describe how many fled – some, they claimed, as far as Damascus. Ibn al-Athir thought that this would have turned into a rout had the Christians thrown down Saladin's tents, as the rest of the army would have seen this as a signal of defeat. However, the Muslim left was untouched and, fearing isolation, the Christians in the centre began to stream back down the hill, only to be attacked by Saladin and both wings of his army, losing many men before they regained their trenches near Acre.46 This was an appallingly bloody battle. Among the high-profile victims were Gerard of Ridefort and Andrew of Brienne, both killed trying to protect the rearguard during the attempted retreat to the camp.47 Ibn Shaddad was told by one of those in charge of disposing of the bodies that he had counted 4,100 Christian dead thrown into the river from the left wing alone, excluding those killed on other parts of the battlefield.48
Saladin did not try to follow up this victory, but instead ordered withdrawal to al-Karruba, just over 7 miles to the south-east, ‘fearing the smells of the corpses and the unhealthy effects of the battlefield on the troops’. ‘Imad al-Din saw this as a serious mistake, prompted by the advice of self-interested emirs, for it gave the Christians time to excavate deeper trenches and to build up ramparts and palisades. These ditches, he said, extended right around Acre from one side to the other. ‘Their camp was transformed into a powerful and formidable town, rich in defensive works and inaccessible even to a bird on the wing.’ This view is confirmed by Ibn al-Athir: what they achieved, he says, was beyond expectation.49
Not surprisingly there was little appetite for fighting on either side after this; apart from sorties against the Christian trenches from Acre itself, there was little contact, since once the winter set in both sides were separated by a sea of mud.50 Ibn Shaddad says that the Muslim soldiers, who had been fifty days under arms, were exhausted, and their horses were upset and fretful. Saladin himself was ill and tired.51 Conditions in the Christian camp were worse. Saladin had ordered the bodies from the battle to be thrown into the river that the Franks used as drinking water, and the spread of disease was almost inevitable. ‘The earth’, says Ibn al-Athir, ‘became unwholesome from the stink of the corpses and the corruption of the air and the atmosphere.’52
The pattern established in the autumn of 1189 was repeated over the next eighteen months: long periods of attritional warfare punctuated by short and often vicious bouts of more intensive conflict. These circumstances completely changed the nature of the fighting. In the past year Saladin had been mobile and successful. He had suffered few losses and had extended his control as far north as the Amanus mountains. Christian resistance had, in general, been slight and mostly in isolated pockets, so they too had sustained relatively few casualties. In contrast, in 1189, both sides became entrenched in static positions, the fighting was uncompromising and the death toll consequently much higher. In such conditions it was hard to keep armies well fed and healthy, and to maintain morale. Nor was it easy to break this cycle. The city was so closely invested that it was extremely difficult for Saladin to supply it or even to keep in regular contact with the defenders, while the besiegers found themselves fighting on two fronts, making it impossible for them to give their entire attention to the attacks on the city. Although both sides were losing many men, neither could prevent the other from receiving reinforcements, as new crusaders came by sea and Saladin called on contingents from throughout the Islamic world to join the jihad.
Spring brought a renewal of hostilities. Both sides were so close they had quite good information about each other, doubtless acquired both by spies and by open observation. In late March or early April, the Christians tried to take advantage of Saladin's absence by attacking the Muslim left under al-Adil, hoping they could damage his forces by trapping them next to the boggy ground along the Na'aman River, where they would be unable to receive help from the rest of the army. The Muslims were forced to fight desperately and were nearly overcome, but managed to hold out until nightfall, obliging the Christians to retreat to their earthworks. According to Ambroise, there was an equally fierce battle at sea as Conrad of Montferrat had led fifty vessels, mostly Genoese and Pisan, against the Turkish fleet outside Acre, presumably timed to coincide with the land battle.53 Saladin had not anticipated any action and reacted by once more tightening his grip on the besiegers by moving back to Tell Kaisan, where he had been based the previous autumn, and by using fresh arrivals at the end of April to re-establish the long front along the hills overlooking the plain of Acre.54 Soon after, on 22 April, Saladin was relieved of another distraction when the defenders of Beaufort finally decided to give up, realising ‘that there was no-one to save them from what God had in store’. Reynald was released and went to Tyre, while the Muslims gained the money and supplies left by the garrison.55
As a result there was no further Christian attack until late July when, on the 25th, another assault was launched on al-Adil and the Egyptian troops, presumably based on intelligence that Saladin had sent some of his forces north to counter the expected arrival of the Germans. Again it failed: Ibn al-Athir says that the Franks were cut down on all sides and that after this they became less aggressive.56 ‘Imad al-Din composed thirty or forty bulletins describing the victory so that they could be sent out across the Islamic world. In the evening he and Ibn Shaddad rode out to inspect the bodies, lying mutilated and naked, including a woman killed in combat.57 There was no hiding the extent of this defeat, but the compiler of the Itinerarium blames it on the lesser members of the army, intent on plunder, who ignored the advice of the leaders, although he adds that the nobility did nothing to help them when they were being slaughtered by the Turks.58 No source, Christian or Muslim, puts the number of Christian dead at fewer than 5,000.59 The Muslims did not follow up their victory, for the next day they heard of the death of Frederick Barbarossa and were, says Ibn al-Athir, ‘too preoccupied by this good news’. Their triumph was short-lived, for, on 27 July, the Franks had their own celebration when Henry, count of Champagne, landed with large forces and considerable funds, ‘so that their spirits rose again and became confident’.60
Engagements like this, however, were exceptional. Most of the time the Christians concentrated upon the siege, deploying their increasing expertise in the use and construction of machines. On 27 April, having managed to fill in part of the fosse, the Franks brought up three massive siege towers, all taller than the walls. After an eight-day struggle, the defenders set them on fire with the help of a specialist artificer from Damascus, but the besiegers had come close to success. Ibn al-Athir thought that, before the conflagration, the city had been on the point of falling, and the Itinerarium even claims that the defenders had offered to surrender, only to be turned down by the overconfident Christians.61 In August, they used some of the funds brought by Henry of Champagne to build new trebuchets, one of which the defenders destroyed, although they were unable to reach the other two, which were screened by a low mound.62
For his part, Saladin responded with strenuous efforts to keep the city supplied, something that would not have been possible in the past, but was practical now that he controlled so many of the ports along the littoral. Although losses were often high, he achieved some successes: on 15 June, most of an Egyptian fleet reached the harbour, having survived a battle with the Christian ships trying to conduct a blockade, never easy for vessels dependent on wind conditions; and again in late August, a Muslim buss from Beirut managed to evade the enemy ships by pretending to be Christian.63 Although a single ship, Ibn Shaddad says that it was loaded with 400 ghiraras of wheat, as well as cheese, corn, onions and sheep, and that relief was vital since the garrison was by this time in serious need.64 Nevertheless, the margins for survival remained
narrow. By the middle of September, they were once more facing a crisis, saved this time by the arrival of three busses from Egypt.65 The Christian reaction to that was to attempt to set fire to the Tower of the Flies, but this failed when one ship caught fire and another capsized.66
Early in October, Frederick of Swabia and the remaining German forces finally arrived from Tyre, having travelled down the coast to Tripoli and taken ships from there. ‘Imad al-Din says that, between Latakia and Jabala, they had lost sixty to seventy horses from their cavalry force, which was already severely weakened. Had Frederick Barbarossa survived with most of his army intact, this might have proved the decisive moment in the crusade, for the French and English kings did not appear until April and June the next year. As it was, ‘Imad al-Din did not think Frederick of Swabia was more dangerous than any ordinary count.67 Frederick, though, believed he could break the stalemate and, against advice, attacked Saladin's advance guard on Tell al-'Ayadiya, only to be beaten back.
Much more threatening to the Muslims was the construction of a huge wheeled battering ram, metal-tipped and propelled by a large number of soldiers protected by iron sheets. The initiative for this seems to have come from Thierry of Montfaucon, archbishop of Besançon. On 15 October, the ram was the centrepiece of a general attack, but it was again repelled. The ram was set on fire and, still ablaze, pulled into the city, while large numbers of men who had taken up position in the fosse in expectation of a breach in the walls were mown down by crossbowmen above.68 Two days later the Christians sent another ship to try to destroy the Tower of the Flies, but again it was fired by the defenders.69
These new failures had a serious effect on Christian morale. ‘They [the Germans],’ says Ibn Shaddad, ‘were overwhelmed with grievous disappointment and a general dejection fell upon them.’ On 16 September, a large party of English crusaders had arrived at Tyre, including Baldwin of Ford, archbishop of Canterbury, Hubert Walter, bishop of Salisbury, and Ranulf Glanville, the former justiciar of England.70 On 21 October, the archbishop moved to the camp at Acre and was shocked by what he found. Baldwin's chaplain sent a very depressing letter to the convent at Canterbury. ‘The army is given over to shameful activity. It is with sorrow and sighs that I tell you that it indulges in idleness and vice rather than in virtue. The Lord is not in the camp: there is none that doeth good. The princes envy one another and jockey for position. The lesser men are in want and find no support. In the camp there is no chastity, sobriety, faith, love or charity, and, as God is my witness, I should not have believed it had I not seen it.’71 According to the Itinerarium, Baldwin thought that ‘the army had lost all discipline, concentrating on taverns, prostitutes and games of dice’.72 While some allowance needs to be made for ecclesiastical moralising, there seems to have been much truth in what he was saying. ‘Imad al-Din, for example, has a long, undated passage describing the arrival of a ship carrying 300 prostitutes, probably in the previous autumn.73
This dip in morale was not, however, surprising. The siege had begun well over a year ago, in late August 1189, and the army had been reinforced by a stream of crusaders ever since, while Guy's small encampment on Tell al-Fukhkhar had developed into a great semicircle of trenches around the city. Yet no progress had been made. A high death rate in the fighting had been exacerbated by disease and famine. ‘In their terrible distress,’ writes the author of the Itinerarium, ‘their limbs swelled up and their whole body was swollen with liquid as if they had dropsy. The violence of the disease was such that some people's teeth fell out, torn away completely at the roots.’74 When Baldwin's chaplain wrote to the convent, Ranulf Glanville was already dead, as were Queen Sibylla and her two young daughters. By this time Patriarch Eraclius was ill and Baldwin had become the effective spiritual head of the crusaders. On 11 November, although an elderly man, he was fit enough to absolve the army before accompanying it in an attack against Saladin's forces in the hills, but by the 19th he too was dead.75 On 20 January the following year, Frederick of Swabia died, followed soon after by Theobald, count of Blois.76
The attack for which Baldwin gave absolution began on Monday, 12 November, when the Christians attempted to overcome Saladin's forces on Tell al-'Ayadiya in an action partly motivated by the situation prevailing in the trenches. Ibn Shaddad says that there had been many desertions among the Franks, who ‘came to give themselves into our hands because of their intense hunger’, and, apparently as a consequence, that ‘the rest made up their minds to move against us’. But the Muslims proved elusive and retreated south to Tell Kaisan. Three days of manoeuvres followed, as the Franks moved down the Na'aman River, intending, it seems, to march to Haifa, where they had heard there was food. On the 15th they were hit by a determined Muslim attack at Recordane, forcing them to retreat, and on Thursday, Frederick of Swabia, who had been keeping his forces in reserve, retaliated. Despite ‘Imad al-Din's claim that the Christians had been humiliated, neither side achieved an unambiguous victory, but the fighting had been fierce and the losses heavy, and Imad was probably correct when he asserted that this deterred the Franks from emerging again.77 As the Franks had taken four days of supplies but had gained nothing, this foray failed to alleviate the famine in the camp.
The Muslims were aware of what was happening. Ibn Shaddad knew that conditions in the Christian camp were deteriorating. ‘After winter had come with its incessant rainfall and change of airs, the plain became very unhealthy and, as a result, there was great mortality amongst the enemy. In addition to that there were the severe shortages and the fact that the sea was closed to them, from which supplies had been reaching them from every quarter. Daily, from 100 to 200 were dying, according to reports, and some said more than that.’78 According to Ambroise's informants, the famine had been exacerbated by Conrad of Montferrat for his own political ends, for when supplies did arrive at Tyre, he had prevented them from reaching the army, causing acute distress among the poorer people. Many existed on carob beans, normally used for animal feed, for little else was available.79
Rivalries among the leaders reduced the effectiveness of the army still further, as Baldwin's chaplain had also noted. New contingents of crusaders provided welcome reinforcements, but inevitably their arrival meant that Guy of Lusignan's control of the army had begun to slip away. James of Avesnes, Ludwig of Thuringia, Henry of Champagne and Frederick of Swabia had at various times all seen themselves as commanders, while the struggle between Guy and Conrad of Montferrat for the kingship remained unresolved.80 An apparent reconciliation between them at Easter 1190 did not last; indeed, the author of the Itinerarium alleges that Conrad was only pretending to be friendly, for he was still plotting to seize the kingdom.81 In the autumn of 1190, Sibylla's death presented Conrad with the opportunity to argue that Guy no longer had any legitimacy, and he now set his sights on marrying Isabella, Sibylla's half-sister, despite the fact that she had been married to Humphrey of Toron since 1183 and the widespread belief that he himself already had two living wives.82
The sources closest to events – the Old French continuations, Ambroise and the Itinerarium – are all hostile to Conrad, so it is difficult to obtain a balanced view of events. Conrad's defence of Tyre was much admired by many in the West: the troubadours, for example, contrasted this activity with the long wait for the arrival of the kings.83 Nevertheless, the story that the chroniclers tell carries conviction: that Conrad bribed the princes in the army to agree to the marriage, that Maria Comnena, supported by Reynald of Sidon, Pagan of Haifa and Balian of Ibelin, her husband, browbeat her daughter into leaving Humphrey, and that Ubaldo of Pisa, the papal legate, and Philip of Dreux, bishop of Beauvais, accepted and promoted the match.84 Only Baldwin of Canterbury stood out against it and his death on 19 November removed the last obstacle.
Conrad therefore married Isabella on 24 November.85 Both Ambroise and the author of the Itinerarium take satisfaction from a Muslim attack upon some of the marriage guests, who, less than sober, were ambushed by the Turks. One of them, G
uy of Senlis, butler of France, who had challenged Humphrey to single combat during the wrangles that led up to the marriage, was captured and never heard of again. Ambroise says that twenty of the wedding guests were captured or killed and that ‘they were well-paid for the marriage’.86 There is no mistaking the bitterness these events caused. For Maria Comnena and her supporters, it was revenge for Guy and Sibylla's coup of 1186, but the Itinerarium describes Maria as ‘steeped in Greek filth from the cradle’ and as having a husband, Balian of Ibelin, ‘whose morals matched her own’.87 Nor was this a dispute exclusive to the ruling classes, for it impinged on the whole army. Conrad had gathered support by offering food supplies, a promise manifestly not kept during the winter famine that followed.
By the spring of 1191, the need for fresh men and resources from the monarchies of England and France had become acute. Hubert Walter, writing to Richard FitzNeal, bishop of London, at about the beginning of the year, thought that the army was actually diminishing in size, as men abandoned the siege, ‘burdened beyond measure by sickness in body, or by labour and expense’. As his later record as archbishop of Canterbury and justiciar and chancellor of England shows, Hubert was a man of keen intellect and sober judgement. He estimated at this time that, unless the two kings arrived by Easter, the money would run out and ‘the hope of worldly consolation will die away’.88 Meanwhile, Saladin had taken advantage of the winter to bring in fresh forces by sea, although this was not an unmitigated success, for the replacements were far fewer than the original garrison, a situation that Ibn al-Athir ascribes to the negligence of Saladin's subordinates.89
Certainly the delays had seemed interminable: Richard, duke of Aquitaine, had taken the Cross in November 1187 and Kings Henry and Philip in the following January. However, Richard had not lost his determination to go on crusade and his father's death relieved him of the worry that he was about to be disinherited. On 3 September 1189, he was crowned king of England at Westminster Abbey, leaving him master of his own policies with no need to take any farther cognisance of his reluctant father. Richard was fully aware that he would stand little chance against the type of coalitions that Saladin was capable of putting together unless he could mobilise sufficient resources. According to Roger of Howden, there were about 100,000 marks in the English treasury.90 Further large sums were then extracted from Henry's leading administrators, all of whom had enriched themselves while in office. Ranulf Glanville had been Henry's chief justiciar since 1180 and more recently sheriff of Yorkshire and Westmorland, but despite a fine of 15,000 pounds of silver he could still afford to fulfil a crusade vow taken in 1185.91 Richard also effected a major redistribution of the offices of sheriff, all of whom had to make proffers for their positions, except for the counties he granted to John, his brother.92 Even William Longchamp, whom Richard appointed to run the country in his absence, suffered confiscations, as well as paying £3,000 sterling for the office of chancellor.93
The Crusader States Page 47
