The Crusades- Islamic Perspectives

by Carole Hillenbrand

  This inscription praises Baybars’ efforts in the jihad: ‘He made efforts and struggled (jahada) until he exchanged unbelief for faith, church bell for the call to prayer, and the Gospel for the Qur’an.’116 This inscription rejoices in Baybars’ recapture of Safad which Ibn al-Furat graphically describes as ‘an obstruction in the throat of Syria and a blockage in the chest of Islam’.117

  The practice of recording the glorious achievements of the Mamluk sultans in monumental inscriptions continued apace throughout their rule. In the first fifty years of the dynasty the emphasis on jihad and related themes is marked. A revealing example of such Mamluk titulature is an inscription on the citadel of Aleppo dated 691/1292 in the name of Khalil b. Qalawun, who is called:

  tamer of the worshippers of crosses, the Alexander of the age,… the ruler of the armies of the Franks, the Armenians and the Tartars, the destroyer of Acre and the coastal regions, the reviver of the illustrious ‘Abbasid state.118

  This is a more elaborate and ambitious set of titles than ever Nur al-Din had enjoyed in an earlier period. The inscription encapsulates the triumphant Mamluk achievement against the Franks. It specifically highlights the Franks in the pejorative term ‘worshippers of crosses’ (which is unusual phrasing on a monument) and refers clearly to the Mamluk policy of razing the Levantine ports to the ground in the phrase ‘the destroyer of Acre and the coastal regions’. The inscription then places the Mamluk realm firmly under the banner of Sunni Islam with the reminder that it is they who have revived the fortunes of the ‘Abbasid caliphate.

  Quoting an earlier work by al-’Umari (d. 749/1349), the chancellery manual of al-Qalqashandi (d. 821/1418), in which scribes are told of appropriate modes of address, lists among the noble titles which should be given to the Mamluk sultan:

  the warrior of jihad, the one who dwells in a ribat, the defender of the frontier,… the sultan of Islam and the Muslims, the reviver of justice in the two worlds, the one who dispenses equity to those who have been wronged by wrongdoers,… the sultan of the Arabs and Persians and Turks … the Alexander of the age … the prince of the two seas,… the servant of the two noble sanctuaries … the one who is close to the Commander of the Faithful.119

  These titles are very similar indeed to those attributed to Baybars on the mausoleum of Khalid b. al-Walid. Obviously, by the time of al-’Umari they were already enshrined in government practice as the official titles of the Mamluk sultan to be used on chancellery documents. It was these grandiloquent protocols, strings of titles emphasising again and again the religious credentials of the sultan, which were transferred on to selected monuments in inscriptions carved at key moments of Mamluk victory against the Franks, Armenians or Mongols. No doubt it was the government clerks who gave the precise instructions to the engravers as to what should be carved on the monuments.

  After the conquest of Arsuf in 663/1265, Baybars distributed decrees to his commanders authorising them to own some of the conquered lands. Each commander was issued with a certificate of ownership, the text of which is quoted by the chronicler Ibn al-Furat. It is an example of panegyrical chancellery prose in praise of Baybars’ achievements so far. Baybars’ reign, according to these texts, compares most favourably to that of the Ayyubid dynasty:

  The best favour is that which follows despair, coming after a period when kings have been feeble and the people negligent. How excellent a favour it was to the religion of Mohammad which brought it unity, opening the doors to conquest when the two enemies, Frank and Tartar, were routed.120

  The document rises to a climax in praise of Baybars, and describes him in the following terms:

  All this has been achieved by one appointed by God, to whom He gave a drawn sword with which he struck. The winds of divine aid were made to serve him and bore up his stirrup as he travelled to the home of Victory, journeying day and night. After seeing him in her court, Fortune made him King: extolling him, she exclaimed: ‘This is no mortal’.121

  Figure 4.26 Mosque of Baybars, south-west porch, 665–7/1266–9, Cairo, Egypt

  Thus we see Baybars’ court scribes depicting him as the chosen one of God, the conqueror of Mongol and Frank, the munificent sultan who shares his conquered territories with those who have helped him towards his God-ordained victories.

  Al-Maqrizi (d. 845/1442) quotes from the diploma written by the chief secretary of the chancellery, Ibn Lukman, solemnising the ceremony of the investiture of Baybars as sultan by the puppet caliph whom Baybars himself had installed. In the course of this high-flown text, proclaimed before his assembled courtiers, Baybars is described as having shown unparalleled zeal in the defence of religion (plates 4.28, 4.29 and figures 4.26, 4.27).122 Turning specifically to the jihad, Ibn Lukman declares:

  As regards Holy War, you have distinguished yourself by brilliant deeds …Through you God has protected the ramparts of Islam and has preserved them from the profanations of the enemy; your courage has maintained for the Muslims the integrity of their empire.123

  Plate 4.28 Mosque of Baybars, detail of portal, 665–7/1266–9, Cairo, Egypt

  (Creswell Photographic Archive, Ashmolean Museum, Oxford, neg. C. 2586)

  Baybars and Jihad: The Evidence of the Chroniclers

  Baybars’ highly successful career is recorded by a number of contemporary and near-contemporary biographers. Ibn ‘Abd al-Zahir, who states that he actually accompanied the Sultan on his various campaigns,124 (d. 692/1292) presents Baybars as the spiritual heir of the last Ayyubid sultan (although Baybars was a first-generation convert to Islam, recruited from the Kipchak Turks) and his acts of murder and usurpation are glossed over.125 The warrior from the steppes with blood on his hands is transformed by the pen of his panegyrist into the ideal mujahid, repelling the pagan Mongols and continuing with distinction the jihad against the Franks: ‘He prosecuted the jihad with the utmost zeal and fought against the unbelievers, for which God rewarded him.’126

  Plate 4.29 Mosque of Baybars, portal, 665–7/1266–9, Cairo, Egypt

  (Creswell Photographic Archive, Ashmolean Museum, Oxford, neg. C. 4503)

  Figure 4.27 Mosque of Baybars, plan and perspectival view, 665–7/1266–9, Cairo, Egypt

  Ibn ‘Abd al-Zahir made strenuous attempts to portray his master as a worthy successor to Saladin: indeed, in his view, Baybars outdid Saladin. As Holt points out in his book on the Crusades, Baybars was a better soldier than Saladin and more single-minded in his military aims.127 Thus there was a good basis on which to build up the image of Baybars as an ideal mujahid. The nephew of Ibn ‘Abd al-Zahir, Shafi‘ b. ‘Ali al-‘Asqalani (d. 730/1330), wrote a somewhat revisionist biography of Baybars after the deaths of both the sultan and his own uncle.128 Nevertheless, as Holt remarks, the Baybars of Shafi‘ is still an impressive figure with great achievements.129 Another contemporary biographer of Baybars, Ibn Shaddad (d. 684/1285), also sees Baybars as the real hero of the Islamic reconquest of Frankish lands.130

  As early as 663/1265 Shafi‘ b. ‘Ali proclaims that his master Baybars will fight ‘until no more Franks remain on the surface of the earth’.131 This war is a reconquest depicted as ‘a lost ewe which is brought back to the flock of Islam’.132 Baybars is depicted as a puritanical and uncompromising Muslim general. The texts mention that he imposed the strictest discipline on his troops. According to Ibn al-Furat, ‘The army brought no wine in its train nor were there any lewd practices: there were only virtuous women who brought the soldiers water to drink in the middle of the fighting’.133 At the siege of Safad in 664/1265–6 Baybars went so far as to proclaim that anyone in the army who brought in and drank wine would be hanged.134

  Through the panegyrics of his contemporary chroniclers and the works of later medieval historians Baybars emerges as a truly formidable figure, full of hatred towards those who dared to attack the House of Islam, uncompromisingly severe on malefactors, razing monuments to the ground with a barely suppressed zeal and anger of a kind seldom shown by Saladin (except in the latter’s treatment o
f Reynald of Chatillon). As Thorau points out, Baybars was an exceptional military commander who managed to convey to his subordinates ‘a sense of his omnipresence’.135 Baybars’ army was obviously controlled by a reign of terror and an iron discipline reminiscent of the extraordinary cohesion of the Mongol troops under Genghis Khan. Baybars would on occasion move around his territories incognito to pick up information on the conduct of his officials.136 The Muslim world had indeed found in Baybars a worthy leader to protect it against all comers.

  The Attitude to Jihad amongst the Military and Religious Classes in the Early Mamluk Period

  The public attitude to jihad displayed by the Mamluk sultans is also mirrored in the enthusiasm for it shown by the Mamluk military commanders who fought under them. Baybars al-Mansuri (d. 725/1325), a well-known chronicler who served as governor of Kerak for a while and was an active participant in military campaigns, declares: ‘My soul had a strong desire for jihad, a desire for it like the earth thirsts for delivering rain.’ He wrote to the sultan asking for permission to participate in the siege of Acre in 690/1291 and when he received a favourable response, he explains: ‘I was like one who has had the happiness of seeing his hopes realised and for whom the night has dissipated before the dawn.’137

  The links of the religious classes with the Mamluk ruling elite seem to have been unusually close. Indeed, Sivan goes as far as to say that without the support of the religious classes, the Mamluks would not have been able to maintain themselves in power for so long.138 Members of the Sufi orders and the ‘ulama’ are mentioned as being on campaign with the sultans. At the conquest of Beaufort (Shaqif Arnun) in 666/1268, for example, Ibn al-Furat mentions that pious shaykhs and ‘ulama’ were present: ‘Each one of them did his best to fight in God’s cause as far as his circumstances allowed.’139

  Two Merits of Jerusalem works date from the early Mamluk period, written by al-Miknasi and al-Kanji, thus testifying to continuing religious interest in the Holy City.140 The Mamluks sponsored religious building programmes elsewhere in their empire, established pious bequests (waqfs) and provided support for the Pilgrimage. In return, the religious classes underpinned Mamluk military initiatives with their writings on jihad and their personal presence on campaign.141

  Jihad and the Fall of Acre, 690/1291

  A modern scholar of the Mamluks, Donald Little, has recently analysed in some detail the campaign of the Mamluk sultan al-Ashraf in 690/1291, which culminated in the fall of Acre. It is clear that the religious context of this campaign was extremely important to those participating in it. About a week before embarking on the campaign in Safar 690/February 1291, al-Ashraf assembled Qur’an reciters, ‘ulama’, qadis and other notables in the tomb chamber of his father Qalawun in Cairo.142 There a complete recitation of the Qur’an took place. This was followed by the sultan’s distribution of largesse to the poor and to those who lived in religious establishments.143 The involvement of the religious classes continued during the month-long campaign – a public recitation of the Sahih of al-Bukhari in the presence of the religious notables of Damascus was attended by a large crowd and helped to fire up public enthusiasm.144

  It is interesting to note that the Damascus manuscript copy of the collection of the sermons of Ibn Nubata dates from this very time,145 thus indicating that perhaps they too had performed a role in arousing public emotion for the proposed attack on Acre.146 According to Ibn Taghribirdi, more volunteers than regular troops assembled for this campaign, surely an indication of the effectiveness of the religious ceremonies and enhanced public awareness which had preceded it.147

  As for the triumphal entry of the victorious sultan into Damascus in Jumada II 690/June 1291 after Acre had fallen, this was a splendid occasion in which everyone was involved:

  The entire city had been decorated, and sheets of satin had been laid along his triumphal path through the city leading to the viceregal palace. The regal Sultan was preceded by 280 fettered prisoners. One bore a reversed Frankish banner; another carried a banner and spear from which hair of slain comrades was suspended. Al-Ashraf was greeted by the whole population of Damascus and of the surrounding countryside lining the route: ‘ulama’, mosque officials, Sufi shaykhs, Christians, and Jews, all holding candles, even though the parade took place before noon.148

  Figure 4.28 Mosque lamp, pierced metal, mosque in complex of Qalawun, 683–4/1284–5, Cairo, Egypt

  Al-Ashraf ended his campaign where it had begun – giving thanks at his father’s tomb in Cairo. In the eyes of Muslim historians, then,149 it is clear that this was a successful and splendidly orchestrated campaign, culminating in the final removal of the Franks from Muslim soil. Its religious dimensions were stressed at every stage of the way.

  A triumphal panegyric to al-Ashraf praises him for his victory over the Franks, but much more than that it celebrates the removal of the infidel from Muslim soil and the triumph of Islam over Christianity:

  Because of you no town is left in which unbelief can repair, no hope for the Christian religion! Through al-Ashraf the Lord Sultan, we are delivered from the Trinity, and Unity rejoices in the struggle!

  Praise be to God, the nation of the Cross has fallen; through the Turks the religion of the chosen Arab has triumphed!150

  Other poets addressed the enemy thus:

  O you yellow-faced Christians (Banu Asfar),151 the vengeance of God has come down upon you! O you ‘images’ which decorate churches … too long have proud chieftains been seen prostrating themselves before you.152

  It was surely no coincidence that one of the honorific titles borne by al-Ashraf was Salah al-Din (Saladin).153 After the fall of Acre, Ibn al-Furat writes: ‘Full of anger you have avenged Saladin, thanks to this secret which God had concealed in this title.’154 Literally the title means ‘Probity of religion’ but no doubt what is being suggested here is that al-Ashraf Khalil, an inexperienced Mamluk sultan who had just come to the throne, could acquire some of the blessing (baraka) and religious credentials of his charismatic predecessor, Saladin (Salah al-Din) by adopting this title.

  The panegyrics of the chroniclers writing long after the event are confirmed by contemporary evidence solidly dated to the time of the fall of Acre itself. Two coins minted in the name of al-Ashraf Khalil link him with Saladin. The first is an undated gold coin which calls him Salah al-dunya wa’l-din (the probity of this world and of religion) – the identical title used of Saladin in the inscription dated 587/1191 on the Qubbat Yusuf.155 The second is an undated silver coin which gives him the title Salah al-Din (Saladin) ‘the helper of the Muhammadan community, the reviver of the ‘Abbasid state’.156

  Figure 4.29 (above and opposite) Helmets, album paintings, early fourteenth century, Tabriz, Iran

  Two extant inscriptions call al-Ashraf Khalil by such a title in 690/1291. The first calls him Salah al-Din.157 The second, recorded on the citadel of Baalbek in Syria, dated Sha’ban 690/August 1291 (two months after the fall of Acre), declares triumphantly that he is ‘the probity of this world and religion … the subjugator of the worshippers of crosses, the conqueror of the coastal marches, the revivifier of the ‘Abbasid state’.158

  Thus we see that the wider historical significance of the fall of Acre and the expulsion of the Franks was not lost on Muslim contemporaries. But this event is clearly not viewed as the end of the story – how could it be, since jihad against the House of War is continuous? Immediately after the conquest of Acre, al-Ashraf declared the Armenian Kingdom of Cilicia and the Mongols as his next targets: the struggle must continue.

  Ibn Taymiyya and Jihad

  Although Ibn Taymiyya (d. 728/1328) lived and wrote beyond the fall of Acre in 690/1291, he was such an influential figure in Mamluk religious circles and public life that his views are included here. A recent study of his influence by Morabia calls Ibn Taymiyya ‘the last great theoretician of medieval jihad’.159

  The period through which Ibn Taymiyya lived had experienced not only the expulsion of the Crusaders but al
so the continuing Mongol threat on the borders of Islam. As we have seen earlier, the dreaded Mongols, with their apparent favouring of Shi‘ites and Christians in Iran, sharpened the resolve of the Mamluks to present themselves as the champions of Sunni Islamic orthodoxy and the implacable opponents of heretics and infidels. We have also seen how under the Mamluks there was a close alliance between the religious classes and the military. The Hanbalites, to whose madhhab Ibn Taymiyya belonged, with their traditionalist approach and emphasis on pure Islam uncontaminated by innovations, were especially well suited to promote intense religious feeling amongst the Mamluks who faced the Crusader and Mongol threat.160

  But Ibn Taymiyya was also heeded by those outside the confines of his own legal school and especially by other leading ‘ulama’ in Damascus. He was a truly charismatic figure; indeed, some Mamluk amirs said that they were his ‘disciples’. He also commanded tremendous popular support, especially when he preached against the Christians. Attitudes had hardened since the advent of the Crusaders. Ibn Taymiyya was often very useful to the Mamluk regime when he and the ruling elite shared the same aims – such as, for example, the waging of jihad against Christians, heretics and Mongols. On other occasions, he was viewed as difficult and uncooperative, and indeed he spent considerable periods of his life in prison. One thing was always certain: he could never be ignored and his uncompromising views earned him the respect of his supporters and opponents alike. Ibn Taymiyya advocated a ‘fundamentalist’ approach in religion, a ‘back to basics’ stance which stripped Islam of all polluting innovations and concentrated exclusively on the pristine values of the Qur’an and the Sunna.