Fall of Outremer



The Fall of Outremer describes the history of the Kingdom of Jerusalem from the end of the last European Crusade to the Holy Land in 1272 until the final loss in 1302. The kingdom was the center of Outremer—the four Crusader states—which formed after the First Crusade in 1099 and reached its peak in 1187. The loss of Jerusalem in that year began the century-long decline. The years 1272–1302 were fraught with many conflicts throughout the Levant as well as the Mediterranean and Western European regions, and many Crusades were proposed to free the Holy Land from Mamluk control. The major players fighting the Muslims included the kings of England and France, the kingdoms of Cyprus and Sicily, the three Military Orders and Mongol Ilkhanate. Traditionally, the end of Western European presence in the Holy Land is identified as their defeat at the Siege of Acre in 1291, but the Christian forces managed to hold on to the small island fortress of Raud until 1302.
The Holy Land would no longer be the focus of the West even though various crusades were proposed in the early years of the fourteenth century. The Knights Hospitaller would conquer Rhodes from Byzantium, making it the center of their activity for two hundred years. The Mamluk sultanate would continue for another century.
Category:Battles involving the Mamluk Sultanate

The last Crusades

The Eighth Crusade ended badly in 1270 and freed the Mamluks to continue to ravage Syria and Palestine. The Frankish fortresses soon fell, and the last major expedition, Lord Edward's Crusade, ended in 1272 and failed to free Jerusalem. There would be at least two planned crusades over the next decade but none that came to fruition, and two more planned before the final expulsion of the Franks from Syria in 1291. At the Second Council of Lyon in 1274, Gregory X, who had accompanied Edward I of England to the Holy Land, preached a new crusade to an assembly which included envoys from both the Byzantine emperor Michael VIII Paliollogos and the Mongol Ilkhan Abaqa, as well as from the princes of the West. Many among the Western nobles took the cross. Gregory was successful in temporarily uniting the churches of Rome and Constantinople, and in securing Byzantine support for his new crusade, which reflected a general alarm at the plans of Charles I of Anjou. On 10 January 1276, Gregory X died and there was to be no crusade. Charles was able to resume his plans. In 1277, Maria of Antioch sold her claims to Charles who was then able to establish a presence in Acre, under the regency of Roger of San Severino. In 1278, he took possession of the Principality of Achaea. With these bases, he prepared for a new crusade, to be directed against Constantinople. His plans were disrupted by the War of the Sicilian Vespers and the coronation of Peter III of Aragon as king of Sicily which occupied him until his death in 1285. This was the last serious attempt at a crusade on behalf of the kingdom for two decades.

Baibars and the Assassins

During the Eighth Crusade in Tunis, Mamluk sultan Baibars expected that he would have to defend Egypt against Louis IX of France. In order to weaken the Frankish position, he arranged for the assassination of a leading baron, the Lord of Tyre, Philip of Montfort. The Assassins in Syria had thrived despite the successful Mongol campaign against the Nizaris in Persia. They owed much to the sultan, who freed them from paying tribute to the Knights Hospitaller, and resented the Frankish negotiations with the Mongol Ilkhanate. At the behest of Baibars, the Assassins sent one of their operatives to Tyre. On 17 August 1270, pretending to be a Christian convert, the would-be assassin entered the chapel where Philip and his son John of Montfort were praying. Philip was mortally wounded, surviving long enough to learn that his heir was safe. His death was a heavy blow to the Franks as John lacked his father's experience and prestige.
The death of Louis IX on 25 August 1270 relieved Baibars of the obligation to assist Tunisian caliph Muhammad I al-Mustansir. In February 1271, he marched into Frankish territory towards the settlement of Safita where the Chastel Blanc stood, a major fortress of the Knights Templar. The Mamluk attack was briefly repelled but the garrison was ordered to surrender by Grand Master Thomas Bérard, and the defenders were allowed to retire to Tortosa. On 3 March 1271, Baibars marched on the huge Hospitaller fortress of Krak des Chevaliers. He was joined by contingents of the Syrian Assassins and the army of al-Mansur II Muhammad, emir of Hama. The Mamluks conveyed a forged letter from Grand Master Hugues de Revel directing the surrender of the garrison and on 8 April they capitulated and were allowed to travel to Tripoli. Krak des Chevaliers had defied even Saladin and it gave Baibars effective control of the approaches to Tripoli. He followed it up with the capture of Gibelacar Castle, falling on 1 May 1271.
Later in 1271, two Assassins were sent by Bohemond VI of Antioch to murder Baibars. The Isma'ili leaders that ordered the assassination were caught and agreed to surrender their castles and live at Baibars' court. Bohemond did not wish for Tripoli the same fate as Antioch and so he proposed a truce to Baibars. The sultan, sensing a lack of courage, demanded that he should pay all the expenses of his recent campaign. Bohemond refused the insulting terms, and Baibars then attacked the small fortress at Maraclea, built on a rock off the coast between Baniyas and Tortosa. Barthélémy de Maraclée, a vassal of Bohemond, fled the attack and took refuge in Persia at the court of Abaqa, where he pleaded with the Mongol Ilkhan to intervene in the Holy Land. Baibars was so furious at this attempt to bring his old nemesis into the equation that he directed the Assassins to murder Barthélémy.
In May 1271, Baibars offered Bohemond a truce for ten years, satisfied with his recent conquests. Bohemond accepted and the sultan returned to Egypt, pausing only to take Montfort Castle, belonging to the Teutonic Knights since 1220. The castle, first besieged in 1266, surrendered on 12 June after one week's siege and was demolished shortly thereafter. All the inland Frankish castles had now been captured. Baibars then sent a squadron of ships to attack Cyprus, having heard that Hugh III of Cyprus had left for Acre. His fleet appeared off of Limassol, but ran aground and its sailors were captured by the Cypriots.

Edward I of England

Edward I of England had attempted to join Louis IX on the Eighth Crusade, but arrived in North Africa after the Treaty of Tunis had been signed. That treaty marked the end of the Louis' last expedition in 1270, freeing up troops that Baibars had planned to send into the theater. Edward proceeded on to the Holy Land to confront the Mamluks, beginning his Crusades, the last from the West.
Early in 1272, Edward realized his expedition was futile, lacking in both manpower and allies. He decided to seek a truce that would preserve Frankish Outremer, at least temporarily. Baibars was ready for a truce as the remnants of the Frankish kingdom could then be attacked once the English had left. His major enemies were the Mongols and he needed to secure on that front before his assaults on the last of the Frankish fortresses. To prevent Western intervention, he need to maintain good relations with Charles I of Anjou, the only one who might bring effective help to Acre. Charles' main ambition was Constantinople, with Syria of secondary interest. He did have ambitions of adding Outremer to his empire and so wanted wished to preserve its existence but not by supporting Hugh III of Cyprus, then king of Jerusalem. He was willing to mediate between Baibars and Edward and on 22 May 1272, a treaty was signed between the sultan and Acre at Caesarea, under Mamluk control since 1265. The kingdom's possessions were guaranteed for ten years and ten months, primarily the narrow coastal plain from Acre to Sidon, plus the unhindered use of the road to Nazareth frequented by pilgrims. Tripoli was safeguarded by the truce that followed the Siege of Tripoli in 1271.
Edward wished to return to the Holy Land leading a greater crusade, and so, despite their truce, Baibars decided to have him assassinated. On 16 June 1272, an Assassin disguised as a native Christian penetrated into Edward's chamber, stabbing him with a poisoned dagger. Edward survived, but was seriously ill for months. After he had recovered, Edward prepared to sail for home. His father was dying, his own health was bad and there was nothing remaining to do. He left Acre on 22 September 1272, and returned to England to find himself king.

Gregory X and the Aftermath of the Crusades

, the archdeacon of Liege, was with Edward I on his Crusade when he received the news that he had been elected pope, taking the name Gregory X. As pope, one of his missions was to see how the crusading spirit could be revived with the goal of recovery of the Holy Land. His appeals for soldiers to take the cross and fight against the Muslims were circulated throughout Christendom, with limited response. As time went on, he received reports that were disturbing and would explain the hostility of public opinion towards the cause. Crusades were viewed as an instrument of an aggressive papal policy. Spiritual rewards were promised to men who would fight against the Greeks, the Albigensians and the Hohenstaufen, and so the fight against the Muslims in a Holy War was just one of many. Even loyal supporters saw no reason for making a long and uncomfortable journey to the Holy Land when there were so many opportunities of gaining holy merit in less exacting campaigns.
Gregory had convoked the fourteenth ecumenical council of the Church on 31 March 1272, wanting to discuss reunion of the Church with the Greeks, a new crusade, and Church reform. He issued the papal bull Dudum super generalis on 11 March 1273, asking for information on all the infidels that threatened Christendom. Among the many reports that he received were ones that pointed the blame for failure at the policies of papacy. Criticism of crusading, a minor occurrence after the earlier Crusades, was sparked anew after the failure of the later Crusades, generally describing needed changes for a successful expedition to the East. They were nevertheless reflected continued interest in and support for the crusading movement. Notable examples included the following:
  • Guibert of Tournai, a French Franciscan, wrote his Collectio de Scandalis Ecclesiae describing of the harm done to the Crusades by the quarrels of the kings and nobility. The main themes were the corruption of the clergy and the abuse of indulgences, with agents raising money by the redemption of Crusading vows. The clergy would not contribute to pay for the Crusades, even though Louis IX had refused them exemption. Yet the general public was taxed again and again for Crusades that never took place.
  • Bruno von Schauenburg, the bishop of Olmutz, wrote a report that spoke of scandals in the Church and called for a strong emperor, namely his benefactor, Ottokar II of Bohemia. Crusades to the East were now pointless and should instead be directed against the heathens on the eastern frontiers of the Empire. The Teutonic Knights were mishandling this work and, if it were directed by a suitable leader, it would provide financial as well as religious advantages.
  • William of Tripoli, a Dominican from Acre, wrote a more constructive memoir. He had little hopes for a Holy War in the East conducted from Europe, but he believed the prophecies that the end of Islam was close, to be destroyed by the Mongols. As a member of a preaching order he had faith in the power of sermons and it was his conviction that the East would be won by missionaries, not by soldiers. His opinion was supported by the theology of philosopher Roger Bacon.
  • Humbert of Romans, the fifth Master General of the Order of Preachers, provided a complete report in his Opus Tripartitum. This was written in anticipation of an ecumenical council which would discuss the crusade, the East-West Schism and Church reform. He did not believe that it was possible to convert the Muslims but thought the conversion of the Jews was a divine promise and that of the East European pagans could also be converted. He proposed that another crusade in the Holy Land was both feasible and essential to the Christian cause. He believed that vice and cowardice kept men from sailing eastward, and the love of their homelands and feminine influences anchored them at home. According to Humbert, few believed in the spiritual merit that was promised to the crusader. Clerical reform may be of some help, but the reform of public sentiment was impractical and his recommendations for the execution of a crusade were valueless. In the area of finance, he implied that papal methods of extortion had not always been popular, clearly an understatement. He believed that if the Church and the princes were to sell some of their treasures, it would have positive psychological as well as material results.