_full_alt_author_running_head (neem stramien B2 voor dit chapter en nul 0 in hierna): 0 _full_alt_articletitle_running_head (oude _articletitle_deel, vul hierna in): Period _full_article_language: en

244 Chapter 7

Chapter 7 Mamluk Period

Following the death of al-Salih Ayyub and the murder of his son al-Mu‘azzam Turanshah in 1250, ‘Izz al-Din established Mamluk rule in Egypt. The ongoing intra-Muslim struggle for regional power continued, however, until Hulagu’s invasion of western and Palestine in 1260.1 Qutuz, who had been the effective ruler of Mamluk Egypt since Aybak’s murder in 1257, halted the Mongol expansion when he defeated the forces left behind by Hulagu at ‘Ayn Jalut on 3 September 1260. Following this watershed event, Qutuz remained in power just long enough to extend Mamluk authority across most of western Syria before he too was murdered in October 1260. It was left to his successor, Baybars, to reveal the potential of Mamluk artillery.2 The ascendancy of Baybars marks the start of the final period of Frankish rule in the Levant, culminating in their expulsion from Acre in 1291. This period is documented in the continuations of William of Tyre’s chronicle and the An- nales de Terre Sainte, which remain important sources, while the so called Tem- plar of Tyre provides the most valuable eye-witness account of events from a Frankish perspective. Numerous later historians, including Marino Sanudo, used these works as the basis for their own accounts. Under Baybars, Egypt and western Syria were once more united under a strong and stable ruler. Like Saladin, Baybars was an attractive subject for biog- raphers and more general historians could hardly ignore his campaigns and military successes. Ibn ‘Abd al-Zahir, Baybars’ secretary, wrote a celebratory bi- ography of Baybars and another dedicated to his ultimate successor, Qalawun. Another important eye-witness source was ‘Izz al-Din ibn Shaddad al-Halabi, whose works on the history and geography of the region can be characterised by their direct style, precision and reliability. Unfortunately, significant sec- tions of his work related to Baybars have been lost. Following these men was a

1 For the last portion of these conflicts, see Ibn ‘Abd al-Zahir, al-Rawd, trans. Sadeque, pp. 80-93. See also Thorau, The Lion of Egypt, pp. 54-69. 2 Qutuz, then , and Baybars, who would soon succeed him, were entertained in Acre ahead of the battle, inadvertently giving Baybars the opportunity to view some of Acre’s de- fences from within, Rothelin 81, RHC Oc 2, pp. 637-38, trans. Shirley, pp. 118-19; Eracles 34.3, RHC Oc 2, p. 444; Ibn ‘Abd al-Zahir, al-Rawd, trans. Sadeque, pp. 193-95; Bar Hebraeus, Makhtebhanuth Zabhne, trans. Budge, 1:437-38. Baybars’ visit to Acre is emphasised in Boase, Kingdoms and Strongholds, p. 204 and Bartlett, ’s War, p. 239. For the murder of Qutuz, see Ibn ‘Abd al-Zahir, al-Rawd, trans. Sadeque, pp. 96-98.

© Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, 2018 | doi 10.1163/9789004376922_009 _full_alt_author_running_head (neem stramien B2 voor dit chapter en nul 0 in hierna): 0 _full_alt_articletitle_running_head (oude _articletitle_deel, vul hierna in): Mamluk Period _full_article_language: en

Mamluk Period 245

second generation of Mamluk sources who were often well informed and ap- pear to have had access to earlier accounts as well as original documents and oral testimony. Shafi’ ibn ‘Ali, nephew of Ibn ‘Abd al-Zahir, was another impor- tant member of the Mamluk secretariat, while Baybars al-Mansuri, one of Qalawun’s , was an active figure in the military. Other key sources in- clude: al-Jazari, al-Yunini, who provided a continuation to Sibt ibn al-Jawzi’s account, and Abu’l-Fida’, who took part in Mamluk campaigns from the siege of Margat in 1285 before rising to become ruler of Hama in the early fourteenth century. To these Syrian perspectives can be added the work of al-Nuwayri, who was based in , and that of Ibn al-Dawadari. Later historians, such as Ibn al-Furat, Mufaddal, al-Maqrizi and al-‘Ayni are also helpful, at times pre- serving information from lost accounts and offering different interpretations of events.3

Baybars’ Early Artillery

In the spring of 1263, Baybars moved his army into Palestine, having resolved to acquire Kerak from al-Mughith ‘Umar, his last remaining Muslim rival between Cairo and . As a sideshow to this, he briefly tested the strength of Acre’s defences from the morning of 14 April until he withdrew from the area on 16 April.4 Peter Thorau has suggested that Baybars brought siege engines with him on this campaign, but Ibn ‘Abd al-Zahir makes no mention of any during the assaults on Acre or at any other point during the ninety-five-day campaign. The source states that craftsmen travelled with the army but that Baybars called only for ladders when they reached Transjordan.5 It would appear, therefore, that Baybars had little intention of using artillery against either Acre or Kerak, instead opting to use assault troops and miners. Baybars faced a growing threat from the in 1263-64, as Hulagu re- ceived support from both the Byzantines and his brother Kublai, who had suc- ceeded Mongke. The emboldened Franks were confident enough to launch raids through Palestine in 1264. Baybars responded by ordering limited raids

3 For a discussion of these historians, their works, sources and relation to each other, see Little, An Introduction to Mamluk Historiography; Haarmann, “L’étude de la chronique mamelouke,” pp. 195-203; Guo, “Mamluk Historiographic Studies,” pp. 15-43; al-Yunini, Dhayl, ed. and trans. Guo, 1:6-96; Northrup, From Slave to Sultan, pp. 25-58; Little, “Historiography,” pp. 421-43; Bauden, “Taqi al-Din Ahmad ibn ‘Ali al-Maqrizi,” pp. 161-200. 4 Ibn ‘Abd al-Zahir, al-Rawd, trans. Sadeque, pp. 139-40, 164-71, 173-75; Ibn al-Furat, Tarikh, trans. Lyons and Lyons, 2:43-44, 56-59; Eracles 34.4, RHC Oc 2, pp. 446-47. 5 Ibn ‘Abd al-Zahir, al-Rawd, trans. Sadeque, pp. 178-82; Thorau, The Lion of Egypt, p. 138.