How important was Muslim disunity to the survival of Crusader states?

?

How important was Muslim disunity to the survival of Crusader states?

Similarities

  • 1100 - 1104: Duquq of Damascus followed a policy of détente (avoidance of conflict) with Frankish Palestine
  • 1105 - 1109: Tughtegin agreed a series of limited-term pacts with Baldwin I aimed at improving trade between Syria and Palestine
  • Tughtegin allied with Prince Roger of Antioch against Bursuq of Hamadan (from Baghdad)

Differences

  • 1105:  a temporary alliance between Egypt and Damascus but this was limited e.g. T. sent only 1500 archers when Al-Afdal sent an army to the 3rd Bttle of Ralma (defeated by Baldwin I)
  • 1108: Ridwan of Aleppo struck up an alliance with Tancred against Jawuli of Mosul and Baldwin of Edessa
  • 1111: Maudud of Mosul again attempted to Turbessel. His forces splintered after the Kurdish leader Ahmadil was brought off by promises of tribule from the Franks. Ridwan refused to help and the army broke up.

Overall comparison

The Muslim disunity had given an advantage to the crusader states because their failure in battles had allowed Baldwin to expand his territory further, making the states stronger both economically and militarily. This would've helped them in future battles, hence Baldwin's military successes in invasions, such as the Port of Acre which soon became a vital area for trading - 'trading capital'

Comments

Bunuminububub

Report

Does similarities mean the disunity of the Muslims or not?

Similar History resources:

See all History resources »See all The crusades resources »