The Impact of the Crusader-Islamic Conflict on the Europeans Pilgrimage in the Thirteenth Century AD/Seventh AH

Prepared by the researcher : Yasser  Mostafa  Abd el Wahab – Professor of the Medieval History, Faculty of Arts, Kafr El- Sheikh University, Egypt

Democratic Arabic Center

Journal of Strategic and Military Studies : Twenty-two Issue – March 2024

A Periodical International Journal published by the “Democratic Arab Center” Germany – Berlin

:To download the pdf version of the research papers, please visit the following link

https://democraticac.de/wp-content/uploads/2024/03/%D9%85%D8%AC%D9%84%D8%A9-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%AF%D8%B1%D8%A7%D8%B3%D8%A7%D8%AA-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%A5%D8%B3%D8%AA%D8%B1%D8%A7%D8%AA%D9%8A%D8%AC%D9%8A%D8%A9-%D9%88%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%B9%D8%B3%D9%83%D8%B1%D9%8A%D8%A9-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%B9%D8%AF%D8%AF-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%AB%D8%A7%D9%86%D9%8A-%D9%88%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%B9%D8%B4%D8%B1%D9%88%D9%86-%D8%A2%D8%B0%D8%A7%D8%B1-%E2%80%93-%D9%85%D8%A7%D8%B1%D8%B3-2024.pdf

Abstract

When Saladin won the Battle of Hattin in 1187 AD/ 583 AH, and restored Jerusalem and the other holy places under Muslim rule once again after nearly ninety years, the question that loomed in the horizon was in what way would the Muslim react against the visits of the Europeans to the holy places after they were controlled by the Muslims, and how did the surrounding political and military circumstances affect this attitude? Due to its centrality to research on this period, the research intends to examine the impact of the conflict between Muslims and crusaders on the Europeans Pilgrimage movement in the thirteenth century AD/seventh AH, taking into consideration the proliferation of wars between the two parties at that time, Not only has the study focused on exploring the details of how the Muslim Administration managed the visits of Christian Christians and Jews Europeans, but it also analyzed the reaction of different Western European forces. Following what the sources have recorded; whether the Arabic Eastern sources or the Western ones, the research attempted to reach the real motive behind the Muslim Administration attitude. Was it truly based on the spirit of tolerance till the extent of beginning to make peace between East and West instead of wars, conflicts, and clashes between the two parties? Or was it a mere attempt that can be viewed as a kind of political maneuvers by the rulers at these hard times of the history of mankind..

The desire to visit the holy places in Palestine has been a common tradition among believers of the three divine religions since the very early ages. These places contain religious sites which Muslims, Christians and Jews used to visit to be endowed by their blessings and to practice their religious rites. Thus, visiting these places was a form of tolerance and accepting the other. It was a civilized embodiment of the perfect ties among believers of the three religions. Yet, the medieval world, especially in the late 11^th century, witnessed an incident which badly affected these peaceful harmonious relations; that was the outrage of what is known as the Crusades; resulting in a long-lasting conflict between the West and the East that lasted for two centuries. The Western European powers found in these visits – which their communities are used to for hundreds of years – an excuse to wage the war which brought death and devastation to the whole world during that period.

The first Crusade, coming from Western Europe, managed to fulfill its objectives in the late 11^th century AD/the 5^th century AH, and established four Crusaders’ centers in the Muslim Levant within one decade; thus, the holy places became under the Crusaders’ control, after four centuries of the Muslim rule. The religious visits deteriorated as the Crusaders failed to grant freedom of visiting for believers of the other religions. Jews were banned from visiting the holy places, especially Jerusalem. Muslims faced the same suffering as long as the Crusaders controlled the holy places. ^[[1]]

In fact, the First Crusade’s success was not due to courage or remarkable fighting techniques on part of the Crusaders, but due to the weakness of the Muslim forces that confronted them, and divisions among the Muslims of the Levant. However, the situation changed after Saladin managed to unify the Muslim troops. He deprived the Crusaders from the life they used to live in Syria when Muslims achieved a great victory in Battle of Hattin on Saturday, the 4^th of July 1187 AD., the 25^th of Rabeea Al-Awal 583 AH.^[[2]] Saladin made the best use of his victory showing his unique fighting capabilities. Instead of attacking Jerusalem, he started by invading Acre and decided to take over the Christian coastal cities.^[[3]] He managed – with amazing speed – to take over Acre, Jaffa, Sidon, Beirut and Byblos; among other coastal cities of the Levant.^[[4]] Almost all the castles from which Christian knights used to launch several attacks on the Muslims such as Tiberias, Safed and Hunin collapsed and submitted to his forces.^[[5]] His vision proved to be true, as he decided to deprive the Crusaders from their bases that have connections with Europe, in order to be sieged in the Levant.

Saladin immediately managed to take over the main religious cities, such as, Nazareth, Bethlehem and Hebron. He, then, invaded Jerusalem, which was occupied by the Crusaders for eighty-eight years. Muslims showed tolerance and forgiveness as they entered the city on the 2^nd of October 1187 AD./ the 27^th of Ragab 583 AH.^[[6]] Immediately, the Crusader messengers hurried to seek support and aids from the pope and the European rulers by informing them of their terrible conditions. They mainly suffered losing their holy places. This resulted in waging the Third Crusade.^[[7]] Despite being the prominent and the best organized, this Crusade merely kept the Crusaders existence and saved the Crusaders from the dangers of Saladin who was at the peak of his victory. Because of this Crusade, Crusaders at the Levant controlled a narrow coastal strip from Tire to Jaffa.^[[8]] The real safety the Crusaders gained in the Levant was merely during the truce held between King of England, Richard the Lionheart, and Saladin in September 1192 AD/Shaaban 588 AH, known as The Treaty of Ramla.^[[9]]

Saladin found himself in a unique situation that never occurred to any of all previous Muslim rulers. He won the holy lands with their holy places which are cherished by believers of the three divine religions. For Europeans this was a bit much. Saladin had to follow new policies appropriate for the current situation; as Muslims were viewed by Europeans and especially European rulers and the pope as a real enemy who occupied their holy lands. He was sure that it was necessary to follow a flexible policy to avoid their angry response.

Indeed, the Crusaders and the European powers, especially the pope, the kings and the leaders realized that they should think of the destiny of the visitors who desire to visit the holy places; and if these visits are still possible within the Muslim ruling of the holy lands? Bearing in mind what Muslims suffered in these places when they have been occupied by the Crusaders for eighty-eight years. The Crusaders still occupy many neighbouring territories. This means that the conflict and fighting between both parties would renew at any time. Undoubtedly, this would impact visiting the holy places, especially by Western Europeans. This would affect not only the Christians but the Jews as well. Hence the question how did Muslims treat the pilgrimage to the holy places after they had taken them over from the Crusaders?

Based on the information mentioned hereinbefore, the researcher has chosen the topic of the The Impact of the Crusader-Islamic Conflict on the Europeans Pilgrimage in the Thirteenth Century AD/Seventh AH., until the end of the Crusaders existence in the Levant in 1291 AD./690 AH. It is worth mentioning that this topic has not been sufficiently covered in the historical studies and writings. For instance, the writings of Diana Webb and Pringle referred to the European pilgrimage to the holy places; and so did the Arab studies.^[[10]] They focused on the Christian pilgrimage to Jerusalem in particular. Taking into consideration that these presented ideas about the attitude of the Muslim Administration towards the Europeans visits to the holy places are few; in addition to the fact that the historical library is void of any research which is intended independently and sufficiently for this topic, the researcher set his eyes on the necessity of clarifying this attitude; not only towards Jerusalem but also towards the other holy places which attract the European pilgrims such as Bethlehem, Nazareth and Hebron. Finally, the researcher tries to answer the important question concerning the interpretation of   The Impact of the Crusader-Islamic Conflict on the Europeans Pilgrimage in the Thirteenth Century AD/Seventh AH ?

We notice that after the Latins invaded Constantinople in the Fourth Crusade, the Crusaders at the Levant became more courageous. Rumors spread among them saying that Muslims were screaming out of fear. Moreover, Pope Innocent III (1198-1216AD/595-613AH ) ^[[11]]celebrated what circulated about the massive grief and fear that inflicted King Al-Adel because of what happened. The pope believed that the Crusade would become more powerful and head to the Levant. Yet, as reported by Arnaoul, the historian; shortly, Constantinople attracted the Crusaders from the West and from the Levant itself who were seeking calm life far from the conflicts in the holy lands.^[[12]] Undoubtedly, this Crusade was the most powerful after the first one. Yet it succeeded against Byzantium rather than against the Muslim world. It served some personal interests rather than supporting the Crusades at the Levant.

Consequently, Amalric II( 1197-1205 AD/ 594-602 AH ), the Crusader King, realized that sending a new Crusade to the Levant would be hopeless; especially that the summer has ended and the Crusaders were still in Constantinople. Thus, he offered to King Al-Adel to hold a truce, who welcomed this offer. A treaty was held between the Muslims and the Crusaders in September 1204 AD./Safar 601 AH. The important point of this treaty was that it obliged King Al-Adel to manage the affairs of the European pilgrims to the holy places. Historian, Ibn Al-Athir, reported that King Al-Adel gave the Crusaders the city of Nazareth, which had a special importance for the Christians and visitors of Jerusalem. ^[[13]]

It seems that King Al-Adel quickly accepted the offer of holding a truce because of his desire to end the state of war with the Crusaders, after their success to hinder the Muslim trade activities on the Levant coasts.^[[14]] Another reason can be added; that is king Al-Adel’s attempt – based on this truce – to appear to be taking care of the European visitors by showing tolerance to the pilgrims. He mainly sought not to provoke the Western powers. His policies were centered on the diplomatic solutions or sometimes referring to the use of power without resorting to it in deed. It seemed that King Al-Adel thought that a military action from his part would result in waging a new Crusade as powerful as the Third Crusade on both the military and political levels.

Western Europe had great interest in the issue of the Christian visits to the holy lands in the Levant; when the Crusaders-Muslims conflict took an important place in the policies of Pope Innocent III. He believed that any Crusade, heading to the Levant to regain control over the holy places, had to be under the papal control. He was concerned with restoring the Crusaders kingdom of Jerusalem destroyed by Saladin. This was what the Third Crusade failed to achieve. He used the Crusade idea as his fatal weapon locally and abroad; facing the secular authority to achieve the utmost papal control. He frankly expressed his great dominion in a letter sent by him to Lords of Tuscany; stating that: “As the moon illuminates by the sunlight, the secular authority gains its power and dignity from the papal authority”.^[[15]]

Due to the pope’s belief that he is the leader of the whole world “Dominus Mundi”, he did not allow anything to prevent him from achieving his objectives. Thus, he indulged in the political, diplomatic, feudal and matrimonial issues in Europe.^[[16]] He had the opportunity, because when he took the Holy See, he has not been opposed by any secular rival after the sudden death of the German Emperor Henri VI;^[[17]] and the civil war broke out in Germany. The conflict escalated between the French and the English kings. The pope regained his control over the south of Italy.^[[18]] It has become clear that the pope combines  the Crusades with the papal supremacy. Hence, Innocent III become able to focus on the troubles in the holy lands, especially the issue of the European visits to the holy places.

As soon as he took the Holy See, he sent several letters to Amalric the Monk: the Patriarch of Jerusalem(1190-1205AD/586-602AH), Gilbert Horal: the Grand Master of the Templars(1191-1204 AH/590-601AH), and Godfrey du Donjon: the Grand Master of the Hospitallers(1192-1204AD/588-601 AH); calling them to send detailed reports about the conditions in the Levant, including detailed data about the Muslim rulers and the nature of the relations among them and their response to the visitors to the holy places.^[[19]] consequently, a report has been delivered to him from the Levant stating that the remains of the Crusaders territories which remained under their control throughout the 12^th century AD./the 6^th century AH., with little European aids were then in the beginning of the new century asking for financial support. The Crusaders’ ports have become void of any strategic depth. The road of the Western visitors to the holy places has become unsafe. The date of this report was November 1199 AD./Muharam 596 AH.^[[20]]

It seems that these reports were being sent from time to time. A detailed one was sent by Albert Verceel: the Patriarch of Jerusalem(1205-1214AD/602-611AH), Garien De Mountiugo: the Grand Master of the Hospitallers(1207-1227AD/604-624 AH), and Guillaume de Poisse: the Grand Master of the Templars(1210-1219AD/607-616AH) in 1213 AD./609 AH., about the conditions of the Ayyubid State in Egypt and the Levant. It included important information about its political and economic conditions. Yet, it included some false information about King Al-Adel’s relation with his sons during this period.^[[21]] Moreover, it claimed that Saladin’s successors, especially King Al-Adel “desired to return the holy lands to the pope”.^[[22]] As soon as this report reached Pope Innocent III, he became more enthusiastic to confront King Al-Adel; motivated by misleading hopes. Despite King Al-Adel’s tolerance with the Crusaders, he had no reason to lose the gains accomplished by his brother Saladin. He has never wasted any effort to defeat any attack by the Franks of the Levant on the Muslims. He had strong relations with his sons. His powerful personality maintained the unity of the Ayyubid State.

Consequently, the pope sent a letter to King Al-Adel calling him to return Jerusalem to the Crusaders; because its existence in the Muslims’ possession would cost him severe sacrifices and dangers which he would fail to face and would fail in the administration of the holy places. This letter was dated on the 6^th of May 1216 AD./the 13^th of Zulhejjah 609 AH.^[[23]] No response from King Al-Adel to this letter has been found in any historical source. If a response were found, it would not be believed to include an acceptance of the Pope’s demand stated in his letter.

Pope Innocent III’s request raised an important question: Did the peaceful policy shown by King Al-Adel in his treaty of 1204 AD./601AH., lead to the Pope’s belief that King Al-Adel was a ruler who tends to pacifism? In fact, despite King Al-Adel’s tolerance and moderate policy with the crusaders, he had no reason to lose Jerusalem. Moreover, his powerful personality helped him to control the Ayyubid dynasty and to unify the State during his reign. Al-Maqreezi depicted him saying: “He uses tricks and plots to fulfill his purposes. His truce with the Franks was due to his strictness, extreme alertness, acute mind, and strong conspiracy”.^[[24]] Thus, he relied on the best use of politics in his dealing with all his affairs. This included his recognition of the religious and political importance of Jerusalem; and his recognition that its religious holy places have been the aim of the believers of all the divine religions.

It is well-known that a very important religious incident in the reign of the Crusader king Baldwin II^[[25]] was the declaration of the discovery of the cave which included the real grave of some prophets. It included the corpuses of prophets Abraham, Isaac and Jacob peace be upon them, and their spouses in the city of Hebron. This took place under the auspices of René Bishop of St. Abraham Church. The place was called the Cave of Macphelah. The cave was opened on the 7^th of July 1119 AD./the 27^th of Rabeea Alakhar 513AH.^[[26]]

In fact, this incident deserves more attention in order to know the attitude of the Crusaders towards what was known as visiting the graves of the prophets or the cave of Machpelah. While the Christians were allowed to visit the place freely and enjoy it, non-Christians, whether Jews or Muslims, were banned. The Spanish Jew, Benjamin of Tudela^[[27]] stated in his journey to the holy places that he had to pay an amount of money to the guards to be able to visit the cave of the prophets.^[[28]] Another Jew, Fetahya of Ratisbon,^[[29]] stated in his journey which has not been written down by him but by his friend and companion Yahuza^[[30]] that he had to pay two golden coins to the Crusader guard in order to be able to visit the cave of the prophets.^[[31]] The Jew, Jacob ha Cohen who visited the place at the end of the Christian existence, exactly in 1187 AD./583 AH.,^[[32]] stated that he managed to visit the place after he had disguised in Frankish clothes to resemble the Christians, because non-Christians were banned from visiting the place.^[[33]]

During king Al-Adel reign, the Western European Jew visitor Samuel ben Samson who arrived at Hebron^[[34]] clarified that he has visited the Sanctuary of Abraham and descended to the cave of the prophets accompanied by two Jews; Rabbi Tobiah and Rabbi Abraham ben Saadyia after the latter managed to take a signed permission from the Muslim Caliph delivered to them by a Muslim who accompanied them. Had not they taken this permission, the visit would be exclusive to the upper sites only without descending to the cave. ^[[35]]

The noticeable development in the attitude of the Muslim Administration of the holy places since they regained them in the late 12^th century AD./the 6^th century AH., is concerned with the Jewish visitors. It is understood from Samuel ben Samson’s story that after the Muslims regained the holy places, visiting the cave of the prophets became possible to Jews and Christians with a permission signed by the Muslim Caliph himself. This shows the Muslim Administration’s tolerance with the European visitors, especially the Jews unlike what was the case at the time of the Crusaders and during the bitter conflict of the Crusades.

During King Al-Kamel reign, and his signature of Jaffa treaty with Emperor Fredrick II on the 18^th of February 1229 AD./the 23^rd of Rabeea Awal 626 AH., we will not pay a great attention to the dispute concerning this treaty, resulting from King Al-Kamel’s wasting what Saladin had regained in his bitter conflict against the Crusaders. In fact, this issue has been studied, criticized and analyzed in many modern studies.^[[36]] Therefore, we will concentrate on the articles of the treaty related to our research, such as King Al-Kamel’s waiver of Jerusalem for the Crusaders provided that it would not be fortified. Thus, he abandoned the holy places in the main cities of Jerusalem, Bethlehem and Nazareth. He was obliged to allow them to establish a road from these cities to the Crusaders’ port of Jaffa, in order to guarantee safety for the holy places visitors and pilgrims, while Muslims kept control over Al-Aqsa Mosque and Dome of the Rock to be governed by a group of Muslims.^[[37]]

Although what King Al-Kamel did was regarded by some historians as pacifism undoubtedly, taking into consideration that he did not cover his negotiations with the Emperor with political appearance like his predecessors of the Ayyubid State had done. Nevertheless, it could be viewed as the essence of tolerance of a ruler who was ahead of his time; especially that religious fanaticism was predominant at his time. However, he rendered Jerusalem into a city ruled by Muslims and Christians together. It became a highly cosmopolitan city, accessible to visitors of all religions freely and safely.

Concerning the Europeans Pilgrimage, they greatly reduced. The results King Al-Kamel sought to achieve through his treaty have not been fulfilled for many reasons; mainly because of the opposition of the Crusaders at the Levant to the results of the treaty. They were led by the Latin Patriarch of Jerusalem, Gerald of  Lausanne (1225-1239 AD/622-636 AH), whose opposition was related to the situation of the Pope and his conflict against Emperor Fredrick whose Crusade was a part of this conflict.^[[38]] Only two days after signing the Treaty of Jaffa, exactly on the 20^th of February 1229 AD./the 25^th of Rabeea Al-Awal 626 AH., the patriarch sent a letter to all the Western Christians about the behavior of the Emperor in Jerusalem and how he abused the Crusaders in the Levant, especially the princes. He also abused the different orders, especially the Hospitallers. He even insulted the clergies in the holy lands.^[[39]] On the 7^th of March 1229 AD./the 9^th of Rabeea Alakher 626 AH., he sent a detailed letter to Pope Gregory IX (1227-1241 AD/624-639 AH) about what Emperor Fredrick did in the Levant. He described the treaty as a treason committed by the Emperor with The Egyptian king. He mentioned the weak points of the treaty. He described the emperor as a bold and a fool as he allowed himself to be deceived by the Muslims. He also mentioned that the Crusader Counties have not benefited from the Crusade which came from Western Europe.^[[40]] These letters seriously influenced Western Europe. The pope made use of them and started abusing the Emperor. He described his acts as shameful. The pope called him “follower of the Muslims”, after he was called “the Church’s loved son”.^[[41]] Adding the fact that Muslims did not like the treaty either,^[[42]] we would realise that it was seriously difficult for the holy places to remain accessible to believers of all the divine religions.

Undoubtedly, the roads and territories from Jaffa and Acre to the holy places which, in accordance with the treaty between King Al-Kamel and Emperor Fredrick, governed by the Crusaders, became isolated lands surrounded by a vast Muslim land. This meant that the freedom of the visitors to the holy places was subject to the continuation of the amicable relations between the Muslims and the Crusaders; which could not be guaranteed given the occurring conflict between them at the time of the Crusades.

Nevertheless, the Crusaders’ control over the religious places of Jerusalem pursuant to Jaffa treaty did not last for long. Al-Naser Dawod managed in a short time to enter the city. The few Crusaders failed to defeat him. Thus, the city with all its facilities and holy places returned to the Muslim rule after about ten years, in 1239 AD./637 AH., exactly.^[[43]]

In another period, exactly in 1253 AD./651 AH., another situation is important to be mentioned. French King, Louis IX during his stay in the Levant was invited by King of Damascus, Al-Naser Yussif, to visit Jerusalem and perform pilgrimage there under the latter’s protection and care. Yet the French king refused the invitation. Joinville has attributed King Louis refusal to visit Jerusalem as a Pilgrim to his fear that another Western king would follow his footsteps and come for pilgrimage only without thinking of reoccupying the holy city.^[[44]] However, the invitation sent by the Ayyubid ruler Al-Nasser Yussif to the French King was out of the spirit of tolerance or pacification. On the contrary, it was an attempt to win his support in the running conflict between him and The Egyptian Mamluk king Ezz Al-Din Aybak. Thus, this offer was based on a political aim.

At the time of the Mamluk king Baibars(1260-1277AD/659-677AH),^[[45]] he achieved several military victories over the Crusaders in the Levant. This certainly affected his situation towards the Western pilgrims to the holy places. In 1267 AD./666 AH., he sent his deputy Ez Al-Din Al-Heli to the city of Hebron to inspect the holy places; after he was informed that the Jewish and Christians visitors have been requested to pay a fee for visiting the holy places and descending to the cave of the patriarchs. He refused and sent a decree with his deputy banning visitors from entering this holy place.^[[46]] Borchard the Traveller told us that he was able to visit all the holy places in Hebron freely in 1283 AD./682 AH.^[[47]] This shows  that Baibars decision has not been implemented strictly after his death.

When King Baibars held a truce with the Crusaders in 1272 AD./670 AH., he vowed to guarantee for the Christian pilgrims the free use of the road to Nazareth without any hindrances from the Muslims.^[[48]] This indicates that Baibars military victories over the Crusaders has given him absolute control over the entire territory; hence, controlling the European visits to the holy places.

It is worth mentioning that a Mamluk decree for Mount Zion Monastery dated by the end of October 1464 AD./the 28^th of Safar 869 AH., was found. It included several privileges to its monks at the era of the Mamluk King Khushqadam(1461-1467AD/860-872AH). He stated that his decree was a mere renewal of these privileges granted in previous decrees. These privileges started since the time of King Baibars. They included the king’s agreement to allow the monks to serve the Western European Christian pilgrims to the holy places.^[[49]] Thus, it is clear that the articles of this Mamluk decree were effective during this age. It was mentioned in the decree of King Al-Zaher Baibars and continued to be renewed by his successors.

As for the Jewish visitors to the holy places at the time of King Baibars, Rabbi Moses ben Nahman known as Nachmanides, came from Spain. He noticed that the Jewish sites were neglected, because they were rarely visited, in addition to the low number of Jewish settlers, especially in Jerusalem. He managed to get permission from King Baibars allowing him to stay in Jerusalem and to revive the Jewish practices. He was also allowed to build a synagogue called after his name. This increased the Jewish visits to the city.^[[50]]

Another aspect – which is considered to be a very important reflection of visiting the holy places – is the Hospice in Hebron which, for long time, Muslims have been taking care of, and continued after Saladin regained control over the holy places. Food remained to be presented to visitors of Hebron.^[[51]] Historian Abu Al-Yaman Al-Olaimi reported that the European visitors continued with the Muslim visitors. Muslims’ generosity remained towards both Jews and Christians. When King Baibars noticed the importance of providing comfort for the visitors of the holy places, he appointed Prince Aladin Aideghdi Al-Aama in a new rank called master of the two holy sanctuaries “Jerusalem and Hebron”. The prince founded a well-set building including some rooms close to the gait of the Sanctuary of Abraham in order to maintain the role of the hospitality houses there.^[[52]] It was certain that the hospice of Hebron reached its peak of activity and generosity with the visitors since the time of King Baibars until the end of the Mamluk dynasty. This was witnessed by a European visitor to the holy places. He stayed there and was entertained.^[[53]] When King Baibars knew the increasing role of this hospice to the extent that its facilities became unable to help play such role, he restored it. He introduced the new rank of Master of the two holy sanctuaries. This step could only be interpreted to reflect his sincere interest in the affairs of the visitors of the holy places.

If we are to evaluate Baibars attitude towards the European pilgrimage to the holy places, we could say that he managed to show generosity and tolerance with the Christians. He facilitated and secured pilgrimage without wasting any of the military victories achieved at his time or at the time of his Muslim predecessors. Accordingly, he managed to reduce the European spirit of hatred, hence mitigate the calls for sending a Crusade to the Levant to retaliate his military successes. Besides, he showed generosity to the Jews by presenting facilities for Nahmanides; which undoubtedly increased the Jewish visits to the holy places. Baibars treated the European pilgrims to the holy places with political keenness.

Concerning the action of the Muslim Administration towards the European visits at the time of Al-Mansour(1279-1289AD/678-689AH), the articles of his treaty with the Crusaders on the first of August 1283 AD./the fifth of Rabeea Al-Awal 682 AH., which can be found in  many Arab sources entail that Al-Hagag gives facilities to the Europeans to help them perform pilgrimage and visits, especially at the city of Nazareth. These articles include making an oath to provide safety for them and to specify four houses near to Nazareth Church for their accommodation.^[[54]]

Historian, Ibn Abd Al-Zaher told us that when Al-Mansour signed a treaty with King of Aragon, Alfonso III and his brother Khaimi king of Sicily, he insisted that it includes allowing Christian pilgrims from Aragon and Sicily and their allies to visit the holy places, provided that each visitor should have a letter from King of Aragon signed by him to the governor of Jerusalem who escorts them till they return home. The treaty was signed on Tuesday, the 23^rd of April, the 13^th of Rabeea Al-Akhar.^[[55]]

These pages clarify that Europeans Pilgrimage to visit the holy places in the Levant has never been interrupted since they returned to the Muslim governance. This was clear after Al-Ramla treaty till the end of the Crusaders’ existence in the Levant. It has been noticed that the attitude of the Muslim Administration towards the European visits to the holy places has been clearly affected by the treaties signed between the parties of the conflict between1192AD and 1291AD/ 588-690AH.; especially within the Muslims’ continuing success in regaining their properties in the region, in addition to the treaties signed by Al-Mansour.

At the end, it must be mentioned that the Muslim Administration represented by the Muslim rulers realized the importance of respecting the other divine religions and the rights of the Jews and Christians to practice their religion freely and safely. Whereas Islam is a tolerant peaceful religion, all the Muslim rulers succeeded at the situations mentioned above, except King Al-Kamel, in following a tolerant policy conforming to the tolerant nature of Islam, without wasting any victories achieved in their venture to recover the lands taken by the Crusaders. This indicates that the Muslim Administration in the holy places have not been influenced by the occurring conflict in the region. They behaved with tolerance and without extremism. This results from their belief in the right for believers of any divine religion to perform their practices freely with no interference. The Muslim rulers realized that the priority of the governance which aims at stability is the belief in the right of the others to practice their beliefs with no abuse.

Bibliography

Abbreviations

1. L: Patro Logia Latina, 221 vols, (ed.), Migne. J.P (Paris, 1844-1855).

R.H.C. – H. Occ,: Recueil des Historiens des Croisades, Historiens Occidentaux.

R.I.S.   : Rerum Italicarum Scriptores .

 Primary Sources

Arabic Sources:

• Abou Al-Yaman Al-Olaimi, Al-Anas Al-Galil fe Al-Quda w Al-Khalil, 2 vols., (Beirut 1973).
• Abou Shama, Al-Rawdatain fe Akhbar Al-Dawlatain Annuriyah w Al-Salahiyah, 2 vols, (Cairo 1962).
• Al-Emad Al-Kateb, Al-Fateh Al-Qassy fel-Fateh Al-Qudsy,, Mohamed Mahmoud Sobh, (Cairo 2003).
• Al-Maqreezy, Al-Solok li Marifa Dauwal al Muluk, edited by Mostafa ,Z., 3 vols,(Cairo,1934-1942).
• Baibars Al-Mansoury, Al-Tohfa Al-Mamlukia fe Al-Dawla Al-Turkiya, ed., Abd Al-Hamid Saleh, (Beirut 1987)
• Ibn Abd Al-Zaher, Tashreef Al Ayyam w Al-Osor fe Serat Al-Malek Al-Mansour, ed., Morad Kamel, (Cairo 1981).
• ——————–, fe Serat Al-Malek Al-Zaher, ed., Abd Al-Aziz Al-Khweiter, (Riyadh 1976).
• Ibn Al-Adim, Zebdat Al-Halab men Tareekh Halab, 3 vols, ed., Samy Addahan, (Damascus 1951),
• Ibn Al-Ahthir, Al-Kamel fel-Tareekh, 12 vols, (Beirut 1982).
• Ibn Al-Forat, Tareekh Al-Dowal w Al-Molok, , Constantine Zuraik, (Beirut 1942).
• Ibn Shaddad, Al-Nwader Al-Sultaniah w Al-Mahasen Al-Yusufeiah, ed., Jamaluddin Al-Shayal, (Cairo 1964).
• Ibn Nazeef Al-Hamawy, Talkhees Al-Kashf w Al-Bayan fe Hawadeth Al-Zaman, (Al-Tareekh Al-Mansoury), ed., Abu Al-Abd Dawod, (Damascus 1981).
• Ibn Wassel, Mufarrej Al-Kurub Fi Akhbar Bani Ayub, 5 vols., ed., Jamaluddin Al-Shayal, (Cairo 1960).
• Sebt Ibn Al-Jawzy, Mreaat Azzaman fe Tareekh Al-Aayan, vol. 8, (Hyderabad 1951)

Western Sources:

• Anselme Adorno,Iteneraire d, Anselme Adorno in Terre-Sainte 1470-1271 A.D.,Heers J.et Groer  J.,( Paris, 1978).
• Benjamin of Tudela, The Travels of Benjamin of Tudela, , Ezra Haddad, 1st ed., (Baghdad 1945).
• Burchard of Mount Sion,ADescription of the Holy Land,tr.by Aubrey Stewart,in:P.P.T.S.,vol.XII,(London,1896).
• Eracles, L’ Estoire de Erac1es Empereur et la conqueste de la Terre d’ Outre- mer, R.H.C. – H. Occ, T.Il, (Paris, 1859).
• Ernoul,Chronique de Ernoul et de Bernard Le Tresorier, L. de Mas – Latrie, (Paris, 1871)
• Goiten,S.D.,(Summarized andtrans.) Geniza Sources for the crusader period Asurvey,in outrener.Studies in the History Kingdom of Jerusalem,ed.Kedar,Z.B.Mayer,H.E.,and Smail,R.C.,(Jerusalem,1982).
• Huillard-Bréhollcs, (ed.), HistoriaDiplomatica Friderica Secundi, 7vols., (Paris, 1851-1862).
• Innocent III, pope, Regesta, in P. L., vol. 214. Cols119- 123.
• Jacob Ben R.Nathaniel Ha Cohen, Itinerary of Rabbi Jacob Ben R.Nathaniel Ha Cohen Twelfh Century.,in Jewish Travelers , 92-100.
• Joinville, Louis,trans. Hassan Habashy,(Cairo,1968)
• Nicetas Choniates, Ocity of Byzantium: Annales of Nicetas Choniates, English trans. H. Magoulias, (Detriot, 1984).
• Petaachia of Ratisbon, Itinerary of Rabbi Petaachia of Ratisbon in1174-1187 A.D.,in Jewish Travelers , 109-123.
• Paul Wiegler, The Infidal Imperor and his Strauggles against the Pope, By B. Downs, (London, 1930).
• Roger of Wendover, Flowers of History, By J.A. Giles, 2 vols., (London, 1849).
• Rohricht, R., ed., Regesta Regni Hierosolymitani, 2vols., (Innsbruck, 1892 – 1904).
• Ryccardus de San Germano, Chronican, in Muratori, R.I.S., vol. VIII
• Samuel Ben Samson, Itinerary of Rabbi Samuel Ben Samson in1210 A.D.,in Jewish Travelers ,ed.by Adler,E.N.,(London 1930).
• William of Tyre,History of the Deeds done beyond the Sea,trans.by.Babock and Key,(New york,1943).
• Vincent de Beauvais, Speculum Historiale,(Graz-Austria, 1965).

Secandary Sources

Arabic References:

• Ali Ahmed El-Sayed, “Tamim Al-Dari’s Waqf in Hebron: Its Role in Flourishing the Sanctuary of Abraham and Accommodating the Locals and the Foreigners”, in: Bulletin of the Faculty of Arts, Issue no. 54, (Alexandria University Press, 2005).
• ———————, Hebron and the Sanctuary of Abraham During the Crusades (1099-1187AD/492-583AH), (Cairo 1998).
• Hassan Abd El-Wahab, Jerusalem Truce: according to the historian Al-Qady Ibn Abi Al-Dam Al-Hamawy 1229AD/626AH, A Comparative Study, in The Conference of Jerusalem History Sources, (Cairo : March 1998).
• Ibrahim Margouna, The Civilized Role of Aladin Aidighdi Al-Aama in Jerusalem and Hebron, Arab Historian Magazine, Issue 18, (Cairo 2010), 233-264.
• Maher Y. Abu-Munshar, Sultan al-Kamil, Emperor Frederick II and the Submission of Jerusalem, International Journal of Social Science and Humanity, Vol. 3, No. 5, September 2013,442-447.
• Mohamed Mones Awad, European Travellers in the Middle Ages, (Cairo 2004).
• Raafat Abd Al-Hamid, The Crusading Papal Thought: A Research in The History of The Crusades, (Cairo 1998),9-65.
• —————-, King Al-Kamel versus the Crusaders: between Excessiveness and Squander, A research in the Crusades History, (Cairo,1998),123-201

Western References:

• Bartlett,W.B., God Wills it! An IIIustrared History of The Crussades,(London,2000).
• Diana Webb,Medieval European Pilgrimage, c.700 – c.1500 ,(New york,2002).
• Elizabeth Siberry, Criticism of Crusading, 10965-1274, (Oxford, 1985).
• Grousset, R., Histore des Croisdes et du Royaume France de Jerusalem, 3 toms, (Paris, 1984).
• Hans, K., Encyc1pedia of the Papacy, (London, 1959),84-86.
• Joseph E. David, Dwelling Within the Law: Nachmanides Legal Theojogy, Oxford Journal of Law and Religion, (2013), 1–21.
• Norman Cantor, Medieval History: The Life and Death of a Civilization,, Qassem Abdou Qassem, 2 vols., (Cairo 1997).
• Pringle, D., The Planning of Some Pilgrimage Churches in Crusader Palestine World Archaeology, Vol. 18, No. 3, Archaeology and the Christian Church (Feb., 1987), 341-362.
• Richards, D.S., The Crusade of Fredrick II and the Hamah Succession, Extacts from the Chronicle of Lbi Al-Damn, in Bullet in d;Etudes Orientales, t. xiv,( 1993), 183-200.
• Riley Smith, J., The Crusades: A Short History,( London 1987).
• Risani, N, Documenti E Firmani, (Gerusalemme, 1931).
• Runciman ,S., A History of the Crusades, 3 vols., (Cambridge, 1968).
• Ursula, S., Die Aufrufe Derpapste zur Befreiung des Heiligen Beiszum Ausgang Innozennz IV, (Berlin, 1937),

[[1]]Goiten,S.D.,(Summarized andtrans.) Geniza Sources for the crusader period Asurvey,in outrener.Studies in the History Kingdom of Jerusalem,ed.Kedar,Z.B.Mayer,H.E.,and Smail,R.C.,(Jerusalem,1982), 308-309.

[[2]] For more details about the battle of Hattin, See Ibn Shaddad, Al-Nwader Al-Sultaniah w Al-Mahasen Al-Yusufeiah, ed., Jamaluddin Al-Shayal, (Cairo 1964),128-130; Ibn Al-Ahthir, Al-Kamel fel-Tareekh, 12 vols, (Beirut 1982), vol. 11, 532-534; Abu Shama, Al-Rawdatain fe Akhbar Al-Dawlatain Annuriyah w Al-Salahiyah, 2 vols, (Cairo 1962), vol 2, 77-85; See also, Ernoul,Chronique de Ernoul et de Bernard Le Tresorier, ed. L. de Mas – Latrie, (Paris, 1871) , 170-172; Eracles, L’ Estoire de Erac1es Empereur et la conqueste de la Terre d’ Outre-  mer, R.H.C. – H. Occ, T.Il, (Paris, 1859), 68-71.

[[3]]Ernoul, Chronique,175.

[[4]]For more details about Saladin victories after the battle of Hattin, See Al-Emad Al-Kateb, Al-Fateh Al-Qassy fel-Fateh Al-Qudsy, ed., Mohamed Mahmoud Sobh, (Cairo 2003), 88-94; See also, Roger of wendover, Flowers of History, trans. By J.A. Giles, 2 vols., (London, 1849), vol. 2., 64-64; Eracles, L’Estoire, 78-79; Ernoul, Chronique, 184.

[[5]]Emad Al-Kateb, Al-Fateh Al-Qassy,95-96.

[[6]]Emad Al-Kateb, Al-Fateh Al-Qassy,124-127; Ibn Al-Ahthir, Al-Kamel, vol. 11, 111; Abu Shama, Al-Rawdatain, vol 2, 96.

[[7]]Ernoul, Chronique, 220-226; Eracles, L’Estoire, 92-93.

[[8]]Eracles, L’Estoire, 98.

[[9]] The truce lasted for three years and eight months. See, Ibn Shaddad, Al-Nwader Al-Sultaniah , 222 ; Abu Shama, Al-Rawdatain, vol 2,203.

[[10]]Diana Webb,Medieval European Pilgrimage, c.700 – c.1500 ,(New york,2002); Pringle, D., The Planning of Some Pilgrimage Churches in Crusader Palestine World Archaeology, Vol. 18, No. 3, Archaeology and the Christian Church (Feb., 1987), 341-362; Maher Y. Abu-Munshar, Sultan al-Kamil, Emperor Frederick II and the Submission of Jerusalem, International Journal of Social Science and Humanity, Vol. 3, No. 5, September 2013,442-447.

[[11]] Reigned from the 8^th of January 1198; the day on which pope Caelestinus III passed away. His birth name was Lotario dei Conti di Segni, he is from a noble Roman family. He studied theology in Paris, and jurisprudence in Bologna. He is the author of many important theological writings. See  Ursula, S., Die Aufrufe Derpapste zur Befreiung des Heiligen Beiszum Ausgang Innozennz IV, (Berlin, 1937), 92-94; Hans, K., Encyc1pedia of the Papacy, (London, 1959),84-86.

[[12]]Ernoul, Chronique,387.

[[13]] Western sources stated that this truce has lasted for six years; however, Arabic sources never mentioned this piece of information. Ibn Al-Athir just said “King Al-Adel and the Franks hold a truce.”Ibn Wassel said that “the two kings signed a truce for a certain period.” Al-Maqreezy stated that “a truce has been reached.” See, Ibn Al-Athir, Al-Kamel, vol. 12,122;  Ibn Wassel, Mufarrej Al-Kurub, vol. 3,161; Al-Maqreezy, Al-Solok li Marifa Dauwal al Muluk, edited by Mostafa ,Z., 3 vols,(Cairo,1934-1942), vol.1,163; See also, Eracles, L’Estoire, 261- 263; Ernoul, Chronique, 360.

[[14]]Runciman ,S., A History of the Crusades, 3 vols., (Cambridge, 1968),vol.3, 103.

[[15]] This letter is dated October 1198 AD/ZulQeada 594 AH. See Pope Innocent III, Letter of Innocent III to The Nobles of Tuscany (October 1198), in Ursula, S., Die Aufrufe Derpapste, 93.

[[16]] Raafat Abd Al-Hamid, The Crusading Papal Thought: A Research in The History of The Crusades, (Cairo 1998),48.

[[17]] Norman Cantor, Medieval History: The Life and Death of a Civilization, trans., Qassem Abdou Qassem, 2 vols., (Cairo 1997), vol 2, 562.

[[18]]Innocent III, pope, Regesta, in p. L., vol. 214. Cols119- 123.

[[19]]Innocent III, Pope, Regesta, in P.L.,. vol.214; cols.737- 738 ; Rohricht, R., ed., Regesta Regni Hierosolymitani, 2vols., (Innsbruck, 1892 – 1904), no.760., 202-203.

[[20]]Vincent de Beauvais, Speculum Historiale,(Graz-Austria, 1965), Libxxix, ch. Lix.

[[21]] King Al-Adel depended on his sons and relatives to run the state, he appointed them deputies everywhere. For instance, he appointed Al-Kamel Mohamed on Egypt, Al-Moatham Eisa on Damascus, Al-Ashraf Mousa on Hiran, Al-Awhad on Meyafarikîn, and Al-Zaher Ghazi, Saladin’s son on Aleppo. See Al-Maqreezy, Al-Solok, vol.1,189-190.

[[22]]Ryccardus de San Germano, Chronican, in Muratori, R.I.S., vol. VIII, cosl. 985-986.

[[23]]Ryccardus de San Germano, Chronican, vol. VIII, cols. 986-988 .

 while Röhricht stated that the letter of Pope Innocent III to King Al-Adel was dated the 26^th April 1213. See Rõhrict, Regesta, no. 864., 232.

[[24]]Al-Maqreezy, Al-Solok,vol.1,229.

[[25]] When Baldwin I passed away on 1118 AD/ 512 AH, he did not leave an heir. A council attended by Arnulf of Chocquas the Patriarch of Jerusalem and the nobles of the kingdom was summoned. After several long discussions it was decided that Baldwin count of Edessa would be crowned as the King of the Kingdom of Jerusalem in the Church of the Holy Sepulcher, under the name of Baldwin II. See,William of Tyre,History of the Deeds done beyond the Sea,trans.by.Babock and Key,(New york,1943),vol.1,520.

[[26]]Ali Ahmed El-Sayed, Hebron and the Sanctuary of Abraham,127.

[[27]] Benjamin of Tudela lived in the town of Tudela in what is now Spain. He is the son of Jonah. He went on a great journey from 1163 till 1179 in which he visited the whole old world, including the Levant and the holy places. See Mohamed Mones Awad, European Travellers in the Middle Ages, (Cairo 2004),39.

[[28]] Benjamin of Tudela, The Travels of Benjamin of Tudela, trans., Ezra Haddad, 1^st ed., (Baghdad 1945),105.

[[29]] Fetahya was born in Ratisbon, in Eastern Europe in the first half of the twelfth century AD / the sixth century AH. His family was a religious one; his father Jacob, his brother Isaac, and his brother Nuchman were all Rabbis. Fetahya lived in Brague; then started his journey to Poland, Armenia, Kiev; then to Persia and the Levant, where he showed great interest of the holy places. After that, he headed to Greece. See Mohamed Mones Awad, European Travellers,53.

[[30]]Petaachia of Ratisbon, Itinerary of Rabbi Petaachia of Ratisbon  in1174-1187 A.D.,in Jewish Travelers , 109-123.

[[31]]Petaachia of Ratisbon, Itinerary, 89-90.

[[32]]Jacob Ben R.Nathaniel Ha Cohen, Itinerary of Rabbi Jacob Ben R.Nathaniel Ha Cohen  Twelfh Century.,in Jewish Travelers , 92-100.

[[33]]Jacob Ben R.Nathaniel Ha Cohen, Itinerary,  p.93.

[[34]] The journey of Samuel ben Samson was mentioned in the Jewish Travels in about nine pages. It was recorded by his friend Jonathan ha Cohen. See Samuel Ben Samson, Itinerary of Rabbi Samuel Ben Samson in1210 A.D.,in Jewish Travelers ,ed.by Adler,E.N.,(London 1930), 101-109.

[[35]] Samuel ben Samson said that he descended twenty-four steps on a small ladder that he could not even turn over, and then he saw three tombs where he prayed in abidance, then he climbed up, and completed his visit around Hebron. After that he headed towards Jerusalem. See Samuel Ben Samson, Itinerary,105.

[[36]]Richards, D.S., The Crusade of Fredrick II and the Hamah Succession, Extacts from the Chronicle of Lbi Al-Damn, in   Bullet in d;Etudes Orientales, t. xiv, 1993, 183-200; See Raafat Abd Al-Hamid, King Al-Kamel versus the Crusaders: between Excessiveness and Squander, A research in the Crusades History, (Cairo,1998),123-201 ; Hassan Abd El-Wahab, Jerusalem Truce: according to the historian Al-Qady Ibn Abi Al-Dam Al-Hamawy 1229AD/626AH, A Comparative Study, in The Conference of Jerusalem History Sources, (Cairo : March 1998).

[[37]] For more details about the Treaty of Jaffa, see Ibn Wassel, Mufarrej Al-Kurub, vol. 3,231-233; Ibn Al-Adim, Zebdat Al-Halab men Tareekh Halab, 3 vols, ed., Samy Addahan, (Damascus 1951), vol 3,205; Ibn Nazeef Al-Hamawy, Talkhees Al-Kashf w Al-Bayan fe Hawadeth Al-Zaman, (Al-Tareekh Al-Mansoury), ed., Abu Al-Abd Dawod, (Damascus 1981),176; Al-Maqreezi, Al-Solok,vol.1,230-232. ; See  Eracles, L’Estoire, 374; Ernoul, Chronique, 465.

[[38]]Paul Wiegler,   The Infidal Imperor and his Strauggles against the Pope, trans. By B. Downs, (London, 1930),141.

[[39]] About this the Patriarch says that “it was widely knows how mean the behaviour of the Emperor was in the Eastern Lands right from the very beginning, till the extent of talking to clergymen in a mocking tone.” See Hassan Abd El-Wahab, Jerusalem Truce,140.

[[40]] Gerald ends his letter to pope Gregory IX saying that: “after the Emperor has figured out that his mean attitude was of no use; achieving no success, he wanted to leave the Levant after doing much harm to the holy lands.” See Letter of Gerald Patriareh of Jerusalem to Pope Gregory IX, Acre (7 Mar. 1229), in Huillard-Bréhollcs, (ed.),  HistoriaDiplomatica Friderica Secundi, 7vols., (Paris, 1851-1862)vol. 3, 86-90.

[[41]] The pope described the Treaty of Jaffa as being in accordance with the religion of the Muslims not the Christian creed. See Roger of Wendoverd, Flowers of History, trans. By J.A. Giles, 2vols., (London, 1849), vol. 2. 528; cf. also: Grousset, R., Histore des Croisdes, t. 3, 322.

[[42]] This Treaty evoked rage in the whole Muslim world; the historian Sebt Ibn Al-Jawzy says: “when Muslims heard the news of handing Jerusalem over to the Crusaders, it was like the dooms day in all Muslim countries, till the extent of holding mourning ceremonies expressing condolences”, Al-Maqreezi also says: “Muslims all over the countries were crying and weeping, and they denounced such act from Al-Kamel. Rumors and false talk about him spread around the countries.” See Sebt Ibn Al-Jawzy, Mreaat Azzaman fe Tareekh Al-Aayan, vol. 8, (Hyderabad 1951), part 2,654; Al-Maqreezi, Al-Solok,vol.1, 230.

[[43]]Al-Maqreezi, Al-Solok,vol.1, 291.

[[44]]Joinville,  St. Louis,trans. Hassan Habashy,(Cairo,1968),243.

[[45]] After Saif ad-Din Qutuz won the Battle of Ain Jalut, Baibars al-Bunduqdari killed him and became the chief commander of the Army. He entered Egypt with this army and the nobles crowned him the Sultan of Egypt; al-Malik al-Ẓāhir Rukn al-Din Baibars al-Bunduqdari, on October 1260 AD./ ZulQeaada 658 AH. See  Ibn Abd Al-Zaher, Al-Rawd Al-Zaher fe Serat Al-Malek Al-Zaher, ed., Abd Al-Aziz Al-Khweiter, (Riyadh 1976),76-78; Al-Maqreezi, Al-Solok,vol.1,432.

[[46]] Baibars Al-Mansoury, Al-Tohfa Al-Mamlukia fe Al-Dawla Al-Turkiya, ed., Abd Al-Hamid Saleh, (Beirut 1987)67; Al-Maqreezi, Al-Selook, vol. 1, 544.

[[47]]Burchard of Mount Sion,ADescription of the Holy Land,tr.by Aubrey Stewart,in:P.P.T.S.,vol.XII,(London,1896), 35

[[48]] Ibn Abd Al-Zaher, Al-Rawd Al-Zaher , 398; Al-Maqreezi, Al-Solok, vol. 1,601.

[[49]] See the full text of the document in : Risani, N,  Documenti E Firmani, Gerusalemme, 1931. Doc XXV, 290 – 317.

[[50]] For more details about Nachmanides, and his works; See  Joseph E. David, Dwelling Within the Law: Nachmanides Legal Theojogy, Oxford Journal of Law and Religion, (2013), 1–21.

[[51]]For more details about the Hospice of Hebron, See Ali Ahmed El-Sayed, “Tamim Al-Dari’s Waqf in Hebron: Its Role in Flourishing the Sanctuary of Abraham and Accommodating the Locals and the Foreigners”, in: Bulletin of the Faculty of Arts, Issue no. 54, (Alexandria University Press, 2005).

[[52]] Abou Al-Yaman Al-Olaimi, Al-Anas Al-Galil fe Al-Quda w Al-Khalil, 2 vols., (Beirut 1973), vol. 2,605-606; about Aladin Aidighdi Al-Aama, See: Ibrahim Margouna, The Civilized Role of Aladin Aidighdi Al-Aama in Jerusalem and Hebron, Arab Historian Magazine, Issue 18, (Cairo 2010), 233-264.

[[53]]Anselme Adorno,Iteneraire d, Anselme Adorno in Terre-Sainte 1470-1271 A.D.,trans.Heers J.et Groer  J.,( Paris, 1978),.251.

[[54]] Ibn Abd Al-Zaher, Tashreef Al Ayyam w Al-Osor fe Serat Al-Malek Al-Mansour, ed., Morad Kamel, (Cairo 1981),35-38; Ibn Al-Forat, Tareekh Al-Dowal w Al-Molok, ed., Constantine Zuraik, (Beirut 1942), 263-264; Al-Maqreezi, Al-Solok, vol 1.985-990.

[[55]]Ibn Abd Al-Zaher, Tashreef Al Ayyam,156-161.