Battle of Hattin 1187

**mercian billman** · 07-05-2006, 10:17

When Guy left the oasis of La Safouri he was roughly 20k away from Tiberas, with the heat and the armor that his men were carrying, the march alone would have been exhausting, it was made even worse by the fact that he chose to leave during the hottest part of the day.

To make the situation worse Guy, set up camp for the night at the village of Maskana, while at the same time, Raymond of Tripoli was advancing towards Hattin. Guy should have continued to support Raymond and advance towards Hattin where water was available. Guy's men were probably tired (if not extremely exhausted)but it makes no sense to set up camp in village where your men cannot get an adequate supply of water, especially when an adequate supply (Hattin) is available only a few kilometers away.

**Puzz3D** · 08-03-2006, 20:28

Originally Posted by mercian billman

To make the situation worse Guy, set up camp for the night at the village of Maskana, while at the same time, Raymond of Tripoli was advancing towards Hattin. Guy should have continued to support Raymond and advance towards Hattin where water was available. Guy's men were probably tired (if not extremely exhausted) but it makes no sense to set up camp in village where your men cannot get an adequate supply of water, especially when an adequate supply (Hattin) is available only a few kilometers away.

The army left the road to Tiberias on Raymond's advice to seek water nearby since they had only made it half-way, due to harrassment by the Saracens which had slowed their progress, and therefore wouldn't get to Tiberias before the end of the day. There was a well near Hattin, but when they got there it was dry. At this point, the rear guard was forced to halt by continuous attacks, and asked Guy for assistance from the main body. One source I read said that Guy asked Raymond's advice and he said, 'There is nothing for it. I cannot now offer any advice other than to try to make camp and to pitch your tent on the top of this hill.' Whether it was Raymond's advice or not, they probably had to stop or else sacrifice the rear guard.

**Kraxis** · 08-03-2006, 21:11

While I think you guys have said all to the reasons for the failure of the Crusaders (I think it was their own fault than Saladin's genius that spelled their doom), I will comment that the Crusader tactics were not at faulty when engaged.

They used what they had, and to the effect they could. They marched in a box, with crossbowmen on the outside, infantry supporting them against enemy cavalry and finally the knights and mounted sergeants in the middle able to quickly respond to danger or charge out should the need be.
This formation held, and while there were losses among the horses, it wasn't as bad as sometime portrayed. If it was then I wonder how a significant force of knights managed to batter their way through.

Had the battle, or rather the campaign taken place in the more 'wet' interior, I doubt that Saladin would have won, he could have, he was after all a very good commander, but his strengths lay not in tactics but in strategy, diplomacy (persionality) and not the least in the understanding of his enemies' psyche. And that last point makes me wonder if there would even have been a battle, if not at Hattin...

But if the fall had not come at Hattin, it would just have come later. The Outremer was an untenable position, too few in population, too many lords vying for power and too many people coming from Europe, and messing up any unstable peace in their religious fervour.

**Randarkmaan** · 08-03-2006, 23:04

Anyway had Guy heeded Raymond's advice, who wanted to stay where the army was gathered (don't remember what it was called) and let Saladin take Tiberius, there would most likely not have been a similar battle, Saladin would probably have taken Tiberius and his troops would have raided the countryside, what would not have happened is Saladin attacking the Crusaders entrenched on a defendible spot of their choosing(There were about 25 000 of them, and that's alot!). Had the Crusaders done this all the time they would maybe have existed longer but slowly they would have been depleted of their territories and it would have ended the same way it did in history, though probably a little later. In the end the tactics used by the Crusaders were far too defensive to enlarge the kingdom and in the end they weren't sufficient to ensure the survival of the Crusader States, their best hope would have been peace with the Muslims as many native-born Europeans in the Holy Land desired.

On a different note, have any of you read the Crusades trilogy by Jan Guillou (a Swedish authour)? If you ask me it's one of the most exciting and most interesting historical novels ever done on the Crusades.

**Watchman** · 08-04-2006, 00:05

The Crusader Kingdoms only lasted as long as they did because the economic, political and military muscle of the Orders, born out of organizational principles and economic bases quite different from the standard feudal setup, allowed the gaping holes in their defences to be filled with crusades, mercenaries and Order fighting men. And the fact all the nearby Muslim states were busy playing Warring States, Middle East Edition and finding the "Franks" occasionally useful blunt instruments in their disputes for a while. Sectarian issues, such as the way the Assasins almost regularly destabilized Sunni states into succession disputes by murdering their rulers, also contributed to the general disorder which enabled the Franks to hang onto their coastal domains as long as they did.

**Kraxis** · 08-04-2006, 02:03

Originally Posted by Randarkmaan

On a different note, have any of you read the Crusades trilogy by Jan Guillou (a Swedish authour)? If you ask me it's one of the most exciting and most interesting historical novels ever done on the Crusades.

About a Templar returning home to Sweden right? Have heard my parents talk about it, no praise it, but haven't heard or read anything else.

**Watchman** · 08-04-2006, 02:22

Seen it in bookstores. Haven't read though. Too busy with Englund and Braudel.

**Randarkmaan** · 08-04-2006, 10:29

Well you should try reading it, though I have heard rumours that the English version is not exactly well translated, so that could ruin something.
It's not that bad reading Norwegian translations of Swedish books, since they are generally well translated because the two languages are pretty similar.

About a Templar returning home to Sweden right

The first book is in Sweden (it is pretty good), the second one is partly in Sweden and partly in the Holy land (This one is excellent), the third one is about that Templar returning home (Which is also very good but not as good as the second).