Military Review

Battle of Montjisar: as the young king of the mighty Sultan defeated. Part two

39
Continuation of the material about the unique victory of the Palestinian Crusaders over a much larger army of Islamists, moving to Jerusalem.


The course of the battle

So, at the end of November 1177, the huge sultan army, consistently defeating several Christian troops, relaxed somewhat (like Saladin himself), spread out over the kingdom of Jerusalem and engaged in looting. Moreover, the Sultan of Egypt and Syria considered the day of 27 to be happy for itself, “the day of triumph”, and apparently assumed that on that day he would be able to join Jerusalem, as a result of a light assault, 3 the year before he triumphantly entered Damascus. But 25 in November, 1177, suddenly everything changed suddenly - the army of the Islamists had to take the battle with a detachment of crusaders who had suddenly approached their camp.

The location of the battlefield is localized in different ways: some believe that Mons gisardi it's a hill Al-safiya at Ramla, other researchers admit that the battle took place at Tell as-safi , near modern settlement Menehem, next to Ashkelon; but one way or another, the battle took place on a flat area with ridges of hills, somewhere between Ashkelon and Ramla.

Battle of Montjisar: as the young king of the mighty Sultan defeated. Part two

Crusader states in Zamorye.


It should be noted that the shock forces of Balduin IV’s army still managed to avoid annihilation thanks to a quick march and excellent maneuvering. The fact is that his small infantrymen were not city militiamen (like the surrounded and destroyed Jerusalem arierbann), but foot and horse "sergeants", professional warriors, who used various "weedy" horses, mules and even donkeys for speed of movement, t. that is, in fact, they acted as the "dragoons" of the New Time or the "dimaha" of Antiquity, not inferior in speed of movement and professionalism to the knights. It was thanks to the speed that the surprise factor worked: under Montjisar, the “francs” managed to catch the “Saracens” by surprise.

However, Balduin IV still had very few warriors: about 450-600 knights as the main striking force (300 templar led by Grandmaster of the Order of the Temple Odo de Saint-Amandan, about 375 of the Hospitallers and a row other equestrian contingents). At the same time, the infantry riding (even in the dragoon version) in the army of Christians played only a supporting role and hardly fought in horse formation, whereas the Muslims had a great superiority in cavalry. The people of Jerusalem were in turmoil, for they saw before us a huge camp of the enemy army, and were aware of the insignificance of their chances. But there was nothing to do - Christians had to enter the battle with the fury of the doomed, in order to try to save the Holy City at the cost of their lives.

In addition, in their hands was a great Christian shrine - part of the Cross, on which Jesus Christ was crucified, which was found during excavations in Jerusalem by Queen Helena, mother of the Roman emperor Constantine. A part of this relic was built by the crusaders according to a Byzantine pattern in a cruciform battle standard, which became the main banner of the army of the Jerusalem kingdom.


The vanguard of the Crusaders of the Templars and the Hospitallers on the march.


Now we will hand over the word to the already familiar to us Patriarch of the Syrian Church Michael, in the chronicles of which one of the best descriptions of the battle of Montjisar has been preserved, in fact, this is a recorded story of the battle participant who remained nameless.

“... Everyone lost hope ... But God revealed all his power in the weak, and inspired the weak King of Jerusalem to attack; around him gathered the remnants of his troops. He came down from his horse, prostrated himself before the Holy Cross, and offered up a prayer ... At the sight of this heart, all the warriors trembled and were filled with hope. They laid their hands on the True Cross and swore that they would not leave the battle to the end, and if the wrong Turks had won, then those who tried to run and not die would be considered worse than Judah. And then they got into their saddles, moved forward and faced the Muslims, who were already celebrating the victory, because they believed that they had destroyed all the Franks before.

Seeing the Turks (as the Syrian hierarch calls all Muslim warriors), whose troops were like the sea, the knights dismounted again, cut off their hair; they hugged for reconciliation and asked each other for forgiveness for the last time, and then rushed into battle. At that very moment, the Lord raised a cruel storm, which raised dust from the Franks and drove it to the Turks. Then the Christians realized that God accepted their repentance and heard their prayer, they rejoiced and cheered ... ”


As is known from other testimonies, the Crusaders, offering prayers to Jesus Christ, the Blessed Virgin and the Great Martyr George, rushed to the attack, "putting everything on one card." At that time, Saladin, seeing a small but determined and ready for battle opponent, began to assemble his own regiments. However, despite the fact that only about 500 knight copies stabbed into the center of the Muslim army, the success was accompanied by Christians (sources do not report whether Christian infantry, which supported the knights' attack, attacked on foot or in horse formation).

If Saladin had shown himself at the hill of Mont-Gisar as a courageous and commanding general, then surely he could have turned the tide of battle in his favor. However, the “Piety of Faith” apparently liked to kill only unarmed prisoners (according to a chronicler, the sultan personally cut the throat of the first captured Christian soldier, apparently from a broken detachment of border guards - Turkopoli), while the prospect of a real hand-to-hand combat with an unknown result strongly frightened him. According to the testimony of a Muslim participant in the battle, a small detachment of knights, apparently led by the King of Jerusalem (less than 100 warriors), clearly focusing on the banner of the Sultan, made his way to his guardsmen, and so fiercely attacked them, 700-1000 warriors), gradually began to retreat. Faced with immediate danger, Saladin himself, and with him and his retinue, fled before any other warriors.


The decisive attack of a small detachment of crusaders led by the king at the headquarters of Salahuddin.


Seeing this, the soldiers of the Islamist army, already hesitating under the blows of Christians, realized that everything was gone, since the sultan himself was running, and they also ran. Attempts by junior officers to restore order in the ranks of the Muslims did not lead to anything; the senior officers ran immediately after their master. Let us give the floor to Mikhail Syriyu again: “... Incorrect Turks, on the contrary, hesitated, then turned around and fled. The Franks pursued them all day and took away many thousands of their camels and all their possessions. Since the Turkish troops scattered across the desert areas, the Franks took 5 days to search for them. ... Some of them, having reached Egypt, led by Saladin, dressed in black and were in deep mourning ... ".

The results and consequences of the battle

Fleeing always means a disproportionate increase in losses on the part of the loser, and the battle of Montjisar was no exception: the Crusaders had very little, and they simply did not have the strength to take prisoners in large quantities. In addition, Christians added bitterness to the fact that the Islamists apparently killed all the captured militias from the defeated Araderban, probably thinking that many slaves would be captured after taking Jerusalem, or they cut the prisoners, seeing that the battle was lost . Therefore, the persecution of fled Muslims lasted for a long time, and it was very fierce. Salahuddin himself escaped, according to an eyewitness, only by transferring from a horse to a fast camel, and practically did not get down from her to the very walls of Cairo.

The huge wagon train and the entire fleet of siege vehicles, which had been prepared beforehand with such difficulty, fell into the hands of the Christian army. The chronicles especially underline the incredible number of captured camels - their number was so great that their prices fell on the Middle Eastern bazaars several times. However, due to the fact that the entourage of Saladin fled one of the first, the top officers of his army (unlike ordinary warriors, especially infantrymen) killed little - only the death of Ahmad, the son of Taki Al-Din, a well-known commander and relative of Saladin, was known.

After the battle, the Sultan's office was taken over by the crusaders, including his personal, jeweled, copy of the Koran, which was presented to him earlier by the King of Jerusalem. At the conclusion of peace between Ayyubid Egypt and the Kingdom of Jerusalem in 1180, Balduin IV again presented this copy to the one to whom it was presented earlier, with the words: “You then lost to Mont-Gisara this present of mine. Take it again. You have already seen that it is not necessary for a lion to act like a jackal. I sincerely hope that you will no longer violate the peace between us and you, and I hope that I will not have to give this book to you a third time again. ”

Very revealing behavior after the battle of the Sinai Bedouins, who were apparently attracted by the Sultan to the march on Jerusalem with promises of rich booty. When the Muslim army ran, their contingent ran one of the first, and, realizing that the promised mining was not foreseen, they began to attack other fugitives from the sultan's army. According to eyewitnesses, the Bedouins killed very many of their fellow believers for the sake of minor trophies, and even tried to attack the retinue of Saladin himself.

The losses of Baldwin IV's army even in the decisive battle were very serious and amounted, according to the surviving letter of the Grand Master of the Hospital Order Roger de Moulins. (Roger des Moulins)1.100 people killed and 750 people. the wounded, who were transferred to the famous hospital in Jerusalem. To this must be added the several thousand dead of the Jerusalem infantry of the encircled militia and an unknown number of Turkopolans of the defeated vanguard.

The losses of Saladin’s army by both sides are estimated as catastrophic - up to 90% of the composition of the army, according to apparently an overestimation of Christian authors. But one way or another, the Muslim infantry (which could not escape from the horse-drawn warriors) suffered very much, while the Muslim cavalry (some of which were generally out of the battlefield, ruining the country) basically retained combat capability. And I must say that another confirmation of the huge losses of Muslims is that the regiments of the black Sudanese mercenaries in the army of Saladin never again reached such a number as they had before Montjisar.

The army of Christians, having won a tremendous victory, did not organize a strategic prosecution and moreover did not march on Cairo, because suffered heavy losses, and was physically and morally severely exhausted. In addition, a more pressing matter was the need to cleanse the center of the country from the marauding detachments that flooded it. But the Muslim army and so suffered huge losses, and most importantly - a direct threat to the very existence of the Kingdom of Jerusalem was removed for many years.

To commemorate the victory, Balduin IV ordered the construction of a Catholic monastery in honor of St. Catherine of Alexandria, the “defender of Christianity”, which had been martyred during the reign of Emperor Maximinus in Alexandria of Egypt, at the scene of the battle. victory was won on the day of her memory.


The borders of the state of Saladin are “from Iraq to Libya,” as its modern followers from ISIL dream.


During the 8 years, while the winner was alive, Saladin well remembered the “lesson learned”, and did not dare to announce a new large-scale campaign “to Jerusalem”, making only disturbing raids on Christian lands. The Sultan of Egypt focused his main efforts on the annexation of the territories of other Muslim rulers, gradually capturing half of the Arabian Peninsula, most of Syria, Iraq, Eastern Libya, the whole of Sudan, and even part of Ethiopia. In fact, he managed to revive the declining Arab caliphate and gradually unite the entire Middle East (excluding the territories of modern Israel and Lebanon, which were part of the Crusader principalities) into a “single Islamic state” from Libya to Iraq, which is also the dream of its current ideological followers - jihadists from ISIL .

The Battle of Montjisar (Tel-Ac-Safita) was one of the greatest victories of the Crusaders in the Middle East and is considered one of the models not only of the commanding art of European knighthood, but also an example of how decisive tactics, heroism and dedication on the one hand allow to overcome, it seemed an incredible ratio, on the other hand, the cowardice of commanding personnel, indiscretion in the conduct of an offensive and low discipline with a great thirst for profit lead to the death of a huge army.
Author:
39 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. sibiryak10
    sibiryak10 30 May 2016 06: 54
    +7
    Thank you for the article! No wonder in the Middle Ages the knightly cavalry was considered the best army. In close combat, it was very difficult to cope with.
    1. Maegrom
      Maegrom 30 May 2016 07: 38
      +3
      Especially reading about its inferiority against the background of equestrian shooters.
      1. Mikhail Matyugin
        30 May 2016 10: 16
        +7
        Quote: Maegrom
        reading about her inferiority against the background of equestrian shooters.

        Actually, one should not exaggerate the role of mounted shooters - this is no more than one of the branches of the armed forces, while the armies that displayed soldiers of this type were often not able to expose others.

        If there is a continuation of the cycle, I will tell you about how European medieval armies very successfully coped with equestrian archers of the East.
  2. Korsar4
    Korsar4 30 May 2016 07: 43
    +2
    Interesting. But for me the times are legendary. And how it was all really possible to guess.
    1. Mikhail Matyugin
      30 May 2016 10: 18
      +5
      Quote: Korsar4
      But for me the times are legendary. And how it was all really possible to guess.

      Just about this battle a lot of information has been preserved and therefore its course is well known.

      As for the legend, the events of the last decades in Iraq, Syria and even Egypt show that Saladin's ideas "live and will live."
    2. Revolver
      Revolver 30 May 2016 22: 35
      +6
      Times are legendary. And the Arabs seem not to have changed since then. To mock and rob - here they are the first, but a little smelled like an otvetka so immediately on a camel aftersexual faster and go. For the last couple of hundreds of years, only the lazy did not heap them, and from the Jews they regularly raked roughly like Saladin at Monjisar from the crusaders.
      1. Revolver
        Revolver 31 May 2016 02: 07
        +3
        Yes, I read a gorgeous joke about Arabs on an English site, I give it right away in translation.

        Question: what is the name of an Arab having a camel and a goat?
        Answer: Bisexual
  3. Riv
    Riv 30 May 2016 08: 05
    +3
    Well, yes ... The Christians suddenly went to the rear to the enemy stretched on a march. The banner of Salah ad-Din at a distance of attack, the general himself can be planted on a spear. Only the knights and care had a haircut and a hug. :)
    1. Mikhail Matyugin
      30 May 2016 10: 23
      +12
      Quote: Riv
      the general himself can be planted on a spear. Only the knights and care had a haircut and a hug. :)

      To "put him on a spear" - it was necessary in a detachment of less than 100 people to break through a guard of 700-1000 people! and in terms of the severity of weapons, Saladin's guard was not inferior to the European chivalry of the 12th century! but ... she began to withdraw, and the sultan himself actually ran first.

      And the episode preserved in the chronicles of how Christian warriors hugged and cut part of their hair is very characteristic, they went to death, but there was no chance of death except heroic death, as they believed before the fight (no one could have suggested the instability of the Sultan and his army).

      "The chieftain took off his hat and laid it on the ground, saying - all the guys, we will not run anywhere."
      1. Riv
        Riv 30 May 2016 11: 45
        0
        Cool.
        Now I know why in the Soviet Army the recruit was sheared off. So that silly thoughts about Christian love do not enter my head.

        Doesn't the simple thing occur to you? Baldwin could heroically die with his army before. There were plenty of cases. But for some reason, the king did not arrange a banzai attack with the complete shaving of all the hair on the body, but quite competently called for help, caught up with the Muslims and fry them at the most opportune moment. Apparently not so much he was going to die, especially since he himself went into battle only when the outcome of the battle was already determined.
        1. Mikhail Matyugin
          30 May 2016 12: 01
          +7
          Quote: Riv
          Baldwin could heroically die with his army before.

          In general, the king was doomed to early death from childhood, when he became ill with leprosy.

          Quote: Riv
          Apparently not so much he was going to die, especially since he himself went into battle only when the outcome of the battle was already determined.
          He attacked in front of his few knights at the very decisive moment.

          And a competent call for help is how? borderline
          Turkopul troops were largely exterminated in a skirmish at the border, Jerusalem infantry was exterminated upon leaving the city, only the cavalry strike forces that successfully hid in Ascalon were saved.
          1. Riv
            Riv 30 May 2016 14: 25
            -2
            About "attacked at the most decisive moment" - you've seen enough of kin. Don't trust fairy tales. And you can't wear a stylish mask in the heat, and the subjects tried to stay away from the king, and leprosy was by no means the main cause of death in the prime of life. She was generally a common evil at that time. He died not from leprosy, but from banal dysentery (according to other sources - from malaria). It was less necessary to sip dirty water on hikes from puddles. The leprosy was probably a complication too.

            By the time of the battle, the Baldwin was practically unable to walk, and if he was not completely blind, he was very close to this. Where can I attack with a spear to an advantage? A horse would hold on. So his personal guard on the battlefield did not burst at a gallop. The guards were simply given the opportunity to chase the fleeing when the battle was already won. Indeed: the horses are fresh, let them stretch their arms.
            1. Mikhail Matyugin
              30 May 2016 16: 29
              +3
              Quote: Riv
              And you can’t swear a stylish mask in the heat,

              Perhaps we will publish the third part, so to speak, which will analyze in detail the identity of Baldwin IV and the specifics of the fighting in Bl.Vostok.

              Quote: Riv
              and by no means leprosy was the main cause of death in the prime of life. She was generally habitual evil at that time.
              A highly controversial moment is rather the opposite of a terrible evil. And the rapidly developing leprosy was precisely the main cause of death (although the king had a clear problem - apparently his body reacted very quickly to this generally slow-moving disease).

              Quote: Riv
              So his personal guard on the battlefield did not burst at a gallop. The guards were just given the opportunity to chase the fleeing,
              That's what attacked! Or do you not believe the description of one of the persons who accompanied Salahuddin himself on the battlefield?
              1. Riv
                Riv 30 May 2016 17: 47
                -3
                Not really. After describing the mass haircut on the battlefield in the mind of the enemy - it’s not very ...

                And leprosy - you do not know. Then they were no more afraid of her than later of smallpox. Well, yes, it’s unpleasant. But to live until the consequences of the disease became fatal, people rarely had time. The incubation period is very long. It was necessary to become infected at a very young age. There were even special written laws for lepers. And so - the matter of life, the scourge of God. We are all sinners, they can fly to each of them.

                But by the end of the 16th century, it was cut off. The pandemic has come to naught. Herself. Tolley man developed immunity, toli plague epidemic burned people weakened by leprosy, who were genetically predisposed to it, but there were no more mass diseases. HZ ... Genes are a dark matter.
                1. Mikhail Matyugin
                  30 May 2016 19: 42
                  +2
                  Quote: Riv
                  And leprosy - you do not know. Then they were no more afraid of her than later of smallpox.

                  That's just for smallpox patients leprozoria is not built, and not fenced off from society.

                  Quote: Riv
                  The incubation period is very long.

                  Well, not only the incubation period is long (from several months to apparently several years), but the course of the disease itself is very long - an average of 20 years. But the course could be different - and the earlier the infection, the greater the consequences and the more likely the death.

                  Quote: Riv
                  But by the end of the 16 century - how cut off. The pandemic has come to naught.
                  You are very wrong - not "as cut off", just learned how to heal. It would be more accurate to isolate the sick in the strictest way - and prevent the spread. But before the invention of the newest antibiotics, it is impossible to treat a serious one in general (more precisely, to arrange long-term remissions).
                  1. Riv
                    Riv 31 May 2016 11: 44
                    -3
                    In the 16th century, learned to treat leprosy ??? And about strict isolation, someone also told you a lie. A living (or rather no longer) example is Baldwin the Fourth himself. Che didn’t painfully strictly isolate him, but he was sick since childhood. And he had lepers knights ... And patients walked along the streets of cities and struggled ...
                    In general, not everything was as they say in films. :)
                    1. Mikhail Matyugin
                      31 May 2016 12: 34
                      +2
                      Quote: Riv
                      In the 16 century we learned how to treat leprosy ??? And about strict isolation, someone also told you a lie.

                      It was the construction of a wide network of leper colony and special leper settlements that led to the recession of the epidemic (which was due to bacteriological rather than genetic, as previously thought, the nature of the spread of leprosy). Not to treat - but to isolate and create relatively normal conditions for the lives of patients separately from society.

                      And yes, plague pandemics have slaughtered so many patients. As a result, there are fewer and fewer distributors. And since then, until today, the number of patients has gradually decreased - except for a small surge associated with the development of colonial territories - and in the 20th century, after the invention of antibiotics, it abruptly waned.

                      In fact, only patients remained in endemic regions - India, Brazil, the South of the USA and a number of territories in the Pacific basin.
                      1. Riv
                        Riv 31 May 2016 17: 59
                        +1
                        Isolate ... Still, you do not know the subject. Leprozoria existed at monasteries, but it was possible to drive a leper there only with his consent. The monastery is not a prison or a strict security zone. Escaping from there was not so difficult. Therefore, there were enough lepers on the city streets.

                        There was another way for them: the Order of St. Lazarus. It consisted of lepers completely combat-ready units, and in battle literally stood to the last. The order was destroyed several times along with the master, but each time it was reborn. Outcasts? No matter how ... Order, by the way, exists now.
            2. Korsar4
              Korsar4 30 May 2016 20: 21
              +2
              You must not underestimate leprosy.

              And in the awareness of doom - something Hamlet. You can do what you think is necessary.
  4. Bashibuzuk
    Bashibuzuk 30 May 2016 09: 20
    +7
    Michael, thanks for the article.
    The text is well written.
    And, last time, here the critics rinsed me .... can I still comment on something.
    For, READ. I read the text ... for those who like to insert their remarks.
    ...
    "... for the speed of movement of which various" skinny "horses, mules and even donkeys"- if the rearban was armed with donkeys, then it is not surprising that it was destroyed cleanly.
    Donkeys do not run. Or run for extremely short distances, a jerk from danger. The speed of a donkey corresponds to the speed of a person. I lived in Central Asia, I'm from there, so I saw donkeys all the time.
    ..
    "..500 copies hit the center of the troops ..". And how to clarify what is meant - 500 copies - the number of purely spearmen, or "spear" - as a unit of soldiers under a knight.
    "Spear" as a unit - can be from 5 - 6 people to ... to .. it's hard to even say, to a company. But we will limit ourselves to just a dozen. Then it turns out - 5000 soldiers, part of the horse, part of the infantry.
    And if you mean pure knight-spearmen, then this is the full composition of the entire Baldwin army, the chivalrous composition.
    ...
    So, given the fact that the main army of Saladin traded robbery, robbery, looting, away from the headquarters ... then, somehow imperceptibly, a special martial art. From the knights.
    To defeat an uncontrollable herd, to fighters imprisoned for battle and inspired by faith - this is natural. And no wonder.
    At least I think so.
    And most likely, it was the routine of such an act that led to the fact that in history this battle remained a purely passing moment.
    The crusader army defeated a horde of brainless marauders. Fate is like that. Naturally.
    Salah ad-din tarnished himself, standing at the head of a gang of looters.
    And Baldwin just fulfilled his duties. Natural duties.
    And what was there to talk and write about to the then chroniclers.
    ...
    Loved the drawings. Highly.
    .
    PC .... who this time will begin to breed criticism?
    1. Mikhail Matyugin
      30 May 2016 10: 29
      +5
      Thank you!
      Quote: Bashibuzuk
      if the arjerban was armed with donkeys, it is not surprising that he was completely destroyed.

      Ayerban was a Jerusalem infantry - a militia. Even without donkeys (if they only carried supplies of water and food).

      I said that horse and foot "sergeants", i.e. professional warriors, but not knights, simply used less powerful horses. Donkeys were used in extreme cases for speed and ease of movement.

      Quote: Bashibuzuk
      Donkeys do not run. Or run for extremely short distances, a jerk from danger
      They were used exclusively as a vehicle. By the way horses on the march they don’t jump at full speed too - they will quickly exhaust, and then what’s the point of attack ?!

      Quote: Bashibuzuk
      And if you mean pure knight-spearmen, then this is the full composition of the entire Baldwin army, the chivalrous composition.
      We are talking only about the number of knights, i.e. copies in the literal sense, and not "copies" as designation of a knightly detachment (something like the modern "squad").
      1. Riv
        Riv 30 May 2016 11: 54
        +8
        These were specially trained, militant Palestinian donkeys. The breed was bred by crossing local donkeys with captive Arabs. You can imagine how a war donkey hated everything Muslim.
        The secret of breed breeding was lost after the capture of Jerusalem, but still in Muslim countries, attempts to restore it have not stopped.
        1. Orakul2000
          Orakul2000 31 May 2016 02: 28
          +4
          Regarding military donkeys, patsstalom !!!!laughing
          1. Bashibuzuk
            Bashibuzuk 31 May 2016 19: 11
            +1
            Riv .... burst my eyes.
            (How else haven't they burst in a day ???)
            ...
            I will contact the moderators ... - you can not skip such comments!
            I stand on that - "... by crossing local ishakov with the captive Arabs. "
            ...
            A legitimate question arises - where were the EGGS?
            .
            Convulsions ... I will bring a lawsuit, KShM ...
  5. pigkiller
    pigkiller 30 May 2016 10: 19
    +2
    The battle of Hattin decided the fate of the Christian state. formations in the Middle East.
  6. Cherkashin Ivan
    Cherkashin Ivan 30 May 2016 10: 24
    +1
    And Baldwin just fulfilled his duties. Natural duties.
    And what was there to talk and write about to the then chroniclers.

    Perhaps there was simply no worthy author who praised this victory))) At the heart of "Song of Roland" are also far from heroic achievements, but how the troubadours turned.

    And if according to the article, it’s very interesting, but you’re right there are a lot of questions to this battle and I don’t think that there are answers to them.
    1. Bashibuzuk
      Bashibuzuk 30 May 2016 14: 42
      +4
      That's for sure, no worthy authors were found.
      And about Roland - well, how can you ... ".. also not heroic achievements" ...
      Well, well, well.
      Roland, the great hero, sometimes even the nephew of Charlemagne.
      How many heroic things he did:
      - called the sword Durendal? Called!
      - called his battle horn Oliphan? Called!
      - called his horse Veitlantif? Called!
      This is what kind of hero you need to be in order to give the name to all the pieces of iron and horn pipes.
      A horse has a worse name-calling than a sword.
      And as the impetus for the dragon to fill up - so he is his club. Not a sword. In what, Hero!
      ...
      ...
      Damn, it even became jealous. Now my "Claudia" named Pamela Anderson. And I will become a Hero!
  7. Mikhail Matyugin
    30 May 2016 10: 36
    +5
    Quote: pigkiller
    The battle of Hattin decided the fate of the Christian state. formations in the Middle East.

    Which existed a whole century after it? In addition, the ensuing war between the European kings and Saladin ended in peace.

    But in something you are right - the kingdom of Jerusalem - just like modern Israel - has a shortage of space, one defeat puts the state on the brink of destruction, nowhere to retreat, behind the sea.

    Quote: Cherkashin Ivan
    And Baldwin just fulfilled his duties. Natural duties.
    Well, so simply, "natural duties" - having 3.000 - defeated 30.000? Of course, no art.
    1. Cherkashin Ivan
      Cherkashin Ivan 30 May 2016 12: 17
      0
      Dear Mikhail, these are not my words. I still do not know how to insert quotes. This quote is uv. Bashibuzuka, then my comment.
  8. Torins
    Torins 30 May 2016 10: 45
    +2
    Quote: Maegrom
    Especially reading about its inferiority against the background of equestrian shooters.

    And what was their inferiority against the background of equestrian shooters?)) Is it that there is an increased risk of losing an expensive war horse while part of the forces goes to the equestrian shooters in the rear) Yes, and let's remember when these equestrian shooters and knights were massively used against each other. Something only occurs to me that the Hungarians raided the Holy Roman Empire, so the Hungarians regularly lost all the main battles and avoided any clashes with the main enemy forces)
  9. Michael.
    Michael. 30 May 2016 11: 07
    0
    This is the Türks. To take it with a weak spirit and to stand up immediately to push the Jackals to flee. An example of the event is April 2-5 in Nagorno-Karabakh. When the elite of the Azerbaijan Army, its professional special forces treacherously attacked the advanced garrisons of the Armenian defenders of the draftees boys. such a rebuff to them. That Baku itself requested a truce.
    1. Riv
      Riv 30 May 2016 11: 49
      +3
      Wah! Pathos! More PAPHOS !!!
      Why are you so bad about the Armenians? I have little faith in the fact that the front line was precisely the call, and the entire cadre Armenian army valiantly hid forty kilometers from the defense line.
  10. Mikhail Matyugin
    30 May 2016 11: 58
    +4
    Quote: Torins
    And what was their inferiority against the background of equestrian shooters?))

    In general, the main problem with European medieval armies is their small size and "excessive desire to show personal heroism."

    And against the horse archers - first there were their horse archers, secondly there were foot crossbowmen, who, due to their range, simply kept the East archers at a distance, and thirdly, what could make horse archers the solid formation of professional infantry, covered with large shields?

    Therefore, one way or another, the outcome of all the battles of the Middle Ages was decided in hand-to-hand combat.
  11. King, just king
    King, just king 30 May 2016 12: 23
    +1
    The strategy in the Middle Ages and earlier was apparently one. To get down to the leader, kill him, or make him flee - and the battle, as a rule, is won.
    The place of the battle is unknown? And the monastery that was supposed to be built on the battlefield, or not built?
    1. Rorabek
      Rorabek 30 May 2016 16: 07
      +5
      To consider the people who lived on this earth before us is more primitive than us ... the usual fallacy, the art of war has always been, according to time, the forces and means of modernity
    2. Mikhail Matyugin
      30 May 2016 16: 24
      +1
      Quote: King, just king
      The place of the battle is unknown? And the monastery that was supposed to be built on the battlefield, or not built?

      There is a huge plain, crossed by low hills, on which active agricultural activity is being carried out. Not only in the Mamluk era, but even during the late Ayyubids, the monastery (which was very small) was destroyed. The battlefield is set only approximately.
    3. uwzek
      uwzek 30 May 2016 19: 16
      +2
      Quote: King, just king
      To get down to the leader, kill him, or make him flee - and the battle, as a rule, is won.

      Only not to the leader, to the flag ... Where there is in the battle the leader, sometimes, the leader himself did not know for sure. The fallen flag meant the command "save yourself who can." Why did they hunt for banners in those battles ...
      1. King, just king
        King, just king 30 May 2016 21: 56
        +1
        Yes, the correct amendment. Although under Hastings, William had to face to prove that he was alive.
  12. Torins
    Torins 30 May 2016 14: 09
    +2
    Quote: Mikhail Matyugin
    Quote: Torins
    And what was their inferiority against the background of equestrian shooters?))

    In general, the main problem with European medieval armies is their small size and "excessive desire to show personal heroism."

    And against the horse archers - first there were their horse archers, secondly there were foot crossbowmen, who, due to their range, simply kept the East archers at a distance, and thirdly, what could make horse archers the solid formation of professional infantry, covered with large shields?

    Therefore, one way or another, the outcome of all the battles of the Middle Ages was decided in hand-to-hand combat.

    Directly everyone?) Remember the battle of Grunwald, the main force on both sides was the knight’s cavalry) But in general, the main role of the knight’s cavalry was to destroy the infantry, which, before the appearance of professional and well-trained pikemen, this very knightly cavalry coped very well) In other words, the knight - this is a tank (from light to heavy, depending on the time period) of the Middle Ages, extremely effective with proper use))
    1. Proxima
      Proxima 30 May 2016 18: 07
      +5
      Quote: Torins
      In other words, a knight is a tank (from light to heavy, depending on the time period) of the Middle Ages, extremely effective if used correctly))

      And professional foot soldiers on mules and donkeys are motorized infantry. Here, without any irony. The article correctly observes the analogy with dragoons. It seems to me that the main guarantee of victory at Montjisar was the MOBILITY of the Baldwin ARMY, albeit provided in such an exotic way.
  13. geologist
    geologist 30 May 2016 18: 39
    +4
    Baldwin IV arouses admiration not only for his fearlessness and fortitude, possibly associated with an incurable disease, but also as a person with general intuition. Recall the dust storm before the attack and hilly terrain. He was able to use his chance of a surprise attack in conditions of poor visibility and rough terrain .... There was a heavy stomp - the earth trembled as a result of terrible genies and suddenly, through the yellow mist of dust, a detachment of mighty horsemen in heavy burst right in Salah al-Din armor with huge spears at the ready ... The nomads from the personal guard of the lord of the East leaned back to reduce the inertia of a sudden blow, but late - several rows with a terrible crack of breaking bones were pierced with spears and thrown down the hooves, and then the hellish cutting of maddened with fear began running crowd ...
    1. King, just king
      King, just king 30 May 2016 21: 40
      0
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CJAr1LdGdNA

      "geologist", a joke, no offense.
  14. Mikhail Matyugin
    30 May 2016 18: 56
    +4
    Quote: Proxima
    It seems to me that the main guarantee of victory at Montjisar was the MOBILITY of the Army of Baldwin

    Yes, uv.Proxima, exactly so, you correctly noticed it. The border guards-turkopoli were partially defeated, partially fled, an immobile foot militia was defeated (and in both cases the prisoners were cut out).
    But the "Kingdom of Jerusalem" still had troops - moreover, mobile (the small number of "foot sergeants" on the march did not lag behind the horsemen, and the "mounted sergeants" were generally heavy cavalry, in terms of armament they were not inferior to the knights) and "the most shock" - which ultimately brought victory.
  15. Torins
    Torins 31 May 2016 16: 59
    +3
    Quote: Proxima
    Quote: Torins
    In other words, a knight is a tank (from light to heavy, depending on the time period) of the Middle Ages, extremely effective if used correctly))

    And professional foot soldiers on mules and donkeys are motorized infantry. Here, without any irony. The article correctly observes the analogy with dragoons. It seems to me that the main guarantee of victory at Montjisar was the MOBILITY of the Baldwin ARMY, albeit provided in such an exotic way.

    Totally agree with you. Salladin was then defeated by his unusual tactics and high moral motivation of the enemy. Actually this is a classic and probably the only way when a weaker one can defeat a strong one)
  16. Jääkorppi
    Jääkorppi 5 June 2016 12: 17
    0
    1100 were killed and 700 wounded crusaders in a decisive battle, and it was previously indicated that the entire army is no more than 600 people! We need to figure out the numbers!