William of Tyre, p. 961. Piers Mitchell published a useful study of Baldwin IV’s leprosy as an appendix to Bernard Hamilton’s biography of the leper king (Hamilton, The Leper King, pp. 245–58).

Anonymi auctoris Chronicon ad AC 1234 pertinens, ed. I. B. Chabot, trans. A. Abouna, 2 vols (Louvain, 1952–74), p. 141.

William of Tyre, p. 991; Ibn al-Athir, vol. 2, p. 253; Baha al-Din, p. 54; Lyons and Jackson, Saladin, pp. 121–6; Hamilton, The Leper King, pp. 132–6.

Lyons and Jackson, Saladin, pp. 130–33.

The excavation of the castle at Jacob’s Ford, pioneered by Professor Ronnie Ellenblum of the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, represents a massive breakthrough in the field of crusader studies. This dig offers an astonishingly detailed glimpse of the crusading world–the equivalent of a freeze-frame image of the twelfth century–because Jacob’s Ford is the first castle to be discovered as it was in 1179, with its slaughtered garrison still within its walls. Many of the physical and material finds from the site can be dated with incredible precision to the morning of Thursday 29 August 1179, because they lay beneath buildings known to have burned and collapsed when the fortress fell. Somewhat ironically, the fact that the stronghold was incomplete actually adds to its archaeological value, because its remains provide an invaluable insight into the construction techniques of medieval castle builders. William of Tyre, p. 998; M. Barber, ‘Frontier warfare in the Latin kingdom of Jerusalem: the campaign of Jacob’s Ford, 1178–9’, The Crusades and Their Sources: Essay Presented to Bernard Hamilton, ed. J. France and W. G. Zajac (Aldershot, 1998), pp. 9–22; R. Ellenblum, ‘Frontier activities: the transformation of a Muslim sacred site into the Frankish castle of Vadum Jacob’, Crusades, vol. 2 (2003), pp. 83–97; Hamilton, The Leper King, pp. 142–7; Lyons and Jackson, Saladin, pp. 133–43.

50 Lilie, Byzantium and the Crusader States, pp. 211–30. Not surprisingly, given the obvious advantages accrued by Saladin at al-Salih’s death, some rumours circulated suggesting that Ayyubid agents had poisoned the Zangid heir. However, Saladin’s initially slow and relatively inept reaction to al-Salih’s demise (which allowed Imad al-Din Zangi to seize power in Aleppo) probably indicates that the sultan was not involved. Lyons and Jackson, Saladin, pp. 143–60.

Lyons and Jackson, Saladin, pp. 165–70; Hamilton, The Leper King, pp. 172–5.

Lyons and Jackson, Saladin, pp. 170–75; Hamilton, The Leper King, pp. 175–7.

William of Tyre, p. 1037.

This territorial expansion prompted Saladin to redistribute power and responsibility within his realm. His brother al-Adil, who since 1174 had governed Egypt, was summoned to Syria to take possession of Aleppo–perhaps with some suggestion that he might be able to pursue semi-independent expansion in the Jazira. The sultan’s nephew Taqi al-Din was promoted, taking over responsibility for the Nile region. Saladin’s other trusted nephew Farrukh-Shah had died of ill-health in late 1182; for the time being he was replaced in Damascus by Ibn al-Muqqadam. Lyons and Jackson, Saladin, p. 202.

It was once popular to suggest that the kingdom of Jerusalem’s Latin nobility were, at this time, divided into two distinct and opposing factions, vying for power and influence as Baldwin IV’s health and authority waned. On the one hand, it was suggested, were the ‘Native Barons’, including Count Raymond III of Tripoli and the Ibelins, who were familiar with the political and military realities of life in the Levant and thus willing to adopt a cautious approach in their dealings with Saladin and Islam; and on the other, the aggressive upstart ‘Court Party’, including Guy of Lusignan and Sibylla, Agnes and Joscelin of Courtenay and Reynald of Châtillon, who were supposedly headstrong newcomers. The problem with this picture, enthusiastically presented by the likes of Steven Runciman in the 1950s, was that it bore little relation to reality. The make-up and policies of these ‘factions’ were never so clear-cut, nor were the members of the ‘Court Party’ ill-informed new arrivals–Reynald of Châtillon and the Courtenays, for example, were well-established figures in Outremer. This traditional image of endemic political factionalism in the 1180s is also suspect because it tends, uncritically, to incorporate the views and prejudices of William of Tyre, who was himself closely embroiled in events and an ardent supporter of Raymond of Tripoli. P. W. Edbury, ‘Propaganda and Faction in the Kingdom of Jerusalem: The Background to Hattin’, in Crusaders and Muslims in Twelfth-Century Syria, ed. M. Shatzmiller (1993), pp. 173–89; Hamilton, The Leper King, pp. 139–41, 144–5, 149–58.

Ernoul, La Chronique d’Ernoul, ed. L. de Mas Latrie (Paris, 1871), pp. 69–70; Abu Shama, p. 231; Lyons and Jackson, Saladin, pp. 185–8; Hamilton, ‘The Elephant of Christ’, pp. 103–4; Hamilton, The Leper King, pp. 179–85.

These included Raymond of Tripoli who, after the attempted coup of 1180, had spent two years in the county of Tripoli (effectively in a state of exile from Palestine) before being reconciled with Baldwin IV in spring 1182. William of Tyre, pp. 1048–9; R. C. Smail, ‘The predicaments of Guy of Lusignan, 1183–87’, Outremer, ed. B. Z. Kedar, H. E. Mayer and R. C. Smail (Jerusalem, 1982), pp. 159–76.

William of Tyre, p. 1058.

Ibn Jubayr also provided a detailed description of the commercial taxes imposed by both Muslims and Latins upon ‘foreign’ traders. Under normal circumstances Muslim merchants passing through either Transjordan or Galilee paid the Franks a toll. This raises the possibility that Saladin targeted these two regions, in part, to open them to commerce free from Christian levies. Ibn Jubayr, pp. 300–301.

Lyons and Jackson, Saladin, pp. 234–9. According to Ibn al-Athir (vol. 2, p. 309), Nasir al-Din ‘drank wine, indulging excessively, and by the morning he was dead. Some have related–and the responsibility for this is theirs–that Saladin arranged for a man, called al-Nasih, who was from Damascus, to go to him, carouse with him and give him a poisoned drink. Come the morning, al-Nasih was nowhere to be seen.’

Lyons and Jackson, Saladin, pp. 239–41; Ehrenkreutz, Saladin, p. 237; Ellenblum, Crusader Castles and Modern Histories, pp. 275ff.

William of Tyre, p. 968. Around the same time, Ibn Jubayr (p. 311) applauded Saladin’s ‘memorable deeds in the affairs of the world and of religion, and his zeal in waging holy war against the enemies of God’, noting that ‘his efforts for justice, and his stands in defence of Islamic lands are too numerous to count’. This evidence is significant because it was not coloured by later events.

Lyons and Jackson, Saladin, pp. 243–6.

P. Balog, The Coinage of the Ayyubids (London, 1980), p. 77; N. Jaspert, The Crusades, p. 73.

Ibn al-Athir, vol. 2, p. 320; Hillenbrand, The Crusades: Islamic Perspectives, pp. 175–85.

Imad al-Din, p. 22; C. P. Melville and M. C. Lyons, ‘Saladin’s Hattin Letter’, The Horns of Hattin, ed. B. Z. Kedar (Jerusalem, 1992), pp. 208–12.

Imad al-Din, p. 23. On Saladin’s defeat of the Franks see: Libellus de expugnatione Terrae Sanctae per Saladinum, Radulphi de Coggeshall Chronicon Anglicanum, ed. J. Stevenson, Rolls Series 66 (London, 1875), pp. 209–62. A translation of this text is available in: J. A. Brundage, The Crusades: A Documentary Survey (Milwaukee, 1962), pp. 153–63. On the Battle of Hattin see: Smail, Crusading Warfare, pp. 189–97; P. Herde, ‘Die Kämpfe bei den Hörnen von Hittin und der Untergang des Kreuzritterheeres’, Römische Quartalschrift für christliche Altertumskunde und Kirchengeschichte, vol. 61 (1966), pp. 1–50; Lyons and Jackson, Saladin, pp. 255–66; B. Z. Kedar, ‘The Battle of Hattin revisited’, The Horns of Hattin, ed. B. Z. Kedar (Jerusalem, 1992), pp. 190–207.