Page 7 of 13 FirstFirst 12345678910111213 LastLast
Results 121 to 140 of 245

Thread: [BC 2.4.2] : Standalone Patched Version - [Preview + Download] RELEASED!

  1. #121

    Default Re: BROKEN CRESCENT 2.4 !RELEASE! - !PREVIEW! AND !DOWNLOAD!

    Marius, I need to check the Arab authors because it was a long time since I researched the battle but I am quite sure a large part of the army was away, some were besieging Gaza and Ascalon, some were on their way to Jerusalem, some were on raids or collecting food. I remember reading a translation of Imad-ad-Din's text saying quite clearly that Saladin's army had dispersed in plundering raids and that they were taken by complete surprise. Men had to scramble to get their arms from the baggage train. Also the horses of Saladin's army were tired from a long march. If they expected a battle, they would have rested their horses.

    Perhaps you can help me locate the passage of Baha-ad-Din claiming that the Crusaders were clad in mail, so we can work out which Crusaders were these. No issue if it was knights. As for the other battles you mention, the battle at Belvoir was a skirmish. Nobody won or lost. I was not thinking about Richard the Lionheart's campaign. Yes Saladdin lost some battles during the third Crusade but in the end Richard the Lionheart did not take Jerusalem. In any case, I was thinking of the local units available to the KoJ, not those Crusaders coming from Europe.

  2. #122
    +Marius+'s Avatar Domesticus
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Zagreb
    Posts
    2,418

    Default Re: BROKEN CRESCENT 2.4 !RELEASE! - !PREVIEW! AND !DOWNLOAD!

    Quote Originally Posted by LinusLinothorax View Post
    If you consider a massive war against an alliance of the KoJ, Armenia, the Mongols, the sixth crusade aswell as other intervening European powers while also ripping Makuria apart on the southern front just as "taking a few remaining coastal cities", ok.
    I did not mean all their actions during that time period, I was replying to your comment about them dealing with the crusaders with "quick process", what prevented them with doing so is irrelevant, as the process was not quick.

    Nobody is denying that the Mameluks finally ushered a Muslim fighting force capable of going toe to toe with the crusaders pound for pound.

    Also, you mean the seventh crusade, not the sixth.

    Reading the primary sources about that crusade also provides very clear image that the Mamelukes did not consider the crusaders an army to be taken lightly.

    Lucky for them the European leaders weren't as wise.


    Quote Originally Posted by Geoffrey of Villehardouin View Post
    I am quite sure a large part of the army was away
    That is written only on the wikipedia as far as I know, for the obvious reason to provide an excuse for the crusaders winning.

    As far as I know, the Muslims sources describe the main army marching towards Jerusalem(!) with small raiding bands riding around it and sacking whatever they could.


    Quote Originally Posted by Geoffrey of Villehardouin View Post
    some were besieging Gaza and Ascalon
    Dubious, as both of those would require thousands of men to besiege...and a fleet.

    Quote Originally Posted by Geoffrey of Villehardouin View Post
    Imad-ad-Din's text saying quite clearly that Saladin's army had dispersed in plundering raids and that they were taken by complete surprise.
    Do you have that source on hand?
    My bookmarked one was removed from the host site for some reason.

    Because Baha-ad-Din for instance does not mention that at all, in any way, but, contrary to an image of surprise, depicts a prepared and formed up army of Saladin;

    "This day the Muslims suffered a setback, and the Sultan himself told me how the defeat happened.

    The Muslims had drawn up for battle and when the enemy approached, some of our men decided that the right wing should cross to the left and the left cross towards the center, in order that the battle was joined they might have at their backs a hill known as Ramla. While they were occupied in this maneuver, the Franks charged them and God decreed their defeat.

    They suffered a terrible reverse and they had no nearby fortress they could take refuge in.

    ...It was a major defeat which God mended with the famous battle of Hattin, God be the praise."

    Not only does he describe a formed up army moving ranks, he directly compares the defeat with the battle of Hattin as a reverse.



    Quote Originally Posted by Geoffrey of Villehardouin View Post
    Men had to scramble to get their arms from the baggage train.
    I believe that is describing merely the men around the baggage train, who were separated from the army.

    Quote Originally Posted by Geoffrey of Villehardouin View Post
    Also the horses of Saladin's army were tired from a long march. If they expected a battle, they would have rested their horses
    They were marching towards Jerusalem and they were just a days/two march away(40ish km), resting was not an option.

    This battle is a clear lesson to those studying history that can very clearly explain nearly every crusader catastrophe on the field.


    Quote Originally Posted by Geoffrey of Villehardouin View Post
    Perhaps you can help me locate the passage of Baha-ad-Din claiming that the Crusaders were clad in mail, so we can work out which Crusaders were these. No issue if it was knights.
    "..drawn up in front of the cavalry, stood firm as a wall, and every foot-soldier wore a vest of thick felt and a coat of mail so dense and strong that our arrows made no impression on them."



    Quote Originally Posted by Geoffrey of Villehardouin View Post
    the battle at Belvoir was a skirmish. Nobody won or lost.
    I would say Saladin lost since he had to turn tail and retreat home.


    Quote Originally Posted by Geoffrey of Villehardouin View Post
    Yes Saladdin lost some battles during the third Crusade but in the end Richard the Lionheart did not take Jerusalem.
    Because the command structure broke down and politics came in...after which Philip and John forced Richard to return home.

    The crusaders were very amped to besiege Jerusalem and the Muslims were bloody terrified of Richard;

    "I have been assured, that on that day the king of England, lance in hand, rode along the whole length of our army from right to left, and not one of our soldiers left the ranks to attack him. The Sultan was wroth thereat and left the battlefield in anger." - Baha' al-Din


    Quote Originally Posted by Geoffrey of Villehardouin View Post
    In any case, I was thinking of the local units available to the KoJ, not those Crusaders coming from Europe.
    Local units available to the KoJ barely numbered 2-3000 men, Saladin had 15000-25000.

    Have you ever seen a map comparison between the KoJ and the Sultanate Saladin ruled?

    Not exactly fair to even expect victory on KoJ behalf alone.
    Last edited by +Marius+; July 05, 2016 at 12:44 PM.

  3. #123

    Default Re: BROKEN CRESCENT 2.4 !RELEASE! - !PREVIEW! AND !DOWNLOAD!

    I have the impression that the foot soldiers with the armour were from Richard the Lionheart's retinue, who were not KoJ troops. Also if everyone was armoured like Richard the Lionheart, everyone would have been ripping through the Arab lines, but only Richard the Lionheart was doing that.

    Unfortunately I also can no longer find Imad ad-Din's source. I am not sure if he was ever officially translated. My memory of it was that some of the army was scattered, as I said, in raids and that some were marching towards Jerusalem. Saladdin was somewhere in the area near the baggage train that had been mired and the rest of the army were stuck behind the baggage train. Imad ad-Din said this was by the hill known as al-Safiya (which I believe means "the white"), the horses were tired, men had left their arms at the baggage train because they were not expecting the Crusaders to be nearby. Gibb in his history referring to the two Arab texts also says that Saladin's army was scattered on plundering raids. Imad ad-Din said something also about the two wings moving about. If you look at the map, Tell es-Safi (probably the hill of al-Safiya https://www.google.com/maps/@31.6997...!3m1!1e3?hl=en) has some rivers running close to it and there were probably limited ways to cross, so if the rearguard managed to cross the river from where they were (south of the river opposite the crusader right, therefore "on the left", they would have ended up opposite the Crusader centre instead. Imagine having an army deployed behind a river and trying to cross the river, the left will end up in the centre in order to cross. The "right wing", those who had already crossed the river and were now opposite the Crusader left, tried to deploy in front of the baggage train (imagine the they had crossed a river crossing in M2TW) and, therefore, had to move to the left. However, all that was going on in great confusion as the Crusaders were moving towards the mired baggage train. The way Baha ad-Din describes it possibly makes it sound as if there was some order in this chaos : the left crosses (the river) towards the centre - but there was no other way to cross the river except where the baggage train had been mired. And why would a commander disobey Saladin and move about from left to the centre without good reason?

    The men near the baggage train were not away from the army! The Crusaders were attacking the baggage train! Those who were away were those that were on the way to Jerusalem, those at Gaza and Ascalon and those on plundering raids.

    Imad ad-Din's description of the battle of Hattin has passages such as: "The fire arrows burned and wounded them, the fierce grip of the bows seized tenaciously upon them and struck them dead" and "As the arrows struck them down, those that had seemed like lions now seemed as headgehogs. The arrows beat them down and opened great holes in their ranks." (The Crusades: A Reader: Second Edition. Google Books), so the KoJ army could not have been so heavily armoured as Richard the Lionheart's retinue.

    Edit: Also the KoJ could not have had 2-3,000 men in total because there were 1100 dead and 700 wounded just in this battle that was hailed as a great victory. So there must have been at the very least a few thousand that survived the battle. There was another major campaign in Syria at that time, where most of the KoJ knights were gone and garrisons on many castles, including Gaza and Ascalon that were being blockaded. You (and many others) focus on the knights, who were only a tiny fraction of all men who could bear arms. Just the rest of the male inhabitants of the KoJ who could bear arms had not much battle training and were worth little on the battlefield.
    Last edited by Geoffrey of Villehardouin; July 05, 2016 at 02:54 PM.

  4. #124
    Campidoctor
    Civitate

    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    1,947

    Default Re: BROKEN CRESCENT 2.4 !RELEASE! - !PREVIEW! AND !DOWNLOAD!

    Quote Originally Posted by +Marius+ View Post
    Also, you mean the seventh crusade, not the sixth.
    In German the crusade of Damietta and the crusade of Friedrich II are counted as one. That's why I refered the crusade from 1248-1254 as #6.

    Concerning the "quick process" I was refering more to Mamelukes relatively easily dominating the Crusaders and their allies than the actual speed of the subjugation. There you are of course right. 2 generations aren't exactly that fast.
    Last edited by LinusLinothorax; July 05, 2016 at 03:22 PM.

  5. #125
    +Marius+'s Avatar Domesticus
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Zagreb
    Posts
    2,418

    Default Re: BROKEN CRESCENT 2.4 !RELEASE! - !PREVIEW! AND !DOWNLOAD!

    Quote Originally Posted by LinusLinothorax View Post
    In German the crusade of Damietta and the crusade of Friedrich II are counted as one. That's why I refered the crusade from 1248-1254 as #6.
    ...why?

    They happened 19 years apart...


    Quote Originally Posted by Geoffrey of Villehardouin View Post
    I have the impression that the foot soldiers with the armour were from Richard the Lionheart's retinue, who were not KoJ troops. Also if everyone was armoured like Richard the Lionheart, everyone would have been ripping through the Arab lines, but only Richard the Lionheart was doing that.
    Huh, I will look into that.


    Quote Originally Posted by Geoffrey of Villehardouin View Post
    Imad ad-Din said this was by the hill known as al-Safiya
    Baha said it was at Ramla, I will try to find Imad ad-Din's account and compare.



    Quote Originally Posted by Geoffrey of Villehardouin View Post
    The men near the baggage train were not away from the army! The Crusaders were attacking the baggage train! Those who were away were those that were on the way to Jerusalem, those at Gaza and Ascalon and those on plundering raids.
    I disagree, from my understanding, the crusaders attacked the baggage train and then continued their attack into an army that already passed that river point.


    Quote Originally Posted by Geoffrey of Villehardouin View Post
    Imad ad-Din's description of the battle of Hattin has passages such as: "The fire arrows burned and wounded them, the fierce grip of the bows seized tenaciously upon them and struck them dead" and "As the arrows struck them down, those that had seemed like lions now seemed as headgehogs. The arrows beat them down and opened great holes in their ranks." (The Crusades: A Reader: Second Edition. Google Books), so the KoJ army could not have been so heavily armoured as Richard the Lionheart's retinue.
    Well firstly, it is not "The fire arrows burned" but "The fire of arrows burned"(the fire is not literal), fire arrows did not exist.

    Secondly, the crusader army at Hattin was 15-20 000 men, meaning the majority weren't KoJ soldiers(which usually numbered only 1-2-3000 men) but massively drafted commoners, sailors from Italian fleets, etc.

    Here is the account of Ibn al-Athīr;

    "The Franks were suffering badly from thirst, and had lost confidence. The battle raged furiously, both sides putting up a tenacious resistance. The Muslim archers sent up clouds of arrows like thick swarms of locusts, killing many of the Frankish horses. The Franks, surrounding themselves with their infantry, tried to fight their way toward Tiberias in the hope of reaching water, but Saladin realized their objective and forestalled them by planting himself and his army in the way."

    So, clouds of arrows like "thick swarms of locusts"...and Ibn just mentions horses dying...

    It is also interesting how Imad does not even mention the melee engagements, but merely states "clouds of arrows Islam great victory YEAH." and then goes on a several page tirade about the glory of Muslims.

    Contrary to him we get this from Ibn al-Athīr;

    "They had to endure thirst, the summer’s heat, the blazing fire and smoke and the fury of battle. When the Count noticed the Franks lost heart and were on the verge of surrender, but seeing that the only way for the Crusades to save their lives was to defy death, they made a series of charges that almost dislodged the Muslims from their position in spite of their numbers, had not the grace of God been with them."

    "The Frankish King had retreated to the hill with his band, and from there he led a furious charge against the Muslims facing him, forcing them. back upon my father. I saw that he was alarmed and distraught, and he tugged at his beard as he went forward crying: “Away with. the Devil’s lie!” The Muslims turned to counter-attack and drove the Franks back up the hill. When I saw the Franks retreating before the Muslim onslaught I cried out for joy: “We have conquered them!” But they returned to the charge with undiminished ardour and drove our army back toward my father. His response was the same as before, and the Muslims counter-attacked and drove the Franks back to the hill."

    Both Baha ad-Din and Ibn al-Athīr barely mention arrows(even though both state that both armies have archers) but instead depict a grinding close combat battle.



    Quote Originally Posted by Geoffrey of Villehardouin View Post
    Edit: Also the KoJ could not have had 2-3,000 men in total because there were 1100 dead and 700 wounded just in this battle that was hailed as a great victory. So there must have been at the very least a few thousand that survived the battle.
    I only use current information, and those casualties are stated as horrid, meaning those 1100 dead present a good section of the army.

    Heck at the battle of Jacob's Ford, the entire KoJ only mustered 1500 men and went up against Saladin which is recorded as having 6,976 Ghulams and 1,553 Qaraghulams, on hand, just a year and a half after that battle.


    Quote Originally Posted by Geoffrey of Villehardouin View Post
    There was another major campaign in Syria at that time, where most of the KoJ knights were gone and garrisons on many castles, including Gaza and Ascalon that were being blockaded. You (and many others) focus on the knights, who were only a tiny fraction of all men who could bear arms. Just the rest of the male inhabitants of the KoJ who could bear arms had not much battle training and were worth little on the battlefield.
    What campaign?

    Also, I do not focus on the knights, I use infantry estimates and mentions that are given by either primary chroniclers or modern historians.

    What you(and many others) seem to forget, is that KoJ was the size of Slovakia and was fighting a Sultanate larger than the HRE.

  6. #126
    Campidoctor
    Civitate

    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    1,947

    Default Re: BROKEN CRESCENT 2.4 !RELEASE! - !PREVIEW! AND !DOWNLOAD!

    Quote Originally Posted by +Marius+ View Post
    ...why?
    I have no idea.

  7. #127

    Default Re: BROKEN CRESCENT 2.4 !RELEASE! - !PREVIEW! AND !DOWNLOAD!

    Ramla was a province, the hill called al Safiya is in that province. Malcolm Barber equates Mont Gisard with the mound of al-Safiya. The Arabs call it the Battle of Ramla because it happened near Ramla but Imad ad-Din specifies it took place before the hill of al-Safiya near Ramla, Baha ad-Din calls the hill itself Ramla (he is not talking about the town) and to the Crusaders it was known as the battle of Mont Gisard (also a hill) so we are certainly talking about a hill not about a town. The hill of al-Safiya is at the start of the road to Jerusalem. The castle of Blanchegarde on top of it was specifically placed there to guard the road to Jerusalem.

    In the KoJ there were more men than knights, for sure, come on, what is so difficult about that? It was not a desert in which only knights lived. Why were commoners of the KoJ not fighting for the KoJ ? Who were those 15000-20000 men at Hattin? All knights and heavily armoured mercenaries? You lament about how few men lived in the Holly Land yet those 15,000-20,000 men were all knights or what is going on? What is so hard about accepting that most of the men capable of bearing arms and fighting for their king were not knights?

    You seem also partial about those men that arrows could not pierce as compared to those other men that arrows could pierce. You quote Baha ad-Din for the former but you do not like Imad ad-Din's quote for the latter.

    If the Crusaders had taken the baggage train at the start of the battle of Mongisard, for sure no one would be scrambling to get their weapons and armour from the baggage train. The only detailed account of the battle is from Imad ad-Din. What is there in Baha ad-Din that contradicts what I said I could remember from Imad ad-Din? I wish I could find Imad ad-Din's translation, I do not think his entire history has ever been translated and I cannot remember where I had found that passage translated.

    At Montgisard there were 200 knights or thereabouts and their sergeants (here is another interesting account https://attwiw.com/2015/11/25/today-...ntgisard-1177/). The knights had chain mail. Their sergeants had lower quality or second-hand armour. The rest were trainees or levies (what else could they be?). They would have not had much armour. The casualties are from William of Tyre. They are horrendous if you think there were only 2-3000 men able to fight in the entire kingdom. They are not horrendous if you consider that Saladin had invaded with some 26-28,000 men and that most of the KoJ dead would have been poorly trained, inadequately armed levies.

    There was a campaign in Syria by Raymond of Tripoli and Philipp of Flanders (see http://blog.templarhistory.com/2010/...of-montgisard/) and a thousand KoJ knights had gone to help (with 2000 foot) when Saladin invaded and laid siege on Gaza and Ascalon.

    The 1500 men at Jacob's Ford were just the garrison, they were not the army under the king. The army under the king was somewhere nearby but they did not arrive on time to save the castle.

    Quote Originally Posted by +Marius+ View Post
    Also, I do not focus on the knights, I use infantry estimates and mentions that are given by either primary chroniclers or modern historians.
    Funnily enough I do the same, and so I do not think the KoJ had 15,000-20,000 knights at Hattin and that there were no simple folk living in the kingdom.

    Quote Originally Posted by +Marius+ View Post
    What you(and many others) seem to forget, is that KoJ was the size of Slovakia and was fighting a Sultanate larger than the HRE.
    I thought you were forgetting that, as you seem to believe that there was no need for ordinary folk to heed to a call of arms from their king.
    Last edited by Geoffrey of Villehardouin; July 06, 2016 at 12:55 PM.

  8. #128
    +Marius+'s Avatar Domesticus
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Zagreb
    Posts
    2,418

    Default Re: BROKEN CRESCENT 2.4 !RELEASE! - !PREVIEW! AND !DOWNLOAD!

    Quote Originally Posted by Geoffrey of Villehardouin View Post
    Ramla was a province, the hill called al Safiya is in that province.
    Ramla was/is also a city;

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ramla


    and Baha stated the "hill of Ramla", thus perhaps the hill of that city, I doubt he would name just one random hill in a province.


    Quote Originally Posted by Geoffrey of Villehardouin View Post
    so we are certainly talking about a hill not about a town.
    Perhaps a hill next to the town?


    Quote Originally Posted by Geoffrey of Villehardouin View Post
    In the KoJ there were more men than knights, for sure, come on, what is so difficult about that?
    ...I am not disputing that.

    Quote Originally Posted by Geoffrey of Villehardouin View Post
    Why were commoners of the KoJ not fighting for the KoJ ? Who were those 15000-20000 men at Hattin?
    Allies.

    It was not just the KoJ army, but a lot of Italians and Turkopoles.


    Quote Originally Posted by Geoffrey of Villehardouin View Post
    All knights and heavily armoured mercenaries? You lament about how few men lived in the Holly Land yet those 15,000-20,000 men were all knights or what is going on? What is so hard about accepting that most of the men capable of bearing arms and fighting for their king were not knights?
    I do not believe you read my post properly, I specifically stated that most of those men were not knights or armored men.


    Quote Originally Posted by Geoffrey of Villehardouin View Post
    You seem also partial about those men that arrows could not pierce as compared to those other men that arrows could pierce. You quote Baha ad-Din for the former but you do not like Imad ad-Din's quote for the latter.
    No, I merely explained the difference, one army was a smaller, better equipped force, while the other was a much larger army, likely with a lot of lightly armed troops.

    I also consider Baha ad-Din and Al Athir to be far, far superior chroniclers than Imad, since they actually write history and not the Islamic Iliad.

    Try reading a single page of Imad's writing and compare it to the mentioned two, the difference is almost comical.

    Quote Originally Posted by Geoffrey of Villehardouin View Post
    If the Crusaders had taken the baggage train at the start of the battle of Mongisard, for sure no one would be scrambling to get their weapons and armour from the baggage train. The only detailed account of the battle is from Imad ad-Din. What is there in Baha ad-Din that contradicts what I said I could remember from Imad ad-Din? I wish I could find Imad ad-Din's translation, I do not think his entire history has ever been translated and I cannot remember where I had found that passage translated.
    I meant that the mentioned men scrambling to get their weapons from the baggage train were the same men who fought at the baggage train.



    Quote Originally Posted by Geoffrey of Villehardouin View Post
    At Montgisard there were 200 knights or thereabouts and their sergeants (here is another interesting account https://attwiw.com/2015/11/25/today-...ntgisard-1177/). The knights had chain mail. Their sergeants had lower quality or second-hand armour. The rest were trainees or levies (what else could they be?). They would have not had much armour. The casualties are from William of Tyre. They are horrendous if you think there were only 2-3000 men able to fight in the entire kingdom. They are not horrendous if you consider that Saladin had invaded with some 26-28,000 men and that most of the KoJ dead would have been poorly trained, inadequately armed levies.
    Baha ad-Din, in one instance, describes a lowly crusader sergeant being completely encased in double linked mail(the most expensive form of armor at the time), so I do not agree that the sergeants were ill-equipped.

    Also, 20-30% casualty rate was nothing unusual for a victorious army, thus, their dead and wounded could indeed have amounted to a few thousand men in total.

    In the Third Crusade, the King of France sails with less than 2000 men, to assume that a country as small as KoJ would have issue with raising armies above a few thousand is not exactly dubious.


    Quote Originally Posted by Geoffrey of Villehardouin View Post
    There was a campaign in Syria by Raymond of Tripoli and Philipp of Flanders (see http://blog.templarhistory.com/2010/...of-montgisard/) and a thousand KoJ knights had gone to help (with 2000 foot) when Saladin invaded and laid siege on Gaza and Ascalon.
    I can find no mention of Baldwin giving those troops to that campaign.


    Quote Originally Posted by Geoffrey of Villehardouin View Post
    The 1500 men at Jacob's Ford were just the garrison, they were not the army under the king. The army under the king was somewhere nearby but they did not arrive on time to save the castle.
    You are correct.

    Quote Originally Posted by Geoffrey of Villehardouin View Post
    I thought you were forgetting that, as you seem to believe that there was no need for ordinary folk to heed to a call of arms from their king.
    Perhaps that is so.

    Perhaps that is exactly what happened at the campaign of Hattin.
    Last edited by +Marius+; July 06, 2016 at 02:12 PM.

  9. #129
    Campidoctor
    Civitate

    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    1,947

    Default Re: BROKEN CRESCENT 2.4 !RELEASE! - !PREVIEW! AND !DOWNLOAD!

    Did the crusaders only hired Poulains and Turkopoles or did they also hired un-mixed locals, like Syrian Christians?

  10. #130

    Default Re: BROKEN CRESCENT 2.4 !RELEASE! - !PREVIEW! AND !DOWNLOAD!

    Linus, unfortunately the chronicles of the Crusaders mostly talk about the knights but if Baldwin had a few thousand men with him and only about 200-400 were knights, the rest must have been just common folk. Someone among the chroniclers mentions that the Arabs took prisoners now and then men who were trying to join the king at Ascalon after he had called the men of his kingdom to arms. They were not knights, at least it is not said that they were knights. EDIT: I just fund a rare case where the infantry is mentioned:

    In April 1291, the Saracen army under the leadership of Sultan Khalid laid siege to Acre. The five military religious Orders joined forces under the control of William de Beaujeu, Master of the Temple. The Christian garrison was made up of about 14000 infantry and 800 knights, of whom more than a half belonged to the Orders. The majority of the knights belonged to the Order of the Temple (about 240 Templars) and the Order of St John (about 140 Hospitallers). The other three military Orders could provide only about 50 knights (25 Knights of St Lazarus, 15 Teutonic Knights, and 9 Knights of St Thomas). Other troops included a Cypriot contingent, the Pisan and Venetian garrisons, the French regiment led by Jean de Grailly, a few Englishmen commanded by Otto de Grandson, the armed citizens of Arce, and the Italian rabble.
    From The Order of St Lazarus in the Kingdom of Jerusalem, C. Sabona-Ventura

    Marius, there were 1500 armed men just at Jacob's Ford which was not even a complete castle. How many would there be in the main castles and the city garrisons?

    By the way, I placed a map of the battlefield at the bottom of my Battle of Montgisard post, here http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showt...1#post10237040

    I hope it is clearer what was happening and what was meant by Arab histories when they said that some of the men on the left crossed to the centre and those on the right decided to move to the left when the Crusaders appeared. It should be obvious what the problem was and that these moves were no orderly manoeuvre or orderly deployment. The mired baggage train had the siege engines, the money and food and much of the soldiers' armament and it is obvious how the soldiers would react.

    I am not sure there is anywhere mention of Italians at Hattin, or any allies though there may have been the odd outsider. There were some mercenaries hired by the Templars, maybe Turcopoles or whatever. However, many of Guy's men would have been ordinary folk with a spear-point at the end of a stick, a makeshift shield and maybe an old rusty helmet they had used as a flower pot at home.

    Quote Originally Posted by +Marius+ View Post
    In the Third Crusade, the King of France sails with less than 2000 men, to assume that a country as small as KoJ would have issue with raising armies above a few thousand is not exactly dubious.
    Kings took with them their retinue, that is their best knights and best men, obviously, whereas at the KoJ everyone who could had to fight when their livelihood was at stake and their king had called them to arms. Sadly not everyone was a knight, but what can you do? Maybe you come from a country where there is no national service and fighting for your country seems to you as someone else's business, better left to professionals, but it was not always that way.

    Quote Originally Posted by +Marius+ View Post
    and Baha stated the "hill of Ramla", thus perhaps the hill of that city, I doubt he would name just one random hill in a province.
    Except that there is no hill in Ramla the town. Baha ad-Din did not know the name of the hill. Imad ad-Din says it was called al-Safiya (a hill with such a name is known), that it was near Ramla (al-Safiya is 17.5 miles away), there was a river and a road next to it going to Jerusalem, which al-Safiya also had, and ibn al-Athir mentions a fortress about to be besieged and there was one on top of al-Safiya, so it looks like we've got that hill. Malcolm Barber, who is an authority on the Crusades, has pointed all this out. So I hope we will not spend more time on this.

    Quote Originally Posted by +Marius+ View Post
    I can find no mention of Baldwin giving those troops to that campaign.
    It must be from one of the William of Tyre/Eracles editions or some other western chronicle, seeing that it is mentioned in a website about the Templars. The link I gave is where I read it in the first place. I do not have access presently to a university library.

    EDIT: Actually here is another account from a book about Saladin by Andrew S Ehrenkreutz mentioning both the campaign in Syria (Hamah and Harim), p. 158, and the battle by al-Safiya (battle of Montgisard) with the usual story including the element of surprise. Here at page 270 is another account of the campaign in Syria from Malcolm Barber's The Crusader States.



    Last edited by Geoffrey of Villehardouin; July 08, 2016 at 02:53 PM.

  11. #131
    +Marius+'s Avatar Domesticus
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Zagreb
    Posts
    2,418

    Default Re: BROKEN CRESCENT 2.4 !RELEASE! - !PREVIEW! AND !DOWNLOAD!

    Quote Originally Posted by Geoffrey of Villehardouin View Post
    EDIT: I just fund a rare case where the infantry is mentioned:


    In April 1291, the Saracen army under the leadership of Sultan Khalid laid siege to Acre. The five military religious Orders joined forces under the control of William de Beaujeu, Master of the Temple. The Christian garrison was made up of about 14000 infantry and 800 knights, of whom more than a half belonged to the Orders. The majority of the knights belonged to the Order of the Temple (about 240 Templars) and the Order of St John (about 140 Hospitallers). The other three military Orders could provide only about 50 knights (25 Knights of St Lazarus, 15 Teutonic Knights, and 9 Knights of St Thomas). Other troops included a Cypriot contingent, the Pisan and Venetian garrisons, the French regiment led by Jean de Grailly, a few Englishmen commanded by Otto de Grandson, the armed citizens of Arce, and the Italian rabble.From The Order of St Lazarus in the Kingdom of Jerusalem, C. Sabona-Ventura
    Is this the same source that states the Mamluk army as being 220 000?

    Also, sieges are not a proper example, apart from all the Italians and the army of Cyprus, the citizens most likely filled in the numbers.


    Quote Originally Posted by Geoffrey of Villehardouin View Post
    Marius, there were 1500 armed men just at Jacob's Ford which was not even a complete castle. How many would there be in the main castles and the city garrisons?
    They had 1500 men there because it was not a complete castle.

    Quote Originally Posted by Geoffrey of Villehardouin View Post
    How many would there be in the main castles
    As low as 20ish dudes.


    Quote Originally Posted by Geoffrey of Villehardouin View Post
    I hope it is clearer what was happening and what was meant by Arab histories when they said that some of the men on the left crossed to the centre and those on the right decided to move to the left when the Crusaders appeared. It should be obvious what the problem was and that these moves were no orderly manoeuvre or orderly deployment. The mired baggage train had the siege engines, the money and food and much of the soldiers' armament and it is obvious how the soldiers would react.
    I'l look into it.

    Quote Originally Posted by Geoffrey of Villehardouin View Post
    I am not sure there is anywhere mention of Italians at Hattin, or any allies though there may have been the odd outsider. There were some mercenaries hired by the Templars, maybe Turcopoles or whatever. However, many of Guy's men would have been ordinary folk with a spear-point at the end of a stick, a makeshift shield and maybe an old rusty helmet they had used as a flower pot at home.
    You are underestimating the armament of a commoner levy, for instance in England or Scandinavia they were required to have proper weaponry as well as helmets and gambesons, by law.


    Quote Originally Posted by Geoffrey of Villehardouin View Post
    Except that there is no hill in Ramla the town. Baha ad-Din did not know the name of the hill. Imad ad-Din says it was called al-Safiya (a hill with such a name is known), that it was near Ramla (al-Safiya is 17.5 miles away), there was a river and a road next to it going to Jerusalem, which al-Safiya also had, and ibn al-Athir mentions a fortress about to be besieged and there was one on top of al-Safiya, so it looks like we've got that hill. Malcolm Barber, who is an authority on the Crusades, has pointed all this out. So I hope we will not spend more time on this.
    I'l look into it.

    Quote Originally Posted by Geoffrey of Villehardouin View Post
    It must be from one of the William of Tyre/Eracles editions or some other western chronicle, seeing that it is mentioned in a website about the Templars. The link I gave is where I read it in the first place. I do not have access presently to a university library.
    I looked into it and still found nothing.


    Quote Originally Posted by Geoffrey of Villehardouin View Post
    EDIT: Actually here is another account from a book about Saladin by Andrew S Ehrenkreutz mentioning both the campaign in Syria (Hamah and Harim), p. 158, and the battle by al-Safiya (battle of Montgisard) with the usual story including the element of surprise. Here at page 270 is another account of the campaign in Syria from Malcolm Barber's The Crusader States.
    Please quote your sources, I cannot go through books to see what you are talking about.


    All in all, you believe I underestimate the amount of levied low folk in KoJ armies, while I believe you may be overestimating them.

    Not that much of a disagreement
    Last edited by +Marius+; July 09, 2016 at 03:29 PM.

  12. #132

    Default Re: BROKEN CRESCENT 2.4 !RELEASE! - !PREVIEW! AND !DOWNLOAD!

    will there also be specific kurdish principalities in the next version or will the only kurdish faction be the ayyubids?

  13. #133
    turkhorde's Avatar Foederatus
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Finland
    Posts
    45

    Default Re: BROKEN CRESCENT 2.4 !RELEASE! - !PREVIEW! AND !DOWNLOAD!

    Awesome job, you guys! I just started replaying Medieval II: Total War and of course this mod was the first one I downloaded, and version 2.4 pretty much exceeded all of my expectations. Keep it up, this is top notch!

  14. #134
    Campidoctor
    Civitate

    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    1,947

    Default Re: BROKEN CRESCENT 2.4 !RELEASE! - !PREVIEW! AND !DOWNLOAD!

    Quote Originally Posted by hemin23 View Post
    will there also be specific kurdish principalities in the next version or will the only kurdish faction be the ayyubids?
    As long as the BC team suffers from a lack of modellers there won't be any new factions.

  15. #135

    Default Re: BROKEN CRESCENT 2.4 !RELEASE! - !PREVIEW! AND !DOWNLOAD!

    Quote Originally Posted by +Marius+ View Post
    Is this the same source that states the Mamluk army as being 220 000?
    No it is not.

    Quote Originally Posted by +Marius+ View Post
    They had 1500 men there because it was not a complete castle.
    From what I remember, inner buildings had not yet been constructed when Jacob's Ford was besieged. Your estimate assumes that there were 1500 men camping at Jacob's Ford, whereas in the castles that had living quarters maybe only as few as 20 men served as a permanent garrison. This is possible but does not sound right. Unfortunately, there are no actual numbers available, which is our problem.

    We read that at the battle of Cresson 140 knights fought 7000 Saracen horsemen. However, when Balian of Ibelin arrived at nearby Nazareth, one of the Eracles manuscripts says: "When Balian came to Nazareth there was great sorrow in the city for those who had been killed or taken in the battle, for there were few families that had not had someone killed or taken".
    Last edited by Geoffrey of Villehardouin; July 13, 2016 at 12:52 PM.

  16. #136
    +Marius+'s Avatar Domesticus
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Zagreb
    Posts
    2,418

    Default Re: BROKEN CRESCENT 2.4 !RELEASE! - !PREVIEW! AND !DOWNLOAD!

    Quote Originally Posted by Geoffrey of Villehardouin View Post
    From what I remember, inner buildings had not yet been constructed when Jacob's Ford was besieged. Your estimate assumes that there were 1500 men camping at Jacob's Ford, whereas in the castles that had living quarters maybe only as few as 20 men served as a permanent garrison. This is possible but does not sound right. Unfortunately, there are no actual numbers available, which is our problem.
    Indeed, the force at Jacob's Ford was there to protect the construction of an unfinished castle.

    As to what the actual garrison of a castle would be, perhaps looking into the English castles in Wales, which similarly also often near/within hostile territory, can give us insight;

    "These castles were not the centres of castleries in the traditional English manner. Nor, for all their splendour, were the castles heavily garrisoned. In 1284 thirty or forty men to each was regarded as appropriate. In the rebellion of 1294-5 Harlech had twenty men, of whom two died during the siege, until reinforcements came from Ireland. With some townsmen who had taken refuge in the castle, the total strength came to thirty-eight men, and in addition there were seven women and five children of the castle, and twelve women, with twenty-one children, of the town." - Michael Prestwich, Edward I. Yale UP, second edition, 1997.

    People often overlook just how easily defendable castles really were.


    Quote Originally Posted by Geoffrey of Villehardouin View Post
    We read that at the battle of Cresson 140 knights fought 7000 Saracen horsemen. However, when Balian of Ibelin arrived at nearby Nazareth, one of the Eracles manuscripts says: "When Balian came to Nazareth there was great sorrow in the city for those who had been killed or taken in the battle, for there were few families that had not had someone killed or taken".
    Well, whatever support troops the crusaders had, surely came from Nazareth itself.

    Interesting quote nonetheless.

  17. #137

    Default Re: BROKEN CRESCENT 2.4 !RELEASE! - !PREVIEW! AND !DOWNLOAD!

    There are also estimates that at its heyday, Crac des Chevaliers had a garrison of 2000 men. You prefer to err on the side of just a few but the risks of a castle being suddenly besieged by a large professional army of an enemy who was bent to destroy your kingdom were much higher in the Kingdom of Jerusalem than in England. The only number for the KoJ for this period that we have I believe is that at Jacob's Ford, which was 1500 men. It is possible that other castles had fewer men - I would tend to agree that some castles would have had a small permanent garrison during the winter, I would guess of the kind of size you imagine. However, the situation at Jacob's Ford indicates that may have not always been the case at least during the campaigning season. Levies were available, even if not needed in the winter. It would be wrong to assume that the number at Jacob's Ford was the greatest number imaginable in the absence of other information about other castles. As far as I remember, there were only relatively few knights in the castle, so it was not as if all the strength of the KoJ was in there. If for 50 or so knights we have about 1450 levies at Jacob's Ford, and there were 800 knights in Acre out of 14,000 men in total, I think that indicates the scale of numbers of non-knights vs knights for the Kingdom of Jerusalem at that time in history.

    SS Titanium has a good balance in my opinion but the situation with Broken Crescent is not ideal. In BC 2.4 when controlled by the AI, the KoJ recruits various Muslim types of light infantry (not as mercenaries!), while there are no Christian militia, who should have been the most common type of unit at least for garrisons. Also note that was not always the case. The original BC had three types of light Christian spearmen, militia and levies of sorts, that were removed because they did not look as nice as some of the other more prestigious units. They were not removed for reasons of historical accuracy.

  18. #138
    +Marius+'s Avatar Domesticus
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Zagreb
    Posts
    2,418

    Default Re: BROKEN CRESCENT 2.4 !RELEASE! - !PREVIEW! AND !DOWNLOAD!

    Quote Originally Posted by Geoffrey of Villehardouin View Post
    There are also estimates that at its heyday, Crac des Chevaliers had a garrison of 2000 men.
    Yes, it is an estimate by Willbrand of Oldenburg and may indeed be true, but Crac des Chevaliers was arguably the largest (singe structure)fortification in the Levant at the time and was in at the start of the Fifth crusade.

    I still consider it an exaggeration, since in 1229 the combined forces of both the Templars and the Hospitallers numbered 500 cavalry and 2700 infantry in total.(Kristian Molin)

    To consider that the Hospitallers could finance 2000 men in a single of their castles(albeit it being the largest) is quite a stretch.


    Quote Originally Posted by Geoffrey of Villehardouin View Post
    The only number for the KoJ for this period that we have I believe is that at Jacob's Ford, which was 1500 men.
    We have them though, they are just not that easy to find.

    For instance(Saphet castle, currently in northern Israel);

    "Figures which have survived for the castle of Saphet tend to confirm this, for they record that the peace time garrison of approximately 1700 people consisted of 430 troops, knights, sergeants, turcopoles and crossbowmen, plus another 820 staff and 400 serfs who were needed 'for labour and other offices' within the castle. In other words, more than 70% of the garrison was primarily employed to carry out repairs and to staff the kitchens, workshops and various other amenities..." - Unknown Crusader Castles By Kristian Molin

    Mind you, this is for a finished and complete castle, unlike Jacob's Ford.

    Quote Originally Posted by Geoffrey of Villehardouin View Post
    the situation at Jacob's Ford indicates that may have not always been the case at least during the campaigning season.
    Again, the situation at Jacob's Ford was an unfinished castle in mid-construction.


    Quote Originally Posted by Geoffrey of Villehardouin View Post
    It would be wrong to assume that the number at Jacob's Ford was the greatest number imaginable in the absence of other information about other castles.
    No, but considering the number of castles in KoJ, if you apply the same standard to each of them, the KoJ would have 30-40 000 men in continuous military employment.


    Quote Originally Posted by Geoffrey of Villehardouin View Post
    As far as I remember, there were only relatively few knights in the castle, so it was not as if all the strength of the KoJ was in there. If for 50 or so knights we have about 1450 levies at Jacob's Ford, and there were 800 knights in Acre out of 14,000 men in total, I think that indicates the scale of numbers of non-knights vs knights for the Kingdom of Jerusalem at that time in history.
    Perhaps, the Tower of David was defended by a single knight with 70 footsoldiers.

    Though, keep in mind that the men at Acre were a result of massive reinforcements from all over the place, including a good part of the army of Cyprus.


    Quote Originally Posted by Geoffrey of Villehardouin View Post
    SS Titanium has a good balance in my opinion but the situation with Broken Crescent is not ideal.
    Yeah, in Titanium, if you lose 30-40 knights, you will scream at your monitor because you know you will not see them again in your roster for quite a while.
    Last edited by +Marius+; July 20, 2016 at 02:46 PM.

  19. #139
    Hoplite of Ilis's Avatar Domesticus
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Hellas
    Posts
    2,121

    Default Re: BROKEN CRESCENT 2.4 !RELEASE! - !PREVIEW! AND !DOWNLOAD!

    Have you added flame throwers yet?

  20. #140
    Chris P. Bacon's Avatar Semisalis
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    New Amsterdam
    Posts
    421

    Default Re: BROKEN CRESCENT 2.4 !RELEASE! - !PREVIEW! AND !DOWNLOAD!

    No not yet

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •