Movies and Edged Weapons Pt. 2

[Aqtai]

Originally Posted by M.carter

But most of Saladins armies came from Cairo and Damascus, and Turkish troops werent that common in Saladins time. The only mamluks in Saladins army were his personal bodyguards. The rest of the army mainly came from barracks in Damascus, Aleppo and Cairo, all arab cities.

Many Islamic states used slave warriors or mamluks from very early on. The 'Abbassid Khalifas were using Turkish mamluks in the 9th century, Ahmad ibn Tulun was himself the son of a Turkish mamluk. Nur-ed-din Mahmud's father Emad-ed-din zenki was originally a mamluk in the Seljuq army. However these mamluks were usually relatively few in number and acted as a body guard to the ruler. The exception was the Fatimids who had large numbers of Nubian slave infantrymen and the later Mamluk Sultanate of Egypt. Salaheddin had a bodyguard of several hundred mamluks called the halaqa, i.e. ring.

The rest of Salaheddin's army was a mixture. he disbanded most of the old Fatimid army after he seized power in Egypt because their loyalty to him was suspect. His light cavalry would have been made of up Turcoman horse-archers who had settled in Syria and Northern Iraq. His heavy cavalry was made up of Kurds, free Turks who had settled in the cities of syria and Northern Iraq for one or two generations, sons of mamluks and a small number of Arabs from the bedouin tribes of Syria, Palestine and Egypt. he would have had some Arab heavy infantry from the Syrian cities as well as bedouin infantry.

With regards to weapons, both straight swords and curved sabres were used. The Arabs and Kurds fought in the traditional way with sword and lance, they used straight swords. Troops of Turkish origin prefered curved sabres. there is a straight sword in the Topqapi Museum in Istanbul which is attributed to Salaheddin Yusef ibn Ayyub. The Topqapi Museum also has several Mamluk swords from the 14th and 15th centuries which are also straight. Arab miniature paintings and Coptic bibles from the 12th and 13th centuries invariably show straight swords with downcurved quillons and spherical pommels.

The film interestingly shows Salaheddin using a sword with a divided point. One of the Prophet's Muhammad's swords was also said to have had a bifurcated point. Salaheddin was undoubtedly a very pious Muslim (of the old-fashioned tolerant kind, not like a modern wahabi), but I have no idea if he would have gone as far as using a sword modelled on the Prophet's. Finally Salaheddin is often described as wearing a mail-lined kazaghand and a mail coif over which he wore a yellow skullcap and a white head cloth. But he may have worn more elaborate armour on certain occasions.

[M.carter]

Originally Posted by Aqtai

With regards to weapons, both straight swords and curved sabres were used. The Arabs and Kurds fought in the traditional way with sword and lance, they used straight swords. Troops of Turkish origin prefered curved sabres. there is a straight sword in the Topqapi Museum in Istanbul which is attributed to Salaheddin Yusef ibn Ayyub. The Topqapi Museum also has several Mamluk swords from the 14th and 15th centuries which are also straight. Arab miniature paintings and Coptic bibles from the 12th and 13th centuries invariably show straight swords with downcurved quillons and spherical pommels.

Saladins sword! Ive never heard of such thing, in Dr.Uncal Yuncel's book, there is a sword in Topkapi attributed to Najmadeen Ayyub, Saladins father, but he clearly states that there is no sword attributed to saladin is in the sarai.

In this pic, posted I believe by eftihis some months ago, the middle saber is typical turkish, while the rest of the swords are arab syrian.

[Aqtai]

I stand corrected. please excuse my rusty memory. In my defense I will say that it has been a long time since I read up on this stuff! I also don't have Dr Yuncel's book.

[Aqtai]

In his 'Arms and Armour of the Crusading Era, 1050-1350: Islam, Eastern Europe and Asia Vol 2', David Nicolle refers to a sword from the Army Museum in Istanbul which is attributed to Salaheddin. Nicolle himself however has doubts about this saying he believes it is actually 13th or 14th century. It is a straight sword by the way.

I knew I had read something somewhere about a 'Sword of Saladin' in Istanbul!

BTW I don't really recommend the book, it was a disappointment. No photos at all, just line drawings.

[ariel]

I just saw Kingdom of Heaven together with a friend of mine who is a maven of all things European medieval (clothings, material artefacts etc).
He loved this movie because the Crusader stuff looked quite authentic.
I found the swords being more or less in accord with what I know about Islamic armies of the time.
Otherwise, this movie is a pure and unadulterated junk. There is no plausible story that binds the plot together (there is no plot as such ...), the characters are unexplainable and do not develop at all and the entire 2 h 25 min enterprise plods thru with as much excitement as one can get driving slowly over a speed bump.
If you, guys, want to see a lot of Islamic-looking weapon props, - plunk $8.50 and buy a ticket.
If you are expecting a semblance of an intelligent and fascinating story of the Crusade era, rent yourself "Robin Hood" ( either the Kevin Costner's one or the cartoon version from Disney). Compared to the Kingdom of Heaven, these two are truly Shakesperean.....

[Aqtai]

Originally Posted by ariel

I just saw Kingdom of Heaven together with a friend of mine who is a maven of all things European medieval (clothings, material artefacts etc).
He loved this movie because the Crusader stuff looked quite authentic.
I found the swords being more or less in accord with what I know about Islamic armies of the time.
Otherwise, this movie is a pure and unadulterated junk. There is no plausible story that binds the plot together (there is no plot as such ...), the characters are unexplainable and do not develop at all and the entire 2 h 25 min enterprise plods thru with as much excitement as one can get driving slowly over a speed bump.
If you, guys, want to see a lot of Islamic-looking weapon props, - plunk $8.50 and buy a ticket.
If you are expecting a semblance of an intelligent and fascinating story of the Crusade era, rent yourself "Robin Hood" ( either the Kevin Costner's one or the cartoon version from Disney). Compared to the Kingdom of Heaven, these two are truly Shakesperean.....

Ooh, thats a bit harsh.

Mind you, I've had few weeks to think think things over and look some things up, mainly in 'Saladin in his Time' by PH Newby and Hattin 1187 by david Nicolle, the only 2 books I have to hand at the moment.

Ridley Scott has taken bigger liberties with history than I thought. Salaheddin's Army at Hattin and Jerusalem was about 45,000 men, not 200,000. For some reason Count Raymond of Tripoli has become 'Tiberias' in the film (although he did have a castle at lake Tiberias), and Balian of Ibelin, who was a real person BTW, was at the battle of Hattin and was captured by Salaheddin. he was released after promising never to take up arms against Salaheddin again. A promise he broke by commanding the defenders at Jerusalem.

The other thing that irritated me is that Salaheddin's generals don't have names, you just have 'the hardliner' acted by Khaled En-Nabawy and 'the moderate' acted by Alexander Siddiq. I think these are meant to represent Salaheddin's 2 main commanders at Hattin. His nephew Taqi-ed-Din and Muzaffar-ed-Din Goqbori. The scenes showing Muslims praying are also wrong as they are all spaced out. Finally when Salaheddin is reciting the 'Fatiha' over the Muslim dead, it was edited in a way that most pious muslims would find rather blasphmemous.

Saying all that, I still liked this film.

[M.carter]

Originally Posted by Aqtai

Ooh, thats a bit harsh.

Mind you, I've had few weeks to think think things over and look some things up, mainly in 'Saladin in his Time' by PH Newby and Hattin 1187 by david Nicolle, the only 2 books I have to hand at the moment.

Ridley Scott has taken bigger liberties with history than I thought. Salaheddin's Army at Hattin and Jerusalem was about45,000 men, not 200,000. For some reason Count Raymond of Tripoli has become 'Tiberias' in the film (although he did have a castle at lake Tiberias), and Balian of Ibelin, who was a real person BTW, was at the battle of Hattin and was captured by Salaheddin. he was released after promising never to take up arms against Salaheddin again. A promise he broke by commanding the defenders at Jerusalem.

Yeah, the army was probably no more than 45,000 men. Some sources say that balian was captured and released on the condition of never carrying arms against muslims again, but when he reached Jerusalem, the people begged him to defend them, and he wrote to saladin about that, and to Saladins chivalry, he allowed him to break his promise. Other sources say that he escaped from the field (fled in reality ) and ran away to Jerusalem.

But then, this movie isnt supposed to be a documentary, just a good movie.