The Chronicle of Ibn al-Athīr for the Crusading Period from al-Kāmil fī'l-ta'rīkh. Part 1: The Years 491-541/1097-1146: The Coming of the Franks and the Muslim Response (review)

Students of the Crusades have long suffered from an imbalance in historical sources available to them. While the accounts of the First Crusade by Robert the Monk, Baudri of Dol, Fulcher of Chartres and Guibert of Nogent are now easily available in translation, it has always been more difficult to find contemporary accounts of these dramatic events from a Muslim perspective. The publication of an annotated English version of the first part of the Chronicle of Ibn al-Athīr (1160-1233) can only be welcomed. Ibn al-Athīr came from Mosul, where he spent much of his life, although he does not seem to have been directly associated with any political authority. This volume presents his chronicle for the years between (in the Western calendar) 1097 and 1146, namely between the first and second crusades, prior to the advent of Saladin. Ibn al-Athīr saw history as offering a mine of exempla, offering practical and moral examples. For readers unfamiliar with Arab perspectives, this volume provides a valuable introduction to the Muslim angle on the Crusades.

In a neat reversal of the Christian tendency to identify the enemy as ethnic aliens (i.e., Turks or Saracens) rather than by any religious label, the enemy for Ibn al-Athīr is the Franks, opposed by Moslems. The Franks are driven not by any appeal from the Pope, but by desire for land. When Roger of Sicily was told by his men that they wanted to spread the Gospel, 'Roger raised his leg and gave a loud fart. "By the truth of my religion", he said, "there is more use in that than in what you have to say."' This little sketch gives a clue as to the way the Franks are presented, namely as hypocrites in religion. Ibn al-Athīr does not speak of jihad in this fight, but simply of necessary resistance to Frankish desire for land. He does not shrink from reporting the defeats experienced by the Muslims, but dwells at length on the atrocities committed by the Franks – such as the 70,000 imams and ascetics who had come to live around the El-Aqsa mosque – and the plunder they acquired. The Franks were only one of several problems, however, that Ibn al-Athīr describes. He also relates a good deal of internal conflict within the Muslim world, such as occasioned by the rivalry between Barkyaruq and his brother Muhammad ibn Malikshah over the control of Baghdad, as well as by the incursion of Turks into Syrian and Arab controlled territory.

The history is narrative rather than analytic. Nonetheless, Ibn al-Athīr's account illustrates well why the Franks were able to assert themselves at a time of disunity within the Muslim world. The ebbs and flows of the Frankish position during their early decades in the Holy Land are presented with precise detail. He recognises the excellence of the Frankish cavalry. There are also not uninformed reports about what was going on in other parts of the lands of Islam, notably in al-Andalus. Successful leaders, like Sultan Muhammad or Muhammad ibn Tumari, were those who governed by justice as much as by bravery. The fusion of military and religious virtue is perhaps not unlike that found in Christian chronicles, but with the difference that there is no equivalent to the Pope seeking to set the agenda for the Muslim world. By drawing attention to events not well covered in the Christian record, such as a failed Frankish siege of Damascus in 1129, we get a valuable alternative perspective...