Regele lepros și urmașii săi. Balduin IV şi Regatul Cruciat al Ierusalimului

by Bernard Hamilton, Alessandro‑Flavio Dumitrașcu (Translator)

Pe Balduin IV, regele Ierusalimului, îl știm cu toții din capodopera lui Ridley Scott, magnifica reconstituire cinematografică a Orientului latin din vremea cruciadelor. Slăbit în trup de boala nemiloasă, regele adolescent intră în istorie ca erou pe câmpul de bătaie. Însuflețit de credința în misiunea sa divină, în mână cu Sfânta Cruce și în fruntea a câteva sute de cavaleri și a câteva mii de pedestrași, cu o lovitură tactică de geniu Balduin spulberă marea armată a lui Saladin pornită să cucerească Orașul Sfânt. Devine astfel el însuși un miracol, reprezentantul pe pământ al lui Cristos.

Într-una dintre cele mai limpezi și convingătoare introduceri în lumea complexă a Orientului Apropiat medieval, Bernard Hamilton reușește să mențină un echilibru între analiza istorică și narațiunea vie, transformând documentele, cronicile și mărturiile vremii într-o poveste captivantă. Scriind istoria acestui rege căruia boala infamantă și slăbiciunea fizică nu îi slăbesc luciditatea politică, curajul personal sau capacitatea de a conduce într-un context foarte incert, el demontează clișeele romantice și simplificările grosiere, oferindu-ne o imagine nuanțată a relațiilor dintre creștini și musulmani, a jocurilor de putere, a alianțelor fragile și a deciziilor dramatice luate sub presiunea timpului.

Această istorie a regatului cruciat al Ierusalimului este o lectură esențială pentru toți cei pasionați de Evul Mediu – sau pur și simplu de poveștil

Genres: History, Biography, Nonfiction, Medieval, Christian, Medieval History, Islam

360 pages, Paperback

First published May 18, 2000

About the author

British Historian (born 1932) Professor Emeritus of Crusading History at University of Nottingham.

Reviews

[E · Rating 5 out of 5]

Baldwin IV was unknown to me until I watched a film called Kingdom of Heaven. The film was entertaining although not entirely true to fact.

Baldwin IV was born in 1161 and died in 1185 at 24 years old. He is what I would consider a Titan of History.

In the 12th Century Lepers were considered "Dead to the World and Alive only to God."

He was the son of Amalric King of Jerusalem. While playing with a group of Noble children, the royal tutor William of Tyre noticed Baldwin did not flinch when his forearm was cut during the rough play.

He took Baldwin aside and wept when he recognized the beautiful boys arm was numb to pain. The symptom of Leprosy.

The discovery was kept secret as long as possible.

Baldwin became King of Jerusalem on July 11, 1174, following the death of his father, King Amalric I. He was crowned on July 15, 1174, at the age of 13 and reigned until his death in 1185.

Baldwin IV decided early he would not retire to solitude to decay slowly. He became a skilled horseman at 16 years old.

His warhorse was over 1000 lbs. Since his lower legs were numb, he strengthened his knees.

He had leather straps fashioned to his arms to hold his sword to his numb hands. He lived in the shadow of a slow death and had no fear.

Riding a warhorse thundering into battle would cause excruciating pain to a Leper with raw sores and nerve endings. He inspired his troops who were awed by his bravery.

King Baldwin IV, became known as the "Leper King," and was famous for his courageous rule as King of Jerusalem despite suffering from debilitating leprosy, leading his outnumbered army to a stunning victory against Saladin at the Battle of Montgisard.

Baldwin, with only roughly 375–500 knights (including about 80 Knights Templar) and a few thousand infantry, broke out of Ascalon and intercepted Saladin's overconfident and scattered army of 26,000 men near the hill of Montgisard.

This delayed the fall of the Crusader Kingdom through sheer willpower and military skill.


His resilience, strategic brilliance, and dedication to his kingdom, proved that inner strength and leadership transcended physical weakness.

Baldwin IV and Saladin never met in person, and their relationship was defined by a deep, mutual respect as fierce military rivals.

Saladin reportedly admired Baldwin’s courage, faith, and ability to command loyalty despite his illness.

Despite becoming blind and losing the use of his limbs toward the end of his life, he refused to hide in a palace, often being carried into battle on a litter to inspire his men.

A fascinating read.

Five Stars

🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟

[Suzannah · Rating 3 out of 5]

When I decided to put some more research into the most famous king of a forgotten kingdom, Baldwin IV, the Leper King of Jerusalem, everyone in a position to know pointed me immediately to this book.

It's a surprisingly slim volume (closer to 250 pages than 300) covering the 24 years of Baldwin's life and the run-up to Hattin afterwards. Definitely written for an academic audience, the book is thick with detailed analyses of events, laborious discussions of historical sources, footnotes, and untranslated passages in Middle French (seriously, sir?). I enjoyed the wealth of detail and valuable weighing of different sources, but I was disappointed by Hamilton's very dry and difficult writing style, though the plot did pick up a bit in Chapter 7. It wasn't just the academic manner: Piers Mitchell's scholarly epilogue on leprosy was significantly more readable.

Also, if you are looking for a biography of the most impressive Christian monarch between Alfred the Great and Richard Coeur-de-Lion, don't look here. Lots of facts, lots of analysis, lots of supporting characters ("OH NO DON'T TELL ME I'M SUPPOSED TO REMEMBER THE NAMES OF REYNALD DE CHATILLON'S STEPSONS oh heavens were these the stepsons of his second marriage or was this his third*?"). As Mrs Schrader mentions in her review, if you're looking for a book to help you get under Baldwin's skin, this is not it.

*Yes, *now* I realise he was only married twice.

But what about the good stuff? *rubs hands* Baldwin! Whattaman! Crowned king of a strip of land hanging on by its toenails to the most debatable place on earth, beset with internal divisions and external foes, at the age of just thirteen, with a vicious case of leprosy... I came away from this book with an enormous respect for a young man who accomplished more in his short life (he died shortly before turning 24) than most people do in nearly a century. A man of remarkable courage, honour, and integrity, Baldwin held his divided kingdom together (to say nothing of his disintegrating body) for ten years with little more than a will of iron and the blessing of Heaven. At fifteen he began to rule in his own right. At sixteen he fought and won the Battle of Montgisard, decisively beating his much stronger enemy Saladin. At eighteen he was in the saddle leading his men on a 200-mile raid into enemy territory and up to the end of his life he led campaigns from his litter. The suffering he must have endured making public appearances at court, handling unruly nobles and going on regular jaunts to war, whether mounted or carried in a litter, must have been intense in his condition, but he faithfully carried out these duties because it was clear that without him, the disunity in the kingdom would substantially weaken it.

Though I found this particular treatment of Baldwin's remarkable reign rather difficult to read, I did appreciate Hamilton's careful weighing of events and particularly his willingness to see the history through twelfth-century eyes, especially when it came to the Epilogue in which he evaluated the success of Baldwin's reign in terms of religious devotion and the young king's leprosy in terms of Christological symbolism (since the Vulgate translation of Isaiah 53:3-4 includes a reference to leprosy).

In summary, this is an important resource for anyone with a serious scholarly interest in Baldwin IV's reign, but inaccessible to the casual reader. I look forward to seeing more authors bridging this gap in the future.

[Johannes · Rating 1 out of 5]

Being a history aficionado means you fall into reading about obscure topics, unknown to the common folk, unless of course you heard about Ridley Scott's movie about this very particular last king. Yes, at one point in history during the Crusades some French noblemen managed to conquer the land, and established several kingdoms in the Levant. The kingdom of Jerusalem was one of them, and Baldwin IV, a leper, one of its last kings.

For such a complicated topic the book is quite easy to approach in its length, and here is where everything stops being manageable because the author chose so:
-There is no timeline whatsoever. Hamilton goes back and forth while introducing new characters all the time completely unrelated to the main plot. You are required to check the family trees constantly to get each new individual, and even then you never fully get why he is writing about them.
-I'm amazed his editor didn't rein him in, several pages have more footnotes than text, and please don't get me started on the full quotes in both old French and Latin he decided not to translate for those who could not manage either.

Somebody already mentioned this book was mostly tailored to scholars but I'm not quite sure that is the case, I think any person would struggle to read this work in its current form. The biggest irony is little is finally written over Baldwin IV himself, Hamilton choses on each chapter to drift away on to other topics to the point he is remembered every now and then, inserted in the "narration" and then dropped again. A pity really since I was really interested in the topic.

To sum it up, please refrain yourself from this mess. It's not worth your time.

[Mircea Petcu · Rating 5 out of 5]

Când Balduin a împlinit 9 ani a fost încredințat tutorelui Guillaume, arhidiacon de Tyr, unul dintre cei mai erudiți oameni ai regatului. Prințul s-a mutat în casa acestui cleric cultivat și cosmopolit, însă foarte repede arhidiaconul a depistat boala elevului său: "în timp ce se juca cu niște băieți nobili, care se ciupeau pe mâini și pe brațe, ceilalți copii țipau când îi durea, în timp ce el suporta totul cu mare răbdare".
În momentul încoronării, Balduin nu fusese diagnosticat în mod formal cu lepră, altfel n-ar fi putut urca pe tron. În mod evident, exista un factor de risc în urma acestei alegeri, însă tinerețea lui Balduin era o garanție. Avea numai 13 ani.

Boala a devenit evidentă "când s-a apropiat de vârsta pubertății". Fără îndoială, boala nu mai putea fi oprită: "Acesta suferea de o formă gravă de lepră. Se agrava în fiecare zi, afectându-i în mod special mâinile, picioarele și fața, în așa fel încât supușii săi simțeau un discomfort când îl priveau". Nu se cunosc detalii referitoare la reacția regelui în fața bolii, în afara faptului că era hotărât să lupte împotriva ei. Cu toate acestea, a fost un lider militar competent. Ar fi putut foarte simplu să se fi declarat invalid și să-și fi delegat puterile militare, dar nu a încercat niciodată să facă acest lucru până când nu a devenit prea bolnav să se urce în șa. A condus armata personal și a luat parte la lupte, chiar dacă de fapt avea doar o mână sănătoasă, folosindu-și abilitățile de echitație pe care le învățase de la profesorii arabi. Curajul său și dorința sa atrăgeau respect și admirație.
Cea mai importantă victorie militară a fost obținută împotriva forțelor lui Saladin la Mont Gisard în 1177.

În ochii istoricilor, înfrângerea de la Hattin (1187) și pierderea regatului au aruncat o umbră întunecată asupra domniei lui Balduin. Atenția li s-a concentrat asupra acelor aspecte ale domniei care conțineau germenii slăbiciunii viitoare a francilor și care au favorizat victoria lui Saladin. Este însă important de reținut că aceasta nu este o perspectivă împărtășită de contemporanii regelui. Sub conducerea lui Balduin, latinii au zădărnicit planurile lui Saladin de a încercui regatul.

Recomand

[Elliott Bignell · Rating 3 out of 5]

I have been waiting a few years to get a copy of this book, for various reasons, and regret not being able to award it a higher rating. While I found the book fascinating and erudite, and have taken advantage of the extensive references to track down further reading, the reasons are that the book does not really engage one in its protagonists and that it fails to do what the author set out to do.

The first expectation is perhaps counter to the spirit in which the book was offered, as Hamilton is an academic and is seeking to redress a perceived false understanding by his fellow academics. As such, it is heavily referenced, fairly dry and very detailed about political and familial matters. It also offers supporting quotes in untranslated middle-ages French and Latin, seeming delightfully to echo from an age when it could simply be presumed that an educated reader would read them fluently. Sadly, even my contemporary French is halting and unpracticed, so as a lay reader I have to say that this book does not always speak to my personal needs. Take that as you may.

The second quibble is, I think, better grounded as a general criticism. Hamilton's account of Baldwin IV does not really conflict with anything else I have read on the period. He makes a strong case, and here the book shines, that Baldwin must have been an extraordinary person. Dying young, at 24, he remained a strong monarch with considerable military gifts despite suffering from lepromatous leprosy, a horribly disfiguring but not inherently fatal disease that often led to isolation in mediaeval society. He rode well despite a crippled arm, until unable. He was then carried into battle on a litter, eventually blind.

But the marshall prowess of the Franks has never been in dispute. That they were fierce warriors is widely understood. That his successor Guy was a poor battle leader who nevertheless showed character after the liberation of Jerusalem is also widely acknowledged. Hamilton points to some brutal acts by Saladin, but these also are not widely denied. Saladin has been favourably judged by history not because he always kept to Islamic law regarding the treatment of captives and the conquered but because he exceeded the clemency and eschewed the barbarity of the Franks.

Baldwin indeed succeeded in containing Saladin for a time, but it can hardly be claimed that this is misperceived, or that Outremer had no choice. The book refers to incessant conflict between the Franks and Byzantines, Frankish-Sicilian attempts to conquer Egypt and Frankish extraction of tribute from Muslim cities. It may have been strategically wise to attempt to contain Saladin, but this choice can hardly be said to have been forced upon the Franks by unwarranted aggression.

The author does, however, portray a more open and tolerant society than some accoutns would have. The Franks permitted heretical Christian sects access to the Holy Places, although they allowed no permanent Jewish or Muslim settlement, a consideration whereby Saladin yet again surpasses them. The Franks traded with Muslims even while at war with them, and mostly treated prisoners decently by the standards of the time, subsequent at least to the orgy of bloodletting of the First Crusade. They adopted many local customs and local dress.

So, all in all, a fascinating read, but one which fails, in my opinion, to assert the inversion to which it aspires.

[Helena Schrader · Rating 4 out of 5]

Good Revisionist History, Poor Biography

This is an excellent, detailed and well-documented account of the crusader kingdom of Jerusalem in the late 12th century. It focuses on the quarter century of Baldwin IV's life span, 1161 to 1186. This was a particularly critical period in the history of the crusader kingdom, and Hamilton's book provides details too often skipped over or even blurred together in accounts that try to cover the whole two hundred years of crusader history. Furthermore, Hamilton provides an excellent summary of his sources up front and impresses with his familiarity with not only Latin and Arab, but Greek, Jewish and Armenian sources.

Particularly impressive was Hamilton's treatment of Reynald de Chatillon. Chatillon is usually depicted as a rogue adventurer, more robber than baron, and often blamed for the war with Saladin. Hamilton, in contrast, effectively defends many of Chatillon's most controversial actions. While not denying his violent and ambitious character, Hamilton convincingly argues that Chatillon followed sound strategic principles when launching his raids into Sinai, putting Christian warships in the Red Sea, and even when breaking the truce with Saladin to attack a heavily armed caravan.

Hamilton's treatment of Raymond of Tripoli is less convincing. He tries to paint Tripoli as a treasonous threat to the throne, and even suggests that Sibylla's marriage to Guy de Lusignan was arranged by King Baldwin in an attempt to prevent a coup by Tripoli. The evidence is very weak for this and contradicted by other accounts, notably the Cronicles of Ernoul, that other historians have followed. Furthermore, Baldwin soon withdrew his favor from Lusignan, while Sibylla remained remarkably loyal -- two historical facts that give credence to the more common intepretation of a love-affair between Lusignan and Sibylla forcing the king's hand. But even here, where Hamilton's arguments are weak, he presents them cogently and names his sources, leaving the reader in a good position to judge for himself which interpretation of history he finds more compelling.

Where this book falls short of the mark is in the essential biographical function of making the subject come to life. For all his meticulous reporting on what happend during "the Leper King's" reign, Hamilton singularly fails to get inside the leprous skin of his subject and help us understand him. We are given no inkling of what he was thinking and feeling, why he behaved in certain ways, how he succeeded in winning the undoubtedly loyalty of his subjects despite his illness or what motivated him at critical junctions. We are not even told until the epilogue that he was chaste but not particularly devout.

Baldwin IV of Jerusalem deserves a better biography precisely because despite his severe handicap he successfully held his kingdom together in a very difficult period, and despite his severe physical handicap he repeatedly defeated Saladin on the battlefield. He also pursued a highly sophisticated foreign policy, which showed profound understanding of the geopolitical position of his kingdom. I would like to read a book that explores the character and psyche of such a man; Hamilton unfortunately does not.

[Ton · Rating 5 out of 5]

This book is officially about the Leper King of Jerusalem, Baldwin IV, but you could perhaps better call it a political history of the Kingdom of Jerusalem in the face of the Muslim threat of re-conquest. The author gives an overview and interpretation of the events from ca. 1165-1190, outlining major political motives and strategies. You could almost say that Baldwin comes second to the greater narrative, but that doesn’t detract from the strength of this work. It’s a great case study for Medieval politics, and truly fascination description of a kingdom under external threat suffering from internal turmoil.

Baldwin IV was King of Jerusalem from 1174 until his death in 1184. His affliction with leprosy was suspected when he was about 10, by William of Tyre (who was his tutor), who gave a moving description of the incident in A History of Deeds Done Beyond the Sea: apparently Baldwin and the other boys were playing a game where they would take turns pinching each other’s arms, and William was surprised to note that Baldwin appeared to feel no pain in his left arm. Doctors consulted (some of the best Arab doctors, appointed by the king) noted that the indications were likely for leprosy, even though a formal diagnosis was impossible until years later, when lesions would start to appear.

However, this is a scholarly work, so Hamilton starts with a description of the sources. He discusses both William of Tyre and the Eracles, the principal sources for this period, at length. Those readers who are not particularly interested in motivations of Medieval chroniclers or separate editions of surviving manuscripts are free to skip this part. For our understanding of the sources, it’s important to note that, for instance, William of Tyre was chancellor of the kingdom, but he took sides in the internal struggle for control. He is a very knowledgeable source, but he sometimes veils certain descriptions when he can’t be too open for the good of the kingdom, and he uses the method of “damning with faint praise” and outright neglect for those he holds responsible for frustrating his career. Throughout the book, Hamilton also uses Muslims sources (mainly Ibn al-Athir, Imad ad-Din and Baha ad-Din) and the occasional Byzantine and Orthodox source, giving (in my view) the most complete picture of events in this period we are ever likely to get.

The second part of the book is about the growing power of the most prominent Muslim rulers facing the Crusader Kingdom, Nur ad-Din and Saladin, and the efforts of both Baldwin III and Amalric (Baldwin IV’s uncle and father, respectively). A notable aspect here is the alliance of the Crusader kingdom with Byzantium; both Baldwin III and Amalric (though Amalric had to divorce the mother of Baldwin IV and Sybilla) took Byzantine wives, and Baldwin even went to Constantinople to discuss the alliance. This alliance was primarily centered on the conquest of Egypt, seen by Amalric as the basis of Saladins power and the heart of the threat against the kingdom. Here also the underlying problem of the kingdom, too few military resources and division amongst the upper nobility, became apparent. When great lords from the West came to the kingdom for their private crusades, they were both enticed by the semi-independent rulers of Antioch and Tripoli to further their ends, and thwarted by the leading nobles who did not want to see them stay on and gain power at their cost; this included territory to be won in Egypt, thereby severely damaging Amalric’s prospects for a successful conquest and ultimately damaging the kingdom’s chances of survival.

The third part starts with Baldwin IV’s ascension, and the division of power in the kingdom. Hamilton notes that there are two primary factions at court, Raymond of Tripoli (William’s patron) and the Ibelins on one side, and Baldwin’s mother Agnes of Courtenay with her family (and Reynald of Chatillon) on the other. At first Raymond of Tripoli was regent during Baldwin’s minority, and he apparently did well, but not entirely to Baldwin’s satisfaction as Baldwin changed tack after reaching the age of majority. Most prominently Raymond sought appeasement with Saladin, whereas Baldwin saw more in the line of constant aggression against Saladin, which was advocated by Reynald of Chatillon. Reynald received a bad press by William of Tyre, and also Sir Steven Runciman, but Hamilton gives us another picture of the man. His line of aggression towards Saladin was a continuation of Amalric’s policies, and intended to deny Saladin the peace he required to expand his conquests in Syria. Their position that Saladin would eventually attack the Crusader kingdom no matter what seems justified. Against that, Raymond or Tripoli twice tried to seize power in the kingdom, and after Baldwin’s death made a private truce with Saladin which Hamilton considers an act of treason. Ironically, William of Tyre, and also Runciman, favour Raymond of Tripoli as the wisest head and the best choice for the regency, and the Ibelins as the best men of the kingdom. Hamilton’s closer reading of the sources suggests otherwise. It is argued that Sybilla of Jerusalem was married to Guy of Lusignan to prevent Raymond and his allies marrying her off to one of the Ibelins, which also puts a very different perspective on the disastrous campaign of Hattin in 1187 (where Guy was isolated and unable to trust many of his most important barons). This division between the highest nobility is what cost the kingdom its best chances to turn the tide, starting with the Second Crusade, and following that up with the failed attempts to annex Egypt and strike at Saladin when he was still relatively weak.

Hamilton continues his narrative with the short reign of Baldwin V and subsequently Guy of Lusignan, though he treats these only briefly. As an appendix there is an article from a medical journal about Baldwin’s leprosy, which argues why lepromatous leprosy (the most severe kind) was the kind that Baldwin contracted. Throughout the book there will be re-evaluations of the sources, and explanations on why Hamilton chose the interpretations that he did.

Also, because you can’t make this up, according to Wikipedia the return address on a package bomb sent by Al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula was Reynald Krak, a reference to Reynald of Chatillon.

[johnny dangerously · Rating 2 out of 5]

Thoroughly disappointing, this book is impossible for non-academics, highly pompous and needlessly verbose, and worse, does not stick to the subject it advertises. While it gives a good general overview of the period during which Balwin IV ruled, that information is only available to you if you speak French and are willing to wade through paragraphs of disjointed and turgid prose.

[Anna Maria Franchesca · Rating 5 out of 5]

"Although he suffered from leprosy from childhood, yet he strenuously preserved the frontiers of the Kingdom of Jerusalem and won a remarkable victory over Saladin at Mont Gisard, and as long as he lived he was victorious." -Sicard of Cremona

Baldwin IV has been a personal hero of mine since I was 17 (thank you, Ridley Scott), and this is probably the most detailed account I've ever come across concerning the Leper King. Despite his short life, Hamilton delves into Baldwin's childhood to his affliction, his reign to the near-constant search of his successor, to his eventual death and the fall of Jerusalem. I've read previous reviews saying how the narrative would deviate from the actual topic at hand, but it being a historical biography I thought the insight to be fascinating.

I had hoped there'd be more details to the strategy and tactics used in the campaigns Baldwin participated in; Wikipedia wins this round but it still doesn't lower my five-star rating. Piers Mitchell's appendix is an excellent insight on what Baldwin's leprosy must've been like especially during a time period that either shunned the afflicted or praised it as a "holy disease". Hamilton's epilogue was enough to make me mourn for a king who had died more than 800 years ago.

[Jack · Rating 4 out of 5]

A highly interesting look at the reign and times of King Baldwin IV. Good examination of the persons involved and their motives.

[mateo · Rating 4 out of 5]

It might seem a bit daunting at first considering the more academic approach but this is a well structured and not-too-lengthy book that, in my opinion, makes an honest effort to not be too confusing or dense and has mild success in this endeavor. Personally, I didn’t struggle with it but results may vary.

there’s 2 main things i appreciate about this book:

1. Hamilton approaches the subject with a lot of nuance, contrasting christian and islamic sources, and attempting to see beyond the biases they might carry.

2. This book provides not only a portrait of king Baldwin IV and his reign, but also of the complex and fascinating intricacies of crusader society in the Kingdom of Jerusalem. There was a LOT of factions and people (and peoples) that needed to be coordinated and conciliated for things to work in the Crusader States.

Anyways, very enjoyable book, if somewhat niche.


PS. Baldwin the Fourth? Pretty admirable guy, all things considered.

[Shirin · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is considered a landmark study of the Crusader kingdoms. Rather than view Baudouin IV as weak-willed and easily led, Hamilton instead views him as a clear-eyed, brave, and intelligent leader.

One of the core problems for the Crusader kingdoms, however, is that they desperately needed the support of the Latin Christendom and the Byzantines to survive. The need to build such outside alliances is probably Baudouin II had arranged for his daughter, Melisende, to marry Foulques V d’Anjou and why Melisende and Foulques’ sons both had Byzantine queens. Yet, nevertheless, the resources of the Latin and Byzantine aristocracies were finite because that had problems of their own and the Crusader barons were often suspicious of outsiders. Looked at in this light, the marriages that Baudouin IV arranged for his sister, Sibylle, then make sense, but this policy nonetheless caused discontent with Raymond III of Tripoli, Bohémond III of Antioch, and the Ibelin brothers, creating divisions right when the kingdom of Jerusalem needed them least. This, however, was not a new problem: one reason for the failure of the Second Crusade, aside from the mediocre military leadership of Louis VII of France and Konrad of Germany, was disagreement about whether to grant Damascus, once taken, to Thierry, count of Flanders, or someone else.

The figure of Guy de Lusignan, then, already had one strike against him because he was an outsider. That in itself was not an insurmountable problem, but the bigger issues were that Guy was indecisive and had little experience in military matters and almost zero flair for diplomacy. This brings us then to Hattin and why Guy chose to fight there. Hamilton says that Guy was under moral pressure to fight. This, then, was the same dilemma that faced Philippe VI of France faced before the Battle of Crécy: not engaging in battle was, militarily, the safer choice, but whether he could afford to do so politically was another matter. Medieval kings were, above all, war leaders and a king who demonstrated skill in neither war nor administrative duties wasn’t one who was going to command support for very long. While it was long recognized that avoiding pitched battles whenever possible was the safest military option (which is why castles were built), victories in pitched battles often inspired much excitement and political support.

One of the ironies of this book, though not fully discussed, is that the victor of Hattin’s triumph turned out to be short-lived indeed. After Saladin’s death, his brother and sons craved up his territories into parts that quickly become hostile to each other and their line met ignominious ends: the last Ayyubid sultan of Egypt was murdered by his Mamulks in 1250 and the last Ayyubid emir, An-Nasir Yusuf, was executed by the Mongols after they besieged and sacked the city of Aleppo ten years later. Thereafter, Saladin was largely forgotten by Muslims until 1898 when (irony of ironies) the German Kaiser, Wilhelm II, made a visit to his tomb.

[Yadira · Rating 5 out of 5]

As another review mentions, it may not be for those that don’t like academic formatting. There are several instances where it can be considered run on sentences and it gets confusing especially when the names are all similar and not entirely differentiated for the sake of brevity.

There also seems to be that the author thought it unnecessary to translate majority of the French lang texts. Thankfully I was able to get by as I know enough French to be able to make out what is being said.

Overall, I enjoyed this text on Baldwin IV. Albeit it was a slow start it eventually picked up and got more interesting. The appendix where Piers D. Mitchell does a review of leprosy in the context of medieval times was especially interesting. I can now say I’ve learned of several subtypes of leprosy and a bit more history of what occurred during his reign.

[salt · Rating 4 out of 5]

always been familiar with the ayyubid dynasty history (esp salahuddin) while not knowing anything about the crusades. recently developed a crazy obsession on king baldwin iv and decided to read this. i have to agree with some reviews; parts of it are not easy to read as a layman/casual reader but i still enjoyed it sm.. sparks joy because... king baldwin iv >_< ... planning to read other sources to know him better and give me more context (except william of tyre's book is so...... not to my liking)

[Marian Pandera · Rating 5 out of 5]

Bernard Hamilton’s The Leper King and His Heirs is a compelling and scholarly account of one of the most intriguing figures in Crusader history—Baldwin IV, who ruled Jerusalem from 1174 to 1185 while suffering from leprosy. Hamilton's work delves beyond the myth and legend, offering a nuanced, well-sourced narrative that re-evaluates Baldwin not just as a tragic figure, but as a skilled ruler navigating the deadly politics of a fragile kingdom.

[Jonathan · Rating 5 out of 5]

The best book currently available on the career of Baldwin IV.

[Simon Sonnak · Rating 5 out of 5]

Great Book. Anyone who has followed Bernard Hamiltons academic papers will know what to expect - a rejection of the Hawks and Doves Party, rehabilitation of Reynald de Chatillon and a fresh look at Baldwin IV's reign. Baldwin comes off just as competent as his predecessors and maybe even stronger having to deal with a unified enemy under Saladin and a fractious Kingdom of increasingly squabbling lords from the peace seeking Raymond of Tripoli (for his own ends) to that recipient of recent, unwarranted bad press Reynald who kept Saladin too busy to organise a proper offense for a good 10 years.
This is an academic book which can be enjoyed by those with a well informed understanding of Crusade historiography but the plethora of "soft" biographies will probably leave many disappointed and scratching their heads.
You don't have to agree with Hamilton to enjoy his take on the end of the First Kingdom of Jerusalem. Very useful apparatus too with a thorough discussion of sources, fully notated and a decent bibliography.

[Mike Morton · Rating 5 out of 5]

Buna nasil review yazmamisim amk nasillll. Baldwin hakkinda gercekten oturup bilgi sahibi olmak istiyorsaniz direk okumaniz gereken kitap bu. Tamamen objektif bi tarihcinin gozunden yazilmis dolu dolu bir kitap. Surekli not aldigim icin okumam uzun surmustu. Bi tarih kitabi okurken bu kadar eglenecegimi dusunmedim.

[Michi · Rating 5 out of 5]

Ahhh... I have fallen in LOVE with King Baldwin the IV and Saladin. Well, I should expand that a little: I love the Crusades.

[モーリー]

I decided a rating is unfair given my experience of this book. I've been on a crusades kick and was very curious about the dynasty that ruled Jerusalem after its Christian takeover. This turned out to be for extreme specialists - not just "too academic" but rather nearly impossible to follow if you're not doing serious research on the people and events it covers. Yet for that group, it looks to be an amazing resource. So in all, just not what I was looking for but probably what someone else is seeking!