We have met the enemy, and he is us

This expensive scholarly volume contains one article which is of considerable interest even for the general reader. It's titled "The Supply of War Materials to Egypt in the Crusader Period".

The Middle East was largely deforested during the crusades, especially Egypt, the economic power-house of the Arab Muslim world. Yet, the Muslims built efficient war ships. Where did they acquire the wood? Iron was also in short supply, especially after the Muslim Fatimid dynasty in Egypt lost control of Sicily. Indeed, Muslim sword-making was of a relatively inferior quality. So where did the Muslims get their iron and their swords to fight the crusaders? Nor could Muslims enslave other Muslims, yet Egypt under the later Mamluk dynasty boasted a large slave-army. Where did the slaves come from? The mystery deepens when we realize that Muslims weren't free to go to Europe, which had both iron and forests.

It turns out that wood, iron and slaves were exported to Egypt by...Christian merchants!

Both Pisa, Genoa and Venice traded with Egypt on a massive scale both during and after the crusades. They brought timber and iron from Europe to Egypt, in return for oriental spices, alum (a mineral used in the Italian textile industry) and, of course, money (the Muslim rulers of Egypt usually paid market prices). Sometimes, they even sold actual ships to the Muslims. Ready-made swords from Christian Europe was another popular item. Many Muslim warriors brandished "crusader swords". The Christian kingdom of Cilician Armenia also traded with Egypt, with Italian merchants as middle-men. Here, wood was the prime commodity, since Asia Minor wasn't deforested.

Naturally, the popes and crusaders weren't amused, and attempted to curtail the trade in war material. Despite a number of bans, it continued unabated. Bizarrely, the Italian merchant-republics had extensive trading privileges in the Levantine crusader states. Often, ships with war material destined for Muslim Egypt made landfalls at Acre and other crusader ports! The crusaders were unable or unwilling to stop it. The Venetians and their Italianate competitors played a seemingly dangerous game, aiding the crusaders with ships at crucial junctures, while nevertheless providing their enemies with the means to fight them. Yet, it seems to have worked for centuries.

The Venetians, Pisans and Genoese managed to out-compete the Amalfitans (from Amalfi in southern Italy), who had dominated Christian-Egyptian trade before the crusades, even giving direct naval assistance to the Fatimids of Tunisia during their actual conquest of Egypt. (Before the crusades, it was the Byzantine Empire, constantly under Muslim attack, which attempted to impose an embargo on Egypt.) However, Amalfi kept aloof from the crusaders, which eventually undermined their position. The more galling Venetians, Pisans and Genoans successfully pretended to be on the right side while nevertheless making hefty profits at the crusaders' expense. The most extreme example is a certain Viviano de Ginnebaldo, a Venetian merchant stationed in Acre who traded with Egypt in war materials until the last moment in 1291, when the town fell to the Egyptian Mamluks. Ginnebaldo had to flee for his life to Cyprus, still under crusader control. There, he established himself at Famagusta *and resumed his trade with Egypt*.

Well, don't you just love the spirit of free enterprise!

Under the Mamluks, Italian merchants began to ship slaves from the Black Sea region to Egypt, where the peculiar "slave dynasty" of the Mamluks needed fresh new supplies of man-power for their armies. This, too, was made in face of papal prohibition. However, Jacoby says relatively little about this in his article. I suspect this trade became important only during the 14th century (after the crusades).

I'm sure the other articles in this collection are equally interesting, including one on Cretan cheese! However, I bought this book for one article only, the previously mentioned "The supply of war materials to Egypt in the crusader period". Some interesting information was also gleaned from "Byzantine trade with Egypt from the mid-tenth century to the Fourth Crusade".

Since I happen to be interested in the Ismailites, I admit that I have mixed feelings towards their conflicts with the Latins and Byzantines (the ruling Fatimid dynasty of Egypt was Ismailite). Saladin, the Mamluks or the Ottomans are something else again. I never liked Venice, either, so the revelation that the Serenissima traded for base profit with such scum of the earth as the Mamluks doesn't exactly come as a surprise.

We have met the enemy, and he is...one of ours.