An Introduction to Crusader Castles - Part 1
The Need for Castles
The Crusading castles, in varying states of repair, reflect a relentless energy that stemmed from the battle for power and the desire to rule a turbulent land. Indeed, there are a huge number of fortifications dominating the landscape of the Levant, some areas having borne the weight of earlier fortifications. The Franks built almost with a frenzy over a period of approaching 200 years. 170,000 tonnes was carved, hacked and removed by the Normans from the natural rock at Saone in order to strengthen its defences. The cellars beneath Margat were huge, and constructed in such a way to ensure supplies could be stored for a thousand men in a five year siege. But why did the Crusaders fortify on such a lavish scale and devote so much of their time to building?
It becomes clear that there were three predominant and fundamental reasons; the unorthodox shape of the Latin Kingdom, the lack of manpower and the need for a feudal administration.
The shape of the land here was important. Some 450 miles long and, apart from the extreme North, rarely 50 miles across, the area was flanked by the Muslim towns of Aleppo, Hama and Damascus. These towns were never taken and as a result the Crusader lands were stemmed back, rather than being able to use the natural defence of the desert. There was a constant threat of attack from the Muslim controlled lands they bordered, and if they were to capture a town or fortification, they would instantly have a foothold in what was essentially the heart of ‘crusader territory’. Further North, Cilicia was the connecting link between Asia Minor and Syria. Crucially, the area could be largely controlled by five mountain passes... the Cilician Gates, the Amanus Gates, the Syrian Gates, the extreme northerly pass at Coxon and the fifth near Silifke were the only routes into Cilicia. The control of these passes were of prime consideration throughout the crusading era, not just for defence, but for revenue.
There was a distinct shortage of manpower too. Whilst the army that set out from Nicaea to Jerusalem in 1097 was huge, losses were heavy. As commanders approached their goal, more and more peeled off to establish their own feudal domains in the new territories (Bohemond of Sicily established himself at Antioch, for example) and by the time the crusading force reached Jerusalem in 1099, probably no more than 1500 knights and 13,000 soldiers remained. Once the goal had been realised, many returned back to their native countries. 300 knights is hardly enough to maintain a kingdom. Richard III, Philip of France and Emperor Frederick each led armies to the Holy Land, achieving little in the way of permanence and returning to their home leaving few soldiers behind. The Fifth Crusade saw disaster as many sickened and died by the Nile. With inadequate reinforcements, it became clear that stone would be forced to do the work of soldiers.
Castles continued to be an essential feature of feudal administration but in the Latin states assumed a rather more complex and highly developed form. Many of the Frankish barons had imposing town houses, but required the additional security of a secure centre (the castle) from which to administer their fiefs. In describing crusader castles, chroniclers refer to their vineyards and revenues as much as they do their fortification. Saphet, for example, was praised for the fertility of its soil and the abundance of its fruits, not to mention the thousands of men who laboured in the fields.
These three fundamental reasons can help to explain the number and importance of Crusader castles.
Researched and written by Sulis
* denotes a former staff member.