How would you rate Salah ad-Din as a general? - Historum

**Salah** · March 20th, 2010, 08:00 PM

Just as his great rival Richard the Lionheart has been celebrated as the greatest Western Crusader, so Yusuf ibn Ayyub Salah ad-Din - "Saladin" - has went down in history as the greatest defender of the Islamic World against these barbarous Franj.

As with many contemporary Christians, it is difficult to sort out of all the religious-inspired propoganda just what kind of a man - let alone a general - Salah ad-Din was. But from what you know - what is your opinion of him as a general?

(those will do not vote 5 stars will be summarily beheaded by my mamluk bodyguards. Just so you know

)

**okamido** · March 20th, 2010, 08:13 PM

I gave him a four based solely on the aformentioned propoganda that started popping up in the 19th Century.

**Labienus** · March 20th, 2010, 10:04 PM

I gave him three stars. A competent military leader but not a brilliant one. When he met a brilliant general in battle (Richard), he got trashed.

Best Muslim leader of the crusades in my opinion is certainly Baybars.

**plutoboyz** · March 20th, 2010, 11:14 PM

3, because Baibars are 4. and no one perfect (5)

sylla1 · March 21st, 2010, 12:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Salah ad-Din

Just as his great rival Richard the Lionheart has been celebrated as the greatest Western Crusader, so Yusuf ibn Ayyub Salah ad-Din - "Saladin" - has went down in history as the greatest defender of the Islamic World against these barbarous Franj.

As with many contemporary Christians, it is difficult to sort out of all the religious-inspired propoganda just what kind of a man - let alone a general - Salah ad-Din was. But from what you know - what is your opinion of him as a general?

(those will do not vote 5 stars will be summarily beheaded by my mamluk bodyguards. Just so you know

)

The sponsor of Maimonides was much more than a mere warlord; under him, Cairo replaced Baghdad as the intellectual center of Islam.

Anyhow, he was by far the most succesful commander of his era; a self-made man that founded a dynasty, Sala-ad-Din's armies were mostly victorious from Yemen to Mosul all along three decades. The Crusader states never recovered from his attacks.

**Chookie** · March 21st, 2010, 11:25 AM

Four stars, because of his military success and other accomplishments, some of which Sylla has described.

BrowniesRule · March 21st, 2010, 11:43 AM

4 stars, stricly lower than 5 because he was often entitled to his emirs, and because he set Lusignan free.

**Salah** · March 21st, 2010, 12:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BrowniesRule

4 stars, stricly lower than 5 because he was often entitled to his emirs, and because he set Lusignan free.

How does an act of chivalry make him less a general?

**Cicero** · March 21st, 2010, 12:13 PM

I voted 5 as my well know cowardice was showing.

Quote:

those will do not vote 5 stars will be summarily beheaded by my mamluk bodyguards. Just so you know

BrowniesRule · March 21st, 2010, 08:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Salah ad-Din

How does an act of chivalry make him less a general?

As compassionate and beautiful as it may appear in history books, letting Lusignan go without swearing an oath or making promises endangered Saladin's new conquests. Especially dangerous considering that Lusignan was able to get reinforcement from outre-mer and from his own Kingdom.