the disintegration of the empire 73
an imagined threat that provoked a commensurate response from the
mamluks.59
for the sultan, neutralizing one of the most important crusader posi-
tions was a long-fought victory: after these latest setbacks, Western chris-
tendom’s enormous efforts to sustain footholds in outremer lost their
purpose.
although King hethum had unsuccessfully tried to mediate between
abaqa and Baybars in 1267, and the Byzantine emperor michael viii
palaiologos did the same in 1268/9, the struggle for the fertile crescent
resumed, and the ilkhan found that circumstances were much less favor-
able now that his enemy had taken firm hold of syria. having thus won
the initiative, sultan Baybars (d. 1277) devoted most of the last years of his
life to extending mamluk power northward.
Unlike the christian kingdom of cilician armenia, muslim seljuk ana-
tolia resented the ilkhanid yoke, and saw the sultan of cairo as their natu-
ral protector. the first signs of a rapprochement here date from 1271/2,
but Baybars only took action in 1275 when he suddenly invaded cilician
armenia in order to make it a bridgehead toward the neighbouring turk-
ish sultanate. although their coreligionists indeed greeted the mamluks as
liberators, the 1277 campaign in asia minor did not fulfil cairo’s hopes: the
seljukid state could not be dislodged from persian “infidel” hegemony.60
despite this success, the final outcome of the ilkhanid-mamluk struggle
for the fertile crescent in 1260–1277 did not favor the mongols. not only
did they fail to conquer egypt and syria, but they were even in danger of
losing the greatest asset with which they had entered the fray: although
the mamluk campaign into anatolia of 1277 was more of a warning shot
than anything else, Baybars’ invasions of cilician armenia in 1266 and
59 the first to respond was James i, who in 1269 took ship from Barcelona for acre,
though only part of his troops ever reached syria; several units of ilkhanid cavalry sent
to meet the expeditionary force were easily crushed by the mamluks, while the disem-
barked aragonese troops, together with the garrison at acre, were intercepted trying to
join forces with the mongols and met the same fate. the french crusade led by louis ix
went astray quite early on and came to grief in tunisia in 1270. crown prince edward of
england at least managed to distract the mamluks enough that they interrupted the siege
of tripoli, though the mongols who came to his aid were driven away. after this debacle,
in 1271 Bohemond concluded a ten-year truce with Baybars, as did the defenders of acre
(Khowaiter, Baybars, pp. 61–62, 105–14).
60 after the mongol troops broke the siege of ablastin, Baybars took the seljukid
throne at caesarea; this was a mostly symbolic gesture, like the occupation of the coun-
try, since the sultan ordered a speedy withdrawal, fearing that the mongol troops abaqa
had dispatched may be able to cut him off in syria (ibid., pp. 62–63, 72–76; thorau, Sultan,
pp. 281–290).