A History of The Bible & The Other Lost Books

 

In the Gospel according to St. John 7:38, Jesus is recorded as saying, “He that believeth on me, as the scripture hath said, out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water.” However, this particular verse of scripture quoted by Christ is nowhere to be found written within the entire library of books which make up the Hebrew Bible, also known as the Old Testament. Now as faithful Christians know, the Lord cannot be wrong. So, the scripture that Christ quoted from in John's Gospel must have been a reference taken from a certain lost book of the Bible. Additionally, the tradition of the Orthodox Church informs us that there is also a lost book of the New Testament. For in Colossians 4:16, St. Paul makes mention of the church of the Laodiceans and gives instructions so that the epistle from Laodicea should be read in the church along with the epistle to the Colossians. Now as all students of the New Testament know, there is no epistle to the Laodiceans listed among the 27 books that comprise the corpus of the New Testament. But the fact that the epistle of Laodicea is referenced to in the New Testament, reveals that there was at least one book that didn't make it into the canon of the New Testament, just as Christ referenced a book that didn't make it into the canon of the Old Testament. It is also of great importance to realize how some Christian sects, such as the Greek Orthodox and Roman Catholic Churches, have more books in their Bibles (specifically within the Old Testament) than what we find in the accepted canon of the 66 books which make up the Protestant version of the Bible that has come down to us in modern times. And these specific books of the Old Testament, held sacred by the Orthodox, were eventually excluded by the Protestants who came to believe that certain books of the Old Testament were not divinely inspired and thus labeled as Apocrypha, (a word of Greek origin meaning: “hidden”). The intention of this Biblical exegesis will be to provide the truth seeker with a heightened awareness concerning the collection of books (known as the Apocrypha) which were taken out of the Holy Bible, and to discuss in thorough detail all the various versions of the Bible that have come down to us over time, and how we arrived at the accepted canon of the scriptures that we read today.

The various books which make up the Apocrypha were removed from the Bible, primarily as a result of the Protestant Reformation which occurred in the early 16^th century AD. Martin Luther, the founder of the Protestant Reformation, was the first to separate the Apocrypha into an inter-testamental section of the holy scriptures with his translation of the Bible into German, which was first published in 1534. The Protestant reformers, including Luther, questioned the authority of the Apocrypha and held that these books were not written under divine inspiration. Now the Authorized King James Version of the Bible published in 1611 AD did originally include the Apocrypha in its canon, but in a separate section between the Old and New Testaments. However, by the 19^th century the British Foreign Bible Society, as well as other organizations, began excluding the Apocrypha from their standard printings of the King James Version. The motivating factors behind this omission may have been due to production costs and also because the books of the Apocrypha were not part of the Hebrew Bible. Even though the Apocrypha was included in the Greek Septuagint, the fact that most of the Apocrypha was not originally written in Hebrew also drove the reformers to question the authority of these books. For according to Jewish opinion the books of the Apocrypha (originally written in Greek) did not meet the requirements needed for their use in Jewish religious life and worship. Though the ancient Jewish communities of the latter Second Temple period read from the Greek Septuagint, which included the Apocrypha, these extra books of the Old Testament along with the Septuagint as a whole have been rejected by mainstream Rabbinic Judaism, beginning from late Antiquity and extending all the way up into the modern era.

Now to provide some historical background concerning the Greek Septuagint, we must first focus our attention upon Alexandria, Egypt during the 3^rd century BC. For it was at this place and time where we discover how Ptolemy II Philadelphus, the Greek Pharaoh or ruler of the Ptolemaic Kingdom of Egypt, directed all the scholars and librarians of Alexandria to collect and translate the myriads of scrolls and books from all across the known world in the aspiration of possessing a copy of every book in the world to be included within the famed Library of Alexandria, which was originally established by Ptolemy I Soter, the successor of Alexander the Great. The Library of Alexandria was also attached to a lager complex known as the Mouseion, which was a center for higher learning and research. As an institution of scholarship and culture, the Library of Alexandria encouraged the exchange of ideas, fostered intellectual debates, and supported the research and development into all the various disciplines of the arts and sciences. It was at this time and place when Ptolemy II ordered the translation of the Hebrew Scriptures into Greek, by employing seventy-two Jewish scholars to complete this noble task. Each one of the seventy-two scholars independently translated the Hebrew Bible into Greek and these translations, which all matched, were then compiled into what became known as the Septuagint, a Greek word meaning “seventy” or “of the seventy.” The Septuagint became a very important translation of the Hebrew Scriptures into Greek, which was widely read by the Greek-speaking Jews of Alexandria as well as by other Hellenistic Jewish communities living outside the land of Judea during the first few centuries before the Christian era. It is also interesting to note that in the New Testament we find how the Apostle Paul often quotes from the Septuagint, which suggests that the majority of the early Christians must have been Greek speakers and thus were primarily familiar with the translation of the Hebrew Bible known as the Greek Septuagint.

Apart from the Apocrypha, most modern day Protestant Christian sects include the accepted 39 books of the Hebrew Bible as a part of their own scriptures, which they classify as the Old Testament. However, in the Jewish Masoretic Text there are a total of only 24 books listed in this authoritative Hebrew version of the Jewish Bible, which is also known as the Tanakh in Rabbinic Judaism. The reason for the greater number of books listed in the Christian canon is because at a certain point in time Christian scribes (possibly inspired by the Septuagint) divided some of the books in the Hebrew Bible into two or more parts, such as how the book of Chronicles is divided into two parts, along with the book of the Minor Prophets being divided into 12 separate books each. The compilation of the Jewish Masoretic Text took place over the course of a few centuries, beginning in the 6^th century AD, through the efforts of a group of Jewish scribes and scholars called the Masoretes (taken from the Hebrew word masoreth, meaning “tradition”). Through generations of meticulous transmitting, copying, and assembling the Masoretic Text reached its most influential and definitive form in the 10^th century AD with the emergence of the Aleppo Codex which is considered to be one of the most accurate and complete copies of the Masoretic Text ever produced. Along with the Leningrad Codex, written in the 11^th century AD, the Aleppo Codex also serves as the primary source for modern editions and translations of the Hebrew Bible which are widely read and studied today. Now the 24 books in the Jewish Masoretic canon are divided into three sections: The Torah (Pentateuch), the Nevi'im (Prophets), and the Ketuvim (Writings). However, not only were some books of the Hebrew Bible divided in the Christian version, but the order of the books listed in the Jewish Masoretic Text also differs from the order of the books listed in the Christian Old Testament. Interestingly, the order of the books in the Old Testament also differs in the Christian world. For in the Greek Orthodox and Roman Catholic Old Testament, the books of the prophets are in a different order from what we find in the Protestant Old Testament. And, returning our attention back to the Apocrypha, it should also be noted that there are more accepted books in the Greek Orthodox Bible than that of the Roman Catholic Bible. But trumping both the Greek Orthodox and Roman Catholic canons is the version of the Bible held sacred by the Ethiopian Orthodox Church, whose accepted canon of scripture (including both the Old and New Testaments) comprises a grand total of 84 books, the most books held canonical out of any other Christian institution.

When it comes to the accepted canon of the 27 books which comprise the Christian scriptures, that we know today as the New Testament, the history of how this canon came to be accepted as the unadulterated Word of God must first be fully understood. Now one of the earliest known canons of the New Testament was first compiled and published around the year 140 AD by the influential, yet controversial early Christian theologian Marcion of Sinope. However, Marcion's canon contained only one Gospel, which is believed to be a highly edited version of the Gospel according to St. Luke. Additionally, Marcion only included ten Pauline epistles in his canon, of which he also made considerable alterations as compared to the original text, such as removing references made to the Old Testament which he believed to be incompatible with the teachings of Christ and therefore (in his opinion) should be rejected by all faithful Christians. Though Marcion held to a form of dualism, believing that the God of the Old Testament was harsh and vengeful compared to the God of the New Testament Who was loving and merciful, he was not completely Gnostic in his theology. However, some of the Early Church Fathers such as St. Irenaeus and St. Justin Martyr denounced Marcion's teachings and branded him as a heretic, which ultimately led to his excommunication by the Church in Rome in the year 144 AD, shortly after he published his heretical Christian canon. One such book in Marcion's canon was the Epistle to the Laodiceans, an epistle previously mentioned as a lost book of the Christian scriptures. But this epistle of Laodicea, found in Marciaon's canon, is considered by the Orthodox Church to be a forgery written by Marcion himself in order to support his own personal point of view, and is not believed to be the original epistle and neither as being inspired by the Holy Spirit.

Towards the end of the 2^nd century AD, before Christianity was legalized in the Roman Empire, several books which make up the official canon of the New Testament scriptures were indeed accepted as the inspired Word of God by many Christian groups. However, though the four Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John along with some other writings were all agreed upon by the majority of Christian communities as legitimate, there was still some doubt regarding the authenticity of other Christian books in circulation that were being passed around among the various Christian communities during this period in the history of the early Church. For it wouldn't be until the year 367 AD when St. Athanasios, Bishop of Alexandria, wrote a letter (known as the “39^th Festal Letter” or the “Easter Letter of Athansios”) to the various Christian churches under his jurisdiction, where he officially listed the 27 books that are now accepted as the New Testament. Yet even though St. Athanasios' list was a huge step for the canonization of the Christian scriptures, it must be known that this canon was not initially met with universal acceptance. But with the Synod of Hippo held in Hippo Regius (modern day Annaba, Algeria) in 393 AD, was confirmation made regarding all 27 books which are recognized today as the Christian New Testament. However, this decision only reached a regional audience and failed to achieve an immediate universal acceptance throughout the early Christian world. This led to the Council of Carthage in 397 AD, where several bishops met to discuss and agree upon all the books that would encompass the definitive New Testament canon. Ultimately these Christian councils held in North Africa in the late 4^th century AD, collectively established the universal recognition and acceptance of the 27 books which now comprise the official canon of the New Testament.

Now during the late 4^th century in Rome, around the same time that the New Testament canon was being universally accepted in North Africa, did Pope Damasus I commission St. Jerome to translate the entire Bible (both Old and New Testaments) into a common form of Latin. And this version of the Bible, translated into the Latin vernacular, would later be known and referred to as the Latin Vulgate. Though the type of the Latin language used in this translation was originally intended to be more understandable to the general population, as opposed to other Latin versions of the Bible, it was not uniformly written in the same dialect of the Latin spoken by the common people. For the Latin of the Vulgate, referred to as “Vulgar Latin,” possessed a loftier literary style as compared to everyday spoken Latin. Now the term “Vulgar” used to describe this type of Latin does not mean crude, but rather refers to a broader form of Latin which developed over time among the various people groups who lived within the vast territories of the Roman Empire. So it was that St. Jerome began his translation around the year 382, and taking time to revise and refine his work, he finally completed it around the year 405. Jerome translated the Old Testament directly from the original Hebrew and spent a great amount of time in the Holy Land, such as in the city of Bethlehem, where he studied Hebrew and consulted with Jewish scholars in order to ensure that his translation was as accurate as possible. It should also be noted however, that Jerome did consult the Greek Septuagint when at times the Hebrew text was too difficult to accurately translate and interpret. St. Jerome also translated the Old Testament Apocrypha and included these books (along with the translation of the New Testament from the original Greek) in his final version of the Latin Bible. Thus the Latin Vulgate became the standard version of the Holy Bible which has been used by the Roman Catholic Church for centuries, and has served as an important element in the historical and liturgical heritage of the Western Church.

When it comes to the books that make up the Old Testament the earliest and the oldest surviving copies that exist today have been pulled from an ancient and vast library, famously known as the Dead Sea Scrolls, which are dated to have been written from about the 2^nd century BC to the 1^st century AD. The Dead Sea Scrolls were initially discovered in 1947 by a Bedouin shepherd looking for a lost goat in the Judean Desert, near the ancient Jewish settlement of Qumran. As the story goes the shepherd came upon a cave overlooking the Dead Sea and threw a rock inside and heard what sounded like pottery breaking. He then went in and discovered several clay jars with scrolls inside wrapped in animal skins. The Bedouins then sold some of the scrolls to an antiquities dealer in Bethlehem, who in turn sold them to some Jewish scholars. Word of this discovery lead to an expedition of academics and archaeologists from the Hebrew University in Jerusalem, who surveyed and excavated the areas around the Dead Sea beginning in 1949 up until 1956. During this time a total of 11 caves were discovered which all together contained over 800 scrolls that were written primarily in Hebrew, with a good amount written in Aramaic, and some also written in Greek. All the books of the Old Testament were found among the Dead Sea Scrolls except for the book of Esther. Along with the canonical Old Testament scrolls found, several Apocryphal books were also discovered. Now the most revealing element surrounding the Dead Sea Scrolls, are the different versions of the same books within the Old Testament scriptures that were discovered among the cache of scrolls in the Dead Sea Scroll library. For example, there were found among the Dead Sea Scrolls different versions of the Law of Moses, primarily the book of Deuteronomy. Additionally, seven differing versions of the book of Isaiah were also found which do indeed fulfill the teachings of Jesus that He uttered to a couple of His disciplines on the road to Emmaus after His resurrection. For the prophecy that Christ quotes from in the Gospel of St. Luke, stating how the Christ ought to have suffered and to enter into His glory, is not found written anywhere in our Old Testament, but it is found in at least one version of the prophecy of the book of Isaiah within the Dead Sea Scroll collection.

Continuing on the topic of the Old Testament it has been suggested that the books which make up the Hebrew Bible were first compiled (at least in a partial form) when the Jews found themselves in exile in Babylon, after the destruction of the first Temple in the 6^th century BC. The Jewish scribes compiled the religious writings they had brought with them from Judah, such as the books of the law and combined them with the books that were written during their exile, to at least partially form what we known today as the Old Testament of the Holy Bible. But it wouldn't be until after the destruction of the second Temple in 70 AD, when a fixed canon of the holy scriptures for the Jewish people would be established. For towards the end of the first century AD, did Jewish rabbis and scholars assemble at the Synod of Jamnia, also known as the Council of Yavne in Palestine, in order to decide which books in religious circulation were in fact the inspired word of God. During this council, the rabbis engaged in a debate in order to discern which books were authoritative, and they also reasoned together to better decide which books should be excluded. These decisions would go on to solidify the authenticity of the books that are currently accepted in Judaism as the unadulterated word of God, and would also go on to provide the Christian world with an additional set of scriptures to be included along with the accepted books of the New Testament canon. However, some modern day scholars hold that the Judaic canon of scriptures evolved over time and were not decided in just one council, thus making the Synod of Jamnia a concocted story and not a genuine historical event as held in scholarly opinion. For example, citing the later development of how the Jewish Masoretic Text was transcribed over the period of a few centuries strengthens this hypothesis. So, while it is commonly believed among certain rabbis that the council of Jamnia provided the definitive version of the Jewish Biblical canon, the specific details surrounding this council are still a subject of debate among scholars even up to the present day.

Returning to the history of the Church, we see that in the 3^rd century AD, a very influential Christian theologian and scholar named Origen made many significant contributions towards the development of early Christianity. However, some of his ideas were controversial and these teachings were debated by Christian scholars during his lifetime and even continued to be the subject of criticism in the centuries following his death. Yet overall Origen's impact on Christian thought is not to be underestimated. Known for his extensive knowledge of the Hebrew Bible, Origen would go on to compile a comprehensive edition to the Old Testament scriptures, which may in fact be his best work of research. And this Biblical document put together by Origen is known as the Hexapla. Origen presented this translation with multiple versions of the Hebrew Scriptures side by side with other Greek translations which were then divided into six columns altogether, hence the name “Hexapla,” which means “sixfold.” The six Biblical versions in the Hexapla included: the original Hebrew text of the Old Testament, a Greek transliteration of Hebrew into Greek, Aquila's Greek translation, Symmachus' Greek translation, The Greek Septuagint, and Theodotion's Greek translation. Origen's intention on presenting these various translations side by side was to revise the Greek Bible, and to provide scholars with a useful tool to better aid them in their study of all the variations between the different versions of the Hebrew Bible and to compare and contrast all these differences in the hopes of producing the most accurate translation of the Hebrew scriptures into the Greek language. Origen also believed that even the errors and mis-translations of the Bible were still inspired, for he felt that there must have been a reason why God allowed these various “mistakes” in His sacred Word. Origen ultimately donated his Hexapla to the municipal library of Caesarea in Palestine where it was frequently referenced up until the Muslim invasions of the 7^th century AD, when the library was burned down and Origen's Hexapla was lost.

Along with the scriptures of the Old Testament (which were originally written in Hebrew) which were in turn later translated into Greek, the scriptures of the New Testament (which were originally written in Greek) would go on to be translated into many other languages once the religion of Christianity was introduced into other parts of the world. One such version of the original Greek Christian scriptures that was translated into a foreign tongue, is known as the Syriac Peshitta. The Peshitta (a word meaning “simple” or “clear”) is believed to have been translated somewhere between the 2^nd and 5^th centuries AD in the Syriac language, which is a dialect similar to that of Aramaic. The translation of the Peshitta was most likely transcribed by scholars who were fluent in both Greek and Hebrew, with the aim of providing a reliable and straightforward translation of the Bible into the Syriac language. In addition to the translation of the New Testament scriptures, the Peshitta translation also contains a translation of the books of the Old Testament into Syriac. However, when compared to other versions of the Bible, the Peshitta is quite unique. For example, the Peshitta version of the New Testament does not include the books of 2 Peter, 2 and 3 John, Jude, and Revelation. Additionally, the Peshitta also excludes the story of the woman caught in adultery, as found in the 8^th chapter of the Gospel according to St. John in the original Greek text. But by looking past these omissions it should also be noted that the Syriac Peshitta has over the centuries well served the various Syriac speaking Christian communities, such as the Syriac Orthodox Church, the Assyrian Church of the East, and the Chaldean Catholic Church. The Peshitta is considered as the authoritative version of the Bible for these Middle Eastern Christian communities, where it is often used in their liturgical worship services, and where it also serves as a valuable resource for private and communal Bible study.

In addition to the various Apocryphal books of the Old Testament, which are considered as uninspired by certain Jewish and Christian groups, there were also in the early days of Christianity a set of esoteric “Gospels” floating around among the various Christian communities that were vehemently rejected as heretical by mainstream Christian Orthodoxy. And these heretical Christian writings are known as “The Gnostic Gospels.” The Gnostics were a group of early Christian mystics who believed that by acquiring a special type of knowledge, spiritual liberation and salvation would be achieved. For the term “Gnostic” comes from the Greek word “gnosis,” meaning “knowledge.” Gnosticism incorporated Christian theology along with various other religious and philosophical traditions and also held dualistic beliefs. For example, the Gnostics believed in a supreme benevolent God, but also believed in a lesser malevolent God known as the Demiurge. The Gnostics in turn sought to unite themselves to the supreme God through the secret spiritual knowledge of gnosis. Now the term “Gnostic Gospel” refers to the collection of ancient Christian texts that were discovered in 1945 by an Arab peasant who was digging for fertilizer in Nag Hammadi, a small town located in Upper Egypt. Similar to what the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls (by a Bedouin shepherd) did for a better understanding of Jewish tradition before Christ, so too did the Gnostic Gospels (discovered by an Arab peasant) go on to shed much light on the alternative perspectives on the teachings of Jesus Christ which existed in the first few centuries after Christ. However, since the Gnostic Gospels presented a spiritual alternative which stood in conflict with the accepted writings of the New Testament, the early Christian authorities excluded these texts from the official teachings of the Church.

Now as we have already explained, some books were removed from the Protestant canon of the Holy Bible and the collection of these questionable texts are labeled as the Apocrypha. But in addition to the Apocrypha there are other books labeled as Pseudepigrapha, a term which signifies how certain books have been attributed to a particular author, when in fact the claimed author is not the true author. One such example of the various works of the Pseudepigrapha, is the Book of Enoch. The Book of Enoch, also known as I Enoch, is an ancient apocalyptic religious text whose authorship has traditionally been attributed to the Antediluvian patriarch Enoch, the great-grandfather of Noah. However, modern scholars hold that the Book of Enoch was originally written by Jewish scribes somewhere between 300 – 200 BC. The Book of Enoch contains questionable material such as fallen angels mating with human women, which has led both Jewish and Christian institutions to regard it as non-canonical or uninspired. However, the Ethiopian Orthodox Church does accept the Book of Enoch as inspired and includes I Enoch as well as II Enoch in their Biblical canon. Going further, even though several copies of 1 Enoch were preserved among the Dead Sea Scrolls, the entirety of the Book of Enoch only survives in the Ethiopic liturgical language of Ge'ez. It is also of importance to note how the Book of Enoch is quoted in the New Testament. For in the Epistle of St. Jude 1:14-15, a quote is taken nearly verbatim from I Enoch 1:9. This quotation of the Book of Enoch in the Christian scriptures leads me to believe that Enoch himself may have indeed authored at least some parts of the book attributed to him, but not the entire manuscript all together, yet again this is only speculation.

Continuing in the Epistle of St. Jude do we come across a verse referencing an event taken from the story of the prophet Moses which is no where to be found in the Torah, nor the rest of the Old Testament, and not even among the Apocryphal books of the Old Testament. And this mysterious quote concerning Moses reads as follows: “Yet Michael the archangel, when contending with the devil he disputed about the body of Moses, durst not bring against him a railing accusation, but said, The Lord rebuke thee” (Jude 1:9). Since this particular scripture quotation is not taken from any of the books comprising the accepted Biblical canon, including the books of the Apocrypha, this scriptural anomaly has led some modern scholars, and even some ancient writers, to conclude that St. Jude must have been referencing a 1^st century apocryphal text known as the “Assumption of Moses.” The Assumption of Moses, also known as the Testament of Moses, contains the alleged secret prophecies which Moses revealed to Joshua shortly before Moses died, making this final speech by Moses to serve as his last will and testament. Believed to have been originally written in Hebrew, the only surviving copy of the Assumption of Moses is a 6^th century Latin translation from a Greek text. However this manuscript is incomplete, and the rest of the text has been lost. Additionally, since the quote by Jude concerning Moses is not even found among the various surviving fragments that make up the text of the Assumption of Moses, then Jude's quote may have been taken from parts of the missing text. Due to the fact that the text of the Assumption of Moses is incomplete, and also missing certain sections, we cannot prove for certain that St. Jude quoted from this document. It would however make sense if Jude did quote from the Assumption of Moses, when considering how there is no verse in the Old Testament which Jude could have drawn from. Also, since St. Jude quotes from another extra-Biblical source, namely the Book of Enoch, then this could support the notion that Jude was indeed quoting from the Assumption of Moses, or at least another apocryphal text which lays outside of the accepted scriptures.

Another ancient document that was not included in the canon of the New Testament, yet at the same time sheds much light on the early formation of the Christian religion, is called the “Didache”, also known as “The Teachings of The Twelve Apostles.” Although a relatively brief text, the Didache is believed to have been written around the mid-1^st century AD, and served as a guide book for the early Christian priesthood on how to perform the Divine Liturgy. It also functioned as an instruction manual for Christian laity on certain things that a believer should do and other things which were forbidden to do, and ultimately ends with a chapter devoted to end times prophecy. Previously known only in fragmentary copies, the entire Didache was re-discovered by a Greek Orthodox Metropolitan in a monastery in Constantinople in 1873, and has gone on to help modern Christians to become better acquainted with the life of the ancient Church. The origins of the Didache can be traced to a Christian group made up of ethnic Jews who's main focus was on the teachings of Jesus as opposed to the legalism of the law of Moses. Along with the various maxims of what to do and what not to do, the Didache's prime legal structure centers around the golden rule, namely: do unto others as you would have them do unto you. Additionally, since this 1^st century Christian document lists instructions on how to perform the various Christian sacraments, such as baptism and holy communion, the Didache indeed serves as a historical element which upholds the legitimacy of the traditions exercised by the Orthodox Church that have been passed down throughout the centuries dating all the way back to the time of Christ Himself.

Shifting our attention back to the Old Testament do we come across an alarming anomaly when comparing the various translations from the original Hebrew into Greek and then later on into English. For when placing the Greek Septuagint along side the King James Bible, it is undeniable how the verses in the last chapter of the book of the prophet Malachi are not in the same order in these two separate versions of the Bible. Though the verses themselves have not been added to, nor has anything been taken away, yet the order in which these specific verses are recorded is different. For example, in the English King James Version of the Bible all six verses of the fourth chapter of Malachi are in order, beginning with verse one on through to verse six. However, in the Greek Septuagint the verses in Malachi chapter four start off from verse one and then on to verse three, but then following verse three the text jumps to verse five followed by verse six, and then continues with verse four ending the chapter after verse six. Though these verses are in a different order the translation between the two is congruent, but the fact remains that somehow somewhere these verses were indeed tampered with. The good new for us Bible believers is that there is no contradiction in the text, even though the order of the verses in Malachi chapter four were rearranged. Also, to the best of my knowledge this is the only place in all of the Septuagint where such a thing like this occurs, so this shouldn't shatter one's faith in the Bible as being the inspired word of God. What it does mean is that somethings do indeed get lost in translation, no matter how much we try to preserve the original meaning of the language of a root text.

In conclusion it is my sincere hope that everything presented in this condensed overview of the history of how all the various ancient scrolls and manuscripts, which were ultimately compiled into the vast and inspired library of books that we know today as the Holy Bible, has enlightened the reader with a better understanding concerning all the various versions and translations of the Bible that have come down to us over the centuries. It was also my intent to present this work to serve as a reference point for the serious Bible student who is interested in the history behind the accepted canon of the holy scriptures, and to guide them with an historical backdrop as they study the theology of both the Old and New Testaments. That being said I must confess that there is indeed much more to say concerning these subjects, which was not covered in this particular study, but again my desire is that what has been presented will inspire the student to do their own private research. So one could say that this presentation has functioned as a primer into the history of how we acquired the 66 books of the Bible that we read today, and hopefully it may even serve as an introduction that explains how some books were taken out of the Bible, and how others books were totally rejected all together and never even made it into the accepted canon held by the Greek Orthodox Church in the first place. In the final analysis of what has been covered in this brief Biblical exegesis, it is evident that a further study of the history of the Bible is indeed required for one to possess a clearer understanding of the Christian Faith and all the prophecies of the Old Testament, which were fulfilled in the New Testament. For in order to rightly divide the word of truth, one must study to show themselves approved (2 Timothy 2:15).

 

Bibliography

• Abegg, M.,Flint, P., Ulrich, E. The Dead Sea Scrolls Bible. (New York, NY: Harper Collins Publishers, 1999).

• Brenton. The Septuagint with Apocrypha: Greek and English. (London: Samuel Bagster & Sons, Ltd., 1851).

• Brown, R.K. The Book of Enoch. (Nashville, Tennessee: James C. Winston Publishing Company, Inc., 1997).

• Cambridge University Press. The Apocrypha, New Revised Standard Version. (Cambridge, United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press, 1992).

• Charles, R.H. Apocalypse of Baruch and the Assumption of Moses. (York Beach, ME: Red Wheel/Weiser, 2006).

• Didache: The Teaching of the Twelve Apostles. (Saint Ignatius Orthodox Press, 2018).

• Green, J.P. The Interlinear Hebrew-Greek-English Bible. (Lafayette, IN: Sovereign Grace Publishers, 2000).

• Holy Bible: Ethiopic Version. (Saderingrad Productions, 2007).

• Marcionite Christian Church. The Very Fist Bible: Original Scriptures Transcribed by Marcion of Sinope 144AD. (Marcionite Christian Church, 2020).

• Orthodox Study Bible (Elk Grove, CA:St. Athanasius Academy of Orthodox Theology, 2008).

• Pagels, E. The Gnostic Gospels. (New York, NY: Random House, Inc., 1979).

• Schiffman, L.H. & VanderKam, J.C. Encyclopedia of the Dead Sea Scrolls. (New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 2000).

• The Complete 54-Book Apocrypha. (Covenant Press, 2022).

• The Jewish Publication Society of America. The Holy Scriptures, According to the Masoretic Text. (Philadelphia, PA: The Jewish Publication Society of America, 1917).

• Vermes, G. The Complete Dead Sea Scrolls in English. (London, England: Penguin Books, 2004).

• Zondervan. The Holy Bible, King James Version. (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan, 2009).

The End of the Crusader Kingdoms in the Holy Land: The Church, The Templars, and The Crusades – Part 9

 

Shortly after king Louis IX left the Holy Land in 1254, a civil war broke out between Venetian and Genoese merchants in the port city of Acre. Acre had replaced Jerusalem as the crusaders military headquarters ever since the loss of the Holy City to Saladin in 1187. During the course of the conflict, the Templars joined with the Teutonic Knights and the corporate powers of Genoa and Barcelona. This vicious battle known as the Saint Sabas War, may have been responsible for the deaths of as many as twenty thousand Christians between 1256 and 1260 AD.

This period was also filled with danger from the Mongol conquests under the leadership of Huelgu. The Mongols had issued threats to both the Templars and the Hospitallers in 1255. In 1258, Huelgu took Baghdad and in 1260, Aleppo fell, as did Damascus shortly thereafter. The Templars, Hospitallers, and Teutonic Knights sent representatives to Europe to raise funds and gather troops. For the fierce barbarity of the Mongols struck fear into the hearts of many, and caused panic and dread throughout all of Europe.

However, the more dangerous threat was closer to home. For in September 1260, the great Mameluke general Baibars defeated the Mongols at Ain Jalut, just south of Nazareth. Baibars murdered the Sultan of Egypt in October 1260 and seized the Mameluke throne. The Mameluke empire eventually included Egypt, Palestine, Syria, and other adjoining territories. In 1265, Baibars launched his offensive against Outremer. He took Caesarea, Haifa, and Arsuf. In 1266, he took Safed, and as soon as Baibars took control of the castle and captured the Templars, he gave them a choice: convert to Islam or death. The Templars chose death rather than to give up the cross. In 1268, Baibars took Beaufort, Antioch, Jaffa, Banyas, and Baghras, the first Templar castle in Palestine.

Pope Clement IV pleaded for help from all the European crowned heads. King Louis IX, now fifty-four years old and the father of eleven children, again answered the call of Christian duty. Louis left France for his second Crusade on July 1, 1270. He arrived at Carthage in Tunisia on July 17, where he contracted dysentery accompanied by fever and convulsions. On August 27 he died, whispering his last words, “Jerusalem, Jerusalem!”

Charles of Anjou took command of the Crusade after the death of Louis IX. The decision was made to withdraw from Carthage after a deal was negotiated with the Emir of Tunis to hand over Christian prisoners, guarantee freedom of worship in the city, and donate over 200,000 pieces of gold. After hearing of the death of Louis and the evacuation of the Crusaders from Tunis, Baibars canceled his plan to send Egyptian troops to fight Louis in Tunis. It was at this point that Edward I of England arrived in Africa, but the part was already over. The fleet sailed back to Sicily to regroup, but any plans to use the military force to make any gains were washed away along with most of the Crusader ships and 1,000 men due to a violent storm out at sea. Only Edward wished to continue on to the Holy Land, everyone else abandoned the Crusade, the most crushing failure of a long line of Crusader catastrophes.

Despite the failure, the Papacy did not abandon the idea of crusading. Edward I and his small force of 1,000 men, along with a regime of French knights, arrived at Acre in September 1271 AD marking the beginning of what is sometimes referred to as the Ninth Crusade. Edward arrived at Acre while it was still under siege, causing Baibars to change his plans and abandon Acre. However, the forces under Edward's command were much too small to take on the Mamelukes. Later, the arrival of additional forces from England and Hugh III of Cyprus under the command of Edward's younger brother Edmund, emboldened Edward. With more support he then launched a larger raid on the town of Qaqun.

Informed of Edward's activity, Baibars came to suspect there would be an attack on Egypt. After building a fleet, Baibars attempted to land on Cyprus hoping to draw Hugh III of Cyprus and his fleet out of Acre, with the plan of conquering the island and leaving Edward and the Crusader army isolated in the Holy Land. Baibars disguised many warships as Christian vessels and attacked Limassol. However, the fleet was destroyed off the coast of Limassol and Baibars and his army were forced back.

Following this victory, Edward realized that to create a force capable of retaking Jerusalem it would be necessary to end the internal unrest within the Christian state. So Edward mediated between Hugh and his knights from the Ibelin family of Cyprus. At the same time, price Edward and king Hugh began negotiating a truce with Baibars. In May 1272, at Caesarea, a 10-year-10-month-10-day agreement was made. In 1273 Edward began his journey home, via Italy and Paris. Edward finally reached England in the middle of 1274, and was crowned King of England on the 19^th of August, 1274 AD. Back in the Levant, in 1291 AD, with the fall of Acre to the Mamelukes, the Latin East, established during the First Crusade, effectively and finally came to an end.

References:

Adduson, C.G. The Knights Templars. (Forgotten Books, 2012).

Haag, M. The Templars: History & Myth. (London, England: Profile Books, 2008).

Robinson, J.J. Dungeon, Fire & Sword. (Lanham, Maryland: The Rowman & Littlefield Publishing Group Inc., 2009).

Wasserman, J. The Templars and the Assassins. (Rochester, Vermont: Inner Traditions, 2001).

The French King Louis IX and the Seventh Crusade: The Church, The Templars, and The Crusades – Part 8

 

The endeavor of the Seventh Crusade began under the French king Louis IX. Louis was an intensely spiritual man, and was canonized as a saint of the Catholic Church twenty-seven years after his death. He brought a holy passion for the Crusades that seemed reminiscent of the victorious First Crusade. Louis' enthusiasm, sincerity, and piety allowed him to gain support for a new crusading effort. The Templars were instrumental in helping him organize and finance the Crusade. So, Louis set sail in August of 1248 AD, and thus began the Seventh Crusade.

Louis' armada stopped off at Cyrus and stayed on the island for eight months to resupply and make ready. The delay also allowed stragglers to join the main army from both Europe and the Middle East. In addition Louis would benefit from the contribution of the military orders based in the Levant, namely the Knights Hospitallers, Knights Templar, and Teutonic Knights. By the summer of 1249, the army was finally ready to begin the Crusade. Louis wrote to the Sultan of Egypt, boldly expressing his intention of not just taking back Jerusalem but of conquering all of Egypt and the Levant:

“I will assault your territory, and even were you to swear allegiance to the cross, my mind would not be changed. The armies that obey me cover mountains and plains, they are as numerous as the pebbles of the earth, and they march upon you grasping the swords of fate.”

Louis' Crusader army landed in Egypt in June of 1249, and met their first of many problems. The heavy and deep-bottomed sailing ships of the Europeans meant that the army could not easily disembark to the sandy beaches of Egypt, and so the knights were forced to wade their way to the shore. Meanwhile, al-Kamil had been busy reinforcing Damietta, the fortress city of the Nile Delta. As it turned out, the Crusaders captured Damietta with surprising ease. An added bonus was that because the garrison had fled in a panic, the cities fortifications remained intact. However, the Sultan's main army waited at a safe distance from Damietta. This was only the opening move of what would be a very long game.

The Ayyubid Dynasty was at this time led by al-Salih Ayyub, the second son of al-Kamil, the previous Sultan of Egypt. Like his father, al-Salih struggled to keep control of his territories due to rivalries between Muslim leaders and even Ayyubid princes. In addition, the Mongol Empire was rapidly expanding westwards and seemed unstoppable. Louis IX had made some diplomatic advances towards the Mongol khan hoping that he might make a usefully ally in pushing the Ayyubids out of Egypt and the Levant. But the Mongols were only interested in conquest, it made no difference to them whether the lands be in the control of Christians or Muslims.

In the Fall of 1249, al-Salih was dying at his camp at Mansourah on the Nile Delta. The people of Cairo were in a panic at the double blow of losing Damietta and now possibly their leader. Meanwhile, Louis was still waiting for an important military force belonging to his brother Alphonse, which did not arrive in Egypt until October. At this time the annual Nile flood was abating, and so the way to Cairo was open. Going against the advice of most of his nobles to wait out the winter in safety at Damietta, Louis ignored their warnings and set off for Cairo on the 20^th of November in 1249 AD.

The Crusaders made very slow progress as they marched along the banks of the Nile. At this point, the end of November 1249, al-Salih died, succumbing to his illness. The officers, led by their commander Fakhr al-Din, then stepped in to smoothly continue the war against the Crusaders. In December, the Crusader army reached the canal separating them from Mansourah. On the other side of the canal were the armies of Fakhr al-Din, and the Mameluke general Baibars. The Muslims held the Crusaders in check until February of 1250, when part of the Christian force was able to cross the canal and attack the Muslim camp at dawn. Fakhr al-Din was killed as he jumped naked from his bath. The Crusaders continued on to Mansourah, where Baibars tricked them. His soldiers hid themselves within the walls of the town. The Crusaders stormed through the gates, where they were ambushed resulting in great casualties on the Christian side. Meanwhile, the rest of the army crossed the river and were attacked by the Egyptian force, where they also suffered a great loss of men.

By the end of February in 1250 AD, the new Sultan of Egypt, al-Mu'azzam Turan Shah, arrived at Mansourah along with vital supplies and reinforcements. The Crusaders, on the other hand, had no means of resupply, since their camp had been cut off from Damietta by a fleet of Muslim ships. Soon starvation and disease spread throughout their camp. Finally, on the 5^th of April in 1250, Louis ordered a retreat. The Crusader army, greatly reduced by disease, starvation and constant attacks from the Ayyubid army, was virtually useless as an effective force. The remaining Crusaders surrendered, and the French king was captured. Louis was released on the 6^th of May, but only after a large ransom was paid for himself, and for what remained of his army, and also the surrender of Christian held Damietta.

Once free from his Muslim captors Louis did not flee back to Europe in disgrace, but remained in the Middle East for four more years. During that time, he oversaw the re-fortification of his base at Acre, as well as the strongholds of Sidon, Jaffe, and Caesarea. Louis also created an innovative new force of 100 knights along with a regime of crossbowmen. Unlike previous knights, who were garrisoned at particular strategic cities or castles, this force was used wherever they were most needed to protect Latin interests in the Middle East. Eventually King Louis IX left the Holy Land in 1254 AD, officially bringing an end to the Seventh Crusade.

References:

Adduson, C.G. The Knights Templars. (Forgotten Books, 2012).

Haag, M. The Templars: History & Myth. (London, England: Profile Books, 2008).

Robinson, J.J. Dungeon, Fire & Sword. (Lanham, Maryland: The Rowman & Littlefield Publishing Group Inc., 2009).

Wasserman, J. The Templars and the Assassins. (Rochester, Vermont: Inner Traditions, 2001).

The Holy Roman Emperor Frederick II and the Sixth: Crusade: The Church, The Templars, and The Crusades – Part 7

 

The Sixth Crusade was led by the Holy Roman Emperor Frederick II in 1228 AD. Frederick was an intriguing and exotic person who spoke six languages fluently, including Arabic. He was liked and respected by the Muslims. He enjoyed long-standing friendships with various members of Islamic royalty, kept a harem in Sicily, and was schooled in Arabic philosophy and mathematics. Frederick was known to his contemporaries as Stupor Mundi, the “Marvel of the World.” Frederick II was crowned king of Germany by Pope Innocent in 1215, and immediately announced his intention to go on a Crusade. In 1225, he was married to the daughter and heiress of John of Brienne, king of Jerusalem. John assumed the marriage would encourage Frederick to finally begin his Crusade, but instead he delayed.

In 1227, Pope Honorius III died, and was succeeded by Pope Gregory IX, who immediately ordered Frederick to fulfill his promise to begin the Crusade. Frederick quickly returned however, claiming illness, but Gregory did not believe him. Pope Gregory then excommunicated Frederick for his premature return and for his military efforts against the Templars. Frederick set off again in June 1228, and his resolve to fight a Crusade for two years was initially received with enthusiasm by the Templars and the Hospitalers. Yet soon after his arrival in Acre, a letter from the pope ordered the Templars to play no part in Frederick's efforts because of his excommunication. The pope soon sent another letter to the Templars announcing that he had just excommunicated Frederick a second time. The Templars were now presented with a problem, for it was forbidden for an excommunicate to take part in a Crusade.

Although the Templars were bound by their vows of obedience to the pope, they knew that any changes Frederick might make with the Muslims would effect the balance of power in the Holy Land. Therefore they needed full knowledge of his actions, and in the event of any military or territorial gains, they wanted to be included. Thus the Templars decided on a compromise: they rode one day's journey behind Frederick so they could not be accused of marching with him. Later they marched alongside him. The terms of this arrangement were that Frederick would state that his orders were being given in the name of God, rather than in his own name, that of an excommunicated emperor.

In February 1229, Frederick negotiated a ten year treaty with al-Kamil for the return of Jerusalem and a portion of the land leading to the Mediterranean. In addition, the sultan agreed to the return of Nazareth, western Galilee, and the lands around Sidon and Bethlehem. In March 1229, Frederick crowned himself king of Jerusalem. The very next day, the archbishop of Caesarea excommunicated the entire city of Jerusalem for harboring the excommunicated emperor. Although Frederick negotiated his treaty in the name of all Franks, he never received their permission to do so. The Templars were angry that the site of their original Temple would remain in Muslim hands. The holy war against the infidel was the raison d'etre of the military orders, and Frederick had just undermined it. Feelings were so tense between him and the Templars that he feared for his life and so he left Jerusalem.

The Templars joined in a plan with the patriarch of Jerusalem to take back Jerusalem in the name of the pope. However, Frederick learned of their activities and called them traitors. He also expelled them from Acre, and disarmed them to the extent that he was able. He helped strengthen the newly arrived Teutonic Knights, a German military order founded in 1198, and patterned after the Templars. Meanwhile, the pope had undertaken a Crusade against Frederick in Italy, and the Templars tried to persuade sultan al-Kamil to turn against Frederick. Finally, on May 1, 1229, the pressure from the pope forced Frederick to return to Europe. Thus the Sixth Crusade lasted from 1228-1229 AD, one year.

 

 

References:

Adduson, C.G. The Knights Templars. (Forgotten Books, 2012).

Haag, M. The Templars: History & Myth. (London, England: Profile Books, 2008).

Robinson, J.J. Dungeon, Fire & Sword. (Lanham, Maryland: The Rowman & Littlefield Publishing Group Inc., 2009).

Wasserman, J. The Templars and the Assassins. (Rochester, Vermont: Inner Traditions, 2001).

The Fifth Crusade and the Assault on Egypt: The Church, The Templars, and The Crusades – Part 6

Pope Innocent was succeeded by Pope Honorius III, who continued to embrace the Templars with his support. The Templars looked after their own interests and developed their remaining holdings into self sufficient feudal communities. Castles were reinforced in keeping with the lessons of siege warfare. The skill by which Saladin's soldiers had been able to undermine castle walls was not forgotten. Castle Pilgrim at Atlit, between Jaffa and Haifa, marked the ultimate in medieval castle design. Construction began under the Templar Grand Master William of Chartres in 1217 AD, the same year the Fifth Crusade began.

Beginning in 1217, the Fifth Crusade started off as a multinational force comprised of volunteers from Cyprus, Hungary, Italy, France, England, Holland, and Austria. To start with, the Crusaders attempted to take the Egyptian city of Damietta hoping that a strategic victory against the Ayyubid sultan al-Kamil would allow them safe passage on to Jerusalem. The main commander in this Crusade was a Spanish cardinal named Pelagius. The defining strategy pursued by Pelagius and Pope Honorius was the late Pope Innocent's interpretation of scripture that Muhammad was the Beast as prophesied in the book of Revelation, whose evil empire would eventually fall by its own wickedness. Thus the counsel of the Templars, the Hospitallers, and any other military leaders could be ignored due to religious prejudice.

Francis of Assisi visited al-Kamil at Cairo during the siege of Damietta. Through Francis, the sultan offered the Christians a truce. If they would leave Egypt, he would return the holy relic of the True Cross (previously held by Saladin) and give them the area around Galilee and all of central Palestine, including Jerusalem. Pelagius refused, believing it was sinful to negotiate with an infidel. The more sophisticated military leaders knew that Jerusalem would be in a strategically indefensible position because the sultan insisted on keeping two castles that could be used for future attacks from the Muslims. They also reasoned that the sultan must be weaker than they had estimated if he was willing to offer such favorable terms. Thus they attacked Damietta with renewed enthusiasm and the city fell in November 1219. Upon entering Damietta, they discovered that the city had been ravaged by a plague.

Templar Grand Master William of Chartres had died that summer, due to complications from his wounds. He was succeeded by Pedro de Montaigu, whose leadership inspired morale and confidence among the Templars. Meanwhile, Pelagius held the army within a twenty mile radius of Damietta, and this would last for the next two years. This infuriated the military leaders, but since the Templars were bound by their strict allegiance to the pope, they were forbidden to disobey his orders or the orders of his direct representative no matter how incompetent he may have been.

Ultimately, Pelagius ordered the assault force of over six hundred ships and nearly fifty thousand foot soldiers towards Cairo in July 1221. He had chosen a bad time however, for the annual inundation of the Nile was at hand. After a twelve day march, the Crusader armies came to a plain from which they could see the Muslim army that had surrounded them undetected throughout their march. The Crusaders attempted to retreat only to have the Muslims open the Nile flood gates, which nearly destroyed them. The Fifth Crusade ended in disaster. While al-Kamil offered to return the True Cross as part of the truce ending the Crusade, it had been misplaced and could not be found. The Sultan ordered a thorough search for the holy relic, but unfortunately it was never recovered.

 

References:

Adduson, C.G. The Knights Templars. (Forgotten Books, 2012).

Haag, M. The Templars: History & Myth. (London, England: Profile Books, 2008).

Robinson, J.J. Dungeon, Fire & Sword. (Lanham, Maryland: The Rowman & Littlefield Publishing Group Inc., 2009).

Wasserman, J. The Templars and the Assassins. (Rochester, Vermont: Inner Traditions, 2001).

The Fourth Crusade and the Sack of Constantinople, 1204 AD: The Church, The Templars, and The Crusades – Part 5

 

The Ascension of Pope Innocent III in 1198 AD would be a stroke of good fortune for the Knights Templars. Pope Innocent was a powerful and influential leader, who would reign for eighteen years. He maintained an iron will towards establishing the Church as the supreme ruler of a theocratic hierarchy, in which all Christian kings would willingly submit themselves to the authority of the pope. Innocent protected the Templars, yet he ruled them with an equally firm hand. The Knights Templar became Pope Innocent's personal army, the militia of Christ, by which the pope would enforce his will and attain his goals. Among those goals would be the liberation of Jerusalem by calling for yet another Crusade.

In 1202, Pope Innocent preached a Fourth Crusade whose glory would be equal to that of the First Crusade. Egypt would be the initial target, as taking a leaf from the notes of King Richard. The army of the Fourth Crusade was led by various nobles deemed loyal to Pope Innocent, of whom Boniface of Montferrat was the overall leader. The Templars helped fund the European armies as they assembled and began to travel eastward. The Crusaders assembled in Venice from all across Europe, and from Venice the plan was to sail to Egypt.

The merchants of Venice had been enlisted to provide the required ships and passage arrangements for the army as well as to procure a year's supply of food. The Crusaders were unaware that the Venetians had also at the same time made a trade agreement with the sultan of Egypt, promising him that no European army would land in Egyptian territory. So the Venetians demanded of the Crusaders a price for their services. The Crusaders could not meet the demands of the Venetians, so the Venetians proposed a deal. If the Crusaders captured the Dalmatian port of Zara for Venice, the Venetians would then extend credit to them. Although Zara was a Christian city, the Crusaders agreed, and within five days, the Crusaders delivered the city of Zara to the Venetians. Pope Innocent was mortified at the shedding of Christian blood and excommunicated both the city of Venice and the Crusader army. However, after realizing that the army had been manipulated, the Pope lifted their excommunication.

Now, the Venetian leader Enrico Dandelo, had a long sanding grudge against Constantinople. Intent on winning Venetian dominion in the trade of the east, he all too well remembered his undignified exile from Constantinople when he had served there as an ambassador. So Dandelo in-sighted the conquest of the grand Byzantine city as a detour of opportunity for the Crusaders. They could stamp out the Orthodox Christian heresy and unite all of Christendom under the pope. They could also avail themselves of the legendary wealth of Constantinople to pay their Venetian debt. The Crusader leaders agreed and attacked Constantinople in 1204 AD. The city fell once the Crusaders managed to lower the massive chain which blocked the harbor of the Golden Horn. Sailing in with their fleet and attacking the sea walls and land walls simultaneously with siege engines and scaling ladders, even the elite Varangian Guard could not prevent the Crusaders from forcing their way into the city.

Once the Latin Christian soldiers had entered the Orthodox Christian city, wholesale looting and pillaging followed. The carnage and violence of theft would soon be accompanied by drunkenness, sacrilege, murder, and rape. Thousands were killed. In the aftermath the Byzantine territories were distributed between Venice and its allies. Pope Innocent's dream of a united Christianity was destroyed. The Fourth Crusade extinguished itself without even reaching the Holy Land. However, the Byzantine Empire would be reestablished in 1261 AD, when the Orthodox Christian forces of the Empire of Nicaea led by Michael VIII Palaiologos recaptured Constantinople.

References:

Adduson, C.G. The Knights Templars. (Forgotten Books, 2012).

Haag, M. The Templars: History & Myth. (London, England: Profile Books, 2008).

Robinson, J.J. Dungeon, Fire & Sword. (Lanham, Maryland: The Rowman & Littlefield Publishing Group Inc., 2009).

Wasserman, J. The Templars and the Assassins. (Rochester, Vermont: Inner Traditions, 2001).

Richard The Lionhearted and the Third Crusade: The Church, The Templars, and The Crusades – Part 4

After the Christian Kingdom of Jerusalem fell to the Muslim forces of Saladin, news began to arrive in Europe of how the Crusaders were defeated at the Horns of Hattin, as well as how the Christians suffered with the fall of Jerusalem to Saladin, and that the relic of the True Cross was now in the hands of a non-Christian people. Interestingly, Saladin was on good terms with a certain Christian people, as well as their Christian queen - namely Queen Tamar of the Orthodox Christian land of Georgia. The Georgians were, in contrast to other Christian pilgrims, allowed free passage into the city. Queen Tamar outbid the Byzantine emperor in the efforts to acquire the holy relic of the True Cross, offering 200,000 gold pieces to Saladin who had taken the relic as a prize at the battle of Hattin, but Saladin rejected her offer. Thus as each piece of depressing news found its way into Europe it would eventually inspire Pope Gregory VIII to call for the Third Crusade.

Pope Gregory VIII only reigned for a few months in 1187 AD, but he reigned long enough to call for yet another Crusade to win back Jerusalem and the lost holy relic of the True Cross. Three European monarchs took up the pope's declaration: one - the Holy Roman Emperor Frederick I Barbarossa King of Germany, another - Philip II of France, and thirdly – Richard I The Lionhearted of England. With these monarchs being the three most powerful men in Western Europe, the campaign looked promising. Barbarossa was the first king to set forth, traveling with his army through Thrace in the spring of 1190. The Byzantine emperor Isaac II Angelos was not happy about the Western Christians traveling through his territory, but was relieved once the Germans had passed on into Anatolia. Soon afterwards a calamity occurred for in June of 1190 the Holy Roman Emperor Frederick Barbarossa drowned by falling from his horse into the River Saleph in southern Cilicia. Frederick's death on top of the dysentery which was spreading through his army, would result in the majority of the European forces to actually make it to the Holy Land, be the French and the English.

To recover that which had been lost became the utmost desire of every Christian knight. For the Pope's call for a new Crusade, would wash away every sin. The kings of England and France received the sacred badge from the Archbishop of Tyre, and were now ready for a Holy War. The first major battle of the Third Crusade was at Acre. The city had already been under siege for some time by an army led by the former king of Jerusalem: Guy of Lusignan. Fortunately for Guy, many other Crusader armies quickly arrived in support. Some of the troops left over from Frederick Barbarossa's army, as well as a French force led by Henry of Champagne, along with the armies of Richard I and Philip II, made all forces united and ready to take the city in early June of 1191 AD. With a constant flaying of the walls of the city of Acre using catapults, the siege engines of king Richard, as well as divisions in Saladin's army, would all add up to factors in the Crusader victory at Acre which was officially captured on the 12^th of July in 1191. However, in just the next month after the Crusader victory king Philip needed to return to France due to political problems in Flanders which threatened his throne. So, from the original three kings, the Crusader army was now left with one: King Richard the Lionhearted.

After the fall of Acre the Crusaders set their eyes on Jaffa, a vital port which supplied Jerusalem. However, Saladin felt the best way to deal with the Christian invaders was to fight them in hand to hand combat out in an open field. Thus on the 7^th of September in 1191, on the plain of Arsuf, the two armies clashed head long with one another. The Crusaders ended up winning the battle but the Muslim losses were not that heavy. The Crusaders then marched on to Jaffa, but were also intent on heading straight for Jerusalem. King Richard agreed with the armies popular demand and they then moved towards the Holy City. Unfortunately for the Christian armies, they would not reach their goal of Jerusalem until after January of 1192. For rainy weather was slowing them down, as was a dwindling supply of food. Due to these conditions, a fateful decision was made.

Richard had marched within sight of Jerusalem, but he knew that even if he could storm the city's walls, his army which had been so reduced by the various battles over the past two years would not be able to hold it against an inevitable counterattack. It was a decision supported by the commanders of both of the army's two most experienced fighting units: the Knights Templar and the Knights Hospitaller. Now more than ever the loss of Fredrick's army was most deeply felt. Another march was made on Jerusalem the following year, but as times before, it stopped short and the leaders once again decided they might take the city after a prolonged siege, but they would almost certainly be unable to keep in check a counterattack from Saladin.

During this time, Saladin went on to attack Jaffa, which would fall in July of 1192. Richard sailed to and arrived in Jaffa in August after the city fell to Saladin. Richard was determined to reclaim Jaffa. Taking the lead the “Lionhearted” achieved his goal against all odds, though in the terms of the bigger picture not much had changed. The Muslims still controlled Jerusalem and Saladin's army was still intact. It was pretty much a stalemate, and just as with Philip of France, domestic affairs in England demanded Richard's immediate return home in order to safeguard his throne in October of 1192. The entire Third Crusade campaign was officially abandoned, and no Crusader army would ever get this close to Jerusalem ever again.

Richard and Saladin did manage to negotiate a peace deal at Jaffa. The Crusader held fortresses of Ascalon had to be given up and dismantled while a small strip of land around Acre was to be kept by the Crusaders. The future of the safety and humane treatment of Christian pilgrims in the Holy Land was also bargained for. It was not quite what was hoped for at the outset, but there was always the possibility of another Crusade at some time in the future. King Richard did indeed note that in any future campaign against the Arabs it would be to the Crusaders advantage to attack from Egypt, the weak underbelly of their empire. And it was precisely this plan which the Fourth Crusaders adopted, even though they would again become distracted from their original objective. For the prize of the Fourth Crusade would not be Damascus, The Queen of Syria, nor Jerusalem the Holy City, but the soldiers of the Fourth Crusade would covet and set their eyes upon the jewel of the Byzantine Empire, namely Constantinople.

References:

Adduson, C.G. The Knights Templars. (Forgotten Books, 2012).

Haag, M. The Templars: History & Myth. (London, England: Profile Books, 2008).

Lane-Poole, S. Saladin and the Fall of Jerusalem. (London, England: Greenhill Books, 2002).

Lewis, B. The Assassins: A Radical Sect in Islam. (New York, NY: Basic Books Inc., 1968).

Robinson, J.J. Dungeon, Fire & Sword. (Lanham, Maryland: The Rowman & Littlefield Publishing Group Inc., 2009).

Wasserman, J. The Templars and the Assassins. (Rochester, Vermont: Inner Traditions, 2001).

Saladin and the Fall of Jerusalem, 1187 AD: The Church, The Templars, and The Crusades – Part 3

 

Saladin was born in 1137 AD in Tikrit, in the territory of modern day Iraq, and was a Kurd by blood. Shortly after he was born Saladin's father Ayub and uncle Shirkuh, voluntarily gave themselves into the service of Zengi in Mosul. The two brothers served in his armies in many wars, and when Baalbeck fell, in October 1139, Ayub became the governor of the conquered city. Baalbeck was celebrated not only for its antiquity and its temples, but for its lofty situation. Baalbeck in the time of Ayub was surrounded by fertile fields, orchards, and gardens. It was here that the governor's son Yusuf (the future Saladin) received the typical education for a Muslim boy. He most likely learned Arabic grammar, in order for the reciting of the Koran, as well as the elements of rhetoric, poetry, and theology.

From 1154 to 1164, Saladin lived in Damascus, at the Court of Nur-ad-din. The Arab chroniclers are silent as to what Saladin studied, but we are informed that he showed himself a youth of “excellent qualities,” that he learned from Nur-ad-din how “to walk in the path of righteousness, to act virtuously, and to be zealous in fighting the infidels.” As the favored governor's son, he naturally enjoyed a privileged position. He was the shining example of that tranquil virtue which shuns, “the last infirmity of noble minds.” This is all we are told of Saladin up to the age of twenty-five. The fact that Saladin, who later would become the most renowned leader of his day, was apparently an obscure individual up to the age of twenty-five, is even more mysterious given that his uncle Shirkuh, who later brought him into public life, was Nur-ad-din's right hand man, an able and ambitious general.

In 1159 Nur-ad-din was stretched out on a bed dying of an illness. Shirkuh was thinking to take the crown himself, but Ayub counseled his brother otherwise and suggested to wait and see if their master was in fact going to die or not. Nur-ad-din did recover, and in 1160 Shirkuh acted as leader of the Damascus caravan of pilgrims on their way to Mecca. Shirkuh took a prominent part in the wars of Nur-ad-din, in the conquest of Harim from the Franks in 1164, and the massive capture of fifty Syrian fortresses. In all of this Saladin had no share. It was not until Shirkuh made his memorable expeditions to Egypt that the future “Sultan of the Muslims” emerged from his voluntary retirement and stepped boldly into his uncle's place as the true successor of Zengi in the role of champion of Islam.

For two centuries Egypt had been ruled by a dynasty of Caliphs who claimed to descend from Fatima, the daughter of Mohammad, and were hence known as the Fatimids. Now in the days beginning in 1164 there were many Syrian soldiers in Egypt, mainly from the forces of Nur-ad-din. Many conflicts between the Syrians, Crusaders, and the Fatimids took place for about five years. Then on the 26^th of March in 1169, the Fatimid Caliph chose Saladin to be the successor of his uncle Shirkuh. Saladin was led to the throne, and was invested with the mantle of vizier and decorated with the title el-Melik en-Nasir, “The King Strong to aid.” Saladin began to order his life more rigorously. Devout as he had always shewn himself, he became even more strict and austere. He put aside the thought of pleasure and the love of ease, adopted a Spartan rule, and set it as an example to his troops.

In the years to follow in the land of Egypt, Saladin managed to fend off attacks from Christian Crusaders, as well as insurrection from within Egypt itself. And with the death of Nur-ad-din in May of 1174, Saladin became the most powerful ruler between Baghdad and Carthage. Following in the footsteps of Zengi, and Nur-ad-din, Saladin made his way onto the conquest of Syria. However, the Assassins of Persia had at this time made their way into Syria and were the terror of the country. While making his march to Allepo, Saladin was resting in the tent of one of his captains, when an Assassin rushed in and struck at his head with a dagger. Thankfully the chain-mail Saladin was wearing saved his life, but his sudden assault from the Assassins brought terrors which he never felt on the battle-field.

So Saladin fervently increased his assaults. On June 21^st 1176 the fortress of Azaz surrendered to Saladin. He then turned to Aleppo, and made an agreement with the king of Aleppo, and other neighboring princes. Now Saladin was officially recognized as ruler over all the dominions he had conquered. Saladin would also go on to make truces with the Christians.

By July 1187 AD, Saladin had captured most of the Kingdom of Jerusalem. On the 4^th of July in 1187, at the Battle of Hattin, he faced the combined forces of Guy of Lusignan, and Raymond III of Tripoli. In this battle the Crusader force was almost completely annihilated by Saladin's tenacious army. It was a major disaster for the Crusaders and a turning point in the history of the Crusades. Saladin captured Raynald of Chatillon and was personally responsible for his execution in retaliation for his attacks against the Muslim caravans making the Hajj. The members of these caravans had besought his mercy by reciting the truce between the Muslims and the Christians, but Raynald ignored this and insulted the Islamic prophet Mohammad, before murdering and torturing a number of them. Upon hearing this, Saladin swore an oath to personally execute Raynald. Guy of Lusignan was also captured. Seeing the execution of Raynald, he feared he would be next. However, his life was spared by Saladin, who said to Guy, “it is not the wont of kings, to kill kings; but that man had transgressed all bounds, and therefor did I treat him thus.”

After the Battle of Hattin and capturing almost every Crusader city, Saladin set his eyes on Jerusalem. Saladin offered generous terms and desired to take Jerusalem without the shedding of blood. Unfortunately those inside the holy city refused Saladin's terms and vowed to destroy Jerusalem in a fight to the death rather than surrender it peacefully into the hands of the Muslims. Thus Jerusalem fell to Saladin's forces om Friday, 2^nd of October in 1187 AD, after a brief siege. In the aftermath Saladin met with the Crusader noble Balian of Ibelin to discus terms. The terms agreed upon were for every Christian to pay Saladin a tribute for their freedom. Saladin let some very poor families leave without paying the tribute. Also Patriarch Heraclius of Jerusalem organized and contributed to a collection that paid the ransoms for about 18,000 of the poorer citizens, leaving another 15,000 to be enslaved. In addition to the capture of Jerusalem, Saladin petitioned the Jews and permitted them to resettle in the holy city.

Once all the Franks had departed, and only the slaves and rescued Muslim captives remained, along with the native Christians who begged to stay and pay tribute, Saladin ordered the holy places to be purified and restored for the worship of Islam. The golden cross had been torn down from the Dome of the Rock, and all traces of the Templars' additions were removed from the Al-Aqsa Mosque by ritually purifying the entire site with rose water. However, Saladin would only briefly enjoy his crowning achievement of Muslim control over Jerusalem. For news had reached all the way into England that the holy city was now ruled by a Muslim Sultan. Thus in the year 1189 AD, King Philip II of France and King Richard I The Lion-heart of England joined forces to lead what would become the Third Crusade.

References:

Adduson, C.G. The Knights Templars. (Forgotten Books, 2012).

Campell, A. The Assassins of Alamut. (Published by Lulu, 2008).

Haag, M. The Templars: History & Myth. (London, England: Profile Books, 2008).

Hodgson, G.S. The Secret Order of Assassins. (Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2005).

Lane-Poole, S. Saladin and the Fall of Jerusalem. (London, England: Greenhill Books, 2002).

Lewis, B. The Assassins: A Radical Sect in Islam. (New York, NY: Basic Books Inc., 1968).

Robinson, J.J. Dungeon, Fire & Sword. (Lanham, Maryland: The Rowman & Littlefield Publishing Group Inc., 2009).

Wasserman, J. The Templars and the Assassins. (Rochester, Vermont: Inner Traditions, 2001).