Talk:Seventh Crusade

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Potential Vandalism and contradictory evidence in the sources referenced

J. Riley Smith does not mention 100,000 Crusaders in his work. In fact, he mentions around 15,000 men. Specifically he writes in the reference "The army that eventually departed was probably of c. 15,000 men, of whom there were around 2,500-2,800 knights." I'm correcting the number provided in the article to the one mentioned in the citation. I think there is an editor who is trying to jack up the numbers of crusaders as a form of activism.--TheSteelShepherd (talk) 19:42, 9 May 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

id like to comment on "...left Egypt for Acre, one of the few remaining possessions of the Christians in Syria." , because the relative ambiguity of the sentece regardig the time frame it talks about , i.e. the remaining possessions of christians at that time or nowadays ! there for i think it would be better to change the term Christians to Crusaders or some term that clearly diffrentiates between the Crusader States and the the Christian population that inhabited that reagion without being Crusaders , i.e. the Orthodox christian state(s) if any existed at that time ("i guess not") or the citizins of near non Crusaders state(s) . -- uwe

Ok...I changed Christians to Crusaders. Is it better now? Adam Bishop 05:04, 29 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  • I think the change was better. During the crusades the Muslims distinguished the local christian population from the ( european ) crusaders by calling the last Firinja ( franks ). The word Crusaders were never used by the Muslims of the crusades time. Samsam22 (talk) 01:51, 2 February 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • (Turanshah, as-Salih's successor, took control of Cairo, creating a Mameluk dynasty destined to conquer the last of the crusader territories.)

This information is not correct. Turanshah never arrived to Cairo after the battle of al-Mansurah and he did not creat a Mamluk dynasty. Turanshah was an ayyubid son of as-Salih Ayyub. he was the last Ayyubid Sultan. THIS NEEDS CORRECTION . thank you. Samsam22 21:09, 12 September 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You seem right, so far as I know he was killed by the Mamluks. A change is necessary. --Chapultepec 02:01, 13 September 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Hi Chapultepec, I just saw your answer today !. Turanshash went straight to the battlefield at Al Mansurah from Hasankeyf through Gaza and al-Salhiyah. He did not go to Cairo. After the battle he was assassinated in Farskur. I will add Farskur to the text. Samsam22 (talk) 01:31, 2 February 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks for your comments. Of course you can make the necessary corrections. Have a nice weekend! --Chapultepec (talk) 20:19, 2 February 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Seventh Crusade. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:38, 10 December 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]


It's way too long. Why is every nobleman treated as a commander? Same thing at Eighth Crusade. Srnec (talk) 17:23, 21 March 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Maybe not every nobleman was a commander (everyone commanded their contingent for sure), but some really did. For example, the Count of Flanders and the Duke of Burgundy are missing in the infobox, also took part and should be there, because Flanders and Burgundy were important larger states and are always mentioned in infoboxes. Dragovit (talk) 09:45, 12 May 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]