User:Per Honor et Gloria/Alliance

Historians describing the existence of a Franco-Mongol alliance

An alliance is "an agreement between two or more parties, made in order to advance common goals and to secure common interests". Agreements clearly took place, proved by the multiple exchanges and letters, and combined operations occured as a result, which amply fulfills the defining conditions of an alliance. The outcome however was frought with difficulties: ambitious attempts at collaboration ended with minimal results, and the efforts ended in defeat against the Mamluks. Saying that there were only "attempts at an alliance" or that there was "no alliance" however is an abuse of language that confuses an alliance (agreements to collaborate) and its outcome (failed attempts at collaboration). In order to reflect what historians as a whole say about these events, it is necessary to distinguish this subtlety. For reminder, the basic facts of the Franco-Mongol alliance that these historians comment upon are quite straightforward:

FRANCO-MONGOL ALLIANCE AND OPERATIONS:
(+ indicate apparent frequency of academic coverage)

1248: First diplomatic exchanges under Saint-Louis, with attempts at an alliance. +++
1260-1275: Alliance with the Mongols of Bohemond VI, Frankish ruler of Antioch and Tripoli, with joint campaigns (especially the joint capture of Damascus). +++++
1271: Combined operations of Edward I of England with the Mongols (although no junction). ++
1280-1281: Direct participation of the Knights Hospitallers of Margat to the Mongol offensives. ++
1299-1303: Combined operations around the Ruad expedition. ++

DESCRIPTION OF THESE EVENTS BY HISTORIANS:

Historian	50 historians on the Franco-Mongol alliance	Year	Type of analysis
1. Jotischky, Andrew	There was an "uneasy series of temporary alliances" between the West and the Mongols throughout the second half of the 13th century [1] "Hulagu, the Mongol leader in the Near East, offered an alliance to Louis IX. An uneasy series of temporary alliances with the Mongols followed in the second half of the 13th century, but it was always an unequal relationship, and nothing substancial came out of them" [2]. "Antiochenes took part in the siege of Damascus" [3]. "Those Christians who had sided with the Mongols would pay dearly for choosing the wrong side" [4].	2004	Crusades historian
2. Phillips, J.R.S.	There was "some kind of alliance or collaboration" between the Mongols and Europe throughout the second half of the 13th century [5]. In 1260 Bohemond VI "openly assisted the Mongol invasion" [6]. In 1271 the Mongols and the English Crusaders "combined forces" but these were "insufficient to achieve anything significant" [7]. Philip IV of France committed to Arghun that "if the armies of the Ilkhan go to war against Egypt, we too shall set out from here to go to war and to attack in a common operation" [8]. Edward I of England also expressed his willingness to take part in a joint operation [9]	1998	Crusades historian
3. Sédillot, René	There was a genuine Franco-Mongol alliance, but for a short time. "For a brief space in Syria there was even a genuine Franco-Mongol alliance. Later they sent an embassy to Rome, and to Paris a Nestorian priest to whom Philippe le Bel accorded the honors of the Sainte-Chapelle." (The history of the world in three hundred pages, p.166 [10])	1951	Crusades historian.
4. May, Timothy	An alliance was "hammered out" between the Mongols and the Pope and Western Powers, but only had very limited results [11][12]. "Overjoyed, the Pope described his new allies in July 1263 as "God-sent avengers of Muslim perfidy"" [13]. "The Ilkhanate alliance with Rome was extended to Jaume I of Aragon and Edward I of England" [14]. "The high point of the alliance came in 1274 with the convocation of the Council of Lyons" [15]. The "alliance began to unravel" in 1275 with the death of Bohemond VI [16]. In 1280 "only a contingent of Hospitallers fought alongside the (Mongol) invaders" ([17]).	2003	Crusades historian
5. Colin Morris	Existence of a "Mongol-Christian alliance" that resulted in "common actions" "Since 1258, there had been a formidable Mongol presence established in Persia, a serious threat to the Mamluk dominions, and a Mongol-Christian alliance several times resulted in common actions between the Mongols, Antioch and Armenia [18]. "The opportunities of 1300 however quickly vanished" [19].	2005	Historian
6. René Grousset	A "Mongol alliance", or "Franco-Mongol coalition", upheld by Edward I and the Knights Hospitaller. "Louis IX and the Franco-Mongol alliance" (p521). The 1260 expedition in some respect "had even the appearance of a Franco-Mongol crusade" [20], with successful combined opearations to take Aleppo and Damascus [21], after what they advanced as far as Gaza [22]. Later, "only Edward I understood the value of the Mongol alliance" (p.653) "Edward I and the Mongol alliance" (p.653), "Edward I renewed the precious Mongol Alliance" (in "L'épopée des Croisades", p.301). "The Franco-Mongol coalition, of which the Hospitallers were giving the example" in 1281 (p.686). "Thus to the 50000 Mongols were added 30000 Armenians, Georgians, and Franks" in 1282 at Homs [23]	1952	French crusades historian
7. Jean Richard	A "Franco-Mongol alliance" and "coalition" started in earnest in the 1260s [24], to continue on-and-off and "survive" with the efforts of Ghazan, until it ultimately foundered [25]. The Franco-Mongol alliance started in earnest in the 1260s: "The sustained attacks of Baibars (...) converted the Westerners to this alliance, which the Mongols were also able to persuade the Byzantines to join." [26] and continue on-and-off until it was strongly revived by Ghazan, to continue to have an influence until 1322: "In 1297 Ghazan revived his projects against Egypt (...) the Franco-Mongol cooperation had thus survived, to the loss of Acre by the Franks, and to the conversion of the Khan to Islam. It was to remain one of the givens of Crusading politics, until the peace treaty with the Mamluks, which was concluded in 1322 by khan Abu Said." [27]. "The coalition of Franks, Mongols and Byzantines, was matched by a coalition between the Golden Horde and the Mamluks" [28]. He concludes on the many missed opportunities the alliance offered: "The Franco-Mongol alliance... foundered... It is a story of lost opportunities" p.456	1999	French Central Asia historian
8. Jean-Paul Roux	A "Frank alliance" with the Mongols that lasted until the early 14th century. In Histoire de l'Empire Mongol ISBN 2213031649, Jean-Paul Roux has a chapter on the "Frank alliance" with the Mongols. He describes the continuation of this alliance until the time of Oljeitu in the early 14th century: "The Occident was reassured that the Mongol alliance had not ceased with the conversion of the Khans to Islam. However, this alliance could not have ceased. The Mamelouks, through their repeated military actions, were becoming a strong enough danger to force Iran to maintain relations with Europe." (p.437)		French Crusades historian
9. Reuven Amitai-Preiss	A "budding alliance", marqued by the "unequivocal alliance of Bohemond VI", that led to attempts at a common strategy [29]. An "unequivocal pro-Mongol alliance" maintained by Bohemond VI [30]. A "Latin-Ilkhanid alliance" ("The Latin-Ilkhanid alliance was much less equivocal than Saunders would have us believe" [31]). He also writes about the "Mongol-Frankish rapprochement" (Mamluk perceptions of the Mongol-Frankish rapprochement, MHR 7 (1992), p.50-65 [32])	1995	Crusades historian
10. Peter W. Edbury	Describes the Franks and the Mongols as "allies", who were unsuccessful at coordinating operations. Initial fear of a Franco-Mongol alliance: "The sultan was afraid that St Louis' second crusade would come to the East, and that there could be a Franco-Mongol alliance against him". Edbury further describes the Franks and the Mongols as allies who engaged into combined operations, that were ultimately unsuccessful: "In 1269 and 1271, the Il-Khan had failed to send out enough support, and in 1280, it was the Christians who let down their allies" ( p.104). Under Edward I, the Mongols staged an attack to coincide with the Frank offensive during the Crusade of Edward I ("The Mongols staged an attack on Mamluk territory to coincide with Edward's presence in the east, but there was no effective cooperation between the Mongols and Christians").	1993	Historian of the Crusades
11. Christopher Tyerman	Mentions the "Mongol alliance", although he specifies that in the end it led nowhere. "The Mongol alliance, despite six further embassies to the west between 1276 and 1291, led nowhere" God's war: a new history of the Crusades Christopher Tyerman p.816. The alliance turned out to be a "false hope for Outremer as for the rest of Christendom" at the time of Saint Louis' Crusades (pp. 798-799). Tyerman further describes successes and failures of this alliance from 1248 to 1291, with Bohemond VI's acceptance of Mongol overlordship and their joint victories [33], and Edward's largely unsuccessful attempts to pursue the Mongol alliance [34]. Tyerman does not mention the Ruad expedition in 1300-1303.	2006	Crusades historian
12. Demurger, Alain	An alliance, starting in 1260 (or even 1258), and which came to fruition with the the 1300 combined offensives between the Templars and the Mongols. In 1258, "Armenian troops and the troops of Antioch participated to the fights and plundering (of the Siege of Baghdad) at the side of the Mongols". From 1260, the Northern Franks chose the Mongols: "The Templars of Antioch and Tripoli chose the Mongols", Les Templiers, p.81). The "complicity of the Hospitallers of Margat with the Mongols" (p.82). In 1281, the Mongols were accompanied by the Armenians and the Latins of the North in their offensive (p.82). In 1299, a naval expedition by the Franks of Cyprus sealed by a concrete act the Mongol alliance" (Demurger, The Last Templar, p.147). These events represent "the strategy of the Mongol alliance in action" (Demurger p.145). "De Molay led the fight for the reconquest of Jerusalem by relying on an alliance with the Mongols", back cover). The Grand Master of the Knights Templar Jacques de Molay "chose resolutely the alliance with the Mongols" (Alain Demurger Les Templiers p.81-83). For Demurger, the death of Ghazan in 1304 puts an end to the "strategy of the Mongol alliance" ("En 1304, la mort de Ghazan mettait fin à cette stratégie d'alliance avec les Mongols" in Alain Demurger Les Templiers p.85).	2002	French Crusades historian
13. Setton, Kenneth M.	Mongol-Christian alliance by Bohemond VI in 1260, and allies in 1281. "Hethoum tried to win the Latin princes over to the idea of a Mongol-Christian alliance, but could convince only Bohemond VI of Antioch" (A History of the Crusades, Volume II, p.653). Edward I advocated alliance with the Mongols, and the Hospitallers effectively allied with the Mongols in 1281, together with the Armenians of Cilicia: "The more responsible statesmen of Western Europe, such as Edward of England, advocated alliance with the Mongols, but the only allies that the Ilkhan found in Syria were the Armenians of Cilicia and the Order of the Hospital, which sent a contingent of knights from its headquarters at al-Marqab, to join in the battle of Homs" [35].	2006	Crusades historian
14. Jim Bradbury	"Alliance" and "intermittent collaboration" Bohemond VI ally of the Mongols [36]. "The Mongols invaded Syria, joined by some Armenian and crusader Christians" [37] "Co-operation was intermittent" between the Mongols and Christians, but in the end "opportunities were lost". [38].	1992	Historian
15. Steven Epstein	An Alliance between the Principality of Antioch and the Mongols, as well as common operations [39]. "Prince Bohemond VI of Antioch had ridden with the Mongols when they captured Damascus, and had received some lands for their support" [40]. "This alliance between a much-weakened Principality of Antioch left behind no written treaty or agreement" [41].	2007	Historian
16. Peter Jackson	Numerous combined operations and attempts at coordination, from Bohemond's settlement and campaign with the Mongols in 1260, to a climax with the operations of 1300. In The Mongols and the West entitles a whole chapter "An ally against Islam: the Mongols in the Near East" [42]. Describes all the viscicitudes and the few limited results of the Franco-Mongol collaboration: Bohemond VI's participation to the Mongol campaign in 1260 ("Prince Bohemond VI, perhaps under the influence of his father-in-law King Hetum of Lesser Armenia, waited upon Hulegu in person and was allowed to reach a settlement that covered his county of Tripoli as well. He participated in the Mongol campaign against Ba'labakk, which he hoped to obtain from Hulegu, and may have ridden into Damascus with the Mongol army" [43]. Edward I's ineffective coordination with the Mongols ("Only the English contingent under the Lord Edwards... made contact with the Mongols" [44]. The failed junction of Hugh III of Cyprus with the Mongols in 1280 [45]. The participation of the Hospitallers in the Mongol offensive in 1281 [46]. The arrival of a contigent of 800 Genoese in Baghdad in 1290 to build a fleet against the Mamluks [47]. The seaborne operations of 1299 in attempts to coordinate with the Mongols [48]. The major Ruad expedition in 1300 to coordinate an offensive with the Mongols [49], described as "the high-water mark of Mongol-Latin relations" [50].	2005	Crusades historian
17. Evelyn Lord	"Even Pope Gregory IX agreed to an alliance with the Mongols in an attempt to stem stem the tide of the Mamlukes". [51].	2008	Historian
18. Philip Jenkins	Alliance between the Crusaders and the Mongols. "Seeing glorious prospects, the Western crusaders allied with these Asian invaders" [52])	2002	Professor of humanities
19. Paul K. Davis	Assistance to the Mongols and Alliance of several Crusader States with the Mongols. Mongol-Crusader cooperation, although not as much ass would have been possible. Assistance of Crusader forces to Hulagu in taking Damascus and Aleppo [53] and alliance of several Crusader States with the Mongols, although not all [54]. "Hulagu, with the assitance of crusader forces in Palestine, took Aleppo on 25 January 1260 and Damascus on 2 March" [55]. "The Mongols and the Crusaders never cooperated as fully as they might have" [56].	2001	Historian
20. The New Cambridge Medieval History	Alliance of Bohemond with the Mongols. Hospitaller support to the Mongols. The Frank ruler of Antioch and Tripoli Bohemond VI was in alliance with the Mongols, for which he was punished by having Antioch taken from him by the Mamluks [57]. "There is evidence that the Hospitallers from Margat in northern Syria fought on the side of the Mongols [58]. "The Hospitallers had supported the Mongols at Homs" [59]. "Nearby Maraclea also held a pro-Mongol lord" [60]	2001	Reference work
21. Riley-Smith, Jonathan	Alliance of Bohemond with the Mongols, and successful combined operations. Alliance of the Hospitallers with the Mongols before 1285. "Bohemond VI of Antioch-Tripoli, who had succeeded Bohemond V in 1252, joined by his father-in-law Hetum of Cilician Armenia in seeking an alliance with the Mongols and entered Damascus with the Mongol army in March 1260" [61]. Further describes Bohemond's alliance with the Mongols: "Bohemond VI of Antioch-Tripoli became their [the Mongol's] ally" [62]. Before 1285 the Hospitallers of the north also had agreed to ally to the Mongols: "In 1285, Qalawun, the new Mamluk sultan, resumed the offensive, directed against the Hospitallers of the North who had shown their readiness to ally to the Mongols.", Jonathan Riley-Smith, "Atlas des Croisades", p.114)	2005	Crusades historian
22. Oxford History of the Crusades	Alliance of Bohemond with the Mongols in 1260. Unsuccessful attempts at cooperation in 1300. Bohemond's alliance with the Mongols: "Bohemond VI of Antioch-Tripoli became their [the Mongol's] ally" [63]. Henry II of Cyprus "made some serious, if in the event ineffectual attempts to cooperate with Ghazan, the Mongol ilkhan of Persia, during the later's invasion of Syria in 1299-1300" [64]	2002	Reference work
23. Cambridge History of Islam	Alliance of Bohemond with the Mongols and combined operations. Bohemond allied with the Mongols, and particpated in the Mongol conquest of Damascus, and was later excomunicated for it [65]	1997	Reference work
24. Ryan, Jame D.	A Mongol alliance with combined operations. Bohemond was persuaded of the "advantages of Mongol alliance" [66]. Bohemond rode into Damascus in victory with Hulagu [67]	2001	Crusades historian
25. Peter Malcolm Holt	Ally of the Mongols. "Bohemond had rallied to Hulegu in 1260" [68]. Bohemond was the ally of the Mongols: "During the episode of Mongol domination in Syria, Bohemond VI of Antioch and Tripoli was their ally" [69]	1995	Crusades historian
26. Judith Bronstein	Antioch-Mongol alliance. Bohemond VI "concluded an alliance with the (Mongol) invaders" [70]. Description of the "Antioch-Mongol alliance" [71].	2005	Crusades historian
27. Encyclopedia of the Middle Ages	Alliance of Antioch. The city of Antioch was punished for its alliance with the Mongols. [72].	2000	Reference work
28. Concise Encyclopaedia of World History	An alliance between the Mongols and Antioch and Armenia. An alliance between the Mongols and Antioch and Armenia, leading to "a Mongol-Christian coalition" which marched victoriously into Damascus". [73]. "The only discordant note in this alliance was the Christian Lord of Sidon" [74]	2007	Reference work
29. Dr. Martin Sicker	A Frank-Mongol alliance that ended with the events of Sidon. "Ket-Buqa and Bohemond VI fully appreciated the mutual advantages of the Frank-Mongol alliance" [75]. Bohemond "operated under the Mongol security umbrella" [76]. Bohemond VI supplied troops to the Mongols for their Syria offensive [77]. "Hulagu rewarded his Christian allies" [78]. Sicker also mentions an end to the Franco-Mongol alliance after the events of Sidon: "Suitably provoked, the Mongols responded by pillaging Sidon, thereby bringing an effective end to the Frank-Mongol alliance." [79].	2000	Crusades historian
30. Kevin Shillington	Alliance of Bohemond with the Mongols. Describes Bohemond's alliance with the Mongols: "No all Crusaders allied with the Mongols, as did Bohemond initially" [80]	2005	Crusades historian
31. Claude Mutafian	Alliance of Bohemond VI and the Armenians with the Mongols. The participation of the Hospitallers on the Mongol side at the Battle of Homs in 1281. Attempts at coordination in 1299-1300. "Hethoum is intimately linked to this campaign (in Syria), as when as his son-on-law Bohemond VI of Antioch, whom he convinces to enter into the Alliance" (La Cilicie au carrefour des Empires, Claude Mutafian, ISBN 2251326308, 1988, p.430). "This Mongol alliance allows Antioch to recover the harbour of Lattakia" (p.431). "We posess for this first battle of Homs the account of a participant, Joseph de Cancy, of the Order of the Hospitallers" (p.452). Also in Le Royaume Arménien de Cilicie Mutafian describes "the Mongol alliance" entered into by the king of Armenia and the Franks of Antioch ("the King of Armenia decided to engage into the Mongol alliance, an intelligence that the Latin barons lacked, except for Antioch"), and "the Franco-Mongol collaboration" (Mutafian, p.55)	1988	Historian of Armenia
32. Christopher Marshall	Assistance Mongol assistance to Antioch in 1261 [81].	1994	Historian
33. Hovannisian, Richard G.	A Mongol alliance to which the Pincipality of Antioch participated, with combined operations.[82] "The papacy, the Crusaders and the Armenians all made great efforts at an alliance with the Mongol leaders, even hoping for their conversion too Christianity" [83]. "The Mongol alliance was initially of great benefit to the Cilicia and to the Mongols themselves in holding back the Seljuks and the Mamluks. Armenians fought side-by-side with Mongols and Antiochenes to defeat the Mamluk army at Aleppo and Damascus." [84]	2004	Historian
34. Zoe Oldenbourg	Alliance of Franks and Mongols against Qalawun. Zoe Oldenbourg in her chronology of The Crusades mentions the 1280 "Alliance of Franks and Mongols against Qalawun", although this is not further elaborated in the rest of her book. (Oldenbourg, "The Crusades", p.620)	2001	Historian of the Crusades
35. Laurent Dailliez	Alliance with the Mongols and treaty by Jacques de Molay In Les Templiers, Laurent Dailliez mentions that the Knights Templar allied with the Mongols, and that Jacques de Molay signed a treaty with them against the Muslim "their common enemy".("The Mongols, after taking Damascus and several important cities from the Turks, after having been routed by the Sultan of Egypt at Tiberiade in 1260, allied themselves with the Templars. Jacques de Molay, in his letter to the king of England said that he had to sign such a treaty to fight against the Muslims, "our common enemy" Dailliez, p.306-307). The "signature" of a treaty doesn't seem to be supported by other sources though.	1972	French historian
36. Claude Lebedel	Alliance of the Armenians and the Prince of Antioch with the Mongols. Claude Lebedel in Les Croisades describes the alliance of the Franks of Antioch and Tripoli with the Mongols: (in 1260) "the Frank barons refused an alliance with the Mongols, except for the Armenians and the Prince of Antioch and Tripoli".		French historian
37. Amin Maalouf	Bohemond of Antioch and Hethoum of Armenia allies of the Mongols. Alliance of the Hospitallers with the Mongols in 1281. "The Armenians, in the person of their king Hetoum, sided with the Mongols, as well as Prince Bohemond, his son-in-law. The Franks of Acre however adopted a position of neutrality favourable to the muslims" (The Crusades through Arab eyes, French edition, p.261). "Bohemond of Antioch and Hethoum of Armenia, principal allies of the Mongols" (p.265). "Hulagu (…) still had enough strength to prevent the punishment of his allies [Bohemond and Hethoum]" (p.267), "..the Hospitallers. These monk-horsemen allied with the Mongols, going as far as fighting at their side in a new attempt at invasion in 1281."		Historical novelist
38. Sylvia Schein	Templars, Hospitallers and crusaders of Cyprus "allies" of the Mongols in 1300-1302 Sylvia Schein in Gesta Dei per Mongolos describes the Templars, Hospitallers and crusaders of Cyprus as allies of the Mongols in the campaings of 1300-1302: "They (the Templars, Hospitallers and crusaders of Cyprus) sailed to the island of Ruad, and, from that base, captured Tortosa, but retired a few days later when their allies (the Mongols) did not appear.", p.811		Crusades historian
39. E.L. Skip Knox	"Joined the Mongols" and "fought alongside" with them. "Some of the Crusader States wanted to form an alliance with the Mongols, while others weren't so sure. The allure of destroying Egypt was great, but the Mongols were pretty scary allies. In the end, Armenia and Antioch joined, along with the Templars and Hospitallers." online. Also "A double army marched down from the north and east, crossing the Euphrates in 1281. Qalavun marched north and they met near Homs on 30 October. Once again, Christians fought alongside the Mongols (the Hospitallers and the Armenians this time)" [85].	2010	History professor, Boise State University
40. Patrick Huchet	"Association" with the Mongols. "Jacques de Molay, elected Master in 1292, associated himself with the Mongols to set up military operations on the island of Ruad (near Tortose)." (Les Templiers, une fabuleuse épopée)	2007	Historian
41. Nicolle, David	Alliance of the Crusader Principality of Antioch with the Mongols. "1260: Mongols invade Syria. Crusader Principality of Antioch and Kingdom of Cilician Armenia ally with the Mongols" [86]	1990	Historian
42. Franco Cardini	An actual Mongol/Crusader coalition in action. "In 1260, the Mamelukes vanquished the Mongol/crusader coalition, and began a systematic campaign to get rid of the last "Frankish" garrisons in Syria and Palestine" [87]	2001	Historian
43. Hugh Kennedy	An alliance, which was breached with the Sidon incident. "Julien, whose stupidity caused a fatal breach between the Crusaders and their Mongol "allies" [88].	2001	Historian
44. George Lane	Coordination between Edward I and the Mongols, with little results. "Edward dispatched envoys to Azerbaijan to contact the Il-Khan, Abaqa... they received a pleadge of military aid under the control of the Mongol commander of Anatolia, Samaghar... However these plans came to little and though a Mongol force did invade Syria with a relatively small force of between 10,000 and 12,000 men attacking as far south as the environs of Harim and Afamiya." [89] "The only gain this allowed Edward was the opportunity to launch a coordinated pillaging raid on the town of Qaqun from which he quickly retreated" [90]. "Abaqa was later to apologize to Edward, who becam king on his return to England, for his failure to rpovide sufficient aid to the Prince's forces" [91].	2003	Historian
45. Jaroslav Folda	Alliance and combined operations. "Baybars had especially resented the alliance of Bohemond VI and King Hetoum with the Mongols against the Mamluks at the time of the battle of Ain Jalud" [92]. Collaboration of the Mongols and Edward I: "The Mongol commander in Turkey was ordered to march into Syria accompanied by troops of the Seljuk sultan. Meanwhile, Edward tried to organize the knights..." [93]	2005	Historian
46. Turnbull, Steven	An unholy alliance, which led to combined operations. "One by one these Christian kingdoms began to consider the possibilities of an alliance with the Mongols against the Muslim infidels" p.8 [94] "This unholy alliance took the field in 1259" p.8 [95] "Their Christian allies joined them in a triomphal entry (in Damascus)" p.8 [96]	1980	Historian
47. Barber, Malcom	Numerous contacts and embassies since 1260 due to the "Belief in the genuine possibility of an alliance", that led to various military operations, which met with "political and logistical difficulties". Author is specific that treaties were passed between the Franks and the Mongols, and combined operations were organized. Specific about the fact that Bohemond had entered into a treaty with the Mongols [97]. Specific about the 1300 naval expedition, which was "apparently a preliminary to a combined attack with the Mongols". Specific about the 1300 Ruad expedition, where they "waited for the arrival of the Mongols" [98]	2001	Historian
48. Encyclopedia Britannica	An "ostensible alliance". "The fact that the Mongols were in ostensible alliance with Christian princes led to a renewal by the sultan of the ordinances against Jews and Christians." (Encyclopedia Britannica: A Dictionary of Arts, Sciences, Literature.., p.100 [99])	20th century	Reference work
49. Runciman, Steven	Bohemond VI "gave his adhesion" to the "Christian alliance" with the Mongols, and the Mongols collaborated with Edward I. "Hethoum's attempt to build a great Christian alliance to aid the Mongols was well received by the native Christians; and Bohemond of Antioch, who was under his father-in-law's influence gave his adhesion. But the Franks of Asia held aloof" p.298-299 "On 1 March Kitbuqa entered Damascus at the head of a Mongol army. With him were the King of Armenia and the Prince of Antioch. The citizens of the ancient capital of the Caliphate saw for the first time for six centuries three Christian potentates ride in triumph through their streets." p.307 "In mid-October, Abaga fullfilled his promise (to Edward I by detaching ten thousand horsemen from his garrisons in Anatolia. They swept down past Aintab into Syria, defeating the Turcoman troops that protected Aleppo." p.336 In 1285 "The Genoese welcomed him (Rabban bar Sauma) with great ceremony. The Mongol alliance was important to them, and they gave due attention to the ambassador's proposals". p.399	1951	Historian
50. Nersessian, Sirarpie Der	A Christian-Mongol alliance to which Bohemond VI adhered. "Hetoum tried to win the Latin princes over to the idea of a Christian-Mongol alliance, but could convince only Bohemond VI of Antioch" "The Kingdom of Cilician Armenia" (in Setton's Crusades)[100] p.653	1969	Historian
51. Michael Angold	Alliance, complicity and military collaboration. "Eastern Christians were happy to ally with the invaders" [101]. Prince Bohemond VI of Antioch accompanied Hulegu in Damascus [102]. "This time any suspicion of complicity with the Mongol enemy was well founded" [103].	2006	Historian
52. Michael Shterenshis	Treaty between the Crusaders and the Mongols "In 1289-1291, the last Crusaders made a treaty with the Mongols of Persia, proposing a joint campaign against the Mamluks. The Mongols agreed to cede Jerusalem to the Christians if the Mamluks were defeated, but once again the Mongols were beaten, and Jerusalem remained in the hands of the Muslims." in Tamerlane and the Jews by Michael Shterenshis p.92	2002	Jewish historian

Irwin, Robert: Bohemond submitted to the Mongols [104]. 1986.
Bernard de Vaulx. Writes about the "Franco-Mongol alliance" in History of the Missions (p. 53).

Rapprochement

Emmanuel Berl in Histoire de l'Europe (p. 219) writes about the "Franco-Mongol rapprochement".
Mamluk Perceptions of the Mongol–Frankish Rapprochement. Mediterranean Historical Review 7 (1992): 50–65.

Elonka's claims vs historians

Historian	Analysis and quotes (by Elonka [105])	Year	Actual content (Per Honor et Gloria)	Synthesis (Per Honor et Gloria)
1. Barber, Malcolm	Alliance seen as "possible" but was not realized. "The period of the most intensive effort, though, seems to have been between 1300 and 1302, partly because it was believed in some quarters that there was a genuine possibility of an alliance with the Mongols. Both Pope Innocent IV and King Louis IX had sent representatives to the Mongols, but neither had found much to encourage them. However, the rise of Mamluk power and the defeat at Ain Jalut in 1260 seems to have persuaded the Mongols to take a more positive attitude to the Christians and, from 1267, embassies came to the west reasonably regularly in the hope of organising a joint campaign. The idea was not therefore new in 1300, but the attempts at practical implementation were to show that the logistical and political difficulties which had wrecked previous initiatives still existed." The New Knighthood 293-294	2001	Actually mentions numerous contacts and embassies since 1260 due to the "Belief in the genuine possibility of an alliance", that led to various military operations, which met with "political and logistical difficulties". Specific about the fact that Bohemond had entered into a treaty with the Mongols [106]. Specific about the 1300 naval expedition, which was "apparently a preliminary to a combined attack with the Mongols". Specific about the 1300 Ruad expedition, where they "waited for the arrival of the Mongols" [107]	Genuine efforts towards an "alliance", but practical implementation was a problem. Author is specific that treaties were passed between the Franks and the Mongols, and combined operations were organized.
2. Maalouf, Amin	Alliance was a "cherished dream" that didn't occur. Arghun, grandon of Hulegu, "had resurrected the most cherished dream of his predecessors: to form an alliance with the Occidentals and thus to trap the Mamluk sultanate in a pincer movement. Regular contacts were established between Tabriz and Rome with a view to organizing a joint expedition, or at least a concerted one." Crusades Through Arab Eyes 254. "guilty of having made common cause with the Mongol invaders" 267	1984	Actually mentions Bohemond of Antioch and Hethoum of Armenia allies of the Mongols. Alliance of the Hospitallers with the Mongols in 1281. "The Armenians, in the person of their king Hetoum, sided with the Mongols, as well as Prince Bohemond, his son-in-law. The Franks of Acre however adopted a position of neutrality favourable to the muslims" (The Crusades through Arab eyes, French edition, p.261), "Bohemond of Antioch and Hethoum of Armenia, principal allies of the Mongols" (p.265), "Hulagu (…) still had enough strength to prevent the punishment of his allies [Bohemond and Hethoum]" (p.267), "..the Hospitallers. These monk-horsemen allied with the Mongols, going as far as fighting at their side in a new attempt at invasion in 1281." The "cherished dream" quote is only related to Arghun's ancestors' hopes to form an alliance.	Amin Maalouf does states that the alliance was once a "dream" of early rulers, but is specific that finally the Franks of Antioch (1260) and the Hospitallers (1281) became allies of, and made common cause with, the Mongols.
3. Newman, Sharan	No strong mention. "Join forces" "But these were all small matters compared to the long-dreaded arrival of the Mongols in the Near East. Under Genghis Khan, they had already conquered much of China and were now moving into the ancient Persian Empire. Tales of their cruelty flew like crows through the towns in their path. However, since they were considered "pagans" there was hope among the leaders of the Church that they could be brought into the Christian community and would join forces to liberate Jerusalem again. Franciscan missionaries were sent east as the Mongols drew near." Real History Behind the Templars 174	2006	"Proposed invasion" combining Templar and Mongol troops in 1300 "In 1300, the island (of Ruad) was a staging ground for a proposed invasion in which the Crusader forces would attack from the west and the Mongol army would come in fron the east. For a variety of reasons, oncluding weather and problems among the Mongol leaders, the invasion never occured." p.229	Actually specific on the plans and actual troop movements for a proposed invasion by the Crusaders and the Mongols in 1300.
4. Schein, Sylvia	Said an alliance was "planned" but didn't come together. "the Mongol khan, joined by the Christian kings" Gesta Dei per Mongolos "plans for an alliance"	1989	Templars, Hospitallers and crusaders of Cyprus "allies" of the Mongols in 1300-1302 Sylvia Schein in Gesta Dei per Mongolos describes the Templars, Hospitallers and crusaders of Cyprus as allies of the Mongols in the campaings of 1300-1302: "They (the Templars, Hospitallers and crusaders of Cyprus) sailed to the island of Ruad, and, from that base, captured Tortosa, but retired a few days later when their allies (the Mongols) did not appear.", p.811	Actually specific on the Templars, Hospitallers and crusaders of Cyprus being "allies" of the Mongols in 1300-1302.
5. Martin, Sean	No strong mention. "Combined force" Knights Templar 114	2005		Yes, the Templars combined forces with the Mongols...
6. Tyerman, Christopher	Hoped-for alliance never occurred. "Edward contented himself with pursuing the will of the wisps of a Mongol alliance with the il-khan of Persia" God's War "The mission [of William of Rubruk] was regarded by some on all sides as another attempt to capture the chimera of a Franco-Mongol anti-Islamic alliance" 798 "an attempt to capture the chimera of a Franco-Mongol alliance....[turned out to be] a false hope for Outremer as for the rest of Christendom" 798-799 "The Mongol alliance, despite six further embassies to the west between 1276 and 1291, led nowhere" 816	2006	Actually mentions the existence of the "Mongol alliance", although he specifies that in the end it led nowhere. "The Mongol alliance, despite six further embassies to the west between 1276 and 1291, led nowhere" God's war: a new history of the Crusades Christopher Tyerman p.816. The alliance turned out to be a "false hope for Outremer as for the rest of Christendom" at the time of Saint Louis' Crusades (pp. 798-799). Tyerman further describes successes and failures of this alliance from 1248 to 1291, with Bohemond VI's acceptance of Mongol overlordship and their joint victories [108], and Edward's largely unsuccessful attempts to pursue the Mongol alliance [109]. Tyerman does not mention the Ruad expedition in 1300-1303.	Tyerman highlights the false hopes of the alliance, but is specific on the joint victories of Bohemond VI with theMongols, and the combined campaign of Edward I with the Mongols.
7. Nicolle, David	Mongols were regarded as "potential allies" but not that the alliance occurred. Overall the major players were the Mamluks and the Mongols, and that the Christians were just "pawns in a greater game" "In later years Christian chroniclers would bemoan a lost opportunity in which Crusaders and Mongols might have joined forces to defeat the Muslims. But they were writing from the benefit of hindsight, after the Crusader States had been destroyed by the Muslim Mamluks. Few at the time -- certainly not those in the Crusader Kingdom of Jerusalem -- thought in such terms while Hulegu still aimed to extend Mongol rule over the entire known world." p.114	1990	Actually mentions the alliance of the Crusader Principality of Antioch with the Mongols. "1260: Mongols invade Syria. Crusader Principality of Antioch and Kingdom of Cilician Armenia ally with the Mongols" [110]	States indeed that the Mongols were regarded as "potential allies", but is specific that an alliance indeed occured with Bohemond VI.
8. Grousset, Rene	Argued that an alliance would have been a good idea, and was a "missed opportunity" "The Mongols and Western Europe". In this chapter an attempt will be made to give a succinct but comprehensive picture of the relations that existed between the Mongols and Western Europe." History of Crusades, Vol. III 513-544 "the Mongols' relations with the west" 526 "The possibility of an alliance with the Mongols was completely lost from sight" 516 "Arghun's boldest attempt to establish an alliance with the western powers" 532 "Oljeitu... followed the same friendly policy towards the Western powerns... and offered in very general terms an alliance... No answer by the French king to Oljeitu's letter has come to light" 537 "Louis IX et l'Alliance Franco-Mongole" Adam Bishop refers to Grousset as "quaint and outdated"[111] "Seul Edward I comprit la valeur de l'Alliance Mongole" (Only Edward I understood the value of the Mongol alliance) 653 "La coalition Franco-Mongole dont les Hospitaliers donnaient l'exemple" (The Franco-Mongol alliance, exemplified by the Hospitallers) 686 "Kitbuqa, now in control of Mongol Syria and Mongol Palestine, was well-disposed toward the Christians there, not only because he himself was a Nestorian, but also, it seems because he appreciated the advantage to both parties of the Franco-Mongol alliance. Unfortunately, though Bohemund VI, prince of Antioch-Tripoli, might share his views on the subject, the barons of Acre continued to see in the Mongols mere barbarians to whom even the Muslims were to be preferred. One of these barons, Count Julien of Sidon, attacked a Mongol patrol and killed Kitbuqa's nephew. The enraged Mongols replied by sacking Sidon. This was the end of the alliance, explicit or tacit, between Franks and Mongols."[112] The Empire of the Steppes: A History of Central Asia 363	1930s	Actually mentions that a "Mongol alliance", or "Franco-Mongol coalition", was upheld by Edward I and the Knights Hospitaller. "Louis IX and the Franco-Mongol alliance" (p521). The 1260 expedition in some respect "had even the appearance of a Franco-Mongol crusade" [113], with successful combined operations to take Aleppo and Damascus [114], after what they advanced as far as Gaza [115]. Later, "only Edward I understood the value of the Mongol alliance" (p.653) "Edward I and the Mongol alliance" (p.653), "Edward I renewed the precious Mongol Alliance" (in "L'épopée des Croisades", p.301). "The Franco-Mongol coalition, of which the Hospitallers were giving the example" (p.686). "Thus to the 50000 Mongols were added 30000 Armenians, Georgians, and Franks" in 1282 at Homs [116]	Author actually states that many attempts were made, leading to a sort of Franco-Mongol crusade, a renewed alliance, and a Franco-Mongol coalition, and resulting in actual combined operations in 1260, 1271 and 1281.
9. Demurger, Alain	Called the alliance a "strategy" that never came to clear fruition. "The Cypriot Christians tried to form a strategic alliance with the Mongols" The Last Templar 91 "in the hope that all the promises made by the Mongol alliance would finally be realised" 98 "the strategy of a Mongol alliance was not yet quite dead" "Thus ended the strategy of a Mongol alliance" 115 "...idea of a rapid reconquest of the Holy Land and Jerusalem was widely shared, all the more so because an alliance with the Mongols looked possible" 127 "in the late thirteenth and fourteenth century there was still an opportunity to be seized: the Mongol alliance" 217 "Above all, the expedition made manifest the unity of the Cypriot Franks and, through a material act, put the seal on the Mongol alliance." 147 Ruad (Mongols didn't show up) "The concretization of this alliance met with three obstacles etc..." Croisades et croises au Moyen-Age 287 "These are the only Frank forces, located in Armenia and Cyprus, which cooperated with the Mongols" 287 "This ended the promisses of the Mongol alliance" 287	2002	Actually mentions an alliance, starting in 1260 (or even 1258), and which came to fruition with the the 1300 combined offensives between the Templars and the Mongols. In 1258, "Armenian troops and the troops of Antioch participated to the fights and plundering (of the Siege of Baghdad) at the side of the Mongols". From 1260, the Northern Franks chose the Mongols: "The Templars of Antioch and Tripoli chose the Mongols", Les Templiers, p.81). The "complicity of the Hospitallers of Margat with the Mongols" (p.82). In 1281, the Mongols were accompanied by the Armenians and the Latins of the North in their offensive (p.82). In 1299, a naval expedition by the Franks of Cyprus sealed by a concrete act the Mongol alliance" (Demurger, The Last Templar, p.147). These events represent "the strategy of the Mongol alliance in action" (Demurger p.145). "De Molay led the fight for the reconquest of Jerusalem by relying on an alliance with the Mongols", back cover). The Grand Master of the Knights Templar Jacques de Molay "chose resolutely the alliance with the Mongols" (Alain Demurger Les Templiers p.81-83). For Demurger, the death of Ghazan in 1304 puts an end to the "strategy of the Mongol alliance" ("En 1304, la mort de Ghazan mettait fin à cette stratégie d'alliance avec les Mongols" in Alain Demurger Les Templiers p.85).	Wrong. Actually, the author describes collaboration of the Franks and the Mongols since 1260, with the alliance being sealed in 1299.
10. Riley-Smith, Jonathan	Said forces were "ready" to ally, but not that it occurred. "The brunt of the sudden, ferocious descent of the Mongols upon Europe is 1241 was borne by the hapless Poles and Hungarians, prompting in the same year that declaration of the first of a number of crusades against them. Attitudes would change in the later thirteenth century with the prospect of a joint alliance against the Muslims." Oxford Illustrated History of the Crusades p.41 "King Het'um II [of Cilician Armenia] was able to reach an accommodation with the Mongols in the 1240s." p.175	2002	Actually mentions the alliance of Bohemond with the Mongols, and successful combined operations. Alliance of the Hospitallers with the Mongols before 1285. "Bohemond VI of Antioch-Tripoli, who had succeeded Bohemond V in 1252, joined by his father-in-law Hetum of Cilician Armenia in seeking an alliance with the Mongols and entered Damascus with the Mongol army in March 1260" [117]. Describes Bohemond's alliance with the Mongols: "Bohemond VI of Antioch-Tripoli became their [the Mongol's] ally" [118]. Before 1285 the Hospitallers of the north also had agreed to ally to the Mongols: "In 1285, Qalawun, the new Mamluk sultan, resumed the offensive, directed against the Hospitallers of the North who had shown their readiness to ally to the Mongols.", Jonathan Riley-Smith, "Atlas des Croisades", p.114)	Actually specific that there was an alliance of Bohemond with the Mongols, and successful combined operations. Also alliance of the Hospitallers with the Mongols before 1285.
11. Stewart, Angus Donal	Said the alliance was promoted, but not that it occurred	2001
12. Encyclopedia Britannica	Called the alliance a "chimera" or fantasy	20th century	Actually describes an "ostensible alliance" "The fact that the Mongols were in ostensible alliance with Christian princes led to a renewal by the sultan of the ordinances against Jews and Christians." (Encyclopedia Britannica: A Dictionary of Arts, Sciences, Literature.., p.100 [119])	Actually an ostensible alliance that was a fact.
13. Richard, Jean	Said the alliance occurred, but was a "lost opportunity". "The Franco-Mongol alliance (...) seems to have been rich with missed opportunities". "In 1297 Ghazan resumes his projects against Egypt (...) the Franco-Mongol cooperation had thus survived, to the loss of Acre by the Franks, and to the conversion of the khan to Islam. It was to remain one of the political factors of the policy of the Crusades, until the peace treaty with the Mamluks, which was concluded in 1322 by khan Abu Said." p.469 Histoire des Croisades. "The sustained attacks of Baibar (...) rallied the Occidentals to this alliance, to which the Mongols also convinced the Byzantines to adhere" p.453 "Franco-Mongol cooperation thus survived both the loss of Acre by the Franks and the conversion of the Mongols of Persia to Islam. It was to remain one of the givens of crusading politics until the peace treaty with the Mamluks, which was concluded only in 1322 by the khan Abu Said. The Franks may be criticised for having done too little to promote this policy.... But we need to emphasise the role of the Frankish adventurers who had entered Mongol service and who made themselves the zealous agents of the agreement between their Mongol masters and the West." 468(f)/455(e) "The Mongol alliance could mean the intervention of a large army and other forms of assistance which could be helpful to a crusade. It is hardly surprising that, for nearly forty years, the Westerners remained hopeful of achieving this combination of their efforts and those of the sovereigns of Persia"[120] p.424 "The Franco-Mongol alliance... foundered in the face of the vastness of the distances, and the impossibility of predicting events that make joint operations not feasible or of seizing chances offered. It is a story of lost opportunities." (Timeline) Hulegu offered an alliance to King Louis[121] p.487 "1274: Promulgation of a Crusade, in liaison with the Mongols" p.502 "[Cioli Bofeti's] mission was perhaps primarily to secure the cooperation of Franks and Mongols, and to implement the promise the latter had made to their allies, the return to them of the recovered Holy Land." p.468 English edition	1999	Actually mentions a "Franco-Mongol alliance" and "coalition" started in earnest in the 1260s [122], to continue on-and-off and "survive" with the efforts of Ghazan, until it ultimately foundered [123]. The Franco-Mongol alliance started in earnest in the 1260s: "The sustained attacks of Baibars (...) converted the Westerners to this alliance, which the Mongols were also able to persuade the Byzantines to join." [124] and continue on-and-off until it was strongly revived by Ghazan, to continue to have an influence until 1322: "In 1297 Ghazan revived his projects against Egypt (...) the Franco-Mongol cooperation had thus survived, to the loss of Acre by the Franks, and to the conversion of the Khan to Islam. It was to remain one of the givens of Crusading politics, until the peace treaty with the Mamluks, which was concluded in 1322 by khan Abu Said." [125]. "The coalition* of Franks, Mongols and Byzantines, was matched by a coalition between the Golden Horde and the Mamluks" [126]. He concludes on the many missed opportunities the alliance offered: "The Franco-Mongol alliance... foundered... It is a story of lost opportunities" p.456 "[Cioli Bofeti's] mission was perhaps primarily to secure the cooperation of Franks and Mongols, and to implement the promise the latter had made to their allies, the return to them of the recovered Holy Land." p.468 English edition	Specific about the existence of a "Franco-Mongol alliance" started in earnest in the 1260s, to continue on-and-off and "survive" with the efforts of Ghazan, until it ultimately "foundered".
14. Morgan, David	Said there were attempts at an alliance, but that it did not occur "From 1263 until well into the fourteenth century repeated attempts were made to arrange an alliance" p.183 The Mongols "No really effective joint action had ever been organized: in thirteenth-century conditions the problems of co-ordination appear to have been insuperable" p.185 "Contacts were maintained under Oljeitu... But after Oljeitu's reign attempts at alliance at last ceased." 186 "This has long been seen as a 'missed opportunity' for the Crusaders. According to that opinion, most eloquently expressed by Grousset and frequently repeated by other scholars, the Crusaders ought to have allied themselves with the pro-Christian, anti-Muslim Mongols against the Mamluks. They might thus have prevented their own destruction by the Mamluks in the succeeding decades, and possibly even have secured the return of Jerusalem by favour of the Mongols." 136 "From 1263 until well into the fourteenth century repeated attempts were made to arrange an alliance, and these appear to have been entered into in perfectly good faith by both sides. We possess the texts of numerous letters sent in both directions. The Popes were always enthusiastic, as much for evangelistic as for specifically crusading reasons, and several western monarchs also treated the idea of an alliance seriously." 160 "The authorities of the crusader states, with the exception of Antioch, opted for a neutrality favourable to the Mamluks." The Mongols and the Eastern Mediterranea p.204	2006	Actually describes the crusaders as allies of the Mongols. "The Crusader ruler of Antioch and Tripoli hastened to make his submission and to join forces with the all-conquering Mongols" p.135 "The famous scene in which Damascus was entered by the Mongols and their allies, alledgedly headed by three Christians -Bohemond of Antioch, King Het'um of Cilician Armenia, and Hulegu's Nestorian general Kitbuqa- might have seemed to herald a new era for the fortunes of Christianity in the land of its foundation" p.135	Alliances were made, joint actions were taken, but were not really effective.
15. Oldenbourg	Timeline mention that an alliance occurred in 1280. (timeline mention) "1280: Alliance of Franks and Mongols against Qalawun". Commentary: "Oldenbourg's 1966 book is about the Crusades through 1200. No other scholars agree with the "1280" date"	1966	Actually describes the alliance of Franks and Mongols against Qalawun. Zoe Oldenbourg in her chronology of The Crusades mentions the 1280 "Alliance of Franks and Mongols against Qalawun", although this is not further elaborated in the rest of her book. (Oldenbourg, "The Crusades", p.620)	Positive about an "alliance" of Franks and Mongols in 1280.
16. Runciman, Steven	Said the alliance was a "hope" but ultimately a waste of time. "The King of Aragon, in conjunction with Pope Clement IV [sent a messenger to Abaqa] to suggest a military alliance. But Abaga, who was fully occupied by his war against the Golden Horde, would only make vague promises." p.332 History of the Crusades "In 1270, [Abaga] wrote to King Louis undertaking to grant military aid as soon as the Crusade appeared in Palestine. King Louis went instead to Tunis, where the Mongols could not help him." p.332 "Edward..hoped to unite the Christians of the East into a formidable body and then to use the help of the Mongols....The English Prince was not much more successful with the Mongols.... By the spring of 1272 Prince Edward realized he was wasting his time." p.335-337 "chances of a Mongol alliance with the Christians faded out" p.439-440	1951	Actually mentions that Bohemond "gave his adhesion" to the "Christian alliance" with the Mongols, and the Mongols collaborated with Edward I. "Hethoum's attempt to build a great Christian alliance to aid the Mongols was well received by the native Christians; and Bohemond of Antioch, who was under his father-in-law's influence gave his adhesion. But the Franks of Asia held aloof" p.298-299 "On 1 March Kitbuqa entered Damascus at the head of a Mongol army. With him were the King of Armenia and the Prince of Antioch. The citizens of the ancient capital of the Caliphate saw for the first time for six centuries three Christian potentates ride in triumph through their streets." p.307 "In mid-October, Abaga fullfilled his promise (to Edward I by detaching ten thousand horsemen from his garrisons in Anatolia. They swept down past Aintab into Syria, defeating the Turcoman troops that protected Aleppo." p.336 In 1285 "The Genoese welcomed him (Rabban bar Sauma) with great ceremony. The Mongol alliance was important to them, and they gave due attention to the ambassador's proposals". p.399	Bohemond "gave his adhesion" to the "Christian alliance" with the Mongols, and the Mongols collaborated with Edward I in 1271. The Mongol alliance remained important afterwards. In the end, the Mongol alliance was not "fully achieved".
17. Jackson, Peter	No alliance occurred "No military collaboration against the common Mamluk enemy resulted from the Il-khans' frequent embassies. The Mongol rulers did not come over to the Roman Church; nor did the Latin missionaries succeed in winning many of their subjects to the faith." New Cambridge Medieval History, vol. 5 p.719 "Like the failure to assist Hulegu's forces during their invasion of Syria in 1260, the lukewarm reaction accorded to his successors has been seen as a wasted opportunity. Underlying both verdicts, of course, is the belief that, had a Mongol-western alliance been forged and the Mamluk empire been overthrown, the Il-khanid state would in time have adopted Christianity and thereby changed the whole history of Persia and the Near East -- a dubious proposition." p.716 "Although several scholars have criticized the Catholic world for its failure to perceive what the Mongols of Persia offered, I shall argue that the majority of Western observers were lukewarm about an alliance precisely because they recognized Ilkhanid ambitions for what they were." 6 "In trying to elicit why Ilkhanid-Western contacts bore no fruit..." p.73 "The failure of Ilkhanid-Western negotiations, and the reasons for it, are of particular importance in view of the widespread belief in the past that they might well have succeeded." p.4 "The Mongol Ilkhans of Persia made repeated overtures to Western rulers for concerted operations against the Muslim Mamluk Empire in Egypt and Syria." p.1 "The still-born attempt to launch Ilkhanid-Western collaboration, the relatively fruitless efforts of the friars" p.362 "Why, then, did the diplomatic contacts between the Ilkhanate and the West fail to lead anywhere?" p.179 "In their successive attempts to secure assistance from the Latin world, the Ilkhans took care to select personnel who would elicit the confidence of Western rulers and to impart a Christian complexion to their overtures." p.173 "In many respects, the Mongol occupation of Syria in 1299-1300 represents the high water-mark of Mongol-Latin relations." p.172 "Hulegu and his successors made a series of overtures designed to gain Latin collaboration in the war against the Mamluks. These diplomatic contacts, which continued into the early fourteenth century, were made with the popes and with Western European sovereigns, particularly the French and English kings and sometimes also those of Aragon and Sicily. Only minimally and rarely did they involve the Near Eastern Franks, who were now a negligible quantity." "Arghun had persisted in the quest for a Western alliance right down to his death without ever taking the field against the mutual enemy." p.170	2006	Actually specific about the numerous combined operations and attempts at coordination, from Bohemond's settlement and campaign with the Mongols in 1260, to a climax with the operations of 1300. In The Mongols and the West entitles a whole chapter "An ally against Islam: the Mongols in the Near East" [127] and describes all the viscicitudes and the few limited results of the Franco-Mongol collaboration: Bohemond VI's participation to the Mongol campaign in 1260 ("Prince Bohemond VI, perhaps under the influence of his father-in-law King Hetum of Lesser Armenia, waited upon Hulegu in person and was allowed to reach a settlement that covered his county of Tripoli as well. He participated in the Mongol campaign against Ba'labakk, which he hoped to obtain from Hulegu, and may have ridden into Damascus with the Mongol army" [128]. Edward I's ineffective coordination with the Mongols ("Only the English contingent under the Lord Edwards... made contact with the Mongols" [129]; the failed junction of Hugh III of Cyprus with the Mongols in 1280 [130]. The participation of the Hospitallers in the Mongol offensive in 1281 [131] The arrival of a contigent of 800 Genoese in Baghdad in 1290 to build a fleet against the Mamluks [132] The seaborne operations of 1299 in attempts to coordinate with the Mongols [133]. The major Ruad expedition in 1300 to coordinate an offensive with the Mongols [134], described as "the high-water mark of Mongol-Latin relations" [135].	An alliance which was "stillborn", but author is specific about the numerous combined operations and attempts at coordination, from Bohemond's settlement and campaign with the Mongols in 1260, to a climax with the operations of 1300.
18. Prawer, Joshua	Attempts that failed. "The attempts of the crusaders to create an alliance with the Mongols failed." The Crusaders' Kingdom p.32	1972
19. Prawdin, Michael	Attempts that failed. "The failure of the attempt at an alliance"	1961	Actual collaboration between the Mongols and the Crusaders. "Two years later, Hulagu took Damascus with a Christian crusader Bohemond and the king of Armenia, Hetum I" [136].	Actual military collaboration.
20. Lebedel, Claude	No alliance	2004	Alliance of the Armenians and the Prince of Antioch with the Mongols. Claude Lebedel in Les Croisades describes the alliance of the Franks of Antioch and Tripoli with the Mongols: (in 1260) "the Frank barons refused an alliance with the Mongols, except for the Armenians and the Prince of Antioch and Tripoli".	Wrong: no alliance of the Frank barons, except for the alliance of the Prince of Antioch with the Mongols= The Prince of Antioch allied with the Mongols.
21. Clough/Garsoian	Possible allies, but didn't come together. "Despite the extreme cruelty of the new barbarian hordes, some western leaders saw in the still-heathen Mongols possible allies against Islam, and Christendom deluded itself with many tales about the legendary kingdom of Prester John. Missionaries traveled to the distant court of the khan hoping to convert him and win his aid, while the Latin attack against Islam continued unsuccessfully in the south." A History of the Western World: Ancient Times to 1715, 2nd ed. p.299	1964
22. Sinor, Denis	Possible, but didn't happen. "It is important to note that attempts to seek an alliance with the Mongols were made by princes of France or England..." History of the Crusades p.516 "The possibility of an alliance with the Mongols" p.519 [despite positive overtures, the] "policy of rapprochement was destined to fail" p.523 "Perhaps in the darkest moments of affliction Louis had the hopeful thought that the Mongols might wish to join forces with him against the common enemy" p.524 "The possibility of an alliance between the il-khans and the Franks was explored by both parties. ... Contacts between the two were quite frequent and aimed at establishing a coordination of eastern and western forces to counterbalance the formidable Mamluk threat...For a number of reasons which it cannot be our task to analyze here, the alliance between the il-khans and the West failed to become operative. Efforts by Berke and his successor Mongke Temur (1267-1280) were certainly instrumental in barring the il-khans from the Mediterranean world until such time as the collapse of Frank implantations in Outremer made any hope of cooperation between them and the il-khans illusory." "Mongols and the West" (in Journal of Asian History)[137]	1999		Actually describes an alliance that failed to become operative.
23. Turnbull, Steven	Possible, but didn't happen. "Christian kingdoms began to explore the possibilities of an alliance with the Mongols against the Muslim infidels." The Mongols p.8	1980	Actually describes an alliance that took the field. "One by one these Christian kingdoms began to consider the possibilities of an alliance with the Mongols against the Muslim infidels" p.8 [138] "This unholy alliance took the field in 1259" p.8 [139] "Their Christian allies joined them in a triomphal entry (in Damascus)" p.8 [140]	Wrong. Author is actually positive about an unholy alliance between the Christians and the Mongols, with combined operations in 1259-1260.
24. Burger, Glenn	Alliance refused. "The arrival of the Mongols in Persia in the middle of the century, and with it the possibility of a Western-Mongol alliance, provided a chance to break out of the strategic impasse that had always plagued Outremer: its dependence on constant infusions of European men and aid, and its uneven position against the forces of the sultans of Egypt. While the kingdom of Cilician Armenia under Hetoum I quickly responded to the potential offered by an alliance with the Mongols, the refusal of the Latin Christian states in the area to follow Hetoum's example and adapt to changing conditions by allying themselves with the new Mongol empire must stand as one of the saddest of the many failures of Outremer." A Lytell Chronicle xiii-xiv	1988
25. Phillips, J.R.	Said the Pope made no commitment to an alliance. "The pope expressed his pleasure at Abaka's letter, and promised that any future crusading army would seek the active co-operation of the Mongols. Yet, despite the fact that a crusade was actively being planned, Gregory X's reply fell short of a definite commitment to an alliance." The Medieval Expansion of Europe 122	1988	Actually mentions that there was "some kind of alliance or collaboration" between the Mongols and Europe throughout the second half of the 13th century [141]. In 1260 Bohemond VI "openly assisted the Mongol invasion" [142]. In 1271 the Mongols and the English Crusaders "combined forces" but these were "insufficient to achieve anything significant" [143]. Philip IV of France committed to Arghun that "if the armies of the Ilkhan go to war against Egypt, we too shall set out from here to go to war and to attack in a common operation" [144]. Edward I of England also expressed his willingness to take part in a joint operation [145]	Wrong. Author is actually specific that there was "some kind of alliance or collaboration" between the Mongols and Europe throughout the second half of the 13th century, which led to some combined operations.
26. Cahen, Claude	Said an alliance was sought but did not occur. "The Il-khanid state...encompassed... rather good diplomatic relations with the Byzantine state in common opposition to the Golden Horde and the Mamluks, and also with the western Christans specifically against the Mamluks." "Mongols and the Near East" (in Setton's Crusades) p.719 [146] "The Mongols now sought an alliance which would produce a concerted effort by the Christians of Europe and themselves against the Mamluks." 722-723	1970
27. Nersessian, Sirarpie Der	Alliance did not occur. "Hetoum tried to win the Latin princes over to the idea of a Christian-Mongol alliance, but could convince only Bohemond VI of Antioch" "The Kingdom of Cilician Armenia" (in Setton's Crusades)[147] p.653 "Leon III believed, as his father had, in a Mongol-Christian alliance which would save the Holy Land; he made repeated pleas to the western powers; Abagha also sent envoys to the popes and to Edward I of England, without any success." 654	1969		Actually positive that a Christian-Mongol alliance was joined by Bohemond VI of Antioch, despite later failures by Abagha.
28. Atwood	Alliance was not achieved. "Despite numerous envoys and the obvious logic of an alliance against mutual enemies, the papacy and the Crusaders never achieved the often-proposed alliance against Islam." Encyclopedia of Mongolia and the Mongol Empire p.583	2004
29. Edbury, Peter	Attempted ineffectually to join forces. "The Cypriots had attempted -- ineffectually it is true -- to join forces with the Mongols in their invasions of Syria in 1299 and 1301, and a Cyprus-based Templar force had briefly reoccupied the island of Ruad near Tortosa in 1301-1302. But after 1303 there were no more Mongol campaigns into Syria, and the idea that the Holy Land might be recovered for Christendom by the Ilkhans of Persia, who in any case by now had adopted Islam, ceased to be taken seriously." "Christians and Muslims in the Eastern Mediterranean", The New Cambridge Medieval History, Vol. VI p.871	2000	Actually describes the Franks and the Mongols as "allies", who were unsuccessful at coordinating operations. Initial fear of a Franco-Mongol alliance: "The sultan was afraid that St Louis' second crusade would come to the East, and that there could be a Franco-Mongol alliance against him". Edbury further describes the Franks and the Mongols as allies who engaged into combined operations, that were unsuccessful: "In 1269 and 1271, the Il-Khan had failed to send out enough support, and in 1280, it was the Christians who let down their allies" ( p.104). Under Edward I, the Mongols staged an attack to coincide with the Frank offensive during the Crusade of Edward I ("The Mongols staged an attack on Mamluk territory to coincide with Edward's presence in the east, but there was no effective cooperation between the Mongols and Christians").	Actually describes the Franks and the Mongols as "allies", who were unsuccessful at coordinating operations.
30. Mantran, Robert	Attempted unsuccessfully "A more far-seeing policy might have enabled the Franks, by seeking an alliance with the Mongols sooner than they did (Louis IX attempted one unsuccessfully), to keep all or some of their positions in Syria and Palestine." "A Turkish or Mongolian Islam" in The Cambridge Illustrated History of the Middle Ages: 1250-1520 (trans. from French: Le Moyen Age. 3. Le Temps des Crises 1250-1520) p.258	1983
31. Prestwich, Michael	Absence of the hoped-for alliance. "The prospects for the crusade were undoubtedly diminished in the absence of the hoped-for Mongol alliance." Edward I, p.131
32. Powell, James	Potential that was rejected/pursued. "Mongke agreed to an alliance as long as Louis became his vassal, a condition the French king naturally rejected. Still, as the Mongol advances on Islam continued, the potential for a Christian-Mongol alliance remained and was later pursued by Lord Edward I of England." Chapter 7 in Crusades: The Illustrated History, Madden, Thomas (ed.) p.159	2004
33. Robinson, John J.	No alliance. "Having failed to achieve their mission at the council [of Lyon], the Mongol envoys stayed behind in Europe to visit some of the secular rulers and make direct appeals for alliances to fight the Muslims, but they finally returned home to report to the ilkhan that there would be no alliance with a Christian Crusade." Dungeon, Fire and Sword: The Knights Templar in the Crusades p.372 "The one substantial fighting force that might be sought as an ally was that of the Latin Christians of the Crusader states, including the military orders. Abaga sent ambassadors to Acre. The Mongol envoys explained to the barons and grand masters that during the following year, 1281, the ilkhan Abaga planned to send all his forces, a mighty army of one hundred thousand men, into Syria with the final objective of the conquest of Egypt. In exchange for the assistance of the Crusaders with men and military supplies, Abaga would guarantee that their rewards would include all of the original kingdom of Jerusalem. Every object of the crusading desire would be fulfilled. The Latin Christians still had no central authority and no central voice. They had been so splintered by internal squabbles that they could not address the Mongol proposals.... Abaga's ambassadors went back to him frustrated and confused, but quite certain that the ilkhan could expect no help from the Crusaders." p.381	1991
34. Andrea, Alfred	all proposals failed. "During the latter half of the thirteenth century, several popes and King Louis IX of France unsuccessfully sought to convert the Mongols, whom they mistakenly called the Tartars, to Latin Christianity and to enlist them as allies in the struggle against Islam. Likewise, during the late thirteenth century, several Mongol leaders sought military alliances with various Western leaders against the Mamluks, but all proposals failed." Encyclopedia of the Crusades p.218	2003
35. Amitai-Preiss, Reuven	Unsuccessful in achieving the goal of a common venture. "…the fact is that through his reign Abagha sent at least four embassies to the West. Each visited more than one court, including that of the Pope, and carried a letter calling for a joint anti-Muslim campaign. This phenomenon, perhaps more than any other, indicates the importance which Abagha attributed to the war with the Mamluks, and the extent to which he wanted to extend his sway into Syria and perhaps beyond. Most of his successors shared these goals, and in order to realize them they attempted, like him, to interest the Christian West in a common venture. They were all equally unsuccessful in achieving this goal. "	1995	Actually describes a "budding alliance", marqued by the "unequivocal alliance of Bohemond VI", that led to attempts at a common strategy [148]. An "unequivocal pro-Mongol alliance" maintained by Bohemond VI [149]. A "Latin-Ilkhanid alliance" ("The Latin-Ilkhanid alliance was much less equivocal than Saunders would have us believe" [150]). He also writes about the "Mongol-Frankish rapprochement" (Mamluk perceptions of the Mongol-Frankish rapprochement, MHR 7 (1992), p.50-65 [151])	A "budding alliance" and "unequivocal pro-Mongol alliance by Bohemond VI, but inability to achieve the goal of conquering Syria through a common venture.

Armenian-Mongol alliance

Historian	Opinion	Year	Type of analysis
Mesrob K. Krikorian	"The Armenian and Mongol allied armies invaded Syria and conquered Aleppo" [152]	1978	Historian
Kevin Shillington	Describes the Mongols allies in Cilicia: "The Mongols allies in Cilicia or Lesser Armenia" [153]	2005	Crusades historian
Vahan M. Kurkjian	Describes the "the allied Mongol and Armenian armies", and the fact that the Armenians were "treated as allies" by the Mongols [154]	2008	Crusades historian
Milo Kearney	Hulegu was allied with Christian Armenia [155]	2004	Crusades historian
Tomothy M. May	"The Mongols' one remaining ally Cilicia" [156]		Crusades historian
The New Cambridge Medieval History	"Cilician Armenia, the feable ally of the Mongols" [157].		Reference work
Claude Mutafian	Alliance of Bohemond VI and the Armenians with the Mongols. Combined offensive in 1299-1303. The end of the Armeno-Mongol alliance thereafter. "Hethoum is intimately linked to this campaign (in Syria), as when as his son-on-law Bohemond VI of Antioch, whom he convinces to enter into the Alliance" (La Cilicie au carrefour des Empires, Claude Mutafian, ISBN 2251326308, 1988, p.430). "This Mongol alliance allows Antioch to recover the harbour of Lattakia, while Hethoum receives from his suzerain Behesni and Maracha" (p.431). "The end of the Armeno-Mongol alliance" (p.465)	1988	Historian of Armenia

Grousset "The Armenian Kingdom of Cilicia, client and close ally of the Mongols" [158]
The Cambridge history of Islam "The Armenian-Mongol alliance, however, was a reality of some importance" [159]
"The Mongol alliance was initially of great benefit to Cilicia and to the Mongols" [160]

Byzantine-Mongol alliance

Historian	Opinion	Year	Type of analysis
Averil Cameron	Description of the Byzantine alliance with the Mongol, with marriage agreement [161]	2006	Historian
Reuven Amitai-Preiss	Close alliance. ("If anything, the Byzantine Empire was more closely allied with the Persian Mongols than with their cousins in the Kipchaq steppe" [162]). Evidence of a Byzantine-Mongol alliance ("There is some evidence in 1267-68 of a Mongol-Byzantine alliance against the Mamluks, which was to receive aid from James I, king of Aragon" [163])	1995	Historian
Phillips, J.R.S.	"The Byzantine emperor was still in alliance with the Mongols [164])		Crusades historian

Russian-Mongol alliance

Historian	Opinion	Year	Type of analysis
Charles J. Halperin	"Moscow had allied itself with the Mongols when the Golden Horde was strongest and then seized more autonomy when the Horde faltered." [165]	1987	Historian

Trebizond

"Trebizond was spared their invasion but the emperor Manuel had to declare

himself a vassal of the Mongol empire" E.J. Brill's first encyclopaedia of Islam, 1913-1936, p. 661

"The emperor of Trebizond made a speedy peace with them and,on condition of

paying an annual tribute,became a Mongol vassal." [166]

"The Emperor of Trebizond, realizing the impossibility of righting the Mongols, made a speedy peace and became a Mongol vassal" History of the Byzantine Empire, 324-1453 Vol 2, A. A. Vasiliev [167]

More facts

The three envoys sent by Edward I of England to Hulagu were Reginald Russel, Godfrey Welles and John Parker [168].
Philip IV of France committed to Arghun that "if the armies of the Ilkhan go to war against Egypt, we too shall set out from here to go to war and to attack in a common operation". [169]
Edward I of England also expressed his willingness to take part in a joint operation [170]
"The Mongol alliance was particularly advocated by the Genoese (...) but opposed by the Venetians" [171]
"In military and demographic terms, Antioch was the most important of the Frankish states in the north." [172]
In 1234, Muslim ambassadors ("ex parte universitatis Orientalium") went to the court of the French and English kings to ask for help against the Mongols [173].
In 1269, two embassies to the French court, one from the Sultan of Egypt, the other from the Ilkhan, encountered in a central public square in Genoa and fought with each other [174].
Raymond Lulle wrote in 1285-86 a dialogue between a "Tartar" and a Christian (Liber Tartari et Christiani), in which the Tartar is presented as a sage, preoccupied with the salvation of his soul and the well-being of the others, and who ultimately converts to Christianism [175].
An embassy from Charles of Anjou reached Cairo in 1264 [176].
Battle of Gaza, when the Mamluks under Qutuz retook the city from the Mongols: "Qutuz led his troops to Gaza where they overwhelmed the small Mongol garisson" [177].
"In the autumn of 1244, Bohemund V of Antioch-Tripoli had made a well-publicized appeal to Frederick II for help against a Mongol army menacing Syria" [178]
Bohemond VI summoned to surrender to the Mongols in 1244 [179]
Capture of Nablus by Hulagu [180]
Occupation of Jerusalem: "1300: Mongols occupy Jerusalem briefly" [181], "After a brief and largely symbolic occupation of Jerusalem, Ghazan withdrew to Persia" [182]