The Split between Sunni Seljuk Turks and the Shi’ah Fatimids of Egypt (Edexcel A-Level History): Revision Notes
The Split between Sunni Seljuk Turks and the Shi'ah Fatimids of Egypt
Introduction to Muslim disunity before the First Crusade
In the 11th century, the Islamic world was deeply divided between two rival religious traditions: Sunni and Shi'ah Islam. This fundamental split had created competing dynasties, each claiming legitimate authority over the Muslim world. When crusader armies arrived in Asia Minor in 1097, they encountered a fractured Muslim world that had been weakened by centuries of internal conflict. This disunity prevented an effective Muslim response and allowed the crusaders to march south and capture Jerusalem in 1099.
The two main groups whose rivalry created this weakness were:
- The Shi'ah Fatimids based in Egypt
- The Sunni Seljuk Turks who controlled much of Syria and Palestine
Understanding this religious and political division is essential for explaining why the Muslim opposition to the First Crusade failed. The internal conflicts between Sunni and Shi'ah powers proved more significant than the external crusader threat.
The Shi'ah Fatimids
Religious beliefs and political structure
Shi'ah Muslims held the belief that legitimate political and religious authority descended directly from the Prophet Muhammad through his daughter Fatimah and son-in-law Ali. These descendants were known as imams. Different Shi'ah groups disagreed about which line of descent was legitimate and where it ended, but the Fatimid dynasty claimed continuous descent from Ali, giving them the right to rule with his authority.
The head of the Fatimid state was called a caliph, though this was largely a symbolic position. Real power lay in the hands of the vizier, who managed the day-to-day government.
Key term: Caliph - the supreme religious and political leader in Islam; the Fatimids and Sunnis had different views on who could legitimately hold this title.
Key term: Vizier - the chief minister who ran the government on behalf of the caliph.
Fatimid territories and decline
By 969, the Fatimids had established control over Egypt and built an empire that stretched across Syria and Palestine until the 1060s. However, over the following decades, they lost most of their northern territories. By 1095, their authority outside Egypt was limited to just three coastal cities:
- Tyre
- Sidon
- Acre
This reduction in power was partly due to the efforts of the Egyptian vizier Badr al-Jamali, who fought to maintain some Fatimid presence outside Egypt despite facing pressure from rival Muslim groups. Essentially, the once-expansive Fatimid Empire had become confined primarily to Egypt by the time of the First Crusade.
The Sunni Seljuk Turks
Religious beliefs and governance
The Sunni tradition followed a different principle of governance. Sunni Muslims believed that government should operate according to:
- Sunna: the customs and practices of the Prophet Muhammad
- Shari'a: the main body of Islamic law that provided legal and moral guidance
Key term: Sunna - literally meaning 'habitual practice', this refers to the collection of legal and social customs followed by the Sunni Islamic community.
Key term: Shari'a - literally meaning 'the path leading to the watering place', this is the main body of Islamic law providing instruction on how to live as a Muslim.
The Sunni world was led by a caliph, with sultans beneath him who had the power to enforce law based on Sunna and Shari'a. The most powerful Sunni caliph belonged to the Abbasid dynasty based in Baghdad.
Key term: Sultan - the ruler of a sultanate, equivalent in status to a king with a large kingdom in western Europe.
The rise of Seljuk power
The Seljuk Turks were originally nomadic people from the steppes around the Aral Sea. After 1059, they became the real power behind the Abbasid caliphate, reducing the Abbasid caliph to a puppet ruler. The Seljuks established a vast sultanate covering:
- Parts of Iran and Iraq
- Syria and Palestine
- Cilicia and Anatolia
The growth of Seljuk power can be traced through key events:
1037 - Seljuk, leader of a nomadic Turkish tribe, took control of Khorassan, establishing the foundation of Seljuk power.
1059 - Tughrul, grandson of Seljuk, gained control of Iraq and created a powerful sultanate with the Abbasid caliph as a figurehead.
1065 - Alp Arslan, Tughrul's nephew, captured Ani, the former capital of the Armenian kingdom, expanding Seljuk territory westward.
1071 - Two crucial developments occurred:
- Alp Arslan defeated the Byzantine emperor at the Battle of Manzikert, establishing Seljuk control over much of Asia Minor
- Alp Arslan extended his overlordship into Syria and Palestine, taking Aleppo and forcing Jerusalem to capitulate
The Battle of Manzikert in 1071 was a turning point that established Seljuk dominance in Asia Minor and opened the way for Turkish expansion westward into Byzantine territory.
1072 - Malik Shah, son of Alp Arslan, became sultan and ruled a vast Seljuk empire in the name of the Abbasid caliph.
1078 - Suleiman Ibn Kutulmus took control of Nicaea, which became the capital of Seljuk power in Asia Minor.
c1080 - The sultanate of Rum was established in Anatolia under a branch of the Seljuk family, first ruled by Suleiman Ibn Kutulmus and then by his son, Kilij Arslan.
1084 - Antioch fell to the Seljuks, marking the height of their imperial power.
Critical weaknesses in 1095
The impact of succession crises
The Seljuk Turks and Fatimids might have presented a united front against the crusaders if the strong leadership of Malik Shah had continued and if the Fatimids had either cooperated or remained neutral. However, the deaths of several key figures in the 1090s completely transformed the political landscape of the Muslim world.
1092 - Two devastating losses occurred:
- Malik Shah's vizier, Nizam al-Mulk, was murdered
- Malik Shah himself died just one month later
- These deaths triggered a succession crisis that crippled the Seljuk Empire
1094 - The Fatimid world also experienced crisis:
- The Egyptian vizier Badr al-Jamali died
- The Fatimid caliph al-Mustansir died shortly afterwards
- This triggered a succession crisis among the Fatimids as well
Different consequences for Fatimids and Seljuks
The Fatimids lost a capable leader in Badr al-Jamali, who had been responsible for their resurgence in the 1080s. His death temporarily stopped Fatimid expansion into Palestine, but after a few years, the political situation in Egypt stabilised.
Importantly, the Fatimids then resumed their attacks against the Seljuk Turks and recaptured Jerusalem in 1098. This action demonstrated clearly that the Fatimids would not support or cooperate with the Seljuks. Instead, they chose to exploit the crusader attacks for their own territorial gain, attacking Seljuk-held territories while the Seljuks were preoccupied with the crusaders.
The Fatimid recapture of Jerusalem in 1098 was a clear demonstration that Muslim rivalry was stronger than Muslim unity against the crusaders. The Fatimids prioritised territorial gains against their Seljuk rivals over forming a united front against the Christian invaders.
In stark contrast, Malik Shah's death had a profound and long-lasting effect on the Seljuk Turks. They had lost an exceptionally strong ruler, and his empire began to fragment into rival territories ruled by different atabegs (military governors). The Seljuk political situation faced threats from multiple directions:
- External threats from the Fatimids and crusaders
- Internal threats from their own competing rulers
Key term: Atabeg - a military ruler similar to a general in the West; an atabeg could lead an army and rule a city or territory.
The fragmentation of Seljuk power
The internal divisions that emerged after Malik Shah's death were particularly damaging. Several conflicts broke out:
Inheritance disputes:
- Malik Shah left Aleppo to his nephew Ridwan, who was deeply unpopular with the local population
- Ridwan's brother Duqaq received Damascus and actively opposed Ridwan's attempts to expand his territory in Syria
- The Atabeg of Mosul threatened Ridwan's control of Aleppo, seeking to extend his own power over northern Syria
Competing alliances:
- The emir of Antioch joined Duqaq of Damascus in an alliance against Ridwan of Aleppo
- Malik Shah's brother, who ruled Syria, was killed by his own nephew in the fighting that followed
Key term: Emir - the Islamic equivalent of a lord; emirs held some independence but received their power from a sultan or caliph. They typically ruled over cities and commanded armies.
Territorial fragmentation:
- Homs came under the control of a Turk called Janah al-Dawla
- Tripoli was governed by a group called the Qadis
- Jerusalem was ruled by the Artugids
Key term: Artugid - a member of a tribe of Turks from eastern Anatolia and Iraq, founded by Artug. Though theoretically under Seljuk control, they often acted independently.
This disintegration of centralised Seljuk power had direct consequences for the crusades. It explains why the Fatimids were able to recapture Jerusalem in 1098 and why Muslim counter-attacks against the crusaders took so long to organise and ultimately proved ineffective. The Muslim rulers were simply too divided among themselves to mount a coordinated defence.
Evidence of Muslim disunity
The Muslim writer al-Sulami wrote a treatise on holy war around 1105, attempting to call for a jihad against the Franks (though his call was unsuccessful). In his work, he argued that disunity had fatally weakened Muslim Syria and led to devastating losses during the First Crusade:
When the reports confirmed for them that Syria suffered from the disagreements of its masters and its rulers' being unaware of its deficiencies and needs, they confirmed their resolution to set out for it, and Jerusalem was their dearest wish... They looked out over Syria, on separated kingdoms, disunited hearts and differing views linked with hidden resentment.
Al-Sulami described how the crusaders saw the Muslim world divided into:
- Separated kingdoms
- Disunited hearts
- Differing views
- Hidden resentment
He lamented that the Muslims were "sluggish" in responding to the crusader threat and "reluctant to engage in combat", allowing the enemy to conquer far more than they had initially hoped. Al-Sulami noted that Muslim "abstinence from opposing them" convinced the crusaders that they could conquer the entire region.
This contemporary source provides powerful evidence that Muslims at the time recognised that their internal divisions were the primary reason for their failure to resist the First Crusade effectively. Al-Sulami's testimony from 1105 confirms that disunity, not military weakness, was the critical factor.
The significance of religious division
The split between Sunni and Shi'ah Islam was not merely a religious disagreement—it had profound political and military consequences. The theological dispute about legitimate succession from Muhammad translated into:
Political rivalry: The Fatimids and Seljuks both claimed to be the rightful leaders of the Islamic world, making cooperation virtually impossible.
Territorial competition: Rather than unite against the crusaders, the Fatimids saw the crusader invasion as an opportunity to reclaim territory from their Seljuk rivals, as demonstrated by their recapture of Jerusalem in 1098.
Strategic weakness: The crusaders were able to exploit the divisions between Muslim powers, essentially facing multiple smaller enemies rather than one united force.
Delayed response: Even when individual Muslim rulers recognised the crusader threat, they could not organise an effective coalition response due to mutual suspicion and competing interests.
This religious and political fragmentation of the Muslim world in 1095 was therefore a critical factor in explaining the success of the First Crusade and the establishment of crusader states in the Levant.
Remember!
Key Points to Remember:
-
Islam was divided into two rival traditions: Sunni Muslims (following Sunna and Shari'a) and Shi'ah Muslims (following the line of descent from Muhammad through Ali) competed for control of the Muslim world.
-
The Shi'ah Fatimids controlled Egypt and claimed legitimate authority through descent from Muhammad, but by 1095 they had lost most of their territories in Syria and Palestine to the Seljuk Turks.
-
The Sunni Seljuk Turks had built a vast empire by 1084 under strong leaders like Alp Arslan and Malik Shah, but this empire rapidly fragmented after Malik Shah's death in 1092.
-
Succession crises in the 1090s devastated both Muslim powers: the deaths of Malik Shah (1092) and al-Mustansir (1094) created political chaos that prevented effective resistance to the crusaders.
-
Internal Muslim divisions were more important than the crusader threat: The Fatimids exploited Seljuk weakness to recapture Jerusalem in 1098 rather than unite against the common enemy, demonstrating that rivalry between Muslim powers undermined any coordinated defence.