CHRISTENDOM AND ISLAM 2OJ
the Orders most weakened the Latins was in pursuing
opposing policies. As the most experienced warriors of the
East they exercised a considerable influence on the course of
nearly every Crusade, and yet they often adopted entirely
different views. Sometimes the leaders of the Temple were
sincere in emphasising the advantage to be gained through
supporting a certain Moslem prince, but frequently the
Templars would favour a particular line of action for no
more reason than because the Hospital opposed it. The
Crusade of Edward I (when Prince Edward) was almost
ruined because the Temple insisted on supporting the
Damascenes while the Hospital lent its aid to the Egyptians.
During most of the Latin occupation, however, both
Orders were agreed that the way to Palestine lay through
Egypt. The Temple had refused to take part in Amalric's
third and most disastrous expedition to Egypt, and the
Hospital had taken the side of Egypt against Damascus on
several occasions 5 but in general the two Orders were always
enthusiastic for an attack on Cairo. Even when they were
pursuing a policy of peace in Syria, they enthusiastically
supported descents on Egypt. They were not alone in the
opinion that the safe custody of the Holy Land was
impossible until Egypt had been crushed 5 for almost every
Christian military leader of the thirteenth century shared
that view. Especially after Saladin had united Egypt and
Moslem Syria under one rule, the Christians felt that
Jerusalem could never be secure until Egypt was defeated.
Egypt with its fabled wealth was an unfailing lure, and
the Templars and the Hospitallers longed to march into
Cairo as conquerors and enrich themselves with its vast
treasures. But though the policy of winning Jerusalem by
invading Egypt was to some extent due to a passion for spoil,
the military leaders were correct in their belief that Egypt
must be crushed if Jerusalem were to be the permanent
possession of the Christians. The city of Jerusalem was