and its inhabitants came out to him seeking safe-conduct and stipulating certain conditions (1). He refused to grant their request, sent them back disappointed, and persisted in the siege. By Allah’s might, power, support, and victory, he captured the city on Saturday, the fourteenth of Ramadan (2). He took from it abundant spoils, bestowed generous sums upon the emirs, and found within its walls a great multitude of Muslim captives from Aleppo—all of this accomplished in roughly four days.
The Frankish lord (3) of Antioch—who was also lord of Tripoli—had been among the fiercest in harming the Muslims when the Mongols seized Aleppo and its people fled. Allah, exalted is He, exacted vengeance upon him through the man He raised up as a champion of Islam, one who crushed and shattered the cross; to Allah belong all praise (4) and favor. News of the victory arrived with the royal couriers, and the glad tidings were answered by jubilant proclamations from the victorious citadel.
When the people of Baghras (5) learned that the Sultan was on his way to them, they requested that he dispatch someone to receive their fortress. Accordingly, on the thirteenth of Ramadan he sent his majordomo, Emir Aq Sunqur al-Farqani (6), who took possession of it; in the same manner they also assumed control of several great strongholds (7) and numerous castles.
The Sultan then returned, divinely supported and triumphant, and entered Damascus on the twenty-seventh of Ramadan of that year amidst immense splendor and awe. The city had been adorned for his arrival, and the drums of glad tidings were beaten in celebration of Islam’s victory over the vile unbelievers.
Yet he had resolved to seize many lands (8)—villages and orchards still held by their owners—on the pretext (9) that the Mongols had once taken them and that he had subsequently wrested them back (10). Some Hanafi jurists issued him a legal opinion to that effect, reasoning that if unbelievers take possession of Muslim property it becomes theirs, and when it is recovered it is not returned to its original owners. This question is well known, and scholars hold two opinions concerning it: