'A handbook of Syria (including Palestine). London: Naval Staff Intelligence Department, June 1919' [‎59r] (122/738)

MILITARY HISTORY
111
periods). Invaders of Palestine coming from Damascus or
the north have usually fought their battles in the plain of
Esdraelon (Merj ibn ‘Amir). The decisive battle of Hattln,
on the hills above the plain, was an exception; the choice
of site was then part of Saladin’s plan for forcing the Latins
to an engagement. There are three gates of entrance into
Palestine from Damascus, (a) by Baniyas, (6) across the
Jordan, south of Lake Huleh, (c) across the Jordan, south
of Lake Tiberias. These also determine the routes by which
an army from Palestine or Egypt advances against Damascus.
The chosen battle-ground of the army of Damascus against an
enemy approaching by either of the southern routes was
frequently Merj es-Suffar, between Kisweh and Sanamein,
a day’s march south of Damascus. The invaders of Palestine
from Egypt were usually met just on the border at Rafah
(near Khan Yunus) or towards Gaza. When an Egyptian
garrison held Gaza or Ascalon, the country northwards as far
as Ramleh and Jaffa was the scene of frequent battles (cru
sading period). Occasionally armies met farther north where
the spurs of Carmel join the central hills (Thothmes III,
Pharaoh Necho). It seems to have been unusual for invaders
to enter the hill country of Judah from the Philistine plain.
If they did so, a battle might have to be fought in one of the
valleys leading towards Jerusalem (Ajnadein, a. d. 634).
The weapons and military methods and organization of
Syrian wars are necessarily those of the foreign powers who
have ruled and fought in Syria. They are commented on in
each successive period. The development of equipment and
tactics is always affected by collision with new enemies. This
finds striking illustration in the case of the Arabs, who adopted
and adapted the principles and practice of Greek warfare when
they became a world power. As early as the ninth century
they were also influenced by Turkish models and leadership.
It is wrong to describe the tactics of the Moslem armies which
fought with the Byzantines and the Crusaders in terms of
the warfare of the Arabs of the desert. The ‘ oriental ’ method
of fighting in mediaeval times and later was Turkish rather