The Crusades of the Middle Ages are generally not a glorious story. First, there is the obvious fact that these alleged religious wars were mostly nothing more than bloodthirsty raids without much religious content and their consequences still overshadow Christian-Muslim relations today. Apart from that, the Crusades stand out because of another fact:They were mostly incredibly unsuccessful! The first crusade may have led to the brief conquest of Jerusalem in the late 11th century. The third left us heroic tales of Richard the Lionheart and Saladin. Apart from that, the history of the Crusades is a history of mishaps. Here are my top 3!
1 | The Third Crusade and Death of Barbarossa
Let's start with the most famous crusade of all - the third of 1189. To this day it is the crusade that has remained most prominent in the public eye. After all, it's teeming with legendary heroes! Richard the Lionheart is heading towards Jerusalem in the third crusade, Philip of France did the same and Emperor Friedrich Barbarossa was also part of the party. On the other side of the conflict we find Sultan Saladin, the most well-known Muslim actor in the entire history of the Crusades. A top-class ensemble! The fact that half the high nobility of Western Europe took part does not mean that the crusade was particularly successful. In fact, it was quite sobering.
Of course, that didn't just begin with the third edition either. The second crusade, forty years earlier, was also a single failure, even if it did not stick so much in the collective memory. In any case, he was unable to prevent the Muslim Seljuks from gaining strength in the Holy Land. At this point I don't even want to talk about earlier failed crusade attempts like the people's crusade of 1096. The third, from 1189, was supposed to change everything for the better. Shortly before, Saladin had finally conquered the city of Jerusalem and the pope set out to reverse this as quickly as possible with the help of the new crusade.
A little glorious ending
Richard the Lionheart and Philip of France, unlike previous Crusades, this time (and wisely) set out for Palestine by sea. The Roman-German Emperor Friedrich Barbarossa, on the other hand, chose the (by now one could say) traditional route overland. This arduous path led him from Regensburg down the Danube, across the Balkans via Constantinople and Anatolia. And although Barbarossa and his troops started in May 1189, a good year before the kings of England and France, they did not meet their allies in the Holy Land until October of the following year. Friedrich Barbarossa himself was no longer there. He famously drowned while swimming along the way. Apparently he wanted to treat himself to a cool dip in the Saleph River in Anatolia, as Alexander the Great is said to have done in a similar place. We don't know exactly, but the sudden temperature difference probably resulted in a heart attack for Friedrich, who is almost 70 years old.
But he didn't miss too much anyway. Philip of France also retired home shortly thereafter to attend to more important dynastic matters. Richard the Lionheart, on the other hand, was ultimately only able to negotiate a peace treaty with Saladin due to a lack of military successes. Instead of making Jerusalem Christian again, Saladin now guaranteed Christian pilgrims safe passage into the city. Needless to say, this "deal" was still sold as a big win in the West. And speaking of victory:On the way back, Richard the Lionheart was taken prisoner by the Austrians and had to be ransomed at great expense. Glorious through and through, then, this Third Crusade.
2 | The Fourth Crusade and Fall of Constantinople
With a look at the Crusades up to that point, we can conclude around the turn of the century 1200:With the exception of the very first Crusade, these undertakings had not exactly been successful. The last attempt even ended with the death of the Holy Roman Emperor and the arrest of the King of England on his way home, while Jerusalem remained under Muslim control... Considering this, it may seem almost impossible but:It was only going to get worse. The infamous Fourth Crusade followed in the early 13th century, and it really was the biggest Oops of all. The Crusaders didn't even come close to the Holy Land or any Muslim forces. Instead, the greatest city in Christendom fell...
The problems with the venture actually began with the proclamation of the crusade. Pope Innocent III – not without reason a notorious pope of the Middle Ages – proclaimed him without recognizable reason. There had not been a major defeat against Muslim troops before, and otherwise little had happened in Palestine since the last crusade. Despite everything, there were enough knights this time who were willing to go east in the name of the Christians. However, these were not the great kings of Western Europe, but smaller nobles, especially from northern France. In doing so, Innocent wanted to repeat the tactics of the first crusade a hundred years earlier. After all, one had had mixed experiences with Richard the Lionheart and above all with Friedrich Barbarossa. This time, however, the crusaders should not take the arduous land route, but set off by ship towards the Levant. So they turned to the only power in Europe that could provide a fleet of this size.
Venice and the noble motifs
It was clear:the city republic of Venice had to ensure that the more than 30,000 crusaders were transported across the sea. After agreeing on a handsome payment with the Serenissima, Egypt was also set as the destination of the new crusade. This was intended to shake the center of power of the Ayyubid dynasty before continuing to Jerusalem. The problem is that neither the pope nor the crusaders actually had the money to pay the Republic of Venice for their work. So the problem started where so many problems start:with dear money. But Venice had an alternative proposal. The crusader army could help the city on the way, a few .... less godly… goals to conquer. Then you didn't want to take the money too seriously. While most of the participating fighters were unaware, the Venetian and Crusader leadership found a compromise on the matter. The fourth crusade thus began in October 1202 and, to everyone's surprise, after just a few days it reached its first destination:the coastal town of Zara (today's Zadar). It was besieged and taken for Venice - even though it belonged to the Christian Kingdom of Hungary. The Pope was enraged and then excommunicated the entire city republic. But it should only be the beginning.
In the meantime, the leaders of the "crusade" had also received news from Byzantium. At the same time, a succession conflict over the imperial crown was smoldering there, and the crusader army – still in dire financial straits – saw its opportunity. So they drove to the gates of Constantinople to support Prince Alexios against his uncle and reigning emperor of the same name (yes, I know ...). They succeeded in overthrowing it. However, Alexios (the younger one) was not paid for the most part even weeks later. So the Venetians and their crusader army had no choice... They stormed Constantinople, taking the opportunity to crush the Byzantine Empire and built a "Latin Kingdom" instead. Although this only lasted 50 years, Byzantium was never able to fully recover from the blow. Oh yes:the crusader army never got to see Egypt or even Jerusalem.
3 | All Crusades After
I have to admit quite frankly:This is where my “Top 3 biggest Crusade mishaps” topic breaks down a bit. No mishap could be greater than that of the Fourth Crusade at Constantinople! And while the direct link from the events of 1204 to Byzantium's defeat by the Ottomans 250 years later is too simplistic, the consequences of this "slip" can hardly be overestimated. Therefore, the third item on this top 3 list is meant to be a rallying point. It is dedicated to all Crusades since then. Because they were all more or less brilliant mishaps and achieved next to nothing.
The Fifth Crusade according to Damiette
Only a few years after the events in Constantinople, Pope Innocent started a new attempt in 1217. This time, his call was followed by two campaigns. On the one hand, Frederick II fought his way towards Jerusalem, on the other hand, fighting broke out in Egypt, as had been planned 15 years earlier. It was there that the crusader armies of the Fifth Crusade covered themselves with plenty of glory. For four months they besieged the fortified city of Damietta at the mouth of the Nile, only to quarrel for several months immediately after the victory as to who owned the city. This gave the opposing armies time to regroup and crush the Crusaders the following year.
The Sixth Crusade after... Damietta?
It took a few decades, but in the middle of the 13th century a new attempt followed:crusade number six (at least in the German census – elsewhere the march to Damiette and the crusade of Frederick II are counted as two separate crusades and we're already there number seven). Apart from that, there was little new. In the spring of 1249, Damiette fell to the crusaders again, they again waited too long to pursue the retreating defenders, besieged the city of al-Mansura after a few partial successes in the spring of 1250 and finally failed because of the better-supplied troops of the Ayyubid dynasty.
The Seventh Crusade to Tunisia
And then there was the Seventh Crusade to Tunisia. It is the last crusade of the classical census (although, as you can see, this is quite subjective and the word crusade did not exist at the time anyway) and took place in 1270. This seventh edition was led by the French King Louis IX. His crusaders besieged Tunis right from the start, failed after a short time and Ludwig died. There really isn't much more that needs to be said.
The story of a crazy idea
So what can be said about the Crusades of the Middle Ages? So. All in all, they were a silly idea. For almost 200 years (and even longer in parts of the world) the idea of wresting Jerusalem and all of the Holy Land from the Muslims lived on in Western Europe. But the idea was never realistic. The first crusade was the closest thing to come, and with the Kingdom of Jerusalem and other crusader states, a “Latin” presence could actually be established in the Middle East. The various Muslim dynasties emerged from this, however, only superficially weakened, which was then also shown by the repeated reconquests. Meanwhile, the Crusades served one purpose above all:They poisoned neighborly relations and, in the process, weakened Byzantium - which really couldn't have been in the interest of Western Europeans. And who won in the end? Plot twist! The Mongols. But that's another story.