why was the first crusade successful? Flashcards
what are 4 reasons for why the first crusade was successful?
- Unity, Leadership, & Military Skill
- Religious Zeal
- Aid of Byzantium
- Disunity of Muslims
what is a limitation to the theory that it was the unity and leadership of the crusaders that meant they were successful?
leaders were determined to head their own armies and do jointly only what was agreed jointly
give an example of how the unity of the crusaders did not mean they were successful
- it was luck only that when the leaders were at their most divided, after the fall of antioch, the islamic world was demoralised and unable to exploit their problems, so they were able to press on to jerusalem
- August 1098-Jan 1099 Raymond vs. Bohemond following the death of Adhemar argued over possession of Antioch
- Tancred and Baldwin’s rivalry over Cilicia
- Disunity and rivalry over the rulership of Jerusalem
give an example of how the leadership and militaery skill of the crusaders did not mean they were successful
- It was luck only that when attempted co-operation was at its newest and their troops rawest, they confronted the weakest of their enemies (Turks of Asia Minor). The nomads were not numerous and Kilij Arslan’s tactics depended too heavily on the morale affect of sudden onslaughts; he allowed his men to be caught in matches where numbers counted
- The failure of the crusaders to capture Arqah (1099)
give examples of the Role of individual leaders & Military skill of the unified Crusader force in the first crusade
- Battle of Dorylaeum
- Siege of Antioch
- siege of Jerusalem
- Battle of Ascalon
how did the battle of dorylaeum show the Role of individual leaders & Military skill of the unified Crusader force in the first crusade?
- Arslan had gathered a much larger army than previously and surrounded crusaders with fast moving archers
- Normans deployed in a tight-knit defensive formation to surround their equipment and non-combatants who had followed them
- Robert of Normandy and Bohemond rallied the troops at a crucial moment (kept vanguard together whist awaiting reinforcements)
- when the French arrived, Godfrey broke through Turkish lines and Adhemar outflanked Turks from rear
- Turks fled as they did not expect the quick arrival of the French
how did the siege of antioch show the Role of individual leaders & Military skill of the unified Crusader force in the first crusade?
- Unified efforts against divided Muslim foes during the Crusader siege (ridwan, duqaq, kerbogha)
- Bohemond, an general, used aggressive tactics to win against Ridwan and kerbogha (used unwieldy numbers of Kerbogha’s forces against him at Antioch (28 June 1098))
what tactics and skills made bohemond such a successful general?
- Bohemond made the crusaders use rear-guards which required discipline and control
- Bohemond was determined to unsettle the enemy and take them unawares
- Bohemond’s importance lay in his appointment as sole commander in moments of crisis; he was not a tactical innovator as the real innovation was the use of infantry which arose from circumstances as they became better armed and more experienced
how did the siege of jerusalem show the Role of individual leaders & Military skill of the unified Crusader force in the first crusade?
- Robert of Flanders organised the foraging and gathering of materials,
- Godfrey was in the thick of the fighting (leading by example in this age, mattered) with Baldwin to the North
- Co-operation between North and South attack
- Construction and use of siege engines
how did the battle of ascalon show the Role of individual leaders in the first crusade?
Robert of Normandy was at the heart of a charge which swept all before it
describe the differences and similarites in equipment and weaponry between crusaders and Turks
- Franks had no technical advantage over their enemies, as their western horses soon died
- the Turks had the short bow which dictated their tactics and which the Franks found difficult to counter
- Franks probably had better armour, but in general similar weaponry
give examples of how the Crusaders were able to work together despite differences
- siege of nicaea
- siege of antioch
- seige of jerusalem
- battle of ascalon
how does the siege of nicaea show that Crusaders were able to work together despite differences ?
it helped to settle a raw army
how does the siege of antioch show that Crusaders were able to work together despite differences ?
tackled problems (e.g. Antioch able to stay partially supplied as crusaders did not have enough troops to surround it, crusaders forced to defeat 2 large relief armies under Duqaq and Ridwan) with enormous persistence and eventual success. The 8-month siege of Antioch would have been impossible without co-operation, e.g. shared war chest
how does the siege of jerusalem show that Crusaders were able to work together despite differences ?
exemplifies skills of highly experienced and coherent grouping of armies e.g. -Robert of Flanders organised the foraging and gathering of materials, Godfrey was in the thick of the fighting with Baldwin to the North
how does the battle of ascalon show that Crusaders were able to work together despite differences ?
Crusaders resolved differences (over ruling Jerusalem) to fight the Fatimids at Ascalon (August 1099) after capturing Jerusalem.
what are some limitations to the theory that it was the religious zeal of the first crusaders that allowed them to succeed?
- The People’s Crusade failed even though its participants were highly religiously motivated.
- There was a growing suspicion among the crusaders that the ‘Holy Lance’ was a fraud and was ‘discovered’ by one of Raymond of Toulouse’s followers (Peter Bartholomew) to enhance his authority.
- Bohemond and many of his Norman followers did not complete their pilgrimage.
what are some limitations to the theory that it was muslim disunity that allowed the first crusade to succeed?
- Misunderstood religious nature of crusade
- Kilij Arslan and Danishmends allied together against the crusaders at Dorylaeum but were still defeated.
- Jotischky claims that both Ridwan’s army at Antioch (1098) and the Fatimid army at Ascalon (1099) should have been able to defeat the crusaders on their own, so unity should not have been necessary
how does the muslim misunderstanding of the crusade undermine the theory that muslim disunity led to the first crusade’s success?
- there was no possibility of a unified muslim response because the various muslim powers did not see the crusade as a religious threat to islam until it was too late - this is not due to muslim disunity but misperceptions
- did not see it as a force intent on colonising the Levant in the name of christianity but at another mercenary raiding party which had come and gone regularly in the past
what are some limitations to the theory that it was the aid of byzantium that allowed the first crusade to succeed?
- Crusaders remained suspicious of Byzantines after disputes at Constantinople and betrayal at Nicaea and Antioch
- The crusaders ignored the advice of the Byzantines to form an alliance or understanding with the Fatimids.
why were the crusaders suspicious of byzantines after the siege of nicaea?
Taticius secretly worked with Boutoumites to negotiate surrender of Nicaea without Crusaders’ knowledge - caused a deep rift between the Latins and Greeks
why were the crusaders suspicious of byzantines after the siege of antioch?
- Taticius left the siege of Antioch (February 1098) and did not return
- Alexius had marched an army to assist at Antioch but turned back hearing that the crusade was doomed; crusaders regarded this as a betrayal
- Alexius I largely refused further aid to the crusade after they failed to return Antioch to him (Autumn 1098).
give an example of how Religious conviction allowed the Crusaders to maintain morale in battle even in desperate situations during the first crusade
- Religious zeal had an important impact on morale at Dorylaeum
- The discovery of the ‘Holy Lance’ (June 1098) restored the morale of the army at Antioch despite starvation and overwhelming Muslim numerical advantage.
how did religious zeal aid the first crusade?
- Religious conviction allowed the Crusaders to maintain morale in battle even in desperate situations
- Religious zeal drove the crusaders on to Jerusalem & kept them fixed on their goal
how did religious zeal impact the outcome of the battle of dorylaeum?
The vanguard under Bohemond sang hymns whilst waiting for reinforcements from main Crusader army
give an example of how Religious zeal drove the crusaders on to Jerusalem & kept them fixed on their goal
- Role of Bishop Adhemar as conciliator until his death at Antioch (August 1098).
- Ordinary crusaders threatened to elect new leader, when their leaders were bickering over possession of Antioch, to lead them to Jerusalem
- Ma’arrat al-numan (december 1098)
why was the role of bishop adhemar as conciliator so significant? what did he do?
- As the pope’s representative, he was widely respected and was always recognised as the spiritual leader of the crusade, while other leaders often quarrelled
- He negotiated with Alexius at Constantinople
- He re-established some discipline among the crusaders at Nicaea
- he fought a crucial role at the Battle of Doryaleum
- He was largely responsible for sustaining morale at the Siege of Antioch through various religious rites (e.g. fasting, special observances of holy days)
- after the capture of Antioch and siege led by Kerbogha, he organised a procession through the streets and had the gates locked so the crusaders would be unable to flee (as many were panicking)
how did the religious zeal of ordinary crusaders after the siege of antioch help the first crusade?
- threatened to elect new leader, when their leaders were bickering over possession of Antioch, to lead them to Jerusalem as they were determined to fulfil their vow of pilgrimage
- this threat led the leaders to settle their dispute and resume the crusade
how did the religious zeal of ordinary crusaders help the first crusade as ma’arrat al-numan?
crusader leaders returned to bickering so, to prevent further delays in the journey to Jerusalem, ordinary soldiers pulled down the walls of the town to force their leaders to abandon it and move on
how did byzantium aid the first crusade?
- Byzantines provided crusaders with vital intelligence and information
- Byzantines provided the Crusaders with practical aid and logistical support
what vital intelligence and information did the byzantines provide the first crusaders with?
- Alexius informed crusaders of Sunni-Shia split and suggested alliance with the Fatimids.
- Timing of crusade was partly consequence of Byzantine strategy. as Alexius had sought Western support at this time because of growing splits between Muslim powers
- Alexius and Taticius informed crusaders of Turkish battle tactics.
what practical aid and logistical support did the byzantines provide the first crusaders with?
- 1097: Alexius send Taticius to Nicaea to assist the crusaders
- Byzantine fleet blockaded Nicaea.
- Byzantine fleets supported the Crusaders at Antioch
how did Taticius help the First Crusade?
- Taticius brought with him a force of 2000 skirmish fighters
- Taticius secretly worked with Boutoumites (Byzantine general) to negotiate surrender of Nicaea without Crusaders’ knowledge
- Taticius acted as guide to lead them across Anatolia; acted as a liaison with local Armenian Christians that the crusaders used to help them.
- Gesta Francorum records Taticius frequently warned crusaders of ferocity of Turks
what contingents did Taticius accompany after Nicaea?
the Norman (Bohemond, Tancred, Robert of Normandy) and Flemish (Robert of Flanders) contingents
how did the byzantines aid the crusaders at the siege of antioch?
- Byzantine fleets supplied the Crusaders at Antioch (from Cyprus).
- Byzantines provided supplies and designs for siege weaponry at Antioch.
what Divisions had occured between Muslims before the First Crusade, ujndermining their ability to cooperate?
- Rivalry between Sunni and Shia Muslims was over 400 years old at this point
- 1080s-90s Fatimid power in Palestine had been reduced by Seljuk Turks
- 1086: Death of Suleiman led to splintering of Seljuk rule in Anatolia
- Many prominent Muslim leaders died in the in early 1090s:
how had Fatimid power in Palestine had been reduced by Seljuk Turks during the 1080s-90s,?
- the Seljuks (Tutush I) captured Jerusalem in 1071 and the Fatimids were seeking to recapture it (did so in 1098)
- 1097: Fatimids captured Tyre from the Seljuks
how did the disunity between seljuks and fatimids aid the first crusade?
crusade arrived in middle of conflict between Seljuks and Fatimids over Palestine
how did the Death of Suleiman led to splintering of Seljuk rule in Anatolia in 1086?
Danishmends gained greater power in northeast, Caka seized Smyrna
which prominent Muslim leaders died in the in early 1090s?
- Seljuk Turks: Malik Shah and Nizam al-Mulk (1092), Tutush (1095), Abbasid Caliph al-Muqtadi (1094).
- Fatimids: Al-Mustansir and Badr al-Jumali (1094).
what was the impact of malik shah’s death?
Disintegration of Seljuk Empire after Malik Shah’s death:
- Malik Shah’s brother, Tutush, seized Syria but was killed fighting his nephew, Barkiyaruq in 1094
- In Anatolia, Malik Shah was succeeded by Kilij Arslan.
- Malik Shah’s nephews, sons of Tutush, Ridwan and Duqaq inherited Aleppo and Damascus respectively and contested each other for control over Syria.
- In Persia, Malik Shah was succeeded by his son Mahmud I whose reign was contested by his other three brothers.
- Another group of Turks, the Artuqids, gained control in northeastern Syria.
what divisions between muslims were present during the first crusade?
- Kilij Arslan, Turkish Sultan of Rum in Anatolia, was attacking Danishmends at time of Nicaea attack (May 1097)
- at the Siege of Antioch
- Many Muslim coastal leaders (Antioch-Jerusalem) were willing to pay tribute to crusaders
- Fatimids had offered to ally with Crusaders (April 1098); Turks unwilling to aid the Fatimids when they were subsequently attacked (Fatimids having recaptured Jerusalem from them in 1098)
why did kilij arslan feel safe attacking the danishmends, even when the first crusade arrived?
Arslan had defeated the People’s Crusade so did not consider the main crusader army to be a serious threat
how did muslim disunity help the crusaders success at the siege of antioch?
- During the siege, the crusaders were attacked by numerous Muslim forces but at no point, until the arrival of Kerbogha, was any effort made to unify the Muslim leaders
- Disunity and division within Kerbogha’s (Atabeg of Mosul) large force
- The Muslim convert, Firuz, betrayed the garrison at Antioch allowing the Crusaders to enter the city
what separate muslim forces initially attacked the crusaders at antioch?
- Ridwan of Aleppo and Duqaq of Damascus were unwilling to co-ordinate due to civil war; both wanted to conquer Antioch for themselves
- December 1097: Duqaq sent a force against the crusaders and February 1098: Ridwan sent a separate force; both defeated by Bohemond
how did Disunity and division within Kerbogha’s (Atabeg of Mosul) large force undermine him at antioch?
- 1098 marched to relieve Antioch, supported by Duqaq of Damascus and other local forces
- Alliance between muslim forces was precarious; local Turkish leaders worried Kerbogha was attempting to reassert Seljuk Empire’s control
- Spent much time en route capturing Muslim towns e.g. failed siege of Edessa
- Then failed at Antioch, 28 June 1098, due to divisions in force
