1

Why was the First Crusade More Successful then the others that Followed? The First Crusade (1096-1099) was initial stage of the series of military campaigns accomplished by the Western Christians against non-Christian powers or movements, led by the religious motives, namely by the desire to help Christians of the East and to regain Holy Christians places. As any such kind of revolutionary movement led by the religion devotions, crusades often deflected from the original plan, causing such awful side effects as Jews pogroms in Europe, slaughter of thousands innocent people, devastation of many towns and cities such as Belgrade or Nicaea, great unjustified loses among crusades themselves and the long legacy of bitterness. For these side effects the whole idea of crusading was largely criticized both on the East and the West, and what is more, some even blame the First Crusade campaign for laying the ground of hostility between Muslims and Christians which is nowadays can be seen behind such terrifying events as 9/11. Keeping in mind all these proved facts and various assumptions I will still claim that the first crusades was a successful campaign, however only in comparison with the following crusades, and only from the military and strategic points of view. My main statement is that the biggest and unquestioning achievement of first crusade is regaining Jerusalem and establishment of the series of Christian states, such as Kingdom of Jerusalem, the Country of Tripoli, the Country of Edessa and the Principality of Antioch (which however did not exist for a long time). From the strategic points of view these achievements were far more important then majority of the mentioned side effects. Let us now look at the reasons for which it was so important to get the holy places back. In the seventh century A.D. such territories as Asia Minor, Egypt, Palestine, Syria, North Africa, Italy, Spain, France, the islands of Sicily and Sardinia were all Christians.

However, just a century later the situation was changed dramatically two-thirds of the formerly Christian world fell under the Muslim pressure: Christians communities of Arabia were destroyed in 633; Christians lost Egypt, Palestine, Syria, North Africa, territories of Spain and Italy were under continuous pressure; Muslims pirates bases were established near Italian and French costs allowing them to attack southern and central parts of the countries. In 1009 Muslims overdo all what was done by the destruction of the Church of the Holy Sepulchre in Jerusalem1. In fact the rise of Islam was not purely the threat for the religious believes only, but encroachment upon the territories, provocative and rough threat to the unity of the Western and Eastern Christians, parts of the Roman Empire. No wonder the institute of papacy (playing a major role on the international political arena at that time) appealed to rescue believers. We may even say that the First Crusade was the first large and successful Christian counterattack to the Muslim offensive actions. The rise of the Muslim Turks in Byzantium, establishing of the Muslim capital just some 50 miles away from Constantinople, made the Byzantines rulers in search for help from their western counterparts, and of course they addressed the pope who was representing for them the chief western authority. However, Gregory VII for whom the initial appeal was addressed, did not manage to convince the western Christians, while Urban II got a bit unexpected result: upon his speech in Clermont in 1095 and following propaganda campaign under the slogan God Wills It!, instead of sending a well-armed army, as it was asked buy Alexius, he got massive migration to the East2.

Crawford, P. F. (2011). Four Myths about the Crusades. Intercollegiate Review, 46(1), p. 14

Calhoun, D. (2006). Crusades or Missions?. Ancient and Medieval Chruch History. Retrieved May 30, 2011, from http://http://worldwidefreeresources.com/upload/CH310_T_26.pdf.

Trying to realize the background for the crusades success, one can find no other major reason then deep believe in God and the idea of Holy War, and in their inevitable ticket to Heaven in case joining the army. Of course, some argue that crusades were ignorant peasants and angry for enrichment nobility, but we should not forget that very often in order to leave for the East a crusade was forced to sell all his possessions (which actually caused a widespread inflation3), as such kind of adventure was ruinously expensive, and only some of them did in fact got some gain. In order to support crusades the first income tax was introduced in Europe, and the church made a series of adjustments to the system of indulgences. Besides that, those leaving for the crusading were very well aware of the possible dangers they may meet on their way. On the one hand, those from the knights class had the taste of adventure and were largely searching for these threats in order to improve their status. Some even presume that it was better to send them fight on the East, than to experience continuous struggle in the West. But how can one explain the motive of a peasant leaving abandoned his goods and harvest, taking with him his wife and children and voluntary heading to the long unknown journey, expecting not to return? (Accordingly to some historians the casualty rate for the First Crusade was up to 75 per cent4!). I can find now other reason then deep religious believes, willingness to please God, and confidence in automatic forgiveness of all their sins. This was one of the major reasons of the First Crusades success as it is well-known that the following periods of crusading were not anymore marked by such an enthusiasm. From the later period we remember such prominent names as Richard I of England (the Lion heart), King Philip Augustus of France, Emperor

3 4

Crawford, P. F. (2011). Four Myths about the Crusades. Intercollegiate Review, 46(1), p.16 Ibid, p.17

Frederick Barbarossa, but their efforts gave no result for crusades, as some of them spent major time instead fighting with each other. Without depreciation the role of crusades, we should nevertheless mention the situation in the Middle East and particularly division in the power circles, as it was also the significant factor allowing crusades to fulfill such achievements. By the time of the First Crusades the Great Seljuq Empire was divided into several smaller states following the death of Malik-Shah I in 1092. The territories were inherited and divided between Malik-Shah brother and then his sons, in this manner at that particular moment the Muslims did not represent a united power to fight with Christians. Seljuqs and Fatimids and other smaller Turkish tribes were fighting for Jerusalem and other territories causing great disruptions in the Middle East. This destabilization in the region led to the situation when the new rulers came, not willing to respect the modus vivendi, which existed between Arab Muslim rulers and Christians. Popular pilgrimages of the western Christians became very dangerous, as more and more believers were assaulted on their way to the Holy places. This danger for pilgrims was a certain trump in the speech of Urban II, who was actually searching for excuse to create his own army and to conquer the East. The First Crusade is very often blamed to cause unprecedented and unneeded amount of casualties (approximately only one-fourth of the original number of crusades got to Jerusalem5), because many of the first crusades were peasants unprepared for battles or long journeys. At the same time, in comparison to the other crusades this argument losses its accuracy. Just to mention the example of the Childrens Crusade of 1212 (or so-called Childrens, because modern historians call into question who did in fact join that movement). It is very uncertain who ruled this groups of some 30, 000 teenagers and young
5

The First Crusade. Middle Ages. Retrieved May 30, 2011

people of other ages, what were their motives, where exactly they were heading to and what they excepted to achieve. Nevertheless, the result of this unorganized movement was very lamentable: among presumed seven ships who took children in the Mediterranean Sea, two were lost and the others met with Muslim ships and crusade children were most probably sold to slavery6. Let us now finally look at the most important point of comparison between the First and the following crusades, which are the final achievements of the military campaigns. In the initial request of Alexius to Urban II the assistance in protecting Byzantium was asked, but what was achieved at the end surpassed expectations and the Jerusalem was took by the combined army in June of 1099, and several Christian countries were established. The Second Crusade were called after the capture of Edessa by Muslims, however the large army of French King and German Emperor was defeated. In 1117 Jerusalem was recaptured by Muslim, leading to the Third Crusade, however equally unsuccessful. The Fourth, the Fifth, the Seventh and the Eighth (with the exception of the Sixth) Crusades were similarly failure and the crusading period ended in 1270. In this manner, the First Crusade was the most successful campaign due to its huge military and strategic achievements. At the same time, one should not forget the real price of this campaign, such further deepening of the division between Western and Eastern Christianity, commencement of prosecution of Jews, and the cruelty which accompanied capturing of the cities, especially Jerusalem, which should not be repeated again.

Calhoun, D. (2006). Crusades or Missions?. Ancient and Medieval Chruch History. Retrieved May 30, 2011, from http://http://worldwidefreeresources.com/upload/CH310_T_26.pdf.

References

Calhoun, D. (2006). Crusades or Missions?. Ancient and Medieval Chruch History. Retrieved May 30, 2011, from http://http://worldwidefreeresources.com/upload/CH310_T_26.pdf.

Crawford, P. F. (2011). Four Myths about the Crusades. Intercollegiate Review, 46(1).

Davis N. (1997) Europe: A History. Pimilico, p.1392

Magadalino, P. (1996). The Byzantine Background to the First Crusade. Canadian Institute of Balkan Studies. Retrieved May 30, 2011.

The Crusaders Capture Jerusalem, 1099. EyeWitness to History.com. Retrieved May 30, 2011, from http://http://www.eyewitnesstohistory.com/crusades.htm

The First Crusade. Middle Ages. Retrieved May 30, 2011.