3rd Crusade Failure

With the mission seemingly completed after the First Crusade, the armies demobilized and many of the Crusaders departed Jerusalem. The remaining Crusaders divided the conquered lands into four territories for governance: Jerusalem, Antioch, Edessa, and Tripoli. In time, the Muslims countered with their own holy war (jihad) against the Christians with the goal or regaining control over Jerusalem. In 1144, the Seljuks recaptured Edessa. This development led to other Crusades. Since the military battles are not the major focus of this research effort, I will only briefly describe the remaining Crusades.

Pope Eugenius III proclaimed the Second Crusade in 1145 and it was led by King Louis VII of France beginning in 1147. Unlike its predecessor,

this Crusade failed to achieve any papal or military objective and culminated in 1149. Following this failed effort, the Muslims rallied against the Holy City, and in 1187, retook Jerusalem. The Crusaders would never succeed in totally conquering the Holy Land.
The Third Crusade began in 1189 following a proclamation by Pope Gregory VIII.

A joint effort between England and France, this crusade achieved some success but ultimately failed to retake Jerusalem. Pope Innocent III proclaimed the Fourth Crusade in 1199, but this crusade, lasting from 1202 to 1204 also failed. A significant consequence of this Crusade for the Byzantine Empire was the fall of Constantinople, at the hands of the Crusaders. Another crusade proclaimed by Pope Innocent III, the Fifth Crusade, was prosecuted against Egypt from 1217 to 1221 but ended in failure in terms of the goal of recapturing Jerusalem. During the Sixth Crusade, proclaimed by Pope Gregory IX, Holy Roman Emperor Frederick II “took the cross,” led the expedition and agreed to a treaty with Egypt that resulted in Jerusalem, Bethlehem, and Nazareth again coming under Christian control. In the Seventh Crusade, not only did the crusade fail, but its leader, King Louis IX of France was captured in 1250. Twenty-one years later, following an earlier negotiated release with Egypt for money, King Louis IX joined Prince Edward of England in the Eighth and final Crusade; this too ended in failure. While not significant, another historical discrepancy arises as Walker does not credit King Louis IX as participating in the Eighth

Crusade.
Despite the various details of the Crusades provided by different authors, the overall narratives are often similar.

What is different, is the perspective of whether the wars were successes or failures. Although acknowledging that the Crusades failed to accomplish the objectives of recapturing the Holy Lands and defending the Eastern Empire against the Muslim Turks, T.A. Archer and Charles L. Kingsford argued that the Crusades succeeded in delaying, and perhaps stopping the advance of Islam; a fact that changed the course of history.

Presenting a different perspective, James A. Brundage viewed the Crusades as a partial success. He acknowledged “the Crusades failed to establish a long-lived kingdom in the Holy Land, set the stage for the fifteenth-century Muslim takeover of the Byzantine Empire, and shattered any hope of reconciling the Eastern and Western Churches.” Nevertheless, he also asserted that the Crusades “contributed profoundly to the political, economic, and intellectual development of Western Europe.”

Finally, Steven Runciman viewed the Crusades as a complete failure for Western Europe, the Byzantine Empire, and the Islamic Middle East. He assigns most blame to the Popes, whom he criticized for their greed and lust for power. While he celebrated the Crusades for being “triumphs of faith,” he concludes the “Holy War itself was nothing more than a long act of intolerance in the name of

God.”
With such disagreements on the ultimate success or failure of the Crusades, it is not surprising that there are various viewpoints on the significance of the Holy Wars.
According to Byrne, the real significance of the Crusades is that it “reacquainted Europe with her [cultural] past, helped bring her out of the so-called Dark Ages and mark the beginning of a new era in Western history, the High Middle Ages, which laid the foundation for transforming epochs like the Renaissance and Scientific Revolution.” He added that the Crusades sparked intellectual revitalization in mathematics and sciences and also ignited the thinking of “one of Catholicism’s greatest philosophers, St. Thomas Aquinas.”
Within The Crusades: Turning Points in World History, Erbstosser agreed with Byrne, asserting the Crusades enabled Western Europeans to benefit from a significant transfer of intellectual knowledge from the Arabs in mathematics, science, agriculture, philosophy, and crafts. In the same book, Hilmar C. Krueger described how the Crusades reopened Mediterranean Sea trade routes for the Italians that Muslims had previously controlled for several centuries: “Their [Italians] shops carried the Crusaders and their equipment, even their horses, to the Holy Land, and then supplied the Crusaders with food, drink, and on occasion, with timber manpower, and siege machinery.” Moreover, the Italians became very wealthy as a result of being paid to transport the Crusaders’ personnel and equipment. In this manner, the Crusades provided lasting economic significance for the Italians.
Blaydes and Paik concurred with Krueger, that the “Crusades were a catalyst for the reintegration of Western Europe into global trade networks.” They noted, however, that this trade reintegration (as well as military mobilizations) had “implications for the rise of towns and urban governance structures.” Abu-Lughod documented how Western Europe gained a desire for Eastern products such as “spices, silk, porcelain, and other luxury goods.” Whereas much of the trade discussed above occurred via sea, several authors opined that some of the primary benefits of the Crusades included the expanded road networks in eastern Europe that were improved to support the land-based excursions.
In contrast to several of the historians and authors mentioned above, Walker had a different opinion concerning the significance of the Crusades: “Viewed by the light of their original purpose, the Crusades were failures. They made no permanent conquests of the Holy Land. They did not retard the advance of Islam.” In fact, he argued, the Crusades “fostered a harsh intolerance between Muslims and Christians, where before there had been a measure of mutual respect.” If Walker had the opportunity to read Blaydes’ and Paik’s writings on the Crusades, he would have rejected their views because he claimed “the Crusades did not create towns and trade…they presupposed these things.”
Since he writes in a book about church history, it is understandable that the significance of the Crusades according to Walker was not economic or scholastic achievements but rather theological ones. For Walker, “the chief beneficiary of the Crusades was the medieval papacy, whose authority and prestige were greatly enhanced by these expeditions.” Indeed, the Crusades were proclaimed by popes. Arguably, in terms of a historical perspective, they had the most to risk and gain.
My initial thoughts concerning the Crusades were influenced by previous history classes taken during high school and college. That was a long time ago. In fact, I completed my last college history class, Western Civilization, in the 1980s. Studies of military history over the past two decades combined with consideration of the ongoing War Against Terrorism, and conflicts in the Middle East also contributed to my quest for learning more about the Crusades. During the past few weeks, my intrigue concerning the Crusades grew as I contemplated the effects that the so-called Holy Wars, prosecuted in the eleventh through thirteenth centuries, may have had on economic, political and theological affairs today. It is from this aperture that I developed my conclusions concerning the significance of the Crusades.
First, the mobilization of the armies in France and Germany resulted in territorial expansion throughout Europe. Not only did new towns and states develop, but Christian influence and control reached areas such as Denmark, Sweden, and even the Iberian peninsula. Moreover, the movement of personnel and equipment required upgraded road networks as well as sea lines of communication; both of these things developed in part, as a result of the Crusades. This, in turn led to the reintegration of Western Europe into global trade networks by way of the Mediterranean Sea.
Above all, I concur with Hafer, who provided one of the best summaries when he asserted that “the Crusades are significant because they showed how powerful the Catholic Church became in the middle ages, displayed how Europeans developed intellectually through the transition of ideas from the East, and [indicated] ... how animosity started between Christian, Muslims, and Jews.” Even though the Catholic church was isolated from the Holy Lands prior to the Crusades, the Popes had enough power and influence to declare war and then compel the masses to prosecute the wars in the name of God. Through the Crusade experience, the Popes gained even more power and influence. It is not an overstatement, therefore, to historically link the strength of the modern papacy back to the times of the Crusades.
What may be an overstatement is to assert that the Crusades started the animosity between Christians and Muslims; indeed, the very setting of the Crusades speaks to animosity and conflict between the Catholic Church and Muslims. However, during the Crusades, as Christians viewed both Muslims and Jews as those who did not ascribe to and practice orthodox beliefs, Christians killed thousands of Jews and Muslims. The Muslims responded with jihad and today, over seven hundred years later, radical jihadists continue their own “holy wars” that we in America earnestly view as terrorism. Finally, many Christians who fought in the Crusades viewed their efforts as a righteous path to salvation. The same is true for jihadist today. With no true lasting peace in the Holy Lands, this animosity remains a significant ramification of the Crusades.