CHW3M
Mr. D. Woods
E.O.M S.S.
10/06/2005
The Crusades were believed to have begun in the early eleventh century, and to have concluded hundreds of years thereafter. Literally hundred of Crusades from 1096-1231 A.C.E, but only four possessed any noticeable significance. The Crusades failed in a spectacular fashion because the absences of adequate leadership lead to disorganization. Currently, speculations made by few historians attempt to emphasize the successes of the Crusades. However, without recognizable doubt, Crusading in the Middle Ages accomplished little more then complete failure due to disorganization, poor communication, logistical and moral shortcoming, and disunity.
While it is true that brave men and women united together in adventurous pursuit of glorious battles and the acquisition of Holy Land, more often then not insufficient organization techniques caused much dismay among the ravenous hordes of Christian followers. Power struggles between kings, noblemen, and knights, combined with Christian fanaticism, contributed to the dissolve of organization in the Crusades. It can be proven that the actions of many leaders during the Crusading era were often of moral and ethically questionable origin. Firstly, the Crusaders inspired the most dedicated valor, the most blood thirsty cruelty, and the greediest vandalism of medieval men.1 In true fanatical fashion, the most important legacy of the Crusades was the sanctification of violence in pursuit of ideological ends.2 Even though the Crusades appeared to provide an easy solution to the problematic events, this was not the case. Lastly, Crusading was a partial solution to the problem of endemic private warfare in Europe – means to turn outward ferocity towards Muslims rather than inward on themselves, internal conflict still existed.3 “News that the people of the Persian kingdom, an alien people, a race so completely foreign to God…has invaded Christian territory and has invaded this territory with pillage, fire and the sword.” Examples of Christian intolerance were commonplace in this time period. All throughout western Europe, those who had received news of their Crusading brethren would have became enthralled with tales of glorious wealth and spiritual importance, little would they have known of power seeking nobility, fanatical ways, and disorganized actions which resulted in recurring failure.
All the splendid legions and shimmering swords of devout Christian warriors could not prevent the inevitable. Unrestricted disorganization caused too many logistical and military planning impediments for the chivalrous invaders. Firstly, there was little that could have been done in order to prevent such unforeseen catastrophes in the Crusades considering the fact that disunity between power hungry nobility was common.4 Without adequate leadership, attempts to Crusade against the so-called “Infidel” Muslims were doomed to fail before they began. An example that demonstrates the audacity of wealth seeking noblemen occurred four years after the third Crusade. The fourth Crusade launched to capture Egypt (the centre of Muslim power), but they never reached Egypt and attacked Constantinople instead to capture its wealth.5 Not only were power hungry and corrupt kings and leaders to blame, the Crusades were plagued by misfortune due to disorganization. Furthermore, many Crusades where launched in the following century which enabled the diminished Christian states on the coast of Syria and Palestine to survive for a time, but after two centuries disorganization they all but disappeared.6 Lastly, disputes among leaders and strategic problems prevented any lasting results mostly 2nd Crusade, but lasted the entire duration of Crusading events. Inadequate financing, economic, intellectual problems resulted7.
With the established notion that they were completely unorganized, there was a more problematic reason that contributed to the numerous failings of the Crusades. The lack of a supreme leader allowed directionless, unwise actions to occur, which resulted in the consistent failure of the Crusades. Men on Crusade would have found communication was difficult, and the fact that nobody to provided guidance escalated the matter. An unstable base of leadership resulted in failed objectives and false information. Apparently many a crusader also suffered from delusions of grandeur, the holy land did not flow with milk and honey and could not be made to support the Latin principalities there without commerce.8 In addition to false hopes, the long term effects of the Crusades must not have been realized until they took their toll. The Crusades were an utter failure in both military and moral terms, leaving the Holy land in Muslim hands and severely hardening Islamic attitudes against both Christianity and western civilization.9 Even petty Christian states were inferior and unorganized compared to Muslims, a valid sign of inadequate leadership.10 Lastly, actions of unwise origin allowed starvation and disease to wrack the army, prevented supply lines from being set up, and caused the Turks to be slaughtered by the hundreds.11
Not only were the crusaders directing their crudely devised efforts of external hostility towards Muslims, problems existed internally as well. Disagreement and doubt provided a construct in which failure was bound to overcome any worthy attempt to reclaim the holy land. From the very beginning, inward anxieties intensified for the crusaders over trivial political matters. Huge theological disagreement split the Greek church of Byzantium and the Roman church of the west, the Pope believed that a Crusade would lead to strong Roman influence in Greek territories.12 Internal squabbling became so bad that when the eventual reunion of churches occurred, the Knights were urged to fight the enemy of God (Muslims) as opposed to other Christians.13 Through embellishment and propaganda, the few accomplished objectives achieved by the crusaders were spread throughout Western Europe, the purpose of which was to recruit more people. One such occurrence of Crusade-inspired youth ended in a complete disaster. In 1212, the “Children’s Crusade” consisting of 50,000 French and German teens took up arms and marched reverently towards the Holy Land. Most of them died, or were enslaved by the very men they had intended to slay.14 Not only were cries of ‘Deus Volt’ (‘God wills it’) contributing to the rise of bloodlust and abandonment among the Christian followers, it appears that the existence of any sort of logical rule evoked the same feelings.15
As if all hope had descended from the heavens, encapsulated in a veil of blazing hellfire, the Crusades had disintegrated into mere skirmishes lead by malevolent leaders who cared only for wealth and glory. The Crusades did not leave lasting legacy of sweet victory and gloriousness, but a bitter construct of religious dispute and conflict which still exists. The Crusades failed in a spectacular fashion because the absences of adequate leadership lead to an unprecedented level disorganization. In closing, one could ascertain that with a proper leader, logistical development, proper communication, organized armies, and concise, unified actions the successes of the Crusades could far greater and less disastrous.
No comments:
Post a Comment