Leadership of the crusades, 1095–1192 — Edexcel A-Level History
Verified courseTeaching note checked against the official specification.
Leadership of the crusades, 1095–1192 explained
Leadership of the crusades, 1095–1192 covers 3 specification points, including The eight princes and their changing… and Personal and political rivalries and tensions;….
Read the full explanation
Open a point below for its explanation and revision guidance.
The First Crusade: the eight princes and their changing priorities; Baldwin’s conquest of Edessa 1097; Bohemund’s seizure of Antioch 1098; emergence of Godfrey of Bouillon as leader and the capture of Jerusalem 1099.
The First Crusade was led by eight princes: Raymond of Toulouse, Bohemund of Taranto, Godfrey of Bouillon, Baldwin of Boulogne, Hugh of Vermandois, Robert of Normandy, Robert of Flanders, and Stephen of Blois. Their priorities shifted from religious zeal to territorial acquisition. Baldwin secured the County of Edessa (noted in the specification as 1097, though historically finalised in 1098). Bohemund seized Antioch in 1098 after a gruelling siege, keeping it for himself. Godfrey of Bouillon emerged as the primary leader, culminating in the capture of Jerusalem in 1099, after which he became its first Latin ruler. These events highlight the evolution from pilgrimage to conquest.
Louis VII, Conrad III and the Second Crusade: personal and political rivalries and tensions; their relationship with Manuel I; the failure to consult the leaders of the crusader states; failure at Damascus 1148 and the end of the crusade.
The Second Crusade (1147–1149) was led by Louis VII and Conrad III, whose personal and political rivalries undermined the campaign. They travelled separately, and their relationship with Manuel I was tense: Conrad allied with Manuel, while Louis distrusted Byzantine motives. Crucially, the kings failed to consult the leaders of the crusader states effectively, ignoring Raymond of Antioch's advice to attack Aleppo. This poor coordination culminated in the disastrous failure at Damascus in 1148, where the crusaders withdrew after four days. The end of the crusade damaged Christian prestige and prompted bitter recriminations. Understanding these factors explains why the campaign achieved so little.
The troubled leadership of the Third Crusade: the significance of the death of Frederick Barbarossa; the rivalries of Richard I and Philip II; Richard’s decision to attack Sicily and Cyprus; Philip’s return to France. Richard’s leadership at Acre and Jaffa and reasons for his decision not to attack Jerusalem.
The Third Crusade (1189–1192) was hampered by troubled leadership. Frederick Barbarossa's death in 1190 led to the disintegration of much of his German army, reducing the crusade's strength. Richard I and Philip II had a tense rivalry, exacerbated by disputes over Sicily and Cyprus. Richard's decision to attack Sicily and Cyprus secured supplies and a base but delayed the main objective and strained relations with Philip. Philip returned to France in 1191, leaving Richard to lead alone. Richard's leadership at Acre and Jaffa demonstrated military skill, but his decision not to attack Jerusalem was influenced by logistical problems and the need to secure a sustainable peace. The crusade ended with a truce, not the recapture of Jerusalem.
Your focus
- Students can identify all eight princes and describe their changing priorities during the First Crusade.
- Students can explain the significance of Baldwin's conquest of Edessa and Bohemund's seizure of Antioch.
- Students can assess the role of Godfrey of Bouillon in the capture of Jerusalem and his emergence as leader.
Show all 9 objectives
- Explain the personal and political rivalries between Louis VII and Conrad III and how they affected the Second Crusade.
- Analyse the relationship between the crusader leaders and Manuel I, including its impact on the campaign.
- Evaluate the consequences of the failure to consult the leaders of the crusader states, leading to the failure at Damascus and the end of the crusade.
- Explain the significance of Frederick Barbarossa's death for the Third Crusade.
- Analyse the rivalries between Richard I and Philip II and their impact on the crusade's leadership.
- Evaluate Richard's leadership at Acre and Jaffa, and the reasons for his decision not to attack Jerusalem.
Leadership of the crusades, 1095–1192 exam tips
Marking Points
- Identifies the eight princes and explains how their priorities changed from religious pilgrimage to political and territorial ambitions.
- Describes Baldwin's conquest of Edessa (specification date 1097) and its significance as the first crusader state.
- Explains Bohemund's seizure of Antioch in 1098, including the role of the siege and internal crusader politics.
- Analyses Godfrey of Bouillon's emergence as leader and the capture of Jerusalem in 1099, and the impact of these events on the crusade's outcome.
- Explains how personal and political rivalries between Louis VII and Conrad III, including separate routes and competing priorities, weakened unified command.
- Analyses the relationship with Manuel I, such as the Byzantine desire to control crusader gains and the lack of trust between Latin and Greek leaders.
- Assesses the failure to consult the leaders of the crusader states, such as alienating Raymond of Antioch, and how this led to poor strategic decisions.
- Evaluates the failure at Damascus in 1148, including the swift withdrawal and its consequences for the crusade's collapse.
- Discusses the end of the crusade and its impact on the reputation of the leaders and the wider crusading movement.
- Explains the significance of Frederick Barbarossa's death, including the loss of a large contingent and the impact on the crusade's overall strength.
- Analyses the rivalries between Richard I and Philip II, such as disputes over Sicily and Cyprus, and how these affected cooperation.
- Assesses Richard's decisions to attack Sicily and Cyprus, including the strategic benefits and the delays caused.
- Evaluates Philip's return to France and its consequences for the leadership of the crusade.
- Discusses Richard's leadership at Acre and Jaffa, and the reasons for his decision not to attack Jerusalem, such as supply issues and the political situation.
Examiner Tips
- 💡Use a chronological framework to show how priorities changed over time, from the initial gathering to the capture of Jerusalem.
- 💡Support your arguments with specific names of the eight princes and key events like Bohemund's capture of Antioch in 1098.
- 💡Use specific examples, such as the separate routes taken by Louis and Conrad, to illustrate personal and political rivalries.
- 💡Link the failure to consult the leaders of the crusader states, like Raymond of Antioch, to the disastrous decision to attack Damascus.
- 💡When discussing the end of the crusade, consider both immediate and long-term consequences for the Latin East.
- 💡Use specific events, such as the siege of Acre and the Battle of Jaffa, to illustrate Richard's leadership.
- 💡When discussing Philip's return, consider its impact on the balance of power and Richard's subsequent decisions.
- 💡Link the decision not to attack Jerusalem to the broader aims of the crusade and the feasibility of holding the city.
Common Mistakes
- Assuming the eight princes acted in perfect unity; in reality, they often had competing interests and rivalries. Correction: Emphasise the factionalism and shifting priorities among the leaders.
- Confusing the sequence of events, such as placing the capture of Jerusalem before the seizure of Antioch. Correction: Maintain a strict chronological timeline of the campaign.
- Taking the specification date of 1097 for Edessa's conquest as absolute. Correction: Acknowledge the specification date of 1097, but demonstrate historical awareness that Baldwin's control was solidified in early 1098.
- Error: Treating the Second Crusade as a single unified campaign. Correction: Recognise that Louis and Conrad operated separately and often at cross-purposes due to personal and political rivalries.
- Error: Ignoring the relationship with Manuel I and Byzantine-crusader relations. Correction: Include how Manuel's diplomacy and the lack of trust affected the campaign.
- Error: Assuming the failure at Damascus was solely due to military weakness. Correction: Consider the failure to consult the leaders of the crusader states effectively, leading to strategic errors.
- Error: Underestimating the impact of Frederick Barbarossa's death. Correction: Explain how it deprived the crusade of a major army and leader.
- Error: Treating Richard's attack on Cyprus as a mere diversion. Correction: Recognise its strategic value in securing supplies and a base.
- Error: Assuming Richard's decision not to attack Jerusalem was solely due to military weakness. Correction: Consider logistical, political, and strategic factors, including the need to preserve his army and secure a negotiated settlement.