The Second Crusade

[Panita Ristau]

Since the original negotiations between Louis and Manuel, Manuel had broken off his military campaign against the Sultanate of Rüm, signing a truce with his enemy Sultan Mesud I. This was done so that Manuel would be free to concentrate on defending his empire from the Crusaders, who had gained a reputation for theft and treachery since the First Crusade and were widely suspected of harbouring sinister designs on Constantinople. Nevertheless, Manuel's relations with the French army were somewhat better than with the Germans, and Louis was entertained lavishly in Constantinople. Some of the French were outraged by Manuel's truce with the Seljuks and called for an alliance with Roger II and an attack on Constantinople, but they were restrained by Louis.[23]

When the armies from Savoy, Auvergne, and Montferrat joined Louis in Constantinople, having taken the land route through Italy and crossing from Brindisi to Durazzo, the entire army was shipped across the Bosporus to Asia Minor. The Greeks were encouraged by rumours that the Germans had captured Iconium, but Manuel refused to give Louis any Byzantine troops. Byzantium had just been invaded by Roger II of Sicily, and all of Manuel's army was needed in the Balkans. Both the Germans and French therefore entered Asia without any Byzantine assistance, unlike the armies of the First Crusade. In the tradition set by his grandfather Alexios I, Manuel also had the French swear to return to the Empire any territory they captured.[24] The French met the remnants of Conrad's army at Nicaea, and Conrad joined Louis' force. They followed Otto of Freising's route, moving closer to the Mediterranean coast, and they arrived at Ephesus in December, where they learned that the Turks were preparing to attack them. Manuel also sent ambassadors complaining about the pillaging and plundering that Louis had done along the way, and there was no guarantee that the Byzantines would assist them against the Turks. Meanwhile Conrad fell sick and returned to Constantinople, where Manuel attended to him personally, and Louis, paying no attention to the warnings of a Turkish attack, marched out from Ephesus with the French and German survivors. The Turks were indeed waiting to attack, but in a small battle outside Ephesus, the French were victorious.[25]

They reached Laodicea early in January 1148, around the same time Otto of Freising’s army had been destroyed in the same area.[26] Resuming the march, the vanguard under Amadeus of Savoy became separated from the rest of the army, and Louis’ troops were routed by the Turks. Louis himself, according to Odo of Deuil, climbed a rock and was ignored by the Turks, who did not recognize him. The Turks did not bother to attack further and the French marched on to Adalia, continually harassed from afar by the Turks, who had also burned the land to prevent the French from replenishing their food, both for themselves and their horses. Louis no longer wanted to continue by land, and it was decided to gather a fleet at Adalia and sail for Antioch.[20] After being delayed for a month by storms, most of the promised ships did not arrive at all. Louis and his associates claimed the ships for themselves, while the rest of the army had to resume the long march to Antioch. The army was almost entirely destroyed, either by the Turks or by sickness.[27]

[Panita Ristau]

Emperor Manuel I

[Panita Ristau]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_crusade

[Panita Ristau]

Journey to Jerusalem

Louis eventually arrived in Antioch on March 19 after being delayed by storms; Amadeus of Savoy had died on Cyprus along the way. Louis was welcomed by Eleanor’s uncle Raymond of Poitiers. Raymond expected him to help defend against the Turks and to accompany him on an expedition against Aleppo, the Muslim city that was the gateway to Edessa, but Louis refused, preferring instead to finish his pilgrimage to Jerusalem rather than focus on the military aspect of the crusade.[27]

[Panita Ristau]

Eleanor enjoyed her stay, but her uncle implored her to remain to enlarge family lands and divorce Louis if the king refused to help what was assuredly the military cause of the Crusade. Louis quickly left Antioch for Tripoli with Eleanor in arrest. Meanwhile, Otto of Freising and the remnant of his troops arrived in Jerusalem early in April, and Conrad soon after.[28] Fulk, Patriarch of Jerusalem, was sent to invite Louis to join them. The fleet that had stopped at Lisbon arrived around this time, as well as the Provençals who had left Europe under the command of Alfonso Jordan, Count of Toulouse. Alphonso himself did not make it to Jerusalem as he died at Caesarea. He was supposedly poisoned either by Eleanor of Aquitaine or Raymond II of Tripoli, the nephew who feared his political aspirations in the county. The original focus of the crusade was Edessa, but the preferred target of King Baldwin III and the Knights Templar was Damascus.[27]

[Panita Ristau]

Council of Acre

The nobility of Jerusalem welcomed the arrival of troops from Europe, and it was announced that a council should meet to decide on the best target for the crusaders. This took place on 24 June 1148, when the Haute Cour of Jerusalem met with the recently-arrived crusaders from Europe at Palmarea, near Acre, a major city of the crusader Kingdom of Jerusalem. This was the most spectacular meeting of the Cour in its existence.[29][30]

In the end, the decicion was made to attack the city of Damascus, an former ally of the Kingdom of Jerusalem that had shifted its allegiance to that of the Zengids and attacked the Kingdom's allied city of Bosra in 1147. In July their armies assembled at Tiberias and marched to Damascus, around the Sea of Galilee by way of Banyas. There were perhaps 50,000 troops in total.[31]

[Panita Ristau]

The Council of Acre met at Palmarea, near Acre, a major city of the crusader Kingdom of Jerusalem, on 24 June 1148. The Haute Cour of Jerusalem met with recently-arrived crusaders from Europe, to decide on the best target for the crusade. The Second Crusade had been called after the fall of Edessa to Zengi in 1144. In 1147, armies led by Conrad III of Germany and Louis VII of France began their separate journeys to the east. Conrad arrived at Acre in April 1148, and Louis marched south from Antioch.

The nobility of Jerusalem welcomed the arrival of troops from Europe, and it was announced that a council should meet. After much discussion, it was determined that the crusaders would march against Damascus. Whatever the reasons for the Siege of Damascus were, the results were disastrous for the crusaders. As a result, Antioch, which lay in closer proximity than Damascus to Jerusalem, was to become vulnerable. William of Tyre recorded numerous participants at the Council.

[Panita Ristau]

Image of William of Tyre writing his history, from a 13th century Old French translation, Bibliothèque Nationale, Paris, MS 2631, f.1r

[Panita Ristau]

The Second Crusade had been called after the fall of Edessa to Zengi in 1144. In 1147, armies led by Conrad III of Germany and Louis VII of France began their separate journeys to the east; after passing through Constantinople, Conrad suffered a heavy defeat in Anatolia, and retreated to meet Louis at Nicaea. Conrad then spent the winter in Constantinople while Louis continued south to the Mediterranean coast, harassed by the Turks along the way, and finally sailed to Antioch, then ruled by Raymond of Poitiers, uncle of his wife Eleanor of Aquitaine. Conrad arrived at Acre in April, and Louis marched south from Antioch.[1] The nobility of Jerusalem welcomed the arrival of troops from Europe, and it was announced that a council should meet in Acre; as William of Tyre says, "together with the nobles of the realm who possessed an accurate knowledge of affairs and places, they entered into a careful consideration as to what plan was most expedient."[2]

[Panita Ristau]

Target of the crusaders

There were a number of choices for the target of the crusade. In northern Syria, Edessa was firmly in the control of Nur ad-Din, the successor of Zengi; its count, Joscelin II, was in captivity and there was no hope of retrieving him or the city, so the matter, so important to the original call for the crusade, was apparently not even discussed. In Antioch, Raymond of Poitiers had tried to convince Louis to attack Aleppo, Nur ad-Din's capital and the greatest threat to that city, but Raymond and Louis had quarrelled (partly over rumours of an incestual relationship between Eleanor and the prince) and Raymond was not present at the Council. The County of Tripoli was also not represented, although an attack on Aleppo would have benefitted Tripoli as well; however, the rule of Raymond II of Tripoli was challenged by Alfonso Jordan, Count of Toulouse, his cousin, and when Alfonso was poisoned on the way to the Council, Raymond was implicated in his murder. Conrad and Louis were, in any case, unconcerned with matters in northern Syria; for them, pilgrimage to Jerusalem was an inherent part of the crusading vow, and defense of Jerusalem was of utmost importance.[3]

[Panita Ristau]

In the south, the most immediate threats to Jerusalem came from Ascalon and Damascus. The crusade had coincidentally arrived during a political crisis in Jerusalem: King Baldwin III had ruled jointly with his mother Melisende since the death of King Fulk of Jerusalem in 1143, when Baldwin was only 13 years old; but Baldwin was now 18 and wished to assert his authority. The option of Ascalon did not suit Baldwin, since his brother Amalric, who supported their mother, was already Count of Jaffa and Ascalon would have been added to his territory. Ascalon had also been contained by a number of castles built during the reign of Fulk and was not an immediate threat. The capture of Damascus, on the other hand, would benefit Baldwin; despite being a sometime-ally of Jerusalem, Nur ad-Din also desired it, and capturing it would help limit the emir's power.[4] It would please Conrad and Louis, who were interested in capturing a city which, unlike Ascalon, was important to the history of Christianity.[5] It was therefore determined that the crusaders should march against Damascus. William of Tyre passes over these discussions, saying only that "various opinions of diverse factions were offered and arguments pro and con presented, as is customary in matters of such importance. At last it was agreed by all that under the circumstances it would be best to besiege Damascus, a city of great menace to us."[6

[Panita Ristau]

Aftermath of the council

Whatever the reasons for the Siege of Damascus were, the results were disastrous for the crusaders. The combined forces besieged the city in July, but the campaign was a terrible blunder and failed after only four days. The crusaders blamed each other and there were rumours of bribery. Conrad and Louis lingered in Jerusalem for some time, accomplishing nothing, before returning to Europe. Just as had been feared, Nur ad-Din used the opportunity to impose his power over Damascus, and was in personal control of the city by 1154.[7] The general historical debate now appears to view the decision to attack Damascus as somewhat inevitable. The campaign is viewed by historians, such as Martin Hoch, that the decision was the logical conclusion of Damascene foreign policy shifting into alignment with the Zengid dynasty. King Baldwin III had previously launched a campaign with the sole objective of capturing the city. This aided in shifting the Burid dynasty's relations with the Kingdom of Jerusalem.[8]

[Panita Ristau]

The original target of the crusade, Edessa, was an unfeasible target in any case. King Baldwin III was locked in a family dispute with his mother Queen Melisende over territory in Nablus and would therefore be reluctant to campaign in the North. This was echoed by the general consensus of the nobility of Jerusalem, who wished to strike out the threat of increasing Zengid influence in Damascus. If the city fell to the army of an enemy, which it did in 1154, the strategic importance of the city would allow for a campaign to be assembled directly into the heartland of Jerusalem. The Byzantine-Antioch treaty of 1137, which outlined the rights of the Byzantine Emperor to former Byzantine lands captured by the crusading armies, would also persuade many not to campaign in the North. Despite this, an attack on a neutral territory for the benefit of Jerusalem would compromise security in the North, particularly with the growing strength of the Zengid dynasty in the territory around Aleppo and, from 1144, Edessa. By deciding against a campaign at Aleppo, Antioch, which lay in closer proximity than Damascus to Jerusalem, was to become vulnerable.[9]

[Panita Ristau]

Participants

William of Tyre lists numerous participants at the Council. The Germans and others allied to the Holy Roman Empire included:

    * Conrad III of Germany
    * Otto, Bishop of Freising
    * Stephan of Bar, Bishop of Metz
    * Heinrich I von Lothringen, Bishop of Toul
    * Theodwin, Bishop of Porto, papal legate
    * Henry II Jasomirgott, Duke of Bavaria and Margrave of Austria
    * Duke Welf VI
    * Frederick III, Duke of Swabia
    * Herman III, Margrave of Baden
    * Berthold III of Andechs
    * William V, Marquess of Montferrat
    * Guido, Count of Biandrate

[Panita Ristau]

There were also "other noted men of high rank, whose names and titles we do not recall."[10] Otto of Freising would later write the Gesta Friderici, a history of Holy Roman Emperor Frederick Barbarossa, who himself attended the Council while still only Duke of Swabia. He lists Conrad, Henry of Bavaria, Welf, and Frederick, as well as Ortlieb, Bishop of Basel, and Arnold of Wied, Conrad's chancellor, "and other counts and illustrious men and nobles"; however, he passes over the Council and the siege completely, saying "what issue and event this expedition to Damascus also experienced must be related elsewhere, and possibly by others."[11] From the French, participants included:

    * Louis VII of France
    * Godefroy de la Rochetaillée, Bishop of Langres
    * Arnulf, Bishop of Lisieux
    * Guy of Florence, cardinal priest of San Crisogono, papal legate
    * Robert I of Dreux
    * Henry I, Count of Champagne
    * Thierry, Count of Flanders
    * Ivo de Nesle