• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

Why did the Second Crusade Fail?

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

Why did the Second Crusade Fail? The Second Crusade was called on the 1st of December 1147 by Pope Eugenius III. Initially, it had been addressed to King Louis VII of France and his subjects. The main objective that had been announced was to reclaim Edessa as it was essential for the Franks to recapture this land. Unfortunately, the objective had not been achieved in the crusade; in fact the goal to recapture Edessa was a complete failure. However, although Edessa was the main objective of the Second Crusade, during the course of the crusade the Christians set their sights on Damascus, the Baltic and Iberia. These additional aims came about when they reached the Holy Land. Despite these new goals, the only true success of the Second Crusade was Iberia; all other aims failed (although the Baltic crusade was a success to a certain degree, but only for a short period). ...read more.

Middle

Now the question 'was the aim to recapture Damascus instead worth all the effort?' arises. The answer is simple; it was certainly not. Damascus leads me on to the next point of failure of the Second Crusade. Damascus was a great city which radiated the blossoming Arab race. It had been such a city that it motivated the crusaders through greed, which was most probably why the crusaders could not achieve the capture of such a city - because every crusader had their own goals in mind. This particular city had been too strong for the crusaders to take over, and since the crusaders were disunited by greed, and the such, it was only expected that they would fail to capture Damascus as well. The crusaders did have their chance to successfully capture the city, and that was to continue the seigure of the northern wall of the city, however, the crusading leaders had a fatal change of plan which drastically affected the outcome. ...read more.

Conclusion

The Second Crusade also had its long term effects. It created problems for the Catholic Church as it resisted any chance of Christianity establishing itself in Outr´┐Ż-mere and the surrounding area. It had also created a huge loss in confidence among the Christians after such a humiliating defeat. The defeat had caused so much pain for the Christians that many believed that God was no longer on their side and so many Christians lost their faith. In conclusion, to a very large degree, the Second Crusade was a failure. Edessa, the main reason behind the crusade was lost and they failed to reclaim it. Damascus was, frankly, a waste of time (due to their careless tactics which were not well thought out) and finally the success of the Baltic was only for a short period. Iberia was the main success of the Second Crusade and even that is not worthy of mention as it was not even planned from the beginning of the Crusade. The Second Crusade proved to be a disaster and caused a lot of pain for many Christians. ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our AS and A Level Other Historical Periods section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related AS and A Level Other Historical Periods essays

  1. To what extent was the Third Crusade a defeat for the Latins?

    The amount of men and support for the Third Crusade was never to be accomplished again. In terms of organisation the deliverance of manpower and material resources to the east was as Riley-Smith writes, "remarkable". This can be seen for instance in the organisation of Emperor Frederick's army.

  2. What was the impact of the Norman Conquest

    It was the law of the local churches, made by churchmen in their own assemblies, such as that which Lanfranc had summoned in 1075. Overlooking this was the underlying authority of the Pope at Rome, who would generally agree on the objectives of the local churches, but this complicated the relations between King and Church.

  1. Strategy in Cortes' conquest of Mexico

    On the other hand, the seizure of Montezuma and his subsequent untimely death left a vacuum in the Aztec leadership. This situation worsened when Montezuma's immediate successor, Cuitlahauh, died of smallpox less than three days after his election. As Thomas explains, "the crisis was great, for the Emperor was essential to the direction of Mexican society.

  2. What was the short term significance of the Amritsar Massacre?

    of nationalism, which was significant in changing the relationship between Britain and India. The Amritsar Massacre and the treatment of Dyer had convinced all Indians that the whole British people stood behind the inhumanity of Dyer and no fair treatment of India could be expected from them20; however, this is not to say that all British people supported Dyer.

  1. How important was the discovery of the Holy Lance in the Crusader success in ...

    is largely based on the profound effect it had on their morale and the assertion that the battle would've been lost had they not been inspired by the discovery. Before the Lance was discovered the Crusaders' morale was low as the city's food supplies had been depleted as a result

  2. How were the lives of Civilians affected by the Second World War

    He explains how the evacuees were just forced on them, common in evacuation. This often led to conflict, were the evacuees went home due to a different lifestyles/class. The Blitz was the heavy bombing of British cities by the Germans in an attempt to lower morale.

  1. In What Ways Was The Siege Of Antioch The Turning Point Of The First ...

    Antioch took the Crusaders to the brink but they managed to stay united whereas the Muslims were beginning to divide under the pressure and were weakened by their defeat whereas the Crusaders were stronger for their victory. One factor that made Antioch such an important moment was that it was

  2. To what extent was the military prowess of the Crusaders the main reason for ...

    towards the enemy firing off rounds of arrows, when they reached the ranks they would turn and ride along the rank of the enemy firing arrows at the same time, they would then turn again and ride back to the main body of the army, as this did this another

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work