To what extent was strong leadership the main reason for the success of the First Crusade (1096-99)?

Authors Avatar

Kurt Shead

MTG: C

To what extent was strong leadership the main reason for the success of the First Crusade (1096-99)?’

There were many reasons as to why the First Crusade was successful. It is debatable as to whether strong leadership was the main one – other factors should also be considered, such as the level of disunity in the Muslim world at the time, as well as the aid the Western forces were given by their Byzantine allies.

        Since the death of the Seljuk emperor Malikshah in 1092, a power vacuum was created in the East. Malikshah’s four sons and brother fought over the right of succession, and as a result the once great empire was splintered into a number of warring provinces, all of which were only interested in gaining personal power. Because of this, the Muslim leaders were only concerned about expansion, and failed to take exterior powers into account. When the People’s Crusade arrived in the East their forces were not considered to be overly dangerous. Indeed, they were little more than an army of peasants, and Kilij Arslan’s forces slaughtered almost all thirty thousand. As well as not taking this threat seriously, the Muslim leaders did not comprehend that this attack was anything more than a raid. This proved to be a bad move by the Muslims, as when the first wave of crusaders laid siege to Nicaea, Kilij Arslan was away fighting the Danishmends. When he returned to try and lift the siege, he found himself outnumbered and was subsequently defeated, as he had no allies to augment his forces. Muslim disunity was the most important reason as to why the First Crusade succeeded as if the Muslim world had been united in repelling the Crusaders from their lands, the Crusaders’ would have had to fight for every inch of land they took instead of picking off individual Muslim leaders one by one. It was more important than strong leadership because had the Muslim world been unified, the leaders of the Crusade would have had a much harder time reaching Jerusalem. As well as this, it is likely that had the Muslims been unified, the cracks that already existed between the Western Christians and their Byzantine allies would have widened and been exploited, thus leading to disunity amongst the Crusaders.

Join now!

        However, strong leadership was of course a large part of why the First Crusade was successful. Without powerful leaders, such as Bohemond and Adhemar, leading the Crusading armies, the Western forces would have dissolved and would have most likely have turned against each other and their Eastern allies. The Crusaders found themselves upon foreign lands, and at the Battle of Dorylaeum, they were confronted by a style of warfare that was to them barbaric and alien. But Bohemond was a stout enough leader to keep his forces disciplined and in check, long enough for Godfrey of Bouillon and the ...

This is a preview of the whole essay