100% satisfaction guarantee Immediately available after payment Both online and in PDF No strings attached
Previously searched by you
"To what extent was the bitter rivalry between Philip Augustus and Richard I the main reason for the failure of the Third Crusade?" Model Essay£5.99
Add to cart
To what extent was the bitter rivalry between Philip Augustus and Richard I the main
reason for the failure of the Third Crusade?
It is undeniable that the Third Crusade failed in its main goal of recapturing the city of Jerusalem and the
reasons for this can be categorised into three key factors: the bitter rivalry between Philip Augustus and
Richard, the strength of Saladin/ Muslim unity and issues the Crusaders faced, namely one of the leaders,
Fredrick Barbarossa, drowning on the journey to the Holy Land. A close examination of the time period
reveals that this rivalry was evidently the main reason for the failure of the Third Crusade as it depleted the
final army size and lessened the effectiveness of what would have been an otherwise strong army, as shall
be discussed.
Clearly, the main factor for the failure of the Third Crusade was the bitter rivalry between Phillip and
Richard. Even before the Crusade, there was a strong rivalry between the two and this highly impacted
their ability to recapture Jerusalem. Initially, the two kings had to leave three years later than expected due
to arguments and rivalry and this delay allowed Saladin to consolidate control of his kingdom before they
arrived so he was more prepared for a potential attack than if they had left at the expected time. When
they did get to the Holy Land, this rivalry continued and led to a lot of infighting between the French and
English which thus distracted from the main aim of recapturing Jerusalem and the common enemy of the
Muslims. Also, this rivalry led to Philip actually leaving the crusade after the siege of Acre and this had two
main consequences on the Third Crusade. Firstly, Richard chose not to attack Jerusalem as he knew he
would be unable to take and maintain it and this was primarily due to a lack of troops after Philip and many
of the French army left. In addition to this, when he returned, Philip attacked Richard’s continental lands,
forcing Richard to return early rather than stay in the holy land and fight and this proved disastrous
because only 6 months later, Saladin died and the Muslim empire crumbled meaning that Richard could
have easily taken Jerusalem had he not been forced to leave. It is clear that this was the most significant
factor because it heavily impacted Richard’s decision to not attack Jerusalem. The crusader army was
highly skilled despite this rivalry, as shown by the numerous military successes they achieved at Acre, Jaffa
and Cyprus when they worked together and did not allow this bitter rivalry between the kings to dominate,
so clearly they would have been more effective had they been united and been consistent in working
together and may have had the opportunity to attack Jerusalem.
Another significant but less important factor in explaining why the Third Crusade failed was the strength of
Saladin. Saladin was a strong, intelligent military tactician and leader who was able to unite Syria and Egypt
with his army far outnumbering that of the Crusaders. One of the reasons Richard chose not to attack
Jerusalem was because he understood the strength of Saladin and his army size, knowing it outnumbered
his own. However, Richard was also a shrewd military tactician which Saladin recognised and this led to the
1192 Settlement where the two agreed a peace treaty and to stop fighting. Had Saladin and his army been
stronger than Richard and his, this Settlement would not have been necessary as Saladin would have felt
confident in defeating the Crusader army but the fact that he agreed to peace shows that perhaps his
strength was limited compared to Richard. The truth was that it was Richard’s army size, which was
depleted mainly due to rivalries and Philip and his French army leaving, which impacted his decision to not
attack Jerusalem. Also, unlike the Crusader army, the Muslim one was very much united and thus arguably
stronger. Previously, both the First Crusade and the Crusader State had relied on Muslim disunity to
survive so now that the Muslims had been united more under Saladin, they were facing a stronger and
harder to defeat army. However, despite Saladin uniting the Muslims, there were still underlying tensions
and disunity which were made apparent after the death of Saladin so had the Crusader army been united
and not faced such a bitter rivalry, they may have been able to exploit this disunity and use it to their
advantage much like what was witnessed in the First Crusade which was successful. Moreover, as
previously mentioned the Crusaders were able to achieve some military successes against the Muslims
The benefits of buying summaries with Stuvia:
Guaranteed quality through customer reviews
Stuvia customers have reviewed more than 700,000 summaries. This how you know that you are buying the best documents.
Quick and easy check-out
You can quickly pay through credit card for the summaries. There is no membership needed.
Focus on what matters
Your fellow students write the study notes themselves, which is why the documents are always reliable and up-to-date. This ensures you quickly get to the core!
Frequently asked questions
What do I get when I buy this document?
You get a PDF, available immediately after your purchase. The purchased document is accessible anytime, anywhere and indefinitely through your profile.
Satisfaction guarantee: how does it work?
Our satisfaction guarantee ensures that you always find a study document that suits you well. You fill out a form, and our customer service team takes care of the rest.
Who am I buying these notes from?
Stuvia is a marketplace, so you are not buying this document from us, but from seller bethemmahook. Stuvia facilitates payment to the seller.
Will I be stuck with a subscription?
No, you only buy these notes for £5.99. You're not tied to anything after your purchase.
