Crusades Article 9

q ( bo"k> fn',lureo{ +1,*F;#A CruroJ, irn"t{ F. ll"^J"rson ("J|lorS t1tO l.,o^rJo^ G *rJ, Belto^J So,,,,s

Failureof the FifthCrusade

P .t

The FifthCrusade(1217-1229) markedthe last majorexpeditionto the Eastinitiatedand 11tnchedby the papacy.OrganizationaUy speaking,it was far moresophisticated thanany predecessors. of its PopeInnocentlll, who plannedandpromotedthe campaign,leameda greatdealfromthe lessonsof the FourthCrusade(1202-1204) and intendedto givethe new Crusadea betterchanceof successthrougha massivereassessment and revisionof

P-&

crusadingapparatus.That planningdid not savethe FifthCrusade,however,from becoming rife with dissension,paralyzedby leadershipproblems,and rackedby a shortageof resources.The campaignoscillatedbetweenextendedstalemateand rashadvance.Despite the conquestof the importantcity of Damietta(1219),the expeditionfailedin the end. A varietyof reasonshavebeenprofferedto explainthe failureof the FifthCrusade.Some historians havepointedtowarda decliningcommitment to, andwaningenthusiasm for, crusadingamongwestemEuropeans.Somebelievethat increasinginternecineconflicts withinthe Westgobbledup the resourcesand attentionof rulerswho,thoughstill interested in the statusof Jerusalem, focusedmoreattentively on domesticissues.Othershavecited poortacticaldecisionsmadein the field,the inabilityof the papacyand empireto workin concert,or the differingviewsof the CrusaderStatearistociacyanOthe Westernerswho tookthe cross.Frequently, the debatehasfocusedon the strongpersonalities and shortcomings of the mainparticipants: Pelagius, the intransigent papallegatewhose influencesteadilyincreased as the campaignworeon; Johnof Brienne,kingof Jerusalem, whoseincompetence as a leadervastlyoutweighedhis commandof militarytactics;and HolyRomanEmperorFrederickll, whosecontinuousdelayslefttroopson the ground chronicallystrandedand ineffective. The followingtwo assessments of the FifthCrusadetacklethe problemfrom different angles.The firstfocuseson structuralproblemsthatwere hardwiredinto medievalmilitary logistics.The secondespousesa moretraditionalapproachby focusingon the ideological contextsurroundingthe Crusade.Bothagree,however,that the reasonsleadingup to the failureof the FifthCrusadewerenot uniqueto it. Thus,studyingthe failureof the Crusadein manywaysis to studythe failureof the movement.The two viewsdiffer,however,in their datingof the end of the FifthCrusade.Thefirst marksthe end with the surrenderof the main CrusaderarmybetweenDamiettaand Mansurahin 1221.The secondholdsthat the Fifth Crusadeendedin Jerusalemin 1229whenFrederickrecoveredthe city througha negotiatedsettlementwith the Egyptiansultan.

Viewpoint The FifthCrusadefailedbecauseof the logisticalinabilityof medievalarmiesto wagewars in farawayregions. The {ailureof a particularCrusadeis merelyan episodein the long-continuing conflictover the Holy Land.Historians,however,haveoftenjudgedsuccessand faiturealmostentirelyin termsof individualCrusades,ignoringthe fact that Crusadersoccupiedportionsof the Near Easternmainlandfor almosttwo hundredyears.Theyhaveassessedthe successor failure of eachCrusadeon manygrounds,but probablya majorityhavefocusedon whatthey have seenas an increasingalienationfrom the Crusadeon the partof Westemersin the laie twelfthand earlythirteenthcenturies.Manyalso believetfrattherewas increasing disenchantment with the roleof the Churchin Europeansociety,growingtensioni between papacy tfe and secularrulers,and a deepeningrift in Western-soiiety c6ncerningreligion. Otherhistorianshavechallengedthe ideathat the Crusadewas lesspopularas t'netnienn centuryendedand the thirteenthcenturyadvanced.\Mthoutdenyingthe existenceof profoundproblemsin Europeansocietyassociatedwiththe sociil and economicchanges that markedthis period,they argueagainstany majorideologicalrift amongWesterneis. Instead,they try to understandthe placeof the Crusadein thl Latinmind.fn"y are far from agreeingwith one another,but mostwouldarguethat the Crusadearosefrom a combination of politicalcircumstances and relioiousideatism

Latinsinheriteda traditionof defendingtheirfrontiersfrom the expandingforcesof lslamas well as barbariantribes.Theycameto see themselvesas heirsof the RomanEmpirein a culturalsenseand regardedMuslimsas invadersof the empirethey sharedwith the Thisviewfit quitewell intothe ideasof the Churchreformers,who,fromthe late Byzantines. workedto separatethe Churchfrom lay controlandwho desiredto restore eleventhcentury, -Church underthe leadershipof the papacy.Shortlyafterthe call by Pope the unityof the preachers of the Crusade Urbanlifor whatis referredto as the FirstCrusade(1096-1102), the needto liberatethe holyplaceswhereChristlivedanddied.Bothof wereproclaiming theseapproaches,however,haveoftenignoredthe ordinaryrealitiesthat influenced decisionmaking.Relyingheavilyon narrativeaccounts,they reflectattitudesof the clericat authorswho wr-oteaOouithe Crusades.Suchan approachhas biasedthe analysisof the werefought.Failureor successdependedas much underwhichCrusades actualconditions of an often or moreon adequatetroopsandsupplies,as wellas the effectiveleadership attitudes toward or the enemy. on religious motives force, as military uncertain and divided consider that were they often Indeed,thosewho viewthe Crusadesas religiouswars alwaysreliedonthe ideaof liberation directedagainstlslam,but the brun!of the argume-nt of theirenemies.The Vrerrys paid religioOs to the less attention much of the HolyLandand demonstrate providesan excellentopportunityto the processof FifthCrusade(1217-1229) playeda beyondthe controlof the participants decisionmakingandto showhowconditions outcome. decisivepart in the one of a seriesof The FifthCrusade-thenumberis arbitrarybut conventional-was campaignsaimedat restoringthe LatinKingdomof Jerusalemand recapturingJerusalem andfailure, lossesto Saladinin 1187.lt was bom out of frustration afterthe disastrous ih (1189-1192), succeeded gains which made Third Crusade by the followingthe small the andthe diversionof the holdof the Latinson portionsof the mainland, maintaining whichsiphonedoff Westernforcesand againstConstantinople, FourthCrusade(1202-1204) dividedthe commitmentof leadingWesternnoblesto the liberationof the HolyLand.The for a waveof popularreactionthat coalescedin FourthCrusadewas probablyresponsible Crusade(1212),whichmighthavereceivedits namebecauseof the the so-calledChildren's in the FourthCrusade.PopeInnocentlll, who had of somesonsof participants involvement failedin his effortto directthe FourthCrusadeto its originalgoal,announcedhis planfor a a councilto meetin 1215, and summoned newCrusadein 1213,appointedpreachers, wherethe Crusadewas a majortopic. \Mren Innocentdiedin 1216,plansfor the new Crusadewerewell underway.At the Fourth to the decreesof the council.This LateranCouncilhe appendedhis plan,"Ad liberandem," plan,whichwas undoubtedly discussedat the counciland reflectedthe viewsof the participantsas well as thoseof the Pope,is the mostextensiveand detailedCrusadeplan producedby any Popeup to this time.Already,the youngGermankingandfutureHoly RomanEmperor,Frederickll, had takenthe Crusadevow,as had the penitentand aging KingJohnof England.Philiplt Augustusof France,who had takenpart in the ThirdCrusade, even did not take the Crusadervow and remainedsomewhatalooffromthe preparations, ground they that council on the Pope and by the objectingto someof the decisionsmade preachers iffinged on royalrights.Still,manyFrenchnoblestookthe Crusadevow,while enjoyedgreatsuccessin the landsalongthe RhineRiveras well as in England.Underpapal direction,they workedto reconcilewaningfactionsand to induceleadingnoblesto takethe vow. Innocentled this peaceeffortat the council,thoughwithoutgreatsuccess.He was, in fact,workingtowardthis end in northemltalywhenhe diedin Perugia.

?3

( The cardinalschoseas his successorCardinatCensius,who tookthe nameHonoriustll. was well equippedto pick up whereInnocenthad leftoff. This experiencedadministrator thathe plannedto followInnocent'stimetablefor the announcing Honoriuslostno time in Crusade.The task,however,was dfficultbecausea key figure,Frederick,had not yet consolidated his politicalpositionin Germany.Indeed,evenafterthe defeatof his rival,Otto ally and supporter,Philipll Augustus,Otto lV, at the Battleof Bouvines(1214)by Frederick's threat.In England,KingJohn,who had beenalliedto and his alliesremaineda formidable Otto,died in 12'16.Thus,noneof the majorrulerswerepreparedto departfor the Easton for thistime.The kingAndrewll plannedhis departure timein 1217.OntyHungarian delayedtheirdepartureuntilthe springof 1218,expecting Rhenishand Englishcontingents to be led by Frederick. The firstcontingentsanivedin Acreon the northernPalestiniancoastin the latesummer and earlyfall of 1217.Firstto arrivewas DukeLeopoldof Austria,an experiencedCrusader, who led a grouplargelyfromAustriaand Germanybut includedsomewaniorsfrom other partsof Europe.In September, Andrewanived.Ater consultingwith Johnof Brienne,the rulerof the remnantof the LatinKingdom,theydecidedon a showof forcein northern Palestineand Lebanon.ThisdecisioncertainlysuitedJohnof Brienneand the localbarons, whosepositionwas nonetoo secure.In part,theirobjectivewas aimedat solvinga severe foodshortageby raidinggrainsuppliesin the regionaroundal-Fulah.Theymet little resistance.The Muslimforceswithdrewand madeno attemptto engagethem.The Crusadersalso scoutedthe areaaroundMountTabor,a key fortressin the areasouthwest of the Sea of Galilee.They retumedto Acreand,aftera shortstay,launchedan attackon MountTabor.The mountain,whichrisessharplyfromthe plain,was wellfortifiedand was defendedby sometwo thousandtroops.lt represented a seriousthreatto Acre.In early madetheirascent.Althoughtheyhad surprised the garrison, December1217the Crusaders Johnof Briennedecidedto breakoff the attack.A secondattack,two dayslater,was also indecisive,and the Crusadersreturnedto Acre.Despitethis lackof perseverance, Sultanal'Adildecidedto withdrawhis forcesfrom MountTabor.AlthoughAndrewleft,the arrivalof Rhenishtroopsin the springof 1218permittedthe Crusadersto turn theirattentionto their chiefobjective,an attackon Egyptdesignedto splitthe Muslimforcesand deprivethemof the wealthof that land.The decisionwas now madeto launchthe attackagainstDamietta, at the eastemmouthof the Nile,whichgavedirectaccessto Cairo. An 24 May 1218theCrusaderfleetbeganto movesouthwardtowardDamietta,landlngon the coastto the west of the DamiettaNileand eastof the al-AzraqCanal.(lt shouldbe noted that the geographyof the areahas changeddramatically betweenthe thirteenthcenturyand the present.Amongotherchanges,the presentcity is just southof whereit was in 1218and the coastlineis furthernorth.)The CrusaderselectedJohnof Brienneas their leader.This decisionwas necessarybecausetheydid not owe allegianceto any commonruler.The first task of the Crusaderswas to destroythe towerfromwhicha chainstretchedacrossthe Nile to preventshipsfrom movingup the river.Sincethe towerstoodoffshore,it couldonly be attackedfrom the river,requiringsiegemachinesmountedon Ships.The attackproveda majorchallenge.Progresswas slowuntil,with newlydesignedmachines,the ChainTower fellon 25 August. The way was now opento crossthe riverand cut the cityoff from the mainMuslimcampto the south.The deathof al-'Adilon 31 AugustthrewSaladin'sempireintoconfusion.The sonsof al-'Adildividedthe empire.Al-l\Iu'azzam gainedSyria;al-Ashrafruledlraq;whilethe

q

n< r.J

richestprize,Egypt,wentto al-Kamil,thuslayingthe foundationfor rivalryamongthe brothersand theirsupporters.\Mrenal-Kamillearnedthat manyCrusaderswere leavingin the aftermathof the vicloryat the ChainTower,whichwas not unusualsinceCrusadersfrom the Westnormallyspentlessthana yearin the East,he decidedto attacktheircamp. Despitethe elementof surprise,the Egyptianforcesweredefeated.Al-Kamilcontinuedto try to preventthe Crusadersfrom crossingthe Nileto lay siegeto Damietta.The Crusadersalso preyto weatheranddisease.The papallegate,CardinalPelagius,rallied foundthemselves theirspiritsduringthis periodand encouraged themto takepracticalmeasuresto strengthen theirposition,but moralecontinuedto be low as theyentered1219.Thingswerealso going badlyfor the Egyptians.Al-Kamillearnedof a conspiracyagainsthim. He movedhis forces awayfrom Damiettaand thusopenedthe way for the Crusadersto crossthe river.Damietta wereunableto do morethanisolatethe city.Alwas stillwellfortified, and the Crusaders put the down rebellion and launchedan attackagainstthe Crusaders Kamil,meanwhile, on PalmSunday,1219.ltwas repulsedchieflythroughthe leadership of Leopold,Dukeof Austria,but the effortto takethe citywas frustratedwhenLeopolddepartedwith manyof his followers.

fromthe Westdictatedmostof the The dependenceof the Crusaderson reinforcements decisionsreachedin the followingmonths.Theylauncheda directattackon the city,but it failed.lt was duringthe ensuinglullthatone of the mostcharismatic figuresin history, Francisof Assisi,arived in the Crusader€mp. Francis,the founderof a religiousorder calledthe Orderof LittleBrothers(theFranciscans)-who weredevotedto poverty-preached a messageof conversionand peace.In his sermonto the Crusadershe warnedthatthe battlethey plannedfor the nextdaywouldfail. In fact,it was a neardisaster,savedonlyby the strongactionof the KnightsTemplar,the Hospitallers, and the TeutonicKnights, supportedby Johnof Brienne.Francisalsocarriedhis messageto the Muslimcamp, preachingbeforethe Sultan.Thoughoftendismissedas ineffectual,it seemslikelythat alKamilreadFrancis'smessageas offeringthe possibilityof a negotiatedsettlement,a course that he favoredbecausehe wishedto devotehis majoreffortsto makinghimselfsoleheirto Saladin'sempire,eliminatinghis brotheral-Mui'azzam, who ruledSyria.In fact,therewas a periodof truceand negotiations at thistime.Al-Kamilofferedto retumthe city of Jerusalem as well as Crusaderfortffications westof the Jordanbut this offerwas rejectedbecause, withoutthe key fortsacrossthe Jordanand southof Jerusalem,the citywas too vulnerable. Al-Kamilcouldnot surrenderthesefortswithoutgivingup his own ambitionto ruleSyria. \Mth the negotiations endingin failure,the stalematecontinued.Crusadeleadersknew, however,that the citywouldeventuallyfall unlessal-Kamillauncheda majoreffort.His attemptto relievethe city in late October1219failed.Shortlyafter,the Crusadersentered the city throughan unmannedtower.The defendersof the city had simplystarvedto death. The bootywas enormousand servedto replenishthe dwindlingresourcesof the city.The conquest,however,resultedIn a conflictbetweenPelagiusand Johnover ruleof Damietta and angeramongthe rankand file overthe divisionof spoils.Pelagiusfelt the full bruntof theiranger.In fact,however,he was merelyfollowingpapalinstructions aimedat securing the positionof the Church.The conflictwas,for a time,damaging,untila @mpromisewas reachedplacingthe city underthe ruleof JohnuntilFrederickarrived.His coming,already delayedfor two years,was now anticipated. The shareof bootyallottedto commonsoldiers was also increased.In the weeksthatfollowed,it was clearthat Johnand his supporters understoodthattheirdifferencewas withthe Pope,and theypresentedtheircasein Rome. Tensionsover leadership wereendemicin medievalarmies,whichoftenlackeda clearline

of command.Decisionswereusuallymadein councit,and thosewhoseviewswere rejected?'G sometimeswithdrewtheirsupport.For this reason,one shouldnot readtoo muchintosuch playedan importantrole,but the issueswere disagreements. Of course,personalities The main definedby conditionson the ground,whichfurnishedthe basisfor disagreements. problemswerelogistical. were by lines Men and travel sea,a long. supplieshadto Supply voyagethatwas possibleonly duringthe springand fall becauseof the dangerof stormsat othertimes.Crusaderswereexpectedto pay theirown expenses.Manyrelieduponthe leadersof theircontingents, but moneywas alwaysshort.Pelagius'scontrolof moneyraised by the Crusadetax on the clergy,whichhe seemsto havecarefullysavedfor major As fundsgrewscarce,his influenceincreased.The expenses,was a boneof contention. continuedabsenceof Frederickdeprivedthe Crusadeof effectiveleadershipand no doubt addedto the dissensionamongthosepresent.Uncertainty fueleddebate.

a -

Studyof anivalsand departuresshowsthat militarydecisionswere stronglyinfluencedby the numberof troopsavailable.Afterthe fall of Damietta,therewas a substantialreductionin the numberof Crusadersin EgyPt,\Mth highmortalityratesfrom diseaseand militaryaction, the lackof replacements sappedthe moraleas wellas the abiligof the Crusbders to mount an effectivecampaign.Johnof Briennedepartedto dealwithmattersin Syriaand Palestine, wheresl-ffis'a-zamharassedthe remnantof the LatinKingdom.\Mth the arrivalof reinforcements from northernltalyand a forcesentby Frederick,announcinghis plansto join the Crusade,Pelagiuswantedto movequicklyagainstthe enemy.ButmanyCrusaders were reluctantto gamble.Theyfelt thattheirforceswerestilltoo weak.The arrivalof Duke Frederick,in the springof 1221broughtmattersto a head. Louisof Bavaria,representing on Pressureto launchan attack the mainMuslimforcesincreased.The moraleof the Crusadersdependedon action.Althoughthe dukewas underimperialordersto await Frederick's arrival,he was a realist.He decidedto undertakea reconnaissance in force preparation, toward Fariskur. southwardalongthe Nile In the legaterecalledJohnand his forces.On the Egyptiansidetherewas growingconcern.Al-Kamilwasjoinedby his brothers.He decidedto renewhis offerof peaceterms,but boththe Popeand the emperor had forbiddenany treaty.Frederickwas stillexpectedto arrive.The Crusaderarmybeganto movesouthwardand on 18 JulyreachedSharamsah. The Nilefloodwas due in lessthana month.At this point,no decisionhad beenmadeaboutadvancingfurther,but the massof Crusadersand the legate,probablymisledby the lackof seriousresistance,wantedto advance,whileJohncounseledwithdrawal.Nevertheless, the armymovedfurthersouthinto a nanowtriangleof landformedby the Nileand a smallstreamthat enteredthe rivernear Baramun.The Crusaderswerenow in a positionwherefurtheradvancewas blockedby a canalbetweenal-Mansurah and LakeManzalah.Theycouldeasilybe cut off by the riseof the Nilewaters.The decisionto retreat,takenabout26 August,was too late.Also,the Nile floodreacheda higherlevelthanin previousyears.The Sultanopenedthe sluicesto run waterintothe fields,addingto the discomfortof the soldiers.Aftera seriesof indecisive skirmishes,the Crusaderarmynegotiatedits sunenderon 29 August1221.Al-Kamil,who had neverwantedto fighta campaignthatjeopardizedhis own plans,was willingto agree. The CrusaderswouldabandonDamiettaand exchangeprisoners.The trucewouldlasteight years.Thosewho remainedin Damiettawerebitterlydisappointed, but therewas no leader willingto undertakea furthercampaign.Frederickhad not arrived.lt was not until1229that he wenton Crusade,afterhe was excommunicated by PopeGregorylX in 1228torfailureto tutfillhis Crusadevow. He thenfollowedthe directionthat had beenrejectedduringthe Fifth Crusade.He reacheda settlementthatwas essentiallythe sameas the peaceagr-eement that al-Kamilhad offeredearlier.As experiencewouldshow,it provedto be illusory. Jerusalemremainedin westem handsfor onlyaboutfifteenyears.

The failureof the FifthCrusadeto attainits objectivesevokedcriticismfrom manyquarters ?'7 It did not,however,dampeninterestin the Crusade.Contemporaries explainedthisfailure largelyin termsof theirown experience. clergy lamented The that God had not foundthem worthyof victory.SomeblamedFrederickor the Pope,but bothmen agreedto work togetherfor a new Crusade.Modernscholarshaveoftenlookedfor the reasonsfor failurein ideologicalconflict,but therewerenone.Thereweremerelyrecriminations. The reasonsfor failurewerenot in conflictsover ideasbut the resultof problemsof leadershipthatwere endemicto medievalwarfareand,aboveall,to problemsof manpowerand logisticscaused by the effortto wagewar at sucha greatdistance. - - - - . , , ''_ - - - % .-

Viewpoint The Fifth Crusadefailedbecauseof conflicts between ecclesiastical and secularpowersandthe challengethat territorialinterests presentedto the universalobjectivesof the reformedpapacy. Expiainingthe failureof any particularCrusade,by contemporaries who participatedin it and alike,frequently by manymodemhistorians degenerates intofinger-pointing. Thistrend firstof beganin earnestwiththe disillusioning endof the SecondCrusade(1147-1149)-the what becamea longlineof 'Tailedcrusades."Althoughthe failureto recaptureEdessawas the resultof a single,but devastating, strategicblunder,treacheryon the partof the Byzantinesor the baronsof the LatinEast(or both)becamethe explanationof choice amongEuropeanpeoplewho traveledthousands and of milesto takepartin a humiliating unqualifieddefeat.On the Europeanhomefront,an explanation for the failureof all particularCrusadesto the Eastis summedup in the phrasepeccatisexigentibushominum (the sinsof men).Accordingto thisformula,Godgrantedovenrhelmingvictoriesto the pure and afflictedmoraldegenerates with chastisingfailures.lf a Crusadefailed,it was because the particularCrusaderswerelasciviousmen puffedup with pride,hidingtheiravarice behinda veneerof pietyand holyservice. providesthe bestcasestudy Of all the Crusadesto the East,the FifthCrusade(1217-1229) for examiningthe problemsthatconfrontedtheseexpeditions and draggedtheminto continuousfailure.The FifthCrusademarksthe lastmajorCrusadelaunchedby the papacy to the Eastandwas the mostmeticulously organizedand matureexpeditionof its kind.lt was plannedby Popelnnocentlll, who,havingpresidedoverthe disastrousFourthCrusade (12O2-12U), wentto greatpainsto curecrusading of all its ailments.In short,the Fifth Crusadeofferedthe besteffortthatthirteenth-century Europecouldmusterto savethe Holy Land.lts failureunderscores, in boldrelief,the overallfailureof the Crusades A popularway of explainingthe failureof the FifthCrusadehas beento focuson the personalconductof the mainparticipants. In a way,this approachis a modification of the medievalexplanation, the "sinsof the men,"by transforming it intothe "shortcomings of the leaders."The villainof the piecevariesfrom historianto historian.Somehavefocusedon HolyRomanEmperorFrederickll's continuouseffortsto dodgethe Crusadethrougha long seriesof delaysthat amountedto an almostperpetualdefermentof his vow.Thus,Frederick is to blamesincehis selfishmachinations deprivedthe hostof desperatelyneeded leadershipand resources.Somehavefocusedon the weaknessof the elderlyPope Honoriuslll, who inheritedthe projectafterInnocent's death(1216).lfHonoriushad only appliedmorepressureto the Emperor,ratherthanindulginghim,then Frederick'shand

?.tr

wouldhavebeenforcedand the Crusademadeviable.CardinalPelagius,the papallegate,I has receivedthe lion'sshareof criticism.StevenRunciman,in A Historyof the Crusades (1951),for example,describedhimas lsingularlylackingin tact,"a "haughty"and "unpopula/'manwho managedto antagonize all partieswheneverhe triedhis handat mediation.His increasingprominenceas leaderof the Crusade-largelyby default-ledto heighteneddissensionwithinthe ranksthat paralyzedthe expeditionat timesand pushed the hostintopoortacticaldecisionsat others.The kingof Jerusalem, Johnof Brienne,who buttedheadswith Pelagiusin a seriesof spectacular confrontations, has received considerable criticismas well. Not onlywas he convincedthat his viewswerealwaysright and all altemativeswerewrong,he actually"abandoned" the Crusadein progress,even thoughhe was its nominalleader,to pursuepersonalinterestsin Armenia. Personalcharacterflawsamongthe participants probablywereaggravating factorsof great magnitudebut, in the end,cannotin and of themselvesexplainthe riftsthat literallypulled the FifthCrusadeapart.Excessiveconcentration on specificpersonalities has obscured (thoughhas not completelyconcealed)the ideological and politicalmatrixin whichthe protagonists The FifthCrusade,likealmostall Crusades, wereembedded. was planned, launched,and wagedamida confliclthatcast its longshadowoverthe wholeof western politics.betweenthe reformedpapacyand the HolyRomanEmpire Europeaninternational in particularand the Churchand emergingterritorialstatesin general.The incompatible and rivalinterestsof ecclesiastical and secularpowerspreventeda true synchronization of their respectiveresources,one thatwas the sinequa nonfor sucha massiveundertakingas a Crusadeto the East.The greatest,problem facingthe Crusadeswas the two main,yet mutuallyexclusive,goalsof the reformedpapacy.On the one hand,it wantedto liberate itselffromseculardomination anddeclareitstemporal,as wellas spiritual,supremacyin all matters.On the otherhand,its commitment to recoveringJerusalemand the Holy Land increasedits dependencyon secularpowers.To reconcilethesegoals,the papacyneeded not only a successfulCrusadebut one thatwas underits controt.lnconsistency bred ftustrationand perpetualanimosity.

Innocentlll mnectly recognizedthat one of the greatestobstaclesto launchinga Crusadeto the East,at leaston the homefront,was the incessantsquabblingamongEuropeanpowers. Establishing relativepeacewithinEuropewas the essentialfirstslep towlrd successiul organization of the Crusade,and the papacyoffereditselfas an honestbroker.The mainhot spotsat the timewerethe civilwar in the Empireand the wars betweenEnglandand France.Legatespromotedreconciliation and urgedthe combatants,at the ieast,to put their conflictson the backbumerfor the sakeof Christ'spatrimony.The papacy,howevei, seemedlesswillingto placeits own politicalinterestsas a secularlordon the backburner. Chiefamongtheseinterestswas the papalobjectiveto bifurcatethe GermanEmpireinto separatekingdoms:Sicily(technically a papalfief)and Germanyproper.The two kingdoms ran the riskof beingconsolidated underthe crownof HolyRomanEmperorFrederick-ll-who was supposedto be the leaderof the FifthCrusade.lf this Unification wereto happen,then the papacywouldonceagainfind itselfsandwiched withina two-frontwar whenhostiiities resumed(whichtheycertainlywould)betweenpopeand emperor.Thus,any partnership betweenthe secularand religiousheadsof the Crusadewouldbe a tenuousone, prnctuatedby mutualsuspicion. llRerial-Rapaltensionscan be seenat work in the ambivalentreactionthe papacyhad to Frederick'sdecisionto take the Crusadervow. BothInnocentand HonoriusknewFrederick

protec{or and the latteras his tutor. P'( wellandpersonally, theformeras his childhood Likewise,bothusedextremecautionwhenmeasuringhim as man or emperor.Emperors and popesalikelaidclaimto authorityof a universaltypeand sawthemselvesas sanctified Thus,authorityoverCrusadeswas oftena boneof and rivalheadsof Christendom. goingfar beyondcontrolovera militarycampaign. contention thathad implications did not havepapalpreapproval; cross his announcement the Frederick's decisionto take papacy, probably correctly,as havingdeeper was a "surprise"andwas interpretedby the rneaningsthat reachedto the rootsof Christianauthorityand smackedof an aspiring vow couldworkmorethanoneway and,likedynamite, But Frederick's Caesaro-Papism. hadto be handledwith caution.On the one hand,it couldtrumppapalauthorityby stakinga and henceChristianleadership (a tacticthatsomeof his majorimperialclaimto crusading of with). On the otherhand,renegingon or delayingfulfillment predecessors experimented the vowwouldleavethe emperorexposedto the tendermerciesof a papacythat could easilyuse it as an offensiveweaponagainstFrederick.Thatwas exactlywhat PopeGregory lX did.Yet, Honorius,despitehis tacitconcerns,was willingto give Frederickthe benefitof approachesto him.The and accommodating the doubtand actuallyadoptedconciliatory it was set but on For the time being,bothPope a delayed fuse. eventuallyexploded, issr.re and emperorcooperated. The reformedpapacydid not seethe Empireas its onlythreat.On the contrary,it viewedthe and secularauthority,and the dangersit posed,in the relationship betweenecclesiastical considerably falling shortof playinga "zero-sumgame,"the papacy hroadestof terms.\Mrile on the primacyof ecclesiastical viewedany signof secularpowerencroaching authorityas a personalities, Fezard.Essentially, it was this conflict,ratherthanone of mereincompatible againstone tfiatpittedthe papallegatePelagiusandJohnof Brienne,kingof Jerusalem, another. Oneof the greatestironiesof the CrusaderStatesis that,thoughcreatedby a movement h.rnclredby the reformedpapacy,theyboastedthe most"unreformed" modelof church mgranization in the Latinworld,whichcan be seenin the nascenttitlefor the kingof "Advocateof the HolySepulchre." The titleis extremelyreminiscentof the "wild..lerusalem: m€st'atmosphere that predatedthe Cluniacand Gregorianreforms.The CrusaderStatesin nnanywaysremainedan ossifiedreplicaof the religio-political organizationof lateeleventhffirtury France,despitethe nuancesproducedby the religiousdiversityof the region. Pmoprietary churchesand monasteries remainedubiquitoustherelongafterbecomingan aborninable relicof an uncouthand spirituallyimmatureage in the Europeanheartland.The Ctnrch, in the CrusaderStates,continuedto be viewedby rulersas a departmentof state and tendedto be treatedas such.Takingthisclimateintoconsideration, one can assessthe betpvbr of Johnof Briennemoreempathetically. He was a noblefrom Champagnewho, despitehis advancedage and yearsof royalservice,had nothingto showfor it. His maniage bothe cpeenof Jerusalemwas a greatopportunity for salvaginga failed€reer. Givenhis age,he neededto movequickly,and the LatinEastprovidedthe perfectenvironment. Gorningface to facewitha firebrandof the reformedpapacysuchas Pelagius,however, couHand did introducestumblingblocks. Peftagits's appointment as papallegateby Honoriushas beencriticizedby manyscholars, huiln'ealfy he was a manwell suitedfor the job. Keepingin mindthat the specterof the FourthCrusadeinformedmanyof the decisionsmadeduringthe organizationof the Fifth Grusade,one can betterappreciatehis qualifications for beingpapallegatefor the Crusade.

?.rc

Despileaccusationsof beingtactless,Pelagiuswas a veteranstatesmanwhosequalities Eavehim an excellentchancefor keepingthe Crusadeon targetwhilesafeguarding the lnterestsof the reformedpapacy.The firmnessthat he so oftendemonstrated shouldnot be confusedwith an uncompromising rigidity.OnceCrusadeshit the groundtheytendedto be run by committee,and Pelagiusdemonstrated a markeddegreeof flexibilityin dealingwith thfissituation. did not violatethe essentials So longas concessions of his mission,he was .r'elatively opento them.The concessions thatJohnof Briennehad in mind,however,would inaveconstituteda violation,and this stanceled to clashesbetweenthe king and the legate.

Cnucialto understanding John'ssituationis the fact thathe was a tenitorialmonarchand not a Crusader.He was moreinterestedin preservingand extendinghis own personalpowerin fiheregionthanscoringa resoundingvictoryfor the papacyor Empire.AlthoughJohnmight fuve beenbothresentfulandsuspicious of Pelagius's increasing prominence in the Orusade,the firstsubstantivebreachbetweenthe two menoccurredin responseto the sultan'sofferof a treaty.In exchangefor a Crusaderwithdrawal,the sultanwas preparedto oartwilh the city of Jerusalemand severalfortresseswest of the Jordan.The Crusaders ws!'edividedoverwhetherto acceptthe offer.The dealwouldrestoreJerusalembut leaveit ;n a strategically precarious state.Johnand Pelagiusfoundthemselves in opposingcamps. A,fterweighingthe situation, Johnprobablyfoundthe dealattractivesinceit wouldpermit nrmn to becomea real,ratherthannominal,kingof Jerusalem.His interestsweretenitorial and lgcal.Pelagius,as legate,was the defenderof papalinterestsand policies,and these sfiicted with John'smoreimmediateconcerns.The ultimaterejectionof the offerindicates fwt th9 majoritymostlikelyopposed.it-withgoodreason.KingJohn,however,probably utienred his defeatas one guaranteedby Pelagius'sinterference, one that infringeduponthe ruyailprerogative to pursuewhateveractionwas bestfor the crown. ,\1'cer the conquestof Damietta(1219)Johnand Pelagiusclashedwith evengreaterferocity. lhe fssuenowwas controloverthe newlyacquiredcity.John'sperceivedrrghtof conquest :clided withthe idealof Christianuniversalism defendedby Pelagius.By the termsof his Pelagius presiding was charged with over the divisionof landconqueredby the l,ss,on Orusade. As a papalventure,the divisionof spoilswas to be handledby the legate.John's renspedivewas quitedifferent:the Crusadewas an auxiliaryforce,afbeita massiveand @speti|telyneededone,thatwas to facilitatethe strengthening and eventualrecoveryof a BrmrtffialCrusaderState.Sincethe expeditionwas essentiallya royalventure,Damieitawas lc @ funcorporated intohis kingdom.Pelagius'schallengewas an egregiousexampleof aiencallnterference in a secularaffair.Complicating the issueyet furtherwas the possibility tld uheCrusadewas an imperialventureunderthe auspicesof the still-absentFrederick. Oertailnly thisviewwas not the papalperception,but it was probablyheldby the German m\Naflced guardthat Fredericksentandwas presentin camp.Popeand emperor, llmqre@lrer, weresiill at leastnominallyworkingtogether,andthat cooperationmingled StreryTlse finallyemergedfromthe confusion:Johnreceivedcontrolover the city until F-em.nd(sanival. Bm ,fil'lie conflictbetweenJohnand Pelagiusleadto the unravelingof the FifthCrusade?This lmcifu'tEbndoesnot seemto have beenthe case.Certainlyit createda wide anayof r'mErms and complications. \Mtenmeasuredagainstsuchissuesas racingto conquer ESYFil heforethe inundationof the Nileor the continuingabsenceof Frederi-ck, however, iwi'JfresbetweenJohnand Pelagiusranklow on the rosterof difficultiesimpedingthe )

r On the Butthe clashbetweenthe two menwas not simplyone of personalities. Gru.sade. thoseof tenitorial ctrtmary,it was a conflic{betweenthe worldviewstheyrepresented, strong,theysimply particularly were and a universalpapacy.\Mrenpersonalities **".#y a problemthatwas alwaysthere. nrnagnified

P'rt

crusadingcouldabsorbthe impactof this conflict,and at othertimesit buckled Sornetimes neneathits weight.tf-onedefersto conventionand marksthe end of the FifthCrusadeat situationis the case.Fromthisvantagepointthe Crusadefailedbut 1n1, thenthe f-ormer motbecauseof ctasninginterestsof popesand monarchs.lf, however,one viewsFrederick's canpaignas partof th6 FifthCrusadeiatherthanas an addendumto it, a differentpicture **1"'ng"ithat is moreconsistentwith the latterscenario.The FifthCrusade,like most,was constitutedof a seriesof waves,andthe portionof this Crusadeled by its designatedleaderpartof it. be considered *'/en thoughhis arrivalwasbelatedin the extreme-should as weak,was in fact a approachto Frederick,whichsomehavecharacterized hllonorius's betweenpopeand partnership wrciliatory ;d pradatic one that proposed3.genuine that could erlperor.AlthoughlionoriusremindedFrederickof the ultimateconsequences f,oflowa breachof the vow,he alsorealizedthatthe emperorfaceda wide arrayof problems, Universal fr:omMuslimsin Siciryto Lbmbardsin northemltaly,whichdefiedeasysolutions. erlperorshad univerialproblems.Honoriusbackedawayfrom hardline claimsof papal way on the Sicilyissue.To showof goodfaithby g_iving pnnmacy and madea spectacular in papalcircles,suchas the bishopof Ostia,whowouldsoonbecome individuals s,cil1e popeGregorylX, it seemedas thoughHonoriuswas givingawaythe store.Gregory'smain ffiiective was to get it back. Gregorywas cut from differentcloththanHonorius.The primarygoalof his pontificatewas clarity,the supremacyof the papacyover all otherpowerswith unprecedented m "it"Otish,ine empire.This objectivecompletelychangedthe significanceand even particularly tusirabilityof the irusade. Ratherthandoingwhateverwas possibleto facilitateFrederick's Gregorysaw the advantagesthatthe emperor'sfailureto do so wouldpresent' deparhJre, perspective, stranglingthe Crusadeservedpapalinterestsbetter m*^nolry,'fom-Grilgory's vic1oryfor the frrlanrtsirrccessfut[roiecution.R successfulCrusadewouldbe a propaga.nda ernpire.Gregorybeganby linkingthe Crusadeto a wide arcayof disputedissuesbetween with Frederick.His true casusbelli e"e""y andEmpireinhiipreliminarycorrespondences whenFrederick,afterfinallydepartingfor the East,fell sickand disembarkedat $r6madrd Diseasewas rife ratherthanfictitious,and Frederick's for convalescence. Otranrto wlnpanion,the tandgraveof Thuringia,diedfrom it en route.Gregoryrefusedto receivethe Attentionnow who cameto explain.Frederickwas excommunicated. *pdra ambassadors strheAfrom Frederickthe Crusaderto Frederickthe tyrant,who madean art form of pavedthe way for a papalinvasionof espoiling the Church.FredericKsexcommunication Siory. Frederickresumedthe Crusade,he was in an extremelydifficultposition.Not only \ttrtrTen hamperedhis abilityto drawon furtherhumanand ry,-as trc an excommunicate-which ffnencialresourcesfor the expedition-hewas alsofacingan impendingpapalinvasionof his of manyof his subjects.Hastecharacterized Itr16sthattappedintothe rebelliousinclinations authoritymadedealingwith the baronsof royal and views of imperial ms actions.His strong (he trrcLatinEastdfficultin any circumstances was now kingof Jerusalemas well as a nicetiesthat woulddelayhis Crusade but he did not havetimefor constitutional Cnurusader),

\

P't7 certainlyoccupiedmuchof his time,butwiththe andthushis returnhome.Diplomacy Egyptiansultanratherthan his own subjects.Johnof Brienne,whoseclaimto the throneof Jerusalemhad beenthwartedby Frederick,joinedforceswith Gregoryand stoodat the headof the papalarmyintendingto evictFrederickfrom Sicily.Frederick'sCrusadebecame a diplomaticratherthana militaryone.The "victory"that he securedin realitybroughtthe treatynegotiations, conductedwith the sultanyearsearlier,to a successfulconclusion. In an age limitedby primitivemilitaryorganization, a campaignon the scaleof a Crusade neededto drawuponthe very marow of the resourcesin existence.To do so, western Europecouldnot affordto be a housedivided.Giventhe feudalstructureof society,there woufdalwaysbe a measureof chaosand conflict.Butthe clashbetweensaeculumand sacerdotium, whattodayis referredto as Churchand State,was a deep-seatedand destructiveone that drewin and accentuatedall otherdisputes.In an ideologicalsense,the issuewas one of conflictingtheoriesof leadershipand primacy.Personalitie-s did not create this problembut did providethe matchesthat ignitedthe powderkeg. In a practicalsense palsiedthe movement.Particularand the interestsof territorialmonarchsincreasingly localizedinterestsconflictedwith,and ultimatelydefeated,the universaland sweeping agendaof the papacy.