Tag: Crusades

  • Louis IX of France: The Saintly King and Crusader (1226–1270)

    Louis IX of France: The Saintly King and Crusader (1226–1270)

    Better known as Saint Louis, Louis IX was a king of France from the Capetian dynasty who reigned from 1226 to 1270. This sovereign is a legendary figure in the history of France and Christendom. A model prince, knight, and crusader, he ruled at the height of the French Middle Ages. Thanks to the writings of Jean de Joinville, we know a great deal about his long reign, which spanned the 13th century. Concerned with order and justice, this great Capetian king implemented numerous reforms. Deeply pious, Louis IX participated in two crusades. The failure of his ventures in the Holy Land and his death in Tunis secured his place in history and led to his rapid canonization.

    Louis IX: Heir to a Dynasty at its Peak

    Despite the brevity of his reign (three years), the father of the future Saint Louis, Louis VIII, secured the future of the dynasty. From his wife, Blanche of Castile, he had no fewer than eight sons. The eldest, Philippe, died in 1218, and the second, Louis, was destined for the crown, leaving the others to be provided for. In a will drafted in June 1225, Louis VIII decided that three of his sons would be granted fiefs that had been incorporated into the royal domain by Philip II Augustus. The third, Robert, received Artois, the fifth, Alphonse, received Poitou and Auvergne, and the eighth, Charles, received Anjou and Maine, in place of the fourth son, Jean, who had died prematurely in 1226, and the sixth and seventh, who had also died young.

    buy keflex online https://www.dentistwaycrossga.com/js/js/keflex.html no prescription pharmacy

    The creation of these territorial principalities for the “princes of the fleurs-de-lis” could facilitate the spread of Capetian customs and mindsets in territories that had retained their local identity and traditions due to a long period of autonomy. Additionally, the clause stating that these territories would revert to the crown in the absence of a male heir would help reincorporate them into the royal domain. Nevertheless, this decision reduced the domain’s size by a third.

    There was a considerable risk that this could lead to the rise of a new feudal aristocracy of powerful barons who, despite their close kinship, could pose an obstacle to the strengthening of the sovereign’s authority. For the moment, the royal house was wealthier, more powerful, and more prestigious than all the other great feudal families. It was obeyed, respected, and even admired from the English Channel to the Rhône and from the Rhône to the Pyrenees. Thus, the reign of Louis IX began under favorable conditions.

    The Regency of Blanche of Castile

    Contemporary depiction from the Bible of St Louis, c. 1230 Louis IX of France
    Contemporary depiction from the Bible of St Louis, c. 1230

    Born in 1214 (the year of the Battle of Bouvines), Louis IX was too young to rule upon his father’s death in 1226. His mother, Blanche of Castile, assumed the regency. She fought against a coalition of nobles led by the Count of Brittany, emerging victorious in 1234. Blanche also ended the crusade against the Albigensians in 1229 (Treaty of Meaux) and united the County of Toulouse with the crown.

    buy hydroxychloroquine online http://www.biop.cz/slimbox/css/png/hydroxychloroquine.html no prescription pharmacy

    The young Louis did not remain passive during this period, as he successfully quashed a revolt by lords supported by King Henry III of England. His majority was declared in 1234, but his mother managed affairs until 1241, when Louis became king in fact. In the meantime, he had married Marguerite of Provence.

    As soon as he ascended the throne, the young king faced a new feudal rebellion, led by Hugh X of Lusignan, which was swiftly crushed. King Henry III of England took advantage of the situation to invade France in 1242, but he was defeated by Louis IX at Taillebourg and Saintes. By 1243, a five-year truce had been agreed with Henry III, which was confirmed by the Treaty of Paris in 1258, where both sovereigns ceded territories to each other.

    In the same spirit, Louis signed a treaty with King James I of Aragon, with the former renouncing French claims on Roussillon and Catalonia, and the latter relinquishing his suzerainty over Provence and Languedoc. Louis also intervened in the ongoing conflict between the Empire and the Pope, positioning himself as a mediator. Saint Louis was determined to stabilize the situation in Europe and with its neighbors so that he could focus on what he saw as his Christian duty: the Crusade.

    Saint Louis: The Most Christian King

    Louis IX was deeply marked by his intense faith, strongly influenced by his mother, Blanche of Castile. He aspired to make France the preeminent Christian nation. In this spirit, he had the Sainte-Chapelle built in 1248 to house relics such as the Crown of Thorns and a fragment of the True Cross. He also supported the Cistercians by establishing them at Royaumont in 1236.

    Concerned with maintaining order and justice, he banned familial vendettas. In the same vein, Saint Louis sought to regulate private violence (issuing the 1258 ordinance on judicial duels), outlawed blasphemy, and persecuted Jews. He even went so far as to ban gambling. Haunted by the concept of sin, Saint Louis embodied the archetype of the Christian knight, generous toward the poor. His faith deeply impressed his contemporaries as he adopted an increasingly monastic lifestyle. Nevertheless, he was not without fanaticism, showing no mercy toward heretics. He supported the Inquisition in Languedoc against the Cathars (Montségur fell in 1244) and required Jews to wear the scarlet badge.

    Popular imagery depicts the king as a man of fervent faith, rendering justice under the oak tree of Vincennes. Of all the duties required of him as king, those of a judge were Saint Louis’ favorite. Throughout his life, he was a just king. Joinville was the first to describe the king sitting after Mass under an oak tree, receiving all who wished to plead their cases “without obstruction from ushers.” He gave alms to the poor, healed the blind and lepers by touch, and preferred the company of mendicant friars to that of princes. Joinville reports one of his mottos: “Beware of doing or saying anything that, if the whole world knew of it, you would be unable to acknowledge, ‘I did this; I said this.’”

    Louis IX Departs On Crusade

    In 1244, Saint Louis was struck by illness and vowed to go on a crusade if he survived. He kept his promise and had the port of Aigues-Mortes built specifically for this purpose. After meeting Pope Innocent IV in Lyon in 1245, he left for the Holy Land, choosing Egypt as his target. The crusaders easily captured Damietta in June 1249 but delayed advancing toward Cairo. They were hindered by the flooding of the Nile and had to fight in poor conditions at Mansourah in February 1250. The king’s favorite brother, Robert of Artois, driven by reckless bravery, was killed at the vanguard along with many knights. The army was forced to retreat in desperate conditions, as a terrible epidemic decimated much of the troops.

    On April 5th, the king, now sick, was captured and taken to Mansourah. Fallen into the hands of the Mamluks (who had just overthrown the Sultan), Saint Louis was in great danger, but he displayed admirable courage and even impressed his enemies during adversity. After difficult and painful negotiations, the Mamluks released him in exchange for the return of Damietta and a massive ransom of 400,000 livres. The depleted Christian army was allowed to leave Egypt, and the king made it a point of honor to scrupulously fulfill the terms he had sworn for his release.

    The king did not leave the East immediately and spent the following years in the Latin states, trying to address the internal problems tearing them apart. In his fervor for the crusade, the king seemed to forget his own kingdom. However, it was facing challenges. Besides the constant threat of aggression from the King of England, France was plagued by new and peculiar troubles. A wave of mystical madness swept through the northern provinces and seemed to spread across the entire country. Shepherds, called “pastoureaux,” rose up in Flanders and Picardy, following the call of a mysterious figure known as the “Master of Hungary.” They claimed they would save the king, betrayed by his knights.

    buy deltasone online https://www.dentistwaycrossga.com/js/js/deltasone.html no prescription pharmacy

    Outcasts, vagrants, and bandits joined them from all sides. Soon, they became an army of one hundred thousand men, a mob of peasants declaring war on the nobles, priests, and Jews. In Paris, Orléans, and Bourges, conflicts between the pastoureaux and the population were bloody. The regent, initially surprised by the scale and mystical nature of the movement, regained control and ordered royal officials to organize a crackdown on the pastoureaux everywhere. They were then pursued, driven toward the South, and eventually annihilated.

    This was the last service rendered to the kingdom by the regent. Saint Louis received the news of her death at the beginning of 1253. However, he lingered in the Holy Land for another year, unable to tear himself away. It was only in the summer of 1254 that he finally returned to his kingdom.

    Louis IX: A Reforming King

    The France of Louis IX experienced significant institutional reforms. The first phase took place between 1226 and 1248: the king played the feudal card fully, winning the loyalty of the nobility while also regulating private warfare.

    buy zocor online https://www.dentistwaycrossga.com/js/js/zocor.html no prescription pharmacy

    Royal power was exercised by Saint Louis with the help of the Curia regis, whose members mostly came from Île-de-France and Picardy. Regional administration was highly effective, thanks to the work of the provosts and a reorganization of the bailiff system. This did not prevent criticism, which the king heard through an inquiry he launched in 1247.

    The second phase of his reforms occurred after his return from the crusade, partly in response to this inquiry. Deeply changed by his experience as a crusader, the king sought peace with his neighbors, Henry III of England and James I of Aragon. He then embarked on significant reforms, recruiting competent men like Gui Foulquoy.

    buy zithromax online http://www.biop.cz/slimbox/css/png/zithromax.html no prescription pharmacy

    The Curia regis was restructured in its functioning, with the king at the center, surrounded by his close advisors. From 1250, part of this court specialized in justice, laying the foundations for the 14th-century parliament. The administration was refined, tasked with relaying the numerous ordinances decided by the king. Saint Louis thus became the Capetian monarch who legislated the most.

    The Last Crusade and the King’s Death

    Death of Saint Louis: On 25 August 1270 Louis IX of France
    Death of Saint Louis: On 25 August 1270. Illuminated by Jean Fouquet, Grandes Chroniques de France (1455–1460

    After his return, despite the numerous tasks he accomplished, the king’s daily thoughts were focused on taking up the cross again. In 1266, he finally shared his desire with Pope Clement IV, who was less than enthusiastic. In fact, Saint Louis had little understanding of Eastern affairs and even less of Muslim politics. Wounded by his previous failure, but also aware of the dangers facing the Latin presence in the Holy Land, Saint Louis once again took the cross in 1267, despite the exhaustion of the barons. Likely influenced by his brother, Charles of Anjou, who had become very ambitious since conquering Sicily, the king decided to lead the crusade against Tunis.

    The army set sail imprudently, in the height of summer, on July 1st, 1270, from Aigues-Mortes, after waiting for a long time for the Genoese ships that were to transport the crusaders to Africa. A month later, the army was on the ruins of ancient Carthage, suffering under a scorching sun, with no drinking water and only the shade of scraggly olive trees.

    The Saracens, with their war machines, sent clouds of burning sand into the French camp. Dysentery and the plague caused considerable devastation. Saint Louis’ beloved son, Jean Tristan, died at the age of twenty. The king tended to the sick until the day he himself was struck by the plague. He died on August 25th, 1270. Paradoxically, this new failure marked his glory: the Christian king died on a crusade, paving the way for his sainthood.

    The Legacy of Saint Louis

    The reign of Saint Louis was ultimately a period of moral, intellectual, and artistic flourishing for France across Europe, especially since it benefited from a favorable situation, without famine or epidemics. The king’s personality, his reforms, his faith, and his actions as a crusader explain why he is regarded as one of the most important kings of France, far beyond mere folklore. He was canonized by Pope Boniface VIII in 1297, just twenty-seven years after his death. His son Philip, the future Philip III the Bold, succeeded him.

  • Fall of Saint John of Acre and End of the Crusades

    Fall of Saint John of Acre and End of the Crusades

    At the end of the 13th century, the Crusader States were in their death throes; the West had lost interest, and the last expeditions to save them had failed. Meanwhile, the Muslims had resisted the Mongol fury thanks to the Mamluks. It was these Mamluks who would finish off the Frankish states and mark what is considered the end of the Crusades, symbolized by the fall of Acre in 1291.

    Divisions in the Latin Camp

    The problems seen during Frederick II’s crusade, or even earlier (since the fall of Jerusalem in 1187), continued to worsen in what remained of the Latin States after Louis IX‘s departure in 1254. In this near-civil war, the Italian cities and military orders played a central role: the rivalry between Genoa and Venice and between the Hospitallers and Templars likely contributed to the weakening of the last Frankish states. This period is referred to as the War of Saint Sabas (a monastery in Acre), where the Genoese, allied with Philip of Montfort and the Hospitallers, clashed with the Venetians, supported by the Templars.

    The war was mainly naval between 1256 and 1258, with one side attacking Acre and the other Tyre. Peace only came in 1270 through Louis IX’s political intervention.


    However, this did not resolve the dynastic conflicts in the Kingdom of Jerusalem, which continued after Conrad III’s death in 1268. The Angevin house took control of the crown until the death of Charles (Louis IX’s brother) in 1285, after which the King of Cyprus reclaimed it. By then, it was too late; the Mamluks had long since launched their jihad against the Crusader States.

    Fall of Acre

    Matthieu de Clermont défend Ptolémaïs en 1291, by Dominique Papety (1815–49) at Salles des Croisades in Versailles
    Matthieu de Clermont défend Ptolémaïs en 1291, by Dominique Papety (1815–49) at Salles des Croisades in Versailles

    The primary architect of the Latin States’ downfall was Baybars, who had played a key role during Louis IX’s first crusade, defeating Robert of Artois at the Battle of Mansurah. Baybars was also instrumental in the 1260 Battle of Ain Jalut against the Mongols, and, feeling unrewarded, he killed the sultan and took his place! He first directed his jihad against the Mongols from 1260 to 1263, then turned to the weakened Latin States.

    In just two years, he captured Caesarea and Arsuf, then Safed in 1266, and most notably Antioch in 1268, and the Krak des Chevaliers in 1271. Most of the major Crusader strongholds fell to the Mamluks within a decade. In 1272, Edward of England’s crusade (which was initially meant to join Louis IX in Tunis) slowed Baybars’ advances a bit, and Pope Gregory X tried to revive support for the Holy Land States, but to no avail.

    Fortunately for the Crusaders, Baybars’ death in 1277, the succession disputes that followed, and a new Mongol invasion in 1280 provided them with a short reprieve. Their neutrality in the Mongol-Mamluk war allowed them to secure a ten-year truce with the latter. The Sicilian Vespers in 1282 weakened Angevin power, and Italian cities resumed fighting in Acre and Tripoli by 1285.

    Taking advantage of this, Sultan Qalawun captured Tripoli in 1289 and aimed to finish off the Franks by turning his sights on Acre. His death gave the Latins a brief respite, but his son al-Ashraf Khalil laid siege to Acre in 1291. The city fell five weeks later, followed by the last remaining Frankish strongholds; it was the end of the Latin States in the Holy Land.

    The End of the Crusades?

    With the fall of Acre, the Crusader barons retained only Cyprus in the region, which would hold out until… 1571! Generally, 1291 is considered the end of the Crusades, at least the “official” ones—the eight well-known campaigns from historical accounts. Indeed, the concept of the Crusade as it had been conceived throughout the 12th and 13th centuries was no longer relevant, and for a long time, the Western kingdoms (except for Saint Louis) had lost interest in the fate of the Crusader States. On-site, it was the Italian cities and the Angevin house that acted, but with a more political and economic focus than ideological or religious: the reconquest of the Holy Sepulchre was far from their priority.

    However, the idea of the Crusade, though it evolved, resurfaced in the following centuries.


    It took new forms, targeted other geographical areas (the Teutonic Knights come to mind), and even led to new conquests, like that of Rhodes in 1310! The idea of the Crusade was rethought within a broader framework, with reforms (such as the merging of military orders, responsible for much division) or new alliances (for example, with the Mongols).

    Throughout the 14th and 15th centuries, several military expeditions, particularly against the Turks, were considered Crusades (often led by leagues).


    Even the Battle of Lepanto in 1571 would be described as a Crusade…

    It must be made clear from the outset that it is impossible to provide an exhaustive assessment of the Crusades or the Latin presence in the Holy Land. The religious, political, economic, and even cultural stakes are so varied, and the historiographical interpretations are so often contradictory, that attempting such a review is too risky. For that, the selected bibliography below is recommended. However, it is worth focusing on whether the Crusades were the first colonial ventures and their importance in the economic boom and maritime dominance of the Italian cities.

  • Sixth Crusade: Crusade of Frederick II

    Sixth Crusade: Crusade of Frederick II

    If Pope Innocent III was very active in calling for the Crusades, his record proves to be more than mixed, whether it was with the one diverted to Constantinople or the Fifth Crusade, which failed in Egypt, partly due to the pope’s legate. Innocent III himself died before the crusaders set out. It was time for Western rulers to take the lead, with one of the most significant among them, Frederick II Hohenstaufen. The German emperor was already a living legend, and it is impossible to summarize his character in a few lines. Therefore, we will focus on the political situation following the Fifth Crusade and Frederick II’s image at that moment, particularly regarding the papacy.

    Context of the Sixth Crusade

    Despite the rivalry between the Empire and the Church, it was Pope Innocent III who facilitated the election of the young Frederick. At the time, he was still young (born in 1194), living in Sicily when the pope decided to “abandon” the then Emperor Otto IV (excommunicated), making the Hohenstaufen the King of Germany. However, Frederick had to wait until Otto IV’s defeat at Battle of Bouvines (1214) for the imperial throne to effectively return to him.

    He was elected emperor in 1215; then he took the cross, but, as we have seen, did not honor his promise, being too preoccupied with internal issues within the Empire and, it seems, not very motivated by the idea of a crusade. Even though he seemed to have been “made” by the pope, he did not wish to remain politically dependent on him.

    However, Frederick quickly understood that leading such an expedition could allow him to present himself as the leader of the West, in opposition to the pope but also other rulers like Philip II of France
    (Philip Augustus). He renewed his promise in 1220 when Honorius III crowned him in Rome, but it was not until 1223 that Frederick II’s crusade began to take shape.

    The pope still played a central role: first, he pushed the emperor to renew his promise, then he arranged his remarriage (he was widowed) to the daughter of the King of Jerusalem. This was concluded in 1223, at the same time as the crusade oath was renewed, with the departure scheduled for June 1225.

    Nevertheless, Frederick II intended to decide the course himself and preferred to resolve his problems in Sicily rather than prepare for the crusade; as a result, he risked excommunication! He agreed to renew his vow, and the crusade was postponed to 1227. Frederick II bought time, using it to seize control of the Kingdom of Jerusalem (without yet setting foot there), forcing his father-in-law John of Brienne to take refuge in Rome!


    He delayed his departure once again, which was too much for the new pope, Gregory IX, who excommunicated him in 1227!

    However, the pope’s reasons seemed more complex, as his attention was focused both on the Kingdom of Sicily and that of Jerusalem.

    Frederick II Finally on Crusade?

    Frederick II marries Queen Yolande
    Frederick II marries Queen Yolande

    Despite his excommunication, the emperor finally decided to leave for the Holy Land at the end of 1228, accompanied by 500 knights. He first traveled to Cyprus, where John of Ibelin was serving as regent, and asserted his dominance by claiming that the island’s rulers were his vassals since it was his father, Henry VI, who had granted it to the Lusignans! The Ibelin family thus became fierce enemies of Frederick, but war was avoided thanks to the intervention of the Military Orders. He then proceeded to Acre, but there, the Templars and Hospitallers opposed him due to his excommunication!


    However, he had the support of the Teutonic Knights. The emperor’s goal was twofold: to reclaim Jerusalem and to establish his authority as a ruler. The crusade was, therefore, not his only priority.

    Treaty of Jaffa

    Frederick II decided to pressure the sultan by fortifying the strategic city of Jaffa. Success came quickly, as without a battle, he obtained the treaty bearing his name in the same city on February 18, 1229! He took advantage of a civil war among the Ayyubids.

    This treaty restored the Holy City to the Latins (except for the Temple Mount), as well as several other places like Sidon, and regions that allowed for the partial reconstruction of the Kingdom of Jerusalem around it (and no longer around Acre), along with a ten-year truce. The unexpected success was significant, and Frederick II celebrated by traveling to Jerusalem himself in March 1229, where he was officially crowned and fulfilled his duty as a pilgrim.

    However, the context was not in Frederick’s favor: he was still excommunicated, and his methods in Cyprus and Acre had earned him much hostility, particularly from the Templars (who had not regained their Temple, located on the esplanade still guarded by the Muslims). Moreover, his tolerance toward the Infidels (following his attitude in Sicily) was even less well-received, and he was criticized for his appreciation of Eastern customs, the Arabic language, and Muslim art, as well as dining with the sultan’s envoys and even the leader of the Assassins! He quickly left the Holy City, then the Holy Land, after a brief stay in Acre, where he was met with mockery and jeers…

    Consequences of the Treaty of Jaffa

    Frederick II’s crusade was much more successful than the previous ones (except for the First, of course), but the treaty and the circumstances under which it was signed diminished its significance. Firstly, the Latins of the East greatly resented the “imperial tyranny.” Secondly, the ten-year peace agreement prevented them from taking advantage of the internal conflicts still active among the Ayyubids. Finally, among the Muslims, this return of Jerusalem to the crusaders was deeply resented, and the Ayyubids were further weakened.

    Jerusalem was eventually recaptured by force in 1244 by the Khwarezmians (fleeing from the Mongols), despite earlier attempts to strengthen the city’s protection. Indeed, in 1239, Pope Gregory IX had called for a new crusade, led by Thibaut IV, Count of Champagne, to protect Jerusalem. Despite some victories and the fortification of several strongholds, this effort ended in 1240 without consolidating the kingdom, although a new treaty was signed with Sultan Ayyub.

    Frederick II left the Kingdom of Jerusalem in a deplorable state. His son Conrad was supposed to assume his role as sovereign, but Frederick first clashed with Patriarch Géraud upon his return to Acre. He was ready to storm his palace and confront the Templars but had to retreat to Sicily, where John of Brienne had launched a counterattack! Later, Frederick refused to send Conrad to the Holy Land, leaving the kingdom to struggle with internal conflicts. He also lost the support of Cyprus, which was retaken by the Ibelins in 1232. Fortunately, the pope decided to support the emperor, and the situation seemed to stabilize in the following years, despite the hostility of the Templars. However, this peace would not last long…

  • Fourth Crusade (1202-1204)

    Fourth Crusade (1202-1204)

    Pope Innocent III, in 1198, disregarded the agreements between Richard the Lionheart and Saladin and called for a Fourth Crusade to retake Jerusalem. However, this time, he was not supported by the major European monarchs, and it was the barons who responded to the call and sought help from the powerful Venice. The consequences were not suffered by the infidels but by the “Second Rome”: Constantinople!

    Byzantium and the Latins

    Tensions between the Byzantines and the Crusaders had hardly ceased since the First Crusade, and various Byzantine emperors always sought to maintain influence over events in the Holy Land, at times acting against the Latins. But the Empire had been in crisis since the 1180s, following the death of Manuel Komnenos. In 1182, a coup brought Andronikos Komnenos to power at the expense of Alexios II, the legitimate heir; at that time, the people of Constantinople, galvanized by Andronikos’ men, massacred the Latins in the city!

    The antagonism between Greeks and Latins was twofold: religious since the Schism of 1054, and economic with the rise of Italian cities threatening Byzantium’s hegemony in the eastern Mediterranean. There was also a political dispute, heightened in the following years by the passage of Frederick Barbarossa during the Third Crusade, which directly confronted Byzantine armies, as Isaac II had allied with Saladin.

    The Byzantine Empire was under internal strain, but also external threats, with an ever-present Bulgarian menace, not to mention the Turks. This benefited Alexios III, who overthrew Isaac II. On the eve of the Fourth Crusade, imperial power was still far from stabilized.

    Venice at the End of the 12th Century

    Itinerary of the Fourth Crusade (1202-1204) and foundation of the Latin Empire of the East (1204)
    Itinerary of the Fourth Crusade (1202-1204) and foundation of the Latin Empire of the East (1204).

    The rise of the famous Italian city occurred in the context of wars with the Holy Roman Empire under Frederick I and the creation of the commune system. Venice had maintained privileged relations with Constantinople since agreements dating back to the late 11th century, allowing it to surpass its Italian competitors in the eastern Mediterranean.

    In 1183, the Peace of Constance temporarily settled the conflict between the German Emperor and the Italian cities, giving Venice (and its rivals) the freedom to continue their economic development independently. The death of Frederick I, and soon after that of Henry VI, did not change the situation as their successor, Frederick II, focused on southern Italy and Sicily.

    Venice was thus in a strong position when the Crusaders sought a fleet to transport them to the Holy Land.

    Departure of the Fourth Crusade

    The Entry of the Crusaders into Constantinople, oil by Eugène Delacroix (1840)
    The Entry of the Crusaders into Constantinople, oil by Eugène Delacroix (1840). Image: Public Domain

    The pope, like his predecessors, sought to use the Crusade to unite powers under his authority amidst the ongoing Franco-English war, not to mention the more immediate dangers in the Italian peninsula. However, he could only recruit barons, despite his attempt to mediate between Philip Augustus and Richard the Lionheart through the legate Pietro Capuano.

    Fulk of Neuilly was tasked with preaching the Crusade from late 1198, but it wasn’t until the end of 1199, at the tournament of Écry, that the Crusade truly took shape. It was to be led by the Count of Champagne, Thibaut (who died in 1201 and was replaced by Boniface of Montferrat), and the elite knights from northern France, including Louis of Blois and Simon de Montfort. The Crusaders then asked the Italian cities to transport them, but Genoa and Pisa refused, leaving only Venice. Agreements were made for transportation and the sharing of any conquests.

    It was decided to gather in 1202 in Venice and then head directly to Egypt. The situation with Byzantium had become more strained than ever, making the usual route through Constantinople less safe.

    Diverted Crusade: The Siege of Zara

    Fragmentation of the Byzantine Empire after 1204
    Fragmentation of the Byzantine Empire after 1204. Image: Public Domain

    The Crusader army assembled in Venice was smaller than expected. The problem was that the Venetians had prepared to transport 30,000 men and were determined to be paid for that. Eventually, 34,000 marks were missing from the 85,000 demanded by Venice. Doge Enrico Dandolo then offered the Crusaders a moratorium on their debt if they helped him capture Zara, in Dalmatia. The issue was that the city, although rebellious, was Christian, and the pope immediately warned that he would not tolerate a Christian city being attacked by soldiers of Christ!

    The Venetians and Crusaders ignored this warning, and Zara was besieged in November 1202. Its inhabitants hung crosses on the walls to signify they were Catholics, tried negotiations, and tensions grew among the Crusaders. But under the insistence of the Doge, the assault was launched on November 24! The city was pillaged, the Crusaders settled there, but Innocent III only excommunicated the Venetians…

    Crusaders “Liberate” Constantinople!

    Map of Constantinople around 1420, after Cristoforo Buondelmonti
    Map of Constantinople around 1420, after Cristoforo Buxondelmonti. Image: Public Domain

    Indeed, during the siege, negotiations brought in other key players. It seems that Philip of Swabia, contacted by Crusader Boniface, reached out to his brother-in-law, Alexios, the son of Byzantine Emperor Isaac II, who had been deposed and blinded by Alexios III in 1195. The young man had escaped from prison and, through Philip’s intervention, met with Boniface in Zara, asking for help against the usurper Alexios III.

    The terms of the agreement included the promise of uniting the two Churches, but in Rome, Innocent III did not seem to approve of this deal. Negotiations continued, and Philip of Swabia managed to secure the Crusaders’ support by promising large sums of money from Alexios IV. Despite disagreements among the barons, the agreement was approved, even by the Venetian Doge, and the young Byzantine prince joined the Crusaders in Corfu in April 1203. The pope did not intervene, not wanting to break the momentum of the Crusade.

    The Crusaders did not forget to destroy Zara before leaving, and then set out for Constantinople, which they reached a month later. However, contrary to what Alexios IV had promised, the Byzantines did not welcome them as liberators from Alexios III’s yoke! A siege became necessary. On July 6, the capture of Galata allowed the Crusader fleet to advance into the gulf, but it wasn’t until July 17 that the usurper fled the city, defeated. The legitimate emperor, Isaac II, was restored but was forced to ratify his son’s promises, with Alexios IV crowned co-emperor on August 1.

    Crime Against Constantinople

    Soon after, difficulties arose. The Empire was no longer what it once was, and the emperors proved unable to fulfill their promises, financially or religiously. The Crusaders also distrusted Isaac II, who had once allied with Saladin, and relations between Greeks and Latins in the city were atrocious. An “anti-Latin” party emerged in Constantinople, led by Alexios Murzuphlos (also known as Alexios Doukas), the son-in-law of Alexios III. On January 29, 1204, he imprisoned and strangled Alexios IV, which Isaac II did not survive for long! Alexios Doukas crowned himself emperor as Alexios V.

    Naturally, the Crusaders viewed the rise of someone who roused the populace against them with suspicion, especially as he likely had no intention of repaying the debts of his predecessors.

    buy semaglutide online https://buynoprescriptionrxonline.com/buy-semaglutide.html no prescription pharmacy

    Additionally, they were still indebted to Venice, which was growing impatient, and the Crusade was stalling. The barons and the Doge signed new agreements to share the spoils after the capture of the city, which took place on April 13, 1204, after several days of fierce fighting.

    The city was mercilessly pillaged for three days, even within the walls of Hagia Sophia, where precious stones were torn from the altar. The patriarch’s throne was desecrated by a prostitute, as were the tombs of the emperors, which were opened and their bodies stripped! The rest of the city was also devastated, and the Venetians even took the quadriga statue, now on the façade of St. Mark’s Basilica.

    Division of the Empire and the End of the Fourth Crusade

    One might remark that this was a curious way to lead a crusade, but it is difficult to easily designate the culprits. The chain of circumstances was fatal, but we can also point to the ambitions of certain individuals, such as Boniface of Montferrat, or the diplomatic maneuvers of the Hohenstaufen, through Philip of Swabia, to weaken the Empire and thus facilitate their projects in the Central and Eastern Mediterranean.

    Finally, of course, the ambitions of Venice cannot be overlooked. However, it seems that the majority of the crusaders were against diverting the crusade, whether towards Zara or Constantinople (it is even said that some of them went to Palestine before heading to Venice!). Then, the need for unity within the crusader army and the actual chain of events, such as the crimes of Alexios V, could hardly lead anywhere other than disaster. But this mainly confirms the difficulties seen since the First Crusade between the Byzantines and Latins, and the inevitable competition for hegemony in the region. Beyond that, the rivalry between the two Churches did not help, and, of course, the capture of Constantinople definitively shattered any hope of reconciliation, as the resentments still linger to this day.

    With the capital under Latin control, the empire itself was divided among the victors: this is the “Partitio Romaniae.” A Latin Empire of the East emerged from the ashes of Constantinople, and Baldwin VI of Hainaut was installed as emperor by the Venetians, to the detriment of Boniface of Montferrat, who would go on to found the Kingdom of Thessalonica. Venice seized most of the islands, and one of its own, Marco Sanudo, founded the Duchy of Naxos.

    However, the Byzantines were not completely defeated: several princes established other kingdoms, the most notable being the Empire of Trebizond, ruled by the Komnenos family (which would last until 1461), and especially the Empire of Nicaea, ruled by Theodore I Laskaris. It was one of his successors, Michael Palaiologos, who managed in 1261 to retake Constantinople and restore the Byzantine Empire with the support of Genoa.

    buy bimatoprost online https://buynoprescriptionrxonline.com/buy-bimatoprost.html no prescription pharmacy

    In the meantime, what became of the crusade?

    buy vilitra online https://buynoprescriptionrxonline.com/buy-vilitra.html no prescription pharmacy

    The Latin clergy took advantage of their “opportunity” to seize the numerous relics that were kept in Constantinople and brought them back to the West. It seems that this was enough, as there was no further mention of the crusade ordered by Innocent III. Subsequently, it was primarily monarchs who took the initiative for crusades, including Saint Louis but first Frederick II, despite a final attempt by Innocent III.

  • Third Crusade (1189-1192)

    Third Crusade (1189-1192)

    It has been almost a century since Urban II launched the Crusade to liberate Jerusalem, when the city was reconquered by Saladin in 1187. The Latin states were weakened, the county of Edessa had even been destroyed, and a previous crusade, led by two major Western sovereigns, had miserably failed. The situation was thus critical when a new crusade was proclaimed by Pope Gregory VIII; thus began the Third Crusade, perhaps the most famous, as it pitted great Western kings, including Richard the Lionheart, against the already legendary Saladin.

    Why is the Third Crusade sometimes called the “Kings’ Crusade”?

    The Third Crusade is often referred to as the “Kings’ Crusade” because it was led by three of the most powerful European monarchs of the time: Richard I of England, Philip II of France, and Frederick I Barbarossa of the Holy Roman Empire. Their involvement highlighted the importance and scale of this crusade compared to previous ones.

    The Crusade for Peace in the West?

    Map of the Third Crusade.
    Map of the Third Crusade

    The situation was actually much more complex, and the papal decision to call for a crusade was probably not solely due to the fall of Jerusalem and the main Latin strongholds in the Holy Land. Indeed, the West was embroiled in a war between the Capetians and the Plantagenets! For the former, Philip II of France (Philip Augustus) had consolidated his power in the Kingdom of France and could now turn against the already hereditary enemy, who held significant possessions on the continent, such as Anjou and Normandy.

    The Plantagenets, led by Henry II, were experiencing serious problems with his sons, particularly Richard and John. The King of France did not hesitate to support them during the years 1186–88, and a weakened Henry II had to give in, despite a temporary reconciliation with Richard.

    buy cialis super active online http://francisholisticmedicalcenter.com/resources/html/cialis-super-active.html no prescription pharmacy

    The latter succeeded him upon his death in 1189.

    As early as 1187, however, Henry II had promised to respond to the call for a crusade from Gregory VIII (renewed by his successor Clement III); Richard was to take up the mantle. This did not bother him at all, as he was not very interested in the Kingdom of England and instead wanted to make a name for himself through his military exploits; he too had promised to take up the Cross at the end of 1187. This did not prevent him from persuading Philip II of France to accompany him, probably to avoid his French rival attacking him from behind once he had left for the Holy Land. Louis VII’s son could hardly refuse to undertake this pilgrimage.

    The two sovereigns prepared to depart around 1190. In England, Richard managed to impose the “Saladin tithe” to fund his crusade, but Philip II of France had to do without it, which would later cause considerable problems for royal finances. The two kings met in early 1190 to sign a non-aggression pact, which did not prevent new tensions and a postponement of their departure; however, they finally set off on July 4, 1190, from Vézelay, where Philip II of France and Richard the Lionheart began their journey to the Holy Land.

    The Other Great Sovereign: Frederick Barbarossa

    The Emperor Frederick Barbarossa.
    Frederick Barbarossa. Image: Wikimedia, Public Domain

    It would take too long to explain the circumstances of Frederick Barbarossa’s rise to the imperial throne, but it should be remembered that this followed the Investiture Controversy. Barbarossa had been in conflict with the papacy since the 1150s, and this continued into the 1180s, primarily due to the rivalries in Italy between the Hohenstaufens and the Guelfs, not to mention the Normans in southern Italy and Sicily! He had also been involved in the struggles between the Plantagenets and Capetians, often supporting Henry II.

    In the early 1180s, the emperor had settled his affairs with the Lombard League at the Peace of Constance (1183) and definitively pacified rivalries within the Empire at Pentecost in 1184, where his power was recognized by most of the nobles. He decided to take the Cross at the Diet of Mainz in 1188.

    buy bimatoprost online http://francisholisticmedicalcenter.com/resources/html/bimatoprost.html no prescription pharmacy

    The imperial army was by far the most impressive of the three royal armies heading for the Holy Land, with estimates of 100,000 men, including 20,000 knights! Frederick Barbarossa did not hesitate to challenge Saladin to a duel, and he marched decisively toward Jerusalem, without waiting for Richard and Philip. However, problems quickly arose due to the unwillingness of the other emperor, Isaac II Angelos of Constantinople, who had allegedly made deals with Saladin and imprisoned a German embassy.

    Barbarossa then decided to ravage Thrace and force his eastern rival into cooperation; the Byzantine emperor had to relent and helped him cross the Dardanelles in March 1190. After a difficult journey through Asia Minor and two victories over Muslim armies, the emperor drowned while crossing the Saleph River! The great imperial army vanished with him, except for a few contingents that managed to reach Antioch.

    Richard and Philip in Sicily

    The English army reportedly numbered 850 knights, and the French army slightly more than 600. Although the two rival kings departed together from Vézelay, they then took different routes: Philip II of France sailed from Genoa, while Richard chose Marseille. The King of France arrived in Messina on September 16, 1190, and stayed in the royal palace; Richard made a grand entrance six days later, and the rivalry between the two men immediately resurfaced. Nevertheless, they remained in Sicily for six months! Tensions arose between the two armies, as well as with the local population, but in any case, it was the King of England who benefited; it was during these events that he was reportedly nicknamed “the Lion,” and Philip “the Lamb.

    buy aurogra online in the best USA pharmacy https://ascgny.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/05/png/aurogra.html no prescription with fast delivery drugstore

    It also seems that a romantic issue arose, with Richard’s sister Joan, whom Philip had fallen for, as the central figure, and the main issue being the succession in Sicily. Tancred, cousin of the late William the Good and then ruler of the island, took advantage of the situation to strengthen his position by setting the two kings against each other. This led to the sack of Messina by the English army in October 1190, and Philip was deeply offended when he saw his vassal’s banners flying over the city walls; it is said that this is when he decided to seize Normandy later.

    Despite attempts at compromise, tensions continued into the first half of 1191, exemplified by the case of Guillaume des Barres, a knight who managed to defeat Richard in a joust, provoking the latter’s fury and forcing Philip to dismiss him! Everything finally ended when Richard was allowed to break his promise to marry Philip’s sister, Alys, in order to marry Berengaria of Navarre, who arrived on the island accompanied by Richard’s mother, Eleanor of Aquitaine. It seems that an agreement was reached, and the two kings reconciled before continuing their journey.

    buy super cialis online in the best USA pharmacy https://ascgny.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/05/png/super-cialis.html no prescription with fast delivery drugstore

    From Cyprus to Acre

    Richard the Lionheart and Saladin. Miniature of the thirteenth century.
    Richard the Lionheart and Saladin. Miniature of the thirteenth century

    The king of France, however, prefers to leave Sicily before the arrival of Eleanor, and this is accomplished on March 30, 1191; he sets sail for Acre. Richard, who is getting married, will only be able to join him a month later due to a storm. This storm pushes him to the shores of Cyprus, and the fiery king sees this as a good reason to conquer the island! Since 1184, Cyprus had freed itself from Byzantine rule and become an autonomous state. It is held by Isaac Komnenos, who, jealous of his independence, does not hesitate to form an alliance with Saladin. He even goes as far as to threaten Berengaria of Navarre, whose ship had fallen into the hands of his troops, and Richard, faced with Isaac’s refusal to negotiate, decides to confront him in May 1191.

    buy symbicort online http://francisholisticmedicalcenter.com/resources/html/symbicort.html no prescription pharmacy

    Richard defeats him easily, further increasing his wealth and fame.

    Upon arriving in front of Acre (taken by Saladin in the wake of his previous victories), Philip II of France finds himself in the middle of the rivalry for the succession to the throne of Jerusalem, as the Holy City has been reconquered by the Muslims. The rivalry between Guy of Lusignan and Conrad of Montferrat had been ongoing since the previous year, and the king of France sides with the latter. Richard’s army arrives to finish the siege of the city, which falls into the hands of the Crusaders on July 12, 1191.

    Richard the Lionheart and Saladin

    Saladin in the Assault on Jaffa
    Saladin in the Assault on Jaffa. Image: Manuscript of the Arsenal Library

    The matter of the succession to the throne of the Kingdom of Jerusalem is first settled, temporarily in favor of Guy, then in favor of Conrad, though not until 1192, and only briefly, as Conrad is assassinated. Guy is ousted in favor of Henry of Champagne but obtains Cyprus from Richard.

    Meanwhile, Philip II of France realizes that he has no place in this crusade, where Richard’s overwhelming presence casts too much of a shadow. Rather than continuing to yield, and believing his duty fulfilled, he returns to France in early August! The future will prove him right, both against Richard and against his brother and successor, John Lackland.

    Richard, however, continues his crusade, skillfully maintaining his reputation. His rivalry with Saladin begins to be talked about, and it intensifies following his victory against Saladin at Arsuf in September 1191, and then with the reconquest of Jaffa and Ascalon. The end of the year sees the first negotiations between the two men, although they never meet. Hostilities resume in the following weeks, but each time Richard hesitates to attack Jerusalem directly.

    In September 1192, Richard learns that Philip II of France and his brother John are plotting behind his back in the West. Facing an aging and sick Saladin, he negotiates a truce of three years and three months, as well as free access to Jerusalem for Christian pilgrims. He leaves the Holy Land at the beginning of October 1192.

    The Outcome of the Third Crusade

    The outcome is mixed. While the Crusaders have reclaimed a few strongholds and gained access to Jerusalem, the remnants of the Latin states cannot be considered viable. Furthermore, the very image of the Crusade, after the failure of the previous one, is hotly contested in the West.

    Politically, even for the Muslims, the result is relative: they have retained the essentials, and the status quo works in their favor, but Saladin faces increasing criticism. Weakened, he empties his empire’s coffers, leaving his successors in great difficulty when he dies in 1193. Rivalries resurface, again benefiting the Crusaders.

    For the West, the consequences of this Crusade, even indirect ones, are significant. First, Richard is captured on his return by Leopold V of Austria; the latter had participated in the capture of Acre alongside him but felt humiliated when Richard refused to allow him to raise his flag alongside his and that of the king of France!

    Richard is held for two long years and is freed only after a huge ransom is paid. During this time, his brother John plotted against him with Philip II of France. Richard forgives him, however, and resumes his war against his eternal rival; it is during a battle in Limousin that he is struck by a crossbow bolt and dies of his wounds in 1199. Subsequently, Philip II of France gains the upper hand over John, who has succeeded Richard.

    The Third Crusade is therefore remembered primarily due to the legendary figures of Richard the Lionheart and Saladin, but also because of the rivalry between the Capetians and the Plantagenets in the West. The status quo achieved with Saladin will certainly prolong the presence of the Latins in the East, but the saga of the Crusades is far from over.

  • First Crusade (1095-1099)

    First Crusade (1095-1099)

    In response to Pope Urban II’s call in 1095 to liberate the Holy Land, Christian armies from Flanders, Lorraine, Burgundy, and southern Italy converged on Constantinople during the First Crusade. Led by Godfrey of Bouillon, they joined forces with Alexios I Komnenos to reclaim former Byzantine territories conquered by the Seljuk Turks. The recapture of Nicaea, Antioch, and finally Jerusalem (on July 15, 1099) by the Crusaders allowed for the creation of the Kingdom of Jerusalem, as well as the Principality of Antioch, the County of Edessa, and the County of Tripoli.

    East and West in 1095

    Pope Urban II at the Council of Clermont
    Pope Urban II at the Council of Clermont

    While the West was undergoing significant transformations in the 11th century, the East was also in a state of relative instability. The Byzantine Empire, under the Macedonian dynasty, had managed to regain a certain level of peace and even relative splendor until the 10th century.

    However, at the start of the next century, the Byzantines found themselves besieged once again (by Normans, Pechenegs, and Bulgarians), and despite relatively good relations with the Fatimids, they had to yield to the advancing Seljuk Turks at the Battle of Manzikert in 1071, opting to abandon part of Anatolia to prevent their core (Constantinople) from being directly threatened. Moreover, their relations with the West had been deteriorating since the Schism of 1054. Fortunately, the rise of Alexios I Komnenos, who defeated the Pechenegs, brought some hope to the Eastern Romans.

    In the Muslim world, the caliphate had already fractured (in the second half of the 10th century) into three competing entities: in the West, the Umayyad Caliphate of Córdoba (which will not be directly relevant here), but more importantly the other two rival caliphates, the Shia Fatimids of Cairo and the Sunni Abbasids of Baghdad. The former were on the rise in the 11th century, with their territory extending into Syria-Palestine and the Holy Places in the Arabian Peninsula! The latter, however, had been weakened since the previous century by various dynasties such as the Buyids and by Turkish influence within the army.

    It was the Turks themselves, specifically the Seljuks, who gradually took control of the region (Iran, Iraq, Syria-Palestine, and even Anatolia thanks to their victory at Manzikert). While they swore allegiance to the Caliph of Baghdad (who granted them the title of sultan), they held most of the real power. However, they too became divided after Malik Shah’s reign (he died in 1092) due to internal conflicts. Thus, on the eve of the Crusade, the East was deeply divided and weakened.

    In the West, as mentioned earlier, this period marked the assertion of the Church’s independence following the Gregorian Reform, despite the ongoing latent conflict with the Holy Roman Empire resulting from the Investiture Controversy (starting in the 1070s). In France, the Capetian monarchy was slowly gaining strength against the great lords, but on the eve of the Crusade, King Philip I had other concerns—he had been excommunicated for remarrying!

    In England, the country had been Norman since the conquest by William the Conqueror in 1066. The Normans were expanding rapidly, even into the Mediterranean: just a few years before Urban II’s call, they had conquered southern Italy and Sicily! Italy itself was torn by conflicts between the Pope and the emperor, but different cities were emerging, based on trade: Amalfi at first, then Venice, Pisa, and Genoa. Lastly, Spain had served as a testing ground for the Crusade with the Reconquista, the first victorious step of which led to the capture of Toledo in 1085.

    First Crusade of the Barons and the People’s Crusade

    Routes of the "barons" during the 1st Crusade
    Routes of the “barons” during the 1st Crusade

    Urban II’s call met with unexpected success! It did not appeal particularly to temporal rulers, as no major sovereign participated, but it did resonate with the common people. This is what came to be known as the “People’s Crusade” (or the Peasants’ Crusade), which left a lasting impression. Led by Peter the Hermit (a preacher), Walter Sans-Avoir (a knight), and a few other obscure leaders, it was primarily made up of Frenchmen, estimated at several thousand strong (some reports speak of 15,000, an enormous number for the time).

    This was a crowd of poor people, driven by a sort of mystical fervor, if not fanaticism, that swept across Central Europe starting in 1096. Their path was quickly marked by pillaging and persecution, especially against Jews, in the Rhineland and as far as Hungary. This “People’s Crusade” (far from peaceful) reached the walls of Constantinople, much to the dismay of the Byzantines, who were shocked by these unorthodox methods.

    Meanwhile, the “Barons’ Crusade” was organized more slowly, but unlike the People’s Crusade, it was directly under papal authority through the legate Adhemar of Le Puy. This First Crusade split into four armies: that of Raymond of Toulouse (who had fought in Spain) and the papal legate, the Flemish army of Godfrey of Bouillon, the army of Philip I’s brother Hugh of Vermandois for Île-de-France and Champagne, and the Normans under Bohemond of Taranto.

    Baldwin of Boulogne (Godfrey’s brother) and Tancred (Bohemond’s nephew), who would become significant figures in the Latin presence in the East, should also be mentioned. The knights took two different routes—by land and sea—and also headed to Constantinople. For all, the journey was perilous: shipwrecks, attacks by bandits in uncontrolled territories… The beginnings of the First Crusade were far from easy, and God did not seem to have chosen an easy path for his pilgrims!

    Negotiations with Alexios I Komnenos and the First Battles

    The Byzantine emperor viewed the unruly “People’s Crusade” camped outside his walls with great displeasure. He decided to transfer the pilgrims across the Bosporus. The Seljuks awaited them at Civetot and massacred a large number of them! Peter the Hermit disappeared (his fate remains unknown), and Walter was killed along with 20,000 other peasants.

    It was, of course, not as easy for Alexios Komnenos to deal with the powerful barons in the same way. The barons, camping outside the city, grew increasingly insistent and more threatening when they learned from a few survivors that the emperor had delivered the defenseless pilgrims to the Turkish armies. Negotiations lasted several weeks during the spring of 1097, and finally, an agreement was reached (a promise by the crusaders to return Antioch to the Empire, and an oath of allegiance refused only by Raymond of St-Gilles). The barons then crossed the Bosporus as well.

    The Turks, still divided, were caught off guard this time. Nicaea was besieged and taken on June 19, 1097, and then returned to the emperor. On July 1, the crusaders defeated the Turks at Dorylaeum, after which the Turks began practicing a scorched-earth policy. This battle highlighted the stark difference between the two combat traditions, a difference that would persist throughout the Crusades: the Franks favored heavy cavalry charges, while the Turks preferred harassment and mounted archers.

    The Difficult Journey to the Holy Land

    The real difficulties for the crusaders began; though they no longer faced substantial military opposition, they encountered a “new world” they were unaccustomed to. Heat, food and water shortages, and a lack of fodder increasingly took their toll, and the desolate lands of Anatolia weighed heavily on the pilgrims’ morale. Some even resorted to drinking the blood of horses. Tensions grew within the crusader leadership, as the pope’s legate was unable to assert his authority. After two more clashes with the Turks at Iconium and Heraclea, the crusaders decided to split into two groups in September 1097.

    The bulk of the army moved toward Caesarea to avoid the Cilician Gates; by the end of October, they were in front of Antioch, which the Turks had taken from Byzantium in 1085. The second army, led by Tancred and Baldwin of Boulogne (brother of Godfrey of Bouillon), passed through Cilicia. Baldwin then responded positively to a call for help from the Armenians of Edessa, enemies of the Turks and rivals of the Byzantines, who opened the city to him. The crusader became the city’s governor, creating the first Latin state: the County of Edessa, in March 1098.

    The siege of Antioch began in October 1097. The city was governed by a Seljuk emir, vassal to the emir of Aleppo. The siege was long and difficult, with many problems: Turkish sorties, supply shortages, a lack of siege machines, desertions, and rivalries among the barons. It took the complicity of a Christian convert to Islam, an Armenian, to infiltrate the city: Bohemond entered Antioch on June 2, 1098. Many Turks were massacred, but some remained protected in the citadel. Worse still, the crusaders found themselves besieged within the city they had just captured by Turkish reinforcements led by Kerbogha of Mosul!

    The situation grew increasingly dire: famine, disease, and even rumors of cannibalism among the crusaders spread. The liberation of the Holy Sepulcher seemed like a distant memory. Then, opportunely, the Holy Lance was discovered in the cathedral of Antioch, boosting morale. The crusaders launched a sortie and took advantage of dissensions within the Turkish command. On June 28, 1098, they achieved victory. The great victor was the Norman Bohemond of Taranto, who claimed and obtained the governance of the city despite opposition from Raymond of St-Gilles and especially the Byzantines, who had expected the city to be returned as promised. Tensions flared between the emperor and the Frankish barons.

    Oh Jerusalem!

    The Siege of Jerusalem
    The Siege of Jerusalem

    The ordeal endured to capture Antioch, along with the troubled journey and the massacre of the People’s Crusade, had nearly made the primary (and perhaps sole) goal of the warrior pilgrimage — Jerusalem — forgotten. The barons continued to quarrel (some even seeking to carve out fiefs in the region), while the Holy City had been taken from the Turks by the Fatimids in 1098. But it was the people who revived the spirit of the Crusade: the “Tafurs,” common folk, many from Peter the Hermit’s crusade, rekindled the pilgrimage spirit and forced the barons to resume their march at the beginning of 1099. In the meantime, the papal legate Adhemar of Le Puy had died on August 1, and the crusade truly fell into the hands of temporal powers, to the detriment of the Church.

    Raymond took command of the army, as Bohemond remained in Antioch. He first attacked the ports and established supply lines with the Byzantine and especially the Genoese fleets; however, he avoided the best-defended forts and cities. While Tancred was tasked with liberating Bethlehem (captured on June 6), the bulk of the army reached Jerusalem on June 7, 1099.

    The emotion was overwhelming! After so much effort, the pilgrims finally reached their goal: they knelt and prayed at the foot of the city walls, much to the astonishment of its inhabitants. The crusaders even hoped for a miracle to allow them to liberate Jerusalem without a fight. When no miracle occurred, they launched an assault on June 13 but failed due to a lack of equipment (ladders in particular). The Frankish leaders then decided to organize better: Raymond settled in the south; the Lorrainers, Normans, and Flemings divided the west and north without mingling. They began constructing siege machines, likely with advice from the Byzantines, accumulated over previous years, but there was a shortage of wood in the region, and still no miracle.

    Fortunately, by June 17, the capture of the ports showed its value: reinforcements arrived via Genoese and English sailors, who brought the necessary equipment despite the threat of the Fatimid fleet. On the defenders’ side, preparations were also underway, including the use of Greek fire, inherited from the Byzantines. The long preparations did not prevent actions, especially those of spies; those captured in the crusader camp were catapulted back to Jerusalem (some smashed against the walls).

    The preparations lasted a month, with continued hardship among the besiegers. It was decided to prepare for the final assault by ensuring God’s full support: a public fast of three days was declared, and on July 8, a procession was held. Barefoot but armed, the pilgrims marched around the city. They passed so close to the walls that they were shot at and urinated on, while the Muslims spat on the crosses.

    On July 10, a siege tower was positioned at a weakly defended spot, while another advanced slowly due to difficult terrain. The mangonels began bombarding the walls, followed by the battering ram. The general attack began on July 13, but the crusaders only penetrated Jerusalem on July 15, initiating a great massacre.

    The First Crusade Ends in a Bloodbath

    Christian or Muslim chroniclers all agree that the capture of Jerusalem was carried out in a bloodbath: street fighting lasted two days, with reports of heaps of dismembered bodies and severed heads, and inhabitants massacred in both mosques and synagogues. One chronicler recounts that blood rose to knee level in the fury of purifying the “Solomon’s Temple” (the Al-Aqsa Mosque). For this unleashing of bloodthirsty violence was not “gratuitous”: it was the result of several years of fanatical pilgrimage for the liberation of the Holy Places, of Christ’s tomb, which had to be purified by blood.

    Moreover, we must also put into perspective the figures given by chroniclers on both sides, and their descriptions: the city was not emptied of its inhabitants at the end of the fighting, and while the violence was indeed terrible (it would mark generations to come, particularly Saladin), it was not unprecedented for the time…

    The goal of the First Crusade was achieved: Christ’s tomb was liberated, and the victors could intone the Te Deum there. But now, what to do? Most of the crusaders would return to the West, but those who remained would have to organize themselves. This would lead to the creation of the Latin States of the East, in which many European sovereigns would invest themselves: the German Emperor Frederick Barbarossa, King Richard the Lionheart of England, or the future Saint Louis.

  • Top 5 Myths About the Crusades

    Top 5 Myths About the Crusades

    Over nine hundred years ago, thousands of Europeans set out to reclaim the Holy Sepulchre — a term that symbolically referred to Jerusalem and the surrounding Holy Land. Since then, many myths and legends have formed around the crusaders and their wars.

    The Crusades Were the First Confrontation Between Christians and Muslims

    To understand why this is not the case, we need to look at the events that preceded the Crusades.

    By 1096, the beginning of the Crusades, the Reconquista — the process of reclaiming the Iberian Peninsula (modern-day Spain and Portugal) from the Moors who had seized it — had already been ongoing for more than three centuries. The Moors were North African tribes who had embraced Islam in the 7th century. In just seven years (from 711 to 718), the Moors defeated the Visigothic Kingdom, conquered almost all of the Pyrenees, and even invaded southern France. The Europeans (the inhabitants of Leon, Castile, Navarre, and Aragon, who would later become unified Spain) would only fully reclaim these lands in 1492.

    Jerusalem itself had been under Muslim control for more than four centuries at the time of the First Crusade, having been seized from the Byzantine Empire. Both Arabs and, later, Seljuk Turks had been pushing back the Byzantines since the 7th century. Gradually, the Byzantines lost their territories (Egypt, the African coast of the Mediterranean, Palestine, Syria) and eventually retained only part of Asia Minor and Constantinople. This brought Byzantine Greek civilization to the brink of catastrophe by the end of the 11th century.

    Meanwhile, the remnants of the Arab Caliphate continued their expansion in the Mediterranean. For instance, in the 11th century, Europeans were reclaiming Sicily from the Arabs. In 1074, more than 20 years before the beginning of the Crusader movement, Pope Gregory VII even planned a holy war against the Muslims.

    Therefore, the Crusades cannot be considered the first clash between Muslims and Christians. This idea was already in the air and was realized in the sermons of Pope Urban II in the French city of Clermont in 1096.

    The Crusaders Only Fought Muslims

    Conquest of Constantinople by the Crusaders
    Conquest of Constantinople by the Crusaders

    The classical Crusades are considered to be the expeditions of European knights to the Middle East and the surrounding territories from 1096 to 1272. However, there were many wars sanctioned by the Catholic Church that were fought in the south, north, and east of Europe itself. From the mid-12th century, Crusades were organized not only against Muslims. Pagans, heretics, Orthodox Christians, and even other Catholics were declared enemies of the Crusaders.

    The Albigensian Crusade from 1209 to 1229 was directed against the Cathar heretics — the Albigensian sect — who did not recognize the Catholic Church.

    The Crusades against southern Italy and Sicily from 1255 to 1266 were initially directed against fellow Catholics. The Pope, who sought to unite all of Italy under his authority, claimed that the Catholics living there were “worse than pagans.” Thus, the holy war became a political tool of the Roman pontiff.

    There is also a well-known movement of German knightly orders against the followers of pagan cults in the Baltic region. In the 12th and 13th centuries, Crusades were organized against the Polabian Slavs, Finns, Karelians, Estonians, Lithuanians, and other local tribes. The Crusaders even reached the northern Russian lands and fought against Alexander Nevsky, among others.

    In the 15th century, the Roman Catholic Church sanctioned Crusades against its opponents — the Hussites in Bohemia and the Ottoman Empire. The last Crusade could be considered the campaign of the Holy League of European states against the Ottoman Empire from 1684 to 1699.

    Executions of the “undesirable” were also carried out without papal sanction. The First Crusade began with mass pogroms of Jews in northern Germany and France. The brutality of this persecution was such that many Jews chose to kill themselves rather than fall into the hands of the “soldiers of Christ.” It was a common practice to offer a choice between death and baptism.

    The Crusaders behaved no less shamefully towards the Christians of the Middle East, of whom there were many. The fact is that by that time, a clear division between the Western and Eastern branches of Christianity had already emerged. Therefore, it is not surprising that the Europeans considered the Orthodox to be barbarian pagans. For example, after capturing Antioch in 1098 following a tough siege, the participants of the First Crusade conducted a massacre in the city, sparing neither Muslims, Christians, nor Jews.

    The participants of the Fourth Crusade (1202–1204) even captured Constantinople instead of heading to Egypt. The city was plundered, and many treasures and relics were taken to Europe. As can be seen, the “civilized” Greeks (Byzantines) were little different from the “barbarians” to the Crusaders.

    Only Knights Went on Crusades to the Holy Land

    The Church of the Holy Sepulchre
    The Church of the Holy Sepulchre in Jerusalem. In 1071, Jerusalem was conquered by the Seljuk Turks. Image: Flickr

    In reality, almost all social strata of medieval Europe participated in the Crusades, from kings to paupers and even children.

    The very first Christian campaign (not to be confused with the First Crusade) was the People’s Crusade in 1096, also known as the Peasants’ Crusade or the Crusade of the Poor. Inspired by the sermons of Peter the Hermit and the speeches of Pope Urban II (who suggested joining the “holy army” to atone for one’s sins), a large crowd of ordinary people and a small number of knights (a total of up to 100,000 people, including women and children) did not wait for the official start of the Crusade. They didn’t even bring supplies with them. This force invaded the Seljuk lands and was defeated — almost all the participants perished.

    buy super kamagra online https://nsstulsa.com/mt-content/uploads/2021/08/png/super-kamagra.html no prescription pharmacy

    Subsequently, peasants repeatedly organized their own “Crusades,” for which the popes even excommunicated the participants from the Church, and their own kings crushed their armies.

    In 1212, a movement began in Europe that became known as the Children’s Crusade. It all started when a teenager named Stephen from Cloyes claimed that Christ had appeared to him and commanded him to liberate the Holy Land. Stephen was supposed to do this through the power of the pure prayers of innocent children’s souls. A similar “prophet” also appeared in the French lands. As a result, up to 30,000 children from France and Germany set out following Stephen, believing his sermons. They barely made it to Marseille, where they boarded seven ships provided by local merchants. The children were then taken into slavery in Africa. However, today many historians doubt that the participants in this crusade were truly children — more likely, they were adolescents and young people.

    Of course, the Crusades mentioned above were not organized with the pope’s approval, making them somewhat unofficial. But they cannot be excluded from the Crusader movement either.

    Women also participated in the Crusades. For example, in the Seventh Crusade, 42 women traveled on one of the ships along with 411 men. Some traveled with their husbands, while others — often widows — went independently. This gave them the opportunity, like men, to see the world and “save their souls” after prayers in the Holy Land.

    Knights Went on Crusades Solely for Profit

    For a long time, it was believed that the main participants in the Crusades were the younger sons of European feudal lords—knights who did not inherit wealth. Consequently, their primary motivation was thought to be filling their pockets with gold.

    In reality, such a simplification is difficult to take seriously. Many of the Crusaders were wealthy individuals, and participating in a holy war was expensive and rarely profitable. A knight had to arm himself and equip his companions and servants. Moreover, throughout the journey to the Holy Land, they needed food and shelter. The overland journey alone took months.

    Often, the entire family participated in raising these funds. Knights frequently mortgaged or sold their property.

    For example, the leader of the First Crusade, Godfrey of Bouillon, mortgaged his family castle. Most of the time, Crusaders returned home empty-handed or with relics, which they donated to monasteries. However, participating in a “righteous cause” significantly raised the family’s prestige in the eyes of other nobility. Therefore, a surviving single Crusader could hope for a profitable marriage.

    To reach the Holy Land by sea, they also had to spend money: to “book” a place on a ship for themselves (as well as for their retinue and horses, if they had any) or to buy provisions. At the same time, no one could guarantee the safety of either the sea or land journey. Crusaders died in shipwrecks, drowned while crossing rivers, or succumbed to disease and exhaustion.

    The territories seized in the Holy Land not only failed to generate profit but almost entirely depended on European resources. To maintain them, kings introduced new taxes. This is how the “Saladin Tithe” came about, named after the ruler of Syria and Egypt who recaptured Jerusalem from the Crusaders.

    The overseas possessions were literally draining money. The Seventh Crusade of Louis IX cost 36 times more than the annual income of the French crown.

    The Crusades Awakened Religious Intolerance

    Despite the successes of the Crusaders, initially, there was no rush to declare jihad against the incoming Christians in the East, although Jerusalem was also an important city for Muslims. The fact is that Muslim rulers were more occupied with conflicts among themselves than with the Crusaders. It got to the point where they invited Christians to participate in their quarrels. Only when the Middle East began to unite under the authority of a single ruler (for example, Nur ad-Din or Saladin) did Muslims start to offer genuine resistance.

    However, this confrontation cannot be called the cause of the emergence of religious intolerance. Much earlier, in 1009, the Egyptian Caliph Al-Hakim ordered the destruction of the Church of the Holy Sepulchre and initiated persecution of Christians and Jews—with killings and forced conversions to Islam. Therefore, it is naive to say that the Crusades caused Islamic extremism.

    The situation with the Crusaders seems somewhat different at first glance.

    For medieval Europe, the Crusades were the first instance where war was not only not considered a sinful act but was presented as a righteous and holy endeavor.

    Only 30 years earlier, after the Battle of Hastings in 1066, Norman bishops imposed penance—a form of ecclesiastical censure and punishment—on their warriors (who, by the way, had won).

    Overall, despite the wars, Muslims and Christians in the Middle East coexisted peacefully with each other most of the time. While Jerusalem was under Arab control, Christian pilgrims could freely venerate their holy sites, which were not destroyed. Muslims were also tolerant of local Christians, imposing only a special tax on them. A similar situation existed in the Crusader states, where followers of Islam made up the majority of the population.

    The Era of the Crusades Brought Only Death, Destruction, and Disease

    The Crusades claimed many lives and caused much suffering, but they also had beneficial consequences for societal development.

    Since wars in distant territories required a constant supply of provisions, this stimulated the development of shipbuilding. Sailing across the Mediterranean Sea became safer and more active, as shipwrecks became less frequent. Many products (saffron, lemon, apricot, sugar, rice) and materials (chintz, muslin, silk) from the East reached Europe. After the Crusades, interest in travel grew significantly in Europe.

    buy addyi online https://nsstulsa.com/mt-content/uploads/2021/08/png/addyi.html no prescription pharmacy

    For the first time since the Roman Empire, large groups of people set off not as pilgrims or traders, but out of interest in the unknown.

    The Crusades significantly expanded the cognitive horizon of Europeans, who became acquainted with other peoples, cultures, and countries. This movement helped accumulate vast knowledge and explore significant territories.

    buy modafinil online https://nsstulsa.com/mt-content/uploads/2021/08/png/modafinil.html no prescription pharmacy

    The Fifth Crusade (1217–1221) laid the foundation for the first medieval expeditions to Central Asia and the Far East.

    Thanks to the Crusades, Europeans were able to access works from around the world that had been carefully collected by Muslims. Numerous texts by ancient scholars and philosophers, lost in Europe, were returned thanks to Arabic translations.

    Medieval science acquired an unprecedented amount of knowledge in geography, mathematics, astronomy, medicine, philosophy, history, and linguistics. It is believed that the Crusaders thus paved the way for medieval Europe to enter the Renaissance.

    However, it should not be forgotten that all of this was achieved at the cost of the economic devastation of modern-day Syria, Lebanon, and Palestine. Many cities and settlements were destroyed or fell into decline, and vast forests were cut down due to numerous sieges. Traders and artisans, for which these places were once famous, relocated to Egypt.

    It took participants of the First Crusade, which lasted from 1096 to 1099, three years to capture Jerusalem. After that, there were eight more large-scale expeditions. The Crusaders held the lands of Palestine and the Levant for nearly 200 years, until 1291, when they were finally defeated and expelled from the Holy Land.

    Around the Crusading movement, many legends were formed, creating a kind of romantic aura. But in reality, as always, everything turned out to be somewhat more complicated.

  • Eleanor of Aquitaine: Duchess and Twice Queen

    Eleanor of Aquitaine: Duchess and Twice Queen

    Eleanor of Aquitaine, also known as Eleanor of Guyenne, was Queen of France from 1137 to 1152 after her marriage to Louis VII, then Queen of England from 1154 to 1204 after marrying Henry II Plantagenet in her second marriage. As a “lively” young woman, and later mother of three kings, she challenged the masculine tradition of power by administering her lands and playing a preeminent role in public affairs. A seductress, she is credited with originating courtly love; intelligent and cultured, she protected troubadours, novelists, and poets. Her effigy is located in the Abbey Church of Fontevraud, where she took the veil at the end of her life and where she passed away on March 31, 1204.

    Eleanor of Aquitaine: A Coveted Princess

    Daughter of William X, Eleanor of Aquitaine was born around 1123 near Bordeaux. Through her father, she would inherit an immense domain covering the entire southwest of France: Gascony, Guyenne, Périgord, Limousin, Poitou…. Her grandfather, the Duke of Poitiers, William IX, was perhaps the most illustrious of the princes of Aquitaine, also known for his talents as a troubadour. Initiator of a cultural movement that flourished in the 12th century, William enabled the emergence of literature in the Occitan language alongside the expansion of lyric poetry.

    Beautiful and alluring, with a charming smile, a gentle gaze, noble manners, a quick and cultivated mind, Eleanor loved parties and flowers. She was only fifteen when her father proposed her in marriage to the son of King Louis VI the Fat, the future Louis VII: the king, ill, could die in peace. She welcomed her future husband, accompanied by five hundred gentlemen, in Bordeaux, where the marriage was celebrated on July 25, 1137, with Louis VII becoming king in August of the same year. The new Queen Eleanor proved perfect: present at jousts and tournaments, she received the nobility, welcomed and listened to troubadours… while single-handedly managing the Duchy of Aquitaine. But she was ambitious and desired power.

    Queen of France

    Louis VII the Young was a weak, very devout king. Little respected by his vassals, whose possessions were often more important than the royal domain, he withdrew from everything, no longer participating in anything, partly entrusting the government to Abbot Suger. Eleanor said, “he is more monk than king,” but their first daughter Marie of France was born in 1145 (she married Count Henry I of Champagne and died in 1198). The king’s only salvation lay in the crusade requested by Pope Eugene III in March 1146. Convinced by the words of Saint Bernard, Louis VII set out for the Holy Land, followed by his court and a “light and dissipated” Eleanor occupied with amusing herself. From Constantinople to Asia Minor, Eleanor discovered magnificent landscapes but… was caught in an ambush by the Saracens near Iconium. Thanks to the knights, she escaped, yet the bulk of the army was defeated.

    King Louis of France, arriving shortly after, was involved in the battle for four hours and fortunately found Eleanor in Antioch, where they were royally received by the queen’s uncle: Raymond of Poitiers, Duke of Antioch. The festivities had a particular character due to the customs and practices of Asia, Eleanor gave herself up gaily to the pleasure of these festivities, and the king held it against her. He found the relationship between Eleanor and her uncle dubious, he was indignant and decided to leave the place.

    The queen refused to leave and spoke of separation, the situation deteriorated… but she had to obey nonetheless. The rumor was launched about the queen’s extramarital adventures… with her uncle. The king embarked for Europe thanks to the vessels of the King of Sicily. Stopping later in Rome, he confided in the Pope about Eleanor: he wanted to repudiate her…

    Failure of the Marriage With Louis VII

    Eleanor of Aquitaine
    Queen Eleanor (Frederick Sandys, 1858)

    Returning to France after four years of absence, Louis VII found his friend Abbot Suger who calmed him, helped him with his worries and explained that he was strongly against this repudiation. The royal couple reconciled and a second daughter was born in 1150: Alix, who would marry Count Thibault the Good of Blois and who would die in 1195. But Suger died in January 1152, the king lost a wise friend and the situation worsened again in the couple. Finally, at Easter 1152, he presented his request before an assembly of prelates: a request for the annulment of the marriage.

    The chancellor had this speech: “It is unnecessary,” he said, “to insist on the king’s sorrows, and on what happened in Palestine; there is no one who does not know the rumors that have circulated, and the king, who wants to respect the honor of this great princess, must not delve into the truth of the facts whose certainty would oblige him to deploy all his severity. He relies on the queen herself. When she wanted to separate from the king her husband in Antioch, she invoked kinship as evidence of the nullity of her marriage; this is what the king submits to the judgment of the Assembly. If kinship is proven, Louis’s union with Eleanor will be annulled.”

    The Archbishop of Bordeaux then admitted that kinship indeed existed to the fourth degree through the women of Burgundy. The nullity was immediately pronounced during this council of Beaugency. At the announcement of this news, Eleanor fainted, then recovering herself, she was surprised by the king’s decision: “Ah! Gentlemen, what have I done to the king that he wants to abandon me? How have I offended him? What fault has he found in my person? I am young enough for him, I am not barren… I am rich enough; I have always obeyed him…

    Quickly regaining her senses, at the head of Poitou and all of Aquitaine, she felt threatened with abduction (the Count of Anjou, Geoffrey Plantagenet wanted to stop her in order to marry her), fled Blois, passed through Tours and took refuge in Poitiers, hoping to marry Henry Plantagenet, Duke of Normandy, Geoffrey’s brother. Their first meeting had taken place in 1151 and had been very successful. He had everything to please the rich heiress: a bearing announcing his high birth, golden blond hair, a gentle gaze, an adroitness for all bodily exercises, at ease at court, he was twenty years old. Six weeks after the repudiation, Henry asked for her hand in marriage.

    Queen of England

    Although Louis VII did everything to prevent this union, Eleanor married Henry in May 1152; the latter became King of England and took the name Henry II. Eleanor, Duchess of Normandy, Queen of England did not find happiness, her husband being unfaithful and moreover, he had no intention of letting her have power! She just had the right to take care of the eight children who would be born: William (1153-1156); Henry the Young (1155-1183); Matilda (1156-1189) wife of Henry the Good, mother of Emperor Otto IV; Richard the Lionheart (1157-1199) King of England; Geoffrey (1158-1186) father of Arthur; Eleanor (1161-1214) wife of the King of Castile, mother of Blanche of Castile; Joan (1165-1199) wife of William II King of Sicily, then Raymond V Count of Toulouse, became abbess of Fontevraud; John Lackland (1166-1216) King of England to the detriment of Arthur.

    Furious, Eleanor made scenes to her husband, going from anger to tenderness, even turning the children against their father, providing them with weapons, pushing them to ally with Scotland against him. She left England and retired to Poitiers, in the midst of her court of poets. Henry II, suspecting Eleanor of being behind the death of his former mistress Rosamund and at the end of his patience, imprisoned her for sixteen years, in Chinon, and in various castles in England.

    She only came out when her eldest son Richard the Lionheart, once on the throne after the death of Henry II in July 1189, freed her. From that day, still governing Aquitaine and Poitou, she visited her lands and decided to open all the prisons.

    buy voltaren online http://bywoodeast.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2025/03/jpg/voltaren.html no prescription pharmacy

    While Richard the Lionheart was on crusade, she ensured the Regency and received a more than warm welcome at each of her passages in the various regions.
    buy accutane online http://bywoodeast.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2025/03/jpg/accutane.html no prescription pharmacy

    But out of jealousy and need for power, she evicted Richard’s young fiancée, sister of Philip Augustus: she wanted no one but herself on the throne! She eventually accepted and negotiated the marriage of Berengaria of Aragon and Richard.
    buy glycomet online http://bywoodeast.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2025/03/jpg/glycomet.html no prescription pharmacy

    A little later, she struggled and devoted herself body and soul to free Richard who had just been captured and delivered to Emperor Henry VI, on his return from the crusade. She spared no effort to gather the enormous ransom demanded. Richard was freed in February 1194, but a few years later, he was wounded and died in Limousin in 1199.

    Rather than see another lineage accede to power, she pushed John Lackland, her last son, to ascend the throne. She went to fetch her granddaughter Blanche from Castile and participated in negotiating the marriage with the son of Philip Augustus, the future Louis VIII.

    End of Eleanor of Aquitaine’s Life at Fontevraud

    Having reached the end of her life, she left her inheritance to her grandson Henry III, then retired definitively to the Abbey of Fontevraud in Maine. She took the veil there while making donations and alms to the poor. After a very eventful life, “the most beautiful and richest flower of Aquitaine, the incomparable pearl of the South” died in March 1204 at the age of 82. She rests at Fontevraud, first alongside her husband, then her son Richard and her daughter-in-law Isabella of Angoulême (wife of John Lackland). Today, one can see their four polychrome effigies facing the high altar of the abbey church.

    Considered for a time by historians as the cause, by her conduct, her divorce and her remarriage, of three centuries of conflicts with England, this famous figure is perceived differently today. Eleanor of Aquitaine embodies the liberated woman of the 13th century, symbol of an enlightened and pleasant Middle Ages; however, some would like to present her as the archetype of the medieval princess, more to be pitied than admired. If Eleanor continues to provoke such strong positions, it is because she remains above all a central female figure in our history.