Personal and Political Rivalries and Tensions (Edexcel A-Level History): Revision Notes

Personal and Political Rivalries and Tensions

Introduction

The Second Crusade (called in December 1145 after the fall of Edessa to Zengi) was led by very different figures compared to the First Crusade. Rather than minor nobles and princes, this crusade was commanded by two powerful monarchs: Louis VII of France and Conrad III of Germany. Their personal motivations, existing political relationships, and rivalries with other rulers significantly shaped the course of the crusade from its very beginning.

Who were the leaders of the Second Crusade?

Louis VII of France

Louis VII became king of France and controlled a substantial kingdom through his marriage to Eleanor of Aquitaine, a powerful noblewoman in her own right. Historians have suggested several reasons for his decision to lead the French crusade:

• Penance: He may have sought forgiveness for burning a church at Vitry
• Family honour: He might have wanted to fulfil his deceased brother's vow to travel to Jerusalem

Regardless of his true motivation, Louis publicly committed himself to the crusading cause at Vézelay during Bernard of Clairvaux's influential sermon at Easter 1146. He set his departure date for 15 June 1147.

Conrad III of Germany

Conrad III, the king of Germany, commanded an army of approximately 30,000 to 35,000 soldiers. However, his motivations were more overtly political than Louis's. Conrad used the crusade call to consolidate his power within the German empire.

His political manoeuvring became clear when rivals such as Duke Welf VI of Bavaria, who had already publicly declared their intention to crusade, found themselves forced to support Conrad when he made his formal commitment at Speyer on 18 December 1146. This ceremony, held before his senior nobles and Bernard of Clairvaux, demonstrated Conrad's political authority. He set his departure for May 1147, giving himself six months to prepare.

The journey to Constantinople

The routes both monarchs chose to reach Constantinople revealed how their existing political rivalries shaped crusade planning, but also demonstrated their willingness to cooperate with each other.

Conrad's route: Political constraints

Conrad chose to travel through Hungary to reach the Byzantine Empire's borders. This decision was made cautiously because:

• He had recently been defeated in war by Geisa II, King of Hungary
• His poor relationship with Roger of Sicily meant the sea route was impossible
• His campaigns against Roger (undertaken to protect the papacy in Rome) had created lasting enmity

Despite the risks, the Hungarian route was Conrad's only realistic option.

Louis's route: Balancing alliances

Louis's route choice showed considerable diplomatic sensitivity to both Conrad's situation and his own political interests:

Rejection of Roger of Sicily's offer: Louis turned down Roger's proposal to transport the French forces by sea to the Byzantine Empire. This decision had two key reasons:

1. Alliance with Conrad: Louis did not want to antagonise his new ally, Conrad III, who was hostile to Roger
2. Eleanor of Aquitaine's influence: Roger had made clear his ambition to control Antioch, a principality ruled by Eleanor's uncle. Eleanor, being powerful in her own right, played a significant role in Louis's decision to follow a land route similar to Conrad's

Early cooperation

Despite the complex issue of Louis's earlier negotiations with Roger over troop transport, the two kings began their journeys with a spirit of friendly cooperation:

• Louis met with Conrad's ambassadors at Châlons-sur-Marne in mid-1147 and responded positively to their requests
• When Louis arrived in German territory, Conrad had made preparations for his journey
• At Regensburg, ships were ready to transport Louis's troops along the River Danube
• Although occasional conflicts occurred between French and German soldiers, the Second Crusade started promisingly

Louis and Conrad's relationship with Manuel I

Why was a good relationship with the Byzantine emperor important?

Unlike 1095, when Alexius I had invited crusaders to help combat the Muslim threat, there was no such invitation in 1147 from the new Byzantine emperor, Manuel I. This absence of an invitation made the relationship between the crusade leaders and the emperor absolutely critical to success or failure.

The emperor's attitude would affect four crucial aspects of the crusade:

1. Military support: During the First Crusade, Alexius had provided the Byzantine general Taticius to act as both guide and military support. Without such assistance, the crusaders would have struggled to navigate Asia Minor. Manuel had the power to provide or withhold similar support.

2. Supplies and provisions: The emperor controlled whether markets would be available for crusaders to purchase goods, and at what prices. He could also make ships available at ports under Byzantine control in Asia Minor. Without adequate provisions, crusading armies would quickly fail.

3. Byzantine loyalty: Manuel had signed a treaty with the Turks at Konya. A poor relationship might lead to betrayal—the Byzantines could reveal the crusaders' location or plans to their Muslim enemies.

4. Delays: The First Crusaders had been held up at Constantinople while Alexius I pressured them to swear oaths of loyalty. Manuel could impose similar delays on Louis and Conrad if he distrusted them, slowing the crusade's progress significantly.

Conrad III's relationship with Manuel I

Initially, Conrad's relationship with Manuel was strong. The two rulers had formed an alliance against the southern Italian Normans, creating a foundation of trust and mutual interest.

However, this relationship came under strain during Conrad's march through Hungary and the Byzantine Empire towards Constantinople:

• Manuel ordered the Byzantine army, commanded by Prosuch, to follow the German forces
• This was intended to prevent any attempts by Conrad to capture Byzantine territory
• The shadowing led to several violent incidents
• In one notable example, Frederick of Swabia attempted to burn down a monastery after a Greek soldier killed a German

Perhaps as a consequence of these tensions, Conrad was required to swear a limited oath promising not to act against Manuel's wishes. This was less demanding than full homage but still demonstrated Manuel's caution.

Louis VII's relationship with Manuel I

The relationship between Manuel and Louis was more strained from the outset, primarily due to Louis's close association with Roger of Sicily. This suspicion had two sources:

1. Roger's Norman origins: The Byzantines had historical conflicts with the Normans
2. Planned cooperation: Roger and Louis had originally intended to crusade together, which raised Byzantine concerns

Attempts at diplomacy: Louis and the pope tried to build trust with Manuel in autumn 1146 by sending him a letter explaining their intentions. However, Manuel's reply revealed his mistrust of the French—significantly, it referred to an oath of homage.

Remember!