Crusades · CHAPTER 10 ·
Fifth to Eighth Crusades
Chapter 10 of The Crusades, 1095–1291: “The Crusades of Kings”
From 1218 the royal crusades targeted Egypt, whose wealth sustained Muslim power in the region. The Fifth Crusade took Damietta but was trapped by the Nile flood; the excommunicated Frederick II regained Jerusalem by treaty in 1229; and Louis IX was defeated and captured near Mansura after attacking Egypt in 1249.
Chapter 10 is included with every paid plan. WW2 is free in full, and chapter 1 of every atlas is free. A free account opens 3 more chapters a day. Starter, at $9 a month, opens all 21 with no daily limit — see the plans.
The map above is the world of The Crusades, 1229 — Frederick’s Jerusalem, by treaty.
Part of IB History: The Crusades →
SHORT EXPLANATION
Egypt offered crusade leaders a way to strike at the resources that supported Muslim power around Jerusalem. The Fifth Crusade captured Damietta and refused an offer involving Jerusalem, then advanced toward Cairo. Caught by the Nile flood, the army had to surrender its gains. A valuable target had drawn it into a landscape where the season, waterways and local knowledge could decide the campaign.
In 1229 Frederick II recovered Jerusalem by treaty, using a rivalry within the Muslim ruling family, although the pope had excommunicated him. Louis IX of France chose invasion: he attacked Egypt in 1249 and was defeated and captured near Mansura. On a later expedition he died of disease at Tunis in 1270. Devotion could sustain a crusade, but its outcome also depended on political choices and supplies.
The full story
Richard’s judgment about Jerusalem shaped the campaigns that followed him. Egypt supplied regional rulers with grain, taxes and fleets; a crusade that weakened Egypt might therefore make Jerusalem more secure. This was a strategic reason to attack the Nile, even though the holy city lay elsewhere.
The Fifth Crusade put the idea to work. In 1219 its army captured Damietta, the fortress guarding the Nile’s eastern branch. Sultan al-Kamil offered terms involving Jerusalem, but the crusade leaders refused them and continued toward Cairo. Their advance took them into channels, mud and defended crossings. The annual flood trapped the army, and the crusaders had to surrender Damietta. Taking a port had given them an entry into Egypt; it had not given them command of the country beyond it.
Frederick II approached the problem through negotiation. The Arabic-speaking emperor was excommunicated and at odds with the papacy. Al-Kamil, meanwhile, faced a struggle with relatives and had reason to make peace. Their agreement of 1229 restored Jerusalem to Christian control, while Muslims retained important sacred precincts and surrounding strongpoints. It was a real gain, obtained without an invading army fighting its way to the city, but its terms and Frederick’s position made it controversial among Church leaders.
Louis IX of France returned to the Egyptian strategy. His expedition was carefully prepared, and his devotion was deep; in 1249 he attacked Egypt, only to be defeated and captured near Mansura. Mamluk officers soon took power there. Louis mounted another expedition and died of disease near Tunis in 1270.
The route inland from Damietta looks short on the map. An army that had arrived by sea, however, had to leave the protection of its ships and move through a river system known better to its opponents. Divided command made adjustments harder as conditions changed. Frederick avoided that journey because his interests and al-Kamil’s briefly coincided. His settlement was fragile, and the contrast with Louis also shows why contemporaries judged more than land gained or lost: the Church later honored Louis’s devotion and conduct with sainthood, while Frederick’s conflict with the papacy and the terms he accepted troubled his critics.
FULL EXPLANATION
Why Egypt Defeated Crusading Armies
Egypt’s wealth made it worth attacking. Grain, taxes and fleets gave its rulers resources with which to exercise power across the region. Yet an army approaching that wealth from the coast faced a difficult crossing. The Nile delta was divided by channels and marshes; seasonal flooding altered roads and possible campsites. A crusading force could arrive by sea and take Damietta, as both the Fifth Crusade and Louis IX did, but an advance inland left its ships farther behind. Egyptian commanders knew the waterways and supply routes and could gain time by delaying the invaders. Crusading coalitions had a limited campaigning season and divided leadership. Holding the port gave them a base, not mastery of the river system. The reasons for choosing Egypt did not supply the local capacity needed to conquer it.
When Success Violated the Script
Frederick and al-Kamil made a bargain for a fixed term. Jerusalem, Bethlehem and a corridor to the coast returned to Christian control; Muslims retained the sacred precincts and surrounding strongpoints. Both rulers had immediate reasons to accept those terms. The agreement opened holy places without the military cost of an invasion, but its duration and the positions retained by Muslims fell short of a secure, complete restoration. Church leaders also had to consider who had made it. Frederick was excommunicated and in conflict with the papacy. Louis IX, by contrast, suffered defeat and was later made a saint: his devotion, conduct and suffering mattered to that judgment. Crusading was a penitential undertaking as well as a contest for territory, and the standing and actions of leaders shaped its reception. Frederick’s achievement was substantial, politically contested and difficult to hold.
Key places on the map
On this day
Why it happened
The Egypt-first doctrine. Richard’s insight (Ch. 7) led later crusade leaders to look to Egypt for a secure Jerusalem. Its resources made it a valuable target, but the flooding Nile delta also placed invaders among waterways and terrain familiar to local commanders.
Diplomacy could do what war could not. Al-Kamil’s struggle with relatives made peace useful to him, and Frederick II had reasons to negotiate. When their interests aligned, they could agree on Jerusalem’s return to Christian control without the battle an invasion would have required.
The gap between piety and power. Louis IX’s devotion, preparation and courage sustained his expedition. They did not provide an army with the supplies and freedom to maneuver that a campaign on the Nile required. His commitment could not by itself resolve those difficulties.
THE TURNING POINT
Jerusalem regained by treaty, 18 February 1229. Frederick II and al-Kamil agreed on 18 February 1229 to return Jerusalem to Christian control. The city had been recovered by an excommunicated emperor through negotiation, and both his dispute with the papacy and the treaty’s limits made the result controversial. The episode shows why the religious and political circumstances of a crusade mattered alongside the territory it gained.
What it changed
A treaty-held Jerusalem, then gone. The Jerusalem Frederick obtained by treaty was poorly defended and did not remain under Christian control. Khwarezmian mercenaries sacked it in 1244, and an allied army was destroyed at La Forbie. Watch the corridor vanish: Jerusalem was lost for the rest of the crusading period.
The Mamluks made. Louis IX’s defeat near Mansura was followed within weeks by a change of rulers in Egypt. Mamluk slave-soldier officers overthrew the Ayyubid dynasty; the power they established would later play a decisive part in destroying Outremer.
The centre of gravity moves to kings — and then away. Royal expeditions came to prominence after the earlier baronial campaigns, but kings also had kingdoms to govern. Once major expeditions stopped arriving, the crusader states had less prospect of relief from them. Acre fell in 1291, after the royal effort had been exhausted.
DISCUSSION QUESTION — Frederick II recovered Jerusalem by treaty and faced condemnation; Louis IX fought, failed and became a saint. What does the contrast tell us about crusading?
Frederick’s treaty and Louis’s campaigns were judged in a movement that valued religious conduct as well as territory. Frederick obtained Christian control of Jerusalem while excommunicated and in conflict with the papacy; the terms he accepted were disputed too. Louis failed in his campaigns, but his devotion, conduct and suffering contributed to his later canonization. The contrast does not make territorial results irrelevant. Frederick’s gain was real, though fragile, and Louis’s defeat left the eastern states’ practical problem unresolved. It shows that crusading was also a religious and penitential undertaking, in which a leader’s standing and methods affected the judgment of his actions.
An interesting fact
The Damascene chronicler Ibn Wasil recounts an exchange during Frederick’s stay in Jerusalem in March 1229. As a courtesy to the emperor, the qadi of Nablus had suspended the muezzins’ call to prayer. Frederick noticed the silence and objected: he said that hearing the call was chiefly why he had spent the night in the city. The story places the excommunicated ruler who had negotiated Jerusalem’s return in an encounter with its Muslim practice.
Related
THE FREE PRINTABLE STUDY GUIDE
Get the printable study guide for The Crusades free. I’ll send you a few short letters, then one when a new atlas opens. That’s all. — Paul
NO TRACKING · YOUR ADDRESS IS USED FOR THE DISPATCH AND NOTHING ELSE · UNSUBSCRIBE ANYTIME