Many historians believe that the Crusader states were doomed to failure. Although the Crusaders certainly believed that they were here to stay, as demonstrated by the great castles and fortresses that were built, they faced many immediate problems. They were seriously lacking in manpower; The First Crusade was always intended as an armed pilgrimage and this is why the vast majority of crusaders returned home after the capture of Jerusalem, leaving those who remained massively outnumbered. Moreover, as a strip of Crusader land entirely surrounded by a sea of ​​Muslim territory and barred from Europe by the Byzantine Empire to the north, the Crusaders only clung to the Holy Land, "satellites of the Latin West in a sea of ​​Islam. '. In this essay, I will argue that the Kingdom of Jerusalem was not doomed to failure. Until the reign of Baldwin III, the Crusaders demonstrated their ability to survive against all odds, regardless of their precarious geographical situation. I believe it was short-term factors like the resurgence of Muslim forces under Zengi, Amalric's mistakes in Egypt, and deteriorating relations between crusade leaders that ultimately cost the crusaders the Holy Land they worked for so hard to protect. plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why Violent Video Games Should Not Be Banned”? Get an original essay The first element I want to consider is the weakness of the Muslim world and how this was one of the key factors allowing the Crusaders to gain the upper hand. Kingdom of Jerusalem. At the time of the First Crusade, the Muslim enemies were not united and this disunity contributed to the strength and stability of the early Outremer. The First Crusade was an exceptional military achievement for the Franks, but divisions within the inward-looking Muslim world were an important factor when considering the survival of the Kingdom of Jerusalem. In addition to fighting between the two main religious branches of Islam, the Shiites and the Sunnis, the death of the Seljuk emperor Malik in 1092 led to a power vacuum in the East. The emperor's four sons and brother fought for the right to succession, dividing the once great empire into fighting factions, each focused on acquiring personal power and land, and caring little about the external powers. The Empire was too divided to be able to defend itself against attack. The reign of King Baldwin I, first king of Jerusalem, is considered a success, particularly as a military leader. He has been shown to make many impressive tactical decisions, including the strategic choice to capture the important coastal cities of Arsulf, Acre, and Caesarea during the First Crusade. These vital ports provided coastal access to Western allies and also opened a world of trading possibilities to the East. Furthermore, Baldwin managed to devise a clever model that allowed tighter control over barons and knights to be maintained, thereby outpacing the disaffected nobility. The subsequent deterioration of this model in the 1180s was one of the main reasons for the decline of the Kingdom of Jerusalem, as I will discuss later, but Baldwin I set the standards for the management of the Kingdom of Jerusalem and had his Si Had his example been followed by his successors, the kingdom could have prospered. Baldwin I was one of the most significant figures of the First Crusade. Its military success during the Crusade laid the foundation for the Kingdom of Jerusalem. This is explained through the words of Fulcher of Chartres, Baldwin's chaplain. He wrote: "He was a very skilled fighter andso, even though he had few men, they [the Muslims] did not dare to attack him. » While this may be the case, Fulcher's close relationship with Baldwin may have influenced his writing. His motive was also to attract people to settle in the kingdom of Jerusalem, as the Crusaders were few in number. After considering all the evidence, Baldwin I led the Crusaders in victories that ensured the survival of the Kingdom of Jerusalem while preserving the gains of the First Crusade. Baldwin I was known for his ability to control the ungovernable aristocracy. There were many social changes during the time of Baldwin's reign; dukes and barons were at the height of their power and at the same time, knights and lesser nobles were constantly demanding more power and land. The way he adapted to these changes with the "New Feudal" shows that he is cunning and intelligent. Baldwin created a new system, based on the feudal model of the West, to replace the hierarchy of the Byzantine Empire that made the barons and nobility so difficult to control. However, not all historians view Baldwin I in such an admirable light. Asbridge considers the Crusaders under Baldwin's leadership to be: "little more than a loose network of scattered outposts." He attributed the success of the Crusaders more to luck than anything else, and it is important to note that although Baldwin I was a strong strategist and demonstrated great political skill, there were many examples of him being a far from exemplary military leader. He captured important areas such as ports and coastal towns, but failed to bring them together into a single body of Crusader territory, which caused some problems later when the Crusader states were too scattered to 'a single leader can effectively manage them all. I believe this argument has merit; the Crusader States were indeed "a loose network", but it was by focusing their attention on the coasts that the Crusaders allowed such a hold on the Kingdom of Jerusalem, so it is understandable that its main priority was to secure the Crusader States. Baldwin managed to consolidate his power by being a forceful negotiator. This style of diplomatic negotiation also gained him key allies. For example, the partnership with the Italians, with both leaders described as "competent and wise mediators", was very important to the survival of the Kingdom of Jerusalem and ties were maintained for 80 years. In fact, these early relations led to the establishment of a treaty of alliance between Jerusalem and the Venetians in 1123, called Pactum Warmundi. As a strip of Crusader land in a sea of ​​Muslim territory, the connections the Crusaders established with outside forces proved to be extremely useful short-term factors that contributed to the kingdom's fate. Baldwin I left behind a kingdom much larger than the one he had created. inherited, and this is an important factor in judging him that historians like Asbridge have not emphasized enough. One thing that sets Baldwin apart as a particularly effective leader is that he had a vision for his kingdom from the beginning of his reign and his actions all seemed planned and well thought out, as if he was thinking decades into the future. I think that although it was the Crusaders who captured the city of Jerusalem, Baldwin I should be most credited for consolidating and creating the structure that allowed the Kingdom of Jerusalem to survive. It is when this structure is broken down by infighting and political divisions that we see the Kingdom struggle to keep its external enemies at bay and ultimately cannot keep the.