Siege of Damascus

Infobox Military Conflict| conflict=Siege of Damascus


caption=Crusaders intended for Edessa, seen here on the right of this map (c.1140), were diverted by King Baldwin III of Jerusalem to Damascus.
partof=the Second Crusade
date=23 July-28 July, 1148
place=Damascus
result=Decisive Strategic Crusader defeat; withdrawal of army
combatant1=Crusaders
*
**
**
*
**
*
**
combatant2=Saracen
*
*
combatant3=
commander1=
commander2=Imad ad-Din Zengi
**
*
*
combatant3=
commander1=
commander2=
strength1=50,000
strength2=Unknown
casualties1=Unknown
casualties2=UnknownThe Siege of Damascus took place over four days in July 1148, during the Second Crusade. It ended in a decisive crusader defeat and led to the disintegration of the crusade. The two main Christian forces that marched to the Holy Land in response to Pope Eugenius III and Bernard of Clairvaux's call for the Second Crusade were led by Louis VII of France and Conrad III of Germany. Both faced disastrous marches across Anatolia in the months that followed, most of their armies were destroyed. The original focus of the crusade was Edessa, but in Jerusalem, the preferred target of King Baldwin III and the Knights Templar was Damascus. At the Council of Acre, magnates from France, Germany, and the Kingdom of Jerusalem decided to divert the crusade to Damascus.

The crusaders decided to attack Damascus from the west, where orchards would provide them with a constant food supply. Having arrived outside the walls of the city, they immediately put it to siege, using wood from the orchards. On 27 July, the crusaders decided to move to the plain on the eastern side of the city, which was less heavily fortified but had much less food and water. Nur ad-Din arrived with Muslim reinforcements and cut off the crusader's route to their previous position. The local crusader lords refused to carry on with the siege, and the three kings had no choice but to abandon the city. The entire crusader army had retreated back to Jerusalem by 28 July.

Each of the Christian forces felt betrayed by the other and mutual distrust was fostered for a generation due to the defeat. As a result of the Crusade, Damascus also no longer trusted the crusaders, and the city was formally handed over to Nur ad-Din in 1154. In Europe, Bernard of Clairvaux was humiliated by the result and he tried to disassociate himself from the events altogether.

econd Crusade

The two main Christian forces that marched to the Holy Land in response to Pope Eugenius III and Bernard of Clairvaux's call for the Second Crusade were led by Louis VII of France and Conrad III of Germany. Conrad's force included Bolesław IV the Curly and Vladislaus II of Bohemia, as well as Frederick of Swabia, his nephew who would become emperor Frederick I. [Runciman (1952) pg. 211.] The crusade had been called after the fall of the County of Edessa on 24 December 1144. The crusaders marched across Europe and arrived at Constantinople in September and October of 1147.

Both faced disastrous marches across Anatolia in the months that followed, and most of their armies were destroyed. Louis abandoned his troops and travelled by ship to Antioch, where his wife Eleanor of Aquitaine's uncle, Raymond, was prince. Raymond expected him to offer military assistance against the Seljuk Turks threatening the Principality, but Louis refused and went to Jerusalem to fulfil his crusader vow.Brundage (1962) pp.115-121.] Conrad, stricken by illness, had earlier returned to Constantinople, but arrived in Jerusalem a few weeks later in early April 1148. [Riley-Smith (1990) pp.49-50.] The original focus of the crusade was Edessa, but in Jerusalem, the preferred target of King Baldwin III and the Knights Templar was Damascus. [Brundage]

Council of Acre

The Council of Acre was called with the Haute Cour of Jerusalem at Acre on 24 June. This was the most spectacular meeting of the Cour in its existence: Conrad, Otto, Henry II of Austria, future emperor Frederick, and William V of Montferrat represented the Holy Roman Empire. Louis, Thierry of Alsace, and various other ecclesiastical and secular lords represented the French. From Jerusalem King Baldwin, Queen Melisende, Patriarch Fulk, Robert of Craon (master of the Knights Templar), Raymond du Puy de Provence (master of the Knights Hospitaller), Manasses of Hierges (constable of Jerusalem), Humphrey II of Toron, Philip of Milly, Walter Grenier, and Barisan of Ibelin were among those present. [William of Tyre wrote "it seems well worth while and quite in harmony with the present history that the names of the nobles who were present at the council...should be recorded here for the benefit of posterity." He lists these and numerous others; "to name each one individually would take far too long." "A History of Deeds Done Beyond the Sea", trans. E.A. Babcock and A.C. Krey (Columbia University Press, 1943), vol. 2, bk. 17, ch. 1, pp. 184-185.] Notably, no one from Antioch, Tripoli, or the former County of Edessa attended. Both Louis and Conrad were persuaded to attack Damascus.Riley-Smith (1990) p.50.]

Some of the barons native to Jerusalem pointed out that it would be unwise to attack Damascus, as the Burid dynasty, though Muslim, were their allies against the Zengid dynasty. Zengi had besieged the city in 1140, and Mu'in ad-Din Unur, a Mameluk acting as vizier for the young Mujir ud-Din Abaq, negotiated an alliance with Jerusalem through the chronicler Usamah ibn Munqidh. Conrad, Louis, and Baldwin insisted, Damascus was a holy city for Christianity. Like Jerusalem and Antioch, it would be a noteworthy prize in the eyes of European Christians. In July their armies assembled at Tiberias and marched to Damascus, around the Sea of Galilee by way of Banyas. There were perhaps 50,000 troops in total. [Runciman (1952) pp. 228-229.]

The general historical debate now appears to view the decision to attack Damascus as somewhat inevitable. The campaign is viewed by historians, such as Martin Hoch, that the decision was the logical conclusion of Damascene foreign policy shifting into alignment with the Zengid dynasty. King Baldwin III had previously launched a campaign with the sole objective of capturing the city. This aided in shifting the Burid dynasty's relations with the Kingdom of Jerusalem. [Hoch (2002)]

Fiasco at Damascus

The crusaders decided to attack Damascus from the west, where orchards would provide them with a constant food supply. They arrived at Daraiya on 23 July, with the army of Jerusalem in the vanguard, followed by Louis and then Conrad in the rearguard. The Muslims were prepared for the attack and constantly attacked the army advancing through the orchards outside Damascus on 24 July. The orchards were defended by towers and walls and the crusaders were constantly pelted with arrows and lances along the narrow paths.

Thanks to a charge by Conrad, the crusaders managed to fight their way through and chase the defenders back across the Barada River and into Damascus. Having arrived outside the walls of the city, they immediately put it to siege, using wood from the orchards. Inside the city the inhabitants barricaded the major streets, preparing for what they believed to be an inevitable assault. Unur had sought help from Saif ad-Din Ghazi I of Mosul and Nur ad-Din of Aleppo, and personally led an attack on the crusader camp; the crusaders were pushed back from the walls into the orchards, where they were prone to ambushes and guerrilla attacks. According to William of Tyre, on 27 July the crusaders decided to move to the plain on the eastern side of the city, which was less heavily fortified but had much less food and water.

There were conflicts in both camps: Unur could not trust Saif ad-Din or Nur ad-Din from conquering the city entirely if they offered help; and the crusaders could not agree about who would receive the city if they captured it. Guy Brisebarre, lord of Beirut, was the suggestion of the local barons, but Thierry of Alsace, Count of Flanders, wanted it for himself and was supported by Baldwin, Louis, and Conrad. It was recorded by some that Unur had bribed the leaders to move to a less defensible position, and that Unur had promised to break off his alliance with Nur ad-Din if the crusaders went home. Meanwhile Nur ad-Din and Saif ad-Din had by now arrived at Homs and were negotiating with Unur for possession of Damascus, something that neither Unur nor the crusaders wanted. Saif ad-Din apparently also wrote to the crusaders, urging them to return home. With Nur ad-Din in the field it was impossible to return to their better position. The local crusader lords refused to carry on with the siege, and the three kings had no choice but to abandon the city. First Conrad, then the rest of the army, decided to retreat back to Jerusalem on 28 July, though for their entire retreat they were followed by Turkish archers who constantly harassed them. [Baldwin (1969) p.510.]

Aftermath

Each of the Christian forces felt betrayed by the other. A new plan was made to attack Ascalon but this was abandoned due to the lack of trust that had resulted from the failed siege. This mutual distrust would linger for a generation due to the defeat, to the ruin of the Christian kingdoms in the Holy Land. Following the battle, Conrad returned to Constantinople to further his alliance with Manuel. As a result of the attack, Damascus no longer trusted the crusaders, and the city was formally handed over to Nur ad-Din in 1154. Bernard of Clairvaux was also humiliated, and when his attempt to call a new crusade failed, he tried to disassociate himself from the fiasco of the Second Crusade altogether. [Runciman (1952) pp. 232-234 and pg. 277.]

Notes

References

*cite book|last=Runciman|first=Steven|title=A History of the Crusades, vol. II: The Kingdom of Jerusalem and the Frankish East, 1100-1187|publisher=Cambridge University Press|year=1952; repr. Folio Society, 1994
*cite book|last=Smail|first=R. C.|title=Crusading Warfare 1097-1193|publisher=Barnes & Noble Books|year=1956|pages=
*cite book|last=Brundage|first=James|title=The Crusades: A Documentary History|location=Milwaukee, WI|publisher= Marquette University Press|year=1962|pages=
*cite book|last=Baldwin|first=M. W.|title=The first hundred years|location=Madison, WI|publisher=University of Wisconsin Press|year=1969|pages=
*cite book|last=Riley-Smith|first=Jonathan|title=Atlas of the Crusades|location=New York|publisher=Facts on File|year=1991|pages=
*cite book|last =Hoch, Martin & Jonathan Phillips - editors| first =|title = The Second Crusade: Scope and Consequences|publisher = Manchester University Press|date =2002|location =| pages =

Further reading

*"The Damascus Chronicle of the Crusaders, extracted and translated from the Chronicle of Ibn al-Qalanisi". Edited and translated by H. A. R. Gibb. London, 1932.
*William of Tyre. "A History of Deeds Done Beyond the Sea". Edited and translated by E. A. Babcock and A. C. Krey. Columbia University Press, 1943.

External links

* [http://digicoll.library.wisc.edu/cgi-bin/History/History-idx?type=browse&scope=HISTORY.HISTCRUSADES Kenneth Setton, ed. - "A History of the Crusades, vol. I". University of Pennsylvania Press, 1958] . Retrieved on 27 March 2008

* [http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/source/tyre-damascus.html William of Tyre - The Fiasco at Damascus (1148)] at the Internet Medieval Sourcebook. Retrieved on 27 March 2008