Script - Planning

Was the Third Crusade a Failure?

Success (8)

• Secured land for crusaders and other Christians of the West (Acre, Arsuf, Jaffa).
• Richard I was never defeated in battle, plus they had forced the Muslims to retreat to Jerusalem.
• Capture of Cyprus was an added bonus.
• Certainly it was comparatively more successful than the Second Crusade.
• Demonstrated Christian support within the Levant as to maintain Crusading ideal.
• Christian pilgrims were granted safe passage to visit Jerusalem again.
• Richard’s behaviour maintained and raised moral of his forces, his leadership pointing to success in their military victories despite the other two Kings being gone.
• Castles and strongholds were rebuilt, establishing safe zones for future forces and even current citizens.

Failure (7)

• Failed to retake Jerusalem which was seemingly the main objective.
• Lack of total defeat of Saladin in the field, just victory in skirmishes and battles where Saladin was able to escape. Insult to injury how he died soon after the Crusade.
• Reduction of Christian power at Ascalon.
• Capture of Cyprus had annoyed the Byzantines, which would lead to tension on future campaigns.
• Waste of potential resources and forces.
• Failed to re-establish Christian power or a Christian ‘King of Jerusalem’, an issue for Crusader States and future campaigns.
• Conflict between Guy and Conrad persisted as to indicate disunity amongst Crusaders.

Issue is that it was only a success in some regards, of which there are clear cons. However, it is perhaps more successful that the Second and all the Crusades following, somewhat indicating it as a success on a wider scale.