The Fractured Crusade Reorganizes

On January 13, 1099, an extraordinary sight unfolded near Ma’arrat al-Nu’man in Syria. Count Raymond IV of Toulouse, known as Saint-Gilles, deliberately adopted the humble appearance of a pilgrim – barefoot, wearing coarse woolen robes, carrying only a staff topped with a cross. This theatrical display masked his true position as leader of the largest remaining crusader force, their tunics emblazoned with the white cross that would become iconic. His performance reflected both genuine piety and shrewd leadership, setting the tone for what would become the final march toward the crusade’s ultimate objective: Jerusalem.

The First Crusade had reached a critical juncture. Three years after departing Europe with over 50,000 warriors, the crusading armies now numbered barely 12,500 effectives. The brutal Siege of Antioch (1097-98) and subsequent power struggles had decimated their ranks and fractured their leadership. As Saint-Gilles prepared to march south, the crusade’s remaining princes made separate decisions that would shape the campaign’s final phase.

Competing Visions for the Holy Land

The crusader leadership split along revealing lines. Bohemond of Taranto, victor of Antioch, remained to consolidate his new principality. Baldwin of Boulogne stayed in Edessa, establishing Europe’s first crusader state. Meanwhile, three distinct forces prepared to march on Jerusalem:

Saint-Gilles’ contingent embodied the crusade’s spiritual ideals, adopting pilgrim austerity despite their military purpose. In contrast, Robert of Normandy and Tancred marched as conquering knights in full armor. A month later, Godfrey of Bouillon and Robert of Flanders would follow with heavily armed forces taking a different coastal route.

This division reflected deeper tensions. Saint-Gilles maintained uneasy relations with Bohemond, explaining why Tancred – Bohemond’s nephew – refused to march under the count’s command. The crusaders carried these political rivalries southward even as they approached their sacred goal.

Through the Syrian Gauntlet

The crusaders entered a complex political landscape. Fatimid Egypt had recently seized Palestine from the Seljuk Turks, leaving local emirs with divided loyalties. Some saw the crusaders as liberators from Egyptian rule; others as invaders threatening their autonomy.

Saint-Gilles demonstrated growing diplomatic skill, negotiating safe passage with the Emir of Shaizar who promised supplies and guides. Yet old habits resurfaced when crusaders looted local shepherds’ flocks, selling the stolen sheep back to townspeople to remount their cavalry. This blend of pragmatism and predation characterized their advance.

The march south revealed strategic tensions. When Saint-Gilles proposed diverting to the coast for Genoese supplies, young Tancred vehemently opposed crossing winter mountains controlled by their enemy Duqaq of Damascus. Remarkably, the experienced count deferred to his junior, showing the crusaders’ evolving adaptability.

The Castle of Krak des Chevaliers

A pivotal moment came at Hisn al-Akrad, a fortress blocking their path. After initial resistance, defenders abandoned the stronghold in a curious retreat – first driving livestock out to distract the crusaders before fleeing entirely. The fortuitous capture allowed the crusaders to fortify the position extensively. This site would evolve into the legendary Krak des Chevaliers, a crusader stronghold for centuries.

Here, the Emir of Tripoli made a surprising offer: alliance against Egypt in exchange for recognition of his independence. Saint-Gilles considered creating his own Syrian principality, but Tancred insisted on prioritizing Jerusalem. Their debate previewed tensions between immediate conquest and long-term settlement that would define the crusader states.

The Ordeal by Fire and Leadership Crisis

The crusaders’ unity faced a severe test at Arqa. Saint-Gilles’ prolonged siege drew criticism from other leaders, while the disastrous “Ordeal by Fire” – where mystic Peter Bartholomew attempted to prove the authenticity of the Holy Lance by walking through flames – ended in his agonizing death. This humiliation weakened Saint-Gilles’ authority just as Godfrey’s forces arrived from the coast.

The converging crusader armies now numbered 15,000. With four princes united against him, Saint-Gilles abandoned his Tripolitan ambitions and joined the march south. The compromise saw them accept 15,000 Byzantine gold pieces from Tripoli rather than conquer it – a pragmatic solution that preserved their strength for Jerusalem.

The Final Approach

From May 1099, the crusaders adopted a new strategy: bypassing coastal cities in exchange for supplies. The sight of European heavy cavalry – armored “like mechanical men” in the words of Arab observers – created psychological dominance. Cities from Beirut to Jaffa provisioned the army rather than resist, often due to local resentment against Fatimid rule.

At Ramallah, crusaders encountered Bethlehem’s Latin Christians, who guided them to Christ’s birthplace. Tancred’s swift capture of Bethlehem and subsequent claim to lordship sparked tensions with local clergy, foreshadowing conflicts between crusader rule and indigenous Christian communities. Godfrey mediated, but Tancred’s independent action revealed the persistent tension between collective purpose and personal ambition.

The Legacy of the March

The 1099 march to Jerusalem represents a critical transition in crusader mentality. Having survived Antioch’s horrors, the remaining forces displayed new levels of strategic adaptability, blending religious zeal with political pragmatism. Their success in traversing hostile territory with minimal losses demonstrated growing military sophistication.

Yet the divisions among leaders – between pilgrims and conquerors, between those seeking principalities and those focused on Jerusalem – prefigured the crusader states’ future challenges. The march also established patterns of crusader-indigenous interaction, from pragmatic alliances with local Muslims to complex relationships with Eastern Christians.

Most significantly, the convergence of crusader forces before Jerusalem in June 1099 set the stage for one of history’s most consequential sieges. The campaign’s mixed legacy – of both inspired leadership and bitter conflict, of shared purpose and competing ambitions – would shape the Crusader Kingdom of Jerusalem for generations to come. The “Knight’s Castle” at Krak des Chevaliers still standing today serves as a powerful physical reminder of this pivotal moment when a battered but determined force marched toward what they believed was their divine destiny.