How significant were the divisions among the Latin leaders in bringing about the fall of Jerusalem?

Although divisions between the devotees of Raymond of Tripoli and Guy of Lusignan caused much conflict and suspicion, there is a considerable amount of evidence to suggest that there were a series of other factors; for example Saladin’s personal qualities which proved extremely significant in the failure of Latin’s at the Battle of Hattin in 1187 and the lack of support/money received by the Latin’s.
In source 7 Ralph of Coggershall describes his concern surrounding the lack of support and money the Latin side possessed; ‘we should not move away from water, food and other necessities to lead to such a multitude of men to death’. As a result of the lack of resources, death and disease were colossal issues, especially as there was already a lack of men due to a downturn in crusading appeal, leaving the Latin troops somewhat outnumbered. The lack of support lead to momentous failures in the first and second crusade and therefore men not wanting to risk their lives and livelihood for what they believed to be an imminent death. This compared with Saladin, who was only growing in power in the build up to the Battle of Hattin in the year 1187, becoming king of Egypt and seizing control of Damascus. This power is supported within Source 1, where William of Tyre states ‘a man of humble antecedents and lowly station now holds under his control all these kingdoms’. This illuminates the disbelief and frustration the Latins felt at being gradually defeated by Saladin, having no power to reverse the lack of support, lack of money and his rising popularity and power.

Having lost a lot of support for the crusade due to the misadventures of the first and second crusades, not even the promise of remission of sins from Pope Urban III aided the rallying of troops and therefore, the Latin leaders had minimal resources to be fully equipped for battle. This difference between the two sides is emphasised in Source 2 with Baha ad-Din describing the intense support for Saladin as a result of his personal qualities, describing his despair at the bloodshed; ‘the suffering involved in it weighed heavily on his heart.’ This dedication to Holy War and love for his people gained him a reputation as ‘a remarkable man’ (Barber). This image gained Saladin a great deal of support and united front from his troops, preaching the Jihad to ignite anti-Christian believers and a thirst for their defeat. This is supported in Source 4 with Pope Urban III describing the Muslims as ‘the wicked race of the pagans’ during the heat of the despair at being defeated, having written the letter in May 1187. Though this view contradicts with Malcolm Barber’s views of Christian sympathy towards Saladin, Pope Urban was not at the Crusades himself and therefore, never knew Saladin who in turn received sympathy and an element of fear from the Latin side.

In relation to the question, Source 5 supports the view that the divisions between the Latin leaders were very significant in contributing to their defeat that the Battle of Hattin. The joining of forces made Raymond and Guy’s loyalists extremely suspicious of each other, with Eraclius blaming Raymond for their defeat; ‘had the Christians kept to their original plan, the Turks would have been defeated.’ Eraclius was a fierce loyalist to Guy, this omnipresent suspicious and heated attitude towards Raymond’s loyalists highlights the division and conflict between the two, adding to their poor leadership. The blame continues to be towards Raymond as shown in Source 3, which states that Raymond was ‘resentful’ that he was disposed of as regent to Baldwin IV and replaced by Guy, causing more conflict between the two parties. However Source 6 shows us the hatred between the two parties as being largely down to Guy’s refusal to unite the Poliens and the Poitou.

Though evidence suggests that the constant conflicts between Raymond and Guy were significant factors in their defeat at the Battle of Hattin, the sources also suggest other factors such as Saladin’s personal qualities and power and the lack of support and resources the Latin troops received, evidence such as the huge amount of land Saladin received and the strong reluctance to join the crusade despite the Pope’s call supports the view that the Latins were doomed from the beginning, no match against the Turkish front. Therefore, the sources infer that though the battles between the two parties were significant factors, it was not as significant as the power of Saladin or the lack of support they received.