Why did Stephen II of Blois (father of King Stephen of England) abandon the First Crusade in 1098 knowing how much he would lose by doing so?

score:7

Accepted answer

Stephen of Bloch "deserted" the First Crusade at a critical time in the Siege of Antioch. It's true that the Crusaders had beaten off two relief expeditions and were about to capture the city. But there was a third, larger relief expedition on the way, and the Crusaders were low on food.

Stephen's worst fears were realized when the besiegers became the besieged. They managed to defeat the Turks countersiege by breaking through from the inside, but that is a rare, unexpected result. The likelihood was that they would have been forced to surrender or starve.

Stephen may have left thinking that "discretion was the better part of valor," that escaping and living to another day was better than "certain death." He did not realize that the Crusaders had a chance to survive.

Upvote:-1

I saw your question and the one reason you can rule out is written in his own words. In his last letter to his wife March 29th 1098 he brags about having doubled the amount of money she had given him to go on crusade. If that were true why did he and the other crusaders in his charge have issues with food and equipment

Upvote:-1

I am currently writing my masters on cowards of the crusades and Steven is chapter 1. Here is what I have found out and come to the conclusion: First I agree with the writer he was not poor maybe not as rich as he was but was not poor. His wife gave him a lot of money to go on the crusade she basically forced him to go and then shamed to go back when he fled. The answer in my opinion sits between being not in the best of health and seeing Kerbogha's army advancing. At the time he left he was in good standing with the other crusaders. The evidence I have found does not state anything different. It was only after he left that they turned on him.

More post

Search Posts

Related post