What if King Philip the Fair does not destroy the Templar Knights, whether it us more likely that the Templar Knights allow Philip to join the order, or Philip cannot or does not persecute them? How does this affect the Crusades after Philip the Fair?
What if Philip the Fair does not Destroy the Templar knights
- Thread starter veni vidi vici
- Start date
I thought their was a couple Crusades against The Spanish Moors? (I apologize in advance if that is not the Correct name)
But those were primarily within by Spaniards, so what happens to the Templars - much of their property going to the knightly orders there I note - isn't going to influence them either.
I'm not saying the Templars would have zero impact on history, but other than being rich and mistrusted, they're not amounting to much at the point they were destroyed.
That would require a force substantial enough to matter - not easy, to say the least.
VVV: Not so much washed up as essentially idle. Had the Templars been as active as the Knights Hospitalers/Knights of St. John, it'd be different, but they weren't.
Not so much permanently washed up as looking for a new mission.
The last Templar campaigns in the Holy Land were as recent as 1300-02 [the Templar order was dissolved in 1307], when they captured Ruad Island and were supposed to link up with Mongol forces from Persia in a land campaign. The Mongols showed up in 1300 and took some territory but then withdrew and didn't return. Ruad was lost in 1302 and the Templars retreated to Cyprus. They had been consulting with the Pope on a 'what next' report when the Pope and the French king turned on them.
The Templars' proposals centered around another crusade led by the French and English kings. Neither of them had much enthusiasm for the idea. If the Templar Order had continued to exist, therefore, it would have been back to the drawing board. Which is where this thread came in.
The last Templar campaigns in the Holy Land were as recent as 1300-02 [the Templar order was dissolved in 1307], when they captured Ruad Island and were supposed to link up with Mongol forces from Persia in a land campaign. The Mongols showed up in 1300 and took some territory but then withdrew and didn't return. Ruad was lost in 1302 and the Templars retreated to Cyprus. They had been consulting with the Pope on a 'what next' report when the Pope and the French king turned on them.
The Templars' proposals centered around another crusade led by the French and English kings. Neither of them had much enthusiasm for the idea. If the Templar Order had continued to exist, therefore, it would have been back to the drawing board. Which is where this thread came in.
Discussed, but dismissed by the Templars, who argued, essentially, that it would do the Hospitalers a disservice, as the Templars were so wealthier than than them that the Hospitalers would essentially get absorbed.
Okay then how bout the Templars take up a similar job to what the Knights of Saint John ended up doing and become an anti-muslim piracy group who just so happened to be pirates against the muslims. This way the Hospitaliers will be preserved and basically the same thing happens.
Wondered why exactly that got dismissed, thanks.
The Professor: Setting up a state in North Africa sounds like a heck of a challenge.
Assisting the Hospitallers in Rhodes would have serious effects in Estern Mediterranean;The fortifications of Rhodes could withstand a lot more and if supported,the Turks would have to face a very serious defeat.What they needed were more guns and especially gunpowder,a reserve of nights within the lines in Rhodes(500 aprox.) and a contingent in Kos;sortage of gunpowder was the main reason for their surrendering the island.
The Turks could not take the forts anyway.
The Turks could not take the forts anyway.
Philip the Fair should've been in Assassins Creed.
the most famous assasin ever