Gregory X lives longer?

[AlexanderDragon]

This is part of a TL that i'm writing, originally as an afterthought but more and more I've grown interested in the effects. Gregory had actually been elected while on crusade, and he was singleminded and incredibly energetic in the cause of calling another- and he had a list of kings, Peter of Aragon, Charles of Sicily, Edward of England, Philip of France, Rudolph of Germany, even the Byzantine Emperor on board with it. Peter and Charles both wanted to leave within months. And the Council of Lyon famously had the Mongol Representatives, declaring their willingness for an alliance if only they would take it...

Of course, Gregory had a hernia and died shortly after, the vast sums of money raised were returned and the planned crusade never got out of the planning stages. But there was a real opportunity, in 1277 nearly every King who had taken crusading vows was at peace, Edward was wrapping up in Wales(or so he thought) and only Rudolph needed to secure his Kingdom, and he would within a year.

So what would this tenth crusade look like? And if egos could be held in check(which would be a great undertaking) what could they accomplish?

 

[mrmandias]

Fascinating

 

[Elfwine]

So what would this tenth crusade look like? And if egos could be held in check(which would be a great undertaking) what could they accomplish?

That if is such a substantial part of this that it's hard to answer what they can accomplish without going through how that is accomplished. But any crusade raises the question: What is the actual plan for the long term? Retaking much of the former Crusader States - from Antioch to Jerusalem itself - might well be possible, establishing a presence in the Levant that would actually hold it for very long (as far as that all these rulers, Michael VIII included, are going to be packing up and focusing on other concerns when the crusade is done) is "How do they even plan to do this?"

 

[AlexanderDragon]

That if is such a substantial part of this that it's hard to answer what they can accomplish without going through how that is accomplished. But any crusade raises the question: What is the actual plan for the long term? Retaking much of the former Crusader States - from Antioch to Jerusalem itself - might well be possible, establishing a presence in the Levant that would actually hold it for very long (as far as that all these rulers, Michael VIII included, are going to be packing up and focusing on other concerns when the crusade is done) is "How do they even plan to do this?"

I agree, and that's one of the reasons I asked the question. The general sketch of a campaign, going off of Edward and Louis's experience(and the miserable experience of the later) would be a move to first retake Antioch, meeting up with the Armenians- and in conjunction with the Mongol Host which would cross over the Euphrates. Then South to try and retake Jerusalem.

Gregory seemed to encourage Charles to take over Jerusalem and did so in 1276. He's the most likely ruler in the short term. You bring up a good point about the inherent stability of the crusader system, but even prolonging the Kingdom by, say a hundred years would still be a important divergence. And many things are possible

 

[Elfwine]

Gregory seemed to encourage Charles to take over Jerusalem and did so in 1276. He's the most likely ruler in the short term. You bring up a good point about the inherent stability of the crusader system, but even prolonging the Kingdom by, say a hundred years would still be a important divergence. And many things are possible

It's not so much "even prolonging it by say, a hundred years" as "How do you maintain these gains for longer than it takes Michael to return to Constantinople?"

Someone is going to have to station troops and something of a government here, and if it's Charles, that's going to take away from having them (And the money to pay for them) for his other ambitions.