Imagine with a Byzantine victory at Manzikert or some other POD that keeps the empire strong in anatolia past the 11th century , is the concept of the crusade still likely to materialise? If yes, then when, and where might it strike? Still the Levant? Perhaps North Africa given its proximity? What do we reckon?
 
So you think it would still develop then? I often wonder how inevitable they were - they are a strange concept after all. A lot of it seems based on the personal fervour of Pope Urban, and his direct response to the collapse of Byzantine control in Anatolia. I just wonder if such a concept would even enter into people's heads without the events that happened.
 
I do think there would be some sort of campaign against the cathars in southern France at some point, likely with the insistence and support of the papacy. Whether that would be in terms of an actual holy war, or framed as a war against disobedient vassal, idk.
 
So you think it would still develop then? I often wonder how inevitable they were - they are a strange concept after all. A lot of it seems based on the personal fervour of Pope Urban, and his direct response to the collapse of Byzantine control in Anatolia. I just wonder if such a concept would even enter into people's heads without the events that happened.
The crusades didn't start with Pope Urban. They began 300 years prior to that, with Pelagius of Asturias, at the battle of Covadonga.
 
The crusades didn't start with Pope Urban. They began 300 years prior to that, with Pelagius of Asturias, at the battle of Covadonga.
That's true, although I would see a distinction between the reconquista as a localised crusade, with the aim of reclaiming land they felt was theirs by inheritance - more of a war at home and in the service of 'nation' building - and the Crusades that were based on the conquest of a foreign land either because of its religious importance or for the advancement of Christendom as a whole.

It's that idea mainly that I'm thinking about.
 
I do think there would be some sort of campaign against the cathars in southern France at some point, likely with the insistence and support of the papacy. Whether that would be in terms of an actual holy war, or framed as a war against disobedient vassal, idk.

That's a very good point. There were religious wars like the albigensian crusade that rightly had little to do with the crusades for the holy land and would those conflicts be lumped together as we know them under the banner of crusades without the development of a formalised crusading mission? Holy war and crusading became a way of neatly dealing with problems like the cathars and later the ottomans (although that didn't work) because there was this formalised notion in place. So I wonder whether crusading would have taken off inevitably when Christians felt under threat. It's interesting.
 
Top