Will the Crusaders make contact with Saint Thomas Christians in India? Because if the Kingdom of Jerusalem is going to be there for a while I assume there’s going to be some contact soon with them right?
And All Nations Shall Gather To It - Volume I: The Abode of Peace
- Thread starter Ricard (i.e. Rdffigueira)
- Start date
That brings up a really interesting point. If Jerusalem is going to have first-hand knowledge of the Thomasian Chistians they are going to have to have connections with Egypt that either go across the sea or across land. Now, across land means following the Silk Road (and passing through a number of hostile Turkic states) or by sea. The Sea is a bit problematic due to the fact that under normal times, Egypt would likely cut off the sea routes. But the state of Egypt right now is such that it would be hard for the government to exhert that much control over the sea - but I suspect that this means that piracy is a major issue: unless the Jerusalem navy is such that they have been able to take control over the sea routes.
If the latter? Oh, that changes a LOT and actually probably means that the ports of Jerusalem are going to become a major part of the spice trade with the West.
I'd think the Jerusalemites would contact them after conquering Egypt since they would still be looking closer to home for now, which is conquering Egypt and ensuring Syria is a Crusader heartland.
This makes sense to an extent. But: while Egypt was strong, I would suspect the government would let crusader merchants through the sea for a fee - religion is certainly important, but business is business after all. However, with the collapse of Egypt, you are likely to see the rise of piracy. This is going to threaten the Hedjaz states as well as the Crusaders and more. I wonder if Jerusalem might be willing to make a temporary alliance to help bring some order to the seas - they need not even be the senior party in any such agreement (because once again, religion is important: but business is business. And lets not forget that the Italian merchant states have established interests in Jerusalem by this point, and if they can use the Crusader states to secure a cheaper access to the spice trade you KNOW they're gonna push for that). But it would give them a foothold and a commitment that they could use to expand their influence at a later date as well.
If the Crusaders get Egypt could there be Muslims fleeing south and enforcing Islam on the Nubians or would some Christian Nubians ally with the Crusaders?
I think both would occur at the same time. Who wins long term is another story.
On the topic of African Christians, Ethiopians may be bolstered by the Egyptian Crusaders which would make things very interesting.
Yeah, the Crusaders could end up being the Hammer to the Ethiopian's Anvil.
Something else to consider: It was just about this time, duing the 12th centuries that we first see evidence of the Legend of Prester John - a Christian Monarch which was thought to live, first, in India (and then in Central Asia and, later, in Africa). There is some evidence that an Indian Patriarch, and member of the Church of the East, traveled to Constantinople during this time while another traveled to Rome and met with Callixtus II. All of these accounts are second hand, of course, but it IS interesting because it establishes some possible precedent for the communities being aware of each other and making efforts to reach out
In this, ATL, if such a visit by a Eastern Patriarch from India did occur, they would likely certainly travel to Jerusalem as well and meet with the Catholic Archbishop there before eventually traveling onto Rome. I'd imagine that any such visit would lead to some pretty overblown talk of an alliance with Christian communities to the East and likely help fuel the legend of a Christian monarch in those regions (if there's a Patriarch there HAS to be a King! Right, guys?! Right!?).
What would the ramifications of this be? Truthfully, I don't know - I don't expect see Crusaders sending armies about the entirety of the Arabian peninsula, skirting Iran, and then trying to set up a Kingdom in Indian to 'liberate' Eastern Christians there. But the fact of the matter is that the Church of the East was stronger during this period than many people give it cedit - and I could certainly see the Catholic Church sending diplomatic feelers out, with the Archbishop of Jerusalem acting as the most obvious intermediary.
Its probably too much to hope for that when the *Mongols arrive, they have already been converted to the Eastern Church (though, my god would that be a fascinating development!) As much as that would throw a wrench into the typical "Mongols Arrive" scenerio, it would likely be straining credibility a bit. But it would be nice to see the Church of the East coming out of this timeline in a stronger position than OTL - they are a fascinating Church, were actually very active during this era, and don't get the love they deseve on this board
Damn. So the second invasion is a failure too. A damn shame that Manuel didn’t get to succeed here! At least this time other than his Egyptian invasions he’ll likely be remembered as a rather good emperor seeing as how everywhere else he was successful.
I really hope the empire doesn’t go on a decline after this or anything. I don’t want that to happen at all, I really don’t like in TLs where some people or groups still meet the same fate despite so many changes.
Since Manuel has proper heirs I’d presume the succession will be stable. Hopefully his sons will decide to maintain their borders and focus on internal manners.
I really hope the empire doesn’t go on a decline after this or anything. I don’t want that to happen at all, I really don’t like in TLs where some people or groups still meet the same fate despite so many changes.
Since Manuel has proper heirs I’d presume the succession will be stable. Hopefully his sons will decide to maintain their borders and focus on internal manners.
Last edited:
Crusader contact with the Eastern Christians could also go pear-shaped -- they don't treat the ones they rule over as equals, this is still an era where theological differences (and cultural differences produced by centuries of separation) really matter, and the IOTL attempts made by the Portuguese centuries later in Ethiopia and India saw the St. Thomas Christians fractured and saw the Ethiopian nobility rally against the imposition of Catholicism. I could see a "Coptic Uniate" kind of deal, but I don't know that the Ethiopians, who claim to own the literal Ark of the Covenant, are going to go along with uniting with a church that has to pay obeisance to some rando shmuck all the way in Italy.
I don't think the initial Future Steppe Horde of As-Yet-Undetermined Origin being Nestorian is ASB; them staying Nestorian when the first territories in both directions they'd conquer are ruled by Sunni Turks, OTOH, probably is. Hell, even the early Seljuks made the jump from Nestorianism to Islam, and the incentives for the khanates to do so will be immense. You could probably swing a survival of Nestorianism in China though, especially if, like the Shimabara rebellion or the Manichean roots of Ming, it ends up filing that valuable "anti-Mongol secret society" niche.
In terms of trade, it'll be interesting to see how Christians compete with the Hadhramis, Tamils and Chinese for both market share and the potential to convert the religiously pluralistic Malay states. Even the help of Ethiopia wouldn't make a foothold in Somalia viable, but perhaps a monastic order could turn Socotra into alt-Knights Malta? In any case, even a FSHAYUO Silk Road can't overcome the Roman ownership over Aleppo -- there has to be a terminus somewhere. The real domino there lies with the further enrichment of the Italian cities (or Ragusa) and less incentive for the Iberians to invest in sailing into mare incognita (and shit, they haven't even had an Almohad invasion, let alone an alt-Navas that would give Portugal the breathing room to go sail in the first place). I imagine exploration would rest in the hands of the Northern Europeans instead at first, and a general slower go of the colonial boom (given that North America was much less lucrative early on than the brazilwood trade, sugar plantations, or stumbling back asswards into two campaigns of threadbare conquest of mondo money, aided by extremely well-timed local malcontents looking for a patron).
I don't think the initial Future Steppe Horde of As-Yet-Undetermined Origin being Nestorian is ASB; them staying Nestorian when the first territories in both directions they'd conquer are ruled by Sunni Turks, OTOH, probably is. Hell, even the early Seljuks made the jump from Nestorianism to Islam, and the incentives for the khanates to do so will be immense. You could probably swing a survival of Nestorianism in China though, especially if, like the Shimabara rebellion or the Manichean roots of Ming, it ends up filing that valuable "anti-Mongol secret society" niche.
In terms of trade, it'll be interesting to see how Christians compete with the Hadhramis, Tamils and Chinese for both market share and the potential to convert the religiously pluralistic Malay states. Even the help of Ethiopia wouldn't make a foothold in Somalia viable, but perhaps a monastic order could turn Socotra into alt-Knights Malta? In any case, even a FSHAYUO Silk Road can't overcome the Roman ownership over Aleppo -- there has to be a terminus somewhere. The real domino there lies with the further enrichment of the Italian cities (or Ragusa) and less incentive for the Iberians to invest in sailing into mare incognita (and shit, they haven't even had an Almohad invasion, let alone an alt-Navas that would give Portugal the breathing room to go sail in the first place). I imagine exploration would rest in the hands of the Northern Europeans instead at first, and a general slower go of the colonial boom (given that North America was much less lucrative early on than the brazilwood trade, sugar plantations, or stumbling back asswards into two campaigns of threadbare conquest of mondo money, aided by extremely well-timed local malcontents looking for a patron).
Long term mesopotamia, Persia and Central Asia will be Islamic strongholds. The Maghreb will be subjugated at the early modern era, since they'd be separated from the Persians, the other strong Muslim power, by the Egyptians. Arabia should also stop being controlled by the Muslims during a period of Persian instability in the modern period. Most likely there'd be the first invasion, which has the Christians treat the Muslims well first, then after some time a restriction on the power of the Muslims and a destruction of the biggest Mosques in Mecca.
I'd think that Persia ittl would see themselves as the bulwark of Islam as Islam would become more and more Persian.
I doubt the separation from Persia by a Crusader Egypt would automatically spell the fall of the Maghreb. Throughout its history, the Maghreb has largely been administered autonomously by local polities. The Umayyad, Abbasid, Fatimid and even Ottoman Caliphates permitted the rulers of North Africa significant autonomy, at times teetering on independence, from their respective capitals. Local dynasties have emerged without having to rely on any sort of backing from larger Muslim powers.
Therefore, I do not believe a cut off by Egypt inevitably entails the fall of Islamic North Africa. Nevertheless, the seismic consequences will indisputably be reflected in local politics. Efforts such as those of the Spanish and Normans could prove to be much more successful, although I believe it’s likely that any Crusader effort will face a significant degree of in the Maghreb.
In terms of Arabia, I sincerely doubt that any Christian polity would have much interest in the region. Especially considering an invasion of the Hejaz will perhaps unite the Islamic world in the fiercest opposition seen in history.
Perhaps I’m drifting slightly too much in the future but if the Maghreb remains non-subjugated by the 15th and 16th centuries, could we see a potential discovery of America with Maghrebi merchants stumbling on the continent in a parallel to OTL? Crusader Egypt and Outremer could seek to block the trade of spice to the Maghreb thus stimulating trade with West Africa and attempts to circumnavigate the blockage.
I totally agree with this, with the possible (POSSIBLE!) exception of Yemen - if for no other reason than to seal up the Red Sea and further control the trade into the Indian Ocean. But I suspect that that would be a bridge too far, and not worth the effort whenestabishing non-hostile relations with a local state would bring many of the same benefits without having to actually occupy the region and all the headaches that that entails.
I don't see any way for the European kingdoms to conquer Yemen. Like, they don't have the naval technology or money to invade the territory without using Egypt as a staring point. They would have to go around Africa and to the christian kingdoms that's imposible at the moment. There's also the fact that they are not really big on commerce, they mostly rely on agriculture with the exception of the eastern Roman empire.
West Africa may not fall to the Christians, but the coastal regions of the Mediterranean certainly will. Tunis was even taken by the HRE in our timeline, only to end up abandoned because of an Egyptian counterattack and France causing trouble on mainland Europe.
With a stronger Crusading Movement where Catholics of different nations unite to lead military expeditions on foreign heathen lands, the Crusaders could end up taking the coastal cities and just staying there.
Its funny, the Crusading Movement is the closest thing we got to adventurers of the fantasy works.
I wonder, when Europe discovers America, could there end up being Crusader Nations there too?
With a stronger Crusading Movement where Catholics of different nations unite to lead military expeditions on foreign heathen lands, the Crusaders could end up taking the coastal cities and just staying there.
Its funny, the Crusading Movement is the closest thing we got to adventurers of the fantasy works.
I wonder, when Europe discovers America, could there end up being Crusader Nations there too?
Last edited:
Well, we know that Crusade Egypt will eventually become a thing - so that would remove the need to go around Africa. Also, you're forgetting about the port city of Aqaba (though, to be fair, I'm not entirely sure that this falls within the borders of Crusader Jerusalem at this point. Although, if it isn't, its location near the Jerusalem border and it's possession of a port woul make it a natural target for further expansion in the region. Even in OTL the city was conquered by Jerusalem in 1115 without too much effort). And, though there can be no question that Jerusalem's government and economy is largely focused on agriculture and land, one also cannot deny the close relations that the Prince of Jerusalem has with the Italian maritime powers - and Venice, Genoa and the like would salivate at the opportunity to have access to a port on the Red Sea and cut out some of the middle men in both the silk and spice trade. I would expect that a deal would be struck with the Prince to allow them to operate out of the port in exchange for paying royal duties to transport the goods though the Princedom and to Mediterranean ports. Assuming that they can find a way to mitigate piracy on the Red Sea (which is certainly going to be a problem with the anarchy in Egypt) this holds the possibility of becoming VERY lucrative for all the parties involved.
Now, having said that, as I stated in my original power - I find the Cusaders taking control of Yemen to be unlikely (not impossible, mind you, just unlikely) as there would be easier and less spendy ways protect their trade in the Red Sea when it develops
I do believe it's been confirmed that the Reconquesta will push across the Pillars of Heraclese in this timeline and into OTL Moracco and I believe that a Crusader Tunis is pretty much assured. This doesn't meant that all of North Africa will be Christian, of course - but there are going to be important Christian states in that region.
I made this educated guess because the Maghreb in otl when it fails to defend itself tends to look at the nearest Islamic power to defend itself. As Egypt will be conquered, Egypt is a no-go, and as Syria and the middle East won't help (Arabia won't be able to help either) so the Persians are the only ones who could help, and given the distances and hostile enemies, I don't think Persia can help. So when the Maghreb loses land ittl no one's going to help them, and various European powers which will field much bigger armies than the people in Maghreb will agitate for their land.
West Africa being reconquered by the Ethiopians is possible but it's not something that's certainly going to happen. Personally I'd like to see Ethiopia expanding to Kenya, Somalia and Eritrea, but it really depends on how good the kings of Ethiopia are ittl. Plus it's like really far into the future so idk.
If this occurs then most of the major cities of the Maghreb would most likely be in Christian control. Tunis/Carthage and Morocco would definitely be part of the crusader states (imagine a HRE claimant surviving in Tunis and creating a centralised country out of that. That'd be interesting). The Muslims would either be the poor serfs or they'd be raiding the cities. Long term people who are Muslim are going to be swamped by Christians in the long run.
On a side note if the Reconquista continues into Morocco ittl would the exploration of America not be done by the conquistadors (who were soldiers that fought in the Reconquista and were looking for other lands to conquer for their crown) since they would be busy in Africa. I'd think it'd be plausible for the Scandinavians or the English to discover America ittl. Or the French. The natives would fare better ittl due to this I think, and I think the lands that ittl would be colonised is north America (I think their civilisations were collapsing while European diseases spread, so I think they're fucked, nomad tribes will fare much better with horses tho), Brazil and Argentina. I'd think an Inca empire with Argentina as it's second heartland would be very interesting.
On the topics of alt Christianity spreading to weird places, Christian Japan. I'd like to see how an extremely individualistic religion affects Japan due to being it's primary religion. How much Buddhist concepts would be incorporated? How would language change due to religious differences? You'd build a superficially very similar yet radically different Japan.
Do you think there would be Crusader Nations in the Americas? As in, the Crusading Movement spreading there too?
The success of the Crusading Movement is proof that the Christian Nations would accept the existence of adventurers of different nations uniting to bring the Cross to heathen lands and forming their own nations. Not all european presence ITTL needs to be colonies of european countries. Maybe a group of Crusaders went, conquered some land/native state, made it their own, and eventually the christianized descendants of these natives would join the Crusader Movement to spread the Cross.
Tlaxcala OTL became an important christian supporter of the spanish, sending mussionaries and warriors whenever the spanish needed. Perhaps a Crusading Tlaxcala would do the same, only without being under the Spanish Crown?
Sure there would be colonies ruled by the european mainland/being sworn to european countries, but the precedent of Crusader Nations has already been set.