Baldwin IV of Jerusalem never contracts leprosy.

I've read that the western immigration was the problem, the newcomers couldn't come to grips with the Byzantine and native born Franks treating with the Muslim powers. The Franks even hated the native Christians.
 
I've read that the western immigration was the problem, the newcomers couldn't come to grips with the Byzantine and native born Franks treating with the Muslim powers. The Franks even hated the native Christians.

More like it would had been helpful if more immigration initially would had increased the pool of manpower made available for the Crusader states.
 
The fall doesn't have to be inevitable in the short term, Outremer lasted as the Kingdom of Acre for another 100 years after Hattin and the Empire held on as a reasonable Greek Kingdom for a long time after the 4th Crusade and reconquest. Without the weakening caused the OTL events these two states don't get knocked down and survive for the same time in a larger and therefore more influential form.

I never considered it an inevitable fall. If the Byzantines and the Latin Crusader states simply cooperated a lot more and [more so for the Crusaders] had more Western immigration into the states, it would had been possible to hold on to the territory.



Well, I was more referring to el t's reply stating that Baldwin's survival would likely only delay the collapse. They are surrounded on all sides by hostile forces. Of course, if the Muslim world found itself divided, then they might stand a better chance.

How could the Kingdom of Jerusalem have gotten better immigration?
 
I once read that taxation in Outremer was considerably lighter than in the Byzantine Empire or Islamic states, so perhaps people could move to Outremer as a tax haven.

However from what I have read Outremer was probably already about 50% Christian, but these native Christians were marginalised by the Franks. An important factor I think was that Christians had been tolerated by the Muslim rulers of the levant but were forbidden to carry weapons and ride horses for centuries, so they were not much good as natural recruits for the Army. Therefore their marginalisation was continued under the Franks, who looked elsewhere for their armies and ended up with the independant military orders and itinerant adventurers to add to the troops bound to the king.

Perhaps instead the Franks would have done well to boost the native Christians by encouraging them to use arms and ride horses which would make them more recruitable. Perhaps the native Christians could be forged into a peasant militia between the foundation of the Kingdom and Hattin some 4 generations later.
 
Top