Best chances-Crusader state?

Is there a specific point in history where one or more of the Crusader states could have had a chance at survival? I mean, more than say 200 years? What could have gone differently and when to ensure this?
 
Crusader States

Do you mean the crusader states in Syria/Palestine? The kingdom of Cyprus lasted nearly 3 centuries and the principality of Achaia in Greece lasted at least 2 centuries but under many different rulers and dynasties.
 
barring some kind of successful Mongol-crusader alliance (the one IOTL, but earlier and more successful), there really isn't a strong chance that the Levantine crusader states would survive. sooner or later the Arabs or Turks are going to get a strong enough army to retake them. the reason Cyprus and Achaea (and Morea) survived for so long was because they didn't have a land border with a hostile Muslim power.

so for them to survive, probably an alliance with the Ilkhanate is one of the best bets.
 
Well the Knights survived on Malta, but I don't know if the island ever left Christian hands . . . have to check on whether or not they were . . .
 
They were Muslim for over two centuries.

Indeed - and if memory serves me correct, the entire population of Malta was evacuated to Sicily in the 8th century or so, mainly as a result of Saracen piracy.

The island remained abandoned until it was resettled by Arabs in 870.
 
Last edited:
What about the Spanish states? Sure, they aren't exactly crusader states per se, but the Reconquista...
 
If you mean Outremer there were several of times during the second half of the 12th century where a different course of action, or a bit of luck would have made all the difference. Some that spring to mind are the abortive alliance with Byzantium in the 1160s, the stupidity of Guy/Horns of Hattin and the death of Barborossa before the 3rd Crusade started.
 

trajen777

Banned
The crusader states actually had many very good chances to survive and thrive quite well.

The best chances were

  • 2nd crusade (to regain Edessa) travels together – heeds Byz advise and ends in the crusader states thereby bringing much needed manpower to the crusaders.
    • The focus on the conquest of defaceable borders – Damascus (leaving no base of attack from the east
    • Capture Aleppo – thereby again gaining a strong border and denying anyone from the north a true base to operate from
  • Capture Egypt before Saladin can gain control – at this time this was the true economic powerbase of the mid east. If this was in Crusader hands they would have had much great resources and denied these same resources to Saladin and his predecessors. The leper king received payments to support the Egyptian caliph. In fact they actually had troops in Cario.
  • They had 2 good opportunities to take Egypt – a. Have the invasion when they were support to combine with the Byzantines actually happen instead of a jealous aristocrat in the crusader states invade by themselves.
  • Have Richard finish his plans to capture Egypt and devastate the economic support of Saladin
  • Support the Mongols better vs. mamulks
 
Go Native.

Seriously. If the Abuyyids remained in Egypt and/or Outremer sided aginst the Mongols, it is not inconceivable that they intergrate with the near east economically and arabize.

Not _likely_, but the odds of this are better than the odds of them keeping the place by might of arms.

HTG
 
Top