Crusader-Makurian relations in a successful conquest of Egypt by Amalric?

Let's say the Kingdom of Jerusalem (under Amalric) with Byzantine aid is successful in conquering Egypt from the Fatimid dynasty and making sure Saladin doesn't get anywhere near of it. What would relations be between the Crusaders and the nearby Nubian Christian state of Makuria?
 
Let's say the Kingdom of Jerusalem (under Amalric) with Byzantine aid is successful in conquering Egypt from the Fatimid dynasty and making sure Saladin doesn't get anywhere near of it. What would relations be between the Crusaders and the nearby Nubian Christian state of Makuria?

Good question. Makuria isn't really worth conquering, so it might be treated as a at-least-they're-not-an-enemy.
 
Good question. Makuria isn't really worth conquering, so it might be treated as a at-least-they're-not-an-enemy.

Makuria were also allies of the Fatimids, because as Shia they had very few allies among their fellow Muslims and thus had to resort to looking to Christians as allies. The Makurians were also fellow non-Chalcedonian Christians, like their Coptic brethren in Upper Egypt so they might make some fuzz if the Crusaders mess around with them too much. If the Fatimids are gone, the Copts might look to the Kingdom of Makuria for protection. There was a lot of trade in between Makuria and Egypt apparently.
 
Makuria were also allies of the Fatimids, because as Shia they had very few allies among their fellow Muslims and thus had to resort to looking to Christians as allies. The Makurians were also fellow non-Chalcedonian Christians, like their Coptic brethren in Upper Egypt so they might make some fuzz if the Crusaders mess around with them too much. If the Fatimids are gone, the Copts might look to the Kingdom of Makuria for protection. There was a lot of trade in between Makuria and Egypt apparently.

True. If the Crusaders botch things, they could have a real mess from that - possibly disastrously so. I don't know what the state of the Makurian army was at this point, but they were tough fighters (and skilled archers) at the time of the Arab Conquest, so if those traditions have stayed...ouch.
 
True. If the Crusaders botch things, they could have a real mess from that - possibly disastrously so. I don't know what the state of the Makurian army was at this point, but they were tough fighters (and skilled archers) at the time of the Arab Conquest, so if those traditions have stayed...ouch.

It'll put an interesting twist onto the whole Crusader Egypt thing since the few timelines that have it always ignore Makuria which was at the zenith of its power and influence in the twelfth century. It could capture Upper Egypt (still mostly Christian) and keep it. It could butterfly the Arab incursions and migration into what is the northern Sudan.
 
It'll put an interesting twist onto the whole Crusader Egypt thing since the few timelines that have it always ignore Makuria which was at the zenith of its power and influence in the twelfth century. It could capture Upper Egypt (still mostly Christian) and keep it. It could butterfly the Arab incursions and migration into what is the northern Sudan.

Which itself would have a slew of butterflies in Africa itself. The Sahel states won't convert to Islam, which means generally less advancement in technology, literacy, and wealth due to OTL's increased trade and contact across the Sahara with other Islamic states. On the flip-side of that though this means they don't waste what wealth they have on outrageous projects like the Hajj, which the African princes were (in)famous for their extravagant spending on, or Abu Bakr II's failed expeditions across the Atlantic.

Also without Islamic invasion later the Empire of Kitara survives, and likely continues to expand and consolidate around the African Great Lakes.
 
Which itself would have a slew of butterflies in Africa itself. The Sahel states won't convert to Islam, which means generally less advancement in technology, literacy, and wealth due to OTL's increased trade and contact across the Sahara with other Islamic states. On the flip-side of that though this means they don't waste what wealth they have on outrageous projects like the Hajj, which the African princes were (in)famous for their extravagant spending on, or Abu Bakr II's failed expeditions across the Atlantic.

Also without Islamic invasion later the Empire of Kitara survives, and likely continues to expand and consolidate around the African Great Lakes.

Indeed. If relations between the Crusaders of Egypt and Makuria remains cordial for the most part, is it possible for the Crusader states to increase contacts with the other major Christian state in East Africa, Ethiopia? Continue discussing folks!
 
Indeed. If relations between the Crusaders of Egypt and Makuria remains cordial for the most part, is it possible for the Crusader states to increase contacts with the other major Christian state in East Africa, Ethiopia? Continue discussing folks!

There might be contact, but it seems unlikely - though not necessarily impossible - that it will amount to very much in the short run or for the Crusaders.

On the other hand, interesting potential ripples in Ethiopia.

Note: I'm being cautious for discussion's sake - as much to inspire counterargument as anything else.
 
There might be contact, but it seems unlikely - though not necessarily impossible - that it will amount to very much in the short run or for the Crusaders.

Oh I don't expect much of a long term contact. It would probably be noted off as a curious oddity for both sides. What would this due to the big legend of Prester John if they end up discovering Ethiopia?

On the other hand, interesting potential ripples in Ethiopia.

Mind being specific? :p
 
Oh I don't expect much of a long term contact. It would probably be noted off as a curious oddity for both sides. What would this due to the big legend of Prester John if they end up discovering Ethiopia?

I wish I knew.

Mind being specific? :p

Well, Ethiopia is exposed to foreign contact (again) earlier, which may influence either the kings or the nobles or both - exactly how I'm not sure, just that it seems like a great chance for a butterfly or three.
 
Well by the time of the Crusades Ethiopia was neck-deep in its Dark Ages with most of Ethiopia under the Zagwe dynasty except for Shewa, which was held by the Solomonic dynasty. Negus Yemrehana Krestos is best known for the construction of a large church on Mount Abuna Yosef, and his successor, Kedus Harbe, tried to break the Ethiopian church away from Patriarch of Alexandria by appointed his own bishops, but the prelate refused, so Harbe wrote to Al-Aziz Uthman requesting for his permission. Uthman was apparently approving of such a move at first, until he realized that with so many of their own bishops the Ethiopians could elect their own Archbishop and be completely free of Egyptian influence, and might develop "enmity and hostility" toward their Muslim neighbors, so the deal was nixed.

ITTL the Crusader kingdom of Egypt might approve of such a move, or at least work out some sort of deal increasing ties between the two, which would legitimize the Zagwe dynasty by the establishment of its own Ethiopian Church, and might pull the kingdom out of its Dark Age some hundred years or so before IOTL.
 
Last edited:
Might this mean an early trade in coffee to Europe? The Italians presumably would be making obscene amounts of money controlling trade through Egypt anyway.

Arab traders on the Red Sea might have some objections to Italian competitors attempting to set up shop in East Africa though...
 
Egypt

I've also been very intrigued by this. Makurians (Nubians) may even have been employed by the crusader government in Egypt as mercenaries, in order to help control the large Muslim population there. A western controlled Egypt means that there are earlier African/European contacts.
 
Top