First Crusade

The siege of Antioch fails. The bulk of the crusader army decides to go further south after several months in northern Syria, where little was accomplished. What would the crusader states be like, and how would they develop if the Principality of Antioch had never existed?
 
The siege of Antioch fails. The bulk of the crusader army decides to go further south after several months in northern Syria, where little was accomplished. What would the crusader states be like, and how would they develop if the Principality of Antioch had never existed?

Mount Lebanon is easier to conquer due to less authority from Seljuk rulers. So there will be a county of Tripoli. I can't really say anything about Jerusalem. It still might fall. Acre might fall earlier as well.

One thing is sure, if Edessa is still established it will be harder if not impossible to help from nearby Crusader states. At that point being a vassal of Byzantium is much likely.
 
Remember that Antioch fell only just in time for the Crusaders. Kerbogha's large Arab relief force from Mosul arrived days after the city fell and would probably have destroyed the Crusader force if it was still in the open. In any case, moving south after accomplishing little isn't in the cards for the Crusaders. They either win or lose a major battle against the relievers.
 
Top