If the 3rd Crusade recaptures Jerusalem...

[Elfwine]

How are future crusades impacted, and how does it effect enthusiasm (or lack of it) for crusading over the course of the 13th century?

OTL, sometime between the middle and the end of the 13th century, the precarious situation of the surviving Crusader states seems to have been more and more "So what?".

It seems unlikely that crusading enthusiasm can be kept up forever - the European kingdoms simply have too many other projects more immediately relevant. But that Jerusalem being retaken does nothing except add another slice of territory to the rickety state and things collapse more or less as OTL seems going too far the other way. Surely at the least this impacts whether or not the 4th Crusade happens as OTL (the part up to arriving at Venice, not the sack of Constantinople), as the situation is very different.

 

[Prefrence]

Richard the Lionheart reasoned he could have taken Jerusalem, however he reasoned he couldn't hold it, and decided to consolidate his costal holdings then go back to England raise alot more funds and a larger army then try again.

Now, if Fredrick Barbossa doesn't drown, and his 100,000 strong army doesn't lose heart and return home, you can pretty much guess what happens when they reach Jerusalem

 

[Darth_Kiryan]

Now, if Fredrick Barbossa doesn't drown, and his 100,000 strong army doesn't lose heart and return home, you can pretty much guess what happens when they reach Jerusalem

They pretty much kill everyone who is not christian. ....

 

[Elfwine]

Richard the Lionheart reasoned he could have taken Jerusalem, however he reasoned he couldn't hold it, and decided to consolidate his costal holdings then go back to England raise alot more funds and a larger army then try again.

Now, if Fredrick Barbossa doesn't drown, and his 100,000 strong army doesn't lose heart and return home, you can pretty much guess what happens when they reach Jerusalem

Thus the possibility of this scenario occurring (The part of your post I put in bold).

Richard and Frederick together ought to be able to at least push the Kingdom's borders to the levels OTL saw when Frederick II cut a deal with the Muslims over the city, maybe more.

Neither they or their armies are likely to stick around much longer than that - they've done what they came to do and on a temporarily secure footing (as such a win seriously messes up Saladin's position).

 

[Prefrence]

They pretty much kill everyone who is not christian. ....

I was referring to the fact that the city would stand no chance and fall.

 

[Prefrence]

Thus the possibility of this scenario occurring (The part of your post I put in bold).

Richard and Frederick together ought to be able to at least push the Kingdom's borders to the levels OTL saw when Frederick II cut a deal with the Muslims over the city, maybe more.

Neither they or their armies are likely to stick around much longer than that - they've done what they came to do and on a temporarily secure footing (as such a win seriously messes up Saladin's position).

I think they would also avenge the second Crusade and take (then destroy) Damascas, possible Eleppo. The Crusader State of Edessa also needs to be reestablished.

 

[Elfwine]

I think they would also avenge the second Crusade and take (then destroy) Damascas, possible Eleppo. The Crusader State of Edessa also needs to be reestablished.

Damascus is important if memory serves to Christianity, so I'm not sure it would be destroyed. Sacked most likely, though.

But either way, why would they stick around to rebuild the Crusader states in their entirety?

Even if things go smoothly that's another year or two or maybe even more (from OTL's duration). Sieges take a while.

I mean, future crusaders might well do that if at all possible, but Frederick and Richard do have kingdoms to run back home.

 

[Prefrence]

Richard stayed around for 4 years, so I think Fredrick could do the same (unlike Richard, Fredrick can get home somewhat quickly as he is much closer)

 

[Elfwine]

Richard stayed around for 4 years, so I think Fredrick could do the same (unlike Richard, Fredrick can get home somewhat quickly as he is much closer)

If I am not misreading this, Richard left the Holy Land in 1192: http://www.englishmonarchs.co.uk/plantagenet_2.htm

So the crusaders staying past 1194 or so seems unlikely - Frederick is closer but also dealing with a more unruly kingdom (and old), though his son is more trustworthy and capable than Richard's brother.

 

[Cuāuhtemōc]

They pretty much kill everyone who is not Roman Catholic. ....

I fixed it for you. Anyways I reckoned with those extra men, Jerusalem is retaken. I can't say how long the Crusaders can hold on to it.

 

[Prefrence]

If I am not misreading this, Richard left in 1192: http://www.englishmonarchs.co.uk/plantagenet_2.htm

he arrived in 1189

 

[Elfwine]

I fixed it for you. Anyways I reckoned with those extra men, Jerusalem is retaken. I can't say how long the Crusaders can hold on to it.

What do you suppose happens in regards to future expeditions thusly?

Assuming Jerusalem remains in Christian hands to mid (13th) century or so, unless someone has a better guesstimate.

he arrived in 1189

So that would mean he spent three years or so, OTL.

 

[Prefrence]

What do you suppose happens in regards to future expeditions thusly?

Assuming Jerusalem remains in Christian hands to mid (13th) century or so, unless someone has a better guesstimate.



So that would mean he spent three years or so, OTL.

alright i was off by a little

Anyway, if Fredrick leads this crusade would it be known as the Emperor's Crusade? (since the First was the Prince's crusade, the second was the king's crusade)

 

[Elfwine]

alright i was off by a little

Not by enough to worry about. I'm just a compulsive nitpicker.

Anyway, if Fredrick leads this crusade would it be known as the Emperor's Crusade? (since the First was the Prince's crusade, the second was the king's crusade)

Quite possibly.

I'm not sure if Frederick would be formally in charge or just the senior most ruler.

 

[Cuāuhtemōc]

What do you suppose happens in regards to future expeditions thusly?

Depends. Correct me if I'm wrong but one of the lessons that was supposedly learned from the Third Crusade that Egypt was needed to be conquered by the Crusaders in order to relieve the Crusader States or something. Perhaps subsequent Crusades are still focused in taking back whatever lands conquered by the Muslims such as Edessa?

 

[Prefrence]

I wonder what would happen if the christians added a tax onto the Muslims? would the populace start reconverting?

 

[Elfwine]

Depends. Correct me if I'm wrong but one of the lessons that was supposedly learned from the Third Crusade that Egypt was needed to be conquered by the Crusaders in order to relieve the Crusader States or something. Perhaps subsequent Crusades are still focused in taking back whatever lands conquered by the Muslims such as Edessa?

That sounds right. I think it was specifically Richard's advice, but don't quote me.

It would be interesting to see if Crusader expeditions against Syria are less ill fated than OTL's against Egypt. The conditions are different (politically and geographically), but the Crusader armies are still somewhat less than ideal.

I wonder what would happen if the christians added a tax onto the Muslims? would the populace start reconverting?

Trouble & rebellion seem more likely.

 

[Cuāuhtemōc]

That sounds right. I think it was specifically Richard's advice, but don't quote me.

I'm pretty sure it was Richard's advice. I wasn't so sure.

It would be interesting to see if Crusader expeditions against Syria are less ill fated than OTL's against Egypt. The conditions are different (politically and geographically), but the Crusader armies are still somewhat less than ideal.

I don't think the Crusader armies themselves are much of a problem when it comes to facing the armies of the local Muslim states. The big problem is when the Crusade ended and most of the European Crusaders returned back home, leaving the local Crusader kingdoms with very little men spread out throughout a large area to hold down to it all. Damascus and Aleppo are likely to be the two most important targets in a Syrian Crusade.

 

[Elfwine]

I don't think the Crusader armies themselves are much of a problem when it comes to facing the armies of the local Muslim states. The big problem is when the Crusade ended and most of the European Crusaders returned back home, leaving the local Crusader kingdoms with very little men spread out throughout a large area to hold down to it all. Damascus and Aleppo are likely to be the two most important targets in a Syrian Crusade.

Yeah. That sort of thing pretty much ensures that unless the crusading pattern changes, even if it continues the long run chances are poor.

On the armies, they're not horrible, but something like the Mameluke army that beat the Mongols at Ain Janut vs. a Crusader army would be an epic curbstomping...by the Muslims.

 

[MNP]

That's not because the Crusaders sucked, that's because the Mamelukes were that good. And it depends on the leadership and discipline. Given the right leadership the Crusaders would not be crushed.