Lets make Crusader Egypt happen. An AHC!

For once, theological development can bring them closer by pure chance, but more important, the pope has the ability to motivate thousands of fighters to go there. Granted, there's a high chance of the Copts regretting it later, but a pragmatic crusader king might get it done (not many of those, though). So, yeah, it's not easy. One would need an early POD affecting the whole middle East and in particular the theological fundaments of mainly the Copts - but also the Catholics. In the later case, they must be more open to the other Christian faiths, and more hostile to non-Christians.

Theological development is unlikely to do so, though.

As for the pope motivating thousands of fighters to go there: And this is a good thing for the Copts why again?

Neither the original poster no I mentioned a particular POD. In fact I made it clear that you'd need a POD decades before the conquest of Egypt.

A first thing that's needed is more immigration from the West, immigration of ordinary people with families. There could be lay orders to organize that or the knightly orders could be open to married laymen in lower ranks.

Or we could recognize that most people weren't interested in moving to the East instead of insisting that because we can think of ideas that they could be implemented.

Having lay orders or knightly orders with married lay men still requires people to WANT to do it, and there's very little sign they did on the whole.

I'm sure Riain will mention the busted crusade of 1102(?), but that was long before the POD range here.

Considering Egypt, "A revival of Rhomanion" presented an easy way to reduce the fraction of Muslims: civil war followed by a very bloody conquest.

And a very bloody crusader conquest is a crusader conquest that will be violently unpopular.

Now for foreign intervention: How many invaders of Egypt came from the West and how many came from the East? If the East is secured (and that means control of Syria or at least larger parts of Syria by the crusaders or Byzantines as an earlier POD), Egypt is pretty safe from the East (aside from invasions of competing crusaders :rolleyes:). And given the direction where historically invaders came from, that means Egypt is pretty safe overall.
The question isn't how many came from the West, the question is whether or not they can come from the West. And the East being secured would be a Herculean labor in itself - and I say this as someone writing a TL with a 1176 POD and a successful Third Crusade.

Also, of course, Eastern threats include the Byzantines and the Mongols, not just competing crusaders.

So no, Egypt is not pretty safe overall. It's not even close to being safe.

That's an important point to consider when discussing the stability of crusader states: Egypt and the Levante combined are more stable, even if the crusader states are not fundamentally different to OTL.

Except that "the Levant" isn't in Christian hands (crusader or otherwise).

At most you have a narrow strip along the coast and a little ways inland, at worst you don't even have all the coast. And while this may change after whatever POD we pick, the amount of effort and attention it would take to do so - even with a strong, active Byzantium - is going to divert Christian resources away from Egypt.

And of course, their own internal problems - both the Franks (used to avoid confusing the inhabitants of the Crusader states vs. the people who went on Crusade) among themselves and with their subjects - are hardly encouraging.

I can see a Latin Empire like scenario in Egypt. I can't see a Crusader Egypt sinking deeper roots.
 
Top