More succesful crusader states

katchen

Banned
The Mongols rule weakened because they lost in Palestine to the Mamelukes. If ATL with the Crusader's help, they wiped out the Mamelukes and conquered Egypt and then the Seljuq Turks, who would finally defeat them? The Timurids in the 14th Century? The Djungars in the 16th Century? Perhaps. But the Mongols might well have had a longer run as rulers in the Middle East. Though they finally converted to Islam. Which I believe may have been Shia Islam, given that they ruled Iran. Shia rule from Iran to Egypt to Asia Minor would be a definite change ATL. And the Shiites might well be more tolerant of Crusaders and let them continue as vassals or tributaries.
 
Later Crusades, revoling around the French, DID invade Egypt. Considering they also occupied parts of Tunisia and Tripolitania, I think sufficient PoDs exist for the N African littoral to be re-Christianised in a timeline.

Other Crusades were supposed to have gone to Egypt, and its perfectly possible to imagine them having success, at least in taking and holding the Alexandria-to-Cairo axis. What happens later would be a mirror of what happened with Antioch and Edessa - ie unless massively reinforced from Europe, they will gradually fall to enemy powers, perhaps keeping a hold on a coastal pale for a while.

Best Regards
Grey Wolf
 
The Mongols had Nestorian Christians among their ranks, if the Latins had been more savvy they could have struck up more of an alliance.

I bumped this with an idea: what would promote greater Latin settlement in the Crusader States? I had thought of an ahistorical plague or something that caused a lot of them to flee to the east and to the Levant, but the local authorities there would probably enact some sort of draconian quarantine system.
 
A successful crusade of 1101 would promote greater Latin settlement of the Crusader states for two reasons.

Firstly it would bring large numbers of Latins to Outremer in the formative period, where a significant portion of them would stay much like they did in the First Crusade. IOTL the Latins who stayed after the major Crusades made up the 5000 strong Paulain class by the time of Hattin. If 1101 was added to this the Paulain class should have been significantly bigger.

Secondly a successful 1101 would have opened up Anatolia to poorer travellers, many of whom will stay on to add to the Paulain class. IOTL Anatolia was closed to Christian pilgrims travelling under their own steam, only those who could afford passage on an Italian ship could reach the Holy Land, which discounts a huge section of the European population which might want to go.
 
I bumped this with an idea: what would promote greater Latin settlement in the Crusader States? I had thought of an ahistorical plague or something that caused a lot of them to flee to the east and to the Levant, but the local authorities there would probably enact some sort of draconian quarantine system.
Plagues tended to spread from Asia into Europe, anyway, and this would already have been known at the time, so people deciding to flee to Asia to escape plagues seems a bit unlikely to me.
 
Top