Siege of Antioch (First Crusade).

I recall that shortly after the armies of the First Crusade captured Antioch, they were actually besieged in the city by a Turkish army. (I don't recall the name of the actual sultan). WI: Emperor Alexius arrives and defeats this army. Would he have claimed Antioch and forced the crusaders to move further south? Or what if the Turks had recaptured Antioch and destroyed the crusader army? Would this bring the entire crusader movement to an end in it's infancy, or would there be more crusades?
 
The First Crusade was a very tenuous affair that could've fallen apart at almost any point along the way. Hell, I think it's a miracle that most of them even managed to reach the Levant in one piece, much less conquer bits and pieces of the region.
 
I recall that shortly after the armies of the First Crusade captured Antioch, they were actually besieged in the city by a Turkish army. (I don't recall the name of the actual sultan). WI: Emperor Alexius arrives and defeats this army. Would he have claimed Antioch and forced the crusaders to move further south? Or what if the Turks had recaptured Antioch and destroyed the crusader army? Would this bring the entire crusader movement to an end in it's infancy, or would there be more crusades?
The guy you are thinking of is Kerbogha the Atabeg of Mosul. I've asked this question myself, supposedly someone who fled the siege ran into Alexius marching to help and told him that all was lost, so he turned around. I think he'll have a much stronger hand in dealing with the Crusaders if he's there to lead them to victory--Antioch would belong to the Byzantines outright perhaps?
 
Alexios couldn't have arrived before the battle was decided anyway. Bohemund would most certainly have been thwarted in his ambition on Antioch and Frank-Byzantine relations would have been better. Alexios would have rewarded them with ample treasure and the Franks would have moved on without a fight. I imagine Alexios helps Raymond of Toulouse attack Shaizar. Maybe Bohemund goes for Tripoli instead...
 
The First Crusade was a very tenuous affair that could've fallen apart at almost any point along the way. Hell, I think it's a miracle that most of them even managed to reach the Levant in one piece, much less conquer bits and pieces of the region.

True. I've been toying with idea of assembling various PODs from that and ask opinions about them here.
 
Antioch

The guy you are thinking of is Kerbogha the Atabeg of Mosul. I've asked this question myself, supposedly someone who fled the siege ran into Alexius marching to help and told him that all was lost, so he turned around. I think he'll have a much stronger hand in dealing with the Crusaders if he's there to lead them to victory--Antioch would belong to the Byzantines outright perhaps?
Under Byzantine rule, I think that the horrible sack and destruction of the city in 1268 by sultan Baibars would have been avoided.
 
Top