So in 1174 Amalric of Jerusalem died from dysentery on the verge of launching another invasion of Egypt. He had already proven himself a capable general and was starting to finally get some support from the West he had also managed to gain some naval support and a significant enough army to invade Egypt. Nur ad-Din had just died leaving Muslim Syria in chaos and Egypt vulnerable to Amalric. Capturing Egypt would be vital as it would give the Christian states a significant base of operations as well as the huge wealth and grain reserves from the Nile. Not only that but a Sunni caliph had recently been established there and there was dissent among the Shi'ite Muslims of Egypt against the Sunni Caliph and they may well have supported the crusaders as the Shia had done during the first crusade. However there was one person stood in his way of doing so if he did get to his invasion, Saladin.
As we know Saladin was a great general but he would have little support from the territories of the Levant whereas Amalric would have naval support and dominance and possibly more support from the West. Not only that but it is possible that the Shi'ite Muslims would help him.
So if he didn't die in 1174 of dysentery at the age of only 38 could he have gone on to conquer Egypt and remove the general responsible for destroying the Kingdom of Jerusalem?
Could he then have re-conquered Syria afterwards?
Could he save the Crusader Kingdom?
As we know Saladin was a great general but he would have little support from the territories of the Levant whereas Amalric would have naval support and dominance and possibly more support from the West. Not only that but it is possible that the Shi'ite Muslims would help him.
So if he didn't die in 1174 of dysentery at the age of only 38 could he have gone on to conquer Egypt and remove the general responsible for destroying the Kingdom of Jerusalem?
Could he then have re-conquered Syria afterwards?
Could he save the Crusader Kingdom?