WI Baldwin V of Jerusalem had lived longer?

Shortly before his death in 1185 the leper King Baldwin IV of Jerusalem crowned his 5 year old nephew Baldwin de Montferrat co-King of Jerusalem following Guy de Lusignan's deposition as bailli...(crowning took place in 1183)
Baldwin IV finally succumbed to leprosy in 1185 and Baldwin V succeeded him as sole King... However Baldwin was always a sickly child and he died next year causing a huge succesion crisis...
WI Baldwin V lives longer? Does his reign butterflies away the collapse of the Kingdom (since the defeat in Hattin and loss of Jerusalem was Guy de Lusignan's and Reynald de Chatillon's work...)???
How possible is a potential coup d'etat by Raymond III of Tripoli? Sending Isabella and Sibylla in a monastery and rules as an invisible dictator?
 
Shortly before his death in 1185 the leper King Baldwin IV of Jerusalem crowned his 5 year old nephew Baldwin de Montferrat co-King of Jerusalem following Guy de Lusignan's deposition as bailli...(crowning took place in 1183)

This isn't right. Raymond III was Baldwin V's regent. Guy initially was named regent, but fell out of favor with Baldwin IV, and was substituted with Raymond.

Baldwin IV finally succumbed to leprosy in 1185 and Baldwin V succeeded him as sole King... However Baldwin was always a sickly child and he died next year causing a huge succesion crisis...
WI Baldwin V lives longer? Does his reign butterflies away the collapse of the Kingdom (since the defeat in Hattin and loss of Jerusalem was Guy de Lusignan's and Reynald de Chatillon's work...)???
How possible is a potential coup d'etat by Raymond III of Tripoli? Sending Isabella and Sibylla in a monastery and rules as an invisible dictator?

He wouldn't send both Isabella and Sibylla to a convent (monasteries were for men), Isabella was married to one of his erstwhile political allies, Humphrey IV of Toron, whose defection to Guy and Sibylla ended Raymond's attempted coup (attempted in the aftermath of Baldwin V's death).

If Baldwin V is given more time then I think that Raymond will come up with a way to remove Sibylla. Let's say that Sibylla is killed. This negates Guy's claims on the crown, and moves Isabella and her husband into the position of heirs to the young Baldwin V.

I think that Baldwin V was going to die, whether it was sooner or later. The best bet for the continued Kingdom of Jerusalem is for Raymond III to have a son. If he is able to produce a son, then he becomes a very good candidate for King. He could assume the throne when Baldwin V dies, having the support of nearly all of the native nobility.

The problem however is that this will not save the Kingdom of Jerusalem. Significant strategic changes needed to take place, primarily the fall of Aleppo and Damascus to the Crusaders, in order to secure all of Syria. By this stage of the game the Crusaders were not in a position to be able to take either one of these cities. The best bet for a continuing Outremer is either in the First Crusade, having the Crusaders taking Aleppo instead of Edessa, or in the Second Crusade, having the French aid Antioch in taking Aleppo.

By Baldwin V's time, the game was done.
 

mojojojo

Gone Fishin'
How would a longer lasting Crusader kingdom effect the world we live in ? Any ideas? Any one up for a timeline
 
For Raymond to take the throne Isabella must be eliminated too... She had a higher claim than Raymond... Who held his claim through Hodierna of Jerusalem (through female line)...
If he stages a coup without eliminating Isabella this can lead to a civil war...
 
For Raymond to take the throne Isabella must be eliminated too... She had a higher claim than Raymond... Who held his claim through Hodierna of Jerusalem (through female line)...
If he stages a coup without eliminating Isabella this can lead to a civil war...

Actually Raymond was aiming for civil war. He would have supported Isabella and her husband against Sybilla and Guy. Unfortunately Isabella's husband remained fiercely loyal to Guy, continuing to pledge his alliegance even after the Battle of Hattin, the Fall of Jerusalem, and Sybilla's death (with her dead Guy had no right to the throne). Raymond refused to swear alliegance to Guy, and actually plotted with Saladin against Guy.

If Raymond had been able to father a son, then in the aftermath of Baldwin V's death he may have been able to make himself King, because he had all the support of the native barons. Though his claim did descend through a female branch, he was a man, and both Sybilla and Isabella's husbands were unpopular morons. With the crisis that the Kingdom was facing in Saladin I think that he would have been able to get the crown. His lack of male offspring however simply made him a power-broker.

If Raymond had not only a son, but daughters to marry off to foreign princes, then his worth is even more increased, as those marriages would be able to bring in the military aid lost in ignoring Sybilla and Isabella's claims (and thus their husbands) to the throne.
 
How about English help? Henry II's family were the nearest blood relatives to Baldwin IV Sybille and Isabella... If Raymond had children he could marry them to one of Henry II's sons/daughters secure the throne and raising a higher claim by marriage...
 
Baldwin V

If he had been healthier, the regency of Raymound of Tripoli would have continued until he came of age. The Kingdom would have been in a position to buy time until the death of Saladin, which again resulted in the surrounding Muslim states being divided.
 
Saladin controlled both Syria and Egypt, and was intelligent enough to be well aware of Muslim polities tendency to split after the founder's death (since this was how he got the Syrian half of his territory). He was also pretty single-minded in his pursuit of destroying the Crusader States. Basically, Baldwin V might live, but Saladin is coming anyway, and he has vastly more resources than the Crusaders, so he will win.
 
Top