WI: Saladin Killed at Tel Jezer

This is a what-if I've been thinking about for some time:

At the battle of Tel Jezer in 1177, King Baldwin IV of Jerusalem and his 375 Templar Knights ambushed Saladin and slaughtered his army. Saladin barely escaped, riding a particularly swift camel to safety.

So the question is this: What-If Saladin hadn't been so lucky and had been killed by the Templars?
 
Ayyubids go through a tremendous political realignment. Saladin barely kept his kingdom together under the constant pressure as it is. He was actually a much better politician than warrior and his strengths there should not be ignored. It's possible that if Saladin does pass in 1177, it's possible that As-Salih the son of Nuradin survives to adult hood and then it's Syria and the Jazira that are the primary foes of the Christians for a while. Such a thing might be interesting in regards to the relationship with Egypt.
 
Does it preserve the Crusader Kingdoms for a while? I would imagine it would give them a good shot at lasting for some time because of this.
 
I reckon it allows the Crusader states to have some breathing room. Maybe the Third Crusade is directed towards conquering Egypt instead of defending the Crusader states already in existence.
 
A very interesting question!

Seperating Egypt from Syria looks like a great relieve for the crusader states, in case that will be a consequence.

As to the Third Crusade, I don't see an attack on Egypt.
Some things the crusaders were only up to when it was too late.

Note that the fast sequence of crusades only started with the Third one.
If Jerusalem doesn't fall approximately as early as IOTL, it is entirely possible that there won't be another crusade at all ...
 
Right, the Crusades were really popular stories in the west, but after the pathetic #2 until the Fall of Jerusalem not many people went except private great lords. There was also a lot of criticism as to the actions of the Crusaders in terms of conduct. A sense that failed Crusades were a result of less than Christian conduct. Looking at reactions to the Lisbon Crusade where a lot of people either went home of settled in Spain for lands there was a lot of "you have abandoned your crusading for personal gain!" One reason why the 3rd Crusade led by kings, was much more disciplined. Of course being led by Kings it didn't listen to the Pope and the Pope was eager to regain his prominence in Crusading so he sanctioned another Great Lords Crusader that turned out to be #4.... There was also a very real sense (in Europe) that the Outremer Franks were degenerate sybarites who lost because they spent more time rebelling and marrying each other than fighting Muslims.

The Kingdom of Jerusalem might well attempt to capture Egypt but I think it depends on what happens to the Antiochenes. Will they succeed against As-Salih or whoever takes over in the north? Do things just remain status quo because the Outremer Franks can't get it together? What happens with Manuel? Is it possible that the Byzzies control Antioch a bitter bettter?
 
So the Kingdom of Jerusalem lasts until the Ottoman's perhaps?

That might be the next major crusade perhaps.
 
Okay well let's start. I enjoy Crusade PoDs and am actually kicking around a concept called "Crusader Queens" myself.

Okay, so if Salidan dies at say, Montisgard or some small action later:

Humphrey is going to survive. He was killed in 1179 battling Saladin's troops in a raid. Humphrey was respected to a point and was part of the Anti-Lusignan party. Anything that keeps Guy away from Jerusalem is a plus for that troubled land and things started to sour in 1179 for Baldwin so he had to turn to Guy. This will give him more breathing space to marry Sybilla off to someone who isn't a total failure.
 
Jerusalem was already de-facto heriditary, right?

I don't think the outremerrings are capable of performing a promising attack on Egypt;
that seems to require a lot of fresh new troups and a strict coordination.
But I am not a specialist on these military details.

If Jerusalem and the Knights want to seize the opportunity of the chaos the death of
Saladdin might have caused, the their best guess is to assault Damascus.
Perhaps they can restore their predominance over Syria.

If not, it seems at least likely that Jerusalem will be able to control the communication
lines right East of its borders.
 
Saladin

The recapture of Banyas by the forces of Baldwin IV is a real possibility. Damascus is a long shot. The crusaders don't have the man power, and if they try it would definitely increase Muslim resistance. I think that the Muslims would have recovered from Saladin's death relatively quickly.
 
Top