AHC Kingdom of Jerusalem lasts until 1400

So I got to thinking recently, what would it take for at least the Kingdom of Jerusalem to survive as an entity (not necessarily independent of another power) into the late middle ages.

I've always been curious about some surviving Crusader state in the Middle East and what knock on effects it might have for Western and Eastern Christianity.

Thoughts?
 

Riain

Banned
The Crusade of 1101 consolidates in Anatolia and successfully makes it across, capturing Konya and handing to the Byzantines in the process. These armies campaign in the Holy Land and consolidate and expand the fledgling KoJ, putting it on a firmer footing much earlier than OTL as well as leaving behind a much larger influx of settlers than OTL.

A side benefit is the capture of Konya makes the route across Anatolia much more secure enabling a constant trickle of pilgrims who IOTL couldn't go because they couldn't afford the fares the Italian city ships were charging.

These two things change the basic demographic problem of the KoJ in favour of the Franks and enable them to resist Saladin.
 
A side benefit is the capture of Konya makes the route across Anatolia much more secure enabling a constant trickle of pilgrims who IOTL couldn't go because they couldn't afford the fares the Italian city ships were charging.

These two things change the basic demographic problem of the KoJ in favour of the Franks and enable them to resist Saladin.

Hm really? Would that provide a more stable overland route than OTL? I'm not quite so well up to date on Crusader state geography, but wouldn't by ship still be faster than travelling to say, Constantinople then overland through Asia Minor?
 

Riain

Banned
A couple of maps, during the 1st Crusade and about the time of the 2nd Crusade. If Iconium (Konya) was held after 1101 then the Empire would have a greater hold over central Anatolia than IOTL, opening a land route for people who couldn't afford the fares on a ship but who walk for free and live off the land on the cheap.

first_crusade.jpg


Asia_minor_1140.jpg
 
Egypt

As discussed in this thread:

https://www.alternatehistory.com/discussion/showthread.php?t=375483

I think that Crusader control over Egypt, or at least the shattering of Fatimid power before it can transfer to Saladin in the late 1100s, would be key. Egypt represented a huge potential threat to the KoJ which, when united with "Syria" was simply overwhelming.

The creation of lordships in a fractured Egypt, a series of devastating defeats inflicted on the Fatimids that see them descend into civil war, or, at best, the establishment of a second Crusader Kingdom in Egypt after a crusade would give the Crusaders a breathing space in the South (and potentially a regional ally). This would allow them to take Aleppo and Edessa and maybe, at a push, Damascus, securing their frontier against further incursion.
 
Tricky. A bigger Christian kingdom in Syria for a start would change everything, as has been pointed out. Have the crusaders take Aleppo and Damascus and everything changes. Have them contribute to the Byzantines permanently retaking Caesarea and everything changes even further.
Or you could have Baibars fall on his head and die before the Battle of Ain Jalut. That would throw everything up in the air, especially if the Mongols got to Cairo and carried out their threat to level the place.
 
Last edited:

Alcsentre Calanice

Gone Fishin'
So I got to thinking recently, what would it take for at least the Kingdom of Jerusalem to survive as an entity (not necessarily independent of another power) into the late middle ages.

I've always been curious about some surviving Crusader state in the Middle East and what knock on effects it might have for Western and Eastern Christianity.

Thoughts?

Better and stronger alliance with the Mongols - have the local mongol commander become a christian and support the Kingdom of Jerusalem with his army, which had already conquered Baghdad.

Though, you need the Christians to accept an alliance with the "barbarian" mongols.
 
A couple of maps, during the 1st Crusade and about the time of the 2nd Crusade. If Iconium (Konya) was held after 1101 then the Empire would have a greater hold over central Anatolia than IOTL, opening a land route for people who couldn't afford the fares on a ship but who walk for free and live off the land on the cheap.

Ah! Those maps are enlightening! Thanks!

So what might prompt this more mutual support by the Crusaders and the Byzantines?

Better and stronger alliance with the Mongols - have the local mongol commander become a christian and support the Kingdom of Jerusalem with his army, which had already conquered Baghdad.

Though, you need the Christians to accept an alliance with the "barbarian" mongols.

Would the Mongols be under any need to keep their alliance with the Crusaders intact past a certain point though?
 
Maybe the Kingdom of Jerusalem would become part of a Christian Mongol Empire in the middle east?

That would fit in with my challenge actually...

On a side note, how likely would Mongol dominance of the Middle East be? TBH I'm not totally sure of the Mongols success in the Middle East other than the sacking of Baghdad.
 
That would fit in with my challenge actually...

On a side note, how likely would Mongol dominance of the Middle East be? TBH I'm not totally sure of the Mongols success in the Middle East other than the sacking of Baghdad.


Not likely until Timur. The Mongols were hard pressed taking Iraq, it could've gone far worse for them and in truth they could've been routed outside Baghdad or close to Alamut. They were not invicible and Qutuz showed that.

As far as the Crusaders go, the best bet for a late survival is weakening the Mamluks further. So Qutuz is killed by Baibars as usual, but then have Baibars catch Smallpox or something and give the Mamluks a weak ruler for a period, this will give the crusaders more time. Then when Timur comes to the Levant the crusaders ally with him against the Mamluks and then they only have 5-10 years until they are in the 1400s.
 
Maybe the Kingdom of Jerusalem would become part of a Christian Mongol Empire in the middle east?

Christian Mongol Empire might happen if Sartaq Khan somehow succeeded in converting the population. Making them interested in Middle Eastern affairs is a whole 'nother kettle of fish, though.
 
Kingdom of Jerusalem

Control of Aleppo and Damascus as well as a stronger population may have done the trick.
 
A great starting place would be a more successful 2nd crusade methinks...the first of the so called "Kings Crusades" was a total disaster insofar as it failed to coordinate with the Romans and failed to seize Damascus...
 

Riain

Banned
Ah! Those maps are enlightening! Thanks!

So what might prompt this more mutual support by the Crusaders and the Byzantines?



.....snip....
Simple self interest.

The Byz did a lot of campaigning in the years of the first Crusade, taking advantage that another army was on the loose taking on the Turks. They captured Nicea when the Crusaders were besieging it and were on campaign in central Anatolia when the siege of Antioch was being undertaken.
 

trajen777

Banned
I think the keys are to create a more defensible and economic geogragphy. To do this you need to create control of the inland cities that reduces bases of attack form the Muslims.

First Crusade:
A. Have Antioch turned over to the Byzantines, and have the troops that were based their go to Edessa. Now you have a strong Allie in Byz, and enough troops to defend the north (Edessa)

2nd Crusade :
Consolidate and listen to Byz advise in crossing Anatolia. he combined crusaders would have brought badly needed reinforcements and perhaps could have captured Damascus or better yet Aleppo. Aleppo would have further consolidated the northern part of the kingdom, brought a rich city into the KOJ, and eliminated a major attack point of the Muslims, as well as destroyed Zengi power.

3rd Crusade :
With the elimination of the Zengi threat the KOJ would not have lost Jerusalem, so who knows if the forces brought forth would have been as massive. Lets say it was. Now if you dont have Barbarossa go swimming and drown, then you have a massive German army marching south along the coast , and Kings Richard and Philip at Jerusalem. The really only main targets would be Damascus and Egypt. With the forces arrayed each would be realistic objectives and obtainable.

So you now have defensible borders, tremendous wealth, and inland areas protected from raiding which would allow for future population growth and increasing wealth. This is an area which could have survived well past the 1400's. The threats could only be mounted from Mosul or Bagdad. You do have the Mongols to deal with in the future.
 
Top