Long Lasting Crusade States

gochisox

Hey I was wondering if their was a possibility for the Crusader States to be long lasting countries instead of just for the couple hundred years that they lasted in OTL. I don't see much of a way for it to work besides if their was a much stronger and powerful relationship between the Byzantine Empire and the Crusader States as well as a much stronger immigration movement possibly from a war in Europe that makes people flee, but i cant see it working unless their is an extremely strong Byzantine and even Armenian Christian that support their boarder and give them supply line.

Any other idea. I'm mainly looking to see if theirs a way they could last until at least the Renissance but any way for a much stronger Crusader States would be appriciated.
 
Sian

Sian

much less internal disunity, intrigue and powerplay between second/third sons and happy-go-lucky Europeans having left their original country (most usually Franks) to become important in another country, leaving focus on surviving as a state, rather than who's got the bigger ...

Keeping the Crusader states much more religously tied up, with a pseudo theocracy on top (say an elected king by a council of leaders from the holy orders and maybe a few chosen nobles), maybe by letting Godfrey of Bouillon survive a bit longer in the first Crusade so he could set up the kind of rule he appearently wanted
 

el t

Crusade States.

The Kingdom of Cyprus did last for just about three centuries. In Syria and Palestine, I think that the kingdom of Jerusalem could have lasted had both Aleppo and Damascus been captured.
 

Riain

Banned
The biggest problem is demographic, on the eve of Hattin there were only about 5000 Poulians in the KoJ, not enough to sustain a Frankish minority in power indefinitely.

The answer to this problem is a successful Crusade of 1101 which would bring:


  • Armies to drastically speed the consolidation of the Crusader states.
  • Settlers to fill the ranks of the armies and tenant empty villages, especially common people without purity of birth to worry about in order to intermarry with locals and create a class of Poulians.
  • Further consolidate the overland route through Anatolia so that the Crusader States can receive a steady stream of pilgrims without having to rely on the extortionate shipping of Italian city states, this would further increase the power of local magnates at the expense of the Italians who had their own ends in mind at all times.
 

Harald Sigurdson II

Riain said:
The biggest problem is demographic, on the eve of Hattin there were only about 5000 Poulians in the KoJ, not enough to sustain a Frankish minority in power indefinitely.

The answer to this problem is a successful Crusade of 1101 which would bring:


  • Armies to drastically speed the consolidation of the Crusader states.
  • Settlers to fill the ranks of the armies and tenant empty villages, especially common people without purity of birth to worry about in order to intermarry with locals and create a class of Poulians.
  • Further consolidate the overland route through Anatolia so that the Crusader States can receive a steady stream of pilgrims without having to rely on the extortionate shipping of Italian city states, this would further increase the power of local magnates at the expense of the Italians who had their own ends in mind at all times.
Click to expand...

Hmm...

DEPORT THE ANGLO-SAXONS!
Oh, and a whole-heartedly French England.

EDIT: To the Levant
 
Last edited:

Riain

Banned
Harald Sigurdson II said:
Hmm...

DEPORT THE ANGLO-SAXONS!
Oh, and a whole-heartedly French England.
Click to expand...

The Normans were in a similar position to the Crusaders, a military elite over an alien (to them) and sometimes hostile populace. The difference being a lack of totally hostile set of neighbours in England, the Normans had a better chance to consolidate. Besides, the Anglo-Saxons did leave and join the Varangian Guard in decent numbers.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top
Top