What would the Third Crusade have looked like with a surviving Frederick Barbarossa? Would the Crusaders have actually managed to reconquer Jerusalem from Saladin in this scenario? And just how much longer of an existence would the Crusader states have had in this TL?
The Third Crusade with a surviving Frederick Barbarossa
- Thread starter WolfBear
- Start date
Circle of Willis
Well-known member
Can't imagine the crusaders wouldn't have taken Jerusalem without an extra 15,000 or so German troops given all their other battlefield successes against Saladin in this round. Richard the Lionheart will also probably avoid captivity (and his gigantic ransom) ITL, since the Holy Roman Emperor is obviously at least equal to him & Philip II of France and not a man he could get away with provoking - no way he'd dare topple Barbarossa's banner, whether at Acre or Jerusalem. So England will be in better financial shape, and might avoid the reign of King John altogether (whether because Arthur of Brittany succeeds Richard, or the butterflies give Richard a son).
However, with a strong Muslim power still occupying both Egypt & Syria in the form of the surviving Ayyubids, the crusader kingdoms are likely still hosed in the long term, even if a bunch of German crusaders decide to settle down in the aftermath of the victorious Third Crusade. To save them, I think you'd need the Fourth Crusade to stay on target and crack Muslim rule over Egypt.
However, with a strong Muslim power still occupying both Egypt & Syria in the form of the surviving Ayyubids, the crusader kingdoms are likely still hosed in the long term, even if a bunch of German crusaders decide to settle down in the aftermath of the victorious Third Crusade. To save them, I think you'd need the Fourth Crusade to stay on target and crack Muslim rule over Egypt.
Why did Arthur fail to succeed Richard in real life?
As for the Fourth Crusade cracking Muslim power in Egypt, that seems like quite a challenge due to Egypt's sheer size and population, no? And of course Byzantium could still present some attractive opportunities for the Crusaders on the Fourth Crusade, no? The Byzantine Empire's problems started with the death of Emperor Manuel I in 1180, after all, whereas here the PoD is 1190--ten years later.
Circle of Willis
Well-known member
Arthur was still underage when Richard died, killed while trying to put down one of the revolts among the continental barons endemic to the Angevin Empire. With Richard immediately returning in triumph (and having the added prestige of helping to actually take Jerusalem to boot) rather than having to be ransomed back from an archduke he insulted after spending two years in captivity, I think there's a good chance that that particular rebellious lord might choose some other time to rebel instead, and buy Arthur a few more years to mature.
Yes, it'd be a hell of a challenge, but then so was creating the Latin Empire and associated crusader principalities atop the temporarily-mostly-dead carcass of Byzantium. The crusaders will be further aided by the Ayyubids having just come out of a civil war between Saladin's sons and brother, not that dissimilar to the turbulence of the Angeloi period in Byzantine lands. I also don't think it's a given that events in the ERE will play out exactly like they did historically with 5-10 years' worth of butterflies, it took a very specific chain of disastrous events for that to happen - just not having Alexios III succeed in deposing his brother Isaac II while the latter was on a hunting trip in 1195 will derail this course, and put off some sort of fatal Byzantine-Latin confrontation (which admittedly was very likely to happen at some point after the 1182 Massacre of the Latins) for a while longer.
Yes, it'd be a hell of a challenge, but then so was creating the Latin Empire and associated crusader principalities atop the temporarily-mostly-dead carcass of Byzantium. The crusaders will be further aided by the Ayyubids having just come out of a civil war between Saladin's sons and brother, not that dissimilar to the turbulence of the Angeloi period in Byzantine lands. I also don't think it's a given that events in the ERE will play out exactly like they did historically with 5-10 years' worth of butterflies, it took a very specific chain of disastrous events for that to happen - just not having Alexios III succeed in deposing his brother Isaac II while the latter was on a hunting trip in 1195 will derail this course, and put off some sort of fatal Byzantine-Latin confrontation (which admittedly was very likely to happen at some point after the 1182 Massacre of the Latins) for a while longer.
What if we use a PoD further back, such as Byzantine Emperor Manuel I having a son in the 1150s instead of one of his daughters? How would that have affected things?
Circle of Willis
Well-known member
An enduring Komnenoi dynasty and renaissance most likely butterflies away any possibility of the 4th Crusade attacking the Byzantine Empire.
On that note you'd also probably butterfly away the OTL future of the Plantagenet line altogether, as Richard's brother Henry will still be alive and his prematurely born son may not die (or be born healthy and on schedule, or just be born as a different kid in a different time altogether) with a POD that far back. John may not even be born with an 1150s POD, since he was historically born in the 1170s.
On that note you'd also probably butterfly away the OTL future of the Plantagenet line altogether, as Richard's brother Henry will still be alive and his prematurely born son may not die (or be born healthy and on schedule, or just be born as a different kid in a different time altogether) with a POD that far back. John may not even be born with an 1150s POD, since he was historically born in the 1170s.
That makes sense; thank you. Also, what about if Manuel I's children are the same other than the fact that the future Alexios II will be born a girl and thus Manuel I will make Bela III of Hungary his heir instead?
Circle of Willis
Well-known member
Assuming Bela can survive the inevitable tsunami of contenders (Andronikos, for example, is already around) and doesn't just convert to Orthodoxy (which would lead to the same problem but in Hungary instead), the butterflies and possibilities are endless. Maybe a Hungaro-Byzantine Empire can be the ticket to finally patching up the Great Schism, not to mention it'd obviously be a prime contender for 'indefinite Balkan superpower' if it lasts.
Who can take power in Hungary if Bela converts to Orthodoxy?
Circle of Willis
Well-known member
Interesting. Also, any odds of Bela himself participating in the Third Crusade if he is Byzantine Emperor in the late 1180s and early 1190s?
History Learner
Well-known member
I wonder what effects Barbarossa would have in terms of the Byzantine-Turkic balance in Asia Minor; the Battle of Iconium in particular stands out.
What did Freddie plan to do with Iconium? Give it to the Byzantines?
History Learner
Well-known member
I could be wrong on this, but my understanding was yes.
I wonder why that didn't happen in real life. He did, in fact, conquer Iconium before his death, after all.
History Learner
Well-known member
He died, his army fell apart. Also typical friction between the Byzantines and the Westerners, IIRC.