Ferengi_Earwax t1_irep1fa wrote
Reply to comment by StringSing in Did the first crusade impact significantly the war-making capacity of states like england, west and east francia? And did later crusades impose equal burdens, or was the distribution of this burden different for the 2nd and 3rd crusades? by Qazwereira
The church absolutely said it was going to protect people's land who took the cross, but they couldn't do much but point a finger and wag the excommunication punishment. Even after that, people would just pay off the church. Most of the time the land was stolen by other people's family members. Now as for whether england was any better off without Richard, no by far no. England was taxed to 7 hells for the crusades and there would absolutely still be enough normans to boot stomp any anglo saxon who got uppity.
[deleted] t1_irfdr6o wrote
[removed]
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments