Richard didn't go directly back to England after he left the Holy Land - he was stuck in a German prison for a while.
A person did not need to go 'on crusade' with a King. They were constantly looking for manpower (particularly knights and barons) in the middle east and pilgrims were encouraged to go at any time - and every once in a while a major baron would go with a large army. Henry II swore after the death of Becket that he would go on Crusade -he just didn't get around to it, but other people did.
I'm not sure what you mean by 'kingly take overs'.
very easily- as the above comment hints- have him be captured for ransom of put into slavery (if he was low-born), and escape from slavery OR have his realations drag their feet in getting a ransom together.
If you're going to involve Richard Coeur de Lion make sure you don't have him in England at the wrong time. He was only there for the second half of 1189 and a short part of 1194.
His service to Henry II would automatically have ended on Henry's death. Service - homage - was a very personal thing, with the vassal swearing a personal oath to their lord. Way back centuries earlier, it was relatively easy to leave someone's service, but by this date it was next thing to impossible; you could change allegiance on your lord's death, but that was it. One of the complicating things in Richard's life was that the King of France was techncially his overlord, and they spent most of the time at daggers drawn with each other (no, not literally).
work out how someone could return from the Crusades around 1191 and have been away from home for over ten years... err.. have him leave in 1181? But, if what you really want to know is what he might have been doing during the years after he "took the cross"-You should probably look at Outremer, Knights Templar and the Knights Hospitaller, check out pilgramages, crusades, Byzantioum /constantinople, fiefs held by crusaders in the Kingdom of Jerusalem http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kingdom_of_Jerusalem. William of Tyre, archbishop of Tyre and chancellor of Jerusalem wrote the Historia rerum in partibus transmarinis gestarum. (History of Deeds Done Beyond the Sea) about your period. and don't forget- The trip itself could take several years. Hope that helps!
That depends..what route? sea or overland? where is he? What time of year? What's going on at the time? Who is he? whose service is he in? Is his overlord feuding with anyone whose lands he'd be passing thru? whose permission does he need to get to leave? Who could give him a safe conduct? Does he have funds? That might facilitate matters, altho he wouldn't be able to travel alone in any case- invader alone in hostile occupied territory will never get home
( ... )
Comments 13
A person did not need to go 'on crusade' with a King. They were constantly looking for manpower (particularly knights and barons) in the middle east and pilgrims were encouraged to go at any time - and every once in a while a major baron would go with a large army. Henry II swore after the death of Becket that he would go on Crusade -he just didn't get around to it, but other people did.
I'm not sure what you mean by 'kingly take overs'.
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
err.. have him leave in 1181? But, if what you really want to know is what he might have been doing during the years after he "took the cross"-You should probably look at Outremer, Knights Templar and the Knights Hospitaller, check out pilgramages, crusades, Byzantioum /constantinople, fiefs held by crusaders in the Kingdom of Jerusalem http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kingdom_of_Jerusalem. William of Tyre, archbishop of Tyre and chancellor of Jerusalem wrote the Historia rerum in partibus transmarinis gestarum. (History of Deeds Done Beyond the Sea) about your period. and don't forget- The trip itself could take several years. Hope that helps!
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment