What if the fourth crusade had not happened? Could they have

>>3068736
No, the fourth crusade was a sign of how weak the byzantines had become.

>>3068736
>What if the fourth crusade had not happened? Could they have reconquered the rest of Anatolia

By they i think you mean Gr**ks
No lol, it was a stalemate, we (Turks) were constantly fighting against Byzantines, sometimes we won sometimes we lost, even after Turks defeated a large Byzantine/Crusader army at Myriokephalon, Turks managed to fuck up at Western Anatolia while raiding a Greek town and killing its inhabitants inside Byzantine borders.

Also Mongol invasion made more Turks/Turkmens to migrate to Anatolia and this new manpower influx made Turks to conquer new lands in Western Anatolia.

Probably not.
The empire was again falling apart after the Angeloi usurped the throne.

>>3068736
The fourth crusade was supposed to conquer Egypt, at that time Copts stilled formed the majority of the Egyptian population until being shoah'd by Mamelukes in the 13th or 14th century. But they needed Byzantine military support to attack the Turks in Anatolia first so they tried to overthrow the Byzantine emperor to install another Greek nobleman who promised to support the crusades as emperor. The siege went out of hand and resulted in the city being sacked.

So if the 4rth crusade actually went as planned and succeeded then yes the crusaders would've conquered Egypt and today Egypt would probably be a Christian majority state like Lebanon used to be assuming timurids and ottomans don't invade it.

File: who-would-win-1-enrico-dandolo-15-000-byzantine-infantry-1162160.png (66KB, 500x307px) Image search: [Google]

66KB, 500x307px

>>3068745