Viggen Posted March 9, 2004 Report Share Posted March 9, 2004 When Saladin retook the crusader kingdom of Jerusalem for Islam in 1187,Pope Innocent III declared a new crusade to recapture it. But the crusaders ran into financial difficulties and took advantage of Greek imperial infighting to raise money. The scheme was a disaster, laying Constantinople to waste, gutting its churches and sending many of its citizens into slavery in Europe. The crusaders never went on to Jerusalem, but calcified the mistrust between eastern and western Christendom. full article at AthenNews Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Philhellene Posted January 30, 2006 Report Share Posted January 30, 2006 (edited) The scheme was a disaster, laying Constantinople to waste, gutting its churches and sending many of its citizens into slavery in Europe. You`re wrong, crusaders initially didn`t plan to sack Constantinople, but to make Alexius, son of Isaac, emperor and to overthrow Alexius III. Alexius promised to return his empire to Roman church, to give money to crusaders, to take part in their Crusade and then to keep some of his soldiers in Holy land. When they did it and Alexius and his father became emperors they refused to pay the crusaders and even started to fight them. So the crusaders said that they will take that he promised befor in any case. Both emperors were overthrown by Murtzuphlus and that Murtzuphlus decided to wage war against cruseders, but he was defeated and Constantinople was taken a second time. Moreover there were 3 fires in Constantinople, two of them - during the siege, and the last - because of quarrel between Venetians and Francs and their battles on the streets. So the main reason of disasters is this fires. And they were not planned by crusaders. The crusaders never went on to Jerusalem, but calcified the mistrust between eastern and western Christendom. Nevertheless some of crusaders came to Syria (the plan was to come to Syria, then to defeat Egypt and then to return Jerusalem), but they were defeated because their forces were too small. And the general forces of crusaders (they never rejected the plan to fight against muslims) were defeated by Bulgarian king and they weren`t able to wage war with new enemies. Edited January 30, 2006 by Philhellene Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Honorius Posted January 30, 2006 Report Share Posted January 30, 2006 The scheme was a disaster, laying Constantinople to waste, gutting its churches and sending many of its citizens into slavery in Europe. You`re wrong, crusaders initially didn`t plan to sack Constantinople, but to make Alexius, son of Isaac, emperor and to overthrow Alexius III. Alexius promised to return his empire to Roman church, to give money to crusaders, to take part in their Crusade and then to keep some of his soldiers in Holy land. When they did it and Alexius and his father became emperors they refused to pay the crusaders and even started to fight them. So the crusaders said that they will take that he promised befor in any case. Both emperors were overthrown by Murtzuphlus and that Murtzuphlus decided to wage war against cruseders, but he was defeated and Constantinople was taken a second time. Moreover there were 3 fires in Constantinople, two of them - during the siege, and the last - because of quarrel between Venetians and Francs and their battles on the streets. So the main reason of disasters is this fires. And they were not planned by crusaders. The crusaders never went on to Jerusalem, but calcified the mistrust between eastern and western Christendom. Nevertheless some of crusaders came to Syria (the plan was to come to Syria, then to defeat Egypt and then to return Jerusalem), but they were defeated because their forces were too small. And the general forces of crusaders (they never rejected the plan to fight against muslims) were defeated by Bulgarian king and they weren`t able to wage war with new enemies. Phil is correct...the crusaders failed to make up the fees required to pay the Venetians as alot of crusaders travelled to the southern ports of italy and the city of genoa to reach the holy land...Also you left out the capture of Zara Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Viggen Posted January 31, 2006 Author Report Share Posted January 31, 2006 You`re wrong Me?, you mean Judith Herrin who is professor of Late Antique and Byzantine Studies at King's College London who wrote this for the Athen News... cheers viggen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Philhellene Posted January 31, 2006 Report Share Posted January 31, 2006 (edited) Me?, you mean Judith Herrin who is professor of Late Antique and Byzantine Studies at King's College London who wrote this for the Athen News... My sources are Robert de Clari and Geoffroi de Villehardouin , participants of this Crusade. Edited January 31, 2006 by Philhellene Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Primus Pilus Posted February 1, 2006 Report Share Posted February 1, 2006 Me?, you mean Judith Herrin who is professor of Late Antique and Byzantine Studies at King's College London who wrote this for the Athen News... My sources are Robert de Clari and Geoffroi de Villehardouin , participants of this Crusade. Yes, what Viggen is saying is that he is simply reporting the 'News'. Its not his opinion, but that of the author Judith Herrin. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Segestan Posted February 2, 2006 Report Share Posted February 2, 2006 The facts: Universal History 1887 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Honorius Posted February 2, 2006 Report Share Posted February 2, 2006 The facts: Universal History 1887 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Philhellene Posted February 2, 2006 Report Share Posted February 2, 2006 The French and Italian Knights, under the Count Baldwin of Flanders, at the instigation of Pope Innocent III. The chief of crusaders was Boniface of Montferrat. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrew Dalby Posted February 2, 2006 Report Share Posted February 2, 2006 The facts: Universal History 1887 ... they proceeded against Constantinople for the purpose of restoring to the throne of the Byzantine Empire, Isaac Angelus, who had been dethroned and imprisoned by his brother. Headed by the Blind Old Dandolo, Doge of Venice, the Crusaders appeared before Constantinople , took the city, and restored Isaac Angelus to the Greek throne; but when the French Crusaders demanded the rewards which had been promised to them , the inhabitants of Constantinople raised an insurrection in which the Emperors Isaac Angelus and his son Alexius perished. Thereupon the French Crusaders stormed and took the Byzantine capital , plundered the Churches, palaces , and dwellings, destroyed many valuable monuments of art , and filled the whole city with terror and desolation. After the plundering Constantinople , the French crusaders subverted the Byzantine , or Greek Empire , and established in it Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.