|
Post by ayatollah on May 25, 2023 12:58:31 GMT
The Fourth Crusade that sacked Constantinople in 1204 gets a bad rap, but it preserved some Eastern Roman artifacts that probably would've been destroyed or just considered garbage by the Ottomans later. Take for example the Four Tetrarchs statue now in the side of the Basilica San Marco, or the Icon of the Archangel Micheal, or the famous Horses of Saint Mark. People will point to how the Ottomans covered or painted over Christian iconography in Haghia Sophia but these were works of art built into the building itself and couldn't be removed with doing expensive damage to a ridiculously impressive place the Sultans wanted for their own house of worship. Things that were portable, forget it. That's a pretty crappy justification. If it wasn't for the Latin princes raping the Empire, it might have not fallen in 1453. I didn't say it was a justification, just an upside. Westerners didn't just go attack Byzantium. There was a civil war going on, and while the Venetian fleet carrying the crusader army was in the harbor, one of the Byzantine factions (the one the Byzantine army didn't support) hired the crusaders to fight for him. He never paid them, so they looted the city. History blamed them almost entirely for a huge mess with plenty of blame to go around.
|
|
|
Post by papamihel on May 25, 2023 13:08:26 GMT
That's a pretty crappy justification. If it wasn't for the Latin princes raping the Empire, it might have not fallen in 1453. I didn't say it was a justification, just an upside. Westerners didn't just go attack Byzantium. There was a civil war going on, and while the Venetian fleet carrying the crusader army was in the harbor, one of the Byzantine factions (the one the Byzantine army didn't support) hired the crusaders to fight for him. He never paid them, so they looted the city. History blamed them almost entirely for a huge mess with plenty of blame to go around. The Latins cut the empire into pieces. By the time most of them were gone, it was too late. In a different world Turkic tribes might never have gotten a chance to spread into Asia Minor and Greece.
|
|
|
Post by ayatollah on May 25, 2023 14:25:20 GMT
I didn't say it was a justification, just an upside. Westerners didn't just go attack Byzantium. There was a civil war going on, and while the Venetian fleet carrying the crusader army was in the harbor, one of the Byzantine factions (the one the Byzantine army didn't support) hired the crusaders to fight for him. He never paid them, so they looted the city. History blamed them almost entirely for a huge mess with plenty of blame to go around. The Latins cut the empire into pieces. By the time most of them were gone, it was too late. In a different world Turkic tribes might never have gotten a chance to spread into Asia Minor and Greece. The Latins? If I'm not mistaken virtually all of the empire became Ottoman.
|
|
|
Post by PaulsLaugh on May 25, 2023 23:45:39 GMT
The Latins cut the empire into pieces. By the time most of them were gone, it was too late. In a different world Turkic tribes might never have gotten a chance to spread into Asia Minor and Greece. The Latins? If I'm not mistaken virtually all of the empire became Ottoman. I think he’s talking about in the West. Constantinople stood between the Arabian Muslims and the West for like 900 hundred years and then the Western princes didn’t support Byzantium as the more powerful Turks invaded, but weaken it with plunder. The immediate wealth was quickly spent and the Muslim East has plagued the Christian West ever since. It did spurn on explorations to find a way around the Ottomans to those spice islands.
|
|
|
Post by ayatollah on May 26, 2023 1:36:14 GMT
The Latins? If I'm not mistaken virtually all of the empire became Ottoman. I think he’s talking about in the West. I know who he is talking about. I didn't think he meant Mexicans. That's exactly what the crusades were, they started as Byzantine pleads for help against invading Muslims. I'm not saying the Fourth Crusade plundering Constantinople was just peachy, I'm simply saying it had the good effect of preserving Byzantine artefacts.
|
|
|
Post by ofunknownorigins on May 26, 2023 3:18:43 GMT
The Fourth Crusade that sacked Constantinople in 1204 gets a bad rap, but it preserved some Eastern Roman artifacts that probably would've been destroyed or just considered garbage by the Ottomans later. Take for example the Four Tetrarchs statue now in the side of the Basilica San Marco, or the Icon of the Archangel Micheal, or the famous Horses of Saint Mark. People will point to how the Ottomans covered or painted over Christian iconography in Haghia Sophia but these were works of art built into the building itself and couldn't be removed with doing expensive damage to a ridiculously impressive place the Sultans wanted for their own house of worship. Things that were portable, forget it. That's a pretty crappy justification. If it wasn't for the Latin princes raping the Empire, it might have not fallen in 1453. To be fair though, some Latins did come to their aid during the final siege by Mehmet II. If the Latins or Romans (as the Byzantines called themselves) had only paid that inventor of a practical cannon he may not have sold it to the Sultan instead. Those cannons the Ottomans had were crucial in defeating the Romans. It’s definitely one of those crucial turning points in Western history when Constantinople fell. It was nearly a 1,000 years old when the Turks finally got in and raped and pillaged for three days (as was common then). What if Constantinople never fell? Personally I think it was inevitable given the Ottomans picking away everything around the city. They were doomed.
|
|
|
Post by papamihel on May 26, 2023 5:17:21 GMT
That's a pretty crappy justification. If it wasn't for the Latin princes raping the Empire, it might have not fallen in 1453. To be fair though, some Latins did come to their aid during the final siege by Mehmet II. If the Latins or Romans (as the Byzantines called themselves) had only paid that inventor of a practical cannon he may not have sold it to the Sultan instead. Those cannons the Ottomans had were crucial in defeating the Romans. It’s definitely one of those crucial turning points in Western history when Constantinople fell. It was nearly a 1,000 years old when the Turks finally got in and raped and pillaged for three days (as was common then). What if Constantinople never fell? Personally I think it was inevitable given the Ottomans picking away everything around the city. They were doomed. But what if the city wasn't sacked by the crusaders? And they didn't cut the empire into little pieces? It might have been strong enough to withstand the Turks.
|
|
|
Post by PaulsLaugh on May 26, 2023 9:08:11 GMT
I think he’s talking about in the West. I know who he is talking about. I didn't think he meant Mexicans. That's exactly what the crusades were, they started as Byzantine pleads for help against invading Muslims. I'm not saying the Fourth Crusade plundering Constantinople was just peachy, I'm simply saying it had the good effect of preserving Byzantine artefacts. Yep, the holy Crusaders turned out to greedy backstabbers.
|
|
|
Post by Power Ranger on May 27, 2023 15:19:04 GMT
Ottomans wage their battles to destroy the evil forces of all the infidels. Which in theory is what the righteous is supposed to do. However, in the Fourth Crusade, it was the righteous, not just battling, but raping and pillaging the righteous more than the infidel. I think us Westerners should admit we have long been a society of pirates and travelers. No more than their contemporaries. You malign the west but that’s easy to do when you are from the ass end of it.
|
|