![PriseDeConstantinople1204PalmaLeJeune[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/5LOxaBh.jpg "PriseDeConstantinople1204PalmaLeJeune[1].jpg")
Why do people condemn the 4th crusade all the time, but no one mentions the massacre of the latins?
Not saying the 4th crusade was a good thing, but it seems like they provoked some kind of retaliation
People do like the Roman empire, it's much funnier to adore an enlightened empire that fell victim to the barbary and bad manners of it's neighbor instead of just one powerful player among many others that could be just as brutal as it's enemies.
>>844953
Well people like to romanticize the Byzantine Empire
>>844953
Probably because the ruin of a city like Constantinople is seen as a bigger crime than killing a bunch of merchants.
>>844975
They didn't just kill a bunch of merchants
>>844978
Doesn't matter in this case. Thousands of people, to many interested in history, are easy to come by. The wonders and icons of Constantinople are not. We look at human life as a very cheap and very numerous resource, especially if that life is already dead, but mourn the destruction of priceless monuments and works of art. Just my two cents on the matter.
Another question, are Byzanboos among the peoples easier to troll?
>>845051
I can't think of a more butthurt Empire. Just reading the history of it made me cringe.
>>845080
Dude, half of the Byzaboos are probably Turks that just wanna hate on the Catholics.
because the latin massacre happend under an entirely different dynasty to the one present at the time of the fourth crusade and isn't a justification for war
prince Alexios' claim was the reason the crusade was diverted to Constantinople
>>844953
Today I will remind them.
>The predominance of the Italian merchants caused economic and social upheaval in Byzantium: it accelerated the decline of the independent native merchants in favour of big exporters, who became tied to the landed aristocracy, who in turn increasingly amassed large estates.[1] Together with the perceived arrogance of the Italians, it fueled popular resentment amongst the middle and lower classes both in the countryside and in the cities.[1]
>The religious differences between the two sides, who viewed each other as schismatics, further exacerbated the problem. The Italians proved uncontrollable by imperial authority: in 1162, for instance, the Pisans together with a few Venetians raided the Genoese quarter in Constantinople, causing much damage.[1] Emperor Manuel subsequently expelled most of the Genoese and Pisans from the city, thus giving the Venetians a free hand for several years.[7]
>>845244
>In early 1171, however, when the Venetians attacked and largely destroyed the Genoese quarter in Constantinople, the Emperor retaliated by ordering the mass arrest of all Venetians throughout the Empire and the confiscation of their property.[1] A subsequent Venetian expedition in the Aegean failed: a direct assault was impossible due to the strength of the Byzantine forces, and the Venetians agreed to negotiations, which the Emperor stalled intentionally. As talks dragged on through the winter, the Venetian fleet waited at Chios, until an outbreak of the plague forced them to withdraw.[8]
>The Venetians and the Empire remained at war, with the Venetians prudently avoiding direct confrontation but sponsoring Serb uprisings, besieging Ancona, Byzantium's last stronghold in Italy, and signing a treaty with the Norman Kingdom of Sicily.[9] Relations were only gradually normalized: there is evidence of a treaty in 1179,[10] although a full restoration of relations would only be reached in the mid-1180s.[11] Meanwhile, the Genoese and Pisans profited from the dispute with Venice, and by 1180, it is estimated that up to 60,000 Latins lived in Constantinople.[1]
tl; dr LATINS WERE GOOD BOYS THEY DIDNU NUFFIN
>>845244
>>845253
>Let's blame the victims
>>845261
>start shit, get hit
>OY VEY REMEMBER THE 60 GORRILION LATINS
When people hear the word "merchant" they think harmless little men peddling wares, not extremely rich and influential men that can and have caused political and economical chaos in cities not owned by their own government.
U KILL MURCHAND, Y U BARBARIK
>>845292
You realise they butchered the latins right? Not just latin merchants, latins
>>845289
So what exactly was the civilians of the city doing against the Byzantines, apart from raiding each other?
>>845307
If you were about to butcher hundreds if not thousands of a specific type of person, you wouldn't allow the opportunity for retaliation by leaving friends/family/countrymen alive
It didn't stop tradition from happening, of course, but that's all hindsight
>>845333
Not tradition, *retaliation.
>>845333
Would you, with the same logic, say that the fourth crusade wasn't an atrocity?
The Crusaders had been asked to come over to Constantinople, they had been promised money and then isolated and starving they were refused that money as the Byzantines killed the man that promised them it.
Sure, the citizens of Constantinople had little to do with the power-play at the Byzantine court, but you can't just let a country leave without paying you when you are in a dire situation.
>>844969
>enlightened
>victim to barbary and bad manners of it is neighbor
You mean fell victim to its own shitty infighting religion and perfidious government, military, and bureaucracy?
>>845051
>>845060
>>845080
THE PROPHECY HAS BEEN FULFILLED
>>845244
>>845253
>a few lead Italian merchants and their hired Greek street scum have a scuffle with others
>oy vey it's anuddah shoah, arrest AND MURDER all Italians
>"the Greeks dindu nuffin"
Not to mention that Italian merchants edging out Greek competitors is just the free market at work. In any case they wouldn't have been able to get the edge if it wasn't for members of the Greek government and bureaucracy selling out their own people (shit government, shit bureaucracy, shit populace).
They shoulda just payed denbts tbhonest
>>845358
>You mean fell victim to its own shitty infighting religion and perfidious government, military, and bureaucracy?
Well, what I did mean is that it is not what people like to think.
They prefer the story of a glorious empire, not what you just said.
>>845349
I want arguing that the cruise was or wasn't an atrocity, just that the killing of the Latins want some sort of Stalinist/Hitler cultural cleansing. The Latins had become a social, economic and political threat and they were treated as such in an appropriate way for that era. A massacre, yes, an atrocity? Hardly
Latin barbarians had been attacking the empire for centuries. Remember, these were descended from the gothic tribes that had destroyed western rome. Killing them was an act of mercy.
Besides, those Eye Talians were up to some shady shit, their enclaves were proto cosa nostra shenanigans. Criminality is in their blood.
>>845371
Oh I see. By "a powerful player that could be just as brutal as its enemies" I thought you meant the Roman Empire (RIP 33 BC to AD 650). The Byzantine Empire, while powerful, had a very hard time expanding even with all the resources at its disposal. The only real long term reconquests that it made were Bulgaria, Crete, and Syria, tiny compared to its own size.
>>845389
Filed with typos because I'm on mobile but you get the gist
>>845387
Does it hurt that the Byzantines was so terrible at ruling over Italy that they preferred to be ruled by Nomads over some Greek empire?
>>845398
Normans*
Also, let's not forget the entire Levant, that preferred some Muhammedan Arabs.
>>845386
I can't think of any massacre of foreign CIVILIANS with legitimate business and rights just that bad except for Mithridates's murder of Romans, Latins, and Italians, and also the Galatian cheifs. Greeks confirmed for perfidious as fuck. How can you not call that an atrocity? Civilians.
>>845398
Kek, agreed.
>>845358
>>a few lead Italian merchants and their hired Greek street scum have a scuffle with others
Nowhere is it mentioned that local Greeks aided the Italians other than you saying it.
>>a few lead Italian merchants
They literally caused two nations to go at war with each other. Hardly insignificant.
>b-but the people...
Reminder that the Italian parts of Constantinople were still on Roman property regardless if the authorities didn't have any rule on them. Also, the Emperor tried giving chances to the Latins but they blew it over, essentially ruining their reputation in the Byzantine Empire.
>They shoulda just payed denbts tbhonest
what debts
>>845398
The Normans conquered England and their descendants almost won France in the Hundred Years War, yet they failed on numerous occasions to conquer the Empire, being relegated to their containment zone in backwater Naples, and formerly Arab Sicily.
And I've never read any source that claims the Normans were particularly likeable as rulers, by all accounts they were ruthless and despotic. To say that that Robert Guiscard won through popular acclaim is like saying Lutheranism was instituted democratically. I understand you meant this as bait, but please be serious.
>>845475
The Normans came in after a long lasting war of independence in the Byzantine parts of Italy, starting as mercenaries that kinda fought for both sides.
At the end of it all they decided to take power for themselves, "liberating" large parts of southern Italy form the Byzantines.
If they weren't at least preferable over the Byzantines, shouldn't they have lacked the popular support needed to fight such a large empire?
ANd I didn't say they were popular, just preferred.
>Backwater
Which is why the Byzantines once ruined their empire to conquer it and the rest of Italy for like 45 minutes (Ruining it in the process as well)
>>844953
Because they are edgy Byzantineboos
>>845428
I concede on your first point, expecting a Greek to get any kind of job, even as a hired ruffian, is a bit out there.
Which two nations, what war?
So by that logic some Greek spies caught in Sicily or the Levant gives the Normans or Arabs the right to massacre all Greeks there? Very outlandish, how can you think this way?
The debts they owed the Crusaders of 1204. If they had done that, no sack would have occurred.
>>845475
What part of
>at ruling over Italy
did you not understand? In any case, Robert Guiscard almost took over the Empire, kicked Byzantine ass in 1084 and was master of all Thessaly. He had to stop because he died.
If the Normans weren't preferable, how did they become undisputed (I mean undisputed seriously, of course the Byzantines whined about it) masters of cities where almost everybody was Greek? Magic?
>>844953
Who fights the evil that is popery?
crusades
not again, i thought I banned these nightmares
The people preferred in the Levant and Egypt preferred the muslims to Byzantine.
>>845546
>Which two nations, what war?
As mentioned above, ERE and Venice.
Massacring over spy work is a bit of a stretch because that's assuming that a foreign power comes to play. Also, the point is that the Latins attacked each other over political and trade differences. But what if at some point they begin attacking local Greek property? This could increase paranoia among the population.
>The debts they owed the Crusaders of 1204.
You mean those that were promised by an usurper whom nobody liked and was quickly deposed from the throne?
>>845523
>Which is why the Byzantines once ruined their empire to conquer it and the rest of Italy for like 45 minutes (Ruining it in the process as well)
They did that for Rome itself, not Southern Italy. Southern Italy just coincidentally happens to be attached to the rest of Italy. The more you know.
>>845546
>how did they become undisputed
If by undisputed you mean constantly fighting with everyone, then yeah, undisputed.
>>845660
>constantly fighting
The Normans and their descendants and then legitimate heirs (Capetian Angevins) held southern Italy and Sicily without any serious opposition or dangerous threat for over 200 years.
>>845607
Why would they attack the Greeks? That's their customer base.
And that's too bad, it's what the usurper promised them. Look at it from the Crusaders' perspective, they sacrificed their lives for that emperor, they had to recoup something.
Massacres over spying is more logical than massacres over trading disputes.
