This article is a contribution to the ‘diversion debate’ concerning the Fourth Crusade (1202-1204), which argues that ultimately the endangered Venetian commercial interests were at the core of the final decision by the crusade leadership to conquer and take over the Byzantine empire.
After the fall of Constantinople to the Latin Crusaders in 1204 hundreds of relics were carried into the West as diplomatic gifts, memorabilia and tokens of victory. Yet many relics were alsosent privately between male crusaders and their spouses and female kin.
Although 1054 is indeed the date most often found on timelines and in textbooks—and therefore the date most often memorized by students of the medieval period—the majority of modern scholars recognize that the East-West Schism was in fact, as Timothy Ware writes, “something that came about gradually, as the result of a long and complicated process.”
Dr. Brian Jeffrey Maxson describes Biondo Flavio’s account of the Fourth Crusade
Since the focus of the conflict between the crusaders and Constantinople changed from obtaining transportation to Jerusalem to a religious war against the people of Constantinople, it is critical to understand the role of relics in pilgrimage and the concept of how relics were understood to be translated from one owner to another, i.e., furtum sacrum.
At first sight, the topic’s title sounds somewhat intriguing. It certainly raises the question: is it possible for the Venetians to regard themselves as an obstacle for such a noble initiative as crusades had been?
If one compares the Russian Anthony text with the original Mercati Anonymus text, the longest and most detailed of the three extant contemporary Western descriptions of the shrines of Constantinople, one finds that the Latin text includes only twenty of the seventy-six religious shrines mentioned by the Russian enumeration.
What was going through the minds ofthese men who were fighting for the cross when they attacked a Christian city, which was one oftheir allies?
This thesis will attempt to unravel how it came to be that men who claimed to fight in the name of the cross had come to attack one of the most important cities in all of Christendom. It shall focus particularly on the motivations and actions of the Venetians, a people whose involvement in this crusade and the crusading movement in general has often been misunderstood.
The real reason for the diversion to Constantinople in 1203 by the Venetians and the crusaders, and for their subsequent attack on the imperial capital in 1204, was a simpler and, in their minds, increasingly pressing concern: the payment of outstanding debts
Jonathan Phillips sees one of the most notorious events in European history as a typical ‘clash of cultures’
This article is in direct contrast to an earlier one by Joseph Gill, in which he utilizes primary sources in an attempt to establish Pope Innocent III’s lack of responsibility in the outcome of the Crusade.
This paper discussed the mutually beneficial relationship between Philip II and women, and their experiences in wielding power during his rule.
Constantinople, 1204, renewal of interest in Imperial and other Byzantine cults in the West, and the deeproots of new traditions’ Jones, Graham Miša Rakocija…
Articles about the Fourth Crusade: The Debate on the Fourth Crusade, by Jonathan Harris The merchant of Genoa : the Crusades, the Genoese…
EMBARGO: THE ORIGINS OF AN IDEA AND THE IMPLICATIONS OF A POLICY IN EUROPE AND THE MEDITERRANEAN, ca. 1100 – ca. 1500 Stantchev,…