Byzantine Crusade

[Skooma Addict]

After reading wikipedia for about ten minutes, I hearby declare myself an expert on medieval history. Since the first crusade was called on by the Byzantine emperor, in a letter to the pope ,to reclaim Christian lands they lost to the Muslims(mainly the Turks)(The Turks REALLY wupped their butts), wouldn't it make sense for Orthodox factions to be able to join the crusades as well? I also read that Byzantine rulers were sending envoys to Song Dynasty China requesting aid against the Seljuks.(The Turks really wupped their butts)

[AnthoniusII]

Orthodox rullers did not trusted the catholic ones since 801ad but even worst after 1054!!!
They could not participate in a crusade UNDER the orders of infirior rullers!

[Gatorgolfer]

Alexius didn't expect heads of states as much as he hoped for large numbers of volunteers to fight under Byzantine guidance. Bohemund taking the cross, not to mention Antioch, made the Byzantines pretty dubious about the future of Western crusades.

[aduellist]

Alexius didn't expect heads of states as much as he hoped for large numbers of volunteers to fight under Byzantine guidance. Bohemund taking the cross, not to mention Antioch, made the Byzantines pretty dubious about the future of Western crusades.

You're thinking of the wrong Alexius, I think. Alexius Angelus, son of deposed/blinded/exiled Emperor Isaac Angelus and nephew of "usurper" Alexius III, specifically requested that the army of the Fourth Crusade place his father back in the throne (with him as co-ruler). In return, he would give them supplies, reinforcements, and a substantial cash payment. They took the city once and fulfilled their side of the bargain. When Alexius delayed and eventually skipped town without fulfilling his side of the bargain (because he realistically couldn't with the state of the Empire at that time), they took it a second time. The second time is what we refer to as the Sack of Constantinople.

Apologies to all, really didn't intend to divert this thread into an historical discussion of the Fourth Crusade.

[Gatorgolfer]

I understood which Alexius/os Kommenos I was referring to. I didn't consider Angelus to be emperor, but I won't argue if you do. I'm fairly well read about Byzantine history for an Anglophone.

[Ali G]

Byzantium would've fallen anyway. sack of fourth Crusade did'n do much damage. the Byzantines did it to themselves.

[aduellist]

I understood which Alexius/os Kommenos I was referring to. I didn't consider Angelus to be emperor, but I won't argue if you do. I'm fairly well read about Byzantine history for an Anglophone.

Sorry, didn't mean to imply otherwise. I have a hard time keeping them straight myself. And I certainly don't claim to be an expert, so more in depth info is always appreciated. I only pretty much know the bits that relate to the various crusades.

Byzantium would've fallen anyway. sack of fourth Crusade did'n do much damage. the Byzantines did it to themselves.

Well, I'd say it certainly sped up the process. At the time of the final fall of Constantinople in 1453 most histories I've read agree that the city was still underpopulated.

[Gatorgolfer]

No difficulty, I didn't read the entire thread. The Venetians, with some of the other members of the 4th Crusade/Latin Empire, certainly accelerated the process of Byzantine atrophy, but the decline had certainly began long before. The first Kommeni revived things somewhat, but after Manuel it slipped away pretty quickly. Really, the high tide (post Arab invasions) had to have been Basil Bulgaroktonos, John Tzimisces, and Nicephorus Phocas.

[Chappy4756]

I think that's a pretty cool idea, tho there may be a couple snags. What happens if the Crusade is declared on Constantinople..while you own it...it may be a bit of a screwy dynamic just because there's no association between Byz and the Pope like the Catholic factions..he can't excommunicate you.

[matc4]

Correct me if i'm wrong here as i'm not history expert having not read wikipedia for 10 minutes myself, but surely the idea of the crusades was to get the kings in europe to stop killing each oher and start killing the turks. If so then the Byzantines wouldn't need to crusade as they were already fighting the turks? Sorry if what i have just described is nothing like what actually happened im just sort of guessing.

EDIT: i took so long writing my post, while doing other things, that the two above me appeared and have sort of made mine redundant

[Skooma Addict]

Correct me if i'm wrong here as i'm not history expert having not read wikipedia for 10 minutes myself, but surely the idea of the crusades was to get the kings in europe to stop killing each oher and start killing the turks. If so then the Byzantines wouldn't need to crusade as they were already fighting the turks? Sorry if what i have just described is nothing like what actually happened im just sort of guessing.

EDIT: i took so long writing my post, while doing other things, that the two above me appeared and have sort of made mine redundant

Yes, but they could merge their units with the crusading army to reclaim the holy lands and hire mercs to fight the Turks in Asia Minor. And why stop at Western Catholics? Why not unite the northern orthodox rulers to help fend off the Turks while simultaneously launching a campaign in Jerusalem? Hypothetically of coarse.

[The Noble Lord]

Orthodox rullers did not trusted the catholic ones since 801ad but even worst after 1054!!!

True. It was impossible to do anything together after 1054.
When Emperor Alexius asked Pope for help he didn't have in mind a full-blown Crusade. What he thought was few hundred mercenaries and thats it.
Pope Urban the II thought otherwise. For him this was the perfect opportunity to unite two Christian Churches, to take back Jerusalem, reassert his supremacy in Europe and beyond. When Emperor Alexius saw the hordes of western Europeans marching through his empire towards Constantinople he was horrified.


CHEERS

[Militia Cavalry]

True. It was impossible to do anything together after 1054.
When Emperor Alexius asked Pope for help he didn't have in mind a full-blown Crusade. What he thought was few hundred mercenaries and thats it.
Pope Urban the II thought otherwise. For him this was the perfect opportunity to unite two Christian Churches, to take back Jerusalem, reassert his supremacy in Europe and beyond. When Emperor Alexius saw the hordes of western Europeans marching through his empire towards Constantinople he was horrified.


CHEERS

Yes, I saw that documentry, too
It is a main reason why I tend not to play Orthodox factions, though- no crusades or interesting religious consiquences. Not even a crusade can be declared on you.

[AnthoniusII]

Byzantines always faught a crusade!!
The faught under the cross and the Crist's insignia all the time!

[themoob]

Also, it wasn't exactly "holy war" for the Byzantines.

They more followed along because they had a chance to reclaim a lot of lost land from the Seljuks, seeing as they had the cannon fodder that was the Crusader army. This worked sometimes (Nicaea), but not at others (Antioch).

[moosey]

Yeah, the byzantine idea before the crusades was to get a bit of help, a few mercs etc... as they had been having torn apart by the turks which had managed to defeat the greek army at mazinkert. It was pope Urban II who took the oppertunity to get all the warring catholic lords of europe to unite against non christians. Emperor alexius never really joined the crusade, just provided transport to the crusaders with the understanding that all lands that the greeks had lost and recovered by the crusaders would be returned to them.

Things turned sour after antioch where the greek troops going along with the crusaders just stopped and left the crusaders to their own devices which was seen as almost a betrayal and actually worsened the orthodox/catholic relations thereafter.

[LionQ]

After reading wikipedia for about ten minutes, I hearby declare myself an expert on medieval history. ...

"Despite the importance the Byzantine Empire attached to its position as the defender of true, orthodox Christianity against Muslim and Catholic alike, it is worth noting that the Empire never developed or understood the concept of a "holy war". Its neighbours' concepts of Jihad and Crusade seemed to it gross perversions of scripture or simple excuses for looting and destruction." ~ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Byzanti...ary_philosophy

Looks like you missed out on a page.

[Sonny WiFiHr]

They were actualy minion of Byzantine empire but only on paper. But Byzantine did provide some siege engines in siege of Acre (?). Every crusader had to sworn loyalty to Bizantyne Emperor (only in first real military crusade (4 army ), real first crusade was lead by some donky monkey (priest) and it was disaster).
What about 4th crusade ? Should Byzantine emperor call crusade on his capital?

[Coffeejunkie]

What about 4th crusade ? Should Byzantine emperor call crusade on his capital?

If i remember right, the crusade wasn't initially aimed at Constantinople. But either way that's a good point.
For the game, I think it would be a good idea if it depended on the relationship between the orthodox faction and catholic factions/the pope if it can ask for, join or be target of a crusade.

[The Noble Lord]

You are right , the fourth Crusade was not meant to go to Constantinople, but it was diverted there by the cunning Venetians and their Doge Enrico Dandolo.
Once the Crusaders stormed the city, it was the beginning of the end for the Byzantium. The so-called Latin Kingdom of Constantinople was a monstrosity that lasted for 54 years, much longer than it should have lasted.


CHEERS