The Crusaders of the Fourth Crusade I do not think even made it to the Holy Land. They were too concerned with setting up their new state. The Fourth Crusade never left Europe. But I think that their was a small group that broke off from the very begining; don’t take me up on that though.He may well have done so. I’m not aware of any record that the excommunication was ever revoked. But the Crusaders had quickly moved on to the Holy Land as the Pope ordered, or else gone home. The Venetian soldiers and administrators who set up the Venetian state at Constantinople were not Crusaders.
No, you are wrong here. The Latin Empire installed at Constantinople was not Venetian but was a Crusader state like the ones established in the Holy Land. The Venetians got a lot of Byzantine territory, but Constantinople itself was ruled by Baldwin of Flanders. Check wikipedia for starters and any reliable historian of the subject for more detailed info.He may well have done so. I’m not aware of any record that the excommunication was ever revoked. But the Crusaders had quickly moved on to the Holy Land as the Pope ordered, or else gone home. The Venetian soldiers and administrators who set up the Venetian state at Constantinople were not Crusaders.
It’s true that a portion of the Eastern Roman Empire’s territory was later carved off and ruled directly by Venice, but the 4th “Crusaders” and Venetians went to Constantinople to support the claim to its throne by Alexius, son of the deposed emperor Isaac Angelus. After the newly reinstated Alexius was assassinated, a a council composed of Venetians and “crusaders” (who were there in direct disobedience to the Pope’s orders) elected a “Latin” emperor. It is wrong to characterise the “Latin empire of Constantinople” as a “Crusader State”. It was **not **formed to defend the Holy Land, or even Christendom as a whole, from the Moslems.No, you are wrong here. The Latin Empire installed at Constantinople was not Venetian but was a Crusader state like the ones established in the Holy Land. The Venetians got a lot of Byzantine territory, but Constantinople itself was ruled by Baldwin of Flanders. Check wikipedia for starters and any reliable historian of the subject for more detailed info.
Edwin
If you want to be picky. However it was founded by [renegade] Crusaders. Furthermore, since they saw themselves as spreading the True Church and rescuing the Eastern Empire from schism, and since (as I have said) the Pope recognized this by acknowledging the Latin Patriarch and by not putting the Latin Empire under interdict, I think “Crusader State” is fair. Crusades don’t have to be directed against Islam. However, what matters is that it was a “Frankish” state formed in the Eastern Mediterranean with a Latin Patriarch recognized by the Pope–I won’t fight for the word “Crusader,” because that’s irrelevant to the real issue.It’s true that a portion of the Eastern Roman Empire’s territory was later carved off and ruled directly by Venice, but the 4th “Crusaders” and Venetians went to Constantinople to support the claim to its throne by Alexius, son of the deposed emperor Isaac Angelus. After the newly reinstated Alexius was assassinated, a a council composed of Venetians and “crusaders” (who were there in direct disobedience to the Pope’s orders) elected a “Latin” emperor. It is wrong to characterise the “Latin empire of Constantinople” as a “Crusader State”. It was **not **formed to defend the Holy Land, or even Christendom as a whole, from the Moslems.
In my personal opinion, denying the injustice of the Fourth Crusade may exacerbate the grievance felt by the Orthodox.The Orthodox have a very real grievance here, and it will accomplish nothing to try to deny it.
I have it all in my basement.From your previous post:
What happened to the gold and riches stolen by the Catholic Crusaders from the Eastern Orthodox Churches?
Ridiculous.I have it all in my basement.
Don’t tell anyone else.
Unless Simple Sinner is a spokesman for the Vatican, allowing a little levity may not be such a bad thing.Ridiculous.
Much of the treasure was later found in Catholic Churches, such as for example, St. Mark’s of Venice. In my personal opinion, trivialising the injustice of the Fourth Crusade may exacerbate the grievances felt by the Orthodox.
It depends on whether you are looking at this from the Catholic point of view or from the Orthodox point of view. Some Catholics may think it is a joke, but I doubt that the Orthodox would.Unless Simple Sinner is a spokesman for the Vatican, allowing a little levity may not be such a bad thing.
I’m sure we’re trying to be sensitive to your feelings, but to pick on this one incident out of so many similar ones in history is a bit pointless. We Catholics aren’t bugging the Anglicans or the English government to give back the countless cathedrals, monasteries and churches and all their furnishings and works of art, which they stole from us in the 16th century. I think we’re big enough to get over it.It depends on whether you are looking at this from the Catholic point of view or from the Orthodox point of view. Some Catholics may think it is a joke, but I doubt that the Orthodox would.
I think from Simple Sinners previous posts, he doesn’t think it’s a joke. Christians will never reconcile until we take that chip off of our shoulder. People that holdout for the return of some items 8 centuries ago have probably got bigger problems with the Church than that, IMO. Not to minimize that calamity, but a little forgiveness can go a long way among Christians.It depends on whether you are looking at this from the Catholic point of view or from the Orthodox point of view. Some Catholics may think it is a joke, but I doubt that the Orthodox would.
Much gratitude, NotWorthy. I appreciate it.Unless Simple Sinner is a spokesman for the Vatican, allowing a little levity may not be such a bad thing.
Cleveland? That terrific link in the chain of the “Pierogi Belt”! Certainly Ohio is where the East coast’s New American Industrial/Immigrant cultures begins to melt and mingle with the rural midwest and the South. Whereas Cleveland is the capital of the Rustbelt, Toledo is Detroit’s automotive little sister, Dayton is the urban focal point of the rural valley, Cincinatti is the northernmost city of the South, and Athens & Marietta are the Jewels of Appalachia…Hey, Simple Sinner? What part of Ohio? (I know, out of all that post, “you want to know what part of Ohio I’m in”?!?).
Well, you see, I’m in exile this week in Cleveland attending a training course.
Much of the booty is in Catholic Churches today. For example, the Church of St. Mark’s in Venice is adorned inside and out with Byzantine spoils. Visible in the exterior, west facade, you will see columns, capitals, and sculptures taken from Constantinople in the Fourth Crusade, including the four gilded horses above the main portal. Inside you will see things such as a white alabaster, gold, silver and enamel, 6-lobed pate which holds an enameled bust of Christ with a metal rim adorned with cabochon jewels - located now in the Treausry of St. Mark’s Church but was part of the booty taken from the Orthodox during the Fourth Crusade. Obviously, these stolen items should be returned to the Greek Orthodox Church.One is left to wonder, if it is discovered there is a big old horde of ill-gotten gain underneath the Vatican in some secretive catacomb that we as Catholics (even us mostly American working class laity on this forum) know about and reveal in, where exactly should we return it to, if we even had it?.
Right. You aren’t bugging the Anglicans. That’s nice. Well, in my personal opinion, it is not right to joke about the Fourth Crusade.I’m sure we’re trying to be sensitive to your feelings, but to pick on this one incident out of so many similar ones in history is a bit pointless. We Catholics aren’t bugging the Anglicans or the English government to give back the countless cathedrals, monasteries and churches and all their furnishings and works of art, which they stole from us in the 16th century. I think we’re big enough to get over it.
No-one is joking about the 4th Crusade. A Simple Sinner made one joke about the endless urgings by some posters here to “return” the looted items. Not about the fact that the 4th crusaders/Venetians looted.Right. You aren’t bugging the Anglicans. That’s nice. Well, in my personal opinion, it is not right to joke about the Fourth Crusade.
The two are interrelated. When items are stolen from another Church, simple justice demands that they be returned. I don’t get the joke here.A Simple Sinner made one joke about the endless urgings by some posters here to “return” the looted items. Not about the fact that the 4th crusaders/Venetians looted.
PeterGee speaks for himself! No kind thoughts or civil discourse until we get back Tintern Abbey! Mean old Anglicans!Right. You aren’t bugging the Anglicans. That’s nice. Well, in my personal opinion, it is not right to joke about the Fourth Crusade.
And every last square inch of property in Eastern Europe stolen from the Catholic Church in my grandmother’s lifetime by athiestic regimes that the Orthodox now enjoy free use of should be returned to the faithful Catholics of those areas. NOW.Much of the booty is in Catholic Churches today. For example, the Church of St. Mark’s in Venice is adorned inside and out with Byzantine spoils. Visible in the exterior, west facade, you will see columns, capitals, and sculptures taken from Constantinople in the Fourth Crusade, including the four gilded horses above the main portal. Inside you will see things such as a white alabaster, gold, silver and enamel, 6-lobed pate which holds an enameled bust of Christ with a metal rim adorned with cabochon jewels - located now in the Treausry of St. Mark’s Church but was part of the booty taken from the Orthodox during the Fourth Crusade. Obviously, these stolen items should be returned to the Greek Orthodox Church.