How do you defend The Fourth Crusade?

How do you defend The Fourth Crusade?

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massacre_of_the_Latins
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

I don't.

You don't, you attack.

Nothing to defend.

Easy.

Byzantium had an illegal regal overthrow and the Venetians were still loyal to the old king and took over Constantinople to give it back to the old king

>Hurr crusaders helped Byzantines fall
Nope. Mass corruption caused it to die. The crusaders kept their loyalties to the king that hired them. Simple as that.

t. John Shitholismus Angband du Crecy

With weapons.

Great Album, great song.

> chvrches
> not purity ring

Son. I am disappoint.

By showing the present.

We don't "defend" it, because it wasn't the plan.
The Pope said specifically NOT to attack any Christian states, and it was more or less Venice's money-grubbing merchants and the backstabbing elite of Constantinople that diverted this mass of soldiers far from home into doing bad, fratricidal things.
It doesn't invalidate the concept of a Crusade, if anything it reinforces it, due to the contrast between the unChristian motives of those involved and the Christian ideal that, if followed, might have changed history for the better.

>murder of the latins
>no longer sanctioned by the pope once they moved onto attacking Christians
>were literally following orders of Byzantine exile
It began as a crusade but the moment the pope revoked his support it no longer was

faggot

Go listen to your screamo bullshit.

The people with taste will be looking for trendsetting bands.

I want CTR to go

Are you a moron? Venice's motive was definitely to sack Constantinople and profit. Alexios wasn't even installed as emperor during the invasion so that 'motive' doesn't seem nearly as important as taking every valuable from the Greeks and going home

Massacre of the latins

Massacre of the Latins 1182
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massacre_of_the_Latins

Also the Catalan Company did nothing wrong

>The Roman Catholics of Constantinople at that time dominated the city's maritime trade and financial sector.
>Maria of Antioch, acted as regent to her infant son Alexios II Komnenos. Her regency was notorious for the favoritism shown to Latin merchants and the big aristocratic land-owners,
I'm sure they had their reasons

>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.

really makes you think

What the fuck is that fag shit?