Villehardouin's Success In The Battle Of Byzantium
After the election of Baldwin of Flanders as emperor of Constantinople in 1204, the Latins’ control of Byzantium faced constant pressure from Greeks both inside and outside the city. Despite this adversity, they remained in control of Constantinople up until 1261. The struggle to both capture the city and then maintain it is described in Geoffrey of Villehardouin’s Conquest of Constantionple up through the death of Marquis Boniface in 1207. Villehardouin attributes the Latins’ success in conquering Byzantium to the grace and will of God. Furthermore, he claims that the losses they face are a part of God’s plan as well. Despite this, it clear that it was fear of Johanitsa, king of Vlachia, as well as the actions of the Greeks in response to
…show more content…
The first few cities “welcomed them very warmly and swore their loyalty to the emperor” (Villehardouin 72). The Greek historian Niketas Choniatēs also describes the early surrenders in his history, O City of Byzantium. Choniatēs states that the western territories had “all together submitted servilely within a year’s time to the Latin nations” (Choniatēs 335). It is possible that a majority of the Greeks surrendered partially out of fear given the recent battle for Constantinople, which would give credit to the military prowess of the Crusaders. However, Choniatēs also describes a situation where the inhabitants of the Hellas “submitted to the marquis” even though “he led an army of no great numbers” (Choniatēs 334). A possible explanation for this comes from Villehardouin’s description of one city, Salonika, that surrenders on the condition that they “maintain the usages and customs upheld by the Greek emperors” (Villehardouin 76). These Greeks want to maintain the status quo and they think that that is possible under the Latins. Hence, it seems that the Crusader’s ease at conquering the first cities in Byzantium can be attributed to the Greeks desire to avoid conflict. This does shows some amount of respect for the Crusaders military force, yet it also illustrates that from the start, Latin control of Byzantium was partially independent of any specific Crusader
The first few cities “welcomed them very warmly and swore their loyalty to the emperor” (Villehardouin 72). The Greek historian Niketas Choniatēs also describes the early surrenders in his history, O City of Byzantium. Choniatēs states that the western territories had “all together submitted servilely within a year’s time to the Latin nations” (Choniatēs 335). It is possible that a majority of the Greeks surrendered partially out of fear given the recent battle for Constantinople, which would give credit to the military prowess of the Crusaders. However, Choniatēs also describes a situation where the inhabitants of the Hellas “submitted to the marquis” even though “he led an army of no great numbers” (Choniatēs 334). A possible explanation for this comes from Villehardouin’s description of one city, Salonika, that surrenders on the condition that they “maintain the usages and customs upheld by the Greek emperors” (Villehardouin 76). These Greeks want to maintain the status quo and they think that that is possible under the Latins. Hence, it seems that the Crusader’s ease at conquering the first cities in Byzantium can be attributed to the Greeks desire to avoid conflict. This does shows some amount of respect for the Crusaders military force, yet it also illustrates that from the start, Latin control of Byzantium was partially independent of any specific Crusader