University of Wisconsin Digital Collections
Link to University of Wisconsin Digital Collections
Link to University of Wisconsin Digital Collections
The History Collection

Page View

Hazard, H. W. (ed.) / Volume III: The fourteenth and fifteenth centuries

II: Byzantium and the Crusades, 1261-1354,   pp. [unnumbered]-68 PDF (9.6 MB)

Page 40

mutual distrust of Latins and Greeks, the probable unwillingness of Latin
leaders to relinquish territories taken by their arms, the con stant temptation
for the crusaders to seize Constantinople for them selves, and finally the
ill-will, if not overt hostility, of the Byzantine population to the entire
expedition—all these factors would have seriously hampered the success
of any such joint action, and perhaps even resulted in war between Greeks
and Latins. 
 Under the new pope, Innocent V, the plan for a land expedition through Anatolia
was abandoned. Apparently Michael VIII had con fidence only in Gregory, or
the new pope may have distrusted the Greeks. Moreover, the western leaders
may have believed that a sea route was more practicable.32 Nevertheless,
negotiations for some kind of joint expedition were continued by Michael
and Innocent. Now, however, Michael raised many questions as to the participation
and attitude of western rulers. He also sought to clarify the question of
the future of Egypt, since Michael himself was then in alliance with the
Mamluk sultan Baybars. To these complex political factors was added the question
of how the union of Lyons was to be implemented in the Byzantine areas. This
was a particularly touchy matter since Charles of Anjou was continuously
pressing the pope to unleash him against Michael on the grounds that the
emperor was reneging on or lax in fulfilling his promises to implement the
 Several popes succeeded Innocent, and with all of them Michael exchanged
numerous embassies. In 1277, however, he encountered a really intransigent
pontiff, Nicholas III. While expressly forbidding Charles to attack Constantinople,
Nicholas demanded that Michael, in accordance with papal stipulations, impose
on his empire complete uniformity of (Latin) dogma and liturgical custom.
To this end the pope sought to dispatch a cardinal-legate to Constantinople
and even to demand from each Greek ecclesiastic a personal oath of submis
sion to Rome.34 Meanwhile Charles, impatient at all the years of 
 32. Actually the land route was no longer practicable for the west, especially
as Adalia, on the southern Anatolian coast, had been in Turkish hands since
1207. Thus after 1204 Cyprus was considered even more precious than Constantinople.
But when Michael VIII reigned, Constantinople was again considered necessary
for a crusade to Jerusalem. See V. Laurent, "La Croisade et la question,"
p. 133, and his "Grégoire X," pp. 265—267; also the 13th-century
theoretician Fidenzio of Padua, Liber de recuperatione Terrae Sanctae, in
G. Golubovich, ed., Biblioteca bio-bibliografica della Terra Santa e deli'
Oriente francescano, II (Quaracchi, 1913), 51. M. H. Laurent, Le B. Innocent
V, p. 273, does not think Gregory was well informed as to the risks involved
on the land route. 
 33. M. H. Laurent, Le B. Innocent V, pp. 256—286. Pachymeres, V, 26
(CSHB, I, 410) describes Charles as pressing the pope against Michael. 
 34. E. Van Moe, "L'Envoi de nonces a Constantinople par les papes Innocent
V et Jean 

Go up to Top of Page