This is not a proud event in Byzantine history, perhaps it is the most shameful moment. However, it is an important one. In April of 1182, when entering Constantinople for his coup against the regent Empress Maria of Antioch, wife of the deceased Manuel, and mother of the young Alexios – Andronikos Komnenos sent his Anatolian soldiers ahead of him to incite a fury.
Donald M. Nicol wrote in Byzantium and Venice that “the people needed no encouragement. With an enthusiasm fired by years of resentment they set about the massacre of all the foreigners that they could find. They directed their fury mainly against the merchant quarters along the Golden Horn. Many had sensed what was coming with the arrival of Andronikos Komnenos and made their escape by sea. Of those who remained, the Pisans and Genoese were the main victims. The slaughter was appalling. The Byzantine clergy shamelessly encouraged the mob to seek out Latin monks and priests. The pope’s legate to Constantinople, the Cardinal John, was decapitated and his severed head was dragged through the streets tied to the tail of a dog. At the end some 4000 westerners who had survived the massacre were rounded up and sold as slaves to the Turks. Those who had escaped by ship took their revenge by burning and looting the Byzantine monasteries on the coasts and islands of the Aegean Sea.”
Anthony Kaldellis wrote in The New Roman Empire that it was “likely that resentment had built up at the favoritism that Manuel showed to the ‘barbarians.’ Latins had backed the regime of a foreign empress-regent (Marie of Antioch)…the populace might well have feared, as Andronikos claimed, that the Latins were taking over the Roman state behind the scenes. It was a long standing fear that the crusaders wanted to seize Constantinople. Manuel himself had encouraged such fears in 1147 in order to cast himself as the City’s savior during the passage of the Second Crusade. We should not dismiss these fears as irrational, for many western authors of the 12th century advocated precisely the capture of Constantinople and the subjugation by fore of the ‘faithless Greeks’ to papal obedience.” Thus by 1182 “Latinophobia was pervasive in Roman society, especially in religious and popular circles.”
Andronikos Komnenos harnessed this Latinophobia, the fear of a foreign-backed usurpation through Marie of Antioch, and his Komnenian name in order to make a bid for the throne. He portrayed himself as a restorer of Roman rule and a hero against Latin tyranny.
Chilling scenes, I can’t defend the massacre of the Latins. There was some pent up resentment from the preferential treatment of the Italians, and their domination of the trade economy. Andronikos himself deserves most of the blame. But it was despicable conduct on the part of the Romans. It was the wrong way to solve the issue.
A MUTUAL HATRED:
The underlying cultural difference between the Romans and the Latins was religion. Throughout the 12th century, with Crusaders active in the East, the problems were growing. According to Anthony Kaldellis “religious hostility to the Greeks in Venice and Jerusalem had even created obstacles to Manuel’s diplomacy.” And Manuel was a highly pro-western Emperor. The Latins looked down on the Romans as schismatic and effeminate, the Romans saw the westerners as barbaric, violent, and greedy.
AFTERMATH:
The Romans would pay severe and disproportionate reparations for this event in 1185 and 1204 and suffer a revenge greater than this terrible misdeed…this event fueled the already burning fires of hatred against the medieval Romans. Andronikos was among the worst ever emperors, and his actions did contribute to the Fourth Crusade.
SOURCES:
Byzantium and Venice by Donald M. Nicol
shadowsofconstantinople.com 