We ignore history at our peril – today, so many are arguing through false histories or no history whatever.
There are three main sources for this essay.
1. Difference and Identity in Francia and Medieval France edited by Meredith Cohen, p109
An alien people, in the form of warriors, are accommodated by the leaders and therefore, the obedient people – where have we seen this subsequently?
In 2020, in every western land, sold out by those above, quislings, traitors at the gate.
Because there are two cultures and religions quite alien to one another and which shall get its way more readily over time? The more aggressive and savage, yes?
Which is not to say the passive native culture is entirely subordinated and suppressed, it exists underground and eventually comes back – we can look at the English under Norman rule, the merging of Israel and Assyria/Babylon and many other examples.
The passive culture is adopted by warlike rulers/warriors and assumes a pagan form, from sun worship to other mystery religion trappings, all of which can be seen in Catholicism and the Masonic abomination above the blue orders.
This explains so much about who rules and through which vehicle but before that:
2. My notes from 2003 on the Merovingians and the Templars
This was well before my blogging days, sources were cursory in many cases, I was lucky enough to just grab the text at the time – it’s presented as is.
The first kings of France were the Merovingians (c. 500 – 751 AD), a Frankish dynasty started by the chieftain Meroveg, said to be descended from the union of a sea creature and a French queen and following the pagan cult of Diana.
The Merovingians planned to rule the world from their future throne at Jerusalem, claiming to come from the tribe of Judah through Jesus Christ and Mary Magdalene. However, the weight of evidence indicates that they were really descended from the tribe of Dan.
The Pont de l’Alma site in Paris is ancient and dates back to the Merovingian kings and before. In pre-Christian times, the Pont de l’Alma was an underground chamber and was used as a pagan sacrificial site. In Middle English, “soul” has, as its etymology, “descended from the sea.”
“Pont” has as a Latin root “pontifex”, meaning a Roman high priest. “Alma” also is Spanish for “Soul or spirit”. One translation of Pont del’ Alma would be “Bridge of the Soul.” It was believed that those who died at the sacrificial site became saintly and went directly to heaven.
[The section on Diana’s death I leave out here.]
Merovaeus was King of the Salian Franks. It is believed by some historians that this dynasty was descended from Jesus and Mary Magdalene, and that the blood-line has continued down through the centuries to the present day.
Organisations which seem to been involved in its continuation and protection of this bloodline include the Knights Templar and the secret society of the Priory of Sion, whose Grand Masters are said to include Leonardo da Vinci, Isaac Newton, Victor Hugo and Claude Debussy.
During the Crusades, the Crusaders did battle with the Moslems and this resulted in the capture of Jerusalem around 1099. This Holy City now belonged to the Crusaders and all Christendom rejoiced.
The highways and byways leading to Jerusalem, though, were unprotected. The ferocity of the Moslems seemed to increase with the fall of the city, and mutilated bodies and bleached bones of pilgrims soon became a common site along the roadways.
To add to the vulnerability of the pilgrims, thousands of the Crusaders, their primary objective accomplished, returned to their own lands, leaving the countryside to the Moslems uncontested.
This was the circumstance that set the stage for the Knights Templar. They were formed as a result of a small band of Crusaders remaining after the conquest, who recognized the plight of the pilgrims and bound themselves in a Holy Brotherhood in Arms, entering into a solemn agreement to aid one another in clearing the highways, and in protecting the pilgrims through the pathways and cuttings of the mountains to the Holy City.
In short, these knights were laymen who protected and defended Christians travelling to Jerusalem. They took vows of poverty, chastity and obedience, and were renowned for their fierceness and courage in battle.
The Templars, were pious men. They gave up all their worldly possessions when they entered the Order, only carrying money on special occasions when they traveled alone, turning over whatever money that remained upon reaching their destination. They were ferocious warriors; pitching themselves into the midst of their enemies, astride charging warhorses, against incredible odds.
“in turn lions of war and lambs at the hearth; rough knights on the battlefield, pious monks in the chapel; formidable to the enemies of Christ, gentleness itself towards His friends.” -Jacques de Vitry
Templars were not to succumb to the temptation of thinking that they killed in a spirit of hate and fury, nor that they seized booty in a spirit of greed. For the Templars did not hate men, but men’s wrongdoing.
They were dedicated to the protection of travellers and pilgrims of all religions, though they themselves were Christians, in fact many Templars were of Palestinian birth, spoke perfect Arabic, and were familiar with every religious sect, cult, and magical doctrine, including that of the Islamic Assassins. The Grand Master Philip of Nablus (1167 A.D.) was a Syrian.
In 1118 A.D., nineteen years after the first successful Crusade, these Poor Fellow Soldiers of Jesus Christ, as they had termed themselves, were officially recognized and sanctioned and were given for their headquarters a building on Mount Moriah, the site of the former Temple of King Solomon. Consequently, they became known as the Knights of the Temple, or Knights Templar.
The Knights Templar had their vicissitudes through the centuries, with more downs than ups on the battlefield. They had been the ‘poor’ fellow soldiers.
Now, In honour of their elite status among the nobles of Europe, Pope Innocent II issued a Papal Bull in 1139 granting the Templars diplomatic immunity throughout Europe, a practice still enjoyed by the members of today’s diplomatic elite who very often have brotherhood affiliations themselves.
According to this edict, the Templars would submit to no power in church or state but the Pope himself, though evidence would suggest that the Templars exercised control over the Pope and continue to do so through an organization known as P2 (Propaganda 2) Freemasonry.
The Templars were now a law unto themselves, an anonymous transnational empire, superceding the power of sovereign states. They now had diplomatic immunity, were exempt from taxation, and were bound by none of the customs or laws of any nation state. Their landholdings were exceeded only by the Church.
This wealth gave them control over Europe’s emerging capitalist system. They were, in effect, the world’s first international financiers. No one else had the power to transfer investment and capital from one state to another tax-free. Accumulated investment capital alone would have given them the money to finance everything from construction projects to wars. In addition, they were the first international arms dealers and traders.
Their treasury became too large to escape the notice of some financially embarrassed rulers, especially Philip the Fair, King of France. Philip the Fair, with Pope Clement, arranged for the Convocation of the Grand Master of the Knights Templar, Jacques DeMolay and his officers in Paris. In 1314, on a Friday the 13th, Jacques De Molay was slowly cooked at the stake for alleged heresy and dozens of other accusations; all Knight Templar wealth which could be found was seized and Templary “moved underground.”
[I leave out the burning of de Molay here and his curses.]
More factually, the Templars in Portugal, for example, simply changed their name to the Knights of Christ and went on to gain fame in their explorations of Africa and the West Indies with such names as King Henry the Navigator, (who was a Grand Master), Vasco da Gama, and Christopher Columbus’ father-in-law, who inspired Columbus to emblazon the red cross of the Templars on his three famous ships.
Why such action by the state? The Templars were the money lenders of Europe and the great royal houses were nearly all in debt to them. Having established a transnational empire extending from Europe all the way to the Holy Land as early as the 12th century, the Templar lust for land acquisition could not be easily quelled.
The usurous banking system they founded and continue to control, helped in this endeavour. With their network of preceptories throughout Europe and the Middle East, they were able to organize, at moderate rates of interest, loans to merchant traders, who increasingly depended on borrowed capital to trade in goods, proof that a primitive form of capitalism existed long before the demise of feudalism.
By issuing promissory notes, a primitive version of the modern check, the Templars were able to lend capital en masse. The checks were inscribed with intricate codes, which could only be deciphered by clerks and accountants employed in their preceptories, which were, for all intents and purposes, the world’s first banks. The Templars became the primary moneylenders of the day, their Paris preceptory becoming the centre of European finance as early as the mid-13th century.
The financial centre of London known as Temple Bar is built on the foundations of the Templar preceptory from which it descends. The power today wielded by Temple Bar in international finance should not be underestimated. By bankrolling the military campaigns of the various monarchs of Europe, the Templars were able to increase their wealth by charging interest on the gold used by these same monarchs to hire their militias and to purchase arms.
The ‘double cross’ that went on in these transactions was scandalous, with the Templars lending money to both sides in many of these conflicts. There is substantial evidence of such duplicity also, in the American War of Independence, the American Civil War and the First and Second World Wars. The two crosses or double-cross was a later Templar symbol.
3. The Venetians and the concept of Oligarchy
This is from an old post which relies heavily on Larouche’s Schiller Institute’s take on the Venetians:
The oligarchy has believed for millennia that the Earth is overpopulated; the oligarchical commentary on the Trojan War was that this conflict was necessary in order to prevent greater numbers of mankind from oppressing “Mother Earth.” They’ve constantly stressed race and racial characteristics, often as a means for justifying slavery.
In international affairs, oligarchs recommend such methods as geopolitics, understood as the method of “divide and conquer,” which lets one power prevail by playing its adversaries one against the other. Oligarchical policy strives to maintain a balance of power among such adversaries for its own benefit, but this attempt always fails in the long run and leads to new wars.
The essence of oligarchism is summed up in the idea of the empire, in which an elite identifying itself as a master race rules over a degraded mass of slaves or other oppressed victims. If oligarchical methods are allowed to dominate human affairs, they always create a breakdown crisis of civilization, with economic depression, war, famine, plague, and pestilence.
The post-industrial society and the derivatives crisis in our own time have brought about the potential for a new collapse of civilization. This crisis can only be reversed by repudiating in practice the axioms of the oligarchical mentality.
A pillar of the oligarchical system is the family fortune, or fondo, as it is called in Italian. The continuity of the family fortune which earns money through usury and looting is often more important than the biological continuity across generations of the family that owns the fortune.
Hence the Black Nobility, the bloodlines, the councils of elders, the round tables, Chatham House and all that.
The long and tortuous path of peoples through history sees the Khazars in the Holy Land and part of the Canaanites eventually in northern Italy, adopting the name “Sepharvaim” for deceptive purposes. They later became known as Venetians, and by marrying into European royalty and aristocracy, the “black nobility.”
In the pre-Christian world around the Mediterranean, oligarchical political forces included Babylon in Mesopotamia. The “whore of Babylon” condemned in the Apocalypse of St. John the Divine, is not a mystical construct, but a very specific cartel of oligarchical families. Other oligarchical centers included Hiram of Tyre and the Phoenicians.
The Persian Empire was an oligarchy. In the Greek world, the center of oligarchical banking and intelligence was the Temple of Apollo at Delphi, whose agents included Lycurgus of Sparta and, later, Aristotle.
In Venice, the largest fondo was the endowment of the Basilica of St. Mark, which was closely associated with the Venetian state treasury, and which absorbed the family fortunes of nobles who died without heirs. This fondo was administered by the procurers of St. Mark, whose position was one of the most powerful under the Venetian system.
Around this central fondo were grouped the individual family fortunes of the great oligarchical families, such as the Mocenigo, the Cornaro, the Dandolo, the Contarini, the Morosini, the Zorzi, and the Tron. When the Venetian oligarchy transferred many of its families and assets to northern Europe, the Venetian fondi provided the nucleus of the great Bank of Amsterdam, which dominated Europe during the Seventeenth century, and of the Bank of England, which became the leading bank of the Eighteenth century.
Venice was the enemy of Charlemagne. Charlemagne’s son, King Pepin of Italy, tried unsuccessfully to conquer the Venetian lagoon. Charlemagne was forced to recognize Venice as a part of the eastern or Byzantine Empire, under the protection of the Emperor Nicephorus. Venice was never a part of Western Civilization.
Over the next four centuries, Venice developed as a second capital of the Byzantine Empire through marriage alliances with certain Byzantine dynasties and conflicts with the Holy Roman Empire based in Germany. The Venetian economy grew through usury and slavery. By 1082, the Venetians had tax-free trading rights in the entire Byzantine Empire.
The Venetians were one of the main factors behind the Crusades against the Muslim power in the eastern Mediterranean. In the Fourth Crusade of A.C.E. 1202, the Venetians used an army of French feudal knights to capture and loot Constantinople, the Orthodox Christian city which was the capital of the Byzantine Empire.
During the 1200s, the Venetians, now at the apex of their military and naval power, set out to create a new Roman Empire with its center at Venice. They expanded into the Greek islands, the Black Sea, and the Italian mainland. They helped to defeat the Hohenstaufen rulers of Germany and Italy. Venetian intelligence assisted Genghis Khan as he attacked and wiped out powers that had resisted Venice.
The Venetians caused the death of the poet and political figure Dante Alighieri, who developed the concept of the modern sovereign nation-state in opposition to the Venetian plans for empire. A series of wars with Genoa led later to the de facto merger of Venice and Genoa. The Venetian bankers, often called Lombards, began to loot many parts of Europe with usurious loans.
Henry III of England in the years after 1255 became insolvent after taking huge Lombard loans to finance foreign wars at 120-180 percent interest. These transactions created the basis for the Venetian Party in England. When the Lombard bankers went bankrupt because the English failed to pay, a breakdown crisis of the European economy ensued. This led to a new collapse of European civilization, including the onset of the Black Plague, which depopulated the continent.
In the midst of the chaos, the Venetians encouraged their ally Edward III of England, to wage war against France in the conflict that became the Hundred Years War (1339-1453), which hurled France into chaos before St. Joan of Arc defeated the English. This was then followed by the Wars of the Roses in England. As a result of Venetian domination, the Fourteenth century had become a catastrophe for civilization.
In the midst of the crisis of the 1300s, the friends of Dante and Petrarch laid the basis for the Italian Golden Renaissance, which reached its culmination with Nicolaus of Cusa, Pope Pius II, and the Medici-sponsored Council of Florence of 1439. The Venetians fought the Renaissance with a policy of expansion on the Italian mainland, or terra firma, which brought them to the outskirts of Milan. More fundamentally, the Venetians promoted the pagan philosophy of Aristotle against the Christian Platonism of the Florentines.
Around AD1400, European power centers coalesced into two camps: the Ghibellines, who supported the Hohenstaufen family, and the Guelphs, from Welf, the German prince who competed with Frederick for control of the Holy Roman Empire. The Pope allied himself with the Guelphs. All modern European history stems directly from the struggle between these two powers.
The Guelphs are also called the Neri, Black Guelphs, or Black Nobility, and supported William of Orange in his seizure of the throne of England, which eventually resulted in the formation of the Bank of England and the East India Company.
When Cusa and his friends succeeded in reuniting the Roman Catholic Church and the Orthodox and other eastern churches at the Council of Florence, the Venetians tried to sabotage this result.
The Venetians tried to use the power of the new nation-states, especially France, to crush Milan and allow further Venetian expansion. But ambassadors for the king of France and the Austrian emperor met at Cambrai in December 1508 and agreed to create a European league for the dismemberment of Venice.
An immediate target of the Venetians had always been Milan and a broader target – the papacy.
The reformation as a ploy
The leading figure of the Protestant Reformation, the first Protestant in modern Europe, was Venice’s Cardinal Gasparo Contarini, who was also the leader of the Catholic Counter-Reformation. Contarini was a pupil of the Padua Aristotelian Pietro Pomponazzi, who denied the immortality of the human soul. Contarini pioneered the Protestant doctrine of salvation by faith alone, with no regard for good works of charity.
He organized a group of Italian Protestants called gli spirituali, including oligarchs like Vittoria Colonna and Giulia Gonzaga. Contarini’s networks encouraged and protected Martin Luther and later John Calvin of Geneva. Contarini sent his neighbor and relative Francesco Zorzi to England to support King Henry VIII’s plan to divorce Catherine of Aragon.
As the Counter-Reformation advanced, the Contarini networks split into two wings – the pro-Protestant spirituali, who later evolved into the giovani and who serviced growing networks in France, Holland, England, and Scotland. The other wing were the zelanti, oriented toward repression and the Inquisition, and typified by Pope Paul IV Caraffa. The zelanti evolved into the oligarchical party called the vecchi, who serviced Venetian networks in the Vatican and the Catholic Hapsburg dominions. The apparent conflict of the two groups was orchestrated to serve Venetian projects.
The obvious criticism here is that this seems to be giving inordinate credit for influence to the Venetians when there were homegrown oligarchs and tyrants in all the nation states, all pursuing their own dreams of expansion and conquest.
This is so but three factors have to be born in mind – the Lombards who were financing all European powers at the time against one another, the Papacy which meant [until Henry VIII] that dictums were coming constantly from Italy and the church had had, for centuries, a most powerful grip on the hearts and minds of men and women all over Europe and then there was the intrigue, the intelligence services and the intermarrying into the great families of Europe by the Venetians themselves.
Henry’s marriage to Catherine illustrates in itself the extent to which the English monarchy was in no way head-in-the-sand and isolationist. Look at how the Reformation came to England.
Exactly who were and who are these intermarried families connected to the Venetians? A mix of sources:
The old-line ruling families who believe that they have the right to rule the world because they are descended from the emperors of the ancient Roman and so-called ‘holy’ Roman Empires consist of 13-15 ‘blue blood’ families, which include: Rothschild; Kuhn; Loeb; Lehman; Rockefeller; Sach; Warburg; Lazard; Seaf; Goldman; Schiff; Morgan; Schroeder; Bush and Harriman.
Other names are: the Giustiniani family, of Rome and Venice who trace their lineage to the Emperor Justianian; Sir Jocelyn Hambro of Hambros (Merchant) Bank; Pierpaolo Luzzatti Fequiz, whose lineage dates back six centuries to the most ancient Luzzatos, of Venice, and Umberto Ortolani of the ancient Black Nobility family of the same name.
Other old Venetian Black Nobility and board members of ASG and RAS are the Doria family, the financiers of the Spanish Hapsburgs, Elie de Rothschild of the French Rothschild family, Baron August von Finck (Finck, the second richest man in Germany now deceased), Franco Orsini Bonacassi of the ancient Orsini that traces its lineage to an ancient Roman senator of the same name, the Alba family whose lineage dates back to the great Duke of Alba, and Baron Pierre Lambert, a cousin of the Belgian Rothschild family.
Has anyone ever stopped to think what the Holy Roman Empire actually meant?
The power of the Guelphs would extend through the Italian financial centers to the north of France in Lombardy. Lombard in German means “deposit bank”, and the Lombards were bankers to the entire Medieval world. They would later transfer operations north to Hamburg, then to Amsterdam and finally to London.
The Guelphs would start the slave trade to the colonies. The Guelphs, in order to aid their control of finance and politics, would perpetuate gnostic cults which eventually developed into the Rosicrucians, Unitarians, Fabian Society and the World Council of Churches.
The East India company, together with John Stuart Mill, would finance the University of London. A friend of Mill, historian George Grote, a founder of London University donated £6000 for the study of “mental health”, which began the worldwide “mental health” movement.
Banca Commerciale d’Italia, Banca Privata, Banco Ambrosiano, the Netherlands Bank, Barclays Bank, Banco del Colombia, Banco de Ibero-America.
Of special interest is Banca del la Svizzeria Italiana (BSI) – since it handles flight capital investments to and from the United States – primarily in dollars and US bonds – located and isolated in “neutral” Lugano, the flight capital center for the Venetian Black Nobility.
Lugano is not in Italy, nor in Switzerland, and is a kind of twilight zone for shady flight capital operations. George Ball, who owns a large block of stock in BSI, is a prominent “insider” and the bank’s US representative.
In the 1822 Treaty of Verona (between Austria, France, Prussia and Russia) the Jesuits agreed to smash the US Constitution and suppress the freedom of the US. Their methods included destroying free speech, destroying and suppressing the press, universal censorship, sustaining the cooperation of the Pope and clergy to use religion to help keep nations in passive obedience and financing wars against countries with representative governments.
The monarchs who signed this treaty were ultimately deposed. Most of these families are very wealthy and may be more powerful today than when they sat upon thrones.
They are known collectively as the Black Nobility. Privately, these families refuse to recognize any right to rule except their own. The fact that this treaty was made long ago does not mean it is void. The treaty was placed in the Congressional Record on April 25, 1916 by Senator Owen.
[Remember that this below is from around 2010, before events changed in the way they did but it holds true up to that point.]
Italy and in particular, Venice, is very important, strategically because 1. it is the closest to the middle-east and 2. it is a gateway for drugs entering Europe from Iran and Lebanon.
After the Club of Rome was established in 1968, a body which is from this black nobility, all sorts of things began in a socialist manner – the Paris uprising, the Red Brigades, the fall of various regimes and the Aldo Moro case, which investigators found had old families somehow interested in the issue for not entirely clear reasons.
The Club of Rome’s Peccei headed the Atlantic Institute’s Economic Council for three decades while he was the Chief Executive Officer for Giovanni Agnellis’ Fiat Motor Company. Agnelli, a member of an ancient Italian family, playing a leading role in development projects in the Soviet Union. The Club of Rome is an umbrella organization for Anglo-American financiers and the old families of Europe, particularly in London, Venice and Genoa.
Hence the reference in a previous post to the Queen sailing near Venice on occasions in the Britannia.
Their key role, according to the 90s article I got it from, is to create and manage economic recessions and eventual depressions. Social convulsions on a global scale, followed by depressions, are the only real way to create “welfare” recipients of the future and a series of nanny states. That’s the long term function, meanwhile cleaning up in the financial markets as they go along.
One of their members, Etienne D’Avignon, was assigned the task of collapsing the steel industry in the US and as the Treaty of Verona showed, the European families have quite an interest in the U.S.A. and vice versa – hence the congressional record entry.
More difficult to establish is Jacques Soustelle, financed by the Swiss Oltramaire family, who ran one of the assassination centres from Confederation Helvetica.
Another interesting snippet, to me, was Richard Gardner marrying into the old families in Italy and providing yet more connections between Italy and the States.
This is not all about money. It’s also about culture and science and this conflict plays a huge role in the major societal movements in modern history.
All European history since the Fifteenth century within Europe and globally, has been dominated by the cultural conflict between the radiated influence of the Renaissance and the opposing, Venice-launched force of the so-called ‘Enlightenment.’
[I see that I led into ‘the assault on Science’ near the end of that post but that’s one step too far for this long, long post.]
Some notes on what we have above
The good thing is that the bias is clear to see in the various foregoing snippets [e.g. Larouche] and it was never meant to be a definitive case; the aim of this exercise was to ground the reader in past history he or she may not have seen before.
At the time of the posting of that Venetian post, I was taken to task by an Aristolean and by others loyal to those mentioned in the text – the cumulative force of those notes is fairly overwhelming, especially [to bring a new element into it] for a Christian, because he/she remembers references in the Bible [inc. Apocrypha] to the Watchers, the Giants, the Nephilim if you wish.
I’ve always asked why, how, such families can dominate through the Millennia? Aside from better organisation, higher intelligence, greater ruthlessness via being satanic in nature – let’s just say they’re not ‘as other humans’ and that’s an entire other discussion/fight for another day.
My core point is that unless we at least have the notes above in our heads, unless we’ve at least seen that, along with all those from yours, then how can we possibly debate why things are as they are today?
We’re not even on the same page to begin with – all which could happen is factionalism, such as that which caused 1204 in Constantinople.
When you return to regular sources, e.g. Wikipedia, you find things like this:
The Sack of Constantinople occurred in April 1204 and marked the culmination of the Fourth Crusade. Crusader armies captured, looted, and destroyed parts of Constantinople, the capital of the Byzantine Empire. After the capture of the city, the Latin Empire (known to the Byzantines as the Frankokratia or the Latin Occupation) was established.
Worth pausing and considering that – ‘Christian’ Crusaders not just attack Byzantium but sack, loot, rape, mass murder – that is very different in character, as Poirot might point out, to the Christians of the 1st century eaten by lions. In fact, it is far more in keeping with Clovis – look him up – the Merovingian/Carolingian, far more in keeping with Mo and his hordes.
In fact, it stems from the Franks and the corruption of bloodlines way back then. It’s not enough to say ‘pagans’ because the paganism of the fertility cultures is a different animal to this – a Christian would say that these are almost the fallen angels at a later date.
Either way, what was in the heads of the coarse Franks, hardly Latins, except in hybrid form, the rosy cross on the red background is anything BUT Christian, assuming Christianity is contained within the gospels and in particular, the Sermon on the Mount:
One account from the time:
The peasants and common riff-raff jeered at those of us from Byzantium and were thick-headed enough to call our miserable poverty and nakedness equality…Many were only too happy to accept this outrage, saying “Blessed be the Lord that we have grown rich”, and buying up for next to nothing the property that their fellow-countrymen were forced to offer for sale, for they had not yet had much to do with the beef-eating Latins and they did not know that they served a wine as pure and unmixed as unadulterated bile, nor that they would treat the Byzantines with utter contempt.
— Nicetas Choniates
Speros Vryonis in Byzantium and Europe gives a vivid account of the sack:
The Latin soldiery subjected the greatest city in Europe to an indescribable sack. For three days they murdered, raped, looted and destroyed on a scale which even the ancient Vandals and Goths would have found unbelievable. Constantinople had become a veritable museum of ancient and Byzantine art, an emporium of such incredible wealth that the Latins were astounded at the riches they found.
Though the Venetians had an appreciation for the art which they discovered (they were themselves semi-Byzantines) and saved much of it, the French and others destroyed indiscriminately, halting to refresh themselves with wine, violation of nuns, and murder of Orthodox clerics.
The Crusaders vented their hatred for the Greeks most spectacularly in the desecration of the greatest Church in Christendom.
They smashed the silver iconostasis, the icons and the holy books of Hagia Sophia, and seated upon the patriarchal throne a whore who sang coarse songs as they drank wine from the Church’s holy vessels.
The estrangement of East and West, which had proceeded over the centuries, culminated in the horrible massacre that accompanied the conquest of Constantinople. The Greeks were convinced that even the Turks, had they taken the city, would not have been as cruel as the Latin Christians.
The defeat of Byzantium, already in a state of decline, accelerated political degeneration so that the Byzantines eventually became an easy prey to the Turks.
The Fourth Crusade and the crusading movement generally thus resulted, ultimately, in the victory of Islam, a result which was of course the exact opposite of its original intention.
Opposite of its intention … or was it? All along?
1204 was preceded by the Massacre of the Latins – many will point to that as the core reason but I point to the whole nature of the Franks for centuries and the abomination and desolation in these people – the Venetians were no better [God or Mammon?] such that this whole thing was about pillage and gore, nothing whatever to do with Christian principles.
The Massacre of the Latins, a massacre of the Roman Catholic or “Latin” inhabitants of Constantinople by the usurper Andronikos Komnenos and his supporters in May 1182, had a dramatic effect on the politics between Western Europe and the Byzantine Empire.
Although regular trade agreements were soon resumed between Roman Byzantine and Latin states, many westerners sought some form of revenge.
I am suggesting that there is nothing Christian whatever in those doings – they’re far more in common with the mentality of Antifa, BLM, the sheer destructiveness, the wanton psychopathy today.
I believe we really must see today, still not resulting in our mass slaughter, as merely the overture to what’s to come and am further suggesting you’d best get yourselves ready to get out of there because these ‘people’ have zero mercy, they’re not interested.