Military Review

Byzantine lessons. To the 560 anniversary of the fall of Constantinople

33
29 May 1453, Constantinople fell under the blows of the Turks. The last Byzantine emperor Constantine XI Palaeologus died, fighting heroically in the ranks of the city’s defenders. Constantinople became the capital of the Ottoman Empire, the residence of the Turkish sultans and received a new name - Istanbul. 1100-year period stories Christian Byzantine Empire ended. This victory ensured the Ottomans domination in the Eastern Mediterranean basin, they received full control over the Bosphorus and Dardanelles. Constantinople-Istanbul remained the capital of the Ottoman Empire until its collapse in 1922. Today, Istanbul is the largest city in Turkey.


It is clear that by the time of the fall Constantinople was already a fragment of the former greatness of the great empire, which owned lands from North Africa and Italy to the Crimea and the Caucasus. The power of the Byzantine emperor extended only to Constantinople with its suburbs and part of the territory of Greece with its islands. The Byzantine state in the 13-15 centuries can be called an empire only conditionally. The last Byzantine rulers were actually vassals of the Ottoman Empire. However, Constantinople was the direct heir of the ancient world, was considered the "Second Rome". It was the capital of the Orthodox world, which opposed both the Islamic world and the Pope. The fall of Byzantium was an important milestone in the history of mankind. Especially the "Byzantine lessons" are important in modern Russia.

Geopolitical situation for the 1453 year. Ottoman conquests

The uniqueness of the position of the Byzantine Empire was that it was constantly subjected to military-political pressure from the West and the East. In this respect, the history of Russia is similar to the history of the “Second Rome”. In the east, Byzantium endured numerous wars with the Arabs and the Seljuk Turks, although it lost most of its possessions. The West also presented a grave danger in the light of Rome’s global political plans and the economic claims of Venice and Genoa. In addition, Byzantium has long pursued an aggressive policy towards the Slavic states in the Balkans. The grueling wars with the Slavs also had a negative effect on the defenses of the empire. The expansion of Byzantium gave way to heavy defeats from the Bulgarians and Serbs.

At the same time, from within, the empire was undermined by the separatism of the governors of the provinces, the elite egoism of the feudal lords, the confrontation of the “pro-Western” wing of the political and spiritual elite with the “patriots”. Supporters of a compromise with the West believed that it was necessary to accept the union with Rome, which would allow them to stand in the fight against the Muslim world. This more than once led to popular uprisings, in which citizens were dissatisfied with the policies of the government that patronized Italian merchants, and the middle and lower clergy, who protested against the policy of rapprochement with Rome. Thus, the empire from century to century opposed the enemies in the West and the East, and at the same time was split from the inside. The history of Byzantium was full of uprisings and civil unrest.

In 1204, the Crusader army captured and plundered Constantinople. The empire collapsed into several states - the Latin Empire and the Achaean principality created in the territories controlled by the crusaders, and the Nicene, Trapezund and Epirus empires - remaining under the control of the Greeks. In 1261, the emperor of the Nicaean empire, Mikhail Paleolog, formed an alliance with Genoa and beat Constantinople. The Byzantine Empire was restored.

The Ottomans. At this point in the east, a new enemy - the Ottoman Turks. In the 13th century, one of the Turkic tribes, the Kaiy, under the command of Ertogrul Bey (1198 — 1281), driven from the nomads in the Turkmen steppes, moved to the West. Ertogrul Bey became a vassal of the Seljuk ruler of the Koni Sultanate of Kay-Kubad I (Aladdin Kaykubad) and assisted him in the struggle against Byzantium. For this, the sultan bestowed Ertogrulu on the land in the Bithynia region between Angora and Bursa (without the cities themselves). Prince Ertogrul's son, Osman (1258-1326), was able to dramatically strengthen his position, as the rich Byzantine empire in the West was exhausted by external wars and internal unrest, and the Muslim rulers in the East were weakened after the invasion of the Mongols. His army was replenished with refugees who fled from the Mongols and mercenaries from all over the Muslim world, who sought out Osman in order to fight against the weakening Christian empire and to use its wealth. The massive influx of Muslim refugees and Turks has led to a change in the demographic balance in the region not in favor of Christians. Thus, the mass migration of Muslims contributed to the fall of Byzantium and subsequently led to the emergence of a strong Muslim element in the Balkans.

In 1299, after the death of Aladdin, Osman took the title "Sultan" and refused to submit to the Koni (Romanian) sultans. By the name of Osman, his subjects began to be called Ottomans (Ottomans) or Ottoman Turks. Osman captured the Byzantine cities of Ephesus and Bursa. Often Byzantine cities themselves surrendered at the mercy of the victors. Muslim warriors did not storm the powerful fortifications, but simply devastated the countryside, blocked all ways of transporting food. Cities were forced to capitulate, as there was no outside help. The Byzantines chose to leave the countryside of Anatolia and direct their efforts towards strengthening fleet. Most of the local population was quickly Islamized.

Bursa fell in 1326 year and was turned into the capital of the Ottomans. From 1326 to 1359 was ruled by Orhan, he added an infantry corps to the strong Ottoman cavalry, and began to create units of the prisoners from captured young men. In the 1331, Nikea fell, it was the capital of the Ottomans in 1331 — 1365. 1337, the Turks seized Nicomedia, it was renamed Izmit. Izmit became the first shipyard and harbor for the nascent Turkish naval forces. In 1338, the Ottoman Turks reached the Bosphorus and soon were able to force it at the invitation of the Greeks themselves, who decided to use them in the civil war (1341 — 1347). Turkish troops acted against the side of the future emperor John VI Kantakouzin against the current emperor John V Palaeologus. In addition, John VI regularly used Ottoman troops as mercenaries in the wars with the Serbs and Bulgarians. As a result, the Greeks themselves allowed the Ottomans to the Balkans, and the Turks were free to explore the local political situation, learn about the roads, water sources, forces and weapons of their opponents. In 1352 — 1354 the Turks captured the Gallipoli peninsula and set about conquests in the Balkan Peninsula. In 1354, Orhan captured Ankara, which was ruled by the Mongol rulers.

Sultan Murad I (1359 — 1389) captured Western Thrace in 1361, occupied Philippopol, and soon Adrianople (the Turks called it Edirne), where it moved its capital in 1365. As a result, Constantinople was isolated from the remaining areas of his, and his capture was only a matter of time. Emperor John V Palaeologus was forced to sign an unequal treaty in which Byzantium renounced possession in Thrace gratuitously, pledged not to help the Serbs and Bulgarians in the struggle against the Ottomans, the Greeks also had to support Murad in the struggle with rivals in Asia Minor. In fact, Byzantium became a vassal of the Ottoman state. In 1371, the Ottoman army defeated the allied army of the Prilepsky kingdom (one of the states created after the collapse of the Serbian state Stefan Dusan) and Serres despotism. Part of Macedonia was conquered by the Turks, many local Bulgarian, Serbian and Greek feudal lords became vassals of the Ottoman sultan. In 1385, Murad’s army took Sophia, in 1386, Nis, in 1389, defeated the combined forces of the Serbian feudal lords and the Bosnian kingdom. Serbia became a vassal of the Ottoman Empire.

Under Bayazid I (reigned in 1389 — 1402 years), the Ottomans defeated a number of Muslim possessions in Anatolia, reached the shores of the Aegean and Mediterranean Seas. The Ottoman state became a sea power. The Ottoman fleet began operating in the Mediterranean. In 1390, Bayazid took Konya. The Ottomans gained access to the port of Sinop on the Black Sea and subjugated most of Anatolia. In 1393, the Ottoman army captured the capital of Bulgaria - the city of Tarnovo. The Bulgarian Tsar John Shishman, who was already a vassal of the Ottomans under Murad, was killed. Bulgaria completely lost its independence and became a province of the Ottoman state. Wallachia was also subordinate. The Turks conquered most of Bosnia and set about capturing Albania and Greece.

Bayazid blocked Constantinople in 1391 — 1395. Forced Emperor Manuel II to make new concessions. He was distracted from the siege by the invasion of a large Crusader army under the command of the Hungarian king Sigismund. But 25 September 1396, in the battle of Nikopol, underestimated the enemy European knights suffered a terrible defeat. Bayazid returned to Constantinople. "Spas" Constantinople the great commander Timur. Iron Chromets demanded obedience from the Ottoman Sultan. Bayazid responded with insult and summoned Timur to battle. Soon, a huge Turkic army invaded Asia Minor, but without meeting serious resistance - Sultan’s son Suleiman, who had no major military units, headed for Europe towards his father, Iron Chromets moved troops to conquer Aleppo, Damascus and Baghdad. Bayazid clearly underestimated his opponent, having poorly prepared for the battle. His mental abilities were undermined by the riotous lifestyle and drunkenness. 25 July 1402 of the battle at Ankara, Bayazid's army was defeated, the main reasons for the defeat were the sultan's mistakes and the betrayal of the Anatolian beys and Tatars mercenaries (it is interesting that the Serbs-Slavs were the most stable part of the Ottoman army). Bayazid got into shameful captivity, where he died. Anatolian Ottoman possessions were devastated.

Byzantine lessons. To the 560 anniversary of the fall of Constantinople


The defeat led to the temporary disintegration of the Ottoman Empire, which was accompanied by civil strife between the sons of Sultan Bayazid and the peasant uprisings. Bysana received a half-century delay. In the internecine struggle, Mehmed I won (reigned in 1413 — 1421 years). All Ottoman possessions re-united under the rule of one ruler. Mehmed, restoring power, maintained peaceful relations with Byzantium. Moreover, the Greeks helped him in the fight with his brother Musa, sending the troops of Murad from Anatolia to Thrace.

Murad II (reigned in 1421 — 1444 and 1446 — 1451) finally restored the power of the Ottoman state, suppressed the resistance of all the claimants to the throne, the uprising of the feudal lords. In 1422, he besieged and tried to take Constantinople by storm, but without a powerful fleet and strong artillery, the offensive was not crowned with success. In 1430, the Ottomans captured the major city of Thessaloniki. The Crusaders suffered two heavy defeats from the Ottomans - in the battle of Varna (1444 year), and in the battle of Kosovo (1448 year). The Ottomans conquered Morea and seriously strengthened their power in the Balkans. Western rulers no longer made serious attempts to recapture the Balkan Peninsula from the Ottoman Empire.

The Ottomans were able to focus all their efforts on the seizure of Constantinople. The Byzantine state itself no longer represented a major military threat to the Ottomans, but the city had an advantageous military-strategic position. The Union of Christian States, relying on the Byzantine capital, could deploy an operation to oust Muslims from the region. Venice and Genoa could have come against the Ottomans - they had economic interests in the eastern part of the Mediterranean, the Knights of Joannites, Rome and Hungary. Constantinople was now located practically in the middle of the Ottoman state, between the European and Asian possessions of the Turkish sultans. The task of seizing the city was decided by Sultan Mehmed II (he reigned in 1444 — 1446 and 1451 — 1481).


Possessions of the Byzantine Empire in 1453

The position of Byzantium

By the beginning of the 15 century, the Byzantine Empire possessed only a shadow of its former power. Only the huge Constantinople and its dilapidated, but powerful fortifications reminded in the past of greatness and splendor. The entire 14 century was a period of political failure. "King of the Serbs and Greeks" Stefan Dusan occupied Macedonia, Epirus, Thessaly, part of Thrace, there was a moment when the Serbs threatened Constantinople.

Internal division and elite ambitions were constant sources of civil wars. In particular, Emperor John VI Kantakouzin - who ruled in 1347 — 1354, devoted almost all his time to the struggle for the throne. First, he fought against the supporters of the minor John V of Paleologue - the civil war 1341 - 1347. In this war, John Kantakuzen relied on the Aydyn emir Umur, then on the Ottoman emir Orhan. With the support of the Turks, he occupied Constantinople. During the civil war 1352 — 1357. John VI and his eldest son Matthew fought against John V Palaeologus. In the civil strife again Turkish troops were involved, as well as Venice and Genoa. The Ottomans for their help had to give all the treasury, church utensils and even money donated by Moscow Russia for the repair of the St. Sophia Cathedral. Venetians and Genoese paid with trade privileges and lands. John Cantacuzien was defeated. In addition to these disasters, a plague epidemic began in 1348, which claimed the lives of a third of the Byzantine population.

The Ottomans, taking advantage of the turmoil in Byzantium and in the Balkan states, crossed the straits towards the end of the century and reached the Danube. In 1368, Sultan Murad I submitted to Nissa (the country residence of the Byzantine emperors), and the Turks were already under the walls of Constantinople. The city was surrounded by Ottoman possessions.

In Constantinople itself, not only the claimants to the throne confronted each other, but also supporters and opponents of the union with the Catholic Church. Even in 1274, a church council convened in Lyon, union was concluded with the Orthodox Church. The Byzantine emperor Michael VIII agreed to a union in order to gain the support of Western rulers and loans for waging war. But his successor, the emperor Andronicus II, convened a council of the Eastern Church, which rejected this union. The Byzantine politicians who sought help from the West in the struggle against the Ottomans, or belonged to the intellectual elite, were supporters of the union with the Roman throne. In this regard, Byzantine intellectuals are similar to the Russian intelligentsia, "sick of the West." Opponents of the union with the western church were the middle and lower clergy, the majority of the common people.

Emperor John V Palaeologus accepted the Roman faith in Rome. However, he did not receive help from the West against the Ottomans and was forced to become a tributary and a vassal of the Sultan. Emperor John VIII Paleologue (1425 — 1448) also believed that Constantinople would only be saved by the support of Rome and tried to conclude a union with the Catholics as soon as possible. In 1437, he, along with the patriarch and the representative Greek delegation, arrived in Italy and stayed there for two years. Ferrara-Florence Cathedral 1438 — 1445 held in succession in Ferrara, in Florence and in Rome. Eastern hierarchs, in addition to Metropolitan Mark of Ephesus, came to the conclusion that the Roman teaching was Orthodox. A union was concluded - the Union of Florence 1439 of the year, and the eastern churches were reunited with the Catholic Church. But the union was short-lived, soon it was rejected by most of the eastern churches. And many Eastern hierarchs present at the Council began to openly deny their agreement with the Council or say that the decision was obtained through bribery and threats. Union was rejected by most clergy and people. The Pope organized the crusade 1444 of the year, but it ended in complete failure.

External threat, internal unrest occurred against the backdrop of the economic decline of the empire. Constantinople at the end of the 14th century was an example of decay and destruction. The capture of Anatolia by the Ottomans deprived the empire of almost all agricultural land. Virtually all trade passed into the hands of Italian merchants. The population of the Byzantine capital, which in the XII century numbered 1 million people (along with the suburbs), fell to 100 thousand people and continued to fall - by the time the Ottomans captured the city, there were about 50 thousand people. The suburb on the Asian coast of the Bosporus was occupied by the Ottomans. The outskirts of Per (Galata) on the other side of the Golden Horn became the possession of the Genoese. The Golden Horn was a narrow, curved bay that flows into the Bosphorus at its junction with the Sea of ​​Marmara. In the city itself, many neighborhoods were empty or half empty. In fact, Constantinople turned into several separate settlements, separated by abandoned quarters, ruins of buildings, overgrown with parks, gardens and gardens. Many of these settlements even had their own individual fortifications. The most populous neighborhoods-settlements were located on the shores of the Golden Horn. The richest quarter of the Golden Horn belonged to the Venetians. Nearby there were streets where other people from the West lived - Florentines, Anconians, Raguzians, Catalans, Jews, etc.

But the city still retained the remnants of former wealth, was a major trading center. Its marinas and markets were full of ships and people from Muslim, Western European and Slavic lands. Every year, pilgrims arrived in the city, among whom were many Russians. And most importantly - Constantinople was of great military-strategic importance.



To be continued ...
Author:
Articles from this series:
Byzantine lessons. To the 560 anniversary of the fall of Constantinople
Byzantine lessons. To the 560 anniversary of the fall of Constantinople. Part of 2
Byzantine lessons. To the 560 anniversary of the fall of Constantinople. Part of 3
Byzantine lessons. To the 560 anniversary of the fall of Constantinople. Part of 4
33 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. svp67
    svp67 29 May 2013 09: 03 New
    10
    No matter how the story repeats itself ...
    1. klimpopov
      klimpopov 29 May 2013 09: 46 New
      13
      So that it does not repeat it is necessary to study and analyze the lessons of history. And then here some on the site at any opportunity shout that history does not give anything. But everything was already there and you can draw conclusions based on history ...
  2. Seraph
    Seraph 29 May 2013 09: 38 New
    14
    Thanks for the article and the topic raised. A wonderful film in addition to "The death of the empire. A lesson from Byzantium" by Archimandrite Tikhon (Shevkunov).
    I was in Constantinople in 2011 with the Byzantologist V.E. Larionov. Even now, this city makes an indelible impression and is full of monuments of imperial glory and Christian shrines. And how did he imagine visiting his century in the XIII-XV!!? All other European cities in comparison with it are rotten places, a crap province. It is clear why our ancestors chose the Byzantine Empire as a socio-political landmark: culture, government, the army, and the economy did not reach such a height in the Middle Ages in any other country.
    1. Guun
      Guun 29 May 2013 09: 48 New
      10
      Byzantium is a descendant of Ancient Rome, of course, all of Europe is not suitable for this beautiful city as a sole. But they made the same mistake as the Romans - a luxurious lifestyle and the moral decline of the people led to its death.
      1. Maks111
        Maks111 29 May 2013 13: 06 New
        +3
        luxurious lifestyle and moral decline of the people led to its death.
        . Yeah ... but the people didn’t want to give money for the guns, after which the engineer of these guns went to the Turks and with the help of those guns the Turks conquered Constantinople (((
        1. does it
          does it 29 May 2013 20: 51 New
          0
          Quote: Max111
          . Yeah ... but the people didn’t want to give money for the guns, after which the engineer of these guns went to the Turks and with the help of those guns the Turks conquered Constantinople (((

          not the people, but the oligarchs, Mehmed2 executed them when I read the lines where they obeyed Mehmed 2, then I mentally saw Chubais in their ranks. Why Chubais? probably because I'm Russian ....
      2. datur
        datur 29 May 2013 13: 10 New
        +1
        Byzantium is a descendant of Ancient Rome, of course, all of Europe was not suitable for soles - and rightly so !!! And RUSSIA !!! - THIS IS THE 3rd ROME !! and 4mu not happen !!! SO WIN !!!
  3. MilaPhone
    MilaPhone 29 May 2013 09: 38 New
    +1
    Not everything is lost yet, after all, we are the heirs of Byzantium!
  4. pinecone
    pinecone 29 May 2013 09: 39 New
    +3
    [quote = svp67] No matter how the story repeats itself ... [/ quote

    Just concern.
  5. Guun
    Guun 29 May 2013 09: 58 New
    +3
    The Ottoman empires had the strongest army in the Janissary corps precisely in the early and middle epoch of the Ottoman Empires (in the late period they weakened and rebelled against the Sultans more than once refusing to obey him), they, as Spartans, were taught military craft from childhood and during the service they were given a good land destiny and a generous pension at the end of the service. The Turks did not have orphans, street children and simply unnecessary children - they all went to the Janissaries where they had a comfortable existence, it is interesting why our government does not make some kind of such kind of troops? After all, a very good idea.
    1. neri73-r
      neri73-r 29 May 2013 11: 29 New
      +4
      and more than once rebelled against the sultans refusing to obey him


      That’s why they don’t create it, they know that their power (the powers that be) is not quite ..... eeee ..... legal, they can give it in the ass !!! hi
    2. Yeraz
      Yeraz 29 May 2013 11: 32 New
      +4
      Quote: Guun
      The Ottoman empires had the strongest army in the Janissary corps precisely in the early and middle epoch of the Ottoman Empires (in the late period they weakened and rebelled against the Sultans more than once refusing to obey him), they, as Spartans, were taught military craft from childhood and during the service they were given a good land destiny and a generous pension at the end of the service. The Turks did not have orphans, street children and simply unnecessary children - they all went to the Janissaries where they had a comfortable existence, it is interesting why our government does not make some kind of such kind of troops? After all, a very good idea.

      Because you need a strong ideology supported financially. Indeed, everyone in the empire knew that the Janissaries were representatives of the Az peoples, but they felt themselves to be part of the empire and fought to the end, the weaker the empire became, the weaker its Janissaries. Considering that there are so many orphanages in Russia , you can grow up worthy fighters, BUT there is no ideology, nor justice, and financially bureaucrats devour everything, on such a foundation it will not work.
  6. omsbon
    omsbon 29 May 2013 09: 59 New
    +3
    it’s like the whole Christian kingdom has condescended into yours, like two Roman fools, and the third is standing, and the fourth should not exist: your Christian kingdom will not get any other - from the message of Elder Philotheus, traditionally considered the “manifesto” of the doctrine of Moscow - the Third Rome.
  7. starch
    starch 29 May 2013 10: 28 New
    +3
    Good, capacious article. Recall the defenders of Constantinople and the last emperor Constantine XI Paleolog Dragash. The remarkable Greek composer Stamatis Spanoudakis (Σταματησ Σπανουδακησ, Stamatis Spanoudakis) has an album Μαρμαρωμενοσ βασιλιασ (Russian) - The Marble King, dedicated to the fall of the city and the heroism of the deaths of the biblical death στα τειχη (literally "Down, from the wall (Theodosius the Great) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0DYwZ6JGAKs
  8. Metlik
    Metlik 29 May 2013 10: 39 New
    +3
    Byzantine emperors relied on religion, the technological superiority of the army, and money (soldiers were always well paid). When the money ran out, Byzantium ended. What will our government do when oil prices fall?
  9. Trapperxnumx
    Trapperxnumx 29 May 2013 11: 42 New
    +4
    Yes. And as always - a very sophisticated intelligentsia, forgetting about their roots in the "flight of thought", being too carried away by all sorts of theories, is one of the reasons for the defeat. Instead of looking for strength within themselves, all hopes are that "the West will help us." How all this is familiar ... And once again confirms that the salvation of the people and the country is in the people themselves. And forgetting about this, the countries are dying.
  10. Strashila
    Strashila 29 May 2013 11: 55 New
    +3
    History repeats itself ... Catholics oppress the Orthodox by the hands of Muslims. Byzantium also began by accepting the Western values ​​of that era ... as a result, it was plundered and betrayed by Catholics.
  11. apro
    apro 29 May 2013 12: 00 New
    +6
    Not everything is so obvious The Byzantine empire fell, but the merits of Muslims were not very significant; Catholics Europeans played a crusade on Byzantium. A very strong commercial competitor controlled trade with the Middle East. , today, the Europeans are swinging Syria acting obsalyutno exactly like 600 years ago.
  12. Standard Oil
    Standard Oil 29 May 2013 12: 06 New
    +3
    Byzantium itself is to blame for everything that happened to her, and only she.
  13. _KM_
    _KM_ 29 May 2013 12: 08 New
    0
    The history of Byzantium is repeated in the Russian Federation. A good movie was made about this. I don’t remember the name. In my opinion, "Byzantium. Forgotten lesson."
    1. starch
      starch 29 May 2013 12: 40 New
      +2
      "The death of the empire. Byzantine lesson" Dir. Archpriest Tikhon (Shevkunov) website http://vizantia.info/, pretty good
      1. Seraph
        Seraph 29 May 2013 23: 42 New
        0
        only archimandrite, not archpriest
  14. Jurkovs
    Jurkovs 29 May 2013 12: 39 New
    +1
    Controlling the Bosphorus is the only geopolitical task that has never been given to Russia. If there were no fragmentation, as now, however, then there would be no shame on Kalki. And then perhaps the falling banner would have been really captured from Byzantium. And so: "third Rome", "third Rome", the endless mantra and the shaking of the air.
  15. Setrac
    Setrac 29 May 2013 13: 13 New
    -6
    There was the Great Roman Empire of the German nation, the rest of the "Roman" empires were invented by historians, there was ONE Roman Empire and modern Rome and Istanbul have nothing to do with it. Austria-Hungary, they were called “imperials” and “Caesars” at the beginning of the twentieth century. What conclusions can be drawn from the fall of the Eastern Roman Empire; conclusions from fictional history will not yield any benefit!
    1. washi
      washi 29 May 2013 14: 43 New
      +1
      Read historical research. If there is not enough education and patience, then at least fantasy, about fellow travelers in that era
      1. Setrac
        Setrac 29 May 2013 15: 09 New
        -4
        Quote: Vasya
        Read historical research. If there is not enough education and patience, then at least fantasy, about fellow travelers in that era

        Well, of course!!!
        When history was written, Istanbul was Istanbul for many centuries and there were no allusions to Constantinople. Where are these romans? The only state where there are Romans is Romania, and in Romania, near the mouth of the Danube there is the city of Constanta, what a coincidence! And in Greek Constance - Constantinople. It is obvious
        1. hristoforos
          hristoforos 29 May 2013 23: 42 New
          +2
          you are welcome!!! stop saying what's horrible, what is Constance? what romanians? if you want to see where these Romans are, come to Greece or to any other country where they live and you will see them! and in Greek, Constantinople, Constantinupoli !!! this is really "obvious."
        2. Seraph
          Seraph 30 May 2013 00: 06 New
          +3
          what is your strange mix of fiction, fables and ridiculous assumptions instead of history? is this a form of sarcasm? or what is it? judging by the fact that no one bothered to polemicize with you, everyone is already accustomed to such an "interesting" presentation of information and does not react.
          Istanbul was named in all international documents and official Turkish papers by Constantinople until 1930. The population of the Vilayats of Constantinople, Chataldzha and East Thrace until the exchange of the population in 1922 after the Greek-Turkish war was approximately the following: Turks 55%, Greeks 40%, Armenians and other peoples 5%. That is, even ethno-confessional, he very much resembled the Byzantine capital.
          Romei (Romans) - the self-name of the citizens of Byzantium, that is, the Empire, in contrast to the "Latins" - the inhabitants of the defeated and degraded Rome, the capital of all kinds of barbarians and savages. There are no and no Romans in Romania, because there is no longer such a state - the Roman Empire
          About Constanza. Previously, it was the ancient Greek colony of Tom, later renamed in honor of the half-sister of Constantine the Equal-to-the-Apostles - Constance. For the first time under the name Κωνστάντια (Constantia), the city was mentioned in the X century.
          Where you learned Greek I don’t know. I am in a seminary, for example, in Greece and Cyprus.
          It seems to me another OBVIDENCE: You are an illiterate person with a desire to express absurdly and thereby attract the attention of others. In a cultural society, this is not welcome.
      2. does it
        does it 29 May 2013 20: 28 New
        0
        Quote: Vasya
        Read historical research. If there is not enough education and patience, then at least fantasy, about fellow travelers in that era

        EDWARD LUTWAC “Strategy of the Byzantine Empire”, ANNA COMNINA “Alexiada”, JOHN NORWICH “history of BYZANTIA”, A.A. CHEKALOV “AT THE SOURCES OF THE BYZANTINE STATE; Senate and senatorial aristocracy of Constantinople. Mauritius
        1. Setrac
          Setrac 29 May 2013 21: 53 New
          -5
          Quote: kvirit
          EDWARD LUTWAC “Strategy of the Byzantine Empire”, ANNA COMNINA “Alexiada”, JOHN NORWICH “history of BYZANTIA”, A.A. CHEKALOV “AT THE SOURCES OF THE BYZANTINE STATE; Senate and senatorial aristocracy of Constantinople. Mauritius

          Are these all contemporaries of Byzantium? Oh no !? Then why did you bring here writers of the genre of "alternative history"? Where is the evidence (sorry for offtopic). Where is written by eyewitnesses? I’ll say where, no, there are only copies left.
          1. does it
            does it 30 May 2013 07: 30 New
            +1
            Quote: Setrac
            Are these all contemporaries of Byzantium?

            ANNA COMNINA - the Greek princess, the eldest daughter of the Byzantine emperor Alexei I Komnin and Irina Dukini. One of the first women historians.
  16. washi
    washi 29 May 2013 14: 40 New
    +4
     apr (2)  Today, 12:00 New
    Not everything is so obvious The Byzantine empire fell, but the merits of Muslims were not very significant; Catholics Europeans played a crusade on Byzantium. A very strong commercial competitor controlled trade with the Middle East. , today, the Europeans are swinging Syria acting obsalyutno exactly like 600 years ago.
    I agree. Surviving several crusades (robberies) is difficult. And the Western warriors Knights, as usual, were robbed and left.
    No need to be equal to the western robbers, robbers, looters.
    They created an international war crimes court. Submit for the destruction of Hindus, Indians, Madogascars, Yugoslavs, Japanese, Filipinos, Australians, etc.
  17. Arhaik
    Arhaik 29 May 2013 20: 12 New
    0
    History repeats itself.
  18. rumpeljschtizhen
    rumpeljschtizhen 29 May 2013 22: 36 New
    +1
    well, if something doesn’t threaten us right away ..... but with the replacement of nations, we must follow
  19. _KM_
    _KM_ 30 May 2013 13: 07 New
    0
    Quote: Vasya
    Not everything is so obvious The Byzantine empire fell, but the merits of Muslims were not very significant; Catholics Europeans played a crusade on Byzantium. A very strong commercial competitor controlled trade with the Middle East. , today, the Europeans are swinging Syria acting obsalyutno exactly like 600 years ago.


    Very true remark! Europeans, what then, that now they repeat the same mistakes.