Eupedia Forums
Site NavigationEupedia Top > Eupedia Forum & Japan Forum
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 51 to 75 of 92

Thread: Byzantium

  1. #51
    Advisor LeBrok's Avatar
    Join Date
    18-11-09
    Location
    Calgary
    Posts
    10,295

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b Z2109
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H1c

    Ethnic group
    Citizen of the world
    Country: Canada-Alberta



    Quote Originally Posted by Diocletian View Post
    The Ottomans never called themselves Romans, although the maternal line of the dynasty was clearly Byzantine as the step-moter of Mehmed the Conqueror was Mara Brankovic, a Kantakouzene. Mehmed himself was thinking that he was related to John Tzelepes Komnenos. Mehmed was most probably an orthodox christian in the heart and perceived the conquest of Constantinople as uniting with his roots. Persians and Arabs regarded him as the Caesar of the Rum, since he declared himself that way and got recognized by the Ecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinope. The claim of the Ottoman Empire being the continuation of Byzantium and the Third Rome is taking its arguments from this perspective.
    Intriguing idea. Genetically speaking the Ottoman empire incorporated same local populations within its borders. Ethnic Turks were just a small minority, and Turk rulers quickly mixed with local aristocratic blood. The official language changed, but his we saw already when Latin changed for Greek, so no biggy. If not change of religion Ottoman Empire could have been easily considered as continuation of Roman Empire, and head of all orthodox Europe.

    Religion is one of strongest atuts, because on grounds of religion Russian Tzars claimed this continuation and leadership of Orthodox church. No wonder their last name was Romanov. :)
    Be wary of people who tend to glorify the past, underestimate the present, and demonize the future.

  2. #52
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    14-12-10
    Posts
    1,603


    Country: Serbia



    Quote Originally Posted by Yetos View Post
    the biggest hate was due to 4rth Crusade,
    Yes.

    What's is interesting, Crusaders headed to Egypt, but things were changed.

    Probably the main role played Venetian leadership who had plan to defeat the biggest rival - Constantinople.

    http://www.roman-empire.net/constant/1203-1204.html

    Thus began the sack of Constantinople, the richest city of all Europe. Nobody controlled the troops. Thousands of defenseless civilians were killed. Women, even nuns, were raped by the crusading army and churches, monasteries and convents were looted. The very altars of churches were smashed and torn to pieces for their gold and marble by warriors who had sworn to fight in service of the Christian faith.
    Even the magnificent Santa Sophia was ransacked by the crusaders. Works of tremendous value were destroyed merely for their material value. One such work was the bronze statue of Hercules, created by the famous Lysippus, court sculptor of no lesser than Alexander the Great. The statue was melted down for its bronze. It is but one of a mass of bronze artworks which was melted down by those blinded by greed.

  3. #53
    Advisor Angela's Avatar
    Join Date
    02-01-11
    Posts
    19,453


    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: USA - New York



    1 members found this post helpful.
    Perhaps this might be helpful...from a link I provided upthread...

    "The people who lived in the "Byzantine Empire" never knew nor used the word "Byzantine." They knew themselves to be Romans, nothing more and absolutely nothing less. By transferring the Imperial capital from Rome on the Tiber to the New Rome on Bosphorus, dubbed Constantinople, the Emperor Constantine I had transferred the actual identity of Rome to the new location. Long before Constantine I, the idea of "Rome" had become dissociated from the Eternal City on the Tiber. For a Roman meant a Roman citizen, where ever he lived. Before the Imperial period, in 89 BC, a Roman law had granted Roman citizenship to people throughout Italy. Afterwards, citizenship became extended to an increasing number of people in different parts of the Empire. In 212, Emperor Caracalla declared all free persons in the Empire to be Roman citizens, entitled to call themselves Roman, not merely subject to the Romans. Within a few decades, people begin to refer to the entire Empire less often [in Latin] as "Imperium Romanorum" [Domain of the Romans] and more often as "Romania" [Romanland]

    In the provinces close to Constantinople, where the Greek language predominated over the Latin of Old Rome, the idea of Roman citizenship and identity appealed to a broad segment of the population. Greek speaking citizens were proud to be Romans: in Latin, "Romani," or, in Greek, "Romaioi." The word "Romaioi" became descriptive of the Greek speaking population of the Empire. The old ethnic name applied to Greeks, "Hellene",fell into disuse. In ancient times, of course, "Hellene" had meant Greek. Hellene meant Greek from the seventh century BC onward, if not earlier. Although Homer called Greeks by other names, Herodotus, Pericles, Plato and Alexander were all "Hellenes," as were Greek speaking inhabitants of the Roman Empire in the first and second centuries AD. In the fourth century AD, as the Empire became Christianized, the term "Hellene" became redefined by common convention to include people who still worshipped the old gods and studied philosophy in hopes of resisting the new faith of Christianity. Emperor Julian II [361-363], an Emperor who tried to stop the Christian tide, described himself as a "Hellene." By "Hellene," Julian signified his combination of Neo-Platonic philosophy and worship of the Olympians.


    In the final years of the fourth century AD, Emperor Theodosius I [379-395] made Christianity the sole state religion after subduing the rebellion of an "Hellene" usurper, a westerner named Eugenius. After Theodosius' critical decision, fewer and fewer people were willing to call themselves "Hellenes." For centuries more, the word "Hellene" remained in bad repute, associated with outlawed religious ideas and disloyalty to the state. Greek speakers found the identity of "Romaioi" in place of "Hellene" to be a safe refuge in changing times. Greek speaking "Romaioi" inhabited the Empire until the its demise in the fifteenth century.

    The Empire at Constantinople should not be called the "Byzantine Empire" at all. If it requires a special name, we might better name the Empire at Constantinople with the title of the "Romaion Empire" from the Greek "Basileia Romaion" [Empire of the Romaioi]. "

    It would seem that the ancient Romans were less "race" and "ethnicity" obsessed than some modern inhabitants of Europe.

    He continues:

    "The transition to a more Greek style of titulature after 700 might be associated with a change in dynasty. The family of Heraclius [reigned 610-641] hailed from Latin speaking North Africa. Heraclius' descendants, including Constans II, were probably slow to abandon Latin titles partly in tribute to their own family heritage. The Latinity of the Heraclian family did not confine itself to forms and titles. Constans II actually considered moving the Imperial capital from Constantinople to Syracuse in Sicily. Although Syracuse itself was as Greek a city as Constantinople, famous since antiquity, the movement of the capital westward out of Constantinople to Syracuse would have pulled the focus of the Empire in a new direction, a direction less fundamentally Greek. Constans II suffered an untimely death, which prevented the fruition of his plans. He was murdered at Syracuse, likely by enemies of his planned transfer of the capital. Notwithstanding the fate of Constans II, the Heraclian family remained in power at Constantinople two generations longer. The end of the Heraclian era in 711 signaled a further shift in the orientation of the Empire towards the Greek world. The next ruling family, the Isaurian Dynasty [717-802] was Greek speaking from the start. In the course of the eighth century, "Dominus Noster" disappeared from Imperial coins. The words "Perpetvus Augustus" also began to fade in the same era, replaced by the Greek "Basileus."

    The word "Basileus" deserves a history of its own. In classical Greece, "Basileus" meant "King," equivalent to the Latin "Rex." From the time of Emperor Augustus [died 14 AD], Greeks called the Roman Emperor by the name "Basileus." In the Latin language, of course, the Emperor was never called "Rex," which was offensive to Roman Republican sensibilities: the Emperors were, in theory, chiefs of a Republican government. Roman Republicanism notwithstanding, the use of "Basileus" became standard among Greek speaking Romaioi to describe the Emperor. No way existed to translate the titles of "Imperator" or "Augustus" into Greek that did not sound contrived or ridiculous. The word "Autocrator" was coined to translate "Imperator.";"Sebastos" stood as the parallel to "Augustus," but neither "Autocrator" nor "Sebastos" acquired popular currency. Instead, the pretense developed that "Basileus" meant "Emperor" instead of "King.". Romaioi commenced to use the Latin "Rex" to mean "King" in reference to non-Roman rulers of lesser rank than their own Emperor. The new usage of "Basileus" gained formal status much later. In the seventh century, Emperor Heraclius first employed "Basileus"."

    See:http://www.romanity.org/htm/fox.01.e...zantine.01.htm


    Non si fa il proprio dovere perchè qualcuno ci dica grazie, lo si fa per principio, per se stessi, per la propria dignità. Oriana Fallaci

  4. #54
    Advisor Angela's Avatar
    Join Date
    02-01-11
    Posts
    19,453


    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: USA - New York



    Quote Originally Posted by LeBrok View Post
    Intriguing idea. Genetically speaking the Ottoman empire incorporated same local populations within its borders. Ethnic Turks were just a small minority, and Turk rulers quickly mixed with local aristocratic blood. The official language changed, but his we saw already when Latin changed for Greek, so no biggy. If not change of religion Ottoman Empire could have been easily considered as continuation of Roman Empire, and head of all orthodox Europe.

    Religion is one of strongest atuts, because on grounds of religion Russian Tzars claimed this continuation and leadership of Orthodox church. No wonder their last name was Romanov. :)
    I'm not convinced that there would have been a tremendous difference between the pre-Turkic invasion westernmost "Anatolians" and their closest neighbors in "Greek" territory.

  5. #55
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    20-11-12
    Posts
    562


    Country: Canada



    Quote Originally Posted by Diocletian View Post
    The Ottomans never called themselves Romans, although the maternal line of the dynasty was clearly Byzantine as the step-moter of Mehmed the Conqueror was Mara Brankovic, a Kantakouzene. Mehmed himself was thinking that he was related to John Tzelepes Komnenos. Mehmed was most probably an orthodox christian in the heart and perceived the conquest of Constantinople as uniting with his roots. Persians and Arabs regarded him as the Caesar of the Rum, since he declared himself that way and got recognized by the Ecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinope. The claim of the Ottoman Empire being the continuation of Byzantium and the Third Rome is taking its arguments from this perspective.
    Yea, they did have some sort of contrived argument for public use, supported by sell-out clergy, but really, the Ottomans fundamentally and philosophically stand opposite to Byzant. The ex-Byzantines in the Balkans were pretty much choked for 500 yrs under Ottomans and their backwards authoritarian rule.

  6. #56
    Regular Member Diocletian's Avatar
    Join Date
    09-10-14
    Posts
    29


    Ethnic group
    Turkish
    Country: Turkey



    Quote Originally Posted by LeBrok View Post
    Intriguing idea. Genetically speaking the Ottoman empire incorporated same local populations within its borders. Ethnic Turks were just a small minority, and Turk rulers quickly mixed with local aristocratic blood. The official language changed, but his we saw already when Latin changed for Greek, so no biggy. If not change of religion Ottoman Empire could have been easily considered as continuation of Roman Empire, and head of all orthodox Europe.

    Religion is one of strongest atuts, because on grounds of religion Russian Tzars claimed this continuation and leadership of Orthodox church. No wonder their last name was Romanov. :)
    Yes, it is certain that the local Byzantine commoners didn't just evaporate, but merged into the Turkic newcomers. Latin changed for Greek, and Imperial cult changed for Christianity. It seems like religion change was no biggie too.

  7. #57
    Regular Member Diocletian's Avatar
    Join Date
    09-10-14
    Posts
    29


    Ethnic group
    Turkish
    Country: Turkey



    Quote Originally Posted by kamani View Post
    Yea, they did have some sort of contrived argument for public use, supported by sell-out clergy, but really, the Ottomans fundamentally and philosophically stand opposite to Byzant. The ex-Byzantines in the Balkans were pretty much choked for 500 yrs under Ottomans and their backwards authoritarian rule.
    Ottomans were, due to Islam, fundamentally and philosophically opposite to Christianity. Too bad Mehmed II didn't accept the invitation of Pope Pius II.

  8. #58
    Regular Member Sile's Avatar
    Join Date
    04-09-11
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    5,115

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    T1a2 -Z19945..Jura
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H95a1 ..Pannoni

    Ethnic group
    North Alpine Italian
    Country: Australia



    Quote Originally Posted by Garrick View Post
    Yes.

    What's is interesting, Crusaders headed to Egypt, but things were changed.

    Probably the main role played Venetian leadership who had plan to defeat the biggest rival - Constantinople.

    http://www.roman-empire.net/constant/1203-1204.html

    Thus began the sack of Constantinople, the richest city of all Europe. Nobody controlled the troops. Thousands of defenseless civilians were killed. Women, even nuns, were raped by the crusading army and churches, monasteries and convents were looted. The very altars of churches were smashed and torn to pieces for their gold and marble by warriors who had sworn to fight in service of the Christian faith.
    Even the magnificent Santa Sophia was ransacked by the crusaders. Works of tremendous value were destroyed merely for their material value. One such work was the bronze statue of Hercules, created by the famous Lysippus, court sculptor of no lesser than Alexander the Great. The statue was melted down for its bronze. It is but one of a mass of bronze artworks which was melted down by those blinded by greed.
    I do not understand the last paragraph, Venice was already one of 4 merchant groups in Constantinople, they sat on the council as part of the blue group, the other members where the genoese, the pisans and another which i cannot recall.

    the 4th crusade was purely the result of lack of money ( paying your dues)
    summary- the year before its departure from Venice, the franks and the pope asked Venice to build enough ships to transport 70000 men , horses and supplies to the levant, Venice stated ok and gave them a price . Venice built the ships.
    a year later the franks returned, but had only 36000 men and no money. Venice placed these people in the lido ( an 18km island ) . the franks could not pay their dues.
    2 options
    1- Venice could have left these 36000 on the lido to die and rot in which many of the current european nobility would have perished or
    2 - Support the pope in its request to head to Constantinople to bring the orthodox church back under the pope and Venice could be repaid by looting the city............not a hard decision is it..........religion was minor in the eyes of Venice........a personnel thing and not intended for a national organization ( maybe why venice was excommunicated 13 times by the pope , they did not care )

    the contract was stated in the book by one of the leaders of the franks who fought there and eventually secured a piece of the Peloponnese for himself..............his name was VILLEHARDOUIN

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geoffrey_of_Villehardouin



    có che un pòpoło no 'l defende pi ła só łéngua el xe prónto par èser s'ciavo

    when a people no longer dares to defend its language it is ripe for slavery.

  9. #59
    Regular Member Yetos's Avatar
    Join Date
    02-10-11
    Location
    Makedonia
    Posts
    5,812

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    G2a3a
    MtDNA haplogroup
    X2b

    Ethnic group
    Makedonian original
    Country: Greece



    Quote Originally Posted by Diocletian View Post
    If anything remotely related with, at least, Rome was seen as heresy, then they must have had immediately abandoned identifying themselves as Romans. But Persians kept calling them Romans and Turks learned from Persians that they were called Roman, when they came in. Turks then started calling them Rum, meaning Roman. And the Seljuk state in Anatolia was thought of as a Roman sultanate. I don't think the Roman identity was that much of a heresy among the Byzantine.
    even today the what left behind from 1923 in Turkey is named Rum and the Greek language Rumlar
    ΟΘΕΝ ΑΙΔΩΣ OY EINAI
    ΑΤΗ ΛΑΜΒΑΝΕΙΝ ΑΥΤΟΙΣ
    ΥΒΡΙΣ ΓΕΝΝΑΤΑΙ
    ΝΕΜΕΣΙΣ ΚΑΙ ΤΙΣΗ ΑΚΟΛΟΥΘΟΥΣΙ ΔΕ

    When there is no shame
    Divine blindness conquers them
    Hybris (abuse, opprombium) is born
    Nemesis and punishment follows.

    Εχε υπομονη Ηρωα
    Η τιμωρια δεν αργει.

  10. #60
    Regular Member Yetos's Avatar
    Join Date
    02-10-11
    Location
    Makedonia
    Posts
    5,812

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    G2a3a
    MtDNA haplogroup
    X2b

    Ethnic group
    Makedonian original
    Country: Greece



    Quote Originally Posted by Angela View Post
    Perhaps this might be helpful...from a link I provided upthread...

    "The people who lived in the "Byzantine Empire" never knew nor used the word "Byzantine." They knew themselves to be Romans, nothing more and absolutely nothing less. By transferring the Imperial capital from Rome on the Tiber to the New Rome on Bosphorus, dubbed Constantinople, the Emperor Constantine I had transferred the actual identity of Rome to the new location. Long before Constantine I, the idea of "Rome" had become dissociated from the Eternal City on the Tiber. For a Roman meant a Roman citizen, where ever he lived. Before the Imperial period, in 89 BC, a Roman law had granted Roman citizenship to people throughout Italy. Afterwards, citizenship became extended to an increasing number of people in different parts of the Empire. In 212, Emperor Caracalla declared all free persons in the Empire to be Roman citizens, entitled to call themselves Roman, not merely subject to the Romans. Within a few decades, people begin to refer to the entire Empire less often [in Latin] as "Imperium Romanorum" [Domain of the Romans] and more often as "Romania" [Romanland]

    In the provinces close to Constantinople, where the Greek language predominated over the Latin of Old Rome, the idea of Roman citizenship and identity appealed to a broad segment of the population. Greek speaking citizens were proud to be Romans: in Latin, "Romani," or, in Greek, "Romaioi." The word "Romaioi" became descriptive of the Greek speaking population of the Empire. The old ethnic name applied to Greeks, "Hellene",fell into disuse. In ancient times, of course, "Hellene" had meant Greek. Hellene meant Greek from the seventh century BC onward, if not earlier. Although Homer called Greeks by other names, Herodotus, Pericles, Plato and Alexander were all "Hellenes," as were Greek speaking inhabitants of the Roman Empire in the first and second centuries AD. In the fourth century AD, as the Empire became Christianized, the term "Hellene" became redefined by common convention to include people who still worshipped the old gods and studied philosophy in hopes of resisting the new faith of Christianity. Emperor Julian II [361-363], an Emperor who tried to stop the Christian tide, described himself as a "Hellene." By "Hellene," Julian signified his combination of Neo-Platonic philosophy and worship of the Olympians.


    In the final years of the fourth century AD, Emperor Theodosius I [379-395] made Christianity the sole state religion after subduing the rebellion of an "Hellene" usurper, a westerner named Eugenius. After Theodosius' critical decision, fewer and fewer people were willing to call themselves "Hellenes." For centuries more, the word "Hellene" remained in bad repute, associated with outlawed religious ideas and disloyalty to the state. Greek speakers found the identity of "Romaioi" in place of "Hellene" to be a safe refuge in changing times. Greek speaking "Romaioi" inhabited the Empire until the its demise in the fifteenth century.

    The Empire at Constantinople should not be called the "Byzantine Empire" at all. If it requires a special name, we might better name the Empire at Constantinople with the title of the "Romaion Empire" from the Greek "Basileia Romaion" [Empire of the Romaioi]. "

    It would seem that the ancient Romans were less "race" and "ethnicity" obsessed than some modern inhabitants of Europe.

    He continues:

    "The transition to a more Greek style of titulature after 700 might be associated with a change in dynasty. The family of Heraclius [reigned 610-641] hailed from Latin speaking North Africa. Heraclius' descendants, including Constans II, were probably slow to abandon Latin titles partly in tribute to their own family heritage. The Latinity of the Heraclian family did not confine itself to forms and titles. Constans II actually considered moving the Imperial capital from Constantinople to Syracuse in Sicily. Although Syracuse itself was as Greek a city as Constantinople, famous since antiquity, the movement of the capital westward out of Constantinople to Syracuse would have pulled the focus of the Empire in a new direction, a direction less fundamentally Greek. Constans II suffered an untimely death, which prevented the fruition of his plans. He was murdered at Syracuse, likely by enemies of his planned transfer of the capital. Notwithstanding the fate of Constans II, the Heraclian family remained in power at Constantinople two generations longer. The end of the Heraclian era in 711 signaled a further shift in the orientation of the Empire towards the Greek world. The next ruling family, the Isaurian Dynasty [717-802] was Greek speaking from the start. In the course of the eighth century, "Dominus Noster" disappeared from Imperial coins. The words "Perpetvus Augustus" also began to fade in the same era, replaced by the Greek "Basileus."

    The word "Basileus" deserves a history of its own. In classical Greece, "Basileus" meant "King," equivalent to the Latin "Rex." From the time of Emperor Augustus [died 14 AD], Greeks called the Roman Emperor by the name "Basileus." In the Latin language, of course, the Emperor was never called "Rex," which was offensive to Roman Republican sensibilities: the Emperors were, in theory, chiefs of a Republican government. Roman Republicanism notwithstanding, the use of "Basileus" became standard among Greek speaking Romaioi to describe the Emperor. No way existed to translate the titles of "Imperator" or "Augustus" into Greek that did not sound contrived or ridiculous. The word "Autocrator" was coined to translate "Imperator.";"Sebastos" stood as the parallel to "Augustus," but neither "Autocrator" nor "Sebastos" acquired popular currency. Instead, the pretense developed that "Basileus" meant "Emperor" instead of "King.". Romaioi commenced to use the Latin "Rex" to mean "King" in reference to non-Roman rulers of lesser rank than their own Emperor. The new usage of "Basileus" gained formal status much later. In the seventh century, Emperor Heraclius first employed "Basileus"."

    See:http://www.romanity.org/htm/fox.01.e...zantine.01.htm

    You are correct, the word Hellenas was just like admit that you are a pagan,

    that is the reason I do not like byzantine times,
    but history is history.

    AMMIANUS MARCELLINUS
    BISHOP ΣΩΖΟΜΕΝΟΣ SOZOMEN etc

    Ammianus writes, 14:19

    'ηρκει να κατηγορηθει τις Ελληνας υπο κακκοβουλου κατασκοπου ... ινα καταδικσθει εις θανατον ως ειδωλολατρης'

    meaning it was enough to say 'he is Greek' by a bad (christian) spy or..... so to judged to death penalty as pagan or idol worshiper.

    The begining of Byzantium is connected also with the Mediolanum recognition of Christianity,
    few decades later, the word Hellen-as was enough to send you to death penalty,

    THAT IS WHY ALL GREEKS ADOPTED THE IDENTITY Ρωμιος Ρωμαιος Roman. to survive

    for those who can not find Ammianus Marcellinus or Sozomen bishop or others, about Schythopolis and rest,
    Codex Theodosianus XVI is enough to understand
    X. De paganis sacrifictis et templis
    XVI 16 10 2
    XVI 16 10 6 etc

    we consider Kleopatra as Last of Makedonians, but if we read more we see Makedonian nobility existed till Scythopolis.
    emperror Constans 2nd should seccure its empire from all previous inheritages.
    that is why Flavians last for centuries till the 'σταση του Νικα' Nica's riots
    Thessaloniki 390 AD the slain of 15 000 unarmed Makedonian men (Greeks) in Hippodrome
    Pagan Thessaloniki was the biggest threat to christian Nova Roma
    Last edited by Yetos; 10-10-14 at 00:05.

  11. #61
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    14-12-10
    Posts
    1,603


    Country: Serbia



    Quote Originally Posted by Sile View Post
    I do not understand the last paragraph, Venice was already one of 4 merchant groups in Constantinople, they sat on the council as part of the blue group, the other members where the genoese, the pisans and another which i cannot recall.

    the 4th crusade was purely the result of lack of money ( paying your dues)
    summary- the year before its departure from Venice, the franks and the pope asked Venice to build enough ships to transport 70000 men , horses and supplies to the levant, Venice stated ok and gave them a price . Venice built the ships.
    a year later the franks returned, but had only 36000 men and no money. Venice placed these people in the lido ( an 18km island ) . the franks could not pay their dues.
    2 options
    1- Venice could have left these 36000 on the lido to die and rot in which many of the current european nobility would have perished or
    2 - Support the pope in its request to head to Constantinople to bring the orthodox church back under the pope and Venice could be repaid by looting the city............not a hard decision is it..........religion was minor in the eyes of Venice........a personnel thing and not intended for a national organization ( maybe why venice was excommunicated 13 times by the pope , they did not care )

    the contract was stated in the book by one of the leaders of the franks who fought there and eventually secured a piece of the Peloponnese for himself..............his name was VILLEHARDOUIN

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geoffrey_of_Villehardouin



    It is this paragraph:


    The Triumph of Venice This left the republic of Venice in triumph. Their greatest rival in the Mediterranean was smashed, led by a ruler who would be of no danger to their aspirations of dominating maritime trade. They had successfully diverted the Crusade from attacking Egypt with whom they had signed a lucrative trade agreement. And now many artworks and religious relics would be taken back home to adorned their own great city. Their old, blind Doge, already in his eighties, had served them well.

    ...

    The website is:

    Illustrated History of the Roman Empire:

    http://www.roman-empire.net/index.html

    Web-Resource on Rome

    Franco Cavazzi - [email protected]

  12. #62
    Banned
    Join Date
    24-08-14
    Posts
    467


    Country: Albania



    1 members found this post helpful.
    Turk rulers quickly mixed with local aristocratic blood.????


    We have not heard about any Turkish Romeo in love with a Byzantine Juliet.
    Obviously Turks mixed with the locals, but they followed a different approach.


    Final assault


    The Army converged upon the Augusteum, the vast square that fronted the great church of Hagia Sophia whose bronze gates were barred by a huge throng of civilians inside the building, hoping for divine protection. After the doors were breached, the troops separated the congregation according to what price they might bring in the slave markets. Mehmed II allowed his troops to plunder the city for three days as it was customary.[77] Soldiers fought over the possession of some of the spoils of war.[78] According to the Venetian surgeon Nicolò Barbaro "all through the day the Turks made a great slaughter of Christians through the city". According to Philip Mansel thousands of civilians were killed and 30,000 civilians were enslaved or deported.[79] An eyewitness account, which appears in the book Routh, C. R. N. They Saw It Happen in Europe 1450-1600 (1965), is as follows:

    "Nothing will ever equal the horror of this harrowing and terrible spectacle. People frightened by the shouting ran out of their houses and were cut down by the sword before they knew what was happening. And some were massacred in their houses where they tried to hide, and some in churches where they sought refuge. The enraged Turkish soldiers . . . gave no quarter. When they had massacred and there was no longer any resistance, they were intent on pillage and roamed through the town stealing, disrobing, pillaging, killing, raping, taking captive men, women, children, old men, young men, monks, priests, people of all sorts and conditions . . . There were virgins who awoke from troubled sleep to find those brigands standing over them with bloody hands and faces full of abject fury. This medley of all nations, these frantic brutes stormed into their houses, dragged them, tore them, forced them, dishonored them, raped them at the cross-roads and made them submit to the most terrible outrages. It is even said that at the mere sight of them many girls were so stupefied that they almost gave up the ghost.
    Old men of venerable appearance were dragged by their white hair and piteously beaten. Priests were led into captivity in batches, as well as reverend virgins, hermits and recluses who were dedicated to God alone and lived only for Him to whom they sacrificed themselves, who were dragged from their cells and others from the churches in which they had sought refuge, in spite of their weeping and sobs and their emaciated cheeks, to be made objects of scorn before being struck down. Tender children were brutally snatched from their mothers' breasts and girls were pitilessly given up to strange and horrible unions, and a thousand other terrible things happened. . .
    Temples were desecrated, ransacked and pillaged . . . sacred objects were scornfully flung aside, the holy icons and the holy vessels were desecrated. Ornaments were burned, broken in pieces or simply thrown into the streets. Saints' shrines were brutally violated in order to get out the remains which were then thrown to the wind. Chalices and cups for the celebration of the Mass were set aside for their orgies or broken or melted down or sold. Priests' garments embroidered with gold and set with pearls and gems were sold to the highest bidder and thrown into the fire to extract the gold. Immense numbers of sacred and profane books were flung on the fire or tom up and trampled under foot. The majority, however, were sold at derisory prices, for a few pence. Saints' altars, tom from their foundations, were overturned. All the most holy hiding places were violated and broken in order to get out the holy treasures which they contained . . .
    When Mehmed (II) saw the ravages, the destruction and the deserted houses and all that had perished and become ruins, then a great sadness took possession of him and he repented the pillage and all the destruction. Tears came to his eyes and sobbing he expressed his sadness. 'What a town this was! And we have allowed it to be destroyed'! His soul was full of sorrow. And in truth it was natural, so much did the horror of the situation exceed all limits."

  13. #63
    Advisor LeBrok's Avatar
    Join Date
    18-11-09
    Location
    Calgary
    Posts
    10,295

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b Z2109
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H1c

    Ethnic group
    Citizen of the world
    Country: Canada-Alberta



    Quote Originally Posted by Diocletian View Post
    Yes, it is certain that the local Byzantine commoners didn't just evaporate, but merged into the Turkic newcomers. Latin changed for Greek, and Imperial cult changed for Christianity. It seems like religion change was no biggie too.
    Not a big deal for locals I guess, but a big deal for the rest of Christian Europe in acceptance of Ottoman Empire as extension of Byzantium.

  14. #64
    Advisor Angela's Avatar
    Join Date
    02-01-11
    Posts
    19,453


    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: USA - New York



    Yetos;441276]You are correct, the word Hellenas was just like admit that you are a pagan,

    that is the reason I do not like byzantine times,
    The western empire was no more, and you think you all would have been better off without the "Byzantines"?

    Was their Empire perfect? Of course not. I don't know of a perfect empire. Did it go through periods of decline? Yes, of course. Does that mean you would all have been better off without it? Doing what exactly? Living as illiterate subsistence farmers or pastoralists in mud huts surrounded by raiding bands and with no access to the outside world? Are you aware of what the west was like for hundreds of years after the fall of Rome?

    Perhaps it's time for some of our Balkan members to actually read the specialist literature on life in the Balkans during the days of the "Byzantine" Empire from, say, about 400-1000 AD and compare it to conditions in the West during the same period.

  15. #65
    Advisor LeBrok's Avatar
    Join Date
    18-11-09
    Location
    Calgary
    Posts
    10,295

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b Z2109
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H1c

    Ethnic group
    Citizen of the world
    Country: Canada-Alberta



    I think this clip is in order again: "What Romans did for us?". The rhetorical question that went wrong, lol.

  16. #66
    Advisor Angela's Avatar
    Join Date
    02-01-11
    Posts
    19,453


    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: USA - New York



    Quote Originally Posted by LeBrok View Post
    I think this clip is in order again: "What Romans did for us?". The rhetorical question that went wrong, lol.
    Well, a different "Rome" but the point is the same...

    Ed. The ironic thing is that a good part of my ancestry stems from people who fought against the Rome of the West with passion and commitment (the Celt-Ligures and the Apuani), and the war that the Rome of the East fought with the Ostrogoths on Italian soil caused more destruction than the original invasions. (My grandfather was born in a village built on the site of a Byzantine castrum.)

    Facts are stubborn things, however, and they have to be dealt with honestly, in my opinion. I'm also not in the business of fighting wars two thousand years old. These are matters of academic interest which should hopefully teach us useful lessons, but we should be concentrating on making life better NOW, not on reliving and reviving old rivalries.

  17. #67
    Banned
    Join Date
    24-08-14
    Posts
    467


    Country: Albania



    1 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by kamani View Post
    In the mean time Italian Rome was sitting back and laughing it. Albanian Skanderbeg went to ask them for help against the Turks around 1440-s. Ofcourse they gave him nothing, since they had no intention to support the Albanian Orthodox population or anything that smelled Byzantine. Do you know what Skanderbeg told them in the end: "Instead of the Turks, I should have fought you..."




    A sentence out of context loses meaning. Scanderbeg has not had good relations with Venice. These relationships have had their fluctuations.
    But should not forget that with Vatican and the Kingdom of Naples these relationships were excellent.

    The Siege of Berat

    More than 5,000 of Skanderbeg's men died, including 800 men of a 1,000-man-strong contingent of Neapolitans from Alphonso V as experts in demolition, artillery, and siege warfare.[6] The commander of the siege, Muzaka Thopia, also died during the conflict.[7]

    After the victorious Battle of Ujëbardha, Skanderbeg's relations with the Papacy under Pope Calixtus III were intensified. The reason was that during this time, Skanderbeg's military undertakings involved considerable expense which the contribution of Alfonso V of Aragon was not sufficient to defray.[97] In 1457, Skanderbeg requested help from Calixtus III. Being himself in financial difficulties, the Pope could do no more than send Skanderbeg a single galley and a modest sum of money, promising more ships and larger amounts of money in the future.[97] On December 23, 1457, Calixtus III appointed Skanderbeg as Captain-General of the Curia in the war against the Ottomans and declared him Captain-General of the Holy See. The Pope also gave him the title Athleta Christi, or Champion of Christ.[97]

    Meanwhile, Ragusa bluntly refused to release the funds which had been collected in Dalmatia for the crusade and which, according to the Pope, were to have been distributed in equal parts to Hungary, Bosnia, and Albania. The Ragusans even entered into negotiations with Mehmed.[97] At the end of December 1457, Calixtus threatened Venice with an interdict and repeated the threat in February 1458.
    In this context he used That expression: "Instead of the Turks, I should have fought you..."

    And must not forget this moment:
    In November 1463, Pope Pius II tried to organize a new crusade against the Ottomans, similar to what Pope Nicholas V and Pope Calixtus III had tried to do before him. Pius II invited all the Christian nobility to join, and the Venetians immediately answered the appeal.[107] So did Skanderbeg, who on 27 November 1463, declared war on the Ottomans and attacked their forces near Ohrid. Pius II's planned crusade envisioned assembling 20,000 soldiers in Taranto, while another 20,000 would be gathered by Skanderbeg. They would have been summoned in Durazzo under Skanderbeg's leadership and would have formed the central front against the Ottomans. However, Pius II died in August 1464, at the crucial moment when the crusading armies were gathering and preparing to march in Ancona, and Skanderbeg was again left alone facing the Ottomans.[107]

    Pope will reach personally in Durres and will crowned Scanderbeg King of Albania and commander of the crusade, and the Pal Engjellin cardinal.

    Meanwhile, King Ferdinand of Naples' gratitude toward Skanderbeg for the help given during this Italian campaign continued even after Skanderbeg's death. In a letter dated to 24 February 1468, King Ferdinand expressively stated that "Skanderbeg was like a father to us" and "We regret this (Skanderbeg's) death not less than the death of King Alfonso", offering protection for Skanderbeg's widow and his son. It is relevant to the fact that the majority of Albanian leaders after the death of Skanderbeg found refuge in the Kingdom of Naples and this was also the case for the common people trying to escape from the Ottomans, who formed Arbëresh colonies in that area.
    Approximately 150.000-200.000 albanians arrived and took refuge in Italy.



    OK, we are talking about peoples not angels.

  18. #68
    Banned
    Join Date
    24-08-14
    Posts
    467


    Country: Albania



    Quote Originally Posted by Diocletian View Post
    The Ottomans never called themselves Romans, although the maternal line of the dynasty was clearly Byzantine as the step-moter of Mehmed the Conqueror was Mara Brankovic, a Kantakouzene. Mehmed himself was thinking that he was related to John Tzelepes Komnenos. Mehmed was most probably an orthodox christian in the heart and perceived the conquest of Constantinople as uniting with his roots. Persians and Arabs regarded him as the Caesar of the Rum, since he declared himself that way and got recognized by the Ecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinope. The claim of the Ottoman Empire being the continuation of Byzantium and the Third Rome is taking its arguments from this perspective.
    I do not think he was an crypto-christian, he was an musslim emperor. If we use a modern term of his claims may consider propaganda.He knew very well that part of his citizens were Christian, also he knew the claim of Byzantine emperors as legitimate heirs of the Roman Empire. And Sultan Mehmet Fatih dreamed the invasion of Rome. Turks called Rome Red Apple and said they would turn the Vatican into a stables for horses.

  19. #69
    Banned
    Join Date
    24-08-14
    Posts
    467


    Country: Albania



    The Roman East Empire was an multiethnic empire. Emperors who ruled had different nationalities.
    Constantine the Great
    Flavius Valerius Constantinus, as he was originally named, was born in the city of Naissus, (today Niš, Serbia) part of the Dardania province of Moesia, on 27 February of an uncertain year,[28] probably near 272.[29] His father was Flavius Constantius, a native of Dardania province of Moesia (later Dacia Ripensis).

    He Was Illyrian.

    The first Roman emperor to claim conversion to Christianity,[notes 4] Constantine played an influential role in the proclamation of the Edict of Milan, which decreed tolerance for Christianity in the empire. He called the First Council of Nicaea in 325, at which the Nicene Creed was professed by Christians.
    Foundation of Constantinople

    Eventually, however, Constantine decided to work on the city of Byzantium, which offered the advantage of having already been extensively rebuilt on Roman patterns of urbanism, during the preceding century, by Septimius Severus and Caracalla, who had already acknowledged its strategic importance.[206] The city was thus founded in 324,[207] dedicated on 11 May 330[207] and renamed Constantinopolis ("Constantine's City" or Constantinople in English).


    Colossal marble head of Emperor Constantine the Great, Roman, 4th century
    Following his death, his body was transferred to Constantinople and buried in the Church of the Holy Apostles there.[260] He was succeeded by his three sons born of Fausta, Constantine II, Constantius II and Constans. A number of relatives were killed by followers of Constantius, notably Constantine's nephews Dalmatius (who held the rank of Caesar) and Hannibalianus, presumably to eliminate possible contenders to an already complicated succession. He also had two daughters, Constantina and Helena, wife of Emperor Julian.[261]

    Justin I

    Justin was a peasant and a swineherd by occupation[2] from the region of Dardania, which is part of the Diocese of Illyricum.[3]
    He was born in a hamlet Bederiana near Naissus (modern Niš, South Serbia). The Justinian Dynasty descend from him.

    He Was Illyrian.

    Tremissis of Emperor Justin I
    Justinian I or Justinian the Great


    Justinian was born in Tauresium[12] around 482. The cognomen Iustinianus which he took later is indicative of adoption by his uncle Justin.[17] During his reign, he founded Justiniana Prima not far from his birthplace, today in South East Serbia.[18][19][20] His mother was Vigilantia, the sister of Justin. Justin, who was in the imperial guard (the Excubitors) before he became emperor,[21] adopted Justinian, brought him to Constantinople, and ensured the boy's education.[21]
    Justinian (b. 483) and consequently Vigilantia Dulcissimus were children of a sister Vigilantia Sabbatius (b. a. 455) of Justin I (b. a. 450, r. 518–527), founder of the Justinian Dynasty. The family originated in Bederiana, near Naissus (modern Niš in Serbia) in Dacia Mediterranea.[4] Procopius, Theodorus Lector, Zacharias Rhetor, Victor of Tunnuna, Theophanes the Confessor and Georgios Kedrenos consider Justin and his family Illyrians.
    As a ruler, Justinian showed great energy. He was known as "the emperor who never sleeps" on account of his work habits.



    He Was Illyrian.

    He increased the Byzantine Empire due to its maximum.


    Emperor Justinian reconquered many former territories of the Western Roman Empire, including Italy, Dalmatia, Africa, and southern Hispania.

    He made this with the help of Illyrians generals, the most distinguished was .

    Flavius Belisarius was probably born in Germane or Germania, a fortified town (some archaeological remains exist) on the site of present day Sapareva Banya in south-west Bulgaria, in the borders of Thrace and Illyria.


    Belisarius may be this bearded figure [1] on the right of Emperor Justinian I in the mosaic in the Church of San Vitale, Ravenna, which celebrates the reconquest of Italy by the Byzantine army. Compare Lillington-Martin (2009) page 16.
    He Was Illyrian.

    Justinian I built in the territory of Illyria 167 castle, which together with the mountainous terrain helped Illyrians during the invasions of the barbarians and the fist wave of slavic invasion.The Justinian Dynasty made the Empire strong and beautifull, during the Justinian I started the construction of Hagia Sophia
    whose works were completed during the reign of Emperor Justin II (565–578).His reign also marked a blossoming of Byzantine culture, and his building program yielded such masterpieces as the church of Hagia Sophia, which was to be the center of Eastern Orthodox Christianity for many centuries.



    During this period the empire retained its Latin character. Later emperors with different nationalities ruled the Byzantine Empire.
    The last Emperor was Constantine XI Dragaš Palaiologos.
    He was half serbian, 1/4 italian and the rest i don`t know.
    Last edited by King Bardhyl; 10-10-14 at 21:30.

  20. #70
    Advisor Angela's Avatar
    Join Date
    02-01-11
    Posts
    19,453


    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: USA - New York



    King Bardhyl:Meanwhile, King Ferdinand of Naples' gratitude toward Skanderbeg for the help given during this Italian campaign continued even after Skanderbeg's death. In a letter dated to 24 February 1468, King Ferdinand expressively stated that "Skanderbeg was like a father to us" and "We regret this (Skanderbeg's) death not less than the death of King Alfonso", offering protection for Skanderbeg's widow and his son. It is relevant to the fact that the majority of Albanian leaders after the death of Skanderbeg found refuge in the Kingdom of Naples and this was also the case for the common people trying to escape from the Ottomans, who formed Arbëresh colonies in that area.
    Approximately 150.000-200.000 albanians arrived and took refuge in Italy.
    A little off topic, I know, but in this regard I'd like to point out that although the period of twentieth century Albanian emigration to Italy had its stresses, the migrations of the period discussed in the prior post are, in fact, a model of the movement of refugees into another country. The Arbereshi villages were allowed to practice their religion and speak their language unharmed, and in return, they caused no problems for their hosts. Over the centuries, there was some intermarriage and blurring of ethnic lines, of course, but their culture still remains and forms part of the mosaic of the greater Italian culture.

    Likewise, until very recently, there were many Greek speaking southern Italian towns; the man I married has most of his ancestry from one of them, as does the famous actor Raoul Bova. The Griko speaking community of the Salento is, in fact, enjoying something of a resurgence.

    It is not impossible for people speaking different languages and following different forms of Christianity to live in harmony with one another.

  21. #71
    Regular Member Yetos's Avatar
    Join Date
    02-10-11
    Location
    Makedonia
    Posts
    5,812

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    G2a3a
    MtDNA haplogroup
    X2b

    Ethnic group
    Makedonian original
    Country: Greece



    @ Bardulic

    now Flavians are Illyrians?


    did they spoke Illyrian too?
    or the continue of Illyrian?

  22. #72
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    20-11-12
    Posts
    562


    Country: Canada



    Quote Originally Posted by King Bardhyl View Post
    A sentence out of context loses meaning. Scanderbeg has not had good relations with Venice. These relationships have had their fluctuations.
    But should not forget that with Vatican and the Kingdom of Naples these relationships were excellent.

    The Siege of Berat

    More than 5,000 of Skanderbeg's men died, including 800 men of a 1,000-man-strong contingent of Neapolitans from Alphonso V as experts in demolition, artillery, and siege warfare.[6] The commander of the siege, Muzaka Thopia, also died during the conflict.[7]
    Lets not get lost in the court pleasantries, the actual help received was very symbolic, and most of it was from the King of Napoli (the enemy of Venice). The Turks were coming with 100.000+ men, Skanderbeg stopped them for 25 years with around 20.000 total, which is a miracle for Albania. To add to the absurdity of this, at one point he was fighting Venice and the Turks at the same time. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albania...93Venetian_War
    Note that at some point Venice send 15.000 men to fight Skanderbeg. So the soldiers from overseas were coming, but not to fight the Turks...
    I think Venice and Rome were always in control of the situation. They knew the Turks had no good navy to invade them and figured lets watch Byzant get annihilated and if the Turks get to Austria we'll deal with them, which is what happened later, but the Austrians and Polish Hussars dealt with them instead.

  23. #73
    Regular Member Sile's Avatar
    Join Date
    04-09-11
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    5,115

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    T1a2 -Z19945..Jura
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H95a1 ..Pannoni

    Ethnic group
    North Alpine Italian
    Country: Australia



    1 members found this post helpful.
    served at the Ottoman court, George Kastrioti
    sought opportunities to organise a resistance against
    his suzerain. First, with the mediation of his father
    , he entered into negotiations with Venice, later,
    on 28 November 1443, taking advantage of the wa
    rs waged by John Hunya
    di, he proclaimed a
    rebellion and made efforts to unite the Albanian
    forces to ensure its success. It is a curious
    circumstance that Skanderbeg's mother was a Slav woman, according to some sources a Bulgarian
    named Voisava, a fact recorded in an anonymous
    Venetian chronicle:
    "Huic uxor fuit Voisava,
    Pologi Domini filia, est aute
    m Pologum oppidum in Macedoniae et
    Bulgarie confinibus" (the
    provinces of Upper and Lower Polog ranged ove
    r the territory of the Tetovo plain - A.t.).
    22

  24. #74
    Banned
    Join Date
    24-08-14
    Posts
    467


    Country: Albania



    Quote Originally Posted by Angela View Post
    A little off topic, I know, but in this regard I'd like to point out that although the period of twentieth century Albanian emigration to Italy had its stresses, the migrations of the period discussed in the prior post are, in fact, a model of the movement of refugees into another country. The Arbereshi villages were allowed to practice their religion and speak their language unharmed, and in return, they caused no problems for their hosts. Over the centuries, there was some intermarriage and blurring of ethnic lines, of course, but their culture still remains and forms part of the mosaic of the greater Italian culture.

    Likewise, until very recently, there were many Greek speaking southern Italian towns; the man I married has most of his ancestry from one of them, as does the famous actor Raoul Bova. The Griko speaking community of the Salento is, in fact, enjoying something of a resurgence.

    It is not impossible for people speaking different languages and following different forms of Christianity to live in harmony with one another.

    From this diaspora has emerged important personalities for Albania and Italy like Girolamo De Rada, Francesco Crispi etc. Both countries are very close to each other geographically.
    During World War II, Albania was occupied by Italy. However after the Armistice of Cassibile, thousands and thousands of Italian soldiers took refuge from the Albanian population, and none of them surrendered to the Germans. They took refuge in the houses of the Albanians until the end of the war, even though it constituted a risk.
    I have this kind of experience in my family.

    Friendship among the people is greater than the misguided ideologies.

  25. #75
    Banned
    Join Date
    24-08-14
    Posts
    467


    Country: Albania



    Quote Originally Posted by kamani View Post
    I think Venice and Rome were always in control of the situation. They knew the Turks had no good navy to invade them and figured lets watch Byzant get annihilated and if the Turks get to Austria we'll deal with them, which is what happened later, but the Austrians and Polish Hussars dealt with them instead.
    I think you are a little wrong. The distance between Albania and Italy is 60 miles. In 1988 an italian Swimmer named Paolo Pinto, traveled by swimming this distance.
    Mehmed II was a very ambitious man. He had the dream the occupation of Rome, but he was fighting on many fronts, and Scanderbeg and the albanians constitute a danger for his army if he will began an campaign against Italy. This is why the Roman popes called Scanderbeg "sword and shield of christianity".

    However in 1480 Mehmed II send an expedition in Italy.

    Expedition to Italy (1480)

    An Ottoman army under Gedik Ahmed Pasha invaded Italy in 1480. The Ottoman army captured Otranto in 1480 but after the death of Mehmed most of the troops returned and Otranto was retaken by Papal forces in 1481. Because of lack of food Gedik Ahmed Pasha returned with most of his troops to Albania, leaving a garrison of 800 infantry and 500 cavalry behind to defend Otranto. It was assumed he would return after the winter. Since it was only 28 years after the fall of Constantinople, there was some fear that Rome would suffer the same fate. Plans were made for the Pope and citizens of Rome to evacuate the city. Pope Sixtus IV repeated his 1471 call for a crusade. Several Italian city-states, Hungary and France responded positively to this. The Republic of Venice did not, as it had signed an expensive peace treaty with the Ottomans in 1479.
    In 1481 an army was raised by king Ferdinand I of Naples to be led by his son Alphonso II of Naples. A contingent of troops was provided by king Matthias Corvinus of Hungary. The city was besieged starting May 1, 1481. On May 3 the Sultan of the Ottoman Empire, Mehmed II, died, with ensuing quarrels about his succession. This possibly prevented the sending of Ottoman reinforcements to Otranto. So in the end the Turkish occupation of Otranto ended by negotiation with the Christian forces, permitting the Turks to withdraw to Albania.
    From that time in Italy began to use a phrase: "Mamma li turchi".

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •