|
| 19 Dec 2013 03:43 PM |
Who's better?
Rome all the way bb. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 19 Dec 2013 03:45 PM |
| A steampunk ottoman empire would be cool. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 19 Dec 2013 03:46 PM |
| Can someone define "steampunk" in a clan reference????... |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
richyard
|
  |
| Joined: 25 May 2008 |
| Total Posts: 29119 |
|
| |
|
|
| 19 Dec 2013 03:47 PM |
| the ottomans beat the byzantines because the roman empire wasnt in its prime |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 19 Dec 2013 03:48 PM |
Rome.
“The biggest challenge after success is shutting up about it.” (Add 8357 to post count - Connorking88) |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
runeyak5
|
  |
| Joined: 13 Aug 2009 |
| Total Posts: 2690 |
|
| |
|
|
| 19 Dec 2013 03:48 PM |
| Ever read Behemoth by Scott Westerfeld? |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 19 Dec 2013 03:51 PM |
Firstly, the Byzantine Empire had Constantinople sacked by the western crusaders 90% of its land was now occupied by western foreigners, only two cities were controlled by Byzantium (constantinople and mistra), at the same time, the ottomans were invading through the balkans.
Justinian's era was at their prime, if that was the case, the Ottomans would've been "rekt" |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
| |
|
Komnenos
|
  |
| Joined: 25 Jan 2011 |
| Total Posts: 8299 |
|
|
| 19 Dec 2013 09:27 PM |
| Justinian Byzantium would destroy the Ottomans in their prime. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 19 Dec 2013 09:29 PM |
well considering ottoman probably had guns
ottoman |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 19 Dec 2013 09:38 PM |
When you consider the known world at the time, Rome all the way. Ottoman controlled more land and threatened more but there was so much more discovered that they couldn't control. The only place Rome never fully conquered in the known world was britain because there was no reason to occupy a dead country.
~Keep |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 19 Dec 2013 09:39 PM |
Byzantium fell into several Civil Wars that lost Justinian's Expansion along with all of its powers.
Whcih Roman Empire? - Byzantium still would've lost, it just would've been much more bloody.
- The Classical Roman Empire wins all the way. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
Fortitudo
|
  |
| Joined: 04 Feb 2011 |
| Total Posts: 10881 |
|
|
| 19 Dec 2013 09:43 PM |
Whoever said the Byzantine Empire was the eastern European version of the Holy Roman Empire is so wrong.
Byzantine was an actual centralized, imperial state. The HRE was just a front for many regional kingdoms who were led by their own princes. They had an emperor who was appointed by the pope, but due to a power struggle between the popes and the emperors, neither had much power.
To gain influence, pope i forgot his name had the crusades. yadda yadda yadda fourth crusade sacked Constantinople, never recovered, Ottomans took over |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
| |
|
|
| 19 Dec 2013 09:58 PM |
Actually Rome occupied britannia for a while.
The two places they never fully conquered was Gaul and Saxon. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
Komnenos
|
  |
| Joined: 25 Jan 2011 |
| Total Posts: 8299 |
|
| |
|
fryber11
|
  |
| Joined: 06 Mar 2010 |
| Total Posts: 12280 |
|
|
| 19 Dec 2013 10:03 PM |
| Ottomans with their superior tech (Cannons and early guns) |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 19 Dec 2013 10:04 PM |
| Isn't an ottoman something you put on your porch? |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
fryber11
|
  |
| Joined: 06 Mar 2010 |
| Total Posts: 12280 |
|
|
| 19 Dec 2013 10:06 PM |
@Caboose, it could be.
(For those who don't get it, Ottoman is a furniture brand) |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
Fortitudo
|
  |
| Joined: 04 Feb 2011 |
| Total Posts: 10881 |
|
|
| 19 Dec 2013 10:07 PM |
fyi its not a brand, its a piece of furniture
and who the heck puts an ottoman on their porch? mines in the living room |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 19 Dec 2013 10:11 PM |
Ottoman.
They had destroyed anyone in their way in their prime. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
| |
|
|
| 20 Dec 2013 06:30 AM |
"They had an emperor who was appointed by the pope, but due to a power struggle between the popes and the emperors, neither had much power."
The emperors were chosen by bloodline or by command of previous emperors. The western popes, if anything were rivals with the Greco-Byzantine patriarchs. Also the "civil war" happened only once and that was before Justinian had formed an empire stretching through Africa to Spain.
The Ottomans were lucky in the right time, in the right place. If it were not for the Crusaders' sacking and weakening Constantinople (as well as annexing 80% of Greece and several Aegean Islands), then the Byzantine Army would've held out at Nicea (nowaday some Turkish name I think Izmir).
Their cannons were adopted from the Mongols (of whom they lived with back in Turkmeninstan) and the Mongols took those from the Chinese.
The Ottomans had no technological sparks to form an empire, they just used skirmishing tactics with mounted Turkic archers and bombed every city with cannons the size of houses.
Not only that, but apparently a Byzantine Guard left the gate open (according to sources, still possibly untrue) and accidentally allowed the Ottoman army to burst through the gates.
The Ottoman Empire, later on was also controlled by Greeks (the navy, etc.) and Armenians and other indigenous people of the land the Ottomans had controlled. Which is why the Greeks and others managed to so easily rebel in the 1820's.
In my opinion, culturally the Ottomans were a pile of rugs pillaging and destroying, as well as ridiculing the capital of Orthodoxy Christianity (seeing as they destroyed / converted all of the churches of Constantinople as mosques, also destroyed the holy apostles (tombs of previous emperors), destroyed the hippodrome, destroyed other buildings etc.) |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|