It's less "mistakes" than gradual decay. It's not like over 11 centuries is a short lifespan for a state anyway.what were the mistakes of the byzantine empire that made it fall?
what gradual decay is that you are talking about?It's less "mistakes" than gradual decay. It's not like over 11 centuries is a short lifespan for a state anyway.
Just rhymed.
In power, size, stability, and wealth I believe.what gradual decay is that you are talking about?
There is a popular TL with that as a topic. It's called Age Of Miracles I believe.any way that could be stopped?
would pacifying Africa help the empire survive?can the empire hold africa against the Muslim attacks?One of them could have been the Justinian obsession about the reconquest of Rome. Lots of man and money went in this adventure, manpower that would have been more usefull in pacifying north Africa or the Persian border
Another is, obviously the plague but its more a bad luck then a mistake...
what could the Byzantines do to pacify Africa ?Northern Africa was a hotbed for revolts due to religious schismes and regionalism, this is what helped the muslims conquered it. If the Byzantine had pacified this region it would have 1) Get rid of the violence, freeing troops for somewere else 2) Make them profitable for the empire, giving new revenues to the empire.
From that perspective, converting to Christianity was probably a mistake, or at least Caesaropapism was.Northern Africa was a hotbed for revolts due to religious schismes and regionalism, this is what helped the muslims conquered it. If the Byzantine had pacified this region it would have 1) Get rid of the violence, freeing troops for somewere else 2) Make them profitable for the empire, giving new revenues to the empire.
One, reunifiy the monophysitist, nestorian and chalcedonian (this is the tricky part, religion is by its very nature irrational and based on belief)what could the Byzantines do to pacify Africa ?
Except that trying to "rationalize" Christianity and putting it under the authority of the emperor was what caused schisms in the first place. A policy of toleration seems like it'd do more good in the long run.One, reunifiy the monophysitist, nestorian and chalcedonian (this is the tricky part, religion is by its very nature irrational and based on belief)
Two, either reinstate strong byzantine officials presence or decentralize and give more autonomy to local officials
Three, strongly link the African province economically to Byzantium
You are probably rightExcept that trying to "rationalize" Christianity and putting it under the authority of the emperor was what caused schisms in the first place. A policy of toleration seems like it'd do more good in the long run.
One of them could have been the Justinian obsession about the reconquest of Rome. Lots of man and money went in this adventure, manpower that would have been more usefull in pacifying north Africa or the Persian border
Another is, obviously the plague but its more a bad luck then a mistake...
The Fourth Crusade and subsequent Interregnum of the 13th Century really did a number on the empire; don't know how it emerges from something like that as the great power it was in the 11th and 12th centuries, to say nothing of earlier glory.