Rome Will Survive. Rome Must Always Survive.

Spain doesn't even exist in 1453. Aragon and Castile-Leon are still separate kingdoms - different laws, different customs, different traditions, different culture (heck "Aragon" itself is divided in that regard, and yet none of that impaired it holding together cohesively as the time understood the term) - without even a personal union between them.

France is divided, and England is only somewhat better - and neither are defined by some kind of "national character" at this point.

The Romans includes the 'Byzantine" period (and thus the late middle ages), and WWI - where the Ottomans held together internally fairly well (including the Arab Revolt, which hardly had the support of most of the Arab population - and the issues with the Armenians, which is hardly enough to dissolve the empire) - is centuries after the first international conflict of the Ottomans (not to mention that the Ottomans as "a perfect rotting corpse" held together for another century and half until forcibly dismembered by the Allies).

And I see that you're trying to bring in examples from the 19th and 20th century - nevermind that things have changed considerably over that period of time.

So if the Byzantines/Romans are no better off in "Greek" areas than any other they manage to claw back, if they manage to claw anything back.

Spain is in the road of Unification under Ferdinant and Isabela,same language same religion and the differences you present don't exist;minimal differences in law must exist since they were created by different circumstances and that applies in many countries today;customs that's a nice myth!even today there are different customs in different parts of the country in all European countries.customs are local,in few instances regional or they can even differ between neighbouring villages;that doesn't signify anything!
 
Spain is in the road of Unification under Ferdinant and Isabela,same language same religion and the differences you present don't exist;minimal differences in law must exist since they were created by different circumstances and that applies in many countries today;customs that's a nice myth!even today there are different customs in different parts of the country in all European countries.customs are local,in few instances regional or they can even differ between neighbouring villages;that doesn't signify anything!

Spain is not on any such route in 1453. They're not even married for another sixteen years, let alone ruling.

Language: http://spanish.about.com/od/spanishlanguageculture/a/spainlanguages.htm

This today, after centuries of unification.

Religion is the same (just like it is the same between the Byzantines/Walllachians/Serbs/Bulgarians), the differences in law are significant enough to matter, customs being different is significant enough to matter..

Please do some research. Hearing you claim knowledge when there are holes in it large enough to sail an armada through does you no credit.
 
This leaves the question where will the Byzantines expand to if they are going to, Cyprus with the Ottoman's blessings? Try to take advantage of Ottoman weakness's if they can, or possibly even though it might be ASB by aiding the Ottomans they could carve out territories themselves.
 
This leaves the question where will the Byzantines expand to if they are going to, Cyprus with the Ottoman's blessings? Try to take advantage of Ottoman weakness's if they can, or possibly even though it might be ASB by aiding the Ottomans they could carve out territories themselves.

Why would the Ottomans let one of their vassals gain territory like that?

What's in it for them besides a more powerful vassal (and thus more problematic one)?
 
Maybe not an Ottoman screw, but will we see the Byzantines (sans Byzantium) take Greece bit by bit over the centuries, maybe retaking Constantinople at some distant date in the future?

Or are we going to see them go the Third Rome route? and where shall it be?
 
Spain is not on any such route in 1453. They're not even married for another sixteen years, let alone ruling.

Language: http://spanish.about.com/od/spanishlanguageculture/a/spainlanguages.htm

This today, after centuries of unification.

Religion is the same (just like it is the same between the Byzantines/Walllachians/Serbs/Bulgarians), the differences in law are significant enough to matter, customs being different is significant enough to matter..

Please do some research. Hearing you claim knowledge when there are holes in it large enough to sail an armada through does you no credit.

They don't matter Elfwine and never will;the Balcans had and have various customs that are similar at extreme ends of the region and others that are very different in neighbouring villages.In the Iberian peninsular the need for national unification against external threats is born as early as the 11th century with the story(later raised to the legend status) of Rodrigo Diaz of Bivar called "El Sid" and something similar happened in France agaist the invaders(Arabs in that instance) with the Sanson de Roland ; and was the surge of 'national feeling' then;that feeling knew new hights in the fifteenth century France after the execution of Joan of Ark when that feeling united the French to heap defeat upon defeat on the Enlish army who were finally left only with Pas de Calais in France.
Finally Elfwine Roman doesn't include byzantine because Rome died and the east dominated by Greeks,founded an other empire consisting of Greeks and Orthodox people with some minorities;The Greek empire of the middle Ages as the most important authorities admit and so write starting with your Ostrogorsky and what surprises me is that you claim to be Byzantinophile,but you have read skin-deep and apart from those references to the Web which is exceedingly dubious,unreliable and unverified,you haven't offered anything; I allowed some time to pass,I wanted to see if you would ever back up an argument with some authoritative basis but no!not you! Two years ago I visited Greece and I saw the syllabus and content of ancient and Byzantine history in 14 year olds;I am not certain that your knowledge goes that far;OK I admit that everything around them reminds them of that history and can visit libraries you have no access to.However,since you have read even Ostrogorsky, how did it escape your attention that he said:"Now we can talk about the history of Medieval Greek Empire"(Ostrogorsky:"History of the Byzantine State p.86(translation into English:Joan Hussay-new Brunswick 1969) and that is only one source out of more than 50 I can give you another 49 sources but for the moment I will confine myself only to sources not even remotely connected with Greece of biased sources or even remotely related.Are you perhaps biased Elfwine?
 
Last edited:
I think the only realistic scenario for a continuing Byzantine polity if the Ottomans have any say in the matter is moving it to somewhere deep within the Empire (totally dependent on the grace of the Turks and being utterly subservient) or out of their sphere of influence entirely. The Ottomans, of course, are not going to long tolerate a potential beach head for a Western offensive against the Ottomans. OTL, the Ottomans didn't let the Despotate of the Morea survive past 1460. And the last Byzantine ruler of Trebizond's political maneuverings gave casus belli for the Ottomans to snuff it out a year later. I don't see any future for a Byzantine marcher state, at all.
So, the Morea has to be pretty temporary and whatever sanctuary is next is going to be a fair distance away. Crete, if the Venetians found it in their interests? (Nah!:rolleyes:) Northwards to the lands of Muscovy? Westwards to and at the grace of the Catholic kingdoms?

So, I look to see how the Author will handle this conundrum.
 
I think the only realistic scenario for a continuing Byzantine polity if the Ottomans have any say in the matter is moving it to somewhere deep within the Empire (totally dependent on the grace of the Turks and being utterly subservient) or out of their sphere of influence entirely. The Ottomans, of course, are not going to long tolerate a potential beach head for a Western offensive against the Ottomans. OTL, the Ottomans didn't let the Despotate of the Morea survive past 1460. And the last Byzantine ruler of Trebizond's political maneuverings gave casus belli for the Ottomans to snuff it out a year later. I don't see any future for a Byzantine marcher state, at all.
So, the Morea has to be pretty temporary and whatever sanctuary is next is going to be a fair distance away. Crete, if the Venetians found it in their interests? (Nah!:rolleyes:) Northwards to the lands of Muscovy? Westwards to and at the grace of the Catholic kingdoms?

So, I look to see how the Author will handle this conundrum.

Your last sentence is my thoughts entirely:the author?certainly...
 
Top