Faeelin said:I was assuming that there was no 1204, and that byzantium had had a couple of emperors focused on reforming the military.
So they're still toast?
Faeelin said:I was assuming that there was no 1204, and that byzantium had had a couple of emperors focused on reforming the military.
So they're still toast?
Grey Wolf said:I can't accept that, 150 years of history without collapse implies that collapse is not inevitable
Grey Wolf
Faeelin said:Oman's book is over 80 years old, and is hardly the best subject on the empire. The Nicaean empire was rather viable, and for an empire that was fated to collapse, succeeded in pushing back the turks rather well.
Matt Quinn said:Perhaps a Byzantine win at Manzikert keeps the "center of gravity" of the Seljuk state further east (their capital was @ Ishafan in Persia, but there was the Sultanate of Rum in ex-Byzantine lands). This means that all their power is in Persia for the Mongols to pulverize...no extensions in Anatolia to run to ground.
Rich, strong Byzantium now looks like a potential danger to the Mongol dominions in the Middle East.
Grey Wolf said:I can't accept that, 150 years of history without collapse implies that collapse is not inevitable
Grey Wolf
robertp6165 said:The Seljuks, who, like the Mongols considered settled, agricultural populations to be worthless, slaughtered or drove away almost all of the people they found living there in order to make pastureland for their horses. When the Byzantines were able to retake parts of the interior, all they found was devastation...and no people there to recruit. From there, it was just a continual downward spiral for the Byzantines from which they never recovered. Charles Oman, THE ART OF WARFARE IN THE MIDDLE AGES, has an excellent discussion of this.