The Undying Empire: A Trebizond Timeline
- Thread starter Eparkhos
- Start date
- Status
Sorry, but I don't really know? The last map show that the Ottomans, the Rumites and Trebizund control Anatolia, so I'm a bit confused. Are the Candarid Beyliks just the name for a Beylik in Anatolia?
>"because a church burned"
It's not "a church," it's the Hagia Sophia, one of the holiest sites in Eastern Orthodoxy. This is the equivalent of destroying the Kabbah or the Vatican, it's not some random parish. Secular people, and many Protestants tbh, often seem incapable of understanding that for a lot of people of faith, certain places have a transcendent value and significance which means that their destruction is not just arson but the equivalent of murder. No one is advocating genocide that I can see, but to say "Orthodox Christians are going to be so deeply incensed by these events that they will hold a deep grudge and probably do a lot of un-Christian things as a result" is just a statement of fact.
It's not "a church," it's the Hagia Sophia, one of the holiest sites in Eastern Orthodoxy. This is the equivalent of destroying the Kabbah or the Vatican, it's not some random parish. Secular people, and many Protestants tbh, often seem incapable of understanding that for a lot of people of faith, certain places have a transcendent value and significance which means that their destruction is not just arson but the equivalent of murder. No one is advocating genocide that I can see, but to say "Orthodox Christians are going to be so deeply incensed by these events that they will hold a deep grudge and probably do a lot of un-Christian things as a result" is just a statement of fact.
You're legitimately rethreading things that have already been brought up, almost as if trying to gotcha me or something. Quoting myself from up above:
People advocating for it, or wink-winking at the author for it to happen isn't acceptable. That's the line. It's that straightforward.
Now what I'd said in my first post was that it'd be cool if people stop with the half-wishes. I didn't say anyone was wishing for it outright. But when you get a sequence of posts all talking about the idea of it, that's when you start getting the feeling people aren't being very subtle.
Let me steelman you a bit here, because I don't think that's how you want to state that at all. It's more like "What's coming is acceptable to 16th century people, according to their standards."
yeah your way of saying it is much better
so you're accusing some of the viewers of doing something that they didn't DO. Brilliant.
Exactly. It's unrealistic that the Orthodox Christians will do nothing about it. I'd think most people would be operating that assumption.
When you cherrypick what I'm saying to make it seem like I'm only speaking in hard absolutes, then sure, yep, that's exactly what I'm doing. I've been bringing up quotes repeatedly for this conversation, but if all I'm getting is cherry-picked comments then why are you still going on about this? I've said my piece in the original post
what you're claiming is that people are actively wanting the turks to genocided. Saying this requires you to give evidence for such a serious accusation, which you haven't given.
you also haven't quoted anything throughout this conversation when I asked you about which posts actively advocated for committing genocide against the turks, so I'd say your claim that I have been cherry picking your comments is at least misleading.
ps: the only quote you used was you telling someone that his response was better than the posters who posted about genociding the turks. you haven't quoted anything repeatedly throughout the conversation. You only did it once.
Edit: rephrased some things.
Last edited:
Eparkhos
Banned
On a different note, would the Hagia Sophia being blown to smithereens be enough to get the Patriarchs to start reconsidering their stance on Holy War? The Orthodox would be fairly against it at this point, but that's probably the most transgressive thing I can think of right now. (Except for maybe converting the Sophia to a temple to Moloch and conducting mass sacrifice of nuns and orphans).
Possibly. After all, one of THE biggest centres of Orthodox just got blown up by heretics. There’s definitely going to be a few crusades by Orthodox churches that will involve either the whole sale slaughter of every Muslim in sight or the destruction of every Mosque they can find.
I wouldn’t be surprised if the Catholics and the Vatican also decide to use this and hit the Muslims too.
That said. moloch is popular so go for it.
Does it actually matter?
I think not.
It stands an excellent reminder that this is bloody
Last edited:
it does because he's accusing someone of expressing the enjoyment of a very horrifying action.
it's like someone writing an offensive comedy script and being lambasted as being racist when the comedy is about the south in the early 20th century. to be in-period offensive things have to be present because that's accurate to the period.
Putting words in my mouth that I've never said. I'd quote myself again but it's pretty clear you're not reading anything I write. Try going to my posts and hitting ctrl+f for 'or'. Maybe that'll get the idea across to you.
As soon as you give evidence that I'm accusing people. Once again, 'or'. That's a word. That's very important.
You'd be right if I was fool enough to fall for a gotcha you've set up intentionally or otherwise. Who's talked about people advocating openly for genocide? Please, scroll through my posts and see where I lambast people for actively doing so.
Oh, hold on. The person who brought up the idea of me accusing people of openly calling for genocide is you, in your own post.
So the proof of me accusing others of actively supporting genocide, is the post you made where you say that I'm actively accusing others of calling for genocide
- Status