Possible Byzantine Reconquest

[Prince Cobra]

Was the Byzantine reconquest of Minor Asia possible?Could Byzantium defeat the Turks? Or the empire was doomed? Something between two possibilities? Discuss, please...

[Avicenna]

It was doomed I think.. their military wasn't great, there wasn't much scientific advance and they were too focussed on living luxurious lives instead of doing what needed to be done (for their own good) : getting rid of the Sassanids and Ottomans.

[Subedei]

I am reading a book about Vlad Draculae these days. Actually historical, so no bloodsucking, only impelling.

In there the author says they -the Eastern Romans- were a bit of a hassle for the sultan, but as they didn't have too much territory/power left, it may well have been just a question of time, until the Ottomans would conquer the whole city. It still was wealthy, that's for sure.

The Trapezunt period looks pretty much the same to me: not really a worthy enemy to the Ottomans who oriented themselves towards the Balkans & Europe. These days the Byzantines payed 2000 Ducats a year to the Sultan.

Feel free to correct me, I am not really an experet on Byzantine history.

[Avicenna]

I am reading a book about Vlad Draculae these days. Actually historical, so no bloodsucking, only impelling.

In there the author says they -the Eastern Romans- were a bit of a hassle for the sultan, but as they didn't have too much territory/power left, it may well have been just a question of time, until the Ottomans would conquer the whole city. It still was wealthy, that's for sure.

The Trapezunt period looks pretty much the same to me: not really a worthy enemy to the Ottomans who oriented themselves towards the Balkans & Europe. These days the Byzantines payed 2000 Ducats a year to the Sultan.

Feel free to correct me, I am not really an experet on Byzantine history.

Vlad is disgusting. Do you know how long it took to die on one of those stakes? Days. And he did that to pregnant women as well. A psycho.

[edyzmedieval]

Vlad is disgusting. Do you know how long it took to die on one of those stakes? Days. And he did that to pregnant women as well. A psycho.

Hey fella, you're talking about my ancestor here.
We need another Dracula in our country again.

Do you know what order and discipline was when Vlad reigned? There's a legend about this:

A merchant left a town with the caravan for another town. At the middle of the road, he found out that he forgot his large bag of gold coins in the market. He rapidly came back, and he found it untouched and unharmed.

Order and discipline man.

@back to topic

It would have been very hard for the Byzantines to reconquer the lost territories. Seldjuks were in extremely large number, and the stupid commercial privileges accorded to the Genoese and Venetians was fatal.

[Avicenna]

Dracula once had a mistress who lived in a house in the back streets of Târgovişte. This woman apparently loved the prince to distraction and was always anxious to please him. Dracula was often moody and depressed and the woman made every effort to lighten her lover's burdens. Once, when Dracula was particularly depressed, the woman dared tell him a lie in an effort to cheer him up; she told him that she was pregnant. Dracula warned the woman not to joke about such matters but she insisted on the truth of her claim despite her knowledge of the prince's feelings about dishonesty. Dracula had the woman examined by midwives, to determine the veracity of her claim. When informed that the woman was lying, Dracula drew his knife and cut her open from the groin to her breasts while proclaiming his desire for the world to see where he had been. Dracula then left the woman to die in agony.

If this guy isn't a monster, I don't know what is.

[Subedei]

Vlad is disgusting. Do you know how long it took to die on one of those stakes? Days. And he did that to pregnant women as well. A psycho.

I never meant to say I am a vlad fan. "Not bloodsucking, only impalling" was meant ironic.

I think he was a power greedy bastard & pretty much used every kind of means to increase his influence.

To quote Rosacrux redux: That doesn't mean he wasn't a monster by current standards, but by medieval standards he was just a very harsh despot, one of the many.

[Knight Templar]

Was the Byzantine reconquest of Minor Asia possible?Could Byzantium defeat the Turks? Or the empire was doomed? Something between two possibilities? Discuss, please...

Which period are you talking about? The Turks conquered Minor Asia twice; first time after the battle of Manzikert 1071, and second time in 14th century (Ottomans Osman and Orhan).

After Minor Asia was conquered first time, the Comnen dynasty came to the Byzantine throne. They managed, alone or with the crusades, to re-conquer big parts of Minor Asia. Outememer states were even vasals (for some time) to Manuel I.

https://img289.imageshack.us/img289/...komneni4jv.jpg

This map (it was too big to post here) shows Byzantine re-conquer of Minor Asia during the Comnen dynasty. When Alexius I came to the throne, even Nicacea (close to Constatinopolis) was Turkish.


And about the Ottoman conquer of Minor Assia in 14th century- the empire was completely doomed at a time. While Ottomans were advancing and gaining new cities and territories, Byzantines were destroying themselves by civil wars.

[Rosacrux redux]

The blow the Seljuks dealed to Byzantium after Manzikert was so decisive not per se (the Komnenoi indeed reconquered the largest part of Asia Minor) but it was significant because of the way the Byzantines dealed with it. Instead of trying to repopulate with Greeks and other christians the parts of Asia Minor (especially the Anatolian plateau) that was either resettled with Turks or massively converted under the "Ghazi" pressure, they settled for trying to take advantage of the "heithen" subjects just as they did with the Christians. The demographic alteration of Asia Minor - which came more apparent about in the Ottoman times - is what doomed the Empire. In the last 2 centuries of imperial rule, the Byzantines relied solely on mercenaries. They couldn't survive long that way.

It is true that every state or culture has a period of advance and a period of decay. Byzantion stood proudly - more or less - for 1.100 years. That's quite an achievement.

[Prince Cobra]

Which period are you talking about? The Turks conquered Minor Asia twice; first time after the battle of Manzikert 1071, and second time in 14th century (Ottomans Osman and Orhan).

Both periods. And also between them i.e. what if Michael VIII Palaelogus had paid more attention to the Asian borders of Byzantium and the akritois (border keepers) still existed. The Seljuk sultanate had fallen, no a strong and a big rival of Byzantium... Possible reconquest. But continue to discuss the other possibilities, too.
As for Vlad. Agree, Rosacrus. Extremely cruelty yes. He was the same as his time- cruel. It is not excuse but a good explanation. Were Genghis khan ,Timur or sultan Mehmed II better? I don't think so. What about the Turks- isn't it cruel to take the children from their mothers to recruit an army will serve to their enemies?! The Jannisaries were ready to kill anybody even their parents for the sake of the sultan. Vlad was an extremely cruel just as the time he lived. It is not so surprising...
Most probably there wasn't only a influence factor, Vlad liked it. But he's not an exception- another legendary leader Mehmed II (who conquered Constantinople) was extremely cruel too. He killed some slaves because there were doubts a melon had been stolen by them or when he wanted to demonstrate to an Italian artist how human neck looked inside he himself beheaded a slave or when he conquered Trapezund he killed the children of the Trapezund emperor and forced the empress herself to bury them , alone. Like any legendary leader Vlad had his positive and negative sides ( no one-sided point of view). I think edyz wanted to emphasize on this but he was misunderstood.
Edited: Grammar reasons.