- This topic has 84 replies, 1 voice, and was last updated 7 months, 3 weeks ago by
.
-
Posts
-
-
Byzantines were so primitive…
-
everything other than Constantinople was a dump
-
No
-
Ravenna is as impressive as Instanbul
-
Probably more impressive in terms of surviving Byzantine mosaics.
-
-
-
Fuck no.
Thessalonika, Nicaea, Amorion were bigger than freaking Paris which was the largest in Western Europe. -
>what is Thessaloniki
-
What’s left in Thessaloniki today? Either the Turks destroyed everything memorable or the Byzantines never built anything worth preserving.
-
Are you really scrotebrained or you just wanna shitpost?
-
The walls and some byzantine churches
-
Woke af on the perimeter of the old city walls, it was quite a large city for its time
-
True. The much older and scattered Hellenes left more memorable things than this supposed great 1000 year empire.
>"Its general aspect presents a disgusting picture of imbecility[…] Rebellion on the part of generals, depositions of the Emperors by their means or through the intrigues of the courtiers, assassination or poisoning of the Emperors by their own wives and sons, women surrendering themselves to lusts and abominations of all kinds […] till at last—about the middle of the fifteenth century (a.d. 1453)—the rotten edifice of the Eastern Empire crumbled in pieces before the might of the vigorous Turks." —Hegel
-
but ottomans were worse in all aspects he mentioned?
-
Thank you for this anon. With this extract of yours my interest in Hegel vanished.
-
-
There are quite a few remaining Byzantine structures and artworks in Thessaloniki. Nothing in the Byzantine world really compares to the grandiosity of Constantinople, but there is still plenty to see.
https://www.thebyzantinelegacy.com/thessaloniki
-
-
Built up by french investors
-
-
-
Their culture was pretty freaking stagnant
-
That’s not really an argument.
I’m not a Byzantine shill, but if their culture was woke af (which it was) then stagnation is fine.
Stagnate awesome is still awesome.[…]
The problem with Byzantium really started around Justinian.
Read the secret history.-
kys
-
>Read the secret history
>muh floating head
>muh naked goose feedingProcopius was a salty snake who didn’t like Justinian.
-
You’re a dishonest scrote. Everyone can only point to those two things in the secret history and the author himself says “yeah I don’t know about this shit; but a trusted friend and good source told me so I’m adding it”
-
-
-
What was egyptian culture then if byzantine was stagnant?
-
-
>Byzantines were so primitive…
nobody ever said that lol-
Anti-Christians say it all the time
-
Anti-Christians on top of being mentally ill most of the time are also illiterate and low IQ
-
True
-
-
nah, those say Byzantines were decadent, that U 100% agree with. but nobody said they were primitive. just they could be better without christianity.
-
Atheist and LARPagan societies are historically the apex of human degeneracy
-
>t. christcuck
stop projecting
-
-
-
Do Christscrotes purposely make up dumb strawman arguments just so they can dunk on people they disagree with?
-
They do.
-
You guys are dishonest freaking trannies if you purposely ignore the Anti Christian sentiments, which in most cases, are usually the basis for their Byzantine hate threads.
-
-
Do you have any examples?
-
-
-
Byzantines lived on the corpse of a civilization
-
If the Byzantines lived on a corpse, what must they have been doing in western Europe, living inside a corpse maybe?
-
-
>What changing anything from the Late Roman Era?
>NO FUCK YOU FUCK OFF -
Such deplorable cavemen!
-
Byzantium was really a futuristic society surrounded by a bunch of ugga buggas. It’s so ironic that there was a coordinated effort in the 19th century to degrade it by fresh out of the caves westerners.
-
-
>the kings are not permanent rulers, but they select men of merit; if an extraordinary calamity visits the country or if wind and rain come at the wrong time, he is deposed, and another man is put in his stead
classic
-
-
-
-
Constantinople has been a shithole most of the time barring some periods like
Constantine/Justinian pre volcano/Mehmet reviving the city
Its the paris of its times, i wouldnt be suprised if their was a Constantinople-syndrome like
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paris_syndrome-
>Mehmet reviving the city
Subtle roach bait, nice-
Is it wrong?
Istanbul was the absolute peak of the city. Only scrotebrained Byzanchud will disagree -
it’s not bait tho, the city (as a whole, buildings, infrastructure, trade, city life) flourished under roaches, much more than after its reconquest by byzantines from the latin empire
of course, the massacred byzantines in 1453 would have kind of disagreed with this statement
-
-
-
Said no one ever
-
byzantines are their own civilization. surely they weren’t roman. neither roman nor western.
-
looks like a Roman one to me but with Christianity at the center.
-
-
>Byzantines were so primitive
Nobody with an IQ higher than 60 has ever said anything even remotely comparable to this -
>There is another history even more ridiculous: that is Byzantine history. This unworthy collection contains only declamations and miracles: it is the disgrace of the human mind, just as the Greek empire was the reproach of the earth.
-
It’s because Byzantium was sensationalized by the nuFrench. They told the crazy gossip stories about Byzantium because they thought it was fresh and funny, kind of like how nuAtheists talked about banana memes because some bald fat jobless guy joked that god made bananas as female masturbation tools. It wasn’t really funny but they were too far up their asses to admit it wasn’t so they kept repeating it. Same thing happened in France.
-
Losing territory didn’t matter as much for the Byzantines since the Empire was basically Constantinople itself.
As long as the City was intact they could always recover as we saw.
So many defeats, so many territorial losses, but they kept coming back. Till 1204.-
>As long as the City was intact they could always recover as we saw.
No, they couldn’t. Each time they recovered, they ended up with less than what they had lost. They lost a lot, recovered a little, lost a lot, etc, until all they were left with was Constantinople itself.
In this way, they were the Anti-Rome. While Rome started as one city and gradually conquered a huge empire, Byzantium started with a huge empire and gradually lost it until they were a mere city-state.>surpassed only in modern time by the USA
Of course the Byzaboo would be some scrotebrained mutt.
-
-
-
No one calls them primitive. But they were certainly a decadent and increasingly pathetic society in constant decline.
-
>constant decline
Meme created by westoids who lived as serfs up until the 19th century and then started to LARP as ancient Greeks immediately when they learned how to read and write (which was supposedly some kind of a huge achievement for them)-
He’s right. Most of Byzantine history was spent losing territory and changing dynasties through violence.
-
>Every political entity’s history in the era of humanity ever was spent losing territory and changing dynasties through violence
The difference with Byzantines is that they lived for a longer time than all of them and they also hold more power than all of them, surpassed only in modern time by the USA-
>>Every political entity’s history in the era of humanity ever was spent losing territory and changing dynasties through violence
It happened in the Byzantine empire far more frequently than in any other place in Europe at the time.
>The difference with Byzantines is that they lived for a longer time than all of them
What? The Byzantines stopped existing in 1453, most European countries at that same time are still around today.
>surpassed only in modern time by the USA
USA has existed or less than 300 years.-
>It happened in the Byzantine empire far more frequently than in any other place in Europe at the time.
The European states had very short lives and they were usually tied to some dynasty, meaning that they died when their ruler died. The rest of the population were mere serfs.
>What? The Byzantines stopped existing in 1453, most European countries at that same time are still around today.
Not as the same entity. Otherwise we can say that Byzantium is still around today as well.
>USA has existed or less than 300 years
I meant in terms of world domination. After the Byzantine/Roman empire died, only the British (forgot to mention them) and now the USA surpassed them on superpower status and cultural domination.-
>The European states had very short lives
Not at all, most lasted hundreds of years and many are still around today.
>The rest of the population were mere serfs.
You are very mistaken if you think serfdom didn’t exist in the Byzantine Empire.
>Not as the same entity.
What do you mean by "entity"
>I meant in terms of world domination.
The Byzantine empire was not even close to dominating the world.
>superpower status and cultural domination.
If you mean this instead of world domination, then France and Germany would also have count as well.-
>would also have count as well
wouldn’t that unintentionally include spain as well?-
You’re right, forgot about that one.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
>ITT coping byzaboos
The byzantines funneled all resources into Constantinople-
Actually I think most of the empire’s resources went toward maintaining the armed forces and trying to prevent civil wars.
-
>maintaining the armed forces and trying to prevent civil wars
the theme system lumped the maintenance onto the locals and the soldiers were no longer paid and civil wars were rarely prevented-
>lumped
dumped -
Yeah that’s where most of the resources went, the local paying for their own defenses, especially in the minor cities like Thessaloniki, Nicea, Trebizond etc. And it doesn’t mean that this worked, it just means that’s what resources were spent on.
-
>force locals to defend themselves. "reward" them with local land. Tax them once they successfully set up their farms. A few decades later the aristocracy and provincial magnates buy up all the land and create plantations cutting out the little guy
As long as Constantinople got its taxes it didn’t give a single shit about what happened elsewhere. You’re also forgetting some things exclusive only to Constantinople like it’s silk trade-
>as Constantinople got its taxes it didn’t give a single shit about what happened elsewhere
I gotta say I really disagree with this assessment. I would say the court in Constantinople would alternate between looking inwardly and looking outwardly, and usually that is dependent on the sate of the empire itself. And of course Constantinople is the wealthiest city due to things like trade, but the economy of the city is not what I would consider the majority of the resources of the empire.
This is a weird line of thinking you are trying to take me on, I’m pretty confused by this.-
>tinople would alternate between looking inwardly and looking outwardly
no it wouldn’t. It was always inwardly unlike a provincial magnate started acting out forcing Constantinople to look outward-
What do you call the times when emperors would launch and/or lead military expeditions? Basil II comes to mind.
-
>Basil II comes to mind
you mean the guy whose reign was followed by Constantinople partying themselves to destruction? The Bulgar conquest the incomplete as Bulgaria was incorporated without breaking Bulgarian identity which would come back to haunt the byzantines-
What are you going on about? I asked if you thought he represented an inward or outward looking individual.
-
he’s an example of someone who thinks he’s outward but actually inward as he leaves the empire to his scrotebrained sis
-
Do you have some kind of strange agenda when it comes to the Byzantines? You are saying things that make no sense.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Let’s not pretend that wasn’t a major reason rome fell
-
>Let’s not pretend that wasn’t a major reason rome fell
In the case of Rome it was Italy that received gibs from the provinces rather than one city and has time passed those special privileges were mostly taken away-
Rome was succing the whole empire dry, especially the fertile east. It started failing when logistics failed and routes were broken by invaders
-
-
-
-
why do Byzaboos receive so much flak?
-
they’re annoying
-
Every type of -boo eventually receives flak because
-
Edward Gibbon looked disgusting–double chin protruding–in his red coat before Parliament of Great Britain. Very very disrespectful.
-
because there’s a 45% chance they’re here because of Dovahchud.
-
-
I’m sorry, but an Empire that constantly produces men like Justinian I and II, Anastasius, Maurice, Belisarius, Narses, Heraclius, Constans II, Leo the Isaurian, Constantine Kopronymos, Nikephoros, Bardas, Patriarch Photios, Basil the Macedonian, Romanos Lekapenos, John Kourkouas, Nikephoros and Leo Phokas, John Tsimiskes, Bardas Skleros, Nikephoros Ouranos, Basil II, George Maniakes and Basil Boioannes could not be anything but utterly B A S E D and there is quite literally nothing you can do to convince me otherwise
-
>Byzantium consistently fielded a smaller army then Albania in its last 100 years of existence
-
In it’s last 100 years of existence it had zero economic power and a puny population base, smaller even than Albania
-
-
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.