Byzantium has gone too far

[unmerged(8123)]

Originally posted by ryoken69
And that is the problem. No one knows. Once you take a few steps away from history, predicting what "would have happened" becomes IMPOSSIBLE. Human relations are too complex and misunderstood to possibly predict those kinds of things. Not even Byzantine experts
could know.

[/B]

exactly, so if you follow your own logic there should be *no* scripted events after the first few decades of a scenario.

as an example, if england takes all the french culture provinces in by 1540 then the war of the roses event affects only as small portion of thier holdings, where it should instead affect most of them.

another, if England or Spain is a one province minor, then they really shouldn't get a chance to vassilize a Portugal that has a world spanning empire. Yet these events exist in the GC.

 

[unmerged(7529)]

(posted by isaac brock)
"Iwannhs: I can't see that Byzantium had much to do with the Enlightenment as it had been good and dead for 150-200 years beforehand. However, if you want to argue about how Hobbes' and Rousseau's idea's were inspired by the code of Justinian feel free to do so".

Isaac i don't understand what your sight or insight has to do with it. My statement isn't anything radical or even debatable, you can merely browse the internet for "greek scholars"^englightenment for example and read for yourself.

 

[unmerged(6159)]

My top hit from Google, first line:
"The Neohellenic Enlightenment is a lesser-known aspect of the European Enlightenment. It flourished from about 1750 up to 1821, the year of the outbreak of the Greek War of Independence, and it was a strong intellectual movement, which arose out of the European Enlightenment"

Sounds like interesting stuff that was pivotal in the struggle for Greek Independence. Doesn't sound like it has anything to do with Byzantium.

 

[unmerged(6159)]

A little firther down on Google after the Islam Web part about Byzantine myth's which I will certainly ignore:
"Furthermore, classical secularism, so attractive to Renaissance and Enlightenment scholars, had no place in Byzantine thought worlds. As a result Byzantine culture was subjected to centuries of abuse as a time of barbarism and superstition."

 

[unmerged(4990)]

Ok, here's the scoop.

After the fall of Constantinople, Greek scholars fled to Italy, and were responsible for the major outbreak of the Renaissance. That alone is enough to tell me, and other prominent historians, that Byzantium was still an educational lighthouse amid its own destruction.

Still wish to argue?

 

[unmerged(7529)]

I hope you dont need me to tell you that there are thousants of sites on the topic and not just the one off topic you saw. Of course i am not urging you to do so, i dont really care. Speaking of off topic this little discussion is too.

 

[unmerged(5161)]

FUN!

What do you guys think about this event, for France, triggered in 1750 if BYZ is still around?

-----------------------------------------------
Name: "Anti-Byzantine Alliance of Death"
Desc: "The Byzantine Empire, combined with Russia, was causing severe distress for the non-Orthodox Christian nations of Europe. They decided to eradicate these backward people for good. Soon after the alliance is formed, French spies steal millions of ducats from the Byzantines."

Action A: DO IT
Command A: Gain 20000 gold
Command B: Trigger "Byzantine Gold stolen from treasury"
Command C: Alliance with England
Command D: Alliance with Austria
Command E: Alliance with Spain
Command F: Alliance with Prussia
Command G: Alliance with Spain
Command H: Alliance with Papal States
Command I: Alliance with Sweden
Command J: Alliance with Poland
Command K-R: Relations +400 with above countries
Command S: War with Byzantium
Command T: Trigger "All of Byzantium's Soldiers Desert"

Action B: DONT DO IT, but rob them blind
Command A: Gain 20000 gold
Command B: Trigger "Byzantine Gold stolen from treasury"

Action C: DONT DO IT
Command A: Relations +10 with Byzantium
-----------------------------------------

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!

If anyone can provide a logical reason why this event would not have happened, please tell me. I will promptly disagree with you.

 

[unmerged(2833)]

Ryoken, have you read Byzantine events at all? While they have some inconsistences, they aren't that stupid as the thing you posted (last time i checked, Byzantium gained Turkish culture even after expelling the Turks...nope, sorry, shouldn't be that, it's arguable if they should gain it at all)

 

[unmerged(2833)]

Originally posted by Constantine XI
Ok, here's the scoop.

After the fall of Constantinople, Greek scholars fled to Italy, and were responsible for the major outbreak of the Renaissance. That alone is enough to tell me, and other prominent historians, that Byzantium was still an educational lighthouse amid its own destruction.

Still wish to argue?

First time i hear of it (well, not exactly, i mean i only heard it from Byzantine clan here)

Can someone give me few links regarding this issue?

 

[unmerged(7837)]

It's well documented that Byzantine scholars fled to the West before and after the fall of Constantinople. I've read that in several sources...I suggest you pick up a book sometime.

Ryo, I thought you weren't going to respond to this thread anymore? As far as your event goes...sure, script it, submit it for discussion, see if it meets everyone approval. I seriously doubt that it will, but there's nothing stopping you from doing it. You're right, it certainly is possible that the West would gang up on the Orthodox East if they were causing problems...in fact, I often end up allying with Russia and whipping up on the Western powers. However, events must also be looked at for their gameplay value...possible? yes. Would that event be fun and balanced, etc? Probably not. Which is why you don't see that type of event for ANY country in the game. Also, I'm not sure if it has any historical precedent, although I could be wrong. So, if you have any more ideas, please bring them up...surely, even in that childish, immature mind of yours, there's ONE good Byzantium idea.

 

[unmerged(2833)]

Originally posted by dunkel
It's well documented that Byzantine scholars fled to the West before and after the fall of Constantinople. I've read that in several sources...I suggest you pick up a book sometime.

You happen to know that telling me that it's "well documented" doesn't make me more knowledgeable about it? As i said, i didn't read about it in books i read (mostly Polish ones, so their names won't tell you much,i suppose)

 

[Havard]

Originally posted by dunkel
It's well documented that Byzantine scholars fled to the West before and after the fall of Constantinople. I've read that in several sources...I suggest you pick up a book sometime.

Yes - it is well documented that Greek scholars fled to the West (i.e. Italy/Spain) before and after the fall of Constantinople. However, I don't think that is what the debate is about...

What I would like to comment on is Constantine XI's statement:

After the fall of Constantinople, Greek scholars fled to Italy, and were responsible for the major outbreak of the Renaissance.

The early renaissance (e.g. Petrarca, 1304-1374) spun from a revival of interest in classical literature and the classical ideals, and led to studies of old latin, and later greek writers. The first Greek chair at the university in Florence was established in 1360, and Greek scholars were now encouraged to come from Byzantium to Italy. Italian scholars on the other hand visited Byzantium in order to learn Greek and to buy old manuscripts.

I'd say the Renaissance started long before the fall of Byzantium, and that it probably would have been better off with Greeks in Byzantium than the Ottomans...

 

[unmerged(4990)]

The start of the renaissance isn't what I'm arguing. The renaissance actually exploded with the fall of Constantinople, since most every Greek scholar fled to the west.

 

[unmerged(2833)]

Originally posted by Constantine XI
The start of the renaissance isn't what I'm arguing. The renaissance actually exploded with the fall of Constantinople, since most every Greek scholar fled to the west.

Then why i haven't heard even one Greek name among the most important figures of Rennaisance?

Not to mention that it's the first time i hear that it 'exploded' in 1453. Not very surprising i remain doubtful, isn't it?

 

[unmerged(1302)]

Ever heard of de Medicis of Toscana? In 1439 Cosimo de Medici hired a few Byzantine scholars to translate the works of Plato from Greek into Latin - this date is considered as a start date of Renaissance. Though there is no proof that they (Byzantines) brought anything more than an ability to translate.

 

[Havard]

Originally posted by Crook
Ever heard of de Medicis of Toscana? In 1439 Cosimo de Medici hired a few Byzantine scholars to translate the works of Plato from Greek into Latin - this date is considered as a start date of Renaissance. Though there is no proof that they (Byzantines) brought anything more than an ability to translate.

The University in Firenze had a Chair of Greek studies already in 1360, and Greek and Italian scolars are known to have worked togeter for a long period before 1439. Who says that 1439 is the start of the Rennaissance? I have seen references to Petrarca (1304-1374) as the "first" Rennesaince writer...

 

[unmerged(5928)]

A Greek that converted to Catholocism might have been elected pope if he hadn't have died. I forgot what his name was, but I remember that he was an excellent scholar and was greatly admired and popular. I think the Renaissance happened before the Fall in the 1300's with, like Havard said, Petrarca the Italian poet.

 

[unmerged(5630)]

If anyone can provide a logical reason why this event would not have happened, please tell me. I will promptly disagree with you.

Because the Byzantine treasury never had millions of ducats lying around? They may have had that much in lands, buildings, etc. at the very height of their power (I almost doubt that as well), but never simply lying around. As well, do you really think France would ever have allied with England or Austria?

Also, the Byzantine soldiers didn't desert when it may have saved them in 1453. Why would they desert now when the heretics of the West (often viewed as worse than the Muslims... "Better the turban of the caliph than the tiara of the Pope" was the phrase, I think) were assaulting the Holy City of the Virgin?

I had some modicum of respect for you up til now, Ryoken, but that post came off as extremely bitter and spiteful. It may have had a point, but it seemed covered in vitriol.

 

[Idiotboy]

Originally posted by Priam


Because the Byzantine treasury never had millions of ducats lying around? They may have had that much in lands, buildings, etc. at the very height of their power (I almost doubt that as well), but never simply lying around. As well, do you really think France would ever have allied with England or Austria?

Also, the Byzantine soldiers didn't desert when it may have saved them in 1453. Why would they desert now when the heretics of the West (often viewed as worse than the Muslims... "Better the turban of the caliph than the tiara of the Pope" was the phrase, I think) were assaulting the Holy City of the Virgin?

I had some modicum of respect for you up til now, Ryoken, but that post came off as extremely bitter and spiteful. It may have had a point, but it seemed covered in vitriol.

Well unlike those who writes the byzantine event he obviously don´t know the first thing about byzantine history so what do you expect?? There is an old saying "if you have bad arguments shout real high" which fits here I think.

Oh and at the heighday around 1025 when Basil II died the treasury had a surplus of 14,4 million nomismata and then he had waived 2 years worth of land and hearth taxes worth another 8 million so they had plenty of dough when they were big.

 

[unmerged(5630)]

What was the conversion from nomismata to ducats? If it is still over a million, then I apologize and stand corrected.