Author |
Share Topic Topic Search Topic Options
|
Iranian41ife
Arch Duke
Joined: 24-Dec-2005
Location: Tajikista
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1832
|
Quote Reply
Topic: Would Constatinople have been captured without artillery? Posted: 18-Mar-2006 at 17:27 |
Constantinople had been besieged by Persians, Arabs, and Turks, but neither were able to take the city until the cannon was invented.
Would Constatinople have fallen if the cannon wasnt invented, or if the Turks didnt have the cannon?
I do not think so. Walls and castles then were not built to with stand cannon fire, and the Turks, using cannons, easily destroyed the walls.
Yes, the cannon of that was very inferior, but it was still more powerful than trebutchets or catapults.
Later on, after the invention of the cannon, castles and walls were not only built stronger, but were built to absorb the impact of cannon balls, so that they would do less damage.
I dont believe that Constantinople would have fallen had it not been for the cannons.
Many people had tried in the past but were unsuccessful. Even Turks could not take Constatinople without the cannon the first time.
|
"If they attack Iran, of course I will fight. But I will be fighting to defend Iran... my land. I will not be fighting for the government and the nuclear cause." ~ Hamid, veteran of the Iran Iraq War
|
|
RomiosArktos
Consul
Joined: 13-Jan-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 309
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 18-Mar-2006 at 19:59 |
You are right.Turks had tried in 1396 and 1422 to capture the city without having artillery and didn't manage to do anything.
I think however that it was not only the artillery that brought the
victory to the Turks.It was also the fact that the ottoman navy managed
to get into the Keratios despite the chain that had been placed
there.So the defenders were forced to keep an eye to the turkish ships
in the Keratios.So they split their forces.The walls that looked to the
sea were not as high as the walls that looked to the land.Maybe because
the Byzantines thought that could easily be defended by the
fleet.However,at the time of the reign of Konstantinos Palaiologos the
fleet was virtually non-existent.Konstantinos himself used Catalan
ships of the Duchy of Athens to get himself from Peloponissos to the
capital...
|
|
Ponce de Leon
Caliph
Lonce De Peon
Joined: 11-Jan-2006
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2967
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 18-Mar-2006 at 22:07 |
|
|
Komnenos
Tsar
Retired AE Administrator
Joined: 20-Dec-2004
Location: Neutral Zone
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4361
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 19-Mar-2006 at 10:53 |
The main reason for Constantinople fall wan't its military inferiority, that was only a symptom of it, but because it was politically and economically on its last leg. The Byzantine Empire had been reduced to a ram-shackle small town with a couple of fields before its gates, it had been forsaken and sold by the other Christian powers, and there wasn't a chance in hell it could have carried on.
The canons might have speeeded up the whole process a bit, and without them it might have taken a few more weeks longer. But the Byzantines had already used up their alloted numbers of miracles in earlier centuries, and that was it.
|
[IMG]http://i71.photobucket.com/albums/i137/komnenos/crosses1.jpg">
|
|
Kapikulu
Arch Duke
Retired AE Moderator
Joined: 07-Aug-2004
Location: Berlin
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1914
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 19-Mar-2006 at 20:13 |
Even artillery is not enough by itself, naval dominance is needed for such a conquest either
When the Turks besieged Constantinople in 1453, the city didn't fall till the Ottoman navy entered into Golden Horn, which was protected from foreign ships' entrance with thick chains.
Constantinople had been besieged many times, by Huns, Bulgars, Avars, Umayyads and Ottoman Sultan Yldrm Bayezid, none was able to achieve the success of conquest of this wondrous city,which had huge fortified walls, without roaring artillery and naval power.
|
We gave up your happiness
Your hope would be enough;
we couldn't find neither;
we made up sorrows for ourselves;
we couldn't be consoled;
A Strange Orhan Veli
|
|
RomiosArktos
Consul
Joined: 13-Jan-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 309
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 20-Mar-2006 at 09:43 |
Originally posted by Kapikulu
Even artillery is not enough by itself, naval dominance is needed for such a conquest either
When the Turks besieged Constantinople in 1453, the city didn't
fall till the Ottoman navy entered into Golden Horn, which was
protected from foreign ships' entrance with thick chains.
|
Right
|
|
RomiosArktos
Consul
Joined: 13-Jan-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 309
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 20-Mar-2006 at 09:48 |
Originally posted by Komnenos
The canons might have speeeded up the whole
process a bit, and without them it might have taken a few more weeks
longer. But the Byzantines had already used up their alloted numbers of
miracles in earlier centuries, and that was it.
|
I think that if Turks didn't have the cannons and didn't come up with
the clever plan to carry their ships by land so as to avoid the chain
and enter the Golden Horn,the Venetian fleet would probably bring the
needed reeinforcements.I think that when the city fell to the Turks the
fleet of Venice ws in Euboia,Negroponte,So in a few days they would
have come in Constantinople if it hadn't been for the ottoman cannons.
|
|
Kapikulu
Arch Duke
Retired AE Moderator
Joined: 07-Aug-2004
Location: Berlin
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1914
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 20-Mar-2006 at 13:22 |
Actually, Pope offered its help for the Byzantines either, but after 1204 incident, Byzantines rejected a Latin help or takeover of the city.
Komnenos has some right parts in his posteither, Byzantines just lost too much land everywhere and got only stuck in Istanbul at that time, but nowhere else.
|
We gave up your happiness
Your hope would be enough;
we couldn't find neither;
we made up sorrows for ourselves;
we couldn't be consoled;
A Strange Orhan Veli
|
|
Komnenos
Tsar
Retired AE Administrator
Joined: 20-Dec-2004
Location: Neutral Zone
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4361
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 20-Mar-2006 at 14:51 |
Originally posted by RomiosArktos
Originally posted by Komnenos
The canons might have speeeded up the whole
process a bit, and without them it might have taken a few more weeks
longer. But the Byzantines had already used up their alloted numbers of
miracles in earlier centuries, and that was it.
|
I think that if Turks didn't have the cannons and didn't come up with
the clever plan to carry their ships by land so as to avoid the chain
and enter the Golden Horn,the Venetian fleet would probably bring the
needed reeinforcements.I think that when the city fell to the Turks the
fleet of Venice ws in Euboia,Negroponte,So in a few days they would
have come in Constantinople if it hadn't been for the ottoman cannons.
|
Yet another slight postponement of the inevitable.
|
[IMG]http://i71.photobucket.com/albums/i137/komnenos/crosses1.jpg">
|
|
R_AK47
Baron
Joined: 25-Jan-2006
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 468
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 20-Mar-2006 at 22:29 |
Inevitable? I don't think so. About the cannons, Constantinople would not have fallen if the Turks did not have them. Even with the cannons, the Turks nearly lost. Really the only reason the Turks won was because they had cannons, a navy transported into the Golden Horn, and a ridiculously huge army (80,000 men). And they still almost lost! If you took away any one of those advantages the Turks would have definetly failed.
|
|
Kapikulu
Arch Duke
Retired AE Moderator
Joined: 07-Aug-2004
Location: Berlin
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1914
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 20-Mar-2006 at 23:13 |
Well what Komnenos meant was, it was gonna fall sooner or later... If it wasn't in 1453, it would be in 1525 or 1614 for example
Byzantine Empire at that time had been reduced just to a city state of Constantinople. And at that time Ottomans came and ordered huge cannons to be built by the Hungarian artillery master Urban, and constructed a navy and passed it to Golden Horn by sliding it with the help of wet woods, from the land...And as technology was developing, it was gonna fall sooner or later.
|
We gave up your happiness
Your hope would be enough;
we couldn't find neither;
we made up sorrows for ourselves;
we couldn't be consoled;
A Strange Orhan Veli
|
|
Seko
Emperor
Spammer
Joined: 01-Sep-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 8595
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 20-Mar-2006 at 23:33 |
Fatih Sultan Mehmed had practically owned the surrounding countryside. The Ottomans lands stretched to both sides of the Bosphorus and beyond. Had Constantinople been Catholic instead of Eastern Orthodox perhaps military aid would have been more abundant and punctual.
The guns were important for the Ottoman military. Even with such weapons many days would pass before a successfull onslaught. As the Ottomans breached the walls the Byzantines plugged them up overnight. The Ottoman galleys from the golden horn gave them strategic advantage. They could press the battles from land and sea. Not enough defenders to keep up.
|
|
Komnenos
Tsar
Retired AE Administrator
Joined: 20-Dec-2004
Location: Neutral Zone
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4361
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 21-Mar-2006 at 01:25 |
Originally posted by Kapikulu
Well what Komnenos meant was, it was gonna fall sooner or later... If it wasn't in 1453, it would be in 1525 or 1614for example
|
That late.
I was thinking in years rather than in decades.
The only way Constantinople would have had a slight chance to survive for longer, would have been massive assistance from any other Christian state in Europe. But none was able or willing to do so, help in 1453 was mostly based on private iniative than on organised assistance. As for the Venetians, as discussed so often here, the only interest the Serene Republic had was to increase their profits and they couldn't care less who ruled Constantinople as long they had their trade privileges.
|
[IMG]http://i71.photobucket.com/albums/i137/komnenos/crosses1.jpg">
|
|
Idanthyrus
Pretorian
Joined: 03-Feb-2005
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 188
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 21-Mar-2006 at 22:28 |
The Ottoman mercenary Urban and his artillery's role in the capture of Constantinople is overrated. The damn this took so long to reload that the Byzantine soldiers were able to repair the damage between each shot.
By 1453 Byzantine lands consisted of little more than the capital itself. They had been weakened by internal power struggles, the 4th crusade and the war with the resulting Latin successor states. Mehmed II had singned treaties with two of Constantinople's allies: Hungary and the Venetian Empire, isolating Constantinople politically. The fortresses of Anadolu Hisari and Rumeli Hisar completly closed off the Bosphorus to routes of Byzantine resupply from the Black sea. Once the Ottomans managed to circumvent the Golden Horn its was over for Constantinople .
|
|
azimuth
Caliph
SlaYer'S SlaYer
Joined: 12-Dec-2004
Location: Neutral Zone
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2979
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 21-Mar-2006 at 22:47 |
Originally posted by prsn41ife
Constantinople had been besieged by Persians, Arabs, and Turks, but neither were able to take the city until the cannon was invented.
.
|
it has nothing to do with cannons.
first Arabs were able to take constantinople in the 9th centurey and there was peace treaty between the Queen and the Caliph that the Queen to pay a sum of gold every year to keep the Caliphs army away from attacking Constantinople.
then the Crusaders did conquere Constantinople in the 11th century and there were no cannons.
the turks couldve taken constantinople at earlier time but again there were peace treaties that made them away from it.
look at these maps and see how easly it was for the turk to take it but they didnt.
the above map is when the Ottoman started rising and you can see under Sultan Mehmet the first they already took the lands after constantinople. its like a city in the middle of the empire. this is 1382 AD.
1430, the ottomans got bigger and stronger, why do you think they left constantinople in the middle free like that?
1470
|
|
|
RomiosArktos
Consul
Joined: 13-Jan-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 309
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 22-Mar-2006 at 06:55 |
Originally posted by azimuth
it has nothing to do with cannons.
first Arabs were able to take constantinople in the 9th centurey and
there was peace treaty between the Queen and the Caliph that the Queen
to pay a sum of gold every year to keep the Caliphs army away from
attacking Constantinople. |
The Arabs had failed three times,so how are you so sure about their ability to capture Constantinople?
In 846 the Arabs sacked the suburbs of Rome but they didn't besiege Constantinople in the 9th century.
The fact that an emperor bribed the Arabs so as to keep them away
doesn't mean that they were able to take the city.Just the Emperor
wanted to be sure that there would be no attack from the Arabs so as to
deal with other enemies in other frontiers.
Who was the Queen that you are referring to?
|
|
R_AK47
Baron
Joined: 25-Jan-2006
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 468
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 08-Apr-2006 at 13:17 |
Originally posted by Seko
Fatih Sultan Mehmed had practically owned the surrounding countryside. The Ottomans lands stretched to both sides of the Bosphorus and beyond. Had Constantinople been Catholic instead of Eastern Orthodox perhaps military aid would have been more abundant and punctual.
|
Are you suggesting that at this point in history, if the Latin Empire of Constantinople was still in existance, it would have been in a better political position to recieve aid that would have ensured its survival?
|
|
Maju
King
Joined: 14-Jul-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6565
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 08-Apr-2006 at 14:15 |
From the maps above that Azimuth posted, one can gather that there were no real Christian powers with "free time" to dedicate to the Byzantine-Turk issue except Aragon, Venice and Hungary. As far as I know the three tried to do something but were overcome. I just don't see any other power that could do anything with the Golde Horde and Hundred Years' War around.
In fact this Turk advance is considered to be somehow the trigger that caused some reaction in Europe later on. First of all, because the traditional routes of spice, silk and gold were becoming problematic, what pushed transatlantic exploration; second: because the Turk advance eventually became a true threat for Western Europe, what caused the coalition that fought in Lepanto and Vienna.
|
NO GOD, NO MASTER!
|
|
RomiosArktos
Consul
Joined: 13-Jan-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 309
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 08-Apr-2006 at 17:57 |
In fact,Hungary led a major crusade in 1444 but they failed.If the
Hungarians hadn't failed in Varna,then the capture of Constantinople
would not be so certain.
While Hunyadi and the other lords were fighting in the northern
balcans,the last emperor who was at that time Despot of Mystra led an
attack against the Turks in Thessaly.But when the news about the
destruction of the army of Hunyadi reached Greece,Constantine withdrew
in Peloponesos
|
|
Byzantine Emperor
Arch Duke
Kastrophylax kai Tzaousios
Joined: 24-May-2005
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1800
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 08-Apr-2006 at 18:15 |
Originally posted by RomiosArktos
In fact,Hungary led a major crusade in 1444 but they failed.If the Hungarians hadn't failed in Varna,then the capture of Constantinople would not be so certain. |
The Varna crusade's main objective was not to relieve Constantinople and deliver any kind of aid to the Byzantines. It was, rather, an effort by the Papacy to get the Hungarians involved in Eastern Europe in combating the advance of the Ottomans, since Western European Catholic kingdoms were not willing to cooperate with each other.
I will have to check on my dates here, but I think the council of Ferrara-Florence had not yet concluded by the time the battle at Varna was fought. The Byzantine emperor John VIII Palaiologos was trying to get military aid, or at least money, from the West by attending the council and promising union. But, as it had many times before with other emperors, his efforts failed. If the Hungarians had won at Varna, I think it would have only set the Ottomans back temporarily, much as it had done when Tamerlane attacked Eastern provinces during the Ottoman siege of Constantinople in 1422. The Byzantines' real hope was in the possibility of the fragmentation of the new Ottoman empire and the succession of a series of weak sultans; which almost happened in 1422 except Mehmed II eventually put an end to the disunity.
|
|
|