QuoteReplyTopic: What is the bravest act in history? Posted: 01-Jul-2005 at 12:01
Originally posted by Murtaza
Aknc will you give your city without fight Even If you had 1% chance?
as the emperor my duty would be to take care of my citizens,and i will hold it before my crown and empire.The ottoman rule is far better than that,besides,don't think the whole fight was stupid.I think that the emperor not taking the suurender offer before the all out assault that made the city fall is stupid.HE had been fighting for three months and he knew that there wasn't even a 0.000000000000000001 chance.
"I am the scourage of god appointed to chastise you,since no one knows the remedy for your iniquity exept me.You are wicked,but I am more wicked than you,so be silent!"
Well not excatly people always forget, that castle is best defended castle at that times. They have always some chance. That is reason why I dont think they were most brave people. They had best castle.
But Emperor is a brave man, whatever Its cause.
I dont think he cared for Byzantium culture much, but he cared for his city, his crown, his people.(crown and people can be same) And He fight bravely.
Infact It would be realy disgusting, If he didnt fight until to last. He was the one of best enemy.
suicide attacks or making last stands is never heroic just plain stupid. runnign toward an enemy trench udner full enemy fire, throwing a grenade in and making it back to the own trench is bravery; taking a bunch of grenades, wrapping them aroud the body and suicide jump into the other trench is stuipd. making a last stand against a favourable enemy against all odds is stupid, the enemy will move on and take what he wants anyways; under the same situation retreat and try to defeat him in small prologned skirmishes or to lure him into a prepared ambush and to ultimately defeat him this way is the way of sucess. if anybody has doubts about what i said just look at WW2 and see how well the fight to the last man doctrine worked for Germans and Japansese...or the Greeks at Thermopylae for that matter...
Well Temujin. you can call it what u like , but in here u talk about strategy and not bravery.Take for example Stalingrad .... according to your opinion , the Russians would have given the city to the Nazis cause they were outnumbered....Lenningrad too , would have surrendered to the Germans , since they were outnumbered...In WW2 the war from the German part was conducted by Hitler and NOT by his generals. I am pretty sure that IF the war was conducted more profecionally than politicaly , it would have been much more difficult for the allies to win it. And Temujin... read about the Hungarian uprising in 1956 , against the communists. There were young people who took a bunch of grenades wrapped them around their body and jumped under Soviet tanks .... u consider them stupid too , because the Soviets were too strong to be opposed ?? Keep in mind that in Hungary , ChechoSlovakia , Polad ...everywhere there was an uprising against the Soviets , there was NEVER a partizan fighting as u suggest that they ought to do. In the case of sacrifice , like in Thermopylae , or Konstantinopolis , there is more than a simple desperate fight. They both have a political meaning , and above all , they are calculated to the point.Leonidas knows about the oracle ....he also knows that he must buy time for the rest of the Greeks . He also knows that his death will increase the feeling of revenge that the Greeks will feel towards Persians... Same thing goes for Konstantine Paleologos. He knows that he can not defend the City with his little army....IF he gives the City , and retreats to Mystras , it would be a matter of time for the Turks to attack him there...He has no lands , and no people to join his army , in case he wants to keep fighting the Turks. He also will be another one of the many unworthy emperors , and noboby will trust him as a leader...On the other hand , he knows the Turkish ways ... he knows the milliet tactics of theirs , so he advertises that the priests are saying : better the muslims than the Catholics....This is why he does not call for a general fight ...this is why he fights with almost 5000 Greeks and the 700 knights of Justiniani , leaving the people to gather to the churches...He knows that there will be loot and slaughter , but the Turks will not put all of them to the sword. And his personal death will be a reason for the Greeks to keep fighting...This is why Greeks were never the loyal subjects of Turks ... in 368 years of enslavement 93 small or big uprises will occur , almost one in every 4 years. As a matter of fact , there was never a period of more that 40 years of not fighting between Greeks and the Turks.
So , a last stand sometimes is required IF its sure outcome , will give a meaning for those who will come next.This kind of sacrifice , is never a final point . It is always a step upon which others will stand to keep the fight.
Before all we ex-Byzantine emperors get carried away, I would like to point out that Constantinople in 1453 is only example under many of a medieval city defending itself bravely against an overwhelming besieging force. There were thousands of others towns who fought with the same desperation and heroism against the inevitable. Constantinople might have been the historically most significant,but that doesn't make it automatically the bravest.
Of course...There will NEVER be "the bravest act"...It is always the bravest act at the PRESENT MOMENT of TIME...
------------------------------------------------------------ ---------------------- charles brough wrote :
The discussion has reached an important question. Is the act of a suicide bomber a "heroic act?" I don't think there is any question that it takes a lot of "guts". It takes bravery, but is it "heroic" to take your life murdering other and helpless civilians?
There is no question that Fundamentalist Islam is the underdog and has had to seek other ways of defending its identity, but even so, it is a new low in the history of warefare for our and Islamic civilization. We are all aware of a time in our history when armies marched against each other. Now we fly over them and gleefully rain death and destruction on them. We fire missiles at them from beyond the horizon or from under the ocean. We assasinate important people, float counterfit money, use depleated uranium and stock atomic bombs. Yet, the deliberate killing of civilians in restaurants and busses is a new low.
The important thing about it is that it works. It is a successful strategy. It caused Spain and the Philappines to take their troops out of Iraq. It aggrivated us into invading Islam and, hence, drive more young Muslim men into terrorism. It works. They attack us and we attack them so that we increase their numbers. It is called "a retaliatory partnership" and we learned it from israel. It will succeed in getting Bush re-elected because Iran is next.
charles
Well said Charles. In this point i would like to point out that i , for myself ,examine brave acts that happen in warfare. What you describe above , is not bravery in war , it is terrorism and i think it belongs to another topic.You are right to say that war has lost its glory , cause of technology , but u must take into consideration that even today , the foot soldier is atill required to march to the land which has been bombed and to keep it. That is until in the future ( far or near ) , these foot soldiers will be manufactured in a lab.
As for terrorism , its NOT working exactly ...it is NOT dealt the right way...
I do believe that self sacrifice is the ultimate probe of bravery. However, when conducted to inflict damage on unarmed civilians lacks entirely of bravery and it is replaced by fanatism and madness.
Completely agreed Mr.Lancer..Though i have to remind you that Santa Anna , didn't think that Alamo will have so great a psychological effect to the Americans , to make them use the battle cry :" Remember the Alamo "....
If you attack an army that is larger than yours you are brave (but in some cases maybe stupid).Also if you choose to defend against one.
i do not think the Constantinople defence was the most brave act in history.I think there is a lot of brave acts in history just as brave as that defence.
What i wanted to say was that i think that if you face an army that is larger than yours you are brave ( or maybe in some cases stupid ).
Not exactly Jors.. There are always exceptions and what u say its rather tactics than actual war. Of course the Konstantinopolis defence is NOT the bravest act in history. Thermopylae , was the bravest act , at the time it was done.... So it was the Konstantinopolis defence , so was Lenningrad , so was Stalingrad....each at his own time. When u face an enemy larger than yours is stupid but brave to stand against it ?? So Englad who withstood Hitler's bombing , was brave , but stupid ?? So the Greeks against the Italians , were brave but stupid ?? The same , against the Germans ?? The Serbians against the Germans ?? The Israelis in 1967 ?? and in 1973 ?? ... I dont think so ....War is NOT numbers and equipment always , its a lot of other qualitiies too.
Well Temujin. you can call it what u like , but in here u talk about strategy and not bravery.Take for example Stalingrad .... according to your opinion , the Russians would have given the city to the Nazis cause they were outnumbered....Lenningrad too , would have surrendered to the Germans , since they were outnumbered...In WW2 the war from the German part was conducted by Hitler and NOT by his generals. I am pretty sure that IF the war was conducted more profecionally than politicaly , it would have been much more difficult for the allies to win it. And Temujin... read about the Hungarian uprising in 1956 , against the communists. There were young people who took a bunch of grenades wrapped them around their body and jumped under Soviet tanks .... u consider them stupid too , because the Soviets were too strong to be opposed ?? Keep in mind that in Hungary , ChechoSlovakia , Polad ...everywhere there was an uprising against the Soviets , there was NEVER a partizan fighting as u suggest that they ought to do. In the case of sacrifice , like in Thermopylae , or Konstantinopolis , there is more than a simple desperate fight. They both have a political meaning , and above all , they are calculated to the point.Leonidas knows about the oracle ....he also knows that he must buy time for the rest of the Greeks . He also knows that his death will increase the feeling of revenge that the Greeks will feel towards Persians... Same thing goes for Konstantine Paleologos. He knows that he can not defend the City with his little army....IF he gives the City , and retreats to Mystras , it would be a matter of time for the Turks to attack him there...He has no lands , and no people to join his army , in case he wants to keep fighting the Turks. He also will be another one of the many unworthy emperors , and noboby will trust him as a leader...On the other hand , he knows the Turkish ways ... he knows the milliet tactics of theirs , so he advertises that the priests are saying : better the muslims than the Catholics....This is why he does not call for a general fight ...this is why he fights with almost 5000 Greeks and the 700 knights of Justiniani , leaving the people to gather to the churches...He knows that there will be loot and slaughter , but the Turks will not put all of them to the sword. And his personal death will be a reason for the Greeks to keep fighting...This is why Greeks were never the loyal subjects of Turks ... in 368 years of enslavement 93 small or big uprises will occur , almost one in every 4 years. As a matter of fact , there was never a period of more that 40 years of not fighting between Greeks and the Turks.
So , a last stand sometimes is required IF its sure outcome , will give a meaning for those who will come next.This kind of sacrifice , is never a final point . It is always a step upon which others will stand to keep the fight.
Isk, what you've described were not last stands, like the uprisings, uprisings are like small skirmishes to weaken the occupying force, in this case Greeks are attackers and Ottomans defenders. and Leningrad was one of the two biggest Russian cities, they could not have surrenderd that easily... but look at Stalingrad, Stalingrad was German held, not Russian held, in the end Germans were surrounded and caught in a pocket because they had the order to make a last stand, in the end they starved to death. not really glorious, eh? furthermore Thermopylae, you said they had to buy time...for whom? the other Greeks that fled the Thermopylae position and let Spartans and Thespians alone? where were they? where was the Greek army the Spartans were supposed to buy time for? did they prevent the sacking of Athens? no they did not, and Greeks only rallied against the occupants left at Paltaea when the main Persian army has already left Greece...thats not heroic...Leonidas and the other Greeks died for nothing at all, thats all the heroism Themopylae was about. Constantinople is similar to WW2 again, Constantinople was left alone, surrounded by the Turks and the emperor and his few troops had no other chance but to die an unglorious death by the hands of a superior force that came out of the nothing and brought the end of a century old empire. with their backs against the wall, they had no other choice.
I did not mean that facing an army that is bigger than yours is brave and stupid at the same time.I meant that in some cases it can be stupid for example if you underestimate the enemy.
Constantinople is similar to WW2 again, Constantinople was left alone, surrounded by the Turks and the emperor and his few troops had no other chance but to die an inglorious death by the hands of a superior force that came out of the nothing and brought the end of a century old empire. with their backs against the wall, they had no other choice.
Way wrong!
Ottomans were building their army and positions in the open (they even build forts and sieged the last surrounding free smal cities) and the Byzantines had plenty of time to scavenge around for provisions & mercenaries. With their limited finances they couldn't get any!
The emperor Constantine Paleologous rejected the Sultan's proposal for an honorary surrender.
These're elementary facts!
Edited by Yiannis
The basis of a democratic state is liberty. Aristotle, Politics
Those that can give up essential liberty to obtain a temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. Benjamin Franklin
Yes, Ottomans made their preperation realy fine. Istanbul had chance against the Ottomans. It is not a stupidy act to refuse Proposal. Ottomans didnt take that city so cheap and easy
I do believe that self sacrifice is the ultimate probe of bravery. However, when conducted to inflict damage on unarmed civilians lacks entirely of bravery and it is replaced by fanatism and madness.
Completely agreed Mr.Lancer..Though i have to remind you that Santa Anna , didn't think that Alamo will have so great a psychological effect to the Americans , to make them use the battle cry :" Remember the Alamo "....
Santa Anna issued a decree on December 1835 when the texican rebels took the Alamo. The Decree specified that any foreigner captured would be executed.
At his arrival to El Alamo, Santa Anna raised the Scarlett Flag and the army played Toque a Dequello.
Toque A Dequello was taken from the spaniards and they took it from the moorish.
However, at least Santa Anna allowed the evacuation of children and women. El Alamo has some interesting aspects that could help us to understand the final outcome.
First of All, El Alamo was not a battle of a single assault.
The siege took 13 days. Santa Anna ordered the bombardment of El Alamo whilst he gathered enough forces to storm the Mission.
When Santa Anna requested the surrender of the mission, Travis answered with cannon fire.
During the assault to the mission, a part of the texicans surrended raising white flags while others opened fire.That really angered to the mexican soldiers.
At the end, only 2 black slaves were spared by considering them as no combatants.
I'm not trying to justify to Santa Anna. He was unmerciful on victory, but the Texicans pushed to a intolerant murder as Santa Anna.
The defending of Istanbul (ex Constantinopole) was brave, but it was the last chance, and not kind of a bravest act.
The bravest act for my country was the Battle of Gallipoli. The bravest act for my nation was the whole Turkish War of Independence.
I am not sure about the bravest act of the history of humanity, but I think the resistance of Native Northern Americans against European colonists, the resistance of Zulu against British, the war of William Wallace against British were some bravest ones I can remember now. And the battle of Thermophylae was also one of them.
Altough I dont like Enver Pasha, his acts were some of the bravest in history. He entered Russia three times illegally, he fought and died with the Uzbeg rebel forces against Russians. He died for Turan, but I still dont appreciate him.
Ottomans were building their army and positions in the open (they even build forts and sieged the last surrounding free smal cities) and the Byzantines had plenty of time to scavenge around for provisions & mercenaries. With their limited finances they couldn't get any!
The emperor Constantine Paleologous rejected the Sultan's proposal for an honorary surrender.
In 1241 after the battle of Muhi the Hungarian king Bla IV. fled to the west chased by mongol cavalry.
The king 's life was in danger many times, but once they were pulled up by the mongol warriors. Then one man from the royal retinue stopped to delay then. The king managed to escape, but his man alone faced with the whole enemy band. I think the fact that he managed to survive is the most incredible in this whole story. Later this man, Ernye kos became a baron of the kingdom (voivod of Transylvania, ban of Ozora, royal marshal) and his family became a powerful baronical family by the thankful king. I think it is an amazing story.
King Bla flees from the battle of Muhi from the Chronica de gestis Hungarorum (or Chronicon Pictum):
Singing and dancing , one by one they jump over the cliff with their children in their arms , choosing death , than slavery in the TurkAlbanian hands...
heh, this is sort of similar to a story in Alb tradition.
On the Subject of Ali Pasha, here is an interesting play about his special kind of cruelty.
When the Turks finally conquered Shkoder then started heading through Rozaffa castle. I dont remember the details of the character but she ran with her child to escape the Turks, when this was no longer an option, she jumped and took her child with her.
I think it was Rozaffa Castle, man I havnt heard this story in a long time....
Anyway, the stand at Ulqin is quite memorable for me. It marks one of the first time Albanian catholics and muslims united against a common cause since 200 years earlier when they planed together a revolt against the Ottomans. As the Ottoman Empire was dying, the Serbs began chipping away at the northern lands. The Ottomans then prepared to give off northern Albania to the Montenegrins. Whne the Albs heard of what was going to happen they revolted and killed the pasha who came from Constantinople to give the land off and any Turk with him. Finally the Serbs had enough and they started attacking. One of these cities was Ulqin, in todays Montenegro (still has an 85% Alb populus). The Serbs began surrounding the city full of modern artillery and other Russian gives. they had an army over 10X larger then the Alb one. Attack after attack they could not break through the defenses, and their attacks were pinned back by the Albs(who were mostly citizen conscripts with dated or weak rifles). The Serbs continued for 30 days and still no success. Finally they went to the western powers for help. They sent in ships which blockaded and attacked the city. Finally the Serbs gained an upper hand and overran the city and began disarming the populus, a last offensive was made by the remaining Alba soldiers before they died and the city fell.
A similar even would occur in their siege of Shkoder. In total the Serbs lost about 15,000 soldiers. But caused the deaths of thousands as they moved from Shkoder down to Durres.
I suppose that on of the bravest act in history can be charge at Samosierra -30 XI 1808. That day 140 uhlans (from 3rd squadron's regiment) had to conquer defile, which was defended by 16 field-guns and several thousand soldiers. What couldn't have done Napoleon's Army, polish soldiers procured spanish positions by daring charge. This event went on only few minutes.
And I dont think It is a survival war, Greeks at the Istanbul prefered Ottomans over latins. Even At third crusaders, Greeks dont help crusaders agains Turk.
So I think they dont afraid so much from the Ottomans. They afraid from latins more and more.
Im not going to say my nations bravery is above anyone else's. Having said that, i would like to mention the battle of Avarayr in 451 A.D.
In the years leading up to the battle, the Zoroastrian Sassanid Empire had been trying to get Armenia to relinquish Christianity and accept Zoroastrianism as the national religion. Being part of the Sassanid Empire, many Armenians wanted to agree and convert, because a war with Persia was basically suicidal. They had some meetings with Persia, but they were stalemates. The Sassanids sent Maji (Zoroastrian priests) with very small armies to Armenia to convert the population. An Armenian priest named Ghevont organized revolts and drove the Maji out of Armenia, killing many of them.
The Persian King Yazdegird II gave the Armenians one last chance and asked them to accept Zoroastrianism. The Armenian general, Vartan Mamikonian, met with high ranking Persian officials and gave this response:
"From this faith no one can move us-neither angels nor men; neither sword, nor fire, nor water, nor any deadly punishment. If you leave us our faith, we will accept no other lord in place of you; but we will accept no God in place of Jesus Christ; there is no other God beside Him. If, after this great confession, you ask anything more of us, lo, we are before you and our lives are in your power. From you, torments; from us, submission; your sword, our neck. We are not better than those who have gone before us who gave up their goods and their lives for this testimony."
It was quite obvious that the Persians were being shown resistence. Knowing a war was about to ensue, Vartan mustered up as many men as he could from those who were willing to defend Armenian culture. The Armenians mustered 66,000 men, while the Persians invaded with a force of over 220,000 men, backed up by sqaudrons of armored elephants. On June 2, 451, Vartan Mamikonian died in the fields of Avarayr (present-day northern Iran) during the battle. With the loss of their general and the overwhelming number of Persians, the Armenians retreated for the day, losing the battle. The Armenians lost just over 1,000 men, while the Persians lost nearly 6,000. It was, however, a moral victory for Armenians, who gained a memory of martyrdom for their culture. The battle was lost, but the war was far from over. A 33-year guerilla war ensued, with Armenians from all over harassing and attacking the Persian army over and over again, until, the Persians had simply had enough and left the Armenians alone, surrendering.
The resistance offered by the Armeniansmen, women, and childrenconvinced the king of Persia that he could never make fire worshipers out of the Armenians. As an old historian expressed it: "The swords of the slayers grew dull, but their necks were not weary. Even the high priest of Zoroastrianism saw that the Persians had undertaken an impossibility, and thus advised the king: "These people have put on Christianity, not like a garment, but like their flesh and blood. Men who do not dread fetters, nor fear torments, nor care for their property, and, what is worst of all, who choose death rather than life,-who can stand against them?"
After they retreated in 484 A.D., the Persians signed a treaty granting the Armenians freedom of worship within their empire.
The battle of Avarayr is the first ever armed defense of Christianity in history. More importantly, it prevented Armenia from being assimilated, and to this day Armenia remains the world's first Christian nation. I am not a Christian, but it was an important event for the cause of keeping alive Armenian identity.
Just one of the stories in Armenian history. Ive enjoyed reading about the other brave acts, keep posting them!
The bravest act in Serbian history was certainly facing the Turks who outnumbered us greatly. That was in Kosovo 1389, on June 28th. There were aproximatly 10 times more Turks then Serbs (and some Hungarians, a few crusaders and others).
AS HOMER SAID: IT'S BETTER TO DIE A HEROIC DEATH THEN TO LIVE AS A COWARD.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum