this post was submitted on 10 Feb 2010
26 points (82% like it)
33 up votes 7 down votes

comments

Sealbhach 18 points19 points 5 months ago[-]

What we call the Byzantine Empire was called the Roman Empire, Imperium Romanum, Basileía tôn Rhōmaíōn or Romania by the people who actually lived there.

It was the eastern part of the Roman Empire - the division happened around the time Emperor Constantine founded Constantinopolis in 330 AD. So, although the Roman Empire died out in the West, it lingered on in the East until 1453. It wasn't until 1557 that historians began to call it the Byzantine Empire.

anarchoal 8 points9 points 5 months ago[-]

Indeed, and that the Germans were still claiming the title until Napoleon, and the Russians were still claiming it until Lenin.

TopRamen713 13 points14 points 5 months ago[-]

Caesar, Kaiser, Tzar

qoumran 3 points4 points 5 months ago[-]

I very much agree with you. I had learned about the Roman empire in school - and through reading Asterix ;-) but knew next to nothing about the Byzantine Empire.

Reading about it was a real eye opener. Not only did Byzantium follow in the heels of the Roman empire, but it also had a massive influence on many areas of civilization like law, religion, languages (like inventing the cyrillic alphabet in order to write down slavic), etc. It is also an example of a great empire being destroyed not by war (although it did play a part), but by greed and incompetence.

Sealbhach 7 points8 points 5 months ago[-]

Not only did Byzantium follow in the heels of the Roman empire...

Yeah but my point is it WAS the Roman Empire, at least that part of it that still remained after Rome fell. And just thinking about what someone else said here, Constantinople lasted as the capital of a single Imperium (if you begin from the administrative division of the Empire in AD 330) for over 1,000 years. That's amazing.

bski1776 4 points5 points 5 months ago[-]

Also the Byzantine academics that left the Empire to go to Italy in the 1400's arguably had a great influence on the Renaissance. Due partially to its ability to exist as a functioning government uninterrupted over 1000 years, the Bynzantine empire held onto knowledge that the rest of Europe had long forgotten.

qoumran 3 points4 points 5 months ago[-]

I thought the same when reading about the end of the empire. Does anyone know of any books which get into how Byzantine knowledge and academics influenced the renaissance?

bski1776 5 points6 points 5 months ago[-]

I'm currently reading "Sailing from Byzantium : how a lost Empire shaped the world". It explains in three separate parts how the Empire affected the West, Islam, and Slavic areas.

The first section gives you the answer to your question.

qoumran 4 points5 points 5 months ago[-]

Looks good, the interactions with Islam are also a great interest of mine so this book just landed on my Amazon shopping list.

Thank you for the recommendation.

mitravelus 9 points10 points 5 months ago[-]

Tesla, everything that man accomplished amazes me to this day.

FilthMontane 9 points10 points 5 months ago[-]

Check out Russia during WW2. I went through high school believing that America was the primary force that won the war. Russians were in Germany before Americans were. The entire history of Russia itself is also quite interesting.

Grokkin_it 2 points3 points 5 months ago[-]

This is what has always bugged the crap out of the Russians.

The US history books loudly brag about the US winning against the Germans when it was the Russians who sacrificed the most, lost more and fought the hardest against Nazi Germany.

Edit: and won the most

oneordinarylife 4 points5 points 5 months ago* [-]

Though to be fair, they sacrificed the most because Stalin was willing to get his whole population killed in order to get revenge on Hitler for breaking their peace agreement. This basically amounted to "Get shot on the front-lines or get executed where you stand."

quelar 8 points9 points 5 months ago[-]

Napolean is responsible for the beginings of Egyptology as a study.

Hannibal for some reason, had decimated the Romans but stopped short or attacking Rome.

The War of 1812 (US vs Canada/Britain) was a war of errors, between Fort Mackinac falling to the British before the Fort even knew they were at war. The Battle of New Orleans, which in the end was a slaughter of the British happened after the war had ended, but no one was able to get a message to the Brits.

The Rebellion of Upper Canada took place in Toronto took about 4 days and ended when the Rebels, who had made it 4 city blocks, found a house with meat and whiskey, this was as far as the rebellion got.

doombucket 4 points5 points 5 months ago[-]

Ah! For some reason? I forget the name, but if I recall correctly it was a dangerous game where the Roman legions shuffled around and constantly retreated from Hannibal, while burning villages as they left to starve the Hannibal army. If I recall correctly, Hannibal couldn't go on to Rome because of the proximity of the legions, but also couldn't attack the legions because they kept retreating before or during each confrontation.

I'll have to look into this again to try and remember what actually happened...

Heyyouu 5 points6 points 5 months ago* [-]

What happened was that the romans learned their lesson. Do not fight Hannibal head on, avoid him at all costs.

What they did was attack Hannibal's newly found allies, forcing him to move his army to their aid, and then when he got close, the Romans would retreat and another Roman army would move to another of Hannibals allied cities, forcing Hannibal to just shuffle his army around the playing field, never really fighting anything but small skirmishes.

Meanwhile, the Romans are wreaking havoc around Carthage in Africa and their bases in Spain, a campaign that eventually forces Hannibal to move his army back to Africa where he will be defeated.

Now why didn't Hannibal move onto Rome earlier when the Romans were at their lowest point? One reason is that his army wasn't a siege army, and Rome had strong defenses. A siege could be drawn out for years, and he was not sure his tired army was up for something like that.

Hannibal's long term plan was also never to destroy Rome, but to defeat their armies in the field, motivating Romes confederates to switch side to Hannibal, removing Rome's power.

doombucket 0 points1 point 2 months ago[-]

I just recently realized I had an inbox and was able to read this message. Thank you for the thought you had put into it.

doombucket 0 points1 point 5 months ago[-]

Nice, I'm very glad to know that I was pretty close to the mark and that my reading of ancient Roman history wasn't for nothing.

strum 0 points1 point 5 months ago[-]

Fabius Maximus (Cunctator) - is the general I remember.

quelar 0 points1 point 5 months ago[-]

Please come back with anything you can find, I'd like to hear it.

I was under the impression that this was speculation and no one is entirely sure he turned back, but any more information is invited.

doombucket 1 point2 points 2 months ago[-]

What happened was that the romans learned their lesson. Do not fight Hannibal head on, avoid him at all costs.

What they did was attack Hannibal's newly found allies, forcing him to move his army to their aid, and then when he got close, the Romans would retreat and another Roman army would move to another of Hannibals allied cities, forcing Hannibal to just shuffle his army around the playing field, never really fighting anything but small skirmishes.

Meanwhile, the Romans are wreaking havoc around Carthage in Africa and their bases in Spain, a campaign that eventually forces Hannibal to move his army back to Africa where he will be defeated.

Now why didn't Hannibal move onto Rome earlier when the Romans were at their lowest point? One reason is that his army wasn't a siege army, and Rome had strong defenses. A siege could be drawn out for years, and he was not sure his tired army was up for something like that.

Hannibal's long term plan was also never to destroy Rome, but to defeat their armies in the field, motivating Romes confederates to switch side to Hannibal, removing Rome's power.

quelar 0 points1 point 1 month ago[-]

Sir, I bow to you in honour of you living up to your statement of months ago that you would come back and fill us in. I like it.

cdigioia 7 points8 points 5 months ago* [-]

OK I'll give it a go:

The largest empire in history was the British Empire at it's peak. Somehow that interests me, as well as all the cultural leftovers of that which one can see all over much of the world.

smclt 2 points3 points 5 months ago[-]

And to think that that peak was only attained during the last century.

cdigioia 4 points5 points 5 months ago* [-]

That makes sense to me actually. It was kind of the golden combination of relative technology-to-conquer/world-view which considered direct conquering to be acceptable. Though perhaps I'm oversimplifying to the point of invalidity, I don't know.

As an example - If the world were OK with the idea, I imagine the US could create a larger empire just "conquering" much of sub-Saharan Africa and the poorer states of central Asia. However, such direct empire-building is no longer viewed as acceptable, so at the present time, it can't really happen.

Zman11588 7 points8 points 5 months ago[-]

The story of Rasputin and pretty much all of Russia's history.

j0hnsd 6 points7 points 5 months ago[-]

Alexander's conquest of the Persian Empire.

roland19d 2 points3 points 5 months ago* [-]

Similarly, The Sacred Band of Thebes.

I find the modern-day controversy about homosexuals in the military especially funny considering that gays were specifically recruited, trained, and forged into one of the premier elite units of the ancient world 400 years before Christ was born. They were never defeated in battle until Alexander's forces annihilated them.

Edit: sp

jnana 16 points17 points 5 months ago[-]

Smedley Butler and the Business Plot.


The Gulf of Tonkin incident.


Eisenhower's farewell/warning about the Military-industrial Complex.


..we have come to be one of the worst ruled, one of the most completely controlled and dominated, governments in the civilized world — no longer a government by free opinion, no longer a government by conviction and the vote of the majority, but a government by the opinion and the duress of small groups of dominant men.

-W. Wilson


there's plenty more where that came from...

_Spy_ 0 points1 point 5 months ago[-]

Eh, the first two are alright but the others are just you trying to insert your bullshit politics in here.

jnana 1 point2 points 5 months ago[-]

eh?

they happened, it's history. he asked, i gave.

if you want to engage in a discussion about my 'bullshit politics' do so. if not keep your trite condescension to yourself.

chesterogilvie -1 points0 points 5 months ago* [-]

Whatever tin foil hatter! You really think people work together to gain more power and wealth?! HA!

Edit: Am I getting downvoted because people are too dense to notice sarcasm, or because people are too dense to except that conspiracies happen? I'm confused.

Blackstaff 7 points8 points 5 months ago[-]

When King Sobieski of Poland pretty much saved western Europe from yelling "Allahu Akbar" for the foreseeable future.

kerchnerstyle 0 points1 point 5 months ago[-]

Even if the Turks had been successful at the battle of Vienna, it seems unlikely to me that they would have been able to hold onto the city for long. It seems especially unlikely that they would have been able to conquer all of western Europe, considering their ongoing wars in the Baltics with Russia and their administrative difficulties due to the size of their already stretched out empire. Also consider that Christians in the Ottoman empire lived under much less severe rule than Muslims would have been in many European states. It was unusual for Ottoman rulers to force conversion of their Christian subjects, and if their subjects did convert it would have been a personal decisions; only Muslims in the Ottoman Empire held legal rights. My point is that the majority western Europe would not be yelling "Allahu Akbar" even if the Turks had been victorious at the battle of Vienna. Still, an Ottoman victory was definitely possible and the history of Europe would have been much different if it weren't for the armies of John III.

acegibson 7 points8 points 5 months ago[-]

That there was some guy who was the first dude ever to ride a horse.

I imagine there were fermented fruits/juices involved, followed by a "Hey! Watch this!"

Veteran4Peace 5 points6 points 5 months ago[-]

Must have been a real WTF? moment for the horse too.

acegibson 1 point2 points 5 months ago[-]

Horse is thinking "Oh there's nothing good gonna come from this".

Veteran4Peace 0 points1 point 5 months ago[-]

♫ ♪ Look at mah horse.. ♫ ♪♪

oneordinarylife 2 points3 points 5 months ago[-]

I learned recently that the beginnings of serfdom in the Middle Ages occurred in the Roman Empire. Towards the end of the Roman Empire, the army's size expanded drastically. This army needed to be fed, but there were far more lucrative jobs in the cities and in the army itself than that of the lowly farmer.

To counteract this, the emperor at the time introduced a decree forcing farmers to stay farmers for the rest of their lives, thereby ensuring the continued production of food for the army.

Also, Egyptian farmers were sharecroppers. The Pharaoh owned all the land in Egypt, and then farmers were allowed to work on that land as long as they gave a ridiculously high amount of the food grown back to their employer.

DENVER0501 3 points4 points 5 months ago[-]

Eleanor of Aquitane -- 12th century lady -- married the King of France, had the marriage annulled so she could marry her lover, King Henry II of England; she led a crusade; was the mother of Richard of Lion-Hearted and John, who was such a bad king, his subjects revolted and it resulted in the Magna Carta, the bedrock document of representative government. Something like a combination of Elizabeth Taylor, Hillary Clinton, and Condeleeza Rice.

strum 2 points3 points 5 months ago[-]

his subjects revolted and it resulted in the Magna Carta, His subjects didn't get a look-in. His barons revolted (largely because his loss of Normandy deprived those barons of wealth).

John revoked the Great Charter (which was not known by that name) within six weeks of signing it.

'Magna Carta only took its place at the centre of English justice because it was re-promulgated by Willam Marshal - as Regent.

To return to the question at the top of the page - the one 'thing' in history I feel the need to shout about is William Marshal - surely the greatest English hero of them all (and hardly known by Englishmen).

http://www.strum.co.uk/wessex/devizes8.htm et. seq.

DENVER0501 0 points1 point 5 months ago[-]

Agree with you completely about William Marshall. When I had to downsize by library after retirement, a historical biography about him was a very reluctant donation to the local public library. I can only hope some teenager picks it up sometime and also finds out what a great man he was. Thanks for reminding me -- I should have looked all the stuff up before I posted by relying on my memory. (Raps own knuckles w/ruler like the nuns used to do!)

Damietta 0 points1 point 5 months ago[-]

She didn't really lead a crusade, she just insisted on going on it and had all of her ladies dress up as Amazons. It was Louis who led that crusade, and she was sent home after rumors of her doing the nasty with her uncle started circulating. However, this is made up for by the fact that while her son Richard was imprisoned in Germany, she essentially ran England and did a damn good job of it, unopposed as well.

Comrad_Pat 4 points5 points 5 months ago[-]

The climax of the Russo-Japanese war. The Russian's sent their BALTIC fleet to fight the japanese, pretty much upon arrival it was anihilated. It just blows my mind.

[deleted] 6 points7 points 5 months ago[-]

It blew the minds of everyone at the time. Japan was only like 30 years out of their feudal system at the time; they went from swords, bows, spears and a few muskets to modern dreadnaughts practically overnight.

An amazing transformation.

AnhaengerVonMarx 5 points6 points 5 months ago* [-]

Japan had more guns than any European country until 1600 when Tokugawa banned them. It is ignorant to say that Japan stepping out of a feudal society meant they had poor military technology. By about 1850, Japan was covered with gun manufacturing facilities and nearly every major port had the capacity to build very large battleships.

The reason Russia did so poorly against the Japanese in the Russo-Japanese war is because the Japs sprung a suprise attack on Port Arthur, the only real Russian Port in the Pacific. They had no choice but to send the Baltic fleet over to the Sea of Japan. The book Red Mutiny gives a great narrative of the plight of the Russian Navy on its way to the Sea of Japan, as well as the first major uprising in Russia.

But yes, it shocked the fuck out of the entire world when giant, anceint, powerful Russia got bitch-slapped by tiny, savage, baby Japan.

Psyqlone 0 points1 point 5 months ago[-]

"...and nearly every major port had the capacity to build very large battleships."

A large portion of Japan's navy at the time was built in England.

iobe 2 points3 points 5 months ago[-]

Naval warfare between Japan and Korea during Imjin War and the Korean General Yi Sun Shin.

Admiral George Alexander Ballard of the Royal Navy considered Yi a great naval commander, and compared him to Lord Nelson of England:

It is always difficult for Englishmen to admit that Nelson ever had an equal in his profession, but if any man is entitled to be so regarded, it should be this great naval commander of asiatic race who never knew defeat and died in the presence of the enemy; of whose movements a track-chart might be compiled from the wrecks of hundreds of Japanese ships lying with their valiant crews at the bottom of the sea, off the coasts of the Korean peninsula... and it seems, in truth, no exaggeration to assert that from first to last he never made a mistake, for his work was so complete under each variety of circumstances as to defy criticism... His whole career might be summarized by saying that, although he had no lessons from past history to serve as a guide, he waged war on the sea as it should be waged if it is to produce definite results, and ended by making the supreme sacrifice of a defender of his country. (The Influence of the Sea on The Political History of Japan, pp. 66–67.)

Chris1218218 2 points3 points 5 months ago[-]

Just random interesting facts that I love throwing out there.

Everyone knows about the revolutionary war, but it seems very few know about the War or 1812. Even fewer know how close we came to losing the war, and how an act of God probably saved our capitol.

That despite making France one of the most powerful empires in the world, Napoleon was exiled into Saint Helena after Louis XVIII regained power.

I've been recently studying up on the blood-filled history of the Ireland-England battles. Fascinating stuff.

oneordinarylife 0 points1 point 5 months ago[-]

An act of god meaning Andrew Jackson, is I suppose what you MEANT to say.

Chris1218218 1 point2 points 5 months ago[-]

No I meant the tornado that hit DC when it was burning.

oneordinarylife 0 points1 point 5 months ago[-]

They're one and the same.

roland19d 2 points3 points 5 months ago[-]

Ernest Shakleton's 1914 - 1917 Expedition to the South Pole and everything he and his men went through to be rescued. Wikipedia doesn't do it justice. I recommend this version for reading.

DENVER0501 0 points1 point 5 months ago[-]

Kenneth Branagh's movie about it is worth watching.

snuggleslut 2 points3 points 5 months ago[-]

I find the Taiping Rebellion fascinating.

totallynaked-thought 2 points3 points 5 months ago[-]

Amundsen-Scott race to the South Pole Story of the Erie Canal Watergate that I know Otto von Bismark & German Unification 1850-1903 Project Paperclip The Second Economy & the Soviet Union

finno 5 points6 points 5 months ago[-]

Is this what you meant?

  • Amundsen-Scott race to the South Pole
  • Story of the Erie Canal
  • Watergate that I know
  • Otto von Bismark & German Unification 1850-1903
  • Project Paperclip
  • The Second Economy & the Soviet Union

totallynaked-thought 3 points4 points 5 months ago[-]

yes..i meant to reformat it.. but my son started banging on my keyboard and i got distracted. +1thanx

anarchoal 2 points3 points 5 months ago[-]

The Spanish Revolution. Yes, workplace democracy is possible.

snuggleslut 1 point2 points 5 months ago[-]

Meaning the revolution that occurred in the midst of the Civil War?

prof_hobart 2 points3 points 5 months ago[-]

Today I was amazed to find out that the fax machine is older than the telephone.

Psyqlone 0 points1 point 5 months ago[-]

...fax machines? Did you mean teletype or teleprinter machines?

prof_hobart 1 point2 points 5 months ago[-]

No. I mean fax machine

Neonblack 2 points3 points 5 months ago[-]

Tesla invented free energy and the world will never know.

carlsonj 1 point2 points 5 months ago[-]

The Mongol empire is the largest continuious empire

bski1776 1 point2 points 5 months ago[-]

was

brickne3 1 point2 points 5 months ago[-]

That the fall of the wall (at least on the day it happened) was the result of what amounts to a lucky accident.

thenightwassaved [S] 0 points1 point 5 months ago[-]

Odd that you mention this, I was turning one the day that happened.

evanspw 1 point2 points 5 months ago[-]

An Shi Rebellion. Killed on in eight human beings. Unbelievably awful.

totallynaked-thought 1 point2 points 5 months ago[-]

wow.. holy crap! just read about that maybe i should file that under TIL?

mestguy182 1 point2 points 5 months ago[-]

Hitler attacked Russia.. causing Germany to lose WWII.

sully84 0 points1 point 5 months ago* [-]

WWI was started because of a sandwich

Granted the war would have started for some reason eventually regardless of this incident, but I find these random quirks of history to be very interesting. There are a few more here

chrisbraniac 0 points1 point 5 months ago[-]

Metaphors about the philosophy of time embedded in modern geology in the work of Burnet, Whiston, Werner, Hutton, Cuvier, and Lyell. This is my undergraduate thesis.

liberdade 0 points1 point 5 months ago[-]

thwackitechnica 0 points1 point 5 months ago[-]

Belgium's revolution and secession started with an Opera performance.

bennybenners -1 points0 points 5 months ago[-]

The story of Pope Joan is very interesting, whether it is real or not.

Veteran4Peace -5 points-4 points 5 months ago[-]

48,000 BCE: The Protheans, a sentient race with hyper-advanced technology, were mysteriously wiped out leaving almost no trace of their existence.

Only their galaxy-spanning Mass Relay system is still intact.

Stu8912 -4 points-3 points 5 months ago[-]

My Birth!!!!!! ,oh and the roman empire was pretty cool I guess.