eat cold steel........
-
"With Amyntas I., who was contemporary with Darius Hystaspis, light dawns upon Macedonian history. We find that by this time the Macedonian monarchs of this line had made themselves masters of Pieria and Bottiaea, had crossed the Axius and conquered Mygdonia and Anthemus, had dislodged the original Eordi from Eordia and themselves occupied it, and had dealt similarly with the Alm6pes in Almopia, on the Rhaedias. But the advance of the Persians into Europe gave a sudden check to this period of prosperity. After a submission which was more nominal than real, in B.C. 507, the Macedonians, in B.C. 492, became Persian subjects, retaining, however, their own kings, who accepted the position of tributaries. Amyntas I., who appears to have died about B.C. 498, was succeeded by his son, Alexander I., king at the time of the great invasion of Xerxes, who played no unimportant part in the expedition, B.C. 480 to 470.
The repulse of the Persians set Macedonia free; and the career of conquest appears to have been at once resumed. Crestonaea and Bisaltia were reduced, and the Macedonian dominion pushed eastward almost to the Strymon. The authority of the monarchs of Pella was likewise extended over most of the inland Macedonian tribes, as the Lyncestis, the Eleimiots, and others, who however retained their own kings."
http://www.historyofmacedonia.org/AncientMacedonia/Rawlinson.html
that site quite power. Set up to dispute modern day greece's claim of the name macedonia. the articles inside are quide comprehensive -
ermm...since you are interested in Alexander III then i put this to you. In your opinion, was Parmenion the reason behind Alexander's success or was he a conservative old man always getting in Alexander's ambitions. The first view was held by Amnanias while the second by Callisthenes i think.
These two were first hand account other from Perdiccas's journals. -
I personally believe that Parmenion was the how do i say the experience that held back Alexander from commiting into rash mistakes on the battlefield.Alexander was good but at times i believe he was much much too rash so i think Parmenion was the thing that prevented him from commiting to rashly.I'll try to find some sources on why but it might take time this comp is new so no websites.Originally posted by redrooster79:ermm...since you are interested in Alexander III then i put this to you. In your opinion, was Parmenion the reason behind Alexander's success or was he a conservative old man always getting in Alexander's ambitions. The first view was held by Amnanias while the second by Callisthenes i think.
These two were first hand account other from Perdiccas's journals.
Anyway Macedonia of the old is in present day greece.Macedonia is part of Thrace very close to the Greek penisular.Modern day macedonia is way way to far north.Heck i have website who say modern day macedonians are the same as ancient day macedonians...though they left out the part that modern day macedonia are slavs! -
Macedonian are neither greek nor slavs. there is genetic testing done to atest to that fact. Although largely believed to be of slavic stock, the genetics test have proven a sizable amount of people in macedonia belongs to neither greek or slavic genetic stock but to a macedonian ethnbic stock.
Macedonia is settled by 66% ethnic macedonians(although there could be a sizable slavic portion in there) with sizable groups of them living in albania bulgaria and greece.
I myself do not really care for this conflict but the fact remains that site has good objective articles. -
lol honestly that site is way to bias the people who moved into what is now known as macedonia.They are slavsOriginally posted by redrooster79:Macedonian are neither greek nor slavs. there is genetic testing done to atest to that fact. Although largely believed to be of slavic stock, the genetics test have proven a sizable amount of people in macedonia belongs to neither greek or slavic genetic stock but to a macedonian ethnbic stock.
Macedonia is settled by 66% ethnic macedonians(although there could be a sizable slavic portion in there) with sizable groups of them living in albania bulgaria and greece.
I myself do not really care for this conflict but the fact remains that site has good objective articles.
there is as much ethnic macedonians there as there are anatolians in Turkey..a very very small population due to alot of inter breeding with the greeks i've been this over way too much haha -
Ever heard of the Pan-slavic movement, It got so bad that the even claimed to have invented a systemetic code of writing before the summerians.
-
Biased, doesn't seem so biased when they present facts along with arguments. Doesn't seem biased when they present many documents and writings from antiquety. Yes along side them are arguments for this and that but alongside them are clear factual or historical articles. Write it off, its up to you.
anyway, it was not set up to argue the case for the republic of Macedonia but it was set up for Ethnic macedonians. Look through it properly, they do not only hightlight the current wrangle over the name of macedonia but also highlights the plight of macedonian minorities in albania, greece and other places. It is a site set up by macedonians for macedonians -
Originally posted by |-|05|:
Macedonia of old is only partly in modern day Greece. Modern day macedonia consist of land the was only 38% of ancient day Macedonia. Neither is modern day mecedonia not part of ancient macedonia nor is it too far north.
Anyway Macedonia of the old is in present day greece.Macedonia is part of Thrace very close to the Greek penisular.Modern day macedonia is way way to far north.[/b] -
you go read the pro greek websites and you will know loh.....ethnic macedonian's have for way too long inter-breed with the greek liao it got worse under roman rule.....which was 2,000 years.Haiz i've seen greeks and macedonian's argue about this for such a long time i get sick of it liao haha
Heck some slav said the bulgars invented the most advanced calander in the world when it was obvious they copied if from the chinese and that calander wasnt even as advance as the mayan calander.Anyway let's not talk about this anymore and concentrate on the topics at hand...... like what do you say about Hannibal and Scipio at the battle of Zama....was it luck that the Numidian force arrived when they did or was Scipio better then Hannibal?By the way the battle of Ilipa was masterful -
Hmm..anyone knows about the fall of Constaninople? if im nt wrong, it was besiged quite a few times in it's history, however managed to surivive, due to it's solid fortifications.
The Fall of it was partly due to the advent and clever use of cannon/artillery to bombard the Walls -
The Great city of Constainople was seige at least 11 times of which it's walls was only breeched twice once in the 12th cent during the 4th cursade when they stormed the sea wall and the 2nd and last time was during the 15th cent when the arabs using a brand new cannons pounded the walls and stormed the city.The city at that time was defended by a mere 40,000 soldiers of which 5,000 out of a possible 100,000 males of fighting age were locals.The rest were allies and hired soldiers.The Turks numbered some 200,000.Originally posted by Saint Valentinian:Hmm..anyone knows about the fall of Constaninople? if im nt wrong, it was besiged quite a few times in it's history, however managed to surivive, due to it's solid fortifications.
The Fall of it was partly due to the advent and clever use of cannon/artillery to bombard the Walls
The city was defended by 3 layers of walls on the land,1 layer for the sea wall,had over 1500 towers on the land walls which stretched some 40km i think,The imperial navy though old had Greek fire which burned on water was very deadly and was very very very well trained.The Naval Harbour was seated in in Golden Horn which was a protacted harbour with only 1 entarence with 2 guard towers and a chain preventing ships from entering.The city was on one side and on the other was the walled off town/fort of Galica i think,it had the 2nd tower.
Is that enough or do you want more? or do you want to discuess more? -
The largest cannon that was used to bombard the walls was named Urban after it created who was refused employment in christiandom and thus went over and offered his services to the turks. i think he was killed during the siege during an accident to his cannon. Maybe somebody took notice of his betrayal.
Anyways the whole of christiandom stood at one side and watched the center of the orthodox church captured and plundered. The pride of the orthodox church then became a mosque.
I think the city's fall was brought along sooner when some side door was left open or something when a sallying party retreated hastily. Also the Genoeses guarding the wall retreated when their captain was injured. The Byzantine (or roman) emperor deserves mention cause i think he died protacting his city dieing at the gates.
Did the secret of greek fire die then? or was it earlier. some speculate that the byzantines discovered gunpowder before the chinese(B.S) and that it was an ingredient of greek fire. -
Not gunpowder black powder.Gun powder is more powerful and less volitile then black powder.Yea the guy who created the guns was a christan but the roman emperor rejected his idea.The Romans had their own cannons but these were small cannons.The city was lost simply cause there was too little people to defend againest it!Heck the turks CARRIED their navy overland into the harbour!Originally posted by redrooster79:The largest cannon that was used to bombard the walls was named Urban after it created who was refused employment in christiandom and thus went over and offered his services to the turks. i think he was killed during the siege during an accident to his cannon. Maybe somebody took notice of his betrayal.
Anyways the whole of christiandom stood at one side and watched the center of the orthodox church captured and plundered. The pride of the orthodox church then became a mosque.
I think the city's fall was brought along sooner when some side door was left open or something when a sallying party retreated hastily. Also the Genoeses guarding the wall retreated when their captain was injured. The Byzantine (or roman) emperor deserves mention cause i think he died protacting his city dieing at the gates.
Did the secret of greek fire die then? or was it earlier. some speculate that the byzantines discovered gunpowder before the chinese(B.S) and that it was an ingredient of greek fire. -
Seems like eastern invaders had a habit of carrying their fleet overland.Originally posted by |-|05|:Not gunpowder black powder.Gun powder is more powerful and less volitile then black powder.Yea the guy who created the guns was a christan but the roman emperor rejected his idea.The Romans had their own cannons but these were small cannons.The city was lost simply cause there was too little people to defend againest it!Heck the turks CARRIED their navy overland into the harbour!
You're saying you have seen sites which claim to have the ingredient of greek fire? i'll like to take a look, another forum that i go to have people experimenting for the possible ingredients to greek fire.
Aren't the ingredient's for gunpowerder and black powder almost the saem? gunpowder uses sulfer saltpeter, coal, what does black powder use? -
Oops, sorry the largest cannon was named basilica, not urban and could only fire 3 times a day of 800pound balls. the cannon itself weighed 19tons.
anyway like you mentioned it was not solelythe numbers that the turks had that brought the city to its knees, it was the cannons.
hee and i do not know why i always have disputes with you over numbers but from what i read, mehmet had 80,000 -150 000 while the romans had 10 000 (and 10000 is generous quotation, many quoted much less) witht his best troops being volunteers from the trade cities of italy.
Some tidbit, dracula and his brother were hostages at a young age to the very same mehmet II (el conquistador). Vlad went home but his brother staid in the sultans court. -
Oh yes and about hannibal, we will get to Zama shortly but why do you think he did not take Rome. Politics? Unable to siege a city? Siege weapons? hoping for a treaty with favourable terms for carthage?
-
It is ironic that throughout the earlier history, the peoples of the East/orient were very developed and possesed cutting edge technology during their period, yet, during the later stages of history, almost all of them were defeated by western powers. What was the reasons for this decline..
-
Nope the Ingredients were lost.Blackpowder was weaker..i think the composition was different with more sulfer and maybe no saltpeter not to sure.They are saying that Greek Fire was something like a thicker version of Naplam which ingredients is quite classified.Originally posted by redrooster79:Seems like eastern invaders had a habit of carrying their fleet overland.
You're saying you have seen sites which claim to have the ingredient of greek fire? i'll like to take a look, another forum that i go to have people experimenting for the possible ingredients to greek fire.
Aren't the ingredient's for gunpowerder and black powder almost the saem? gunpowder uses sulfer saltpeter, coal, what does black powder use?i do not know why i always have disputes with you over numbers but from what i read, mehmet had 80,000 -150 000 while the romans had 10 000 (and 10000 is generous quotation, many quoted much less) witht his best troops being volunteers from the trade cities of italy.
Hahahaha cause i use numbers from many sources and average it
The imperial Janissarys numbered some 50,000-80,000 already so i highly doubt they had only 80,000!150,000-200,000 seemed a better number considering they had that much when trying to storm Malta!
The romans had around 10,000 most prob less(8,000)
They were happy when a captain of troops arrived with some 800 soldiers!!!cheering a mere 800 thats how despo they were!!!!The imperial bodyguard was around 2,000 and like i said around 4,000-5,000 were city levies from a possible pool of 100,000!!Those cowards!
It is ironic that throughout the earlier history, the peoples of the East/orient were very developed and possesed cutting edge technology during their period, yet, during the later stages of history, almost all of them were defeated by western powers. What was the reasons for this decline..
Typical Asian Surpremnessium(sic) The Chinese thought they were the best in terms of culture and had no need for western inventions and ideals....that has and always will be their downfall...sadly
I mean they had cannons and guns and rockets but did not use them like the west did!!Infact during the Opium wars the Chinese sad they would repel the invaders the moment they hit the beaches with their bigger cannons!!But they were infact out ranged by the better made English cannons.The Chinese might have invented weapons but the westerners invented warfare!!Oh yes and about hannibal, we will get to Zama shortly but why do you think he did not take Rome. Politics? Unable to siege a city? Siege weapons? hoping for a treaty with favourable terms for carthage?
Well he lack seige equipment and had too little troops.....a mere 30,000?The defeat of his Brother who was bringing reinforcements and the lack of revolt among rome's vassals was the death blow to his plans.How could he Storm a city that after putting 80,000 men into the field and had them all killed/defeated/capture could raise another 20,000men and also had 50,000 men roaming around their empire!!!Hack the Carthagins(sic) destroyed the Roman Navy twice!!!!! and yet each time rome came back with a bigger navy!!How do you defeat someone like that?! -
hmm......seems blackpowder is almost the same as gunpowder...interesting that both greek fire and chinese gunpowder came into use at around the same time!!!!!
-
I always thought gunpowder was just the same ingredients but more finely meshed up.
There is a problem with taking an average from many sources is that one source that quotes too much or too little would throw your avegrae off.
Yeah the Captain was a Genoese name Giuliani Longo something.
There were 5000 greeks and 2000 volunteers from mainly italy.
The population was 40,000 and that was the numbered swelled by refugees. This was not the Constantinople of old but the capital of an empire that had been on the decline for a very long time who had for a very long time lost her grain and soldier themes in anatolia.
Yeah greek fire was used just a little before the discovery of gunpowder in china. I think it was during the reign of Constantine IV from the line of heraclius. A Macedonian family i believe. -
Much blame was put on the conservatism of the Ming Dynastiy. The conservatism was muchly blamed on the power mongering of the emperor's mandarins. At their insistance China finally Kwan Men Bi Shou. The gigantic fleet that Zheng he sailed to africa with was sunk. That fleet at that time was bigger then wat the whole of europe can put together.
Continued conservatism and isolation coupled with the leadership living in denial meant that China fell further and further behind. In contrast was Japan, after being forced to open her ports for trade, she quickly adapted western gun technology and for a while cou;ld built better arqubuses then the europeans. This came to an end during the tokugawa but technology was forcebly adapted during the late meiji and after period culmanating in the victory over the russians in Tsushima. -
40,000 is way to little with the Churches reportedly being swelled to max capcity.....that's already 100,000 people with the Hagia Sophia being able to handle 50,000 people!Originally posted by redrooster79:I always thought gunpowder was just the same ingredients but more finely meshed up.
There is a problem with taking an average from many sources is that one source that quotes too much or too little would throw your avegrae off.
Yeah the Captain was a Genoese name Giuliani Longo something.
There were 5000 greeks and 2000 volunteers from mainly italy.
The population was 40,000 and that was the numbered swelled by refugees. This was not the Constantinople of old but the capital of an empire that had been on the decline for a very long time who had for a very long time lost her grain and soldier themes in anatolia.
Yeah greek fire was used just a little before the discovery of gunpowder in china. I think it was during the reign of Constantine IV from the line of heraclius. A Macedonian family i believe.
Yes this city was far from it's height of 500,000-1million but was still a city of sufficent size.The grain always came from Alexandria anyway so they lost that along time ago...but they did lose the Thememic troops which cost them their empire.The degeneration of their army right before Manzikert -
Well the only thing that seems consistant was the number of defenders.
-
I really do not know where you get your numbers from but hagia sophia handling 50,000???
the church is around 70 by 70, you could get 50,000 inside by perhaps stacking them up. -
eh some of the post disappeared
edit : this thread seems to be working again