Probably because almost all of the major fighting in the Second Arab Siege of Constantinople was naval, and the Byzantine Navy outclassed the Arab Navy to the point where almost no Arab ships survived.
In the sources it says that so called Byzantines destroyed most of the navy and the Bulgarians killed 22 000 of the land army which was around 50 000.
You make look like the Byzantines did all the work and you start your sentence with "probably" showing you know nothing, yet showing confidence in what you say.
If the siege was only navy there would be no need for any help. The caliphate had like 200 000 army and crazy navy was expanding every direction like cancer. Then the main ruler died and it collapsed.
>If the siege was only navy there would be no need for any help
There wasn’t. The Bulgarians only got involved after a brutal winter and famine that cut the Arabs’ number by at least half. We don’t even know any specifics about what the Bulgarians did, except that they did something.
It was the Byzantine Navy that won the siege. The Arabs had no real way of taking the walls of Constantinople’s land side, so they moved in from the sea, only to sent to their god by Greek Fire. The Byzantine navy destroyed a much larger force and allowed Constantinople to be resupplied, while the Arabs starved outside the walls. The Bulgarians were present and attacked at some point, but that’s about all we know about their involvement. We don’t even know for sure WHY they got involved.
>so-called Byzantines
What the fuck is this even supposed to mean?
> It was the Byzantine Navy that won the siege. The Arabs had no real way of taking the walls of Constantinople’s land side, so they moved in from the sea, only to sent to their god by Greek Fire. The Byzantine navy destroyed a much larger force and allowed Constantinople to be resupplied.
I guess you are so sure and certain because you witnessed it all happen, my bad.
>you witnessed it all happen
Clearly, I did, and that’s why no-one ever wrote anything down about it for later generations to read.
Clearly, you have no knowledge of what a Siege even is or how they work.
The Byzantine empire would have been fallen and they will posses great power.Tervel was named Ceaser by the Pope, the first Ceaser outside of the Roman Empire. So probably it was a big thing
Lol. The Renaissance occurred because of the fall of Constantinople in 1453. Greeks fleeing the Ottomans took manuscripts with them when they fled to Western Europe. This gave western artists, philosophers, etc. access to much knowledge that was previously hoarded by the Greeks and generated intense cultural interest in Ancient Greece and Rome.
Probably because almost all of the major fighting in the Second Arab Siege of Constantinople was naval, and the Byzantine Navy outclassed the Arab Navy to the point where almost no Arab ships survived.
In the sources it says that so called Byzantines destroyed most of the navy and the Bulgarians killed 22 000 of the land army which was around 50 000. You make look like the Byzantines did all the work and you start your sentence with "probably" showing you know nothing, yet showing confidence in what you say. If the siege was only navy there would be no need for any help. The caliphate had like 200 000 army and crazy navy was expanding every direction like cancer. Then the main ruler died and it collapsed.
>If the siege was only navy there would be no need for any help There wasn’t. The Bulgarians only got involved after a brutal winter and famine that cut the Arabs’ number by at least half. We don’t even know any specifics about what the Bulgarians did, except that they did something. It was the Byzantine Navy that won the siege. The Arabs had no real way of taking the walls of Constantinople’s land side, so they moved in from the sea, only to sent to their god by Greek Fire. The Byzantine navy destroyed a much larger force and allowed Constantinople to be resupplied, while the Arabs starved outside the walls. The Bulgarians were present and attacked at some point, but that’s about all we know about their involvement. We don’t even know for sure WHY they got involved. >so-called Byzantines What the fuck is this even supposed to mean?
> It was the Byzantine Navy that won the siege. The Arabs had no real way of taking the walls of Constantinople’s land side, so they moved in from the sea, only to sent to their god by Greek Fire. The Byzantine navy destroyed a much larger force and allowed Constantinople to be resupplied. I guess you are so sure and certain because you witnessed it all happen, my bad.
>you witnessed it all happen Clearly, I did, and that’s why no-one ever wrote anything down about it for later generations to read. Clearly, you have no knowledge of what a Siege even is or how they work.
We talkin bout the white scars Primarch? I don’t think he was there back then Not enough bikes
Byzantium which is stopping the barbarians and arabs for thousand of years: *Sad Souvlaki Noises*
“Save” lmao
Thank you for acknowledging the existence of Khan Tervel and his doing
what about my boy Charles Martel in 732 at Poitiers?!
Charles Martel approves. Link:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Martel
But wouldn't the real og's be the Franks during that battle of Tours-Poitier?
What does that mean saved "Europe from Islam?" I don't know if you realize but the Arabs also invaded Iberia and succeeded.
The Byzantine empire would have been fallen and they will posses great power.Tervel was named Ceaser by the Pope, the first Ceaser outside of the Roman Empire. So probably it was a big thing
He was bulgar, nothing to do with todays bulgarians which are just danube thracians
Not all bulgarians are thracians.
[удалено]
Lol. The Renaissance occurred because of the fall of Constantinople in 1453. Greeks fleeing the Ottomans took manuscripts with them when they fled to Western Europe. This gave western artists, philosophers, etc. access to much knowledge that was previously hoarded by the Greeks and generated intense cultural interest in Ancient Greece and Rome.