The fall of Constantinople - Blessing for the West?

Hi everyone,

i thought on my comeback i give you experts something to ponder about...

My question; was there a correlation bewteen the fall of Constantinopel and the Renaissance? Was there an influx of greek (romanoi) intelligenzia to northern Italy that had something to do with it? Wasnt ancient greek all but forgotten by the 13th century in science/art and literature and had a revival because of the final Fall of Constantinople?

cheers

viggen

It sure did! At least for culture.

From an economic point of view it was bad news. Ottoman conquest greatly hindered the lucrative italian trade and gradualy reduced the genouese and venetian trade bases in the region. The fall of Constantinopole was just a step in this evolution that slowly turned Black Sea, Egeean and Eastern Mediterranean in turkish lakes.

For the Black Sea trade 1453 (with anihilation of Galata as well) was a devastating blow followed switfly by the ottoman conquest of Trapezunt, Caffa, Mangop and romanian ports Chilia and White Fortress (Akkerman). With the ottoman hold on Byzantium and near artillery armed fortresses in the straits the trade routes and bugets of the neighbours of the Black Sea were at the mercy of ottomans.

Genoa was the Western state who felt the worse blow but Venice, Hungary and Poland were hit as well.

After the loss of eastern trade routes genovese moved their trade to Spain and Portugal and that included financing of portuguese exploration of African road to India and of spanish conquest of America (Cristofor Columb was genovese) They also invested in sugar plantantions in Spain and Portugal, then in the islands of Africa and finally in America. So, after all the West made nice profits even from the shift of trade caused by the byzantine tragedy.

I wouldn't necessarily call it a blessing. They did however gain a chance to develop their own customs, though not immediately, building strong empires and kingdoms. Had Constantinople fell the West would be a bit more reliant on the East. When the Ottomans conquered Byzantium it pretty much severed relations between the East and West thus creating Western European powers to arise. Also Russia can be used as an example.

Off the record, for us the fall of Constantinople was an awful day and Tuesday is still to the Greeks the unluckiest day of the week.

My question; was there a correlation bewteen the fall of Constantinopel and the Renaissance? Was there an influx of greek (romanoi) intelligenzia to northern Italy that had something to do with it? Wasnt ancient greek all but forgotten by the 13th century in science/art and literature and had a revival because of the final Fall of Constantinople?

No, I don't think the fall of constantinople had that kind of effect. The process had begun much earlier, at the end of the 11th century ad with the first crusade. Large migrations of warriors and assorted misguided innocents were travelling to this area and undoubtedly a few returned much wiser and better endowed with scholarly material. I agree that most crusaders weren't exactly keen on learning anything except where the cashbox was, but this to-ing and fro-ing across europe and asia minor must have opened channels of communication that weren't there before.

Reading somne texts from the early Middle ages, including works from the twelfth century - You can see that many of the writers had an average or good knowledge of the Classical world. There are frequent refernces to Caesar and Cicero as well as Greek Mythology. These refernces were made by the scholars of the time to show how learned they were. Even Geoffrey of Monmouth, the writer of the pseudo-historical 'History of the High Kings of Britain' mentions Caesar's expedition to Britain as well as other events from Classical history and mythology.

In terms of other areas like art, it is obvious that Italian artists had already developed the Renaissance style before the fall of Constantinople. Artists like Pietro Cavallini and Giotto di Bondone were painting masterpieces in the fourteenth century, while Jan Van Eyck's famous 'Arnolfini wedding' was painted in 1434. These art techniques were therefore not influenced by Byzantine learning.

We can be sure that some Classical Greek and Latin learning was known in Western Europe before the collapse of the Byzantine Empire. But what the fall of Constantinople did do was increase this learning ten-fold. Many Greek scholars brought unkown Classical works to Italy, while others opened up 'academies' where noble Italians could attend lessons on ancient history and civilisation.

Of more importance to history was the effect that the fall of Constantinople would have on trade and exploration. The closing of the eastern trade routes would eventually lead to the decline of Venice as a superpower and would lead to the eventual discovery of America.

The other thing to remember is that most of the knowledge etc that came from the classical world did not come via Constantinople, but was derived from the intellectual culture of Moorish Spain. In Spain, Arab (that is to say, Muslim), Christian and Jewish scholars translated texts into many languages, especially Greek and Arabic into Latin so that the educated people of Europe could read it too. Our debt to the Moors in Spain is probably at least equal to our debt to the Byzantines.

Yet I am speaking as a man of Western Europe. No doubt from the perspective of areas nearer to Constantinople the fall was a disaster and set back development for centuries as the Ottomans found their own imperial system was enough for their needs without adopting what they found in south eastern Europe.

However, I am typing off the top of my head (ie as I think, with no planning etc) so this may be all a load of fetid dingoes kidneys!!

PS 'America' was discovered by i) the Native Americans and ii) the Vikings. Also, Christopher Columbus already knew there was something there. His 'discovery' is still slightly over-rated!

The Renaissance had already begun at that point.... So I don't think that is necessarily true.

Sure, the Byzantine scholars help... But they certainly didn't "start" the Renaissance.... By 1453 it was already occurring.

The influx of Byzantine scholars did facilitate the trend, though. During the Middle Ages the Monks had neglected Greek (and Greek was furthermore the language of the Eastern "heretics" and not worth knowing), and thus the works written in those languages were inaccessible to them.

There was an interesting post in the archaeological forum about two years ago that cited evidence Christopher Columbus' family were actually Byzantine Greeks before they became Italians.

The influx of Byzantine scholars did facilitate the trend, though. During the Middle Ages the Monks had neglected Greek (and Greek was furthermore the language of the Eastern "heretics" and not worth knowing), and thus the works written in those languages were inaccessible to them.

 

There was an interesting post in the archaeological forum about two years ago that cited evidence Christopher Columbus' family were actually Byzantine Greeks before they became Italians.

Of course it facilitated it, but the Renaissance was not started by them. Italy was not in the dark post-Roman Empire, as the cities became richer, the culture began reviving. It's way too much of a stretch to say the Byzantines started it.

Colombus is definitively Italian. Both from his records the Genoese administration holds, from his genetics (which confirm him as being Italian), and also from the fact that he sent a third of his reward to Genoa after discovering the Americas.

Did Ravenna play any part in this?

Salve, Amici.

I would agree with CA, SO and RI; the Renaissance had begun long before 1453; simply check out the dates for Dante Alighieri (1265

Did Ravenna play any part in this?

Well, Dante lived and died in Ravenna, so something should have happened.

But throughout much of its Renaissance existence, Ravenna was occupied by Venetian soldiers.

Did Ravenna play any part in this?

 

Well, Dante lived and died in Ravenna, so something should have happened.

 

But throughout much of its Renaissance existence, Ravenna was occupied by Venetian soldiers.

I always thought Ravenna was part of the papal states? anyway if i recall correctly from Norwichs books that when Manuel Paleologos travelled to the west for a crusade and when he visited the italian cities that he gave a number of lectures in his greek to the growing school of greek speaking scholars in the west.

Did Ravenna play any part in this?

 

Well, Dante lived and died in Ravenna, so something should have happened.

 

But throughout much of its Renaissance existence, Ravenna was occupied by Venetian soldiers.

But Dante only lived there for the last part of his life, and in exile.

And wasn't Ravenna returned to Papal control after the League of Cambrai wars?

As far as I know nothing much happened in Renaissance Ravenna, it was just a provincial town.

Hi everyone,

i thought on my comeback i give you experts something to ponder about...

 

My question; was there a correlation bewteen the fall of Constantinopel and the Renaissance?

 

cheers

viggen

By 1453 (the year Constantinople fell and the Byzantine Empire ceased to exist), the Renaissance had already achieved critical mass in both Italy and Northern Europe. The capture of Constantinople by the Ottoman ruler Mehmet II, therefore, did little to effect the development of the Renaissance.

The Byzantine influence on the Renaissance began much earlier than 1453. Byzantine contributions included the re-introduction of long forgotten Ancient Greek scholarship to a Latin oriented Western Europe. These included works by Plato, Plutarch, and the early Eastern Christian writers. Without this Hellenic influence, the West would have been much less rich in its intellectual development. Much of this impact, however, began long before 1453.

According to Kenneth W Harl, Ph.D., there were only 50,000 inhabitants in Constantinople by 1453. According to Harl, the last emperor of Constantinople, Constantine XI, lamented that by then the city only needed a mayor rather than an emperor. (At the time of the final siege, the city was able to muster only 7,000 defenders.)

By 1453, many of the greats of the Renaissance had already left their mark: Dante, Petrarch, Boccaccio in literature; Giotto, Masaccio, Donatello, Ghiberti in art; and Brunelleschi in architecture.

As written earlier on this subject, 1204 was a more critical date for the development of the Renaissance. It was that year that the soldiers from the Fourth Crusade sacked Constantinople. The returning soldiers re-exposed Europe to some of the Ancient knowledge preserved in the Byzantine Empire. With the loss of prestige and power, Constantinople began to suffer the exodus of its intellectuals who sought patronage in the more prosperous cities of Western Europe. These intellectuals brought with them the Ancient knowledge that helped to spur on the Renaissance movement.

The Black Death in the late 1340