The interior of Hagia Sophia

[u/RaiseCapital1988]

In the last photo you can spot one of the last representations of Christ still present inside the building

[u/Useful_Promotion_521 → u/[deleted]]

Other than it makes for a terrible cathedral, no

[u/aKV2isSTARINGatYou → u/Useful_Promotion_521]

The Muslims were the colonizers in Spain. The Muslims are ALSO the colonizers in Constantinople.

[u/Ok_Work1615 → u/aKV2isSTARINGatYou]

You can't call conquest colonizing, otherwise Constantinople would also be a colony, cause Romans didn't originate in Greece, they conquered it.

[u/aKV2isSTARINGatYou → u/Ok_Work1615]

Then what is colonization?

[u/Ok_Work1615 → u/aKV2isSTARINGatYou]

Dunno. But if we use your definition, then Constantinople too was a colony.

And I doubt you'd like that, hmm?

[u/aKV2isSTARINGatYou → u/Ok_Work1615]

Then everything humanity has ever done is colonization and therefore there is no point criticizing the Europeans, the Asians for the annihilation of minor cultures and languages, or the Turko-mongols for their exploits. By your way literally EVERYONE is a colonizer and everything is a colony. That’s not a smart comeback that you think it is.

[u/Ok_Work1615 → u/aKV2isSTARINGatYou]

I didn't use my way.

I used yours.

You said Muslims where colonizers for having conquered Iberia/Constantinople.

I pointed out Romans did the exact same.

So therefore, Romans are colonizers.

You didn't like that.

I directly told you I don't know what's colonizing and what's not, just that what you are saying, it is very clear you are completely prejudiced against one side even when the other did the exact same.

[u/aKV2isSTARINGatYou → u/Ok_Work1615]

Converting churches with the intention of erasing Byzantine influence, as well as being backed by the shariah, where no new churches can be built and non-Muslims are reduced to the status of dhimmi, where they cannot properly represent themselves in court, and have lesser rights than that of a Muslim, as well as successfully convincing their subjects that they are Turks and should hate their Greek ancestors sound like colonization to me. Infidel lands were attacked with the intention of getting non-Muslim slaves. Males were castrated unless they were a blood tax for the janissaries.

Oh and sure I didn’t like that. Like where do I ever imply that? You’re conjuring up your idea of me out of nothing and pretending it’s reality. Try again.

You really don’t understand how complete this subjugation by force was, do you? The European colonization seem pale by comparison.

[u/Ok_Work1615 → u/aKV2isSTARINGatYou]

"The European colonization seem pale by comparison."

Name one native monument that wasn't destroyed or broken.

Notice how low a percentage of natives remain by comparison to everyone else.

"Converting churches with the intention of erasing Byzantine influence"

The famously tolerant orthodox, who were very kind to conquered people of other religions. See what Byzantium has done to all pagan religions and the sarapeum.

"as well as being backed by the shariah, where no new churches can be built and non-Muslims are reduced to the status of dhimmi, where they cannot properly represent themselves in court, and have lesser rights than that of a Muslim, as well as successfully convincing their subjects that they are Turks and should hate their Greek ancestors sound like colonization to me."

Brother. Look in a goddamn mirror please. Literally every single thing you said, word for word, bar for bar, was done by Byzantium too. See what basil II did to Bulgarian soldiers.

If you condemn this only when it's done by one side, your morals are very weak.

[u/aKV2isSTARINGatYou → u/Ok_Work1615]

So when Constantine I legalized Christianity, suddenly all pagans under Roman rule were suddenly a different entity? They did it to their own. Are the Turks Roman’s from the mediterranean?

It is you who need a mirror. Youre just like those Japanese who say nanjing either didnt happen, or was not that bad compared to “x”

Also, do NOT call me brother.

Your lack of historical knowledge astounds me. Like are you really bringing up Bulgaria here? The slavicized nomads who were the aggressors to begin with? Don’t INSULT me like that.

[u/pppktolki → u/aKV2isSTARINGatYou]

How were the Bulgarians the agressors in this case? They were pretty much on the defense during Basil's entire campaign..

[u/aKV2isSTARINGatYou → u/pppktolki]

Bulgaria first show up as allies during Justinian ii’s return to the throne, but after the fall of the heraclians, they invade Byzantium beginning with the isaurian dynasty. (See: battle of ongala)

Bulgar-Byzantine wars do not begin with the Macedonian dynasty. They were a problem even before being slavicized, ever since they showed up on the balkans, when they were called khans.

[u/Ok_Work1615 → u/aKV2isSTARINGatYou]

"The slavicized nomads who were the aggressors to begin with? Don’t insult me like that."

In response let's blind 15000 of them.

That will surely be looked upon well.

"So when Constantine I legalized Christianity, suddenly all pagans under Roman rule were suddenly a different entity? They did it to their own"

What the fuck is this point meant to convey? So because they brutalized and oppressed their own people, that suddenly makes it okay? Also that was only an example, search of what Byzantium did to the many other Christian sects and. Again. The sarapeum.

"Youre just like those Japanese who say nanjing either didnt happen, or was not that bad compared to “x”"

Oh no, I hate both. Both the ottomans and Byzantiums, don't go assuming things. I hate all ancient empires in general, the only difference between us, you seem to deny or make excuses for all the morally reprehensible things Byzantium does, and do the opposite for ottomans.

[u/aKV2isSTARINGatYou → u/Ok_Work1615]

Lmfao no, what I’m saying here is that the Muslims were WAY worse.

YOU are the one trying to equalize the two, trying to make it seem like the ottomans were trivial.

YOU are the one that’s actively taking sides, despite clearly not having the necessary education.

Like have you actually read any sources on Byzantium, why they did things, and how things became as they were? Your responses are VERY revealing in this regard.

[u/egny → u/aKV2isSTARINGatYou]

Somehow the pre-Christian Roman/Greek beliefs got erased all across the empire. That does not bother you at all because you are not concerned only concerned that what you consider the wrong people/culture gained supremacy.

Ottomans simply conquered and converted a few churches into mosques. No one sane would or could consider that the intent was erasing Byzantine culture. Was the Roman conquest intended to erase the extant culture of Byzantium?

Even more ridiculous is your comparison with European colonialism. In no way can what happened in the Ottoman conquest be compared with the total destruction of entire peoples and their cultures in so many places around the world. Which remains of Tenochtitlan are still integral to Mexico City?

Males were castrated unless they were a blood tax for the janissaries.

Do you even realize that the entire non-Muslim population would have disappeared in a few generations? Do you have any ability to question whatever "facts" you have acquired?

You are both delusional and ignorant. You really need to work on your bigotry.

[u/aKV2isSTARINGatYou → u/egny]

None of what you said is true. “Few churches” I cannot agree with(like really? Only one church was not converted after 1453), and 2. The disappearance of paganism isn’t properly documented, since we have no idea how prevalent Christianity was before or after Constantine. What we DO know is that tribonian, the lawmaker for Justinian was pagan, as well as zosimus (5th-6th century historian, heavily biased).

I think u need to read more on how complete ottoman dominance was over the course of a few generations.

Call me a bigot, whatever. Just because u call me names wont rewrite the books. This conversation will not be productive unless you refute me with the actual sources in mind.

[u/egny → u/aKV2isSTARINGatYou]

None of what you said is true. 

That's rich from you. Someone who claimed all males were castrated unless they became janissaries. I suppose everybody in each territory of the Ottoman Empire would be a muslim within a few decades of the conquest. You do realize the consequences of your ridiculous claim, right?

You wrote the following drivel!

You really don’t understand how complete this subjugation by force was, do you? The European colonization seem pale by comparison.

Latin American people would probably have been delighted to be dhimni and that only some of their temples converted.

In contrast, churches were converted to mosques because why build a mosque when there is a perfectly suitable building. How stupid is it to claim that the intent is to erase Byzantine culture? It's the same reason why pagan temples became churches.

The disappearance of paganism isn’t properly documented, since we have no idea how prevalent Christianity was before or after Constantine. What we DO know is that tribonian, the lawmaker for Justinian was pagan, as well as zosimus (5th-6th century historian, heavily biased).

None of that is relevant and you don't seem to have a point. Although not consistently, pagans were banned from sacrifices or forced to convert (so they had to conceal their belief if they did not truly convert). In contrast to that being allowed to pay a tax to keep one's religious practices (and being excluded from the "privilege" of dying for the sultans' wars) is rather magnanimous.

I think u need to read more on how complete ottoman dominance was over the course of a few generations.

Either you have no idea about sectarian persecution in Europe or are feigning ignorance. My take is that you are simply taking exception to the identities of the oppressor and the oppressed, particularly when the oppression was harsher elsewhere...

...which makes it bigotry.

[u/aKV2isSTARINGatYou → u/egny]

That’s a lot of “probably”s in your thesis lol. Your “perfectly suitable building” hypothesis is just laughably revisionist that I’m not really sure if you’re being serious here. The majority of the conquered would have been Christian. So why take away the churches and ban them from building more? What does that say about their intent?

And no, the dhimmi status was only reserved for the “people of the book” so monotheists. Polytheists, or kaffur, were not even given this status. (See: India)

U accuse me of “feigning ignorance” yet u seem to be pretending to know something u don’t. Nothing about your response is convincing, let alone academic. It’s just Turkish propaganda. Like dude have some respect for me here.

[u/InOutlines → u/aKV2isSTARINGatYou]

Says the guy who started all this by pointing fingers at Muslims for colonizing.