>Crusades are from France >Normans >Chivalry >Gothic

File: byzantine_flag_by_diasaleftis-d4adyod.jpg (109KB, 445x444px) Image search: [Google]

109KB, 445x444px

> not glorious Byzanitum

>>1006911
Yes, it was the leading European power until around 1815, but still remained as a big power

>>1006933
Well, it was conquered by french crusaders...

>>1006933

>1,000 years of collapse

WE

>>1006911
you're forgetting:
>Successfully took constantinople and ruled it
>Ruled the crusader states
>took the papacy away from rome to their own country for nearly half a century.

>>1007109

Every country is "collapsing" though. Rome was in continuous decline after Augustus, even though they continued being powerful after it.

Hell, even the mighty Ottoman Empire was in continuous decline after Suleiman.

>>1007123
>mighty
>ottoman
>empire

>>1007123

>Hell, even the mighty Ottoman Empire was in continuous decline after Suleiman.

So is taught, that even if it showed a powerful facade to the European powers, the seeds of decadence were becaming more and more apparent at the end of Suleiman reign.

File: europeclimates.jpg (135KB, 870x1137px) Image search: [Google]

135KB, 870x1137px

>>1006911
Much of France is great for the heavy plow 3 field crop rotation agriculture that became noticeable in the time of Charlemagne.

Northern Spain, Northern Germany, Denmark, Southern England and the low countries also had this terrain, though not as much.

>>1007123
>this is what b*zantiboos actually believe

Byzantium never had a peak.

>>1007205

Yeah it did. It peaked at Augustus. Saw slight ups and downs (Justinian, Makedon restoration, Komnenoi restoration) but generally after Augustus it was all downhill

>>1007292
>byzantium was rome

Greeks plz leave.

>>1007297

I'm not Greek. But there is no logically sound reason to call Rome Byzantium. Even Empire of the Greeks would be better.

File: Flag_of_Greece.svg.png (11KB, 2000x1333px) Image search: [Google]

11KB, 2000x1333px

>>1007303
>I'm not Greek
>there is no logically sound reason to call Rome Byzantium
>Empire of the Greeks would be better

Who could be behind this post?

>>1007308

>>>58120727

>>1007329

Whoops
>>>/int/58120727

>>1006939
>1815
No they managed to regain that status after the Crimean War
It was in 1870 that they lost there hegemony to Prussia and even then Cultural Wise Untill 1945

File: ea82139849c92795d615e38f3e1fed07.jpg (166KB, 564x886px) Image search: [Google]

166KB, 564x886px

>>1006911
Like 1/4th of medieval Europeans in the high and late middle ages lived in France, so yeah by extension you could say it was one of the most important countries.

File: Van_Eyck_-_Arnolfini_Portrait.jpg (2MB, 3087x4226px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3087x4226px

>>1007469
That said Burgundy also had a nice golden age in which western art, fashion and music were pretty much all determined by the court of Burgundy. England had great variations of the Gothic architecture such as English gothic vaulting which is absolutely beautiful.

All in all I'd say the map in >>1007177 is pretty accurate, France, England and the Low Countries were pretty much the core of western Europe for much of history, though I reckon Spain and Switzerland deserve to be mentioned too.

>>1007292

WE

File: France (2).jpg (219KB, 681x1119px) Image search: [Google]

219KB, 681x1119px

>>1006911
France should go back to the borders of those glory days.

>>1007469
>one of the most important countries

Bong pls
It was THE most important country

1. France
2. >H >R >E
3. >E >R >E

The rest is irrelevant

>>1008022
>HRE
>relevant
getting pathetically Germanic in here.

>>1008053
Swing and a miss, I'm Hungarian.

>>1008058
>Hungarian
little cuck under Austrian HRE emperor rule.

>>1008095
Sort of.

>>1007123
>Rome was in continuous decline after Augustus
Holy shit you are retarded

>>1006911
>Crusades are from France
They came from all over the west
>Normans
Were Norwegians
>Chivalry
Who cares
>The capetian dynasty defeated the pope, the empire, and their relatives ruled over Naples, Hungary, Poland, Portugal
All kinds of noble families ruled over different lands. What makes them so special?

>>1008244
>Were Norwegians
Scandinavians sure love to attach themselves to Normans, must be because they accomplished shit all aside from Gustavus.

>>1008244

>t. butthurt bong

>>1008244
>They came from all over the west
But mainly from France

>Were Norwegians
They were Frenchmen of Danish ancestry

>>1008244
>They came from all over the west
Let's be serious. The first crusade and the most successful one was mostly french. It was the Franks that built the latin states in the middle east. It was the Franks and the Venetians that took Constantinople. For better or worse, the crusaders were mostly from what is today France. With successes (first crusade) and huge failure.
Normans that conquered England had nothing to do with Norvegians at that time.
Chivalry is pretty god damn important when we talk about the middle ages.
I can't know many families that experienced success as the capetian dynasty did. Only the Habsburgs comes close, and they're not really important yet in the middle ages.

>>1008352
>But mainly from France
And Italy, and Germany, and England

>They were Frenchmen of Danish ancestry
It wasn't even a part of France until after the Seventh Crusade

>>1008374
>It was the Franks that built the latin states in the middle east. It was the Franks and the Venetians that took Constantinople.

Btw, the term "Frank" post 843 basically means French
It's because they were obsessed with keeping this name, while the Germans (heirs of the Eastern part of the empire) didnt give a shit
You can use French instead of "Franks" when discussing crusades, French and German identities had existed and been separate for centuries at this point

Note that eventually, "Franks" became a term to define all europeans in Crusades because muslims generalized all of crusaders as if they were Frenchmen due to them making up the vast majority of the contingent

>>1008397
>Crusaders
In this aspect youre entirely wrong. Theres a reason why the Byzantines used the term Frank to refer to all Westerners.
Sure there were crusaders from other lands too but the French formed the majority.

>>1008397
>It wasn't even a part of France until after the Seventh Crusade
It always was part of France. It's because the duke of Normandy was the vassal of the french king that Philip II had the right to confiscate Normandy from the Plantagenet.

>>1008397
>And Italy, and Germany, and England
I'll give you Italy and Germany, but most of """English""" crusaders were just French nobles who happened to rule England

>It wasn't even a part of France until after the Seventh Crusade
What kind of cretin are you?
Do you think that because Normandy conquered England, it made Normandy English until France retook it?

Frenchmen of Danish ancestry conquered England in 1066
Then a bunch of Frenchmen from Anjou gained Normandy, and later England, through marriage and shit
All this combined with their native land, Anjou, formed the Angevin Empire
Just because some French family unsubmitted to the French throne happened to rule Normandy and England until 1485 doesnt mean that Normans ceased to be Frenchmen during that era

>>1008244
How can someone be this butthurt ?

I would say that from the early middle ages up until 1071 the Byzantine Empire was pretty much the top dog in the Balkans and the near east, and was a great power, as well as the only centralized non-feudal European state.

For the next 100 years large feudal states like that of Phillip II of France and Holy Roman Emperor Frederick II, would put the stepping stones of a centralized administered bureaucracy that would eventually surpass Byzantium. Contrary to those emerging powers Plantagenet England lost eventually the continental game due to being unable to upgrade itself into an imperial power where nobles had less power than the king.