Tyrtaeus and Muhammad

Philosophy Forums Society, Government, and Economics
1

Tyrtaeus

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tyrtaeus

He was a lame Athenian school teacher given by the Athenians to Sparta, and became the Spartan general. He wrote a constitution (guessing they meant formally wrote down Lycurgus’ Oral Constitution) and the Spartans were fanatically addicted to his poetry from that point on.

I know Lycurgus required Spartans to memorize their laws. I also know Aristotle had access to this Constitution, and Socrates and Plato talked often on the life of Lycurgus, as well as the early Cynics who followed suit in this philosophical outlook. Makes sense… purely hypothetical sense, that this constitution included a life of Lycurgus, as in sayings for understanding it’s background.

Main point for this thread I want to make, is the similarity between Muslims memorizing the Koran, and Spartans memorizing the laws… it is/was expected of both groups. Likewise, of poetry.

I personally lean to the idea Tyrtaeus IS the reason why hoplite armies avoided Arrow Infantry… the farther you got away from Sparta, the more willing states were to rely on it… it was a religious pronouncement on machoism… states wanting to win against Sparta, not giving a damn about such things, used arrows, and oftentimes won… they were used in every geographical location around, before and after Sparta’s Golden Age… and yet they treated it as a new development. I know damn well it wasn’t, but can seem like it if your living relatively isolated listening to stories of Homer’s Illiad, stuck in light infantry skirmishes while laying siege for ten years… they didn’t have much use for arrows, and the accident of that necessity became religious observance for the Spartan state, post Tyrtaeus, in his emulation of Homer.

The Spartans never really mastered warfare… they are renowned for it, but outsourced even it’s most essential infantry roles, such as protecting the left flank, to auxillaries… which is the hardest position to fight in. They never were renowned for their Calvary, nor usually their Navy. Their archer corps seems to be usually non-existent. Some great shock infantry, learned some basic infantry maneuvers such as segmenting and flank attacks earlier than most, but that us the best I can say. A one trick pony.

Similar generally with Islam. Islam, to expand by the sword, requires a weak enemy. Jihad is conceptual, not experienced one generation to the next, ran by veteran strategists playing the numbers. They learn of it reciting it, and rush out to inact it, and usually get clobbered in doing so. Islam’s early foreign successes occurred in the wake of a 20 year, exhaustive war between Persia and Rome. North Africa quickly fell, but mostly because there wasn’t much resistance. It found it in Europe… was pushed back.

The Mongols and Turks made many gains in warfare, until the Islamified… Turks had to switch to Janissaries (Christian slaves converted to Muslim soldiers, how bad it was… apparently not enough quality Jihadis around.

Islam made a lot of advances in India, but never quite conquered it. I am not in a position to say for certain why not, as I’ve only read a few primary sources for their Indian campaigns, across several centuries, so may find information that discredits my general idea.

My idea, in general, is that states that fanatically inculcate such mandatory poetry, memorizing it, however pointless or absurd, fossilizes the military and legal framework of the state. They may know this, even be proud of this, as ISIS is, but it forces odd anachronisms, awkward polemics, and aweful stretches of the imagination between the glorification of war in a conservative sense, and the evolving actualities of the tactical synthesis. Islam didn’t evolve in the face of tanks, airforces, special forces infantry… turning towards suicide bombing is hardly Halah, but it is the best mist can pull off in their confusion and supreme incompetency. They are more or less stuck in the same sort of confused horror the Spartans were in after increasingly losing to missile troops. Would Jihadis prefer US technology across the board? Yes, certainly they would, but such professional armies are a near impossibility, with Pentagon’s and civilian oversight, combined arms and constant peace time training, to the motivations of your average Jihadist. Best they get are finding left over weapons from other nations, occasional skilled recruits. Other than that, it is always a rag tag army… and if they establish a state in the long term… it quickly ceases to be Jihadi. It turns lame like the rest. Joining a professional state military isn’t the same as Jihad. Not anymore. That era ended as Clausewitz was ruminating on logistics. It isn’t coming back short of a nuclear war.

2

The romans also used mostly infantry, but what you are missing is that red [the colour] went from Sparta to Rome, then later to the Normans, and then the British, and along with it went empire. :slight_smile:

3

India also stopped Alexander - I reckon it is simply too large, old, populated, deep, fanatical, and saturated with poetry, myth and worshipping to be overtaken by outsiders.

It is still a surprisingly mighty nation, all things considered. It has preserved a great deal of very unmodern practices and shows no inclination to change. It also never gets entangled in pointless wars.

4

India didn’t stop Alexander, his men had full range of motion, and continued their conquest down the Indus and retained their colonies. What Chanakya and Chandragupta did was apply frictional resistance, decreasing the Greek sense of purpose and need to even be there. India would of gotten wiped out had they been in Persia… geographically on Alexander’s conquest itinerary (1st up, not 3rd/4th). Even had he skipped his four years in Afghanistan, it wouldn’t of likely of resulted in the bewilderment of his troops, freshly arrived from Persia, Macedonia fresh in their memories. The Indo-Greek colonist left behind appears (debateably, given some of the sources) to of reached Patiliputra and Sri Lanka eventually post Alexander, having a hugh influence of Theraveda Buddhism as well as later Roman trade in the south. Alexander laid down the basis, had local governors. Only went tits up due to the war of the successors, and even then Greeks made some awesome states in Bactria and along the Chinese border… it was the very height of Ancient Greek civilization…

You can’t infinitely deploy troops, who have wives and estates deep in the rear, as well as family responsibilities. Young men are easier, especially unwedded ones… you can colonize mist anywhere with them. His veterans wouldn’t put up with this shit though, home was Macedonia, and they had some serious plunder to burn. Plus… the Indian jungle gives Westerners the shits. Honestly… it isn’t wise for white people not used to a similar climate today to move just anywhere in India, it gets seriously hot and rainy and some unique diseases and critters abound. My town here has a lot of Indians (Hindus and Sihks, they even published local books surprisingly)… they go back home for visits, despite the vaccinations, and get seriously sick. When you read guys like Adrian talking about cities worshiping Dionysus in India, I presume it is what we now call a “Hill Station”, Greeks displaced on the far side of the Persian empire and pressed into service fighting on that frontier for Persia. Can Westerners eventually adapt? Yes. But it is hard initially.

The “retreat” down the Indus also produced a Cynic philosopher, a direct disciple of Diogones, and therefor of Sparta philosophically, given the Cynic laconian discipline.

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Onesicritus

The color red or purple doesn’t matter here. Fancy dresses rarely win wars. I had Belgian and Dutch crap all over my dress uniform in the army, doesn’t mean jack diddly squat to me, they gave my unit during WW2 that stuff after we regretfully liberated them. All I got in exchange was listening to Sauwelios stone on for years about nothing. I’m sure someone can explain the descent and medieval honors, but I frankly don’t give a fuck. I wasn’t a friendly person to talk to when made to wear that retarded useless clown uniform. I still have it, everything is purposely offset cause I didn’t give a fuck, too perfect of a uniform earned you guard duties at stupid functions. It matters to some, but I think those guys it matter to are the same who go out buying 50 pairs of shoes and colognes and hats and metrosexual shit, or worst keep little toy replica soldiers minutely dressed from the civil war or WW2. I want nothing to do with either.

5

Ah, now I get it.

that is humiliating, yes.
Why would your command do this to its soldiers?

6

Not just us, all militaries.

I get your a Nietzschean, I presume your just as ignorant as Cedar/History Boy on “Anglo-Saxon Warfare” vs “French”, or “Bosniak”… so on and do on. Truth is, there is only so many ways you can mass train and store troops away, waiting for a conflict… ancient or modern, and the psychological needs of the troops start leeching in. This includes pagentry, any homosexual pulses they have, such as overly grooming themselves decoratively despite no women bring around, at all. I tended always to have a girlfriend, so the threat of a all man drinking hall dressed up in a stupid green suit in worthless shoes that cost me $100 bucks with zero functionality… to stand around in a room while men got shitfaced wasn’t ever appetizing. I had pussy, didn’t socially drink unless wayltchomg over some new guys keeping them out of trouble at bars… why the Fuck would I ever want to do this? Company Balls (all men), then battalion, then brigade/base. Great for attracting women who want to play princess, I had to most tolerance for them… but the rest, especially just older soldiers or officers, colonels or generals having events… that call down for guards… dear fucking God, I.am not doing it again, I don’t care how much Ham and heef slices I can snag. I’m not a museum piece, or a Buckingham palace guard.

My Class As still have the wrong rank and a military footprint on them, wrinkled up. I really wasn’t having shot to do with that. They tried giving me a bunch of nonsense bullshit medals when I left, I don’t know the names, never accepted them. Court Marshall me, Ill go to jail, like give a fuck, can’t be worst than deployment.

The need for pagentry is great for those who crave social status… progress via recognition in climbing the rank ladder, in attracting pretty girls, but merit and a decent personality does this better. I am not against medals, just most now aren’t worth much. The highest, yes… rest are chosen by some dick in a battalion S Shop, used as tokens for promotion… congresdionally limited prior to deployment how many can get what. What does this have to do with me? Nothing at all. But many thrive on it… the psychology of your football team guys. Matters a lot to them, despite them becoming cynical about it later on.

Most of the flashes and special badges are design to make guys feel special, make the impressionable enlist. Trinkets in the end. Only reason I still have mine is because it hasn’t judges since I tossed them on the wall after unpacking my books they padded. Long successful units since Roan times were preserved over centuries, losing ones shit down. Everyone wants a elite unit. I got 1-501st… fairly elite. They liberated half your country, memorials everywhere. They started the US Airborne training during WW2, fought in some nasty battles, made the screaming eagles famous (1-501st was in the 101st Airborne, they inherited their fame, despite them moving one to another division). The movie “Hamburger Hill” based on them. Darth Vader’s 501st legion likewise, several video games and books featuring them.

But little shit like Bergdalh can derail it. They may shut the unit down eventually do to him alone. Just how shit works. It has Jack diddly squat yo do with the actual soldiers, or the current mission. I never fought against the Nazis save here… my war was in Alaska against the snow and the middle east… yet soldiers inculcated in such histories apparently have more pride and increased fighting capacity, so they load troops up with all sorts of bullshit pagentry fossils, like presidential citations from generations ago, or awards from extinct foreign governments, slogans, etc. This magic dies after so many unit reassignments… but young guys love it… enough St least they carry on. I’ve never seen any Rangers or SF guys with all that crap though. They honestly want nothing to do with it.

7

The Battle of the Jhelum river against King Parurava in Punjab is considered by many historians, Peter Connolly being one of them, as the most costly battle that the armies of Alexander fought. from wiki

Here they argue Alexander would have got whooped, and I think he knew it after battling them.

historum.com/ancient-history/613 … rmy-3.html

8

He had a massive treasury, could hire mercenaries, and a secure, well fortified rear.

Not only did his army continue on, to his capital in Iraq, but his colonies stayed in India, and he was preparing western invasions. He wasn’t acting defeated, just overstreched. Frictions matter a lot here, it is no small task to aggitate such a Juggernaut. Both Chanakya and even Nanda deserves some credit here.

I’ve mentioned Arrian and Chanakya often over the last few years on this site, I’m not just pulling this info out of my ass. Alexander could of continued on, and wanted to… just his Army didn’t agree. We try to make the modern Anti-Colonial claim that India was awesome, but India wasn’t a concept yet, took Chanakya to do thus, and it was a latent reaction from ruminating on Alexander’s phenomena and impact.

I am by no means belittling him, hold him in very, very high esteem and some of his ideas are central to my philosophy… but I know the supreme irresponsibility of importing false anachronisms to eras that didn’t support such ideas. It makes for poor history, and weakens the effort yo build a solid Philosophy of History.

Not only did the Indians largely fail to push the Greeks out, but also several later invaders… it continued on into Islamic times like Babar (not the cartoon elephant). It also preceded the Greeks, as the Persians were colonizing areas. I use the term colonizing loosely… they definitely were in the Indus Valley.

India didn’t traditionally have a lot of success pushing these groups out. The best polemic response they offer is Hinduism absorbs everything in the end. It clearly doesn’t. Its why you have Pakistan, Nepal, Bangladesh, Mynamar, Cambodia, Indonesia, Malaysia, Vietman… they all spat Hinduism out and half of India… the nation today doesn’t even follow the religion… and as religions go, it’s highly factional and all over the place. Very loose intellectual strings hold it all together in a holistic academic sense… bunch of religions and languages wanting nothing to do with one another and each demands it’s own state, or else civil war and terrorism is threatened, and repeatedly embarked upon.

So India essentially is just as fucked up as anywhere else outside of Pax Americana. Relief from these sort of wars only came as a result of WW2. It isn’t a inherent result of the nation state, but forcing alliances in such a way Chanakya’s Rajamandala wouldn’t normally function. Peace in Europe usually comes from NATO force, which is heavy US lead. Same in Africa. South America, etc. China does a near equivalent in China, but under a adjusted system that evolved out of classic Chinese principles of statecraft.

9

So why didn’t he send his troops home, then send for new ones e.g. spartans, and athenians etc, or compose a persian force with added indian troops he gained?

Secondly, if he went the other way and into northern europe he would have met the celts and germans, who defeated his descendents. Those long pikes don’t present the same wall to rushing celts.

The way I see it, to conquer the world is going to generate forces of history against you – equal and opposite.

10

He didn’t control the Spartans, he left them alone. Feel free to speculate why.

Why didn’t he just send his troops home? He did… to his capital at Babylon. This is exactly what he did… but the route from Taxila was via Afghanistan (conquered, but high and exhausting), but the Sea Route and Land Route back through Persia quicker… and through unconquered terrain, closing up his rear. Gave him three lines of communications instead of just one to India via just Afghanistan. Seems a decent compromise with rebelling troops.

Why didn’t he just send more troops? He would need a fresh army. He had to switch out a considerable chunck of his men on rotation out of local garrisons, from Egypt to Macedonia and Greece, attend the many affairs of state in the meantime of shit going haywire everywhere, sending his veterans home, promoting them… land grants, titles, etc… settling more colonists, making new weapons, shortening logistic routes, and making them more hospitable (walking across Iran’S deserts makes you thirsty.)

He was planning a invasion of Arabia when he died in Babylon. Arabia has Persian cities on the east coast if the Persian gulf… he seems to of been solidifying the sea route to control Indic trade, have better ports all along the coast, clear potential pirates. He also is rumored to if wanted to take Italy and Carthage too, expand in Thrace. He died very young. It isn’t as simple as “send troops home and get new ones”, as it us a series of complex adjustments. Many new troops were not even Greek, but Persians trained as Greeks. This isn’t a overnight process, not even in a year. Takes a lot of time training ranks marching in a line left to right to turn right to left, keeping in that line, if you want to keep your unit commander always on the same side, and units on either side of this unit on either side the same. Matters not to you, seems as simple as turning 180° and who was on your left now us on the right now… who cares? The buglar cares… and the general cares, cause he gives unit directions through him, and everything is suddenly inverted, throwing everything off. This matters a lot in the heat of a ambush, when you gotta steer around suddenly if attacked in the rear.

Instead if just turning 180°, every other rank has to go out in a line and March left, while every other turn in the opposite right… they crash into one another a lot. Hard maneuver, but very basic, and essential.

m.youtube.com/watch?v=EgeZl9UOJ0I

Hoplites require the short guts up front, tall in rear, due to spears extending more than one rank… guys behind need to see. A 180° turn reverses this. Likewise, communication between companies would have each unit commander in opposite positions, they need maximum consistency so as yo better communicate and adjust instinctively. Your irregular skirmishers in between can get confused, when running between units.

This is just one maneuver, takes a long time to build up from scratch, especially when language and cultural barriers exist. Alexander would need well trained troops in India, capable of doing this under combat conditions, fully adept in wearing armor (which requires having armor to begin with) and able to do this marching long distances. He would still need veterans to disperse amongst these guys, and go to units. His Calvary will switch out too, needing to be retrained. His quartermasters need to learn the new routes, where to find food, how to resupply all along it.

This takes time. It isn’t as simple as saying in a dispatch “send me more troops, this army is bitching, need to switch out.” They guts wanted to retire, not just go to pacified territory… so if the rear echelon (Persia, Macedonia, Egypt, Afghanistan) sent all it’s troops who we’re skilled in sufficient numbers, they would face local rebellions. New soldiers can’t exactly put that sort of stuff down.

Alexander held India. Period… Chanakya stopped him from expanding eastward. He is the only one with success against Alexander. Chanakya didn’t stop him from conquering the Eurphrates, and once his Maurya Empire came into being, it was give and take between the Greeks and Indians. Greeks oftentimes were valued, mass converted to Buddhism. Greek World split over time into Christianity and Buddhism. Many eastern areas still are around in Iran, wearing traditional clothes, etc. You see heavy influences in Tibetian Buddhism… it is likely the reason why Catholicism and Tibetian Buddhism evolved in a similar pattern, and share similar philosophical parallels. Why Thomas Merton and the Dali Lama could be such close friends… echoes of similar classical roots.

11

Interesting read. A massive change across Persia would have had a big impact, I just don’t know about people like Alexander. We can always say what if person x lived longer, but they didn’t. In most cases once you got a chunk of empire e.g. like the Hittites, you are going to test boundaries and consolidate that. I just think stuff would have happened to make him do the same.

12

Carthage never expanded into Africa from Carthage… it’s a weird situation… the colonized and upsurped a lot of already established ports, but didn’t want the lands closest to home.

Sane with Rome and Africa post Nero. Nero was the last who bothered… he sent expeditions from Morocco into Chad (I’ve had a headache of a time trying to recreate this route, the fauna has changed) and troops down the Nile into Sudan. All they found was a sizzling hot as fuck black rock reset in Chad, a few rivers, and in the Nile a bunch of impassable cataphracts, mosquito infested swamps stretch everywhere, and a few cavemen (yes, cavemen).

Rome said Fuck Africa from that point on. The expansion was a case of what seemingly was left uncontested to expand into, no real need other than self aggrandizement. It pits a bit of a flaw into the presumption underlining Chanakya’s RajaMandala:

image.slidesharecdn.com/kautily … 1338107754

While the math seems to consistently enough play out across history (but not always, other factors too) Nero was looking to expand into a unknown area for glory… went searching for a enemy to conquer where mathematically there should of been one, and didn’t find one. Like I said, a couple of impoverished nomads and a few cavemen. It wasn’t Imperial Rome’s finest hour.

You also gotta factor in Sacred and Taboo lands states won’t touch… most civilizations have these.

Having a fucked up sense of geography really does affect how states decide to form alliances.

You gotta look back to Anaximander for this:

[Img]Both Strabo and Agathemerus (later Greek geographers) claim that, according to the geographer Eratosthenes, Anaximander was the first to publish a map of the world. The map probably inspired the Greek historian Hecataeus of Miletus to draw a more accurate version. Strabo viewed both as the first geographers after Homer.

Maps were produced in ancient times, also notably in Egypt, Lydia, the Middle East, and Babylon. Only some small examples survived until today. The unique example of a world map comes from late Babylonian tablet BM 92687 later than 9th century BC but is based probably on a much older map. These maps indicated directions, roads, towns, borders, and geological features. Anaximander’s innovation was to represent the entire inhabited land known to the ancient Greeks.

Such an accomplishment is more significant than it at first appears. Anaximander most likely drew this map for three reasons.[50] First, it could be used to improve navigation and trade between Miletus’s colonies and other colonies around the Mediterranean Sea and Black Sea. Second, Thales would probably have found it easier to convince the Ionian city-states to join in a federation in order to push the Median threat away if he possessed such a tool. Finally, the philosophical idea of a global representation of the world simply for the sake of knowledge was reason enough to design one.

Surely aware of the sea’s convexity, he may have designed his map on a slightly rounded metal surface. The centre or “navel” of the world (ὀμφαλός γῆς omphalós gẽs) could have been Delphi, but is more likely in Anaximander’s time to have been located near Miletus. The Aegean Sea was near the map’s centre and enclosed by three continents, themselves located in the middle of the ocean and isolated like islands by sea and rivers. Europe was bordered on the south by the Mediterranean Sea and was separated from Asia by the Black Sea, the Lake Maeotis, and, further east, either by the Phasis River (now called the Rioni) or the Tanais. The Nile flowed south into the ocean, separating Libya (which was the name for the part of the then-known African continent) from Asia.[/img]

He wasn’t the first to make a world map, mesopotamians had them… but it was novel, taken from trade routes and periplus, applying geometry to show the world, contrasted against astronomical assumptions… Babylonians never mixed both as far as I can tell into a visual matrix of physics confirming cartography, arriving at presumably concrete, verifiable presumptions of the world from a reference point no one can actually see from. Chanakya gave the formula for the sequence of alliances, but it wasn’t terrain based. Nero set off costly expeditions… found shit. Philosophical lesson to be learned here.

You know the story of Prester John?

13

A quote from Any Rand, goes the opposite direction of Nero’s Impulse for Externalizing Displays of Glory (Attention Whore), in displaying the triump of empire (which failed cause there was nothing external to discover and invade on these expeditions yet, best he managed was to bump off the last of the Ptolomies, who were already a Roman Client Kingdom since Augustus retook Egypt)

Exact opposite of Nero. Notice the modern capitalist isn’t as concerned with the balance of powers and nation state building beyond the acquisition and maintence of property. Roman Fabrica (factories, yes they did have them, powered by water mills producing armor and such things) was rooted in the state economy, no export. Now, usually the other way around. They don’t stagger enemy, friend, enemy by territories, they want factories, resources, and customers in each.

14

I expect Carthage knew much of that from local tribes, and opted for the much richer Mediterranean.

I was watching a documentary last night, and they went over how so many battles/wars were lost due to logistics. It seams one always gets to a certain expanse and then it starts getting messy.

Nero was looking to expand purely for cheap glory, I agree.

The romans knew of china, the scythians and india, so why didn’t he go there? Wanted an easy victory perhaps. Did the greeks not know where silk came from?

Thanks for the information – the effort, :slight_smile: its an interesting read and I am going along with it in my mind, but popping the questions which naturally arise tis all.

Absolutely. Britain wasn’t massively bothered loosing the empire, because it kept most of the trade connections and hence the sources to cheap labour, materials and goods. The west is still doing the same to the world, its all about how cheap they can get stuff for so they can sell it on at profit, and where money is worth in some cases a thousand percent more.

15

Not just the west.

Think the Marxist model started to collapse under Marx, there is a collection of Marx and Engels writings during the American Civil War, I recall one of them was Marx flipping out that some of the businessmen were trying to get factories to become illegal to attack during war time under international law… law didn’t pass of course, it’s why shit gets nationalized in many failing leftist nations today, but does signal where this cognitive divide begins. Marx wasn’t much of a strategists, Engels was… he read Clasewitz, was constantly having to calm Marx down explaining stuff to him.

I have no doubt Carthage knew what was going on, they took auxiliaries from them (paid, unpaid, I dunno), and the Jugunthine War Rome later experienced only occurred once Rome was occupying Carthage… gives a indication of what Carthage occasionally had to deal with. None the less, they refused to expand, and the walls stayed put… when the population went up, they built 10 story tall apartment buildings. Romans eventually could do that, but I am fairly sure they learned it first from these crazy Carthagenians. I would be nervous as hell stepping into such a building of that era, expect the whole thing to cave in.

You can’t expand into China, due to the absurdity of the terrain. Rome in the late republic was mostly heavy infantry, supported by light Infantry and light Calvary. Persians had the heavy Calvary… the kind the Romans would adopt during the middle ages as the so-called Byzantine Empire.

Rome had great difficulty expanding into Persia… could usually get to the Euphrates, but whenever they did, Goths and other Germans would slam into the western defenses. I can’t find much evidence the Persians were coordinating this, or the Goths were just playing it by ear hearing of Roman Armies heading east. Seems too big of a coincidence especially 3rd and 4th centuries. I’ve been keeping my eye out for this.

Rome was dealing with Goths and Celts invading Asia minor. Byzantium prior to the foundation of Constantinople was just a outpost that blacksea trade poured through. Romans had troops placed around the black sea. Not legions, just what we would call companies or even battalions of a few hundred men at important ports. Armenia was usually a buffer state that switched to Christianity early on (prior even to Rome), was sometimes Roman leaning, sometimes Persia leaning.

Romans and Persians together guarded the major passes in the Caucasian Mountains… holding back the “Magog” where the Jewish Mountain people now live. The area has produced a few modern Russian philosophers of note, as well as a few terrorist. Its the periphery of the Russian sphere of Influence.

Beyond this, Roman/Byzantine influence is spotty. They obviously colonized the black sea, including the Crimea, which was the last part of Rome to hold out (wasn’t Trebizond, Crimea’s Principality lasted longer), they converted the Russians. Russians were a good check against their exxpsnsion into Ukraine. For the silk trade route, I know since ancient times we knew the basic geography up till modern Kazakhstan. I don’t think these cities were ever captured, lots of nomads, little payback… yes, the silk trade routes have riches, but those riches are flowing west anyway… it’s gonna show up in Constantinople eventually.

Chinese sent some Christian missionaries to the west (yes, I said that right) and occasionally popped up, in one case outside Antioch, were shocked we used appointed governors and not hereditary governors… we could replace our leadership on this level at will with few hard feelings, whereas in China it was a fight to the death if attempted.

Our missionaries made it pretty far east, the largest Christian principalities were Mongol princes. A Jewish state popped up in Ukraine and Kazakhstan from Jewish refugees fleeing the Eastern Roman Empire… the nomads readily adopted the religion. They did a lot to stop Islam from conquering Russia, and it’s why you read of white nomadic hun like groups in the middle ages fighting from whatbwe now call Russia down to Romania… the steppes could get pretty diverse.

Farthest purely Orthodox Christianity (not including the Nestorians) got east via the land silk trade route was possibly Issuk Kul, where the remains of St. Matthew is said to reside, under the lake. This is dead smack in the silk trade route. Has bubonic plague naturally, year round. I have the deepest suspicions the ultimate origin of the “Indo-European” languages begin here in the underwater settlements, mixing the languages of this land bridge.

Romans never tried to conquer India as far as I know. Iraq was occupied for a while, trade always extensive. We had a few Roman temples in India, a Temple of Augustus too. Our traders sometimes pushed past Sri Lanka to China, we have recorded contacts.

Almost as soon as the western empire collapse, Roman Philosophy was still expanding. I know the Cynics made it to Kazakhstan, prior to Islam… but after the Islamic expansion, they adopted in into their Proto-Sufi formulations, almost immediately the beggars were equipped with absurdly expensive praying bowls made of coconut shells from the Seychelles… does this mean the Romans knew of it? Likely, but not proven… they traded between Ethiopia and India.

Once Constantinople managed to get enough quality heavy Calvary houses bred, west was lost, and it was fast losing the muddle east. It was at best the equal of the Persians. The Romans discovered they couldn’t best medieval knights, who were heavily armored, excellent fighters, so just killed their much lighter armored horses instead, preferring not to Fuck around with them. They hired out a lot of Russians as mercenaries, as well as these western knights.

At any given time, the eastern empire could have Asia minor overrun by Jihadis, or it’s European side by Goths and Russians. I think theveastern empire would if been better off with it’s capital city outside of Athens on the Isthmus connecting the Peloponnese to the mainland, fortifying that… lot easier to secure the Peloponnese as a fortified peninsula for dependable farmland and raising emergency troops. They had a bad center of gravity at Constantinople, once surrounded, you had to hope someone would arrive by sea or land to help you. Constantine didn’t think thebrest of the Empire would collapse slowly around his city… he was merely relocating it’s capital. You can guess I’m not a big fan of Washington DC’s location, or of London. I like a easily secured rear you can use to subsist on and secure new recruits with when under siege.