PDA

View Full Version : It is not Constantinople its Istanbul !!!



fizy45
06-11-2011, 04:07 PM
I dont understand the western countries habbit to use that name which is not used for 400 years...that name chanced after 1453 when Turks captured that city and its named as Istanbul.

But in trailers and many other games still Istanbul named as constantinople which is very annoying for a Turk and a historican...

Imagine this situation...you are a French and you saw your city names written in German...or you are an american and your city names are written in Russian...How will you feel...

Also please dont get me wrong I am not a ultra nationalist person or a facist etc I just want Ubisoft to show little respect to us...

Thanks...

fizy45
06-11-2011, 04:07 PM
I dont understand the western countries habbit to use that name which is not used for 400 years...that name chanced after 1453 when Turks captured that city and its named as Istanbul.

But in trailers and many other games still Istanbul named as constantinople which is very annoying for a Turk and a historican...

Imagine this situation...you are a French and you saw your city names written in German...or you are an american and your city names are written in Russian...How will you feel...

Also please dont get me wrong I am not a ultra nationalist person or a facist etc I just want Ubisoft to show little respect to us...

Thanks...

albertwesker22
06-11-2011, 04:14 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by fizy45:
I dont understand the western countries habbit to use that name which is not used for 400 years...that name chanced after 1453 when Turks captured that city and its named as Istanbul.

But in trailers and many other games still Istanbul named as constantinople which is very annoying for a Turk and a historican...

Imagine this situation...you are a French and you saw your city names written in German...or you are an american and your city names are written in Russian...How will you feel...

Also please dont get me wrong I am not a ultra nationalist person or a facist etc I just want Ubisoft to show little respect to us...

Thanks... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Troll...The game takes place in 1511, only 58 years since the city was taken by the Turks. Europeans still would have known the city as Constantinople during that time.

iN3krO
06-11-2011, 04:17 PM
fizy i didn't know it was on 1453 when constantinople became instanbul but i'm sure they will refer to this (like leonard refer to the ball-world or how it's named and mario thinks the world is plan -&gt; maybe speech error)

ILIKESOUP94
06-11-2011, 04:27 PM
"In 1453, Ottoman Sultan Mehmed II conquered the city and made it the capital of the Ottoman Empire. Now under new rule, the metropolis was dubbed "Istanbul" from the Greek phrase "eis ten polin," which meant "in the city." The name of the city wasn't officially changed until 1930, and Westerners continued to refer to it as Constantinople on maps and in speech into the '60s."

http://ask.yahoo.com/20030225.html

rob.davies2014
06-11-2011, 06:12 PM
I'm sure this will settle the matter:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...m_tQ&feature=related (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VZfR33-m_tQ&feature=related)

iN3krO
06-11-2011, 06:28 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by RussellSparrow:
I'm sure this will settle the matter:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...m_tQ&feature=related (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VZfR33-m_tQ&feature=related) </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Have you read what the guy above u said? -.-''

Chamboozer
06-11-2011, 06:30 PM
The city was still officially known as Constantinople by both Europeans and the Ottomans. Of course, the Ottomans referred to it by its Turkish pronunciation and spelling, transliterated as Kostantiniyye.

LieutenantJojo
06-11-2011, 07:28 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by fizy45:
I dont understand the western countries habbit to use that name which is not used for 400 years...that name chanced after 1453 when Turks captured that city and its named as Istanbul.

But in trailers and many other games still Istanbul named as constantinople which is very annoying for a Turk and a historican...

Imagine this situation...you are a French and you saw your city names written in German...or you are an american and your city names are written in Russian...How will you feel...

Also please dont get me wrong I am not a ultra nationalist person or a facist etc I just want Ubisoft to show little respect to us...

Thanks... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Err... Why would they write the german translation for a french city's name? And even if they did, who cares? As long as it's pronounceable for everyone, it's okay. That's why they use the english pronunciation. It's understandable for EVERYONE. Turkish on the other hand is not. And seeing as practically every game, including the AC-series, is in english, it is only logical.

iN3krO
06-11-2011, 07:33 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LieutenantJojo:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by fizy45:
I dont understand the western countries habbit to use that name which is not used for 400 years...that name chanced after 1453 when Turks captured that city and its named as Istanbul.

But in trailers and many other games still Istanbul named as constantinople which is very annoying for a Turk and a historican...

Imagine this situation...you are a French and you saw your city names written in German...or you are an american and your city names are written in Russian...How will you feel...

Also please dont get me wrong I am not a ultra nationalist person or a facist etc I just want Ubisoft to show little respect to us...

Thanks... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Err... Why would they write the german translation for a french city's name? And even if they did, who cares? As long as it's pronounceable for everyone, it's okay. That's why they use the english pronunciation. It's understandable for EVERYONE. Turkish on the other hand is not. And seeing as practically every game, including the AC-series, is in english, it is only logical. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

It's instanbul everywhere but only officialy on 20th century... the game happens in 16th century when it's still officially Constantinople everywhere...

Oatkeeper
06-11-2011, 08:31 PM
Its accurate to say that the city "should" be called Istanbul. But during that period of time most people in the world still new the city as Constantinople, and The country did not really require people to accept the name change until much much later.

And frankly I would think (and this is MY opinion) the fact that people even now still know the name Constantinople is a good indicator of how cultured the city is.

ThaWhistle
06-11-2011, 08:37 PM
i seem to think itll be represented how it was in history, anyone who isnt a turk is going to call it constantinople, and everyone who is will call it istanbul, why? because that is how it was.

As someone else stated, just about noone in europe called the city istanbul until the 20th century.

Chamboozer
06-11-2011, 08:51 PM
Turks called the city Kostantiniyye in 1511. That's just because it was easier to pronounce in the Ottoman Turkish language than Constantinople (or whatever 'Constantinople' is in Greek). They did similar things with the cities that are now modern Izmir, Ankara, Edirne, etc. The name Istanbul was not commonly used until the 20th Century, even among Turks. It is historically accurate for Ubisoft to use the name Constantinople.

ThaWhistle
06-11-2011, 08:54 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Chamboozer:
Turks called the city Kostantiniyye in 1511. That's just because it was easier to pronounce in the Ottoman Turkish language than Constantinople (or whatever 'Constantinople' is in Greek). They did similar things with the cities that are now modern Izmir, Ankara, Edirne, etc. The name Istanbul was not commonly used until the 20th Century. It is historically accurate for Ubisoft to use the name Constantinople. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

doh, so it was, i knew it was something other than constantinople, and wikipedia confirmed it, i just forgot it was konstantiyettitittie

Chamboozer
06-11-2011, 09:15 PM
Well, you were right. Constantinople and Kostantiniyye were really the same name, just in a different language. I was just pointing out that the average Turk would not have referred to it as Istanbul. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

SAVMATIC
06-12-2011, 12:54 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by fizy45:
I dont understand the western countries habbit to use that name which is not used for 400 years...that name chanced after 1453 when Turks captured that city and its named as Istanbul.

But in trailers and many other games still Istanbul named as constantinople which is very annoying for a Turk and a historican...

Imagine this situation...you are a French and you saw your city names written in German...or you are an american and your city names are written in Russian...How will you feel...

Also please dont get me wrong I am not a ultra nationalist person or a facist etc I just want Ubisoft to show little respect to us...

Thanks... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

i actually LOLed reading this. bravo

kriegerdesgottes
06-12-2011, 01:09 AM
It was Constantinople for 1100 years as opposed to the 558 years that it has been Istanbul. It actually had many names and Constantine intended on calling it Nova Roma but it didn't really catch on very well. It'll always be Constantinople to me http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Turkiye96
06-12-2011, 02:42 AM
nice song RussellSparrow http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_razz.gif
to the starter of the thread im turk too, and i dont really care that its called Constantinople much but i find it annoying because of it being historically inaccurate so when the animus shows the map it should say Istanbul and if the Ottoman royalty and very high class should refer to it as Istanbul while most of the population should call it constantinople thats pretty much spot on and historically accurate. : )

AEKTZIS_1921
06-12-2011, 03:25 AM
????????????????? or Konstantinople in english was often referred to as "? ????", "the city" in short. this was the case for both Christians and Muslims at the time.

"eis tin ????", is Greek meaning "to the City" and Ottomans translation was to "Is tan bul".

stop getting cut coz ottomans couldn't come up with thier own turkish name for the city and instead used a Greek name. same with gallipoli meaning good city in Greek..lol

iN3krO
06-12-2011, 03:35 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Turkiye96:
nice song RussellSparrow http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_razz.gif
to the starter of the thread im turk too, and i dont really care that its called Constantinople much but i find it annoying because of it being historically inaccurate so when the animus shows the map it should say Istanbul and if the Ottoman royalty and very high class should refer to it as Istanbul while most of the population should call it constantinople thats pretty much spot on and historically accurate. : ) </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Have you read what was said in Yahoo? It's OFFICIALLY instanbul at 20th century.... and the game is at 16th century....

BLooDLineS666
06-12-2011, 04:33 AM
The Names of Istanbul (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/5251069024/m/6511079429)

Take a look at this article of mine if you bother.

Keksus
06-12-2011, 04:37 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by RussellSparrow:
I'm sure this will settle the matter:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...m_tQ&feature=related (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VZfR33-m_tQ&feature=related) </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

"Unfortunately, this SME-music-content is not available in Germany because GEMA has not granted the respective music publishing rights."

http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif

fizy45
06-12-2011, 04:39 AM
For those say that name is not exist in those years then why we see Italy word in brotherhood at those times Italy was not even a nation.It was divided by many other small city states...But ubisoft used the name which is used today...

So when it comes to you new name...when it comes to us old name...

Alright this is what you call respecting a nation then...

fizy45
06-12-2011, 04:46 AM
and for those who will say that Italy is used to name that penninsula and known in those years oke then use Anatolia,Balkan in game as territory names...

Also if its called as Konstantinye in those years then you Konstantinye cause I remember Italian city names used in brotherhood...

Come on people lets be fair the examples are in front of your eyes...

Turkiye96
06-12-2011, 05:06 AM
yes but the Animus showing it to us is in the modern era ( so it should show the places for their modern terms)and it was dubbed Istanbul after 1453, so why would they use that name of a city if it has changed? i mean thats like saying that Rome should be called Roma, that New York should be called new amsterdam, Brooklawn, New Jersey should be Fort Nassau and London should be called Londinium and so on. We dont see these names of modern day maps
here are just a couple of examples of modern day maps of the Ottoman empire

http://www.naqshbandi.org/otto...aps/expansionmap.gif (http://www.naqshbandi.org/ottomans/maps/expansionmap.gif)

http://www.kaankahraman.com/tu...re_Map_1359-1856.jpg (http://www.kaankahraman.com/turkiye/Ottoman_Empire_Map_1359-1856.jpg)

Also Kostantiniyye is the translation of Constantinople to Turkish not Istanbul
And people actually used Istanbul even before its capture ''?stanbul was the common name for the city in normal speech in Turkish even before the conquest of 1453, but in official use by the Ottoman authorities, other names such as Kostantiniyye were preferred in certain contexts.''

''Recent research has shown that the name 'Istanbul' was used if not during the Byzantine period, at least during the 11th century and that the Turks knew the city by this name. Istanbul has had other names at various times but none of them was used widely or for any great length of time.''

Ass4ssin8me
06-12-2011, 05:26 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by fizy45

a historican.... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

If you are going to pretend to be something your not, at least spell the proffesion right...

I'm sure a Historian would know of the time frames between which the name change took place and would have enough common sense to know why people refer to it as so.

BLooDLineS666
06-12-2011, 06:14 AM
Look guys the name Istanbul started to be used in 1930. Under Ottoman reign, the city was called Kostantinniye. END.

ILIKESOUP94
06-12-2011, 08:43 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by daniel_gervide:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Turkiye96:
nice song RussellSparrow http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_razz.gif
to the starter of the thread im turk too, and i dont really care that its called Constantinople much but i find it annoying because of it being historically inaccurate so when the animus shows the map it should say Istanbul and if the Ottoman royalty and very high class should refer to it as Istanbul while most of the population should call it constantinople thats pretty much spot on and historically accurate. : ) </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Have you read what was said in Yahoo? It's OFFICIALLY instanbul at 20th century.... and the game is at 16th century.... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

LOL. I think they may have skipped it. But yah, people are basically posting the same thing I have. We all get the point now. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

kriegerdesgottes
06-12-2011, 09:58 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by fizy45:
and for those who will say that Italy is used to name that penninsula and known in those years oke then use Anatolia,Balkan in game as territory names...

Also if its called as Konstantinye in those years then you Konstantinye cause I remember Italian city names used in brotherhood...

Come on people lets be fair the examples are in front of your eyes... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

ok first of all Istanbul is not a nation. Secondly that area was STOLEN like all the areas around it from the "christian" byzantine/romans. It was the last city in that area that the ottomans had not taken because they couldn't for the longest time until Mehmet the II finally TOOK it. So the town in my vocabulary will remain Constantinople or even byzantium as it was known before Constantine made it the new capital of Rome.

KZarr
06-12-2011, 12:26 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Keksus:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by RussellSparrow:
I'm sure this will settle the matter:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...m_tQ&feature=related (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VZfR33-m_tQ&feature=related) </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

"Unfortunately, this SME-music-content is not available in Germany because GEMA has not granted the respective music publishing rights."

http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Better version (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IqJXxHi6RwQ&feature=related)

albertwesker22
06-12-2011, 12:34 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by kriegerdesgotte:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by fizy45:
and for those who will say that Italy is used to name that penninsula and known in those years oke then use Anatolia,Balkan in game as territory names...

Also if its called as Konstantinye in those years then you Konstantinye cause I remember Italian city names used in brotherhood...

Come on people lets be fair the examples are in front of your eyes... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

ok first of all Istanbul is not a nation. Secondly that area was STOLEN like all the areas around it from the "christian" byzantine/romans. It was the last city in that area that the ottomans had not taken because they couldn't for the longest time until Mehmet the II finally TOOK it. So the town in my vocabulary will remain Constantinople or even byzantium as it was known before Constantine made it the new capital of Rome. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yeah and the Romans stole England from the Tribal People. England stole Hong Kong from China, thats just History.

Now I've been to Istanbul in the past. I call it Istanbul myself. The city should be called Constantinople in the game by all exept the Turks. The Animus should refer to it as Istanbul.

BLooDLineS666
06-12-2011, 12:40 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by kriegerdesgotte:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by fizy45:
and for those who will say that Italy is used to name that penninsula and known in those years oke then use Anatolia,Balkan in game as territory names...

Also if its called as Konstantinye in those years then you Konstantinye cause I remember Italian city names used in brotherhood...

Come on people lets be fair the examples are in front of your eyes... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

ok first of all Istanbul is not a nation. Secondly that area was STOLEN like all the areas around it from the "christian" byzantine/romans. It was the last city in that area that the ottomans had not taken because they couldn't for the longest time until Mehmet the II finally TOOK it. So the town in my vocabulary will remain Constantinople or even byzantium as it was known before Constantine made it the new capital of Rome. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Nonsense. Then let every city be called as their old name. Like Devanha isntead of Aberdeen, or Wiryeseong instead of Seoul or New Amsterdam instead of New York.

AEKTZIS_1921
06-12-2011, 01:36 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Secondly that area was STOLEN like all the areas around it from the "christian" byzantine/romans </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


how was it stolen by the Byzantines since Greeks have been living there since 800BC? Byzantines are Greek

kriegerdesgottes
06-12-2011, 04:50 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by AEKTZIS_1921:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Secondly that area was STOLEN like all the areas around it from the "christian" byzantine/romans </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


how was it stolen by the Byzantines since Greeks have been living there since 800BC? Byzantines are Greek </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

It wasn't stolen by the greeks. It was actually taken from the greeks by the Romans and even then it was still known as Byzantium, then when Constantine took down maxintinus and lucinius he united the entire empire to one and made the capital in constantinople which was a christian city until it was taken my the ottomans later. and for the person saying oh rome stole England you sir are correct however England was not a nation at all at the time and they actually named a lot of places that were there like Londinium. Most people don't change the name of an ancient place when they take it and the turks claiming that oh we should all respect it as istanbul can suck it as far as I'm concerned.

AEKTZIS_1921
06-12-2011, 07:29 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">turks claiming that oh we should all respect it as istanbul can suck it as far as I'm concerned. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yesssssssssssssssss!!!!!!!!!!

Turkiye96
06-13-2011, 01:25 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by AEKTZIS_1921:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">turks claiming that oh we should all respect it as istanbul can suck it as far as I'm concerned. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yesssssssssssssssss!!!!!!!!!! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
oh thats very kind of you : / especially since its just a NAME your insuting us on...
and Istanbul wasn't "STOLEN " it was conquered

Chamboozer
06-13-2011, 02:16 AM
Verily you shall conquer Constantinople. What a wonderful leader will that leader be, and what a wonderful army will that army be!

BLooDLineS666
06-13-2011, 09:31 AM
I dont give a damn about what trolls think about the name of this beautiful city. Just that it belongs to me, my people and my country, thank God. Now do whatever you want. I rest my case.

AEKTZIS_1921
06-13-2011, 10:09 AM
? ??????? ?? ?? ????????, ????? ??? ????? ?? ????!

?????????? ??? ??????? ????? ? ????????????????!

???? ?? ?????? ?? ??????? ???? ????? ??? ?? '???!

glenneey
06-13-2011, 10:19 AM
^
Please talk english, not greek.
:l

piratprince
06-13-2011, 10:50 AM
We all live in one earth. The conqueror writes history so basically is should be called Istanbul. At least in the animus. Because today its called Istanbul. How dare we? some people might ask? We pretend to know everything and deny the rules created by ourselves?

Maybe there will be one time where people can discuss peacefully and without ignorance and lives without frontier. At least we can try. Its a long way to go. Sooner or never the respect itself become more important than words.



We know one thing: everything is true nothing is permitted...

And sorry for that....

... because the earth belongs to me. Muhahaha

Its my earth and also the sun, mars, Jupiter, minerva belongs to me too and basically everything.

Help me i become a templar. :O

Grandmaster_Z
06-13-2011, 10:54 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by albertwesker22:

Troll...The game takes place in 1511, only 58 years since the city was taken by the Turks. Europeans still would have known the city as Constantinople during that time. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

58 years is a long time

Turkiye96
06-13-2011, 11:38 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by AEKTZIS_1921:
? ??????? ?? ?? ????????, ????? ??? ????? ?? ????!

?????????? ??? ??????? ????? ? ????????????????!

???? ?? ?????? ?? ??????? ???? ????? ??? ?? '???! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

haha :P thats funny, Athens is the capital of greece not Istanbul :P u need a geography lesson!

when u can read greek... GOOGLE TRANSLATE!!! :P

albertwesker22
06-13-2011, 11:44 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Grandmaster_Z:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by albertwesker22:

Troll...The game takes place in 1511, only 58 years since the city was taken by the Turks. Europeans still would have known the city as Constantinople during that time. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

58 years is a long time </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Its a long time to your life, but in terms of history its 2 minutes shorter than a blink of an eye http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Chamboozer
06-13-2011, 12:20 PM
Everyone would have still known the city as Constantinople, Turks and Europeans. It's not like the Turks felt the need to change the name of the city at the time, its name was not connected to Greek nationalism as it is today.

Agalex2010
06-13-2011, 12:38 PM
I love history and i read long time ago an article saying that " All Asia belongs to Turks and Greeks came and conquered our lands our villages our homes etc . "(It was written between 1920-1925 AD) . When i finished reading that i understood how poorly educated people are because not only the Turkish nation didn't exist while Greeks were living in "their" lands but they were cultured. Milos , Smyrni, Alicarnassus, Ionia , Dwroupolis cities with many people, among them soldiers craftsmen , priests artists . All that city names remained as they were. But Constantinople was founded by Kostantinos , it was the roman capital for many years and it remained roman influenced by greek culture. The language the writing the habits the arts all were influenced by the greek civ and do you know why ? Because we are a civilized nation lived there grew there from 2000 BC. And what now a mongolian tribe lived as slaves to Arabs come here and say that is Turkish ? A nation who doesn't have more than 750 years of existence ? And the most crazy of all is that they insist to rename the city. I do not doubt your rise to power your arts your culture which is greater than any other nation in Europe and all over the world but calm down. Your capital (Ankara) was conquered by Greeks and by Persians but it never changed it name because these nations had RESPECT.It is unbelievable and i must say terrible. Now i can understand why Ancient Greeks told this " Everyone who is not Greek is Barbarian". Because of Greek civilization the world knew a great increase to sciences . (Archimedes, Aristotelis, Dimokritos, Sokratis , Platon , Praxitelis Aristophanes Euripides Eukleidis ,Thalis, etc) Search these names in Wikipedia learn their success and their help to the world and do not dare and say that any greek city any greek homeland that existed before any barbarian nation like Seljuks or all Europe of middle age is not Greek because then what you will be a unhistorical person without sense and respect.The only nation that I admire for her contribution to the world is the Arabic nation between 600-1000 AD.It's the only nation that learned from the monsters of sciences and continued their work. Turks - Christians- Crusaders burned alive almost the 95% of all the work that was occupied all the greek philosophers . Many historians and i can say also old historians ( Eric Slyman or Chadwick etc) said that if we had all the work that greek did the years between 550- 175 BC the world would knew an unbelievable increase of in all themes of life arts sciences biology etc. None has the right to touch the name of any greek city even now that the Greeks are in great problems .All of you are in debt not for Greeks , **** them the modern one sucks but for their ancestors who lived created gave and never asked for return.

NORTHBOERN1
06-13-2011, 12:53 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Agalex2010:
I love history and i read long time ago an article saying that " All Asia belongs to Turks and Greeks came and conquered our lands our villages our homes etc . "(It was written between 1920-1925 AD) . When i finished reading that i understood how poorly educated people are because not only the Turkish nation didn't exist while Greeks were living in "their" lands but they were cultured. Milos , Smyrni, Alicarnassus, Ionia , Dwroupolis cities with many people, among them soldiers craftsmen , priests artists . All that city names remained as they were. But Constantinople was founded by Kostantinos , it was the roman capital for many years and it remained roman influenced by greek culture. The language the writing the habits the arts all were influenced by the greek civ and do you know why ? Because we are a civilized nation lived there grew there from 2000 BC. And what now a mongolian tribe lived as slaves to Arabs come here and say that is Turkish ? A nation who doesn't have more than 750 years of existence ? And the most crazy of all is that they insist to rename the city. I do not doubt your rise to power your arts your culture which is greater than any other nation in Europe and all over the world but calm down. Your capital (Ankara) was conquered by Greeks and by Persians but it never changed it name because these nations had RESPECT.It is unbelievable and i must say terrible. Now i can understand why Ancient Greeks told this " Everyone who is not Greek is Barbarian". Because of Greek civilization the world knew a great increase to sciences . (Archimedes, Aristotelis, Dimokritos, Sokratis , Platon , Praxitelis Aristophanes Euripides Eukleidis ,Thalis, etc) Search these names in Wikipedia learn their success and their help to the world and do not dare and say that any greek city any greek homeland that existed before any barbarian nation like Seljuks or all Europe of middle age is not Greek because then what you will be a unhistorical person without sense and respect.The only nation that I admire for her contribution to the world is the Arabic nation between 600-1000 AD.It's the only nation that learned from the monsters of sciences and continued their work. Turks - Christians- Crusaders burned alive almost the 95% of all the work that was occupied all the greek philosophers . Many historians and i can say also old historians ( Eric Slyman or Chadwick etc) said that if we had all the work that greek did the years between 550- 175 BC the world would knew an unbelievable increase of in all themes of life arts sciences biology etc. None has the right to touch the name of any greek city even now that the Greeks are in great problems . </div></BLOCKQUOTE>You're a bigot, and a racist.

Agalex2010
06-13-2011, 12:58 PM
[QUOTE]Originally posted by NORTHBOERN1:

If you do not believe me search in wikipedia search the facts and then try to understand what i say. The Human has the mind a great advantage that other creatures do not have use it and see why i say that.

Grandmaster_Z
06-13-2011, 01:04 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by albertwesker22:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Grandmaster_Z:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by albertwesker22:

Troll...The game takes place in 1511, only 58 years since the city was taken by the Turks. Europeans still would have known the city as Constantinople during that time. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

58 years is a long time </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Its a long time to your life, but in terms of history its 2 minutes shorter than a blink of an eye http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

doesn't matter, things can change in an instant. 9/11/2001 was just a day, but it changed alot in the world. saying that 58 years is not alot of time is just ridiculous. but anyway, i don't really agree/disagree with the topic of this thread, i just had to respond to that post.

Agalex2010
06-13-2011, 01:05 PM
??????? ???????? ?????? ??' ?? ?????? ?????? ???????????.?????????(Pythagoras)
To think a great education is that one which will give you the ability to suffer the ignorance.

piratprince
06-13-2011, 01:19 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Everyone who is not Greek is Barbarian </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Sadly

ALL THAT EDUCATION FOR NOTHING

I do respect every contribution but not nonsense!

Agalex2010
06-13-2011, 01:27 PM
Also i would like to refer in the fact that a city and its name stays in history only in the ages of her GOLDEN AGE or for great moments in history!! Take for example the city of Stalingrad ! Now it was renamed to Volgograd or something like this . Everyone knows it as Stalingrad for the biggest battle the WW2 knew. So, how do you want a city who lived in history as Constantinople for her great inventions(???? ???-Liquid Fire) its philosophers, for the first grand university and of course the arts . History forgets the other periods and remains in great moments of development wars arts etc. For those who thought thought i was racist or a little bid hard with my previous posts think this and forget the other one.

Chamboozer
06-13-2011, 01:28 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Agalex2010:
I love history and i read long time ago an article saying that " All Asia belongs to Turks and Greeks came and conquered our lands our villages our homes etc . "(It was written between 1920-1925 AD) . When i finished reading that i understood how poorly educated people are because not only the Turkish nation didn't exist while Greeks were living in "their" lands but they were cultured. Milos , Smyrni, Alicarnassus, Ionia , Dwroupolis cities with many people, among them soldiers craftsmen , priests artists . All that city names remained as they were. But Constantinople was founded by Kostantinos , it was the roman capital for many years and it remained roman influenced by greek culture. The language the writing the habits the arts all were influenced by the greek civ and do you know why ? Because we are a civilized nation lived there grew there from 2000 BC. And what now a mongolian tribe lived as slaves to Arabs come here and say that is Turkish ? A nation who doesn't have more than 750 years of existence ? And the most crazy of all is that they insist to rename the city. I do not doubt your rise to power your arts your culture which is greater than any other nation in Europe and all over the world but calm down. Your capital (Ankara) was conquered by Greeks and by Persians but it never changed it name because these nations had RESPECT.It is unbelievable and i must say terrible. Now i can understand why Ancient Greeks told this " Everyone who is not Greek is Barbarian". Because of Greek civilization the world knew a great increase to sciences . (Archimedes, Aristotelis, Dimokritos, Sokratis , Platon , Praxitelis Aristophanes Euripides Eukleidis ,Thalis, etc) Search these names in Wikipedia learn their success and their help to the world and do not dare and say that any greek city any greek homeland that existed before any barbarian nation like Seljuks or all Europe of middle age is not Greek because then what you will be a unhistorical person without sense and respect.The only nation that I admire for her contribution to the world is the Arabic nation between 600-1000 AD.It's the only nation that learned from the monsters of sciences and continued their work. Turks - Christians- Crusaders burned alive almost the 95% of all the work that was occupied all the greek philosophers . Many historians and i can say also old historians ( Eric Slyman or Chadwick etc) said that if we had all the work that greek did the years between 550- 175 BC the world would knew an unbelievable increase of in all themes of life arts sciences biology etc. None has the right to touch the name of any greek city even now that the Greeks are in great problems .All of you are in debt not for Greeks , **** them the modern one sucks but for their ancestors who lived created gave and never asked for return. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

It was the Greeks who invited the Ottomans into Europe, and they who chose to submit to the Turks rather than the Latin Catholics. Remember, "Better the Turkish turban than the Papal tiara"? Greek civilization was collapsing when the Ottomans arrived, the Serbians still ruled northern Greece and Macedonia, the Latins controlled most of the mainland. If the Turks hadn't conquered you, then it would have been the Hungarians or Italians, and anyone who remembers what happened in 1204 can see why being ruled by the Ottoman Empire was far superior. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

masterfenix2009
06-13-2011, 01:50 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Keksus:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by RussellSparrow:
I'm sure this will settle the matter:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...m_tQ&feature=related (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VZfR33-m_tQ&feature=related) </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

"Unfortunately, this SME-music-content is not available in Germany because GEMA has not granted the respective music publishing rights."

http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE> Censorship: The assassination of an idea.

albertwesker22
06-13-2011, 02:02 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Grandmaster_Z:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by albertwesker22:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Grandmaster_Z:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by albertwesker22:

Troll...The game takes place in 1511, only 58 years since the city was taken by the Turks. Europeans still would have known the city as Constantinople during that time. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

58 years is a long time </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Its a long time to your life, but in terms of history its 2 minutes shorter than a blink of an eye http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

doesn't matter, things can change in an instant. 9/11/2001 was just a day, but it changed alot in the world. saying that 58 years is not alot of time is just ridiculous. but anyway, i don't really agree/disagree with the topic of this thread, i just had to respond to that post. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

So you're saying that Constantinople was known by everybody as Istanbul in 1511? Bull ****...The name of the city was not even officially changed until the 20th century.

And yes 58 years is the blink of an eye in historical terms. I'm guessing you're about 12?

Grandmaster_Z
06-13-2011, 02:30 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by albertwesker22:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Grandmaster_Z:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by albertwesker22:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Grandmaster_Z:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by albertwesker22:

Troll...The game takes place in 1511, only 58 years since the city was taken by the Turks. Europeans still would have known the city as Constantinople during that time. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

58 years is a long time </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Its a long time to your life, but in terms of history its 2 minutes shorter than a blink of an eye http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

doesn't matter, things can change in an instant. 9/11/2001 was just a day, but it changed alot in the world. saying that 58 years is not alot of time is just ridiculous. but anyway, i don't really agree/disagree with the topic of this thread, i just had to respond to that post. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

So you're saying that Constantinople was known by everybody as Istanbul in 1511? Bull ****...The name of the city was not even officially changed until the 20th century.

And yes 58 years is the blink of an eye in historical terms. I'm guessing you're about 12? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

did you even read my post idiot? nevermind, not worth my time.

albertwesker22
06-13-2011, 02:39 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Grandmaster_Z:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by albertwesker22:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Grandmaster_Z:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by albertwesker22:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Grandmaster_Z:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by albertwesker22:

Troll...The game takes place in 1511, only 58 years since the city was taken by the Turks. Europeans still would have known the city as Constantinople during that time. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

58 years is a long time </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Its a long time to your life, but in terms of history its 2 minutes shorter than a blink of an eye http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

doesn't matter, things can change in an instant. 9/11/2001 was just a day, but it changed alot in the world. saying that 58 years is not alot of time is just ridiculous. but anyway, i don't really agree/disagree with the topic of this thread, i just had to respond to that post. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

So you're saying that Constantinople was known by everybody as Istanbul in 1511? Bull ****...The name of the city was not even officially changed until the 20th century.

And yes 58 years is the blink of an eye in historical terms. I'm guessing you're about 12? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

did you even read my post idiot? nevermind, not worth my time. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

My whole original post was about how 58 years was nowhere near enough time to erase centuries of culture and national identity and international identity. So yeah 58 years is not that long a time in that regard.

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/compsmash.gif

Agalex2010
06-13-2011, 02:49 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Chamboozer:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Agalex2010:
I love history and i read long time ago an article saying that " All Asia belongs to Turks and Greeks came and conquered our lands our villages our homes etc . "(It was written between 1920-1925 AD) . When i finished reading that i understood how poorly educated people are because not only the Turkish nation didn't exist while Greeks were living in "their" lands but they were cultured. Milos , Smyrni, Alicarnassus, Ionia , Dwroupolis cities with many people, among them soldiers craftsmen , priests artists . All that city names remained as they were. But Constantinople was founded by Kostantinos , it was the roman capital for many years and it remained roman influenced by greek culture. The language the writing the habits the arts all were influenced by the greek civ and do you know why ? Because we are a civilized nation lived there grew there from 2000 BC. And what now a mongolian tribe lived as slaves to Arabs come here and say that is Turkish ? A nation who doesn't have more than 750 years of existence ? And the most crazy of all is that they insist to rename the city. I do not doubt your rise to power your arts your culture which is greater than any other nation in Europe and all over the world but calm down. Your capital (Ankara) was conquered by Greeks and by Persians but it never changed it name because these nations had RESPECT.It is unbelievable and i must say terrible. Now i can understand why Ancient Greeks told this " Everyone who is not Greek is Barbarian". Because of Greek civilization the world knew a great increase to sciences . (Archimedes, Aristotelis, Dimokritos, Sokratis , Platon , Praxitelis Aristophanes Euripides Eukleidis ,Thalis, etc) Search these names in Wikipedia learn their success and their help to the world and do not dare and say that any greek city any greek homeland that existed before any barbarian nation like Seljuks or all Europe of middle age is not Greek because then what you will be a unhistorical person without sense and respect.The only nation that I admire for her contribution to the world is the Arabic nation between 600-1000 AD.It's the only nation that learned from the monsters of sciences and continued their work. Turks - Christians- Crusaders burned alive almost the 95% of all the work that was occupied all the greek philosophers . Many historians and i can say also old historians ( Eric Slyman or Chadwick etc) said that if we had all the work that greek did the years between 550- 175 BC the world would knew an unbelievable increase of in all themes of life arts sciences biology etc. None has the right to touch the name of any greek city even now that the Greeks are in great problems .All of you are in debt not for Greeks , **** them the modern one sucks but for their ancestors who lived created gave and never asked for return. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

It was the Greeks who invited the Ottomans into Europe, and they who chose to submit to the Turks rather than the Latin Catholics. Remember, "Better the Turkish turban than the Papal tiara"? Greek civilization was collapsing when the Ottomans arrived, the Serbians still ruled northern Greece and Macedonia, the Latins controlled most of the mainland. If the Turks hadn't conquered you, then it would have been the Hungarians or Italians, and anyone who remembers what happened in 1204 can see why being ruled by the Ottoman Empire was far superior. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Your point is obviously good one but i prefer to be greek and not under the rule of someone that made my people suffer. Turks , Ottomans people who lived their golden age while Greece's(Byzantium) golden era finished. None said that greeks didn't fall from the Turks it should be 200 years ago but the mongols with Tamerlane attacked from behind and gave us time. Anyway our civ was collapsing while another was growing and lived its era(Ottoman Empire) .Hungarians nor Bulgars or serbia would conquer us because we use religion to calm down unexpected powers like these one or even Russia with Vladimir ! We turned them allies but they couldn't reach Bosporos because of a great blockade that Ottomans made. We were paying a tax every year to Bulgar nation and we had our view to Ottomans . So , it was obviously that Ottomans would conquer us and the Papal states or Europe never would attack us cause of " Hunder year wars " , the Vikings and the raids of the nord people . Spain knew a great rise these years in the same time with Ottomans. It was about time to collapse by the Turkish nation.

LieutenantJojo
06-13-2011, 05:59 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Grandmaster_Z:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by albertwesker22:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Grandmaster_Z:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by albertwesker22:

Troll...The game takes place in 1511, only 58 years since the city was taken by the Turks. Europeans still would have known the city as Constantinople during that time. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

58 years is a long time </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Its a long time to your life, but in terms of history its 2 minutes shorter than a blink of an eye http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

doesn't matter, things can change in an instant. 9/11/2001 was just a day, but it changed alot in the world. saying that 58 years is not alot of time is just ridiculous. but anyway, i don't really agree/disagree with the topic of this thread, i just had to respond to that post. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Did you just compare a terrorist attack with the changing of a city's name? Really?

And let's see, the city was called Constantinople for centuries, so everyone recognized it by that name. People were so used to that name that they kept referring to it when telling stories (or whatever they said about it). It's just like when your favorite soccer team, of whom you have been a fan since you were a child, suddenly changes it's name. You'll keep referring to it by it's old name. You simply do it because you were so familiar with the old name. It's an automatism. Same goes for the city's name. There was no television or radio at that time, so the news of the change didn't spread so fast and older people, who were so familiar with the old name, still referred to it as Constantinople.

Hope that helped. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Ass4ssin8me
06-13-2011, 09:47 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Pirat of Persia Warrior Muffin:
We all live in one earth. The conqueror writes history so basically is should be called Istanbul. At least in the animus. Because today its called Istanbul. How dare we? some people might ask? We pretend to know everything and deny the rules created by ourselves?

Maybe there will be one time where people can discuss peacefully and without ignorance and lives without frontier. At least we can try. Its a long way to go. Sooner or never the respect itself become more important than words.



We know one thing: everything is true nothing is permitted...

And sorry for that....

... because the earth belongs to me. Muhahaha

Its my earth and also the sun, mars, Jupiter, minerva belongs to me too and basically everything.

Help me i become a templar. :O </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Here I was thinking you were very wise and philosophical. Until I got to the end, where you said you owned the earth =P

Chamboozer
06-13-2011, 10:01 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Agalex2010:
Your point is obviously good one but i prefer to be greek and not under the rule of someone that made my people suffer. Turks , Ottomans people who lived their golden age while Greece's(Byzantium) golden era finished. None said that greeks didn't fall from the Turks it should be 200 years ago but the mongols with Tamerlane attacked from behind and gave us time. Anyway our civ was collapsing while another was growing and lived its era(Ottoman Empire) .Hungarians nor Bulgars or serbia would conquer us because we use religion to calm down unexpected powers like these one or even Russia with Vladimir ! We turned them allies but they couldn't reach Bosporos because of a great blockade that Ottomans made. We were paying a tax every year to Bulgar nation and we had our view to Ottomans . So , it was obviously that Ottomans would conquer us and the Papal states or Europe never would attack us cause of " Hunder year wars " , the Vikings and the raids of the nord people . Spain knew a great rise these years in the same time with Ottomans. It was about time to collapse by the Turkish nation. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

After 1204 it was pretty much inevitable that the Greek lands would end up conquered by a foreign power. After all, that's exactly what happened with the Latin Crusader States set up in the Greek peninsula and Thrace. Also Tamerlane didn't really slow the Ottomans down much, he merely bought you guys an extra decade. It only took 10 years for Mehmed I to win the civil war and regain all the territory that had been lost following the battle of Ankara. Serbia was in decline by the time the Ottomans got into Europe so you're right that they would not have conquered you but the Hungarians were Catholic and desired to rule all of the Balkans. They would have had no qualms about attacking the Byzantine Empire or other Greek states as they did not share your religion. Byzantine handling of the Bulgars was impressive, I'll give you that. Without skillful diplomacy it would have been they who would have taken Constanatinople (or the Arabs in 717 when the Bulgarians were coerced into saving you http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif). The western nations definately were not too heavily distracted by the Hundred Years' War, as they had the time to send two crusades against the Ottomans! If they had not been directed against the Turks, perhaps they would have been directed against you. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Agalex2010
06-13-2011, 10:44 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Chamboozer:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Agalex2010:
Your point is obviously good one but i prefer to be greek and not under the rule of someone that made my people suffer. Turks , Ottomans people who lived their golden age while Greece's(Byzantium) golden era finished. None said that greeks didn't fall from the Turks it should be 200 years ago but the mongols with Tamerlane attacked from behind and gave us time. Anyway our civ was collapsing while another was growing and lived its era(Ottoman Empire) .Hungarians nor Bulgars or serbia would conquer us because we use religion to calm down unexpected powers like these one or even Russia with Vladimir ! We turned them allies but they couldn't reach Bosporos because of a great blockade that Ottomans made. We were paying a tax every year to Bulgar nation and we had our view to Ottomans . So , it was obviously that Ottomans would conquer us and the Papal states or Europe never would attack us cause of " Hunder year wars " , the Vikings and the raids of the nord people . Spain knew a great rise these years in the same time with Ottomans. It was about time to collapse by the Turkish nation. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

After 1204 it was pretty much inevitable that the Greek lands would end up conquered by a foreign power. After all, that's exactly what happened with the Latin Crusader States set up in the Greek peninsula and Thrace. Also Tamerlane didn't really slow the Ottomans down much, he merely bought you guys an extra decade. It only took 10 years for Mehmed I to win the civil war and regain all the territory that had been lost following the battle of Ankara. Serbia was in decline by the time the Ottomans got into Europe so you're right that they would not have conquered you but the Hungarians were Catholic and desired to rule all of the Balkans. They would have had no qualms about attacking the Byzantine Empire or other Greek states as they did not share your religion. Byzantine handling of the Bulgars was impressive, I'll give you that. Without skillful diplomacy it would have been they who would have taken Constanatinople (or the Arabs in 717 when the Bulgarians were coerced into saving you http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif). The western nations definately were not too heavily distracted by the Hundred Years' War, as they had the time to send two crusades against the Ottomans! If they had not been directed against the Turks, perhaps they would have been directed against you. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Concerning Hungary the thing is that it was Bulgary between Byzantium and Hungary. If they wanted to come and conquer Constantinoupolis or any greek state they had to pass through the Bulgarian state something very difficult because Bulgary until 1911 that lost in Balkan war was a very powerful nation and showed her military and political power ! Hungary wasn't very strong enough after her defeat against Genghis Khan and the Mongols around 1214 AD.It would be a grand mistake.

Also Crusaders had as a goal to conquer non holy christian lands. Any attack against a Christian land would be a disaster because their people were Christians and they wouldn't believe such a lie from Papal states, they wouldn't accept the call! The Crusade that sacked the city of Constantinople was recalled by the pope and it was called unholy crusade after the sack of Zara in Croatia . Boniface of Montferrat, meanwhile, had left the fleet before , to visit his cousin Philip of Swabia. The reasons for his visit are a matter of debate; he may have realized the Venetians' plans and left to avoid excommunication, or he may have wanted to meet with the Byzantine prince Alexios Angelos, Philip's brother-in-law and the son of the recently deposed Byzantine emperor Isaac II Angelos. Alexios had recently fled to Philip in 1201 but it is unknown whether or not Boniface knew he was at Philip's court. There, Alexios offered 200,000 silver marks, 10,000 men to help the Crusaders, the maintenance of 500 knights in the Holy Land, the service of the Byzantine navy to transport the Crusader Army to Egypt and the placement of the Eastern Orthodox Church under the authority of the Pope if they would sail to Byzantium and topple the reigning emperor Alexios III Angelos, brother of Isaac II. It was a tempting offer for an enterprise that was short on funds. He trusted them.When the Fourth Crusade arrived at Constantinople,The Crusaders' initial motive was to restore Isaac II to the Byzantine throne so that they could receive the support that they were promised. But the promise broke and the things didn't go his way. Do not forget that the Latin states didn't hold too much and they didn't had a big organization.That's why Michael Paleologus with an army of 1000 cavalry was sent to scout the area and recaptured Constantinople in 1261 without any try! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Chamboozer
06-14-2011, 12:54 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Agalex2010:
Concerning Hungary the thing is that it was Bulgary between Byzantium and Hungary. If they wanted to come and conquer Constantinoupolis or any greek state they had to pass through the Bulgarian state something very difficult because Bulgary until 1911 that lost in Balkan war was a very powerful nation and showed her military and political power ! Hungary wasn't very strong enough after her defeat against Genghis Khan and the Mongols around 1214 AD.It would be a grand mistake.

Also Crusaders had as a goal to conquer non holy christian lands. Any attack against a Christian land would be a disaster because their people were Christians and they wouldn't believe such a lie from Papal states, they wouldn't accept the call! The Crusade that sacked the city of Constantinople was recalled by the pope and it was called unholy crusade after the sack of Zara in Croatia . Boniface of Montferrat, meanwhile, had left the fleet before , to visit his cousin Philip of Swabia. The reasons for his visit are a matter of debate; he may have realized the Venetians' plans and left to avoid excommunication, or he may have wanted to meet with the Byzantine prince Alexios Angelos, Philip's brother-in-law and the son of the recently deposed Byzantine emperor Isaac II Angelos. Alexios had recently fled to Philip in 1201 but it is unknown whether or not Boniface knew he was at Philip's court. There, Alexios offered 200,000 silver marks, 10,000 men to help the Crusaders, the maintenance of 500 knights in the Holy Land, the service of the Byzantine navy to transport the Crusader Army to Egypt and the placement of the Eastern Orthodox Church under the authority of the Pope if they would sail to Byzantium and topple the reigning emperor Alexios III Angelos, brother of Isaac II. It was a tempting offer for an enterprise that was short on funds. He trusted them.When the Fourth Crusade arrived at Constantinople,The Crusaders' initial motive was to restore Isaac II to the Byzantine throne so that they could receive the support that they were promised. But the promise broke and the things didn't go his way. Do not forget that the Latin states didn't hold too much and they didn't had a big organization.That's why Michael Paleologus with an army of 1000 cavalry was sent to scout the area and recaptured Constantinople in 1261 without any try! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

At the time of the Ottoman entry into Europe the Bulgarians were in the midst of a devastating three-way civil war. This is part of the reason why the Ottomans were so successful in taking over the region. Quite simply there was a great vaccum of power in the southern Balkans by that time which would most definately have been filled by a non-greek power, if not the Turks than someone else. If the Hungarians had been more successful in forcing their dominion upon the danubian principalities (Wallachia & Moldavia) then it is doubtful that the Bulgarians would have been able to resist either. Where would that leave Byzantium, weak and surrounded by the Catholic powers, Hungary from the north & Venice from the south? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif Far from being weak, the middle of the 14th Century is considered to be a Hungarian golden age, as the administration was centralized & more power delegated to the Monarchy, especially under Louis I. The reason they did not conquer the Balkans is because most Hungarian campaigns were directed north against Poland and Lithuania.

I agree that a large-scale western European attack on the Byzantines would be unlikely, but lacking that they would still have to contend with the Venetian & Genoan stranglehold on their economy. Genoa controlled most trade in the Black Sea and through the Bosphorus (They controlled the trading post of Galata across the Golden Horn from Constantinople) and the Venetians dominated the Eastern Mediterranean trade in general.

Basically, even without a Turkish invasion of Europe, the Byzantine Empire was completely and utterly doomed after the Fourth Crusade. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

AEKTZIS_1921
06-14-2011, 05:54 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Turkiye96:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by AEKTZIS_1921:
? ??????? ?? ?? ????????, ????? ??? ????? ?? ????!

?????????? ??? ??????? ????? ? ????????????????!

???? ?? ?????? ?? ??????? ???? ????? ??? ?? '???! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

haha :P thats funny, Athens is the capital of greece not Istanbul :P u need a geography lesson!

when u can read greek... GOOGLE TRANSLATE!!! :P </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

ante kai gamisou re kolotourko find that on your google translate poustaki

???????? ???? ????... ???????? ???, ???? 40 ??????... ??????? & ??????

LieutenantJojo
06-14-2011, 06:25 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by AEKTZIS_1921:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Turkiye96:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by AEKTZIS_1921:
? ??????? ?? ?? ????????, ????? ??? ????? ?? ????!

?????????? ??? ??????? ????? ? ????????????????!

???? ?? ?????? ?? ??????? ???? ????? ??? ?? '???! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

haha :P thats funny, Athens is the capital of greece not Istanbul :P u need a geography lesson!

when u can read greek... GOOGLE TRANSLATE!!! :P </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

ante kai gamisou re kolotourko find that on your google translate poustaki

???????? ???? ????... ???????? ???, ???? 40 ??????... ??????? & ?????? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

How 'bout you try talking english? Practically no one understands what you are saying. And please tell me (in english if you will) that you didn't just say that Istanbul is the capital of Greece...

BLooDLineS666
06-14-2011, 12:19 PM
@Agalex2010
So you think ancient Greeks were the only ones that expertised in the most important branches of art, science etc?

Mic_92
06-14-2011, 12:27 PM
Oh my god...Get over it.

Turkiye96
06-14-2011, 01:55 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Agalex2010:
I love history and i read long time ago an article saying that " All Asia belongs to Turks and Greeks came and conquered our lands our villages our homes etc . "(It was written between 1920-1925 AD) . When i finished reading that i understood how poorly educated people are because not only the Turkish nation didn't exist while Greeks were living in "their" lands but they were cultured. Milos , Smyrni, Alicarnassus, Ionia , Dwroupolis cities with many people, among them soldiers craftsmen , priests artists . All that city names remained as they were. But Constantinople was founded by Kostantinos , it was the roman capital for many years and it remained roman influenced by greek culture. The language the writing the habits the arts all were influenced by the greek civ and do you know why ? Because we are a civilized nation lived there grew there from 2000 BC. And what now a mongolian tribe lived as slaves to Arabs come here and say that is Turkish ? A nation who doesn't have more than 750 years of existence ? And the most crazy of all is that they insist to rename the city. I do not doubt your rise to power your arts your culture which is greater than any other nation in Europe and all over the world but calm down. Your capital (Ankara) was conquered by Greeks and by Persians but it never changed it name because these nations had RESPECT.It is unbelievable and i must say terrible. Now i can understand why Ancient Greeks told this " Everyone who is not Greek is Barbarian". Because of Greek civilization the world knew a great increase to sciences . (Archimedes, Aristotelis, Dimokritos, Sokratis , Platon , Praxitelis Aristophanes Euripides Eukleidis ,Thalis, etc) Search these names in Wikipedia learn their success and their help to the world and do not dare and say that any greek city any greek homeland that existed before any barbarian nation like Seljuks or all Europe of middle age is not Greek because then what you will be a unhistorical person without sense and respect.The only nation that I admire for her contribution to the world is the Arabic nation between 600-1000 AD.It's the only nation that learned from the monsters of sciences and continued their work. Turks - Christians- Crusaders burned alive almost the 95% of all the work that was occupied all the greek philosophers . Many historians and i can say also old historians ( Eric Slyman or Chadwick etc) said that if we had all the work that greek did the years between 550- 175 BC the world would knew an unbelievable increase of in all themes of life arts sciences biology etc. None has the right to touch the name of any greek city even now that the Greeks are in great problems .All of you are in debt not for Greeks , **** them the modern one sucks but for their ancestors who lived created gave and never asked for return. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

i dont think you are being racist but maybe just need to know some things Firstly Turks were NEVER slaves to anybody historically. Also you refere to the Turks currently taking over Constantinople but this was like over 500 years ago! also Turks are n?t Mongolian but Turkic though the mistake is relatable as there are similarities. Yes They was a LOT of Greek culture in Constantinople but ever since 1453 it has been declining and so current day Istanbul is very different culturally. Also it is understandable that the City was dubbed Istanbul after the Fall of Constantinople as the City was totally changed! it was made soo much more powerfull and vibrant as the Capital. Also you said ''calm down'' but we are not hostile against these ideas... you on the otherhand might wana take a chill pill :P and when you say our capital (Ankara) was conquered are you refering to after the First world war as Ankara was the Capital after we took our lands back as Istanbul was the current capital and was turkish territory at the time. Also you are saying that just because a nation is not as old as another it is less i÷portant which is very false. If you were right this would mean America would be one of the least important countries in the world which it it not. And just i think you have the right to call Turks and every other nation barbaric... do you know why? because the Turks waged war and conquered land, both of which are considered barbaric acts and so did EVEY other nation but you do not have the right to say that greeks were not barbaric as they have waged war and conquered too, so Greece is no better than any other country in that aspect. Also you imply that the Turks didn't have respect by changing the name of the city when Greece and Persia took Ankara they didn't change it. BUT the Ottomans resected the people only sacking the settlement for 3 days and a bunch of people in the city flocked to the turks which the turks actually protected them and then totally changing the city in such a way that its population was increased a lot! and look i am a historical person and have respect for some Greeks ( those who dont disrespect Turks) but no land in Current day Turkey is Greek. let me explain. the Altay mountains are the ''motherland'' of the Turks yet they are based on the edge of Mongolia's borders. They are NOT Turkish lands... as the Mongolians came and conquered that land as most of the people had migrated west. All that can be said about those lands are that they USED to be Turk but NOW IS Mongolia.and so the same rule applies. All lands that the Turks took from the Greeks IS turk but WAS greek. also turkish people have been living in those lands for centuries becoming more established while greeks used to live there but as they moved they lost their cultural establishment in those areas.
but i respect your appriciation for history :P just wondering but why dont you like current day Greeks?

Turkiye96
06-14-2011, 02:38 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Agalex2010:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Chamboozer:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Agalex2010:
I love history and i read long time ago an article saying that " All Asia belongs to Turks and Greeks came and conquered our lands our villages our homes etc . "(It was written between 1920-1925 AD) . When i finished reading that i understood how poorly educated people are because not only the Turkish nation didn't exist while Greeks were living in "their" lands but they were cultured. Milos , Smyrni, Alicarnassus, Ionia , Dwroupolis cities with many people, among them soldiers craftsmen , priests artists . All that city names remained as they were. But Constantinople was founded by Kostantinos , it was the roman capital for many years and it remained roman influenced by greek culture. The language the writing the habits the arts all were influenced by the greek civ and do you know why ? Because we are a civilized nation lived there grew there from 2000 BC. And what now a mongolian tribe lived as slaves to Arabs come here and say that is Turkish ? A nation who doesn't have more than 750 years of existence ? And the most crazy of all is that they insist to rename the city. I do not doubt your rise to power your arts your culture which is greater than any other nation in Europe and all over the world but calm down. Your capital (Ankara) was conquered by Greeks and by Persians but it never changed it name because these nations had RESPECT.It is unbelievable and i must say terrible. Now i can understand why Ancient Greeks told this " Everyone who is not Greek is Barbarian". Because of Greek civilization the world knew a great increase to sciences . (Archimedes, Aristotelis, Dimokritos, Sokratis , Platon , Praxitelis Aristophanes Euripides Eukleidis ,Thalis, etc) Search these names in Wikipedia learn their success and their help to the world and do not dare and say that any greek city any greek homeland that existed before any barbarian nation like Seljuks or all Europe of middle age is not Greek because then what you will be a unhistorical person without sense and respect.The only nation that I admire for her contribution to the world is the Arabic nation between 600-1000 AD.It's the only nation that learned from the monsters of sciences and continued their work. Turks - Christians- Crusaders burned alive almost the 95% of all the work that was occupied all the greek philosophers . Many historians and i can say also old historians ( Eric Slyman or Chadwick etc) said that if we had all the work that greek did the years between 550- 175 BC the world would knew an unbelievable increase of in all themes of life arts sciences biology etc. None has the right to touch the name of any greek city even now that the Greeks are in great problems .All of you are in debt not for Greeks , **** them the modern one sucks but for their ancestors who lived created gave and never asked for return. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

It was the Greeks who invited the Ottomans into Europe, and they who chose to submit to the Turks rather than the Latin Catholics. Remember, "Better the Turkish turban than the Papal tiara"? Greek civilization was collapsing when the Ottomans arrived, the Serbians still ruled northern Greece and Macedonia, the Latins controlled most of the mainland. If the Turks hadn't conquered you, then it would have been the Hungarians or Italians, and anyone who remembers what happened in 1204 can see why being ruled by the Ottoman Empire was far superior. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Your point is obviously good one but i prefer to be greek and not under the rule of someone that made my people suffer. Turks , Ottomans people who lived their golden age while Greece's(Byzantium) golden era finished. None said that greeks didn't fall from the Turks it should be 200 years ago but the mongols with Tamerlane attacked from behind and gave us time. Anyway our civ was collapsing while another was growing and lived its era(Ottoman Empire) .Hungarians nor Bulgars or serbia would conquer us because we use religion to calm down unexpected powers like these one or even Russia with Vladimir ! We turned them allies but they couldn't reach Bosporos because of a great blockade that Ottomans made. We were paying a tax every year to Bulgar nation and we had our view to Ottomans . So , it was obviously that Ottomans would conquer us and the Papal states or Europe never would attack us cause of " Hunder year wars " , the Vikings and the raids of the nord people . Spain knew a great rise these years in the same time with Ottomans. It was about time to collapse by the Turkish nation. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
thats very ture The Byzantines even tried to stop the Ottomans by offering money gifts and even the princess... but that just made them stronger and Fatih Sultan Mehmet 's mother or grandmother was that princess so he claimed the title of cesear (nobody was there to oppose him)but nobody listened as most of catholic europe hated us :/

AEKTZIS_1921
06-14-2011, 03:15 PM
yea reason why turkey doesnt have greeks is due to genocide which turkey still refuse to recognize.


turks are responsible for the Greek, Armenian and Assyrian genocides...i guess the whole turkish rulers were considerate and tolerant towards others kinda doesnt fit the picture.

AEKTZIS_1921
06-14-2011, 03:17 PM
kolo mounia gamw thn ankara o ellhnas gamaei kai ton allah

Turkiye96
06-14-2011, 03:25 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LieutenantJojo:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Grandmaster_Z:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by albertwesker22:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Grandmaster_Z:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by albertwesker22:

Troll...The game takes place in 1511, only 58 years since the city was taken by the Turks. Europeans still would have known the city as Constantinople during that time. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

58 years is a long time </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Its a long time to your life, but in terms of history its 2 minutes shorter than a blink of an eye http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

doesn't matter, things can change in an instant. 9/11/2001 was just a day, but it changed alot in the world. saying that 58 years is not alot of time is just ridiculous. but anyway, i don't really agree/disagree with the topic of this thread, i just had to respond to that post. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Did you just compare a terrorist attack with the changing of a city's name? Really?

And let's see, the city was called Constantinople for centuries, so everyone recognized it by that name. People were so used to that name that they kept referring to it when telling stories (or whatever they said about it). It's just like when your favorite soccer team, of whom you have been a fan since you were a child, suddenly changes it's name. You'll keep referring to it by it's old name. You simply do it because you were so familiar with the old name. It's an automatism. Same goes for the city's name. There was no television or radio at that time, so the news of the change didn't spread so fast and older people, who were so familiar with the old name, still referred to it as Constantinople.

Hope that helped. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

you are right about the automatism ( also people refused to call it Istanbul to stick up to the Ottomans but it has ended since 1970 and for Desmond to get current day references just as the Animus translates language for desmond to understand the name should be Istanbul also

Are you saying not many people knew that Constantinople was called Istanbul in 1511? BULL ****

1. The Fall of constantinople Signified the end of a huge famous empire, do you relly think europe would not hear about the end of the empire the catupre and renaming of the city?

2.People were calling it Istanbul since the 11th century so 450 years before it was actually named Istanbul, so if 58 years wasn't enough for you.. :P so thats over 500 year! half a millenia for it to spread... even though things got around slow back then everybody would have heard it by 1511

3. the AC franchise said Istanbul at that time was the centre of the world back then. even said to be the New York of its time! it was very important and so news like '' the Ottomans have taken Constantinople and named it Istanbul'' would spread very quickly and be vitale to a lot of people as it was a very important trading area.

So people definatly knew it was called Istanbul but didn't use it a lot.

4. ok when ''Istanbul'' was used before it was officially tooken and dubbed Istanbul, it was an unofficial slang like term... BUT when it was tooken over and dubbed Istanbul ( definition of dubbed means to name so if the Sultan, leader of a whole empire names HIS OWN city, thats pretty official, atleast for those time) constantinople became the unofficial slang like term for the place as Istanbul was its actual name. this is why historical acconts say that officials ( like high classes and the roal ottoman family would call it Istanbul while the less educated ones would call it constantinople.

so it should be called Istanbul in the animus, officials should call it Istanbul but the poor uneducated civilians should call it constantinople. ( seeing as Ezio is well educated and established, id say it would be more historically accurate for his to call it Istanbul)

AEKTZIS_1921
06-14-2011, 03:49 PM
no in fact instabul is the slang name for Konstantinoupoli....meaning "to the city" so why would people who are educated refer to the city as its slang name as opposed to its actual name.

its like using the big apple instead of new york in a historical context which wouldn't make sense

"like high classes and the roal ottoman family would call it Istanbul while the less educated ones would call it constantinople"

so your basically saying that turks would refer to it as instabul and the "less educated" as Konstantinoupoli...tell me who r u referring to as less educated in this context...because there were many poor Byzantines who prior to being taken over were well educated...would they refer to it as instanbul or Konstantinoupoli

Chamboozer
06-14-2011, 03:50 PM
Everything I've ever seen says that Istanbul (related to 'To the City' in Greek) has been nothing more than a slang term before it became the official name proclaimed by Kemal AtatŘrk. In 1453 the name 'Constantinople' held all the trappings of its imperial past and that was what Mehmed al-Fatih wanted to attach himself to, hence him calling himself the Caesar of Rome. Every source I've seen has stated that the city was known by everyone as Constantinople up until its official renaming following the end of the Ottoman Empire.

Basically calling it Istanbul in 1511 would be like calling New York 'The Big Apple'. It's slang. It would fit in normal conversation but it's not the official name of the city. Other Turkish cities that got renamed upon conquest like Edirne (Adrianople) and Ankara (Ancyra) did not need an official renaming upon the proclaimation of the Turkish Republic, why would Istanbul? The reason, clearly, was that the city was still known by most as Constantinople, even in the 20th Century.

Edit: Wow, I'm amazed. The guy above me posted at the same time and we both somehow used the same analogy with New York... strange.

Turkiye96
06-14-2011, 03:55 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by AEKTZIS_1921:
yea reason why turkey doesnt have greeks is due to genocide which turkey still refuse to recognize.


turks are responsible for the Greek, Armenian and Assyrian genocides...i guess the whole turkish rulers were considerate and tolerant towards others kinda doesnt fit the picture. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

ok dude now you are getting into deep waters...

1. a have little information about the assyrian CLAIM of genoside.

2. It seems you do not understant the definition of a war. The Turks and the Greeks were AT WAR WITH EACH OTHER just because the Greeks died a lot in battle doesn't mean the Turks tried to Fully kill the greeks, thats just stupid of you to accuse a country of such acts without knowing the basic details. Its WAR just because people die in a war doesn't maen u can call genoside on the other... just just pathetic!

3. While we were at war with the russians ( they didn't call for genoside...) the Kurds turnned on us and many kurds all over the country were killing turks so to protect us we exiled them from out lands ( what would you do? ) AND FULLY PAYED THEM FOR EVERY CENT TO PAY FOR THEIR HOMES!!! the reason they the turks are described as cruel when sending them out of the country is that the kurds were bad to the turk on the journey.

Seriously though... i am begging you to stop it right here.. do not continue about the genosides as it is very controversial and very insulting to turks! how would you feel if somebody said you killed an innocent and you didnt? pretty angrry so i advise you tos top right here!

turks are considerate to people places they have captured, not people who try to kill them...

Chamboozer
06-14-2011, 03:59 PM
It's a little weird how this guy can claim that there was a genocide against Greeks when in 1919 they invaded Turkey purely to satisfy their imperialist ambitions, burned Izmir to the ground, and then got upset when they found conquering Turkey wasn't as easy as they imagined. XD

At least the claims of the Armenian genocide are somewhat plausible, but a genocide of the Greeks? That makes no sense at all.

If anyone wants an example of just how great the Ottoman Empire was for minorities, just look at what happened to the Spanish Jews, kicked out of Spain by Ferdinand & Isabella and their posessions stolen, the Ottomans then freely gave them homes to live in in their country. European Jews in the 16th Century famously stated that the Ottoman Empire was the best place to live as a Jew and tried to encourage migration.

Turkiye96
06-14-2011, 04:13 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by AEKTZIS_1921:
no in fact instabul is the slang name for Konstantinoupoli....meaning "to the city" so why would people who are educated refer to the city as its slang name as opposed to its actual name.

its like using the big apple instead of new york in a historical context which wouldn't make sense

"like high classes and the roal ottoman family would call it Istanbul while the less educated ones would call it constantinople"

so your basically saying that turks would refer to it as instabul and the "less educated" as Konstantinoupoli...tell me who r u referring to as less educated in this context...because there were many poor Byzantines who prior to being taken over were well educated...would they refer to it as instanbul or Konstantinoupoli </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

first i was talking about the less educated public of Istanbul ( im guessing mainly turks and greeks and many other people)while the higher classes (im guessing mainly turks and greeks and many other people) would call it Istanbul

and thats wrong its nothing like calling New York the big apple! whe the sultan of an empire names its own city that is pretty official... (for those times) Also HISTORICAL ACCOUNTS say that officials would use Istanbul not Constantinople, while the word ''Istanbul'' was slang... UNT?L 1453 when it was renamed by the owners whe could name it whatever they wanted also places but people used constantinople (outside of Istanbul) because as said its automatism.
and yes Chamboozer, you are right but in part, people refered to it as Constantinople BUT also know that it was dubbed the the owned as Istanbul

I am tired why do people insist on saying A country cant name its own cities? thats like London having to be changed to warsaw just because i ( a non important person in this dession) said so...

Turkiye96
06-14-2011, 04:21 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Chamboozer:
It's a little weird how this guy can claim that there was a genocide against Greeks when in 1919 they invaded Turkey purely to satisfy their imperialist ambitions, burned Izmir to the ground, and then got upset when they found conquering Turkey wasn't as easy as they imagined. XD

At least the claims of the Armenian genocide are somewhat plausible, but a genocide of the Greeks? That makes no sense at all.

If anyone wants an example of just how great the Ottoman Empire was for minorities, just look at what happened to the Spanish Jews, kicked out of Spain by Ferdinand & Isabella and their posessions stolen, the Ottomans then freely gave them homes to live in in their country. European Jews in the 16th Century famously stated that the Ottoman Empire was the best place to live as a Jew and tried to encourage migration. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

hahaha :P thats funny :P i think i heard about it, the turks got an army ready to take it back so the greeks set fire to Izmir ( in the jolly good spirit of ''if i cant have it nobody can!'') and ran away

Chamboozer
06-14-2011, 04:30 PM
I've gone back and I see now that you're more correct about the name than I had thought. I quote from one of my books,

"The city's Byzantine name, rendered in Turkish as Kostantiniyye, continued to be used alongside the newer 'Istanbul'. Istanbul was punningly rendered as 'Islambol', 'abounding with Islam', and also called Asitane-i Saadet, the 'Threshold of Felicity, or Dersaadet, the 'Abode of Felicity', among other names."

It explains in a footnote that 'Istanbul' was used mainly to describe the downtown areas, outside of the walls, and 'Constantinople' continued to refer to the areas inside the walls and especially to the area near the Topkap? Palace and Aya Sofya. 'Islambol' was coined by Mehmed II as a joke during one of the calls to prayer on May 30 1453.

AEKTZIS_1921
06-14-2011, 05:10 PM
there was no greek genocide you say??

MEMORIES FROM TURKEY - PONTIAN GENOCIDE

Documents From the New York Times By EDWIN I. JAMES. Copyright, 1922 by The New York Times Company

"Lord Curzon then said that he wished to give some statistics in order that there might be a clear idea what was at stake. He said that figures from American sources showed that before 1914 there were 1,600,000 Greeks in Anatolia. Between 1914 and 1918 300,000 died, left the country or otherwise disappeared. Between 1919 and 1922 another 200,00 left Anatolia or disappeared. In September and October of this year another reduction of 500,000 took place leaving now 500,000 or
600,000 Greeks in Anatolia, most of whom were males between 15 and 60, to whom the Turks had refused permission to leave."

"Lord Curzon said that there had been 300,000 Greeks in Constantipole, most of whom were still there, 320,000 Greeks in Eastern Thrace, some of whose families had been there for a thousand years and more, all had fled before the dread of the Turks, leaving desert areas behind them."

"Is this to be the end of the Christian minorities in Asia Minor that land where, thirteen centuries and more before the Turk came first to rule it, Paul had journeyed as a missionary through its length and breadth, and where the first "seven churches that are in Asia stood," to which the messages written in the Book of Revelation were sent?"

"do not continue about the genosides as it is very controversial and very insulting to turks"

and what about my great grandfather who was from Pontos living in Konstantinoupoli and was killed by turks for no reason? isnt that insulting towards me and my whole family??


"Greeks when in 1919 they invaded Turkey purely to satisfy their imperialist ambitions."

ok so your telling me they had no right to claim back lost land in 1919 but if they did so a couple of years after the fall of Konstantinoupoli it would be acceptable? and what during the Greek revolution were the Greeks not meant to get rid of the turkish rule upon them as it would satisfy their imperialist ambitions?

LieutenantJojo
06-14-2011, 05:16 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Turkiye96:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LieutenantJojo:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Grandmaster_Z:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by albertwesker22:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Grandmaster_Z:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by albertwesker22:

Troll...The game takes place in 1511, only 58 years since the city was taken by the Turks. Europeans still would have known the city as Constantinople during that time. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

58 years is a long time </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Its a long time to your life, but in terms of history its 2 minutes shorter than a blink of an eye http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

doesn't matter, things can change in an instant. 9/11/2001 was just a day, but it changed alot in the world. saying that 58 years is not alot of time is just ridiculous. but anyway, i don't really agree/disagree with the topic of this thread, i just had to respond to that post. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Did you just compare a terrorist attack with the changing of a city's name? Really?

And let's see, the city was called Constantinople for centuries, so everyone recognized it by that name. People were so used to that name that they kept referring to it when telling stories (or whatever they said about it). It's just like when your favorite soccer team, of whom you have been a fan since you were a child, suddenly changes it's name. You'll keep referring to it by it's old name. You simply do it because you were so familiar with the old name. It's an automatism. Same goes for the city's name. There was no television or radio at that time, so the news of the change didn't spread so fast and older people, who were so familiar with the old name, still referred to it as Constantinople.

Hope that helped. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

you are right about the automatism ( also people refused to call it Istanbul to stick up to the Ottomans but it has ended since 1970 and for Desmond to get current day references just as the Animus translates language for desmond to understand the name should be Istanbul also

Are you saying not many people knew that Constantinople was called Istanbul in 1511? BULL ****

1. The Fall of constantinople Signified the end of a huge famous empire, do you relly think europe would not hear about the end of the empire the catupre and renaming of the city?

2.People were calling it Istanbul since the 11th century so 450 years before it was actually named Istanbul, so if 58 years wasn't enough for you.. :P so thats over 500 year! half a millenia for it to spread... even though things got around slow back then everybody would have heard it by 1511

3. the AC franchise said Istanbul at that time was the centre of the world back then. even said to be the New York of its time! it was very important and so news like '' the Ottomans have taken Constantinople and named it Istanbul'' would spread very quickly and be vitale to a lot of people as it was a very important trading area.

So people definatly knew it was called Istanbul but didn't use it a lot.

4. ok when ''Istanbul'' was used before it was officially tooken and dubbed Istanbul, it was an unofficial slang like term... BUT when it was tooken over and dubbed Istanbul ( definition of dubbed means to name so if the Sultan, leader of a whole empire names HIS OWN city, thats pretty official, atleast for those time) constantinople became the unofficial slang like term for the place as Istanbul was its actual name. this is why historical acconts say that officials ( like high classes and the roal ottoman family would call it Istanbul while the less educated ones would call it constantinople.

so it should be called Istanbul in the animus, officials should call it Istanbul but the poor uneducated civilians should call it constantinople. ( seeing as Ezio is well educated and established, id say it would be more historically accurate for his to call it Istanbul) </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes, they would know Constantinople was conquered, but the city was already called Istanbul by some people, while it was still officially called Constantinople at that time, so people didn't think it was that big of a deal that more people started calling it Istanbul after that, I guess...

AEKTZIS_1921
06-14-2011, 05:17 PM
hahaha :P thats funny :P i think i heard about it, the turks got an army ready to take it back so the greeks set fire to Izmir ( in the jolly good spirit of ''if i cant have it nobody can!'') and ran away[/QUOTE]

"I could plainly see the Turks carrying the tins of petroleum into the houses, from which, in each instance, fire burst forth immediately afterward. There was not an Armenian in sight, the only persons visible being Turkish soldiers of the regular army in smart uniforms."

think your both wrong in your reference of the burning of Smyrna

Chamboozer
06-14-2011, 05:25 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by AEKTZIS_1921:
there was no greek genocide you say??

MEMORIES FROM TURKEY - PONTIAN GENOCIDE

Documents From the New York Times By EDWIN I. JAMES. Copyright, 1922 by The New York Times Company

"Lord Curzon then said that he wished to give some statistics in order that there might be a clear idea what was at stake. He said that figures from American sources showed that before 1914 there were 1,600,000 Greeks in Anatolia. Between 1914 and 1918 300,000 died, left the country or otherwise disappeared. Between 1919 and 1922 another 200,00 left Anatolia or disappeared. In September and October of this year another reduction of 500,000 took place leaving now 500,000 or
600,000 Greeks in Anatolia, most of whom were males between 15 and 60, to whom the Turks had refused permission to leave."

"Lord Curzon said that there had been 300,000 Greeks in Constantipole, most of whom were still there, 320,000 Greeks in Eastern Thrace, some of whose families had been there for a thousand years and more, all had fled before the dread of the Turks, leaving desert areas behind them."

"Is this to be the end of the Christian minorities in Asia Minor that land where, thirteen centuries and more before the Turk came first to rule it, Paul had journeyed as a missionary through its length and breadth, and where the first "seven churches that are in Asia stood," to which the messages written in the Book of Revelation were sent?"

"do not continue about the genosides as it is very controversial and very insulting to turks"

and what about my great grandfather who was from Pontos living in Konstantinoupoli and was killed by turks for no reason? isnt that insulting towards me and my whole family??


"Greeks when in 1919 they invaded Turkey purely to satisfy their imperialist ambitions."

ok so your telling me they had no right to claim back lost land in 1919 but if they did so a couple of years after the fall of Konstantinoupoli it would be acceptable? and what during the Greek revolution were the Greeks not meant to get rid of the turkish rule upon them as it would satisfy their imperialist ambitions? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Lord Curzon was a member of the British government, a country which was at war with the Ottomans just prior to the publishing of that article. Do you really think that he is a reliable source for anything on that matter? Of course he would like to slander Turkey's international image. Greece itself does not recognize that there was ever a genocide of the Greeks.

Yes, the Greeks had no right to invade Anatolia in 1919. It was Turkish land under Turkish sovereignty inhabited by Turkish people. The Greeks had no legitimate claim to the area, their claims to Anatolia based on the fact that it used to belong to Greeks were as valid as Italian claims on Greece based on the fact that it used to belong to the Romans. That is not valid at all.

In 1453 the Greeks had every right to fight for their land, and during the war for independance in the 19th Century they also had that right. But defending one's homeland is not the same as invading another country.

AEKTZIS_1921
06-14-2011, 09:10 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Chamboozer:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by AEKTZIS_1921:
there was no greek genocide you say??

MEMORIES FROM TURKEY - PONTIAN GENOCIDE

Documents From the New York Times By EDWIN I. JAMES. Copyright, 1922 by The New York Times Company

"Lord Curzon then said that he wished to give some statistics in order that there might be a clear idea what was at stake. He said that figures from American sources showed that before 1914 there were 1,600,000 Greeks in Anatolia. Between 1914 and 1918 300,000 died, left the country or otherwise disappeared. Between 1919 and 1922 another 200,00 left Anatolia or disappeared. In September and October of this year another reduction of 500,000 took place leaving now 500,000 or
600,000 Greeks in Anatolia, most of whom were males between 15 and 60, to whom the Turks had refused permission to leave."

"Lord Curzon said that there had been 300,000 Greeks in Constantipole, most of whom were still there, 320,000 Greeks in Eastern Thrace, some of whose families had been there for a thousand years and more, all had fled before the dread of the Turks, leaving desert areas behind them."

"Is this to be the end of the Christian minorities in Asia Minor that land where, thirteen centuries and more before the Turk came first to rule it, Paul had journeyed as a missionary through its length and breadth, and where the first "seven churches that are in Asia stood," to which the messages written in the Book of Revelation were sent?"

"do not continue about the genosides as it is very controversial and very insulting to turks"

and what about my great grandfather who was from Pontos living in Konstantinoupoli and was killed by turks for no reason? isnt that insulting towards me and my whole family??


"Greeks when in 1919 they invaded Turkey purely to satisfy their imperialist ambitions."

ok so your telling me they had no right to claim back lost land in 1919 but if they did so a couple of years after the fall of Konstantinoupoli it would be acceptable? and what during the Greek revolution were the Greeks not meant to get rid of the turkish rule upon them as it would satisfy their imperialist ambitions? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Lord Curzon was a member of the British government, a country which was at war with the Ottomans just prior to the publishing of that article. Do you really think that he is a reliable source for anything on that matter? Of course he would like to slander Turkey's international image. Greece itself does not recognize that there was ever a genocide of the Greeks.

Yes, the Greeks had no right to invade Anatolia in 1919. It was Turkish land under Turkish sovereignty inhabited by Turkish people. The Greeks had no legitimate claim to the area, their claims to Anatolia based on the fact that it used to belong to Greeks were as valid as Italian claims on Greece based on the fact that it used to belong to the Romans. That is not valid at all.

In 1453 the Greeks had every right to fight for their land, and during the war for independance in the 19th Century they also had that right. But defending one's homeland is not the same as invading another country. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Greece does recognize a genocide committed by Turks on its people thats why the 19th of May is a national day of mourning for those that died.

in terms of the genocide why would the turks only commit a genocide against the Assyrians and the Armenians at the same time and not the Greeks since they all lived in turkey and were the minorities. in relation to the article it is from the New York Times 1922 and quotes the American figures in regards to the population of the Greeks during that period and the decrease in numbers through death or exile by the turks. Dont know about you but most newspapers are considered historical account of events thus it is legitimate.

so in response defending one's homeland is not the same as invading another country. what about the ottomans in the first place.....they INVADED!! therefore Greece did have a claim to retake what was hers plus the Greeks of Smyrna, Pontos, Trapezounta etc were all under the turks....so why couldn't they be liberated just like the mainland Greeks of the Peloponnese?

so what you are saying is that it is ok for turkey to invade Konstantinoupoli and take take the rest of Greece. though you are for the Greek Independence. However against Greece trying to get back Konstantinoupoli and against the Greeks of turkey to have their own independence?

wild accusations mate

Chamboozer
06-14-2011, 10:15 PM
Just because a group of people once owned land doesn't mean that they forever have a claim to that area. By your own logic, the Turks have the right to invade Greece right now because their ancestors once ruled that area. Morality as it relates to the conquest of land did not work the same in the middle ages as it does now. It doesn't matter whether or not what the Ottomans did in 1453 was morally correct, because there was no common moral order governing the world as there is nowadays. If modern day Turkey invaded Greece, I would condemn it just as I condemn the Greek invasion of Turkey of which we speak.

Just because it's a newspaper doesn't mean it's a reliable source. It's not like God himself wrote the article, it was made by a man with his own agenda and his own biases. You can't just accept everything that was written in the past as true simply because it was written in the past. It's circular logic.

The Anatolian territories you seem to think should be owned by Greece are in fact inhabited mostly by Turks and have been for centuries. Before the population exchange there were hundreds of thousands of Turks living in Greece, if the Greeks had the right to invade to conquer those parts of Turkey then Turkey would also have the right to invade Greece, no? you can see why this type of logic is unreasonable, and it is why there was a great population exchange so militaristic people on both sides could not start wars over the issue.

There was no genocide of the Greeks because they as a minority did not threaten the Ottoman State. Greece did not border the Ottoman Empire nor was it powerful enough to invade and thus there were no real fears that the minorities would assist any invasion force. However the Armenians in the east were directly helping the Russian invasion and thus caused the Ottoman high command to make the unfortunate decision to deport many of them (or worse, according to some people). The reason for the 'reductions' in Greek population during wartime is simple. People would not want to identify themselves with an enemy nation and thus many Greeks simply claimed that they were Turks when the census came around. The true number of Greeks did not actually decrease by all that much.

AEKTZIS_1921
06-14-2011, 11:05 PM
you mentioned that turks have been living in turkey for many centuries? how can this be? were turks living in turkey when alexander the great went by there? were their turks in pontos since 4th century BC? when Homer was born in Anatolia were turks there...no they were back in mongolia or turkmenistan.

here you go historical accounts from turkish prime minister and german officials regarding the extermination of Greek Orthodox Christians:

AUSTRIAN AND GERMAN ARCHIVES

24 July 1909 German Ambassador in Athens Wangenheim to Chancellor
Below quoting Turkish Prime Minister Sefker Pasha: "The Turks have
decided upon a war of extermination against their Christian subjects."

26 July 1909 Sefker Pasha visited Patriarch Ioakeim III and tells him:
"we will cut off your heads, we will make you disappear. It is either
you or us who will survive."

31 July 1915 German priest J. Lepsius: "The anti-Greek and
anti-Armenian persecutions are two phases of one programme - the
extermination of the Christian element from Turkey.

16 July 1916 German Consul Kuchhoff from Amisos to Berlin: "The entire
Greek population of Sinope and the coastal region of the county of
Kastanome has been exiled. Exile and extermination in Turkish are the
same, for whoever is not murdered, will die from hunger or illness."

so its alright for turkey to get away with a genocide which people still are reluctant to recognize than Greece trying to take back its lost lands and this was supposedly during a moral governing era after WW1 occurred..

misusel
06-15-2011, 02:38 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Chamboozer:
It's a little weird how this guy can claim that there was a genocide against Greeks when in 1919 they invaded Turkey purely to satisfy their imperialist ambitions, burned Izmir to the ground, and then got upset when they found conquering Turkey wasn't as easy as they imagined. XD

At least the claims of the Armenian genocide are somewhat plausible, but a genocide of the Greeks? That makes no sense at all.

If anyone wants an example of just how great the Ottoman Empire was for minorities, just look at what happened to the Spanish Jews, kicked out of Spain by Ferdinand & Isabella and their posessions stolen, the Ottomans then freely gave them homes to live in in their country. European Jews in the 16th Century famously stated that the Ottoman Empire was the best place to live as a Jew and tried to encourage migration. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>u obviously need more education man..Greeks burned Izmir to the ground?????where the hell did u read this????Greeks were living there and they burned it???this was the stupidest thing i heard today!!!try and read what was happening back then for other minorities except jews ok???

misusel
06-15-2011, 02:41 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by AEKTZIS_1921:
you mentioned that turks have been living in turkey for many centuries? how can this be? were turks living in turkey when alexander the great went by there? were their turks in pontos since 4th century BC? when Homer was born in Anatolia were turks there...no they were back in mongolia or turkmenistan.

here you go historical accounts from turkish prime minister and german officials regarding the extermination of Greek Orthodox Christians:

AUSTRIAN AND GERMAN ARCHIVES

24 July 1909 German Ambassador in Athens Wangenheim to Chancellor
Below quoting Turkish Prime Minister Sefker Pasha: "The Turks have
decided upon a war of extermination against their Christian subjects."

26 July 1909 Sefker Pasha visited Patriarch Ioakeim III and tells him:
"we will cut off your heads, we will make you disappear. It is either
you or us who will survive."

31 July 1915 German priest J. Lepsius: "The anti-Greek and
anti-Armenian persecutions are two phases of one programme - the
extermination of the Christian element from Turkey.

16 July 1916 German Consul Kuchhoff from Amisos to Berlin: "The entire
Greek population of Sinope and the coastal region of the county of
Kastanome has been exiled. Exile and extermination in Turkish are the
same, for whoever is not murdered, will die from hunger or illness."

so its alright for turkey to get away with a genocide which people still are reluctant to recognize than Greece trying to take back its lost lands and this was supposedly during a moral governing era after WW1 occurred.. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>aderfe, oso k dikio na exeis to xaneis me auta pou grafeis otan ekneurizesai...den prokeitai na tous peiseis gia kati oute tha tous anoikseis ta matia gia na exoun politismiko sok gia to parelthon tis tourkias...parolauta edw den einai to meros gia tetoia suzitisi k tetoies diafwnies..!

Chamboozer
06-15-2011, 03:28 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by AEKTZIS_1921:
you mentioned that turks have been living in turkey for many centuries? how can this be? were turks living in turkey when alexander the great went by there? were their turks in pontos since 4th century BC? when Homer was born in Anatolia were turks there...no they were back in mongolia or turkmenistan.

here you go historical accounts from turkish prime minister and german officials regarding the extermination of Greek Orthodox Christians:

AUSTRIAN AND GERMAN ARCHIVES

24 July 1909 German Ambassador in Athens Wangenheim to Chancellor
Below quoting Turkish Prime Minister Sefker Pasha: "The Turks have
decided upon a war of extermination against their Christian subjects."

26 July 1909 Sefker Pasha visited Patriarch Ioakeim III and tells him:
"we will cut off your heads, we will make you disappear. It is either
you or us who will survive."

31 July 1915 German priest J. Lepsius: "The anti-Greek and
anti-Armenian persecutions are two phases of one programme - the
extermination of the Christian element from Turkey.

16 July 1916 German Consul Kuchhoff from Amisos to Berlin: "The entire
Greek population of Sinope and the coastal region of the county of
Kastanome has been exiled. Exile and extermination in Turkish are the
same, for whoever is not murdered, will die from hunger or illness."

so its alright for turkey to get away with a genocide which people still are reluctant to recognize than Greece trying to take back its lost lands and this was supposedly during a moral governing era after WW1 occurred.. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

In case you don't understand, a Century is 100 years. Turks have been living in Anatolia since 1071, and by the 20th Century Anatolia was already 80% Turkish in most places and even higher in others. That's almost 9 Centuries since 1071, thus what I said was not untrue. Perhaps you confused centuries with millenia.

Regarding your quotes:

The first takes place during the Bulgarian war of independance, and is a reference to the slaughter of many Bulgarians at the hand of Ottoman militias, acting AGAINST the orders of the Sultan. It is true that a slaughter of Bulgarians did take place but it was not intended to occur and the Sultan did not approve.

The second is a quote taken out of context. He is not referring to the Christians of the Empire, but rather the supporters of Sultan Abdulhamid II. Sefker Pasha intended to overthrow the Sultan and replace him with his brother Mehmed, that included removing all of Abdulhamid's supporters, including the Patriarch. It had nothing to do with religion or ethnicity.

The third has little context. Who is J. Lepsius and why is he significant? What makes him a credible source on this issue? I doubt this one german priest has perspective enough to analyze the policies the Ottoman Empire was carrying out in any reliable way. It's not like he's an insider in the Ottoman government, able to know what's really going on, unless you can prove me wrong on this one.

The fourth is the only one with even a speck of credibility, but even then how can you know that this german consul really knows what he is talking about when he speaks of the situation of Greeks in Turkey?

Furthermore, where did you get any of these quotes from, how do I know that you didn't just make them up yourself? Even if you did find them, just posting some random quotes with very little context makes it seem like you just spent the last 30 minutes fishing through the internet until you could find something that supports your argument. None of these quotes really prove anything at all, as I have explained above.

Also, how is Turkey 'getting away with genocide'? What exactly is supposed to happen to prevent them from 'getting away with it'?

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">u obviously need more education man..Greeks burned Izmir to the ground?????where the hell did u read this????Greeks were living there and they burned it???this was the stupidest thing i heard today!!!try and read what was happening back then for other minorities except jews ok??? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Izmir was burned to the ground in September 1922. This is historical fact and is not debatable. What is debatable is the cause of the fire. Greeks were living there alongisde Turks and other minorities. It is possible that the fire was set by the Turks but this would not make sense as Turks would have no reason to set their own city on fire. More likely it was caused by Greek nationalists who realized that the Greek armies would not be able to annex the city into the Greek State and thus decided to burn it rather than allow it to return to Turkey intact.

Don't tell me I'm the one that needs education when you've hardly added anything to this conversation yourself. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif I've studied the Ottoman Empire quite a bit and trust me, I know what was going on with all minorities back then, Greeks included. If you think you know something that should be stated then say it, don't just accuse me of not knowing what I'm talking about without having anything to back that up. That's ad hominem and a logical fallacy.

Blind2Society
06-15-2011, 03:39 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Chamboozer:
I've studied the Ottoman Empire quite a bit and trust me, I know what was going on with all minorities back then, Greeks included. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
I apologise as I have not followed this argument at all but this caught my attention. Why should I trust you. Moreover, why should I even trust the written accounts you "studied". Especially given your comments about not trusting them yourself.

Chamboozer
06-15-2011, 03:46 AM
Mainly because most of what we're discussing isn't historical fact but rather speculation and moral reasoning.When I say his sources aren't credible, I'm referring to his historical 'quotes' and newspaper articles. The one historical work I have quoted (regarding the name of Istanbul) I can cite right now.

-Osman's Dream by Caroline Finkel, p. 55

She's credible because she has a doctorate in Oriental and African Studies.

All I ask is that everyone else give some context to what they quote because it's common practice in internet arguments to make quotes up or take historical statements and use them out of context.

EDIT: Looking back I did use some statistics in some of my posts. I'll go get my sources for those tomorrow, as it's almost 3 A.M. here. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Blind2Society
06-15-2011, 04:16 AM
I understand the importance of stating sources. I am question the credibility of historical sources in general. All we can really do is assume the people who wrote these things down back then were telling the truth. And we all know what assuming does right?

misusel
06-15-2011, 05:38 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Chamboozer:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by AEKTZIS_1921:
you mentioned that turks have been living in turkey for many centuries? how can this be? were turks living in turkey when alexander the great went by there? were their turks in pontos since 4th century BC? when Homer was born in Anatolia were turks there...no they were back in mongolia or turkmenistan.

here you go historical accounts from turkish prime minister and german officials regarding the extermination of Greek Orthodox Christians:

AUSTRIAN AND GERMAN ARCHIVES

24 July 1909 German Ambassador in Athens Wangenheim to Chancellor
Below quoting Turkish Prime Minister Sefker Pasha: "The Turks have
decided upon a war of extermination against their Christian subjects."

26 July 1909 Sefker Pasha visited Patriarch Ioakeim III and tells him:
"we will cut off your heads, we will make you disappear. It is either
you or us who will survive."

31 July 1915 German priest J. Lepsius: "The anti-Greek and
anti-Armenian persecutions are two phases of one programme - the
extermination of the Christian element from Turkey.

16 July 1916 German Consul Kuchhoff from Amisos to Berlin: "The entire
Greek population of Sinope and the coastal region of the county of
Kastanome has been exiled. Exile and extermination in Turkish are the
same, for whoever is not murdered, will die from hunger or illness."

so its alright for turkey to get away with a genocide which people still are reluctant to recognize than Greece trying to take back its lost lands and this was supposedly during a moral governing era after WW1 occurred.. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

In case you don't understand, a Century is 100 years. Turks have been living in Anatolia since 1071, and by the 20th Century Anatolia was already 80% Turkish in most places and even higher in others. That's almost 9 Centuries since 1071, thus what I said was not untrue. Perhaps you confused centuries with millenia.

Regarding your quotes:

The first takes place during the Bulgarian war of independance, and is a reference to the slaughter of many Bulgarians at the hand of Ottoman militias, acting AGAINST the orders of the Sultan. It is true that a slaughter of Bulgarians did take place but it was not intended to occur and the Sultan did not approve.

The second is a quote taken out of context. He is not referring to the Christians of the Empire, but rather the supporters of Sultan Abdulhamid II. Sefker Pasha intended to overthrow the Sultan and replace him with his brother Mehmed, that included removing all of Abdulhamid's supporters, including the Patriarch. It had nothing to do with religion or ethnicity.

The third has little context. Who is J. Lepsius and why is he significant? What makes him a credible source on this issue? I doubt this one german priest has perspective enough to analyze the policies the Ottoman Empire was carrying out in any reliable way. It's not like he's an insider in the Ottoman government, able to know what's really going on, unless you can prove me wrong on this one.

The fourth is the only one with even a speck of credibility, but even then how can you know that this german consul really knows what he is talking about when he speaks of the situation of Greeks in Turkey?

Furthermore, where did you get any of these quotes from, how do I know that you didn't just make them up yourself? Even if you did find them, just posting some random quotes with very little context makes it seem like you just spent the last 30 minutes fishing through the internet until you could find something that supports your argument. None of these quotes really prove anything at all, as I have explained above.

Also, how is Turkey 'getting away with genocide'? What exactly is supposed to happen to prevent them from 'getting away with it'?

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">u obviously need more education man..Greeks burned Izmir to the ground?????where the hell did u read this????Greeks were living there and they burned it???this was the stupidest thing i heard today!!!try and read what was happening back then for other minorities except jews ok??? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Izmir was burned to the ground in September 1922. This is historical fact and is not debatable. What is debatable is the cause of the fire. Greeks were living there alongisde Turks and other minorities. It is possible that the fire was set by the Turks but this would not make sense as Turks would have no reason to set their own city on fire. More likely it was caused by Greek nationalists who realized that the Greek armies would not be able to annex the city into the Greek State and thus decided to burn it rather than allow it to return to Turkey intact.

Don't tell me I'm the one that needs education when you've hardly added anything to this conversation yourself. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif I've studied the Ottoman Empire quite a bit and trust me, I know what was going on with all minorities back then, Greeks included. If you think you know something that should be stated then say it, don't just accuse me of not knowing what I'm talking about without having anything to back that up. That's ad hominem and a logical fallacy. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>u've studied nothing if i judge from what u r writing...the fire was set by the soldiers of Kemal...there r reports that the soldiers were with bottles with gazoline and when a fire was about to faint they were fglaming it again...it wouldnt make sence to set the turks the fire? and the greeks would?the greeks were at the port (those who escaped the slaughtering ) and trying to leave with any way they could and they set fire to their houses???u definetelly need more reeding in history from more trustfull sources and independent too..!ooh and i didnt add anything to this convo cos i dont want to argue like this for a game that is coming and it suppose to be for fun..."the greeks set the fire..."i dont know what am i suppose to do with that u've said...cry or laugh...

AEKTZIS_1921
06-15-2011, 06:22 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">misusel </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


funny though that there was no damage to the turkish or jewish quaters of the city only Greek quaters were. so you are saying that the Greeks deliberately set fire to their own buildings and killed their own ppl because of the fire? just doesnt make any sense?

and in regards to the newspaper article the newspaper The New York Time happened to actually win a journalism award due to its coverage of what occurred in turkey at the time. how can that not be credible...

tell me do you believe osama bin ladden was killed? if yes where would i find a source to back up that he died? since no body, no image was shown? only the US gov "knows" about it. however in this issue there are testimonies from Greeks armenians british, german french, austrian ppl, images of genocide occurring can be found, international newspapers not just Greek or turkish that referred to this event which would suggest that at the time symbolized something of major importance was taking place in the region.

i have one credible source and that is my grandmother who actually lived there at the time when she was young and who fled from turkey with my great grandmother but not my great grandfather who was killed by the turks at sight

misusel
06-15-2011, 08:00 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by AEKTZIS_1921:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">misusel </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


funny though that there was no damage to the turkish or jewish quaters of the city only Greek quaters were. so you are saying that the Greeks deliberately set fire to their own buildings and killed their own ppl because of the fire? just doesnt make any sense?

and in regards to the newspaper article the newspaper The New York Time happened to actually win a journalism award due to its coverage of what occurred in turkey at the time. how can that not be credible...

tell me do you believe osama bin ladden was killed? if yes where would i find a source to back up that he died? since no body, no image was shown? only the US gov "knows" about it. however in this issue there are testimonies from Greeks armenians british, german french, austrian ppl, images of genocide occurring can be found, international newspapers not just Greek or turkish that referred to this event which would suggest that at the time symbolized something of major importance was taking place in the region.

i have one credible source and that is my grandmother who actually lived there at the time when she was young and who fled from turkey with my great grandmother but not my great grandfather who was killed by the turks at sight </div></BLOCKQUOTE>auta ta les se mena i gia na ta dw egw?giati ta kserw apo prwto xeri...apla thewrw xazo na tsakwnomai edw pera i na prospathw na anoiksw ta matia allonwn k sti sugkekrimeni periptwsi tourkwn..!

dchil279
06-15-2011, 09:08 AM
let's compramise and call it by it's ancient name, Byzantium

El_Sjietah
06-15-2011, 09:16 AM
RACE WAR!!!

Seriously, this has strayed quite a bit off topic.

misusel
06-15-2011, 09:36 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by El_Sjietah:
RACE WAR!!!

Seriously, this has strayed quite a bit off topic. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>u r right..pfff we humans can argue for everything...its rediculus...lets enjoy the game and leave the ****ing past behind us ok everybody..???

Turkiye96
06-15-2011, 10:56 AM
"I could plainly see the Turks carrying the tins of petroleum into the houses, from which, in each instance, fire burst forth immediately afterward. There was not an Armenian in sight, the only persons visible being Turkish soldiers of the regular army in smart uniforms."

think your both wrong in your reference of the burning of Smyrna

yes you are right, as i said i didn't really look up on it... until now, when the Ottomans were expanding, and the Byzantines lost control of Smyrna (renamed Izmir in 1930), and they burn the place down (although it is not prooven who actually started the fire. Also you have to refere to topics that aren't prooven, i can go on google and find hundreds of quotes saying the greeks did it or the turks did it, but think for a second... there is no reason for us to burn our own city killing our own men, women and children destroying millions worth of buildings thats just stupid

Turkiye96
06-15-2011, 11:21 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by AEKTZIS_1921:
"Greeks when in 1919 they invaded Turkey purely to satisfy their imperialist ambitions."

ok so your telling me they had no right to claim back lost land in 1919 but if they did so a couple of years after the fall of Konstantinoupoli it would be acceptable? and what during the Greek revolution were the Greeks not meant to get rid of the turkish rule upon them as it would satisfy their imperialist ambitions? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

you know what you are right, but it was kinda late ( that shouldn't make a difference) but it was technically turkish land at the time and Greeks wanted to conquer it? so its a little ( very) unfair that you get to say we were very bad for waging war and conquering land when you did the same... also it was very wrong that the Greeks started war and so when the Turks fought back, they said we weren't allowed to because it was a ''genoside'' (in war time) so were we suposed to offer our land to you? i dont get it... And dude i can find thousands of articles or quotes saying it wasn't a ''genoside''. just as before, its not proven and there are 2 sides to it all...

and i told you not to go there... but u did, i dont want to make Greece look bad ( because Greece and some Greeks are cool, like misusel on this forum) but your pushing it ( and this has gone from normal topic about the name of a city in a game to insulting Turks... so i suggest you stop and either put some relevent info on the thread or leave... because if you continue to do this sooner or later you will be banned

Turkiye96
06-15-2011, 11:40 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LieutenantJojo:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Turkiye96:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LieutenantJojo:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Grandmaster_Z:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by albertwesker22:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Grandmaster_Z:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by albertwesker22:

Troll...The game takes place in 1511, only 58 years since the city was taken by the Turks. Europeans still would have known the city as Constantinople during that time. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

58 years is a long time </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Its a long time to your life, but in terms of history its 2 minutes shorter than a blink of an eye http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

doesn't matter, things can change in an instant. 9/11/2001 was just a day, but it changed alot in the world. saying that 58 years is not alot of time is just ridiculous. but anyway, i don't really agree/disagree with the topic of this thread, i just had to respond to that post. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Did you just compare a terrorist attack with the changing of a city's name? Really?

And let's see, the city was called Constantinople for centuries, so everyone recognized it by that name. People were so used to that name that they kept referring to it when telling stories (or whatever they said about it). It's just like when your favorite soccer team, of whom you have been a fan since you were a child, suddenly changes it's name. You'll keep referring to it by it's old name. You simply do it because you were so familiar with the old name. It's an automatism. Same goes for the city's name. There was no television or radio at that time, so the news of the change didn't spread so fast and older people, who were so familiar with the old name, still referred to it as Constantinople.

Hope that helped. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

you are right about the automatism ( also people refused to call it Istanbul to stick up to the Ottomans but it has ended since 1970 and for Desmond to get current day references just as the Animus translates language for desmond to understand the name should be Istanbul also

Are you saying not many people knew that Constantinople was called Istanbul in 1511? BULL ****

1. The Fall of constantinople Signified the end of a huge famous empire, do you relly think europe would not hear about the end of the empire the catupre and renaming of the city?

2.People were calling it Istanbul since the 11th century so 450 years before it was actually named Istanbul, so if 58 years wasn't enough for you.. :P so thats over 500 year! half a millenia for it to spread... even though things got around slow back then everybody would have heard it by 1511

3. the AC franchise said Istanbul at that time was the centre of the world back then. even said to be the New York of its time! it was very important and so news like '' the Ottomans have taken Constantinople and named it Istanbul'' would spread very quickly and be vitale to a lot of people as it was a very important trading area.

So people definatly knew it was called Istanbul but didn't use it a lot.

4. ok when ''Istanbul'' was used before it was officially tooken and dubbed Istanbul, it was an unofficial slang like term... BUT when it was tooken over and dubbed Istanbul ( definition of dubbed means to name so if the Sultan, leader of a whole empire names HIS OWN city, thats pretty official, atleast for those time) constantinople became the unofficial slang like term for the place as Istanbul was its actual name. this is why historical acconts say that officials ( like high classes and the roal ottoman family would call it Istanbul while the less educated ones would call it constantinople.

so it should be called Istanbul in the animus, officials should call it Istanbul but the poor uneducated civilians should call it constantinople. ( seeing as Ezio is well educated and established, id say it would be more historically accurate for his to call it Istanbul) </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes, they would know Constantinople was conquered, but the city was already called Istanbul by some people, while it was still officially called Constantinople at that time, so people didn't think it was that big of a deal that more people started calling it Istanbul after that, I guess... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

yea, they used constantinople in official terms too ( as they didn't wana call it Istanbul)BUT the Nation that ACTUALLY OWNED IT named it Istanbul. so the nation that actually has the city should have no right to call it what it wants? so by that theory, should i be allowed to name the capital of your city's name? of course not! so stop being hypocritical

El_Sjietah
06-15-2011, 11:46 AM
Triple post and a quoting pyramid.

Nice.

Turkiye96
06-15-2011, 11:59 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by AEKTZIS_1921:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Chamboozer:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by AEKTZIS_1921:
there was no greek genocide you say??

MEMORIES FROM TURKEY - PONTIAN GENOCIDE

Documents From the New York Times By EDWIN I. JAMES. Copyright, 1922 by The New York Times Company

"Lord Curzon then said that he wished to give some statistics in order that there might be a clear idea what was at stake. He said that figures from American sources showed that before 1914 there were 1,600,000 Greeks in Anatolia. Between 1914 and 1918 300,000 died, left the country or otherwise disappeared. Between 1919 and 1922 another 200,00 left Anatolia or disappeared. In September and October of this year another reduction of 500,000 took place leaving now 500,000 or
600,000 Greeks in Anatolia, most of whom were males between 15 and 60, to whom the Turks had refused permission to leave."

"Lord Curzon said that there had been 300,000 Greeks in Constantipole, most of whom were still there, 320,000 Greeks in Eastern Thrace, some of whose families had been there for a thousand years and more, all had fled before the dread of the Turks, leaving desert areas behind them."

"Is this to be the end of the Christian minorities in Asia Minor that land where, thirteen centuries and more before the Turk came first to rule it, Paul had journeyed as a missionary through its length and breadth, and where the first "seven churches that are in Asia stood," to which the messages written in the Book of Revelation were sent?"

"do not continue about the genosides as it is very controversial and very insulting to turks"

and what about my great grandfather who was from Pontos living in Konstantinoupoli and was killed by turks for no reason? isnt that insulting towards me and my whole family??


"Greeks when in 1919 they invaded Turkey purely to satisfy their imperialist ambitions."

ok so your telling me they had no right to claim back lost land in 1919 but if they did so a couple of years after the fall of Konstantinoupoli it would be acceptable? and what during the Greek revolution were the Greeks not meant to get rid of the turkish rule upon them as it would satisfy their imperialist ambitions? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Lord Curzon was a member of the British government, a country which was at war with the Ottomans just prior to the publishing of that article. Do you really think that he is a reliable source for anything on that matter? Of course he would like to slander Turkey's international image. Greece itself does not recognize that there was ever a genocide of the Greeks.

Yes, the Greeks had no right to invade Anatolia in 1919. It was Turkish land under Turkish sovereignty inhabited by Turkish people. The Greeks had no legitimate claim to the area, their claims to Anatolia based on the fact that it used to belong to Greeks were as valid as Italian claims on Greece based on the fact that it used to belong to the Romans. That is not valid at all.

In 1453 the Greeks had every right to fight for their land, and during the war for independance in the 19th Century they also had that right. But defending one's homeland is not the same as invading another country. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Greece does recognize a genocide committed by Turks on its people thats why the 19th of May is a national day of mourning for those that died.

in terms of the genocide why would the turks only commit a genocide against the Assyrians and the Armenians at the same time and not the Greeks since they all lived in turkey and were the minorities. in relation to the article it is from the New York Times 1922 and quotes the American figures in regards to the population of the Greeks during that period and the decrease in numbers through death or exile by the turks. Dont know about you but most newspapers are considered historical account of events thus it is legitimate.

so in response defending one's homeland is not the same as invading another country. what about the ottomans in the first place.....they INVADED!! therefore Greece did have a claim to retake what was hers plus the Greeks of Smyrna, Pontos, Trapezounta etc were all under the turks....so why couldn't they be liberated just like the mainland Greeks of the Peloponnese?

so what you are saying is that it is ok for turkey to invade Konstantinoupoli and take take the rest of Greece. though you are for the Greek Independence. However against Greece trying to get back Konstantinoupoli and against the Greeks of turkey to have their own independence?

wild accusations mate </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

you have some good points man, but iv gota shed some light on that, first the British were sort of sponsors to the Greeks (and so shared a rivalry to the Ottomans but not as much as they mainly wanted to gain land from it) , so there is a lot of biasism in that quote secondly havent the Greeks tooken lands from other people? they have and fought against the rebellions! only difference was that the Turks won their rebellion fights. thirdly the turks land was taken by mongols and stuff, but we are fine with it because thats how nations work you fight to gain and keep land and you get fought by other nations who want to take that land and if you fail to do that then your nation dies out. the greeks could rebel all they wanted and the ottomans would fight them back. you were sucsessful with greece but not asia minor. simple as that. sorry that the turks dont just give land away to rivals... and also we didn't really invade we migrated west to asia minor until we were the main population in some areas and so fought for land ( some even might say rebel) against the Byzantine empire ( we had a legitamite claim to that land while the greeks didn't to asia minor). so you tell me why you are for Greeks taking lands they live in while Turks aren't allowed to do that?
bit hypocritical mate

El_Sjietah
06-15-2011, 12:07 PM
Oh god, you weren't done yet.

LieutenantJojo
06-15-2011, 12:09 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Turkiye96:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LieutenantJojo:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Turkiye96:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LieutenantJojo:

Did you just compare a terrorist attack with the changing of a city's name? Really?

And let's see, the city was called Constantinople for centuries, so everyone recognized it by that name. People were so used to that name that they kept referring to it when telling stories (or whatever they said about it). It's just like when your favorite soccer team, of whom you have been a fan since you were a child, suddenly changes it's name. You'll keep referring to it by it's old name. You simply do it because you were so familiar with the old name. It's an automatism. Same goes for the city's name. There was no television or radio at that time, so the news of the change didn't spread so fast and older people, who were so familiar with the old name, still referred to it as Constantinople.

Hope that helped. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

you are right about the automatism ( also people refused to call it Istanbul to stick up to the Ottomans but it has ended since 1970 and for Desmond to get current day references just as the Animus translates language for desmond to understand the name should be Istanbul also

Are you saying not many people knew that Constantinople was called Istanbul in 1511? BULL ****

1. The Fall of constantinople Signified the end of a huge famous empire, do you relly think europe would not hear about the end of the empire the catupre and renaming of the city?

2.People were calling it Istanbul since the 11th century so 450 years before it was actually named Istanbul, so if 58 years wasn't enough for you.. :P so thats over 500 year! half a millenia for it to spread... even though things got around slow back then everybody would have heard it by 1511

3. the AC franchise said Istanbul at that time was the centre of the world back then. even said to be the New York of its time! it was very important and so news like '' the Ottomans have taken Constantinople and named it Istanbul'' would spread very quickly and be vitale to a lot of people as it was a very important trading area.

So people definatly knew it was called Istanbul but didn't use it a lot.

4. ok when ''Istanbul'' was used before it was officially tooken and dubbed Istanbul, it was an unofficial slang like term... BUT when it was tooken over and dubbed Istanbul ( definition of dubbed means to name so if the Sultan, leader of a whole empire names HIS OWN city, thats pretty official, atleast for those time) constantinople became the unofficial slang like term for the place as Istanbul was its actual name. this is why historical acconts say that officials ( like high classes and the roal ottoman family would call it Istanbul while the less educated ones would call it constantinople.

so it should be called Istanbul in the animus, officials should call it Istanbul but the poor uneducated civilians should call it constantinople. ( seeing as Ezio is well educated and established, id say it would be more historically accurate for his to call it Istanbul) </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes, they would know Constantinople was conquered, but the city was already called Istanbul by some people, while it was still officially called Constantinople at that time, so people didn't think it was that big of a deal that more people started calling it Istanbul after that, I guess... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

yea, they used constantinople in official terms too ( as they didn't wana call it Istanbul)BUT the Nation that ACTUALLY OWNED IT named it Istanbul. so the nation that actually has the city should have no right to call it what it wants? so by that theory, should i be allowed to name the capital of your city's name? of course not! so stop being hypocritical </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I'm not a hypocrite. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif

But do you have any idea how ridiculous this whole discussion is? So what if it's called Constantinople (which is actually correct, but whatever) in the game? I don't care how the city's called, as long as the game is good.

Highwayman48
06-15-2011, 12:11 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by ILIKESOUP94:
"In 1453, Ottoman Sultan Mehmed II conquered the city and made it the capital of the Ottoman Empire. Now under new rule, the metropolis was dubbed "Istanbul" from the Greek phrase "eis ten polin," which meant "in the city." The name of the city wasn't officially changed until 1930, and Westerners continued to refer to it as Constantinople on maps and in speech into the '60s."

http://ask.yahoo.com/20030225.html </div></BLOCKQUOTE>This guy is right.

Turkiye96
06-15-2011, 12:25 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LieutenantJojo:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Turkiye96:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LieutenantJojo:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Turkiye96:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LieutenantJojo:

Did you just compare a terrorist attack with the changing of a city's name? Really?

And let's see, the city was called Constantinople for centuries, so everyone recognized it by that name. People were so used to that name that they kept referring to it when telling stories (or whatever they said about it). It's just like when your favorite soccer team, of whom you have been a fan since you were a child, suddenly changes it's name. You'll keep referring to it by it's old name. You simply do it because you were so familiar with the old name. It's an automatism. Same goes for the city's name. There was no television or radio at that time, so the news of the change didn't spread so fast and older people, who were so familiar with the old name, still referred to it as Constantinople.

Hope that helped. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

you are right about the automatism ( also people refused to call it Istanbul to stick up to the Ottomans but it has ended since 1970 and for Desmond to get current day references just as the Animus translates language for desmond to understand the name should be Istanbul also

Are you saying not many people knew that Constantinople was called Istanbul in 1511? BULL ****

1. The Fall of constantinople Signified the end of a huge famous empire, do you relly think europe would not hear about the end of the empire the catupre and renaming of the city?

2.People were calling it Istanbul since the 11th century so 450 years before it was actually named Istanbul, so if 58 years wasn't enough for you.. :P so thats over 500 year! half a millenia for it to spread... even though things got around slow back then everybody would have heard it by 1511

3. the AC franchise said Istanbul at that time was the centre of the world back then. even said to be the New York of its time! it was very important and so news like '' the Ottomans have taken Constantinople and named it Istanbul'' would spread very quickly and be vitale to a lot of people as it was a very important trading area.

So people definatly knew it was called Istanbul but didn't use it a lot.

4. ok when ''Istanbul'' was used before it was officially tooken and dubbed Istanbul, it was an unofficial slang like term... BUT when it was tooken over and dubbed Istanbul ( definition of dubbed means to name so if the Sultan, leader of a whole empire names HIS OWN city, thats pretty official, atleast for those time) constantinople became the unofficial slang like term for the place as Istanbul was its actual name. this is why historical acconts say that officials ( like high classes and the roal ottoman family would call it Istanbul while the less educated ones would call it constantinople.

so it should be called Istanbul in the animus, officials should call it Istanbul but the poor uneducated civilians should call it constantinople. ( seeing as Ezio is well educated and established, id say it would be more historically accurate for his to call it Istanbul) </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes, they would know Constantinople was conquered, but the city was already called Istanbul by some people, while it was still officially called Constantinople at that time, so people didn't think it was that big of a deal that more people started calling it Istanbul after that, I guess... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

yea, they used constantinople in official terms too ( as they didn't wana call it Istanbul)BUT the Nation that ACTUALLY OWNED IT named it Istanbul. so the nation that actually has the city should have no right to call it what it wants? so by that theory, should i be allowed to name the capital of your city's name? of course not! so stop being hypocritical </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I'm not a hypocrite. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif

But do you have any idea how ridiculous this whole discussion is? So what if it's called Constantinople (which is actually correct, but whatever) in the game? I don't care how the city's called, as long as the game is good. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
haha :P sorry http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif i didn't mean to offend, im just really into this debate :P while i do have a bias opinion just like the rest of us i find talking about history really fun ( u probabally thing im a nerd! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/typing.gif ) i know, i cant wait for Assassin's creed Revelations, its gona be awesome man! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Turkiye96
06-15-2011, 12:29 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Highwayman48:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by ILIKESOUP94:
"In 1453, Ottoman Sultan Mehmed II conquered the city and made it the capital of the Ottoman Empire. Now under new rule, the metropolis was dubbed "Istanbul" from the Greek phrase "eis ten polin," which meant "in the city." The name of the city wasn't officially changed until 1930, and Westerners continued to refer to it as Constantinople on maps and in speech into the '60s."

http://ask.yahoo.com/20030225.html </div></BLOCKQUOTE>This guy is right. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

ok look he is right BUT there is a lot of context to be added, firstly back in those times things weren't exacly ''very official'' so when the sultan of a country dubs his own city Istanbul, just after capturing it, its pretty official, the only reason they changed it in 1930 on paper is because they wanted everyone to use its correct term.

Turkiye96
06-15-2011, 12:35 PM
yes the New York Times is a good news paper and got the Award for covering it, ( but i have not looked it up so not too sure about it) also 3 things, first that award wasn't based on if it was bias or not just how good it was. and this guy didn't get the award as many other writters covered this in the NY times. yes newspapers are historical accounts but the people who write them are not historians trying to be non bias, they are writters who try to get their own oppinions out into the world. so while they are historical accounts they are very often bias.

SabbataiSevi12
08-09-2011, 11:24 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by misusel:
try and read what was happening back then for other minorities except jews ok??? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

What you think the Jews werent important? Sounds like you're the one who needs more education, we contributed endlessly to science and economy of Europe and how were we repaid? Kicked out in the middle ages! You talk of being oppressed by the turks but how about being oppressed by all of europe? turks were the only people who took us in and helped us prosper and the same thing was happening with the Greeks and Christians, read about the Phanariot Greeks!!!In the meantime all of europe was slaughtering their minorities in endless wars.

misusel
08-10-2011, 05:09 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by SabbataiSevi12:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by misusel:
try and read what was happening back then for other minorities except jews ok??? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

What you think the Jews werent important? Sounds like you're the one who needs more education, we contributed endlessly to science and economy of Europe and how were we repaid? Kicked out in the middle ages! You talk of being oppressed by the turks but how about being oppressed by all of europe? turks were the only people who took us in and helped us prosper and the same thing was happening with the Greeks and Christians, read about the Phanariot Greeks!!!In the meantime all of europe was slaughtering their minorities in endless wars. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>no. of course not! i didnt say that and i definetelly didnt meant something like that! its just that many people use to say about jews and i said that there werent only the jews as a minority in ottoman empire...maybe they helped u, but the attrocities they did to christian populations r beyond words..!and u dont want to know my education my friend...its big in many subjects..!

SabbataiSevi12
08-10-2011, 05:57 AM
@misusel

Frankly im quite offended that you seem to think that somehow special rules apply to jews that dont apply to everyone else. The jews as a minority in the ottoman empire were treated just like the christians with only minor exceptions. the ottoman government was really quite progressive, you'll find that orthodox chistians (and of course jews and protestants etc.) were treated much better in the ottoman lands than they were in for example catholic austria. really all this ottoman-hating is a result of nationalism and if you studied your history objectively you'd find that greeks like all others were in fact treated quite well. And as a matter of fact I would love to hear more details about your education, since you seem to prize it so highly.

LightRey
08-10-2011, 07:06 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by misusel:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by SabbataiSevi12:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by misusel:
try and read what was happening back then for other minorities except jews ok??? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

What you think the Jews werent important? Sounds like you're the one who needs more education, we contributed endlessly to science and economy of Europe and how were we repaid? Kicked out in the middle ages! You talk of being oppressed by the turks but how about being oppressed by all of europe? turks were the only people who took us in and helped us prosper and the same thing was happening with the Greeks and Christians, read about the Phanariot Greeks!!!In the meantime all of europe was slaughtering their minorities in endless wars. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>no. of course not! i didnt say that and i definetelly didnt meant something like that! its just that many people use to say about jews and i said that there werent only the jews as a minority in ottoman empire...maybe they helped u, but the attrocities they did to christian populations r beyond words..!and u dont want to know my education my friend...its big in many subjects..! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Come back when your "education" includes the English language.
Trust me, whatever they did to christian populations, christian populations have done equally bad things to others. To say that they deserve more sympathy is just another form of discrimination.

Turkiye96
08-10-2011, 08:33 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by SabbataiSevi12:
@misusel

Frankly im quite offended that you seem to think that somehow special rules apply to jews that dont apply to everyone else. The jews as a minority in the ottoman empire were treated just like the christians with only minor exceptions. the ottoman government was really quite progressive, you'll find that orthodox chistians (and of course jews and protestants etc.) were treated much better in the ottoman lands than they were in for example catholic austria. really all this ottoman-hating is a result of nationalism and if you studied your history objectively you'd find that greeks like all others were in fact treated quite well. And as a matter of fact I would love to hear more details about your education, since you seem to prize it so highly. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
i agree with you but to be completly objective, by law the Ottomans treated minorities equal ( althought they gave special perks to muslims) they didn't slaughter them like most countries did. and there are a lot of sources depicting the Ottomans being harsh upon the Byzantines, but thats because the Ottomans and the Byzantines were sworn enemies! what do you expect your country to treat the people who want you dead like royalty? and im sure the Byzantine have or alteast would have done the same to the Ottomans had they the chance, infact when a Greek king was captured the sultan asked what he would he of it was the other way around and he said that he would either kill the sultan or throw him to the streets of Constantinople so people could throw sruff at him. But the sultan said he would let him go and even said that he should be treated as royalty rather and a prisoner of war.

you cant expect a nation to be good to those that want them totally killed.

ProletariatPleb
08-10-2011, 08:39 AM
No matter how much we're gonna babble here about proving each other wrong ..ubi isn't gonna change the name...

So.... :
Constantinople (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vankaSlfSr0)

Turkiye96
08-10-2011, 08:40 AM
UHHH this is just making me angry they should just change it to Istanbul i mean nobody will be angry on unhappy about it seeing how it doesn't directly concern them while when its ''Constantinople'' all the Turks are unhappy, and they have reason to be!

Turkiye96
08-10-2011, 08:45 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by sidspyker24:
No matter how much we're gonna babble here about proving each other wrong ..ubi isn't gonna change the name...

So.... :
Constantinople (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vankaSlfSr0) </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

yea your probabally right, :/ while i asked a mod if some things (like name and the palm trees ect) would change and he said that there is alwqays a possibility. even though its simply changing 1 title, they wont do it yay for historical inaccuracy :/

misusel
08-10-2011, 08:59 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by SabbataiSevi12:
@misusel

Frankly im quite offended that you seem to think that somehow special rules apply to jews that dont apply to everyone else. The jews as a minority in the ottoman empire were treated just like the christians with only minor exceptions. the ottoman government was really quite progressive, you'll find that orthodox chistians (and of course jews and protestants etc.) were treated much better in the ottoman lands than they were in for example catholic austria. really all this ottoman-hating is a result of nationalism and if you studied your history objectively you'd find that greeks like all others were in fact treated quite well. And as a matter of fact I would love to hear more details about your education, since you seem to prize it so highly. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>everyone is reading history from the side he/she is...we cant be sure who's right cos we werent alive back than...as am seeing it, its just a game and i dont want to get in a fight in this forum about history arguments...again!

misusel
08-10-2011, 09:01 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LightRey:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by misusel:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by SabbataiSevi12:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by misusel:
try and read what was happening back then for other minorities except jews ok??? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

What you think the Jews werent important? Sounds like you're the one who needs more education, we contributed endlessly to science and economy of Europe and how were we repaid? Kicked out in the middle ages! You talk of being oppressed by the turks but how about being oppressed by all of europe? turks were the only people who took us in and helped us prosper and the same thing was happening with the Greeks and Christians, read about the Phanariot Greeks!!!In the meantime all of europe was slaughtering their minorities in endless wars. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>no. of course not! i didnt say that and i definetelly didnt meant something like that! its just that many people use to say about jews and i said that there werent only the jews as a minority in ottoman empire...maybe they helped u, but the attrocities they did to christian populations r beyond words..!and u dont want to know my education my friend...its big in many subjects..! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Come back when your "education" includes the English language.
Trust me, whatever they did to christian populations, christian populations have done equally bad things to others. To say that they deserve more sympathy is just another form of discrimination. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>i hope when my english gets better u allow my presence in this forum...AMEN..!

misusel
08-10-2011, 09:03 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Turkiye96:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by SabbataiSevi12:
@misusel

Frankly im quite offended that you seem to think that somehow special rules apply to jews that dont apply to everyone else. The jews as a minority in the ottoman empire were treated just like the christians with only minor exceptions. the ottoman government was really quite progressive, you'll find that orthodox chistians (and of course jews and protestants etc.) were treated much better in the ottoman lands than they were in for example catholic austria. really all this ottoman-hating is a result of nationalism and if you studied your history objectively you'd find that greeks like all others were in fact treated quite well. And as a matter of fact I would love to hear more details about your education, since you seem to prize it so highly. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
i agree with you but to be completly objective, by law the Ottomans treated minorities equal ( althought they gave special perks to muslims) they didn't slaughter them like most countries did. and there are a lot of sources depicting the Ottomans being harsh upon the Byzantines, but thats because the Ottomans and the Byzantines were sworn enemies! what do you expect your country to treat the people who want you dead like royalty? and im sure the Byzantine have or alteast would have done the same to the Ottomans had they the chance, infact when a Greek king was captured the sultan asked what he would he of it was the other way around and he said that he would either kill the sultan or throw him to the streets of Constantinople so people could throw sruff at him. But the sultan said he would let him go and even said that he should be treated as royalty rather and a prisoner of war.

you cant expect a nation to be good to those that want them totally killed. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>Arp-Aslan after the Majikert battle!true king i respect him very much, for the battle strategy and his behavior...but seriously u cant believe that every sultan the empire had was like this...???

Turkiye96
08-10-2011, 09:48 AM
EXACTLY! while there has been a lot of chivalric actions done by the turks to others (eg the sultans oath about serbia), we turks (just like everyone else) will be hostile to enemies, and you cant blame the Turks for that. the turks got the title of being ''barbaric'' NOT because we were dread leaders but because we were fierce in battle from which by that standard a lot of powerful empires should be considered barbaric, also i would like to point out in those times ''morals'' were not taken into consideration alot exactly why the whole of the middle ages were barbaric (IMO) Just give me a strong Empire and a could give you atleast 1 point in history where they were truely cruel. Im not saying the Ottomans were ALWAYS good to everyone, however i am saying that you souldn't look down upon or think differently of the Turks, for the main reason of the time period and most importantly that everyone was like that.

and yea i like him too! :P his death is pretty interesting too, if you haven't read up on it already that is http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Animuses
08-10-2011, 10:58 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Turkiye96:
UHHH this is just making me angry they should just change it to Istanbul i mean nobody will be angry on unhappy about it seeing how it doesn't directly concern them while when its ''Constantinople'' all the Turks are unhappy, and they have reason to be! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
It was still officially named Constantinople, so there is nothing to be angry about.

Turkiye96
08-10-2011, 12:29 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Animuses:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Turkiye96:
UHHH this is just making me angry they should just change it to Istanbul i mean nobody will be angry on unhappy about it seeing how it doesn't directly concern them while when its ''Constantinople'' all the Turks are unhappy, and they have reason to be! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
It was still officially named Constantinople, so there is nothing to be angry about. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Officail just means on paper, but fine! continue thinking that when the Sultan of a huge empire dubbs ITS OWN CITY then that means nothing! Dam i dont go around trying to call your city some foreign name? id like to see you go up to him and say its not official and his world mean nothing. All i wanted was for it to be historically accurate but fine, go ahead do what you want iv had enough of this ****

LightRey
08-10-2011, 03:07 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Turkiye96:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Animuses:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Turkiye96:
UHHH this is just making me angry they should just change it to Istanbul i mean nobody will be angry on unhappy about it seeing how it doesn't directly concern them while when its ''Constantinople'' all the Turks are unhappy, and they have reason to be! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
It was still officially named Constantinople, so there is nothing to be angry about. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Officail just means on paper, but fine! continue thinking that when the Sultan of a huge empire dubbs ITS OWN CITY then that means nothing! Dam i dont go around trying to call your city some foreign name? id like to see you go up to him and say its not official and his world mean nothing. All i wanted was for it to be historically accurate but fine, go ahead do what you want iv had enough of this **** </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
So you're saying it's historically inaccurate to use the official name?
It's the name most citizens of Constantinople used for generations after its capture by the Ottomans. It makes perfect sense to call it that.

Chamboozer
08-10-2011, 04:58 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Turkiye96:
id like to see you go up to him and say its not official and his world mean nothing. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Honestly, if I were to go back in time and ask Sultan Mehmed II what the name of his capital was, he would respond, "Constantinople". He LOVED that city, he loved the prestige that came with its name. He called himself the Caesar of Rome, why would he do that if he then was going to rename the capital of the Roman Empire to something else? It is true that Istanbul as a name came into use at this time, but for the Sultans of the Ottoman Empire, simply being able to say they were the rulers of Constantinople was a great boost to their prestige and it was something that they treasured. Would you rename New York, or Moscow, or Berlin if you found yourself to be its ruler? No, because its very name is synonymous with power, history, and most of all prestige, which is what Mehmed II wanted most of all.

Turkiye96
08-10-2011, 07:43 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Chamboozer:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Turkiye96:
id like to see you go up to him and say its not official and his world mean nothing. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Honestly, if I were to go back in time and ask Sultan Mehmed II what the name of his capital was, he would respond, "Constantinople". He LOVED that city, he loved the prestige that came with its name. He called himself the Caesar of Rome, why would he do that if he then was going to rename the capital of the Roman Empire to something else? It is true that Istanbul as a name came into use at this time, but for the Sultans of the Ottoman Empire, simply being able to say they were the rulers of Constantinople was a great boost to their prestige and it was something that they treasured. Would you rename New York, or Moscow, or Berlin if you found yourself to be its ruler? No, because its very name is synonymous with power, history, and most of all prestige, which is what Mehmed II wanted most of all. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes, changing the name of a place after you take it isn't unheard of i mean by that logic you should call New york by New Netherlands and New Amsterdam but we dont, and its unfair that this should be treated any differently. i agree you are right on some level however that just doesnt hold up as like many other places, we know that the New names are directly linked with the old names that are ''synonymous with power, history, and most of all prestige'' volvograd/ stalingrad is just 1 great example of this also the title of ''Istanbul'' has prestige to it too i mean under the hands of the Ottomans it became huge and much more powerful then it ever was before, so be that note, the title ''?stanbul'' would hold more prestige.

and I agree but let me ask you one thing... if he wanted to keep it constantinople why o why did he then dubb it ''Istanbul'' seconds after having won the city? unless maybe... just maybe, he actually wanted to change the name...
And to be more accurate, he claimed title to the cesar of rome however due to him being muslim and the leader of a muslim nation, wasn't accepted by the western public. which is fairly understanable. he wanted the more the power of the title as a foothold into christian and western diplomacy.

Oh and i wasn't saying you should ask him, i was saying that would you go up to his the figure that he was and tell him the city was named constantinople and his word ment nothing

also sources have sited that the higher classes Especially the Sultan would use Istanbul, so know historically it is much more accurate that he would have said Istanbul.

i was trying to explain how even though he didn't go threw a lot of paperword to change it ''officially'' even though on most official paperwork ( the ottomans wrote) used Istanbul however every now and then they would use Constantinople, he didn't need to, as he was sultan and his word was the law, just like a lot of other important leaders. i mean most of the time leaders would say kill him and their guards would without thought. even though they didn't go threw the process of having to sign a bunch of documents. heard of bloody mary? i dont even think she would even have the time to fill in those forms for killing so many people with the wiggle of her tounge. for those times you didn't need paper work, exactly why he didn't go threw with all the documents, because he as the owner of the city and Sultan was offical and thus whatever he said was ( for those times). and when those times ended, then the Turks needed to change it ''officially'' and thus they did.

Turkiye96
08-10-2011, 07:51 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LightRey:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Turkiye96:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Animuses:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Turkiye96:
UHHH this is just making me angry they should just change it to Istanbul i mean nobody will be angry on unhappy about it seeing how it doesn't directly concern them while when its ''Constantinople'' all the Turks are unhappy, and they have reason to be! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
It was still officially named Constantinople, so there is nothing to be angry about. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Officail just means on paper, but fine! continue thinking that when the Sultan of a huge empire dubbs ITS OWN CITY then that means nothing! Dam i dont go around trying to call your city some foreign name? id like to see you go up to him and say its not official and his world mean nothing. All i wanted was for it to be historically accurate but fine, go ahead do what you want iv had enough of this **** </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
So you're saying it's historically inaccurate to use the official name?
It's the name most citizens of Constantinople used for generations after its capture by the Ottomans. It makes perfect sense to call it that. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
yes in terms of slang for the majorinal lower classes whike the officals and upper class refered to it as Istanbul

and as i said, the sultans word was law back then just like many other leaders words were law. so it is OFF?C?AL for that time.

and just because you call it by a name doesn't automatically make it a law, unless your royalty in the medieval ages...

to be historically accurate, the Animus should name it by ''Istanbul'' while the upper class in the game should refere to it as Istanbul while the lower class should refere to it as Constantinople or maybe even have the Greeks in the city call it by Constantinople with the Turks call it Istanbul to show the national tension.

PunkEuR7
08-10-2011, 07:53 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by albertwesker22:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by fizy45:
I dont understand the western countries habbit to use that name which is not used for 400 years...that name chanced after 1453 when Turks captured that city and its named as Istanbul.

But in trailers and many other games still Istanbul named as constantinople which is very annoying for a Turk and a historican...

Imagine this situation...you are a French and you saw your city names written in German...or you are an american and your city names are written in Russian...How will you feel...

Also please dont get me wrong I am not a ultra nationalist person or a facist etc I just want Ubisoft to show little respect to us...

Thanks... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Troll...The game takes place in 1511, only 58 years since the city was taken by the Turks. Europeans still would have known the city as Constantinople during that time. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

i was going to say the same thing ,i think that they've noted that http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Animuses
08-10-2011, 08:59 PM
LMFAO It's named Constantinople.
It's like saying, "don't call New York City by it's official name, only call it The Big Apple."
Worry about the important stuff, this is in no way a big deal.

Chamboozer
08-10-2011, 09:12 PM
When New Amsterdam was renamed to New York it was before the name of the city was connected to any sort of prestigious history, thus renaming it had no negative effects. Constantinople on the other hand had a long history of being the most important city in the world for the most part. And Istanbul does indeed have prestige now, after it's been the Ottoman capital for centuries. But in 1512 when the game takes place the name Istanbul was not prestigious, as it had yet to reach the apex of its glory.

It has been stated that Mehmed II dubbing the city 'Islambol' meaning 'abounding with Islam' was a pun, just a joke not meant to be the actual renaming of the city. As you said he wanted to be included in Western diplomacy and to be seen as the successor to the great heroes of antiquity such as Alexander the Great (whom was a personal hero of his). Thus keeping the name as Constantinople fits exactly into his plan, the west would have seen him as a person to take seriously as the ruler of Constantinople, rather than the ruler of 'Istanbul' which they had never heard of, even if in fact there was no real difference.

If I told him the city was named Constantinople he was have said, "Yes, that is correct." If I had said the city was named Istanbul, he would have said, "Yes, Constantinople is Istanbul (abounding with Islam) but when people ask me, 'What is the name of the city of which you are Sultan?' my response is 'I am the Sultan of Constantinople.'"

medcsu11
08-10-2011, 10:15 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by fizy45:
I dont understand the western countries habbit to use that name which is not used for 400 years...that name chanced after 1453 when Turks captured that city and its named as Istanbul.

But in trailers and many other games still Istanbul named as constantinople which is very annoying for a Turk and a historican...

Imagine this situation...you are a French and you saw your city names written in German...or you are an american and your city names are written in Russian...How will you feel...

Also please dont get me wrong I am not a ultra nationalist person or a facist etc I just want Ubisoft to show little respect to us...

Thanks... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

It amazes me the idiocy of some people. As my old drill instructor once said "You must never underestimate the power of stupidity because there are many stupid people in this world".

Yes.....now I see why he said it.

kriegerdesgottes
08-10-2011, 10:53 PM
Once again I agree with everything Chamboozer has said.

SabbataiSevi12
08-11-2011, 12:52 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by kriegerdesgotte:
Once again I agree with everything Chamboozer has said. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

This has to be THE most sensible post i have seen here in this entire thread. Seriously you all should just listen to Chamboozer...

melihxenon
08-11-2011, 01:17 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by SabbataiSevi12:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by kriegerdesgotte:
Once again I agree with everything Chamboozer has said. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

This has to be THE most sensible post i have seen here in this entire thread. Seriously you all should just listen to Chamboozer... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

^this. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/clap.gif yeah, listen to Chamboozer...

LightRey
08-11-2011, 03:57 AM
I'm with Chamboozer too. He appears to know a lot about this stuff.

Rakudaton
08-11-2011, 06:37 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LightRey:
I'm with Chamboozer too. He appears to know a lot about this stuff. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I second that.

Turkiye96
08-11-2011, 06:51 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Animuses:
LMFAO It's named Constantinople.
It's like saying, "don't call New York City by it's official name, only call it The Big Apple."
Worry about the important stuff, this is in no way a big deal. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

... seriously how many time do i have to say this? the word or royalty (back then) was law and so ''?stanbul'' wasn't a nickname like the big apple it was official for the time, maybe not for our currnet time, hence why the officials and sulatins called it Istanbul as many sources state.

LightRey
08-11-2011, 07:01 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Turkiye96:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Animuses:
LMFAO It's named Constantinople.
It's like saying, "don't call New York City by it's official name, only call it The Big Apple."
Worry about the important stuff, this is in no way a big deal. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

... seriously how many time do i have to say this? the word or royalty (back then) was law and so ''?stanbul'' wasn't a nickname like the big apple it was official for the time, maybe not for our currnet time, hence why the officials and sulatins called it Istanbul as many sources state. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
y'know, before you go badmouthing everyone who disagrees with you, why don't you come up with some evidence? Up till now Chamboozer has made a whole lot more sense than you have.

Grandmaster_Z
08-11-2011, 07:03 AM
Turkiye, these people think they are scholars because they read something on wikipedia.
i'm with ya man

LightRey
08-11-2011, 07:23 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Grandmaster_Z:
Turkiye, these people think they are scholars because they read something on wikipedia.
i'm with ya man </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
According to my encyclopedia the name Constantinople was the official and most commonly used name for the city until the founding of the Turkish Republic. It's true that it was sometimes referred to as Islambol, or later Istanbul, but Constantinople was its official name even to its Ottoman rulers.

itsamea-mario
08-11-2011, 07:46 AM
Stop yo moanin', its not that big of a deal.
Ezio is a man of the people, and most of the people still called the city constantinople, then ezio will call it constantinople, so the game is set in 'constantinople'.

Turkiye, you keep saying it was 'dubbed', a person can be dubbed as 'sir whatsisname' but there name will still be 'whatsisname'.
just because the city was 'dubbed' istanbul, doesn't mean its actually called istanbul.
(That was probably the worst analogy ever.)

Turkiye96
08-11-2011, 09:25 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Chamboozer:
When New Amsterdam was renamed to New York it was before the name of the city was connected to any sort of prestigious history, thus renaming it had no negative effects. Constantinople on the other hand had a long history of being the most important city in the world for the most part. And Istanbul does indeed have prestige now, after it's been the Ottoman capital for centuries. But in 1512 when the game takes place the name Istanbul was not prestigious, as it had yet to reach the apex of its glory.

It has been stated that Mehmed II dubbing the city 'Islambol' meaning 'abounding with Islam' was a pun, just a joke not meant to be the actual renaming of the city. As you said he wanted to be included in Western diplomacy and to be seen as the successor to the great heroes of antiquity such as Alexander the Great (whom was a personal hero of his). Thus keeping the name as Constantinople fits exactly into his plan, the west would have seen him as a person to take seriously as the ruler of Constantinople, rather than the ruler of 'Istanbul' which they had never heard of, even if in fact there was no real difference.

If I told him the city was named Constantinople he was have said, "Yes, that is correct." If I had said the city was named Istanbul, he would have said, "Yes, Constantinople is Istanbul (abounding with Islam) but when people ask me, 'What is the name of the city of which you are Sultan?' my response is 'I am the Sultan of Constantinople.'" </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

interesting analysis, and a very good argument! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif but, i would like to point some things out, ( as usual i just wont shut up :P).

Firstly, little to no accounts in the history books say he titled the city ''Islambol'' what way more a name made up by contemporary writers to Sultan Mehmed II, and used as a folk-etymological adaptation of Istanbul for those who favoured it's link with Islam. It is widely believed through countless sources that he actually titled the city ''Istanbul'' rather than ''Islambol'', so im just curious where you heard that false info. maybe a muslim bias source. however the term some how did come to ''OFF?C?AL'' use in the 17and 18th century.

The name ''?stanbul'' had been around since atleast the 10th century. stated by Armenian, Arabic and then Turkish sources. and ofcourse titled Istanbul by the Sultan. Again, there are no statements or sources anywhere what so ever that have said he said it in a laughful manner and that he was joking about it. please show me some if i am wrong but until then that statment is wrong, He was totally serious in titling the city Istanbul.

and while your first paragraph has a good point, there is 1 huge flaw in it.
you say that Istanbul wasn't ''offocial'' until the 1900's when the Ottoman empre desolved into Turkey and reforms were made. And yet you also say that that ''And Istanbul does indeed have prestige now, after it's been the Ottoman capital for centuries.'' but im confused it has not even been 1 century since the name has ''offocially'' changed.
Im a little confused, how come its not ''official'' until the 1900's and yet you consider the city to be called ''Istanbul'' for centuries ( im asuming you ment atleast 2 or 3) so whats the key difference im missing here? if this was unbias, you wouldn't have refered to it as Istanbul under the ottomans and since you have why would 1511 be any different? it wasn't and we know there is no reason to believe just because its newer back then its any less official.

And yes i agree that sure they could change it to New york without any huge negative effects, however there are 2 points to this i feel you should know. firstly, yes, there were disadvantages to renaming it as at first nobody would know it and also new amsterdam DID HAVE HISTORY TO IT. back when they were considering to change it's name, they knew they would have to sacrifice some of its historical presence, with the title and it being known for its founding and colonial history. And yet the did it anyway, because they wanted to leave their inprint to is just like ever nation puts their flag up in the places they own. but nobody knows New York for its historic prestige, rather its economical power and tourism. so they changed the name and made it famous. and seeing as back then new amsterdam wasnt that important not many people would know it changes yet as it because more famous, people realized. what im trying to say here is that whenever that first initial change happens it might not be too beneficial and people might look down upon it but as time goes on, It will carv out its own benefits, and prestige, but without that initial step... its nothing.
same with ''Constantinople''/''Istanbul'' in 1453 when the Ottomans took ''Constantinople'', it was tiny almost a town rather than a bursting metropolis, there were clames that is was soo poor and underpopulated that some of the urban areas had been abandoned and unused have turned back into wilderness. in 1502 the title ''Constantinople held little to no power in that respect, it was just a village with great potential yet still nothing impressive, the only thing of value that the title held was its historical. and soon after the Ottomans conquered it they turnned it back to a huge city, very dense rich and populated, so the term Istanbul would hold more prestige as it would be a much more important city, the City was at it's apex ( historically) under the Ottomans. and as you even refered to it being Istanbul in those times. (exactly why you called it Istanbul rather than Constantinople.

And is 1511 or 1512 ( when the game takes place), Istanbul was far better than the 1453 Constantinople, as the game even says, ''It was the New York of its time'' and was a major trade route to europe. i doubt to believe that it is refering to the 1453 constantinople as it was a simple town.

Truely, in 1511 that city is closer to its apex than ever before, and so Istanbul held a title of prestige higher than Constantinople.

and look i dont care how slow the media was back then, no matter what happened, if Constantinople really had all that history to it, people would know it had been tooken by the ottomans and titled ''Istanbul''. even a crusade was called upon it so all christians would have know about it. the title '' Istanbul'' was well know back then ( maybe not well used but) and thus when a Sultan for the ottoman empire said he was the ruler of Istanbul people would know it for the remenece of is age long historical prestige and its huge military and economic prestige.

''If I told him the city was named Constantinople he was have said, "Yes, that is correct." If I had said the city was named Istanbul, he would have said, "Yes, Constantinople is Istanbul (abounding with Islam) but when people ask me, 'What is the name of the city of which you are Sultan?' my response is 'I am the Sultan of Constantinople.' ''
i agree with alomst everything you said there, im not trying to say ''Constantinople'' was unofficial, not by a long shot, because technically it was. Im only trying to say that as he was sultan and his word mean law, when he titled the city ''Istanbul'' it, by law was official. so yes to say both names are correct for the period, as both are the same place. YET the last part would depend on who was asking, to get a better standing among european leaders, he would use Constantinople, however if you were a normal lets say guard, he would say Istanbul. he did want to keep the title of constantinople for european power yet still, he in every day life would use Istanbul

please im arguing tooo much :P i have a life to attent to so can we please srop for a while http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_razz.gif

Chamboozer
08-11-2011, 10:38 AM
Alright, I'm just going to go through every relevant book I have on the Ottoman Empire and see what they have to say about it. The trouble is authors are not likely to comment about a city not being renamed rather than the reverse.

"The city's Byzantine name, rendered in Turkish as Kostantiniyye, continued to be used alongside the newer 'Istanbul'. Istanbul was punningly rendered as 'Islambol', 'abounding with Islam', and also called Asitane-i Saadet, the 'Threshold of Felicity, or Dersaadet, the 'Abode of Felicity', among other names."

- Osman's Dream, Caroline Finkel, p.57 (earlier in the thread I said 55, my mistake)

"From the moment of his succession Mehmed II had seen himself as the heir to the classical Roman Empire and its Christian successor. Now his conquest of Constantinople confirmed him as such."

The Ottoman Centuries, Lord Kinross, p. 111/112, goes on to make no mention of a renaming of Constantinople

"According to the Ottoman chroniclers, "The sweet five-times-repeated chant of the Muslim faithful was heard in the city" and in a moment of piety Mehmet coined a new name for the city: Islambol - a pun on its Turkish name, meaning "Full of Islam"

1453, Roger Crowley, p. 237

"The city that he had conquered was known to the Turks as Kostantiniye, but after the conquest its name in common Turkish usage became Istanbul, a corruption of the greek 'eis tin polis' meaning, 'in the city' or 'to the city'"

The Grand Turk, John Freely, p.45

This particular quote seems to show the opposite of what you're saying Turkiye96, that it was common (lower class) Turkish people who referred to it as Istanbul and high class who still used Constantinople.

Another six books make no mention of an actual renaming of Constantinople by Mehmed II. One book does say the city was renamed Istanbul, but this is clearly a simplification as that particular book is aimed at an audience of lower age, and also is written by the same author who made the above quote (John Freely), so clearly the author himself did not even believe it was officially renamed at that time.

Turkiye96
08-11-2011, 10:38 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LightRey:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Turkiye96:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Animuses:
LMFAO It's named Constantinople.
It's like saying, "don't call New York City by it's official name, only call it The Big Apple."
Worry about the important stuff, this is in no way a big deal. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

... seriously how many time do i have to say this? the word or royalty (back then) was law and so ''?stanbul'' wasn't a nickname like the big apple it was official for the time, maybe not for our currnet time, hence why the officials and sulatins called it Istanbul as many sources state. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
y'know, before you go badmouthing everyone who disagrees with you, why don't you come up with some evidence? Up till now Chamboozer has made a whole lot more sense than you have. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

is their any proof that i am as you say ''badmouthing everyone who disagrees with [ me]''? have i said 1 single bad word in my previous post, and yet you insist on saying i am some how hostile, i dont think you should acuse people of being such bad things when they are not, its a bit mean :/

let me make this clear, i am not arguing because i am stuck up in me believes, which i probably am a bit ( just like anyone). I am agruing ( not in the hostile way, but in the debate way) because i enjoy it. and i believe anyone who is here to insult or offend is on the wrong site.

also i agree chamboozers statments make sence too, yet he has not put any sources down on the table and even some of the statements he has made aren't historically accurate. but let me show you some evidence.
-Barbier de Meynard (1881): Dictionnaire Turc-Franšais. Paris: Ernest Leroux- official names of the Military commanders and civil magistrate were ?stanbul a?as? ?stanbul efendisi

thanks Grandmaster_Z, im pretty much everyone is against me in this :P

''According to my encyclopedia the name Constantinople was the official and most commonly used name for the city until the founding of the Turkish Republic. It's true that it was sometimes referred to as Islambol, or later Istanbul, but Constantinople was its official name even to its Ottoman rulers''

really? is that so? well you have me, but i have a question, if the ottomans wanted to keep that title, why exactly did Mustafa III, the sultan during 1757-73 get so annoyed with the lack of respect being paid to the name of the capital city that he actually banned name 'Konstantiniye' ( evidence enough?) the ottoman royalty knew the name to be Istanbul. i think you should look up the author of the book as he could very well be bias on some matters and thus not reliable, or even not too ottoman history orientated and not look knowledgable on the topic. i dont think what you have as any standing point.

also as iv said the term ''official'' is a very lucid and widely fluctiating idea which differes especially through the ages, and thus event such as this were, in its time, considered to be within the bounds, in our current society the general and widely considered ( yet still not perfectly defined) term it is excluded.

-it wasn't officially changed until March 28, 1930
What does that mean? Is there a "name change registrar" that countries apply to? :P

still not satisfied, From the Catholic Encyclopedia of 1908:

"Thus was granted the sacrilegious prayer of so many Greeks, blinded by unreasoning hate, that henceforth, not the tiara, but the turban should rule in the city of Constantine. Even the name of the city was changed. The Turks call it officially (in Arabic) Der-es-Saadet, Door of Happiness, or (chiefly on coins) Konstantinieh. Their usual name for it is Stamboul, or rather Istamboul, a corruption of the Greek expression eis ten polin (pronounced stimboli), perhaps under the influence of a form, Islamboul, which could pass for 'the city of Islam'."

do i really have to prove my point any further?

LightRey
08-11-2011, 10:57 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Turkiye96:
do i really have to prove my point any further? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Yes, because up till now all you've stated are reasons why they could have called it Istanbul, not why they shouldn't call it Constantinople.

EDIT: With "they" I mean Ubi of course.

Turkiye96
08-11-2011, 11:11 AM
good quotes, im tired today but i'll get back to you on them tomorrow! :P

Chamboozer
08-11-2011, 11:18 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by kriegerdesgotte:
Once again I agree with everything Chamboozer has said. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by SabbataiSevi12:
This has to be THE most sensible post i have seen here in this entire thread. Seriously you all should just listen to Chamboozer... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by melihxenon:
^this. yeah, listen to Chamboozer... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LightRey:
I'm with Chamboozer too. He appears to know a lot about this stuff. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Rakudaton:
I second that. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Thanks for all the support. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Turkiye your arguments do make sense but even if 100% of the people in the city use Istanbul, the Animus still has to use the official name rather than something that's just a nickname. And based on the books I listed above, I still believe that Istanbul was merely a nickname.

ShaneO7K
08-11-2011, 11:26 AM
I actually got annoyed reading through this when Turkiye was given evidence multiple times but still argued that they were false.

SabbataiSevi12
08-11-2011, 09:30 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Turkiye96:
also i agree chamboozers statments make sence too, yet he has not put any sources down on the table </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Chamboozer CLEARLY listed MULTIPLE sources in the post prior to this one. Just thought it necessary to point that out.

SabbataiSevi12
08-11-2011, 09:32 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by dead_gunner187:
I actually got annoyed reading through this when Turkiye was given evidence multiple times but still argued that they were false. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

THANK YOU! FINALLY SOMEONE ELSE NOTICES.

Animuses
08-12-2011, 01:42 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Turkiye96:
... seriously how many time do i have to say this? the word or royalty (back then) was law and so ''?stanbul'' wasn't a nickname like the big apple it was official for the time, maybe not for our currnet time, hence why the officials and sulatins called it Istanbul as many sources state. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
If it wasn't officially named Istanbul yet, so it is a nickname. Regardless of who called it Istanbul, whether it be royalty or everybody, it was still officially named Constantinople.

SabbataiSevi12
08-12-2011, 02:14 AM
@Turkiye96: At least your arguments make sense my friend. Unlike those greek fellows from a few pages back.

Turkiye96
08-12-2011, 06:29 AM
dead_gunner187
i had reason to believe they were wrong. but whatever. i was gona talk about the quotes Chamboozer put up but i know im clearly not wanted here.i couldn't possibaly argue against the whole lot of you :/ have fun thinking whatever you want guys. i couldn't change your mind no matter what, iv clearly waisted my time.
but i will leave you with 1 point, those quotes agree with what iv been arguing, i was gona put them into context, like as Chamboozer said it turns out Fatih did at the very least agree upon the title of Islambol as a pun, maybe even as a joke, but I was saying that he didn't title the name Islambol just after taking the city, which he didn't, he titled Islambol later, and not the enet i was refering to. just wanted to clear up that confusion.


SabbataiSevi12 while i was writting that Chamboozer hadn't listen evidence, he had not done so yet and i so when i was posting that i was unaware he posted them

and yet again Animuses, i will just let you know, Istanbul was official, im not saying Constantinople wasn't (exept for in the years of 1757-73 ) as LightRey pointed out. which is a good point, but iv had enough of this ( possibly pointless) arguement.
i'll just say that you should get to tile your own things, just like everyone has.

SabbataiSevi12 thank you, most Greeks really hate Turks, but that it expected.


well im ''officially'' :P off this topic, do whatever you want.

Animuses
08-12-2011, 09:22 AM
Yes, Istanbul was an official nickname.

itsamea-mario
08-12-2011, 12:19 PM
Acting all happy and uncaring doesn't make you right...

Subject_4
08-12-2011, 12:55 PM
Or maybe, just maybe, somehow, the game will include something about the shift from Constantinople to Istanbul.
Frankly, with no disrespect intended towards any of the participants, or the fine people who call Turkey home, or it's rich heritage and history, this conversation is less interesting than an argument about how fast or slow grass is growing.
This is an semantic argument about 1 word in a context that is irrelevant.

Subject 4

misusel
08-12-2011, 04:40 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by SabbataiSevi12:
@Turkiye96: At least your arguments make sense my friend. Unlike those greek fellows from a few pages back. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>yeah yeah, the Greeks cant make sense at all, they r all lying and being foolish...right???i feel sorry for u and for this guy turkiye...its just a game and his writing in every post an entire book about his opinions that everyone must accept as his own...ITS JUST A GAME!!!FUN!!!ENTERTAINMENT!!! u know what is that???history isnt only turkeys privillege and turkeys wasnt and isnt so perfect and all others were and r crap and thanx to turkeys conquere they were blessed!!!Gooooooood!!! i want to stay calm and laugh with all these but u guys r beyond that...

Chamboozer
08-12-2011, 06:40 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by misusel:
yeah yeah, the Greeks cant make sense at all, they r all lying and being foolish...right? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I don't think he meant to say that you don't make sense because you're greek, but rather that the things posted earlier by you and AEKTZIS_1921 tended to be less of arguments and more of rants. You also lacked clear sources (and don't accuse me of only saying that cause you're greek, it has been said to Turkiye96 as well). I'll give you an example. You claimed to have an extensive education, but when asked about it your response was, "u dont want to know my education my friend...its big in many subjects..!"

misusel
08-13-2011, 02:26 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Chamboozer:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by misusel:
yeah yeah, the Greeks cant make sense at all, they r all lying and being foolish...right? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I don't think he meant to say that you don't make sense because you're greek, but rather that the things posted earlier by you and AEKTZIS_1921 tended to be less of arguments and more of rants. You also lacked clear sources (and don't accuse me of only saying that cause you're greek, it has been said to Turkiye96 as well). I'll give you an example. You claimed to have an extensive education, but when asked about it your response was, "u dont want to know my education my friend...its big in many subjects..!" </div></BLOCKQUOTE>well, i dont remember exactly but he doubt about my education and i answered like that...not a goodsounded answer but i am angry with all these...its just a game and they made the name of the major city of the game the problem of the century!!!u said i didnt mention my sources...thats true. only isnt cos i dont have sources but cos i dont want to get it to this convo here...

Turkiye96
08-13-2011, 05:39 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> Or maybe, just maybe, somehow, the game will include something about the shift from Constantinople to Istanbul.
Frankly, with no disrespect intended towards any of the participants, or the fine people who call Turkey home, or it's rich heritage and history, this conversation is less interesting than an argument about how fast or slow grass is growing.
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

hahaha :P http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by misusel:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by SabbataiSevi12:
@Turkiye96: At least your arguments make sense my friend. Unlike those greek fellows from a few pages back. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>yeah yeah, the Greeks cant make sense at all, they r all lying and being foolish...right???i feel sorry for u and for this guy turkiye...its just a game and his writing in every post an entire book about his opinions that everyone must accept as his own...ITS JUST A GAME!!!FUN!!!ENTERTAINMENT!!! u know what is that???history isnt only turkeys privillege and turkeys wasnt and isnt so perfect and all others were and r crap and thanx to turkeys conquere they were blessed!!!Gooooooood!!! i want to stay calm and laugh with all these but u guys r beyond that... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I was just posting why they should call it Istanbul rather than Constantinople, giving them a wider view on the matter. I didn't think anyone ''must'' follow my what i say, thats foolish. I just wanted they to heard the unheard side... so they can make up their own minds based on a better exetent of knowledge.

oh and I agree the Greeks have a lot of reason to be anti Turk, i mean we did a bunch of bad stuff to you guys through out history, naturally you are gona be ****ed and angry at the Turks for taking out the Byzantines, Its just a fact of life... like the Trojans hating the Greeks, it happens and there is nothing to do about it. its best just to move on from that ( yet almost impossible to do so).

''Acting all happy and uncaring doesn't make you right...''

asuming things doesn't make you right either, i was never ''acting'' happy or uncaring about what you or anyone thought in terms of what to call it because its their choise. Also i never thought being origianally happy or uncaring you make any difference, the only way to find out which side is right in this agrument is to look at as much evidence as there is(evaluating is validity) and finally come to a acceptable understanding. not by being nice, thats quite shallow.

Chamboozer
08-14-2011, 03:13 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Turkiye96:
I am agruing ( not in the hostile way, but in the debate way) because i enjoy it. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Exactly, and I hope everyone else holds this view as well.

misusel
08-14-2011, 07:03 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Chamboozer:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Turkiye96:
I am agruing ( not in the hostile way, but in the debate way) because i enjoy it. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Exactly, and I hope everyone else holds this view as well. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>this is the healthy way of thinking and it would be great if everybody else was doing like this.but...when u say things ( with a good will and not to offend ) like "people were treated very good from Turks" or the children the Ottomans were taking from their families had very good education" like they were "blessed" that the Turks conquered them its VERY sure to make some people (me included ) very upset..!

LightRey
08-14-2011, 07:13 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by misusel:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Chamboozer:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Turkiye96:
I am agruing ( not in the hostile way, but in the debate way) because i enjoy it. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Exactly, and I hope everyone else holds this view as well. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>this is the healthy way of thinking and it would be great if everybody else was doing like this.but...when u say things ( with a good will and not to offend ) like "people were treated very good from Turks" or the children the Ottomans were taking from their families had very good education" like they were "blessed" that the Turks conquered them its VERY sure to make some people (me included ) very upset..! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
I don't think anyone said people were "blessed" that the Ottomans conquered them. Minorities were generally treated better under Ottoman rule, but that's it.

misusel
08-14-2011, 11:58 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LightRey:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by misusel:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Chamboozer:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Turkiye96:
I am agruing ( not in the hostile way, but in the debate way) because i enjoy it. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Exactly, and I hope everyone else holds this view as well. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>this is the healthy way of thinking and it would be great if everybody else was doing like this.but...when u say things ( with a good will and not to offend ) like "people were treated very good from Turks" or the children the Ottomans were taking from their families had very good education" like they were "blessed" that the Turks conquered them its VERY sure to make some people (me included ) very upset..! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
I don't think anyone said people were "blessed" that the Ottomans conquered them. Minorities were generally treated better under Ottoman rule, but that's it. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>yeah yeah if u say so...i suppose u r older than me, so u must remember better than me..!as much as we try we will all end up in history arguments and fights...pfff!

Giannis1515
08-14-2011, 12:07 PM
It is Constantinoupole and not istanbul.Actually istanbul comes from a greek phrase which means'at the great city'.So it is definately NOT istanbul.learn some history...congratulations to ubisoft group,they kick asses,especially in history.keep on the good work guys!

Turkiye96
08-14-2011, 01:56 PM
you sure it means the ''great city'', maybe you should look again as from my understanding it translates to ''The city'' in Greek.
but then again i shouldn't get into this. Think what you want... thats your opinion

LightRey
08-14-2011, 02:15 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Turkiye96:
you sure it means the ''great city'', maybe you should look again as from my understanding it translates to ''The city'' in Greek.
but then again i shouldn't get into this. Think what you want... thats your opinion </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
It comes from "eis ten polin" which is ancient Greek for "to the city".

Chamboozer
08-14-2011, 03:00 PM
Yeah, 'to the city' or 'of the city'. I get the feeling that it's the kind of thing merchants would say, that they are either going to the city to sell goods, or the goods they are selling are of the city.

Chamboozer
08-14-2011, 03:03 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by misusel:
or the children the Ottomans were taking from their families had very good education" like they were "blessed" that the Turks conquered them </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Actually I found a very enlightening quote on this issue I was looking to share the next time this kind of thing came up, it might change how you view the Janissary recruitment system. I'll see if I can find it.

EDIT: "Many men who had entered the Sultan's service vie the 'levy of boys' (Devshirme) - the forced conscription of youths for the Ottoman palace and the janissary troops - were by no means cut off from their former homes. On the contrary, if their careers were successful they frequently interceded for their relatives or even brought the latter to Istanbul. Presumably the fathers and brothers of Janissaries got to hear something of their relatives' experiences"

- Subjects of the Sultan: Culture and Daily Life in the Ottoman Empire, p. 62, by Suraiya Faroqhi

So in fact the families did benefit from their sons being Janissaries, as they recieved money and the chance to escape countryside peasant life and to live more comfortably in the cities.

misusel
08-15-2011, 03:05 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Chamboozer:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by misusel:
or the children the Ottomans were taking from their families had very good education" like they were "blessed" that the Turks conquered them </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Actually I found a very enlightening quote on this issue I was looking to share the next time this kind of thing came up, it might change how you view the Janissary recruitment system. I'll see if I can find it.

EDIT: "Many men who had entered the Sultan's service vie the 'levy of boys' (Devshirme) - the forced conscription of youths for the Ottoman palace and the janissary troops - were by no means cut off from their former homes. On the contrary, if their careers were successful they frequently interceded for their relatives or even brought the latter to Istanbul. Presumably the fathers and brothers of Janissaries got to hear something of their relatives' experiences"

- Subjects of the Sultan: Culture and Daily Life in the Ottoman Empire, p. 62, by Suraiya Faroqhi

So in fact the families did benefit from their sons being Janissaries, as they recieved money and the chance to escape countryside peasant life and to live more comfortably in the cities. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>the source u mention is turkish, so i am not surprised...i can give u stories about jenissares that took orders to go and destroy their ex-homes and kill their parents just for their trainers to see that they have forgotten their "past" lives...maybe money is being given to some families but not to all and u must understand that Ottomans were taking the first born boys from their families to make them whatever they wanted...i cant say anything else for this, i feel stupid just for trying to make u understand that this was wrong and cruel...

kalo.yanis
08-15-2011, 04:09 AM
Wow, is this thread still going on? I thought it has already been established that, at the time, Westerners called the city Constantinople, along with a version of the name still being used by the Ottomans. Is it really so hard to understand?

In my country, almost all the cities have old names that I wouldn't mind being used instead of the current ones by Ubisoft and it wouldn't be a big deal.

Chamboozer
08-15-2011, 05:34 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">the source u mention is turkish, so i am not surprised...i can give u stories about jenissares that took orders to go and destroy their ex-homes and kill their parents just for their trainers to see that they have forgotten their "past" lives...maybe money is being given to some families but not to all and u must understand that Ottomans were taking the first born boys from their families to make them whatever they wanted...i cant say anything else for this, i feel stupid just for trying to make u understand that this was wrong and cruel... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Not only is Suraiya Faroqhi German, but she is also one of the most respected historians of the Ottoman Empire in her field.

If you can give me stories of Janissaries being ordered to do such things then you should do so, where did you hear them? Anyway, the fact that by the 1600's Turkish families were paying huge sums of money to have their children recruited into the Janissaries may serve as an example of how beneficial being recruited really was.

LightRey
08-15-2011, 06:07 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Chamboozer:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">the source u mention is turkish, so i am not surprised...i can give u stories about jenissares that took orders to go and destroy their ex-homes and kill their parents just for their trainers to see that they have forgotten their "past" lives...maybe money is being given to some families but not to all and u must understand that Ottomans were taking the first born boys from their families to make them whatever they wanted...i cant say anything else for this, i feel stupid just for trying to make u understand that this was wrong and cruel... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Not only is Suraiya Faroqhi German, but she is also one of the most respected historians of the Ottoman Empire in her field.

If you can give me stories of Janissaries being ordered to do such things then you should do so, where did you hear them? Anyway, the fact that by the 1600's Turkish families were paying huge sums of money to have their children recruited into the Janissaries may serve as an example of how beneficial being recruited really was. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Wow, the Ottomans were good at politics.

gharlazufarc
08-15-2011, 06:53 AM
Well in AC1 they didn't call Acre as Akka/Akko or Damascus as Sham, but in AC2 the cities are called by their Italian names like Firenze and Venezia. Even then Altair speaks with American accent unlike Ezio who speaks with Italian accent, so I guess you can blame it on the Animus, there are two version of it, LOL

SabbataiSevi12
08-15-2011, 09:37 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by misusel:
"people were treated very good from Turks" or the children the Ottomans were taking from their families had very good education" like they were "blessed" that the Turks conquered them </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I don't recall anyone ever saying it in that manner...

Calvarok
08-15-2011, 01:08 PM
If I know AC, they're not going to show any bias towards the terrible things that EITHER side did. Evin In brotherhood, they explained that Lorenzo de Medici wasn't as perfect and good as he liked to pretend, and that Ezio should have been more aware of what happened as a result of his actions.

Turkiye96
08-15-2011, 01:55 PM
I agree, and I believe you are right as just with lorenzo while you are helping the assassin's (who are at this time Ottoman) you negativly influence the Byzantines and so bad things happen to them that you wouldn't want.

well i havent seen any sources that they would attack their own houses, its not impossible as the ottomans were very strict with their military as to not make them route, though i do have my doubts and the wise ( or those with common sence) would not want to harm their owm empires houses and population.

i have heard a lot of stories and seen facts about this both of which portray this enrollment as very good or very bad. iv heard that some of the Greeks would break their leg not to join others would do anything and everything they could to join. so in that respect, that system the Ottomans applied was cruel to those who didn't want to be a soldier or a noble ( if they were smart) and was generous to those who did. so it balances itself out to be both good and bad. oh and the reason why people said that the ottomans were good is because people have already said that they were bad and it isnt too fair that only 1 side of the arguement is given... thats why we give examples of them being good too so that people can judge for themselves, rather then only being taught that the Ottomans were very bad from 1 side. I could as 1 example totally say the English ( remember its just an example) were bad and give evidence why, but then a bunch of people will give the other side of the arguement saying they are good with evidence. just because i have given 1 instance of something that some people didn't like doesn't make a nation bad. in truth a lot of nations have been both bad and good and it isn't fair to emphisize only the bad parts of an empire.

Chamboozer
08-15-2011, 02:03 PM
Certainly. The final 50 years of the Ottoman Empire are filled with stories of tragic atrocities, while in the early centuries it can be seen that the Ottoman conquest was beneficial both to the Ottomans themselves as well as their Balkan subjects. Ironically the people who resisted Ottoman rule the most were the Anatolian Turks, whom did not like the strict Sunni doctrine of the Ottomans and would have preferred Iranian rule.

Krayus Korianis
08-15-2011, 02:18 PM
I'm gonna go with the stance, it's Istanbul NOW but was Constantinople THEN.

People, they never cease to amaze me.

misusel
08-15-2011, 05:00 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Chamboozer:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">the source u mention is turkish, so i am not surprised...i can give u stories about jenissares that took orders to go and destroy their ex-homes and kill their parents just for their trainers to see that they have forgotten their "past" lives...maybe money is being given to some families but not to all and u must understand that Ottomans were taking the first born boys from their families to make them whatever they wanted...i cant say anything else for this, i feel stupid just for trying to make u understand that this was wrong and cruel... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Not only is Suraiya Faroqhi German, but she is also one of the most respected historians of the Ottoman Empire in her field.

If you can give me stories of Janissaries being ordered to do such things then you should do so, where did you hear them? Anyway, the fact that by the 1600's Turkish families were paying huge sums of money to have their children recruited into the Janissaries may serve as an example of how beneficial being recruited really was. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>she lives in Germany but she is Turkish! (have u heard many suraiyas in germany man???)anyway i dont know where r u from and how old r u, but u r reading the story from one side and thats wrong...turks want to change their history and make it look a bit better cos its bloody...i am not sure u understand what was the "kid-taking" thing...u want to make it in your mind more ideal i suppose but its not..!

kalo.yanis
08-15-2011, 05:06 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Chamboozer:
...the Ottoman conquest was beneficial both to the Ottomans themselves as well as their Balkan subjects.... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I'm going to have to say a big no to that, but this is OT.

LightRey
08-15-2011, 05:22 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by NBST:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Chamboozer:
...the Ottoman conquest was beneficial both to the Ottomans themselves as well as their Balkan subjects.... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I'm going to have to say a big no to that, but this is OT. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
He just explained why he was right about that. How exactly was he wrong? Because saying no doesn't really hold as much value as an actual explanation of why something is true or not.

Chamboozer
08-15-2011, 07:34 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by NBST:
I'm going to have to say a big no to that, but this is OT. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Lower taxes, exemption from miliary service, access to markets across the Middle-East and Asia allowing Balkan goods to fetch much higher prices (The Ottomans also tended to not declare state monopolies on profitable trade goods, something that can't be said of European countries). Defense against bandits and pilliagers, guaranteed religious toleration, easier access to divorce for women, autonomy of the legal system, the list goes on...

Clearly life was just so terrible for Christians in the Ottoman Empire.

Chamboozer
08-15-2011, 07:51 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by misusel:
she lives in Germany but she is Turkish! (have u heard many suraiyas in germany man???)anyway i dont know where r u from and how old r u, but u r reading the story from one side and thats wrong...turks want to change their history and make it look a bit better cos its bloody...i am not sure u understand what was the "kid-taking" thing...u want to make it in your mind more ideal i suppose but its not..! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes, she's lived in Germany for most of her life and is the professor of Ottoman history at the University of Munich. Is she automatically disqualified from writing Ottoman history because of her ethnicity? That's a rather racist thing to say. Personally I would take a Greek professor's word on matters regarding Greek history and I'm sure you would too, I don't see why the same logic can't apply to Turks.

LightRey
08-15-2011, 08:24 PM
Chamboozer, when it comes to this subject your awesomeness knows no bounds.

kriegerdesgottes
08-15-2011, 09:44 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Chamboozer:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by NBST:
I'm going to have to say a big no to that, but this is OT. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Lower taxes, exemption from miliary service, access to markets across the Middle-East and Asia allowing Balkan goods to fetch much higher prices (The Ottomans also tended to not declare state monopolies on profitable trade goods, something that can't be said of European countries). Defense against bandits and pilliagers, guaranteed religious toleration, easier access to divorce for women, autonomy of the legal system, the list goes on...

Clearly life was just so terrible for Christians in the Ottoman Empire. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Honestly though, The Janissaries for example were typically hand picked to be Christians by the Ottomans just so that they could be forced into Islam. And many families encouraged their children to do it because of the many incentives to being a Janissary but they were still forced to turn from Christianity and convert to Islam.

Chamboozer
08-15-2011, 10:09 PM
It's one of those things that makes more sense in context. The Ottomans were worried about certain families within the military becoming too powerful, by having their sons fight, gain wealth, then their sons' sons' etc. Thus the military's influence over the state could become bloated. The Janissaries were the solution, fresh soldiers who could send money back to their families but could not have children themselves, preventing any local dynasties from springing up. At least, thats how it worked until the Janissaries were actually allowed to have kids, then all the Sultans' fears came true.

And yeah, the kids being recruited was an exception to the rule of 'no compulsatory military service' but the actual number of Janissaries were really quite small. If I remember correctly the new recruits were collected every four years, with the total Janissary force never really exceeding 40,000 until the 17th Century. There were also strict rules on who could be recruited, such that older children that are necessary for work on their farms/shops could never be taken, and extremely young children reliant on their mothers were likewise exempt.

Chamboozer
08-15-2011, 10:34 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LightRey:
Chamboozer, when it comes to this subject your awesomeness knows no bounds. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Thank you. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif

melihxenon
08-15-2011, 11:05 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Chamboozer:

Lower taxes, exemption from miliary service, access to markets across the Middle-East and Asia allowing Balkan goods to fetch much higher prices (The Ottomans also tended to not declare state monopolies on profitable trade goods, something that can't be said of European countries). Defense against bandits and pilliagers, guaranteed religious toleration, easier access to divorce for women, autonomy of the legal system, the list goes on...

Clearly life was just so terrible for Christians in the Ottoman Empire. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

^Sarcasm, right? Nice one http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

I think that it's easier for some people to see the empty side of the glass! And you, Chamboozer, are great at showing and also explaining(with valid sources) the full side to them, and to us of course.

Jexx21
08-15-2011, 11:06 PM
..don't they call it Istanbul in the game, like how Damascus was called Damas, how Florence was called Firenze, how Tuscany was called Tuscana, how Rome was called Roma, etc.

It's only called Constantinople on the actual Animus interface. Not in conversation.

misusel
08-16-2011, 01:17 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Chamboozer:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by misusel:
she lives in Germany but she is Turkish! (have u heard many suraiyas in germany man???)anyway i dont know where r u from and how old r u, but u r reading the story from one side and thats wrong...turks want to change their history and make it look a bit better cos its bloody...i am not sure u understand what was the "kid-taking" thing...u want to make it in your mind more ideal i suppose but its not..! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes, she's lived in Germany for most of her life and is the professor of Ottoman history at the University of Munich. Is she automatically disqualified from writing Ottoman history because of her ethnicity? That's a rather racist thing to say. Personally I would take a Greek professor's word on matters regarding Greek history and I'm sure you would too, I don't see why the same logic can't apply to Turks. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>she isnt disqualified and i am not a racist, ok..?but, its very logic for her to say things different to make them sound better in everyones else ears...show me one turk historian that says clearly about the genocides turkey commited from 1915 to 1922...show me one that says what happened in Cyprus in 1974...have u seen a painting that shows the massacre in Chios...?Christians had better days before and after the ottomans come i can ensure u for that...i am from Greece and maybe i cant see things as it should, where r u from and u admire so much Ottomans and the way they treated christians..?

Chamboozer
08-16-2011, 01:25 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by misusel:
she isnt disqualified and i am not a racist, ok..?but, its very logic for her to say things different to make them sound better in everyones else ears...show me one turk historian that says clearly about the genocides turkey commited from 1915 to 1922...show me one that says what happened in Cyprus in 1974...have u seen a painting that shows the massacre in Chios...?Christians had better days before and after the ottomans come i can ensure u for that...i am from Greece and maybe i cant see things as it should, where r u from and u admire so much Ottomans and the way they treated christians..? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I don't think you're actually a racist, I was just pointing out how strange the comment was. Tomorrow I'll look for Turkish historians who confirm the genocide. The problem is that those Turkish historians would not be allowed to publish their works in Turkey should they say that, so Turkish historians from outside of Turkey (such as the aforementioned Suraiya Faroqhi) can be expected to be more reliable than the ones inside of Turkey. This is an unfortunate result of Turkey's (lack of) freedom of the press in modern times...

As for where I'm from, I am American. And before you ask, I have no Turkish ancestry. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Turkiye96
08-16-2011, 11:15 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by kriegerdesgotte:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Chamboozer:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by NBST:
I'm going to have to say a big no to that, but this is OT. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Lower taxes, exemption from miliary service, access to markets across the Middle-East and Asia allowing Balkan goods to fetch much higher prices (The Ottomans also tended to not declare state monopolies on profitable trade goods, something that can't be said of European countries). Defense against bandits and pilliagers, guaranteed religious toleration, easier access to divorce for women, autonomy of the legal system, the list goes on...

Clearly life was just so terrible for Christians in the Ottoman Empire. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Honestly though, The Janissaries for example were typically hand picked to be Christians by the Ottomans just so that they could be forced into Islam. And many families encouraged their children to do it because of the many incentives to being a Janissary but they were still forced to turn from Christianity and convert to Islam. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

what difference does that make? dont missionaries in africa try to spread their faith but giving stuff to the poor only if they convert. exactly why most of them do. this isn't any different. and they still do that today while back then there wasnt an understanding of moralty to be kept with while ruling a nation.

kriegerdesgottes
08-16-2011, 11:39 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Turkiye96:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by kriegerdesgotte:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Chamboozer:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by NBST:
I'm going to have to say a big no to that, but this is OT. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Lower taxes, exemption from miliary service, access to markets across the Middle-East and Asia allowing Balkan goods to fetch much higher prices (The Ottomans also tended to not declare state monopolies on profitable trade goods, something that can't be said of European countries). Defense against bandits and pilliagers, guaranteed religious toleration, easier access to divorce for women, autonomy of the legal system, the list goes on...

Clearly life was just so terrible for Christians in the Ottoman Empire. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Honestly though, The Janissaries for example were typically hand picked to be Christians by the Ottomans just so that they could be forced into Islam. And many families encouraged their children to do it because of the many incentives to being a Janissary but they were still forced to turn from Christianity and convert to Islam. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

what difference does that make? dont missionaries in africa try to spread their faith but giving stuff to the poor only if they convert. exactly why most of them do. this isn't any different. and they still do that today while back then there wasnt an understanding of moralty to be kept with while ruling a nation. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Everything you just said is wrong. First of all it's not like they go to Africa and say oh yeah we will feed you but only after you accept Jesus. What a bunch of b.s. and secondly the concept that people back then didn't have moral code and that it's a modern concept is absolutely ridiculous. I would even argue it's the other way around to some degree. Sure people have committed horrible atrocities on both sides in the names of their "religions" but the fact of the matter is no real Christian or even Muslim I suspect, would ever go out and murder people or withhold food from people for their religion.

Turkiye96
08-16-2011, 11:55 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by misusel:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Chamboozer:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by misusel:
she lives in Germany but she is Turkish! (have u heard many suraiyas in germany man???)anyway i dont know where r u from and how old r u, but u r reading the story from one side and thats wrong...turks want to change their history and make it look a bit better cos its bloody...i am not sure u understand what was the "kid-taking" thing...u want to make it in your mind more ideal i suppose but its not..! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes, she's lived in Germany for most of her life and is the professor of Ottoman history at the University of Munich. Is she automatically disqualified from writing Ottoman history because of her ethnicity? That's a rather racist thing to say. Personally I would take a Greek professor's word on matters regarding Greek history and I'm sure you would too, I don't see why the same logic can't apply to Turks. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>she isnt disqualified and i am not a racist, ok..?but, its very logic for her to say things different to make them sound better in everyones else ears...show me one turk historian that says clearly about the genocides turkey commited from 1915 to 1922...show me one that says what happened in Cyprus in 1974...have u seen a painting that shows the massacre in Chios...?Christians had better days before and after the ottomans come i can ensure u for that...i am from Greece and maybe i cant see things as it should, where r u from and u admire so much Ottomans and the way they treated christians..? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I dont think your racist, I think you meant to say that, because she is Turk, you believe she has reason to bias on the matter, however she does have credibility as she in a professor and thus if she was a national bigot she would not have gotten to the position she is in now. also the same could be said to you, you would ( im not saying you do) have a potential reason to show your nations worst enemies as evil, cruel and barbaric ( which i have seen countless Greeks do so, iv even been called a ''rat'' just for being born Turkish) i know its not nice or fair but i get it, its just how things work, i mean a bunch of Muslims hate Christians and a bunch of Christians hate Muslims, france- germany, israel- palestine, greece- germany.
its just how it is.

''turks want to change their history and make it look a bit better cos its bloody...'' Firstly i dont think you can validly represent that as fact, secondly there is the slightest chance that maybe, just maybe the turks actually believe their own history to be like that rather then them trying to make it up as they go along. I am Turk, I am also very proud that my ancestors were feirce nomadic wariors. these suposed ''genosides'' are yet to be accepted, while i dont think these actions you call genoside were nice ( i think they were harsh and mean) i personally dont think the definition of genoside ''to whipe a people out'' applies. but that can be your opinion.
yes i agree SOME indavidual christians were better off while also SOME indavidual christians were worse off. its not fair to only show 1 side. if i were you i wouldn't go any further, you can have your own ideas about history and dont worry a lot of people who actually know some history do know the ottomans have done bad things, but they also know they have done good things ( just like everyone else). you dont need to prove anything we know the ottomans were not saints but we know they were not devils either ( although i guess a bunch of people missed out on that history class )

misusel
08-16-2011, 04:14 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Turkiye96:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by misusel:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Chamboozer:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by misusel:
she lives in Germany but she is Turkish! (have u heard many suraiyas in germany man???)anyway i dont know where r u from and how old r u, but u r reading the story from one side and thats wrong...turks want to change their history and make it look a bit better cos its bloody...i am not sure u understand what was the "kid-taking" thing...u want to make it in your mind more ideal i suppose but its not..! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes, she's lived in Germany for most of her life and is the professor of Ottoman history at the University of Munich. Is she automatically disqualified from writing Ottoman history because of her ethnicity? That's a rather racist thing to say. Personally I would take a Greek professor's word on matters regarding Greek history and I'm sure you would too, I don't see why the same logic can't apply to Turks. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>she isnt disqualified and i am not a racist, ok..?but, its very logic for her to say things different to make them sound better in everyones else ears...show me one turk historian that says clearly about the genocides turkey commited from 1915 to 1922...show me one that says what happened in Cyprus in 1974...have u seen a painting that shows the massacre in Chios...?Christians had better days before and after the ottomans come i can ensure u for that...i am from Greece and maybe i cant see things as it should, where r u from and u admire so much Ottomans and the way they treated christians..? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I dont think your racist, I think you meant to say that, because she is Turk, you believe she has reason to bias on the matter, however she does have credibility as she in a professor and thus if she was a national bigot she would not have gotten to the position she is in now. also the same could be said to you, you would ( im not saying you do) have a potential reason to show your nations worst enemies as evil, cruel and barbaric ( which i have seen countless Greeks do so, iv even been called a ''rat'' just for being born Turkish) i know its not nice or fair but i get it, its just how things work, i mean a bunch of Muslims hate Christians and a bunch of Christians hate Muslims, france- germany, israel- palestine, greece- germany.
its just how it is.

''turks want to change their history and make it look a bit better cos its bloody...'' Firstly i dont think you can validly represent that as fact, secondly there is the slightest chance that maybe, just maybe the turks actually believe their own history to be like that rather then them trying to make it up as they go along. I am Turk, I am also very proud that my ancestors were feirce nomadic wariors. these suposed ''genosides'' are yet to be accepted, while i dont think these actions you call genoside were nice ( i think they were harsh and mean) i personally dont think the definition of genoside ''to whipe a people out'' applies. but that can be your opinion.
yes i agree SOME indavidual christians were better off while also SOME indavidual christians were worse off. its not fair to only show 1 side. if i were you i wouldn't go any further, you can have your own ideas about history and dont worry a lot of people who actually know some history do know the ottomans have done bad things, but they also know they have done good things ( just like everyone else). you dont need to prove anything we know the ottomans were not saints but we know they were not devils either ( although i guess a bunch of people missed out on that history class ) </div></BLOCKQUOTE>look, i dont want to go again in this kind of convo here, i said already to much, its a game and thats it...if u believe the things u say, u have my respects, just when i am listening things that were horrible to my people shown like they were generocities ( i dont know if i wrote it correct ) i become angry, i cant help it..!

melihxenon
08-16-2011, 06:01 PM
This topic is out of its track... It was about naming of a city but now its about so called genocides, religion and things nothing to do with the topic...

Chamboozer
08-16-2011, 06:10 PM
The conversation is traveling in a natural direction. We have for the most part solved the issue of the name of Constantinople, and now are moving on to a general discussion of the Ottoman Empire. No harm done. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

EvileBluemonst
08-16-2011, 06:14 PM
ASSASSINS CREED HELP (http://assassinscreed101.com)

NewBlade200
08-16-2011, 06:31 PM
So this is about someone being angry about a name? It's not that much of a deal. There will probably be people calling it a vast number of things in-game. Ubi may be using the name to avoid any controversy that seems to plague games set in the East.

PS: Constantinople sounds cooler than Istanbul. If Ireland was renamed Hibernia than I would totally go for it.

LightRey
08-16-2011, 07:38 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by NewBlade200:
PS: Constantinople sounds cooler than Istanbul. If Ireland was renamed Hibernia than I would totally go for it. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
That is so very true.

kriegerdesgottes
08-16-2011, 09:25 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by NewBlade200:
So this is about someone being angry about a name? It's not that much of a deal. There will probably be people calling it a vast number of things in-game. Ubi may be using the name to avoid any controversy that seems to plague games set in the East.

PS: Constantinople sounds cooler than Istanbul. If Ireland was renamed Hibernia than I would totally go for it. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I don't know that one is a tough call. Hibernia sounds super cool to me but I think Ireland is cool too. I feel most old Roman names are cooler or just as cool as their modern ones like Dacia and Gaul rather than Romania and France.

LightRey
08-16-2011, 09:34 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by kriegerdesgotte:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by NewBlade200:
So this is about someone being angry about a name? It's not that much of a deal. There will probably be people calling it a vast number of things in-game. Ubi may be using the name to avoid any controversy that seems to plague games set in the East.

PS: Constantinople sounds cooler than Istanbul. If Ireland was renamed Hibernia than I would totally go for it. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I don't know that one is a tough call. Hibernia sounds super cool to me but I think Ireland is cool too. I feel most old Roman names are cooler or just as cool as their modern ones like Dacia and Gaul rather than Romania and France. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Actually Gaul is a somewhat barbaric butchering of the actual name the Romans had for that area. It was actually called Gallia.

kriegerdesgottes
08-16-2011, 10:06 PM
That sounds just as awesome. Also Germania sounds awesome too. Also Londinium.

NewBlade200
08-16-2011, 10:11 PM
Why did anyone bother changing these names? They're brilliant!

kriegerdesgottes
08-16-2011, 10:14 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by NewBlade200:
Why did anyone bother changing these names? They're brilliant! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

lol I don't know I would much rather book a trip to GAULIA LAND OF THE FRANKS than ....france.... lol.

LightRey
08-16-2011, 10:17 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by kriegerdesgotte:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by NewBlade200:
Why did anyone bother changing these names? They're brilliant! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

lol I don't know I would much rather book a trip to GAULIA LAND OF THE FRANKS than ....france.... lol. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
It's the communi- eh, I mean barbarians I tell you!

SabbataiSevi12
08-21-2011, 05:15 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Turkiye96:
these suposed ''genosides'' are yet to be accepted, while i dont think these actions you call genoside were nice ( i think they were harsh and mean) i personally dont think the definition of genoside ''to whipe a people out'' applies. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yeah you're right. People throw around the word 'genocide' and try to apply it to everything but common sense shows that there was no genocide of the Greeks.

SabbataiSevi12
08-21-2011, 05:21 PM
Also what happened to the Greeks is nothing in comparison to what happened to MY people in World War II with the holocaust. We had it way worse and have had it worse for way longer than your people.

Calvarok
08-21-2011, 06:33 PM
Not either of you personally, though, so remember to stay objective if you end up arguing about the above post.

LightRey
08-22-2011, 06:04 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by SabbataiSevi12:
Also what happened to the Greeks is nothing in comparison to what happened to MY people in World War II with the holocaust. We had it way worse and have had it worse for way longer than your people. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Eh, not only were the same things done to homosexuals and other people that weren't necessarily Jewish, but through the ages things that were just as bad have been done to multiple different groups of people.
You're right that the Jews are some of the most used scapegoats out there though.

As Calvarok said, please stay objective.

ShaneO7K
08-22-2011, 07:02 AM
Can't believe this thread is still going.

LightRey
08-22-2011, 07:09 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by dead_gunner187:
Can't believe this thread is still going. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Yeah, it's especially surprising that it hasn't been locked.

misusel
08-22-2011, 01:57 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by SabbataiSevi12:
Also what happened to the Greeks is nothing in comparison to what happened to MY people in World War II with the holocaust. We had it way worse and have had it worse for way longer than your people. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>basically 1.400.000 dead Greeks from 1915-1922 says differently...from the other hand u compare who had greater number in victims and u say "thats nothing"...that makes u really pathetic...the soviets had 20.000.000 victims, they should be talking more then u and your people then huh..???i got tired with this convo again...i dont care if u continue writing nonsence like the last one u wrote..the next time i will write here it will be to discuss a game's matter and not talking to a pathetic like u..!

Calvarok
08-22-2011, 02:11 PM
Yeah, if any mods are checking this out I think it could use a lock. It's kinda becoming even more about nationalism than it was in the beginning.

Krayus Korianis
08-22-2011, 04:31 PM
I'm still inclined to call the city "Constantinople" instead of Istanbul as, oh I don't know, it was named that when Ezio and Alta´r were around...

kalo.yanis
08-22-2011, 05:46 PM
Oh, please, don't start this again...

I think we should settle for: "It had many names at the time and westerners called it Constantinople."

Turks called it Konstantinniyye or Istanbul. Greeks called it Constantinople or Istanbul. Slavs called it Tsarigrad (city of tsars/caesars) or Constantinople.

Different names, same city. Big deal.

SabbataiSevi12
08-28-2011, 02:31 PM
@misusel

The fact that you are trying to discredit the Holocaust is quite offensive and outrageous. Statistically if you look at it one out of every THREE Jews was murdered at the time. You sir are unbelievable....

misusel
08-28-2011, 02:58 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by SabbataiSevi12:
@misusel

The fact that you are trying to discredit the Holocaust is quite offensive and outrageous. Statistically if you look at it one out of every THREE Jews was murdered at the time. You sir are unbelievable.... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>yeah yeah, whatever u say honey..!go now and play with your toys and brush your teeth before u sleep..!

Black_Widow9
08-28-2011, 03:23 PM
This original question/thought has been answered and this Topic is now becoming offensive. Please take a moment to check out the Forum Rules here. (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/5251069024/m/2961017947#II) Posting attacking others nationalities and cultures is not tolerated.

<span class="ev_code_RED">Topic Closed</span>