[Honorius]

Just a quick question guys...Why did the Ottomans wait so long to conquer the Kingdom of Trebizond.. Or was trebizond recognizing the ottomans as their suzerains?

[Philhellene]

Because of their defeat in the war against Tamerlan.

[Neos Dionysos]

Philhellene, on Jan 11 2006, 07:24 AM, said:

Because of their defeat in the war against Tamerlan.

No, that defeat happened in 1402, the defeat and death of the sultan gave Constantinople a repreive since it was said that the sultan, (can't remember his name), was planning on taking the holy city soon.

I think a more plausible reason is the location of Trezibond, which is very rugged hills and mountains hugging the small coastline on the Black Sea. It fell just two years after Constantinople and given the logistics and the terrain I think a fair amount of time to pass before the attack would come.

[Philhellene]

Why Constantinople? We are talking about Trezibond. And the deafeat of 1402 was crushing and the Ottoman Porta needed time to recuperate.

[Neos Dionysos]

Philhellene, on Jan 12 2006, 07:06 PM, said:

Why Constantinople? We are talking about Trezibond. And the deafeat of 1402 was crushing and the Ottoman Porta needed time to recuperate.

I know that, I am merely pointing out that the delay in time from Constantinople's fall and that of Trezibond is not attributed to, (IMO), to the defeat to Tamerlane. They did need time to recover, hence why Constantinople was not going to be taken for another 51 years. Once they had taken that, they went to root out the last vestiges of Greek rule.

[Philhellene]

By the way, Tamerlan restored old Seljuk states.

[Tobias]

Trebizond was an empire that continued to survive by playing it's enemies against each other and forming political alliances through marriages. The Empire was in constant conflict with many enemies after the Latin Empire; such as the Turks and their various Sultanates, the Italian republics (especially Genoa) and occasionally against Constantinople itself.
When Baghdad was destroyed in 1258, Trebizond become the major trade centre of the Silk Road. Whilst inder the protection of the Mongols, the city grew to tremendous wealth. When Alexius II was on the throne, the empire reached it's peak of wealth, artistic accomplishment and territorial extent.
Towards the end of his reign, the empire was continually fractured by civil war. It never recovered it's unity or wealth or dominance of the area's trade.
By 1442, the strength of Trebizond's army was made known to the Turkish empire, and Murad II attempted to take the city by sea, although the attempt was repulsed.
The ruler of the city at the time (John IV) could tell that his city would soon face Turkish conquest, and prepared for this by forging alliances. John's son, however, misused these alliances, and began intriguing with European powers, talking of wild schemes against the Turks. Mehmet II eventually heard of this, and led an army from Brusa in 1461. He isolated Trebizond from it's allies and laid siege to the city. After a month, the city surrendered.
As i said, the city survived for so long for various reasons; protection from the Mongols, it was useful to the Turks (providing considerable tribute) and it also played on the disunities of the Turkish empire; as well as appearing to not be a threat to the Turks.

This post has been edited by Tobias: 15 January 2006 - 03:23 AM

[Manuel I Comnenus]

Tobias, on Jan 14 2006, 07:21 PM, said:

Trebizond was an empire that continued to survive by playing it's enemies against each other and forming political alliances through marriages. The Empire was in constant conflict with many enemies after the Latin Empire; such as the Turks and their various Sultanates, the Italian republics (especially Genoa) and occasionally against Constantinople itself.
When Baghdad was destroyed in 1258, Trebizond become the major trade centre of the Silk Road. Whilst inder the protection of the Mongols, the city grew to tremendous wealth. When Alexius II was on the throne, the empire reached it's peak of wealth, artistic accomplishment and territorial extent.
Towards the end of his reign, the empire was continually fractured by civil war. It never recovered it's unity or wealth or dominance of the area's trade.
By 1442, the strength of Trebizond's army was made known to the Turkish empire, and Murad II attempted to take the city by sea, although the attempt was repulsed.
The ruler of the city at the time (John IV) could tell that his city would soon face Turkish conquest, and prepared for this by forging alliances. John's son, however, misused these alliances, and began intriguing with European powers, talking of wild schemes against the Turks. Mehmet II eventually heard of this, and led an army from Brusa in 1461. He isolated Trebizond from it's allies and laid siege to the city. After a month, the city surrendered.
As i said, the city survived for so long for various reasons; protection from the Mongols, it was useful to the Turks (providing considerable tribute) and it also played on the disunities of the Turkish empire; as well as appearing to not be a threat to the Turks.

Just like the second World War, the greater alliances forged by the small Empires of the East were defeated because none of them came to the aid of the other when the time called. The Ottoman Empire was able to pick off one kingdom at a time until Trebizond itself fell.

[Kosmo]

It's interesting that despite two centuries and a half of existance and some serious infighting it was ruled by just one dinasty. That is more then any other roman/byzantine dinasty. Even the infighting was not so bitter like in the proper empire. Another special thing it's his open foreign policy forging close contacts with mongols, georgians, turks etc.
They had some important possesions in Crimeea.