pantigin
Tudun
Without Uighurs, there was no Mahmud and without him, there is no complete stories of Turks !
Posts: 164
|
Post by pantigin on Mar 1, 2008 17:30:50 GMT 3
It took place near Malazgird some 40 km north of Lake Van in what is now eastern Turkey in the year of 1071. The most valuable account of the battle is that of the Byzantine historian Attaliates who was an eyewitness. The battle is also mentioned in Armenian, Syriac, Islamic, and western European sources. In the battle the Byzantine Emperor Romanus IV Diogenes, campaigning on his eastern borders with 200000 soldiers to counter the Seljuk Turk threat of an army of 50000 turk warriors led by Sultan Alp Arslan. Few details of the actual battle are known. The Byzantine rearguard left the battlefield at nightfall and the Seljuk army was able to lure them into ambushes. The terrain favoured the Seljuk mounted archers and the Byzantine army was wracked with internal dissension. Although Romanus's army was superior in numbers, its composition was heterogeneous, containing many foreign mercenary contingents. The ultimate humiliation was the capture of Romanus himself. But he was honourably treated by Alp Arslan and released after a few days. It was also said that Sultan Alp Arslan let Malik shah's son marry with Emperor Romanus IV Diogenes's daughter. Anyway Byzantine prestige was seriously damaged by this defeat. The disaster at Malazgird has been seen as a convenient point from which to date the decline of the eastern Byzantine empire and eventually the Turkification of Anatolia. The battle has also been viewed as one of the mainsprings of European involvement in the Levant in the Crusades.
|
|
|
|
Post by H. İhsan Erkoç on Mar 1, 2008 19:46:20 GMT 3
Nice topic  The Roman (Byzantine) army was made up of around 100,000 men. |
|
pantigin
Tudun
Without Uighurs, there was no Mahmud and without him, there is no complete stories of Turks !
Posts: 164
|
Post by pantigin on Mar 2, 2008 10:20:52 GMT 3
Nice topic The Roman (Byzantine) army was made up of around 100,000 men. But according to my sources it's been said as 200000 men. |
|
pantigin
Tudun
Without Uighurs, there was no Mahmud and without him, there is no complete stories of Turks !
Posts: 164
|
Post by pantigin on Mar 2, 2008 19:08:02 GMT 3
I've found someting named a painting about Battle of Malazgird. Please.  |
|
|
|
Post by H. İhsan Erkoç on Mar 3, 2008 1:46:49 GMT 3
According to İbrahim Kafesoğlu and Salim Koca, the number was around 100,000. Roman armies were never as huge as 200,000. Islamic sources written much later after the battle usually exaggarate the numbers  The miniature you posted is from Medieval France, painted several centuries after the battle |
|
pantigin
Tudun
Without Uighurs, there was no Mahmud and without him, there is no complete stories of Turks !
Posts: 164
|
Post by pantigin on Mar 3, 2008 17:42:28 GMT 3
According to İbrahim Kafesoğlu and Salim Koca, the number was around 100,000. Roman armies were never as huge as 200,000. Islamic sources written much later after the battle usually exaggarate the numbers In this sense maybe you are right. |
|
|
|
Post by Azadan Januspar on May 27, 2008 21:58:30 GMT 3
weren't that rearguard actually the varangians?!
|
|
|
|
Post by H. İhsan Erkoç on May 27, 2008 22:01:01 GMT 3
Uhm I'm not sure  What I know is that they were commanded by Doukas who later fled the battlefield. |
|
|
|
Post by Nomad (Daz) on Jun 19, 2008 13:32:45 GMT 3
How typical for Empires. As you get bigger you starting to think smaller. You will only engage battle if you number of troops a twice or three times as much as the enemy troops. Many big empires ceased to exist this way.
|
|
|
|
Post by Subu'atai on Jun 26, 2008 3:12:28 GMT 3
^ Natural law of empires, that's how they rise and fall, and that's how defenders will always have a consistent advantage - a divine chance of freedom if you will.
|
|
What I know is that they were commanded by Doukas who later fled the battlefield.
