Why didn't they just use boats for naval supremacy?>have the most boats>destroy other's boats>use your boats to prevent others from building new boats>permanent naval supremacywere they stupid? they had a map of the Med and knew it was possible
how are boats meant to stop invading turkic hordes?
>>18402509>As early as 1081, Çaka Bey established a Turkish fleet, signaling the start of a long-term threat to Byzantine maritime control.> The Ottoman navy took control of the Aegean and Black Seas, cutting off Constantinople from potential aid from colonies in the Crimea and reducing Byzantine influence to almost nothing.I think that in 1081 the Byzantines shouldve been able to block Turkish shipbuilding....
>>18402470Too busy killing each other in ridiculous civil wars.For some reason people look down on the Western feudal monarchies of the period, but Byzantium would have been far more succesful if they just imitated the Western dynastic model.The Byzantine succession model (basically demagoguery) was primitive by comparison.
too busy arguing about angel parts
>>18402509whack them with the oars you fucking retard
>>18402470Decades of poor management made it so the navy was too expensive
>>18402470>mogged by some Swamp Italians in some trade boatsByzantie-bros...
There was a pro sassanid whale attacking their ships
>>18402845How much did they pay him
>>18402845Okay but the Sassanids were dead by the 8th century, what's their excuse for the next 700 years?
They did have naval supremacy, it’s how they were able to halt the Arab conquests and prevent Constantinople from falling into their hands
>>18404113The Arabs became the new Persian Empire
> Build a fleet to set sail from Constantinople> The admiral claims to be a long lost cousin and usurps the throne> 4 years of civil war> Another pretender steals half the fleet to Euboeia many such cases
Byzantines has naval supremacy for most time albeit their lost Crete for 200 years in 9th century. Their economic base in Anatolia was however not a naval based economy and naval supremacy did little to protect it from Arabs and Turks.The idea that 10th century navy could be used to outfit expeditions to collapse Muslim capitals in Egypt, Syria and Iraq is absurd.
>>18402568Hence they block them from sea route during the crusade
>>18402470The problem with your retarded question is it make it as if you are asking why the byzantine Empire never used boats, rather you should have asked "Why was the Byzantine Navy so ineffective", and actually you should have researched that yourself and come back to to explain your own opinion.
>>18404113>>18404281How close for Neo-Sassanids revival?https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mardavij
>>18402568This is just barbarians taking over byzantine naval industry.
>>18402845>Porphyrios (Greek: Πορφύριος) was a large whale (κῆτος) that harassed and sank ships in the waters near Constantinople in the sixth century. >Active for over fifty years, Porphyrios caused great concern for Byzantine seafarers. Emperor Justinian I (r.527–565) made it an important matter to capture it, though he could not come up with a way to do so. >Porphyrios eventually met its end when it beached itself near the mouth of the Black Sea and was attacked and cut into pieces by a mob of locals.>its real>islam won because of a fucking whale
>>18405854Not it's not "real"It's largely exaggerated
>>18402470Boat upkeep is expensive (if it flies, floats or sucks, it's expensive). They often just threw together a navy from their scraps whenever they needed, otherwise they avoided the cost by letting Venice or Genoa take care of it.
>>18402509^This.
>>18406074its probably cheaper to have a navy then to get invaded by muslims
>>18407366Islam won tho
>>18402509pour greek fire on their horses as they swim across a river, duh
