This is Peak Eastern Europe/Balkans

[lifestyle21873]

Spoiler: this is what you are

whore's son

ur mother is my personal sex slave, i fuck her everyday and beat her make her my little bitch all while she enjoys it like the useless whore she is

 

[Deleted member 10913]

in which war for example

This war. Sırpsındığı happened however western sources doesn't show it. This and sırpsındığı where all defensive wars we had against. Us taking byzantine lands let to a christian coalition against us. From your point of view this should place us as the defenders because we didn't fight against serbia or bulgaria, however they still found reason to attack us.

Keep note maritsa was also fought in our borders.

In all honesty look at this objectivly the case has been presented. We where on the defensive against the first balkan states we came in contact with. Both serbia and bulgaria.

 

[Deleted member 10913]

ur mother is my personal sex slave, i fuck her everyday and beat her make her my little bitch all while she enjoys it like the useless whore she is

Your whore mother is getting used for 1 dollar go and cope with that. We Turks rather die then selling our women, i see that the same santiment isn't shared with your family line of whores.

 

[lifestyle21873]

Your whore mother is getting used for 1 dollar go and cope with that. We Turks rather die then selling our women, i see that the same santiment isn't shared with your family line of whores.

you turkish roaches would sell your whole family tree for some small money wtf are u talking about

your turkish women are white mans whore, getting their pussy destroyed by cumskins

 

[goat2x]

This war. Sırpsındığı happened however western sources doesn't show it. This and sırpsındığı where all defensive wars we had against. Us taking byzantine lands let to a christian coalition against us. From your point of view this should place us as the defenders because we didn't fight against serbia or bulgaria, however they still found reason to attack us.
View attachment 1006291
Keep note maritsa was also fought in our borders.

In all honesty look at this objectivly the case has been presented. We where on the defensive against the first balkan states we came in contact with. Both serbia and bulgaria.

there are no eastern sources either no hungarian serbian or whatever the only source i have says what i said
and this video is like 30 years later? lol you are a fucking idiot for real

the case has been presented you are a dumbass who jumps from point to a different point just like in this post you are disingenuous as fuck

 

[Deleted member 10913]

there are no eastern sources either no hungarian serbian or whatever the only source i have says what i said
and this video is like 30 years later? lol you are a fucking idiot for real

the case has been presented you are a dumbass who jumps from point to a different point just like in this post you are disingenuous as fuck

Everything has been showed. Sırpsındığı was the first agression and this battle was the second. All sources state that a coalition formed against the turks at the moment the Turks annex the balkan parts of east rome. You can't deny this. Wether sırpsındığı or this battle.

you are disingenuous as fuck

Smh no.

Why did you even call that foul mouthed faggot here who is eager to defend you in this manner..

 

[goat2x]

Everything has been showed. Sırpsındığı was the first agression and this battle was the second. All sources state that a coalition formed against the turks at the moment the Turks annex the balkan parts of east rome. You can't deny this. Wether sırpsındığı or this battle.

Smh no.

Why did you even call that foul mouthed faggot here who is eager to defend you in this manner..

the sirpsindgi sources clearly tell that the ottomans attacked serbia ,bulgaria and made expansion policies.
i clearly posted it havent i? you are just in denial.

whatever its done at this point all the sources i read proves me

 

[Deleted member 10913]

whatever its done at this point all the sources i read proves me

The source you came with is wiki...
Like i said this battle does not exist in western sources however the Turkish sources clearly show who the agressors where. The pope who mobilised the serbs against us. These are our sources. Not wikipedia. This is all canon.

 

[goat2x]

The source you came with is wiki...
Like i said this battle does not exist in western sources however the Turkish sources clearly show who the agressors where. The pope who mobilised the serbs against us. These are our sources. Not wikipedia. This is all canon.


View attachment 1006378

this doesnt prove anything + wiki is real source i dont know turkish

 

[Deleted member 10913]

this doesnt prove anything + wiki is real source i dont know turkish

Here.

Positivist historians understand the Battle as the culmination of a continuous series of decisions by Christian polities in the region who attempted to forge a coalition against the Ottomans. This is why modern studies examined documents referring to the negotiations between Despot Uglješa and the Patriarchy in Constantinople when narrating the battle. The rich archives in Ragusa were also utilized by researchers to reconstruct the political relations between King Vukašin and the Serbian political entities in the north in the years preceding the battle. From the very few narrative sources contemporary to the Battle researchers used a short note by the monk Isaiah (probably residing on the Holy Mountain) who tells us that the death of the brothers Vukašin and Uglješa and the destruction of their army by the Turks was followed by the worst time for the Christians in the “west”. George 79 Gökbilgin in his entry on Edirne in Islam Ansiklopedisi gives the same information on the battlefield as Ahmed Badi Efendi who was probably his source.

 

[goat2x]

Here.

Positivist historians understand the Battle as the culmination of a continuous series of decisions by Christian polities in the region who attempted to forge a coalition against the Ottomans. This is why modern studies examined documents referring to the negotiations between Despot Uglješa and the Patriarchy in Constantinople when narrating the battle. The rich archives in Ragusa were also utilized by researchers to reconstruct the political relations between King Vukašin and the Serbian political entities in the north in the years preceding the battle. From the very few narrative sources contemporary to the Battle researchers used a short note by the monk Isaiah (probably residing on the Holy Mountain) who tells us that the death of the brothers Vukašin and Uglješa and the destruction of their army by the Turks was followed by the worst time for the Christians in the “west”. George 79 Gökbilgin in his entry on Edirne in Islam Ansiklopedisi gives the same information on the battlefield as Ahmed Badi Efendi who was probably his source.

can i get a source

 

[Deleted member 10913]

can i get a source

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://research.sabanciuniv.edu/8505/1/3021800000030.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwiUkeHT8oPvAhUP2qQKHTfSAAQQFjABegQIDRAC&usg=AOvVaw0NmepLDaMV_EoGxugjTlqK

'The falling like an autumn leaf' looks into a various sources of sırpsındığı.

 

[goat2x]

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://research.sabanciuniv.edu/8505/1/3021800000030.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwiUkeHT8oPvAhUP2qQKHTfSAAQQFjABegQIDRAC&usg=AOvVaw0NmepLDaMV_EoGxugjTlqK

'The falling like an autumn leaf' looks into a various sources of sırpsındığı.

where does it say that its about the battle we talk about? it could be before or after?

 

[goat2x]

Here.

Positivist historians understand the Battle as the culmination of a continuous series of decisions by Christian polities in the region who attempted to forge a coalition against the Ottomans. This is why modern studies examined documents referring to the negotiations between Despot Uglješa and the Patriarchy in Constantinople when narrating the battle. The rich archives in Ragusa were also utilized by researchers to reconstruct the political relations between King Vukašin and the Serbian political entities in the north in the years preceding the battle. From the very few narrative sources contemporary to the Battle researchers used a short note by the monk Isaiah (probably residing on the Holy Mountain) who tells us that the death of the brothers Vukašin and Uglješa and the destruction of their army by the Turks was followed by the worst time for the Christians in the “west”. George 79 Gökbilgin in his entry on Edirne in Islam Ansiklopedisi gives the same information on the battlefield as Ahmed Badi Efendi who was probably his source.

neither talks about the ottoman expansion policy or attacking others lol
ofc you will bring your "mates" together if you know a big empire will attack you, non sense

 

[goat2x]

@SayHeyHey i dont even agree w fucking nigger cuck ottomans taking byzanthine its just pure faggotry btw

 

[lifestyle21873]

imagine linking some source that is obviiously written by some subhuman mehmet cuck

 

[Deleted member 10913]

where does it say that its about the battle we talk about? it could be before or after?

The whole study is about if maritsa and sırpsındığı is the same. If it talks about the latter it is stated under the writings. Most of the Turkish sources are of sırpsındığı from page 54 starts the Turkish cronology

Apz’s account on the events from the conquest of Biga (766/1364) to the conquest of Kütahya (783/1381) is the best example of how the authors of the first major Ottoman dynastic histories had to interpolate events into the available chronology coming from early Ottoman calendars. If in the previously mentioned Ottoman history written by the Grand Vizier Mehmed the conquests of Biga and Kütahya were briefly mentioned in successive ordering, Apz History covers the same time sequence (between 766 and 783) with five bâbs (chapters). Each of the chapters describe the conquest of Biga, the routing of the Sırfs, the negotiations with the Germiyanoglu, the wedding of Bayezid with the Germiyan princess and the envoys sent by the Germiyans to bring the bride, respectively.139 When Apz was incorporating the story on the routing of the Sırfs and the wedding of Bayezid I he was not able to give an “exact” chronology of these events. As a solution he must have resorted to connecting the stories to events for which chronology already existed and such were the conquests of Biga and Kütahya. At the beginning of the bâb on the conquest of Biga, Apz mentions that the town was conquered when Murad I was on the way to cross to the other side and help the Ottoman forces under threat from the Sırfs army approaching Edirne.140 The forces of the Sırfs mentioned in the beginning of the bâb do not appear until the bâb. There the beginning of the bâb repeats the same information-that the Sırfs approach Edirne. However, what follows in the rest of the bâb is their arrival in the vicinity of Edirne, at the place where

Kosovo in 1389. Apart from the similar chronological ordering of the events in both historiographies, the depiction of the enemy in the narratives can assist the researcher in establishing whether the battle at Sırpsındığı and the Battle of the River Maritsa are just a different appellation for the same event. Idris Bitlisi is the author of the first Ottoman historical narrative from the first decade of the 16th century who mentions the leader of the Christian forces approaching Edirne. In his work Heşt Bihişt we read that the army of the destbot camped not far from Edirne.96 There can be no doubt that the name destbot refers to Uglješa’s Byzantine title Despot as we do not know of such Persian word or a name.97 In the Ottoman histories from the end of the 15th century the ruler called Despot is not mentioned when authors narrate the battle at Sırfsındığı. This means that Idris Bitlisi had used either an Ottoman source which has not been found yet 96 İdris Bidlisi, Heşt Bihişt, MS. Topkapı, Revan, fol. 174a 97 Stoyan Novaković in his study on the battle 1371 reports that in Idris Bitlisi’s work we read of Despot. However he does not tell anything else about the manuscript he had used.

BAB [chapter] [48] Tells about the arrival of the Sırfs in Edirne The Serbian infidels joined their forces. They advanced to the vicinity of Edirne. Şahin Lala and the prepared gazis intercepted them. In the darkness of the night with the sound of the drums and taking refuge in the mighty God they marched toward the infidels. As soon as the infidels heard the sound of the drums the infidels violently jostled against each other. The horses broke loose and were scared. In the darkness of the night the infidels suddenly began to kill each other. This happened on the banks of Meriç [Maritsa]; the rest of them [the infidels] drowned in the water and died. From those infidels only a few survived. And some of them were followed by the gazis and killed along the road. Today, gazis call that place Sırf Sındugı [the routing of the Sırfs]. When the Han [Murad I] heard that the infidels were utterly defeated he returned to Bursa with glory and circumcised his sons. [He] had an Imaret constructed in Yinişehir and there was a dervish called Postınpuş, so he built a dervish-lodge for him. And in Bilecük he built a Friday-mosque and for himself within the wall of Bursa, at the gate of the Palace, he constructed a mosque and in Kapluca he built an imaret and above it a Medrese.

 

[Deleted member 10913]

@SayHeyHey i dont even agree w fucking nigger cuck ottomans taking byzanthine its just pure faggotry btw

The whole study talks about the battle. It takes both western and Turkish sources in consideration. We talk about the Turkish sources that you can find throughout the paper. You can read for yourself that it talks about the christian armies joining in coalition against the ottomans

 

[Deleted member 10913]

imagine linking some source that is obviiously written by some subhuman mehmet cuck

It's over. Turkish sources is what we talk about. This battle only exist in our sources. Now gtfo and read book or 2

 

[goat2x]

The whole study is about if maritsa and sırpsındığı is the same. If it talks about the latter it is stated under the writings. Most of the Turkish sources are of sırpsındığı from page 54 starts the Turkish cronology

Apz’s account on the events from the conquest of Biga (766/1364) to the conquest of Kütahya (783/1381) is the best example of how the authors of the first major Ottoman dynastic histories had to interpolate events into the available chronology coming from early Ottoman calendars. If in the previously mentioned Ottoman history written by the Grand Vizier Mehmed the conquests of Biga and Kütahya were briefly mentioned in successive ordering, Apz History covers the same time sequence (between 766 and 783) with five bâbs (chapters). Each of the chapters describe the conquest of Biga, the routing of the Sırfs, the negotiations with the Germiyanoglu, the wedding of Bayezid with the Germiyan princess and the envoys sent by the Germiyans to bring the bride, respectively.139 When Apz was incorporating the story on the routing of the Sırfs and the wedding of Bayezid I he was not able to give an “exact” chronology of these events. As a solution he must have resorted to connecting the stories to events for which chronology already existed and such were the conquests of Biga and Kütahya. At the beginning of the bâb on the conquest of Biga, Apz mentions that the town was conquered when Murad I was on the way to cross to the other side and help the Ottoman forces under threat from the Sırfs army approaching Edirne.140 The forces of the Sırfs mentioned in the beginning of the bâb do not appear until the bâb. There the beginning of the bâb repeats the same information-that the Sırfs approach Edirne. However, what follows in the rest of the bâb is their arrival in the vicinity of Edirne, at the place where

Kosovo in 1389. Apart from the similar chronological ordering of the events in both historiographies, the depiction of the enemy in the narratives can assist the researcher in establishing whether the battle at Sırpsındığı and the Battle of the River Maritsa are just a different appellation for the same event. Idris Bitlisi is the author of the first Ottoman historical narrative from the first decade of the 16th century who mentions the leader of the Christian forces approaching Edirne. In his work Heşt Bihişt we read that the army of the destbot camped not far from Edirne.96 There can be no doubt that the name destbot refers to Uglješa’s Byzantine title Despot as we do not know of such Persian word or a name.97 In the Ottoman histories from the end of the 15th century the ruler called Despot is not mentioned when authors narrate the battle at Sırfsındığı. This means that Idris Bitlisi had used either an Ottoman source which has not been found yet 96 İdris Bidlisi, Heşt Bihişt, MS. Topkapı, Revan, fol. 174a 97 Stoyan Novaković in his study on the battle 1371 reports that in Idris Bitlisi’s work we read of Despot. However he does not tell anything else about the manuscript he had used.

BAB [chapter] [48] Tells about the arrival of the Sırfs in Edirne The Serbian infidels joined their forces. They advanced to the vicinity of Edirne. Şahin Lala and the prepared gazis intercepted them. In the darkness of the night with the sound of the drums and taking refuge in the mighty God they marched toward the infidels. As soon as the infidels heard the sound of the drums the infidels violently jostled against each other. The horses broke loose and were scared. In the darkness of the night the infidels suddenly began to kill each other. This happened on the banks of Meriç [Maritsa]; the rest of them [the infidels] drowned in the water and died. From those infidels only a few survived. And some of them were followed by the gazis and killed along the road. Today, gazis call that place Sırf Sındugı [the routing of the Sırfs]. When the Han [Murad I] heard that the infidels were utterly defeated he returned to Bursa with glory and circumcised his sons. [He] had an Imaret constructed in Yinişehir and there was a dervish called Postınpuş, so he built a dervish-lodge for him. And in Bilecük he built a Friday-mosque and for himself within the wall of Bursa, at the gate of the Palace, he constructed a mosque and in Kapluca he built an imaret and above it a Medrese.

piles of nonsense again thanks for proving my point that you are a fucking low iq bitch who just uses random shit as a "sOuRrcE"
this doesnt disprove my point at all lmfao

 

[goat2x]

The whole study talks about the battle. It takes both western and Turkish sources in consideration. We talk about the Turkish sources that you can find throughout the paper. You can read for yourself that it talks about the christian armies joining in coalition against the ottomans

yes obvsly? lol they did when they attacked first + expanded their european policies its literally in history books lmfao you fucking retard
+
what would they except they attacked byzanthines like little bitch savage animals, no wonder they wouldnt want them in their country
Georgios Phrantzes
"The Fall of the Byzantine Empire" p.130

"As soon as the Turks were inside the city, they began to seize and enslave every person who came their way, all those who tried to offer resistance were put to the sword. In many places the ground could not be seen, as it was covered by heaps of corpses.There were unprecedented events, all sorts of lamentations, countless rows of slaves consisting of noble ladies, virgins, and nuns, who were being dragged by the Turks by their headgear, hair, and braids out of the shelter of Churches, to the accompaniment of mourning. There was the crying of children, the looting of our sacred and holy buildings. What horror can such sounds cause!
Our greatest and holiest Church of Saint Sophia, the earthly heaven, the throne of God's glory, the vehicle of the cherubim and second firmament, God's creation, such edifice and monument, the joy of all earth, the beautiful and more beautiful than the beautiful became a place of feasting; its inner sanctum was turned into a dining room, its holy altars supported food and wine, and were also employed in the enactment of their perversions with our women, virgins, and children"

 

[goat2x]

It's over. Turkish sources is what we talk about. This battle only exist in our sources. Now gtfo and read book or 2

yes kinda concerning isnt it?
the turkish source we have says " It WaS tHr ChRisTiAnS bRo" even doe the hungarian king went war in the same year with bosnia

 

[goat2x]

@SayHeyHey you changed my mind in one thing i admit
i dont consider these attack immoral/uncalled cuz it was neceserrary to them to conquer etc since they were an empire striving
but my point was against the slavery/rape/destroying of the country itself/killings

 

[Deleted member 10913]

@SayHeyHey you changed my mind in one thing i admit
i dont consider these attack immoral/uncalled cuz it was neceserrary to them to conquer etc since they were an empire striving
but my point was against the slavery/rape/destroying of the country itself/killings

Well glad that we moved that out of the way. The rest is not my subject of knowledge so i can't say much about that.

 

[goat2x]

Well glad that we moved that out of the way. The rest is not my subject of knowledge so i can't say much about that.

this wasnt my point in the first place, you need to look it in context
i said it to a guy in the balkans

 

[Deleted member 23286]

7 pages of pure autism
I love this community

 

[STAMPEDE]

I feel sorry for the Greeks Phillip the II of Macedon (Alexander the goats father) was blonde and now greeks are mutts

The Turks nuke the genes of the people wherever they go
View attachment 1005477

greeks were never blonde and they look the exact same today as they looked in ancient times.