Greek Fire

[Cactus]

http://www.mlahanas.de/Greeks/Medieval/war/GrFire.jpg

Greek Fire was a kind of flamethrower weapon. The fleet of King Ihor (or Igor) of Kiev encountered Greek Fire during his 941 A.D. invasion of Byzantium according to the RUS (not Russian) chronicler in the Primary Chronicle. The Chronicler wrote: "The Greeks possess something like the lightning in the heavens and they released it and burned us. For this reason we did not conquer them." However, according to tradition, King Oleh in 907 A.D. did mount his shield on the Gates of mighty Constantinople.

http://www.infoukes.com/history/inventions/


GREEK FIRE

"Greek fire" was a weapon employed by the Byzantines, and its nature remains as mysterious today as it was in the 7th century when it was first unleashed. It was instrumental in saving Constantinople from invasion by Muslim fleets in 678 and again in 718. Such a veil of secrecy surrounded the weapon that, in time, the Byzantines themselves forgot how to produce it.

Incendiary weapons were nothing new in warfare in the Mediterranean world. Naphtha, a petroleum distillate, was known in the 4th century BCE. In combat on both land and sea, petroleum, sulphur, bitumen, and resin had been used since early Christian times. But Greek fire was more insidious. It was projected upon enemy forces in the fashion of a flamethrower. Contemporary accounts frequently mention the mixture being discharged from tubes mounted on the prows of Byzantine ships. Like modern napalm, it adhered to whatever it struck, and could not be extinguished with water.

The Byzantine historian Theophanes credits its development to a man called Calinicus, a Syrian refugee from the Arab conquest. We still do not know its precise chemical composition, nor do we know exactly how it was ignited. It may have been a mixture of distilled petroleum (similar to modern gasoline) that was thickened with resins and sulphur. This would have prevented it from being quickly extinguished or washed away by water. The Chinese possessed a similar weapon in the 10th century that was ignited with gunpowder – something unknown to the Byzantines in the 7th century. One hypothesis suggests that the Byzantines stored the mixture in vats and projected it with a type of force pump of the sort attributable to the Hellenistic inventor Ctesibius. An 8th century account speaks of iron shields that sheltered the men who operated the bronze "flamethrowers," and the author also describes the thunderous noise that the weapon emitted as it discharged. This noise has led some scholars to speculate that the Byzantines may have indeed known how to make gunpowder at that time, but this is by no means certain. The exact nature of the weapon was a state secret known only to a small circle of Byzantine elites. The infrequent record of its use after the defence of Constantinople in 718, and the poor performance of the Byzantine navy in subsequent years, indicates that the secret of Greek fire had been lost to its users. But even secret weapons do not usually remain completely secret, and the Arabs themselves managed to develop a version of Greek fire that was used for some time to come.

Ambiguity even surrounds the weapon’s name. The term "Greek fire" was coined by Western European crusaders in the 13th century - quite some time after the method of producing the weapon in its original form was lost. One of its original names was actually "Roman fire," since the Arabs, Russians, and Bulgars against whom it was used saw the Byzantines as Roman rather than Greek. The Byzantines themselves termed the weapon "marine fire," "liquid fire," "prepared fire," or "artificial fire." Despite its shrouded nature and its limited use, Greek fire is a good example of how a single weapon can alter the balance of power and, if even for a short period of time, alter the course of history.

http://www.ucalgary.ca/applied_history/tut.../greekfire.html (http://www.ucalgary.ca/applied_history/tutor/oldwrld/armies/greekfire.html)

They remade it on the history channel and tested it out to see if it would work. It infact did and worked rather nicely I think. Pretty amazing given the time it was invented. 8)

[Firefly]

Very interesting stuff indeed. I saw that programme too. Just because it wa sin the past we shouldnt think that men were less intelligent than today.

[Minimalistix]

actually id say the Classcal and Ancient Greeks were more smart then modern day Greeks :lol: :lol: :oops:

either way i never knew such a weapon existed back then, pretty amazing, bit scary too...

[Firefly]

actually id say the Classcal and Ancient Greeks were more smart then modern day Greeks :lol: :lol: :oops:

either way i never knew such a weapon existed back then, pretty amazing, bit scary too...

A question and not a flame.

Did the Byzantines classify themselves as Greek?

[Minimalistix]

yes

and the language they spoke was Classical Greek (which is the language spoken in ALL Orthodox Churches)

my Uncle is actually a Byzantian Greek (born in Instanbul)

the problem with Greece is that they consider anyone with a Greek Birth Certificate Greek, and say theres no minorities amon Greeks

so if you're Albanian you're considered Greek and dont have a minority background

theres no Greek tribes like Spartans or Athenians, you're just Greek, which is incorrect as im proud to say im half Mycenean and half Corcyrian (Myceneans from Argos in the Peloponese and Corcyrians from a island called Corfu)

anyways to stay on topic, does anyone know how they were made those flame throwers?

[Sturmtruppen]

totally agree :wink:

[Minimalistix]

also the member Tsolias is a Byzantium Greek as well

[Tsolias]

Greek fire -called liquid fire by the Greeks (υγρόν πύρ) was propably made from a micture of brimstone,tar,salt,petrol,olive oil,naphta,and some kind af early powder.
It could be extinguised with vinegar.

[Firefly]

yes

and the language they spoke was Classical Greek (which is the language spoken in ALL Orthodox Churches)

my Uncle is actually a Byzantian Greek (born in Instanbul)

the problem with Greece is that they consider anyone with a Greek Birth Certificate Greek, and say theres no minorities amon Greeks

so if you're Albanian you're considered Greek and dont have a minority background

theres no Greek tribes like Spartans or Athenians, you're just Greek, which is incorrect as im proud to say im half Mycenean and half Corcyrian (Myceneans from Argos in the Peloponese and Corcyrians from a island called Corfu)

anyways to stay on topic, does anyone know how they were made those flame throwers?

Thanks for that because I thought they considered themselves Romans. So what was all the stuff about the Western Roman Empire?

Did they act as Romans or Greeks? Did the call themselves Roman Emperors or greek emperors?

I dont know enough about this, but if you point me in the right direction I will continue my studies, as I did with the macedonians.

[Firefly]

totally agree :wink:

With what?

[Sturmtruppen]

totally agree :wink:

With what?

with Minimalistix
the problem with Greece is that they consider anyone with a Greek Birth Certificate Greek, and say theres no minorities amon Greeks

the ethnical minoritie have to be respeted also

[Tsolias]

Did they act as Romans or Greeks? Did the call themselves Roman Emperors or greek emperors?


Just imagine that the main cause for the fall of Constantinople was that when the Byzantine Emperor forced to make piece with the Pope and unite the two Christian churches (in order to get military help from him) all Greeks were furious and said: we prefer the Turks from the Romans!

[Minimalistix]

Thanks for that because I thought they considered themselves Romans. So what was all the stuff about the Western Roman Empire?

Did they act as Romans or Greeks? Did the call themselves Roman Emperors or greek emperors?

I dont know enough about this, but if you point me in the right direction I will continue my studies, as I did with the macedonians.

Oh no they didnt consider themselves Romans, the Byzantine Empire was formed when Rome split thanks to Germanic pressure, and the Eastern Part of the Roman Empire became the Byzantine Empire

and you say did they act like Romans or Greeks, well whats the difference??? (lol) the Romans were very much like Greek, they copied the Greek Gods, just only added different names to them (for example Jupiter The King of the Gods was Zeus in Greek) and the architecture of the Roamn buildings were just like the Greeks, etc etc etc

another interesting thing, Byzantium (original name of the city) was renamed Constantinople (modern day Instanbul, Turkey) Constantinople was a ROMAN and not a Greek (most un-educated Greeks think King Constantinople was actually Greek) so there was still alot of Roman 'influence' in Byzantium/Constantinople

The Byzantine Empire were MOSTLY Orthodox and the Western Empire was MOSTLY Catholic

the Byzantians also had alot of affiliation with the Muslims of Palestine and theres been alot of historical sources that show the Byzantian Orthodoxies marrying Arab Muslims and there was alot of friendship between the two Empires, of course that all changed when the Catholics went and attacked the Muslims...

[Bladensburg]

Minimal, Do you mean Constantine the Great? He was an Emperor or a Caesar or even an Augustus but not a King. Constantine might very well have come from York (Eboracum to the Romans) in England. The "-ople" bit in Constantinople is a form, as you no doubt know, of the word polis meaning city.

Your claim that the Romans merely renamed the Greek gods is slightly off, yes the Romans tended to borrow gods from people they took over, but they also had an original pantheon of their own gods (Jupiter, Mars, Minerva, Quirinus, Venus etc) and they tended to associate foreign gods with similar characteristics with them assuming that if they did the same thing they must be the same deity. Over time many of these became so closely associated with one another that they were indistinguishable but they did have separate roots.
The Romans also had a distinctly different outlook on the world. They were much more practical while the Greeks were philosophical, Latin is a much more practical language than greek while greek is much better at expressing abstract concepts. The Romans liked gladiatoral games while the greeks prefered theatre, hence the fact that there were far more Amphitheatres in the western Empire than the eastern "Greek" provinces but more theatres in the east than the west.

[Minimalistix]

Bladensburg everything you say is true, except i didnt know about the Gods, learn new things everyday :lol: however, yes i am talking about Constantine The Great, who was the emperor of the Byzantine empire, and renamed Byzantium after himself

also Constantinople (the city) was the largest city back in that time before the Ottomans over ran it

more info for you firefly if you're religious, in Instanbul (formerly Constantinople) the Churches mother Church is in Instanbul, Hagia Sophia, which means Saint Sophie in English

Its the headchurch for the Orthodoxies, Catholics, Anglicans etc etc etc
and they believe some of Jesus' belongings are hidden in the Church, even the Catholics think so, so there a good chance there could be

During the Ottoman Empire, Holy Hagia Sophia was used as a Mosque but when Kamel Ataturk created the modern country of Turkey he turned Hagia Sophia into a museum and stopped it being a Mosque (doesnt redeem him for being responsible for the killings of over 5 Million Orthodox Christians)

[Firefly]

Bladensburg everything you say is true, except i didnt know about the Gods, learn new things everyday :lol: however, yes i am talking about Constantine The Great, who was the emperor of the Byzantine empire, and renamed Byzantium after himself

also Constantinople (the city) was the largest city back in that time before the Ottomans over ran it

more info for you firefly if you're religious, in Instanbul (formerly Constantinople) the Churches mother Church is in Instanbul, Hagia Sophia, which means Saint Sophie in English

Its the headchurch for the Orthodoxies, Catholics, Anglicans etc etc etc
and they believe some of Jesus' belongings are hidden in the Church, even the Catholics think so, so there a good chance there could be

During the Ottoman Empire, Holy Hagia Sophia was used as a Mosque but when Kamel Ataturk created the modern country of Turkey he turned Hagia Sophia into a museum and stopped it being a Mosque (doesnt redeem him for being responsible for the killings of over 5 Million Orthodox Christians)

Ah well mate, thats religion for you, so uncompromising. As I have posted before My grandad was a Minister. So Im in no way religious after the treatment I recieved in my early years. Sunday was a day that me and my brother looked forward to with dread. but thats another story and off topic.

Thanks for the info though. Im sure that Jesus belongings have rotted away in 200 years though. But nonetheless i do believe there was a Jesus. What was his Greek name?

[Tsolias]

His Greek name is Ιησούς (Eeshoes).

[Minimalistix]

but his mostly referred to Xristos in Greek which means Christ.

[TexWiller]

During the Ottoman Empire, Holy Hagia Sophia was used as a Mosque but when Kamel Ataturk created the modern country of Turkey he turned Hagia Sophia into a museum and stopped it being a Mosque (doesnt redeem him for being responsible for the killings of over 5 Million Orthodox Christians)

5 million orthodox christians?even armenians claim that we killed 1 million!just where did you get that "historical fact"?you can not honor your ancestors this way my friend.see,they used "greek fire" but you are being a "greek flamer".oh,i remember now,you were 16 years old or something;hormones raging and all that.well at least you are interested in history;you could be listening to doom metal or doing drugs.even worse you could be an anime fanboy.

[Minimalistix]

and thats why your fucked up Mongol-Turkik Race cant join EU, because one of the conditions is for you Turks to RECOGNISE the Orthodox Genocide which you people keep denying you did

i didnt want to be rude, but why start saying those things about with with drugs and all???

and perhaps this is enough proof http://www.neobyzantine.org/movement/problems/asia_minor/genocide_asia_minor.php asshole

leave me alone and start killing Kurds instead, u guys already had ur fun with Greeks, Armenians and Assyrians

[TexWiller]

yeah yeah,a website called "neo byzantine" is really a dependable source of information.also,i hope your racist attitude will not go unnoticed by the moderators.

[Tsolias]

Hey Tex
Do you deny the Greek and Armenian genocide?

[Firefly]

Just to balance this up a bit, if you search back through the threads, you will find certain Greeks here saying that Turks and Musllims were hunted down after Greek independance.

I think we should all look ahead sometimes and not back. Otherwise we will always repeat the mistakes of the past.

[Tsolias]

Just to balance this up a bit, if you search back through the threads, you will find certain Greeks here saying that Turks and Musllims were hunted down after Greek independance.

I think we should all look ahead sometimes and not back. Otherwise we will always repeat the mistakes of the past.

Those were Greeks that changed their faith in order to get better living contitions.

[TexWiller]

you know that question will only result in a flame war,don't you?guess it was a mistake for me to reply Minimalistix's post.this forum suffered enough and i will not cause more mindless forum dog-fighting by not allowing myself to sink deeper into this meaningless feud.

[Firefly]

Guys, I would please ask you to agree to disagree on this. All counties have done things at times in the past that today we are not proud of.

I state again, agree to disagree and move on.

[Tsolias]

you know that question will only result in a flame war,don't you?guess it was a mistake for me to reply Minimalistix's post.this forum suffered enough and i will not cause more mindless forum dog-fighting by not allowing myself to sink deeper into this meaningless feud.

I respect that but if you're not willing to discuss it why start an argument?

[Tsolias]

Guys, I would please ask you to agree to disagree on this. All counties have done things at times in the past that today we are not proud of.

I state again, agree to disagree and move on.

Just a moment there.
There are some historical facts that cannot be altered.
Today,most of the Democratic countries had recognise the Armenian genocide and they are on the way to do the same with the Greek genocide.
This is a fact.

[Firefly]

Guys, I would please ask you to agree to disagree on this. All counties have done things at times in the past that today we are not proud of.

I state again, agree to disagree and move on.

Just a moment there.
There are some historical facts that cannot be altered.
Today,most of the Democratic countries had recognise the Armenian genocide and they are on the way to do the same with the Greek genocide.
This is a fact.

Then you agree with me then?

All countries have done things they were not proud of.

[Tsolias]

Then you agree with me then?

All countries have done things they were not proud of.

Of course i am.
As far as these countries recognise it.

[Firefly]

My country has done some despicable things too, and by that I mean Scotland, witness what the Scottish Clan Chiefs brought about their own people:

http://members.aol.com/Skyewrites/menu9.html

[TexWiller]

I respect that but if you're not willing to discuss it why start an argument?


guess it was a mistake for me to reply Minimalistix's post

[Minimalistix]

Guys, I would please ask you to agree to disagree on this. All counties have done things at times in the past that today we are not proud of.

I state again, agree to disagree and move on.

Just a moment there.
There are some historical facts that cannot be altered.
Today,most of the Democratic countries had recognise the Armenian genocide and they are on the way to do the same with the Greek genocide.
This is a fact.

Then you agree with me then?

All countries have done things they were not proud of.

firefly, i DONT disagree with you

the only thing you dont understand is that the Turks were responsible for the deaths of 5 million Orthodoxies which included Armenians, Greeks and Assyrians, there been so much proof of the Genocide laid against Orthodoxies by the Turks, yet they deny it, best example is this pathetic user here, denying it

I know Greeks are responsible for Jewish, Muslim/Turkish deaths, i know Turks have been slaughtered during the population exchange of Greece and Turkey, the Turks also did the same

but the difference is we say, YES,WE DID KILL THEM AND WE WERE WRONG IN DOING SO, while these Turks go, No, there was no such genocide that killed over 5 million Orthodox Christians, no such event happened

Now how would that make you feel if you were Greek and knew over 2 Million of your fellow country-men died and the murderers say we did not do it, even after so many historical sources and proofs

and like i said, best example that the Turks deny it, is this fool of a member of this forum

it truly sickens me

[TexWiller]

please do not insult me anymore.

[Minimalistix]

consider it done (unless you say something degrading to Cyprus, Greece or Australia, or denying history)

[Dani]

and thats why your fucked up Mongol-Turkik Race...

Your racist post deserves an informal warning.

Also I request you to stop insulting.

On the other hand, I want to correct you on one of your affirmations:
Eastern Roman Empire (The Byzantine Empire) last from 312 AD to 1453 AD. Up to Great Schism (in 1054) was no Catholic nor Orthodox Church.
From 1054 to 1453 was Orthodox Church in The Byzantine Empire.
So, for 742 years The Byzantine Empire has the same ritual like the West. Only for the remaining 399 years The Byzantine Empire has The Orthodox Church.

http://campus.northpark.edu/history/WebChron/EastEurope/Byzantium.html

[Minimalistix]

well my good friend, tell me when the Catholic Church was founded, then tell me what religion the Byzantines followed :roll: Orthodoxy was the first Christian Church founded, and when the Western Romans created the Catholic Church the Orthodox KEPT the SAME PRACTICES and TRADITIONS except the only difference was that it was called Orthodoxy as it had to make a name because the Catholics created their own Church

research first my friend before you post ;)

[Dani]

well my good friend, tell me when the Catholic Church was founded, then tell me what religion the Byzantines followed :roll: Orthodoxy was the first Christian Church founded, and when the Western Romans created the Catholic Church the Orthodox KEPT the SAME PRACTICES and TRADITIONS except the only difference was that it was called Orthodoxy as it had to make a name because the Catholics created their own Church

research first my friend before you post ;)

Typically orthodox answer!! :D
Anyway, I believe in reconciliation.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/East-West_Schism#Great_Schism

...This conflict led to the exchange of excommunications by the representative of Pope Leo IX and the Patriarch of Constantinople, Michael Cerularius, in 1054 (finally rescinded in 1965) and the separation of the Roman Catholic and the Orthodox churches, each of which now claims to be "the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church. Though communion was not finally and completely broken until after the Ottoman invasion of Constantinople in 1453, the fundamental breach has never been healed.

And second link:


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholic-Orthodox_joint_declaration_of_1965

The Catholic-Orthodox Joint Declaration of 1965 was read out on 7 December 1965 simultaneously at a public meeting of the Second Vatican Council in Rome and at a special ceremony in Istanbul. It addressed an exchange of excommunications between prominent ecclesiastics in the Roman see and the Patriarchate of Constantinople, commonly known as the Great Schism of 1054. It did not end the schism but showed a desire for greater reconciliation between the two churches, represented by Pope Paul VI and Ecumenical Patriarch Athenagoras I.

[Firefly]

Good stuff Dani. I suppose the dominant church today would be the catholic one? Must be many more catholics than orthodox.

What about Romania?

[Dani]

According to http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/ro.html,
in Romania there are (as religion declared):
Eastern Orthodox (including all sub-denominations) 86.8%,
Protestant (various denominations including Reformate and Pentecostal) 7.5%,
Roman Catholic 4.7%,
Other (mostly Muslim) and unspecified 0.9%,
None 0.1% (2002 census)

Also, the Pope John Paul II visited Romania in 1999, as a first visit in an Orthodox country.
http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/travels/sub_index/trav_romania-1999.htm

[Dani]

Orthodoxy was the first Christian Church founded, and when the Western Romans created the Catholic Church the Orthodox KEPT the SAME PRACTICES and TRADITIONS except the only difference was that it was called Orthodoxy as it had to make a name because the Catholics created their own Church
research first my friend before you post ;)

Quoted from http://www.answers.com/main/ntquery;jsessionid=368nq0dbj20u7?method=4&dsid=2055&dekey=easternortho&gwp=8&curtab=2055_1&sbid=lc01a&linktext=Eastern%20Orthodox%20Church

The ritual that developed at the patriarchate of Constantinople—known as the Byzantine rite—gradually replaced other local rites in the Orthodox East, and after the 13th cent. became, with local variations and translations, the standard of Orthodox worship.
End quote.
What you say about this?


Also another quote:
The word Orthodox became current at the time of the defeat (753) of iconoclasm in Constantinople. Orthodox acceptance of the seven councils resulted in the exclusion from their communion, on grounds of heresy, of the Nestorian, Jacobite, Coptic, and Armenian churches; it also involves holding a sacramental doctrine of grace ex opere operato (see grace) and of veneration of the Virgin Mary, two points differentiating the Orthodox from Protestants.


Mate, up to the Great Schism (in 1054) was only ONE church!!

Please research!! :D :D

[Minimalistix]

Good stuff Dani. I suppose the dominant church today would be the catholic one? Must be many more catholics than orthodox.

What about Romania?

yes the Catholic Church is the most dominant Church with the most worshippers, second is Orthodoxy and 3rd being Protestant, most people from the Eastern European areas are Orthodox and most in the West are Catholic or Protestant (and of course there are minorities in other countries including Anglicans, Quakans etc etc)

oh also Dani you'd have to say that Orthodoxy is the most traditional Church with alot of the same customs dating back to when the first Church was established

Alas, im a strong believer in Holy Orthodoxy Preaches and Relevations... and unfortunetly disagree with alot of the things the Catholic Church has done in the past and the things they do in Church...

[Bladensburg]

Noo, religion, it burns :twisted: .

Seriously though Minimal you would be wise to remember that the Anglican communion and its various offshoots are Protestant and that includes not hust the African Anglicans but also Apostolics in the US.

[Minimalistix]

too be honest Bladensburg, i find Anglicans and Catholics VERY similar, the only difference is that the Anglicans could get a divorce back in the day, can anyone enlighten me on the main differences ??? (if there are any)

[Bladensburg]

Anglicanism remains a "catholic" or "universal" communion like the RC and Greek orthodox and it does have similarities with the RC, particularly in High Church parishes thanks in part to Archbishop Laud and others during the 17thC. Backed by Charles I Laud tried to introduce a universal prayerbook and liturgy with a more "Popish" feel, when he tried to force it on the Scottish Kirk the presbyterians went mental and this lead to the Civil War. The book still survives though in the Book of Common Prayer, which is one of the great works in the English language regardless of how one feels about religion.
Nevertheless the Church of England draws much of its character from the Protestant tradition, with the emphasis on individual responsibility to God and priests leading and teaching congregations rather than being their conduit to God as the RC and Orthodox believe. There is no confessional in Anglicanism and vicars and rectors canot give absolution for that would be hubris.

[pdf27]

too be honest Bladensburg, i find Anglicans and Catholics VERY similar, the only difference is that the Anglicans could get a divorce back in the day, can anyone enlighten me on the main differences ??? (if there are any)
Couple of IMHO very relevant quotes for you...

Sir Humphrey: "The Church is looking for a candidate to maintain the balance."
Master of Baillie College: "What balance?"
Sir Humphrey: "Between those that believe in God and those that don't."

Sir Humphrey: The Queen is inseparable from the Church of England."
Jim Hacker: "And what about God?"
Sir Humphrey: I think he is what is called an optional extra."

[Minimalistix]

Bladensburg, thanx for that :D


pdf27 i dont understand you :?:

[Dani]

OK, now back on topic!

We could open in off-topic - general a discussion on religion issues.

Thanks!