Comments on: The Guns of Constantinople http://www.historynet.com/the-guns-of-constantinople.htm?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=the-guns-of-constantinople From the World's Largest History Magazine Publisher Tue, 14 Feb 2012 22:24:31 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3 By: mushroom http://www.historynet.com/the-guns-of-constantinople.htm#comment-478756 mushroom Tue, 01 Mar 2011 15:06:37 +0000 #comment-478756 i was taught that the fort pulaski disaster was the end of masonry forts. so much for american school history... i was taught that the fort pulaski disaster was the end of masonry forts.

so much for american school history…

]]> By: dgher http://www.historynet.com/the-guns-of-constantinople.htm#comment-416010 dgher Mon, 03 Jan 2011 20:33:44 +0000 #comment-416010 iulian, the latin word is urbe, urbis not just urbis that is the genitive form iulian,

the latin word is urbe, urbis not just urbis that is the genitive form

]]> By: Probon http://www.historynet.com/the-guns-of-constantinople.htm#comment-271981 Probon Thu, 06 May 2010 18:16:42 +0000 #comment-271981 Iulian, Yet another typical piece of inventing history, akin to the children's tale of Romanians being some Dacian descendants. For starter, Temesvár in 1453 was just as much a part of the Kingdom of Hungary as Esztergom or Buda; second, at that time there were simply no "Romanians", but Wallachians, Moldavians, who had no clue that someday (when they have forgotten about their Albanian-related language and Cyrillic alphabet) they will be called "Romanians", a notion that did not appear on maps until the mid-19th century. And last, even if there had been a few Wallachians in Hungarian cities, such as Temesvár, at that time, surely they could not have made such an invention, as even the first print in Romanian language was established anbd funded by Hungarian nobles much later in Transylvania. Iulian,

Yet another typical piece of inventing history, akin to the children's tale of Romanians being some Dacian descendants. For starter, Temesvár in 1453 was just as much a part of the Kingdom of Hungary as Esztergom or Buda; second, at that time there were simply no "Romanians", but Wallachians, Moldavians, who had no clue that someday (when they have forgotten about their Albanian-related language and Cyrillic alphabet) they will be called "Romanians", a notion that did not appear on maps until the mid-19th century. And last, even if there had been a few Wallachians in Hungarian cities, such as Temesvár, at that time, surely they could not have made such an invention, as even the first print in Romanian language was established anbd funded by Hungarian nobles much later in Transylvania.

]]> By: Iulian http://www.historynet.com/the-guns-of-constantinople.htm#comment-270077 Iulian Mon, 03 May 2010 10:26:34 +0000 #comment-270077 well , the builder of the canon was not hungarian but romanian.he was bord in Timisoara , in the principality of Transiylvania. his name is spelled Urban (means from the city, or city folk . latin: urbis = city) Orban is just the hungarian version of the romanian name. to this day alot of romanians have the name Urban. (as confirmed by Laonicus Chalcondyles ) back then in the city of Timisoara was a famous canon factory,there were also many other canon factories in the principalities of Muntenia and Moldova. recheck your historical sources. transylvania wasn`t anexed to hungary back then .. only in 1865 within the Austro-hungarian empire. well , the builder of the canon was not hungarian but romanian.he was bord in Timisoara , in the principality of Transiylvania. his name is spelled Urban (means from the city, or city folk . latin: urbis = city) Orban is just the hungarian version of the romanian name. to this day alot of romanians have the name Urban. (as confirmed by Laonicus Chalcondyles )
back then in the city of Timisoara was a famous canon factory,there were also many other canon factories in the principalities of Muntenia and Moldova. recheck your historical sources.

transylvania wasn`t anexed to hungary back then .. only in 1865 within the Austro-hungarian empire.

]]> By: Ryan Silve http://www.historynet.com/the-guns-of-constantinople.htm#comment-137623 Ryan Silve Mon, 26 Oct 2009 02:52:46 +0000 #comment-137623 On the whole I enjoyed this article but it omits several important points, the most important being the fact that the Turks did not obtain victory until they found an unguarded and open postern gate at a point in the wall that had seemingly been forgotten. Also, it is worth point out the genius of Constantinople's gun master Giustani who figured out every possible way to counteract the Ottoman offensive measures. Also, the Knights Hospitallers would defeat the Turks using a defensive system similar to the Byzantine empire in 1480 at Rhodes and in 1565 at Malta. On the whole I enjoyed this article but it omits several important points, the most important being the fact that the Turks did not obtain victory until they found an unguarded and open postern gate at a point in the wall that had seemingly been forgotten.

Also, it is worth point out the genius of Constantinople's gun master Giustani who figured out every possible way to counteract the Ottoman offensive measures. Also, the Knights Hospitallers would defeat the Turks using a defensive system similar to the Byzantine empire in 1480 at Rhodes and in 1565 at Malta.

]]>