<p>I think i got this question right.</p>
<p>the persistant weakness of the Byzantine Empire was its loose control over the economy.</p>
<p>"Rak, I think you were right now the ancestor-worship question."</p>
<p>Neat, thanks.</p>
<p>"the persistant weakness of the Byzantine Empire was its loose control over the economy."</p>
<p>I'm afraid that's not correct. The right answer is that it didn't have a stable system of political succession. The Byzantine political system was so unstable and full of intrigue, in fact, that in English "Byzantine" today means extremely convoluted or characterized by devious intent.</p>
<p>See [url=<a href="http://courses.wcupa.edu/jones/his101/web/99byzpol.htm%5Dhere%5B/url">http://courses.wcupa.edu/jones/his101/web/99byzpol.htm]here[/url</a>], for instance.</p>
<p>consider how much little restrcitions the merchants / trades in Byzantine had, my answer makes sense in some degrees</p>
<p>Rak, I thought the answer to that was because they didnt have a powerful navy (which the Turks had, so they conquered Constantinople).</p>
<p>I can't say I agree. Byzantine controlled the thriving entrep</p>
<p>Ottoman Turks = horse riders, nomadics, Janisarries</p>
<p>I would doubt the Turks even had a navy...</p>
<p>I mean both answers make sense.</p>
<p>Your answer of political intrigue reminded something like Theodora telling Justinian not to flee, and how she gained power from this, and became a co-ruler of the empire</p>
<p>Goldfish,</p>
<p>At the very end the Byzantine Navy was weak, but at that point their entire empire was almost dead. Until that point, they maintained naval supremacy over the Turks (the Byzantines had Greek Fire, for instance).</p>
<p>Picasso = expressionist or impressionist ?</p>
<p>Ok.</p>
<p>Picasso = cubist. I missed that one too.</p>
<p>Van Gogh = impressionist right?</p>
<p>"I would doubt the Turks even had a navy..."</p>
<p>The Ottomans did have a navy, although their blue-water (deep sea) fleet was outclassed by the fleets of the Europeans. In the Black Sea, however, they maintained an impressive naval capability in order to protect commercial vessels from raiders and deter Russian advances.</p>
<p>See [url=<a href="http://powerpolitics.org/ottomanfleet.png%5Dthis%5B/url">http://powerpolitics.org/ottomanfleet.png]this[/url</a>], for instance, which is an excerpt from [url=<a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0199241619/qid=1133658787/sr=2-1/ref=pd_bbs_b_2_1/103-7284298-7597431?s=books&v=glance&n=283155%5Dhere%5B/url">http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0199241619/qid=1133658787/sr=2-1/ref=pd_bbs_b_2_1/103-7284298-7597431?s=books&v=glance&n=283155]here[/url</a>].</p>
![http://powerpolitics.org/ottomanfleet.png%5Dthis%5B/url">http://powerpolitics.org/ottomanfleet.png]this[/url</a>](http://powerpolitics.org/ottomanfleet.png%5Dthis%5B/url%22>http://powerpolitics.org/ottomanfleet.png%5Dthis%5B/url</a>){kind=link}
<p>Van Gogh was an expressionist.</p>
<p>But Rak, look here <a href="http://www.answers.com/topic/byzantine-empire%5B/url%5D">http://www.answers.com/topic/byzantine-empire</a></p>
<p>It says "Likewise, the term "Byzantine" also suggests a penchant for intrigue, plots and assassinations. In fact, the Empire was among the more stable political entities of its own or any other time. Its famous intrigue and turmoil was far less than that of Western Europe's unruly feudal states, and occurred most often during relatively brief interregnums between strong (and sometimes brilliantly led) dynasties. The very stability of the imperial state, however, probably undermined the creative impulses and innovativeness that characterized the early centuries of the remarkable Byzantine civilization, thus contributing to its eventual downfall."</p>
<p>what were the differences between impressionism , expressionism and cubism?</p>
<p>by the way, is cubism just means 3-dimensional and using two-point perspectives?</p>
<p>Nash,</p>
<p>
[quote]
I mean both answers make sense.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I know. I just disagree.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Byzantine controlled the thriving entrep</p>
<p>What a paradox ...</p>
<p>Goldfish,</p>
<p>First of all, I tend not to trust Wikipedia. Second of all, the things I've read have indicated that the court intrigue was quite debilitating.</p>
<p>Perhaps the view you cited is revisionist history, which has its merits but I wouldn't consider a good answer on a standardized test.</p>
<p>In any case, I'm going to look it up in A History of the Modern World and get back to you.</p>
<p>find anything?</p>
<p>Okay, I looked it up in *Encyclopaedia Britannica<a href="print,%202002">/i</a>. They made a point of emphasizing how political instability and intrigue reduced the ability of the Byzantines to confront their foreign enemies and made strong leadership a rarity. The article is extremely lengthy, but if you have access to a copy of the book (it's in the Macropaedia, volume 15), I suggest you give it a read.</p>