Was the collapse and fall of the Byzantine Empire a good or a bad thing for the Eastern Slavic Orthodox lands?

Futurist

Ad Honoris
May 2014
20,960
SoCal
#1
Was the collapse and fall of the Byzantine Empire a good or a bad thing for the Eastern Slavic Orthodox lands? By "Eastern Slavic Orthodox lands", I mean the territories that are now Russia, Ukraine, and Belarus. These territories--like the Byzantine Empire--were Eastern Orthodox. Like the Byzantines, the Russians would subsequently wage numerous wars against the Turks (in Russia's case, the Ottoman Turks).

I'm wondering if the Slavic Orthodox lands were more beneficiaries from the Byzantine collapse or whether the effect of this collapse on them (in the long(er)-run) was largely/mostly negative. Personally, it seems to me that the Russians (once they built a modern, powerful state of their own) might have benefited from the Byzantine collapse due to the fact that they no longer had a potential Eastern Orthodox rival to deal with and thus could be the indisputed leaders of Eastern Orthodoxy. Russia could then--centuries later--act as the liberator of various Eastern Orthodox peoples from Ottoman Muslim rule. Of course, it also helped that the Ottomans never actually expanded deep into the Eastern Slavic Orthodox lands. Whether this was the result of a lack of Ottoman power projection or a result of something else is best for others to speculate, though. In any case, though, this ensured that the Ottoman Turks would never actually be able to conquer and wipe out the Russian state just like they did with the Byzantine state in the 1.5 centuries leading up to 1453.

Anyway, what are your thoughts on this?
 
Jun 2016
1,784
Russia
#3
Was the collapse and fall of the Byzantine Empire a good or a bad thing for the Eastern Slavic Orthodox lands? By "Eastern Slavic Orthodox lands", I mean the territories that are now Russia, Ukraine, and Belarus. These territories--like the Byzantine Empire--were Eastern Orthodox. Like the Byzantines, the Russians would subsequently wage numerous wars against the Turks (in Russia's case, the Ottoman Turks).

I'm wondering if the Slavic Orthodox lands were more beneficiaries from the Byzantine collapse or whether the effect of this collapse on them (in the long(er)-run) was largely/mostly negative. Personally, it seems to me that the Russians (once they built a modern, powerful state of their own) might have benefited from the Byzantine collapse due to the fact that they no longer had a potential Eastern Orthodox rival to deal with and thus could be the indisputed leaders of Eastern Orthodoxy. Russia could then--centuries later--act as the liberator of various Eastern Orthodox peoples from Ottoman Muslim rule. Of course, it also helped that the Ottomans never actually expanded deep into the Eastern Slavic Orthodox lands. Whether this was the result of a lack of Ottoman power projection or a result of something else is best for others to speculate, though. In any case, though, this ensured that the Ottoman Turks would never actually be able to conquer and wipe out the Russian state just like they did with the Byzantine state in the 1.5 centuries leading up to 1453.

Anyway, what are your thoughts on this?
As far I know the religion has nothing to do with these matters. Neither Byzantine nor Ottoman empire were ever menace for Russia, rather contrary. The real menace for Russia and its neighbors were Crimean Tartars, vassals of Ottoman empire. They even sized Moscow once or twice. To speak the truth, all these numerous Turkish-Russian and Tartar-Russian wars were never battles of Christians against Moslems. In 1918 more than 50% of citizens of today's Turkey were Christians: Greeks and Armenian, the same about Crimean Tartars.