Balkaners, what was the worst empire that ruled over you in attrocities, culture loss etc? And which was best(the least bad)
Posted by Ok-Demand8957@reddit | AskBalkans | View on Reddit | 228 comments
Leading-Attempt-7364@reddit
As a Croat i would kill for Bizantian Empire. Make Bizant Great Again!
HumanMan00@reddit
Your existence confuses me greatly - positivly but greatly.
tipoftheiceberg1234@reddit
Best empire was Austria-Hungary. If it wasn’t for them (and the Czechs) Bosnia and Herzegovina wouldn’t look European
Worst empire is universally considered to be the Ottoman Empire except by an unfortunately growing number of Slavic Muslims.
Glarxan@reddit
My understanding is that Austria rule over various nations gets a lot of bad rep. It's not like they were particularly good, but compared to others Empires they were pretty tolerant. Hell, the fact that a lot of those nations retained or developed their own distinct culture after so many years of rule says a lot.
treba_dzemper@reddit
Even then, compared to Russian or Ottoman empire, Hungarians were still tolerant. They were assholes in the years around Ottoman conquests mostly because they expected help from Vatican -- which was pretty much fuck all -- but what Vatican expected in return is from Hungarians to act like Catho-Taliban inquisitors for them, and Hungarians obliged.
Later suppression of Slavs in Austria-Hungary in 19th century was mostly about their rising nationalism against the Germans that they wanted to numerically beef up at the expense of Slavic subjects of the empire.
Deep-Ad4183@reddit
Why, unfortunately? To be honest, I didn't understand that comment
Snoo-42876@reddit
I suppose he meant "unfortunately growing number of slavic muslims [who defend the ottomans]"
Deep-Ad4183@reddit
If they voluntarily adopt Ottoman culture, unfortunately there is none.
They do it because that is how they feel.
Styljac@reddit
Islam by no means makes you defend Ottomans. Or do you think neo nazis can defend nazi Germany because that is how they feel? It is, in fact, unfortunate.
Deep-Ad4183@reddit
Do you mean they support the bad things the Ottomans did?
Intelligent-Bat7390@reddit
Yeah slavery and having young boys cock and ball sliced off with barbaric methods sounds lovely let’s not sugar coat it they were fucking the Turks were barbarians
Deep-Ad4183@reddit
That wasn't the case. The only castrated men were those in the harems, and they weren't janissaries.
Intelligent-Bat7390@reddit
They did it in a barbaric ways to little boys many of them died due to the way they did it
Deep-Ad4183@reddit
What exactly are you referring to? Could you please point me to a source?
Intelligent-Bat7390@reddit
They were castrated and forced into sex slavery
Deep-Ad4183@reddit
Your comments lack seriousness, to put it politely.
Intelligent-Bat7390@reddit
I think you are a Turk not Greek 😆
Deep-Ad4183@reddit
No! You're just making stuff up.
vintage_cycles@reddit
Will speak on behalf of Moldova region as a whole (parts of Romania, Moldova and Ukraine). Best was Roman, worst was Russian.
tipoftheiceberg1234@reddit
Ottoman?
vintage_cycles@reddit
We were under Ottomans but with rather autonomous. Of course at some point the degree of autonomy was decreasing and ottomans were nominating the rulers directly, and we ended up having the fortresses directly controlled by the ottomans but we were never colonized, we were not asked or encouraged to convert to Islam, we did not have devşirme etc. East Moldova (most of today’s Republic of Moldova) was occupied by Russians in 1812. Things became worse, we were heavily colonized, we were Russified, they ended up messing our culture, language and identity. The local Moldovan elite has also nearly disappeared. And economically we were worse than West Moldova that still remained under Ottoman dominance and later unified with Walachia to form Romania.
treba_dzemper@reddit
Arguing facts from lived experience of your nation to russophile Serbs, especially Bosnian ones, like explaining maths to a cockroach.
treba_dzemper@reddit
They were never under Ottoman.
Ans we were never under Russians - which was at least as bad as the Ottomans - if not worse.
tipoftheiceberg1234@reddit
Being under Russians was considerably better because they encouraged literacy.
And the ottomans were absolutely in the territory of modern day Moldova. Who told you they weren’t?
treba_dzemper@reddit
Wallachia and Principality of Moldova were vassal countries, not territories of the Ottoman empire.
The distinction is significant, especially with regard to this topic.
The whole Poland A vs Poland B situation is extremely similar to the Austrian Yugoslavia vs Ottoman Yugoslavia with regard to all aspects of development, including literacy.
Russian empire enforced ubiquitous serfdom, religious persecution was orders of magnitude worse than Ottoman empire - there was no such thing as a millet system, so russification and suppression of native culture, language and identity was also much worse in Russian empire, and devshirme has nothing on Russian brutal conscription system.
tipoftheiceberg1234@reddit
Actually, vassal states absorbed their occupiers culture a lot. That’s why half the food in Moldova is Turkish, and why their main dance moves stems from a Turkish one (linking arms in a line, bending them up at the elbow and stomping their feet down). Literally pulled directly from the book.
The Russian empires official religion was orthodoxy, which Moldovans are. Did you mean the Soviet Union? People may have been thrown out of the communist party if they were seen going to church (as in Yugoslavia), which is a dire consequence, but at least the people who were smart enough to worship privately didn’t get taxed an obscene amount of money.
Oh yeah. I forgot all the cultural promotion Ottomans did during their empire. What did they call Slavic people who spoke a Slavic language, had Slavic genes and followed Slavic culture but then accepted Islam? Muslims. That’s it. Same Muslim as the one in Algeria. Not to mention the cultural genocide that happened with janissaries, which brings me to your last point
> Devshirme has nothing on conscription
You’re comparing child trafficking to mandatory military service.
I cannot tell you how unwelcome and unwanted apologists like you are in Bosnia and Herzegovina. You’re quite literally one of the reasons why the country can’t trust each other, because they know that you would gloss over a very traumatic part of Bosnian history that disenfranchised everyone, Muslims most of all (though they don’t seem to get that). People hate the Ottoman Empire, it is associated with everyone who isn’t brainwashed by Muslim or Turkish propaganda with an evil surpression that got us as messed up as we are today. And then you come in here, an apologist of child human trafficking and cultural genocide from that era.
At this point it doesn’t even matter where that ranks in comparison to Moldova. What you said was so outrageous and shockingly culturally blind that it’s humiliating. That in my country, which suffered so much under the Ottomans, I have to make excuses for apologists like you who embarrass the entire nation with this rhetoric.
treba_dzemper@reddit
I am a Croat, I'm just not a Russian cocksucker.
tipoftheiceberg1234@reddit
Well we have two different definitions of inhumane then. And judging by the slew of factoids and misprints in your response, I wouldn’t gamble my luck on your definition.
treba_dzemper@reddit
You got your answers from people whose nations had actual experience with both empires so I agree that us two having any more say on the matter is pointless.
vintage_cycles@reddit
Literacy rates in East Moldova also called Bessarabia (occupied by Russia) were absolute worst compared to West Moldova that remained under ottoman dominance and later became independent or Northwest Moldova (Bucovina) that was part of Austro-Hungarian empire.
tipoftheiceberg1234@reddit
Doesn’t look like it
vintage_cycles@reddit
Here’s a map of literacy rates in Romania based on the 1930 census. The map that you shared is very ambitious in terms of the information it wants to share. Were there censuses organized in all of those regions at the same exact time to collect such data? The map also shows modern day divisions which did not exist back then. Who spent all that time adjusting old literacy rates data based on the modern day borders? So I am very very skeptical.
outlanderfhf@reddit
Im here just to say you dont rly know much tbh
tipoftheiceberg1234@reddit
Okay.
Cudomudoviste@reddit
I had to vote Romans, since Montenegro was never defeated by any of the others. Yes we did fight, but we never lost.
Butterpye@reddit
My brother in christ, you were under Ottoman control for like 500 years straight
Cudomudoviste@reddit
No, Montenegro defeated Byzantine - Serbian armies at Tudjemil 1042, and that is official army day in Montenegro. Aparently there where 60.000 amnd we killed 40.000. Modern history considers that an exageration, but fact is. Since then. Serbs conquered us shortly in Nemanjic Times . For few decades. and next time was in ww1, and ww2.
And since then Montenegro was never defeated. We are small , but Montenegrin hills where never conquered. We had our Dukes and eventually kings , our church ect ect. All other states on Balkans fell to Turks , Venetians or Austrians. Venetia did hold our sea ports, that is true, but as far s 5 km from the coast, there was death for whomever ventured in.
There is famous historical joke - story. A traveler asked in Kotor. For how long he can reach Cetinje from Kotor?
Answer was : A friend will arrive in two hours. Enemy never.
SrbljeCharts@reddit
From what historical source do you have a mention of Byzantine-Serbian army and also can you tell me what people did Stefan Vojislav command in his army? And there was never independent montenegrin orthodox church
Cudomudoviste@reddit
Montenegro was mostly catholic until Balsa 2 married Jelena Lazarevic witch broth it with her and raised her son Balsa the third to be an Orthodox. Since then was a process . Today Montenegro is 75% Orthodox, 4,5% Catolik. At this time it was Docleat army since name of the country then was Duclea and nation was Ducleats. Name Montenegro rose up soon after. Evan though country was named Zeta, nation was already Montenegrin and this is well documented in Venetian. Turks, Russian documents of the time.
Montenegrin orthodox church was formed as independent when Ivan Crnojevic build Cetinje Monastery in 1475. Church was recognized by other Christian churches in 1485 with patrirh Visarion on its head. Booth Vatican and Moscow did so. And on Diptih that Russian orthodox church has , Montenegrin is listed as 9-th in hierarchy. Russians did also ``rukopolozili`` aka ``produced`` almost third of Montenegrins patriarchs and Mitropolits since then.
All of this is a historical fact.
SrbljeCharts@reddit
Sources for the existance of Duclean nation? And none of these things are facts Visarion or as a matter of fact any metropolitan of Mintenrgro ever had a title of patriach not to mention that Cetinje was built as a NEW seat of already existing church organization that being Zetska mitropolija,not to mention that there was never a real legal process of authocephaly of montenegrin church
Cudomudoviste@reddit
That is not what is written in founding documents . Original is at museum on Cetinje .
As well as in one in Moscow and one later confiremed by Fanar . But.... i am not going to debate any more about my history , nation and church. It is in me and those before and after me. I wish you a long life so that you can watch us free and strong as we where since the Roman province of Prevalitana.
Good night.
SrbljeCharts@reddit
As someone who is from montenegro you are a disgrace to our ancestors but remeber that truth will prevail at the end
Cudomudoviste@reddit
i hate to quote wikipedia since Serbian editors have tainted all as Serbian, witch is inacurate and false and , as any lie, with time it folders on it self as a bumerang. But ok. at least dates are acurate.
Битка код Бара — Википедија
SrbljeCharts@reddit
Stefan Vojislav is literaly called arhont of Serbs by medieval greek writers ehat are you talking about
Cudomudoviste@reddit
Shure. Funy how word Sclav ends up as Serb . 👀
SrbljeCharts@reddit
Show me where its writen as sclav
Butterpye@reddit
Ok wow you are correct. It was not the entirety of modern montenegro that kept its independence, a big part was indeed conquered like I said, but I did completely miss the fact that there was actually an independent montenegrin state there, pretty impressive.
Cudomudoviste@reddit
tnx
SuperConcert8949@reddit
"Mi uz Lovćen, a turci za nama..."
Cudomudoviste@reddit
Cudo jedno pa se nikad ne popese. Niti kod mene na Sinjavinu. Slabo im je islo to planinarenje. Nijesu vjezbali.
zara_anwar@reddit
When Austro-Hungary conquered Croatia, they came with horses and left with cars, when Ottomans conquered Albania they came with horses and left with donkeys.
liberaetimpera1@reddit
75% of ottoman army in balkans were albanian lol
zara_anwar@reddit
Sure, and yet for all the influence nothing was spend into infrastructure and education for Albanians not only that but even denying our language and culture. Gorgeous
liberaetimpera1@reddit
Who denied us our culture or language? Lol
If all that you say is true tell me why was Ismail Qemaili deposed? Why did Isë Boletini refuse to help depose the sultan? Name me the top 5 requirements from League of Prizren? Who led the revolution and counter revolution during 1908?
Ottoman empire in general was underdeveloped due to unfortunate policies
tipoftheiceberg1234@reddit
Because they human trafficked their children
Hour-Promotion-2496@reddit
Austria-Hungary did not conquer Croatia.
Croatia entered Habsburg rule in 1527, when the Croatian parliament chose Ferdinand Habsburg as king
Tight_Researcher1897@reddit
That poll is kind of pointless. Best is obviously the one you don't remember anymore and the worst is the most recent one, because this is how we memorize things. As if there are people who know what the Romans did back then...
Responsible_Trick466@reddit
In Albania we joke about how good it would be to have Austro Hungaria as a ruler actually
LordFumeitor@reddit
If you look at Romania, the parts of it that were under austro-hungarians, it's way more developed, more educated, and way more pro European.
Responsible_Trick466@reddit
Clearly
0BS3RVR@reddit
As a turk I am confident in saying that the scars left by the ottomams have not fully healed even after a century of their collapse. Were they the worst empire? No idea, ask a historian, but I can tell you that the ottoman empire was at least as disgusting as any other empire.
PainOk1877@reddit
with all respect to modern day turks,out of all of them,ottoman empire was the worst.
Empty-Pace-4228@reddit
Ottoman Empire caused way less life loss then UK, France, Russia, Spain and Portugal. However, kept the regions that they've ruled behind due to lack of progressivist government.
fogleth@reddit
Yeah sugarcoating the Devshirme is like putting vinegar on icecream bud.
AST360@reddit
Would you rather be an Indian under British rule, deemed of a lesser race and worked to death; an Algerian under French rule, a native American under American rule, a Circassian under Russian rule, a Congolese under Belgian rule?
Or a Balkaner under Ottoman rule, where unlike any of those above you get to keep your culture/religion/language, you are exempt from military service for a small fee, you are deemed of an equal race but your oldest one son (if you have only one son you are still exempt) might be taken by the state to be raised as their own to be an elite guard or a high ranking statesman.
I am aware your son being taken isn't a nice thing but considering what Belgians were doing in Congo centuries later you were lucky to be under Ottoman rule than any other empire.
fogleth@reddit
Yo what are you talking about we are the same race and it wasn't about the race. The Ottomans deemed non Muslim as lesser don't give me the nebulizing comparisons.
AST360@reddit
Europeans have literally deemed their own subjects akin to animals and had put them in human zoos all over Europe just because of the color of their skin. Nowhere in Ottoman Empire a race was deemed lesser because of where they come from.
Coming somewhere, deeming them akin to animals and putting them in human zoos and coming somewhere, granting cultural and religious autonomy and exempting people of military duty for increased tax is not the same thing.
fogleth@reddit
Dude f the Ottomans they set the Balkans back 300 years. Nothing will change the fact that we hate their guts immensely.
AST360@reddit
How many years did:
"Would you rather be an Indian under British rule, deemed of a lesser race and worked to death; an Algerian under French rule, a native American under American rule, a Circassian under Russian rule, a Congolese under Belgian rule?"
these countries in question set those who they ruled over back?
When a Turk looks at an Indian's attitude towads the British and a Balkaners attitude towards them that is how that "we should have committed far greater atrocities" thought baloon appears for many. Because the idea of justification was that we were just rulers over Balkans, bringing justice and protection to the Balkans against other countries like France/Russia/Britain or a crusade from Catholics on Orthodox like the 4th etc.
It is ironically true that there wouldn't be a thing called Orthodoxy beyond Russia if Ottomans did not counter all the crusades (like Nicopolis) and all that Catholic enthusiasm was directed to Orthodoxy or other Christian faiths like in the case of Bogomils.
Empty-Pace-4228@reddit
I completely understand your point and as a matter of fact, I mentionned that the Otomans caused less life loss than European Colonial Powers.
However, it is still completely justified for a nation to desire independence. No matter the conditions are. It is not a point of debate. In 21th century, the period of empires is long gone.
AST360@reddit
I agree, I am talking retrospectively from the perspective of the middle ages.
hopper_froggo@reddit
We would rather be under no one's rule. Why do the only options have to be shitty empire and super shitty empire?
AST360@reddit
I respect that but that, realistically was not an option.
lovinGamin@reddit
Because shitty empires always want to conquer small and not so strong territories, just like now?
hopper_froggo@reddit
Of course but that doesnt make it right and it doesnt give you the right to dismiss the experiences of the conquered people because "they could have it worse:
Empty-Pace-4228@reddit
The time is very different than the time that the Ottoman Empire was established.
__1992__@reddit
%0.0001 of the whole Balkan population but if you need something to cry over, go on.
Empty-Pace-4228@reddit
When I sugarcoated it?
DanneLagom@reddit
Yeah but in their case, most of that loss of life came as a result of disease. Which sort of hollows out the argument. The Ottomans were never in the position to almost completely wipe out millions of people by bringing what was to them novel viruses.
In terms of actual intentional killings, and enslavement. Doesn't the Ottomans rank right up there with the "greats". Especially considering the empire ended on a genocidal note.
Empty-Pace-4228@reddit
Ottomans could Islamize (maybe not Turkify) a chunk of Balkans if they were not that insisting on expansion and they attempted from 14th to 16th century where they were at the peak of their power. It was their choice becaue the tax money was sweeter.
No, British, UK, France, Spain and Portugal's death rates don't come from viruses. They exterminated 90% of Natives in Americas and very important amount them in Australia. They eradicated half of the Congolese Population and caused a very big amount of Indians to die which they never apologized for like we don't.
Only the Bengal Famine that they did in 1943, after the fall of the Ottoman Empire took as many lives as what the Ottomans took from 1900 to 1922.
DanneLagom@reddit
I don't know enough about Ottoman history. I do know a lot about European colonial history.
Well over half, and possibly upwards of 90% of the death tally for the American natives post contact, was due to diseases. It's how a tiny fraction of Europeans were able to conquer those lands to begin with. Smallpox killed more than swords and gunpowder ever could.
The Bengal famine in 1943 is the wrong one to go for. There are earlier famines which you could credibly blame British administration for, but that one isn't it. It occurred as a result of multiple factors, famine coinciding with natural disaster, mass psychology causing people who could to hoard food, and the largest war in human history occurring just next door. The Brits actually tried, and did eventually take action to ameliorate it.
Australia I would grant you, but that's exactly it, were in the same ballpark as the Armenian genocide there.
Belgian congo is probably the worst one of the lot though.
Empty-Pace-4228@reddit
It is very known that the Indian Americans were genocided by the US and there's no dispute about that.
DanneLagom@reddit
Yeah you're missunderstanding me. Both can be true, upwards of 90% of native americans died to disease, and during/after that Europeans and later the US conducted what could (maybe should) be described as genocide.
But the idea that Europeans exterminated 90% of natives in the Americas, is incorrect. You can look it up if you don't believe me. Most died as a result of disease.
hopper_froggo@reddit
Yeah the colonialism those empires brought was a level of devastation that imo doesnt compare. Literal civilizations were destroyed and millions were enslaved for generations.
But they didnt really rule in the balkans so out of the options I would say ottomans are remembered the least fondly
Empty-Pace-4228@reddit
That's understandable. Are you Turkish ya habibi?
PainOk1877@reddit
yes,i agree.currently listening to a circassian song and relaxing.they had also tragic history,being decimated by the russian empire.anyways guys,all the best and stay safe :)
Empty-Pace-4228@reddit
You too bro.
I can share a little anectode with you. Banu Alkan is a Turkish actress of Croatian descent and is the only Turko-Croatian celebrity that I know. She's known for her roles in erotic movies.
I bet most don't know there were Croatians in Turkey ;)
Impressive-Quiet-284@reddit
Banu Alkan ne alaka olm ya
PainOk1877@reddit
a classic,for all of you.from the best guitarist of all askbalkans,of course me. the animals-house of the rising sun. and yes,i am drunk again.
Playful_Row4208@reddit
How? Ottoman empire didnt even force assimilation, idk about violence but a majority of South slavic culture would have been lost If it was Russians of the french/British colonising the region
MartinBP@reddit
Malta and Cyprus didn't lose their culture under the Brits. And there were multiple waves of forced conversions, they just gave up eventually because it wasn't economically and logistically feasible.
lovinGamin@reddit
How many years Cyprus was under britsh rule? That’s a lame attempt
ATAKURT1453@reddit
why are croats the ones crying the most about ottoman empire, even though they never lived under ottoman rule?
PainOk1877@reddit
since you use a mocking tone,i will not engage with you.part of croats lived under ottoman rule.but also to you,salute.
0BS3RVR@reddit
Mayhaps. Like I said, ask a historian.
Early-Show2886@reddit
As someone of Turkish descent, I can't confirm that. My Turkish grandparents and their ancestors had a good life on Ada Kaleh. Whether it belonged to the Ottoman Empire, or later to Austria-Hungary, and then Romania.
EfficiencySmall4951@reddit
I have to agree. There's no need to point fingers tbh. Not a historian but a history student and I can safely say they all did their fair share of atrocities. Was one worse than another? No idea and I'm reluctant to believe some history as it's told in some of the sources we have, but I can safely say none did much good anyway
Vlad_TheImpalla@reddit
Otomsns but i don't think they beat the Russians.
another_countryball@reddit
Need I say more?
GoddessOfAffection@reddit
Who would even vote for epic empires like Roman or Byzantium? Thr answer is something else.
pdonchev@reddit
Byzantine was definitely negative for Bulgaria. Quite a bit.
Mucklord1453@reddit
Why? They gave Bulgaria religion and alphabet. And for 150 years lived together as one. It was only "bad" for Bulgaria, because Bulgarian warlords wanted to rule for themselves. The peasants would have been just fine with a distant Emperor in Constantinople.
pdonchev@reddit
If you mean the Glagolitic, it was not created for Bulgaria, but for Moravia. There is no data on Constantine-Cyril ever visiting Bulgaria. The Cyrillic was created in Pliska, by Bulgarian scribes, most likely Naum (if we assume it has to be ine of the known names).
Byzantium hired Sveinald (Svyatoslav) to attack and plunder the North, and later Varyags too. In general, the Roman empire playbook was to hire steppe tribes to attack their opponents and plunder. While it is fair that they were engaged in war, the raids were instructed specifically to target civilian population in order to create attrition.
The Byzantine rule destroyed the structure of the state and only extracted taxes for a century without investment.
And they were not "warlords" - it was a highly structured medieval state, one of the most advanced one at the time.
In general Eastern Rome was an advanced empire, that left rich legacy, but the northern frontiers (that is, Bulgaria) were never going to be developed - they were just a buffer to be exploited. That is also the reason for Slavs and Bulgars to be able to settle and create a powerful political structure so fast.
AgitatedDare2445@reddit
There is not an "epic" empire
Usual-Package7120@reddit
Yeah exactly, that wasn't even negative 🤣
prodigioustimekiller@reddit
Speaking about Empires in particular for us it was the Ottoman Empire. Rampant corruption, relegation to second degree subjugates, execution or Islamic "court justice" which almost always superceded any local court or justice since in every Muslim-Christian disagreement the Muslims always came on top. No religious freedom in my area which now Ottoman apologists want to rewrite claiming the Rum millet was an example of religious freedom. In fact at the countryside you could get killed by the Muslim citizens for any reason. Notably because your house had a higher floor, because you dressed colorfully, celebrating Christmas or just speaking against your Muslim landlord's crimes in court. Or just because the church bells rang.
In Pontus there was the infamous right of the first night where again in an event of marriage, the couple had to marry in secret. And when we mean secret it could take so much time as even the firstborn could be born, raised and even start appearing outside home. There were oral accounts of people that went down to tradition, where the Muslim timariot came to claim the "right" on the bride and was killed on sight by the groom. Then the groom either had to flee or be killed of course. The first born male offspring of the marriage would be raised as an orphan often called black denoting his father's disappearance, hence the part of Mavro- in greek surnames.
Here in my area of Macedonia, people lived mostly as peasants bound to the land. They had no right, working day and night to give their product to the Muslim timariot, the harac which was said to be a specific percent though more often than not most if not all product was seized by the brutal Muslim overlords. So in this case the peasants were left with next to nothing to survive, living in mud huts dying often during drought or famine seasons. The timariots would them move whole families from their other timars to resettle the vacated timars.
prodigioustimekiller@reddit
Early Ottoman rule here in my area of Macedonia was at first seen through oral records as indifferent. The original Muslim nomads were sipahis, warriors who were awarded these lands due to their service in the wars of the Imperial expansion. They settled in the wider area and had no interest in the local peasants issues and heavily deferred their issues to the local elected elders. Of course there was no written law, or any case of pursuing your right in some sort of legislation as ending up dead in any disagreement would be an issue. Things went downhill however in late Ottoman rule during the time of Ali Pasha Tepelenli who brought his own band of Muslim Albanians who were known to be extremely violent and brutal towards the local Christian rayyah. Even after the independence the hatred towards Muslim Albanians was still soaring as they were deemed the enemy even by the local Albanian speaking Christian peasants who avoided having any relations with them. Of course the past ruling nobility of Turkic sipahis saw the newcoming Muslim Albanians with distrust however no local dared to interfere with Muslim citizen issues.
InfinitePractice9014@reddit
Albanians gave you freedom my romioi friend, forgot about the contribute of the same Ali Pasha on greek revolution?
prodigioustimekiller@reddit
You think your Albanian ancestors had anything to do with Greece in general when the Arvanites where the first ones to go on a rampage and declare they had nothing in common with what you call Albania today especially the Muslim brigands that Ali Pasha brought down from his local area. That is the oral tradition here. Ali Pasha might had been a more indifferent ruler of the pashalik of Yanya, but he still didn't differ from all the other Muslim overlords. He did stall the organized efforts of the organized Ottoman army to reach the Peloponnese. However what you seem to either not know or forget is his organised efforts to destroy Souli and the autonomous villages surrounding it all Albanian speaking. His efforts were remarkable in some wider sense of politics considering his era and his contemporaries, but he was still famous for the same brutality that regarded the ruling Ottoman Muslim caste a lot of which in those areas were armed Muslim Albanians.
The same propaganda you seem to invoke that Albanians were the ones that liberated somehow Greece when back then if you call them Albanians you would probably get killed as the Turkalbanian was seen as an insult. In the Orlov uprising of mainland Greece the march of Muslim Albanians was seen as so destructive for the main Ottoman government that the pillage of the Greek countryside was seen as uncontrollable and left to ruins. The Arvanites who you call Albanians were the ones that Cezayirli Hasan Pasha called forth to bring Morea back into order from the Albanian brigands, and it has been said that they butchered so many Albanians especially in Peloponnese that the whole campaign was nicknames the slaughtering of Arvanitia. It is said that the beach near Nafplio settled by Albanians turned red from the Arvanites and the Ottoman navy that was sent to enforce order here.
So it is an interesting modern take when you consider Albanians to have liberated us. I wonder how can Albanians perform so many atrocities that their own kinsmen massacred so many while the Greeks seemingly watched. Who knows. Maybe modern Albanian historiography can explain to us how the Greek nation was liberated from Albanians who for some reason enjoyed killing Albanians yet wanted to liberate a seemingly alien nation. Who knows?
Corp-Por@reddit
The Yugoslav Empire.
Electronic-Ocelot261@reddit
During the Ottomans we got zero development while the Western Europe was already showering in money from industry and colonies
Crypzzz@reddit
You forgot to add Axis in WW2, those times were nasty too. My great-grandfather got his eyes gouged out and tongue cut out by Bulgarian nazis in 1944 because he was suspected of being a partizan.
Hyllius1@reddit
My grandmother was born Dolni Dissan. She used to share stories about the Bulgarian soldiers. One that I can't forget is how they captured women and cut their breats off to cook them and eat them becuase of their lack of food.
Could be a lie. Or truth. We will never know.
originalno_ime@reddit
Serbian communist propaganda in order to demonize Bulgarians after WW2
Hyllius1@reddit
Most likely yes. It's like when the newspapers claimed that Albanians in Kosovo fed their cows with infants.
determine96@reddit
Most likely lie about eating them.
Cutting them is possible.
There was documented atrocities like that during WW1 in Serbia committed by the Bulgarian army.
But many of them I have seen mentioned by other ethnicities about their enemies - classics like cutting pregnant women bellies, throwing the babies on a bayonets.
I mean Idk, probably such things happen during wars, but usually the scales are exaggerated or are implied to everyone.
Like if in one village the occupiers, so battalion or grouo or whatever had done something like this than in was applied to the whole occupying army, country.
Like in my village Bulgarians cut the women's breast, then in became "Bulgarians used to cut the breast of the women" like it was a common practice.
But I know where that conversation my go from this - "Oh, so one village is not a big deal" or somethig - No, I don't want to say that.
MartinBP@reddit
I've heard the exact same stories about both Serbs and Croats so go figure.
determine96@reddit
I mean as I said it's difficult to say what is true and what isn't.
I think that many stuff are just "classic" in the atrocities manual - titts easy to cut, just a flesh, ears like in a movies about USA-Vietnam war and such how they are collecting them.
So it's not impossible same to be done in many places.
And sometimes it's more of a propaganda.
Like the flesh eating, basically cannibalism was a tactic used by many armies so they can motivate they soldiers to fight hard because of the fear of what the enemy savages would do to them if getting captured.
originalno_ime@reddit
Obviously communist terrorists would get killed . They did the same to anyone that was considered fascist, before and after the war . Yet you believe serbian / yugoslav communist propaganda that it was "ethnic cleansing" and "occupation" , when it was ideological.
Antique_Ad_9250@reddit
I mean you can also add USSR in that case.
tipoftheiceberg1234@reddit
USSR was negative, but nowhere near the axis and Ottoman Empire.
Fit_Program1891@reddit
I'm Romanian. I would take the Nazis and the Turks over the Communists.
tipoftheiceberg1234@reddit
Then you’re an idiot
MartinBP@reddit
In your country maybe. They killed and starved millions in Eastern Europe.
tipoftheiceberg1234@reddit
Not in Bulgaria though! But I bet you wish they did, so you could be a bigger victim than you actually are.
LibertyChecked28@reddit
Unless those guys fullfill their daily quota for screeching against the USSR how else are you goanna know that they are Western European Warpers?
WorkerPlayful4192@reddit
I'm Bulgarian and i support you. This guy is just wimp.
LibertyChecked28@reddit
How exactly the USSR is to blame that his grandfather got tortured by the Gestapo⁇
MartinBP@reddit
There were no Bulgarian nazis in Macedonia, those were monarchist forces and mostly local recruits and descendents of refugees from these areas who were enacting revenge killings against Serb/Yugoslav loyalists during both WW1 and WW2. The actual nazis (the legionnaires) were a domestic issue and their leader Lukov was assassinated in 1943.
You'll have a much better life and get along with your neighbours better without twisting history.
Crypzzz@reddit
We know our family and village history well enough, man. Don't try to gaslight us by hiding behind semantic distortions. Trying to split hairs over whether the forces were technically "monarchist" or "fascist" means absolutely nothing to the people who were on the receiving end of their brutality. The Kingdom of Bulgaria was an official Axis power allied with Nazi Germany, and their state army used textbook Axis terror tactics to crush resistance.
SignificantMeet8747@reddit
What happened to your grandpa is awful, but there is zero comparison between the Ottomans and anyone else. The Ottomans ruled some places for over 400 years, and for a good amount of that time anyone non-Ottoman was treated worse than cattle. They were stealing firstborn sons and taking them to Istanbul to train as the elite army that later went back to crush any revolutionary movements. There are cases where those kids ended up killing their parents.
They've massacred civilians en masse, burned entire cities and are to this day the main reason we have the split of West/East Europe. Many people believe it's because of the Black Curtain and the USSR, but it's not. The Ottoman Empire enabled the USSR's Black Curtain. There was zero technological advancement during the Ottoman rule; that's why they fell. Zero technological advancement for 400 years until just \~150-180years ago (many countries were still under their rule even after the the official collapse of the empire). There is no coming back from that without massive efforts for the next hundreds of years, and with the USSR fucking all of us up, things didn't get better.
In Bulgaria, there were only 3 generations between the end of Ottoman rule and becoming a communist state. We had no chance to overcome that deficit
,
Desmazio@reddit
In no way I'm defending the Axis, but i would say that it's not in the list because it didn't alter the local culture, considering how short it was
x-rascal-x@reddit
Im sorry to hear about that.
Thalassophoneus@reddit
My grandfather was a Communist. He was arrested and beaten up by the Nazi forces, shot on both legs by the British during the Dekemvriana, then exiled to Lemnos and then Makronisos by the royalist powers after they won the Greek Civil War. Greece is pretty much still ruled by the descendants of Nazi collaborators.
Unable_Ad9968@reddit
Best empire is definitely Achaemenid empire , followed by Austro Hungarian , for Bulgarians, worst ones are obviously Ottomans and Byzantium
azzurro99@reddit
Why is Communism missing? Formally not an empire ok but in essence, it was an ideological imperialism (with indirect USSR hegemonia)
It’s in any case the worst regime
TaisDoubt@reddit
Ottomans not because they were cruel, but because they were incompetent by the end of it.
KingKohishi@reddit
The success of the Byzantium was to convince Slavs into believing they are Orthodox Greeco-Romans. Even the Modern Russians believe that they are the true inheritors of Byzantines.
Nobody remembers Basil the Bulgar Slayer.
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/8b/First_Bulgarian_Empire_%28976-1018%29.png
Ottomans did not try to assimilate the locals.
Mysterious-Put1459@reddit
As a Bulgarian I claim this - Basil II won an important battle and handicapped the army in order to weaken the Bulgarian state. This pretty much secured the inability of Bulgaria to wage another war against him at least in the near future. It was a show off but also a strategic move. Meanwhile Ottomans during the 16th-18th century went about slaughtering civilians in massacres, chopping off heads of random villagers, stealing children, livestock and valuables as if it was a raid, not like it was their own territory. This forced people to abandon most urban settlements and move to the mountains in small village communities. Turks then settled those cities like Sofia, Plovdiv and Varna which had been important Roman hubs since Before the Common Era. What did they leave? Mosques, bathhouses, and guesthouses. Did they leave schools, universities, banks? No. Did they leave proper roads? No. Absolutely useless.
KingKohishi@reddit
They left your language and identity intact. If Bulgarians remained under the Byzantine rule, all of the Slavs would have been assimilated into the Hellenic identity.
We know this to be fact because majority of the Norther Greeks are of Slavic heritage.
Also, expecting the Ottomans to build modern institutes and facilities is unfair. They did not have any of them just like the rest of the World. It took several centuries for the independent Russia to keep up with the West, and still are behind in so many aspects of a modern society.
MartinBP@reddit
Bulgaria was not under Byzantine control nor in any danger of falling under Byzantine control when the Ottomans invaded. The only reason the Bulgarian language survived was because of remote communities and monasteries.
KingKohishi@reddit
Bulgaria like the rest of the Balkans were already assimilated into Byzantine identity. Bulgarians worshipped in Koine Greek, believed in the Greek version of Christianity, had Byzantine names and lived like them.
Bulgarian language survived because the Ottomans never interfered with peoples' languages ever. Not a single case.
Mysterious-Put1459@reddit
You are mixing up Byzantium with Modern Greece. This assimilation happened at the climax of nationalism in the 1910-1930 Balkan war, WW1, Interwar period, not during the 500 years before that. It was a direct result of Ottoman oppression that those cultures had to lash out with national extremism and monoethnic protectionism. Nationalism in this sense didn't exist until the French revolution, so even if Byzantium was the ruler of Slavs up to that point, nothing of what you're describing would've happened. In fact, when they ruled Slavs 1000 years before that, they went out of their way to create the first written Slavonic script - Glagolitic, instead of imposing their Greek script on Slavs. Talk about eroding cultures. The Slavs wanted to be like the Byzantines, they chose Christianity themselves, Bulgarian nobility saw studying under Byzantine scholars as prestigious and necessary for developing key cultural concepts and applying them to Bulgaria. Meanwhile Islam was imposed as "convert or we take your children, assets and perhaps life" if the local Bashibuzuk was feeling like it. It was a barbarous bloodbath, that has been recorded in the books. Also note that during the Byzantine rule of Bulgaria there were only 3 uprisings for 170 years, while for 450 years of Ottoman rule there had been at least several dozen uprisings and insurgencies against the "benevolent" Ottomans. And yeah, do you expect me not to blame the Ottomans for the lack of social development achieved for those 450 years? While other Europeans were inventing calculus, observing planets, debating philosophy, my guys the Ottomans were doing jack shit and just collected taxes. Bulgarians in 1800's were on the level of 1400's western europeans in terms of standard of living. Still using wagons with horses, agricultural society, no industrialization, no rails, no telegraph, no high schools even. Even Russia westernized with Peter the Great.
Mucklord1453@reddit
speak that truth, the turks need to read it
QuietWaterBreaksRock@reddit
What the fuck are you on about, Ottomans had an egregious record of forcing their captives into Islam and force converting churches and other religious sites into Mosques.
Empty-Pace-4228@reddit
Ottomans took children, bring them to Istanbul and make them Turks. However, they didn't force people live in those villages to be Turks. Most converted for prestiges.
QuietWaterBreaksRock@reddit
No, they converted because non Muslims had basically no schooling and were heavily taxed for being of a different religion. People mainly converted so they could combat hunger, and that's as forceful as it comes without spilling direct blood
Deep-Ad4183@reddit
Also, that’s not how it actually was. It was almost always voluntary, and yes, that was a key reason. When someone converted to Islam, they paid a tax just as high as the poll tax imposed on Christians and Jews, called Zakat, which was a charity tax that other religious groups did not pay, and yes, conversions were for social and economic
reasons, not because of hunger, but mainly to preserve more wealth; hence, most aghas had a family history of conversion, which, however, was forgotten four generations later.
Telitelo@reddit
Non-muslims were taxed much less than muslims. That’s why they wanted to join the empire. If you say the opposite u should prove it.
QuietWaterBreaksRock@reddit
You prove your claim, you made it. Of course, it needs to be internationally approved source, and not history revisionist, probably aligned, propaganda.
Intelligent-Bat7390@reddit
💯
KingKohishi@reddit
Wrong. The Christian subjects were free in their internal businesses including education.
Only limited number of promising children integrated into the imperial system. Other than that, locals were untouched.
The church conversions were limited to the beginning phase of the empire when Turks had no architectural skills.
Empty-Pace-4228@reddit
Ah yes, that was also one thing. We could only converted Bosnians and Albanians with this methods. I wish we also used sword to increase the number.
QuietWaterBreaksRock@reddit
If we ignore actual history, then sure.
Empty-Pace-4228@reddit
As far as I know, we only converted Bosnians and Albanians without directly using the sword. And almost every country in Balkans today are still christian and speak their native tongue.
If we forcefully convert and assimilated another country, can you share the sources with me? No need to be shy I'm asking it to be proud of my ancestors.
QuietWaterBreaksRock@reddit
It was done all across. Later on, when being of same ethnicity as non believers, when ethnicity started being more cared for, during 19th century, people started transitioning to other religions which were seen as move favorable
Empty-Pace-4228@reddit
Okay, so like we converted Serbians and they became Orthodox again in 19th century? Afaik, they always had their church authority even before 19th century.
Can you give me some resources and incidents about ottoman soldiers, coming in a Balkan city. Force natives to repeat the Shahadah (conversion to Islam) and kill those who refuse to speak Turkish?
KingKohishi@reddit
Wrong. The Christian subjects were free in their internal businesses including education.
Only limited number of promising children integrated into the imperial system. Other than that, locals were untouched.
The church conversions were limited to the beginning phase of the empire when Turks had no architectural skills.
QuietWaterBreaksRock@reddit
Lmao
Freedom to fund it themselves, while they had no money because of Ottomans stealing their money and crops through taxess
Meanwhile, Muslims were much richer, had less taxes and state funded schools, iirc
KingKohishi@reddit
That was an empire, so just like the rest of Empires it was supposed to funnel money to the capital.
Christians paid 10% extra tax but saved their sons from military service. In the long term, that allowed Christians to have a higher population and capital than the muslims.
No state funded schools by the way.
Lorumba@reddit
The thing is my friend ottoman had 600 years of presence and in all those times there were tons of different sultans that had different views. One h@nged people smoking cigars, one had gay sex, one forced people into islam, one did not give a shit about it.
There is no goverment policy or culture just a family who do what they want. I agree that nonmuslims were forced to taxes but it feels light given the empire we are talking is ottomans. They sure did more terrible things right? For example *xecuting people who said I am a turk.
BamBumKiofte23@reddit
Least confusing poll on r/AskBalkans be like:
Alarmed-Weekend1926@reddit
Bulgarian here. Worst was the Ottomans for sure. Least bad was the Soviets, because they let us govern ourselves and didn't settle our land with their people like they did in other places. We just had to be aligned with them.
Andreuw5@reddit
Where is the USSR in the list, as it was the worst for Bulgaria.
CucumberExpensive43@reddit
All around Slovenia we have very old stone markers called "Plague signs". Therse do not mark places where there were outbreaks of literal disease, but the furthest places where Ottoman attacks reached. So despite Ottomans not actually ruling over our lands, I think that the fact that my ancestors considered their arrival as similar to the plague allows me to vote for that option.
therage03@reddit
Why not include the soviets here?
CatnipSniffa@reddit
Even though I'm categorically not part of the target audience (not Balkaner) as a Turk, on behalf of Anatolia, it's the Ottomans for sure. Especially in the latter half of the empire's lifetime, Turkish peasants (along with other muslims) were crushed under constant conscription for the Ottoman war machine and the insane taxes a large amount of which went to the corrupt local leaders. A culture of corruption was allowed to take root in these lands, a type of corruption that is so deeply engrained into the culture that many many people are still today trying to find ways of screwing each other over petty things like a bit of land, or an amount of money that isn't really significant, in an attempt to become part of the practically irreplacable oppressing class, which is a rampant problem especially in rural areas.
Turkish people of minority muslim subgroups were also massacred, over and over throughout the millenium.
The amount of massacres that were carried out to stop insurgencies was also insane. They culled the population to shape to their tastes, eliminating those who would ask for even infinitesimally better living conditions. This is still happening to this day, anyone interested might wanna check how the leftist population in the northeast region (a.k.a eastern black sea/doğu karadeniz) was wiped out, or how leftist and revolutionary public figures were hanged, within the last century.
DuePositive8957@reddit
I felt the comments few posts away
Montenegirl@reddit
Austro-Hungary is best out of their sheer naivety. They deadass believed they were gonna occupy territories in Bosnia and Herzegovina + parts of today's Montenegro for a long time and started building and building. They effectively wasted their money on something we got to keep later. 10/10 practice, keep it up.
Montenegirl@reddit
I mean, which of these two you want us to vote in that poll?
Mustafa312@reddit
Slavs. Almost wiped us off the map multiple times.
robi228@reddit
R*ssians
WorkerPlayful4192@reddit
These guys. 👇
Early-Show2886@reddit
Janissaries were taken from Orthodox Christian families in the Balkans by the Devshirme (religious authorities), circumcised, and raised as Muslims in Anatolia by the Turks. Afterwards, they joined the Ottoman army and received military training. Their religion was Bektashi. You're posting about Janissaries? As an example? Do you know the origins of the Janissaries? If so, find out more:
WorkerPlayful4192@reddit
No, just referring to Ottoman Empire. Janissaries are been just "tool". Seems like you can't get it. Turks have many sins to pay.
Early-Show2886@reddit
to pay? Oh dear.
Also the turkish gypsys? also the dobrujan Tatars?
what about us?
Sea_Gap_6569@reddit
devshirmes?
BadBoyHG1@reddit
The Soviet empire.
Niocs@reddit
the ottoman empire belongs surely to the empires with the least contributions and most destruction.
And their successors - the Young Turks were even worse
Trody34@reddit
The romans were great for us. The Habsburgs, less so
pinelogr@reddit
Byzantium? You mean the Roman empire? That respected the Hellenic culture so much it adopted it to the point of splitting the empire into two, culturally speaking?
Erozbey@reddit
I guess they didn’t teach you at school that it wasn’t due to cultural repect but administrative, military, and political necessity, did they?
Gimmebiblio@reddit
They actually do teach us that. Sorry to my compatriot above, but this is the first time I'm hearing that it was a cultural divide.
pinelogr@reddit
Eastern part greek, western part latin. First time hearing it? That the romans, the latin people, didn't force their own culture and trued to erase the greek one but supported it and adopted it? Good for you for never having heard it before!
Gimmebiblio@reddit
But that's not what I said now, was it? I said that the divide of the Roman Empire to Western and Eastern was decided for administrative reasons and not cultural. And please spare me the irony. I was courteous and so should you.
Erozbey@reddit
That’s completely understandable. It’s wonderful that you’ve remained so loyal and committed to your history.
pinelogr@reddit
I dont mean that! I mean the Eastern part was basically greek. Long before the empire split administratively, militarily and politically
TinyAsianMachine@reddit
You could say that we had cultural erasure due to the spread of Abraham monotheism. Even more so for the Slavic populations that lost a lot of their Slavic identity.
pinelogr@reddit
Well sure religion is a big part of culture but it wasn't the romans that brought it while conquering the greek lands. Monotheism came later
Turbulent-Lime-2466@reddit
Ottomans just leeched and didn’t really do any good for the region.
BDP-SCP@reddit
I live in Istria we never had the Ottomans, the Byzantines were present some 200 years , from the reqonquista until the end of the 8th centuary.
On one side for sure were the Romans, uterly destroyed the original residents with no records of the original language and we know very little about the preroman religion. On the other side Romans brought civilisation and 2000 years later we still live how the Romans orgaized the territory.
The best was Austria- Hungary, no doubt.
Imaginary-Brick-1614@reddit
Soviet Union
twiningelm7453@reddit
As a Bulgarian, almost every history teacher here dislikes the term “(under) Ottoman slavery” (idk how to translate ,,турско робство”). The Ottoman rule wasn’t as bad as it seems. Yes, there was the blood tax, but there was also religious freedom and things like that. Most people prefer the term “Ottoman *rule*”.
treba_dzemper@reddit
Ottomans were the worst, by a long shot.
But I think it wouldn't be a different story if we were ever ruled by the Russians as they had similar civilisationally regressive effect on every nation they ruled over.
So thank god for that. Imagine being ruled by Turks then by Russians.
Poor Armenia.
Final-Nebula-7049@reddit
British empire
Lorumba@reddit
I think the pool is about the empires who were close to balkans and effected it.
Everyone knows no lads gon beat the o mighty queen and her lands when it comes to being the worst.
Final-Nebula-7049@reddit
British empire affected all of Balkans negatively, and caused all the animosities of the past 100 years
MartinBP@reddit
Sure they did
No_Idea_479@reddit
Repulsive_Work_226@reddit
why is there no Russia? do you still see USSR as a peace loving socialist country?
Lorumba@reddit
Empire. USSR is not an empire.
MartinBP@reddit
Lol
Repulsive_Work_226@reddit
you say so. it was a despotic structure.
aBlindGeminiWhisper@reddit
what's up with everyone going for ottomans which ironically gave you religious and cultural exemption and autonomy in the first place? i'm not saying they haven't done terrible things in the past, far from it. still, even the different christian groups were terrible to each other in the middle ages. but turks made europe assemble their finest armies for the common hatred much like they did for germany later in ww2. it gave europe an external objective for hate, discrimination, marginalization, nationalization and so on. a true enemy to the civilized world they say. it's like the only reason europe stopped fight themselves after centuries of in-fighting. same as balkans. if turks weren't there in the borders of europe, threatening everyone, they would have continued to fight with themselves like anglo-franco wars in the 11-12th century.
MartinBP@reddit
The Ottomans were by far the worst at governing, only challenged by the Russians. And genocided everyone they could on their way out.
Fit_Program1891@reddit
Russians. By far.
Thalassophoneus@reddit
The Ottoman Empire, mostly for leaving behind a culture of corruption that is decades away from properly waning.
Who did the Byzantine Empire rule over? The worst thing it did to other Balkaners was Basil destroying the First Bulgarian Empire and gouging their eyes out. But that was once.
MartinBP@reddit
That story is mostly apocryphal. There's no material evidence of such a thing and the logistics are absolutely absurd for the Middle Ages.
AST360@reddit
Yeah as if Byzantines were not corrupt as hell, dude we inherited that culture of corruption from Byzantines after the conquest of Istanbul. Ottoman Empire became a newer Byzantine that didn't take lessons from it and hence fell.
No_Idea_479@reddit
And that was Bulgarian POWs too, not civilians. Granted, you can't help but feel bad for them.
Cristopia@reddit
Yeah, then Romans actually did good stuff, developed their institutions which were the best at the time
Succotash_Existing@reddit
suan balkan kulturu dediginiz seylerin cogu hatta balkan denen olgu bile bize ait lol. bu got yanıklıgı 1000 yıl daha gecmeyecek herhalde.
P-l-Staker@reddit
Usual-Package7120@reddit
Ottomans = worst
Roman/Byzantine = best
pdonchev@reddit
Ottomans, and it's because they basically failed at empiring. Once the sultan was afraid of janissaries and had to resort to marauders (bashibozouk) for war, it was bottom already.
Deep-Ad4183@reddit
The Ottoman Empire. Minimal development, inhumane taxation, violent repression of religious minorities, and severe damage to cultural heritage through the conversion of religious buildings from churches to mosques with all that this entailed, such as the covering of mosaics, the destruction of icons of inestimable value, and the disappearance of that today would be tremendous attractions for global culture.
The Ottomans had many positive aspects, however, and I particularly like Ottoman architecture. Nevertheless, this was not the case throughout the entire territory, a fact that, in my view, did not occur to the same extent in other empires.
Playful_Row4208@reddit
Ain't NO ONE remembering how life was under there except maybe ottomans, any given answer is just agenda
erythrocytes235@reddit
Worst: USSR Best : Bulgarian Empire. (Obviously)
South-Fudge-1550@reddit
only romans and ottomans were able to control the whole of the peninsula and ottomans were a LOT recent, so this poll doesnt even makes sense
Early-Show2886@reddit
Look: I'm not surprised by which country the question came from.
wiglafofpinwick@reddit
OTTOMANS NUMBER 1 ALWAYS THE BEST RULES THE BALKANS NUMBER 1 EMPIRE 🇹🇷🇹🇷🇹🇷🇵🇰🇵🇰🇵🇰☪️☪️☪️🕌🕌🕌⭐️🌙⭐️🌙⭐️🌙🛋🛋🛋
Kooky_Appeal_6554@reddit
Well, I can't say anything against either the Austro-Hungarian or the Ottoman Empire. As a descendant of Danube Swabians and Balkan Turks living in both empires, it was a beautiful and happy time for my ancestors on both sides. After the collapse of both empires, life for my ancestors was completely different.
CataphractBunny@reddit
Worst: Ottomans. Best: Austria.
Independent_Depth248@reddit
You missed to list the most recent empire influence. The others on your list, I'm not able to have personal real time opinion. But I guess they were no bueno at the time and for its time depend on the prospective.
HorrorsPersistSoDoI@reddit
Soviets
SnooLentils726@reddit
What a stupid poll. Who even remembers the Achaemenid,Roman or Byzantine rule that happened 2 millenias ago? Only two of these empires collapsed recently and one of them only controlled a quarter of Balkans
Stverghame@reddit
Ottomans obviously.
Yavannia@reddit
Is that a rhetorical question?