1

The Fall of Constantinople and It’s Effect on the Age of Discovery

Mackenzie P. Knoch

12Y ALC, MSCOE

Class 004-021

SSG Robinson, Jarell

September 02, 2021

 2

Abstract

A myth long perpetuated by the simple (but faulty) logic, is that because of the Fall of

Constantinople, Europe “lost” their trading post between them and the East, which created a need

for these countries to find new routes. This implies that they weren’t already searching for new

routes and that they couldn’t have continued to trade with the Ottoman Empire instead of the

Byzantine Empire. Additionally, Constantinople wasn’t even as important of a trading hub as

Beirut or Alexandria, on the southern and eastern shores of the Mediterranean; though this could

be attributed to it becoming under Turkish rule, when there was a great anti-Turkish sentiment in

the 15th century. In this paper, I will explain why I don't accept that the fall of Constantinople

was causally liable for the Age of Discovery, or in any event, not as immediately as suggested

anyways.
 3

My first point is that even before Constantinople's fall, its placement as a financial nexus

was overstated. The principal Asia-Europe shipping lane was the Indian Ocean-Red Sea-Egypt

course. In addition, in 1453, Egypt was controlled by the Mamluk Sultan instead of the Ottoman

Empire. The Ottoman Empire didn't take over Egypt until just around 1517, after the revelation

of the Americas and after the Portuguese got comfortable with the Indian Ocean. (Indeed, the

Ottoman triumph of Egypt was somewhat simple and generally welcomed by local people, as

almost certainly, the Portuguese were interfering with the commerce of the Indian Ocean.) [1]

When the Ottoman Empire conquered Constantinople, the vast majority of the spice trade

was through Egypt, occupied by Venetians, who controlled the local trade through syndication.

This control was significant because it should have started a search for alternative routes by then.

Furthermore, this commercial activity was unaffected by the circumstances in Constantinople,

making it more likely that neither Greek nor Turkish intervention would have presented any

trouble. By this reasoning, the idea that the fall of Constantinople had a real financial effect that

drove the European forces into the Age of Discovery is mistaken.

Nonetheless, Constantinople might have been by implication significant, yet not in how

the premises accept. Constantinople was of some significance as the business focus of the Greek

and Black Sea exchange, and the success of Constantinople ended a lot of this exchange,

particularly Italian dealers and investors. On the other hand, the triumph might have in a

roundabout way supported the disclosure by certain Italians putting less trade in the eastern

Mediterranean and Black Seas and more in the Iberian and Atlantic exchange. In any case, this
 4

is, for the most part, theory, as it is hard to decide if this has really occurred. On the off chance

that it does, it is practically difficult to quantify its adequacy.

Secondly, before the Fall of Constantinople, the Age of Discovery was at that point

already in progress, and the intention of its beginning didn't have anything to do with arriving in

India. The Portuguese started methodically investigating the African coast in 1415 and after the

victory of Ceuta.[2]

They [the Portuguese] began utilizing Madeira and Azores during the 1420s, Caravel

during the 1430s, attacked Cape Bojador, and regular undertakings (subjection) along the

African coast began. Then, during the 1440s, they exchanged slaves and gold in sub-Saharan

Africa, utilizing Senegal and Gambia. Continued exchange with Africa rejuvenated the

disclosure and permitted it to keep going for quite a while (1415–1498 (when Da Gama showed

up in India)).

Truth be told, even references to yearnings to circumnavigate Africa to arrive at India

before 1453 can be discovered (which additionally discredits the case that the Ottoman success

started it); however, most Portuguese were happy with the simple exchange. Travel to India was

far and costly; however, when Columbus figured out how to cruise for the Portuguese, it led to

the immediate premise of his future trips, including Columbus' famous journey to the Americas.

Third point: the Portuguese previously had fully utilized all their required resources for

travel before their success. Explosive weapons were at that point being used, and their
 5

advancement was independent of the Fall of Constantinople. By the 1430s, they previously had a

Caravel, and its shape and size will barely change for the following 100 years. Not only did they

utilize late sails, square sails, and compasses, but they had their own map-making techniques,

which were very cutting-edge because of the map-making schools in Mallorca and Catalonia.

Astronomy of the journey of 1453 was as yet in its earliest stages. However, by advancements in

the last part of the 1400s, space experts/celestial prophets were generally of Iberian-Jewish

heritage, so connecting it with Constantinople is a genuine stretch. The Portuguese were

additionally very coordinated in their movements, making maps, noticing wind examples and

flows, aggregating experience, and passing on that information.

The Greeks, then again, had minimal functionality to bring to the table for the Age of

Discovery, besides some hypothetical books that could be helpful overall. One of them was

Ptolemaic Geography, which was converted into Latin in 1406, notwithstanding the occasions

that prompted the interpretation being influenced by the Turkish danger. “Ptolemy’s book was

brought to Florence in 1400, probably by Manuel Chrysoloras, and the new arrival of this book

in Europe sparked the whole Fifteenth Century research in cartography and led directly to the

journey of Christopher Columbus to North America.”[2] (As a matter of fact, it was interpreted

before 1453; however, it was just reprinted during the 1470s).

Fourth point: Politically, the Portuguese didn't disregard the triumph of Constantinople.

Indeed, his country's traveling research at the time dialed him back, as King Afonso V[Portugal]

was one of only a handful of rulers who reacted emphatically to the Crusaders' solicitation to

retake Constantinople. Instead, he started to build up his military and printed "Cruzado
 6

[Crusade]" gold coins to fund this campaign utilizing the leftover gold from the African coast

trade. He even diverted research and discovery assets in preparation for this.

At any rate, the Crusades never emerged, so Alfonso V utilized his military and cash for

his highly effective campaign to conquer Morocco in 1458. Whether he considered going to

Constantinople or joining the Crusaders heading northeast through Africa is up to debate.

Throughout the following years, King Afonso V was fundamentally uninterested in putting

further effort into new discoveries until his child Joao II grew up and became more intrigued by

this.

Whether Joao himself was impacted by the victory of Constantinople is also up to debate.

Yet, it is not too far to say that the country's success was why no serious notice of Constantinople

or the Ottoman Empire was taken by Portugal during the Age of Discovery.
 7

References

[1] LYBYER, A. H. (1915). The Ottoman Turks and the routes of Oriental Trade. The English
Historical Review, XXX(CXX), 577–588. https://doi.org/10.1093/ehr/xxx.cxx.577

[2] Institute for the Study of Western Civilization. (n.d.). Ptolemy comes to Florence. Institute
for the Study of Western Civilization.
https://westernciv.com/syllabus/renaissance/fall/ptolemy-comes-to-florence/.

[3] De Azvedo, R., Geerkens, P., & Durden, T. (2015, March 7). How significant was the fall of
Constantinople as an event leading to the age of exploration? History Stack Exchange.
https://history.stackexchange.com/questions/20769/how-significant-was-the-fall-of-
constantinople-as-an-event-leading-to-the-age-of.