"Byzantium Triumphant " Topic
5 Posts
All members in good standing are free to post here. Opinions expressed here are solely those of the posters, and have not been cleared with nor are they endorsed by The Miniatures Page.
In order to respect possible copyright issues, when quoting from a book or article, please quote no more than three paragraphs.
For more information, see the TMP FAQ.
Back to the Ancients Media Message Board
Areas of InterestAncients
Featured Hobby News Article
Featured Link
Top-Rated Ruleset
Featured Showcase Article The fascinating history of one of the hobby's major manufacturers.
Featured Profile Article Wargame groundcloths as seen at Bayou Wars.
Current Poll
Featured Book Review
|
Please sign in to your membership account, or, if you are not yet a member, please sign up for your free membership account.
| Tango01 | 04 Aug 2017 12:11 p.m. PST |
"The Byzantine army generally doesn't get a good press. Its many failings over the centuries tend to dominate the memory, with the possible exception of Belisarius. This book by Julian Romane, offers a correction for the period 959 to 1025. It was by no means a stable period. It starts with the reign of Romanus II whose general Nicephorus conquered Crete and defeated the Muslim armies in the East. When Romanus died unexpectedly young the heirs apparent were five and two years old, creating the space for Nicephorus to take the throne. The author explains very clearly the power structures in the Empire that allowed him to gain control. A new campaign in the East resulted in the conquest of Cilicia and then campaigns in Italy and the Balkans. The conflict with Bulgaria is a recurring part of the story during this period. The soldier emperors of the period often came from families like the Phocas whose lands were in the East and had little time for the City. It all ended badly with his murder and replacement by John Tzimiskes…" link Full review
link
Amicalement
Armand
|
 piper909  | 04 Aug 2017 8:33 p.m. PST |
I don't understand why the bad press. The empire lasted a thousand years. It suffered numerous reverses and horrible monster rulers but kept bouncing back, tenacious even in defeat. Let those who surpass that record brag about how superior they are! |
| Tango01 | 05 Aug 2017 10:55 a.m. PST |
Me also… Maybe because they were from the far East…? Amicalement
Armand |
| Perris0707 | 05 Aug 2017 1:10 p.m. PST |
Most would probably credit Gibbon for the "bad press", or the Crusades era chroniclers. The Eastern Roman Empire was not popular in Europe during the Middle Ages and that view has carried over until quite recently. The word "Byzantine" actually had a negative connotation in the English language for quite some time – meaning "devious" or overly complex. In recent years the Empire has recovered quite a pit of its reputation and prestige. As piper909 pointed out it was a remarkably resilient and long-lived entity. It is very popular to play in Medieval Total War I and II, and Attila: Total War computer gaming too. |
| piper909 | 05 Aug 2017 9:40 p.m. PST |
Yes, recent decades have seen a useful corrective thanks to more fair-minded and sympathetic historians. |
|
