Talk:Decline of the Byzantine Empire

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

rename?[edit]

Could i be so bold as to propose a renaming of this section to a more simplistic format? Such as Fall of the Byzantine Empire? Similar to Decline of the Roman Empire? I find the usage of all the determinants "for the fall of the" to be a waste of space and a harder article title ot search up should on not know its name before hand. Discussion and opitions are most appreaciated.--Dryzen 15:28, 17 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

How about 'Decline of the Byzantine Empire'? That would seem to fit. I suppose the only question is whether to include more information on what happened during the decline, as opposed to just 'why' it happened, if you see what I mean? Bigdaddy1204 19:05, 17 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I hold no arguments against Decline of the Byzantine Empire. Since where on the subject of its fall, might has well not be picky, we have the room for it and I find it best to keep all this information in one place, lets speak of the events and concequences as well as the causes. What are your thoughts?--Dryzen 19:41, 17 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I think this is a good idea. Moved! Bigdaddy1204 20:28, 17 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Flagged as personal essay[edit]

The tone of this article resembles an essay more than an encyclopedia article. Its thesis is that the decline of the themata precipitated the decline of the empire. That may be so, but it should be structured differently. I'll come back later to do what I can, but this isn't an area where I'm an expert by any means. Fishal 13:13, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

It is natural that the collapse of any military system is usually a sisgnificant cause for the demise of any power. ook at the Mamelukes for instance, whose reliance on Cavalry charges saw them defeated in the 16th century by the advanced Ottomans.Tourskin 22:33, 17 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Komnenoi[edit]

I want to know this - does Andronicus Comnenus count as part of the Komnenus restoration? He wasn't a bad emperor, he pretty much continued the work Manuel Comnenus was doing but in every article I see it focuses on the first three emperors namely Alexius, John and Manuel. Tourskin 17:29, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

On a side note, it seems that the centralization of Imperial power left the Byzantines in trouble. The Roman Empire was slighly less centralized - with all those governers and Roman Generals and their legions of soldiers they didn't have to wait for orders from the Emperor to act. We should bring that one in. Also we need more citations. I will work on it so soon as I can. Tourskin 17:31, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Byzantine Arab wars[edit]

That was certainly a down point, the damn empire lost well over half its territory, population and resources in less than a century. Tourskin 00:20, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The loss of Egypt alone removed the main grain supplier for Constantinople. User:Dimadick

Yes - Syria was an important province, providing a large amount of manpower (unreliable albeit) but that didn't compare to Egypt - which is why Manuel I Comnenus sent an army to Egypt in 1160's rather than to Syria.Tourskin 19:17, 21 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Needs serious boosting[edit]

At the moment, this article looks like a list. In my opinion, it should be more of a Chronologically ordered article with each period in Byzantine's history examined for potential down points. I am prepared to lend a hand here. Besides, if the Byzantine Empire article is gonna be linked to this, it needs to be upto standard. This is what I am proposing:

  • Section on Pre-Islamic wars; Jutinian's western expedition may have cost the empire an early defeat of Persia and averted the future Arab threat
  • Loss of Western territories to Germans and how in the future these Frankish kingdoms would play a bigger role in Byzantium
  • Byzantine-Arab Wars, countless battles were Byzantines lost decisively.
  • Arrival of Seljuks (covered) and wth it a sub section about the Latin intervention as Crusades who helped and who hindered (4th crusade)
  • Ottomans and how Palaelogoi could not restore empire

Then perhaps before or after the above talk about long term problems i.e. military (themata and tagmata), politics (civil wars everywhere), society (iconclasm and alienation of people), economy (venice and genoa).

I think that would sum it all nicely. If agreed, I'll see to it that this isn't just me talking big. Anyone?Tourskin 01:35, 16 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Much help would be appreciated - this article is dieing! Tourskin 18:56, 18 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No longer a personal essay[edit]

I have read this article and given it a little extra. I don't think its much of a personal essay right now and even if it is, or was, its because theres not enough editting done - so if u think its personal, then stop talking about it and be bold. In any case it is a very valid point that the collapse of the theme system led to the collapse of Byzantium because without military power how can anyone defend themselves? The following books emphasize the link between the success of the Theme system and that of the Empire:

  • Haldon, John. Byzantium at War 600 - 1453. New York: Osprey, 2000.
  • Mango, Cyril. The Oxford History of Byzantium. 1st ed. New York: Oxford UP, 2002
  • Philip Sherrard, Great Ages of Man Byzantium, Time-Life Books

I don't think its a matter of opinion.

Tourskin 22:21, 16 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I apologise that I am very late in responding to your comments at this page! Well, I think you were right when you said that this article needs some work. I am thinking of deleting the entire last section, for now. The problem is it's supposed to be about the decline of the empire, yet in fact a lot of it is about the Komnenoi in the 12th century, which is relevant, but doesn't really answer the question. I think you're right about the lack of editing being done here - I created this page, and yet I have spared very little time to look after it. I'm thinking about what to do with it next... Bigdaddy1204 18:30, 18 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Plague of Justinian?[edit]

I'm surprised that there is no mention of the Plague of Justinian in this article. Surely the event had a significant impact, arguably paving the way for the Byzantine-Arab wars. Is the 6th century simply too far back to include in the empire's long, slow decline?

See: Rosen, William. Justinian's Flea: Plague, Empire, and the Birth of Europe. New York: Viking Adult, 2007. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.200.167.38 (talk) 08:39, 16 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Plagiarism[edit]

A large portion of the "Historical Events" text seems to have been directly copied from the book "Lost to the West" by Lars Brownworth. Credit should be given to the author and a citation, whoever was in charge of those copied texts did a poor job. Either write the text in your own words and cite the book or place the book's text in quotations. Enough with the Plagiarism! User:Justinian43 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.113.17.196 (talk) 08:27, 11 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Great Job[edit]

May I just say good job to the person or people who thought of the idea of having a time-line of pictures showing the expansion and decline of the Byzantine Empire, instead of just one or two pictures within the body of the page. Watching the territorial progression of the empire over time is very helpful. Great job guys! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.239.102.91 (talk) 18:07, 22 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Decline_of_the_Byzantine_Empire&oldid=1206913336"