This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Byzantine navy article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | Byzantine navy is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
![]() | This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on October 1, 2009. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | This article is rated FA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Gosh darnit, this does need cleaned up. A lot. A pity I don't know anything about the Byzantine fleet...
--- You do have to admit, however, that it is a hilarious article, even if it doesn't conform to any standards of quality... Morgan2317 17:28, 10 August 2005 (UTC)
I think the section for Greek fire is too long and needs to be merged with the Greek fire article-- Cigor 18:55, 21 August 2005 (UTC)
The article is in good shape, IMHO. Does anybody object if I remove context and cleanup tags? -- Cigor 14:42, 29 September 2005 (UTC)
I 've stumbled upon this article and while adding few wikilinks, I saw terms like "desert people", "police". I'm afraid it needs a little cleanup. +MATIA ☎ 09:51, 9 October 2005 (UTC)
Should we open up a section on the Byzantines' naval strength? As shown by number of Marines and Oarsmen in the Aegean, Cibyrrhaeot, Hellas and Samos Themes, plus the Imperial Fleet? I have the 773 to 899 numbers. Dryzen 13:17, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
With regard to the following statment
Although the Eastern Empire was a direct continuation of the Roman empire begun by Augustus, it developed its own unique culture and identity that in hindsight, appears to be Roman only in name.
I believe that this a fairly controversial statement given the leanings of modern historians. That is, it can be said that arguing that the late "Byzantine" empire was very different from the earlier "Roman" empire is really a lot like saying the modern United States is a different nation from that founded in 1776. Certainly such an argument could be made but the reality is that it is still the same state and one would expect that any nation changes over time. In the case of the Roman Empire there was a span of over a thousand years so one would certainly expect substantial changes over that time (certainly the Roman state when Rome fell was quite different than the state that existed when G. Julius Caesar was born). The fact that the primary language of the Eastern court changed to Greek (it had been the language of the people long before the fall of Rome) is really no different from the fact that Norman Britain switched from French back to English as the language of the court. It was still the same state with a continuity of culture (i.e. continually changing culture) regardless of the change in language.
I believe a discussion of the continuity of the Roman heritage is probably best left for the article on the "Byzantine Empire." I think this article should be more neutral on this point simply saying something to the effect that "Byzantine" is the name that western historians of the past few centuries (until recently) have assigned to the Eastern Empire after the Western Empire was lost. -- Mcorazao 16:09, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
I'm unsure at the veracity of user 71.113.102.33's adits, at the very least his numbers (unsourced) seems far too large. His delivery is also suspect. Hopefully clearity will be given.-- Dryzen 15:56, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
Merging some of the text describing the different varieties of dromon into the more specific article -- Matt 04:01, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
Great job! I'm impressed by the great usage of sources, the cleanliness of the article structure, and the comprehensiveness of the material covered.
Yep, no doubts there Tagmatarchos ( talk) 08:47, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
WP has a rather thin article on Medieval ships, which would benefit from some fattening from here and cross-linking, if anyone's keen. Gwinva ( talk) 02:00, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
The Byzantine navy comprised the naval forces of the Byzantine Empire.
Really, who'd've guessed that. JIMp talk· cont 04:13, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
...and control of the Aegean passed definitively to the Italian and Ottoman navies.
Not wanting to be picky, but as long as the Byzantine empire existed (-1453), the Ottomans did not have a navy worth its name. They only started to field one in the late 15th century in their wars against Venice. Until then, control of the Aegean Sea, as the whole Levante, lay with the Italians, mainly Venice and Genua. Gun Powder Ma ( talk) 13:05, 14 March 2010 (UTC)
What dialect of English is this supposed to be in? -- John ( talk) 18:00, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on Byzantine navy. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 15:27, 11 November 2016 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Byzantine navy article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | Byzantine navy is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
![]() | This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on October 1, 2009. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | This article is rated FA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Gosh darnit, this does need cleaned up. A lot. A pity I don't know anything about the Byzantine fleet...
--- You do have to admit, however, that it is a hilarious article, even if it doesn't conform to any standards of quality... Morgan2317 17:28, 10 August 2005 (UTC)
I think the section for Greek fire is too long and needs to be merged with the Greek fire article-- Cigor 18:55, 21 August 2005 (UTC)
The article is in good shape, IMHO. Does anybody object if I remove context and cleanup tags? -- Cigor 14:42, 29 September 2005 (UTC)
I 've stumbled upon this article and while adding few wikilinks, I saw terms like "desert people", "police". I'm afraid it needs a little cleanup. +MATIA ☎ 09:51, 9 October 2005 (UTC)
Should we open up a section on the Byzantines' naval strength? As shown by number of Marines and Oarsmen in the Aegean, Cibyrrhaeot, Hellas and Samos Themes, plus the Imperial Fleet? I have the 773 to 899 numbers. Dryzen 13:17, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
With regard to the following statment
Although the Eastern Empire was a direct continuation of the Roman empire begun by Augustus, it developed its own unique culture and identity that in hindsight, appears to be Roman only in name.
I believe that this a fairly controversial statement given the leanings of modern historians. That is, it can be said that arguing that the late "Byzantine" empire was very different from the earlier "Roman" empire is really a lot like saying the modern United States is a different nation from that founded in 1776. Certainly such an argument could be made but the reality is that it is still the same state and one would expect that any nation changes over time. In the case of the Roman Empire there was a span of over a thousand years so one would certainly expect substantial changes over that time (certainly the Roman state when Rome fell was quite different than the state that existed when G. Julius Caesar was born). The fact that the primary language of the Eastern court changed to Greek (it had been the language of the people long before the fall of Rome) is really no different from the fact that Norman Britain switched from French back to English as the language of the court. It was still the same state with a continuity of culture (i.e. continually changing culture) regardless of the change in language.
I believe a discussion of the continuity of the Roman heritage is probably best left for the article on the "Byzantine Empire." I think this article should be more neutral on this point simply saying something to the effect that "Byzantine" is the name that western historians of the past few centuries (until recently) have assigned to the Eastern Empire after the Western Empire was lost. -- Mcorazao 16:09, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
I'm unsure at the veracity of user 71.113.102.33's adits, at the very least his numbers (unsourced) seems far too large. His delivery is also suspect. Hopefully clearity will be given.-- Dryzen 15:56, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
Merging some of the text describing the different varieties of dromon into the more specific article -- Matt 04:01, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
Great job! I'm impressed by the great usage of sources, the cleanliness of the article structure, and the comprehensiveness of the material covered.
Yep, no doubts there Tagmatarchos ( talk) 08:47, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
WP has a rather thin article on Medieval ships, which would benefit from some fattening from here and cross-linking, if anyone's keen. Gwinva ( talk) 02:00, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
The Byzantine navy comprised the naval forces of the Byzantine Empire.
Really, who'd've guessed that. JIMp talk· cont 04:13, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
...and control of the Aegean passed definitively to the Italian and Ottoman navies.
Not wanting to be picky, but as long as the Byzantine empire existed (-1453), the Ottomans did not have a navy worth its name. They only started to field one in the late 15th century in their wars against Venice. Until then, control of the Aegean Sea, as the whole Levante, lay with the Italians, mainly Venice and Genua. Gun Powder Ma ( talk) 13:05, 14 March 2010 (UTC)
What dialect of English is this supposed to be in? -- John ( talk) 18:00, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on Byzantine navy. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 15:27, 11 November 2016 (UTC)