Was Basil II the roman emperor of constantinople considered a great emperor? from what I read about him, i consider him a good emperor if not great the economy was doing alright, almost all the borders were secure. what you guys think about him. by the way i'm new here, but I've been reading the threads of this forum for about a month
Basil II " the bulgar slayer"
- Thread starter Latin_G
- Start date
well he did a number on the bulgers! soon a person a name xen will post in a foreign, unreadable language telling more about basil, rome and byzantium then you will ever want to know 
on the serious side, basil took over with the nobles of asia minor in revolt, he crushed them, moved east and pushed the arabs out of syria, the persians out of armenia. he retook much of southern italy back from the normans. militarly the empire was in better shape than it had been in some time. at the same time he cut taxes on farmers and raised it on nobles and the church and left a full treasury at his death.
on the serious side, basil took over with the nobles of asia minor in revolt, he crushed them, moved east and pushed the arabs out of syria, the persians out of armenia. he retook much of southern italy back from the normans. militarly the empire was in better shape than it had been in some time. at the same time he cut taxes on farmers and raised it on nobles and the church and left a full treasury at his death.
Companiero
proletarian par excelence
I suppose you know the legend about him, when he defeated the army of the Slavic tsar Samuel. He blinded the enitre captured army, but leaving one eye on every hundredth soldier so that he could lead the others back to their king. When they got back to Prespa, the capitol of Samuel's Empire, and when he saw his entire army of blind man, he couldn't bear it and died from the shock. After this event, Basil II easily reconquered Samuel's lands.
Though, I dont think he ever conquered Sicily, as was said. However, true, he was maybe the greatest Emperor of the Byzantine second golden age.
Though, I dont think he ever conquered Sicily, as was said. However, true, he was maybe the greatest Emperor of the Byzantine second golden age.
PresidentMarcos
Warlord
- Joined
- Aug 31, 2004
- Messages
- 105
Yes, indeed. History's ultimate eyeball atrocity. He did it to the 15,000 POWs he had captured after the Battle of Kleidon. And he managed to add Syria to the empire, which remained "Roman" for about seventy more years. Shame he didn't have a son or something like that. If he did, well, maybe the "Roman" Empire would still be around...a regional superpower controlling Asia Minor, Greece, and Central Europe, if not more.
Basil II was kick ass- and his reign was one fo the last few great eras of the cataphract, becuase, rather soon after the death of Basil, the entire thematic military system fell apart (becaus eof nobles buying up all the farmland fo the peasentry, creating a lack of troops for provincial defence, amoung other things) and with the fall of the military orginization, so too went the cataphract, and with it, the Byzantine empires military fortunes
Vasileius
Warlord
Yes, Vasileios the second was great indeed... As every Vasileios ... 
Latin_G said:
no, its one thing to strip troops from other areas to campaign for a year, its another to do it for 3-4 and hold the new lands. to many fronts, bulgars in the balkens, normans in italy, arabs and persians in the east
