Talk:Eustathios Daphnomeles/GA1
Latest comment: 8 years ago by Cplakidas in topic GA Review
GA Review edit
| GA toolbox |
|---|
| Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Sturmvogel 66 (talk · contribs) 01:58, 23 December 2015 (UTC)
I'll get to this shortly.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 01:58, 23 December 2015 (UTC)
- One DAB, external links OK
- Image appropriately licensed.
- With only the possible capture of a single city, it's very hard to credit him as one of the most successful generals of the time. What else did he do?--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 18:23, 3 January 2016 (UTC)
- Hi Sturmvogel 66 and a happy New Year! Well, his operation to take out Ibatzes was a major coup de main. Ibatzes could easily have held out there indefinitely, and this would have left the conquest of Bulgaria an unfinished business and a possible rallying point for resistance to coalesce around. The "reputation of one of the most prominent and successful generals" was in the judgment of contemporaries, at least as far as we can determine today from the narrative as given in the surviving sources. It is very likely that he also did other stuff, but we don't really know, possibly because during the Bulgarian wars, Basil himself led the army most of the time, leaving few opportunities for the generals to distinguish themselves in independent commands and be mentioned accordingly. If Stephenson, however, who is probably the most pre-eminent scholar on the Byzantine Balkans of the 10th-12th centuries, regards him as such, then he undoubtedly represents the prevailing opinion of Byzantinists. Constantine ✍ 19:45, 6 January 2016 (UTC)
- Fair enough, although the foundation of that opinion rests on pretty shaky ground, IMO. Anyway, fix the DAB and we'll be done with this puppy.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 21:53, 6 January 2016 (UTC)
- DAB fixed, and rephrased a bit to address your very understandable concern. Cheers, Constantine ✍ 15:54, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
- Fair enough, although the foundation of that opinion rests on pretty shaky ground, IMO. Anyway, fix the DAB and we'll be done with this puppy.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 21:53, 6 January 2016 (UTC)
- Hi Sturmvogel 66 and a happy New Year! Well, his operation to take out Ibatzes was a major coup de main. Ibatzes could easily have held out there indefinitely, and this would have left the conquest of Bulgaria an unfinished business and a possible rallying point for resistance to coalesce around. The "reputation of one of the most prominent and successful generals" was in the judgment of contemporaries, at least as far as we can determine today from the narrative as given in the surviving sources. It is very likely that he also did other stuff, but we don't really know, possibly because during the Bulgarian wars, Basil himself led the army most of the time, leaving few opportunities for the generals to distinguish themselves in independent commands and be mentioned accordingly. If Stephenson, however, who is probably the most pre-eminent scholar on the Byzantine Balkans of the 10th-12th centuries, regards him as such, then he undoubtedly represents the prevailing opinion of Byzantinists. Constantine ✍ 19:45, 6 January 2016 (UTC)