The Greatest Eastern Roman Basileus

Here am I asking, that by your definition of greatness, please tell me whom of these was the Greatest of the Basileus Basileon Basileuon Basileunton... (aarghhh. that took me five times of spelling it right..... try sounding it...lol)

Edited by rider - 28-Jun-2006 at 12:30

I said I like Herakleios' thematic system.. that is art.. and a great piece of military art. Leon V was just a clever person... you still can see that I chose Theophilos... and it seems I was wrong: I intended Leon VI...

But also he used most of the empire's finances to the west and that was useless in the end and it became their doom. Without conquering Western territories, the Byzantines could have concentrated to East and maybe defeated Persians and Arabs... but that was their beginning and undoing... West...

Yes and his successors often gathered large amounts of money that their sons or grandsons would just distribute freely or waste on parties when the country is in trouble: I hate such idiocy.

My vote may be controversial, but I vote for Basil II Bulgaroctonus. He defeated the empire's most dangerous enemies, he strenghtened the empire in every way, and he left his successors both a strong empire and a full treasury (something that few other rulers in history can boast). True, he may have been somewhat uneducated and crude, and he may be hated by certain people, but strictly for Byzantium he accomplished a lot.

Yes, I have heard sometimes that Empire's enemies didn't dare to attack it when Bulgaroktonos or Isaak I were reigning and it was because of their military careers. Is it true? I believe that I included it in Isaak I, not sure.

Heralius, I would be twenty times grateful to you if you would use NOT the English form of Johannes or whatever the true Greek form is... John is just so.... wierd... John's can rule England but not Rome....

Originally posted by Heraclius Originally posted by rider Heralius, I would be twenty times grateful to you if you would use NOT the English form of Johannes or whatever the true Greek form is... John is just so.... wierd... John's can rule England but not Rome....    It may sound a bit cooler and stuff, but I don't use Grek names for places and people whens theres a perfectly familiar alternative, e.g Hercules is the latin version of the Greek word for the god Herakles, does it really matter if I use the latin version instead of the original in that case?    English is heavily influenced by latin, I don't see any reason why I should have to type in another language, it'll just end up confusing me.    I don't mean to be a pain, but does it really matter what version of the name I use? I am English speaking afterall, not Greek.

I voted for Basil II a near perfect statesman who brought the empire to its true if not territorial height (Justinians empire was larger but poorer, oversteched and in general not very stable). bringing it to its greatest territorial extent since the ummayad caliphate and doing so without the assistence of generals of the genius of Narses or Belisarius (indeed he had to quash a rebbellion led by two of the empires best generals) and lets not forget the full treasury among other accomplishments.

Then this discussion is over about the names!