Notice: This is the official website of the All Empires History Community (Reg. 10 Feb 2002)

  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

Heraclius

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  123>
Author
Adalwolf View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar

Joined: 08-Sep-2006
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1230
  Quote Adalwolf Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: Heraclius
    Posted: 29-Oct-2007 at 02:48
The Byzantine Emperor Heraclius was one of the greatest Emperor's in Roman or Byzantine history. His reorganized the army, and personally led it into the field in a counter-attack against the Sassanids. He personally defeated a Sassanid general in battle!

His campaign was the deathblow to the Sassanids, who were throughly drained from the war. The Arabs soon after defeated and replaced the Sassanids, and soon after that took over most of the lands Heraclius had relcaimed.

I have not found much information on how the Arab armies defeated Heraclius's armies. Were the Byzantines outnumbered? Ill-led? (heraclius didn't take the field against the Arabs. he may have been too old) Or were the Arabs simply better led and out-fought/out-smarted the Byzantines?

Any help would be appreciated.

Also, what is your opinion of Heraclius and his deeds?
Concrete is heavy; iron is hard--but the grass will prevail.
     Edward Abbey
Back to Top
Justinian View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar
King of Númenor

Joined: 11-Nov-2005
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1399
  Quote Justinian Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29-Oct-2007 at 04:49
Well, I know you'll get some responses here.  One reason was the arab leadership.  khalid ibn al-walid was one of the greatest generals of the medieval era.  The size of the opposing forces was rather great it seems.  Now I don't believe most of the sources saying the byzantine army was 200,000- that was larger than the entire army of Justinian.  At most I would believe 100,000.  The arabs probably had at most 50,000.  There is a wiki article that is pretty detailed.  So basically, the arabs were better led.  There are several strategical reasons that can be said accounted or set up the defeat but I'll let someone like BE or HeracliusBig%20smile explain those.
 
Edit:   I got a bit carried away, some modern estimates place the size of Justinian's army at 300,000 or so.  I forgot to add this, I simply think that is high, considering Justinian ruled over an empire much smaller than that of the emperors of old whose army was in that area.


Edited by Justinian - 29-Oct-2007 at 04:56
"War is a cowardly escape from the problems of peace."--Thomas Mann

Back to Top
Akolouthos View Drop Down
Sultan
Sultan
Avatar

Joined: 24-Feb-2006
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2091
  Quote Akolouthos Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29-Oct-2007 at 05:22
Hm. As I recall, that wikipedia article was written almost exclusively from an Arab propagandist's point of view (at least it was the last time I saw it...hmm...two months ago?). Detailed? Yes. Misrepresentative? Extremely.
 
Incidentally, I may have a bit to post here later.
 
-Akolouthos
Back to Top
Knights View Drop Down
Caliph
Caliph
Avatar
suspended

Joined: 23-Oct-2006
Location: AUSTRALIA
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3224
  Quote Knights Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29-Oct-2007 at 05:30
Ditto. I read that article about Herakleios, and also some about Byzantine-Sassanid-Muslim battles - and you are spot on about them. Contrary to popular belief, Herakleios was not present in the campaigns with Khalid. He was an ill, old man, who remained in Constantinople. The Byzantine and Sassanid Generals were not of the highest quality, and they were up against a giant among the generals world - Khalid ibn al Whalid.

He was a genius on the battlefield, Yarmouk being a sound exemplification of his skill. So yes, the Byzantines and Sassanids were out-witted by him. Though quite good, the "Muslim" (I will use this term if that's OK) soldiers weren't spectacular. Nor were the Byzantines, Sassanids or their allies, in general. Of course there are exceptions.

Khalid conquered the Sassanids and retook much of Herakleios's territory, which he had spent so many years retaking. In fact, he thought God had placed a curse on him. If Herakleios hadn't have been so down and ill at the time of Khalid's campaigns - who knows how things might have turned out, both in the war, and for Islam.

- Knights -

PS. I'm with Ako - future posting on this topic is pretty much inevitable...Smile


Edited by Knights - 29-Oct-2007 at 05:31
Back to Top
Praetor View Drop Down
Consul
Consul

Suspended

Joined: 26-Jun-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 386
  Quote Praetor Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29-Oct-2007 at 11:15
gentlemen let me begin by stating my agreement in regards to the military genius of both Heraclius and Khalid Ibn Al Walid.

For now I would merely like to add the role of timing, motivation and chance in the conflict.

It should be noted that the Arab invasions of the Byzantine and Sassanid empires occurred soon (relatively speaking) after Heraclius's eventual victory over the Sassanids with both empires exhausted from the colossal clash (this can not be blamed on Heraclius as he tried to make peace multiple times with generous terms prior to the battle of Nineveh). Hence both empires were drained of resources.

Secondly there is the positive impact on morale that the new religion of Islam and there recent unification of the majority of the Arabs had on their morale. Then there's the effect constant warfare and religious conflict and divisions had on the exhausted Byzantine's morale (hint: not good).

On a final note a sandstorm that supposedly blew up in the faces of the Byzantine army at Yarmouk which greatly aided the much smaller and Brilliantly led Arab army.

These are contributing factors of importance to the Arab conquest nevertheless I believe they could not have achieved what they did without superior leadership which is exactly what they had due to to the abscence of Heraclius and the presence of Khalid.

Regards, Praetor.
Back to Top
Adalwolf View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar

Joined: 08-Sep-2006
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1230
  Quote Adalwolf Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29-Oct-2007 at 12:01
Thanks for the info. I need to read more about Khalid!
Concrete is heavy; iron is hard--but the grass will prevail.
     Edward Abbey
Back to Top
Al Jassas View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar

Joined: 07-Aug-2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1810
  Quote Al Jassas Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29-Oct-2007 at 15:44
Hello to you all
 
I have posted earlier an opinion that saying the Byzantines were exhausted was not true for various reasons.
The tide of Arab conquests was obvious in coming, it was the speed and determination that surprised the Byzantines. Hostilities began when a messenger for the prophet was killed by the Ghassanid vassals and this action was condoned by their Byzantine masters. Arabs sent several campaigns against the Ghassanids and they were intending on sending more and they did. The Byzatines had almost 10 years of total peace 5 of them on the constant threat of an Arab invasion and when it came they were prepared. Remember, Khalid routed 3 large Byzantine-Ghassanid armies other than in Yarmouk with basically the same army. He reached as far as Hims (Emessa) after conquering Damascus the year before Yarmouk and when the Byzantine counter attacked, he abandoned every major city except Damascus and masterfully lured the Byzantine to a pitched battle in Yarmouk besieging them in the valley and preventing them from water.
 
Heraclius was always thought to be a very wise and great man by the Arabs and they had much respect for him especially after his victory against the Persians. Arab traditions maintain that Heraclius admitted that Islam was the true religion and that the prophet a true one but he refused fearing the loss of his power. One Arab historian devoted a whole chapter for him in his great book about the Byzantines that I used to have but sadly was torn apart by one of my very young cousins 7 years ago.
 
Al-Jassas


Edited by Al Jassas - 29-Oct-2007 at 15:50
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29-Oct-2007 at 16:49
Originally posted by Adalwolf

Thanks for the info. I need to read more about Khalid!
The best resource? The book "Sword of Allah".
 


Edited by Sparten - 29-Oct-2007 at 16:49
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29-Oct-2007 at 17:54
In these early days I would rather use the term Arab soldiers over Muslim, because while the higher leadership were all Muslim at least publicly there were many Christian tribes- Arab ones that is that contributed soldiers to the armies of the early Caliphate who partook in battle and booty. They were all still bound by long standing Arab tribal notions of alliances. Source, Hodgson Venture of Islam Vol I.
Back to Top
Omar al Hashim View Drop Down
King
King

Suspended

Joined: 05-Jan-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 5697
  Quote Omar al Hashim Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 31-Oct-2007 at 01:31
Originally posted by al Jassas

Heraclius was always thought to be a very wise and great man by the Arabs and they had much respect for him especially after his victory against the Persians. Arab traditions maintain that Heraclius admitted that Islam was the true religion and that the prophet a true one but he refused fearing the loss of his power.

Its not just Arab traditions, its a confirmed Hadies:


Sahih Bukhari 1.1.6
Narrated 'Abdullah bin 'Abbas:

Abu Sufyan bin Harb informed me that Heraclius had sent a messenger to him while he had been accompanying a caravan from Quraish. They were merchants doing business in Sham (Syria, Palestine, Lebanon and Jordan), at the time when Allah's Apostle had truce with Abu Sufyan and Quraish infidels. So Abu Sufyan and his companions went to Heraclius at Ilya (Jerusalem). Heraclius called them in the court and he had all the senior Roman dignitaries around him. He called for his translator who, translating Heraclius's question said to them, "Who amongst you is closely related to that man who claims to be a Prophet?" Abu Sufyan replied, "I am the nearest relative to him (amongst the group)."

Heraclius said, "Bring him (Abu Sufyan) close to me and make his companions stand behind him." Abu Sufyan added, Heraclius told his translator to tell my companions that he wanted to put some questions to me regarding that man (The Prophet) and that if I told a lie they (my companions) should contradict me." Abu Sufyan added, "By Allah! Had I not been afraid of my companions labeling me a liar, I would not have spoken the truth about the Prophet. The first question he asked me about him was:

'What is his family status amongst you?'

I replied, 'He belongs to a good (noble) family amongst us.'

Heraclius further asked, 'Has anybody amongst you ever claimed the same (i.e. to be a Prophet) before him?'

I replied, 'No.'

He said, 'Was anybody amongst his ancestors a king?'

I replied, 'No.'

Heraclius asked, 'Do the nobles or the poor follow him?'

I replied, 'It is the poor who follow him.'

He said, 'Are his followers increasing decreasing (day by day)?'

I replied, 'They are increasing.'

He then asked, 'Does anybody amongst those who embrace his religion become displeased and renounce the religion afterwards?'

I replied, 'No.'

Heraclius said, 'Have you ever accused him of telling lies before his claim (to be a Prophet)?'

I replied, 'No. '

Heraclius said, 'Does he break his promises?'

I replied, 'No. We are at truce with him but we do not know what he will do in it.' I could not find opportunity to say anything against him except that.

Heraclius asked, 'Have you ever had a war with him?'

I replied, 'Yes.'

Then he said, 'What was the outcome of the battles?'

I replied, 'Sometimes he was victorious and sometimes we.'

Heraclius said, 'What does he order you to do?'

I said, 'He tells us to worship Allah and Allah alone and not to worship anything along with Him, and to renounce all that our ancestors had said. He orders us to pray, to speak the truth, to be chaste and to keep good relations with our Kith and kin.'

Heraclius asked the translator to convey to me the following, I asked you about his family and your reply was that he belonged to a very noble family. In fact all the Apostles come from noble families amongst their respective peoples. I questioned you whether anybody else amongst you claimed such a thing, your reply was in the negative. If the answer had been in the affirmative, I would have thought that this man was following the previous man's statement. Then I asked you whether anyone of his ancestors was a king. Your reply was in the negative, and if it had been in the affirmative, I would have thought that this man wanted to take back his ancestral kingdom.

I further asked whether he was ever accused of telling lies before he said what he said, and your reply was in the negative. So I wondered how a person who does not tell a lie about others could ever tell a lie about Allah. I, then asked you whether the rich people followed him or the poor. You replied that it was the poor who followed him. And in fact all the Apostle have been followed by this very class of people. Then I asked you whether his followers were increasing or decreasing. You replied that they were increasing, and in fact this is the way of true faith, till it is complete in all respects. I further asked you whether there was anybody, who, after embracing his religion, became displeased and discarded his religion. Your reply was in the negative, and in fact this is (the sign of) true faith, when its delight enters the hearts and mixes with them completely. I asked you whether he had ever betrayed. You replied in the negative and likewise the Apostles never betray. Then I asked you what he ordered you to do. You replied that he ordered you to worship Allah and Allah alone and not to worship any thing along with Him and forbade you to worship idols and ordered you to pray, to speak the truth and to be chaste. If what you have said is true, he will very soon occupy this place underneath my feet and I knew it (from the scriptures) that he was going to appear but I did not know that he would be from you, and if I could reach him definitely, I would go immediately to meet him and if I were with him, I would certainly wash his feet.' Heraclius then asked for the letter addressed by Allah's Apostle

which was delivered by Dihya to the Governor of Busra, who forwarded it to Heraclius to read. The contents of the letter were as follows: "In the name of Allah the Beneficent, the Merciful (This letter is) from Muhammad the slave of Allah and His Apostle to Heraclius the ruler of Byzantine. Peace be upon him, who follows the right path. Furthermore I invite you to Islam, and if you become a Muslim you will be safe, and Allah will double your reward, and if you reject this invitation of Islam you will be committing a sin by misguiding your Arisiyin (peasants). (And I recite to you Allah's Statement:)

'O people of the scripture! Come to a word common to you and us that we worship none but Allah and that we associate nothing in worship with Him, and that none of us shall take others as Lords beside Allah. Then, if they turn away, say: Bear witness that we are Muslims (those who have surrendered to Allah).' (3:64).

Abu Sufyan then added, "When Heraclius had finished his speech and had read the letter, there was a great hue and cry in the Royal Court. So we were turned out of the court. I told my companions that the question of Ibn-Abi-Kabsha) (the Prophet Muhammad) has become so prominent that even the King of Bani Al-Asfar (Byzantine) is afraid of him. Then I started to become sure that he (the Prophet) would be the conqueror in the near future till I embraced Islam (i.e. Allah guided me to it)."

The sub narrator adds, "Ibn An-Natur was the Governor of llya' (Jerusalem) and Heraclius was the head of the Christians of Sham. Ibn An-Natur narrates that once while Heraclius was visiting ilya' (Jerusalem), he got up in the morning with a sad mood. Some of his priests asked him why he was in that mood? Heraclius was a foreteller and an astrologer. He replied, 'At night when I looked at the stars, I saw that the leader of those who practice circumcision had appeared (become the conqueror). Who are they who practice circumcision?' The people replied, 'Except the Jews nobody practices circumcision, so you should not be afraid of them (Jews).

'Just Issue orders to kill every Jew present in the country.'

While they were discussing it, a messenger sent by the king of Ghassan to convey the news of Allah's Apostle to Heraclius was brought in. Having heard the news, he (Heraclius) ordered the people to go and see whether the messenger of Ghassan was circumcised. The people, after seeing him, told Heraclius that he was circumcised. Heraclius then asked him about the Arabs. The messenger replied, 'Arabs also practice circumcision.'

(After hearing that) Heraclius remarked that sovereignty of the 'Arabs had appeared. Heraclius then wrote a letter to his friend in Rome who was as good as Heraclius in knowledge. Heraclius then left for Homs. (a town in Syrian and stayed there till he received the reply of his letter from his friend who agreed with him in his opinion about the emergence of the Prophet and the fact that he was a Prophet. On that Heraclius invited all the heads of the Byzantines to assemble in his palace at Homs. When they assembled, he ordered that all the doors of his palace be closed. Then he came out and said, 'O Byzantines! If success is your desire and if you seek right guidance and want your empire to remain then give a pledge of allegiance to this Prophet (i.e. embrace Islam).'

(On hearing the views of Heraclius) the people ran towards the gates of the palace like onagers but found the doors closed. Heraclius realized their hatred towards Islam and when he lost the hope of their embracing Islam, he ordered that they should be brought back in audience.

(When they returned) he said, 'What already said was just to test the strength of your conviction and I have seen it.' The people prostrated before him and became pleased with him, and this was the end of Heraclius's story (in connection with his faith).
Back to Top
Akolouthos View Drop Down
Sultan
Sultan
Avatar

Joined: 24-Feb-2006
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2091
  Quote Akolouthos Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 31-Oct-2007 at 01:44

What is the nature of this source? You will forgive me if I dismiss it out of hand; it doesn't seem at all likely in light of the life and times of Heraclius.

-Akolouthos
Back to Top
Constantine XI View Drop Down
Suspended
Suspended

Suspended

Joined: 01-May-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 5711
  Quote Constantine XI Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 31-Oct-2007 at 02:04
I have more to say on Heraclius personally later, but I agree that the above text on Heraclius seems like wishful thinking. It is nearly impossible to believe that a Byzantine Emperor like Heraclius, an astute politician at that, would take up an obscure Bedouin heresy. If he were going to become a heretic (and he never wavered from the Orthodox fold, evident during the Monothelite compromise), he may as well have become Monophysite.

The staunch Orthodoxy of the man never wavered. Not in all the years when the Monophysite provinces fell away to the Sassanids, nor when the True Cross was taken by Chosroes, nor when the Sassanids were encamped as Chalcedon. In the bleakest of times he always remained an Orthodox Emperor. To suddenly reject all that during the easiest years of his reign is rather unbelievable.
Back to Top
Omar al Hashim View Drop Down
King
King

Suspended

Joined: 05-Jan-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 5697
  Quote Omar al Hashim Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 31-Oct-2007 at 04:52
Your forgetting that he didn't reject it. He died an Orthodox Christian.

The Sahih Bukhari is one of the most reliable compilations of Hadiths. Without going into the explanations of Hadith sciences (you can write whole books on the issue), in order for it to be admitted into the Sahih Bukhari it has to be an event that has numerous eyewitnesses, with excellent memory, and a very similar recollection. It is therefore very likely the event described happened.

There are multiple different Hadiths in the Sahih Bukhari which refer to that event. A search for the name 'Heraclius' turns up the following results:

001.001.006 001.002.048 003.048.846 004.052.060 004.052.191 004.052.221 004.053.399 006.060.075 008.073.010 008.074.277 009.089.304



Edited by Omar al Hashim - 31-Oct-2007 at 04:53
Back to Top
Leonardo View Drop Down
General
General
Avatar

Joined: 13-Jan-2006
Location: Italy
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 778
  Quote Leonardo Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 31-Oct-2007 at 07:37
Originally posted by Omar al Hashim

Your forgetting that he didn't reject it. He died an Orthodox Christian.

The Sahih Bukhari is one of the most reliable compilations of Hadiths. Without going into the explanations of Hadith sciences (you can write whole books on the issue), in order for it to be admitted into the Sahih Bukhari it has to be an event that has numerous eyewitnesses, with excellent memory, and a very similar recollection. It is therefore very likely the event described happened.

There are multiple different Hadiths in the Sahih Bukhari which refer to that event. A search for the name 'Heraclius' turns up the following results:

001.001.006 001.002.048 003.048.846 004.052.060 004.052.191 004.052.221 004.053.399 006.060.075 008.073.010 008.074.277 009.089.304

 
 
How an intelligent person could believe this BS? It's pure wishful thinking and self delusion.
 
 
Back to Top
Omar al Hashim View Drop Down
King
King

Suspended

Joined: 05-Jan-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 5697
  Quote Omar al Hashim Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 31-Oct-2007 at 08:26
Why do I get the feeling your rejecting the source not because you know anything about its authenticity (because you surely don't) but because you don't like what it contains?

Weighing up the opinions of a few Christians with ruffled feathers, and a historical eyewitness source backed up by transparent and often revised historiography*, of course I choose the latter. Unless someone can shed doubt on the authenticity of that particular hadith.

There isn't anything even extraordinary in there. Heraclius received a letter from the Prophet, and this is the eyewitness report of those who delivered it. So he was sympathetic to Islam, what do you care? If you can take the fact that most of his compatriots converted to Islam within the next 150 years, surely you can take the fact that Heraclius didn't.

*see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historiography#Islamic_world


Edited by Omar al Hashim - 31-Oct-2007 at 08:28
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 31-Oct-2007 at 10:21
Its just a letter sent. And he was courteus in reply. It dose not say he converted or anything, just that as Omer said, he was sympathetic.
Back to Top
Leonardo View Drop Down
General
General
Avatar

Joined: 13-Jan-2006
Location: Italy
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 778
  Quote Leonardo Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 31-Oct-2007 at 13:21
Originally posted by Omar al Hashim

Why do I get the feeling your rejecting the source not because you know anything about its authenticity (because you surely don't) but because you don't like what it contains?

Weighing up the opinions of a few Christians with ruffled feathers, and a historical eyewitness source backed up by transparent and often revised historiography*, of course I choose the latter. Unless someone can shed doubt on the authenticity of that particular hadith.

There isn't anything even extraordinary in there. Heraclius received a letter from the Prophet, and this is the eyewitness report of those who delivered it. So he was sympathetic to Islam, what do you care? If you can take the fact that most of his compatriots converted to Islam within the next 150 years, surely you can take the fact that Heraclius didn't.

*see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historiography#Islamic_world
 
 
It's only your islamic religious bigotry that prevent you to understand how ridicoluos are those claims.
 
 
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 31-Oct-2007 at 14:01
"Islamic religious bigotry" ?

I don't know, you display bigotry on a continuous basis, and here it goes again.
Back to Top
Akolouthos View Drop Down
Sultan
Sultan
Avatar

Joined: 24-Feb-2006
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2091
  Quote Akolouthos Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 31-Oct-2007 at 14:34
Originally posted by Omar al Hashim

Why do I get the feeling your rejecting the source not because you know anything about its authenticity (because you surely don't) but because you don't like what it contains?

Weighing up the opinions of a few Christians with ruffled feathers, and a historical eyewitness source backed up by transparent and often revised historiography*, of course I choose the latter. Unless someone can shed doubt on the authenticity of that particular hadith.

There isn't anything even extraordinary in there. Heraclius received a letter from the Prophet, and this is the eyewitness report of those who delivered it. So he was sympathetic to Islam, what do you care? If you can take the fact that most of his compatriots converted to Islam within the next 150 years, surely you can take the fact that Heraclius didn't.

*see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historiography#Islamic_world
 
I think, Omar, that the initial phrasing is what led to such a vehement denial. The issue was initially put to us as a situation wherein Heraclius "admitted that Islam was the true religion," which is untenable. That he may have been sympathetic seems like it may be in character with the rest of what we know of Heraclius; the general picture of Heraclius that emerges, with regard to the advent of Islam, is of a man who didn't fully understand the nature of the controversy. That said, the initial phrasing--and it was not your phrasing, nor do I think it was intentionally misleading--would lead us to believe a bit more.
 
-Akolouthos
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 31-Oct-2007 at 16:05
Nobody is claiming that he was a "closet" muslim. Just that his reply was rather courteous and one of a man who clearly wanted to learn more.
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  123>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Bulletin Board Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 9.56a [Free Express Edition]
Copyright ©2001-2009 Web Wiz

This page was generated in 0.141 seconds.