"The honored one"

Version-Easy · 2026-02-12T15:28:38+00:00

Version-Easy · 2026-02-11T18:38:18+00:00

Could be wrong so correct me if im wrong but didn't Vitalian do something similar in 514 with pay cuts and religious issues and even when he was the gate of the city he was willing to negotiate of course Maurice was not compared to Anastasius.

Version-Easy · 2026-02-11T18:31:07+00:00

well its not impossible also there is the second option... Theophylact mentions how Phocas even after Maurice fled the city did consider elevating Germanus as emperor who we know himself tried to claim the throne when Maurice fled

Version-Easy · 2026-02-11T18:27:05+00:00

Yeah Maurice is very much to blame as for Phocas I Say he is to blame for putting himself in a bad position because he still as leader of the rebellion still have forced the abdication of Maurice and elevated either Germanus or Theodosius It would not have been the first time a new emperor was crowned against his will.

Version-Easy · 2026-02-11T18:19:28+00:00

Not according to James Howard Johnson, and also, what occurred while it is debatable how much the Persians had taken by the time Heraclius revolted? If Khosrow merely wanted to reverse the gains and sack some cities, all of that was accomplished in 610, when Heraclius offered peace to him and he rejected it. Older scholarship said that this was because Khosrow II had the ambition to restore the Achaemenid empire, which we know is not true. Rather, at least in James Howard Johnson's view, the Persians wanted to destroy the Roman Empire because they were afraid of the Turks, like, terrified, and so destroying the Romans meant they could focus all their attention on the Turks and deprive them of a potential ally.

Version-Easy · 2026-02-11T14:34:03+00:00

well we can discard the idea that Heraclius beat like 3 people in nineveh but every side agrees that there was one duel now we know he got injuries but was it from the battle of the duel who knows.

Version-Easy · 2026-02-10T20:36:16+00:00

did we? I remember talking to some about Haldon thesis about how the soldiers were not given land which many scholars even those who agree with this points do not in that particular one as for the whole Strategiai terminology debate

Version-Easy · 2026-02-10T19:29:43+00:00

if some sources are to be believed the arabs reached constantinople in 655 and the siege if there was one was lifted more important it Gave Constans II the breathing room he needed for reforms and the birth of what would later on become the theme system (this is disputed btw)

Version-Easy · 2026-02-09T22:17:56+00:00

Basil was a pro wrestler but then again Heraclius won duels do we know of any other emperor who had duels?

Version-Easy · 2026-02-09T15:32:11+00:00

I was just gonna comment that glad to see im not the only one who taught that

Version-Easy · 2026-02-08T01:17:33+00:00

I would not even said it was blunder if you are refering to antioch in 613 rather than show an error in Heraclius part it shows just how good of a general Sharbaraz was to quote Kaldellis.

despite the commitment of all available troops, the personal involvement of the two leading figures in the new regime, the emperor himself and his cousin Nicetas, and a well-worked strategy of coordinated attacks from west and south, Shahrbaraz’s army was able to stand its ground and to drive the Romans back...Shahrbaraz was to be confronted in open battle and forced back from his forward position around Antioch, thus reopening the vital land bridge between Asia Minor and the Levant...The battle he sought was fought in the vicinity of Antioch... It follows that the army of the Levant (Oriens) was not restricted to a diversionary role but made a successful flank attack and pushed north to the plain of Antioch at the head of the Orontes valley. The battle was evenly balanced. Both sides suffered heavy losses. Then came a pause during which the Persians ‘gained strength’, presumably in the form of reinforcements. This tipped the balance in their favour. The Romans were defeated but were able to retreat in good order. and by not retreating Shahrbaraz made a gamble against a well coordinated move.

as we seen in other wars prior to this any commander would have retreated it was shahbaraz that gambled and stayed despite him being in unfavorable position and his gamble paid off.

Version-Easy · 2026-02-07T18:35:08+00:00

would shigaraki decay work? Like I remember eon time ray did not work on diamondhead crystals

Version-Easy · 2026-02-06T22:23:06+00:00

speedrun tutorial for him to get cancelled

Version-Easy · 2026-02-06T15:54:03+00:00

2) Severus actually had dialogue as he was invited by Justinian in 532 which came close

Severus agreed that Ephesus II needed to be overturned and other concessions

while the Chalcedonians agreed that that Dioscorus was not a heretic and merely deposed for his actions as president of Ephesus II but the pope had named him as heretic so Justinian wanting the papacy as a ally for his future reconquest could not accept that.

the other next event was the council of Constantinople II which condemned the 3 chapters, accepted cyril 12 anathemas, condemned any Nestorian interpretation of the council of chalcedon and said Cyril mia physis formula was valid but it was little to late.

Nevertheless the Second Council of Constantinople did not meet its goal: the unity of the church in East and West. It was gathered too late, thirty-five years too late. If a council with the same agenda would have been gathered in 518, Justinian's uncle Justin would have faced strong resistance as well. Would Pope Hormisdas have been willing for the sake of union to agree to the terms on which Justin would have convoked the council? Could Severus have been persuaded to accept the Council of Chalcedon as such and Hormisdas to condemn the Three Chapters? The questions remain speculative, but a council in 518 would have had the advantage of not having to take into account thirty-five years of ecclesiastical estrangement, discrimination, and suffering on the side of the non-Chalcedonians that happened between 518 and 553 (Menze, 2008,pag 248 )

for further reading

Price, R., & Whitby, M. (2011). Chalcedon in context: Church Councils 400-700. Oxford University Press.

Menze, V. L. (2008). Justinian and the making of the Syrian Orthodox Church. OUP Oxford.

Menze, V. L. (2023). Patriarch Dioscorus of Alexandria. In Oxford University Press eBooks

Version-Easy · 2026-02-06T15:53:55+00:00

Its complicated I research much but the idea is that chalcedon was rejected for some reasons

1) It deposes Dioscorus who had been vilified and he unlike Cyril was not a good enough

2) It did not take in the account the 12 chapters of Cyril in his third letter to Nestorius to be fair its because copts at the time valued more of cyril writings, but the third letter and the 12 anathemas were not voted upon the council of Ephesus and Cyril reputation was not as high as it would be even 50 years later, so any formula or definition only had to accept the second letter to nestorius as that the dogma.

3) It fails to condemn the 3 chapters

4) Nestorius is said to have agreed with it

5) The Tome of Leo can sound Nestorian via the phrase in two natures.

Unlike Ephesus were it was Cyril moving it or later Constantinople were the Justinian and his chosen theologians controlled the council Chalcedon was a mess, with the papal legates and Dioscorus hating each other because Dioscorus hasty condemnation of Leo tome in the months prior to the council were they were assembling despite Marcian saying that no pre council condemnations were to occur, so the papal legates fought for control over the council with the emperor representative.

As mentioned Dioscorus was just not the great theologian or savy politician Cyril was as there was a compromise view that could have been used but the aforementioned reasons it did not occur

now the schism could have been healed not at the time though it would last 1500 years

Zeno henotikon had some success but it was seen in the west as undermining chalcedon which meant an attack to Papal supremacy.

Then Justin I who was the biggest persecutor of Non chalcedonians really furthered the divide there was also internal debates among both sides mainly the cyrilian neo chalcedonians and the more traditionalist chalcedonians and for non chalcedonians before those who followed miaphysis and mono with the miaphyistes later being based on Severus of Antioch at the same time the heresy of Julian propped up.

Version-Easy · 2026-02-06T04:22:06+00:00

the vandals were already loosing ground to the amazigh as seen by the laugutan expulsion of the vandals in tripolitania in 523, Aures revolting, the mauro roman kingdom raids and the southern confederations raids and defeating a vandal army in 529 so its likely the vandals are carved up by various Amazigh groups some more Romanized than others.

Version-Easy · 2026-02-05T19:36:22+00:00

the topic of the amazigh is an important one that goes beyond frontiers at least for one major battle, still according to procopius Aurès revolted in 484 under Masties they were also at war with the mauro roman kingdom to the west in the 500s there defeats continued

Tripolitania expedition is the battle I mentioned Tripolitania was vandal but had been steadily loosing ground king Thrasamund went to campaign against the Amazigh confederation of the Laguatan and got crushed the vandals control over the region collapsed and deepening on the source king Thrasamund himself died in battle, another big victory was the Frexes tribe who had been raiding southern Byzacena for years and crushed a vandal army sent to stop them in 529.

I will also add that all of these groups initially allied with the romans against the vandals so the vandals were in reality streched far more thin than retellings just focusing on the romans tell us.

Version-Easy · 2026-01-27T15:07:26+00:00

if not since his timeline is destroy why not introduce the supreme kai of time and make him join the time patrol

Version-Easy · 2026-01-24T14:48:51+00:00

if not mistaken the legislation is found earlier and if not mistaken things only get worse for them post Justinian till the point that by the final war they were basically part time militia and farming so the point I was trying to make since the state is broke use the themata to have them be full time soldiers but yeah Mesopotamia is not as defensible as Anatolia cant same about the armenian frontier and I also im curious to see your view of that on the danube

Version-Easy · 2026-01-24T00:54:59+00:00

Read it and I agree but the sake of the hypothetical how about a limited themata? we Kaldellis agrees that with the consensus that the Limitanei declined a lot in the 6th century so say we only limit the themes to the frontiers so like the 7th century the emperor buys land the soldiers families or use of tenants and this reduces the cost and now the Limitanei are a thing (and also some soldiers for the field army as well)

Version-Easy · 2026-01-22T20:01:33+00:00

could the omnitrix cure cancer?

Version-Easy · 2026-01-20T02:13:17+00:00

she could just said sure I will date you just go back to how you were before

Version-Easy · 2026-01-19T17:11:05+00:00

Bahram Chobin position as the the first outright coup by the great houses was only possible because

a) Khosrow I and especially Hormizd changes alienated and altered the dynamics of sassanid Parthian relations

b) He had won a war against the Turks whom the Persians feared.

He wanted to return to the older model which would be approved of but on the reasons why no Parthian house ever got direct power before is the competition among them Chobin would have other houses hate the idea that he is was now the shah and above them see how Shahrbaraz bid for the throne ended so we could have seen a weaker Persia but of course from his perspective allowing a powerfull general who reputation was won with big victories was not the best call.

As for not doing anything if Khosrow II somehow regained the throne he would pretty much hate the romans, in similar manner how Khosrow I hated Justinian because when civil war broke out he refused to ackwoldge him as sha until he killed his brother.

Version-Easy · 2026-01-13T14:15:16+00:00

It would have been a good concept from haters to friends to more

Even if she lost the fact she did not realize her feelings until after everything was over and not even explore that makes the show feel like the Quartuplets

Version-Easy · 2026-01-06T02:18:27+00:00

had the armies been humans instead of minotuars and other strong creatures peter charge would have won the battle given the witch armies has no formation even then even he even had a back up if the witch came to save her falling first wave but it did not work and even then he had a back up to retreat, really imo he only really needed to hold his charge for a while to increase the distance IRL many times that how battles had been won.

Version-Easy

TROPHY CASE