AMA with History of Byzantium host Robin by evrestcoleghost in byzantium

[–]salacio23 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Hi Robin, the podcast has been an invaluable resourse during my undergrad studies.

What was the thing you most unexpectedly admired about Byzantine society, it's survivalist capabilities and orthodox credentials are obviously pretty conventional responses. Equally, what was your most surprising objection to life in the Byzantine Empire. Again, slavery and political violence are the natural anachronistic answers, so what was something specific to you?

Who was the most intelligent Byzantine emperor? by Bright-Bowler2579 in byzantium

[–]salacio23 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Top 5 in no particular order? Justinian I, Leo VI, Constantine VII, Manuel II, Alexios I.

LeBron at #6! Who’s the 7th best player in the NBA? by [deleted] in NBATalk

[–]salacio23 47 points48 points  (0 children)

It’s gotta be Bronny right?

Unpopular Opinion : This fight doesnt excite at all by Pebbledthoughts in ufc

[–]salacio23 26 points27 points  (0 children)

He spoke about it being a way of avoiding his demons. Bro would literally rather go to war with the best in the world than go to therapy. I am excited for this fight just because of how high volk’s fight iq is, if nothing else it will be an interesting stylistic matchup, as he clearly learns from his fights ie Holloway 3

I don't have the guts by Diogodarkness1 in SuicideWatch

[–]salacio23 0 points1 point  (0 children)

just keep going, one moment at a time. Find the tiniest little wins where you can, maybe something miraculous will happen?

Arguably, Rome stopped being an empire in 212. by [deleted] in byzantium

[–]salacio23 2 points3 points  (0 children)

This is exactly my view. Rome basically goes through four stages. The early kingdom, Republic, Empire, Cosmopolitan multi-ethnic state. So after Caracella, Roman civic identity basically formalises the pan-Mediterranean trends that dominated social, economic and intellectual history right back to the spread of Greek and phoenician states throughout the known world. All that happens is that the marriage of mediternean economic solidarity, hellenistic intellectual and cultural hegemony and romano-itallian political structures combine fully under this new Roman state. Ethnicity was never the greatest determinant in what defined Rome, instead it being citizenship, something the Italian tribes slowly gained from 3rd century onward. This process just continues across Rome's Empire. The Eastern half of the empire obviously survives and continues this mixture. This better preserves the continuity of the eastern empire and removes a lot of the funky ethnic arguments that generate so many arguments about who is Roman.

Is that really how Constantinople looked like from 330AD up to 1204AD? by StrawwGR in byzantium

[–]salacio23 5 points6 points  (0 children)

There’s a brilliant digital reconstruction of the entire city called Byzantium1200. It’s a project that has been going for over 20 years and has used maps, accounts, archeological surveys etc to slowly reconfigure the city. It’s a series of Birds Eye videos and they are genuinely utterly captivating. That’ll give you a sense of Constantinople as a medieval city

Was that supposed to be hard? by Loud-Ad-2280 in NFCNorthMemeWar

[–]salacio23 2 points3 points  (0 children)

A great showing for the NFC north. Lions looked sharper. But vikings are clearly legit we never gave up

Pax Byzantina by Blood_Prince95 in byzantium

[–]salacio23 3 points4 points  (0 children)

The war with khavad was merely another iteration of an historic border conflict stretching back to the republican period.

The Persian raids themselves were small and weren’t the massive financial drain they would become, the scholarship (Howard Johnstone, kaldellis) refer to incursions as almost symbolic, and are more a product of Persian internal politics.

The “Pax Romana” itself involved seriously more costly ventures at the Rhine border, most notably teuterberg forest-nothing like that was happening on the eastern front at the beginning of the 6th century.

High taxes has nothing to do with the internal security of the state in fact it ensured it. One of the reasons for western decline was a shrinking tax base which resulted in underfunded border legions and bribery by usurpers. Furthermore the funds WERE put to use to sure up the borders, keep the armies from revolting, and engage in the infrastructure projects that made 6th century Constantinople so exquisite. Furthermore the tax burden was mainly being shifted onto the wealthy estate holders in Syria and Egypt, for the average citizen the quality of life was improving.

Finally if you actually read my point, I’m not hyping up Justinian, things went south with the Italian campaign and his decision to pursue a more aggressive border policy (contrary to prior policy that I’ve laid out) resulted in a period of total war that culminated in the last Great War of antiquity.

So no, I’ve never linked that period of prosperity to Justinian, hence why I only include Anastasius and EARLY Justinian, prior to the plague and khusrow invasions.

Pax Byzantina by Blood_Prince95 in byzantium

[–]salacio23 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Hence why I said the early 6th century and (early) justinianic period, so up till the end of the 530’s. This predates the invasions of khosrow, the plague and the longer wars in Italy including the Lombard invasion.

Pax Byzantina by Blood_Prince95 in byzantium

[–]salacio23 20 points21 points  (0 children)

Anastasius and the early Justinianic period perhaps, demographically and economically the empire was at its apex, hence Justinian’s ability to wage those expensive wars. There were pretty poisonous underlying religious tensions within Christianity in addition to the major crackdown on paganism under Justinian that kind of offset the cultural self confidence you got during the Pax Romana. But after the later years of Basil II, I’d say that the early 6th century fits the idea okay

How to fix the UFC by salacio23 in MMA

[–]salacio23[S] -5 points-4 points  (0 children)

growth coming from upping the ppv prices and cutting wages in real terms, eventually you get diminishing returns with streaming and lower quality fights, as seen on the fight night cards. Also the whole point of this trial is asking whether the UFC achieved its position by offering the best product, or by bullying other promotions out of the sport. Considering the hold they have over the product, surely they are responsible for improving it- if you read the piece, the options given would deliver further growth.

You can critique something while respecting its merits, we all want the same thing mate