Talk:Byzantine army (Komnenian era)

message: Could someone explain me why does this article (and I just noticed that other articles changed since my last visits) use the form "Komnenian" instead of the usual and recognizable "Comnenian"? GhePeU 12:19, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Komnenian

message: This seems quite impressive. As a Byzantine empire fan, I would wish it to be true, but - seriously - 70,000 troops? 1097? The restoration had not truly begun yet in 1097, though Nicaea was in Byzantine hands. With 70,000 troops, I can't see how Alexius could not even take back the whole of Asia minor. Tourskin
I'm not sure where the 70,000 number comes from. Without a citation, you are right not to trust it. I am the author of this article, but if I remember correctly the 70,000 figure was not part of my original text. I will look into Byzantine army sizes, and see if I can find a reliable estimate of imperial strength at the time. I do have a suspicion that the 70,000 figure may have come from the Men-at-arms book on 'Byzantine armies, 1118-1400s', but I'm not certain of this. Bigdaddy1204 14:20, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  1097 = 70,000 troops? 

message: Under John and Manuel a system of permanent army camps was organised (the names Lopadion and Rhyndacus spring to mind) one in Bythinia the other in Thrace.  The army was concentrated at one or other of the camps, depending on the projected area of operations, and these seem to have been used to prepare the field army for campaign.  This appears to have been an innovation and may have played a part in the increase in efficiency seen in the Byzantine army in the period.
The Vardariots were an important cavalry unit in the period, raised from Christian Turks settled in the Vardar valley in the Balkans.
The Archontupouloi was a guard regiment raised by Alexius from the sons of dead Byzantine officers.
It might be mentioned that Manuel allegedly Westernised his heavy cavalry, presumably introducing the couched-lance technique and close order charge. (from Kinnamos/Cinnamus - I think).
Urselius 13:37, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Additions? 

message: I have added a section on the structure of the army and some footnotes.Urselius 08:03, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  New Section 

message: Can anybody refer me to a primary source that shows the continuing presence of cataphracts in the Komnenian army? As far as I know their last appearance was in 1001--before Alexios I had even risen to the throne--but I'm not closing my eyes to the possibility that the Komneni might have revived the cataphracts yet again.
Lay (talk) 13:04, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cataphracts 

message: An image used in this article, , has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests August 2011 
;What should I do?
Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.
* If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
* If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.
This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 11:18, 24 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: File:Kremlin Armoury 015.jpg Nominated for Deletion

message: There are two Treadgold books in the secondary sources, but the inline citations for this author do not indicate which of the two books are being referred to. I don't have the books so cannot correct this. Urselius (talk) 20:39, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Treadgold 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Byzantine army (Komnenian era). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101123070354/http://doaks.org/publications/doaks_online_publications/LACR.html to http://www.doaks.org/publications/doaks_online_publications/LACR.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:19, 11 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Byzantine army (Komnenian era). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110216085233/http://www.levantia.com.au/military/KKK.html to http://www.levantia.com.au/military/KKK.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:42, 8 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: To everyone tempted to change all use of 'Russia' and 'Russian' in the article. Please consider that scholarship takes precedent over political or nationalistic considerations, and that in the English language Wikipedia sources in English language are used preferentially.
The use of 'Russia' and 'Russian' is supported by a number of factors.
1) It is used in the secondary sources.
2) The word 'Russia' derives from the Byzantine Greek Rhosia, so its use in a Byzantine article is apt linguistically.
3) At the time period of the article the ethnogenesis of White Russians, Ukrainians and Great Russians had not taken place. It did not take place until after the Mongol invasions, at the earliest. These peoples were politically and culturally homogenous, spoke East Slavic dialects that were not yet separate languages and wrote in the same language, Old Church Slavonic. Plus, to outsiders, who universally adopted variants of the Greek term Rhosia, they were all 'Russians'.
4) The use of a terminal apostrophe, as in Rus', is remarkably ugly to English-speakers and primarily suggests "belonging to more than one 'Ru'". Urselius (talk) 17:55, 12 November 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Russia and Rus'