Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Staurakios

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article promoted by Hawkeye7 (talk) via MilHistBot (talk) 02:20, 2 April 2020 (UTC) « Return to A-Class review list[reply]

Staurakios

Instructions for nominators and reviewers

Nominator(s): Iazyges (talk)

Featured article candidates/Staurakios/archive1

I am nominating this article for A-Class review because it is a part of my Roman and Byzantine Emperors project, and I believe it meets the A-Class standards. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 23:16, 1 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

CommentsSupport by CPA-5

Staurakios or Stauracius (Greek: Σταυράκιος; Early 790s – 11 January 812 AD) Unlink Greek because it is a comment term.
Cannot be unlinked because it is within the template.
He was born sometime after 778 AD, to Nikephoros I and an unknown woman The body says something different it says he was born by his father and Prokopia and both the infobox and the body say he was born in in the early 790s AD?
Done
~~at the time of Staurakios' birth, before he revolted --> "at the time of Staurakios's birth, before he revolted"~~
Staurakios is not a plural noun; singular nouns ending in s get a ' after the s, not s's; have crossed out suggestions of the same nature for ease. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 23:02, 17 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Staurakios was around 10–12 years old at this time You mean 9–12 years old? Or is this what the sources say?
Sources say, probably due to some intricacy with the date of his birth they don't explicitly mention. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 23:02, 17 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
~~After Staurakios' elevation to co-emperor, he is not mentioned again until 807 --> "After Staurakios's elevation to co-emperor, he is not mentioned again until 807".~~
~~legitimacy to both Nikephoros and Staurakios' rule --> "legitimacy to both Nikephoros and Staurakios's rule"~~
alongside Staurakios, his son-in-law and kouropalates Michael Rhangabe What is a kouropalates?
Done
Staurakios' spine had been severed during the battle, which along with Staurakios' lack of previous --> "Staurakios's spine had been severed during the battle, which along with Staurakios's lack of previous"
the magistros Theoktistos, the Domestic of the Schools Stephanos What's a magistros?
Done
to consider the issue of Nikephoros' successor. The severity of Staurakios' injury led to speculations --> "to consider the issue of Nikephoros's successor. The severity of Staurakios's injury led to speculations"

where he insulted Nikephoros' military judgment --> "where he insulted Nikephoros's military judgment"

granted to him by his marriage to Staurakios' sister, Prokopia --> "granted to him by his marriage to Staurakios's sister, Prokopia"

~~Staurakios' sister, Prokopia, backed her husband Michael --> "Staurakios's sister, Prokopia, backed her husband Michael"~~
The second option is considered[by whom?] to be the machinations of an addled There is a by whom template?
Done
~~Staurakios come from Theophanes' Chronographia, which was tainted by Theophanes' hatred --> "Staurakios come from Theophanes's Chronographia, which was tainted by Theophanes's hatred"~~

~~Because of the brevity of Staurakios' reign, and the weakness --> "Because of the brevity of Staurakios's reign, and the weakness"~~

That's anything from me. Cheers. CPA-5 (talk) 16:25, 7 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@CPA-5: Done. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 23:02, 17 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for the delay. Cheers. CPA-5 (talk) 21:03, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by Constantine

Claiming my place here, will review over the next few days. Constantine ✍ 15:27, 12 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

However, due to these injuries his reign was short, he was usurped by his brother-in-law, Michael I Rangabe, on 2 October 811, after which he was sent to live in a monastery, where he stayed until he died of gangrene on 11 January 812. too long, split this up. Also, there is a source of confusion here: "due to these injuries his reign was short" implies that it was short because he died, whereas he was usurped before that.
Done
Since Bury 2008 is a reprint of the original work, I strongly recommend altering the reference (and the citations) to that, since it is publicly available at the Internet Archive.
Done
The Lawler reference is an encyclopedia, so I guess that a specific entry is cited. Please give that in the reference. Also, as far as I can tell, the publication year for that work is 2004.
Done
He was one of the few "strong emperors" who had not previously been a general, although it is considered likely that he had some military training "strong emperors" appears to be a quote, or otherwise a qualification by someone; name the scholar from which this comes. Ditto for the "it is considered likely"; by whom? Ditto for many modern historians, the section only references two works. Better to name a few, or, if it is a view from one of the sources, quote it along with the name of the historian who wrote it. I had added a further 'by whom' tag back in December for the same reason, but this has also not been addressed yet.
Unable to find the source which references it, so I have removed the first two, referenced the last one. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 23:35, 17 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
On the name of his mother, the PmbZ article on Nikephoros says "Das Chronikon Altinate nennt die Ehefrau des N. Prokopia. Hierbei handelt es sich aber wohl um eine Verwechslung mit dem Namen der Tochter (so Grierson, Tombs 55; anders Treadgold, Revival 405, der Prokopia als Namen der Frau gelten lassen möchte). Die Möglichkeit, daß sowohl die Mutter als auch die Tochter Prokopia hießen, ist nicht gänzlich auszuschließen, aber doch recht unwahrscheinlich." in other words, it is unlikely that she was named Prokopia, and the sole reference to her by that name is probably through confusion with her daughter. Amend the infobox accordingly and add this to the main text.
Done
Nikephoros and Staurakios were generally successful in maintaining the borders of the Byzantine Empire, although they did not achieve much military success, occasionally being forced to make humiliating concessions to powerful enemies, such as the Abbasid caliph Harun al-Rashid why is this relevant here?
Done Have moved it down to Historiography. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 23:35, 17 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
While Staurakios, now somewhere between the ages of 11 and 13, was not yet old enough to actually exercise power, Nikephoros removed any question of the imperial succession by declaring Staurakios his co-emperor and heir, as well as increased his own legitimacy I think the sense is conveyed better if you reorder this "While Staurakios... power, by declaring Staurakios his co-emperor and heir, Nikephoros removed...".
Done
he is not mentioned again add "in the sources"
Done
both Nikephoros and Staurakios' rule add apostrophe after Nikephoros
Done
the heavily biased Theophanes explain that Theophanes was a historian (perhaps introduce him when you speak of the heavily biased ecclesiastical sources earlier).
Done
After his marriage, Staurakios is not mentioned again until 811, when Nikephoros prepared his invasion of the Bulgarian Empire in May 811. Redundant repetition of the date. Change the first to "May 811" and drop the second. Also, at this stage in history this is still the Bulgar/Bulgarian khanate; the Bulgarian monarchs had no imperial title yet.
Done
The Bulgarian had been a serious foreign threat to the Byzantine Empire since the reign of Constantine IV (r. 668–685), whose invasion of them ended in disaster. Between 808 and 811, the building tension between the two powers ended in outright warfare. "The Bulgarians", "invasion of them" is awkward phrasing, "resulted" rather than "ended", as the warfare was not the end of the tension.
Done
massacre for the Byzantine forces, where much of the army Replace comma with full stop, lose the "where"
Done
retreated to Adrianople in three days what do you mean that they retreated in three days? Did they reach Adrianople after three days, over three days?
Done
Staurakios' spine had been severed during the battle, which along with Staurakios' lack of previous demonstrations of ability, led the three uninjured influential people who had traveled with Nikephoros and Staurakios, the magistros Theoktistos, the Domestic of the Schools Stephanos, and Michael Rhangabe, to consider the issue of Nikephoros' successor. Too long, split this up.
Done
on c. 28 July 811. Either around 28 July 811, or simply c. 28 July 811. "On" implies a definite date.
Done
became hostile to Theoktistos and Michael I assume the link to Theoktistos is incorrect, and this Theoktistos is the same as Theoktistos (magistros). If so, unlink him.
Done
As Staurakios became more and more aware that his days were numbered rhetorical flourish that can be removed entirely.
Done
in a ninth-century chronicle, if you have the name of the chronicle, please name it.
Unfortunately I do not; Bury doesn't name it. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 23:35, 17 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
After hearing the two options -> " After hearing of the two options"
Done
return to the uncertainty which had pervaded Irene's rule You ought to explain though why Irene's rule was "uncertain". This justification is too vague.
Done
On 1 September 811, Staurakios summoned Stephanos, whom he trusted wholly, likely because Stephanos was the first to proclaim Staurakios emperor, to propose blinding Michael, who Staurakios was unaware had the support of Stephanos himself. very convoluted phrasing. Split up.
Done
Link Byzantine Senate at "senate".
Done
answered in person, alongside Michael and Prokopia, does this mean the letter was handwritten by the three of them, or that they visited Staurakios in person?
Done
and informed the patriarch that "you will not find him a better friend" Capitalize "Patriarch". Who is "him" and why is that phrase important?
Done
Link "Syriac" to Syriac language
Done
" the Syriac Chronicle 754–813 AD." if this is the same as the Chronicle of 813, be consistent with your naming
Done
Regarding the sources more broadly, Bury is invaluable and largely still reliable on the narrative parts, but I note that the major modern study of the period, Treadgold's Byzantine Revival, has not been consulted. Marsh is fairly up-to-date though, so this may not matter that much. I will have a look in Treadgold and see if there is anything missing. Constantine ✍ 18:56, 18 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Cplakidas: Done all, await news on Treadgold. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 23:35, 17 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
G'day Constantine, just wondering if you've had a chance to take a look Treadgold? Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 02:53, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Source review—pass

Please be consistent about locations of publications: all or none
Sources appear reliable
No source checks done b uidhe 16:23, 17 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Image review—Pass

No issues b uidhe 16:24, 17 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Buidhe: Done all. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 23:37, 17 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

CommentsSupport by PM

This article is in great shape. I have a few comments:

Lead

suggest "Staurakios was declared emperor, despite severe wounds suffered in the same battle."
Done
suggest "His reign was short due to the political uncertainties surrounding his wounds, which included the severing of his spine; he was usurped by his brother-in-law, Michael I Rangabe, on 2 October 811."
Done
given the uncertainty of his cause of death, I suggest "...he stayed until he died of gangrene or poisoning on 11 January 812."

Body

suggest dropping the piping of Irene of Athens to just Irene
Done
there is a bit of repetition regarding elevating and declaring co-emperor status
Done
kinsman→kinswoman, there is another example of this
Done
heavily biased→heavily-biased
Done
Historian→historian
Done
"over the Balkan Mountains"
Done
high ranking→high-ranking
suggest "resulted in a Bulgarian massacre ~~for~~of the Byzantine forces"
Done
suggest "The remaining Byzantine forces, including a severely wounded Staurakios, retreated to Adrianople over three days."
Done
Staurakios' lack of previous demonstrations of ability→Staurakios' demonstrated lack of ability
Done
"The severity of Staurakios' injury (should this be "wounds") led to speculation about whether he would live"
Done
Unsure of the naming arrangements of the time, but should it be Rhangabe rather than Michael per MOS:SURNAME?
Emperors usually get first name treatment, since he is a future emperor I think it's appropriate. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 22:20, 28 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
and Prokopia, who he suspected of conspiring to kill him→and that he suspected Prokopia of conspiring to kill him
Done
due to her ruling as empress despite being a woman→due to her ruling despite being a woman (as empresses are automatically women)
Done
whom he trusted wholly→whom he trusted completely
Done

That's all I could find. Nice work thus far. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 03:35, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Peacemaker67: Done all. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 22:20, 28 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I tweaked a couple of things, rv if I've changed the meaning or got it wrong. Supporting. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 05:14, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support from AustralianRupert

G'day, Iazyges, I hope you are well. Unfortunately, I don't know much about this period of time, so can't really assess coverage. That said, it looks a tidy little article and I only have a few minor comments/suggestions: AustralianRupert (talk) 04:46, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

citation # 4 seems to be showing an sfn error
Appears to now be fixed? May have been an issue with the template because I've not touched it. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 09:22, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, looks fixed now. AustralianRupert (talk) 09:59, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
citation # 17 has a missing closing bracket, although for consistency it should probably be "p. 240"
Done
Prokopia appears to be overlinked
Done
Staurakios lived another three months before dying of gangrene on 11 January 812, and was buried in the Monastery of Braka, which was given to Theophano by Prokopia. Suggest maybe splitting this sentence. For instance, "Staurakios lived another three months before dying of gangrene on 11 January 812. He was buried in the Monastery of Braka, which was given to Theophano by Prokopia."
Done
The main source for the reigns of both Nikephoros I and Staurakios come from... --> "The main source for the reigns of both Nikephoros I and Staurakios is..." or "The main source for the reigns of both Nikephoros I and Staurakios comes from..."
Done
tend to be riddled with errors --> seems a little flippant, suggest maybe "including many errors" or something similar?
Done
The only proof of such intrigues given by contemporary historians is records that --> "The only proof of such intrigues given by contemporary historians comes from records that..."
Done

@AustralianRupert: Believe I've done all. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 09:22, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Added my support above now. Thanks for your efforts. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 09:59, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.