Talk:Battle of Sebastopolis

What treaty?

The article says the Umayyads were "incensed at the breaking of the treaty", but the article doesn't tell me which treaty. Can anyone fix the article? --HughCharlesParker (talk - contribs) 09:37, 9 December 2012‎ (UTC)

"Had shrank"

The first graphic has the ungrammatical construction "had shrank" in its caption. I'm not handy enough to figure out how to edit the caption. It should be "had shrunk"--shrank is the simple past tense form of shrink, while what is needed here is the past participle. Jprschaefer (talk) 12:01, 12 December 2025 (UTC)

The figure caption was updated. Does this resolves the issue?A.Cython (talk) 14:07, 12 December 2025 (UTC)

GA review

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.

---

This review is transcluded from Talk:Battle of Sebastopolis/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: A.Cython (talk · contribs) 20:36, 23 May 2026 (UTC)

Reviewer: TheNuggeteer (talk · contribs) 21:58, 7 June 2026 (UTC)

Will review this for GARC. 🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 (My "blotter") 21:58, 7 June 2026 (UTC)

Rate	Attribute	Review Comment
1. Well-written:
	1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.	Some concerns
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.	Some matching concerns with neutrality
2. Verifiable with no original research, as shown by a source spot-check:
	2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.
	2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose).	A mysterious source
	2c. it contains no original research.
	2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism.
3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.	Some vague words
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.	Many concerns
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
	6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content.
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.
	7. Overall assessment.

Issues

• Lead of Armeniac Theme add "the" before Armeniac Theme
  •  Done
• Lead The battle ended the peace Peace is not a measurable thing; different people have different definitions of peace. Please add who said this or change this to something else.
  •  Done I rewrote it
• Lead restore the glory "the glory" does not seem neutral, please omit or change it
  •  Done replaced with "territorial extend"
• Lead aggressive military campaigns that reversed his father's peaceful the first and last words here are biased, it is best to omit them.
  •  Done
• Lead 80 percent of the lead is the background, and the battle and aftermath each have only one sentence. Please omit or summarize some parts of the background in the lead.
  •  Done
• Background he aggressively sought combat by undoing measures that brought the peace and prosperity not neutral.
  •  Done removed "aggressively" and "peace and prosperity"
• Background broke a peace please omit "a"
  •  Done
• Background attacked slavic tribes capitalize Slavic.
  •  Done
• Background had established add "themselves" succeeding this.
  •  Done
• Background Justinian II forcibly no need for "forcibly"
  •  Done
• Background which was depopulated change "was" to "had been"
  •  Done
• Background under Justinian's father → under the father of Justinian's
  •  Done
• Background particular function to fulfill Can you add what function this was?
  • There is some debate about this in the literature. They think that this meant that they would serve as elite military unit or that they would colonize an area chosen by the emperor.
  • my translation of Κουντουρά-Γαλάκη, Ελεωνόρα, ed. (2001). Οι σκοτεινοί αιώνες του Βυζαντίου (7ος–9ος αι.) p. 326 Although the term periousios laos ("chosen people") mentioned in Theophanes' excerpt means a selected, favored army recruited exclusively by and for the emperor—almost as if it were his personal possession (that is, a people specially belonging to him)—we believe that its origin and recruitment are connected with certain "chosen" populations who, after their long servitude under a Balkan Pharaoh, returned to the land of their ancestors. More specifically, they were settled by Justinian in Bithynia and Thrace.
  • see also Greek Earth, Roman Kingdom: Byzantium as Troubled Platonic Polity (PhD thesis) p.105 The "Chosen People", or "special army", joining the Arabs was a betrayal for Justinian II who then brutally exterminated all the remaining Slavs of the Opsikion province in Bithynia, northern Asia Minor (see Foss 1991, 1528–1529 on Opsikion). Events prior to, during and after the battle are confirmed, again, by Patriarch Nikephoros (Short History 38 in Mango 1990, 92–93) and George the Monk (Chronicon 729–731 in de Boor and Wirth 1978); both authors record Justinian II declaring his Slavic corps as the "Chosen People" (Nikephoros: "λαὸν ἐκάλεσε περιούσιον", George: "περιούσιον ἐκεῖνον λαόν") though George describes the corps as "rather unholy" (mallon de anosion, "µᾶλλον δὲ ἀνόσιον") given Neboulos' treason (see Chronicon 730 in de Boor and Wirth 1978). Interestingly, George's negative description allows for a brief segue regarding the Byzantine worldview where civilized Byzantines contraposed themselves against barbaric non-Byzantines, including Slavic peoples...
• Background Christ's please link
  •  Done
• Battle In 692/3 what does this mean? Third month of 692?
  •  Done Added an explanatory note. It meant one of the two, as some sources have some uncertainty, e.g., Oxford Dictionary of Byzantium: In 693, Justinian II formed a special force..., Treadgold, Warren (1997) By the summer of 692, Justinian’s thirty thousand Slavs had been trained, armed, and ..., Ostrogorsky, George (1969) p. 131 but Justinian in the knowledge of his own superiority disdainfully rejected Caliph's protests thus provoking a clash of arms in 691/2., etc
• Aftermath He took his revenge... did the source also say this?
  •  Done I changed it for us to be on the safe side, but yes secondary source use words like "revenge" and "iritated"
  • Ostrogorsky, George (1969). History of the Byzantine state p. 131 It is not of course possible to credit Theophanis when he say that in revenge Justinian II ordered all the Slavs in Bithynia to be massacred? and that the transportation of the Mardaites meant a pointless exposure of the Byzantine eastern frontier, while the...
  • Treadgold, Warren (1997). A History of the Byzantine State and Society p. 335 Though the Arabs also withdrew, Justinian was irate. He disbanded the Slavic company, of whom some ten thousand men remained, and is said to have killed many of them, apparently including wives and children of the deserters.
• Aftermath remaining Slavs. He disbanded kindly merge the sentences
  •  Done
• Aftermath near the gulf capitalize "Gulf"
  •  Done
• Aftermath place in 694/5 same problem
  •  Done changed it to 694/695 as in the source:
  • Whalin, Douglas (2020) p. 170 Although George’s seals are also found for other years in the early 690s, all of the seals which mention the ἀνδράποδα are firmly dated to 694/695. These seals appear to attest to the systematic destruction of the remaining Sklavene communities by the Roman state, enslaving and dispersing them as a conquered peoples.
• Aftermath Douglas Whalin contends who is he?
  •  Done added "Historian"

@A.Cython: spotcheck will take place today or tomorrow. 🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 (My "blotter") 04:22, 9 June 2026 (UTC)

Spotcheck

• The International Journal of Social Science and Humanity does not show up at the SCImago Journal Rank and seems mysterious
  •  Done removed source as this is not essential
• Zgodovinski časopis source is a dead link
  •  Done updated
• 9: Y

I could only access one source (which is correct). I will accept good faith and complete the review. @A.Cython: another ping. 🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 (My "blotter") 07:54, 9 June 2026 (UTC)

@TheNuggeteer: Thank you for your thorough review. I believe I have addressed all your comments. If I missed something, please let me know. PS: Internet Archives have Ostrogorsky's book, also found in Google books. A.Cython(talk) 02:36, 10 June 2026 (UTC)

Everything looks good! Thank you for this interesting article, and I will pass this now. 🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 (My "blotter") 23:28, 11 June 2026 (UTC)

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.

Did you know nomination

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. Track your hook after promotion. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Zzz plant (talk) 13:35, 23 June 2026 (UTC)

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

• ... that the image of Christ on gold coins was a pretext for war?

• Source: Treadgold, Warren (1997). A History of the Byzantine State and Society pp. 334-335 The emperor soon found an excuse to escape his treaty with the Arabs. He issued a new type of nomisma showing both his own portrait, as was customary, and for the first time a bust of Christ. Hitherto the caliphs had minted gold dinars that copied Byzantine nomismata down to the emperor's portrait; but “Abd al-Malik understandably omitted the head of Christ from his dinars, which he began to mint in a different style and with a somewhat lighter weight. Justinian refused the caliph’s tribute on the ground that the coins in it failed to match his own. Although the caliph added extra coins to make up the full value, Justinian insisted on the bust of Christ. Declaring the treaty broken, he prepared for a campaign against the Arabs.

• • ALT1: ... that during the Battle of Sebastopolis, a copy of a treaty was placed on a spear by the Arabs in front of their army to display the justice of their cause? Source: Treadgold, Warren (1997). A History of the Byzantine State and Society p. 335 But during the emperor’s prolonged preparations, “Abd al-Malik had put the Alids under siege in Mecca, mustered an Arab army, and invaded the empire before Justinian could invade the caliphate. The two armies clashed near Sebastopolis in the middle of the Armeniac Theme, with the Arabs brandishing a copy of the treaty on a spear in front of them to emphasize the justice of their cause.
  • Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Hotel Marcel
  • Comment: 2nd QPQ: Template:Did you know nominations/George W. Grace

Improved to Good Article status by A.Cython (talk). Number of QPQs required: 2. DYK is currently in unreviewed backlog mode and nominator has 24 past nominations.

A.Cython(talk) 22:57, 17 June 2026 (UTC).

• Newly promoted, no plagiarism etc., QPQs done, both hooks interesting and verified AGF. Dahn (talk) 07:20, 19 June 2026 (UTC)

Image 'Byzantine Empire at different periods. '

It isn't immediately clear how the image is supposed to be interpreted, because several colours are given for the same date. Anonymous44 (talk) 00:39, 28 June 2026 (UTC)

well they are three different colors and dates with colors being awfully similar... I know it is not the best figure but that's the one that I could find in wikicommons. If you find a better one please replace A.Cython(talk) 07:17, 28 June 2026 (UTC)