Marcian and leo i between eprsia and the mediterranean
Bookmark this page

·        Attempts at disengagement seen as provocation as much as non-payment.

·        Prior to Treaty of Sporacius 441-442 – neither party to build fortifications on border. Persians want this clause, even in 5^th century.

·        Theodosiopolis fortified by T2 – miraculously recovered from siege – accordance 384? Theodosiopolis as a key stronghold of complex defence system in Roman Armenia – part and parcel of garrison system along Armenian border. Treaty of 442 shows Persian not keen on its rebuilding, breach of treaty. Another aspect of policy enticing Saracens to cross into Byzantine soil – occurrences of 439 – 42. Mediterranean outlook which formed basis of policy.

Other Notes in this Category

1. Anastiasius between persia and mediterranean
2. Attempts at Disengagement with the alliance with Persia
3. Byzantium between the mediterranean and fertile crescent
4. epilogue: justinian and the reconquest of the mediterranean
5. Key Points
6. Marcian and leo i between eprsia and the mediterranean
7. Pirenne and the Mediterranean
8. Strategic Geography
9. The crisis of 441-42 and the byzantine political dilemma
10. the mare nostrum as an economic, political and cultural entity in greek and latin sources
11. The mediterranean and financial liabilites towards persia
12. The mediterranean and the literary tradition of the roman world
13. The mediterranean and the literary tradition of the roman world
14. The vandals and the decline of mediterranean navigation
15. Theodoisus ii, yazdgard i and the mediterranean
16. Two great powers in Late antiquity : A comparison
17. Whittow – making of orthodox byzantium

Didn't find this useful?

• Visit Coursework.Info for over 14,000 GCSE, A-Level and University Essays