Talk:Michael VIII Palaiologos

Requested move
The discussion for this move request is undergoing, as well as other similar requests, in Talk:List of Byzantine Emperors. Please go there to discuss the move request.--Panairjdde 22:08, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
 * The debate on the move is now completed; the result was no consensus. Mango juice talk 20:25, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Debasement not true
In reconstituting the Byzantine Empire Michael VIII restored the old administration without endeavouring to correct its failures, and by debasing the coinage he hastened the decay of Byzantine commerce

Michael VIII did not debase the coinage system, Andronikus II did so according to this:

Mango, Cyril. The Oxford History of Byzantium. 1st ed. New York: Oxford UP, 2002 pg 260

I added some sentences about conflict between Mongols and Byzantines in 1265. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Enerelt (talk • contribs) 04:40, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Beyliks
The following sentence, placed as last of the lead, makes little sense, but even if revised to be grammatical, seems out of place at best, and more probably irrelevant: "However, Turk Beyliks began scattering Byzantine territory in 1260 and the Beylik of Menteşe was founded in Caria region." I've removed it, but left it here in case someone wishes to try to discern its meaning and salvage it.MayerG (talk) 06:27, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

Rating
I'm surprised that this article has been rated by some as "B". Not only does there need to be more inline references, the version I found lacks many important details of his life & reign: details of his coup; intrigues against the West, first against Manfred of Sicily, then Charles of Anjou; negotiations with Genoa, Venice & the various Popes; the consequences of the Council of Lyons (it was an unpopular move to which Michael responded viciously); & the loss of the Asian territories. (I added details of his youth & early career which were missing.) Maybe after I add details from Geanakoplos' monograph (which only covers his foreign policy with Western powers -- a very small part of his career) & from Nicol's The Last Centuries of Byzantium, it will be closer to being worthy of a "B". -- llywrch (talk) 21:35, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

Criticism
Hmm. On the one hand since I did provide a good deal of the content of this article, I'm mildly pleased someone thought this worthy of a GA rating. On the other, alas, I don't think it quite qualifies. The reason is simple: there is little attention to the Turkish encroachments on the Eastern Byzantine borders, which Michael allowed to happen due to his preoccupation with Charles of Anjou. (And that handling these chronic attacks -- let alone successfully handling them -- would occupy the attention of any competent ruler. I do have some sources that address this problem, so if I find the time I will make the needed contributions to secure this rating. Or, if asked, provide the names of the book & related articles. -- llywrch (talk) 16:45, 20 May 2019 (UTC)