>>18662179
The Isaurians were based and I'm tired of pretending otherwise

>>18662179
That period between the Heraclius I and the Basil I is definitely the most kino period in Byzantine history desu.

> forcibly baptize all jews in the empire

>>18662179
There’s a Syrian series on him that actually views him very sympathetically, The Knight of Bani Marawan it’s called.

>>18662179
>arabophone
[citation needed]

>>18662260
Why is that a point of contention?

>>18662179
>> smashes images

Modern scholarship tends to emphasize that Leo wasn't very comited iconoclast.
If anything, he was more or less forces to take side in an ongoing conflict, most likely because the army was increasingly iconoclast.
Later generations conflated Leo with his son Constantine V, who was indeed an ardent image-smasher.

> Arabophone

I believe this comes from the fact that Theophanes called him "Saracen-minded" and was meant as an insult regarding his policies, not regarding his native tongue.
They were Syrians by descent, so their ancestral language would be Aramaic/Syriac.

>>18662179
>>smashes images
He didn't do that. His policy towards icons was a out of sight out of mind deal, he even accepted having icons in churches so long as they were held up high so nobody could touch or kiss them which many churchmen did have a problem with as it was close to being worship of the icons in their view. Active destruction of icons was something from the second Iconoclast period.
>>Arabophone
Which he was absolutely not. What did he really do that was any way pro-Arab? He was like any other emperor, committed to fighting them and there is no indication he particularly cared for them