A few word about the Byzantine Empire

[KostasHBK]

The reason I’m writing this post is because in some conversations I had in the forum I realized that some people have a wrong view of the Byzantine Empire. So I’ll try to present the main characteristics of that misunderstood culture.


The history of the Byzantine Empire begins in the year 324, when Constantine was left the only ruler of the Roman Empire. The name “Byzantine” was given to the empire of Constantinople because of the former name of its capital. Byzantium was the Greek colony which Constantine converted to city which is known as “Νέα Ρώμη = New Rome” or “ΚωνσταντίνουΠόλη = Κωνσταντινούπολη, Constantine’s City = Constantinople”. The empire was never called “Byzantine” during the middle ages by its emperors or citizens. It was the Roman Empire and its emperors the heirs of Augustus. To the rest of the world was known as the state of the “Imperator Romanorum” or “Imperator Constantinopolitanus” or “Imperator-Rex Greekorum”.

The empire was called Roman but it was nothing like the empire of Augustus. There are 3 fundamental characteristics.
1.The Christian fate.
2.The Roman administration
3.The Greek culture and language

The emperor was God’s chosen. He was the supreme leader. Unlike Augustus who ruled as primus inter pares, Constantine was Dominus. That kind of ruling was established by Diocletian who ruled as Dominus et Deus and was called Dominatus. The Church in Byzantium was never as strong as the Papacy. Patriarchs were often chosen by the emperor and many times they were overthrown by him. Many emperors prosecuted the clergy, especially the monks. Nevertheless, religion was a strong factor in the society of the empire.

In the first centuries, the administration’s language was Latin. When Constantinople was built, all the signs were Latin. But the people of the city were Greek. Greek was the common language in the East since the time of Alexander the Great. In the 6^th century, the administration was totally Hellenized and even the Latin title of the emperor (Imperator) was replaced by the Greek title Βασιλεύς (title of Augustus was replaced by Αεισέβαστος etc.). The new empire like the old one had the constant problem of barbaric invasions.

By the centuries, a number of nations like the Slavs in Europe, the Arabs in the east, the Lombard in Italy invaded the lands of the empire and conquered them. The reason why Byzantium outlasted the Western Empire was because it was in place to absorb them and many times to rule over them because of its superior civilization. For this cause, the empire used its biggest weapon, Christianity. It converted many of these pagan people to Christians and added their leader in the political idea. The Slavs is the biggest example of that. The empire not even converted them but gave the means to process their own culture. The two brothers who converted the Slavs, Constantinos-Cyril and Methodios are saints in most of the Slavic nations. In the end though, it was not possible for the empire to face all its enemies and after centuries of shrinking, it finally fall.

The political idea of Byzantium was based in the eternity of the Roman Empire and its universality. According to that political idea, the Christian world belonged to the Empire. Even when the state was shrinking and the Byzantine rule was existed only to Constantinople, the idea of the Universality of the empire was intact. The Emperor was according to this Idea the supreme leader of the world. Every other ruler was inferior. There was a complicated system of evaluating the foreign rulers. They were referred as sons of the Emperor or cousins or nephews depending of their relationship with the empire. When a part of the empire was captured by a foreign leader he was acknowledged as an officer of the Empire, as a Preatoror a governor of the area so that the universality and the position of the emperor as the first of the rulers would stay intact.

That was a few basics for the Byzantine Empire. If you have any questions I’ll be glad to help you.
Thanks for reading.

[hellheaven1987]

Byzantine Empire is Greek, not Roman; anyone who did not use Latin as official language was not Roman.

[AnthoniusII]

Byzantine Empire is Greek, not Roman; anyone who did not use Latin as official language was not Roman.

That is what I call well documented argument....
I sugest you read ALL medieval Roman military manuals and chronicals.
I sugest you read Alfred Rambaud's "Studies over Byzantine History"/Etudes sur l' Histoire Byzantine "....
I sugest you read thousands more historians that PROVE the "byzantium" as you mean it NEVER existed. It was the Roman Empire in the middle ages!
About the language.
Latin language remained the 2nd one over Law documents untill 14th century while Latin language was UNKNOWN to non clerics in west "barbarian" Europe!
A couple examples:

''The evening star was already sinking when the Emperor John launched his finally cavalry-charge on the Russians with devastating effect: ''You are Romans!'' he cried, ,,Now show your valour in your deeds!'' Thus heartened, the cavalry burst out with irrestible ardour. The bugles sound the charge. The Byzantine battle-cry rang out. The Russians wavered and fled. Their losses were enormous.''

Leo Diaconis, Historia

These are two pages of Leonis Imperatoris Tactica or more simple Tactica by Emperor Leon VI the "Wise".
The underlined words and sentences mean:
"Ever respectfull August"
"of the Roman State"
"Our Roman state"...
This is a late 9th century document.

The problem with US (the modern people ) is that we think we know more about the people of the past than them selvs!!!!
Who said that Latin language was a must even in the Roman Republican era?
In fact Roman Republic was a federation of oqupied, autonomus (like all Hellenic cities) and semi indipendent cities leading by Rome its self!
In fact the most common language in Republican Rome was not Latin but Hellenistic Greek language becuase without it NO ONE could trade!!!!
Latin language was a "dead" language for Roman state (republic/empire) since the very 1st Greek city entered the Roman alliance in the early Italian wars!
Rome its self was NEVER a must for Roman Empire espesialy when it entered in its "Imperial" phace!
Try to find out what terms like:
Roma Mobilis
Roma Orbis , mean and you will understand what i am talking about!!!!
My advice to all of us...
Let people of the past talk about them!
Do not think that you know more for them than themselvs!!!

[KostasHBK]

All that I have written above are documented facts. You can read Georg Ostrogorsky, Charles Diehl, Alexander Avenarius and other known historians and find out yourself.

About “Τακτικά”, the only reason why there is a double text is because it was copied in the west. It was never written in 2 languages.

[Kyriakos]

Thanks for the posts in the thread

I only have to note that i have not formed the view that many people in strategy forums (TWC or Paradox anyway) have biased views against the Byzantine Empire. It was both Greek and Roman, and its name was the Roman Empire till its very end.

I also would like to note that for me, personally, it was a VERY pleasant surprise to notice many years ago already that there was so great interest in the Byz Empire, which it deserves in my view, due to its position for most of history as a cultured domain, and not a warmonger like virtually everyone around it.

Of course not all things were positive in it. For starters i doubt another realm had quite this ratio of years/civil wars. But anyway, that is for another thread..

[Diocle]

OMG!
I'll stay away from here as from the pest!
This thread is damned, it can bring war and destruction,
it's perfidious, malicious and dangerous.
Beware good people of TWC this is the Hell's Gate,
these are the words carved on this gate:

"Per me si va ne la città dolente,
per me si va ne l'etterno dolore,
per me si va tra la perduta gente.
....
Lasciate ogne speranza, voi ch'intrate."

"THROUGH ME THE WAY TO THE CITY OF WOE,
THROUGH ME THE WAY TO EVERLASTING PAIN,
THROUGH ME THE WAY AMONG THE LOST.
.....
ABANDON ALL HOPE, YOU WHO ENTER HERE."

Dante Alighieri, Divina Commedia, Inferno, Canto III, 1-9.

Byzantine Empire is Greek, not Roman; anyone who did not use Latin as official language was not Roman.

Anyway Hellheaven has already written all what was needed about the matter, so ... what could I add?

... + rep when I can, Hell!

[Kyriakos]

OMG!
I'll stay away from here as from the pest!
This thread is damned, it can bring war and destruction,
it's perfidious, malicious and dangerous.
Beware good people of TWC this is the Hell's Gate,
these are the words carved on this gate:

"Per me si va ne la città dolente,
per me si va ne l'etterno dolore,
per me si va tra la perduta gente.
....
Lasciate ogne speranza, voi ch'intrate."

"THROUGH ME THE WAY TO THE CITY OF WOE,
THROUGH ME THE WAY TO EVERLASTING PAIN,
THROUGH ME THE WAY AMONG THE LOST.
.....
ABANDON ALL HOPE, YOU WHO ENTER HERE."

Dante Alighieri, Divina Commedia, Inferno, Canto III, 1-9.

^Dante sucked too, i mean he did not even know the Minotaur had the HEAD of a bull, not the body of a bull and the head of a human

(ps: and no, he wasn't allegorical, just sucked ).

[G-Megas-Doux]

The state was known as Empire of the Romans throughout its whole existence. Historians call it the Byzantine Empire because Byzantium was the Greek fishing village that Constantine refounded as Nova Roma, the locals called it Constantinopolis and the name stuck. The Romans split their Empire multiple times through the history and each division had to have a Capital the important part was having Roman Citizenship which the inhabitants had even when the city of Rome was lost they were still Romans. Like the Jews were still Jews without Jerusalem. Blood quantum definition does not matter in this instance as the Romans had been ruling over the Empires inhabitants for such a long time that they earned the status that Caracalla gave them as Roman. Thus all living within the Empire's borders wherever they were could always be considered Roman as borders move and so do people.

The influences of government and religion were of course Greek culture as that was the dominant culture that consumed the state. But the State was Roman and its capital was Nova Roma.

[KostasHBK]

Byzantine Empire was exactly that, an EMPIRE. So it was not Greek or Roman or anything else. There were many nations living in it. Nevertheless, the language that was used by the government and among most of the common people (especially after the first Arab conquests) was Greek. The laws were published in Greek. There is not even one law saved from the 7th century and after in any other languages. Even Justinian's Νεαρες were published in Greek. It was a Christian, Greek speaking Empire, based on the Roman law and administration and the political ideas of Dominatus.

[hellheaven1987]

Byzantine Empire is as much Roman as Carolingian Empire - both hold the title Emperor of Roman by the way.

[neoptolemos]

Byzantine Empire is as much Roman as Carolingian Empire - both hold the title Emperor of Roman by the way.

with the big difference that the academics argue for the opposite so not really.

[Stavroforos]

The Byzantine Empire as it existed until 1204 was certainly the Roman Empire. Whether it was Greek or Latin is irrelevant, since it was Roman. For me the biggest challenge is in interpreting the Byzantine state from 1261 onward. It retained the same offices, titles, and names as the Roman Empire, but it was much Hellenic in character.

[Sir Adrian]

I find the idea that the ERE was not Roman because the emperors happened to speak Greek after 1081 to be utterly stupid. Galerius spoke Dacian, does that mean he ruled the dacian empire? Morover the vasty majority of the empire's population still spoke latin or latin based languages (granted thier number was decreasing as the Slavs assimilated them)

The Church in Byzantium was never as strong as the Papacy. Patriarchs were often chosen by the emperor and many times they were overthrown by him. Many emperors prosecuted the clergy, especially the monks.

Actually that is not true. There is a grand total of two instances when the Emperor appointed the Patriarch or demoted him. The Orthodox church was never as powerful as the Catholic church because the leadership of the church is selected from among the monks, who take an oath not to involved themselves in worldly matters, and it is forbidden for all other members of the church to get involved in politics or disputes of power.

[Geronimo2006]

Important to remember there was a large Latin-speaking minority in the empire in the Danubian provinces. Also I read somewhere recently (I think on wikipedia) that the majority of the army may have been Latin speaking for some time. Justinian I was the last emperor who spoke Latin as a first language.

[Stavroforos]

Whether they spoke Latin is irrelevant, of course.

[Tiberios]

That the Byzantines switched from Latin to Greek doesn't mean the Empire was not the continuation of the Roman Empire. Using that logic, modern England can't claim to be England, because the ruling class spoke French for several hundreds of years in the Middle Ages. Same goes for my own country were German and French was once prefered by the aristocracy and Royal officials. Languages change or are replaced, but the nature of a state is not solely determined by language.

[nce_wht_guy]

You know, saying it was a 'Greek Empire and not Roman' over and over again doesn't make you any less wrong.

[NikeBG]

The two brothers who converted the Slavs, Constantinos-Cyril and Methodios are saints in most of the Slavic nations.

St. Constantine-Cyril has, as far as I remember, not converted any Slavic tribes or nations. St. Methodios has, IIRC, converted only (some of) the Czech and Silesian tribes. The other Slavic nations they had contacts with (Great Moravia and Bulgaria) had already converted to Christianity on their own - Bulgaria shortly after the beginning of the brothers' Moravian mission (but for completely other reasons), while Moravia had been Christian since at least half a century before that.
In other words - the two brothers didn't convert the Slavs. They enlightened them and that's how we call them even today - the Slavic enlighteners.

As for the Byzantine Empire being a "Greek Empire" - let's not forget how dominant the Greek language and culture was during the times of the "real" Roman Empire (and even the Republic) itself. "Graecia capta ferum victorem cepit et artes intulit agresti Latio" - anyone remember that quote from Horace?
Thus, for me, "Byzantine Empire" is a strictly scholastic term (born out of political interests), used to designate the "medieval Roman Empire (in the East)" - an empire, which is equally Roman and Greek (or Greko-Roman, if you prefer), Christian in its deepest foundations, and which is the most direct political continuation of the Roman Empire of Antiquity (and which indeed became increasingly Hellenic, particularly after the Fourth Crusade, but without losing its Roman basis at any point of its existence as a state).

[Akrotatos]

Yeah one side offers sources, documents and actual historical arguments, the other side says "La-la-la I don't read what you say, Romans spoke Latin and did not change since Caesar oh and Charlesmagne something"....ignoring that Charlesmagne was given the title by a priest a few centuries after there was no Roman administration in those territories while the emperor of Constantinople could trace his title back to Augustus himself.

[Cyclops]

A few words about the Byzantine Empire:

The Byzantines as we call them did not call themselves such, aside for a few poets who refered to the inhabitants of Nea Roma Konstantinopoulos by their pre-Roman name.

The East Roman Empire is a less ignorant terms for this polity although the emperors, citizens and subjects of the empire called themselves Romans, as did their neighbours, friends and enemies. For example the Lombard barbarians occupying the city of Rome and most of Italy called the portion still loyal to the Emperor Romagna, the land of the Romans. This is a clear indication modern Italy has at least as much separation from the Roman Empire than states like Greece and Turkey.

Classical Rome was based on a Latin city but absorbed so much more from the cultures around it (especialy Helenic but also Eruscan, Punic, Gallic etc) and became much more than a physical location. Rome lived on by the Golden Horn when the mother city was reduced to ruins and bitter memories.

Snobbish French historians (ashamed of a barbarian origin that paled in comparison to Roman brilliance) and the facist goons of Mussolini (trying desperately to cover their cowardice and ineptitude with stolen antique glory) may have liked to run down the Roman Empire that continued when their provinces fell into uncivilised darkness, but their propaganda is outdated and sad.

The term Byzantine Empire is a poor, intellectually starved, sadly lacking expression. East Roman Empire comes closer to the truth, and history is better served by accurate language than loaded prejudicial claptrap.