Byzantine scent

[Prince Cobra]

The 22nd International Congress of Byzantine Studies (http://22byzantinecongress.org/program/programme-scientifique/) is in my homeland Bulgaria. Apart from shamelessly promoting this event, I want to open this topic. What does the word "Byzantine" call in your memory?

In my early teenage years, some of my classmates joked I looked slightly creepy "like a Greek" (Bulgarian idiom that probably came from the century old rivalry between the Bulgarians and their Southern neighbour). At the same time, I got a book on world history that had a fantastic resume of several hundred pages on the Byzantine culture, politics and etc. A bit of gaming interferred as I was familiarised with AoE II and since there were no Bulgarians, I picked the closest civilisation (albeit a mortal enemy but a cultural pattern ). You see how it all summed up. :stare: The more I read, the more interested I got. At the same time I developed some taste for XI-XIV century history of Southeastern Europe.

Well, maybe it will partially fit the cliche but actually, that's my point of view for "Byzantine": rich culture, refined ceremonial, diplomacy, treasures, ability to survive. I would not reserve the intrigues and treachery only for the Byzantine court: they actually existed in every single court around the world. Reasons for the term "Byzantine" to become a synonym of insidiousness was the contrast between the "barbarians" (who set in formerly Roman territories) and the Roman feeling of superiority; this was later enhanced by the difference between the Western and Eastern Christianity and the search of an excuse to sack the riches of the Empire. Actually, one can easily see how intrigues dragged the Byzantine Empire to its bottom. From Manzikert (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Manzikert) to the sacking of Constantinople by the Crusaders lightly invited by Alexius IV (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexios_IV_Angelos) who wanted to reclaim his father's crown. And of course, there are always the Civil wars (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Byzantine_Civil_Wars) of the 14th century, which finished what was left of the Byzantine vitality.

The biggest problem of the Byzantine Empire, which was also its blessing, was its position between East and West. In many ways, it suffered the same trends the West did but it could not afford because of its geographic location.

[Skullheadhq]

The first thing that comes to my mind is Basileios II Boulgaroktonos, who knew how to handle them Bulgarians :laugh4:
But some other things that come to mind is of course Justinian the Great with Belisarius and Narses, Iconoclasm with Leo III, Alexios Komnenos, the Theme system, John Palaiologos and of course the great hero-emperor Konstantinos XI Drageses-Palaiologos.

Oh oh, I really am a Byzantophile :)

[Prince Cobra]

The first thing that comes to my mind is Basileios II Boulgaroktonos, who knew how to handle them Bulgarians :laugh4:

Oh, that was very impolite. :laugh4:

On a more serious matter, Basil II is really remarkable but I blame him for the decline in the following decades. He failed to put order in his family affairs. He failed to marry and produce an heir. That's actually not such a big drama if he had managed to arrange a suitable marriage of at least one of the daughters of his brother Constantine VIII. Unfortunately for the Empire, Constantine VIII decided to marry his daughter Zoe on his deathbed when she was too old (and her husband was also a bit senile). The other daughter of Constantine Theodora refused to marry and even reigned as the second female monarch of Byzantium for a brief period of 2 years.

And actually, today (29th) is the date of the battle of Kleidon (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Kleidion) that was decisive for the conquest of Bulgaria. I actually think the monstrous blinding of 14 000 Bulgarian prisoners was a sign of desperation of Basil II (he died of old age only about 10 years after that) but produced an unexpected effect on the health of the Bulgarian Tzar Samuel. That was actually an epic war between two Empires that lasted for about 50 years. Byzantium had the advantage of a secure base such as Asia Minor and the riches of Constantinople whilst actually, almost none of the Bulgarian lands were spared by a Russian/Hungarian and later Byzantine invasion.

But Basil II is truly one of the greatest statesmen and generals of the Byzantine Empire, one of the few real warrior Emperors and it's not surprising that's the first association for him.

I could not resist decribing all the things above and let's hope I have not been very boring.




But some other things that come to mind is of course Justinian the Great with Belisarius and Narses, Iconoclasm with Leo III, Alexios Komnenos, the Theme system, John Palaiologos and of course the great hero-emperor Konstantinos XI Drageses-Palaiologos.

Oh oh, I really am a Byzantophile :)

Actually, talking of Byzantine rulers, my association would also include some rulers such as John II Comnenus (1118-1143) for his balanced rule, John III Vatatzes (1221- 1254) who prepared the reconquest of Constantinople (ironically, this was exploited by another person from another dynasty Michael VIII). These were not that spectacular but did a lot to strengthen the Empire from inside. And apart from the theme system, Alexius I did a major reform making the pronoia as the basis of the imperial military. I still think the Empire needed time and relative peace to make it work but that did not happen.

[Skullheadhq]

The Palaiologoi-dynasty was pretty good, since in the relatively short time it was in power it produced many great and wise emperors, one of them created controversy to this day, Manuel II Palaiologos. He said "Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached", when the pope quoted this in 2006, rage in the muslim world ensued. So funny.

[Kralizec]

Things that come to mind: (i.e. do not require a visit to wikipedia)

- a generally well-run state that preserved Roman and Greek traditions, while western kingdoms struggled to imitate them
- an empire that, despite popular perception of being weak and fragile, managed to last a millenium against Persian, Arab and Turkish invasions
- intrigue and deception; not because I'm particulary familiar with their politics but because some older works of fiction use the terms "Byzantine" in that sense.

[Skullheadhq]

Intrigue and deception yes. They used to blind or castrate emperors/pretenders so that he couldn't be emperor anymore. And Anna Komnenos is of course infamous when it comes to intriguing.

[edyzmedieval]

I'll be honest, I wanted to come to the conference to hear some of the lectures, must be pretty impressive.

Byzantine? Ah, you hit a sweet spot my friend. I always admired the Medieval Greek Empire of it's elegance, culture, refinement, brilliant generals, brilliant army (sometimes), shrewd organisation and management, a capital that was the jewel of the world.

On the other hand, there's rampant corruption, greed, political intrigue, deception, ruthlessness that goes to the utmost level, inability to command even a bunch of angry mobs (Justinian, I'm looking at you, your wife had to protect your backside)...

Lots of things. I am a Byzantophile, I greatly appreciate this huge file of our world history. :bow:

[Skullheadhq]

So many hidden Byzantophiles everywhere, makes me feel like I'm not alone on this one.

[edyzmedieval]

So many hidden Byzantophiles everywhere, makes me feel like I'm not alone on this one.

We are hidden in the depths of the Library of the University of Constantinople, buried underneath texts of ancient scholars and burdened with the compulsive obsession that we must glean all of that knowledge in our puny minds.

[Brandy Blue]

I don't know much about the Byzantines. I've only read one history book about them. Still, I got to say they impress me. They were at war most of the time, often on two fronts, and still kept going for a long time. As far as I can see they were not all that ruthless by the standards of their time. Blinding or castration sounds pretty bad, but I'm sure many realms back then simply executed "traitors" (i.e. rivals for power.) As for corruption, you'd have to naive to think that doesn't come with power and wealth. In spite of their troubles and weaknesses they managed to remain a beacon of civilization, culture, and learning.

[edyzmedieval]

I don't know much about the Byzantines. I've only read one history book about them. Still, I got to say they impress me. They were at war most of the time, often on two fronts, and still kept going for a long time. As far as I can see they were not all that ruthless by the standards of their time. Blinding or castration sounds pretty bad, but I'm sure many realms back then simply executed "traitors" (i.e. rivals for power.) As for corruption, you'd have to naive to think that doesn't come with power and wealth. In spite of their troubles and weaknesses they managed to remain a beacon of civilization, culture, and learning.

Power and wealth indeed, but what they had was a couple of notches more than the usual rich kingdoms/empires. Corruption and skullduggery were common in the Byzantine Empire, especially during the latter reigns (from 12th century onwards).

AFAIK, traitors and opposing rulers were not executed, they were blinded or imprisoned or poisoned. Execution was not common in the Byzantine Empire.

[Prince Cobra]

AFAIK, traitors and opposing rulers were not executed, they were blinded or imprisoned or poisoned. Execution was not common in the Byzantine Empire.

I have not thought about that, edyz. Yet, decapitation could be also a method for execution. Andronicus I used the capital punishment a lot, though he was quite unpopular with his terror. I can't remember many executions that were described by the historians and yet, this does not mean they were not used. Thomas the Slav (9th century rebel) was for example dismembered and finally beheaded, but 9th century is a bit different than XIV century, for example. On a different matter, Baldwin I of Flanders had a similar fate in 13th century in the Bulgarian prison and having in mind the Byzantine influence on the second Bulgarian Empire, that probably meant such a punishment was not uncommon. Alexius V was thrown from a column by the Latin and that was probably another method of execution. In the capital of the second Bulgarian Empire that is Turnovo, there was a rock used for the same purpose.

The way the head of Alexius Branas and the corpse of Andronicius I were treated does not mean the Byzantines were far more refined in the punishment than the Westerners. In fact many of the murdering techniques were taken from the East: strangling, blinding, for example. Muslims and Westerners used decapitation widely, too.

I think most notable people (mainly deposed emperors) were poisoned/blinded/strangled (another method of murder) (such as Isaac II Angelus(blinded), Alexius II(strangled)) because the rulers feared a reaction or in other cases did not want to look very oppressive. Again, sometimes Emperors simple took the cowl and were sent to distant monastery.


I have actually not searched anything about the punishment in the Byzantine Empire and the topic does sound intriguing. I mainly derive my conclusions from what I have read and my national Bulgarian history.

[edyzmedieval]

Your points are all valid, Cobra. When you think of it it's quite an interesting turn because although rebellions and revolts were common in Byzantine history, they tried to avoid them as much as possible by inflicting a level of damage before death, if I can somehow call it like that. In the end, they used all sorts of torture methods and execution, it all depended on how influential or how important the said character was.

Or if anyone wanted to strike an example to the local population.

Blinding was definitely the preferred method, the opposing candidate or troublemaker was still alive and placed in a monastery for the rest of his tragic days.