Byzantine Empire Imperium Graecorum or Imperium Romanum??

[Agiselaos]

I am Greek and I see The Byzantine Empire as medieval Greek Empire But i am curious to see how the Western(especially Italians) an other nations see this Empire.I am no offense to anyone just i want to know how others view it.

[Boyar Son]

Well really we are told that they were politicaly descended from the Romans.

[Watchman]

AFAIK the Byzantines themselves considered themselves as "Romans". Their varyingly hostile Middle Eastern neighbours did the same, if only out of habit. Conversely the Western Christians ("Latins" as far as the Byzantines were concerned) regarded them as "Greeks"...

Well, pretty much everyone liked to claim himself the True Heir of Rome. How much such varying pretensions now really mattered (outside official propagandas of course) is another question.

[Kralizec]

Well, pretty much everyone liked to claim himself the True Heir of Rome. How much such varying pretensions now really mattered (outside official propagandas of course) is another question.

Yet, the Byzantine claim is by far the best of them.

The state itself was very much Roman, but it evolved over the years, eventually ditching Latin as the official language in favour of Greek, wich is what the vast majority of the population had as first (and often only) language anyway.

[Orb]

I refer to them as 'Roman empire', usually, though I think that's just because I like Psellos.

[Wolfshart]

AFAIK the Byzantines themselves considered themselves as "Romans". Their varyingly hostile Middle Eastern neighbours did the same, if only out of habit. Conversely the Western Christians ("Latins" as far as the Byzantines were concerned) regarded them as "Greeks"...

Well, pretty much everyone liked to claim himself the True Heir of Rome. How much such varying pretensions now really mattered (outside official propagandas of course) is another question.

Exactly. The Holy Roman Empire for one....hell even Hitler used the Roman Empire in many of his propaganda campaigns. Seems the Romans had a major inpact on the Germanic peoples....

[Pelopidas]

I'm French, and I see the Byzantine empire as the continuation of the Roman empire ( remember that in the late Antiquity, even the writers of Constantinople wrote in latin, not in Greek...the Greek language return later, during the medieval era )

[Watchman]

At least the Byzantines could claim direct state-lineage descent from the Roman Empire and boast a decent number of surviving institutions. The derived Muscovite claim for being "third Rome" (IIRC) of course gets rather dodgier.

Not that the Holy Roman Empire ("neither holy, Roman, nor an empire" as some wit summed it up) was much of a competing pretender of course.

[the_handsome_viking]

I am Greek and I see The Byzantine Empire as medieval Greek Empire But i am curious to see how the Western(especially Italians) an other nations see this Empire.I am no offense to anyone just i want to know how others view it.

I consider them Romans and later on the Greek succssors of the Romans more than anything else, I consider the Franks to be something of the Germanic successors of the Western Romans.

[Intranetusa]

I consider the Byzantines as a separate Greek-based culture with heavy Roman influences. They were also influenced by their Middle Eastern neighbors, and became sort of a conglameration of cultures, with Greek & Roman being at the top.

In a way the Roman-Byzantine relationship is sorta like relationship of the culture of East Asia.

[Geoffrey S]

Greek and more eastern thought had already had a huge influence on the Roman empire as a whole; seperation from its historical geographic origins intensified this, and arguably the effect eastern thought had on the Eastern Romans outweighed original values. So, Greek.

[keravnos]

I consider them Romans and later on the Greek succssors of the Romans more than anything else, I consider the Franks to be something of the Germanic successors of the Western Romans.

Exactly. I consider them as east romani speaking greek. It was only after us Greeks were under Turkish occupation that we considered ourselves as Greeks. Prior to that we thought ourselves as Romans, and so did the Turks. "Rumi" they called us then, aka Romani.

[Morte66]

I thought they were Roman, until I read a book about them. Now I think that after the first few generations they were "medieval Greek with a strong Roman streak" (law, economics, roads).

But hey, even their contemporaries called them "Romanoi" (in Greek).

p.s. I thoroughly recommend John Julius Norwich's three volume history of Byzantium as a fascinating read.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

I consider Byznatium to be the decendant of Rome, but also the remainder. It depends of whether you consider the ERE as a true part of Rome or a spilt-off.

I consider it the continuation of the Roman Empire, with no break.

[keravnos]

Roma as a state begins 753 BCE and ends in another land with a people speaking a different language in 1453 CE. This is my take on it.

[the_handsome_viking]

Exactly. I consider them as east romani speaking greek. It was only after us Greeks were under Turkish occupation that we considered ourselves as Greeks. Prior to that we thought ourselves as Romans, and so did the Turks. "Rumi" they called us then, aka Romani.

Yeah, it's quite an interesting subject really, Roman identity politics that is, not even most people of the Italian peninsula could really consider themselves to be Roman latins, and even the Turks having conquered the Eastern Roman Empire considered themselves to be Eastern Romans.

[Intranetusa]

Yeah, it's quite an interesting subject really, Roman identity politics that is, not even most people of the Italian peninsula could really consider themselves to be Roman latins, and even the Turks having conquered the Eastern Roman Empire considered themselves to be Eastern Romans.

They were conquered by the Romans, after all. I'm sure even the people in Gaul, Spain, North Africa, etc all considered themselves Roman or at least Roman-esque

[Magister Militum Titus Pullo]

The Byzantine Empire was just the surviving eastern half of the old Roman Empire. It was the 16th century German historian Hieronymus Wolf whom coined the phrase "Byzantine." They never declared independence, they just split the empire between two emperors. Its like if Britain was conquered by Nazi Germany, and the British Government and Royal Family relocated to Canada or Australia, and remained the case for more than sixty years.

[MiniMe]

I am Greek and I see The Byzantine Empire as medieval Greek Empire But i am curious to see how the Western(especially Italians) an other nations see this Empire.I am no offense to anyone just i want to know how others view it.

I'm from Russia, so that makes me feel neither Westerner neither Easterner but definitely Northerner, but I'll answer you anyway =)
I consider Byzantine Empire 100% Greek. Romans could never outmatch the superiority and creativity of late Greek culture. So their Constantinople ruling class was slowely assimilated into greek society. IMO, early Christianity (that has not Ancient Roman but Eastern origins) and late Greek philosofy were greatly interlaced.

At least the Byzantines could claim direct state-lineage descent from the Roman Empire and boast a decent number of surviving institutions. The derived Muscovite claim for being "third Rome" (IIRC) of course gets rather dodgier.

The world famous claim for being a "third Rome" was never made to claim direct state-lineage descent from the Ancient Roman Empire.
It was a sermon metaphor about state support of the orthodox church.
It was made because Constantinople fell.
But yes, it was not precise at all, because the real ancient Rome never was supporting orthodox church =)

I hope I did not offend somehow anybody's national and religious feelings =)

[Boyar Son]

I'm from...[the/a]Westerner....
I consider Byzantine Empire 100% Greek. Romans could never outmatch the superiority and creativity of late Greek culture.

Wasnt the Greeks taken over by the Romans and the western world adopted the Roman way (admitted also part greek, but Roman version) ?

[abou]

Romans could never outmatch the superiority and creativity of late Greek culture.

Highly debatable. Superiority is a very relative term, as is creativity. Besides, anything invented by the Greeks or others that the Romans later used were never exploited to the extent that they were by the Romans. In fact, many were later altered or further innovated by the Romans.

The biggest that come to mind are concrete and vaulting. Unless I am completely mistaken, you will never find anything like the Porticus Aemilia in Greece or the Baths of Caracalla.

[MiniMe]

Wasnt the Greeks taken over by the Romans and the western world adopted the Roman way (admitted also part greek, but Roman version) ?

Yes, they were taken over. However, the most prestigious colleges were in Athens and Alexandria.

Highly debatable.

Highly debatable, indeed =)
But:
There was no theoretical science in Rome. 10:0
Literature: greek win 10:2
Theater@drama: greek win 10:1
Historians: er, well, romans had one good historian. the funny thing is: he wasn't roman =)
Philosophy&religion_innovations: 10:1 (1 goes for stoicism)
Athletics&sport: Olympiad versus Circus Maximus. MiniMe votes for Olympiad, Greek win. Again.

Now the back side of the coin =)
1. Law system. 5:10 (lawyers are roman invention )

2. And finally, the one and only explanation of roman supremacy:

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Military recruitment system. 10:200
Romans winwinwin

[Agiselaos]

I think that you all must consider that The Emperors thought themselves descendants of Constantine not Augustus.then after the Arab Conquest the territories the Empire Had was populated by Hellenes from ancient times.The used the term ''Roman'' only for political mean.we must not forget Plithon who said that We are Hellens Not Romans.As for Roman in east they were assimillated by the Greek population

[Morte66]

I think Byzantium may have been pretty Roman in 477CE, but 75 years later everybody who personally remembered Rome was dead and they just had scrolls. By about the 8th century it was medieval Greek with a lot of Romanesque institutions and the "continuous Roman empire" thing was a marketing slogan.

The most Roman thing about them was that they were an empire, but you could equally well call that "Persian".

Those who looking at things from a historical timescale tend to forget that lives are short and societies change. E.g. I'm British, our empire essentially ended about fifty years ago, and anybody who seriously hearkens back to "the glory of empire" is a loony. But a thousand years from now, historical wargamers will think we were just the same as the British of 1880 and probably build forces for the reconquest of our rightful territories in America.

[abou]

Highly debatable, indeed =)
But:
There was no theoretical science in Rome. 10:0
Literature: greek win 10:2
Theater@drama: greek win 10:1
Historians: er, well, romans had one good historian. the funny thing is: he wasn't roman =)
Philosophy&religion_innovations: 10:1 (1 goes for stoicism)
Athletics&sport: Olympiad versus Circus Maximus. MiniMe votes for Olympiad, Greek win. Again.

Now the back side of the coin =)
1. Law system. 5:10 (lawyers are roman invention )

2. And finally, the one and only explanation of roman supremacy:

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Military recruitment system. 10:200
Romans winwinwin

Obviously you completely ignored the spirit of my post. I suggest you go back and read it. Also, quoting arbitrary numbers doesn't help your argument and doesn't do anything to point out the differences in Roman culture compared to Greeks - ie. concern for the here & now compared to a concern for the metaphysical.

[alatar]

Obviously you completely ignored the spirit of my post. I suggest you go back and read it. Also, quoting arbitrary numbers doesn't help your argument and doesn't do anything to point out the differences in Roman culture compared to Greeks - ie. concern for the here & now compared to a concern for the metaphysical.

Abou has a point.