Author |
Share Topic Topic Search Topic Options
|
ArmenianSurvival
Chieftain
Joined: 11-Aug-2004
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1460
|
Quote Reply
Topic: Was the Byzantine Empire mainly a Hellenic Empire? Posted: 15-Oct-2005 at 19:22 |
Well, I know Greek was probably their strongest language, seeing as
they ruled an empire that was more or less Greek. But I was saying that
in response to people that say "He wasnt Armenian because he probably
didnt speak the language". Unless it was documented, no one really
knows how well they actually knew Armenian, all we know is that they
are of Armenian origin. In Armenian culture family ties are everything,
in some cases it actually defines who the person is. Whether or not
they had these same family ties as rulers of an empire is not widely
known.
|
Mass Murderers Agree: Gun Control Works!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Van_Resistance
Քիչ ենք բայց Հայ ենք։
|
|
Constantine XI
Suspended
Suspended
Joined: 01-May-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 5711
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 15-Oct-2005 at 21:10 |
With regard to his links to Armenia itself,that is a bit shadowy. We know that he was actually brought up in Bulgarian territory after a Bulgarian raid captured him as a boy. If memory serves I think it was his family which came from Armenia, yet he himself was born in the Greek-speaking Thrace, was transported to a Slavic country, then later managed to make it to Constantinople. In that case he must be considered as probably being bi-lingual in Bulgar and Greek, though being better at Greek in all probability. He did not carry monophysitism with him, had he been a monphysite like virtually all Armenians we would definitely have heard of it. So it seems that in terms of basic bloodlines he had a strong Armenian heritage, though was culturally Greek enough to make an acceptable Emperor for the Byzantines. All in all it hardly matters what ethnicity he was, what is important is that he inaugerated a dynasty which would lead a vanguard in the resurgence of his civilization.
|
|
ArmenianSurvival
Chieftain
Joined: 11-Aug-2004
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1460
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 16-Oct-2005 at 06:50 |
Ya, all rulers of the Byzantines were culturally Greek with a few
exceptions. I would imagine he was part of the Greek Orthodox church as
you said (Armenians had/have a completely different form of
Christianity). The Byzantines ignored pleas from Armenia against Muslim
invaders, all because the Armenians refused to place their church under
the authority of the Greek Orthodoxy. This fact is proof enough to me,
that all Armenian rulers of Byzantium were most probably nominal to the
Greek Orthodox Church (they were probably crowned by Greek bishops
too). Also, Armenian rulers of Byzantium were very agressive towards
Armenia, trying to incorporate Armenia into the Byzantine Empire,
levying heavy taxes towards them, and ignoring their pleas against
Muslim invaders.
|
Mass Murderers Agree: Gun Control Works!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Van_Resistance
Քիչ ենք բայց Հայ ենք։
|
|
Constantine XI
Suspended
Suspended
Joined: 01-May-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 5711
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 16-Oct-2005 at 21:58 |
Now there is an interesting point, they often were agressive towards
their place of origin. The more intelligent Emperors retained Armenia
as an autonomous buffer state. One of the greatest causes of decline
IMO was that Constantine X Ducas abolished the right of the Armenians
to maintain 50,000 men under arms in preference of them simply paying
tribute to Byzantium instead. Soon enough the Turkish raids began, and
would soon encroach on Byzantine Anatolia itself.......
|
|
ArmenianSurvival
Chieftain
Joined: 11-Aug-2004
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1460
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 16-Oct-2005 at 22:34 |
What you said is agreed by some historians to be one of the key causes
of the downfall of the Byzantine Empire. While the Byzantines were
concentrating efforts on encorporating the Armenian church as part of
the Greek Orthodoxy, and while they were trying to subdue Armenian
leaders and undermining their efforts against Muslim invaders, the
Byznatines lost their buffer-zone, and eventually, their empire.
You would think they would learn something after the Bagraduni Dynasty
of Armenia fell to the Seljuks. But when the Rubenian Dynasty
established an Armenian kingdom in Cilicia the Byzantines pulled the
same act, allowing the Egyptian Mameluks to topple the kingdom in 1375.
Again, no more buffer-zone, and their eastern flank was left wide open.
You know what happened after
Edited by ArmenianSurvival
|
Mass Murderers Agree: Gun Control Works!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Van_Resistance
Քիչ ենք բայց Հայ ենք։
|
|
Guests
Guest
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 17-Oct-2005 at 16:56 |
One thing is certain.. Byzantines are distinct from the Greeks, they just used their language... thats all.. Same with the Ancient Macedonians (the inhabitants of today's Republic of Macedonia) - they just used the greek language and culture, and btw the greek language was second, an ancient macedonian language was the first spoken one.
greetings
Edited by azwhoopin
|
|
Alkiviades
Baron
Joined: 01-Sep-2005
Location: Antarctica
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 469
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 17-Oct-2005 at 17:22 |
|
|
Menander
Immortal Guard
Joined: 08-Oct-2005
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 0
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 17-Oct-2005 at 17:49 |
Oh god. Quick, someone jump onto it before it explodes into saying Alexander was Slavic.
|
"No one saves us but ourselves. No one can and no one may. We ourselves must walk the path." -Siddhartha Gautama
|
|
Guests
Guest
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 07-Nov-2005 at 14:19 |
Byzantine state was a multiethnical empire and "Orthodoxy" was the
connecting element within the population;and the dividing element
between the Greeks who were distinguished as "Hellenes"-those who
remained attached to their traditions and finally destroyed-and those
who identified themselves as "Romans" and assimilated to the eastern
christian melting pot.
However-especially after Justinian-Byzantine Empire was established in
lands that were in the sphere of influence of Greek culture for
centuries,from Magna Gracea to modern Syria, and the population was
either hellenic or hellenized.
In a modern parallel we would say that Greeks were for Byzantine Empire
what Russians were for the Soviet one.Byzantines called Romans
themselves but they were the Greeks for all the others,just like
Soviets were the "Russians" for the rest of the world as they were the
dominating population in the state.Communism would be the "Orthodoxy"
of USSR...
In my opinion Byzantine Empire was heir of the ancient Greek states but
the destroyer of Greek civilazation and culture the same time.
Complicated,eh?
Edited by Polemidas
|
|
Belisarius
Chieftain
Suspended
Joined: 09-Dec-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1296
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 07-Nov-2005 at 16:04 |
No, it was actually a very good analogy.
True it was that the Byzantines in their devotion to Christianity destroyed many monuments from ancient Greece because of their pagan history.
|
|
Komnenos
Tsar
Retired AE Administrator
Joined: 20-Dec-2004
Location: Neutral Zone
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4361
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 07-Nov-2005 at 16:32 |
Originally posted by Belisarius
True it was that the Byzantines in their devotion to Christianity destroyed many monuments from ancient Greece because of their pagan history. |
As discussed before, without Christianity as the one stable and unifying factor in their long history, the Byzantine Empire would have succumbed much earlier than 1453 to one of many attacks on its existence, and thus even less of the heritage of Greek antiquity would have survived and eventuall disseminated to the West.
|
[IMG]http://i71.photobucket.com/albums/i137/komnenos/crosses1.jpg">
|
|
Alkiviades
Baron
Joined: 01-Sep-2005
Location: Antarctica
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 469
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 07-Nov-2005 at 16:36 |
Many monuments? That's an understatement. I've found this little list in another forum. Enjoy...
- In 335 AD Constantine the great (a saint of the Christian church)
orders the destruction of hundreds of pagan temples in Asia Minor and
Palestine and the crucifixion
of all wizards and diviners. Unluckily, the Christian church
considers scientists and philosophers also wizards and diviners and
hunts them down to. The neoplationic philosopher and scientist Sopater
(Sopatros) was among those crucified.
- 341 AD and Constantius bans officially the hellenizein trait
worship of Greek gods, practicing of philosophy, experimenting,
thinking. Hundreds of philosophers get slaughtered or imprisoned. Only
five years later, the Christian mob in Constantinople performs an
impressive anti-Hellen pogrom in Constantinople. The philosopher and
author Livanius is exiled.
- On 359 AD the first death camp known in history is being created in
Skythopolis, Syria. Its sole reason for existence is the concentration
of every free-thinking person from throughout the empire like 99% of
them were put to death in that camp.
- On 364 Flavius Joviannous, an avid Christian, orders the burning of
the great library of Antioch, in the name of the Christian god.
Thousands of books are rendered into ashes.
- Valence, another avid Christian, in cooperation with the Church,
begins another great empire-wide pogrom of the pagans from 370 to
373. The philosopher Simonides is burn on the stake, Maximus is
decapitated, Patricius and Ilarius are getting the crucifixion
treatment. Thousands of books are being burned Valens orders are
clear eliminate all the Nationals and their works.
- The greatest holy warrior of Christianity, Theodosios
(the so-called The Great) initiated the greatest pogrom against the
non-christians ever, on 380. Whatever survived the previous attacks is
now being torn down. Libraries get burned; most of the philosophy
schools still open are being closed down. The same emperor appointed
Maternus Cynegius and his horde of fanatic Christian monks, to find and
destroy every non-Christian written work. In the subsequent four years
(385-390) Cynegius and his monks complete the destruction.
- On 391 in Alexandria, the drama reaches its culmination: the remnants
of Bibliotecha Alexandrina, the greatest library and center of
knowledge of the ancient world, are being burned. The Serapion, hosting
the precious tomes containing the last fragments of the ancient
Graeco-Roman body of knowledge, is burned to the ground.
- The 4th ecclesiastic convention in Carthage bans on 398 the study of
the Greek writings (all Greek writings) even for the Christian bishops!
- And, as an icing to the cake, on 415 the monks and guards of the
Patriarchy of Alexandria, arrest the greatest scientist still alive,
the lady Hypatia, a great mathematician and philosopher. They drag her
inside the temple of St Michael, rip off her clothes, skin her alive
with seashells, break all her bones and then cut her into small pieces.
|
|
Jazz
Baron
Joined: 29-Mar-2005
Location: Canada
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 410
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 08-Nov-2005 at 22:44 |
Originally posted by Komnenos
Originally posted by Belisarius
True it was that the Byzantines in
their devotion to Christianity destroyed many monuments from ancient
Greece because of their pagan history. |
As discussed before, without Christianity as the one stable and
unifying factor in their long history, the Byzantine Empire would have
succumbed much earlier than 1453 to one of many attacks on its
existence, and thus even less of the heritage of Greek antiquity would
have survived and eventuall disseminated to the West. |
Not only that, but a lot of things simply got recycled. There are
Bronze doors when you exit the Hagia Sophia that were from a 2nd
century BC temple, and all the columns used in the numerous cisterns
were recycled from ancient temples. Their re-use ensured thier
longevity to this day for us to enjoy, otherwise they may have simply
crumbled into oblivion otherwise.
|
|
|
merced12
General
Joined: 24-Sep-2005
Location: Turkey
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 767
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 23-Jan-2006 at 06:51 |
i found it leo4
he was a khazar turks
Leo IV
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
Leo IV, called Chozar or the Khazar (c. 750 September 8, 780), succeeded his father, Constantine V, as emperor of the Byzantine Empire in 775. In 776 he associated his young son, Constantine, with himself in the empire, and suppressed an uprising led by his five step-brothers which broke out as a result of this proceeding.
Like his father and grandfather, Leo was successful in battle against the Arabs and Bulgars. Unlike his father and grandfather, however, Leo favoured the iconophiles, and restored an iconophile patriarch.
During his reign Leo was largely under the influence of his wife Irene, and when he died suddenly in 780 she was left as the guardian of his son and successor, Constantine VI.
|
http://www.turks.org.uk/
16th century world;
Ottomans all Roman orients
Safavids in Persia
Babur in india
`azerbaycan bayragini karabagdan asacagim``
|
|
Yiannis
Sultan
Joined: 03-Aug-2004
Location: Neutral Zone
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2329
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 23-Jan-2006 at 07:20 |
Originally posted by merced12
i found it leo4
he was a khazar turks
|
He was not a Khazar, his mother was one and that's why people called him as such (Chazaros). It was common to distinguish Byzantium emperors on such characteristics, so we have emperors nicknamed by the people as:
"Sh*tnamed" -Kopronymos, "Gladiator" - Monomachos, slitnose - rinotmitos etc... so Leo IV was nicknamed Chazaros.
|
The basis of a democratic state is liberty. Aristotle, Politics
Those that can give up essential liberty to obtain a temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. Benjamin Franklin
|
|
Alkiviades
Baron
Joined: 01-Sep-2005
Location: Antarctica
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 469
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 23-Jan-2006 at 07:30 |
Also we have the naming of the dynasties/emperors according to their land of origin, irregardles of nationality. Like the Illyrian, the Isaurian, the Makedonian etc. The Makedonian, for instance, came from a clear Greek-Armenian bloodline, it doesn't mean that Basil I and his offspring (or, actually, Michael's offsrping, according to Byzantine gossip ) were of some "Makedonian" ethnic group.
|
If you wanna play arrogant with me, you better have some very solid facts to back up that arrogance, or I'll tear you to pieces
|
|
merced12
General
Joined: 24-Sep-2005
Location: Turkey
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 767
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 23-Jan-2006 at 08:29 |
thanks yiannis
|
http://www.turks.org.uk/
16th century world;
Ottomans all Roman orients
Safavids in Persia
Babur in india
`azerbaycan bayragini karabagdan asacagim``
|
|
Spartakus
Tsar
terörist
Joined: 22-Nov-2004
Location: Greece/Hellas
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4489
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 23-Jan-2006 at 16:10 |
Originally posted by Yiannis
Originally posted by merced12
i found it leo4
he was a khazar turks
|
"Sh*tnamed" -Kopronymos, " |
.That was good!
|
"There are worse crimes than burning books. One of them is not reading them. "
--- Joseph Alexandrovitch Brodsky, 1991, Russian-American poet, b. St. Petersburg and exiled 1972 (1940-1996)
|
|
Guests
Guest
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 24-Jan-2006 at 03:54 |
Originally posted by Jazz
Not only that, but a lot of things simply got recycled. There are
Bronze doors when you exit the Hagia Sophia that were from a 2nd
century BC temple, and all the columns used in the numerous cisterns
were recycled from ancient temples. Their re-use ensured thier
longevity to this day for us to enjoy, otherwise they may have simply
crumbled into oblivion otherwise.
|
I thought this was ironic and i lought a lot....it was wasn't it?
|
|
Guests
Guest
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 30-Aug-2007 at 14:45 |
Komnenos said: "That over the centuries the B.E. was reduced to a territory that
allowed for a identity between ethnicity and state, namely today's
Greece, might explain why the term "Romaioi" eventually became
synonymous with the population of Greece, and why the Turks called the
Greeks "Rum"."
Komnenos I think you're missing a few key points of both medieval and modern Greek history. "Romaioi" has been restricted to the Greeks of Greece only for the last 80 years, i.e. ever since the great population exchange between Greece and Turkey, when all ethnic Greeks from Asia Minor and later Constantinople went to Greece. In the 19th century there were more ethnic Greeks outside the Greek state rather than within it. Also you're also missing the fact that ever since the days of Jusinian I and until 1453, all Europeans referred to the Byzantine Empire as Greece and its people as Greeks in an ethnic sense. This is valid for Latins and Slavs alike. Also you seem to be completely ignorant of the modern Greek proto-nationalism which was born within the Byzantine Empire, starting with Psellos and reaching its peak in 1204. Then the term "Hellene" is returned to official use. The Byzantines did use another ethnic term prior to those events, that would be the Greek word "Graikos". This word was a synonym to "Rhomaios" though less frequently used (see the 6th c. trial of Abba Maximus when the monk was asked in Constantinople "why do you love the Romans and hate the Greeks"). Most scholars agree that the Greek Rhomaios was merely a political term and was only used within Byzantium. In other words the Byzantine Empire is considered as Eastern Roman until Heraclius, Greek until 1204 (see G. Ostrogorsky) and Hellenic until 1453.
You're obviously a person who is interested in the history of that state, however that does not give you the right to belittle Greek history and use such blunt language. Some of your arguments are really absurd and your tone does indeed imply a bias. The reason you are being so one-sided is due to the recent interest that western scholarship has shown in Byzantine culture. If the Ottoman Empire was somehow discovered to have been influencing western culture then people would argue that "Ottomans weren't Turks" and that "Sassanians weren't Iranians". This is how amateur western scholarship and revisionism works. Regards.
Edited by Scipion - 30-Aug-2007 at 23:05
|
|