|
 .
Nicephorus II Phocas
Emperor 963 - 969
This page refers to life in the
Byzantine Empire, from the foundation of Constantinople in 330 until its
fall because of the attack by the Ottoman Turks in May 29th, 1453. From
this date, indeed, the dark reigned for the true history of the old Empire
(and its particular inhabitants), the one that was considered during the
following centuries by the Occident as an example of decay and corruption.
For years, some historians have been realizing this
great mistake, and they begin to investigate a past that soon will seem
fascinating to them, rich in all the topics of the life of a very
particular Roman and Christian Greek State.
For that reason we propose that, once and for all,
the light becomes!
Alexius I Comnenus
Emperor 1081 -
1118
Comments for a better understanding of this work:
I must begin by making it abundantly clear that the Byzantine Empire
never should have been known by that name. By rights it ought to be
known to all as the Roman Empire. However. French historians writing
centuries after its fall decided on their own to call it "Byzantine,"
for the evident purpose of treating it as something separate from Rome.
And, with an incredible degree of dishonesty, they told the story of its
history as a succession of corrupt emperors and officials, totally
worthless and totally decadent.
Their efforts were successful, and this is why the Empire (which must be
called "Byzantine" simply to avoid confusion) is ignored by many people
who enjoy learning about the history of Rome up to the year 476 but who
do not investigate any further.
As far as I am concerned, the Roman Empire actually lived on until 1453,
even in spite of the enormous changes which occurred over time. The
reason for this is obvious: if the inhabitants of the Empire themselves
considered themselves to be Romans, heirs of Rome, what right do we have
to refer to them by another name or to conclude that the changes they
underwent produced a completely different Empire?
Was the Roman society of the year 500 AD not radically different from
that of 200 AD, 70 AD, or 248 BC? If Rome continuously evolved to such a
great degree and underwent so many changes, how can we say that after
the year 330, or 564, or 641, or 717 it was suddenly transformed into
something different? Such a line of thinking is completely artificial.
For this reason, in the present work we will refer to the Byzantine
Empire or Byzantium in order not to confuse readers, but it should
remain clear throughout that we are speaking of the Roman Empire.
On the other hand, there is much discussion about "the beginning of the
Byzantine Empire." General dates have been offered, such as that of the
foundation of Constantinople (330), the fall of the Western Empire
(476), the death of Justinian, considered by many to be the last Roman
emperor (564), the death of Heraclius after the loss of Syria, Palestine
and Egypt (641), or Leo III's defense of Constantinople against the
Arabs in 717.
As far as I can see, this question is irrelevant, precisely because the
"Byzantine Empire" was an invention of unscrupulous historians. Thus, I
consider the foundation of Constantinople as the capital of the Roman
World the cornerstone of a new historical stage for Rome. Thus, the
story begins for me at that moment and ends in 1453 with the conquest of
that same capital by the Ottoman Empire, which would transform it into
the capital of a completely different world.
This is the “official” history of Byzantium. However, given that it was
an empire based on the Idea of the Empire of Humanity on Earth, formed
in the image and likeness of the Empire of God in heaven, and ideas
never die, I consider that the Empire remains alive in many hearts.
But, that is another story.
Of course, speaking about the countless changes which the Roman Empire
underwent during more than eleven centuries, one may talk about
different eras based on events that marked its people with fire. It is
not the same thing to talk about the newly-founded Constantinople of
330, where there were still many pagan temples standing, and the
besieged capital of 717 at the point of falling to Arab armies, or the
flourishing city of the 10th century under the great Macedonian dynasty,
or the conquered and destroyed Constantinople of 1204, or even the
destitute, decaying and semi-abandoned city of 1453.
And, I use Constantinople as a point of reference to refer to the
Empire, in spite of the large number of cities it included, because it
was axiomatic for the Byzantine citizen that while the capital stood, so
stood the Empire.
Another error of historians, even those who were contemporaries of the
Empire, is that of constantly referring to it as the Greek Empire. Even
though it is true that Greek was spoken, it was spoken in different
forms depending on whether one was referring to the European or Asiatic
regions. And, even within certain regions the language was spoken in
different ways. And, if we speak of races the diversity was even
greater, given that Greeks, Slavs, Bulgars, Armenians, Syrians and many
other peoples all lived within the Empire and gave it its multiracial
character.
It was this diversity of races that caused an immense number of problems
for the Empire in reconciling vastly different interests, but also in
something that characterized it even more strongly: it was a Universal
Empire for all the inhabitants of Byzantium of whatever race, as long as
they accepted the emperor and the Orthodox Church, and spoke Greek, more
or less.
One of the great differences between the Byzantines and the Latins was
that the former considered the emperor to be the representative of God
on Earth and the most sacred personage of all, while the patriarch was
reduced to representing the Church as such. The Latins, on the other
hand, saw the Pope as the representative of God, and rulers were subject
to the will of the Church. It is for this reason that the history of
Byzantium is the story of the competition between the Byzantine emperors
and the Roman Papacy, until the definitive break of 1054.
Later, the Byzantine Church saw its power grow while the emperors saw
theirs shrink, so much so that after 1453 it was the Orthodox Church
that kept alive the tradition of the Empire, its ideas and its culture,
up to this very day.
I hope this website will help to share the truth about the Empire, its
culture, its people and its life. I hope that those who read it will
realize that the story of Byzantium is as interesting as that of Rome,
and that Byzantine civilization was the most advanced of the Middle
Ages, at a moment when the West was but a shadow lost in ignorance.
Rolando Castillo
rolandcas@hotmail.com
Translated by Silvana Castillo.
Edited by Owen Williamson
Home
|