How The Byzantines Viewed The Earlier Romans

[Ursus]

An interesting book I am currently reading makes the point that different people in different times and places had different ideas about what constituted Roman identity ... even before the West fell. The local elites through the empire were keen to link themselves to the imperial grandeur of Rome ... but how a Celt, an African and a Greek lived their day-to-day lives as citizens of Rome left room for considerable diversity.

 

There was thus never one idea of Rome. There was a vague and overarching idea of power and majesty, of endless and eternal empire, to which local cultures could append themselves while still allowing room for local expression. The Roman empire was a sprawling commonwealth of diverse cities connected to each other by the army, by roads, and by Greco-Latin education.

 

I think we have to take this in mind when evaluating the Byzantines and their claim to Romanatis.

[Tobias]

I would also add that Rome was an ideal...originally based around the worship of a sort of godhead/place which was the city and spirit of Rome. By moving the capital to Nova Roma, one could say that this was transferring the ideal to Constantinople.

 

What's that book Ursus? I might look out for it...

Edited September 6, 2006 by Tobias

[Ursus]

It's called _Experiencing Rome_. I will be doing a review on it shortly.

[Horatius]

Considering that by tradition Rome was founded by refugees from Anatolia I guess you could say that they were bringing Rome back home, where it belonged.

[DecimusCaesar]

What Horatius says is very true, If Rome was based on Greek culture and architecture and the Greeks were influenced by the east, then Rome really did go home when the capital was transferred to Constantinople. (Not only considering as Horatius pointed out, that the Romans believed the Aeniad of Virgil, that they were descendants of the Trojan refugees).

 

Very interesting Ursus, I will be looking forward to your review. Does the book mention how the Romanised client cultures saw themselves (especially those that existed outside of Roman borders but had a sufficient amount of Roman culture and material goods). I have read of Romans being greeted by German tribes who lived along the border of the Empire, but were almost indestingushable between from those who lived on the other side of the border. Would they have saw themsleves as being part of Rome's glory? or just as a individual tribe with Roman style wealth and material goods?

[WotWotius]

I would also add that Rome was an ideal...originally based around the worship of a sort of godhead/place which was the city and spirit of Rome. By moving the capital to Nova Roma, one could say that this was transferring the ideal to Constantinople.

 

With the expasion of the Empire, rather than being an ethnic race, the Romans became a political one. I think that if you were of Roman citizenship during the Byzantine period, standing for a Roman ideal was viewed as being much more important your ethnic background.

[Tobias]

standing for a Roman ideal was viewed as being much more important your ethnic background.

 

Precisely. That is why there were peoples in Greece well into the 20th century who still called themselves "Rhomaioi", and possibly the reason why the Roman Empire lasted as long as it did. The people considered themselves part of the best culture in the world, and although the Empire was plagued by disaster for many years, they still kept the Roman ideal alive.

Edited September 20, 2006 by Tobias

[Parius]

I was just reading J.J Norwich's "Byzantium" and I came across this reference to the decanneacubita. This was a special dining room with nineteen couches, where the emperors and their guests would gather to dine on special occasions, like Christmas, the old fashioned roman way (reclining on couches instead of sitting on tables).

 

So this started me thinking, what other customs and traditions held on to Byzantium, in one form or the other from the old times? There were the horse races in the Hippodrome for one thing, that lasted all the way to 1204 ( the latins used the place fro jousting tournaments I think, and then when the Byzantines retook the City it was used by young aristocrats to play polo)

And the triumphs.They were more in a christian context of course, like when John Comnenus gave his place on the chariot to an icon of Mary, and i'm not sure if they had slaves whispering in their ears "remember that you are a mortal", but they were triumphs nonetheless.

 

Anyone have more information on the subject?

[Ludovicus]

I was just reading J.J Norwich's "Byzantium" and I came across this reference to the decanneacubita. This was a special dining room with nineteen couches, where the emperors and their guests would gather to dine on special occasions, like Christmas, the old fashioned roman way (reclining on couches instead of sitting on tables).

 

So this started me thinking, what other customs and traditions held on to Byzantium, in one form or the other from the old times? There were the horse races in the Hippodrome for one thing, that lasted all the way to 1204 ( the latins used the place fro jousting tournaments I think, and then when the Byzantines retook the City it was used by young aristocrats to play polo)

And the triumphs.They were more in a christian context of course, like when John Comnenus gave his place on the chariot to an icon of Mary, and i'm not sure if they had slaves whispering in their ears "remember that you are a mortal", but they were triumphs nonetheless.

 

Anyone have more information on the subject?

 

 

Very interesting. Did the Eastern Empire have a Senate in Constantinople? If so, that would be another continuation.

[Gaius Octavius]

There was a Senate in Constantinople. I don't know how long it lasted but there was a thread on the subject recently. The answer is probably on the home page.

[Aphrodite]

No, I don't think at all the Byzantines thought the earlier empire was not worthy of respect.

 

The Byzantines basked in their past glories and the tradtions and ways of life carried on. Much art and sculpture especially took its influences from earlier times in the Empire.

 

The main thing though to remember was that the empire was Christian, and very religious. This means the Christian emperors are going to be the ones mentioned the most in the sources. It would not have been proper to venerate the pagan ways of the old emperors, and even offensive to many ascetics.

 

What can be seen though is the classical education of many of the christain writers, Jerome is greatly influenced by cicero - and talks about his consuming passion for his work in one of his letters, one that he then criticised himself for, for not being devoted enough to the writings of the bible - to speak of unchristian things was simply wrong. However, when reading his work, there are so many striking paralels between his rhetoric, and that of the classical writers.

 

History is not all about 'the great men' - look further than that and you will see the old empire glorified in many ways. )

 

I was just reading J.J Norwich's "Byzantium" and I came across this reference to the decanneacubita. This was a special dining room with nineteen couches, where the emperors and their guests would gather to dine on special occasions, like Christmas, the old fashioned roman way (reclining on couches instead of sitting on tables).

 

So this started me thinking, what other customs and traditions held on to Byzantium, in one form or the other from the old times? There were the horse races in the Hippodrome for one thing, that lasted all the way to 1204 ( the latins used the place fro jousting tournaments I think, and then when the Byzantines retook the City it was used by young aristocrats to play polo)

And the triumphs.They were more in a christian context of course, like when John Comnenus gave his place on the chariot to an icon of Mary, and i'm not sure if they had slaves whispering in their ears "remember that you are a mortal", but they were triumphs nonetheless.

 

Anyone have more information on the subject?

 

So, so, so many tradtions stayed on. The social codes on the importance of the family, and of the mother stayed strong throughout the byzantine era. Views on women, and women's role in religion stayed pretty much the same (they were bottom of the pile).

 

The thing to remeber is the 'byzantines' WERE roman - they did not see themselves as different, they saw no major cut off from the old empire. Yes things progressed, but compare any two parts of the western empire and you will see both change and continuity.

[Kosmo]

During the iconoclast emperors the focus of intelectual life returned to the study of classic writers. Even some forms of pagan mysticism, like astrology, returned to favor. The classic studies remained important, despite the deep christian feelings, and the last moment was the cultural renaissance under the paleologian dinasty.

This shows that they considered classical culture as their ancestry and tried hard to reconcile Platon, Aristotel and Plotin with christianity as their III and IV century ancestors did.

 

They played polo? I thought that this was a persian sport picked by brits from moghul India.

[Andrew Dalby]

During the iconoclast emperors the focus of intelectual life returned to the study of classic writers. Even some forms of pagan mysticism, like astrology, returned to favor. The classic studies remained important, despite the deep christian feelings, and the last moment was the cultural renaissance under the paleologian dinasty.

This shows that they considered classical culture as their ancestry and tried hard to reconcile Platon, Aristotel and Plotin with christianity as their III and IV century ancestors did.

 

They played polo? I thought that this was a persian sport picked by brits from moghul India.

 

Yes, they did play polo. Alexius II, for example, spent too much time playing polo and too little time learning to be an emperor. Andronicus then put an end to both pastimes (by killing him).