DOCSLIB.ORG

Introduction

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Introduction Cambridge University Press 978-0-521-85703-1 - Imperial Ideology and Political Thought in Byzantium, 1204-1330 Dimiter Angelov Excerpt More information Introduction This bookis a study of imperial ideology andpolitical thought in Byzantium after thewatershed in its history caused by theLatin conquest of the city of Constantinople, New Rome, inthe year 1204.Thedichotomyimperial ideology vs.political thought is deliberateandpurposeful. It reflects the approach of this study toward a large and diversebody of Byzantinepolit- icalliterature, consisting of rhetorical, theoretical, andecclesiasticaltexts which all share the common subject of imperial rulership. Our principal goal istoexplore the correspondence,tensions, andrifts betweenofficial ideology of kingship,onthe one hand, and ideasofimperial governance formulated at a semi-officialorindependent level, on the other, during a period of unparalleled political andfinancialcrisisfacing Byzantium. We will examineasetofcompetingpolitical ideas; some of them were traditional and conventionalfor theempire of New Rome, while others were novel, occasionallyreformist, andalways relevant to the new political realities intheaftermath of theFourth Crusade. The study is promising not onlybecause of the considerable quantity of political writingwhich hassofar attracted a relatively scant scholarlyatten- tion. An arresting historical problemstands atthe crux of thediscussion in the following chapters: the manner in which Byzantinepolitical imagina- tion responded to the trauma of the loss of Constantinopleand to thepost- 1204 historical realities. How did the Byzantines accommodate themselves mentally to thepolitical reality of Byzantium as a small and fragmented state, a second-ratepower inthepolitics of theEastern Mediterranean? The writingsofaremarkable constellation of literati – propagandists and court rhetoricians, theorists andauthorsofadvice tracts, historians and ecclesiastics–open awindowinto Byzantinepolitical imagination, andits limits, in a periodwhentheempire lost theextensive territory, international prestige, andwealth which ithad onceenjoyed, especiallyduring the reigns of such emperors as JustinianI(527–65), BasilII(976–1025), andManuelI Komnenos (1143–80). Indeed,this bookis as much about theevolution 1 © Cambridge University Press www.cambridge.org Cambridge University Press 978-0-521-85703-1 - Imperial Ideology and Political Thought in Byzantium, 1204-1330 Dimiter Angelov Excerpt More information 2 Introduction of state ideology as it is about the opinions and perspectivesofindividual Byzantineauthors, who left their strong personal imprint on courtlygenres thatmandated adherence to tradition rather thanoriginal thought. The methodology employed inthe following chapters is both literary and historical.Wewill extrapolate ideas exclusively from writtentexts. In other words, pictorial representations of theemperor (on coins andin wall painting) and courtceremonies – sources which, too, shed light on imperial ideology – will be used only occasionally, mostlywhenthey complement theanalysisofthe written sources. In addition, we will make no attempt to distill ideology from imperial policies, for ourinterest lies inthearticu- lated politicalthinkingandvocabulary of the Byzantinesthemselves.1 Our methodology is also decidedly historical. One canform a comprehensive understanding of political ideas onlywhensetting them in a concrete his- torical context. At the outset, therefore, it ishelpful to familiarize the reader with the hallmarksoftheempire’s politicalhistory inthe thirteenth and the early fourteenth century. We should bear inmind thatthis introduction is brief and sketchy.2 Each chapter will provide further historical context as relevant. The year 1204 pitted Byzantium against unprecedented political divi- sion. In the wake of the fall of Constantinople theimperialterritoriesthat eluded Latin conquest – andin some casesthathad seceded from the empire before the arrivalofthe crusader armies–fell into the handsofa multitude of Greek lords.3 The three most important successor statesto Byzantium formed inthe thirteenth century were theempiresofNicaea and TrebizondinAsia Minorand the principality (brieflyan empire)of Epiros intheBalkans.The statesofNicaea, Trebizond, and Epiros each claimed at a certain point of their history to be the legitimate successor to Byzantium and hadaruler bearing the title of emperor of theRomans. Of the three splinter states, theempire of Nicaea (1204–61) was by far the most successful one. The founder of theNicaean empire Theodore I Laskaris(1205–21) was a talented Byzantinegeneral who had married before 1204 adaughter of Emperor Alexios III Angelos (1195–1203) and had been 1 For the of use of artistic evidenceas a source on the state ideology of theempire of Trebizond,see A.Eastmond, Art and Identity in Thirteenth-Century Byzantium: Hagia Sophia and the Empire of Trebizond (Aldershot, 2004). 2 Fordetailed accounts of political events inthe period,see A. Gardner, The Lascarids of Nicaea: The Story of an Empire in Exile (London, 1912);D.Nicol, The Last Centuries of Byzantium, 1261–1453, 2ndedn(Cambridge, 1993);D.Geanakoplos, Emperor Michael Palaeologus and the West, 1258–1282: A Study in Byzantine–Latin Relations (Cambridge, Mass., 1959); Laiou, Constantinople and the Latins. 3 N. Oikonomides, “La de´composition de l’empire byzantin a` laveillede1204 etlesorigines de l’empire de Nicee:´ apr` opos de la Partitio Romaniae,”in XVe Congr`es d’Etudes´ Byzantines. Rapports et co-rapports, vol. 1 (Athens, 1976), 1–28 (repr. in Byzantium from the Ninth Century to the Fourth Crusade (Aldershot, 1992), Study XX). © Cambridge University Press www.cambridge.org Cambridge University Press 978-0-521-85703-1 - Imperial Ideology and Political Thought in Byzantium, 1204-1330 Dimiter Angelov Excerpt More information Introduction 3 giventhe high honorifictitle of Despot.Laskarisslipped away from Con- stantinople shortlybefore theLatin conquest and managed to carve out a small principalitydespitean inauspicious beginningas a state-builder; thefirst episode of his activities inAsia Minor mentioned by the sources wastherefusalofthe citizens of Nicaea to admithim into their city.4 In 1205, inthe city of Nicaea,hewas proclaimed emperorandin 1208 was officially crowned in an ecclesiasticalceremony. Theodore I’s son-in-law and successor,theemperorJohn III Vatatzes(1221–54), reconquered large territories intheBalkans, including theimportant city of Thessaloniki in 1246. His son and successorTheodore II Laskaris(1254–58) withstood suc- cessfully the counteroffensive of theBulgarians inthe years 1254–55. In 1261 Michael VIII Palaiologos (1259–82), ageneral who usurped power from theLaskarid dynasty, recaptured Constantinopleand moved the seatof theempire backinto the oldimperialcapital.Nonetheless, theNicaean stateand therestored empire of thePalaiologoi never managed to reunite fully thedisparate piecesofthe fragmented Byzantineworld. Large areas formerlybelonging to Byzantium escaped imperial control.Not only did many Aegean and Ionian islands andasizeableportion of mainlandGreece remainunder Latin dominion, but soon after 1300 almost thewhole of Asia Minorwas lost to theTurks. In the early fourteenth century Andronikos II Palaiologos (1282–1328)oversaw the transformation of Byzantium into a small Balkanstate. TheNicaean and thePalaiologan empires thus had to coexist not onlywith foreign powers’domination over former Byzantine territories, but also with the rival Byzantine statesofEpiros and Trebi- zond. In the longrun, therulersofEpiros and Trebizondacquiesced to demandsthatthey abandon their claims to the Byzantineimperialtitle and had to settle, in 1242 and 1282 respectively,for the lesser title of Despot, the secondinthe courthierarchy of titles after thatoftheemperor, but nevertheless they were to remainmastersofindependent territorial states.5 Thereconstituted imperialofficeafter 1204 was a historical and sym- bolic bridge to theempire of the twelfth century. Theemperors inthe later period continued to enjoy the same wide-rangingprerogatives as before 4 AkropolitesI,10–11. 5 G. Prinzing, “Das Byzantinische Kaisertum imUmbruch zwischen regionaler Aufspaltung und erneuter Zentralisierungin den Jahren 1204–1282,”in R. Gundlach and H. Weber (eds.), Legiti- mation und Funktion des Herrschers vom agyptischen¨ Pharao zum neuzeitlichen Diktator (Stuttgart, 1992), 129–83.Between 1282 and 1360 theruler of Trebizondreassumed theimperialtitle, although in a modified version less offensive to the mastersofConstantinople: inthe second half of the four- teenth century he styled himself as “emperor of theentire Orient, the Iberians and Perateia,theGrand Komnenos.” See N. Oikonomides, “TheChancery of theGrandKomnenoi: Imperial Tradition and Political Reality,” ìArce±on P»ntou, 35 (1979), 299–332, esp. 321–30. © Cambridge University Press www.cambridge.org Cambridge University Press 978-0-521-85703-1 - Imperial Ideology and Political Thought in Byzantium, 1204-1330 Dimiter Angelov Excerpt More information 4 Introduction andin practiceruled more or less as absolute monarchs.They still served as commanders-in-chief, presided over the highest civillaw court, theimpe- rialtribunal, redistributed the state’stax resources, andretained traditional powers in ecclesiastical administration, such as appointingandinvesting theecumenical patriarch of Constantinople (seated in Nicaea between 1208 and 1261).6 In theeleventh andincreasinglyduring the twelfth century the imperialoffice had begun to make widespread
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Crisis of the Fourth Crusade in Byzantium (1203-1204) and the Emergence of Networks for Anti-Latin Reaction and Political Action
    The Crisis of the Fourth Crusade in Byzantium (1203-1204) and the Emergence of Networks for Anti-Latin Reaction and Political Action Ilias GIARENIS In spite of a great number of important publications on the relevant issues,1 the Fourth Crusade and its impact in the Eastern Mediterranean are often – even nowadays – neither fully apprehended nor sufficiently explained. Important aspects of the rich scientific debate still are the collapse of the Byzantine state, the formation of smaller political entities, and the processes through which such immense changes took place. As is well known, the two most prominent among those successor polities were the States of Nicaea and of Epirus, which were both established mainly by members of the high Byzantine Constantinopolitan aristocracy;2 neverheless, the empire of Trebizond, where the imperial legacy of the Komnenoi had been considered as a solid ground for the Grand Komnenoi rulership, should also not be neglected in the study of the historical framework.3 The events of 1203/1204 led to the conquest of Constantinople by the Latin Crusaders, the milites Christi of the Fourth Crusade who had reached the Byzantine capital in a “diversion” from the declared original destination of the Crusade, i.e. Jerusalem. The latter, a Sacred *This paper is dedicated to Nikolaos G. Moschonas. 1 See D. E. Queller and Th. F. Madden, The Fourth Crusade. The Conquest of Constantinople, second edition, Philadelphia 1997; M Angold, The Fourth Crusade. Event and Context, [The Medieval World] Harlow 2003; J. Phillips, The Fourth Crusade and the Sack of Constantinople, London 2004; Urbs Capta.
    [Show full text]
  • INTRODUCTION the Capture of Constantinople by the Armies of the Fourth Crusade in 1204 Fragmented the Byzantine Empire. Territor
    INTRODUCTION The capture of Constantinople by the armies of the Fourth Crusade in 1204 fragmented the Byzantine empire. Territories which did not submit to the Crusaders fell into the hands of Byzantine magnates who became rulers of numerous small political entities. The most important of these newly founded states, which each claimed to be the successor of the destroyed Byzantine empire, were the empires of Trebizond and Nicaea in Asia Minor and the principality of Epiros in the Balkans.1 The so-called empire of Nicaea, which was established as a viable state by Theodore I Laskaris (1204–1221), was the most suc- cessful of these. Laskaris averted the threat of a combined attack from the Latin empire of Constantinople and the Seljuks of Rum and over- came various local lords who, in the wake of the collapse of Byzantium, had established their own independent authorities in Asia Minor. His successors, John III Vatatzes (1221–1254) and Theodore II Laskaris (1254–1258), conquered large territories in the Balkans. They forced the rulers of Epiros to abandon their claim to the imperial title and reduced the military strength of the Latin empire of Constantinople. Under John III and Theodore II, Nicaea prevailed as the legitimate successor to the Byzantine empire. In 1261, the Nicaean army cap- tured Constantinople and Michael VIII Palaiologos (1259–1282), who had seized the throne from the Laskarids, restored the Byzantine empire. Yet, despite the conquests of the Laskarids and the recovery of Constantinople by Michael VIII, much territory which had belonged to the Byzantine empire before the Fourth Crusade remained beyond imperial control.
    [Show full text]
  • Of Masters and Servants: Hybrid Power in Theodore Laskaris
    ANDRIA ANDREOU - PANAGIOTIS A. AGAPITOS Of Masters and Servants Hybrid Power in Theodore Laskaris’ Response to Mouzalon and in the Tale of Livistros and Rodamne Abstract The present paper examines two Byzantine texts from the middle of the thirteenth century, ostensibly unrelated to each other: a political essay written by a young emperor and an anonymous love romance. The analysis is conducted through the concept of hybrid power, a notion initially developed by postcolonial criticism. It is shown that in the two texts authority (that of the Byzantine emperor and that of Eros as emperor) is constructed as hybrid and thus as an impossibility, though in the case of the political essay this impossibility remains unresolved, while in the romance it is actually resolved. The pronounced similarities between the two texts on the level of political ideology (e.g. the notion of friendship between master and servant, the performance of power relations, shared key concepts) informing the hybrid form of authority and its relation to its servants is a clear indication that they belong to the same socio-cultural and intellectual environment, namely the Laskarid imperial court in Nicaea around 1250. * The present paper is a substantially The aim of this study* is to examine two ostensibly unrelated Byzan- revised and expanded version of a talk tine texts. The first is a ‘political essay’ by the emperor Theodore II given at a workshop on Theodore Doukas Laskaris (1254–58) on the relation of friendship between Laskaris as emperor and author, organized by Dimiter Angelov and rulers and their close collaborators; it can be plausibly dated between Panagiotis Agapitos in Nicosia with 1250 and 1254, at the time when the author was crowned prince.
    [Show full text]
  • Περίληψη : Manuel Laskaris Was a Member of the Laskaris Family and One of the Six Brothers of Theodore I Laskaris (1204-1222)
    IΔΡΥΜA ΜΕΙΖΟΝΟΣ ΕΛΛΗΝΙΣΜΟΥ Συγγραφή : Γιαρένης Ηλίας Μετάφραση : Βελέντζας Γεώργιος Για παραπομπή : Γιαρένης Ηλίας , "Manuel Laskaris ", Εγκυκλοπαίδεια Μείζονος Ελληνισμού, Μ. Ασία URL: <http://www.ehw.gr/l.aspx?id=7801> Περίληψη : Manuel Laskaris was a member of the Laskaris family and one of the six brothers of Theodore I Laskaris (1204-1222). In the years of John III Vatatzes (1222-1254), he was in disgrace, while when Theodore II Laskaris assumed the throne (1254-1958), he was recalled along with the rest of his relatives. He became an important trusty counselor of the emperor and was honoured by him with the notable title of protosebastos. He was not a successful fighter in the battlefield, though. After Theodore II died in 1258, he did not support the election of Michael Palaiologos as the regent of John IV Laskaris and, as a result, was exiled in Prousa. Άλλα Ονόματα Manuel Komnenos Laskaris, Manuel Tzamanturos, Maximos Τόπος και Χρόνος Γέννησης late 12th / early 13th century Τόπος και Χρόνος Θανάτου third quarter of the 13th century Κύρια Ιδιότητα protosebastos 1. Βiography Manuel Laskaris was the youngest brother of the emperor of Nicaea Theodore I Komnenos Laskaris, and the last of all six Laskaris brothers. The Laskaris brothers from the eldest to the younger were: Isaac, Alexios, Theodore (I Komnenos Laskaris, emperor in the exile of Nicaea), Constantine (XI Laskaris, uncrowned Byzantine emperor), Michael and Manuel.1 The activity of Michael Laskaris is also mentioned by George Akropolites, Theodore Skoutariotes and George Pachymeres, who calls him ‘Tzamanturos’( Tζαμάντουρος).2 There is information about his life and work until Michael VIII assumed the throne; Michael Laskaris must have died in exile in Prousa.
    [Show full text]
  • A Chronological Particular Timeline of Near East and Europe History
    Introduction This compilation was begun merely to be a synthesized, occasional source for other writings, primarily for familiarization with European world development. Gradually, however, it was forced to come to grips with the elephantine amount of historical detail in certain classical sources. Recording the numbers of reported war deaths in previous history (many thousands, here and there!) initially was done with little contemplation but eventually, with the near‐exponential number of Humankind battles (not just major ones; inter‐tribal, dynastic, and inter‐regional), mind was caused to pause and ask itself, “Why?” Awed by the numbers killed in battles over recorded time, one falls subject to believing the very occupation in war was a naturally occurring ancient inclination, no longer possessed by ‘enlightened’ Humankind. In our synthesized histories, however, details are confined to generals, geography, battle strategies and formations, victories and defeats, with precious little revealed of the highly complicated and combined subjective forces that generate and fuel war. Two territories of human existence are involved: material and psychological. Material includes land, resources, and freedom to maintain a life to which one feels entitled. It fuels war by emotions arising from either deprivation or conditioned expectations. Psychological embraces Egalitarian and Egoistical arenas. Egalitarian is fueled by emotions arising from either a need to improve conditions or defend what it has. To that category also belongs the individual for whom revenge becomes an end in itself. Egoistical is fueled by emotions arising from material possessiveness and self‐aggrandizations. To that category also belongs the individual for whom worldly power is an end in itself.
    [Show full text]
  • Michael Panaretos in Context
    DOI 10.1515/bz-2019-0007 BZ 2019; 112(3): 899–934 Scott Kennedy Michael Panaretos in context A historiographical study of the chronicle On the emperors of Trebizond Abstract: It has often been said it would be impossible to write the history of the empire of Trebizond (1204–1461) without the terse and often frustratingly la- conic chronicle of the Grand Komnenoi by the protonotarios of Alexios III (1349–1390), Michael Panaretos. While recent scholarship has infinitely en- hanced our knowledge of the world in which Panaretos lived, it has been approx- imately seventy years since a scholar dedicated a historiographical study to the text. This study examines the world that Panaretos wanted posterity to see, ex- amining how his post as imperial secretary and his use of sources shaped his representation of reality, whether that reality was Trebizond’s experience of for- eigners, the reign of Alexios III, or a narrative that showed the superiority of Tre- bizond on the international stage. Finally by scrutinizing Panaretos in this way, this paper also illuminates how modern historians of Trebizond have been led astray by the chronicler, unaware of Panaretos selected material for inclusion for the narratives of his chronicle. Adresse: Dr. Scott Kennedy, Bilkent University, Main Camous, G Building, 24/g, 06800 Bilkent–Ankara, Turkey; [email protected] Established just before the fall of Constantinople in 1204, the empire of Trebi- zond (1204–1461) emerged as a successor state to the Byzantine empire, ulti- mately outlasting its other Byzantine rivals until it fell to the Ottoman Turks in 1461.
    [Show full text]
  • The Miracle Cycle Between Constantinople, Thessalonike, and Mistra
    chapter 14 The Miracle Cycle between Constantinople, Thessalonike, and Mistra Maria Alessia Rossi This paper will address the dialectic between the City and the cities from an art historical perspective. I will focus on the development of Christ’s Miracle Cycle in Constantinople, Thessalonike, and Mistra. The comparison of three churches housing this iconography, one from each city, will give an insight into the relationship between the capital and the other cities of the empire in the early Palaiologan period: the monastery of Chora in Constantinople (1316–21), the parekklesion of St. Euthymios in Thessalonike (1303), and the church of the Aphendiko in Mistra (1311–13).1 The aim is to examine the differences and simi- larities in the layout and grouping of the episodes of this Cycle, as well as the function and meaning they came to convey. In the first instance, this is in order to understand why this rare iconography was chosen to decorate churches so far away from each other. Secondly, this paper will ask whether the icono- graphic scheme conveyed different meanings in different cities and contexts. The reconquest of Constantinople by Emperor Michael VIII in 1261 sealed the beginning of the Palaiologan period and was hailed by its contemporaries as the will of God.2 Nevertheless, the empire was reduced in size, and surrounded 1 For a general overview of the artistic and cultural patronage of the period, see Edmund Boleslaw Fryde, The Early Palaeologan Renaissance (1261–c. 1360) (Leiden, 2000). For the years concerning Andronikos II’s reign, see Alice-Mary Talbot, “Building Activity in Constantinople under Andronikos II: The Role of Women Patrons in the Construction and Restoration of Monasteries,” in Byzantine Constantinople: Monuments, Topography and Everyday Life, ed.
    [Show full text]
  • Epidemic Waves of the Black Death in the Byzantine Empire
    Le Infezioni in Medicina, n. 3, 193-201, 2011 Le infezioni Epidemic waves of the Black nella sto - Death in the Byzantine Empire ria della medicina (1347-1453 AD) Ondate epidemiche della Morte Nera nell’Impero Bizantino Infections (1347-1453 d.C.) in the history of medicine Costas Tsiamis 1, Effie Poulakou-Rebelakou 2, Athanassios Tsakris 3, Eleni Petridou 1 1Department of Hygiene, Epidemiology and Medical Statistics, Athens Medical School, University of Athens, Greece; 2Department of History of Medicine, Athens Medical School, University of Athens, Greece; 3Department of Microbiology, Athens Medical School, University of Athens, Greece n INTRODUCTION a small geographical area is impressive; it is ba - sically a case of “all against all”. The Republics he completeness of the Byzantine historiog - of Venice and Genova held strategic and eco - raphy of the plague epidemics in the 14 th and nomically important areas in the region after T15 th century cannot be compared with that the 4 th Crusade (1204) and were in permanent of the West. References made to the plague are conflict with the Byzantines for control of the often in conjunction with other concurrent his - Aegean Sea and the trade roads [2, 3]. torical events. The political turmoil and the de - In the east, the Ottoman Turks of Asia Minor cline experienced by the Empire in the 13 th and exert pressure on the Empire of Trebizond, in - 14 th century gradually changed the mentality of vading the Balkan Peninsula, detaching Greek Byzantine scholars. Military defeats, civil wars, territories of the Byzantine Empire, while fight - earthquakes and natural disasters were joined by ing with Venice, Genova and the Knights of the plague, which exacerbated the people’s sense Saint John of Rhodes for control of the sea [4, 5].
    [Show full text]
  • Byzantine Empire (Ca 600-1200): I.1
    INSTITUTE OF HISTORICAL RESEARCH ΙΝΣΤΙΤΟΥΤΟ ΙΣΤΟΡΙΚΩΝ ΕΡΕΥΝΩΝ SECTION OF BYZANTINE RESEARCH ΤΟΜΕΑΣ ΒΥΖΑΝΤΙΝΩΝ ΕΡΕΥΝΩΝ NATIONAL HELLENIC RESEARCH FOUNDATION ΕΘΝΙΚΟ IΔΡΥΜΑ ΕΡΕΥΝΩΝ Τομοσ 31 VOLUME EFI RAGIA CHRISTOS G. MAKRYPOULIAS – TAXIARCHIS G. KOLIAS – THE GEOGRAPHY OF THE PROVINCIAL ADMINISTRATION GEORGIOS KARDARAS OF THE BYZANTINE EMPIRE (CA 600-1200): I.1. THE APOTHEKAI OF ASIA MINOR (7TH-8TH C.) AN OVERVIEW OF ARMED CONFLICTS IN LATE BYZANTIUM: THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK AND CURRENT RESEARCH ΑΘΗΝΑ • 20092021 • ATHENS CHRISTOS G. MAKRYPOULIAS – TAXIARCHIS G. KOLIAS – GEORGIOS KARDARAS AN OVERVIEW OF ARMED CONFLICTS IN LATE BYZANTIUM: THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK AND CURRENT RESEARCH* Military history, although viewed by most outsiders as a unified field of scholarship, usually takes two forms, not necessarily mutually exclusive, but often quite distinct from each other. On the one hand, there are those who view military history from the point of organisation and institutions; to pose it differently, they are interested in establishing what an army is. Others focus on warfare itself: battles, tactics, and military strategy; in other words, they study what an army does. Historians of the latter persuasion are viewed by proponents of the so-called “new military history” as nothing more than devotees to an obsolescent histoire événementielle1. However, one can hardly question the pivotal role played by warfare in human history and, since military engagements are the tesserae which form this mosaic in all its gory detail, the necessity to study armed conflict and its effects on human society is self-evident. * The project entitled “ANAVATHMIS. Historical research and digital applications” (MIS 5002357) is implemented under the “Action for the Strategic Development on the Research and Technological Sector”, funded by the Operational Programme “Competitiveness, Entrepreneurship and Innovation” (NSRF 2014–2020) and co-financed by Greece and the European Union (European Regional Development Fund).
    [Show full text]
  • The Views of Byzantine Thinker Theodoros Metochites About the Sorrow, and the Instability of Human Life
    American International Journal of Social Science Vol. 4, No. 2; April 2015 The Views of Byzantine Thinker Theodoros Metochites about the Sorrow, and the Instability of Human Life Sotiria, A. Triantari Associate Professor in Philosophy School of Education University of Western of Macedonia Foteini, P. Sarimichailidou PhD candidate in Philosophy School of Philosophy and Education Aristotle University of Thessaloniki Abstract The purpose of this study is to show, first, that Theodoros Metochites recognized the human weakness to lead a life without sorrow “ἄλυπος βίος” and proceeded to the distinction of sorrow that is not up to us caused by external reasons and the sorrow that is up to us due to the human will. The sorrow that is up to us is related to learning and constitutes treatment for the estrangement of a human being from the sorrow that is not up to us and the turn to himself. Second, aim is to show that Metochites’ perception about a life without sorrow “ἄλυπος βίος” was influenced by Stoic Epictetus’ views, which respect to the proairesis, and particularly what it’s up to us. Keywords: Sorrow, human will, education Introduction: The Intellectual Context of Metochites Time Theodoros Metochites (1260-1332) was an authentic Humanist, who lived in the Palaiologan period. He was the son of the pro-unionist George Metochites. His parents supervised his early education and Theodoros himself showed a great zeal for learning. At the age of thirteen he had a complete Enkyklios paideia. After he had completed the study of grammar and poetry, he started a course in rhetoric.
    [Show full text]
  • The World View of the Anonymous Author of the Greek Chronicle of the Tocco
    THE WORLD VIEW OF THE ANONYMOUS AUTHOR OF THE GREEK CHRONICLE OF THE TOCCO (14th-15th centuries) by THEKLA SANSARIDOU-HENDRICKX THESIS submitted in the fulfilment of the requirements for the degree DOCTOR OF ARTS in GREEK in the FACULTY OF ARTS at the RAND AFRIKAANS UNIVERSITY PROMOTER: DR F. BREDENKAMP JOHANNESBURG NOVEMBER 2000 EFACE When I began with my studies at the Rand Afrikaans University, and when later on I started teaching Modern Greek in the Department of Greek and Latin Studies, I experienced the thrill of joy and the excitement which academic studies and research can provide to its students and scholars. These opportunities finally allowed me to write my doctoral thesis on the world view of the anonymous author of the Greek Chronicle of the Tocco. I wish to thank all persons who have supported me while writing this study. Firstly, my gratitude goes to Dr Francois Bredenkamp, who not only has guided me throughout my research, but who has always been available for me with sound advice. His solid knowledge and large experience in the field of post-classical Greek Studies has helped me in tackling Byzantine Studies from a mixed, historical and anthropological view point. I also wish to render thanks to my colleagues, especially in the Modern Greek Section, who encouraged me to continue my studies and research. 1 am indebted to Prof. W.J. Henderson, who has corrected my English. Any remaining mistakes in the text are mine. Last but not least, my husband, Prof. B. Hendrickx, deserves my profound gratitude for his patience, encouragement and continuous support.
    [Show full text]
  • Manuel II Palaiologos' Point of View
    The Hidden Secrets: Late Byzantium in the Western and Polish Context Małgorzata Dąbrowska The Hidden Secrets: Late Byzantium in the Western and Polish Context Małgorzata Dąbrowska − University of Łódź, Faculty of Philosophy and History Department of Medieval History, 90-219 Łódź, 27a Kamińskiego St. REVIEWERS Maciej Salamon, Jerzy Strzelczyk INITIATING EDITOR Iwona Gos PUBLISHING EDITOR-PROOFREADER Tomasz Fisiak NATIVE SPEAKERS Kevin Magee, François Nachin TECHNICAL EDITOR Leonora Wojciechowska TYPESETTING AND COVER DESIGN Katarzyna Turkowska Cover Image: Last_Judgment_by_F.Kavertzas_(1640-41) commons.wikimedia.org Printed directly from camera-ready materials provided to the Łódź University Press This publication is not for sale © Copyright by Małgorzata Dąbrowska, Łódź 2017 © Copyright for this edition by Uniwersytet Łódzki, Łódź 2017 Published by Łódź University Press First edition. W.07385.16.0.M ISBN 978-83-8088-091-7 e-ISBN 978-83-8088-092-4 Printing sheets 20.0 Łódź University Press 90-131 Łódź, 8 Lindleya St. www.wydawnictwo.uni.lodz.pl e-mail: [email protected] tel. (42) 665 58 63 CONTENTS Preface 7 Acknowledgements 9 CHAPTER ONE The Palaiologoi Themselves and Their Western Connections L’attitude probyzantine de Saint Louis et les opinions des sources françaises concernant cette question 15 Is There any Room on the Bosporus for a Latin Lady? 37 Byzantine Empresses’ Mediations in the Feud between the Palaiologoi (13th–15th Centuries) 53 Family Ethos at the Imperial Court of the Palaiologos in the Light of the Testimony by Theodore of Montferrat 69 Ought One to Marry? Manuel II Palaiologos’ Point of View 81 Sophia of Montferrat or the History of One Face 99 “Vasilissa, ergo gaude...” Cleopa Malatesta’s Byzantine CV 123 Hellenism at the Court of the Despots of Mistra in the First Half of the 15th Century 135 4 • 5 The Power of Virtue.
    [Show full text]