DOCSLIB.ORG

From Justinian to the End of the Eastern Roman Empire (527-1453) (2Nd Ed

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
From Justinian to the End of the Eastern Roman Empire (527-1453) (2Nd Ed The History of Byzantine Literature: from Justinian to the end of the Eastern Roman Empire (527-1453) (2nd ed. Munich: Beck, 1897) By Karl Krumbacher Introductory sections translated by David Jenkins and David Bachrach Copyright: University of Notre Dame 2001 Translators’ Preface Introduction 1. Concept and General History of Byzantine Literature 2. Characteristics 3. International cultural relations First Section: Prose Literature 1. Theology 2. Historians and Chroniclers 3. Geography 4. Philosophy 5. Rhetoric, Sophistry and Epistolography 6. Classical Studies 7. Scientific Specialties a. Law b. Medicine c. Mathematics and Astronomy (including Astrology and Fortune Telling) d. Zoology, Botany, Mineralogy and Alchemy e. Military Science Second Section: Poetic Literature 1. General Characteristics and Introduction 2. Church Poetry 3. Popular Poetry Third Section: Vernacular Greek Literature — Introduction 1. Discussion of terms 2. Historical Overview 3. Language and Meter 1 Translators’ Preface Karl Krumbacher was born on Sept. 23, 1856 in Kempten, Bavaria and died on Dec. 12, 1909 in Munich. He was educated in the classics at the universities of Leipzig and Munich and in 1897 became Professor of medieval and modern Greek at the University of Munich. Arguably the greatest Byzantinist of his generation, his contributions to the field were profound. He both founded the discipline’s leading international journal, the Byzantinische Zeitschrift, and authored its standard reference work, Die Geschichte der Byzantinischen Litteratur (1892; 2nd ed., 1897). Die Geschichte der Byzantinischen Litteratur, The History of Byzantine Literature, is a wealth of general and detailed information. General introductory chapters on particular genres are followed by shorter chapters on individual authors, and detailed bibliographies enrich its more than 1100 pages. It was the most comprehensive achievement of Byzantine scholarship and became a necessary addition to any reference collection. Its contents and bibliographies have now been updated by Hans Georg Beck’s Kirche und theologische Literatur im Byzantinischen Reich (Munich: Beck, 1959) and by Herbert Hunger’s Die hochsprachliche profane Literatur der Byzantiner (Munich: Beck, 1978). Die Geschichte der Byzantinischen Litteratur has never been translated into English (there is a modern Greek translation). We have translated only the introductory chapters and have not included the footnotes or bibliographies. The bold numbers throughout the text refer to the pagination of its second edition (Munich: Beck, 1897). We hope that these selections serve as an accessible introduction to both Byzantine literature and to the thought and work of Karl Krumbacher. David Jenkins David Bachrach 2 Introduction The Concept and General History of Byzantine Literature. [1] 1. In the literary as well as in the political consideration of history, it has become customary to date the Byzantine period between the years 527 and 1453, i.e., to begin with Justinian’s assumption of the throne (or even with his closing of the university at Athens in 529) and to end with the capture of Constantinople by the Turks. There is no controversy about the end point. The final destruction of the political, literary and cultural life particular to the Byzantines symbolized by the planting of the half-moon on the Hagia Sophia produced a historical moment as powerful and as definite as any in the history of humanity. There are, however, many problems concerning the prevailing view about the beginning of the Byzantine period. This view contradicts the facts and is without any historical foundation. The arbitrary decision to date the beginning of the period around the time of Justinian has significantly clouded the understanding of literary as well as other cultural developments. It is high time to prove and to establish definitively the untenability of this periodization. We must briefly consider not only the literary but also the political, ecclesiastical and cultural history of the later Roman Empire in order to reach a well-founded and lasting judgment. Rather than becoming mired in details, it is important to view the entire development in all areas of life from the first days of the Empire until the last of the Palaiologoi, and to do this from the loftiest standpoint, with a view free of the prejudice of old doctrines. After we have done that, the question, “Where is the origin of this age to be found?” cannot remain in doubt for long. It is the time when ancient paganism was officially replaced by the new world religion, when the nature of the State experienced a deep and [2] lasting transformation, when the Greek element in the Roman Empire began to grow to a politically powerful and exclusive ruling factor through the founding of a new capital city that lay in the Greek cultural sphere, and when fundamental and consequential changes were carried out in Greek language, literature and art. This was the beginning of the fourth century, or, if one demands an exact date, the year 324, when Constantine the Great ascended the Roman imperial throne as its sole ruler. We have placed our conclusion about the origin of the Byzantine period right at the start for the sake of clarity. Nevertheless, it is important to explain at least in general terms the basis for our conclusion since we have not employed any artistic effect and have forgone a well organized and persuasive presentation of the evidence. The greatest political difference between the Byzantine and Roman periods was the transfer of the center of gravity from the West to the East and the consequent gradual supersession of the Latin language by the Greek. The point of departure of this process, which determined the entire later history of the Roman Empire, lies undoubtedly in the founding of the new capital city, Constantinople, (326 A.D.) and in the definite partition of the Empire it into western and eastern halves (395 A.D.) that arose from it. This sealed the permanent separation of the Greek East from the Latin West and was also the fundamental reason for the estrangement that soon followed between the Greeks and the Latins. Over the course of centuries, this estrangement grew to become a deep-seated aversion resulting in open enmity in 3 innumerable political and ecclesiastical squabbles. The linguistic and cultural dualism had already existed before Constantine and Theodosius. However, it was only after the founding of New Rome and the partition of the Empire that it received its official confirmation. It was on this basis that the division could grow unhindered. The contrast was especially promoted and strengthen by the rapid growth of the new capital city, which conferred on the Greek or hellenized half of the Empire a political and geographical, and soon even a religious, social, literary and artistic center. The centralizing tendency and power of Constantinople was noticeable in everything. New Rome triumphed over Alexandria on account of the Council of Chalcedon in 451. The ruthless exclusivity of the new capital city expressed itself even in the insignificant area of chronology, when the older eras of Alexandria and Antioch were suppressed by that of Constantinople. The city on the Bosporos was the Paris of the Byzantine Empire — indeed, of the entire eastern world. The truthfulness of this claim is made clear by the countless panegyric speeches of Byzantine writers, who never shrank [3] from the boldest comparisons in order to describe the all encompassing greatness of the marvelous metropolis. It is still expressed in the modern Greek proverb, /Oloj( o ( ko/smoj dw/deka ki h ( Po/li dekape/nte (“The whole world twelve and the City fifteen”). However, the political collapse of the western half of the Empire was even more important for the growth and triumph of the Greek element than was the vibrancy of Constantinople. As a result of the events of the years 455 and 476, the power of the old Imperium Romanum became more and more concentrated in the eastern lands. It was here that for ages the Greek element had dominated in the broad mass of the people, in the society and in the church. While the entire political organism remained both externally and internally Roman, Greek could now take up the struggle for rule with entirely different means than before and with better prospects of success. Certainly, the Greeks considered themselves politically as Romans, and they maintained the name Romaii from the terrible period of Turkish rule until the present day as the living and most comprehensive denomination of the Greek people. By contrast, the occasional appearance of Graikoi/ has little historical significance, and the term /Ellhnej( , which was reintroduced artificially by the government and schools, has hardly any importance at all. The simple fact that even modern Greeks call themselves Romaii reminds us to judge carefully the significance of this name in the Middle Ages. There is no doubt that the original meaning of this name gradually disappeared from the consciousness of the people after the complete hellenization of the Eastern Empire. A Roman was increasingly understood to be a Greek speaking citizen of the Roman Empire, and finally simply a Greek. Although historians made a precise distinction between Romans and Greeks and clearly expressed it until the final days of the Empire (e.g. Kinnamos and Laonikos Chalkokondyles), the word Rwmai( oj= gradually lost its ethnographic and finally even its political significance among the broad masses of the people. That it came to this was a natural consequence of the great numeric superiority of the Greeks over the Romans in the Eastern Empire. Since the founding of New Rome, and even more since the partition of the Empire and the demise of its western half, the Greeks again felt themselves to be the lords of their own house and began immediately to hellenize the state in its head and members with their own forcefulness and energy.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Personalism and Bulgarian Identity Discourse Between the Two World Wars (A Preliminary Exploration)
    ISSN 2029–2236 (print) ISSN 2029–2244 (online) SOCIALINIŲ mokslų STUDIJOS SOCIETAL STUDIES 2012, 4(4), p. 1281–1298. PERSONALISM AND BULGARIAN IDENTITY DISCOURSE BETWEEN THE TWO WORLD WARS (A PRELIMINARY EXPLORATION) Jordan Ljuckanov Bulgarian Academy of Sciences, Institute of Literature Shipchenski Prohod blvd. 52, block 17, 1113 Sofia, Bulgaria Telephone (+359 2) 979 6341 E-mail: [email protected] Received on 5 May, 2012; accepted on 12 June, 2012 Abstract. In this paper I investigate the compatibility between personalist philosophy and the Bulgarian identity discourse between the two World Wars. Having outlined the variability and conceptual tensions (on “collective personality,” e.g.) within Russian and French personalism(s) of the 1910s-1940s, I delineate four prerequisites for emerging and adopting personalism in interwar Bulgaria: (1) the post-idealist crisis of identities and identifications; (2) the reception of foreign personalist (or close to such) philosophy; (3) the re- assessment of “home” (East-Christian) theological tradition and its philosophical implications; (4) the discovery of someone “other” needed worthy of being recognised as (collective) “Thee.” Postponing the exploration of the third prerequisite for a subsequent study, I conclude so far that within interwar Bulgarian secular thought only random juxtapositions between personalism and identity discourse can be expected, and I examine three such cases. Keywords: personalism, collective identity, Byzantium after Byzantium, morphology of history, conservative avant-garde, Bulgarian intellectual culture 1919–1944. Socialinių mokslų studijos/Societal Studies ISSN 2029–2236 (print), ISSN 2029–2244 (online) Mykolo Romerio universitetas, 2012 http://www.mruni.eu/lt/mokslo_darbai/SMS/ Mykolas Romeris University, 2012 http://www.mruni.eu/en/mokslo_darbai/SMS/ 1282 Jordan Ljuckanov.
    [Show full text]
  • Ancient Rome and Byzantium: the Birth of the Byzantine Empire
    Ancient Rome and Byzantium: The Birth of the Byzantine Empire Ancient Rome and Byzantium: The Birth of the Byzantine Empire by ReadWorks Constantinople, 15th century In 330 A.D., the Emperor Constantine moved the capital of the Roman Empire from Rome. He chose Byzantium, a city far east of Rome, as his new capital. He renamed the city Constantinople. In 476 A.D., the city of Rome was conquered. The western part of the Roman Empire was defeated. After that, only the eastern part of the empire was left. This was centered in Constantinople and became known as the Byzantine Empire. Latin and Greek were the two most important languages of the Byzantine Empire. Greek was spoken in daily life. Latin was used for religious ceremonies and government work. The Byzantine Empire's rulers made it a Christian empire. Christianity became the core of Byzantine life. Constantinople became the center of the Christian world. In 1453 A.D., the Byzantine Empire fell to the Turks. Today, Constantinople is called Istanbul, and it is the largest city in Turkey. ReadWorks.org · © 2012 ReadWorks®, Inc. All rights reserved. Ancient Rome and Byzantium: The Birth of the Byzantine Empire - Comprehension Questions Name: ___________________________________ Date: _______________ 1. According to the text, which of the following was an important language in the Byzantine Empire? A. Italian B. Greek C. Turkish D. English 2. What was the effect of the western part of the Roman Empire being defeated? A. Emperor Constantine moved the capital from Rome to Byzantium. B. Emperor Constantine renamed the city of Byzantium to Constantinople.
    [Show full text]
  • Byzantine Missionaries, Foreign Rulers, and Christian Narratives (Ca
    Conversion and Empire: Byzantine Missionaries, Foreign Rulers, and Christian Narratives (ca. 300-900) by Alexander Borislavov Angelov A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy (History) in The University of Michigan 2011 Doctoral Committee: Professor John V.A. Fine, Jr., Chair Professor Emeritus H. Don Cameron Professor Paul Christopher Johnson Professor Raymond H. Van Dam Associate Professor Diane Owen Hughes © Alexander Borislavov Angelov 2011 To my mother Irina with all my love and gratitude ii Acknowledgements To put in words deepest feelings of gratitude to so many people and for so many things is to reflect on various encounters and influences. In a sense, it is to sketch out a singular narrative but of many personal “conversions.” So now, being here, I am looking back, and it all seems so clear and obvious. But, it is the historian in me that realizes best the numerous situations, emotions, and dilemmas that brought me where I am. I feel so profoundly thankful for a journey that even I, obsessed with planning, could not have fully anticipated. In a final analysis, as my dissertation grew so did I, but neither could have become better without the presence of the people or the institutions that I feel so fortunate to be able to acknowledge here. At the University of Michigan, I first thank my mentor John Fine for his tremendous academic support over the years, for his friendship always present when most needed, and for best illustrating to me how true knowledge does in fact produce better humanity.
    [Show full text]
  • Archaic Eretria
    ARCHAIC ERETRIA This book presents for the first time a history of Eretria during the Archaic Era, the city’s most notable period of political importance. Keith Walker examines all the major elements of the city’s success. One of the key factors explored is Eretria’s role as a pioneer coloniser in both the Levant and the West— its early Aegean ‘island empire’ anticipates that of Athens by more than a century, and Eretrian shipping and trade was similarly widespread. We are shown how the strength of the navy conferred thalassocratic status on the city between 506 and 490 BC, and that the importance of its rowers (Eretria means ‘the rowing city’) probably explains the appearance of its democratic constitution. Walker dates this to the last decade of the sixth century; given the presence of Athenian political exiles there, this may well have provided a model for the later reforms of Kleisthenes in Athens. Eretria’s major, indeed dominant, role in the events of central Greece in the last half of the sixth century, and in the events of the Ionian Revolt to 490, is clearly demonstrated, and the tyranny of Diagoras (c. 538–509), perhaps the golden age of the city, is fully examined. Full documentation of literary, epigraphic and archaeological sources (most of which have previously been inaccessible to an English-speaking audience) is provided, creating a fascinating history and a valuable resource for the Greek historian. Keith Walker is a Research Associate in the Department of Classics, History and Religion at the University of New England, Armidale, Australia.
    [Show full text]
  • Bourbouhakis Curriculum Vitae
    Curriculum Vitae Emmanuel C. Bourbouhakis Assistant Professor Department of Classics Princeton University 141 East Pyne Princeton, NJ 08544 Tel: 609-258-3951 Email: [email protected] Current Position 2011- Assistant Professor, Department of Classics, Princeton University Previous Employment 2008-2010 DFG Teaching–Research Fellow, Department of History, Albert-Ludwigs Universität Freiburg 2007-2008 Lecturer, Department of the Classics, Harvard University Education 09/1999-10/2006 PhD in Classical and Byzantine Philology, Harvard University 09/1997-06/1999 MA in Classical Philology, University of Western Ontario 09/1989-06/1993 BA in History, McGill University; Liberal Arts College, Concordia University Ancient Languages Latin, Greek (classical & medieval) Modern Languages Greek (modern), English, French, German, Italian Awards, Honours, Fellowships 2010 Gerda Henkel Stiftung Fellowship 2008 Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft Forschungsstipendium (German National Research Foundation Fellowship) at the Albert-Ludwigs Universität Freiburg 2005 Harvard University Humanities Dissertation Fellowship 2004 Dumbarton Oaks Junior Fellowship 2003 DAAD Doctoral Fellowship at the Byzantinisch-Neugriechisches Institut, Freie Universität Berlin 2 2002 Canadian Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council Doctoral Grant Academic Service Princeton University 2011-2012 Search Committee, Byzantine Art and Archaeology 2012-2013 Forbes College Academic Advisor 2012-2013 Department of Classics Seniors Adviser 2012-2013 Department of Classics Undergraduate
    [Show full text]
  • Krumbacher's History of Byzantine Literature Geschichte Der
    318 THE CLASSICAL REVIEW. to Rome before 729 A.U.C. (25 B.C.) ; he was The chapters on the language and metre one of the first of the poets included by cannot be here summarized. It is enough Philip of Thessalonica in his Corona, and was to say that the author has shown much the friend and contemporary of Parthenius. insight and acumen in his observation and He was in all likelihood a tep.cher of Greek analyses, and that his task is indispensable and was perhaps the tutor of the children of to the student of the Greek Anthology, Octavia, as his fellow-countryman Potamon especially from the point of metre, and of (according to Westermann) became the contemporary historical references and al- teacher of Tiberius. lusions ; it is not without its value to the In a brief niantisa Variana the author student of Roman poetry, as well as in endeavours to controvert Mommsen's view pointing out many Latin turns of thought that in Ep. 33 (A.P. ix. 291) the defeat of and expression, as in giving us in a con- Varus is referred to; he claims that the venient form a collection of epigrams which reference is to the expedition of Germanicus without doubt the poets of the Augustan in 769 A.U.C. (16 A.D.). Likewise in Ep. 24 age were wont to con over and aimed to (A.P. vii. 741) he cannot, with Mommsen, reproduce in Latin form. see a necessary reference to the defeat of J. H. WEIGHT. Varus. KRUMBACHER'S HISTORY OF BYZANTINE LITERATURE.
    [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 Function of Christian Letters of Recommendation; from Paul to Julian
    THE FUNCTION OF CHRISTIAN LETTERS OF RECOMMENDATION; FROM PAUL TO JULIAN Jason File A thesis submitted to the faculty of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts in t he Department of Religious Studies. Chapel Hill 2006 Approved by: Bart Ehrman Zlatko Plese Peter Kaufmann ABSTRACT THE FUNCTION OF CHRISTIAN LETTERS OF RECOMMENDATION; FROM PAUL TO JULIAN (Under the Direction of Bart D. Ehrman) This paper explores the function of Christian letters of recommendation, from the time of Paul (c. 50 CE) to the time of Emperor Julian (c. 350 CE). The first chapter provides background information concerning the function of letters of recommendation generally in antiquity. It is argued that the primary functions of such letters in Greco -Roman society was to provide hospitality for the traveler, and to testify to their trustworthiness. Where pagans used such letters for business or filial purposes, the early Chri stian church used them to build religious networks across the wide span of the Mediterranean world and the Levant. The second chapter of the thesis takes up the subject of hospitality practices in the Christian mission, and the third explores the use of letters of recommendation in the writings of the apostle Paul. Letters of recommendation were extremely important for the growth, spread and development of the Christian church. ii TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter I. INTRODUCTION…………………………………………………………….1 II. LETTER S OF RECOMMENDATION IN GRECO -ROMAN SOCIETY…...7 Overview of Letter -Writing in the Ancient Near East…………..………….…7 The Hellenistic Period and Letter -Writing Manuals…………...……………...9 The Form and Structure of the Letter of Recommendation………………….14 The Function of the Letter of Recommendation……………………………..19 Summary……………………………………………………………………..26 III.
    [Show full text]
  • Filip Ivanovic
    C u r r i c u l u m v i t a e FILIP IVANOVIC Address: Ivana Vujosevica 19, 81000 Podgorica, Montenegro Phone: +382 69 498 468 E-mail: [email protected] EDUCATION PhD (2010-2014) Department of Philosophy and Religious Studies, Norwegian University of Science and Technology MA (2007-2009, score 110/110 cum laude) Department of Philosophy, University of Bologna BA (2004-2007, score 110/110) Department of Philosophy, University of Bologna APPOINTMENTS 2017-2018 Onassis International Fellow, Norwegian Institute at Athens 2016–2017 Postdoctoral Research Fellow, Department of Greek Studies, University of Leuven 2015-2016 Postdoctoral Research Fellow, The Polonsky Academy for Advanced Studies, The Van Leer Institute – Jerusalem 2015-2016 Visiting Researcher, Hebrew University of Jerusalem 2010-2014 Research Fellow, Department of Philosophy and Religious Studies, Norwegian University of Science and Technology – Trondheim 2010 Fellow, Centre for the Study of Antiquity and Christianity, University of Aarhus LANGUAGES Serbian (native), English (fluent), Italian (fluent), French (fluent), Spanish (reading and good communication skills), Norwegian (basic reading skills), Ancient/Byzantine Greek (reading and research skills), Modern Greek (reading and basic conversation skills) SCHOLARSHIPS AND FELLOWSHIPS 2017-2018 International Postdoctoral Fellowship, Onassis Foundation, Athens 2016–2017 Postdoctoral Research Fellowship, University of Leuven 2015-2016 Polonsky Postdoctoral Research Fellowship, The Van Leer Institute, Jerusalem 2012-2013
    [Show full text]
  • The Making of Byzantinism Dimiter G. Angelov Harvard University the Foundations of Byzantine Studies Were Laid During the Age Of
    The Making of Byzantinism Dimiter G. Angelov Harvard University The foundations of Byzantine studies were laid during the Age of Absolutism in France, when Byzantium became a fashionable academic subject because of its perceived similarities with the French monarchy. The Enlightenment, in turn, brought about an almost universal condemnation of Byzantine civilization which was thought to embody exactly what the Age of Reason opposed: an authoritarian political system; a culture permeated by blind religious belief; and a society fervently hostile to any notion of reform. While modern Byzantine scholarship has progressed in the study of the complexities and continuous transformation of Byzantine institutions, economy and culture, there still exist a simplistic and negative assessment of Byzantine civilization and of the Byzantine legacy in southeastern Europe by historians, political scientists and publicists. I use the term Byzantinism to designate a representation of Byzantine civilization as an antipode and an imperfect reflection of Western historical experiences and values. In my view, Byzantinism shares common characteristics with the Balkanist discourse as defined by Maria Todorova, since both Byzantinism and Balkanism try to present a variation within the construct of European civilization and to portray the other “within.” Byzantinism is both a specific discourse about Byzantium with a long history stretching back to the Middle Ages and a reductionist approach which essentializes Byzantium through the application of analytical categories derived, explicitly or indirectly, from Western historical experience. Two main elements of Byzantinism are the notions of caesaropapism and of the unlimited absolutism of the Byzantine emperor. The concept of caesaropapism is based on the subordinate position of the Byzantine patriarch, which differs from the relative independence of the papacy from political authority.
    [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]