University of Birmingham the Climate and Environment Of
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Cappadocia and Cappadocians in the Hellenistic, Roman and Early
Dokuz Eylül University – DEU The Research Center for the Archaeology of Western Anatolia – EKVAM Colloquia Anatolica et Aegaea Congressus internationales Smyrnenses X Cappadocia and Cappadocians in the Hellenistic, Roman and Early Byzantine periods An international video conference on the southeastern part of central Anatolia in classical antiquity May 14-15, 2020 / Izmir, Turkey Edited by Ergün Laflı Izmir 2020 Last update: 04/05/2020. 1 Cappadocia and Cappadocians in the Hellenistic, Roman and Early Byzantine periods. Papers presented at the international video conference on the southeastern part of central Anatolia in classical antiquity, May 14-15, 2020 / Izmir, Turkey, Colloquia Anatolica et Aegaea – Acta congressus communis omnium gentium Smyrnae. Copyright © 2020 Ergün Laflı (editor) All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without the prior written permission from the editor. ISBN: 978-605-031-211-9. Page setting: Ergün Laflı (Izmir). Text corrections and revisions: Hugo Thoen (Deinze / Ghent). Papers, presented at the international video conference, entitled “Cappadocia and Cappadocians in the Hellenistic, Roman and Early Byzantine periods. An international video conference on the southeastern part of central Anatolia in classical antiquity” in May 14–15, 2020 in Izmir, Turkey. 36 papers with 61 pages and numerous colourful figures. All papers and key words are in English. 21 x 29,7 cm; paperback; 40 gr. quality paper. Frontispiece. A Roman stele with two portraits in the Museum of Kırşehir; accession nos. A.5.1.95a-b (photograph by E. -
“A Translation and Historical Commentary of Book One and Book Two of the Historia of Geōrgios Pachymerēs” 2004
“A Translation and Historical Commentary of Book One and Book Two of the Historia of Geōrgios Pachymerēs” Nathan John Cassidy, BA(Hons) (Canterbury) This thesis is presented for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy of the University of Western Australia. School of Humanities Classics and Ancient History 2004 ii iii Abstract A summary of what a historical commentary should aim to do is provided by Gomme and Walbank in the introductions to their famous and magisterial commentaries on Thoukydidēs and Polybios. From Gomme: A historical commentary on an historian must necessarily derive from two sources, a proper understanding of his own words, and what we can learn from other authorities . To see what gaps there are in his narrative [and to] examine the means of filling these gaps. (A. Gomme A Historical Commentary on Thucydides vol. 1 (London, 1959) 1) And from Walbank: I have tried to give full references to other relevant ancient authorities, and where the text raises problems, to define these, even if they could not always be solved. Primarily my concern has been with whatever might help elucidate what Polybius thought and said, and only secondarily with the language in which he said it, and the question whether others subsequently said something identical or similar. (F. Walbank A Historical Commentary on Polybius vol. 1 (London, 1957) vii) Both scholars go on to stress the need for the commentator to stick with the points raised by the text and to avoid the temptation to turn the commentary into a rival narrative. These are the principles which I have endeavoured to follow in my Historical Commentary on Books One and Two of Pachymerēs’ Historia. -
THE IMPERIAL QUARTER to a Major Extent, the Latin Emperors Modelled
CHAPTER THREE THE IMPERIAL QUARTER To a major extent, the Latin emperors modelled their emperorship ideologically on the Byzantine example, while at the same time signifi- cant Western influences were also present. But how did they actually develop the concrete administrative organization of their empire? The constitutional pact of March 1204 established the contours within which this imperial administration was to be constructed. The starting point of the convention meant a drastic change with regard to Byzantine administrative principles. A fundamental aspect was the feudalization and the theoretical division of the Byzantine Empire into three large regions. One-quarter of the territory was allotted directly to the Latin Emperor. Three-eights were allotted to the non-Venetian and three- eights to the Venetian component of the crusading army. Both regions were to be feudally dependent upon the emperor. In this chapter we examine administrative practice in the imperial quarter. The Location of the Imperial Quarter The imperial domain encompassed five-eighths of the capital Cons- tantinople: the imperial quarter plus the non-Venetian crusaders’ sec- tion. It is true that the March 1204 agreement allotted only the Great Palace—designated as the Boukoleon palace—and the Blacherna pal- ace to the emperor, which implied that the rest of the city should have been divided up according to the established distribution formula, but in practice there is not a single indication to be found that part of the city (three-eighths) was to be allotted to the non-Venetian crusaders in the form of a separate enclave with administrative autonomy from the imperial quarter.1 Apparently, the definitive distribution agree- ment stipulated that five-eighths of Constantinople was to fall to the emperor or, de facto, this was the situation there.2 1 Prevenier, De oorkonden, II, no 267. -
A List of D1ta11kta George Huxley
A List of "aplekta" [Greek] Huxley, George Greek, Roman and Byzantine Studies; Spring 1975; 16, 1; ProQuest pg. 87 A List of d1tA11Kta George Huxley HE ONLY complete manuscript of the De Ceremoniis of Con Tstantine Porphyrogenitus, the Lipsiensis of saec. XII,1 in dudes, ff.l-21 recto, three texts which do not belong to the ceremonial treatise, although Reiske oddly entitled them Appendix ad librum primum. 2 All three texts are closely related in subject matter. The first is {m60enc TWV {Jaet>..tKWV Tafet8lwv Kat {nrop.VTJCLC Twv a1T>..orJKTWV (pp.444-45 ed. Bonn). The second is bca 8et 1Tapacf>v>..&TTELV {JaoA.lwc p.l>..A.ovToc TafEtSevew (pp.445-54). The third, &a Set ylvecOat, TOV p.ey&>..ov Kat vt/J'fJ>I.Ov flact>..lwc TWV •pw/Latwv iJ-tAAoVTOC q,occaTEVCat (pp.455-508), is a treatise dedicated to Romanos, the emperor's son. The three texts together form material assembled for a treatise, which Bury entitled '17'Ept Twv {JactAtKwv TafetSlwv; he suggested that the first and second sections had been prepared for incorporation in the third. They were, however, not incorporated, but, Bury further suggested, the redactor who is responsible for the form in which the De Ceremoniis has come down had found all three pieces in physical juxtaposition.3 Here I am concerned only with the text of the first of the three pieces, the list of a'1TATJKTa (a'1TAtKTa< applicatus), 'etapes' or 'stations', at which the emperor halts on his way through Asia Minor. Since the • list provides valuable evidence for East Roman military organisation in Asia Minor, it is important that historical conclusions should not be drawn from a defective text. -
Authority and Control in the Interior of Asia Minor, Seventh–Ninth Centuries
chapter 4 Authority and Control in the Interior of Asia Minor, Seventh–Ninth Centuries James Howard-Johnston 1 Asia Minor and the Onset of the War for Survival: Cities, Villages and Fortresses Byzantium cannot be demarcated clearly from its greater, antecedent, imperial self. The name is a term of art, used to pick out the most Roman of the Roman successor states. Continuity being so marked in terms of constitution, institu- tions (notably those which sustained a traditional fiscal prowess), infrastruc- ture and, not least, culture and religion, the east Roman empire simply shades into a reduced but still ideologically potent early medieval state. But change was forced upon it from without, by successive defeats at the hands of Mus- lims, by successive losses of territory to the Muslim umma. At the beginning of the eighth century, the authority of east Roman emperors was confined to a well-defended but exposed capital city, enclaves in the far west (Sicily, south- ern Italy and the exarchate of Ravenna) and north-east (part of the Crimea and the western Caucasus), tracts in the western, southern and south-eastern Balkans (often under no more than nominal Roman control), the islands of the Aegean, and one substantial, defensible land-mass, Asia Minor. Asia Minor became the heartland of the rump-empire from the 640s, its most important resource-base, the great eastern bulwark of Constantinople. Explanations for the extraordinary resilience shown by Byzantium in its 200-year-long battle for survival and the success ultimately achieved have to be sought as much in the evolving structures, social, economic, administrative, of Asia Minor as in poli- cies formulated at the centre and the ideology which underpinned the will to fight on.1 1 This paper represents views developed over many years of reading and teaching. -
The Emperor Michael III and the Battle of Bishop's Meadow (A.D. 863) Huxley, George Greek, Roman and Byzantine Studies; Winter 1975; 16, 4; Proquest Pg
The Emperor Michael III and the Battle of Bishop's Meadow (A.D. 863) Huxley, George Greek, Roman and Byzantine Studies; Winter 1975; 16, 4; ProQuest pg. 443 The Emperor Michael III and the Battle of Bishop's Meadow (A.D. 863) George Huxley HE FOUR BOOKS of Genesios deal with Byzantine history from T the accession of Leo the Armenian to the death of Basil I. In the fourth book Genesios includes an account of the defeat by Petronas, uncle of the emperor Michael III, of the redoubtable cOmar cUbaid Allah al AqtaC of Melitene.1 According to the historian, cOmar (" Af'EP, C Amr) invaded the Armeniak theme and advanced as far as the coast at Amisos where, because he could progress no further, he ordered the sea to be beaten with rods (Genesios here com pares the behaviour of Xerxes at the Hellespont). The emperor, being dismayed at the number of prisoners taken by cOmar, appointed Petronas to command the tagma of the Schools with orders to attack the enemy. When news of the coming attack reached cOmar, his subordinates urged him to retreat to his own territory and to fight only if the Byzantine forces overtook them; but the emir, declaring that he was no coward, decided to advance towards Petro nas and his army. The opposed forces drew close together in the Abisian district on the borders of the Paphlagonian and Armeniak themes, with a mountain between them, at a place called Porson (ll6pcwv). Both sides tried to occupy the mountain, and in the ensuing battle COmar was killed. -
Byzantina Symmeikta
View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by National Documentation Centre - EKT journals Byzantina Symmeikta Vol. 10, 1996 The Decline of the Opsikian Domesticates and the Rise of the Domesticate of the Scholae LOUNGHIS T.K. IBE https://doi.org/10.12681/byzsym.804 Copyright © 2014 T.K. LOUNGHIS To cite this article: LOUNGHIS, T. (1996). The Decline of the Opsikian Domesticates and the Rise of the Domesticate of the Scholae. Byzantina Symmeikta, 10, 27-36. doi:https://doi.org/10.12681/byzsym.804 http://epublishing.ekt.gr | e-Publisher: EKT | Downloaded at 24/12/2020 03:26:45 | T. C. LOUNGHIS THE DECLINE Ol THE OPSIKIAN DOMESTICATES AND THE RISE OF THE DOMESTICATE OF THE SCHOI AE In this brief note I intend to put forward the hypothesis that the tate during the so-called 'Dark Ages' ot the Opsikian army -'guarded b> God'- divided impressions in the mind of subsequent generations1, but also initiated a number of crucial changes that were to regenerate Byzantine militar) institutions as early as m the second half of the eighth century At some stage not very long after the crushing of the Opsikian- supported orthodox emperor Artavasdos2 and, more evidently, immediateh following the mutiny of 7661 described in contused and horrified tones b\ 1 Literature on the Opsikion and its sub divisions Ju A KLL\KOVSKY Kvoprosuo femach Vizantijskoj imperii, Izbornik Kicvsknjposviascennyj, Τ D Flounskomu Kiev 1904, 82-118 (= IDEM Istonja Vizantu III 602-717, Kiev 1915 Exkurs IV 399-418 On the subdivision of -
ACT of the SENATE to REFORM the Imperial Land Claims
AN ACT OF THE SENATE TO REFORM the Imperial land claims Be it enacted by H IS IMPERIAL MAJESTY THE FAITHFUL PAVLOVIAN EMPEROR AND AUTOCRAT OF THE ROMANS AND ALL RUS’, Pius Felix, Magnus et Semper Augustus, Defender of the Faith, Turtle and Elephants, in the Eighth year of His Imperium and in the first year of the consulate of Duchissa Helena Alexandra filia Kirsanova and Dominus Iohannes Gavrijil filius Brienorum Rex, in the year Seven thousand Five hundred and twenty nine after the creation of Adam, by and with the advice of all Senators, and by the authority of the same, as follows: I. Article V of the Basic Law of the Empire of Pavlov is to be amended to: A. Pavlov is located on ------------------------ (Aleksandropol), on ------------------------ (Theodosia), on ------------------------ (Mariupol), on ------------------------ (Posonium), on ------------------------ (Chalcedon) on ------------------------ (Osokorky), on ------------------------ (Moskva), on ------------------------ (Augusta Iupitera) on ------------------------ (Hrejmanna), on ------------------------ (Triconia), on ------------------------ (Trebizond), on ------------------------ (Pompeiopolis), ------------------------ (Seleucia), ------------------------ (Famagusta), ------------------------ (Laranda), on ------------------------ (Daljam), on ------------------------ (Nov Asenovgrad) on ------------------------ (Chersonesus), on ------------------------ (Sušice), on ------------------------ (Olvija), on ------------------------ (Villa Cassa) on -
Byzantine Names for SCA Personae
1 A Short (and rough) Guide to Byzantine Names for SCA personae This is a listing of names that may be useful for constructing Byzantine persona. Having said that, please note that the term „Byzantine‟ is one that was not used in the time of the Empire. They referred to themselves as Romans. Please also note that this is compiled by a non-historian and non-linguist. When errors are detected, please let me know so that I can correct them. Additional material is always welcomed. It is a work in progress and will be added to as I have time to research more books. This is the second major revision and the number of errors picked up is legion. If you have an earlier copy throw it away now. Some names of barbarians who became citizens are included. Names from „client states‟ such as Serbia and Bosnia, as well as adversaries, can be found in my other article called Names for other Eastern Cultures. In itself it is not sufficient documentation for heraldic submission, but it will give you ideas and tell you where to start looking. The use of (?) means that either I have nothing that gives me an idea, or that I am not sure of what I have. If there are alternatives given of „c‟, „x‟ and „k‟ modern scholarship prefers the „k‟. „K‟ is closer to the original in both spelling and pronunciation. Baron, OP, Strategos tous notious okeanous, known to the Latins as Hrolf Current update 12/08/2011 Family Names ............................................................. 2 Male First Names ....................................................... -
Map 87 Pontus-Phasis Compiled by David Braund and T
Map 87 Pontus-Phasis Compiled by David Braund and T. Sinclair (Turkey), 1997 with the assistance of Diane Braund Introduction Pontus The land of Pontus has two main parts, both of which belonged to the Mithridatic kingdom of Pontus in the Hellenistic period. The first is the main ridge of the Pontic mountains and the steep descent to the shore. The lower slopes are thickly wooded, and the shore districts have a humid and rainy climate. In the main Pontic ridge a gap occurs in the hinterland of Amisus (modern Samsun), after which the mountain chain continues at a lower height and with less abrupt slopes (Strabo’s term Paryadres seems to denote the higher part of the chain). As far east as Rhizaion (Rize) Greek settlements along the coast have existed since the sixth century B.C., and in the case of Sinope the seventh. To the south, the Pontic chain is bordered by Armenia Minor, a part of Armenia itself (Late Antique Sper, probably the Syspiritis of the classical authors), and what was to become the Georgian mountainous district of Tao, drained by the R. Glaukos (Oltu Çay) and the Tortum Çay. The district of Chaldia, the Gümüşhane basin, is difficult to classify, particularly in classical times, as there is no evidence that it belonged either to Pontus (in a geographical or administrative sense), to Armenia Minor, or to Armenia itself. The Roman empire made no effort to control the interior of Chaldia until the reign of Justinian. The second part of Pontus is the series of fertile inland plains, joined by relatively low chains of hills, in the river systems of the Iris (Kızıl Irmak) and the lower Halys (Yeşil Irmak). -
Ashvath Asia Asia Minor
1005 Asia Minor 1006 through the 3rd/2nd centuries BCE. “Ashur,” in a kingdom, the setting of the mountains of Ararat number of late biblical texts, stands for “Syria” where Noah’s ark supposedly lay (Gen 8 : 4). Ionian (e.g., Isa 11 : 11–16; 19 : 23–25; 27 : 13; Mic 7 : 12; colonies appear in the P source’s Table of Nations Zech 10 : 10–11; Ps 83 : 8), and a Minaean text from (Gen 10 : 2–5), the sole Hebrew reference to the the 3rd century BCE has Asur in the same sense. Greeks before the coming of Alexander. Javan (LXX Ιων α) and Lud (LXX Λυδ α) are among the future Bibliography: ■ D. Edelman, “The ‘Ashurites’ of Eshbaal’s State (2 Sam. 2,9),” PEQ 117 (1985) 85–91. ■ E. A. Knauf, witnesses to God’s glory (Isa 66 : 19). Javan came to “Saul, David and the Philistines,” BN 109 (2001) 15–18. mean the whole Aegean world and its king, Alexan- ■ F. V. Winnett, “The Arabian Genealogies in the Book of der (Dan 8 : 21; 10 : 20; 11 : 2). The Septuagint Genesis,”inTranslating & Understanding the Old Testament, makes Asia Minor more prominent than in the He- FS H. G.May (eds. H. T. Frank/W. L. Reed; Nashville, Tenn. brew Bible: Cappadocia (Amos 9 : 7; HB Caphtor); 1970) 171–96. Rhodians (Ezek 27 : 15; HB Dedanites); Cilicia (Jdt Ernst Axel Knauf 1 : 12; 2 : 21–25); “crown of Asia” (1 Macc 11 : 13– 14; 12 : 39; 13 : 32). In the New Testament, Acts 21 : 39 presents Ashvath Paul as Asian, a citizen of Tarsus, Cilicia, who trav- Ashvath (MT Asˇwa¯ t; LXX Ασιθ) only appears in els through much of Asia Minor as an apostle. -
Settlements and Necropoleis of the Black Sea and Its Hinterland in Antiquity
Settlements and Necropoleis of the Black Sea and its Hinterland in Antiquity Select papers from the third international conference ‘The Black Sea in Antiquity and Tekkeköy: An Ancient Settlement on the Southern Black Sea Coast’, 27-29 October 2017, Tekkeköy, Samsun edited by Gocha R. Tsetskhladze and Sümer Atasoy with the collaboration of Akın Temür and Davut Yiğitpaşa Archaeopress Archaeology Archaeopress Publishing Ltd Summertown Pavilion 18-24 Middle Way Summertown Oxford OX2 7LG www.archaeopress.com ISBN 978-1-78969-206-8 ISBN 978-1-78969-207-5 (e-Pdf) © Authors and Archaeopress 2019 Cover: Sebastopolis, Roman baths. All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying or otherwise, without the prior written permission of the copyright owners. Printed in England by Oxuniprint, Oxford This book is available direct from Archaeopress or from our website www.archaeopress.com Contents Preface ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������ iii List of Figures and Tables ���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� iv Once again about the Establishment Date of Some Greek Colonies around the Black Sea ������������������������������������1 Gocha R� Tsetskhladze The Black Sea on the Tabula Peutingeriana �������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������42