Comments for Finding History http://larsbrownworth.com/blog by Lars Brownworth Sat, 21 Apr 2012 03:06:11 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2 Comment on What language did the Normans of Sicily speak? by Mediterranean History http://larsbrownworth.com/blog/2012/04/21/what-language-did-the-normans-of-sicily-speak/comment-page-1/#comment-6030 Mediterranean History Sat, 21 Apr 2012 03:06:11 +0000 http://larsbrownworth.com/blog/?p=686#comment-6030 [...] What language did the Normans of Sicily speak? [...] [...] What language did the Normans of Sicily speak? [...]

]]> Comment on What was the point of the Byzantine Senate? by Mark http://larsbrownworth.com/blog/2010/11/03/what-was-the-point-of-the-byzantine-senate/comment-page-1/#comment-4885 Mark Sat, 10 Mar 2012 13:43:29 +0000 http://larsbrownworth.com/blog/?p=286#comment-4885 I also wanted to ask whether the Trebizond emperors had established a rival Senate to that of Constantinople as Quintus Sertorius had done during the republican era? I also wanted to ask whether the Trebizond emperors had established a rival Senate to that of Constantinople as Quintus Sertorius had done during the republican era?

]]> Comment on What was the point of the Byzantine Senate? by Mark http://larsbrownworth.com/blog/2010/11/03/what-was-the-point-of-the-byzantine-senate/comment-page-1/#comment-4884 Mark Sat, 10 Mar 2012 13:37:51 +0000 http://larsbrownworth.com/blog/?p=286#comment-4884 I remember reading somewhere that Heraclius ended the free-bread hand-outs during the Byzantino-Persian wars of the early 7th century - if this is true, at what point was the policy re-instituted and then abolished? Also, I know Sir Steven Runciman is not the best source on these matters, but in his book on the fall of Constantinople he describes the Senate has having a role in persuading policy under the Basileus John VIII. Runciman of course does not cite this, which is why I am wondering if he completely fabricated it? (It is on pg. 44, second paragraph.) Any help would be much appreciated. I remember reading somewhere that Heraclius ended the free-bread hand-outs during the Byzantino-Persian wars of the early 7th century – if this is true, at what point was the policy re-instituted and then abolished?

Also, I know Sir Steven Runciman is not the best source on these matters, but in his book on the fall of Constantinople he describes the Senate has having a role in persuading policy under the Basileus John VIII. Runciman of course does not cite this, which is why I am wondering if he completely fabricated it? (It is on pg. 44, second paragraph.)

Any help would be much appreciated.

]]> Comment on Did the Byzantine Empire Fall in 1991? by cynthia curran http://larsbrownworth.com/blog/2012/01/31/did-the-byzantine-empire-fall-in-1991/comment-page-1/#comment-4486 cynthia curran Sat, 04 Feb 2012 05:04:55 +0000 http://larsbrownworth.com/blog/?p=664#comment-4486 Well, Putin himself does have some things in common with Byzantine emperors he poisoned his opposition which is certainly Byzantine of him to killed off arrivals or politcal threats. As mention above modern Russian society probably less in common with the Byzantine or even the Russian Empire and more in common with modern Republics. True,some Russian Emperors bahave similar to Byzantine ones as well. He's right probably the religion is what is the most common with all three societies. Orthdoxy with the help of the state is making it difficult for christian arrivals such as protestants and roman catholics but so does modern Greece which is more democratic and probably less corrupted compared to Russia, though the Russia people are more into piety than the Greeks. In orthodoxy being a leader that kills some enemies off is ok even Justinian is a Saint in the Orthodox Church though there are some that don't except because of heresy mention toward the end of his life in Evagrius Scholastius. Orthodox have a different prespective than Protestants and Catholics on tough leaders that kill off some enemies. Granted, some younger orthodox in Russia don't agree with this. Well, Putin himself does have some things in common with Byzantine emperors he poisoned his opposition which is certainly Byzantine of him to killed off arrivals or politcal threats. As mention above modern Russian society probably less in common with the Byzantine or even the Russian Empire and more in common with modern Republics. True,some Russian Emperors bahave similar to Byzantine ones as well. He’s right probably the religion is what is the most common with all three societies. Orthdoxy with the help of the state is making it difficult for christian arrivals such as protestants and roman catholics but so does modern Greece which is more democratic and probably less corrupted compared to Russia, though the Russia people are more into piety than the Greeks. In orthodoxy being a leader that kills some enemies off is ok even Justinian is a Saint in the Orthodox Church though there are some that don’t except because of heresy mention toward the end of his life in Evagrius Scholastius. Orthodox have a different prespective than Protestants and Catholics on tough leaders that kill off some enemies. Granted, some younger orthodox in Russia don’t agree with this.

]]> Comment on Did Byzantium persecute the Jews? by cynthia curran http://larsbrownworth.com/blog/2010/09/17/did-byzantium-persecute-the-jews/comment-page-1/#comment-4417 cynthia curran Mon, 30 Jan 2012 04:33:08 +0000 http://www.larsbrownworth.com/blog/?p=230#comment-4417 Actually, Justinian and Justin second crushed the Sarmartians. Justinian took syngogue property from the Sarmartians according to James Evans who has written several histories on Justinian this cause a revolt from the Sarmartians and Procopius probably exggerates but thousands might have perished during three revolts up to Justin Second. The Byzantine history usually gets off scott free but Justinian, Justin second and later Heraclius and then foreced conversation by Islam is why there is only about 700 Sarmartians. Some Byzzantine historians loved to blame the west on the Jews but the Sarmartians the other Jewish people were greatly reduced during the Byzantine period. Actually, Justinian and Justin second crushed the Sarmartians. Justinian took syngogue property from the Sarmartians according to James Evans who has written several histories on Justinian this cause a revolt from the Sarmartians and Procopius probably exggerates but thousands might have perished during three revolts up to Justin Second. The Byzantine history usually gets off scott free but Justinian, Justin second and later Heraclius and then foreced conversation by Islam is why there is only about 700 Sarmartians. Some Byzzantine historians loved to blame the west on the Jews but the Sarmartians the other Jewish people were greatly reduced during the Byzantine period.

]]> Comment on Was Islam the inspiration for Iconoclasm? by cynthia curran http://larsbrownworth.com/blog/2012/01/24/was-islam-the-inspiration-for-iconoclasm/comment-page-1/#comment-4407 cynthia curran Sat, 28 Jan 2012 17:06:14 +0000 http://larsbrownworth.com/blog/?p=658#comment-4407 The only thing I think against monphysites influencing the iconolastic were that in many monophysties churches there are icons. The only thing I think against monphysites influencing the iconolastic were that in many monophysties churches there are icons.

]]> Comment on Was Islam the inspiration for Iconoclasm? by cynthia curran http://larsbrownworth.com/blog/2012/01/24/was-islam-the-inspiration-for-iconoclasm/comment-page-1/#comment-4386 cynthia curran Fri, 27 Jan 2012 12:13:07 +0000 http://larsbrownworth.com/blog/?p=658#comment-4386 A lot of historians do seem to favor contact with islam as a reason for Ionoclasm. But it also might be a frontrunner to Protestantism in the west later. During the reformation there was also the destrucation of icons. In the east, the iconoclastic movement was defeated, not so in the west. Probably another difference from eastern and western christians. A lot of western christians today don't vernerate objects like the Virgin's Belt is being vererate in Russsia currently. A lot of historians do seem to favor contact with islam as a reason for Ionoclasm. But it also might be a frontrunner to Protestantism in the west later. During the reformation there was also the destrucation of icons. In the east, the iconoclastic movement was defeated, not so in the west. Probably another difference from eastern and western christians. A lot of western christians today don’t vernerate objects like the Virgin’s Belt is being vererate in Russsia currently.

]]> Comment on How did the Byzantine army change over 1000 years? by Byzantine legions | Aiacompany http://larsbrownworth.com/blog/2010/05/04/how-did-the-byzantine-army-change-over-1000-years/comment-page-1/#comment-4171 Byzantine legions | Aiacompany Tue, 10 Jan 2012 07:14:49 +0000 http://www.larsbrownworth.com/blog/?p=94#comment-4171 [...] Finding History » How did the Byzantine army change over 1000 …May 4, 2010 … Listener Detlef asked if I could give a brief overview of the Byzantine … Imperial Rome depended mostly on massive, infantry-heavy legions to … [...] [...] Finding History » How did the Byzantine army change over 1000 …May 4, 2010 … Listener Detlef asked if I could give a brief overview of the Byzantine … Imperial Rome depended mostly on massive, infantry-heavy legions to … [...]

]]> Comment on Are there modern Byzantines? by Theo http://larsbrownworth.com/blog/2011/08/05/are-there-modern-byzantines/comment-page-1/#comment-4014 Theo Mon, 02 Jan 2012 01:39:47 +0000 http://larsbrownworth.com/blog/?p=612#comment-4014 And Lars, Good job! Happy new year! And Lars, Good job! Happy new year!

]]> Comment on Are there modern Byzantines? by Theo http://larsbrownworth.com/blog/2011/08/05/are-there-modern-byzantines/comment-page-1/#comment-4012 Theo Mon, 02 Jan 2012 01:18:46 +0000 http://larsbrownworth.com/blog/?p=612#comment-4012 Hi guys I'm Greek and I just wanted to comment that I see more ancient Greek sites than churches being neglected! If you go to Argos or Mycaenes you'll see what I mean! The churches are well preserved by the Church. And I do agree we have much more in common with the Byzantines, they are also much more close (timewise) to modern Greeks than ancient Greeks. The reason the modern Greek state has a tendency to prefer the ancient Greeks is a complicated one. When Constantine split the empire between Rome and Constantinople, he did it with the intention to facilitate the state affairs by have two control zones. Gradually the 2 new halfs got separated even further, as the latin speakers were predominantly living in the West and the Greek speakers in the East. The Western and Eastern Roman Empires gradually developed slightly different characters and became a bit 'cold' between them for political reasons. The division became so immense that during the Crusades they attacked and sacked Constantinople. The city was so robbed that it never recovered. One of the modern Popes actually apologised on behalf of the Catholic Church for that attack to the Greek Patriarch some years ago! (funny!) When the Turks were finally almost outside the city walls, the Byzantines were arguing if they should accept help from the West or accept their defeat by the Turks. The Pope's message was that he would help only if the Greek Church would recognize him as the ultimate Head of Christendom. In the end they accepted but it was too late and the Pope didnt seem to be so bothered too. After the Fall, the Greek Patriarch told the Pope to f... o.. (not with these words I'm sure lol) and the Greek Church stayed autonomus. The Byzantines (as the modern Greeks did for the Byzantines) didnt like to be associated with the ancient Greeks as they were considering them as pagan and therefore they preferred the title Romans (ΡΩΜΙΟΙ) for themselves as it was a legitimate Christian term. Some Byzantine churches in Greece have ancient marble stones as part of their building material, and some times placed in a very symbolic way i.e. upside down. A similar thing happened after the Greek revolution against the Ottoman Empire. During that period there was a crazy ancient Greek fashion in the high circles of Europe. They were in love with everything ancient Greek so actually timing was great for the Greek scholars to take advantage of it, and ask help from the West As well as encouraging the rest of the Greeks who for 400 years were under foreign occupation, they needed to reinforce their Ego and identity. The problem also was that only recently researchers are starting to realize how important the Byzantine culture was for the whole of European History, until a couple of decades ago it was considered a very ''dark'' culture! That coming from the ''broken glass'' between the West and East. need to go to sleep now! Goodnight! Hi guys I’m Greek and I just wanted to comment that I see more ancient Greek sites than churches being neglected! If you go to Argos or Mycaenes you’ll see what I mean! The churches are well preserved by the Church. And I do agree we have much more in common with the Byzantines, they are also much more close (timewise) to modern Greeks than ancient Greeks. The reason the modern Greek state has a tendency to prefer the ancient Greeks is a complicated one. When Constantine split the empire between Rome and Constantinople, he did it with the intention to facilitate the state affairs by have two control zones. Gradually the 2 new halfs got separated even further, as the latin speakers were predominantly living in the West and the Greek speakers in the East. The Western and Eastern Roman Empires gradually developed slightly different characters and became a bit ‘cold’ between them for political reasons. The division became so immense that during the Crusades they attacked and sacked Constantinople. The city was so robbed that it never recovered. One of the modern Popes actually apologised on behalf of the Catholic Church for that attack to the Greek Patriarch some years ago! (funny!) When the Turks were finally almost outside the city walls, the Byzantines were arguing if they should accept help from the West or accept their defeat by the Turks. The Pope’s message was that he would help only if the Greek Church would recognize him as the ultimate Head of Christendom. In the end they accepted but it was too late and the Pope didnt seem to be so bothered too. After the Fall, the Greek Patriarch told the Pope to f… o.. (not with these words I’m sure lol) and the Greek Church stayed autonomus.
The Byzantines (as the modern Greeks did for the Byzantines) didnt like to be associated with the ancient Greeks as they were considering them as pagan and therefore they preferred the title Romans (ΡΩΜΙΟΙ) for themselves as it was a legitimate Christian term. Some Byzantine churches in Greece have ancient marble stones as part of their building material, and some times placed in a very symbolic way i.e. upside down. A similar thing happened after the Greek revolution against the Ottoman Empire. During that period there was a crazy ancient Greek fashion in the high circles of Europe. They were in love with everything ancient Greek so actually timing was great for the Greek scholars to take advantage of it, and ask help from the West As well as encouraging the rest of the Greeks who for 400 years were under foreign occupation, they needed to reinforce their Ego and identity. The problem also was that only recently researchers are starting to realize how important the Byzantine culture was for the whole of European History, until a couple of decades ago it was considered a very ”dark” culture! That coming from the ”broken glass” between the West and East. need to go to sleep now! Goodnight!

]]>