Yes, today we appreciate the Byzantines as “bulwarks of Europe”, but from a medieval perspective the Byzantines had failed at protecting Christendom and were now essentially a state composed entirely of Greeks and Hellenized “Greek” Anatolians (another story). Southern Italy at this point was still largely Greek. The Byzantines no longer even used Latin for administrative purposes, unlike the Franks.
You could have added even more scare quotes
--viz;
""""Greeks"""""" and ""Hellenized"" “""""Greek”"""" Anatolians (another story). Southern Italy at this point was still largely ""Greek""
'Anyways, another annoyance I have with Byzantboos is the endless bitching and moaning about the Crusades.'
For a based corrective view of relations between Alexios and 1st Crusaders you could read keyed Alfred Duggan's Count Bohemond and Knight with Armour. They're historical fiction but read like contemporary accounts--mahvellous, as we used to say down at the Savoy. The gay Runciman (otherwise a good writer) has a lot to answer for in this connexion. I think he liked all the imperial purple just a little too much if you take my meaning.
I respek the Byzantines, it was a great civilisation in its own right and did much good (even with all the bad) over its 1100 years or so, but I agree it was not Roman except in limited formal ways. The continuity argument is laughable.
edit: for account of small glories of western fiefdoms following 4th Crusade Duggan's Lord Geoffrey's Fancy is an entertaining counter to Runciman's Frank-hating book on the Morea.
Yeah, I don't mean to shart on the Byzantines too much. They were sometimes kewl. But so many Byzantboos are in reality Catholic Western Europeans from Nebraska and it just ticks me off watching them side with the Byzantines and slandering their own forefathers all the time.
Yes Orthodox larpers of the western hemisphere can be most irritating.
On the upside though I find that the Greeks' Byzantium worship is one of the few forms of Balkan ethnonarcissism that isn't pathetic or annoying (when they don't overdo it and get all western schizmatic WHITEY to blayme for our 500 YEARZ A SLAVERAY to the TOURKOS).
Trve trve. Many Balkaners just whine and whine and whine about the Turks. Greeks at least have an epic history of pwning everyone else to bring up, and how the Turks were still living in huts on the shteppe while the Greeks ruled the whole world. And how the Greeks bested the Bulgars and whatnot
I think the reason byzantium is liked by catholics is because it's seen as a trad monarchist roman empire, and the fact it was destroyed by demon-worshipping turks. Also the sack of constantinople & the purge of catholics isn't taught much, and orthos make up a very small amount of population. Catholics, including me, see the orthodox aesthetics and some of them making speeches and think they're just they're slavic brothers (and to be fair a non-libtard Pope would be nice for a change!)
It’s kind of like Lord of the Rings. The relief of Gondor by Rohan is kind of like Tolkien’s wishful thinking about a hypothetical relief of Constantinople by the Latins. It was a chance for the Christian west to save the now largely defunct Christian Near East, and I think Catholics have kind of regretted it since.
As a Byzantineboo myself, I don’t think it’s ever claimed by anyone outside Reddit and its orbit that the Byzantines were *literally* Roman. To me, “Successor of Rome” has always been an honorific and more like handing off the torch than saying “we are exactly the same as Rome”. But, I disagree in downplaying the “Roman-ness” of the Byzantines, or saying that people like the Ostrogoths were more Roman. In my opinion there was state more Roman in that time than the Byzantines.
I look at them favorably not only because I’m an OrthoLarp, but for a while they were basically the only reason Europe itself wasn’t conquered. Among many other things
“Roman Emperor” is less about being the literal exact civilization that built the aqueducts and had the tortoise formation, etc. and more about being the preeminent ruler of the Christian world. The Emperor, in theory, is supposed to be the most powerful Christian leader in the world and the defender of Christendom’s interests. That’s what Russia is getting at with their Third Rome thing, for instance. They don’t literally think there’s a continuum between Russia and the Roman Empire, it’s that they view themselves as the natural leaders of the Orthodox world.
Yes, today we appreciate the Byzantines as “bulwarks of Europe”, but from a medieval perspective the Byzantines had failed at protecting Christendom and were now essentially a state composed entirely of Greeks and Hellenized “Greek” Anatolians (another story). Southern Italy at this point was still largely Greek. The Byzantines no longer even used Latin for administrative purposes, unlike the Franks.
You could have added even more scare quotes
--viz;
""""Greeks"""""" and ""Hellenized"" “""""Greek”"""" Anatolians (another story). Southern Italy at this point was still largely ""Greek""
'Anyways, another annoyance I have with Byzantboos is the endless bitching and moaning about the Crusades.'
For a based corrective view of relations between Alexios and 1st Crusaders you could read keyed Alfred Duggan's Count Bohemond and Knight with Armour. They're historical fiction but read like contemporary accounts--mahvellous, as we used to say down at the Savoy. The gay Runciman (otherwise a good writer) has a lot to answer for in this connexion. I think he liked all the imperial purple just a little too much if you take my meaning.
I respek the Byzantines, it was a great civilisation in its own right and did much good (even with all the bad) over its 1100 years or so, but I agree it was not Roman except in limited formal ways. The continuity argument is laughable.
edit: for account of small glories of western fiefdoms following 4th Crusade Duggan's Lord Geoffrey's Fancy is an entertaining counter to Runciman's Frank-hating book on the Morea.
Yeah, I don't mean to shart on the Byzantines too much. They were sometimes kewl. But so many Byzantboos are in reality Catholic Western Europeans from Nebraska and it just ticks me off watching them side with the Byzantines and slandering their own forefathers all the time.
Yes Orthodox larpers of the western hemisphere can be most irritating.
On the upside though I find that the Greeks' Byzantium worship is one of the few forms of Balkan ethnonarcissism that isn't pathetic or annoying (when they don't overdo it and get all western schizmatic WHITEY to blayme for our 500 YEARZ A SLAVERAY to the TOURKOS).
Trve trve. Many Balkaners just whine and whine and whine about the Turks. Greeks at least have an epic history of pwning everyone else to bring up, and how the Turks were still living in huts on the shteppe while the Greeks ruled the whole world. And how the Greeks bested the Bulgars and whatnot
I think the reason byzantium is liked by catholics is because it's seen as a trad monarchist roman empire, and the fact it was destroyed by demon-worshipping turks. Also the sack of constantinople & the purge of catholics isn't taught much, and orthos make up a very small amount of population. Catholics, including me, see the orthodox aesthetics and some of them making speeches and think they're just they're slavic brothers (and to be fair a non-libtard Pope would be nice for a change!)
It’s kind of like Lord of the Rings. The relief of Gondor by Rohan is kind of like Tolkien’s wishful thinking about a hypothetical relief of Constantinople by the Latins. It was a chance for the Christian west to save the now largely defunct Christian Near East, and I think Catholics have kind of regretted it since.
https://aidanmacmillan.substack.com/p/rome-was-my-home?utm_source=publication-search
"Now Rome is conquered by divers races:
Christians and Muslims with Jewish faces.
We look down on Her with tearful grimaces.
It was our lifeblood that gave Rome blessing.
It was our lifeblood that brought Her a living
through the long years of dreadful fighting.
We added to Her mythological tome
because Rome was our home."
OrthoDOGS...CATlics... Do yuo sqq novv? Joe Biden's dog bites marines, gets away with it... BIDEN IS JUST A PUPPET!
As a Byzantineboo myself, I don’t think it’s ever claimed by anyone outside Reddit and its orbit that the Byzantines were *literally* Roman. To me, “Successor of Rome” has always been an honorific and more like handing off the torch than saying “we are exactly the same as Rome”. But, I disagree in downplaying the “Roman-ness” of the Byzantines, or saying that people like the Ostrogoths were more Roman. In my opinion there was state more Roman in that time than the Byzantines.
I look at them favorably not only because I’m an OrthoLarp, but for a while they were basically the only reason Europe itself wasn’t conquered. Among many other things
“Roman Emperor” is less about being the literal exact civilization that built the aqueducts and had the tortoise formation, etc. and more about being the preeminent ruler of the Christian world. The Emperor, in theory, is supposed to be the most powerful Christian leader in the world and the defender of Christendom’s interests. That’s what Russia is getting at with their Third Rome thing, for instance. They don’t literally think there’s a continuum between Russia and the Roman Empire, it’s that they view themselves as the natural leaders of the Orthodox world.
*no state more Roman