The Byzantium Question

Happy Monday Everyone! Today, we have Black Wolf from X answering the Byzantium Question for us. For those who are not familiar with his work, he is best described as a warrior-scholar with a passion for ancient history, particularly the Hellenic world, who believes in the power of wisdom through adversity and the timelessness of classical art.

Everyone has heard of Rome; but not everyone knows about the Eastern Roman Empire. Were Byzantines true Romans or true Greeks?

Let’s explore their identity and what made Constantinople a symbol of a renewed Empire.

Let us start from the context and why we talk about “West” and “East”; the division of the Roman Empire and the establishment of Constantinople as a new imperial capital were responses to several interconnected political, economic, and military challenges.

The Roman Empire had grown vast, stretching from Britain to Egypt and from Spain to the Near East. Managing such a large territory was increasingly difficult, leading to inefficiency and slow response times to crises.

Different regions of the empire faced distinct challenges, including invasions in the West and threats from the Persian Empire in the East. A centralized government struggled to address these issues.

The eastern provinces, such as Egypt, Anatolia, and Syria, were more economically vibrant, with bustling trade networks and fertile lands. In contrast, the western provinces suffered economic stagnation and population decline.

The East's wealth generated more revenue, making it a logical center for imperial administration. The West’s economic struggles exacerbated its vulnerability to invasions and internal unrest.

The Western Roman Empire faced constant pressure from migrating and invading barbarian tribes, such as the Visigoths, Vandals, and Huns. A divided empire allowed for more focused military responses, with dedicated resources and leadership in both East and West.

Emperor Diocletian recognized the inefficiencies of governing the empire as a single unit. He introduced the Tetrarchy in 293 AD, dividing the empire into four regions, each ruled by an emperor or a subordinate co-emperor (Augustus and Caesar). This system aimed to provide better governance and defense.

Although the Tetrarchy collapsed into civil wars, Constantine the Great emerged as the sole ruler and retained the idea of dividing the empire for administrative purposes.

 Although the Tetrarchy collapsed into civil wars, Constantine the Great emerged as the sole ruler and retained the idea of dividing the empire for administrative purposes.

Constantine chose Byzantium, a small Greek city on the Bosporus Strait, as the site for his new capital. Renamed Constantinople in 330 AD, it offered A defensible position with natural barriers (surrounded by water on three sides), control over key trade routes between Europe and Asia and proximity to the empire's wealthiest and most stable provinces.

Constantinople was designed as a "New Rome," reflecting Constantine's Christian vision for the empire. It featured grand architecture, a Senate, and imperial residences, mirroring the structures of Rome.

Constantine's embrace of Christianity played a significant role in shaping the empire’s identity. Constantinople became a center of Christian administration, distinguishing it from the more traditional, pagan roots of Rome.

After the death of Emperor Theodosius I, the empire was permanently divided between his two sons. Arcadius ruled the Eastern Roman Empire from Constantinople and Honorius ruled the Western Roman Empire from Ravenna. Rome had already been abandoned as an administrative center in the West, which is indicative that the Empire was changing.

The Eastern Empire thrived due to its wealth, defensible position, and strong administrative structure. In contrast, the Western Empire declined, culminating in its fall, while the East would go on for another 1000 years.

Latin was the primary official language, serving as the medium for government, law, military communication, and administration throughout the empire. It was the foundation of Roman identity and a unifying element across the diverse territories under Roman control. But even from the old times, noble Romans spoke Greek among themselves, showing off their sophistication.

In the Eastern provinces of the Roman Empire, however, Greek played a significant role even before the rise of the empire due to the influence of Alexander the Great and the Hellenistic kingdoms. Everyone spoke Greek from Crimea to Athens and from Anatolia to Egypt; it was like English today.

Greek was deeply entrenched as the language of education, culture, and trade in the eastern Mediterranean. While Latin was introduced as the official administrative language in the East, Greek remained dominant in everyday life and intellectual discourse. By the 7th century, Greek had become the official language of the Byzantine Empire under Emperor Heraclius, reflecting the linguistic reality of the eastern provinces.

Procopius, a prominent Byzantine historian, wrote extensively about the Byzantine Empire during the reign of Emperor Justinian I. In his work The Secret History (Anecdota), Procopius criticizes the administration but also highlights the Greek cultural environment of Constantinople, despite the Roman administrative framework.

While the legal corpus compiled under Emperor Justinian I was originally in Latin, the influence of Greek culture and law was evident in its application in the Eastern provinces. By the 7th century, the Greek translations of Justinian’s laws became standard in the Byzantine Empire, reflecting the linguistic shift.

Heraclius officially adopted Greek as the administrative language of the empire, replacing Latin. Though no single decree explicitly records this change, the inscriptions and official documents from his reign mark the clear shift. The use of Greek became ubiquitous in Byzantine imperial edicts and correspondence.

Theophanes the Confessor writes in Greek and chronicles the Byzantine Empire’s history, emphasizing the empire’s Christian and Greek identity. His work illustrates the Greek self-perception of the Byzantines, especially in the context of their rivalry with both Western Europe and Islamic powers.

Michael Psellos, a Byzantine philosopher and historian, provides a rich source of information about Byzantine culture. He wrote in Greek and championed the classical Hellenic tradition, reflecting the Byzantine Empire’s self-identification with Greek intellectual heritage.

Eusebius, an early Christian historian and theologian, wrote extensively in Greek. His Ecclesiastical History and Life of Constantine illustrate the linguistic and cultural continuity of Greek traditions in the Eastern Roman Empire, even during the transitional period.

The philosopher George Gemistos Plethon famously stated, “we, over whom you rule and hold sway, are Hellenes by genos, as is witnessed by our language and ancestral education,” highlighting a direct claim to Greek identity despite the formal Roman political structure.

The historical works of figures like Anna Komnene in "The Alexiad" employ classical Greek styles, suggesting a deep connection to Greek cultural heritage. Her work has been noted for its Homeric vocabulary and imagery, indicating a literary Hellenism.

Anthony Kaldellis in his work "Hellenism in Byzantium: The Transformations of Greek Identity and the Reception of the Classical Tradition" (2007) explores how from the 12th century onwards, the ethnonym "Hellene" became progressively more popular among influential intellectuals and political actors, who preferred it over "Roman" or "Greek" in a common sense.

He suggests a reevaluation of Hellenitas in shaping collective and individual identities post-12th century. The Byzantine Renaissance, or Macedonian Renaissance, is marked by a revival of Hellenistic culture in art, literature, and philosophy, indicating a strong Greek cultural identity.

But the Emperors and their dynasties started spawning from the Greek populations, naturally; here are the Byzantine dynasties that are commonly recognized as having Greek origins or being predominantly Greek:

Heraclian Dynasty (610–711) - While Heraclius himself was of Armenian and Cappadocian (Greek) descent, his adoption of Greek as the official language of administration significantly Hellenized the empire.

Isaurian Dynasty (717–802) - Although named after the Isaurian region, this dynasty, particularly under Leo III and his successors, was instrumental in promoting Greek culture and language, with Leo III and his son Constantine V being of Syrian or Greek descent.

Macedonian Dynasty (867–1056) - This dynasty is often considered one of the most Greek in character due to its efforts in cultural, literary, and artistic revival. Basil I, the founder, was of Armenian descent but was deeply Hellenized, and his successors like Constantine VII were patrons of Greek culture.

Komnenian Dynasty (1081–1185) - Alexios I Komnenos and his descendants were of Greek origin, and their reign is noted for a cultural renaissance where Greek literature, philosophy, and art were significantly promoted.

Angelos Dynasty (1185–1204) - Although their rule was brief and tumultuous, the Angeloi were a Greek family from Philadelphia in Asia Minor.

Laskaris Dynasty (1204–1259) - Rulers of the Empire of Nicaea during the period of the Latin occupation of Constantinople, they were Greek and played a crucial role in the cultural continuity of Greek identity in the Byzantine world.

Palaiologos Dynasty (1261–1453) - The last dynasty of the Byzantine Empire, they were Greek and presided over the final centuries of the empire, which saw a renewed interest in Greek philosophy and culture, often termed the Palaiologan Renaissance.

So you can see that – like the original Romans – they were not just cool with the Hellenic part of their identity but they actually cherished it. Byzantine identity was complex, with layers of Roman, Christian, and Greek elements interwoven.

The Byzantines themselves identified primarily as Romans (Rhōmaîoi), but the Greek cultural, linguistic, and intellectual heritage was undeniably central to their identity, especially as reflected in the policies and cultural initiatives of these dynasties.

But they were not cool with being called “just Greeks”; in their minds they were descendants of the Romans while being Greek. When the Great Schism of Christianity happened (between Orthodox and Catholic Churches), the Pope exchanged some favors and arbitrarily crowned the German king as “Holy Roman Emperor”; of course, the “True Romans”, the Byzantines were not cool with that, as they were themselves the “Holy Roman Imperium”.

The term "Emperor of the Greeks" was sometimes used by Western Europeans, including the Papacy and the Holy Roman Emperors, to differentiate the Byzantine Emperor from their own claims to the Roman imperial title. This usage was often seen as derogatory by the Byzantines, who considered themselves Romans (Rhōmaîoi) despite speaking Greek and having a predominantly Hellenic culture.

While not a "joke" per se, there's an account from the 10th century where Nikephoros II Phokas was insulted by being called the "Emperor of the Greeks" by Pope John XIII's emissaries. Nikephoros, known for his military prowess and stern character, had these emissaries imprisoned for this affront, as he and other Byzantine emperors saw themselves as the legitimate successors of Rome, not merely of the Greek-speaking East.

It is indicative that internal Byzantine struggles that led to immense clashes were not about Greek nationals fighting Romans but rather Christians fighting the pagan past and vice versa. You see, the Byzantine identity was evolving and some aspects were creating more friction than others.

Although Constantine is often celebrated for his pro-Christian policies, he did not immediately suppress paganism. He allowed public divination and pagan rituals to continue, but he also began to favor Christianity by building churches and giving privileges to Christians.

After Constantine, the gradual suppression of paganism became more pronounced. His successors, particularly his sons like Constantius II, enacted laws against pagan practices, although enforcement varied.

A pivotal figure in the persecution of paganism, Theodosius issued several edicts in 391-392 that officially prohibited pagan sacrifices, closed temples, and in some cases, led to the destruction of pagan sites. These laws were part of a broader effort to consolidate Christianity as the sole religion of the empire. The famous example is the destruction of the Serapeum in Alexandria.

There were numerous instances where Christian zealots, sometimes incited by clergy or supported by imperial decree, destroyed pagan temples or converted them into churches. The most famous being the conversion of the Parthenon into a Christian church in the 5th century.

Although not directly a Christian-pagan conflict, the Iconoclastic Controversy (726–843) reflects the ongoing tension between different interpretations of Christianity, as the religious identity was still evolving, where some practices might have been reminiscent of or confused with paganism.

Try to imagine how hard – and how irrelevant – it would be to define a single, simplistic identity for a multicultural Empire that survived for more than a millennium; today, we cannot even define what a woman is these days!

So even if the identity was clearly evolving, could we claim that the Eastern Romans were true Romans? The answer in my opinion is definitely YES. They were the direct, unbroken political descendants of Rome.

Were they also Greeks? The answer in my opinion is ALSO YES. They were nationally and culturally Hellenes, through unbroken lineages from Greek/Hellenized populations from Greece, Anatolia, Middle East and Egypt.

So even if some “Roman-leaning” analysts disagree with the term “Byzantine” as a post-mortem irrelevant term, I think it is the best one for us today to examine Eastern Rome; because this was a fusion of Hellenic and Roman identities, forged in the fire of war for thousands of years. This Empire had the strength to survive for a Millenium (almost 1123 years) until it was extinguished by the steppe plague.

And yet it still lives one; because modern Greeks still carry the flame; modern Greek identity through the millennia is forged with Byzantium embedded in it. Because the last Emperor was Greek and they kept fighting until the bitter end against the pseudo-Mongols from the steppes.

And even in that identity – as it was in the past – it is still hard to reconcile how Leonidas and Alexander can coexist with Christians like Manuel Komnenos and Konstantinos Palaiologos. But this is what happens when a nation has been around for millennia, unbroken.

When the Greeks rose up and liberated themselves after 400 years under ottoman yoke, they carried with them the flame of Byzantium, through the “Great Idea”, aiming at liberating not only the ancient motherland (from Peloponnese to Macedonia) but also the Byzantine territories, starting from Constantinople; and they indeed came close.

The “Great Idea” is a Greek political and cultural ideal aimed at reviving the Byzantine Empire's glory by uniting all Greek-speaking peoples. Although it led to conflicts like the Greco-Turkish Wars it underscores a collective memory of Byzantium in Greek national consciousness.

But even in the realm of symbolism, the line is unbroken; the Double Headed eagle was Byzantium’s standard until the bitter end and today it is still the standard of the Orthodox Greek Church.

It started from the Roman Eagles (and even before them, Alexander considered the Eagle to be his “spirit animal”) and then symbol was adopted by the Byzantine Empire, notably during the reign of the Palaiologos dynasty in the 13th century.

The double-headed eagle was used to symbolize the dual sovereignty of the Byzantine Emperor over the Eastern and Western parts of the Christian world or as a representation of both temporal and spiritual power.

In understanding the Byzantine Empire, its symbols, and its enduring legacy, we see a civilization that masterfully blended Roman governance, Greek culture, and Christian faith into a unique identity that continues to fascinate historians and inspire nations. The adoption of the two-headed eagle serves as a potent reminder of Byzantium's dual aspirations—temporal and spiritual, eastern and western—and its enduring influence on the world.

Art

I’ll be hosting a LIVE WORKSHOP on February 5th at 5 PM EST for Masterclass 24/7 members. Bring your posts, threads, memes—whatever you’re working on—and I’ll give you real-time feedback to help you craft content that gets noticed!

Masterclass 24/7 will be offering a one-week free trial until February 14, 2023. This is a monthly or yearly membership.

Contact me at [email protected] if you have any questions.

I will also throw in a 30-minute consultation call which would include a profile review for anyone who signs up for a yearly membership.

To join check out the link below.

Become a paying subscriber of Premium to get access to this post and other subscriber-only content.

Already a paying subscriber? Sign In.

A subscription gets you:

• • Support high-quality content and independent writing.
• • Help to keep this free for all readers.
• • Connect with us directly.
• • Our sincere gratitude.