This thesis is a systematic examination of the use of the term phoideratos in Greek and how it relates to the Greek word symmachos. The term was recognized as not precisely equivalent to its Latin cognate foederatus over a century ago by Jean Maspero, but no complete study of every use of the term has been made until now. This has been facilitated by the Thesaurus Linguae Graecae, an online database of searchable Greek texts. These terms are important since they provide a framework within which foreigners came to serve the Roman army. They also reveal the changing nature of that army, and how the foederati, formerly allies who came to serve the Roman state in exchange for a combination of land, supplies, and cash became the phoideratoi, an elite regular unit in the Roman army. Meanwhile, symmachos came to refer to those who were formerly called phoideratoi. This interpretation is crucial since some modern historiography has considered the phoideratoi of the sixth century as equivalent to the foederati of the fourth.

No description available.

The Fourth Ecumenical Council, held at Chalcedon in 451, began a period of extraordinary social and political crisis across the Eastern Mediterranean. In Palestine, as elsewhere, the centuries that followed were characterised by internecine conflict between local Christians, persisting until the collapse of Roman authority in the region during the reign of the emperor Heraclius. Since Edward Gibbon, historians have struggled to contextualise this debate, ostensibly an argument between proponents of rival, but also substantially identical, Christologies. This thesis considers what role socio-economic factors may have played in shaping contemporary accounts of the Council's fraught reception. It asks whether this may have distorted our understanding of a defining Late Antique debate. Chalcedon's reforms had wide-reaching consequences, not only for the Empire's official Christological policy, but for the broader structure of the 'Church economy,' the systems through which Christian institutions were financed and maintained, referred to at length in the Council's disciplinary canons. Its rulings held particular significance for Palestine in its status as the Christian 'Holy Land.' Here I explore this facet of Chalcedon's legacy, whilst considering how the language of doctrinal controversy generated by the Council served to frame episodes of material competition between rival communities of clerics and monks. The thesis offers a new reading of the texts produced by key actors in these confrontations, many of which have been historically neglected. It follows in the wake of recent attempts to analyse other religious conflicts of this period in light of contemporary social or political conditions, or through reference to 'networks' of influence and patronage. I apply this methodology to the study of the Palestinian partisans in the antagonism which followed Chalcedon, whilst also drawing upon the archaeologically-grounded study of material culture which has influenced so many other areas of early medieval history.

No description available.

No description available.

La captivité était une situation transitoire qui conduisait soit à l’esclavage soit à la libération. Pendant le période de VIe à XIe s. on voit les captifs assumer des rôles divers: comme soldats, agriculteurs, porteurs d’idéologie, de culture et de savoirs. Une série des questions se posent à propos de leur libération en termes de rançon, échange de prisonniers, et leur statut social et civil. La théorie impériale ne correspondait pas toujours à la réalité des sociétés concernant ce sujet. Par conséquent, la recherche touche à des questions militaires et diplomatiques et aussi avec les domaines de la culture et de l'intelligence militaire et révèle enfin comment Byzance elle-même et les «autres» perçu. Par une approche multidimensionnelle et en termes de méthodologie sur l'analyse critique des sources primaires et de comparaison, mon objectif principal est de décrire la position de l'État et de l'Église « vis-à –vis » la question particulière et de son évolution. La recherche commence à une époque où l’attitude à l’égard des prisonniers de guerre héritée du monde romain est en train de changer sous l’impact du christianisme ; elle se termine à une période où les échanges des prisonniers avec les Arabes, devenus une routine, perdent de l’actualité et les guerres avec les Bulgares battent le plein. La présente étude démontre les mutations de la loi byzantine et son impact sur le traitement à l'égard des problèmes divers concernant les prisonniers de guerre. Etudier l'ère particulière peut éclaircir ce sujet afin d'en déduire si l'attitude de Byzance différait envers ses ennemis et donc les captifs chrétiens et non-chrétiens. / The state of captivity is a transitional situation which leads either to slavery or to freedom. During 6th-11th c. prisoners under captivity could have various occupational roles. In addition, they could be bearers of a different ideology, culture and knowledge. A series of questions arise about their release in terms of ransom, prisoner exchange, and their social and civil status. Imperial theory was not always corresponding at the societies’ reality concerning this issueTherefore, the research is dealing with military and diplomatic questions and also with the spheres of culture and military intelligence and finally reveals how Byzantium perceived itself and the ‘others’. Based on a multidimensional approach and in terms of methodology on the critical analysis of primary sources and comparison, my main aim is to describe the position of both State and Church “vis-à-vis” the particular issue and its evolution. The starting point of my research is set on a period, when the attitude towards prisoners of war as it was inherited from the Roman world, begins to change due to the influence of Christianity and reaches up to a point, when exchanges of prisoners with the Arabs were consolidated and the wars with the Bulgarians had started. The present study demonstrates the changing face of the byzantine law and its impact on the treatment towards the diverse problems concerning prisoners of war. Studying the particular era can shed light on this topic in order to infer whether Byzantines’ attitude differed towards his enemies and therefore Christians and non-Christians captives.

In the eleventh and twelfth centuries southern Italy passed irrevocably out of Byzantine control and into Norman control, at roughly the same time as the Roman papacy and the Christians of the East were beginning to divide into what we now know as the Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox Churches. Historians have typically viewed the history of southern-Italian monasticism in this period around the notion of a cultural conflict between Latins and Greeks, either arguing for or against the idea that the Italo-Normans had a policy of ‘latinisation’ with regards to Eastern-rite monasteries. This thesis will argue, however, that this conceptual framework obscures more important long-term economic and social factors that affected Germany, Italy and Byzantium alike. Having outlined the political and social context of southern-Italy in the eleventh and twelfth centuries in Chapter 1, Chapter 2 will demonstrate the manner in which southern-Italian monasticism was firmly embedded into a network of cultural and social contacts in the broader Mediterranean world, and especially with Byzantium, even during the Norman domination. Chapter 3 will focus on the fundamental patterns of southern-Italian monastic change in the early Middle Ages, emphasising the gradual movement from informal asceticism to organised monastic hierarchies. Chapter 4 will set forth the essential irrelevance of viewing this structural change in terms of ‘Latin’ and ‘Greek’ identities, underlining the point that the distinction is largely meaningless in the context of monastic change. Chapter 5 will explain by contrast the far greater significance of economic and social expansion to monastic change in both ‘Latin’ and ‘Greek’ areas of the Mediterranean, and especially southern Italy. Finally, Chapter 6 will show that consolidation in southern-Italian monastic structures was not simply part of a centrally-directed papal reform movement, but part of a wider range of innovations undertaken on a local basis throughout the peninsula and the rest of the Mediterranean, with a considerable range of influences. An extensive selection of literary and documentary evidence will be examined in both Latin and Greek, with an especial focus on the monastic and ecclesiastical archives of southern Italy. / Thesis (Master, History) -- Queen's University, 2011-06-12 13:50:46.867

L’étude de l’iconoclasme byzantin, cette crise théologique ayant pour cause l’essor du culte associé aux images religieuses, a été un exercice ardu pour les historiens. En effet, les maigres sources disponibles pour cette période sont toutes favorables au culte des images. Bien qu’écrite par un iconodoule convaincu et hostile aux empereurs iconoclastes, la Chronographie de Théophane le Confesseur ne mérite pourtant pas ses étiquettes contemporaines de pro-iconophile et d’anti-iconoclaste. Le présent mémoire propose donc de revoir et de nuancer les écrits de Théophane en ce qui a trait au pouvoir impérial. Il s’agira de démontrer que la place des empereurs sur l’échiquier théologique n’a aucune influence sur la représentation du pouvoir, voire et de ceux qui l’exercent, dans la Chronographie. En effet, une analyse rigoureuse des empereurs de la période iconoclaste (717-780) et de la période iconodoule (780-815) prouvera que pour Théophane, rien n’est absolu : les iconoclastes ne sont pas dépourvus de vertu et les iconodoules peuvent agir de façon tyrannique. La Chronographie propose ainsi une image complexe du pouvoir impérial, qui oblige à reconsidérer les frontières entre légitimité impériale et tyrannie. -- The study of Byzantine iconoclasm, a theological crisis caused by the emergence of religious practices centered on divine images, has proven to be a difficult endeavor for historians. Indeed, the few available sources which discuss this period are clearly favorable to this cult of images. Despite having been written by a convinced iconodule who was also hostile to iconoclastic emperors, the Chronicle by Theophanes the Confessor should not be labelled as purely pro-iconophile and anti-iconoclastic. As such, the present thesis will seek to review and relativize the writings of Theophanes with regards to imperial power. This will attempt to demonstrate that in the Chronicle, the place of emperors on the theological playing field has no impact on the representations of power or those who exert it. In fact, a rigorous analysis of emperors from the iconoclastic period (717-780) as well as the iconodule period (780-815) will show that inTheophanes’ mind nothing is absolute: iconoclasts are not devoid of virtue and iconodules can be tyrannical. Hence, the Chronicle presents a complex image of imperial power, one which demands a reconsideration of the boundaries between imperial legitimacy and tyranny.

Ce mémoire traite de l’histoire politique et dynastique de l’empire byzantin du Xe au début du XIIe siècle, et propose de réinterpréter certaines querelles de succession et la stratégie, matrimoniale et politique, des grandes familles aristocratiques. Partant de la querelle de 1118 qui opposa Jean II à sa soeur Anne pour la succession d’Alexis Ier, l’analyse montre que ce conflit recouvrait l’opposition entre deux sources de légitimité, les Comnènes et les Doukai, et de deux principes, primogéniture masculine et primogéniture « absolue ». Cette hypothèse est confirmée par une analyse des relations avant et après le couronnement d’Alexis Ier : la campagne d’Alexis contre Roussel de Bailleul, le contexte des fiançailles d’Alexis Comnène et d’Irène Doukaina, ou la prise de Constantinople sont particulièrement revisités. Ayant dû accorder des garanties à sa belle-famille Doukas, Alexis Ier va utiliser les interdictions de mariage et les circonstances diplomatiques pour annuler les fiançailles de sa fille et de Constantin Doukas, le fils de Michel VII. L’analyse se poursuit par une étude de la révolte de 1057 et met en évidence que Constantin (X) Doukas et Isaac (Ier) Comnène étaient alors les défenseurs des héritières de Constantin Dalassènos, qui était, avec Romain (III) Argyros, le chef d’une des deux familles apparentées par mariage avec les Lécapènes et les Macédoniens. Après avoir vu la stratégie matrimoniale de Romain Ier Lécapène, l’étude montre que Constantin VIII maria sa fille Zôè tardivement afin de réserver le pouvoir à ses lointains cousins et ainsi établir par la pratique un règle de succession à Byzance. / This study deals with the political and dynastic history of the Byzantine empire from the 10th to the early 12th centuries. It offers a reinterpretation of some succession crises and of the matrimonial and political strategy of great aristocratic families. About the conflict which opposed John II and his sister Anna on the succession of Alexius I in 1118, the analysis shows that this conflict was also the opposition of two sources of legitimacy: the Doukas and Comnenus families, and of two principles: masculine and absolute primogeniture. This hypothesis is confirmed by an analysis of the relations between both families before and after Alexis I’s accession: Alexius’ campaign against Roussel, the context of his betrothal with Irene Doukaina, of the taking of Constantinople are particularly revisited. Having reluctantly given warrants to his step-family, Alexius I uses marriage prohibitions to cancel his sister’s betrothal with Constantine Doukas, Michael VII’s son. The study then deals with the revolt of 1057, and shows that Constantine (X) Doukas and Isaac (I) Comnenus were the defenders of the female heirs of Constantine Dalassenos, who was, along with Romanos (III) Argyros, the head of one of the two families related to the Lecapenus and Macedonian dynasties. After an analysis of Romanus I’s matrimonial strategy, the study shows that Constantine VIII married his daughter Zoe so late because he wanted to reserve the power to his distant relatives and thus to establish, through practice, a succession rule in Byzantium.

Il 29 maggio 1453, dopo un assedio di circa otto settimane, Costantinopoli fu conquistata dal sultano ottomano Mehmed II. La caduta della città fu un duro colpo per la cristianità occidentale, che non era riuscita a valutare la gravità della sua situazione e aveva mandato, nonostante molte promesse, un aiuto del tutto insufficiente. Le polemiche sui mancati soccorsi coinvolsero principalmente il pontefice Niccolò V, il re di Napoli Alfonso d'Aragona e Venezia. La decadenza dell'impero bizantino era tuttavia cominciata da lungo tempo, era stata accelerata dalle funeste conseguenze della quarta crociata ed era divenuta irreversibile allorché i Turchi, impadronitisi dell'intera Asia Minore, avevano attaccato e sistematicamente occupato i territori bizantini in Grecia e nell'Europa orientale. I sovrani della dinastia paleologa si convinsero che solo da Occidente sarebbe potuto giungere a Bisanzio un soccorso efficace e, per ottenerlo, si rivolsero ai papi, all'imperatore, ai sovrani dei principali stati europei, alle repubbliche e ai principati italiani. Condizione irrinunciabile posta dall'Occidente per l'invio di adeguati soccorsi era l'unione delle Chiese greca e latina, che i Bizantini sostenvano dovesse essere ricercata solo attraverso un concilio ecumenico. Il Papato, dopo la conclusione del Grande Scisma e il ristabilimento dell'unità nella Chiesa romana, dovette affrontare la sfida del movimento conciliare; esso la vinse, grazie anche al successo conseguito nel 1439 a Firenze, dove fu proclamata solennemente l'unione di cattolici e ortodossi. Eugenio IV, dopo una lunga contrapposizione con il concilio di Basilea, aveva trasferito il sinodo in Italia, dove, nella prima metà del Quattrocento, si stava assistendo alla graduale formazione di entità statali territoriali: alcune di esse, le repubbliche di Venezia e Genova in particolare, avevano svolto per secoli un ruolo politico-economico di primo piano nell'Oriente bizantino. / On 29 May 1453, after a siege of some eight weeks, Constantinople fell to the Ottoman sultan, Mehmed II. The fall of the city came as a bitter shock to Western Christendom, which had failed to see its plight and had, in spite of promises, sent it negligible help. Bitter controversies followed, involving mainly pope Nicholas V, the king of Naples, Alfonso of Aragona, and Venice. The long decline of the Byzantine Empire, which had been quickened by the outcome of the fourth crusade, became irreversible as the Turks conquered the whole of Asia Minor and occupied the Byzantine territories of Greece and Eastern Europe. The Palaelogan emperors were persuaded that Byzantium could be saved only by Western help; to obtain it, they addressed popes, the Western emperor, European Kings and Italian states. The main condition for proper aid from the West was the union of Greek and Latin Churches; in Byzantine opinion, however, it might be attained exclusively through an oecumenical council. Papacy, after the vicissitudes of the Great Schism, had to face the challenge of the conciliar movement, which it won thanks to the successful, even if ephemeral, result of the council of Florence as well. There, in July 1439, the union between Catholic and Orthodox Churches was solemnly celebrated. The synod had been moved by pope Eugenius IV, after harsh quarrels with the council of Basel to Italy, where, in the first half of fifteenth century, bigger territorial states were forming. Some of them had been long time playing an important political and economical part in the Byzantine East.