Scandinavia has a rich history of the raising of runestones, monuments in stone of varying sizes for honoring the fallen. Among these there exist a group of runestones that mention a land far away from the cold winds of the north, the land of the Byzantine Empire, stretching from the Balkans to the edge of Anatolia with Greece at its center. Scandinavia and the former Byzantine empire has a long history between them where many made their way down the eastern rivers of the Rus to finally reach the city of Constantinople or ‘Miklagard’ as the Scandinavians called it, the great city. Here in the vast empire of the Greeks many Scandinavians saw an opportunity for wealth and fortune. Many of these however did not return home, they died in Greece and for some of them a runestone was raised in their memory. These would form the so-called Greece runestones, a collection of 27 runestones which will be explored in this thesis. The travelers to Greece also left behind their own writings at places like the Hagia Sophia and the Piraeus Lion. Where with their own words they tell of their journey to this distant land, which will also be covered along with the Greece runestones. The aim of this thesis is to explore these writings to hopefully give a greater insight to the early medieval Scandinavian society and what would motivate so many to travel all the way to Greece. This together with an analysis of the import of byzantine coins to the baltic area will hopefully provide us with a better understanding of these motives and at what period these travels primarily took place.

As a debate over the legitimacy of the liturgical use of images, the Byzantine Iconoclastic controversy (ca. 726-843) had important political and theological implications, which modern scholarship generally tends to treat unconnectedly. The primary object of this study is to explicate the relationship between the political and theological dimensions of the controversy and to reconstruct the debate over images in a comprehensive approach that accounts for both its political and theological dimensions. / The main argument of the thesis is that the question of images was a politico-theological problem and the prospects of 'political expediency' and 'theological propriety' were correlated in the minds of both the Iconoclastic reformers and their Iconodule rivals. Indeed, it was through their respective soteriologies that the two parties gave meaning to the theological and political dimensions of the debate in relationship with their respective theological first principles. Therefore, the Iconoclastic debate is explained as a soteriological dispute where the worldview represented by the traditional Byzantine religio-political ideology and the worldview represented by the proponents of images were set over against each other. / The main contribution of our thesis to modern scholarship of the Byzantine Iconoclastic controversy is to reconstruct the debate in the light of the contending theological paradigms of the two parties, which shaped not only their attitudes towards images but also their political stands in relation to the Byzantine Empire's involvement in ecclesiastical politics. This new synthetic reading explains the debate in reference to two essential theological cornerstones of the Byzantine tradition---the Eusebian "Imperial Theology" and the Christological definition of the council of Chalcedon---both taken as key reference points, against which the political and doctrinal stands of both parties were constructed and interpreted.

The purpose of this thesis is to further our understanding of the period between the death of Basil II in 1025 and the accession of Alexios I Komnenos in 1081. Modern scholarship has often portrayed these 56 years as an important, transformative period, viewing the empire as standing at the height of its power at its beginning, only to be brought to the brink of collapse by civil wars and foreign invasions following the battle of Manzikert in 1071. Based on three unique and underexploited sources of evidence, namely the letters of Michael Psellos, the judicial handbook commonly known as the Peira and the so-called Consilia et Narrationes of Kekaumenos, it argues that the Byzantine state to a large extent relied on private networks to carry out public administration throughout the empire. Public and private power were thus intimately intertwined and by conveying information, orders and requests, but also by reproducing and enforcing norms of acceptable political behaviour, these networks served to compensate to some extent for the institutional shortcomings of the premodern state. It also challenges the idea that the political dynamic of the eleventh century was centred around the power struggles of 'great families' or clans that effectively functioned as political parties, as well as the idea that the emperors and their officials were apathetic about governing the provinces beyond what was necessary to pacify and extract resources from them. Taken together, the evidence examined consequently appears to suggest that, by the standards of the pre-modern world, the Byzantine empire had a reasonably well-functioning state and a fairly coherent society during the period in question, suggesting that the focus of the scholarly debate on the eleventh-century Byzantine collapse should, to some extent, be shifted from internal to external factors.

No description available.

[Truncated abstract] My focus has been twofold. On the one hand I have highlighted and elucidated the events which Pachymerēs narrates, glossing with prosopographical and topological notes the people, places and things mentioned in the text, and explaining other esoteric details, such as the range of many and varied, ornate Byzantine court honorifics. On the other hand I have made a critical comparison between Pachymerēs and the other important sources for the period, Greek, Western, and Eastern, to provide explanations for differences in the various narratives, to suggest which source is the more accurate for any given event, and to fill up the narrative ‘gaps’ of Gomme .... I must stress that both by training and inclination I am an historian, not a philologist, so the commentary will be historical rather than philological. This is despite the importance Pachymerēs himself places in the clever use of language and his frequent use of allusions to and quotes from other works, Classical, Byzantine or biblical. The question of mimēsis, how much Pachymerēs is directly trying to imitate or incorporate older texts, has received limited attention, and only where Pachymerēs’ use of the earlier text is vital to the understanding of his own work. Similarly, questions of language, and the way in which Pachymerēs uses it, have not been explored except in those instances where it directly affects the historical point our author is making. Pachymerēs’ Historia is an important source for a pivotal period in Byzantine Imperial history, and many scholars have not used it as efficiently as they could due to the denseness of his prose and his “tortuous syntax” (Bartusis 1992:55) ...

This thesis is concerned with the editorial, printing and marketing history of four Byzantine historical narratives, published between 1556 and 1645, and soon collectively identified under the name Corpus Historiæ Byzantinæ (hereinafter, 'Byzantine Corpus'). The four Byzantine historians - Ioannes Zonaras, Niketas Choniates, Nikephoros Gregoras and Laonikos Chalkokondyles - enjoyed considerable popularity in early modern Europe, with a peak of interest in the second half of the sixteenth century. This thesis aims at highlighting how these four texts, despite being so popular in a number of early modern European countries (particularly in the German-speaking area, in Italy and in France), did not do so for the same reasons: in fact, depending on the country in which these books were printed, they were marketed, perceived and read in very different ways. This element is particularly relevant in light of the fact that the Byzantine Corpus represents the earliest predecessor of the Corpus Fontium Historiæ Byzantinæ, the modern resource for the study of Byzantine historical sources. Chapter 1 analyses the early formation of the Byzantine Corpus and, in particular, the figure of Hieronymus Wolf, first editor of the Byzantine Corpus, often considered the 'father' of Byzantine studies; his relation with his patrons, the Fuggers of Augsburg; finally, his relation with his publisher, the Basel printer Johannes Oporinus. It then provides contextualised bibliographical and paratextual descriptions of the editiones principes of the Byzantine Corpus, all printed in Basel. Chapters 2-5 reflect the same comparative approach, used to investigate how the later editions of the Byzantine Corpus were prepared and marketed in different European countries: each chapter provides a bibliographical and paratextual analysis of the subsequent German, Italian, French and Genevan editions respectively. The Conclusions draw together all the information collected in the previous chapters and investigate three pivotal aspects of the Byzantine Corpus: i) the formation of the Byzantine Corpus and the individual popularity of each of the four Byzantine historians based on the frequency and popularity of both individual and collective editions; ii) the distinctive reasons of their popularity, analysed through a comparison of the different approaches with which editors and publishers have presented these texts to their respective audiences in Germany, Italy and France; iii) the reasons for the rise and decline in popularity of the Byzantine Corpus in the early seventeenth century.

Doctorat en philosophie et lettres / info:eu-repo/semantics/nonPublished

No description available.

This thesis surveys and discusses the documentary and archaeological evidence for sixth-century fortifications in Byzantine Africa. Chapter I examines the sources of evidence, noting that over 80 years have passed since the last major study of the subject was undertaken, by Charles Diehl in 1896. Chapter II traces the military history of Byzantine Africa from 533 to 602, with introductory and concluding sections on the fifth and seventh centuries. Chapter III discusses the evidence for the military organization and defensive strategy of Byzantine Africa in the sixth century, looking in particular at the structure of military command, the composition of the Byzantine army, the garrison structure (including the evidence for the nature and size of local garrisons stationed in forts and towns), the administrative machanisms by which fortifications were built and the strategy to be discerned in their siting. The chapter ends with a general appraisal of the benefits that Roman Africa received from Justinian's reconquest. Chapter IV examines the architecture of Byzantine fortifications in Africa, comparing it with earlier and contemporary practice in the eastern and western empires. The tactical aspects of fortifications are also considered, in particular the question of how far their design was influenced by the use made of artillery and archery in the sixth-century Byzantine army. In a short final chapter, an assessment is made of the value that the study of sixth-century Byzantine fortifications in Africa has for understanding later developments in the military architecture of eastern and western Christendom and of Islam. The Gazetteer includes full descriptions (with plans and photographs) of all the Byzantine fortifications identified in Africa, and shorter notes on other structures of more doubtful Byzantine identification; an index to fortifications in Africa referred to by Procopius; and a corpus of sixth- and seventh century military inscriptions from Africa.

The present thesis aims to conclude an analysis of political and administative structures in Byzantium and Western Empire from the end of the 9th until half of the 11th century. This was achieved by means of comparison. The author attempted resolve the issue of mutual relationship between the political elite and the ruler and how differences both in the Byzantine and Western Empires influenced the social system. The research included analysis of ruler legitimity, organisation of administration, social mentality and abstract ideas of the state. In the conclusion of this work, the author presented the major differences between West and Byzantium and evaluated future development of both states in regard to internal stability and integration fo political elites. Keywords: Byzantine Empire, East Francia, Roman Empire, Idea of the State