The historians' history of the world in twenty-five volumes, volume 07 : $b the history of the later Roman Empire — John Shaqi
The historians' history of the world in twenty-five volumes, volume 07 : $b the history of the later Roman Empire
History
The historians' history of the world in twenty-five volumes, volume 07 : $b the history of the later Roman Empire
World history
It must not be overlooked, however, that there were other reasons for
withholding the unqualified title of Roman Empire from the Eastern
dominions. The chief of these is that the court of Constantinople
departed very radically from the traditions of the West, taking on
oriental manners and customs, and, what is most remarkable, gradually
relinquishing the Latin speech and substituting for it the language
of Greece. We have seen in our studies of earlier Roman history the
marked tendency to the Hellenisation of Rome through the introduction of
Greek culture from the time when the Roman Republic effected the final
overthrow of Greece. It will be recalled that some of the most important
histories of Rome, notably those of Polybius and Appian and Dionysius and
Dion Cassius, were written in Greek. The emperor Marcus Aurelius wrote
his _Meditations_ in the same language. But this merely represented the
tendency of the learned world. There was no propensity to substitute
Greek for Latin as the language of everyday life so long as the seat of
empire remained in the West. Now, however, as has been intimated, this
strange substitution was effected; the writers of this Later Roman Empire
in the East looked exclusively to classical Greece for their models, and
in due course the language of court and of common people alike came to be
Greek also, somewhat modified from the ancient idiom with the sweep of
time, but in its essentials the same language which was spoken at Athens
in the time of Pericles. Obviously there is a certain propriety in this
use of the term Greek Empire as applied to a principality whose territory
included the ancient realms of Athens, and whose customs and habits and
speech thus preserved the traditions of ancient Hellas.
The use of the terms Eastern Empire and Byzantine Empire requires no
elucidation, having an obvious propriety. As has been said, we shall
find it convenient here to employ one or another of the four terms
indiscriminately; giving preference perhaps, if a choice must be made, to
the simplest and most non-committal form, Eastern Empire.
By whatever name designated, the principality whose fortunes we are to
follow will hold our interest throughout a period of more than a thousand
years, from the death of Theodosius in 395 to the final overthrow of
Constantinople in 1456. This period is almost exactly coincident with the
epoch pretty generally designated by historians as the Middle Ages, and
usually estimated as a time of intellectual decadence.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account