Η σχέση Βυζαντίου και Ελλάδας

[KWSN_Men]

Πάντως, κάποτε πρέπει να αποφασίσουμε, δε νομίζετε; Από τη μια δεν έχουμε σχέση με τους Αρχαίους Έλληνες, από την άλλη δεν έχουμε με τους Βυζαντινούς καθώς αυτοί ήταν κατακτητές μας, εμείς τελικά τι είμαστε;

 

Λέω εγώ τώρα...

[Lucifer]

..Έλληνες?

[KWSN_Men]

Το οποίο σημαίνει τι; Σκλαβωμένοι για 2000 χρόνια; Για 400; Ουρανοκατέβατοι (μια και με τους αρχαίους σχέση δεν έχουμε);

[Snoob]

Πώς ορίζουμε το "σχέση με τους αρχαίους";

[KWSN_Men]

Πολιτισμικά, ανθρωπολογικά, ό,τι γουστάρεις.

[Snoob]

Ανθρωπολογικά; Δηλαδή, τι, "καθαρότητα φυλής";

 

Η γλώσσα δεν είναι πολιτισμικό στοιχείο;

[KWSN_Men]

Δε μιλάω για καθαρότητα φυλής. Ούτε στην αρχαία Ελλάδα υπήρχε τέτοιο πράγμα, πόσο μάλλον κάποιες χιλιάδες χρόνια μετά.

 

Απλά βλέπω ότι υπάρχει μια γενικότερη τάση άρνησης του παρελθόντος.

[Str]

βασικα, περα απο την πλακα (γιατι για μενα ειναι τουλαχιστον φαιδρο το να ασχολουμεαστε με κατι που ειναι τετελεσμενο, ακομα και αν ειναι λαθος. εξ αλλου, η ιστορια γραφεται απο τους νικητες!! ) ειμασταν ωραιοι και καλοι μονοι μας, πολεις-κρατη και εττσι... σκαει μυτη ο Περσης, αποκταμε μια καποια συνειδηση, αρχιζουμε τη συσπυρωση, μας ενωνει και ο Αλεκος (πλην Λακαιδεμονίων ομως μη ξεχναμε) κατακταμε το συμπαν (αρα ΙΜΗΟ γουσταρουμε να ειμαστε νικητες κατω απο μια κοινη "σημαια"), σκανε μυτη ομως τα ρωμαιάκια, πληρωνουμε φορους (σημαντικο) και τουσ ανοιγουμε και τα ματια (εαακ ηθος πολιτισμος ) σκανε μυτη οι χριστιανοι, το γυριζει ο αυτοκρατορας (στο νεκροκρεβατο του Κυριε Μπραουν ε στο χριστιανικο, αρχιζουν τα αδερφακια-μελλονες-αυτοκρατορες να τσακωνονται, χωριζεται στα 2, με την απαραιτητη ιδεολογικη διαφορα στο θρησκευμα, ποιος θα εχει την εξουσια (εγω θα την εχω-οχι εγω θα την εχω) ΣΥΝΕΧΙΖΟΥΜΕ να πληρωνουμε φορους στους ρωμαιους, μονο που τωρα που χωριστηκαμε και λεγονται αυτοι ρωμαιοι εμεις ονομαζομαστε Βυζαντες, πληρωνουμε μεν, χαθηκε ο τροπος ζωης μας ΔΕ... την πεφτουνε απο παντου οι αλλοθρησκοι (μηπως και ΑΙ ΚΟΜΜΟΥΝΙΣΤΑΙ????) μικραινουμε μικραινουμε σε εκταση, μένει αυτο που παλια ηταν μια επαρχια μας...δλδ η Ελλαδα, την χανουμε και αυτη και μετα απο 400 χρονια θελουμε την ελευθερια μας, ΜΕ ΟΝΟΜΑ ΕΛΛΑΔΑ ΑΛΛΑ με θυμηση τις τελευταιες μερες τησ βυζαντινης αυτοκρατοριας..

......................................

αυτη ειναι η σχεση μας νομιζω

οπως ειχα πει και παλιοτερα

οταν ειχε πρωτοανοιξει το thread

[Lucifer]

Το οποίο σημαίνει τι; Σκλαβωμένοι για 2000 χρόνια; Για 400; Ουρανοκατέβατοι (μια και με τους αρχαίους σχέση δεν έχουμε);

 

Ελληνορωμαϊκά φύλα τα οποία στην πορεία αναμίχθηκαν με οθωμανούς σε κάποιο βαθμό.

 

Ωραίο άβαταρ, ψήνω το κάστρο του τα Χριστούγεννα.

[Lighter122]

Πολεις Κρατη--->

Αρχαια Ελλαδα--->

Ρωμα'ι'κη Αυτοκρατορια--->

Βυζαντιο--->

Οθωμανικη Αυτοκρατορια--->

Ελλαδα

 

Μετα απο 2000 χρονια και τοσες αλλαγες δεν πιστευω οτι ειμαστε απογονοι των προγονων μας...

Επηρρεαστηκαμε και επηρρεασαμε και οτι εγινε, εγινε.

Ο συγχρονος ελληνας καλα θα κανει να κοιταξει να φτιαξει το παρον και το μελλον του και οχι να τσακωνετε για το παρελθον του.

 

 

Υ.Γ. παντα προτιμουσα τους ρωμαιους και οχι το βυζαντιο...

ισως επειδη μας κατακτησανε ανοικτα και οχι με το γαντι οπως οι δευτεροι

[Fidelio]

(..) εμείς τελικά τι είμαστε;

Είμαστε μια κατηγορία δίποδων , πλάσματα βιολογικής κατασκευής, όπου μεγαλώνουμε μαθαίνοντας να υλοποιούμε το ελληνικό όνειρο της εποχής που διανύουμε στα όμορφα εφηβικά μας χρόνια.

Γέλασα με την ψυχή μου διαβάζοντας ΟΛΟ το thread , καλοπροαίρετα έτσι ;

[Spartacos]

Πολλες αναρθρες κραυγες,γαυγισματα και μηδενιστικα ανιστορητα επιχειρηματα καφενειακου επιπεδου.

Τελικα τι ηταν το Βυζαντιο;

Hταν απλως ενα κρατος θρησκοληπτων βαρβαρων,καποιων μη-Ελληνων που επεβαλαν καταπιεση στον Ελληνισμο ή ηταν μια Ελληνικη αυτοκρατορια,το 1/3 της Ελληνικης Ιστοριας;

 

 

Ο Μέγας Κωνσταντίνος εγκαινιάζει στίς 11 Μαΐου τού έτους 330 τήν νέα Ρώμη, πρωτεύουσα του Ρωμαϊκού κράτους.Σύμφωνα μέ τόν Κωνσταντίνο Παπαρρηγόπουλο η Ρωμαϊκή κυριαρχία διήρκησε μέχρι τόν 5ο αιώνα, καί ομοίως συμφωνεί η ιστορικός Ελένη Γλυκατζή Αρβελέρ, η οποία αναφέρει: "Κατά τήν διάρκεια της περίοδου (379-641), τό Βυζάντιο θά αποκτήσει τά χαρακτηριστικά, πού θά τό καταστήσουν αργότερα, Ελληνική Αυτοκρατορία της χριστιανικής Ανατολής." O Finlay θεωρεί ότι: "από τό 716 η ιστορία των Ελλήνων τοσούτον στενώς συμπλέκεται μετά των χρονικών της κραταιώς ήδη οργανωθείσης αυτοκρατορικής κυβερνήσεως, ώστε η ιστορία του ανατολικού κράτους αποτελεί έκτοτε έν όλον μετά της του ελληνικού έθνους ιστορίας."

 

Η Ελληνική αυτοκρατορία ήταν ο προμαχώνας της χριστιανικής Ευρώπης γιά χίλια καί πλέον έτη, προστατεύοντάς τήν από επιδρομές βαρβάρων, επιδρομές οι οποίες ήταν ικανές νά διαγράψουν τελείως τήν πολιτιστική ταυτότητα της Ευρώπης πού γνωρίζουμε σήμερα. Αν οι Πέρσες ή οι Aραβες ή οι Οθωμανοί είχαν κατακλύσει τήν Ευρώπη, σίγουρα η Ευρωπαϊκή ιστορία θά ήταν πολύ διαφορετική σήμερα. Επίσης τό κράτος του Βυζαντίου ήταν ο θεματοφύλακας της Ελληνικής γλώσσας καί της πνευματικής κληρονομιάς των Αρχαίων Ελλήνων. Αν δέν είχαν αντιγραφεί τά χιλιάδες έργα των αρχαίων σοφών καί είχαν παραδοθεί στό έλεος των ασιατών εισβολέων, ελάχιστα θά γνωρίζαμε γιά τίς αρχαίες επιστήμες καί τήν αρχαία φιλοσοφία.

 

Οι αρχαίοι Ελληνες ανέπτυξαν όλες τίς επιστήμες, αλλά παρέλειψαν νά κάνουν κάτι εξίσου σημαντικό. Δέν δημιούργησαν Ελληνικό κράτος μέ αποτέλεσμα νά γίνουν υπόδουλοι των αρχαίων Ρωμαίων χωρίς νά οργανώσουν ούτε τήν υποτυπώδη αντίσταση.Οι μεσαιωνικοί Έλληνες δημιούργησαν καί οργάνωσαν τό πρώτο Ελληνικό κράτος, τό οποίο ήταν τό ισχυρότερο του τότε γνωστού κόσμου. Όλοι οι υπόλοιποι λαοί σέβονταν τόν Έλληνα αυτοκράτορα καί φθονούσαν τόν πλούτο καί τήν αίγλη της Κωνσταντινουπόλεως. Η Ελληνική γλώσσα ακούγονταν από τήν Σικελία μέχρι τήν Καππαδοκία καί τόν Πόντο, καί από τήν Μακεδονία μέχρι τήν Κρήτη καί τήν Κύπρο. Οι Ελληνες, γιά πρώτη φορά ήταν ενωμένοι καί δέν μάχονταν ο ένας τόν άλλον.

 

Οι αρχαίοι Ελληνες ανέπτυξαν τήν ιατρική, αλλά οι Βυζαντινοί δημιούργησαν νοσοκομεία καί ιατροφαρμακευτική περίθαλψη, οι αρχαίοι Ελληνες είπαν: "Υπέρ πάντων η Πατρίς", αλλά οι Βυζαντινοί έκτισαν τά δυνατότερα τείχη καί οργάνωσαν τόν ισχυρότερο στρατό καί στόλο της εποχής, οι αρχαίοι Ελληνες μίλησαν πρώτοι γιά δικαιοσύνη καί ισότητα, αλλά οι Βυζαντινοί ανέπτυξαν τό καλύτερο νομοθετικό καί διοικητικό σύστημα γιά νά διοικήσουν τό αχανές κράτος τους, οι αρχαίοι Ελληνες ήταν οι καλύτεροι μαθηματικοί καί φυσικοί, αλλά οι Βυζαντινοί έκτισαν τό μεγαλύτερο κτίριο του τότε γνωστού κόσμου μέσα σέ πέντε χρόνια, τήν του Θεού Αγία Σοφία. Οι μεσαιωνικοί Ελληνες ή Ρωμιοί, όπως αποκαλούσαν τούς εαυτούς τους, ήταν εξίσου ικανοί μέ τούς προγόνους τους στήν τέχνη. Σύμφωνα μέ τόν ιστορικό Steven Runciman: "Η βυζαντινή τέχνη ήταν από τίς μεγαλύτερες σχολές τέχνης παγκοσμίως. Κανένας αρχαίος Ελληνας δέ θά μπορούσε νά χτίσει τήν Αγία Σοφία, αυτό απαιτούσε πολύ βαθιά τεχνική γνώση".

 

Οι Βυζαντινοί πού συνέχισαν μέ φανατισμό νά ομιλούν τήν αρχαία Ελληνική γλώσσα καί νά εξελληνίζουν τά ξένα ονόματα θεωρούσαν τιμή τους ότι ήταν απόγονοι των Αρχαίων Ελλήνων. Τά πρώτα βιβλία πού μάθαιναν τά παιδιά ήταν η Ιλιάδα καί η Οδύσσεια του Ομήρου καί οι αγαπημένοι τους ήρωες ήταν μεταξύ άλλων, ο Λεωνίδας καί ο Μέγας Αλέξανδρος. O Παναγιώτης Κανελλόπουλος άριστος μελετητής της Ελληνικής Ιστορίας μάς παραθέτει στό βιβλίο του, Γεννήθηκα στό 1402: "Οι πατέρες της Εκκλησίας πήραν από τήν αρχαία Αθήνα τά φώτα τους, ενώ οι άριστα μορφωμένοι Πατριάρχες, Φώτιος καί Αρέθας, είχαν αγκαλιάσει τόν Πλάτωνα. Όταν δε οι Φράγκοι κατέλαβαν τήν Βασιλεύουσα, ξύπνησε έντονα η Ελληνική συνείδηση των Ελλήνων καί αισθάνθηκαν όσοι αποσύρθηκαν στήν Μικρά Ασία, αντικρύζοντας τήν Σμύρνη, τήν Έφεσσο καί τή Μίλητο, τό Ελληνικό αίμα νά ρέει στίς φλέβες τους. Εάλω μέν η πατρίς, αλλ' ανδρί σοφώ πάς τόπος Ελλάς".

[gerontas]

Αν κατάλαβα καλά, ένα copy-paste από ένα site (ανεξάρτητα από την αντικειμενικότητα του τελευταίου) μας δίνει το δικαίωμα να κατηγορούμε τους συνομιλητές μας για "αναρθρες κραυγες,γαυγισματα και μηδενιστικα ανιστορητα επιχειρηματα καφενειακου επιπεδου".

 

Γηράσκω αεί διδασκόμενος...

[olvios]

On line you can read one from the most famous book that ever written and consern the Byzantium History.

Alexei Vasilief with George Ostrogorsky in my are the most reliable modern books regarding the Byzantium History

 

Enjoy

 

Vasilief : A History of the Byzantine Empire

http://www.ellopos.net/elpenor/vasilief/default.asp

 

Και αυτο για τους Ρωμαιους

 

Roman descent from the Hellenes

 

Plutarch. Roman causes

 

Ianos ,an Ellin from Peraivia was the first colonist in Rome , α progenitor teacher & civilizer of the Romans. The Romans honored him as a God with many temples and also gave his name to the first month of the year ,January (Ianouarios in Hellenic).

 

Virgil .Aeniad tome 8 ,50-55

 

His oris arcades ,genus profectorum ,

Qui regem euandrum comites qui signa secuti

Delegere locum et posuere in montibus urbem

Pallantis poavi de nomine pallanteum .

 

On these shores Arcadians a line led by Pallantas and as they were followers of Evandros followed his banners chose an area and found the city of Pallantio from Evanderʼs grandfather Pallanta.

 

Later at 138-161 ad the roman emperor Antoninos the respectful out of gratitude to the Pallantian colonizer gave honor to the pallantians with privileges making Pallantio (in Arcadia) from komi(large village) to poli(city). He also rid the inhabitants from any taxes and awarded them their freedom. (Pausanias. 4 XLIII, 1)

 

Julian hidalgos (emperor) in his work “For the king helios to Soloustion” 153 a. among his other praises to the Hellenes he writes “ besides the Romans not only belong in the genus (line) of the Hellenes but their sacred institutions (and those of justice) and their religious beliefs are from the beginning to the end Hellenic “. Also in his work “Symposium or lilies” 324 a he writes “although I know that you too Romans descent from the Hellenes”.

 

Pausanias Arcadika 3,5

 

Oinotros a mythic heroe younger son of Arcados king Lycaonos .According to tradition he was the first Hellene organizer of a colony. With his brother Italon (from where the term Italians & Italy come from) and Peuketion lead Arcadians and colonized the shores of lower italy .The ancient name he gave the land was Oinotria and later took the name italy from his brother Italon .

 

Note that Lykaon was a contemporary of Kekrops that lived a generation before the Deukalion flood .Though the above part is an ancient myth even in antiquity it shows the depth of time that Italy was colonized by the Arcadian Hellenes.

 

Eusevios (fragm. Chronicles Aʼ CI CIH , tome 20 , pg 170)

« The first Hellenes were the Arcadians and having filled the Ionian gulf colonized Italy led by Oinotros of Lycaon, fifth from Azeiou and Foroneus. After along time another Hellenic fleet led by Pallantios came to these villages in Italy from arcadia and Euandros led these colonies.”

 

Justinian (Taktika leontos chapter 10)

“The nation of Lycaon is most related to the Romans … Lycaon came from Arcadia in hellas and when he came named this land Lycaonian”\

 

Thus we can discover the names given to Italy had the following order = LYCAONIA – OINOTRIA – ITALIA .

…………………………….

Also not that the first Roman historians wrote in Greek and not in Latin

Namely:

Quintus fabius pictor

Lucius Cincius Alimentus

Gaius Acilius

Aulus Postumius Albinus

 

According to Cicero one of the first Romans who wrote in Latin prose was the Sabine Claudius, Appius Caecus who was consul in 307 and 296 BC. He delivered a speech in Latin to the Senate against making peace with Pyrrhus, the king of Epirus.

 

The first Roman historians who wrote in Latin were Porcius Cato (234-140 BC) and Lucius Cassius Hemina (circa 146 BC).

 

The name "Rome" in Greek means "power," "force," "fighting army" and "speed tactics."

 

The name "Rome" derives from two the Greek verbs: 1) roomai which means "to move with speed or violence, to dart, rush, rush on, esp. of warriors. "

 

The name "Rome" also derives from of the Greek passive verb: 2) ronnymi which means "to strengthen, make strong and mighty" and "to put forth strength, have strength or might.

 

The closest Latin equivalent verb is ruo, which is connected to the Greek verb reo meaning "to flow, run, to hasten."

 

Of all the uses of Latin verbs both active and passive there is none that even comes close to meaning "rome."

 

Romans, Latins and Sabines were agreed that the name quiris (sing.) quiretes (pl.) would be their common name which dictionaries translate as citizen. But the Romans had a name for citizens, like the Greek, polites, i.e. civitas. But the names quiris-quiretes derive from the Greek name kouros-kouretes which means young men of fighting age and therefore warriors, "young men, esp. young warriors," Iliad 19. 193, 248. So the Romans, Latins and Sabines called themselves first "warriors" and later "citizens."

 

Because all three groups of Romans, Latins and Sabines came to Italy by sea from Greece and Asia minor they were warrior sailors and sea faring peoples. It is obviously for this reason that at their weddings they shouted the Greek word Thalassios, sailor, at the groom and not the Latin name marinos.

 

The rhetorician Quintilian (c. AD 35-95) regards the "Aeolic" Greek dialect as the closest to Latin

 

The Greek historian of "Roman Antiquities," Dionysius of Halicarnassus (c. 60 or 55 BC-c. 21 AD). He writes the following: "The language spoken by the Romans is neither utterly foreign (βάρβαρον) nor perfectly Greek, but a mixture, as it were, of both, the greater part of which is "Aeolic"; and the only disadvantage they have experienced from their intermingling with these various nations is that they do not pronounce all their sounds correctly. But all other indications of a Greek origin they preserve beyond any other colonists. "

Dionysius summarizes the reports of the Greek origin of the Romans by the Romans themselves as follows: “But the most learned of the Roman historians, among whom is Porcius Cato (who compiled with the greatest care the ʽoriginsʼ of the Italian cities) Gaius Sempronius and a great many others, say that they are Greeks, part of those who once dwelt in Achaia, and that they migrated many generations before the Trojan war.”

 

How the Byzantines saw themselves

http://www.orthodoxnews.netfirms.com/137/How.htm

 

Published by The National Herald, September 12, 2004

 

Christian Hellenism and How the Byzantines Saw Themselves

By Demetrios J. Constantelos

 

This article was written as a response to a request to address the issue concerning the nature of the so-called "Byzantines," and the question whether we can speak of "Christian Hellenism." What follows is a popularized summary of what I have published in several studies incorporated in my books "Christian Hellenism" and "Understanding the Greek Orthodox Church." For obvious reasons I do not cite any Greek historians or theologians.

 

A nation's self-image and self-understanding is shaped by the history it remembers and the culture that has molded its ethos and character from generation to generation. The memory of ancient Greece, from the beginning of its history down to the Christian era, was very much alive in the Byzantine Empire. Even though for legal and political reasons the inhabitants of the Empire called themselves Romans (Romaioi, Romioi), the history they remembered and the history they studied was that of the ancient Greeks – Herodotos, Thucydides, Polybios, Plutarch[os], the image they possessed of themselves had been molded by the language they spoke [Greek], the literature they read – Homer, Hesiod, Sophocles, Plato – and the physicians and scientists they studied – Hippocrates, Archimides, Hero, Ptolemeos, Strabo and many more – from ancient times to their times.

 

It is for this reason that Hellenology rather than Byzantinology more accurately expresses the nature of the Byzantine Empire's people and culture as the Hungarian scholar Gy Moravesik writes. It is well known that the transitional years between the death of Justinian in 565 and the reign of Phocas (602-610) have been perceived as the end of the ancient Greek-Roman world and the beginning of the medieval Greek Empire. With the death of Phocas in 610 "Byzantine history properly speaking is the history of the medieval Greek Empire" in the words of the Russian-Serbian historian George Ostrogorsky. The Byzantine Empire was no less than a continuation of the Greek world as it had evolved after the age of Alexander the Great. Even from as early as the reign of Constantine the Great we can identify the Byzantine Empire as the Greek Empire of the middle centuries.

 

"Notwithstanding the various tribes and peoples that settled on the territory of the [byzantine] Empire… the prevailing population was as Greek or Hellenized as it had been in the Balkans and Asia Minor during the fourth through sixth centuries (A.D.). Certainly, there were ethnic minorities there sometimes inclined to secession (the Italians, Bulgarians, Armenians, and so on), but the main ethnic substratum consisted, throughout Byzantine history, of Greek and Hellenized constituents. The language [Greek] remained unchanged… A form of diglossia, the artificial gap between the language of literature and the spoken vernacular…" write Alexander Kazhdam and Anthony Cutler, both leading "Byzantine" scholars.

 

It was the Greek influence that was markedly present throughout the Empire's existence. Whether in ethnic composition, language and literary forms, both secular and religious, art, or cultural consciousness, the Byzantine Empire was conscious of its continuity with the Greek world of antiquity and the Roman political heritage. Christianity, a religion that triumphed over Hellenism, was transformed and Hellenized. Hellenism, not in racial but in cultural and linguistic terms was perceived by Church Fathers as propaideia, preparatory for the success of Christianity.

 

The importance of philosophy and Hellenic ideals as a prodromos (forerunner) to Christ was beautifully developed by Justin the philosopher and martyr and others. Clement of Alexandria (153-217) writes that before the coming of Christ "philosophy was necessary to the Greek for righteousness," and it was given to them by God, "for God is the cause of all good things." He adds that "philosophy was given to the Greeks directly and primarily, until the Lord shall call the Greeks." The "Hellenic mind" and "Hebrew law" became schoolmasters, paving the way for the believer "who is perfected in Christ." In addition to Justin and Clement, Origen of Alexandria, shared many beliefs with the Greek philosophers. For Origen, biblical teachings and philosophical speculations were not antithetical.

 

Influential Church fathers such as the Cappadocians, the Alexandrians, the Antiochians and many ecclesiastical writers, including hagiologists, had been nurtured in an intellectual climate that had respect for both Christian faith and Greek learning. Revealed truth in Scripture, and revealed truth through human logos, were perceived as two interrelated principles and God-given gifts to humankind. It is for this reason that they relied on Scriptural passages and Greek educational proof texts. St. Basil urged young students to study Homer because Homer's epics are full of ethical instructions that lead to the truth and virtue. The interrelationship between Hellenism and Christianity gave birth to what is called Christian Hellenism (Glanville Downey, Francis Dvornik, George Florovsky and several more).

 

Following the example of Basil and other Church fathers, Greek Christianity of the Byzantine and post-Byzantine centuries never subscribed to the notion that whatever is Greek in Christianity is a corruption of pure revealed biblical truth. They saw a wider preparation for the invasion of history by God's incarnate Logos, Jesus the Christ, than the preparation only through the prophets of ancient Israel. Biblical and patristic instruction and ancient Greek thought were integrated into a system of belief, ethos, and customs

which determined its continuum throughout the Byzantine millennium. They spoke the language of Plato and cited Greek poets and philosophers and were at home among Greek ideas, rhetoric, ethics; it was their belief that Greek philosophy was the instrument of God for an ecumenical appeal of Christianity. The ancient Church adopted classical culture as a new spiritual force uniting the Greek and Roman world with the religious impulse of the Hebrew world. In the process of Hellenism was Christianized and Christianity was Hellenized. As history and literature professor Ihor Sevcenko, a Ukrainian-American leading Byzantine scholar has put it: "Hellenism vanquished by Christianity conquered its victor in turn". And Father John meyerdorff, a leading theologian adds:

 

"…it is the adoption of the Greek language and the use of cultural and philosophical features borrowed from Hellenism which really witnessed to philosophical features borrowed from Hellenism which really witnessed to a `Catholic' understanding of the church…the christian Gospel had to be proclaimed in a world which spoke and thought in Greek. To do so was not a betrayal of the scripture…but a direct missionary task which was begun by the first generations of Christians and fulfilled by those whom we call `the fathers'.

 

Let me emphasize that it is a great error to identify and speak of Hellenism in racial terms. The Greek in Christianity is not ethnic, it only reflects the fundamental historical and cultural relationship between Hellenism and Christianity. It is correct to say that "Greek is to Christianity what Hebrew is to Judaism and Arabic is to Islam."

 

It is well known that the so-called "Byzantines" defined themselves as Romans (citizens of the Roman Empire). After the edict of Caracallus all free people of the Empire became Romans. Other nations and peoples such as Latins, Franks, Germans, Russians, Armenians, Georgians, Khazarian Jews thought of the "Byzantines" as Greeks or Yunani, Yavani, Yoyn (Ionians). The "Byzantines" called their state "Kingdom of the Romans" (Basileion ton Rhomaion) but others described it as Graecia (Greece), the Greek Empire, or Yunastan, Yavan, Yawan (Ionia).

 

Aristotle, Apollodoros, the Chronicle of Paros and other ancient sources tell us that the name Greek is older than Hellene. It was occasionally used by the Byzantines themselves for self-identification, but more frequently it was used to designate the learning, language, and culture of their Empire. With some exceptions, for most of the foreigners the whole Byzantine Empire, including Asia Minor, was Greece, and its citizens Greeks. In determining the Greek national character, outsiders made no distinction between pagan and Christian Greeks, between the Greeks of ancient times and the "Byzantines" of the Middle Ages.

 

The overwhelming majority of the "Byzantines" themselves were

conscious of their uninterrupted continuity with the ancient Greeks

who, although not Christians, were ancestors. Though the adjective

Hellene, was used to imply pagan, it never disappeared as an ethnic

name. However, the names Greek and Ionian had been extensively used

by their neighbors and other people of Europe and the Orient and even

by themselves.

 

Graekos, as an ethnic identification, was used often. Priskos, the

fifth century historian, relates that, while unofficially on an

embassy to Attila the Hun, he had met at Attila's court someone

dressed like a Scythian but who spoke Greek. When Priskos asked him

where he had learned the language, he smiled and said that he was a

Graikos [Greek] by birth.

 

Many other "Byzantine" authors speak of the Empire's natives as

Greeks [graikoi] or Hellenes. For example, writing about the revolt

of a Slavic tribe in the district of Patras in the Peloponnesos,

Constantine Porphyrogennitos of the tenth century writes that the

Slavs first proceeded to sack the dwellings of their neighbors, the

Greeks, [ton Graikon], and gave them up to rapine and next they moved

against the inhabitants of the City of Patras.

 

Hellene as an ethnic name was used frequently after the eleventh

century by Anna Komnene, Michael Psellos, John III Vatatzes, George

Pletho Gemistos and several more. Anna Komnene writes of her

contemporaries as Hellenes. She does not use Hellene as a synonym

for pagan. Anna boasts about her Hellenic classical education, and

she speaks as a native Greek not as an outsider who learned Greek as

a foreigner. She writes of her country not as an insider.

 

Michael Psellos, a philosopher and historian of the 11th century was

another person conscious of the Greek nature of the Empire. When he

attacks Herodotos, the son of Lykos, who dared to criticize his

fellow Greeks and express his bias in favor of the Persians, Psellos

writes as if Herodotos had insulted his own ancestors. Emperor John

III Vatazes in his correspondence with old Rome writes of his people

as Hellenes.

 

In one of the early debates between representatives of the See of

Rome and the Patriarchate of Constantinople at the Council of

Florence (1438-1439) on the subject of Purgatory, Markos of Ephesos

and Bessarion of Nicaea drafted a response to the Latin position and

added that "on the subject [of Purgatory] our Fathers and all of the

Hellenes who have written have said nothing about it. What the

Latins have said, appear to us Hellenes unintelligible (senseless)."

Note here that Markos and Bessarion used the name Hellenes rather

than Graekoi or Romioi.

 

It was on the basis of the learning and language that Plethon

Gemistos identified the Empire's people as Hellenes. There are

linguistic, cultural and psychological indications that

the "Byzantines" viewed themselves as direct descendants and

inheritors of the ancient Hellenes. Culture, language, education,

religion were far more important factors than racial characteristics

in their self-understanding.

 

To be sure most of them followed the beliefs and practices of

Orthodox Christianity. But their religious faith did not force them

to reject their cultural past.

 

Instead, we discern in their writings and practices of daily life an

effort to integrate their old culture with the new faith. Their

perception of themselves found support in the views of their

neighbors and other nations which invariably called them Greeks or

Ionians.

 

The sixth century Syrian monk, Joshua the Stylite, writing about a

famine that plagued Edessa in Mesopotamia ca. 501-502 praised the

army stationed there for the help they provided to the victims. He

relates that "the Greek soldiers" set up places in which they looked

after the sick.

 

In a seventh century text, known as an Apocalypse, originally written

in Syrica and attributed to Methodios of Patara, known as Pseudo-

Methodios, uses the terms Greeks and Romans as synonyms,

interchangeably. He describes the rulers of the Byzantine Empire

as "the rulers of the Greeks, that is the Romans."

 

To Benjamin of Tudela, the Spaniard Jew who traveled to the East in

the 12th century, the whole of the Empire, including the Balkan

Peninsula and Asia Minor, is Greece. Constantinople "is the capital

of the whole land of Javan, which is called Greece." In the eyes of

Benjamin, the Byzantines were not warlike. Instead, for their wars,

usually defensive, they hired among all nations warriors called

barbarians to fight against the Sultan of the Seljuks, "for the

natives are not warlike." Lawless people from the hills of Wallachia

despoiled and ravaged "the land of Greece." While those lawless

people refrained from killing Jews, "they killed the Greeks."

Benjamin adds that in Constantinople is the church of Santa Sophia

and the seat of the Patriarch of the Greeks, "since the Greeks do not

obey the Pope of Rome." He calls the whole Empire, including the

Balkan Peninsula and Asia Minor, "the Empire of Greece." The Greeks

are described as very rich, possessing of gold and precious stones,

and dressed in garments of silk with gold embroidery; they ride

horses and look like princes. "Indeed, the land [of the Greeks] is

very rich in all cloth stuffs, and in bread, meat, and wine. Wealth

like that of Constantinople is not to be found in the whole world.

Here also are men learned in all the books of the Greeks, and they

eat and drink, every man under his vine and his fig-tree."

 

For Ibn Batuta, the twelfth century Arab traveler, the Emperor in

Constantinople is the King of the Greeks. Cities such as Sinope,

Brusa, Ephesos are Greek cities. Ghazi Chelebi ruled over Sinope, a

city surrounded by eleven villages inhabited by Greek infidels, he

used to sail out in order to "fight the Greeks." He writes that the

City of Brusa was captured "from the Greeks." Ephesos on the other

hand, a large and ancient town, was venerated by "the Greeks." When

Smyrna was besieged by the Turks "the Greeks under pressure of the

attacks appealed to the West for help."

 

The Russian chroniclers of "Tales of Bygone Years," known also as The

Primary Chronicle or The Chronicle of Nestor, very frequently

describe the Byzantine Empire as Greece and its inhabitants as

Greeks. The Empire's ruler is the Emperor of Greece; the Russian

prince, Igor, advanced upon the Greeks and he received from the

Greeks gold and palls. But who were the Greeks? They were

Macedonians, Thracians, Thessalians, Epirotes, Peloponnesians and

people of the entire Greek nation in other geographical areas of the

ancient Greek world. For the Chronicle Byzantium meant only the City

of Byzantion.

 

Later Russian sources, too, call the Byzantine Empire a Greek land.

For example, the Zabelin and Hludov manuscripts of The `Wanderer'

Stephen of Novgorod relate that "in Constantinople, at the Jordan, on

the Holy Mountain ,and all over the Greek land it is the Typikon of

St. Sabas [which is followed]."

 

What do they mean by "all over the Greek land?" To be sure, not

merely the mainland, the Greek chersonese proper.

 

There is no great need to elaborate on how Latin sources refer to the

Byzantines. A few illustrations will suffice. In several of the

lives of popes such as Stephen II, Hormisdas, John I, John III,

Stephen III, Hadrian I, the Byzantine Empire is Graecia, its emperor

is called Greek Emperor, and the Empire's inhabitants are designated

as Greeks. Several Latin or Western European sources, too, such as

Gregory of Tours, the Venerable Bede, Gregory the Great, Isidore of

Seville, Liutprand of Cremona, to mention only a few representative

sources provide identical information.

 

The designation Greek was not used as a derogatory name but as a

historical and long-standing appellation. Paul the Deacon, the

eighth-century chronicler of the Lombards, writes that Maurice (582-

602) was the first emperor of the race of the Greeks. And for

Liutprand of Cremona whether for realistic or polemical reasons, the

Byzantine Empire was Greek and its emperor the king of the Greeks.

 

For the Latin chroniclers who wrote about the Crusades, the

Byzantines were Greeks and their Empire, including Asia Minor, was

Graecia.

 

Guibert of Nogent praised "the hospitality of the inhabitants of the

Greek Provinces," notwithstanding the "utmost insolence" of

the "pilgrim" crusaders. For Peter the Hermit, it was the Empire of

Constantinople and its inhabitants were Greeks. For Geoffrey of

Villehardouin and Robert di Clary, both eyewitnesses of the Crusades

and recorders of speeches by the movement's leaders, the Byzantine

Empire is called Greek Empire and its citizens Greeks.

 

Several more western Europeans, travelers, chroniclers, and

theologians after the twelfth century continued o call the so-called

Byzantine Empire as Graecia and its inhabitants Greeks. Khazarian

Hebrew sources express themselves in terms identical with Latin

sources.

 

For the Arabs, too, the "Byzantines" were the descendants of the

ancient Greeks. Arabic sources indicate that the Arabs made no

distinction between ancient and contemporary Greeks.

 

"Only the highest praise could do justice to the importance of the

Greeks. Even excessive admiration is not infrequently expressed" by

Arabs in the words of Franz Rosenthal, a leading scholar of Islam and

the Arabs. He cites Arabic sources.

 

For the Arabs, the Byzantine rulers were Greeks, not Roman,

and "Greek rulers were always building level roads through difficult

territory, filling hollows, cutting through high mountains and

banishing fear of them.

 

They were always constructing various kinds of bridges, erecting

strong walls, building aqueducts and diverting rivers… They were

concerned with science and medicine." Other Arabic sources describe

the Byzantine state as Rum but they consider its people and culture

as Ighritsi (Greek).

 

For Armenians, Georgians, and several Semitic people of the Near

East, the "Byzantines" are Ionian Greeks (Yoyn, Yavani) and their

Empire is Yunastan, Yavan, Javan, Yawan (Ionia, Greece).

 

For Armenian sources in particular, all the emperors from Diocletian

in the third to Constantine XI Palaiologos in the fifteenth century

as well as military leaders, and all the Patriarchs of Constantinople

are called Yoyn.

 

In brief, the so-called "Byzantines" identified themselves as

Graekoi, Hellenes, and Rhomioi while Western European (Latin,

Germanic, Frankish) and Eastern European (Russian, Khazarian, Hebrew) and other non-Greek sources describe them as Greeks and their Empire as Graecia, or "land of the Greeks." The sources we have cited were closer to the events they described, and to the mind of the people they knew. They should be considered more reliable than later

writers who invented rather than inherited the perceptions of the past.

 

* Fr. Demetrios J. Constantelos is the Charles Cooper Townsend Sr. Distinguished Professor Emeritus of History and Religious Studies at Richard Stockton College in New Jersey. He is also a Distinguished Scholar in Residence there, with specialties in the Byzantine or Medieval Greek world, ancient Greece, Rome and the Roman Empire, early Christianity, New Testament Studies, and the history of Philanthropy. He also serves as the Chair of the Hellenic Studies program at Richard Stockton.

[Spartacos]

Αν κατάλαβα καλά, ένα copy-paste από ένα site (ανεξάρτητα από την αντικειμενικότητα του τελευταίου) μας δίνει το δικαίωμα να κατηγορούμε τους συνομιλητές μας για "αναρθρες κραυγες,γαυγισματα και μηδενιστικα ανιστορητα επιχειρηματα καφενειακου επιπεδου".

 

Γηράσκω αεί διδασκόμενος...

 

Οι 'διδασκομενοι' κακοπιστοι μπορουν να περιοριστουν στις πηγες,στους βυζαντινολογους και στους μελετητες

ετσι και αλλιως ειναι πολυ ευκολο να αποδειχθει το αυτονοητο