WHAT, IF ANYTHING, IS A BYZANTINE?

wwwtc.nhmccd.edu ^ | Revised 3/29/96. | Clifton R. Fox

[Tuco Ramirez]

They didn't regard themselves as Romans; they regarded themselves as (and spoke) Greek.

[Destro]

Are you ignorant on purpose?

From the article:

In the provinces close to Constantinople, where the Greek language predominated over the Latin of Old Rome, the idea of Roman citizenship and identity appealed to a broad segment of the population. Greek speaking citizens were proud to be Romans: in Latin, "Romani," or, in Greek, "Romaioi." The word "Romaioi" became descriptive of the Greek speaking population of the Empire. The old ethnic name applied to Greeks, "Hellene",fell into disuse.

[Tuco Ramirez]

The areas outside the vicinity of Constantinople were held by Turks.

I'll guess you're either Greek (by ethnicity) or Orthodox (by faith); in any case, if Byzantium was such a bulwark for the Roman Empire, why couldn't they save Rome (as good Romans would). Also, why did they have competing emperors in the West and East?

When Muslims invaded Spain, there was no "Crusades" from the East to help push them back across the Straits. The East made various deals with Islam to prevent an earlier (an inevitable) collapse, while the West fought a death struggle against them (Charles Martel in France, the later "Reconquista" in Spain, etc.).

[Destro]

Constantinople resisted Islam for 1,000 years. The Turks did not appear in Thrace until the end. You are indeed ignorant.

[Tuco Ramirez]

You are correct; the city of Constantinople resisted Islam for 1,000 years. The Empire itself (including the Holy Land) fell quickly indeed. As long as you held the city until 1453, the fact that EVERYTHING ELSE around fell doesn't count for anything, does it? Turks took everything else long before 1453.

What "Westerners" did to Constantinople pales in comparison to what the Turks did; Westerners are just an easier target for sour grapes, huh?

[Destro]

Especially when Westeners attacked from the West while Islam attacked in the east - and that is why the Pope apologized for the 4th crusade against Constantinople.

[Tuco Ramirez]

YOu said they were all Romans, and Constantinople was their capital...

No reason for the Pope to apologize then, right?

[Destro]

Traitors (Pope of that time) need to apologize for their treason (4th Crusade) in turning on their capital.

[Tuco Ramirez]

The Greeks should apologize for trying to shortchange the troops; they were merely taking what was due them...

and the Pope is NOT going to return the shroud. Look at it as back pay for those poor soldiers.

: )

[Destro]

Satan's wages.

[StAthanasiustheGreat]

I would certainly consider the Eastern Empire, a continuation of the Roman Empire. Perhaps an accurate historical term would be the Roman Empire during the Byzantine Period. Besides, then we can say Rome lasted from 753 B.C. - A.D. 1476. Not a bad little empire.

[FBDinNJ]

They were not traitors and it was not their capital. Rome was the capital of the West and always has been.

If anything the Orthodox were traitors for not accepting the authority of the Pope.

[Antoninus]

Constantinople resisted Islam for 1,000 years. The Turks did not appear in Thrace until the end.

That is true. However, aside from a brief revival in the tenth century, the period from AD 565 to AD 1071 is one of decline and dismemberment of the Eastern Empire. The great provinces of Italy, Egypt, Africa, Syria, Palestine, Sicily, and most of Asia Minor were lost to the empire forever.

The fact that Byzantium survived at all past the 12th century can be attributed to the fact that the crusades took some of the pressure off.

[Antoninus]

Traitors (Pope of that time) need to apologize for their treason (4th Crusade) in turning on their capital.
R Oh knock it off. Pope Innocent III protested the diversion of the crusade, lamented the sack and even excommunicated the Venetians who took part in it. John Paul II apologized for the actions of Catholics during this crusade just last week on the 800th anniversary of the sack--that's right--800 YEARS AGO. I suspect there are certain people who just enjoy holding a grudge.

After 800 years, it's pathetic that anyone would STILL claim to be angry about this. Get over it, already.

[Antoninus]

I would certainly consider the Eastern Empire, a continuation of the Roman Empire. Perhaps an accurate historical term would be the Roman Empire during the Byzantine Period. Besides, then we can say Rome lasted from 753 B.C. - A.D. 1476. Not a bad little empire.

In my opinion, the Roman Empire ended after Heraclius lost most of the eastern provinces to crusading Islam in the 7th century. The Empire that emerged at the beginning of the 8th century was almost wholly different from the Roman Empire that had existed from Actium to Adrianople.

[StAthanasiustheGreat]

And that Islamic Jihad inagurated a 1000 year war with the West (that may in fact, not be over, and may be approaching 1400 years). A.D. 632 with Mohammad to A.D 1682 and the relief of the Vienna by the Poles (think that is a right date).

[Destro]

The Pope has no temporal authority. They capital of teh Roman empire was Constantinople.

[Tuco Ramirez]

If that makes you feel better; Rome was done earlier on. I'm descended from those who sacked Rome; we created a better way, that was the envy of Rome. In either case; the East was small potatoes (the Germanic way won, and there's not much else to add). If you answer in English, you've made my point. If you answer in an Eastern tongue, bueno suerte. Es posible que ayudamos!

[Tuco Ramirez]

OK, if that makes you feel better. The schismatics got their just due (Muslims in St. Sophia). Enjoy!