Beloved Son-In-Law: Charters of Byzantine Emperors to Hilandar After the Marriage of King Milutin With Symonis_SCRIPTA_12-2013 (original) (raw)
Related papers
CONSTANTINE THE GREAT -THE MODEL OF BYZANTINE
2014
Paper was written for class during academic studies. Introduction: Throughout history, there are many interesting civilizations full of colorful characters who have played important roles in the events which have shaped both their culture and facets of the world which exists today. In our classroom we have taken a closer inspection of one such civilization – the Byzantine Empire - and asked to provide personal analysis on the following question: Who would you consider the greatest - the most Byzantine - emperor of the period? Upon review of the various emperors of the period, there is one individual who stands out from the pack and indeed, is the prototype for all others who came after. Constantine the Great is the very definition of what it means to be “byzantine” and it is the intent of this research paper to provide a brief overview of Constantine’s background, his contributions to the Byzantine Empire, and a personal analysis of why this researcher believes he is the most “byzantine”. In addition, a bibliography will also be listed for the further reading and research of the target audience.
Proceedings of Days of Justinian I , 2022
This paper will refer to two aspects, the ongoing debate that takes place within the field of Byzantine studies about the factors that were responsible for longevity of the Byzantine Empire on the political scene for over a millennium and its connection with the Roman state. Specifically, it will focus on some segments in relation to the art of conducting state affairs, i.e., on Byzantine statecraft, more precisely, on the state-shaped grand strategy and diplomacy during the imperial period that ended with the reign of the Komnenoi dynasty. In that context, part of the Byzantine governmental strategies and foreign policies whose initial stages of establishment, development and field implementation can be traced all the way back to the reign of the first Roman emperor, Octavian Augustus, will be examined.
Byzantinoslavica, 2022
The concept of the Byzantine Commonwealth, conceived by Dimitri Obolensky almost half a century ago, remains one of the rare innovative attempts to study the relations of Byzantine Empire with the wider Orthodox world that leaned toward Constantinople. However, Obolensky paid little attention to the idea of Romanness as the core identity marker of the Byzantines, focusing mainly on the second element of the Byzantine political identity, especially after the fall of Constantinople in 1204: Orthodoxy and its bonding potential. The present paper offers a new perspective by arguing that the bases of the gradually strengthening bonds between the Byzantine states, both the empire of Nicaea and the state of Epirus, with the Bulgarians and the Serbs, are to be found in the system of kinship networks established both within the now destroyed Byzantine empire, and beyond its borders, from the beginning of the twelfth century onwards.
Rethinking the Position of Serbia within Byzantine Oikoumene in the Thirteenth Century
The Balkans and the Byzantine World before and after Captures of Constantinople, 1204 and 1453, 2016
Byzantine world was profoundly shaken by the Crusadersތ capture of Constantinople in 1204 but the overwhelming dominance of the ramified Byzantine imperial clan over southeastern Europe, strengthened through an allencompassing hierarchical system of mutually connected relatives, gradually put in place over the course of the previous hundred years, prevented a total political upturn in the region and enabled the continuity of intensive regional communication and cooperation. 1 Serbiaތs reaction to the events of 1204 and its position within the Byzantine world 2 in the course of the turbulent thirteenth century is a case in point of the functioning of the new political system in southeastern Europe that rested on the personal connection of the regional rulers directly with the Byzantine Emperor and his closest relatives, established firmly in the decades that preceded the Crusadersތ sack of Byzantine capital. [8.1] Rethinking Serbiaތs position in the aftermath of the catastrophe of 1204 and reexamining the thirteenth century in Byzantine world in general-and in southeastern Europe in particular-requires a decisive break with the deeply rooted assumptions in scholarship that events unfolded in a way determined by strong and "unchangeable" factors, such as ethnicity or religious orientation. 3 Reflection much more of national or ideological orientations of modern scholars than of historical realities of the thirteenth century southeastern Europe and the eastern Mediterranean, the dominant approach in historiography-that should be finally done away with-laid too strong an emphasis on teleological character of events, leading to a flat and linear view of the complex historical developments. 4 On top of that, Serbian historiogra
The eighteen chapters of this book explore the complex history of exchange between Byzantium and the Latin West over a period of more than three hundred years, with a focus on the political, ecclesiastical and cultural spheres. Besides outlining the history of competition and collaboration between two empires in medieval Europe, a range of regional approaches, stretching from England to the Crusader kingdoms, o fer insights into the many aspects of Byzantine-Latin contact and exchange. Further sections explore patterns of mutual perception, linguistic and material dimensions of the contacts, as well as the role played by various groups of "cultural brokers" such as ambassadors, merchants, monks and Jewish communities.
Cuestiones Políticas
The aim of the article is to determine the legal foundations. The methodological basis of the study is analysis and synthesis, systems approach, genetic and comparative methods. Conclusions: The Byzantine law can be traced to the legislation of Basil I and Leo VI. However, jus gentium (law of nations) did not have sufficient representation in their codes. Therefore, the legal basis of Byzantine foreign policy consisted of customs and traditions that had been formed in diplomatic practice in ancient times.The system of international relations of Byzantium was hierarchical. The legal status of each participant in this system was determined by military power, political potential, tradition and religious identity. The relations between Byzantine and Kievan Rus’ can serve as a model of the application of international legal norms, which were based on the treaty of 944, which regulated the legal status of merchants, property rights, mutual military assistance and the use of territories on...