Caesar Bardas and the Earthquake of Constantinople: The Rival Depictions of the Event in the Arabic and Byzantine Sources (original) (raw)
Related papers
The Byzantine-Arab Chronicle of 741: Translation and Commentary
The Byzantine-Arab Chronicle of 741 of the two texts is often obscure, but this seems to be due less to the linguistic (in)competence of the authors than to their desire to condense the common source, a process they often carry out to such extremes. that the original sense is difficult to grasp. §1. Reccared died having completed the 15th year of his reign. 3 §2. Era 639 4 (601): After Reccared his son Liuva, born of a humble mother, was set over the Goths and remained in the rule for two 5 years. 6 §3. Era 641 (603): Witteric claimed for himself for 7 years the rule that he had tyranically seized from Liuva, and because he lived by the sword he perished by the sword. For the death of the innocent Liuva, Reccared's son, did not go unavenged in him; indeed he (Witteric) was slain between the courses of a meal by his own men. 7 §4. Era 642 (604): Phocas, 56th [emperor] of the Romans, was set in power in a tyrannical manner and he remained in it for 8 years. • The Persians left their own homes and achieved successes against the Romans. Having driven back the Romans, they subjected Syria, Arabia: and Egypt. 8 §5. Era 648 (610): Gundemar was set in power over the Goths after Witteric for two years. 9 §6. Era 649 (611): Heraclius was crowned emperor, 57th 10 of th Romans.11 He had plotted a rebellion against Phocas from Africa out oL by "cf." before the reference. Dubler, "La cr6nica ar.ibigo-bizantina de 741/' 298-321, gives correspondences with other chronicles when the same event is narrated,' even when there is not the slightest resemblance in the details of the two accounts.-Although this approach has its merits 1 it can give a misleading impression, and I_ shall only give correspondences with other works (chiefly Syriac CS) when there is' some similarity between their respective notices. 3 Cf. Isidore of Seville, History, §56; Reccared I reigned 586-601. 4 This is the Spanish era, which counts from 1 January 38 BC for reasons not altogether clear. 5 Where I write a number in full, it is because it appears that way in the text.
Edited by 3 See in particular William Labov and Joshua Waletzky, "Narrative analysis: oral versions of personal experience", in Essays on the verbal and visual arts, ed. June Helm (Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1967), 12-44. 4 I leave to one side the use of the term 'narrative' to refer to the imposition of form on the past, as argued by the 'narrativist' tradition, most clearly by Hayden White, Tropics of discourse: essays in cultural criticism (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1978), even though the common element-evaluation through language and the construction of a specific 'story'-is apparent. See
In this paper, I argue that the story of the collective martyrdom of the 42 captives of Amorion is most probably an invention for propagandistic reasons. No evidence of a public execution of high-ranking Roman prisoners in the caliphate can be found in non-Byzantine sources which provide detailed accounts of the sack of Amorion. Mid-tenth century Constantinopolitan historiography reproduced the information of the martyria which were the first to report on a public execution, thus irrevocably sealing the historicity of an invented event in the collective memory of eastern Roman society along with the historical image of the events of the sack of Amorion. The early martyria of group B, which established the basic features of a story of heroism on behalf of empire and faith, were intended to turn hagiography into history in order to invert the image of a bitter defeat and exonerate the still ruling Amorian dynasty. The new version of the story that came about with the later martyria of group A provided a new historical interpretation of the defeat as God’s will due to the heretical beliefs of emperor Theophilos.
For Byzantium the relationship and the cohabitation with the Islamic-Turkish world are inexorable necessity to know and to understand the last centuries of the Greek Empire. Nevertheless at the beginning of 14 th Century the process of formation of Turkish emirates in the Western lands of Asia Minor meant an absolute novelty for the political and religious scene of Byzantium. Necessary and constant exchanges, the aggressive policy of the numerous emirates, the need to rely on them to work out the institutional muddle of the civil wars have been reasons of acceleration of the phenomenon which have finally led to the end of the Empire. Obviously other elements – seemingly unrelated – have contributed: the convulsive development of the palamitic debate, the social changes and the troubled relationship with the Latin World are only the main factors. To be interested to the perception of the Turkish danger is a necessary engagement to fully understand the 14 th Century. We must consider that the main figures who debated about the Islamic-Turkish matters are the same who played an important role in the religious and political life at that time (John VI Cantacuzenus, Gregory Palamas, Callistus I patriarch). But there are some other factors for the urgency of the study we offer. First of all the renewed interest that it finds in the scientific literature. Then we have to consider the lack of comprehensive studies available on the matter. The Khoury's works, for now the summa for everyone who likes to approach the byzantine antislamic controversy, don't deal with 14 th Century authors or writings. The convergence of these three elements (relevance of the matter, renewed interest and lack of comprehensive studies) have persuaded us to take up this matter. Our work is divided into five parts: the presentation of four dossiers and a conclusion that revalues and upgrades the materials we gathered. Indeed other sources have allowed us to enlarge the objective of our observations. So we have been able to define a significant overview. First of all we have selected four areas of research according to the importance and dimension of the available works. So we have focused our attention on authors and documents relating to the middle of 14 th Century: documents from the archives of the
Proceedings of the Plenary Sessions. The 24th International Congress of Byzantine Studies, 2022
OPEN ACCESS: http://doi.org/10.30687/978-88-6969-590-2 The present volume collects most of the contributions to the plenary sessions held at the 24th International Congress of Byzantine Studies, and incisively reflects the ever increasing broadening of the very concept of ‘Byzantine Studies’. Indeed, a particularly salient characteristic of the papers presented here is their strong focus on interdisciplinarity and their breadth of scope, both in terms of methodology and content. The cross-pollination between different fields of Byzantine Studies is also a major point of the volume. Archaeology and art history have pride of place; it is especially in archaeological papers that one can grasp the vital importance of the interaction with the so-called hard sciences and with new technologies for contemporary research. This relevance of science and technology for archaeology, however, also applies to, and have significant repercussions in, historical studies, where – for example – the study of climate change or the application of specific software to network studies are producing a major renewal of knowledge. In more traditional subject fields, like literary, political, and intellectual history, the contributions to the present volume offer some important reflections on the connection between Byzantium and other cultures and peoples through the intermediary of texts, stories, diplomacy, trade, and war.