Just How 'Greek' Was The Byzantine Empire???

[Delodephius]

Eh, reposted.

[Demos]

There is this funny thing about us Slavs. We wrote on wood, burned our dead to ashes and built buildings from lumber.

The only thing the Greek inscriptions in ancient Macedonia prove is that inscriptions in ancient Macedonia were written in Greek.

Ok, agreed. But why not write in your own language? Why put up inscriptions in a foreign language?

I have been to the Roman Forum. I know the Romans admired Hellenic civilization and culture. The Romans spoke Latin. Everywhere I looked the overwhelming majority of inscriptions were in Latin. Occasionally, I did see some inscriptions in ancient Greek.

[Sarafot]

Sarafot,

I think this topic is above your knowledge. The Roman-Macedonian Wars (1, 2, and 3rd) occurred after the Successor Wars, which were wars between the Generals of Alexander after his death.

Oh yea,sorry my Eng is not that well!!The succesor=Naslednik,i'll remeber that word.

[Delodephius]

Why wait to write in our own (Slovak) language all the way to the 18th century? Why Slavs in general started to write in the 9th century AD? If they didn't write in the 8th century AD why would the reason be different in the 3rd century BC?

[Sarafot]

So Slovak what do you think why Koine,and when it is saied Hellenic,is it ment like Balkanian or European???

[Demos]

Why wait to write in our own (Slovak) language all the way to the 18th century? Why Slavs in general started to write in the 9th century AD? If they didn't write in the 8th century AD why would the reason be different in the 3rd century BC?

The question however remains, why did the ancient Macedonians if we are to assume that they were not Greek and spoke an entirely different language than Greek and had a different alphabet, did not leave us with thousands upon thousands of inscriptions at Pella, Aegae etc in their own language?

You're simply paraphrasing my question and asking it back at me.

[Delodephius]

I don't think ancient Macedonians had their own alphabet. Maybe some symbols used for certain sacral purposes like all European cultures had.
Why use Greek and not their own language to write? I don't think there was any motive to do that. The ruling class and the nobility was well versed in Attic Greek. There was no productive reason to write in their native tongue, if they all even knew it and were not taught only Koine since childhood.

[Risto the Great]

The question however remains, why did the ancient Macedonians if we are to assume that they were not Greek and spoke an entirely different language than Greek and had a different alphabet, did not leave us with thousands upon thousands of inscriptions at Pella, Aegae etc in their own language?

You're simply paraphrasing my question and asking it back at me.

I thought S/A/T gave you a thought provoking question back. The Slovaks wrote in their own language from the 18th century. You either believe they did not exist before then or else you accept that the written language is no indicator of a separate ethnicity.

Personally, I feel the Ancient Macedonians (amongst others) quite simply saw an evolved written language that was of use to them. You make it sound like everyone could read and write back then. When for 1500 years after this date, it (written language around the world) was still only in the hands of a few scholars and monks.

[Demos]

I don't think ancient Macedonians had their own alphabet. Maybe some symbols used for certain sacral purposes like all European cultures had.
Why use Greek and not their own language to write? I don't think there was any motive to do that. The ruling class and the nobility was well versed in Attic Greek. There was no productive reason to write in their native tongue, if they all even knew it and were not taught only Koine since childhood.

I agree with your assessment. I would say that the Macedonian ruling class were most likely entirely Hellenized, but that perhaps the commoner ploughing the fields, making leather shoes, etc were probably not and spoke a dialect entirely different.

[Sarafot]

That is the best answer=odgovor,even today on Blakans there is only around 70% pismenost=?,wright?

It was ment for Ristos answer

[Soldier of Macedon]

The Byzantine Empire was as multi-ethnic as the Roman Empire. However, the prevailing language and culture were Greek/and Greco-Roman and Latin/Roman respectively regardless of a person's ethnic background.

The prevailing language in the markets and shopping centres of Australia is English, are you trying to tell me that all of the Macedonians, Greeks, Vietnamese, Ethiopians and Samoans who speak this common English language are all "culturally" English and can lay claim to Henry the VIII? This is a reason for the modern Greek to claim some Armenians and Slavic-speakers from the Medieval period as 'ancestors', because of the common language used?

With regard to how Greek the Byzantine Empire was, I will say that after the coronation of Charlemagne in 800AD as "Holy Roman Emperor", the kingdoms in Western Europe typically referred to the "Byzantine" Empire as Empire of the Greeks and the Byzantine Emperor as Emperor of the Greeks. Of course this annoyed greatly the Byzantine rulers who saw themselves as the true and legitimate heirs to the Romans.

So? During this very same period, the East Romans (Who never called themselves Byzantines or Greek) referred to the West Romans as Latins, despite the fact that the kings and a large part of the population were undoubtedly Germanic-speakers. That sort of leaves the 'Greek' theory in the pile of unrealistic where it belongs. Westerners used the term 'Greek' for citizens of East Rome, for Eastern Christians and the Eastern (Orthodox) Church, there are several accounts of the Russian Church being referred to as the 'Greek' Church. There is no 'ethnic' connection to the modern Greek people who seem to enjoy usurping the former use of the term 'Greek' for eveything it is worth, whether related or not.

With regard to the last emperor of Byzantium (Constantine Palaiologos) I never recall reading he was of Armenian extract, but instead of Greek (father's side) and Serbian (mother's side) background.

Show me a credible contemporary (or near) source that refers to Palaiologos as of "ethnic Greek" and "ethnic Serb" extraction.

Greeks today seen themselves as the inheritors of Byzantine Empire owning to it predominately Greek language and culture, just as the Italians see themselves as the inheritors of the Roman Empire, the Turks to the Ottoman Empire, and the Arabs to the Arabian Caliphate Empire.

Well then Greeks today have a false picture of history, and you have just contradicted yourself, for earlier you clearly make mention of the multi-ethnic character of East Rome and now you are trying to claim all of her history for the mere nation of the modern Greeks? I don't think so. The Italians can claim the original Romans as they were their Latin ancestors and it was they who began the state which turned into an empire. However, they cannot claim the Roman Empire in all of its glory and history, they cannot claim the Balkan and Germanic rulers of later periods, as Rome was much more than just Italy.

In all cases the Empires were multi-ethnic, but there was a predominate language and culture in all of them.

Language yes, but what makes the culture 'Greek' in the modern sense you would like to interpret it today? The culture of East Rome, although drawing much from previous Greek and Macedonian civilizations and the native populations, was nevertheless Roman to begin with, and was later mixed with Eastern Christianity. By what right do the modern Greeks claim this empire or its culture as 'theirs'? Because of the official language of the state? Meaning that all the Germanic rulers and their people in West Rome were Italians because they used Latin as an official language? Do modern Italians claim the deeds of the Germanic rulers in West Rome?

By the way, using 'Hellenism' in the context of the East Roman CHRISTIAN state reveals how you yourself may be out of your league with this topic, of course, you can prove me otherwise by showing me a chronology of all the examples of the word 'Hellenism' during the life of East Rome, along with all of the people who self-identified as 'Hellenes'.

I eagerly await. If you cannot provide this (which I know you cannot), please cease using the term 'Hellenism' in relation to an East Roman Empire that despised anything 'Hellenic' as devil-worshipping.

[Demos]

The prevailing language in the markets and shopping centres of Australia is English, are you trying to tell me that all of the Macedonians, Greeks, Vietnamese, Ethiopians and Samoans who speak this common English language are all "culturally" English and can lay calim to Henry the VIII? This is a reason for the modern Greek to claim some Armenians and Slavic-speakers from the Medieval period as 'ancestors', because of the common language used?

So? During this very same period, the East Romans (Who never called themselves Byzantines or Greek) referred to the West Romans as Latins, despite the fact that the kings and a large part of the population were undoubtedly Germanic-speakers. That sort of leaves the 'Greek' theory in the pile of unrealistic where it belongs. Westerners used the term 'Greek' for citizens of East Rome, for Eastern Christians and the Eastern (Orthodox) Church, there are several accounts of the Russian Church being referred to as the 'Greek' Church. There is no 'ethnic' connection to the modern Greek people who seem to enjoy usurping the former use of the term 'Greek' for eveything it is worth, whether related or not.

Show me a credible contemporary (or near) source that refers to Palaiologos as of "ethnic Greek" and "ethnic Serb" extraction.

Well then Greeks today have a false picture of history, and you have just contradicted yourself, for earlier you clearly make mention of the multi-ethnic character of East Rome and now you are trying to claim all of her history for the mere nation of the modern Greeks? I don't think so. The Italians can claim the original Romans as they were their Latin ancestors and it was they who began the state which turned into an empire. However, they cannot claim the Roman Empire in all of its glory and history, they cannot claim the Balkan and Germanic rulers of later periods, as Rome was much more than just Italy.

Language yes, but what makes the culture 'Greek' in the modern sense you would like to interpret it today? The culture of East Rome, although drawing much from previous Greek and Macedonian civilizations and the native populations, was nevertheless Roman to begin with, and was later mixed with Eastern Christianity. By what right do the modern Greeks claim this empire or its culture as 'theirs'? Because of the official language of the state? Meaning that all the Germanic rulers and their people in West Rome were Italians because they used Latin as an official language? Do modern Italians claim the deeds of the Germanic rulers in West Rome?

By the way, using 'Hellenism' in the context of the East Roman CHRISTIAN state reveals how you yourself may be out of your league with this topic, of course, you can prove me otherwise by showing me a chronology of all the examples of the word 'Hellenism' during the life of East Rome, along with all of the people who self-identified as 'Hellenes'.

I eagerly await. If you cannot provide this (which I know you cannot), please cease using the term 'Hellenism' in relation to an East Roman Empire that despised anything 'Hellenic' as devil-worshipping.

@Soldier

I am sorry for not clarifying this earlier, but the term "Greek" or "Greece" does not exist in my language. The terms we use to describe ourselves in our own language are "Hellenes" who speak "Hellenic". The terms Greek or Greece is a term coined by the Romans who first came into contact with the Graeci which was a Greek colony in southern Italy. Just like most of the people of the Middle East use the term Yunan and Yunanistan from the term Ionan (Ionian) as the Persians first came into contact with the Ionian Greeks in Asia Minor.

The culture of the Byzantine Empire was Roman as well, primarily in public administration and law, but in many of the sciences it was Greek in many ways. I never claimed it was entirely Greek, but to ignore the impact of Greek cultural contributions to the Empire is simply not correct from a historical point of view.

[Sarafot]

@Soldier

I am sorry for not clarifying this earlier, but the term "Greek" or "Greece" does not exist in my language. The terms we use to describe ourselves in our own language are "Hellenes" who speak "Hellenic". The terms Greek or Greece is a term coined by the Romans who first came into contact with the Graeci which was a Greek colony in southern Italy. Just like most of the people of the Middle East use the term Yunan and Yunanistan from the term Ionan (Ionian) as the Persians first came into contact with the Ionian Greeks in Asia Minor.

The culture of the Byzantine Empire was Roman as well, primarily in public administration and law, but in many of the sciences it was Greek in many ways. I never claimed it was entirely Greek, but to ignore the impact of Greek cultural contributions to the Empire is simply not correct from a historical point of view.

And where do you put Macedonians in that empire?Under Greeks,how it is posible when Romans fighted with Macedonians not with Hellenes,and you mention Greaci in Sicilia,but Romans steel fought with Macedonians,not Hellenes,not Greci,not Dorians...blabla,but simply with Macedonians!!

[Soldier of Macedon]

@Soldier

I am sorry for not clarifying this earlier, but the term "Greek" or "Greece" does not exist in my language. The terms we use to describe ourselves in our own language are "Hellenes" who speak "Hellenic". The terms Greek or Greece is a term coined by the Romans who first came into contact with the Graeci which was a Greek colony in southern Italy. Just like most of the people of the Middle East use the term Yunan and Yunanistan from the term Ionan (Ionian) as the Persians first came into contact with the Ionian Greeks in Asia Minor.

Demos, thanks for clarifying that point, although I should inform you that I am well aware that neither 'Greek' nor 'Byzantine' are used as an identity by your people, despite certain claims made when in reference to events pertaining to East Rome or Orthodoxy.

I am also aware that the term you guys use to describe yourselves today is 'Hellenic', as I am equally aware that prior to the 1800's no person that resides in what is today known as modern Greece ever used the term 'Hellenic' to refer to their people or language, except a few bored and educated Platoists that sprung up every few hundred years during the East Roman period. Generally, the East Romans viewed the 'Hellenes' as pagans and devils, are you aware of this? If am I wrong, please correct me by showing me a list of East Roman citizens that identified as 'Hellenes' from the time of Christ to 1800ad.

The culture of the Byzantine Empire was Roman as well, primarily in public administration and law, but in many of the sciences it was Greek in many ways. I never claimed it was entirely Greek, but to ignore the impact of Greek cultural contributions to the Empire is simply not correct from a historical point of view.

The culture of East Rome was a blend of many elements as I described previously, and nobody is trying to discount the relevance of the official tongue of the state from the 600's onwards, but to piggy-back a delivery of cultural significance emanating from the 'ethnic Greeks' of the empire based on the official use of a language is hardly correct from a historical viewpoint either, particularly considering that of all the rulers in East Rome, hardly any originated from what is now modern Greece.

Influence in a formal manner can definetly be attributed, in the same manner as countries like India, Samoa (or any other islander entities that have now developed into states) now use English as an official tongue in their states. However, this does not give any English-speaker in the world the right to claim these deeds and much less the 'cultural' history of places like India, Samoa, etc.

Can you see it from this pragmatic and realistic angle?

[Demos]

Demos, thanks for clarifying that point, although I should inform you that I am well aware that neither 'Greek' nor 'Byzantine' are used as an identity by your people, despite certain claims made when in reference to events pertaining to East Rome or Orthodoxy.

I am also aware that the term you guys use to describe yourselves today is 'Hellenic', as I am equally aware that prior to the 1800's no person that resides in what is today known as modern Greece ever used the term 'Hellenic' to refer to their people or language, except a few bored and educated Platoists that sprung up every few hundred years during the East Roman period. Generally, the East Romans viewed the 'Hellenes' as pagans and devils, are you aware of this? If am I wrong, please correct me by showing me a list of East Roman citizens that identified as 'Hellenes' from the time of Christ to 1800ad.

The culture of East Rome was a blend of many elements as I described previously, and nobody is trying to discount the relevance of the official tongue of the state from the 600's onwards, but to piggy-back a delivery of cultural significance emanating from the 'ethnic Greeks' of the empire based on the official use of a language is hardly correct from a historical viewpoint either, particularly considering that of all the rulers in East Rome, hardly any originated from what is now modern Greece.

Influence in a formal manner can definetly be attributed, in the same manner as countries like India, Samoa (or any other islander entities that have now developed into states) now use English as an official tongue in their states. However, this does not give any English-speaker in the world the right to claim these deeds and much less the 'cultural' history of places like India, Samoa, etc.

Can you see it from this pragmatic and realistic angle?

I have studied the Byzantine Empire on many occasions as I am history buff and very well know that many ethnic groups contributed to its success and dominance during Europe's Dark Ages. I never claimed Greek exclusively ran the Empire.