{"title":"Absence","authors":"Averil M. Cameron","doi":"10.23943/princeton/9780691196855.003.0002","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This chapter examines Byzantium's absence from the wider historical discourse. Part of the reason for this absence is that it has been relegated to the sphere of negativity. The very name that people use today—“Byzantium”—was a derogatory coinage of the early modern period, and Byzantium has traditionally been the subject of adverse comparisons with Rome and with everything classical. Autocracy, bureaucracy, deviousness, and a stultifying lack of originality—all still seem to go together with the word “Byzantium,” underpinned by the ever-present awareness that in the end Byzantium “fell.” In general historiography, Byzantium is either nonexistent or in between. In many Anglo-Saxon history departments, Byzantium is regarded as a niche specialization, while among books intended for the general reader, many of the most successful continue to emphasize court intrigue or a romanticized view of Orthodoxy. The chapter then looks at the role played by Orthodoxy in Byzantium. It also studies Byzantine literature.","PeriodicalId":430142,"journal":{"name":"Byzantine Matters","volume":"12 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-09-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Byzantine Matters","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.23943/princeton/9780691196855.003.0002","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
This chapter examines Byzantium's absence from the wider historical discourse. Part of the reason for this absence is that it has been relegated to the sphere of negativity. The very name that people use today—“Byzantium”—was a derogatory coinage of the early modern period, and Byzantium has traditionally been the subject of adverse comparisons with Rome and with everything classical. Autocracy, bureaucracy, deviousness, and a stultifying lack of originality—all still seem to go together with the word “Byzantium,” underpinned by the ever-present awareness that in the end Byzantium “fell.” In general historiography, Byzantium is either nonexistent or in between. In many Anglo-Saxon history departments, Byzantium is regarded as a niche specialization, while among books intended for the general reader, many of the most successful continue to emphasize court intrigue or a romanticized view of Orthodoxy. The chapter then looks at the role played by Orthodoxy in Byzantium. It also studies Byzantine literature.