What can be learned about Byzantine dream culture from the works of Byzantine historians? on firs... more What can be learned about Byzantine dream culture from the works of Byzantine historians? on first impression, the answer would seem to be, not much. Dream narratives and mentions of dreams occupy very little space in the voluminous pages of Byzantine historical literature. some texts contain none at all; a significant number record only one dream, while of those that narrate more than three, all but two works achieve this statistic mainly with material drawn from earlier texts, including, of course, the Bible which was a standard source for the universal chronicles that remained the bedrock of history-writing throughout the middle ages. yet the incidence of dreams in historical narratives, and the types of dreams they narrate, afford some insight into the role of dreams in the Byzantine conception of history. The pattern obtained should reveal something of the importance those Byzantine historians and their readers accorded to dreams in the construction and explanation of past events. admittedly, to say this is to beg two very big questions that cannot be answered in this chapter. first, how does one measure the importance of a Byzantine literary motif – by the frequency, or by the conspicuous singularity, with which it occurs in the composition? By the insistence or the understatement of the author? By its originality, or by the richness of its borrowings, echoes and allusions? secondly, what was the Byzantines' conception of good history? according to the prefaces of their historical compositions, it was not that different from ours: a sober concern for the plain, unvarnished truth; to tell things the way they really happened, on the basis of eyewitness observation and careful research. 1 They clearly distinguished, in theory, between history writing and rhetorical modes of expression that served to embroider and distort the facts, to whitewash and denigrate the actors. But in practice, they treated historiography as literature that had to edify, entertain and echo other literary works; and they used it, like other forms of literature, as a vehicle for ideological argument and the settling 1 on the motifs of historical prooimia, see i. grigoriadis, 'a study of the Prooimion of zonaras' Chronicle in relation to other 12th-Century historical Prooimia' , BZ 91 (1998), 328–44.
The Cambridge History of the Byzantine Empire c.500–1492, 2009
Between the death of Alexios I Komnenos and the establishment of the Latin empire of Constantinop... more Between the death of Alexios I Komnenos and the establishment of the Latin empire of Constantinople, eight emperors ruled in the eastern Roman capital. Their reigns were as successful as they were long: under John II Komnenos (1118–43) and Manuel I Komnenos (1143–80) Byzantium remained a wealthy and expansionist power, maintaining the internal structures and external initiatives which were necessary to sustain a traditional imperial identity in a changing Mediterranean world of crusaders, Turks and Italian merchants. But the minority of Manuel’s son Alexios II Komnenos (1180–83) exposed the fragility of the regime inaugurated by Alexios I. Lateral branches of the reigning dynasty seized power in a series of violent usurpations that progressively undermined the security of each usurper, inviting foreign intervention, provincial revolts and attempted coups d’etat . Under Andronikos I Komnenos (1183–5), Isaac II Angelos (1185–95), Alexios III Angelos (1195–1203), Alexios IV Angelos (1203–4) and Alexios V Doukas (1204), the structural features which had been the strengths of the state in the previous hundred years became liabilities. The empire’s international web of clients and marriage alliances, its reputation for fabulous wealth, the overwhelming concentration of people and resources in Constantinople, the privileged status of the ‘blood-royal’, the cultural self-confidence of the administrative and religious elite: under strong leadership, these factors had come together to make the empire dynamic and great; out of control, they and the reactions they set up combined to make the Fourth Crusade a recipe for disaster.
REB 34 1976 France p. 143-149 ; P. Magdalino, Notes on the last years of John Palaiologos, brothe... more REB 34 1976 France p. 143-149 ; P. Magdalino, Notes on the last years of John Palaiologos, brother of Michael VIII. — The Despot John Palaeologus fell into disgrace after the Battle of Neopatras. A brief chronicle situates his death between 1272 and 1273. The « Despot John » mentioned by Gregory of Cyprus in 1284 is therefore not the brother of Michael VIII. He should rather be identified with John Asen of Bulgaria. Some cartulary acts of Makritinissa contribute further evidence in favour of dating the Battle of Neopatras and the disgrace of John Palaeologus between November 1272 and October 1273.
orient et méDiterranée (Umr 8167) / monDe BYZantin Collège De FranCe / institUt D'étUDes BYZantin... more orient et méDiterranée (Umr 8167) / monDe BYZantin Collège De FranCe / institUt D'étUDes BYZantines TRAVAUX ET MÉMOIRES-publication annuelle paraissant en un ou deux fascicules-Fondés par paul lemerle Continués par gilbert Dagron Dirigés par Constantin Zuckerman
What can be learned about Byzantine dream culture from the works of Byzantine historians? on firs... more What can be learned about Byzantine dream culture from the works of Byzantine historians? on first impression, the answer would seem to be, not much. Dream narratives and mentions of dreams occupy very little space in the voluminous pages of Byzantine historical literature. some texts contain none at all; a significant number record only one dream, while of those that narrate more than three, all but two works achieve this statistic mainly with material drawn from earlier texts, including, of course, the Bible which was a standard source for the universal chronicles that remained the bedrock of history-writing throughout the middle ages. yet the incidence of dreams in historical narratives, and the types of dreams they narrate, afford some insight into the role of dreams in the Byzantine conception of history. The pattern obtained should reveal something of the importance those Byzantine historians and their readers accorded to dreams in the construction and explanation of past events. admittedly, to say this is to beg two very big questions that cannot be answered in this chapter. first, how does one measure the importance of a Byzantine literary motif – by the frequency, or by the conspicuous singularity, with which it occurs in the composition? By the insistence or the understatement of the author? By its originality, or by the richness of its borrowings, echoes and allusions? secondly, what was the Byzantines' conception of good history? according to the prefaces of their historical compositions, it was not that different from ours: a sober concern for the plain, unvarnished truth; to tell things the way they really happened, on the basis of eyewitness observation and careful research. 1 They clearly distinguished, in theory, between history writing and rhetorical modes of expression that served to embroider and distort the facts, to whitewash and denigrate the actors. But in practice, they treated historiography as literature that had to edify, entertain and echo other literary works; and they used it, like other forms of literature, as a vehicle for ideological argument and the settling 1 on the motifs of historical prooimia, see i. grigoriadis, 'a study of the Prooimion of zonaras' Chronicle in relation to other 12th-Century historical Prooimia' , BZ 91 (1998), 328–44.
The Cambridge History of the Byzantine Empire c.500–1492, 2009
Between the death of Alexios I Komnenos and the establishment of the Latin empire of Constantinop... more Between the death of Alexios I Komnenos and the establishment of the Latin empire of Constantinople, eight emperors ruled in the eastern Roman capital. Their reigns were as successful as they were long: under John II Komnenos (1118–43) and Manuel I Komnenos (1143–80) Byzantium remained a wealthy and expansionist power, maintaining the internal structures and external initiatives which were necessary to sustain a traditional imperial identity in a changing Mediterranean world of crusaders, Turks and Italian merchants. But the minority of Manuel’s son Alexios II Komnenos (1180–83) exposed the fragility of the regime inaugurated by Alexios I. Lateral branches of the reigning dynasty seized power in a series of violent usurpations that progressively undermined the security of each usurper, inviting foreign intervention, provincial revolts and attempted coups d’etat . Under Andronikos I Komnenos (1183–5), Isaac II Angelos (1185–95), Alexios III Angelos (1195–1203), Alexios IV Angelos (1203–4) and Alexios V Doukas (1204), the structural features which had been the strengths of the state in the previous hundred years became liabilities. The empire’s international web of clients and marriage alliances, its reputation for fabulous wealth, the overwhelming concentration of people and resources in Constantinople, the privileged status of the ‘blood-royal’, the cultural self-confidence of the administrative and religious elite: under strong leadership, these factors had come together to make the empire dynamic and great; out of control, they and the reactions they set up combined to make the Fourth Crusade a recipe for disaster.
REB 34 1976 France p. 143-149 ; P. Magdalino, Notes on the last years of John Palaiologos, brothe... more REB 34 1976 France p. 143-149 ; P. Magdalino, Notes on the last years of John Palaiologos, brother of Michael VIII. — The Despot John Palaeologus fell into disgrace after the Battle of Neopatras. A brief chronicle situates his death between 1272 and 1273. The « Despot John » mentioned by Gregory of Cyprus in 1284 is therefore not the brother of Michael VIII. He should rather be identified with John Asen of Bulgaria. Some cartulary acts of Makritinissa contribute further evidence in favour of dating the Battle of Neopatras and the disgrace of John Palaeologus between November 1272 and October 1273.
orient et méDiterranée (Umr 8167) / monDe BYZantin Collège De FranCe / institUt D'étUDes BYZantin... more orient et méDiterranée (Umr 8167) / monDe BYZantin Collège De FranCe / institUt D'étUDes BYZantines TRAVAUX ET MÉMOIRES-publication annuelle paraissant en un ou deux fascicules-Fondés par paul lemerle Continués par gilbert Dagron Dirigés par Constantin Zuckerman
Uploads
Papers by Paul Magdalino