The Byzantine Empire was a very different government, especially in comparison to the rest of the modern world. While modern governments have a constitution based largely on the American model, the Byzantine Empire came about in an era where many governments had their structure based on the traditions that they carried with them. For example, the Roman Empire did not have a true constitution per say but a collection of rules that woven together into a cohesive whole. The Byzantine Empire was really the culmination of many centuries of Roman tradition and innovation in law coming together to create a new kind of state that still sought to emulate the old Roman ways.
The Roman Empire, especially with the reforms of Augustus, became more of a monarchy even though the state was still officially a Republic. Over the years, the Empire became more and more of monarchy, with the leader becoming more exalted and elevated over his respective peers. By the time of Justinian, the Emperor was an absolute monarch, even though he was expected to respect the traditions set down by the Byzantine Senate.
It is not surprising that Justinian often chaffed at having to deal with the Byzantine Senate, who were often the old aristocratic mainstays in the Empire. When the Nike Riots broke out in 532 AD, Justinian took the opportunity to clean house and seize the properties and wealth of many of these snobbish senators.
By this time, the Roman Empire had converted to Christianity and the Christian church was a big part of the society.
What type of state was the Byzantine Empire in the time of Basil II and his contemporaries? Was it a theocracy like today’s Iran or was it something entirely that is pre-modern in understanding?
In some ways, the Byzantine Empire has the characteristics of a theocracy, which is a state that is ruled by the clergy.
The Byzantine Empire, it’s very ideology was something that could motivate a theocratic state. The Byzantines or Eastern Romans believed that their state was the earthly version of God’s kingdom. It was their duty to spread the word of Jesus Christ to all corners of the globe.
However, the way how the state was run was quite different from a theocratic state. The most important aspect of the theocratic state is that the state is supposed to have the clergy run the inner parts of government. For example, in the Islamic Republic of Iran, the clergy hold very important parts in the government itself, combining both religious and secular authority.
Another example of theocracy would be the Papal States in the 16th century through the 19th century were a form of a theocracy. The Pope had supreme authority in the lands that he had under his dominion. He had a bureaucracy of talented religious officials who were responsible for the day-to-day administration of the papal states.
The Byzantine Empire in its ideology had the seeds of becoming a theocracy, but it was still governed in the same old way that it had been under the Republic and the Empire. It was not governed by bureaucrats who had religious authority. The spiritual life of the empire was governed by the Orthodox church. The Patriarch of Constantinople was involved in the politics of the Imperial Court for sure, but he did not rule from a throne like the emperor. The Emperor of the Byzantine Empire often claimed to be chosen by the divine to rule the people, but his authority was still secular not spiritual. He was not head of the church.
The Byzantine Empire by its very nature was an absolute monarchy not a theocracy. The state was run by a series of a very educated bureaucrats who were running one of those complex states on the planet at that time. The emperor held all the authority, and he was not held in check by any formal structure excluding the power of the military and the church. However, his authority was secular not religious.
Byzantine-Empire.com 