My website uses the word Byzantine in both its old title and the new title that I am now using. However, the word Byzantine is now something seen as misnomer by some people who study Byzantine history. There is a sense that Byzantine is more of a product of an age that was seeking to distance itself from the Muslims or Saracens rather than a histography which is neatly dividing one period of empire from another. It has evolved into a way to separate the Romans from the Greek-oriented Byzantine Empire.
Some say that we shouldn’t use the word Byzantine when trying to describe the Byzantine state that was in power in Constantinople from 330 AD to 1453, with some interruptions in continuity when the occupation of the city by the Western Crusaders in the 13th Century. However, I would like to emphasize the origin of Byzantine is here.
The ”Byzantine” Empire was an invention of historians after the fall of Constantinople to the Ottomans. The Christian Europeans were not going to praise a Muslim Empire as the heir to the Romans, no matter what Mehmed II was saying in his decrees and statements.
The need to separate the Ancient Romans from the Byzantines has already been stated here many times. In this blog post from 2021, I talk about when did the Roman Empire become the ”Byzantine Empire”. The Byzantine Empire, as it seen by the views of historians in the modern age, is that of an Empire that is driven by Greek Language and Christianity. This separates it from the pagan Roman Empire, which based on the usage of Latin in administration and inscriptions.
Eastern Roman Empire fits better with the era between Arcadius and Heraclius.
After Heraclius and the changing of the official language to Greek and the titling of the Emperor from Imperator to Basilieus, this is the beginning of the Byzantine Empire.
The Byzantine Empire of Constantine IX is the same in continuity with that of Augustus, but we need to divide this long period of time to truly understand it. Histography is a tricky thing to understand but human beings need to bring order to this already complex existence and the usage of Byzantine is important here.
While some may say that Byzantine is meant to degrade the nature of the empire, I think that it represents quite nicely what the empire is. It is simply the empire of Byzantium, just as the Roman Empire was the empire of Rome. The name could be Eastern Roman Empire but that only really applies when Rome was still under the authority of the Western Roman Empire and the two empires were still close together.
Byzantium began as an Ancient Greek colony, an expression of that civilization’s ability to stretch its influence throughout the Mediterranean. That spirit did not leave when the Roman Empire imposed its will on it. What was happening in the Eastern Roman Empire was a reassertion of the Greek culture which had been secondary to the Roman Empire. Now, it was coming back because it no longer had to pay deference in obedience to the Latin-speaking Emperors. Byzantium and Basilieus were now the way to talk about an empire that had moved away from Paganism and towards a Christian and Greek culture.
That is why I use Byzantine Empire and not Eastern Roman Empire or New Roman Empire. While the Romans may themselves may have used such words to describe their relation to this empire, in this modern age, we need to categorize the empire according to different rules. These other terms such as Eastern Roman Empire or New Roman Empire are better used in the context of those two hundred years that saw the old Imperial system continue in Constantinople.
The Byzantine Empire is simply a way to break such long chunks of Imperial history into something more manageable to understand when talking about this Empire that dominated the lives and imaginations of so many in Medieval Europe.
Byzantine-Empire.com 