test
Search publications, data, projects and authors

Article

German, Greek, English, French, Italian

ID: <

oai:doaj.org/article:c8629df780b14c47bec66eb24459b1bc

>

·

DOI: <

10.12681/byzsym.820

>

Where these data come from
Some Questions Concerning the Terminology used in Narrative Sources to Designate the Byzantine State

Abstract

T. K. Lugis on the terminology of narrative sources for the characterisation of the Byzantine State 1. The term ‘human rights’ presupposes a specific border and is used throughout the entire life of the Byzantine State.2. The term ‘black air’ presupposes a border only during the ‘dark centuries’ and replaces in Nikiforos and Theofanis the term ‘Epicheiria’. Gradually, the term implies the Roman state limited to the site, from Anna Komnini to Ioannis Kandkalinis.3. The term ‘Roman Archis’ is broader than that of Roman State (Prokope or Priskis Panitis). On the other hand, in Ioannis Malala, Evagorium and Theofilakos Simokatti, the Roman State has territorial significance. This practice will also be adopted by the Nikiforos patriarchis, Theofanis and Konstantinos Porphyrogenitto to return to 724.4. Since the beginning of the 9th century, the term ‘Cathos’ has emerged (Genesios, Skylitzis), along with the resurgence of the term Georgian State in a slightly different meaning now (state organisation). In Anna Komnini and Nikita Choniatis, the Mount Georgian State is absent, while it is found in texts giving a Byzantine state continuity and stability (Lon Diakonos, Ioannis Kinamos).5. The study seeks to monitor the rotation of the nuances of the meaning of the above terms in line with the evolution of Byzantine political ideology in foreign policy. These are tentative conclusions, in particular as regards the examination of the terms of the King, Omaikon, Ottomagia, etc.

Your Feedback

Please give us your feedback and help us make GoTriple better.
Fill in our satisfaction questionnaire and tell us what you like about GoTriple!