The Byzantine Royals

[grecka]

I have always been most interested in the Byzantine Royal Family or Families when it comes to royal and European history. I suppose it's because of the fact that I'm Greek and they, as Greeks, dominated European culture and history for more than 500 years. They were, certainly, the most revered, powerful, wealthy, and illustrious monarchy in Europe and The Middle East during the Middle Ages. I was wondering if anyone else shared my interest in the Byzantines, as I most certainly find them perhaps some of the most fascinating figures of medieval and world history.

[grecka]

It will likely be no surprise to anyone who's heard my comments concerning the Greek Royal Family of modern days that I am no fan of the Oldenburgs, butI have always been most interested in the Byzantine Royal Family or Families, their predecessors, when it comes to royal and European history. I suppose it's because of the fact that I'm Greek and they, as ethnic Greeks (rather than Danish pretenders), dominated European culture and history for more than 500 years. They were, certainly, the most revered, powerful, wealthy, and illustrious monarchy in Europe and The Middle East during the Middle Ages. I was wondering if anyone else shared my interest in the Byzantines, as I most certainly find them perhaps some of the most fascinating figures of medieval and world history.

[laskaris]

take the next bus to Mystras......You'll find all the answers you want !!As for Danish 'pretenders'you say...at least They were Danish...WHO WAS YOU,WHEN YOU MET THEM???

[grecka]

My father is Greek and my last name is Psiharis, so I am somewhat qualified to criticize them. As for Mystra, I've been there and it's very pretty, but it's from the late period in Byzantine history- from 1200-1400. And aside from that I was wondering what other people thought.

[cuervo]

I think you understood wrong grecka.....He wasn't talking about your family!The question was aiming on (Danish pretenders)you wrote...So, he was quoting your doubt on the Byzantine roots of the GRF!!

What Laskaris ment is that when Oldenbergs came to Greece they knew who they were,on the other side the people they saw and met weren't actually the ....Greeks of the "Golden age"....:p

I like your family name 'Psycharis'..Allow me to intoduce my self: Carabostanoglou-How do you do-Both parents Greek from the second pillar of Hellenism (you know TROY!!):p :p

[grecka]

Well, I think that the people who rule a country should at least be of the same nationality as the people they rule. The Danish "Greek Royal Family" were and are 100% Germanic and Danish, which I think really disqualifies them to rule Greece.

[Chatleen]

Originally Posted by grecka

Well, I think that the people who rule a country should at least be of the same nationality as the people they rule. The Danish "Greek Royal Family" were and are 100% Germanic and Danish, which I think really disqualifies them to rule Greece.

Well, than I guess all of Europe's royal families are disqualified - all of them descendants from various European royal and aristocratic families.

Excuse me, but what a disgusting, racist viewpoint.

[grecka]

I don't think it's racist at all. The fact is that every royal family in Europe has some kinship, some lineage in the country they rule. the Greek royals can claim not one Greek ancestor. To me, that sort of delegitimizes their claim on the Greek throne.

[cuervo]

Originally Posted by grecka

Well, I think that the people who rule a country should at least be of the same nationality as the people they rule. The Danish "Greek Royal Family" were and are 100% Germanic and Danish, which I think really disqualifies them to rule Greece.

But They are!!!A Byzantine Greek Prince came from Denmark after invitation made by the other Byzantine Greeks(The Krifo scholio graduates) who made their revolution 30 years before His arrival...All of them together, became one Nation with identity perspectives......and they tried to deleberate the second pillar of Hellinism in Asia Minor,after they had the first pillar extented and delebarated!!!So, They are Greeks as much as the rest of us!!!

Signature: Carabostanoglou

[grecka]

George the First, the first king of Greece of the modern line, was previously Prince Wilhelm of Denmark and was descended from Danish kings and queens, not Byzantines.

[laskaris]

Read it!!

[Jo]

Originally Posted by Chatleen

Well, than I guess all of Europe's royal families are disqualified - all of them descendants from various European royal and aristocratic families.

Excuse me, but what a disgusting, racist viewpoint.

I agree. The royal families are a "race" all their own so to speak.

I have greek blood and i'm happy with the royal famliy or former as they are. As far as i concented they are greek. i mean the two older kids were born in greece.

[cuervo]

Originally Posted by Jo

I agree. The royal families are a "race" all their own so to speak.

I have greek blood and i'm happy with the royal famliy or former as they are. As far as i concented they are greek. i mean the two older kids were born in greece.

I too have greek blood from both parents,grand parents but Iam not sure for my grand parents parents......Some "Two Sicilian Soldiers conqered my town around 1000 ac.....so....

A Family that gave to Greece 6 Kings WHO CARED ABOUT GREECE,quatrified Greece .......They are Greece Themselves even if ALL our Princes were borned abroad!!

[Splodger]

The GRF may have their flaws but I find it dissapointing that people are often prejudice against them beacuse they "are not greek." It seems like this view is held against them most unfairley. Some of the most significant reasons that a non-Greek was chosen to be King in the first place was beacuse a) which Greek had more right to be King than another Greek and b) Greeks considered them selves to equalitarian to place one of their own at such an elovated rank. Therefore the Greeks invited a non-Greek to be their King as it would solve the internal selection process and they would also bring with them no preconceived biasases.

King George I then Hellenised his family as far as he could by encouraging them to live a greek life, and as such they had a very informal royal court compaired to other European Monarchies. Constantine II was the third generation to be born in Greece. What does it take to become Greek? We as a human race are always so critical of people to remind people of what they are not. Constantine might not have the traditional blood in his veins but no one suggested the Gold Olympic Medel he won should be given to Denmark and not Greece? Although the GRF have no "blood" from traditional greeks, upto Constantine II they were born in Greece, Loved Greece, Spoke Greek, were Greek Ortherdox, Lived in Greece and have died from a broken heart from being exciled from Greece. Even the wives of the Greek Prince's like Grand Duchess Helen and Princess Alice loved their adopted country and refused to leave during the war prefering to do what they could for their fellow Greek citizens.

Im not going into the poltics of the rights and wrongs of GRF rule, only their nationality. I just feel that to criticise them for their ancestory is unfair and it is just a failing on us as humans to always criticise people for what they cant do. Even Queen Paola of Belgium who is Italian by birth, has learnt to speak French and German but is always criticised by Belgians for not speaking Dutch 2/3 isnt bad but no one is perfect. To criticise the GRF beacuse they are not decended from the Byzantines is asking for the impossible. They are invited to a foriegn country by its people who then criticise them for not being one of their own. They didn't invade, they didnt bring an army to ocupy and opress the native people, they were invited. They are no more to blame for not being "greek" than the Greeks who invited them. If after three generations of being born in Greece they can not be considered Greek then it would only be fair the Greek comunities in USA, Australia and UK surrender their respective passports beacuse they can not be considerd American, Australian or English either. I can imagine the international offence that would cause, so it goes both ways.

[Chatleen]

Thank you Splodger for writing this in such a eloquent manner :)

I can only second your viewpoints.

The Danish Royal Family isn't really Danish in their "blood" either - but I for sure can't think of anyone more Danish As for nationality culture is sure more important than your ancestors.

[grecka]

I suppose I should admit defeat, as that was a good argument for the Greek royals. My father and my family really has harboured quite a malignant dislike of them since we came to this country in the forties after King George fled the country after the Italians invaded. My family felt betrayed by the royals and became die-hard republicans afterward. I suppose King Constantine was a good monarch, if a bit naive, but I still find fault with his ancestors.

[grecka]

Now, back to the topic of the Byzantines. Here's a short history of the empire and of the royals of Byzantium.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Overview

It is not possible to effectually distinguish between the later empire in Rome and the Byzantine empire centered around Constantinople. For the Byzantines were the Roman Empire, not simply a continuation of it in the East. The capital city, Constantinople, had been founded as the capital of Rome by the Emperor Constantine, but a uniquely Greek or Byzantine character to the Roman Empire can be distinguished as early as Diocletian. When Rome was seized by Goths, this was a great blow to the Roman Empire, but it didn't effectively end it. Although Rome was under the control of foreigners who themselves claimed to be continuing the empire, the Byzantine empire continued as before, believing themselves to be the Roman Empire.

Over the centuries, however, Byzantium evolved into a very different civilization. The eastern Empire had always had a predominately Greek character, but the Byzantines through the course of the first millenium AD had to deal with cultural influences and political threats from European cultures, Asian cultures and, primarily, Islam after the seventh century.

Through the later Middle Ages, however, Byzantium both gradually declined politically and became more isolated from the rest of Europe. While the last centuries of the European Middle Ages saw the consolidation of the idea of Europe and the incorporation of European cultures into a larger, overarching European monoculture, Byzantium was left out of this new European concept. By the beginning of the modern period, when "Europe" had become a solid, cultural idea, Byzantine had come to an end with the Ottoman conquest of Constantinople.

Byzantine history, then, stretches in a continuous line from the latter centuries of Rome to the very beginning of the modern period. It transmited the classical culture of Greece and Rome but it also developed a unique historical and cultural character based on a synthesis of Greek, Roman, European, and Islamic elements.

[grecka]

Reign of Justinian I

Most historians consider the reign of Justinian (527-565) as marking a significant break with the Roman past. This is difficult to support—Justinian not only considered himself the emperor of all of Rome, including the territories occupied by the Goths, but also spoke Latin as his primary language.

After the fall of Rome, the Byzantine emperors never gave over the idea of reconquering Rome. They did, however, take a lesson from the fall of Rome and all throughout the fifth century, the Byzantine emperors wrought a series of administrative and financial reforms. They produced the single most extensive corpus of Roman law in 425 and reformed taxation dramatically. Most importantly, however, they did not entrust their military to German generals—this had been the downfall of the Latin portion of the empire. They could not, however, maintain a powerful military—the loss of territory in the west had dramatically shrunk their financial resources.

Justinian was perhaps the last emperor that seriously entertained notions of reconquering the west—the institution of the western emperor fell permanently vacant in 476 and the Byzantine emperors claimed as theirs. His expeditions against Italy, however, failed. Although he conquered North Africa and retook Italy from the Ostrogoths, this Gothic War drained the Byzantine Empire of much-needed resources. Most importantly, the Gothic War devestated Italy economically. The economic destruction of Italy was so total that it destroyed Italian urban culture for centuries. The great cities of Rome and her allies would be abandoned as Italy would fall into a long period of backwardness. The impoverishment of Italy and the drain on Byzantium made it impossible for the Byzantines to hold Italy—only three years after the death of Justinian, the Italian territories fell into the hands of another Germanic tribe, the "Long Beards," or Langobardi (Lombards).

Justinian, however, is most famous for the body of laws that he promulgated—the Corpus iuris civilis. This was not only a great legal achievement in codifying Roman law, it was also the first systematic attempt to synthesize Roman law and jurisprudence with Christianity. Although Byzantium would eventually fade in influence, from the eleventh century onwards, Justinian's Corpus iuris civilis became the foundation of all European law and legal practice (except for England).

Justinian is also credited for founding Byzantine architecture with his building of the Santa Sophia in Constantinople and the church of San Vitale in Ravenna, Italy. The Santa Sophia continued the Roman tradition of building domes, the architecture of the Roman basilica, but it was carried out on a scale unheard of in earlier centuries. In fact, it would remain the largest dome ever built until Sinan built the Selimye Mosque in the sixteenth century. Both Santa Sophia and San Vitale are decorated inside with a uniquely Byzantine mosaic style, a style that was to characterize Byzantine architecture for nearly another millenium. It is a style that fuses both Roman mosaic realism and an otherworldly, almost abstract use of simple forms and dramatic colors.

The most serious and lasting mistake of Justinian's reign was the persecution of heretical Christians. The eastern empire had always been distinguished from the western empire by the proliferation of religions and metaphysical speculation as a characteristic of religions. This did not substantially change with the advent of Christianity. Although non-Christians were stamped, the eastern Christians engaged in high intellectual specuation on theological and Christological questions with a fervor unmatched in the West. You might say that the model of Christian belief in the east was more mystical and philosophical while the Christian belief in the west was more practical and obedience-centered. This meant that a number of competing doctrines circulated in the Greek-centered areas of the Byzantine world. One of these doctrines, the Monophysite doctrine, was so serious a challenge to the western church that it was declared heretical.

The Monophysite doctrine arose from Christological speculation. What was the nature of Christ? This was one of the dominant speculative questions in the eastern empire from the fifth century onwards. The Monophysites argued that Christ had one and only nature (mono=one, physis=nature) and that nature was divine—the orthodox Christian church held that Christ had a double nature, that of divinity and humanity. In the latter decades of the fifth century, the Byzantine Emperor declared himself to be a Monophysite—this estranged the Byzantines from the Roman Pope.

But Justinian—and his father before him, Justin I—needed the support of the Pope in order to retake Italy. So both Justin and Justinian renounced Monophysite belief and were reincorporated into the Latin church. But Justinian went even further—to demonstrate his commitment to Latin Christianity, he began a series of oppressive persecutions of Monophysites in Syria and Egypt. This would have a profound effect on later history—the Monophysite Christians, horribly persecuted by the Byzantines, welcomed Muslim conquerors with open arms based on their promise to tolerate their religion

[grecka]

The Byzantines and Islam

Almost all of Byzantine energy over the next centuries would be focussed on Islam. The Muslims very quickly conquered Byzantine territory in Syria and Egypt largely because of disaffected populations of Christians and Jews who had been persecuted since the time of Justinian. The patriarchal caliphs and later the Umayyad caliphs, however, really had their sights on Byzantine territory—in fact, the conquest of Byzantium itself. They easily conquered all the Persian territories, but they could never quite conquer the heart of Byzantium itself. In 670, they attempted this conquest with a large fleet; in 717, they tried again with a land and sea operation against the city.

This operation, however, turned the tide away from the Muslims. Under the emperor Leo the Isaurian (717-741), the Muslim invasion was turned back and the Byzantines began to hold their own against Islamic incursions.

As the centralized Islamic government under the caliph began to disintegrate in the ninth century, the Byzantines began to reassert their dominance over Asia Minor. By the middle of the tenth century, they reconquered most of Syria and were once again and powerful and influential empire stretching from Greece to Arabia.

In 1071, however, the Seljuk Turks conquered the Byzantine army at Manzikert in Asia Minor—after this victory, the Seljuks quickly overran all of Byzantine territory in the east.