End or beginning?
Here's a good summary article about the relationship between the eastern Roman Empre and the Persian Sassanian Empire.
For some amazing reconstructions of Constantinople, try http://www.byzantium1200.com/
So in the time 400 - 500 are we looking at the end of one empire or the beginning of the new Europe? Probably both. Interestingly all the 'barbarian' kings that came to leadership in this time saw themselves as 'doing a Roman'. The model of what power meant was created with reference to the Roman past.
What's in a name? Well, plenty. Consider this. In Europe we started calling the eastern Roman Empire 'Byzantium' or the 'Byzantine Empire'. some time in the 1700s. We did this because we felt it was important not to call them Roman.
They called themselves 'Rome'. They had no problem with the concept that their territory was the direct heir of the ancient Roman Empire.
But we in the west developed a major problem with this. Rome, to western Europe, became associated with a specific western interpretation of Christianity now known as Roman Catholicism.
This in turn became associated with powerful secular leaders.
As 'Byzantium' came increasingly under threat from Sassanian Persia, then from Islam, animosity grew between western Europe and Constantinople about who the heck was in charge of this Christianity lark. Was it the eastern Emperor with his dwindling plot of land, or was it whichever powerful western king had the biggest army?
This burst out into terrible sectarian violence and total religious schism in the 10oos, but that's beyond the scope of this course - another story.
For some amazing reconstructions of Constantinople, try http://www.byzantium1200.com/
So in the time 400 - 500 are we looking at the end of one empire or the beginning of the new Europe? Probably both. Interestingly all the 'barbarian' kings that came to leadership in this time saw themselves as 'doing a Roman'. The model of what power meant was created with reference to the Roman past.
What's in a name? Well, plenty. Consider this. In Europe we started calling the eastern Roman Empire 'Byzantium' or the 'Byzantine Empire'. some time in the 1700s. We did this because we felt it was important not to call them Roman.
They called themselves 'Rome'. They had no problem with the concept that their territory was the direct heir of the ancient Roman Empire.
But we in the west developed a major problem with this. Rome, to western Europe, became associated with a specific western interpretation of Christianity now known as Roman Catholicism.
This in turn became associated with powerful secular leaders.
As 'Byzantium' came increasingly under threat from Sassanian Persia, then from Islam, animosity grew between western Europe and Constantinople about who the heck was in charge of this Christianity lark. Was it the eastern Emperor with his dwindling plot of land, or was it whichever powerful western king had the biggest army?
This burst out into terrible sectarian violence and total religious schism in the 10oos, but that's beyond the scope of this course - another story.