During the early centuries of the Roman Empire, the western provinces wereLatinised, but the eastern parts kept theirHellenistic culture.Constantine I (r. 324–337) legalisedChristianity and moved the capital to Constantinople.Theodosius I (r. 379–395) made Christianity thestate religion and Greek gradually replaced Latin for official use. The empire adopted a defensive strategy and, throughout its remaining history, experienced recurring cycles of decline and recovery.
The empire was largely dismantled in 1204, following thesack of Constantinople during theFourth Crusade; its former territorieswere then divided into competing Greekrump states andLatin realms. Despite the eventualrecovery of Constantinople in 1261, the reconstituted empire wielded only regional power during its final two centuries. Its remaining territories were progressively annexed by the Ottomans ina series of wars fought in the 14th and 15th centuries. The fall of Constantinople to the Ottomans in 1453 brought the empire to an end, but its history and legacy remain topics of debate to this day.
The empire's inhabitants, now generally termed "Byzantines", regarded themselves asRomans (in Greek,Ῥωμαῖοι orRomaioi).[6] Similarly, their Islamic contemporaries called their empire the "land of the Romans" (Bilād al-Rūm).[7] However, Western Europe since 800 AD called them "Greeks" (Graeci), as the Papacy and medieval German emperors regarded themselves as the true inheritors of Roman identity.[8] The adjective "Byzantine", derived fromByzantion (Byzantium in Latin), the name of the Greek settlementConstantinople was established on, was only used to describe the inhabitants of the city; it did not refer to the empire, calledRomanía (Ῥωμανία or "Romanland") by its citizens.[9]
Following the empire's fall,early modern scholars referred to it by many names, including the "Eastern Empire", the "Low Empire", the "Late Empire", the "Empire of the Greeks", "Empire of Constantinople", and "Roman Empire".[10] The increasing use of "Byzantine" and "Byzantine Empire" started with the 15th-century historianLaonikos Chalkokondyles, whose works were widely propagated byHieronymus Wolf.[11] "Byzantine" was used adjectivally alongside terms such as "Empire of the Greeks" until the 19th century.[12] It is now the primary term, used to refer to all aspects of the empire; some modern historians believe it should not be used because it was originally a prejudicial and inaccurate term.[13]
Given the significant overlap in historiographicalperiodisations of "Late Roman history", "late antiquity", and "Byzantine history", there is no consensus on a "foundation date" for the Byzantine Empire, or even if one existed. Scholarship with links to Greece orEastern Orthodoxy has customarily placed it in the early 300s.[14] The growth of the study of "late antiquity" has led to some historians setting a start date in the seventh or eighth centuries.[15] Others believe a "new empire" began during changesc. 300AD.[16] Geoffrey Greatrex believes that it is impossible to precisely date the foundation of the Byzantine Empire.[17]
Pre-518: Constantinian, Theodosian, and Leonid dynasties
Between the 3rd and 1st centuriesBC, theRoman Republic establishedhegemony over theeastern Mediterranean, whileits government developed into the one-person rule ofan emperor.[18] TheRoman Empire enjoyed a period ofrelative stability untilthe 3rd century AD, when external threats and internal crises caused it to splinter, as regional armies acclaimed their generals as "soldier-emperors".[19] One of these,Diocletian (r. 284–305), recognised that the state was too big to be ruled by a single person.[18] He instituted theTetrarchy, a system which divided the empire into eastern and western halves.[20] Although the Tetrarchy quickly failed, the division of the empire proved an enduring concept.[21]
Constantine I (r. 306–337) secured absolute power in 324.[22] Over the next six years, he rebuilt the city of Byzantium as a newcapital that he called “New Rome” (later namedConstantinople).[23] The old capitalRome was further from the prosperous eastern provinces and in a less strategically important location; it was not esteemed by the "soldier-emperors", who ruled from the frontiers, or by the empire's population.[24]Having been granted citizenship, they considered themselves just as Roman as those in the city of Rome.[25] He continued reforms of the empire's military and civil administration and instituted thegold solidus as a stable currency.[26] Hefavoured Christianity and became an opponent of paganism.[27] Constantine's dynasty prioritiseda lengthy conflict against the comparably powerfulSasanid Persia and ended in 363 with the death of his nephewJulian.[28] The reign of the shortValentinianic dynasty, marked bywars against the Goths, religious debates, and anti-corruption campaigns, ended in the East with the death ofValens at theBattle of Adrianople in 378.[29]
Division of the empire after the death of Theodosius I in 395
The Western Roman Empire
The Byzantine/Eastern Roman Empire
Valens's successor,Theodosius I (r. 379–395), secured peace in the east by allowing theGoths to settle in Roman territory;[30] he also twice intervened in the western half, defeating the usurpersMagnus Maximus andEugenius in 388 and 394, respectively.[31] Heactively condemned paganism, confirmed the primacy ofNicene Orthodoxy overArianismin the East, and establishedChristianity as the Roman state religion.[32] He was the last emperor to rule both the western and eastern halves of the empire.[33] After his death, the West was destabilised but the East thrived due to its civilian administrators that continued to hold power.[34]Theodosius II (r. 408–450) largely left the rule of the East to officials such asAnthemius, who constructed theTheodosian Walls.[35] Constantinople had now firmly entrenched itself as the empire's capital.[36]
Through a combination of fortune and good political decisions, the Eastern Empire never experienced rebellious barbarian vassals or rule by barbarian warlords—the problems which ensured the downfall of the West.[44]Zeno (r. 474–491) convinced the problematicOstrogoth kingTheodoric to take control of Italy from Odoacer;[45] dying when the empire was at peace, he was succeeded byAnastasius I (r. 491–518).[46] His belief inmonophysitism brought occasional issues, but Anastasius was a capable administrator and instituted successful financial reforms including the abolition of thechrysargyron tax.[47] He was the first emperor since Diocletian who did not face any serious problems affecting the empire during his reign.[48]
The reign ofJustinian I was a watershed in Byzantine history.[49] Following his accession in 527, the legal code was rewritten as theCorpus Juris Civilis and Justinian produced extensive legislation on provincial administration;[50] he reasserted imperial control over religion and morality through purges of non-Christians and "deviants";[51] and having ruthlessly subduedthe 532 Nika revolt he rebuilt much of Constantinople, including the originalHagia Sophia.[52] Justinian I took advantage of political instability in Italy to attempt the reconquest of lost western territories. TheVandal Kingdom in North Africawas subjugated in 534 by the generalBelisarius, whothen invaded Italy; theOstrogothic Kingdom was destroyed in 554.[53]
In the 540s, Justinian began to suffer reversals on multiple fronts. Capitalising on Constantinople's preoccupation with the West,Khosrow I of the Sasanian Empire invaded Byzantine territory and sackedAntioch in 540.[54] The emperor's internal reforms and policies began to falter, anda devastating plague killed a large proportion of the population and severely reduced the empire's social and financial stability.[55] The most difficult period of the Ostrogothic war, against their kingTotila, came during this decade, while divisions among Justinian's advisors undercut the administration's response.[56] He also did not fully heal the divisions inChalcedonian Christianity, as theSecond Council of Constantinople failed to make a real difference.[57] Justinian died in 565; his reign was more successful than any other Byzantine emperor, yet he left his empire under serious strain.[58]
Financially and territorially overextended,Justin II (r. 565–578) was soon at war on many fronts. Fearing the aggressiveAvars, theLombards conquered much of northern Italy by 572.[59] TheSasanian wars restarted in the same year, and continued until the emperorMaurice emerged victorious in 591; by this time, the Avars andSlavs had repeatedly invaded the Balkans, causing great instability.[60] Mauricecampaigned extensively in the region during the 590s, and although he re-established Byzantine control up to theDanube, he pushed his troops too far in 602—they mutinied, proclaimed an officer namedPhocas as emperor, and executed Maurice.[61] The Sasanians seized their moment andreopened hostilities; Phocas was unable to cope and soon faceda major rebellion led byHeraclius. Phocas lost Constantinople in 610 and was executed; this destructive civil war accelerated the empire's decline.[62]
The next seventy-five years are poorly documented.[67]Arab raids into Asia Minor began almost immediately, and the Byzantines responded by holding fortified centres and avoiding battle wherever possible; although Anatolia was invaded annually, it avoided permanent Arab occupation.[68] The outbreak of theFirst Fitna in 656 gave Byzantium breathing space, which it used wisely: some order was restored in the Balkans byConstans II (r. 641–668)[69] following his administrative reorganisation known as the "theme system", which allocated troops to defend specific provinces.[70]Constantine IV (r. 668–685) repelled the Arab efforts tocapture Constantinople in the 670s usingGreek fire,[71] but suffereda reversal against theBulgars, who soon establishedan empire in the northern Balkans.[72] Nevertheless, he and Constans had done enough to secure the empire's position, especially as theUmayyad Caliphate was undergoinganother civil war.[73]
Justinian II sought to build on the stability established by his father Constantine, but was overthrown in 695 after attempting to exact too much from his subjects; over the next twenty-two years, there were six more rebellions duringan era of political instability.[74] The reconstituted caliphate sought to break Byzantium by taking Constantinople, but the newly crownedLeo IIIrepelled the 717–718 siege, the first major setback of the Muslim conquests.[75]
718–867: Isaurian, Nikephorian, and Amorian dynasties
Leo and his sonConstantine V (r. 741–775), two of the most capable Byzantine emperors, withstood continued Arab attacks, civil unrest, and natural disasters, and reestablished the state as a major regional power.[76] Leo's reign produced theEcloga, a new code of law to succeed that of Justinian I.[77] He also continued to reform the theme system in order to lead offensive campaigns against the Muslims, culminating ina decisive victory in 740.[78] Constantine overcame an early civil war against his brother-in-lawArtabasdos, made peace with the newAbbasid Caliphate,campaigned successfully against the Bulgars, and continued to make administrative and military reforms.[79] Due to both emperors' support for theByzantine Iconoclasm, where the use ofreligious icons was banned, they were later vilified by Byzantine historians;[80] Constantine's reign also saw the loss ofRavenna to theLombards, and the beginning of a split from theRoman papacy.[81]
In 780, EmpressIrene assumed power as regent for her sonConstantine VI.[82] Although she was a capable administrator who temporarily resolved the iconoclasm controversy,[83] the empire was destabilised by her conflict with her son. The Bulgars and Abbasids inflicted numerous defeats on the Byzantine armies, and the papacy crownedCharlemagne as Roman emperor in 800.[84] In 802, the unpopular Irene was overthrown byNikephoros I; he reformed the empire's administration but diedin battle against the Bulgars in 811.[85] Military defeats and societal disorder, especially the resurgence of iconoclasm, characterised the next eighteen years.[86]
Stability was somewhat restored during the reign ofTheophilos (r. 829–842). He capitalised on economic growth to complete construction programmes, including rebuilding thesea walls of Constantinople, overhaul provincial governance, and wage inconclusive campaigns against the Abbasids.[87] After his death, his empressTheodora, ruling on behalf of her sonMichael III, permanently extinguished the iconoclastic movement;[88] the empire prospered under their sometimes-fraught rule. Michael was posthumously vilified by historians loyal to the dynasty of his successorBasil I, who had him assassinated in 867 and was credited with his predecessor's achievements.[89]
Basil I (r. 867–886) continued Michael's policies.[90] His armies campaigned with mixed results in Italy butdefeated thePaulicians of Tephrike.[91] His successorLeo VI (r. 886–912)[b] compiled and propagated a huge number of written works. These included theBasilika, a Greek translation of Justinian I's legal code incorporating over 100 new laws created by Leo; theTactica, a military treatise; and theBook of the Eparch, a manual on Constantinople's trading regulations.[93] In non-literary contexts Leo was less successful: the empirelost in Sicily andagainst the Bulgarians,[94] and he provoked theological scandal by marrying four times in an attempt to father a legitimate heir.[95]
After John's death, Constantine VII's grandsonsBasil II andConstantine VIII ruled jointly for half a century, although the latter exercised no real power.[101] Their early reign was occupied by conflicts against two prominent generals,Bardas Skleros andBardas Phokas, which ended in 989 after the former's death and the latter's submission, and a power struggle against the eunuchBasileios, who was dismissed in 985.[102] Basil, who never married or had children, subsequently refused to delegate any authority: he sidelined the military establishment by taking personal command of the army and promoting officers loyal to him.[103] His reign witnessedthe decades-long campaign against Bulgaria, which ended in total Byzantine victory at theBattle of Kleidion in 1014.[104] Diplomatic efforts, critical for this success,[105] also contributed to theannexation of several Georgian provinces in the 1020s and coexistence with the newFatimid Caliphate.[106] When he died in 1025, Basil's empire stretched from the Danube and Sicily in the west to theEuphrates in the east; his swift expansion was unaccompanied by administrative reforms.[107]
After Constantine VIII's death in 1028, his daughters, the empressesZoe (r. 1028–1052) andTheodora (r. 1042–1056), held the keys to power: four emperors (Romanos III,Michael IV,Michael V, andConstantine IX) ruled only because of their connection to Zoe, whileMichael VI (r. 1056–1057) was selected by Theodora.[108] This political instability, regular budget deficits, a series of expensive military failures, and other problems connected to over-extension led to substantial issues in the empire;[109] its strategic focus moved from maintaining its hegemony to prioritising defence.[110]
The empire soon came under sustained assault on three fronts, from theSeljuk Turks in the east, thePecheneg nomads in the north, and theNormans in the west. The Byzantine army struggled to confront these enemies, who did not organise themselves as traditional states, and were thus untroubled by defeats in set-piece battles.[111] In 1071Bari, the last remaining Byzantine settlement in Italy, wascaptured by the Normans, while the Seljuks won a decisive victory at theBattle of Manzikert, taking the emperorRomanos IV Diogenes prisoner.[112] The latter event sparked a decade-long civil war, and as a result the Seljuks took possession of Anatolia up to theSea of Marmara.[113]
Alexios' concentration of power in the hands of hisKomnenos dynasty meant the most serious political threats came from within the imperial family—before his coronation, John II had to overcomehis mother Irene andhis sister Anna, and the primary threat during his reign washis brother Isaac.[119] John campaigned annually and extensively—he fought the Pechenegs in 1122, theHungarians in the late 1120s, and the Seljuks throughout his reign, waginglarge campaigns in Syria in his final years—but he did not achieve large territorial gains.[120] In 1138, John raised the imperial standard over the CrusaderPrincipality of Antioch to intimidate the city into allying with the Byzantines, but did not attack, fearing that it would provoke western Christendom to respond.[121]
Manuel I used his father's overflowing imperial treasury in pursuit of his ambitions, and also to secure the empire's position in an increasingly multilateral geopolitical landscape.[122] Through a combination ofdiplomacy and bribery, he cultivated a ring of allies and clients around the empire: the Turks of theSultanate of Rum, theKingdom of Hungary, theCilician Armenians, Balkan princes, Italian and Dalmatian cities, and most importantly Antioch and theCrusader States, marryingone of their princesses in 1161.[123] Manuel averted the threat of war during the tumultuous passage of theSecond Crusade through Byzantine territories in 1147, but the campaign's failure was blamed on the Byzantines by western contemporaries.[124] He was less successful militarily: an invasion ofSicily was decisively defeated byKing William I in 1156, leading to tensions withFrederick Barbarossa, the Holy Roman Emperor;[125] two decades later, an invasion of Anatolia was resoundingly defeated at theBattle of Myriokephalon.[126]
Manuel's death left the empire rudderless and it soon came under intense pressure.[127] His sonAlexios II was too young to rule, and his troubled regency was overthrown by his uncleAndronikos I Komnenos: he was replaced byIsaac II in 1185.[128] Centrifugal forces swirled at the borders as ambitious rulers seized their chance: Hungary and the Turks captured Byzantine territories,an exiled Komnenian prince seized Cyprus; and most injuriously,a revolt in 1185 caused the foundation of aresurrected Bulgarian state.[129] Relations with the West deteriorated further after Constantinople allied withSaladin, the vanquisher of theThird Crusade, whose leaders also fought against Byzantium as they passed through its territory.[130] In 1195, Isaac II was deposed by his brotherAlexios III; this quarrel proved fatal.[131]
TheFourth Crusade was originally intended to targetEgypt, but amid strategic difficulties, Isaac II's sonAlexios Angelos convinced the crusaders to restore his father to the throne in exchange for a huge tribute.[132] Theyattacked Constantinople in 1203, reinstating Isaac II and his son to the throne. The new rulers swiftly grew unpopular and were deposed byAlexios V, an event used by the crusaders as a pretext tosack the city in April 1204, ransacking the wealth it had accumulated over nine centuries.[133]
Byzantine territories fragmented into competing political entities. The crusaders crownedBaldwin I as the ruler of a newLatin Empire in Constantinople; it soon suffereda crushing defeat against the Bulgarians in 1205. It also failed to expand west or east, where three Greek successor states had formed: theEmpire of Nicaea and theEmpire of Trebizond in Asia Minor, and theDespotate of Epirus on the Adriatic. The Venetians acquired many ports and islands, and thePrincipality of Achaea emerged in southern Greece.[134] Trebizondlost the key port ofSinope in 1214 and thereafter was unable to affect matters away from the southeastern Black Sea.[135] For a time, it seemed that Epirus was the one most likely to reclaim Constantinople from the Latins, and its rulerTheodore Doukas crowned himself emperor, but he suffered a critical defeat at theBattle of Klokotnitsa in 1230, and Epirote power waned.[136]
Michael desired to restore the empire's glory through a rebuilding programme in Constantinople, clever diplomatic alliances, and expansionist wars in Europe.[142] He staved off the threateningCharles I of Anjou first by recognising papal primacy and certain Catholic doctrines at the 1274Second Council of Lyon, and then by aiding theSicilian Vespers against Charles in 1282.[143] However, his religious concessions were despised by most of the populace, and were repudiated by his successorAndronikos II (r. 1282–1328).[144] He and his grandsonAndronikos III (r. 1328–1341) led several campaigns to restore imperial influence, succeeding in Epirus and Thessaly. They also made several critical mistakes, including dismissing the fleet in 1285, hiring the mercenaryCatalan Company, who turned on the Byzantines, in the 1300s, and fighting each other between 1320 and 1328.[145] A disastrous civil war between 1341 and 1354 caused long-term economic difficulties, while theOttoman Turks gradually expanded.[146]
The diminished and weak Byzantine state only survived for another century through effective diplomacy and fortunately-timed external events.[147] The Ottomans gradually subjugated Anatolia and simultaneously expanded into Europe from 1354, takingPhilippopolis in 1363,Adrianopolis in 1369, andThessalonica in 1387.[148] Emperors were crowned and deposed at the whim of the Venetians, Genoese, and Ottomans.[149] AfterManuel II (r. 1391–1425) refused to pay homage to SultanBayezid I in 1394,Constantinople was besieged until the rampaging warlordTimur decisivelydefeated Bayezid in 1402, with the city perilously close to surrender.[150]
Diocletian and Constantine's 4th-century reforms reorganised the empire's provinces into overarchingDioceses and then intoPraetorian prefecture's, separating the army from the civil administration.[155] The central government, led by theemperor from the time of the earlierpax romana and into the latePalaiologan era, typically focused on the military, foreign relations, administering the law, and collecting taxes.[156] Thesenate evolved into a ceremonial body within the imperial court.[157]
Cities had been a collection of self-governing communities with central government and church representatives from the 5th century.[158] However, constant warfare significantly altered this, as regular raids and ongoing conflict led to power centralising due to the empire's fight for survival.[159] After the 7th century, the prefectures were abandoned, and in the 9th century, the provinces were divided into administrative units calledthemes (orthemata), governed solely by a military commander (strategos).[160]
Theodosius II (r. 402–450) formalisedRoman law by appointing five jurists as principal authorities and compiling legislation issued since Constantine's reign into theCodex Theodosianus.[161] This process culminated in theCorpus Juris Civilis under Justinian I (r. 527–565), who commissioned a complete standardisation of imperial decrees since Hadrian's time and resolved conflicting legal opinions of the jurists.[162] The result became the definitive legal authority. This body of law coveredcivil matters and alsopublic law, including imperial power and administrative organisation.[163] After 534, Justinian issued theNovellae (New Laws) in Greek, which marked a transition from Roman to Byzantine law. Legal historian Bernard Stolte distinguishes Roman law as this because Western Europe inherited law through the Latin texts of theCorpus Juris Civilis only.[164]
Zachary Chitwood argues that theCorpus Juris Civilis was largely inaccessible in Latin, particularly in the provinces.[165] Following the 7th-century Arab conquests, people began questioning the development and application of law, leading to stronger ties between law and Christianity.[166] This context influenced Leo III (r. 717–741) to develop theEcloga, which placed an emphasis on humanity.[167] The Ecloga inspired practical legal texts like theFarmers' Law, Seamen's Law, andSoldiers' Law, which Chitwood suggests were used daily in the provinces as companions to theCorpus Juris Civilis.[168] During the Macedonian dynasty, efforts to reform law began with the publication of theProcheiron and theEisagoge, which aimed to define the emperor's power under prevailing laws, and to replace theEcloga due to its association withiconoclasm.[169] Leo VI (r. 886–912) completed acomplete codification of Roman law in Greek through theBasilika, a work of 60 books which became the foundation of Byzantine law.[170] In 1345, Constantine Harmenopoulos compiled theHexabiblos, a six-volume law book derived from various Byzantine legal sources.[171]
Christianity, bolstered byConstantine's support, began shaping all aspects of life in the early Byzantine Empire.[172] Despite the transition, the historian Anthony Kaldellis views Christianity as "bringing no economic, social, or political changes to the state other than being more deeply integrated into it".[173] When the Roman state in the West collapsed politically, cultural differences began to divide the Christian churches of the East and West.[174] Internal disputes within the Eastern churches led to the migration of monastic communities to Rome, exacerbating tensions between Rome and Constantinople.[175] These disputes,[c] particularly in Egypt and the eastern Mediterranean, eventually split the church into three branches:Chalcedonian, Monophysite (Coptic), andNestorian.[178] The Chalcedonian group maintained dominance within the empire's territories, while the Monophysite and Nestorian branches largely fell under Muslim rule in the 7th century.[179]
Eastern patriarchs frequently sought the Papacy's mediation in doctrinal and practical matters, but the pope's authority was not universally acknowledged, even in nearby regions like Northern Italy.[180] By 600, the Slavic settlement of the Balkans disrupted communication between Rome and Constantinople, further widening the divide.[181] The Arab and Lombard invasions, and the increasedFrankish presence, deepened this estrangement and intensified disputes over jurisdiction and authority between the two spiritual centres.[182] Differences in ritual and theology, such as the use ofunleavened bread and theFilioque clause, as well as divergences in ecclesiology—plenitudo potestatis versus the authority ofEcumenical Councils—and issues of mutual respect, contributed to the separation of Western Christianity from Eastern Christianity.[183] This separation began by 597 and culminated in 1054 during theEast–West Schism.[184]
In the late 6th century, following Justinian I's wars, seven mobilefield armies calledcomitatenses, numbering around 150,000 troops, were deployed around the empire; they remained the finest armies in Europe.[185] They were aided by twenty-five frontier garrisons of approximately 195,000 lower-qualitylimitanei troops.[186] Additional troops includedsubsidised allied forces andimperial guard units like theScholae Palatinae.[187] Naval forces were limited:flotillas were based at key locations, while 30,000 oarsmen were assembled to row 500, mostly requisitioned,transports to support theVandalic War in Africa in 533.[188]
The losses suffered in the 7th-centuryArab conquests led to fundamental changes.[189] The field armies were withdrawn into the core Anatolian territories and assigned to settle in specific districts, which became known asthemata and eventually replaced theold provinces.[190] The thematic armies, supported by the proceeds of their districts, came to resemble a provincialmilitia with a small professional core, aided by foreign mercenaries and imperial regiments at Constantinople.[191] To defend againstits new Muslim enemy, the navy was similarly reorganised into several provincialised fleets.[192] It became the dominant power in the eastern Mediterranean, withdromons equipped withGreek fire proving crucial on several occasions.[193]
As the 8th-century empire stabilised, the thematic militias proved rebellious and only suitable for defensive operations.[194] The professionaltagmata regiments, first introduced in the mid-700s and consisting of native Byzantine units alongside foreign forces such as theVarangian Guard, had completely replaced them by the 11th century.[195] The mobiletagmata, suitable for offensive warfare, evolved new tactical and strategic structures;[196] the late 10th-century army, perhaps the highest-quality force the empire produced, numbered approximately 140,000, up from below 100,000 in the late 700s.[197] However, its defensive capacities were neglected, especially during the 11th-century civil wars, leading to the loss of Anatolia to the Seljuks.[198] The navy had also been reduced, as the empire increasingly relied on potentially hostile powers such asVenice.[199]
Post-1081 reforms re-established an effective army; the institution offeudal-likepronoia grants provided revenue to individuals in exchange for soldiers.[200] The new army heavily relied on foreign mercenaries alongside indigenous Byzantine troops, but the financial demands of a standing army proved too much for the Byzantine state, which succumbed to theFourth Crusade in 1204.[201] Thearmy of the Palaiologan dynasty, which retook Constantinople in 1461, was generally composed of a similar mix of mercenaries and indigenous troops, but it had lost all offensive capability by the late 1200s.[202] The empire's continued survival depended on foreign armies; attempts in the 1340s to rebuild the fleet, unwisely disbanded in 1284, were forcibly halted byGenoa.[203] No post-1204 Byzantine field army fielded more than 5,000 troops, and less than 8,000 defendedthe final siege of Constantinople in 1453.[204]
Byzantine strategy was primarily defensive, aside from the brief period of aggression between the ninth and eleventh centuries, because of the empire's habitual lack of resources.[205] To avoid risky and expensive military campaigns, the Byzantinesengaged in extensive diplomatic efforts.[206] These took various forms, including: formal embassies, client management, alliance or peace negotiations, political marriages,propaganda and bribery, or evenespionage and assassination.[207]
Defensively-oriented Byzantine diplomacy was intended to protect theoikoumenē, the civilised Christian world which the empire rightfully ruled.[208] The decline of the keylimitrophe system, wherein client states along the borders served as intermediaries between the empire and other large enemies, exposed the empire to attack. By the eleventh century, Byzantine diplomacy was more bilateral and balanced.[209] Although it lost some important advantages post-1204, diplomacy, including the still-influential Orthodox church, was nevertheless a central element in the empire's lengthy survival until 1453.[210]
Scholars associate the Roman, Hellenic, and Christian imperial identities with the general population, but there is ongoing debate about how these and other regional identities blended together.[211]
As many as 27 million people lived in the empire at its peak in 540, but this fell to 12 million by 800.[212] Although plague and territorial losses to Arab Muslim invaders weakened the empire, it eventually recovered and by the near end of theMacedonian dynasty in 1025, the population is estimated to have been as high as 18 million.[213] A few decades after the recapture of Constantinople in 1282, the empire's population was in the range of 3–5 million; by 1312, the number had dropped to 2 million.[214] By the time the Ottoman Turks captured Constantinople, there were only 50,000 people in the city, one-tenth of its population in its prime.[215]
Education was voluntary and required financial means, so the most literate people were often those associated with the church.[216] Primary education focused on teaching foundational subjects like reading, writing, and arithmetic whereas secondary school focused on thetrivium andquadrivium as their curriculum.[217] TheImperial University of Constantinople was formed in 425, and refounded in 1046 as a centre for law.[218][219][220]
During the 3rd century, 10–15% of the population was enslaved (numbering around 3 million in the east).[221] Youval Rotman calls the changes to slavery during this period "different degrees of unfreedom".[222] Previous roles fulfilled by slaves became high-demand free market professions (like tutors), and the state encouraged thecoloni, tenants bound to the land, as a new legal category between freemen and slaves.[223] From 294 the enslavement of children was progressively forbidden;Honorius (r. 393–423) began freeing enslaved prisoners of war, and from the 9th century, emperors freed the slaves of conquered people.[224] Christianity as an institution had no direct impact, but by the 6th century it was a bishop's duty to ransom Christians, there were established limits on trading them, and state policies prohibited the enslavement of Christians; these changes shaped Byzantine slave-holding from the 8th century onwards.[225] Non-Christians could still be enslaved, and prices remained stable until 1300, when prices for adult slaves, particularly women, started rising.[226][227]
Socio-economic
Agriculture was the main basis of taxation and the state sought to bind everyone to land for productivity.[228] Most land holdings were small and medium-sized lots around villages, and family farms were the primary source of agriculture.[229] Thecoloni, sometimes called proto-serfs, were free citizens, though historians continue to debate their exact status.[230]
TheEkloge laws of 741 made marriage a Christian institution and no longer a private contract, where it evolved alongside the increased rights of slaves and the change in power relations.[231] Marriage was considered an institution required to sustain the population, transfer property rights, and support the elderly of the family; the EmpressTheodora had also said it was needed to restrict sexualhedonism.[232] Women usually married between the ages of 15 and 20, and the average family had two children.[233] Divorce could be done by mutual consent but was restricted over time, for example, only being allowed if a married person was joining a convent.[234]
Inheritance rights were well developed, including for all women.[235] The historian Anthony Kaldellis suggests that these rights may have been what prevented the emergence of large properties and a hereditary nobility capable of intimidating the state.[236] The prevalence of widows (estimated at 20%) meant women often controlled family assets as heads of households and businesses, contributing to the rise of some empresses to power.[237] Women played significant roles as taxpayers, landowners, and petitioners, often seeking the resolution of property disputes in court.[238]
Women had the same socio-economic status as men, but faced legal discrimination and limitations in economic opportunities and vocations.[239] Prohibited from serving as soldiers or holding political office, and restricted from serving asdeaconesses in the Church from the 7th century onwards, women were mostly assigned labour-intensive household responsibilities.[240] They worked in the food and textile industries, as medical staff, in public baths, in retail, and were practising members of artisan guilds.[241] They also worked in entertainment, tavern keeping, and prostitution, a class where some saints and empresses may have originated from.[242] Prostitution was widespread, and attempts were made to limit it, especially during Justinian's reign under the influence of Theodora.[243] Women participated in public life, engaging in social events and protests.[244] Women's rights were better in the empire than in comparable societies. Western European and American women took until the 19th century to surpass them.[245]
Left: The Mudil Psalter, the oldest completepsalter in the Coptic language (Coptic Museum, Egypt,Coptic Cairo) Right: TheJoshua Roll, a 10th-century illuminated Greek manuscript possibly made in Constantinople (Vatican Library, Rome)
Latin andGreek were the primary languages of the late Roman Empire, with the former prevalent in the west and the latter in the east.[246] Although Latin was historically important in the military, legal system, and government, its use declined in Byzantine territories from 400 AD.[247] Greek had begun to replace it even in those functions by the time ofJustinian I (r. 527–565), who may have tried to arrest Latin's decline. Its extinction in the east was thereafter inevitable.[248] A similar process of linguisticHellenization occurred in Asia Minor, whose inhabitants had mostly abandoned their indigenous languages for Greek by early Byzantine times.[249] Still, much of the population of the empire would have known neither Latin nor Greek, especially in rural areas—their languages includedArmenian inthat people's homelands,Aramaic dialects such asSyriac in Mesopotamia and the Levant,Coptic in Egypt,Phoenician on the Levant coast and inCarthage, andBerber in rural North Africa.[250]
The empire lost its linguistic diversity in the wars of the 7th and 8th centuries, becoming overwhelmingly Greek-speaking.[251] During this troubled period, classicalAttic Greek—one of thelinguistic registers the Byzantine Greeks inherited—fell out of use, while theeveryday vernacular registers were still used.[252] As the empire gained some stability from the 9th century onwards, and especially after theKomnenian restoration, Attic Greek came back into fashion for written works. In a phenomenon calleddiglossia, the gap between vernacular spoken Greek, which was rarely written in published works, and literary registers only spoken in formal contexts, became very wide.[253]
During thePalaiologan period, although classically-written works remained the normal style, Western-inspired writers began to use more vernacular elements, especially forromances or near-contemporary histories. One example is theChronicle of the Morea, probably written by a French immigrant who was ignorant of formal Greek literature and who incorporated spoken Greek into his work.[254] All such written vernacular was in verse form, becoming the ancestor ofmodern Greek poetry, while prose remained classically-written.[255]
The empire's geographic and maritime advantages reduced the costs of transporting goods and facilitated trade, making it a key driver of economic growth from antiquity and through the post-classical period.[256] Infrastructure, including roads, public buildings, and the legal system, supported trade and other economic activities.[257] Regions like Asia Minor, the Aegean islands, Egypt, the Levant, and Africa thrived as mature economic centres despite political challenges and military insecurities.[258] From the mid-6th century onward, plagues, invasions, and wars caused populations and economies to decline, leading to the collapse of the ancient economy.[259] Major cities like Constantinople, Antioch,Alexandria, andThessaloniki continued to support substantial populations exceeding 100,000, while the countryside transitioned into fortified settlements.[260] These rural areas developed into hamlets and villages, reflecting an economic shift between historical periods towards more efficient land use.[261]
Low population density prompted emperors to encourage migration and resettlement, stimulating agriculture and demographic growth.[262] By the 9th century, the economy began to revive, marked by increased agricultural production and urban expansion.[263] Advances in science, technical knowledge, and literacy gave the empire a competitive edge over its neighbours.[264] The 11th and 12th centuries witnessed consistent and rapid population growth, marking the peak of this revival.[265] Italian merchants, particularly the Venetians, Genoese, and Pisans, took control of international trade, thus reducing the influence of native merchants.[266] The political system grew increasingly extractive and authoritarian, contributing to the empire's collapse in 1204.[267]
The fall of Constantinople during the Fourth Crusade in 1204 destroyed centuries of its wealth.[268] Large landholdings were confiscated, and the empire fragmented into smaller rump states ruled by competing factions, making governance inefficient and increasing the costs of doing business.[269] The state gradually lost control over trade practices, price regulations, the outflow of precious metals, and possibly even the minting of coins.[270] Italian merchants further dominated trade as the events of 1204 opened the Black Sea to Western merchants, permanently altering the empire's fortunes.[271] Farmers and manufacturers increasingly produced goods for local use and were affected by the insecurity of constant warfare.[272] Despite these challenges, the empire's mixed economy (characterised by state interventions, public works, and market liberalisation)[273] remained a model of medieval economic adaptability, even as it deteriorated under external pressures.[274]
Historical evidence of Byzantine dress is scant. It is known that the court had a distinguishable dress, and that ordinary men and women observed certain conventions of clothing.[275] Fashion trends started in the provinces, and not in the capital, which was more conservative.[276] The imperial dress was centred around theloros,tzangia and crown, which represented the empire and the court.[277] Theloros derived from thetrabea triumphalis, a ceremonial toga worn by consuls. It was more prominent in the early empire, indicating a continuation of the traditions of the Roman Empire.[278] Historian Jennifer Ball suggests that thechlamys cloak, which originated in the military, was similar to a modern-day business suit and an evolution of thepaludamentum cloak worn by aristocratic men, including the emperor during the early empire.[279] In the middle empire, dresses replaced the tunic for women.[280] The late empire saw the larger influence on Byzantine dress of non-Greek cultures like the Italians (Genoese and Venetians), Turks (Ottomans), and the Bulgarians.[281]
Feasting was central to the culture.[282] By the 10th century, dining shifted fromreclining to tables with clean linen.[283] The introduction of the fork and salad dressing (with oil and vinegar) further shaped Italian and Western traditions[284] Classical Greco-Roman era foods were common such as the condimentgaros (similar to fermentedfish sauces today) as well as the still popularbaklava.[285] Fruits likeaubergine andorange, unknown during classical times, were added to diets.[286] Foods that have continued into the modern era include the cured meatpaston,Feta cheese, salt roe similar to the modernboutargue, black sea caviar,tiropita,dolmades, and the souptrachanas.[287] There were famed medieval sweet wines such as theMalvasia fromMonemvasia, theCommandaria, and the eponymousRumney wine which were drunk, as weremillet beer (known asboza) andretsina.[288]
Chariot races were held from the early era until 1204, becoming one of the world's longest continuous sporting events.[290]Mimes, thepantomime and some wild animal shows were prominent until the 6th century.[291] Because Christian bishops and pagan philosophers did not like these activities, the state's funding for them ceased, leading to their decline and a move to private entertainment and sporting.[292] A Persian version of polo introduced by the Crusaders calledTzykanion was played by the nobility and urban aristocracy in major cities during the middle and late eras, as was the sport of jousting introduced from the West.[293] Over time,game boards liketavli became increasingly popular.[294]
The subsequent cultural Macedonian Renaissance (c. 800–1000; the "Encyclopedism period") saw a renewed proliferation of literature and revived the earlier Hellenic-Christian synthesis.[315] Works byHomer,Ancient Greek philosophers andtragedians were translated, andhagiography was heavily reorganised.[321] After this early flowering of monastic literature, there was a dearth untilSymeon the New Theologian in the late 10th century.[321] A new generation (c. 1000–1250), including Symeon,Michael Psellos andTheodore Prodromos, rejected the Encyclopedist emphasis on order, and were interested in individual-focused ideals variously concerningmysticism,authorial voice, heroism, humour and love.[323] This included the Hellenistic-inspiredByzantine romance andchivalric approaches in rhetoric, historiography and the influential epicDigenes Akritas.[321] The empire's final centuries saw a renewal of hagiography and increased Western influence, leading to mass Greek to Latin translations.[324] Authors such asGemistos Plethon andBessarion exemplified a new focus on humanvices alongside the preservation of classical traditions, the latter greatly influenced theItalian Renaissance.[324]
Byzantine chant was central to theByzantine Rite; the earliest music was notnotated,[331] including early monostrophic short hymns like thetroparion.[332] Proto-Ekphonetic notation (9th century onwards) marked simplerecitation patterns. Theneumatic Palaeo-Byzantine notation system emerged in the 10th century, and the Middle Byzantine "Round Notation" from the mid-12th century onwards is the first fullydiastematic scheme.[333] Several major forms developed alongsidewell-known composers: the longkontakion (5th century onwards), popularised byRomanos the Melodist; the also-extensivekanōn (late 7th century onwards), developed byAndrew of Crete; and the shortersticheron (at least 8th century onwards), championed byKassia.[334] By the Palaiologan period, the dominance of strict compositional rules lessened andJohn Koukouzeles led a new school favouring a moreornamental "kalophonic" style which deeply informed post-empire Neo-Byzantine music.[335]
Secular music, often state-sponsored, was ubiquitous in daily life and featured in a variety of ceremonies, festivals, and theatre.[336] Secular vocal music was rarely notated, and extant manuscripts date much later, suggesting the tradition was passed throughoral tradition and likelyimprovised.[337] Prohibited for liturgical use, a wide variety of Byzantineinstruments flourished in secular contexts, although no notated instrumental music survives.[338] It is uncertain to what extent instrumentalists improvised or if they doubled vocalists monophonically orheterophonically.[339] Among the best known instruments are thehydraulic organ, used for circus and imperial court events; theancient Greek-descendedaulos, awind instrument; thetambouras, a pluckedstring instrument; and mostly popularly, theByzantine lyra.[339] Prominent genres includedacclamation chants of laudation or salutation; the celebratoryAcritic songs; symposia instrumentalbanquets, based on ancientsymposiums; anddance music.[340]
Interior of theHagia Sophia; the influence ofArchimedes' principles of solid geometry is evident.
The scholars of the empire played a principal role in transmitting classical knowledge to theIslamic world andRenaissance Italy, as well as producing commentaries that helped expand scientific knowledge.[341] This medieval Greek scholarship was not only based on scientific treatises from antiquity but also drew from Islamic, Latin, and Hebrew works, which helped spearhead new developments as late as the 11th and 12th centuries.[342]
Military innovations included theriding stirrup which provided stability for mounted archers and dramatically transformed the army; a specialised type ofhorseshoe; thelateen sail, which improved a ship's responsiveness to wind; andGreek fire—an incendiary weapon capable of burning even when doused with water, first appearing around the time of theSiege of Constantinople (674–678).[346] Inhealthcare, the empire pioneered the concept of the hospital as an institution offering medical care and the possibility of a cure for the patients, rather than merely being a place to die.[347]
After Constantinople fell, the Ottomans quickly absorbed the remaining independent territories, including Morea in 1460, Trebizond in 1461,Acciaiuoli Athens in 1456, andGattilusi Lesvos in 1462.[348] They dismantled the Empire's political and secular institutions, leaving the impoverished Church to manage what would be later called theRum Millet, primarily as a tool for taxing its followers.[349] As the sole sovereign Orthodox state, Russia developed theThird Rome doctrine, emphasising its cultural heritage as distinct from Western Europe, because the latter had inherited much of the empire's secular learning.[350] TheDanubian Principalities became a haven for Orthodox Christians andPhanariot Greeks who sought to recreate a Byzantine Greek Empire.[351] In modern Greece, members of theRum Milletincreasingly identified as Greeks, eventually leading to asuccessful war of independence in the 19th century.[352] The modern Greek state nearly doubled its territory through the pursuit of theMegali Idea—a colonialist vision of reclaiming the former lands of the eastern empire—achieving limited success during theCrimean war but making significant gains during theBalkan wars.[353]
Since the 15th century, Byzantine history has been deeply politicised, woven into nationalist, colonialist, and imperialist narratives.[354] This politicisation appears not only in Greece but also in Bulgarian, Romanian, Serbian, Hungarian, and Turkish nationalism, as well as in former French and Russian imperialist agendas.[355] In the English-speaking world, interpretations of Byzantine history frequently surface in political debates, alongside the growing appreciation for its legacy.[356] The complexity of this history makes it a sensitive topic, especially regarding Greece's role in Europe's evolving sense of identity and the origin stories of many European nations.[357]
The Byzantine Empire distinctively blended Roman political traditions, Greek literary heritage, and Christianity, creating the civilisational framework that laid the foundation for medieval Europe.[358] The Empire preserved European civilisation by acting as a shield against forces from Eurasian Steppe people such as the Avars, Bulgars, Cumans, Huns, Pechenegs, and Turks.[359]
The empire's legal codes significantly influenced the civil law traditions of continental Europe, Russia, Latin America, Ethiopia, and even the English-speaking common law countries; and possibly influenced Islamic legal traditions as well.[360][361] It also preserved and transmitted classical learning and manuscripts, making important contributions to the intellectual revival which fuelledItalian humanism.[362]
The Byzantine Empire played a pivotal role in shaping Christianity by supporting early Church fathers and the decisions of Church councils; developing the institution ofmonasticism; and fostering theOrthodox tradition which continues to define much of Eastern European identity.[363] It was also instrumental in preserving the Greek language and is credited with developing theGlagolitic alphabet, which later evolved into theCyrillic script andOld Church Slavonic.[364] These innovations provided the first literary language for the Slavs and formed the educational foundation for all Slavic nations.[365]
^Leo VI was officially the son of Basil I, but a persistent rumour alleged that he had been fathered by Michael III, who had previously taken Leo's motherEudokia Ingerina as his mistress. One of Leo's first acts was to rebury Michael III in Basil's mausoleum in theChurch of the Holy Apostles complex, which exacerbated the rumours.[92]
^Arianism, one of the first major controversies, shook the empire until it was addressed by theNicene Creed.[176] Other controversies persisted, leading to schisms, such as debates on the fundamental definitions of Christ's nature at theCouncil of Chalcedon in 451.[177]
^Constantelos 1998, p. 19: "The fifth century marked a definite turning point in Byzantine higher education. Theodosios ΙΙ founded in 425 a major university with 31 chairs for law, philosophy, medicine, arithmetic, geometry, astronomy, music, rhetoric and other subjects. Fifteen chairs were assigned to Latin and 16 to Greek. The university was reorganised by Michael III (842–867) and flourished down to the fourteenth century.".
Howard-Johnston, James (2024).Byzantium: Economy, Society, Institutions 600–1100. Oxford: Oxford University Press.ISBN9780198897880.
Kaldellis, Anthony (2007).Hellenism in Byzantium: The Transformations of Greek Identity and the Reception of the Classical Tradition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.ISBN978-0-521-87688-9.
——— (2023).The New Roman Empire: A History of Byzantium. New York: Oxford University Press.ISBN978-0197549322.
Dingledy, Frederick (2 May 2019).The Corpus Juris Civilis: A Guide to Its History and Use.Legal Reference Services Quarterly. Vol. 35, no. 4.doi:10.31228/osf.io/meq6c.
Poppe, Andrzej (1991). "Christianity and Ideological change in Kievan Rus': The First Hundred Years".Canadian-American Slavic Studies.25 (1–4):3–26.doi:10.1163/221023991X00038.
Aschenbrenner, Nathanael; Ransohoff, Jake (2022).The Invention of Byzantium in Early Modern Europe. Washington DC: Harvard University Press.ISBN978-0-88402-484-2.
Casiday, Augustine; Norris, Frederick W., eds. (2007).The Cambridge History of Christianity. Vol. 2. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.ISBN9781139054133.
Casiday, Augustine; Norris, Frederick W. (2007a). Introduction. InCasiday & Norris (2007), pp. 1–5.
Garland, Lynda (2006).Byzantine Women: Varieties of Experience, 800–1200. Publications for the Centre for Hellenic Studies, King's College, London. Aldershot, Burlington: Ashgate.ISBN978-0-7546-5737-8.
Dawson, Timothy. "Propriety, Practicality, Pleasure: The Parameters of Women's Dress in Byzantium, A.D. 1000-1200". InGarland (2006), pp. 41–76.
Grosdidier de Matons, Jean (1967). "La Femme dans l'Empire Byzantin" [Women in the Byzantine Empire]. InGrimal, Pierre (ed.).Histoire Mondiale de la Femme: Préhistoire et antiquité [World History of Women: Prehistory and Antinquity] (in French). Vol. I. Paris: Nouvelle librairie de France. pp. 11–43.OCLC490034792.
Laiou, Angeliki E., ed. (2002b).The Economic History of Byzantium. From the Seventh Through the Fifteenth Century. Vol. 2. Washington DC: Dumbarton Oaks.ISBN978-0884022886.
Lazaris, Stavros (2020a). Introduction. InLazaris (2020), pp. 1–26.
Inglebert, Herv. "1. ‘Inner’ and ‘Outer’ Knowledge: the Debate between Faith and Reason in Late Antiquity". InLazaris (2020), pp. 27–52.
Manolova, Divna. "2. Science Teaching and Learning Methods in Byzantium". InLazaris (2020), pp. 53–104.
Telelis, Ioannis. "5. Meteorology and Physics in Byzantium". InLazaris (2020), pp. 177–201.
Salmon, Thomas. "12. The Byzantine Science of Warfare: from Treatises to Battlefield". InLazaris (2020), pp. 429–463.
Lenski, Noel (12 August 2021). "Slavery in the Byzantine Empire". In Perry, Craig; Eltis, David;Engerman, Stanley L.; Richardson, David (eds.).The Cambridge World History of Slavery. Vol. 2: AD 500–AD 1420. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. pp. 453–481.doi:10.1017/9781139024723.019.ISBN978-1-139-02472-3.
Louth, Andrew (2005). "The Byzantine Empire in the Seventh Century". InFouracre, Paul (ed.).New Cambridge Medieval History. Vol. 1: c. 500 – c. 700. pp. 289–316.ISBN9781139053938.
Noble, Thomas F. X.;Smith, Julia M. H., eds. (2008).The Cambridge History of Christianity. Vol. 3. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.ISBN978-1-139-05422-5.
Kazhdan, Alexander (1990). "The Notion of Byzantine Diplomacy". InShepard, Jonathan (ed.).Byzantine Diplomacy: Papers of the Twenty-fourth Spring Symposium of Byzantine Studies. Cambridge: Variorum. pp. 3–24.ISBN9780860783381.
Stewart, Michael Edward; Parnell, David Alan; Whately, Conor, eds. (2022).The Routledge Handbook on Identity in Byzantium. The Routledge History Handbooks. New York: Routledge.ISBN978-0-367-14341-1.
Muthesius, Anna. "Imperial identity: Byzantine silks, art, autocracy, theocracy, and the image of the Basileia". InStewart, Parnell & Whately (2022), pp. 81-103.
Goldwyn, Adam J. "Byzantium in the American Alt-Right Imagination: Paradigms of the Medieval Greek Past Among Men's Rights Activists and White Supremacists". InStewart, Parnell & Whately (2022), pp. 424–436.
Stouraitis, Yannis (2022b). "1 Is Byzantinism an Orientalism? Reflections on Byzantium's Constructed Identities and Debated Ideologies". InStouraitis (2022), pp. 19-47.
.jpg)
_by_Jean_Le_Tavernier_after_1455.jpg)
_-_Baptism_-_detail_02.jpg)
.jpg)
![Late 4th-century "Mosaic of the Musicians" playing the organ, aulos, and lyre from a Byzantine villa in Maryamin, Syria[325]](/mt/?noimg=&dark=on&url=https%3a%2f%2fwikipedia.org%2fwiki%2fFile%3aMosaic_of_the_Female_Musicians.jpg)
