Customer Reviews

Byzantium: The Apogee

5 star:		(22)
4 star:		(9)
3 star:		(1)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(1)

 

 

This, the second volume of Norwich's Byzantine history, is the climactic center of the story. The book begins with Charlemagne's corronation in 800 -- an act that destroyed the idea of a universal Christendom -- and concludes with the battle of Manzikert in 1071 -- one of the most consequential and regrettable military losses in European history. In between we learn about the Viking impact on Byzantium, conflicts with Kievan Rus, the rise of the Bulgar Empire, and the growing and intensifying conflict between Orthodoxy and Catholicism. Family and court intrigues are illuminated, while changes in religion, art, and leisure are explained. Norwich uses his amazing command of the English language to take us on a wild rollercoaster ride through the changing fortunes of Europe's chief protector, finally leaving us with a strong sense of the impending doom in store for both Byzantium and Europe as a whole.

This book was the first I read of Norwich's trilogy - by accident, of course. I didn't realize it was the second of three books until I started reading it. It is SUCH a fascinating account of an empire that is now gone. I became interested in reading about the history of the Turkish area when I visited Istanbul last summer, and am now very interested in the rich history of that city. The debt owed to Byzantium is more than most of us ever learn about. Byzantium's rich culture retained much ancient learning which served eventually to spur Europe out of the dark ages.

It is impossible to read this book without becoming consumed with curiosity for the other two books of the trilogy. The reader gets a very good look at the inside of the empire, but also is given glimpses of other empires and peoples as they affected or interacted with the direction of Byzantium. Personalities, politics and intrigues; families, buildings and architecture; religion, government, and commerce; geography, weather, and natural disasters; armies, navies and strategy; invasions, skirmishes, disease, torture, destruction, death and birth; all are given in depth treatment by Norwich in order to show the meandering evolution of the Byzantium Empire and its interactions with Europe and the Middle East. The book is richly annotated, which adds greatly to the enjoyment, in my opinion.

The beginning of the book sees religious dogma continuing to widen the schism between the Western and Eastern Empires and the end of the book sees the Byzantium facing its first major loss of land in military defeat to the Turks.

I highly recommend the trilogy to all history buffs.

Norwich writes with passion and intelligence of a subject that has been near his heart. He lays out the stories and the facts with a style that is never boring or obtuse. After I read each volume I would take time out and read Ostrogorsky's History of Byzantine. Adding the latter's more politically oriented work to the mix made Norwich's work even more complete. If nothing else I had the chance to re-read Ostrogorsky. One does not need anything else to enjoy and learn from Norwich. With the excitement that Norwich created, I then took up Babinger's Mehmed the Conqueror. A wonderful way to continue. What makes these three authors work is their style and subtle sense of humour. Norwich brought me back to an intriging era of world history that we need to learn from in our present time. What makes it even better is that he levels the playing field. I am happy that I opted for the complete set and not the condensed version. This way I get the author's whole intent along with his wit and style. Well worth the time and money involved. This is a work that I will return again and again. A good friend!

Norwich writes for the lay reader, but relies heavily on primary sources, often with intriguing quotes. Despite the potential for dry history, he instead presents a lively and fascinating account of the millennium of Byzantine history, starting with Constantine and ending with the Ottoman conquest. Beginning with a quote from W.E.H. Lecky, 1869, "Of that Byzantine empire the universal verdict of history is that it constitutes, without a single exception, the most thoroughly base and despicable form that civilisation has yet assumed.. ...The history of the Empire is a monotonous story of the intrigues of priests, eunuchs and women, of poisonings, of conspiracies, of uniform ingratitude of perpetual fratricides.", he comments, "This somewhat startling diatribe... although to modern ears it is perhaps not quite so effective as the author meant it to be -- his last sentence makes Byzantine history sound not so much monotonous as distinctly entertaining -- the fact remains that, for the past 200 years and more, what used to be known as the Later Roman Empire has had an atrocious press.  "
Norwich proceeds to prove that point in 3 volumes of readable history filled with tales both heroic and despicable. The footnotes are as intriguing as the main text. After describing how "the soldiers everywhere proclaimed that they would accept on none but Constantine's sons, reigning jointly. With Crispus dead, that left the three sons born to Fausta; the Caesar in Gaul Constantine II, the Caesar in the East Constantius, and the Caesar in Italy Constans", he footnotes "The distressing lack of imagination shown by Constantine in the naming of his children has caused much confusion among past historians, to say nothing of their readers. The latter can take comfort in the knowledge that it lasts for a single generation only -- which, in a history such as this, is soon over" His style is brisk and interlocking, writing on the broader European history, he'll follow one thread for several years, then return to the main branch and continue on. The current year under discussion is always in the upper right corner of the page, making it easier to follow the twists and turns of the plot. The book is so well written that one can easily jump in anywhere and pick up the flow.
One of the major benefits of this leisurely treatment is the ability to correct historic misunderstandings and mistakes. The first and most interesting is his emphasis on the fact that the 'barbarian' invasions of the 4th and 5th centuries were almost always led by christianized tribes (Goths, Vandals, Ostrogoths, Visigoths) looking for a land to settle their people. And in many cases, these were not invasions, but uprisings and revolts of peoples who had been promised land and security by the emperor(s) and then been ignored. The case of Alaric is of particular interest -- history books typically spend a paragraph at best and describe him as an invading brute, whose invasion of Italy is stopped only by a courageous pope. In fact, Alaric and his Visigoths had been alllied with the Roman Empire for some years, and it was only after they had been continually denied their promised lands that Alaric invaded. (He was opposed by the Vandal Stilicho who led the Imperial forces.
It's always difficult for modern readers to fully understand any previous culture, and for the Byzantine case, Norwich spends extra time trying to convey a sense of the importance of religion in every day affairs. Many of the political arguments revolved around the propagation and extermination of various heresies. Despite the attempts of various councils convened by the Emperors, heresies such as the Arian, Nestorian and monophysite continued to prosper. What's particularly interesting is that the history is not a simple progression of orthodox emperors and allied clergy fighting a successful battle against heterodox opinion. Rather it's a much more complex situation in which Arian or monophysite ideas would control the state and church for long periods. Only after the fact can one look back to see the emergence of the orthodox. Splits between east and west were also common, but sometimes even comical:
In 482, the Emperor Zeno's attempt to
"heal the breach by means of a circular letter known as the Henoticon, had proved spectacularly unsuccessful. It had sought to paper over the differences .. and, like all such compromises, it had aroused the implacable hostility of both sides. Most outraged of all were Pope Simplicius in Rome and his successor Felix III, whose anger was still further increased by the appointment to the Patriarchate of Alexandria, with the bless of both Zeno and Acacius, of one Paul the Stammerer, a cleric whose utterances, when comprehensible at all, were violently monophysite in character. At a synod held in Rome in 484, Pope Felix had gone so far as to excommunicate the Patriarch of Constantinople -- a sentence which, in default of any orthodox ecclesiastic courageous enough to pronounce it, had been transcribed on to a piece of parchment and pinned to the back of Acacius's cope during a service in St. Sophia, when he was not looking, whereat the Patriarch, discovering it a few moments later, instantly excommunicated him back, thereby not only placing the see of Constantinople on the same hierarchical level as that of Rome but simultaneously confirming and open schism between the two churches that was to last for the next thirty-five years."
The Byzantium trilogy contains a good index, and excellent tables of the emperors, and family trees for the often confusing lineages. The maps are adequate, but as so often happens, fail to contain many of the important place names contained in the text. Luckily there are many excellent historical atlases available as complements. While expensive ($45 each in hard cover), Byzantium is well worth the price.

The way Norwich writes is hilarious! He has such a dry sense of humor and is ultra witty. I would read this only if you have prior experience with Byzantine history because this will seem very jumpy to those who try to read it as their first book on Byzantium. If you love Byzantine and Orthodox Christian history, read it, but only after you have read other books on them so as to have a basis in what you are taking in which will help you fill in the blanks. He's doesn't talk too much about the Nestorian controversy which is something I would have liked very much to read about from his perspective. Over all, an excellent read, very funny, I highly recommend it.

Note: The review cited above refers only to the first volume in this excellent history of Byzantium (the whole trilogy will apparently appear in abridged form in March 1998).

This second volume covers the period from 800AD and the coronation of Charlemagne (which irrevocably split the Roman Empire into "West" and "East") to the battle of Manzikert in 1071 which saw Constantinople cut off to a large degree from its principal resources in Asia Minor (after the Imperial army was defeated by the Seljuk Turks). Throughout the narrative Lord Norwich concentrates to a large degree on the constant conflicts between the Empire and its neighbours - the Bulgars to the north-west, the Rus to the north east and the forces of Islam to the south.

A sense of ultimate doom is inevitable as you read the book, and yet some of the greatest characters in Byzantine history make their appearance in this period. This appears, indeed, to be the apogee of the eastern empire and you are left in little doubt as to what would have happened to the subsequent history of Europe if emperors with the power and wisdom of Basil II had not come to the throne and countered the forces pressing from the east and south.

There are so many frustrating questions as well: how might the history of Christianity have differed if the personalities involved in the "filioque" controversy - which contributed greatly to the schism between the eastern and western church - had been different? Might there still have been an Eastern Empire (or its close descendent) today if the amicable terms agreed between the Seljuk Turks and the defeated emperor Romanus Diogenes been honoured by those who overthrew him?

We will never know, of course, but it is fun to speculate and this excellent overview of the highpoint of Byzantine history provides an excellent platform for asking that most intriguing of historical questions "what if ......?"

This book, as many reviewers have pointed out, is part II of a trilogy and sequel to "Byzantium The Early Centuries". You don't really need to read the first book to follow this one, but you will certainly enjoy it much more if you read "The Early Centuries" first. In this volume you'll encounter many interesting characters: Emperors, Patriarchs of the Eastern Church, able generals, usurpers, debauchees and good-for-nothing bums. (In fact, some of them fall into two or more of the previous categories!). In my opinion, the story of Emperor Basil II alone is worth the price of this second volume. If you haven't read the first volume of this series and want to know about Byzantine History, consider taking advantage of Amazon's offer and get both volumes. You won't be disappointed.

In _Byzantium: the Apogee_, Norwich continues his excellent history of the Eastern Roman empire, beginning with the regin of Empress Irene (775 - 810) and concluding with the defeat of the Byzantines at Manzikert in 1071. While a considerably shorter time span than the previous work (_Byzantium: the early centuries_, a history from 330 - 811), Norwich give the political zenith of the empire meticulous attention.

The role Byzantium played as a major political force in the Mediterannean is frequently overlooked in histories of the early and high middle ages. Norwich does much to remind us that Europe - and the world - owe much to the Byzantines. Beginning with the failed political relationship between Charlemagne and Irene in 802 (and the resulting union of Christendom that would have resulted), Norwich goes on to illustrate the profound impact Byzantium had on the Balkans, Russia and the near east, particularly as the Abbysid Caliphate, il Khanid Caliphate and subsequent Sekjuk Turks grew in power in the region. The brilliant (and frequently mercurial and trecherous) political manoeverings of the Byzantines is the strongest portion of the book.

However, as with his previous book, Norwich's focus is almost exclusively towards the political. While the econcomic issues Byzantium faced are discussed at more length thatn in _The Early Centuries_, they are empahsized primarily as they impacted or were the consequences of political decisions. The role of women or common citizens were scarcely mentioned at all. For this, I had to deduct a star from my rating.

This remains an excellent history on the subject, and I do recommend it particularly to those wanting a broader view of Christendom in the high middle ages; merely be aware of the shortcomings of the historial narrative.

Byzantine history is a little dry, but then again, history never made any promises to be exciting. This "apex" of the Byzantine empire is surprisingly dull when compared to the apex of other empires, especially, and perhaps ironically, the great Ottoman Empire. Nevertheless, its worthwhile if not just because it covers the reign of the unfortunately named Basil the Bulgar-Slayer (Basil II), and the Macedonian dynasty.

The book opens with the revivacation of the Western empire under the Franks, the dwindling power of iconoclasm in its second outbreak, and the looming schism between the papacy and Constantinople. Then, of course, the rise to power of Basil I, the first of many great usurpers, who rose to power by killing the great Regent Bardas and the Emperor Michael III. A cultural high-point is reached under Basil's dynasty, and competent leadership manages to at least overweight bad leadership for a time. The Emperor John I, one of my favorite bloody usurpers, is also dealt with. The book closes with the chaotic period that followed Basil II's death, in which the Emperors and Empresses seemed to replace each other annually, each outdoing the last in mismanagement, and the beginning of the end, with the arrival of a new enemy, the Seljuk Turks, and the defeat at Manzikert.

The book suffers a bit by lack of reliable contemporary sources, and one can feel the author's frustration. Still, there are bright moments, not the least of which is the luckless Liudprand and the eloquent but dangerously conceited Michael Psellus, both of which are quoted liberally for good reason. Lord Norwich isn't a professional scholar, but he's certainly well read on the topic, and writes with great humor and color. Worth reading.

I had a hard time putting this book down. For those who want more than just a cursory review of the history of this important civilization, the trilogy is a must. This second book begins with the coronation of Charlemagne and ends with Alexius Comnenus coming on the scene. Why events happened as they did is always a question in medieval history; however, the author provides several views in most cases.