Customer Reviews

History of the Byzantine State (Rutgers Byzantine series)

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

 

 

Either in its original German or in this English translation by Joan Hussey, "History of the Byzantine State" is a standard reference used in other modern historical books on Byzantium; at least two authors I have read openly praise the book in their own bibliographies as the best work on Byzantine history. It is hard to disagree with this assessment, since this tome is really that good and the research which went into it is nothing short of painstaking. George Ostrogorsky introduces his narrative with a thorough overview of the development of Byzantine studies from the sixteenth century onwards, followed by the history of the Empire proper by sections, each of which covers a specific historical period. In addition, each section is prefaced by an excellent bibliographical narrative of Byzantine sources which cover the period in question; these narratives put together provide the reader with a very instructive literary history of Byzantium. Ostrogorsky has a penchant for detail in both the text and the extensive footnotes accompanying it. But let the reader beware: this book is essentially a dry political and military history with some legal, theological, and economic history thrown in for good measure; even the literary history mentioned above limits itself to documents of historiographical value. The author did compensate for the lack of written coverage of the arts and architecture by including nice illustrations of Byzantine structures and artwork. Even as this revised edition was published almost 30 years ago, "History of the Byzantine State" remains a much-revered classic among Byzantinists.

George Ostrogorsky's book covers all Byzantine history from Diocletian and Constantine to the fall of Constantinople in 1453. It is, moreover, intelligible and useful to the nonspecialist with only a broad historical background. Its particular value is that it imparts an understanding of the *process* of Byzantine history, especially in three key periods. First, the transformation of the decrepit East Roman Empire to a viable state able to withstand great adversities and heavy defeats. Second, the reinvigoration of that state after the iconoclast crisis and its rise to great power. Finally, the unintentionally suicidal policies adopted after the death of Basil II, which led to the breaking of Byzantium's back only fifty years later. Ostrogorsky's copious footnotes - happily, not endnotes - are especially useful because they cite many arguments and authors with which Ostrogorsky himself disagrees. Thus he provides easy access to views other than his own. There are a few minor irritants in the softcover edition, the absence of most of Ostrogorsky's excellent maps being the main one. There is also some little use of untranslated and untransliterated Greek. But neither deficiency adversely affects the book's overall value.

Ostrogorsky has put together a good single-volume survey of the thousand years of Byzantium. The tale begins, standardly, with Diocletian and Constantine, and ends with the fall of Constantinople in 1453. He takes an omniscient view of Byzantium, focusing neither on the lives and deeds of the Emperors nor the cultural and religious developments, but telling a well-balanced narrative. In that it serves as a useful introduction. However, Ostrogorsky writes without any passion, and fails to humanize the major figures. There are, though, several excellent maps that put others to shame. In all, the book is worth owning for the factual narrative and great maps. If you are looking for an impassioned and entertaining story you should pick up John Julius Norwich instead.

Ostrogorsky's History of the Byzantine State is an excellent book for the scholar, as well as the interested reader to use for any understanding of the history of the Byzantine Empire. Well written, concise, and thoroughly interesting, Ostrogorsky depicts the transition of a multi-cultural Late Roman Empire, to a smaller but more centralized and powerful Byzantine State, that became the cultural Renaissance for Eastern Europe and the Near East. Anyone wishing to expand his/her knowledge on this important time in history will not be disappointed to read this work

This book is a well presented overview of the political history of the Byzantine Empire. Therefore, it suffers from the same problems as most other political history books, it fails to take into account important non-political developments. For instance, the Plague of Justinian is not mentioned. One would thing that a sixty percent mortality rate in Constantinople would earn at least a passing glance. However, the author/publishers are not responsible for the woeful inadquecies of political history. The problem with the book lies in the bizarre lack of maps. (I have the Rutgers University Press, Fourth Paperback Printing, 1995.) There are only two maps (p. 289 and 521). They are both of the Balkans. There is not a single map of Anatolia in the entire book. Why would anyone publish a book in English for a western audience on the Byzantine Empire and not include a single map of Anatolia?

Ostrogorski's History of the Byzantine State does a great job describing the relationship between the state, the civil and military aristoracy and small holders.

He starts this theme during the early tenth century and carries it forward to the end of the book. It is a story of how the state becomes less and less able to defend itself against the aristocracy.

While other writers speak of Ostrogorski's lack of passion about Byzantium's last centuries, this is also an advantage because it allows him to focus on political and military causes of the Empire's decline after 1025.

A few years ago I read Vassliev's two volume book on Byzantium and enjoyed it very much. In particular, those looking for a lengthy discussions of culture would do better with Vassilev.

But it was only after reading Ostrogoski that I got a clear understanding of the political change after the death of Basil II (and the role of Psellus in them), the wars against Michael VIII after the recapture of Constantinople in 1261 and fourteenth century civil wars.

In addition, this is a very well written book. In particular, Ostrogoski does a great job of starting his paragraphs with short, pithy topic sentences. He is also very good at drawing broad comparisons across Byzantine history (Vassilev, by contrast, tends to get caught up in details).

In sum, while I am glad I read Vassilev first, Ostrogoski's book has given me a much stronger sense of the outlines of Byznatine history.

"Roman political concepts, Greek culture, and the Christian faith were the main elements which determined Byzantine development. Without all three the Byzantine way of life would have been inconceivable. It was the integration of Hellenistic culture and the Christian religion within the Roman imperial framework that gave rise to that historical phenomenon which we know as the Byzantine Empire." Thus begins the first paragraph of George Ostrogorsky's masterful narrative of Byzantine history. As this quotation demonstrates, Ostrogorsky's writing is a model of erudition, clarity, and efficiency. It would be hard to improve the quality of his prose, and he maintains this level of scholarship throughout the 500+ pages of main text. But the writing has a natural fluidity which carries the reader along rather effortlessly throughout the full span of East Roman/Byzantine history, from 284 A.D. (rise of Emperor Diocletian) to 1453 A.D. (fall of Constantinople to the Turks). Ostrogorsky gives this inherently rich and fascinating material the virtuoso treatment it deserves, and the reader is rewarded on every page by Ostrogorsky's efforts.
Of course, readers of this English translation from the original German of the 3rd edition (1963) of Ostrogorsky's "History of the Byzantine State" owe an immense debt to Professor Joan M. Hussey, whose rendering of the German into English is a masterpiece in its own right. Moreover, through the collaboration of Professors Ostrogorsky and Hussey, the truly extensive references and footnotes have been brought up to date from the 1940 German 1st ed. to the 1967 time-frame of Hussey's 2nd English edition presented here. Of course, in the intervening 40+ years a veritable explosion in the fields of Late Antique and Byzantine studies has taken place, but Ostrogorky's mastery of the original sources, and the German, French, Italian, English, and Slavic secondary literature will not soon be replicated.
"History of the Byzantine State" is a delight to read, and is divided into 8 main chapters. These chapters are respectively subdivided into numbered sections, and both chapters and sections are clearly titled, so that the breadth of Byzantine History is clear through a glance at the Table of Contents.
Other reviewers have complained that Ostrogorsky's writing is dry and lacks a "human touch." I found the opposite to be the case: "History of the Byzantine State" has a cogency and beauty of style, and is a model of articulate scholarship. And with such rich material as the myriad colorful historical human figures and locales which populate Byzantine history, it would be difficult to render this history in a boring fashion. Ostrogorsky's emphasis is the political narrative, but he does not ignore social and cultural aspects of Byzantium, and upon finishing his book the reader has a sense of a complete picture of Byzantine history and civilization. In the paperback version now standard the maps are incomplete, but this is easily remedied by consulting an historical atlas or the Internet.

This presents too much material to absorb. There are too many names, places, parties, and so on. But it is what I wanted: a sweep through the political history of the Byzantine Empire. Unfortunately, it doesn't have enough maps (just two of the Balkans late in the book), and it's very badly copy-edited.

This book covers the whole history of the Byzantine state from aound 400 to its collapse in about 1400.

The good part of the book is that in a compact way it covers the major political events over that 1000 year period. The not so good part is that it assumes knowledge about many peoples that contribute to the story.

When I read "The Histories" by Herodus I had a terrible time getting through the part on the Scythians. That is because I had know idea who they were. I went to the Net and found a reference to them that was just a few paragraphs, that they were Indo-European, that they may have invented horseback riding, that their decendents still lived in the Cacus mountians. After that I was interested in them and had not trouble reading the material.

I say this to point out the biggest drawback of this book. There is no mention of the ethnographic or linguistic relationships between the various groups. Today it is important that Serbs and Russians are enthnically close. This books doesn't give a hint of these kinds of relationships. That makes it more difficult to remember the information.

However, it is still a valuable book to help understand the events that made the world the way that it is. It is scrupulous about its sources and there is no question that the information is as accurate as possible.