Should It Really Be Called The BYZANTINE EMPIRE? - Anthony Kaldellis New Roman Empire

"New Roman Empire" by Anthony Kaldellis - Revisiting the Identity of Byzantium
Dive into the riveting historical narrative of "New Roman Empire" by Anthony Kaldellis, where the traditional boundaries of the Byzantine Empire are reexamined and redefined. This book challenges long-standing Western perceptions and offers a refreshing take on the empire's Roman roots. 📚
Roman Identity and Continuity:
Kaldellis passionately argues that the so-called 'Byzantine Empire' should rightfully be called the Roman Empire, as its citizens, culture, and emperors saw themselves as the direct continuations of the Roman tradition. With vivid descriptions of how Roman citizenship evolved post-Caracalla’s decree, Kaldellis positions the empire as a nation unified under a Roman identity well beyond the fall of its Western counterpart in 476 AD.
Rich Historical Tapestry:
The book does a commendable job in compressing a millennium of history without losing depth or engaging power. From the intricate details of imperial politics to the cultural and religious intricacies that defined the era, Kaldellis provides readers with a lucid and energetic exploration of Eastern Roman life.
Addressing Byzantine Complexities:
Kaldellis navigates through the empire’s religious controversies with clarity, presenting them not as esoteric debates but as pivotal issues that influenced imperial policy and everyday life. His treatment of iconic rulers like Justinian and Heraclius blends political insight with captivating storytelling, reflecting both the brilliance and the pitfalls of their reigns.
Debates on Nomenclature and Cultural Identity:
While advocating for a more authentic historical understanding, Kaldellis challenges the conventional Western naming practices, which he views as cultural impositions. His stance on the usage of "Byzantine" versus "Roman" sparks a thoughtful discussion on how historical entities are labeled and remembered.
Critique of Modern Historiographical Practices:
Despite the compelling arguments, Kaldellis' rigid stance on naming conventions might seem pedantic to some. His critique of the anglicization and Latinization of Greek names, although rooted in a call for historical accuracy, may also complicate the reader's understanding, especially for those familiar with traditional terms.
Conclusion:
"New Roman Empire" by Anthony Kaldellis is an essential read for anyone interested in the true legacy of the Roman Empire. It not only provides a comprehensive overview of a misunderstood era but also invites readers to question how history is written and taught. Kaldellis’ work stands out as a definitive volume that could replace older narratives like those by John Julius Norwich, offering new insights and a robust defense of Roman continuity in the East.
Join us as we explore the complex, vibrant history of what many know as the Byzantine Empire, but as Kaldellis would insist, should be recognized as the Roman Empire.
Don’t forget to like, share, and subscribe for more thoughtful reviews on historical works!
#ByzantineEmpire #RomanHistory #BookReview

[@Marmalade9001]

ok after 5 minutes I realised this is AI generated

[@thebookreporters]

The review is all human. The voice is AI.

[@papagaiofilmes6642]

​@@thebookreportersJust use your voice

[@draggador]

@thebookreporters
The audience always prefer a semblance of genuine personal connection to their entertainers & informers over anything else. Using either a real voice or a real face or a real name is the most common way to form that on social media sites. There's no substitute because it's a fundamental aspect of the human society & a requirement for being a part of the whole in any form, whether as a leader or a teacher or anything else. Resorting to tricks, shortcuts & loopholes has its own limits.

[@thebookreporters]

@@draggador That's all well and good. This channel is a side project to learn video making and explore the rise of AI tools while reviewing books we read. Apologies if we tricked you in anyway.

[@matthiuskoenig3378]

when did the roman empire fall? 1806

[@thebookreporters]

That's not a wrong answer

[@mysteriousman4966]

1453

[@xersoslexersos6366]

Return to Rome.

[@manuelgarcia-ve5vm]

you may also call it the grecoroman empire but byzantine sounds cooler

[@thebookreporters]

Gotta agree, Byzantine does sound cooler.

[@IonutPaun-lp2zq]

@@thebookreporters does it? It has quite negative connotations.

[@thebookreporters]

@@IonutPaun-lp2zq What would you rather call it?

[@IonutPaun-lp2zq]

@@thebookreporters I would use the same name they used in their sources. To be clear. I might medieval, or Eastern in front, i.e. Medieval Roman empire or the Eastern Roman empire.

[@pio4362]

Kaldellis is being hypocritical: he's all about one emperor that can be based in Constantinople, but then when it comes to the Church he's suddenly all for division. I'm sorry but institutions need strong leaders to last, not committees. After Jerusalem, Antioch and Alexandria were taken by the Caliphate, Rome had the best claim to leadership of the Christian community.
6:03 No, it's not offensive. John, Jean, Giovanni, Juan, Ionnes... they're all equivalents in different languages of the same saint's name. There's a long tradition of doing this with monarchs names - just search what Elizabeth II was called in Spain. I'd agree that the "Byzantine" term should be retired, as it downplays the Roman roots of the empire, but the other extreme of saying it's exactly like things were under Augustus is also not helpful. All empires must evolve and change over time, it's hard to fault them, it's the only strategy for survival.

[@thebookreporters]

Thanks for the comment! There's the fundamental disagreement between the orthodox east and Latin we, and even within the west. Bishops and kings on the west spent centuries resisting the growth of a papal authority. Not to mention the protestant reformation.