Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;FitzNigel, post: 2572387, member: 74712&quot;]The Romans may have never used the term Byzantine, but it is a convenient term for us modern people to clearly distinguish the differences of the Greek cultured Roman Empire that evolved after the capital was moved to Byzantium/Constantinople from the Latin Empire of Rome (heck, even the crusader takeover of the Byzantines we call the &quot;Latin Empire&quot; since the Romans had become so Greek - Medieval Europeans would refer to them as the Greeks, since Rome was where the Pope lived).&nbsp; I find nothing wrong with using the term &quot;Byzantine.&quot;</p><p><br /></p><p>I believe Dr. Fox&#039;s article (20 years old now, and out of date in terms of what the &#039;educated public&#039; understands) gives away the problem of his own argument in his concluding paragraph.&nbsp; Periodization is something we historians place on the past and have been doing for centuries.&nbsp; It is artificial, and always will be.&nbsp; To change names to make things &#039;fit&#039; adds another layer of unnecessary (and dare I say, Byzantine) complexity to history which will only muddle past scholarship.&nbsp; </p><p><br /></p><p>Sorry if I sound like I&#039;m getting worked up over this: I&#039;ll blame the sauce.&nbsp; And frankly I shouldn&#039;t be saying anything, since I&#039;ve already labeled myself a hypocrite...[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>

Your name or email address:

Do you already have an account?

• No, create an account now.
• Yes, my password is:
• Forgot your password?

Stay logged in