Byzantium. Was it Greek or Roman, familiar or hybrid, barbaric or civilised, Oriental or Western? In the late eleventh century Constantinople was the largest and wealthiest city in Christendom, the seat of the Byzantine emperor, Christ s vice-regent on earth, and the centre of a predominately Christian empire, steeped in Greek cultural and artistic influences, yet founded and maintained by a Roman legal and administrative system. Despite the amalgam of Greek and Roman influences, however, its language and culture was definitely Greek. Constantinople truly was the capital of the Roman empire in the East, and from its founding under the first Constantinus to its fall under the eleventh and last Constantinus the inhabitants always called themselves Romaioi, Romans, not Hell nik s, Greeks. Over its millennium long history the empire and its capital experienced many vicissitudes that included several periods of waxing and waning and more than one golden age . Its political will to survive is still eloquently proclaimed in the monumental double land walls of Constantinople, the greatest city fortifications ever built, on which the forces of barbarism dashed themselves for a thousand years. Indeed, Byzantium was one of the longest lasting social organisations in history. Very much part of this success story was the legendary Varangian Guard, the lite body of axe-bearing Northmen sworn to remain loyal to the true Christian emperor of the Romans. There was no hope for an empire that had lost the will to prosecute the grand and awful business of adventure. The Byzantine empire was certainly not of that stamp.
Dr Nic Fields started his career as a biochemist before joining the Royal Marines. Having left the Navy, he went back to University and completed a BA and PhD in Ancient History at the University of Newcastle. He was Assistant Director at the British School of Archaeology, Athens, and is now a lecturer in Ancient History and Archaeology at the University of Edinburgh.
God's City: Byzantine ConstantinopIe is the title. What would you expect the book to be about then? Perhaps a history of the city and its important places during the Byzantine period? You won't get that here! I'm almost a third of the way through it and about 5 pages have been dedicated to discussing places.
The author talks about the Theodosian walls, the Hagia Sophia and a passing mention of Constantine's forum and column. That's it. Nothing about the cistern, hippodrome, churches, palaces or anything about daily life (lower, middle or upper class). My understanding so far is that the city consisted of a large wall and a cathedral and a couple other minor monuments. If you weren't there to pray, guard the walls or look at monuments, you must have gone there by accident.
This book feels like it was made up of 'research leftovers' from other books. Basically, a general history of the Byzantine's with a couple facts about the city thrown in and some personal opinions. The author spends several chapters discussing the weaknesses of Christian theology and gives a perception that he thinks religion is make believe (I am not religious and have no stake in it either way). What does that have to do with the history of Constantinople? I have no idea. Did an editor look at this at all??
I am hopeful that it will improve and I will revise my review but highly doubt it. I was curious and jumped to the epilogue, which continues in its preachy modernist mindset. I thought this would be a nice overview of the city during the Byzantine period. Guess not.
**Apologies for any spelling or grammatical errors. I wrote this quickly using my cell phone.