Download PDF | Anthony Kaldellis - A Cabinet of Byzantine Curiosities-Oxford University Press (2017).
249 Pages
PREFACE
For those who want to lecture or write, this book is not without its uses. —Photios, Zen Thousand Books cod. 167
YZANTIUM Is enigmatic enough by itself, but its popular reputaB tion these days is also a mystery. Undergraduate students at my Midwestern university enroll by the hundreds in introductory survey courses of its history and even attend academic lectures whose Byzantine-themed titles should give them ample warning to stay away. Still, they come. Why? Twenty-year-olds are more opaque to me than Byzantines who lived a thousand years ago.
If their interest has deeper roots than the orientalist fantasy of Assassins Creed, 1 do not know what they are. On the first day of class, they often cannot name a single Byzantine emperor between Constantine I and Constantine XI (which should not be that difficult, when they are asked it that way). In more literate circles, including the mainstream media, “Byzantine” continues to be used in its pejorative sense, for unnecessarily complicated systems that work through intrigue, evasion of responsibility, obfuscation, and backstabbing. This usage results from centuries of Western prejudice.
In the Western Middle Ages, some Germanic warlords began to fancy themselves as Roman emperors and decided that the Byzantines were not really Romans, as they claimed, but something far, far worse: Greeks, an effeminate, cowardly, and treacherous lot, who ate with forks and liked to read and write. Later, some Catholics decided that the “Greek” Church was disobedient, even heretical, faithless, and in league with Islam.
They ratcheted up the rhetoric. The Byzantine imperial mystique was dispelled when Constantinople was captured by the armies of the Fourth Crusade, in 1204, and then again by the Turks in 1453. In the eighteenth century, Enlightenment thinkers decided to make this long-extinct civilization their poster child for the worst imaginable society: theocratic, superstitious, and run by eunuchs and evil monks with no trace of civic virtue. Voltaire called it a worthless collection of miracles, a disgrace for the human mind, while for Hegel it was a disgusting picture of imbecility; wretched, insane passions stifle the growth of all that is noble. In the twentieth century, some political scientists attributed the totalitarian evils and dysfunctions of the Soviet Union to its Byzantine origins.
The move to rehabilitate this relatively harmless civilization began in earnest quite late—only in the past generation. Yet despite hopeful claims that the nonsense is all behind us, in reality it continues to shape how Byzantium is discussed. Moreover, it is unclear what positive image has taken its place. Byzantine literature remains mostly inaccessible to the broader public, despite (or because of) the increasing sophistication of studies devoted to it. Byzantine art remains a strong draw, but is often promoted in a way that reinforces the orientalist image of an otherworldly “spiritual” civilization, and so still caters to Western anxieties and needs. And beyond literature and art, how might Byzantine history and politics find a voice in contemporary discussions and debates? What is Byzantium saying about itself these days?
This conundrum makes it trickier to identify what is “strange” and “surprising” about Byzantium. By what standard of normalcy? Greece and Rome have established and relatively coherent reputations to poke fun at. A scientific breakthrough is more curious in a Byzantine context than a Greek one, and, given the Byzantine reputation for mysticism, asceticism, and “spirituality,” so is the lewd, bawdy, indulgent, and forgiving attitude toward the body that we encounter in so many aspects of Byzantine life.
Therefore, a flexible approach seemed best for this volume. I have included material that makes the Byzantines seem weird and alien along with material that highlights their down-to-earth, pragmatic, inventive, and rational sides. They could be a vulgar, worldly, and witty lot, even in their spiritual moments. They had admirable powers of description, a love of paradox, and a deep humanity that was independent of dogma.
A Cabinet of Byzantine Curiosities is primarily a work of entertainment. Each item is self-contained, so the whole can be read in snatches. My highest ambition, that the book should be ideal for bathroom reading, was driven home by the fact that the Greek derivative of French cabinet (kabinés) means a toilet.
In another sense, I have written this book as a tribute to those Byzantine authors who have given me so much enjoyment and intellectual stimulation during the past decades. It would include, for example, the philosopher-monk who admitted in a letter to a lovesick friend that [ too have fallen for the charms of a brown-eyed girl, and, elsewhere, that J saw a wonderfully-made icon in a church, and so I stole it, by hiding it under my cloak. 1 can only hope that such Byzantines would appreciate what I have done here under their names. Their culture, after all, produced many thematic anthologies, paradoxography, and collections of edifying tales and miracles, along with books of quotations. They might recognize this book as kindred to one of their own. They did, after all, produce almost all the material that it contains.
In addition to entertainment, A Cabinet of Byzantine Curiosities may provide, to anyone who lectures on Byzantium, a handy reservoir of tales and anecdotes that amusingly illustrate a range of contexts and situations. Many are also great for dinner-party conversations— though you should judge the company’s tolerance for vulgarity carefully in advance. Some are so obscure, or culled from such diverse texts, that with them in hand you can pretend to know the culture far more intimately and widely than you actually do. So plunder away! The book even has uses for those who do not actually wish to read it: for example, it may be reviewed.
The individual entries in A Cabinet of Byzantine Curiosities are slightly longer than in its Greek and Roman counterparts and feature more short stories, a format in which the Byzantines excelled.
Unless otherwise indicated, all translations are my own, though in many cases I have condensed or paraphrased them to heighten the focus on the punch line or curious aspect. There is no bibliography. Anyone with internet access should be able to find full references for the primary sources that I cite, though I have placed the truly obscure ones in the endnotes. For most items, I give a specific date when known, an approximate date otherwise, or the years of the relevant emperor's reign.
Some of the curiosities in this book were contributed, wittingly or not, by my usual crowd of Byzantinist friends (they know who they are). Technology has enabled us to stay in close contact over great distances, and the format of its media has promoted the art of the small oddity sent to amuse. I thank especially Naomi Pitamber for suggesting some of the images used in this book. Above all, the book owes its existence and whatever virtues it may have to Stefan Vranka, who read and reread it, culled the initial dross, and gave excellent advice for refining the final product. Credit for inventing the format goes to Jim McKeown, whom I was also fortunate to have as one of my readers. I thank him along with the one other anonymous reviewer for their valuable suggestions.
Link
Press Here
0 التعليقات :
إرسال تعليق