Talk:Michael Attaleiates

message: :Attaliates writes as an eyewitness and contemporary. Because of this, his history is burdened with the usual Byzantine affectations. In one passage, when he talks about the emperor Romanos IV Diogenes, he makes it seem as though Botaniates– a potential candidate for the empress Eudokia Makrembolitissa's hand in marriage after the death of Constantine X Doukas, who was emperor while he was writing– should have succeeded to the throne. His judgment is also affected towards the emperor Romanos, who he regarded as a wronged soul. His writing style is in imitation of earlier Roman historians rather than Greek historians. An example of this is his reference to the senators, though like Nikephoros Gregoras he simply means the imperial officials.
*Because he is an eyewitness, his style is affected; what?
*He imitates Roman rather than Greek historians (because he writes of the Senate). Huh? Cassius Dio wrote of the Senate - and gerontes/gerousia were Greek words centuries before there were any Roman historians. 
This is unsourced original research. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 20:45, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Paragraph

message: Of course anthypatos is "proconsul"; as here of John Ducas, just as hypatos is "consul"; indeed the use of it in Byzantine Italy may have led to the modern diplomatic sense of "consul". This edit is half-right that it was not (in Constantinople) an office any longer; I should have caught the implication, as should Cplakidas' original edit.  Septentrionalis PMAnderson 14:52, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Of course anthypatos "is" proconsul, that's where the term originated. And yes, "proconsul" is sometimes used to render even the later title. However, since there is a very clear distinction between the Roman Republican and Imperial proconsul, which was a gubernatorial office, and the middle Byzantine anthypatos, which was an honorary dignity, it is IMO best not to use the former, especially since it is a well-known term. Either way, the Byzantine title is covered at anthypatos, not at proconsul. Constantine   ✍  17:11, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Anthypatos

message: Dr.K added a number of helpful tags on the page I recently edited which helped me to enhance the page with citations to the most up-to-date scholarship on Attaleiates. I assume that Dr. K was also the one who changed the original wording in the text I produced from Attaleiates being a "Medieval Roman historian" to "Byzantine historian". The change is of course uncontroversial as Attaleiates was a Byzantine in the modern sense of the word. My intention in the use of the expression "Medieval Roman", however, was to emphasize the fact that there is a problem with the use of the term "Byzantine". I am a Byzantinist and yet I am still troubled by our use of the term both within the field and outside. The Byzantines themselves only used it in a rhetorical fashion to refer to Constantinopolitans (citizens of ancient Byzantium). At the same time, "Medieval Roman" or plain "Roman" is the only historically correct and accurate way to describe Attaleiates' identity. He never conceived of himself as anything but Roman. His text uses Roman and sometimes the antiquarian Ausones (which means Roman) to refer to himself and to his fellow "Byzantines". The Byzantines were of course Romans. They were, for the most part, Greek speaking Romans but there was no other identity that they accepted as theirs (exceptions to be found only in the late Byzantine period and among some intellectuals speaking of their philosophical interests and not of their "national" identity). Once one became part of the Byzantine polity (Romanía) then one was a Roman. There was not even such a thing as a hyphenated Roman like say Greek-Roman or Armenian-Roman. Once you were accepted as part of the polity you were a Roman tout court. A Roman of Armenian or Slavic origins perhaps but a Roman nonetheless. I am sure that this is not new to most people. It is just that under the influence of modern nationalism scholars have found it useful to deploy the term Byzantium. It is easier to serve Balkan, Russian, or even western national identitarian agendas if there is this weird orthodox thing called Byzantium from which to claim origin and which to claim as the source for a medieval past. I am not going to change the text back to what I had it before. This would not be useful and I am not interested in an editing back-and-forth on an issue where too many people may have strong opinions. I just want the point made in the form of a discussion on the margins of the entry. Perhaps this way some thinking may occur that will affect how future posts are created. Thanks to all for the editorial work on my post. Dimik72.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dimik72 (talk • contribs) 00:29, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi Dimik72. This issue has been resolved in favour of using the term "Byzantine Empire". Please seee discussions at Talk:Byzantine Empire on multiple archives. Δρ.Κ. λόγοςπράξις  06:36, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Hello from me as well, Dimik72. It is a pleasure to welcome a Byzantinist here, and I hope you will have a long and productive stay! It was me who changed the "Roman" to "Byzantine", because, as Dr.K says, this issue has been debated to death. While it is generally acknowledged by the more history-savvy that "Byzantine" equals "Medieval Roman", Wikipedia is bound by its policies to follow general usage and academic consensus, and in both these areas, "Byzantine" is the established term; rightly or not does not enter into it. Cheers, Constantine   ✍  09:42, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  On the uses of Byzantine 

message: An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect :Italiartes and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 February 28#Italiartes until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion.  signed, Rosguill talk 19:44, 28 February 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Italiartes" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]]