Posts
Below is Part 1 divided in 3 sections of a video series being done by Greek Orthodox TV in which they discuss the illuminating book by Fr. John Romanides titled Franks, Romans, Feudalism and Doctrine. I highly recommend everyone to have a listen, as it serves as a pretty good introduction to the subject. Part 2 can be found here. Part 3 is here.
Franks, Romans, Feudalism, and Doctrine - PART 1A
Franks, Romans, Feudalism, and Doctrine - PART 1B
Franks, Romans, Feudalism, and Doctrine - PART 1C
Franks, Romans, Feudalism, and Doctrine - PART 1A
Franks, Romans, Feudalism, and Doctrine - PART 1B
Franks, Romans, Feudalism, and Doctrine - PART 1C
Maybe I'm am a product of my politically correct environment, but I do not like when the Germanic tribes are referred to as "barbarian". I know there language sounded like "barbarbarbar" to the Hellenes and Romans, who represented the apogee of culture in the past. And I know that every nation/culture that has reigned in the past was guility of solipsism. But can we not lose the pejoratives of the past, and just call them Germanic tribes or what not? Let us not forget St. Antony's example of what an illiterate person can be and judge with righteous judgement.
ReplyDelete-H
I apologize for the typing and spelling errors. I was not trying to illustrate my illiteracy.
ReplyDelete-H
I respect your opinion on the issue, but I think its an error to think of the term "barbarian" as a rascist or even demeaning term (no one really knows what it even means, but it was a way to classify all the tribes that threatened the Roman Empire). Every nation in the past spoke of their "others" in a generalized "us and them" sort of why. For example, when Jesus or St. Paul divide the world between Jews and Gentiles, are we to think they were using rascist or demeaning words to describe the "other"? The important thing to consider is that these names and divisions all disappear upon conversion to Christianity and baptism. If we were to change the term barbarian, to be fair we would have to change many other historical designations as well. Asians would no longer be called Asians, Africans would not be called Africans, etc etc. These are all European words to define the "other", as Asians and Africans didn't call themselves such. My point is that these are historical realities that will never change, just like the world will never refer to the Greeks as "Romans" ever again though this is what they really are.
ReplyDeleteI understand your idea of designating "otherness", but the word was used with a degree of condescension in the videos. It was used to highlight the inferiority of the Franks, when juxtaposed with Hellenized-Romanism. "They were barbarians no less". But to be fair, everyone acknowledges that the Germanic tribes were culturally inferior to the Romans. I'm just calling for tactfullness when talking about the "others".
ReplyDelete-H
I think the term barbarian comes from how these people acted. They were brutish and quick to pick a fight, violent and had poor manners. Our education system doesn't emphasize this but the army that invaded peaceful Christian and Muslim lands were known as Franks. Read the original manuscripts and correspondence. The Muslim Turkish rulers and East Roman Emperors called them "Franks" and they were a massive rowdy and very violent mass of people who killed just about everything in their path. When they got to Constantinople, the East Romans were still wearing togas and speaking with English accents about thinks like "procurators" and "senators" and other such things. The Emperor didn't want these people in his city so he ferried them over the Bospheris as quickly as possible where they promptly slaughtered the good Christian people of Nicea-town! To say that the East Romans were really upset is an under statement.
ReplyDelete"Barbarian" is also the word used at this time in history so any other word would be quite anachronistic.
I've always heard that barbarian meant bearded one, though yes, we were also looked upon by "the Civilized" as the Great Unwashed etc etc. Unwashed, unshaven ... yet look at Father today (kissing his right hand of course!), and so many of our holy ikons! Just like the Lord Himself. Though all "civilized" means is Urban, from civis, city -- just a different approach to social organization, each with its pluses and minuses. Obviously the "Barbarians" looked down in many ways on the "Civilized" too, and intentionally didn't quite aspire to emulate them in every way....
ReplyDelete--Peter O'Filon
Barbarian originally was a neutral (at least, as neutral as a term that describes the Other can be) term that described non-Greek-speaking populations. After the Persian Wars (ie when the Greek met the Other in a certain environment) it took on the negative meaning of "uncivilized" and could even be applied to Greek persons or people. Just remember the comical episode in Athenaeus "are the Boeotians more barbarian or the Thessalians? neither, the Eleans are".
ReplyDeleteMuch of Romanides' understanding of history is painfully wrong (and even batshit crazy when he discusses e.g. the legendary foundations of Rome) but some is correct. It would be wrong (or rather, impossible) for anyone to learn *history* from his writings anyway and one starts to sound like a bot harping on about "Franks" after a while if he follows R.
Anonymous, Romanides makes his history clear that it is based on the way the people viewed themselves and others. He wasn't writing as a historian in the scholarly sense, and he would be the first to admit this I'm sure. His aim was to unravel how Orthodoxy came to be viewed by the West, and in this sense there is no greater historian and he did this better than anyone.
ReplyDeleteEvery nation in the past spoke of their "others" in a generalized "us and them" sort of why. For example, when Jesus or St. Paul divide the world between Jews and Gentiles, are we to think they were using rascist or demeaning words to describe the "other"?
ReplyDeleteNot so. There were cleavages in religious history:
Gentile and Hebrew - Lot and Abraham - Ishmael and Isaac - Esau/Edom and Israel - Jeroboam and the faithful to Solomon's son Rohoboam (Samarian vs Jew).
Germans had a lot more of difference in lookout. Laps and Fins go together as "Fins" - and both are finno-ugrians. Latins and Celts (excepting Irish) go together as "Welsh". Slavs were never called either of them. Germanic old languages have no unified word for non-Germans.