I Graduated! Moving On To…
So, it’s been a while since I have written a post and I need to apologize to my millions of readers out there who wait for these posts on bated breath. Ha! Millions? Sorry, I was confused. The fog of my MA research, writing, defence, revisions, starting my Ph.D. while moving into a new home, renovations, and all that jazz has made me slightly delusional — just slightly.
Okay, let’s get some of the logistical shit out of the way. I have graduated from the University of Calgary with a MA in Greek and Roman Studies and I have now started my Ph.D. in History (with a concentration in Public History) at Carleton University, Ottawa. Cool eh! My focus will be on how Eastern Roman identity is presented and represented in museums, particularly Canadian museums, and the effects that such representation has on public perception of the Eastern Roman Empire.
In my last post, I discussed the Public Post system (Dromos) in Anatolia, which I was researching as part of my MA, and how it aided in the development of settlement identities. Well, I’m done talking about that for now (a thesis will do that to you), and I will get back to that topic sometime in the future. Today’s Identity theme is related to what my Ph.D. research will focus on: The term “Byzantine” and “Byzantium” as identity labels.
As we all should know by now, I dislike the use of the term Byzantine and what it is meant to represent. Unfortunately, the discipline of Byzantine studies has been reluctant to address this topic and whether professional academics should be using this term to describe a society that never identified as Byzantine. A short but fantastic talk was given recently by a few prominent scholars about the problems these two terms embody and whether it is time for scholars to stop using them.
Is It Time To De-Colonize The Terms “Byzantine” and Byzantium”?
The first question that many people may ask after watching this video is: Who gives a F@K!?
Well, we all should care, and the reason why we all should care is quite simple. It sets the template and precedent for the misuse of history to serve agendas that target the public with false and misleading information. A case in point is the use of the Star of David by individuals who are at rallies to protest against COVID-19 mandates and restrictions.
This shit really grinds my gears. Many people equate the public health mandates to Nazi Germany and the plight of the Jewish people, and other minority communities, that suffered horrific atrocities at the hands of Nazis. This is a large and complex topic to dive into and unpack, and frankly, I cannot do that here. But as shown in the picture below, the use of History for advancing, promoting and protesting current issues is not an uncommon practice in today’s world. The appropriation of historical narratives or themes for advancing current agendas by various groups of people is only a symptom of a larger problem. It is a red flag (or that damn yellow canary in the coal mine) for how history has been presented to the public. What do I mean by this? I will tell you, but first I want to say:
Comparing vaccine mandates to the events of the Holocaust is simply DISGUSTING! Comparing public health measures to the plight of Anne Frank is DISGUSTING! Wearing the Star of David on your jacket to demonstrate against vaccine mandates is ignorant and DISGUSTING! I am so tired of seeing people compare health measures to the Holocaust. How quickly we forget what the Holocaust was.
Moving on to my main point which is that people will appropriate history, misrepresent history and twist history for their own political and personal agendas. The language scholars choose to employ aids in the use of history by groups who seek to promote misleading information or falsehoods in order to promote particular ideologies and beliefs. So we need to check ourselves before we spit out inaccurate labels.
That’s right, professional academics have a moral and ethical obligation to represent the past as accurately, and as truthfully, as possible through the terminology we use. And most scholars are very rigorous and uphold these moral and ethical responsibilities. Unfortunately, sometimes things fall through the cracks, and we just don’t want to get down on our hands and knees and get dirty trying to pick up those fallen word crumbs. (I mean, why would you if you have a Dyson? That f@kr picks up EVERYTHING). The terms Byzantine and Byzantium are not accurate nor are they truthful. Therefore, we need to stop using the terms. Plain and simple?
Simple? I’m not so sure about that. As Kaldellis stated in the above video (I timestamped the beginning of his talk), just stopping the use of the term Byzantine is not quite so simple, and it probably won’t be dropped as a label to distinguish our field in the near future. But that does not mean we should neither address the problem nor use the proper labels with which the Romans used to identify themselves as. So WTF do we do?
For now, those of us who recognize the inherent colonial ideology embedded into these terms must continue to provide sound critiques against its use as an identifier for those who lived in this period (and to be fair, the period in question is f@k’n massive and is a significant element in this debate that needs to be addressed), and as a label for the field itself. I use the label Eastern Roman Empire, but this has its own problems in contemporary usage to distinguish our discipline and as a name that the Romans called their state. But, for now, I think it’s better than Byzantium.
“WHOA! Back that shit up…Who the hell is using Byzantine or Byzantium for an agenda? I mean, they haven’t been around for eons. So how are people using this term and the society it represents for their own agendas?”
Lots of people do. Mainly, white supremacists groups. Read this article by Roland Bentancourt:
Why white supremacists and QAnon enthusiasts are obsessed – but very wrong – about the Byzantine Empire
Did you read it? Crazy eh! The term Byzantium provides a vessel for groups like those formed by Jason Kessler to appropriate an ancient and medieval society as a western and white society. Which is COMPLETELY FALSE AND INCORRECT. The eastern Roman state was a diverse and multi-ethnic society, even though many of its citizens did identify as ethnically Roman. However, this ethnic identifier DOES NOT MEAN WHITE OR WESTERN EUROPEAN. Roman is not a Race; it is not European, as these people (Romaioi: Romans) had no concept of Europe as we do today. The concept did not exist!
Let me wrap this shit up so you can go on with your day. The Public History program I’m enrolled in is a new direction for my research on identity themes in — UGH — Byzantine Studies (F@k’n Son of A…Maybe we should just use Romania (Romanland) Studies). The program allows me to blend my many interests (especially in the use of digital humanities to help promote the field and the discourses that are taking place within the field), in order to address the current problems that have been heightened by the appropriation of histories to promote white supremacist agendas. Furthermore, it allows me to dive deep into interdisciplinary research which will aid in my research on how Romans understood their own identity, and help provide you, the millions of readers, with factual representations of the Roman world. This project, I believe, can help take out many birds with one stone. Well, maybe I shouldn’t kill birds. How about…ah f@k it, I’m tired. Birds it is. Sorry birdies.