Although this is a history book it wasn’t a serious read for me. It was inspired by a favourite author (KJ Parker/Tom Holt) since the Byzantium Empire usually gives the worldview/cultural backdrop for many of his fantasies. And I know next to nothing about that strange concoction of Greece, SE Europe and Anatolia (pre-Turkish Turkey) that grew out of the old Roman Empire and lasted more than a 1000 years. Parker/Holt says he regularly reads the full three volume edition of this history of Byzantium for inspiration but I decided this abridged single volume by the same author was enough for me, out of curiosity.
As it is 1000 years of history condensed into nearly 500 pages it’s very dense with facts, incidents and characters. In fact the change in a regime every few pages gives an impression of instability which can’t have really been the case for such a long lasting the empire. In addition, the author states he’s not an historian but someone with a keen interest in the subject. Consequently he is prone to making somewhat sweeping statements about national characteristics and individuals, on occasion, which I’m sure a serious historian would avoid (E.g. “He was, moreover, an Armenian; a race noted for its keen and subtle intelligence, shot through with resourcefulness and guile”). Actually, a bit worrying the author had such general opinions/prejudices since he’d once been in the UK diplomatic service!

However, it was good fun and fairly informative to run through this superficial sketch of such a distinctive culture. Dominated by its Eastern Orthodox version of Christianity, with a powerful Patriarch who frequently resisted the emperors and which produced beautiful iconography. Stand out points: regular appearances of religious fanaticism leading to the destruction of said artworks! (iconoclasts reacting against what they believed to be idolatry): the frequency with which children killed parents, or vice versa, in pursuit of the throne; the frequency army chiefs became emperors or even joint emperors, often through marriage into the bloodline: the tendency to send deposed emperors off to monasteries and empresses to convents rather than execute them, though sometimes with the bonus that the remaining male bloodline would be castrated to ensure no surprise rivals are born at later times. The importance of eunuchs in the bureaucracy given their inability to favour sons (nephews could still be a problem)! And much more that I’m sure KJ Parker has sometimes been inspired by. The facts often seemed stranger than fiction.

I regarded it as more entertaining than informative but it’s a shame that a little more depth wasn’t present about the society below that of the elite, what gave the society cohesion for so long. The penalty, I guess, of such a condensed history. And I was also left wondering what this enduring empire left for posterity. Ancient Greece, Rome, China, India, Mesopotamia, Egypt all seem to have left some noted legacy. I scratched my head wondering what came out of this especially long lived empire.

I’m not rating it as it was a curiosity read on my part, I skipped a few sections, and I can’t judge how good a history it is. But committed KJ Parker fans might find it of interest for the background it provides for his fantasies. Maybe also a reminder of the lengths, that still persist today, of how far some people will go to seize and maintain a position of power!

Very readable book despite the history being relatively repetitive. The author isn't going to knock you over with wit and humor but he does provide a bit of color which is refreshing considering the often grim nature of the content. This version was a pared down version of his 3 book history of Byzantium and sometimes it seems as though they just cut and pasted certain chapters but that doesn't really take away from the enjoyment. The names are repetitive which makes for a confusing read at times but if you're simply looking for an education on Byzantium that isn't dry or too academic, this is a good choice.

True rating: 4.25/5

I ought to check my home library top shelves more often (or at least dust them from time to time). There, seated appropriately but shyly between From Pagan Rome to Byzantium and Mediterranean and the Mediterranean World in the Age of Philip II was this treasure, bought several years ago in advance of a long trip to Turkey.

But then I was distracted by the more proximate history of the Ottomans. This time around, my interest in Byzantium, as well as its antecedents, neighbors and many descendents, is deeper, more informed and hopefully more lasting. The only (and eternal) question is....which of the three books do I read first?

Ugh. I learned a lot of emperors' names and results of campaigns, and I guess I wanted that. Sometimes you need a basic general history, but there's almost no social or economic history in here at all and no explanation.

Norwich makes a lot of anachronistic moral commentary, such as one emperor being "shamelessly bisexual," some theological dogma being a triumph of "West over East, clarity over mysticism," and three or four emperors having saved Western civilization from barbarism or "the Islamic tide" or whatever. Even worse, at each point in the narrative when an emperor dies he indulges in a judgment of their lives and says things like "It is hard not to feel sorry for him" and "Nevertheless, he did his best." He also gives moral judgment on power politics but tries to have it both ways - he makes a token protest against child emperors being blinded and strangled but then also criticizes other emperors who failed to ruthlessly eliminate their rivals. He even tries to blame a group of mercenaries for not living up to their contract and betraying the emperor, instead of blaming the emperor for relying on mercenaries or better yet trying to explain why the empire couldn't defend itself anymore. The explanations he does give aren't any more detailed than "The economy had been in decline for the past half-century."

Maybe all the crucial detail in the three-volume set was cut for this summary but I doubt it. It's basically the worst kind of sentimental tribute to 'lost empires and fallen glory.' Everything's triumphant and splendid until later it's very wistful and sad but at least they produced some great art.

Just a great, quick summation of one thousand years of Byzantine Empire wars, royal murders, succession plots, religious schisms that clearly explains the issues. Sometimes hard to follow and a few of the internecine dramas could have been shortened, it’s a thorough way to refresh in this important culture that bridged East and West

This book is a whirlwind of a single volume to cover the 1,123 years and 18 day history of the empire, from 330 AD to 1453 AD.

The Epilogue notes that “Byzantium many not have lived up to its highest ideals, but it certainly did not deserve the reputation which, thanks largely to Edward Gibbons, it acquired in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. The Byzantines were, on the contrary, a deeply religious society in which illiteracy – at least among the middle and upper classes – was virtually unknown, and in which on e Emperor after another was renowned for his scholarship; a society which alone preserved much of the heritage of Greek and Latin antiquity, during these dark centuries in the West when the lights of learning were almost extinguished; a society, finally, which produced the astonishing phenomenon of Byzantine art.” (Page 382 and 382)

I found these passages quite interesting, in that they give a sense of how different our world is from periods in the past. From page 58, talking about things around 511 AD.

"Another major cause of unrest was the division of the populace into two rival factions, the Blues and the Greens…Blues had gradually come to be loosely associated with religious orthodoxy, the Greens with monophysitism [the belief that Christ 'possessed but a single nature, and that nature was divine' as opposed to the orthodox view (since 451 AD) of 'two distinct persons in Christ, the human and the divine' (Page 48)]

"Hostility between the two demes (as they were called) increased steadily…which came dangerously near to toppling the Emperor from his throne. He was now in his eighties, and his monophysite sympathies had become plain for all to see."

It goes on to describe the near riots that broke out attempting to overthrow the Emperor, and his diffusing the situation. The author then says: "It has seemed worth describing the religious riots in some detail simply to emphasize that aspects of daily life in Byzantium the twentieth century finds hardest to comprehend: the involvement by all classes of society in what appear today to be impossibly abstruse doctrinal niceties."

It makes me wonder what from the age I live in will be viewed similarly?

I learned from the book that Byzantium has every bit as much history to be respected and revered as the British people. It is unfortunate we have not minded the lessons of this history as thoroughly in my culture as we have others. This book doesn't really give one a sense of those stories, but it gives a context upon which one can then hang them in future study. Not an easy book, but an important one for general history knowledge.

Ако историята на една държава се простира цели 1123 години, 700 от които тя е твой съсед - понякога най-големият ти враг, понякога неохотен съюзник, то тази държава заслужава много повече от бегло споменаване в учебниците, повече от отреденото й академично внимание и най-вече – по-голямо присъствие в популярната история и култура.

За да компенсира този присъщ и на западната историография грях и дълговековно пренебрежение за сметка на Древен Рим, английският дипломат (забележете, поредният не-историк!) Джон Норуич възкресява историята на Византия за непредубедения от информация читател.

За тази цел, Норуич е сгъстил максимално наратива, за да изпълни очакванията, както сам признава, за краткост и яснота. Това обаче създава известни затруднения при възприемането на текста, може би дори в по-голяма степен, ако авторът се беше придържал към разгърната версия на историята – тук-там има бели полета и дребни неясноти, както и на моменти едно безкрайно струпване от хора, събития и места. Но нищо от това, разбира се, не омаловажава живото и интересно писане, с което толкова (и с право) може да се гордее английската школа.

Прочутото византийско хитроумие, лесно преливащо в политическо и лично коварство, неизброимите политически обрати, невероятната жестокост към явни или подозирани врагове (със сигурност характерна не само за Византия), възходът и падението на династии, славни военачалници, амбициозни съпруги, майки и сестри на василевси, безкрайните теологични препирни и най-вече размахът в строителството, естетическото великолепие и процъфтяващата книжнина – всичко това е предадено в пределно концентриран вид, без амбицията за изчерпателност, но с максимална духовитост, запомнящи се характерови описания и интелигентен хумор. Не са подминати и други участници в събитията – българи, кръстоносци, италианските републики, перси, османци и вездесъщите папи.

В крайна сметка, това, което “остава” след подобно шеметно препускане из една хилядолетна история не са толкова отделните имена на владетели и техните дела (признавам, аз не ги запомних, а и вероятно ще препрочитам някои пасажи многократно), а едно цялостно усещане за величие, дори и в упадъка, за един особен вид носталгия, който само четенето на историята ни дава – копнежа да присъстваме и да видим с очите си, нещо което вече не може да се види, но чийто далечен отглас можем да усетим чрез добре написани книги.

Вратата към плашещо богатата и бурна история на Византия е открехната по най-добрия начин – начинаещите като мен има върху какво да стъпят, ако решат да задълбаят допълнително. Не се плашете, историята на Византия чака да бъде преоткрита от повече читатели.

John Julius Norwich's [apparently] famous 1200-page "History of Byzantium" trilogy gets condensed to just under 400 pages, in the hopes that by making it accessible - and not force readers to commit to 3 books, instead reading just one and getting the most important info. So yes - the pace is a bit break-neck, but Norwich still manages to explain things satisfactorily, yet never condescendingly.

Besides all the "history" being skimmed over (with 383 pages for about 1200 years of Byzantine Empire, there's no other way), what especially struck me is that a lot of them - the "main cast" if we can call it that - had a lot of the same names, so it got a bit hard to keep track of them all individually. And sometimes some of them had different names but then changed it to one that had been used oh so many times before. It got to the point that at times I just stopped trying to keep it all clear in my head, and just plowed on to the next section. It also led to some annoyance on my part, so much that I'm just glad I finished it. And I seriously doubt I'll be reading the original trilogy. It was informative, yes, but ultimately did not make me care. Byzantium couldn't stay on top forever. All empires must some day crumble, to be replaced by other empires. The wheel was turning and it was Byzantium's turn.

It's ridiculous how many plots and counter-plots they went through. One crisis after another! Assassinations, blinding people (thousands upon thousands of people!), cutting off noses, East/West religion schisms, excommunications, ever-shifting alliances, concubines, second/third/fourth wives, invasions, sieges, treaties signed (and broken at a whim), protection money payoffs, co-Emperors, patricides, fratricides, regicides, etc. Make it stop!

There are plenty of illustrations (photos and paintings), all in black & white. It would've been nice to have them printed in colour on glossy paper. It would be at least that. Norwich supplies lots of maps, family trees (which come in very handy in the later chapters of the book), and lists of Emperors, Sultans, and Popes.

I still remember sitting in my high school history class, learning about the Roman Empire. Our history teacher mentioned in passing that in the 5th century, it was only the Western Roman Empire that ended; the Eastern half continued on for over 1,000 years--and oh, by the way, for a time they got back a large portion of what had been the full Roman Empire when it was at its peak. But after that little snippet, my teacher quickly moved on to something else.

Why should that be surprising? Because the Eastern Roman (Byzantine) Empire lasted until just 39 years before Christopher Columbus sailed west; was a forced to be reckoned with for most of the Middle Ages; was notorious for its art and literature (and cutthroat politics); and had a profound impact upon how Christianity is observed by millions of people to this day. All this, and yet my teacher had so little to say about it. As a teenaged history buff, I could only wonder why.

A few years later, I came across John Julius Norwich's 3-volume history of the Byzantine Empire. But really, who has time to read it all, marvelous though it may be?

This is why Norwich's "Short History" is such an important work. Granted, he practically apologizes for the brevity of it, and having to skip over many lush historical details. One can only sympathize with Norwich for having to condense over 1,000 years of history into some 380 pages.

Having said that, he beautifully introduces his readers to this forgotten empire with readable, engaging, and occasionally witty prose. From Constantine the Great to Constantine XIV, Norwich shows how this Empire rose in prominence, narrowly escaped defeat in its early years, rebounded in the late 9th Century, then gradually declined under weak and short-sighted leadership.

Attention is also given to important events like the Great Schism, Byzantium's role in the Crusades, and the debacle of the Fourth Crusade (which incidentally is the greatest black eye that professing Christianity ever inflicted upon itself).

The only reason I give "Short History" 4 stars instead of 5 is due to its brevity. Many important historical events (like those in the previous paragraph) are skimmed over, and the reader is left wanting more. Even still, I highly recommend this book to anyone who wants to begin learning about the Byzantine Empire (and that includes my former high school history professor).

Knowing nothing of the Byzantium Empire this must be as good as it gets for a short history. My only complaint was that the authors opinions as to the individuals was a touch too prominent for me and the lack of footnotes is also a small complaint. I suspect I will never read another book that has so many eyes "put out" Brutal!

"Liked it" is a pretty apt summary of my response to this book. My interest in Constantinople, Byzantium, and the region itself stem predominately from too much interest in historical RTS games like Age of Empires. Prior to reading this book, my previous experience with the Byzantine Empire was through Steve Runciman's 'The Fall of Constantinople' and historical works about the Roman Empire as a whole and the Ottoman Empire. This was my first dedicated foray into the Byzantine Empire.

It goes without saying that, for one reason or another, the Byzantine Empire seems to get a bad rap. Somewhere in the prologue it mentions that we can blame Edward Gibbon (of 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire' fame) for this, given the fact that he clearly hated Byzantium. I think it has to do with the fact that there was (in Gibbon's age and today) a lot of Romanticism around Ancient Rome. Despite clearly posturing itself as a continuation of the Roman Empire, the Byzantine Empire quickly interbred with Greek culture and 'Oriental monarchy' (I mean, eunuchs?! How Eastern of you). Factor in the schism in the churches, and I think it makes sense that Western audiences relegate the Byzantine Empire to some outcast stepchild of Rome (I don't agree, obviously, but I believe I understand the historiography). Also, the Fourth Crusade's mere existence is a horrible blight on Christianity, so it makes sense to me that people want to forget all about the region before it was taken over by Turks in the 15th century.

As for the book itself, the author mentions that this is a 'condensed' version of what I can only imagine is his magnum opus, a three-part history of the Byzantine Empire. I have no interest in actually reading the enormous original version, but I would probably read a few chapters on some of the more fascinating parts of the Empire's history, which is both grandiose and sad (the number of slain monarchs is enough to make a Russian blush).

That said, this book reads very smoothly. I'm not sure how long he spent trimming down his earlier works (or how many editors he may have had in that process), but the author does a great job at creating a very well-paced historical text, especially given the fact that it covers over a thousand years. I would recommend the text for anyone interested in a very detailed overview of the region. As I mentioned in the last paragraph, the hypocrisy of the Roman Church and response to Byzantium over the course of the middle and late Middle Ages is fascinating and just another bleak chapter in the history of the Medieval Church.