I don't know where I became someone who reads a lot of books on Byzantium, but there are a lot of books on that medieval society [1], and I somehow find myself reading a few of them also.  In general, these books seek to demonstrate the importance of the Byzantine Empire to the contemporary Western world in one way or another, and this book certainly fits within that trend.  After all, why would one read about an empire that ended lamentably and definitively in 1453, decades before Columbus sailed the ocean blue, unless the empire had some importance on the way we currently live.  This particular book is a relatively short one and certainly a very well-written one, and it certainly justifies the intents of its author to let the reader know about the importance of the Byzantine influence on surrounding peoples, even if that influence was not always straightforward.  And that lack of straightforwardness is not necessarily a disadvantage, as it allows the author to tell a fascinating story that has some surprising relevance when one examines the question of pietism within different religious traditions.

This book is about 300 pages long and is focused on looking at the influence of the Byzantine empire and its scholarship and knowledge of Greek philosophical thinking on the West, Arabs, and the Slavic world.  The book begins with an introduction to major characters, a concurrent timeline of the four worlds the author is discussing, maps, an introduction, and a prologue that sets up a controversy between philosophical and pietist Byzantines that led to a fatal division of the empire in the 14th century.  After that the author spends five chapters discussing the relationship between Byzantium and the West (I), discussing the parting of the ways (1) between the West and Byzantium in the early Middle Ages, the struggle within the Byzantine Empire between Athens and Jerusalem (2), the early instruction of Greek to the humanist elite of Renaissance Italy (3), how these efforts increased (4), and the importance of Byzantine emigres to the development of the Italian humanist culture of the 15th century (5).  After that the author discusses the relationship between Byzantine culture and the Arab world (II), with three chapters that deal with the efforts of the Arabs to establish a new Byzantium (6), the house of wisdom through translation (7), and the Arabic enlightenment (8).  Finally, the author discusses in eight chapters the relationship between the Byzantine Empire and the Slavic World (III), with chapters on the threat of invasion (9), the mission of Cyril and Methodius (10), wars of emulation between the Bulgars and the Byzantines (11), the Serbs and others (12), the rise of Kiev (13), the golden age of Kievan Rus (14), the rise of Moscow (15), and Moscow's role as the third Rome (16), after which the epilogue discusses the last Byzantine and there is an author's note, acknowledgements, notes, bibliography, and index.

There are several different layers of this author's particular discussion.  One of them, the surface layer, is to discuss that Byzantine expertise in holding on to the Greek philosophical tradition and its texts allowed these texts to dramatically influence the development of the Italian and Arab Renaissance periods.  Additionally, Byzantine attitudes towards encouraging national churches in the local vernacular languages allowed its influence to spread throughout the Eastern European slavic peoples, dividing them from the influence of Rome with its more imperial use of the Latin language in liturgy.  Beyond this, though, the author is making a subtle but definitely pointed attack on pietism as an approach, viewing it as a weakening force in the loyalty that people felt to beleaguered states like the late Byzantine Empire that were fighting for their survival by privileging a sense of religious purity over engaging in the actions that would be necessary for survival in the face of the hostility of the Turks.  Pietism privileges personal morality over the compromises of the political or geopolitical world, and hence those who hold to a pietistic belief tend to ultimately be hostile to political savvy and the sacrifices that are necessary to get along with others in the sake of building coalitions, which the author views as a major negative, along with the pietistic hostility to philosophy that tends to exist as well.

[1] See, for example:

https://edgeinducedcohesion.blog/2016...

https://edgeinducedcohesion.blog/2016...

https://edgeinducedcohesion.blog/2018...

https://edgeinducedcohesion.blog/2016...

https://edgeinducedcohesion.blog/2018...

https://edgeinducedcohesion.blog/2017...

One cannot go wrong reading about lost empires and the Eastern Roman state is no exception. I got serious about Byzantine history in 1996 and by the early 2000s there was this bestseller, among others, on this obscure and fascinating topic. About the Near East Roman culture that brought us the Bible.

This is a fascinating, but at times difficult (or downright boring) book. While it does a great work presenting the influence and its routes from Byzantium to its neighbors, there are several parts where the book is just names after names, travels after travels where I found my mind wondering off.

Still, a unique subject and a unique book.

Did the Byzantine scholars who fled Constantinople provide the spark for the Italian Renaissance? Did the Byzantines provide the bulwark against the Muslim invasion in the Middle Ages? Did the Byzantines dwell way too much on their past? All these questions are dealt with in this informative book.

Disappointing. Will I ever find a book about the Byzantine Empire that is readable, scholarly, and thesis driven? This certainly isn't it.

First, if you are at all interested in this subject let me direct you to the very entertaining, very informative podcast 12 Byzantine Rulers: The History of the Byzantine Empire by Lars Bronworth.

This book is very different from Bronworth’s work and acts as a pretty satisfying complement to a straightforward history. There’s not a single mention of Constantine, only glancing mentions of Justinian and Theodora or Belisarius or Irene or any of the other "big names" of Byzantium. While there is plenty of history (and lucid discussion of the disastrous fourth crusade and the final, ultimate fall of Constantinople in 1453), it is mostly context to set up the thesis.

Instead, this book looks at the legacy of the Byzantines on three younger civilizations that succeeded it: the Western, Islamic, and Slavic worlds. The main characters in this book are not emperors, generals, or politicians, but philosophers, monks, and teachers.

How did the European Renaissance get started? How did Islam manage to move so quickly out of the hinterlands of the Arabian peninsula to become a global force? Why did the Russians call their leaders tsar and see Moscow as the “third Rome”?

The answer takes us back to the golden horn on the Bosphorus, a gleaming ancient city that built a shrine to holy wisdom.

amazing book. really gave me more depth on Byzantium itself as well as the three intersecting worlds that it influenced (middle east, slavic world and the west). Very inspiring

A really great look at the influence of Constantinople on Italian humanists, Muslim science, and Russian orthodoxy. The final third -- that of the influence on the Russian church -- was possibly the least interesting of the three, but still a good read.

Sadly the inside didn't live up to the outside. The cover is lovely, and the back of the dust jacket has comments about the city's beauty from the 4th through 15th centuries (rather than modern reviewers blurbing the book). But the book ... just seemed like random things strung together, and the author didn't bother to explain why they were important. Lost to the West is also on my list of things to read; perhaps it handles this theme and material in a more interesting way.

Wells takes a very interesting premise, slaps on an interesting title, and then fails to deliver the goods. Minutae and exceptionally obscure individuals scattered throughout the Byzantium's history dominate the book, and Wells in my opinion never gets to the meat of what his title promises. The Sack of Constantinople by knights of the Fourth Crusade gets PART of a paragraph, the final fall of Constantinople at the hands of Mehmet II in 1453 only gets tangentially mentioned in paragraphs about other stuff. Constantine, Theodosius, Diocletian: hardly mentioned.
Maybe what Wells was trying to do was explain how the obscure individuals highlighted and expounded upon in his book did more for Byzantine influence than the emperors or the "moves and shakers" and the cataclysmic events we all know about; maybe he wanted to express how important it was that little-mentioned people or long-forgotten events really had more influence on the emergence of Byzantine culture as the characteristic that shaped the world even as her direct influence waned. But he does not make his case. EPIC FAIL.

This book is interesting because I have a good grasp of the era from previous reading. It is informally written for the lay reader, so the author adds footnotes -- at the bottom of the page -- yea!! -- to give basic info. to that lay reader.

The section about Humanism and its birth and growth in Italy is pretty good. Sometimes Colin Wells seems to resort to a sort of serial biography, but most of the time, the info. is developed clearly and with some differeniation to help the reader begin to see the persons about whom he is writing.

It is hard to rate a book like this- i guess it depends on what information you want to learn. "Sailing from Byzantium" is a short brief look at how ERE influenced the West, the Islamic World, and the Slavic world.

As a starting point/introduction to ERE the book is decent. It quickly lays out the important conquests and events from 500-1400 while paying extra attention to the study and spread of philosophy (Plato/Aristotle) and religion. In these aspects the book is good and gives a number of starting points for further research.

The books shortcomings can be divided into three categories:
1) Because the book is so brief, and somewhat focused, it tends to leaves out information. For example the book touches on The Schism by talking about Papal missteps and the 4th Crusade while ignoring others like the "Massacre of Latins". This is OK- however on topics that i am not informed on the book leaves me wondering how tilted other information is and how much is left out.
2) I am not a huge philosophy or doctrine fan myself, so found some of the passages rather dry.
3) As others have reviewed the timeline bounces back and forth. In general i had no problems with it until towards the end when it was larger.