- Meredith L.D. Riedel, D.Phil
Assistant Professor of History of Christianity
The Divinity School
Duke University
407 Chapel Drive
Durham, NC 27708-0968
mriedel@div.duke.edu
www.mldriedel.com
Meredith Riedel
Duke University, Duke Divinity School, Faculty Member
- University of Oxford, Oriental Studies, Post-Docadd
- Byzantine History, History of Christianity, Medieval History, Byzantine Studies, Cultural History, Middle East Studies, and 15 moreIntellectual History, Historiography, History of Religion, Just War, Cultural History of War, Syriac literature, History, Late Antique and Byzantine History, Byzantine Literature, Byzantine history and archaeology, Syriac Studies, Medieval Islam, Byzantine historiography, Early Medieval History, and Biblical Exegesisedit
The Byzantine emperor Leo VI (886–912), was not a general or even a soldier, like his predecessors, but a scholar, and it was the religious education he gained under the tutelage of the patriarch Photios that was to distinguish him as an... more
The Byzantine emperor Leo VI (886–912), was not a general or even a soldier, like his predecessors, but a scholar, and it was the religious education he gained under the tutelage of the patriarch Photios that was to distinguish him as an unusual ruler. This book analyses Leo's literary output, focusing on his deployment of ideological principles and religious obligations to distinguish the characteristics of the Christian oikoumene from the Islamic caliphate, primarily in his military manual known as the Taktika. It also examines in depth his 113 legislative Novels, with particular attention to their theological prolegomena, showing how the emperor's religious sensibilities find expression in his reshaping of the legal code to bring it into closer accord with Byzantine canon law. Meredith L. D. Riedel argues that the impact of his religious faith transformed Byzantine cultural identity and influenced his successors, establishing the Macedonian dynasty as a 'golden age' in Byzantium.
Research Interests:
Medieval cultures in the East were generally more reticent than Western ones in describing warfare in bloody detail. As events that involved the death or mutilation of large numbers of people, battles are traumatic experiences that tend... more
Medieval cultures in the East were generally more reticent than Western ones in describing warfare in bloody detail. As events that involved the death or mutilation of large numbers of people, battles are traumatic experiences that tend to inhibit creative literary description of them. The three cultures examined in this chapter approached the recording of war very differently. The Tang Chinese histories are formulaic, abstract to the point of statistics; they offer only names and casualty numbers. Byzantine writing about warfare is pragmatic, gives some operational details, and is concerned for the character of commanders, but avoids exalting them. Abbasid war poetry and chronicles glorify the moral superiority of Muslim commanders, especially in comparison to non-Muslim opponents, yet present the brute facts of battles in an epigrammatic way. All three cultures combined accounts of war with the exigencies of religion, which influenced their goals before battle and means of commemoration after battle. For the purposes of this chapter, ‘medieval’ will refer to the period between the seventh and thirteenth centuries. In taking an explicitly comparative approach, this investigation aims to illumine certain principles common to war-making in early medieval cultures, whilst also exposing religious biases that serve to differentiate opponents. Three cultures will be examined:
- the Tang dynasty in China (618–908),
- the Macedonian dynasty in Byzantium (867–1025)
- and the Abbasid caliphate in the Middle East (750–1258).
- the Tang dynasty in China (618–908),
- the Macedonian dynasty in Byzantium (867–1025)
- and the Abbasid caliphate in the Middle East (750–1258).
Research Interests:
This essay proposes to present an analysis of how the emperor Leo VI (r. 886‒912) used scriptural language and biblical references to mold his vision of proper Christian political identity. He was not following cultural norms, but rather... more
This essay proposes to present an analysis of how the emperor Leo VI (r. 886‒912) used scriptural language and biblical references to mold his vision of proper Christian political identity. He was not following cultural norms, but rather deliberately attempting to set them. As an elite, educated porphyrogennetos of the middle Byzantine era, Leo was comfortable using and referencing scriptural materials. Moreover, he was also unafraid to do that most un-byzantine of things: innovate. In particular, biblical references from one political document attributed to Leo VI – his military manual, the Taktika – reveal his particular approach to using the Bible.
Based on evidence from the Taktika, this essay will present a preliminary sketch of Leo’s exegetical method, and then consider how this contributes to his concept of ideal Byzantine Christianity. His use of scripture is interesting for its creativity, flexibility, and sometimes-overt cheekiness. It thus provides an initial direction for theorizing the use of religious language in Middle Byzantium.
Based on evidence from the Taktika, this essay will present a preliminary sketch of Leo’s exegetical method, and then consider how this contributes to his concept of ideal Byzantine Christianity. His use of scripture is interesting for its creativity, flexibility, and sometimes-overt cheekiness. It thus provides an initial direction for theorizing the use of religious language in Middle Byzantium.
Research Interests:
The author examines the military manual of the Byzantine emperor Leo VI the Wise. It is a unique work of consolidation and innovation: while Leo's Tactics draws upon Earlier military texts, he also imbues it with Christian ideals - that... more
The author examines the military manual of the Byzantine emperor Leo VI the Wise. It is a unique work of consolidation and innovation: while Leo's Tactics draws upon Earlier military texts, he also imbues it with Christian ideals - that is, he presents a Christianized general. This balance of imitation and innovation would appear to give a new lease of life to the military manual. These chapters appear to agree that one aspect of military thinking is the focus on how to conceptualize the enemy. Whereas the Greeks and romans considered themselves as superior fights to their foreign (barbarian) enemies, by the Byzantine period there appears to be a recognition that this was no longer the case. In this sense, Maurice and Leo balance between following the generic traditions of the military manual and creating texts that are relevant to the shifting realities of warfare in that period.
Research Interests:
The Amphilochia of Photios (d. ca.895) is a collection of letters that explain difficulties in the scriptures and related doctrines of the church. In Amphilochia 9, Photios applies himself to harmonizing what appears to be a conundrum in... more
The Amphilochia of Photios (d. ca.895) is a collection of letters that explain difficulties in the scriptures and related doctrines of the church. In Amphilochia 9, Photios applies himself to harmonizing what appears to be a conundrum in Orthodox theological anthropology:
How does one reconcile the saying of David ‘human life is like grass’ (Psalm 102.15) with the proverb of Solomon ‘man is great and precious’ (Prov 20.6)? [Πως του θεοπατορος Δαυιδ ειποντος ‘ανθροπος ωσει χορτος αι ημεραι αυτου’ και εξης, ο τουτου παις Σολομων αποφαινεται ‘μεγα ανθρωπος και τιμιον ανηρ’;]
This is more philosophical than exegetical, in terms of the content of these particular biblical sayings from the wisdom literature of the LXX. Photios approaches the problem with several concerns in mind. First, he must deal with the immediate question of the significance of humanity in the divine oikonomia. Second, the sayings of two of the Byzantines’ favourite biblical models of kingship, David and Solomon, must be reconciled or harmonised without impugning either David (a model claimed by Basil I) or Solomon (the model later applied to Basil’s son, Leo VI). As biblical prototypes, the wisdom of these two Israelite kings, particularly for Byzantine emperors, cannot be overstated. After the period of exile in which Photios wrote the first 75 treatises of the Amphilochia, he rather famously authored two mirrors-of-princes, directed to the newly-baptized Boris-Michael of Bulgaria and to his former pupil Leo VI, so his analysis of these conflicting sayings is also useful to understanding how he theorized kingship and authority.
How does one reconcile the saying of David ‘human life is like grass’ (Psalm 102.15) with the proverb of Solomon ‘man is great and precious’ (Prov 20.6)? [Πως του θεοπατορος Δαυιδ ειποντος ‘ανθροπος ωσει χορτος αι ημεραι αυτου’ και εξης, ο τουτου παις Σολομων αποφαινεται ‘μεγα ανθρωπος και τιμιον ανηρ’;]
This is more philosophical than exegetical, in terms of the content of these particular biblical sayings from the wisdom literature of the LXX. Photios approaches the problem with several concerns in mind. First, he must deal with the immediate question of the significance of humanity in the divine oikonomia. Second, the sayings of two of the Byzantines’ favourite biblical models of kingship, David and Solomon, must be reconciled or harmonised without impugning either David (a model claimed by Basil I) or Solomon (the model later applied to Basil’s son, Leo VI). As biblical prototypes, the wisdom of these two Israelite kings, particularly for Byzantine emperors, cannot be overstated. After the period of exile in which Photios wrote the first 75 treatises of the Amphilochia, he rather famously authored two mirrors-of-princes, directed to the newly-baptized Boris-Michael of Bulgaria and to his former pupil Leo VI, so his analysis of these conflicting sayings is also useful to understanding how he theorized kingship and authority.
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
The Byzantine emperor Leo VI “the Wise” (r. 886-912) rewrote civil law in an attempt to bring it into conformity with the ecclesiastical canons of the eastern Christian church. In the context of the later ninth century and the adjustment... more
The Byzantine emperor Leo VI “the Wise” (r. 886-912) rewrote civil law in an attempt to bring it into conformity with the ecclesiastical canons of the eastern Christian church. In the context of the later ninth century and the adjustment of the empire to a cultural context where iconophile theology had won a decisive battle, Leo wanted to demonstrate unimpeachable orthodoxy in the citizenry and to develop unity and harmony in a religious context that had been shredded for more than a century over the iconoclast controversy. His method for achieving this required reshaping the behavior and customs of his subjects by means of an extensive legislative program. Leo’s introduction to his new laws described the endeavor as cleansing ("anakatharsis" is the Greek term he uses).
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
This article examines the two extant military speeches attributed to Constantine VII Porphyrogennetos for their biblical references and allusions. These speeches demonstrate imperial Byzantine exegesis, establish biblical grounds for the... more
This article examines the two extant military speeches attributed to Constantine VII Porphyrogennetos for their biblical references and allusions. These speeches demonstrate imperial Byzantine exegesis, establish biblical grounds for the ‘chosen’ status of Byzantine Christians, and reveal that the non-soldierly emperor Constantine VII appropriated the role of a mediating priestly figure as a way of claiming authority over his fighting forces. In this, he follows in the footsteps of his father, the emperor Leo VI (r. 886–912). Both speeches are explicitly Christian, and were used to bolster military morale and to reinforce imperial authority.
Research Interests:
Constantine's birth name was Herakleios Novus Constantinus (Herakleios the New Constantine), which was also the official name under which he reigned. Keywords: Byzantine history; Late Antiquity; political history
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
living—witness the portrait of Constantine, the brother of the commissioner and donor in the so-called Leo Bible (figure 4.1). How many of Franses’s “non-donation donor portraits” may actually be depictions of the deceased? These... more
living—witness the portrait of Constantine, the brother of the commissioner and donor in the so-called Leo Bible (figure 4.1). How many of Franses’s “non-donation donor portraits” may actually be depictions of the deceased? These different possibilities and scenarios are surely significant and must be taken into account when discussing the various valences of “contact portraits.” Franses is also mistaken in assuming that sacred giving was solely and exclusively a matter of preoccupation with the afterlife. Other more specific, earth-bound concerns were also at play. Consider, for instance, the practice of votive offering. Ex-votos—gifts made in fulfillment of a vow— acknowledge and respond to manifestations of divine favor that have transpired in this life. Incidentally, the category of the ex-voto also challenges Franses’s resolute denial of any transactional element in sacred giving. By its very nature, a votive gift is the result of a straightforward quid pro quo exchange, an exchange whose terms are, moreover, stipulated by the votary. One gets the impression that some of these inaccuracies and omissions could have been avoided, had the author engaged with the primary sources in a more sustained and systematic fashion. It is rather surprising that relevant Byzantine texts, including inscriptions, monastic foundation documents, and wills and acts of donation, among others, do not play a more prominent role in his account. These texts are of critical importance; they provide us not only with a period-specific language of religious patronage, but also with a set of concepts and discourses that framed and animated the phenomenon of pious generosity in Byzantium. Any attempt to come to an understanding of Byzantine donors and their images should give due consideration to this precious body of evidence. Franses has written an intelligent and provocative book, but its readers would do well to approach it with caution.
Research Interests: Art and Church History
Research Interests:
This chapter examines how medieval cultures in the East were generally more reticent than Western ones in describing warfare in bloody detail. It looks at how three cultures approached the recording of war very differently. The Tang... more
This chapter examines how medieval cultures in the East were generally more reticent than Western ones in describing warfare in bloody detail. It looks at how three cultures approached the recording of war very differently. The Tang Chinese histories are formulaic, abstract to the point of statistics; they offer only names and casualty numbers. Byzantine writing about warfare is pragmatic, gives some operational details, and is concerned for the character of commanders, but avoids exalting them. Abbasid war poetry and chronicles glorify the moral superiority of Muslim commanders, especially in comparison to non-Muslim opponents, yet present the brute facts of battles in an epigrammatic way. All three cultures combined accounts of war with the exigencies of religion, which influenced their goals before battle and means of commemoration after battle.
Research Interests:
This article provides a brief overview of early Syriac sources useful for researchers in Byzantine history and late antiquity. As a guide for finding relevant material, it seeks to introduce the non-Syriacist to the contribution of Syriac... more
This article provides a brief overview of early Syriac sources useful for researchers in Byzantine history and late antiquity. As a guide for finding relevant material, it seeks to introduce the non-Syriacist to the contribution of Syriac literature in the transmission of Greek texts, preserved only in extant Syriac translations. It explains the characteristics of the Syriac language, including various alphabets and doctrinal terminologies, and offers an annotated bibliography of reference materials, along with a brief survey of Syriac literature up to the seventh century CE.
The Byzantine emperor Nikephoros II Phokas (r. 963– 69), revered by the Orthodox Church as a saint, is reviled in John Skylitzes's eleventh-century chronicle. Skylitzes's criticism has been widely quoted to support many claims but never... more
The Byzantine emperor Nikephoros II Phokas (r. 963– 69), revered by the Orthodox Church as a saint, is reviled in John Skylitzes's eleventh-century chronicle. Skylitzes's criticism has been widely quoted to support many claims but never examined on its own merit and is too quickly accepted by modern scholars. When examined in the context of tenth-century warfare and Byzantine religion, Skylitzes's remark—the claim that Nikephoros attempted to pass a law declaring fallen soldiers automatic martyrs— reveals conflict between emperor and patriarch but ultimately cannot be considered either plausible or accurate, because it fails to take account of the emperor's ascetic faith as well as the high spiritual honor accorded to military casualties by the population.
Research Interests:
The Byzantine emperor Leo VI “the Wise” (r. 886-912) rewrote civil law in an attempt to bring it into conformity with the ecclesiastical canons of the eastern Christian church. In the context of the later ninth century and the adjustment... more
The Byzantine emperor Leo VI “the Wise” (r. 886-912) rewrote civil law in an attempt to bring it into conformity with the ecclesiastical canons of the eastern Christian church. In the context of the later ninth century and the adjustment of the empire to a cultural context where iconophile theology had won a decisive battle, Leo wanted to demonstrate unimpeachable orthodoxy in the citizenry and to develop unity and harmony in a religious context that had been shredded for more than a century over the iconoclast controversy. His method for achieving this required reshaping the behavior and customs of his subjects by means of an extensive legislative program. Leo’s introduction to his new laws described the endeavor as cleansing ("anakatharsis" is the Greek term he uses).
Research Interests:
This article examines the two extant military speeches attributed to Constantine VII Porphyrogennetos for their biblical references and allusions. These speeches demonstrate imperial Byzantine exegesis, establish biblical grounds for the... more
This article examines the two extant military speeches attributed to Constantine VII Porphyrogennetos for their biblical references and allusions. These speeches demonstrate imperial Byzantine exegesis, establish biblical grounds for the ‘chosen’ status of Byzantine Christians, and reveal that the non-soldierly emperor Constantine VII appropriated the role of a mediating priestly figure as a way of claiming authority over his fighting forces. In this, he follows in the footsteps of his father, the emperor Leo VI (r. 886–912). Both speeches are explicitly Christian, and were used to bolster military morale and to reinforce imperial authority.
Research Interests:
In the summer of 944 CE, a sermon was commissioned by the Byzantine emperor Constantine VII (r. 945 - 59) to explain the history and significance of one of the most famous pieces of visual religious rhetoric in the medieval Middle... more
In the summer of 944 CE, a sermon was commissioned by the
Byzantine emperor Constantine VII (r. 945 - 59) to explain the history and significance of one of the most famous pieces of visual religious rhetoric in the medieval Middle East: a cloth that according to legend miraculously bore the imprint of the face of Christ. This object, also known as the mandylion or Image of Edessa, was transferred to Constantinople in the summer of 944; the sermon commemorating this event was delivered on August 16, 945. The date of the sermon is important, because it combined the translation of the relic with Constantine VII’s recovery of the throne from the usurper Romanos I. The sermon itself (hereafter Narratio) proved a powerful tool of propaganda, because it presented the story of the object’s translation to Constantinople in a way that subverted its previous history, portrayed Constantine as a divinely ordained ruler, and in the process employed a shrewdly creative exegesis of biblical texts for the emperor’s political gain.
Byzantine emperor Constantine VII (r. 945 - 59) to explain the history and significance of one of the most famous pieces of visual religious rhetoric in the medieval Middle East: a cloth that according to legend miraculously bore the imprint of the face of Christ. This object, also known as the mandylion or Image of Edessa, was transferred to Constantinople in the summer of 944; the sermon commemorating this event was delivered on August 16, 945. The date of the sermon is important, because it combined the translation of the relic with Constantine VII’s recovery of the throne from the usurper Romanos I. The sermon itself (hereafter Narratio) proved a powerful tool of propaganda, because it presented the story of the object’s translation to Constantinople in a way that subverted its previous history, portrayed Constantine as a divinely ordained ruler, and in the process employed a shrewdly creative exegesis of biblical texts for the emperor’s political gain.