Why Byzantines didn't produce a single classic work of literature?

that's because their culture was dissolved you dummy

...

Nobody in the west knew anything about Byzantine literature until quite recently. The Byzantines were considered orientals, too christian, and not worth studying.

Byzantium has a really interesting literary history, and a lot of medieval classics have byzantine versions/came through Byzantium first before heading west.

Very little Byzantine literature has been translated from the medieval Greek.

I studied Byzantium at Oxford. A couple of my ex classmates are now working to publish a bunch of their translations of Byzantine works, ignored for decades or newly discovered.

Basically if you don't know much about Byzantine scholarship you shouldn't really be giving your dumb ass opinion on it because there is now way you know anything about a quite new field of study like this.

I mad.

reverse searching this pic on google

>History of Istanbul - Les Clefs d'Or

>About 300,000 years ago the first inhabitants of what is now Istanbul made their home in Yarimburgaz Cave ....

Do you hate Luttwaks work like every other academic byzaboo?

Yes, it's shit.

Can you recommend top tier non-fiction works for after justinian up to and including basil II?

apparently anika, a hero of a russian folk poem, was written after a byzantine epic hero digenes

it's a pretty creepy poem btw, she [the death personified as a monster whom anika met on his errand to conquer and to defile jerusalem] produces saws invisible, she rubs him by arms and by ribs, brrr

...that's pretty much all what i know about the ancient byzantian fiction (i know they wrote some theological works etc)

oh, and also some byzantian princess wrote some lengthy poem which is nowadays glorified cos muh feminism, but i forgot the name of it

Be a dear and make threads here when they're published, yeah?

too busy blowing everyone the fuck out at chanting

>famous=good
This is the same argument that plebs use trying to argue that asoiaf is great literature

The Byzantines produced nothing of intellectual value in hundreds of years. The fact that you are defending them indicates that you're a fucking moron.

How is Norwich's 3 volume series on Byzantium? Would you recommend it? If not could you suggest some alternatives for intro and deeper reading?

PS did you guys read Procopius? How useful/influential are his histories ("secret history" and the lesser known texts) as sources?

Please and thank you. You're the first person I've seen on lit to lay claim to any Byzantine knowledge.

>western lit
>universally famous

>they produced nothing of value cos they're not famous lol

t. roach

Go to bed Edward Gibbon.

>famous=good
Daily reminder:
>The fact that so many books still name the Beatles as “the greatest or most significant or most influential” rock band ever only tells you how far rock music still is from becoming a serious art. Jazz critics have long recognized that the greatest jazz musicians of all times are Duke Ellington and John Coltrane, who were not the most famous or richest or best sellers of their times, let alone of all times. Classical critics rank the highly controversial Beethoven over classical musicians who were highly popular in courts around Europe. Rock critics are still blinded by commercial success. The Beatles sold more than anyone else (not true, by the way), therefore they must have been the greatest. Jazz critics grow up listening to a lot of jazz music of the past, classical critics grow up listening to a lot of classical music of the past. Rock critics are often totally ignorant of the rock music of the past, they barely know the best sellers. No wonder they will think that the Beatles did anything worthy of being saved.

The best introduction to that period is usually held to be The Making of Byzantium by Mark Whittow

Byzantines created the cyriic and slavic church speak, they were pretty influential with kickstarting russias medieval literature age.

The beatles are gods to me and will always be because they pioneered so many mixing techniques that make up the foundation of modern recording today.

Procopius is popular, but really it's as someone said earlier that they were deemed both too foreign and not foreign enough to be worth study.

And neither were great
:^)
Instead of actually writing something of merit
The Romans just mostly "collectivised" shit.

Daily reminder that The Beatles had a perfect balance between accessibility and musical complexity, and, regardless of what Scaruffi's faggot ass thinks of their songs, completely changed the music industry and the way music was made.

Bump for this