ABSTRACT

The political, military and diplomatic history of the middle and late Byzantineempire (roughly ad 610-1453) is known to us largely through the more or less continuous series of extensive narratives composed by about thirty individual historians. While writing within a relatively limited range of generic forms, most of these men (and one woman) turned to history on their own initiative and each wrote in his own manner, reflecting individual biases, access to information and limitations. The comparatively high level of their accuracy and perspicacity has been praised even by scholars who used to disparage other aspects of Byzantine culture, while the total loss of the imperial archives makes their works our most important historical sources. Despite their differences, these works constitute a well-defined corpus. Though one could include political hagiography along with certain imperial orations and even sermons in the broader category of “Byzantine historical writing,” this chapter will discuss the corpus of historiography proper, those texts whose generic coherence has stimulated and accommodated general surveys.1 While the latter proceed from author to author, this study will look at the overall contours of the corpus, focusing on its coherence and conditions of its formation, its authors, their goals and intellectual resources. It will situate the writing of history at the nexus of literary and political activity in Byzantium and highlight its strengths and weaknesses.