The Chronicle of Theophanes: Anni mundi 6095-6305 (A.D. 602-813) (The Middle Ages Series)

very nice.

Bought as a birthday gift for my nerd of a husband. He said he liked it. Sorry I'm not much more help.

This is the paperback edition of the translation of the Chronicle of Theophanes by Harry Turtledove, published by the university of Pennsylvania press. The translation covers the years AD 602 to 814. The Greek chronicle actually starts with Diocletian, about AD285, a date often used as an era by Eastern Christian sources. However Theophanes only becomes a primary source after 602, because all of the sources he used after that date have not survived. Theophanes is the fullest source I am aware of upon the tyrrany of Phokas, who is up there with Caligula, Nero and Commodus in the rankings of imperial crazies. He preserves what I think is a Christian idealised account of the great campaigns of Heraclius, and he gives an account of the early conquests of Islam attributing Christian disaster to imperial heresy, and there is some implication of blaming the Jews and heretic Nestorians for the problems of the empire. he is almost the only source for the first, little recorded siege of Constantinoplie by the forces of the Khalif Muawiyah in the years 673 onwards.He is a fuller source for the second siege in 717, and the Iconoclast/Iconodule religious conflict of the Eighth century, of the reign of the empress Irene, and the Bulgar victory of Krum, and the defeat and death of the emperor Nikephorus in 811.The introduction tells us what we know about the chronicler, indicating that his chronicle survives because of the close links between his family and the Macedonian dynasty. It describes some of the Chronological problems arrising from the complex chronological structure of the chronicle.Theophanes uses Anno Mundi dates for every year, and then enters the regnal and episcopal year for the Pope, the bishop of Constantinople, the reigning emperor and the eastern potentate - Persian up to c640, Muslim after that date. The AM date used is 5,500 BC = 1BC. There is a small error of about 1 year between these two sources, (probably arising from using AD1 as the base year? Theophanes also uses AD dates for some entries, and oddly these are always 7/8 yerars too early, not just in the early entries, but also in the last entries, made in Theophanes own life. Hence for Theophanes Michael 1 is proclaimed emperor in AD804, and not AD811/812, the true date. How could Theophanes not know an AD date for an event ten years before the time he was writing? If they were inserted later, why would the ammender of the text not ensure his corrections were accurate to at least a year or so? Harry Turtledove gives a brief summary of the sources and construction of the chronicle, and a set of tables on the post holders whose dates are used to buttress the chronicle by Theophanes.

This translation provides a much needed text for students looking for a primary source on the 7th and 8th centuries of Romania, or the Roman Empire in the East. Theophanes was a 9th century writer, who compiled this work from many other sources, some of which are lost to us. Thus some parts of the text are rich in information, such as Heraclius' wars with Persia. On the other hand, there is also some distortion, due to bias, the account of Constantine V comes to mind. The text is arranged in a series of annals, moving year by year; this gives the reader a fairly good chronological foundation for most events.The text itself is a no frills translation. It is clear and there are some footnotes to clear up discrepancies. There are some tables of Roman emperors, Persian kings, Arab rulers, Popes, and Patriarchs of Constantinople. There is also a good index in the back. Unfortunately, there are no maps, or commentary on how this text matches with other histories. For example, Theophanes' account of the emperor Constans II is very different from that of the Armenian history of Sebeos. Still, this is a good text that gives you the best history of the 7th and 8th centuries from a Roman perspective, rather than say an Armenian, Arab, or Syrian source.

The five reviews up to here have already explained how much this book matters and how good of a translation this is. I agree with all of them. For the casual reader, you can't beat the price and the translation is very readable.I use this book to triangulate Theophanes's own sources. First, Theophanes used a Greek translation and expansion of Theoph-ILUS's chronicle; probably composed at Emesa / Homs in the 780s AD. Second, Theophanes used two Byzantine chronicles: one was a patriotic source from Leo III's court, so around 720 AD; and the next was from the iconophilic resistance to Leo's policies, composed against Constantine V probably in the 770s. For Theophilus, Robert Hoyland's synopsis is to be consulted. For the Byzantine material, we don't have a published synopsis yet, but Mango has come through with his translation of Nicephorus's "Short History".True, Mango and Scott have made Turtledove's translation obsolete for academia. Still. It seems to me that Theophanes, himself, had compiled "A Near Eastern Chronicle For Penurious Students Who Can't Read Syriac". If that's you, then Turtledove's work is perfect.

This is a great primary source, I am a "Byzantophile." I wanted it to write a paper on the second Arab siege of Constantinople(RIP), using Theophanes account as one of my sources. I could of got it at the library, but this a great work, and a good collection to my dozens of Byzantine/Roman books.

Incredible book, even if just for a glimpse of the sheer brutality that was commonplace in the 5th century.

Very good account.A concise view of this era.

A good English translation of the original.

L'auteur a écrit une chonique des événements entre l'an 284 et l'an 813. C'est un document considérable dont le livre ici présent ne constitue qu'une partie aux 7e, 8e et début du 9e siècles.A ma connaissance, il n'en existe pas de traductions françaises.Ardu à lire, le texte partiel proposé est étoffé de notes permettant une meilleure compréhension de l'histoire.Bien que lisible sans difficulté en anglais, il est préférable d'avoir une bonne connaissance de l'empire byzantin à ces périodes.Aux historiens, et intéressés de cette période de l'empire.Pour ceux que cela intéressent à fond, une version intégrale de 744 pages existe éditée par C. Mango.