晚期拜占庭如何看待古典时代的拉丁罗马人？ 第1页

这问题其实有个巨大的样本偏见。13世纪之后东罗马的历史叙事还是以传统的罗马叙事以及基督教化的罗马叙事为主的，比如Ephraim of Ainos的Chronicles直接从凯撒和奥古斯都开始写，以及我下面贴出来的一堆截图里的文献。这些东西虽然数量庞大，但是实在不够“有趣”，所以说现在的历史书写里不把他们选出来当“晚期东罗马代表性作品”罢了（所谓的“屋中大象”）。不是说Hellenic revivalists不存在或者是不重要，只是他们实际上占的整个文献比例也就那么一丁点大，并且他们也没有抛弃传统的罗马叙事亦或是基督教罗马叙事。真正跟现代希腊民族叙事这条线沾点边的是Laonikos Chalkokondyles，而Chalkokondyles的作品已经是1453之后了。

说晚期东罗马人完全把古代的拉丁罗马人当成他者是存在问题的：Blemmydes一个亲历过1204的人在13世纪都还把图拉真拖出来当做君主楷模。^[1]这个问题其实Kaldellis那本Hellenism in Byzantium (Libgen上有) 最后几章说的已经挺清楚了。（也暂时没有其他可靠的secondary source讨论这个问题，Malatras那几篇文章给人的感觉是太过于痴迷于抓典型，结果抓了几个根本没法算“典型”的“典型”出来...）

或者你不想看那整本书，那么这里是Kaldellis自己的简单解释：

真正明明白白试图解释这个问题的也就Akropolites一个人，翻译是Kaldellis书里的：^[2]

It seems, O Italians, that you no longer remember our ancient harmony . . . But no other nations were ever as harmonious as the Graikoi and the Italians. And this was only to be expected, for science and learning came to the Italians from the Graikoi. And after that point, so that they need no longer use their ethnic names, a New Rome was built to complement the Elder one, so that all could be called Romans after the common name of such great cities, and have the same faith and the same name for it. And just as they received that most noble name from Christ, so too did they take upon themselves the national (ethnikon) name [i.e., of Roman]. And everything else was common to them: magistracies, laws, literature, city councils, law courts, piety itself; so that there was nothing that was not common to those of Elder and New Rome. But O how things have changed!

ps. 其实我建议有条件的人上TLG自己拿着几个关键词搜一搜，自己看看13世纪之后的东罗马历史书写到底是怎么回事。

比如某坚定的拉丁反对者Matthaios Blastares在这儿轻描淡写的管Septimius Severus叫"King of the Romans"

然后这里是Ioannes Kantakouzenos轻描淡写的管哈德良叫罗马皇帝并且把他跟君士坦丁放一起：

然后这里是Xanthopoulos的罗马皇帝流水账：

参考

1. ^ 142 Nikephoros Blemmydes, A Partial Account 1.6, 2.25.
2. ^ Georgios Akropolites, Contra Latinos 2.27