The Origins of Europe:
Eric Fernie
This paper begins with an accusation of theft. 'The fall the Roman empire' is a common, indeed standard, phrase used to refer effects events such as sack Rome in 4io, and deposing Emperor Romulus Augus tulus 476. Yet these are relevant only western empire. Of course everyone knows this; some authors even using first formu lation then changing second. What makes this self-deception 'the possible, especially we also all know that eastern empire continued beyond fifth century, via Justinian sixth, until I453? Part answer seems be we-or at least those us writing within anglophone tradition-obscure status by referring it Byzantine empire, term never far I rulers themselves. The combined effect 'Roman for 'western 'Byzantine for'eastern deprive its romanitas (the 'theft' my introduction) and, turn, make West appear sole inheritor tradition. have introduced observation because end antiquity fulcrum arguments about origins Europe, any discussion involves well-known terms phrases which may allow more than one meaning. In fact, likely there not single concept importance has been subject debate. so continent since Europe con tinent (in sense being separate contained), but rather region Eurasia. referred subcontinent, India is, despite vastly greater barrier represented Himalayas Urals or Don. Taking mean culture identified last few centuries modern world, most prominent candidates Bronze Age, ancient Greece, late West, Carolingian dynasty, Ottonian finally Renaissance (or, after prehistory, might say, Greeks, Romans, barbarians, Franks, Saxons, Italians). All proposed originators various points over century; deciding between them matter establishing right six wrong ones, much weighing different criteria against another. To me evidence suggests three particular crucial, namely (a) cultural characteristics identifiable extended length time; (b) awareness Europe; (c) signs coherent process leading present-day Europe.
Northwestern University Press eBooks