Differences between Western(Catholic-Protestant) and Orthodox civilisations.

[Stears555]

After the Great Schism


It is not a secret in history, that countries civilizations are/were not in the same level of development.
It is well-known that Western and Central Europe, ( the so-called Western civilization) was always more developed than Orthodox Slavic or Eastern European civilization.
The cultural the societal-system and the economical civilizational (and technological) differences between Orthodox countries and Western Christian (Catholic-Protestant) countries were similar great, as the differences between Northern America (USA Canada) and Southern- (Latino) America.


MEMENTO:
Western things which were not existed in orthodox world:




1. POLITICAL AND CONSTITUTIONAL development: Medieval appearance of parliaments (a legislative body(!), DO NOT CONFUSE with the “councils of monarchs” which existed since the beginning of human history), the estates of the realm, the clergy, the nobility, and the commoners,


2. SELF GOVERNMENT status of big royal/imperial cities, (local government systems of cities), which are the direct ancestors of modern self/local governmental systems.


3. ECONOMY: The medieval appearance of banking systems and social effects and status of urban bourgeoisie, the absolute dominance of money-economy (when the vast majority of trade based on money and the taxes customs duties were collected in money) from the 12th -13th century, instead of the former primitive bartel-based commerce (barter dominated the economies orthodox world until the 17-18th centuries.)





4. HIGHER EDUCATION: The medieval appearance of universities and the medieval appearance of secular intellectuals,





5. CULTURE: Knights, the knight-culture, chivalric code, (and the technological effects of crusades from the Holy Land,)

Music and literature: courtly love, troubadours, Gregorian chant, Ars nova, Organum, Motet, Madrigal, Canon and Ballata, Liturgical drama, Novellas,

medieval western THEATER: Mystery or cycle plays, morality and passion plays, which developed into the renaissance theater, the direct ancestor of modern theaters.

Philosophy: Scholasticism and humanist philosophy,



6. The medieval usage of Latin alphabet and medieval spread of movable type printing,


7. TECHNOLOGY: The guild system is an association of artisans or merchants, which organized the training education, and directed master's exam system for artisians. Due to the compulsory foreign studies of the artisian master's candidates, the guilds played key role in the fast spread of technologies and industrial knowledge in the medieval Western World.



8. The defence systems & fortifications: The spread of stone/brick castle defense -systems, the town-walls of western cities from the 11th century. (In the orthodox world, only the capital cities had such a walls . The countries of the Balkan region and the territory of Russian states fell under Ottoman/Mongolian rule very rapidly - with a single decesive open-field battle - due to the lack of the networks of stone/brick castles and fortresses in these countries. The only exception was the greek inhabited Byzantine territories which were well fortified.)



9. FINEARTS and ARCHITECTURE: western architecture, sculpture paintings and fine-arts: the Romanesque style, the Gothic style and the Renaissance style.

The orthodox church buildings and „palaces(?)” were very little, they had primitive structure and poor decorations, their style were influenced by non-European arabic and persian influenced Byzantine ornamentics.






The renaissance & humanism , the reformation and the enlightenment did not influenced/affected the Orthodox (Eastern European) countries.
Before 1870, the industrialization that had developed in Western and Central Europe and the United States did not extend in any significant way to the rest of the world. In Eastern Europe, industrialization lagged far behind, and started only in the 20th century.

 

[Stears555]

Samuel Huntington called the Orthodox civilization as semi-asian or Eurasian civilization, and considered it as a transition between European and Asian culture.

 

[Stears555]

What do you think about it? Please feel free to share your opinion.

 

[oldeuropeanculture]

Are you for real?

 

[Stears555]

Are you for real?

......Who?

 

[Angela]

Pseudo-history, pseudo-sociology, pseudo-theology...a pastiche of misinformation and misinterpretation...the less said the better.

 

[Templar]

It is well-known that Western and Central Europe, ( the so-called Western civilization) was always more developed than Orthodox Slavic or Eastern European civilization.

This wasn't always the case. Maybe from the 1300+. Kievan Rus and Byzantine empire were both very developed and powerful states (together they composed over 50% of the orthodox population of Europe).

 

[Stears555]

Pseudo-history, pseudo-sociology, pseudo-theology...a pastiche of misinformation and misinterpretation...the less said the better.

Only an illiterate person say this. Can you refute my points? No, because I wrote simple facts. I suggest to read only the books of academic scholar authors, instead of fantasy.

 

[Stears555]

This wasn't always the case. Maybe from the 1300+. Kievan Rus and Byzantine empire were both very developed and powerful states (together they composed over 50% of the orthodox population of Europe).

Just see the orthodox Eastern Slavic and Balkan slavic countries, they were backward in technology and economy primitive in societal meaning since their very beginnings.

 

[Aberdeen]

The flight of Byzantium scholars from the approaching Turkish armies into the previously more backward west created an explosion of learning that led to the Renaissance. And the Rus were actually more advanced than most of the medieval societies of western Europe until the Russians suffered a slight setback in the form of the Mongol invasions.

 

[Stears555]

The flight of Byzantium scholars from the approaching Turkish armies into the previously more backward west created an explosion of learning that led to the Renaissance. And the Rus were actually more advanced than most of the medieval societies of western Europe until the Russians suffered a slight setback in the form of the Mongol invasions.

Wrong. Renaissance started long before the Ottomans captured Constantinaples. It had an effect, but it is 500% exaggerated. Hungary was the first country which adopted the renaissance from Italy in the 14th century, and it was even long before the Ottoman conquest of Constantinaples. Do not forget, even the Byzantine intellectuals went to Italian universities, because they were better than their domestic schools. Byzantines had not enough large libraries, like the papal library or libraries of Western universities, or the biggest: the royal library of Hungary.

Russians were backward before the mongol invasions and 500 years after the mongols too... See the primitive little buildings of Russians and balkan slavs. Russia had no serious architecture and arts before Peter the great imported french german holland engineers and artists.

 

[John Doe]

Wrong. Renaissance started long before the Ottomans captured Constantinaples. It had an effect, but it is 500% exaggerated. Hungary was the first country which adopted the renaissance from Italy in the 14th century, and it was even long before the Ottoman conquest of Constantinaples. Do not forget, even the Byzantine intellectuals went to Italian universities, because they were better than their domestic schools.

Not entirely accurate, here's from Wikipedia:
"In the revival of neo-Platonism Renaissance humanists did not reject Christianity; quite the contrary, many of the Renaissance's greatest works were devoted to it, and the Church patronized many works of Renaissance art. However, a subtle shift took place in the way that intellectuals approached religion that was reflected in many other areas of cultural life.^[18]In addition, many Greek Christian works, including the Greek New Testament, were brought back from Byzantium to Western Europe and engaged Western scholars for the first time since late antiquity. This new engagement with Greek Christian works, and particularly the return to the original Greek of the New Testament promoted by humanists Lorenzo Valla andErasmus, would help pave the way for the Protestant Reformation."

Russians were backward before the mongol invasions and 500 years after the mongols too... See the primitive little buildings of Russians and balkan slavs. Russia had no serious architecture and arts before Peter the great imported french german holland engineers and artists.

Also not entirely accurate, here's from Wikipedia on the Kievan society:
"Due to the expansion of trade and its geographical proximity, Kiev became the most important trade center and chief among the communes; therefore the leader of Kiev gained political "control" over the surrounding areas. Thisprincedom emerged from a coalition of traditional patriarchic family communes banded together in an effort to increase the applicable workforce and expand the productivity of the land. This union developed the first major cities in the Rus' and was the first notable form of self-government. As these communes became larger, the emphasis was taken off the family holdings and placed on the territory that surrounded. This shift in ideology became known as the verv'.In the 11th century and the 12th century, the princes and their retinues, which were a mixture of Slavic and Scandinavian elites, dominated the society of Kievan Rus'. Leading soldiers and officials received income and land from the princes in return for their political and military services. Kievan society lacked the class institutions and autonomous towns that were typical of Western European feudalism. Nevertheless, urban merchants, artisansand labourers sometimes exercised political influence through a city assembly, the veche (council), which included all the adult males in the population. In some cases, the veche either made agreements with their rulers or expelled them and invited others to take their place. At the bottom of society was a stratum of slaves. More important was a class of tribute-paying peasants, who owed labour duty to the princes. The widespread personalserfdom characteristic of Western Europe did not exist in Kievan Rus'.
The change in political structure led to the inevitable development of the peasant class or smerdy. The smerdy were free un-landed people that found work by laboring for wages on the manors which began to develop around 1031 as the verv' began to dominate socio-political structure. The smerdy were initially given equality in the Kievian law code, they were theoretically equal to the prince, so they enjoyed as much freedom as can be expected of manual laborers. However in the 13th century they began to slowly lose their rights and became less equal in the eyes of the law."


Here's more:

"Kievan Rus', although sparsely populated compared to Western Europe,^[100] was not only the largest contemporary European state in terms of area but also culturally advanced.^[101] Literacy in Kiev, Novgorod and other large cities was high.^[102][103] As birch bark documents attest, they exchanged love letters and prepared cheat sheets for schools. Novgorod had a sewage system^[104] and wood paving not often found in other cities at the time. The Russkaya Pravda confined punishments to fines and generally did not use capital punishment.^[105] Certain rights were accorded to women, such as property and inheritance rights.^{[106][107][108]}The economic development of Kievan Rus may be translated into demographic statistics. Around 1200, Kiev had a population of 50,000, Novgorod and Chernigov both had around 30,000.^[109] Constantinople had population of about 400,000 around 1180.^[110] The Soviet scholar Mikhail Tikhomirov calculated that Kievan Rus' on the eve of the Mongol invasion had around 300 urban centers.^[111]
Kievan Rus' also played an important genealogical role in European politics. Yaroslav the Wise, whose stepmother belonged to the greatest dynasty to rule Byzantium, married the only legitimate daughter of the king who Christianized Sweden. His daughters became queens of Hungary, France and Norway, his sons married the daughters of a Polish king and a Byzantine emperor (not to mention a niece of the Pope), while his granddaughters were a German Empress and (according to one theory) the queen of Scotland. A grandson married the only daughter of the last Anglo-Saxon king of England. Thus the Rurikids were a well-connected royal family of the time.^[112][113]"

 

[King Bardhyl]

We should be careful when referring to Wiki, evryone can enter and can edit.





Implemented communism was an invention of slavo-orthodoxy.Started from Russia and expanded generally in the slavic and orthodox countries.
While capitalism was an invention of Anglosaxon Protestantism and expanded in all western part of Europe.
Two different social structures that produced two different social systems.

 

[John Doe]

Implemented communism was an invention of slavo-orthodoxy.Started from Russia and expanded generally in the slavic countries.
While capitalism was an invention of Anglosaxon Protestantism and expanded in all western part of Europe.
Two different social structures that produced two different social systems.

True but the editor I used cited sources.

 

[kamani]

Why are we exclusively pairing a religion with a language group and then calling them all names. This does not smell right... Ok Russia was/is less developed than Europe but what has that got to do with Orthodoxy, which was developed as a philosophy by Greek and Albanian Byzantines.

 

[John Doe]

Why are we exclusively pairing a religion with a language group and then calling them all names. This does not smell right... Ok Russia was/is less developed than Europe but what has that got to do with Orthodoxy, which was developed as a philosophy by Greek and Albanian Byzantines.

Let's also not forget that according to what I posted (which is cited by sources), Kievan Russia wasn't such a "backwards primitive place" as has been commonly assumed.

 

[Stears555]

Not entirely accurate, here's from Wikipedia:
"In the revival of neo-Platonism Renaissance humanists did not reject Christianity; quite the contrary, many of the Renaissance's greatest works were devoted to it, and the Church patronized many works of Renaissance art. However, a subtle shift took place in the way that intellectuals approached religion that was reflected in many other areas of cultural life.^[18]In addition, many Greek Christian works, including the Greek New Testament, were brought back from Byzantium to Western Europe and engaged Western scholars for the first time since late antiquity. This new engagement with Greek Christian works, and particularly the return to the original Greek of the New Testament promoted by humanists Lorenzo Valla andErasmus, would help pave the way for the Protestant Reformation."



Also not entirely accurate, here's from Wikipedia on the Kievan society:
"Due to the expansion of trade and its geographical proximity, Kiev became the most important trade center and chief among the communes; therefore the leader of Kiev gained political "control" over the surrounding areas. Thisprincedom emerged from a coalition of traditional patriarchic family communes banded together in an effort to increase the applicable workforce and expand the productivity of the land. This union developed the first major cities in the Rus' and was the first notable form of self-government. As these communes became larger, the emphasis was taken off the family holdings and placed on the territory that surrounded. This shift in ideology became known as the verv'.In the 11th century and the 12th century, the princes and their retinues, which were a mixture of Slavic and Scandinavian elites, dominated the society of Kievan Rus'. Leading soldiers and officials received income and land from the princes in return for their political and military services. Kievan society lacked the class institutions and autonomous towns that were typical of Western European feudalism. Nevertheless, urban merchants, artisansand labourers sometimes exercised political influence through a city assembly, the veche (council), which included all the adult males in the population. In some cases, the veche either made agreements with their rulers or expelled them and invited others to take their place. At the bottom of society was a stratum of slaves. More important was a class of tribute-paying peasants, who owed labour duty to the princes. The widespread personalserfdom characteristic of Western Europe did not exist in Kievan Rus'.
The change in political structure led to the inevitable development of the peasant class or smerdy. The smerdy were free un-landed people that found work by laboring for wages on the manors which began to develop around 1031 as the verv' began to dominate socio-political structure. The smerdy were initially given equality in the Kievian law code, they were theoretically equal to the prince, so they enjoyed as much freedom as can be expected of manual laborers. However in the 13th century they began to slowly lose their rights and became less equal in the eyes of the law."


Here's more:

"Kievan Rus', although sparsely populated compared to Western Europe,^[100] was not only the largest contemporary European state in terms of area but also culturally advanced.^[101] Literacy in Kiev, Novgorod and other large cities was high.^[102][103] As birch bark documents attest, they exchanged love letters and prepared cheat sheets for schools. Novgorod had a sewage system^[104] and wood paving not often found in other cities at the time. The Russkaya Pravda confined punishments to fines and generally did not use capital punishment.^[105] Certain rights were accorded to women, such as property and inheritance rights.^{[106][107][108]}The economic development of Kievan Rus may be translated into demographic statistics. Around 1200, Kiev had a population of 50,000, Novgorod and Chernigov both had around 30,000.^[109] Constantinople had population of about 400,000 around 1180.^[110] The Soviet scholar Mikhail Tikhomirov calculated that Kievan Rus' on the eve of the Mongol invasion had around 300 urban centers.^[111]
Kievan Rus' also played an important genealogical role in European politics. Yaroslav the Wise, whose stepmother belonged to the greatest dynasty to rule Byzantium, married the only legitimate daughter of the king who Christianized Sweden. His daughters became queens of Hungary, France and Norway, his sons married the daughters of a Polish king and a Byzantine emperor (not to mention a niece of the Pope), while his granddaughters were a German Empress and (according to one theory) the queen of Scotland. A grandson married the only daughter of the last Anglo-Saxon king of England. Thus the Rurikids were a well-connected royal family of the time.^[112][113]"

Wrong. You confused ancient greeks and their achievement with byzantines. Byzantine Empire was nor Roman and no continuity of ancient greeks. It was a mongrel population of Middle Eastern Near Eastern and survivor greek population. They were not really European and not really ancient greek by etnic point of view.


The architecture and arts of the Byzantine Empire was influenced strongly by persian and arabic elements. Renaissance West have never was influenced by Byzantine architecture or arts. Byzantines inherited the primitive poor structures and arts of post-classical era roman Empire, which was a decline a draw-back from the classial roman architecture and arts. It was caused by the economic decline of the roman Empire since the fourth century. (The key words of the post classical decline era became: cheaper faster and simplier) So it is not wonder that Renaissance idolized the classical era in its pomp, instead of Byzantine primitive post-classical arts and architechture (which was mongrelized by asian persian and arabic arts.)

The governmental forms of Byzantine Empire, their public administration was also influenced by the Persians.

How the eastern influences transformed Byzantines to Western state and indeological concept into an Eastern civilization?

Byzantium was always in close contact with the absolutism of the Eastern peoples, the ideas of despotism derived from there.

Unlike the West, which separated slowly the church and state, in Byzantium they could never separate religion from Imperial politics.

The religion began under the patronage of the emperor, interwoven with the empire, with the realm, with the political power. The Orthodox Church's servility derives from here. This situation has not changed during the last one and a half thousand years, it produced the state-church in all Orthodox countries, executing the power of government administration and supervision, almost as an organ of police. In such a political system, the clergy cannot progress and remains on a low level, the state does not develop either, life becomes rigid. This is the cause of the amazing primitiveness one notices when crossing the border of Orthodoxia.

In Balkan fashion, lies are considered virtue and to cheat someone is a glory. It would be a mistake to believe that these acts would cause some sort of remorse.

The Byzantines wanted to dominate the world. They elevated this concept to the rank of messianism in the Balkans and later in Russia, where the Greek Orthodox faith was gaining ground. Ever since, in the ethos of Orthodoxia, the East is the incarnation of morality, perfection, truth, it is itself the light, as opposed to the West, which is the nest of sin and decay. The West has to be conquered. In the New Testament the chosen people are the Byzantines whose duty it is to guard the Ortho-dox faith and to prepare the redemption of humanity.

Professor Hans Kohn writes in his book Pan-Slavism (New York: Vintage Books 1960): "Khomyakov (1804--60) a leading Slavophile thinker was convinced by the events of 1848 that hope resided only in Orthodox Slavdom. He predicted in 1848 the end of Austria and of the last Charlemagne's Empire, and the disappearance of papal power 'in the archives of history, followed by Protestantism and by Catholicism... Now it is the turn of Orthodoxy, the turn of the Slav races to enter the stage of the world...'."






Wrong again: The first greek language Bible was translated to greek before Constantin founded city of Constantinaples.

"Kievan Rus' also played an important genealogical role in European politics" In what sense? The word: "importnt" is a relative term. Sure, they were more important than Orthodox Balkan slavic states or late-nomadic Vlachs (ancestors of modern romanians), but they were nothing more.


There were no self government (local governments) in in Russian cities. You confused the councils of cities (because every city centered state like Novgorod) had a council, but it WAS a CITY state, there were no more local-governments in the state. which created statutums in the above mentioned 300 cities. So they were not local governments of cities, but they were state-governments of the central state (Hungary had more than 500 towns)

Feudalism did not exist in Most Western European territories. Feudalism existed only in France and Germany, which were the former core territories of the Frankish Empire.


"which included all the adult males in the population. " Resembles to the tribal system of barbarians the Early medieval West, which disappeared by the diversification of labour, the complexity and development of society in the west.

The widespread personalserfdom existed only in the medieval france and germany (the core of former Frankish territories), and it was a real aswer for the contemporary political and societal situation.

Smerdy was not a parliament, because it could not create laws. laws which was created by medieval western parliaments were higher legal norms than the royal decrees, and overwrite it.


You cited some dynastic marrages, which had no importance, when the countries are far from each other. Many Hungarian Kings had wifes from the daughters of Holy Roman Emperors French, Hispanian kings, Italian kings Byzantine Emperors. It had importance when the father-in-law was a ruler of a neighbouring country.


The countries of the Balkan region and the territory of Russian states fell under Ottoman/Mongolian rule very rapidly - with a single decesive open-field battle - due to the lack of the networks of stone/brick castles and fortresses in these countries. The only exception was the greek inhabited Byzantine territories which were well fortified.)
Because their economy was poor to build such a system.


""Kievan Rus', although sparsely populated compared to Western Europe,[100] was not only the largest contemporary European state in terms of area but also culturally advanced.[101]" culturally advanced? Again, a relative term, they were advanced than their enemies, the nomadic turkic nations of the East, but they were much more primitive than Western Christian neighbours like Hungary or Poland. Medieval Russians military and economic inlfuence were very weak due to their backwardness. There were average at least 300 years of difference in development of society, infrastructure, technology and economics , if you compare them with central European countries.

 

[Stears555]

Just compare medieval Hungary with your russia , or your other balkan slavic countries. The differences were enormous. WATCH IT in here: http://www.eupedia.com/forum/thread...rches-paintings-sculpture-music-amp-fine-arts

 

[John Doe]

Wrong. You confused ancient greeks and their achievement with byzantines. Byzantine Empire was nor Roman and no continuity of ancient greeks. It was a mongrel population of Middle Eastern Near Eastern and survivor greek population. They were not really European and not really ancient greek by etnic point of view.


The architecture and arts of the Byzantine Empire was influenced strongly by persian and arabic elements. Renaissance West have never was influenced by Byzantine architecture or arts. Byzantines inherited the primitive poor structures and arts of post-classical era roman Empire, which was a decline a draw-back from the classial roman architecture and arts. It was caused by the economic decline of the roman Empire since the fourth century. (The key words of the post classical decline era became: cheaper faster and simplier) So it is not wonder that Renaissance idolized the classical era in its pomp, instead of Byzantine primitive post-classical arts and architechture (which was mongrelized by asian persian and arabic arts.)

The governmental forms of Byzantine Empire, their public administration was also influenced by the Persians.

How the eastern influences transformed Byzantines to Western state and indeological concept into an Eastern civilization?

Byzantium was always in close contact with the absolutism of the Eastern peoples, the ideas of despotism derived from there.

Unlike the West, which separated slowly the church and state, in Byzantium they could never separate religion from Imperial politics.

The religion began under the patronage of the emperor, interwoven with the empire, with the realm, with the political power. The Orthodox Church's servility derives from here. This situation has not changed during the last one and a half thousand years, it produced the state-church in all Orthodox countries, executing the power of government administration and supervision, almost as an organ of police. In such a political system, the clergy cannot progress and remains on a low level, the state does not develop either, life becomes rigid. This is the cause of the amazing primitiveness one notices when crossing the border of Orthodoxia.

In Balkan fashion, lies are considered virtue and to cheat someone is a glory. It would be a mistake to believe that these acts would cause some sort of remorse.

The Byzantines wanted to dominate the world. They elevated this concept to the rank of messianism in the Balkans and later in Russia, where the Greek Orthodox faith was gaining ground. Ever since, in the ethos of Orthodoxia, the East is the incarnation of morality, perfection, truth, it is itself the light, as opposed to the West, which is the nest of sin and decay. The West has to be conquered. In the New Testament the chosen people are the Byzantines whose duty it is to guard the Ortho-dox faith and to prepare the redemption of humanity.

Professor Hans Kohn writes in his book Pan-Slavism (New York: Vintage Books 1960): "Khomyakov (1804--60) a leading Slavophile thinker was convinced by the events of 1848 that hope resided only in Orthodox Slavdom. He predicted in 1848 the end of Austria and of the last Charlemagne's Empire, and the disappearance of papal power 'in the archives of history, followed by Protestantism and by Catholicism... Now it is the turn of Orthodoxy, the turn of the Slav races to enter the stage of the world...'."






Wrong again: The first greek language Bible was translated to greek before Constantin founded city of Constantinaples.

"Kievan Rus' also played an important genealogical role in European politics" In what sense? The word: "importnt" is a relative term. Sure, they were more important than Orthodox Balkan slavic states or late-nomadic Vlachs (ancestors of modern romanians), but they were nothing more.


There were no self government (local governments) in in Russian cities. You confused the councils of cities (because every city centered state like Novgorod) had a council, but it WAS a CITY state, there were no more local-governments in the state. which created statutums in the above mentioned 300 cities. So they were not local governments of cities, but they were state-governments of the central state (Hungary had more than 500 towns)

Feudalism did not exist in Most Western European territories. Feudalism existed only in France and Germany, which were the former core territories of the Frankish Empire.


"which included all the adult males in the population. " Resembles to the tribal system of barbarians the Early medieval West, which disappeared by the diversification of labour, the complexity and development of society in the west.

The widespread personalserfdom existed only in the medieval france and germany (the core of former Frankish territories), and it was a real aswer for the contemporary political and societal situation.

Smerdy was not a parliament, because it could not create laws. laws which was created by medieval western parliaments were higher legal norms than the royal decrees, and overwrite it.


You cited some dynastic marrages, which had no importance, when the countries are far from each other. Many Hungarian Kings had wifes from the daughters of Holy Roman Emperors French, Hispanian kings, Italian kings Byzantine Emperors. It had importance when the father-in-law was a ruler of a neighbouring country.


The countries of the Balkan region and the territory of Russian states fell under Ottoman/Mongolian rule very rapidly - with a single decesive open-field battle - due to the lack of the networks of stone/brick castles and fortresses in these countries. The only exception was the greek inhabited Byzantine territories which were well fortified.)
Because their economy was poor to build such a system.


""Kievan Rus', although sparsely populated compared to Western Europe,[100] was not only the largest contemporary European state in terms of area but also culturally advanced.[101]" culturally advanced? Again, a relative term, they were advanced than their enemies, the nomadic turkic nations of the East, but they were much more primitive than Western Christian neighbours like Hungary or Poland. Medieval Russians military and economic inlfuence were very weak due to their backwardness. There were average at least 300 years of difference in development of society, infrastructure, technology and economics , if you compare them with central European countries.

The term Byzantine has been coined after the demise of the eastern Roman empire, the people of the empire saw themselves as Romans, but spoke Greek, as for being "mongrels", the same can be said of the original Roman empire, which was far from ethnically homogeneous, what was unique about the eastern empire was that it was influenced by both east and west. But it's true that the eastern Roman empire saw itself as somehow different from the old classical empire, in the sense that it was Christian and not Pagan, emperor Justinian even closed the university of Athens that dated to the classical period because of its Pagan roots.

 

[John Doe]

Just compare medieval Hungary with your russia , or your other balkan slavic countries. The differences were enormous. WATCH IT in here: http://www.eupedia.com/forum/thread...rches-paintings-sculpture-music-amp-fine-arts

I have no doubt there were differences, I never said there weren't any.
Interesting video, yes I'm aware Hungary was at the frontier between Christendom and the Ottoman empire, at times Hungary was under half Christian and half Muslim control.