Basil The Second Analysis

669 Words3 Pages
The late Byzantine empire had a flurry of great and powerful empires, one of which was named Basil the second. In contrast, Romanus the third proved to be a weak emperor, both of whom were written about by a middle aged man born in 1018 named Michael Psellos. Michael Psellos wrote about many Byzantine emperors, strong or weak, not only to document the incredible and unbelievable history unfolding before his eyes but to inform the people of the community he loved dearly about the strengths and weaknesses of their autocratic style of government which relied so harshly on the character of the ruling emperor. He was a great philosopher and statesman whose power was high among the people giving him unquestionable reliability in his early years.…show more content…
The reign of Basil admirably illustrates the strength of the Byzantine system and style of government. Basil not only extended Byzantine rule in Bulgaria but in Mesopotamia and Armenia. Basil the second strongly put forth an effort to extend the borders of his empire and to solidify his rule throughout his conquered lands and mainly at home in Constantinople. Basil the second did this to a harsh extent, he increased the domestic authority by attacking the powerful landed interests of the military aristocracy and of the church. Basil, by attacking the over powerful, gained power. This was accomplished because when Basil attacked the people in power he gain land and money, which he later gave to the small farmers of his empire. These farmers then proceeded to participate in his service by paying higher taxes, contributing to the wealth of his country, and by giving good word of him to other farmers and civilians around the Byzantine empire. When Basil gained the heavy amount of money the farmers had to offer, he then left a high treasury for the emperors to come. Basil the seconded was a very bold, stingy, and conservative emperor whose unbelievable qualities were highlighted by the powerful government he lead. Michael Psellos loved Basil II as an emperor and later wrote highly of him, in contrast, he wrote terribly of Romanus III and he believed he was not fit
Open Document