The role of violence in the Roman Empire | Anthony Kaldellis and Lex Fridman
Anthony Kaldellis discusses how the Byzantine Empire maintained stability for a thousand years through a system of perpetual popular consultation rather than formal institutions, where emperors faced constant threats of violent overthrow but used public opinion feedback to govern effectively. The threat of civil war and public disapproval acted as checks on imperial power, incentivizing good governance and preventing despotic behavior.
Summary
The conversation explores the role of violence and popular consent in the Byzantine Empire's thousand-year survival. Kaldellis explains that approximately 120 civil wars occurred during this period, but these were swift, non-ideological conflicts solely about succession rather than fundamental disagreements. Roughly 46% of Byzantine emperors were overthrown through violence, creating constant insecurity that paradoxically incentivized competent governance.
Unlike modern democracies with fixed electoral mandates, Constantinople operated on a 'perpetual referendum' system. Emperors conducted ongoing opinion polling through public appearances at the Hippodrome—a massive stadium holding 30,000-100,000 people. Citizens would chant acclamations or boo and demonstrate disapproval, providing immediate feedback on policies. When Emperor Alexios III attempted to impose a German tax in the 1190s, popular outcry in the Hippodrome forced him to reverse the decision immediately.
The Hippodrome and other public gathering spaces (churches, military grounds, forums) served as channels for political participation beyond mere entertainment. Rival circus factions held social power, and emperors could be insulted or dragged from office by angry crowds. This system created a tension between absolute-appearing institutional authority and practical limitations on power—emperors who ignored public sentiment faced assassination, blinding, mutilation, or exile to monasteries.
Kaldellis emphasizes he is not advocating for this system but rather analyzing how and why it functioned effectively. The Byzantine Empire's resilience suggests that mechanisms of give-and-take in power exercise, even when violent, created a more durable governmental system than previously understood.
Key Insights
- Kaldellis argues that approximately 120 civil wars occurred during the thousand-year Byzantine period, but these were swift, non-ideological conflicts about succession rather than about fundamental values like slavery or political rights
- Roughly 46% of Byzantine emperors were overthrown through violence, meaning every emperor lived in constant insecurity and knew they must maintain goodwill to prevent rebellion rather than ruling through fear and executions
- The Byzantine system operated as a 'perpetual referendum' rather than periodic elections, where emperors tested public opinion through appearances in the Hippodrome where crowds would chant acclamations or boo in response to policies
- When Emperor Alexios III proposed a German tax in the 1190s, the uproar from the Hippodrome crowd was so severe he immediately reversed the decision, demonstrating that emperors could be forced to backtrack on policy through popular demonstration
- Kaldellis argues the Byzantine Empire's thousand-year survival demonstrates that a system with mechanisms of give-and-take in power exercise, even when violent, created more resilience and durability than purely institutional approaches
Topics
Transcript
[0:02] We should also say one more thing where dare I carefully say this, but it seems like riots and civil wars is a feature not a bug of the system. >> Yes. >> This is a different thing that we have to modern day. is because the threat of a civil war of violent civil war where you overthrow the government and there's just a lot of >> Yeah. >> death and struggle for power is always a threat. That's another incentive I guess [0:35] the stick not the carrot but the stick for the emperor to behave. >> Yes, it's the main one. In other words, just take the the thousand years that I study. Uh there's something…
Full transcript available for MurmurCast members
Sign Up to AccessMore from Lex Clips
Taxation in the Roman Empire - historian explains | Anthony Kaldellis and Lex Fridman
Historian Anthony Kaldellis discusses how Diocletian's administrative reforms, particularly his universal taxation system, fundamentally transformed the Roman Empire. Rather than creating a sinister 'deep state,' Diocletian established bureaucratic structures that unified taxation across all territories, including Italy, and created mechanisms to track taxable assets—establishing a framework that lasted over three centuries.
The 3 biggest threats to the Roman Empire | Anthony Kaldellis and Lex Fridman
Anthony Kaldellis explains that the Roman Empire's history was defined by three swift, catastrophic military defeats (Arab conquests in the 630s, Seljuk conquest in the 1070s, and the Fourth Crusade in 1204) punctuated by long periods of gradual consolidation and economic growth. He emphasizes the importance of distinguishing between discrete historical events with major consequences and longer developmental processes that historians often conventionally date to specific points.
Anti-matter & nuclear weapons: Why technology is always a double-edge sword | Don Lincoln
Don Lincoln discusses how advanced energy sources like nuclear fusion, fission, and antimatter represent transformative but double-edged technologies. He argues that science's role is to understand nature, while society must collectively decide how to apply that knowledge. The conversation concludes with a celebration of humanity's innate curiosity as the driver of civilizational progress.
Why antimatter costs $63 trillion dollars to produce | Don Lincoln and Lex Fridman
Don Lincoln and Lex Fridman discuss the extreme difficulty and cost of producing antimatter, noting that Fermilab could only produce about one nanogram per year. They explore the theoretical potential of antimatter as a propulsion system for space travel, while emphasizing that the core challenge is an engineering problem of concentrating energy, not a physics breakthrough.
Is loop quantum gravity wrong? - physicist explains | Don Lincoln and Lex Fridman
Don Lincoln explains the differences between loop quantum gravity and string theory, noting that loop quantum gravity attempts to quantize space itself rather than unify all forces. He discusses how an early prediction of loop quantum gravity — that light speed would vary by frequency — was disproven by gamma ray burst observations, but the theory adapted. He also highlights the landmark gravitational wave observation confirming that gravity travels at the speed of light.