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
Do antipsychotic drugs work? | Andrew Scull and Lex Fridman
Andrew Scull discusses the efficacy and serious side effects of antipsychotic drugs, explaining that while they help some patients, many are non-responders, and the medications carry substantial risks including tardive dyskinesia, weight gain, metabolic syndrome, and cognitive dulling. The landmark CATIE study revealed that newer, expensive second-generation antipsychotics are no more effective than older first-generation drugs, with 67-82% of patients dropping out due to inefficacy or intolerable side effects.
Surprising origin of antipsychotic drugs | Andrew Scull and Lex Fridman
Andrew Scull explains how chlorpromazine, an antihistamine synthesized in the 1880s, was accidentally discovered to have psychiatric applications in the 1950s through French Navy lieutenant Alain Laborit's experiments. The drug's rapid adoption was driven by pharmaceutical companies' aggressive marketing to politicians and hospital administrators rather than by psychiatrists' initial enthusiasm, transforming it from a 'major tranquilizer' into the first 'antipsychotic' drug.
Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT) vs Psychoanalysis | Andrew Scull and Lex Fridman
Andrew Scull discusses how clinical psychology and cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) emerged after WWII as alternatives to psychoanalysis, becoming dominant through better empirical evidence, shorter treatment duration, and federal funding advantages. CBT's symptom-focused approach proved more measurable and reproducible than psychoanalytic theory, though its effectiveness remains limited for serious mental disorders.
Do anti-depressant drugs work? | Andrew Scull and Lex Fridman
Andrew Scull discusses the history and efficacy of antidepressants, particularly SSRIs like Prozac, explaining that while they statistically outperform placebo, the clinical improvement is often marginal and comes with significant side effects including sexual dysfunction and withdrawal difficulties. He also addresses 'diagnostic creep' in psychiatry, where conditions become increasingly broadly defined and diagnosed over time.
How drugs and psycho-pharmacology changed mental health | Andrew Scull and Lex Fridman
Andrew Scull traces the accidental discovery of psychopharmacology, beginning with chlorpromazine's unexpected psychiatric effects in the 1950s, and discusses how pharmaceutical companies transformed mental health treatment while also introducing serious side effects like tardive dyskinesia and metabolic complications that remain inadequately addressed.