The era that Anna would be born into would be one of discord. Her father, Alexios I Komnenos, was a general who served the Eastern Roman Empire in the mid-11th century. He began his career under the reign of Emperor Romanos IV Diogenes (1068–1071) and served until the reign of Nikephorous III Botaneiates (1078–1081). During this time, he would fight against all different types of opponents of the Eastern Roman Empire from Norman mercenaries invading from Italy to fighting against the invading Sejuk Turks in Anatolia to subduing rebels to the Byzantine throne (Komnene, 1153). Thus, he was an invaluable tool for any Roman Emperor at the time due to his being one of the empire’s best during a period of much decay.

Under the reign of Nikephoros III, Komnenos would lead a violent revolt in 1081 (Neville, 2016). Komnenos’ insurrection would be supported by many powerful backers, such as the Empress Maria of Alania herself, and other members of the Doukid Dynasty. Komnenos would then capture the capital of Constantinople (the capital of the Eastern Roman Empire) with ease (Wikipedia), forcing Nikephorous to retire to the Peribleptos Monastery. It would be during this early period in Komnenos’ reign that Anna Komnene would come into the timeline (Britannica).

Conceived on December 1st or 2nd, 1083 AD (Wikipedia)(Britannica)(Neville, 2016), Anna Komnene would be born into royalty. With her father being the current emperor at the time, she would be quickly used as a political tool as soon as she was born—just like how any other Roman Princess in this period would be—being married off to Constantine Doukas, the son of Maria of Alania. Komnenos did this to better establish his legitimacy as an emperor through linking his new dynasty with the previous (Neville, 2016).

Despite her being used as a political tool by her father so early on in life, Anna would receive an education abnormal for a woman at the time. To quote a book called Anna Komnene: The Life and Work of a Medieval Historian by Leonora Neville, ¨…Anna's education was on an entirely different order of magnitude. She delighted in ancient philosophy, commissioning commentaries on Aristotle. She read Attic tragedy and comedy, making meaningful allusions to the plays of Sophocles. She studied mathematics, astronomy, and enough medicine to argue forcefully with her father’s doctors…” (Neville, 2016) Anna was so educated that later in life, her father would even construct a massive hospital and orphanage for Anna to run and teach new physicians in Constantinople itself (Youtube, 2020). However, even with such a special education that almost no other woman in the entire medieval era would ever see, Anna still had to comply with societal norms for them.

One of these social norms is living with your mother-in-law if betrothed at a young age, and Anna would comply with this social norm. After age 7, Anna would be sent to ex-Empress Maria of Alania’s household to live in. Despite not being with her family most of the time during this period of her life, Anna would still be first in line of succession if her father ever died. However, this would all change between the years of 1088 and 1094, when John Komnenos, the younger brother of Anna, would become the new heir to the empire—due to him being born. Moreover, Constantine, Anna’s future husband, would unfortunately die from illness around 1095.

However, even if Anna lost her claimants to the Byzantine throne, she would then be sent off to marry another man named Nikephorous Bryennius. Alexios arranged this marriage due to the Komenids (Anna’s family clan) being fierce rivals with the Bryennii, who had immense influence over the northeastern Balkans, a few brief steps away from Constantinople itself. Thus, being married off again, Anna would most likely have lived with the Bryennii in the northeastern Balkans. During this period, not much is known about Anna’s life; but we do know that she traveled across the Balkans—as far as the walls of Belgrade in modern-day Austria (Neville, 2016).

Anna would then actually marry Bryennius at the age of 15 (quite shocking in modern lens, but remember this was a much different time). Although most shockingly, Anna actually had some common interests with Bryennius: both were well educated and very interested in history-writing and philosophy (Neville, 2016). Anna would go on to describe her second husband as, “...a man who far outshone his contemporaries by his surpassing beauty, his superior intelligence, and his accurate speech. To look at him or listen to him was a delight… (Komnene, 1153).” Together, the two would make many pieces of literature. Anna would be more specialized in writing about philosophy, while her husband was more into history. The two would also sponsor many different intellectuals in the Byzantine Empire.

The two would also have many successful children, despite a majority dying off young (Neville, 2016). Some of these successful children would be one of Anna’s sons, Alexios, who held various important positions within the Byzantine military such as Stratēgos, and eventually the commander-in-chief of the entire navy, the position of Megas Doux (EugenDalianis, 2021). In fact, Anna’s grandchildren would even grow up to become capable generals themselves, such as one of her grandsons, Alexios Doukas. Along with that, although Anna's only stretch for power was stripped away from her by her little brother John, Anna's children and her husband himself, would serve vital positions within John's administration and military (Neville, 2016).

Mentioned in previous sections, Anna’s works would act as a primary source of the Crusades. The Crusades were a string of military campaigns which were religiously charged to retake the Holy Land, the Levant. Its armies consist of all peoples from all christian nations in Europe, from French Dukes to Kings from England. Anna as a teenager would see the Crusade in full action. She was there when her husband Bryennius defended Constantinople from a Crusader attack and when her father settled a compromise with the Crusaders for safe passage into Asia (Youtube, 2021).

However, Anna had merely been a witness to the Crusades, her true gambit in politics would be when her and her mother, Irene Doukina, decided to convince Alexios on his deathbed to make Nikephorous (Anna's husband) emperor instead of Anna's little brother, John. Alexios would then proceed to die before Anna or Irene could convince him otherwise. Thus, upon hearing the death of his father, John would rush to Constantinople's Hippodrome to be crowned as Emperor, refusing to even attempt to attend Alexios' funeral due to his fear of a counter coup (Wikipedia). However, what occurs next is very much debated about and thus, deserves its own section.

There are two versions of what possibly happened next, a timeline of where Anna would go on merely to live out the rest of her life peacefully (Neville Interview, 2021)(Neville, 2016) or a timeline where she gets locked up in a monastery after attempting to kill her brother (Almost every other source).

Anna was Guilty!!!

The second timeline being the most widespread, a basic gist of it being: "Later conspiring to depose her brother after his accession to the throne (1118), Anna was, however, unable to obtain the support of her husband, the plot was discovered, and she forfeited her property, retiring to a convent (monastery), where she wrote the Alexiad. (Britannica)" This timeline is supposely supported by Anna’s own writings in the Alexiad, in which she repeatedly, and in many cases, backtracks to explain every single one of her points in a sympathetic light, which many people find to be a way of convincing the public that she was innocent of the coup she may have attempted (Neville Interview, 2021).

Along with that, while stating her sources and backtracking, Anna admits that she had been inside her own home for more than 30 years; thus, many have come to the conclusion that she had been exiled to a monastery. Not to mention, further evidence can be found in how most Byzantine writers were heavily educated on how to sway the mood of the audience (Neville, 2016).

Anna was Innocent!!!

However, this argument has been challenged by many people (such as historian Leonora Neville). Many of these defenders of Anna Komnene like to point out that many people in the 12th century thought that a woman writing history was absurd and arrogant; thus, Anna needed to paint herself as a humble person who had experienced misery after misery to convince the public that her works were humble. Writing in a method many people in the 12th century would have considered feminine and, thus, trustworthy.

Not to mention, the part where Anna states that she had been inside of her own home for more than 30 years also plays a part in upholding an image of her trustworthiness, as, in Byzantine society (reminder: a society completely different from ours), the most "virtuous" woman was one who normally stayed at home, free from gossip. Thus, Anna had to convince the public that she was one of these models of Byzantine femininity with a pinch of humility—thus, trustworthy and acceptable in her society's eyes (Neville Interview, 2021).

However, the biggest piece of evidence for Anna’s innocence from attempting a coup against John would be how the only piece of work written during the Byzantine Empire which suggests Anna partook in the coup would be from a man named Niketas Choniates—a court offical who lived 90 years after the supposed event and was an active sexist (Neville Interview, 2021)(Wikipedia).

Of course, both sides have their merits, and feel free to choose whatever you believe. This section is merely food for thought and a way to get you interested in perhaps looking deeper into the life of this incredible medieval historian, who so happens to be a woman and a Roman princess.

Anna Komnene’s biggest legacy has to do with her tremendous work of the Alexiad—Note: most say that Anna wrote the book in a monastery after (her banishment). Not only has the Alexiad given her the title of the first woman historian in the world, but it also used a style never seen before, for a work to be written out in a homeric poem (Youtube, 2020). This style is in stark contrast to the styles used by traditional Roman Historians. Compared to books like the Twelve Caesars by Suetonius in the 2nd Century AD, which uses the most blandish of words and feels boring after a while of reading, the Alexiad uses vivid imagery and a lot of descriptive words.

To provide examples, here’s one from the Twelve Caesars; “The patrician family of the Claudii came originally from Regilli, a town of the Sabines. They removed thence to Rome soon after the building of the city, with a great body of their dependents, under Titus Tatius…”

While here’s a quote from the Alexiad; “...Then, just when the affairs of the Romans were in this critical condition, with this barbarian rushing upon everything like a thunderbolt, my brilliant father Alexius was thought as the one man able to resist him…”

Also, I’d like to also mention how Anna is also one of the first people to have ever used the style of the Epic Poet since classical Greece—which, during her time, would have been a solid two millennia—but the first to ever use it to detail actual history. However, this brings an end to this article. To reiterate why it was made, it was made to celebrate the many contributions that women had made throughout history, and what more important of a woman to write about than the first female Historian. This article has been more focused on the life of Anna, but her contributions and achievements are scattered and define her life in the historical sense, and her interesting life provides her the means to manufacture these said achievements and contributions. Thankfully, Anna's determination and love of the classics got her work, the works of many of these said classics, to survive till modern day.

(Komnene, 1153) - The Alexiad itself, but in an online pdf version.

(Neville, 2016) - A book by Historian Leonard Neville, it is an online pdf, it gives a very brief, and yet in depth exploration of Anna’s life and the arguments on whether she committed a coup or not.

(Wikipedia I) - A wikipedia article called “Alexios Komnenos”, it discusses how Alexios took over the empire and gave it in a very brief manner.

(Britannica I) - A Britannica article called “Nikephoros Botaniates”. It talks about where Nikephoros went after he was deposed by Alexios.

(Wikipedia II) - A wikipedia article called “Anna Komene”, mainly looked at it for when Anna was born.

(Britannica II) - A Britannica article called “Anna Komnene” which argues for a different birthday than what Wikipedia suggests. Mainly included this as Britannica is a trustworthy source, leagues above Wikipedia.

(Youtube, 2020) - A youtube video which provided a summary of Anna Komnene’s life. This video itself served as the thing which caught my attention to write this article in the first place.

(EugenDalianis, 2021) - An article which details the life of one of Anna’s children, Alexios.

(Youtube, 2021) - A youtube video detailing the events of the First Crusade. Had a whole section about the events of the Crusade and how it was resolved in Constantinople.

(Neville Interview, 2021) - An interview with Historian Neville to go into the arguments of whether Anna went ahead to do a coup or not.