In the third volume, we have already established that in the world of Byzantium, world-historical changes are recorded, which on the one hand restore the universal cosmopolis to the legislative (identitarian, etc.) line of the Greek cosmological system, and on the other hand aim to complete the anthropocentric background of the inhabited world in contrast to the feudal perspective of the West.

In the present volume, an attempt is made to clarify the nature of Byzantium as a cosmopolitan state that experiences the phase of the anthropocentric inhabited world in its complete form. The changes that occur over the course of eleven centuries of the life of the Greek inhabited world in the atmosphere of the Byzantine cosmopolis reveal the panorama of a world that has only the period of the city-state as a comparable reference.

In this context, we revive in the life of the Byzantine world the cities, their states, the universal generalization of citizenship, a society free from slavery/servile labor, an economic system built on the basis of democratic principles, the transformations in the nature of the cosmopolis as a particular type of state, the city-centered organization of the new religion as the Church of the Municipality of the faithful, the legal culture, the notion of the political municipality as the universal principle that constitutes the states of the cosmopolis to which the principles of the city and the metropolitan state are subject, as well as the kingship.

On the ground of Byzantium, the dynamics of the transition from the small to the large cosmological scale will ultimately ferment, that is, the road to the next phase of the entire anthropocentric cosmological system, which is commonly referred to as modernity.

From the comprehensive summarization of the sources, it emerges effortlessly that Byzantium is neither dark, nor theocratic, nor authoritarian, nor an empire. It is evidenced that it incontrovertibly constitutes the state of the universal democratic entirety, of the cosmopolis.

The restoration of the Byzantine cosmopolis to the pedestal of anthropocentric completeness and its subjection to comparative examination under this perspective with its despotic periphery (the Western and Slavic) allows for the deconstruction of modernity itself from the position of the anthropocentric vanguard to which its spiritual advocates attempt to place it, thereby revealing its biological belonging to the early anthropocentric period.

The functioning of the West as an embryonic precursor for the transition to a larger scale does not negate the fact that modernity was born in Byzantium and that the assumption of leadership in the transition by its despotic periphery had critical repercussions, primarily the regression of anthropocentric culture from the phase of the inhabited world to its early stage, that is, along a complete, in terms of evolutionary biology, historical trajectory.