No More Learning

Nor was this all. The Empire had neither unity of race nor unity of
language. It was, as has truly been said by A. Rambaud,“ an entirely
artificial creation, governing twenty nationalities, and uniting them by
this formula: one master, one faith. ” If, after the middle of the seventh
century owing to the Arab conquest, and after the eighth owing to the
loss of the Latin provinces, the Greek-speaking population held a
preponderance in the Empire, many other ethnical elements-Syrians,
Arabs, Turks, and above all Slavs and Armenians—were intermingled
with this dominant element, and imparted a cosmopolitan character to
the monarchy. To govern these varied races, often in revolt against
imperial authority, to assimilate them gradually, and to bestow cohesion
and unity on this State devoid of nationality, such was the task which
confronted the imperial government and which devolved on its ad-
ministrative agents. And the work achieved by this administration is
undoubtedly one of the most interesting aspects of the history of
Byzantium, one of the most striking proofs of the power of expansion
which was for so long possessed by Byzantine civilisation.
“Every nationality,” says Constantine Porphyrogenitus,
" which
posse
sesses characteristic customs and laws, should be allowed to retain its
peculiarities. ” The Byzantine government did not indeed always apply
this rule of perfect toleration to the vanquished; more than once it
happened that some small body of people was forcibly removed from
one district to another so as to make room for others more amenable to
imperial authority. In general, however, it shewed more consideration
for those who had been annexed by conquest, endeavouring by calcu-
lated mildness to gain their affections and encourage them to adopt
the manners and customs of Byzantine society. Thus, in conquered
Bulgaria, Basil II decreed “that the old order of things should continue,"
that taxes should be paid as heretofore in kind, that, subject to the
authority of the Byzantine High Commissioner, the country should
לל
CH, XXIII.


## p. 736 (#778) ############################################

736
Hellenisation of the Empire
retain its native officials, and that a Bulgarian prelate should be at the
head of the Bulgarian Church, which was to be independent of the
Patriarch of Constantinople. By a lavish distribution of titles and
honours the Basileus endeavoured to conciliate the Bulgarian aristocracy,
and sought, by encouraging intermarriage, to establish friendship between
the best elements of both nations, thus leavening the Byzantine nobility
with the most distinguished of the vanquished. In like manner in
Southern Italy the imperial government very skilfully adapted its
methods to local conditions, allowing members of the native aristocracy
to share in the government of the province, seeking also to attract
them by lavishing on them the pompous titles of its courtly hierarchy,
and scrupulously respecting the customs of the country. Elsewhere the
vanquished were conciliated by reductions in taxation, or by a system
of exemption for a more or less extended period. Thus, little by little,
was stamped on these alien elements a common character, that of
Hellenism, while moreover they were unified by the common profession
of the Orthodox religion.
Greek was the language of the administration and the Church. It
was inevitable that by slow degrees all the populations of the Empire
should come to speak it. In certain districts colonies were established
to secure the predominance of Hellenism ; such was the case alike in
Southern Italy and in the region of the Euphrates, on the confines of
the Arab world. In other parts, by the mere influence of her superior
civilisation Byzantium assimilated and modified those elements which
were most refractory. Whether she succeeded in merging the best of
the vanquished in her aristocracy by their marriages with wives of noble
Greek birth, or whether she attracted them by the lure of high command
or great administrative office, by the distribution of the sonorous titles
of her hierarchy or the bribe of substantial pay, she conciliated all
these exotic elements with marvellous ingenuity, The Greek Empire
did not shrink from this admixture of barbarian races; by their means
it became rejuvenated. Instead of excluding them from political life it
threw open to them the army, the administration, the court, and the
Church. Byzantium in its time had generals of Armenian, Persian, and
Slav origin; Italian, Bulgarian, and Armenian officials; ministers who
were converted Arabs or Turks. For all these aliens Greek was the
common language in which they could make themselves understood, and
thus Greek assumed the spurious appearance of a national language.
Speaking the same language, gradually and insensibly adopting the
same customs and manners of life and thought, they emerged from the
mighty crucible of Constantinople marked with the same character and
merged in the unity of the Empire.
It was the great aim of the imperial administration to apply this
policy and realise this union by means of Hellenism. The Church
helped this work by uniting all the discordant elements which formed


## p. 737 (#779) ############################################

Assistance of the Church
737
1
the Empire in a common profession of faith. Here again language and
race mattered little ; it was enough to have been baptised. Baptism
admitted the barbarian neophyte to the State as well as to the Church.
No doubt this religious propaganda more than once took the form of
cruel persecutions, in the ninth century of the Paulicians, in the eleventh
of the Armenians, in the twelfth of the Bogomiles. It was generally,
however, by shewing a more skilful tolerance that Byzantium gained
adherents. She evangelised and made Christians of the dissidents, Slavs
of Macedonia and the Peloponnesus, the Turks of the Vardar, the
pagan mountaineers of Maina, the Muslims of Crete and the Upper
Euphrates, who formed part of the Christian Empire or became subject
to it by annexation. Conquest was everywhere followed by religious
propaganda, and, to incorporate the vanquished territory more com-
pletely in the Empire, the Church multiplied the number of Greek
bishoprics, whose incumbents, subject to the Patriarch of Constantinople,
were the most faithful and efficient agents for the spread of Orthodoxy.
In the regions of Anatolia recaptured from the Arabs, as in Southern
Italy regained from Lombards or Saracens, and also in Armenia which
was annexed at the beginning of the eleventh century, the first work of
the imperial government was to create numerous bishoprics of the Greek
rite, which by establishing the predominance of Orthodoxy in the
country ensured its moral possession by the monarchy. The monks,
especially in Southern Italy, were not the least active agents of Hellenisa-
tion. In Calabria, the territory of Otranto, and Apulia, their monasteries,
chapels, and hermitages were centres round which the people gathered,
and where, by association with the monks, they learnt Greek. Thus
religion in combination with Hellenism assured the unity of the
Byzantine Empire. “ Orthodoxy,” says Rambaud, “ took the place of
nationality. ”
IV.
The administrative organisation of the Byzantine Empire was
founded, as we have seen, on military institutions. In Byzantium, ,
indeed, as in all states in the Middle Ages, an essential place was held
by the army, which assured the defence of the territory and formed the
strength of the monarchy. “The army," wrote one Emperor, “is to the
State what the head is to the body. If great care be not taken thereof
the very existence of the Empire will be endangered. ” Consequently
all the rulers who really considered the greatness of the monarchy, alike
the Isaurian Emperors, the great military sovereigns of the tenth cen-
tury, and the Busileis of the Comnenian family, exercised a constant and
watchful care over their soldiers; and as long as the Byzantine army was
steadfast and numerous, devoted to its task and to its master, so long
the Empire endured in spite of all difficulties.
C. MED, H. VOL. IV. CH. XXIII.
47


## p. 738 (#780) ############################################

738
The army
At all periods of its history the Byzantine army was partly recruited
from the inhabitants of the Empire. In theory every Roman citizen was
subject to military service, and those men who rendered it, either by
conscription or by voluntary enlistment, were even in administrative
language regarded as the real soldiers, the true representatives of the
national army; they were always called oi 'Pwpaſou. Actually these levies
were of somewhat unequal quality, and for various reasons the imperial
government very soon allowed a military tax to be substituted for actual
military service. And it gradually came to rely in greater measure on
the services of mercenaries, whom it regarded as superior in quality and
more constant in fidelity. Since the Emperor paid handsomely, since to
those who enlisted under his flag he made liberal grants of land, actual
military fiefs, irrevocable, inalienable, and hereditary, he had no difficulty
in securing from the neighbouring states a countless number of ad-
venturers ready to barter their services. Thus it was a strange patchwork
of nationalities that met under the standards of Byzantium. In Justinian's
day there were Huns and Vandals, Goths and Lombards, Persians,
Armenians, African Moors, and Syrian Arabs. In the armies of the
tenth and eleventh centuries there appeared Chazars and Patzinaks, Var-
angians and Russians, Georgians and Slavs, Arabs and Turks, Northmen
from Scandinavia and Normans from Italy. In the army of the Comneni
there were Latins from all the countries of the West, Anglo-Saxons and
Scandinavians, Italians and Germans, Frenchmen from France, Normans
from Sicily, and representatives of all the races of the East. These aliens
were even allowed to enlist in the bodyguard of the Emperor. One of
the regiments of this guard, the hetairia, was in the tenth century almost
exclusively composed of Russians, Scandinavians, and Chazars. And the
famous Varangian guard, originally formed of Russians at the end of the
tenth century, was successively recruited from among Russian Scandi-
navians, Northmen of Norway and Iceland, and Anglo-Saxons. In the
tenth century Armenian contingents were numerous and highly esteemed
in the imperial army; in the twelfth century the Latins were the best of
the Byzantine troops. Many of these foreigners achieved brilliant careers
in Byzantium, and attained high command and great military honours.
The army thus constituted possessed great qualities of steadfastness
and courage. Inured to the profession of arms, capable of bearing every
kind of hardship, fatigue, and privation, constantly engaged in strenuous
exercises, strengthened by the frequent improvements that were intro-
duced into its methods of warfare, it was a matchless instrument of war
which for over six hundred years rendered brilliant services to the
monarchy and crowned its banners with a halo of glory. Nevertheless
the army was not without grave and formidable defects. The system of
regional recruiting resulted in placing the soldiers in too close a personal
relation with their leader, generally one of the feudal nobility of the land,
to whom the men were closely attached by many ties of dependence, and


## p. 739 (#781) ############################################

Quality of the army and its leaders
739
whom they more readily obeyed than the distant Emperor; so that the
monarchy was constantly disturbed by political insurrections, caused by
the ambitions of the generals and supported by the fidelity of their men.
On the other hand, the mercenaries, homeless adventurers intent only on
earning as much as possible, were no less dangerous servants, owing to
their want of discipline and their tendency to mutiny. Their leaders were
real condottieri, always ready to sell themselves to the highest bidder or
to fight for their own hand; and during the latter part of its existence
the Empire suffered terribly, alike from their greed and their insurrections.
The efficient control of such soldiers depended entirely on the general
commanding them, the influence he exercised, and the confidence he
inspired. Fortunately for Byzantium it happened that for centuries the
Empire was lucky enough to have eminent generals at the head of its
army-Belisarius and Narses in the sixth century, the Isaurian Emperors
in the eighth, John Curcuas, the Phocas, Sclerus, Tzimisces, and Basil II
in the tenth, and the Emperors of the Comnenian family in the twelfth.
All these, and especially those of the tenth century, watched over
their soldiers with careful solicitude; they lavished on them rewards and
privileges, they surrounded them with consideration and recognition, so
as to keep them contented and enthusiastic, and to find them always ready
to“risk their lives for the sacred Emperors and the whole of the Christian
community. ” By encouraging in them this double sentiment, first that
they were the descendants of the invincible Roman legions, and secondly
that they were fighting under Christ's protection for the defence of
Christendom, the Basileis inspired their soldiers with patriotism for
Byzantium, a patriotism compounded of loyal devotion and pious en-
thusiasm which for long made them victorious in every field of battle.
The troops forming the Byzantine army were divided into two
distinct groups, the táquata, who garrisoned Constantinople and its
suburbs, and the Oéuata, who were stationed in the provinces. The first
group was chiefly composed of the four cavalry regiments of the Guard,
the Scholae, Excubitors, Arithmus or Vigla, and Hicanati, and the
infantry regiment of the Numeri. Each of these corps, whose strength
was generally quoted, perhaps with some exaggeration, at 4000, was
commanded by an officer bearing the title of Domestic; in the tenth
century the Domestic of the Scholae was Commander-in-chief of the
army. The themes, or provincial army corps (Tà čFw Oéuata, tà trepatiKià
Ofuata), whose strength varied from 4000 to 10,000 men according to
the importance of the province they defended, had at their head a strate-
gus; each theme was divided into two or three brigades or turmae, each
turma into three μοίραι or δρούγγοι commanded by a Drungarius,
each połpa or regiment into ten banda commanded by a count. These
troops are often referred to in the texts as τα καβαλλαρικά θέματα. The
cavalry indeed formed their principal part, for cavalry in Byzantium, as
CH. XXIII,
47-2


## p. 740 (#782) ############################################

740
Organisation of the army
in all states in the Middle Ages, was the most esteemed arm; whether
it were the heavy cavalry in armour, the cataphracts, or the light cavalry,
the trapezitae, it formed an instrument of war of admirable strength
and flexibility.
Besides these troops, which constituted the actual army in the field,
there was the army of the frontiers (Tà åkpitikà Ouara), which was
formed on the model of the limitanei of the fifth and sixth centuries; it
occupied military borderlands along the frontier, where in return for
their military service the soldiers received land on which they settled
with their families. The duties of these detachments were to defend the
limites, hold the fortified posts, castles, and citadels which Byzantium had
established in successive lines along the whole extent of the frontier, to
occupy strategic points, hold mountain passes, guard roads, keep a close
watch on all preparations by the enemy, repel invasion, and be ready
with a counter-offensive. A curious tenth-century treatise on tactics has
preserved for us a picturesque account of the strenuous life led on the
“marches" of the Empire, on the mountains of Taurus, or the borders of
Cappadocia, perpetually threatened by an Arab invasion. It was an
arduous and exacting warfare, in which the problem was to contain an
enterprising and daring enemy by means of weak forces ; a war of sur-
prises, ambushes, reconnaissances, and sudden attacks, in which the
trapezitae, or light cavalry, excelled. All along the frontier a network of
small observation posts was connected with headquarters by a system of
signals; as soon as any movement by the enemy was observed, skirmishing
parties of cavalry set out, carrying only one day's rations to ensure
greater mobility, and with darkened accoutrements and weapons so as to
be less visible. Behind this curtain mobilisation proceeded. The infantry
occupied the mountain passes, the population of the plains took refuge
in the fortresses, and the army concentrated. It is interesting to note in
these instructions with what care and forethought nothing is left to
chance, either as regards information or supplies, the concentration or
movements of troops, night attacks, ambushes, or espionage. Mean-
while the cavalry made daring raids into enemy territory to cause the
assailants uneasiness regarding their lines of communication and to
attempt a useful diversion, while with his main force the Byzantine
strategus sought contact with the enemy and engaged battle, generally
by a sudden and unforeseen attack displaying mingled courage and cunning.
It was an arduous type of warfare in which it was necessary always to be
on the alert to avoid a surprise, to counter blow with blow, raid with raid;
a war full of great duels, cruel, chivalrous, and heroic episodes; but a
marvellous training for those who took part in it.
The Byzantine epic gives a magnificent picture of the valiant and
free life led by these soldiers on the Asiatic marches in the poem of
Digenes Akritas, the defender of the frontier, “the model of the brave,
the glory of the Greeks, he who established peace in Romania. ” Nowhere


## p. 741 (#783) ############################################

Its numbers
741
are the qualities of courage, energy, and patriotism of these Byzantine
soldiers more clearly shewn than in this poem, wherein also is evident
the proud consciousness of independence innate in these hard fighters,
great feudal lords, who waged the eternal struggle with the infidel on
the frontiers, amid glorious adventures of love and death. “When my
cause is just," says the hero of the poem, “I fear not even the Emperor. '
This characteristic feature betrays, even in an epic which exalts into
beauty all the sentiments of the age, the inherent weakness from which
the Empire was henceforward to suffer—the insurmountable unruliness
of the Byzantine army and its leaders.
It is difficult to calculate exactly the strength of the Byzantine army,
but we must be careful not to exaggerate its size. In the sixth as in the
tenth century, in the tenth as in the twelfth, armies were not of vast
numbers-only about 20,000 to 30,000 men, and often much less,
although they achieved the most signal victories and conquered or
destroyed kingdoms. Against the Arabs in the tenth century the army
in Asia attained a total of some 70,000 men. Including the Guard and
the regiments of the army in Europe, the grand total of the Byzantine
forces does not seem to have amounted to more than 120,000 men. But
handled as they were with a tactical skill the rules of which had been
carefully laid down by the Emperors themselves, such as Leo VI and
Nicephorus Phocas, fortified by a multitude of ingenious engines of
war which were preserved in the great arsenal of Mangana, based finally
on the network of strongholds which Byzantine engineers constructed
with so consummate a science of fortification, this army, steadfast and
brave, full of spirit, enthusiasm, and patriotism, was indeed for long
almost invincible.
V.
Owing to the great extent of her coast-line, and the necessity of re-
taining command of the sea, which formed the communication between
the different parts of the monarchy, Byzantium was inevitably a great
maritime power. Indeed, in the sixth and seventh centuries, and until
the beginning of the eighth, the imperial fleet dominated the eastern seas,
or rather it was the only Mediterranean fleet until the Arabs made their
appearance halfway through the seventh century. It was thus capable of
successfully carrying on the struggle when the Umayyad Caliphs of Syria
in their turn created a naval power and assailed Byzantium by sea as
well as by land; it was actually the fleet which saved the Empire in the
seventh century, and which saved Constantinople in the great siege of
717. After this the navy was apparently somewhat neglected. The war
with the Caliphs of Baghdad was mainly on land; and the Isaurian
Emperors seem moreover to have felt some uneasiness as regards the
excessive power of the Grand Admirals. In the ninth century the
CH. XXIII.


## p. 742 (#784) ############################################

742
The fleet
monarchy paid dearly for this neglect when the Muslim corsairs, who
were masters of Crete, for over a century ravaged the coasts of the
Archipelago almost with impunity, and when the conquest of Sicily
ensured to the Arab navy the supremacy of the Tyrrhenian sea as well
as that of the Adriatic. Towards the close of the ninth century it was
decided to reorganise the fleet, and once more, until the beginning of the
twelfth century, Byzantium was the great sea-power of the Mediterranean.
In the tenth century the Emperor of Constantinople boasted that he
commanded the seas (Palaoookpateiv) up to the Pillars of Hercules.
Nicephorus Phocas declared that he was the sole possessor of naval power,
and even at the end of the eleventh century Cecaumenus wrote: “The
feet is the glory of Romania (ο στόλος εστίν η δόξα της Ρωμανίας)”.
This position was seriously threatened when the Seljūq Turks conquered
Asia Minor, because the Empire was thereby deprived of the provinces
whence its best crews were drawn. Henceforth Byzantium resorted to
the practice of entrusting its naval operations to other navies, those of
Pisa, Genoa, and above all Venice; and depending on these allies it neg-
lected naval construction. This was the end of the Byzantine navy. In
the thirteenth century the maintenance of a fleet was regarded by the
Greeks as a useless expense, and a contemporary writer states with some
regret that "the naval power of Byzantium had vanished long ago. "
Originally all the naval forces of the Empire were combined under
one command; in the seventh century the fleet was the “theme of
the sailors” (το θέμα των καραβισιάνων or των πλωιζομένων), whose
chief, or strategus, generally held the rank of patrician. The Isaurian
Emperors divided this great command, and created the two themes of
the Cibyrrhaeots (which included all the south-western coast of Asia
Minor) and the Dodecanese, or Aegean Sea, whereto was added in the
ninth century the theme of Samos. These were the three pre-eminently
maritime themes; but naturally the other coastal provinces—Hellas,
Peloponnesus, and above all the themes of the Ionian Sea (Nicopolis,
Cephalonia)—also contributed somewhat to the formation of the fleet
and the provision of crews.
The Byzantine fleet, like the army, partly recruited its men from the
population of the Empire; and in return for their services the Empire
assigned to the sailors of the Cibyrrhaeot, Samian, and Aegean themes
estates which, as with the land forces, were constituted as inalienable and
hereditary fiefs. Another part of the personnel was drawn from the
Mardaites of Mount Lebanon, whom the Emperors established in the
seventh century, some in the region of Attalia where they possessed a
special and almost autonomous form of government under their catapan,
others in the coastal provinces of the Ionian Sea. Finally, Varangian
sailors, whose skill was highly appreciated, were often engaged to serve
in the fleet. As in the land forces, the pay was good; consequently the
Empire found no difficulty in securing crews for its ships.


## p. 743 (#785) ############################################

Its organisation and equipment
743
Like the army, the navy was divided into two distinct groups. There
was in the first place the imperial feet (το βασιλικοπλόϊμον), commanded
by the Drungarius of the Fleet, whose importance seems to have increased
immensely towards the close of the ninth century. This squadron was
stationed in the waters of the capital. There was also the provincial fleet
(ó DepatikÒS OTóos), composed of the squadrons from the maritime themes,
which was commanded by the strategi of these themes. Generally in
great naval expeditions both these fleets were united under the command
of the same admiral. It is impossible to compute, from the documents
extant, the relative strength of these two fleets. The number of ships
assembled for the campaign of 907 shews an imperial fleet of 60 dromons
in line as opposed to 42 from the maritime themes, and this fact is enough
to shew the importance of the squadron entrusted with the defence of
the capital.
The Byzantine fleet contained units of various types. There was first
the dromon, which was a strong and heavy but swift vessel, with a high
wooden turret on deck (the xylokastron) furnished with engines of war.
The crew consisted of 300 men, 230 rowers and 70 marines. Originally,
the same men were employed for rowing and for fighting, but soon the
drawbacks of this system became apparent, and by the reforms of the
ninth century the two groups which formed the crew were separated.
Subordinate to the dromon there were lighter vessels, the pamphylians,
some manned by 160 others by 130 men, and the ousiai, which seem
to have been built after the model of the large Russian boats, and
to have been attached to the dromons at the rate of two ousiai to each
larger vessel. Their crews varied from 108 to 110 men. All vessels other
than dromons were often referred to under the general name of chelandia,
some belonging to the pamphylian class, others to that of the ousiai.
What rendered these ships particularly formidable was the superiority
which they derived from the use of Greek fire. A Syrian engineer of the
seventh century, named Callinicus, had imparted to the Byzantines the
secret of this “liquid fire,” which could not be extinguished, and which
was said to burn even in water. It was thrown on to the enemy ships,
either by means of tubes or siphons placed in the prow of the Greek
vessels, or by means of hand-grenades. The reputation of this terrible
weapon, exaggerated by popular imagination, filled all the adversaries of
Byzantium with terror. Igor's Russians, who were crushed outside Con-
stantinople in 941, declared: “The Greeks have a fire resembling the
lightning from heaven, and when they threw it at us they burned us; for
this reason we could not overcome them. ” In the thirteenth century
Joinville speaks of Greek fire with similar emotion. Any man touched by
it believed himself to be lost; every ship attacked was devoured by flames.
And the Byzantines, conscious of the advantage they derived from this
formidable weapon, guarded the secret with jealous care. The Emperors,
in their dying recommendations, advised their successors not to reveal it
CH. XXIII.


## p. 744 (#786) ############################################

744
Tactical handling of the fleet
to anyone, and threatened with anathema any impious person who might
dare to disclose it.
Like the army, the navy was handled with great tactical skill. In the
special treatises of the tenth century which have been preserved, we find
the most minute instructions for maneuvring and for boarding, for the
use of Greek fire and other weapons of offence, boiling pitch, stones,
masses of iron, and the like. There is also evident the same anxiety in
maintaining the efficiency of the crews by incessant practice, and the same
care with regard to the sailors as to the soldiers. Nevertheless, and in
spite of the importance given to the great theme of the Cibyrrhaeots
by the proximity of the Arab territory, in spite of the great services
rendered by the fleet, in the tenth century the navy was less regarded
than the land forces; the strategi of the three maritime themes received
much lower salaries (ten pounds of gold) than those of the governors of
the great continental themes of Anatolia.
But by all these means, by land and sea, Byzantium was a great
power; and, by her wise naval and military organisation, she remained
until the end of the twelfth century a great and powerful military state.


## p. 745 (#787) ############################################

745
CHAPTER XXIV.
BYZANTINE CIVILISATION.
For over a thousand years, from the end of the fourth century to the
middle of the fifteenth, the Byzantine Empire was the centre of a civi-
lisation equal to that of any age in brilliancy, certainly the most brilliant
known to the Middle Ages, and possibly even the only real civilisation
which prevailed in Europe between the close of the fifth century and the
beginning of the eleventh. While the barbarian states of the West were
laboriously developing the elements of a new culture from the scanty
remains of the Roman tradition, Byzantium—Rome's successor, and
imbued with the spirit and teachings of Hellenism-never ceased to be
the centre of refinement and the home of a great movement in thought
and art. Byzantium, indeed, was no mere transmitter of the tradition of
antiquity. Contact with the East had modified her, and the influence of
Christianity had left a deep imprint; and, contrary to a still widely-spread
opinion, she was capable of originality and creation. Hellenism, Christi-
anity, and the East met and combined in forming Byzantine civilisation;
and by the characteristic forms it assumed, by its superiority, as well as
by the long and profound influence it exercised in both the Eastern and
Western world, this civilisation played a prominent part in the history
of the Middle Ages, the history of thought, and the history of mankind.
For over a thousand years, Constantinople, the capital of the Empire,
was the most brilliant and characteristic expression of this civilisation. For
over a thousand years the whole world gazed with feelings of admiration
and greed at the city which Byzantines called “the City protected by God,"
or merely, “the City (tókus),” the magnificent, mighty, and prosperous
city which has been felicitously described as “the Paris of the Middle
Ages. ” The whole medieval world dreamt of Constantinople as a city
famous for beauty, wealth, and power, seen through a shimmer of gold.
“She is the glory of Greece,” wrote a Frenchman in the twelfth century;
“her wealth is renowned, and she is even richer than is reported. ” “Con-
stantinople,” said another, “is the peer of Rome in holiness and majesty”;
and Benjamin of Tudela adds: “Except Baghdad there is no town in the
universe to be compared with her. ” According to Robert of Clari, it was
said that “Two-thirds of the world's wealth were in Constantinople, and
the other third was scattered throughout the world. " And everyone
knows the celebrated passage in which Villehardouin declares: “No man
could believe that so rich a city existed in all the world,” and asserts that
בי
CH, XXIV.


## p. 746 (#788) ############################################

746
Twofold aspect of Byzantine civilisation
66
לל
the city was “ queen over all others. ” The fame of the imperial city re-
sounded throughout the whole of the then-known world. Men dreamt of
her amid the chilly mists of Norway, and on the banks of the Russian
rivers, down which the Varangians sailed towards matchless Tsarigrad;
they dreamt of her in Western strongholds, where trouvères sang the
marvels of the imperial palace, the floating hall swayed by the breezes of
the sea, and the dazzling carbuncle which gave light to the imperial
apartments during the night. Men dreamt of her alike among the bar-
barian Slavs and the needy Armenians, who aspired to seek their fortunes
in the service of an Emperor lavish of pay. Men dreamt of her in Venice
and the commercial cities of Italy, and calculated the magnificent revenues
which the Byzantine sovereigns yearly derived from their city. Even
up to her final days of decadence, Constantinople remained one of the
most beautiful and illustrious cities of the universe, the splendid centre
and ornament of the Empire, the home of matchless wealth and culture,
the pride and glory of the monarchy.
In order to obtain a clear understanding of Byzantine civilisation, to
visualise the mode of life and the dominant tastes in this vanished society,
and to realise the mentality of the Greeks in the Middle Ages, we must
therefore begin by studying Constantinople. And moreover it is about
her that we have most information. At every stage of her history there
are valuable documents which describe for us admirably the buildings
of the great city, and the appearance she presented: for the fifth
century we have the Notitia of 450; for the sixth century the book of
Edifices by Procopius, the poem of Paul the Silentiary, and the description
of the church of the Holy Apostles by Nicholas Mesarites; for the tenth
century the
of Constantine the Rhodian on the seven wonders of
the capital and the Ceremonies of Constantine Porphyrogenitus ; finally
the narratives of countless travellers, French, Italians, Spaniards,
Russians, and Arabs,-who visited Constantinople from the twelfth to
the fifteenth century. Moreover Byzantine literature reflects, as in a
magic mirror, the ideas which were familiar and precious to the inhabitants
of the capital, and the great currents of thought which prevailed in her.
But Constantinople was not the Empire. In contrast to the capital which
was luxurious, refined, and elegant, and also turbulent, cruel, and corrupt,
there was another Byzantium, simpler and ruder, more robust and more
serious, the Byzantium of the provinces, about which we know less than
the other, but whose aspect we must nevertheless attempt to reconstruct;
for the strength and stability of the monarchy was derived therefrom, no
less than from Constantinople, and its study is indispensable if we wish
to understand the character of Byzantine civilisation. In this vanished
world, Constantinople and the provinces seem like the two opposite leaves
of a diptych, and, in spite of the deep contrast offered by these two
Byzantiums, it was their union which formed the power and greatness
of the Empire.
poem


## p. 747 (#789) ############################################

Constantinople: its extent and walls
747
But before presenting a picture of Byzantine civilisation under this
twofold aspect, a preliminary remark is necessary. In the course of a
thousand years, between the fourth century when it came into being and
the fifteenth when it disintegrated, Byzantine society necessarily under-
went profound changes. A historian who seeks to present a picture of
the whole runs great risks of completely falsifying the aspect of things if
he borrows indiscriminately from authors of widely different ages, if, like
Krause who aspired to shew us the “Byzantines of the Middle Ages,” he
combines facts drawn from sources which are chronologically widely apart.
In order to avoid this danger, we shall here note only the most persistent
features, those which seem really characteristic of Byzantine civilisation,
and, apart from these permanent elements, we shall always be careful to
mention the exact date of the social phenomena recorded and to mark
their evolution. Thus perhaps will emerge an approximately correct
presentment of this vanished world, this infinitely complex society to
which the mixture of nationalities imparted so strongly cosmopolitan a
character, and which we must study successively in Constantinople and
in the provinces so as to arrive at a clear understanding of the soul of
Byzantium.
I.
By the general appearance she presented, the splendour of her public
buildings, the multitude of ancient statues which adorned her broad
squares, the luxury of her palaces and the beauty of her churches,
the picturesque animation lent to her streets by a motley and cosmo-
politan crowd, Constantinople, even at first sight, produced a powerful
impression of wealth and magnificence. By the middle of the fifth
century, barely a hundred years after her foundation, the Byzantine
capital was already a very large town.
Theodosius II was obliged to
enlarge the city which had become too narrow for the enormous influx of
population, and carried the new enclosure far beyond the wall built by
Constantine, thus making her boundaries, except at one point, identical
with those of Stamboul in the present day. For her protection he built
the admirable line of ramparts from the Sea of Marmora to the end of
the Golden Horn, which still exist to-day, and whose triple defences,
ranged one behind the other, remain one of the finest examples of military
architecture of all time. Against this mighty wall, which rendered
Constantinople a great and impregnable fortress, there hurled themselves
in succession all the barbarians, Huns and Avars, Bulgars and Russians,
Arabs from the East and Crusaders from the West. On the very eve
of the final catastrophe in 1453, the great capital still vaunted her
military power and “this crown of ramparts, which was surpassed not
even by those of Babylon. ”
Within this vast enclosure there stretched henceforward a magnificent
city. Built like Rome on seven hills, she was divided like the former
CH. XXIV.


## p. 748 (#790) ############################################

748
Plan of Constantinople in the tenth century
capital of the Empire into fourteen regions, and since the days of Con-
stantine the Emperors had spared no pains to render her equal or even
superior to the great city, which for so many centuries had been the
heart of Roman power. The Notitia of 450 shews us a Constantinople
full of palaces—the first region especially was, says this document, regiis
nobiliumque domiciliis clara-magnificent squares; sumptuous buildings
for public utility, baths, underground cisterns, aqueducts and shops;
buildings devoted to popular amusement, theatres, hippodromes, and
the like. Some figures given in the Notitia are significant of the great-
ness and wealth of the city: without taking into account the five imperial
palaces, six domus divinae belonging to Empresses, and three domus
nobilissimae, there were in Constantinople in the fifth century 322 streets,
52 porticoes, 4388 domus or mansions, and 153 private baths; and more-
over this magnificent city was the finest museum in the world, because
of the masterpieces of ancient art which the Emperors had removed from
the famous sanctuaries of the Hellenic world to adorn their capital.
But to realise fully the importance of the imperial city, we must
consider her as she was in the tenth century, at the moment when, indeed,
she attained her apogee of splendour and prosperity. We possess fairly
exact information as to her plan and her principal streets at this date,
and they can still be traced in the thoroughfares of present-day Con-
stantinople.
Between St Sophia to the north, the imperial palace to the south,
and the Senate-house to the east, there stretched the square of the
Augusteum,“ Constantinople's square of St Mark," all surrounded with
porticoes, in the centre of which, on a tall column, towered an equestrian
statue of the Emperor Justinian. To the west lay the arcade of the
Golden Milestone, whence started the great street of the Mese, which,
like all the important thoroughfares of the city, was bordered with
arcaded galleries, or čußoroi. Crossing the quarter of the bazaars, and
passing the Royal Basilica (Law-courts) and the Praetorium (residence
of the Prefect of the City), it led into the Forum of Constantine, one of
the handsomest parts of the city. In the centre stood a porphyry column
(now called the burnt pillar), and all round the square there were palaces
with gigantic domes, their walls decorated with mosaics and panels of
precious metals; in front of these, under marble porticoes, were ranged
the masterpieces of Greek sculpture. Thence, through the quarter of
the Artopolia (the bakers), the Mese reached the great square of the
Taurus, where in front of the Capitol was erected the lofty column of
Theodosius, decorated, like Trajan's column, with spiral bas-reliefs com-
memorating “the slaughter of the Scythian barbarians and the destruction
of their towns. ” Farther on there were the cross-roads of Philadelphion,
where the main street split into three branches. One descended towards
the Golden Horn; the second led to the church of the Holy Apostles and
the gate of Charisius (Hadrianople Gate); the third and most frequented
לל


## p. 749 (#791) ############################################

Contrasts presented
749
בל
crossed the squares of Amastrianon and the Bous, whence a street
branched off to the right towards the gate of St Romanus (Top Qāpū),
and finally, after crossing the Forum of Arcadius in which rose a tall
column with bas-reliefs representing scenes of war and triumph, it passed
in front of the monastery of Studion, and reached the Golden Gate.
This was the most famous and most magnificent of all the gates of Con-
stantinople, with its propylaea decorated with ancient bas-reliefs and
inlaid with coloured marbles, and the triple bay of its triumphal arch
flanked by two massive marble pylons ; it was through this gate that the
Emperors made their solemn entry into the capital on their days of coro-
nation or triumph, when they went in stately procession through streets
hung with tapestry, blazing with lights, and strewn with flowers, amidst
the acclamations of the people, and passed along the Mese to St Sophia.
In close proximity to these vast thoroughfares, bordered with long
arcaded galleries, decorated with statues, and full of rich palaces, there
were naturally to be found in Constantinople narrow streets, dark,
muddy, and squalid, infested with dogs and with thieves, who, says one
historian, were almost as numerous as the poor. ” Often sheltered
in cellars, there swarmed a wretched and sordid population in miser-
able houses. In strong contrast to these noisy, overcrowded quarters
where the people huddled together, there were peaceful and deserted
districts—such, for instance, as Petrion, on the slopes of the fifth hill,
where amid shady gardens there stood monasteries and quiet churches,
schools and hospitals. In the tenth century all the outskirts of the city,
the district lying between the wall of Constantine and that of Theo-
dosius II, was as yet sparsely inhabited; great open-air cisterns lay there
with their still waters; the valley of the Lycus with its meadows was a
rural and deserted spot; and there were hardly any buildings in the
Blachernae suburb, with the exception of the famous sanctuary of the
Virgin. Later, from the twelfth century, when the Emperors transferred
their residence to the Blachernae palace, this suburb became fashionable
because of its proximity to the Court, and churches and houses sprang up
there. The sanctuaries of the Pantokrator (Kilisa-jāmi'), Pantepoptes
(Eski-Imaret-jāmi'), Pammakaristos (Fethiye-jāmi'), and the Christ of
Chora (Qahriye-jāmi“) date from this period. But in the tenth century
fashionable life was elsewhere.
By the contrasts she presented Byzantine Constantinople was truly a
great Oriental city. And she offered a magnificent spectacle. All these
buildings of which she was full, public buildings of classical architecture
and private houses of a more eastern type, palaces and churches, baths
and hostelries, underground cisterns and aqueducts, columns and statues,
combined to produce an incomparable effect. Constantine the Rhodian,
writing in the tenth century, has justly sung the praises of “the famous
and venerable city which dominates the world, whose thousand marvels
shine with singular brilliancy, with the splendour of her lofty buildings,
CH. XXIV.


## p. 750 (#792) ############################################

750
The population of Constantinople
the glory of her magnificent churches, the arcades of her long porticoes,
the height of her columns rising towards the skies. " Within her walls
Constantinople contained seven wonders—as many as the whole ancient
world had known—" wherewith she adorned herself, as was said by one
author, “as with so many stars. ”
In this vast city there dwelt an enormous population whose numbers
during the period between the fifth and the thirteenth centuries
may
be
fixed without exaggeration at from 800,000 to 1,000,000. It was a
motley and cosmopolitan population in which might be met every type,
garb, condition, race. From every province in the Empire and every
country in the world men flocked to Byzantium for business, for pleasure,
for litigation. There were Asiatics with hooked noses, almond eyes
under thick eyebrows, pointed beards, and long black hair falling over
their shoulders ; Bulgars with shaved heads and dirty clothes, wearing
an iron chain round their waists by way of belt; fur-clad Russians with
long fair moustaches; Armenian or Scandinavian adventurers, who had
come to seek their fortunes in the great city; Muslim merchants from
Baghdad or Syria, and Western merchants, Italians from Venice or Amalfi,
Pisa or Genoa, Spaniards and Frenchmen; there were Chazars of the
Imperial Guard, Varangians “tall as palm-trees,” Latin mercenaries with
long swords, who in their armour " looked like bronze figures. ” There
was a confusion of every tongue and every religion. And in the midst
of this animated and picturesque crowd, the inhabitants of the city might
be recognised by the rich silken garments embroidered with gold in
which they were clad, the fine horses on which they were mounted, and
the exhibition of such luxury as gave them, as was said by a traveller,
“the semblance of so many princes. ” Anyone who visited Constantinople
a few years ago will remember the spectacle offered by the Great Bridge
at Stamboul. Medieval Byzantium offered a somewhat similar spectacle,
and foreigners who visited the imperial city carried away a dazzling
picture of the Byzantine streets.
But in this magnificent Constantinople full of splendid sights, where
extravagance of costume vied with beauty of architecture, three things
were specially characteristic of Byzantine civilisation : the pomp of
religious ceremonial as displayed by the Orthodox liturgy on great feast
days; the brilliant ostentation of imperial life shewn in the receptions
and the etiquette of the Sacred Palace; and the amusements of the
Hippodrome where was manifested the mind of the people. “In Con-
stantinople,” says A. Rambaud, “ for God there was St Sophia, for the
Emperor the Sacred Palace, and for the people the Hippodrome. ” Round
these three poles there gravitated a great part of Byzantine life, and
in them may best be studied some of the leading features of this
society.


## p. 751 (#793) ############################################

II.
Religion
751
Religion held an essential place in the Byzantine world. The medieval
Greeks have often been blamed for the passionate interest they took in
theological disputes, and the manner in which they neglected the most
serious interests and the very safety of the State for apparently futile
controversies. There is no doubt that, from the Emperor down to the
meanest of his subjects, the Byzantines loved controversies about faith
and dogma to distraction. It would nevertheless be foolish to believe
that these interminable disputes of which Byzantine history is full, and the
profound troubles which resulted from them, were only caused among the
masses by the love of controversy, the mania for argument, and the subtlety
of the Greek intellect, and, among statesmen, by the empty pleasure of
laying down the law. These great movements were determined by deeper
and graver reasons. In the Eastern world heresies have often concealed
and disguised political ideas and enmities, and the conduct of the
Emperors in these matters was often inspired rather by State reasons than
by a desire to make innovations in matters of faith. Nevertheless a deep
and sincere piety inspired most Byzantine souls. This people which
adored pageants loved the sumptuous magnificence of liturgical cere-
monies; their pious credulity attributed miraculous virtues to the holy
icons, and images “not made by hands” (axelporontoL); they devoutly
adored those holy relics of which Byzantium was full, treasures a thousand
times more dearly esteemed than “gold and precious stones," and which
tempted so strongly the covetousness of the Latins. Finally, their super-
stitious minds sought in every event an indication of the Divine Will;
so much so that the Byzantine people, which was singularly impression-
able, lived in a constant state of mystic exaltation, which, from the very
outset, rendered them very amenable to the all-powerful influence of
the Church. In education the study of religious matters held an im-
portant place. In society, devotion was closely allied with fashionable
life; church and hippodrome were, as has ingeniously been said, the only
places of public resort possessed by Byzantine society, and people re-
paired to the former to meet and to gossip as much as to pray. Finally,
the cloister exercised a mystical attraction over many men. The founda-
tion or endowment of monasteries was one of the commonest forms of
Byzantine piety. The monks were objects of universal veneration; they
were much sought after as directors of conscience by pious persons, and
consequently they exerted a profound influence on society. Moved by
natural piety, by weariness of the world, or by the need for renunciation
and peace, many Byzantines aspired to end their days among these holy
men, who by their prayers and mortifications assured the salvation of the
Empire and of humanity; and wished to become, like them, “ citizens of
heaven. ” The life of the Emperor himself, closely associated with all the
CH. XXIV.


## p. 752 (#794) ############################################

752
St Sophia
לל
religious feasts, was indeed, as has been said, a sacerdotal life; and
St Sophia, where the Emperor's coronation took place, and where the
ostentatious retinue of the imperial processions was displayed on the
innumerable feast-days, St Sophia, the most venerated of sanctuaries, in
which the Patriarch could entrench himself as in a citadel, was one of the
centres of public life, of the government, and even of the diplomacy of
the monarchy.
Ever since it had been rebuilt by Justinian with incomparable
splendour, St Sophia had been the wonder of Constantinople. With its
lofty dome, so aerial and light that, in the phrase of Procopius, it
seemed “to be suspended by a golden chain from heaven,” the fine
breadth of its harmonious proportions, the splendour of its facings of
many-coloured marble, the brilliancy of its mosaics, the magnificent
gold and silver work which enriched the iconostasis, ambo, and altar, the
church built by Anthemius of Tralles and Isidore of Miletus has through-
out centuries excited the admiration of all beholders. If we consider its
design, its enormous dome with a diameter of 107 feet, supported by four
great arches which rest on four colossal piers, the two semi-domes which
abut the central dome and are in their turn supported by three smaller
apses, if we study the skilful combinations of equipoise which ensure the
success of the work, we are overcome with amazement at this “marvel
of stability and daring,” this masterpiece of logical audacity and scientific
knowledge. The magnificence of the decoration, the beauty of the lofty
columns with their exquisite capitals, the many-coloured marbles so skil-
fully variegated as to give the illusion of Oriental carpets hung on the walls
of the apse, and the dazzling effect of the mosaics with their background
of dark blue and gold, complete the effect of magic splendour produced
by St Sophia. Robbed though it has been since 1453 of its former
magnificence, it still justifies the profound admiration which it excited
from the time of Justinian until the last days of the Byzantine Empire.
“ Words worthy of it are not to be found,” wrote an author of the
fourteenth century, “and after we have spoken of it, we cannot speak
of anything else. ” Another Byzantine writer declared that God must
certainly have extended His mercy to Justinian, if only because he built
St Sophia. And if we try to picture the great church as it was in former
days on occasions of solemn ceremonial, when, amid clouds of incense,
glowing candles, and the moving harmony of sacred chants, there was
displayed the mystic pageant of ritual processions and the beauty of the
Orthodox liturgy, the impression becomes even more marvellous. There
is a legend that ambassadors from Vladímir, Great Prince of Kiev,
imagined that in a vision they had seen the angels themselves descending
from heaven to join with the Greek priests in celebrating Mass on the
altar of St Sophia, and they could not resist the attraction of a religion
in which such things were to be seen, “transcending, they said, human
intelligence. ” Under the golden domes of Justinian's church, every


## p. 753 (#795) ############################################

Power of Monasticism
753
Byzantine experienced emotions of the same kind, as deep and as powerful,
and his mystic and pious soul became marvellously exalted.
Constantinople, moreover, was full of churches and monasteries. There
was the church of the Holy Apostles, with its five domes, an architectural
masterpiece of the sixth century, from which St Mark's in Venice was
copied at a later date; here were buried ten generations of Emperors in
sarcophagi of porphyry or marble. There was the New church (Nea), a
basilica built in the ninth century by the Emperor Basil I, and the
fine churches of the Comneni, the most famous of which, that of the Panto-
krator, was from the twelfth century the St Denis of the monarchy. “In
Constantinople," wrote one traveller,“ there are as many churches as there
are days in the year. ” To mention a few of those that still exist, there
were St Irene and Little St Sophia (really the church of SS. Sergius and
Bacchus) which date from the sixth century, the church of the Theotokos
(Vefa-jāmi'), which appears to date from the eleventh, and also the
Pammakaristos (Fethiye-jāmi') and the Chora (Qahrīye-jāmi'), built in
the twelfth and thirteenth centuries, the latter of which still contains
mosaics which are among the masterpieces of Byzantine art.
A singularly active and powerful religious life filled the Byzantine
capital with its manifestations. Although in somewhat close dependence
on the Emperor who appointed and deposed him at will, the Patriarch,
a veritable Pope of the Eastern Church, was a power to be reckoned with
in the State, especially when the holder of the office was a Photius, a
Cerularius, or even a Polyeuctes or a Nicholas. The power of the Church
was further increased by the great development in monasticism. We have
already referred to the prominent part played in the Byzantine world by
religious houses; Constantinople was full of monasteries; in like manner,
outside the capital, in Egypt, in Palestine, and in Sinai during the fourth
and fifth centuries, later, on Olympus in Bithynia, and on Latros in Caria,
in the solitudes of Cappadocia, and—especially in the tenth century-on
the Holy Mount of Athos, there was a marvellous expansion of monastic
establishments. We know with what respect Byzantine society regarded
the monks, and how great an influence they exercised in consequence. More-
over the monks became a real power, and sometimes one formidable to
the State, because of the vast possessions which accumulated in their
hands. Against this the Emperors—not only the iconoclasts, but even
the orthodox-were obliged to wage a bitter and violent struggle.
“The monks," said Nicephorus Phocas in a Novel,“ possess none of the
evangelical virtues ; at every moment of their existence they are only
considering how to acquire more earthly possessions. ” But the monks
were too powerful to be easily overthrown; the State had to give way
before the strong current, as it had often to yield to the turbulent out-
bursts organised in the monasteries, which penetrated even to the Sacred
Palace, to present the grievances and claims of the Church. Vainly it
endeavoured to reform the frequently relaxed discipline of the monas-
וי
C. MED. H. VOL. IV. CH. XXIV.
48


## p. 754 (#796) ############################################

754
The Sacred Palace
teries ; even the Church itself, led by men such as Christodulus of Patmos
in the eleventh century, or Eustathius of Thessalonica in the twelfth,
failed to attain this object. The Byzantine monks were extremely popular
because of the miraculous powers and prophetic gifts which were attri-
buted to them, the holy images and venerable relics of which their
monasteries were the pious depositaries, their preaching and moral
influence, their works of mercy and the schools clustered round their monas-
teries. On account of this popularity of their fanaticism, and their spirit of
independence, they were a perpetual source of trouble in Byzantine society,
and a double danger-political and social—to the State. The important
place held in the Byzantine world by the monastic institution is one of
the most characteristic features of this vanished civilisation, and is the
best proof of the essential importance within it of everything which con-
cerned religion.
On the side of the hills that slope from the square of Atmeydān to
the Sea of Marmora, close to St Sophia and the Hippodrome, were
ranged the innumerable buildings which formed the imperial palace.
Of this vast assemblage there now remain only ruins; owing, however,
to the descriptions left by Byzantine authors, above all in the Ceremonies
of Constantine Porphyrogenitus, it is easy to reconstruct its plan and
picture its appearance. The Sacred Palace was indeed a city within a
city; from its builder, Constantine, until the twelfth century, almost
every Emperor took pride in enlarging it, or improving it by some new
addition. After the fire which accompanied the Nika riot, the vestibule
of Chalce, which opened on the Augusteum, was magnificently rebuilt
by Justinian. The Chrysotriclinium, a sumptuous throne-room, was
erected in the midst of the gardens by Justin II, and, at the end of
the seventh century, Justinian II connected it with the ancient palace
by the long arcades of Lausiacus and Justinianus. In the ninth century
Theophilus built the palace of Triconchus in imitation of Arab models,
surrounding it with gardens and adding a number of elegant pavilions
decorated with rare marbles and precious mosaics, which were known
by picturesque titles, such as the Pearl, Love, or Harmony. A little
later Basil I erected the new palace, or Caenurgium, close to the Chryso-
triclinium ; Nicephorus Phocas added magnificent decorations to the
maritime palace of Bucoleon, his favourite residence. Even in the
twelfth century buildings were added within the grounds of the great
Palace; from this period dated the pavilion of Mouchroutas, “the
Persian house,” whose architecture was inspired by Seljūq models.
Thus, within high walls which after the tenth century bore the
appearance of a fortress, the work of successive generations had pro-
duced a complicated assemblage of all kinds of buildings, great reception
rooms and more private pavilions hidden among trees, palaces and
barracks, baths and libraries, churches and prisons, long arcades and


## p. 755 (#797) ############################################

Imperial ceremonial
755
terraces whence the
eye
could look far over the Sea of Marmora and the
Bosphorus, wide stair-ways and magnificent landing-stages adorned with
statues, gardens rich with flowers, trees, and running water, and large
open spaces in which the Emperor played polo with his intimates. All
this was laid out without symmetry or settled plan, but was full of
charming fancy and of unparalleled magnificence. If we wish to form
some idea of the Sacred Palace, we must not recall the noble and
symmetrical façades of the Louvre and Versailles, but rather some
Eastern palace, the Kremlin of the Tsars, or the Old Seraglio of the
Sultans.
The resplendent luxury of the imperial apartments has often been
described, and it is unnecessary to dwell for long on the precious marbles,
mosaics, and gold; the gorgeous processions which passed every day
through the lofty rooms hung with tapestries and strewn with flowers;
the picturesque and glittering train of court officials, the magnificent
ceremonial of the solemn audiences, receptions, and State dinners; and
the thousand refinements of the precise and somewhat childish etiquette
which regulated every act of the imperial life—the fairy-like setting of
this court life, whose brilliant picture, worthy of the Arabian Nights,
dazzled all the Middle Ages like a blaze of gold. In this magnificent
setting, adorned with all the magic of art, within which passed the
ostentatious and complicated life of the Emperor, everything was care-
fully calculated to enhance the sovereign majesty: whether by the
luxury of splendid costumes, which for each fresh feast were of new
form and colour, or by the pomp of the ceremonies which from the day
of his birth to that of his death accompanied every act in the existence
of the Basileus, and which rendered his life, as has been said, “a com-
pletely representative and pontifical life. ” On each of the great feasts
of the Church, and on each solemn Saint's Day, the Emperor went to
St Sophia, or to some other church in the capital, to be present in great
state at the Divine Office. Then there were in the palace the civil
festivities, daily processions, receptions, dinners, and audiences in which
Byzantium took pride, in order to dazzle visitors and to display all her
riches, magnificent jewels, precious tapestries, and splendid mosaics,
multiplying lights and flowers, resplendent costumes, and gorgeous
uniforms, and seeking even by magical illusions to astonish strangers.
There were the feasts of the Dodecahemeron which lasted from Christmas
till Epiphany, of the Brumalia, and many others, in which songs, dances,
banquets, and performances by buffoons succeeded each other in an exact
and complicated etiquette which left nothing to chance or fancy. And
if we consider the busy, monotonous, and empty existence led by the
Byzantine sovereign, and the crowd of courtiers who from morning till
night, from one year's end to the other, seemed to have no object save
to participate in this pompous puppet-show, we wonder whether indeed
these people did not run a risk of developing, as was said by Taine,
CH. XXIV.
48–2


## p. 756 (#798) ############################################

756
Court life: intrigues
“idiot minds," and whether the ruler who submitted to such a life of
show was not in danger of losing all capacity and energy. But although
there was certainly some monotony in the profusion of purple, precious
stones, and gold which illuminated the imperial existence, and a good
deal of futility in the etiquette which surrounded him, it must not be
forgotten that Byzantium wished thereby to give to the world an im-
pression of incomparable splendour, of dazzling wealth and luxury, and
that she thereby succeeded in giving a particular stamp to the civili-
sation of which she was the brilliant centre.
In the twelfth century the Comneni left the former imperial residence
and settled in a new one at the end of the Golden Horn. This was the
palace of Blachernae, whose splendour was not less striking than that of
the Great Palace. Strangers permitted to visit it have left us dazzling
descriptions. Everywhere there were gold and precious stones, gold-
smith's work and mosaics, and, writes a contemporary, “it is impossible
to say which gave most value and beauty to things, the costliness of the
material or the skill of the artist. " Round the rulers of the Comnenian
dynasty there moved an elegant and worldly court, less ceremonious
than the former one, passionately interested in festivities, music, tourneys,
art, and letters, full of intrigues and amorous adventures. And all this
lent a singular attraction to the city. Travellers who came to Constanti-
nople declared that “nothing like it can be found in any other country. ”
But somewhat grave consequences arose from the essential place held in
Byzantine society by the Sacred Palace and court life.
In an absolute monarchy, where everything depended on the ruler's
favour, the palace was the centre of everything; and naturally, to gain
or retain this favour, there was an atmosphere of perpetual intrigue
round the prince. In this court full of eunuchs, women, and idle high
dignitaries, there were intrigues incessantly and everywhere, alike in the
Gynaeceum, the barracks of the guards, and the Emperor's antechambers;
every man fought for himself and sought to overthrow the reigning
favourite, and any means were good, flattery or calumny, bribery or
assassination. In dark corners was prepared the fall of the minister in
power, nay even the fall of the Emperor himself. The history of the
Sacred Palace is full of plots, murders, and coups d'état. And naturally
in this court atmosphere there was scope for every kind of meanness,
villainy, surrender of principle, recantation, and treachery. We must
not indeed draw too black a picture. There were not only Emperor-
drones content to slumber in the ostentatious and empty life of the
palace, but also rulers full of energy, determined to carry out their great
task as leaders of the State both in the field and in the government;
and there were more of the latter than is commonly thought. In strong
contrast to the mean and worthless courtiers, there were in this society
many worthy men, and alike in the Byzantine aristocracy and the
bourgeoisie there was an accumulated treasure of strong qualities and


## p. 757 (#799) ############################################

Part played by women
757
solid virtues. Nevertheless, even in the best of the Byzantines, there is
visible a disquieting love for complication, subtlety, and intrigue, a way
of contemplating and conducting life which suggests a certain amount
of cunning, of prudent cleverness not overburdened with useless scruples,
a weakness of character which contrasts with their superior intelligence.
Court life greatly helped to develop this background of corruption
and demoralisation, and to present a somewhat turbid picture of
Byzantium, a picture of gorgeous luxury and excessive refinement, but
of refinement in vice as well; shewing us amidst a marvellously en-
chanting setting a multitude of mediocre and worthless spirits, led by a
few superior and evil geniuses.
Finally, in this elegant and ostentatious court, devoted to pleasure
and feasting, in which women played a leading part, there was great
corruption, and the imperial palace was the home of many startling
adventures and wide-spread scandals. In spite of the apparently severe
seclusion in which the life of the Empress was passed, in spite of the
retinue of eunuchs by which the approaches to the Gynaeceum were
guarded, Byzantine history is full of Empresses who played a leading
part in State affairs or in society. They were granted a great place in
palace festivities by ceremonial custom; the political constitution of the
monarchy, which did not exclude women from the throne, bestowed on
them an official position in the government at the side of the Emperor;
several Byzantine Empresses by their high ability succeeded in gaining
powerful influence and playing the part of a statesman. To appreciate
the active part they took in directing political affairs, it is only necessary
to recall the names of Theodora and Irene, of Theophano and Eudocia
Macrembolitissa ; or to realise what Byzantine society owed to their
luxury, elegance, and spirit of intrigue, we may conjure up the figures
of Zoë Porphyrogenita, Mary of Antioch, or the princesses, of such
varied character, of the Comnenian family. Their morality was frequently
doubtful, but their talent and culture were often eminent; and as they
shared all the tastes of the period, alike for religion and for the Hippo-
drome, as they were as intriguing and ambitious as the men, they helped
to bestow a characteristic stamp on Byzantine society. And from the
imperial palace this love of intrigue so necessary for success, this openly-
flaunted corruption, spread throughout all classes of society.
Round the palace there revolved a whole noble society, powerful
alike by the high offices with which its members were invested and the
territorial wealth they possessed; from it were drawn the intimates of
the Emperor, his counsellors, ministers, officials, and generals; it was
called the Senatorial Order (ovykAntikol). We can most easily judge of
Byzantine social life and luxury from these great aristocratic families.
Though we know little about Byzantine dwellings, it may be said that,
up to the time of the Crusades, they were constructed on the plan of the
houses of antiquity; those which still exist in the dead cities of Central
CH. XXIV.


## p. 758 (#800) ############################################

758
Luxury of society
Syria contain courts surrounded by porticoes, baths, and large gardens
round the central edifice; in miniatures we see buildings of two or three
stories, with gabled, terraced, or domed roofs; their façades, decorated
with porticoes and flanked by towers or pavilions, were often adorned
with balconies or loggias. The internal decorations seem to have been
extremely luxurious. The rooms were lined with marble and decorated
with mosaics or paintings; they were furnished with sumptuous articles
made of wood inlaid with metal, mother-of-pearl, or ivory, covered with
magnificent tapestries embroidered with religious subjects or fantastic
animals. The luxury of the table was great, and still more that of
costume. The forms of classical attire had been retained, but the in-
fluence of the East had added great extravagance, and, moreover, certain
new fashions had been introduced from neighbouring peoples, which soon
lent singular diversity to Byzantine costume. Its characteristic feature
was extraordinary magnificence. Only garments of silk or purple were
worn, tissues embroidered with gold which fell in stiff, straight folds,
and materials embellished with embroideries and priceless jewels. There
was no less extravagance in horses and carriages, and moralists such as
St John Chrysostom in the fifth century, or Theodore of Studion in the
ninth, severely criticised the excessive expenditure of their contemporaries.
The period of the Crusades somewhat altered the character of this luxury,
without diminishing it. Magnificence was always one of the characteristic
features of Byzantine life; it is what strikes us first in the pictures of
this vanished world preserved for us in mosaics and miniatures, both in
the brilliant pictures which in San Vitale at Ravenna represent Justinian
and Theodora in the midst of their court, and in the sumptuous portraits
of emperors and empresses, ministers and great dignitaries, which illus-
trate manuscripts.
לל
It was said for long and is still often repeated that the whole history
of Byzantium is summed up in the quarrels of the Greens and Blues.
However exaggerated this statement may be, it is certain that up to the
twelfth century the games in the circus were among the favourite pleasures
of the Byzantine world; so much so that it has truly been said of the
Hippodrome that it was indeed “the mirror of Greek society in the
Middle Ages. ” From the Emperor down to the meanest of his subjects,
Byzantium devoted a passionate attention to everything which concerned
the Circus, and women were no less keenly interested than men in the
spectacles of the Hippodrome, the success of the fashionable charioteers,
and the struggles between the factions. “The ardour which in the circus
inflames men's minds with extraordinary passion is a marvellous thing,”
says a writer of the sixth century. “Should the green charioteer take
the lead, half the people are in despair ; should the blue one outstrip
his rival, at once half the city is in mourning. Men who have no stake
in the matter give vent to frenzied abuse; men who have suffered no


## p. 759 (#801) ############################################

The Hippodrome and the factions
759
hurt feel gravely injured; for a mere nothing people come to blows,
as though it were a question of saving the country from danger. ” The
gravest of men declared that without the theatre and the hippodrome
“life were totally devoid of joy,” and an Emperor who was a good
psychologist wrote: “We must have games to amuse the people.
Consequently the societies which organised the games in the Circus,
the famous factions of Greens and Blues, were recognised corporations
of public utility, with their presidents or demarchs, their leaders of the
regions, their funds, their places in official ceremonies, in fact a complete
organisation in the form of a kind of urban militia- which put arms
in their hands and rendered them powerful and frequently dangerous.
The whole people ranged itself on one side or the other, according to
the colour favoured, and the Emperor himself took sides passionately in
the struggle between the rival factions; so that the rivalries of the
Circus very often assumed a political aspect, and spread from the Hippo-
drome to the State. The Atmeydān in Constantinople still marks the
site and retains the shape of the Byzantine Circus, where, in the magnifi-
cent arena, along the spina decorated with lofty columns and statues,
the charioteers urged their horses down the track, and where the people
thrilled with excitement at the thousand spectacles-animal-hunting,
combats between men and wild beasts, the feats of acrobats, and the
fooling of clowns—lavished by imperial liberality. But the Hippodrome
was much more than this. It was also the scene of solemn triumphs,
when under the eyes of the people there passed some victorious general,
followed by a train of illustrious prisoners and a display of the wealth
taken from a conquered world. Here also was the scene of public execu-
tions, which gratified the taste for cruelty and blood always existent in
the Byzantine populace. But it was still something more. It took the
place of the ancient Forum as one of the centres of public life. Here,
and here only, the people could give vent to their feelings, their spirit
of opposition and discontent, and here they retained their right to hiss
or applaud anyone, even the Emperor. In the Circus the new Basileus
came for the first time in contact with his people; in the Circus there
sometimes occurred—as, for instance, at the beginning of the Nika riot-
really tragic scenes, the prelude to mutiny or revolution; in the Circus,
amid the execrations of the people, there sometimes closed the existence
of the dethroned and tortured Emperor. For over two hundred years,
from the fifth to the seventh century, the factions of the Circus main-
tained a profound and ceaseless agitation in the Byzantine State; they
were in the forefront of all the insurrections, all the revolutions, in
which the Hippodrome was often the battlefield or the chief fortress.
The government indeed gradually succeeded in taming the factions; it
appointed as their leaders democrats, who were great officers of the crown;
and they became more and more official corporations, which on the days
of great ceremony lined the streets on the sovereign's way and greeted
CH, XXIV.


## p. 760 (#802) ############################################

760
The populace
him with their rhythmic acclamations. But, although less formidable to
the State, the games of the Hippodrome were no less dear to the people,
and the population of the capital still remained a source of constant
preoccupation to the imperial government.
It was not an easy matter to keep the peace in this cosmopolitan multi-
tude, constantly augmented by the undesirables who flocked from the
provinces to the capital, an idle populace, impressionable, restless, turbu-
lent, and discontented, which passed with equal facility from cheers to
abuse, from enjoyment to mutiny, from enthusiasm to discouragement.
Agitators found it easy to exert an influence over this superstitious and
devout populace, always ready to believe the prophecies of soothsayers
or the miracles of the holy images, and to credit all the rumours, false or
true, which were abroad in the city. In a few hours the multitude
became excited and infuriated; they were passionately interested in
religious and political questions, and under the leadership of the monks
who directed them, or of politicians who made use of them, they often
imposed their will on the palace. Eager for gossip, they delighted in
pamphlets, in abuse, in brawling and idle opposition. Moreover there
was much corruption in the city. Houses of ill-fame established them-
selves at the very church doors; in the police orders are recorded the
impious blasphemies, the rage for gambling, the licentious morals, the
affrays which constantly took place in drinking-booths, and the con-
sequent necessity of closing the latter at seven o'clock in the evening,
the number of thieves, and the insecurity of the streets during the night.
“If Constantinople,” said a writer of the twelfth century, “surpasses all
other cities in wealth, she also surpasses them in vice. " Thus it was a
hard task for the Prefect of the City, entrusted with the policing of the
capital, to maintain order in this fickle, passionate, bloodthirsty, and
ferocious crowd, always ready to blame the Emperor when dissatisfied
with anything.