No More Learning

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. Exempt from all taxation, the populace were fed by the
government, who distributed bread, wine, and oil gratuitously, and it
was no small matter to ensure supplies for the enormous capital, to
regulate exactly the arrival of wheat from Egypt, as was done by
Justinian, to supervise, as is shown by the Book of the Prefect at the
end of the ninth century, the making of bread and the sale of fish and
meat. Then the populace had to be amused by games in the circus, and
by dazzling pomps and ceremonies, which thus became means of govern-
ment. Above all it had to be mastered, sometimes severely, by bloody
repression. Nevertheless imperial authority had often to yield when
popular fury was unchained. From the twelfth century onwards, we
even find the dregs of the Byzantine people, the poorer classes of the
great cities, becoming organised to give voice to their demands, and for
social struggles; the history of the “ Naked” (youvoi) in Corfù in the
twelfth century, and that of the “ Zealots” in Thessalonica in the four-
teenth, betray a vague tendency towards a communistic movement.
לי


## p. 761 (#803) ############################################

III.
Bazaars and gilds
761
But Constantinople was also a great industrial and commercial town.
Between the square of the Augusteum and that of the Taurus, all
along the great street of the Mese, there stretched the quarter of the
bazaars. Here were exhibited in great quantity the products of the
luxury trades, sumptuous materials in bright colours embroidered richly
in gold, a monopoly jealously guarded for themselves by the Byzantines ;
wonderful specimens of the goldsmith's art; jewels glittering with rubies
and pearls; bronzes inlaid with silver ; enamels cloisonné in gold;
delicately carved ivories ; icons of mosaic—in fact everything in the way
of rare and refined luxury known to the Middle Ages. There, at work
under the porticoes in the open air, might be seen the innumerable
craftsmen of Byzantine industry, jewellers, skinners, saddlers, wax-
chandlers, bakers, etc. , the tables of the money-changers heaped with
coin, the stalls of the grocers who sold meat and salt fish, four and
cheese, vegetables, oil, butter, and honey in the street; and the stalls of
the perfume-sellers, set up in the very square of the Palace, at the foot
of a venerable icon, the Christ of the Chalce, “in order," says a docu-
ment at the end of the ninth century, “to perfume the sacred image as
is fitting, and to impart charm to the palace vestibule. ” And it is
evident how much all this resembles the Eastern colour still apparent in
present-day Stamboul. Farther on, close to the Long Portico, between
the Forum of Constantine and the Taurus, was the quarter of the silk and
linen merchants, where each branch of the trade had its own place. In the
Taurus and the Strategion were sold sheep and pigs, in the Amastrianon
horses; on the quays of the Golden Horn was the fish-market. And all
day long in the bazaars of the main street, an active and incessant move-
ment of business was kept up by an animated, noisy, and cosmopolitan
crowd.
The industrial corporations were each hedged round by very strict
administrative regulations. Constantinople in the Middle Ages was, as
has been said, “ the paradise of monopoly, privilege, and protection. ”
There was no liberty of labour. Under the superintendence of the Pre-
fect of the City, the various trades were organised in hermetically closed
gilds, minutely regulated in everything concerning membership, wages,
methods of manufacture, conditions of work, and prices. Industrial life
was watched over in every detail by government officials, often very
inquisitorial in their methods. On the other hand, these gilds were
protected by severe measures limiting or suppressing foreign competition. /
In the Book of the Prefect, an ordinance dating from the reign of Leo VI,
we see the essential features of this economic system, and also the nature
of the most important of these gilds, which is worthy of note. Some of
them were occupied in provisioning the capital, others in building, as
was natural in a great city where many
edifices were under construction.
CH. XXIV.


## p. 762 (#804) ############################################

762
Commerce
Most were employed in manufacturing articles of luxury, and this was
indeed the characteristic feature of Byzantine industry, which was essen-
tially a luxury-industry. Finally, the money market, represented by the
very numerous money-changers and bankers, who were highly respected
in Constantinople, naturally held a prominent position in a city which
was one of the great markets of the world.
By her geographical position, situated as she was at the point of
contact between the East and the West, Constantinople was the great
emporium in which the commerce of the world became centralised.
Through Syria and by the Red Sea the Empire was in communication
with the Far East; and either directly, or by way of the Persians, and
later of the Arabs, it came into touch with Ceylon and China. Through
the Black Sea and the Caspian Sea, spices, aromatic essences, and precious
stones reached it from Central Asia. Towards the North trade-routes
extended even to the Scandinavians and the Russians, who supplied
Byzantium with furs, honey, wax, and slaves. The Byzantine merchants,
Syrians, especially in the fifth and sixth centuries, and Armenians pene-
trated to Africa, Italy, Spain, and Gaul. Until the eleventh century
the Byzantine merchant marine, under the protection of the imperial
fleet, dominated the Mediterranean. Merchandise from the whole world
poured into the markets of the capital. Paul the Silentiary, a poet of
the sixth century, pleasantly describes the trading vessels of the universe
sailing full of hope towards the queenly city, and even the winds con-
spiring to bring the goods which enriched her citizens. There was there-
fore ceaseless activity all day long in the port, alike near the Golden
Horn and on the shores of the Propontis. Thither Asiatics from
Trebizond and Chaldia brought their spices and perfumes, Syrians and
Arabs their sumptuous silken robes and their carpets, merchants from
Pontus and Cerasus their cloth, Russians their salt fish, caviar, salt,
and furs, and Bulgarians their flax and honey. Western merchants, first
of all from Amalfi and Venice, later from Pisa and Genoa, as well as
Catalans and “ Celts from beyond the Alps," played an ever-increasing
part in this great business activity. From the tenth century there were
special places reserved for the warehouses and colonies of the Venetians
along the Golden Horn, and from the thirteenth century for the Genoese
at Galata. By the liberality of the Emperors, they secured substantial
reductions on the custom-house dues levied on the ingress and egress to
the Dardanelles, as well as important privileges for their compatriots,
and thus, from the twelfth century, they gradually became masters of all
the trade of the capital, to the great discontent of the Byzantines. Thé
economic policy of the Emperors contributed not a little to this result;
Byzantium shewed scanty interest in opening commercial channels and
conducting her own export trade, but took pride in seeing all the world
meet on the shores of the Bosphorus, to seek precious merchandise and
bring their gold. The inevitable consequence was that, in the rich market


## p. 763 (#805) ############################################

Culture
763
לל
of the East, Byzantium insensibly allowed herself to be supplanted by
younger and more active nations. But, in spite of this mistaken policy,
Constantinople nevertheless remained throughout centuries “a great
business centre,” to quote the expression of Benjamin of Tudela, “whither
merchants come from all countries of the world," a marvellously prosperous
and wealthy city. It has been calculated that, in the twelfth century,
in the city of Constantinople alone, the Emperors received from shop-
rents, and narket and custom-dues, the enormous annual revenue of
7,300,000 solidi of gold.
Finally Constantinople was a great intellectual city.
We have already alluded to the fact that, in spite of all she owed
to contact with the East and to the influence of Christianity, Byzantine
civilisation had remained imbued with the spirit of antiquity. In no
other place in the medieval world had the classical tradition been retained
so completely as in Byzantium, in no other place had direct contact
with Hellenism been so well maintained. Politically, the Byzantine
Empire could indeed claim the name of Rome and to be her heir,
intellectually she was firmly rooted in the fertile soil of ancient Greece.
In the rest of medieval Europe Greek was a foreign language, which
was difficult to learn and which even the most eminent intellects for
long found hard to understand. In Byzantium Greek was the national
language; and this fact alone was enough to bestow on Byzantine
civilisation an absolutely different aspect from that of other medieval
civilisations. There, it was never necessary to discover Greek antiquity
anew.
The Byzantine libraries were richly endowed with all the wealth of
Greek literature, and in them there existed many works of which we
have only preserved the title and the bare memory. The nature and
extent of reading shewn in the works of Byzantine authors prove no
less what close contact Byzantium had kept with the classical master-
pieces. Greek literature was the very foundation of Byzantine education.
An important place was indeed reserved for the Scriptures, the works of
the Fathers, the lives of saints, and sometimes also for mathematics and
music; but grammar, rhetoric, dialectic, the perusal and annotation of
the classical masterpieces, were its essential features. Every cultivated
person had studied Homer, “the all-wise Homer," as he was called by
Tzetzes, and not only Homer but Hesiod and Pindar, the tragic poets
and Aristophanes, historians such as Thucydides and Polybius, orators
such as Demosthenes, the treatises of Aristotle and the dialogues of
Plato, as well as Theocritus, Plutarch, Libanius, and Lucian. When we
consider the extent of learning shewn by an imperial princess such as
Anna Comnena, who prided herself on having studied “Hellenism from
end to end,” or by a man of high descent such as Photius, or by
a lettered member of the middle class such as Michael Psellus, we
וי
CH, XXIV.


## p. 764 (#806) ############################################

764
The University of Constantinople
realise what were the character and extent of this education throughout
all classes of society. From the ninth to the fourteenth century the
schools of Constantinople were renowned throughout the whole world,
in the Arab East as in the Latin West. An author of the thirteenth
century has left a picturesque sketch of the eager life led there-very
like that led in the Musulman universities of the present day-and of
the subtle arguments which went on all day long in the school of the
Holy Apostles, between grammarians and dialecticians, doctors, mathe-
maticians, and musicians. But above all the University of Constantinople
was the incomparable home of the classical tradition.
Founded in the fifth century by the Emperor Theodosius II, recon-
stituted in the ninth century in the palace of Magnaura by Caesar
Bardas, protected with careful solicitude by the Emperors of the tenth
century, the University was an admirable school of philosophy and
science. The “masters of the rhetors," who were alike grammarians,
philologists, and humanists, lectured on the texts of the poets, historians,
and orators of ancient Greece. The “consuls of the philosophers
studied Aristotle and Plato, and from the eleventh century onwards
teachers such as Psellus and John Italus preluded that Platonic renais-
sance which was to be the glory of the fifteenth century in Italy. Men
of science, mathematicians, astronomers, and naturalists rendered services
comparable, as is declared by a good judge, to those rendered by Roger
Bacon in the West. The School of Law, which had been so flourishing
in the days of Justinian, was reorganised in the eleventh century.
Medicine was the object of learned research.
But education was mainly
based on the study of the classical masterpieces. In the eleventh century
Psellus interpreted the ancient texts with an enthusiasm for Athens
which betrayed itself in striking and charming touches. In the twelfth
century Eustathius of Thessalonica wrote commentaries on Homer and
Pindar. The great professors of the days of the Palaeologi, such as
Planudes, Moschopulus, and Triclinius, were admirable philologists
inspired already with the spirit of humanism. Round them there flocked
students drawn from every part of the Empire, and also from the Arab
world and from the distant West; the success of their teaching was
prodigious and its influence profound. The whole of Byzantine society
in its literary tastes and its writings seems to have been imbued with the
spirit of antiquity. The language used by most of the great Byzantine
authors is a learnéd, almost artificial, language, entirely modelled on the
classical masterpieces, and quite unrelated to the spoken tongue, which
came to approximate more and more to its modern form. And from all
this there arose a remarkable movement of thought of which Byzantine
literature is the significant expression.
This is not the place in which to write the history of Byzantine
literature. To indicate the position it occupied in the civilisation of
the Empire, it will be enough to mention its different periods, its


## p. 765 (#807) ############################################

Literature: history
765
principal tendencies, and to describe the general features which
characterised it.
In the history of ideas, as in the history of art and in political
history, the sixth century was a brilliant and fruitful period, still imbued
with Hellenic influence, which in history as in poetry and eloquence still
appeared to be continuing the development of classical Greek literature.
The grave crisis through which the Empire passed between the seventh
and ninth centuries caused a notable slackening in the intellectual
movement; literature then assumed an almost exclusively ecclesiastical
character; this was undoubtedly the feeblest period in the history of
thought in Byzantium. But after the middle of the ninth century,
contact being restored with the ancient culture, a renaissance came
about, simultaneously with the political renaissance experienced by the
Empire under the government of the princes of the Macedonian family,
and with the renaissance of art, likewise inspired by the classical tradi-
tion. The tenth century appears especially as an era of scientists and
learned men, intent on compiling in vast encyclopaedias an inventory of
all the intellectual riches inherited from the past. On these foundations
later generations were to build. The eleventh and twelfth centuries
were a period of extraordinary brilliancy in history, philosophy, and
eloquence. And notwithstanding the crisis of 1204, this great activity
of thought lasted until the days of the Palaeologi when, during the four-
teenth and fifteenth centuries, both Byzantine literature and Byzantine
art experienced an ultimate renaissance, as though, on the eve of the
final catastrophe, Byzantium had gathered all her energies in a last
magnificent expansion.
At every period in this great movement of ideas, history was the
favourite form of expression of Byzantine thought, and in this, and in
religious poetry, we find the most remarkable manifestation of the
Byzantine genius. To shew the prodigious wealth and infinite variety
of this class of literature it will be enough to recall the names of its
most famous representatives: in the sixth century Procopius, Agathias,
and Menander; in the tenth Constantine Porphyrogenitus and Leo
Diaconus; in the eleventh Psellus and Michael Attaliates; in the twelfth
Nicephorus Bryennius, Anna Comnena, Cinnamus, and Nicetas ; in the
thirteenth Acropolita and Pachymeres; in the fourteenth Nicephorus
Gregoras and John Cantacuzene; and finally, in the fifteenth, Chal-
condyles, Ducas, Phrantzes, and Critobulus. In addition there were
chroniclers, such as Malalas in the sixth century; Theophanes and
Nicephorus at the end of the eighth ; George Monachus and Simeon
Magister in the tenth ; Scylitzes in the eleventh; and Cedrenus and
Zonaras in the twelfth. If we compare some of these great historians
with their contemporaries in the Latin West, we shall recognise that the
Greeks are on an undoubtedly higher intellectual plane, by their political
insight, the delicacy of their psychology, their sense of composition, and
CH, XXIV.


## p. 766 (#808) ############################################

766
Literature: theology
the quality of their language. And there are some of them, for instance
Psellus, who by the picturesque precision of their descriptions, their
acuteness of observation, and the raciness and humour of their style, are
equal to the greatest in any literature.
This was partly because all these writers had behind them a long
tradition by which they were inspired. In Byzantium history was closely
allied to the classical past; in like manner theology, which, with history,
was the subject which undoubtedly most interested Byzantine thought,
was always dominated by the Christian past. Here again, to shew the
abundance of their literature, it will be enough to mention a few names :
Leontius of Neapolis in the sixth century; John Damascenus and
Theodore of Studion in the eighth ; Photius in the ninth ; Psellus in
the eleventh; Euthymius Zigabenus, Nicholas of Methone, and Nicetas
Acominatus in the twelfth ; during the last centuries of the Empire the
great representatives of Eastern mysticism, Palamas and the two Cabasilas,
and the followers of Western scholastic philosophy, Gregory Acyndinus,
Demetrius Cydones, and Nicephorus Gregoras ; and in the fifteenth
century the adversaries and the friends of the Latins, Marcus Eugenicus,
George Scholarius, and Bessarion. There were also the hagiographic
writers whose work was summed up in the tenth century in the vast.
collection of Simeon Metaphrastes; and the masters of religious eloquence,
whose most famous representatives—Photius in the ninth century,
Eustathius of Thessalonica and Michael Acominatus in the twelfth-
greatly superior to most of the contemporary Western preachers. And
here again it is an undoubted fact that this theological literature was, as
a whole, at least until the twelfth century, greatly superior to anything
similar produced by the West.
However, the powerful influence exerted on all minds by the classical
or Christian past was not without drawbacks. The constant effort to
adhere to classical models bestowed a singularly artificial style on his-
torical writing. The incessant fear felt by theologians lest they should
depart from the tradition of the Fathers deprived their ideas of much
originality and freedom, especially after the middle of the ninth century.
In spite, however, of these shackles, Byzantium was sometimes capable of
creative work. It is the immortal glory of Michael Psellus that in the
eleventh century he restored the Platonic doctrine to its place in educa-
tion, and he inaugurated a movement of free thought which was a source
of serious disquietude to the Church; and it was likewise by means of
Byzantines—Gennadius, Gemistus Plethon, and Bessarion—that, in the
fifteenth century, the West became acquainted with Platonic thought.
It is the immortal glory of Romanus, “ le premier des mélodes,” that, at
the dawn of the sixth century, by his hymns full of ardent inspiration,
heartfelt sincerity, and intense dramatic power, he created that school of
religious poetry which is indeed the most personal expression of the
Byzantine genius. It is the glory of the philologists of the fourteenth
-were


## p. 767 (#809) ############################################

Poetry. Art
767
century that, as we have seen, they initiated the great movement towards
humanism. Many other instances might be cited to shew alike the
variety and creative power of this literature. It must however be ad-
mitted that as a whole, in spite of the real talent of many of its writers,
it often lacks freshness, spontaneity, and life, and that, being almost the
exclusive property of the learned, it very quickly became more and more
unintelligible to the mass of the Greek people.
It was exactly for this reason that, little by little, the spoken language
found a place in literature, and here a masterpiece made its appearance.
This was the popular epic, a cycle of chansons de geste, of which the
poem of Digenes Akritas is the most celebrated example, and which
about the eleventh century collected round the name of some national
hero. In this epic poetry, as in religious poetry, Byzantium owed nothing
to ancient models. Its form and language were new, it had its roots in
the depths of the Byzantine soul, the Christian soul of the people; thence
it derived its freshness of inspiration and of thought. It also proves, with
other works, that in spite of its close dependence on the past, in spite of
the learned and artificial style which it too often assumed, Byzantine
literature, alike by the free circulation of ideas which it exhibits and the
creative originality which it often displayed, deserves a place in the history
of Byzantine civilisation.
Byzantine art was one of the most brilliant expressions of Byzantine
civilisation, and also one of the most characteristic. Everywhere in it we
find that love of stupendous luxury and of prodigious splendour which
Byzantium displayed at every period of her history. In the decoration
of churches and palaces it is always the same story-precious marbles,
glittering mosaics, magnificent work in gold and silver, and wonderful
hangings, all intended to enhance the beauty of the rites of religion,
and the majesty of the imperial person ; in public and private life
nothing but sumptuous tissues shot with purple and gold, finely carved
ivories, bronzes inlaid with silver, richly illuminated manuscripts, enamels
cloisonné in resplendent colours, gold and silver plate, and costly jewels.
Whether, by decorating the walls of churches with the pageant of sacred
history skilfully disposed, this art was intent on glorifying God, on
expressing an article of faith, on interpreting the liturgical rites, or
whether, to glorify the majesty of the sovereign and to give pleasure to
the court and to the grandees, it was depicting in a more profane spirit
subjects borrowed from classical history or mythology, picturesque scenes
dear to Hellenistic art, as well as historical paintings, representations of
imperial victories, and portraits of the princes in their glory, every-
where we find that love of magnificence which even to-day makes us
visualise Byzantium in a jewelled iridescence, in a shimmer of gold.
It must not, however, be thought that, as is too often said, this art
was a lifeless and monotonous one, incapable of transformation or
CH. XXIV.


## p. 768 (#810) ############################################

768
Art (a) in the age of Justinian,
renewal. Like Byzantine literature it remained, indeed, firmly attached
to classical tradition and constantly returned to classical models for
fresh sources of inspiration and occasionally for fresh methods. Like the
whole of Byzantine civilisation it had, indeed, been greatly influenced by
the East, and had thence derived a taste for realism and colour, and it
had received an even deeper imprint from Christianity, which, while
using it for the service of the Church, also brought it under her guardian-
ship and subjection. Because of all this, and also because it was essentially
an official art, Byzantine art often lacked freshness, spontaneity, and life;
it was often both an imitation and a copy; in its excessive attachment
to tradition, and docility to the Church, it too often and too quickly
translated its most fertile discoveries into immutable formulas. Never-
theless the fact remains that this art shewed itself capable of creation,
that at least twice in the course of its thousand years' existence it suc-
ceeded in regaining a new vigour and experiencing an unlooked-for revival,
and that by combining the various tendencies under whose influence it
had come it succeeded in assuming an original form “responding to the
real genius of the people. ”
Justinian's reign marks the decisive moment when, after a long period
of preparation and experiment, Byzantine art found its definitive
formula
and at the same time attained its apogee. “At this moment,” says
Choisy with much discrimination, “ the evolution was complete. All the
methods of construction were fixed, all types of buildings had been produced
and were being applied at the same time, without exclusion or prejudice;
the polygonal design found new life in St Sergius at Constantinople and
San Vitale at Ravenna; the basilican form recurs in the church of the
Mother of God in Jerusalem ; the cruciform plan with five domes appears
in the reconstruction of the church of the Holy Apostles ; St Sophia in
Salonica presents the type of a church with a central dome, of which the
churches of Athos and Greece are only variants. ” Finally, St Sophia at
Constantinople, a marvel of science and audacity, is the original and
magnificent masterpiece of the new style. In these buildings, so varied in
type and plan, in which the creative fertility of Byzantine art shews
itself, a sumptuous decoration clothes the walls with many-coloured
marbles and dazzling mosaics with backgrounds of blue and gold, such as
are to be seen in Sant' Apollinare Nuovo or in San Vitale at Ravenna,
and at Parenzo in Istria, or such as could be seen at St Demetrius in
Salonica before the fire of 1917. These same tendencies-love of luxury,
and a combination of the classical spirit and Eastern realism-are revealed
in all the works of this period, in the miniatures which illustrate the Genesis
and the Dioscorides in Vienna, the Joshua and the Cosmas at the Vatican,
the Bible of Florence, the Gospels of Rossano, in the ivories, and in the
tissues; everywhere we find this striving after decorative effect, this love
for brilliant colours, this eagerness for pomp and majesty, which bestow
such imposing beauty on the monuments of this age.


## p. 769 (#811) ############################################

(b) from tenth to twelfth century, (c) under the Palaeologi 769
ול
This was the first golden age of Byzantine art. But this great effort
was no transitory one. After the iconoclastic crisis, there was a magnifi-
cent revival from the tenth to the twelfth century in the days of the
Macedonian Emperors and the Comneni. Under the influence of the
recovered classical and secular tradition Byzantium then experienced a
marvellous efflorescence of art. Unfortunately nothing is left of the
Imperial Palace, nor of the Nea, the “New” basilica which was one of the
masterpieces of the new style. But the little churches in Constantinople,
Salonica, and Greece are enough to shew how Byzantine architects suc-
ceeded in making charming and ingenious variations on the plan of a
Greek cross, and how they sought inspiration sometimes in simple lines,
sometimes in harmonious complexity, in the picturesque effects taught
by the Hellenistic tradition or in the austere and grave ideal, with
large masses and firm lines, derived from the Eastern tradition. The
mosaics of St Luke in Phocis and of Daphni in Attica in their admirable
blending of colour and decorative effect reveal the skilful arrangement of
this iconography, an achievement alike artistic and theological, which
devoted profound thought to the inspiration and scheme of the decora-
tions in sacred edifices, and which was one of the most remarkable
creations of the Byzantine genius. The same mastery is visible in the
beautiful manuscripts illuminated for the Emperors, the Gregory Nazian-
zene and the Psalter of Paris, the Menologium in the Vatican, the
Psalter of Venice, and in all the examples of the minor arts, such as ivory
triptychs, reliquaries or bindings set with enamels, the figured or
embroidered silken stuffs. No doubt during this second golden age, under
the influence of theology, art sacrificed a great deal to decorum, to
discipline, and to respect for tradition. Nevertheless there is evident,
especially in the imperial and secular art of which there remain only too
few examples, a search for the picturesque, an often realistic observation
of life, and a feeling for colour, which shew a continual desire for renewal,
and foreshadow the evolution whence was derived the last renaissance of
Byzantine art during the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries.
The mosaics of Qahrīye-jāmi', the frescoes at Mistra, the churches in
Athos, Macedonia, Serbia, and Russia bear witness to the marvellous
expansion which Byzantine art experienced in the days of the Palaeologi.
Once again Byzantine art was transformed; it became living, picturesque,
dramatic, emotional, and charming; its iconography became enriched
and renewed itself, more pathetic and more impassioned ; its skilful and
harmonious use of colour seems almost impressionistic. Schools were
formed and works comparable to the creations of the Italian Primitives
were produced.
In the course of its thousand years' history, the Byzantine monarchy
experienced many unexpected and striking revivals, in which, according
to the phrase of one chronicler, “that old mother, the Empire, appeared
like a young girl adorned with gold and precious stones. ” Byzantine art
ר
C. MED. H. VOL. IV. CH. XXIV.
49


## p. 770 (#812) ############################################

770
The provinces : the towns
underwent similar experiences; it also became transformed and renovated.
And Constantinople, which, as Rambaud has justly remarked, was more
than once in the course of her long history herself the whole Empire,
and which, on the very brink of the catastrophe which threatened destruc-
tion, succeeded in striking out a path of salvation and renewed life,
likewise represents by the monuments which are preserved the evolution
and greatness of Byzantine art. St Sophia and the other monuments of
Justinian's reign, the charming churches of the period of the Macedonians
and the Comneni, and the mosaics of Qahrīye-jāmi', testify to the
splendour and the transformations of this art, and, in spite of the loss of
so many other monuments, are enough to shew what a marvellously
artistic city she was, and why for centuries she appeared as the real
centre of the civilised world.
IV.
Constantinople was not the only great city in the Empire. All round
the shores of the Eastern Mediterranean, at the termini of the known
and frequented trade-routes, flourishing towns were to be found, active
centres of exchange, at which were gathered the merchants and mer-
chandise of the whole world. Among them, until the seventh century
when they were taken from the Empire by the Arab conquest, were
Alexandria in Egypt and the Syrian ports. Later there were the great
cities of Asia Minor, Tarsus, Ephesus, Smyrna, Phocaea, and Trebizond,
which last was from the thirteenth to the fifteenth century to be the
capital of a powerful state. In Europe there was Thessalonica, which
was, after Constantinople, the most important economic centre of the
European provinces and which boasted that it was particularly dear to
the Emperor's heart. There, every year at the end of October, on the
occasion of the feast of St Demetrius, the patron and celestial protector
of the city, was held a famous fair in the plain of the Vardar, to which
for business transactions there resorted Greeks and Slavs, Italians and
Spaniards, “ Celts from beyond the Alps," and men who came from the
distant shores of the Atlantic. In this great city of commerce and wealth,
sumptuous churches testified to the riches of the inhabitants and their
love of magnificence; of these the most famous was the basilica of St
Demetrius. In many provinces of the Empire, a flourishing industry was
engaged in the manufacture of those articles of luxury which were
the glory of Byzantine work-shops. Thebes, Corinth, and Patras were
famous for their silks ; Thessalonica was renowned for its activity in the
arts of smelting and metal-work. Heavy gold brocade, magnificent silken
stuffs dyed in dark violet or in bright purple and covered with embroidery,
fine linens, marvellous goldsmith's work, cloisonné enamel, elegant
glass-work, all came from the hands of Byzantine artisans. And it was
to this industrial and commercial activity that the Byzantine Empire,


## p. 771 (#813) ############################################

The countryside: the “powerful” and the “poor” 771
the economic centre of the Eastern world, owed long centuries of pro-
digious wealth.
This was not, however, the most original and noteworthy feature
which Byzantine civilisation presented in the provinces. All through
the Empire, but especially in the Asiatic provinces, were to be found
vast domains whose proprietors, with their retinue of clients, vassals,
and soldiers, led an entirely feudal existence on their estates. Very early,
both in the Byzantine East and in the Latin West, a twofold social
phenomenon was observable. In the general insecurity of a troubled
time the obscure, the poor, and the weak sought the patronage (patro-
cinium) of some powerful and wealthy neighbour, and in return for the
advantages they reaped from this protection, they bartered their liberty
and became the clients and vassals of the great noble who was to defend
them. On the other hand the great landowners, the “powerful" (duvatoi)
as they were called, made use of their power to increase their lands at the
expense of the small landholders; and thus small independent holdings
disappeared at the same time as the freemen.
On the enormous estates which thus came into existence lived those
great feudal families whose names fill Byzantine history. In Asia there
were the Phocas, Scleri, Dalasseni, Ducas, Comneni, and Palaeologi ; in
Europe the Bryennii, Melisseni, Cantacuzenes, and many others. Very
rich from the lands they possessed and which they were constantly
augmenting by their usurpations, very powerful from the number of
clients and vassals whom they collected round them, they added to these
causes of influence the prestige of the high offices which the Emperor
entrusted to them, and they increased their riches by the salaries and
endowments which the government distributed among them.
amongst these great nobles indeed that the Basileus found his best
servants and his most illustrious generals. But, in spite of the services
it rendered, this landed aristocracy created a formidable danger for the
Empire. A serious social question arose from the ninth century onwards
in the Byzantine world confronted by the two classes, the “powerful"
(δυνατοί) and the “poor” (πένητες).
The disappearance of the free peasant had the effect of robbing the
State of taxable material, necessary for a satisfactory state of the finances;
the disappearance of the small freeholds, especially of those military fiefs
which the Emperors had established as one of the bases of recruiting,
robbed the army, of which the hardy peasants were the essential nucleus,
of its best soldiers. To defend the small holdings and the middle class
of small peasant proprietors, and to check the usurpations of the “power-
ful,” the Emperors of the ninth and tenth centuries struggled energetically
and even violently with the great feudal barons, and for a time, during
the reign of Basil II, it seemed as though they had conquered. But it
was only in appearance. From the eleventh century the aristocracy
raised its head once more and took its revenge. When, at the beginning
It was
CH. XXIV.
49--2


## p. 772 (#814) ############################################

772
Power of the great nobles
of the thirteenth century, the Latins conquered the Byzantine Empire,
they easily identified the Greek archon with the Western baron, and
the peasant tied to the land (Trápoukos) with the villeins they had at
home. And indeed the place occupied in this apparently absolute
monarchy by feudalism was not the least curious nor the least surprising
thing in the history of Byzantium.
Nor was this all. By the fact of regional recruiting, the soldiers who
were placed under the command of these great nobles in the army were
very often their clients and vassals in civil life; they knew their leaders,
their illustrious descent, their wealth, and their exploits; they appreci-
ated their liberality and the value of their protection. These soldiers
therefore displayed whole-hearted devotion and fidelity to their generals;
they obeyed these leaders whom they admired much more readily than
the distant Emperor. Moreover, although the great barons were generally
faithful subjects, they were always unruly ones; they treated the Emperor
almost as an equal; they considered that they had a right to give him
advice, and were very much surprised if he did not follow it in every par-
ticular. Finally, a firm solidarity arising from community of interests, rein-
forced by numerous family marriages and maintained by a common life of
exploits and dangers, united the members of this aristocracy. Entrenched
in their impregnable castles, proud of their wealth, their popularity, and
their prestige, these great feudal lords were therefore quite naturally
inclined to lay down the law to the Emperor, to express their dissatis-
faction, or to manifest their ambition by formidable insurrections. The
second half of the tenth century was full of these great feudal insurrections,
with which are associated the names of Bardas Phocas and Bardas Sclerus,
and which caused such serious trouble to the Byzantine Empire. There
we see what close bonds of devotion and fidelity united the great barons
and the men of their native province, how community of interests and of
sentiments made all these archons into one caste, and what proud and
magnificent figures were produced by this aristocratic Byzantine society.
The epic of Digenes Akritas gives a good picture of the life of these
great Asiatic barons, a life of luxury, wealth, and splendour; the beauty
of their palaces built in the midst of gardens and glittering with jewels
and gold and with shining mosaics ; the marvellous feasts which were
given in these castles, the unparalleled extravagance of costume and
arms, the great hunting expeditions, the adventures in love and in war,
and the wonderful exploits of which their life was full. There also is
shewn the independent temper of these great barons; and above all we
realise the violent and brutal, chivalrous and heroic, existence which was
led on the frontiers of Asia, subject to the perpetual menace of a Muslim
invasion and to the constant care for the defence of the Empire and the
Orthodox religion. It was a land of fine feats of arms, of single combats,
abductions, pillage, massacres, adventure, war. No doubt the epic has
embellished it with a touch of the marvellous ; it has adorned with grace


## p. 773 (#815) ############################################

The Byzantine character
773
and courtesy the real and permanent background of brutality and cruelty
which characterised this society. Nevertheless it explains how good a
preparation for life and for warfare this rough existence was to these
men of the provinces, and how it enabled these indefatigable warriors to
become the real strength of the monarchy.
The provinces, and especially the Asiatic provinces, supplied the
Empire with its best soldiers and with the greater part of the crews for
the fleet. The themes of Anatolia, as has been said, “really formed the
Roman Empire. ” When contrasted with the capital, the Byzantine
provinces appear as a hardy element, healthy and strong, with their
rough peasants, their tenants of military fiefs (raßartupcoi), and their
great nobles marvellously trained for war from boyhood. These men
indeed had their faults and they were often dangerous to the Empire.
The curious little book in which one of them, Cecaumenus, towards the
middle of the eleventh century summed up the lessons of his long experi-
ence, and of his realistic and somewhat disillusioned wisdom, reveals them
as rather mistrustful of the capital as too refined, too elegant, and of the
court as too fertile in humiliations and disgraces. They lived on their
estates and were eager to enrich themselves; as loyal and faithful subjects
they served in the army; above all, they wished to remain independent.
But such as they were, they were the strength of the Empire. As long
as Byzantium was mistress of Asia, she was strong militarily and economi-
cally. When, at the end of the eleventh century, she lost the greater
part of Anatolia, it was a terrible blow from which the Empire never
recovered.
V.
We must now seek to ascertain from the sources at our disposal
what was the mentality of the medieval Greeks, and to discover the
general character, so complex and cornplicated, of the Byzantine mind.
We have already described some of the dominant tastes of this society,
the place held by religion both in public and private life, the love of
shows, of ceremonies, of the games in the circus, the taste for intrigue
and for magnificence; we have referred to the industrial and commercial
activity, the stout military energy, and above all the intellectual
superiority which characterised it. To arrive at a complete understanding
of the Byzantine character, we must also remember of how many dif-
ferent elements and how many different races this medieval Greek society
was composed. Situated on the borders of Asia and Europe, and subject
alike to the influences of the Persian and Arabian East and the infiltration
of all the Northern barbarians, this society was essentially cosmopolitan.
Here Slavs, Thracians, Armenians, Caucasians, Italians, and Arabs met
and mingled; certain races, such as Slavs and Armenians, at certain
moments exercised a preponderating influence. By the prestige and
power of her civilisation Byzantium indeed succeeded in assimilating
CH. XXIV.


## p. 774 (#816) ############################################

774
Oriental, Greek, and Christian influences
יל
and transforming these apparently opposed and refractory elements, and
such was the strength of the classical tradition with which this society was
imbued that Hellenism stamped its impress deep on all these foreigners,
and that Greek, the language of the Church, of the administration, and
of the literature, acquired, as has been said by Rambaud, “a false air of
being the national language” in the Byzantine Empire. But under this
common stamp there existed many contrasts, and the Byzantine mind
presented a mixture, often contradictory and sometimes disconcerting,
of high qualities and startling vices.
In many ways the Byzantine was an Oriental. As we have seen, he
delighted in magnificent spectacles ; it did not displease him if these
spectacles were bloody and savage. We know the atrocity of Byzantine
punishments, the refinements of torture with which the people wreaked
their
anger on their victims. By contact with the East these Greeks
acquired a cruel mentality; they were pitiless as they were unscrupulous;
they delighted in alternations of bloodshed, sensuality, and death. When
their passions were aroused, when their anger was excited, when their
religious or political hatred was unloosed, these nervous and impression-
able people were capable of all kinds of violence. And like the Turks of
the present day, whom they resemble in many particulars, these same
men, when cool, shewed themselves to be gifted with strong qualities
and real virtues. Among the Byzantine middle class, as depicted by
Psellus, and even among the aristocracy, we find charming examples of
the close ties of family life. But in these same exquisite minds there
was sometimes to be found a singular hardness of heart, and their
religious preoccupation encouraged in them a lack of balance and
steadiness, and a mystic exaltation, which rendered them dangerous to
handle.
But, although they were akin to the East, the Byzantines were also
Greeks, keenly interested in all things of the mind, curious about en-
quiries and subtleties of all kinds, and generally intelligent to a very
high degree. Like true Greeks, they delighted in the refinements of
argument, applying the methods of ancient sophistry to religious matters
with a passionate ardour. They delighted in words; in their eyes
eloquence was always the supreme virtue. And they also delighted in
gossip, in raillery, and in abuse, whether it were vulgar or witty. But
although they were thereby indeed the heirs of the Athenians of
Aristophanes, Christianity had given another direction to these tend-
encies. The Byzantines believed in miracles, in soothsayers, in magic,
in astrology; they lived in an atmosphere of exalted mysticism, and
when their piety was involved, they were prepared to sacrifice everything,
even their country, to their desire to prove their case and triumph in
the controversy.
Under this twofold influence a very complex character became formed.
In great moments indeed—and these were frequent—the Byzantines


## p. 775 (#817) ############################################

Virtues and defects of the Byzantines
775
were capable of valour, of delicacy, of disinterestedness, of devotion.
There were many very worthy men in Byzantine society. Nevertheless the
morality of most was indifferent, or even doubtful. In spite of the
apparently severe segregation of feminine life, there was great corruption
in the Greek world of the Middle Ages. The administration, in spite of
the great services it rendered to the State, was honeycombed with vices.
As places were sold, so were favours and justice. To make a fortune and
gain advancement, merit was of less use than intrigue, and even among
the best, by the side of undeniable good qualities, there is visible an
eager pursuit of selfish aims, whether of pleasure or of adventure, wealth
or power, and a manner of conducting life which left too much scope for
skilful acuteness, for successful cunning, and for cleverly calculated
treachery. And this explains why these supple and subtle Greeks, in
spite of their real virtues, were always regarded with distrust by the blunt
and straightforward Latins, and why so many lamentable prejudices
arose in the West against Byzantium which have survived to the present
day.
What is specially noticeable in the Byzantines, who were as extra-
ordinarily ardent for good as for evil, is a frequent lack of balance and
steadiness, and above all a striking discrepancy between their intelligence,
which is unquestionable and often admirable, and their character, which
was not up to the level of their mentality. We feel that they were over-
burdened by their past, that their energies were soon exhausted, and that
they were wanting in moral principles. Whether we consider Psellus,
who was certainly one of the most remarkable men produced by Byzan-
tium, and the most finished type of courtier, or, in a somewhat different
social grade, John Cantacuzene, or again Andronicus Comnenus, or a
provincial mind such as is revealed in the writings of Cecaumenus-every-
where we find the same characteristics: a prudent cleverness untroubled by
idle scruples, a wary caution bordering on cunning, unmeasured ambitions
and vile intrigues, a subtle intelligence which is not supported by
moral principles. But although demoralisation was undoubted and deep-
seated, the Byzantines were always supremely talented. Compared with
the barbarians who surrounded them, these ingenious and cultivated
Greeks, who reflected on complex and difficult themes and speculations,
and who knew how to express their thoughts in fine language, who were
capable of comprehending and discussing the most delicate problems, who
understood how to resolve all the difficulties of life with elegant ingenuity,
and who moreover were not hampered by idle scruples, seem like men of
a higher race, like educators and masters. It was for this reason that
Byzantine civilisation exercised such profound influence on the whole
medieval world, as much by its external splendour as by its innate value,
and that it rendered eminent services alike to the Arabs and Slavs in
the East and to the Latins in the West.
CH. XXIV.


## p. 776 (#818) ############################################

776
The inheritance of Europe from Byzantium
VI.
לל
To the Slav and Oriental world Byzantium was what Rome has been
to the Western and Germanic world, that is to say the great educator,
the great initiator, the bringer both of religion and of civilisation. She
supplied the Serbs, Croats, Bulgars, and Russians, not only with the
Orthodox faith but with all the elements of their future greatness, the
conception of government, the principles of law, the forms of more
refined life and of intellectual and artistic culture. Byzantium gave the
Slavs their alphabet and their literary language on the day when Cyril
and Methodius, “the Apostles of the Slavs,” translated the Scriptures
into a Slavonic dialect for the use of the Moravians whom they were
about to convert, and invented the Glagolitic script in which to write
their translation. Not only by her missionaries but also by her architects
who built churches for the new converts and her artists who decorated
them with mosaics and frescoes, Byzantium brought historic life and
civilisation to all the Slav nations of the East; over all of these and also
over the nations of the Asiatic East, the Armenians and even the Arabs,
she exercised supremacy to a greater or lesser degree, by means of her
literature, her art, her laws, her religion. To all of them she presented
a marvellous model ; and thereby Byzantium accomplished a very great
work in the general history of civilisation.
To the West she also gave many things. For centuries, as we know,
the Greek Empire possessed more or less important parts of Italy, and
the imperial government made so great and successful an effort to
assimilate its Italian subjects, that even under the Norman and Angevin
kings the peninsula seemed like a new Magna Graecia. We have referred
to the active relations which Syrian and Byzantine merchants maintained
in the Western Mediterranean and the numerous establishments founded
there by Greek monks. We have called special attention to the marvellous
prestige which the imperial city enjoyed among Western peoples, and how
all works of art which were difficult of execution or of rare quality were
sought in Constantinople.