Other Variorum Reprints in the Collected Studies series:

ROMILLY J.H. JENKINS

Studies on Byzantine History of the 9th and 10th Centuries

IVAN DUJCEV
Slavia Orthodoxa: collected studies in the history of the Slavic Middle Ages

ANDRÉ GUILLOU
Studies on Byzantine Italy

NIKOLAY ANDREYEV
Studies in Muscovy: Western influence and Byzantine inheritance

HÉLÈNE AHRWEILER
Etudes sur les structures administratives et sociales de Byzance

DIMITRI OBOLENSKY
Byzantium and the Slavs: collected studies
 Byzantium: its internal history
and relations with the Muslim World
Professor Speros Vryonis Jr.
 Speros Vryonis Jr.

Byzantium: its internal history

and relations with the Muslim world
Collected Studies

Preface by Milton V Anastos

VARIORUM REPRINTS
London 1971
 ISBN 0 902089 16 1

Published in Great Britain by

VARIORUM REPRINTS
21a Pembridge Mews London W ll 3EQ

Printed in Switzerland by
REDA SA
1225 Chêne-Bourg Geneva

VARIORUM REPRINT CS7

 CONTENTS
Preface

Acknowledgements

INTERNAL HISTORY
I Hellas Resurgent 92-118
THE TR A N SF O R M A TIO N OF THE RO M AN
W ORLD, ed. L. White. University o f California Press
(Berkeley-Los Angeles, 1966)

II X Byzantium: The Social Basis of Decline in the

Eleventh Century 159-175
In: Greek, Roman and Byzantine Studies, II n.2 (1959).
Cambridge, Massachusetts

III Byzantine ΔΗΜΟΚΡΑΤΙΑ and the Guilds in the

Eleventh Century 289-314
In: Dumbarton Oaks Papers, XVI I ( 1963). The
Dumbarton Oaks Center fo r Byzantine Studies

IV St. lonnicius the Great (754-848) and the “Slavs”

of Bithynia 245-248
In: Byzantion, X X X I (1961)

V The Will of a Provincial Magnate, Eustathius

Boilas (1059) 263-277
In: Dumbarton Oaks Papers, X I (1957). Harvard
University Press

VI The Question of the Byzantine Mines 1-17

In: Speculum, XXXV11 n.l (1962). The Mediaeval

Academy o f America
VII An Attic Hoard of Byzantine Gold Coins (668-741)
from the Thomas Whittemore Collection and the
Numismatic Evidence for the Urban History
of Byzantium 291-300
In: Zbornik Raciova Vizantoloshkog Instituta, VIII
(Belgrade 1963)

VIII Review Article of TRAVAUX ET MEMOIRES,

ed. P. Lemerle, vol. I (Paris 1965) 210-234
In: Byzantina, I (1969)

BYZANTIUM AN D THE MUSLIM WORLD

IX Byzantium and Islam, Seven-Seventeenth Century 205-240

In: East European Quarterly, II n.3 ( 1968)

X Byzantine Circus Factions and Islamic Futuwwa

Organisations (Neaniai, Fityan, Ahdath) 4 6 -5 9
In: Byzantininische Zeitschrift, LVIII ( 1965)

XI The Conditions and Cultural Significance of the

Ottoman Conquest in the Balkans 3-10
Rapport at the lié Congrès international des études du
sud-est européen (Athens, 1970)

XII Seljuk Gulams and the Ottoman Devshirmes 224-252

In: Der Islam, X L I (Berlin, 1965)

XIII Isidore Glabas and the Turkish Devshirme 433-443

In: Speculum, X X X I n.3 (1956). The Mediaeval
Academy o f America

XIV Review article of B. Papoulia, Ursprung und Wesen

der “ Knabenlese” im osmanischen Reich
(Munich, 1963) 145 153
In: Balkan Studies, V ( 1964)
 PREFACE

Professor Vryonis is one o f the most brilliant o f the younger

generation o f Byzantinists, and this selection o f his articles is
reproduced here in order to make the results o f his valuable
researches available to students o f general history. He specializes in
social and economic developments, as well as in the relations
between Byzantium and the Muslims. In all of these areas he has
made important contributions.

Particularly interesting among the materials included in Part I o f

the present volume is his analysis o f the political, social, economic,
and cultural forces which determined the character o f the
Byzantine Empire in the eleventh and subsequent centuries.
Moreover his paper on the Constantinopolitan guilds breaks new
ground and lays the basis for a true understanding o f the economic
structure o f Byzantium. Historians o f economics will profit greatly
also from his essays on the great landed estates, the continuity
between the urban centers o f antiquity and Byzantium, money
economy, and mining.

Vryonis’ papers in Part 11 discuss illuminatingly the influence of

Byzantine forms and institutions not only upon Islamic society in
general but also upon the popular culture o f the Ottomans even
after the Turks had completed their conquest of Asia Minor and
Islamized its inhabitants.

The materials included in Part 11 thus prepare the way for

Vryonis’ monumental forthcoming book, in which he examines
tile process by which Asia Minor was Islamized.

MILTON V. ANASTOS
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I should like here to acknowledge the kindness of several

journals and institutions which granted permission for the
reproduction o f my studies in this volume. These include:
University o f California Press; Duke University Press and the
editor o f Greek Roman and Byzantine Studies; Dumbarton Oaks
Research Library and its Publication Committee; Comité National
Grec des Etudes du Sud-Est Européen; The editors of Byzantion,
Speculum, Byzantina, Zbornik Radova Vizantoloshkog lnstituta,
E ast E u p o p e a n Quarterly, Der Islam, Balkan Studies,
Byzantinische Zeitschrift.

SPEROS VRYON1S, JR.

Internal History
 I

HELLAS RESURGENT

^ T h
H E T IT L E "Hellas Resurgent” will seem to some
JL a euphemism, or perhaps a device intended to pro­
voke a critical audience. Is it justified in the light of all
that has been said about the chaos of the third century,
that chaos which exposed classical civilization to a thun­
derous series of political, economic, spiritual, and intellec­
tual shocks? Even superficial perusal of Gibbon leaves not
the slightest doubt that he would have objected most em­
phatically, if not cholerically, to^'Hellas Resurgent” as a
label for Byzantine civilization.1 There is no mistaking

1 The only quandary in one’s mind arises in determining whether

scholars today will be more outraged by the first half of the title than
Gibbon would have been by the second. The term "H ellas” is used in
this chapter to indicate the Greek cultural tradition which remained
strongest in classical and medieval times among the Greek and Hellen-
ized populations of Greece, Anatolia, and a few isolated spots in
Egypt, Syria, southern Italy, and Sicily. Whether the polyglot Byzan­
tine empire was possessed of a culture that may be characterized as
Greek has been occasionally and passionately debated. In terms of
literary production, there is little question in this matter. The literary
language was Greek, and the models of education and literary pro­
duction were both classical and Christian. A t the same time, disparate
elements from various nonclassical traditions were absorbed into
Byzantine culture. The single most important was the Christian re­
ligion^ by origin Semitic and Monotheistic. B y virtue, however, of the
Christianization of the pagan world of the eastern Mediterranean,
Christianity was itself Hellenizcd (see W. Jaeger, Early Christianity
and Greek Paidcia [Cambridge, 19 6 1] · p. 5). And so it was with
9*
 HELLAS RESURGENT 93
Gibbon’s sentiments: there was no resurgence of Hellas or,
indeed, of anything else. Gibbon’s evaluation of Byzantine
civilization becomes apparent, line after line, paragraph
after paragraph, page after page, throughout his seventy-
one chapters. He sees it as the story of a profound and un­
relenting political and cultural decline, inseparably asso­
ciated with a degenerate, orientalized, Christianized Greek
nation."*w!
In the preface of the first volume which appeared in
February, 1776, Gibbon remarks: "The memorable series
of revolutions, which, in the course of about thirteen cen­
turies, gradually undermined, and at length destroyed, the
solid fabric o f human greatness, may, with some propriety,
be divided into the three following periods.” 2 These three
periods are: ( 1 ) From Trajan to the sixth century; (2)
from Justinian to 800; and (3) from 800 to 1453. From
this periodization, one perceives that his history is one of
colossal decline with a final and inexorable vengeance. Gib­
bon devoted three ponderous tomes to the events of the
first four centuries and one to the remaining 900 years.
The reason for this seeming geometric disproportion he ex­
poses at the beginning of chapter 48 :
I have now deduced from Trajan to Constantine, from
Constantine to Heraclius, the regular series of the Roman
emperors; and faithfully exposed the prosperous and ad­
verse fortunes of their reigns. Five centuries of the decline
and fall of the empire have already elapsed; but a period
of more than eight hundred years still separates me from
the term of my labours, the taking of Constantinople by
the Turks. Should I persevere in the same course, should I
observe the same measure, a prolix and slender thread

many other cultural phenomena. Though it is true that the Byzantine

Empire, like the Roman Empire, was multinational, within the
heartland of the Empire, the Greek peninsula and Anatolia, the
predominating element was that of the Greek speakers.
J Decline anil l, reface: I, v -v i.
Pa
F
 94 I II I I AS Rl 7.9 U RG ENT

would be spun through many a volume, nor would the

patient reader find an adequate reward of instruction or
amusement. At every step, as we sink deeper in the decline
and fall of the Eastern Empire, the annals of each succeed­
ing reign would impose a more ungrateful and melancholy
task. These annals must continue to repeat a tedious and
uniform tale of weakness and misery. . . . The fate of the
* Greek empire has been compared to that of the Rhine,
which loses itself in the sands before its waters can mingle
with the ocean. The scale of dominion is diminished to our
view by the distance of time and place; nor is the loss of
external splendour compensated by the nobler gifts of vir­
tue and genius.3
A fter comparing these latter day Greeks with their classi­
cal ancestors, much to the disadvantage of the former, he
returns to the Byzantine Greeks:
The subjects of the Byzantine empire, who assume and
dishonor the names both of Greeks and Romans, present
a dead uniformity of abject vices, which are neither sof­
tened by the weakness of humanity nor animated by the
vigour of memorable crimes. . v. , From these considera­
tions, I should have abandoned, without regret, the Greek
slaves and their servile historians, had I not reflected that
the fate of the Byzantine monarchy is passively connected
with the most splendid and important revolutions which
have changed the state of the world.4
Gibbon presents us with what he considers to be the un­
mistakable causes for and manifestations of this decline,
some of which have already been described in the preced­
ing chapters. Preeminence among these causes and mani­
festations Gibbon assigns to the triumph of Christianity:
Christianity absorbed and distracted society with its use­
less and endless theological squabbles; it was responsible
for the rise of superstition so clearly visible in those emi-
3 Ibid.,
ch. 48 :V , 169.
4 In ibid.y ch. 48 :V. 1 7 0 - 1 7 1 , Gibbon has italicized the word "pas­
sively.”
 I l l 1.1.AS HI'.SURGIÏNI 95
nently Greek phenomena within Christianity, iconolatry
and hagiolatry, and this superstition debased the spiritual
and intellectual standard o f society; Christianity con­
tributed to the degeneracy of the Greek nation by teaching
it abasement and passivity. Monasticism was complemen­
tary to this process, for it caused men and women to
renounce not only the pleasures but also the business of this
world. Thus, the world was deprived of the energies of
these "monastic saints, who,” Gibbon writes, "excite only
the contempt and pity of a philosopher.” 5 Christianity
created a state within a state and so helped to consume the
Empire in a parasitic manner. -
Gibbon sees "orientalization,” whatever this may have
meant to him, as a further contributing factor to this
degeneracy. In chapter 17 it is the vanity of the East mani­
fest in court forms and ceremonies, and it has vanquished
Roman manly virtue. In speaking o f the new "oriental”
forms o f civil and military administration which Diocle­
tian and Constantine introduced, he remarks that their
mere discussion will illustrate the Empire’s rapid decay. In
the civil war between Coristantine’s two sons, Constans is
supported by the "m artial nations of Europe” whereas
Constantius is at the head o f the "effeminate troops of
Asia.” Let me add that it was the latter, not the former,
who finally won. Gibbon’s work bristles with literary
shafts hurled at the effeminacy o f Greeks, at the malevo­
lence o f eunuchs, and at the heroic hypocrisy of bishops.®
In chapter 53 he describes the state of the Empire in the
tenth century and presents a symptomatic comparison be­
tween the Greek character, on the one hand, and that of
the Latins and Arabs on the other:

5 Ibid., ch. 3 7 :IV , 74.

8 Ibid.,ch. 2 2 :11, 39 .
6 Gibbon begins this chapter: "W hile
Romans languished under the ignominious tyranny of eunuchs and
bishops. . . .”
96 1 II I I AS HI SUI U. I N Γ

Whatever titles a despot may assume, whatever claims

he may assert, it is on the sword that he must ultimately
depend to guard him against his foreign and domestic
enemies. From the age of Charlemagne to that of the Cru­
sades, the world (for I overlook the remote monarchy of
China) was occupied and disputed by the three great em­
pires or nations of the Greeks, the Saracens, and the Franks.
Their military strength may be ascertained by a compar­
ison of their courage, their arts and riches, and their obedi­
ence to a supreme head, who might call into action all the
energies of the state. The Greeks, far inferior to their rivals
in the first, were superior to the Franks, and at least equal
to the Saracens, in the second and third of these warlike
qualifications. . . . Whatever authority could enact was
accomplished, at least in theory, by the camps and
marches, the exercizes and evolutions, the edicts and books,
of the Byzantine monarch. Whatever art could produce
from the forge, the loom, or the laboratory, was abundantly
supplied by the richness of the prince and the industry of
his numerous workmen. But neither authority nor art
could frame the most important machine, the soldier him­
self. . . . Notwithstanding some transient success, the
Greeks were sunk in their own esteem and that of their
neighbours. A cold hand and a loquacious tongue was the
vulgar description of the nation. . . . What spirit their
government and character denied, might have been in­
spired in some degree by the influence of religion; but the
religion of the Greeks could only teach them to suffer and
to yield.7

Though Gibbon reiterates the theme of Eastern martial

degeneracy, he is quite ready to admit that the Empire’s
scientific skill, economic capacity, and the centralization
of authority enabled it to compete successfully with both
Latins and Arabs. The former are braver, but more an­
archic in the arrangement of their energies. The latter are
better than the Latins in ordering these same energies, but
are still inferior to the Greeks whom they imitate.

7 Ibid.y ch. 53:V I, 9 1, 95.

 I
HELLAS RESURGENT 97

Gibbon continued the theme of orientalization as a

factor in Byzantine decay in chapter 55, where he states
that the conversion of the Slavs meant an advance for
them from barbarism to civilization, but in a qualified sort
of way: " I t should appear that Russia might have derived
an early and rapid improvement from her peculiar con­
nection with the church and state of Constantinople
which in that age so justly despised the ignorance o f the
Latins. But the Byzantine nation was servile, solitary, and
verging to an hasty decline.” 8 This oriental character is
also present at the final siege o f Constantinople by the
Turks (a nation far more “ oriental” than the one it van­
quished!) in 1453. In describing the events of that dra­
matic battle, Gibbon cannot refrain from lavishing praise
upon the greatly outnumbered Christian defenders, but he
does so only after uttering the customary anathema upon
the latter: "T he nation was indeed pusillanimous and base;
but the last Constantine deserves the name of an hero; his
noble band o f volunteers was inspired with Roman virtue;
and the foreign auxiliaries supported the honor of western
chivalry.” 9
These examples are only a few from the detailed cata­
logue of causes and manifestations of the Empire’s decline
which Gibbon presents. But he realized that though its de­
cay was always in progress, it took a millennium for the
Empire to fall. Therefore, he was on occasion forced to
give reasons for the uncalled-for survival of Byzantium.
More often than not, Gibbon’s explanation of this longev­
ity is negative. In the East it was the decadence of the Arab
Caliphate and in the West the feudal chaos and anarchy,
which, among other factors, brought respite to the Greek
Empire. That is to say, Byzantium did not fall sooner be­
cause its internal decline was not so advanced as that of the
8 Ibid.,ch. 5 5 : V I, 166.
9 Ibid.,ch. 68:V II, 17 7 - 17 8 .
I
98 I II Ι.Ι.ΛΝ Kl S U H ( , I . N I

Arabs, and because its state of civilization was not so prim­

itive as that of the West. But certainly this docs not ex­
plain why it was that the Caliphate was more affected by
internal decline, or why Byzantium was not in the state of
chaos which the West experienced. It would be unfair to
Gibbon to state categorically that he was not conscious of
the necessity of supplying more positive reasons for Byzan­
tine longevity. He recognizes the importance of the gifted
individual in history, and such a person he considers Basil
the Macedonian to have been. H e comprehends the signifi­
cance o f technology and attributes the salvation o f Con­
stantinople from the Arabs to the invention of Greek fire.
He comes closest, perhaps, to a positive explanation of
Byzantium’s endurance in chapter 53 where he speaks of
centralized government, economic wealth, industry, and
skills which the Greek Orient possessed in abundance. But
by and large, Gibbon failed to come to grips with the
problem of the unique length o f the "decline.”
H ow are Gibbon’s evaluation and judgment of the
Byzantine Empire to be explained? The remarks of A n ­
drew Lossky and Gerhart Ladner have indicated the gen­
eral nature o f the answer. Though Gibbon was perhaps
something more than a child o f the Enlightenment, to the
degree that he was its intellectual and emotional offspring,
he was imbued with a corresponding distrust o f and con­
temptuous disdain for organized hierarchical religions.
This so prejudiced his view of history that he could not
fu lly appreciate the historical role of religion in a period
wherein religion dominated and colored every phase o f life.
His personal experience with religion, as well as with much
of the literature that he read, contributed to the acerbity
of his criticism of the Church. The unfortunate effect of
Gibbon’s blindness to the historical and cultural impor­
tance of religious matters was heavily compounded by his
limited view o f the historical unity of the subject he
 Ill 1.1.AS HI lUHCI'.NT 99
treated. I It· saw only two <*Icments of continuity in his
epic: the threadbare existence of that Empire that "dis­
honored the name of both Greeks and Romans,” and, sec­
ond, its uninterrupted millennial decline. He paid little at­
tention to, and perhaps was incapable of comprehending,
the larger historical process within which occurred the
transmission o f Greco-Roman civilization and its muta­
tion into the Christian cultures of Byzantium and the
West, entities simultaneously old and new, conservative
and yet creative. As his history advanced through the cen­
turies, Gibbon increasingly restricted the narrative to the
surface o f the Empire’s life: the dark intrigues o f the court
and the bloody seditions of the armies. Rarely did he pierce
beneath these superficial phenomena to the inner meaning
of these events. There are times when, in the latter part of
his narrative, Gibbon managed to break through this ex­
terior and succeeded in finding something essential, indeed
perhaps something he considered worthwhile. Invariably,
this involved him in inconsistencies and outright contra­
dictions until his personal tastes finally overcame his logic
in the matter.10
[The consequence of Gibbon's work for the study of
10 Gibbon condemned the administrative reforms o f Diocletian
because they placed affairs in the hands of the eunuchs and courtiers
and so relaxed the vigor o f the state. A mere description of these
institutions, Gibbon states, demonstrates the Empire’s decay. But, at
the very end of the same chapter ( 1 7 ) , he suddenly reverses himself and
declares that these reforms in government enabled the Empire to survive
the barbarian invasions, to restrain the license of the soldiery, and to
enjoy a continuity of its cultural life. In another realm, he traces the
rise of superstition in the early Middle Ages to the spread of
Christianity. Again, in one and the same chapter (2 8 ), he proclaims
that the victors (Christians) were vanquished by the arts of their
vanquished rivals (pagans). Thus he recognizes that much of
Christian superstition already existed in the pagan world and simply
penetrated the new religion as the latter absorbed the pagans. In
spite of his insight into this matter, he continues to charge Christianity
with the rise and spread of superstition.
I QO III 1,1.AS H I ' S U R G I 'N T
Byzantium can be overestimated only with ingenuity. The
Decline and Fall long placed the kiss of death upon Byzan­
tine studies, even though these had already made remarka­
ble progress in the seventeenth century. In fact, Gibbon’s
history, for much of the Byzantine period at least, would
have been impossible without the earlier editions o f the
basic Byzantine historical texts and the remarkable works
of Ducange. That it would take another century for
Byzantine scholarship to revive is an unfortunate measure
of Gibbon’s greatness.11 Contributing factors in the fame
o f the work were his greatness as a scholar, albeit one
marred by heavy prejudice, and his superb style. His erudi­
tion and prejudice were rendered palatable not merely by
his literary style; for even if one writes in the crispest fash­
ion, nevertheless a wholesale narrative of wars, rebellions,
court intrigues, and obscure religious controversies, com­
pacted and squeezed into 2,500 pages, would soon exhaust
the interest o f the most scholarly reader. It is one particu­
lar element in his literary style, namely his ironic and sar­
castic wit, which so greatly flavors the narrative as to
relieve first the pain and then the exhausting fatigue of the
reader’s almost endless journey to 1453. Felicitous though
this may be as literary anesthesia, the sarcasm and irony
contribute seriously to the distortion of the picture o f a
whole society which Gibbon presents.
The morbid effects that Gibbon’s pronouncements had
on Byzantine studies are still discernable today among a
very few of his more recent compatriots. It was the most
distinguished o f modern English Byzantinists, J. B. Bury,
who published the critical edition o f the Decline and Fall.
In his edition, Bury takes more than sixty pages in the
preface to indicate how outdated and insufficient Gibbon
was on such basic matters as Justinian’s reign, Constan-
11 G. Ostrogorsky, History of the Byzantine State (New Brunswick,
19 5 7 ) . PP· 5- 6 .
 11I I I . ΛS RESURGENT ΙΟΙ

tinopolitan topography, vernacular Greek, the Slavs, and

so forth. Nevertheless, by his own explicit admission, Bury
fell under the Gibbonian spell: "T o attempt to deny a gen­
eral truth in Gibbon’s point o f view is vain; and it is feeble
to deprecate his sneer. We may spare more sympathy than
he for the warriors and the churchmen; but all that has
since been added to his knowledge of facts has neither re­
versed nor blunted the point of the Decline and Fall.” 12
Because of his belief in the validity of Gibbon’s point of
view, Bury felt that the whole work could be brought up
to date by the simple insertion of footnotes and appendices
at the proper places, without changing the "point of
view.” More striking perhaps is the remark of Hugh
Trevor-Roper, Regius professor of history at Oxford, in
his preface to a recent paperback edition of an excerpted
version of the Decline and Fall: " I t remains a remarkable
fact that anyone who wishes to study the later Roman or
Byzantine Empire will still find Gibbon’s Decline and Fall
of the Roman Empire the best, as well as the most readable
narrative o f it. . . . Gibbon is the first great historian of a
remote past whom the work o f later centuries has not
driven from the field.” 13
Though the Gibbonian judgment on Byzantium is still
discussed, though many feel that Gibbon cannot be avoid­
ed, and there are even those who still feel that Gibbon was
right, the results of scholarly research in the past three- /
quarters o f a century have largely invalidated Gibbon, ✓
Trevor-Roper to the contrary notwithstanding. This is the
result largely of a new scholarship inspired by the critical
method of German classical philologists. This modern ap-
12 Decline and Fall, Introduction: I, xxxviii.
13 H . R . Trevor-Roper, The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire
and Other Selections from the Writings of Edward Gibbon (New
York, 19 6 3 ), p. vii. Those who concur might even emend Trevor-
Roper’s last sentence to read: "Gibbon is the first great historian of a
remote past who has driven from the field the work of later centuries” !
102 I [I'l l.AS RESURGENT

proach, which gradually spread throughout Europe and to

the United States, has disagreed with Gibbon in no uncer­
tain terms. It has found that Byzantium was conservative,
but that it was also creative. Indeed, it manifested innova­
tive powers that left their indelible mark upon European
civilization. Among the reasons for its conservatism were
the burden and privilege of an illustrious inheritance. This
inheritance, whether literary or political, had been canon­
ized in late Antiquity, and one could do no better than to
imitate this perfection. On the other hand, pressing neces­
sity as well as new opportunities often forced or induced
the Byzantines to seek new formulations and solutions.
Thus, modern scholarship has revised the Gibbonian view
in favor o f a more nearly accurate judgment on Byzantine
civilization.14
B y examining the principal aspects of Byzantine civili­
zation, that civilization which resulted from the fusion of
Greek culture, Roman legal and administrative institu­
tions, and Christian eschatology and ethics, one can discern
to what extent there was a resurgence of Hellas. In the
political realm, certainly one of the most important events
o f the late third and early fourth centuries was the re­
moval o f the imperial capital first to Nicomedia and then
to Byzantium, both Greek cities in regions which had been
Hellenized. The seat o f imperium abandoned the Latin
West and migrated to the Greek East even before the bar­
barian cataclysm o f the fourth and fifth centuries. Follow­
ing Rome’s reduction of the Hellenistic monarchies, the
Greek Orient had been subordinated in a provincial rela­
tionship to Rome, but as a result of the disorders o f the
third century, which the East was better equipped to resist,
the situation o f provincial subordination was suddenly
reversed.
14 Ostrogorsky, op. cit., pp. 1 —20, gives a brief and convenient su
vey of the history of Byzantine studies.
 I ll I I AS RESURGENT 103

The vitality of the East is further demonstrated in the

fact that the eastern half of the Empire survived the Ger­
manic invasions, whereas the Latin West succumbed in the
fifth and sixth centuries. This indicates that the East was
now the more vital portion of the imperial organism, be­
cause, when the German crisis first burst, it came from the
Gothic nation in southeast Europe. The Goths attempted,
first in the third and then again in the late fourth and fifth
centuries, to take over the Balkans, Constantinople, and
parts of Asia Minor. But the effort proved beyond their
capacities, and it was only after this failure that they were
forced to move westward. The failure of the West to resist
them is all too well known. It was a period in which there
arose urban militias made up o f citizens who effectively
fought off barbarian attacks on their city walls.15 In Con­
stantinople, it was an aroused citizenry that helped to
chase the Gothic soldiery from the city, killing many of
them in the process. Simultaneously, a Greek intellectual
from the province of Cyrene came to Constantinople and
harangued the emperor on the evils of bringing Germans
into the armies. Synesius warned the emperor that offices
should be reserved for the citizens of the Empire, else one
would be introducing wolves into the sheep fold. In Asia
Minor the peasantry rose to defeat and slaughter the
Gothic tribes when the latter had escaped the imperial
troops as a result of the treachery of German officers. Then
when the remnants of these Gothic tribes were settled in
Asia Minor, they were eventually absorbed by Christiani­
zation and Hellenization, and so disappeared.16 Is this not
proof that there was a will to resist?
15 G. Manojlovié, “ Le peuple de Constantinople,” Byzantion, X I
( 19 3 6 ) , 6 17 - 7 16 .
16 E. Stein, Histoire duBas-Empire (Paris, 19 3 9 ), I, 23
A . H . M. Jones, The Later Koman Empire, 284-602, (Oxford, 19 6 4 ),
I, 17 8 - 17 9 ; P. Charanis, "O n the Ethnie Composition of Asia Minor,”
in Erosfora eis S. P. Kyriakiden (Thessalonica, 19 5 3 ) , ρ. 14 1 .
IO4 I l l I I AS RESURGENT

It is not mere chance that when once more the floods of

Slavic tribal migrations and Arab military conquests
threatened to destroy the Byzantine state, it survived. In
the case of the former, it was the Latin-speaking parts of
the Balkans, that is, the central and northern Balkans,
which were permanently wrested from the Byzantines by
the Slavs. In the East the Arabs were successful largely in
the Armenian, Syrian, Egyptian, and A frican regions.
Thus the Slavic and Arab high tides were reached when
they washed against the Hellenized regions of the Balkans
and Asia Minor. The Greek-speaking parts of the southern
Balkans and Asia Minor displayed a remarkable vigor in
surviving these great storms of the period of late A ntiq­
uity and of the early medieval world,17 Given the magni­
tude of the threatening forces, this fact deserves careful
attention and explanation. Moreover, under Justinian I the
East destroyed both the Ostrogothic and Vandalic states;
less than a century later, Heraclius virtually destroyed the
Persian empire; and in the tenth century the Macedonian
dynasty began the reconquest of large parts of the Slavic
Balkans as well as parts of Muslim Mesopotamia, northern
Syria, Crete, and Cyprus.
It is often the administrative or governmental institu­
tions of a state which hold the balance of the state’s fate,
for it is through these institutions that the energies and
resources o f the state are mobilized. It is perhaps here, more
than in any other respect, that Gibbon the political his­
torian has failed to present a satisfactory analysis of B y ­
zantine civilization. The successful modulation of flexible
administrative institutions played a critical role in the
Empire’s ability to resist her powerful foes and then often
to vanquish them. A state of such complexity and size
17 W. M. Ramsay, "T h e Attempt of the Arabs to Conquer As
Minor (6 41-6 9 4 A.D.) and the Causes of Its Failure,” Bulletin de
la section historique de l’Académie Roumaine, X I (19 2 4 ) .
 HELLAS RESURGENT 105

could not attain satisfactory efficiency without centraliza­

tion o f authority and a great bureacracy obedient to the
will of the supreme ruler. Byzantium could not have been
run as was Athens, Republican Rome, or feudal Germany.
Inasmuch as Gibbon hated these institutions because he
felt that they had destroyed freedom, he gave insufficient
attention to the administrative reforms o f Diocletian and
Constantine, and almost completely ignored the equally
important institutional arrangements of the seventh-
century rulers. B y way o f example, he despised the Dio-
cletianic separation of military and civil power (a separa­
tion deemed worthwhile in our day) in the provinces as
the artifice of eunuchs and courtiers who feared that pro­
vincial generals might march on the capital and so deprive
them o f their sinecures. His obsession with eunuchs blind­
ed Gibbon to the basic fact that the principal danger to the
state in the late third century was not the barbarian threat,
but the all-powerful and covetous Roman generals in the
provinces. Quite rightly, Diocletian and Constantine, men
o f more immediate experience in matters concerning both
eunuchs and ambitious generals, whittled down the
amount o f power in any one man’s hand. Civil and mili­
tary functions were henceforth exercized by separate civil
and military officials, and the provinces were cut down in
size so that the effective power yielded by one man was de­
creased. So efficacious was this institutional reform that
Byzantium did not experience another third century for
many generations to come.
Even more glaring is Gibbon’s failure to note adequately
the great administrative changes o f the seventh century,
upon which the very fate o f much of Europe depended
when, as a result of the invasions o f the Slavs and Arabs,
prompt action was needed to save the state. Here again, in
the face o f necessity, Byzantine statecraft devised a solu­
tion. Civil and military power were reunited in the hands
Ιθ6 HELLAS RESURGENT

of the provincial generals, and their provinces were in­

creased in size and decreased in number. The local peasantry
was given plots of land, salaries, and tax exemptions
in return for which it was to perform military service, and
so henceforth a free peasantry came to constitute the
backbone of the Byzantine military strength. It was this
army of free peasant soldiers which saved the Empire from
Arabs and Slavs and then went over to the offensive in the
tenth century.18
The Byzantine institutions, which Gibbon so richly
despised and so poorly comprehended, played a primary
role in the political tenacity and periodic resurgence of
Byzantium for eight centuries. In view of the overall polit­
ical performance o f Byzantium, Gibbon’s judgment seems
unfair. The Greek East attained a remarkable political
achievement when in the late third and fourth centuries it
donned the ponderous armor of the Roman Imperium, an
armor which the Latin West could no longer support, and
wore it successfully for so long.
The recuperative powers of medieval Hellenism are per­
haps nowhere demonstrated so strikingly as in the impor­
tant position Byzantium held in the economic life o f the
medieval world until the Crusades. As we have seen, the
third century was a time o f extensive economic woes. It'
was pointed out that the economy o f ancient society was
unable to sustain the shocks of this period, but the situa­
tion was worse in the West than in the East. Though the
West declined economically to a state where a self-
sufficient, natural economy played an increasingly great
but not exclusive role, the East displayed remarkable eco­
nomic recuperative powers. The troubles of the third
18 G. Ostrogorsky, “ Agrarian Conditions in the Byzantine Empire
in the Middle Ages,” in Cambridge Economic History, I (Cambridge,
1 9 4 1 ) , 196; P. Charanis, "Some Remarks on the Changes in B y­
zantium in the Seventh Century,” Z radova vizantoloshkog
instituta, V III ( 19 6 3 ) , 7 1-7 6 .
 I II I I,AS RESURGENT IO7

century and later did not reduce its economy to the rude
level of the economy of Western Europe. Its economy re­
vived and developed in a comparatively vigorous fashion
for almost 800 years.19
Though the manifestations of this economic vitality are
clearly discernible, the causes are more tenebrous. Cer­
tainly one important factor in the economic stamina of
the East was its survival of the barbarian invasions, though
this is a circular argument inasmuch as its political sur­
vival cannot be separated from its economic strength.
Conditions that favored industrial production and money
economy included large population and a developed urban
society.20 As to size of population, the most recent study
of ancient demography would have us believe that the
eastern provinces were more heavily populated than the
western.21 The importance of towns for industry, com­
merce, and indeed for civilization as a whole is even

19 The reader will find a very informative account in R . Lopez,

"The Trade of Medieval Europe: The South,” in Cambridge Economic
History, II (Cambridge, 19 5 2 ) , 257 ff.
20 F. Lot, The End of the Ancient World (London, 1 9 3 1 ) , pp.
69 ff.
21 The most recent and detailed treatment of the population
question is that of J . C. Russell, Late Ancient and Medieval Population,
Transactions of the American Philosophical Society, Vol. X L V III, pt. 3
(Philadelphia, 19 5 8 ). His conclusions (pp. 7 1- 8 7 ) on the populations
o f the Empire in the period prior to the great plague of 543, estimated
in millions, are:
West East
Italy 4.0 Greece and Balkans 5.0
Iberia 3 to 4 E gypt 3.0
North A frica 2.5 Asia Minor i l .6
Gaul 5·° Syria 4-3
Britain 0.5 * 3*9
13 to 1 6
Russell’s figures are in keeping with the conservative estimates of J.
Beloch, Die Bevölkerung der greichis ch-römischen Welt (Berlin,
18 8 6 ).
ιο8 I l I.AS RESURGENT

philologically self-evident. By and large, the East seems to

have been possessed of larger numbers of towns and more
vital cities, Asia Minor being perhaps the single most im­
portant province in this respect. Because of economic fac­
tors and its security from barbarian invasions, its towns
continued a vital existence down to the eleventh and
twelfth centuries at which time the Turkish invasions
brought a partial disruption to their good fortune.22 This
urban vitality was crucial to the East’s ability to withstand
the economic and political vicissitudes of the transitional
period. Urban continuity was important not only as a
material factor: it was also essential to the survival of
Christian Hellenism or Byzantine civilization. Without
these cities the East would likewise have gone down.
The crafts, industry, and commerce had older and bet­
ter established traditions in the East. Perhaps related to this
are the findings of the pseudoscience of ethnic psychology,
according to which Syrians, Greeks, Jews, and Armenians
found commerce and the crafts more congenial than did
the inhabitants of the Latin West in this early period of
22 A. H. M. Jones, The Greek City from Alexander to Justinian
(Oxford, 19 4 0 ), deals masterfully with the history of the towns in
the eastern Mediterranean during the first six centuries of the Christian
era. The problem of the continuity of towns in Byzantium between the
seventh and ninth centuries is presently the subject of debate. It seems
highly probable that the continuity of urban centers in much of Asia
Minor and the southern Balkans was not interrupted (G. Ostrogorsky,
"Byzantine Cities in the Early Middle Ages,” Dumbarton Oaks
Papers, X III [ 19 5 9 ], 47-66; S. Vryonis, "A n A ttic Hoard of B y­
zantine Gold Coins (6 6 8 -74 1) from the Thomas Whittemore Collec­
tion and the Numismatic Evidence for the Urban History of B y­
zantium,” 2 bornik radova vizantoloshkog instituta, V III [ 19 6 3 ] ,
2 9 1- 3 0 0 ) . A . P. Kazdan, Derevnia i gorod v Vizantii I X - X vv
(Moscow, i9 6 0 ), has maintained that these cities suffered a severe
decline between the seventh and ninth centuries and then recovered.
O f general interest is the fact that Russell’s study, as well as that of
Ostrogorsky, "D ie Steuersystem in byzantinischen Altertum und
Mittelalter,” Byzantium, V I ( 19 3 1)» 233» indicates that population
was expanding during this period.
 I II I I AS RESURGENT 109

history. This is another way of saying that historical and

other environmental experiences had accustomed these
Eastern peoples to commerce and artisanal enterprise.
Much of classical Greek and Phoenician colonialism prior
to the age of Alexander was commercial rather than im­
perial, and, in later times, the word "Greek” in central E u ­
rope very often came to connote any merchant from the
Ottoman Empire. The capacity that Jews, Syrians, and
Armenians have displayed in modern commerce is com­
monplace knowledge.
It is impossible to state precisely the causes for the eco­
nomic superiority and revival o f the East, but one can
focus upon the manifestations of this vigor much more
sharply. Though the examples of this stamina are both
numerous and striking, a few cases will suffice to evoke a
general picture. One of the most remarkable physical sur­
vivals of this prosperity is the still extensive number of
Byzantine gold coins found today in museums, private col­
lections, and also in the stalls of the money changers and
jewelers in the streets o f Athens, Thessalonica, and Istan­
bul. When Constantine the Great instituted the gold coin
known as the solidus in the early fourth century, he
inaugurated what has recently and felicitously been bap­
tized the "dollar o f the Middle Ages.” 23 This gold coin
remained relatively constant in weight and purity until
the decline o f the eleventh century. Down to the eighth
century it was the principal money of international ex­
change, and after that time it shared the field only with the
Arab gold dinar, itself inspired by and modeled on the
solidus. Cosmas Indicopleustes, a sixth-century merchant

28 R . S. Lopez, "T h e Dollar of the Middle Ages,” Journal of Eco­

nomic History, X I ( 1 9 5 1 ) , 209-234. On Byzantine money, see P.
Grierson, "Coinage and Money in the Byzantine Empire, 498-c.
1090,” Settimane distudio del Centro di Studi sull’ Alto Evo, V I
Moneta e scambi nell’ Alto Medievo (Spoleto, 19 6 1) , 4 1 1 - 4 5 3 .
I ΙΟ I I I Ί LAS R liSUlU iH NT

from Egypt, noted the importance of this gold coin in the

emporia of southern India, and recent archaeological ex­
cavations have uncovered the Byzantine solidus in Chinese
tombs of the sixth and seventh centuries.24 That this was
no mere occasional coinage intended solely to flatter the
prestige of the emperors emerges from the incidental in­
formation that around the year 800 the government paid
to the indigenous soldiery of Anatolia as their annual sal­
ary some i million gold solidi. The peasantry paid a portion
o f its taxes in gold, and salaries and fines in the legal codes
were often reckoned in cash.25
To Latin and Muslim travelers, however, the most strik­
ing proof of the economic sinews of Byzantium was Con­
stantinople itself.26 Constantinople, like the solidus, was
the creation of a monarch of genius, and it remained the
largest and wealthiest city of Christendom for eight cen­
turies. It was an international emporium governing the
carrying trade of east and west, north and south, and a
cosmopolis in the streets of which were to be heard not only
the Greek, but the Italian, Arabic, Persian, Turkish, and
Slavic tongues as well.27 The harbor areas were full of
trading vessels, bickering merchants, and imperious cus­
toms officials. It has been customary to think of the East­
ern Empire as a one-town affair, that town, of course,

24 E. Winstedt, The Christian Topography of Cosmas Indicopleustes

(Cambridge, 19 0 9 ), p. 323; S. Nai, “ Zolotaia vizantiiskaia moneta,
naidennaia v mogile perioda dinastii Sui,” Yizantiiskii Yremennik,
X X I ( 19 6 2 ) , 17 8 - 18 2 .
25 Vryonis, op. cit.y pp. 297-300.
26 Among the most graphic descriptions are those from the hands of
the twelfth-century Jewish traveler Benjamin of Tudela and the
Latin Villehardouin.
27 The Cons tan tinopolitan poet John Tzetzes boasts that he can
address people in seven languages. For this and other literary references
to the cosmopolitan nature of the city, see S. Vryonis, “ Byzantine
Demokratia and the Guilds in the Eleventh Century,” Dumbarton
Oaks Papers, X V II ( 19 6 3 ) , 2 9 1—292.
 I II I I.AS RESURGENT III

being Constantinople. Hut its provincial urban centers

were also important: Thessalonica, Thebes, Corinth,
Ephesus, Nicaea, Caesarea, Trebizond, and others. These,
then, were some of the manifestations of the Empire’s
economic strength.
The medieval resurgence of Hellas took both dynamic
and conservative form in the cultural life of the Byzantine
Empire. To Gibbon, this culture consisted of a rich base of
crass superstitution among the masses overlaid with a thick
frosting of meaningless theology and lifeless literary com­
pilations at the level of the intellectuals. Let us listen to
Gibbon himself:

In the revolution of ten centuries, not a single discovery

was made to exalt the dignity or promote the happiness
of mankind. N ot a single idea has been added to the specu­
lative systems of antiquity, and a succession of patient
disciples became in their turn the dogmatic teachers of
the next servile generation. N ot a single composition of
history, philosophy, or literature has been saved from ob­
livion by the intrinsic beauties of style or sentiment, of
original fancy, or even of successful imitation. . . . Their
prose is soaring to the viscious affectation of poetry: their
poetry is sinking below the flatness and insipidity of prose.
The tragic, epic, and lyric muses were silent and in­
glorious; the bards of Constantinople seldom rose above a
riddle or epigram, a panegyric or tale; they forgot even the
rules of prosody; and, with the melody of Homer yet
sounding in their ears, they confound all measure of feet
and syllables in the impotent strains which have received
the name of political or city verses. The minds of the
Greeks were bound in the fetters of a base and imperious
superstition, which extends her dominion round the circle
of profane science. Their understandings were bewildered
in metaphysical controversy; in the belief of visions and
miracles, they had lost all principles of moral evidence; and
their taste was vitiated by the homelies of the monks, an
absurd medley of declamation and scripture. Even these
contemptible studies were no longer dignified by the abuse
I 12 Hl 1.1,AS HI'SURGI'N T

of superior talents; the leaders of the Greek church were

humbly content to admire and copy the oracles of antiq­
uity, nor did the schools or pulpit produce any rivals of
the fame of Athanasius and Chrysostom.28
As is so often the case, there is an element of truth in
Gibbon’s remarks on Byzantine culture, but again it is not
the whole truth. Greek culture had experienced its greatest
flowering in classical times and its greatest expansion in the
Hellenistic era. But this Greek culture, for a variety of rea­
sons which become more apparent in Miriam Lichtheim’s
chapter, remained a surface phenomenon in much of the
Near East. In this latter area, it was strongest in the towns
and weakest in the countryside of Syria, Egypt, and
Armenia, where local traditions remained largely un­
changed in the face of Greco-Roman political domination
for the better part o f a millennium. Greek culture proved
to be most dynamic, or resurgent, in Anatolia. In this large
peninsula the Greek language and eventually Greek Chris­
tianity presided over the extinction of both the local lan­
guages (Phrygian, Lydian, Lycian, Cappadocian, etc.) and
the local religious cults. The process was long but was
largely complete by the end of the sixth century o f the
Christian era.29 Thus, the failure of Hellenization in
Egypt, Syria, and Armenia was counterbalanced by its re­
markable success in Anatolia. This phenomenon, along
with the foundation of Constantinople, resulted in the dis­
placement of the heartland of Greek culture northward
and eastward from the original homeland of Hellas. A t the
same time, however, the linguistic tenacity of the older
homeland is illustrated in the medieval Balkans. When the
Slavic invasions of the early Middle Ages swept through
28 Decline and Fall, ch. $3:V I, 10 7—108.
29 K. Holl, "D as Fortleben der Volksprachen in Kleinasien in nach­
christlicher Zeit,” Hermes, X L III (19 0 8 ), 24 0-254 ; P. Charanis,
"Ethnie Changes in the Byzantine Empire during the Seventh Cen­
tury,” Dumbarton Oaks Papers, X III ( 19 5 4 ) , 2 6.
 Il l I. AS RIISURGCN r 1 1 3

the Balkans, large numbers of Slavs settled not only in the

northern half of the peninsula but in the southern half as
well. In spite of the fact that these invaders largely Slavon-
ized the Latin-speaking northern half of the area, they left
very scant linguistic traces in the Greek language. In the
Peloponnese they were Hellenized and left behind them as
the only evidence of their existence the great numbers of
Slavic placenames in the Peloponnesian countryside.30
The Christianization of the Russians, Serbs, and Bulgars
was one of the more dramatic expressions of Hellas Resur­
gent. In this respect, the Byzantine church did for these
peoples what the Latin church did for the Germanic bar­
barians. Byzantium thus indelibly colored a very impor­
tant portion o f future Europe. This Christianization in­
cluded not only religion, but the elements of civilization
itself— alphabet, literature, art, and so forth. The victory
of Byzantine culture here is all the more indicative of
strength in that the Greek East won these areas not merely
by default but after rather stiff competition with the
Papal W est?1
In the intellectual realm, we saw that Gibbon con­
demned the thinkers of Byzantium because “ not a single
30 The question of the Slavic settlement in Greece is in many ways
the "Hom eric Question” of Byzantine studies. The controversy,
centering on the descent o f the modern Greeks, threatens to blossom
once more with the announced republication of the work of J.
Fallmereyer, Geschichte der Halbinsel Morea während des Mittelalters
(Stuttgart, 1 8 3 0 - 1 8 3 6 ) . That the Slavs came into Greece in large
numbers during the sixth and seventh centuries is no longer doubted
by serious scholars, a conclusion made abundantly obvious by the
study of place names (M. Vasmer, Die Slaven in Griechenland, in
Abhandlungen der Preuss. Akademie der Wissenschaften, Philosophische-
historische Klasse, X II [ 1 9 4 1 ] ) . The Slavs in Greece were largely ab­
sorbed through Christianization and Hellenization (Ostrogorsky,
History of the Byzantine State, p. 85; F. Dvornik, The Slavs: Their
Early History and Civilization [Boston, 19 5 6 ], pp. 1 1 6 - 1 1 7 ) .
31 Dvornik, op. cit., pp. 218 if., and Les Slaves Byzance et Rome
au IX e siècle (Paris, 19 2 6 ).
H 4 I I I I .I AS RESURGENT

idea has been added to the speculative systems o f an­

tiq u ity.” It is true that Byzantium produced no Platos and
Aristotles; few societies have. Pagan society itself was not
able to do so for the six hundred years that separate the age
o f Aristotle from that o f Constantine. T o this one may
perhaps retort that at least the late pagan world produced
certain lesser figures, such as Plotinus, who worked the
older body o f philosophical material and gave it a new
tw ist. The vapid ideas o f late H ellenistic and Rom an phi­
losophers, how ever, were already the products and instru­
m ents o f the ossification o f the ancient philosophical tradi­
tion.
W hat the Christians did was to create theology, or a
Christian philosophy. The love o f metaphysical speculation
w hich is so characteristic o f the pagan intellectual world
did n ot die w ith the victory o f Christianity. Pagan philoso­
phy had already com e to a dead end before the trium ph o f
Christianity. The Christian intellectuals, the C hurch Fa­
thers, and authors such as O rigen and the Cappadocians
w ho were educated in the classics, opened new channels for
this Greek predisposition to indulge in m etaphysical specu­
lation .82 Christianity was grafted onto Greek philosophy,
and, by a cultural metamorphosis, the pagan love o f philo­
sophical discussion was transform ed into a passion for
theological speculation. T he result was the philosophical or
theological definition o f the Christian faith, one o f the
great intellectual m onum ents o f W estern civilization. This
was, to a great extent, the w ork o f the Greek East, where
the first seven ecum enical councils took place. It is true, at
the same tim e, that after this extraordinary m anifestation
o f theological energy, theology became conservative, and
the church henceforth considered it a sacred duty to pre­
serve the results o f these councils unaltered and u n ­
changed. This philosophical definition o f C hristianity was
32 This them e is incisively developed in Jaeger, op cit .
 I
IIELLAS RESURGENT 11 $
something Gibbon did not appreciate, mainly for the same
reasons that modern society largely ignores it. G ibbon was
a modern man and, as such, was the product o f a series o f
evolutions and revolutions w hich finally caused interest in
theology to dwindle. In the D e c lin e a n d Fall he repeatedly
justifies the discussion o f any theological issue purely on
the grounds that it affected the political history o f the
times, but he never bothers to explain w h y an etherial m at­
ter should so frequ en tly and so violently affect political
history. H e does n ot conceive o f theology as som ething
w hich has an existence, im portance, and interest o f its ow n
and as an intellectual discipline w hich in m edieval times
was considered to be the queen o f the sciences.
Byzantine art likewise represents the sublim ation o f an
expressive form o f pagan A n tiq u ity into som ething new .
The art o f the ancient world had run its ow n course and
then began to decline in originality and vigor w hen the
Byzantines took it, transform ed it, and created a new
art .33 The examples o f philosophy and theology, on the
one hand, and o f pagan and Byzantine art, on the other,
are quite parallel in this respect. Because they were reli­
gious (th at is to say, related to a hierarchically structured
religion) and therefore quite different from classical art
and philosophy, Gibbon despised both Byzantine theology
and art. In our ow n day, how ever, the originality, the im ­
portance, and even the beauty o f Byzantine art have
finally been recognized.
Y et, because it does contain a part o f the truth, once
more one m ust consider G ibbon and his pejorative judg­
m ent o f Byzantine culture. Its conservatism was so pow er­
fu l and so pervasive that it successfully obscured the more
creative aspects o f this civilization. Byzantium was the *

33 For elements of continuity, see E. K itzinger, "T h e H ellenistic

H eritage in Byzantine A rt,” Dumbarton Oaks Papers, X V II ( 19 6 3 ) ,
97 - 1 1 6 .
116 I I I I I AS HI S U I U İ R N T

child o f A n tiq u ity, a most obedient child that was never

able to destroy com pletely the father image. Its literary
and linguistic inheritance was particularly rich, for the
parent was one o f genius. I f the Byzantines worshiped
H om er, Aristotle, Polybius, and Thucydides, their taste
has been vindicated by the taste o f the modern world. The
pagan world had already bestowed the canonization o f
perfection on these great figures and their works. Thus the
late pagan world was as Byzantine as the Byzantines them ­
selves in their faith fu l im itation o f and enslavem ent to
these works. This aspect o f the Byzantine tradition cer­
tainly did not provide the optim um conditions for the
freeing o f new rivulets o f literary experim entation and
creation. It did result, however, in the preservation of
m any o f the Greek classics until the W est was ready to re­
ceive this priceless treasure and to reevaluate it under the
pow erful renaissance light o f H um anism .34 Byzantine
m onks toiled endlessly in copying the texts, Byzantine pro­
fessors and bishops w rote copious commentaries on them ,
and the bureaucrats and m en o f letters all studied these
w ritings as the basis o f their education. But, as Gibbon re­
marks, they often studied the form rather than the content.
A t the same tim e, the preservation o f this body o f literature
assured the Byzantines a higher level o f civilization than
that o f the W est in the earlier centuries o f the M iddle
Ages. The barbarians, strangers to this tradition, were
forced to resort to their imaginations, and the felicitous re­
sults o f this fa ct w ould n ot become apparent until the
W est faced the East in the period o f the Crusades. It is this
circum stance that Gibbon underlines w hen he remarks
that while B yzantium was absorbed w ith theology, the
Latins developed som ething called technology. Byzantine

34 The literary inheritance is traced b y R . Jenkins, "T h e H ellen

istic O rigins of Byzantine L iterature,” Dumbarton Oaks Papers.
X V II ( 19 6 3 ) , 37 - 5 2 .
 HELLAS RESURGENT I 17

technology has not yet been investigated, but it is quite

possible that G ibbon’s view in this particular m atter w ill be
partially vindicated once such an investigation is carried
out. O ne is struck by the com parative frequency w ith
which the Byzantines copied and used the classical manuals
on agriculture, warfare and tactics, hunting, fishing, and
so forth. Their continued use w ould indicate that the
methods and technics worked out in them satisfactorily
fulfilled the needs o f society in the eastern Mediterranean.
So long as a particular arrangement in society fulfills its
function, it is not likely to change easily. It is only w hen it
is forced to com pete or face a new challenge that the old
arrangement or order m ust change. O n the other hand, one
m ust acknowledge that it was Byzantine conservatism that
aided the Empire in the utilization o f its energies in the
m ost econom ical manner and thus enabled it to survive the
storms o f the early Middle Ages.
Lest it appear that I have fallen victim to the Gibbonian
view on Byzantine culture, it should be added that B yzan­
tine literature had a newer, more creative strain in addi­
tion to that w hich Gibbon ascribed to it. It developed a
new religious poetry o f great beauty, truly w orthy o f its
classical predecessor. H agiography, in spite o f Gibbon, was
a living genre, largely devoid o f the artificiality o f the
atticizers. Vernacular poetry and literature also appeared
and developed. Finally, one should note that those servile
Byzantine historians, as Gibbon referred to them , at least
m aintained the standard o f excellence o f their ancient
models, even though they did not create som ething new.
Their historiographical production was superior to its con ­
tem porary counterparts in the W est; they recorded for
later ages the greatness o f this m illennial state in almost u n ­
broken succession from Constantine to the fall in 1 4 5 3 .
T h ey are also far more objective than Gibbon w ould have
us believe w hen he speaks o f them as “servile” : they do not
118 I H U .AS RESURGEN T

hide the weakness or shortcom ings o f Byzantium , and they

fu lly acknowledge the prowess o f both Latins and M us­
lims. This is more than their W estern and Muslim counter­
parts did.
It m ay seem that this chapter has been nothing more nor
less than a running criticism o f w hat is rightly considered
to be one o f the classics o f modern historiography. B ut
such has been the fate o f m any great histories. In spite o f
the fact that G ibbon distorted the picture o f an entire
civilization, and did so w ith considerable prejudice, biting
malice, and obvious pleasure, his w ork w ill abide as an ob­
ject o f contem plation.
 II

BYZANTIUM: THE SOCIAL BASIS

OF DECLINE IN
THE ELEVENTH CENTURY
 m: i l i Vi n u i ckntury was a particularly critical period
lor both Byzantine and Islamic society, for the appearance
of the Saljuk l urks in the Near East at this time profoundly af­
ire ted both societies. In the year 1055 the Saljuk prince T ugh-
ril Beg entered Bagdad with his army where he was received
by the khalifah, and soon after succeeded in resurrecting the
Islamic Empire on a Turkish basis. In 1071 his successor Alp
Arslan inflicted upon the Byzantine Empire the crushing de­
feat at Manzikert in Asia Minor. T h is marked the collapse of
Byzantium as a great political power and the beginning of the
Turkification of Asia M inor, the cradle of the future Ottoman \
Empire. T h u s the appearance of the Turks in the Near East
resulted in the re-invigoration of the political forces of Islam j
and accelerated the decline of Byzantine political power. \
H ow is one to explain the sudden and com plete collapse
of Byzantium after the disaster at Manzikert? Byzantium had
suffered severe m ilitary disaster in the past and yet had sur­
vived. T h e battle itself had occurred in the easternmost
reaches of Asia M inor, far removed from the heart of the
empire. But ten years after the battle of Manzikert, in 1081,
on the accession of A lexius Com nenus, the condition of By­
zantium contrasted sadly with its position in the early eleventh
century, when it had been w ithout a doubt the most powerful,
the wealthiest, and the most civilized state in all of Christen­
dom. On the death of the emperor Basil II in 1025 its boun­
daries stretched from the Euphrates to southern Italy, and
from the D anube to the islands of Crete and Cyprus. T h e
imperial treasury was full, and commerce flourished. T h e
revival of classical art and learning had already gotten well
under way in the tenth century, and the conversion of Kievan
Russia to O rthodox Christianity had brought greater glory and
influence to Byzantium. T h u s the collapse of the Byzantine
Empire in the latter half of the eleventh century seems star­
tlingly com plete and unexpectedly rapid.
A num ber of scholars have exam ined the course of By­
zantine decline in the eleventh century and have clearly out­
lined its general path. T h ey have described in detail the de­
generation of the ruling dynasty; the absorption of the free
peasantry by the great land owners; the dim inishing of gov-
 HiO

em inent revenue through grants of p ro n o ia , e x c u se ia , charisti-

kia ; the granting of privileges to Venetian traders; the de­
basement of the coinage; the sale of offices and farming of
taxes; the civil wars; and finally the ethnic-religious difficul­
\ ties .1 T here can be no doubt that all of these phenom ena had
dire consequences for Byzantium, but it can be argued on
good grounds that two of these problems, the civil wars and
the ethnic-religious difficulties in the provinces, were the key
developm ents which led to the collapse of Asia M inor in the
face of the Saljuk invasions and the resultant hum bling of
Byzantium from its position of power and glory.
T h e civil wars in Byzantium during the eleventh century
took on the aspect of a contest for supreme power between
the bureacracy and the army, and all the grandees of the
em pire took one or the other side in consonance with their
interests. T h is struggle between the bureaucracy and the
army had set in shortly after the death of Basil II when the
succeeding weak rulers turned the direction of affairs and
power over to the bureaucrats. Gradually their predom inance
in affairs of state became so overw helm ing that the officers
of the army were not only subordinated in all important mat­
ters, but severely persecuted by confiscation of property, exile,
blinding, and execution. T h is persecution of the military
aristocracy, coupled with the lack of an established succession,

1 T h ere is a considerable b od y of literatu re on th e elev en th cen tu ry, th

im portant, item s of w hich are the follow in g: N . Sk ab alan ovich , B ii3aH T H fiC K O e
ro cy /ta p C T B O h ijepKOBL· b X I B e n e (S t. P etersbu rg, 1884) ; P . Charanis, “T h e
B y za n tin e E m pire in th e E lev e n th C e n tu r y /’ A H is to r y o j th e C ru sades, I. ed.
M . B ald w in (P h ilad elp h ia, 1955), 177-219, where on e can find th e la stest b ib li­
ography on th e su b ject; R . H . J. Jenkins, T h e B y za n tin e E m p ire on th e E v e
o j th e C ru sades (L on d on , 1953), a short w ork b u t w ith rem arkable in sigh t in to
th e intern al e v o lu tio n o f B y za n tin e so c ie ty ; C. N eu m a n n , “L a situ a tio n m on d iale
de l ’em pire b y zan tin a v a n t les croisades,” R e v u e d e V orient la tin , 10 (1905),
57-171; J. H u ssey, “T h e B y zan tin e E m pire in th e E lev e n th C en tu ry: S om e
D iffe r e n t In te r p r e ta tio n s/’ T ran saction s o j th e R o y a l H is to n c a l S o c ie ty , 32
(1950), 71-87, is v e ry p ro v o ca tiv e and stresses th e im p ortan t cultural a ch ieve­
m en ts o f th e e le v en th cen tu ry; G. Schlum berger, L ’E p o p é e b y za n tin e ά la
Jin d u d ix iè m e siècle, 3 (P aris, 1905) ; C. C ahen, “La cam pagne de M a n tzik ert
d ’après les sources m u su lm an es,’’ B y za n lio n , 9 (1934), 613-42.
 BYZANTIUM: ΊΊΙΚ SOCIAL BASIS OF DECLINE 161

presented both the instigation and the opportunity to the

am bitious soldiers.
T h e socio-economic aspect of the civil war comes boldly
into relief when one exam ines closely the make-up of the
military and bureaucratic parties .2 T h e m ilitary aristocracy
consisted of the great landow ning families com m anding the
armies in the provinces. By the eleventh century many of
these families had acquired a long and glorious tradition which
made of them a highly articulate and proud aristocracy. T h e
most important group came from Anatolia and num bered
about twenty families. T h e oldest of these, the Botaniates
family, seems to go back to the late sixth century, w hile the
bulk of these families from Anatolia had already risen to
great prom inence by the ninth century, the most important
being the families of Phocas and Sclerus. T h e great wars in
the east at the end of the tenth century added five more fami­
lies, including those of Com nenus and Diogenes, w hile the
addition of three more fam ilies in the eleventh century
rounded out the ranks of the Anatolian aristocracy .3 A ll
twenty of these families, w ithout exception, are prom inent in
the armies when they first appear in the sources.
T h ere was a parallel developm ent in the western prov­
inces, though here the aristocracy developed on a m uch more
lim ited scale. By the ninth century there appears in the
sources a clearly formed aristocracy centering about the fami­
lies of Rentacius, Tessaracontopechys, Bryennius, Choiros-
phactes, and M onomachus. T h is was enlarged in the tenth
century by the five new fam ilies of T ornicius, Taronites,
Curticius, Vatatzes, and Glabas. T h ere was a great disparity
between the eastern and western nobility and the Anatolians

2 F or th e m ak e-u p o f th ese tw o so cia l groups and for w h at fo llo w s on th e

fa m ilies see th e u n p u b lish ed H arvard dissertation , S. V ryonis, T h e In te rn a l
H is to r y o f B y z a n tiu m du rin g th e T im e o f T ro u b le s (1057-1081), (1956), 172-287.
3 T h e fa m ilies w h ich had em erged b y th e n in th cen tu ry w ere th ose o f
P h o ca s, M a lein u s, D u cas, Argyrus, Sclerus, M u sele, B o ta n ia tes, M elissen u s,
T zim isces, C urcuas and M elias. B y th e end o f th e te n th cen tu ry appeared th e
fa m ilies o f B o u rtzes, C om n en us, D io g e n e s, D alassen u s, and C ecau m en us, w h ile
th e fa m ilies o f Syn ad en n u s, M a a ia ces, and P a la eo lo g u s app eared in th e
elev en th cen tury.
 were highly conscious of their superiority, m anifesting it on
several occasions. Important factors in this disparity were the
fact that Asia M inor could furnish unlim ited land for the
formation of great estates, and at the same time Asia M inor
was more difficult to control than was the European section
of the empire. Also the constant invasion of Bulgars and Pat-
zinaks into the European provinces must have had some dis­
rupting effect on land tenure .4
T h e sources of power of these great aristocrats were of
course two, the huge landed estates which they possessed and
their official positions as generals of the provincial armies.
One family very often possessed vast lands in several different
provinces, as in the case of the M aleinus family with its prop­
erties in the themes of Charsianon, Anatolikon, and Optima-
ton. One of these properties was over seventy m iles in length
and supported the entire army of Basil II at one point during
his campaigns in the east. T h us it is obvious what the sustain­
ing potential of these estates was, and the nobility not only pos­
sessed a great source of revenue but could and did support
large private armies. T h is com bination of estates and official
military command was a dangerous threat to the central
government.
T h ough this aristocracy was of a m ixed ethnic back­
ground, including Greeks, Armenians, Bulgars, Georgians,
Arabs, Italians, and Vlachs, eventually the non-indigenous
elem ents were Byzantinized and absorbed. Amongst them
arose a sentim ent of nobility by birth, and a solidarity of
feeling resulting from close intermarriage w ithin the group.
In general they were anti-imperial but not separatist, that
is they generally aimed at replacing the ruling dynasty with
their own family, rather than setting up independent states.
In the tenth century their energies had been largely harnessed
by the central governm ent in the eastern wars against Islam.
H owever, even in the tenth century they had been difficult to
control. As the source of their wealth was land, their appetite
for land was insatiable, and in the tenth century they had
begun to absorb the free peasantry and peasant soldiery, the
4 V ryonis, o p .cit., pp . 172-287.
 H
UY/ ΛΝ I HIM İ lil SOCIAL HASİS OF DECLINE 163

source of the em pire’s financial and military strength. Here

(he government had only lim ited success against the magnates
in its program of agrarian legislation .56
It is this landed military nobility which the bureaucrats
or civil aristocracy attem pted to control in the eleventh cen­
tury, at first successfully, but finally giving in to their superior
power. T h e civil aristocracy is somewhat more difficult to
describe or define as it was not so hom ogeneous a group as its
opponents the m ilitary aristocracy. T h is group consisted
largely of the prom inent families of Constantinople in the bu­
reaucracy, such families as M onomachus, Argyrus, Ducas, and
Cerularius. In addition this civil aristocracy included those
persons of hum ble origin, such as the eunuch John Orphano-
trophus and Philocales, who had been able to ascend the
cursus honorum to the higher administrative posts. A third
and new group which gave the civil aristocracy its peculiar
appearance in the eleventh century was that of the professors
and graduates of the refounded University of Constantinople.
T h is group was made up of m en, such as Psellus and X iphili-
nus, for whom education was the key to a highly successful
governm ent career .0
T h e source of power of the civil aristocracy was the con­
trol of the im perial adm inistration and finance, control of
the capital city itself, and control of the imperial armies sta­
tioned in Constantinople. O ne readily sees how by this
antagonism between the urban bureaucratic aristocracy and
the provincial m ilitary aristocracy the energies of the Byzan­
tine state were to be harnassed to a highly destructive and ex­
hausting civil war. T h e two groups were extrem ely conscious 1
of the struggle for power in terms of the civil and military
elem ents, and each looked upon the other with great hatred

5 G. O strogorsky, “Agrarian C on d ition s in th e B y za n tin e E m p ire,” T h e

C a m b n d g e E c o n o m ic H is to r y , 1 (C am b ridge, 1942), 194-233. H is v iew s are
so m ew h a t altered in, “Q u elqu es p ro b lè m e s d ’h isto ire de la p a ysa n n erie b y za n tin e
(B russels, 1956). P . Charanis, “T h e M o n a stic P rop erties and th e S ta te in th e
B y za n tin e E m p ir e / D u m b a r to n O aks P a p ers, 4 (1948), 53-118.
6 F or th e refou nding of th e U n iv e r sity o f C on stan tin op le and its per­
son n el see J. H u ssey , C hurch a n d L earn in g in th e B y za n tin e E m p ir e 867-1185
(L o n d o n , 1937), 37-88.
and contem pt. Psellus clearly distinguishes these two groups
throughout his chronicle as τ ο π ο λ ι τ ι κ ό ν and τ ο σ τ ρ α τ ι ω τ ι κ ό ν .1
T h e bureaucrats had great contem pt for the rudeness
of the provincials, considering them unintelligent boors.
Psellus takes particular delight in describing the lack of ed­
ucation of these soldier-emperors by comparing them to his
own highly educated person. In one of his letters the philoso­
pher describes his brilliance with characteristic immodesty.
T h e C elts a n d A rabs cam e u n d e r o u r sway, m en fro m th e o th e r
c o n tin e n t jo u rn e y e d h e re because of th e r e p o rt of o u r fam e. A n d as
th e N ile w atered th e la n d of E gypt, so o u r discourses refresh ed th e
soul. A n d if you h a p p e n to ta lk w ith P ersian s o r E th io p ia n s, they
w ill say th a t they know a n d a d m ire m e, a n d h av e com e in p u rs u it
of m e .8

T h e greatest m om ent of influence which Psellus and the b u ­

reaucrats enjoyed came when Psellus’ pupil, Michael VII, as­
cended the throne in 1071. And of course Psellus had suc­
ceeded in com m unicating to his imperial pupil a great con­
cern for literary form and com position. T h e m ilitary reaction
against the over-refined manners of the court is sarcastically
reflected in the chronicle of Cedrenus-Scylitzes.
(M ichael D ucas) b usied h im self co n tin u o u sly w ith th e useless
a n d u n e n d in g study of elo q u en ce a n d w ith th e co m p o sitio n of iam bics
a n d anapests; m oreover he was n o t p ro fic ie n t in th is a rt, b u t b e in g
deceived an d b eg u ile d by th e consul of th e p h ilo so p h ers (P se llu s),
h e destroyed the w hole w orld, so to sp eak .9

Cecaumenus, the prototype of the rough but vigorous provin­

cial magnate, exhorts his son:
D o n o t w ish to be a b u re a u c ra t, for it is n o t possible to be b o th
a g e n e ra l a n d a c o m e d ia n .10
T h e civil wars between the bureaucratic and m ilitary
parties were renewed with particular violence over the im-
7 P sellu s, C h ron ograph ia, ed. E . R en au ld , 2 (P aris, 1928), 83, 86. C edrenus-
S cy litzes, H isto ria ru m C o m p e n d iu m , ed. I. B ekker, 2 (B o n n , 1839), 634.
8 C. Sathas, Μβσαιωνικη Βιβλιοθήκη, 5 (P aris, 1876), 508.
9 C ed ren u s-S cylitzes, 11.725.
10.C ecaum enu s, S tra te g ic o n , ed. V a siliev sk y and J ern sted t (S t. P etersbu rg,
1896), 20. S e e also pp. 8-9, 20, where h e castigates th e bureaucrats.
 Il
BYZANTIUM: Π ! K SOCIAL HASİS OF DECLINE 165

perial succession alter the death of the last M acedonian in

1056. I his lasted until the soldiers com pletely prevailed with
the* vit tory of Alexius Com nenus in 1081, success having alter­
nated between both groups in the interm ediate years .11 In
the ( ivil strife and internal upheaval two other social groups
clearly emerged as important factors, namely the church and
the Constantinopolitans. Both soldiers and bureaucrats were
anxious to secure the support of the church and of the capital’s
populace, and well they m ight have been. For the com bina­
tion of these two, church and people, was responsible for the
violent deposition of three emperors (M ichael V, M ichael VI,
Michael VII). As a result the church received num erous con­
cessions and the patriarch attem pted to assert the supremacy
of sacerdotium over im perium . T h is was the first appearance
of the idea of the D onation of Constantine in Byzantium.
T h e Constantinopolitans resumed political behavior of a na­
ture recalling the violent disturbances in Constantinople of
the fifth and sixth centuries. T h eir political activities seem
to have centered in the guilds and corporations. T h ey became
such a powerful force in eleventh century politics that the
emperor Constantine X Ducas attem pted to obtain their sup­
port by adm itting a great host of artisans and craftsmen into
the ranks of the senate .12
D uring these civil wars arising from the contest for im ­
perial power, the total energies of Byzantium, political, m ili­
tary, social, religious, econom ic, were com pletely absorbed y
and wasted at a tim e when the Normans, Patzinaks, and Sal-
juks were establishing themselves on the borders .13 T h e par­
ticipants in the civil wars eventually came to rely on these

11 The a ccessio n o f Isaac C om n en us, R o m a n u s D io g en es, and N icep h oru s

B o ta n ia tes rep resented v ictories for th e m ilitarists, w h ile th e accession of C on stan ­
tin e D u ca s and M ich a el D u cas rep resented tem p orary v ictories for th e bureaucrats.
12 V ryon is, o p .cit., pp. 51, 288-314. On th e C o n sta n tin o p o lita n s see also
A. R u d ik o v , O n e p K H BH saH TH ftCK oft K y jib T y p H n o ^ η η η μ r p e n e c i c o n
a r n o r p a i j m n (M o scow , 1917), 120.
13 On th ese, F . C h alan d on , H is to ire d e la d o m in a tio n n o rm a n d e en Ita lie
e t en S icile, 1 (P aris, 1907); V . C. V a siliev sk y , ,,B H 3aH T H Ji h n e n e n e m , "
TpyßH , 1 (S t. P etersbu rg, 1908), 1-175; J. L aurent, B y za n c e e t les T u rcs
se ljo u cid e s daris VAsie occid en ta le ju sq u 'en 1081 (P aris, 1913).
foreigners for support in their factional strife, calling them
into the empire and actually turning over considerable terri­
tory to them.1 T h e soldiers, of course, made use of the armies
in the civil strife, and on the occasion of each revolt all the
armies were removed from the frontiers and led to Constan­
tinople. Consequently the borders were left unguarded, and
in addition the armies themselves were subjected to inten­
tional and systematic neglect. Inasmuch as the provincial
armies were the main strength of the magnates of Asia M inor,
the bureaucracy, and particularly Constantine M onomachus
and Constantine Ducas, began to dismantle them. T h e gen­
eral anti-military feeling became such that according to the
contemporary sources,
. . . th e soldiers them selves, a b a n d o n in g th e ir w eapons a n d th e arm y,
becam e law yers a n d keen follow ers of legal q u estio n s a n d p ro b lem s.
. . . T h e arm y was u n a rm e d a n d depressed because of th e lack of
p ay a n d provisions; a n d only th e b arest section of it was p resen t, for
th e bravest p a r t of th e arm y h a d been rem oved fro m th e arm y
cadasters. . . ,14

T h e armies had been dim inished already by the mag­

nates’ absorption of the free peasant soldiery throughout the
eleventh century, but the effect of this process was not as
widespread nor as decisive as was the studied bureaucratic
program of dem ilitarization. T h e central governm ent now
came to rely more and more on foreign mercenaries, who
brought with them the double liability of extrem ely high
m ilitary expenditures and decreased loyalty of the armies.
T h e Greek sources give a bew ildering list of nationalities in
the Byzantine armies of the eleventh century: Russians, Koul-
pings, English, Normans, Germans, Bulgars, Saracens, Alani,
Georgians, Turks, Patzinaks, Armenians, Albanians, Scandin­
avians .15* And it came to pass that Byzantium suffered almost

14 C ed ren u s-S cylitzes, 11.652; A tta lia tes, H is to r ia , ed. I. B ek k er (B on n ,

1853), 79.
15 G . R ou illard , and P . C ollom p, A c te s de L a v r a (P aris, 1937), 83, 111;
A tta lia tes, pp. 9, 18; C eeaum enus, pp. 95-6, exhorts th e em peror to disp en se
w ith th e foreigners and to d ep en d m ore clo sely on th e G reeks. So aggravated
and w idespread w as th is ev il th a t th e M u slim op p on en ts of B y za n tiu m w ere
 IIY/ANTUJM: NIK SOCIAL BASIS OF DECLINE I<>7

«ıs much at the hands of the mercenaries as at the hands of the

T u rk s.Ht T h e Norman mercenaries Roussel and Crispin were
almost successful in establishing a new Norm andy on the
northern coast of Asia M inor in the very face of the T urkish
invasions .17 W ith the disbanding of the indigenous armies,
entire provinces were deprived of m ilitary defense, and the
mercenaries were sufficient only for the border areas them ­
selves. But even here it became painfully evident that By­
zantium had not sufficint forces to fight on m ore than one
frontier at a time, so that when the empire was faced by N or­
mans in Italy, Patzinaks on the Danube, and Saljuks in Asia
Minor, it could not oppose its enem ies sim ultaneously on all
three fronts.
T h e second great problem facing Byzantium in the
eleventh century arose from its nature as a polyglot or m u lti­
national state .18 Alongside the Greek elem ent there were
Slavs, Albanians, Vlachs in the European provinces; Latins,
Jews, Syrians, M uslims, Arm enians in the capital; Armenians,
Syrians, Kurds, Jews, Georgians in Anatolia. A nd though the
O rthodox Christians were in the majority, there were con-

clearly aware o f it, as is ev id en t from th e A rabic sources. A l-B on d ârî, H is to ire

d e s S e ljo u cid e s de l'Iraq, ed. M . H o u tsm a (L eid en , 1889), 29; w a ’l-rüm f î
th a lâ th m i’a t a lf w a-yazîd û n a m a b a in rüm ï w a-rüsî w a-gh u zzï w a-q afjâq î
w a-kurjï w a-ab k h âzï w a-khazarï w a-faranjî w a-arm anî.

16 On th e d ifferen ce in p ay b etw een n a tiv e and foreign troop s see C on­

sta n tin e P o rp h yrogen itu s, D e C erem o n iis A u la e B iza n tin a e , ed. J. R eisk e and
I. B ekker, 1 (B o n n , 1829), 655ff.

17 L. B reh ier, “L es aven tu res d ’un ch ef n orm and en o rien t au XI© siècle . . .
R o u ssel de B a illeu l,” R e v u e d es cours e t con feren ces, 20 (19 1 1 /1 2 ), 172-188;
G . Schlu m b erger, “D e u x chefs norm and s d es arm ées b y z a n tin e s au X I e siècle:
sceau x d e H er v é e t d e R o u ssel de B ail!eu l,,, R e v u e H is to n q u e , 16 (1881), 289-303.

18 O n th e p rob lem o f eth n ograp h y se e C. C ah en , “L e p rob lèm e eth n iq u e

e n A n a to lie,” Jo u rn a l o f W o rld H is to r y , 2 (1954), 347-62; P . Charanis, “On th e
E th n ie C o m p o sitio n o f B y za n tin e A sia M in or,” Τίροσφορά d s Στίλπω να Π.
Κυριακίδην (T h essa lo n ik i, 1953), 140-47; J. Starr, T h e J ew s in th e B y za n tin e
E m p ir e 641-1204 (1 9 3 9); F . T ou rn eb ize, H is to ire p o litiq u e e t religieu se d e
VA rm é n ie (P aris, 1910); M . G yon i, “L O eu v re d e K ek au m en os, source de
l ’h istoire rou m a in e,” R e v u e d ’h isto ire co m p a rée , 23 (1945), 96-180; also th e
n u m erous a rticles o f N . A d on tz on th e A rm en ians.
 siclcrable numbers of heretic Bogom ils 10 in the western prov­
inces and M onophysites and Gregorians in Asia Minor. T h e
ethnic-religious problem was most pressing in Asia M inor in
the eleventh century where the eastward expansion of Byzan­
tium had brought w ithin the empire large numbers of A rm eni­
ans, Syrians, and Georgians. Of these only the Georgians
were Orthodox, w hile most of the Armenians and Syrians had
not accepted the Council of 451 at Chalcedon.
W e do not know nearly as m uch as we should like about
Byzantine Asia Minor, and this is particularly true concerning
ethnic, religious, and linguistic problems. It has been m ain­
tained by a num ber of scholars that Asia Minor fell with such
astounding rapidity to the Turks because the population had
only been touched by a thin veneer of H ellenism or Byzantine
civilization, and as a result the provincials were never assimi­
lated. T h ey were largely indifferent to the concept of the
Byzantine Empire. As is the case with most generalizations,
This statement errs in oversim plifying. For here we are deal­
ing with an area of land which is larger in extent than modern
France, and while it is true that large portions of Asia M inor
were non-H ellenic, yet Asia M inor was the source of the
spiritual and physical strength of Byzantium and the O rthodox
Church during the reign of the M acedonian dynasty and its
/ predecessors. It was from Asia M inor that came the leading
lights of the Eastern Church, hosts of saints and patriarchs,
imperial dynasties, the great aristocratic families, and the
peasant soldiery. So that in one sense Asia M inor was the cradle
of the Byzantine Em pire’s strength.! It would be more nearly
correct to say that while eastern Asia M inor was out and out
V Arm enian, Georgian, Kurdish, Syrian, etc., western and cen­
tral Asia M inor to the province of Cappadocia was greatly in-
I fluenced by H ellenism . W hile it is true that colonies of Arme-
/ nians and Jews were to be found in western Asia M inor, and
colonies of Greek O rthodox in the eastern part, one may
divide Asia M inor into Greek and non-Greek at Cappadocia.
It was because of the conflict between the ethnic and religious
groups of Asia M inor, rather than because of the abseneqf19

19 D . O bolen sk y, T h e B o g o m iles (C am b ridge, 1948).

 HY/ Λ N Ml IM M il S O C I A L HASİS Ol· DECLINK 169

ol .i (ö r e k ethnie group that the Byzantine collapse in Asia

M inor was accelerated .20
T h e Armenians, loc ated as they were in eastern Anatolia,
had long been the bone of contention between the two great
powers on (heir east and west. A gifted and courageous people
they had vigorously resisted absorption by Byzantines, Sas-
sanids, and Muslims, but at best their political position had
a lw a y s been precarious. T h e increase of internal strife
amongst them and the expansion of Byzantium in the east
during the tenth and eleventh centuries resulted in the
wholesale incorporation of Arm enian lands by the Byzantines.
In the year 968 T aron was annexed, in 1000 T aiq, in 1021
Vaspuracan, and in 1045 A ni. T h e displaced Arm enian
princes were now given other lands w ithin the em pire at
Lycandus, Cappadocia, Tzam andos, Kharsianon, Cilicia, and
Mesopotamia. W ith these princes there came tens of thou­
sands of Arm enians as immigrants who now altered the ethnic
and religious com position of these provinces. T his, of course,
led to bitter strife with the Greek O rthodox population al­
ready in the area .21
T h e central governm ent in the eleventh century made
strenuous but short sighted efforts to assimilate the Arm enians
and the Syrian M onophysites of the eastern provinces by forc­
ing ecclesiastical union upon them. T h is religious tension,
centering about the Council of Chalcedon and the nature of
Christ, probably had more im m ediate disastrous results for
Byzantium than did the split w ith Rom e in 1054.
T h e persecution of these eastern subjects of the empire
was renewed in 1029-30 when the Byzantine governm ent sum­
moned the Syrian ecclesiastics to appear before the synod in
Constantinople. T h e Greeks failed to enforce union on the
Syrians and the Jacobite patriarch was exiled to Macedonia.
T h e newly elected Syrian patriarch as a result now fled the
20 J. L aurent, “L es origines m éd iév a les de la q u estio n arm én ien n e,” R e v u e
den é tu d es a rm én ien n es, 1 (1920), 35-54.
21 T o u rn eb ize, o p .cit., pp. 118-126; R . G rou sset, H is to ire d e V A rm énie d es
origin es à 1071 (P aris, 1947), 493, 531-5, 553-5, 547-80. F o r th e C h alced on ian
A rm enians in eastern A sia M inor, th e so -called T za to i, see th e in terestin g
article o f I. D o e n s, “N ic o n d e la M o n tagn e N o ir e ,1’’ B y za n tio n , 24 (1954), 134.
Il
170

Byzantine Empire and henceforth took up his residence at

Amicla amongst the Muslims, where he would be free of the
imperial authorities. T h is was followed by a persecution of
the Syrians, particularly in the cities of Antioch and M elitene.
At the same time, the transference of the Arm enian Catholicus
from A ni to Sebasteia after the cession of the kingdom of A ni
to Byzantium brought the Arm enians in for their share of
imperial coercion. By 1040 the situation between Greeks and
Syrians in the city of M elitene had become so tense that the
patriarch in Constantinople issued a pronouncem ent on mat­
ters of inheritance in m ixed marriages between O rthodox and
M onophysites and on the testim ony of M onophysites in court.
T hese rulings of course favored the Greeks and constituted
substantial lim itations on the basic rights of the Syrians .22
T h e attempt to force union on the Syrians and Arm enians
reached a clim ax during the reign of Constantine X Ducas.
In 1063 an edict was issued ordering all those who did not ac­
cept the Chalcedonian faith to be driven out of the Byzantine
city of M elitene, and a few months later an order was issued
to burn the holy books and the holy mysteries of the Arm enian
and Syrian churches. In 1064 the Syrian patriarch, Athanasius,
was taken, along with his bishops, and imprisoned in the
residence of the Greek m etropolitan of M elitene. T h en five
months later they were ordered to proceed to Constantinople,
Athanasius dying on the way. A m ong those led to Constanti­
nople was his nephew Ignatius, m etropolitan of M elitene.
H ere he was accused of spreading M onophysite propaganda,
and when in defining his confession of faith before the synod
he refused to recognize the council of Chalcedon and the two

22 V . G rum el, L e s re g e stes d es a c te s d u p a tria rc a t d e C o n sta n tin o p le ,

(P aris, 1956), 253-5, 258; M ich ael th e Syrian, C h ron iqu e, transi. J. C h abot,
3 (P aris, 1906), 140-5,160-1. M ich ael, III.280, m en tio n s th a t w h en th e B y za n tin e
general M a n ia ces to o k th e c ity o f E d essa th e S yrian C h ristians fled alon g w ith
th e M u slim p o p u la tio n from th e ad van cin g G reek arm y. M a tth ew o f E d essa,
C h ro n iq u e de 952 à 1136, transi. E . D u lau rier (P aris, 1858), 95-8. T h e m o st
d e ta ile d in fo rm ation is to be foun d in th e G reek sources ed ited b y G . F ick er
E rla sse d e s P a tria rch en v o n K o n s ta n tin o p e l A lex io s S tu d ite s (K ie l, 1911), 8-42.
A ssem an i, “J oan n is A b d o n V ita ex M ich a ele E p iscop o T a n e o s,” B ib lio th e c a
O H entalis, 2 (R o m e , 1721), 150.
 BYZANTIUM THK SOCIAL BASIS OF DECLINE 171

n.iiuics of Christ, he was exiled lo M l Ganos in Macedonia

for three years. In 1060 Khatchik II, the Arm enian Catholi-
c us, and several of his bishops had also been sum m oned to
Constantinople where they were held virtual prisoners until
1063. In 1065 the emperor ordered not only the Arm enian
ecclesiastics to present themselves at the court in Constanti­
nople again, but this time he ordered also that the Arm enian
princes, Adorn and Aboucahl Ardzrouni, should be present.
T hese two princes were shortly joined by Kakig Bagratouni,
the former king of Ani, who put an abrupt end to the theo­
logical discussions by refusing to adhere to the ecclesiastical
u nion .28 And though the Arm enians seem to have been al­
lowed to withdraw from the capital, they were no less em ­
bittered than the Syrians by the harsh treatment which they
had received at the hands of the Byzantine clergy and emperor.
In fact when the Bagratid prince Kakig returned to his estates
in Cappadocia he began a persecution of the Greeks by slay­
ing the m etropolitan of Caesarea. T h e Arm enian chronicler
Matthew of Edessa records that the Arm enian prince had the
Creek m etropolitan put into a sack with his large dog (nick­
named Arm en because of the Greek's hatred for the Arm e­
nians) and had his m en beat both the m etropolitan and the
animal until the enraged dog killed its master. After this the
estates of the m etropolitan were pillaged, and M atthew of
Edessa relates that Kakig had the wives of the leading Greek
nobles violated by his men. T h e Arm enian chronicler adds
that Kakig intended to desert to the Turkish sultan, however
he was eventually slain by the Greek family of M andale (Pan-
taleimon ?) in what had becom e virtually open warfare be­
tween the two peoples .2324 Some five years later when the em ­
peror Rom anus IV Diogenes passed through these provinces
the Greeks com plained to him that they had suffered more at

23 G rum e 1, o p .cit., 1.3.18-21. T h e G eorgian m on k G eorge M th a tsm id el par­

ticip a ted a t th is sy n od , M . B rosset, H is to ire d e la G éorgie, 1 (S t. P etersbu rg,
1849), 340; P eeters, H is to ire s m o n a stiq u e s géorgien n es, A n a le cta B o lla n d ia n a , 36-37
(1917-19), 136ff. M a tth ew o f E d essa, pp. 133-52, g iv es a lo n g accou n t of th e
th eo lo g ica l p o in ts o f d isp u te b etw een G reek s and A rm enians. M ich a el th e
Syrian, II I . 166-8.
24 M a tth ew o f E d essa, pp. 152-54, 183.
Il
172

the hands of the Arm enians than at the hands of the Turks.
Because of this Rom anus is reported to have sworn the de­
struction of the Arm enian faith, and to have licensed his
troops to sack the city of Sebasteia, new home of the Ardzrouni
family. Further, the Greek chronicler Attaliates remarks that
Rom anus Diogenes had been forced to be extrem ely cautious
to protect his troops so that they m ight not perish at the hands
of the Armenians w hile marching in the eastern provinces .25
It is obvious what the exacerbated state of relations be­
tween Chalcedonians and non-Chalcedonians was. M ichael
the Syrian, a M onophysite, gives us an accurate picture of the
latter's sentiments.
T h e G reeks ren ew ed th e ir b a d h a b its a n d b eg an to p ersecu te
ty ran ically th e fa ith fu l (in Syria, P ale stin e , A rm en ia, a n d C a p p a d o ­
cia) . T h u s G od was ju stly irrita te d a g a in st th e m a n d because of th is
h e sen t th e T u rk s to in v a d e (th e ir co u n try ) ,26

As a result of this religious persecution the eastern provinces

were disaffected, and in some cases actually welcom ed and led
the Turks into Asia Minor. M ichael further narrates that at
the crucial battle of Manzikert,
. . . th e A rm en ian s, w hom (th e G reeks) w ished to force to a d o p t th e ir
heresy, w ere th e first to tu r n th e ir backs a n d to flee . . . all of th e m
fled .27

In the breakdown of the imperial adm inistration of Asia

M inor just before and after Manzikert the Arm enians began
to form independent bands and to raid both the Greeks and
Syrians, and to set themselves up independently in the Taurus
m ountains .28
But this tension between Greeks and Arm enians was not
m erely religious nor was it of recent vintage. As the two lead­
ing ethnic groups in the Byzantine Empire they were often

25 A tta lia tes, 135; M ich a el th e Syrian, II I. 172-3.

26 M ich a el th e Syrian, III.154.
27 M ich a el th e S yrian, III.169; B ar H eb raeus, C h ro n o g ra p h y, transi. E . A. W .
B u d ge, 1 (L on d on , 1932), 217.
28 J. L aurent, “B y za n ce e t A n tioch e sou s le curopalate P h ila rète,” R e v u e
d e s é tu d e s a rm én ien n es, 9 (1929), 61-72.
 II
ΒΥΖΑΝΊ IUM: THE SOCIAL BASIS OF DECLINE 173

bitterly struggling for power and position. So that the petty

religious issues merely covered deeper racial and cultural
antagonism. And this was openly manifested not only between
Greeks and Gregorian Armenians, but also between Greeks
and Chalcedonian Armenians. O ne of the earliest and most
graphic expressions is in a ninth century epigram attributed
to the nun Casia .29
T h e m ost te rrib le race of th e A rm en ian s
Is d eceitfu l a n d evil to extrem es,
M ad a n d cap ricio u s a n d slan d ero u s
A n d fu ll of deceit, b ein g g reatly so by n a tu re .
O nce a wise m a n said of them :
A rm e n ia n s are evil even w h en they are obscure.
O n b e in g h o n o re d they becom e m ore evil;
O n a c q u irin g w ealth they (becom e) m ore evil o n th e w hole;
B u t w hen they becom e ex trem ely w ealthy a n d h o n o re d ,
T h e y a p p e a r to all as evil d o u b ly co m p o u n d ed .
T h is racial hatred is further reflected in the ty p ic o n of
Gregory Pacurianus, the Georgio-Armenian general of the
Chalcedonian faith, which was drawn up for his monastery at
Backogo. In the ty p ic o n is included a chapter entitled, “Con­
cerning the fact that there shall not be introduced a Greek
presbyter or m onk in my monastery, for the follow ing rea­
son.“ 30
29 T e x t in C. A. T rypanis, M e d ie v a l a n d M o d e m G re e k P o e tr y (O xford,
1951), 43. See also K. Krumbacher, “Kasia,” S itzu n g sb e ric h te d e r p h ilo s
p h ü o lo g . u n d d er h isto n sc h e n C lass d er ka yser, b a yer. A k a d e m ie d e r W issen sch aft
zu M ü n ch en ( 1897), 335-7.
Ύων Α ρ μ ενίω ν τό δεινότατον 'γένος
νπουλόν έστι και φαυλώδες εις ä y a v ,
μανιώδες τε και τρεπτόν και βασκαίνον,
πεφυσιωμένον π ά μ π λεισ τα και δόλου πλήρες*
είπ ε τις σοφός περί τούτων εΙκότως·
*Αρμένιοι φαύλοι μεν, κάν άδοξωσι,
φαυλότεροι δε γ ίν ο ν τα ι δο^ασθέντες,
7Γλουτησαντες δε φαυλότατοι καθόλου,
ύπερπλουτισθέντες (δ ε) και τιμηθέντες
φ αυλεπιφαυλότατοι δείκνυνται πάσι.
K rum bacher, lo c.cit., 336, also q u otes a proverb attrib u ted to M axim u s P lan u d es
expressing th is hatred b etw een G reek s and A rm en ians: UtΑρμένιον έχ εις φ ίλον,
χείρον* εχθρόν μη θέλε·”
30 T y p ic o n o f B ack ogo, ed. L . P e tit, T y p ic o n d e G régoire P acou rian os p o u r
Il
174

T h us if one exam ines the problems of civil strife and

ethnic-religious hatred with all their ramifications w ithin By­
zantine society, the defeat at Manzikert and the T urkish oc­
cupation of Asia M inor consequent to it seem less startling.
T h e civil wars between bureaucrats and soldiers occupied all
of Byzantium's energies in a destructive conflict. As a result
of this strife the generals removed the armies from the borders
and the bureaucrats replied by com pletely dissolving the
Byzantine indigenous armies. In their place costly and dis­
loyal mercenaries were hired, who, though they m ight be
successful in patrolling the borders, were unable to protect
the central provinces once the enem y had crossed the bor­
ders. T h e results of this strife were disastrous at Manzikert
where the Arm enian, Frankish, Uze, and Patzinak mercenaries
deserted, and when the bureaucrats, led by Andronicus Ducas,
intentionally deserted the general-emperor Rom anus D iog­
enes in order to secure power at Constantinople. W ith the
destruction and dispersal of the Byzantine armies on the
eastern frontiers of Anatolia, there were no longer any pro­
vincial armies in the heart of the em pire to defend the prov­
inces against the T urks. T h ese had for the most part been
disbanded by the bureaucrats. But even after Manzikert the
Turks were not essentially interested in a systematic conquest
of Anatolia. It was thanks to the civil strife that they were
able to occupy m uch of Anatolia quickly and easily. Both
bureaucrats and soldiers called the T urks in for m ilitary aid
during the civil wars so that the Turks were brought all the

le m o n a stè re d e P e tr itz o n (B a c k o g o ) en B u lgarie (1904), 44-5. “ΠβρΙ τον μή

κατατάσσβσθαι Ύωμαίον vpecßvTepov ^ μονάζοντα ev τ® κατ* épè μονή, καί δι' ήτινα
ττ)ν α Ιτία ν” F urther in cid en ts o f th is a n im o sity are to b e fou n d th rou gh ou t th e
chronicles. P h ilaretu s, th ou gh a C h alced on ian A rm en ian, had th e G reek troop s of
A n tio ch treach erou sly slain after th e y had h an ded th e c ity over to h im (M a tth ew
o f E d essa , 179). In th e great r e v o lt o f Bardas Scierus in th e reign o f B a sil Π , th e
G reek troop s w h o seem to h a v e h ad a particular d islik e for th e A rm en ian troop s
in th e arm y o f Scierus, m arked th em o u t for sp ecial trea tm en t and p u t th em all
to th e sw ord (C ed ren u s-S cylitzes, 11.425-26). On th e hatred b etw een G reek s and
A rm en ians in th e b eg in n in g o f th e th irteen th cen tu ry, se e P . C haranis, “O n th e
E th n ic C o m p o sitio n o f A sia M in or,” p. 144.
 BYZANTIUM: THE SOCIAL BASIS OF DECLINE 175

way to the Aegean and many walled towns and cities were
willingly handed over to them.
T h e ethnic-religious problem received a disastrous solu­
tion at the hands of the empire, but perhaps it could not have
been otherwise between the Greeks and the Armenians. T h e
imm igration of a great part of the Arm enian nation with its
strong culture into the Greek provinces produced a serious
problem for the empire. T h e attempt of the Byzantines to
assimilate the Arm enians by a forced ecclesiastical union em ­
bittered the Arm enians greatly, to the point that open war­
fare broke out between the two elem ents in the eastern prov­
inces. T h e Arm enians, who formed the most important ele­
m ent of the border guards, com pletely disorganized the bor­
der defenses, in some cases by actually bringing the T urks in,
in other instances by setting up independent political entities
in the wake of the Turkish invasions. T here can be no doubt
but that many of the Arm enians and Syrian M onophysites
saw in the Saljuks their deliverers from the hands of the Ortho­
dox Greeks.

H A R V A R D U N IV E R S IT Y
 m

BYZANTINE ΔΗΜΟΚΡΑΤΙΑ
AND THE GUILDS
IN THE ELEVENTH CENTURY
 II

I n t r o d u c t io n

E F O R E en terin g upon th e su b ject of B yzantine guilds a n d u rb a n violence

B in th e eleventh cen tu ry , it w ould be useful to set fo rth certain m ajo r

questions or observations in connection w ith m ediaeval guilds in general.
T hough th ere will be no a tte m p t to answ er these b ro ad er questions here,
nevertheless these questions will co n trib u te to a b e tte r u n d e rsta n d in g of
B y zan tin e guilds them selves an d possibly also to th e u n d erstan d in g of th e
relatio nship betw een guild organizations an d u rb a n p o litical a c tiv ity in th e
m ediaeval w orld from th e M editerranean to th e P ersian Gulf. Such a course
w ould serve th e function of p u ttin g m y own m ore p a rtic u la rize d researches on
th e B y zan tin e guilds in to a b ro ad er a n d perhaps m ore m eaningful co n tex t.
T he first of these o bservations is th e a p p a re n t sim ila rity of m an y aspects
of L atin , B y zan tin e, an d Islam ic societies in th e m ediaeval period. Islam ,
B y zan tiu m , a n d th e L a tin W est w ere all, to a lesser or g re a te r degree, th e
heirs of G raeco-R om an a n tiq u ity . T he v ery geography of these th ree cu ltu ra l
blocks forced th e h eritage of la te a n tiq u ity up o n th e em erging societies.
Secondly, in m a n y of th e provinces w here these th re e cu ltu res developed an d
cam e to pred o m in ate, a n u m b er of th e form s of G raeco-R om an econom ic
o rganization continued, th o u g h of course in v arying degrees. C onsequently, th e
form s of th e organization of ag ricu ltu ral, artisan , and com m ercial energies in
these th re e areas often bore c e rta in resem blances.
T he th ir d observation is m ore in th e n a tu re of an unan sw ered question. To
w h at e x te n t are these sim ilarities in B yzantine, L atin , a n d Islam ic econom ic
organization due to com m on origins a n d to w h at e x te n t to like necessities
a n d fu n ctio n s? To p u t th e question in m ore obvious te rm s: To w h at degree
was th e organization of craftsm en a n d m erch an ts in to a p p a re n tly sim ilar cor­
p o ratio n s u n d er th e control of u rb a n officials in P av ia, C onstantinople, an d
D am ascus, say in th e te n th c e n tu ry ,1 due to com m on in stitu tio n a l an cestry ,
an d to w h at degree w as it due to a com m on need of som e k in d of control of
th e lab o r forces an d p ro d u ctio n of u rb a n society? T here is a sim ilarity , an d
how does one explain it ? B u t a sim ila rity w hich is even m ore strik in g lies in
th e political a c tiv ity , violence, a n d political pro g ram s of th ese u rb a n organiza­
tio n s w hich fill a significant n u m b e r of pages in th e m ed iaev al L a tin an d A rab
chronicles. L a tin a n d A rabic sources are consciously se p a ra te d from th e
B y zan tin e sources in th e preceding sta te m e n t. F o r th o u g h Islam ists h av e
ac c u m u la ted a b u n d a n t te stim o n y as to th e political activ ities of th e akhis,2
1 J . Lestocquoy, A u x origines de la bourgeoisie: le gouvernement des patriciens ( X I e- X V e siècles)
(Paris, 1952), 17 . G. Mickwitz, Die Kartellfunktionen der Zünfte und ihre Bedeutung bei der Entstehung
der Zunftwesens (Helsingfors, 1936), 18 8 -19 0 .
2 F . Taeschner, “ A k h i," Encyclopedia of Islam , 2nd ed., I (i960), 3 2 1 —3 2 3 . C. Cahen, “ A h dath ,”
in the same volume, 256, suggests that the ahdath were perhaps a survival of the old Byzantine fac­
tions in the cities of the Levan t. I f this is so, it would strengthen the whole likelihood of the existence
of certain other similarities between Muslim and Byzantine cities.28 9

19 289
m
290

an d though th e dynam ic consequences of guild p a rtic ip a tio n in th e activ e p ol­

itical life of m an y of th e w estern tow ns are k no w n ,3 n o th in g of th e so rt has
been connected w ith th e B y zan tin e guilds .4 I t does seem stran g e to th e h is­
to ria n of B y zan tiu m th a t, w hereas it h as been established for b o th w estern
a n d Islam ic m ediaeval society th a t th e in h a b ita n ts of u rb a n cen ters often
found expression for th e ir political n a tu re s an d political p ro g ram s th ro u g h th e ir
econom ic organizations, th e guilds, th e sta n d a rd tre a tm e n ts of B y zan tin e
econom ic an d u rb a n life are alm ost devoid of references to such facts. In m aking
th is sta te m e n t, one is of course aw are th a t th e resu lts of th is research will
becom e suspect; suspect as h av in g been forced to ap p ear u n d er a certain
T o ynbeean c o n strain t, so th a t th e conclusions will n o t be a d m itte d before
h isto ry ’s trib u n a l of fact. B u t th is is n o t a t all valid. Such a ju d g em en t
w ould te n d to condem n th e value of c o m p arativ e h isto ry . F o r even th o u g h
m ost historians are agreed th a t h isto ry does n o t rep eat itself as ex actly as
P olybius felt it did in connection w ith th e h isto ry of R o m an political in s titu ­
tions, or as Ib n K h ald u n felt it did in connection w ith th e rise a n d decline of
d y n astic pow er, th e y will agree th a t sim ilar situ a tio n s recur. G iven th e above
sim ilarities of u rb a n an d socio-econom ic organ izatio n in th e th re e g reat
m ediaeval cu ltu ra l spheres, given also th e political artic u la tio n of th e co rp o ra­
tio ns in th e W est an d in th e Islam ic realm , one m ig h t w ith som e profit a p ­
proach th e B y zan tin e sources w ith a view to w a rd ascertain in g w h eth er or n o t
th e B y zan tin e corporations w ere likewise active in u rb a n political life .5

3 R . Lopez, “ The Trade of Medieval Europe: The South,” 2 9 5 -29 6 , and M. Postan, “ The Trade of
Medieval Europe: The N orth ,” 2 2 0 -2 2 2 , in The Cambridge Economic History, ed. b y M. Postan and E .
Rich, I I (Cambridge, 1952).
4 A . R udakov, Ocherki vizantiiskoi kul'tury po dannym-grecheskoi agiografii (Moscow, 19 17 ), p. 120 ,
was the first, to m y knowledge, to hint at the connection in Byzantium . Most recently A . K azhdan,
“ Gorod i derevnia v Vizantii v X I - X I I v v .,” X I I e Congrès International des Études Byzantines, R a p ­
ports, I (Ohrid, 19 6 1), 43, has emphasized the activity of the tradesmen in the twelfth century. The
author has attempted to draw the same connections for tenth-century Constantinople in his Derevnià
i gorod v Vizantii I X - X vv. (Moscow, i960), 3 75 , 386, 392, but on the basis of inconclusive evidence.
5 F o r comments on the elements of continuity between Graeco-Roman antiquity on the one hand
and mediaeval Latin and Islamic civilization on the other hand, and also for remarks on the elements
of sim ilarity in the cultural, political, and economic realm, see the following: C. Dawson, The M aking
of Europe (New Yo rk, 19 57 ), 2 5 - 7 2 , for general cultural and political continuity in the W est. In the
sphere of economic continuity, scholarship during the first quarter of the present century had moved
aw ay from the theory of Rom an origins of the western guilds to the theory of completely independent
origins, J . Kulischer, Allgemeine Wirtschaftsgeschichte des Mittelalters und der Neuzeit, I (Munich-
Berlin, 1928), 1 8 1 - 1 9 2 . Since then there has been a gradual and limited modification of this stand to
the point where possibilities of continuity of Rom an and sim ilarity to Byzantine economic institu­
tions are being reconsidered. G. Mickwitz, “ Un problème d ’influence: Byzance et l’économie de
l’Occident médiéval,” Annales d'histoire économique et sociale, V I I I (1936), 2 1 - 2 8 . R . Lopez, op. cit.,
269 -280 , 29 5-29 6 , comments on the elements of economic continuity and survival in Italy , and on
the political activities of the guilds in eleventh-twelfth-century Italy . M. Postan, op. cit., 1 5 7 - 1 5 9 ,
2 2 0 -2 2 2 , comments on the same phenomena in northern Europe. F . Dölger, “ Die frühbyzantinische
und byzantinisch beeinflusste S ta d t,” Attı de Congresso Internazionale di Studi sull' Alto Medioevo
(Spoleto, 1958), 17 -2 0 , 3 2 - 3 3 , on guilds and cities. B . Mendi, “ Les corporations byzantines,” B y -
zantinoslavica, X X I I (19 61), 3 0 1 - 3 1 9 . V . Hrochova, “ L a révolte des Zélotes à Thessalonique et les
communes italiennes,” B y zantinoslavica, X X I I (1961), 1 - 1 5 .
In the realm of Islam : G. von Grunebaum, Medieval Islam. A Study in Cultural Orientation, 2nd
ed. (Chicago, 1953)» 2—3, 8, and B . Lewis, The Arabs in History, 2nd ed. (London, 1954), 66, 8 6 ,1 3 8 - 1 3 9 ,
on economic, political, artistic, and intellectual continuity. On the elements of continuity in the cities,
guilds, and the fiscal system , B . Lewis, “ The Islamic Guilds,” The Economic History Review, V I I I
(I 937 )> 2 0 - 3 7 ; C. Cahen, “ Zur Geschichte der städtischen Gesellschaft im islamischen Orient des
 H
Δ Η Μ Ο Κ Ρ Α Τ Ι Α ANI) E L E V E N T H - C E N T . GUILDS 291

B yzantine δημοκρατία,0 th a t is th e political a g itatio n s an d m an ifestatio n s

of th e demos, th e u rb a n populace, h as been for th e p a s t half c e n tu ry th e
central them e of a nu m b er of learn ed studies. I n picking up th is seem ingly
ex h au sted th em e once m ore, th is stu d y will c o n cen trate alm ost exclusively
upon th e intense political ag itatio n s a n d d em onstratio n s th a t w ere c h a ra c ter­
istic of th e C o n stan tin o p o litan scene in th e elev en th cen tu ry . T he v iru len t
p articip atio n of th e u rb a n populace in th e political life of th e em pire is well
know n to th e h isto ria n of B y z a n tiu m during th e earlier centuries, especially
from th e fifth to th e seventh, a t w hich tim e th e local u rb a n groups, th e so-
called dem es (m ilitia) a n d th e circus p a rtie s (Blues a n d Greens), w ere th e
vehicles of p o p u la r political expression .6 7 Sim ilar a c tiv ity seem s to h av e b u rst
fo rth in tw elfth -cen tu ry C onstantinople w hen th e citizen ry raised a n o u tcry
ag ain st Ita lia n econom ic d o m in a tio n .8 N icetas C honiates h as recorded a vivid
d escription of one such o u tb re a k (th a t of M ay 2 , 1 1 7 1 ) w hich is p a rtic u la rly
w o rth y of reference here :

“ T he th ro n g s of o th er cities rejoice in disorder a n d are w ith g reat dif­

ficulty k e p t in h an d . B u t th e populace of th e m a rk e t place in C o n stan tin ­
ople is th e m ost disorderly of all, rejoicing in rashness an d w alking in
crooked w ays. As it is governed b y different peoples 9 a n d because of th e

M ittelalters,” Saeculum, I X (1958), 59—76 ; F . Dölger, Beiträge zur Geschichte der byzantinsichen F in an z­
verwaltung besonders des 10 . und 1 1 . Jahrhunderts (Leipzig, 1927), 94.
6 Consult the remarks of G. Bratianu, “ Em pire et Démocratie à Byzan ce,” Byzantinische Zeit­
schrift, X X X V I I (19 37), 8 7 -9 1 , on the meaning of the word δημοκρατία in Byzantine times. See also
the detailed study of D. Xanalatos, Βυζαντινά Μελετήματα. Συμβολή είς τήν Ιστορίαν του βυίαντινου
λαού (Athens, 19 4 0)· A . Kazhdan, “ Sotsial’n yï sostav naseleniia vizantiïskikh gorodov v I X —X w . , ”
Vizantiiskii Vremennik, V I I I (1956), 8 7-9 0 , and N . Skabalanovich, Vizantiiskoe gosudarstvo i tserkov’
v * X I veke (St. Petersburg, 1884), 2 3 3 - 2 3 5 , for a description of the make-up of the city populace.
7 The literature on the circus factions and demes is considerable, amongst the more important
items of which are the following. A . Maricq, “ Factions de cirque et partis populaires,” Bulletin de
la Classe des Lettres, Académie royale de Belgique, X X X V I (1950), 396—4 2 1. A . Diakonov, Vizantiïskie
dem y i faktsii (τα μέρη) v V —V I I w . , ” Vizantiiskii Sbornik, I (1945), 14 4 —227. G. Manojlovié, “ L e
peuple de Constantinople,” Byzantion, V I (1936), 6 1 7 —7 16 . F . D vom ik, “ The Circus Parties in B y ­
zantium,” Byzantina-Metabyzantina, I (1946), 1 1 9 - 1 3 4 ; see also his remarks in The Photian Schism,
History and Legend (Cambridge, 1948), 6 -9 .
8 F o r details on the urban outbreaks in the twelfth century one m ay consult the studies of; F .
Cognasso, Partiti politici e lotte dinastiche in Bizanzio alla morte di Manuele Comneno. Reale Accademia
delle scienze di Torino, ı ç ı ı —1 2 (Turin, 1 9 1 2 ) ; F . Chalandon, Les Comnènes : Études sur Γ empire by­
zantin aux X I e et au X I I e siècles (Paris, 1 9 0 0 -1 2 ) ; H . F . Brown, “ The Venetians and the Venetian
Quarter in Constantinople to the Close of the Tw elfth Century,” Jo u rn al of Hellenic Studies, X L
(1920), 68—88; E . Besta, L a cattura dei Veneziani in Oriente (Feltre, 1920 ); M. Sm zium ov, “ Vnutren-
niaia politika Andronika Komnina i razgrom prigorodov Konstantinopolia v 1 1 8 7 godu,” Vizantiiskii
Vremennik, X I I (19 57), 58—7 4 ; A . Kazhdan, “ Gorod i derevnia v Vizantii v X I - X I I w . , ” X I I e Congrès
International des Études Byzantines, Rapports, I (Ohrid, 19 6 1), 4 1—42.
9 The writings of the twelfth-century poet Joh n Tzetzes bear colorful testimony to the polyglot
nature of the Constantinopolitan population. In Chiliades, ed. T . Kiessling (Leipzig, 1826), lines
3 6 0 -36 9 , he remarks both on the polyglot and corrupt nature of the citizens :

OO yàp πάντων έστίν όμός θρόος, ούδ’ ϊα γήρυς,

’Αλλά γλώσσα μέμικταη πολύκλεπτοι δ’ είσίν άνδρες,
Οί πόλιν yàp τήν άνασσαν ναίοντες Κωνσταντίνου,
ΟύχΙ μιας φωνής είσΐ καί ΙΘνους ένός μόνου,
Μίξεις γλωσσών δέ περισσών, άνδρες τών πολυκλέπτων,
Κρήτες καί Τούρκοι, ΆλανοΙ, ‘ Ρόδιοι τε καί Χΐοι,

19’
m
292

v a rie ty of th e trad es, one m ay say th a t its m in d is easily altered. B u t since

th e w orst alw ays wins out, an d one scarcely finds am ongst th e sour grapes
a ripe one, th e populace of th e m a rk e t place u pon w h atev er u n d e rta k ­
ing it em barks, does n o t do so reasonably, no r w ith good will, n o r su itab ly .
B u t a t a m ere w ord it disposes itself to rebellion an d becom es m ore
d e stru ctiv e th a n fire . . . accordingly, it suffers from an in co n stan cy of
ch a ra c ter an d is u n tru stw o rth y . N or are these people ever d ete c te d doing
th ose things w hich are m ost ad v antageous to them selves, n o r w ere th e y
ever persuaded b y others who counselled th e m for th e ir own good. B u t
th e y alw ays do those things w hich are d e trim e n ta l. . . . T heir indifference to
th e rulers is preserved in th e m as if it w ere inborn. H im w hom to d a y
th e y raise as legal m a g istrate, th is sam e one n e x t y ear th e y will te a r to
pieces .10 T hey do n o t perform these th in g s w ith an y logic, b u t th ro u g h
sim ple-m indedness an d ignorance .” 11
I t w ould be strange indeed, how ever, if betw een th e sev en th an d th e tw elfth
cen tu ries th e in h a b ita n ts of th e largest an d w ealthiest city in E u ro p e (w ith a

'Απλώς έθνους του σύμπαντος, των άπασών χωρουντες,

"Απαντες οΐ κλεπτίσεροι και κεκιβδηλευμένοι,
Χειροτονούνται άγιοι τη πόλει Κωνσταντίνου.
*6) τής τοσαύτης ύβρεως άνθρώποις των άσκοπων.
The verses edited b y G. Moravcsik in “ Barbarische Sprachreste in der Théogonie des Johannes Tzetzes,”
Byzantinisch-neugriechische Jahrbücher, V I I (1930), 356 —357 , are of particular interest in this respect,
for they reflect again the variety of tongues to be heard on the streets of Constantinople. Tzetzes
boasts to the reader that he can address a person in seven languages, and what is more he implies
that he can speak each with a good accent :
„και Σκύθην Σκύθαις ευροις με, Λατίνον τοίς Λατίνοις
καί πασιν άλλοις έθνεσιν ως ενα γένους τούτων.
και Σκύθην άσπαίόμενος ούτω προσαγορεύω**
σαλαμαλέκ άλτή (— ) σαλαμαλέκ άλτουγεπ.
καί ΓΤέρσαις πάλιν περσικώς ούτω προσαγορεύω*
άσάν χαΐς κουρούπαρία χαντάίαρ χαραντάση.
τω δε Λατίνω προσφωνώ κατά Λατίνων γλώ σσαν
βένε βενέστι δόμινε, βένε βενέστι φράτερ,
ούνδε ές ετ δεκούαλε προβίντίια βενέστι;
κόμοδο, φράτερ, βενέστι ΐνίσταν τΐιβιτάτεμ;
πεδόνε, καβα(λλά)ριους, περμάρε, βίς μοράρ(ι);
τοϊς Άλανοΐς προσφθέγγομαι κατά την τούτων γλώ σσαν
ταπαγχάς μέσφιλι χοινά κορθιν (------- )
τό φάρνετίν κίντίι μέσφιλι καιτερφουά(— ) ουγγε.
τοΤς δ' "Αραψιν άραβικώς ( -------- ) προσ(λέγω)·
άλενταμόρ βενένεντε σιτη μουλέ σεπάχα.
πάλιν τοίς ‘ Ρώς ως εχουσιν έθος προσαγορεύω·
τό σδρά πράτε, σέστριτία καί (τό) δόβρα δένη λέγω*
τοϊς δ' άρ’ Έβραίοις προσφυώς έβραϊκώς προσλέγω*
μεμακωμένε βηθφαγή βεελϋεβούλ τιμαΐε,
εβερ έργαμ μαράν άθά βείέκ εΐστοχω(— ).”
10 This line would im ply that the citizens played an active role in the appointment and removal of
governmental officials.
11 N icetas Choniates, Historia, ed. I. Bekker (Bonn, 1835) (hereafter, Nicetas Chômâtes), 3 0 4 -3 0 5 .
Chômâtes is the single most important text for the events concerning Byzantine urban violence in
the twelfth century.
 m
Δ Η Μ Ο Κ Ρ Α Τ Ι Α ANJ) E L E V E N T H - C E N T . G U I L D S 293

po pulation of p erh ap s 500 ,00 ο )12 h ad failed to leave an y significant reco rd in

th e pages of h isto ry as to th eir political existence. As a m a tte r of fact, one
does see in th e te n th - an d above all in th e eleven th -cen tu ry B y zan tin e ch ro n i­
clers, as well as in th e som ew hat la te r A rab chronicle of Ib n al-A thir, a b u n d a n t
testim ony to th e fact th a t th e C onstantinopolitan s h a d n o t ab an d o n ed th e ir
tim e honored ta ste for strife, rebellion, an d riot. The citizen ry of th e cap ital
p layed im p o rta n t roles in th e deposition of four em perors (Michael V, M ichael V I,
M ichael V II, N icephorus B otaniates), a n d it becom es ev id en t from th e sources
th a t th e em perors a tte m p te d , increasingly, to w in th e su p p o rt of th e u rb an ites
b y extensive g ra n ts an d favors.
W h at is m ost in terestin g is th e fact th a t th e h e a rt of all th is u rb a n political
a c tiv ity seem s to have been th e v a st guild system of th e city , as will soon
becom e ap p a re n t. I t w ould seem e x tra o rd in a ry th a t th is connection betw een
th e a rtisa n class an d th e e lev en th -cen tu ry u rb a n d istu rb an ces should h av e been
neglected b y th e social h isto rian of B y zan tiu m , for, as w as m en tio n ed earlier,
th e connections betw een u rb a n violence a n d guilds h av e been described in
d etail b y h isto rian s of th e m ediaeval W est as well as b y th e h isto rian s of
m ediaeval Islam . T he B y zan tin e guilds, th o u g h th e y too h av e been stu d ied in
a num ber of significant m onographs an d articles, h av e been stu d ied p rim arily
from th e p o in t of view of th e ir econom ic significance an d o rg an izatio n .13 J . B.

12 A . Andreades, " L e montant du budget de l’empire b yzan tin ," Revue des études grecques, X X X I V
(19 21), 29. See also the remarks of P. Charanis in his review of G. Downey, Constantinople in the Age
of Justinian (Oklahoma, i960), in Speculum, X X X V I (1961), 477—478, where he defends this more
generous estimate of the c ity ’s population.
13 The literature on the guilds and tradesmen is extensive and scattered throughout a wide variety
of periodicals. A satisfactory monograph on this vast and complex subject is still lacking. I t is hoped
that the following bibliography, though not complete, will be of some use. F . I. Uspenskii, "K o n stan -
tinopol’skiï eparkh," Izvîèstiià russkago arkheologicheskago instituta v Konstantinopolîè, IV , 2 (1899),
79—104. J . Nicole, L e livre du préfet ou Védit de l’empereur Léon le sage sur les corporations de Constan­
tinople (Mémoire de l’Institut National Genevois, X V I I I ) (Geneva-Basel, 1894). H. Gehrig, "D a s
Zunftwesen Konstantinopels im X Jahrh un dert," Hildebrands Jahrbücher für Nationalökonomie und
Statistik, 93 (1909), 5 7 7 —596. A . Stöckle, Spätrömische und byzantinische Zünfte Klio, Beiheft 9 (Leipzig,
1 9 1 1 ) ; reviewed b y E . Meyer, Byzantinische Zeitschrift, X X I (19 12), 5 3 1 —5 3 5 , and b y Bezobrazov,
Vizantiiskii Vremennik, X V I I I (19 11) , 30—38, 2nd pagination. E . Chernousov, "R im skie i vizantiıskie
tsekhi," Zhurnal ministerstva narodnago prosvîèshcheniià, 52 (Sept. 19 14 ), 1 5 4 - 1 7 8 . A . Rudakov,
Ocherki vizantiiskoi kul’tury po dannym grecheskoi agiografii (Moscow, 19 17 ), 1 2 0 fï. C. Macri, L ’ Organisa­
tion de l’économie urbaine dans Byzance sous la dynastie de Macédoine (Paris, 19 2 5 ); reviewed b y F .
Dölger, Byzantinisch-neugriechische Jahrbücher, V (1927), 2 3 5 —243, and b y F . Ganshof, Byzantion,
I V (1927), 658—660. T . Begleres, "Άνακοίνωσις περί εμπορικών σωματείων ή συστημάτων παρά βυζαντινών
καί περί ταβουλαρίων," Έπετηρίς Εταιρείας Βυζαντινών Σπουδών, V I I (1930)» 4 Ι 4~ 4 1 ^· G. Zora, L e cor-
porazioni bizantine (Rome, 1 9 3 1 ) ; reviewed b y G. Ostrogorsky, Byzantinische Zeitschrift, X X X I I I
(19 33), 3 8 0 -3 9 5 , where he includes a considerable bibliography on the Book of the Prefect. A . Christ-
ophilopoulos, To sΕπαρχικόν βιβλίον Δέοντος του Σοφού καί αί συντεχνίαι έν Βυϋαντίω (Athens, 1935) >
reviewed b y G. Mickwitz, Byzantinisch-neugriechische Jahrbücher, X I I (1936), 368—3 75 . Mickwitz, “ Un
problème d ’influence: Byzance et l’économie de l’Occident m édiéval," Annales d ’histoire économique
et sociale, V I I I (1936), 2 1 —28. Mickwitz, Die Kartellfunktionen der Zünfte (Helsingfors, 19 36 ); reviewed
b y H . Seeveking, Deutsche Literaturzeitung, L I X (1938), 928—930. D. Ghinnis, "Τ ό έπαρχικόν βιβλίον
καί ot νόμοι Ίουλιανου του Άσκαλωνίτου," Έπετηρίς Εταιρείας Βυζαντινών Σπουδών, X I I I ( ΐ 937 )> 1 8 1 —1 9 1 .
L . Bréhier gives a review of literature on the Book of the Prefect in Revue historique, C L X X X I V (1938),
3 5 5 —358 . A . Christophilopoulos, "Ζητήματα τινά εκ του έπαρχικου βιβλίου," Ελληνικά, X I (ΐ939)>
1 2 5 —136 . R . S. Lopez, " S ilk Industry in the Byzantine E m p ire," Speculum, X X (1945), 1—4 2 ; reviewed
b y A . Kazhdan, Vizantiiskii Vremennik, I I I (1950), 2 9 0 -2 9 3. P. Koukoules, Βυζαντινών βίος καί
πολιτισμός, II, ι (Athens, 1948), 17 9 —249. Μ. Siuzium ov, K niga Eparkha. Ustavy vizantiiskikh tsekhov
X v. (Sverdlovsk, 194 9 ); reviewed b y A . K azhdan and M. Zaborov, Vizantiiskii Vremennik, V (1952),
2 7 3 -2 7 6 . Siuzium ov, "Rem eslo i torgovlia v Konstantinopole v nachale X v .,” Vizantiiskii Vremennik,
m
294

B u ry cam e close to discovering th e relationship of guilds and violence in

B y zan tiu m m an y decades ago. B u t he m isin te rp re te d a critical te x t. H e
recognized th a t th e te x t in question referred to political a c tiv ity on th e p a rt
of certain u rb a n groups, th e έταιρεϊα, w hich he tra n sla te d to m ean p riv a te
political clubs .14 As we shall see, th e p hrase referred to th e public guilds. A nd
th is p u ts in to bold relief one of th e basic difficulties of th e problem , th a t of
sem antics. F o r m an y of th e te rm s used in th e te x ts are am biguous an d vague,
an d could refer n o t only to guilds b u t to organizations in general.

T h e G u il d s P r io r to th e E lev en t h Ce n t u r y

W h a t do we know , if a n y th in g , of th e B y zan tin e guilds p rio r to th e elev en th

c e n tu ry th a t m ight suggest th e ir political p o te n tia l ? F irst th e re are th e sc a t­
te re d references in th e chronicles which, because of th e e x tra o rd in a ry n a tu re
of a p a rtic u la r event, th e chronicler has chosen to record. T h a t is to say, v ery
little has been preserved. T hese m eagre sources are su p p lem en ted b y th e Book
of the Eparch, The Book of Ceremonies, a n d th e lives of th e saints.

j . Political Activities
W e hav e records of “p o litical” a c tiv ity am ongst th e guildsm en as far b ack
as th e reign of J u stin ia n I, w hen m em bers of th e jew elers guild, th e argyro-
pratai, p lo tte d to assassinate th e em peror a n d to th is en d supplied th e ir ac­
com plices w ith fifty pounds of gold (3,600 nomismata) .15 In 623 H eraclius left
C onstantinople, accom panied b y a form al procession, to greet th e A v ar K h a n

I V (19 51), i l —4 1. S. Runciman, “ Byzantine Trade and In dustry,” Cambridge Economic History, ed. b y
M. Postan and E . Rich (Cambridge, 1952), 8 6 - 1 1 8 . A . Kazhdan, “ Tsekhi i gosudarstvennye masterskie
V Konstantinopole v I X —X v v .,” Vizantiiskii Vremennik, V I (19 53), 1 3 2 - 1 5 5 . G. Spyridakis, “ Τό έργον
του μιτωτου κατά τό Έπαρχικόν βιβλίον Δέοντος του Σοφού,” Mélanges, ed. b y Ο. et P. Merlier, I I (Athens,
1:953), 4 1 7 -4 2 3 . P. Nasledova, “ Remeslo i torgovlia Fessaloniki kontsa I X - nachala X v . po dannym
Ioanna K am en iaty,” Vizantiiskii Vremennik, V I I I (1956), 6 1—84. I· Fihman, “ K kharakteristike
korporatsiï vizantiiskogo E g ip ta ,” Vizantiiskii Vremennik, X V I I (i960), 1 7 —27. A . Kazhdan, Derevnïà
i gorod v Vizantii I X —X vv. (Moscow, i960), 3 0 1 ff. B . Mendi, "L e s corporations byzantines (01 μή έν
τη cnroypacprj δντες),” Byzantinoslavica, X X I I (1961), 309—3 19 , includes some recent bibliography b y
Loos, as well as useful comments. In Pauly-W issowa, Real-Encyclopädie, the following articles, amongst
others, are of use; "Monopole,” “ Industrie,” "Collegium ,” "Berufsverein ,” and "N a vicu la ri.” U n ­
fortunately some of the recent Soviet literature has not been available to me, as for instance; M.
Siuzium ov, "O pravovom polozhenii rabov v Vizantii,” Uchenye zapiski sverdlovskogo gosudarstven-
nogo pedagogicheskogo instituta, I I (19 55), as well as a second article b y the same author on Ju lian
the Ascalonite in Uchenye zapiski UraVskogo universiteta, X X X V I I I (i960), I, 3—34, and a third article
in the same journal, X X V (1958), 14 7 —1 7 3 , on hired labor. N or have I ye t seen the study of V . Shand-
rovskaia, on the crafts in thirteenth- and fourteenth-century Byzantium in Issledovanie po istorii
kultury narodov Vostoka (Moscow-Leningrad, i960). In recent years various articles in Voprosy Istorii
(no. 10 [1958], 9 1 ; no. 3 [1959], 1 12 —1 13 ) have given a rapid survey of the literature which has been
published on this subject in the Soviet Union. Since this article went to press there has appeared the
interesting article of E . Frances, " L ’É t a t et les métiers à B yzan ce,” Byzantinoslavica, X X I I I (1962),
2 3 1-2 4 9 .
14 J . B . B u ry, Selected Essays (Cambridge, 1930), 207—208. The texts were Joannes Zonaras, Annales,
ed. b y T . Büttner-W obst, I I I (Bonn, 1897) (hereafter all texts are of the Bonn edition unless otherwise
stated), 664, and Cedrenus, II, 635.
15 Theophanes, Chronographia, ed. b y C. de Boor, I (Leipzig, 1883) (hereafter, Theophanes), 2 3 7 —238.
 Ill
ΔΗΜΟΚΡΑΤΙΑ ANI ) K L E V E N T H - C E N T . G U I L D S 295

in Thrace. We are told th a t th e guildsm en p a rtic ip a te d in th is procession

alongside th e nobles, clergy, an d dem esm en .10 In 6 95 , w hen J u stin ia n I I
equipped a large fleet a n d sent it on an expedition to Cherson, he d ra fte d
guildsm en, dem esm en, an d senators to au g m en t th e m ilita ry catalo g u es .17 In
775 Leo IV associated his son C onstantine V I in th e im p erial pow er an d h a d
th e officials an d citizens sw ear an o a th on th e relics of th e H o ly Cross to accept
as em peror only his offspring. Those w ho swore th e o a th w ere th e th e m a tic
officials, th e senate, th e guards, th e citizens, an d th e g u ild sm en .18 C o n stantine
P o rp h yrogenitus rem ark s th a t w hen th e enem y app ears before th e walls of
th e city, th e m ilita ry contingents in th e c ity an d th e guilds are to assum e th e
m ilitary defense of C onstantinople.19a T hese few passages im ply, in one case
a t least, th a t th e guildsm en d id indulge actively in political life. A t th e sam e
tim e th e recourse of th e em perors to th e guildsm en for m ilita ry , cerem onial,
an d d ynastic purposes im plies th a t th e y w ere a real force in th e society of th e
capital.

2 . Wealthy Guildsmen
T he te x ts reveal th a t guildsm en often m anaged to accu m u late considerable
w ealth. Sozom enus relates th a t w hen th e G othic general G ainas en tered
C onstantinople he in te n d e d to p lu n d er th e shops of th e argyropratai because
of th e ir g reat w ealth. B u t as th e guildsm en got w ind of th e b a rb a ria n ’s in te n ­
tions, th e y rem oved th e ir goods from th e shops a n d h id th e m .19 T he chronicler
T heophanes records th e fact th a t th e wife of J u s tin I I , th e E m p ress Sophia,
dissolved all d e b ts ow ed to th e argyropratai b y th e citizens. As th ese w ere
v ery extensive, th e citizens acknow ledged Sophia as a g re a t b en efactress .20
16 Chronicon Paschale, I, 7 12 . “ άλλά yàp και έργαστηριακών καί δημοτών έξ έκατέρου μέρους καί
πλήθους άλλου ούκ ολίγον;/’
17 Theophanes, I, 377 · “ πάσαν ναυν δρομώνων τε καί τριηρών καί σκαφών μυριαγωγών καί αλιάδων καί
έως χελανδίων, άπό διανομής τών οίκούντων την πόλιν συγκλητικών τε καί έργαστηριακών καί δημοτών καί
παντός όφφικίου.” Nicephorus, Breviarium, ed. b y C. de Boor (Leipzig, 1880) (hereafter, Nicephorus),
p. 44. “ ναυς πολύ πλείστας καί διαφόρους συνάγειρας, έμβιβάσας παρ’ αυτού άχρις εις έκατόν χιλιάδας άριθμόν
άνδρών, είδότας εκ τε τών στρατιωτικών καταλόγων, ετι δέ καί του γεωργικού καί τών βαναυσικών τεχνών
τών τε έκ τής συγκλήτου βουλής καί τού τής πόλεως δήμου.”
18 Theophanes, I, 449· “ καί ώμοσε πας ô λαός εις τά τίμια καί ίωοποιά ξύλα, οϊ τε τών θεμάτων καί τής
συγκλήτου καί τών έσω ταγμάτων καί τών πολιτών πάντων καί έργαστηριακών, τού μή δέξασθαι βασιλέα
έκτός Δέοντος καί Κωνσταντίνου καί τού σπέρματος αυτών, καί έποιήσαν έγγραφα καθώς ώμοσαν ιδιόχειρα
αυτών.”
19a Constantine Porphyrogenitus, De Caeremoniis, ed. b y I. Reiske, I (Bonn, 1829) (hereafter, De
Caeremoniis-Bonn), 449. “ άπαριθμήσαι τόν λαόν, όσοι τε ύπό τά τάγματά είσι τής πόλεως καί όσοι ύπό τόν
ύπαρχον, καί τούτους προορίζειν καθ' έαυτόν, έν ποίω μέρει έκαστον τούτων τών συστημάτων φυλάξει τήν πόλιν
âVκαιρώ έπιδημίας έχθρών.” This passage could possibly refer to the guilds. M. Siuzium ov has so interpreted
the passage, “ Remeslo i torgovlia v Konstantinopole v nachale X v .,” Vizantiïskii Vremennik, IV
(I 9 5 1 )* 40·
19 Sozomenus, Patrologia Graeca, L X V I I (Paris, 1864), 15 2 4 .
20 Theophanes, I, 242. The argyropratai appear more frequently in the sources than do most of
the other guildsmen. See Tipucitus, ed. b y F . Dölger, Stud i e Testi, L I (1929), xi, 1 ; xix, 1. Also, their
guild seems to be the only one which emerges from the sources with a personality. Nicetas Choniates,
1 5 6 - 1 5 7 , relates that during the visit of the Seljuk Sultan Kilij Arslan to Constantinople, the Em peror
Manuel I took him to see the games at the hippodrome. One of the scheduled performances was to
have been a flight through the air from a high tower b y a Muslim garbed in a sail-like garment. H ow ­
ever, the flight failed and the Muslim w as killed, much to the distress of the Sultan and his Turks,
but to the merriment of the Greeks. Afterwards, when an y of the Turks appeared in the agora the
Ill
296

W e h av e y e t an o th er anecdote in T heophanes concerning th e w ealth of a

m em ber of th e candlem akers' guild, a cerularius. D uring th e course of his
financial exactions N icephorus I h a d a cerularius b ro u g h t to co u rt and forced
him to declare th e ex te n t of his w ealth, w hich a m o u n ted to io o p o unds of
gold (7,200 nomismata). T he E m p ero r confiscated th e g reater p a rt of th e gold,
leaving th e candlem aker only 100 nomismata.21 One is b e tte r able to grasp th e
tru e significance of th e m a n 's w ealth b y com paring it w ith th e salary of th e
strategus. T he highest p aid strategus, or general, in th e B y zan tin e a rm y receiv­
ed fo rty pounds of gold a year. T hus we see th a t guildsm en could becom e
v ery w ealth y from th e ir trad es. As will becom e clear a t a la te r p o in t, this
w ealth was an im p o rta n t facto r in th e social fluidity of a n u m b er of th e guilds­
m en as well as in th e ir political im portance. I n th e eleventh c en tu ry th ere are
exam ples of a p a tria rc h , a general,22 tw o em perors,23 an d a high a d m in istra tiv e
official who were of fam ilies w ith guild or a rtisa n b ack g ro u n d s.24

3. Organization-Book of the Eparch

T he only docum ent w hich deals specifically a n d exclusively w ith th e guilds
of C onstantinople is th e w ell-know n Book of the Eparchy U n fo rtu n ately , th is

argyrocopoi no sooner caught sight of them than they began to ridicule them and to strike their tables
loudly. For the greater context of this “ flying” story, see L . W hite, “ Eilm er of Malmesbury, an
Eleventh-Century A via to r,” Technology and Culture, II, 2 (19 6 1), 98ff. Leo Gramaticus, 1 2 1 - 1 2 2 ,
records a humorous incident in which a “ chemist” defrauds the argyropratai.
21 Theophanes, I, 4 87-48 8.
22 Such would seem to be the case from the verse edited b y S. Lampros. “ T à Crrr’ αριθμόν PIZ'
καί Ρ Γ κατάλοιπα,” Νέος ‘ Ελληνομνήμων, X V I (1922), 4 5 ·
Του αύτου els στρατηγόν Κηρουλάριον.
Kal συ στρατηγός κηροπώλου παιδίον,
oö καί τό ρώ πέφευγεν εκ των ρημάτων,
ποιαν φρόνησιν ή λόγον κεκτημένος.
"Ομως κατεΐδον δαίμονα, στρατηγέτην
καί κηροπώλην εν βλέΥαι μόνον θέλω,
καί Χαβδαν αυτόν έν μέση Βυίαντίδι
καί σίτον οκτώ τόν μέδιμνον χρυσίων.
23 The members of the Paphlagonian dyn asty obviously had some connection with the artisan class.
24 The twelfth-century literary figure Ptochoprodromus has left us an interesting poem which is
as informative in regard to the economic well-being of the artisan class as it is humorous in depicting
the po verty of the intellectuals and scribes. The poet begins b y telling the reader that he studied
letters in obedience to his father’s admonitions. B u t now arrived at man’s estate, with vast literary
learning and talent, Ptochoprodromus complains (to no less, a person than his patron the Emperor)
th at he is starving to death. In contrast to the penurious income of his own profession, the trades of
the tailor, cobbler, baker, seller of whey, etc. enable these artisans to eat veritable banquets. The food
larders of the latter are plentifully stocked with tunny and mackerel, and their daily meals include
tripe, V lach cheese, stew, marinated roasts, boiled dishes, wine, pure wheat bread, etc. Ptochoprod­
romus concludes b y anathematizing the day on which, as a young boy, he had been turned over to
the grammarians. H e informs the Em peror that should his neighbor seek advice as to his son’s educa­
tion, he (the poet) will advise the father to have the son taught the trade of a cobbler. The facts and
sentiments are not unfamiliar to twentieth-century society ! See the text in D. Hesseling and H . Pernot,
Chrestomathie Néo-Hellénique (Paris, 1925), 42—46.
25 The Book of the Eparch was edited b y J . Nicole, Le livre du préfet (Geneva, 1894). T . Zepos
reproduced the text in J u s Graecoromanum, II (Athens, 19 3 1), 369—392. There are translations in
English b y A . E . R . Boak, “ The Book of the Prefect,” Journal of Economic and Business H istory,
I (1929), 597—6 18, and also b y E . H . Freshfield, Roman Law in the Later Roman E m pire (Cambridge,
19 38 ). There is an annotated translation in Russian b y M. Siuziumov, K n iga Eparkha. U stavy vizantii-
skikh tsekhov X v. (Sverdlovsk, 1949). F o r other literature, footnote 1 3 supra.
 Ill
ΔΗΜΟΚΡΑΤΙΑ AND ELKVENTH-CENT. GUILDS 2ί)7
I m ili cen tu ry com pilation is not a collection of guild sta tu te s, b u t ra th e r a
collection of sla te ordinances p ertain in g to certain trad es. T he Book of the Eparch
regulates th e relationship betw een these select guilds an d th e s ta te an d th e
populace* of C onstantinople. I t m entions nineteen guilds; tahularioi (notaries),
urgyropratai (jewelers), trapezitai (bankers), vestiopratai (dealers in silk garm ents),
prandiopratai (dealers in S yrian silks), metaxopratai (dealers in raw silk),
ratartarioi (silk spinners), sericarioi (silk w eavers), othoniopratai (dealers in linen),
myrepsoi (dealers in perfum e), cerularioi (candle-m akers), saponopratai (soap-
m akers), saldamarioi (grocers), lorotomoi (leather cutters), macellarioi (butchers)
choiremporoi (dealers in pork), ichthyopratai (fishmongers), artopoioi (bakers),
an d capeloi (innkeepers).26 I t is obvious th a t th is list con tain s th e m ost highly
esteem ed guilds a n d those th a t w ere essential to th e business an d provision­
ing of th e capital.
T hough th e Book of the Eparch is n o t specifically concerned w ith th e in ­
tern al organization of a guild itself, one m ay exam ine th e reg ulations govern­
ing th e co rporation of th e tabularioi w ith som e profit. To en te r th e guild, th e
in itiate h a d to learn th e fo rty title s of th e Prochiron b y h e a rt a n d also th e
six ty titles of th e Basilica. H e h a d also to pass an e x am in atio n in th is before
a m eeting of th e guild, a t w hich tim e his candidacy for e n tran ce w as accom pa­
nied b y th e testim onies of w itnesses as to his w orthiness. H e w as elected b y
the v ote of th e guildsm en a n d th e ir chief, th e primicerius. P a r t of th e cere­
m ony is described in th e Book of the Eparch.
“ T he election of th e c a n d id a te shall be carried o u t as follows. A fter
th e hearin g of th e w itnesses a n d th e exam inatio n , he shall p resen t him self
w earing a cloak before th e m ost glorious P refect of th e C ity, accom panied
b y th e guild of th e n o taries an d th e primicerius. T hese shall sw ear before
God a n d b y th e safety of th e em perors th a t he is being enrolled in th e
order n o t th ro u g h an y favor, influence, fam ily connections, or friendship,
b u t b y reason of his good conduct, know ledge, ab ility , a n d general fitness.
A fter th e o ath s h av e been tak en , b y m eans of a sign th e P refect in office
shall elect him in th e p refectu ral b u reau , a n d he shall b e enrolled in th e
guild a n d n u m b ered am ong th e notaries. T hen he shall go to th e church
w hich is n earest his residence, w hile all th e n o taries w ear th e ir cloaks, an d ,
doffing his cloak a n d donning a w hite surplice, shall be consecrated b y a
p ra y e r of th e priest. H e shall be escorted on his w ay b y all th e no taries
clad in th e ir cloaks, w hile th e primicerius him self holds a censer an d directs

26 The question has arisen whether other guilds existed aside from those mentioned in the Book
of the Eparch. B asilica, L I V , vi, 6 - 1 6 (Zepos edition), seem to provide a positive answer to the ques­
tion, Άργυροκόττοι, σκυτοτόμοι, χρυσοχόοι, Lcoypâtpoı, μαρμαράριοι are listed amongst the various occupa­
tions. Since the first three are mentioned as having guilds in the Book of the Eparch, it would seem
that the grouping of all of them together in the B asilica would im ply that all had guilds. Stöckle,
op. cit., says that it is impossible to determine from the Book of the Eparch whether there were guilds
other than the nineteen mentioned in the heads of the chapters. Christophilopoulos, op. cit., p. 9,
repeats this judgement. B u t the Book of the Eparch does furnish evidence that there were guilds other
than those of the chapter headings : In chap, x iv , para. 2, we find two other guilds, that of the
μαλακατάριοι (the softeners of leather), and of the βυρσοδέψαι (tanners). See also the remarks of B .
Mendi, loc. cit., 303.
m
298
th e fum es tow ards him , th e new ly elect, who carries th e B ible openly
before h im ; th is signifying th a t his w ays shall be m ade stra ig h t as th e
incense ascending before th e face of God. In th is glorious fashion he shall
proceed to th e seat to w hich he has been a llo tte d an d th en re tu rn hom e
w ith th e sam e pom p, th e re to feast an d rejoice w ith his a sso c ia te s/’27
T he new ly elected m em ber h a d to p a y to th e primicerius th ree nomismata
as in itia tio n fee, an d to each of th e tabularioi one nomisma. H e also h a d to
c o n trib u te six nomismata for ta b le expenses. N o m em ber of th e guild could be
ab sen t from im perial processions w hen th e eparch com m anded th em to p a r ti­
cipate, as absence from such processions drew a fine of four ceratia. W hen th e
chief of th e guild, th e primicerius, was no longer able to perform his fu n c­
tions he h a d to retire an d was th e n given a pension. T hough th e eparch a p ­
p o in ted th e ranking tabularius to replace him , here th e m em bers of th e guild
could exercise some choice. F o r if th e y did n o t w a n t th e primicerius chosen b y
th e eparch, th e y could declare him u n w o rth y , an d th e eparch w ould choose
th e second or th ird in line for th e office. A m ongst th e d u ties of th e primicerius
was th a t of ad ju d icatin g m inor d isputes betw een th e m em bers of th e guild.
T he Book of the Eparch also regulates th e salaries of th e tabularioi. A tabularius
received tw elve ceratia in draw ing up an y c o n tra c t in w hich th e su b ject m a tte r
was n o t w o rth m ore th a n io o nomismata. If th e valu e exceeded th is sum , th e n
he received one nomisma. If th e value far exceeded io o nomismata, he received
tw o nomismata. No m em ber of th e guild could em ploy a secretary w ith o u t
first p resen tin g him to th e primicerius an d th e guild, an d o b tain in g th e ir a p ­
proval. F inally, w henever a m em ber of th e guild died, he was b u rie d b y th e
guild. A ny m em ber of th e co rp o ratio n who was ab sen t from th e fu n eral proces­
sion p a id a fine of six ceratia.28
T he provisions governing th e rem ain d er of th e guilds are n o t q u ite so ex ­
tensive. M ost of th em seem to have h a d sim ilar cerem onies of in itiatio n , an d
th e d u ties of th e heads of th e guilds w ere m ore or less sim ilar. One of th e m ore
in terestin g features of these regulations is th e exclusion of th e nobles or
archontes from p a rtic ip a tio n in m a n y of th e tra d e s of th e guilds.29
W ith o u t going in to an y fu rth e r detail, it should be p o in ted o u t th a t these
reg u lations reveal a guild system , descended from th a t of th e fo u rth cen tu ry ,
w hich cre a te d a ce rta in cohesive a n d co rp o rate sp irit am ong th e m em bers of
an in d iv id u al guild, a n d p e rh a p s am ong th e guilds them selves. A n d th o u g h all
were, theoretically, u n d er th e close supervision of th e p refect of th e city , th e y
held c ertain in te rn a l a d m in istra tiv e an d judicial pow er in th e ir ow n hands. 4

4. Topographical Location of the Guilds

T he location of th e guild establishm ents in th e c ity is an im p o rta n t facto r
in considering th e political p o te n tia l of these groups. F o rtu n a te ly th e sources
are m uch m ore am ple here th a n th e y hav e been in th e preceding considera-
27 Boak, loc, cit., 601.
28 Book of the Eparch, I.
29 Book of the Eparch, V , 4 ; V I, 10.
 II
Δ Η Μ Ο Κ Ρ Α Τ Ι Α A N D E L E V E N T I I - C E N Τ. G U I L D S 299

(ions. The Book of the Epar ch specifies th a t th e argyropratai could ca rry on

(heir business only in th e ir w orkshops on th e Mese.30 T heophanes in d icates
th a t th eir shops stre tc h e d along th e Mese from th e F o ru m of C o n stantine to
the Palace of L ausus.31 T he chalcopratai h a d th e ir shops n e a r th e w estern door
of St. Sophia.32 T he fur-dealers h a d th e ir shops in th e F o ru m of C o n stantine,33
while th e slave-dealers h a d th e ir establishm en ts n ear th e b ak eries.34 T he
artopoioi h a d th e ir bakeries betw een th e F o ru m of C on stan tin e a n d th e F o ru m
of T heodosius along th e Mese 35 T he candle-m akers h a d th e ir shops in th e
forum an d also in th e church of S t. S ophia.36
T he life of St. A ndrew th e Fool is of p a rtic u la r in te re st in th is connection,
for it ta k e s place in th e m ilieu of th e guilds, shops, an d w orking people. W e
find m ention of innkeepers an d saldamarioi (grocers) in th e antiforum , an d of
th e p ro stitu tio n estab lish m en ts n ear th e F o ru m of C on stan tin e a n d th e arto-
poleia.37 T he Book of the Eparch says of th e saldamarioi th a t th e y w ere to
have th e ir shops all over th e c ity so th a t th e provisioning of th e in h a b ita n ts
w ould be fa c ilita te d .38 I t also includes a ra th e r in terestin g specification con­
cerning th e place of business of th e myrepsoi.
“ T hey shall place th e ir show tab les w ith th e co n tain ers in a line e x te n d ­
ing from th e sacred im age of C hrist our L o rd w hich is b y th e Chalce up
to th e M ilestone, so th a t these m a y send fo rth a sav o ry aro m a befittin g
th e im age, a n d m ake p leasan t th e porches of th e p alace.” 39
I t is obvious th a t a considerable p o rtio n of th e shops a n d w arehouses of
th e guilds was lo cated along th e triu m p h a l b o u lev ard of C onstantinople, th e
so-called Mese,40 a n d in th e Milion in th e v icin ity of th e palace. So in m ore
recent tim es th e g re a t covered b a z a r of Ista n b u l w as n o t too far from th e
sa ra y of th e O tto m a n su ltan s. B y th e ir location a n d c o n cen tratio n in th e
a d m in istra tiv e a n d com m ercial h e a rt of th e city, th e guildsm en could an d did
convulse n o t only th e econom ic life of th e c ity b u t th e p o litical life of th e
w hole of th e em pire.

5. Munera

A n o th er aspect of th e relationship of th e guilds to th e go v ern m en t is a p ­

p a re n t in th e fact th a t a n u m b er of these groups w as still, as in th e fo u rth
c e n tu ry , responsible for c ertain munera. T he Book of Ceremonies of Cons­

30 Book of the Eparch, II , n .

31 Theophanes, I, 184.
32 R . Janin, Constantinople B yzantine (Paris, 1950), 9 7-9 8 .
33 Theophanes Continuatus, 420.
34 Pseudo-Codinus, 50.
35 Constantine Porphyrogenitus, De Caerimoniis, ed. A . V ogt, I (Paris, 1935) (hereafter, De Caeri-
m oniis-Yogt), 4 4 - 5 1 .
36 Theophanes Continuatus, 420.
37 V ita Andreae, A cta Sanctorum, M a ii Tom us Sextus (Paris-Rome, 1866), appendix, 2 - 1 4 .
38 Book of the Eparch, X I I I , 1.
39 Boak, loc. cit., 6 1 1 .
40 On this street, consult R . Guilland, “ Autour du L ivre des Cérémonies de Constantin V I I Por­
phyrogénète,” Actes du V I e Congrès International D 'Études B yzantines, I I (Paris, 19 5 1), 1 7 1 - 1 8 2 .
Ill
300

ta n tin e V II gives a num ber of details concerning th e guilds in th e im perial

processions of th e te n th cen tu ry . In th e processions of th e em perors from th e
palace to St. Sophia th e guilds of th e vestiopratai an d of th e argyropratai
were responsible for adorning th e tribunalium w ith p u rp le silk cloths, a n d gold
an d silver objects. A nd all of th e guilds of th e city , u n d er th e leadership of
th e eparch, took p a rt in th e procession.41 T he co u rt cerem onial prescribed
th a t em perors re tu rn in g to th e cap ital a fte r a perio d of absence were to p ro ­
ceed to th e church of th e H oly A postles, th e n th ro u g h th e Mese to th e palace.
On th e ir w ay from th e church to th e palace th e y were received along th e
Mese b y th e eparch an d all th e guilds.4243
In th e official reception given th e A rab am bassad o rs from T arsu s b y Con­
sta n tin e V II an d R om anus I I , th e argyropratai, u n d er th e d irectio n of th e
eparch, w ere responsible for th e decoration of th e tribunalium w ith silk cloths
an d objects of gold an d silver. N o t only w ere th e guildsm en responsible for
th e d ecoration of th e tribunalium, b u t th e m em bers of th e guilds a n d th e ir
officers w ere present in th e tribunalium during th e reception. T he archontes or
chiefs of th e guilds wore th e six platonica chlanidia of th e secreticoi, while th e
o th ers wore th e w hite chlanidia of th e tagmataP
T h a t these guildsm en were m em bers of th e public guilds an d n o t of th e
im p erial w orkshops w ithin th e palace is d e m o n stra te d b y tw o facts. F irst
C on stantine P o rp h y ro g en itu s m entions th a t th e y w ere u n d er th e directio n of
th e eparch. A ccording to th e Basilica an d to th e Cletorologion of P hilo th eu s,
th e public guilds were u n d er th e jurisdiction of th e eparch. A nd in these
processions an d receptions th e guilds m entioned are u n d er th e prefect or
eparch of th e city .44 T he craftsm en of th e im perial w orkshops w ere u n d er a
sep arate official.4546 Secondly, C onstantine P o rp h y ro g en itu s distinguishes b e ­
tw een th e public an d im perial craftsm en b y referring to th e la tte r as βασιλικοί
an d b y usually referring to th e ir w orkshops as βασιλικά εργοδόσια, while th e
w orkshops of th e public guilds w ere generally εργαστή ρια 46 I t w as ce rta in of

41 De Caerim oniis-Vogt, I, 9. "αυτό γάρ τό τριβουνάλιον κατακοσμουσιν οΐ τε βεστιοπράται καί άργυ-

ροπράται διά τε βλαττιών και λοιπών εντίμων απλωμάτων τε καί πέπλων, καί μήν διά τε χρυσών καί άργυρών
παντοίων σκευών τούτο καταγλαΐί,ουσιν.. . και μήν καί τα συστήματα τής πόλεως καί ot περί τόν ύπαρχον
όφφικιάλιοι, μετά και του συμπόνου και του λογοθέτου του πραιτωρίου."
42 De Caerimoniis-Bonn, I, 497—498. "ώ ς δέ είσήλθεν είς τήν μέσην.. .τάξις τών έπάρχων καί του
έπάρχου, άργυροπράται καί πάντες πραγματευταί, καί παν σύστημα."
43 De Caerimoniis-Bonn, I, 572» 579 · “ ίστέον, ότι τό τριβουνάλιον έξώπλισεν ό ύπαρχος κατά τό είωθός
τής προελεύσεως άπό τε βλαττιών άπλωμάτων καί σενδές καί άπό έργων χρυσών καί χυμευτών καί άναγλύφων
άργυρών, δηλονότι τών άργυροπρατών ταυτα παρεχόντων." ,,έν δέ τώ τριβουναλίω Ιστη Ινθεν κάκεΐθεν ή
πολιτική μετά τών συστημάτων καί τών Ιδίων άρχόντων, φορούντων τών μέν άρχόντων τά έξ χλανίδια τών
σεκρετικών τά πλατώνια, οί δέ λοιποί πάντες τά λευκά χλανίδια τών ταγματικών.”
On other munera, see P. Koukoules, op. cit., IV , 33 9 ff. Cedrenus, II, 300, for a brilliant reception
given an Iberian prince in the agora.
44 J. B . B u ry, The Im perial A dm inistrative System in the N inth Century, with a R evised Text of
the Kletorologion of Philotheos (London, 1 9 1 1 ) (hereafter, Philotheos), 1 3 1 , 7 1. B asilica, V I, iv, 13 .
"π ά ν τα τά έν Κωνσταντινουπόλει σωματεία καί οί πολϊται καί άπό του δήμου παντός έπάρχερ τής πόλεως
ύπόκεινται.’ ’ Peira, L I , 29. "ο ί τών τεχνών τώ έπάρχω υπόκεινται.”
45 De Caerim oniis- Bonn, I, 720. " . . . τ φ δέ έπί τοΰ ειδικού λ ό γ ο υ .. .άρχοντες τών έργοδοσίων, έβδο-
μάριοι καί μειϋότεροι τών έργοδοσίων.”
46 M y colleague Prof. Lopez has, I think, erred in his identification of the imperial "gu ild s" (he
says the "p u b lic” and "im p erial" guilds are one and the same thing) with what he calls the δημόσια
σώματα. These public or imperial guilds are, he says, differentiated from the "p riv a te " guilds b y the
 m
ΔΗΜΟΚ ΚΛΊΊΛ AND ELEVENTH-CENT. GUILDS 301
the public guilds, th en , th a t were responsible to a great e x te n t for th e splendid
and luxurious furnishings so pleasing to B yzantin e sp ectato rs an d so daz­
zling to th e eyes of foreign envoys. T he guilds and th e ir chiefs were im p o rta n t
enough to tak e p a r t in the a ctu al receptions of foreign am bassadors in th e
palace.

6. Conclusions on Political Potential Of Guilds Prior to the Eleventh Century

This ra p id survey of th e condition of th e guilds p rio r to th e elev en th cen tu ry
shows th em to hav e possessed m uch of th e a p p a ra tu s n ecessary to p a rtic i­
p a te significantly in th e political life of th e im perial cap ital. T heir political

fact that the former are δημόσια σώματα and the latter are simply σώματα. In fact, then, the adjective
δημόσιον is the key word, its use indicating that the guild is an imperial-public one. However, it is much
more probable that in the tenth century δημόσιον σωματεϊον (σωματεϊον is far more common in the
literature than σώμα) was not an imperial-public guild at all. In fact, one really wonders to w hat
extent the groups of imperial craftsmen working in the palace constituted guild groups. Further, his
use of the word “ public” as the equivalent of “ imperial” is confusing. Certainly the Byzantine texts
of this period do not use this adjective, δημόσιον, in describing the artisans and workshops of the
palace; they use the adjective βασιλικόν for this purpose. Thus, when Leo Diaconus (14 6 -14 7 ) speaks
of the imperial textile workshop, he uses the phrase βασιλική ίστουργική. Theophanes, I, 469, uses the
same adjective in describing the imperial workshops, “ άνήφθη καί μέρος του βασιλικού εργοδοσίου,
των χρυσοκλαβαρίων κατά τόν χρυσεώνα.” So also Pseudo-Codinus, ρ. 74 * “ τά δέ Μάγγανα ό Μέγας
Κωνσταντίνος εκτισε λόγω των βασιλικών εργοδοσιών” ; on ρρ. ι ι 8 , Ι 2 ΐ , he simply refers to the
imperial workshops as έργοδόσια. N icetas Chômâtes, 15 7 , δώρα πολλά έκ τών βασιλικών
χρυσώ νω ν.. . . ” De Caerimoniis-Bonn, I, 725» “ άκολουθεΐν δέ εις τάς προελεύσεις τούς ράπτας τούς βασιλι­
κούς καί τούς χρυσοκλαβαρίους καί τούς χρυσοχους” ; also 5 18 , 572. The members of the imperial workshops,
then, were called imperials, βασιλικοί, not δημόσιοι. Further, public and imperial are quite different.
Often the meaning of δημόσιον is “ public,” even though it is also used to denote the fisc. This adjec­
tive is frequently employed to denote anything having to do with the citizenry. Thus in one of the
letters of Psellus, M iscellanea, ed. b y C. Sathas, Μεσαιωνική Βιβλιοθήκη, V (Paris, 1876), 320, the expres­
sion δημοσίων καπηλειών is used to refer to the public inns and taverns. A s the Book of the Eparch,
X I X , testifies, these were to be found all over the city. Therefore, they were not “ imperial” guilds
simply because they are described as δημοσίων. B asilica, L I V , xxxvii, 4, uses the adjective δημόσιον
to refer to the public stoas of Constantinople, δημοσίαις στοαϊς. These are not imperial from the utili­
tarian point of view. T h e y were intended for public rather than for imperial use. Therefore βασιλικόν
and έργοδόσιον have to do with the imperial artisans and workshops. Δημόσια σωματεία have to do
with corporations in which were enrolled artisans of the city itself. On this point, see also the remarks
of M. Siuzium ov, “ Remeslo i torgovlia v Konstantinopole v nachale X veka,” V izan tiiskii Vremennik,
I V (19 51), 28, no. 3.
Prof. Lopez further states that the provisions in the B asilica refer only to the imperial guilds,
and that the guilds of Constantinople are not mentioned here. The latter, he concludes, are present
only in the Book of the Eparch. N ow it so happens that he used the Heimbach edition of the B asilica,
asserting that there was no other. However, he was not aware of the slightly improved edition of
Zepos. H ad he referred to this latter edition, he would have seen that the B asilica do deal with the
public corporations. L I V , vi, 6—19, lists over fo rty guilds, among which are the architects, doctors,
veterinarians, painters, sculptors, masons, woodworkers, potters, goldsmiths, glassworkers, fullers,
silversmiths, coppersmiths, etc. B u t even the Heim bach edition mentions a number of public guilds
(“ private” guilds, according to Lopez). L I V , vii, 1, mentions tabularioi’, L I V , x x , mentions the guilds
of the pork-dealers and innkeepers, and other guilds as well; L I V , xxi, mentions chalcopratai and
trapezitai ; L I V , x x v , mentions artocopoi. Most of these latter guilds appear in the Book of the Eparch
as well, which, according to Lopez, is the only document describing the public (“ private” ) guilds.
Therefore, the B asilica, as well as the Book of the Eparch, deal w ith the non-imperial guilds, those
which I refer to as public guilds.
On the imperial craftsmen, see, in addition to the work of Siuziùm ov cited above, A . Kazhdan,
“ Tsekhi i gosudarstvennye masterskie v Konstantinopole v I X —X v v .,” V izan tiiskii Vremennik, V I
(19 53), 1 5 0 - 1 5 3 . J· Ebersolt, Les arts som ptuaires de B yzance (Paris, 1923), is of some use on the sub­
ject. Unfortunately he has interpreted the regulations of the Book of the Eparch as intended for the
imperial workshops.
Ill
302

p o te n tia l was m anifested in th e ir a c tu a l p a rtic ip a tio n in political life, in th e

considerable w ealth accruing to m a n y of th e guildsm en (which w ealth, in
one case, w as applied to th e a tte m p te d assassination of an em peror), in th e
guild organization w hich pro v id ed th e guildsm en w ith a close k n it co rp o rate
sp irit,47 in th e geographical p ro x im ity of th e guilds to th e p alace enabling
th em to terrorize th e governm ent, an d in th e fact th a t th e g o v ern m en t an d
em perors relied upon th em for ce rta in munera a n d for occasional m ilita ry
service. B etw een th e reigns of H eraclius a n d Leo I I I th e political prom inence
of th e dem es an d circus factions declined considerably. T h ey were a p p a re n tly
reo rg anized an d took on functions w hich w ere com pletely o rn am en tal. T he
im p erial governm ent assum ed charge of th e circus gam es in th e hippodrom e,
a n d th e factions henceforth m ade th e ir ap pearance only in th e official proces­
sions a n d im perial cerem ony. Such w as th e ir role in th e Book of Ceremonies 48
T hus, w ith th e suppression of these circus factions, th e guild system , along
w ith th e church, seem s to h av e rem ained as th e only m ajo r org an izatio n of
th e in h a b ita n ts in th e cap ital w ith sufficient pow er to ta k e an activ e p a r t in
th e politics of C onstantinople.

U r ban V io l e n c e an d G u il d s in th e E lev en t h Ce n t u r y

T he salient featu re of th e h isto ry of B y zan tiu m in th e elev en th c e n tu ry

was th e b itte r an d fa ta l struggle betw een th e civil b u re a u c rats an d th e p ro v in ­
cial feudal generals for th e possession of suprem e pow er.49 W ith th e d e a th of
th e la st m ale ruler of th e M acedonian d y n a sty in 1028, th e am b itio u s generals
beg an to h a tc h plans an d conspiracies w hich, th e y hoped, w ould give th e ir
fam ilies th e throne. T hese provincial generals w ere rep resen tativ e of th e som e
forty-five m ost p ro m in en t fam ilies of th e provinces, fam ilies w ith tra d itio n s of
illu strious m ilita ry service often going back tw o to th re e h u n d re d years, an d
in one case half a m illenium . T hese generals w ere a t th e sam e tim e th e g reat
landow ners of th e provinces.
T he generals, in th e ir quest for im perial pow er, w ere v io len tly opposed b y
th e b u reau cracy in th e capital. T his w as a d isp a ra te group in its com position,
draw ing its leading m em bers from th e a c tu a l corps of ad m in istrato rs, especial­
ly th e eunuchs, b u t also including th e professors from th e u n iv ersity of Cons­
ta n tin o p le an d a certain group w hich we m ay describe as th e u rb a n aristo c­
racy or nobility.
So th e g reater p a rt of th e eleventh c e n tu ry is th e sto ry of th e a tte m p ts
of th e provincial generals to rem ove th e civil a risto cracy from th e d irectio n

47 T h e y had certain favorite saints. See the life of St. Artemius, Papadopulos-Kerameus, V aria
Graeca Sacra in Sbornik grecheskikh neizdannykh bogoslovskikh tekstov I V —X V viekov (St. Petersburg,
19 0 9 ), 1 - 7 9 . A s the healer of hernia St. Artem ius was of particular importance to the artisans.
48 D e Caerim oniis-Bonn, I, 7 9 8 -7 9 9 . F . D vom ik, “ The Circus Parties in Byzan tium ,” B yzantina-
M etabyzantina, I (1946), 1 1 9 - 1 3 4 .
49 F o r w hat follows, see, S. Vryonis, “ Byzan tium : The Social Basis of Decline in the Eleven th
C en tu ry,” Greek Roman and B yzantine Studies, I I (1959), 1 5 7 - 1 7 6 .
 m
Δ Η Μ Ο Κ Ρ Α Τ Ι Α ANI) E L E V E N T H - C E N T . G U I L D S 303

of affairs in C onstantinople. T heir obvious stren g th lay in th e fact th a t th ey

h ad th e provinces a n d provincial arm ies in th eir hands. Before th e m ilitarists,
under A lexius I Com nenus, finally triu m p h e d in 1081, th e b u re a u c rats p u t u p
a long a n d very sp irited resistance, for th e y h ad a n u m b er of adv an tag es. In
th eir hands were th e im perial palace, th e cen tral offices a n d finances of th e
state, the sm all b u t crack b o d y of tro o p s an d th e fleet sta tio n e d a t C onstan­
tinople, and, m ost im p o rta n tly , th e im p erial city itself w ith its invincible
walls. I t is rem ark ab le to w h at degree th e ideology of th e B y zan tin e E m p ire
was centered on C onstantinople. T he v e ry fact th a t th e im p erial cap ital was
in th e h an d s of th e b u re a u c rats for th e g reater p a rt of th e eleventh c en tu ry
was alm ost enough in itself to th w a rt th e fifty or six ty rebellions raised b y th e
provincial m ilita rists during th e period betw een 1028-1081. F o r no m a tte r
how long a rebellious general m ig h t hold A natolia or th e B alkans, w ith o u t th e
conquest of th e c ity on th e B osphorus it w as a m eaningless achievem ent. I t is
in terestin g th a t these generals did n o t, for th e m ost p a rt, th in k in term s of
founding se p a ra tist states.
G iven th e im p o rtan ce of th e a c tu a l possession of C onstantinople in th is
struggle betw een th e b u reau cracy an d th e provincials, an y group w ith in th e
c ity th a t w as a rtic u la te politically acq u ired increasing significance in th e af­
fairs of th a t day. A nd in fact tw o C onstan tin o p o litan groups do com e to th e
fore in th is tense po larizatio n of political forces, th e ch u rch a n d th e v ery
populace of th e city. I t is w ith th e la tte r ra th e r th a n w ith th e form er th a t
we are here concerned.

M ic h a e l V Ca la ph a tes

In 1042, w hen th e u p s ta rt M ichael V C alaphates a tte m p te d to rem ove his

a u n t b y m arriage, Zoe, an d w ith h er th e M acedonian d y n a sty , he first stro v e
to secure th e su p p o rt of th e u p p er class, b u t also, a n d especially, th e su p p o rt
of th e people, b y conferring favors.50 T he rem oval of th e E m p ress from th e
p alace w ould be an extrem ely to u ch y m a tte r a t v ery best. H ence Michael w as
obliged to proceed cautiously. H e decided to te st th e populace an d its sen ti­
m en ts on E a s te r S unday.
“ T he im perial procession h av in g been p rep ared , th e προεξάρχοντες51 of
th e agora strew ed th e ground w ith luxuriously w oven silk carp ets from
th e v ery palace to th e gates of th e revered a n d m ost h oly St. Sophia.
T hey h a d p re p a re d these so th a t th e E m p ero r m ig h t pass th ro u g h in
honor w ith his arm ed re tin u e .” 52

60 Psellus, Chronographia, ed. b y E . Renauld, I (Paris, 1926) (hereafter, Psellus, Chronographia), 96.
51 Προεξάρχοντες would seem to refer to the heads of the guilds, or at least to the heads of the
agora. The heads of the guilds appear variously as προστάται, προστατεύοντες, πρωτοστάται, πριμικήριοι,
Ιξαρχοι, έξάρχοντες. Stöckle, op. cit., 78—79, 8 4 -8 5 . Nicole, op. cit., 29. Sathas, op. cit., V I, 645. W hether
it refers to the heads of the guilds or to the officials of the eparch, the total effect is the same here. It is
the populace of the m arket place that Michael was sounding out.
52 Attaliates, p. 12.
m
304

Satisfied w ith th e luxurious reception given him b y th e people, Michael decid­

ed to m ake y et one m ore sounding as to his p o p u la rity in th e c ity ; so th e
co u rt announced a public procession on th e S u n d ay following E a ste r. T he
E m p ero r w as to go th ro u g h th e streets to th e church of th e H oly A postles.53
This w as to be th e final te st as to w hether he could openly propose th e deposi­
tion of Zoe to th e populace.
“ T he E m peror, crow ned, proceeded w ith th e senate, th e whole of th e
c ity having g ath ered for th e sight. T hose w ho lived on th is b o u lev ard
hu n g o u t silver an d gold vessels a n d carp ets an d o th er gold cloths. A nd
th e y greeted him w ith such shouts th a t it seem ed as if th e y w ere pou rin g
o u t th e ir v ery s o u ls /’54
T he n a rra tiv e of Psellus com pletes th e p ictu re given b y A tta lia te s an d C edrenus
of th e people’s reaction to Michael.
“ T here rem ained, how ever, th e problem of th e o th e rs—th e pick of th e
c ity populace an d all those who belonged to th e people of th e agora a n d
th e m an u al w orkers. T heir adherence, too, w as assu red an d th e h e a rts of
th e people w on over b y his favors. I t was a necessary expense, for one
d ay, if need arose, he m ig h t w an t th e ir b ackin g for his p ro jects. T he
people, on th eir side, were genuinely a tta c h e d to him an d th e ir sen tim en ts
fo und expression in c ertain obvious m ark s of goodwill. F o r instance, th e y
w ould n o t allow him to w alk on th e bare g round : it w ould be a dread fu l
th ing, th e y th o u g h t, if he did n o t tre a d on carpets. H is horse, too, m u st
needs revel in covers of silk. These com plim ents, n o t u n n a tu ra lly , gave
h im pleasure an d in his elation he began to reveal w h at his secret designs
w ere.” 55
I t is ra th e r obvious th a t in th e above passages th e populace of C o n stan ­
tinople, i.e., th e πολΤται, th e δήμος, was th e p rim e concern of M ichael in his
bid for su p p o rt. More specifically, he w as concerned w ith th e agora a n d its
in h a b ita n ts, i.e., th e craftsm en a n d shopkeepers, th a t is, th e m em bers of th e
guilds.56 Psellus says th a t he bestow ed favors on “ όσοι τής α γορ α ίου τύρβης ή τω ν
βαναύσω ν τ ε χ ν ώ ν . . . , ” on all of th e people of th e agora a n d craftsm en. As a
resu lt, th e craftsm en gave th e E m p ero r a b rillia n t recep tio n on E a ste r S u n d ay
a n d on th e following S u n d ay w hen his entourage passed th ro u g h th e agora
a n d silk c arp ets covered th e stre e t over w hich he w as to pass. In th e first
instance, A tta lia te s relates th a t th e προεξάρχοντες of th e agora w ere responsible

53 Cedrenus, II, 536. “ έδοξεν ούν άποπειραθήναι των πολιτών πρότερον, δίαν έχωσι περί αύτου γνώμην,
καί εΐ μέν χρηστήν διάθεσιν φανώσι φυλάττοντες εις αυτόν καί φιλίαν όρθήν, τότε δη καί έγχειρήσαι τή μελέτη,
εί δε τούναντίον, ησυχίαν άγειν. τή κυριακή ούν τή μετά τό όγιον πάσχα προέλευσιν δημοσίαν κηρύξας εν τώ
των αγίων αποστόλων ναω, καί δι’ αυτής άποπειραθήναι κρίνας τής γνώμης των πολιτών.”
54 Cedrenus, II, 536· Attaliates, ρ. Ι2. ‘‘μετά δέ ταυτα καί κατά την νέαν κυριακήν εφίππου τής προόδου
γεγενημένης έπεριπετάννυντο ώδε κάκεΐσε τά πολυτελή τών υφασμάτων καί τίμια, καί κόσμος άλλος χρυσώ
καί άργύρω καταστράπτων συνεχώς ύπερήρτητο, καί παν τό τής αγοράς στεφανηφορούν καί οΐον έορτάϋον
χαρμόσυνά τι να σωτηριώδη κατελαμπρύνετο. ή δέ προπομπή θαυμαστή τώ οντι καί βασιλική, πανταχόθεν
εύφημίαις συγκροτουμένη καί χάρισι καί παιανισμοϊς Ιξαιρουμένη τής πόλεως.” Note that where Cedrenus
refers vaguely to the whole city, Attaliates speaks of the inhabitants of the market place.
55 The Chronographia of M ichael Psellus, tr. b y E . R . A . Sewter (London, 19 53) (henceforth,
Sewter), p. 93. Psellus, I, 96.
56 Psellus, I, 96.
 m
ΔΗΜΟΚΡΑΤΙΑ ANI) ELE VE NT H-CENT. GUILDS 305
fo r t h e strewing o f t h e s t r e e t s w i t h s i l k c a r p e t s . T h e s e προεξάρχοντες s e e m t o
h a v e b e e n t h e h e a d s o f t h e g u ild s .
T he second procession, to th e church of th e H oly A postles, w ent th ro u g h
th é Mese, th e g reat stre e t of C onstantinople along w hich w ere lo cated th e
m a jo rity of th e shops an d w here th e craftsm en an d m erch an ts p racticed th e ir
trad es.67 C edrenus says th a t th e procession passed th ro u g h th e λεωφόρος to th e
church. As is well know n, λεωφόρος refers to a boulevard, a g reat street. F u r ­
ther, it is a well established topographical fact th a t it w as th e Mese w hich led
from th e palace to th e church of th e H oly A postles.58 C edrenus says th a t it
was th e in h a b ita n ts of th e Mese, th e shopkeepers an d craftsm en , who d eco rat­
ed it w ith silver cloths, a n d gold a n d silver objects. A tta lia te s rem ark s th a t
th e whole agora, “ . . . w a s g a r l a n d e d ...” on th e occasion. T he objects d is­
p lay ed during b o th processions w ere p ro d u c ts of craftsm en w ho were obliged
b y law to have th e ir shops on th e Mese, i.e., gold a n d silver objects could be
han d led only b y th e ά ρ γ νρ ο π ρ ά τ α ι. These ά ρ γυ ρ οπ ρ ά τα ι w ere obliged to h av e
th e ir shops on th e Mese.59 Also, th e π έ π λ α σηρικά και υφ άσματα χρυσοϋφή were
re stric te d to ce rta in w orkshops along th e Mese. A close e x am in atio n of th e
o rn am ents th a t ad o rn ed th e procession in such g reat n u m b e r suffices to in ­
d icate th a t th e guilds were responsible for th e reception, for, as we h av e
alread y seen in th e Book of Ceremonies, th e guilds w ere responsible for d eco rat­
ing th e processional w ay. T hus, it becom es strik in g ly obvious th a t Michael
w as seeking to ensure th e su p p o rt of th e shopkeepers a n d craftsm en who h a d
th eir places of business in th e v icin ity of th e Mese a n d in th e neighborhood of
th e palace.
As a resu lt of th e tw o receptions w hich he h a d received, M ichael felt th a t he
h a d th is su p p o rt. T he n ig h t of th e S u n d ay a fte r E a ste r he h a d th e u n fo rtu ­
n a te Zoe b ro u g h t from her cham bers a n d accused h er of a tte m p tin g to poison
him , a fte r w hich she w as exiled to th e isle of P rincipo w here she w as shorn
an d forced to don th e m onastic garb. T he n e x t d a y th e populace g rad u ally
learn ed of Zoe’s fate, an d th e p o p u la rity of M ichael am ongst th e citizens was
soon replaced b y anger.60 As a result, M ichael gave a d ra m a tic account of th e
ev en ts w hich h a d tra n sp ire d to th e senators, an d secured th e ir ap proval. T hen
a pittacion w as d raw n u p an d given to th e eparch of th e c ity who w as to read
it to th e people a t th e F o ru m of C o n stan tin e.61 M ichael th u s ho p ed to q u iet th e
u n rest. T he eparch, th e patricius A nastasius, proceeded to th e F o ru m of Con­
sta n tin e a n d re a d th e le tte r, th e co n ten ts of w hich are p reserv ed in Cedrenus.
“ As Zoe h as p lo tte d against m y im p erial pow er I h av e exiled her, an d
h er accom plice A lexius has been rem oved from th e church. Y ou, m y people,
if you persevere in yo u r good fa ith in m e, shall receive g re a t honors an d
benefits a n d you shall live a clean a n d sorrow less life.” 62
57 Stöckle, op. cit., 7 1 - 7 2 .
58 R . Jan in , op. cit., m a p no. 5 .
69 Nicole, op. cit., 24. “ Μή έχειν κελεύομεν έξουσίαν χρυσοχόον οίκοι έργάί,εσθαι χρυσόν ή άργυρον, άλλ’
âv τοΤς έργαστηρίοις της Μέσης.”
60 A tta lia te s, 1 3 .
61 Attaliates, 14 . Cedrenus, II , 536 - 537 · Psellus, I, 9 8 -10 0 . Zonaras, I I I , 609.
62 Cedrenus, II, 53 7 . 20

20
m
306

T he silence w hich followed w as broken b y a single voice which cried o ut,

“ W e do n o t w an t a blasphem er of th e cross a n d a caulker as o u r em ­
p eror, b u t th e original heir, our m o th er Z o e."63
A nd im m ed iately th e crow d began to shout,
“ Curse th e bones of C a la p h a te s."64
T his w as th e usual curse em ployed b y th e rio tin g dem es in th e earlier p eriod
of B y zan tin e history. T hen th e crow d g a th e re d sticks an d stones a n d w ould
h av e slain th e eparch h a d n o t he an d his troops fled from th e scene. T he
pittacion in fu riated th e crow d a n d set in m otion th e rio tin g w hich ev en tu ally
o v erth rew M ichael.65
On th e second d ay a fte r E a s te r th e whole c ity w as aroused an d c ertain
officials a n d th e clergy openly denounced M ichael's act. T he m em bers of th e
guilds, i.e. th e trad esm en in th e εργαστή ρια , were p rep arin g an u p risin g .66 As
Psellus rem arks, ” . . . th e people of th e agora, a lread y let loose, w ere m oving
to replace th e ty ra n n y of th e ty r a n t." 67 T hen th e y beg an to g ath er, w ith th e
in te n tio n of settin g fire to th e palace. T he g ath erin g w as form ed in to a m ilita ry
fo rm atio n ,68 an d th o u g h som e of th e m ob were a rm ed w ith axes, sw ords, bows,
a n d spears, th e m a jo rity w ere arm e d only w ith stones.69 B u t b o th Psellus an d
A tta lia te s im ply th a t th e group was m ore th a n a rab b le, for it followed cer­
ta in th o u g h t o u t p lan s.70 T he jails w ere opened a n d th e prisoners en listed in

63 Cedrenus, I I , 537 .
64 Cedrenus, I I , 53 7 . “ άνασκαφείη τά όστά του καλαφάτου."
65 Attaliates, ρ. 14. “ έλαθε δέ τόν καπνόν ύπεκκλίνων εισβολών ε!ς τό πυρ."
66 Psellus, I, 102. “ οί δ’ούν έπί των έργαστηρίων καί πρός ρεγάλας τόλμας παρεσκευάίοντο." The έργα-
στήρια were the workshops of the craftsmen along the Mese. Stöckle, op. cit., 7 1—72. Nicole, op. cit., 24.
“ .. .έν τοίς έργαστηρίοις τής Μέσης."
67 Psellus, I, 102. “ τό δέ άγοραϊον γένος καί άφετον ήδη που καί παρεκεκίνητο ώς άντιτυραννήσον τω
τυραννεύσαντι." Here the phrase άγοραϊον γένος really refers to the people of the agora, that is, to the
craftsmen. This is made clear in other passages. Psellus relates that women left their seclusion to join
the rebellion, “ έγώ γουν πολλάς έωράκειν, ας ούδείς άχρι τότε τής γυναικωνίτιδος έξω τεθέαται, δημοσίφ
τε προϊούσας καί βοώσας τε καί κοπτομένας καί δεινόν άπολοφυρομένας έπΐ τω πάθει τής βασιλίδος, αί δέ
λοιπαΐ Μαινάδων δίκην έφέροντο καί τάγμα ου τι μικρόν έπ! τόν άλιτήριον σννεστήκεσαν."
68 Psellus, I, 10 3. “ τά μέν πρώτα κατά μέρος καί ώσπερ κατά σύστημα έπί τόν πόλεμον κατεστρατοπε-
δεύοντο, έπειτα όλη τής Πόλεως κατ' αύτου συνεστρατήγουν τη φάλαγγι." Constantine Manasses, 263.
“ θυμού καχλάί,ει τη πυρφ, λίθους ευθύς άρπάϋει,
ξύλα καί παν τό προστυχόν, βώλους, κορύνας, ξίφη."
69 Psellus, I, 10 3.
70 Attaliates, 1 4 - 1 5 · “ καί τούτους άρδην καταβαλόντες καί φυγεϊν αίσχρώς άναγκάσαντες ού διασκεδάσ-
θησαν, οΐα τά του συμμιγούς πλήθους, καί χηρεύοντα άρχηγού, άλλ' ώσπερ άνωθεν στρατηγούμενοι γενναιοτέ-
ροις βουλεύμασι προς τό καρτερώτερον άνελάμβανον έαυτούς, καί προσθήκην έκάστης ώρας έκ των συρρεόντων
έλάμβανον." Psellus, I, 103. “ . . .ό δήμος άπας έπί τόν βασιλέα κεκίνηται καί ώσπερ ύφ' ένί σννθήματι πρός τήν
αύτήν γνώμην συνείλεκται.” Cecaumenus, Strategicon, ed. b y B . V asilievsky and V . Jernstedt (St. Peters­
burg, 1896) (hereafter, Cecaumenus), 99. “ τελευτήσαντος γάρ έκείνου έν είρήνη καί έν μετανοία καλή καί
του άνεψίου αύτου βασιλεύσαντος έπανέστη πάσα ή πόλις καί οί έκ των έξω εύρεθέντες έν αύτη, πρόφασιν
εύρηκότες κατ' αύτου ώς τήν θείαν αύτου, τήν δέσποιναν έξορίσαντος. καί έξηλίφθη κάκεϊνος καί ή γενεά αύτου
πάσα έν μιφ ήμέρφ.” Ibn-el-Athiri, Chronicum quod perfectissimum inscribitur, ed. b y C. Tornberg, I X
(Leiden, 186 3), 342, supplements the accounts of Attaliates and Psellus. Ibn al-Athir remarks that
the leader of the outbreak w as the Patriarch. This makes sense in the light of the other urban out­
breaks which occurred during the eleventh century. F o r it w as the patriarch who usually assumed
the over-all direction of the revolutions. Ibn al-Athir remarks th at the Em peror had had the
Patriarch arrested and then ordered the Bulgarian and Russian guards to execute him. B u t the
Patriarch succeeded in winning them over to his side and so obtained his release. According to the
narrative of the A rab chronicler, the Patriarch then proceeded to the church (St. Sophia), summoned
the citizenry, and urged them to remove Michael. See also Matthew of Edessa, Chronique de 9 5 2 à
1 1 3 6 , tr. b y E . Dulaurier (Paris, 1858), 7 2 - 7 3 .
 Ill
ΔΗΜΟΚΡΑΤΙΑ ANI) ELEVENTH-CENT. GUILDS 307
th e forces of the rebels. T he p ro p e rty of M ichael’s fam ily was th e n razed to
th e ground. At first Michael h a d n o t feared th e uprising, considering it little
m ore th a n a p o p u lar tu m u lt. H ow ever, w hen th e citizens’ a rm y (Psellus speaks
of â t as th e π ο λιτικ όν στράτευμα)71 a p p eared before th e palace, M ichael saw th a t
th e people were d raw n up according to b a tta lio n s an d th a t th e fo rm atio n was
of considerable size. I t was th e n th a t he began to d esp air.72
A fter th e ap p earan ce of th e rebel a rm y before th e palace, M ichael’s posi­
tion was som ew hat stren g th en ed b y th e a rriv a l of his uncle, th e nobelissimus
C onstantine, w ith his p riv a te troops. T he new ly a rriv e d soldiers w ere placed
in th e heights of th e palace, an d th e y show ered m issiles an d stones on th e
people’s p h a la n x below. B u t a fte r a te m p o ra ry success in b reak in g up th e
m ilita ry fo rm atio n of th e citizens, th e la tte r once m ore re tu rn e d to th e a tta c k .73
M eanwhile Zoe h a d been recalled from P rincipo b y Michael, w ho hoped to
quell th e d istu rb an ce b y p resen tin g h e r to th e crow d fully g arb ed in im perial
raim en t. H ow ever, th e appearance of Zoe d id n o t p u t an en d to th e citizen s’
a tta c k on th e palace, for a group of citizens proceeded to St. Sophia, where,
a fte r co n su ltatio n w ith th e P a tria rc h A lexius, it was decided th a t th e y w ould
retrieve Zoe’s sister, T heodora, from th e m o n astery of P e trio n .74 T he patricius
C on stantine C abasilas a n d a section of th e people’s a rm y w ere d isp atch ed to
th e m onastery. A t first T heodora refused to leave th e sa n c tu a ry , b u t w as
ev en tu ally dragged o u t b y m em bers of th e citizens’ arm y . She w as clothed in
th e im perial robes a n d escorted to St. S ophia w here she w as acclaim ed em press.75
T he b a ttle betw een M ichael’s forces a n d th e citizens w as b y now raging
furiously. T he rebels w ere divided in to th re e sections. One w as a tta c k in g th e
p alace in th e section of th e excubita, a second was in th e h ippodrom e, an d a
th ird in th e tzyeanisterion. T hough th e a rriv a l of C atacalon C ecaum enus from
Sicily h a d stre n g th e n e d th e forces of th e E m pero r, on th e evening of th e
second d a y of th e revolt, th e citizens’ a rm y prevailed over th e im p erial forces
b y w eight of sheer num bers, a n d succeeded in sm ashing th e g ates of th e palace.
O n en terin g th e secreton, th e y p lu n d ered th e gold an d o th e r o b jects accu m u ­
la te d th ere an d d estro y ed th e public registers. Michael an d his uncle h astily
b o ard ed a ship a n d sailed to th e m o n a ste ry of S tu d io n for refuge, w here th e y
ad o p te d th e m onastic h ab it. B u t th e b a ttle , w hich h a d la ste d for rou g h ly
tw en ty -fo u r h o u rs,76 h a d been a b loody one, a n d over 3,000 citizens h a d fallen.77
As a result, w hen Zoe addressed th e people a n d asked w h at w as to becom e of
71 Psellus, I, 108.
72 Psellus, I, 104. “ έπεί δέ ήδη λαμπρά ή άποστασία έγένετο, καί ό δήμος κατά λόχους συνήεσαν, καί
άξιόλογος ή παρεμβολή έγεγόνει, τότε δή δεινώς τε έστρέφετο τήν ψυχήν___ “
73 Psellus, I, 10 5.
74 Attaliates, ιό ; Psellus, I, ιο 8 ; Cedrenus, II, 537 · Psellus specifically states that the crowd sought
out Theodora only after Zoe had been displayed in the imperial raiment. Cedrenus implies the reverse.
The reference to the fact that the rebels went to the Patriarch for instructions confirms that which
Ibn al-Athir has to say about the role of the Patriarch in the rebellion.
75 Psellus, I, 1 0 8 -1 0 9 ; Attaliates, 16. Cedrenus, I I , 5 3 7 , says that both Zoe and Theodora were
acclaimed.
76 Cedrenus, I I , 539.
77 Cedrenus, I I , 53 8 —539. “ καί γίνεται φόνος πολύς των πολιτών οΐα γυμνών καί αόπλων πρός ένόπλους
άγωνιίομένων μετά ξύλων καί λίθων καί τών παρατυχόντων είδών. φασί γάρ ώς άπώλοντο κατά τούτην τήν
ήμέραν.. . άνδρες άμφί τάς τρεις χιλιάδας.“

20*
m
308

th e deposed Michael, th e ir cry w as for vengeance. Cedrenus, who preserved

m an y of th e curious details of th e revolt, included here th e answ er of th e crowd.
“ K ill th e abom inable one, rem ove th e sinner. L et him be im paled,
crucified, b lin d ed .” 78
Zoe h e sita te d to punish M ichael, b u t T heodora ordered th e new ep arch ,
C am panares, to blind M ichael an d his uncle. T he citizens accom panied Cam-
p an ares to S tudion w here th e y rem oved th e tw o u n fo rtu n a te m en from th e
sa n c tu a ry b y violence an d th e bloody deed w as perform ed a t th e Sigm a.79
Clearly, Michael h a d realized th e im p o rtan ce of o b tain in g th e su p p o rt of
th e guilds. B u t he o v erestim ated th e success of his policy of bribes, an d u n d e r­
estim ated th e great stre n g th of d y n astic sen tim en t. H e overplayed his h an d ,
an d th e guilds, speaking for th e populace—an d in th e very w ords tra d itio n ­
ally spoken b y th e dem es—condem ned him . Δ ημοκρατία h a d th e last w ord.
In th e reign of C onstantine IX M onom achus, th e sources reveal th a t th e
C on stantinopolitans con tin u ed to be active in th e political affairs of th e city,
th o u g h th e re is no m en tio n of an y connection specifically w ith th e guilds.
C on stantine h a d established a n am orous liaison w ith th e b e au tifu l Scleraina
p rio r to his accession to th e th ro n e. A fter his coro n atio n C o n stantine k e p t
Scleraina as his m istress, in spite of his m arriage to Zoe, th e re b y inducing a
fear on th e p a r t of th e demos th a t th e lives of T heodo ra a n d Zoe w ere e n d a n ­
gered. I t w as th is apprehension of th e citizens w hich pro d u ced rio ts of such
violence th a t th e new E m p ero r w as alm ost overthrow n . A ttack in g C on stan tin e
an d a considerable arm ed retin u e w hich were on th e ir w ay to religious ser­
vices, th e populace re p u d ia te d Scleraina a n d clam ored for th e ir “ m o th e r s /*
Zoe a n d T heodora. H a d n o t th e tw o w om en been sum m o n ed a n d p resen ted to
th e populace, C o n stan tin e’s reign w ould surely hav e com e to an a b ru p t end
d u rin g th e course of th e rio t.80
In 1047 th e revolt of Leo Tornices a n d his adv an ce on C onstantinople
occurred so unexpectedly th a t th e re were n o t sufficient forces w ith in th e walls
for th e defense of th e c ity ; so th e E m p ero r w as forced to raise levies from
th e populace w hich were th e n p o sted upon th e w alls.81

78 Cedrenus, II, 540. "αϊρε τόν παλαμναϊον, ττοίησον εκ μέσου τόν άλιτήριον. άνασκολοπισθήτω, σταυρω-
θήτω, τυφλωθήτω.”
79 Cedrenus, I I, 539 —54 ° · See Schlumberger, L 'É po p ée byzantine à la fin du dixième siècle, I I I
(Paris, 1905)» 377 » for a reproduction of the Scylitzes miniature which depicts the dragging of the
victim s across the agora.
80 Cedrenus, II, 5 5 5 —556. “ μέλλων ό βασιλεύς εις προσκύνησιν άπελθείν των αγίων δημοσία ττροόδω κατε-
στασιάσθη παρά του δήμου, έξελθόντος γάρ τούτου πεέή μετά πολλής δορυφορίας άπό του παλατιού καί
ευφημίας.. . εξαίφνης έξηχήθη φωνή άπό μέσου του πλήθους ‘ημείς την Σκλήραιναν βασίλισσαν ού θέλομεν,
ούδέ δι* αυτήν αί μάνναι ήμών αί πορφυρογέννητοι Ζωή τε καί Θεοδώρα Θανουνται.’ καί ευθύς συνεχύθη τά
πάντα, καί ταραχή κατέσχε τό πλήθος, καί έΐήτουν τόν βασιλέα διαχειρίσασθαι. καί εί μή τάχιον αί βασιλίδες
προκύψασαι άνωθεν κατεστόρεσαν τό πλήθος, άπολώλεισαν άν ούκ όλίγοι, ίσως δέ καί αυτός ό βασιλεύς.”
Ibn al-Athir, I X , 352» implies that the Muslim and Christian foreigners in Constantinople had played
some role in the rioting. A s a result, Constantine banished from Constantinople all foreigners who had
been residents there for less than th irty years. H e gives an obviously exaggerated number for those
banished, over 100,000!
81 Cedrenus, II, 5 6 3 -5 6 4 . W hen Tornices arrived before the walls he made overtures to the citizen
defenders of the walls to desert Constantine. I t was on such occasions of emergency, remarks Constan­
tine Porphyrogenitus, De Caerimoniis-Bonn, I, 449, that the guildsmen were recruited for m ilitary
service on the walls.
 m
Δ Η Μ Ο Κ Ρ Α Τ Ι Α AND E L E V E N T H- CENT. G U I L D S 309
1057-1081

D uring th e period 1057-1081 th e populace of th e cap ital figured in four

majjor rebellions, th ree of w hich succeeded in d ethro n in g m onarchs. In fact,
th e turbulence of th e people w as such th a t th e new ly crow ned sovereigns in
m ost cases a tte m p te d to secure th e ir good will b y th e bestow al of favors.
In 1057 th e p a tria rc h C erularius w as able to dethro n e M ichael V I b y p ro m o t­
ing a revolution of th e Const a n t inopolit ans. Michael h a d realized th e d anger
w hich a hostile citizenry posed an d consequently h a d a tte m p te d to secure its
good will.82 W hen th e revolt d id b re a k o u t in th e cap ital, th e citizens all
g ath ered a t St. Sophia an d acclaim ed Isaac Com nenus em p ero r.83 A m ongst
those present were th e heads of all th e guilds,84 an d A tta lia te s relates th a t
groups of citizens a n d soldiers th e n tra n sfe rre d th e seat of go v ern m en t to
St. Sophia. A fter Isa a c ’s coronation b y th e P a tria rc h , th e new E m p ero r
rew arded all his followers, am ongst w hom were, of course, th e populace of
th e c a p ita l.85
W hen C onstantin X D ucas succeeded to th e th ro n e in 1059 he m ade a d e te r­
m ined effort to secure th e favor of th e people. A t his acclam ation w ere g ath ered
all th e guilds a n d th e senate, an d a fte r addressing th em , he rew ard ed m a n y of
th e people an d se n a to rs.86 Z onaras re p o rts th a t num erous sen ato rs an d large
n u m bers of th e com m on people w ere raised to higher ra n k s.87 In a un iq u e p a s­
sage, Psellus elucidates som ew hat th e vague sta te m e n t of Z onaras.
“ N ot a single m an o u t of th a t assem bly was sen t aw ay w ith o u t some
rew ard. T he governm ent officials, th e ir deputies, th e m in o r w orkers, even
th e m an u al w orkers, all received som ething. In th e case of th e la st nam ed,
he actu ally raised th e ir social sta tu s. U n til th is tim e th e re h a d been a
sharp d istin ctio n betw een th e class of o rd in ary citizens a n d th e Senate,
b u t C onstantine d id aw ay w ith it. H en cefo rth no d iscrim in atio n was m ade
betw een w orkers and Senators, a n d th e y w ere m erged in to one b o d y .” 88

82 Cedrenus, II, 634. “ ό δέ γέρων συνέσφιγγε εις αύτόν των ιτολιτών εύνοιαν___ ” Psellus, II, 10 3—104.
“ δέδοικα γάρ τό τε δημοτικόν πλήθος.. ·ϊν’ ουν μή κινήσω πράγματα έπ* εμέ.. . .**
83 Attaliates, 58· “ καί ό δήμος άπας τής πόλεως αυτόν εύφημεϊ.”
84 Cedrenus, II, 635· “ ol των έταιρειών πάντες άρχοντες, καί τινες άλλοι των αφανέστερων.” Zonaras, III,
664. Εταιρεία would seem to indicate the guilds. Εταιρεία is used as a designation for guild, along
w ith σύστημα, σωματείοv etc., in Basilica, V I I I , 2, ι ο ί ; X I , 1 , 14. Εταιρεία is often used to designate
the body of mercenary troops in the palace. B u t Attaliates, 58, says that the palace guard remained
loyal. Thus, it is the guilds about which Cedrenus, I I, 635, is talking, In addition, he uses the plural
form of the word, not the singular.
85 Attaliates, 60. “ . . .φροντιστάς πολλούς των δημοσίων άποδείξας συλλόγων, ούτω καί τό δημοτικόν
τής προσηκούσης τιμής άξιοι.”
86 Attaliates, η ο-ητ. “ . . .συνήθροισε τά σωματεία τής πόλεως, καί λόγους επιείκειας γέμοντας έδημηγό-
ρησε πρός αυτούς.. .καί ήσαν οί τιμηθέντες πολλοί των τε τής αγοράς καί τής συγκλήτου βουλής.” Note
the conjunction of σωματεία and των τε τής άγοράς. Cedrenus, II, 6 5 1. “ λόγους επιείκειας γέμοντας
έδημηγόρησε πρός τήν σύγκλητον καί πρός άπαν τό δημοτικόν τε τής πόλεως καί κοινόν.. . έτίμησε δέ των τε
τής συγκλήτου καί του δήμου πολλούς.”
87 Zonaras, I I I , 674· “ πολλούς των τής συγκλήτου βουλής καί του δημώδους πλήθους είς μεί Γόνας
άξιωμάτων βαθμούς προεβίβασε.”
88 Sewter, 258. Psellus, II, 14 5· “ ούδένα γοϋν των πάντων άφήκεν άγέραστον, ου των εν τέλει, ού
των μετ’ έκείνους εύθύς, ού των πόρρωθι, άλλ’ ούδέ των βαναύσων ούδένα. αίρει γάρ καί τούτοις τούς των
άξιωμάτων βαθμούς, καί διηρημένου τέως τοΰ πολιτικού γένους καί του συγκλητικού, αύτός άφαιρεΐ τό μεσό­
τοιχον καί συνάπτει τό διεστώς, καί τήν διάστασιν μετατίθησιν εις συνέχειαν.”
m
310

A tta lia te s specifically sta te s th a t those honored were τής ά γο ρ ά ς,89 an d fu rth e r
confirm s th is sta te m e n t of Psellus in a passage describing th e don atio n s w hich
N icephorus B o tan iates d istrib u te d a fte r his coronatio n : “ T he whole sen ate,
n u m b erin g tho u san d s of m en, w a s . . .re w a r d e d /'90 T hus, it is q u ite clear from
th e sources th a t C onstantine changed th e n a tu re of th e senate b y a w holesale
in co rp o ratio n of th e βάναυσοι, th e guildsm en.91
A fu rth e r confirm ation of th e fact th a t m em bers of th e guilds h a d en tered
th e sen ate is th e chrysobull issued b y A lexius C om nenus en titled , “ G uildsm en
a n d m erch an ts m ay n o t ta k e th e o a th in th e ir h o m e s /'92 T his decree w as
issued e ith er in 1083, 1098, or 1113, an d was pron o u n ced in a d isp u te over
ce rta in m erchandise betw een tw o m erch an ts an d a w om an n am ed A nna. W hen
th e form er w ere asked to te stify u n d e r o ath , th e y d em an d ed to ta k e th e o a th
in th e ir hom es ra th e r th a n in a public court, claim ing th is p rero g ativ e on th e
grounds th a t th e y w ere b o th sen ato rs.93 B u t A n n a p ro te ste d th a t th e y w ere
m erch an ts an d did n o t h ave th e rig h t to ta k e th e o a th p riv a te ly .94 T he case
w as deadlocked over th is issue an d so th e eparch referred it to th e E m p ero r.
A lexius decreed th a t guildsm en w ho also h a d se n ato rial ra n k w ere req u ired to
ta k e th e o a th in public, ju s t as those guildsm en w ho d id n o t h av e sen ato rial
ra n k w ere required to do. F o r as m em bers of th e corporations, th e y w ere u n d er
th e ju risd ictio n of th e ep arch .95 T he co n ten ts of th is chrysobull m ake it q u ite
clear th a t m em bers of th e corporations h a d en te re d th e sen ate as a d istin c t
group.
T he m otives of C onstantine X D ucas in opening th e sen ate to th is group
m o st p ro b ab ly lay in th e fact th a t he w ished to find stro n g er su p p o rt for his
fam ily as th e new d y n a sty , an d su p p o rt also in th e struggle ag ain st th e m ili­
ta r y elem ent. I t is p ro b ab le th a t m em bers of th e m ore pow erful an d resp ect­
able guilds received sen ato rial ran k .
T he rebellion w hich b roke o u t on th e feast d a y of St. George in 1059 w as
larg ely engineered b y th e leaders of th e a rm y a n d n av y , b u t th e in h a b ita n ts

89 Attaliates, 7 1.
90 A tta lia te s, 27 5. “ π δ σ α γά ρ ή σύγκλητος, ίπτέρ μυριάδας άνδρών παραμετρούμενη . . . ήξιουντο τιμών.'*
91 Here βάναυσοι and οί τής άγοράς refer to the members of the trades and corporations rather
than to the rabble. This is made clear b y Attaliates, 2 7 5—276. Here these new senators, th e βάναυσοι
of Psellus, are carefully distinguished from the “ . ..ά ρ γ ο ί καί πένητες τής βασιλευούσης, ol ταϊς έπι-
σκέττεσι τω ν λεωφόρων, απτερ έμβολοι λέγονται, περινοστουντες καί έμφωλεύοντες, καί πα ρα σίτω ν τάξιν ή
κολάκων___ ” Βάναυσος w as m o s t o fte n u sed to d e s ig n a te th e low er tra d es. T h eod ore S tu d ites, Patrologia
Graeca, X C I X (Paris, 1903), 27 3 , “ . . . τ ω ν βαναύσω ν τ ε χ ν ώ ν .. .δθεν ύφάνται τε καί βαφείς, σκυτοτόμοι
τε καί σκηνοποιοί, λεπ τουργοί τε καί οίκοδόμοι, κανοποιοί τε καί μ α λ α κ ο ρ γο ί.. . . ” See also P. Koukoules,
op. cit., II, 2 2 1 fï., “ δς έν τοϊς άγενέσιν εργοις___ ” P sellu s, I, 1 3 2 , in d ic a te s t h a t C o n sta n tin e I X h a d
a lrea d y a tte m p te d to g a in th e fa v o r o f th e com m on ers b y sim ilar co n cessio n s, “ άμέλει τοι τάξιν έχούσης
τής τιμής έν τ ω πολιτικω δήμω, καί δρου τινός έπικειμένου άμεταθέτου τής άναβάσεως, ούτος έκείνην μέν συγχέας,
τούτον δέ άφελών, μικρού δεϊν τόν άγοραΤον καί άγύρτην δήμον ξύμπαντα κοινωνούς τής γερουσίας πεποίηκε,
καί το ύτο ού τισιν ή πλείοσι χαρισάμενος, ά λλ’ ευθύς ά π ό μιας φωνής άπαντα ς είς τάς ύπερηφάνους μετενεγκών
άρχά ς,” T h e sen a te seem s a lso to h a v e b een o p en ed to p e o p le o n th e b a sis o f in tellec tu a l accomplish­
m e n t, P se llu s, ed. b y S a th a s, I V , 4 3 0 -4 3 1 .
92 Novellae, ed. b y I. Zepos and P . Zepos, J u s Graecovomanum, I (Athens, 19 3 1) (hereafter, Novellae),
645. “ περί του τούς συστηματικούς καί πραγματευτάς μή οίκοι όμνύειν.**
93 Novellae, 6 4 5 · “ καί ol μέν οίκοι όμωμοκέναι προετείνοντο, τό είναι συγκλητικοί προβαλλόμενοι.”
94 Novellae, 6 4 5 · “ή δέ γυνή δημοσίφ τόν δρκον αύτούς υποσχεϊν, π ραγματευτάς είναι τούτους διατεινομένη.”
95 Novellae, 6 4 5 . “τούς δέ συστηματικούς καί πραγματεύεσθαι βουλομένους, μή του προνομίου τούτου
ά π ο λ α ύ ε ιν .. .δημοσίφ τούτους όμνύειν, καθάπερ τούς μηδενός τετυχηκότας άξιώματος.”
 m
Δ Η Μ Ο Κ Ρ Α Τ Ι Α A N İ ) E L E V E N T H - C E N T. G U I L D S 311
of the cap ital were also involved.06 T he h ead of th e conspiracy w ith in th e city
was th e eparch, responsible for th e m ain ten an ce of o rder in th e cap ital, an d
in d irect an d im m ed iate control over th e c ity ’s guilds. Before th e Caesar
Jo h n D ucas was able to restore order, th e citizens h ad th ro w n th e city in to
chaos.07
T he n ex t reference to th e political activ ities of th e populace of C onstan­
tinople occurs d u ring th e revolt of N icephorus B o tan iates in 1078. T he cir­
cum stances were q u ite sim ilar to those of Isa a c ’s rev o lt, as once m ore th e
co n sp irators g ath e re d a t St. S ophia w here B o tan iates w as p ro claim ed th e new
em peror. A tta b a te s re p o rts th a t p resen t in St. Sophia a t th a t m om en t w ere
th e synod, th e m ore p ro m in en t m em bers of th e senate, th e clergy, th e m ore
p ro m in en t m onks, an d people from th e agora, th e tra d e sm e n .969798 A fter th e
acclam ations a t S t. S ophia th e people a n d those p ro m in e n t persons involved
in th e rebellion w ere draw n up in to som e k in d of m ilita ry fo rm atio n s.99 L e t­
ters were sent b y th e P a tria rc h to all those in th e gov ern m en t w ho w ere n o t y e t
a p a rty to th e conspiracy, urging th e m to join, an d w hoever refused to join
th e rebellion was th re a te n e d w ith th e d e stru ctio n of his hom e an d p ro p e rty .100
T his was th e sam e w eapon C erularius h a d used in th e rev o lu tio n of 1057 w hen
he tu rn e d th e citizens loose on th e p ro p erties of all those who h a d opposed
th e acclam ation of Isaac. T he rebel a rm y of citizens th e n besieged an d to o k
th e g reat palace. M ichael V II h a d previously sum m oned A lexius Com nenus an d
ask ed his advice as to w h a t should be done. A lexius replied th a t it w ould be
possible to sm ash th e rebellion, for m o st of th e crow d w hich h a d g ath ered
was βάναυσον a n d therefore inexperienced in w arfare. T h a t is, th e y w ere of th e
m a rk e t place.101 M ichael disregarded th e advice of A lexius, a n d a t th e en d he
w as ta k e n cap tiv e a n d th e citizens to o k possession of th e palace.
B o tan iates h a d been able to e n te r th e c a p ita l only because of th e rev o lt
w hich h a d opened th e g ates to him . A t th e sam e tim e th e rev o lt of B ryennius
in th e w estern provinces posed a serious th re a t to B o ta n ia te s; so he was
forced n o t only to rew ard those w ho h a d opened th e c ity to h im , b u t also to
ensure th e ir fu tu re lo y a lty in th e face of his rival, B ryennius. T his he d id b y a
v ery liberal bestow al of title s a n d m oney. All ta x e s ow ed to th e tre a su ry

96 Psellus, II, 148. “ μέτοχοι δέ του σκέμματος ού των άγενών μόνον καί Ανώνυμοι.” Attaliates, 74» speaks
of the Αφανέστεροι in the rebellion.
97 Attaliates, 73. “ καί ό δήμος άπας συνεκροτεϊτο καί συνηθροίίετο, καί ταραχής ύπήρχον τά κατά
τήν πόλιν άνάμεστα.. . . ”
98 Attaliates, 270. “ κάκεΐσε μετά τής συνόδου συγκροτουσιν ol τής συγκλήτου λογάδες.. .πας ό
κλήρος.. .καί όσοι τής Αγοράς, καί των Ναϋιραίων ol δοκιμώτατοι.” Zonaras, I I I , 7 * 9 - “ . . .τό τε τούτης
δημοτικόν καί τό ύπερέχον έν άρχουσι... καί των τή έκκλησίςχ.. .τό έκκριτον.” Bryennius, 12 3 . “ . . . τ ό
πλεΐστον άπόλεμόν τέ έστι καί βάναυσον.”
99 Attaliates, 270. “ καί τηνικαυτα κατά φατρίας διαιρεθέντες οί τής πολιτείας έπώνυμοι καί πάντες ol
τής ‘ Ρωμαίων φυλής.. . συνταγματάρχαις τε αυτόμολοι έχρήσαντο.” Zonaras, I I I , 7 19 · “ διαιρεθέντες ούν
κατά φατρίας τής πολιτείας ol έξοχοι καί κατά φάλαγγας συνασπίσαντες.. . . ”
100 Bryennius, 1 2 2 . “ καί έμπιπραν τάς οίκίας ήπείλουν εί μή πρός αυτούς παραγένοιντο καί του σκέμ-
ματος κοινωνήσαιεν.”
101 Bryennius, ρ. 12 4 . ‘έφησε γάρ ώς του συναθροισθέντος πλήθους τό πλεϊστον άπόλεμόν τέ έστι καί
βάναυσον, καί ούκ άν ύποσταΐεν καθωπλισμένους άνδρας Ιδόντες καί πρός μάχην έτοίμους.” Here the word
admits of the more general meaning, i.e., the crowd. In an y case, the passage refers to the political
activities of the citizens.
m
312
before his accession were cancelled, a n d all th e senate, now including a v a st
h o st of artisa n s (A ttaliates says thousands), w as rew ard ed .102 T he chronicle,
in m eter, of C onstantine M anasses, describes th is scene in very in terestin g
d etail :
“ H e (B otaniates) cloaked in g arm en ts gleam ing w ith gold,
an d in p urple raim en t of golden brocade stu d d e d w ith pearls
w hich gave fo rth a p u rp le a n d golden brilliance

sa t high on a silver-studded th ro n e
bestow ing ran k s on all those who cam e fo rw ard :
B lacksm iths, w oodcutters, diggers, m erch an ts, farm ers,103
cobblers, rope-m akers, fullers, v in ey ard w orkers.
H e debased th e things of honor an d defiled th in g s of illustrious n a tu re ,
b y sending dow n such glory to th e craftsm en (βάναυσους),
w hich rew ards form er em perors h a d bestow ed
to those achieving g re a t deeds of glory
a n d to those w ho w ere of illustrious lineage an d b lo o d .” 104
F inally, during th e revolution of A lexius Com nenus, B o tan iates h a d been
forced to su p p lan t th e garriso n of th e walls w ith levies of citizens. Z onaras
sta te s th a t th e E m p ero r recru ited th em from th e people of th e m a rk e t place
an d from th e c ity m o b .105
T he events described in th e preceeding p a ra g ra p h s show th a t th e in h a b ita n ts
of C onstantinople exercised considerable influence on th e course of th e in te rn a l
h isto ry of th e period. T hey w ere a force to be considered b y b o th th e b u re a u ­
c ra ts an d th e generals. F u rth e r, th e term inology em ployed in th e sources to
describe these activities indicates th a t th e guilds w ere th e leaders in th e
p o litical activ ities of th e C onstantinopolitans.
A tta lia te s speaks of th e δημοσίω ν σ υ λ λ ό γ ω ν, an d of th e σωματεία τής πόλεω ς106

102 Bryennius, 1 2 8 ; Zonaras, I I I , 7 1 9 ; Attaliates, 275.

103 Γαιομάχος in D. Demetrakou, Μέγα Λεξικόν τής Ελληνικής Γλώσσης, II, 1537 » is defined as “ ό άπό
γής, άπό τής ξηρας μαχόμενος.” B u t the Latin translation of the Bonn text, agricola, seems closer to the
meaning intended here.
104 Constantine Manasses, 285.
“ αυτός δ’έπιπορπούμενος χρυσοεστίλβους ιτέπλους
καί βύσσινα χρυσοϋφή μαργαροφόρα φάρη,
καί βάμματι πορφυρανθεϊ λάμποντα καί χρυσίοο,

|φ* υψηλών έκάθητο θρόνων άργυροήλων,

κόσμων τοΐς άξιώμασι πάντας, τούς προσιόντας,
χαλκεϊς, δρυτόμους, σκαφευτάς, εμπόρους, γαιομάχους,
κρηπιδοπώλας, σχοινουργούς, κναφεϊς, άμπελεργάτας,
καί χυδαίων τά τίμια, καί τα λαμπρά ρυπαίνων,
καί τηλικαύτην εύκλειαν κατάγων είς βαναύσους,
ήν έπαθλον έδίδοσαν οί κροπτορες οί πρώην
άνδραγαθίας καί χειρών κατορθουσών μεγάλα,
καί ταυτα τοΐς έξ αίματος καί γένους λαμπροσπόρου.”
105 Zonaras, I I I , 728. “ σύγκλυδες άνθρωποι καί πολέμων οί πλείονες άδαεΐς ή μάλλον έξ άγοραίων άθροισ-
θέντες καί πληθύος δημότιδος.” Άγοραίω ν again almost certainly refers to the craftsmen of the market
place, as has been shown above in footnote 8 1. Notice that Zonaras seems to differentiate between
άγοραίων and πληθύος δημότιδος.
106 Attaliates, 60, 70; Cedrenus, II, 6 4 1.
 m
Δ Ι 1 Μ 0 Κ Κ Α Τ Ι Α A N I ) It L E VK N Τ Η - C E N T . G U I L D S 313
( m lrcnus speaks of th e έταιριιφν.107 A nd finally, Psellus an d B ryennius m ention
I h e β α υ α ύ σ ω ν.,0Η
Σ ύ λ λο γο ς,100 έταιρεϊα,110 σω ματεϊον,111 σ ύ σ τη μ α ,112 th e te rm s used in th e te x ts, all
refer to th e guilds. T his is clear from th eir use in th e legal lite ra tu re of th e
te n th and eleventh centuries, i.e., in th e Basilica , th e law s of Leo V I, th e
Book of the Prefect, a n d th e Peira. Βάναυσος113 refers to th e m em bers of th e
lower guilds. As m entioned above, βάναυσος ad m its of tw o m eanings. I t specific­
ally refers to a rtisa n s a n d craftsm en, b u t is also used in a less specific sense to
denote a rabble. H ow ever, in our te x ts it generally im plies th e form er, i.e.,
a rtisan s an d craftsm en. T his is usually evident from th e general co n tex t of
th e passages q u o te d .114 M ost illu stra tiv e in th is respect is th e te x t of Cons­
ta n tin e M anasses q u o ted above (p. 312) w here he em ploys th e te rm βάναυσους
an d spells ou t th e ex act m eaning b y saying th a t th e te rm includes, am ongst
others, blacksm iths, w oodcutters, diggers, m erchan ts, cobblers, rope-m akers,
fullers, e tc .115
T hus, th e heads of th e guilds p lay ed an im p o rta n t role in th e rebellion w hich
ov erthrew M ichael V I.116 A fter Isaac C om nenus w as crow ned he rew ard ed th e
populace an d to o k a c ertain in te re st in th e guilds. W hen C on stan tin e D ucas
was crow ned, he sum m oned th e guilds of th e c ity a n d ad d ressed th em . A fter
the address m a n y m em bers of th e guilds w ere m ade senators. T he guilds again
p lay ed an im p o rta n t role in th e rev o lt th a t overth rew M ichael V II D ucas. In
the defense of th e w alls against th e forces of A lexius Com nenus, N icephorus
B o tan iates h a d to em ploy artisan s. T his review or su m m arizatio n of th e evi-
107 Cedrenus, II, 6 3 5 ; Zonaras, I I I , 664.
108 Psellus, II, 1 4 5 ; Bryennius, 12 3 .
109 Nicole, op. cit., 1 5 —16.
110 Basilica, V I I I , 2, 1 0 1 , equates έταιρεϊα w ith σύστημα and σωματεϊον. B asilica, X I , 1, 14, equates
έταιρεϊα with σύστημα and κολλέγιον. This word is missed b y Stöckle, op. cit. Bu ry, Selected E ssays
(Cambridge, 1930), 2 0 7 -2 0 8 , makes the following remark on Cedrenus, I I , 6 35, and Zonaras, I I I ,
664 : “ . . .p arty organizations or clubs, hetaireiai. These clubs which Zonaras has fortunately mentioned,
had politically somewhat the same significance in the eleventh century as the demoi or factions of the
hippodrome in the sixth ; though doubtlessly th ey were much smaller and possessed far less influence
than the blues and greens.” B u ry seized upon the political significance of the hetaireiai but failed
to identify them properly.
111 B asilica, V I I I , 2, ι ο ί. “ ού πάσιν έφεϊται ποιεϊν έταιρείας ή συστήματα, ή σωματεία.” B asilica, V I ,
4 ,1 3 · “ πάντα τα έν Κωνσταντινουπόλει σωματεία.. . τω έττάρχω τής πόλεως υποκείσθωσαν.” See also B asilica,
L X , 32, 2. P eira, L I , 7, distinguishes between σωματεϊον and σύστημα, “ ότι σωματεϊον καί σύστημα
διαφέρει, σωματεϊον μεν γάρ ’εστί πάσα τέχνη, ήτις διά χειρός εχει την έργασίαν, οϊον σκυτοτομική ή βαπτική.
σύστημα δέ ή μη Ιχουσα διά χειρών την έργασίαν, οϊον οί πρανδιοπράται και οί μεταξοπράται καί ot λοιποί,
οΐτινες αύτοί ούκ έργάΐονται.”
118 This is the term used most frequently in the Book of the Prefect to signify guild. Nicole, op. cit.,
I V , 5 ; V I , 6, 10, 12 , 1 3 ; V I I , 3, 6; V I I I , 1 3 ; I X , 6; X I I , 2, 6; X I I I , 4; X I X , 4. B asilica, V I I I , 2,
ιο ί; X I , I, 14; L I V , 6, 16; V I , 4, 1 3 ; V I I , 8, 10. De C aerim oniis-Vogt, I, 1 3 , 498.
113 Psellus, I, 148. “ . . .τω ν επί τής αγοράς έργαστηρίων, έφ’ ών ot βάναυσοι των τεχνών καί έμπύριοι
τήν ξυντέλειαν Ιχουσι.” A great number of these έργαστήρια were located on the Mese. Psellus, I, 96,
speaks of the βαναύσων τεχνών.
114 Psellus, I, 96, 148. According to the distinction made between the σωματεϊον and σύστημα in the
Peira, the βάναυσοι would have belonged to the σωματεία. However, it is highly doubtful whether
such a distinction is observed in the terminology of our chroniclers.
115 See supra, note 104.
118 The heads of the guilds are designated variously; προστάται, προστατεύοντες, προεστώτες, πρωτο-
στάται, πριμικήριοι, Ιξαρχοι, Stöckle, op. cit., 78. Attaliates, 12 , seems to refer to them as ot τής άγοράς
ττροεξάρχοντες, and Cedrenus, I I, 6 4 1, is possibly referring to them when he speaks of φροντισταί;
Attaliates, 60. These Ιξαρχοι had considerable jurisdiction within the guild.
m
314

dence shows beyond a d o u b t th a t th e citizens were activ e politically d u rin g

th e eleventh century, an d th a t th e ir a c tiv ity was cen tered in th e guilds.
M eager th ough th e evidence of th is period is, one can fo rm u late a h y p o ­
thesis. T he guilds of elev en th -cen tu ry C onstantinople exercised som e of th e
political functions of th e old dem es an d circus factions. B y political fu n ctio n s
is m ean t th a t th e y were a vehicle of political expression of th e people. A t th e
sam e tim e th e ir repeated use for garrison d u ty along th e g reat walls of th e
city is rem iniscent of some of th e du ties of th e dem es. A te x t from th e eleventh-
c e n tu ry provincial general C atacalon C ecaum enus furnishes w h at w ould seem
to be a strik in g confirm ation of th e h ypothesis th a t th e C o n stan tin o p o litan
guilds of th e eleventh c e n tu ry w ere engaged in political as well as in econom ic
endeavor. C ecaum enus ex h o rts his son: “ B ew are th a t you h av e ex trem e
exactness in th e affairs of th e city, so th a t n o th in g m ay escape y our know ledge ;
b u t h av e spies on every side an d everyw here in all th e guilds, so th a t w hen­
ever som ething is p lo tted , you shall learn of i t .” 117 W ith th e suppression of
th e p olitical life of th e dem es in th e sev en th and eigh th centuries, th e political
life of th e C onstantinopolitans possibly becam e con nected w ith th e co rp o ra­
tions. T he sources of th e n in th and te n th centuries in d icate th a t th ese bodies
p lay ed a significant role in th e general life of th e cap ital, though th e y do n o t
say v ery m uch as to th e ir political role. B u t if these sources are re tic e n t in
th is respect, th e sources of th e eleventh c e n tu ry leave no d o u b t w hatsoever.
T he appearance of th e guilds as such im p o rta n t elem ents in th e in te rn a l his­
to ry of elev en th -cen tu ry B y zan tiu m is to be explained n o t only b y th e ir
econom ic stren g th and organization, b u t also b y th e tense division betw een,
and opposition of, th e civil a n d m ilita ry factions. T h e guilds (along w ith th e
church) were, therefore, often th e decisive force in th is struggle.
T he em ergence of th e guilds as political factors in th e life of th e cap ital is
dou b ly significant. F irst, as m entioned above, on th e local scene it accounts,
in p a rt, for th e successors to th e dem es. Second, in te rm s of m ediaeval
society generally, it shows th a t ju st as a c ertain relatio n sh ip existed betw een
u rb a n political violence a n d th e guilds a t various tim es in th e Islam ic E a s t
a n d th e L a tin W est, so also such a relationship ex isted in elev en th -cen tu ry
B y zan tiu m . A nd even th o u g h th is sim ilarity m a y n o t h av e been d ue com ­
p letely to com m on in stitu tio n a l a n cestry an d developm ent, nevertheless it
in d icates a ce rta in basic affinity am ong th e th ree m ediaeval societies.

117 Cecaumenus, 5. “ πρόσεχε ούν καί έχε άκρίβειαν είς τά τής πόλεως πράγματα ύπερβάλλουσαν, ϊνα
μηδέν σε λανθάνη, άλλ’ εχε κατασκόπους πάντη καί πανταχου είς πάντα τά συστήματα, ΐν’ όπόταν μελετηθή
τι, μάθης τούτο." In the German translation of Cecaumenus b y H . G. Beck, Vademecum des byzan tini­
schen Aristokraten, in Byzantinische Geschichtsschreiber, V , 26, συστήματα has been translated as Zünfte.
 IV

ST. ÏOANNICIUS THE GREAT (754-84(>)

AND THE «SLAYS» OF BITHYNIA

There seems to be some reason to suggest, though the

evidence is not complete, that St. Ioannicius was possibly a
descendent of the Bulgars transplanted in Bithynia during
the seventh century by the Byzantines. In the early part of
the V ita written by his contemporary and associate, Sabas,
occurs an interview between Ioannicius and the emperor
Constantine VL The occasion is a remarkable feat of arms
which Ioannicius accomplished in a severe battle with the
Bulgarians.

"Οθεν δη τό τε θαυμάσας ό βασιλεύς τό άνδρεϊον τον στρα­

τιώ του * ώ π α ϊ κα λέ , φ ησ ί , ποιας χώρας και στρα τία ς εϊ σν ,
και τ ι σου υπ ά ρχει , λ έ γ ε ι , τ ο όνομα ; 'Ο δε είρηκώς ώς χώρας
μέν εσ τι Βιθννών επα ρχία ς , κώμης δε των Μ αρνκάτου και γ έ ­
νους των Βοϊλάδων, την τε κλήσιν π έλει Ίω αννίκιος, καί την
στρατείαν εξσκουβίτω ρ (^ ,

The family name, given here in the plural, Βοϊλάδων

(Βοϊλάς in the singular), is the main reason for suggesting that
perhaps St. Ioannicius might have been a descendent of the
Bithynian "Slavs’. The name is a Bulgarian word used to
denote a noble or high dignitary. It appears with this mean­
ing in the Orhon inscriptions of Mongolia and also in the
early Bulgarian inscriptions in the Balkans in the ninth

(1 ) V i t a l o a n n i c i i , A c t a S a n c to r u m N o v e m b r is I I ( B r u x e ll i s , 1 8 9 4 ) ,
p p . 3 3 7 - 3 8 . S u m m a r ie s o f t h e l if e a re a ls o t o b e f o u n d in P . V an d e n

G h e y n , U n m o in e grec a u n e u v iè m e s i è c l e , S . J o a n n ic e L e G r a n d , in
É tu d e s r e l ig ie u s e s , p h i l o s o p h iq u e s , h is to r iq u e s e t l i t t é r a i r e s , L (1 8 9 0 ),
4 0 7 - 3 4 . C. L o pa r ev , V i z a n t i j s k i j a ï i t i j a s v j a t y h V I I - I X v e k o v , in
V i z a n t. V r e m .9 X V I I I (1 9 1 1 ) , 7 2 -9 2 .
century (x). The word is used by Theophanes and Constan­
tine Porphyrogenitus when they speak of certain Bulgarian
nobles. Thus Theophanes speaks of the βοϊλάδων (nobles)
who accompanied their king to an audience with Constan­
tine V in 748 (2). The family name Boilas, which became
prominent in Byzantium, is most probably related to this
Bulgarian word signifying a high dignitary or noble, and
which seems even to have been used as a proper name.
Ioannicius is the earliest person to appear bearing this name
in the Byzantine sources (3).
The saint came from the village of Marykatos in Bithynia
(Βιθννών επαρχίας) located on the north shore of Lake Apol­
lonias near the town of Miletopolis(4). In 773, at the age of
nineteen, he was enrolled in the eighteenth bandon of the
imperial excubitores and remained in the army until some

(1 ) T h is f a c t is n o t e d b y t h e e d it o r o f t h e V i ta I o ., p . 3 3 9 ; « G e n u s
B o ila d u m a p u d B u lg a r o s d é s i g n â t d u c e s e t o p t i m a t e s ». A n d h e f u r t h e r
c o m m e n t s ; « A t q u o m o d o S . I o a n n ic io , h u m ili lo c o n a t o , h a e c a p p e l-
l a t i o c o n v e n i a t n o n l iq u e t . F o r s a n f a m i li a m q u a n d a m d e s ig n a r e
v o l u e r i t S a b a s ». O n t h i s w o r d s e e G. M o rav csik , B y z a n t i n o t u r c i c a ,
I I 2 ( 1 9 5 8 ) , 9 3 -4 ; W . R a d lo ff , D ie a ltt ü r k is c h e n I n s c h r if te n d e r
M o n g o le i ( S t . P e t e r s b u r g , 1 8 9 4 ), p . 1 4 0 ; F . M iklosich , L e x ic o n
P a la e o s lo v e n ic o - G r a e c o - L a tin u m ( V ie n n a , 1 8 6 2 ) , 5 0 ; W . T h o m se n , A l t ­
tü r k is c h e I n s c h r if te n a u s d e r M o n g o le i in Z e i t s c h r i f t d e r d e u ts c h e n
M o r g e n lä n d is c h e n G e s e l ls c h a f t , L X X V I I I ( 1 9 2 4 ) , 1 7 1 . S e e a ls o t h e
lo n g b o o k r e v i e w o f P a p a d e m e t r io u , in V i z a n t. V r e m ., V ( 1 8 9 8 ) , 7 1 7 ,
w h o n o t e d i t s n o n - G r e e k o r ig in . [V o ir a u s s i B e Se v l ie v -G r é g o ir e ,
L e s in s c r ip tio n s p r o to b u lg a r e s, d a n s B y z a n tio n , X X V I I I (1 9 5 8 ),
p p . 307 sq . N .d .l.R .] .
(2) T h eo ph a n e s , C h r o n o g r a p h ia , e d . C. d e B oor , I ( L e ip z i g , 1 8 8 3 ),
4 3 6 , 4 4 7 . C o n stantine P o rph y r o g en it u s , D e C e r e m o n iis A u l a e
B y z a n t i n a e , e d . J . R e is k e a n d I. B e k k e r ( B o n n , 1 8 2 9 ) , 6 8 1 , m e n ­
t i o n s t h e s i x g r e a t β ο λιά ό ες a t t h e B u lg a r ia n c o u r t , a n d t h e εσω a n d
εξω β ο λιά ό ες b e lo w t h e m . In D e A d m i n i s t r a n d o I m p e r i o , e d . G . Mo­
ravcsik ( B u d a p e s t , 1 9 4 9 ) , p . 1 5 4 , h e m e n t i o n s t h e t w e l v e g r e a t
β ο ϊλά δ ω ν. T h e r e a r e v a r io u s s p e llin g s o f t h e n a m e ; Β ό ϊλ α ς , Β ο ίλ α ς ,
Β ό η λα ς ; Mo ha vcsik , B y z a n t i n o t u r c i c a , I I 2, 9 4 .
(3 ) F o r l a t e r m e m b e r s o f t h e B o i la s f a m i ly , o r a t l e a s t b e a r e r s o f
t h i s n a m e , s e e S . V r y o n is , T h e W i l l o f a P r o v i n c i a l M a g n a te , E u s t a ­
th iu s B o i la s { 1 0 5 9 ) , in D u m b a r to n O a k s P a p e r s , X I ( 1 9 5 7 ) , 2 7 3 .
(4 ) V i ta I o ., p . 3 3 5 . S e e t h e m a p in W. R amsay , T h e H is to r ic a l
G e o g ra p h y o f A s i a M i n o r (L o n d o n , 1 8 9 0 ) , o p p o s i t e p . 1 7 8 .
 IV
ST. lOANNICIl JS ( ί ΗΚΛ Τ 217

time around 795, when he sought refuge in the monastic life

of Ml. Olympus (*).
As is well known, Justinian II, after his campaign of 688/9
in the Balkans, transplanted Bulgars from the Balkans into
Asia Minor. They were transported via the town of Abydos
and then settled in the Opsikion theme as soldiers (12).
The information furnished by the V ita, in combination
with what little we know about the settlement of "Slavs’
in Bithynia, would suggest that St. Ioannicius was a descen­
dent of the Bulgars settled as soldiers in the Opsikion theme
by the Byzantines during the seventh century, possibly by
Justinian shortly after 688/9. His family name, Boilas, is
Bulgarian. His village, Marykatos, located in Bithynia near
Lake Apollonias, was in the general area of Slav settlement.
As a matter of fact it was directly in the line of march for
the Bulgars brought over by Justinian II through Abydos.
And his profession, that of soldier for twenty-four years, is
consonant with the fact that the emperor intended to use
these Bulgars in the armies.
If we can accept the above conclusion, that St. Ioannicius
was a descendent of the Bulgars brought into Asia Minor
in the seventh century, then we have an interesting example
of a "Slav’ who had been Byzantinized. His parents were
already Christians, as their names, Anastaso and Myritzikos
(diminutive of myrh), testify, and Ioannicius became the
very picture of the pious Byzantine monk (3). If one accepts
the date of the first Bulgarian colonization in Bithynia as
688/9, or even if he places it during the reign of Constans II (4),

(1 ) V i t a I o ., p p . 3 3 4 , 3 3 8 -9 .
(2) T h e o p h a n e s , 364, « π ο λλ ά π λή θ η τω ν Σ κ λά β ω ν . . . είς τά τοϋ Ό ψ ι-

κίο υ διά τής Ά β ν δ ο υ περάσας κ α τέσ τη σ ε μ έρη » ; N l C E P H O R U S , O p u s c u la

H is to r ic a , e d . C. d e B o o r ( L e ip z ig , 1880), p . 36 ; G . O s t r o g o r s k y , H i s ­
to r y o f the B y z a n t i n e S t a t e ( N e w B r u n s w ic k , 1957), p p . 105, 116-117 ;
P . C h a r a n i s , T h e S l a v ic E le m e n t in B y z a n t i n e A s i a M i n o r in the
T h ir te e n th C e n t u r y , in B y z a n t i o n , X V I I I (1946-48), 69-83. 754, t h e
d a t e o f t h e b i r t h o f S t . I o a n n ic iu s , w o u ld e x c l u d e t h e p o s s i b i l i t y o f
h is h a v i n g b e lo n g e d t o t h e la t e r g r o u p s e t t l e d in 762 b y C o n s t a n t in e V
a lo n g t h e A t a r n a s R iv e r .
(3 ) V i ta I o ., p . 3 3 3 .
(4) Ch a r a n is , loc. c i t ., 70 ; Ost r o g o r sk y , o p . c i t ., p. 105.
IV
248

the assimilation in this particular instance would seem to

have been comparatively rapid and complete (l). The two
elements operating for this assimilation, as they appear in
the V ita , were the army and the church (2).

(1 ) T h a t s u c h w o u ld h a v e b e e n t h e c a s e is t h e o p in io n o f F a t h e r
D , L e s S l a v e s , B y z a n c e e t R o m e a u I X e s iè c le ( P a r is , 1 9 2 6 ) ,
v o r n ik

p . 1 0 2 . « E n c e q u i c o n c e r n e le s S la v e s d 'A s ie M in e u r e , ils f u r e n t e u x
a u s s i t o u c h é s p a r la p r o p a g a n d e b y z a n t i n e . L à , le s c ir c o n s t a n c e s
é t a ie n t f a v o r a b le à u n e a c t io n r a p id e . L e m i li e u é t a i t c o m p lè t e m e n t
c h r é t ie n . L e s p a ïe n s n e p o u v a i e n t p lu s c o m p t e r su r le u r s c o m p a t r i o t e s ,
d o n t ils é t a i e n t s é p a r é s , e t ils s u b i s s a ie n t d ' a u t a n t p lu s f a c il e m e n t
l'in f lu e n c e b y z a n t i n e ».
(2 ) T h e s a m e c o m b i n a t i o n o f a r m y a n d c h u r c h a p p e a r s in t h e l if e
o f S t . P a u l t h e Y o u n g e r , w h o w a s r e la t e d t o S t. l o a n n ic iu s t h r o u g h
h i s m o t h e r a n d w h o s e f a t h e r w a s a n o f f ic e r in t h e f l e e t . A n a l e c t a
B o l l a n d i a n a , X I ( 1 8 9 2 ) , 2 0 -1 . O f h is m o t h e r , t h e V i ta P a . s a y s ;
« κ α τ ο ικ ε ί δε εν τ ιν ι χ ω ρ ίω ο τον Π έ τ ρ ο ν μ ε ν λ έ γ ε τ α ι, π ρ ο σ εχές δέ εσ τι
το ίς Μ αρνκάτον- κ α το νο μ α ζο μ ένο ις, δθεν ό θείος εν μ ο ν α χ ο ις , Ί ω α ννίκ ιο ς,
ώ ρ μ η το, ε π ε ι κα ι λ ό γο ς δ ια π εφ οίτη κ εν ον μ α κρά ν είνα ι γέ ν ο νς α ντή ν
Ί ω α ν νικ ίω .
 V
T H E W IL L O F A P R O V IN C IA L M A G N A T E , E U S T A T H IU S
B O IL AS ( 1059) 0
I

Y Z A N T IN E d ocu m en ts d ea lin g in an eleven th -cen tu ry m anu script of the

B w ith in d iv id u a l lan d ow n ers b e g in B ib lioth èq u e N ation ale, m s. C oislin 263,

to appear in app reciab le num bers only fols. 159-165v. w h ere it fo llo w s th e S p irit­
in th e elev en th century. T h e n ovels of
th e ten th cen tury an d th e P eira in th e
elev en th still treat th e land ow ners as a
class, referring to in d ivid u als on ly rarely.
T h e app earance o f person al records in
th e latter h a lf o f th e elev en th century
presents th e historian w ith a m ore d e ­
ta iled p icture of this social class. A series
o f chrysobulls issu ed b y M ich ael V II
D u ca s, N icep h oru s III B otaniates, and
A lexius C om n en us en um erate th e vari­
ous h old in gs o f L eo C eph alas and An-
dronicus D u ca s. T h e chroniclers and h is­
torians relate th e exten t o f th e p osses­
sions h eld b y C on stantin e L eich u d es and
N icep h oritzes, w h ile th e letters of
M ich a el P sellus g iv e an am ple list of th e
philosopher's h old in gs. T h e dia ta x is of
M ich ael A ttaliates’ poorhou se in C on ­
stan tin op le and R h aid estus, alon g w ith
th e ty p ic o n of G regory Pacurianus’
m onastery at B ackovo, com p lete th e p ic ­
ture o f th ese eleven th -cen tu ry m agnates.
T o th ese d ocu m en ts one m ay add y e t
another, th e w ill o f th e p ro to sp a th a riu s
E ustathius B oilas from th e year 1059.
T his w ill, w h ic h is alm ost u n iq u e for th e
elev en th century, g ives a d etailed ac­
cou n t of th e esta te o f a large land ow ner
in th e eastern p rovin ces.1 It is to b e fou n d
* I should like to express m y appreciation
for th e suggestions w h ich th e faculty and
fellow s o f D um barton Oaks, esp ecially Pro­
fessor G lanville D o w n e y and Dr. C yril M ango,
offered in th e translating o f certain tech n ical
terms and obscure passages. I should also like
to thank Mr. M arvin C. Ross, w h o w as very
h elp fu l in this respect, and Mr. G eorge Soulis
o f th e D um barton Oaks staff, w h o first called
m y attention to th e w ill of Eustathius Boilas.
1 See also th e w ills o f Sym batius Pacurianus
and his w ife Gale Basilacaina, w h ich date from
u a l L a d d e r o f John C lim acu s. T h e m an u ­
script, w h ich also in clu d es an abrid ged
life o f John C lim acu s b y D a n ie l of
R aithou, a letter o f D a n ie l to John, and
a letter con tain in g J o h n s answ er to
D a n iel, w as w ritten in 1059 b y th e m onk
T h eod u lu s at th e req u est o f B oilas.2 H .
O m on t first m ad e th e contents of th e
d ocu m en t kn ow n in 1890, and prom ised
a m ore d etailed report on th e w ill in a
fu tu re com m u nication . 3 H ow ever, it w as
V. B en esh evich w h o p u b lish ed th e text
in the Journal o f th e M in istry of P u blic
E d u c a tio n in 1907, and an in com p lete
com m entary w as p u b lish ed b y P. B e zo ­
brazov in 1 9 1 1 .4 T h e w ill in clu d es
th e late eleven th century; Ioach eim Iberitou,
“ Έ κ τ ο υ ά ρ χ ε ί ο υ τ η ς è v 'Α γίω wOpeı le p â s μ ο ν ή ς
τ ω ν Ί β ή ρ ω ν , β υ ξ α ν τ ι ν α ί δ ί α θ ή κ α ι ” *Ο ρ θ ο δ ο ξ ί α ,
V ( 1 9 3 0 ) , 6 1 3 -8 , and V I ( 1 9 3 1 ) , 3 6 4 -7 1 .
D ölger has p u blished an isocodicon o f th e
properties m entioned in th ese w ills; Aus den
Schatzkammern des heiligen Berges (M un ich ,
1 9 4 8 ), 1 8 0 -4 . In his com m entary D ölger has
confu sed Sym batius Pacurianus w ith Gregory
Pacurianus, th e founder o f th e m onastery at
Backovo. It seem s h ig h ly probable that G reg­
ory Pacurianus had m arried th e daughter of
N icep horus C om nenus, w hereas Sym batius had
m arried th e dau ghter o f th e curopalates
Basilacius.
2 R. D evreesse, Catalogue des manuscrits
grecs, II, L e Fonds Coislin (Paris, 1945), 2 4 1 -2 .
3 Scéance du 5 Février, Bulletin de la
société nationale des antiquaires de France
(1 8 9 0 ) , 10 0 -1 .
^ V . B en eshevich, “Z avieschanîe vizantiïskago
boiarïna X I jvieka,” Zhurnal mïnïsterstva narod-
nago prosvieshchenia^ (M a y , 1 9 0 7 ), 2 1 9 -3 1 .
P. Bezobrazov, “Z avieshchanîe V o ily ,” Vizan-
tïiskïi Vremennik, X V III ( 1 9 1 1 ) , 1 0 7 -1 5 . T h e
com m entary o f B ezobrazov is largely concerned
w ith th e icons and books, and does not id en ­
tify th e individuals w h o appear in th e w ill,
nor does it locate th e estates o f Boilas. T he
im portant chronological n otice inserted b etw een
V
264 THE WILL OF EUSTATHIUS BOILAS
am ong other things a d etailed inventory
of B o ila s’ p ossession s, thus ad d in g y e t
another item ized inventory to th e sm all
num ber of su ch lists that has su rvived
from B yzan tin e tim es.*5 T h e translation
of the w ill, w h ich fo llo w s b elow , is b a sed
prim arily on th e text of B en esh evich w ith
on ly a fe w m inor changes. T h e text has
b een ch eck ed against a m icrofilm of th e
th e Climax and th e w ill itself in th e m anu­
script has been noticed and com m ented on by
a num ber o f scholars. See S. Lam pros, “ Ε ν θ υ ­
μ ήσ εω ν ήτοι χ ρ ο ν ικ ώ ν σ η μ ε ιω μ ά τ ω ν avW oyrj
πρώ τη” N éo s Έ λ λ η ν ο μ ν ή μ ω ν , V II
( 1 9 1 0 ) , 1 3 0 -1 ; V. Zlatarşki, “E d n a datirana
pripiskana grietski ot srîedata n a XI viele,”
Byzantinoslavica, I (1 9 2 9 ) , 2 2 -3 4 ; S. K ougeas,
Έ πι του β ιβ \ιο ^ ρ α φ ικ ο ΰ σ η μ ε ιώ μ α τ ο ς του ύπ*
α ρ ι θ μ ο ύ 2 6 3 Κ ο ϊ σ λ ι ν ι α ν ο υ κ ώ δ ικ ο ς ,” ' Ε λ λ η ν ι κ ά ,
III ( 1 9 3 0 ) , 4 5 8 -6 2 ; Ν . B änescu, Les duchés
byzantins de Paristrion ( Paradounavon) et de
Bulgarie (B ucharest, 1 9 4 6 ), passim.
5 Inventories are in clu d ed in th e follow in g
docum en ts: T h e diataxis of M ichael A ttaliates,
1077, in C. Sathas, Μ ε σ α ι ω ν ι κ ή Β ι β λ ι ­
ο θ ή κ η , I (V en ice, 1 8 7 2 ), 3 -6 9 ; L. Petit,
T y pikon de Grégoire Pacourianos pour le
monastère de Petritzos ( Baékovo ) en Bulgarie
(S t. Petersburg, 1 9 0 4 ), forms su pplem en t 1 to
vol. XI o f th e Vizantïiskïi Vremennik, XI
(1 9 0 4 ) ; a diplom a from th e m onastery of
Peter and Paul (1 1 3 5 ) in B. d e M ontfaucon,
Palaeographia Graeca (Paris, 1 7 0 8 ), 4 0 3 -7 ;
th e inventory of the m onastery of X ylourgou
( 1 1 4 3 ) in Akty russkago na Cviatom Afonie
monastyria (K iev, 1 8 7 3 ), 5 0 -6 7 ; th e typicon
o f St. N icholas of C asole (1 1 7 4 ) , see H .
O m ont, “L e typ icon de Saint N icolas d i Casole
près d ’O trante,” Revue des études grecques,
III ( 1 8 9 0 ) , 3 8 1 -9 1 . T here are tw o published
inventories for the m onastery o f St. John at
Patm os, one dated 1201, th e other 1355; See
C. D ieh l, “L e trésor et la b ib lioth èq u e d e Pat­
m os au com m encem ent d u 13e siècle,” B y ­
zantinische Zeitschrift, I (1 8 9 2 ) , 4 8 8 -5 2 5 ;
Catalogus Librorum Monasterii Insulae Patmi
Saeculo X IV , in Migne, Patrologia Graeca,
C X L IX ( 1 8 6 5 ) , 1047 -5 2 ; th e inventory o f the
m onastery o f St. Laurentius in Thessalonike
( 1 4 0 6 ) , in P. Papageorgiou, “Ilepi χ ε ι ρ ο γ ρ ά φ ο υ
Β ύ α ^ Ύ ε λ Ι ο υ Θ ε σ σ α λ ο ν ί κ η ς ,” Byzantinische Zeit­
schrift, V I (1 8 9 7 ) , 5 3 8 -4 6 ; th e inventory of
th e m onastery o f E leou sa at Strum pitza in
M acedonia (1 4 4 9 ) , in L. Petit, “L e m onastère
d e N otre D am e d e P itié en M acéd oin e,” îz-
viestïia russkagn arkheologicheskago instituta v
Konstantinopolie, V I ( 1 9 0 0 ) , 1 1 4 -5 2 ; th e in ­
ventory of th e cathedral at M esem bria ( 1 4 9 4 ) ,
in M. G edeon, “ ’Α ν έ κ δ ο τ ο ς κ ώ δ η ξ τ η ς μ η τ ρ ο π ό -
λεω ς Μ ε σ η μ β ρ ί α ς ,” ‘Η μ ε ρ ο λ 6 y ι ο ν τη ς
' Α ν α τ ο λ ή ς (C onstan tinop le, 1 8 8 6 ), 179—
83.
m anu script k in dly furnish ed b y th e B ib ­
lio th èq u e N ation ale.
“As th e tim e has arrived, I w ish to ar­
range m y affairs tranquilly and com ­
p letely , w ith a broad and o p en m ind. 6
T his, so th at n oth in g w ill b e carried
around in sh ad ow y m em ory, for this is
th e custom o f th e m ind. I am n ot ab le
to relate to w h a t exten t th e u n even n ess
of th e tim es has brough t m e hardship. I
w as o verw h elm ed b y difficulties and b y
th e m o u n tin g v io len ce o f th e w a v es to
su ch an exten t that I b eca m e an em i­
grant from th e lan d w h ic h b ore m e, and
I w e n t a d istan ce o f o n e and on e-h alf
w eek s from m y fatherlan d. A n d I settled
am ong alien nations w ith strange reli­
gion and ton gu e. I h ad com e un der th e
h e lp in g w in g s o f M ich ael th e m ost il­
lustrious and fam ous dux, un der w h o m I
served th e im perial orders in p u b lic
service for fifteen years. A n d then I rested
for eig h t years, and h e en d ed his life here
in seem ly fash ion .7 H is m ost glorious son,
th e m ost illustrious m a g istru s, h avin g re­
w ard ed m e w ith victories in every w a y
and freed om in everyth in g, sh o w e r e d 8*
m e w ith con sid erab le favors. T h e bu rd en
that n o w w e ig h s d ow n m y soul, in stead
of m aking m e forget, (m akes m e) h asten
tow ard rep en tan ce and (affords m e) an
occasion to review w h a t rem ains o f m y
life, (thus) castin g everyth in g to th e all-
seein g justice, and settin g th e T rin ity at
th e b eg in n in g and en d o f m y discourse.
“In th e nam e o f th e F ather, th e Son,
and th e H o ly G host, I, E ustathius p ro to -
^. . . τή yvώ μ η ε ύ ρ ε ία κ α ί ά ω ρ ίψ . . It İS
difficult to understand w h a t th e obscure and
ungram m atical G reek m eans. Perhaps th e scribe
used ά ω ρ ίιι for ά ο ρ ι σ τ ί α . T h e scribe, a C appad o­
cian monk, attem pted to com pose th e w ill in
th e learned langu age and fa iled utterly. T h e
text is fu ll o f gram m atical errors and m isspell­
ings, particularly iotacism s.
7 ά ν τ ιλ η π τ ικ ω τ ά τ ο ις έ ν τ υ χ ώ ν π τ έ ρ υ ξ ιν Μιχαήλ
τφ λα μπροτάτω καί π ε ρ ιβ ο ή τ φ δ ο υ κ ί, ώ ς έ π ΐ r o ts
ε κ α ϊ δέκ α ύ π o υ p y η σ a ς α ύ τ φ χ ρ ό ν ο ις ra ts β α σ ι λ ι κ α ΐ ς
λ ε ıτ o υ p y ώ v r p o a r â y p a a ıv αύτώ ν, όκτώ δέ πρδς
τ ο ύ τ ο ις χ ρ ό ν ο ις 6λω ς ήρεμ ή σ α ς, αύτοΰ μ έν τδν
β ίο ν καλώ ς έκ μ ετρ ή σ α το .
8 π ε ρ ι έ θ λ ι φ ε ν m u st b e em en d ed to π ε ρ ι έ θ α λ φ ε ν .

upatharius o f the ch ryso triclin iu m and
h y p a tu s, draw up the p resent w ritten
und sig n ed secret w ill; and I do this w ith
w illin g m ind and b y sim p le w ish , nor do
I do it from som e n ecessity or force or
m ockery or d e c eit or w ick ed n ess or ig ­
norance or en ticem en t or pretension; b u t
rather, w ith ev ery w illin g n ess and w ith
sincere p u rp ose o f life an d m ind, actin g
properly, b ein g in g o o d h ealth and of
sound m ind, and in fu ll possession of all
m y senses.
"I w as from th e b eg in n in g and
through m y ancestors o f a free estate
and sou nd nature, and in all w ays O rtho­
dox accord in g to th e p recep t and rule
o f th e sev en h o ly o ecu m en ical councils. I
ha v e n ot up to this d ay fa llen in to p u b lic
d eb t so as to b e un der any ob ligation ,
b u t h a v e led a free an d un en cu m b ered
life u p to th e p resen t, (h avin g ben efited )
on ly from m ercifu l P rovid en ce, from the
d iv in e h an d o f th e em peror, and (having
received) from m y p reviou sly-m en tion ed
lord and m aster, th e la te d u x countless
good s and benefits, and all th ose w h ich
th e m ost illustrious m a g istru s th e lord
B asil, h is son and su ccessor, d isp la y e d .9
A fter I m arried, m y la w fu l w ife A nna, of
b lessed m em ory, (and) I le ft m y h om e
and settled in this land; (and I brought)
w ith (m e) w h a tev er m o n ey and property
rem ained to m e an d w h a t I h a v e n o w
am assed b y fair m eans, and th e tw o
daughters and son w h o h a d b e e n v o u ch ­
sa fed m e . 10 T h e son liv e d on ly through
e μετ' αύτόν όσα έ ν δ ε ίξ η τ α ι
. . . T h e verb ε ί σ π ρ ά ξ η τ α ι does not fit th e sense
o f th e sen ten ce at all.
10 ά π ο ι κ ο ς y à p μ ε τ ά r b σ υ ν ο ι κ ή σ α ι μ ε τ ή ν ν ό μ ι ­
μόν μου y α μ ετή ν r jj èv b a lq .
μ εταναστά ς τη ς π α τ ρ ίδ ο ς καί ε ίς
κ ο ε π ιδ η μ ή σ α ς χώ ρα ν μεθ' όσω ν
μ ο ι χ ρ η μ ά τ ω ν κ α ί ό σ ον ν υ ν εξ à ya O o v π όρ ου
σ τησάμ ην, καί άπ ερ μοι έ χ α ρ ίσ θ η σ α ν
τ ρ ι α δ ύ ο κ α ί & ρρ εν έ ν · T h e scribe's grammar
seem s q u ite aw kw ard. T h e general m eanin g
o f th e passage is th at Boilas left his original
hom e after his marriage to A nna, and that h e
brought w ith him w h atever m on ey he still had
(along w ith that w h ich h e w as able to raise)
and his son and tw o daughters. But th e word
'όσον in the clause . . . κ α ί ό σ ο ν ν υ ν ε ξ à y a O o C
V
265
th e third year of his life, and d ied in
th e sixth year of the ind iction . In the
b egin n in g of th e n in th year o f th e in d ic­
tion his m other, m y w ife, shorn and in
th e m onastic garb, fo llo w ed her son b y
th e p rovid en ce of G od, lea v in g m e w ith
m y tw o daughters for th e rem ainder of
m y life. A n d I have w a tch ed over them
up to the p resen t tw e lfth year of th e
in d iction , accordingly as the unknow n
w ill o f G od provided. A n d in th ese cir­
cum stan ces th e recollection of death
continuou sly spurring m e, and h avin g the
u n tim ely and u n ex p ected b efore m y
ey es, I desired to arrange m y affairs.
I w as concerned first w ith cares of
loftier and b etter things, that is of G od,
and o f the soul, w h ich b ear resem blan ce
to th e arch etyp e b y d iv in e inspiration,
and w h ich one is w o n t to call th e church
and th e tem p le of G od and of the m other
of G od; (this, so) th at th e b o d y should
turn aw ay from th e excitem en ts of p lea s­
ure. 11 W h en I first arrived and settled
h ere I received this land , and it w as fou l
and un m an ageab le. It w as in h ab ited b y
snakes, scorpions, and w ild beasts, so
th at th e Arm enians w h o d w elled opp osite
h ere w ere n ot ab le to h ave ev en a little
rest. If th e y (the A rm enians) w ere
πόρου σ υ ν ε σ τ η σ ά μ η ν , has b een incorrectly tran­
scribed b y B en eshevich, loc. cit., 2 23. In th e
m anuscript it reads ω σ ο ν , ob viou sly a m isspell­
in g for ό σ ω ν . T h e latter form seem s to be cor­
rect, for the w ord is govern ed b y μ ε θ ’ and agrees
w ith χ ρ η μ ά τ ω ν . T hus th e text should read
. . . μ εθ' όσω ν π α ρεφ υΧ ά χθ η σ ά ν μοι χρη μ ά τω ν
καί όσω ν νυν εξ àyaO oô B ut
πόρου συνεσ τησ ά μ η ν.
καί ε ίσ π ρ ά ξ η τ α ι. th e w ord ν υ ν presents a further difficulty, for
it does n ot fit into th e general m eanin g o f the
sen ten ce, i.e., th at Boilas brought w ith him
w h atever m on ey w as left to him and w hatever
τη μνή μη " Α ννη h e w as able to raise. It is not absolutely clear
{τ ή ν ) νυν π α ρ ο ι- w h eth er th e children w ere b o m before or after
π α ρεφ υΧ ά χθ ησάν Boilas set out for his n ew hom e, but th e in­
συνε­ feren ce is that th ey w ere grouped togeth er w ith
τέκνα 6vyà- th e m on ey as item s w h ich h e brought w ith him
to th e n ew land.
11 κ α ί π ρ ώ τ ο ν μ ε ν ε ίς ύ ψ η Χ ο τ έ ρ α ς κ α ί κ ρ ε ί τ τ ο ν α s
φ ρ ο ν τ ίδ α ς ή μ η ν , ΐν ' ό θεός μ ν η μ ο ν ε ύ ε τ α ι καί ψ υχή
7τρ ός τ ό ά ρ χ έ τ υ π ο ν κ α ί θ ε ίω φ υ σ ή μ α τ ι τ ά ς ε μ φ ά σ ε ις
εμ φ έρ ο υ σ α , σ ώ μ α δε τή ς ή δονή ς ε κ τ ρ έ π ε τ α ι τ α κ ιν ή ­
μ α τ α · ή ν έ κ κ Χ η σ ία ν κ α ι ν α ό ν θ ε ο ΰ κ α ί τ ή ς θ ε ο μ ή τ ο ρ ο ς
ο ίδ ε ν ô X ô y os· εκ τρ έφ ετα ι has been em ended to
ε κ τ ρ έ π ε τ α ι.
V
266 THE WILL OF EUSTATHIUS BOILAS
constrained b y the fact that th e lan d
w as in a ccessib le to m ost m en and u n ­
know n, I red u ced it to ashes, w ith fire
and a x e ,lla as the Psalm sayeth. A n d
in this p la ce I bu ilt m y h ou se and th e
h o ly tem p le from th e foun dations, and
(I created) m eadow s, parks, vineyards,
gardens, aqu ed u cts, sm all farm s, w ater
m ills, and (I brought) anim als for use,
b oth necessary and usefu l. In lik e m an ­
ner m y property of B ouzina, w h ich h a p ­
p en s to b e a com p lete m o n id io n ,12 I
cu ltiv a ted from its poor state; and also
th e v illa g e o f Isaion w h ich w as d eserted
and poor, ex cep t for th e m o n id io n of
T z a le m a .12a Sim ilarly th e v illa g e of
O uzik e, and C houspacrati, and th e v il­
la g e o f C opteriou, and th e v illa g e of
O ph id oboun i, and C ousneria, w h ich w ere
for a lo n g tim e u n inhab ited and deserted,
I con trived to im prove through great ex­
p en d itu re o f m oney. A n d th e v illa g e of
O uzik e I h a v e giv en to th ose w h om I
ha v e nam ed as heirs, giv in g in addition
th e original b ill o f sale. T h e v illa g e of
C op teriou and C houspacrati I have
g iv en to th e orphan brothers C hristo­
ph er and G eorge and to their cousin, as
th ey are poor and orphans. T h e u se of the
v illa g e o f O p h id ob ou n i and C ousneria
a lon g w ith C alm ouche, h a vin g b een re­
q u ested b y th e b lessed dux, m y lord, I
g a v e them to him through a pap er of as­
surance. I h a v e giv en th e p ro a ste io n of
Barta, as I receiv ed it and w ith o u t im ­
p rovin g it, to the m ost illustrious m agis-
tru s K y r B asil, b e in g forced to sell; b u t
I r eceiv ed no paym ent. Sim ilarly, th ou gh
h o ld in g w ritten ev id en ce of other debts
incurred b y th e m ost illustrious m a g is-
tru s, and th e b lessed d u x and du cain a, m y
lords, am ou n tin g to tw en ty-five pou nd s,
I h a v e receiv ed non e of this. L e t th e all-
se e in g p ro v id en ce of G od ju d ge these
lla Psalms 7 4 :5 -7 .
12 μ ο ν ί δ ι ο ν seem s to design ate a p iece o f land
w h ich differs from a χ ω ρ ί ο ν or a π ρ ο ά σ τ α ο ν . T he
w ord is also used to sign ify a sm all m onastery.
12a O n th e place nam es, see th e com m entary
that follow s th e translation.
things as it is w on t to do. For G od th e
kn ow er o f hearts is w itness that up to th e
p resen t I h a v e n ot con sciou sly b e e n
treacherous or d eceitfu l again st h im or
his child ren, m y a u th en to p o u lo i; or ap ­
p eared w ick ed or contrived or w ritten
an yth in g slanderous, b u t rather I h ave
striven w ith o u t d e c eit or artifice on their
b eh a lf up to th e poin t of m y death. A n d
I h a v e accom p lish ed great an d un ex­
p e c te d th in gs b y th e grace o f our all-
p o w erfu l G od, b y th e active operation
o f th e in v in cib le cross, and b y th e succor
o f m y T heotocos, alth ou gh I h a v e b e e n
slan d ered b y them and through th em in
m any harsh and terrible respects, ev en
h avin g m y life p lo tted against. B u t as I
exp ected recom p en se from th e unerring
E ye, I d id n ot lose m y h ea d over this.
“O f the rem aining four properties and
p ro a steia , I h ave given T an tzou te, that
is Salem , w ith its hills as it d elim its m y
lands, th e w atered from th e u n w atered ,13
in d ow ry to m y first born and leg itim ate
dau ghter Irene, and to her husband; that
is, th e w h o le o f th e rent of this p ro a steio n
o f eig h ty n o m ism a ta and th e enno-
m io n ,14 w ith o u t th e four z e u g o to p ia 15
w h ich h a v e b e e n granted as th e inh erit­
an ce of m y freed m en , and w h ic h th ey in
fa ct possess. A n d she sh all h ave th e p o s­
session of th e eig h ty n o m ism a ta , and th e
pasturage, and th e ow n ersh ip o f all th e
land, so th at this sam e, m y daughter,
sh all h ave b y w a y o f her patern al in ­
h eritan ce and dow ry thirty pou nd s. In
ad d ition to all this, sh e has already taken
13. . . ύ π ά δ ρ ο υ κ α ί ά ν ύ δ ρ ο υ . ύ π ά δ ρ ο υ should
probably read ύ φ ύ δ ρ ο υ .
14 This w as th e sum o f m o n ey paid for th e
pasturage o f livestock in th e fields. See F . D ö l-
ger, Beiträge zur Geschichte der byzantinischen
Finanzverwaltung besonders des 1 0 und 11
Jahrhunderts (L e ip z ig and Berlin, 1 9 2 7 ), 5 3 -
4; Also D ölger, Aus den Schatzkammern des
heiligen Berges (M u n ich , 1 9 4 8 ), 1 5 8 -9 , 171.
15 Zeugotopion for tax purposes w as the
am ount o f land w h ich a farm er could p lo w
w ith a pair of oxen. See D . X analatos, Beiträge
zur Wirtschafts- und Sozialgeschichte Make­
doniens im Mittelalter, hauptsächlich auf Grund
der Briefe des Erzbischofs Theophylaktos von
Achrida (M u n ich , 1 9 3 7 ), 40.

m ovable, self-m ovab le, and sem i-m ovab le
p roperties.10 Som e she took secretly, oth ­
ers overtly, i.e., slaves, cloth em broid ered
w ith silver,1617 and flocks. She shall have
a ll these things w ith m y b lessin g and d e ­
sire and sh e shall d w ell in m y hou se, liv ­
in g in p iety and in the O rthodox faith,
b ein g liab le to th e regular and im perial
census as it is due. A n d I h ave g iven to
her sister M aria, m y legitim ate daughter,
as dow ry, ten pou nd s (worth) in m ovables,
self-m ovab les, and sem i-m ovab les, that is
slaves, cloth em b roid ered w ith silver, and
flocks. A n d w ish in g to co m p lete her d o w ­
ry in a m anner sim ilar to th e in h eritan ce
and d ow ry o f thirty p ou n d s of her sister,
I h ave g iv en h er h a lf o f m y property
B ouzina. A n d sh e is to h a v e all of th ese
as dow ry and paternal inh eritan ce to th e
sum o f thirty p ou nd s. T h e rem aining
h alf o f this sam e property I b eq u ea th to
m y church o f th e T heotocos, w h ich I
b u ilt from th e fo u n d ation s, in co m p lete
and in alien ab le o w n ersh ip for th e m ain­
ten an ce o f th e clerg y w h o serve in the
church; and I g iv e tw en ty-six n om ism ata
as salary o f th e priests and deacon s and
tw elv e for th e lig h tin g o f candles. A n d
to the church o f th e h o ly m artyr Barbara,
w h ich serves as th e bu rial-place of m y
true m other, of m y son R om anus, and of
m y w ife, and sh all also serve as th e
bu rial p la ce for m e, th e m iserab le and
un w orthy, tw e lv e (nom ism ata) for th e
litu rgies and th e com m em oration serv­
ices, to w it for th e church and th e fu ­
nerals. I h a v e g iv en from m y villa g e of
P arabounion tw o h u n d red m o d io i of
grain and one thou san d litrai o f w in e,
and as m u ch fru it as God's p rovid en ce
sh all a llo w .18 I h a v e g iven th e villa g e
o f Isaion in stea d o f five pou n d s to
M ich ael m y son -in -law .
16. . . κ ι ν η τ ά κ α ι α ύ τ ο κ ί ν η τ α καί ευ κ ίν η τ α
π ρά γμ α τα . . . .
17 . . . ά σ η μ ί ω ν β Χ α τ ί ω ν . . . .
18 T he text is very obscure here. . . . κ α ί
. . . B en esh evich transcribed
ώ σ π ερ εα κα ί υ π ό p a s.
this phrase incorrectly as . . . κ α ί ώ σ π ε ρ ε α ξ ν π ό -
p a s . . . . Perhaps υ π ό p a s is a corrupt form of
07r io p a s .
V
267
“If by the grace of G od and in terces­
sions of the T h eotocos, m y tw o d au gh ­
ters and son s-in-law b e of one m ind and
rem ain at p ea ce and love, and d w ell in
m y hou se in th e ey es o f th e T heotocos,
th ey shall also h ave all m y property,
m ovable, self-m ovab le, and im m ovable.
“I have already allotted to m y h o u se­
h old servants their shares, and accord­
in g ly each is fam iliar w ith his portion
and property in kind.
“A n d neither h ave I acquired or left
any debt, even of one n o m ism a , sin ce G od
th e ben efactor co llects as h e pays out.
“N or h ave I le ft to an yon e else ev en
on e n om ism a or an yth in g else, excep t
for th e sacred and h o ly objects w h ich
I d ed icated lon g ago in th e m ost sacred
church w h ich I bu ilt. T h at is to say: th e
h oly cross in laid w ith go ld and h avin g
en am elled im ages (and also) six m e­
dallions; 19 another p rocession al cross,
silver-p lated w ith reliefs; and a sm all
silver cross. Sacred vessels: a chalice, 20
a strainer, an asterisk, tw o spoons, a
p aten , anoth er d eep on e, an in cen se-
h old er, all silver-gilt. H a n g in g lam ps; 21
three h u nd red n o m ism a ta h avin g b een
exp en d ed on all o f th ese things. A nother
ch alice, w ood en , w ith th e equip m ent;
th at is, six pu rp le silk tow els and chalice
veils; three cloth s for the coverin g of
th e p aten , and a g reen -w h ite silk cloth
for th e c h a lic e ;22 five garm ents and
sacerd otal robes, tw o o f th em black, the
19 β Χ ε μ ία εξ. β Χ ε μ ία is an incorrect form o f
Χ α ιμ ία .See L. Petit, “L e monastère^ de^ N otre
D am e de P itié en M acédoine,” îzviestïia russ-
kago arkheologicheskago instituta v Konstanti-
nopolie, V I (1 9 0 0 ) (h ereafter Petit, “N otre
D am e d e P itié” ), 1 2 9 -3 0 .
20 δισ κ ο π ο τ η ρ η ν . A ccordin g to th e dictionary
of Sophocles this refers to th e chalice only.
T h e paten (δίσκο?) is listed separately here.
21 T his item has b een inserted into the m anu­
script b y a later hand.
22 B en esh evich , loc. cit., 2 2 6 . T his cloth is
described as σ π ο ν δ η ν 'ή τ ξ η ν . T h e w ord appears
to be a form o f σ π ο ν δ ή “lib ation.” H en ce it pos­
sib ly refers to th e cloth coverin g th e com m union
chalice. T his explanation fits in w ith th e fact
th at th e preceding item s are cloths for covering
th e paten.
268 THE WILL OF EUSTATHIUS BOILAS
other four w h it e ,23 and a pu rp le one
w h ich N ich olas hid; altogeth er seven
robes w ith the stola and belts; tw o
om oph oria; 24 four large tow els of p u re
silk; a pu rp le caftan cloth h avin g crosses
w ith letters; 25 another cloth of silk and
g o ld brocade, (and) vio let and w h ite
(in color).26 O ther silver-gilt vessels:
a silver candlestick and reliquaries fu ll
o f h o ly relics. E ig h t gilt icons; that is,
one o f the Crucifixion on a d ip ty ch ,27 St.
G eorge s c o u ta r e n ,28 o n e of St. T heodore
w ith St. G eorge, a sm all one o f th e T heo-
tocos, on e o f St. B asil, tw o large ones
o f th e T h eotocos, and one o f th e C ruci­
fixion scoutaren; altogeth er eigh t.
T w e lv e other icon s of c o p p e r .29 T hirty
assorted icon s p a in ted in g o l d ,30 w ith
23 The scribe’s calculations are somewhat
erroneous here.
24 The omophorion was a long strip of cloth
worn over the shoulders by bishops. See F .
Cabrol, Dictionnaire d'archéologie chrétienne
et de liturgie, X II, 2 ( 1936 ), 2089 - 90 .
25 Possibly with the device ^ j
28 έ τ ε ρ ο ν χ ά σ δ ιο ν Ια στόν και φουφούδην καί
λευκό//. The word φ ο υ φ ο ύ δ ω ν probably refers to
cloth of gold brocade. See the dictionary of
Du Cange under ρ έ ν δ α ; ρ έ ν δ α ν β α β υ λ ο ν ι τ ι κ ή ν
φουφ ουδοτήν καλήν, ή γουν χλαμ ύδα β α σ ιλ ικ ή ν
χρυσήν. It also occurs in the^inventory of Xylour-
gou, Akty russkago na Cviatom Afonie monas-
tyrïà (Kiev, 1873 ) (hereafter Xylourgou,
A kty), 54 , 63 .
27. . . ή σ τ α ύ ρ ω σ ή ά λ ο κ ά ν ο ν ο ς δ ίθ υ ρ ο ν . A c ­
cording to the dictionary of Sophocles the word
ό λ ο κ ά ν ο ν ο ς refers to an object made completely
of reed. But this does not seem to fit the text
here.
28 σ κ ο υ τ ά ρ η ν possibly refers to an icon painted
on a shield, perhaps to an icon in the form of
a shield. Petit, “ Notre Dame de Pitié,” 133 - 4 ,
believes that it refers to icons painted on
shields, as the inventory of Xylourgou, Akty,
56 , lists shields ( σ κ ο υ τ ά ρ ι α ) and swords among
the items in the treasury of the monastery. In
this same document there is also mention of
σ κ ο υ τ ά ρ η ν icons.
29 These are described as σ α ρ ο ύ τ ι α . W . Nis­
sen, D ie Diataxis des Michael Attaliates von
1 0 7 7 (Jena, 1894 ), 80 , erroneously translates
this word as signifying mosaic icons. See the
dictionary of Du Cange under σ α ρ ο ύ κ τ η .
30 ή λ ι ο γ ρ α φ ί ε ς χ ρ υ σ έ ς δ ι ά φ ο ρ ε ς τ ρ ι ά κ ο ν τ α . The
word ή λ ι ο γ ρ α φ ί ε ς of the text seems to be an in­
correct form of ο λ ο γ ρ α φ ί ε ς . The latter is the
technical term used to denote the process of
encaustic painting wherein wax is used as a
base for the colors. The identification of the
th e L o r d s fea st days and th ose of th e
various saints. 31 T en other sm all icon s
of different saints, eig h t of w h ich are of
th e fo ld in g type, and tw o others. T w o
large candelabra of bronze and five iron
ones; on e sm all lamp; tw o lam ps w ith
term ο λ ο γ ρ α φ ί α w ith this ty p e o f pain ting can
b e m ad e from tw o parallel passages in N icep h -
orus th e Patriarch and T heophan es th e C on­
fessor. B oth chroniclers are recording th e d e ­
struction o f certain icons in th e secreton by
th e Patriarch N icetas in th e reign o f C onstan­
tin e V C opronym us ( 7 6 8 - 9 ) . N icep horus,
Breviarium, ed. C. d e Boor (L e ip z ig , 1 8 8 0 ),
76. . . . κ α ί τ ω ν ά γ ι ω ν ο ΰ σ α ς δ ιά ψ η φ ί δ ω ν χ ρ υ ­
σών καί κηροχύτου ύλη ς ε ικ ο ν ο γ ρ α φ ία ς ά π έξυσ ε.
T heophan es, Chronographia, ed. C. d e Boor,
I (L eip zig , 1 8 8 3 ), 4 43. . . . Ν ι κ ή τ α ς . . . rà s
èv τ φ π α τ ρ ια ρ χ ε ία ε ίκ ό ν α ς τ ο υ μ ικ ρ ο ύ σ ε κ ρ έ τ ο υ δ ια
μ ο υ σ ε ίο υ οϋσας ëξ ε σ ε ν , καί τού μ εγά λου σεκ ρέτου
τ ή ς τ ρ ο π ικ ή ς έ ζ ο λ ο γ ρ α φ ία ς οϋσας κα τή νεγκεν, καί
τ ω ν λ ο ιπ ώ ν εΙκ ό νω ν τ α π ρ ό σ ω π α ί χ ρ ι σ ε ν . T h e icons
w h ich N icep horus describes as o f κ η ρ ο χ ύ τ ο υ
ύλη ς, T heophan es describes as έζ ο λ ο γ ρ α φ ί α ς
ο ϋ σ α ς . B ut this ty p e o f pain ting w as apparently
abandoned during th e period o f Iconoclasm .
H en ce, in th e tenth century C onstantine Por-
ph yrogenitus refers to certain paintings o f th e
church o f St. Anastasia in D iadora, D alm atia,
as . . . ε ξ ο λ ο γ ρ α φ ί α ς ά ρ χ α ία ς ; D e Adminis-
trando Imperio, ed. G. M oravcsik and tr. R. J.
H . Jenkins (B u d ap est, 1 9 4 9 ), 1 3 8 -9 . C edrenus,
Historiarum Compendium, ed. I. Bekker, II
(B onn , 1 8 3 9 ), 4 9 7 , speaks o f an icon pain ted
in encaustic tech n iq u e, w h ich w as discovered
in th e church o f th e Virgin o f B la ch em a e dur­
in g th e reign o f Rom anus III Argyrus in 1031,
and w h ich dated back at least to th e eighth
century. . . . ε ύ ρ έ θ η ε ίκ ώ ν ύ λ ο γ ρ α φ ικ ή . . . .
ά μ ό λ υ ν τ ο ς δ ια μ ε ίν α σ α α π ό τ ώ ν ή μ ε ρ ώ ν τ ο ύ Κοπρω νύ-
μου έω ς τήσδε τή ς ήμέρας, ετώ ν δ ιε λ θ ό ν τ ω ν τ ρ ια -
κ ο σ ίω ν . B ut in th e text o f th e w ill ή λ ι ο γ ρ α φ ί ε ς
χ ρ υ σ έ ς does n o t seem to refer to the old en ­
caustic typ e icons. Rather it w ou ld seem to re­
fer in this case to icons pain ted on gold lea f
or pain ted in a color fabricated from gold dust.
On the latter see D ionysius o f Ph um a, Ε ρ μ η ­
ν ε ί α τ ή ς ζ ω γ ρ α φ ι κ ή ς τ έ χ ν η ς , ed . A.
Papadopoulos-K eram eus (S t. Petersburg, 1 9 0 9 ),
44. This typ e o f icon abounds in th e m onastic
inventories. X ylourgou, A kty, 54, lists n in ety o f
them ; L. Petit, Typikon de Grégoire Pacouri-
anos pour le monastère de Petritzos ( Backovo )
en Bulgarie (S t. Petersburg, 1 9 0 4 ) (h ereafter
Petit, Baëkovo), 52, lists tw en ty -eig h t such
icons. See also Sathas, op. cit ., 4 7 , and Petit,
“N otre D am e d e P itié,” 1 1 8 -1 9 . T h e text,
B en eshevich, loc. cit., 2 2 6 , speaks o f ε ίκ ό ν ε ς
δ ιά χ ρ υ σ ε ς έγκ α υσ τες. In this case ί γ κ α υ σ τ ε ς
m eans gilt. T h e w ord is used w ith this
m eanin g elsew here in th e inventory o f objects.
31 έ χ ο ν τ α ς δ ε σ π ο τ ικ ά ς έο ρ τά ς καί δ ια φ ό ρ ω ν
ά γ ιω ν ·

eight lights; six chandeliers with their
chains; four incense receptacles,82 and
two censers.
“Various books: M y h ig h ly prized,
o r * rather m y p riceless treasure, th e
sacred and h o ly G ospel, w ritten in gold
letters throughout, con tain in g g old en
pictures o f the four evan gelists, w ith en ­
am el decorations, a p u rp le b in d in g and
silver-gilt p laits.3233 It has a bu ck le,
pa in ted letters, and also a scen e from th e
fea st of th e N ativity. It has eigh ty-n in e
sm all clasps in la id w ith gold . 34 Sim ilarly,
another G ospel o f parchm ent. A sm all
and poor b ook o f ivory, th e F our G os­
p els.35 A nother, th e interp retation of
the four evan gelists. A sm all b ook for
th e road, th e A c ts of th e A p ostles. A nd
another one of large size w ith th e
L eim o n a rio n ,363
7 T h e books of G en esis ,
P ro v erb s, and P ro p h ets. A n d another
. . . large b ook w ith th e P en ta teu ch
and tw o (books) of K in gs. T h e P an­
d e ctes. 37 O n e h eo rtologion . T hree con -
tacaria. A large b ook con tain in g tw o
serm ons to A ntipas, and h is life. A nother
book, to w it, St. John D a m ascen e, con ­
taining also th e p o em s o f (St. G regory)
th e T h e o lo g ia n .3839* A n other book, th e
M elissa. 39 T h e P a n a rio n 40 O ne psalter
w ith its interpretation. O ne psalter and
32 κ α ί χ ό τ α μ έ τ α σ μ υ ρ ν ί δ ι α . This would seem
to refer to metallic ( χ ό τ α - χ υ τ ά ?) receptacles in
which incense was placed. In Petit, “ Notre
Dame de Pitié,” 149 - 50 , they are referred to
as κ α τ ξ ί α .
38 Ι α σ τ ό ρ η ν ’έ ν δ υ μ α έξ έ π ίπ λ ε κ τ α άρΎ υροχρού-
σω τα·
34 The number of clasps is extremely large.
85 r e r p a ß d y y e X o v μ ικ ρ ό ν \ ε φ α ν ά \ _ τ ο ν ],
β ιβ λ ίο ν The descriptions of the book as λ ε φ α -
ν ά τ ο ν and π τ ω χ ό ν are contradictory. Perhaps
the scribe meant two books, one λ ε φ α ν ά τ ο ν , the
other π τ ω χ ό ν .
36 This is a reference to the Spiritual Meadow
written by John Moschus, the Palestinian monk
of the late sixth and seventh centuries.
37 A work of the Palestinian monk Antiochus,
ca. 620 . Sathas, op. d t ., 4 9 .
38 'έ τ ε ρ ο ν ό Δ α μ α σ κ η ν ό ς έ χ ο ν κ α ί τ ο υ Q e o X ô y o v
τά επη · w ork o f th e first century b .c ., The Testament
39 Written by the eleventh-century monk
Antonius.
V
269
tw o stich ologia. 41 F our books of trans­
lation s.42 T w o syn axaria w ith various
selection s. An e c lo g id io n and another
book w ith various w orks.43 A nother book
containing th e P ersica and other th in gs.44
A nother on e of th e A rchistrategus.45
T h ree books of th e E th ics of C hrysos­
tom .46 T h e H exam eron o f St. B asil and
pam p h lets of th e w ork of C hrysostom .
T h e A n tirrh etica of B asil th e G reat in six­
te en p am p h lets.47 A b ook of explanations.
T h e S yn o dicon of C h alced on . O d e g o s.48
A canonicon. A n other can on icon contain­
in g an abridgem en t of th e O ld and N e w
T estam en ts. T h e N o m o s. T h e A lexan ­
d e r 49 T h e L e u c ip p e .50 T h e O n eirocri-
tu s.51 T h e T w e lv e P atriarch s ,52 A esop.
40 A n obvious reference to th e fou rth-cen­
tury work o f E piph anius o f Cyprus.
41 Bezobrazov, loc. cit., I l l , has em en d ed
B en esh evich ’s reading o f σ τ ι χ η ρ ό ν to φ α λ τ η ρ ι ο ν
on th e basis o f analogous passages in Sathas,
op. cit., 49, and D ieh l, loc. cit., 5 1 5 .
42 Possibly from saints’ lives. See B ezobra­
zov, loc. cit., I l l ; Sathas, op. cit., 67; D ieh l,
loc. cit., 516.
43 Probably refers to excerpts from th e
menaia. See B ezobrazov, loc. cit., I l l ; Petit,
Backovo, p. 53.
44 Bezobrazov, loc. cit., 1 1 2 -3 , im plies that
this is a reference to th e Eis t İjv κ α τ ά Τ ίε ρ σ ω ν
ε κ σ τ ρ α τ ε ί α ν Ηρακλείου o f G eorge Pisides. H o w ­
ever, Pisides is m en tion ed at a later point in
th e list of books, and th e term Persica is broad
en ou gh to in clu d e other possibilities, e.g., th e
w ork o f A gathias.
“ Possibly a reference to th e service of St.
M ichael. See B ezobrazov, loc. cit., 111.
“ T h e Ethics seem s to b e a general title
coverin g the various works o f John Chrysostom
on ethics and m orality.
47 This refers prim arily to B asil’s work
against E unom ius.
“ Probably a work o f th e seventh-century
Sinai m onk Anastasius. B ezobrazov, loc. cit.,
π τω χόν 112.
49 A t first this m igh t appear to b e a reference
to th e m ed iev a l rom ance o f A lexander the
Great. B ut sim ilar references in Sathas, op.
cit., 50, and D ieh l, loc. cit., 516, im p ly that
it is a religious book.
60 T h e rom ance o f A chilles Tatius.
“ Probably one o f th e standard books on
dream interpretation, such as th ose o f Artem i-
dorus and A chm et.
52 A reference to th e apocryphal H ebrew
of the Tw elve Patriarchs, w h ich w as translated
into Greek.
V
270 THE WILL OF EUSTATHIUS BOILAS
P isid es. M aleinus.53 N ip h on .54 P hilon .55
T w o C lim a c es .56 T w o chronicles. E p a -
n ectirin .57 Q u estio n s of G ram m ar. A n­
other (book a) p a tericon . T w o h eirm olo-
gia. T h e P en ta b ib lo s .58 F iv e octaech oi.
T w o id io m e la stich eraria. A trio d io n .
Six m en aia. O ther works o f Chrysostom .,
A nother h avin g qu estion s and th e letters
of St. Isid ore of P elusium . A b asin 59 and
p late.
“A n d th ese are d ed icated to th e h o ly
church, so th at m y tw o daughters m ay
h a v e th e u se and p o ssession o f th em for
chanting, read in g, and learning. T h ey
m ay n o t b e a lien ated b y other persons;
ex cep t b y th e w ill and con sen t of th e
clerg y , th ese m ust b e u sed as it is
necessary, w h en it is necessary, and
w h ere it is necessary. Sim ilarly, (they
sh all have) p ossession of m y four prop­
erties, if th ey fulfill m y com m an ds fa ith ­
fu lly , as has b een said ab ove ( I h a v e d e ­
clared th ese things in greater d etail at
various other p oin ts ). M y tw o daughters
sh all h a v e p o ssession of them , that is of
Salem , B ouzina, Isaion, and Parabou-
nion, if th ey five in friend ship and p eace.
A n d th ey sh all also observe th e h olid ays
and m em orial services, and th ey shall
p ro v id e for th e co m p lete care o f th e
church, and o f the clergy, and of m y
w retch ed and m iserab le soul. T h ey shall
ob serve th e fo llo w in g fe a st days: T h e
53 Probably the life o f St. M ich ael M aleinus,
th e u n cle and advisor o f th e em peror N icep h -
oras Phocas.
54 L ife o f th e fourth-century saint.
55 A uthor of a com m entary on th e Song of
Songs, and of an interpretation of Genesis.
See B ezobrazov, loc. cit., 112; D ieh l, loc. cit.,
523; Suidas, Lexicon, ed. A. Adler, IV (L e ip ­
zig , 1 9 3 5 ), 738. H is dates are n ot known.
56 T h e m anuscript contain ing Boilas’ w ill
also contain ed a Climax, and w as probably a
part o f B oilas’ library.
57 T h e title έπανηκτήρην seem s to b e un id en ­
tifiable.
58 This does n ot seem to refer to th e Penta­
teuch.
59 χβρνφού&στον is a reference to th e basin
in w h ich th e prelate w ash ed his hands. See
S. Salaville, A n Introduction to the Study of
Eastern Liturgies (L on d on , 1 9 3 9 ), 148.
lyin g-in of th e V irgin,60 th e D orm ition ,
the E xaltation o f th e life-g iv in g Cross,
and the entrance of th e V irgin in to th e
tem p le; m em orial services on th e fifth
o f N o vem b er for m y parents, and on th e
tw en ty-six th of S eptem ber for m y b le sse d
w ife; and furtherm ore (w h atever else)
G od en ab les them . T h ey sh all observe
strictly th e three h oly Q u a d ra g esim a , i.e.,
th e great one, that of th e H o ly A p ostles,
and th at of Christm as. A n d (th ey sh all
observe) th e h oly W ed n esd ays and
F ridays ex cep t for those of E aster an d th e
D u o d ec a m ero n , 61 according to th e tra­
d ition of th e seven oecu m en ical C ou n ­
cils. A n d as I w ish ed th ese com m em ora­
tions o f m y fam ily to b e eternal, and as
I w ish ed th e services o f th e h oly church
to b e u n d istu rb ed and u n trou bled , I pro­
vid ed for this ou t of m y free property.
I f m y ch ild ren and heirs fu lfill th ese
th in gs read ily and sou nd ly, th ey sh all b e
lords and m asters of all m y property. B ut
if m y heirs are slack or careless abou t
th ese things, th ey sh all h a v e possession of
Salem , Isaion , and Parabounion. B u t m y
p roperty o f B ou zin a sh all go for th e
su ccor o f th e clergy and th e lig h tin g of
can d les o f b o th churches as has b e e n said
above.
“I took care o f m y h ou seh old servants,
and also th ose born in m y h ou seh old , a
fe w years ago, and I freed th em all and
p rovid ed for th em an in h eritan ce (so m e
h a v e alread y d ied , others still liv e ) , so
th at th ey w o u ld b e co m p letely free and
R om an citizen s accord in g to th e c o d ­
icils 62 w h ich concern them . T h ey shall
h ave th e ze u g o to p ia w h ich are g iven
60 T h e έπιλόχια w ere celeb rated on D e ce m ­
ber 26th. See M. G edeon, Βυζαντινόν * E ο p τ o-
λ ό 7 ιο V (C onstan tinop le, 1 8 9 9 ), 205.
61 T h e tw elv e-d a y period from Christmas to
E piph any.
62 Codicils, additions or supplem ents to w ills,
could b e draw n u p either before or after th e
w ill had b een w ritten, b u t in the form er case
th ey had to b e ack n ow led ged in th e w ill itself.
Thus Boilas confirms th ese codicils in his w ill.
It seem s to ha v e b een com m on practice to free
slaves through codicils. See Basilica, X X X V I, i,
3 -6 .

them , com p letely free and for all tim e.
In the first pla ce (I m ention) C yriacus
w h o grew up w ith m e and w h o has
to iled greatly on m y b eh a lf through out
m y M e. I g a v e him as w ife a free w om an ,
th e sister o f the m onk and p resbyter
C lem en t, and I fulfilled over him th e rites
o f th e m arriage. A n d d u rin g m y severe
illness I w ille d to him fifteen (n om is-
m a ta ) and w h a tev er articles of personal
and b e d clo th in g h e m igh t h ave ac­
quired. A n d during th e sixth year of th e
in d ictio n ten m ore. A n d n o w at th e en d
of m y life, sin ce I d e d ica ted his son
C on stantin e to th e T heotocos, I g iv e him
ten. A n d h a v in g p rov id ed sim ilarly for
m y servant Sem ne on tw o occasion s, and
h a v in g p rovid ed h er son B asil w ith a
w ife and m ad e h im a priest, I giv e him
a free ze u g o to p io n an d ten <n o m ism a ta ).
A nd th e sisters S op hia an d M aritza and
their hu sb ands an d ch ild ren I freed and
p rovid ed for on th e tw o previou s and
aforem en tion ed o ccasion s. A n d I re­
cen tly g a v e to A b asgu s on e z e u g o to p io n ;R om anus.
to Lascaris o n e b o id o to p io n ; 63 and th e
sam e for N iceta s, h a v in g p rovid ed for
h im th e first tim e on ly, I n o w lea v e him
o n e b o id o to p io n an d th ree {nom ism ata).
Sin ce I d ed ica ted G eorge th e son of
A b asgu s and M ich a el th e son o f Lascaris
to th e T h eotocos, I lea v e G eorge five
(n om ism a ta) and M ich ael three. I h ave
arranged for th e leg a l m arriage of
M arcianus, and (I w ish that) h e also
sh all b e free and b e p rovid ed for as th e
o cca sio n dem and s i t . 64 H avin g freed
Sotericus and le ft h im his share, I h ave
g iv en him his co d icil. I free G regory, and
h is w ife T heodora, w h o (w as form erly)
th e slave o f m y b lessed w ife Anna. I or­
d ain ed h im a cleric o f the church o f th e
T h eotocos and h e sh all receive th e salary
and anon a 65 o f a d eacon and w h atever
else accrues to h im from his trade as a
63 Boidotopion for tax purposes w as the filled from th e yearly in com e o f m y
am ount of land w h ich a farmer could p low w ith
on e ox. X analatos, op. d t., p. 40.
. . . καί ΧηΎατευθγί καθώς άν τύχοι.
“ T heir salaries w ere paid in cash and pro­
duce.
V
271
copyist; and as leg a cy three (n om is­
m a ta ). A ll m ale child ren w h o are b o m
o f m y freed fam ily servants and slaves,
sh all b e brough t u p in th e church of the
T h eotocos in th e learn in g of the h oly
letters and shall b e m ad e clerics, b ein g
p rovid ed for b y th e church. B u t all the
m en and w om en w h o w ish to w ork for
m y heirs, if there b e any such, shall re­
c eiv e their salaries and anon ae to the
satisfaction of all, and no on e of them
sh all b e given aw ay or sold in any m an­
ner. B u t I w ish th em to b e resp ected and
free in every fash ion . A n d S elegn oun ,
w h om I had freed b efore and m arried to
m y slave A bouspharius, I h ave given in
service to m y dau ghter M aria from the
p resen t tw elfth year o f th e in d iction to
th e first (year of th e next) in d iction . A nd
I w ish th at h e also b e free and receiv e as
leg a c y three n o m ism a ta ; and th e sam e
for m y slave M ouseses and his father
G aripius, for th e sake o f th e salvation
an d m em ory of m y m ost b e lo v ed son
"And ev en th ou gh I b eca m e an em i­
grant from m y fatherlan d, th e piou s
th em e o f C ap pad ocia, I do n ot w ish to
aban don th e church b u ilt b y m y m other
and ca lled th e T hree H ierarchs. (Ac­
cord in gly) I ap p oin ted M od estu s as care­
taker and m aster to care for it. 66 [a gap
h ere of ab ou t five to sev en w ord s] . . .
th e grandchildren o f m y sister Irene th e
ca te ch u m e n , and all th e h o ly vessels in
th e said church, th e silver crosses, th e
g ilt icon s, th e books o f th e y e a r ,67 and
finally a priest's robe.
"So m u ch th en for th e h o ly hou ses. I
sh all b e grateful if, b y th e p rovid en ce
o f G od and th e in terven tion o f th e Vir­
gin, I sh all h a v e tim e to carry ou t th e
leg a c ies m en tion ed ab ove. B u t if th e
com m on fa te overtakes m e (before th ese
th in gs are carried out), m ay th e y b e fu l­
“ “M05ecr[roy ώς c?]7r07rτ[ η ν καί ό]εσπότην
τ{ η ν τούτ]ου πρόνοιαν κ α τείθέμ η^ν· T his is the
p assage as reconstructed b y B en eshevich.
67 . . . βιβλία τοΰ χρόνου.
272 THE WILL OF EUSTATHIUS BOILAS
properties (a fter th e d ed u ction of the
im perial ta x e s). W h atever rem ains shall
b e distribu ted am ongst m y brothers and
m asters, that is the p o o r .68 If any of m y
flocks and property (b o th m ovab le and
sem i-m o v a b le) are foun d, th ey sh all b e
distribu ted to m y relatives and kin w h o
are there. I cannot recall any good w ork
I h a v e d on e throughout th e w h o le
course o f m y life, b u t I lab ored in vain,
a slave to m y stom ach and pleasures.
“I do not kn ow h o w m y slave Zoe,
w h om I b o u g h t for four hu n d red nom-
ismata, has b een overlooked. E v e n if in
th e codicil w h ich grants h er freed om it
is sta ted th at sh e sh all b eco m e a slave
again if sh e sh ould break a v o w to G od,
and alth ou gh sh e g ave h erself aw ay to a
m an w ith o u t m y approval, I w ish that sh e
rem ain free and b e co m p letely free w ith
her children.
“A n d G od w h o sees all [ab ou t tw en ty-
eig h t letters m issin g here] . . . or of
[several lin es m issin g here] . . . and I
am la id d o w n in th e grave w h ere m y
b u rial-p lace has b een app ointed . I en ­
treat and pray that all, priests, m onks,
and m y heirs, perform over m y b o d y the
trisagion and yearly m em orial services
for th e a ton em en t of m y sins. A b ove all I
p u t un der oath and h o ld resp on sib le to
G od th e Pantocrator, to th e im m acu late
V irgin, and to all o f th e h ea v en ly pow ers,
n o t on ly m y heirs and successors, b u t also
all of th e h ig h officials — m etropolitans,
bish ops, catepans, duces, and them atic
ju d ges — to preserve m y com m an ds u n ­
im paired and uninjured. If any on e of
m y relatives or heirs or freed m en goes
astray, and slips from the O rthodox faith
to a strange and h eterod ox one, if h e
is o f the heirs, h e sh all lo se h is share; if
h e is o f th e freed m en , h e sh all fa ll under
th e y o k e of slavery; if h e is an outsider,
h e sh all b e ch a sed far from m y authority.
68 On the provision for the poor in wills see
E . Brack, “ Kirchenväter und Seelteile,” Zeit­
schrift der Savigny-Stiftung für Rechtsge­
schichte, Romanistische Abteilung, L X X II
( 1 9 5 5 ) , 1 9 1 -2 1 0 .
“A nd if on e of m y daughters or her
h u sb an d should, b y con sen t of both , d e ­
sire to settle elsew h ere, all th e h oly p o s­
sessions of th e church shall b e d ivid ed , if
th ey sh all b u ild a church sim ilar to, or
sm aller than that of, th e T h eotocos. A n d
this sh all suffice for th e allotted p ortion
o f each , and thus each sh all b en efit from
th e b lessin g o f G od and o f th e T heotocos;
in ad d ition [eig h t to ten w ords m issin g]
. . . and [thirteen to fou rteen w ords
m issin g] . . . and h e [five or six w ords
m issin g] . . . and [sixteen letters m iss­
in g ] . . . d eath sh all b e his portion, and
h e sh all b e d en ou n ced b y all as a parri­
cid e and a fratricide.
“In ad d ition to all this, I lea v e as ad ­
m inistrators of m y h u m b le w ill: F irst th e
L ord Pantocrator and H er w h o bore
H im w ith o u t seed; also th e m ost illu s­
trious magistrus Kyr B asil and his brother
th e perivleptos vestarch Kyr Phares-
m anes; th e b ish op of th e d iocese, m ost
b e lo v ed o f God; as adm inistrators and
governors m y tw o son s-in-law , th e
spatharocandidatus Kyr G regory and th e
merarchus M ichael; th e ranking priest
of m y church. A n d I b eq u ea th e to th e
illustrious brothers (Basil and Phares-
m anes) tw o and ev en three p ou n d s (of
gold) for their a c c e p ta n c e ;69 to the
h oly b ish op m ost b e lo v ed of G od, six
(nomismata) or a book; to th e p riest a
sim ilar sum . A n d if there sh ou ld b e fou n d
any o f m y cloth es or b e d apparel, th ey
sh all b e d istribu ted to any o f th e h oly
m onks.
“T h e p resen t d ocu m en t w as w ritten
at m y com m an d b y the h an d of T h e-
odulus, th e m onk and presbyter o f th e
church of th e T h eotocos, w h o set it in
order, and has b e e n sign ed b y th e p resen t
w itn esses in th e tw elfth year of th e in ­
diction , April, 6567, b efore th e F ather,
Son, and H o ly G host. I, E ustathius pro-
tospatharius hypatus B oilas h a v e sign ed
w ith m y o w n han d .”
6 0 . . . δμολοΎΐαν αύτων. . .

T h e nam e of Boilftl seem s to h ave
I»een a prom inent o n e in B yzan tiu m .70
'Hie first m ention of the nam e occurs in
l ho chronicle of T h eop h an es. In d escrib ­
ing the Em press Irene's procession from
the church of the H o ly A p ostles at E a s­
ter 798, T h eop h an es recoun ts that she
w as escorted b y four patricians, on e of
w hom w as C on stantin e B oilas.71 T h e
nam e th en disappears from the sources
for over on e hu n d red years. In 923 Bardas
Boilas, th e strategus o f C haldia, w as
arrested for consp iring to dethrone Ro-
m anus L eca p en u s.72 T w o years later
C onstantine B oilas, an official in th e im ­
perial p alace, w as in v o lv ed in th e p lot
o f th e mysticus John to rem ove Ro-
m anus.73 D u rin g th e reign of C onstantine
V II th e protospatharius Petronas B oilas
served as catepan o f N icop olis in A sia
M inor.74 T his is th e la st m en tion o f th e
nam e in th e sources du rin g th e ten th
century.
T h e nam e occurs again in th e m id d le
of the elev en th cen tu ry during th e reign
o f C on stantin e IX M onom achus. It has
b e e n su p p o sed th a t R om anus B oilas
exercised th e fu n ctio n of court jester
du rin g th e reign o f M onom achus. T h e
basis for this assertion is th e fact that
C edrenus, P sellus, and Zonaras d ep ict
R om anus as am u sin g th e E m peror w ith
his d e fe ctiv e sp eech .75 H ow ever, the
70 See G. Moravcsik, Byzantinoturcica, II
(Budapest, 1943 ), 91 - 2 .
71 Theophanes, Chronographia, ed. C. de
Boor, I (Leipzig, 1883 ) (hereafter Theoph­
anes), 474 .
72 George Continuatus, Chronicon, ed. I.
Bekker (Bonn, 1838 ) (hereafter George Con­
tinuatus), 896 - 7 .
73 George Continuatus, 903 .
74 Constantine Porphyrogenitus, D e Admin-
istrando Imperio, ed. G. Moravcsik and trans.
R. H. J. Jenkins (Budapest, 1949 ) (hereafter
D e Administrando Imperio), 212 .
75 S. Lampros, “ Σύμμικτα,” N ^ o s Έ λ λ 17 -
νομνημων, IX ( 1912 ), 301 - 4 ; Cedrenus,
Historiarum Compendium, ed. I. Bekker, II
(Bonn, 1839 ) (hereafter Cedrenus), 605 ;
Psellus, Chronographia, ed. E . Renauld, II
(Paris, 1928 ) (hereafter Psellus), 38 - 4 4 ;
Zonaras, Annales, ed. T . Biittner-Wobst, III
(Bonn, 1897 ) (hereafter Zonaras), 644 .
V
273
G reek archivist L am pros sh ow ed that
B oilas w as a person o f considerable im ­
portance and not just a court fool. H e
w as an officer in th e grand hetaireia, and
h e even tu ally attained th e h igh est p osi­
tion in the sen ate.76 H e consp ired w ith
certain other senators to rem ove C on­
stan tin e IX and to h a v e h im self pro­
claim ed em peror. H e an d his associates
w ere app rehend ed , and th ou gh th e latter
w ere severely p u n ish ed , h e h im self w as
reinstated at th e court after a tem porary
exile. T h e date o f this consp iracy is fixed
b y a passage in C edrenus. T h e chron­
icler records that in th e fourth and fifth
years o f th e in d iction th e Patzinaks in ­
vad ed th e E m pire, and also that during
this tim e there occu rred the p lo t of
B oilas.77 T h e fourth an d fifth years of
this particular in d iction are th e years
1051-1052.
T h e next occu rren ce o f th e nam e is
in th e w ill of E ustathius B oilas, proto­
spatharius epi tou chrysotricliniou and
hypatus, in th e tw elfth year o f th e in d ic­
tion, 1059. F rom his title it is obviou s
th at E ustathius h ad b e e n a m an of e le ­
v a ted position . T h e title o f protospa­
tharius epi tou chrysotricliniou in d icates
th at h e w as a h ig h official at th e court,
w h ile that of hypatus p laces h im in th e
senatorial rank.78 T h e con ten ts of th e
w ill offer a certain am oun t of chrono­
lo g ica l ev id en ce w h ich is w orthy of
consideration in con n ection w ith th e
id en tification of B oilas, th ou gh it does
n ot p rod u ce any co n clu sive results. T h e
w ill records that E u stath iu s h ad three
child ren, Irene, M aria, and Rom anus.
R om anus, th e you n gest, d ied in the
sixth year o f th e in d iction , h avin g at-
78 Lampros, loc. cit., 301 - 4 .
77 Cedrenus, II, 604 - 5 .
78 See J. B. Bury, The Imperial Administra­
tive System in the Ninth Century (London,
1911 ), 22 - 3 . The designations of protospatharius
and hypatus still denoted senatorial rank in the
eleventh century. On this see A. Christophilo-
poulou, Ή σύγκλητος els τό βυζαντινόν κράτοί
(Athens, 1949 ), 36 . Also, Synopsis Chronice,
ed. C. Sathas, in Μεσαιωνική Βιβλιοθήκη, V II
(Paris, 1894 ), 171 .
V
274 THE WILL OF EUSTATHIUS BOILAS
tain ed the age o f three. B oilas’ w ife ,
Anna, d ied in th e ninth year of th e in ­
diction . T h e w ill itself w as draw n up in
th e tw e lfth year of th e in d iction . T his
tw e lfth year is th e year 1059, as re­
cord ed at the en d of th e w ill. I t is n ot
sp ecifically stated that th e sixth year of
th e in d ictio n ( th e year of R om anus’
d e a th ), or th e nin th year of th e in d iction
(th e year o f A nna’s d ea th ) occu rred in
th e sam e in d iction as d id th e tw elfth
year (th e year o f th e w ill) . B u t th e nar­
rative seem s to im p ly that all three dates
p robab ly fa ll w ith in th e sam e in d iction .
H o w ev er, of this one cannot b e certain.
T hus th e d eath of B oilas’ w ife probab ly
occu rred in 1056, and that of his son in
1053. As his son w as three years o f ag e
at th e tim e of his d eath in 1053, it fo llo w s
th at h e w as p robab ly born in 1050.
B oilas states in the w ill th at *. . . th e
m ou n tin g v io len ce o f th e w a v es . . .” 79
of life h ad forced him to b ecom e an em i­
grant, and that he, Anna, and p robab ly
th e three child ren had left their hom es in
C ap p ad ocia for a lan d w h ich w as on e and
on e-h alf w eek s distant. B u t th e w ord in g
o f th e text is rather v a g u e as to w h eth er
th e child ren actually accom p an ied their
parents, or w h eth er th ey w ere born after
th e arrival o f B oilas and his w ife in T aiq.
άποικος yap μετά το συνοικήσαι με την νόμιμόν
μον γαμέτην τη εν όσια τη μνήμη ‘Ά ν ν η μετανασ-
τας τής πατρίδος καί εις την νυν παροικοεπι-
δημήσας χωράν μεβ' όσων παρεφνλάχθησάν μοι
χρημάτων και όσων ννν ε£ αγαθόν πόρου σννεστη-
σάμην, και άπερ μοι εχαρίσθησαν τέκνα θνγατ-
ρια δνο και άρρεν ev.80 A p p aren tly B oilas İS
listin g th e item s w h ich h e b rou gh t w ith
him to T aiq. In this "inventory’ th e m on ey
and ch ild ren are seem in gly grou p ed to ­
gether. It is also sta ted that th e son and
m other, after their deaths, w ere b u ried in
th e n e w lan d to w h ich th ey h ad com e.
T hus it is p o ssib le to su g g est that this
em igration m ig h t h a v e occu rred after
1050, th e year o f his son’s birth, and b e ­
fore 1053, the year of his son’s death, i.e.,
79 Beneshevich, loc. cit., 2 2 2 .
80 Beneshevich, loc. cit., 223 .
du rin g th e years 1051-2. T his coin cid es
exactly w ith th e date of the consp iracy
of R om anus B oilas. B oth R om anus Boilas
and E ustathius Boilas w ere m em b ers of
th e senate, b oth w ere presen t at th e
court, and it is stated that R om anus
B oilas h ad certain senators as accom ­
p lices in his p lot to seize th e throne.
T h ou gh th e lan gu age of th e w ill is
vagu e, on e m igh t su ggest th at E u stath iu s
B oilas w as p ossib ly a relative o f R o­
m anus B oilas, a m em b er of th e latter’s
conspiracy, and exiled from th e capital
and from his h om e in C ap p ad ocia as a
result of h is com plicity.
E u stath iu s further m entions th at h e
served un der th e d u x M ich ael for fifteen
years, and that during th e fo llo w in g eig h t
years (th a t is up to 1059) h e w as no
lon ger in th e service o f th e dux. T h e
en d o f his service un der M ich ael thus
coin cid es w ith th e p eriod of th e consp ir­
acy again st C on stantin e IX, 1051.
B oilas also m entions th e nam es and
ranks o f M ich ael’s sons, i.e., th e m agis-
tru s B asil and th e v esta rch Pharesm anes.
T h ey, as w e ll as their father, can b e
id en tified from G reek and A rm enian
sources. T h e m a g istru s B asil is id en tica l
w ith th e m a g istru s B asil A p ocap es w h o
served as arch on of Parad ounab on from
1059 to 1065.81 Earlier h e h ad rep u lsed
th e Seljuks un der T ogh ru lb eg at M an-
zikert ( 1 0 5 4 ) .82 A fter th e d efea t o f R o­
m anus D io g e n e s in 1071 h e seem s to
h ave served un der th e A rm enian P hila-
retus, w h o had estab lish ed h im self in
C ilicia. As an officer of P hilaretus, B asil
A p ocap es com m an d ed th e city of E d essa
from 1077 u n til h is d eath in 1083.83
T h e brother of B asil, th e v esta rch
P haresm anes, is id en tica l w ith th e v e s ­
tarch Pharesm anes A p ocap es to w h om
R om anus D io g e n e s entrusted th e city
81 Attaliates, Historia, ed. I. Bekker (Bonn,
1853 ) (hereafter Attaliates), 83 . Banescu, op.
cut., 32 —3 .
82 Attaliates, 47 . Matthew of Edessa, Chro­
nique, tr. E . Dulaurier (Paris, 1858 ) (hereafter
Matthew of Edessa), p. 99 .
83 Matthew of Edessa, 180 - 1 , 186 .

of Ilierap olis after its con q u est in 1069.H4
T hough th e last nam e of th e tw o brothers
does not appear in th e w ill of B oilas,
(heir titles and first nam es are sufficient
to establish their id en tity w ith th e A p o-
eapes brothers m en tio n ed b y th e chroni­
clers.
Their father, th e d u x M ich ael o f th e
w ill, is referred to in th e ch ron icle of
M atth ew of E dessa. H ere h e appears
sim ply as A p ocap es, father of B asil.8485
H e w as an im portant officer in th e B y­
zantine arm ies as early as th e reign o f
R om anus III Argyrus. H e also seem s to
have exercised authority in th e city of
E dessa as far b ack as 1038.86 T hus
B oilas’ lords w ere th e A rm eno-G eorgian
fam ily of A p ocap es from th e district of
T aiq.
T h e fa m ily nam e B oilas, on first
sight, w o u ld seem to h ave B ulgarian
affinities. T h eop h an es, w ritin g in th e
ninth century, speaks of th e Bulgar
βοίλάδων ( n ob les ) w h o accom p an ied
their king to an a u d ien ce w ith C on stan­
tin e V in 748.87 In another p assage h e
speaks of th e B ulgarian βοϊλάδας w h o
a ccom p an ied their k in g in war, and of a
βοϊλάς sent to p etitio n p ea ce term s from
C on stantin e V .88 In th e B ook of C e re ­
m o n ies C on stantin e P orphyrogenitus
m entions that th ere w ere six great βολιά-
8eç at th e B ulgarian court, and b e lo w
them w ere th e έσω και Ι|ω βολιάδες89* T h e
w ord βοϊλάς w h ich in T h eop h an es and
C onstantine Porp hyrogen itu s is u sed to
d en o te th e B ulgarian nob ility, w o u ld
seem to b e id en tica l w ith th e fam ily
nam e of B oilas. T hu s th e fam ily nam e
o f Boilas, w h ic h first appears in th e
84 Cedrenus, II, 675 - 6 .
85 Matthew of Edessa, 51 .
86 J. Laurent, Byzance et les Turcs seljoucides
dans l’Asie occidentale jusqu’en 1081 (Paris,
1913 ), 40 , 43 , 70 , 8 4 .
87 Theophanes, 436 .
88 Theophanes, 447 .
89 Constantine Porphyrogenitus, D e Cere-
moniis Aulae Bizantinae, ed. J. Reiske and I.
Bekker, I (Bonn, 1829 ), 681 . In D e Adminis-
trando Imperio, 154 , there is mention of the
twelve great βοϊλάδων.
V
275
B yzantine sources tow ard th e end of
the eigh th century, originally w o u ld
seem to have h ad som e B ulgarian con ­
nection . B ut it does n ot fo llo w that th e
fam ily itself w as of B ulgarian origin.
Jud ging from th e con ten ts of th e library
of E ustathius B oilas, w h ic h con tain ed
m any of th e standard w orks of m ed ieval
H ellen ism , the B oilas fam ily, regardless
of its origin, w as th orou gh ly B yzantin-
ize d b y th e elev en th century.
As has b een m en tion ed ab ove, th e
w ill states that B oilas m igrated from
C ap pad ocia to a lan d on e and on e-h alf
w eek s distant, and settled am ongst
p e o p le w h o had a different lan gu age and
religion. In another p assage this "na­
tion ” İS nam ed, " . . . r o î ç ά ν τ ί κ ρ ν ς ε ν ο ι -
κ η σ α ν τ α Ά ρ / χ ε ν ί ο ι ς . . . .” 90 T hus far th e
ev id en ce in d icates th at th e estates of
B oilas w ere located som ew h ere in east­
ern Asia M inor. T h e w ill lists the nam es
of elev en villages and properties; Isaion,
Parabounion, B ouzina, T an tzou te (a lso
called Salem and T z a le m a ), Barta, C al­
m ou ch e, C ousneria, O ph id oboun i, Cop-
teriou, C houspacrati, and O uzike. O b ­
viou sly m ost of th ese p la ce nam es are n ot
G reek. O f th e e lev en nam es w h ich ap ­
pear in th e w ill, on ly that of C alm ouche
can b e located w ith som e certainty. A
su ggestion can b e m ad e concerning th e
location of C opteriou, b u t th e other place
nam es seem to b e u n identifiab le. C al­
m ou ch e w as lo cated in northern Asia
M inor, on th e river Tsorokh in th e d is­
trict o f T aiq .91 C op teriou m ay b e id en ti­
cal w ith C apetrou, th e site of th e im ­
portant b a ttle b e tw e en th e Seljuks and
th e B yzan tin es in 1049. C apetrou w as
lo ca ted on th e sou th east confines of
T aiq. B ut this identification cannot b e
dem onstrated.
T h e location of C alm ou ch e show s
th at th e estates of B oilas w ere in th e
A rm eno-G eorgian district of T aiq, a dis-
90 Beneshevich, loc. cit., 223 .
01E . Honigmann, Die Ostgrenze des byzan­
tinischen Reiches von 3 6 3 bis 1071 (Brussels,
1935 ), 219 - 21 .
276 THE WILL OF EUSTATHIUS BOILAS
trict ann exed to the E m pire b y B asil II
in 1000-01 up on the death of its ruler
D a v id th e cu ropalates, and m ad e into
th e th em e of Iberia. T his ties in w ith th e
fa ct th a t th e A p ocap es fam ily, B oilas’
a u th en ta i, w ere from th e district of T aiq,
and that th ey took som e of B oilas’ lands
aw ay from him b y force.
B oilas’ w ill giv es a graphic p icture of
th e th em e of Iberia just after th e onset
of th e Seljuk invasions. T h ese invasions
had com m en ced prior to B oilas’ em igra­
tion to Iberia. T h e callin g of th e eastern
arm ies to q u ell th e reb ellion of L eo
T o m iciu s in 1047 h ad left th e eastern
p rovinces unprotected . As a result in
1 0 4 7 -9 th e Seljuks ravaged th e area
w ith o u t opp osition. A gain in 1050-1 th e
eastern troops w ere su m m oned to th e
w e st to fight the Patzinaks, an d on ce
m ore th e Seljuks fou n d th e borders in ­
sufficiently protected . C ecau m en u s as­
serts th at th e inhabitants of this th em e
had b een a lien ated b y th e p olicies of
C on stantin e IX M onom achus, w h o had
rep laced m ilitary service on th e part of
th e inh abitants w ith n e w taxes, thus
p rovokin g th em to d esert to th e Turks.92
D u e to th e opp ression of th e central
govern m en t and th e Seljuk ravages,
B oilas fo u n d h im self in a relatively d e ­
serted and u n in h ab ited area w h en h e
arrived in Iberia in 1051-2. H e fou n d
th e lan d “. . . fo u l and un m an ageab le
. . . in h a b ited b y snakes, scorpions, and
w ild b easts.” 93 O f his ele v en properties,
h e states that those of O uzik e, Chous-
pacrati, C opteriou, O ph id ob ou n i, C ous-
neria, B ouzina, and Isaion w ere “. . . d e ­
serted and u n inhab ited. . . .” 94 T hrough
great expenditures o f m on ey and effort
h e cleared and im proved h is properties.
V ineyards and gardens w ere p lan ted ,
m ea d o w s and parks w ere cleared, a q u e­
d u cts and w ater m ills b u ilt, and anim als
for u se in th e fields w ere brough t. In a
92 Cecaumenus, Strategicon, ed. B. Vasiliev­
sky and V . Jemstedt (St. Petersburg, 1896 ), 18 .
93 Beneshevich, loc. cit., 223 .
94 Beneshevich, loc. cit., 223 .
relatively short period of tim e Boilas'
industry had turned th e on ce desolate
area in to a prod u ctive estate. H e bu ilt,
in ad d ition to his ow n h ou se, tw o
churches, on e d ed icated to th e V irgin
and th e other to St. Barbara. T h ese
churches w ere ad eq u ately fu rn ish ed w ith
religiou s vessels and icons, and w ere pro­
v id e d w ith a library w h ich w o u ld h ave
d on e credit even to an urban estab lish ­
m ent.
B u t adversity fo llo w ed B oilas to th e
lan d of his exile, and soon after h is ar­
rival in Ib eria h e lost his only son. Ro-
m anus d ied at th e age of three, and w as
b u ried in th e fam ily cem etery at th e
church o f St. Barbara. B oilas’ w ife took
th e m on astic v ow s and retired from th e
w orld after h er son’s death. H er death,
p rob ab ly in 1056 as su g g ested ab ove, le ft
B oilas alon e to care for his tw o dau ghters
Irene and M aria. T h e traged ies in his
fam ily life w ere accom p an ied b y th e
opp ression of th e A p ocap es fam ily.
B oilas states that, th ou gh h e had alw ays
w orked for th e good of his lords, th ey
h ad sland ered him and ev en p lo tted
against his life. In add ition , th ey had
forced B oilas to g iv e th em th e u se and
p ossession o f four of his properties. T h e
d u x h ad req u ested and ob tain ed th e use
of th e v illa g e properties of O ph id oboun i,
C ousneria, and C alm ouche. H is son,
Basil, forced B oilas to sell th e property
o f Barta, and th en refu sed to p ay him
for it. In add ition , B oilas com plain s that
th ou gh h e p ossessed receipts for m on ey
w h ich B asil and his parents o w ed him ,
am oun tin g to tw en ty-five pou n d s of gold ,
th ey n ever p aid him . T h e A p ocap es
fam ily u sed its p osition to extract th e
p ossession o f th e four properties from
Boilas, w h o as a political exile w as en ­
tirely d ep en d en t on th ese prom inent
lords in Iberia.
T hu s after th e d eath of B oilas less
than h alf of th e properties rem ained in
th e p ossession o f his fam ily. T h e four
properties m en tion ed ab ove w e n t to th e
A p ocap es fam ily. B oilas w ille d C op teriou

und C houspacrati to th e brothers C hris­
topher and G eorge, and to their cousin.
T h ese three persons are not identified
excep t for th e fact that th ey w ere orphans
and destitute. O uzik e w as w ille d to p er­
sons w h o se nam es are n ot g iven in th e
docum ent. O f B oilas’ ele v en properties,
seven p assed from th e han ds of th e fam ­
ily into th e possession o f outsiders.
B oilas’ older d a u gh ter Irene received
as her share th e property of Salem m inus
four z e u g o to p ia w h ich h ad b een given
to freed slaves. In a d d ition sh e received
slaves, cloth, and flocks; altogeth er,
therefore, h er share am ou n ted to thirty
pounds or 2,160 n o m ism ata. H er sister
M aria receiv ed on e-h alf of th e property
of B ouzina, and th e eq u ivalen t of ten
p ou nd s in slaves, cloth, and flocks; her
share, therefore, also am oun ted to thirty
pounds. T h e other h a lf o f th e property
of B ouzina w a s g iv en to th e church of
th e T h eotocos. T h e church o f St. Bar­
bara w as to receiv e tw o h u nd red m o d io i
of w h ea t and o n e thou san d m easures of
w in e from P arabounion. B oilas’ son-in-
la w receiv ed th e property of Isaion in
p la ce of five pou n d s. T hus th e tw o
dau ghters and th eir hu sb ands ob tain ed
possession o f all or part of th e four prop­
erties of Salem , B ouzina, Isaion, and
Parabounion, and of th e tw o churches
of St. Barbara and th e Virgin. In th ese
tw o churches w ere to b e fou n d num erous
icons, religiou s vessels, and religiou s
cloth in g, all of considerable value. T h e
V
277
library, containing ab ou t n in ety item s,
seem s large for such a rem ote and u n ­
inh abited province w h en one considers
that th e library of A ttaliates’ estab lish ­
m en t at R h aed estus and C on stantin ople,
and that of Pacurianus’ m onastery at
B ackovo each con tain ed few er than
n in ety books.95
T h e m anu m ission of B oilas’ slaves
and their portions o ccu p y an im portant
section of th e w ill. T h e ex-slaves Cyri-
acus, Basil, and A b asgu s each received
a ze u g o to p io n from th e property of
Salem , w h ile Lascaris and N icetas each
received a b o id o to p io n . W h atever re­
m ained from B oilas’ w ea lth and property
w as to b e distribu ted am ongst th e poor.
T h e w ill of B oilas is a u n iq u e d ocu ­
m en t for th e elev en th century. It is the
earliest d etailed inventory o f th e p o s­
sessions of a p rovincial m agn ate that has
su rvived from B yzan tin e tim es. B ut it is
m ore than a m ere inventory, for in it
one can catch glim p ses of th e political
intrigu es in w h ich B oilas w as presum ­
ably in volv ed at th e court in C on stanti­
n op le, and of th e v icissitu d es w h ich h e
suffered at th e h an d s of th e A p ocap es
fam ily. T h e d eclin e of th e fam ily is
clearly traced in th e w ill. F in ally, th e
w ill is th e m ost d etailed B yzan tin e d o cu ­
m en t y e t k n ow n to us o f conditions in th e
eastern p rovinces just after th e Seljuk in ­
vasions h ad b egu n .
95 Sathas, op. dt., I, 49 - 50 , 6 6 -8; Petit,
Backovo, 53 .
 VI

TH E QUESTION OF T H E B Y Z A N T IN E M IN E S

W h e r e did B yzantium get its m etals after the period of the Arab conquest?
These metals — prim arily gold, silver, copper, iron, and lead — were of con­
siderable im portance to B yzantium for its superb coinage and m anufacture of
luxury items, as well as for the m anufacture of weapons and for other industries.
The problem of the source of these metals has not been satisfactorily treated and
perhaps it really cannot be completely solved because of the lack of sufficient
source m aterial. M . Bloch and M . Lom bard touched on this point when discuss­
ing the general question of the circulation of gold in the M iddle Ages. According
to these two scholars, B yzantium was, up to the seventh century, the domain of
gold par excellence for three reasons: ( 1 ) a favorable balance of trade which
brought in a steady stream of gold; (2 ) arrival of new gold from neighboring
lands which possessed gold mines; (3) the already existing stock of gold within
the Em pire. B ut by the end of the sixth century B yzantium ’s gold stocks had
greatly diminished because of the flux of gold to the E ast, and because, with the
Arab conquests in the seventh century, the Byzantines lost contact with those
lands where the gold was mined. Of course this reasoning left the phenomenon of
the gold solidus unexplained. If B yzantium did lose control of the gold to the
Arabs, how was it th a t the Byzantine solidus remained pure and stable to the
middle of the eleventh century, i.e., for a period of over four hundred years after
the Arab conquests had begun? The explanation which Lom bard and Bloch give
is th a t (1) B yzantium began to touch its inactive gold stocks, and (2 ) it even­
tually acquired a favorable balance of trade w ith the W est, which in tu rn was
acquiring gold from the Arabs in favorable commercial relations. B ut one m ight
well ask whether B yzantium m ight not have obtained gold, or other metals,
within its own dom ains .1
In the question of Byzantine mines one m ust begin, as w ith so m any other
aspects of Byzantine history, with the sources of the late R om an Em pire. Except
for a limited num ber of inscriptions, the principal source is R om an legal litera-
1 M . Lombard, “ Les bases monétaires d’une suprématie économique: L ’or musulman du V II e
siècle au X I e siècle,” Annales, n ( 1947 ), 146 - 160 ; M . Bloch, “ Le problème d ’or au moyen-âge,”
Annales d'histoire économique et sociale, y ( 1933 ), 1- 34 .

1
VL
2 The Q u estion o f the B y z a n tin e M in e s

ture. Here the most im portant testim ony is th a t of the Codex Theodosianus, the
mining decrees of which are repeated, often verbatim , in the Codex Iustinianus,
the Basilica, and the Hexabiblos of Armenopoulos. T he information in the Codex
Theodosianus is of a general nature. One of the m ost striking facts which emerges
from this legal collection, and a not unexpected one, is the widespread use of
work in the mines as punishm ent for criminals and prisoners of war. This is of
course an old practice. To condemn someone to the mines, in metotlum damnare,
or in B yzantine language, geraXXt^etv, was probably the worst punishm ent in
R om an law next to the punishm ent of death itself. T he unfortunate individuals
condemned to such a life naturally sought to escape it by any means, w ith the
result th a t the legal proscriptions forbidding the hiding of escaped miners are
severe. M ost of these unfortunate miners were no doubt employed in mines be­
longing to the state. A combination of the rigors of mining life and the scarcity
of labor manpower in the late Em pire forced the emperors to issue measures
which would keep the supply of miners from dwindling. Thus we read a decree
of the E m peror Theodosius I I to the C ount of the Sacred Im perial Largesses
M aximus dated 424 :
If m iners should desert the d istrict where th e y appear to have been born and should
m igrate to foreign parts, th ey sh all undou btedly be recalled to the fam ily stock and the
household of their own birth statu s. M oreover, if such m en and wom en should prefer to
chose marriage unions from th e hom es of private citizens, their progeny shall be divided
in to equal parts betw een M y fisc and the parents and those who are proved to be parents
of only one shall surrender such a single child entirely to the fisc. In th e future, if any
person shall be borne from a m iner and from any other stock, he shall necessarily follow
th e ignoble birth statu s of a m iner.2

However, it seems th a t not all miners belonged exclusively to the state during
the later Rom an Em pire, for a decree of Em perors Valentinian and Valens ad­
dressed to Cresconius, Count of M inerals and M ining, in 365 reads:
W ith long pondered deliberation W e consider th a t a sanction m ust be issued to the
effect th a t if an y person should w ish th e industry of m ining to flourish b y his own labor
he m ay acquire advan tages b oth for him self and for th e state. Therefore, if any persons
volun tarily should com e togeth er in large num bers for th is purpose, Y our L aud ability
shall require such persons to p a y eigh t scruples each of gold dust. M oreover, if th ey
should be able to collect more, th e y shall preferably sell th e sam e to th e fisc, from w hich
th ey shall receive an appropriate price from Our Largess.3

And the edict of 424 quoted above also implies th a t n o t all miners were slaves :
“If it should be claimed th a t any person has purchased the property of miners
th a t is obligated to the aforesaid compulsory service, he shall undoubtedly be­
come subject to the compulsory public services which the author of his right
was accounted to fulfill.” 4
H ere we see miners who can dispose of their property and even leave the profes-
2 Theodosiani Libri X V I cum Constitutionihus Sirmondianis , ed. T . Mommsen, I (Berlin, 1905)
(hereafter Cod. Theod.), x .1 9 .1 5 . The Theodosian Code, tr. C. Pharr (Princeton, 1952) (hereafter
Pharr), p. 285. See also Codex lu stian ianus , x i.7 .7 .
8 Pharr, pp. 2 8 3 -2 8 4 . Cod. Theod., x .1 9 .3 .
4 Pharr, p. 285. Cod. Theod., x .1 9 .1 5 . This is repeated in Cod. lu st., x i.7 .7 .
 VI
T he Q u estion o f the B y z a n tin e M in e s 3
sion, provided, of course, th a t their services are taken over by the purchasers of
the property. B ut in the middle Byzantine period the fixing of urban and in­
dustrial society to its professions and trades was relaxed, as implied in the Book
of the Eparch. So it is quite possible th a t it was relaxed in the sphere of non-slave
miners. The Byzantine governm ent continued to perm it private individuals to
engage in mining alongside the state mining enterprises. T hus the private owner­
ship of mines is described in the Basilica and in certain scholia on the Basilica:
“If he found clay or silver, or other substance, or m etal ore, it is reckoned as
‘fru it ’ .” 5 — “I t is also possible for a private individual to have mines of clay,
silver, and the like .” 6 On the other hand, the grimmer aspect of mining life was
retained, and the ancient practice of sending the condemned to the mines re­
mained in force .7
Thus, from this brief survey, it does not seem to be stretching the point to say
th a t mining held the same position in Byzantine society th a t it did in the society
of the late Rom an Em pire. The question has been raised by certain scholars, how­
ever, whether the Byzantines, after the great losses to the Arabs in Africa and
Asia, were not in fact cut off from the mines which had supplied them with the
various metals. To phrase the question differently, did the Byzantines actually
derive any of their m ineral supply from the Balkans and Asia M inor after the
Slavic invasions in the Balkans and the Arab conquests in the E ast, or were they
simply left w ithout any mines and mining industry? The discussion of mines and
mining is no mere academic exercise, for it m ust be obvious th a t they were im ­
p o rtan t sources of raw m aterial and wealth for ancient and m ediaeval society.
In fact the im portance of mines and the mining industry have been given great
emphasis for the actual or com parative prosperity of ancient and mediaeval
states. This has been asserted for the H etite state of Asia M inor. One historian
m aintains th a t the failure of the mines in the western half of the Rom an Em pire
and their continuity in the eastern half help to explain the collapse of the empire
in the W est and its survival in the E a s t .8 Another historian posits the develop­
m ent of the mining industry in the Balkans as one of the bases for Bosnian and
Serbian strength and prosperity in the fourteenth century .9 B u t in discussing
B yzantine mines one meets w ith an obstacle which plagues the historian of
B yzantium all too frequently. Unlike the M uslim authors th e Byzantines, be­
cause of their indifference or sophistication, do not bother to discuss such m at-

6 Basilica , ed . G. H eim b ach , vol. I l l (L eipzig, 1843), x x v m .8 .3 0 . “ εΐ δε κριταριον ή άργύρου, ή trépas

ύλης, ή ψάμμου μετ άλλον ευρεν, els καρπόν λογίζεται.” A sch oliu m , y . 376 (D o ro th eu s), on th is passage
r ea d s’ “ εί dé καϊ κριταριον ήτοι λευκόγειον εξώριξεν be του προικιμαίον άγροΰ, ή άργύρου ενρε μέταλλα, ή χρυσίου,
ή άλλας οΐασοΰν ύλης, ταντα πάντα εν καρποϊς τον άγροΰ ψηφίζεται ”
6 S ch oliu m , y. 376 J “ Αυνατόν γάρ καί Ιδιώτης μέταλλα κριταριον καϊ άργύρου, καϊ των παραπλήσιων
Ιχ * ιν ”
1 A steriu s of A m aseia, Homilia V I I I in SS. Petrum et Paulum , i n Patrologia Graeca, xl (1 8 6 3 ), 276,
rem arks” “ "Αποροι dé παντελώς καϊ ol τόν χρυσόν άνορύττοντες, τόν βασιλέα του πλούτου. Μία γάρ αύτοϊς
άξίνη συνεργεί, ξύλινος πίναξ, ό τής γης τόν χρυσόν άποκρίνων”
8 Ο. D a v ie s, Roman M ines in Europe (O xford, 1935) (hereafter D a v ie s, Roman M ines), p . 2.
• C. Jireéek, D ie Handelsstrassen und Bergwerke von Serbien und Bosnien während des M ittelalters
(P ragu e, 1879) (h ereafter Jire& k, Bergwerke), p. 41.
VI
4 The Q u estio n o f the B y z a n tin e M in e s

ters.9a The little information to be gleaned on this subject is scattered am ongst a

small num ber of Byzantine, Armenian, Arab, Persian, Turkish, and L atin
sources. Though this inform ation is not plentiful, when one combines it with
w hat is known about pre-Byzantine and early O ttom an mining in Asia M inor
and the Balkans, it is possible to get a general answer to the problem of B yzan­
tiu m ’s source of metals after the Arab conquest.

ASIA M IN O R
The m ost informative of the classical authors on the subject of mining, for our
purposes, is the geographer Strabo. An inhabitant of northern Asia M inor writing
in th e first century A.D., Strabo took particular care to record the presence of
several mining districts in Asia M inor, the seat of the H etite Em pire, whose p ri­
m ary economic basis was the mining industry, and the home of the Chalybys, to
whom H om er attributes the invention of the a rt of m ining .10 Strabo speaks of
gold mines a t Syspiritis near K aballa, a considerable distance to the southeast
of T rebizond .11 He gives the m ost inform ation concerning the Pontic coast with
which he was so familiar, as this was the place of his origin. He says of the n o rth ­
eastern Pontic coast: “ Generally in these lands the coast is extremely narrow,
and the m ountains lie im m ediately beyond, being full of mines and thickets.
There is little agriculture, and the miners make their livelihood from the m ines .” 12
Strabo mentions specifically the presence of iron mines a t Pharnaci (Byzantine
Cerasus) to the west of T rebizond ,13 mines a t Cabira (Byzantine Neocaesareia)
to the southw est of T rebizond ,14 and mines in M t Sandaracurgium south of
Sinope .15 Finally he mentions the presence of copper mines on C yprus .16 T hus in
the first century A.D., according to Strabo, there were in Asia M inor and Cyprus
mines providing gold, copper, and iron; and the eastern Pontic region seems to
have been the m ost im portant mining area .17
The gold miners of the area of Asia M inor come up for specific mention in the

9a S ee for in sta n ce D . M . D u n lo p , “ Sou rces of G old an d Silver in Isla m according to a l-H a m d â n ï,”
Studia Islamica, v m ( 1957 ), 29 - 50 .
10 Homer, Iliad n . 857 .
11 Strabo, Geography, ed. H . L . Jones, vol. v ( 1928 ) (hereafter Strabo, with vol. and page numbers),
p. 328 ’ Μέταλλα δ* ε ν μ ϊ ν τ η Σ ν σ π ι ρ ί τ ι δ ί ε σ τ ι χ ρ υ σ ό ν κ α τ ά τ ά Κ ά β α λ λ α .
12 Strabo, ν , 402 .
13 Strabo, V, 400 . “ ε κ b k τ ή ς Ύ ή ς τ α μέταλλα, ν υ ν μ ϊ ν σ ι δ ή ρ ο υ , π ρ ό τ ε ρ ο ν bk àpyhpov**
14 S trab o, ν, 428 .
16 Strabo, V, 450 . “ e ip y à Ç o v T O b k δ η μ ω σ ι ώ ν α ι , μ ε τ α λ λ ε υ τ α ϊ ς χ ρ ώ μ ε ν ο ι τ ο ıs α π ό κ α κ ό ν p y las ^ ο ρ α ξ ο μ ί ν ο π
ά ν δ ρ α π ό δ ο ι ς . π ρ ό ς y à p τ ώ ε π ι π ό ν ω τ ο ν t p y o v κ α ι Θ α ν ά σ ιμ ο ν κ α ι δ ϋ σ ο ι σ τ ο ν ε ί ν α ι τ ό ν άέρα φ α σ ι τ ό ν kv r o is μ ε τ α λ λ ο ις

δ ι α τ η ν β α ρ ύ τ η τ α τ ή ς τ ω ν β ώ λ ω ν ό δ μ ή ς , ώ σ τ ε ώ κ ύ μ ο ρ α ε ί ν α ι τ ά σ ώ μ α τ α .* *
16 Strabo, ν ι, 383 .
17 On ancient mines see also the articles “ Gold,” “ Silber,” “ K upfer,” “ Bergbau,” in Pauly-
Wissowa. On the mines of Anatolia and their working a certain amount of material has been col­
lected in Tenney Frank, A n Economic Survey of Ancient Rome , iv ( 1959 ), 620 - 623 , 693 - 695 , and in
D . M agie, Roman Rule in A sia M inor, i - ii ( 1950 ), 7 , 43 - 44 , 179 , 375 . There is a short note on B yzan ­
tine mining in P. Koukoules, Β υ ζ α ν τ ι ν ώ ν β ί ο ς κ α ί π ο λ ι τ ι σ μ ό ς , il 1 (Athens, 1948 ), 203 - 204 . On mediaeval
mining there is the useful study of J . U . N ef, “ Mining and M etallurgy in M edieval Civilization,”
Cambridge Economic H istory , ii -( 1952 ), 430 - 492 .
 The Q u estio n o f the B y z a n tin e M in e s

Theodosian Code, first in the year 370 and then a few years later in 392. The first
of these two decrees was issued jointly by Emperors V alentinian, Valens, and
G ratian to Probus the P raetorian Prefect. “Ju st as our Lord Valens commanded
throughout all the O rient th a t if the miners with vagrant wandering should there
seek out the mineral gold, they should be kept away from the property of all
landholders .” 18
The second decree was issued by Em perors Valentinian, Theodosius, and
Arcadius to Romulus, Count of the Sacred Im perial Largesses. This is of interest
in th a t it seems to be indicative of active mining operations in western Asia
M inor. “E ach year seven scruples per m an shall be paid to the largesses by the
gold miners, not only in the Diocese of Pontus bu t also in the Diocese of Asia .” 19
There are also a few interesting references to a century-long dispute between the
Sassanids and Byzantines over w hat m ust have been com paratively rich gold
mines in the border regions of Armenia. D isputes over the rights to these mines
figured as principal causes in a t least four wars between Persia and Byzantium ,
giving them somewhat the appearance of economic wars. These disputes took
place first in 421-422, then under A nastasius (491-518), again in 530, and finally
in 534. On his accession V ahram V began a persecution of the Christians in Persia,
and Em peror Theodosius I I used this persecution, along with the refusal of the
Persians to hand back certain gold mines, as a causus belli in 421. “I t happened a t
this tim e th a t the Rhomaioi were vexed w ith the Persians because of another rea­
son; because the Persians, having those gold mines which they had leased from
the Rhomaioi, did no t wish to give them back .” 20 A pparently the Persians were
leasing the mines from the Byzantines a t this time.
M alalas records the fact th a t in the reign of Anastasius (491-518) certain gold
mines in Armenia were taken over by the Byzantines a t the expense of the
Persians.
H e took as a pretext the [matter] of th e gold-stream ing [mountains] w hich were found
previously, in th e tim e of A nastasius the emperor, in the possession of th e Rhom aioi.
Form erly these m ountains were under Persian rule. T he gold-stream ing m ountains are
located betw een th e boundaries of th e Arm enians, R hom aioi, and Persarm enians, as
those who know say. T hese m ountains bring forth m uch gold. W hen rains and storm s
occur, the earth of these m ountains is brought down, and nuggets of gold gush up. For­
m erly certain persons leased these m ountains b oth from th e R hom aioi and Persians for
tw o hundred pounds of gold. Afterwards these sam e m ountains were seized b y th e m ost
sacred Anastasius, and the R hom aioi alone received th e decreed revenue. A nd as a result
of th is the trea ty was v iolated .21

The mines in these m ountains were very rich, and the gold was so near to the
surface th a t after heavy rains nuggets of gold could be found on top of the soil.
Hence extraction of the m etal presented no problem a t all. M alalas seems to
imply th a t formerly these mines were leased out by both Persians and Byzantines
18 Pharr, p. 284 . Cod. Theod., x . 19 .7 .
19 Pharr, p. 285 . Cod. Theod., x . 19 . 12 . T h is is rep eated in Cod. lu st., x i. 7 .5 , a n d in A rm enopoulos,
Hexabiblos, ed . G. H eim b a ch (L eipzig, 1851 ), p. 310 .
20 Socrates, H istoria Ecclesiastica , ed. W . Bright (Oxford, 1893 ), pp. 298 - 299 .
21 Ioannes M alalas, Chronographia, ed. B . N ieh b u h r (Bonn, 1831 ), pp. 455 - 456 .
ο T he Q u estio n o f the B y z a n tin e M in e s

to certain individuals for two hundred pounds of gold, presumably per year. N o
doubt the yield of the mines was then sold to one or other or both of the govern­
ments.
According to M alalas, the disputed ownership of these mines became the pre­
tex t for war between Justinian I and K avades in 530. In this war the Byzantines
took possession of certain other mines held by the Persians a t Pharangium and
Bolum in Arm enia .22 Kavades had leased the working of one of the mines to a
local business man, Symeon by name.
B u t from there begins the territory of Persarm enia; and here is the gold-m ine which,
w ith th e perm ission of K avades, was worked b y one of the natives, Sym eon b y nam e.
W hen this Sym eon saw th a t b oth nations were activ ely engaged in the war, he decided
to deprive K avades of the revenue. Therefore he gave over both him self and Pharangium
to th e R hom aioi, b u t he refused to deliver over to either one th e gold of th e m ine.23

Symeon was very shrewdly playing off one side against the other and attem pting
to retain the gold taken from the mine, instead of turning it over either to Persians
or Byzantines. The new mines a t Pharangium and Bolum, first mentioned by
Procopius, would seem to be mines other than those seized by Anastasius as re­
ported by M alalas .24 For a t the outbreak of hostilities between Justinian and
K avades, Pharangium and Bolum were held by the Persians, and the other mines
were in the hands of the Byzantines. The peace concluding this war in 532-533,
however, provided th a t Pharangium with its gold mine should be returned to the
Persians .25 B ut, evidently, either the term s of this tre a ty were not kept, or a viola­
tion of some earlier mining agreem ent was alleged, for the Persians once more
declared war on Byzantium in 534 over the gold m ines .26 This short survey makes
it clear th a t the gold mines of the border areas were a prime factor of contention
between the Sassanids and Byzantines for over a century. E vidently the ou tp u t
of the mines was considerable.
Armenian, Arab, Persian, and Turkish sources also m ention the presence of
mines in northern and eastern Anatolia. Lazarus of Pharbe (about 500 A.D.)
says th a t gold, copper, and iron were to be found in the province of A rarat ,27
while Ghevond (about 778-785) mentions the discovery of a new vein of silver in
A rm enia .28However in the eighth century this was utilized by the Muslim governor
of Armenia for his m int, and the silver could not have been available to B yzan­
tium until a later date, when the Armenian provinces were incorporated into the

22 P rocop iu s, History of the W ars, ed . H . B . D e w in g (L ond on, 1954) (hereafter P ro co p iu s), I.x v .1 8 .
“ t5t € καί Ήβρσών χωρία iv Hepaappeviois 'Ρωμαίοι ίσχον, φρουρών re τό Βώλον καί τύ Φapayyiov καλούμενον,
'όθβν δι) το χρυσόν Tlipaaı όρνσσοντες βασιλβΐ φερουσι.”
23 P rocop iu s, Ι .χ ν .2 7 -2 9 .
24 O n th is p o in t see E . S tein , Histoire du Bas-Em pire , n (P aris, 1949), 2 9 1 -2 9 2 .
25 M a la la s, p. 477; S tein , n , 294.
26 T h eop h an es, Cronographica, ed . C. de B oor, i (L eipzig, 1883), 179. “ αφορμήν δέ eßaXev repi των
χρυσορυχίων των iv roh Ôpect, 'Appevias, cos -πρώην àvà ταλαντον τώλοΰντων 'Ρωμαίο« re καί Πέρσα«, νυν
δέ ’Ρωμαίο« pôvoLS τβλούντων”
27 L azare de Ph arb e, in Collection des historiens anciens et modernes de VArménie, ed. V. L an glois,
π (P aris, 1869), 263.
28 G h evon d , Histoire des guerres et des conquêtes des Arabes en Arménie , tr. G. V. C hachnazarian
(P aris, 1869), p. 149.
 VI
T he Q u estion o f the B y z a n tin e M in e s 7

Byzantine Em pire. Copper mines were also located a t V arajnounik (northw est of
Van), Gougark, and M ananaghi in A rm enia .29 M ost of the later references to
mines in B yzantine and eastern Asia M inor come from M uslim geographers and
travellers. Istahri, writing in 951, speaks of gold, silver, copper, and iron in the
vicinity of T aron ,30 and his contem porary al-M aqdisi m entions copper mines in
eastern A natolia .31
T he anonymous Persian work, Hudud al-Alam, which was w ritten in 982-983,
gives a num ber of references to mines in the area. I t mentions the presence of gold
in the m ountains between R um and Armenia, gold and lead in the m ountains of
the Alans, silver and copper in the m ountains of the Georgian border, silver and
copper in C yprus .32 Though the references in this author are rath er hazy, they
point to the general area of northeast Asia M inor and Cyprus as regions with
mines in operation. Finally the placename Χαλκουργία in the epic of Digenis
Acrites indicates the presence of copper mines near the Syria border .33 In an in­
teresting article published in 1937 R. P. Blake attem pted to show th a t from the
ten th to the thirteenth centuries exports and m inting of silver in the M uslim
east declined sharply. He m aintained th a t one of the reasons for this was the
fact th a t during this tim e the Muslims had lost control of certain argentiferous
lands, am orgst them parts of Asia M inor and Armenia. I t was a t this time, then,
th a t m any of the mines in Armenia m ust have passed into B yzantine h ands .34
There is also mention of the mines of Anatolia in later Islam ic authors after
Asia M inor had been overrun and settled by the Seljuks and had thus become
more accessible to the M uslim travellers. Y acut, a Greek slave from Asia M inor
who turned Muslim, reports the presence of copper mines in eastern Asia M inor
a ro u n d C h liat,34a while Abul Feda speaks of silver mines a t A m asya .35 M arco Polo
29 J . L au ren t, U A rm enie entre Byzance et VIslam (P aris, 1919 ), pp . 37 , 41 , 98 . A cco rd in g to L auren t,
th e A sh ot fam ily had as a basis of its w ealth an d pow er p riv a te silver m in es. O n silv er in m ed ia ev a l
A rm en ia th ere is an article b y R itte r in Erdkunde , x , w h ich w as, u n fo rtu n a tely , u n a v a ila b le to m e.
F o r m ed iaeval A rm en ian leg isla tio n on m in es see, Sempadscher Kodex aus dem 13. Jahrhundert, tr.
J . K arst, i (S trassburg, 1905 ), 25 .
30 Al-Istahri, Viae Regnorum , ed. M . J . de Goeje, in Bibliotheca Geographicorum Arabicorum, i

(Leiden), 1927 ), 190 - 191 . « J& llj Jjij j lju W îb

y/* [}
31 Al-Mokaddasi, Descriptio Imperio M oslem in, ed. M . J . de Goeje, in Bibliotheca Geographicorum
Arabicorum , m (Leiden, 1877 ), p. 148 . l a A İ 1 e^ JU f will J S j E . Honig­
mann, “ Un itinéraire à travers le Pont,” Annuaire de Vinstitut de philologie et d'histoire orientales et
slaves , iv ( 1936 ), 263 . He seems to imply that Muslim prisoners of war were working these mines.
32 H udud al-A lam , tr. V . M in o rsk y (L on d on , 1937 ), pp. 59 , 67 - 68 .
33 Digenes Abrites , ed. J . Mavrogordato (Oxford, 1956 ), p. 156 . “ kcù τη ς όδου ηπτόμβθα ώς irpos τη ν
Χ α λ κ ο υρ γία ν (τόπος y à p ουτος π ΐφ υκ ε πλησίον της Σ υ ρ ία ς )."
34 R . Ρ. B lak e, “ T h e C ircu lation of Silver in th e M o slem E a s t D o w n to th e M o n g o l E p o c h ,” H ar­
vard Journal of A siatic Studies , π ( 1937 ), 291 , 301 - 310 . „
34a Y acu t, Jacut's geographisches W örterbuch ed. F . Wustenfeld, iv (Leipzig, 1869 ), 92 - 93 . J f i w
j o f Jli 1* Jk /-o JI ^ JLA é êâ ! 1 ( 1924 ), 455 .

çLH C* -A ΧγΙγΛ ^ Jßj

“ y j» ÿ JLß * j if Y I See also I. H. U zu n ça rşilio g lu , Anadolu
Beylikleri ve Äkkoyunlu , K arakoyunlu Devletleri (A nk ara, 1937 ), p. 1 1 1 .
VI
8 T he Q u estio n o f the B y z a n tin e M in e s

saw the rich silver mines of P aip u rt and Argyropolis-Gümüsh H ane when lie went
through Asia M inor on his way to China in the thirteen th century .36 Ib n B a ttu ta ,
in his travels through Asia M inor, visited the silver mines of Gümüsh H ane in
eastern A natolia and rem arks th a t a num ber of m erchants from Syria and Ira q
come to this city, no doubt to buy the silver .37 His travels also carried him to the
area of Taganrog in southern Russia. This area, formerly either under Byzantine
control or in close contact with Byzantium , in Ib n B a ttu ta ’s tim e still had a good
num ber of Greeks. Perhaps the product of the mines in this region had been
available to the Byzantines a t the time when Byzantine influence had still been
param ount there.
A day’s march from this town are the mountains of the Russians. These are Christians,
red-haired and blue eyed, with ugly faces and treacherous. In their country are silver
mines and thence are brought the ingots of silver with which selling and buying are done
in this land (Crimea). The weight of these ingots is five ounces.38
T he m ost detailed and best informed source as regards the mines of Asia M inor
in this Islamic period of Asia M inor prior to th e O ttom an conquest is the Arab
geographer al-Umari, who seems to have got much of his information from a
Genoese renegade to Islam . He mentions the presence of one iron and four silver
mines.
In the part (of Asia Minor) occupied by the lieutenants of the princes descended from
Jingiz Khan, there are three silver mines: one is in the vicinity of the city of Luluh; the
second is near Gumush; and the third near B adhert. . . in the year 733 these mines were
still in full production and producing a very pure silver.39
85 A b u l F ed a , Géographie d’Aboulfedat ed . M . R ein a u d an d M . d e S lan e (P aris, 18 4 0 ), p . 383.

I ^ «İA * L fy 0 \ U I, ” T h e se are a lso m en tio n ed

b y th e -fo u rteen th -cen tu ry biograph er of th e M e v le v i d èrvish es, E flaki, Les saints des derviches
tourneurs, tr. C . H u art, n (1922), 380.
36 M arco P olo, The D escription of the World, ed . A . C. M o u le an d P a u l P e llio t, I (L on d on , 19 3 8 ),
9 6 -9 7 . I t is in terestin g th a t M arco P o lo still refers to G ü m ü sh H a n e b y its earlier B y z a n tin e nam e,
A rgiron . “T h e oth ers are A rgiron w h ich is great, an d a v e ry great q u a n tity of silver is d u g th ere
a n d in a certain village w h ich is called P ap erth th ere is a very large silver m in e.”
37 I b n B a ttu ta , Voyage d’Ibn Batoutah , ed . C. D efrem ery an d B . S a n g u in etti, π (P aris, 18 7 7 ), 293.

^ j Laa Wy \ 5 U *O «M*-»·

» I b n B a ttu ta , n ; « 4 . ^ 1 j | ^ - y

ojc^JI ô jj
tfS J l Ä ^ ill Λw
l ^

U y il ^ jik ll « J U Λ *
B y za n tiu m w as one of K ie v a n R u ssia ’s m ain sources of gold silv er on4 η v j i
K ievan R ussia (N e w H a v e n , 1951), p p . 4 6 ,1 1 2 . ® ’ wd C° P p er· G ' V ern a d sk y ·
” A1-Umen- A l-U m a ri' s
Bericht über Anatolien in seinem Werkeal-absar fi mamalik
amsar, ed . F . T aesch n er (L eip zig, 1929) (hereafter al-Umari), p. 20. ÿ

α^ΙΛ orbJ, ^11,, Ia j î .1 ώ

6
o1 Jte «y··!* «*·*· <y*!A oJUij

A lso p . 31. T h e p ro d u ctiv e n a tu r e of th e A n atolian m in es is ·“ L · » IL eJ U J ! Â ıâ Â İ l

con firm ed b y th e fou rteen th cen tu r y au th or, H a y to n , L a flor estoires de terre d'orient in
 T h e Q u estio n o f the B y z a n tin e M in e s 9

This passage refers to the city of L uluh in southern Anatolia near the modern
Ulukishla, to Gllmtlsh H ane in northern Anatolia (mentioned by Ib n B a ttu ta ),
and to P aip u rt (mentioned by M arco Polo). Then al-Umari in his description of
th a t p a rt of Anatolia, in the west, which was not directly under the rule of the
Mongols, describes an im portant silver mine in the principality or beylik of
Germian (the regions about C otyeion-K utahya).
■
He (the bey of Germian) has under his dependence a city named Gumush-Sar, that
is the city of silver, which one must not confuse with that of the same name which is in
the lands of the family of Jingiz Khan. One sees there a prosperous mine, of a rich product
and great importance, which is far superior to that of the lands under the domination
of the Mongols in respect to the metal’s quality, the accessible nature of the land, and the
ease of exploitation.40
This la tte r notice is particularly interesting in th a t it refers to western Asia
M inor, an area which produced metals in H ellenistic and Rom an times. Finally,
he says th a t there was an im portant iron mine in the southern Anatolian district
of E rm enak: “In their land (the K aram an dynasty) is an iron mine which has
greatly contributed to their success and assures them considerable profits .5’41
T he Byzantine ju rist Armenopoulos, w riting in 1345, records th a t each gold
miner of Pontus and Asiane (western Asia M inor) had to pay a sum of seventeen
keratia, annually, to the governm ent .42 I t is difficult to tell, however, w hether this
is anything more th an an anachronism and a carry over from the earlier legisla­
tion on the subject.
T he Greek and O ttom an historians of the fifteenth century record more p e rti­
nen t inform ation on the mines of Pontus, inform ation which indicates th a t they
were flourishing in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries. These mines, which
yielded copper for the m ost part, were located a t sites near Castam on, Samsun,
T zanik, Osmanjik, and Sinope. Bayazid I brought th e rich copper mines of
Castam on, Samsun, Tzanik, and Osm anjik under O ttom an control during his
reign .43 In the beginning of the fifteenth century M ehm ed I forced Ism ael of
Sinope to tu rn over to him the rich revenues of the copper mines of his city ,44

Recueil des historiens des Croisades: Documents arméniennes , u (P aris, . 1 9 0 6 ), 1 3 2 ..“ L e roiaum e d e
T u rq u ie e s t m o lt gran t e riche. M in iers y a d ’argen t, d ’araim , d e fer, e d e lu m e asses e b o n es.”

« A l-U m a r i.p .3 5 . t* J * * j Ua/ é ij

J> U - t— ο
**· c* * i U JI
« A l-U m ari, p p . 2 3 -2 4 . O ' * * * 1* J V “ O * !>
“ jg j * i j * l* à* «%
42 A rm enopoulos, p . 310. “ Έ ν έκαστψ ενιαυτω δέκα κεράτια ils έκαστος άνθρωπος χρυσολεκτης παρεχετω
ού μόνον της Τϊοντικης διοικησεως, ά λλ α καί της ’Ασιανής, ” P o ssib ly th is w as m erely a n a rch a istic rep eti­
tio n o f th e p rovision s of th e T h eo d o sia n an d J u stin ia n ic C odes.
43 J . von H am m er-P u rgstall, Geschichte des osmanischen Reiches, i (P est, 1 8 2 7 ), 2 2 7 , 607. T h ese
m in es w ere leased o u t a n n u ally for a su m of 10,000 v a tm a n of copper. T h e m in es a t C a sta m o n are
a lso m en tio n ed b y Ia co p o de P rom on torio w h o v isite d th e O tto m a n E m p ire in 1475. F . B ab in ger,
D ie Aufzeichnungen des Genuesen Jocopo de Promontorio-de Campis über den Osmanenstaat um 1^75,
B a y erisch e A k ad em ie der W issen sch aften , P h il.-H is t. K la sse , S itzu n g sb erich te, (1 9 5 6 ), p . 67.
VI
10 T he Q u estio n o f the B y z a n tin e M in e s

and in 1425 M urad I I retook the mines of Castam on.44“ A t the time of the conquest
of Sinope by Mehmèd I I in the middle of the fifteenth century the mines brought
in annually 50,000 gold pieces in taxes alone .45
W ith these references to the mines of Asia M inor in the Byzantine and O tto ­
man historians of the fifteenth century we come to the O ttom an period proper.
F or this period the O ttom an archives and sources throw a great deal more light on
the problem of mining in Asia M inor and in the Balkans as well. T hanks to the
publications of Anhegger, Gordlevsky, Refik, and others, quite a b it is known
about mining in the O ttom an Em pire, and it is now obvious th a t the mines con­
tinued to be active throughout this later period .46 In addition to the aforem en­
tioned mines in Anatolia, there were deposits of gold a t Artvini, and of copper,
lead, and iron in the valleys of the Chorokh and Oltis-Tsgali. Along the D ebeda
valley to the east of K ars were also deposits of gold, copper, lead, and a t A khtala
gold and silver .47 An interesting sidelight is the persistence of the mining skills and
traditions amongst the Greeks of Pontus (the descendents of the B yzantine in-,
h abitants of the area) down to the beginning of the tw entieth century. T he core
of these Greek miners lived to the south of Trebizond a t Gümüsh H ane (Argry-
opolis), and from tim e to tim e throughout the centuries of O ttom an rule they sent
out mining colonies to thè south as far as the T aurus a t Bulgar M aden. T hey also
sent mining colonies to the region of the Pyram is river, to the lead and silver
mines of K eban M aden on the E uphrates, and to the copper mines of Arghana
M aden in the vilayet of D iyarbekir .48 In the eighteenth century the Georgian
king Irakli brought in m any of these Greek miners to work the gold and sil­
ver mines a t A khtala .49
44 C h alcocon d yles, Historiarum Demonstration's, ed . E . D a r k o , i (B u d a p est, 1 9 2 2 -2 3 ), 1 7 3 -1 7 4 .
“ πρεσβείαν δέ πέμψας καί τάζόμενος ά,πά^είν φόρον την τον χαλκόν πρόσοδον, (δοκεί yàp. τούτο τό χωρίον των
κατά την Ασίαν φέρει μόνον, ών ημείς ϊσμεν, τόν χαλκόν).“ In th is la st particular C ha lco co n d y les is cer­
ta in ly m istak en . C ritobu lus, Historiae, ed . C . M ü ller in Fragmenta Historicorum Graecorum, v (P aris,
1870), 138, adds*' “ καί πολλοϊς εύθηνονμένη rots ôyadoïs, όσα φέρονσι ώραι καί yfj καί θάλασσα (τό μεγιστον
ό χαλκός εστι, os άφθονος όναρυττόμενος αϋτον yεωpyεlτaı, καί διαδ ιόμένος πανταχον της Ασίας τε καί Ευρώπης
καί διατιθέμενος), προσόδους μεyάλaς χρυσόν καί άργυρον παρέχει τοις b α ύτη ”
44a N e şr i, K itâb-i Cihan-nümâ, ed . F . R . U n a t, M . A . K ö y m e n , ιι (A nk ara 1 9 57), 576.

μυριάδες στατήρων ”
46 A nu m ber of d ocu m en ts d ealin g specifically w ith m in es in th e O tto m a n E m p ire w ere p u b lish ed
by A h m e t R efik , Osmanli Devrinde Türkiye M adenleri , 967-1200 (Ista n b u l, 1931). A n a rticle on
T u rk ish m in in g based to a great d egree on th ese d ocu m en ts b u t also b a sed on a w ider selection of
sources w as pu b lish ed b y V . G ord levsk y, “ 3KcnjioaTamia HeAP 3 eMjni B T y p r u m ,” CoBeTCKoe
Boe.TOKOBeAeHne., m (1945), 109-145. T h e first volu m e of w h at p rom ises to b e th e last w ord on
th e su b ject has app eared, R . A nhegger, Beiträge zur Geschichte des Bergbaus im osmanischen Deich ,
i: Europäische Türkei, i (Ista n b u l, 1943). T h is w ork is c ited hereafter m erely b y th e author’s name.
47 W . E . D . A llen , A History of the Georgian People (L on d on , 19 3 2 ), p p . 57, 59, 201.
48 R . M . D a w k in s, Modern Greek in A sia M inor (C am b ridge, E n g la n d , 19 1 6 ), p p . 6 - 8 . T h ere are
so m e v ery in terestin g com m en ts o n th e d escen d an ts of th ese m in ers a n d co m m u n ities in th e e a rly
n in etee n th cen tu ry in K y rillo s, *Ιστορική περνγραφή του εν Βιένη προεκδοθέντος χωpoypaφıκoΰ πίνακος
τής μεyάλης όρχισατραπίας Ίκονίον (C on stan tin op le, 1815), ρ ρ . 1 4 -1 5 , 2 3 , 55. H e records th a t so m e
of th ese m in in g com m u n ities h ad im m igrated from th e m in es of th e P o n tic region.
48 W. E. D. Allen, p. 201.
 VI
The Q u estion o f the B y za n tin e M in e s 11

T H E BALKANS
The references to mining in the Balkans during the Byzantine period are even
fewer than in the case of Asia M inor. Strabo mentions the presence of gold mines
a t D atum on the Strym on Gulf 60 and extensive gold mining a t Crenae near M t
I'ungaeus, as well as on M t Pangaeus and in the land of the Paeonians .51 Concern­
ing the famous silver mines of Laurion, he says th a t in his tim e these were already
exhausted .62 However, in the late Rom an period the Balkans were a very im por­
tan t source of m etals. A certain am ount, although not enough, is known about
these mining activities from the decrees and inscriptions addressed to the mining
officials and organizations. F or example, the “ comes metallorum per Illyricum ” is
mentioned in the fourth century, and an inscription m entions the “procurator
argentariarum per provincias Pannoniam et D alm atiam ,” and a “ collegium
auriarium .” 63
Two edicts in the Theodosian Code for the years 370 and 386 reflect certain
difficulties which the state was having w ith the mining industry. T he first of
these, addressed to Probus the praetorian prefect by the emperors Valentinian,
Valens, and G ratian reads:
Just as our Lord Valens commanded throughout all the Orient that if the miners with
vagrant wandering should there seek out the mineral gold, they should be kept away from
the property of all landholders, so Your Sincereity by edict should notify all provincials
throughout Illyricum and the Diocese of Macedonia that no person shall suppose that
on his own landholding any Thracians may be harboured any further, but that each
and every one of them shall be compelled rather to return to the land of his birth, whence
they are known to have come. Otherwise a grievous punishment shall be inflicted on that
person who furnishes hiding places to such men after the issuance of this interdict.64

There is no doubt th a t the invasions and attacks of the Goths increased the con­
fusion in the Balkans and cut down the ou tp u t of the mines. Ammianus Marcel-
linus reports th a t the T hracian miners, because of the excessive taxation, joined
the Gothic army.
Besides these there were not a few who were expert in following out veins of gold, and
who could no longer endure the heavy burden of taxes; these were welcome . . . and
rendered great services . . . as they wandered through strange places, by pointing out
hidden stores of grain, and the secret refuges of the inhabitants. With such guides nothing
that was not inaccessible and out of the way remained untouched.65

The edict of 386 which Em perors G ratian, V alentinian, and Theodosius addressed
to Eusignius, the praetorian prefect, further reflects the troubles and disruption
which the invasions had brought.
Since the procurators of the mines within Macedonia, Midland Dacia, Moesia, and

M S trab o, m , 854.
51 Strabo, III, 354 . “ Ό τι χλίΐστα μέταλλά έστι χρυσόν iv r a ïs Κρηνίσιν, δπου νυν ol Φ ίλιπποι π ό λ ıs ΙδρυταΙ,
πλη σίο ν του TLayyaLov Spovs' καί α ύτό Si τό TLayyaîov δρο$ χρυσεΐα και àpyvpela 2χ«ι μέταλλα καί ή π'εραν καί
ή İ vtös του Στρυμ&νος ποταμού μ έ χ ρ ι U aıovİas' φ ασί Si και τού s τή ν Παιoviav yrjv άροΰντας εύρίσκειν χρυσού
τιν α μόρια.”
“ S trab o, ν , 1 2 -1 3 . B u t th is does n o t seem to h a v e b een tru e, a t le a st for th e la ter period.
63 D a v ie s, Roman M ines , pp . 2, 7, 9.
M Pharr, p. 284, Cod. Theod.t x .1 9 .7 .
86 A m m ian u s M arcellin u s, ed . an d tr. J . C. R o lfe (C am b ridge, E n g la n d , 19 4 2 ), x x x i.6 .6 - 7 .
VI
The Q u estio n ofB y z a n tin e M in e s

D ardania, who are custom arily appointed from the decurions and who exact th e usual
tax collection, have rem oved them selves from th is com pulsory public service b y pre­
tending fear of the enem y, th ey shall be dragged back to the fulfillm ent of their d u ties.56

I t is obvious th a t the mining industry of certain areas in the Balkans was p ar­
tially disrupted. B ut it would be incorrect to claim th a t it was perm anently dis­
continued. F irst of all, the G oths left the area, and secondly, we have the decree of
424 (quoted above) which attem pts to prevent the miners from leaving their
homes to go elsewhere. I t would seem th a t scarcity of manpower and the difficult
n ature of the work were more im portant obstacles to a successful mining industry
a t this tim e than were the G othic invasions.
W here were the Balkan mines located? T he sources here are relatively ab u n ­
d an t for the period of the late Rom an Em pire, and for the th irteenth to the six­
teenth centuries for mediaeval Bosnia, Serbia, and the O ttom an Em pire. B u t the
period between the two is alm ost blank as far as records of mines or mining are
concerned.
The mining center of Illyricum in the R om an period seems to have been the
city of Vrbas in modern Bosnia. According to Pliny, the area produced fifty
pounds of gold daily .57 Silver was mined a t the sight of modern Srebrenica in
Bosnia, while iron and lead were also found in the area. An inscription of the
second century mentions a procurator of the silver mines of Pannonia and D al­
m atia who was stationed a t Srebrenica. These deposits continued to be exploited
system atically in the fourth century as is indicated by the appointm ent of a
comes metallorum in Illyricum .58
D acia, after it was opened up by T ra ja n ’s conquest, became a rich source of
metals for the empire. E vidently the mining centered in central and southern
Transylvania. Im m ediately upon the conquest T rajan settled the P irustae, who
had practiced mining in northern Albania, in the area of modern Rosia M ontana
(Verespatak) where there were im portant gold m ines .59 Gold was also m ined a t
Zalatna, R uda, and Boicza. John Lydus informs us th a t T rajan reconstituted
Rom an finances w ith gold from the province of D acia to the tune of 5,000,000
pounds of gold and 1 0 ,000,000 pounds of silver .60 T he figures are w ithout a doubt
exaggerated, b u t nevertheless are symbolic of the com parative wealth and im ­
portance of the D acian mines. Copper and iron, and probably silver and tin, were
also mined in the area. I t has been m aintained th a t as a result of the barbaric
invasions the mining industry here broke down between the second and fourth
centuries, and th a t mining was renewed only in the fourteenth and fifteenth cen­
turies w ith the appearance of the Saxon miners in the B alkans .61 This is an im por­
ta n t point and will be dealt w ith in a later section.
56 Ph arr, p . 35. Cod. Theod., 1.32.5.
67 P lin y , N atural H istory , ed. H . R a ck h a m (C am b ridge, E n g la n d , 19 4 2 ), x x x m .2 1 .6 7 . F o r a general
su rv ey of th e B a lk a n m in es see D a v ie s , Roman M ines , pp. 1 8 2 -2 6 7 .
58 D a v ie s, Roman M ines , pp . 1 8 2 -1 8 7 .
50 D a v ie s , Roman M ines , p. 201, feels th a t th ese m in es w ere d eserted as a resu lt of th e M a rco m a n n i
W ars. H ow ev er, G. T eg la s, “ Zur V erw altu n gsgesch ich te der röm isch en E isen b ergw erk e in D a k ie n ,”
K lio , i x (1909), 376, sh ow s th a t m in in g d id n o t cease after th ese w ars an d in v a sio n s.
60 Io a n n es L y d y s, De magistratibus.populi romani libri très, ed . R . W u en sch (L eip zig, 19 0 3 ), n .2 8 .
61 D a v ie s, Roman M ines , p. 206.
 VI
T he Q u estion o f the B y z a n tin e M in e s 13

Moesia was also productive from the point of view of the mining industry,
though we know fewer of the details here. The Theodosian code mentions procura-
tores metallorum of this district along w ith the other Balkan districts .62 I t has
also been asserted for this area th a t w ith the barbaric invasions all mining ac­
tivity ceased until the appearance of the Saxons in the thirteen th and four­
teenth centuries .63
M etals were mined in M acedonia, Thrace, and Greece as well during the period
of antiquity. T he sites of K ratovo and Osogov produced lead, gold, silver, and
copper, and Bozica produced iron .64 Above we noted the itinerant Thracian gold
washers in the Theodosian Code in A.D. 373. M ost of the stream s of the Rhodope
region were probably auriferous a t th a t tim e. In the peninsula of Chalcidice, the
later area of the M ademochoria, the m etals were mined extensively, as also a t the
rich fields of M t Pangaeus. A smaller am ount of the precious m etals was also ex­
tracted from the mines of eastern Thrace and the islands. In Greece there were
the mines of A ttica producing silver, lead, and iron, the copper mines of the
O thrys range, silver in the vicinity of Lake Ochrid, and copper in E uboea .65
From this rapid survey it is highly probable th a t the later R om an and early
Byzantine Em pires drew a considerable revenue and m etal supply from the mines
of th e Balkan area. L et us now examine the sources for the next thousand years
and see w hat is m entioned about this rath er extensive mining industry. I t has
been implied, by Davies in particular, th a t mining ceased in the Balkans as a re­
sult of the various invasions. And the relative silence of the sources would seem to
favor this view. L iterary references to the sources of B yzantium ’s m etals are ex­
trem ely rare. One such reference is in the sixth-century description of the church
of S t Sophia, in which Paul Silentiarius m entions silver from Pangaeus and Sou-
nion .66A certain num ber of place names from this period refer to mines, though it is
n o t possible to say w hether the mines were being worked a t the tim e th a t the
names are mentioned. Such are M etallus, Argentares, F erarria ,67 Sidera Chora ,68
and Siderocausa .69 M etallus has been identified with Boizica, which in later times
produced iron. Siderocausa is in the peninsula of the Chalcidice; it is the area later
called M ademochoria which flourished as a mining center in O ttom an times.
Davies has rejected Siderocausa as a genuine Byzantine place nam e on the
grounds th a t it is a combination of Greek and T urkish words, σίδηρος and

62 Cod. Theod., 1.82.5.

63 D a v ie s, Roman M ines , pp . 2 0 9 -2 1 0 .
61 D a v ie s, Roman M ines, pp. 2 2 7 -2 2 9 . H e asserts th a t th e y d id so o n ly under th e R o m a n s and
Saxon s.
85 D a v ie s, Roman M ines , p p . 267, 2 8 9 -2 5 1 . A gain , h e m a in ta in s th a t th e y w ere w orked in R o m a n
a n d T u rk ish tim es, b u t n o t, gen erally, b y th e B y za n tin e s.
86 P au lu s S ilen tiariu s, Descriptio S. Sophiae et Ambonis , ed . I . B ek k er (B o n n , 18 3 7 ), p . 33.
“ kvdabe HayyaioLO 'ράχis καί Σοννιάς άκρη
àpyvpkas ώϊξαν 6\as <p\eßas”
67 P rocop iu s, Buildings , ed . H . B . D e w in g a n d G. D o w n e y (C am b ridge, M a ssa c h u setts, 19 5 4 ),
iv . 4 ; i v .l l .
68 Z onaras, Annales , ed. B . N ieb u h r, i n (B on n , 1897), 889.
89 G. Sm yrn ak is, Τ ό "Αγιο»' Opos (A th en s, 1903), p . 25. B y th e tim e o f L eo V I, C h alcid ice w as called
Sid erocausa b ecau se of its m in es.
VI
14 T he Q u estio n o f the B y z a n tin e M in e s

kapusu, an imperfect translation of Demir kapusu ‘iron gate.* Therefore, since

this place name is a late one, it does not indicate the presence of mines in the area
in Byzantine times. However, there is no reason to doubt th a t Siderocausa is
tru ly a Byzantine place name, Σιδηρόκαυσα,70 and therefore probably refers to a
Byzantine mining center .709 In addition to these few references and place names,
a small am ount of archaeological evidence indicates th a t in some areas the older
R om an mines continued to function in Byzantine times. Davies has himself con­
cluded on the basis of this la tte r type of evidence th a t the Byzantines continued
to mine a t Siderocausa(!), Pangaeum , and further to the n o rth .71 He also refers to
the fact th a t gold was mined a t B aia-M ara in Transylvania in 1086.72 In Bulgaria
coin finds in the area of the mines and in one case inside the mines, a t Stara
Planına and Etropolje, from the period of Anastasius I to Isaac I I Angelus indi­
cate th a t possibly the mines were not completely abandoned .73 JireSek has m ain­
tained th a t the mining activities in the Balkans, though they m ay have dim in­
ished after the downfall of the Rom an Em pire in the W est, never completely dis­
appeared, and th a t there was a certain continuity in Balkan mining from late
an tiquity to the end of the M iddle Ages .74
References to Balkan mining reappear with increasing regularity from the
th irteen th century onwards, exactly the period in which non-Byzantine sources
begin to become more plentiful. These sources are in p a rt local, such as R agusan
archival m aterial and Bosnian documents, and partly western, such as Venetian
reports. This reappearance of m ining activities in the sources is probably to a cer­
tain extent connected w ith the establishm ent and expansion of the various
Balkan states and w ith the efforts of the local rulers to exploit the old and fam iliar
mines. From the end of the th irteen th and beginning of the fourteenth centuries
this flowering of the mining industry in the Balkans is accompanied by an exten­
sive colonization m ovement, a diaspora of Saxons, which placed them in all the
mining centers of the northern and central Balkans, in Bosnia, Serbia, and T ran ­
sylvania. T hey were followed by Ragusan capitalists and m etal craftsmen.
Two Bosnian docum ents of 1339 and 1426 state th a t gold and silver were being
exported by Bosnia, and the gold of Vrbas is once again m entioned in the fifteenth
century .75 In Serbia the presence of Saxon miners is first m entioned under Stephen
70 D a v ie s, R o m a n M in es, p. 233, n . 5. E v e n th e T u rk ish sp ellin g in th e O tto m a n d o cu m en ts
p u b lish ed b y A h m et R efik testifies to th is. H ere th e n am e app ears a s Sidre K a p si, n o t as Sidre
K a p u su .
70a See the Athonite documents in F. Dölger, A us den Schatzkammern des heiligen Berges (Munich,
19 48), p. 338, where the name appears during the Byzantine period.
71 D a v ie s, Roman M ines , p. 234.
72 Davies, Roman M ines , p. 198. H e lists his source as Maclaren, Goldt a work which, unfortunately,
was not available to me.
73 D a v ie s, Roman M ines , p . 244. C . Jirecek, “ A rch äologisch e F ra g m en te aus B u lg a rien ,” Archäo­
logisch-epigraphische M itteilungen aus Österreich-Ungarn , x (1 8 8 6 ), 7 5 -8 5 .
74 A s p o in ted o u t ab o v e, T eg la s confirm s th a t th e M arcom an n i W ars d id n o t p u t a n en d to D a c ia n
m in in g. T h e T h eo d o sia n C ode im p lies th a t in th e years 386 an d 4 24 m in in g w as b ein g carried on in
sp ite of in vasion s. I t is to o e a sy to a ttrib u te to th e in vasion s ev er y th in g th a t is c o n v e n ie n t for th e
historian .
76 C . Jirecek, Bergwerke, p . 42. For a d etailed an alysis of th e R a g u sa n arch ives on th e su b ject of
m in in g see pp . 4 8 -5 8 of th is w ork.
 VI
T he Q u estio n o f the B y z a n tin e M in e s 15

Urosh 11 M iliutin (1282-1320). I t seems th a t the Serbs were actively engaged in

mining a t Kopaonik in the tw elfth century. K opaonik and Novo Brdo came to be
the chief centers of Serbian mining activity (they produced m ostly silver and
iron). T he French monk Brocard reported, perhaps with some exaggeration, th a t
in 1332 the Serbian king had five gold mines, five silver mines, and one mine
which produced both silver and gold .76 Exports of gold to the coastal city of
llagusa are mentioned as early as 1253.77 Novo Brdo by the fourteenth century
was producing both silver and gold in appreciable quantities, and after the b attle
of Kossovo in 1389 the sources report th a t Bayazid I acquired considerable reve­
nue from the Serbian m ines .78 The Frenchm an B ertrandon de la Brocquière m en­
tions th a t the income of these mines in 1433 am ounted to 200,000 ducats annu­
ally .79 W hen M ehm ed I I took the city in the middle of the fifteenth century it was
still an im portant source of revenue, and though he enslaved m uch of the popula­
tion and led it away, he allowed the miners to remain so th a t the mines would con­
tinue to produce .80
As has been indicated above, a great deal of the m etal from the Balkan mines
in Bosnia and Serbia made its way to the D alm atian port of R agusa .81 In addition
to gold, quantities of lead, copper, and iron from Olovo, Srbrnica, and R udnik
made their way to Ragusa. After the O ttom an conquest, of course, the flow of the
m etals was diverted to the capital city on the Golden Horn.
W ith the establishm ent of O ttom an control in the Balkan area, references to
the mining industry become even more numerous in the fifteenth century. The
Genoese Iacopo de Prom ontorio, who visited the O ttom an Em pire in 1475, only
tw enty-tw o years after the fall of Constantinople, mentions a num ber of mines in
the Balkans: “ Caue, id est minere d ’ariento existente in Ceruia, Novo Brodo, in
Boxino, Zelebrinaza, C ratauo, Pristina, Ceres, Salonichi, Sophia .” 82 Thus the
O ttom an conquest brought no disruption to the m ajor Balkan mining centers.
The appearance of Thessalonike in this list of the Genoese m erchant no doubt re­
fers to the mines of Siderocausa-M ademochoria in the nearby vicinity, which, as

76 Jireèek, Bergwerke, p. 43. H e im p lies th a t th e a n cien t m in in g tra d itio n had n o t d ied out.
77 Jirecek, Bergewerke, p . 47. M o st of it p rob ab ly cam e from N o v o B rd o a n d B o sn ia .
78 Jirecek, Bergwerke, p . 47. C ritobu lus, 110. “ άφικνεϊται ές πόλιν έχυράν και εύδαίμονα Ν οβόπροδον
οΰτω καλουμένην . . . ον δή καί πλεϊστος άργυρόΐ καί χρυσός γεωργεϊται άναρυττόμενος.” D u c a s, Historia
Byzantina, ed. I. B ek k er (B on n , 1834), p. 17. “ . . . καί àpyvpod τάλαντα Ικανά έκ των μετάλλων Σερβίας”
D u ca s, ρ. 208, records a con versation in w h ich th e m in ister of M urad I I is su p p o sed t o h a v e ad v ised
him to tak e th e c ity of N o v o B rd o for th e follow in g reason. “ αρωμεν άπ' αύτοϋ τάς iryyàs ταs άειζώονς
τά s βρυούσας ως ΰδωρ άένναοντόν apyvpov καί τον χρυσόν, καί συναντάς (sic) κερδησομεν Ο hyyplav και επέκεινα
'Ιταλίας φθάσομεν, ταττεινώσαντες τούς εχθρούς της ημετέρας πίστεως.”
79 A nhegger, ρ . 156. B ertran d on d e la B rocqu ière, Voyage d'outremer de Bertrandon de la Broc­
quière, ed . C. Sh efer (P aris, 1892), p. 214. “ E t e n c este v ille a m in e d ’or e t d ’argen t to u t en sem b le, e t en
tire to u s les ans p lu s de I I e m ille d u catz, e t se n ’e sto it cela, je tien s q u ’ils fu st ores ch acie hors d e
son p a y s de R a sc ie .”
80 C halcocon d yles, II, 177. (<μοίραν riva àirayayùv ές Ανδραποδισμόν, τούς άλλους φκισεν αύτον κατα-
λιπών διά την μετάλλου kpyaaiav, ην μάλιστα δη των ταύτη χωρίων έπιστάμενοι krvyχάνον. πρόσοδος δέ
αυτή ούκ 'ελάχιστη τού βασιλέως άπό των ενταύθα μετάλλων της πόλεως τούτης.”
81 Jireèek, Bergwerke, ρ . 48. M in in g on a sm aller scale seem s to h a v e b een carried on b y th e
V en etian s an d oth ers in Seriphos, C rete, an d th e M orea. D a v ie s, Roman M ines, p. 254.
82 F . B ab in ger, p . 64.
VI
16 The Q u estio n o f the B y z a n tin e M in e s

we noticed above, continued to function in B yzantine times. I t is of interest to

note th a t these mines a t Siderocausa were of considerable extent in the sixteenth
century, the earliest date a t which we have a detailed description of them . Ac­
cording to the French traveller Pierre Belon, who visited the mines in the six­
teenth century, they employed 6,000 men, possessed 500-600 furnaces, and the
m onthly revenues of the mines ranged from 18,000-30,000 ducats.83 In this period
the ancient mines of Pravion on M t Pangaeum continued to yield silver, lead,
and gold, while even a t Sounion a small quantity of silver was being produced.84

C O N C L U S IO N S

1 . T he m ethod which has been pursued in this short note is the following. The
references to mines w ithin the area of Asia M inor, the Balkans, and Cyprus have
been gathered and grouped in three separate chronological groups. T he first
chronological group begins w ith Strabo in the first century A.D. and comes down
to the fourth century, the period of the founding of the Byzantine Em pire. The
second chronological group begins here and comes down roughly to the th ir­
teenth-fourteenth centuries. The third chronological group, overlapping the second
somewhat, begins w ith the expansion of the Balkan states and appearance of the
M uslim T urks in Asia M inor.
2. T he sources of the first group, i.e., of the late Rom an Em pire, indicate th a t
the mines of the Balkans, Asia M inor, and Cyprus were very im portant and pro­
duced considerable gold, silver, copper, iron, and lead.
3. T he sources of the second group, i.e., the B yzantine group proper, produce
far smaller numbers of references to mining activity. In fact one is struck by the
paucity of the references. Y et they do indicate th a t gold, silver, copper, iron, and
lead were being produced in Asia M inor and th a t mining continued in th e B al­
kans.
4. T he third group, covering the thirteenth to the sixteenth centuries, is more
rewarding th an either of the first two groups. We see here a great deal of mining
activity both in the Balkans and Asia M inor. W hereas silver, copper, and iron
seem to have been the principal metals mined in Asia M inor, all these and lead
and gold as well were being m ined in the Balkans.
5. Now the problem remains of explaining the com parative silence of th e
second group of sources, those which we m ay roughly equate w ith the m ost im ­
p o rtan t period of Byzantine history. One explanation of the sources’ com parative
silence is th a t the Arab invasions cut Byzantium off from those lands in the east
which produced the metals, while the Germanic and Slavic invasions in the

83 A nhegger, i, 182 , 197 , 204 . D . Z acyn th in os, “L a com m u n e grecq u e,” VHeüenisme contemporain,
I I ( 1948 ), 807 . P. B elo n , Les observations de plusieurs singularitez mémorables (P aris, 1538 ), p. 10 2 :
“ L es m in ieres d e Sid erocapsa ren d en t u n e m o u lt grande som m e d ’or & d ’argen t a l ’E m p ereu r.” See
a lso pp . 116 - 117 . On pp. 125-126 h e n o tes th a t silver is b ein g m in ed o n M t. P a n g a eu s an d th a t silver,
lea d , a n d a little gold are b ein g m in ed in th e v ic in ity of P h ilip p i. I n reference to th e great p r o d u ctiv ity
of S id erocapse he sta te s th a t th e m in ers are forced to w ork sev en d a y s a w eek w ith o u t p au se.
84 Anhegger, i, 204 - 205 .
 The Q u estio n o f the B y z a n tin e M in e s 17

Balkans performed the same function in th a t area. As a result B yzantium had no

access to mines and therefore they do not appear in the sources.85
A second explanation, which seems more plausible, is th a t the Byzantine
sources simply do not m ention this type of ordinary or common m atter. M ost of
the historical sources and narratives are Constantinople-centered, and, in contrast
to the M uslim sources, we have very little in the way of histories and geographies
of the provinces. F ortunately the eastern sources, in contrast to the contem ­
porary Byzantine sources, give us sufficient information for Asia M inor to show
th a t the Byzantines did in fact have access to m etals and mines. And those
Muslim geographers and historians of the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries who
devoted special sections of their works to A natolia did in fact observe th a t there
was active mining in the area. I t would indeed be strange th a t the conservative
Byzantines w ith all their inherited technical skills — the Muslims professed such
an adm iration for the technical skills of the R um th a t they could only compare
them with the technical skills of the Chinese — should have perm itted the prac­
tice and science of mining to fall into disuse. The generalization above holds true
also for the Balkan area. W hat scant archaeological and source m aterials exist for
the Byzantine period seem to indicate th a t some of the mines were functioning.
In addition, the Byzantines continued to exercise political au th o rity for con­
siderable lengths of time in certain areas of the Balkans where a num ber of these
mines were located. And when the non-Byzantine sources of the th irteen th and
fourteenth centuries become relatively plentiful, the mining industry appears to
be an active one. Now it is a perfectly logical argum ent th a t the rise of the local
kingdoms and the appearance of the Saxon miners gave im petus to a greater de­
velopment of the mining industry, b u t it does no t m ean th a t mining did not exist
in the area before their appearance. Even this phenomenon of the greater mining
activity of the thirteenth-fourteenth centuries would make more sense if, as
Jirefcek states, the Slavs never completely broke the continuity with late Rom an
m ining traditions and practices. In addition, the mining sites of th e th irteen th
to the sixteenth centuries both in Asia M inor and the Balkans were more or less
the same as those in late antiquity.
I t is obvious, then, th a t gold, silver, copper, iron, and lead were available to the
Byzantines on their own soil and in the neighboring lands, in mines which prob­
ably continued to function from antiquity down into O ttom an times. T hus the
Byzantines were not altogether dependent on trade or a favorable balance of
trade for these metals. Given the sparse nature of the sources, it is impossible to
say much about the quantity in which the m etals were produced. B ut they cer­
tainly m ust have been im portant for B yzantium ’s coinage and manufactures.
U n iv e r s it y o f C a l if o r n ia

Los Angeles
86 F . Heichelheim, Wirtschaftsgeschichte des Altertums, i (London, 1938 ), 833 , is of the opinion
th a t th e invasions never broke the continuity of mining activity in the Balkans.
 V II

A N A T T IC HOARD OF B Y Z A N T IN E GOLD C O IN S (668— 741)

F R O M T H E T H O M A S W H IT T E M O R E C O L L E C T IO N A N D T H E
N U M IS M A T IC E V ID E N C E F O R T H E U R B A N H IS T O R Y
O F B Y Z A N T IU M *

T h e subject o f th is article is a h o ard o f fifty-one gold coins fro m

A ttica, th e contents o f w hich range from th e reign o f C onstantine IV
th ro u g h th a t o f L eo I I I . T h is find, w hich includes forty-seven solidi,
th re e sem issus pieces, and one trem issus, is one o f tw o contained in th e
T h o m as W h ittem o re C ollection o f B yzantine coins in th e Fogg M u seu m
a t H a rv a rd U n iv ersity *1. T h e coins are for th e m ost p a rt in m in t condition
an d rep resen t issues o f eight em perors and nine reigns.
T h is h o ard is o f p articu lar in terest inasm uch as th e n um ism atic
evidence has been increasingly considered and discussed and variously
in te rp re te d , o f late, in th e histo ry o f A thens and o f G reece in B yzantine
tim es, as well as in th e question o f B yzantine u rb a n h isto ry as a whole.
A considerable p o rtio n o f th e discussion on th is subject has centered
a b o u t A thens and C o rin th inasm uch as it is fro m th e excavation results
in these tw o cities th a t th e m ost a b u n d an t num ism atic in fo rm atio n is
available. T h e n um ism atic basis fo r th e discussion o f th e h isto ry o f
m edieval A thens has been th e num ism atic m aterial u n earth ed d u rin g th e
course o f th e excavations by th e A m erican School. O f th e 37.090 coins
in th e publication o f M . T h o m p so n , stretch in g fro m th e last century o f
th e R om an R ep u b lic to th e declining years o f th e V enetian R ep u b lic,
only one gold piece was found and th a t a late V enetian one2. T h u s all
th e discussions on th e num ism atic evidence fo r th e early m edieval h isto ry
o f A thens have centered a b o u t b ro n ze coins and b ro n ze coins alone. H e re
is th e analysis o f th e coins fin d s, as th ey ap p ear in T h o m p so n ’s publication,
b y reign and by ratio o f nu m b er o f coins p e r year o f each reign.

* I w ish to thank Prof. John Coolidge o f the F ogg M useum for kindly granting m e
perm ission to publish the hoard.
1 A . Bellinger, ,,A Hoard o f Silver Coins o f the Em pire o f N icaea,“ Centennial
Publication o f the Am erican Numismatic Society (N ew York, 1958), pp. 73— 81.
2 M . T h om p son , The Athenian A gora, II Coins (Princeton, 1954), p. 5, passim.

*19
VII
2 92

Years N u m ber o f coins Ratio

Justin II 565— 78 172 13.20
T iberius I 578— 82 20 5.00
M aurice 582— 02 25 1.45
Phocas 602— 10 48 6.00
Heraclius 610— 41 232 7.48
Constans II 641— 68 817 30.25
Constantine IV 668— 85 30 1.76
Justinian II 1st 685— 95 1 0.10
Leontius 695— 98 0 0.00
T iberius II 698— 705 1 0.14
Justinian II 2nd 705— 11 6 1.00
Philippicus 711— 13 61 30.50
Anastasius II 713— 15 4 2.00
T heodosius III 715— 17 0 0.00
L eo III 717— 41 23 0.95
Constantine V 741— 75 2 0.06
L eo IV 775— 80 1 0.20
Constantine V I 780— 97 1 0.06
Irene 797— 802 1 0.20
N icephorus I 802— 11 0 0.00
Stauracius 811 0 0.00
M ichael I 811— 13 0 0.00
L eo V 813— 20 1 0.14
M ichael II 820— 29 2 0.22
T heophilus 829— 42 4 0.30

I t has been suggested b y som e scholars th a t th is evidence, w hen

com pared w ith sim ilar evidence fro m C o rin th , w hich also displays a ra rity
o f coins fro m th e im m ediate successor o f C onstans I I th ro u g h th e eig h th
cen tu ry , points to a break in relations betw een A thens and C o rin th on
th e one h an d and w ith C onstantinople on th e o th er. H ow ever P. C h aran is
was able to show th e e rro r o f th is conclusion f ir s t b y th e in tern al incon-
sistancies o f th e num ism atic evidence itself, an d also b y th e testim o n ty
o f th e h istorical sources w hich show ed definitely th a t A thens d u rin g th is
tim e was n o t lost to th e B yzantines3. A n o th er scholar, A. K azh d an , has
exam ined th e n um ism atic m aterial fro m th e p o in t o f view o f th e co n tin u ity ,
o r lack o f con tin u ity , o f u rb a n trad itio n s and m oney econom y in th e
B yzantine E m p ire d u rin g th e late seventh, e ig h th , an d early n in th cen tu ­
ries. In an earlier study he had utilized th e catalogues o f W ro th an d T o lsto y
as in dicative o f th e volum e o f cu rrency stru ck b y each em peror. O n th e basis
o f such com pilations, w hich show ed a m arked decrease in th e n u m b e r
o f coins o f th e seventh c e n tu ry , he concluded th a t th e re was a co rres­
p o n d in g u rb a n decline. H e adds th a t th e coin fin d s fro m th e excavations
at C o rin th , A thens, P ergam um , Sardes, and P rien e display a sim ilar
decrease in n u m b e r fro m th e late seventh and eig h th centuries. So m u ch
th en fo r th e conclusions w hich K azhdan drew fro m th e n u m ism atic

3 P. Charanis, „T h e Significance o f Coins as E vidence for the H istory o f A th en

and Corinth in the Seventh and E ighth C enturies,“ H istoria, IV (1955), 163— 172.
 VII
Λη Attic Hoard of Byzantine Gold Coins (668=—741 ) 293

evidence: a m arked u rb a n an d econom ic decline in th e sev en th -n in th

centuries4.
T h e m ethodology o f K azhdan, h as, however, d raw n sh arp criticism
on tw o grounds. F irst, O strogorsky has observed th a t th e coin finds in
G reece and Asia M in o r, as well as th e m aterial fro m W ro th an d T olstoy,
consist very largely o f bronze coinage. T h is was com pletely th e case o f
th e coins fro m th e A thenian A gora a n d also o f th e C o rin th ian coins fro m
th e period u n d er discussion. T h e re fo re all th at can b e concluded fro m
th is evidence is th a t beginning w ith th e m id-seventh c e n tu ry th e re was
a drastic red u ctio n in th e b ro n ze coinage, b u t n o t necessarily in th e gold
coinage. A really significant analysis o f th e coinage, O strogorsky w ent on
to p o in t out, should consider th e gold issues separately fro m those in
b ronze, fo r it is th e gold coinage w hich was m o re im p o rta n t in th e q ue­
stion o f u rb a n co n tin u ity and com m ercial activity56*. G rierso n m ad e a second
o bservation concerning th e analysis o f collection catalogues. T h ese cata­
logues do n o t reflect th e volum e o f coin m in ted , b u t ra th e r th e taste o f
th e collectors o f coins8.
I t is a t th is p o in t th a t th e h o a rd o f fifty-one B yzantine gold coins
fro m th e W h ittem o re C ollection should be considered an d com pared w ith
those fro m th e A gora.

Constantine IV T rem issus BM C # 2 0 , pi. 36— 6 1

Justinian II 1st reign Solidus BM C # 1 0 , pi. 38— 6 1
BM C # 1 4 , pi. 38— 6 1
BM C # 1 8 , pi. 38— 17 2
L eontius Solidus BM C #1, Pi- 42— 7 2
T iberius II Solidus BM C #4, pi. 40— 8 3
Justinian II 2nd reign Solidus BM C #2, pi. 41— 2 2
Solidus BM C #2, var ., T olst. 5 5
Sem issus BM C #3, pi. 41— 3 1
Philippicus Solidus BM C #2, pi. 41— 11 3
Anastasius II Solidus BM C #2, pi. 41— 15 6
Sem issus BM C #9, P i­ 41— 16 1
T heodosius II I Solidus Sab #2, pi. 38— 23 1
L eo III Solidus BM C #7, pi- 42— 9 7
L eo II I w ith Constantine V BM C # 1 2 , pi- 42— 10 8
BM C # 1 2 , var. T o lst. 56 6
L eo III Sem issus BM C # 1 6 , variation o f pi.
42— 11, Rev. w ith cross as in # 1 5 , unpublished 1

51

4 A. P. K azhdan, „BH3aHTHHCKHe ropo/ja b V II— X I b b “ , CoeetucKan apxeodoeun,

X X I (1954), 164— 18S. H e has repeated these argum ents, w ith slight variations, in
JHepeenn u eopod e B m anm uu I X —X m (M oscow , 1960), pp. 260— 270. D . M . M etcalf,
“T h e Byzantine E m pire,“ Congresso internazionale de numismatica, I, R elazioni (Rom e, 1961),
240, has also remarked that the bronze coinage o f this period needs to be interpretated
against the background o f econom ic decline.
8 G . Ostrogorsky, „Byzantine Cities in the Early M iddle A ges,“ Dumbarton Oaks
Papers, X I I I (1959), 48— 52.
6 P. G rierson, „Coinage and M oney in the Byzantine Em pire 498-c. 1090,“ S e tti-
mane d i studio del Centro d i studi sulVAlto E vo, V I II, M oneta e scambi nelV A lto M edievo
(Sp oleto, 1961), 445— 446.
VII
294

W hat is to b e concluded fro m th is hoard? I t is very difficult to

say except th a t perhaps th e com plexity 2 nd u n certain ty o f n u m ism atic
evidence produces m ore difficulties th a n solutions. O ne th in g is, how ever,
p articu larly noticeable. T h e dates o f th e h o ard span 668— 741, exactly
th e p erio d in w hich th e b ro n ze issues decrease so m arkedly. So th is gold
h o ard w hould ten d to suggest an d to reinforce fu rth e r th e p ro p o sitio n o f
O strogorsky, th a t th e decline o f th e bronze o u tp u t after C onstans I I
reflects, p erhaps, nothing m ore th a n a change in m onetary policy and n o t
an u r b in , econom ic decline o f A thens. In line w ith th is th o u g h t is th e
fact th a t th e A gora excavations u n earth ed only tw e n ty -th ree b ro n ze coins
fo r th e reign o f Leo I I I Whereas th e h o ard contained tw enty-tw o gold
coins fro m th e reign o f th e sam e em peror. T h e existence o f th is h o ard
calls into question th e validity o f th e n um ism atic evidence u n covered in
system atic archaeological w ork in G reece and elsew here. F o r th o u g h th e
archaeological evidence revealed sm all q uantities o f b ro n ze coins fro m th e
p erio d , th e existence o f a h oard o f Byzantine gold coins tends to co n ­
tra d ic t th e conclusions fro m th e analysis o f th e b ro n ze finds o f th e
archaeologists. F u rth e r, th is type o f num ism atic evidence is subject to
such a variety o f ’contam inating’ factors th a t to accept it in such w hole
h earted fashion as has done K azhdan is risky a t very best. W h at has
su rv ived o f B yzantine coinage is u n d o u b ted ly only a very sm all fractio n .
So m any centuries have elapsed since th is coinage was stru ck th a t th e
o p p o rtu n ities fo r d istu rb a n c e o f th e evidence have been infinite. A nyone
w ho has read th e accounts o f th e travellers in th e O tto m an E m p ire cannot
b u t have been struck by th e n u m b e r and avidity o f coin collectors fro m
w estern E u ro p e w ho freq u en ted th e bazaars o f In sta n b u l and o f all th e
prov incial tow ns o f R um eli an d A nadolu. A m ongst th e m ost fam ous o f
such collectors w ere th e A u strian de Busbecq (16 th c.) and th e E nglishm en
R icaut (17 th c.) and Leake (19 th c.). In ad d itio n all th e m ajor com ­
m ercial centers have been in h ab ited w ithout in te rrru p tio n to th e p resen t
day so th a t m uch o f th is m oney rem ained in use fo r centuries. T h e
n u m b e r o f coins w hich m u st have been fo und an d dispersed d u rin g th e
course o f these several centuries is exceedingly great. T h e re are m any
o th e r facto rs w hich have d istu rb e d th e reliability o f th e n u m ism atic
m aterial. O ne w hich I m yself know fro m personal experience in th ese
p a rts o f th e w orld is th e follow ing. L arge finds o f coins w hich are su p ­
posedly ra re endanger th e interests o f th e coin dealers. T h u s , on one
occasion a dealer inform ed m e th a t as a result o f a very large fin d o f
solidi fo rm erly th o u g h t to have been rare, he b o u g h t th em 2 nd m elted
th e m dow n fo r th e gold. T o have p u t th em on th e m ark et w ould have
d riv en th e prices o f th e solidi o f th a t p a rtic u la r em p ero r so low th a t he
w ould have lost money! I n th is instance th e dealer was aiding an d ab et­
tin g th e fiction o f th e ra rity o f issues stru ck by a p a rtic u la r em peror.
T h a t th is phenom enon is n o t restricted to p resen t tim es o r to th e gold
coinage is recorded b y o u r sixteenth century frien d de B usbecq. D u rin g
his journey fro m Ista n b u l to A m aseia he rem arks:
„W e found everywhere a great abundance o f ancient coins, especially o f the later
em perors, C onstantine, C onstans, Justinus, Valens, Valentinianus, N um erianus, Probus*
 VI
An Attic Hoard of Byzantine Gold Coins (668— 741) 295

T acitus &c. In many places the Turks use them as weights, especially for drachms and half­
drachm s, and call them giaur manguri, or ’infidels m oney’. T here were also m any coins
o f the neighboring towns o f Asia, A m isus, Sinope, Comana, Am astris, and also o f Amasia,
the goal o f our journey. A C oppersm ith, from w hom I inquired for coins, greatly aroused m y
wrath by telling m e that, a few days before, he had a whole jarful o f them and had made
som e bronze vessels out o f them , thinking that they were o f no use or value. I was very
m uch grieved at the loss o f all these relics o f antiquity; but I avenged m yself by telling
the man that, if he had still h$d them I w ould have paid a hundred gold pieces. I thus
sent him away quite as saddened at so m uch profit having been snatched from his very
grasp as I was annoyed at his destruction o f ancient rem ains...“7

T h u s w hat we have o f th e original Byzantine coinage is only a very

sm all p ro p o rtio n w hich has survived by chance. A n d th e re is no way
by w hich we can determ ine th a t th e percentage w hich has survived fro m
th e o u tp u t o f each em peror is com pletely determ ined by th e actual o u tp u t
itse lf ra th e r th a n by o th e r factors. T h e fact th a t one chance fin d , such
as th a t in th e W h ittem o re C ollection, can change th e su m to tal o f gold
coins from a p a rtic u la r p e rio d so greatly is p ro o f o f th e above statem ent.
O n th e basis o f th e publications o f M oser, Pachom ov, and G erasim ov
only 254 gold coins have been uncovered in ho ard s an d archaeological
excavations fro m th e p erio d 685— 8428. F ro m th e W h ittem o re h o ard fifty
o f th e coins are from th is sam e general p erio d th u s raising th e to tal o f
gold coins to 304, or alm ost 2 0 % . O bviously th is type o f evidence is n o t
w o rth y o f o u r credence. T h e fu rth e r u nreliab ility an d chance character
o f th e n u m ism atic evidence as a reflection o f u rb a n and econom ic vitality
is reflected in th e figures fo r gold coins in A ttica in th e periods 685— 842
an d 842— 1204. In M o sser’s com pilation th e only reco rd o f gold coins
fo u n d in A ttica d u rin g these tw o p erio d s was a b u ria l o f ten solidi fro m
th e reign o f Jo h n I I C om nenus (1118— 1İ43)9. T h is coincided w ith
K azh d an ’s th eo ry th a t th ere was d rastic u rb a n decline in th e late seventh
th ro u g h th e early n in th cen tu ry , an d th en an econom ic and u rb a n revival
in th e follow ing period. B ut i f we are to adopt his reasoning in th e light
o f th is new er h o a rd (viz. th a t econom ic activity and u rb a n vitality are
reflected in th e ’ab undance’ o f m oney), th en we w ould have to ad m it th e
opposite conclusion, nam ely th a t because o f th e fifty gold coins fro m th e
W h ittem o re h o ard , A thens was a m ore th riv in g u rb a n center d u rin g th e
p erio d 685— 842 th a n d u rin g th e p erio d 842— 1204. O ne is forced to
a d m it th e inconclusive and unsatisfactory n a tu re o f th e num ism atic
evidence.

7 D e B usbecq, The Turkish Letters o f Ogier Ghiselin de Busbecq, tr. E. S. Forster

(O xford, 1927), p. 49. H e remarks that from the tim e he reached Belgrade and throughout
his journey to Am aseia he and his friend, W illiam Q uacquelben, sought after coins passio­
nately.- „It gave m e great pleasure, on arriving at each halting-place, to inquire for ancient
inscriptions and G reek and Rom an coins, or failing these, for rare plants.“ p. 48. P. Ricaut>
The Present S ta te o f the Greek and Arm enian Churches (L ondon, 1679), p. 37, notes the
finding o f a „Bushel o f M edals“ o f the emperor Galerius in the ancient theatre o f Smyrna
during his stay in Smyrna (1675), „ ...o f w hich I m yself purchased som e.“
8 K azhdan, op. cit.3 p. 269.
8 S. M osser, A Bibliography of B yzan tin e Coin H oards (N ew York, 1935), p. 8.
νπ
296

H aving indicated th e unreliable and unsatisfactory n a tu re o f th e

n u m ism atic evidence as a source fo r B yzantine u rb a n h isto ry , let us take
a b rie f look at K azhdan’s th e o ry on B yzantine u rb a n h isto ry . I n M a rx ist
th eo ry societies m ust progress th ro u g h th e following socio-econom ic
phases ; slavery, feudalism , capitalism and socialism . A ccording to K azh d an ,
w ith th e decline o f slave p ro d u ctio n in th e early B yzantine p erio d , th e
cities also declined. T h erefo re in 7— 9 th centuries (the p erio d o f tra n sitio n
fro m th e era o f slave-based to a feudal society) cities and tow ns disap­
p e a re d 10. T h a t this was so, K azhdan argues, is ap p aren t fro m tw o facts:
(1) A decline in th e n u m b e r o f coins o f th is era in th e excavations an d
coin hoards. As an ’ab undance’ o f coined m oney indicates econom ic v ita­
lity (w hat o f R om an coinage in th e th ird cen tu ry A. D .?) so its decrease
is indicative o f econom ic stagnation11. (2) T h e re w ere n eith er m erch an ts
n o r craftsm en n o r tra d e in th e provinces d u rin g th is p e rio d , th erefo re
th e re could b e no cities12-
As we have already com m ented on his in te rp re ta tio n o f th e n u m i­
sm atic evidence let us p ro ceed to th e second p o in t, th e alleged absence
o f m erch an ts, craftsm en and trad e. K azhdan is in a sense a rg u in g ex
silentio, for th e sources tell us very little a b o u t th e social an d econom ic
life o f B yzantium in th e p e rio d o f th e late seventh to th e n in th cen tu ries.
B ut even th e little w hich th e sources re p o rt is indicative o f th e fact
th a t b o th m erchants an d craftsm en , as w ell as tra d e , w ere p re se n t, an d
also th a t a m oney econom y based on gold played an im p o rta n t p a r t in
th e provincial life o f th e em pire.
T h e re is th e well know n passage in T heophan es in fo rm in g us th a t C on­
stantine V b ro u g h t 6,900 artisans and craftsm en fro m w estern A sia M in o r,
n o rth e rn Asia M in o r, G reece, T h ra c e , an d th e islands to C onstantinople to
assist in p u b lic b u ild in g projects13. N aucleroi an d m erch an t ships are m en ti­
oned in great profusion along th e shores o f w estern Asia M in o r14. C u rio u sly
K azhdan is w illing to a d m it th a t d u rin g th e 7— 9 th centuries th e m in tin g
o f gold d id n o t decrease significantly. B u t, he co n tin u es, gold was no
longer used for com m ercial exchange, ra th e r it w as used fo r th e p ay m en t

10 In conjunction w ith this theory Kazhdan remarks that after the nin th century
new cities began to appear. O ne o f the few such „new cities“ w hich he identifies specifi­
cally is the Anatolian city o f Phygella on the Aegean coast, Kazhdan. loc. cit., 184. O nce
m ore, how ever, K azhdan is indulging in conjecture. T h is „new city“ o f Phygella w as,
in effect, not a product o f this supposed founding o f „new cities“ in the 9— 10th centuries.
T h e eight century L atin pilgrim , W illibaldus, visited it betw een 723— 726 and remarked
o f P hygella, „...villam m agnam .“ Hodiporicon S . W illibaldi, Itinera H ierosolym itana et
Descriptiones Terrae Sanctae, ed. T . T obler and A. M oliner, P (1880), 256.
11 Kazhdan, op. cit., pp. 261, 267.
12 K azhdan, loc. cit., 188 ff.
13 Theophanes, Chronographia, ed. C. de Boor (L eip zig, 1883), I, 440.
14 Theophanes, 487; T heophanes Continuatus, 385. H . G régoire, Recueil des inscrip­
tions grecques chrétiennes d'A sie M ineure, I (Paris, 1922), 91, 127, lists the tom bstones o f an
eighth century marble worker from Tralles and o f a seventh-eighth century butcher from
'‘Caria. T h e activity o f m erchants from Am astris in T reb izond is m entioned during the
n in th century, Vasilievsky, TpyAM, H I (Petrograd, 1915), 43—4 7 .
 VII
An Auk I lourd of Byzantine Gold Coins (668—741) 297

o f trib u te and for h o a rd in g 1516. In actual fact there seems to b e no evidence

in su p p o rt o f th is conjecture. W hat little evidence th ere is p o in ts in th e
opposite d irection, nam ely th a t gold coins continued to serve as a m edium
o f exchange in tra d e and com m erce. I n th e reign o f C onstantine V I th e
com m ercial fair o f E phesus n etted th e governm ent 100 p o u n d s in gold
coin16. A nother chance rem ark inform s us th a t one ceru lariu s accum ulated
100 pou n d s o f gold from th e incom e o f his craft in th e reign o f N i-
cep h orus I 17.
T h e legal lite ra tu re o f th is period reflects a society w ith a m oney
econom y an d a m erch an t class. M any o f th e provisions o f th e codes
w ould be m eaningless in an econom y n o t based on m oney. T h e F a rm e r's
L aw (usually dated a t th e end o f th e seventh o r early eig h th century),
th o u g h essentially concerned w ith ru ra l society, shows th a t b o th farm
lab o r an d shepherds w ere p a id in cash18. N o t only do farm lab o rers and
shep herds receive cash fo r th e ir services, b u t b o th are liable to paym ents
o f cash fines in case o f violation o f certain laws. T h u s any farm lab o rer
w ho steals various tools d u rin g th e p ru n in g season o r d u rin g th e season
fo r cu ttin g w ood su rren d ers his daily wage o f tw elve folleis19. A shepherd
w ho has been h ire d to p a stu re th e flocks o f ano th er perso n is deprived
o f his salary w hen he is caught m ilking th e anim als an d selling th e m ilk
secretly2021. T h o se w ho steal a plough m u st pay twelve folleis p e r day fro m
th e tim e th a t th e th e ft o ccu rred 81. T h e R hodian Sea L aw (also d ated
600— 800) speaks o f m aritim e com m ercial enterprises involving investm ents
o f gold and silver22. T h e S oldier's L aw also im poses fines in gold solidi23.
T h e E cloga, issued by Leo I I I and reflecting contem porary co nditions,
indicates th a t m arriage contracts w ere concluded by th e paym ents o f sum s
in cash24.
A certain category o f servants could save th e ir salaries and
w ith these buy them selves fre e ;25 C h ap ter IX is devoted to buying and
selling; C h a p te r X iş concerned w ith th e lending o f m oney; P arag rap h
one o f C h ap ter X discusses th e borro w in g o f m oney fo r business ventures
on land and sea, an d it also discusses th e legal p o sition o f capital in
a p a rtn e rsh ip ; C h ap ter X V II lists a n u m b e r o f offences w hich are p u n i­
shable by th e paym ent o f cash fines.

15 K azhdan, op cit., pp. 269— 271. But he alleges that by the eleventh century
gold was once more used in com mercial exchange!
16 T heoph anes, 469.
17 T heoph anes, 487— 88. H ow w ould he have been able to accum ulate it if his
custom ers had not paid him in gold?
18 W . Ashburner, „T h e Farmer’s L aw ,“ Journal of Hellenic Studies, X X X (1910),
ch. 22, 25, 33, 34, 62.
19 Ch. 22.
20 Ch. 34.
21 Ch. 62.
22 Zepos, Jus Graecorpmanum3 vol. II, II I , 17.
23 Zepos, Jus Graecoromanum} vol. II , A , 47.
24 Ecloga, I, 1.
25 Ecloga, V I II, 6.
V II
298

A fu rth e r indication o f th e role played by a money econom y based

on gold are th e follow ing tw o facto rs: (1) T h e soldiery w ere p aid in
gold; (2) A significent p o rtio n o f th e taxes was p aid in cash. A gain it is
due to tw o chance rem arks in T heophanes th a t th e size o f th e m ilitary
roga o f tw o them es has been recorded. In th e last year o f th e reig n o f
N icep h o ru s I , T heophanes re p o rts, th e A rabs cap tu red th e m ilitary pay
chest o f th e them e o f A rm eniakon. T h e roga am ounted to 1,300 lb s. o f
gold, or 93,600 solidi26. T w o years earlier th e Bulgars had p erfo rm ed a
sim ilar deed by cap tu rin g th e pay chest o f th e them e o f S try m o n , w h ich
am ounted to 1,100 lbs. o f gold, o r 79,200 solidi27. T hese tw o figures
are fairly consistent one w ith th e o th er. T h e difference betw een th e tw o
sum s is to be explained by th e fact th a t th e A rm eniacon was a larg er
them e w ith a larger arm y and hence a larger sum o f cash was needed.
I t is possible, on th e basis o f these tw o figures, to speculate w ith som e
p ro fit as to th e them atic m ilitary b u d g et for Asia M in o r in th e n in th
cen tury. W e m ay use th e pay o f th e various Asia M in o r strategoi to fix
rou ghly th e pro p o rtio n s o f th e pay chest o f th e various them es.

P a y o f Strategus, etc. Roga o f Theme, etc.

Anatolicon 40 1300
Arm eniacon 40 1300
T hracesion 40 1300

O psicion 30 (3/4) 975

Bucellarion 30 975

Cappodocia 20 (1/2) 650

Chqrsianon 20 650
Paphlagonia 20 650
Chaldia 20 650
O ptim aton 20 650

Seleuceia 5 (1/8) 162y2

Cibbyrheote 10 (1/4) 325

9,587 y2lbs.
X 72

690,300 solidi

26 T heophanes, 489.
27 T heophanes, 484.
 An Anii Hoard of Byzantine Gold Coins (668—741) 299

T h is sum does not seem overly large w hen one realizes th a t in

the C retan expedition o f 911— 12 consisting o f slightly over 40.000 m en
(including prim arily th e im perial fleet, contigents o f th e m aritim e them es
o! Sam os, C ibyrrheote, A egean, th e M ardaites o f A ttaleia, and cavalry)
th e m ilitary roga am o u n ted to a little m ore th an 3,300 lbs. o r slightly
less than 239,000 solidi. Also the n in th century A rab sources relate th a t
the arm ies from th e A natolian provinces included 70,000 tro o p s, th e
soliders draw ing an annual pay o f betw en 12 an d 18 solidi. A ccording
to these figures th e annual pay e x p en d itu re on th e tro o p s w ould range
from 840,000 to 1,260,000 solidi. T h u s it w ould ap p ear th a t th e fig u re
o f 690,300 solidi as a to al sp en t on th e m ilitary purses o f th e Asia
M in or them es in a given year o f th e n in th century w ould be a conser­
vative one. T h a t it is a conservative estim ate w ould seem to follow also
from this fu rth e r fact. T h e th em e o f S trym on h ad a m ilitary chest o f
1,100 lbs., and yet it was in ferio r in rank to th e them es o f O psicion and
B ucellarion (w hich I have reckoned at 3/4 o f 1,300 or 975 lb s.).28a
In ad d itio n , disabled veterans w ere entitled to p erm an en t pensions,
and the widow s o f soldiers w ere entitled to paym ent in gold fro m th e
governm ent28. F in ally , as we have already seen in th e case o f th e fair at
E p h esus, la n d , h e a d , and com m ercial taxes yielded large sum s in gold
coin d u rin g th e period o f 7— 9 th cen tu ries29a.
In spite o f th e m eagre n a tu re o f th e historical sources for th e
period u n d er discussion, it is q u ite evident th a t conditions w hich K azhdan
describes did not prevail in B yzantium . T h e few details w h ich have been
recounted above, and w hich testify to th e continu ity o f a m oney econom y
based on gold, and to th e continuity in com m ercial life, show th a t th o u g h
B yzantium m ig h t n o t have been as w ealthy a state as w hen it ruled th e
w hole M e d iterran ean , nevertheless it possessed a vital u rb a n society and
a m oney econom y in th e 7— 9 th centuries. T h e vast m ilitary expenditures
o f th e governm ent in th e provinces alone p u t plenty o f h a rd cash in to
circulation, and it is to be do u b ted th a t it was all h o ard ed 29. In fact
th e evaluation o f B yzantine m ilitary expenditures as a factor in th e vitality
o f th e B yzantine provincial econom y is a phenom enon w hich w ould b e
o f considerable interest for fu rth e r investigation. A case in p o int is th e

28a Constantine Porphyrogenitus, De Caeremoniis, ed. J. J. Reiske, I, 653— 654.

O n pay o f the generals see 696— 697. H . G elzer, Die Genesis der byzantinischen The­
menverfassung (L eip zig 1899), pp. 97— 8, 114. Ibn K hordadbeh, tr. M . D e G oeje
(L eid en , 1889), pp. 84, 199.
28 L. Bréhier, Les institutions, p. 382. In one case it is recorded that M ichael I gave
five pounds o f gold, or 360 solidi, to the w idow o f each soldier who had fallen in battle.
29a T heophanes, 482— 483, m entions rich tax revenues in gold from Thrace du ­
ring the reign o f N icephorus I. In fact all o f N icep h oros’ fiscal m easures (T heophanes,
486— 487) are m eaningful only in terms o f a society w ith a m oney econom y.
29 T h is docum entary evidence indicates that large sum s in gold were dispersed to
the provinces. Y et very little o f this gold coin has appeared in the excavations and hoards.
T h is shows that coin hoards and excavation results are no indication as to the volum e o f
coin m inted !
VII
300

follow ing. T h e th ree hoards o f gold coins fo u n d at th e A esclepium in

A thens and dating from th e seventh cen tu ry are usually associated w ith
th e passage o f th e em peror C onstans I I an d his arm y th ro u g h A th en s.
I f th is is in fact c o rre c t, it indicates th a t th e B yzantine arm ies on th e
m a rc h th ro u g h th e provinces w ere good spenders and p aid often in g old30.
G iven also th e state o f society, especially in th e 7— 9 th centuries w hen
B yzantine arm ies w ere in a constant state o f m o tio n , th e ir presence in
an d passage th ro u g h th e provinces included th e extensive dispersal
o f cash.
By way o f su m m ary , one is n o t convinced b y K azh d an 's use o f th e
nu m ism atic evidence th a t cities an d tow ns, and w ith th em com m ercial
life, disappeared in provincial B yzantium fro m th e end o f th e seventh
th ro u g h th e early n in th centuries. T h e w ritte n sources do n o t su p p o rt
such a view , and th e W h ittem o re h o a rd fro m A ttica shows how capricious
th e n um ism atic evidence is.

30 I. N . Svoronos, „Θησαυροί βυζαντινών χρυσών νομισμάτων έκ τώ ν άνασκαφ

του έν Ά θ ή ν α ις Ά σκληπείου“, Journal international d'archéologie numismatique, V II
(1904), 143— 160.
\
 V III

REVIEW ARTICLE
OF

TRAVAUX ET MÉMOIRES
1, Editions Boccard

(Paris 1965)

The appearance of Travaux et Mémoires, 1, (directed by Paul Le-

merle and edited by Jean Gouillard) marks a new serial (the sixth) of
the Centre de recherches d’histoire et civilisation byzantines. As the
beginning of a new serial in the Byzantine field, and because of the
weighty nature of the contents a somewhat lengthy review seems to
be in order.
The first study, which is both the most important and the lon­
gest, is that of H. Ahrweiler, “L’Histoire et la géographie de la ré­
gion de Smyrne entre les deux occupations turques (1081-1317) parti­
culièrement au X IIIe siècle”, pp. 1-204. Before proceeding to a review
of the contents one should note that this monograph constitutes a fun­
damental contribution to the history of medieval Hellenism in western
Anatolia, and takes its place alongside the studies of Arnakis, Wittek,
Lemerle, Uzunçarşılı, Waechter, Flemming and de Planhol on western
Anatolia. However Ahrweiler’s publication stands apart from these
other works; it is a descriptive analysis, constructed from a wealth of
 VIII
211

factual information, which for the first time presents us with a very
detailed picture of the quantity and quality of Byzantine society in a
portion of Anatolia (the district of Smyrna) between the two Turkish
conquests. Most scholars who have dealt with this problem have attempt­
ed to assess the Helleniç character of western Anatolia in an impres­
sionistic manner, touching here and there upon salient references in a
few scattered sources. Ahrweiler has combed historiography, epigraphy,
toponymy, hagiography, sigillography, and epistolography with an inde­
fatigability which is matched by a most exacting critical acumen, both
qualities by now familiar to all those who have read her previous stu­
dies. This is the first detailed picture of Byzantine Hellenism (in the
district of Smyrna) prior to the final Turkish conquest, and all those
who wish to study either Byzantine provincial society or the Turkish
conquest must keep this pioneer effort constantly before them, the me­
thodology and the results of which serve as sure guides.
In the introductory section (Généralités, pp. 1-28) the author con­
trasts the western maritime Anatolian districts with central and eastern
Anatolia, establishes a general chronological structure, and discusses
the problems of historical geography, ethnography, and demography.
According to Ahrweiler one can distinguish two currents of “civilisa­
tion micrasiatique”: the Asiatic current which dominated the Anatolian
plateau and the Graeco-Roman current which dominated the Aegean
littoral. The difference between these two strands is visible in the intel­
lectual, religious, economic, and social life of Byzantine Anatolia. West­
ern Asia Minor was urbanized, commercial and industrial, with a
Graeco-Roman population which participated actively in the political
and intellectual history of the Empire (especially up to the seventh cen­
tury). However central-eastern Anatolia was peasant rather than urban,
living on the margin of Byzantine society and manifesting its uninteg­
rated character through the proliferation of religious sects and polit­
ical insurrections. These separatists movements found propitious soil
in an impoverished, undisciplined, superstitious, and ignorant peas­
antry which did not reap the economic, social, and political advantages
dispensed to the inhabitants of the great cities of western Asia Minor.
Ahrweiler thus characterizes Byzantine Anatolia as divided into
two very different and distinct cultural spheres : The highly urbanized
and civilized Graeco-Roman littoral and the agrarian-peasant 'orien­
tal’ hinterland of central and eastern Anatolia. The author cautiously
draws this distinction between coastal and plateau Anatolia for the
V III
212

period down to the Arab invasions in the seventh century, but most
scholars who have faced this problem have extended the distinction
between the Greek coast and the 'oriental’ tableland down to the elev­
enth century and have utilized this distinction to explain the Turkish
conquest, Turkification, and Islamization. There is no concept which
has done more to obscure and confuse the provincial history of the em­
pire. The epithet “oriental” for these latter scholars is a vague catch-all
which includes such widely disparate elements as Hetite, Phrygian,
Cappadocian, Lycian, and Lydian on the one hand, and Zoroastrian-
Persian and Turkish-Muslim on the other. A. Goetze, in his classic
Kulturgeschichte des alten Orients, Kleinasien (Munich, 1957), estab­
lished the competitive nature of Greek and Persian cultures in the
Anatolian peninsula in the first millennium B.C. with a geographical
distribution of their forces divided roughly between the coast and the
plateau. But with the Alexandrian conquest in the fourth century and
until the initial Turkish invasions of the eleventh century the dominant
politico-socio-economic forces of Asia Minor (up to the regions of Tre-
bizond and Caesareia) were representative of Graeco-Roman society.
Thus for almost 1500 years the major portion of Anatolia (both coastal
and plateau) was ruled by a Graeco-Roman state. And if prior to this
period of 1500 years Greek culture had been restricted to the coasts,
by the time that the Turks had appeared (and indeed long before) the
major portion of the peninsula had become well integrated into Byzan­
tine (Graeco-Roman) society and culture. The salient features of this
cultural unity included the Greek language (spoken), Christianity (hagi-
olatry and monasticism being more important then dogmatic orthodoxy),
and conformity to Byzantine law and administration. The fact that
there was considerable local variety does not mean that Anatolia had
no social and cultural unity. In connection with the demographic and
urban configuration of the coasts and plateau one should note the fol­
lowing point. The existence of more numerous urban centers and more
thickly populated regions in western Asia Minor than on the plateau
were not functions of the former’s Hellenic character but were due rath­
er to the factors of geography and climate. Western Anatolia, water­
ed by rich silt-bearing rivers and blessed with a mild clime, constituted
a fertile breeding ground of man, beast, and vegetation. The plateau
is by and large a region of marginal rainfall which makes of it a much
poorer agricultural zone, its winters are harsh, and much of the area
is semi-arid steppe. Thus no matter what the ethnic character of its
 VIII
213

inhabitants its agricultural potential was much lower and of course

this affected demographic density. Nevertheless, there were important
towns even in the more inhospitable areas of the plateau, such as Ico-
nium, Ankara, Euchaita, etc., which thrived from their positions as
caravan towns and as military, administrative and ecclesiastical cen­
ters. But Iconium, surrounded as it is by semi-arid wastes, could never
have the heavy clusters of villages which one finds about medieval
Smyrna, Nicaea, or Ephesus. Again in eastern Anatolia, contrary to the
generalization which Ahrweiler has made, towns, commerce, and in­
dustry were highly developed. On the eve of the Turkish conquest such
cities as Erzinjian (Celesine), Ani, Caesareia, Edessa, Melitene were
large towns with thick clusters of villages attached to them. Commerce
and industry prospered, supplying both local and international mar­
kets, and some of these towns were quite large by medieval standards
(30-45,000). Yet this portion of Asia Minor was largely Armenian and
Syrian and once more the size and opulence of the towns were not func­
tions of their Hellenic character. (It is very interesting that the culti­
vation of the Greek classics remained alive among the Syrian Chris­
tians of easternmost Anatolia down to the eleventh-twelfth centu­
ries). Eastern Anatolia, and especially Cappadocia in the early period,
not only participated in the cultural life of Byzantium but also made
critical contributions to it.
Scholars have frequently asserted that heresy characterized the
religion of the hinterland and Orthodoxy dominated the coast. One
should, however, be cautious in associating heresy with “oriental”
Anatolia and Orthodoxy with “Greek” Asia Minor. C. Holl, “Das Fort­
leben der Volkssprachen in Kleinasien in nachristlicher Zeit”, Hermes,
XLIII (1908), 25-54, long ago stated the principle that the survival
of the local Anatolian languages went hand in hand with the appear­
ance of religious heresy. Thus Phrygia became the prime example for
this survival of local or “oriental” culture in the evolution of Byzan­
tine Anatolia. Indeed, the Neo-Phrygian language is still in evidence
during the early Christian era, and most famous of the early Anatolian
heresies, Montanism, was a Phrygian product. Thus Holl, and after
him many others, have appeared justified in concluding that these local
or “oriental” cultural strains vigorously resisted Hellenization or Byzan-
tinization, and that Anatolia was not effectively integrated into the
society and culture of the empire. There were in effect two Anatolias :
The Greek coastal Anatolia and the “oriental” Anatolia of the plateau.
V III
214

The former was linguistically Greek and religiously Orthodox, the lat­
ter was Phrygian, Cappadocian, Isaurian, etc., in tongue and heretical
in religious affiliation.
Historians frequently impose an order and categorization upon
their materials which are convenient but none the less arbitrary. It
would seem that the above described characterization of Anatolia is
one of those convenient categorizations. Let us examine the supposed
connection of religious non-conformity and linguistic survival of the
Anatolian tongues in the face of Hellenization (Armenian, Syriac, Kur­
dish, and Georgian are to be distinguished from Cappadocian, Isaurian,
Phrygian, Lydian, Lycian, Celtic, and Gothic). It is assumed that, as
Montanism was a Phrygian heresy and that inasmuch as the Neo-Phry­
gian tongue survived in the early Christian period, the speakers of the
tongue were Montanists, and Phrygian Montanists spoke Neo-Phry­
gian. Ergo, heresy and linguistic fortleben of the Anatolian dialects
went hand in hand in a phenomenon which deprived Byzantine society
of any effective homogeneity in central Anatolia. However, it is signif­
icant that the substantial corpus of Montanist inscriptions which have
survived all were inscribed in Greek, although Neo-Phrygian had been
utilized as an epigraphic language on other occasions. If there were
such an intimate relation between heresy and linguistic variety why did
the Montanists utilize Greek rather than Neo-Phrygian in their in­
scriptions?
Secondly, the supposed longevity and vitality of Neo-Phrygian as
a spoken language have been inferred by Holl and others primarily
from a passage of Socrates who relates that Selinas, bishop of the Goths
in fifth century Anatolia, was the son of a mixed marriage.
. . Σεληνάς ό των Γότθων επίσκοπος, άνήρ έπίμικτον εχων το γένος.
Γότθος μεν ήν εκ πατρός* Φρύξ δε κατά μητέρα* καί Se.dc τούτο άμφοτέραις
ταΐς διαλέκτοις έτοίμως κατά τήν εκκλησίαν έδίδασκε.” (PG, LXVII, 648)
Holl interpreted άμφοτέραις ταΐς διαλέκτοις as referring to Gothic and
Phrygian. But the parallel text of Sozomenus gives the true explanation
of άμφοτέραις ταΐς διαλέκτοις. He says of Selinas;
“ . . .καί επί έκκλησίαις ίκανω διδάσκει, ού μόνον κατά τήν πάτριον
φο^νήν, άλλά γάρ καί τήν Ελλήνων.” (Kirchengeschichte, ed. J. Bidez and
G. Hansen (Berlin, 1960), 236).
These two texts make it clear that Selinas had a Goth for father
and a 'Phrygian’ for a mother and thus spoke two languages. The
two languages are Gothic and Greek (rather than Phrygian), and Phryx
 V III
215

here simply connotes the geographical district from which his mother
came. Thus by the fifth century the Goths were being Hellenized and
the texts of Socrates-Sozomenus testify to the vigor of Hellenization
rather than to the vitality of the Phrygian strain. (It is significant in this
respect that the descendants of the Goths came to be called Gotho-
Greeks rather than Gotho-Phrygians, Theophanes, I, 385. At an earlier
period the Celts of Anatolia by a similar process of Hellenization came
to be know as Gallo-Greeks and Galatia as Gallo-graecia; Strabo XII.
5, 1; Appain, XII, 114; Diodorus Siculus, V. 32. 5; Ammianus Marcel-
linus XXII. 9. 5.) One must conclude that Neo-Phrygian succombed
completely to the process of linguistic Hellenization and that the sur­
vivals of some local tongues as late as the sixth century constitute dying
gasps rather than a vigorous linguistic continuity.
There is, however, the fact that heresy remained an important
factor in the provincial life of Anatolia, Paulicianism constituting the
most spectacular example of religious non-conformity in the middle
Byzantine period. This was an “Armenian” heresy, and therefore its
appearance in eastern and central Anatolia has been explained by the
fact that this “oriental” Anatolia was non-Greek and therefore recep­
tive to such an anti-establishment religious movement. The heretics
appeared not only in eastern Anatolia but in Euchaita in the north and
in Phrygia. Consequently scholars have once more adduced in central
Asia Minor a close interrelation between relegious non-conformity and cul­
tural alienation from the Graeco-Roman traditions. However, one should
note that the Armenian princes and church fought the Paulician heresy
no less vigorously than did their Byzantine counter-parts, and they would
have hardly recognized in the Paulicians anything more than a parni-
cious religious aberration (certainly they would have never entertained
notions about Paulicianism as equivalent to Armenian identity within
the lands of the Byzantine Empire). Secondly, western Anatolia does
not seem to have been any more homogeneous in religious matters then
was the central plateau region. Though we have few sources to illumi­
nate the life of the provinces, nevertheless incidental references indi­
cate the existence of heresy from the Propontid all the way south to
the Attaleian regions of coastal Asia Minor.
1. Nestorians in Bithynia-ninth century (V. Laurent, La vie mer­
veilleuse de Saint Pierre d’Atroa 837 (Brussels, 1956), p. 66).
2. Paulicians (Manichees) in Miletus and the Cibyrrheote theme-
tenth century (Analecta Bollandia, XI, 1892, 156).
VIH
216

3. Paulicians and “heretics” in the metropolitanate of Myrrha-

eleventh century (AS Nov III, 512, 543).
4. “Phundagiagites-Bogomils” in themes of Opsicium and Ci-
byrrheote-tenth and eleventh centuries (Ficker, Die Phundagiagiten,
Leipzig, 1908, pp. 62-63).
5. “Heretics” in Ephesus-twelfth century (R. Browning, “The
Speeches and Letters of Georgios Tornikes, Metropolitan of Ephesos
(X llth century)” Actes du XIIe congrès inter, d’études byz., Belgrade,
1964, II, 424).
Consequently even these few texts would seem to indicate that
coastal Anatolia participated significantly in the heretical movements
of Anatolia, and that the supposed dichotomy of Greek-coastal Ana­
tolia and the “oriental” plateau (Central Asia Minor) on religious as
well as on linguistic grounds is an artificial contrivance of scholars
searching for convenient categories.
To return to Ahrweiler’s general thesis of the opposition between
coast and plateau, it is a function of geography and climate rather than
of religion and language. In the Byzantine period, during which coast
and plateau lived within an intimate political, administrative, and eco­
nomic unity, the currents of language and religion flowed unabated.
Greek penetrated and dominated both regions, the church attempted
to enforce dogmatic conformity throughout, and conversely heretics
brought their ideas to both the plateau and the coasts.

Ahrweiler establishes a periodized structure as a chronological

framework for the fortunes of Smyrna from the fourth to the four­
teenth centuries.
1. 4-7th centuries - economic, social, political essor.
2. 7-10th centuries - decline precipitated by the Arab maritime
raids.
3. 1 0 -llth centuries - new essor.
4. Turkish invasions and temporary decline.
5. Alexius I-1261-period of revival and final bloom.
6. 1261-1317 - Byzantine withdrawal, Turkmen invasions, de­
cline.
The periods and characterizations of each seem valid, though the
reviewer would qualify period # 2 (7th-10th centuries), for reasons
 V III
217

which will appear below. The author proposes a new date, 1093-94,
for the recapture of Smyrna from the Turks in the reign of Alexius I.
Heretofore, historians usually placed this important event at some time
shortly following the battle of Dorylaeum (1097) (Ostrogorsky, Geschich­
te des byz. Staates, 3rd ed., p. 300).
Ahrweiler presents a rapid and accurate sketch of the rich economic
resources of the Smyrniote district, and also of its ethnography. Since
antiquity diverse ethnic groups had settled in western Anatolia: Greeks,
Romans, Goths (in Mysia), Jews, Armenians (in Troad), Sclavenes, Mar-
daites (Pamphylia), and Turks. The “Turks” to which the author refers
(p. 21) were the Khurramite followers of Babek and Nasr-Theophobus,
many of whom fled to Byzantium where they were given asylum in the
ninth century and where the emperor Theophilus settled them through­
out Anatolia (2,000 per theme). However Theophanes Continuatus,
112-113, 125, and other Byzantine authors refer to these easterners
as Persians and not as Turks, and it would appear that Ahrweiler has
committed an anachronism in the application of the nomenclature
Persian-Turk. In the period after the Turkish invasions of Anatolia
(ll-15th c.) the Byzantine sources most frequently refer to the Ana­
tolian Turks as Persians, but this is a comparatively late development
in Byzantine ethnic nomenclature. The application of the epithet Persian
to the Anatolian Turks was in part due to the archaistic mentality of
Byzantine historians, but also to the fact that the Turks had come via
Persia and utilized Persian as their administrative and literary lan­
guages. However the Persians of Babek and Nasr-Theophobus were the
Khurramites (and therefore in reality Persians) of Azerbaijan (The first
Turkish settlements of any substance in Azerbaijan took place only in
the early eleventh century: S. Agadzanov and K. Yuzbashian, “K istorii
tiurskikh nabegov na Armeniiu v XI v ”, Palestinskii Sbornik, XIII,
1965, 144-159), and therefore these foreigners who settled in the Ana­
tolian themes during the reign of Theophilus were Persians and not
Turks.
After having described the compact and prosperous character of
Byzantine Hellenism in the regions of Smyrna Ahrweiler demonstrates
the disastrous effects of the Turkish conquest during the later thir­
teenth and early fourteenth centuries.
“Ainsi la région, qui quelques années auparavant était parmi les
plus habitées, présente dès la fin du X IIIe et le début du XIV siècle
l’aspect d’une contrée quasi déserte et ruinée . . . . Elle connaîtra un
V III
218

nouvel essor au XlVe siècle, sous les émirates turcs qui s’y sont formés:
il se manifestera dans de nouveaux centres et sous des traits nouveaux”,
(p. 28) The description of the economic and cultural essor of western A-
natolia in the thirteenth century and the disastrous effects of the Turkmen
conquests constitute a very important contribution to the historical un­
derstanding of this crucial period. It has often been assumed that B y­
zantine culture and society were weak and diluted and that the Turkish
conquest was a relatively peaceful event which operated in a vacuum.
Ahrweiler has shown that in the Smyrna region just the opposite was
true: Hellenism was highly developed, but the Turkish conquest was
disruptive and extirpated the society, eventually absorbing that portion
which survived the conquest. It is illuminating to compare the Arab
conquest of Byzantium’s eastern provinces in the seventh century with
the Turkish conquests of Anatolia. The Arabs tooks Syria, Palestine,
Mesopotamia, and Egypt effortlessly after a few crucial battles. The
Turkish conquests of many parts of Anatolia involved a prolonged and
often repeated process, with the result that Anatolia remained the bat­
tleground of Islam and Byzantium for almost four hundred years. Con­
sequently the Arabs caused far less disruption in the local societies than
did the Turks.

Part One of the study, entitled Villes et Campagne, is a thorough

and rich description of the towns and villages belonging to the Smyrna
district. Ahrweiler discusses the fortunes of the towns according to the
chronological scheme which she established in her introduction. The
towns flourished in the early Byzantine period, but from the seventh
until the tenth-eleventh centuries the coastal towns declined (“. . . . la
désurbanisation du littoral micrasiatique. . . .” p. 30) because of the
Arab maritime peril, and now the towns of central Anatolia became more
important. By the eleventh century the region revived but its real pros­
perity dates from the thirteenth century when once more Smyrna ap­
pears as a center of urban density. The whole question of the fate of the
Byzantine towns in the 7-9th centuries has already produced a con­
siderable literature in which Ostrogorsky, “Byzantine Cities in the
Early Middle Ages, Dumb. Oaks Papers, XIII, 1959, 47-66, proposes
a basic continuity and survival of the Byzantine Anatolian towns, and
Kazhdan, “Vizantiiskie gorod v VII-XI v v ”, Sov. Arkh. XXI, 1954,
164-188, has championed the opposing view (though he seems to make
an exception of parts of western AM). The major difficulty is of course
 VIII
219

tho lack of almost any source material for the 7-9th centuries, and the
lack of satisfactory sources until the 13th century. As Ahrweiler says,
her results reflect the nature of the sources, but whether these justify
her conclusions that urban society in western Anatolia underwent such
a comprehensive realization is debatable. There is a curious contra­
diction also in the author’s implied proposition that though the Arab
presence (by sea) caused the decline of the coastal towns, the same Arab
presence (by land) did not prevent an increase in the importance of the
towns of the plateau.
On p. 32 Ahrweiler remarks a propos of the urban renewal which
occurred after the supposed ruralization of the 7-10th centuries, that
it reached its climax in the thirteenth century as is noted by the court
literati. But as the author herself has shown in previous articles, the
ruined towns which the Lascarids (and Comnenoi) rebuilt were those
which had been destroyed by the Turkish conquests and raids of the
ll-12th centuries, and not those which had supposedly declined after
the seventh century as a result of Arab raids. It is highly probable that
this hiatus in Byzantine urban continuity occured not with the Arab
maritime threat during the 7-10th centuries but with the Turkish con­
quest and raids of the ll-1 2 th centuries.
Ahrweiler lists and locates the towns of the area which is the sub­
ject of her research: Smyrna, Nymphaeum, Magnesia on Sipylum, Clazo-
menae, Erythrae, Psithyra, Monoicus, Petra, Archangelus, Ambrioulla,
Sosandra, Linoperamata, Stylarium. But what is it that constitutes these
agglomerations towns ? The author relies on two basic criteria: (1) Ap­
pearance in the literature of a site as a metropolitanate, archbishopric,
or bishopric indicates that it is a town (provided that this occurs during
a period of prosperity and not during one of decline), (2) The contem­
porary description of a site as a polis, castrum, etc., indicates that it
is a town. This however leaves us with a protean definition of the B y­
zantine town in terms of its population. Was the Byzantine city a city
in name only or did it possess a substantial population? How strict
were the ecclesiastical authorities in applying the episcopal nomenclature
only to large inhabited sites? And how large did the population have to
be before the site qualified as a city and therefore as an episcopal see?
The canon lawyer Balsamon provides us a partial answer to these
thorny questions inasmuch as he comments on the canons with direct
reference to actual conditions in the Anatolian churches during the
twelfth century. Ahrweiler remarks that the existence of a bishopric
VIII
220

indicates the existence of an urban center, a town (p. 47). However,

she continues, this generalization is valid only for periods of economic
prosperity, and the mention of a bishopric in an area during a period
of decline is questionable evidence for urban history. In other words
the church allowed the titular existence of bishoprics in places where
there was no longer sufficient population (whatever the minimal num­
ber) to constitute a town.
In the twelfth century the upheavals besetting the church as a
result of the Turkish conquests caused considerable administrative
difficulty, not the least of which was the status of the episcopal struc­
ture. There is an indication in Balsamon’s comments that though on
occasion bishops were ordained to villages, by and large the church
and state observed the principle that bishops were appointed only to
towns (Rhalles & Potles, III, 222-223, 245-248). Thus episcopal in­
dications in times of decadance (at least for parts of the twelfth centu­
ry) may have some validity in Byzantine urban history, for the ex­
istence of a bishopric depended on τό πολυάνθρωπον.
But this still leaves unanswered the question of urban numbers.
How large was π ολυά νθρω πος? Did it have numerical substance or
was it merely a sobriquet of Byzantine archaism? Were bishoprics or
poleis simply villages with fancy titles or were they real towns? A short
review of the few available figures would seem to support the latter
conclusion, i.e., that Byzantine towns and bishoprics were usually
substantial (by medieval standards) centers of population.
Edessa -1071 35.000 (Sawirus ibn al Mukaffi, II, iii, 305).
c. 1144 47.000 (Bar Hebraeus, I, 273).
Tralles- 13th century 36.000 (Pachymeres, I, 469).
A lbistan- c. 1155-56 The Turks took a population of 70,000 into
captivity from Albistan and (regions of ?)
Caihan; (Matthew of Edessa, 344).
1256-57 Mongol general Baicu slew 7,000 of the in­
habitants, carried away the youths and
maidens; (Bar Hebraeus, I, 426).
Melitene- 11th century The Turks took away 15,000 of its inha­
bitants; (Michael Syrian, III, 146).
Indications o f N um erical Sm allness
Tantalus (comopolis) In 1197 the Seljuk sultan took captive the
inhabitants of these two comopoleis. These
captives numbered 5,000, therefore c.
 vm
221

& 2,500 for each comopolis (Nicetas Chô­

mâtes, 655-7). However these figures are
Caria (comopolis) probably too low, for Caria had been raided
previous to 1197 and was again raided
after that date. Comopolis is also a vague
term: It may apply to a village, a large town
scattered over a large area, or a large village.
Dorylaeum- 12th century After its destruction by the Turks the
site was inhabited by 2,000 Turkmens, a
figure which contemporaries considered in ­
significant in comparison with its former
size (Cinnamus, 294-5, 297).
These few figures for town populations would indicate that the
epithet πολυάνθρω πος applied by Byzantine and other sources to
the cities has some numerical substance and a large city could have
as many as 35,000 (or more) inhabitants, though it is likely that most
of the towns were smaller, ranging upward from 5,000. This estimate
would seem to be in line with the results of certain other demographic
studies.
L. Torres Baibas, “Extension y demografla de las ciudades hispano-
musulmans”, Studia Islamica, III (1955), 55-57, on the basis of
area measurements, gives the following population estimates for e-
leventh-twelfth century Spain.
Toledo 37,000 Zaragoza 17,000
Almeria 27,000 Malago 15-20,000
Granada 26,000 Valencia 15,000
Mallorca 25,000
O. Barkan, “Essai sur les données statistiques des registres de recen­
sement dans l’empire ottoman aux XVe et XVIe siècles”, Journal of
the Ec. and Soc. History of the Orient, I, 1958, 27, furnishes reliable
figures for some of the Anatolian towns in the years c. 1520-1530 (These
figures are based on official tax registers of hearths).
Bursa 34,930 Tokat 8,354
Amid 18,942 Konia 6,127
Angora 14,872 Sivas 5,560
Though the similar magnitudes of the Spanish figures (arrived at
by area measurement) and the Ottoman numbers (results of reliable
tax registers from a later period) when combined with the Byzantine
VIH
222

estimates do not necessarily prove anything, it is interesting that the

sizes of the towns tend to range between similar extremes.
Byzantium δ,000 to 36,000 (perhaps 47,000)
Spain 15,000 to 37,000
Turkey 5,560 to 34,930
Thus a Byzantine town (and therefore a bishopric) was frequently a
substantial urban settlement which could range from 5,000 to 36,000
or 47,000 inhabitants.
Ahrweiler remarks that, though Smyrna was an important naval
center by the ninth century, it was not a great maritime commercial
port until the thirteenth century, and consequently it is absent from
such itineraries as that of the twelfth century Idrisi. However once
more it is surely a matter of possessing few sources (Even so, A.B.,
XXV, 1906, 81; A.S. Nov. Ill , 579, mention Smyrna as a port for com­
merce and passenger trade with Constantinople, the isles, and the Eu­
ropean provinces during the tenth-eleventh centuries). Indeed by her
own interpretation of the notitiae episcopatum the rise of Smyrna to
metropolitan status in the ninth century and the acquisition of bishop­
rics formerly belonging to Ephesus must indicate a general economic
and demographic prosperity.

Part II, L’Église et son administration, certainly the most signif­

icant portion of Ahrweiler’s monograph, contains a detailed discussion
of the ecclesiastical seats and monasteries, and a highly detailed pros-
opographic table of all known religious officials in this district. The basic
source for much of this invaluable information is the cartulary (of which
Ahrweiler promises a new edition) of Lembos (which ends at 1307 when
the Turks burned the monastery), a monastic foundation 10 km. east
of Smyrna. The drawing up of a prosopographic chart which includes
all the known metropolitans, archbishops, bishops, protopappades,
episcopal officials, notaries, and scribes of the district does more than
anything else to give the appearance of life and historicity to the region
and its society. But it does much more, for it enables Ahrweiler to de­
duce some very important facts about Byzantine society. For instance,
though the metropolitans were usually men who had risen in patriar­
chal service and were not local Smvrniotes, the bishops and other of­
ficials were of local origin. This fact becomes even more striking when
Ahrweiler establishes a similar pattern on the level of Byzantine ad­
ministration. The dux of the Thracesian theme in the thirteenth century
 VIH
223

was an outsider, whereas the prokathemenus of Smyrna (in charge of

police functions within the city) was usually of local origin. Ahrweiler
might have gone on to conclude that centralization did not stifle local
initiative and participation in government. The dux and metropolitan,
appointed from the imperial capital, assuredly constituted the apex
of the power structure, but the mass of the governmental and eccle­
siastical offices were in the hands of local people. This doubtlessly assured
a certain local vitality in economic and political affairs.
Far and away the most important fact to emerge from the author’s
prosopographic investigation is the following: the metropolitans pos­
sessed an 'enormous’ bureaucratic organization, with an extensive
personnel, which dispensed a number of social and political (as well
as religious) services to the populace and as a consequence the church
needed extensive properties and revenues to function. The administra­
tive organization and personnel of the patriarchate have been better
studied than those of the metropolitans and bishops, for the documenta­
tion was more plentiful. Thus H.-G. Beck, Kirche und theologische Li­
teratur im byzantinischen Reich (Munich, 1959), p. 20, posed the ques­
tion whether or not the metropolitans enjoyed so extensive a bureau­
cratic organism. Ahrweiler’s research indicates that the administrative
system of the metropolitanate was similar to and nearly as extensive
as that of the patriarchate (at least in the case of Smyrna). In the
cartulary of Lembos she has found mention of 26 dignitaries who exer­
cized their functions under the metropolitan of Smyrna, though only
the first two pentades appear complete in the Lembos documents.
Ahrweiler’s detailed tableau of this extensive ecclesiastical bureau­
cracy permits a further deduction. The church administration permeat­
ed not only the religious but also the secular life of Byzantine society.
Without the church organization Byzantine life was inconceivable, and
a certain economic well-being was essential to the organization and
functioning of this vast religious bureaucracy. Consequently, the met­
ropolitans and bishops had their own enoriai and incomes to support
their administrative cadres as well as to finance all the eleemosynary
and educational institutions which ministered to the needs of the flock.
Ahrweiler points out that when the Turks conquered Smyrna they con­
fiscated the properties of the church and consequently Ephesus (suf­
fering from a similar confiscation of properties) began to quarrel with
Smyrna over possession of the few remaining ecclesiastical properties.
Ahrweiler’s picture of the economic affluence of the Smyrniote metro­
V III
224

politanate in the thirteenth century enables us to evaluate very clearly

the effects of the Turkish invasions on Byzantine society. By the mass
confiscation of church properties (as well as by the fitful removal of
Byzantine metropolitans) the Turks destroyed the church as an effec­
tive social institution in the life of the remaining Christian subjects
of the Turks. The Turkish emirs then doled out these church properties
and revenues to their military supporters and to Muslim religious and
charitable institutions, and thus the history of the Anatolian church
in the 14-15th centuries is one of great poverty, administrative col­
lapse, and finally of virtual disappearance. (By the early sixteenth cen­
tury only 7,9% of the Anatolian population was Christian, Barkan, loc.
cit., 20). The letters of Matthew of Ephesus (M. Treu, Matthaios Me­
tropolit von Ephesus, Pottsdam, 1901), contain an excellent case study
of this whole process as it occured in the metropolitanate of Ephesus
after it fell to the Turks in the early fourteenth century.
Part Three, Administration civile et militaire, is organized much in
the manner of Part Two and concludes Ahrweiler’s study.
Though the review has been long and though it has gone into cer­
tain questions at great length, it should not fail to convey to the reader
an urgent sense of the great importance of the contribution which
Ahrweiler has made to a better understanding of medieval Hellenism
on the eve of the Turkish conquest. Arnakis was the first to demonstrate
the effect of Byzantine political and social disarray on the decline of
Hellenism. Ahrweiler has shown that the medieval Greek society of
western Asia Minor was a vital, productive and compact entity prior
to the disorganization of the late thirteenth century which prepared
it for the disastrous Turkish conquest. Her study will remain a model
for the future rewriting of the histories of Nicaea and Trebizond.
*****

The remaining eight studies, though shorter, are also significant,

and in many cases fascinating, contributions in the fields of philology,
administrative, social, economic, and political history.
I. Dujcev, “La chronique byzantine de Pan 811”, 205-254, turns
once more to a subject which he first treated in 1936, to wit the Diegesis
on the death of Nicephorus I contained in fol. 119v-122v of Vaticanus
gr. 2014. Dujcev gives a short history of scholarly views as to the impor­
tance and nature of this interesting source, edits, translates, and ex­
plains the text, and then delivers his own opinion as to its character.
It is in essence a historical narrative composed by a contemporary of
 V III
225

the events, w hich w as reworked som e tim e after th e conversion of th e

11ul gars (865) b y an editor w ho sou ght to transform it into a work of
edification and a m em orial to th e B yzan tin e v ictim s of 811-814. It
is this revision of th e te x t w hich has added a certain hagiographical fla­
vor to th e com position. D u jcev agrees w ith th e opinion of the late Gré­
goire th a t th e D iegesis is an ex tra ct from a historical work of th e first
order, b u t he asserts th a t as y e t one cannot say w hether it is part of
either Scriptor Incertus or of a supposed Mai alas C ontinuatus.
*****

P. Lem erle con trib u tes a th orou gh stu d y, “T hom as le S la v e”, 255-
297, in w hich he review s th e com plex problem s atten d an t upon th e his­
tory of th e revolt of T hom as. He subjects the sources to a critical ev a l­
uation (ninth century: L etter of M ichael II to Louis th e Pious, George
M onachus, and th e L ives of D avid , Sym eon, and George of Lesbus;
T enth century: G enesius and T heophanes C ontinuatus) and dem on­
strates th a t th e official version (expressed in th e letter of Michael II
and in th e so-called Syrian version of the revolt) is highly slanderous
of Thom as. T his official version crystallized in th e circle of C onstantine
V II and consigned other m ore reliable accounts to historiographical
oblivion. H ow ever, Lem erle con tin ues, it is the “version m icrasiatique”,
found in parts of b oth G enesius and T heophanes Continua tus, w hich is th e
m ore reliable. L em erle con seq u en tly relies h eavily on this anatolian version
of th e ev en ts to interpret th e h istory of th e revolt. He rejects as leg en ­
dary: T he story of T hom as in C onstantinople and th e seduction of the
patrician ’s wife; T he fligh t to and dom icile am ong th e A rabs for a period
of tw en ty -fiv e years; The assertion th a t T hom as posed as C onstantine
V I; T hom as’ abjuration of th e Christian faith; The beginning of the re­
v o lt in th e reign of Leo V. C onversely, th e follow ing item s are know able
w ith certainty: T hom as w as descended from a Slavic fam ily tran sp lan t­
ed to th e regions of L ake G azourou sou th east of A m aseia; He first
appears in th e retinue of th e strategu s B ardanius Tourkus in th e revolt
against N icephorus I (803); In th e prediction of th e Philom eline m onk
he w as grouped w ith his friend Leo (V) and his enem y M ichael (II);
L ater Leo V appointed T hom as turm arch of th e foederatoi (813), a post
he held until 820; As holder of th is p ost he resided in A n atolia until
th e m urder of Leo V and his d ecision to revolt; T hough he recruited
foreign troops (A rm enians, A b asgians, and Iberians), th e bulk of the
m ilitary and adm inistrators in A n atolia joined him (save for th e arm ies
of Arm eniacon and O psicium ), so th a t contrary to w h at is usually alleged
İS
V III
226

about th e ethnic character of his arm y th e troops seem to h ave been

largely Greek; T hom as acquired th e necessary peace on th e Arab front
b y m ilitary and diplom atic action ( consequent to w hich his coronation
took place in A ntioch); From D ecem ber 25, 820 to Decem ber 821 he
occupied A n atolia, at th e la tter d ate began th e siege of C onstantinople,
and b y m id-O ctober T hom as w as dead. F in ally, Lem erle departs from
th e interpretations w hich h ave long been associated w ith th is spectac­
ular revolt. T he success of T hom as in m ustering so m uch support in
Thrace, th e A egean, and A n atolia w as due neither to Arab m ilitary aid nor
to reliance upon non-Greek ethn ic elem ents. Inasm uch as he was of Slavic
origin it has often been supposed th a t his prim ary support cam e from
Slavs settled in A natolia, b u t th e th em e of O psicium , where Slavic se t­
tlem en t had been strongest, opposed him . L em erle sees no socio-eco­
nom ic basis for th e success of T hom as in A n atolia, for not only do we
know of no social program in th e revolt b u t th e struggle had none of th e
characteristics of class warfare. It w as relatively b lood less, and it did
n ot contin ue after th e rebel’s death. In short, Lem erle im plies th a t w e
are probably dealing w ith one of th ose m an y struggles for th e im perial
power in w hich personal am b ition and p olitical alliances played th e k ey
roles. Lem erle’s insistence upon follow ing th e sources com es as a refresh­
ing and w elcom e breeze upon th e sea of B yzan tin e history where too
often th e storm y w inds of im agin ation have th reatened to sink th e ship
of B yzan tin e scholarship.
*****
The h istory of heresy in th e B yzan tin e Em pire has attracted con ­
siderable a tten tio n in th e research of th e post-w ar years but th e m ajo­
rity of th e problem s rem ain relatively obscure and th e very character
of th e B y za n tin e cultural and social phenom enon cannot be accurately
evaluated w ith o u t a proper understanding of the quality and q u a n tity
of heresy w ith in th e em pire. J. Gouillard, “L ’Hérésie dans l ’em pire
b yzan tin des origines au XII© siècle”, 299 - 324, approaches, m an y
of th ese q uestions in a short stu d y w hich dispenses w ith m ost of th e sec­
ondary literature and u tilizes on ly som e of th e prim ary sources in an
im pression istic m anner. Gouillard begins b y defining th e focus of his
interest: It does n ot include th e Christological heresies of th e first six
ecum enical councils (these concern only th e h aute époque); T he d evia­
tions (Gouillard does n ot sp ecify w hich th ey are) denounced in th e w rit­
ings of th e tw elfth century d ogm atists he leaves to th e research of
other scholars; B u t it is th e syn cretistic sects (such as M arcionism),
 V III
227

the ancient sects severed from th e church before the founding of the
Christian empire (M ontanism , N ovatian ism , etc.) w hich follow ed their
Ολνη evolution, etc., upon w hich Gouillard concentrates. . . Le fait
sectaire nous paraît la m atière essentielle d ’un essai sur l ’hérésie à B y ­
zance. C’est lui qui dégage par excellence les corps étrangers réfractaires
à certaines form es de l ’hellén isation et de la b yzan tinization, fait in ter­
venir des facteurs éthn iqu es et sociaux caractérisés, exprim e la diver­
sité des tem p éram ents religieu x.” (p. 300). W hile there is som e substance
in such a generalization th e little th a t w e do know about A natolian
heresy w ould seem to ind icate th a t th e bonds of heresy and “e th n icity ”
did not alw ays coincide. It is curious th a t he justifies th e concentration
on th is third group of sectaries on th e grounds of their “eth n ic” charac­
ter. It is curious b ecause th e m o st obvious cases of identification b e­
tw een heresy and “e th n ic ity ” in A natoT a are not to be found am ong
an y of th e sectaries he describes (The M ontanists were probably Greek
speaking, as w itn ess all their funerary inscriptions. Though N eo-P h ry­
gian is in evidence as an epigraphic language, th e M ontanist epigraphy
is entirely Greek. T he P aulician m ovem en t seem s to have recognized
no lingu istic boundaries and spread throu ghout th e Greek regions of
w estern A n atolia), b u t am ong th e adherents of th e G hristological here­
sies: th e A rm enians and Syrians in ten th -eleven th century A natolia.
It w as th e A rm enian and Syriac Christians of B y za n tiu m ’s eastern
A natolian regions w ho m ost vigorously resisted B yzan tinization, w ith
disastrous results to th e em pire in th e eleventh century.
Gouillard th en tak es a fleeting glim pse at th e evolu tion of th e sects
during three periods: (1) From th e founding of th e em pire to Iconoclasm;
(2) T he Iconoclastic period; (3) T he era from Bulgarian Bogom ilism
m id -ten th cen tu ry to 1143. T he historian is able to reconstruct the
sectarian life of th e first period from th e religious legislation of the em ­
perors and th e Panarion of E piphanius (f 403). The sects of A natolia
were n ot num erous (T heodosian Code lists a half-dozen nam es, John
of E phesus gives four or five). A fter E piphanius th e literary treatm ent
of heresy b ecom es sim plified and schem atized, and th a t bew ildering
la x ity of n om enclature w hich so harasses th e church historian through­
out B y za n tin e h istory is already apparent. T he second period on th e
sketch of sectarian h istory G ouillard righ tly presents as th e m ost ob ­
scure and th e poorest in d ocu m en tation . T he principal heretics are th e
Paulicians and th e Iconoclasts, w h ich th e author has purposely set
aside as ob viou sly an y treatm en t of th ese sects w ould unnecessarily
V III
228

len gth en his discussion. He sees a resurgence of sectarian life w ith th e

rise of Iconoclasm and poses th e question of reciprocal influences. The
heretical nom enclature of th e period reveals tw o “fam ilies” of sects:
(1) P aulician, M anichee
(2) M ontanist, A th in ganian , P hrygian, Sabbatian.
H aving rem oved th e P aulicians from his discussion Gouillard pro­
ceeds to discuss the second “fa m ily ”. He asks th e question, “W ho were
th e M on tan ists?” and replies th a t th e y w ere n ot in th e tradition of th e
ancient M ontanists (whose traces disappear in th e sixth century). B y
utilizing a series of parallel te x ts Gouillard concludes th a t there is an
equation of heretical appellations : M o n ta n ists= A n th in g a n o i= P h ry -
g ia n s= S a b b a tia n s. H ow ever th e sources do n ot really tell us necessary
detailes ab out th is heretical “fa m ily ”, th ou gh contem porary observers
rightly characterized th e sects of th is period as Judaizing, Iconoclastic,
given to prophecy and m agic, and to gyrovaque m onasticism .
T he author describes th e third period (10th-12th c.) as a veritable
renascence of heresy: B ogom ils in th e B alkans, P hundagiagites-B ogo-
m ils in w estern A sia Minor, M essalians in Cappadocia, etc. The heretical
nom enclature once more changed as th e nam es M ontanist, Sabbatian,
Q uatuordecim an fell into disuse, and P aulician and A thinganus were
m entioned more rarely. The term B ogom il and M essalian cam e to dom ­
inate th e literature, th e affinities of th e tw o heresies being stressed,
and haeresiologists annexed th em to th e heretical line of th e P aulicians.
Gouillard tak es th e position th a t b oth B ogom ils and Neo-M essalians
represent a con tin u ity of th e P aulician and old M essalian heresies, both
heresies flourishing in areas w here P aulicianism and M essalianism had
bloom ed.
G ouillard’s th esis of th e con tin u ity betw een B ogom ilism and P a u ­
licianism seem s quite plausible, and indeed th e author could h ave mar-
tialled th e scant sources of th e ten th -elev en th centuries to support
th is con tin u ity. B y w ay of exam ple, it is n ot u nlikely th a t th e Phunda-
giagites in O psicium and th e B ogom ils of th e Cibyrrheote, w hom Eu-
th ym iu s (976-1025) m entions, are sim p ly th e older Paulicians w ith
new nam es. T he P aulicians seem to have m oved into Pisidia as early
as th e eighth century (R u n cim an , T he M edieval M anichee, p. 35), and
in th e te n th century th e y w ere still a vigorous sect which threatened
the O rthodox. T his detail em erges from the life of St. Paul th e Y ounger
(t 955), A .B ., X I (1892), 156.
“ Ά πόδειξις των είρημένων αί κατά των Μανιχαίων αύτών σπουδαί*
 V III
229

ών τούς έπιση μοτέρ ου ς καί τώ βλάπτειν πιθανωτέρους, των ορίων Κιβυρ-

£αιώτου τέ φημι καί Μιλήτου μακράν έκτετόπικε. .
The “M anichees” of th e Cibyrrheote were such a danger to th e O rtho­
dox th a t St. P aul had their leaders exiled from th e them e. Manichee
here is certainly a reference to th e Paulicians, an equation w hich had
existed at least since th e early n in th century, Theophanes, I, 488,
“των δε Μανιχαίων, των νυν Παυλικιάνων καλού μένων.”
The d ate of St. P aul (f 955) places th e existence of th e Paulicians
in th e C ibyrrheote w ell before E u th ym iu s (976-1025) refers to th e B o­
gom ils in th e area. A century later St. Lazarus of G alesium converted
a village of unnam ed heretics in th e bishopric of P h iletu s (under the me*
trop, of M yrrha), and th e p ossib ility th a t th ey were Paulicians is sug­
gested b y his conversion of a Paulician in his m onastery (A. S. N ov.
I l l , 512, 543). These incidentals from th e v ita e of Sts. Paul and Lazarus
are strong ind ication s th a t th e P aulician heresy w as a significant one
in th e Cibyrrheote T hem e during th e ten th -eleven th centuries and th a t
th e Cibyrrheote “B ogom ils” m ention ed b y E uthym ius (976-1025) are
one and th e sam e w ith th e P aulicians. T he tradition of onom astic con­
fusion is a strong one in th e w orks of B yzan tine haeresiologists (M ani­
ch ee—P aulician, T heophanes, I, 488; B ogom il—M essalian, Rh. & P .,
II, 531-532, IV, 408), and given th e sim ilarities in th e doctrines of
B ogom ils and Paulicians it is h igh ly probable th a t th e P aulicians of
Cibyrrheote m erely received new nam es.
Gouillard concludes his im p ortan t contribution w ith tw o proposi­
tions: ( l)T h e heresies of th e B ogom ils, M essalians, and P aulicians absorb­
ed w hat rem ained of th e old gnostic and prophetic traditions em bodied
in M arcionism and M ontanism . (2) There is a co n tin u ity in th e sec­
tarian life of th e em pire, th ou gh onem u st also tak e accoun t cases of
spontaneous resurgence and “foreign” contributions.
*****
N. Svoronos, “Les privilèges de l ’église à l ’époque des Comnènes:
un rescrit in éd it de Manuel 1er C om nène”, 325-391, m akes im portant
additions to our know ledge of B y za n tin e fiscal, social, and religious
history. A n acknow ledged au th ority on B y zan tin e finance, Svoronos
edits and translates f. 8 -8v of M arcianus gr. 173, and utilizes th is short
te x t as th e startin g poin t for an in v estig a tio n of th e fiscal and ecclesias­
tical policies of Manuel I. T he author dates th e docum ent to 1171 and
identifies it as an im perial rescript of M anuel I in w hich th e em peror
expresses his desires in th e q uestion of property held b y ju st or unjust
V III
230

titles. Svoronos relates this rescript to a series of M anuel’s chrysobulls

w hich reflect a b itter struggle b etw een th e fiscal agents and th e church.
T hough th e docum ents describe th e agents as greedy and ferocious th ey
n evertheless indicate th a t th e church had acquired property in a h igh ly
irregular m anner. M any of th ese abuses are know n from M acedonian
tim es b u t th e y were n ot so ex ten siv e as th e y becam e in th e tw elfth cen­
tu ry. T he sta te had reacted again st such abuses in th e ten th and e le v ­
en th centuries, b u t in th e tw elfth century A lex iu s I and Manuel I had
declared th e agrarian ordinances t o b e in op erative for certain ecclesias­
tical and la y m agn ates and it is b y th is artifice th a t church and la ity
were able to co n stitu te th eir enorm ous properties. The emperors allowed
th is because th e y needed th e support of b oth la y and ecclesiastical lords.
Svoronos divides M anuel’s fiscal p olicy tow ard th e church into tw o
chronological periods: (1) 1143-58 M anuel issued a num ber of ch ry­
sobulls w hich attem p ted to regulate th e quarrel b etw een th e fisc and
th e church, and th ese d ocum ents were com prehensive, encom passing
th e to ta lity of th e church, i.e., bishops, m etrop olitans, priests, and St.
Sophia. In strivin g to safeguard th e rights of th e state, Manuel con tin u ­
ou sly gave in to th e dem ands of th e church, legalizing property acqui­
sition w hich th e latter had m ade illegally and also awarding new pri­
\
vileges. (2) 1158-76 T he ex cessiv e privileges of th e church provoked
conflict am ong th e various social groups w hich in turn prom pted th e
em peror to equalize his gen erosity to all th e pow erful. F inally, during th e
la tter part of his reign (1166-67), pressed b y needs of m on ey for his w e st­
ern project and pushed b y th e ram pant agressions of th e pow erful,
M anuel to o k m ore energetic m easures to bridle their land and privi­
lege-hunger. B y th ese la te m easures M anuel appears as one of th e la st
em perors to a ttem p t to h alt th e grow th of th e powerful.
T he com plex stu d y of Svoronos is a n otew orth y addition to our
know ledge of th e evolu tion of B uzantin e fiscalo-agrarian history dur­
ing th e tw elfth century. Of great interest is his indication th a t th e
m ain th ru st of M anuel’s generosity favored th e church throughout his
reign (even in th e more parsim onious m ood of his later years). T h is
raises an im p ortan t question: W h y did M anuel so favor th e church?
Svoronos rem arks th a t M anuel rewarded b oth th e la y and ecclesiasti­
cal m agnates w ith concessions because he needed th eir support. N ow
his need of th e m ilitary support of th e la ity is self evid en t... wars in th e
w est, th e B alkans, and A sia Minor. B u t w h y did he favor th e church
over th e la y m agnates? W h a t support could th e y give him (aside from
 V III
231

their prayers w hich in an y case th e y w ould tender on th e em peror’s

behalf)? In short Svoronos has show n th a t M anuel strongly subsidized
th e church, b u t he has n ot indicated w h y th e em peror did so.
He explains th e irregularity in th e acquisition of property b y th e
church as h avin g arisen %from th e anom alous situ ation created b y the
invasions and upheavals of th e la te eleventh century in th e Balkans,
A natolia, and th e isles. D uring th is period, he continues, th e represent­
atives of th e bishops and m etrop olitans rem ained in their districts and
profited from th e disarray and th e flight of population to tak e lands
and rights in action s w h ich w ere d irectly opposed to B yzan tine legisla­
tio n (p. 347). T hus Svoronos assum es an unbroken co n tin u ity in th e
grow th and acquisition of ecclesiastical property from th e M acedonian
to th e Com nenian period.
B u t let us exam in e th e conditions atten dan t upon th e Turkish
invasion s of A n a to lia in th e eleven th and tw elfth centuries, for such an
exam in ation w ill shed ligh t on th e increased anom alies related to land
ownership and w ill also help to illu m in ate M anuel’s ecclesiastical policy
in m atters of land ownership and ta x exem ptions. T he sources on the
fate of th e church in A n atolia during th e Turkish invasions and s e ttle ­
m ents reveal a v io len t disruption of ecclesiastical adm inistration and
econom ic life. Contrary to Svoron os’ assertion is th e fact th a t bishops
and m etropolitans were rem oved from th e ecclesiastical seats in A n a­
tolia for considerable periods of tim e. T his disruption in th e co n tin u ity
of episcopal and m etropolitan adm inistration w as accom panied b y a
drastic im p overization of th e A n atolian churches. T he Turkish policy
of rem oving th e hierarchs and of th e m ass confiscation of church prop­
erties is discernable from th e la te eleven th century u ntil th e reign of
M anuel I (R . & P ., II, 46, 147, 388, 390-391, 344; III, 156, 274-275.
Z epos, JG R . I, 325-326). In a p rostaxis of 1093 A lexiu s rem arked of th e
clerics prom oted to A n atolian seats :
“T h ey fear th a t as such churches are located in th e A natolian re­
gions th e y (the appointees) shall never h ave th e necessities, for th e
churches to w hich th e y h ave been appointed are altogether poor and
entirely inaccessible to th e m .” (R. & P. II, 390-391; Zepos, JG R , I, 325-
326).
This prostaxis has survived in B alsam on ’s com m ents on canon 37 of
th e Council in Trullo, a canon concerned w ith bishops and m etropoli­
tan s w ho are unable to ta k e over th eir churches because of barbarian
invasions and occupation,
V III
232

“The present canon decrees th a t th e bishops w ho have not been able

to go to their appointed thrones because of barbarian attack are to be
honored, and are to carry out all th e episcopal d uties... and are plainly
to be reckoned as if th e y had gone to their church and been enthroned.
Ju st so th e m etropolitan of Iconium , and other A n atolian m etropolitans
w ho h ave no churches as th e y are held b y th e barbarians, validly^ordain
bishops. A nd th e y carry ou t all th e m etrop olitan duties, even if th ey
were n ot at all able to go their appointed churches and to be enthron­
ed .” (R. & P. II 390).
One m u st therefore assum e, contrary to Svoronos, a basic disrup­
tio n of ecclesiastical adm inistration and land ow n ing in A natolia during
parts of th e eleven th -tw elfth centuries. C onsequently th e large-scale
acquisition of estates b y th e church (at least in A natolia) in th e tw elfth
century is n ot a con tin uation of th e process w h ich is so m uch in e v i­
dence in th e ten th -elev en th centuries prior to th e Turkish invasions.
This decline of th e A natolian church is no doubt one of th e basic ex p la ­
nations behind th e econom ic generosity of M anuel’s ecclesiastical p ol­
icy, and indeed it is already to be observed in th e policies of A lexius I
(In th e prostaxis of 1093 A lexiu s provided for th e indigent A n atolian
clergy, w hich had tak en up its residence in C onstantinople). The T ur­
kish conq uest had rem oved B yzan tin e control from practically all of
A n atolia b y th e early years of th e reign of A lexiu s I and th is entailed
n ot only a m ass exodus of Greeks from w estern A n a to lia b u t th e col­
lapse of th e church. T he m o st im portant accom plishm ent of th e Com-
nenian d y n a sty w as th e recovery of th e A n atolian littoral from th e Turks
and th e recolonization of th ese regions. A lexiu s I, John II, and M anuel I
resettled th e reconquered lands, rebuilt th e tow n s, and as a v ita l ele­
m ent in th is recolonization th e y gave u nstin ted support to th e re-estab­
lishm ent of th e ecclesiastical in stitu tio n . It w as for th is reason th a t
th e em perors m ain tained th e m etropolitan hierarchy in ta c t and pro­
vided th e titu laries w ith incom e, even w h en th e hierarchs were unable
to go to th eir A n atolian churches.
“Thus let it be n oted th a t th e A natolian bishops w ho do n ot have
seats because their churches are held b y foreigners are n ot to be ejected
from th e queen of citie s.” (R . & P ., I l l , 274-275. The B ishops of E u ­
rope, how ever, were n o t to be allow ed to rem ain in C onstantinople).
W ith th e rem oval of th e T urks from w estern A n atolia b y th eC om nenoi
th e hierarchs once m ore entered their churches, received lands and pri­
vileges, and p layed a v ita l role in th e revival of B yzan tin e control and
society in th e reconquered lands. T he efforts of th e em perors to revive
 VIII
233

th e church w ere n ot lim ited to their new A natolian dom ains, but ex ten d ­
ed as w ell to th e lands held b y th e Turks. E uthym ius Tornices, in a
florid eulogy addressed to M anuel, indicates th a t th e emperor enjoyed
som e success in forcing th e Turks to ap ply his ecclesiastical policies in
their dom ains, i.e ., to receive th e bishops and to g iv e la n d to the ch u rch .
“Y ou persuade th e barbarians to free th e Christians from acts of
violence, to give th em ex ten siv e land to express freely their p iety, and
to receive th e spiritual guardians of each city (bishops). A nd it seem ed
th a t y o u escort th e churches of God again and carefully select th e groom s
th a t th e y m igh t n ot outrage th e w edd ing cerem onies. Y ou do not wed
new w idow s, as th e com m and of th e apostle desires, b u t th ose w ho are
long w idow ed and consum ed b y love for their grooms. Now th e churches
of th e east are once more clad in w h ite, h aving shed th e darkness of
their w id ow ’s garm ents, and th e y em brace their groom s, sing th e nup ­
tial song, and th e children are co m fo rted ...” (P apadopulos-K eram eus,
Sbornik vizan tiisk ik h te x to v X I I -X I I I v ., St. Petersburg, 1913, 182-
183).
V iew ed against th ese rem arks th e econom ic generosity of M anuel’s
ecclesiastical p olicy tak es on a n ew light. The church had suffered a
nearly m ortal blow in A n atolia and th e em perors had to do everything
in their pow er to revive it. E ven th e patriarchate and m onasteries lo ca t­
ed in C onstantinople (and therefore n ot in Turkish lands) suffered lo s­
ses of revenues w h en th e Turks occupied A natolia. T he Turkish in v a ­
sions and continuous raids m u st also h a v e contributed to th e disorder
w hich Svoronos has ind icated in th e titles and docum ents associated
w ith land ownership.
* *
*
I. B eldiceanu-Steinherr, “La conquête d ’Adrinople par les Turcs:
L a pén étration turque en Thrace et la valeur des chroniques o tto m a n es”,
431-461, is a fascin atin g article w hich, in attem p tin g to settle th e chro­
n ology of th e Turkish conquest of A drianople, produces som e startl­
ing propositions. B eldiceanu-Steinherr’s argum entation and her ex a m ­
ination of th e source problem s (she m akes interesting use of th e life
of Sheyh B edr ed -D in of Sim avna), too com plex to discuss in a review ,
lead th e author to form conclusions w hich all stu d en ts of early O tto­
m an expansion (w hether or n ot th e y agree) m u st henceforth tak e into
account.
1. T he in itia l Turkish conquest of A drianople and parts of Thrace
w as th e w ork of em irate Turks, i.e. n on-O ttom an Turks.
2. T hese em irate Turks captured A drianople som etim e b etw een
1365-1369.
vm
234

3. T he first O ttom an to ta k e possession of Adrianople w as M u­

rad I, and he did so in 1376-77 or 1377.
4. T he attribu tion of th e first T urkish con q uest of Adrianople to
th e house of O sm an is a fiction of th e official court chroniclers, w ho
desired to attribu te th is deed to th e O ttom ans for purposes of d ynastic
glorification. C onsequently w e h ave one m ore exam ple of th e unrelia­
b ility of th e court creatures, and th e author righ tfu lly suggests th a t w e
m u st review our know ledge of th e early T urkish penetration in Thrace.
Crucial to her argum ent is th e history of th e enigm atic H aci Ilbeği
(from Qaras!) w ho crossed to T hrace w ith U m ur of A ydin and w ho (ac­
cording to B eldiceanu-Steinherr) conquered D id ym oteichus and A dria­
nople. T he k ey to th e problem is to ascertain w h en and if H aci Ilbeği
becam e attach ed to th e O ttom an rulers, and w as he so attached at th e
tim e th a t he to o k A drianople.
*****

F in ally, th e articles of C. A struc, “L a trad ition m anuscrite des

oeuvres oratoires profanes de T héodore II L ascaris”, 393-404, D. Jacoby,
“U n aspect de la fiscalité v én itien n e dans le P éloponnèse aux X IV e et
XVe siècles : Le zo v a ticu m ”, 405-420; and J. V erpeaux, “Hiérarchie
et préséance sous les P aléologu es”, 421-437, m ake useful contributions
to th e fields of B y za n tin e philology, econom ic and adm inistrative h is­
tory.
W ith th e in itiation of th e new series, T ravau x et Mémoires, M on­
sieur Lem erle and his colleagues have m ade an im pressive contribution
to B yzan tin e studies, one w hich is as rich in co n ten t as it is in variety.
Scholars w ill an xiou sly aw ait th e appearance of th e second tom e, b u t
future contributors are forewarned th a t th e y w ill h ave to strive m ig h ti­
ly to equal th e q u ality of th is first volum e. B y za n tin ists are greatly in ­
debted to th e director and his fellow contributors for th is scholarly jew el !

U n iv ersity of California
Los A ngeles
Byzantium and the Muslim World
 IX

BYZANTIUM AND ISLAM

SEVEN-SEVENTEENTH CENTURY*

/. The First Period

Despite the great religious and linguistic differences which separated
Byzantine and Islamic civilizations, differences reinforced by political
enmity and almost a millennium of mortal combat, one perceives strik­
ing similarities in the Byzantine and Islamic cultures. In the relations of
the citizen to God, to the state, to his fellow citizen, to the exploitation
of the soil and the sea, and even in those highly particular manifesta­
tions of man’s soul and mind which we usually describe as cultural or
intellectual endeavor, these similarities are so definite that they seem to
mock the linguistic, religious, and political differences.1 The problem
which arises here is that of isolating certain of these similarities and
then of explaining their origin. It is obviously impossible to exhaust
such a topic in the brief period which the directors of the conference
have so wisely allotted. But even if the generosity of the directors had
matched their wisdom (and let me add that one should be infinitely
more wise than generous), the task of covering exhaustively these sim­
ilarities throughout 1000 years of development would still have been
doomed to unfulfillment, for the complex problems which stud the com­
parative approach to Byzantine and Islamic civilizations still await the
efforts of the various specialists. Though these questions have long

* T his paper was presented at the sym posium , M edieval G reece: Background
and Legacy, April 21-22, 1967, at the U niversity o f C olorado.
!G . von Grunebaum , M ed ieva l Islam . A S tu dy in C u ltu ral O rientation, 2nd ed.
(C hicago, 1 9 5 3 ).

205
IX
206

interested me I have investigated only a small portion of them on the

basis of a detailed exam ination, and only during the latter period of
Byzantino-Islam ic relations. B ut in a m eeting such as the present one,
where we are concerned with m ore general characterizations of the
medieval G reek heritage, I have taken this broad scope as scholarly
license to w ade into the factual m orass of a thousand years of history,
and to attem pt to generalize outside the area of my own detailed re­
searches. The rem arks which follow are to be construed as a prelim inary
and cursory investigation and nothing m ore.
W hen the A rabs left the A rabian peninsula and conquered their em ­
pire in the seventh century they em erged into an area which had enjoyed
alm ost a thousand years of com m on culture and history. This statem ent
is assuredly a vast oversimplification of the situation in the N ear E ast
during the 956 years separating the deaths of A lexander the G reat and
M uham m ud, for intense local variety is discernable at every point. B ut
the A lexandrian conquests serve as a w ater shed in the history of the
N ear E ast after which there emerges a new cultural koine in m uch of
the area. A t the basis of this koine were elements from the G raeco-
R om an, Iranian, Semitic, and Egyptian traditions, which in one form
o r another becam e p art of a com m on culture. O n the shores of the
M editerranean the G raeco-R om an com ponent tended to predom inate,
whereas a m ovem ent eastw ard reveals the predom inance of the Perso-
Babylonian com ponents. These differences were undoubtedly reinforced
by the political juxtaposition first of R om e and P arthia and then of
Byzantium and Sassanid Persia, but these political antagonism s and
divisions were not sufficient to disturb the cultural entity of the N ear
E ast, an entity which stands apart from th at of India, C entral A sia, and
China, and is basically related to that of the M editerranean world. E le­
m ents from the eastern portion of the cultural entity moved west (such
were the divine absolute m onarchy, the com plex bureaucracy, and
m ystery religions). Conversely, elements of G raeco-R om an science,
m athem atics, art, geography, medicine, philosophy, and law entered the
cultural life of the m ore eastern com ponents of this cultural area. It was
the presence of H ellenism in medieval Islam ic civilization which caused
/ the great Islam ist C arl B ecker to rem ark that the unified character of
Islam ic civilization rested on a base of Hellenism , a foundation which in
turn related Islam ic civilization to that of E urope rather than to those
of India, C entral A sia, and China. It was with this concept in m ind th at
he coined a Pirennism (before the tim e of P irenne) : “W ithout A lex­
ander, no M uham m ud.” T h at is to say, before the appearance of M u-
 Byzantium and Islam 207

Immmuil many of the areas over which his religion eventually spread
possessed a unified civilization and the basis of this unity was late
Hellenism. In essence Becker’s theory is not unlike th at which explains
the spread of C hristianity by the existence of the R om an E m pire and
the (ireek language .2
W hether one agrees or disagrees with such a sharp conceptualization
of this cultural koine there can be little doubt that there is a substantial
truth in B ecker’s Pirennism . A lm ost universally accepted by Islam ists is
the proposition that a good deal in Islam ic civilization is of non-A rab
origin. W hether one thinks of the Islam ic state and adm inistration, or its
m aterial and intellectual culture, there is com paratively little which the
Byzantines and Persians did not influence. E ven in those cultural facets
which are of A rab origin, th at is the Islam ic religion and law, there are
the tell-tale traces of C hristian dogm atism , and a Rom ano-B yzantine
law. Thus the conquering A rabs adapted themselves to the existing
civilization which they found in their em pire b u t they clothed it in the
wealthy raim ent of the A rabic language and in the religious idiom of
their prophet M uham m ud.
A fter such a broad introduction we m ust now narrow the question
som ewhat to consider the influence of medieval H ellenism on Islam ic
civilization. In m any respects it was the P ersian rather than the B yzan­
tine legacy w hich was decisive for the developm ent of Islam ic civiliza­
tion, and because I shall concentrate hereafter on the Byzantine legacy
one should not m isconstrue this concentration on Byzantium to the
exclusion of Persia. O f equally great interest and im portance are the
influences which Islam ic civilization exercised on Byzantium , b ut these
also will receive no treatm ent h ere .3 O ne m ay add parenthetically th at
Byzantine and Persian forms were often so sim ilar (being themselves
the product of this cultural koine) that the question of im m ediate P er­
sian or Byzantine inspiration of a particular institution in Islam ic civili­
zation is rendered difficult and obscure.
W hat were the vehicles by which B yzantine Hellenism was diffused?
T here were the G reeks themselves, m ost num erous in A sia M inor and

2C. Becker, Islam stu dien. V om W erden und W esen der islam ischen W elt (here­
after Isla m stu d ien ) I, (Leipzig, 1 9 24), 1-39.
3A s for instance in art, court cerem onial, and later in astronom y. D . Sourdel,
“Questions de cérém onial abbaside,” R evu e des É tudes Islam iques X X V III
(1 9 6 0 ), 121-148. C. D iehl, M an uel d a r t byza n tin , 2nd ed. (Paris, 1 9 2 5 ), 369-
70 and passim . D . Pingree, “G regory C hioniades and Palaeologan Astronom y,
D u m barton O aks P apers, X V III (1 9 6 4 ), 133-160.
IX
2 08

the Balkans but present as m inorities in Syria and Egypt. F a r m ore

im portant in this diffusion were the non-G reek subjects of the provinces,
that is the Copts, Syriac C hristians and the pagan Sabaeans of H arran .
There can be no doubt th at the A ram aic-Syriac Christians played the
m ost im portant role in the diffusion of this Hellenism. T heir ecclesias­
tical communities form ed a bridge over which the Byzantine and Sas-
sanid customs and practices entered the m elting pot of the cultural
koine. It is no accident th at m any of the G reek and Persian loanw ords
which entered A rabic at an early date entered not directly from G reek
and Pahlevi, but via A ram aic or Syriac forms. T he pre-Islam ic A rabs
living on the Syrian borders had already been heavily influenced by this
Syriac H ellenism, and after the A rab conquest the Syriac speakers be­
cam e the teachers and civilized inculcators of the conquerors. It was
these Syriac Christians, w hether N estorians or M onophysites, who
played the m ajor role in the transm ission of the Hellenic intellectual
heritage to Islam ic civilization. Thus we have a seeming paradox, th at
the principle vehicle of B yzantine influence was n ot the G reeks them ­
selves, but a group of their form er Semitic subjects. T heir partial H el-
lenization is apparent in the attention which their intellectuals gave to
G reek science, philosophy, m edicine, and literature. Thus w hen we
speak of the M onophysite and N estorian reaction against C halcedonian-
ism we m ust rem em ber that this religious antagonism (itself based on
different G reek schools) of G reeks and non-G reeks did not m ean th at
the Semitic Christians rejected this im portant segment of the H ellenic
heritage. Hellenism did not enter Islam solely via G reek and Syriac
speakers, for there is also evidence for the fact th at the Persians and
Indians as well were purveyors of a p a rt of this intellectual stream .
G reek lore passed into A rabic via translations from Pahlevi (a p attern
discernible in the translations of the Persian al-M uqaffa in the ninth
cen tu ry ), w hereas the translations of certain Sanscrit geographical
works into A rabic brought with them G reek elem ents which had entered
Indian geographical science at an earlier date. A principal source of
G reek influence on the developm ent of the theory and practice of m edi­
cine in Baghdad was the N estorian medical academ y in the Persian city
of G undeshapur. The physicians and professors of this school not only
cultivated the traditions of G reek m edicine but w ere called to Baghdad
to found hospitals and to teach medicine. Im p o rtan t in the acquisition
of the m aterial aspects of Byzantine civilization was the role of the A rab
auxiliary tribes (G hassanids and L akhm ids) who had lived for centuries
on the borders of Byzantium and Persia. Finally, and perhaps m ost im-
 Byzantium and I slam 209

portant in conveying Byzantine culture and practice to M uslims were the

converted Copts, Syrians, A rm enians, and G reeks who by the ninth
century constituted a m ajority of the population inhabiting the form erly
Byzantine provinces of the L evant .4
I have, up to this point, spoken briefly of general questions: the cul­
tural koine of the N ear E ast and the vehicle of diffusion of Byzantine
Hellenism. T o these I should like to attach a short outline of the factors
which played a role in determ ining Byzantino-Islam ic relations in the
cultural and other spheres. F irst: the A rabs brought certain forms with
them w hen they emerged from A rabia, and the m ost im portant of these
for the N ear E ast were the A rabic language, a highly developed A rabic
poetry, and the religion of M uham m ud. The language, poetry, and reli­
gion, for a variety of reasons, were equal or superior to their equivalents
in the Pre-Islam ic N ear E ast, but in m ost everything else A rab society
was not nearly so developed as that of the non-M uslim s. Second: Egypt,
Syria, A sia M inor, the Balkans, and N orth A frica were highly devel­
oped regions of B yzantine civilization, as similarly Iran and Ira q were
the abode of the Perso-B abylonian culture .5 R oughly speaking, the E u ­
phrates R iver system m arked the dividing line betw een the Persian and
Byzantine versions of the E rbe der A ntike. T hird: the A rab conquest
was not destructive; the older societies survived the conquest intact . . .

4D e Lacy O’Leary, H o w G reek Science P assed to the A ra b s (L ondon, 1 9 48).

Becker, Islam studien, I, 17. S. Fraenkel, D ie aram äischen F rem dw örter im A ra ­
bischen (Leiden, 1 8 6 6 ). A . Siddiqi, Studien über die persischen F rem dw örter im
klassischen A rabisch (G ottingen, 1 9 19). A . Siassi, “L’Université de G ond i
Shahpur,” M élanges H . M assé (Tehran, 1 9 6 3 ), 366-374. “G ondëshâpür,” EL,.
C .A . N allin o, “Tracce di öpere greche giunte agli Arabi per trafila pehlevica,”
R accolta d i şeritti ed iti e in editi, vol. VI (R om e, 1 9 4 8 ), 285-303. For the role o f
the Arab auxiliaries o f Byzantium see the various articles o f Irfan (K aw ar)
Shahid, “Byzantium and K inda,” B yzantinische Z eitsch rift, LUI (1 9 6 0 ), 57-73;
“Procopius and K inda,” B yzantinische Z eitsch rift, LUI (1 9 6 0 ), 74-76; “The
Patriciate o f A rethas,” B yzantinische Z eitsch rift, LII (1 9 5 9 ), 321-343; “The
Last D ays o f Salih,” A rabica , V (1 9 5 8 ), 145-158. N .V . Pigulevskaia, A ra b y u
g ran its-V izantii i İrana v IV -V I vv (M oscow -Leningrad, 1964).
5F or descriptions o f Byzantine and Iranian societies in these areas just prior to
the Arab conquest one may consult the follow in g: G. D ow ney, A H istory o f
A n tioch in Syria: F rom Seleucus to the A ra b C onqu est (Princeton, 19 6 1 ). M.
G eizer, Studien zu r byzantinische V erw altu ng A eg yp ten s (Leipzig, 1909). C.
D iehl, L ’A friq u e byzan tin e (Paris, 18 9 6 ). P. Goubert, B yzance avant l’Islam .
1 B yzance et l’O rient sous les successeurs de Justinien. L ’E m pereur M aurice
(Paris, 1 9 5 1 ). G . Rouillard, L ’A dm in istration civile de l’E gypte byzan tin e, 2nd
ed. (Paris, 19 2 8 ). A . Christensen, L ’Iran sou s les Sassanides, 2nd ed. (C op en­
hagen, 1 9 4 4 ).
IX
210

violent disruption having been limited to the political apex. T h at is to

say that the Sassanid m onarchy cam e to an end, and the B yzantine
em perors lost control of Egypt, Syria, and N orth Africa. F o u rth : by the
eighth century of the Christian era there is a crystallization of A rabic as
the language of governm ent, and of Islam as an articulate religious
structure. T hereafter these linguistic and religious norm s begin to pene­
trate and to re-arrange the various aspects of organized life in the N ear
East. Though these four factors do not exhaust the categories of deter­
m ining factors, they are sufficient guidelines for this short paper. T here
are, finally, two m ore grids of m nem onic and causal expedience which
will help to give this paper some form. It is not only convenient (at least
for the tem porally m inded race of h isto rian s), but it is also factually
accurate to posit three distinct periods, eras, or waves of Byzantine
influence on Islam ic civilization. T he first begins with the A rab conquest
and ends with the dem ise of the U m ayyad caliphate in the east. The
second begins with the shift of the caliphate to B aghdad, a shift which
displaces the center of gravity of Islam ic civilization from a B yzantine
to a Sassanid milieu. T he third coincides w ith the establishm ent of the
Seljuks and O ttom ans in A sia M inor and the Balkans, a move which
brought an im portant segm ent of Islam into the strongest Byzantine
environm ent. A long with these tem poral dem arcations one should keep
in m ind a two-fold topical one. Byzantium exercised its influence on the
level of form al culture, th at is to say, on the level of civilization which
the state, established religion, form al art, literature, etc., operated, and
also on the level of w hat we would call popular or folk culture. The
historical process of cultural transm ission and continuity thus operated
or failed to operate at these two levels. The rulers and upper classes
played a predom inant role in determ ining cultural developm ents on this
form al level, w hereas this form al culture either left the folk level un­
affected or little affected, or else it took centuries to affect it and then
often did so only in the form of a gross cultural symbiosis and synthesis.—
T he period of Islam ic history which began with the A rab conquests
and ended with the A bbasid revolution was one of the shortest as well
as one of the m ost explosive eras in the long annals of Islam . It was
also the period of the greatest and m ost intense Byzantine influence on
developing Islam ic civilization. In short there were few aspects of By­
zantine society which did not continue to exist u nder and to be im itated
by the A rab conquerors in this one and a quarter century. This B yzan-
tinization is evident in the very highest institution of the new A rab
Em pire, the caliphate. T he despotism so exotically and magnificently
 Byzantium and Islam 211

described in the Thousand and One Nights, entrapped with aulic for­
mulae, rituals, processions, seclusion, rich court costum es, with the
highly developed court retinue, is a far cry from the simple, almost
primitive am biance of M uham m ud and the early orthodox caliphs. It is
obvious that the road from the court of A bu B ekr to th at of H aru n -ar-
Rashid proceeded via the courts of H eraclius and Chosroes. T he sim­
plicity of A rab court life is revealed by an anecdote which has as its
subject the enigmatic C hristian M ukaukas, the first governor of Egypt
after its conquest. A ccording to the story a group of A rabs seated on
the ground were am azed at the appearance of the C hristian lord being
carried on a golden litter. The startled A rabs did not at first realize that
their C hristian subjects w ere long conditioned to show respect to those
who were ornam ented with the symbols of authority .6 The contrast b e­
tween the original A rab simplicity and Byzantine court form emerges
in a second story which T abari tells. M uaw iyya was criticized for having
adopted the foreign ways of the Basileis and of the Shahs, to w hich he
replied, “that D am ascus was full of G reeks and that none w ould believe
in his pow er if he did not behave and look like an em peror .” 7 Thus,
under Byzantine influence the caliphate was first im perialized, a process
com m enced by the U m ayyads, and later com pleted by the A bbasids who
Iranized it. T here seems no reason to doubt the fact th at the caliphate
would have becom e a m ore com plex institution even if there had been
no Byzantine or Persian models to copy, for the fact of the m assive con­
quests dem anded som ething m ore than the prim itive caliphate. H ow ­
ever, such phenom ena as the designation of a royal heir by the caliph
himself, the policy of glorification through m onum ental architecture,
num ism atic policy, cerem onial adaptations, the definition of law by
im perial rescript, plus the above anecdotes leave little room for doubt
th at the B yzantine basileia had a profound influence on the Islam ic
khalifiya. The determ ined and nearly successful attacks of the U m ay­
yads on C onstantinople strongly support G ibb’s thesis th at the U m ay­
yads w ere not only em ulating the em perors on the B osphorus b u t ac­
tually hoped to replace them .8 Though later M uslims had largely forgot­
ten the non-A rab origins of the im perial character of the caliphate, so

6Ibn Khaldun, The M u qaddim ah , tr. F. Rosenthal (hereafter Ibn K haldu n), 1Ï,
(N ew York, 1 9 5 8 ), 53.
70 . Grabar, “Islam ic Art and Byzantium ,” D u m barton O aks P apers, X V III
(1 9 6 4 ), 88.
8H .A .R . G ibb, “Arab-Byzantine R elations under the U m ayyad Caliphate,”
D u m barton O aks P apers, X II (1 9 5 8 ), 223-233.
IX
212

discerning an author as Ibn K haldun perceived it clearly in the fifteenth

century.

They (Muslims) wanted to avoid the coarseness of royal authority

and do without royal customs. They also despised pomp, which has
nothing whatever to do with the truth. The caliphate then came to be
royal authority, and the Muslims learned to esteem the splendor and
luxury of this world. Persian and Byzantine clients, subjects of the
p r eced in g (P rs-T slam ic) d y n asties, mixed w ith them and showed them
their ways of ostentation and luxury .9
T he nature of the evidence for Byzantine influences in the realm of
adm inistrative and therefore also of econom ic life in this early period is
m uch m ore detailed and far m ore satisfactory in term s of specific con­
clusions. T hanks to the Egyptian clim ate and soil the historian is able
to gain a true insight into the extent of this Byzantine influence on the
institutional life of the new em pire during the early years. It has fre­
quently been suggested that E gypt always constituted a unique historical
case and consequently a study of the early institutions there does not
necessarily provide us with any indication as to w hat m ay have h ap ­
pened in Syria and elsewhere. This m ay be true in term s of specific
taxes and offices, but on the m ore general level of continuity o r lack of
continuity there is evidence th at the E gyptian exam ple is not w ithout
value for Syria. Im portant Byzantine adm inistrative units and offices had
been those of the eparchies and the duces, the pagarchies and the pa-
garchs, with the civil governor (the A ugoustalios) resident in A lexan­
dria. T he A rabs m aintained, essentially, the Byzantine adm inistrative
apparatus with all the above offices and divisions. H ow ever they adapted
it along m ore centralized lines. H enceforth the pagarchs becam e the
m ost im portant adm inistrative officials and w ere p u t under the governor
at F ustat with the result that the assessment of the tax shares on the
sm aller units within the pagarchy was carried out in F u stat rath er than
in the pagarchy itself. U ntil the end of the seventh century of the C hris­
tian era these officials cam e from the ranks of the Christian landed aris­
tocracy, and they continued to m aintain their local Christian military
levies as in Byzantine times. The tax structure was, therefore, virtually
the same as it had been on the eve of the conquest. The basic tax divi­
sions rem ained the Byzantine demosia, extraordina, and corvees. T he
first, the haraj ad-dim usiya, continued under the A rabs to consist of the

<Jlb n Khaldun, II, 50. On the Byzantine origin o f the tiraz, A. G rohm ann,
T ira z,” E Ir
 B yzan ti um and I slam 213

chrysika dem osia (cash tax on agricultural land, poll tax, d a p a n e ), and
of the cm bola (corn tax ) which was stored in the silos of Babylon or
Fustat for the A rab settlers in E gypt or to be exported to M ecca and
Medina. T he extraordina consisted of requisitions m ade as the need
occurred for the fleet, docks, arsenals, governm ent buildings, etc. There
were also the old Byzantine corvees for the upkeep of canals and the
like. N ot only were the taxes and the m achinery of early M uslim E gypt
Byzantine, but the A rab language had to borrow the term ini technici
from the Byzantine adm inistrative language, either in A rab translitera­
tion or translation .10 T he com plex E gyptian tax system rem ained the
bailiwick of the C hristian Copts for centuries after the fisc had been
A rabized, and the fiscal governor, the amil, usually had two Coptic
chartularii directly under him. Also the fine and old Byzantine custom
of double receipts is evident in the practice whereby the incom e of the
state granaries was witnessed and receipted by two officials.11
A bandoning the E gyptian docum ents, a brief survey of the num is­
m atic policies of this early period again illustrates the grip of Byzantine
form s on the institutional life of this first Islam ic century, and it further
indicates that even though the Byzantine influence m ay have been m ore

10The basic taxes, the dem osia, sim ply becam e al-haraj ad-dimusi in the Arab
papyri. The tax registers, so frequently m entioned in both the Greek and Arab
papyri, entered the language o f the conquerors in the word tabl via Byzantine
tablon. The silos in w hich the sitika dem osia, the em bola or corn tax, were
stored cam e to be known in Arabic as hury (ahra) from horreum-orrion; farm
lands in lease were denoted as baqt from the Byzantino-Rom an pakton; al-usiya
from the Byzantine ousia was a landed dom ain. Byzantine tax officials who
survived, such as the grafeis and m eizon, becam e garafisis and m azun in the
Arab docum ents.
11Becker, Islam stu dien , I, 146-201; “Egypt,” E IX; “N eue arabische Papyri des
Aphroditofundes,” D e r Islam , I (1 9 1 0 ), 245-268; “H istorische Studien über das
Londoner Aphroditowerk,” D e r Islam , II (1 9 1 1 ), 359-371; “Steuerverhältnisse
im ersten Jahrhundert,” Beiträge zu r G eschichte Ä g yp ten s unter dem Islam
(Strassburg, 1 9 0 2 -0 3 ), 81-112. H.I. B ell, “T he Adm inistration o f Egypt under
the ‘U m ayyad K halifs,” B yzantinische Z eitsch rift, X X V III (1 9 2 8 ), 278-286;
“Translations o f the G reek A phrodito Papyri in the British M useum ,” D e r Islam ,
II (1 9 1 1 ), 269-283, 372-384; III (1 9 1 2 ), 132-140, 369-373; IV (1 9 1 3 ), 87-96.
A.J. Butler, The A ra b C onqu est o f E g y p t an d the L ast T hirty Y ears o f the R om an
D om in ion (O xford, 1 9 0 2 ), pp. 450 ff. W. Björkman, Beiträge zu r G eschichte
d er S taatskan zlei im islam ischen Ä g yp ten (H am burg, 1928), 17. A . G rohm ann,
Einführung und C h restom ath ie zu r arabischen P apyrusku nde (Prague, 1 9 5 4 ),
passim . “G riechische und lateinische Verwaltungsterm ini im arabischen A egyp­
ten,” C hronique d ’E g yp te, N os. 13-14 (1 9 3 2 ), 275-284. E.I. V acca, “Sidji!,” EL.
L. M itteis and U . W ilcken, G rundzüge und C h restom ath ie der P apyruskunde I1?
(H ildesheim , 1 9 6 3 ), 219-238.
IX
214

profound in Egypt, it was very m uch in evidence elsewhere. Indeed the

U m ayyad coinage reflects the pervasive influence of Byzantine im perial
concepts, adm inistration, and economic life. T he Byzantine m onetary
system was at the peak of its influence and vigor in the sixth and early
seventh centuries. The gold solidus was truly the dollar of the early
m iddle ages, constituting the preferred m edium of exchange in India
and it was even in circulation as far east as C hina w here solidi and
im itations have been found in Chinese tom bs of the late sixth and early
seventh centuries .12 It w ould thus be expected, as in fact occurred, th at
the A rabs would adopt the Byzantine coinage current in Syria, Egypt,
and N orth Africa. The earliest dinars of the A rabs were either B yzan­
tine gold coins circulating in the N ear E ast or the same items im ported
from Byzantium , or else A rab im itations of the solidi of Phocas and
H eraclius. The metrology (4 .5 0 g r.), the type (E m peror with cross,
at least on early b ro n ze), were those of the Byzantine coins, though
m ost often there w ere such slight variations as rem oval of the crosses
from the em peror’s crow n or rem oval of the crossbar from the cross
potens on the reverse. E ven the nam e, dinar, is the Byzantine aureus
denarius. In N orth A frica the A rab dinars were true to the local By­
zantine solidus, i.e., they were sm aller (4.32 g r.), lum pier, and featured
the shahada in Latin. The conquerors also m aintained the sm aller de­
nom inations of the solidus, the semissus and trem issus, the A rabic nisf
and thalath. T he bronze coinage, the fols, was similarly an im itation of
the Byzantine follis. It is thus clear that the m onetary policies of the
first century were by and large those of B yzantium , though of course
there w ere m any variations. In addition, the fact th at the A rabs m ain­
tained the two different types of solidi, one for N orth A frica and one
for Syria-Egypt, plus the m aintenance of the Byzantine m etrological
standards for each, indicates a certain exactness in the A rab adm inis­
trative adaptative and imitative process. The history of early A rab
num ism atics dem onstrates not only the continuity of Byzantine eco­
nom ic and adm inistrative life, but also B yzantine influence on A rab
political theory and practices. By the end of the seventh-eighth centuries
the caliphs began to show their independent status as world rulers by
num ism atic innovations. They gradually abandoned the B yzantine
iconography on the solidus-follis imitations, and the bearded caliph with

12E. W instedt, The C hristian Topography o f C osm os In dicopleu stes (C am ­

bridge, 1 9 0 9 ), 323. S. N ai, “Zolotaia vizantiiskaia m oneta naidennaia v m ogile
perioda dinastii Sui,” V izan tiiskii V rem ennik, X X I (1 9 6 2 ), 178-182.
 Byzantium and I slam 21 5

sword in the attitude of Friday prayer and in A rab garb tem porarily
replaced the Byzantine em peror with the globus and cross. H ow ever,
Islam and A rabic com pletely transform ed the dinar and fols ( 6 9 6 /7
first Muslim din ar) so that all hum an representations were eventually
abandoned and replaced by religious form ulae in A rabic. F u rth er the
metrology was slightly altered from 4.50 to 4.25 in conform ance with
A rab weight standards. These alterations and adaptations of detail
should not obscure the fact th at the principles of m onetary policy, a
centralized bi-m etallic currency, the coins themselves, and the use of
coinage in imperial-religious propaganda, were all taken over from
Byzantine exam ples .13
T he uniform adoption of B yzantine currency throughout the form er
Byzantine provinces is not the only evidence for the continuity of By­
zantine adm inistrative and econom ic life outside Egypt. This latter hy­
pothesis is further strengthened by w hat the author of the K itab F u tu h
al-B uldan relates of adm inistrative practice, to wit th at until the reign
of A bd al-M alik “G reek rem ained the language of the state registers,”
in Syria, Jordan, and p a rt of M esopotam ia .14 Ib n K haldun notes clearly
the continuity of b oth Byzantine and P ersian practices in the fisc, and
the A rab im itation of them .
A fte r th e a d v e n t o f Islam , th e m in istry (d iw a n ) o f th e lan d ta x and
ta x c o lle c tio n s rem a in e d as it h a d b een . T h e (d iw a n ) o f th e Iraq u sed
P ersia n , an d th a t o f Syria B y z a n tin e G reek . T h e secretaries o f th e
d iw a n s w e re M u slim su b jects o f th e tw o grou p s. T h en , w ith th e ap p ear­
a n ce o f A b d al M a lik b. M arw an , th e fo r m o f th e state b e c a m e th at o f
roy a l au th o rity . P e o p le tu rn ed fro m th e lo w stan d ard o f d esert life to
th e sp len d o r o f se d en ta ry cu ltu re an d fr o m th e sim p licity o f illiter a cy
to th e so p h istica tio n o f litera cy . E x p erts in w ritin g and b o o k k e e p in g
m a d e th eir a p p ea ra n ce a m o n g th e A ra b s an d th eir clien ts. T h u s, A b d al
M a lik o rd ered S u la y m a n b. Sad , th e n g o v e rn o r o f Jord an ( p r o v in c e ) ,
to in tr o d u c e th e u se o f A r a b ic in th e d iw a n o f Syria. S u la y m a n c o m ­
p leted th e ta sk in e x a c tly o n e y ea r to th e d ay. S arhu n, A b d al M a lik ’s

13J. W alker, A C atalogu e o f the A rab-B yzan tin e and P ost-R eform U m aiyad
C oin s (L ondon, 1 9 5 6 ). G . M iles, “The Early Islam ic Bronze Coinage o f Egypt,”
C enten nial V olum e o f the A m erican N u m ism a tic S ociety (N e w York, 19 5 8 ), 471-
502. Ph. Grierson, “T he M onetary R eform s o f ‘A bd al-M alik. Their M etrological
Basis and their F inancial Repercussions,” Journal o f the E con om ic and Social
H isto ry o f the O rien t, III (1 9 6 0 ), 241-264.
14A1-Baladhuri, The O rigins o f the Islam ic State, being a translation fro m the
A ra b ic , a ccom pan ied w ith ann otations geographic and historical notes o f the
K ita b futûh al-buldan o f al-lm am bu-V A bbas A h m a d ibn-Jabir al B aladhuri, by
Philip Khuri H itti (hereafter al B aladh uri), I (N e w York, 19 1 6 ), 301.
IX
216

secreta ry , lo o k ed (a t th e situ a tio n ) and said to th e B y za n tin e se c r e ­

taries: “seek y o u a liv in g in a n o th er craft, b e c a u se G o d has tak en th is
o n e from y o u .” 15*

The same author repeats the causes for the continuity of Byzantine and
Persian adm inistrative practices in blunter language.
N o sp ecific ranks e x isted a m o n g th e (e a rly M u slim s) in th e field s o f
ta x c o lle c tio n , exp en d itu res, and b o o k k e ep in g . T h e M u slim s w ere
illitera te A ra b s w h o d id n o t k n o w h o w to w rite and k eep b o o k s. F o r
b o o k k e ep in g th e y e m p lo y e d Jew s, C h ristian s, or certain n o n -A rab
c lie n ts v ersed in it. B o o k k e e p in g w a s little k n o w n a m o n g th em . T h eir
n o b les did n o t k n o w it w ell, b e c a u se illitera cy w a s th eir d istin ctiv e
ch a r a cte ristic .10

Though the tax diwans were A rabized w ith the gradual rem oval of
Persian and G reek (a process which stretched out for another century
after the time of A bd al M alik in some provinces) the Coptic C hristians
w ere still in charge of the tax apparatus in fourteenth-fifteenth centuries
E gypt and the M am elukes frequently appointed the vezir from am ong
these Coptic tax officials .17
The situation in the adm inistration and coinage is reflected, on the
everyday level, in the survival of Byzantine standards of weights and
m easures, standards w hich seem to have been utilized along with those
which the A rabs brought from A rabia. A very interesting exam ple of
this metrological continuity is a Byzantine bronze weight of tw o ounces.
The Byzantine weight has on the obverse a cross and, B / , which
m eans two ounces (52.15 gr. so one ounce is 26.8 g r.). T he reverse
has an A rab inscription validating this weight:
In th e n a m e o f G o d : M u h a m m u d is th e m e sse n g e r o f G o d ; E q u ity
is G o d ’s. T h is is (a w e ig h t) o f tw o o u n c e s w h ic h A b d u lla h al-W alid ,
C o m m a n d er o f th e fa ith fu l, h as estab lish ed (W a lid 7 0 5 - 1 5 ) .

T he suprem e terrestrial ruler of the M uslims officially declares the

Byzantine and Islam ic ounces to be one and the sam e .18 T he im pact of
B yzantine standards of m easure can be gathered by a fleeting look at the
work of A. G rohm ann, Einführung und Chrestomathie zur arabischen

15Ibn Khaldun, II, 22.

1GIbn Khaldun, II, 8.
17ibn Khaldun, II, 19.
18G. M iles, A B yzantine W eight V alidated by aU W alid (N ew York, 1939);
N u m ism a tic N o te s an d M on ograph s, # 8 7 . For an earlier weight validated by a
M uslim authority, G . M iles, “A Byzantine Bronze W eight in the N am e o f BiSr b.
M arwan,” A ra b ica, IX (1 9 6 2 ), 113-118.
 Byzantium and I slam 21 7

Papyruskunde (Prague, 19 5 4 ). F rom his study we see th at m uch of

the nom enclature for A rab weights and m easures was borrow ed from
local term inology .10 Such evidence indicates quite strongly th at the
A rabs borrow ed m ore than lexicography from the inhabitants of the
form er Byzantine provinces.
Though the situation in Syria is not nearly so well docum ented as it
is in Egypt, nevertheless the sam e conclusions on B yzantine influence
are inescapable. T he Byzantine post system and highways w ere m ain­
tained, and the A rab arm ies w ere stationed according to th e bro ad
Byzantine provincial divisions .20 T hough som e papyri and a few textual
references have survived for Syria, the crucial evidence lies in the loan
words which entered A rabic via Syriac at this time. T he m ajority of
G reek and even P ersian words w hich entered A rabic at this early date
did so, it is significant, via the A ram aic-Syriac speakers of Syria.
F raenkel’s study lists approxim ately 190 words of B yzantine G reek
origin which passed thus into A rabic at this tim e and the categories
which they represent indicate how pervasive was the influence of By­
zantine society: the house, yard, and household furniture; cuisine, cloth­
ing, and jewelry; anim als; agriculture and botany; viniculture and wine
containers; m inerals; com m erce, and trade; ships and m aritim e life;
w elfare; art of w riting; crafts and arts; religion and C hristianity .21
B efore abandoning the m aterial aspects of U m ayyad society I should
like to exam ine, briefly, u rban life. W hen the A rabs conquered the
B yzantine lands in the first half of the seventh century, m any of the
tow ns surrendered by treaty and thus survived and consequently the old
Byzantine towns continued as the basis of u rb an society. In m any in­
stances the general physical shape of the city survived, the m ark et place
w ith its kaysariya, and the public baths continuing m uch as they h ad

19A . G rohm ann, o p . c it.t p. 146.

G reek A rabic G reek A rabic
keration - —qirat kankellon — qanqal
litra — ritl sitla — situla
ounkia — wunqiyah xestes — qist
kantarı — qantar sextarius
artaba — irdabb knidion — iqniz
oipe — waiba
20G ibb, loc. c it., 223.
21Fraenkel, o p. cit., passim . A . Schall, S tu dien über griechischen F rem d w ö rter
im Syrischen (D arm stadt, 1 9 60).
IX
218

previously been .22 In the realm of m unicipal institutions some students

of the question detect the origin of the M uslim ra ’is (m ayor) in the
B yzantine offices of hipparchos, nykteparchos, praetor, and arch o n ;23
the direct and im m ediate origin of the m uhtesib (an official in charge
of the guilds, weights and m easures, and m unicipal o rd er) in the
agoranom os; and the M uslim guilds in the Byzantine artisinal co rp o ra­
tions .24 The organization of industry and crafts is described only for
Egypt, where the papyri once m ore com e to ou r rescue. A large p art of
the populace of the towns and villages of E gypt had for centuries lived
from the crafts and industries which utilized E gyptian raw m aterials.
T he m ost im portant and w idespread of these was the textile industry. It
is no coincidence that weaving of textiles and carpets centered only in
those towns which continued as im portant C hristian centers, for in the
beginning the A rabs produced nothing. The linen industry was dom i­
n ant in lower Egypt, while wool and cotton were w orked in m iddle and
upper Egypt. T here w ere also state textile factories, but perhaps the
m ost rem arkable Byzantine survival was that of the female textile w ork­
ers in the palace who wove special garm ents for the caliphs and high
officials. This is the old gynaeconitis organization of the Byzantines,
pure and simple. The crafts generally seem to have continued to be
organized in artisinal bodies. Christian m asons and architects of course
rem ained the basis of the building craft both in E gypt and Syria, and
the m anufacture of papyrus was the provenance of Coptic C hristians .25 ~
The Byzantine-U m ayyad cities apparently retained certain aspects of
the regime of the circus factions and the neaniai in the later Islam ic
fityan and ahdath of the futuwwa. These latter, m uch like the Byzantine

22G. von G runebaum, “D ie islam ische Stadt,” Scieculum, VI (1 9 5 5 ), 138-139;

“The M oslim T ow n and the H ellenistic T ow n ,” Scientia (1 9 5 5 ), 364-370. C.
Cahen, “L ’Evolution sociale du m onde m usulm an jusqu’au X Ile siècle face à
celle du m onde chrétien,” C ahiers de civilisation m éd iéva le, 1 (1 9 5 8 ), 451-463;
II (1 9 5 9 ), 37-51. L. M assignon, “Les corps de métiers et la cité islam ique,”
O pera M in o ra, I (Beirut, 1 9 6 3 ), 372. Fraenkel, op. cit.y under hamman.
23E. A shtor/Strauss, “L’Adm inistration urbaine en Syrie m édiévale,” R evista
deg li stu d i orientait, X X X I (1 9 6 5 ), 111, 117.
24G. M arçais, “C onsiderations sur les villes m usulm anes et notam m ent sur le
role du M ohtasib,” R ecu its de la S ociété Jean B odin , V IX (1 9 5 4 ), 260-261.
G audefroy-D em om bynes, “U n magistrat: le m ohtesib,” Journal des savants
(1 9 4 7 ), 36, 40. B. Lewis, “The Islam ic G uilds,” The E con om ie H istory R e view ,
VIII (1 9 3 7 ), 20-37.
25Becker, Islam stu dien, I, 182-185. Al-Baladhuri, I, 383-384. M itteis and
W ilcken, op. cit.y I, xxix-xxxii, 255-256. On m ilitary architecture, Creswell,
“A rchitecture,” E I2. On warfare, F.W . Schwarzlose, D ie Waffen der alten A raber
aus ihren D ichtern dargestellt (Leipzig, 1 8 86), 319-322.
 Byzantium and Islam 219

neaniai, were vehicles of autonom ous urban political, social, and

sportive expression .150 Given all these B yzantine survivals, the urb an life
of Umayyad D am ascus, Jerusalem , C aesareia, A ntioch, and A lexandria
m ust have been largely Byzantine. T he m osque merely replaced the
church and the A rab governor the Byzantine prefect at the apex of the
social and political order, but the substructure was Byzantine.
Particularly interesting are the form al dom ains of Islam ic expression
within which one w ould not expect to see B yzantine intrusions. Such
were the fields of art, possibly music, and law. B ut in these B yzantine
elements appear early and are taken up in the general A rabization and
Islam ization of art, music, and law.
A rab painting has been described as “ . . . one of the products of the
huge m elting pot in which pre-Islam ic and later art form s w ere fused
and crystallized to constitute a new style .” 27 Though it is true th at in
general Islam forbade pictures there w ere factors which am eliorated
the stringency of this prohibition. F irst and forem ost was the historical
fact th at in Syria and E gypt classical and oriental pictorial art and
traditions had prevailed for centuries (as was also the case in Ira n ).
This strong attachm ent to pictorial art found an outlet in the division of
the secular and the religious which rem oved the latter from the an­
thropom orphism of pictorial art and perm itted pictorialism in the secu­
lar dom ain. Thus by com prom ise both tendencies were accom m odated.
Painting could attain a considerable developm ent in the decoration of
such secular and hedonist institutions as the bath houses and the se­
cluded harem q uarters ,28 and later the translation of secular G reek
m anuscripts gave further im petus to the developm ent of the art of the
m iniature.
Definite B yzantine coloration is present in the m onum ental architec­
ture of the U m ayyad dynasty in Syria, Palestine, and A rabia. This

2eS. Vryonis, “Byzantine Circus F actions and Islam ic Futuw wa Organizations

(N eaniai, Fityän, A h d ä th ),” B yzantinische Z eitsch rift, LVIII (1 9 6 5 ), 46-59. The
Byzantine urban factions seem to have been introduced into sixth century Iran by
Chosroes. C. Cahen, “A hdath,” E I2; “M ouvem ents et organisations populaires
dans les villes de l’A sie m usulm ane au m oyen age: m ilices et associations de
foutouw w a,” R ecu eils de la S ociété Jean B o d in , V II (1 9 5 5 ), 279-282. F. Taesch-
ner, “F utuwwa, eine gem einschaftsbildende Idee im m ittelalterlichen Orient und
ihre verschiedenen Erscheinungsform en,” Schw eizerisich es A rch iv fü r V olksku n de,
LII (1 9 5 6 ), 122-158.
27R. Ettinghausen, A ra b Painting (L ondon, 1 9 6 2 ), 12 and passim on all that
follow s. See A . Lane, E arly Islam ic P ottery (L ondon, 1 9 47), 7-8 for the M editer­
ranean background to the developm ent o f Islam ic pottery.
28F. Rosenthal, D a s F ortleben der A n tik e im Islam (Zurich, 19 6 5 ), 357-359.
IX
220

Byzantine influence lies in two spheres: first in the conceptualization of

m onum ental architecture as a vehicle for glorification of dynasty, em ­
pire, and religion; and second in the actual techniques and execution of
these m onum ents. T he D om e of the R ock (6 9 1 ), the m osque of D a­
m ascus (7 0 6 ), and that of M edina (7 0 6 -1 0 ), are the prim ary exam ples
of this glorification through architecture. T he interiors w ere decorated
with the traditional m osaics by C hristian craftsm en, some of whom were
sent from C onstantinople. T he m osaics of the D om e of the R ock depict
plants, fruit, vases, crowns, and arm s in Byzantine and Sassanid pat­
terns, whereas the m osaic decorations of the D am ascus m osque are
predom inantly architectural reproductions in a purely B yzantine m an­
ner. The above m entioned com prom ise which accom m odated B yzantine
art to M uslim religious dem ands is, however, evident in the absence
from these religious structures of hum an and animal figures. If the
Islam ic dem ands in this com prom ise with Byzantine art were rigidly
observed in the U m ayyad religious art, they w ere abandoned in secular
art. O ne need only recall the U m ayyad desert b ath palaces, m ost fam ous
of which is Q usayr ’A m ra. Though certain Persian, and perhaps even
central Asiatic, elements are present the basic ideas and execution com e
from Byzantine painting. T he walls are covered with representations of
nude women engaged in various activities, family groups, scenes of
bathing, wrestling, hunting; views of m asons, carpenters, and artisans at
work. The panel which depicts the personifications of the G reek skepsis,
istoria, and poiesis is m ost rem arkable. Finally on one wall of the en­
trance hall are hierarchically depicted the six rulers defeated by the
A rabs . . . the Byzantine basileus, the Persian shah, R oderic the last
Visigothic king, the negus of Abyssinia, then probably the em peror of
C hina and either the king of India or of the Turks. All this in a scene
which is an A rab adaptation of the Byzantine family of rulers .29
M usic seems to have had a parallel developm ent. T h at which oc­
curred in the music of the Islam ic w orld is m ost succinctly stated by
Ibn K haldun.
In th e n o n -A ra b c o u n tr ies b e fo r e Islam , m u sic w as h ig h ly d e v e lo p ed
in c ities and to w n s. . . . T h e A rab s o rig in a lly had ( o n ly ) p oetry.
N o w , c a m el d rivers sa n g w h en th e y d ro v e th eir c a m els and y o u n g
m e n sa n g w h en th e y w e re alo n e. . . .
W h en (th e A r a b s) san g, th e y o fte n effected a sim p le h a r m o n y b e­
tw e e n th e m o d es. . . . A ll th ese sim p le ty p e s o f m e lo d io u s m u sic are 20

20Ettinghausen, op. c it., 12-33.

 Byzantium and I slam 221

p rim ary o n es. It is n o t u n lik ely to a ssu m e th at th ey can b e grasp ed b y

n atu re w ith o u t a n y in stru ctio n , as is th e c a se w ith all sim p le crafts.
T h e A ra b s c o n tin u e d th is w a y d u rin g th eir d esert an d p re-Isla m ic
p erio d . T h e n , Isla m m a d e its a p p earan ce. (T h e A r a b s ), to o k p o sse ssio n
o f ( a ll) th e rea lm s o f th e w o rld . T h e y d ep riv ed th e n o n -A r a b s o f th eir
ru le a n d to o k it o v er. T h e y h a d th eir w e ll-k n o w n d esert attitu d e and
lo w stan d ard o f liv in g . In ad d itio n th e y p o sse sse d th e th riv in g r elig io n
( o f I s la m ) an d th a t (M u s lim ) r elig io u s sev erity w h ic h is d irected
a g a in st all a c tiv ities a n d all th e th in g s th a t are o f n o u tility in o n e ’s
relig io n . . . . T h e r e fo r e (m u s ic ) w a s a v o id e d to so m e d egree. In th eir
o p in io n , o n ly th e c a d e n c e d r ec ita tio n o f th e Q u ’ran and th e h u m m in g
o f p o etry w h ic h h a d a lw a y s b e e n th eir w a y and c u sto m , w e re p lea su re-
ab le th in g s.
T h e n lu x u ry a n d p ro sp erity c a m e to th e m , b e ca u se th e y o b ta in e d th e
sp o ils o f th e n a tio n s. T h e y c a m e t o lea d sp len d id and refin ed liv e s and
to a p p recia te leisu re. T h e sin gers ( n o w ) le f t th e P ersia n s an d B y z a n ­
tin es. T h e y d e sc e n d e d u p o n th e H ija z an d b e c a m e c lie n ts o f th e A rab s.
T h e y all sa n g a c c o m p a n ie d b y lu tes, p a n d o res, lyres, an d flu tes. T h e
A ra b s heard th eir m e lo d io u s u se o f so u n d , and th e y set th eir p o e m s
to m u sic a c c o r d in g ly .3031

B ut even before Islam , Byzantine singers had m ade their influence felt
am ong the A rabs of the G hassanid court. T hus in the U m ayyad period
the sam e religious indifference and cultural fusion which are discernible
in m uch of U m ayyad art helped to produce a new Byzantino-Persano-
A rab m usic .81
Islam ic law, inextricably linked to religion, began to exist as a form al,
organized, and developed legal system a century and one-half after the
conquests. T h at is to say that for 100-150 years the rulers and judges
had to supplem ent the K oranic injunctions in order to cope w ith p ro b ­
lems and practices th at were not therein covered. Thus no t only w ere
m any local legal practices adopted but, m ore im portant, B yzantine legal
concepts and principles also entered the form ing body of Islam ic law.
T he C hristian subjects w ere possessed of developed systems of law
which w ere essentially orientalized H ellenistico-R om an law. T he best
exam ple is the so-called Syrian Law B ook, entitled Laws of C onstan­
tine, Theodosius, and Leo, though it includes m uch m ore th an the title

30Ibn Khaldun, II, 401-404.

31H .G . Farm er, H isto ry o f A rabian M u sic to the T hirteenth C entury (L ondon,
1 9 2 9 ), 76. See also the follow in g works o f Farm er: “M usiki,” E I^ A n cien t
A rabian M u sical In stru m en ts as D escribed by al-M u faddal ibn Salam a ( 9th c .)
(G lasgow , 1 9 3 8 ); The M in strelsy o f the A rabian N igh ts’’ (Bearsden, 1 9 45).
H . H usm ann, G rundlagen der antiken und orientalischen M u sikku ltu r (Berlin,
19 6 1 ).
IX
222

indicates, as the urban law it contains is basically Hellenistic. The

Syrian Law B ook was translated from G reek into Syriac during B yzan­
tine times, and continued to be the basis of Syriac Christian civil p rac­
tice in the Islam ic period. W ith the linguistic A rabization of these Syriac
Christians, the legal code was also translated into A rabic, strong proof
that it rem ained a living docum ent in later times, though it was no
doubt synchronized. In this respect it is of great interest th at two
karshuni versions date from the sixteenth-seventeenth centuries and so
we have clear proof of a Byzantine legal form surviving from Byzantine
into O ttom an tim es .32
A M uslim judge called upon to decide in a m atter for which, in this
early period, there was no provision in the Q u ’ran obviously had to fall
back upon older local precedents. W here ilm was not possible, th at is to
say judgm ent based on Q u ’ranic legislation, then the judge exercised
ra ’y, i.e., his own judgm ent, and in the course of tim e decisions based
on ra ’y cam e to have equal standing with those proceeding from ilm.
A nd so for one and one-half centuries elements from R om ano-
Byzantine, Talm udic, Sassanid, and eastern ecclesiastical canon law
w ere free to enter into the genesis of Islam ic law. The catalytic agents
in this legal ferm ent w ere the great scores of converts, m any of whom
w ere trained in Hellenistic rhetoric, a genre which contained m any ele­
m ents (i.e., m odes of reasoning and term inology) conducive to the
absorption of Byzantine legal form s .33 A later jurist, A bu Y usuf, com -

32E. Sachau, Syrische R ech tsbü ch er, I (Berlin, 1 907), vii-xix. L. M itteis,
R eichsrech t und V olksrech t in den östlichen P rovin zen des röm ischen K aiser­
reichs. M it Beiträgen zu r K enntn iss des griechischen R ech ts und der spat­
röm ischen R ech tsen tw icklu n g (Leipzig, 18 9 1 ), 30-32, 202-203, 387 ff. See espe­
cially the studies o f N allin o in R accolta, vol. IV. On the translation into Arabic
o f Byzantine legal codes (n om os procheiros, the m ilitary law, part o f the Rhodian
naval law, and the E cloga) consult his article “Libri giuridici bizantini in versioni
arabe cristiane dei sec. X1I-XIII,” R a cco lta , IV , 324-382.
83I. G oldhizer-J. Schacht, “Fikh,” E I2. Schacht, “Pre-Islam ic Background and
Early D evelopm ent o f Jurisprudence,” L aw in the M iddle E ast, I, Origin and
D evelo p m en t o f Islam ic L aw , ed. M. Khadduri and H. Liebesny (W ashington,
1 9 5 5 ), 28-56. A . A b el, “Préambule à un colloqu e sur l’acculturation,” C orres­
pondan ce d ’O rient. É tu des, 5-6 (1 9 6 4 ), 9. N allin o, “Considerazioni sui rapporti
fra diritto rom ano e diritto m usulm ano,” R accolta, IV , 85-94; “A proposito di
alcuni studi sui diritti orientali,” R a cco lto , IV, 95-213. E. Bussi, R icerche intorno
aile relazioni fra retratto bizantino e m u su lm an o, (Pubblicazioni della Universita
catolica del Sacro Cuore, ser. sec., scienze giuridiche X L I) (M ilan, 19 3 3 ). For
specific instances o f Byzantine influence: F .F . Schm idt, “D ie Occupatio im is-
 Byzantium and I slam 223

merited on this process by which foreign legal practices entered what

cam e to be Islamic law:
A bu Y u ssu f h eld th at if there ex ists an an cien t, n o n -A ra b su n n a
w h ich Islam has n eith er ch a n g ed n o r a b o lish ed , and p eo p le c o m p la in
to the ca lip h th at it c a u ses th em h ard sh ip , he is n o t en titled (? ) to
c h a n g e it; bu t M a lik and Shafi h eld th at he m a y c h a n g e it e v e n if it be
a n cien t.34

By the same process which A rabized and Islam ized the adm inistration,
economics, art, and music, the qadis charged the dom ain of law with
the religious norm s of Islam and so the disparate elements of Um ayyad
legal practice em erged from this crucible in a new Islamic m old.35

//. Ab basic! Period

By way of conclusion to this first or U m ayyad period one cannot do

better than paraphrase G aston W iet’s dictum : The Um ayyad Em pire
was a N eo-Byzantine E m pire. H aving put down its roots in a rich
Byzantine soil, its political, adm inistrative, economic, legal, and artistic
life was adapted to Byzantine civilization and all that rem ained to com ­
plete the picture was the accession of the Um ayyad dynasty to the
throne of the C aesars on the Bosphorus.36
A t this juncture, however, any further extensive B yzantinization in
the above-m entioned dom ains cam e to a halt as A rabic and Persian
influences gained the ascendancy in the evolution of Islam ic civilizations.
The linguistic dom inance of A rabic and the spread of Islam were in-

lam ischen Recht,” D er Islam , I (1 9 3 0 ), 300-353. E. Graf, Jagdbeute und

Schlachttier im islam ischen R ech t. Eine U ntersuchung zu r E ntw icklung der is­
lam ischen Jurisprudenz (B onn, 1 9 55), 194 ff, 202, 210 ff, 224, 340 ff. M .F.
Köprülü, “L’Institution du vakouf. Sa nature juridique et son evolu tion histor­
ique,” Vakıflar D ergisi, II (1 9 4 2 ), partie française, 3-48. J. H atschek, D er
Muşta!m in. Ein B eitrag zu m internationalen P rivat- und V ölkesrech t des is­
lam ischen G esetzes (Berlin, 1910). N.J. C oulson, A H istory o f Islam ic L aw
(Edinburgh, 1 9 6 4 ), 28 ff.
34Schacht, “Pre-Islam ic Background and Early D evelopm ent o f Jurisprudence,”
L aw in the M id d le E a st, I, 35-36.
3r,On the process o f Islam ic integration, M. Watt, Islam and the Integration o f
Society (L ondon, 1 9 6 1 ).
36G. W iet, “L’Empire néo-byzantin des O m eyyades et l’empire néo-sassanide
des Abbassides,” Journal o f W orld H istory, 1 (1 9 5 3 -1 9 5 4 ), 63-71.
IX
224

herent in the facts of A rab military and political dom ination.87 T he

replacem ent of G reek and Persian in the financial diwans by the early
eighth century, the A rabization and Islam ization of the coinage (as
indeed of the inhabitants) are but tw o of the m ost spectacular m anifes­
tations in the external transform ation of the old Byzantine and Sassanid
cultures in the N ear E ast. T he assertion of these purely A rab factors
was not the only reason for the eclipse of B yzantine influence, for non-
A rab influences rem ained strong throughout the centuries of the A bbasid
caliphate. B ut after the U m ayyads had failed to capture C onstantinople
and with their political collapse, the A bbasids eventually m oved the
center of the huge em pire to Baghdad, a site which was located well
w ithin the sphere of Sassanid Persian culture. H enceforth the caliphs,
court, and upper classes w ere subjected to and transform ed by the
culture of their m any Persian vezirs, lesser officials, and literati. T he
effects of this Iranization can be observed even in Egypt, w here Byzan­
tine institutions survived in such profusion during the U m ayyad period.
By the time of Fatim id rule, the fiscal adm inistration in E gypt had
begun to conform to Persian forms, and indeed the fiscal adm inistration
of the caliphate henceforth bore the external m arkings of the Persian
rather than of the B yzantine tradition.3738
Inasm uch as the A bbasid period m arks a turning away from Byzan­
tine to Persian m odels and also m arks the upsurge of the A rabo-M uslim
factors, it is all the m ore rem arkable th at cultural H ellenism in the
narrow est sense m ade its greatest im pact on Islam ic civilization at this
time. F o r the G reek cultural heritage entered the m ainstream of Islam ic
civilization in the ninth and tenth centuries with w hat im portant conse­
quences we shall see later. W hy was the G reek heritage taken up? H ow
was it transm itted? W hat p art of it passed to the A rabs? A nd, finally,
w hat w ere its effects on Islam ic civilization?

370 n the A rabization and Islam ization o f the form er Byzantine and Sassanid
provinces: C. Becker, “Egypt,” EI^, Islam stu dien , I, 210-211. M. W att, op. cit.,
passim . R. Brunschwig, “T unis,” E Ir H . Leclercq, L ’A friqu e chrétiènn e, II
(Paris, 1 9 0 4 ). C.J. Speel, “The Disappearance o f Christianity from N orth A frica
in the W ake o f the Rise o f Islam ,” Church H isto ry, X X I X (1 9 6 0 ), 379-97.
E. L évi-Provencal, H istoire de l’Espagne m usu lm an e, I (Leiden, 1950-1953), 33,
66, 74-76, 81, 155, 289; III, 457-460. W. M arçais, “C om m ent l’Afrique du N ord
a été arabisée,” A n n ales de l’In stitu t des étu des orien tales (F acu lté des lettres de
l’U niversité d’A lg e r), IV (1 9 3 8 ), 1-21. A .N . P oliak, “L’Arabisation de l’Orient
sém itique,” R evu e des étu des islam iques (1 9 3 8 ), 35-63. B. Spuler, “D er V erlauf
der Islam isierung Persiens,” D e r Islam , X X IX (1 9 5 0 ), 63-76.
38W. H inz, “D as R echnungswesen orientalischer Reichsfinanzäm ter im M ittel-
alter,” D er Islam , X X IX (1 9 5 0 ), 3-4.
 Byzantium and Islam 225

I shall do no m ore than to broach this question in a brief m anner.

Obviously the causality is in part one of practicality.39 The caliphs, who
perceived the higher degree of civilization among their subjects, looked
to their C hristian underlings for doctors and medicine. T he practice of
medicine was essentially that of G alen, and G alenian m edicine was
closely linked to philosophy. Astrology, linked to astronom y, also had
certain practical applications, so it was thought. It becam e obvious to
the ruling class that G reek knowledge had very profitable applications.
Secondly, som e of the G reek schools and G reek scholarship continued
to exist (indeed that of A lexandria m igrated via A ntioch and H arran to
B aghdad) and the educated classes, especially among the Syriac C hris­
tians, but even am ong the Persian scribes, considered G reek authors
and philosophy as essential to cultural life.40 G reek scholarship, though

39For an evaluation o f this entrance o f H ellenism into Islam ic civilization see

in particular G. von G runebaum, “Parallelism , Convergence, and Influence in the
Relations o f Arab and Byzantine Philosophy, Literature, and P iety,” D u m barton
O aks Papers, X V III (1 9 6 4 ), 91-111; also “Islam and H ellenism ,” Islam . E ssays
in the N atu re and G ro w th o f a C ultural Tradition (M enasha, 1 9 55), 159-167.
H is researches constitute pioneering efforts in the com plicated field o f Greek
borrowings in Arab belles lettres; Ch. IX , “Creative Borrowing. G reece in the
Arabian N ights,” M e d iev a l Islam . In “G reek Form Elem ents in the Arabian
N ights,” Journal o f the A m erican O riental S o ciety, LXII (1 9 4 2 ), 286-292, he
lists the follow in g transm issions from G reek into Arab letters:
a ) Ecphrasis
b) Syncrisis
c ) The “ubi sunt qui ante nos in m undo fuere” m otive from Cynic diatribe
d) H ellenistic eulogy over dead animals
e ) Biographical m aghazi from the Christian m artyrology
f ) Connection o f Arabic m u’ammaun literature and the m akrobioi works of
Pseudo-Lucian and Phlegon
g ) Survival o f the G reek m im os
h ) Influence o f the Cyropaideia
i ) H ellenistic im pact on poetry in ninth-tenth centuries
j ) C lassical influence on early Arab autobiography
k ) Influence o f G reek on Arab rhetoric
See also his “O bservations on City Panegyrics in Arabic Prose,” Journal of the
A m erican O riental S ociety, L X IV (1 9 4 4 ), 61-65.
40D e Lacy O’Leary, op. c it., passim . A. Baumstark, A risto teles bei den Syrern
von V. bis VIII. Jahrhundert (Leipzig, 1 9 00). C .A . N allin o, “Tracce di opere
greche giunte agli Arabi per trafila pehlevica,” R accolta, V I, 285-303. H.W .
Bailey, Z oroastrian P ro blem s (O xford, 1 943). Siassi, loc. cit., passim . M. M eyer­
hof, V on A lexan drien nach Baghdad, Sitzu ngsberichte der Preussischen A kadem ie
der W issenschaften, P hilos.-hist. K lasse (1 9 3 0 ). B. Carra de Vaux, “Tibb,” E Ir
The chronicles o f Bar H ebraeus and M ichael the Syrian give ample evidence for
the vitality and continuity o f Greek scholarship in northern Syria and eastern
Anatolia.
IX
226

we do not know m uch about it, was evidently still alive in early M uslim
Egypt, Palestine, Syria, M esopotam ia, and of course eventually in
Baghdad. Thus the A rabs found themselves in an intellectual milieu
which was overpoweringly Byzantine.
T he vehicle by which the G reek legacy was transm itted to Islam , as
we have already seen, was that of the caliph’s Christian subjects,
w hether N estorian physicians of the school of G undeshapur, w hether
C hristian translators from H ira and Syria, o r w hether G reek subjects
on rarer occasions. T hough the task of translating the G reek philosophi­
cal and scientific w orks had begun practically with the inauguration of
the A bbasid caliphate (an d even b efo re), its center becam e the fam ous
B ayt al-H ikm a (house of w isdom ), a com bination library and transla­
tion center established in B aghdad in the reign of al-M am un (8 1 3 -3 3 ).
Some works w ere translated directly from G reek, and others via Pahlevi,
but the bulk of the G reek corpus w hich entered A rabic did so via Syriac
translations of the G reek originals. M anuscripts and scholars did occa­
sionally com e from Constantinople, and some eastern scholars are re­
ported to have gone to Byzantium to learn G reek. B ut the Syriac
C hristians, w ho had m aintained an active and lively study of the G reek
texts, w ho w ere often trilingual, and who w ere inhabitants of the cali­
phate, form ed the logical link in the transm ission of G reek knowledge.
T he translated w orks, covering five categories (general knowledge,
m edicine and auxiliary disciplines, science, pure and applied m athe­
matics, and philosophy), constituted a distinct body as is evident in
such “bibliographies of the translators” as w ere com posed by al-N adim
(9 8 7 ) and al-Kift (1 1 7 2 -1 2 4 8 ). By and large the authors w ho were
translated w ere those still studied in late antiquity and early Byzantium .
All A ristotle’s w orks, save his dialogues and Politics, becam e know n to
the M uslims. A rab scholars also knew translations of P lato’s Timaeus,
Republic, Laws, Phaedo, Crito, and all the titles of his w orks are m en­
tioned in A rab w orks. B ut Plato and A ristotle were viewed in the
m anner of the N eoplatonists. W orks of the N eoplatonists Porphyry
and Proclus, as well as herm etic writings, w ere translated, and 129
treatises of G alen w ere translated (com pare this with the fact th at the
L atin author Sym m achus lists only one of G alen’s works in his Con-
stitutiones) . T here is no point in a prolonged list of the translations, a
list available to all in Steinschneider’s rem arkable m onograph, b u t one
should em phasize the fact that the A rabs took th at p art of the heritage
w hich was alive in the Byzantine and Persian provinces of the sixth-
 Byzantium and Islam 227

seventh centuries.41 T hus there is little of the pre-Socratics or of the

early and middle Stoics. Obviously G reek poetry was of little interest
cither because of the inherent difficulties of m eter and possibly because
of the loss of language beauty inevitable in translating any poet, or else
because A rabic was considered to be the language p ar excellence for
poetic expression.42 Byzantine and ancient G reek historiography suf­
fered the same fate as poetry.
!T he effects of this large-scale absorption of the G reek intellectual
legacy were extremely im portant in the structure of Islam ic civilization.
In many respects the absorption of G reek philosophy, science, m athe-
m atics, musical theory, m edicine, and other disciplines by Islam ic civili­
zation is parallel to the process by which the same heritage constituted
one of the basic elem ents of medieval L atin and Byzantine civilizations.
The com m on elem ent is this late G reek heritage as it was adapted and
understood by A ugustine, Origen, St. Basil, John Philoponus and by
their M uslim counterparts some centuries later. Thus these societies not
only had a com m on Judaeo-C hristian religious basis, but also a G reek
intellectual heritage at the basis of their cultures. There is neither time
nor space, nor am I qualified, to follow the independent course of these
G reek-inspired disciplines in the hands of the Muslims. I should like,
however, to point out en passant one im portant effect which this G reek
legacy had for Islam ic civilization in the realms of philosophy and
theology.
G reek philosophy had proceeded largely on the assum ption of the
pow er of hum an reason to understand m an and the universe. But

41M. Steinschneider, D ie arabischen Ü bersetzungen aus dem Griechischen

(G raz, 1 9 6 0 ). F. Rosenthal, op. cit., passim . R. Paret, D er Islam und das
griechische B ildungsgut (Leiden, 1941). F. G abrieli, “Recenti studi sulla tradi-
zioni greca nella civilta’ m usulm ane,” L a parola del passato, LX V (1 9 5 0 ), 147-
160. Paret, “N o tes bibliographiques sur quelques travaux recents consacrés aux
premières traductions arabes d’oeuvres grecques,” B yzan tion , X X IX -X X X ( 1959-
6 0 ), 387-446. J. Kraemer, D as P roblem der islam ischen K ulturgesch ichte (T u ­
bingen, 19 5 9 ), ch. V -V l. G. Bergsträsser, H unain ibn Ishaq und seine Schule
(Leiden, İ9 1 3 ). M. Plessner, “H erm es Trism egistcs and Arab Science,” S tadia
Islam ica, II (1 9 5 4 ), 45-59. A lso the articles “A ristutelis” and “Afiatun” by W al­
zer, in E I2.
42F. Rosenthal, o p. cit., 35. But translations o f H om er from Greek into Syriac
were made by the eighth century Syrian and court official Theophilus o f Edessa,
Bar Hebraeus, The C hronography o f G regory A bud Fara} the Son o f A a ro n , the
H ebrew Physician co m m on ly known as Bar H ebraeus being the First P art o f his
P olitical H istory o f the W orld, tr. by E.A.W . Budge (hereafter Bar H ebraeus), I
(London, 1 9 3 2 ), 116.
IX
2 28

Judaism , Christianity, and after them Islam w ere based on an im plicit

priority of prophecy, of revealed knowledge. T hus centuries before the
appearance of Islam the antagonism of hum an reason and prophetic
revelation had becom e the concern of Philo, O rigen, Jo h n Philoponus
and others. T he relation of philosophy and revealed religion also b e­
cam e a problem for M uslim intellectuals as they suddenly discovered
the rich inheritance of G reek antiquity, and so they sought some sort of
harm ony.
In the ninth century al-Kindi declared th at philosophy and theology
constitute two distinct bodies of knowledge th at followed separate lines
of development. Therefore they could co-exist w ithout impinging upon
one another. A t the extrem e and on the question of philosophy and
theology was the philosopher ar-R azi (865-923 or 9 3 2 ) who had little
use for religion, opting for philosophy and reason as the real keys to
understanding. D iam etrically opposed w ere those theologians w ho not
only insisted on the superiority of revealed to philosophic tru th b u t who
would not even adm it the utility of philosophical logic as a m eans of
supporting revealed truth.
H ow ever theologians could not com pletely ignore logic in theological
considerations and so the M utazilites early initiated the discussion of
Islam ic dogm a in term s of G reek philosophical concepts, though they
of course accepted the details of Islam ic dogma. T he tendency tow ard a
logical o r rational defense of sunni theology crystallized first in al-
A shari (late ninth-early tenth c .), who asserted the superiority of revela­
tion to reason and the support of revelation by reason; and second in
al-G hazzali ( + 1111) w ho systematically introduced a w ider use of
A ristotelian syllogistic logic in the defense of M uslim theology. Thus
Islam , in order to retain its essence and flavor, h ad to m ake a scholastic
com prom ise w ith G reek philosophy. The clash of G reek rationalism
with Judaic m onotheism is thus com m on to Islam , Byzantium , and the
L atin W est.43

43M. W att, Islam ic P h ilosoph y and T heology (Edinburgh, 19 6 2 ), 44-89, 93-

142. R. W alzer, G reek into A ra b ic . E ssays on Islam ic P h ilosophy (Cam bridge,
1 9 6 2 ), 2-21. H. Corbin, H istoire de la philosoph ie islam ique. I D es origines
jusqu'à la m o rt d yA v er ro i s (1 1 9 8 ) (Paris, 19 6 4 ). Arnaldez, “F alsafa,” E I2. F or
other questions o f Byzantine influence on M uslim theology: C. Becker, “Christ­
liche Polem ik und islam ische D ogm enbildung,” Islam stu dien, I, 432-449. A . A bel,
“La polém iqué dam asceniènne et son influence sur les origines de la théologie
m usulm ane,” U E laboration de l'Islam (Paris, 19 6 1 ). T.J. de Boer, The H istory o f
P h ilosoph y in Islam (L ond on, 1903). O f particular im portance are the papers
 Byzantium and Islam 2 29

The question of Byzantine influence in A rab painting will perhaps

form a convenient, transitional subject which will lead us in this brief
survey from the second or A bbasid period to the third or T urkish period.
These Byzantine influences on A rab painting readily lend themselves to
transitional characterization because though the B yzantine influence on
A rab painting seems to have been renew ed as a result of the A rab
translations of illum inated G reek texts in A bbasid times, this Byzantine
influence on the A rab art of the book is m ost apparent in the late
twelfth and early thirteenth centuries, thus well into the T urkish period.
Y ou will recall th at the two m ajor elem ents in A rab painting during the
Umayyad period w ere Byzantine and Sassanid. W ith the general Persian
orientation of the A bbasid period, however, the Iranian elem ent pre­
dom inated. W ith a new developm ent in the art of A rab illum ination
Byzantine iconographie types and m any particulars of Byzantine style
produced that which R ichard E ttinghausen has described as “Byzantine
art in Islam ic garb.” This is especially, though not exclusively, apparent
in those G reek texts translated into A rabic which also had illum inations.
Two A rab m anuscripts of the early thirteenth century (located it is sig­
nificant in the T opkapu Sarayı M üzeisi), a translation of Dioscurides
and the Choicest Maxims and Sayings by the eleventh century author
al-M ubashir, em ploy illum inatory apparati and techniques w hich are
strikingly Byzantine. B oth contain double frontpieces depicting the
author (in the one case D ioscurides, in the other the seven wise m en of
an tiq uity); clothing, treatm ent of folds, gold background, plasticity of
the face, etc., are characteristically Byzantine. B yzantine features are
also visible in m echanical works such as the Book of Knowledge of
Mechanical Devices by al-Jaziri, an illum inated copy of w hich from the
T opkapu Sarayı M üzeisi dates to 1254. B ut the B yzantine trend in book
illum ination was so pervasive that w orks of non-G reek origin such as
the thirteenth century m anuscript of al-H ariri’s Maqamat (Bib. N at.
A rab 6094, 1222) and even Q u’ranic m anuscripts, underw ent its influ­
ence.
T hus early Byzantine or late classical origins form the basic ele­
m ent of unity in w hat has been term ed A rab, as in contradistinction

delivered at the first G iorgio della Vida C onference, University o f C alifornia,

Los A ngeles in the spring o f 1967. The subject o f the conference was “Logic and
Islam .”
IX
230

to Persian, painting, even w hen the form er has copied Sassanid

m odels.44

III. The Turkish Period

T he discussion of A rab painting has brought us well within the
chronological confines of the third period of B yzantine influence upon
Islam ic civilization, th at is the period of the eleventh to the seventeenth
centuries and the period of the Seljuks, Beyliks, and O ttom ans. O nce
m ore I should like to preface my rem arks by pointing to three guide­
lines. F irst the T urks took their form al culture from Islam and m ore
specifically from the Iranian corner of the Islam ic world. Second, the
new T urco-Islam ic states of which I am speaking were established in

44Ettinghausen, op. c it., 59-80. Ettinghausen, Turkish M iniatures (N ew York,

1 9 6 5 ), 8-9, on the Byzantine affiliations o f the m iniatures in Ms. B ibliothèque
N atio n a le Persan 174, executed in Aksaray in 1271 and dedicated to the Seljuk
sultan. A lso E. Blochet, L es enlum inures des m anu scrits orientaux de la B ib­
liothèque N ation ale (Paris, 1 9 2 6 ), plates 18-19; M u su lm an Painting X llth -
X V IIth century (L ondon, 1 9 2 9 ), plate xxxiv. Plates lv and lvi from the M s. o f
Rasid ed D in ’s history have angels done in the Byzantine manner. G reek painters
were active in the dom ains o f the A natolian Seljuks during the thirteenth century
as is evident from the frescoes o f the troglodyte churches. Eflaki, L es saints des
d ervich es tourneurs tr. C. H uart, I (Paris, 1 918-1922), 333-334; II, 69, and
pa ssim , m entions G reek painters w ho were active at the Seljuk court as w ell as
in the dervish circle o f C elal al-D in Rum i, and G reek architects and m asons. Bar
Hebraeus, C hronographia, I, m entions a G reek painter w ho w ent to Tabriz to
decorate the chapel o f a Byzantine princess w ho had married the local M uslim
lord. Bar H ebraeus then hired the Greek painter to decorate Syriac churches.
F. Babinger, “M ehm ed’s II. H eirat m itt Sitt-Chatun ( 1 4 4 9 ),” D er Islam , X X IX
(1 9 5 0 ), 230-231, and plate 7 reproduces a portrait o f Sitt H atun (w ife o f M eh-
m ed II) done by a G reek painter. It is in a G reek m anuscript o f P tolem y’s
G eograph y probably sent by M elik Arslan D h u ’l Qadir-oglu (145 4 -1 4 6 5 ) to his
brother-in-law M ehm ed II. T he manuscript, w hich originally contained a picture
o f M elik Arslan as w ell, is Cod. Marc. Gr. 516. Timur, as a result o f his
A n atolian cam paigns, transported num erous Greek, Arm enian, and Turkish sil­
versmiths, m asons, and gunsm iths from A n atolia to Samarkand, G onzales de
Clavijo, tr. Le Strange, E m bassy to Tam erlane 1403-1406 (L ondon, 19 2 8 ), 288.
T he vitality and influence o f Byzantine painting during the twelfth-thirteenth
centuries is perhaps best understood as a phenom enon w hich penetrated both
Europe and parts o f the N ear East. On this artistic penetration by Byzantium
see the recent studies o f K. W eitzm ann, “Various A spects o f Byzantine Influence
on the Latin Countries from the Sixth to the T w elfth Centuries,” D u m barton
O aks P apers, X X (1 9 6 6 ), 1-24; “Icon Painting in the Crusader K ingdom ,” D u m ­
barton O aks P apers, X X (1 9 6 6 ), 49-83; E. K itzinger, “The Byzantine Contribu­
tion to W estern A rt o f the T w elfth and Thirteenth Centuries,” D u m barton O aks
P apers, X X (1 9 6 6 ), 25-47.
 Byzantium and Islam 231

the heart and hom eland of Medieval Hellenism. T hird, the Turkish
conquerors, like the A rabs who conquered the N ear East, were pre­
dom inantly nom ads and they were sedentarized (like the A rab be­
douins) in a Byzantine milieu. H aving exhausted the limits of your
patience, as well as the time limits set by the chairm an, I shall touch
briefly and at random upon this enorm ous subject, only to illustrate this
Byzantine influence on the level of form al institutions and on folk
culture.
[The similarities between the O ttom an and Byzantine Em pires are so
num erous that the draw ing of parallels is an old game in which prac­
tically all Byzantinists and O ttom anists have indulged.45 There are
basically three possible explanations to these m any parallels. First, the
cores of the two em pires included A natolia and the B alkans and so there
were similarities in geographic, climatic, and ethnographic configura­
tions. As a result, the problem s of governm ent which em perors and
sultans encountered were similar and these elicited similar responses
and solutions. This does not, however, explain everything. F o r in­
stance one m ay look at the different attitudes which the dom inant ethnic
groups of Byzantium and the O ttom an E m pire had tow ard the sea. A
second explanation for the similarity lies in a direct borrow ing by the
T urks from the Byzantines. As in the case of the A rabs in the newly
conquered Byzantine provinces, the T urks borrow ed from Byzantine
provincial peoples such as the A rm enians, Syrians, and Slavs, as well
as from the G reeks. B ut unlike the A rab exam ple w here the role of the
non-G reek C hristians was preem inent, in A sia M inor a mass conversion

45M .F. K öprülü has generally taken a negative view on the influences exercized
by Byzantine institutions. “Bizans m üesseselerini Osm anli m üesseselerini tesiri
hakkında bâzı m ülahazalar,” Turk H ukuk ve iktisat tahiri m ecm uasi, I (1 9 3 1 ),
242 ff; A lcu n e osservaziotıi intorno αΙΓ influenza delle institu zioni bizantine sufle
istitu zion i o ttom an e (R om e, 1953); “Les institutions byzantines ont-elles joué un
role dans la form ation des institutions ottom anes?” Bulletin o f the International
C o m m ittee o f H isto rical Sciences, V I (1 9 3 3 ), fasc. 23, 297-302. The affirmative
view is expressed in the follow in g works: E. Taeschner, “Eine neue türkische
Publikation zur W irtschaftsgeschichte,” O rientalistische L iteraturzeitun g, X X X V I
(1 9 3 3 ), 482-490. N . Iorga, B yzance après B yzance (Bucharest, 19 3 5 ). Ph.
K oukoules, V izan tinon vios kai politism o s, 5 vols. (A thens, 1948-1952); “Vizan-
tina kai ouhi tourkika ethim a,” B yzantinische Z eitsch rift, X X X (1 9 2 9 -1 9 3 0 ),
192-196. B. C vetkova, “Influence exercée par certains institutions de Byzance et
des pays balkaniques du M oyen A ge sur le systèm e féodal ottom an,” B yzantino-
Bulgarica, I (9 6 2 ) , 237-257. R. G uillaum e, “Institutions byzantines-institutions
m usulm anes,” A n n ales d ’histoire écon om ie et sociale, V I (1 9 3 4 ), 426-427. G.
Arnakis, O i p ro to i O th om an oi (A thens, 1 947), 101-107.
IX
232

of and interm arriage with the G reeks becam e the basis for a strong
Byzantine coloration of T urkish M uslim society.4*5 Conversion and inter­
m arriage were also significant in the B alkans b u t they never reached the
vast proportions which they attained in A natolia. As a result a great
m any basic facets of O ttom an society had a Byzantine-Balkan base
with a veneer of the T urkish language and the Islam ic religion. A third
route whereby similarities m ay have arisen was the m ore circuitous one
by which the Byzantine elem ents already assim ilated by Islam ic civiliza­
tion in the Um ayyad and A bbasid periods w ere taken over by the T urks
in their Islam ized forms w hen the T urks entered the lands of the Cali­
phate and were Islam ized. T hus elem ents of G reek philosophy, science,
m athem atics, geography, m edicine, etc., w ere p art of this G raeco-
Islam ic heritage which the T urks received. It is no accident that m any
of the m anuscripts dealing with these subjects are to be found in T urkish
libraries today.
U nlike the A rabs of the first M uslim century, the Seljuks and O tto­
m ans inherited a highly developed im perial, adm inistrative, and military

46 The author is now preparing a lengthy study o f this phenom enon in

A natolia, “The D ecline o f M edieval H ellenism and the Process o f Islam ization
in A sia M inor, 11-15th Centuries.” There is no system atic description o f Islam iza­
tion in the Balkans, but one m ay consult the follow ing: P. Petrov, A sim ilatorskata
p o litik a na turksite za voevateli. Sbornik o t doku m en ti za pom okhcim edanchvaniia
i poturchvaniia (X V -X I X v ) (Sofia, 1964); F.W . H asluck, C hristianity and Islam
under the Sultans, I-II (O xford, 1 929). F or the conversions effected through the
devshirm e and service in the governm ent, H.S. K issling, “D as Renegatentum in
der G lanzzeit des osm anischen R eiches,” Scienta (January, 1 9 61), 6, series 55;
I.H . Uzunçarsili, O sm anli devleti teşkilatından kapukulu ocakları, I-II (Ankara,
194 3 -1 9 4 4 ). Extensive conversion is im plied in the cadi registers o f Sofia, T hessa­
loniki, Berroia and N aousa; G . G alabov and H . D uda, D ie P rotokollbü ch er des
K a d ia m tes Sofia (M unich, 19 6 0 ); I.K. Vasdravelles, Istorika A rch eia M akedonias.
A* A rch eion Thessalonikes (Thessalonike, 1952); A rch eion V eroias-N aou ses
( 1 5 9 8 -1 8 8 6 ) (T hessaloniki, 1 9 5 4 ).
T he effect o f the m ore extensive nature o f Islam ization in A sia M inor is
discernible in the registers o f the taxable hearths o f the early sixteenth century.
M uslim Christian Jew Total
A sia M inor 903,997 77,869 559 982,425
less C ilicia
Balkans 194,958 832,707 4,134 1,031,799
less C ’ople
T otal 1,098,955 910,576 4,693 2,014,224
Ö. Barkan, “Essai sur les données statistiques des registres de recensem ent dans
l’Empire Ottom an aux X V e et X V Ie siècles,” Journal o f the E conom ie and Social
H isto ry o f the O rient, I (1 9 5 7 ), 20, 32.
 Byzantium and I si am 233

apparatus from Islamic civilization.47 Though many of these institutions

had evolved from Byzantine and Persian models, by the time the T urks
had adopted them they had been thoroughly stam ped by the integrating
forces of Islam. N evertheless there was a considerable m argin within
which Byzantine form s exercized a very definite influence. F o r basically
the Turkish sultans had to apply this apparatus to a C hristian milieu,

There is no agreem ent as to the proportion between converts and Turkish

M uslims in these figures for the M uslim hearths in the Balkans. Barkan, “Les
déportations com m e m éthode de peuplem ent et de colonisation dans l’empire
ottom an,” R evu e de la facu lté des sciences écon om ique de V U niversité d ’Istan bul,
X I (1 9 4 9 -5 0 ), 67-131, and M .T. G ökbilgin, R u m eli’de Y ürükler, T atarlar ve
E vlad-i Fatihan (İstanbul, 19 5 7 ), both have em phasized the numbers o f Turkish,
especially nom adic, settlers in the Balkans. A ccording to Barkan’s statistics (for
the early sixteenth century) o f the 194,000 M uslim hearths in the Balkans 37,435
represented Yuruk or nom ad hearths, therefore only slightly more than 19% o f
the M uslim population. If we m ultiply by the number 5, as Barkan does, the
nom adic hearths yield approxim ately 187,175 individuals. G ökbilgin’s study results
in the follow in g breakdown for the tribes.
Tribe D ate O caks
N aldöken 1543 196
Tanridagi 1543 328
Selanik 1543 500
O fcaboîu 1566 97
Vize 1543 105
K ocacık 1543 132
Tatars
Aktav 21 ocakb 1543 88
Tirhala 12
Yanbolu 34
Bozapa 21
1,446 ocaks
X 25 m en/o ca k
36,150 m en or hearths
Thus G ökbilgin’s number o f ocaks and hearths w ould seem to coincide with the
figures o f Barkan, but he greatly inflates them (fo r instance he suggests 100,000
population for the Tanridagi in the late sixteenth cen utry). Inasm uch as the
O ttom an statistics indicate that the m ass sedentarization o f these nom ads took
place in the late sixteenth and early seventeenth centuries, the tax figures for the
early sixteenth century show the nom ads to be a m inority o f the M uslim popula­
tion. It is highly probable that even after account has been taken o f the sedentari­
zation o f a sm all portion o f these nom ads during the late fourteenth and fifteenth
centuries, and also o f the m igration o f a num ber o f sedentary M uslim Turks to
the Balkans, a large portion o f the M uslim hearths in the tax registers represents
converted Balkan populations. A. V akalaopoulos, Istoria tou neou E llen ism ou ,
IIj (Thessaloniki, 1 9 6 4 ), 44-49; J. Kabrda, “Les problèm es de l’étude de l’histoire
de la Bulgarie a l’époque de la dom ination turque,” B yzantino-S lavica, X V
(1 9 5 4 ), 197-198.
47I.H. U zunçarsili, O sm anli d evleti teşkilatına m éditai (Istanbul, 1941).
IX
23 4

and so the Turkish sultanate in A natolia and the Balkans was m arkedly
different from the M am eluke sultanate in Egypt and the Safavid rule in
Persia.48 In A natolia and the Balkans M uslim theoria had to adjust to
Byzantine praxis. Basic is an understanding of w hat happened to the
land regime, for the land as the basis of the state’s fiscal sinews deter­
m ined a great deal. W hen the Seljuks entered A sia M inor they occu­
pied and eventually settled in an agricultural environm ent which had
adhered to centuries of Byzantine regulations. The following disparate
and disjointed inform ation is a strong indication th at Turkish agriculture
was essentially Byzantine agriculture. In the tw elfth century the various
T urkish princes in A natolia recolonized their devastated lands with
G reek, A rm enian, and Syrian farm ers, often kidnapping entire villages
and towns in Byzantine and A rm enian lands. N ot only did they resort to
enslavem ent of populations in order to restore agriculture to their do­
m ains, bu t they even fought one another for possession of these C hris­
tian farm ers. W e know little about the tax system in this early period,
but an anecdote of N icetas C hôm âtes gives a very interesting insight as
to the relations of the Byzantine and Seljuk agrarian tax systems. A t the
end of the twelfth century, he reports, the sultan of K onya kidnapped
5,000 villagers from T antalus and C aria in the M aeander valley, and
resettled them about A kshehir-Philom elium . H e had careful registers
m ade of these G reeks and their families, gave them seed and livestock,
five years of tax im m unity, and then ordered th at after this period had
lapsed they were to pay exactly the same taxes which they had previ­
ously paid the Byzantine authorities.49 In thirteenth century A rab vakuf
docum ents from A natolia, the term inus technicus used to define the
boundaries between private lands is sunor, or the Byzantine sunoron.50
İnalcık in a careful study has pointed out the probability th at the O tto ­
m an taxes, çift resmi, and nam çift, are not only direct translations of
the Byzantine zeugarion and boïdaton, but that the tax sums associated
with these are the same in late Byzantine and early O ttom an tax p rac­
tice.51 This conservative nature of O ttom an tax practice is clear in other

48Taeschner, loc. c it., 486-487.

49N icetas Choniates, H istoria (B onn, 1 8 35), 656-657. See also C. Cahen on the
general question o f the Seljuk tax system , “Le regime de la terre et l’occupation
turque en A n atolie,” C ahiers d'histoire m ondiale, II (1 9 5 5 ), 566-580.
50O. Turan, T ürkiyede Selçukulari hakkında resm i vesikalar, m etin, tercüm e ve
araştırm aları (Ankara, 1 9 5 8 ), 27, 41 o f the texts in part II.
51H. İnalcık, “The Problem s o f the Relationship between Byzantine and O tto­
man T axation,” A k ten des X L Internationalen B yzantinisten-kongresses. M ünchen
1958 (M unich, I 9 6 0 ), 237-242.
 Byzantium and Isi am 235

areas where the conquerors simply preserved in slightly altered form

the tax structure which they found. Thus O ttom an agrarian legislation
of the sixteenth-seventeenth centuries preserves certain B yzantine prac­
tices . . . angarya, irgadiya,52 and G reek tax farm ers are in evidence in
A natolia and the B alkans from the thirteenth-fifteenth centuries.53 The
rem arkable philological studies of A ndreas Tietze have isolated about
300 G reek w ords w hich rem ain today in the spoken T urkish of A natolia.
T he fact that m ost of these have to do with agricultural and rural life
bring additional proof in support of the theory that O ttom an agrarian
life in A sia M inor was strongly influenced by that of the Byzantines, and
the same holds true for the B alkans.54
Tim e does not perm it m ore than a passing reference to the Byzantine
num ism atic and sigillographie55 influence on their Turkish counterparts,
to the survival of a Byzantine scribal class am ong Seljuks, beyliks, and

52W. H inz, “D as Steuerwesen O stanatoliens,” Z eitsch rift der D eutsche m orgen-

ländische G esellsch aft, C (1 9 5 0 ), 177-201. F or the problem o f the continuity o f
the com m ercium under Seljuks and O ttom an, S. Lampros, “E Ellenike os episem os
glossa ton soultanon,” N e o s E llen om n em on, V (1 9 0 8 ), 51.
F or other taxes o f Byzantine or Balkan origin, B. Svetkova, Izven redn i danetsi
1 derzh avn i p o vin n o sti v Bulgarskite ze m li p o d turska vlast (Sofia, 1958).
53N . Beldiceanu, L es actes des prem iers sultans conservées dans les m anuscrits
turcs de la B ibliothequen N ation ale à Paris, 1 (Paris, 1 9 60), 113, 146. Bar
Hebraeus, C hronographia, I, 334. M .T. G ökbilgin, X V -X V I asırlarda Edirne ve
Pasa L ivâsi. V akiflar-m ülkler-m ukataalar (İstanbul, 1 9 52), 89, 93, 102, 106, 107,
113, 124, 127, 134, 135, 137, 151, 152, 153, gives num erous exam ples o f Greeks
and converts who were recipients o f mukataas. The name Palaeologus is prom i­
nent.
540 n this subject the studies o f A. T ietze are fundam ental, “G riechischen
Lehnwörter im anatolischen Türkisch,” Oriens, VIII (1 9 5 5 ), 204-257; “G riech­
ischen Lehnwörter im anatolischen Türkisch,” A c te s X . C ongres International
d ’Ê tudes B yzantines, 1955 (Istanbul, 1 9 57), 295 ff; “Einige weitere griechische
Lehnwörter im anatolischen Türkisch,” N ém eth A rm ağanı (Ankara, 1 9 6 2 ), 373-
388. The im portance o f the indigenous agricultural traditions in the Balkans is
m uch more obvious.
55P. Casanova, “N um ism atique des D anishm endites,” R evu e N u m ism atiqu e,
X II (1 8 9 4 ), 307-312, 433-460; XIII (1 8 9 5 ), 389-402; X IV (1 8 9 6 ), 210-230, 306-
315. W. H inz, “H yperper und Asper. Zur vorosm anischen W ahrungskunde,” D er
Islam , X X X IX (1 9 6 4 ), 79-89. F. Babinger, R eliquienschacher am O sm anenhof
im X V . Jahrhundert. Zugleich ein Beitrag zu r G eschichte der osm anischen G o ld ­
prägung unter M eh m ed II. dem E roberer. B ayerische A kadem ie der W issen­
schaften, philosophisch-historische K lass. Sitzu ngsberichte, Jahrgang, 1964, H eft
2 (M unich, 1 9 5 6 ). J. Karabacek, “G igliato des jonischen Turkom anenfürsten
Om ar-beg,” N um ism atische Seitschrift, II (1 8 7 0 ), 525-538; “G igliato des
karischen Turkom anenfürsten Urchan-bej,” N u m ism atisch e Z eitschrift, IX (1 8 7 7 ),
200-215.
IX
236

Ottomans,™ to Turkish borrow ings in m ilitary57 and m aritim e life,68 to

the appearance of N eo-Byzantinism s (i.e., Phanariots and Patriarchate)
in the form al O ttom an adm inistrative structure,59 above all to the great
influence of Byzantine traditions and craftsm en in architecture, p ain t­
ing,60 com m erce (p an ay ır) and the guilds,61 textile m anufacture,62 and

56Lampros, loc. cit., passim . H. D uda, D ie Seltschuken geschickte des Ibn Bibi
(Copenhagen, 1959), 67. Bartholom aeus G eorgiew iz, The Offspring of the H ouse
o f O ttom an no (London, 1 5 7 0 ), under Iaziti (y a z ic i). E.A . Zachariadou, “M ia
hellenike syntheke tou Chidir A yd in oglu,” B yzantinische Z eitsch rift, LV (1 9 6 2 ),
254-265. A . Bom bacı, “N u ovi firmanı greci di M aom eti II,” Byzantinische Z eit­
sch rift, X L V II (1 9 5 4 ), 298-319. C halcocondyles (B o n n ), 501. Inalcik, “Ottom an
M ethods o f Conquest,” Stu dia Islam ica, II (1 9 5 4 ), 111.
57R. Anhegger, “M artoloslar hakkında,” T ü rkiyat m ecm uası, VII-VIII (1940-
4 2 ) , 282-320. Η. inalcik, “G elibolu,” E l2 The question o f the origin o f the timar
and its relation to the Byzantine pronoia have been much discussed without any
definite solution. The nature o f both and the conditions under w hich they were
held are strikingly similar, as is indeed the very m eaning o f both words. D eny,
“T im ar,” E IX derived the timar from the pronoia and other studies have sim ilarly
derived the timar or else have pointed to the strong parallels: V.P. M utafcieva,
“Sur le caractère du timar ottom an,” A cta O rientalia, IX (1 9 5 9 ), 55-61; G.
Ostrogorsky, P our la féo d a lité byzantine (Brussels, 1 9 54), 257; V. Cubrilovic,
“Oko proucavanja srednjovekom og feudalizm a (povod om delà G. Ostrogorsky
Proniji,” Istor. C asopis, III (1 9 5 2 ), 189-203; S. N ovak ovic, “Pronijeri i baStinici
(spahiye i citluk sahibije). Prilog k istoriji nepokretne im ovine u Srbiji X III do
X IX V,” G las, I (1 8 8 7 ), 68 ff. On Christian holders o f timars, Inalcik, “Tim ariotes
chrétiens en Albanie au X V e sie d e ,” M itteilungen des osterrichischen Staatsarch ivs
IV (1 9 5 2 ), 120-128; “Arnaw utluk,” EI2; Suret-i defter-i Sancak-i A rn a vid (A n ­
kara, 1 954).
58A . Tietze and H .R . Kahane, The Lingua France in the L evan t (U rbana,
19 5 8 ).
59Th. Papadopoullos, Stu dies and D ocu m en ts R elatin g to the H istory o f the
G reek Church and P eople under Turkish D om in ation (Brussels, 1952); M -P.
Zallony, Traité sur les princes de la Valachie et de la M oldavie, sortis de C on ­
stantinople, connus sou s le nom : F anariotes etc., (Paris, 1830). lorga, op. cit.
I. G ottwald, “Phanariotische Studien,” L eipziger V iertaljahrschrift fu r Sü dost­
eu ro p a , V (1 9 4 1 ).
eoS. Eyice, “Bizans-Islam -Türk sanat m ünasebetleri,” V. Türk Tarih K on gresi
(Ankara, 1 9 6 0 ), 298-302. “H am m an,” E I2, on Byzantine influences in the archi­
tectural details o f the O ttom an baths. On specific exam ples o f Byzantine architec­
tural influences: J.M. Rogers, “The Cifte M inare M edrese at Erzerum and the
G ök Medrese at Sivas. A Contribution to the H istory o f Style in the Seljuk
Architecture o f Thirteenth Century Turkey,” A natolian Stu dies, X V (1 9 6 5 ), 76;
“A nnual Report,” A n atolian Stu dies, X V (1 9 6 5 ), 12, on the Byzantine round
arch, masonry, and construction in İznik and Bursa. See also note 44 above.
61G. M eyer, Türkische Studien. I D ie griechischen und rom anischen Bestand-
theile im W ortsch ätze d es O sm anisch-Türkischen. Sitzungsberichte der ph iloso­
phisch-historischen C lasse der kaiserlichen A k a dem ie der W issenschaften,
C X X V III, I (V ienna, 1 8 9 3 ), 1-96. N . Beldiceanu, L es actes des prem iers sultans
 Byzantium and Islam 237

finally to Byzantine cuisine and dom estic architecture in Turkish dress.0·'1

Just a few words on Byzantine influences on the level of folk culture
will suffice to indicate how w idespread this was. The basis for this
phenom enon is the very intense symbiosis betw een G reeks and T urks in
Asia M inor which proceeded from the great conversions and w idespread
interm arriage and which also took place betw een Christians and M us­
lims in the Balkans. O ne generation after the battle of M anzikert this
process is already visible . . . A nna C om ena speaks of three ethnic
groups . . . the G reeks, the barbarians, and the m ixo-barbaroi.64 R e­
ligious conversion attained its high tide in the late thirteenth and four­
teenth centuries and by the fifteenth-sixteenth centuries A natolia was
approxim ately 90 percent M uslim .05 B ut though Islam had effaced
Christianity, it was only the m ost recent coating of religious varnish to
cover the population of A natolia, and the Christian coloration of the
previous coating is all to discernible. O n the folk level the converts
brought Christianity with them into the folds of Islam and produced a
religious syncretism .60 This is clear in such Christian practices as icon
worship and pilgrimages to C hristian shrines by Muslims, double sanc­
tuaries, equation of M uslim and C hristian saints, local demonology, the
sacred character of m edicinal earth, blessing of the waters, all of which
appear within popular Islam . I wish to pick out only one of these Chris-

conserves clans les m anuscrits turcs de la B ibliothèque N ationale à Paris (Paris,

1 9 6 4 ), II, R èglem en ts m iniers, 1390-1512. F. Taeschner, “D as bosnische Zunft­
wesen zur Türkenzeit (1463 bis 1 8 7 8 ),” B yzantinische Z eitsch rift, X L IV (1 9 5 1 ),
551-559. For a specific instance o f a guild consisting o f Christians and M uslim s
and converts, am ong the officials o f which were also to be found som e converts,
G . G alabov and H . Duda, D ie P rotokollbü ch er des K a d ia m tes Sofia (M unich,
19 6 0 ), 215.
ü2M arco P o lo , ed. A .C . M oule and P. P elliot, I (L ondon, 1938), 95, on the
dom inant role o f the G reeks and Arm enians in the carpet weaving industry o f
thirteenth century A natolia, lb n Battuta, The T ravels o f Ibn B attu ta, tr. H .A .R .
Gibb, II (Cam bridge, 1 9 6 2 ), 425, on the G reek textile workers o f fourteenth
century Ladik in western A natolia. Bar H ebraeus, I, 408, m entions the Christian
weavers o f M alatya.
e3K oukoules, op. c it., passim .
{^ A n n a C om n en a, ed. B. Leib, 111 (Paris, 1 937), 205. Nicephorus G regoras,
III (Bonn, 18 5 5 ), 509, for fourteenth century Bithynia.
e3H. G eizer, “Ungedruckte und ungenügend veröffentlichte Texte der N otitiae
episcopatum ,” A bhan dlungen der bayerischen A k a d em ie der W issenschaften, X X I
(1 9 0 1 ), 630-631. O.L. Barkan, “Éssai sur les données statistiques des registres
de recensem ent dans l’empire ottom an aux X V e et X V Ie siècles,” Journal o f the
E con om ie and Social H istory o f the O rient, I (1 9 5 8 ), 20.
66F.W . H asluck, C hristian ity and Islam under the Sultans, I II (O xford, 1 9 29).
IX
238

tian practices which becam e widespread in the folk practices of Islam,

the Christian practice of baptism .
A series of sources, reaching from the twelfth to the seventeenth
centuries, reveals that m any Turks had their infants baptized by G reek
priests, “for,” says one authority, “the A garenes suppose that their chil­
dren will be possessed of dem ons and will smell like dogs if they do not
receive C hristian baptism . . . they . . . invoke baptism . . . as a rem edy
or magical charm .” 67 It is interesting that baptism was not restricted to
the lower classes of A natolian M uslims, but it included even Seljuk
sultans and princes of the K aram anid and R am azan dynasties .68 De
Busbecq indicates that M uslims continued to baptize their children in
the sixteenth century ,69 and the church in a decision of the seventeenth
century threatened to defrock any G reek priest who continued to baptize
the children of the T u rk s .70 T he adoption of so patently a Christian
practice as baptism is strong indication of the great quantity of Byzan­
tine practices which passed into Turkish society .71

67R h a lle s a n d P o t le s , Syntagm a ton theion kai ieron kanonon, II ( A t h e n s ,

1 8 5 2 ) , 4 9 8 . R e p e a te d b y th e f o u r t e e n t h c e n tu r y ju r is t A r m e n o p o u l o s , P atrologia
G raeca , C L , 1 2 5 .
68 P a c h y m e r e s , I ( B o n n , 1 8 3 5 ) , 1 3 1 , 2 6 3 - 2 6 8 . N ic e p h o r u s G r e g o r a s , I ( B o n n ,
1 8 5 5 ) , 9 5 . B e r tr a n d o n d e L a B r o c q u iè r e , L e V oyage d ’ou trem er de B ertrandon de
la B rocquière , e d . C . S c h e f e r ( P a r is , 1 8 9 2 ) , 9 0 .
e9D e B u s b e c q , The Turkish L etters o f Ogier G hiselin de Busbecq tr. E .S .
F o r s te r ( O x f o r d , 1 9 2 7 ) , 1 3 6 -1 3 7 .
70 F . K id r ic , B a r t h o lo m a u s G jo r g e v ic : B iographische und bibliographische
Z usam m enfassung (V ie n n a - P r a g u e - L e ip z ig , 1 9 2 0 ) , 1 5 . H a s lu c k , op. c it ., I, 3 2 - 3 4 .
K o u k o u le s , op. cit., I V , 5 4 -5 5 . W .M . C a ld e r , “A J o u r n e y r o u n d th e P r o s e ile m -
m e n e ,” K lio , X ( 1 9 1 0 ) , 2 3 3 ff, g iv e s a n in t e r e s t in g e x a m p le o f th e m e t a t h e s is
w h ic h b a p tis m u n d e r w e n t a m o n g th e p o p u la t io n o f L a d iq . T h e in h a b ita n ts ( m a n y
o f w h o s e a n c e s t o r s w e r e o r ig in a lly c o n v e r t s to I s la m in p a s t c e n t u r ie s ) im m e r s e d
th e ir c h ild r e n in a n o ld C h r is tia n a y a s m a ( m ir a c u l o u s s p r in g p r o m in e n t in G r e e k
O r th o d o x C h r is t ia n it y ) o u t s id e L a d iq s o th a t th e ir c h ild r e n m ig h t n o t b e c o m e
in fid e l C h r is tia n s !
71A c o m p a r a tiv e s tu d y o f G r e e k , A r m e n ia n , a n d T u r k is h f o lk lo r e is m u c h
n e e d e d a n d w ill n o d o u b t g r e a tly illu m in a t e th e h is t o r ic a l r e la t io n s o f B y z a n t in e
a n d T u r k is h s o c ie t ie s . O n e o f th e m o r e f a m o u s s u r v iv a ls o f B y z a n t in e f o lk lo r e
w h ic h h a s a b s o r b e d in t o T u r k is h f o lk lo r e is th e le g e n d o f k iz il e lm a , th e r ed o r
g o ld e n a p p le . I n th e b e g in n in g th e le g e n d a r o s e a b o u t th e e q u e s tr ia n s ta tu e o f
J u s tin ia n th e G r e a t lo c a t e d n e a r S t. S o p h ia a n d d e s c r ib e d b y P r o c o p iu s in th e
D e A edificiis, I, ii, 1 -1 2 . J u s tin ia n h e ld in o n e h a n d a s p h e r e ( w it h c r o s s ) a s s y m ­
b o l o f w o r ld d o m in io n a n d th e o th e r h a n d w a s r a is e d to w a r d A s i a a s t h o u g h h e
h a d ju st r e p u ls e d th e A s i a t ic f o e ( P e r s i a ) . B y z a n tin e le g e n d a s s e r te d th a t th e f a ll
o f th e s p h e r e fr o m th e s ta tu e ’s h a n d in th e fo u r t e e n t h c e n t u r y in d ic a te d th a t p o ­
lit ic a l d o m in io n w a s s lip p in g fr o m th e h a n d s o f th e G r e e k s a n d w o u ld p a s s t o th e
T u r k s . T h u s th e ‘g o ld e n s p h e r e ’ a s a s y m b o l o f w o r ld p o w e r p a s s e d in t o T u r k is h
 Byzantium and Islam 23 9

I have tried to present you with a fleeting glance of that process by

which medieval Hellenism contributed to the form ation of Islam ic civili­
zation. Byzantine civilization was sufficiently vital at the time of the
Arab conquest to determ ine m uch of the adm inistrative structure, soci­
ety, and economic life of the early A rab empire. A t the end of this first
cycle of Byzantine epibiosis the forces of Iranism , A rabism , and Islam
replaced or transm uted Byzantine form s in governm ent and society.
Simultaneously, however, the new M uslim society, by virtue of mass
conversions and confronted with this sophisticated society, was con­
strained to adopt and adapt Byzantine culture. The result was the
fortleben of H ellenism in the very intellectual foundations of Islam ic
civilization. In the final cycle Byzantium exercized both a direct and
indirect influence on Turco-M uslim society. Because the T urkish polity

f o lk lo r e w h e r e it v a r io u s ly s y m b o liz e s C o n s t a n t in o p le , R o m e , B u d a p e s t, e tc . S e e
W . H e ffe n in g , “D i e tü r k is c h e n T r a n s k r ip tio n s te x te d e s B a r t h o lo m a e u s G e o r g ie v it z
a u s d e n J a h r e n 1 5 4 4 - 1 5 4 8 . E in B e itr a g z u r h is to r is c h e n G r a m m a t ik d e s O s m a n -
is c h - T ü r k is c h e n ,” A bhandlungen fu r die K u n de des M orgen lan des , X X V I I , 2
( L e ip z ig , 1 9 4 2 ) , e s p . 2 7 - 3 7 . R .M . D a w k in s , “T h e R e d A p p l e ,” A rcheion tou
thrakikou laographikou kai glossikou thesaurou, E pim etron S T tom ou ( 1 9 4 1 ) ,
4 0 1 -4 0 6 .
O f g r e a te r s ig n ific a n c e is th e h is to r y o f a n im a l s a c r ific e a n d th e a p p o r t io n in g
o f th e p a r ts o f th e s la in a n im a l. F o r th e p e r tin e n t a r r a n g e m e n ts a m o n g th e G r e e k
C h r is tia n s o f n in e t e e n t h -t w e n t ie th c e n tu r y A n a t o l ia , D . L o u c o p o u lo s a n d D . P e tr o -
p o u lo s , E laike latreia ton Pharason ( A t h e n s , 1 9 4 9 ) , 2 1 , 4 4 - 4 9 . O n th e a r r a n g e ­
m e n t s a m o n g th e T u r k s in th e s ix te e n th c e n tu r y , B a r t h o lo m a e u s G e o r g ie u iz , The
Offspring o f the H ouse o f O ttom an n o ( L o n d o n , 1 5 7 0 ) u n d e r “T h e m a n n e r o f
th e ir S a c r ific e s .” T h e a r r a n g e m e n ts o f th e a n c ie n t G r e e k s in th e m a t te r o f a p p o r ­
t io n in g th e p a r ts o f th e s a c r ific e d a n im a l a m o n g p r ie s t, th e o ff e r e r o f th e s a c r ific e
a n d th e c o m m u n it y , w e r e id e n t ic a l w ith t h o s e a r r a n g e m e n ts w h ic h p r e v a ile d
a m o n g G r e e k s a n d T u r k s in la te m e d ie v a l a n d m o d e r n t im e s : E . S c h w y z e r ,
D ialectoru m graecarum exem pla epigraphica po tio ra ( L e ip z ig , 1 9 2 3 ) , # 1 6 8 , # 3 6 6 ,
# 6 9 5 , # 7 2 1 , # 7 2 9 ; T h e a r tic le s “ D e r m a t ik o n ,” “ O p f e r ,” in P auly-W issow a. S e e
a ls o th e c o n tr ib u tio n s o f G . M e g a s , Z etem a ta e ileni kes laographias, III ( A t h e n s ,
1 9 5 0 ) , 2 7 -2 9 ; “T h y s ia ta u r o n k a i k r io n e n te v o r e i o a n a t o lik e T h r a k e ,” Laographia,
I II ( 1 9 1 1 ) , 4 5 . F o r a r e f e r e n c e to th e p h e n o m e n o n o f a n im a l s a c r ific e in B y z a n ­
tin e A s i a M in o r , F . C u m o n t , “L ’A r c h e v e q u e d e P e d a c h t o e e t le s a c r ific e d u f a o n , ”
B yza n tio n , V I ( 1 9 3 1 ) , 5 2 1 - 5 3 3 .
S o m e b e g in n in g s h a v e a lr e a d y b e e n m a d e in th e c o m p a r a t iv e s t u d y o f B y z a n ­
tin e a n d T u r k is h e p ic p o e tr y . H . G r é g o ir e , “L ’É p o p é e b y z a n t in e e t s e s r a p p o r ts
a v e c l ’é p o p é e tu r q u e e t l ’é p o p é e r o m a n e ,” B ulletin de la classe des lettres et des
sciences m orales et politiqu es de l’A cadem ie R o yale de B elgique , X V I I (B r u s s e ls ,
1 9 3 1 , 1 9 3 2 ) , N o . 1 2 , 5 e s e r ie s , 4 6 3 ff. S . K y r ia k id e s , “T o e p o s t o u D ig e n e k a i t o
t o u r k ik o n la ik o n m y t h is t o r e m a to u K i o r o g lo u ,” H ellenika, X V I I ( 1 9 6 2 ) , 2 5 2 - 2 5 3 ;
“ E le m e n ts h is to r iq u e s b y z a n t in e s d a n s le r o m a n é p iq u e tu r c d e S e y y id B a t t a l,”
B yza n tio n , X I ( 1 9 3 6 ) , 5 6 3 - 5 7 0 . T . A la n g u , “B iz a n s v e T ü r k k a h r a m a n lık
e p o s la r in in ç ik is i ü z e r in e ,” Türk D ili, II ( 1 9 5 3 ) , 5 4 1 - 5 5 7 .
IX
240

took root in the heartland of m edieval Hellenism and because of the vast
extent of conversions am ong G reeks and A rm enians, Byzantine civiliza­
tion had a profound and direct influence on this very im portant portion
of the Islam ic world. B ut it also exercized an indirect influence on the
Seljuks and O ttom ans by virtue of the Islam ized B yzantine traditions
which the Turks found in Islam ic civilization at the time of their con­
version to the religion of M uham m ud. Thus M edieval Hellenism rem ains
one of the m ost im portant constitutive and form ative elements in Islam ic
civilization.
Byzantium exercized a relentless fascination on her younger b ut
stronger Islam ic sister. M uslim society was infatuated with the G reek
world and M uslim intellectuals, despite their religious antagonism , and
idealized the Byzantines as the fount of secular wisdom and knowledge,
and as the m aster artists and craftsm en. In some ways the attitude of
the M uslim to the G reek was not unlike th at which the pagan R om an
and the m edieval L atin C hristian felt tow ard the G raeculus .72

7 2 R o s e n t h a l, o p . c it., 6 6 - 6 8 , 3 5 2 - 3 5 6 . L . M a s s ig n o n , “ L e m ir a g e b y z a n t in d a n s
le m ir o ir b a g h d a d ie n d ’il y a m il le a n s ,” O p e ra M in o r a , I ( B e ir u t , 1 9 6 3 ) , 126-
141.
 X

B Y Z A N TI N E C I RC U S FACTIONS A N D ISLAMIC
FUTUWWA O R G A N IZA TIO N S

(N E A N IA I, F IT Y Ä N , A H D Ä T H )

This short note is an attempt to ascertain whether some of the urban

futuwwa organizations of medieval Syria and Iran have any connection
with or are descended from Byzantine municipal institutions in the Near
East. From the time that Henri Pirenne put forth his famous thesis that
the Arab invasions interrupted the unity and continuity of late classical
civilization in the Mediterranean areas, scholars have debated the issue
of continuity and disruption .1 Islamicists demonstrated that contrary to
Pirenne’s general theory the Arabs maintained a very great deal of that
which they found, one historian going so far as to describe the Ummayad
and Abbassid caliphates as Neo-Byzantine and Neo-Sassanid empires re­
spectively .2 A large part of scholarly discussion has, more recently, cen­
tered about the question of innovation and continuity in the Muslim ci­
ties. Concerning the towns of Syria and northern Mesopotamia (those ci­
ties which were, previous to the Arab conquest, within the Byzantine em­
pire) the opinion now is that there was much of pre-Islamic origin in the
Muslim cities of these regions. When the Arabs conquered these lands in
the first half of the seventh century, many of the towns surrendered by
treaty and thus survived. Inasmuch as the newcomers did little in found­
ing new towns in Syria and northern Mesopotamia, the old Byzantine
towns remained as the basis of urban society .3 In many instances the gen­
eral physical shape of the city survived, the market places and the public
baths continuing much as they had previously been .4 In the realm of

1 D . D e n n e t t , “ P i r e n n e a n d M u h a m m a d ” , S p e c u l u m , 2 3 ( 1 9 4 8 ), 1 6 8 , 1 7 4 , 1 8 9 - 1 9 0 .
2 G . W ie t , “ L ’ E m p ir e n é o - b y z a n t i n d e s O m m e y a d e s e t l ’ E m p ir e n é o - s a s s a n i d e d e s
A b b a s s i d e s ” , J o u r n a l o f W o r ld H i s t o r y , 1 ( 1 9 5 3 ), 6 3 - 7 1 .
3 E . A s h t o r / S t r a u ß , “ L ’A d m i n i s t r a t i o n u r b a in e e n S y r i e m é d i é v a l e ” , R i v i s t a d e g l i
s t u d i o r ie n t a li, 3 1 ( 1 9 5 6 ), 1 1 1 .
4 O n t h is s e e t h e i n t e r e s t i n g r e m a r k s o f G . v o n G r u n e b a u m , “ D i e i s l a m i s c h e S t a d t ” ,
S a e c u l u m , 6 ( 1 9 5 5 ), 1 4 1 , 1 4 4 , 1 4 6 , r e l a t i n g p h i l o l o g i c a l l y t h e A r a b ic q a i s a r i y y a ( h a ll
o f t h e t e x t i l e m e r c h a n t s in t h e I s l a m i c b a z a r ) w it h t h e B y z a n t i n e β α σ ιλ ικ ή . S e e a ls o t h e
a r t ic le “ K a i s a r i y a ” , E I X. O n b u i l d i n g s k n o w n a s β α σ ιλ ικ ή in t h e f o r u m o f A n t i o c h , G .
D o w n e y , A H i s t o r y o f A n t i o c h in S y r i a ( P r i n c e t o n 1 9 6 1 ), p . 6 3 4 . T h e r e w a s a b a s i l i k e
in t h e f o r u m w h i c h h a d b e e n p r e v i o u s l y c a lle d K a is a r io n in t h e l a t e f o u r t h c e n t u r y , b u t
it s e e m s t o h a v e b e e n a n a d m i n i s t r a t i v e b u i l d i n g . F o r t h e a r c h it e c t u r a l m e a n i n g o f
β α σ ιλ ικ ή D o w n e y , o p . c i t . , p . 4 0 6 , 5 7 , a n d “ T h e A r c h it e c t u r a l S i g n i f i c a n c e o f t h e U s e
o f t h e W o r d s s t o a a n d b a s i l i k e in C la s s ic a l L it e r a t u r e ” , A m e r . J o u r n . A r c h a e o l . 4 1 ,
( 1 9 3 7 ), 1 9 4 - 2 1 1 . I t s e e m s t o m e a n b o t h ( 1 ) “ a c o v e r e d c o lo n n a d e s u c h a s w o u l d b e
 H ysa n tm e ( 'm u s /'"actions a n d Is la m ic I'u tu iv w a O rg a n iza tio n s 47

municipal institutions some students of the question detect the origin of

the Muslim r a ’îs (sort of 'mayor’) in the Byzantine offices of hipparchos,
nykteparchos, praetor, and archon ;5 the direct and immediate origin of
the muhtasib (official in charge of the guilds, standard weights and mea­
sures, municipal order, etc.) in the agoranom os ;6 and the predecessor of
Muslim guilds in the Byzantine artisinal corporations.7
One of the problems which has called forth considerable attention in
Islamicist circles is the entire history of the futuwwa and the ahdäth,
'ayyärün, and fityän. The ahdäth (literally 'young men’) were groups of
young men who in the period of the ninth-twelfth centuries (the Arab
sources become satisfactory only for this period in regards to the ahdäth)
played an important role in the cities of Syria and upper Mesopotamia as
urban militiamen and as a type of police. Consisting of local inhabitants
the ahdäth, during periods of governmental weakness, were successful in
opposing the arbitrariness of the government, in defending the city from
foreign attack, and in asserting themselves as political factors in the his­
tory of the tim es .8 The 'ayyärün (rascals, vagabonds) by the ninth-
twelfth centuries were performing very much the same functions in the
cities of Iran as did the ahdäth in Syria .9 Quite similar in the same period
were the fityän (young men) who were closely and even synonymously
associated with the 'ayyärün .10 The relations of these three, orpossiblytwo
(there seems to be no unanimous agreement as to whether the 'ayyärün
and fityän are one and the same or are two distinct groups), associations
are not at all clear. There is general agreement that the fityän- 'ayyärün
b u i l t a l o n g t h e s id e o f a f o r u m , a n d ( 2 ) a la r g e r c o l u m n a r s t r u c t u r e s u c h a s w o u l d c o m ­
m o n l y b e c a l l e d a b a s i l i c a ” . V o n G r u n e b a u m p o in t s o u t t h a t t h e A r a b w o r d f o r t h e
b a t h s ( a ls o u s e d in T u r k is h ) h a m m a m , is t h e e q u i v a l e n t o f t h e G r e e k θ ε ρ μ ά . O n t h e
c o n t i n u i t y o f t h e b a t h s f r o m B y z a n t i n e in t o I s l a m i c a n d O t t o m a n t i m e s s e e P . K o u -
k o u le s , Β υ ζ α ν τ ιν ώ ν β ίο ς κ α ί π ο λ ιτ ισ μ ό ς ( A t h e n s 1 9 5 0> I V , 4 2 9· T h e o p h a n e s , C h r o n o -
g r a p h i a , e d . C . d e B o o r ( L e i p z i g 1 8 8 3 ), I, 1 8 6 , r e f e r s t o b a t h s a n d b a t h i n g , “ έ ξ η λ θ ε ν
ε ις τ ά θ ε ρ μ ά τ ω ν Π υ θ ί ω ν θ ε ρ μ ίσ α ι” .
5 A s h t o r / S t r a u ß , lo c . c i t . , 1 1 7 *
6 V o n G r u n e b a u m , lo c . c it ., 1 4 8 . A s h t o r / S t r a u ß , lo c . c it ., 1 1 7 . G a u d e f r o y - D e m o m b y -
n e s , “ U n m a g i s t r a t : le m o h t e s i b ” , J o u r n a l d e s S a v a n t s ( 1 9 4 7 ), 3 6 , 4 0 . G . M a r ç a is , “ C o n ­
s i d é r a t i o n s s u r le s v i l l e s m u s u l m a n e s e t n o t a m m e n t s u r le r ô le d u M o h t a s i b ” , R e c u e i l s
d e la S o c i é t é J e a n B o d in , V I j ( 1 9 5 4 ), 2 6 0 - 2 6 1 .
7 V o n G r u n e b a u m , lo c . c it ., 1 4 8 . B . L e w is , “ T h e I s l a m i c G u i l d s ” , T h e E c o n . H is t .
R e v ., 8 ( 1 9 3 7 ), 2 0 - 3 7 .
8 C . C a h e n , “ A h d ä t h ” , E I 2. A l s o b y t h e s a m e a u t h o r , “ M o u v e m e n t s e t o r g a n i s a ­
t i o n s p o p u la ir e s d a n s le s v i l l e s d e l ’A s i e M u s u l m a n e a u m o y e n â g e : m i l i c e s e t a s s o c i a ­
t i o n s d e f o u t o u w w a ” , R e c u e i l s d e la S o c i é t é J e a n B o d in , V I I ( 1 9 5 5 ) ( h e r e a f t e r “ A lo u v e -
m e n t s e t o r g a n i s a t i o n s ” ), 2 7 9 - 2 8 2 ; “ Z u r G e s c h i c h t e d e r s t ä d t i s c h e n G e s e l l s c h a f t im
i s l a m i s c h e n O r ie n t d e s M it t e l a l t e r s ” , S a e c u l u m , 9 ( 1 9 5 8 ) ( h e r e a f t e r “ Z u r G e s c h i c h t e ” ),
6 8 . A s h t o r / S t r a u ß , lo c . c it ., 1 1 9 - 1 2 1 .
9 F . T a e s c h n e r , “ Ä y y ä r ” , E I 2 .C a h e n , “ M o u v e m e n t s e t o r g a n i s a t i o n s ” , 2 7 6 ; ,,Z u r
G e sc h ic h te ” , 7 0 - 7 2 .
10 F . T a e s c h n e r , “ F u t u w w a , e in e g e m e i n s c h a f t s b i l d e n d e I d e e im m it t e l a l t e r l i c h e n
O r ie n t u n d ih r e v e r s c h i e d e n e n E r s c h e i n u n g s f o r m e n ” , S c h w e i z . A r c h iv f. V o l k s k u n d e ,
LH (1956), 124-134.
X
48

and ahdäth strongly resembled one another in terms of function and ex­
ternal appearance. They were local city groups of'you n g men’ who served
as urban militia, as opposers of oppression by the central government,
and as violent factors in disturbing the peace of the towns.
However it has been maintained by some that, whereas the functions
of the two groups were similar, their origins were different. The 'ayyärün-
fityän, they continue, were organizations which cultivated the ideals of
the futuwwa whereas the ahdäth probably did not pay allegiance to these
ideals.11 Yet other scholars have maintained that the ahdäth did in fact
adhere to the futuwwa.12 The futuwwa, as a social phenomenon, appears
in medieval Islam in the guise of an ideology centering about such virtues
as bravery and generosity which associations of young men theoretically
cultivated. It is from the Arabic designation for these young men (fityän)
that the abstract noun (futuwwa) describing these virtues is derived.
Taeschner has suggested that this moral concept existed amongst the
Arabs in the period before their expansion. After their arrival in Syria,
Mesopotamia, and Iran, the concept was possibly accepted by the pre­
viously existing male associations in these lands, but evidently these asso­
ciations were much given to loose living and did not strictly adhere to
these Arab virtues associated with young manhood.13 It has been suggest­
ed that the fityän and concepts of male associations as social organiza­
tions (as in contrast to the moral concepts) in the Islamic towns of Syria
and Iran themselves probably go back to the municipal institutions or
associations of the Byzantine and Sassanid period. Inasmuch as the
ahdäth were found primarily in formerly Byzantine lands, and the fityän-
'ayyärun in formerly Sassanid regions, it has been suggested that possibly
these institutions are descended from Byzantine and Sassanid associations
respectively.14
Before proceeding to a consideration of the possible relations of the
circus factions and the Islamic ahdäth, fityän-'ayyärün, one ought to
glance briefly at (l) the geographical extent of the Byzantine circus fac­
tions, urban rioting, and city militia, (2) the chronological spread and vi­
tality of these phenomena.

1 1 C a h e n , “ A h d ä t h ” , E I 2.
1 2 A s h t o r / S t r a u ß , lo c . c i t . , 1 2 1 .
1 3 T a e s c h n e r , lo c . c i t ., 1 2 4 - 1 3 5 .
14 T a e s c h n e r , lo c . c it ., 1 3 0 , 1 3 5 . C a h e n , “ Z u r G e s c h i c h t e ” , 73-74, is d o u b t f u l o f c o n ­
t i n u i t y b e t w e e n t h e B y z a n t i n e c ir c u s f a c t i o n s a n d t h e a h d ä t h , f o r , h e s a y s , in t h e s i x t h
c e n t u r y t h e B y z a n t i n e e m p e r o r s f o r b a d e t h e a c t i v i t i e s o f t h e c ir c u s f a c t i o n s in A s i a a n d
o n e d o e s n ’t k n o w i f t h e P e r s i a n c a p t u r e o f A n t i o c h l e f t a n y t h i n g o f t h e f a c t i o n s . F u r t h e r ,
a c c o r d i n g t o t h e s a m e a u t h o r , t h e c ir c u s f a c t i o n s w e r e d iv i d e d in t o t w o p a r t ie s a n d t h e
a h d ä t h w e r e n o t . T h e r e f o r e t h e a h d ä t h a r e p r o b a b l y n o t t h e d ir e c t d e s c e n d e n t s o f t h e
B y z a n t i n e c ir c u s f a c t i o n s . I n “ M o u v e m e n t s e t o r g a n i s a t i o n s ” , C a h e n l e a n s a l i t t l e m o r e
in t h e o p p o s i t e d ir e c t io n in r e m a r k i n g t h a t e v e n t h o u g h t h e f a c t i o n s w e r e w e a k e n e d b y
g o v e r n m e n t c o n t r o l in t h e s i x t h c e n t u r y , t h e r e is s o m e t h i n g o f t h e B y z a n t i n e c ir c u s
f a c t i o n s in t h e a h d ä t h a n d f i t y ä n . T h e s u p p o s e d w e a k e n i n g o f t h e c ir c u s f a c t i o n s is n o t
f a c t u a l l y c o r r e c t , a n d t h e p o i n t w ill b e d i s c u s s e d s h o r t ly .
 t ty Mantine C ircu s F action s a n d Is la m ic F u tu w w a O rg a n iza tio n s 4g

Theophanes describes a series of faction outbreaks which, commencing

in the second year of the reign of Justin the first, convulsed the empire.
“ I n t h is s a m e y e a r t h e B l u e f a c t i o n c r e a t e d t u m u l t s in a ll c i t ie s , r a i s i n g d is t u r b a n c e s
a n d e f f e c t in g s t o n i n g s a n d m a n y m u r d e r s . A n d t h e y a t t a c k e d t h e a u t h o r i t i e s . T h e e v il
o f t h e d is o r d e r b e g a n in A n t i o c h a n d t h e n s p r e a d t o a ll t h e c it i e s , p r e v a i l i n g f o r f iv e
y e a r s . W it h t h e s w o r d t h e y s l a u g h t e r e d t h e G r e e n s w h o m t h e y e n c o u n t e r e d a n d g o i n g
u p s l e w t h o s e h i d i n g in t h e i r h o m e s , t h e a r c h o n s n o t d a r i n g t o e f f e c t p u n i s h m e n t o f t h e
m u rd ers. T h e se th in g s w ere d on e u n til th e s ix th y e a r ( o f th e r e ig n ) o f J u s tin th e
p i o u s .’ * 15

Procopius, in the preface to his description of the great Nika riots which
almost overthrew Justinian in Constantinople in 532, remarks:
“ I n e a c h c i t y t h e p o p u l a t i o n h a s b e e n d i v i d e d f o r a l o n g t i m e p a s t in t o t h e B l u e
a n d t h e G r e e n f a c t i o n s .” 16

The author of the Miracula Sancti Demetrii describes similar condi­

tions in the reign of Phocas (602-610):
“ Y o u a ll k n o w o n l y t o o w e l l w h a t a c l o u d o f d u s t t h e d e v il h a s s t ir r e d u p u n d e r t h e
s u c c e s s o r o f M a u r ic e o f b l e s s e d m e m o r y , f o r h e h a s s t if le d l o v e a n d s o w n m u t u a l h a t r e d
t h r o u g h o u t t h e w h o l e e a s t , in C i lic ia a n d A s i a a n d P a l e s t i n e a n d a ll t h e r e g i o n s r o u n d ,
e v e n u p t o t h e g a t e s o f t h e im p e r i a l c i t y i t s e l f : t h e d e m e s , n o t s a t i s f i e d w i t h s h e d d i n g
t h e b l o o d o f t h e ir f e l l o w d e m e s m e n in t h e s t r e e t s , h a v e f o u n d t h e i r w a y in t o e a c h
o t h e r ’s h o u s e s a n d m e r c i l e s s l y m u r d e r e d t h o s e w it h i n , t h r o w i n g d o w n a l i v e f r o m t h e
u p p e r s t o r ie s w o m e n a n d c h ild r e n , y o u n g a n d o ld , w h o w e r e t o o w e a k t o s a v e t h e m ­
s e l v e s b y f l i g h t ; in b a r b a r ia n f a s h i o n t h e y h a v e p l u n d e r e d t h e ir f e l l o w c i t i z e n s , t h e ir
a c q u a i n t a n c e s a n d r e l a t i v e s , a n d h a v e s e t fir e t o t h e i r h o u s e s . . .” 17
These three texts, which indicate that the circus factions and their strife
consumed all (at least in the east) the cities of the empire in the sixth and
early seventh centuries, are supported by other references to specific
events. Circus factions and riots are mentioned in Asia Minor, Egypt, the
Islands, Jerusalem, Caesareia of Palestine, Apameia, Edessa, Antioch,
Tarsus, and Seleuceia,18 and it is stated that the citizens of many of the

1 5 T h e o p h a n e s , I , 1 6 6 : “ Τ ώ δ ’ α ύ τ ώ έ τ ε ι έ δ η μ ο κ ρ ά τ η σ ε τ ό Β έ ν ε τ ο ν μ έ ρ ο ς , έν π ά σ α ις τ α ΐ ς
π ό λ ε σ ι τ α ρ α χ ά ς έ γ ε ίρ ο ν τ ε ς κ α ί λ ιθ α σ μ ο ύ ς κ α ί φ ό ν ο υ ς π ο λ λ ο ύ ς ά π ε ρ γ α ζ ό μ ε ν ο ι. έ π ή ρ χ ο ν τ ο δέ
κ α ί τ ο ις ά ρ χ ο υ σ ιν . ά π ύ δ έ ’Α ν τ ιό χ ε ια ς ή ρ χ θ η τ ύ κ α κ ό ν τ η ς ά τ α ξ ία ς , κ α ί ο ύ τ ω δ ιε δ ό θ η έν
π ά σ α ις τ α ΐ ς π ό λ ε σ ιν , κ α ί έ κ ρ ά τ η σ ε ν έ π ί χ ρ ό ν ο υ ς ε' * κ α ί Ι σ φ α ζ ο ν ξ ίφ ε σ ι τ ο ύ ς ά π α ν τ ώ ν τ α ς
Π ρ α σ ίν ο υ ς κ α ί τ ο ύ ς κ α τ ’ ο ίκ ο ν κ ρ υ π τ ο μ έ ν ο υ ς ά ν ιό ν τ ε ς έ φ ό ν ευ ο ν , μ ή τ ο λ μ ώ ν τ ω ν τ ω ν α ρ χ ό ν τ ω ν
έ κ δ ίκ η σ ιν τ ω ν φ ό ν ω ν π ο ιη σ α ι. τ α ΰ τ α δ ιε π ρ ά τ τ ο ν τ ο έ ω ς έ τ ο υ ς έκ τ ο υ ’ Ιο υ σ τ ίν ο υ τ ο υ ε ύ σ ε β ο ΰ ς ” .
M a l a l a s , C h r o n o g r a p h i a , e d . L . D i n d o r f ( B o n n , 1 8 3 1 ), p p . 4 1 6 - 4 1 7 , r e m a r k s t h a t it
b e g a n i n C o n s t a n t i n o p l e a n d t h e n s p r e a d t o t h e o t h e r c it ie s .
16 P r o c o p iu s , H i s t o r y o f t h e W a r s , e d . a n d tr . Η . B . D e w i n g ( L o n d o n - C a m b r i d g e ,
1 9 5 4 ), I , 2 1 8 ( I , 2 4 , 2 ): “ ο ι δ ή μ ο ι έν π ό λ ε ι έ κ ά σ τ η έ ς τ ε Β ε ν έ τ ο υ ς έ κ π α λ α ιο ύ κ α ί Π ρ α σ ίν ο υ ς
δ ιή ρ η ν τ ο .”
1 7 T h e t e x t is f r o m t h e M ir a c u l a S . D e m e t r i i , A A S S 8 O c t . I V , 1 3 2 . T h e t r a n s l a t i o n
is t h a t o f G . O s t r o g o r s k y , H i s t o r y o f t h e B y z a n t i n e S t a t e ( N e w B r u n s w i c k , 1 9 5 7 ),
p . 7 7 , 3 . P a u l t h e D e a c o n , H i s t o r i a R o m a n a , F o n t i p e r l a s t o r ia d ’ l t a l i a , e d . A . C r i-
v e l l u c c i ( R o m e 1 9 1 4 ), p . 2 5 5 : “ H u i u s ( s c . P h o c a e ) t e m p o r e P r a s in i e t V e n e t i p e r O r ie n -
t e m e t A e g ip t u m c iv ile b e llu m fa c iu n t a c s e s e m u t u a c e d e p r o s te r n u n t.”
18 A . M a r i c q , “ L a d u r é e d u r e g i m e d e s p a r t is p o p u l a i r e s à C o n s t a n t i n o p l e ” , A c a d . r.
d e B e l g i q u e . B u l l , c l a s s e d e s l e t t r e s e t d e s s c i e n c e s m o r a le s e t p o l i t i q u e s , 3 5 ( 1 9 4 9 ), 7 3 .
Y . J a n s s e n s , “ L e s B le u s e t le s V e r ts s o u s M a u r ic e , P h o c a s , e t H é r a c liu s ” , B y z a n tio n
1 1 ( 1 9 3 6 ), 5 1 4 , 5 1 5 , 5 2 6 - 5 2 9 , 5 3 1 - 5 3 2 . F . C o n y b e a r e , “ A n t i o c h o s S t r a t e g o s ’ A c c o u n t
4 Byzant. Zeitschrift (58) 1965
X
50
eastern towns, such as Edessa, Jerusalem, Sergioupolis, Amida, and A n­
tioch, defended their cities against Persian attacks.19
These texts are sufficient indication that the circus factions were im­
portant factors in the political and social life of most of the towns of the
eastern provinces of the Byzantine empire throughout the sixth century
and down to the fall of Phocas in 610.
It was formerly thought, however, that the political activities and urban
violence of the circus factions fatally declined under Heraclius and that in
the century which followed (down to the reign of Leo III) the factions
disappeared as effective political forces. They fell victims of the thematic
system. It is true that references in the chronicles to the activities of the
Greens and Blues almost disappear in the early seventh century, a dis­
appearance which was accordingly interpreted and explained by the sup­
posed imperial suppression of the demes. However, Levcenko demon­
strated that Leontius was proclaimed emperor at Constantinople in 695
by the Blues.20 Then Maricq advanced the political activities of the de-
mesmen to the early ninth century by showing that Apsimar was pro­
claimed emperor by the Greens in 698, and that in the reign of Michael
Rhangabe (811-813) the emperor still feared the political power of the fac­
tions. As a result, Michael cut off the hands of the bronze statue of Tyche
in Constantinople so that the factions of the city would be made powerless
against the government.21
It is quite obvious that the circus factions continued to indulge their
passions for civil strife as late as the ninth century, and certainly the Con-

o f t h e S a c k o f J e r u s a l e m in A . D . 6 1 4 ” , E n g l i s h H is t o r . R e v . 2 5 ( 1 9 1 0 ), 5 0 3 . M a l a l a s ,
4 1 2 . P r o c o p iu s , I , 3 5 9 - 3 6 1 , 4 9 1 , 3 2 9 . D o w n e y , o p . c i t ., 5 0 4 , p a s s i m . F a c t i o n s a r e a ls o
m e n t i o n e d in E p h e s u s , P a m p h y l i a , P r ie n e , D i d y m a , a n d e ls e w h e r e in A s i a M in o r , a n d
a t O x y r h y n c h u s , A i k e l a h , M a n u f , cM is r ’, a n d A l e x a n d r i a o f E g y p t , a n d f i n a l l y in m a n y
o f t h e is l a n d s .
19 P r o c o p i u s , I, 5 1 , 5 3 , 5 9 , 4 3 3 - 4 3 5 , 4 9 1 , 5 0 1 , 3 2 7 if. C o n y b e a r e , lo c . c i t . , 5 0 4 - 5 0 5 .
20 M . L e v c e n k o , , ,V e n e t y i p r a s in y v V iz a n tii v V - V I I vv.,** V iz . V r e m . 1 ( 1 9 4 7 ) ,
182.
21 M a r i c q , lo c . c it ., 6 7 , 7 0 , w h e r e t h e t e x t s a r e c o n v e n i e n t l y q u o t e d :
“ Α ψ ί μ α ρ ο ς ά ν η γ ο ρ ε ύ θ η υ π ό τ ω ν π ρ α σ ίν ω ν , σ τ ε φ θ ε ίς υ π ό τ ο υ α ύ τ ο ΰ Κ α λ λ ιν ίκ ο υ π ( α τ )ρ ιά ρ -
χ ο υ . β α σ ιλ ε ύ σ α ς έτη ζ . ”
“ *Η δ έ Τ ύ χ η τ ή ς π ό λ ε ω ς χ α λ κ ή μ ε τ ά μ ο δ ίο υ ί'σ τα ται έν τ ή ά ν α τ ο λ ικ ή ά ψ ί δ ΐ ’ ή ν έ φ η σ α ν
(υ π ό ) Μ ιχ α ή λ τ ο υ ‘ Ρ α γ γ α β έ χ ε ιρ ο κ ο π η θ ή ν α ι α ύ τ ή ν τ η ν σ τ ή λ η ν δ ιά τ ό μ ή ίσ χ ύ ε ιν τ ά δ η μ ο τ ικ ά
μ έρ η κ α τ ά τ ω ν ά ν α κ τ ό ρ ω ν ” .
A l s o , T h e o p h a n e s , I, 3 6 7 - 3 6 8 , s e e m s t o i m p l y t h a t J u s t i n i a n I I w a s c u l t i v a t i n g t h e
s u p p o r t o f t h e B lu e s , “ ό δ έ β α σ ιλ ε ύ ς ά π ή τ ε ι Κ α λ λ ίν ικ ο ν τ ο ν π α τ ρ ιά ρ χ η ν π ο ιή σ α ι ε υ χ ή ν , ί'να
κ α τ α λ ύ σ η τ ή ν ε κ κ λ η σ ία ν τ ή ς ά γ ι α ς θ ε ο τ ό κ ο υ τ ω ν μ η τ ρ ο π ο λ ίτ ο υ τ ή ν ο ύ σ α ν π λ η σ ίο ν τ ο υ π α ­
λ α τ ιο ύ , θ έ λ ω ν έν τ ω τ ό π ω σ τ ή σ α ι φ ιά λ η ν κ α ί β ά θ ρ α κ τ ίσ α ι τ ο υ δ ή μ ο υ τ ω ν Β ε ν έ τ ω ν , ό π ω ς
ε κ ε ί δ έ χ ω ν τ α ι τ ο ν β α σ ιλ έ α , ό δ έ π α τ ρ ιά ρ χ η ς έ λ ε γ ε ν ό τ ι· ‘ε ύ χ ή ν ε π ί σ υ σ τ ά σ ε ι έ κ κ λ η σ ία ς
έ χ ο μ ε ν , ε π ί δ έ κ α τ α λ ύ σ ε ι έ κ κ λ η σ ία ς ού π α ρ ε λ ά β ο μ ε ν Ρ β ια ζ ο μ έ ν ο υ δέ α υ τ ό ν τ ο υ β α σ ιλ έ ω ς κ α ι
π ά ν τ ω ς ά π α ιτ ο ύ ν τ ο ς τ ή ν ε ύ χ ή ν , έφ η ό π α τ ρ ι ά ρ χ η ς · ‘δ ό ξ α τ ω θ ε ω τ ω ά ν ε χ ο μ έ ν ω π ά ν τ ο τ ε ,
νυ ν κ α ί ά ε ί κ α ί ε ις τ ο ύ ς α ιώ ν α ς τ ω ν α ιώ ν ω ν , ά μ ή ν .’ κ α ί τ ο ύ τ ο ά κ ο ύ σ α ν τ ε ς κ α τ έ λ υ σ α ν τ ή ν
έ κ κ λ η σ ία ν κ α ί έ π ο ίη σ α ν τ ή ν φ ιά λ η ν , κ α ί έ π ο ίη σ α ν τ ή ν έ κ κ λ η σ ία ν τ ω ν μ η τ ρ ο π ο λ ίτ ο υ ε ις τ ό
Π ε τ ρ ί ν .“
 H yta n tin e ( ir vu s l·'actions a n d Is la m ic F u tu w w a O r g a n iza tio n s 51

B t a n t i n o p o l i t a n s c o n t i n u e to display their violent participation in politics

as late as the eleventh century in the guilds and the twelfth century by
riots against the Latins.22
Antioch, as the largest Byzantine city in Syria, seems to have had the
most highly developed and articulate circus organizations in the east.
Disturbances between the Blues and Greens are recorded as early as 40
A D 23 and by the fifth-seventh centuries the circus factions are playing a
very important role in the political life of this eastern metropolis. Major
insurrections seem to have been those o f 387, the later years of the reign
of Zeno, 494/5, 507, 519-524, 529, the reign of Phocas, 610.24 These out­
breaks were often violent and destructive with the result that, much as in
the Nika riots of Constantinople, large parts of the city were burned and
otherwise destroyed, and officials were driven from the city. The govern­
ment frequently resorted to a variety of measures in an effort to subdue
the bellicosity of the factions. Such were the gift of 1,000 lbs. of gold
which Justin I presented to the city of Antioch, and also the temporary
cessation of the Antiochene Olympic Games, theatrical shows, and dances
in 520. In 527 Justin I and Justinian I issued an edict forbidding factional
strife and disorders in an effort to halt this strife consuming the cities of
the empire.25 But the fact that factional troubles recurred in Antioch two
years later indicates the impotence of the edict. The clash of 529 w~as so
violent that the emperor forbade permanently theatrical performances in
Antioch. How ineffective imperial legislation was in the matter of the fac­
tions is again demonstrated by the fact that performances were once more
taking place in 531.26 The riots of the Blues and Greens were convulsing
Antioch in an almost epidemic fashion by the late sixth and early seventh
centuries. One must conclude that, contrary to what has often been said
about the 'decrepitude* of the factions of Antioch and the other Levantine
towns on the eve of the Arab invasions (as a result of state tutelage), these

22 S . V r y o n i s , “ B y z a n t i n e Δ η μ ο κ ρ α τ ία a n d t h e G u i ld s in t h e E l e v e n t h C e n tu r y ” ,
D u m b a r t o n O a k s P a p e r s , 1 7 ( 1 9 6 3 ), 2 8 9 - 3 1 4 . M a r i c q , lo c . c i t . , 7 4 , g i v e s a p l a u s i b l e
e x p l a n a t i o n f o r t h e v ir t u a l d i s a p p e a r a n c e o f t h e f a c t i o n s f r o m t h e c h r o n i c l e s o f t h i s
la t e r p e r io d . I n a s m u c h a s o n e o f t h e p r in c ip a l r e g i o n s o f f a c t i o n a l s t r if e w a s S y r i a , it s
lo s s t o t h e A r a b s m e a n t t h a t it s e v e n t s w o u l d n o l o n g e r b e c h r o n i c l e d b y t h e B y z a n t i n e
a u t h o r s . A l s o , t h e p r in c ip a l s o u r c e f o r m u c h o f t h e d e t a il o f u r b a n v i o l e n c e a m o n g s t
t h e d e m e s u l t i m a t e l y g o e s b a c k t o t h e a c c o u n t o f J o h n o f A n t i o c h , w h o s e n a r r a t iv e
h a lt s in 6 1 0 . T h u s t h o s e a c c o u n t s w h i c h r e l y o n J o h n o f A n t i o c h h a v e l i t t l e t o s a y f o r
t h e c ir c u s f a c t i o n s a f t e r t h a t d a t e .
23 D o w n e y , o p . c i t ., p p . 1 9 2 - 1 9 3 , 2 2 8 , 2 4 1 . A t h l e t i c c o n t e s t s w e r e t e m p o r a r i l y d i s ­
c o n t i n u e d in 1 7 5 a n d 1 9 6 p r o b a b l y f r o m f e a r o f r e v o l t s .
24 F o r t h e d e t a i l s a n d s o u r c e s , D o w n e y , o p . c i t ., p p . 4 2 6 - 4 3 3 , 4 9 7 - 4 9 9 , 5 0 4 - 5 0 7 ,
5 1 5 - 5 1 9 , 5 3 0 - 5 3 1 , 5 7 1 - 5 7 2 . P . P e t i t , L i b a n i u s e t l a v ie m u n i c i p a l e à A n t i o c h e a u I V e
s i è c l e a p r è s J . C . ( P a r i s 1 9 5 5 ), 2 1 9 - 2 4 5 . G . K o u r b a t o v , “ L e t e r m e δ ή μ ο ς d a n s l e s
o e u v r e s d e L i b a n i u s e t l a q u e s t i o n d e s δ ή μ ο ι b y z a n t i n s ” , in P r o c e e d i n g s o f t h e 2 5 th
I n t e r n a t i o n a l C o n g r e s s o f O r i e n t a lis t s ( M o s c o w i 9 6 0 ), v o l. I l l , 1 - 1 1 .
25 M a la la s , 4 2 2 .
26 M a l a l a s , 4 4 8 - 4 4 9 . D o w n e y , o p . c i t ., 5 2 6 - 5 3 1 .
X
52
u rb a n m ilitia-sportive o rg a n iz a tio n s w ere th riv in g in th e m o st v iru le n t
m a n n e r.
A side from th e fact th a t th e se associations w ere in a vig o ro u s sta te a t
th e tim e o f th e A ra b invasions a n d aside fro m th e sim ilar featu res c h a ra c ­
te riz in g b o th th e B y zan tin e a n d Islam ic u rb a n associations, is th e re a n y ­
th in g else w hich m ig h t su p p o rt th e p ro p o sitio n th a t th e Islam ic fity ä n an d
a h d ä th have, in som e w ay, B y z a n tin e a n c e s try ? I t is w ith th is specific
q u e stio n in m in d th a t one m u st ex am in e th e te x t o f P ro co p iu s d e a lin g
w ith th e siege o f A n tio c h b y C hosroes I in 540 . T h e six th c e n tu ry h isto ria n
re la te s th e sto ry o f th e siege in c o n sid erab le d e ta il a n d in clu d es th e follow ­
in g re m a rk s :
“ T h e R h o m a i o i r e s is t e d w i t h a ll t h e ir s t r e n g t h , n o t s o l d i e r s a l o n e , b u t a ls o m a n y o f
th e b r a v e st y o u n g m e n (ν ε α ν ία ι) o f t h e p o p u l a c e .*’ 27

In th e course o f th e fig h tin g th e im p e ria l tro o p s fled th e city, b u t th e

y o u n g m en (νεανίαι) re m a in e d to m eet th e P e rsia n soldiers w ho h a d b ro k e n
in to A n tio ch .
“ H o w e v e r , m a n y o f th e y o u n g m e n o f th e p o p u la c e w h o h a d o n fo r m e r o c c a s io n s
b e e n i n t h e h a b i t o f f i g h t i n g w i t h o n e a n o t h e r in c i v i l s t r if e in t h e h i p p o d r o m e s , t h o u g h
t h e y d e s c e n d e d f r o m t h e w a ll, in n o w a y fle d b u t r e m a i n e d w h e r e t h e y w e r e .” 28

A fte r th e flight o f th e B y z a n tin e a rm y th e y o u n g m en re m a in e d th e sole

d efen d ers o f th e c ity of A n tio c h a g a in st th e P e rsia n tro o p s, w hose a tta c k
th e y m e t in th e m id d le o f th e city.
“ T h e r e m a n y o f t h e y o u n g m e n o f t h e A n t i o c h e n e s f o u g h t w it h t h e m a n d i n t h e
b e g in n in g s e e m e d to b e w in n in g th e b a ttle . S o m e o f th e m (th e y o u n g m e n ) w e r e h o p lite s
( h e a v ily a r m e d ), b u t th e m a jo r ity w e r e u n a r m e d , th r o w in g s to n e s o n ly . R e p u ls in g th e
e n e m y , t h e y str u c k u p th e p a e a n a n d p r o c la im e d th e e m p e r o r J u s tin ia n v ic to r io u s , a s
i f t h e y h a d w o n .” 29

P ro co p iu s speaks o f th e 'y o u n g men* o f A n tio c h on one m o re occasion.

A fte r c a p tu rin g A n tio ch , C hosroes an d his e n to u ra g e m a d e a to u r o f
D a p h n e , th e fam o u s A n tio c h e n e su b u rb . T h e P e rsia n m o n a rc h sacrificed

27 P r o c o p i u s , I , 3 2 6 - 3 2 7 ( I I , 8 , 1 1 ): “ οί ‘ Ρ ω μ α ίο ι ή μ ύ ν ο ν τ ο δ υ ν ά μ ε ι π ά σ η , ού σ τ ρ α τ ιώ τ α ι
μ ό ν ο ν , ά λ λ ά κ α ί τ ο υ δ ή μ ο υ ε ύ τ ο λ μ ό τ α τ ο ι ν ε α ν ία ι π ο λ λ ο ί.” F o r t h e s i e g e o f A n t i o c h a n d
C h o s r o e s * S y r i a n c a m p a i g n , D o w n e y , o p . c i t ., p p . 5 3 3 - 5 4 6 ; “ T h e P e r s i a n C a m p a i g n
in S y r i a in A . D . 5 4 0 ” , S p e c u l u m , 2 8 ( 1 9 5 3 ), 3 4 0 - 3 4 8 .
28 P r o c o p i u s , I I , 8 , 1 7 : “ τ ο υ μ έ ν ο ύν δ ή μ ο υ ν ε α ν ία ι π ο λ λ ο ί ό σ ο ι τ ά π ρ ό τ ε ρ α π ρ ό ς γ ε
ά λ λ ή λ ο υ ς σ τ α σ ιά ζ ε ιν έν τ ο ΐ ς ίπ π ο δ ρ ο μ ίο ις ε ίώ θ ε σ α ν , έ π ε ιδ ή ά π ό τ ο υ π ε ρ ιβ ό λ ο υ κ α τ έ β α σ α ν ,
ο ύ δ α μ ή έ φ ε υ γ ο ν , άλλ* α ύ τ ο ΰ έ μ ε ν ο ν .”
29 P r o c o p i u s , I I , 8 , 2 8 : “ Ε ν τ α ύ θ α δ έ α ύ τ ο ΐς τ ώ ν Ά ν τ ι ο χ έ ω ν ν ε α ν ία ι π ο λ λ ο ί έ ς χ ε ΐρ α ς
έ λ θ ό ν τ ε ς τ ά π ρ ώ τ α κ α θ υ π έ ρ τ ε ρ ο ι ό δ ό ξ α ν τ η ξ υ μ β ο λ ή ε ίν α ι, ή σ α ν δ έ α ύ τ ώ ν τ ιν ε ς μ έ ν ό π λ ΐτ α ι,
ο ί δ έ π λ ε ΐσ τ ο ι γ υ μ ν ο ί κ α ί λ ίθ ω ν β ο λ α ΐς χ ρ ώ μ ε ν ο ι μ ό ν α ις . ώ σ ά μ ε ν ο ι δ έ τ ο ύ ς π ο λ ε μ ίο υ ς
έ π α ιά ν ιζ ό ν τ ε κ α ί ’ Ι ο υ σ τ ιν ια ν ό ν β α σ ιλ έ α κ α λ λ ίν ικ ο ν , ά τ ε ν ε ν ικ η κ ό τ ε ς , ά ν έ κ ρ α γ ο ν .” P r o c o ­
p iu s , I I , 8 , 35» p r e s e r v e s y e t a n o t h e r i n t e r e s t i n g d e t a i l w h i c h h a s a b e a r i n g o n t h e g e ­
n e r a l t h e m e o f c o n t i n u i t y in t h e e l e m e n t s o f B y z a n t i n e a n d I s l a m i c c u lt u r e , n a m e l y t h e
v e i l i n g o f w o m e n , “ τ ό τ ε φ α σ ί γ υ ν α ίκ α ς τ ω ν έν ’Α ν τ ίο χ ε υ σ ιν έ π ιφ α ν ώ ν δ ύ ο γ ε ν έ σ θ α ι μ έ ν
έ ξ ω τ ο υ π ε ρ ιβ ό λ ο υ , α ίσ θ ο μ έ ν α ς δ έ ω ς ύ π ό τ ο ΐς π ο λ ε μ ίο ις γ ε ν ή σ ο ν τ α ι ( π α ν τ α χ ό σ ε γ α ρ ή δ η
π ε ρ ιιό ν τ ε ς κ α θ ε ω ρ ώ ν τ ο ) δ ρ ό μ φ μ έ ν π α ρ ά π ο τ α μ ό ν Ό ρ ό ν τ η ν έ λ θ ε ΐν , φ ο β ο υ μ έ ν α ς δ έ μ ή τ ι
σ φ α ς έ ς τ ό σ ώ μ α ύ β ρ ίσ ω σ ι Π έ ρ σ α ι, τ α ΐ ς τ ε κ α λ ύ π τ ρ α ις έ γ κ α λ υ ψ α μ έ ν α ς τ ά π ρ ό σ ω π α κ α ί έ ς
τ ό τ ο υ π ο τ α μ ο ύ ρ ε ύ μ α έ μ π ε σ ο ύ σ α ς ά φ α ν ισ θ ή ν α ι.“
 Uy sa n t trie C ircu s F a ctio n s a n d Isla m ic F u tu w w a O rg a n iza tio n s 53

to th e n y m p h s, a d m ire d th e grove a n d th e fo u n tain s, b u t before d e p a rtin g

b u rn e d th e sa n c tu a ry o f th e A rc h a n g e l M ichael an d som e o th e r b u ild in g s.
T h e reaso n for th e b u rn in g o f th ese b u ild in g s is o f som e in terest.
“ A n d a fte r s a c r ific in g to th e n y m p h s h e d e p a r te d , d o in g n o fu r th e r d a m a g e th a n
b u r n i n g t h e s a n c t u a r y o f t h e a r c h a n g e l M i c h a e l t o g e t h e r w it h c e r t a i n o t h e r b u i l d i n g s ,
f o r t h e f o l l o w i n g r e a s o n . A P e r s i a n g e n t l e m a n o f h i g h r e p u t e in t h e a r m y o f t h e P e r ­
s i a n s a n d w e ll k n o w n t o C h o s r o e s , t h e k i n g , w h i l e r i d i n g o n h o r s e b a c k c a m e in c o m ­
p a n y w it h s o m e o t h e r s t o a p r e c i p i t o u s p l a c e n e a r t h e s o - c a l l e d T r e t u m , w h e r e is a
te m p le o f th e a r c h a n g e l M ic h a e l, th e w o r k o f E v a r is. T h is m a n , s e e in g o n e o f th e
y o u n g m e n o f A n tio c h o n fo o t a n d c o n c e a lin g h im s e lf th e r e , s e p a r a te d fr o m th e
o t h e r s a n d p u r s u e d h im . N o w t h e y o u n g m a n w a s a b u t c h e r , A e i m a c h u s b y n a m e .
W h e n h e w a s a b o u t to b e o v e r ta k e n , h e tu r n e d a b o u t u n e x p e c te d ly a n d th r e w a s to n e
a t h is p u r s u e r w h i c h h i t h i m o n t h e f o r e h e a d a n d p e n e t r a t e d t o t h e m e m b r a n e b y t h e
e a r . A n d t h e r id e r f e l l i m m e d i a t e l y t o t h e g r o u n d , w h e r e u p o n t h e y o u t h d r e w o u t h is
s w o r d a n d s l e w h im . T h e n a t h is l e is u r e h e s t r i p p e d h im o f h is w e a p o n s a n d a ll h is g o l d
a n d w h a t e v e r e ls e h e h a d o n h is p e r s o n , a n d l e a p i n g u p o n h is h o r s e r o d e o n .” 30

F ro m th is ac c o u n t o f th e events a t A n tio c h in 540 it em erg es th a t th e

νεανίας w ho p u t u p a sto u t defence a g a in st th e enem y , w ere a so rt o f u rb a n
m ilitia of th a t tim e w hich ex isted in m o st B y zan tin e to w n s .31 T h e k e y
p a ssa g e is th e one in w hich P ro co p iu s tells th e re a d e r w ho th e νεανίαι are.
“ του μέν ούν δήμου νεανίαι πολλοί δσοι τά πρότερα πρός γε άλλήλους στα­
σ ιά ζ ε ι έν τοΐς ίπποδρομίοις είώ θεσαν.“ T h e νεανίαι are n o th in g m o re n o r
less th a n th e m e m b e rs o f th e B y z a n tin e circus factio n s. I t w ould a p p e a r
th a t νεανίαι h as h ere th e sense o f a te rm in u s tech n icu s, fo r in a d d itio n to
its g en eric m e a n in g , sig n ify in g y o u n g m en o r you th s, it o b v io u sly h as th e
sp ecialized m e a n in g o f th e m em b ers o f th e circus factio n s w ho in d u lg e d
in rio tin g a n d w ho also fu n c tio n e d as u rb a n m ilitiam en . P ro co p iu s uses
th e w o rd as a te rm in u s tech n icu s in th is sense on tw o o th e r occasions.
D u rin g th e re ig n o f Ju s tin ia n I th e citizens o f C yzicus in n o rth w e st A sia
M in o r w ere so o p p ressed b y th e ir h a rs h b ishop, E u seb iu s, th a t th e y d e ­
n o u n ced h im to th e e m p ero r a n d called h im to cou rt. Since, how ever, E u ­
seb ius w as so p o w erfu l th a t he w as able to c ircu m v en t th e C yzicenes,
,,c e rta in y o u n g m e n (νεανίαι) p lo tte d a n d killed h im in th e a g o ra o f C y ­
zicu s .“ 32 T h a t th e po p u lace o f C yzicus w as divided in to circus factio n s

30 P r o c o p iu s , I , 3 5 3 ( I I , 1 1 , 6 - 1 0 ). T h e c r i t i c a l p o r t io n o f t h e G r e e k t e x t is t h e
f o l l o w i n g : “ ο ύ τ ο ς ά νήρ τ ω ν τ ι ν α ’Α ν τ ιο χ έ ω ν ν ε α ν ία ν π ε ζ ό ν τ ε κ α ί μ ό ν ο ν κ ρ υ π τ ό μ ε ν ο ν έ ν τ α υ θ α
ίδ ώ ν έ δ ίω κ ε τ ω ν έ τ έ ρ ω ν χ ω ρ ίς , ή ν δ έ κ ρ ε ο π ώ λ η ς ό ν ε α ν ία ς , Ά ε ί μ α χ ο ς ό ν ο μ α .”
3 1 J a n s s e n s , lo c . c i t . , p a s s i m . J o h n o f N i k i u , T h e C h r o n ic le o f J o h n , B i s h o p o f
N i k i u , tr . R . H . C h a r le s ( O x f o r d 1 9 1 6 ), p . 1 7 6 , s a y s t h a t H e r a c l i u s m u s t e r e d t h e m e n
r o u t e t o C o n s t a n t i n o p l e . “ A n d w h e n h e ('H e r a c liu s ) t o u c h e d a t t h e i s l a n d s a n d t h e
v a r io u s s ta tio n s o n th e s e a c o a s t, m a n y p e o p le , n o t a b ly th o s e o f th e G r e e n F a c tio n ,
w e n t o n b o a r d w ith h im .”
32 P r o c o p iu s , I , 2 5 , 3 8 : “ ξ υ μ φ ρ ο ν ή σ α ν τ ε ς ν ε α ν ία ι τΐ'<ές έν τ η Κ υ ζ ίκ ο υ ά γ ο ρ α κ τ ε ίν ο υ σ ιν .”
T h a t t h e s e ν ε α ν ία ι r e f e r t o t h e m e m b e r s o f t h e c ir c u s f a c t i o n o f C y z i c u s is m a d e p la i n
b y P r o c o p iu s , A n e c d o t a , 1 7 , 4 1 , 4 4 : “ τ έ τ τ α ρ σ ι δέ έ ν ια υ τ ο ίς ύ σ τ ε ρ ο ν Π ρ α σ ίν ο υ ς εύρέσ& α ι
δ ύ ο τ ω ν έν Κ υ ζ ί κ φ σ τ α σ ιω τ ώ ν ΐσ χ υ σ ε ν ο ϊπ ε ρ τ ω ν τ ω έ π ισ κ ό π ω έ π α ν α σ τ ά ν τ ω ν έ λ έ γ ο ν τ ο
ε ϊ ν α ι .” “ τ ο ΐν δ έ ν ε α ν ία ιν τ ο ύ τ ο ιν χ ε ιρ α ς τ ά ς δ ε ξ ιά ς ό τ ε μ ε .” M a l a l a s , 4 8 0 , s a y s t h a t J o h n
t h e C a p p a d o c i a n w a s in v o l v e d in t h e p lo t , t h o u g h P r o c o p i u s s e e m s t o d e n y it.
X
54

emerges also from the chronicle of Malalas who describes their acts of
violence during the reign of Justinian.
“ A n d in t h e s a m e m o n t h t h e r e b r o k e o u t a b a t t l e o f t h e d e m e s in C y z i c u s a s a r e s u lt
o f w h i c h m a n y w e r e k il le d f r o m b o t h f a c t i o n s .” 33

Finally, Procopius deals with the νεανίαι-faction members in the Anec-

dota where he considers their activities amongst the major evils which
Justinian and Theodora inflicted upon the empire.
“ N o w t h e p o p u l a c e f r o m o f o ld h a s b e e n d i v i d e d in t o t w o F a c t i o n s , a s w a s s t a t e d b y
m e in t h e p r e c e d i n g n a r r a t iv e , a n d h e ( J u s t i n i a n ) n o w a d o p t e d o n e o f t h e m , n a m e l y
t h e V e n e t i o r ‘ B lu e s* , o f w h o m , a s it h a p p e n e d , h e h a d p r e v i o u s l y b e e n a n e n t h u s i a s t i c
s u p p o r t e r , a n d t h u s s u c e e d e d in t h r o w i n g e v e r y t h i n g i n t o c o n f u s i o n a n d d is o r d e r ; a n d
t h e r e b y h e b r o u g h t t h e R o m a n S t a t e t o it s k n e e s . . . S o a t t h i s t i m e , w h i l e h e k e p t f a n n i n g
t h e f la m e s a n d m a n i f e s t l y s t i r r i n g u p t h e B lu e s , t h e w h o l e R o m a n E m p ir e w a s a g i t a t e d
f r o m t o p t o b o t t o m , a s i f a n e a r t h q u a k e o r a d e l u g e h a d f a l l e n u p o n it, o r a s i f e a c h a n d
e v e r y c i t y h a d b e e n c a p t u r e d b y t h e e n e m y . F o r e v e r y t h i n g w a s t h r o w n in t o c o n f u s i o n
i n e v e r y p a r t a n d n o t h i n g t h e r e a f t e r r e m a in e d f ix e d , b u t b o t h t h e l a w s a n d t h e o r d e r l y
f o r m o f t h e g o v e r n m e n t w e r e c o m p l e t e l y o v e r t u r n e d b y t h e c o n f u s i o n t h a t e n s u r e d .” 34

Inasmuch as Justinian favored the Blues “m any other ‘young men5

(νεανία?,) flocked to this association.” 35 The emperor’s interest did not stop
at the mere protection of the νεανία?, but,
“ h e b e s t o w e d a g r e a t d e a l o f m o n e y o n t h e s e y o u n g m e n (ν ε α ν ια ι) a n d h e k e p t m a n y
o f t h e m a b o u t h im , a n d h e s a w fit t o c a ll s o m e o f t h e m t o t h e m a g i s t r a c i e s a n d t o o t h e r
p o s i t i o n s o f h o n o r .” 36

Procopius excoriates the ‘young men5 for their violence and innovations
which, he claims, had turned the cities into centers of upheaval.
“ N o w a t fir s t p r a c t i c a l l y a ll o f t h e m c a r r ie d w e a p o n s o p e n l y a t n i g h t , b u t in t h e d a y ­
t i m e t h e y c o n c e a l e d s m a ll t w o - e d g e d s w o r d s a l o n g t h e t h i g h u n d e r t h e ir m a n t l e , a n d
t h e y g a t h e r e d in g r o u p s a s s o o n a s it b e c a m e d a r k a n d w o u l d w a y l a y m e n o f t h e b e t t e r
c l a s s e s b o t h in t h e m a r k e t - p l a c e a t l a r g e a n d in t h e a l l e y s , r o b b i n g t h e ir v i c t i m s o f t h e ir
c l o t h i n g a n d t h e ir g ir d le s a n d g o l d b r o o c h e s a n d w h a t e v e r b e s i d e s t h e y m i g h t h a v e in
t h e ir h a n d s .” 37

The normal functioning of urban administrative and juridical institu­

tions was seriously disrupted by the power and influence of the νεανία?..
“ N o i n v e s t i g a t i o n s , h o w e v e r , o f t h e c r i m e s w h i c h h a d b e e n c o m m i t t e d t o o k p la c e .
B u t t h e c a l a m i t y in a ll c a s e s f e ll u n e x p e c t e d l y a n d n o o n e w o u l d t r y t o a v e n g e t h e
f a l l e n . A n d in n o l a w o r c o n t r a c t w a s t h e r e l e f t a n y e f f e c t iv e p o w e r r e s t i n g u p o n t h e
s e c u r ity o f th e e x is t in g o rd er, b u t e v e r y th in g w a s tu r n e d to a r e ig n o f in c r e a s in g v io ­
le n c e a n d c o n f u s i o n , a n d t h e G o v e r n m e n t r e s e m b le d a t y r a n n y , y e t n o t a t y r a n n y t h a t
h a d b e c o m e e s t a b l i s h e d , b u t o n e r a th e r t h a t w a s c h a n g i n g e v e r y d a y a n d c o n s t a n t l y

33 M a l a l a s , 4 9 1 - 4 9 2 : “ κ α ί τ ώ α ύ τ ώ μ η ν ί σ υ ν ή φ θ η δ η μ ο τ ικ ή μ ά χ η έν Κ υ ζ ίκ ω , ώ σ τ ε
π ο λ λ ο ύ ς π ε σ ε ΐν ε ξ ά μ φ ο τ έ ρ ω ν τ ω ν μ ε ρ ώ ν .”
34 P rocopius, A n ecd ota, ed. and tr. Η . B. D e w in g (L on d on -C am b rid ge, 1 9 5 4 ), 77“
7 9 ( 7 , 1 , 6 - 7 ).
35 P r o c o p iu s , A n e c d o t a , 7 , 2 3 : “ κ α ί ά λ λ ο ι δ έ ν ε α ν ια ι π ο λ λ ο ί έ ς τ α ύ τ η ν δη τ η ν έτ α ιρ ία ν
ξυ ν έρ ρ ε ο ν . . . ”
36 P r o c o p iu s , A n e c d o t a , 7 , 4 2 · “ χ ρ ή μ α τ ά τ ε γ ά ρ μ ε γ ά λ α τ ο ις ν ε α ν ία ις τ ο ύ τ ο ις π ρ ο 'ιετο ,
κ α ί π ο λ λ ο ύ ς μ έ ν άμφ* α υ τ ό ν ε ί χ ε , τ ιν ά ς δ έ α ύ τ ώ ν ές τ ε τ ά ς ά ρ χ ά ς κ α ί τ ά ά λ λ α ά ξ ιώ μ α τ α
κ α λ ε ΐν έ δ ικ α ίο υ .”
37 P r o c o p i u s , A n e c d o t a , 8 1 - 8 3 , D e w i n g ’s t r a n s l a t i o n ( 4 , 1 5 ).
 Uysantim ('tuns Factions and Islamic Futuwwa Organizations 55
b e g i n n i n g a g a i n . A n d t In* d e r i s i o n s o f t h e m a g i s t r a t e s s e e m e d lik e t h o s e o f t e r r if ie d m e n
w h o s e m in d s w e r e e n s l a v e d t h r o u g h fe a r o f a s i n g l e m a n ; a n d t h o s e w h o s a t in j u d g e ­
m e n t , in r e n d e r i n g t h e ir d e c i s i o n s o n t h e p o i n t s in d is p u t e , g a v e t h e ir v e r d i c t s , n o t a s
s e e m e d t o t h e m j u s t a n d la w f u l , b u t a c c o r d i n g a s e a c h o f t h e d i s p u t a n t s h a d h o s t i l e o r
f r ie n d l y r e l a t io n s w it h t h e F a c t i o n s . F o r s h o u l d a n y j u d g e h a v e d is r e g a r d e d t h e in s t r u c ­
t i o n s o f t h e s e m e n , t h e p e n a l t y o f d e a t h h u n g i m m i n e n t l y o v e r h i m .” 38

At the same time the actions of these young men seem to reflect a cer­
tain social orientation, if not program, which incidentally favored the poor
at the expense of the rich.
“ A n d m a n y m o n e y - l e n d e r s w e r e f o r c e d t h r o u g h s h e e r c o m p u l s i o n t o r e s t o r e t o t h e ir
d e b t o r s t h e ir c o n t r a c t s w i t h o u t h a v i n g r e c e i v e d b a c k a n y p a r t o f t h e ir l o a n , a n d m a n y
p e r s o n s n o t a t a ll w i l l i n g l y s e t t h e ir s l a v e s f r e e . A n d t h e y s a y t h a t c e r t a i n w o m e n w e r e
f o r c e d b y t h e ir o w n s l a v e s t o m a n y a c t s t h a t w e r e s o r e a g a i n s t t h e ir w ill. A n d a l r e a d y
t h e s o n s o f m e n o f h i g h s t a t i o n , h a v i n g m i n g l e d w i t h t h e s e y o u n g m e n (ν ε α ν ία ι), w e r e
c o m p e l l i n g t h e ir f a t h e r s t o d o m u c h a g a i n s t t h e ir w ill a n d in p a r t ic u l a r t o d e liv e r o v e r
t h e ir m o n e y t o t h e m .” 39

Their rowdiness extended to the violation of married women and young

boys,40 and to competitive displays of physical strength in the dark al­
leys of the cities.
“ F o r th e w r o n g d o e r s h a d n o n e e d to c o n c e a l th e ir c r im e s, fo r n o d r e a d o f p u n is h m e n t
l a y u p o n t h e m , n a y , t h e r e e v e n g r e w u p a s o r t o f z e s t fo r c o m p e t i t i o n s a m o n g t h e m ,
s i n c e t h e y g o t u p e x h i b i t i o n s o f s t r e n g t h a n d m a n l i n e s s , in w h i c h t h e y s h o w e d t h a t
w i t h a s i n g l e b l o w t h e y c o u l d k ill a n y u n a r m e d m a n w h o f e ll in t h e ir w a y .” 41

The young men of the circus factions had also introduced innovations in
dress and coiffure, thus further distinguishing themselves.
“ I n t h e fir s t p la c e , t h e m o d e o f d r e s s i n g t h e h a ir w a s c h a n g e d t o a r a t h e r n o v e l s t y l e
b y t h e F a c t i o n s ; f o r t h e y d id n o t c u t it a t a ll a s t h e o t h e r R o m a n s d id . F o r t h e y d id n o t
t o u c h t h e m o u s t a c h e o r t h e b e a r d a t a ll, b u t t h e y w is h e d t o h a v e t h e h a ir o f t h e s e g r o w
o u t v e r y l o n g , a s t h e P e r s i a n s d o . B u t t h e h a ir o f t h e ir h e a d s t h e y c u t o f f in f r o n t b a c k
t o t h e t e m p l e s , l e a v i n g t h e p a r t b e h i n d t o h a n g d o w n t o a v e r y g r e a t l e n g t h in a s e n s e ­
l e s s f a s h i o n , j u s t a s t h e M a s s a g e t a e d o . I n d e e d f o r t h is r e a s o n t h e y u s e d t o c a ll t h i s t h e
‘ H u n n i c ’ f a s h io n .
I n t h e s e c o n d p la c e , a s t o f a s h i o n s in d r e s s , t h e y a ll i n s i s t e d o n b e i n g w e ll c l a d in fin e
g a r m e n t s , c l o t h i n g t h e m s e l v e s in r a im e n t t o o p r e t e n t i o u s fo r t h e ir i n d i v i d u a l r a n k . F o r
t h e y w e r e e n a b l e d t o a c q u ir e s u c h c l o t h i n g f r o m s t o l e n f u n d s . A n d t h e p a r t o f t h e t u n i c
w h i c h c o v e r e d t h e a r m s w a s g a t h e r e d b y t h e m v e r y c l o s e l y a b o u t t h e w r is t , w h i l e f r o m
t h e r e t o e a c h s h o u l d e r it b i l l o w e d o u t t o a n in c r e d i b l e b r e a d t h . A n d a s o f t e n a s t h e ir
a r m s w e r e w a v e d a b o u t , e it h e r a s t h e y s h o u t e d i n t h e t h e a t r e s a n d h ip p o d r o m e s , o r

38 P r o c o p i u s , A n e c d o t a , 8 7 , D e w i n g ?s t r a n s l a t i o n ( 7 , 3 0 - 3 2 ).
39 P r o c o p i u s , A n e c d o t a , 8 7 - 8 8 , D e w i n g ’s t r a n s l a t i o n ( 7 , 3 3 - 3 5 )« I h a v e a lt e r e d D e w ­
i n g ’s t r a n s l a t i o n s l i g h t l y w h e r e it s e e m e d c a l l e d fo r . T h i s p a s s a g e r e c a lls S o m e w h a t
th e a c tiv itie s o f th e 'a y y â r ü n .
40 P r o c o p iu s , A n e c d o t a , 7 , 3 6 - 3 8 : “ π ο λ λ ο ί δ έ κ α ί ά κ ο ύ σ ιο ι π α ΐδ ε ς τ ο ΐς σ τ α σ ιώ τ α ις ές
κ ο ίτ η ν ά ν ο σ ία ν ο ύ κ ά γ ν ο ο ύ ν τ ω ν ή ν α γ κ ά σ θ η σ α ν τ ω ν π α τ έ ρ ω ν έ λ θ ε ΐν . κ α ί γ υ ν α ιξ ί μ έ ν τ ο ι
ά ν δ ρ ά σ ι ξ υ ν ο ικ ο ύ σ α ις τ α ύ τ ό ν τ ο ύ τ ο ξ υ ν έβ η π α θ ε ΐ ν . κ α ί λ έ γ ε τ α ι γ υ ν ή μ ία κ ό σ μ ο ν π ε ρ ιβ ε β λ η -
μ έν η π ο λ ύ ν π λ ε ΐν μ έ ν ξ ύ ν τ ω ά ν δ ρ ί έ π ί τ ι π ρ ο ά σ τ ε ιο ν τ ω ν εν τ η ά ν τ ιπ έ ρ α ς ή π ε ίρ ω , έ ν τ υ χ ό ν -
τ ω ν δ έ σ φ ίσ ιν έν τ ω δ ιά π λ ω τ ο ύ τ ω τ ω ν σ τ α σ ιω τ ώ ν κ α ί τ ο υ μ έ ν ά ν δ ρ ύ ς α υ τ ή ν ξ ύ ν ά π ειλ ή
ά φ α ιρ ο υ μ έ ν ω ν ές δ έ ά κ α τ ο ν τ ή ν ο ίκ ε ία ν έ μ β ιβ α σ ά ν τ ω ν , έ σ ε λ θ ε ΐν μ έ ν έ ς τ ή ν ά κ α τ ο ν ξ ύ ν τ ο ις
ν ε α ν ία ις , έ γ κ ε λ ε υ σ α μ έ ν η τ ω ά ν δ ρ ί λ ά θ ρ α ά λ λ ά θ α ρ σ ε ΐν τ ε κ α ί μ η δ έ ν έπ* α υ τ ή δ ε δ ιέν α ι
φ α υ λ ό ν .”
41 P r o c o p iu s , A n e c d o t a , 8 5 , D e w i n g ’s t r a n s l a t i o n ( 7 , 2 8 ).
X
56
u r g e d m e n o n t o v i c t o r y in t h e c u s t o m a r y m a n n e r , t h i s p a r t o f t h e ir g a r m e n t s w o u ld
a c t u a l l y s o a r a lo f t , c a u s i n g t h e f o o l i s h t o s u p p o s e t h a t t h e ir b o d ie s m u s t b e s o fin e a n d
s t u r d y t h a t t h e y m u s t n e e d s b e c o v e r e d b y s u c h g a r m e n t s , n o t t a k i n g in t o c o n s i d e r a ­
tio n th e fa c t th a t b y th e lo o s e ly w o v e n a n d e m p t y g a r m e n t th e m e a g r e n e s s m u c h r a th e r
t h a n t h e s t u r d i n e s s o f t h e ir b o d i e s w a s d e m o n s t r a t e d . A l s o t h e ir c l o a k s a n d t h e ir t r o u ­
s e r s a n d e s p e c i a l l y t h e ir s h o e s , a s r e g a r d s b o t h n a m e a n d f a s h i o n , w e r e c l a s s e d a s
H u n n i c .” 42

Following this brief consideration of the circus factions in Byzantium,

and especially in Antioch, it is necessary to compare them with the Is­
lamic fityän and ahdäth. There is an indubitably clear similarity of func­
tion in the Byzantine and Islamic associations. In each case they were
local urban groups which served as urban militia in defending their cities
from foreign enemies, rioting and protesting against demands of their own
central governments. They both were involved in sectarian religious
struggles within Christianity and Islam respectively. Amongst both the
Byzantine and Islamic associations were to be found elements of sportive
associations and elements recruited from the artisinal classes.43
But that which is most striking is the fact that the members of the Byzan­
tine associations, in Antioch and elsewhere, are called νεανίαι, young men.
This is the meaning also of fityän, ahdäth, in Arabic. Given the similarity
of function a n d name, the probability or possibility that the circus factions
of the Syrian towns are the parent institutions of some of the Islamic fu-
tuwwa institutions, the fityän and ahdäth, is greatly increased.44

42 P r o c o p iu s , A n e c d o t a , 7 9 - 8 1 , D e w i n g ’s t r a n s l a t i o n ( 7 , 8 - 1 4 ). I h a v e c h a n g e d t h e
t r a n s l a t i o n a t o n e p o in t . D e w i n g h a s t r a n s l a t e d ά ν α ξ υ ρ ίδ ε ς a s ‘d r a w e r s * , a n d I h a v e
c h a n g e d t h i s t o ‘tr o u s e r s * . T h e w o r d ά ν α ξ υ ρ ίδ ε ς w a s e m p l o y e d a t l e a s t f r o m t h e t im e
o f H e r o d o t u s t o d e n o t e t h e t r o u s e r s w o r n b y e a s t e r n n a t i o n s ( S c y t h i a n s e t c .) , s e e L i d ­
d e ll a n d S c o t t . T h e m e n t i o n o f t h e tr o u s e r s is o f p a r t ic u l a r in t e r e s t in a s m u c h a s t h e
tr o u se r s w e r e a n im p o r ta n t e x te r n a l a s p e c t o f I s la m ic fu tu w w a g r o u p s .
43 P r o c o p iu s , H i s t o r y o f t h e W a r s , I I , 1 1 , 6 - 1 0 , A e i m a c h u s w a s a b u t c h e r . T h e
le a d e r o f t h e in s u r r e c t i o n o f t h e G r e e n s in A n t i o c h in t h e r e i g n o f Z e n o w a s O l y m p i u s ,
a n a t t e n d e n t in o n e o f t h e b a t h s , D o w n e y , o p . c it ., p p . 4 9 8 - 4 9 9 . A w o o d m e r c h a n t a n d
m e m b e r o f t h e G r e e n s w a s k i l l e d b y t h e C o n s t a n t i n o p o l i t a n f a c t i o n o f t h e B l u e s in
5 3 2 , T h e o p h a n e s , I , 1 8 3 . O n e s o u r c e e q u a t e s t h e g u i l d s in E g y p t w it h t h e G r e e n s , J o h n
o f N ik iu , p . 1 7 5 : “ A n d ta k in g a d v a n ta g e o f th e w a r b e tw e e n B o n o s u s a n d N ic e t a s , th e
a r t is a n g u i l d s ( ‘t h e G r e e n s* ) o f E g y p t a r o s e ( a n d ) p e r p e t r a t e d o u t r a g e o n ‘t h e B lu e s * ,
a n d g a v e t h e m s e l v e s s h a m e l e s s l y to p i l l a g e a n d m u r d e r . A n d w h e n N i c e t a s w a s a p ­
p r is e d o f t h e s e f a c t s h e h a d t h e m a r r e s t e d , a n d r e p r o v e d t h e m , a n d s a id u n t o t h e m :
‘ D o n o o u t r a g e h e n c e f o r t h t o a n y o n e .* A n d h e e s t a b l i s h e d p e a c e a m o n g s t t h e m . A n d
h e n a m e d p r e f e c t s in a ll t h e c i t i e s a n d r e p r e s s e d p l u n d e r i n g a n d v i o l e n c e , a n d h e
l i g h t e n e d t h e ir t a x e s f o r t h r e e y e a r s . ” O n p . 1 7 2 J o h n o f N i k i u r e f e r s t o t h e s e s u p p o r ­
t e r s o f h is in t h e t o w n s a s t h e G r e e n F a c t i o n . I n R h o d e s o f t h e e a r l y s e v e n t h c e n t u r y
t h e ά ρ μ ε ν ο ρ ά φ ο ι w e r e a s s o c i a t e d w it h t h e G r e e n s , B o n w e t s c h , D o c t r i n a J a c o b i n u p e r
b a p t i z a t i , A b h a n d l u n g e n d . K . G e s . d . W is s . z . G ö t t i n g e n , P h i l .- h i s t . K la s s e , N . F . , 1 2 ,
3 ( 1 9 0 1 ), p . 8 9 . I h a v e h a d t o q u o t e t h is w o r k f r o m J a n s s e n s , lo c . c it . 5 2 9 , in a s m u c h
a s it w a s n o t a v a i l a b l e t o m e . S e e a ls o G . M a n o j lo v i c , “ L e p e u p l e d e C o n s t a n t i n o p l e ” ,
B y z a n t i o n , 1 1 ( 1 9 3 6 ), 6 4 7 .
44 T h i s p e j o r a t iv e o v e r t o n e a s s o c i a t e d w it h t h e fa y y ä r ü n is f r e q u e n t l y m e t w i t h in
th e B y z a n tin e so u r c e s w h e n t h e y r efer to th e fa c tio n s , A n tio c h o s S tr a te g o s , p. 5 0 3 :
“ B u t in t h e s e d a y s t h e r e a r r i v e d c e r t a i n w i c k e d m e n , w h o s e t t l e d in J e r u s a l e m . S o m e
 F y -a n ttn r ( tr a i s F action s a n d Isla m ic F u tu w w a O r g a n iza tio n s 57
Before abandoning Procopius, two more passages should finally be not­
ed a propos of the present subject, for they have to do with a concrete
example of the importation of the Byzantine circus factions into Sassanid
territory during the sixth century. When Chosroes took away the inhabi­
tants of Antioch into captivity he re-settled them in a region near Ctesi-
phon and built a new city for them.
“ N o w C h o s r o e s b u i l t a c i t y in A s s y r i a in a p l a c e o n e d a y ' s j o u r n e y d i s t a n t f r o m t h e
c i t y o f C t e s i p h o n , a n d h e n a m e d it t h e A n t i o c h - o f - C h o s r o e s a n d s e t t l e d t h e r e a ll t h e
c a p t i v e s fr o m A n t i o c h , c o n s t r u c t i n g f o r t h e m a b a t h a n d a h ip p o d r o m e a n d p r o v i d i n g
t h a t t h e y s h o u l d h a v e fr e e e n j o y m e n t o f t h e ir o t h e r lu x u r i e s b e s i d e s . F o r h e b r o u g h t
w it h h im c h a r io t e e r s a n d m u s i c i a n s b o t h f r o m A n t i o c h a n d f r o m t h e o t h e r R o m a n
c it ie s . B e s i d e s t h is h e a l w a y s p r o v i s i o n e d t h e s e c i t i z e n s o f A n t i o c h a t p u b l i c e x p e n s e
m o r e c a r e f u l l y t h a n in t h e f a s h i o n o f c a p t i v e s , a n d h e r e q u ir e d t h a t t h e y b e c a l l e d
k i n g ’s s u b j e c t s , s o a s t o b e s u b o r d i n a t e t o n o o n e o f t h e m a g i s t r a t e s , b u t t o t h e k i n g
a lo n e . A n d i f a n y o n e e ls e t o o w h o w a s a R o m a n in s l a v e r y r a n a w a y a n d s u c c e e d e d in
e s c a p i n g t o t h e A n t i o c h - o f - C h o s r o e s , it w a s n o l o n g e r p o s s i b l e f o r t h e o w n e r o f t h is c a p ­
t i v e t o t a k e h im a w a y , n o t e v e n i f h e w h o h a d e n s l a v e d t h e m a n h a p p e n e d t o b e a p e r s o n
o f e s p e c ia l n o t e a m o n g t h e P e r s i a n s .” 45

Chosroes had simply founded a Byzantine municipality in his domi­

nions and the implication is that the city had its circus factions. For the
Persian sovereign constructed a bath and hippodrome and had brought
both musicians and charioteers. Now faction life and organization cen­
tered about the hippodrome, bath, and agora. Mention has already been
made of the bath attendent Olympius who was the ring leader of the
Greens in Antioch in the late fifth century. One of the most important chiefs
in the faction risings in Antioch and Constantinople during the late fifth
and early sixth century was the famous charioteer Porphyrius Calliopas.
A similarly important figure in the riots of 610 was the charioteer Calliopas
Tribolaimes.46 Not only was Chosroes aware of circus politics (he knew,
for instance, that Justinian was a supporter of the Blues) but was himself
a keen spectator of the races in the hippodrome on at least one occasion
that it befell him to witness these races. During his Syrian invasion of

o f t h e m a f o r e t im e d w e l l e d i n t h is h o l y c i t y w i t h t h e d e v i l ’s a id . T h e y w e r e n a m e d a f t e r
th e d r e ss w h ic h t h e y w o r e , a n d o n e fa c tio n w a s d u b b e d th e G r e e n s a n d th e o th e r th e
B l u e s . T h e y w e r e f u l l o f a ll v i l l a i n y , a n d w e r e n o t c o n t e n t w it h m e r e l y a s s a u l t i n g a n d
p lu n d e r i n g t h e f a i t h f u l ; b u t w e r e b a n d e d t o g e t h e r f o r b lo o d s h e d a s w e ll a n d f o r h o m i ­
c id e . T h e r e w a s w a r a n d e x t e r m i n a t i o n e v e r a m o n g t h e m , a n d t h e y c o n s t a n t l y c o m ­
m i t t e d e v il d e e d s , e v e n a g a i n s t t h e i n h a b i t a n t s o f J e r u s a l e m . ”
45 P r o c o p iu s , H i s t o r y o f t h e W a r s , I, 3 8 1 , 3 8 3 , D e w i n g ’s t r a n s l a t i o n ( I I , 1 4 , 1 - 4 ).
46 D o w n e y , o p . c i t ., p p . 5 0 4 - 5 0 5 . T h e p a r t i c i p a n t s in d r a m a t i c , m u s i c a l , a n d d a n c i n g
p e r f o r m a n c e s w e r e a l s o i n t i m a t e l y a s s o c i a t e d w i t h t h i s t u r b u l a n c e . I t w a s f o r t h is
r e a s o n t h a t t h e y w e r e b a n n e d s o m e t i m e a r o u n d 5 2 2 / 3 in A n t i o c h a n d a g a i n in 5 2 9 ,
D o w n e y , o p . c i t . , p p . 5 1 9 , 5 3 0 . M a l a l a s , p p . 4 1 6 - 4 1 7 , 4 4 8 - 4 4 9 . J a n s s e n s , l o c . c it .,
5 2 3 - 5 2 4 . P e r sia n m o n a r c h s fr e q u e n t ly tr a n s p la n te d B y z a n tin e s u b je c ts a s c o lo n is ts
t o t h e ir o w n d o m a i n s . T h u s f o l l o w i n g t h e P e r s i a n s a c k o f J e r u s a l e m in t h e e a r l y s e ­
v e n t h c e n t u r y t h e P e r s i a n s t o o k a w a y a ll p e r s o n s w h o ‘k n e w t h e a r t o f b u i l d i n g ’ a n d
w e r e ‘s k i l l e d in a r c h i t e c t u r e ’, A n t i o c h o s S t r a t e g o s , p p . 5 0 7 - 5 0 8 . O n t h e p r o m i n e n c e o f
t h e b a t h s in a ll t h i s , P e t i t , o p . c i t ., 2 2 3 .
X
58
540 he spared the city of Apameia upon payment of a heavy ransom, and
then entered the city, ordered the performance of the games in the hippo­
drome, and watched them himself.
“ A f t e r w a r d s , b e i n g f il le d w i t h a d e s ir e fo r p o p u l a r a p p l a u s e , h e c o m m a n d e d t h a t
t h e p o p u l a c e s h o u l d g o u p in t o t h e h ip p o d r o m e a n d t h a t t h e c h a r io t e e r s s h o u l d h o ld
t h e ir a c c u s t o m e d c o n t e s t s . A n d h e h i m s e l f w e n t u p t h e r e a ls o , e a g e r t o b e a s p e c t a t o r
o f th e p e r fo r m a n c e s. A n d s in c e h e h a d h e a r d lo n g b e fo r e th a t th e E m p e r o r J u s tin ia n
w a s e x t r a o r d i n a r i l y f o n d o f t h e V e n e t u s c o lo u r , w h i c h is b lu e , w i s h i n g t o g o a g a i n s t
h im t h e r e a ls o , h e w a s d e s ir o u s o f b r i n g i n g a b o u t v i c t o r y f o r t h e G r e e n . S o t h e c h a r i o ­
t e e r s , s t a r t i n g f r o m t h e b a r r ie r s , b e g a n t h e c o n t e s t , a n d b y s o m e c h a n c e h e w h o w a s
c la d in t h e b lu e h a p p e n e d t o p a s s h is r iv a l a n d t a k e t h e le a d . A n d h e w a s f o l l o w e d in
t h e s a m e t r a c k s b y t h e w e a r e r o f t h e g r e e n c o lo u r . A n d C h o s r o e s , t h i n k i n g t h a t t h i s h a d
b e e n d o n e p u r p o s e ly , w a s a n g r y , a n d h e c r i e d o u t w i t h a t h r e a t t h a t t h e C a e s a r h a d
w r o n g fu lly s u r p a ss e d th e o th e r s, a n d h e c o m m a n d e d th a t th e h o r se s w h ic h w e r e r u n ­
n i n g in f r o n t s h o u l d b e h e ld u p , in o r d e r t h a t f r o m t h e n o n t h e y m i g h t c o n t e n d in t h e
r e a r ; a n d w h e n t h is h a d b e e n d o n e j u s t a s h e c o m m a n d e d , t h e n C h o s r o e s a n d t h e g r e e n
f a c t i o n w e r e a c c o u n t e d v i c t o r i o u s .” 47

This example of the transplanting of Byzantine populations and their

municipal institutions, and Chosroes’ knowledge of and interest in the
circus factions and games of the hippodrome shows quite clearly that
these institutions were quite familiar to some of Persian society on the eve
of the Arab invasion. That the Arabs found these circus factions in exis­
tence when they took the Byzantine cities of Egypt and Syria is certain.
There is an extremely interesting detail in the chronicle of John of Nikiu
which confirms this fact for the period of the Arab conquest toward the
end of the reign of Heraclius.
“ A n d M e n a s, w h o w a s c h ie f o f th e G r e en F a c tio n , a n d C o sm a s, th e s o n o f S a m u e l,
t h e l e a d e r o f t h e B lu e s , a s s i e g e d t h e c i t y o f M is r a n d h a r a s s e d t h e R o m a n s d u r i n g t h e
d a y s o f t h e M o s l e m .” 48

It is evident that not only had the political activity of the factions not
declined, but in this specific instance certain of the factions had gone over
to the Arabs at a critical mom ent.49 Thus the circus factions and the

47 P r o c o p i u s , H i s t o r y o f t h e W a r s , I, 3 5 8 - 3 6 1 t r a n s l a t i o n o f D e w i n g ( I I , 1 1 , 3 1 - 3 6 ).
48 J o h n o f N i k i u , p . 1 8 7 .
49 T h e d e s e r t io n o f t h e d e m e s t o t h e M u s l i m s in E g y p t d o e s n o t s e e m t o h a v e b e e n
u n iv e r s a l, a t l e a s t s o m u c h is im p l i e d in t h e a c c o u n t w h i c h J o h n o f N i k i u , p . 1 9 4 , g i v e s
f o r t h e s i t u a t i o n in A l e x a n d r i a it s e lf :
“ A n d w h e n t h e p a t r ia r c h h a d c o n c l u d e d t h is n e g o t i a t i o n , h e r e t u r n e d t o t h e c i t y o f
A l e x a n d r i a , a n d h e r e p o r t e d t o T h e o d o r e a n d th e g e n e r a l C o n s t a n t i n e ( t h e c o n d i t i o n s
o f p e a c e ) , t o t h e in t e n t t h a t t h e y s h o u ld r e p o r t t h e m t o t h e e m p e r o r H e r a c l i u s a n d
s u p p o r t t h e m b e f o r e h im . A n d s t r a i g h t w a y a ll t h e t r o o p s a n d t h e p e o p l e o f A le x a n d r i a
a n d t h e g e n e r a l T h e o d o r e c a m e t o g e t h e r to h im a n d p a id t h e ir h o m a g e t o t h e p a ­
t r ia r c h C y r u s . A n d h e a c q u a i n t e d t h e m w it h a ll t h e c o n d i t i o n s w h ic h h e h a d m a d e
w it h t h e M o s l e m , a n d h e p e r s u a d e d t h e m a ll t o a c c e p t t h e m . A n d w h ile t h i n g s w e r e in
t h is c o n d i t i o n , t h e M o s l e m c a m e t o r e c e iv e t h e t r ib u t e , t h o u g h t h e i n h a b i t a n t s o f
A le x a n d r ia h a d n o t y e t b e e n in f o r m e d ( o f t h e t r e a t y ) . A n d t h e A le x a n d r i a n s , o n s e e i n g
t h e m , m a d e r e a d y fo r b a t t l e . B u t t h e t r o o p s a n d t h e g e n e r a l s h e ld f a s t t o t h e r e s o lu t io n
t h e y h a d a d o p te d , a n d s a id : ‘ W e c a n n o t e n g a g e in b a t t le w it h t h e M o s l e m : r a t h e r le t
t h e c o u n s e l o f t h e p a t r ia r c h C y r u s b e o b s e r v e d .* T h e n t h e p o p u l a t i o n r o s e u p a g a i n s t
 it y santim * C ircu s F action s a n d Isla m ic F u tu w w a O r g a n iza tio n s 59

vtaviai, the* p ro b a b le an cesto rs o f som e o f th e M uslim fu tu w w a o rg a n i­

zations, w ere very m u ch in evidence ju st before an d a fte r th e Islam ic co n ­
q u est o f S y ria an d K gypt.

patriarch and so u g h t to ston e him . B ut he said un to th em : ‘ I have m ade this treaty

t I k*
m order to save you and your ch ild ren .’ A n d p lu n ged in m uch w eep in g and g rief he
b esou gh t them . A n d thereu pon the A lex a n d ria n s felt ash am ed before him , and offered
him a large sum o f go ld to hand over to the Ism aélites togeth er w ith the trib ute w h ich
had been im posed on th e m .”
T h is difference o f the attitu d e o f the in h ab itan ts o f A lexan d ria and o f cMisr* (T h e
regions w hich John o f N ik iu calls L ow er and U p p er E g y p t resp ectively), is no doubt
due to the fact o f a n im o sity b etw een the tw o areas, b etw een G reek and Copt. T h is is
what John o f N ik iu sa y s, p. 1 8 9 : “ A n d the in h ab itan ts o f M isr were at variance w ith
those o f L ow er E g y p t and their strife ran high , bu t after a short tim e th e y m ade
p ea ce.“ T h is h ap p en ed after the faction s h elped the M uslim s to take M isr. T h is also
im plies that the faction al strife con tin u ed after a portion o f E g y p t w as conqu ered.
T h e faction s o f Jeru salem , m u ch as th ose o f A lexan d ria, objected w h en the Patriarch
Z achariah tried to n eg o tia te a peace w ith th e P ersians prior to their sack o f Jeru salem
in the early seven th cen tu ry. Z achariah str o n g ly desired to con clu d e term s w ith the
P ersians lest Jeru salem be destroyed . “ B ut w h en the lead ers o f th e riotous faction s b e ­
cam e aw are w hat th e patriarch d esign ed to do, th e y gath ered togeth er and , a ssa ilin g
him lik e w ild beasts, said to him : ‘W e warn thee, w h o art lead er o f th is people, thou
art intent on no g o o d th in g, in so far as thou th in k est o f m ak in g peace with the en e­
m y . . .*” A n tio ch o s S trategos, pp. 5 0 4 - 5 0 5 .
.
 XI

TH E CO NDITIO NS A N D CULTU R A L
SIGNIFICANCE OF TH E O TTO M A N CONQUEST IN TH E BALKA NS

The tittle of this paper calls for a broad examination of the general
conditions surrounding the Ottoman conquest of the Balkans. More
specifically, Dr. Condurachi, the Secretary General of AISEE, directed me
to examine these conditions from the point of view of the Balkan peoples,
taking into account the totality of historical facts which constitute this
period of history in southeast Europe.
This is, of course, an enormous task and one which cannot be satis­
factorily treated whithin the narrow time limits imposed by the conference.
Consequently, I must eschew any detailed treatment of Ottoman military
operations and Christian defeats, of the fiscal system and variations thereof
to which the Balkan Christians were subject, etc. There are however,
several broad topics which would lend themselves to a theoritical discussion
which might be more fruitful in the short time allotted to us here.
It is to one such broad theme that I wish to address the cursory
remarks which follow, the general cultural impact of the Ottoman conquest
on the Balkan peoples. More specifically why were the Balkan peoples so
imperfectly affected by the two related but distinct processes of religious
Islamization and linguistic Turkification? I say ‘distinct processes’ for there
were examples of Islamization without Turkification, and of Turkification
unnaccompanied by Islamization. The historians of the eastern Mediterranean
world have been absorded with the cultural currents that have dominated
that part of the world since the time of Alexander the Great: Hellenization,
Romanization, Arabization, Islamization, have all left their particular
veneers on the exterior of this part of the world in an ebb and flow between
east and west. The appearance of the Muslim Turks and their conquest of
Anatolia and the Balkans represent the most recent of these cultural
pulsations. Thus, in a sense, the cultural impact of the Turks on the Balkan
peoples is but one aspect of the Turkish imposition on the Slavo-Byzantino-
XI
4

Armenian cultural world of Anatolia and the Balkans.

When we compare the Turkish cultural impact on Anatolia with that
which they had on the Balkans, the differences are immediately evident.
Asia Minor was, by the 15-16th centuries, predominantly Muslim and
Turkish speaking. By contrast, the Balkans, from the sixteenth century to
the present, remained essentially Christian and non-Turkophone. The
Ottoman tax registers for sixteenth century Anatolia indicate the presence
of 1,067,355 Muslim and only 78,783 Christian taxable hearths, or a
proportion of 92% Muslim and 8% Christian. The patriarchal documents
of Constantinople confirm the Ottoman tax registers, for they state that in
mid-fifteenth century Anatolia there remained only thirteen metropolitanates
and three bishoprics, whereas in the eleventh century there had been some
fifty metropolitanates and over 400 bishoprics. Contemporary accounts indi­
cate that a large portion of these Greeks and Armenians who had remained
Christians were nevertheless Turkified linguistically. Thus, by the fifteenth
century the cultural transformation of the majority of the Anatolians is
an undeniable fact.
However, in the Balkans, the sixteenth century Ottoman tax registers
reveal quite a different situation: 832,707 Christian, 194,958 Muslim, and
4,134 Jewish hearths, or a ratio of about 80% Christian and slightly less
than 20% Muslim. Though the numbers changed in favor of the Muslims
with the passage of time, nevertheless in the Balkans the Christian remained
a majority and the Turks a minority. In spite of the fact that the Turkish
language became the language of administration and had a heavy lexico-
grafical influence on the spoken Balkan languages, it did not replace them
as it did with the native languages in Anatolia. It is of interest that the Balkan
converts largely preserved their original languages in the rural areas. The
Pomaks continued to speak Bulgarian, the Cretans Greek, the Bosnians
Serbo-Croat, and the Albanians Albanian. Consequently, an aljamiah
literature arose to satisfy the demands of such converts.
How, then, is one to explain the fact that the Turkish conquest of
the Balkans did not radically alter the two basic manifestations of cultural
life, religion and language, whereas from this point of view the Turkish
conquest of Anatolia resulted in a thorough cultural transformation? Perhaps
the best insight into the Balkan historical experience during the Turkish
conquest and domination is to be obtained through a broad historical
approach which will view the Balkan experience against the broader
 XI
5

background of the Turkish instrusion into the entire area of Byzantine

culture, both in the Balkans and Anatolia.
In such an exploratory investigation, one begins with the following
historical facts as the known: The major portion of the Balkans and Anatolia
constituted a triune culture block which might be termed Slavo-Byzantino-
Armenian. In Byzantino-Armenian Anatolia, Islamization and Turkifica-
tion were virtually complete. In the Slavo-Byzantine Balkans, Islamization
and Turkification remained peripheral phenomena. Proceeding from these
two known quantities the historian wishes to ascertain the unknown: Why
was the cultural impact of the Turkish conquest so limited in the Balkans
as in contrast to Anatolia? This necessitates an examination of three
categories:
(a) The state of Christian societies in Anatolia and the Balkans at the
time of the conquests.
(b) Nature of the Turkish conquests in Anatolia and the Balkans.
(c) Nature of events after the conquest and during the long centuries
of Ottoman rule.
If he finds differences in these three historical categories it is quite
possible that they are in some way correlated to the different cultural impact
of the Turkish conquests of Anatolia and the Balkans.
(a) The State of Christian Societies in Anatolia and the Balkans at
the Time of the Conquests >
The Armenian and Greek political entities which were in existence
during the Turkish conquest of Anatolia were for the most part beset by
decline and were in a process of political disintegration. The same is true
of the Balkan Christian states in the late 14-15th century. The Christian
policies in both the Balkans and Anatolia were characterized by disintegra­
tion and consequently the political conditions of Christian Anatolia and
the Balkans were similar.
Did the various Christian peoples constitute socially and culturally
cohesive entities at the time of the conquests? A number of scholars, arguing
ex post facto from the almost completely Turkified and Islamized character
of Anatolia, state that the Anatolian Greeks were neither Hellenized nor
Christianized effectively. Consequently, they succombed readily to Islami­
zation and Turkification. Thus, this community did not form a socially and
XI
6

culturally cohesive unit on the eve of the conquests. This is, however, nothing
more than an assumption deduced from the fact that by the 15-16th
centuries Anatolia had been transformed. Greek Anatolia had been one of
the first regions in the Mediterranean to undergo Christianization and it
had formed the most populous and most vital province of the Constantino-
politan church. Even after conversion this formerly Christian population of
Anatolia brought a great portion of its Christian practices and beliefs into
the popular Islam of Anatolia. One need only examine the cultural trans­
formation of other Mediterranean peoples to see that such compact cultural
and social groups do undergo cultural transformation under certain circum­
stances. Take for example the Coptic Egyptians and Jacobite Syrians, both
of whom constituted strong social groupings. They were both Islamized
and Arabized.
In the Balkans the Serbs, Bulgars, Greeks, Albanians, and Vlachs
formed vital socio-cultural units, though in the case of the Serbs and
Bulgars their Christianity was of much more recent origin than that of the
Balkan and Anatolian Greeks, and it was probably more superficial among
the Slavic masses. So if anything the mass of the Balkan Slavs was less
affected by Christianity than the Anatolian Greeks, and religious heresy
was as significant among them as among the Greek and Armenian Anatolians.
Consequently the differing success of Islam and Turkish in Anatolia
and the Balkans cannot be explained in terms of the differing intensity of
the cultural-religious life of these various communities. For the Anatolian
Greeks and Armenians, most affected by Islamization and Turkification,
formed the oldest, most developed and evolved of the Christian communities.
Demographically, the Anatolian province was possessed of a larger
population, of a more developed urban life, and of a more highly developed
system of bishoprics and metropolitanates than was the Balkan region of
Greece, Bulgaria, Serbia, Albania, and Bosnia (exception made of Constan­
tinople and Thessaloniki). Indeed Serbian urban life was just beginning to
develop in the 13-14th centuries, and in Bosnia it was the creation of the
Ottoman conquerors. So it would be erroneous to argue that Islamization
and Turkification failed in the Balkans because of the denser mass of
Christian population at the onset of the invasions.
The first of the three categories which we set out to examine, the
state of Christian societies in the Balkans and Anatolia at the time of
conquests, does not reveal any differing set of sociocultural circumstances
 XI
7

which would explain the differing fate of the Christian populations in the
wake of the Turkish conquests.
(b) The Nature of the Turkish Conquests in Anatolia and Balkans.
Let us proceed to an examination of the second category, the nature
of the Turkish conquests in Asia Minor and the Balkans. These conquests
had certain overall similarities in both regions. They destroyed the Christian
states and dynasties (with the exception of the Roumanian Principalities),
and replaced them with Muslim states and dynasties. The conquests effaced
the Christian aristocracies, via absorption and decimation. Finally, they
harnassed the economic wealth and manpower to the exploitation of the
Muslim ruling classes. These general patterns characterized the Turkish
conquests both in the Balkans and Asia Minor.
Alongside these broad similarities, however, there are some very
significant differences which characterized the Turkish conquests of the
two peninsulas. I shall list four of these differences and discuss them very
briefly.
(i) The conquests in Anatolia were prolonged, repeated (lasting from
the 11 th- 15th centuries), quite destructive and disruptive of life and property.
They were effected by many states, and the nomadic element played a very
significant role.
The conquest of the Balkans was much shorter, beginning in the mid-
14th century and largely complete by the mid-15th century. Had it not been
for the disastrous Timurid interlude the conquest would have been even
quicker. When the Turkish conquerors crossed at Gallipoli they had been
in Anatolia for almost three centuries and the process of sedentarization
had proceeded apace. Though nomads did participate in this Balkan
conquest, and they played an important role, they were much smaller in
number than those who were in Anatolia, and the conquest was affected
by one powerful state which effectively centralized military and administra­
tive power. The conquest of the Balkans was shorter and more conservative
of Christian life, property, and institutions.
(ii) The conquest of Anatolia did not destroy the Byzantine political
center and monarchy at Constantinople. Consequently the Greek church
of Asia Minor was, until 1453, associated with a patriarch who was often
agent, appointee, and associate of the principal foe of the Turks, the Greek
emperor. For 400 years, then, the church of Asia Minor was politically
XI
8

suspect and undesirable to the Turkish authorities because of its close

affiliation with the Byzantine emperor and patriarch.
The conquest of the Balkans destroyed all the Christian states with
the result that the church no longer entertained dangerous and suspect
political liaisons.
(iii) The conquest of Asia Minor virtually destroyed the Anatolian
Church. The ecclesiastical administrative documents reveal an almost
complete confiscation of church property, income, buildings, and the
imposition of heavy taxes by the Turks. In addition, they furnish evidence
for further irregularity in ecclesiastical life due to the fact that the conquerors
frequently prohibited the entrance of bishops and metropolitans, and often
expelled them from their seats.
The conquest of the Balkans did not destroy the church. As the conquest,
generally, was under centralized control, was shorter, and proceeded first
by subjection of the Christian states to vassalage, the disturbed conditions
did not last as long as they did in Anatolia. After 1453, with the destruction
of Byzantium, the church was no longer associated with the Ottomans’
political foe, and the church was used as an administrative arm of the new
empire. But the fate of the Greek church in Thrace prior to the collapse
of 1453 reinforces the proposition that the church suffered so long as the
Byzantine Empire existed. The ecclesiastical seats of Adrianople, Serres,
Maroneia, and others in Thrace suffered the ravages of war, and the Turks
confiscated the church properties, buildings and revenues, converting them
to waqf and timar, and removed the bishops, metropolitans for many years.
Thus, the fate of the church in Thrace prior to 1453 was exactly parallel
to that of the church in Anatolia. But the time which elapsed between the
conquest and 1453 was shorter in other areas and the ecclesiastical life and
regime suffered much less of a shock. After 1453, the juridical and pragmatic
situation of the church was regularized in the Balkans and Anatolia, and
it functioned in a nearly normal fashion over what was left of Christianity
in the two areas.
(iv) The conquests of Asia Minor were accompanied by large influxes
of Turkmen nomads. Consequently, we are dealing not only with a conquest
but with an ethnic migration. However, it was not only the numbers which
contributed to the Turkification of Anatolia but also the very character
of nomadism. Nomadism brought with it political decentralization, instability,
and intermittent anarchy; it brought a nomadic economy based on pastoralism,
 XI
9

banditry, and slave trading, all of which constituted a heavy burden for
the sedentary Christians. These were instrumental in the devastation and
disruption of Christian rural life throughout much of Anatolia. The Anato­
lian place names, so heavily Turkified, seem to reflect the disruption of
much of the Christian rural society.
In the Balkans, the number of nomads who accompanied the Ottomans
was much smaller (there were about 37,435 nomad hearths in the early
sixteenth century), they were more nearly subject to centralized control,
and so their disruption of Christian rural life was much more restricted.
In contrast to Anatolia where they seem to have spread everywhere, in the
Balkans they were numerous only in certain areas, being strongest in Thrace,
parts of Bulgaria, Macedonia, and Thessaly.
These four basic differences in the Turkish conquests of Anatolia and
the Balkans must be taken into account if one wishes to comprehend why
it was that the Balkan portion of the Byzantine cultural world remained
largely unaffected by Islamization and Turkification whereas the Anatolian
portion succombed. An apparent configuration of these propositions is to
be found in the case of the Anatolian Trebizondine region. The Trebizondine
area is the one region in Anatolia where the Greek church and language
survived most nearly intact from Byzantine times (the Greek speaking
region of Smyrna represents, to a large extent, post-Byzantine immigrations
from the Aegean world). The Empire of Trebizond remained comparatively
inviolate from Turkish nomads and was under a Christian ruler from the
11th-15th centuries. When Mehmed II took the city the conquest was
relatively quick and pacific. The district was quickly incorporated into the
centralized empire and the position of the church regularized. It had been
spared the preceeding 400 years of political changes, Muslim domination,
and nomadic devastation.
These four differences in the conquests of the Balkans and Anatolia
are possibly the determining factors in the different cultural evolution of
the Balkan and Anatolian Christian populations. There were events and
circumstances during the four century Ottoman rule in the Balkans which
led to Islamization among various sectors of the Christian populations,
particularly in Albania, Bosnia, Bulgaria, and Crete. But the nature of the
Turkish conquest did not sufficiently corrode the bonds of social and
cultural cohesion in the Balkans so as to result in the mass Islamization of
the Balkanites. Though the phenomenon of Islamization in the Balkans has
XI
10

not been systematically examined, a new picture is beginning to emerge of

this phenomenon. In the case of Bosnia, the older theory by which Islamiz-
ation was attributed to similarities in the supposedly dualist Bosnian church
and Islam has been abandoned by many scholars. For Islam spread gradually,
from the towns and centers of Turkish administrative control, to the remoter
rural areas. The members of the Bosnian church lived primarily in these
remoter areas and Islam came to them only later. In Albania, Bulgaria,
and Crete, Islamization made its great gains during periods of conquest
or during wars with Catholic Venice and Austria and with Orthodox
Russia. This observation would seem to coincide with the general proposition
that conversions were most numerous in periods of upheaval, warfare, and
in the atmosphere of religious tension and political suspicion which accom­
panied such periods.
 XII

Seljuk Gulams and Ottoman Devshirmes

T h e fam o u s J a n is s a ry corps a n d th e process b y w hich i t w as to a

c e rta in e x te n t sup p lied , th e d ev sh irm e, c o n tin u e to b e su b je c ts o f
re se a rc h a n d c o m m e n t on th e p a r t o f B a lk a n a n d O tto m a n h isto ria n s.
T h is is obvious in th e n u m b e r o f a rtic le s a n d w o rk s w hich h a v e d e a lt
w ith th e se su b je c ts in re c e n t tim e s.1) T h u s, th e sa lie n t fe a tu re s o f th e
sy ste m a re th e su b je c t o f m o re o r less a c c u ra te k n o w ledge a m o n g st
sch o lars in th e se fields. N e v e rth e le ss m a n y o f th e m o re d e ta ile d a sp e c ts
o f th e d e v sh irm e -Ja n issa ry sy ste m a re o nly m o re v a g u e ly k n o w n .
P a r tic u la r ly strik in g in th is re sp e c t is th e fa ilu re o f m a n y sch o lars to
u tiliz e th e O tto m a n d o c u m e n ts concerning th e su b je c t in th e w o rk o f
th e m o d e rn T u rk ish h isto ria n , Î . H . U zu n çarşılı, Osmanlı Devleti
Teşkilâtından K apukulu Ocakları, 2 vols. (A n k ara, 19 4 3 — 1944). O th e r
v o lu m es, p u b lish e d since th e a p p e a ra n c e o f U z u n ç a rşılı’s s tu d y , a d d
b its o f in fo rm a tio n on th e su b je c t a t v a rio u s p o in ts. S u ch a re th e
p u b lic a tio n s b y L. F e k e te , Die Siyaqatschrift in der türkischen F inanz­
verwaltung (B u d a p e st, 19 5 5 ); I. K . B asd ra b e lle s, ‘Ιστορικά 5A ρχεΐα
Μακεδονίας. B ', \Αρχεΐον Βεροίας-Ναούσης (15 9 8 — 1886), (T h essalo n ik e,
19 54); G. Z oras, Χρονικόν περί των Τούρκων Σουλτάνων (A th en s, 19 58 );
Η . D u d a , Die Seltschukengeschichte des Ibn Bibi (C openhagen, 1959).
T h e re m a rk s w hich follow w ill d ra w on sources su ch as h a v e b e e n
m e n tio n e d ab o v e a n d w ill b e a r on th re e to p ics : ( 1 ) P re c e d e n ts fo r th e
O tto m a n J a n is s a ry corps a n d p alace sy ste m in S elju k A n a to lia ,
(2) G eographical a re a s a n d peoples a m o n g st w h ich th e O tto m a n s lev ied
th e d ev sh irm e, (3) R e a c tio n s o f C h ristian s to th e O tto m a n d e v sh irm e .

λ) R e fer e n c es to th is lite r a tu r e on J a n issa r ie s a n d th e d e v s h in n e ca n b e

fo u n d in th e fo llo w in g ; J . P a l m e r , “ T h e O rigin o f th e J a n issa rie s/" B u lletin of
the J o h n R y la n d s L ib r a r y , x x x v (1953), 4 4 8 — 481.
R e le v a n t se c tio n s o f H . A . R . G i b b a n d H . B o w e n , Is la m ic S o c iety a n d the
W e st, I , 1 (O xford , 1950); A . L y b y e r , T h e G overnm ent of the O ttom an E m p ir e
in the T im e of S u le im a n the M ag n ificen t (C am b rid ge, 1913), r e le v a n t s e c tio n s ;
A . B a k a l o p o u l o s , “ Προβλήματα τής ιστορίας του παιδομζώματος/" Ε λλη νικά,
x i i i (1 9 5 4 ), 2 7 3 — 2 9 3 , Ρ . W i t t e k , “ D e v sh ir m e a n d S h ari'a," B u lle tin of the
School of O rien ta l a n d A fr ic a n S tu d ie s, x v i i (1955), 2 7 1 — 2 7 8 ; S. V r y o n i s ,
“ Is id o r e G la b a s a n d th e T u r k ish D e v s h ir m e ,“ S p e c u lu m , x x x i (1950), 433 443.
 ΧΠ
Nrljiik G u İiutih and Ottoman DovehirmeH 22 5

O u l a m s in S e l j u k A n a t o l i a
T ho s u b je c t o f g u lam s in S e lju k A n a to lia is re la te d first to th e
p h en o m enon o f th e O tto m a n ajem oğlans in th a t it w as th e im m e d ia te
h isto rical p re c e d e n t w hich in sp ire d th e O tto m a n s in th e c re a tio n o f
th e Ja n issa rie s a n d slaves o f th e sa ra y , a n d second ly in t h a t i t show s
t h a t such g u lam s w ere raised , for th e m o st p a r t, in A n a to lia b y th e
S elju ks. T h erefo re i t sh o u ld com e as no su rp rise t h a t th e O tto m a n s
also levied th e d e v sh irm e in A n a to lia as w ell as in th e B a lk a n s.
T h e S elju k s o f R u m w ere faced w ith m a n y o f th e p ro b le m s a n d
e n v iro n m e n ta l fa c to rs w hich c o n fro n te d th e o th e r m a jo r d y n a stie s o f
th e Islam ic M iddle E a s t, th e A b b asid s, G haznevid s, M am elu k es, a n d
o th e rs. T h e y ru le d o v er m u lti-se c ta ria n , p o ly g lo t, a n d m u lti-ra c ia l
areas, o fte n as foreigners o r new -com ers th em selv es. T h is v a rie g a te d
e n v iro n m e n t a n d th e p ro b lem s w hich i t p re se n te d to ru lin g g ro u p s w ere
reflected to a degree in v ario u s a sp e c ts o f th e g o v e rn m e n ta l stru c tu re .
O ne o f th e m ore sp e c ta c u la r o f su ch fe a tu re s w as th e e x te n siv e use o f
slaves in th e g o v e rn m e n ta l a n d m ilita ry a p p a ra tu s , as w ell as in th e
u se o f e th n ic m ilita ry gro u p s. H o w fa r b a c k such tra d itio n in th e
M iddle E a s t e x te n d s it is d ifficu lt to say. Isla m ic p o te n ta te s b e g a n to
re ly u p o n foreign slave tro o p s as e a rly as th e n in th c e n tu ry , if n o t earlier,
w hen th e A b b asid caliphs used T u rk ish slave tro o p s to c o u n te rb a la n ce
th e u n ru lin e ss o f th e K h u ra s s a n ia n tro o p s w ho h a d p la y e d su ch a n im ­
p o r ta n t role in b rin g in g th e A b b a sid d y n a s ty to pow er. T h e a tte m p t
o f th e A b b a sid calip h s to free th e m se lv e s o f one o f th e g ro u p s w hich
h a d h elp ed b rin g th e m to pow er is a classic illu s tra tio n o f I b n K h a ld u n ’s
p ro p o sitio n t h a t th e successful fo u n d e r o f d y n a stic ru le m u s t free
h im se lf o f su ch a g ro u p if th e d y n a s ty is to en d u re . T h e u se o f g u lam s
p a rtic u la rly re c o m m e n d e d its e lf in su ch s itu a tio n s. T h a t w h ich r e ­
co m m en d ed th e sy ste m w as t h a t th e g u la m s w ere u su a lly re c ru ite d a t
a y o u n g age fro m a n alien c u ltu ra l m ilieu or d is ta n t g e o g rap h ical
reg io n, a n d so w h en th e y o u n g slaves w ere b ro u g h t to th e c o u rt th e y
could b e p ro p e rly tra in e d a n d m o u ld ed . T h e re su lt w as th e g u lam ,
w ho b ecau se o f h is tra n s p la n tin g to u n fa m ilia r en v iro n s b ecam e,
th e o re tic a lly a t le a st, m ore o b e d ie n t to th e s u lta n his m a s te r, th a n
w ere th e in d ig en o u s M uslim su b je c ts, a n d w ho b ecau se o f h is s p irite d
a n d rigorous tra in in g b ecam e a cap a b le soldier a n d a d m in is tra to r. All
th is w as su m m e d u p in th e p ith y a p h o rism o f th e p o e t: “ A n o b e d ie n t
s e rv a n t is b e tte r th a n one h u n d re d c h ild re n ; th e la tte r d esire th e ir
fa th e r ’s dem ise, th e fo rm e r his long life .” 2) I n th e ab sen ce o f co n cep ts
2) C. E . B o sw o rth , “ G h a zn ev id M ilita ry O r g a n iz a tio n /' D er I s la m , x x x v i
( 1 9 6 0 ), 4 0 — 4 1 .
15 Islam X L 1, Heft 1/2
X II
226

a n d em o tio n s a tte n d e n t u p o n m o d e rn n a tio n a lism , a n d in th e g e n e ra l

a b sen ce o f linguistic, e th n ic , a n d religious u n ity w ith in th e a re a ru le d
b y th e se d y n a sts, th e g u lam sy ste m a tta in e d a r a th e r c o n sid erab le
ach ie v e m en t, a t le a st dow n to th e th ir te e n th c e n tu ry w h en so m a n y
o f th e d y n a stie s b a se d on su ch sy ste m s collap sed like h o u ses o f c ard s
b efo re th e M ongol sto rm . O n th e o th e r h a n d i t is tr u e t h a t th e lo y a lty
o f th e gu lam s v a rie d , a n d in som e cases le a d to th e rem o v al o f d y n a stie s
a n d ev en re su lte d in th e rise o f ‘sla v e ’ d y n a stie s, viz. T u lu n id s,
Ik h sid id s, M am elukes, e tc . F o r a long tim e th e T u rk m e n s on th e
n o rth -e a s te rn b o rd e rs o f th e Isla m ic w o rld w ere p a rtic u la rly fa v o re d
as g u lam s becau se o f th e ir w arlik e q u a litie s. B u t reco u rse w as h a d to
m a n y o th e r g r o u p s . . . In d ia n s , D a y la m ite s, T a jik s, G eo rg ian s,
A rm en ian s, G reeks, R u ssia n s, a n d L a tin s. Q u ite o fte n th e y w ere
a c q u ire d on th e slave m a rk e ts o f K h u ra s s a n , o f th e C au cau su s, o r o f
A sia M inor; o r else th e y w ere c a p tu re d in m ilita ry ra id s a n d co n ­
q u e s ts ;3) or ra ise d as t r ib u te ;4) or a c q u ire d b y th e ru le r as g ifts fro m
h is ow n n o ta b le s a n d fro m o th e r ru le rs. B y a n d larg e th e su p p ly o f
slav es w as su fficien t to k e e p th e sy ste m going fo r cen tu ries.
T h e S elju k s o f R u m , a f te r th e y h a d c o n q u e re d a n d s e ttle d in
A n a to lia , fo u n d th e m se lv e s in a s itu a tio n sim ilar to t h a t w h ich h a s
b e e n d escrib ed in th e p reced in g p a ra g ra p h s. A n a to lia in th e tw e lfth ,
th ir te e n th , a n d fo u rte e n th c e n tu rie s w as n o t y e t th o ro u g h ly Isla m iz e d
a n d T urkified. T h e p resen ce o f C h ristia n G reeks, A rm en ian s, G eo rg ian s,
a n d S y rian s, as a b u n d a n tly te stifie d to in b o th M uslim a n d C h ristia n
sources, m e a n t t h a t th e S elju k s o f K o n y a w ere y e t a n o th e r e x a m p le o f
th e Isla m ic d y n a s ty ru lin g a m u lti-se c ta ria n , p o ly g lo t s ta te .5) I n
a d d itio n th e u n ru ly T u rk m e n trib e s, w ho h a d p la y e d a v e ry im p o r ta n t
ro le in th e c o n q u e st a n d s e ttle m e n t o f A n a to lia , w ere n o t a n e le m e n t
w h ich re a d ily le n t its e lf to a u th o r ity a n d discip lin e. G iv en th e se
c irc u m sta n c es a n d g iv e n also th e tra d itio n a l p a tte r n s o f Isla m ic
s ta te c r a f t o f t h a t tim e , i t is no su rp rise t h a t side b y side w ith th e
S e lju k forces b a se d o n th e g ra n ts o f iq ta th e re aro se th e m ilita ry a n d
a d m in is tra tiv e corps o f g ulam s. T h ere can b e n o d o u b t t h a t th e u se o f
g u lam s on a n e x te n siv e scale in th e m ilita ry a n d a d m in is tra tiv e

3) B o s w o r t h , loc. c it., p a s s im , large n u m b ers o f g u la m s w ere r ec ru ite d b y

th e G h a z n e v id s fro m t h e im m en se n u m b ers o f w ar p riso n ers w h ic h t h e y to o k .
4) I b n K h a l d u n , L e s prolégom èn es d ’I b n K h a ld o u n , tr. M. d e S l a n e
(P a ris, 1934), I , 3 6 5 — 366. T h e p r o v in c e s o f K h u ra ssa n a n d G h ila n e a ch h a d to
p a y a tr ib u te o f 1 , 0 0 0 s la v e s in th e r eig n o f al-M am ou n .
5) B o t h M arco P o lo a n d I b n B a tu ta rem ark ed o n th e large n u m b er o f C h ris­
tia n s in th ir te e n th a n d fo u r te e n th c en tu r y A n a to lia .
 Hnljıık (h ılıın iH and Ottoman Dovshirmes 227

Hyntoms o f th e S e lju k s p ro v id es th e im m e d ia te a n c e sto r o f th e J a n is ­

sa ry -p ag e sy ste m o f th e O tto m a n s .6) T h e m a jo r source fo r th e ex iste n c e
a n d a c tiv itie s o f th e g u la m s in th e S e lju k p e rio d is th e colorful Seljuk-
name o f I b n B ibi, w r itte n a t th e e n d o f th e th ir te e n th c e n tu ry .7) H e re
we find e n o u g h in fo rm a tio n to g e t a n ov erall p ic tu re o f th e g u la m
sy ste m a n d its fu n c tio n in g in th e S e lju k s ta te . T h e e th n ic origins o f
som e o f th e g u lam s a re m e n tio n e d , as w ell as th e m e a n s o f re c ru itm e n t.
T h e re a re glim pses o f th e ir e d u c a tio n , th e ir o rg a n iz a tio n in th e p a la c e
service, a n d th e ir a c tiv ity in th e e le v a te d g o v e rn m e n ta l a n d m ilita ry
p o sts. T h o u g h th e re is little in fo rm a tio n as to th e ir n u m b e rs, o n e g e ts
a v e ry v iv id p ic tu re o f th e ir in v o lv e m e n t a n d im p o rta n c e in p o litic a l
in trig u e s. T h u s th e y em erge fro m th e p ag es o f I b n B ib i b o th as
in d iv id u a l p e rso n a litie s a n d as a g ro u p w ith a m o re o r less d efin ed
co m p osite p e rso n a lity . T h e M uslim in sc rip tio n s, as well as th e v a k u f
d o c u m e n ts, offer v a lu a b le su p p le m e n ta ry m a te ria l.

R e c ru itm e n t and O rg an izatio n of Seljuk G ulam s

T h e m e th o d s o f re c ru itm e n t fo r th e sy ste m seem to h a v e b e e n th e

tra d itio n a l ones. T h e p rin c ip a l source o f y o u th s seem s to h a v e b e e n
th e ‘d o m ain o f w a r’,8) for th e S elju k s w ere en g ag ed in a lm o st c o n s ta n t
w a rfa re a n d ra id s a g a in s t th e G reeks o f T re b iz o n d a n d N ic a e a o n th e
n o r th a n d w est,9) w ith th e A rm e n ia n k in g d o m o f C ilicia o n th e s o u th ,10)
w ith th e peoples o f th e C au cau su s re g io n s,11) a n d w ith th e in h a b ita n ts
o f th e C rim ea.12) T h e su lta n s e v id e n tly ex ercized th e ir rig h t to claim

6) T h e tr a d itio n o f g u la m s in g o v e r n m e n t a n d in th e m ilita r y in th e I s la m ic
M id d le E a s t is d escrib ed in d e ta il b y I. U z u n ç a r ş i l i , O sm a n h d evleti te ş k ila ­
tın a m ed h a l (Is ta n b u l, 1941) (h ereafter M e d h a l). I t is o n ly b r ie fly m e n tio n e d in
M. H . Y i n a n ç , A n a d o lu n u n feth i (Is ta n b u l, 1944), p . 149, for S e lju k A n a to lia .
7) A n a b r id g e m e n t o f th e P er sia n w o rk w a s e d ite d b y M . H outsma in R ecu eil
de tex tes re la tifs à V h istoire des S e ld jo u cid e s, i v (L eid en , 1902). T h e G erm an
tr a n sla tio n o f H . D uda , D ie S eltsch ukengeschich te des I b n B ib i (C o p en h agen ,
1959), is a tr a n sla tio n o f a n e p ito m e o f th e o rig in a l w ork . V o lu m e iii o f H o u ts m a
in c lu d e s th e T u r k ish tr a n sla tio n an d a d a p ta tio n o f th e orig in a l b y Y a z ıc ıo ğ lu
A li.
8) D u d a , o p . c it., p. 00.
9) D uda , o p . c it., p . 63, a fter th e r eca p tu re o f A n ta ly a , th e fa m ilie s of th e
C h ristia n s w ere ta k e n off p riso n ers.
10) D uda, o p . c it., p. 238, mentions the taking of many slaves here during
a campaign of the sahib Şamsuddin.
n ) D uda , o p . c it., p p . 176— 178, y o u th s an d p r iso n e r s w ere ta k e n from

G eo rg ia a n d o th e r p la c e s in th e C au cau su s.
,2) D uda , o p. c it., p. 139.
X II
228

o n e-fifth o f th e spoils acco rd in g to th e law o f g h a n im a t d u rin g th e se

ra id s a n d e x p e d itio n s.13) B u t g u lam s w ere also a c q u ire d b y g ift,14)
p o ssib ly b y p u rch ase, th ro u g h th e v o lu n ta ry a p o sta sy o f re n e g a d e s,
a n d th ro u g h th e ta k in g o f h o sta g e s fro m o th e r sta te s . T h e la tte r w as
th e case d u rin g th e re ig n o f A la u d d in K a iq o b a d w h en , a f te r th e
c a p tu re o f S ougdaia in th e C rim ea, th e sons o f th e n o ta b le s w ere ta k e n
as h o sta g e s.15) T h ere w as p e rh a p s e v e n a le v y in th e form o f a ta x ,
th e re fo re sim ilar to th e O tto m a n d e v sh irm e , b y w hich a p o rtio n o f
th e g u lam s w as re c ru ite d fro m w ith in th e S e lju k d o m ain s p ro p e r.16)
T h u s th e e th n ic origins o f th e S elju k g u lam s w ere re p re s e n ta tiv e o f
q u ite a v a rie ty . P o ssib ly th e m o st p ro m in e n t e th n ic g ro u p a m o n g st
th e g u lam s w as t h a t o f th e C h ristia n G reeks. T h is w as d u e, n o d o u b t,
to th e fa c t t h a t th e S e lju k s ta te h a d b e e n fo u n d e d in th e h e a r t o f th e
B y z a n tin e E m p ire , A n a to lia , a n d also d u e to th e c o n tin u o u s s ta te o f
h o stilitie s w hich e n a b le d th e T u rk s to ta k e p riso n ers in th e n o rth ,
s o u th , a n d w est o f A n a to lia . A m o n g st th e b e tte r k n o w n o f th e G reek
g u la m s w ere th e em ir C elalu d d in K a r a ta y a n d his tw o b ro th e rs,
S a ifu d d in K a ra s u n g u r a n d K a m a lu d d in R u m ta ş .17) O th e rs o f th e m o re
p ro m in e n t gulam s w ho w ere o f G reek orig in in c lu d e th e m a lik u l-u m e ra
H a ss O ğuz Ş a m su d d in 18) a n d th e n a ib u l-h a d ra A m in u d d in M ik ail.19)
T h e re is a n in c id e n ta l referen ce to th e g ift o f five G reek g u lam s to th e
c a lip h .20) B u t A rm e n ia n s m u s t also h a v e b e e n n u m e ro u s as a re s u lt
b o th o f th e n u m b e r o f A rm e n ia n s living w ith in th e S elju k re a lm s a n d
o f th e n u m e ro u s p riso n ers ta k e n in th e ra id s a g a in st th e C ilician

13) D uda , op. c it., p . 220. A fte r th e su p p re ssio n o f th e B a b a i r e v o lt, th e

w iv e s , ch ild ren , a n d p o s se ssio n s o f th e reb els w ere d istr ib u te d to th e tr o o p s a fter
o n e -fifth w a s s e t a sid e for th e s ta te tr ea su ry . T h is w o u ld im p ly t h a t T u rk m en s
w ere a lso ta k e n in to th e ra n k s o f th e g u la m s. D ud a , op. c it., p. 46, th e s u lta n
c la im e d o n e-fifth o f th e b o o ty ta k e n a fter th e c o n q u e s t o f A n ta ly a in 1207.
14) D uda , op. c it., p . 320. T h e b e g s o f th e b ord ers s e n t sla v e s as g if t s t o th e
su lta n . A lso p p . 114, 121.
15) D uda , o p. c it., p . 139. T h is w a s a lso p r a c tic e d b y th e O tto m a n s.
16) D uda , o p. c it., p . 61. U z u n ça r şılı, M e d h a l, p p . 115— 116, s ta te s t h is in
c o n n e c tio n w ith th e b o d y o f ig d işa n , a b o d y r ec ru ite d from th e m a le offsp rin g
o f m ix e d m a rriages in A n a to lia . O. T u ran , “ L T sla m iz a tio n en T u rq u ie a u
m o y e n a g e /' S tu dio, I s la m ic a , x (1959), 147— 150.
17) D uda , o p . c it., p . 257. “ Ü ç se lçu k su lta n ın a sa d a k a tle h iz m e t e d e n E m ir
C elâ led d in K a r a ta y 'm K o n y d a k i m u h te s is m e d r esin e a it a ra p ça v a k fiy e d e n
çık a rıla n h ü lâ sa ," K o n y a , ii, 127— 128; iii, 189·— 191. O. Turan , “ C elâ led d in
K a r a ta y vak ıfla rı v e v a k fiy e le r i,“ B elleten , x i i (1948), 17ff.
18) D uda , op. c it., p. 244.
19) D uda , o p. c it., p . 345.
20) D uda , op. c it., p. 114.
 XII
S n l j i i k ( i n i n i uh h ικ Ι O t t o m a n D evH hirm eH 221)

k in g d o m .81) Z a h iru d d a u la who play ed su ch an im p o r ta n t role in

m ilita ry affairs an d w ho seem s to h a v e b e e n in co m m an d o f th e s u lta n ’s
F ra n k ish m e rcen aries w as a G eorgian re n e g a d e .22) F o r th e m o st p a r t,
how ever, th e sources m e n tio n th e origins o f th e g u lam s o n ly ra re ly ,
usu ally in co n n ectio n w ith th o se g u lam s w ho a tta in e d g re a t d is tin c tio n .23)
T h e slave c h a ra c te r o f th e p a la c e service, as w ell as o f th e c e n tra l
a d m in istra tio n , em erges clearly, i f in c o m p le te ly , fro m th e p ag es o f
Ih n B ibi. T h e la tte r h isto ria n w ill o fte n , th o u g h n o t alw ay s, in fo rm
th e re a d e r t h a t a p a rtic u la r official w as a gulam . W e a re in fo rm e d t h a t
th e m a jo rity o f th e g re a t em irs in th e service o f th e s ta te aro se fro m
th e ra n k s o f th e y o u th s ta k e n in w a r a n d w ho w ere su b se q u e n tly
tra in e d for g o v e rn m e n t se rv ic e .24) So th e re em erges fro m th e p ag es o f
İ b n B ibi a c o n sid erab le n u m b e r o f g u lam s w ho rose to o ccu p y m o st
o f th e h ig h p o sts in th e s ta te ; a ta b e y ,25) a m ir-i-a h u r,26) ta ş td a r ,27)
h a z in e d a r,28) a m ir-i-d a v a t,29) m a lik u l-u m e ra ,30) ig d işb aşı,31) şa ra b -
sa la r,32) a m ir-i-c a n d a r,33) em iru l-isfeh salar,34) em iru l-k e b ir,35) çaşn ig ir,36)
a m ir-i-d a d ,37) h a w a ic sa la r,38) n a ib u l-h a d ra ,39) etc. T h ese h ig h ra n k in g

21) D uda , op. c it., p . 238. 22) D uda , op. c it., p . 335.
23) T h e e th n ic v a r ie ty a m o n g s t th e S e lju k g u la m s w a s p a r a lle led b y th e
n a tu re o f t h e n o n -sla v e a rm ies o f th e su lta n . A s id e fro m th e T u rk ish sp a h is a n d
T u rk m en c o n tin g e n ts fro m A n a to lia , th e r e w ere b o d ie s o f F ra n k , G reek , R u s ­
sia n , G eorgian , A r m en ia n , K h w a r e zm ia n , B a a lb a k i, K ıp ç a k , a n d K u r d ish tro o p s.
24) D uda , o p. c it., p . 328.
25) T u to r to th e p rin ce. S u ch w ere M u b a rizu d d in E r to k u ş , (D uda, p . 142)
a n d C ela lu d d in K a r a ta y (Duda , p . 269).
26) I n ch a rg e of th e im p e ria l sta b le s. Z a in u d d in B işa r a (Duda , p p . 52 ,5 4 ).
27) I n ch a rg e o f p r e sid in g ov er th e su lta n 's a b lu tio n s. C ela lu d d in K a r a ta y
( D u d a , p p . 3 3 0 , 210).
28) H e a d o f th e tr ea su ry . C ela lu d d in K a r a ta y (D uda , p p . 210, 254).
29) S ecreta ry of th e g ran d v izier. C ela lu d d in K a r a ta y (Duda , p. 337).
30) O v era ll m ilita r y co m m a n d er. Ş a m s u d d in T a v ta ş (Duda , p p . 247, 341),
H u sa m u d d in A m ir Ç ob an (Duda , p p . 60, 32 8 ), S a ifu d d in A m ir K ız ıl (D uda ,
p p . 60, 3 28), a n d Ş a m s u d d in H a ss O ğu z (D uda , p . 244).
31) U z u n ÇARŞILI, M e d h a l, p p . 115— 116; D uda , op. c it., p . 61, N o . b.
32) I n ch a rg e o f t h e r o y a l p a n tr y . F a h r u d d in A ja z (Duda , p. 197).
33) H e a d of t h e su lta n 's b o d y g u a r d . M u b a r izu d d in I s a (D uda , p. 59).
34) H e a d o f th e sp a h is. S a ifu d d in K a ra su n k u r {K o n y a , ii, 128).
35) K a m a lu d d in R u m ta ş {K o n y a , ii, 128).
36) I n sp e c to r o f th e su lta n 's k itc h e n a n d ta b le . M u b a rizu d d in Ç avlı (D uda ,
p p . 5 2 , 54— 55). A ltın b e , (A. E rdoğan, “ K o n y a ile e n e sk i b ir se lç u k v a k fiy le,"
K o n y a , vi, 3 7 0 — 3 7 5 ; D uda , op. c it., p . 127; O. Turan, “ Ş e m se d d in A ltu n A b a
vakfiyesi v e h a y a tı," B elleten , x i (1947), 1 9 7 ff.).
37) I n ch a rg e o f ju s tic e . S a ifu d d in K a ja b e ( D u d a , p . 338).
38) H e a d o f t h e r o y a l k itc h e n , D u d a , o p . c it., p p . 265— 267.
39) T h e su lta n 's v ic e -r o y in K o n y a . A m in u d d in M ik ail ( D u d a , p . 297).
XII
230

g u lam s also a p p e a r as m ilita ry g o v ern o rs in th e m a jo r cities o f th e

s ta te . T h e a p p e a ra n c e o f g u lam s in su ch a h igh n u m b e r o f th e im p o r ta n t
s ta te p o sitio n s g ains in significance w h e n w e co n sid er t h a t th is n u m b e r
com es o n ly from one source, a source w h ich is n o t specifically co n ­
c e rn e d w ith re p o rtin g su ch in fo rm a tio n , b u t re p o rts i t o n ly in c id e n t­
ally.
T h o u g h few e x a c t figures a p p e a r in th e c o n te m p o ra ry so u rces,
g u la m s w ere e x te n siv e ly em p lo y e d b y th e su lta n s a n d em irs in th e
th ir te e n th c e n tu ry . W e a re to ld t h a t a f te r th e c a p tu re o f th e c ity o f
C h ilat, a tro o p o f 10 0 0 ro y a l g u lam s w as le ft to s e ttle th e affairs o f
th e c ity .40) I n a n o th e r in sta n c e th e re is m e n tio n o f 500 se rh e n k .41) O n
th e o th e r h a n d th e m o re im p o r ta n t em irs also h a d a c o n sid erab le
n u m b e r o f g u lam s.42) T h e em irs w ho re v o lte d a g a in st A la u d d in K a i-
k o b a d seem to h a v e relied p rim a rily o n th e ir ow n b o d ies o f slav e
tro o p s. I n th e e n su in g stru g g le b e tw e e n th e forces o f th e reb ellio u s
em irs o n th e one h a n d a n d th e forces o f th e s u lta n a n d th o se o f th e
e m ir C om nenos on th e o th e r, m o st o f th e p a rtic ip a n ts o n b o th sides
w ere gu lam s. A fte r th e forces o f A la u d d in h a d em erg ed v ic to rio u s, th e
s u lta n d ecreed th e e x e c u tio n o f th e m a tu re g u lam s o f th e em irs a n d
to o k th e y o u n g e r ones fo r h is ow n serv ice.43)
T h o u g h th e re is n o c o n te m p o ra ry sy s te m a tic d e sc rip tio n o f th e
p a la c e a rra n g e m e n t in th ir te e n th c e n tu ry K o n y a , en o u g h is in tim a te d
to show t h a t th e v a rio u s services c o n n e c te d w ith th e p a la c e w ere ru n
a n d sta ffe d b y g ulam s. T h e re w as a p a la c e school, th e g u la m h a n e , n e a r
th e p a la c e o f th e v izier,44) w h ere th e y o u n g g u lam s w ere tu r n e d o v er
to th e b a b a s fo r th e ir e d u c a tio n .45) A t som e p o in t in th e ir c a re e r th e
y o u th s w ere th e n a p p o rtio n e d o u t to th e v a rio u s p a la c e serv ices,
w h ich services w ere u su a lly ru n b y th e m o re m a tu re m e m b e rs o f th e
slav e corps w ho h a d ac h ie v e d d istin c tio n . A m o n g st su ch p o sts a n d
services w hich a re m e n tio n e d as h e a d e d a n d o r staffed b y g u lam s a re
th e follow ing: th e ro y a l sta b le s, ro y a l w a rd ro b e a n d clean in g serv ice,

40) D ud a , o p . c it., p. 180.

41) U zunşarçili, Medhal, p. 93.
42) I b n B ib i se e m s t o in d ic a te t h a t in so m e w a y s t h e g u la m o r g a n iz a tio n o f
th e e m irs p a r a lle led t h a t o f t h e su lta n s. S u ch is th e im p lic a tio n o f D ud a , o p . c it.,
p . 8 8 , w h ic h se e m s t o refer t o a sc h o o l for g u la m s in t h e c it y o f S iw a s.
43) D u d a , o p . c it., p p . 117— 122, 330. O n th e o c c a s io n o f t h e e x e c u tio n o f a
p r o m in e n t o fficia l, h is g u la m s w ere s o m e tim e s a lso e x e c u te d . S u ch w a s th e ca se
w it h t h e r eta in ers o f Ş a m s u d d in H a ss O ğu z, D uda , o p . c it., p p . 241— 244. E v e n
h is siste r w a s fo rced t o s u b m it t o th e d isg r a c efu l c o n d u c t o f h is o p p o n e n ts .
44) D uda , o p . c it., p. 242.
45) D ud a , o p . c it., p. 330.
 Hnljuk (lıılıu riH and Ottoman Devshirmes 231

th o tre a s u ry , se c re t a rc h iv e s o f th e d iv a n , th e corps o f iğdiş, ju stic e ,

th e s u lta n ’s ta b le a n d p a n try , th e s u lta n ’s b o d y g u a rd , th e s u lta n ’s
v iceroy in K o n y a , th e ro y a l k itc h e n , th e office o f tra n s la tio n s , th e
office o f th e sa h ib tu g ra i, th e h a re m , a n d possibly th e b o d y o f c o u rt
m u sician s.46) I t is lik ely t h a t th e sam e s itu a tio n p re v a ile d in o th e r
p o sitio n s a n d p a la c e services.
I n a d d itio n th e S e lju k su lta n s possessed a co n sid erab le b o d y o f
slav e tro o p s, as w as c u sto m a ry in th e Isla m ic w o rld o f th e m ed iev al
p erio d. T h e d istin c tio n s a m o n g st th e se g ro u p s o f slav e tro o p s h a v e
n o t b een e x a c tly a n d finally e sta b lish e d .47) A m o n g st th o se w h ich I b n
B ib i n am es are th e m a fa rid a ,48) th e g u la m a n -i-h a ss,49) a n d th e m u llazim -
i -y a ta q .50) T h is b o d y o f ro y a l slav e tro o p s m u s t h a v e b e e n o f sig n ifican t
n u m b e r, for as w e p re v io u sly n o te d S u lta n A la u d d in K a ik o b a d s e n t
10 0 0 m a fa rid a a n d g u la m a n -i-h a ss to o ccu p y C h ila t.51) T h o se o f th e
g u lam s w ho rose th ro u g h th e p a la c e sy ste m , w ho d istin g u ish e d th e m ­
selves, w ere th e n a p p o in te d to im p o r ta n t p o sts in th e p a la c e o r else
in th e m ilita ry a n d p ro v in c ia l a d m in is tra tio n . N o d o u b t th o se o f th e
g u lam s o f th e em irs w ho a ch iev ed d is tin c tio n w ere sim ila rly a d v a n c e d .

G u la m s in t h e H i s t o r y o f T h i r t e e n t h C e n tu r y A n a to lia

T h e role a n d im p o rta n c e o f th e g u la m s em erg e in a few iso la te d

h isto ric a l e v e n ts, w h ich e v e n ts v a ry fro m g ra n d p lo ts to v e ry m in o r
in c id e n ts. P e rh a p s th e m o st illu s tra tiv e case o f th e ro le o f th e g u lam s
w as t h a t o f th e a b o rtiv e re v o lt o f th e em irs d u rin g th e reig n o f A la u d d in
K a ik o b a d . T h e g r e a t em irs, th e ç a şn ig ir S a ifu d d in A jb e, th e am ir-i-
a h u r Z a in u d d in B işa ra , th e am ir-i-m a jlis M u b a riz u d d in B e h ra m sa h ,
a n d B a h a u d d in K u tlu c c a h a d a tta in e d su c h p o w er t h a t th e y o v e r­
sh ad o w ed th e su lta n . T h e ir w e a lth a n d th e n u m b e r o f th e ir re ta in e rs
w ere e x te n siv e , a n d b y w ay o f illu s tra tio n I b n B ib i re la te s t h a t
w h ereas th e ç a şn ig ir d is trib u te d e ig h ty sh eep d a ily fro m h is k itc h e n ,
t h a t o f th e s u lta n could d is trib u te o n ly th ir ty . A s th e ç a şn ig ir h a d
ta k e n o v e r a lm o st co m p lete co n tro l o f th e s ta te , th e s u lta n w as

46) D uda , o p . c it., p a s s im , U zunçabşili, M e d h a l, p a s s im .

47) U zunçabşili, M e d h a l, p p . 109— 110.
48) D uda , o p . c it., pp. 88— 89, 2 5 2 , 176. S ee a lso F . K öpbülü, “ B iz a n s
m ü e sseseler in in O sm a n lı m ü esseseler in e te fsiri h a k k ın d a b a z i m ü lâ h a z a la r,“
T ü r k h u k u k ve ik tis a t ta rih i m ec m u a sı, i (1 9 3 1 ), 242 if.
49) D uda , o p . c it., p p . 88— 89, 118, 150, 176.
50) D uda , o p . c it., p p . 176, 2 5 3 ; U zunçabşili, M e d h a l, 109— 110.
51) D uda , o p . c it., p . 180.
X II
232

d e te rm in e d to do aw ay w ith him a n d his pow erful co h o rts. B u t th e

in te n tio n s o f th e s u lta n w ere re v e a le d b y a c o u rtie r to th e em irs. T h e
la tte r , d u rin g th e course o f a b a n q u e t a n d in a s ta te o f in e b ria tio n ,
d ecid ed to in v ite th e s u lta n to a fe a st a t th e h o u se o f S a ifu d d in A jb e, to
seize a n d b in d him , a n d t h e n to rem o v e h im fro m th e th ro n e . B u t o ne o f
th e gu lam s o f th e em irs, w ho w as h im se lf q u ite d ru n k d u rin g th e
course o f th e discussion, w a n d e re d o u t a n d in his in to x ic a te d s ta te
re v e a le d th e p lo t o f th e em irs to one o f th e s u lta n ’s lo y al officials. So
o n th e n e x t d a y w hen A la u d d in w as in v ite d to a b a n q u e t b y th e g r e a t
em irs h e sim p ly p u t th e m o if a n d e v e n tu a lly re tire d to h is wrin te r
h e a d q u a rte rs a t th e c ity o f A n ta ly a . H e re h e d iscu ssed th e crisis w ith
th e e m ir C om nenus52) a n d I b n H o k k a b a z . T h e y d ecid ed t h a t scores
sh o u ld b e s e ttle d w ith th e u n su sp e c tin g em irs w h en th e s u lta n a n d
his re tin u e w ould go to K a y s e ri.53) O nce a rriv e d a t th e la tte r c ity th e
s u lta n a n d his ad v iso rs m a d e th e ir a rra n g e m e n ts . I t w as a n n o u n c e d
t h a t h e n c e fo rth each e m ir w ould b e p e r m itte d to e n te r th e s u lta n ’s
c a stle acco m p an ied b y o n ly a few a tte n d e n ts . O n th e a g re e d d a y , w h en
th e em irs w ere e x p e c te d in th e p alace, C om nenos a n d h is m e n w o u ld
se c re tly p a tro l th e g a rd e n w alls, w hile th e g u lam an -i-h ass, th e s u lta n ’s
b o d y g a rd s, u n d e r M u b a riz u d d in Is a , a n d his b ro th e r, w o u ld b e h e ld
in reserv e. A fte r th e e n tra n c e o f th e em irs a n d th e ir g u lam s in to th e
castle, th e p e rd e d a ra n w ould lock th e g a te s so t h a t n o n e co uld
escape. A s th e em irs e n te re d th e castle w ith th e ir g u lam s on th e
a p p o in te d d a y , th e la tte r w ere forced to w a it in th e o u te r ch am b ers.
T h e n , as each em ir e n te re d , s e p a ra te ly , h e w as a rre s te d b y M u b a riz u d ­
d in Is a , th e a m ir-i-c a n d a r, a n d his b ro th e r. T h e first to b e seized w as
th e çaşn ig ir him self, w ho sto ically re m a rk e d , “ o n e m u s t u p ro o t th e
o ld tre e s a n d p u t in th e new o n e s.” T h e n Z a in u d d in B işa ra , B a h a u d d in
K u tlu c c a , a n d M u b a riz u d d in B e h ra m sa h w ere in tu r n seized. A fte r
th is, th e g u lam s o f th e s u lta n a n d th o se o f th e a m ir-i-d a d p ro c e e d e d
to th e o u te r c h a m b e r w h ere th e u n su sp e c tin g g u lam s o f th e em irs w ere
a rre ste d . T h e castle g a te s w ere o p en ed , a n d th e n a ib p ro ceed ed to th e

52) O n t h is in te r e stin g figu re se e P . W i t t e r , “ L 'É p ita p h e d 'u n C om n en e

à K o n ia ," B y z a n tio n , x (19 3 5 ), 505— 51 5 ; “ E n c o r e l'é p ita p h e d 'u n C om n en e à
K o n ia ," B y z a n tio n , x i i (1 9 3 7 ), 207— 211.
53) D u d a , op. c it., p . 117. I t is r ela ted t h a t t h e y h a d first th o u g h t o f s e t t lin g
w it h th e ça şn ig ir a n d h is co h o r ts in A n ta ly a . B u t C om n en os a n d I b n H o k k a b a z
fe lt t h a t i t w o u ld b e d iffic u lt t o d o so in A n ta ly a a s M u b a rizu d d in E r to k u ş h a d
b e e n serleşk er th e r e for o v e r t w e n ty y ea rs. T h is w o u ld se e m t o in d ic a te t h a t
E r to k u ş , a g u la m b y o rig in , a s o n e o f th e le a d in g a n d e n tr en ch ed m em b ers o f
t h e h ig h er a d m in is tr a tio n m ig h t h a v e fe lt a c e r ta in lo y a lt y to th e o th e r g r ea t
e m irs, a n d so h e w a s n o t co n sid e r ed a g o o d risk .
 XII
Ht'IjnU (JulaniH and Ottoman DovMhinuoM 233

lioueoH o f th e a rre ste d om irs, re g iste re d th e ir possessions as p ro p e rty o f

th e s ta te , a n d th e n sealed th e room s. T h e houses o f th e e m irs’ re la tiv e s,
fam ilies, a n d g u lam s w ere p lu n d e re d . A s a re w a rd fo r th e ir services,
Com nenos, M u b a riz u d d in Is a , a n d his b ro th e r w ere m a d e p erso n al
ad v iso rs o f th e su lta n , a n d C om nenos w as a p p o in te d çaşn ig ir in p lace
o f S aifu d d in A jb e. x
O n th e n e x t d a y , w hile th e s u lta n w as engaged in polo, h e n o tic e d
th re e o f th e lesser em irs ta lk in g secretiv ely . So he o rd e re d th e n a ib to
d riv e th e m o u t w ith a polo stic k a n d th e n ex iled th e m fro m th e
kiligdom . A la u d d in , n o t satisfied w ith his w ork, o rd e re d th e e x e c u tio n
o f all th e g u lam s o f th e a rre s te d em irs. Som e tim e la te r th e em ir
C om nenos a p p e a re d b efo re th e s u lta n a n d sp o k e; “ A s I , y o u r se rv a n t,
b e to o k m y se lf fro m th e s u lta n ’s c a stle to m y h o m e to d a y , th e re
acco m p an ied m e a g re a t crow d o f follow ers, re ta in e rs, a n d w arrio rs.
B u t now o n ly one g u la m a n d one g ro o m sm a n h a v e re m a in e d w ith m e .”
O n b eing a sk e d th e reaso n , h e rep lied ; “ T h e n a ib S a ifu d d in h a s receiv ed
p erm issio n to d e s tro y th e g u lam s a n d a tte n d a n ts o f th e em irs. W h e n
m y m en h e a rd th is th e y w ere stric k e n a n d said, ‘I f som e d a y som e
offence sh o u ld b e ch arg ed a g a in s t y o u w h ich w ou ld b e g ro u n d s fo r a n
ex e c u tio n , th e sam e ju d g e m e n t w ould b e p a sse d o n u s . . . ” ’54) So th e
s u lta n re p e n te d . T h e o ld er g u lam s w ere fre e d a fte r tu rn in g o v er to th e
s u lta n ’s tre a s u ry all th e ir possessions. T h e y o u n g e r g u lam s w ere
d iv id e d in to tw o g ro u p s. O ne o f th e se w as tu r n e d o v e r to C elalu d d in
K a r a ta y , th e ta ş td a r , for service in th e ta ş th a n e , a n d th e re m a in d e r
w ere e n ro lled in th e s u lta n ’s p a la c e school, th e g u la m h a n e , w h ere th e ir
e d u c a tio n w as to b e co m p leted a t th e h a n d s o f th e b a b a s .55)
T h e p e rv a siv e c h a ra c te r o f th e g u la m e le m e n t in th is ep iso d e is
m o st strik in g . I b n B ibi specifically s ta te s t h a t o ne o f th e fo u r co n ­
sp ira to rs, th e a m ir-i-a h u r Z a in u d d in B iş a ra w as a h a ss,56) as w ere also th e
a ta b e y a n d serleşk er o f A n ta ly a M u b a riz u d d in E rto k u ş , M u b a riz u d d in
I s a a n d his b ro th e r, a n d C elalu d d in K a r a ta y th e ta ş td a r . I t is q u ite
p o ssible t h a t som e o f th e o th e r c o n sp ira to rs as w ell w ere o f g u lam
origin. T h e p rin c ip a l forces o f th e em irs, as w ell as o f th e s u lta n ,
C om nenos, a n d M u b a riz u d d in I s a a n d th e a m ir-i-d a d w ere m a d e u p
o f gulam s. T h e re a c tio n o f th e g u lam s o f C om nenos to th e d ecree o f
ex e c u tio n for th e g u lam s o f th e d e fe a te d em irs is o f g re a t in te re s t. As
slav es, th e ir p rim a ry d u ty w as lo y a lty to th e ir m a ste rs. A n d i t is tr u e
t h a t th e c h a ra c te ris tic a sp e c t a b o u t w h ich th e slav e sy ste m o f g o v ern -
54) D ud a , o p . c it . , p. 121.
55) D ud a , o p . c it ., p. 330.
56) D uda , o p . c it ., pp. 54— 55.
XII
234

m e n t in th e Isla m ic w orld c e n te re d , w as th e lo y a lty o f th e slav e to th e

m a ste r. H en ce, th e g u la m s reaso n ed , th e y o u g h t n o t to b e h eld
resp o n sib le for th e a c tio n s o f th e ir m a ste rs. A s, h ow ever, A la u d d in
h a d decreed t h a t th e g u lam s sho u ld p e rish along w ith th e ir g u ilty
m a ste rs, th e gulam s o f C om nenos sim p ly a b a n d o n e d th e ir ow n m a s te r
o n th e g ro u n d s t h a t th e y m ig h t, a t som e f u tu re tim e, receiv e a sim ilar
fa te . T o asso ciate th e g u ilt o f th e m a s te r w ith his g u lam s a n d to
e x te n d th e p u n ish m e n t to th e m a t larg e w ould te n d to u n d e rm in e th e
sy ste m . S uch a c tio n w o u ld cause th e g u lam s to q u e stio n th e ir u n r e ­
se rv e d lo y a lty to a m a ste r. A lso o f in te r e s t is th e fa c t t h a t th e em irs
n o t only h a d e x te n siv e n u m b e rs o f g u lam s, b u t e v id e n tly h a d schools
in w hich th e y w ere tra in e d , ju s t as th e s u lta n h a d . T hose o f th e g u lam s
o f th e em irs w ho w ere still y o u n g e n o u g h wrere sim p ly en ro lled in th e
p a la c e school.57)
S ufficient in fo rm a tio n on th e c a reers o f n u m e ro u s g u la m s is
a v a ila b le fro m th e chroniclers, in sc rip tio n s, a n d v a k u f d o c u m e n ts so
as to w a rra n t a s e p a ra te s tu d y .58) H ig h ly illu s tra tiv e o f th e im p o rta n c e
a n d influence o f th e g u lam s in a d m in is tra tiv e a n d m ilita ry affairs is
57) T h e in flu en ce a n d im p o r ta n c e o f th e g u la m s e m erg es in o th e r a n e c d o te s
fo u n d in I b n B ib i. O ne o f th e g r ea t em irs w a s th e ça şn ig ir S a ifu d d in T ü r k e n ,
a g u la m b y o rig in . H e a tte m p te d to in flu en ce th e s u lta n b y is o la tin g h im from
t h e o th e r g r ea t em irs, C ela lu d d in K a r a ta y , Ş a m su d d in A ltm b e , Ş a m su d d in
T a v ta ş , e t a l. H e d id t h is b y in tr o d u c in g h im to su c h e v il h a b its a s d rin k in g ,
b u t a b o v e a ll b y p e r su a d in g h im t o b e sto w th e h ig h e s t h o n o rs a n d e m ir a te s o n
w o r th le ss g u la m s w h o w ere o f T iirk eri's c h o o sin g ( D u d a , p p . 262— 263). A ll o f
th e a b o v e m e n tio n e d e m irs w ere o f g u la m orig in , a n d T ü rk eri a tte m p te d to
c o n tr o l th e a p p o in tm e n t o f th e g u la m s so t h a t h is in flu en ce a t th e c o u r t w o u ld
b e p r e p o n d er a n t (D uda, p p . 26 5 — 266.)
B u k n u d d in K ılıç A rsla n , o n a c c o m p a n y in g h is b r o th er, th e s u lta n Iz z u d d in ,
t o K o n y a , fo u n d h im s e lf in th e p o w er o f th e la tte r a n d o f h is G reek u n cle . S o
t h e h a w a ic sa la r K a m a lu d d in d e v is e d a sc h e m e b y w h ic h h e w o u ld b e a b le to
flee a n d g o t o K a y se r i. G u la m s from t h e h a w a ic h a n e w ere a p p rise d o f th e
s itu a tio n , a n d h o rses w ere t o b e s ta tio n e d a t a s tr a te g ic p o in t o u ts id e th e c it y .
T h e n in th e b e st tr a d itio n o f t h e T h o u sa n d a n d O n e N ig h t s R u k n u d d in w a s to
b e d ressed in th e ta tte r e d c lo th in g o f a g u la m from t h e ro y a l k itc h e n . A se r v ic e
p la tte r w o u ld th e n b e p la c e d o n th e su lta n 's h e a d t o h id e h is id e n t it y a n d th e
g ro u p w o u ld p r o c ee d t o t h e m a r k e t p la ce. S o i t c a m e a b o u t t h a t th e s u lta n
B u k n u d d in e sc a p e d fro m co n fin e m en t a t th e h a n d s o f h is b roth er. D uda , op.
c it., p p . 2 6 5 — 2 6 6 ; H o u ts m a , I V , 279.
58) A m o n g st th e S e lju k o fficia ls w h o w ere o f g u la m o r ig in are th e fo llo w in g .
Ş a m s u d d in H a ss O ğu z, Z a in u d d in B işa r a , S a ifu d d in T ü rk eri, M u b a rizu d d in
E r to k u ş , F a h r u d d in S iv a s to s , A m in u d d in M ik ail, Ş a m su d d in A ltin b e , S a ifu d d in
T o r u m ta y , C ela lu d d in K a r a ta y , K a m a lu d d in R u m ta ş , S a ifu d d in K a ra su n k u r,
M u b a rizu d d in Ç a vlı, M u b a rizu d d in I s a a n d h is b ro th er, F a r u h A ta b e y ,
R a ş id u d d in A ja z , S a ifu d d in K a ja b e , Ş a m su d d in T a v ta ş.
 XII
Keljuk (hıkım* and Ottoman DevshirmoK 235

th o career o f C elalu d d in K a r a ta y ib n A b d u llah . H is n a m e occupies

a p ro m in e n t p lace in th e pages o f I b n B ibi, b u t a p p e a rs as w ell in th e
chronicle o f A k sa ra y a n d in th e M en ak ib al-A rifin o f E fla k i. W e a re
to ld t h a t ev en th o u g h h e w as a p ag e o f G reek origin h e w as g ifte d w ith
e x tra o rd in a ry ta le n ts .59) H e h eld , a t v a rio u s tim e s th ro u g h o u t th e
reig n o f A la u d d in K a ik o b a d a n d his successors, th e im p o r ta n t p o sts o f
n a ib (s u lta n ’s vice-ro y ), a m ir-i-d a v a t (se c re ta ry o f th e g ra n d v izier),
a m ir-i-ta s th a n e (in c h arg e o f th e s u lta n ’s a b lu tio n s), a n d h iz a n e d a r-i-
h ass (chief o f th e im p e ria l tre a s u ry ).60) As one o f th e fo u r p illa rs o f th e
s ta te 61) h e p la y e d a n im p o r ta n t role in deciding u p o n th e succession
to th e s u lta n a te , a p p o in tm e n t o f v iziers a n d o th e r officials.62) H is
title , a ta b e y , in d ic a te s t h a t h e w as a tu to r to p rin c e s,63) a n d his
closeness to a n d fa m ilia rity w ith th e s u lta n s com es o u t in c e rta in
in c id e n ta l d e ta ils .64) W e h e a r m u c h less a b o u t h is tw o b ro th e rs,
S aifu d d in K a r a s u n k u r a n d K a m a lu d d in R u m ta ş ib n A b d u lla h .65)
O n ly slig h tly less fam o u s w as th e g r e a t e m ir M u b a riz u d d in E rto k u ş
ib n A b d u llah . A s in th e case o f K a r a ta y , h e w as a g u la m o f th e su lta n .
A fte r th e c o n q u e st o f A n ta ly a in 1207 E r to k u ş w as a p p o in te d serleşk er
o f t h a t im p o r ta n t c ity .66) As g o v e rn o r in th is reg io n h e p la y e d a n
im p o r ta n t role in th e S elju k c o n q u e sts o f th e s o u th e rn c o astal region,
b ein g resp o n sib le fo r th e co n q u ests o f A la iy a ,67), M ag h v a, A n d u şig , a n d
A n a m o r.68) A fte r E rz in ja n w as ta k e n b y th e s u lta n , E r to k u ş w as
tra n s fe rre d to t h a t c ity w h ere h e fu n c tio n e d as a ta b e y to th e y o u n g
p rin c e w ho w as to g o v e rn th e c ity .69) T h e la s t a c t w h ich I b n B ib i
59) P . W i t t e k , “ V o n d er b y z a n tin is c h e n zu r tü r k isc h e n T o p o n y m ie /' B y za n -
tio n , X (1935), 29— 30, h a s arg u ed t h a t h e m u s t h a v e b e e n o f a B y z a n tin e a r is to ­
c ra tic fa m ily , b e c a u se b o th K a r a ta y a n d h is tw o b ro th ers ap p ea r in t h e se r v ic e
o f th e su lta n s. T h erefo re it c o u ld n o t b e a q u e s tio n h ere o f g u la m s. H o w e v e r ,
th ere are o th er k n o w n c a se s o f b ro th ers w h o w ere g u la m s, su ch a s M u b a rizu d d in
I s a a n d h is b ro th er. A t a n y r a te, I b n B ib i sp e c ific a lly s t a t e s t h a t K a r a ta y
e n te r e d S e lju k se r v ic e a s a g u la m .
60) D u d a , o p . c i t . y p. 337.
61) D u d a , o p . c i t . y p. 341.
®2) D u d a , o p . c i t . y p. 239.
®3) D uda , o p . c it., p. 269.
®4) D u d a , o p . c i t . y p . 197, h e p a r tic ip a te d in a jo u s tin g to u r n e y w ith th e
s u lta n A la u d d in K a ik o b a d in 1237. D u d a , o p . c i t . y p . 128, h e w a s p r e se n t a t a n d
a s s is te d in th e la n c in g o f a d a n g ero u s b o il o n t h e su lta n 's n eck .
®5) D uda , o p . c it., p p . 298, 343, im p lie s t h a t K a ra su n k u r was p r o m in e n t
a m o n g s t th e sp a h is o f A n a to lia .
®6) D u d a , o p . c it., p p . 46, 63.
®7) D uda , o p . c it., p. 107.
®8) D u d a , o p . c it., pp. 142— 143.
®9) D u d a , o p . c it., p p . 150— 151.
XII
236

m e n tio n s in co n n ectio n w ith th is fo rm id ab le e m ir is his c o n q u e st o f th e

c ity o f K o g o n iy a .70) A n o th e r im p o r ta n t official o f g u lam orig in w as
A m in u d d in M ikail, w ho fu n c tio n e d as n a ib u l-h a d ra u n d e r s u lta n
R u k n u d d in in th e la tte r h a lf o f th e th ir te e n th c e n tu ry . I b n B ib i te lls
u s ta n ta liz in g ly little a b o u t th is figure, b u t i t is en o u g h to in d ic a te
t h a t h e p la y e d a n e x tre m e ly im p o r ta n t role in S elju k financial a d m in is­
tr a tio n . H e w as o f G reek origin, a M uslim , a n d a slave o f S a a d u d d in
A b u B a k r al-M ustaufi a l-E rd e b e li. H e w as resp o n sib le fo r refo rm in g
th e financial a p p a ra tu s o f th e S e lju k s ta te in A n a to lia b y in s titu tin g
th e s iy a q a t sy ste m in to th e fin an cial a d m in is tra tio n , a n d w as fa m e d
g e n e ra lly for his g re a t k n o w led g e.71) A s n a ib , A m in u d d in M ikail
p e rish e d d efen d in g K o n y a a g a in st C im ri a n d th e K a ra m a n id s in
1278.72) J u s t as th e a p p e a ra n c e o f th e g u lam s in th e co n q u e st o f so
m a n y to w n s a n d cities in d ic a te s th e ir im p o rta n c e in th e m ilita ry , so
th e ir a p p e a ra n c e as th e m ilita ry g o v ern o rs o f th e to w n s in d ic a te s t h a t
th e y p e rm e a te d n o t o n ly th e c e n tra l a d m in is tra tio n in K o n y a b u t
t h a t o f th e p ro v in ces as w ell. T o ru m ta y a p p e a rs as serleşk er o f
M a la ty a ,73) Z a in u d d in B işa ra in N iğ d e,74) S a ifu d d in T ü rk e ri in Siw as,75)
M u b a riz u d d in E rto k u ş in A n ta ly a ,76) F a h ru d d in A jaz in S iw as ,77
A ssa d u d d in A jaz in H o n a s78) a n d in M a la ty a ,79) M u b a riz u d d in Ç avlı
in E lb is ta n ,80) Ş a m su d d in T a v ta ş in N ik sa r,81) a n d M u b a riz u d d in I s a
in A m id .82) B ecause o f th e ir p o sitio n in th e c e n tra l a d m in is tra tio n
th e y w ere k e y figures b o th in th e electio n o f th e n ew s u lta n as w ell as
in th e cerem o n y o f e n th ro n iz a tio n .83)
T h e re is evid en ce t h a t th e se Isla m iz e d y o u th s p a rtic ip a te d q u ite
a c tiv e ly in th e c u ltu ra l life o f th e S elju k s ta te in th e th ir te e n th c e n tu ry .

70) D uda, op. c it., p. 152.

71) D uda , o p . c it., p. 345.
72) D uda , op. c it., pp. 311 — 313.
73) D uda , o p . c it., p. 255.
74) D ud a , o p . c it., p. 55.
75) D uda , o p. c it., p. 256.
76) D u d a , o p . c it., pp. 46, 63.
77) D uda , o p . c it., p. 190.
78) XTzunçarşili , A f y o n K a r a h is a r S a n d ık le , B o lv a d in , Ç a y , i s a l d ı , M a n is a ,
B ir g i, M u ğ la , M ila s , P e c in , D e n iz li, İ s p a r ta , A ta b e y ve E ğ ir d ir d e k i kitabeler ve
S a h ip , S a ru h a n , A y d ın , M en teşe, in a n ç , H a m it O ğ u lla rı h a k k ın d a m a lû m a t
(İstanbul, 1929) (hereafter K ita b e le r ) II, 210.
79) D uda , o p . c it., p. 122.
80) D uda , o p . c it., pp. 54— 55.
81) D u d a , o p . c it., p. 214.
82) D uda , o p. c it., p. 216.
83) D uda , o p . c it., pp. 90, 239, and p a s s im .
 floljuk Oıılnme and Ottoman Dovshirmos 237

F o r in sta n c e C elalu d d in K a r a ta y w as a fe rv e n t religious m y stic,

h av in g b een in itia te d as a m u rid b y th e fam ed sh e ik h S u h ra w a rd i
d u rin g th e l a t t e r ’s v is it to th e c o u rt o f A la u d d in K a ik o b a d in K o n y a .84)
H is religious asc e tic c h a ra c te r is re v e a le d b y I b n B ib i, w ho re la te s
t h a t he a b s ta in e d fro m e a tin g o f m e a t, fro m m a rita l jo y s, a n d fro m
p leasu res g en erally . H e w as a n in tim a te o f th e circle o f th e fa m e d
m y stic C elalu d d in R u m i as w ell.85). Ş a m su d d in H a ss O ğuz w as a p o e t
o f q u a lity , h a v in g w r itte n a n o te w o rth y com p o sitio n o n W in e a n d th e
H a rp .86). T h e fam e o f A m in u d d in M ikail in th e le a rn e d w o rld o f
th ir te e n th c e n tu ry A n a to lia h a s a lre a d y b e e n m e n tio n e d .87)
B u t th e m o st im p o r ta n t te s tim o n ia l to th e p a rtic ip a tio n o f th e
m o re successful g u la m s in th e c u ltu ra l life o f th e th ir te e n th c e n tu ry
is th e ir a p p e a ra n c e as p a tro n s o f a rc h ite c tu ra l a r t. T h e y w ere r e ­
sp o nsible fo r th e b u ild in g o f n u m e ro u s m osques, m ed ressas, h o sp ita ls,
fo u n ta in s, fo rtific a tio n s, etc. A m in u d d in M ikail s p e n t su m s o f m o n e y
fo r th e U lu C am i a t S ivri H isa r in 1247 j88) A sa d u d d in A jaz a n d
R a şid u d d in A jaz b u ilt th e A b a t H a n a t Ç a rd a k in th e reg io n o f D enizli
in 1229— 1230, a n d th e fo rm e r also b u ilt a c o n stru c tio n o f som e so rt
in S inope in 1215 ;89) A sa d u d d in R u z b e h b u ilt th e H o ro z lu H a n , a n d
th e son o f a g u la m ,90) A li ib n S iv asto s, h a d a m o sq u e n e a r A fy o n
K a ra h is a r b u ilt in 1272.91) C elalu d d in K a r a ta y a n d h is b ro th e r S aifu d -
d in K a ra s u n k u r a c tiv e ly p a tro n iz e d m o n u m e n ta l a r t. T h e fo rm e r b u ilt
h is fa m e d m e d re ssa in K o n y a in 1251,92) w h ereas th e la tte r c o n stru c te d

84) D uda , o p . c it., p . 103.

85) E flaki, L e s sa in ts des dervich es to u rn eu rs, tr. C. H uart (P a ris, 1918), I,
9 4 — 95, 199, 208. A m in u d d in M ik ail w a s a lso an in tim a te o f t h is circle, E fla k i,
2 5 9 -2 6 0 .
86) D uda , op. c it., p . 244.
87) C erta in ly th e m o s t fa m o u s o f th e s e G reek s la v e s c o n v e r te d to I s la m in th e
a n n a ls o f th ir te e n th c e n tu r y I s la m ic c u ltu r e w a s th e g eo grap h er J a q u t ib n A b ­
d u lla h a r -R u m i (1 1 7 9— 1229). H e w a s b o rn o f G reek p a r e n ts in G reek la n d s,
fe ll in to c a p t iv it y a n d w a s so ld o n th e s la v e m a r k e t o f B a g d a d . H e r e c e iv e d a
g o o d M u slim e d u c a tio n , m a d e m a n y jo u r n e y s, a n d th e n w r o te h is fa m o u s g e o ­
g ra p h ic a l w o rk . C. B rockelmann, G eschichte der arabisch en L itte r a tu r (W eim ar,
1898), I , 4 7 9 — 48 0 .
88) R é p erto ire chronologique d ’é p ig ra p h ie ara b e , ed . E . Combe, J . Sauvaget,
G. W i e t (C airo, 1943) (H erea fter R C E A ) , X I I , 197.
89) U zunçarşili, K ita b e le r , I I , 2 1 0 ; R C E A , X , 115— 116.
90) “ H o ro z lu H a n (R u zb eh H a n )” , K o n y a , ii, 100— 104.
91) U zunçarşili, K ita b e le r , I I , 13— 14; R C E A , X I I , 199.
°2) K o n y a , i i, 127— 128; iii, 189— 191. O. Turan, “ C elâ led d in K a r a ta y ,
v ak ıfları v e v a k fiy e le r i,” B elleten , x ii (1948), 17— 171. F o r th e d a y it o p en ed
se e E fla k i, I , 94 95.
X II
238

th e A k H a n n e a r D enizli in 1249, as w ell as a fo u n ta in .93) M u b a riz u d d in

Ç avlı, a p p o in te d serleşk er o f E lb is ta n , b u ilt a m o sq u e th e re in 1241.M)
M u b a riz u d d in E rto k u ş , th e serleşk er o f A n ta ly a , b u ilt a m e d re ssa in
th e d is tric t o f A ta b e y n e a r İ s p a r ta in 1224.95) Ş a m su d d in A ltm b e
o rd e re d th e c o n stru c tio n o f a m e d re ssa in K o n y a ,96) Ş ih a b u d d in b u ilt
a fo u n ta in a t B o y a H a n e in th e reg io n o f T o k a t,97) a n d T o r u m ta y ’s
tu r b e w as e re c te d a t A m a sy a in 1279.98) Z a in u d d in B işa ra , w hose
g re a t w e a lth a n d p o w er a re m e n tio n e d in I b n B ib i, c o n stru c te d
m o sq u es a t N igde a n d K o n y a , a n d a to w e r in S in o p e as w ell.99) Y a tır ­
m ış com m issioned th e b u ild in g o f a fo u n ta in a t B o ld a v in in 1248,100)
A n b a r o rd e re d th e e re c tio n o f a h o s p ita l in A m a sy a ,101) F a r u h A ta b e y
b u ilt a n edifice a t T sa n g h ir in 1242.102) T h e ir ro le as p a tro n s d id n o t
en d w ith th e financing o f th e a c tu a l c o n stru c tio n o f th e se b u ild in g s,
b u t i t in c lu d e d th e fin an cin g o f th e ir fu tu re e x iste n c e as religious a n d
c u ltu ra l in s titu tio n s . T h u s a n u m b e r o f v a k u f d o c u m e n ts p ro v id in g
fo r th e financial incom e a n d m a n a g e m e n t o f m a n y o f th e se edifices h a s
su rv iv e d .
The names of the thirteenth century Anatolian architects which
have survived indicate that a significant number of these professionals
were either of slave or at least of Christian origin. Such were Ahmad
ibn Abdullah, the builder of the tomb of Sayid Mahmud at Akşehir in
the reign of Alauddin Kaikobad ;104) Lulu the architect who built the
walls of Baiburt;105) and the architect, or architects, variously referred
to as Kaluk ibn Abdullah and Kaluyan al-Kunawi, who built the
mosque near the gates of Laranda,106) the Indje Minare and the
Nalindji Türbe at Konya,107) and the Gök Medressa in Siwas.108)

ö3) U zunçarşili, K ita b e le r , I I , 192— 196; R C E A , X I , 209.

94) R C E A , X I , 132— 133.
95) U zunçarşili, K ita b e le r , I I , 221— 2 2 4 ; O. T uran, “M ü b â rized d in E r-
T o k u ş v e v a k fiy e si," B elleten , x i (1947), 4 1 5 — 4 29.
96) K o n y a , v i, 3 7 0 — 3 7 5 ; O. T uran, “Ş e m sc d d in A ltu n -A b a y v a k fiy e si v e
h a y a tı," B elleten , x i (1947), 197— 235.
9?) U zunçarşili, K ita b e le r , I , 16; R C E A , X I I I , 2 5 6 .
98) R C E A , X I I , 2 4 5 — 2 4 6 ; U zunçarşili, K ita b e le r , I , 90— 99.
" ) R C E A , X , 93, 203, 119.
10°) U zunçarşili, K ita b e le r , I I , 4 6 ; R C E A , X I I , 2 4 6 — 247.
101) U zunçarşili, K ita b e le r , I , 101 ; R C E A , X I I I , 2 4 — 25.
102) R C E A , X I , 141— 142.
104) R C E A , X , 218.
105) R C E A , X , 94— 97.
306) R C E A , X I I , 22— 23.
107) R C E A , X I I , 24.
308) R C E A , X I I , 164 165.
 Holjiik Gulttme and Ottoman Dovshirmos 239

The gulam system as it operated in thirteenth century Anatolia

was obviously a successful system from many points of view. It pro­
duced a comparatively large number of able and gifted generals and
administrators, as well as patrons of Islamic culture, all of whom con­
tributed considerably to Seljuk society. The system was responsible
for providing these slave youths with good training. In time this overall
arrangement provided for the assimilation of the gulams and their
descendents in the Islamic society of Anatolia. Many of these gulams
and their descendents came to be associated with the spahis of the
provinces. Such were Saifuddin Karasunkur the brother109) of Cela-
luddin Karatay, and Rümeri the son of Türken.110) Though they were
‘slaves/ they cast about in an effort to contract favorable marriage
alliances. This concern to acquire connections by convenient marriage
arrangements is in a sense more consonant with the outlook of the
landed aristocrats of the provinces, the spahis, than with that of
court slaves.111) Thus a number of these slaves founded Muslim
dynasties of note in Anatolian society. This tendency is discernable
in the cases of Saifuddin Karasunkur and his brother Kamaluddin
Rum taş.112) Fahruddin Sivastos and his son Ali ibn Sivastos,113) but
above all in the case of Saifuddin Torumtay, the descendents of whose
family were still in evidence during the eighteenth century.114) Thus
new and vigorous blood and outlook were brought into the ranks of
the provincial society by this process.115)

The P eriod of th e Anatolian Emirates

With the collapse of the Seljuk state in the late thirteenth and
early fourteenth century the use of gulams is not so well documented.
But this is no doubt due to the lack of satisfactory source material
rather than to the actual disappearance of the phenomenon. The

109) D uda , o p . cit.f p p . 298, 343, h e w a s a ss o c ia te d w ith th e sp a h is. I n th e

v a k u f o f h is b ro th er h e is e n title d e m ir u l-isfeh sa la r, K o n y a , ii, 128.
110) D uda , o p . ci t., p . 298, w a s o f th e sp a h is.
l n ) S u ch a r ra n g m en ts are reco rd ed in t h e c a se o f Ş a m su d d in H a s s O ğuz
a n d A s a d u d d in R u z b e h , D uda , op. c it., p . 240.
112) K o n y a , ii, 127— 128.
113) U zunçarşili, K ita b e le r , I I , 13— 14.
114) U zunçarşili, K ita b e le r , I , 90— 99. H is so n w a s a n im p o r ta n t officia l
in K o n y a a n d a fr eq u e n ter o f su fi cir cle s, E fla k i, I I , 337.
11δ) V . A . Gordlevsky, O osu darstvo S eV d zlin k id o v M a lo ï A z i i , Iz b ra n n y e
S o c h in e n n a , (M oscow , 1960), I , 106.
XII
240

d is p a ra te sources w hich refer to A sia M inor in th e fo u rte e n th c e n tu ry

in d ic a te t h a t C h ristian slaves w ere as a b u n d a n t as th e y h a d b e e n
p re v io u sly a n d t h a t th e T u rk ish em irs em p lo y ed g u lam s in th e ir
g o v e rn m e n ta l a n d m ilita ry a p p a ra tu s .
I n th e first h a lf o f th e fo u rte e n th c e n tu ry w h en M a tth e w th e
m e tro p o lita n o f E p h e su s first o ccupied h is ecclesiastical s e a t h e w as
a p p a lle d a t th e larg e n u m b e rs o f G reek slaves in th e area. I n one o f
h is le tte rs h e re m a rk s : “ A lso d istre ssin g is th e m u ltitu d e o f p riso n ers,
som e o f w hom a re m ise ra b ly e n slav ed to th e Ism a é lite s a n d o th e rs to
th e J e w s . . . .A n d th e p riso n e rs b ro u g h t b a c k to th is n ew e n s la v e m e n t
a re n u m b e re d b y th e th o u s a n d s ; th o se (priso n ers) arisin g fro m th e
e n sla v e m e n t o f R h o m aio i th ro u g h th e c a p tu re o f th e ir la n d s a n d
cities from all tim e s b y co m p ariso n w ould b e fo u n d to b e sm a lle r o r
(a t m o st) e q u a l.” 116)
T h e M uslim a u th o rs also n o te t h a t th e T u rk m e n trib e s o f w e ste rn
A sia M inor w ere c o n s ta n tly ra id in g th e G reek la n d s a n d w ere c a rry in g
off larg e n u m b e rs o f p riso n ers. B o th A b u l F id a a n d a l-U m ari re m a rk
t h a t th e T u rk m e n s esp ecially singled o u t th e G reek c h ild ren fo r e n ­
s la v e m e n t.117) T h e n u m b e r o f slaves a v a ila b le w as so g re a t t h a t
“ . . .o n e s a w . . .a rriv in g d a ily th o se m e rc h a n ts w ho in d u lg e d in th is
tr a d e .” 118) I b n B a tu ta p ic k e d u p a n u m b e r o f y o u n g m ale a n d fem ale
slaves d u rin g th e course o f his jo u rn e y th ro u g h w e ste rn A sia M in o r ,. .
som e h e p u rc h a se d , o th e rs h e receiv ed as g ifts.119)
G iven th e f a c t t h a t C h ristia n slaves w ere so p le n tifu l in th e
fo u rte e n th a n d fifte e n th c e n tu rie s one w ould h a v e ex p e c te d to see a
c o n tin u a tio n o f th e g u la m p rin c ip le in th e a d m in is tra tiv e a n d m ilita ry
in s titu tio n s o f th e e m ira te s. T h ere a re h in ts t h a t th e g u lam sy ste m
d id c o n tin u e d u rin g th is p e rio d , b u t th e so u rces are v e ry sp arse. A l-
U m a ri n o te s o f th e e m ir o f G e rm iy a n : “ H e h a s a b o u t h im em irs,
v iziers, cadis, secretaries, co u rtisan s, g u la m s; h e possesses tre a su re s,
sta b le s, k itc h e n s, p a la c e s; all his fu rn ish in g s a re w o rth y o f a k in g ,
a n d h e is c o n s ta n tly su rro u n d e d b y all th e p o m p an d lu x u ry w hich

116) M a tth ew o f E p h e s u s , M a tth a io s M e tro p o lit von E p h e su s. U eber se in

L eben u n d sein e S ch riften (P o tsd a m , 1901), p . 56.
117) F . Taeschner, A l - U m a r i ’s B erich t über A n a to lie n in sein em W erke
m a s ä lik a l-a b sä r f l m a m ä lik a l-a m sä r (L eip zig , 1929) (h ereafter Taeschner, al-
U m a r i), p . 44. G éograph ie d ’A b o u lféd a , ed . M. R einaud a n d M. d e Slane (P a ris,
184 0 ), p p . 379, 381.
318) Taeschner, a l- U m a r i, p . 44.
119) I bn B atuta, V o yages d ’I b n B a to u ta h , t e x t e e t tr . C. D e fré m e ry a n d
B. R. Sanguinetti (P a ris, 1854), II, 307, 3 09, 3 1 0 — 311, 317.
 X II
Hnljıık (JıılamH and Ottoman Dovshirmos 241

arc fittin g for a s u lta n .” 120) O bv io u sly th e g o vernin g a p p a ra tu s o f th e

O erm iy an id em irs w as a sm all scale m odel o f t h a t o f th e S elju k s a n d
was to a c e rta in e x te n t m a n n e d b y th e gulam s. T h e sam e a u th o r
fu rth e r n o te s t h a t a c e rta in Z a k a ria , th e em ir o f th e p rin c ip a lity o f
K a ra h isa r, w as o rig in ally a slave o f Y u n u s th e ru le r o f A n ta ly a .121)
I b n B a tu ta also d escrib es th e 'p resen ce o f m am elu k es in th e re tin u e s
o f th e em irs o f A n ta ly a , B irgi, K a s ta m o n u , S inope, a n d K a y s e ri.122)
F in a lly , a n a n o n y m o u s G reek chronicle o f th e s ix te e n th c e n tu ry
m e n tio n s t h a t U z u n H a s a n h a d a corps o f a je m o ğ lan s.123)
T h e p e rio d o f th e A n a to lia n e m ira te s p ro b a b ly saw n o b re a k in
th e tr a d itio n o f g u la m or slave a d m in is tra to rs a n d soldiers, th e
m a jo rity o f w hom c o n tin u e d to b e re c ru ite d from th e C h ristian s o f
A n atolia.

T h e O t t o m a n D e v s h i r m e in A n a to lia

W h en th e O tto m a n s a b so rb e d m o st o f A n a to lia in th e fifte e n th

c e n tu ry th e use o f A n a to lia n C h ristia n y o u th s in s ta te serv ice h a d
a lre a d y e n jo y e d a re sp e c ta b le h is to ry o f a lm o st th re e c e n tu rie s. T h e
e x te n sio n o f th e d e v sh irm e to th e A n a to lia n C h ristia n w o u ld th u s
a p p e a r to be n o th in g e x tra o rd in a ry on th e p a r t o f th e O tto m a n s.
T h o u g h th e raisin g o f th e d e v sh irm e in O tto m a n A n a to lia w as n o te d
th re e c e n tu rie s ago b y th e E n g lish o b se rv e r R ic a u t, a n d w as ag a in
d escrib ed in L y b y e r’s classic,124) n e v e rth e le ss one is s tru c k b y th e
n u m b e r o f sch o lars w ho c o n tin u e to a s s e rt t h a t th e d e v sh irm e w as
lev ied only in R u m e li a n d n o t in A n ad o lu . T h a t th e O tto m a n s d id ta k e
C h ristia n ch ild re n fro m A n a to lia fo r th e J a n is s a ry co rp s a n d fo r
p alace service is te stifie d to n o t o nly b y w e ste rn sources, b u t a b o v e all
b y th e O tto m a n d o c u m e n ts.

120) Taeschner, a l- U m a r i, p . 25. T h e D a n iş m e n d n a m e , e d . I . Melikoff,

L a geste de M e lik D â n iş m e n d (P a ris, 1960), I , 248, 253, m e n tio n s th e k u lla r o f
th e D a n iş m e n d id s . B u t it is d iffic u lt t o s a y w h e th e r th is reflects th e s itu a tio n
in th e e le v e n th c e n tu r y w h e n th e D a n iş m e n d id s first a p p ea red in A n a to lia , or
th e s itu a tio n in th e th ir te e n th c e n tu r y w h e n th e w o rk w a s first c o m p o se d , or
th e s itu a tio n o f th e fo u r te e n th c e n tu r y w h e n th e p r e se n t v e r s io n w a s w r itte n .
121) Taeschner, a l-U m a r i, p. 48.
122) I bn B atuta, I I , 259, 288, 303, 345, 353. I n h is a u d ien ce w ith th e em ir
o f P ir g h i I b n B a t u t a rem ark s t h a t in th e em ir's r e c e p tio n h a ll w ere t w e n t y
G reek p a g e s o f u n u su a l p h y sic a l b e a u ty , c lo th e d in silk , a n d w ith p ecu lia r
co iffu res.
123) S. Lambros, E cth esis C h ron ica (L o n d o n , 1902), p . 32.
124) L ybyer , o p . c it., p. 79.
16 Islam XLT, Heft 1/2
XII
242

The existence of the devshirme in Anatolia is testified to in these

Ottoman sources from the mid-fifteenth through the end of the
seventeenth century. Most of the information comes either from
imperial documents specifically concerned with the regulation and
imposition of the devshirme, or, from the maaş defteri, those documents
concerned with the pay of the Janissaries. These latter documents
usually list the salary of each Janissary and then qualify his name by
a geographical epithet showing his place of origin.
A m o n g st th e e a rlie st referen ces w h ich m e n tio n th e ta k in g o f
C h ristia n c h ild ren in A n a to lia b y th e O tto m a n s is th e G reek d o c u m e n t
d a te d 1456 w hich w as a d d re sse d b y G reek C h ristian s in A n a to lia to
th e G ra n d M a ste r o f th e K n ig h ts H o sp ita le rs o f R h o d e s.125) T h e n w ith
th e c o n q u e st o f T re b iz o n d b y M ehm ed I I co n sid erab le n u m b e rs o f
G reek y o u th s w ere ta k e n fo r th e J a n is s a ry corp s a n d p a la c e se rv ic e .126)
I n a m a a ş d e fte ri d a te d 1526 th e re a re te n Ja n is s a rie s (o u t o f a lis t o f
289) w ho w ere b y orig in T re b iz o n d in e s,127) a n d in a n o th e r su ch d o c u ­
m e n t d a te d 1563 Ja n is s a rie s fro m T re b iz o n d ,128) T o k a t, M ihaliç, a n d
G em lik a re m e n tio n e d .129) A d o c u m e n t o f 1576 m e n tio n s th e n a m e s o f
Ja n is s a rie s from B u rsa , L e fk e , a n d İ z n ik .130) A m a a ş d e fte ri o f th e
y e a r 1623 lists th e p a y o f J a n issa rie s in c lu d in g c e rta in Ja n is s a rie s
fro m M araş, T o k a t, M ihaliç, a n d N iğ d e .131) F in a lly , a p a y re g iste r o f
1679 in clu d es Ja n is s a rie s fro m M ihaliç a n d K a s ta m o n u .132) V ario u s
o th e r d o c u m e n ts m e n tio n d e v sh irm e s fro m S in o p e a n d T o k a t (d a te d
125) Vryonis , loc. c it., 4 4 1 — 442. F . Miklosich a n d I . Müller, A c ta et
d ip lo m a ta m e d ii a e vi sacra et p r o fa n a (V ien n a , 1865 ), I I I , 291.
126) G. Zoras, “ Ή άλωσις τής Κωνσταντινουπόλεως καί ή βασιλεία Μωάμεθ Β'
του κατακτητοΰ,” Έ πετηρίς «Εταιρείας Βυζαντινών Σπουδών, x x i i (1 9 5 2 ), 276.
T h is t e x t g iv e s th e n u m b er 800. A . P a p a z o g lo u , “ Σινάν ό Ά ρ χιτ έκ τω ν,”
Έ πετηρις Εταιρείας Βυζαντινών Σπουδών, x i v (1 9 3 8 ), 4 5 3 — 454, sh o w s t h a t
i t w a s a lre a d y in e ffe c t in th e fifte e n th c en tu r y . U zunçarşili, O sm a n lı d evleti
te ş k ilâ tın d a n K a p u k u lu O ca k la rı (A n k ara, 1943) (h erea fter K a p . O cak.), I , 19,
r e la te s t h a t th e d e v sh ir m e w a s d isc o n tin u e d so o n a fter b e c a u se o f th e e v il
ch a ra cter o f th e T r eb iz o n d in es, a n d t h a t it w a s r e in s ta te d b y S e lim I . I n th e
e x p e d itio n a t C h ald iran th e o ğ la n s from T reb izo n d e x h ib ite d reb ellio u s b e h a v i­
our.
127) L . F ekete, D ie S iy a q a ts c h rift in d er tü rkisch en F in a n zv erw a ltu n g (B u d a ­
p e s t , 1 955), I , 151, 153, 155, 159, 161.
128) U zunçarşili, K a p . O cak., I , 71— 72. I n 1556 it is reco rd ed t h a t a n
a t t e m p t w a s m a d e to le v y th e d e v sh ir m e in T r eb iz o n d b y th e u se o f fo rged
d o c u m e n ts , U zunçarşili, K a p . O cak., I , 15.
129) U zunçarşili, K a p . O cak., I , 71— 72.
13°) U zunçarşili, K a p . O cak., I , 20.
131) U zunçarşili, K a p . O cak., I , 43 6 — 437.
132) F ekete, o p . c it., T, 727.
 XII
Hnljtik Gillums and Ottoman Dovshirmos 243

1559),133) B a ib u rt,184) E ğ ird ir,185) K ü ta h y a ,156) B u rsa , a n d M an y as.137)

In th e p alace service its e lf i t w as s tip u la te d t h a t th e s u lta n ’s k itc h e n s
a n d b a k e ry sh o u ld e m p lo y tw e n ty d ev sh irm es fro m A n a to lia a n d
tw e n ty -liv e from R u m e li.138) T h e A n a to lia n C h ristian s th u s cam e to b e
su b je c t to th e d e v sh irm e as e a rly as th e m id -fifte e n th c e n tu ry , a n d b y
th e s ix te e n th a n d s e v e n te e n th c e n tu rie s th is h a d assu m ed reg u la riz ed
fo rm .139) I t w as q u ite o fte n th e p ra c tic e to sen d th e d ev sh irm es lev ied
in A n a to lia to R u m e li, w h ereas th e d ev sh ires collected in th e
B a lk a n s w ere s e n t to A n a to lia .140) C e rta in ly th e m o st c e le b ra te d o f
th e se A n a to lia n d e v sh irm e s w as M im ar S in an P a s h a th e g re a te s t o f
th e O tto m a n a rc h ite c ts, w ho w as lev ied fro m th e C h ristia n ra y a s o f
th e region o f K a y se ri in th e tim e o f Selim I . 141)
A few o f th e d o c u m e n ts w h ich a re con cern ed w ith th e d ev sh irm e
in A n a to lia h a v e fo rtu n a te ly su rv iv e d a n d b e e n p u b lish ed . T h e y sp eak
o f d e v sh irm e levied from Sis (1574),142) M ihaliç (1567),143) B ilecik
(1574),144) S ivas a n d K a ra m a n .145) I n 1622 a g en eral o rd e r w as issu ed
fo r th e ta k in g o f C h ristia n ch ild ren fro m K o caili, B olu, K a s ta m o n u ,
Ç orum , S inope, A m a sy a , M a la ty a , K a ra h is a r, A ra p k ir, Ç em işkezek,
Cizre, S ivas, M araş, E rz e ru m , D iy a rb e k ir, K e m a h , a n d B a ib u r t.146)
A n o th e r d o c u m e n t o f a sim ilar n a tu r e b u t w ith o u t a d a te re m a rk s
t h a t c h ild ren h a v e b e e n ta k e n fro m th e sa n ja k s o f M aras, K a y se ri,
N ig d e, a n d B eğşehir. H o w ev er i t w as fo u n d t h a t th e se w ere n o t
en o u g h, so a n o rd e r w as issued t h a t one h u n d re d m o re y o u th s sh o u ld
133) U zunç a r ş il i , K a p . O cak., I , 115.
134) U zun ç a r ş il i , K a p . O cak., I , 320.
135) Papazoglou, loc. c it., 4 5 3 — 454.
136) U zunçarşili, K a p . O cak., I, 438.
137) U zunçarşili, K a p . O cak., I , 4 4 2 — 443.
138) U zunçarşili, K a p . O cak., I, 121.
139) U zunçarşili, K ap). O cak., I, 14.
14°) F ro m a m a n u sc r ip t, E y y u b î E fe n d i K a n u n n â m e si p . 34, q u o te d b y
U zunçarşili, K a p . O cak., I , 623. “ R u m e li v e A n a d o lu v ila y e tle r in d e n yarar
o ğ la n la r d e v şir ü p sü rü ile g e lü p k ız ıl a b a g iy erlerd i G elü p d a h il o ld u k ta K ü m e ­
lin d e n g e le n i A n a d o lu A ğ a sı z a p t id ü p A n a d o lu n d a n g e le n i R u m e li A ğ a sı z a p t
id er i d i / ' T h is p r a c tic e w a s a lso n o te d b y co n te m p o ra r y w e ste rn o b serv ers, see
L ybyer , o p . c it., p . 79.
141) U zunçarşili, K a p . O cak., I , 2 0 ; Papazoglou, loc. c it., 4 4 3 — 460.
142) U zunçarşili, K a p . O cak., I , 126.
143) U zunçarşili, K a p . O cak., I , 127.
144) U zunçarşili, K a p . O cak., I, 106.
145) U zunçarşili, K a p . O cak., I , 1 0 2 , N o . 2 .
146) U zunçarşili, K a p . O cak., I , 9 5 — 96. I t is e v id e n t ly to t h is d ecree t h a t
v o n H ammer, ‘Ιστορία της ’οθωμανικής αύτοκρατορίας, tr. C. Crocidas (A th en s,
187 4 ), V I , 30 4 , refers.
10*
X II
244

b e ta k e n from th e d is tric t o f K a ra m a n a n d one h u n d re d fro m th e

d is tric t o f Z u lk a d riy e .147) I n 1583 th e y w ere lev ied from as fa r e a st as
th e beğlerbeğlik o f B a tu m .148)
T h e chance su rv iv a l o f th e se d o c u m e n ts th u s d e m o n stra te s t h a t
th e d e v sh irm e w as lev ied b y th e O tto m a n s in A n a to lia a t le a s t fro m
th e m id -fifte e n th c e n tu ry u n til th e la te s e v e n te e n th c e n tu ry . T h e y
also d e m o n stra te t h a t th e O tto m a n s lev ied th e C h ristian ch ild ren all
th e w ay across A n a to lia fro m B u rsa to B a tu m . T h e list o f th e reg io n s
in w hich ch ild ren w ere ta k e n is im p ressiv e : T reb izo n d , M aras, B u rsa ,
L efk e, İz n ik , K a y se ri, T o k a t, M ihaliç, E ğ ird ir, G em lik, K o caili, B olu,
K a sta m o n u , Ç orum , S am su n , S inope, A m asy a, M a la ty a , K a ra h is a r,
A ra p k ir, Ç em işkezek, Cizre, S ivas, E rz e ru m , D iy a rb e k ir, K e m a h ,
B a ib u rt, N iğde, B eğşehir, K a ra m a n , Z u lk a d riy e , B ilecik, B a tu m , Sis,
K ü ta h y a , a n d M anyas. A n d th o u g h i t is tr u e t h a t A n a to lia w as n o t
a s im p o rta n t as R u m e li as a source fo r J a n is s a ry re c ru its, i t w as
n e v e rth e le ss a sig n ifican t source o f th e se y o u th s .149)

A ttitu d e s a n d R e a c tio n of th e C h ris tia n P o p u la tio n s to

the D evshirm e

A n o th e r o f th o se a sp e c ts o f th e h is to ry o f th e d ev sh irm e w h ich h a s
b e e n d e a lt w ith in a so m ew h at v a g u e a n d in e x a c t fa sh io n co n cern s
th e a ttitu d e s a n d re a c tio n o f th e C h ristia n p o p u la tio n s to w a rd s th e
ta k in g o f th e ir ch ild ren b y th e T u rk s. I t h a s b e e n s ta te d on n u m e ro u s
occasions t h a t th e C h ristia n p o p u la tio n s w ere e ith e r in d iffe re n t to th e
ta k in g o f th e ir ch ild ren o r t h a t th e y w elcom ed th e d e v sh irm e as i t
m e a n t t h a t all th e h ig h e st offices o f s ta te a n d b rillia n t careers w ould

147) U zunçarşili, K a p . O cak., I , 104.

148) U zunçarşili, K a p . O cak., I , 107.
149) T h e c o n tin u ity in th e ta k in g o f C h ristia n ch ild ren in A n a to lia in O tto ­
m a n tim e s , in c o n tr a st to w h a t m a n y sch olars h a v e a lle g e d , ra ises a n o th er p o in t.
T h is h a s t o d o w ith th e e th n ic grou p s from w h ic h r ec ru its for th e J a n iss a r y
co rp s w ere ta k e n . I t h a s u s u a lly b e e n a lle g e d t h a t th e y o u th s w ere ta k e n o n ly
fro m B a lk a n C h ristia n s, t h a t is to s a y A lb a n ien s, G reek s, a n d S la v s. H o w e v e r ,
A rm en ia n s w ere ta k e n fro m A n a to lia in th e s ix t e e n t h a n d se v e n te e n th c e n t u ­
r ies, a n d L a z es from n o rth ern A n a to lia w ere a lso ta k e n for a w h ile , U zunçarşili,
K a p . O cak., I , 17, 19. I n 1569 S e lim I I e n ro lled b o th r en eg a d e G reek s a n d J e w s
in to th e J a n iss a r y corp s, v o n H a m m er , e d . C rocid as, V , 42. M eh m ed I I h a d
d e m a n d ed 500 W a lla c h ia n y o u th s a s tr ib u te from th e p r in c e o f W a lla c h ia , b u t
th e la tte r refu sed t o c o m p ly a n d d e fe a te d th e T u rk ish forces s e n t a g a in st h im ,
D ucas, H is to r ia b y za n tin a , e d . I . B ekker (B o n n , 1834), p p . 343— 355.
 XII
HfiljııU (îuliiniM and O ttom an Ilevshinnea 245

bo open to th e ir c h ild re n .150) N o one w ould d o u b t th e d efin ite a ttr a c tio n

o f prom ising careers as a fa c to r w hich m ig h t m o tiv a te peo p le. A n d i t
is tru e t h a t large n u m b e rs o f th e conversions to Isla m w h ich o ccu rred
th ro u g h o u t th e cen tu ries-lo n g stru g g le b e tw e e n C h ristia n ity a n d Isla m
w ere m o tiv a te d b y th e h o p e fo r a b e tte r p o sitio n in a so c ie ty w hich
w as d o m in a te d b y M uslim s. So i t also o ccu rred in A n a to lia a n d th e
B a lk a n s t h a t C h ristia n s in larg e n u m b e rs ap o sta c iz e d to Is la m in o rd e r
to o b ta in a b e tte r social s ta tu s . B u t in discussing th e d e v sh irm e w e
a re d ealin g w ith th e larg e n u m b e rs o f C h ristian s w ho, in s p ite o f th e
m a te ria l a d v a n ta g e s offered b y co n v ersio n to Isla m , chose to rem ain
m em b ers o f a religious so ciety w hich w as d e n ie d first class citizen sh ip .
T h erefo re th e p ro p o sitio n a d v a n c e d b y som e h isto ria n s, t h a t th e
C h ristian s w elcom ed th e d ev sh irm e as i t o p en ed u p w o n d erfu l o p p o r­
tu n itie s fo r th e ir ch ild ren , is in c o n siste n t w ith th e fa c t t h a t th e se
C h ristian s h a d n o t chosen to becom e M uslim s in th e first in sta n c e b u t
h a d re m a in e d C h ristian s. T h o u g h i t is possible to arg u e o n th e o re tic a l
g ro u n d s t h a t som e o f th e C h ristia n s m ig h t h a v e w elcom ed th e
d e v sh irm e, th e re is a b u n d a n t te s tim o n y to th e v e ry a c tiv e d islike w ith
w h ich th e y view ed th e ta k in g o f th e ir ch ildren. O ne w o u ld e x p e c t
su ch s e n tim e n ts g iv e n th e stro n g n a tu r e o f th e fam ily b o n d a n d g iv en
also th e s tro n g a tta c h m e n t to C h ris tia n ity o f th o se w ho h a d n o t
a p o sta c iz e d to Isla m .
F ir s t o f all, th e O tto m a n s c a p ita liz e d on th e g en eral C h ristia n fear
o f losing th e ir ch ild ren a n d u sed offers o f d ev sh irm e e x e m p tio n in
n e g o tia tio n s fo r s u rre n d e r o f C h ristia n lan d s. S u ch e x e m p tio n s w ere
in c lu d e d in th e s u rre n d e r te rm s g ra n te d to J a n n in a , G a la ta , th e
M orea, Chios, e tc .151) C h ristian s w ho e n g ag ed in specialized a c tiv itie s
w h ich w ere im p o r ta n t to th e O tto m a n s ta te w ere likew ise e x e m p t fro m
th e ta x on th e ir c h ild re n b y w ay o f re c o g n itio n o f th e im p o rta n c e o f
th e ir lab o rs for th e em pire. O tto m a n d o c u m e n ts g ra n tin g im m u n ity to
su ch d h im m is h a v e b e e n p u b lish e d in th e w o rk o f U zu n çarşılı. A m o n g st
th e se one re a d s t h a t th e d e rb e n tc is o f Y e n ik ö y in B u lg a ria , a n d also
th o se o f S id rek ap si in n o rth e rn G reece, w ere e x e m p t fro m giving
th e ir ch ild ren to th e d ev sh irm e collectors. L ikew ise th e a lu m m in ers
fro m th e tw e n ty -th re e villages o f th e reg io n o f Ş ark ı K a ra h is a r w ere

150) T . Arnold, T h e P rea ch in g of I s la m (L o n d o n , 1935), p . 151. W . H . Lan ­

ger a n d R . B lake, “ T h e R is e o f th e O tto m a n E m p ir e a n d I t s H is to r ic a l B a c k ­
g r o u n d ,” T h e A m e r ic a n H is to r ic a l R e v ie w , x x x v i i (1932), 504. H . A . R . Gibb
and H . B owen, o p . c it., 58— 59.
151) Vryonis, loc. c it., 4 4 0 — 441. P . Argenti, C h iu s V in cta 1566 (C am b rid ge,
1941), p p . 2 1 2 — 213.
X II
246

e x e m p t. E x e m p tio n s for C h ristia n s in th e reg io n s o f B ig a (1578) a n d

Y eni II (1579) a re also d e sc rib e d .152) W h e n e v e r la b o r w as n e e d e d ,
e ith e r on sh o rt te rm s o r fo r lo n g er p erio d s, a reg io n m ig h t b e e x ­
e m p te d fro m p a y in g th e child ta x . T h u s th e M orea receiv ed im m u n ity
fo r one y e a r (1574) d u rin g w hich tim e M oreo tes w ere to w o rk o n th e
fo rtific a tio n s o f N a v a rin o .153) R a y a s resp o n sib le fo r th e care a n d
m a in te n a n c e o f b rid g es w ere likew ise on occasions e x e m p te d (1578).154)
E x e m p tio n fro m th is tr ib u te w as co n sid ered a p riv ileg e a n d n o t a
p e n a lty . I n 1576 th e C h ristia n s o f th e A n a to lia n reg io n o f M ihaliç
re g iste re d a n official c o m p la in t t h a t e v en th o u g h th e C h ristia n s o f
th e n eig h b o rin g islan d s w ere ric h e r a n d m o re po w erfu l th a n th e
C h ristia n s o f M ihaliç, a n d t h a t ev en th o u g h th e la tte r w ere o b e d ie n t
to th e co m m ands o f th e su lta n , n e v e rth e le ss th e islan d ers d id n o t h a v e
to give th e ir ch ild ren w h ereas th e in h a b ita n ts o f M ihaliç h a d to
s u rre n d e r th e ir c h ild re n .155) O b viously th e C h ristia n s o f M ihaliç d id
n o t see th e ir lia b ility fo r d e v sh irm e as a n y g re a t re w a rd fo r th e ir
o bedience to th e s u lta n . A fifte e n th c e n tu ry d o c u m e n t d e m o n stra te s
specifically t h a t th e d e v sh irm e w as also u se d as a m e a n s o f p u n ish in g
ra y a s w ho w ere d iso b e d ie n t in v a rio u s m a tte r s .156)
T h a t th e C h ristian s dislik ed , r a th e r th a n w elcom ed, th e ta k in g o f
th e ir ch ild ren is im p lic it in th e d o c u m e n ts co n sid ered ab o v e. H o w ev er,
th e re a re o th e r d o c u m e n ts w h erein th e ir dislike is m u c h m o re e x p lic itly
a p p a re n t. T h ese in c lu d e a series o f O tto m a n d o c u m e n ts d ealin g w ith
specific s itu a tio n s w h erein th e d ev sh irm es th e m se lv e s h a v e esc a p e d
fro m th e officials resp o n sib le for collecting th e m . I n 1573 th e b eğ lerb eğ
a n d cadis o f K a ra m a n re c e iv e d a n o rd e r fro m Is ta n b u l to a ssist th e
d e v sh irm e officials in re c a p tu rin g th e C h ristia n y o u th s w ho h a d b e e n
a id e d b y th e in h a b ita n ts o f th e villages a n d to w n s to escap e.157) I n
1564 th e beğ o f K a y se ri w as o rd e re d to a ssist in th e c a p tu re o f d ev sh irm e
y o u th s w ho h a d m a d e th e ir escape in his p ro v in ce. T h is o rd e r re la te s
t h a t th e se y o u th s h a d escap ed a fte r th e ir 'c o n v e rsio n ’ to Is la m a n d
a d d s th a t, w h en re ta k e n , th e bo y s w ere to b e b o u n d a n d s e n t to
I s ta n b u l u n d e r th e g u a rd o f 'b ra v e m e n ’.158) T h e y o u th s lev ied in
152) U zunçarşili, K a p . O cak., I , 109, 110, 113.
153) U zunçarşili, K a p . O cak., I, 113.
154) U zunçarşili, K a p . O ca k ., I, 110.
155) U zunçarşili, K a p . O cak., I, 127.
156) N . B eldiceanu, L e s A c te s des p re m ie rs su lta n s conservés d a n s les m a n u s ­
c r ip ts tu rcs de la B iblioth èqu e N a tio n a le de P a r is I : A c te s de M e h m e d I I et de
B a y e z id I I d u m s. fo n d s tu rc a n c ien 39 (T h e H a g u e , 1960), p. 147.
157) U zunçarşili, K a p . O cak., I, 105.
158) U zunçarşili, K a p . O cak., I , 126.
 Noljuk Unlanın and Ottoman Devshirmes 247

Mi haliç in 1576 w ore b ro u g h t to p o rts on th e P ro p o n tis fo r tr a n s p o r t

to Ista n b u l. B u t fro m here th e y m a n a g e d to effect th e ir escap e to
v arious o f th e c o a sta l isla n d s.159)
I f th e y o u th s th e m se lv e s fo u n d th e ir new s ta tu s so u n p le a s a n t as
to a tte m p t to escap e it, th e ir p a re n ts also o fte n fo u n d th e p ro sp e c t
u n p le a sa n t. O ne o f th e d o c u m e n ts te stifie s t h a t th e v illag ers a id e d th e
y o u th s in th e ir a tte m p t to escape. A n o th e r re la te s t h a t th e C h ristian s
o f M eki in th e d is tr ic t o f Sis to o k th e sev en y o u th s lev ied in th e ir
lo cality to a C h ristia n ch u rc h a n d p e rfo rm e d a religious serv ice on th e ir
b eh alf, m u c h to th e d isp leasu re o f th e O tto m a n officials.16016) A firm an
ad d re sse d to th e beğ lerb eğ o f R u m e li fo r th e p u rp o se o f co llecting
c h ild ren in 1601 p ro v id e d th e officials w ith s te rn m easu res o f en fo rce­
m e n t, a fa c t w hich w o u ld seem to su g g est t h a t p a re n ts w ere n o t alw ay s
d isp osed to p a r t w ith th e ir sons.
“ K n o w , a lso , t h a t th e m ü b a şir s e n t . . . sh a ll h a v e th e r ig h t, w h en ev e r
n e c e s s ity m ig h t a r ise, t o en force th e c o m m a n d o f th e k n o w n a n d h o ly f e tv a o f
th e Ş e y h u l-Isla m . I n a cco r d a n ce w it h t h is w h en ev e r so m e o n e o f th e in fid el
p a r e n ts or so m e o th e r sh o u ld o p p o se th e g iv in g u p o f h is so n for th e J a n issa rie s,
h e is im m e d ia te ly h a n g ed fro m h is d o o r -sill, h is b lo o d b e in g d e e m ed u n ­
w o r t h y / ' 1β1)

I t is obvious t h a t th e O tto m a n officials on occasion w ere re q u ire d to

re s o rt to v io le n t m e a su re s in o rd e r to en fo rce th e ta x .
T h e C h ristia n s re s o rte d to v a rio u s m easu res, a sid e fro m p ro m o tin g
th e escape o f y o u th s a lre a d y collected, in o rd e r to a v o id th e d ev sh irm e.
T h e re w ere e v e n a p p e a ls to th e L a tin C h ristia n s o f th e W e st in w h ich
th e C h ristian s a p p e a le d for th e ir a id so t h a t th e ir sons w o u ld b e saved
fro m becom ing M uslim s. I n 1456 G reeks in h a b itin g th e w e ste rn sh o res
o f A n a to lia a p p e a le d to th e K n ig h ts H o sp ita le rs o f R h o d es.
“ W e, y o u r p o o r sla v e s . . . w h o d o d w ell in T u r k e y . . . in fo rm y o u r lo rd sh ip
t h a t w e are h e a v ily v e x e d b y th e T u rk , a n d t h a t t h e y ta k e a w a y our ch ild ren
a n d m a k e M u slim s o f th e m . . . F o r th is r ea so n w e b e se e ch y o u r lo rd sh ip to
ta k e c o u n c il t h a t t h e m o s t h o ly p o p e m ig h t se n d h is sh ip s t o ta k e u s a n d our
w iv e s a n d c h ild re n a w a y from h ere, for w e are su fferin g g r e a tly fro m th e T urk.

159) U zunçarşili, K a p . O cak., I , 127. O rd ers to th e c a d i o f Y e n işe h ir (1560)

a n d to th e b e g ler b e g o f D iy a r b e k ir (1573) lik e w is e record th e e sc a p e o f d e v sh ir -
m e s, U z u n ç a r şili, K a p . O cak., I , 125, 127. S o m e o f th e m ore fa m o u s a c c o u n ts o f
th e s y s te m w ere w r itte n b y y o u th s w h o h a d e sc a p e d it a fter h a v in g se r v e d in it
fo r a n u m b er o f y e a rs. P er h a p s th e m o s t fa m o u s o f th e se w a s th e I t a lia n M ena-
v in o w h o a t th e a g e o f tw e lv e w a s c a p tu r e d b y corsairs a n d p u t in th e sc h o o l o f
p a g e s a n d la te r m a d e h is e sca p e.
16°) U zunçarşili, K a p . O cak., I , 126.
161) B asdrabelles , op. e it., 4.
X II
248

(D o th is) le s t w e lo se our ch ild re n , a n d le t u s c o m e to y o u r d o m a in s to liv e and

d ie th e r e as y o u r su b je cts. B u t i f y o u le a v e u s h ere w e sh a ll lo se our ch ild re n
a n d y o u sh a ll a n sw er t o G od for i t / ' 162)

A sim ilar le tte r o f one c e n tu ry la te r h a s also su rv iv ed . I t w as w ritte n

in F e b ru a ry 1581, a n d s e n t b y th e G reek a n d A lb a n ia n in h a b ita n ts
o f th e d is tric t o f C h im ara to P o p e G regory X I I I . T h e y a p p e a le d to th e
P o p e to in te rv e n e on th e ir b e h a lf w ith K in g P h ilip o f S p ain to com e
a n d free th e m .
“M o st h o ly fa th e r, i f y o u p er su a d e h im (P h ilip ), y o u sh a ll s a v e u s a n d our
c h ild re n , o f a ll G recia, w h ere t h e im p io u s o n e s ta k e th e m d a ily (our ch ild ren )
a n d m a k e T u rk s o f t h e m . . . ” 163)

A p p eals to w e ste rn pow ers to sav e th e m fro m p a y m e n t o f th e ch ild

ta x w ere c e rta in ly d ra m a tic , b u t th e y w ere n o t as im p o r ta n t o r as
fre q u e n t as som e o f th e less se n sa tio n a l p ra c tic ie s to w hich th e C h ristia n s
h a d reco u rse to sav e th e ir ch ildren. C o n te m p o ra ry o b serv ers re c o rd e d
som e o f th e se p ra c tic e s, th e one m o st o fte n m e n tio n e d b ein g th e
p ra c tic e o f p a y in g sum s o f m o n e y to th e g o v e rn m e n t officials. T h o m as
S m ith , w ritin g in 1680, re m a rk e d :
“ S o m e o f th e ir p a r e n ts, o u t o f n a tu ra l p ie t y a n d o u t o f a tru e se n se o f r e li­
g io n , t h a t t h e y m a y n o t b e t h u s ro b b ed o f th e ir ch ild ren , w h o h e r eb y lie u n d er
a n e c e s s ity o f ren o u n c in g th e ir C h ristia n ity , c o m p o u n d for th e m a t th e r a te o f
f ifty or a h u n d red d o lla rs, a s t h e y are a b le, or a s t h e y c a n w o rk u p o n th e c o v e ­
to u s n e ss o f th e T u rk m o re or l e s s / ' 164)

T h e sam e p ra c tic e is re c o rd e d one c e n tu ry earlie r, in 1581, in a w o rk

w r itte n b y D a v id C h y tra e u s.165) S te p h a n G erlach n o te d th e p ra c tic e o f
ch ild m a rria g e as a n artific e b y w h ich p a r e n ts so u g h t to sav e th e ir
sons fro m th e t a x .166) T h e G reek cleric M e tro p h a n e s C rito p o u lo s, w ho
w as p a tr ia r c h first o f C o n sta n tin o p le a n d la te r o f A le x a n d ria in th e

162) V ryonis , loc. c it., 442.

163) A T h ein er a n d F . M ik lo sic h , M o n u m en ta sp e c ta n tia a d u n io n em ecclesia-
ru m graecae et ro m an ae (V ien n a , 1872), p . 89. T h e d o c u m e n t w a s sig n e d b y th e
r e p r e se n ta tiv e s o f t h ir ty -e ig h t v illa g e s in C h im ara.
164) Q u o te d from T . A rnold , op. c it., p . 152.
165) D . Chytraeus , W a s zu d ieser Z e it in G riech en lan d, A s ie n , A f r ik a u n ter
d er T ü rc k e n u n d P r ie s te r J o h a n s H errsch aften , I te m in U n gern u n d B eh m en , etc.
d er C h ristlich en K irc h e n zu sta n d S e i , (1581), i— ii. S u ch is also th e in fo r m a tio n
su p p lie d b y G u ille t d e S a in t-G eo rg es, A n A cco u n t of a L a te V oyage to A th e n s
(L o n d o n , 1676), p . 272. I t se e m s a s i f th e a u th o r h a d n o t b e e n t o G reece, b u t
t h a t h is in fo r m a tio n w a s b a s e d o n rep orts o f th e C a p u ch in s. T h u s h is d r a m a tic
a c c o u n t o f th e s la y in g o f t h e A th e n ia n y o u t h a t th e h a n d s o f th e d e v sh ir m e
o fficia ls, for h a v in g r efu sed t o c o n v e r t t o I s la m , is n o t t o b e ta k e n se r io u sly .
166) S. Gerlach , T a g e-B u ch (F ra n k fu rt, 1674), p . 314.
 kSoljuU Gillums and Ottoman Dovshirmos 249

first h a lf o f th e s e v e n te e n th c e n tu ry , m e n tio n s tw o in te re stin g s tra te -

gem s, to w hich th e C h ristia n s re so rte d . C h ristian s on occasion ‘p u r ­
c h a se d ’ M uslim b o y s a n d re p re se n te d th e m to th e d e v sh irm e officials
as C h ristian s, a n d also th e y b rib e d th e m to ta k e less d eserv in g C h ristian
boys, “ su ch as d e se rv e d h a n g in g .” 167) I n som e b o rd e r regions th e
C h ristian s seem to h a v e re so rte d to m ig ra tio n in o rd e r to flee th e
d e v sh irm e .168)
T h ere is ev en e v id en ce t h a t on occasion th e C h ristia n s p re fe rred
reb ellion a n d d e a th to th e h a n d in g o v er o f th e ir ch ild ren to th e
s u lta n ’s ag en ts. A n in sta n c e o f th is ty p e is reco rd ed in th re e d o c u m e n ts
fro m th e cadi re g iste rs o f th e G reek c ity o f N a o u sa in th e y e a r 1705.
T h ese d eal w ith th e a tte m p t o f a n official to re c ru it fifty y o u th s from
N ao u sa, th e refu sal o f th e C h ristia n s to give u p th e ch ild ren , th e ir
reb ellion, th e b lo o d y su p p ressio n o f th e rebellio n , th e tria l o f th e
C h ristian s, a n d finally th e re is in c lu d e d a d e ta ile d fin an cial a c c o u n t
o f th e m o n ey a n d pro v isio n s e x p e n d e d b y th e g o v e rn m e n t in co n n ec­
tio n w ith th is affair. A s th e se d o c u m e n ts a re o f co n sid erab le in te re s t
fro m th e p o in t o f view o f th e C h ristia n ’s a ttitu d e to w a rd th e d ev sh irm e
th e first tw o are tr a n s la te d h ere in th e ir e n tire ty .

N o . 139
“ T o th e m o s t w ise c a d is o f B e ro ia a n d N a o u sa , m a y G od in c re a se th e ir
w isd o m ; t o th e p o w er fu l v o e v o d e s a n d rem a in in g n o ta b le s a n d p o te n ta te s o f
th e la n d , m a y G od in crea se th e ir str e n g th .
B y m y p r e se n t e x a lte d c o m m a n d I b r in g to y o u r a tte n tio n t h a t our su b lim e
ru ler, th e m o s t p o w er fu l s u lta n a n d g r e a t c a lip h o f th e fa ith fu l, h a d c o m m a n d e d
b y h is p r e v io u s e le v a te d firm an th e ra p id c o lle c tio n a n d r em issio n o f th e n e w
J a n issa rie s w h o , a s is k n o w n , are c u sto m a r ily c h o se n from a m o n g s t th e b r ig h t
a n d stu r d y y o u th s o f th e in fid el r a y a s. T h u s, in o b e d ie n c e t o th e c o m m a n d s o f
o f our su b lim e c a lip h w e a p p o in te d a n d im m e d ia te ly d isp a tc h e d t o th e d is tr ic t
o f N a o u sa th e silih d a r A h m ed Ç eleb i w ith th e order to e ffe c t th e se le c tio n a n d
e n r o llm en t o f f ifty n e w J a n iss a r ie s a c co r d in g t o th e v a lid a n c ie n t c u sto m . A s is
k n o w n th e sa id s ilih d a r h a d p r e v io u sly g o n e t o th e c it y o f N a o u s a t o e x e c u te
t h is e x a lte d c o m m a n d a n d h a d u n d e rta k en t h e e n r o llm en t o f th e n e w J a n is s a ­
r ies. A t t h a t tim e t h e in fid el in h a b ita n ts o f t h e s a id c it y r eb ellin g a n d s a y in g ,
“ W e are n o t g iv in g u p our so n s t o th e M u s lim s /' th e n d ared to m u rd er in p u b lic
a n d in th e m id s t o f t h e su lta n 's road th e silih d a r a n d th e tw o M u slim s a c c o m ­
p a n y in g h im . F in a lly th e s e in fid el m u rd erers, fo r m in g a b a n d o f o n e h u n d red
a n d m o re e v il d o ers w it h th e a r m a to lo s Z eses K a ra d em o s a n d h is tw o so n s in
ch a rg e, r a ised t h e b a n n e r o f reb ellio n . N o w r o a m in g th e m o u n ta in s a n d p la in s
o f th e d is tr ic ts o f B e r o ia a n d N a o u sa t h e y h a v e p e r p e tra te d a n d c o n tin u e to

167) Q u o te d fr o m T . Arnold, o p . c it., p . 151.

168) J . Cvijiô, L a p é n in su le b a lk a n iq u e , géograph ie h u m a in e (P a ris, 1918),
p p . 129— 130. H e reco rd s th e sto r y o f th e fa m ily o f L u sch a n th e c eleb ra te d
a n th r o p o lo g is t.
XII
250

p e r p e tra te c o u n tle ss e v ils , t h a t is to s a y m u rd ers a n d rob b eries, a t th e e x p e n se

o f th e M u slim fa ith fu l. B e c a u se o f th is w e order a n d d ecree t h a t im m e d ia te ly
u p o n a rriv a l o f our p r e se n t e x a lte d order t h a t th e r e b e form ed a s ig n ific a n t
fo rce o f su ffic ien t b ra v e w a rriou s, to b e r ec ru ite d from a m o n g s t th e M u slim in ­
h a b ita n ts o f B ero ia , u n d er th e lea d er sh ip o f th e v o e v o d M uharrem A ğ a a n d o f
th e b u lu k b a şı B e c e b A ğ a . T h e y are ord ered t o p u rsu e in e x o r a b ly a n d to a n n ih i­
la te fro m th e fa ce o f th e e a r th th e s e in fid el b r ig a n d s. W e r em in d y o u t h a t th e
a rrest a n d e x e c u tio n o f th e s e in fid el m u rd erers, w h o d ared to s p ill th e b lo o d o f
a M u slim in th e m id st o f th e su lta n 's ro a d , c o n s titu te a n in v io la b le o b lig a tio n
a n d a h o ly d u ty for e v e r y M u slim a c co r d in g t o t h e c o m m a n d s o f th e şe r ia a n d
in th e p r esen ce o f our G o d -se n t p r o p h et.
W r itte n in th e su b lim e d iv a n o f th e b e ğ ler b e ğ o f R u m e li in S ela n ik , first o f
th e h o ly m o n th o f M uharrem 1117 (25. A p ril, 1 7 0 5 ).” 169}

N o . 140
“ T o th e m o s t illu str io u s a n d m o s t g lo rio u s b e ğ ler b e ğ o f a ll R u m e li in S e la n ik .
A s y o u h a p p e n t o k n o w , th e in fid el a n d a b o m in a b le in h a b ita n ts o f th e c it y
o f N a o u sa , h a v in g refu sed t o g iv e u p th e ir so n s a d ju d g e d su ita b le for J a n is s a ­
r ie s d u rin g th e p r e se n t y e a r, d a red s o m e tim e a g o t o m u rd er A h m ed Ç eleb i, w h o
h a d g o n e to th e ir c it y to r ec ru it th e J a n issa rie s a lo n g w ith h is tw o M u slim
a s s is ta n ts , in p u b lic a n d in th e m id d le o f th e s u lta n 's road . F in a lly r a isin g th e
b a n n er o f reb ellio n a n d r e v o lu tio n t h e y fo rm ed a b a n d o f o n e h u n d red a n d m ore
in fid el b rig a n d s u n d er t h e lea d er sh ip o f th e a b o m in a b le Z eses K a ra d em o s an d
h is tw o so n s B a s il a n d D e m e tr io s. R o a m in g th e m o u n ta in s a n d p la in s o f th e
d is tr ic ts o f B e ro ia a n d N a o u s a from t h a t tim e , t h e s e b r ig a n d s h a v e p e r p e tu a te d
c o u n tle ss e v il d e e d s, t h a t is t o s a y m u rd ers a n d ro b b eries, a t th e e x p e n se o f
m a n y M u slim fa ith fu l. T h u s a sh o rt tim e a g o b y e x a lte d c o m m a n d o f th e b eğ ler-
b e ğ 's d iv a n th e v o e v o d e M u h arrem A ğ a a n d th e b u lu k b a şı R e c e b A ğ a o f B e ro ia
o r g a n ize d su ffic ien t force o f s e le c t a n d w a rlik e m e n , M u slim fa ith fu l o f ou r
d is tr ic t, a n d im m e d ia te ly u n d e rto o k th e u n re len tin g p u r s u it o f th e sa id in fid el
b rig a n d s. T h ese, c a rry in g o u t fa ith fu lly a n d w ith d e v o tio n th e ir sa cred d u ty ,
a n d fro m t h a t t im e p u rsu in g c lo s e ly th e in fid e l b r ig a n d s, t h e y su c c e e d e d , g lo ry
to a ll-p o w erfu l G od , in su rr o u n d in g th e m a fe w d a y s a g o in th e n arrow s o f th e
r iv e r A r a p itsa w h ic h flo w s b y N a o u sa . T h ere, a fter a h e a v y a n d r a g in g b a t t le
t h e y d e fe a te d a n d r o u te d th e m . D u rin g th e cou rse o f t h is b a ttle th e in fid el
c h ie fta in o f th e b r ig a n d b a n d Z eses K a ra d em o s h a v in g b e e n str u c k b y fo u r
b u lle ts in th e v a r io u s p a r ts o f h is b o d y g a v e u p h is u n c le a n so u l o n th e s p o t to
sa ta n . H is tw o so n s B a s il a n d D e m e tr io s, w ith s ix o th e r b rig a n d s, w ere c a p tu r e d
a n d b r o u g h t b a c k a liv e t o y o u r sacred c o u r t t o b e ju d g e d a n d p u n ish e d a c co r d ­
in g to th e c o m m a n d s o f th e G o d -p r o te cte d şeria.
A fte r t h is w e im m e d ia te ly su m m o n e d h ere t h e m o s t w ise c a d i o f N a o u sa
H a lil E ffe n d i, th e v o e v o d e s a n d rem a in in g n o ta b le s a n d p o te n ta te s o f th e la n d ,
a n d in th e ir p r esen ce a n d p u b lic ly to d a y w e su m m o n e d a sp ec ia l ju d ic ia r y
b o a rd b efo re w h ic h th e a p p re h e n d ed e v il-d o in g b r ig a n d s w ere b r o u g h t in b o n d s.
T h e se , h a v in g b e e n a sk e d o n e b y on e, d ared in p u b lic a n d w ith in th e h e a r in g o f
th e a u g u st a ss e m b ly t o p r o c la im w ith th e ir u n cle a n lip s th e im p io u s p h ra se,
“ W e are tr u ly a r m a to lo i a n d w e p r o c la im our th o u g h t s .“

169) B asdrabelles, op. c it., p p . 112— 113.

 Boljıık GuIurriH and O ttom an D evshirm es 251

T h u s assu red t h a t th o a p p re h e n d ed are th e a c tu a l e v il-d o e r s w h o u p to th e

p r e se n t p e r p e tra te d c o u n tle ss e v il d e e d s a t th e e x p e n se o f so m a n y M u slim
fa ith fu l, a n d ju d g in g th e m in a cco r d a n ce w it h th e h o ly m a x im o f ou r G o d -se n t
p ro p h et, “ k ill th o in fid e ls w h o o p p o s e /' w e c o n d e m n e d th e m all t o d ie b y h a n g ­
in g. W e tu r n e d th e m o v e r to th e v o e v o d e M uharrem A ğ a , w h o w a s p r e se n t a t
th o a ssem b ly , w h o g a v e th e order a n d th e im p o se d d e a th p e n a lty w a s carried
o u t. N
A fterw a rd th e b u lu k b a şı R e c e b A ğ a w a s ord ered to c u t o ff th e h e a d s o f th e
in fid els Z eses K a ra d em o s a n d o f h is tw o so n s a n d to p a ra d e th e m a lo n g th e
su lta n 's ro a d in t h e c it y . H e w a s a lso ord ered a fter th is to se n d th e s e to th e
e le v a te d d iv a n o f S ela n ik .
W r itte n o n th e 2 8 th o f th e sacred m o n th o f S afer, 1117 (21 J u n e , 1 7 0 5 )." 170)

T h e th ir d d o c u m e n t is a d e ta ile d a n d ite m iz e d a c c o u n t fo r all th e m o n e y

s p e n t fro m th e tim e th e silih d a r A h m ed Çelebi first w e n t to N a o u sa to
co llect th e d e v sh irm e u n til th e 800 M uslim s w ere re c ru ite d to p u t d o w n
th e risin g .171)
T his series o f th re e d o c u m e n ts offers considerab le in te re s tin g d e ta il
o n th e h is to ry o f th e d ev sh irm e. F ir s t o f all o ne sh o u ld n o te th e
c o m p a ra tiv e ly la te d a te , 1705. I t h a s b e e n th e p ra c tic e to d a te th e
e n d o f th e d e v sh irm e a t v a rio u s p o in ts th ro u g h o u t th e s e v e n te e n th
c e n tu ry .172) S econdly, th e in c id e n t d e m o n s tra te s m o st d ra m a tic a lly
t h a t n o m a tte r how a ttr a c tiv e th e c a reers w hich m ig h t o p en u p fo r
th e ir ch ild ren , th e C h ristia n s o f N a o u sa d id n o t con sid er th e a ttr a c tio n
su fficien t to e n a b le th e m to p a r t w ith th e ir sons p eacefu lly . A s th e
n u m b e r o f c h ild re n to b e re c ru ite d w as n o t in co n sid erab le (fifty), th e
r e a c tio n o f th e in h a b ita n ts o f N a o u sa w as v io le n t. T h e in su b o rd in a tio n
to a n d slay in g o f g o v e rn m e n t officials in p u b lic w ere c e rta in ly th e
a c ts o f m e n w ho co n sid ered th e m se lv e s to b e c a u g h t u p in a d e sp e ra te
s itu a tio n . R a th e r th a n give u p th e ir c h ild re n w ith o u t p ro te s t, th e y
chose to die in b a ttle . T h e reb els, as th e y w ere a rm e d a rm a to lo i, w ere
in a p o sitio n to ‘p ro c la im th e ir th o u g h ts .’ F o r i t w as th e se a rm a to lo i,
a rm e d C h ristia n s, w ho w ere resp o n sib le fo r p a tro llin g th e c o u n try sid e
a g a in s t b a n d its , a n d w ho o n occasion w ere o ne a n d th e sa m e w ith th e
‘b a n d its .’ I t m a y e v e n b e t h a t as a rm a to lo i th e y fe lt th e m se lv e s e n title d
to e x e m p tio n fro m th e d ev sh irm e. W e h a v e a lre a d y n o te d th e g ra n tin g
o f e x e m p tio n to sim ilar bodies o f m e n , th e d e rb e n tc is, in G reek a n d
B u lg a ria n lan d s.

170) B asdrabelles, o p . cit.y 113— 114.

171) B asdrabelles, o p . c it., p . 115.
172) U zunçarşili? K a p . O ca k .y I , 66ff. notes evidence for its partial survival
d o w n t o t h e e a r ly y e a r s o f th e n in e te e n th century.
X II
252

SUMMARY

The conclusions of this study are the following. A well-developed

slave system of governmental and military organization was in existence
during the period o f the Seljuk state in Anatolia. The Seljuks brought
this traditional Islamic slave system w ith, them when they entered the
Anatolian peninsula. During the course o f their existence as a state,
the Seljuks found ample sources o f slave personnel amongst the
Christians and Turkmens within their domains and also from the
prisoners taken in their wars against the various Christian states in
Asia Minor. These gulams played an extrem ely important role in the
society and politics o f pre-Ottoman Anatolia. The Ottomans, as one
o f the many successor states to the Seljuks in Anatolia, remained true
to the Islamic tradition o f utilizing slaves in the government and in
the military. Generally speaking, then, the palace system and Janissary
corps of the Ottomans were not innovations in the institutional history
o f the Islamic states and empires. Nor should one be surprised that
the candidates for the system were taken in Ottoman Anatolia as well
as in the Balkans. The Seljuks had previously found the major source
o f their slave manpower in Anatolia, and so the Ottomans likewise
levied candidates for the palace service and the Janissary corps from
Anatolia. These devshirmes in Anatolia were levied not only from the
Greek, but also from the Armenian rayas, and even on occasion from
the Laze population. On the other hand it is true that the major
source of this manpower was the Balkan peninsula. Finally it seems
highly probable that the Christian subjects quite often found this tax
on their children the m ost onerous of all their burdens. There is ample
testim ony to this fact not only in the Greek sources and western
observers, but above all in the Ottoman documents them selves.173)

173 ) F 0r fu r th e r b ib lio g r a p h y sin c e th is p a p er w a s s u b m itte d t o D e r I s la m ,

c o n s u lt, V . M én a ge, “ D e v s h ir m e ,” E I 2; B . D . P a p o u lia , U r sp ru n g u n d W esen
d er „ K n a b e n le se “ im osm a n isch en R eich (M unich, 1963), a n d m y r e v ie w in
B a lk a n S tu d ie s , V (1 9 6 4 ), 145— 153.
 X III

ISID O R E G LA BA S AND T H E T U R K ISH D EV SH İR M E

INTRO DUCTIO N 1

O n e of the m ost im p o rtan t and interesting problems which the historian faces
when dealing w ith the rise of the O ttom an Em pire is the origin of the tw in in­
stitutions of the Janissaries and of the trib u te children or devshirme. Though
the use of slaves as a m ilitary and ruling caste was certainly n o t w ithout prec­
edent, the mode of their recruitm ent, through the devshirme, seems to have
been unique .2 T he dates given by historians for the founding of the Janissaries
and of the institution of the devshirme have varied widely: in the case of the
Janissaries from the reign of O rkhan (1326-59) to th a t of M u rad I I (1421-51),
an d in the case of the devshirme from the reign of O rkhan to th a t of M oham m ed
I I (1451-81). These wide chronological lim its cover th a t period during which the
O ttom ans m ade the transition from a “ G hazi” state to an empire. T hus, a more
exact establishm ent of the chronology of the institutional developm ent during
this period would be significant for the history of the “rise of th e O ttom an
E m pire,” as well as for the actual institutional development.
H istorians who have worked on this particular problem, from the tim e of von
H am m er to the present, have largely draw n their conclusions from four groups
of sources: ( 1 ) the early T urkish chroniclers U ruj (1460-70), A siqpasazade
( fl . 1490), and the so-called Anonymous Giese ( fl . 1490) ;3 (2 ) the T urkish
1 1 sh o u ld lik e to exp ress h ere m y a p p recia tio n to P rofessor R o b e r t L . W olff, m y tea ch er, an d a lso
to m y frien d , G eorge S o u lis of D u m b a rto n O aks, w h o first called m y a tt e n tio n to th e p u b lic a tio n o f th e
t e x t of I sid o re G la b a s’ serm o n . I sh ou ld also lik e to th a n k P rofesso r M a riu s C anard of th e U n iv e r sity
o f A lg iers, w h o w as v is itin g D u m b a rto n O aks in th e fa ll of 1954, for h is e x p e r t a d v ic e on B y za n tin o -
Isla m ic m a tte rs.
2 T u rk ish s la v e s w ere u sed as so ld iers in A b a ssid B a g h d a d an d a lso in A y y u b id C airo. T h e T o u rk o -
p o u lo i of th e B y z a n tin e a rm y w ere T u rk ish ch ild ren w h o w ere ra ised in th e te n e ts of C h ristia n ity ,
a n d tr a in e d to fig h t in a sp ecial corp s u n d er th eir o w n officers. F o r a co m p a riso n of th e T o u rk o p o u lo i
a n d th e J a n issa ries s e e C . P ap arrigop ou los, ‘Ιστορία του'ΈλΧηρι,κου’Έθρους, V (A th en s, 19 2 5 ), 1 7 9 -1 8 5 .
8 F o r a d isc u ssio n o f th e s e sou rces s e e J. P a lm er, “ T h e O rigin of th e J a n issa rie s,” B ulletin of the
John R ylands Library , h erea fte r B .J .R .L . , x x x v , 2 (1 9 3 5 ), 4 4 8 -4 4 9 an d pa ssim ; a ls o F . B a b in g er,
D ie Geschichtsschreiber der Osmanen und ihre W erke (L eip zig , 1927), r ele v a n t se c tio n s. E n g lish tr a n s­
la tio n s of th e r e le v a n t s ec tio n s of U ruj an d A sik p a sa za d e are to b e fou nd in P a lm er, loc. c i t p p . 4 0 0 -
4 61.

433
434 Isid o re G la b a s a n d the T u r k is h D e v s h irm e

historians of the golden age (sixteenth and seventeenth centuries), such as

Sa’d ad-D in and ’Ali, who relied very much on the work of Idris al-Bitlisi (fl.
1500-10) ;4* (3) the B yzantine historians D ucas (fl. 1462), Chalcocondyles (fl.
1480), and Sphrantzes (fl. 1478) ;6 (4) contem porary W estern sources, p articu ­
larly Bartholom aeus de Jano (fl. 1438) and Georgius de H ungaria (fl. 1475-
80).6
Von H am m er, relying on the T urkish historians of th e golden age, passed on
their view th a t the devshirme and the Janissaries were in stitu ted under O rkhan
by K ara H alil C handarly .7 H e implied th a t this new corps, the Janissaries, was
a t first composed of prisoners of war, and th a t when there were n o t enough of
them , C hristian children were taken. H e did not, however, clarify the relation­
ship betw een the Janissaries and the devshirme. On the question of th e institution
of the Janissaries H am m er seems to have been generally negligent. H e failed to
notice the discrepancy between the later historians of the golden age, who placed
th e form ation of the Janissaries in the reign of O rkhan, and the earlier T urkish
chroniclers such as A siqpasazade, who placed the event in the reign of M urad
I .8
In 1912 M ordtm ann m ade the first serious revision of this traditional opinion.
H e shifted the institution of the devshirme from th e reign of O rkhan to th a t of
M u rad I I (1431-51), basing his observations on the evidence of the contem ­
porary W estern observer, B artholom aeus de Jan o .9
The first really significant and successful refutation of the traditionally ac­
cepted account of the Janissaries was th a t of Giese in 1922. Giese was app aren tly
th e first to notice the discrepancies between the account given by the T urkish
historians of the golden age and th a t given by the earlier A siqpasazade. On the
basis of A siqpasazade and N esri he ascribed the institu tio n of the Janissaries to
the reign of M urad I. H e accepted the evidence of B artholom aeus de Jano in
fixing the date of the devshirme a t 1438.10
T hus the established chronology of the institutions was the following: the
Janissaries were established in the reign of M urad I (1359-89), and th e dev-
sliirme was instituted in 1438 in the reign of M urad II.
4 F o r th e T u rk ish h istorian s of th e g o ld e n age s e e th e r ele v a n t s ec tio n s in B a b in g er, op. cii. F o r th eir
r ela tio n sh ip to Id ris a l-B itlisi a n d for th e la tt e r ’s im p o rta n ce in th e w h o le p roblem o f th e in s titu tio n
o f th e J an issaries s ee P alm er, loc. cit.
6 F o r th e im p o rta n ce of th e s e th r e e B y z a n tin e h isto ria n s on ea rly O tto m a n h isto r y s e e th e r ele v a n t
s ec tio n s in G . M o ra v csik , Byzantinoturcica , i (B u d a p e st, 1942).
6 C o n su lt P alm er, loc. cit.. passim , o n B a rth o lo m a eu s d e J a n o a n d G eo rg iu s d e H u n g a ria . S e e a lso
P a lm er, “ F r. G eorgiu s d e H u n g a ria , O .P ., a n d th e ‘T r a c ta tu s d e M o rib u s C o n d icio n ib u s e t N e q u ic ia
T u rco ru m ’, ” J .R .L .B . , x x x i v (1 9 5 1 ), 4 4 -6 8 .
7 K a ra H a lil C h an d arly w as K adiasker o f th e O tto m a n a rm ies in th e reig n o f M u ra d I . F o r th e
h is to r y of th e C h an d arly fa m ily s e e F . T a esc lin e r an d P . W ittek , “ D ie V ezirfam ilie d er Ğ a n d a rly za d e
(1 4 /1 5 J h d t.) u n d ih re D e n k m ä ler ,” Der Islam , x v i i i (1 9 2 9 ), 6 0 -1 1 5 . A lso , “ C en d ereli,” Encyclo­
paedia of Islam , h ereafter E .I ., i, 833.
6 V on H a m m er, Geschichte des osmanischen Reiches , i (P e s th , 1827), 90, 176, 5 81, 592.
9 J. M o rd tm a n n , “ D e w sh ir m e ,” E .I ., i, 9 5 2 -9 5 3 .
10 F . G iese, “ D a s P roblem d er E n ts te h u n g d es osm an isch en R e ic h e s ,” Zeitschrift fü r Sem itistik , ιι
(1 9 2 4 ), 2 4 6 -2 4 7 .
 Isid o re (U ahas a n d the T u rk ish D e v s h irm e 435

THE SERMON OF ISIDORE GLABAS

In 1954 there appeared a hitherto unpublished docum ent which threw new
light on the problem. T his docum ent is a sermon of Isidore G labas, m etropolitan
of Thessaloniki from 1380 to 1396.11 T he sermon is dated 1395, preserved in a
m anuscript of the early fifteenth century, and is entitled “H is sermon concerning
the carrying off of the children, by the decree of the emir, and concerning the
Coming Judgm ent, delivered on the first Sunday of the F a sts .” 12 This docum ent,
Ms. gr. Paris. 1192, f. 320v., had been noted by others in th e p a s t .13 B u t inas­
m uch as this sermon of Isidore rem ained unpublished, until its edition by Laour-
das in 1954, none of the scholars working on the early T urkish institutions m ade
use of it.
T here seems to be no reason to doubt the authenticity of the date, 28 F eb ru ­
ary 1395, ascribed to th e sermon in the codex. This particu lar sermon is pre­
ceded by two others dated O ctober 1393 and is the last of Isidore’s sermons to
appear in this codex. All who have dealt w ith the sermon have accepted this
dating as authentic. B u t the problem of authorship has raised some difficulty.
T he codex a ttrib u te s it to Isidore G labas. B u t E h rh ard a ttrib u te d it, w ith
the two sermons which precede it, to Isidore’s successor as archbishop, Gabriel.
E h rh ard argued th a t Gabriel first occupied the m etropolitan throne of T hes­
saloniki in 1393; therefore our sermon, d ated 28 F ebruary, 1395, should be a t­
trib u ted to Gabriel ra th e r th an to Isidore .14
In thus dating G abriel’s accession as archbishop of Thessaloniki in 1393,
E h rh ard was following L. P e tit and D ocum ent f X l in M eyer’s Haupturkunden
für die Geschichte der Athosklöster,151 6B u t P e tit and E h rh ard failed to notice th a t
D ocum ent #XI actually consisted of tw o distinct and separate docum ents of
two different dates. T he first docum ent is entitled “L etter of his Holiness the
Oecumenical P a tria rc h and of the H oly Synod to the m onks of M o u n t A thos.”
I t is a patriarchal letter addressed to the m onks of Athos, which introduces two
imperial and patriarchal envoys, Gabriel, the m etropolitan of Thessaloniki, and
D aniel, the m etropolitan of Berrhoia. How ever, the docum ent gives neither the
nam e of the p atriarch nor the date. T he second letter in D ocum ent / X I is en­
titled “ Tomos and typos of the H oly M ountain and of the Protatos.” I t is an act

11 On Isid o re G lab as a n d h is serm on s s e e : B . L aou rd as, ’Ισιδώρου 'αρχιεπισκόπου Θεσσαλονίκης

όμιλίαι εις ras εορτας του ’Aylov Αημητρίου, T h e ssa lo n ik i, 1954, pp . 7 -8 3 . N . B ee s, “ Ai πασχάλιαι
h n y ραφαί του ‘Ayiov Αημητρίου Θεσσαλονίκης καί ό μητροπολίτης αυτής 'Ισίδωρος Τλαβας,” B yzan ti­
nisch-neugriechische Jahrbücher, ν π (1930), 1 4 0 -1 6 0 . R . L o en ertz, “ Isid o re G la b a s, M étro p o lite d e
T h e ssa lo n iq u e ,” Revue des Études Byzantines, i v (1 9 4 8 ), 1 8 1 -1 8 7 ; S. L am p ros, “ Ισιδώρου μητρο­
πολίτου Θεσσαλονίκης οκτώ έηστολαι άνεκδοται," Néos ‘Ε λληνομνημων, XI (1 9 1 2 ), 3 4 3 -4 1 4 .
12 B . L aou rd as, “ ’Ισιδώρου 'αρχιεπισκόπου Θεσσαλονίκης όμιλία,” Προσφορά els Στίλπωνα Π. Κυριακίδην,
T h essa lo n ik i, (1 9 5 4 ), ρ ρ . 3 8 9 -3 9 8 .
13 Η . Omont, Inventaire sommaire des m anuscrits grecs, i (P aris, 18 8 6 ), 2 5 9 -2 6 0 . S. L am p ros,
loc. cit., p. 351.
14 A . E h rh ard , Überlieferung und Bestand der hagiographischen und homiletischen Literatur der
griechische Kirche : in Texte und Untersuchungen zur Geschichte der altchristlichen Literatur, l ii (1 9 4 3 ),
711.
16 P h . M ey e r . D ie H aupturkunden fü r die Geschichte der Athosklöster (L eip zig , 1 8 9 4 ), pp . 1 9 5 -2 0 3
X III
430 I s id o r e G lo b a s a n d the T u r k is h D e v s h irm e

em anating from one or more im perial envoys acting in conjunction w ith the
notables of the H oly M ountain. T his letter, in co n trast to the first, is addressed
from M o u n t Athos ra th e r th a n from C onstantinople. I t is dated M ay 1394.16
T hus we have two distinct letters: the first, an u n d ated p atriarchal letter
addressed to the monks of A thos, and m entioning G abriel, the m etropolitan of
Thessaloniki ; the second, a la tte r d ated 1394 from A thos, which m akes no m en­
tion of G abriel. N o t realizing th a t D ocum ent # X I actually consisted of tw o sep­
arate letters, P e tit erroneously a ttrib u te d the date of th e second letter to th e
first letter, which m entions Gabriel. Hence, he concluded th a t by 1394 G abriel
was already m etropolitan. H e th a n selected 1393 as the date of G abriel’s acces­
sion as archbishop of Thessaloniki, w ithout giving any reason for so doing.
Following P e tit, E h rh ard accepted the year 1393 as th e beginning of G abriel’s
m etropolitan jurisdiction over Thessaloniki.
B u t a letter of the P atriarch A nthony IV (1389-97) proves th a t the m etro ­
politan throne of Thessaloniki was v acant as of 20 M arch 1397. In this la tte r
A nthony rebuked the Exarch N athaniel for attem p tin g to usurp the v acan t
throne of Thessaloniki. T hus Gabriel, as late as the year 1397, had n o t y et suc­
ceeded Glabas. Since the first le tte r of D ocum ent # X I nam es Gabriel m etro ­
p olitan of Thessaloniki, it follows th a t this docum ent is also posterior to M arch
1397.
Finally, Cod. Sinaiticus 141 (alias 869) furnishes specific dates for Isidore’s
life and d eath .17 According to this source, Isidore was born in 1342, becam e
archbishop of Thessaloniki in 1380, and died on 1 1 Jan u ary 1396.18 T here is no
reason for us to suppose th a t Isidore was rem oved from his m etropolitan seat
before his death in 1396. A fter his death in 1396, th e throne of Thessaloniki
rem ained vacant a t least until after 20 M arch 1397. D uring this interregnum
th e Exarch N athaniel directed th e ecclesiastical affairs of Thessaloniki.
I t follows th a t our docum ent, concerning the devshirme and dated 1395, is to
be a ttrib u te d to Isidore.
T he serm on is divided into three sections, of which the first is the m ost relevant
to our problem . A translation of this section follows.
What am I to say, and how am I to consider the magnitude of the present misfortune?
Helplessness has afflicted me from all sides, as if I found myself blocked at a crossroad.
I have heard the harsh decree concerning our dearest ones, and I shudder as one before
a fire too hot to approach, or as one facing an invincible swordsman. My voice is cut off
because the “folding up and lying down of the mouth,” as Saint Basil says, occurs
instantly. My lips turn to lamentation, my mind is veiled in a cloud of despondency, and
I am almost mad. My eyes are filled with tears and can no longer bear to see my beloved
ones.
What would a man not suffer were he to see a child, whom he had begotten and raised
. . . carried off by the hands of foreigners, suddenly and by force, and forced to change over
to alien customs and to become a vessel of barbaric garb, speech, impiety, and other con-

16 R . L o en er tz , loc. cit., 1 8 3 -1 8 5 .
17 Idem .y o n th e a u th e n tic ity of th is d o cu m en t.
18 N . B e e s , loc. cit.t p. 143.
 X III
I s id o r e O la b a s a n d th e T u r k is h D

laminations, all in a moment? Or wliat would happen, if this would suffice to make it clear
if a man were to find himself as if cut into two parts; and if he were to see the one dis­
membered section of his body, his son, become a substance of baseness and not used for
any good purpose; and to see the remaining section, himself that is, not only useless but
dead and full of lamentation and agony?
Which one shall the father lament, himself or his son? Shall he lament himself because
he has been deprived of the staff of his old age? Because the light of his eyes has perished?
Because he will not have his son to send him to his grave in fitting manner, and to per­
form the other rites and honors? Because he sees that seed which he hoped to offer to God
changed into an offering to the devil . . . ?
Or shall he lament his son because a free child becomes a slave? Because being nobly
born he is forced to adopt barbaric customs? Because he who was rendered so mild by
motherly and fatherly hands is about to be filled with barbaric cruelty? Because he who
attended matins in the churches and frequented the sacred teachers is now, alas! taught to
pass the night in murdering his own people and in other such things? Because he who was
appointed to serve the holy houses is now entrusted with the care of dogs and fowl? Because
he who was raised in many and pleasing occupations and services is now forced to endure
the freezing and scorching winds, and to cross rivers, mountains, precipices, and places
difficult of access? But the worst of all the evils is that, alas! he is shamefully separated
from God and has become miserably entangled with the devil, and in the end will be sent
to darkness and hell with the demons. Whose heart would these things not crush, who
would not be bent and broken in the face of such a misfortune? If he w^ere a wild beast,
or a stone, or iron, or steel itself, he would have suffered the pains .common to mankind.19
In the serm on of Isidore G labas we have a docum ent d ated 1395 in which
there is a clear reference to the collection of the child trib u te. A close exam ination
of the tex t reveals m any of the salient features of the devshirme as described by
later authors. F irst, there is reference to the collection of children by decree of
th e emir. B oth th e title of the serm on and the opening lines of the G reek tex t
contain references to the έπιταγμα, the decree .20 T hen Isidore goes on to describe
th e fate of the trib u te children .21 T hese free-born youths, as child-tribute and
fu tu re Janissaries, become slaves of the sultan. T hey are tak en aw ay by the
T u rk s and forced to a d o p t different Ιθη, barbaric clothes, barbaric speech,
barbaric im piety. T his refers, no doubt, to their period of training in Anatolia
on the estates of the T urkish spahis and other large land-owners, where th ey
acquired the rudim ents of the T urkish language and were instru cted in Islam .
As a fervent O rthodox cleric and Rhomaios, Isidore feels th a t this conversion to
Islam is th e w orst of all the evils involved, and he so com m ents upon it. Finally,
he depicts th e diabolical results of this institution. These youths, whose parents
h ad raised them as faithful O rthodox, an d who would have studied w ith the
holy teachers of the C hurch and would have served th e holy houses, are now
trained by th e T urks to kill their own people .22
In the funeral monody of Ibangos (a person otherwise unknow n) on Isidore
G labas, we are informed th a t the M etropolitan had on one occasion gone to

19 B . L aou rd as, loc. cit., pp . 8 9 0 -3 9 2 .

80 Ibid., p . 890, lin e s 1 -4 .
« Ibid., p. 890, lin es 15-18, 31-32; p. 392, lin es 8 - 1 1 .
** Ibid., p . 3 9 2 , lin e s 1 -8 .
438 Isid o r e G la b a s a n d the T u r k is h D e v s h irm e

Asia M inor, “ ώ των κινδύνων ofis ύπίρ αυτής kv Α σ ία κβκινδυνβυκβις” (“ You who have
risked dangers on behalf of your flock in Asia.” ) Ibangos speaks of the dangers
which Isidore had risked on behalf of Thessaloniki.23 T he encomium w ritten by
the Nomophylax John Eugenikos also refers to this aspect of Isidore’s life.
“κατά τον καλόν και πρώτον ποιμένα Χριστόν του ποιμνίου πάντα τρόπον πεφροντικότος
και μακρας όδοιπορίας ύπεν^κόντος . . . (‘Τη following the good example of C hrist,
the first Shepherd, you have shown great care for your flock and u ndertaken
long journeys on behalf of it.” )24 T his journey of Isidore to Asia M inor, m ade on
behalf of the citizens of Thessaloniki, perhaps had as an aim the redem ption of
captives taken by the T urks. T his journey to Asia M inor probably enabled
Isidore to get firsthand inform ation on the fate of th e trib u te children. This would
account for the detail and accuracy of his description of the “education” of these
children in Asia M inor.25
G labas’ sermon thus pushes back the date of the institu tio n of the devshirme
from 1438 a t least to the year 1395. We cannot tell, however, w hether G labas was
lam enting a new practice or an old one.
T he O ttom an historian Idris al-Bitlis (fl . 1500-10), in discussing the Janissaries,
indicated th a t the devshirme and th e Janissaries were in stitu ted sim ultaneously
in the last half of the fourteenth century under M urad I .26 Palm er m aintained
th a t this was simply an anachronism . Idris was a ttrib u tin g to the fourteenth
century a stitu atio n which prevailed in the beginning of the sixteenth century,
when Idris was composing his w ork.27 By the sixteenth century, of course, the
Janissary corps and th e devshirme were com plem entary. B u t the evidence from
G labas’ sermon, which shows th a t the devshirme existed a t least as early as
1395, tends to corroborate Idris and to refute Palm er.
F urtherm ore, the institution of the Janissaries has been fairly well linked w ith
K ara H alil C handarly, who was Kadiasker in the reign of M u rad I. T hus, if we
accept Id ris’ testim ony as to the sim ultaneous institutio n of b oth devshirme and
th e Janissaries, it would seem highly probable th a t C handarly also in stitu ted
th e devshirme. We know th a t his reform s generally were unpopular w ith th e
,
Ulema inasm uch as they transgressed the Sheria,28 N ow th e raising of the child
trib u te from the C hristian subjects, w ith the forced conversion to Islam , m ight
well have been one of those reform s which were contrary to the Sheria and there-

23 “ T o9 σοφωτάτου καί λογιωτάτου κυρου Ιβάγκου μονωδία b τϊ τώ άοώίμφ μητοποΧΙτχι κυρψ Ί<πδώ«*> τω
Γλα/3$, in Ε . L egran d , Lettres de Vempereur M anuel Palêologue (P a ris, 18 9 3 ), p . 107.
24 L eo A lla tiu s, De Symeonum S c n p tis (P a ris, 1 664), p. 187.
26 N . B e e s , loc. c it ., p. 154. F o r a n ex a m p le of th e ran som in g of p riso n ers from th e T u r k s in T h e s ­
sa lo n ik i b y th e c le rg y s e e S . K o u g e a s, “ N o tiz b u c h ein e s B e a m te n d er M etro p o lis in T h e ssa lo n ik e
a u s d em A n fa n g d es X V . J a h r h u n d e r ts,” Byzantinische Zeitschrift , x x iii (1 9 1 4 -1 9 ), 144.
2e T h is p articu lar p a ssa g e in Id ris w as in se rted in h is n a rra tiv e o f th e reig n of O rklian . P a lm e r
d e m o n str a te d th a t, th o u g h th is p a ssa g e w a s in serted in th e n a rra tiv e o f th e reign o f O rkhan , Id ris
d id n o t sp ecifica lly d a te th e e v e n t a s occu rrin g in th a t reign. T h e in sertio n h ere r a th er th a n in th e
reign o f M u ra d I w as d u e to I d r is’ m e th o d o f liter a r y c o m p o sitio n .
27 T h e r e le v a n t sec tio n s are to b e fo u n d in P alm er, loc. cit., 4 7 1 -4 7 3 .
28 “ C en d ereli,” E .I., l, 83 3 .
 Isid o re G ldiKis a n d the T u r k is h D e v s h irm e 439

fore not favored by the U lem a. Finally, there is no other Ottoman reformer or
statesman of the last half of the fourteenth century, of the status of Chandarly,
to whom one might attribute such an important innovation, and who would have
had prestige enough to put it into effect.29
That the devshirm e was the really novel aspect which differentiated this body
of slave-soldiers from other suc}i bodies is asserted by a number of historians.
The reasons for the creation of the child tribute are not at all certain. Scholars
have offered a variety of explanations for the appearance of the institution, all
of which seem to hold some grain of truth. Some assert that this was the system
adopted to fill the ranks of the Janissaries at the time when the advance of
Empire had come to a halt, and when the supply of prisoners had dwindled.30
Others maintain that it was a means of converting the Balkans, for in order to
avoid the devshirm e the inhabitants of the Balkan peninsula, especially Thrace
and Macedonia, often adopted Islam.31 Finally, there are those who state that
it was the need for a disciplined arid reliable body of infantry that caused the
Ottomans to resort to the devsh irm e.32 The y a y a , Turkomen infantry instituted
under Orkhan, proved to be unmanageable, and the system was open to corrup­
tion. Therefore the Ottomans hit upon a scheme which would insure them a well-
disciplined infantry. That this last reason was a major factor is brought out by the
testimony of the Turkish sources.33

SOME FIFTEENTH -CENTURY GREEK SOURCES AND THE DEVSHIRME

Four Greek documents of the fifteenth century which are of particular interest
in the question of the devshirm,e have long gone unmentioned by the scholars
who have treated this problem. These fifteenth-century texts demonstrate the
degree to which the institution had spread by the mid-fifteenth century, and
vividly reveal the Christian hatred of it. This evidence challenges those scholars
who have maintained that the institution became a common practice only in
the late fifteenth century, and that the Christians were indifferent to it and some­
times even welcomed it as a means of advancement in the Ottoman army and

29 T h is w ou ld esta b lish th e ex trem e d a te s for th e in s titu tio n of th e devshirme as b e g in n in g w ith

C h a n d a rly ’s a c ce s sio n to th e office of K adiasker in th e reign of M u ra d I, a n d 1395, d a te of I sid o re ’s
serm on . F or T h essa lo n ik i th e d a te s w ould b e 1387, d a te of its first ca p tu re b y th e T u rk s, a n d 1395.
30 H . A . R . G ib b a n d I I. B o w en , Islam ic Society and the W est, i (O xford, 19 5 0 ), p. 4 4 . W . L an ger
a n d R . B la k e , “ T h e R is e o f th e O tto m a n E m p ire a n d its H isto r ic a l B a ck g ro u n d ,” The American
H istorical Review^ x x x v n (1 9 3 2 ), 504. B u t th e n ew d a te of th e ch ild tr ib u te s e t s it in a p eriod of
ex p a n sio n , w h en p rison ers w ere ab u n d a n t.
31 H . G ib b on s, The R ise of the Ottoman E m pire (N e w Y o rk , 1916 ), pp . 1 1 7 -1 1 8 , w a s th e m a in e x ­
p o n en t of th is th eo r y . I t is d ifficu lt to s a y w h eth er its in te n t w as la rg ely to co n v e rt. H o w e v er , th e ea rly
su ccess of T u rk ish Isla m in A sia M in or m u st h a v e g iv e n so m e im p etu s to th is “ m issio n a r y ” a sp ect.
O n th is s u b je c t s e e th e le tte r s of th e P atriarch J o h n X I V , Acta et D iplom ata Graeca M edii Aevi, h ere­
a fter M ik lo sic h a n d M ü lle r , I, 183, 197. F o r a c a se of a p o s ta s y to Isla m , a n d th en rep en ta n c e and
retu rn to C h r istia n ity , s ee M ik losich an d M ü ller, i i, 155.
32 J . Z in k eisen , Geschichte des osmanischen Reiches in Europa (H a m b u rg , 1 8 4 0 -6 3 ), i, 1 1 7 -1 1 8 .
83 G ib b an d B o w en , op. cit ., p. 470.
 440 Isidore Glabas and the Turkish Devshirme

bureaucracy.34 T h a t three of these texts should have rem ained generally neg­
lected in connection w ith our problem for such a long period of tim e is strange
indeed, and shows how m uch can still be gleaned from a careful perusal of the
sources a t hand, even though they m ay have long been published.35
The first of these docum ents is the “ C apitulations of Jan n in a.,, These were
the term s of conditional surrender which Sinan P asha offered the city of Jan n in a
in 1430 after his triu m p h an t capture and sack of Thessaloniki. T he citizens of
Jan n in a found these term s satisfactory and accepted them . T he tex t is of interest
n o t only from the point of view of the devshirme, b u t also as the earliest recorded
example of the term s granted by the T urkish conquerors to their subjects in
the Balkans. A translation of the relevant section follows.
T h is is th e decree and greeting of Sinan P ash a . . . M a y y ou know th a t th e great lord
(th e su ltan ) has sen t us to tak e over th e territory and castles of D u ca s . . . A n d it is b e­
cause of th is th a t I w rite and tell you to su b m it w illin gly an d n o t be d eceived in a n y w ay
and heed th e words of th e F ranks, because th e y do n o t in a n y w ay w ish to help y ou ,
excep t th a t th e y w ou ld d estroy y ou as th e y d estroyed th e in h ab itan ts of T hessalon iki.
A nd because of th ese th in gs I sw ear to y ou . . . th a t you sh all have no fear, eith er from
en slavem en t, or from the taking of your children , or from th e destruction of th e churches,
nor shall w e bu ild a n y m osques, b u t th e bells of your churches sh all ring as has been th e
cu sto m .36

H ere we can note only the clear reference to the devshirme. T he docum ent
carefully distinguishes the trib u te of children (πιασμον παιδιών) from general
enslavem ent and the taking of prisoners (αίχμαλωτισμόν) . F u rth er, it refers to
freedom from this trib u te along w ith im m unity of the population from general
enslavem ent and assurance of the safety of the churches, as one of the m ajor
concessions to the conquered. T he child trib u te was app arently so unpopular a t
this tim e th a t the T urk s could use it as a strong bargaining factor in the term s
of conditional surrender which they offered to the citizens of Jannina.
T he second docum ent is generally referred to as the “ C apitulations of G a la ta /’
M oham m ed I I granted certain concessions to the Genoese colony a t G alata, m uch
as Sinan P asha did to Jannina, when the Genoese offered him the keys to the
tow n during the victorious siege of C ontantinople in 1453. A translation of th e
relevant sections follows.37

34 L a n g er a n d B la k e , loc. cit.f 504. G ib b a n d B o w en , op. cit.y p p . 5 8 -5 9 .

35 K . A m a n to s, “ Ή άνατγνώρισις υπό τών μωαμεθανών θρησκευτικών καί πολίτικων δικαιωμάτων των
χριστιανών και 6 ορισμός του Σινάν Π ασά,” Ηπειρωτικά Χρονικά, ν (1 9 8 0 ), 1 9 7 -2 1 0 . M ik lo sic h a n d M ü l­
ler, III, 2 8 7 -2 9 1 .
36 K . A m a n to s, “ Oi προνομιακοί όρισμοί του Μουσουλμανισμού ύπίρ των Χριστιανών,” Ελληνικά, IX
(1 9 3 6 ), 1 1 9 -1 2 0 ; an d “ ‘Η άνα-γνώρισις ύπό των μωαμεθανών θρησκευτικών καί πολιτικών δικαιωμάτων καί δ
όρισμός του Σινάν Π ασα,” ’ Κπειροπικά Χρονικά, V (1930), 1 9 7 -2 1 0 . L am p ro s, “ Ή Ελληνική ws Επίσημος
Ύλώσσα τών σουλτάνων,” Néos ‘Έ,λληνομνήμων, (1908), 6 3 -6 4 . T h is t e x t a lo n e w ould h a v e in v a lid a te d
1438, th e d a te fu rn ish ed b y B a rth o lo m a e u s d e J an o, as th e e a r liest record ed in sta n ce o f th e devshirme.
T h e referen ce in th is d o c u m en t im p lies th a t th e devshirme w as so m e th in g w ith w h ich b o th T u r k s an d
G reek s w ere q u ite fam iliar; h e n c e it w as u sed as a b argain in g p o in t.
37 E. D a ile g io d ’A lessio, “ L e te x te grec d u tr a ité co n clu par les G én o is d e G a la ta a v e c M e h m e t I I le
I er Ju in 1 4 5 3 ,” ‘Ελληνικά x i (1 9 3 9 ), 1 1 5 -1 2 4 . K . A m a n to s, “ Oi προνομιακοί όρισμοί του Μουσουλμανισμού
 XII
Isid o re (Halms a n d the 'Turkish D e v s h irm e 441

. . . Since the archontes of G alata have sen t to th e P orte of m y dom ains their honored
archontes . . . who did obeisance to m y im perial power and becam e m y slaves, let them
(the G enoese) retain their possessions . . . their w ives, children, and prisoners a t their
own disposal . . . . T h e y shall p ay neither commercium nor kharadj . . . . T h e y shall be
perm itted to retain their churches . . . and never will I on any account carry off their
children or any young man for the Janissary corps.

The “ C apitulations of G alata^ m ake one specific allusion to the devshirme

and one which is m ore general. Again, the im m unity from the trib u te of children
is reckoned as an im p o rtan t concession, one which is placed in the same category
as commercial and juridical privileges.
T he th ird docum ent, dated 1456, contains the privileges which M oham m ed I I
granted certain Greek archontes of the M orea in response to their petition.
While the despots, T hom as and D em etrius Palaeologus, were struggling for
power in the Peloponnesus, and while the Albanians were staging a serious revolt
there, these nobles decided to throw their lot in w ith the T urkish sultan. T he
action of these archontes is rem iniscent of the behavior of the G reek m agnates
of the Peloponnesus after the F o u rth Crusade. A translation of the relevant sec­
tions follows.
T h e great lord an d great em ir S u ltan M oh am m ed to all our arch ontes w ith in our
dom ains . . . w ho desire to com e over to m e. K n ow th a t m y honored Aga , H asam b ey,
cam e to m e an d ann oun ced th a t you desired to b ecom e m ine (m y p eop le). A n d you desire
m y term s in th is m atter, w h ich I do now co n v e y u n to you ; I swear to y o u . . th a t I shall
la y han ds upon . . . neither your things, nor your children , nor your heads, b u t rather I
sh all give y o u peace, and you shall be b etter off th an before .38

In this docum ent the reference to the trib u te of children is n o t quite so specific
as in the other docum ents, b u t inasm uch as the devshirme had, by this tim e, been
long practiced, there can be little doubt th a t it is this to which the docum ent re­
fers. Again, this im m unity from paying the trib u te of children is considered as
an im portant concession by both T u rk and Greek.
T he fourth docum ent depicts m uch more graphically the abhorrence which
the Greeks felt for the devshirme. I t also shows how thorough th e system had
become by the m id-fifteenth century. Some historians m aintain th a t th e dev­
shirme was levied only in the E uropean provinces of the E m pire, b u t this tex t
affords evidence th a t it was levied in Asia M inor in the fifteenth century. T he
petition is addressed to the G rand M aster of the K nights H ospitalers of Rhodes,
Jacques de M illy (1451-61), and was sent by Greeks living in Asia M inor
( . . . όπου ήκββαν eis τψ Τουρκίαν . . . ).39 Since their petition was directed to the
H ospitalers, it would seem th a t they lived on the w estern coast of Asia M inor,
n o t far from Rhodes. A fu rth er reason for addressing their petition to the K nights

ύπkp των Χριστιανών ,” ‘E ΧΧηνικά, i x (1 9 3 6 ), 1 2 0 -1 2 2 . N . Io rg a , “ L e p riv ilèg e d e M o h a m m ed I I p ou r la

v ille d e P era ( 1 -er J u in 1 4 5 3 ),” Académie Roumaine, B ulletin de la section historique , i (1 9 1 4 ), 1 1 -3 2 .
L am p ros, loc. cit., 6 5 -6 8 . M ik lo sic h an d M ü ller, m , 2 8 7 -2 8 8 .
38 M ik lo sic h a n d M ü ller, m , 290. Iorga, loc. cit., 2 1 - 2 2 .
38 M ik lo sich a n d M ü ller, n i, 291.
442 Isidore Glabas and the Turkish Devshirme

a t Rhodes is th a t the la tte r had been very successful in establishing good rap p o rt
w ith their Greek subjects. Hence the addressors of the petition could hope to ac­
quire m asters more tolerant th a n either the T urks or th an m ost other L atin s.40
A translation of the docum ent follows.
T o th e m o st honorable, m ost wise, m ost glorious, an d w orthy of all honors, Lord of
R h odes, G rand M aster T zian a de M illy , and to your council, an d (to the) m ost h oly
patriarch and overseer, th e m ost h oly P op e: W e, your poor slaves, w e proper C hristian
people, w ho do dw ell in T urkey, b o th great and sm all, b oth m en and w om en, inform your
lordship th a t we are h ea v ily vexed b y th e T urk, and that they take away our children and
make M uslim s of them . A nd because of th is w e beseech your lordship and th e m ost h o ly
P op e (patriarch in th e te x t), each of you , to com e w ith th e ships of th e P op e to help the
C hristians. F or th is reason we beseech your lordship to tak e council th a t th e m ost h oly
P op e m ig h t send his ships to tak e us and our w ives and children aw ay from here, for we
are suffering g reatly from th e T urk. (D o this) lest we lose our children , and let us com e to
your dom ains to live and die there as your su bjects. B u t if y ou leave us here we shall lose
our children and you shall answer to G od for it and our sin w ill becom e your burden. F or
th is reason we beg your lordship and th e m ost h o ly P op e (patriarch) th a t he m ay send
his vessels as q u ick ly as possible to tak e us aw ay from here. M a y C hrist th e G od stren gth ­
en th e years of your rule .41

On the eve of the fall of C onstantinople the Megadux Lucas N otaras, in the h eat
of religious passion, m ade the well-known statem ent, “I t is b etter to see in the
m idst of the city the tu rb a n of the ruling T urks th a n th e L atin tia ra .”42 T his
has often been presented as the classic dem onstration of the feeling of the O r­
thodox C hristians who found them selves caught in the dilemma of choosing be­
tween the heretic L atins and the M oslem T urks. T he petition addressed to the
K nights H ospitalers, however, dem onstrates th a t there were some occasions
a t least when Greeks preferred L atin dom ination to T urkish.

CONCLUSIONS

To recapitulate: The serm on of Isidore Glabas establishes 1395 as the earliest

recorded date for the existence of the devshirme. T he testim ony of Isidore tends
to corroborate the evidence presented by Idris (who seems to have h ad access
to sources inaccessible to the three earlier T urkish chroniclers), which m akes th e
Janissaries and the devshirme in stitu ted contem poraneously in th e reign of
M u rad I. We m ight go one step further and suggest th a t perhaps b oth ./the
Janissaries and the devshirme were instituted by C handarly. /
T his early developm ent of such a key institution in the O ttom an governm ent
and arm y as the devshirme would seem to imply a m uch earlier institutional evolu­
tion for the O ttom ans th a n was form erly thought. T his m u st have been of g reat
im portance in the ability of the O ttom ans to survive th e crushing defeat of

40 N . Iorga, Rhodes sous les H ospitaliers (P a ris, 1931), pp . 2 8 9 -2 9 0 . Io rg a str e s se s th e g o o d r ela tio n s
b e tw e e n G reek s an d L a tin s in R h o d e s a s a m ajor factor w h ich e n a b le d th e K n ig h ts o f R h o d e s to h o ld
o u t for tw o c en tu ries a g a in st th e T u rk ish em irs of A sia M in or, th e M a m e lu k e s in E g y p t, a n d th e
O tto m a n s.
41 M ik lo sic h a n d M ü ller, m , 291.
42 D u c a s, ed . B o n n , p . 264.
 XIII
Isidore (llabas and the Turkish Devshirme 443

Angora in 1402 a t the hands of Tim ur. To the weakness of the B alkan states and
the indifference of the W est, one m ust now add this third factor am ongst those
which helped the O ttom ans survive Angora. The institutional foundations of
the O ttom an Em pire had been so securely laid th a t the O ttom ans were able to
m arch back on the road to empire after 1402.
T he four Greek docum ents, ranging in dates from 1430 to 1456, show th a t
the devshirme was com paratively w idespread by the second q u arter of the
fifteenth century and th a t it was so feared and disliked by the C hristians th a t
the T urks could use it as a strong bargaining weapon.43
D um barto n Oa k s R esear c h L ib r a r y

49S in ce th is a r ticle w as w r itte n tw o im p o rta n t a rtic le s on th e devshirme h a v e a p p ea red ; A . V ak alop -

o u lo s, “ Προβλήματα τής Ιστοίας του παιδομαζώματος” ‘Ελληνικά, XIII (1 9 5 4 ), 2 7 4 -2 9 3 , an d P . W ittek ,
“ D e v ş i r m e an d S A a r la ,” B ulletin of the School o f Oriental and A frican Studies , x v ii (1 9 5 5 ), 2 7 1 -2 7 8 .
V a k a lop ou los tr e a ts a n u m b er of th e p rob lem s c o n n e c te d w ith th e devshirme a n d g iv e s references
t o m o s t o f th e im p o rta n t seco n d a ry literatu re. A s h e b rin gs h is tr e a tm e n t o f th e p rob lem up to th e
e ig h te e n th c en tu ry , h e h a s m en tio n ed o n ly on e of th e fifteen th -cen tu ry d o c u m en ts tre a te d a b o v e,
i.e ., th e C a p itu la tio n s o f J a n n in a.
W itte k d eals w ith th e p rob lem p resen ted b y th e a p p a re n t in c o m p a tib ility o f th e devshirme an d th e
Sheria. T h e e x p la n a tio n w h ich h e p resen ts rests o n th e p ro p o sitio n th a t n o t all th e p eo p les of th e
B a lk a n s received th e s ta tu s of dhim m i (p eop le of th e B o o k ). O n ly th o se n a tio n s c o n v e rted t o C hris­
tia n ity b efore th e tim e of th e P ro p h et receiv ed th e s ta tu s o f dhim m i . T h is m e a n t in e ffect th a t o n ly
th e G reek s w ere to b e trea ted as dhim m i , w h ile th e S erb s, B u lgare, and V lach s w ere d en ied th is sta tu s.
A s a resu lt, W itte k co n tin u e s, th e T u rk ish con q u erors w ere a b le to le v y th e ch ild tr ib u te on th ese
s eg m en ts of th e B a lk a n p o p u la tio n w ith o u t te c h n ic a lly v io la tin g th e Sheria. H e a d d s th a t th e G reeks
fu rth er e sca p ed th e ch ild tr ib u te b eca u se th e y liv e d in th e c itie s an d th e tr ib u te w a s le v ie d o n ly in
th e rural areas.
H o w ev er, th e G reek d o c u m en ts of th e la te fo u rteen th an d fifte en th c en tu ries w o u ld te n d to show
th a t th e G reek s of th e to w n s w ere su b je c t to th e devshirme. T h e serm o n o f Isid o re G lab as sp ea k s of
th e ch ild ren ta k e n from T h e ssa lo n ik i, w h ile th e c a p itu la tio n s offered to th e in h a b ita n ts o f Ja n n in a ,
G a la ta , a n d M orea im p ly th a t th e devshirme w as le v ie d in th e c itie s an d o n th e G reek p o p u la tio n . In
fa c t th e sh o r t n o tice e n title d Χρονικόν ’Αθηνών, ed . S. L am p ros (L on d on , 19 0 2 ), p. 86, sh o w s th a t b y th e
b e g in n in g of th e six te en th c en tu ry th e devshirme w a s le v ie d q u ite regu larly in A th en s.
 XIV
Review Article

Basilike D. Papoulia, U r s p r u n g u n d W e s e n d e r “ K n a b e n le s e ” im o sm a -
n isc h e n R e ic h . Südosteuropaische Arbeiten 59 (Munich, 1963).
The book of Miss Basilike Papoulia, concerned with the Turkish
devshirme, is the most detailed scholarly treatment on the origins of
this important Ottoman institution. Thus it is a welcome addition to
the growing body of literature concerned with early Ottoman history. She
has brought together from a wide variety of sources a considerable body
of factual material that relates to the topic. Much of this material was
previously known, but a significant portion was either little known or
at any rate not specifically connected by scholars with the problem of
the child tribute. The interesting results of the author’s research are
presented in four chapters.
The first chapter deals with the general phenomenon of slavery in
the political and military institutions of the Islamic world. Beginning
with the assumption that the extensive use of slaves in the military
and government was unique to the Islamic world, Miss Papoulia notes
the appearance of military slavery from the time of the caliph Uthman
(644-56), and comments briefly on the use of slaves by the Ummayids
of Cordova, Abbasids, Samanids, Seljuks Ayyubids, Chorids, Ghazne-
vids, Ottomans, and Mamelukes. The rulers generally acquired these
slaves as captives in military expeditions, by purchase, gift, and
most interestingly as tribute from their provinces. Some attention is
given to the contents of Nizam al-Mulk’s S iy a s a t - N a m a as regards the
systematization of the gulam system and the training of its members.
Miss Papoulia accepts the contents of these passages in the S iy a s a t-
N a m a as being a reflection of actual conditions. In this she accepts the
earlier view of Barthold which Bosworth ( D e r I s l a m , X X X V I , 45-
46) has rejected. This initial chapter closes with the observation that
the slave institution remained closer to its original purpose in Ottoman
society than it did amongst the Ayyubid and Mameluke dynasties.
Under the Ottomans the system served the dynasty, but under the
Ayyubids the slave system replaced the dynasty.
Chapter two describes the conditions and factors which led to the
spread of the slave institution in the pre-Ottoman Islamic world, in
io
X IV
146

the Ottoman world, and also the appearance of the devshirme. In all
three cases the basic factor was the need of the dynasty to obtain o-
bedient military support against decentralizing and insubordinate forces.
In the Ummayid period the spread of military slavery corresponded
with the increase in tribal strife and with the thinning out of the Arab
ruling class as it was spread out over an increasingly great area. Under
the Ottomans, slaves were utilized against the internal foes of the dy­
nasty, viz. the timar holders and the tribal groups. But that which dif­
ferentiated the Ottoman system from the earlier Islamic practice was
the devshirme. The Ottomans did not restrict themselves to obtaining
slaves by capture, purchase, or gift, but also raised them in the form
of a tribute taken from their Christian subjects. The author reviews
the attempts of Palmer and Wittek to explain away the seeming in­
compatibility between the devshirme and the sharia. Palmer had at­
tempted to do so by asserting that the Ottomans considered the taking
of child tribute as a development of the pencik. W ittek’s explanation
employs the Shafii principle which differentiated between those peo­
ples already in the category of ahl al-kitab at the time of the prophet
Muhammud, and those who became ahl al-kitab after the time of the
prophet. According to Wittek only the former were legitimate dhimmis
and therefore immune from the child tribute. In the Balkans only the
Greeks and Jews belonged to this category, hence their children were not
taken. But Papoulia rightly rejects Wittek’s explanation, as previously
have other scholars who demonstrated that Greeks were taken in the
devshirme. In addition she re-emphasizes the fact that the basic mo­
tive for the creation of the devshirme was not proselytizing zeal.
Chapter three concentrates on the rise of the slave institution and
the devshirme during the fourteenth century, and it is this portion
which constitutes the central core of the author’s thesis, namely that
the Janissaries and the devshirme were instituted in the reign of Orhan
I and the pencik was applied under Murad I. The discussion centers
about the Byzantine and Ottoman sources, of which only some of the
former are of the fourteenth century, the latter dating from the mid­
dle of the fifteenth century and after. Still the most important docu­
ment on the devshirme is the sermon (1395) of Isidore Glabas edited
by Basil Laourdas (1954) from a manuscript of the early fifteenth cen­
tu ry . In addition reference is made by the author to Cantacuzenus and
Symeon of Thessaloniki (between 1410-1429), who refer to the general
captivity of Christians and their children. The author brings to our at­
tention a new reference to the devshirme in the last quarter of the four-
 X IV
147

teenth century (after 1387). The text is an unpublished Athonite manu­

script (132, Dionysiou) dated variously to the sixteenth and seventeeth
century, and implies that the system was by now taking considerable
numbers of children. Thus the contemporary Greek sources bear testi­
mony to the existence of thesdevshirme by the late fourteenth century.
The real difficulty, however, lies in the Ottoman sources, all of
which were written after the mid-fifteenth century. According to Miss
Papoulia, Idris al-Bitlisi (first decade of sixteenth century) sets the found­
ation of the Janissaries and the devshirme under Orhan, whereas Uruc
(1460-70), Aşıkpaşazade (fl. 1490), and Anonymous Giese (c. 1490) present a
different story. These latter authors relate that as a result of the sugges­
tion of Kara Rustem and Kara Halil CandarlT, Murad ordered that one-
fifth of prisoners were to be given to the sultan. These youths were sent
to Anatolia for a few years to labor and to learn Turkish. Then they were
brought to the sultan, white bonnets were placed on their heads, they
were called Janissaries, and, these chronicles continue, the Janissaries
had their origin at this time (reign of Murad I)... “asıl ol vakitden berü
oldu.” But she prefers the testimony of Idris al-Bitlisi, and so places
the beginning of the Janissaries and devshirme in the reign of Orhan,
prior to 1330-31. This of course contradicts the assertions of other recent
scholarship on the subject (Ménage, Giese, etc.) and reverts to a view
expressed by western scholars as early as the time of von Hammer.
Her choice she justifies on the basis of the following considerations:
a) Contemporary sources bear testimony to the existence of the
devshirme by the last quarter of the fourtheenth century.
b) The version of Idris is a much better account for the rise of the
slave institution than is the version of the other chronicles.
c) The chonicles do not mention the devshirme at all.
d) The version of Idris is the difficilior.
Miss Papoulia realizes, however, that it would be difficult to re­
ject in toto the testimony of the other chronicles. So she accepts most
of their testimony, rejecting only the final phrase “ol vakitden beri a-
dïnï yeniçeri qodïlar” (and other variants of the phrase). This latter,
she asserts, was added by the chroniclers because unlike Idris they were
not really aware of the facts and simply felt that the Janissary corps
was instituted at the same time as the pencik. Her conclusions then
are: Creation of the Janissaries and devshirme under Orhan I, and ap­
plication of the pencik under Murad I.

It has long been pointed out that the best approach to the investi-
X IV
148

gation and consideration of early Ottoman institutions is that which

begins with the institutions of the Anatolian Seljuks and the beyliks.
It would, perhaps, have been of some advantage had the author con­
sidered the slave institution of this period in detail. After concentra­
ting on the provisions of the Siyasat-N am a (eleventh century) she skips
to the early Ottoman period, dispensing with the Seljuks of Rum in
one footnote, stating merely that they too had a slave institution (p.
17, 33). She implies that the Ottomans may have had before them the
example of the S iyasat-N ama as an inspiration for the implementation
of their own slave system. But it is even more likely that it was the
traditions of the Seljuks of Rum which influenced them in a more direct
manner. In fact the use of gulams on an extensive scale in the military
and administrative system of the Seljuks in Anatolia provides the im­
mediate ancestry of the Ottoman slave institution. The principal do­
cumentation for the existence and shape of the slave system in thir­
teenth century Anatolia is the Persian chronicle of Ibn Bibi, recently
translated by H. Duda, Die Seltschukengeschichte des Ibn B ibi (Copen­
hagen, 1959). This is supplemented by the Persian chronicle of Keri-
muddin Mahmud, the Arabic inscriptions, vakif documents, etc. There
also exist decriptions of modern scholars. I. Uzunçarşılı, OsmanlI Dev­
leti Teşkilatına medhal (Instanbul, 1941), a work which Miss Papoulia
did not mention, gives a history of the general development of the slave
institution from the time of the Abbasids and includes a chapter on the
Seljuks of Anatolia. These sources, and primarily Ibn Bibi, reveal a
full grown and well developed system of slave troops and adminis­
trators based on the gulams. The slave basis of the palace service,
central and provincial administration is clearly manifested.Among
such posts and services which are mentioned as directed and or manned
by gulams are the following: royal stables, royal wardrobe and clean­
ing service, treasury, secret archives of the divan, corps of iğdiş, justice,
sultan’s table and pantry, sultan’s bodyguard, royal kitchen, office
of translations, office of the sahib tugrai, harem, naib of Konya, various
provincial governments, atabey, and possibly the court musicians.
Bodies of slave troops are mentioned, as for instance the 1,000 gulams
sent to garrison the town of Chliat. The size of this garrison, as also the
frequency with which troops of gulams appear in the pages of Ibn Bi­
bi, indicate that the slave institution must have been of comparatively
significant size. A further indication of the importance and develop­
ed character of the slave institution amongst the Seljuks of Rum are
the following facts. Important officials had their own private corps of
gıılams, a fact which made them powerful above and beyond their own
official positions. Λ palace school, the gulamhane, is mentioned where
the gulams were turned over to the babas for their education (Duda,
242, 330), after which they were often turned over to the various palace
services for further training under the direction of the older members
of the slave institution. There is enough material to trace the histories
of a few of the more important gulams, such as Celaluddin Karatay,
Aminuddin Mikail, and Hass Oguz. These three individuals, who were
of Greek origin, rose to high positions in the state, and contributed
significantly to the cultural and political life of the Seljuk state (Ex­
tremely important in the history of the Seljuk gulams are the vakif
materials edited by O. Turan, “Semseddin Altun aba vakfiyesi ve ha­
yatı.” Belleten, XI (1947), 197, ff; “Mübarizeddin Er-Tokuş ve vakfi­
yesi,” Belleten , XI (1947), 415 fi; “Celaleddin Karatay vakıfları ve vak­
fiyeleri,” Belleten , XII (1948), 17 if.) These gulams came to the state
through the customary methods; from the ganimat or law of one-fifth,
as hostages, as ‘gifts’ from the begs of the borders, etc. Ibn Bibi relates
that most of the important emirs in the thirteenth century were gulams
taken from the dar ul-harb (Duda, 328). However the question has been
raised whether there was not also a form of child tribute amongst the
Seljuks in Anatolia which was similar to the Ottoman devshirme. The
Turkish scholars O. Turan [UL’ Islamisation dans la Turquie du moyen
age” Studia Islam ica , I (1959), 147-150; T ürkiye Selçukluları hakkında
resmi vesikalar (Ankara, 1958), 178] and I. Uzunçarşılî [OsmanlI devle­
ti teşkilatına medhal (İstanbul, 1941), 115-116], have called attention
to the existence of the iğdiş. This was probably a military corps which
was composed of Islamized youths taken from their Christian parents
within the Seljuk domains. Thus, if the conjecture of these Turkish
scholars is correct, as seems highly likely, something similar to the
devshirme was already in existence amongst the Seljuks of Rum. There
are also a few scattered references to the actual taking of children from
the Christian subjects of the Turks in Anatolia during this early period
which would tend to reinforce the suggestion that something similar
to the devshirme existed previous to the Ottomans. Inasmuch as these
cases have not, as far as the reviewer is aware, been discussed in connec­
t io n with the devshirme it may not be out of place to mention them
here. At the end of the eleventh century the Turks took the male
children of the Greek towns between Dorylaeum and Iconium [Gesta
Francorum et aliorum Hierosolimitanorum, ed. L. Brehier (Paris, 1924),
55; Tudebodus, Receuil des historiens des Croisades , H ist. Oc., I ll (Paris,
X IV
150

1866), 29, “Adhuc quoque et Christianorum filios secum tolerabant.”

Tudebodus, 26, mentions ‘Angulani’ in the armies of the Turks opposing
the Crusaders in western Asia Minor. These Angulani are quite possibly the
gulams]. In the same period the Turkish emir of Samosata had likewise
taken children from the Christian inhabitans of the city (William of Tyre,
IV, 4). At Antioch, after 1085, the Turks were short of manpower and
so made use of Armenian and Greek youths whom they had, evidently,
forcibly converted to Islam (Raymond of Aguilers, R.H.C., H.O., III,
250-251. “Quoniam Turei ante annos quatuordecim Antiochiae obti-
nuerant, atque Armenios juvenes et Graecos quasi pro penuria dome-
sticorum turcaverant, et uxores eis dederant.” See also “Tureare” in
Ducange, where he quotes again from Raymond; “Quidam de Turca-
tis, qui erat in eivitate, per Boimundum principibus mandavit nostris
etc.” Also the following interesting passage. “Si qui per Dei gratiam
contempsissent, cogebantur tradere pulchros parvulos suos ad circum-
cidendum vel Tureandum.” Nicephorus Gregoras, I, 58, refers to the
recruitment of military corps of Greek Christians (in contrast to gu­
lams) from those inhabiting the Seljuk state, « έπ εί γάρ ήσαν ύπ* αύτ<5
π άλα ι δεδουλ ω μ ένοι'Ρ ω μ α ίω ν συχνοί,τούτους εις μοίραν κατα λέξας σ τρ α το ύ...» ).
A consideration of the Seljuk slave institution in pre-Ottoman
Anatolia seems to suggest: (a) That the Ottoman system was directly
inspired by that of the Seljuks of Rum. (b) There is great probability
that the levying of Christian children from amongst the subject popu­
lation by the Muslim rulers was practiced in Anatolia between the e-
leventh ant thirteenth centuries.
The section with which the reviewer finds himself least able to
agree is chapter III, in which the author analyzes the Ottoman sour­
ces. She attempts to demonstrate that the narrative of Idris in regards
to early Ottoman institutions is more reliable than that of Uruc, Aşık»
paşazade, and Anonymous Giese. Inasmuch as this is critical to the
entire thesis, one would have expected a more rigorous and thorough
proof of Idris’ accuracy in institutional matters. However Mis Papou-
lia has failed to demonstrate this in a convincing manner. Relying on the
judgement of Palmer (B u lletin o f the John R ylands L ibrary , 1952-53,
473) and Sükrü (D er Isla m , 1931, 149 ίΐ.) she asserts that Idris contains
material not to be found in the other chroniclers and therefore we can­
not reject lightly his contention that the Janissaries and the devshirme
were introduced in the reign of Orhan. However, in the creation of the
Janissaries we are dealing with an event which is not recorded ex­
clusively in Idris, but one which is chronicled by the other sources as well.
 XIV
151

And these latter contradict the account of Idris and agree on the matter
of chronology with one another. Secondly, inasmuch as the Idrisian
text is so important to her thesis, one would have expected a more de­
tailed examination of Idris. Instead, the reader is referred at one time
to the summary of Palmer (based on Br. Museum Add. Mss 7646-7), at
another time to the edition and translation of the relevent section by
V. Ménage (based on the above manuscript and on Bodleian, Ousely
358, in Bulletin o f the School o f Oriental and A frican Studies , 1956, 181-
3), and at still other times to a third manuscript (Westdeutsch Bibli­
othek, Marburg, Orient folio Nr. 3179, dated 1560-61), without any
specific pagination in the last case. The summary of Palmer and the
translation of Ménage contain so many differences in content that these
must be explained, as for instance in the following. The Palmer ‘version’
refers to the collected Christian youths as Janissaries, whereas the Mé­
nage ‘version’ does not call them Janissaries, nor does this latter ver­
sion attribute the innovation to Kara Halil Candarlï, at least not in
the section edited by Ménage.
It is interesting that both Palmer and Ménage reject the account
of Idris, wherein the Janissaries and devshirme are attributed to the
reign of Orhan, as anachronistic. This view is derived from the fact
that Aşıkpaşazade, Anonymous Giese, and Uruc (who wrote their ac­
counts earlier than did Idris) agree in dating the institution of the Ja­
nissaries in the reign of Murad. This is possibly strengthened by the
work of Mehmed Neşri, Kitâb-i cihan-nüm â , ed. F. Unat and M. Kö-
ymen, I (Ankara, 1949), 197-9, which likewise attributes the creation
of the Janissaries to the reign of Murad I and adds a few new details.
In the realization that the unity of the chronicles (that is the chro­
nicles exclusive of Idris) constitutes a difficulty in rejecting their ac­
count in toto, the author attempts to solve her dilemma by deleting the
passage in each of these chronicles which states that ‘the inception of
the Janissary corps dates from that time’ (reign of Murad). By so doing
she accepts everything that they have to say in regards to the taking of
one out of every five prisoners and their training for and induction in­
to the Janissary corps at the suggestion of Kara Halil Candarlï. But,
as the Janissary corps and devshirme existed in the reign of Orhan I, she
continues, the chronicles have confused these two institutions with that
of the one-fifth levy of prisoners of war implemented under Murad I.
The reviewer really sees no justification for the deletion of the
phrase “asılda yeniçerinin ol vakitden berü oldu,” (or variant thereof)
which occurs at the end of the accounts of the four chronicles dating
X IV
152

the Janissaries to the reign of Murad I. If one proceded on the premise

of the author that such deletions are allowable because the texts are
confusing, the Pandora’s box of deletions would be flung open to the
whims of any particular point of view. This phrase could legitimately
form an integral part of any text dealing with the history of institu­
tions and does not necessarily constitute an awkward addition on the
part of the chroniclers. Anonymous Giese contains the same type phrase
after the institution of the yaya in the reign of Orhan, stating that
this body date from the time of Orhan (Anonymous Giese, p. 14 text,
p. 22 translation).
The author sees a possible support for her thesis in the fact that
Ibn Batuta upon visiting Antalya in 1333 noted that the emir had a
body of mamelukes. She remarks, p. 79; “Interessant ist die Angabe
insoweit, als ein anderen Kleinasiatischer Emir schon im Jahr 1333 eine
derartige Garde besass. Es fragt sich also, warum wir nicht dasselbe
fur die Osmanen annehmen sollten, wenn es von einer wichtigen Quel­
le behauptet wird?” Here there seems to be a confusion on the part
of the author between the usual slave troops and administrators (gu-
lam, kul, bende, mameluke) and the Janissary corps raised by the dev-
shirme or by the pencik. As the name implies, Janissaries were a new
troop of slave soldiers, and it does not seem extreme to assume that the
Ottomans had slave bodies of sorts before the creation of the Janissa­
ry corps, just as did the ruler of Antalya.In fact Ibn Batuta also saw
gulams or mamelukes in the retinues of the Muslim rulers of Pirghi,
Castamon, Sinope, and Kayseri (Ibn Batuta, ed., tr. Defremery and
Sanguinetti, II, 307, 309, 310-311, 317. In his audience with the emir
of Pirghi he saw in the reception hall twenty Greek pages clothed in
silk and with strange coiffures). Al-Umari (ed. F. Taeschner, 25) notes
their presence in the service of the Germiyanids. In fact there is evi­
dence of sorts that such slaves existed already under both Osman and
Orhan, prior to the appearance of the Janissaries. When Osman car­
ried on his sieges of the Bithynian cities, he entrusted part of the oper­
ations against Bursa to his slave (kul) Balabancık (Anonymous Giese,
p. 20 tr., p. 12 text). By the reign of Orhan the Ottoman rulers had a
well defined personal troop of slaves (Uruc, ed. Babinger, p. 15, kullar;
Nesri, p. 155, has bendelerü). Though the sources are distant from the
events which they describe some 150 years, the testimony of Ibn Ba­
tuta as to the presence of such kul amongst other emirates tends to
confirm the statement of these chronicles. The probability of the ex­
istence of a slave institution prior to the Janissaries amongst the Ot-
 XIV
153

tomans has already been pointed out by others, viz. Palmer, Gibb and
Bowen, etc.
Thus kuls certainly existed in Ottoman institutions before the
appearance of the Janissaries and the devshirme. In addition one is not
as yet convinced of the superiority of Idris over the other Ottoman
chronicles in relation to the origins of the Janissaries and devshirme.
The chronicles (Idris excepted) attribute the founding of the Janissa­
ries to the reign of Murad I. There is no specific mention of the dev­
shirme prior to 1387 and possibly not until 1395. But the accounts of
Neşri, Uruc, Aşıkpaşazade, and Anonymous Giese describe the col­
lection of the one fifth under Murad as follows: “oğlanlar cemi’ idüb,”
(Neşri, 199); “oğlanlar cem’ olındı.” ((Aşıkpaşazade, ed. Atsız, 128);
“oğlanlar devşirdiler,” (Anonymous Giese, 22 text); “oğlan devşir­
diler,” (Uruc, 22). All four texts state that “they collected the youths,”
or, ‘the youths were collected.’ In two cases the actual verb used de­
rives from devshirmek, and in all cases the passages referred to youths.
Devshirme in the sixteenth century seems to have become a definite
terminus technicus referring to the levy of the children of Christian
subjects. But did it mean this exclusively in the fourteenth century
when the practice arose, did it also include the oğlanlar taken from the
captives in war? It is quite possible, though the evidence is certainly
not conclusive, that as Palmer has suggested we have a reference to
the devshirme here as it evolved from the suggestion of Kara Halil Can-
darlï. In short, the reviewer finds the view that the Janissaries and
devshirme were instituted in the reign of Murad I somewhat more con­
sistant with the sources.
However, given the nature of the sources it would seem that any
position one takes (as to the dating of these institutions) is fraught
with difficulties. Certainly the reviewer does not wish to imply that
the publication of Miss Papoulias is without merit. She has brought
together, for the first time, most of the important material which bears
on the subject. In addition she has pointed out that the Ottoman slave
institution has its roots in a tradition going back as far as Ummayid
times. It is to be hoped that the author will continue her researches
on the later history of the devshirme and the Janissaries, subjects still
awaiting research and clarification.
U n iv ersity o f C aliforn ia
L o s A n g ele s
 INDEX

Abbasid: IX 2 1 0 , 21 1 , 2 2 3 , 22 4 , 2 2 6 , 229; XII 225; XIV 145

Abu Bekr: 1 X 2 1 1
Adrianople: VIII 2 3 3 , 234
Ahdath: III 287; X 4 7 f., 56
Akhi: III 289
Alauddin Kaiqobad: XII 22 8 , 2 3 1 , 23 5 , 237 ff.
A lexius, patriarch: III 30 5 , 307
Alp Arslan: II 159
Amaseia (Am asya): VI 7; VIII, 225
Amida: II 170
Am inuddin Mikail: XII 2 2 8 , 236 ff.; XIV 149
Anastasius I: VI 5, 14
Anastasius, patricius: III 305
Anatolia (Asia Minor): II 159 ff.; III 303; V 273; VI 3 ff.; VIII 2 1 0 -2 1 9 , 225 -2 2 7 ,
2 3 0 -2 3 3 ; IX 209 f., 23 1 , 234; XI 3 ff.; XII 24 ff.
A n atolicon, them e: II 162; VII 298
Angelus, Isaac II: VI 14
Ani: II 169; VIII 213
Ankara: VIII 213
Athinganoi: VIII 228
A n thony IV, patriarch: XIII 4 3 6
Antioch: VIII 2 26; X 51-53
Apocapes: V 2 7 4 , 2 7 6 , 277
Apsimar: X 50
Arab: I 162; VII 2 9 7 -299; VIII 21 6 , 2 1 8 , 2 1 9 , 2 2 5 , 226; IX 2 0 6 -2 0 9 , 2 1 7 , 232;
X 46
Arabia: IX 2 0 6 , 209
Arabic: IX 2 0 8 -2 1 0 , 2 2 3 , 226
Arcadius, em peror: VI 5
Ardzrouni: 171
Arghana Maden: VI 10
Argyropolis (Güm üsh Hane): VI 8
Argyros: II 161
Aristotle: I 114; IX 22 6 , 228
Armenia: VI 5, 6; VIII 215
Arm eniakon, them e: VII 298; VIII 225
Armenian: II 162 ff.; V 265; VI 4 , 6; VIII 2 1 7 , 2 2 5 , 227; IX 209; XII 2 2 6 , 227, 229
Artvini: VI 10
al-Ashari: IX 228
Athanasios: I 112
Athanasius, Syrian patriarch: II 170
Athens: VII 2 9 1 , 2 9 2 , 292 n., 2 9 3 , 295
Attica: VI 13
Augoustalios: IX 2 12
Ayyarun: X 4 7 f.
A yyubid: XIV 145
Azerbaijan: VIII 217

Babek: VIII 217

Backogo, m onastery: II 173; V 263, 277
Baghdad: II 159; IX 2 0 8 , 210, 2 2 4 , 226
Bagratouni, Kakig: II 171
Balkans: I 112, 113; IV 245; VI 3, 11 ff.; VIII 23 0 f.; IX 209 f., 23 1 , 234; XI 3 ff.
 2
Bardanius Tourkus: VIII 225
B a s illi: II 159, 160, 162; V 276
Bayazid I: VI 15
Bayt al-Hikma: IX 226
Bedr ed-Din o f Simavna: VIII 233
Bithynia: IV 245 ff.; VIII 215
Bogom il: II 168; VIII 227 f.
Boilas, Bardas: V 273
Boilas, C onstantine: V 273
Boilas, Eustathius: V 263 ff.
Boilas, Petronas: V 273
Boilas, Rom anus: V 27 3, 274
Botaniates: II 161
Botaniates, Nicephorus: II 165; III 2 9 3 , 3 1 0 -313; V 263
Bourtzes: II 161
Bouzina: V 277 ff.
Bucellarion, them e: VII 298, 299
Bulgar: II 162; IV 245 ff.; VII 298; XI 6
Bulgar Maden: VI 10

Cabasilas, C onstantine: III 307

Caesareia: I 111; VIII 2 12 f.
Caliphate: I 9 7 , 98; IX 21 0 f.
Campanares, eparch: III 308
Cappadocia: I 112, 114; V 2 70, 274; VII 298; VIII 2 1 3 , 228
Caria: VIII 221
Casia: II 173
Castamon: VI 9 ff.
Cecaum enus, Catacolon: II 161, 164; III 307, 314; V 276
Celaluddin Karatay ibn Abdullah: XII 2 2 8 , 23 3 , 2 3 5 , 23 7 , 239; XIV 149
Celaluddin Rum i, m ystic: XII 237
Celt: VIII 215
Cephalas, Leo: V 263
Cerasus: VI 4
Cerularius: II 163; III 3 0 9 , 311; VII 297
Chalcedonian: II 1 6 8 -1 70, 172, 173; IX 208
Chalcidice: VI 13
Chaldia, them e: VII 298
Charsianon, them e: VII 298
Charistikia: II 160
Charlemagne: I 96
Charsianon, them e: II 162
Cherson: III 295
Choirosphactes: II 161
Chosroes I: X 5 2 , 5 3 , 5 7 , 58
C hrysostom : I 112
C ibyrrheote, them e: VII 2 9 8 , 299; VIII 21 5 , 2 1 6 , 22 8 , 229
Cimri: XII 236
Circus factions: III 2 9 1 , 3 0 2 , 314; IX 218; X 4 8 ff.
Clazom enae: VIII 219
Coins: VII 2 9 1 , 2 93, 2 93 h., 2 9 4 .dinar: IX 214, 2 1 5 .folleis: VII 297; IX 214, 215.
nom ism a: III 2 9 4 , 2 9 6 , 298; V 296 ff. semissus: VII 291 ; IX 2 1 4 .solidus: I 19;
VII 2 9 1 , 2 9 4 , 2 9 5 , 2 9 8 , 2 99; IX 214. tremissus: VII 291; IX 214
Com m ercium : XIII 441
C om nenus, A lexius I: II 1 59-164; III 3 03, 3 10-312; V 263; VIII 216, 2 1 7 , 2 30-232
C om nenus, Isaac I: II 165; III 309; III 313
C om nenus, John II: VIII 232
Com nenus, Manuel I: III 295; VIII 2 2 9 , 230-232
Constans II: VII 2 9 2 , 2 9 4 , 300
C onstantine I: I 9 5 , 104
 3
C onstantine IV: VII 291
Constantine V: IV 246; VII 290
Constantine VI: VII 297; VIII 226
Constantine VII: IV 246; V 2 7 3 , 275
Constantine IX: II 166; III 308; V 233 f., 276
Constantine X: II 165, 166; III 3 0 9 , 31 0 , 313
C onstantine XI: I 97
Constantinople: II 163; III 302; VII 292; VIII 2 2 2 , 226; IX 211; XI 7
Constantius: I 95
Copt: XI 6, 2 0 8 , 2 0 9 , 2 1 2 , 216
Corinth: I 111; VII 2 9 1 , 29 2 , 2 9 2 n., 293
Corporations: II 165; XIII passim.
Cratovo: VI 15
Crenae: VI 11
Cresconius, count o f minerals and mining: VI 2
Crete: II 159; VII 299; XI 4
Crispin: II 167
Ctesiphon: X 57
Curcuas: II 161
Curticius: II 161
Cyprus: II 159; VI 4 , 16
Cyzicus: X 53 f.

Dacia: VI 11 ff.
Dalassenus: II 161
Dalmatia: VI 12
Daniel, m etropolitan o f Berrhoia: XIII 435
Daniel o f Raithou: V 263
Daphne: X 52 f.
Dardania: VI 12
Datum: VI 11
David, curopalates: V 276
Daylam ite: XII 226
Demes: III 2 9 1 , 3 0 2 -3 0 4 , 3 0 6 -3 0 8 , 314
De M illy, Jacques, Grand Master o f Knights Hospitalers: XIII 441 f.
Devshirme: XII 2 24 ff., 228 ff., 241 ff., 247 ff.; XIV 145 ff., 153
Dhimmi: XIV 146
D idym oteichus: VIII 234
D iocletian: I 9 5 , 104
Diogenes: II 161
Dioscurides: IX 229
Diyarbekir: VI 10
D onation o f C onstantine: II 165
Dorylaeum , battle of: VIII 2 1 6 , 221
Ducas: II 161
Ducas, Andronicus: II 174; V 263
Ducas, John: III 311

Edessa: V 2 7 4 , 275; VIII 2 1 3 , 220

Egypt: VIII 218; IX 2 0 8 -2 1 3 , 224
Eparch (prefect): III 2 9 7 , 3 0 0 , 3 0 5 , 30 8 , 3 1 0 , 311
Ephesus: I 111; VII 297; VIII 2 1 3 , 2 1 6 , 222 -2 2 4
Ermenak: VI 9
Erzinjian (Celesine): VIII 213
Etropolje: VI 14
Euboea: VI 13
Euchaita: VIII 2 1 3 , 215
Euphrates: VI 10
Eusignius, prefect: VI 11
E uthym ius: VIII 2 2 3 , 229
 4
Excuseia: II 160

Fatimid: IX 224
Ferarria: VI 13
Fityan: X 4 7 f., 56
Foederatoi: VIII 225
Frankish mercenaries: XII 229
Fustat: IX 2 1 2 , 213
Futuw wa: X 4 6

Gabriel, archbishop: XIII 43 5 f.

Gainas: III 295
Galatia: VIII 215
Galen: IX 2 2 5 , 226
Gallo-Greeks: VIII 215
G azourou, Lake: VIII 225
G enoese: XIII 4 4 0
Georgian: II 162; XII 226
Germanic invasions: VI 16
G erm iyanids: VI 9; XIV 152
Ghassanids: IX 208
Ghazi: XIII 4 3 3
Ghaznevid: XII 225; XIV 145
al-Ghazzali: IX 228
Glabas: II 16 1 , 161 n.
Glabas, Isidore: XIII 4 3 3 ff.; XIV 146
G otho-G reeks: VIII 215
G oths: VI 11 ff.; VIII 214 f., 217
Gougark: VI 7
Gratian, em peror: VI 5, 11
Greece : VI 13
Greeks: VIII 2 1 7 , 2 2 6 , 2 27; IX 2 0 7 -2 0 9 , 2 2 5 , 231 f.; XI 6
Gregory XIII, pope: XII 248
Guilds: II 165; III 289 ff.
G ulam : XII 224 ff.; XIV 145, 148 ff.
Gümüsh Hane (Argyropolis): VI 10
Gundeshapur: IX 2 0 8 , 226

Haraj ad-dim usiya: IX 212 f.

al-Hariri: IX 229
Harun ar-Rashid: IX 211
Hass Oğuz: XIV 149
Heraclius: III 2 9 4 , 302; X 50
Heresy: VIII 2 1 3 , 2 1 5 , 2 1 6 , 2 2 6 , 227
Hetaireia: V 2 7 3 , 2 9 4 , 313
Hierapolis: V 275
H ippodrom e: III 3 0 2 , 3 07; X 57

Iberians: VIII 225

Iberikon: V 276
Iconium : VIII 2 1 3 , 2 3 2
Iconoclasm : VIII 227
iğdiş: X IV 149
Ignatius, m etropolitan o f M elitene: II 170
Ikshidid: XII 226
Illyricum : VI 12
Ilm: IX 2 2 2
Ioannicius the Great, St.: IV 245 ff.
Iqta: XII 226
Irakli, Georgian King: VI 10
 5
İran: X 4 H
Iranization: IX 224
Islam: IX 2 1 0 , 224; XI 6

Jacobite Syrians: XI 6
Janissaries: XII 224 ft., 241 f f .; XIII 4 3 3 ff.; XIV 146 f., 150 ff.
John O rphanotrophos: II 163
Justin I: X 51
Justin II: 295
Justinian I: I 9 3, 104 f.; Ill 294; VI 6; X 5 1 , 54
Justinian II: III 295; IV 247

Kaballa: VI 4 '
Karaman: VI 9; XII 236
Kars: VI 10
Kavades: VI 6
Keban Maden: VI 10
Kharadj: XIII 441
Khatchik II, catholicus: II 171
Khurassan: XII 2 2 5 , 226
Khurramites: VIII 217
al-Kift: IX 226
Kilij Arslan: III 295
Kopaonik: VI 15
Kratovo: VI 13

Lakhmids: IX 208
Laurion: VI 11
Law, Islamic: IX 221 -2 2 3
Lazarus o f G alesium , St.: VIII 229
Lecapenus, Rom anus: V 273
Leo III: III 62 ; VII 2 9 1 , 294, 297; X 50
Leo IV: III 295
Leo V: VIII 225
Leontius: X 50
Lycian: I 112
Lydian: I 112

Macedonian dynasty: I 104; III 302

M acedonia: VI 11, 13
M ademochoria: VI 13
Maleinus: II 161, 162; V 270
M amelukes: XII 225 ff.; XIV 145, 152
al-Mamun: IX 226
Mananaghi: VI 7
Manichees: VIII 2 1 5 , 22 8 , 229
Mandate: II 171
Maniaces: II 16 1 , 170
Manzikert: II 159, 172, 174; V 275
Marcionism: VIII 2 2 6 , 229
Mardaites: VII 299; VIII 217
Marykatos: IV 2 4 5 , 246
Melias: II 161
Melitene: VIII 2 1 3 , 220
M esopotam ia: VIII 218; X 48
Messalians: VIII 2 2 8 , 229
Metallus: VI 13
Michael Rhangabe: X 50
Michael II: VIII 225
Michael V: II 165; III 29 3 , 3 03-308
 6
Michael VI: Il 165; 111 293, 309
Michael VII: 164, 165; III 293, 311, 313; V 263
Michael, dux : V 264 ff., 274, 275
M iletopolis: IV 246
Mines: VI passim.
M ongol: VIII 220; XII 226
M onom achus: II 161, 163
M onophysite: II 1 6 8-170, 172, 175; IX 208
Moesia: VI 11, 13
M ontanism: VIII 213 f., 227 ff.
M ount Pangaeus: VI 11, 13, 14
M ount Sandaracurgium: VI 4
M uawiyya: IX 211
M uhammad, the prophet: XIV 146
Muhammad I (M ehmed): VI 9
Muhammad II (M ehmed): VI 15; XII 242; XIII 4 3 3 , 4 4 0
Muhtesib: IX 218; X 47
Musele: II 161
M utazilites: IX 228

Neaniai: X 52-5 4 , 59
Neo-Phrygian: VIII 21 4 , 215, 226, 227
Nestorians: VIII 215; IX 208, 226
Nicaea: III 20; VIII 2 1 3 , 224
Nicephorus I: VII 2 9 7 , 298; VIII 224, 225
Notaras, Lucas: XIII 4 4 2
Novo Brdo: VI 15
Novatianism : VIII 227

Ochrid: VI 13
O psicion, them e: VII 2 9 8, 299; VIII 2 1 6 , 225, 2 2 6 , 228
O ptim aton, them e: II 162
Orkhan: XIII 4 3 3 f.; XIV 146, 147, 151 f.
Origen: I 114
Osman: VIII 234; XIV 152
O ttom an: III 299; VI 4; VIII 233, 234; IX 210, 2 3 0 -2 3 2 , 235; XI 3 ff.; XIII 4 3 3 ff.;
XIV 145 ff., 150, 153

Pacurianus, Gregory: II 173; V 263

Pahlevi: IX 2 0 8 , 226
Painting, Arab: IX 2 1 9 , 229
Paipurt: VI 8 ff.
Palaeologus: II 161
Palaeologus, Thom as: XIII 441
Paphlagonian dynasty: III 296
Patzinaks: II 162; V 2 7 3 , 276
Paulicians: VIII 2 1 5 -2 1 6 , 2 2 7 - 2 2 9
P eloponnese: I 113
Pergamum: VII 292
Persia: VI 5; VIII 217; IX 2 0 7 -2 1 0 , 229; X 52
Phanariots: IX 236
Pharesmanes, vestarch: V 2 7 2 , 274
Philaretus: V 274
Philetus, bishopric: VIII 229
Philocales: II 163
Phocas: II 161; X 5 0 , 51
Phrygia: VIII 2 1 3 , 215
Phrygian: I 112; VIII 214
Phundagiagites-Bogom ils: VIII 2 1 6 , 228
Plato: I 114; IX 226
 7
Pom akκ: XI 4
Porphyry: IX 226
Proclus: IX 226
Proexarchontes: III 3 0 3 , 304
Pronoia: II 160

Qusayr Amra: IX 2 20

Ragusa: VI 14, 15
al-Razi: IX 228
Rentacius: II 161
Rom anus II: III 300
Rom anus III: V 275
Rom anus IV: II 165, 17 1 , 172; V 274
Roum anian Principalities: XI 7
Russia: II 159; XI 10 »
Russians: XII 226

Sabaeans o f Harran: IX 208

Sabbatians: VIII 228
Sassanids: VI 5; IX 2 1 0 , 224
Saxon: 12 ff., 14, 17
Sclavenes: VIII 217
Scleros: II 161
Sebasteia: II 170, 172
Selinas: VIII 214
Seljuks: II 159 ff.; V 2 7 4 , 276; VI 7; VIII 220; IX 210, 230, 2 3 2 , 2 3 4 , 235; XII 224 ff.
XIV 145, 145 ff.
Senate: III 3 0 9 , 310
Sharia: XIII 4 3 8 ; XIV 146
Sicily: I 92; III 307
Siderocausa-M adem ochoria: VI 13 ff.
Sinope: VI 4 , 9 ff.
Slavery: VII 296; IX 23 4 ; XI 9; XIV 145 ff.
Slavs: IV 245 ff.; VI 3, 16, 17; VIII 226; XI 3-5
Smyrna: VIII 2 1 0 -2 1 3 , 2 1 7 -2 1 9 , 222
St. Sophia, church: III 2 9 9 , 300, 303, 3 0 7 , 30 9 , 311; VI 13; VIII 230
Sounion: VI 13, 16
Spahis: XIII 4 3 7
Stephan Urosh II Milutin: VI 14-15
Strym on: VI 11 ; VII 2 9 8 , 299
Studion, m onastery of: III 307, 308
Sym m achus: IX 229
Synadennus: II 161
Synesius o f Cyrene: I 103
Syria: I 92; VIII 2 18; IX 2 0 8 -2 1 0 , 217; X 4 6 , 4 7 , 51
Syrians: VIII 227; IX 2 0 8 , 209

Tabi: IX 213 n.
Taiq: II 169; V 2 7 4 , 275
Tantalus: VIII 2 2 0
Taron: II 169
Taronites: II 161
Tax: VII 299; IX 2 1 2 , 2 1 3, 234 f. çift resmi: IX 2 3 4 , corvee: IX 2 1 2 , 2 1 3.dapane:
IX 21 3 . dem osia: IX 212 f. em bola: IX 213. exem p tion s from: VIII 231.
extraordina: IX 21 2 , 2 13; nam çift: IX 234. poll: IX 213
Tessaracontopechys: II 161
Theodora: III 3 0 7 , 308
T heodosius II: VI 2, 5
Thessalonica: 1 1 1 1
 8
Thrace: VI 13; VIII 226
Thracesian, them e: VII 298; VIII 222
Tımar: XI 8
Timur: XIII 4 4 2
Toghrul Beg (Tughril Bey): II 159; V 274
Tornices, Leo: III 308; V 276
Tornicius: II 161
Trebizond: III 20; VI 4 , 10; VIII 2 1 2 , 224; XI 10
Turkish conquest: VIII 21 1 , 2 1 6 , 2 1 9 , 2 2 4 , 2 3 1 , 2 3 3 , 234
Turkmens: XI 8; XII 226
Turks: VI 16; VIII 2 1 2 , 2 1 6 -2 1 8 , 2 2 0 -2 2 3 , 2 3 2 , 233; IX 232
Tzim isces: II 161

Ulema: XIII 4 3 8 f.
Um ayyad: IX 2 1 0 , 2 1 1 , 22 0 , 2 2 3 , 2 24; XIV 145, 146, 153
Umur o f Aydın: VIII 234
U thm an, caliph: XIV 145

Vahram V, Armenian king: VI 5

V ak f (see also Waqf): XII 2 3 4 , 238
Valens: VI 2, 5, 11
V alentinian: VI 2, 5, 11
Vaspuracan: II 169
Vatatzes: II 161
Venice: II 160; VII 291
Vlachs: II 162; XI 6

Waqf (see also Vakf): XI 8

Xiphilinus: II 163

Yaya: XIII 4 3 9 ; XIV 152

Zalatna: VI 12
Zelebrinaza: VI 15
Zeno: X 51
Zoe: III 30 3 -3 0 8

This volume contains a total o f 280 pages