No More Learning

On the very eve
of the final catastrophe in 1453, the great capital still vaunted her
military power and “this crown of ramparts, which was surpassed not
even by those of Babylon. ”
Within this vast enclosure there stretched henceforward a magnificent
city. Built like Rome on seven hills, she was divided like the former
CH. XXIV.


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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

760
The populace
him with their rhythmic acclamations. But, although less formidable to
the State, the games of the Hippodrome were no less dear to the people,
and the population of the capital still remained a source of constant
preoccupation to the imperial government.
It was not an easy matter to keep the peace in this cosmopolitan multi-
tude, constantly augmented by the undesirables who flocked from the
provinces to the capital, an idle populace, impressionable, restless, turbu-
lent, and discontented, which passed with equal facility from cheers to
abuse, from enjoyment to mutiny, from enthusiasm to discouragement.
Agitators found it easy to exert an influence over this superstitious and
devout populace, always ready to believe the prophecies of soothsayers
or the miracles of the holy images, and to credit all the rumours, false or
true, which were abroad in the city. In a few hours the multitude
became excited and infuriated; they were passionately interested in
religious and political questions, and under the leadership of the monks
who directed them, or of politicians who made use of them, they often
imposed their will on the palace. Eager for gossip, they delighted in
pamphlets, in abuse, in brawling and idle opposition. Moreover there
was much corruption in the city. Houses of ill-fame established them-
selves at the very church doors; in the police orders are recorded the
impious blasphemies, the rage for gambling, the licentious morals, the
affrays which constantly took place in drinking-booths, and the con-
sequent necessity of closing the latter at seven o'clock in the evening,
the number of thieves, and the insecurity of the streets during the night.
“If Constantinople,” said a writer of the twelfth century, “surpasses all
other cities in wealth, she also surpasses them in vice. " Thus it was a
hard task for the Prefect of the City, entrusted with the policing of the
capital, to maintain order in this fickle, passionate, bloodthirsty, and
ferocious crowd, always ready to blame the Emperor when dissatisfied
with anything. Exempt from all taxation, the populace were fed by the
government, who distributed bread, wine, and oil gratuitously, and it
was no small matter to ensure supplies for the enormous capital, to
regulate exactly the arrival of wheat from Egypt, as was done by
Justinian, to supervise, as is shown by the Book of the Prefect at the
end of the ninth century, the making of bread and the sale of fish and
meat. Then the populace had to be amused by games in the circus, and
by dazzling pomps and ceremonies, which thus became means of govern-
ment.
Above all it had to be mastered, sometimes severely, by bloody
repression. Nevertheless imperial authority had often to yield when
popular fury was unchained. From the twelfth century onwards, we
even find the dregs of the Byzantine people, the poorer classes of the
great cities, becoming organised to give voice to their demands, and for
social struggles; the history of the “ Naked” (youvoi) in Corfù in the
twelfth century, and that of the “ Zealots” in Thessalonica in the four-
teenth, betray a vague tendency towards a communistic movement.
לי


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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

772
Power of the great nobles
of the thirteenth century, the Latins conquered the Byzantine Empire,
they easily identified the Greek archon with the Western baron, and
the peasant tied to the land (Trápoukos) with the villeins they had at
home. And indeed the place occupied in this apparently absolute
monarchy by feudalism was not the least curious nor the least surprising
thing in the history of Byzantium.
Nor was this all. By the fact of regional recruiting, the soldiers who
were placed under the command of these great nobles in the army were
very often their clients and vassals in civil life; they knew their leaders,
their illustrious descent, their wealth, and their exploits; they appreci-
ated their liberality and the value of their protection. These soldiers
therefore displayed whole-hearted devotion and fidelity to their generals;
they obeyed these leaders whom they admired much more readily than
the distant Emperor. Moreover, although the great barons were generally
faithful subjects, they were always unruly ones; they treated the Emperor
almost as an equal; they considered that they had a right to give him
advice, and were very much surprised if he did not follow it in every par-
ticular. Finally, a firm solidarity arising from community of interests, rein-
forced by numerous family marriages and maintained by a common life of
exploits and dangers, united the members of this aristocracy. Entrenched
in their impregnable castles, proud of their wealth, their popularity, and
their prestige, these great feudal lords were therefore quite naturally
inclined to lay down the law to the Emperor, to express their dissatis-
faction, or to manifest their ambition by formidable insurrections. The
second half of the tenth century was full of these great feudal insurrections,
with which are associated the names of Bardas Phocas and Bardas Sclerus,
and which caused such serious trouble to the Byzantine Empire. There
we see what close bonds of devotion and fidelity united the great barons
and the men of their native province, how community of interests and of
sentiments made all these archons into one caste, and what proud and
magnificent figures were produced by this aristocratic Byzantine society.