CHAPTER V.

CONDITION OF THE GREEKS FROM THE MOHAMMEDAN INVASION OF SYRIA TO THE EXTINCTION OV THE ROMAN POWER IN THE EAST. A. D. 633-716.

 

SECT. 1.        THE ROMAN EMPIRE GRADUALLY CHANGED INTO THE BYZANTINE.

The precise date at which the eastern Roman empire ceased to exist has been variously fixed. Gibbon re­marks, “ that Tiberius by the Arabs, and Maurice by the Italians, arc distinguished as the first of the Greek Cpesars, as the founders of a new dynasty and empire.”¹ But if manners, language, and religion are to decide concerning the commencement of the Byzantine empire, the preceding pages have shown that its origin must be carried hack to an earlier period ; while, if the ad­ministrative peculiarities in the form of government be taken as the ground of decision, the Roman empire may be considered as indefinitely prolonged with the

¹ Gibbon's Decline and Full «J' the Roman Empire, vii. 3S, rh,q>. liii.

432

EXTINCTION OF THE ROMAN POWER.

chat. iv. existence of t-lie title of Roman emperor, which the sovereigns of Constantinople continued to retain as long as Constantinople was ruled by Christian princes. While the prejudices of the governing classes, both in Church and State, kept them completely separated from the national feelings of every race of their subjects, and rendered the imperial administration, and the people of the empire, two distinct bodies, with dif­ferent, and frequently adverse views and interests, the spirit of Roman domination continued to animate the government, and guide the councils of the emperor. The period, therefore, at which the Roman empire of the East terminated, is decided by the events which confined the authority of the imperial government to those provinces where the Greeks formed the majority of the population ; and it is marked by the adoption of Greek as the language of the government, by the prevalence of Greek civilisation, and by the identifica­tion of the nationality of the people, and the policy of the emperors with the Greek church. For, when the Saracen conquests had severed from the empire all those provinces which possessed a native population distinct from the Greeks, by language, literature, and religion, the central government of Constantinople was gradually compelled to fall back on the interests and passions of the remaining inhabitants, who were chiefly Greeks ; and though Roman principles of administra­tion continued to exercise a powerful influence in sepa­rating the aristocracy, both in Church and State, from the body of the people, still public opinion, among the educated classes, began to exert some influence on the administration, and that public opinion was in its character really Greek. Yet, as it was by no means identified with the interests and feelings of the native inhabitants of Hellas, it ought correctly to be termed Byzantine, and the empire is, consequently, justly called

TRANSFORMATION OF THE EMPIRE.

433

the Byzantine empire. As the relics of the Macedo­nian empire at last overpowered the Roman element in the Eastern Empire, the court of Constantinople be­came identified with the feelings and interests of that portion of the Greek nation which, in Asia, owed its political existence to the Macedonian conquests; and 011 the numbers, wealth, and power of this class, the emperor and the orthodox church were, after the com­mencement of the eighth century, compelled to depend for the defence of the government and the Christian religion.

The difficulty of fixing the precise moment which marks the end of the Roman empire, arises from the circumstance of its having perished, rather from the internal evils nourished in its political organisation, than from the attacks of its external enemies. The termination of the Roman power was consequently nothing more than the reform of a corrupt and anti­quated government, and its transformation into a new state by the power of time and circumstance was feebly aided by the intellects and acts of superstitious and servile men. The Goths, Huns, Avars, Persians, and Saracens, all failed as completely in overthrow­ing the Roman empire, as the Mohammedans did in destroying the Christian religion. For even the final loss of Egypt, Syria, and Africa only reveals the transformation of the Roman empire, when the consequences of the change begin to produce visible effects on the internal government. The Roman em­pire seems, therefore, really to have terminated with the anarchy which followed the murder of Justinian [I., the last sovereign of the family of Heraclius ; and Leo III., or the Isaurian, who identified the imperial ad­ministration with ecclesiastical forms and questions, must be ranked as the first of the Byzantine monarchs, though neither the emperor, the clergy, nor the people

WA EXTINCTION OF THE ROMAN POWER.

c 11 a p. v. perceived at the time the moral change in their posi- ' tion, which makes the establishment of this new era historically correct.

Under the sway of the Heraclian family, the extent of the empire was circumscribed nearly within the bounds which it continued to occupy during many subsequent centuries. As this diminution of territory w^ras chiefly caused by the separation of provinces, in­habited by people of different races, manners, and opinions, and placed, by a concurrence of circum­stances, in opposition to the central government, it is not improbable that the empire was actually strength­ened by the loss. The connection between the Con- stantinopolitan court and the Greek nation became closer ; and though this connection, in so far as it affected the people, was chiefly based on religious and not on political feelings, and operated with greater force on the inhabitants of the cities than on the whole body of the population, still its effect was ex­tremely beneficial to the imperial government.

While the Roman and Persian empires, ruined by their devastating wars, had rapidly declined in wealth, power, and population, two nations had grown up to the possession of a greatly increased importance, and taken their place as arbiters of the fate of mankind. The Turks in the north of Asia, and the Arabs in the south, were now the most numerous and the most powerful nations in immediate contact with the civilised portion of mankind. The Turkish power of this time, however, never came into direct military relations with the Roman empire, nor did the conquests of this race immediately affect the political and social condition of the Greeks, until some centuries later.¹ With the Arabs, or Sara-

¹ The Turks, by their wars with Persia at this period, facilitated the conquest of the Persian empire by the Arabs. There is an excellent description of the Saracens before the time of Mahomet in Ammianus Mareellinus, xiv. 4.

¹  ARABS.                 435

I cens, the case was very different. As they were placed I on the confines of Syria, Egypt, and Persia, the dis­turbances caused by the wars of Heraclius and Clios- t roes threw a considerable portion of the rich trade t with Ethiopia, Southern Africa, and India, into their hands. The long hostilities between the two empires gave a constant occupation to the warlike population of Arabia, and directed the attention of the Arabs to views of extended national policy. The natural advan- : tages of their unrivalled cavalry were augmented by | habits of order and discipline, which they could never have acquired in their native deserts. The Saracens I in the service of the empire are spoken of with praise by Heraclius in his last campaign, when they accom­panied him into the heart of Persia.¹ The profits derived from their increased commercial and military adventures had doubtless given the population of Arabia a tendency to increase. The cdict of Justi­nian, which prohibited the exportation of grain from ' every port of Egypt except Alexandria, must have closed the canal of Suez, and put an end to the trade on the Red Sea, or at least thrown whatever trade remained into the hands of the Arabians.² Their it intimate connection with the Roman and Persian armies had revealed to them the weakness of the two empires ; yet the extraordinary power and conquests I of the Arabs must be attributed, rather to the moral i t strength which the nation acquired by the influence of , ' their prophet Mahomet, than to the extent of their i improvement in military or political knowledge. The difference in the social circumstances of a declining dl and an advancing population must not be lost sight i-V of in weighing the relative strength of nations, which

;if ¹ C'hronicon Pits clinic, 311S.

k;| " Corpus Juris Cictlis, Edict xiii., “ De Alexandrini.s ct ^Egyptiaeis j>ro- vinciis.”

A. D.

(333-710.

436

EXTINCTION OF THE ROMAN POWER.

chap. v. appear the most dissimilar in wealth and population,                              1

and even in the extent of their military establishments.               1

Nations which, like the inhabitants of the Roman and                                  1

Persian empires in the seventh century, expend their                                I

whole revenues, public and private, in the course of                                        "

the year, though composed of numerous and wealthy                            !

subjects, may prove weak when a sudden emergency                                         ^:

requires extraordinary exertion ; while a people with                                S

scanty revenues and small resources may, from its                                        !

frugal habits and constant activity, command a larger                               ;

superfluity of its annual revenues for great public                                       <

works or military enterprises. In one case it may be                                        !

impossible to assemble more than one-twentieth of the                                   !

population under arms; in the other, it may be pos-                                         '

sible to take the field with one-fifth.     i

SECT. II.—CONQUEST OF THE SOUTHERN PROVINCES OF THE EMPIRE, j!

OF WHICH THE MAJORITY OF TIIE POPULATION WAS NOT GREEK |

NOR ORTHODOX.

Strange as were the vicissitudes in the fortunes of j the Persian and Roman empires during the reigns of I Chosroes and Heraclius, every event in their records ¹ sinks into comparative insignificance, from the mighty influence which their contemporary Mahomet, the I¹ prophet of Arabia, soon began to exercise on the poli­tical, moral, and religious condition of the countries ’ ¹ whose possession these sovereigns had so eagerly dis-1 puted. Historians are apt to be enticed from their I t immediate subject, in order to contemplate the personal' J history of a man who obtained so marvellous a domi- {.s nion over the minds and actions of his followers; n I* and whose talents laid the foundations of a political ‘ I and religious system, which has ever since continued I ,4

to govern millions of mankind, of various races and f I & i.

dissimilar manners. The success of Mahomet as a law- j 8

MAHOMET.

437

giver, among the most ancient nations of Asia, and the stability of his institutions during a long series of generations, and in every condition of social polity, prove that this extraordinary man was formed by a rare combination of the qualities both of a Lycurgus and an Alexander. But still, in order to appreciate with perfect justness the influence of Mahomet on his own times, it is safer to examine the history of his contem­poraries with reference to his conduct, and to fix our attention exclusively on his actions and opinions, than to trace from them the exploits of his followers, and attribute to them the rapid propagation of his religion. Even though it be admitted that Mahomet laid the foundations of his laws in the strongest principles of human nature, and prepared the fabric of his empire with the profoundest wisdom, still there can be no doubt that the intelligence of 110 man could, during his lifetime, have foreseen, and 110 combinations 011 the part of one individual could have insured, the extraor­dinary success of his followers. The laws which govern 1 the moral world insure permanent success, even to the . greatest minds, only as long as they form types of the mental feelings of their fellow-creatures. The circum­stances of the age in which Mahomet lived, were in­deed favourable to his career; they formed the mind of this wonderful man, who has left their impress, as well as that of his own character, on succeeding generations. He was born at a period of visible intel­lectual decline amongst the aristocratic and governing

O    OO

classes throughout the civilised world. Aspirations after something better than the then social condition of the bulk of mankind, had rendered the inhabitants of , almost every country dissatisfied with the existing | order of things. A better religion than the paganism of the Arabs was felt to be necessary in Arabia ; and, fat the same time, even the people of Persia, Syria, and

a. r>. G33-71G.

chap. v.

438 EXTINCTION OF THE ROMAN POWER.

Egypt, required something more satisfactory to their religious feelings than the disputed doetrines which the Magi, Jews, and Christians inculcated as the most im­portant features of their respective religions, merely because they presented the points of greatest dissi­milarity. The great success of Mani in propagating a new religion (for Manicheism cannot properly be called a heresy) is a strong testimony of this feeling. The fate, too, of the Manieheans, would probably have foreshadowed that of the Mohammedans, had the reli­gion of Mahomet not presented to foreign nations a national cause as well as an universal creed. Had Mahomet himself met with the fate of Mani, it is not probable that his religion would have been more suc­cessful than that of his predecessor. But he found a whole nation in the full tide of rapid improvement, eagerly in search of knowledge and power. The excite­ment in the public mind of Arabia, which produced the mission of Mahomet, induced many other prophets to make their appearance during his lifetime. His superior talents, and his clearer perception of justice, and, we may say, truth, destroyed all their schemes.¹

The misfortunes of the times had directed public opinion in the East to a belief that unity was the thing principally wanting to cure the existing evils, and secure the permanent happiness of mankind. This vague desire of unity is indeed no uncommon delusion of the human intellect. Mahomet seized the idea ; his f creed, “ there is but one God,” was a truth that in- , surcd universal assent; the addition, “ and Mahomet ¹ is the prophet of God/’ was a simple fact, which, if doubted, admitted of an appeal to the sword, an argu­ment that, even to the minds of the Christian world, ¹ was long considered as an appeal to God. The principle *

¹                                 Oukley’s 1 list, of the Saracens, i. 13, edit. 1757. Sale’s Koran, Prel. Dis. i. 23S. Gibbon’s Decline and Fall, chap. Ii.     I

i

MAHOMET.

W.)

of unity was soon embodied in the frame of Arabic society ; the unity of God, the national unity of the Arabs, and the unity of the religious, civil, judicial, and military administration, in one organ 011 earth, entitled the Mohammedans to assume, with justice, the name of Unitarians, a title in which they particularly gloried.¹ Such sentiments, joined to the declaration made and long kept by the Saracens, that liberty of conscience was granted to all who would put themselves under the protection of Islam, were enough to secure the good­will of that numerous body of the population of both the Persian and the Roman empires which was opposed to the state religion, and which was continually ex­posed to persecution by these two bigoted governments. In Persia, Chosroes persecuted the orthodox Christians with as much cruelty as Heraclius tormented Jews and heretics within the bounds of the empire.² The ability with which Mahomet put forward his creed removed it entirely from the schools of theology, and secured among the people a secret feeling in favour of its justice, particularly when its votaries appeared as offering a refuge to the oppressed, and a protection against religious persecution.

As this work only proposes to notice the influence of Mohammedanism 011 the fortunes and condition of the Greek nation, it is not necessary to narrate in de­tail the progress of the Arab conquests in the Roman empire. The first hostilities between the followers of Mahomet and the Roman troops occurred while TTerac- lius was at Jerusalem, engaged in celebrating the restor­ation of the holy cross, bearing it 011 his own shoulders up Mount Calvary, and persecuting the Jews by driving them out of their native city.³ In his desire to obtain

¹     Ockley’s Hist, of the Snrticcns, i. 197.

²     Tlieophanes, Cliron. 2.r2. Elmacin, Hist. iSarac. pp. 1*2, 14.

³     The holy cross was replaced in the Church of the Resurrection on the 14th September G‘29. In the month of Djoumadi 1 , in the eighth year of the

a. D.

G33-710'.

440 EXTINCTION OF THE ROMAN POWER.

CHAP. V. the favour of Heaven by purifying the Holy City, lie

       overlooked the danger which his authority might incur

from the hatred and despair of his persecuted subjects. \ The first military operations of the Arabs excited little alarm in the minds of the emperor and his officers in Syria ; the Roman forces had always been accustomed to repel the incursions of the Saracens with ease ; the irregular cavalry of the desert, though often successful ¹ in plundering incursions, had hitherto proved ineffective against the regularly disciplined and completely armed ■ troops of the empire. But a new spirit was now infused i| into the Arabian armies ; and the implicit obedience which the troops of the Prophet paid to his commands, | rendered their discipline as superior to that of the im­perial forces, as their tactics and their arms were in- ⁽ ferior.   '

Mahomet did not live to profit by the experience i . which his followers gained in their first struggle with ¹ the Romans. A long series of wars in Arabia ended in ₍ the destruction of many rival prophets, and at last | united the Arabs into one great nation under the i spiritual rule of Mahomet. But Aboubekr, who sue- I ceeded to his power as chief of the true believers, was jl compelled, during the first year of his government, to i renew the contest, in consequence of fresh rebellions and insurrections of false prophets, who expected to _; profit by the death of Mahomet. When tranquillity j was established in Arabia, Aboubekr commenced those j wars for the propagation of Mohammedanism which destroyed the Persian empire of the Sassanides, and j extinguished the power of Rome in the East. The \ Christian Arabs who owned allegiance to Heraclius were j first attacked in order to complete the unity of Arabia, j by forcing them to embrace the religion of Mahomet.

Hogira (September 629), war broke out between the Christian subjects of the ¹ empire and the Saracens, followers of Mahomet.                 ,

CONQUEST OF SYRIA.

In the year G33 the Mohammedans invaded Syria, where their progress was rapid, although Heraclius himself ’ was in the neighbourhood, for he generally resided at Emesa or Antioch, in order to devote his constant at­tention to restoring Syria to a state of order and obe­dience. The imperial troops made considerable efforts to support the military renown of the Roman armies, but were almost universally unsuccessful. The emperor did not neglect his duty ; he assembled all the troops that he could collect, and intrusted the command of the army to his brother Theodore, who had distinguished himself in the Persian wars by gaining an important victory in very critical circumstances.¹ Vartan, who commanded after Theodore, had also distinguished him­self in the last glorious campaign in Persia.² Unfor­tunately the health of Heraclius prevented his taking the field in person.³ The absence of all moral checks in the Roman administration, and the total want of patriotism in the officers and troops at this period, ren­dered the personal influence of the emperor necessary at the head of his armies, in order to preserve due sub­ordination, and enforce union among the leading men in the empire, as each individual was always more oc­cupied in intriguing to gain some advantage over his colleagues than in striving to advance the service of the State. The ready obedience and devoted patriotism of the Saracens formed a sad contrast to the insubor­dination and treachery of the Romans, and would fully explain the success of the Mohammedan arms, without the assistance of any very extraordinary impulse of re­ligious zeal, with which, however, there can be 110 doubt | the Arabs were deeply imbued. The easy conquest of Syria by the Arabs is by no means so wonderful as the

¹ Theophancs, Citron. 2G3.

¹     Ibid. 2G.5. Either in the year G3t or (>3G.

³     Nicophorus Con.stautinopolitiunis, p. 17. Oekley, Hist Same. i. 271.

EXTINCTION OF THE ROMAN POWER.

cftap. v. facility with which they governed it when conquered, and the tranquillity of the population under their government.

Towards the end of the year 633, the troops of Abou- bekr laid siege to Bostra, a strong frontier town of Syria, which was surrendered early in the following year by the treachery of its governor.¹ During the campaign of 634 the Roman armies were defeated at Adjnadin, in the south of Palestine, and at a bloody and decisive battle on the banks of the river Yermouk. in which it is said that the imperial troops were commanded by the emperor’s brother Theodore. Theodore was replaced by Vartan, but the rebellion of Vartan’s army and another defeat terminated this general’s career.² In the third year of the war the Saracens gained possession of Damascus by capitulation, and they guaranteed to the inhabitants the full exercise of their municipal privileges, allowed them to use their local mint, and left the ortho­dox in possession of the great church of St John. About the same time, Heraclius quitted Edessa and returned to Constantinople, carrying with him the holy cross which he had recovered from the Persians, and deposited at Jerusalem with great solemnity only six years before, but which he now considered it necessary to remove into Europe for greater safety. His son, Heraclius Constantine, who had received the imperial title when an infant, remained in Syria to supply his place and direct the military operations for the defence of the province.³ The events of this campaign illustrate the

¹                          For the chronology of the Syrian war, see the table at the commencement of this volume. I have followed Weil, Geschtchte der Chalifen. But the con­fusion is often so great as to defy all explanation.  '

²     Ockley (i. 70) names this general Werdan, and says he was slain at the battle of Adjnadin. Theoplianes (Chron. p. 280) calls him Vahan (iWvjjs), and mentions the rebellion of his army. Eutychius (ii. 276) says he retired from the field of battle, and became a monk at Mount Sinai.

³     Theoplianes, Chron. 2S0. Ockley’s Arabian authorities confounded the young Heraclius with his father.—See p. 271, where the father is spoken of when he could not be in Syria, and the son is mentioned at p. 282. I follow Theoplianes as the best authority in what relates to Heraclius.

JERUSALEM.

448

feelings of the Syrian population. The Arabs plundered , a.d. _ a great fair at the monastery of Abilkodos, about thirty ³ ' ' miles from Damascus ; and the Syrian towns, alarmed for their wealth, and indifferent to the cause of their rulers, began to negotiate separate truces with the Arabs. Indeed, wherever the imperial garrison was not sufficient to overawe the inhabitants, the native Syrians sought to make any arrangement with the Arabs which would insure their towns from plunder, feeling satisfied that the Arab authorities could not use their power with greater rapacity and cruelty than the imperial officers. The garrison of Emesa defended itself for a year in the vain hope of being relieved by the Roman army, and they obtained favourable terms from the Saracens, even after this long defence. Arethusa (Res- tan), Epiphanea (Hama), Larissa (Schizar), and Helio­polis (Baalbec), all entered into treaties, which led to their becoming tributary to the Saracen. Chalcis (Kinesrin) alone was plundered as a punishment for its tardy submission, or for some violation of a truce.

No general arrangements, either for defence or submis­sion, were adopted by the Christians, whose ideas of political union had been utterly extinguished by the Roman power, and who were now satisfied if they could preserve their lives and properties, without seeking any guarantee for the future. The Romans still retained some hope of reconquering Syria, until the loss of another decisive battle in the year G3(J compelled them to abandon the province.¹ In the following year, a.d.

' ¹ Theophanos (f'hron. p. 280) appears to place the buttle of Yermouk in this year, and speaks of Vahan defeated at Yermouk, as the same person who com­manded in the second campaign, and whom the Arabian historian distinguishes.

This Vahan is called Mahan by Ockley (i. 29), who follows the authority of Theo- phanes for the date of the battle of Yennouk. Theophanes, however, indicates that the battle of Yermouk followed immediately after the death of Aboubekr, and appears to have confused the two great battles which decided the fate ot Syria. Ockley’s conjecture that Manuel w:is meant lias been copied in the Universal History, and by Le lieau. 15oth Vartan and Vahan arc; Armenian names. Manuel, who subsequently commanded in Egypt, was also an Armenian.

Le Beau, Jlistnirc ifu Jhat-L'nijnre, xi.— Notes de Saint Martin.

444 EXTINCTION OF THE ROMAN EMPIRE.

ciiAr. v. G37, the Arabs advanced to Jerusalem, and the sur­render of the holy city was marked by arrangements between the patriarch Sophronius and the caliph Omar, who repaired in person to Palestine to take possession of so distinguished a conquest.¹ The conditions of the capitulation indicate that the Christian patriarch looked rather to the protection of his own bishopric than to his duty to his country and his sovereign. The facility with which the Greek patriarch of Jerusalem, Sophronius, at this time, and the patriarch of Constantinople, Gennad- dius, at the time of the conquest of the Byzantine empire by Mohammed II. (a. d. 1453), became the ministers of their Mohammedan conquerors, shows the slight hold which national feelings retained over the minds of the orthodox Greek clergy.² It appears strange that Sophronius, who was the head of a Greek and Melchite congregation, livina: in the midst of a numerous and

O    O     >      o

hostile Jacobite population, should have so readily con­sented to abandon his connection with the Greek em­pire and the orthodox church, when both religion and policy seemed so strongly to demand greater firmness ; and on this very account, his conduct must be admitted to afford evidence of the humanity and good faith with which the early Mohammedans fulfilled their promises.³ The state of society in the Roman provinces rendered it impossible to replace the great losses which the armies had suffered in the Syrian campaigns ; and the finan-

¹     During the middle ages the Christians forged a document purporting to be a charter of protection to the inhabitants of Jerusalem by the prophet Ma­homet himself, dated in the fourth year of the Hegira, but it is doubtful whether this forgery is as old as the first crusade. A Latin text is given in Negociations de la France dans Ic Levant, i. xvi.

2    The Greek patriarchs of this age did little honour to their religion. Pyr­rhus, patriarch of Constantinople, when banished after the death of Heraclius, renounced his Monothelite opinions in orthodox Africa, and made a public ab­juration of them at llome before Pope Theodore. Yet when he visited Ravenna, he as publicly returned to his Monothelite belief.

³     The violence with which Sophronius had opposed the opinions of the Monothelites, may have induced him to confound treason with orthodoxy. —Acta Sanctorum, t<>m. ii. 05.

CONQUEST OF MESOPOTAMIA.

cial resources of the empire forbade any attempt to raise a mercenary force among the northern nations suffi­ciently powerful to meet the Saracens in the field. Yet the exertions of Heraclius were so great that he concen­trated an army at Amida (Diarbekr) in the year 638, which made a bold attempt to regain possession of the north of Syria. Emesa was besieged; but the Saracens soon assembled an overwhelming force ; the Romans were defeated, the conquest of Syria was completed, and Mesopotamia was invaded.¹ The subjection of Syria and Palestine was not effected by the Saracens until they laboured through five vigorous campaigns, and fought several bloody battles. The contest affords conclusive testimony that the reforms of Heraclius had already restored the discipline and courage of the Roman armies ; but, at the same time, the indifference of the native population to the result of the wars testifies with equal certainty that he had made comparatively small progress in his civil and financial improve­ments.²

The Arab conquest not only put an end to the political power of the Romans, which had lasted seven hun­dred years, but it also soon rooted out every trace of the Greek civilisation introduced by the conquests of Alex­ander the Great, and which had flourished in the country for upwards of nine centuries.³ A considerable number of native Syrians endeavoured to preserve their indepen­dence, and retreated into the fastnesses of Mount Leba­non, where they continued to defend themselves. Under the name of Mardaitcs, they soon became formidable to the Mohammedans,and for some time checked the power of the caliphs in Syria, and by the diversions which they made whenever the arms of the Arabs were employed in

¹       Weil, i. <il.     ² Thoophanos, 2S'2.

³     l’ompey expelled Antioclnia, u. c. 05. Alexander the Great conquered Syria B. C. 331.

EXTINCTION OF THE ROMAN POWER.

ciiAi-. v. Asia Minor, tliey contributed to arrest their progress.¹ The year after Syria was subdued, Mesopotamia was invaded, and proved an easy conquest; as its imperial governors, and the inhabitants of its cities, showed the same readiness to enter into treaties with the Moham­medans.²

As soon as the Arabs had completed the conquest of Syria, they invaded Egypt. The national and religious hostility which prevailed between the native population and the Greek colonists, insured the Mohammedans a welcome from the Egyptians: but at the same time, this very circumstance excited the Greeks to make the most determined resistance. The patriarch Cyrus had adopted the Monothelite opinions of his sovereign, and this ren­dered his position uneasy amidst the orthodox Greeks of Alexandria. Anxious to avert any disturbance in the province, he conceived the idea of purchasing peace for Egypt from the Saracens, by paying them an annual tribute ; and he entered into negotiations for this pur­pose, in which Mokaukas, who remained at the head of the fiscal department, joined him. The Emperor Heraclius, informed of this intrigue, sent an Armenian governor, Manuel, with a body of troops, to defend the province, and ordered the negotiations to be broken oft'. The fortune of the Arabs again prevailed, and the Ro­man army was defeated. Amrou, the Saracen general, having taken Pelusium, laid siege to Misr, or Babylon, the chief native city of Egypt, and the seat of the pro­vincial administration. The treachery or patriotism of Mokaukas, for his position warrants either supposition, induced him to join the Arabs, and assist them in capturing the town.³ A capitulation was concluded,

¹     The Mardaites are supposed by some to be the ancestors of the Maronites.

—   Theophanes, Citron. 295, 300. Asseman. Biblioth. Orient. Vat. tom. i. 496.

²     Theophanes, Chron. 202. The governors of Osrhoene and Edessa both proved traitors.

³     Oekley calls Mokaukas the prefect of Heraclius, of the sect of the Jacobites, and a mortal enemy of the Greeks. Eutychius (ii. 302) is his authority.

CONQUEST OF EGYPT.

447

by which the native Egyptians retained possession of all their property, and enjoyed the free exercise of their religion as Jacobites, 011 paying a tribute of two pieces of gold for every male inhabitant. If the accounts of historians can be relied on, it would seem that the population of Egypt had suffered less from the vicious administration of the Roman empire, and from the Persian invasion, than any other part of their domi­nions ; for about the time of its conquest by the Romans it contained seven millions and a half, exclu­sive of Alexandria, and its population was now esti­mated at six millions.¹ This account is by no means impossible, for the most active cause of the depopula­tion of the Roman empire arose from the neglect of all those accessories of civilisation which facilitate the distribution and circulation as well as the production of the necessaries of life.² From neglect of this kind Egypt had suffered comparatively little, as the natural advantages of the soil, and the physical conformation of the country, intersected by one mighty river, had com­pensated for the supineness of its rulers. The Nile was the great road of the province, and nature kept it constantly available for transport at the cheapest rate, for the current enabled the heaviest laden boats, and even the rudest rafts, to descend the river with their cargoes rapidly and securely; while the north wind, blowing steadily for almost nine months in the year, enabled every boat that could hoist a sail to stem the current, and reach the limits of the province with as much certainty, if not with such rapidity, as a

¹     Josephus, B. J. ii. 1G; vol. v. 20G (Whiston’s translation). Eutychius (ii. 311) says that those registered for the tribute amounted to 6,000,000. lie seems to confound this with the whole number of the native population.

²     Strabo says the revenue of Egypt under Ptolemy Auletes was about two and a half millions sterling, and double under the Romans. In 156G, it yielded the Turks only £150,000.—Dr Vincent, ii. G9. Inference has been made at page 435 to the edict which prohibited the exportation of grain from every port in Egypt except Alexandria ; and the exportation from Alexandria had diminished even in the time of Justinian.

A. D.

033-71G.

•J48       EXTINCTION OF THE HOMAN POWER.

j

chap. v. modern steam-boat. And when the waters of the Nile ' were separated over the Delta, they became a valuable ; property to corporations and individuals, whose rights the Roman law respected, and whose interests and , wealth were sufficient to keep in repair the canals of ¹ irrigation; so that the vested capital of Egypt suffered j little diminution, while war and oppression annihilated the accumulations of ages over the rest of the world. The immense wealth and importance of Alexandria, the only port which Egypt possessed for communicat­ing with the empire, still made it one of the first cities ' in the world for riches and population, though its , strength had received a severe blow by the Persian ^f conquest.¹

The canal which connected the Nile with the Red ) Sea furnished the means of transporting the agricultu- !' ral produce of the rich valley of Egypt to the arid coast ; of Arabia, and created and nourished a trade which added considerably to the wealth and population of , both countries.² This canal, in its most improved j state, commenced at Babylon, and ended at Arsinoe ' (Suez). It fertilised a large district on its banks, ' which has again relapsed into the same condition as , the rest of the desert, and it created an oasis of verdure 011 the shore of the Red Sea. Arsinoe flourished amidst J groves of palm-trees and sycamores, with a branch of ; the Nile flowing beneath its walls, where Suez now withers in a dreary waste, destitute alike of vegetables f _s and of potable water, which are transported from Cairo ; j for the use of the travellers who arrive from India, j. This canal was anciently used for the transport of large ? (I and bulky commodities, for which land carriage would t

¹                                            The Emperor Hadrian was struck by tiie commercial activity of Alexan- . dria : “ Civitas in qua nemo vivat otiosus.”—1list. Aug. Scrip. 245.                                             ¹

²                                         Herodotus, Diodorus, and Strabo, saw this canal in operation.—llerod. ii. ! lfiS. Diod. i. 33, 83. Strabo, 1, 17. See also I’liny, 1list. Nat. vi. 29. l’lu- t '• tarcli’s Life of Antony, sect. 82. Lucian, Pseudonaut, sect. 44.   !

CONQUEST OF EGYPT.

liavc proved either impracticable or too expensive. By

means of it, Trajan transported, from the quarries 011 the -----------------------------

Red Sea to the shores of the Mediterranean, many of the columns and vases of granite and porphyry with which he adorned Rome.¹ This canal may have been neglect­ed durino- the troubles in the reiims of Phocas and & &

Heraclius, while the Persians occupied the country ; but it was in such a state of preservation as to require but slight repairs from the earlier caliphs.² A year after Amrou had completed the conquest of Egypt, he had established the water communication between the Nile and the Red Sea ; and, by sending large supplies of grain by the canal to Suez, he was able to relieve the inhabitants of Mecca, who were suffering from famine. After more than one interruption from ne­glect, the policy of the caliphs of Bagdat allowed it to fall into decay, and it was filled up by A1 Manzor,

A. d. 7G2-7G7.³

As soon as the Arabs had settled the affairs of the native population, they laid siege to Alexandria, This city made a vigorous defence, and Heraclius exerted himself to succour it; but, though it held out for several months, it was at last taken by the Arabs, for the troubles which occurred at Constantinople after the death of Heraclius prevented the Roman govern­ment from sending reinforcements to the garrison.

o                       o

The confidence of the Saracens induced them to leave a feeble corps for its defence after they had taken it; and the Roman troops, watching an opportunity for renewing the war, recovered the city, and massacred the Mohammedans, but were soon compelled to retire to their ships, and make their escape. The conquest

¹     Strabo, xvii. 783, SOJ. Ptol. Gcoy. iv, p. 108. It was called, after Trajan’s repairs, 'i^aiecvo; <7rora[j.'o(,

■ Ku.sebius, 7/isl. EccL viii. c. 8. Paul. Silent. Disc- Dundee t<->phitr, i. v. 37‘.»,

³     Le lieau, Ifiatuirc du llns- I 'ui/iirc, xi. —Notes de S. M. Xulicct des M'Anuscrits Arubcs, par Langles, turn. vi. U31.

2    F

450 EXTINCTION OF THE ROMAN POWE11.

chap. v. of Alexandria is said to liave cost the Arabs twenty­       three thousand men; and they are accused of using

their victory like rude barbarians, because they de­stroyed the libraries and works of art of the Greeks, though a Mohammedan historian might appeal to the permanence of their power, and the increase in the numbers of the votaries of the Prophet, as a proof of the profound policy and statesman-like views of the men who rooted out every trace of an adverse civilisa­tion, and of a hostile race. The professed object of the Saracens was to replace Greek domination by Moham­medan toleration. Political sagacity at the same time convinced the Arabs that it was necessary to exter­minate Greek civilisation in order to destroy Greek influence. The Goths, who sought only to plunder the Roman empire, might spare the libraries of the Greeks, but the Mohammedans, whose object was to convert or to subdue, considered it a duty to root out everything that presented any obstacle to the ultimate success of their schemes for the advent of Mohammedan civilisation.¹ In less than five years (a. d. 646), a Ro­man army, sent by the emperor Constans under the command of Manuel, again recovered possession of Alexandria, by the assistance of the Greek inhabitants who had remained in the place; but the Mohammedans soon appeared before the city, and, with the assistance of the Egyptians, compelled the imperial troops to abandon their conquest.² The walls of Alexandria were thrown down, the Greek population driven out, and the commercial importance of the city destroyed. Thus perished one of the most remarkable colonies of the Greek nation, and one of the most renowned seats of that Greek civilisation of which Alexander the Great

¹     Gibbon, in his account of the destruction of the great Alexandrian library, depreciates the injury which literature sustained.— Ch. li.

²     Eutychius, 2, 33[). Oekley, i. 325.

SAllACEN CONQUESTS.

451

bad laid the foundations in the East, after having flour­ished in the highest degree of prosperity for nearly a thousand years.¹

The conquest of Cyrenaica followed the subjugation of Egypt as an immediate consequence. The Greeks are said to have planted their first colonies in this country six hundred and thirty-one years before the Christian era,² and twelve centuries of uninterrupted possession appeared to have constituted them the per­petual tenants of the soil; but the Arabs were very different masters from the Romans, and under their domination the Greek race soon became extinct in Africa. It is not necessary here to follow the Saracens in their farther conquests westward. The dominant people with whom they had to contend was Latin, and not Greek, in the western provinces ; the ruling classes were attached to the Roman government, though

O    ⁷       o

often disgusted by the tyranny of the emperors ; and consequently they defended themselves with far more courage and obstinacy than the Syrians and Egyptians. The war was marked by considerable vicissitudes, and it was not till the year 098 that Carthage fell perman­ently into the hands of the Saracens, who, according to their usual policy, threw down the walls and ruined the public buildings, in order to destroy every political trace of Roman government in Africa. The Saracens were singularly successful in all their projects of destruction ; in a short time both Latin and Greek civilisation was exterminated on the southern shores of the Mediterranean.

¹ Alexandria was founded B. c. 332. After the conquest of Egypt by the Saracens, the Egyptian or Coptic language began to give way to the Arabic. This followed because the numbers of the Copts were gradually reduced by the oppressive government of their new masters, until they formed a minority of the population. Amrou, the conqueror of I'-gypt, who governed it several years, is said to have left at his death a sum equal to eight millions sterling, accumulated by his extoi-tious. The caliph Othman is said to have left only seven millions in the Arabian treasury at his death. The ollieers soon became richer than the State.     ² Clinton’s l<'asti 1! diadd, i. 201.

A. p.

r>33-71<i.

452

EXTINCTION OF THE ROMAN POWER.

chap. v. It may be observed that the success of the Moham­medan religion, under the earlier caliphs, did not keep pace with the progress of the Arab arms. Of all the native population of the countries subdued, the Arabs of Syria alone appear to have immediately adopted the new religion of their co-national race ; but the great mass of the Christians in Syria, Mesopotamia, Egypt, Cyrenai'ea, and Africa, clung firmly to their faith, and the decline of Christianity in all these countries is to be attributed rather to the extermination than to the conversion of the Christian inhabitants. The decrease in the number of the Christians was invariably attended by a decrease in the numbers of the inhabitants, and arose evidently from the oppressive treatment which they suffered under the Mohammedan rulers of these countries,—a system of tyranny which was at last carried so far as to reduce whole provinces to un­peopled deserts, ready to receive an Arab population, almost in a nomade state, as the successors of the ex­terminated Christians. It was only when Mohammed­anism presented its system of unity, in opposition to the evident falsity of idolatry, or to the unintelligible discussions of an incomprehensible theology, that the human mind was easily led away by its religious doc­trines, which addressed the passions of mankind rather too palpably to be secure of commanding their reason. The earliest Mohammedan conversions of foreign races were made among the subjects of Persia, who mingled native or provincial superstitions with the Magian faith, and among the Christians of Nubia and the interior of Africa, whose religion may have departed very far from the pure doctrines of Christianity. The success of the Mohammedans was generally confined to barbarous and ignorant converts ; and the more civilised people retained their faith as long as they could secure their national existence. This fact deserves to be carefully

MOHAMMEDAN CONQUESTS.

453

contrasted with the progress of Christianity, which usually indicated an immediate advance in the scale of civilisation. Yet the peculiar causes which enabled the Christians of the seventh and eighth centuries, in the ignorant and debased mental condition into which they had fallen, to resist steadily the attacks of Mo­hammedanism, and to prefer extinction to apostasy, deserve a more accurate investigation than they have yet met with from historians.

The construction of the political government of the Saracen empire was far more imperfect than the creed of the Mohammedans, and shows that Mahomet had neither contemplated extensive foreign conquests, nor devoted the energies of his powerful mind to the con­sideration of the questions of administration which would arise out of the difficult task of ruling a nume­rous and wealthy population possessed of property but deprived of civil rights. No attempt was made to arrange any systematic form of political govern­ment, and the whole power of the State was vested in the hands of the chief priest of the religion, who was only answerable for the due exercise of this extra­ordinary power to God, his own conscience, and his subjects’ patience. The moment, therefore, that the re­sponsibility created by national feelings, military com­panionship, and exalted enthusiasm, ceased to operate on the minds of the caliphs, the administration became far more oppressive than that of the Roman empire. No local magistrates elected by the people, and 110 parish priests, connected by their feelings and interests both with their superiors and inferiors, bound society together by common ties ; and no system of legal ad­ministration, independent of the military and financial authorities, preserved the property of the people from the rapacity of the government. Socially and politi­cally the Saracen empire was little better than the

4.j4        EXTINCTION OF TIIE HOMAN POWER.

chap. v. Gothic, Hunnish, and Avar nionarehies; and that it proved more durable, with almost equal oppression, is to be attributed to the powerful enthusiasm of Ma­homet's religion, which tempered for some time its avarice and tyranny.

Even the military successes of the Arabs are to be ascribed in some measure to accidental causes, over which they themselves exercised no control. The number of disciplined and veteran troops who had served in the Roman and Persian armies could not have been matched by the Arabian armies. But no inconsiderable part of the followers of Mahomet had been trained in the Persian war, and the religious zeal of Neophytes, who regarded war as a sacred duty, enabled the youngest recruits to perform the service of veterans. The enthusiasm was more powerful than the courage of the Roman troops, and their strict obe­dience to their leaders compensated in a great degree for their inferiority in arms and tactics.¹ P»ut a long war proved that the military qualities of the Roman armies were more lasting than those of the Arabs. The important and rapid conquests of the Mohamme­dans were assisted by the religious dissensions and national antipathies which placed the great bulk of the people of Syria, Mesopotamia, and Egypt, in hos­tility to the Roman government, and neutralised many of the advantages which they might have derived from their military skill and discipline amidst a favourable population. The Roman government had to encounter the excited energies of the Arabs, at a moment, too, when its resources were exhausted, and its strength was weakened by a long war with Persia, which had

¹     Ockley’s ]fist, of the Saracens, i. 85. The Greeks (Roman troops) were completely armed ; the Arabs were almost without defensive armour until they had obtained the arms of the Greeks by conquest. The statements in Ockley’s History must be received with caution. llis principal authority, A1 Wukidi, indulges in romantic colouring, and is careless of facts and dates.

—   Weil, i. 48, note 1.

MOHAMMEDAN CONQUESTS.

for several years totally destroyed the influence of the central executive administration, and enabled nume­rous chiefs to acquire an almost independent authority. These chiefs were generally destitute of every feeling of patriotism ; nor can this excite our wonder, for the feeling of patriotism was then an unknown sentiment in every rank of society throughout the Eastern Em­pire ; their conduct was entirely directed by ambition and interest, and they sought only to secure themselves in the possession of the districts which they governed. The example of Mokaukas in Egypt, and of Youkinna at Aleppo, areremarkable instances of the power and treasonable disposition of many of these imperial officers. But almost every governor in Syria displayed equal faithlessness.¹ Yet in spite of the treason of some officers, and the submission of others, the defence of Syria does not appear to have been on tho whole dis­graceful to the Roman army, and the Arabs purchased their conquest by severe fighting, and at the cost of much blood. An anecdote mentioned in the “ History of the Saracens/'² shows that the importance of order and discipline was not overlooked by Klialed, the Sword of God, as he was styled by his admiring countrymen ; and that his great success was owing to military skill, as well as religious enthusiasm and fiery valour. “ Mead,” says the historian, “ encouraged the Saracens with the hopes of Paradise, and the enjoy­ment of everlasting life, if they fought for the cause of God and religion. ¹¹ Softly/ said Khaled ; ‘ let me get them into good order before you set them upon fight­ing/'’³ Under all the disadvantages mentioned, it is not surprising that the hostile feelings of a numerous,

¹                               Mansour, the governor of Damascus.—Kutychius, ii. 2S1. I’ostra, Kmesa, Kinnisrin, and Aleppo.—Oekley, i. 150-102. The citizens of Laaltioc.—Oeklry, i. 170. '

²     Ockley, i. 70.

^u A similar anecdote is told of Cromwell, who onee addressed his troop.-;,

“ Put your trust in the Lord, and keep your powder dry.”

45G

EXTINCTION OF THE ROMAN POWER.

chap. v. wealthy, and heretical portion of the Syrian community, engaged in trade, and willing to purchase peace and toleration at any reasonable sacrifice, should have turned the scale against the Romans. The struggle became doubtful from the moment that the people of Damascus concluded an advantageous truce with the Arabs. Emesa and other cities could then venture to follow the example, merely for the purpose of securing their own property, without any reference to the general interests of the province, or the military plans of defence of the Roman government. Yet one of the chiefs, who held a portion of the coast of Phoenicia, succeeded in maintaining his independence against the whole power of the Saracens, and formed in the mountains of Le­banon a small Christian principality, of which the town of Byblos (Djebail) was the capital. Round this nucleus the Mardai'tes, or native Syrians, appear to have rallied in considerable force.

The great influence exercised by the patriarchs of Jerusalem and Alexandria in their provinces, tended also to weaken and distract the measures adopted for the defence of these countries. Their willingness to negotiate with the Arabs, who were resolved only to be satisfied with conquest, placed the Roman armies and government in a disadvantageous position. Where the chances of war are nearly balanced, the good will of the people will eventually decide the contest in favour of the party that they espouse. Now there is strong reason to believe, that even a majority of the orthodox subjects of the Roman empire, in the provinces which were conquered during the reign of Heraclius, were the well-wishers of the Arabs; that they regarded the em­peror with aversion as a heretic; and that they fancied they were sufficiently guaranteed against the oppression of their new masters, by the rigid observance of justice which characterised all their earlier acts. A temporary

MOHAMMEDAN CONQUESTS.

457

diminution of tribute, or escape from some oppressive act of administration, induced them to compromise their religious position and their national independence. The faidt is too natural a one to be severely blamed. They feared that Heraclius might commence a perse­cution in order to enforce conformity with his moiio- thelite opinions, for of religious liberty the age had no just conception; and the Syrians and Egyptians had been slaves for far too many centuries to be impressed with any idea of the sacrifices which a nation ought to make in order to secure its independence. The moral tone adopted by the Caliph Aboubekr, in his instruc­tions to the Syrian army, was also so unlike the prin­ciples of the Roman government, that it must have commanded profound attention from a subject people. “Be just,” said the proclamation of Aboubekr, “the unjust never prosper; be valiant, die rather than yield; be merciful, slay neither old men, children, nor women. Destroy neither fruit-trees, grain, nor cattle; keep your word, even to your enemies; molest not those men who live retired from the world, but compel the rest of mankind to become Mussulmans, or to pay us tribute,—if they refuse these terms, slay them.” Such a proclamation announced to Jews and Christians sentiments of justice and principles of toleration which neither Roman emperors nor orthodox bishops had ever adopted as the rule of their conduct. This remarkable document must have made a deep impression on the minds of an oppressed and persecuted people. Its effect was soon increased by the wonderful spectacle of the Caliph Omar riding into Jerusalem 011 the camel which carried all the baggage and provisions which he re­quired for his journey from Mecca. The contrast thus offered betw^reen the rude simplicity of a. great con­queror and the extravagant pomp of the provincial representatives of a defeated emperor must have em-

458

EXTINCTION OF THE ROMAN POWER.

cii ,vi\ v. bittered the hatred already strong in an oppressed

               people against a rapacious government. Had the

Saracens been able to unite a system of judicial legisla­tion and administration, and of elective local and municipal governments for their conquered subjects, with the vigour of their own central power and the religious monarchy of their own national government, it is difficult to conceive that any limits could ulti­mately have been opposed to their authority by the then existing states into which the world was divided.¹

But the political system of the Saracens was of itself utterly barbarous, and it only caught a passing gleam of justice, while worldly prudence tempered the religious feelings of their prophet’s doctrines. A remarkable feature of the policy by which they maintained their power over the provinces which they conquered, ought not to be overlooked, as it illustrates both their confi­dence in their military superiority and the low state of their social civilisation. They generally destroyed the walls of the cities which they subdued, whenever the fortifications offered peculiar facilities for defence, or contained a native population active and bold enough to threaten danger from rebellion. Many celebrated Roman cities were destroyed, and the Saracen adminis­tration was transferred to new capitals, founded where a convenient military station for overawing the country could be safely established. Thus Alexandria, Babylon or Misr, Carthage, Ctesiphon, and Babylon, were de­stroyed, and Fostat, Kairowan, Cufa, Bussora, and Bagdat, rose to supplant them.

¹ It is not correct to reproach the early Mohammedans with fanaticism. Even the fire-worshippers of Persia, who were idolators in the eyes of the Saracens, and did not worship the true God, were, by their principles of toler­ation, allowed the exercise of their religion 011 paying tribute, a fact proved by several passages in the Arabian historians. The instructions of the Othomau Sultan Suleiman in the Multekas, display the increase of bigotry in modern times. If the infidel refuse to embrace Islam, or to pay the capitation-tax, his land is to be rendered desolate with fire, his trees are to be cut down, his corn­fields laid waste, and he is to be slain or enslaved.—Hammer, Stiuttsrerfassuvg ■and JitdatsvcncuUuny des osmanischen lleichs, i. 103.

CONSTANS TT.    4.1!)

SECT. III. — C'ONSTAXS II., A. P. H41—GGS.

After the death of Heraclius, the short reigns of his sons, Constantine III., or Heraclius Constantine, and Heracleonas, were disturbed by court intrigues and the disorders which naturally result from the want of a settled law of succession. In such conjunctures, the people and the courtiers learn alike to traffic in sedition. Before the termination of the year in which Heraclius died, his grandson, Constans II., mounted the imperial throne at the age of eleven, in consequence of the death of his father Constantine, and the dethronement of his uncle Heracleonas. An oration made by the young prince to the senate after his accession, in which he invoked the aid of that body, and spoke of their power in terms of reverence, warrants the conclusion that the aristocracy had again recovered its influence over the imperial administration; and that, though the em­peror’s authority was still held to be absolute by the constitution of the empire, it was really controlled by the influence of the persons holding ministerial offices.¹

Constans grew up to be a man of considerable abili­ties and of an energetic character, but possessed of vio­lent passions, and destitute of all the amiable feelings of humanity. The early part of his reign, during which the imperial ministers were controlled by the selfish aristocracy, was marked by the loss of several portions of the empire. The Lombards extended their conquests in Italy from the maritime Alps to the frontiers of Tuscany ; and the exarch of Ravenna was defeated with considerable loss near Modenna ; but still they were unable to make any serious impression on the exarchate. Armenia was compelled to pay tribute to the Saracens. Cyprus was rendered tributary to the

¹     TliPopliaiU's, ('/iron. ‘2!! I.

A. D.

G33-710.

460 EXTINCTION OF THE ROMAN POWER.

ciiap. v. caliph, though the amount of the tribute imposed was only seven thousand two hundred pieces of gold—half of what it had previously paid to the emperor. This trifling sum can have hardly amounted to the moiety of the surplus usually paid into the imperial treasury after all the expenses of the local government were defrayed, and cannot have borne any relation to the amount of taxation levied by the Roman emperors in the island. It contrasts strangely with the large payments made by single cities for a year’s truce in Syria, and the im­mense wealth collected by the Arabs in Syria, Egypt, Persia, and Africa.¹ The commercial town of Aradus, in Syria, had hitherto resisted the Saracens from the strength of its insular position. It was now taken and destroyed. In a subsequent expedition, Cos was taken by the treachery of its bishop, and the city plundered and laid waste. Rhodes was then attacked and cap­tured. This last conquest is memorable for the de­struction of the celebrated Colossus, which, though it fell about fifty-six years after its erection, had been always, even in its prostrate condition, regarded as one of the wonders of the world. The admiration of the Greeks and Romans had protected it from destruction for nine centuries. The Arabs, to whom works of art pos­sessed no value, broke it in pieces, and sold the bronze of which it was composed. The metal is said to have loaded nine hundred and eighty camels.

As soon as Constans was old enough to assume the direction of public business, the two great objects of his policy were the establishment of the absolute power

¹ The governor of Jushiyah paid 4000 pieces of gold, and fifty picces of silk, for a year’s truce.—Ockley, i. 150. Hems paid 10,000 pieces of gold, and 200

pieces of silk  P. 154. Baalbec, 2000 ounces of gold, 4000 of silver, and 2000

pieces of silk.—P. 177. Kinnisrin and Alhadir, 5000 ounces of gold, as many of silver, and 2000 vests of s,ilk.—P. 233. The tribute of Egypt was two pieces of gold a-head.— Eutychius, ii. 308. The accounts of the wealth of Ctesiphou are almost incredible, and those of Sufetula in Byzacenc completely so.—Le Beau, llistvlre du llas-Empire, vol. xi. 313, 329.

RELIGIOUS DISPUTES.

461

of the emperor over the orthodox church, and the re- .a. covery of the lost provinces of the empire. With the ⁷¹°~ view of obtaining and securing a perfect control over the ecclesiastical affairs of his dominions, he published an edict, called the Type, in the year 048, when he was only eighteen years old.¹ It was prepared by Paul, the patriarch of Constantinople, and was intended to ter­minate the disputes produced by the Ecthesis of Hera­clius. All parties were commanded by the Type to ob­serve a profound silence 011 the previous quarrels con­cerning the operation of the will in Christ. Liberty of conscience was an idea almost unknown to any but the Mohammedans, so that Constans never thought of ap­pealing to any such right ; and no party in the Chris­tian church was inclined to waive its orthodox authority of enforcing its own opinions upon others. The Latin church, led by the Bishop of Rome, was always ready to oppose the Greek clergy, who enjoyed the favour of the imperial court, and this jealousy engaged the pope in violent opposition to the Type. But the bishop of Rome was not then so powerful as the popes became at a subsequent period, so that he durst not attempt J directly to question the authority of the emperor in 1 regulating such matters. Perhaps it appeared to him hardly prudent to rouse the passions of a young prince j of eighteen, who might prove not very bigoted in his attachment to any party, as, indeed, the provisions of the Type seemed to indicate. The pope Theodore, tliere- ! fore, directed the whole of his ecclesiastical fury against the Patriarch of Constantinople, whom he excommuni­cated with circumstances of singular and impressive violence. Lie descended with his clergy into the dark i tomb of Saint Peter in the Vatican, now under the J centre of the dome in the vault of the great Cathedral of Christendom, consecrated the sacred cup, and, hav-

^{1        1} The Type is contained in llanlouin'* Cuncilia, t"in. i. p. S;51.

462

EXTINCTION OF THE ROMAN POWER.

ciiai*. v. ing dipped liis pen in the blood of Christ, signed an • act of excommunication, condemning a brother bishop

to the pains of hell. To this indecent proceeding Paul                                                     ,

the Patriarch replied by persuading the emperor to per-                                               ;

secute the clergy who adhered to the pope’s opinion, in ¹ a more regular and legal manner, by depriving them of their temporalities, and condemning them to banish­ment. The pope was supported by nearly the whole body of the Latin clergy, and even by a considerable party in the East ; yet, when Martin, the successor of Theodore, ventured to anathematise the Ecthesis and

the Type, he was seized by order of Constans, conveyed                                      ,

to Constantinople, tried, and condemned on a charge                                          I

of having supported the rebellion of the Exarch Olym-                                         . i

pins, and of having remitted money to the Saracens.                                                   a

The emperor, at the intercession of the Patriarch Paul,                                           ti

commuted his punishment to exile, and the pope died                                          i s(

in banishment at Clierson in Tauris. Though Constans                                  j oj

did not succeed in inculcating his doctrines on the                                                i ae

clergy, he completely succeeded in enforcing public                                                  iij

obedience to his decrees in the church, and the fullest                                      I §a

acknowledgment of his supreme power over the persons                                     tat

of the clergy. These disputes between the heads of the                                         , are

ecclesiastical administration of the Greek and Latin                                                    ;

churches afforded an excellent pretext for extending                                                pojj

the breach, which had its real origin in national feelings                                     ^j]

and clerical interests, and was only widened by the                                             , defe

difficult and not very intelligible distinctions of mono-                                     I of j

thelitism. Constans himself, by his vigour and personal                                 jop],

activity in this struggle, incurred the bitter hatred of                                             jt[_ei

a large portion of the clergy, and his conduct has been                                          j ^

unquestionably the object of much misrepresentation                        ’

and calumny.                    (|_ea]

The attention of Constans to ecclesiastical affairs in-                                          ^? time

duced him to visit Armenia, where his attempts to unite ; ^ the people to his government by regulating the affairs

RELIGIOUS DISPUTES.

4G3

of their church, were as unsuccessful as his religious in- a. n.^ terference elsewhere. Dissensions were increased ; one of tiie imperial officers of high rank rebelled ; and the Saracens availed themselves of this state of things to invade both Armenia and Cappadocia, and succeeded in rendering several districts tributary. The increasing power of Moawyah, the Arab general, induced him to form a project for the conquest of Constantinople, and lie began to fit out a great naval expedition at Tripoli in Syria. A daring enterprise of two brothers, Chris­tian inhabitants of the place, rendered the expedition abortive. These two Tripolitans and their partisans broke open the prisons in which the Roman captives were confined, and, placing themselves at the head of an armed band which they had hastily formed, seized the city, slew the governor, and burnt tho fleet. A second armament was at length prepared by the energy of Moawyah, and as it was reported to be directed against Constantinople, the Emperor Constans took upon himself the command of his own fleet, lie met the Saracen expedition off Mount Phoenix in Lycia, and at­tacked it with great vigour. Twenty thousand Romans are said to have perished in the battle j¹ and the emperor himself owed his safety to the valour of one of the Tri­politan brothers, whose gallant defence of the imperial galley enabled the emperor to escape before its valiant defender was slain, and the vessel fell into the hands of the Saracens. The emperor retired to Constanti­nople, but the hostile fleet had sullered too much to attempt any farther operations, and the expedition was abandoned for that year. The death of Otliman, and the pretensions of Moawyah to the caliphate, withdrew the attention of the Arabs from the empire for a short j time, and Constans turned his forces against the Sla­vonians, in order to deliver the European provinces

¹ Tlicopliancs, 2S7. Alntlphanig. Ch. Si/r. iii.

464 EXTINCTION OF THE ROMAN TOWER.

chap. v. from their ravages. They were totally defeated, numbers were carried off as slaves, and many were compelled to submit to the imperial authority. No certain grounds exist for determining whether this expedition was directed against the Selavonians, who had established themselves between the Danube and Mount Hremus, or against those who had settled in Macedonia. The name of no town is mentioned in the accounts of the campaign.²

When the affairs of the European provinces, in the vicinity of the capital, were tranquillised, Constans again prepared to engage the Arabs ; and Moawyah, having need of all the forces he could command for his contest with Ali, the son-in-law of Mahomet, consented to make peace, on terms which contrast curiously with the perpetual defeats which Constans is always repre­sented by the orthodox historians of the empire to have suffered. The Saracens engaged to confine their

o                  o

forces within Syria and Mesopotamia, and Moawyah consented to pay Constans, for the cessation of hostilities, the sum of a thousand pieces of silver, and to furnish him with a slave and a horse for every day during which the peace should continue, a. d. 659.

During the subsequent year, Constans condemned to death his brother Theodosius, whom he had compelled to enter the priesthood. The cause of this crime, or the pretext for it, is not mentioned. From this brother s hand, the emperor had often received the sacrament; and the fratricide is supposed to have rendered a residence at Constantinople insupportable to the con­science of the criminal, who was reported nightly to behold the spectre of his brother offering him the con­secrated cup, filled with human blood, and exclaiming, ‘'Drink, brother!” Certain it is, that two years after

¹ ^\^lcol⁾^^lanes) t'h. pp. 2SS, '299. Zinkeisen, i. 733. Tafel, Thessalonica, lxxxiii.

CONSTANS 11.

his brother’s death, Constans quitted his capital, with the intention of never returning ; and he was only pre­vented, by an insurrection of the people, from carrying off the empress and his children. lie meditated the reconquest of Italy from the Lombards, and proposed rendering Rome again the seat of empire. On his way to Italy the emperor stopped at Athens, where he as­sembled a considerable body of troops. This casual mention of Athens by Latin writers affords strong evidence of the tranquil, flourishing, and populous con­dition of the city and country around.¹ The Scla- vonian colonies in Greece must, at this time, have owned perfect allegiance to the imperial power, or Constans would certainly have employed his army in reducing them to subjection. From Athens, the em­peror sailed to Italy; he landed with his forces at Tarentum, and attempted to take Beneventum, the chief seat of the Lombard power in the south of Italy. His troops were twice defeated, and he then abandoned all his projects of conquest.

The emperor himself repaired to Rome. His visit lasted only a fortnight. According to the writers who describe the event, he consecrated twelve days to reli­gious ceremonies and processions, and the remaining two he devoted to plundering the wealth of the church. His personal acquaintance with the affairs of Italy and the state of Rome, soon convinced him that the eternal city was ill adapted for the capital of the empire, and lie quitted it for Sicily, where he fixed on Syracuse for his future residence. Grimoald, the able monarch of the Lombards, and his son Romuald, the Duke of Bene- ventum, continued the war in Italy with vigour, lirun- i dusium and Tarentum were captured, and the Romans expelled from Calabria, so that Otranto and Gallipoli

¹ Anastasius, I)c Vitis Pont. Rom. [>. 51, edit. l'ar. Schlosscr, (!cfchichtct.lt: ljildersliirmcndcn JCuiscr, SI.

4G6

EXTINCTION OF THE ROMAN TOWER.

ci i a p. v. were the only towns on the eastern coast of which i Constans retained possession.     ¹

When residing in Sicily, Constans directed his atten- , tion to the state of Africa. His measures are not de- i- tailed with precision, hut were evidently distinguished ,1 by the usual energy and caprice which marked his | whole conduct. He recovered possession of Carthage, and of several cities which the Arabs had rendered , tributary; but he displeased the inhabitants of the , province, by compelling them to pay to himself the same amount of tribute as they had agreed by treaty . to pay to the Saracens ; and as Constans could not expel the Saracen forces from the province, the amount ₍ of the public taxes of the Africans was thus often doubled,—since both parties were able to levy the ] contributions which they demanded. Moawyah sent _; an army from Syria, and Constans one from Sicily, to decide who should become sole master of the country.

A battle was fought near Tripoli; and though the army 1 of Constans consisted of thirty thousand men, it was ₍ completely defeated. Yet the victorious army of the Saracens was unable to take the small town of Geloula (Usula), until the accidental fall of a portion of the ramparts laid it open to their assault; and this trifling ■ conquest was followed by no farther success. In the [ East, the empire was exposed to greater danger, yet i the enemies of Constans were eventually unsuccessful in their projects. In consequence of the rebellion of j _l the Armenian troops, whose commander, Sapor, assumed ' _# the title of emperor, the Saracens made a successful ₍ j incursion into Asia Minor, captured the city of Amo- ' ^ rium, in Phrygia, and placed in it a garrison of five thousand men ; but the imperial general appointed by L Constans soon drove out this powerful garrison, and recovered the place.

It appears, therefore, that in spite of all the defeats V

CONSTANTINE IV.

which Constans is reported to have suffered, the empire underwent 110 very sensible diminution of its territoiy during his reign, and he certainly left its military forces in a more efficient condition than he found them. He was assassinated in a bath at Syracuse, by an officer of his household, in the year 668, at the age of thirty- eight, after a reign of twenty-seven years. The fact of his having been murdered by one of his own household, joined to the capricious violence that marked many of his public acts, warrants the supposition that his cha­racter was of the unamiable and unsteady nature, which rendered the accusation of fratricide, so readily believed by his contemporaries, by no means impossible. It must, however, be admitted, that the occurrences of his reign afford irrefragable testimony that his here­tical opinions have induced orthodox historians to give an erroneous colouring to many circumstances, since the undoubted results do not correspond with their descriptions of the passing events.

SECT. IV.      CONSTANTINE IV. YIELDED TO TIIE TOPULAK ECCLESIASTICAL

PARTY AMONG TIIE GREEKS.

Constantine IV., called Pogonatus, or the Bearded, has been regarded by posterity with a high degree of favour.¹ Yet his merit seems to have con­sisted in his superior orthodoxy, rather than in his superior talents as emperor. The concessions which lie made to the see of Pome, and the moderation that he displayed in all ecclesiastical affairs, placed his conduct in strong contrast with the stern energy with which his father had enforced the subjection of the orthodox ecclesiastics to the civil power, and gained for him the ₍praise of the priesthood, whose eulogies have exerted

¹ Constantine IV. is called l’ogonatus, but it is his father who i» called Cmi stantinc on his coins, and is represented with an enormous beard.

4G8

EXTINCTION OF THE ROMAN POWER.

. no inconsiderable influence on all historians. Constan­tine, however, was certainly an intelligent and just prince, who, though he did not possess the stubborn determination and talents of his father, was destitute also of his violent passions and imprudent character.

As soon as Constantine was informed of the murder of his father, and that a rebel had assumed the purple in Sicily, he hastened thither in person to avenge his death, and extinguish the rebellion. To satisfy his vengeance, the patrician Justinian, a man of high cha­racter, compromised in the rebellion, was treated with great severity, and his son Germanos with a degree of inhumanity that would have been recorded by the clergy against Constans as an instance of the grossest barbarity.¹ The return of the emperor to Constantin­ople was signalised by a singular sedition of the troops in Asia Minor. They marched towards the capital, and having encamped 011 the Asiatic shores of the Bosphorus, demanded that Constantine should admit his two brothers, on whom he had conferred the rank of Augustus, to an equal share in the public adminis­tration, in order that the Holy Trinity in heaven, which governs the spiritual world, might be repre­sented by a human trinity, to govern the political em­pire of the Christians. The very proposal is a proof of the complete supremacy of the civil over the ecclesias­tical authority, in the eyes of the people, and the strongest evidence, that in the public opinion of the age the emperor was regarded as the head of the church. Such reasoning as the rebels used could be rebutted by no arguments, and Constantine had energy enough to hang the leaders of the sedition, and suffi­

¹     This Germanos, notwithstanding his mutilation by Constantino, became bishop of Cyzicus, and joined the Monothelites in the reign of l’hilippicus. lie retractcd, and was made patriarch of Constantinople by Anastasius II.

(a.. l>. 715), and figured as an active defender of images against Leo III., the laaurian.

MOHAMMEDAN WAR.

m

cient moderation not to molest his brothers. But seve­ral years later, either from increased suspicions, or from some intrigues 011 their part, he deprived them of the rank of Augustus, and condemned them to have their noses cut off;¹ (a.d. G81). The condemnation of his brother to death by Constans, figures in history as one of the blackest crimes of humanity, while the barbarity of the orthodox Constantine is passed over as a lawful act. Both rest 011 the same authority, on the testimony of Theophanes, the earliest Greek chronicler, and both may really have been acts of justice necessary for the security of the throne and the tranquillity of the em­pire. Constans was a man of a violent temper, and Constantine of a mild disposition ; both may have been equally just, but both were, without doubt, unne­cessarily severe. A brothers political offences could hardly merit a greater punishment from a brother than seclusion in a monastery.²

The great object of the imperial policy at this period was to oppose the progress of the Mohammedans. Constans had succeeded in arresting their conquests, but Constantine soon found that they woidd give the empire 110 rest unless he could secure it by his victories. He had hardly quitted Sicily to return to Constantinople, before an Arab expedition from Alex­andria invaded the island, and stormed the city of Syracuse, and after plundering the treasures accumu­lated by Constans, immediately abandoned the placc. In Africa the war was continued with various success, but the Christians were long left without any succours from Constantine, while Moawyah supplied the Sara­cens with strong reinforcements. In spite of the courage and enthusiasm of the Mohammedans, the

¹     Thcoplmncs, ('hrov. 298, 303.

²     Theophanes (293, 300) says that the brothers of Constantine IV. lost their noses in li(J9, but were not deprived of the imperial title until (iSl.

470

EXTINCTION OF THE ROMAN POWER.

cnai*. v. native Christian population maintained their ground with firmness, and carried on the war with such vigour, that in the year 676 a native African leader, who com­manded the united forces of the Romans and Berbers, captured the newly founded city of Kairowan, which at a subsequent period became renowned as the capital of the Fatimite caliphs.¹

The ambition of the caliph Moawyah induced him to aspire at the conquest of the Roman empire; and the military organisation of the Arabian power, which enabled the caliph to direct the whole resources of his dominions to any single object of conquest, seemed to promise success to the enterprise. A powerful expedi­tion was sent to besiege Constantinople. The time re­quired for the preparation of such an armament did not enable the Saracens to arrive at the Bosphorus without passing a winter 011 the coast of Asia Minor, and on their arrival in the spring of the year 672, they found that the emperor had made every preparation for de­fence. Their forces, however, were so numerous, that they were sufficient to invest Constantinople by sea and land. The troops occupied the whole of the land side of the triangle 011 which the city is constructed, while the fleet effectually blockaded the port. The Saracens failed in all their assaults, both by sea and land; but the Romans, instead of celebrating their own valour and discipline, attributed their success principally to the use of the Greek fire, which was invented shortly before this siege, and was first used on this occasion.² The military art had declined during the preceding century, as rapidly as every other branch of national culture ; and the resources of the mighty empire of the

¹ Kairowan was founded l>y Akbah in 670 ; taken by the Christians in 670 ; recovered by the Arabs under Zohair; but retaken by the Christians in C83 ; and finally conquered by Hassan in 097.

-     For an account of the Greek fire, see the articles “Callinicus” (vi. 551), ami “ Marcus Grrccus” (xxvi. 023) in the Biographic Unirersel/e.

STEGE OF CONSTANTINOPLE, A. D. 672—678. 471

Arabs were so limited by the ignorance and bad ad­ministration of its rulers, that the caliph was unable to maintain his forces before Constantinople during the winter. The Saracen army was nevertheless enabled to collect sufficient supplies at Cyzicus to make that place a ’winter station, while their powerful fleet com­manded the Hellespont and secured their communica­tions with Syria. When spring returned, the fleet again transported the army to encamp under the walls of Constantinople. This strange mode of besieging cities, unattempted since the times the Dorians had invaded Peloponnesus, was continued for seven years ; but in this warfare the Saracens suffered far more severely than the Romans, and were at last compelled to abandon their enterprise.¹ The land forces tried to effect their retreat through Asia Minor, but were entirely cut off in the attempt ; and a tempest destroyed the greater part of their fleet off the coast of Pamphylia. During the time that this great body of his forces was em­ployed against Constantinople, Moawyah sent a division of his troops to invade Crete, which had been visited by a Saracen army in 651. The island was now com­pelled to pay tribute, but the inhabitants were treated with great mildness, as it was the polic}' of the caliph at this time to conciliate the good opinion of the Christians by his liberal government, in order to pave the way for future conquests. Moawyah carried his religious tolerance so far as to rebuild the church of Edessa at the intercession of his Christian subjects.

The destruction of the Saracen expedition against Constantinople, and the advantage which the moun­taineers of Libanon had contrived to take of the absence

¹     During the siege of Constantinople, Abou Ayoub, who had received Ma­homet into his house on his flight to Medina, died ; and tin; celebrated mosque of Ayoub, in which the Sultan, on his accession, receives the investi­ture of the sword, is said to mark the spot where he was buried.—See the chronology of the operations ut' the siege, xxxii.

4<72       EXTINCTION OF THE ROMAN TOWER.

chap. v. of the Arab troops, by carrying their incursions into the plains of Syria, convinced Moawyah of the necessity of peace. The hardy mountaineers of Libanon, called Marda’ites, had been increased in numbers, and supplied with wealth, in consequence of the retreat into their country of a mass of native Syrians who had fled be­fore the Arabs.¹ They consisted chiefly of Melchites and Monothelites, and on that account they had adhered to the cause of the Roman empire when the Mono- physites joined the Saracens. Their Syrian origin renders it probable that they were ancestors of the Maronites, though the desire of some Maronite his­torians to show that their countrymen were always perfectly orthodox, has perplexed a question which of itself was by no means of easy solution.² The political state of the empire required peace ; and the orthodox Constantine did not feel personally inclined to run any risk in order to protect the Monothelite Marda'ites. Peace was concluded between the emperor and the caliph in the year 678, Moawyah consenting to pay the Romans annually three thousand pounds of gold, fifty slaves, and fifty Arabian horses. It appears strange that a prince, possessing the power and resources at the com­mand of Moawyah, should submit to these conditions ; but the fact proves that policy, not pride, was the rule of the caliph’s conduct, and that the advancement of his real power, and of the spiritual interests of the Moham­medan religion, were of more consequence in his eyes than any notions of earthly dignity.

In the same year in which Moawyah had been in­duced to purchase peace by consenting to pay tribute to the Roman emperor, the foundations of the Bulgarian monarchy were laid, and the emperor Constantine him-

¹     The earliest mention of the Marda'ites is found in Theophanes, Citron, p. 295.

²     Mosheiin’s Ecclesiastical History, with notes by James Murdock, D.D. Edited by the llev. II. Soamcs, ii. lOU.

BULGARIAN MONARCHY.

473

self was compelled to become tributary to a small horde a.

of Bulgarians. One of the usual emigrations which IZ__________________________ '

take place amongst barbarous nations had induced A spam cli, a Bulgarian chief, to seize the low country about the mouth of the Danube ; his power and acti­vity obliged the emperor Constantine to take the field against these Bulgarians in person. The expedition was so ill conducted, that it ended in the complete de­feat of the Roman army, and the Bulgarians subdued all the countrybetween the Danube and Mount Hcemus, compelling a district inhabited by a body of Sclavonians, called the seven tribes, to become their tributaries.

These Sclavonians had once been formidable to the em­pire, but their power had been broken by the emperor Constans. Asparuch established himself in the town of Varna, near the ancient Odessus, and laid the found­ation of the Bulgarian monarchy, a kingdom long engaged in hostilities with the emperors of Constanti­nople, and whose power tended greatly to accelerate the decline of the Greeks, and reduce the numbers of their race in Europe.¹

The event, however, which exerciscd the most favour­able influence 011 the internal condition of the empire during the reign of Constantine Pogonatus, was the as­sembly of the sixth general council of the church at Con­stantinople. This council was held under circumstances peculiarly favourable to candid discussion. The eccle­siastical power was not yet too strong to set both reason and the civil authorities at defiance. Its decisions were adverse to the Monothelites ; and the orthodox doctrinc of two natures and two wills in Christ was received by the common consent of the Greek and Latin par­ties as the true rule of faith of the Christian church. Religious discussion had now taken a strong hold on public opinion, and as the majority of the Greek pojni-

¹     Ducango, Fumi/ice Byzuntinm, p. 305. Theoplianes, Chrun. 298.

474 EXTINCTION OF THE ROMAN POWER.

oiiAP. v. lation had never adopted the opinions of the Monothe- ‘ lites, the decisions of the sixth general council contri­buted powerfully to promote the union of the Greeks with the imperial administration.

SECT. V.—DEPOPULATION OF TIIE EMPIRE, AND DECREASE OF TIIE GREEKS UNDER JUSTINIANII.

Justinian II. succeeded his father Constantine at the age of sixteen, and though so very young, he imme­diately assumed the personal direction of the govern­ment. He was by no means destitute of talents, but his cruel and presumptuous character rendered him in­capable of learning to perform the duties of his situa­tion with justice. His violence at last rendered him hateful to his subjects ; and as the connection of the emperor with the Roman government and people was direct and personal, his power was so undermined by the loss of his influence, that, in the ninth year of his reign, he was easily driven from his throne by a popu­lar sedition. His nose was cut off, and he was banished to Cherson, a. d. 695. In exile his energy and activity enabled him to secure the alliance of the Khazars and Bulgarians, and he returned to Constantinople as a con­queror, after an absence of ten years. His character was one of those to which experience is useless, and he persisted in his former course of violence, until, having exhausted the patience of his subjects, he was de­throned and murdered, a. d. 705-711.

The reign of such a tyrant was not likely to be in­active. At its commencement, he turned his arms against the Saracens, though the caliph Abdalmelik offered to make additional concessions, in order to in­duce the emperor to renew the treaty of peace which had been concluded with his father. Justinian sent a

JUSTINIAN II.

powerful army into Armenia under Leontius, by whom lie was subsequently dethroned. All the provinces which had shown any disposition to favour the Saracens were laid waste, and the army carried off an immense booty, and drove away a great part of the inhabitants as slaves. The barbarism of the Roman government had now reached such a pitch that the Roman armies were permitted to plunder and depopulate even those provinces where a Christian population still afforded the emperor some assurance that they might be retained in permanent subjection to the Roman government. The soldiers of an undisciplined army,—legionaries without patriotism or nationalit)^r, were allowed to enrich them­selves by slave hunts in Christian countries, and the most flourishing; agricultural districts were reduced to

O O

deserts, incapable of offering any resistance to the Mohammedan nomads. The caliph Abdalmelik, being engaged in a struggle for the caliphate with powerful rivals, and disturbed by rebels even in his own Syrian dominions, arrested the progress of the Roman arms by purchasing peace on terms far more favourable to the empire than those of the treaty between Constan­tine and Moawyali. The caliph engaged to pay the emperor an annual tribute of three hundred and sixty- five thousand pieces of gold, three hundred and sixty slaves, and three hundred and sixty Arabian horses. The provinces of Iberia, Armenia, and Cyprus, wero J equally divided between the Romans and the Arabs ; but Abdalmelik obtained the principal advantage from the treaty, for Justinian not only consented to abandon the cause of the Mardaites, but even engaged to assist the caliph in expelling them from Syria. This was effected by the treachery of Leontius, who entered tliei r country as a friend, and murdered their chief. Twelve thousand Mardaite soldiers were enrolled in the armies of the empire, and distributed in garrisons in Armenia

EXTINCTION OF TIIE ROMAN POWER.

chap. v. and Thrace. A colony of Mardaites was established at Attalia in Pamphylia, and the power of this valiant people was completely broken. The removal of the Mardaites from Syria was one of the most serious errors of the reign of Justinian. As long as they re­mained in force on Mount Libanon, near the centre of the Saracen power, the emperor was able to render them a serious check on the Mohammedans, and create dan­gerous diversions whenever the caliphs invaded the em­pire. Unfortunately, in this age of religious bigotry, the Monothelite opinions of the Mardaites made them an object of aversion or suspicion to the imperial ad­ministration ; and even under the prudent government of Constantine Pogonatus, they were not viewed with a friendly eye, nor did they receive the support which should have been granted to them on a just considera­tion of the interests of Christianity, as well as of the Roman empire.

The general depopulation of the empire suggested to many of the Roman emperors the project of re- peopling favoured districts, by an influx of new inhabi­tants. The origin of many of the most celebrated cities of the Eastern Empire could be traced back to small Greek colonies. These emigrants, it was known, had rapidly increased in number, and risen to wealth. The Roman government appears never to have clearly comprehended that the same causes which produced the diminution of the ancient population would be sure to prevent the increase of new settlers ; and their attempts at repeopling provinces, and removing the population of one district to new seats, were frequently renewed. Justinian II. had a great taste for these emigrations. Three years after the conclusion of peace with Abdalmelik, he resolved to withdraw all the in­habitants from the half of the island of Cyprus, of which he remained master, in order to prevent the

ANARCHY.

477

Christians from becoming accustomed to the Saracen a p. administration. The Cypriote population was trans- ^G3o''^Ih' ported to a new city near Cyzicus, which the emperor called after himself, Justinianopolis. It is needless to offer any remarks on the impolicy of such a project ; the loss of life, and the destruction of property inevit­able in the execution of such a scheme, could only have been replaced under the most favourable circumstances, and by a long career of prosperity. It is known that, in consequence of this desertion, many of the Cypriote towns fell into complete ruin, from which they have never since emerged.

Justinian, at the commencement of his reign, made a successful expedition into the country occupied by the Sclavonians in Macedonia, who were now closely allied with the Bulgarian principality beyond Mount Hamms.

This people, emboldened by their increased force, had pushed their plundering excursions as far as the Pro­pontis. The imperial army was completely successful, and both the Sclavonians and their Bulgarian allies were defeated. In order to repeople the fertile shores of the Hellespont about Abydos, Justinian transplanted a number of the Sclavonian families into the province of Opsicium. This colony was so numerous and power­ful, that it furnished a considerable contingent to the imperial armies.¹

The peace with the Saracens was not of long dura­tion. Justinian refused to receive the first gold pieces coined by Abdalmclik, which boro the legend, “ Cod is the Lord.” The tribute had previously been paid in money from the municipal mints of Syria; and Jus­tinian imagined that the new Arabian coinage was an attack 011 tho IFoly Trinity. He led his army in per­son against the Saracens, and a battle took place near Sebastopolis, on the coast of Cilicia, in which hu was

¹     30,000.—Nicephoru.s Pat. 21. Thc<>]>liaiic-<, 30i>.

47s EXTINCTION OF THE ROMAN POWER.

ciiap. v. entirely defeated, in consequence of the treason of the leader of his Sclavonian troops.¹ Justinian fled from the field of battle, and on his way to the capital he revenged himself on the Sclavonians who had remained faithful to his standard for the desertion of their coun­trymen. The Sclavonians in his service were put to death, and he even ordered the wives and children of those who had joined the Saracens to be murdered. The deserters were established by the Saracens on the coast of Syria, and in the Island of Cyprus ; and under the government of the caliph, they were more prosper­ous than under that of the Roman emperor. It was during this war that the Saracens inflicted the first great badge of civil degradation on the Christian popu­lation of their dominions. Abdalmelik established the Haratch, or Christian capitation tax, in order to raise money to carry on the war with Justinian. This unfor­tunate mode of taxing the Christian subjects of the caliph, in a different manner from the Mohammedans, completely separated the two classes, and reduced the Christians to the rank of serfs of the State, whose most prominent political relation with the Mussulman com­munity was that of furnishing money to the govern­ment. The decline of the Christian population through­out the dominions of the caliphs was the consequence of this ill-judged measure, which has probably tended more to the depopulation of the East than all the tyranny and military violence of the Mohammedan armies.

The restless spirit of Justinian naturally plunged into the ecclesiastical controversies which divided the church. He assembled a general council, called usually in Trullo, from the hall of its meeting having been

¹ The Sclavonian leader Gebulus, or Nebulas, carried off 20,000 men, accord­ing to Theophanes (305); but Saint-Martin cites an Armenian historian who reduccs the number to 7000 cavalry.—Le Beau, xii. 22.

PROGRESS OF THE SARACENS.

479

covcred with a dome. The proceedings of this council, as might have been expected from those of an assembly controlled by such a spirit as that of the emperor, tended only to increase the growing differences be­tween the Greek and Latin parties in the church. Of one hundred and two canons sanctioned by this coun­cil, the pope finally rejected six, as adverse to the usages of the Latins.¹ And thus an additional cause of separation was permanently created between the Greeks and Latins, and the measures of the church, as well as the political arrangements of the times, and the social feel­ings of the people, all tended to render union impossible.

A taste for building is a common fancy of sovereigns who possess the absolute disposal of large funds with­out any feeling of their duty as trustees for the benefit of the people whom they govern. Even in the midst of the greatest public distress, the treasury of nations, on the very verge of ruin and bankruptcy, must con­tain large sums of money drawn from the annual taxa­tion. This treasure, when placcd at the irresponsible disposal of princes who affect magnificence, is fre­quently employed in useless and ornamental building ; and this fashion has been so general with despots, that the princes who have been most distinguished for their love of building, have not unfrequently been the worst and most oppressive sovereigns. It is always a delicate and difficult task for a sovereign to estimate the amount which a nation can wisely afford to expend on orna­mental architecture ; and, from his position, he is seldom qualified to judge corrcctly 011 what buildings

¹ Moshcim’s Eccles. Hist. l>v Murdock, Soames’s t-dit. ii. 111. The sis canons rejected were—the fifth, which approves of the eighty-five apnstolic canons, commonly attributed to Clement; the thirteenth, which allows priests to live in wedlock ; the fifty-fifth, which condemns fasting on Saturdays ; the sixty-seventh, which earnestly enjoins abstinence from blood and things strangled; the eighty-second, which prohibits the painting of Christ in the image of a lamb ; and the eighty-sixth, concerning the equality of the bishops of Rome and Constantinople. — Schlcgel’& note.

4S0 EXTINCTION OF THE HOMAN POWER.

. ornament ought to be employed, in order to make | art accord with the taste and feelings of the people. Public opinion affords the only criterion for the for- j mation of a sound judgment on this department of public administration ; for, when princes possessing a taste for building are not compelled to consult the wants and wishes of their subjects, in the construction of national edifices, they are apt, by their wild projects and lavish expenditure, to create evils far greater than any which could result from an exhibition of bad taste alone.

In an evil hour, the love of building took possession of ¹ Justinian’s mind. His lavish expenditure soon obliged him ' to make his financial administration more rigorous, and general discontent quickly pervaded the capital. The re­ligious and superstitious feelings of the population were severely wounded by the emperor s eagerness to destroy a church of the Virgin, in order to embellish the vicinity • of his palace with a splendid fountain. Justinian’s own ’ scruples required to be soothed by a religious ceremony, ■ but the patriarch for some time refused to officiate, : alleging that the church had 110 prayers to desecrate ! holy buildings. The emperor, however, was the head j of the church and the master of the bishops, whom he 1 could remove from office, so that the patriarch did not long dare to refuse obedience to his orders. It is said, j however, that the patriarch showed very clearly his dissatisfaction, by repairing to the spot and authoris-¹ ing the destruction of the church by an ecclesiastical 1 * ceremony, to which he added these words, “ to God, ^s who suffers all things, be rendered glory, now and for ; * ever. Amen.” The ceremony was sufficient to satisfy ^ the conscience of the emperor, who perhaps neither j⁽ heard nor heeded the words of the patriarch. The j*¹ public discontent was loudly expressed, and Justinian]' soon perceived that the fury of the populace threatened '

ANARCHY.

481

a rebellion in Constantinople. To avert the danger, he a. d. took every measure which unscrupulous cruelty could ^0,i,wl suggest; but, as generally happens in periods of general discontent and excitement, the storm burst in an un­expected quarter, and the hatred of Justinian left him suddenly without support. Leontius, one of the ablest generals of the empire, whose exploits have been already mentioned, had been thrown into prison, but was at this time ordered to assume the government of the province of Hellas. He considered the nomination as a mere pretext to remove him from the capital, in order to put him to death at a distance without any trial.

On the eve of his departure, Leontius placed himself at the head of a sedition ; Justinian was seized, and his ministers were murdered by the populace with the most _; savage cruelty. Leontius was proclaimed emperor, but he spared the life of his dethroned predecessor for the sake of the benefits which he had received from Con­stantine Pogonatus. He ordered Justinian’s nose to be cut off, and exiled him to Cherson. From this 1 mutilation the dethroned emperor received the insult­ing nickname of Pdiinotmetus, or Docknose, by which I he is distinguished in Byzantine history.

SECT. VI.      ANARCHY IN TIIE ADMINISTRATION UNTIL TIIE ACCESSION

OF LEO III.

The government of Leontius was characterised by

the unsteadiness which not unfrequently marks the

administration of the ablest sovereigns who obtain

their thrones by accidental circumstances rather than

by systematic combinations. The most important

event of his reiim was the final loss of Africa, which . ... led to his dethronement. The indefatigable caliph

Abdalmelik despatched a powerful expedition into

482

EXTINCTION OF THE HOMAN POWER.

quercd, and Carthage was captured after a feeble re­sistance.¹ An expedition sent by Leontius to relieve the province arrived too late to save Carthage, but the commander-in-chief forced the entrance into the port, recovered possession of the city, and drove the Arabs from most of the fortified towns on the coast. The Arabs constantly received new reinforcements, which the Roman general demanded from Leontius in vain. At last the Arabs assembled a fleet, and the Romans, being defeated in a naval engagement, were compelled to abandon Carthage, which the Arabs utterly destroy­ed,—having too often experienced the superiority of the Romans, both in naval affairs and in the art of war, to venture on retaining populous and fortified cities on the sea coast. This curious fact affords strong proof of the great superiority of the Roman commerce and naval resources, and equally powerful evidence of the shameful disorder in the civil and military administration of the empire, which rendered these advantages useless, and allowed the imperial fleets to be defeated by the naval forces collected by the Arabs from among their Egyptian and Syrian sub­jects. At the same time it is evident that the naval victories of the Arabs could never have been gained unless a powerful party of the Christiaus had been in­duced, by their feelings of hostility to the Roman em­pire, to afford them a willing support; for there were as yet neither shipbuilders nor sailors among the Mussul­mans.

The Roman expedition, 011 its retreat from Carthage, stopped in the Island of Crete, where a sedition broke out among the troops, iii which their general was killed. Apsimar, the commander of the Cibyraiot troops, was

¹ Carthage was founded B. c. S7S. The Tyrian colony was exterminated by the llomans b. c. 146. The lioman colony of Carthage was founded by Julius Ctesar b. C. 14, and destroyed by the Arabs a. d. 098.

SOT

Mi

liETUUN OF JUSTINIAN 11.

4S3

declared emperor by the name of Tiberius.¹ The fleet proceeded directly to Constantinople, which offered 110 resistance. Leontius was taken prisoner, his nose cut off, and his person confined in a monastery. Tiberius Apsimar governed the empire with prudence, and his brother Heraclius commanded the Roman armies with success. The imperial troops penetrated into Syria; a victory was gained over the Arabs at Samosata, but the ravages committed bv the Romans in this in-

O  */

vasion surpassed the greatest cruelties ever inflicted by the Arabs; for two hundred thousand Saracens are said to have perished during the campaign. Ar­menia was alternately invaded and laid waste by the Romans and the Saracens, as the various turns of war favoured the hostile parties, and as the changing in­terests of the Armenian population induced them to aid the emperor or the caliph. But while Tiberius was occupied in the duties of government, and living without any fear of a domestic enemy, he was suddenly surprised in his capital by Justinian, who appeared be­fore Constantinople at the head of a Bulgarian army.

Ten years of exile had been spent by the banished emperor in vain attempts to obtain power. Ilis violent proceedings made him everywhere detested, but he possessed the daring enterprise and the ferocious cruelty necessary for a chief of banditti, joined to a singular confidence in the value of his hereditary claim to the imperial throne ; so that no undertaking appeared to him hopeless. After quarrelling with the inhabitants of Cherson, and with his brother-in-law,

¹ The Cibyraiot Theme included the ancient Caria, Lycia, Pamphylia, and a part of Phrygia ; Cibyra Magna was a considerable town at the angle of Phrygia, Caria, and Lycia. Tiberius Oiesar was regarded as its second founder, from his having remitted the tribute altera severe earthquake. -Tacitus, slim. iv. 13. From him Apsimar must have taken the name of Tiberius, and not from the emperor of Constantinople of better fame. Constantine Porphyro­genitus, indeed, says the Theme in question was named from the insignificant town of Cibyra in Pamphylia, but his authority is of little value on such a point.—l)c Them. lib. i. p. 16.

a. n.

<io3-71fi.

484

EXTINCTION OF THE ROMAN POWER.

chap. v. the king of the Khazars, he succeeded, by a desperate exertion of courage, in reaching the country of the Bulgarians. Terbelis, their sovereign, agreed to assist him in recovering his throne, and they marched im­mediately with a Bulgarian army to the walls of Con­stantinople. Three days after their arrival, they suc­ceeded in entering the capital during the night. Ten years of adversity had increased the natural ferocity of Justinian’s disposition ; and a desire of vengeance, so unreasonable as to verge on madness, seems hencefor­ward to have been the chief motive of his actions. The population of Constantinople had now sunk to the same degree of barbarism as the nations surrounding them, and in cruelty they were worthy subjects of their em­peror. Justinian gratified them by celebrating his re­storation with splendid chariot races in the circus. He sate on an elevated throne, with his feet resting on the necks of the dethroned emperors, Leontius and Tiberius, who were stretched on the platform below, while the Greek populace around shouted the words of the Psalm­ist, “ Thou shalt tread down the asp and the basilisk, thou shalt trample on the lion and the dragon.⁵’¹ The dethroned emperors and Heraclius, who had so well sustained the glory of the Roman arms against the Saracens, were afterwards hung from the battlements of Constantinople. Justinian’s whole soul was occu­pied with plans of vengeance. Though the conquest of Tyana laid open Asia Minor to the incursions of the Saracens, instead of opposing them, he directed his disposable forces to punish the cities of Ravenna and Cherson, because they had incurred his personal hatred. Both the proscribed cities had rejoiced at his dethrone­ment ; they were both taken and treated with savage

¹ These are the words of the Septuagint, Psalm xc. 13. In our version, Psalm xci. 13, the passage stands, “Thou shalt tread upon the lion and adder; the young lion and the dragon shalt thou trample under feet.”

ANARCHY.

485

cruelty. The Greek city of Cherson, though the seat of a flourishing commerce, and inhabited by a nume­rous population, was condemned to utter destruction. Justinian ordered all the buildings to be razed with the ground, and every soul within its walls to be put to death ; but the troops sent to execute these barbar­ous orders revolted, and proclaimed an Armenian, called Bardanes, emperor, under the name of Philippicus.¹ Seizing the fleet, they sailed directly to Constantinople. Justinian was encamped with an army in Asia Minor when Philippicus arrived, and took possession of the capital without encountering any resistance. He was immediately deserted by his whole army, for the troops were as little pleased with his conduct since his restor­ation, as was every other class of his subjects ; but his ferocity and courage never failed him, and his rage was unbounded when he found himself abandoned by every one. He was seized and executed, without hav­ing it in his power to offer the slightest resistance. His son Tiberius, though only six years of age, was torn from the altar of a church, to which he had been con­ducted for safety, and cruelly massacred ; and thus the race of Heraclius was extinguished, after the family had governed the Roman empire for exactly a century (a. d. 611 to 711).

During the interval of six years which elapsed from the death of Justinian II. to the accession of Leo the Isaurian, the imperial throne was occupied by three sovereigns. Their history is only remarkable as proving the inherent strength of the Roman body politic, which could survive such continual revolutions, even in the state of weakness to which it was reduced. Philippicus was a luxurious and extravagant prince, who thought only of enjoying the situation which lie had accidentally

l Theoi>luuies calls him the son of Nicophorus the Patrician.— 1*. .‘ill. Nin- phorus l’at,. mentions that he was an Armenian.- 1’. .')*•, edit. Umin.

EXTINCTION OF THE ROMAN POWER.

chap. v. obtained. He was soon dethroned by a band of con­spirators, who carried him off from the palace while in a fit of drunkenness, and after putting out his eyes, left him helpless in the middle of the hippodrome. The reign of Piiilippicus would hardly deserve notice, had he not increased the confusion into which the empire had fallen, and exposed the total want of character and conscience among the Greek clergy, by re-establishing the Monothelite doctrines in a general council of the eastern bishops.

As the conspirators who had dethroned Piiilippicus had not formed any plan for choosing his successor, the first secretary of state was elected emperor by a public assembly held in the great clmrch of St Sophia, under the name of Anastasius II. He immediately re­established the orthodox faith, and his character is consequently the subject of eulogy with the historians of his reign.¹ The Saracens, whose power was con­tinually increasing, were at this time preparing a great expedition at Alexandria, in order to attack Constanti­nople. Anastasius sent a fleet with the troops of the theme Opsicium, to destroy the magazines of timber collected 011 the coast of Phoenicia for the purpose of assisting the preparations at Alexandria. The Roman armament was commanded by a deacon of St Sophia, who also held the office of grand treasurer of the em­pire. The nomination of a member of the clergy to command the army gave great dissatisfaction to the troops, who were not yet so deeply tinctured with ecclesiastical ideas and manners, as the aristocracy of the empire. A sedition took place while the army lay at Rhodes : John the Deacon was slain, and the expedi­tion quitted the port in order to return to the capital. The soldiers on their way landed at Adramyttium, and iinding there a collector of the revenues of a popular

¹ Nioephorus Pat. 32. Thoophanos, 322.

ANARCHY.

487

character, they declared him emperor, under the name of Theodosius III.

The new emperor was compelled unwillingly to follow the army. For six months, Constantinople was closely besieged, and the emperor Anastasius, who had retired to Nicsea, was defeated in a general engagement. The capital was at last taken by the rebels, who were so deeply sensible of their real interests, that they maintained strict discipline, and Anastasius, whose weakness gave little confidence to his followers, con­sented to resign the empire to Theodosius, and to retire into a monastery, that he might secure an amnesty to all his friends. Theodosius was distinguished by many good qualities, but on the throne he proved a perfect cipher, and his reign is only remarkable as affording a pretext for the assumption of the imperial dignity by Leo III., called the Isaurian. This able and enterpris­ing officer, perceiving that the critical times rendered the empire the prize of any man who had talents to seize, and power to defend it, placed himself at the head of the troops in Asia Minor, assumed the title of 1 emperor, and soon compelled Theodosius to quit the f throne and become a priest.

During the period which elapsed between the death ( of Heraclius and the accession of Leo, the few remains of Roman principles of administration which had lingered in the imperial court, were gradually extin­guished. The long cherished hope of restoring the ancient power and glory of the Roman empire expired, and even the aristocracy, which always clings the last to antiquated forms and ideas, no longer dwelt with confidence 011 the memory of former days. The con­viction that the empire had undergone a great moral and political change, which severed the future irrevo­cably from the past, though it was probably not fully understood, was at least felt and acted on both by

488 EXTINCTION OF THE ROMAN POWER.

chap. v. the people and the government. The sad fact that the splendid light of civilisation which had illuminated the ancient world had now become as obscure at Constan­tinople as at Rome, Antioch, Alexandria, and Carthage, was too evident to be longer doubted; the very twilight of antiquity had faded into darkness. It is rather, however, the province of the antiquary than of the historian to collect all the traces of this truth scattered over the records of the seventh century.

There is one curious and important circumstance in the history of the later days of the Roman empire, of which little beyond the mere fact has been transmitted by historians. A long and violent contention was carried oil between the imperial power and the aristo­cracy, which represented the last degenerate remains of the Roman senate. This struowle distracted the councils and paralysed the energy of the Roman govern­ment. It commenced in the reign of Maurice, and existed under various modifications during the whole period of the government of the family of Heraclius. This aristocratic influence had more of an oriental than of a Roman character; its feelings and views had originated in that class of society imbued with a semi- Greek civilisation which had grown up during the days of the Macedonian rather than of the Roman empire; and both Heraclius and Constans II., in their schemes for circumscribing its authority in the State, resolved to remove the capital of the empire from Constanti­nople to a Latin city. Both conceived the vain hope of re-establishing the imperial power 011 a purely Roman basis, as a means of subduing, or at least controlling, the power of Greek nationality, which was gaining ground both in the State and the Church. The contest terminated in the destruction of that political influence in the Eastern Empire, which was purely Roman in its character. l>ut the united power of Greek and oriental

ANARCHY.

4,SO

, feelings could not destroy the spirit of Rome, until the well-organised civil administration of Augustus and Constantine ceased to exist. The subjects of the empire ! were no great gainers by the change. The political government became a mere arbitrary despotism, differ­ing little from the prevailing form of monarchy in the East, and deprived of all those fundamental institutions, and that systematic character, which had enabled the ¹ Roman state to survive the extravagancies of Nero and

¹     the incapacity of Phocas.

The disorganisation of the Roman government at this period, and the want of any influence over the court by the Greek nation, are visible in the choice of the persons who occupied the imperial throne after the extinction of the family of Heraclius. They were selected by accident, and several were of foreign origin, j who did not even look upon themselves as either Greeks or Romans. Philippicus was an Armenian, and Leo III., whose reign opens a new era in eastern history, was an Isaurian. On the throne he proved that he was desti­tute of any attachment to Roman political institutions, and any respect for the Greek ecclesiastical establish­ment. It was by the force of his talents, and by his able direction of the State and of the army, that he suc­ceeded in securing his family on the Byzantine throne; for he unquestionably placed himself in direct hostility to the feelings and opinions of his Greek and Roman subjects, and transmitted to his successors a contest between the imperial power and the Greek nation con­cerning picture-worship, in which the very existence of Greek nationality, civilisation, and religion, became at last compromised. From the commencement of the iconoclastic contest, the history of the Greeks assumes a new aspect. Their civilisation, and their connection with the Byzantine empire, become linked with the .policy and fortunes of the Eastern Church, and ecclesi-

490

EXTINCTION OF THE ROMAN POWER.

ciiap. v. astical affairs obtain a supremacy over all social and political considerations in their minds.

SECT. VII.     GENERAL VIEW OF TIIE CONDITION OF THE GREEKS AT

THE EXTINCTION OF THE ROMAN FOAVER IN TIIE EAST.

The geograpical extent of the empire at the time of its transition from the Roman to the Byzantine empire affords evidence of the influence which the territorial changes produced by the Saracen conquests exercised in conferring political importance 011 the Greek race. The frontier towards the Saracens of Syria commenced at Mopsuestia in Cilicia, the last fortress of the Arab power. It ran along the chains of Mounts Amanus and Taurus to the mountainous district to the north of Edessa and Nisibis, called, after the time of Justinian, the Fourth Armenia, of which Martyropolis was the capital. It then followed nearly the ancient limits of the empire until it reached the Black Sea, a short distance to the east of Trebizond. On the northern shores of the Euxine, Cherson was now the only city that acknowledged the supremacy of the empire, retain­ing at the same time all its wealth and commerce, with the municipal privileges of a free city.¹ In Europe, Mount Haemus formed the barrier against the Bulga­rians, while the mountainous ranges which bound Mace­donia to the north-west, and encircle the territory of Dyrrachium, were regarded as the limits of the free Sclavonian states. It is true that large bodies of Scla­vonians had penetrated to the south of this line, and lived in Greece and Peloponnesus, but not in the same independent condition with reference to the imperial administration as their northern brethren of the Servian family.

¹ Gibbon, cli. xvii. vol. ii. p. 3G0, Smith’s edit. Constant. Porphyr. l)e shim- 1 c. 58.

ANARCHY.

491

Istria., Venice, and the cities 011 the Dalmatian coast, . a.d. still acknowledged the supremacy of the empire, though their distant position, their commercial connections, and their religious feelings, were all tending towards a „ final separation. In the centre of Italy, the exarchate ' of Ravenna still held Rome in subjection, but the people of Italy were entirely alienated from the political ad­ministration, which was now regarded by ₍them as , purely Greek, and the Italians, with Rome before their

I     eyes, could hardly admit the pretensions of the Greeks ₍to be regarded as the legitimate representatives of the

Roman empire. The loss of northern and central Italy |] was consequently an event in constant danger of oc- n during; it would have required an able and energetic and

II    just government to have repressed the national feel­ings of the Italians, and conciliated their allegiance.

The condition of the population of the south of Italy and of Sicily was very different. There the majority of the inhabitants were Greeks in language and man-

O O

I ners ; but at this time the cities of Gaeta, Naples, t Amalfi, and Sorento, the district of Otranto, and the ,| peninsula to the south of the ancient Sybaris, now ( called Calabria, were the only parts which remained I under the Byzantine government. Sicily, though it ' had begun to suffer from the incursions of the Saracens,

iwas still populous and wealthy. Sardinia, the last possession of the Greeks to the westward of Italy, was I conquered by the Saracens about this time, a. P. 711.¹

In order to conclude the view which, in the preced­ing pages, we have endeavoured to present of the

■    various causes that gradually diminished the numbers, and destroyed the civilisation, of the Greek race, it is i necessary to add a sketch of the position of the nation at the commencement of the eighth century. At this unfortunate period in the history of mankind, the

¹ Prior*, Mohmiancd'in History, i. -J71.

492

EXTINCTION OF THE ROMAN POWER.

chap. v. Greeks were placed in imminent clanger of that an­nihilation which had already destroyed their Roman conquerors. The victories of the Arabs were attended with very different consequences to the Greek popula­tion of the countries which they subdued, from those which had followed the conquests of the Romans. Like the earlier domination of the Parthians, the Arab power was employed in such a manner as ultimately to exterminate the whole Greek population in the con­quered countries ; and though, for a short period, the Arabs, like their predecessors the Parthians, protected Greek art and Grecian civilisation, their policy soon changed, and the Greeks were proscribed. The arts and sciences which flourished at the court of the caliphs were chiefly derived from their Syrian subjects, whose acquaintance both with Syriac and Greek literature opened to them an extensive range of scientific know­ledge from sources utterly lost to the moderns. It is to be observed, that a very great number of the eminent literary and scientific authors of later times were Asiatics, and that these writers frequently made use of their native languages in those useful and scientific works which were intended for the practical instruction of their own countrymen. In Egypt and Cyrenaica the Greek population was soon exterminated by the Arabs, and every trace of Grecian civilisation was much sooner effaced than in Syria ; though even there no very long interval elapsed before a small remnant of the Greek population was all that survived. Antioch itself, long the third city of the Eastern Empire, the spot where the Christians had first received their name,¹ and the principal seat of Greek civilisation in Asia for upwards of nine centuries, though it was not depopu­lated and razed to the ground like Alexandria and h Carthage, nevertheless soon ceased to be a Grecian city. \ J

¹ Acts, xi. CO*.      F f

CONDITION OF THE GREEKS.  493

The numerous Greek colonies which had flourished in the Tauric Chersonese, and 011 the eastern and northern shores of the Euxine, were now almost all deserted. The greater number had submitted to the Khazars, who now occupied all the open country with their flocks and herds ; and the inhabitants of the free city of Clierson, shut out from the cultivation of the rich lands whose harvests had formerly supplied Athens with grain, were entirely supported by foreign com­merce. Their ships exchanged the hides, wax, and salt fish of the neighbouring districts, for the necessaries and luxuries of a city life, in Constantinople and the maritime cities of the empire.¹ It affords matter for reflection to find that Clierson,—situated in a climate which, from the foundation of the colony, opposed in­surmountable barriers to the introduction of much of the peculiar character of Greek social civilisation, and which deprived the art and the popular literature of the mother country of some portion of their charm,—■ to whose inhabitants the Greek temple, the Greek , agora, and the Greek theatre, must ever have borne the characteristics of foreign habits, and in a land where the piercing winds and heavy clouds prevented a life out of doors being the essence of existence—should still have (preserved, to this late period of history, both its Greek .municipal organisation, and its independent civic gov­ernment. Yet such was the case ; and we know from the testimony of Constantine Porphyrogenitus, tliat Clierson continued to exist in a condition of respcct-

1 ¹ Leucon, king ul' Bosporus (u. c. 3^fJ3—353), once sent to Athens from the Tauric Chersonese, in a year of scarcity, upwards of two million bushels of grain. The ordinary importation was about six hundred thousand.—Strabo, vii. e. 4, vol. 2, 07, edit. Tauch. Demosthenes, in Lrjilin. 1<!7. In the time of Strabo, the eastern part of the Chersonese was a country very fertile in grain ; but in that of Constantine Porphyrogenitus, Clierson imported corn, wine, and oil as foreign luxuries. Gibbon, in copying Constantine l’orphyrogrnitus when speaking of the time o! Justinian 1]., omits to notice the commercial pros­perity of the place, and represents it as a lonely settlement.— Ch. xlviii. vol. iv. 1>- 78.—See pp. 173, 171, of this volume.

a. D.

<>33-71 (J.

494 EXTINCTION OF THE ROMAN POWER.

ciiat. v. able independence, though under imperial protection * down to the middle of the tenth century.

In Greece itself the Hellenic race had been driven from many fertile districts by Sclavonian settlers, who had established themselves in large bodies in Greece and the Peloponnesus, and had often pushed their plun­dering and piratical incursions among the islands of the Archipelago, from which they had carried off numerous bands of slaves.¹ In the cities and islands which the Greeks still possessed, the secluded position of the population, and the exclusive attention which they were compelled to devote to their local interests and personal defence, introduced a degree of ignorance which soon extinguished the last remains of Greek civilisation, and effaced all knowledge of Greek literature. The dimin­ished population of the European Greeks now occupied the shores of the Adriatic to the south of Dyrrachium, and the maritime districts of Greece, Macedonia, and Thrace, as far as Constantinople. The interior of the country was everywhere overrun by Sclavonic colonies, though many mountainous districts and most of the fortified places still remained in the possession of the Greeks. It is, unfortunately, impossible to explain with precision the real nature and extent of the Scla­vonic colonisation of Greece ; and, indeed, before it be possible to decide how far it partook of conquest, and how far it resulted from the occupation of deserted and uncultivated lands, it becomes absolutely necessary to arrive at some definite information concerning the diminution which had taken place in the native agri­cultural classes, and in the social position of the slaves and serfs who survived in the depopulated districts. The scanty materials existing render the inquiry one which can only engage the attention of the anti-

¹     Niceph. Pat. pp. 40, 8(3, edit. Bonn.

*

CONDITION OF THE G KEEKS.

495

quary, who can glean a few isolated facts ; but the his- a. _d. j torian must turn away from the conjectures which would connect these facts into a system. The condition ¹ of social life during the decline of the Roman empire had led to the division of the provincial population into two classes, the urban and the rustic, or into citizens and peasants ; and the superior position and ! greater security of the citizens gradually enabled them | to assume a political superiority over the free peasants,

. and at last to reduce them, in a great measure, to the [ rank of serfs.¹ Slaves became, about the same time, i of much greater relative value, and more difficult to be procured ; and the distinction naturally arose between ¹ purchased slaves, who formed a part of the household and of the family of the possessor, and agricultural serfs, whose partial liberty was attended by the severest I hardships, and whose social condition was one of the lowest degradation and of the greatest personal danger.

The population of Greece and the islands, in the time of Alexander the Great, may be estimated at three millions and a half;² and probably half of this number consisted of slaves. During the vicissitudes of the Greek popu­lation under the Roman domination, the diminution of its numbers cannot have been less than the total , amount of the whole slave population, though the dimi- j nution did not fall exclusively on any one class of I society. The extent, however, to which the general , depopulation affected the agricultural population, and

¹ the value of labour, must be ascertained before full 6 . . light can be thrown on the real nature of the Sclavonic

and Albanian colonisation of Greece.³

' In the island of Sicily, and in the south of Italy, the

^ ¹ Cod. Just. xi. t. 40, 1, 1. Cod. Thcod. v. par. t. LI and 11, &e. j. ² Clinton's Fasti Hell., vol. ii. p. 431.

³     The high value of labour in many thinly-pc-oplcd countrios in a declining |state, as Turkey, is a subject for curious investigation, as connected with the decline of one race of the population, and its replacement by another.

49G

EXTINCTION OF THE ROMAN POWER.

ciiap. v. great bulk of tbc population was Greek, both in lan­guage and manners, and few portions of the Greek race had succeeded so well in preserving their wealth and ' property uninjured.¹

Even in Asia Minor the decline of the numbers of ¹ the Greek race had been rapid. This decline must, ¹ however, be attributed rather to bad government caus-1| ing insecurity of property and difficulty of communica- = tion than to hostile invasions ; for from the period of ( the Persian invasion during the reign of Heraclius, the f greater part of this immense country had enjoyed ; almost a century of uninterrupted peace. The Persian I invasions had never been very injurious to the sea-coast, where the Greek cities were still numerous and wealthy; but oppression and neglect had already destroyed the! internal trade of the central provinces, and literary in-' struction was becoming daily of less value to the in-i, habitants of the isolated and secluded districts of the¹ interior.² The Greek tongue began to be neglected,' and the provincial dialects, corrupted by an admixture^: of the Lydian, Carian, Phrygian, Cappadocian, and Ly- caonian languages, became the ordinary medium of;¹ business and conversation. Bad government had caused, poverty, poverty had produced barbarism, and the', ignorance created by barbarism became the means of J perpetuating an arbitrary and oppressive system of administration. The people, ignorant of all written jl language, felt unable to check the exercise of official; abuses by the control of the law, and by direct appli- , cation to the central administration. Their wish, there­fore, was to abridge as much as possible all the pro-^;, ceedings of power ; and as it was always more easy to ■

¹                                          For the antiquity of the Greek race and language in Magna Gracia, seel ( Niebuhr, Ilist. of Home, i. Gl, English trails. The Greek language continued! i in use until the fourteenth century.                                    ¹

²                                        The barbarism of the provincial Asiatics is often alluded to by the Byzan- ₍ tine writers. Kvx.a.ava; nvas n XvKo.v^i!i-7toui.—Theoplianes, Chron. 406. For the_ existence of Lycaoniau dialect, see Acts, xiv. 11.     1 (

CONDITION OF THE UliEEIvS.

497

save their persons from the central power than their properties from the subordinate officers of the adminis­tration, despotism became the favourite form of govern­ment with the great mass of the Asiatic population.

It is impossible to attempt any detailed examination of the changes which had taken place in the numbers of the Greek population in Asia Minor. The fact that extensive districts, once populous and wealthy, were already deserts, is proved by the colonies which Jus­tinian II. settled in various parts of the country. The frequent repetition of such settlements, and the great extent to which they were carried by the later emperors, prove that the depopulation of the country had pro­ceeded more rapidly than the destruction of its mate­rial resources. The descendants of Greek and Roman citizens ceased to exist in districts, while the buildings stood tenantless, and the olive groves yielded an abun­dant harvest. In this strange state of things the country easily received new races of inhabitants. The sudden settlement of a Sclavonian colony so numerous as to be capable of furnishing an auxiliary army of thirty thousand men, and the unexpected migration of nearly half of the inhabitants of the island of Cyprus, without mentioning the emigration of the Mardaites

&    o

who were established in Asia J\linor, could never have taken place unless houses, wells, fruit-trees, water­courses, enclosures, and roads had existed in tolerable preservation, and thus furnished the new colonist with an immense amount of what may be called vested capital to assist his labour. The fact that these new colonies, planted by Justinian II., could survive and support themselves, seems a curious circumstance when connected with the depo](illation and declining state of the empire which led to their establishment.

The existence of numerous and powerful hands of organised brigands who plundered the country in deli-

2 I

a. n.

33-7113.

498

EXTINCTION OF THE ROMAN TOWER.

chap. v. ancc of the government was one of the features of so­' ciety at this period, which almost escapes the noticc of the meagre historians whom we possess, though it existed to such an extent as materially to have aggra­vated the distress of the Greek population. Even had history been entirely silent on the subject, there could have been 110 doubt of their existence in the latter days of the Roman empire, from the knowledge which we have of the condition of the inhabitants, and of the geographical conformation of the land. History affords, however, a few casual glances of the extent of the evil. The existence of a tribe of brigands in the mountains of Thrace during a period of two centuries, is proved by the testimony of authorities which the time and circumstances render unimpeachable. Menander men­tions bands of robbers, under the name of Scamars, who plundered the ambassadors sent by the Avars to the emperor Justin II. ; and these Scamars continued to exist as an organised society of robbers in the same district until the time of Constantine V. (Copronymus), a. d. 765, when the capture and cruel torture of one of their chiefs is narrated by Theophanes.¹

History also records numerous isolated facts which, when collected, produce 011 the mind the conviction that the diminution in numbers, and the decline in civilisa­tion of the Greek racc, were the effect of the oppression and injustice of the Roman government, not of the vio­lence and cruelty of the barbarian invaders of the em­pire. During the reign of that insane tyrant Justinian II., the imperial troops, when properly commanded,

¹ Excerpt a e Jfenamlri Hist. p. 313, edit. Bonn. Theophanes, C'hron. 367.

The Bagaudrc in Spain and Gaul were a similar race of outlaws______________ Ducange,

67oss. Sled, et Infra Lai., in voee. In the time of Gallienus, Sicily was ravaged by armies of brigands.—Script. Aug. Trebell. Poll. c. 4. In the reign of Arcadius, bands of slaves in the dress of Huns plundered Thrace.—Zosimus, v. 22. The frequent portents of insurrections of slaves and ravages of brigands, indicated by Lydus, proved that men lived in constant fear of these calamities during the sixth century.—De Ustentis, xxxiv. 7, 15, 25.

CONDITION OF TJIE GREEKS.

490

showed that the remains of Roman discipline enabled them to defeat all their enemies in a fair field of battle. The emperor Leontius, and Heraclius the brother of Tiberius Apsimar, were completely victorious over the redoubted Saracens; Justinian himself defeated the Bulgarians and Sclavonians. But the whole power of the empire was withdrawn from the people to be con­centrated in the government. The Greek municipal guards had been carefully deprived of their arms under Justinian I., whose timid policy regarded internal re­bellion as far more to be dreaded than foreign inva­sions. The people were everywhere disarmed because their hostile feelings were known and feared. The European Greeks were regarded as provincials just as much as the wild Lycaonians or Isaurians; and if they anywhere succeeded in obtaining arms and resisting the progress of the Sclavonians, they owed their success to the weakness and neglect which, in all despotic gov­ernments, prevent the strict execution of those laws which are at variance with the feelings and interests of the population, the moment that the agents of the government can derive 110 direct profit from enforcing them.

I The Roman government always threw the greatest difficulties in the way of their subjects’ acquiring the means of defending themselves without the aid of the j imperial army. The injury Justinian inflicted 011 the Greek cities by disbanding their local militia, and rob- ¹! bing them of the municipal funds devoted to preserve ' their physical well-being and mental culture, caused a deep-rooted hatred of the imperial government. This feeling is well portrayed in the bitter satire of the “Secret History” of Procopius. The hatred between the inhabitants of Hellas and the Roman Greeks con­nected with the imperial administration soon became mutual; and at last a term of contempt is used by

500

EXTINCTION OF THE HOMAN POWER.

ciiai*. v. the historians of the Byzantine empire to distinguish the native Greeks from the other Greek inhabitants of the empire,—they were called Helladikoi.

After the time of Justinian we possess little authentic information concerning the details of the provincial and municipal administration of the Greek population. The state of public roads and buildings, of ports, of trade, of maritime communications; of the nature of the judicial, civil, and police administration, and of the extent of education among the people—in short, the state of all those things which powerfully influence the character and the prosperity of a nation, are almost unknown. It is certain that they were all in a declining and neglected state. Thessalonica, though situated in one of the richest provinces of Europe, was often reduced to great distress by famine, and unfor­tunately these famines arose in as great a degree from the fiscal regulations and commercial monopolies of the Roman government, as from the devastations of the barbarians.¹ The local administration of the Greek cities still retained some shadow of ancient forms, and senates existed in many, even to a late period of the Byzantine empire. Indeed, they must all have enjoyed very much the same form of government as Venice and Amalfi, at the period when these cities first began to enjoy a virtual independence.

The absence of all national feeling, which had ever been a distinguishing feature of the Roman govern­ment, continued to exert its influence at the court of Constantinople long after the Greeks formed the bulk of the population of the empire. This spirit separated the governing classes from the people, and induced all those who obtained employments in the service of the State to constitute themselves into a body, directly opposed to Greek nationality, because the Greeks

¹ Tafel, Thessalonica, p. lx\ii.

CONDITION OF THE GREEKS.

formed the great mass of the governed. The election of many emperors not of Greek blood at this period must be attributed to the strength of this feeling.¹ This opposition between the Greek people and the imperial administration contributed, in a considerable degree, to revive the authority of the Eastern Church. The church was peculiarly Greek ; indeed, so much so, that an admixture of foreign blood was generally re­garded as almost equivalent to a taint of heresy. As ! the priests were chosen from every rank of society, the whole Greek nation was usually interested in the prosperity and passions of the church. In learning and moral character, the higher clergy were far supe- ¹ rior to the rest of the aristocracy, and thus they pos-

I     sessed a moral influence capable of protecting their friends and adherents among the people, in many questions with the civil government. This legitimate i authority, which was very great in the civil adminis- j tration, and was supported by national feelings and prejudices, gave them unbounded influence, the moment , that any dispute ranged the Greek clergy and people on the same side in their opposition to the imperial power. The Greek Church appears for a long period of history as the only public representative of the > feelings and views of the nation, and, after the acces­sion of Leo the Isaurian, it must be regarded as an , institution which tended to preserve the national ex­istence of the Greeks.

Amidst the numerous vices in the social state of mankind at this period, it is consoling to be able to , find a single virtue. The absence of all national leel- i mg in the imperial armies exercised a humane influence

¹     Heraclius was a Roman of Africa ; Leontius was an Isaurian \Xicoph. Pat. 25); Leo,an Isaurian (see Theophanes, ('h. 300; Le Beau, xii. !•:},!•(). 1’lii- lippieus and Leo V. were Armenians ; Nicephorus was of Arabian descent (Abou'lfaradj, 139). Michael II., of Amorium, wu.s said to be a Jew (('edivnus, U. C. 2, 49G) ; he was probably of Phrygian race.

A. D.

633-716.

502

EXTINCTION OF THE ROMAN POWER.

chap. v. on the Avars which the empire carried on against the Saracens. It is certain that the religions hatred, subse­quently so universal between the Christians and Mohammedans, was not very violent in the seventh and eighth centuries. The facility with which the orthodox patriarchs of Jerusalem and of Alexandria submitted to the government of the Mohammedans has

O                lj

been already mentioned. The empire, it is true, was generally the loser by this want of national and patriotic feeling among the Christians; but, on the ' other hand, the gain to humanity was immense, as is J proved by the liberality of Moawyah, who rebuilt the church of Edessa. The Arabs for some time contin- \ ued to be guided by the sentiments of justice which , Mahomet had carefully inculcated, and their treatment of their heretic subjects was far from oppressive, in a , religious point of view. When Abdalmelik desired to convert the splendid church of Damascus into a mosque, he abstained, 011 finding that the Christians of Damascus ■ were entitled to keep possession of it, by the terms of 1 their original capitulation. The insults which Justinian j IT. and the caliph Walid respectively offered to the 1 religion of his rival, were rather the effect of personal > insolence and tyranny, than of any sentiment of reli- j gious bigotry. Justinian quarrelled with Abdalmelik, , 011 account of the ordinary superscription of the calij>h\s letters—“ Say there is one God, and that Mahomet is his prophet/’ Walid violently expelled the Christians from j the great church of Damascus, and converted it into a mosque. At this period, any connection of Roman subjects with the Saracens was viewed as ordinary treason, and not as subsequently in the time of the Crusades, in the light of an inexpiable act of sacrilege. Even the accusation brought against the Pope, Martin, of corresponding with the Saracens, does not appear to . have been made with the intention of charging him ,

i

1

1

CONDITION OF TUP] GREEK*.

with blacker treason than that which resulted from his .a. _d. supporting the rebel exarch Olympius. All rebels who '' ' ' found their enterprise desperate, naturally sought assist­ance from the Saracens, as the most powerful enemies of the empire. The Armenian, Mizizius, who was pro­claimed emperor at Syracuse, after the murder of Con­stans II., applied to the Saracens for aid. The Arme­nian Christians continually changed sides between the emperor and the caliph, as the alliance of each appeared to afford them the fairest hopes of serving their poli­tical and religious interests. But as the Greek nation became more and more identified with the political in­terests of the church, and as barbarism and ignorance spread more widely among the population of the Byzan­tine and Arabian empires, the feelings of mutual hatred became daily more violent.

The government of the Roman empire had long been despotic and weak, and the financial administration corrupt and oppressive ; but still its subjects enjoyed a benefit of which the rest of mankind were almost entirely destitute, in the existence of an admirable code of laws, and a complete judicial establishment, separated from the other branches of the public administration. It is to the existence of this judicial establishment, guided by a published code of laws, and controlled by a body of lawyers educated in public schools, that the subjects of the empire were chiefly indebted for the superiority in civilisation which they still retained over the rest of the world. In spite of the neglect displayed in the other branches of the administration, the central gov­ernment always devoted particular care to the dispensa­tion of justice in private cases, as the surest means of maintaining its authority, and securing its power, against the evil effects of its fiscal extortions. Thu profession of the law continued to form an independent body, in which learning and reputation were a surer

504

EXTINCTION OF THE ROMAN POWER.

chap. v. means of arriving at wealth and honour than the pro­tection of the great; for the government itself was, from interest, generally induced to select the ablest members of the legal profession for judicial offices. The existence of the legal profession, uniting together a numerous body of educated men, guided by the same general views, and connected by similar studies, habits of thought, and interests, must have given the lawyers an independence both of character and position, which, when they were removed from the immediate influence of the court, could not fail to operate as some check on the arbitrary abuse of administrative and fiscal power.

In all countries which exist for any length of time in a state of civilisation, a number of local, communal, and municipal institutions are created, which really perform a considerable portion of the duties of civil government; for no central administration can carry its control into every detail; and those governments which attempt to carry their interference farthest are generally observed to be those which leave most of the real work of government undone. During the greater period of the Roman domination, the Greeks had been allowed to retain their own municipal and provincial institutions, as has been stated in the earlier part of this work, and the details of the civil administration were left almost entirely in their hands. Justinian I. destroyed this system as far as lay in his power; and the effects of the unprotected condition of the Greek population have been seen in the facilities which were afforded to the ravages of the Avars and Sclavonians. As the empire grew weaker, and the danger from the barbarians more imminent, the imperial regulations could not be regarded. Un­less the Greeks had obtained the right of bearing arms, their towns and villages must have fallen a prey to

CONDITION OF THE GREEKS.

505

every passing band of brigands, and their commerce would have been annihilated by Sclavonian and Sara­cen cruisers. The inhabitants of Venice, Istria, and Dalmatia, the citizens of Gaeta, Capua, Naples, and Salerno, and the inhabitants of continental Greece, the Peloponnesus, and the Archipelago, would have been exterminated by their barbarous neighbours, unless they had possessed not only arms which they were able and willing to use, but also a municipal form of local administration capable of directing the energies of the people without consulting the central govern­ment at Constantinople. The possession of arms, and the government of a native magistracy, gradually re­vived the spirit of independence; and to these circum­stances must be traced the revival of the wealth of the Greek islands, and of the commercial cities of the Pelo- , ponnesus. Many patriotic Greeks may possibly have lived brooding over the sufferings of their country in the monasteries, whose number was one of the greatest social evils of the time ; and the furious monks, who frequently issued from their retirement to insult the imperial authority under some religious watchword, were often inspired by political and national resent­ments which they could not avow.

Although the period of history which has been treated in this work has brought down the record of events to the final destruction of ancient political society in the Eastern Empire, still the reader must carefully bear in mind that the change had not, in the seventh and eighth centuries, completely changed the external ap­pearance of the ancient cities of the empire. Though the wealth and the numbers of the inhabitants had diminished, most of the public buildings of the ancient Greeks existed in all their splendour, and it would be a very incorrect picture indeed of a Greek city of this iperiod, to suppose that it resembled in any way the

506

EXTINCTION OF THE ROMAN POWEE.

filthy and ill-constructed burghs of the middle ages.¹ The solid fortifications of ancient military architecture still defended many cities against the assaults of the Sclavonians, Bulgarians, and Saracens; the splendid monuments of ancient art were still preserved in all their brilliancy, though unheeded by the passer-by ; the agoras were frequented, though by a less numerous and less busy population ; the ancient courts of justice were still in use, and the temples of Athens had yet sustained no injury from time, and little from neglect. The enmity of the iconoclasts to picture-worship, which, as Colonel Leake justly remarks,² has been the theme for much exaggeration, had not yet caused the destruc­tion of the statues and paintings of pure Grecian art. The classical student, with Pausanias in his hand, might unquestionably have identified every ancient site noticed by that author in his travels, and viewed the greater part of the buildings which he describes.

In many of the smaller cities of Greece it is doubtless true that the barbarians had left dreadful marks of their severity. When imperial vanity could be grati­fied by the destruction of ancient works of art, or when the value of their materials made them an object of cupidity, the finest masterpieces of sculpture were exposed to ruin. The emperor Anastasius I. per­mitted the finest bronze statues, which Constantine had collected from all the cities of Greece, to be melted into a colossal image of himself.³ During the reign of Constans II., the bronze tiles of the Pantheon

¹     Some fine statues were found in the ruins of Eclana, a town near Beneven- turn which was destroyed by Constans II. (a. d. 063). They were conveyed

to Spain.—Le Beau, xi.^v3S7.  ^

²     Topography of Athens and the Demi, vol. i. p. 65. I am not quite sure that i |jv “ it was about the age of the iconoclastic dispute that the productions of an- ¹ cient sculpture finally disappeared from every part of the ancient world, with f Jill the sole exception of the Byzantine capital.” They appear, from the position

in which monuments are often found, to have been preserved untouched to a “

much later period, and it seems probable that they only then began to be ex- I

posed to destruction for the use of the materials of which they were composed. .

⁸ ^Ialalas, xvi. 42, edit. Venet.      .

CONDITION OF THE GREEKS.

507

of Rome were taken away. Yet new statues continued _A. p.

•    to be erected to the emperors in the last days of the ⁰³'³~'^l0‘

I     empire. A colossal statue of bronze, attributed to the | emperor Heraclius, existed at Barletta, in Apulia, as

^II     late as the fourteenth century.¹ That the Greeks had I not yet ceased entirely to set some value on art, is f proved by the well-executed cameos and intaglios, and

the existing mosaics, which cannot be attributed to an earlier period. Yet no more barbarous coinage ever circulated than that which issued from the mint of Constantinople during the early part of the seventh century. The soul of art, indeed, that public feeling Avhich inspires correct taste, was extinct, and the ex­cellence of execution still existing was only the result of mechanical dexterity, and apt imitation of good . models.

The destinies of literature were very similar to those of art; nothing was now understood but what was directly connected with practical utility ; but the memory of the ancient writers was still respected, and •i the cultivation of literature still conferred a high degree itfof reputation. Learning was neither neglected nor fjdespised, though its objects were sadly misunderstood, e and its pursuits confined to a small circle of votaries.

[■ The learned institutions, the libraries, and the univer- ie cities of Alexandria, Antioch, Berytus, and Nisibis, were if destroyed ; but at Athens, Thessalonica, and Constan- ]li tinople,literature and science were not utterly ncglectcd ; iif public libraries and all the conveniences for a life of study still existed. ]\lany towns must have contained individuals who solaced their hours by the use of these \t libraries ; and although poverty, the difficulties of com- 15 (nunication, and declining taste, daily circumscribed the i< lumbers of the learned, there can be no doubt that they a .vere never without some influence on society. Their

*     ] ' . . . ►

■    ¹ Visconti, Icon. Rom. iv. l<if>.

i

f

508

EXTINCTION OF THE ROMAN POWER.

chap. v. habits of life and the love of retirement, which a know- I ledge of the past state of their country tended to nourish, certainly inclined this class rather to conccal themselves • from public notice, than to intrude on the attention j¹ of their countrymen. The principal Greek poet who l| flourished during the latter years of the Roman empire, j and whose writings have been preserved, is George f Pisida, the author of three poems in iambic verses on j the exploits of Heraclius, written in the seventh century, j It would perhaps be difficult, in the whole range of I literature, to point to poetry which conveys less infor- !■<¹ mation on the subject which he pretends to celebrate, j than that of George Pisida. In taste and poetical inspir- | > ation, he is quite as deficient as in judgment, and he dis- * J plays no trace of any national character.¹ The historical I literature of the period is certainly superior to the poetical in merit, for though most of the writers offer . little to praise in their style, still much that is curious n and valuable is preserved in the portion of their writ- '1 ings which we possess. The fragments of the historian " Menander of Constantinople, written about the com- ₍ » mencemcnt of the seventh century, make us regret the jla loss of his entire work. From these fragments we ll:¹ derive much valuable information concerning the state m of the empire, and his literary merit is by no means la contemptible.² The most important work relating to m this period is the general history of Theophylactus Simo- *1 catta, who wrote in the earlier part of the seventh cen-jfm tury. His work contains a great deal of curious infor- tti mation, evidently collected with considerable industry; jifc but, as Gibbon remarks, he is harmless of taste or genius, j|l|

¹                                         The best edition is that of Bekker, in the collection of the Byzantine his- f torians, now publishing at Bonn. It is included in the same volume as Paulus¹ * Silentiarius and the patriarch Nieephorus. The two poets deserved an index,!' ■ for nobody is likely to peruse them for amusement.  i' ¹

²                                         The fragments of Menander are contained in the first volume of the Bonn I edition of the Byzantine historians, a volume valuable to those who may feel^! ^ little interest in the greater part of the collection.               .

I

CONDITION OF THE GIIEEKS.

509

and these deficiencies lead him to mistake the relative importance of historical facts.¹ He is supposed to have been of Egyptian origin.

Two chronological writers, John Malalas, and the author of the “ Chronicon Paschale,” likewise deserve notice, as they supply valuable and authentic testimony as to many important events. The many curious notices concerning earthquakes, inundations, fires, plagues, and prodigies, which appear in the Byzantine chronicles, afford strong ground for inferring that some­thing like our modern newspapers must have been pub­lished even in the latter days of the empire. The only ecclesiastical historian who belongs to this period is Evagrius, whose church history extends from a. d. 429 to 593. In literary merit lie is inferior to the civil historians, but his work has preserved many facts which would otherwise have been lost. The greater number of the literary and scientific productions of this age are not deserving of particular notice. Few, even of the most learned and industrious scholars, consider that an acquaintance with the pages of those whose writings are preserved, is of more importance than a knowledge of the names of those whose works arc lost.² The dis­covery of paper, which Gibbon says came from Samar- cand to Mecca about 710, seems to have contributed quite as much to multiply worthless books as to preserve the most valuable ancient classics. I»y rendering the materials of writing more accessible in an aire destitute

O                  < J

of taste, and devoted to ecclesiastical and theological disputation, it announced the arrival of the stream of improvement in a deluge of muddy pedantry and dark stupidity.

¹     Ikdhie, and eh. xlvi. notes 31, 55.

²     For information on Greek literary history, son Kabrieii, llililiothrea <Inrni, edit. Harless. llamb. 1700, &c. Selioell, l/ixtuirc de hi IAlt<ralnre (! rn-ijiie Profane, <&e., Paris, LS23; nr the improved German translation by hr Pinder. I’t'tersen, ILuulbueh dee llricehischen Lilleralur Ocsehiehte. I lamb. 1631.

510 EXTINCTION OF THE HOMAN POWER.

err a p. v. The mighty change which had taken place in the infillence of Greek literature since the time of the Mace­donian conquest deserves attention. All the most valu­able monuments of its excellence were preserved, and time had in no way diminished their value. But the mental supremacy of the Greeks had, nevertheless, received a far severer shock than their political power ; and there was far less hope of their recovering from the blow, since they were themselves the real authors of their literary degeneracy, and the sole admirers of the , inflated vanity which had become their national cba- i racteristie.¹ The admitted superiority of Greek authors | in taste and truth, those universal passports to admira­tion, had once induced a number of writers of foreign . race to aspire to fame by writing in Greek ; and this ^! happened not only during the period of the Macedonian domination, but also under the Roman empire, after the Greeks had lost all political supremacy, when Latin was the official language of the civilised world, and the dialects of Egypt, Syria, and Armenia, possessed a civil and scientific, as well as an ecclesiastical literature. The Greeks forfeited this high position by their inor­dinate self-adulation. This feeling kept their minds stationary, while the rest of mankind was moving for-1 ward. Even when they embraced Christianity they could not lav aside the trammels of a state of society j which they had repudiated ; they retained so many of their old vices that they soon corrupted Christianity f into Greek orthodoxy.                               j

The position of the Greeks was completely changed by _h the conquests of the Arabs. At Alexandria, in Syria, and Cyrena'ica, they soon became extinct; and that portion of their literature which still retained a value in the eyes of mankind came to be viewed in a totally dif- fercnt light. The Arabs of the eighth century un- (

¹                      1)1011. Clliy.-jostomu*, Or. 38. 'EX\r,vix.a.           |

CONDITION OF THE GIIEEKS.

oil

doubtedly regarded the scientific literature of the Greeks with great respect, but they considered it only as a mine from which to extract a useful metal. The study of the Greek language was no longer a matter of the slightest importance, for the learned Arabians were satisfied if they could master the results of science by the translations of their Syrian subjects. It has been said that Arabic has held the rank of an universal language as well as Greek, but the fact must be ad­mitted only in the restricted sense of applying it to their extensive empire. The different range of the mental and moral power of the literatures of Arabia, of Rome, and of Greece, is only, in our age, becoming fully apparent.

There is 110 country in the Avorld more directly de­pendent 011 commerce for the well-being of its inhabi­tants than the land occupied by the Greeks round the iEgean Sea. Nature has separated these territories by mountains and seas into a variety of districts, whose productions are so different, that unless commerce afford great facilities for exchanging the surplus of each, the population must remain comparatively small, and must languish in a state of poverty and privation.

The Greeks still possessed the greater share of that commerce which they had for ages enjoyed in the Medi­terranean. The conquest of Alexandria and Cartlmgc undoubtedly gave it a severe blow, and the existence of a numerous maritime population in Syria, Egypt, and Africa, enabled the Arabs to share the profits of a trade Avhich had hitherto been a monopoly of the Greeks. The absolute government of the caliphs, their jealousy of their Christian subjects, and the civil wars which so often laid waste their dominions, rendered property too insecure in their dominions for commerce to flourish with the same tranquillity which it enjoyed under tin' legal despotism of the Eastern emperors ; for commerce

512 EXTINCTION OF THE IlOMAN POWER.

cannot long exist without a systematic administration, and soon declines, if its natural course be at all inter­rupted.

The wealth of Syria at the time of its conquest by the Arabs proves that the commerce of the trading cities of the Roman empire was still considerable. A caravan, consisting of four hundred loads of silk and sugar was on its w^Tay to Baalbec at the time the place t; was attacked. Extensive manufactories of silk and! dye-stuffs flourished, and several great fairs assisted in circulating the various commodities of the land through the different provinces.¹ The establishment of post­horses was at first neglected by the Arabs, but it was soon perceived to be so essential to the prosperity of | the country, that it was restored by the caliph Moawyah. The Syrian cities continued, under the Saracen govern­ment, to retain their wealth and trade as long as their municipal rights were respected. No more remarkable proof of this fact need be adduced, than the circum­stance of the local mints supplying the whole currency of the country until the year 695, when the Sultan Abdalmelik first established a national gold and silver coinage.²

Even the Arabian conquests were insufficient to de­prive the empire of the great share which it held in the Indian trade. Though the Greeks lost all direct political j control over it, they still retained possession of the^ carrying trade of the south of Europe ; and the Indian) commodities destined for that market passed almostjj entirely through their hands. The Arabs, in spite ofn the various expeditions which they fitted out to attack: Constantinople, never succeeded in forming a maritime power ; and their naval strength declined with the

¹                            Ockley, i. 1< 36.      _

²                                 Saulcy, Lettres a M. Rchiaml, Meinbre de l’lnstitut, sur quelques points de^ la Numismatique Arabe. Curt Bose, Ucbcr Arabische Byzantuiischc Miinzen. Grunina, 1S40.       j

COMMERCE.

513

numbers and wealth of their Christian subjects, until it a. d.^ dwindled into a few piratical squadrons.¹ The emperors of Constantinople really remained the masters of the sea, and their subjects the inheritors of the riches which its commerce affords.²

The principal trade of the Greeks, after the Arabian conquests, consisted of three branches,—the Mediter­ranean trade with the nations of Western Europe, the home trade, and the Black Sea trade. The state of society in the south of Europe was still so disordered, in consequence of the settlements of the barbarians, that the trade for supplying them with Indian commodities and the manufactures of the East was entirely in the hands of the Jews and Greeks, and commerce solely in that of the Greeks. The consumption of spices and incense was then enormous ; a large quantity of spice was employed at the tables of the rich, and Christians burned incense daily in their churches. The wealth engaged in carrying 011 this traffic belonged chiefly to the Greeks ; and although the Arabs, after they bad rendered themselves masters of the two principal clian- ' nels of the Indian trade, through Persia and Syria, and by the Red Sea and Egypt, contrived to participate in its profits, the Greeks still regulated the trade by the command of the northern route through central Asia to the Black Sea. The consumption of Indian produc-

■    tions was generally too small at any particular port to 1 admit of whole cargoes forming the staple of a direct commerce with the West. The Greeks rendered this traffic profitable, from the facility with which they could prepare mixed cargoes by adding the fruit, oil, and wine of their native provinces, and the produce of their own industry; for they were then the principal

¹     Compare Thcoiihanes, Ch. 3"2, and Srriptorvs post Theoph. I<>.

²     To t«v avroK^aro^a K&iviTTavr/vouToXe*/; tia.Xavuox^r/.TU't fJ.ix?‘ '^ru'¹ ' * *?*** rr*\uv xai ‘rafris opoij rns uhi SuXutrtr*;.”—Constant. l’orpliyr. /><: 'J h< lit. p. .V\ edit. Bonn.

2      K

514 EXTINCTION OF TIIE ROMAN POWER.

chap. v. manufacturers of silk, dyed woollen fabrics, jewellery, ¹ arms, rich dresses, and ornaments. The importance of ■ this trade was one of the principal causes which enabled the Roman empire to retain the conquests of Justinian ' in Spain and Sardinia, and this commercial influence of ■ the Greek nation checked the power of the Goths, the . Lombards, and the Avars, and gained for them as many allies as the avarice and tyranny of the exarchs and , imperial officers created enemies. It may not be super­fluous to remark, that the invectives against the govern- i( ment and persons of the exarchs which abound in the works of the Italians, and from them have been copied into the historians of Western Europe, must always be | sifted with care, as they are the outbreaks of the violent t political aversion of the Latin ecclesiastics to the au- j thority of the Eastern Empire, not an echo of the general opinion of society. The people of Rome, Venice, < Genoa, Naples, and Amalfi, clung to the Roman empire from feelings of interest, long after they possessed the power of assuming perfect independence. These feelings of interest arose from the commercial connection of the West and East. The Italians did not yet possess capital sufficient to carry on the eastern trade without the assistance of the Greeks. The return cargoes from the north consisted chiefly of slaves, wood for building, raw materials of various kinds, and provisions for the j maritime districts.¹                   I

The most important branch of trade, in a large empire, must ever be that which is carried on within its own ₍ territory, for the advantage of its subjects. The pecu- ■ liar circumstances have been noticed that make the i, prosperity of the inhabitants of those countries which it

arc inhabited by the Greek race essentially dependent on I ¹

l     i^!

¹                                           Constant. Porph. De C<vr. jiuhv Byz. 1. i. c. 7'2; vol. i. p. 3(13, edit. Bonn. Anastasius, Dc I 'ills Punt. Rom. p. 79. The Venetians, in 960, were forbidden | bv the Pope to export Christian slaves to sell them to the Saracens.     f

i

COMMEKCE.

515

commercc.¹ The internal commerce, if it had been left a. p. unfettered by restrictions, would probably have saved ⁽³³³'⁷¹'^a the Roman empire; but the financial difficulties, caused by the lavish expenditure of Justinian I., induced that emperor to invent a system of monopolies,² which ulti­mately threw the trade of the empire into the hands of the free citizens of Venice and Amalfi, whom it had compelled to assume independence. Silk, oil, various manufactures, and even grain, were made the subject of monopolies, and temporary restrictions were at times laid 011 particular branches of trade for the profit of favoured individuals.³ The traffic in grain between the different provinces of the empire was subjected to onerous, and often arbitrary arrangements;⁴ and the difficulties which nature had opposed to the circulation of the necessaries of life, as an incentive to human in­dustry were increased, and the inequalities of price augmented for the profit of the treasury or the gain of the fiscal officers, until industry was destroyed by the burden.⁶

These monopolies, and the administration which sup­ported them, were naturally odious to the mercantile classes. When it became necessary, in order to retain the Mediterranean trade, to violate the great principle of the empire, that the subjects should not be intrusted with arms, nor fit out armed vessels to carry on distant commerce, these armed vessels, whenever they were able to do so with impunity, violated the monopolies and fiscal regulations of the emperors. The independence

¹     The ancient prosperity of Crceee is shown in the existence of numerous small towns celebrated for their manufactures. Thus the purple dye of Molibo\i, a little town on Mount Ossa.- Lucretius, 2, -l'jy. Virgil, 5, 251. Leake’s Trarcls in Northern Grccce, iii. 388.

²     l’rocopins, Hist. Arc. e. 25, where particular mention is made of a monopoly of silk at llerytus and Tyre.

³     Leo Oramm. Chron. p. 477. a.d. SS8.

⁴     Procop. Hist. Arc. c. 22, p. til.

⁵     Digest. 1. 50, tit. 5, De cacal. ct cxcueat. Muucrmn, 1. D<' Segntitilor'ihu*

I'ninxcntariis.

510

EXTINCTION OF THE ROMAN POWER.

ciiap. v. of the Italian and Dalmatian cities then became a con­dition of their commercial prosperity. There can be little doubt, that if the Greek commercial classes had been able to escape the superintendence of the imperial administration as easily as the Italians, they, too, would have asserted their independence; for the emperors of Constantinople never viewed the merchants of their dominions in any other light than as a class from whom money was to be obtained in every possible way.¹ This view is common in all absolute governments. An in­stinctive aversion to the independent position of the com­mercial classes, joined to a contempt for trade, usually suggests such measures as eventually drive commerce from countries under despotic rule. The little republics of Greece, the free cities of the Syrian coast, Carthage, the republics of Italy, the Hanse towns, Holland, England, and America, all illustrate by their history how much trade is dependent on those free institutions which offer a security against financial oppression; while the Roman empire affords an instructive lesson of the converse.

The trade of Constantinople with the countries round the Black Sea, was an important element in the com­mercial prosperity of the empire. Byzantium served as the entrepot of this commerce, and the traffic to the south of the Hellespont, even before it became the capital of the Roman empire.² After that event, its commerce was as much augmented as its population. It was supplied with a tribute of grain from Egypt, and of cattle from the Tauric Chersonese, which kept provisions generally at a low price, and made it the seat of a flourishing manufacturing industry.³ The commerce of the countries to the north of the Black

¹ Procop. Hint. Arc. c. 25­

²     Polybius, 1list. iv. sect. 38, 4 ; vol. ii. p. 55, edit. Tauch.

° Cedrcnus, 367. Tlieophanes, Chron. p. 111). Constant. Porph. Dc A Jin. Imp. c. (i.

RELIGIOUS FEELING.

517

Sea, the fur and the Indian trade, by the Caspian, the Oxns, and the Indus, centred at Constantinople, whence the merchants distributed the various articles they im­ported among the nations of the West, and received in exchange the productions of these countries. The great value of this commerce, even to the barbarous nations which obtained a share in it, is frequently mentioned by the Byzantine historians. The Avars had profited greatly by this traffic, and the decline of their empire was attributed to its decay; though there can be little doubt that the real cause, both of the decline of the trade and of the Avar power, arose from the insecurity of property, originating in bad government.¹ The wealth of the mercantile and manufacturino; classes in Constantinople contributed, in no small degree, to the success with which that city repulsed the attacks of the Avars and the Saracens.

Nothing could tend more to give us a correct idea of the real position of the Greek nation at the com­mencement of the eighth century, than a view of the moral condition of the lower orders of the people ; but, unfortunately, all materials, even for a cursory inquiry into this subject, are wanting. The few casual notices which can be gleaned from the lives of the saints, afford the only authentic evidence of popular feeling. It cannot, however, escape notice, that even the shock which the Mohammedan conquests had given to tlie orthodox church, had failed to recall its ministers buck to their real duty of inculcating the pure principles of the Christian religion. They continued their old prac­tice of confounding the intellects of their congregations,

o                     o o

by propagating a belief in false miracles, and by discus- sino; the unintelligible distinctions of scholastic tlieo- logy. From the manner in which religion was treated by the Eastern clergy, the people could profit little

¹ Suiilus, v. iu6> yKOft,.—Vol. i. ]ol", o.lit. IVnili.mly.

a. r>. G33-71<>.

518

EXTINCTION OF THE ROMAN POWER.

chap. v. from the histories of imaginary saints, and understand ' nothing of the doctrines which they were instructed to . consider as the essence of their religion. The consequence was, that they began to fall back on the idle tra- j ditions of their ancestors, and to blend the last recollec­tions of paganism with new superstitions, derived from i a perverted application of the consolations of Christi- _l anity. Relics of pagan usages were retained ; a belief that the spirits of the dead haunted the paths of the ; living, was general in all ranks; a respect for the bones i of martyrs, and a confidence in the figures on amulets, became the real doctrines of the popular faith. The j connection which existed between the clergy and the ¹ people, powerful and great as it really was, appears at bottom to have been based on social and political grounds. Pure religion was so rare, that the word only i served as a pretext for increasing the power of the clergy, » who appear to have found it easier to make use of the j superstitions of the people than of their religious and moral feelings. The ignorant condition of the lower orders, and particularly of the rural population, explains the curious fact, that paganism continued to exist in the mountains of Greece as late as the reign of the Emperor Basil (a.d. 867-886), when the Maniates of j Mount Taygetus were at last converted to Christianity.¹ j It has often been asserted, that about this time con- ; ¹ tinental Greece, the Peloponnesus, and the islands of ' the Archipelago, were reduced to such a state of desti- j ' tution and barbarism, because they are only mentioned ■ f by historians as places of banishment for criminals.² "I But this mode of announcing the fact, that many i ¹ persons of rank were exiled to the cities of Greece, leaves an incorrect impression on the mind of the , 2 reader, for the most flourishing cities of the East were often selected as the places best adapted for the safe _ custody of political prisoners. We know from Con­stantine Porphyrogenitus that Cherson was a powerful commercial city, whose alliance or enmity was of con­siderable importance to the Byzantine empire, even so late as the tenth century.¹ Yet this city was often selected as a place of banishment for persons of high rank, who were regarded as dangerous state criminals.

⁷         O O

Pope Martin was banished thither by Constans 11., and it was the place of exile of the emperor Justinian II. The emperor Piiilippicus, before he ascended the throne, had been exiled by Tiberius Apsimar to Cephallenia, and by Justinian II. to Cherson, a circumstance which would lead us to infer that a residence in the islands of Greece was considered a more agreeable sojourn than that of Cherson. Several of the adherents of Piiilippicus were, after his dethronement, banished to Tliessalonica, one of the richest and most populous cities of the empire.²

The command of the imperial troops in Greece was considered an office of high rank, and it was accord­ingly conferred on Leontius, when Justinian II. wished to persuade that general that he was restored to favour. Leontius made it the stepping-stone to the throne. But the strongest proof of the wealth and prosperity of the cities of Greecc, is to be found in the circum­stance of their being able to fit out the expedition which ventured to attempt wresting Constantinople from the grasp of a soldier and statesman, such as Leo the Isaurian was known to be, at the time when the Greeks deliberately resolved to overturn his throne.³

It is difficult to form any correct representation of a state of society so different from our own, as that which existed among the Greeks in the eighth century.

¹ Const. I’oqili. lie Adm. T»tp. <\ n.'i; vol. iii. *2<I, edit. liomi.

^:i Theophanes, ('hron. 3:21.

- See llyzantinc Empire, i. 13.

520

EXTINCTION OF THE ROMAN POWER.

chap. v. The rural districts, on the one hand, were reduced to a state of desolation, and the towns, on the other, flourished in wealth ; agriculture was at the lowest ebb, while trade was in a prosperous condition. If, however, we look forward to the long series of misfor­tunes which were required to bring this favoured land to the state of complete destitution to which it sank at a later period, we may arrive at a more accurate knowledge of its condition, in the early part of the eighth century, than would be possible were we to con­fine our view to looking back at the records of its ancient splendour, and to comparing a few lines in the meagre chronicles of the Byzantine writers with the volumes of earlier history recounting the greatest actions with unrivalled elegance.