Κύρια Ιδιότητα Emperors IΔΡΥΜA ΜΕΙΖΟΝΟΣ ΕΛΛΗΝΙΣΜΟΥ. 1. Macedonian dynasty s last representative and the problem of succession

Transcript

1 Περίληψη : The years between the death of empress Theodora, last descendant of the Macedonian dynasty, and the rise of Constantine X Doukas to the throne were a period of crucial developments for the society of Byzantium. The elite of military aristocracy claimed the throne by forming a broad alliance of influential families descending from Asia Minor, dominated by the Doukas and the Komnenos family. The rise of these families to the power marked the conversion of the military aristocracy into sovereign class of the empire. Κύρια Ιδιότητα Emperors 1. Macedonian dynasty s last representative and the problem of succession Empress Theodora, emperor Constantine VIII s youngest daughter, was the last representative of the Macedonian dynasty. She assumed authority after Constantine IX Monomachos death in 1055, and upon her death, in 1056, a dispute over authority arose in Byzantium. In accordance to her own wish, empress Theodora was succeeded to the throne by the elder Michael VI Stratiotikos, who until that time served as logothetes of the military. As emperor, Michael VI came across numerous problems of the empire. One of the two main issues in need of an immediate solution was that of the agreement with the generals of the East, who demanded more privileges and greater power. The other was that of succession and of authority s legitimacy; Michael VI had no children and his governing was considered, from its beginning, a transitory period before the establishment of a more powerful personality on the imperial throne Michael VI Stratiotikos ( ) After the death of Macedonian dynasty s last representative, a political dispute over the right to the throne arose in the empire. While her older sister, empress Zoe, had given legitimacy to the claimants to the imperial throne through her marriages and adoptions, Theodora just appointed Michael Stratiotikos her successor, without providing any further support to his legitimacy. In the beginning of his governing and under pressure from the generals of the East, Michael VI met their most influential representatives (Isaac Komnenos and Katakalon Kekaumenos) in the capital, but failed to reach an agreement with them. According to the sources, Michael VI was arrogant to the officials of the army of the East. The emperor s refusal to compromise and the rejection of their demands caused the generals to unite and organize a revolt against Constantinople, which cost Michael VI his crown. 2. Isaac Komnenos revolt In the spring of 1057, the generals of the East proclaimed Isaac Komnenos emperor and revolted against Michael VI. On the newly proclaimed emperor s side were his younger brother, John Komnenos, father of the subsequently emperor Alexios I Komnenos, and the brothers Constantine and John Doukas, eminent members of the military aristocracy. Despite the fact that it was Isaac Komnenos that was proclaimed emperor, the Doukai had, undoubtedly, close alliances with powerful personalities of Constantinople, as the mighty patriarch Michael I Keroularios ( ). 1 The circumstances were even more in favor of the rise of the Doukas family, as Isaac Komnenos faced difficulties ensuring his succession. Isaac only son, Manuel, had already died without rising to the throne while his daughter remained unmarried. On the other hand, patriarch Keroularios supported the Doukas family, and this alliance was soon proven decisive in gaining power in Constantinople. In the summer of 1057, the army of the East camped near Nikaia. Michael VI tried to confront his rivals aided by the troops of the West, coming mainly from the area of Thrace. In the battle that took place near Nikaia in August 20th 1057, the imperial army was defeated. Subsequently, Michael VI decided to enter into negotiations and sent Michael Psellos and Constantine Leichoudes as representatives. Michael Psellos role in the political scenery of his time was, undoubtedly, rather important. In his interesting account/testimony to the embassy, he points out the superiority of the generals of the East. Isaac Komnenos rejected Michael VI s Δημιουργήθηκε στις 27/1/2017 Σελίδα 1/6

2 proposal to make him caesar so that he could later succeed him and waited for the outcome of the revolt against the emperor, staged by patriarch Keroularios in Constantinople, achieving to open the gates of the capital to the revolutionists. In September 1st 1057, the rioters entered Constantinople without a battle and, three days later, Isaac Komnenos was coronated by Keroularios, while Michael VI had to be tonsured a monk Isaac I Komnenos reign ( ) and the rise of the Doukid dynasty With the rise of Isaac I Komnenos to the throne, in 1057, a new phase in the history of Byzantine Empire began and the main features concerning the role of influential families that were to prevail in the subsequent Late Byzantine period began to emerge. The higher military aristocracy had made its appearance and gained power during the previous decades, after the power of old families of the East was limited. The new elite staged the events of 1057 and kept its role in the governing of the Byzantine state until its final fall in Komnenoi and Doukai played a leading part in the political scene. The subsequent power struggle took place between the people that leaded the revolt against Michael VI or participated in it and their descendants was a turning point in Byzantine history, both politically and, maybe even more so, socially. The prevalence of the new aristocracy and the new way in which the empire was governed was based primarily on relatives and a kind of nepotism, which the Paphlagonians had also attempted to achieve in their own singular way during Michael IV s reign ( ). Isaac Komnenos was trying to present himself as a powerful emperor, in contrast to Michael VI. He tried to apply changes in internal politics by a series of reforms, mostly in taxation. He also tried to demonstrate the empire s military power. However, certain generals that had participated with him to the revolt against Michael VI restrained the realization of his work. Members of the Doukas family posed major obstacles to him. His relations with the vigorous patriarch Michael Keroularios were also strained. The reasons that lead to the conflict between Isaac and the patriarch in the autumn of 1058 should be sought in the context of frictions among the new political elite. The patriarch s dissent was triggered by the emperor s tax policy toward the Church. Isaac Komnenos was politically isolated, as he had no heir, while he had only bestowed his brother John the low title of protovestiarios. For his successor he did not choose a relative, but his friend and comrade, Constantine Doukas, according to Michael Psellos plans. 3 Psellos, being Isaac Komnenos main collaborator, was the one who saw to that the power was passed, in a peaceful way and under obscure terms, to the hands of Constantine Doukas ( ). 4 A year after Isaac Komnenos managed to prevail against patriarch Michael Keroularios, in November 1059, he forced himself to abandon the imperial throne and become a monk in the monastery of Stoudios, where he died the following year. 5 In a document about his coronation, the new emperor, Constantine Doukas, announced to the population of the empire that the throne was passed to him after an agreement. After that, along with the new emperor Constantine Doukas, the name of empress Aikaterine, Isaac Komneno s wife, is mentioned again. But, very soon, the empress and her daughter had to become nuns in the monastery of Myrelaion, while Constantine Doukas remained the sole emperor and his wife, Eudokia Makrembolitissa, Keroularios niece, became empress. 1. Patriarch Michael I Keroularios was uncle to Constantine Doukas second wife, Eudokia Makrembolitissa. Eudokia s father, John Makrembolites, was an old ally of Keroularios and married to his sister. In 1040, Keroularios and Makrembolites, along with Keroularios brother, whose name we do not know, staged a failed revolt against Michael IV Paphlagon. The conspirators were arrested and sent to exile. Keroularios brother committed suicide, while Keroularios himself became a monk; see The Oxford Dictionary of Byzantium 3 (1991), p , see ent. Michael I Keroularios (A. Kazhdan) Tinnefeld, F., Michael I. Kerullarios, Patriarch von Konstantinopel ( ), Jahrbuch der Österreichischen Byzantinistik 39 (1989), pp Ostrogorsky, G., Iστορία του βυζαντινού κράτους 2 (Athens 1979), p λου, Α., α 2:2 ( ) (Thessaloniki 1988), p About Constantine Doukas see Polemis, D., The Doukai. A Contribution to Byzantine Prosopography (London 1968), pp Δημιουργήθηκε στις 27/1/2017 Σελίδα 2/6

3 5. Lemerle, P., Cinq études sur le XIe siècle buzantin (Paris 1977), pp Βιβλιογραφία : Χριστοφιλοπούλου Α., Βυζαντινή Ιστορία 2.2, Θεσσαλονίκη 1997 Polemis D., The Doukai. A Contribution to Byzantine Prosopography, London 1968, University of London Historical Studies 22 Ostrogorsky G., Iστορία του βυζαντινού κράτους 2, Aθήνα 1979, Παναγόπουλος, I. (μτφρ.) Cheynet J.-C., Pouvoir et contestations à Byzance ( ), Paris 1990, Byzantina Sorbonensia 9 Krsmanović B., Uspon vojnog plemstva u Vizantiji XI veka, Beograd 2001 Lemerle P., Cinq études sur le XIe siècle byzantin, Paris 1977 Polemis D., "Notes on Eleventh-Century Chronology ( )", Byzantinische Zeitschrift, 58, 1965, Каждан А. П., Социальный состав господствующего класса Византии в XI-XII вв, Москва 1974 Μπουρδάρα Κ., Καθοσίωσις και Τυραννίς κατά τους Μέσους Βυζαντινούς χρόνους ΙΙ: , Αθήνα 1981 Ahrweiler H., "Recherches sur la société byzantine au XIe siècle: nouvelles hiérarchies et nouvelles solidarités", Travaux et Mémoires, 6, 1976, Tinnefeld F., "Michael I. Kerullarios, Patriarch von Konstantinopel ( ). Kritische Überlegungen zu einer Biographie", Jahrbuch der Österreichischen Byzantinistik, 39, 1989, Stanković V., Komnini u Carigradu ( ). Evolucija jedne vladarske porodice, Beograd 2006 Laiou A.E., Mariage, amour et parenté à Byzance aux XΙe et XIIe siècles, Paris 1992 Stanescu E., "Les réformes d'isaac Comnène", Revue des études sud-est européenes, 4, 1966, Δικτυογραφία : Constantine X Doukas and Eudokia ( ) Michael VI Stratiotikos ( ), Isaac Komnenos ( ) Γλωσσάριo : caesar In the Roman Empire the title of Caesar was given to the Emperor. From the reign of Diocletian ( ) on this title was conferred on the young coemperor. This was also the highest title on the hierarchy of the Byzantine court. In the 8th c. the title of Caesar was usually given to the successor of the throne. In the late 11th c. this office was downgraded and from the 14th c. on it was mainly conferred on foreign princes. Δημιουργήθηκε στις 27/1/2017 Σελίδα 3/6

4 protovestiarios (and protovestiarites) Honorific title given to high-ranking officials and future emperors during this period. The protovestiarios was originally responsible for the imperial wardrobe, but in the 9th-11th centuries the holders of the title could command an army or conduct negotiations with foreign states. strategos ("general") During the Roman period his duties were mainly political. Οffice of the Byzantine state s provincial administration. At first the title was given to the military and political administrator of the themes, namely of the big geographic and administrative unities of the Byzantine empire. Gradually the title lost its power and, already in the 11th century, strategoi were turned to simple commanders of military units, responsible for the defence of a region. Πηγές Ioannis Scylitzes Synopsis Historiarum, ed. I. Thurn, I., (Corpus Fontium Historiae Byzantini 5, Berlin New York 1973). Η Συνέχεια της Χρονογραφίας του Ιωάννη Σκυλίτζη (Ioannes Skylitzes Continuatus), ed. E. Τσολάκης, Ε., (Θεσσαλονίκη 1968). Michele Psello, Imperatori di Bisanzio (Cronografia) I II, ed. S. Impellizzeri, (Vicenza 1984). Michaelis Pselli Scripta minora magnam partem adhuc inedita II, ed. E. Kurtz K. Drexl, (Milano 1943). Michaelis Pselli Orationes panegyricae, ed. G.T. Dennis, (Stuttgardt Leipzig 1994). Michaelis Pselli Orationes forenses et acta, ed. G.T. Dennis, (Stuttgardt Leipzig 1994). Michaelis Pselli Poemata, ed. L. G. Westerink, (Stuttgardt Leipzig 1992). Ioannis Zonarae Epitomae historiarum III, ed. Th. Büttner Wobst, (Corpus Scriptorum Historiae Byzantinae, Bonn 1897). Michaelis Attaliotae Historia, ed. I. Bekker, (Corpus Scriptorum Historiae Byzantinae, Bonn 1853). Nicéphore Bryennios, Histoire, ed. P. Gautier, (Corpus Fontium Historiae Byzantinae 9, Bruxelles 1975). Annae Comnenae Alexias, ed. D.R. Reinsch A. Kambylis, (Corpus Fontium Historiae Byzantinae 40, Berlin New York 2001). Gautier, P., Basilikoi logoi inédits de Michel Psellos, Siclorum Gymnasium 32.2 (Luglio dicembre 1980), pp Παραθέματα 1. An assessment of Michael VI Stratiotikos's reign by Michael Psellos: Ἀρχὴ δὲ τῆς βασιλείας Μιχαὴλ τοῦ Γέροντος ὁ τοιοῦτος ἐκράτησεν ἔτος αʹ. (1.) Δοκεῖ πως τοῖς ἄρτι βασιλεύειν λαχοῦσιν ἀρκεῖν εἰς ἕδραν τοῦ κράτους, ἢν τὸ πολιτικὸν γένος τούτους κατευφημήσωσιν ἀγχίθυροι γὰρ αὐτοῖς ὄντες, οἴονται, εἰ τὰ παρὰ τούτων αὐτοῖς εὖ ἕξει, ἀρραγῶς κατησφαλίσθαι τῷ κράτει ἔνθεν τοι ἅμα τε τῶν σκήπτρων ἐπιλαμβάνονται, καὶ τούτοις πρῶτον καὶ τὴν φωνὴν καὶ τὴν ὄψιν διδόασιν ὧν εὐθὺς ἐπισκιρτησάντων καὶ βωμολόχους ἀφέντων φωνὰς, καί τινας δημηγορίας φλυάρους πεποιηκότων, ὥσπερ θείαν ἐσχηκότες ἐπικουρίαν, οὐδεμιᾶς ἑτέρας δυνάμεως ἐπιδέονται. Ἐν τρισὶ δὲ τούτοις τῆς φυλακῆς αὐτοῖς ἱσταμένης, δημοτικῷ πλήθει, καὶ συγκλητικῇ τάξει, καὶ συντάγματι στρατιωτικῷ, τῆς μὲν τρίτης ἧττον φροντίζουσι, τοῖς δ ἄλλοις εὐθὺς τὰς ἐκ τοῦ κράτους προσνέμουσι χάριτας. (2.) Ὁ δέ γε πρεσβύτης Μιχαὴλ ἐπιδεικτικώτερον ἢ προσῆκε τὰς τῶν ἀξιωμάτων διανεμήσεις πεποίητο οὐ γὰρ τῷ προσεχεῖ ἕκαστον συνίστα βαθμῷ, ἀλλὰ καὶ πρὸς τὸν ἐφεξῆς καὶ τὸν ἐπέκεινα ἀνεβίβαζεν εἰ δέ τις αὐτῷ ἐκ πλαγίου στὰς καὶ τὸν τέταρτον ἐπεζήτησεν, εὐηκόου ἐτύγχανεν ἐκείνου ἐντεῦθεν ἄλλος ἀντιπαραστὰς καὶ τὴν ἑτέραν διασείσας πλευρὰν, οὐδὲ τοῦ πέμπτου ἡμάρτανε καὶ ἦν ἀτεχνῶς σύγχυσις τὸ φιλότιμον. Δημιουργήθηκε στις 27/1/2017 Σελίδα 4/6

5 [BEGINNING OF THE REIGN OF MICHAEL THE AGED. (THIS EMPEROR HELD POWER FOR ONE YEAR) 1. Apparently, the last few emperors were convinced that they were firmly established once the civil element acclaimed them. Indeed, their close relations with these persons were such that the emperors believed the throne was safely ensured beyond all dispute if the civilians were well disposed. Naturally, therefore, as soon as they took up the sceptre it was to the civil party that they granted the right to speak in their presence before all others. If they evinced pleasure, if they uttered flattering speeches and gave vent to a little nonsensical clap trap, then the emperors needed no further assistance. It was as if they had the sanction of God. Really, of course, their power rests on three factors: the people, the Senate, and the army. Yet while they minimized the influence of the military, imperial favours were granted to the other two as soon as a new sovereign acceded. 2. In the case of the aged Michael the conferring of honours surpassed the bounds of propriety. He promoted individuals, not to the position immediately superior to that they already occupied, but elevated them to the next rank and the one above that. In fact, the emperorʹs courtiers had only to put themselves forward as candidates for a fourth promotion and he would readily consider their claims. Thereupon another, standing at his other side and plucking at his other sleeve, so to speak, would ask for and get a fifth. His generosity led to a state of absolute chaos.] Michael Psellos, Chronographia, VII.1. 2, ed. Impellizzeri, S., Michele Psello, Imperatori di Bisanzio (Cronografia) II (Vicenza 1984) [Engl. trans. by E.R.A Sewter, Michael Psellus: Chronographia (New Haven 1953), pp ]. 2. Michael Psellos on the imperial aspirations of the military aristocracy: Ἐβούλοντο μὲν καὶ πρότερον τὸ στρατιωτικὸν ξύμπαν τὸ κράτος Ῥωμαίων ὑποποιήσασθαι, καὶ ὑπήκοοι γενέσθαι στρατηγῷ αὐτοκράτορι, καὶ τὴν πολιτικὴν καταλῦσαι τῆς βασιλείας διαδοχὴν, ἐπεῖχον δὲ τὰ βουλεύματα, καὶ μόνον ἐνεκυμόνουν τὸν ἔρωτα, ὅτι μηδεὶς αὐτοῖς εἰς ἀρχὴν ἀξιολογώτατος κατεφαίνετο ἐπεὶ δὲ τὸν Ἰσαάκιον τεθέανται, ὃν οὐδ ὄναρ εἰς τὸ σχῆμα τοῦ κράτους ἰδεῖν προσεδόκησαν, διὰ τὸ περὶ τὰς τοιαύτας ἐπιχειρήσεις ἀκριβὲς, κορυφαῖον γεγενημένον τοῦ τυραννικοῦ σκέμματος, καὶ τὰ μετὰ ταῦτα χειροτονοῦντα βουλεύματα, αὐτίκα οὐδέν τι γνωσιμαχήσαντες τῷ ἀνδρὶ προσερρύησαν, ἀνδρικώτερον ἐπισκευάσαντες ἑαυτοὺς καὶ τὰ πρὸς τὸν πόλεμον ἐξαρτύσαντες. [6. Even before this time it had been the ambition of the military to subjugate the whole of the Roman Empire, to serve a soldieremperor and break down the civil succession to the Principate, but hitherto these designs were kept secret. Their fond designs were cherished only in private for the simple reason that nobody seemed competent to rule. Not even in their wildest dreams had they expected Isaac to entertain ambitions for sovereignty, because of the [212] difficulties attendant on such an enterprise. Now the position was altogether changed. They saw Isaac at the head of a revolutionary party: they saw him personally taking the decisions necessary to its success. The time for compromise was now over. Without more ado adherents rallied to his side, strongly equipped and provided for the exigencies of war.] Michael Psellos, Chronographia, VII.6, ed. Impellizzeri, S., Michele Psello, Imperatori di Bisanzio (Cronografia) II (Vicenza 1984) [Engl. trans. by E.R.A Sewter, Michael Psellus: Chronographia (New Haven 1953), pp ]. 3. Psellos praises Isaac I Komnenos: (48.) Καὶ γὰρ ἦν εἴπερ τις ἄλλος βραχυλογώτατος, οὔτε ἀθρόον ἐφιεὶς τῇ γλώττῃ, οὔτε ἐνδεῶς γνωρίζων τὰ τῆς ψυχῆς ἐνθυμήματα, ἀλλ ὥσπερ οἱ χαρακτηρίζοντες τὸν Λυσίαν, φημὶ δὲ τὸν τοῦ Κεφάλου τὸν ῥήτορα, ἄλλην τε αὐτῷ ἀρετὴν λόγου προσμαρτυροῦσιν, εἶτα δὴ καὶ τὴν πρέπουσαν ἡνίαν τῇ ἐκείνου ἐπιβάλλουσιν εὐστομίᾳ, καί φασιν ὡς δυναμένῳ λέγειν, ἤρκει εἰρηκότι τὰ καιριώτατα δι ὧν ἄν τις συλλογίσαιτο καὶ ὅσα μὴ φθέγξαιτο, οὕτω δὴ κἀκείνῳ ἡ γλῶττα ψεκάζουσα, οὐχ ὑετίζουσα ἐπίαινέ τε τὴν δεκτικὴν φύσιν καὶ ἠρέμα τὸ βάθος εἰσδῦσα πρὸς τὴν τοῦ σιωπηθέντος ἀνεκίνει ἐπίγνωσιν ἐβούλετο γὰρ μηδενὶ ἁλωτὸς ἐν λόγοις γενήσεσθαι, μηδὲ, βασιλεὺς ὢν καὶ τοῖς ὅλοις κρατῶν, ἄκαιρόν τινα φιλοτιμίαν ἐντεῦθεν ἑαυτῷ πλάσασθαι. [48. More than any other man he was laconic in the extreme, not expressing all his ideas in so many words, yet leaving no doubt as to his meaning. Those who describe Lysias (the orator Lysias, the son of Cephalus) attribute to him, among other virtues to which they bear witness, the ability to bridle his eloquence at the appropriate moment. They tell us, moreover, that despite his command of Δημιουργήθηκε στις 27/1/2017 Σελίδα 5/6

6 language, he was satisfied with saying only what was essential, so that his audience might infer from them those things that were left unsaid. In the same way Isaac also had a tongue which by gentle showers, so to speak, and not by heavy rain, fattened the nature ready to receive them, and as the moisture quietly sank deep into the soil, he aroused his listeners to the knowledge of what had been passed over in silence. The truth was that he wished to avoid refutation, and being now emperor and lord of all, he had no desire to foster any inopportune rivalry with himself in the sphere of eloquence.] Michael Psellos, Chronographia, VII.48, ed. Impellizzeri, S., Michele Psello, Imperatori di Bisanzio (Cronografia) II (Vicenza 1984) [Engl. trans. by E.R.A Sewter, Michael Psellus: Chronographia (New Haven 1953), pp. 232]. 4. The condition of the frontier and the provinces during the non-dynastic period: a. [...] a thirty year truce [between Byzantium and the Pechenegs] was agreed in 1033, allowing the immigrant tribesmen to remain in their new habitat in the Black Sea hinterland south of the Danube an area vety close to the original nucleus of the Bulgar kingdom. The empire retained control of the Danubian towns, but the uncomfortable similarity to the seventh century beginnings of the Bulgarian nightmare were probably not lost on the people of Constantinople. The emperor Isaac I Komnenos ( ) tried without great success to impose a more favourable settlement, and inthe 1070s a revolt involving the Pechenegs and the local Vlachs removed the Danubian towns from imperial control. Paul Magdalino, «The Medieval Empire ( ),» in C. Mango (ed.), The Oxford History of Byzantium (New York 2002), p b. As well as the Pechenegs in the north, a new and yet more dangerous foe appeared in the 1050s and the 1060s in the east, in the form of the Turkic Seljuks, a branch of the Oğuz Turks (called Ouzoi by the Byzantines) who had already established themselves as masters in the Caliphate, and whose energies were now directed northwards from Iraq into the Caucasus and eastern Asia Minor. c. Basil IIʹs death in 1025 slowed the process [of reclaiming Sicily and southern Italy from Saracen and Lombard masters], which eventually ground to a halt in the 1030s. In southern Italy pressure from the German emperors was fended off through an alliance with the papacy, but new enemies soon appeared on the scene in the shape of the Normans... Their numbers rapidly swelled, and by the 1030s some had succeeded well enough to gain local lordships and titles and establish a permanent territorial foothold. The most successful was Robert Guiscard of the Hauteville familly: by 1059 he had defeated and driven out Byzantine troops from Apulia and Calabria, and had defeated and captured the Pope, Leo IX, and had been awarded the title of Duke of Apulia and Calabria. John Haldon, The Palgrave Atlas of Byzantine History (New York 2005), pp. 115, 141. Χρονολόγιο : Michael VI Stratiotikosʹs reign spring of 1057: Isaac I Komnenos is acclaimed Emperor by the generals of the East August 20, 1057: Battle near Nicaea. The imperial army is defeated by the rebels September 4, 1057: Isaac I Konenosʹs coronation at Constantinople : Isaac I Komnenosʹs reign November 1059: Isaac I Komnenos abdicates the throne in favor of his friend Constantine X Doukas and is tonsured mokn at the Monastery of Stoudios Δημιουργήθηκε στις 27/1/2017 Σελίδα 6/6