Χρονολόγηση autumn of 667. Γεωγραφικός Εντοπισμός theme of Armeniakon IΔΡΥΜA ΜΕΙΖΟΝΟΣ ΕΛΛΗΝΙΣΜΟΥ. 1. Historical context

Transcript

1 Περίληψη : In the autumn of 667, Saborios, strategos of the theme of Armeniakon, rebelled against emperor Constans II. The rebellion took place in the theme of Armeniakon (in the North-Eastern Asia Minor) and ended probably at the end of the autumn or the beginning of the winter of , following the sudden death of the rebel in an accident. Thus, the threat on the throne was averted without the intervention of imperial troops. Χρονολόγηση autumn of 667 Γεωγραφικός Εντοπισμός theme of Armeniakon 1. Historical context In 667, Byzantine emperor Constans II ( ) was in Sicily. He had been there since 663, in an attempt to secure the Byzantine colonies in the West which were threatened by the Lombards. The emperor was accompanied by the troops of the themes of Anatolikon and Thrakesion. During his absence, the power in Constantinople had been passed to his son, subsequent emperor Constantine IV ( ). At the same time, Asia Minor, already suffering Arab raids since the beginning of 640's, faced a new wave of attacks. The end of the five-year internal conflict between Muawiyah ibn Abi Sufyan, caliph of Syria, and Ali ibn Abi Talib, caliph of Medina (assassinated in 661), meant the beginning of new raids in the Byzantine territory of Asia Minor. Already since 663, the Arabs had returned to the lands of Asia Minor, pillaging the country and leading a large part of the populace into captivity. The rebellion of Saborios in the autumn of 667, the first rebellion of a thematic army against the central power, 1 took place in the theme of Armeniakon, a region where rebellions against the emperor were not unusual. 2 The ancient traditions of the local Armenian aristocracy and the adherence of the local church to Monophysitism had alienated the Armenians from Constantinople. Saborios, as the leader of the theme of Armeniakon, had accumulated great political and military power, as well as a large number of troops under his command. The power resulting by his office, his personal ambitions and the absence of the emperor and of a large part of the troops of Asia Minor in the West during that period, must have led him to rebel, 3 in an attempt to assume the imperial throne. Saborios had also succeeded in gaining the support of the court of Damascus, a prerequisite for the rebels in the region of Asia Minor in order to cover their rear and pursuit their personal interests. 2. The rebellion of Saborios In the autumn of 667, 4 Saborios, strategos of the theme of Armeniakon, rebelled against emperor Constans II. Saborios, who was of Persian descent (in Theophanes Chronographia he is called Περσογενής, the Persian-born), 5 gathered his troops in the region of Melitene and moved to the west, towards Constantinople. At the same time, he sent his subordinate Sergios to the court of Damascus in order to ask caliph Muawiyah to aid and support him militarily. In exchange, Saborios promised to hand Asia Minor over to the Arabs. 6 The reaction from Constantinople was prompt. Co-emperor Constantine IV sent koubikoularios Andrew bearing gifts to Muawiyah, asking him to remain neutral. The two envoys met in the court of the caliph and confronted each other. Muawiyah finally agreed with Sergios and promised to send an Arab military force under general Fudala ibn Ubaid to help the rebel. Returning to Byzantine lands following his fruitless attempt, koubikoularios Andrew met in Cappadocia with the kleisourarches of Arabissos, still loyal to the emperor. Andrew ordered the kleisourarches to arrest Sergios in case the latter passed through the kleisoura of Arabissos. Andrew then moved to Amnesia, 7 where Sergios was finally transferred as a prisoner following his arrest. Andrew gave the order to castrate and execute Sergios. At the same time Constantine, the son of the emperor, sent an army under patrikios Nikephoros against Saborios. The latter, while preparing in Hadrianoupolis of Bithynia to confront the imperial forces, lost Δημιουργήθηκε στις 13/11/2017 Σελίδα 1/5

2 his life in an accident, when his horse run wild. Thus, the rebellion ended before threatening the security of the empire. The relationships between the theme of Armeniakon and the central power in Constantinople were restored shortly after the death of Saborios. 3. Consequences The short and unsuccessful rebellion of Saborios, even though it did not result in great territorial losses for the Byzantines, was the cause of another Arab raid in the lands of Asia Minor. Following the death of Saborios, his troops turned once again obedient to the central power in Constantinople. Nevertheless, the Arab force under Fadal, sent to support Saborios, had already arrived to Hexapolis of the theme of Armeniakon when the news of his death became known. Fadal decided to spend the winter there and asked for reinforcements, which were considered necessary following the restoration of the unity of the Byzantine forces. In the spring of 668, an auxiliary force under Yazīd, son of caliph Muawiyah, arrived to Hexapolis. The united Arab forces raided westwards and pillaged the whole region up to Chalcedon. During their return to Syria, they conquered Amorion of Phrygia and installed a garrison of men. In the winter of 668/9, Constantine IV asked koubikoularios Andrew to recapture Amorion. The Byzantine forces entered the city at night and annihilated the Arab garrison. 8 It has been put forth that the delayed arrival in Sicily of the news about the rebellion of Saborios might have caused the assassination of Constans, in the sense that information about the rebellion taking place in Asia Minor encouraged the rebellion brewing in the west and resulting in the death of the emperor. The sources, however, offer no evidence connecting the rebellion of Saborios with the assassination of Constans, apart from the coincidence of the two events. 1. Kaegi, W.E., Byzantine Military Unrest, An Interpretation (Amsterdam 1981), p. 201, claims that the accumulation of a large number of troops under the command of a powerful commander was the main reason of several rebellions. He does not associate them in any way with the introduction of the institution of themes. On the other hand, Χριστοφιλοπούλου, Αικ., Βυζαντινή Ιστορία 2.1: , (Thessaloniki 1993), p. 258, believes that the stabilisation of the themes in Asia Minor was the main reason of a series of rebellions, a characteristic example of which was the rebellion of Saborios. 2. The case of Theodore Rstuni, commander of Byzantine Armenia, is the most characteristic. He participated in the council of Dvin (648/9), where the local aristocracy and the Armenian clergy refused to obey the imperial order to incorporate the Armenian church in the Orthodox dogma. Under the leadership of Rstuni, the Armenian troops rebelled some time around 651 and deserted to the Arabs. See Kaegi, W.E., Byzantium and the Early Islamic Conquests (Cambridge 1992), pp The sources do not offer any evidence concerning the real motives of the rebel. Στράτος, Α., Το Βυζάντιον στον Ζ αιώνα 4: Κωνσταντίνος Γ, (Athens 1972), p. 255, note 883, reckons that the failure of Saborios in 664/5 to repel the attacks of Abd al-rahman, commander of Emese, made him unsure about his maintaining his office and led him to rebel. 4. The best documented dating of the event was made by Στράτος, Α., Το Βυζάντιον στον Ζ αιώνα 4: Κωνσταντίνος Γ, (Athens 1972), pp In earlier bibliography, the rebellion of Saborios is dated in 668, see Bury, J.B., A History of the Later Roman Empire from Arcadius to Irene (395 A.D. to 800 A.D.) 2 (London 1889), p. 306; a view reproduced in more recent studies, such as Haldon, J.F., Byzantium in the Seventh Century. The Transformation of a Culture (Cambridge 1990), p. 62, and Threadgold, W.T., A History of the Byzantine State and Society (Stanford 1997), pp. 607, De Boor, C. (ed.), Theophanis Chronographia (Leipzig 1883), p Haldon, J.F., Byzantium in the Seventh Century. The Transformation of a Culture (Cambridge 1990), p. 62, claims that Saborios was of Armenian descent. 6. An account of the event can be found in Theophanes' Chronographia, de Boor, C. (ed.), Theophanis Chronographia (Leipzig 1883), pp Amnesia and Hadrianoupolis remain unidentified toponyms. See Βλυσίδου, Β. Κουντούρα-Γαλάκη, Ε. Λαμπάκης, Σ. Λουγγής, Τ. Σαββίδης, Α., Η μικρά Ασία των θεμάτων: έρευνες πάνω στην γεωγραφική φυσιογνωμία και προσωπογραφία των βυζαντινών θεμάτων τηε Μικράς Ασίας (7 ος 11 ος αι.) (Ερευνητική Βιβλιοθήκη 1, Athens 1998), p Δημιουργήθηκε στις 13/11/2017 Σελίδα 2/5

3 8. De Boor, C. (ed.), Theophanis Chronographia (Leipzig 1883), pp Βιβλιογραφία : Treadgold W.T., A History of the Byzantine State and Society, Stanford 1997 Lilie R.J., Die byzantinische Reaktion auf die Ausbreitung der Araber Studien zur Strukturwandlung des byzantinischen Staates im 7. und 8. Jahrhundert, München 1976, Miscellanea Byzantina Monacensia 22 Θεοφάνης, Χρονογραφία, de Boor, C. (ed.), Theophanis Chronographia, Leipzig 1883 Μιχαήλ ο Σύρος, Χρονικό, Chabot, J.B. (ed.), Chronique, Paris Haldon J.F., Byzantium in the Seventh Century. The Transformation of a Culture, Cambridge 1991 Canard M., "Byzantium and the Muslim World to the Middle of the Eleventh Century", The Cambridge Medieval History, 4:1, Cambridge 1966, Χριστοφιλοπούλου Α., Βυζαντινή Ιστορία 2:1, Θεσσαλονίκη 1993 Βλυσίδου Β., Λουγγής Τ., Λαμπάκης Σ., Σαββίδης Α., Κουντούρα-Γαλάκη Ε., Η Μικρά Ασία των θεμάτων. Έρευνες πάνω στη γεωγραφική φυσιογνωμία και προσωπογραφία των βυζαντινών θεμάτων της Mικράς Aσίας (7ος-11ος αι.), Αθήνα 1998, Eρευνητική Bιβλιοθήκη 1 Kaegi W.E., Byzantine Military Unrest An Interpretation, Amsterdam 1981 Bury J.B., A History of the Later Roman Empire from Arcadius to Irene (395 AD to 800 AD), London 1889 al-balādhurī, Kitāb Futūh al-buldān, Hitti, Ph.K. (ed.), The Origin of the Islamic State, Beirut 1966 Kaegi W.E., Byzantium and the Early Islamic Conquests, Cambridge 1992 Στράτος Α., Το Βυζάντιον στον Ζ αιώνα 4, Αθήνα 1972 Δικτυογραφία : Byzantium and the Early Islamic Conquests The failed rebellion of Saborios Roman Emperors DIR Constans II Γλωσσάριo : caliph The supreme religious and political authority of Muslims, considered successor of Muhammad (Arabic: khalifa = deputy). He was the head of the Caliphate, the religious state of the Arabs. kleisoura (lat. clausura) Byzantine military term. Kleisoura initially designated a mountain passage; from the 7 th c. onwards it also meant the military unit Δημιουργήθηκε στις 13/11/2017 Σελίδα 3/5

4 responsible for the defence of the passage. The term is also used for an administrative division (smaller than the theme). Its base was in a rough site close to the border, and its administration and economy was not necessarily the jurisdiction of the strategos of the theme. It is considered as the evolution of tourma. kleisourarch (and kleisouriarch) a Byzantine term denoting the commander of a kleisoura or a kleisarchy. These were military units responsible for the defence of mountain passes; the term is also used to desifnate an administrative unit smaller than the theme. koubikoularios or cubicularius (from lat. cubicularius) The term designated eunuch officials in the service of the Emperor. Apart from their particular responsibilities in the court, they oftenly held positions as military commanders and undertook diplomatic delegations. patrikios (from lat. patricius) Higher title of honour, placed, according to the "Tactika" of the 9th and the 10th centuries, between anthypatos and protospatharios. It was given to the most important governors and generals. Gradually, however, it fell into disuse and from the 12th century did not exist any more. 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 De Boor, C. (ed.), Theophanis Chronographia (Leipzig 1883), pp Παραθέματα Byzantine historian Theophanes accounts the rebellion of the strategos Saborios: Τούτῳ τῷ ἔτει ὁ τῶν Ἀρμενιάκων στρατηγὸς Σαβώριος Περσογενὴς ἐστασίασε κατὰ Κώνστα τοῦ βασιλέως καὶ πέμπει πρὸς Μαυΐαν Σέργιον τὸν στρατηλάτην ὑποσχόμενος τῷ Μαυΐᾳ ὑποτάξαι τὴν Ρωμανίαν, εἰ αὐτῷ συμμαχήσει κατὰ τοῦ βασιλέως. γνοὺς δὲ Κωνσταντῖνος, ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ βασιλέως, ἀποστέλλει καὶ αὐτὸς πρὸς Μαυΐαν Ἀνδρέαν τὸν κουβικουλάριον μετὰ δώρων, ὅπως μὴ συνδώσῃ τῷ ἀντάρτῃ. καταλαβὼν δὲ Ἀνδρέας τὴν Δαμασκὸν εὗρε Σέργιον προλαβόντα, ὁ δὲ Μαυΐας ὑπεκρίνετο συμπαθεῖν τῷ βασιλεῖ. ἦν δὲ Σέργιος καθήμενος πρὸς Μαυΐαν, καὶ εἰσελθόντος Ἀνδρέου, ἰδὼν αὐτὸν ὁ Σέργιος ἐπηγέρθη. ὁ δὲ Μαυΐας ἐμέμψατο τὸν Σέργιον, λέγων «τί ἐδειλίασας;» ὁ δὲ Σέργιος ἀπελογήσατο κατὰ συνήθειαν τοῦτο πεποιηκέναι. στραφεὶς δὲ Μαυΐας λέγει τῷ Ἀνδρέᾳ «τί ζητεῖς;» ὁ δὲ λέγει «ἵνα δώσῃς βοήθειαν κατὰ τοῦ ἀντάρτου.» ὁ δὲ λέγει. «ἀμφότεροι ἐχθροί ἐστε καὶ τῷ πλείω παρέχοντί μοι δίδωμι.» καὶ ὁ Ἀνδρέας ἔφη πρὸς αὐτόν «μὴ ἀμφιβάλῃς, ἀμηρᾶ, ὅτι ὀλίγα παρὰ βασιλέως κρεῖττόν σοι, ἢ πλεῖστα παρὰ ἀντάρτου ὅμως, ὡς ἐρασμίως ἔχεις, ποίει.» καὶ ταῦτα εἰπὼν Ἀνδρέας ἐσιώπησεν. ὁ δὲ Μαυΐας λέγει «σκέπτομαι περὶ τούτου» καὶ κελεύει ἀμφοτέρους ἐξελθεῖν. προσκαλεσάμενος δὲ Μαυΐας κατ ἰδίαν τὸν Σέργιον λέγει αὐτῷ «μηκέτι προσκυνήσῃς τῷ Ἀνδρέᾳ, ἐπεὶ οὐδὲν ἀνύσεις.» καὶ τῇ ἐπαύριον προλαβὼν ὁ Σέργιος τὸν Ἀνδρέαν πρὸς Μαυΐαν ἐκάθητο. καὶ εἰσελθόντος τοῦ Ἀνδρέου, οὐκ ἐπηγέρθη καθὼς χθές. ὁ δὲ Ἀνδρέας περιβλεψάμενος τῷ Σεργίῳ δεινῶς ὕβρισε καὶ ἠπείλησε λέγων, ὅτι «εἰ ζῶ, δεῖξαί σοι ἔχω τὸ τίς εἰμί.» ὁ δὲ Σέργιος ἔφη «οὐκ ἐπεγείρομαί σοι, ὅτι οὐκ εἶ ἀνήρ, οὐδὲ γυνή.» ἀμφοτέρους δὲ παύσας ὁ Μαυΐας τῷ Ἀνδρέᾳ ἔφη «στοίχησον δοῦναι καθὼς ὁ Σέργιος δίδωσιν.» «καὶ πόσον ἔστιν;» ἔφη ὁ Ἀνδρέας. ὁ δὲ Μαυΐας εἶπεν «τὴν εἰσφορὰν τῶν δημοσίων παρέχειν τοῖς Ἄραψιν.» καὶ ὁ Ἀνδρέας ἔφη «βαβαί σοι, Μαυΐα, συμβουλεύεις τὸ σῶμα δοῦναι, τὴν δὲ σκιὰν κατέχειν. ὡς θέλεις, μετὰ Σεργίου στοίχει ἐγὼ γὰρ τοῦτο οὐ ποιῶ. πλὴν σὲ παρεῶντες, πρὸς τὸν θεόν, ὡς δυνατώτερόν σου ὄντα ὑπερασπίζειν Ρωμαίοις, καταφεύγομεν καὶ ἐπ αὐτῷ τὰς ἐλπίδας τιθέμεθα.» ταῦτα εἰπὼν λέγει τῷ Μαυΐᾳ «σώζου» καὶ ἐξῆλθεν ἀπὸ Δαμασκοῦ ἐπὶ τὴν Μελιτηνὴν διὰ τὸ τὸν τύραννον εἶναι ἐν τοῖς μέρεσιν ἐκείνοις, ἐν οἷς καὶ Σέργιος εἶχε πορεύεσθαι. ὡς δὲ κατέλαβε τὴν Ἀραβισσόν, περιτυγχάνει τῷ κλεισουροφύλακι. οὐ γὰρ συναπῄει τῷ τυράννῳ. τούτῳ δὲ προστάττει παρατηρεῖν τὸν Σέργιον ἐπανερχόμενον, ἵνα αὐτὸν ἀγάγῃ πρὸς αὐτόν. αὐτὸς δὲ ἐπορεύθη εἰς Ἀμνησίαν τὸν Σέργιον ἐκδεχόμενος, τὰ δὲ πεπραγμένα τῷ βασιλεῖ ἐδήλωσεν. Σέργιος δὲ στοιχήσας μετὰ Μαυΐου τὰ δοκοῦντα παρέλαβε Φαδαλᾶν, στρατηγὸν Ἀράβων, μετὰ βοηθείας βαρβαρικῆς συμμαχεῖν τῷ Σαβωρίῳ. προπορευόμενος δὲ ὁ Σέργιος τῷ Φαδαλᾷ καὶ περιχαρῶς πρὸς Σαβώριον ἀπερχόμενος περιπίπτει ἐν ταῖς κλεισούραις τοῖς τοῦ Ἀνδρέου λόχοις. καὶ τοῦτον κρατήσαντες πρὸς Ἀνδρέαν φέρουσι δέσμιον. ὁ δὲ Σέργιος ἰδὼν τὸν Ἀνδρέα ῥίπτει ἑαυτὸν εἰς τοὺς πόδας αὐτοῦ δεόμενος φείσασθαι αὐτοῦ. ὁ δὲ πρὸς αὐτόν «σὺ εἶ Σέργιος ὁ ἐγκαυχώμενος ἐν τοῖς αἰδοίοις ἐπὶ Μαυΐου, κἀμὲ θηλυδρίαν ἀποκαλῶν. ἰδού ἀπὸ τοῦ νῦν τὰ αἰδοῖά σου οὐδέν σε ὠφελήσουσιν, ἀλλὰ καὶ θανατώσουσιν.» ταῦτα εἰπὼν ἐπιτρέπει ἐκτμηθῆναι αὐτοῦ τὰ αἰδοῖα, καὶ ἐκρέμασεν αὐτὸν ἐπὶ ξύλου. ὁ δὲ Κωνσταντῖνος ἀκούσας τὴν τοῦ Φαδαλᾶ ἄφιξιν εἰς τὴν Σαβωρίου βοήθειαν ἀποστέλλει Νικηφόρον τὸν πατρίκιον μετὰ Δημιουργήθηκε στις 13/11/2017 Σελίδα 4/5

5 Ρωμαϊκῆς δυνάμεως ἀντιτάξασθαι τῷ Σαβωρίῳ. ἦν δὲ Σαβώριος εἰς Ἀδριανούπολιν, καὶ ὡς ἐπύθετο Νικηφόρον ἔρχεσθαι πρὸς αὐτόν, ἐγύμναζε ἑαυτὸν πρὸς πόλεμον. συνέβη δὲ ἐν μιᾷ τῶν ἡμερῶν κατὰ τὸ εἰωθὸς τοῦτον τῆς πόλεως ἔφιππον ἐξελαύνειν. ὡς δὲ γέγονε πλησίον τῆς πύλης τῆς πόλεως, δίδωσι τῷ ἵππῳ τῇ μάστιγι. ὁ δὲ ἀφηνιάσας καὶ τούτου τὴν κεφαλὴν τῇ πύλῃ προσρήξας κακῶς τοῦ ζῇν ἀπήλλαξεν καὶ οὕτως ὁ θεὸς τὴν νίκην ἐδωρήσατο τῷ βασιλεῖ. De Boor, C. (ed.), Theophanis Chronographia (Leipzig 1883), pp The operations following rebellion of Saborios, as described by Theophanes: Φαδαλᾶς οὖν ἐλθὼν εἰς τὴν Ἑξάπολιν καὶ μαθὼν πάντα ἠπόρησεν, καὶ ἀποστέλλει πρὸς Μαυΐαν αἰτῶν βοήθειαν διὰ τὸ τοὺς Ρωμαίους εἰς ὁμόνοιαν ἐλθεῖν. πέμπει δὲ αὐτῷ Μαυΐας τὸν υἱὸν αὐτοῦ Ἰζίδ, καθοπλίσας αὐτὸν πλήθει βαρβάρων. παρεγένοντο δὲ ἀμφότεροι εἰς Χαλκηδόνα καὶ ᾐχμαλώτευσαν πολλούς, παρέλαβον δὲ καὶ τὸ Ἀμώριον τῆς Φρυγίας ε χιλιάδας ἐνόπλων ἀνδρῶν ἀφέντες εἰς φυλακὴν αὐτοῦ, καὶ ἀνέκαμψαν εἰς Συρίαν. χειμῶνος δὲ γενομένου πέμπει ὁ βασιλεὺς τὸν αὐτὸν Ἀνδρέαν τὸν κουβικουλάριον, καὶ χιόνος πολλῆς οὔσης, ἐν νυκτὶ καταλαμβάνει καὶ διὰ ξύλων ἀνέρχονται ἐπὶ τὸ τεῖχος καὶ εἰσέρχονται εἰς τὸ Ἀμώριον καὶ πάντας κτείνουσι τοὺς Ἄραβας, τὰς ε χιλιάδας, καὶ οὐχ ὑπελείφθη ἐξ αὐτῶν οὐδὲ εἷς. De Boor, C. (ed.), Theophanis Chronographia (Leipzig 1883), pp Χρονολόγιο 663: Arrival of emperor Constans II in Sicily. The power in Constantinople is given to his son Constantine autumn of 668: Rebellion of strategos Saborios against Constans II in the theme of Armeniakon. Negotiations with the Arabs end of autumn or beginning of winter 667/8: Death of Saborios in Hadrianoupolis of Bithynia. End of the rebellion 668: Arab raid up to the shore of Bosporus. Conquest of Amorion of Phrygia winter of 668/9: A Byzantine force recaptures Amorion Δημιουργήθηκε στις 13/11/2017 Σελίδα 5/5