Everyday Life in Byzantium Page 11

  36 Areobindus, Consul of Constantinople in 506

  Senior officials were not appointed for life. Whilst employed by the state they were expected to reside in Constantinople. Since they all owned land this regulation made it impossible for them to live on their estates whilst they held office and, as a result, banishment to their estates eventually came to rank as a punishment for courtiers who had displeased their sovereigns. Whilst in office these senior civil servants took their orders direct from the emperor, who personally paid them their salaries each year on Passion Sunday. They were well rewarded but, like teachers and officers serving in the army and navy, certainly until the seventh century, they were largely paid in kind, though after that date the proportion taking the form of money steadily increased. On Easter Sunday a special ceremony took place in the Great Palace when, in addition to receiving their emblems of office on their appointment or re-appointment to their posts, they were presented with the ceremonial robe to which their position entitled them. Thus a magister—a high court official—received a gold embroidered cloak, a tunic made of a white fabric shot with gold, a cloak trimmed with gold and a jewelled belt; he was expected to wear these on all official occasions. In his Book of Ceremonies Constantine Porphyrogenitus discusses in detail the duties and state costumes of 13 grades of senior administrators and the exact position close to the emperor’s throne where each was entitled to stand during state ceremonies. Spatharii were entitled to a sword with a gold hilt, others to collars of different types.

  All officials, regardless of whether they belonged to the old Roman aristocracy or to the new Byzantine nobility, owned land. By the end of the fourth century they already numbered more than 2,000. In a short space of time the majority had acquired so much land, and as a result, so much wealth, that they were able to live lives of great magnificence. By Justinian’s day many had become so spoilt and corrupt that Justinian felt obliged to curb their ambitions. He attempted to break up the large estates by forbidding the eldest son to inherit the whole of his father’s property at the expense of the younger sons, attempting also to prevent a father from bequeathing all he possessed to a favourite son. He did not succeed in this, nor was he able to end such abuses as tax evasions or the sale of government appointments. As a result the aristocracy and landed gentry continued to add to their wealth at the cost of that of the state and of the peasantry. By the eighth century they had grown as powerful as they were rich. Within yet another century Leo VI found himself obliged to set many of the more important posts aside for them to fill and, in order to curry more favour with them, he raised the ban which had prevented officials purchasing goods or accepting gifts of money or land without the emperor’s permission. Leo also made it easier for the nobility to acquire land. As the disparity in wealth increased, still further distinguishing the rich from the poor, class differences and titles multiplied in a society which set little store on birth and ancient lineage. Even in the eleventh century the aristocracy remained the most powerful element both at court and in the administration. Its position changed for the worse after the twelfth century, when the growing threat to the Empire’s security served steadily to increase the influence and importance of the fighting services. The Latin conquest of Constantinople undermined the aristocracy and weakened the bureaucracy. Though many noblemen emerged from the experience with their fortunes intact and their way of life unaffected, the administrative machine had been weakened beyond repair. Even the efforts of the numerous efficient and upright men who continued to serve it with real devotion were unable to restore confidence either in the administration or in the country’s future. And, indeed, in the realm of politics Byzantium had by then ceased to be a power to be reckoned with by the West.

  5 - THE ARMY AND NAVY

  From the start the Byzantine emperors were in complete accord with the rulers of Rome concerning the importance of ensuring the Empire’s security and preserving its boundaries intact but, in contrast to the Romans, who were strongly militarist in outlook, the Byzantines attached particular attention to methods of defence, preferring them to more aggressive action. As a result they built castles, bastions and fortifications which, though lacking in originality, nevertheless withstood numerous assaults before succumbing to the fierce attacks of the Ottoman Turks. Even when captured, these buildings often continued in use, serving as foundations for Turkish superstructures. Many survive to our day as romantic ruins in areas which once formed Byzantium’s border lands. They are often to be found poised high on the summit of the mountain peaks whence they originally kept watch over vulnerable defiles or mounting guard over some ancient harbour, whilst the foundations of their citadels still occupy the centres of not a few Turkish towns. Some of the most spectacular and enduring defences were built to protect Constantinople, for the town’s position on the coast, on the fringe of two continents, laid it open to attacks by both sea and land.

  Constantine I realised the city’s danger and as early as May 324 he took steps to protect Constantinople from an inland enemy by building a land wall round its northern, western and southern sides. Within a century the enclosed area had become too small to contain the capital’s growing population, nor did Theodosius II (408-50) consider the defences adequate. He decided to fortify the city with a new line of defences and entrusted the work to Anthemius, prefect of the East, perhaps because the most advanced defences known at the time were those which had been erected in Antioch during the preceding century. Theodosius’ walls survive today to form, with Justinian’s cathedral of Haghia Sophia, one of the greatest glories of ancient Istanbul. They stood originally 27 feet high and were strengthened by 96 towers built at intervals of 200 feet. Alternately round and square in shape, the towers projected from the walls to a depth of 16 feet and topped them by eight feet. On the inner side they were provided with a walk along the top of the battlements which was supported by arches. As an additional security a 60-foot moat was added; it was defended by a masonry scarp and counterscarp. At a time when four gates, each set at a major point of the compass, were considered adequate for the needs even of large towns, Theodosius provided Constantinople with ten. His walls were so solidly built that 1,000 years later, when pounded by one of the first cannons to be used in battle, though breached, they did not crumble.

  The scale and efficiency of Byzantium’s defence works may have owed something to the pacifist outlook of her people no less than to the skill of her engineers. Their pacifism may well have been innate, yet it must undoubtedly have been encouraged in them by their Christian faith. St Basil had advised all soldiers who had killed in battle to seek forgiveness for the act by performing a three-year penance. People’s dislike of warfare had led Justinian to create an army made up of a sort of territorial force which could come to the assistance of the regular, mobile army, which was largely made up of mercenaries of various nationalities. Even during the four centuries which witnessed the peak of Byzantium’s political greatness—that is, from the reign of Heraclius (610-41) to that of Basil II (976-1025)—Byzantium owed her military reputation chiefly to these foreign mercenaries and even during that period the emperors preferred to use diplomacy rather than force to secure peace. Whenever possible they kept war at bay by propitiating their neighbours with costly presents or high-sounding titles, obtaining military alliances in return for monetary subsidies or annual allowances, even by conferring Byzantine princesses in marriage to barbarian chieftains. For similar reasons they also always welcomed political refugees but at the same time they lost no opportunity of parading as a highly developed military power, for although Byzantium remained a leading maritime power throughout much of her history, the army always ranked as the senior service.

  37 Infantrymen, showing equipment of the time

  The Roman army had consisted of a large frontier force which was always used to guard the Empire’s boundaries, and of the praetorian guard stationed in Rome; but by the fourth century the army as a whole had become outdated and inefficient, and the p
raetorian guard had often shown itself far from loyal to the government. Constantine therefore determined to create a new army, which he however established according to the old Roman principle. Even though he and his immediate successors built the new force round a strong mobile corps of cavalrymen, sustained by a large infantry, yet they continued to regard the imperial bodyguards, the scholae palatinae, like Rome’s praetorian guard of an earlier date, as the pivot of the army.

  It was their arch-enemies the Persians who taught the emperors the advantages of mobile warfare. Until the rise of the Arabs in the seventh century Sasanian Persia was the most powerful militarised state of the day, yet on many occasions during the past millennium the Persians had found themselves obliged to fight major engagements against the turbulent Central Asian nomads. Those wild and fearless horsemen had exposed the Persians to many new ways of waging war, by subjecting them to> the rapid onslaughts of highly mobile cavalrymen. The Persians learnt from experience and hastened to include cavalry units in their army. They used them with signal success against the Romans. The Byzantines also learnt from experience, and although the infantry remained their most important force in Europe they realised from an early date that cavalry was essential for waging war in the East, where mounted archers were particularly effective in fighting the Persians. To begin with cavalrymen drew the same pay as infantrymen, but within a matter of decades the cataphracti or heavy cavalry units were being more generously rewarded than any other branch of the army including the light cavalry, the trapezitae. From the sixth century the safety of Asia Minor was largely ensured by mounted bowmen. The total strength of the cavalry, the caballaria themata is estimated at some 120,000 men.

  Emperors Tiberius (578-82) and Maurice (582-602) thought it necessary to reorganise the army. Both continued to make it wholly dependent on the emperor. It was to consist of crack regiments comparable to guards regiments called palatini and less good ones known as comitatenses. Tiberius decided to divide the army into three forces to correspond to the country’s three main geographical divisions, basing one in the East, one in Illyria and one in Thrace. Each consisted of from six to eight regiments each numbering 3,000-4,000 men. Each army was commanded by a dux or magister militum and each regiment by a strategus (general or tribune), though the title was also awarded to governors of provinces; the cavalry strategus took precedence over that of the infantry. In contrast to the civilian governor of a district a dux was given control over an area often consisting of several districts or provinces. He was responsible for the overall military organisation within his region but the strategus was entrusted with the actual conduct of military operations. Each general was expected to raise and maintain his own regiment, equipping the men with bows and swords; in return the regiment bore his name; none exceeded 7,000 men in strength and proved constant and efficient. Like the dux, the field commanders and generals were directly answerable to the emperor. With other commissioned ranks they were appointed and paid by the emperors, but they were given the right to select their own non-commissioned officers.

  38 Bronze figurine of a horseman

  Although Maurice was murdered by his own soldiers when campaigning with them against the Slays in the Balkans, yet he had the army’s welfare and efficiency at heart. He was responsible for the appearance in 590 of Byzantium’s first military manual. In accordance with the theories expressed in that work he adopted a number of reforms. The most important of these was to introduce compulsory military service for men aged under 40 and to place three divisions, each commanded by its own general, under the charge of an overall commander. Each division was to consist of three brigades subdivided into seven regiments, each of 400 men. In addition Maurice also attempted to establish a reserve force of archers, the recruits serving on somewhat similar lines to members of Britain’s territorial army; in peacetime they were therefore expected to practise archery only once a week.

  Almost from the start the shortage of man-power made it difficult to carry out the measures laid down by the emperors. There were never enough regular soldiers to keep the regiments at full strength and the authorities were often obliged to rely largely on mercenaries. No one was debarred from enrolling merely on grounds of nationality, even Huns and Langobardians being admitted, though most mercenaries were of German or Illyrian origin. All were highly paid and many, even from as early as the fourth century, rose to top positions in the service.

  In the seventh century the army was so short of men that Emperor Heraclius devised an ingenious scheme for attracting recruits. The process was known as that of the themes and was applied to begin with in the eastern frontier districts. Though the most vulnerable, these were also the worst defended because they were the least popular with the army. To render posting to those remote areas more attractive Heraclius promised each soldier serving in what were to be known as the Anatolikon (Anatolian), Armeniakon (Armenian) or Opsikion forces a strip of agricultural land which he was to regard as his own and to cultivate for his personal benefit. He could marry and live on this plot in the capacity of a sort of military smallholder, but in return he was to present himself fully armed and mounted when summoned to defend the frontier from an invader. Picked men were expected to combine the duties of a passport officer with those of a sentry, checking the documents of travellers and mounting guard on a rota system on turrets placed 3,000-4,000 feet apart, but within sight of each other so that the men could signal the neighbouring look-out post. A theme-holder was entitled to bequeath his strip of land to his eldest son on condition that the latter undertook to carry out the same military duties as his father had done. Younger sons were to become peasant freemen but they were expected to fend for themselves and to obtain uncultivated land in the sparsely inhabited border regions. By doing so they were supposed to increase the peasant population in remote districts and to contribute to the nation’s food supplies by working their land. Hereditary theme-holders were entitled to employ servants and to own slaves to help in their heavier tasks.

  The introduction of the theme system led to a sharp division in the army, the border force becoming wholly distinct from the regiments centred in the capital. The latter consisted of an infantry regiment and an advance defensive force commanded by domestici together with the four most important regiments forming the scholae; each of these was commanded by a drungarius instead of a domesticus; the scholae as a whole was commanded by an officer who was often the commander-in-chief of the whole army, but from the end of the tenth century a separate domesticus was put in charge of the eastern army or schola, and another of the western. The themes on the other hand had been placed by Heraclius under the command of strategi who were to act both as military commanders of the local force and as governors of the district. Heraclius therefore withdrew the themes from the jurisdiction of the praetorian prefect, but he did not permit the strategi to collect the taxes levied on the countrymen; instead he transferred that duty of the earlier prefects to finance officers who were stationed in the themes for the purpose. The strategi were paid a higher salary than were the civilians who had governed the districts in earlier times.

  Succeeding emperors were quick to appreciate the merits of Heraclius’ idea and all warmly sponsored the creation of themes. But it took the best part of 200 years before the scheme was generally applied. To begin with, each of the militarised districts was called after the regiment stationed in it, but from the eighth century, when the number of themes increased as a result of their division into sectors which were in their turn split up, the themes were called after the geographical areas in which they were situated. The themes rapidly acquired a high degree of autonomy and became so popular that many men volunteered for service in them. Digenis Akritas, the semi-legendary hero of a splendid epic, was typical of the men who fostered the independent spirit of the theme-holders. Like many of them Digenis was of mixed origin, for his mother was a Christian and his father a Muslim petty chieftain.

  Although many men volunteered for service in the t
hemes in the eighth century the growing strength of the Arabs made it necessary to settle ever more men in the eastern zones, but once again the shortage of man-power made it difficult to do so. In order to fill the gap Slays were accepted as theme-holders and, in addition, one solidus in cash was offered for each year of service in a theme to the total of 12. In 930 Constantine VII passed a law making it necessary for each plot granted to a member of a theme to be worth the same value as four pounds of gold, but by the end of the century the value of each plot had been raised to that of 12.