READING HALL

DOORS OF WISDOM 2022

A HISTORY OF THE LATE ROMAN EMPIRE FROM ARCADIUS TO IRENE(395 TO 800 AD)

BOOK IV 

THE HOUSE OF JUSTIN PART I -- THE AGE OF JUSTINIAN

CHAPTER I

THE REIGN OF JUSTIN I; AND THE EARLIER YEARS OF JUSTINIAN'S REIGN

In order to understand the European history of the sixth century and the reign of Justinian, we must grasp the fact that it is a direct continuation of the history of the fifth century, but that there is one great difference in the situation. It is a continuation of the struggle between the Romans and the Germans, but their relation has altered. In the fifth century the Germans were conquering lands from the Romans, in the sixth century the Romans are reconquering lands from the Germans. Europe is now divided between them. North-western Europe is irrevocably lost to the Empire and secured to Teutonic peoples, south-eastern Europe is still Roman in the wide sense of the word. Italy is the intermediate land between these extremes, and consequently becomes the scene of the last combat, which results in the overthrow of the Ostrogoths, and leads to the division of the peninsula between the Romans and the Lombards.

Justinian is the great figure of the time. His enterprising spirit carried out the idea of regaining a footing in western Europe. He set in order a system of law for the world. Politically he was absolute, as against the aristocracy; ecclesiastically he was absolute, as against Pope or Patriarch. His buildings in number and splendour were the marvel of his age; and in St. Sophia he bequeathed to posterity an imposing monument of his greatness.

The reign of Justin I is chiefly important as preliminary to the reign of his nephew Justinian I.

Justin is said to have been originally an Illyrian peasant who came to Constantinople with his two brothers in the reign of Leo. We have already met him as a trusted officer of Anastasius, assisting in quelling the Isaurians, and he was afterwards advanced to the post of commander of the guards (comes excubitorum). At the time of Anastasius' death (1st July 518) the eunuch Amantius formed a plot to invest a friend or creature of his own with the purple. To attain this end it was absolutely necessary to gain over the guards, and he consequently enlisted Justin in his service and supplied him with money to bribe the soldiers. But Justin was more wily and more ambitious than Amantius calculated; he took the treasure and secured the interests of the soldiers for himself; the senate consented, and the people acclaimed.

Observe the position of affairs. The government of Anastasius in his later years had been most unpopular in two ways, financially and ecclesiastically. He hoarded the income of the State instead of expending part of it as productive capital, and he increased his hoard by oppressive exactions; he was, moreover, a pronounced monophysite. The opposition to his government was expressed in the revolt of Vitalian, who professed to represent the cause of orthodoxy. Vitalian had indeed been repressed, but he was still in Thrace, his attitude was hostile, and he was doubtless in relation with a faction in the city which shared his disaffection.

Anastasius, though childless, had near relations, especially two nephews, Hypatius and Pompeius, who might urge a claim to the throne, and were secure of the support of the monophysite party and the green faction, which their uncle favoured.

But Justin ousted both Vitalian and the nephews of the late Emperor. Justin's religion was orthodox, and his accession to the throne rested on the facts that he attached to himself the orthodox anti-Anastasian party, including the blue faction, and that he was, by his military reputation and his position as commander of the guards, so formidable that Vitalian could not continue hostilities, especially as the causes for dissatisfaction, which had led to them, were now removed. Vitalian was consoled with a consulship and the office of master of soldiers; and the great schism (which had lasted since Zeno's Henotikon) between the Roman and Byzantine Churches came to an end, as the Emperor recognized the dogmatic symbolum of Pope Leo I. But Vitalian enjoyed his new honours for only a few months; he was assassinated, and his assassination was generally attributed to the jealousy of Justinian.

Justin was an able soldier, but was already wellnigh seventy years old. He had not much aptitude for civil affairs, and he was illiterate. The enemies of the new dynasty afterwards said that he was an imbecile old man, who did neither good nor evil to the Empire, because he was unable to do anything. Such a slight is of no value in regard of the fact. He was a man of ambition and strong will who, notwithstanding his advanced age, steered the Empire into a new era and guided a thoroughgoing reaction.

To make up for his own deficiencies in culture and knowledge of civil government he had the assistance of his nephew Justinian, who was destined to succeed him. Justinian assumed the consulate in 521 AD, and exhibited games and spectacles of magnificent costliness. This munificence was a contrast to the careful frugality of Anastasius, and indicated to the people the reactionary policy of the new dynasty. In April 527 Justinian was created Augustus, and in August, on the death of his uncle, became sole monarch.

The financial difficulties in which the Empire was involved in the latter part of the fifth century had been solved by the care of Anastasius, and the new Emperor found a large sum of money in the treasury. But before the accession of Justinian this sum is said to have been considerably reduced, for the frugality of Anastasius had been followed by a more liberal expenditure, and the exactions for which he had been blamed were not continued. Justinian's ideas soared higher than to the mere maintenance of a brilliant court, and he required money to carry them out. The harmless administration of Justin was incompatible with the achievement of public glories—and there is so much truth in the unkind remark that Justin did no good or evil to the State. The great works by which Justinian's name is remembered, the works on Roman law, the conquest of Italy and Africa, and the public edifices are connected with the names of three men, Tribonian, Belisarius, and Anthemius. The abilities of these men were worthy of the large conceptions of their sovereign. But the great works could never have been executed but for another human instrument, whose name has been handed down to infamy, and not, like theirs, to fame. This was John the Cappadocian, who was appointed praetorian prefect, and supplied the treasury by oppressing the subjects. The most authentic account of him is that of John Lydus, who was a civil servant at the time, and has left us a narrative of his enormities.

It was the duty of the prefect to supply money for needful expenses. John not only supplied it but became immensely wealthy himself, and led a life of gluttony and debauchery. "He did not fear God or regard man". The provinces of Lydia and Cilicia especially suffered from his extortions; he let a company of his creatures loose upon Lydia, and they devastated it for the space of a year, leaving (according to John of Lydia) not a virgin or a youth undeflowered, nor a vessel in a house. He was regarded as a demon, attended by a band of demons, too ready to do his bidding, and such names as Cyclops, Cerberus, Sardanapalus were lavished on him. Of his special acts we may notice the partial abolition, or rather modification, of the State post, cursus publicus, the result of which measure was economically disastrous. Directly, certain expenses were saved to the treasury, but the unfortunate provincials were obliged to undergo the labour of transporting their produce themselves to the ports for transference to Constantinople, and large quantities of corn rotted in the granaries. The impoverished provincials flocked to the capital; a large number of new taxes were invented to extort money, and justice is said to have been so abused that men would not go into court, and the business of advocates declined. The prefect instituted the use of hideous and painful fetters, he had dark dungeons under the praetorium for punishing his subordinate officials, and none were exempted from the indignity of torture. The remarkable point is that, according to John Lydus, Justinian was ignorant of the excesses of the prefect. Lydus is continually inserting a parenthesis to warn us that the E­peror knew nothing of this or that unjust transaction. That Justinian was prepared to enforce rigorously the collection of all established dues we know from his laws; but he may not have been aware of, and, we may be sure, did not inquire too curiously into, all the details of his minister's actions. We can easily understand the value he laid upon a prefect who never failed to supply him with the funds requisite for the achievement of his schemes.

Justinian shared his throne with a remarkable woman, the Empress Theodora. She was originally a ballet-dancer; her beauty and intellectual ability attracted the love of Justinian, before he became Emperor, and he married her. A contemporary said it was impossible for mere man to describe her comeliness in words or to imitate it by art; we cannot judge how far this remark was due to the enthusiasm of adulation, but if we were entitled to form an idea of her features from the mosaic picture in San Vitale at Ravenna, we should infer that Procopius, in speaking of her beauty, uses the language of a courtier. Nevertheless I think we may conclude that Theodora was a beautiful woman, not from the praise of Procopius, but from the admissions of the Secret History, whose author would doubtless, if he could, have disparaged her charms. The only blemishes which he can find in her are that she was rather short in stature and had a somewhat pale complexion, but the pallor, which he assures us was not sickly, he seems to admire rather than censure.

In order to understand her political position we must direct our attention to the factions of the circus, which were of considerable historical importance throughout, especially at the beginning of, the sixth century. The origin of the four parties of the circus, symbolized by the colours white, red, green, and blue, is veiled in obscurity. The masters or leaders of these parties (domini factionum) are first mentioned in the reign of Nero. Caligula favoured the green, Nero the blue color, and the rivalry of the parties continued to a late period of the Empire, the Emperor himself generally patronizing either blue or green, in which white and red had been respectively absorbed. It was not merely in Rome that these factions existed; they cheered and fought throughout the capitals of the provinces; they had existed in Byzantium since (at latest) the time of Septimius Severus. At Constantinople in the fifth century they seem to have assumed greater political importance, and we can hardly avoid connecting this with the religious differences which agitated the East. For the parties of the circus became soon identified with the parties of the Church; the eunuch Chrysaphius, who was inclined to the heresy of Eutyches, supported the Greens, Marcian, the orthodox Emperor, supported the Blues; and at the end of the fifth century the monophysite Anastasius favoured the Greens. In the year 501 a battle took place between the two parties in the hippodrome. It must be observed that these parties did not consist merely of the participators in the games; any citizen might belong to them. They were maintained on an organized system, recognized by the government, with regular officers. They were a machine by which the opinion or will of the people could be expressed; and the Greek name of a "party" was dymos, a deme, or "people".

The support of the Blues was one of the elements on which the new dynasty rested; the hostility of the monophysitic Greens was one of the lurking dangers against which it had to guard. It was natural for Justin and Justinian to favour the blue party, as Anastasius had favoured the green.

Now Theodora, in the days of her life as a public dancer, was identified with the green faction. Her father is said to have been employed in its service; and she held monophysitic opinions. When she married Justinian, she transferred her sympathies to the Blues, but did not change her creed. It is characteristic that the opposition writer, who afterwards treated her with scurrilous virulence in the Secret History, ascribed this change of colour to personal pique.

Many looked upon the interest taken by Justinian in the blue faction as a mania. He is said to have allowed it to commit the most outrageous acts of petulance and violence with impunity, and even to have heavily chastised governors who ventured to punish members of that faction for their misdemeanours. The Greens, on the other hand, were harshly treated, exposed to the malevolence of their opponents and unable to retaliate. We must not forget that the factions were mixed companies; and among the Blues there was clearly a select fellowship of unprincipled adventurers and debauchees, who, under the cover of orthodoxy and loyalty, threw off the restraints of society. About this time they adopted the fashion of wearing beards like the Persians; and shaving the crown of the head to the temples, they wore their hair long behind like Huns. But it would be an error to suppose that all the members of the factions were like these obtrusive individuals.

We can perceive that the license permitted to the favoured party was in a manner a political necessity. Even in the most despotic state, public opinion is more or less a check on the acts of the sovereign, for he feels that there is a limit somewhere at which human endurance will rebel. Now Justinian’s financial exigencies forced him to try the endurance of his subjects; his vigorous policy and his rapacious ministers naturally excited much discontent. The populace were dissatisfied on account of the reduction which was made in the distributions of corn; the conservatism of the patricians and senators revolted against the Emperor's ideas of innovation; and no favour was shown to the professional classes. Besides this the monophysites were hostile to his government, and there were many adherents of the family of Anastasius. Public opinion was a force which he could not ignore, especially as it had made itself heard in the reign of Anastasius. Now the circus was the place in which public opinion could express itself; the denies of the circus were organized parties capable of political combination and action. It was consequently Justinian's policy to enlist in his service one party as a sort of government organ, and his party was naturally the blue, which had been the party of opposition under Anastasius. He could thus paralyze resistance on the part of the people by keeping them divided, and favouring one division. As long as the two parties were opposed, John the Cappadocian and the other unpopular ministers were safe.

But it is evident that such a policy could not be permanent; Justinian could not be content, while his position depended on a party. In 532 AD a turning-point came, the sedition of "Nika", which shook the throne. The import of this event was that Justinian attempted to render himself independent even of the blue faction, which had grown intolerably turbulent. The blue faction consequently coalesced with the green; and the Emperor quelled the rebellion by the soldiers. The affair was further complicated by the fact that the disaffection was taken advantage of by the party of the Anastasian dynasty, an element of danger which the Emperor finally extinguished.

On the 13th of January the Greens complained to the Emperor in the hippodrome of the grievous oppression which they suffered, especially from Calapodius, a guardsman, who had been a Green in the days of Anastasius and had become a Blue under the new dynasty. The Blues supported the Emperor, and the streets were soon the scene of sanguinary conflicts. But a circumstance occurred which determined the union of the hostile parties in a common insurrection against the oppressive administration. Seven individuals had been condemned to death, and five of them were executed without difficulty. But in the case of two, a Blue and a Green, the hangman blundered, and twice the bodies fell, still alive, to the ground. Then the monks of St. Conon interfered and carried the two criminals to the adjacent monastery. As some of the criminals were Blues, and as the hitch in the execution tended to make the incident more impressive than usual, the Blues and Greens united in a determination to avenge themselves on the civil authorities, and they chose the watchword Nika, "conquer", from which the sedition has received its name.

The most obnoxious ministers were John of Cappadocia the praetorian prefect, Tribonian the quaestor, and Eudemius the prefect of the city, who was especially associated with the executions which had taken place. During five days, from 14th to 18th January, the city was a scene of conflagrations and witnessed all the horrors of street warfare. The troops present in the capital were not numerous. The guards of the palace, who used formerly to be recruited by hardy Armenians or Isaurians, consisted of 3500 men; but as Justinian had made a practice of selling sinecure commissions for large sums, the corps was not very efficient. Belisarius, who had lately returned from the Persian war, had a force of cataphracti—cavalry completely mailed—who were lodged in the precincts of the palace; and it happened that the Gepid leader Mundus, who had done good service on the Danube frontier against Bulgarian invaders, was also present in the city with a corps of Heruls. Besides these there were some regiments of municipal guards.

On the 14th (Wednesday) Justinian yielded so far to the public wishes as to depose the three obnoxious ministers and replace them by Phocas, Basilides, and Tryphon. This measure could hardly have been expected to satisfy the Greens, but it might have been fairly expected that it would succeed in dissolving their coalition with the Blues and so paralyze the revolt. But the excitement that prevailed was fomented by the secret machinations and bribes of the partisans of Anastasius’ nephews. The people seemed resolved to overthrow the dynasty of Justin. But Hypatius and Pompeius, the nephews of Anastasius, were in attendance on Justinian in the palace, and Probus, their brother, had escaped to Asia, so that the insurgents had no one whom they could proclaim Augustus.

In the afternoon Belisarius issued from the gate of Chalke at the head of his Goths and harassed the rioters until even­tide. When he retreated they set fire to the Chalke porch; the flames enveloped the senate house and spread along the Diabatika of Achilles to St. Sophia. On the same evening the offices of the prefect of the city were probably burnt, but we do not know in what locality they were situated. On the 15th (Thursday) the conflagration continued, and a part of the hippodrome on the side of the Augusteum was consumed; on the 16th (Friday) the offices of the praetorian prefect were fired. Meanwhile the ruins of St. Sophia were smouldering, and either from them or from the praetorium (which may have been in that region), a wind blew flames northward, which wrought the destruction of the hospital of Samson and the church of St. Irene. The palace of Lausus, rebuilt after the fire in 465, the baths of Alexander, and many private houses perished in the course of the conflagration. On Friday evening some ships arrived with troops from neighbouring cities; and, encouraged by this increase of his forces, the Emperor arranged an attack on the insurgents, who on the following day (17th, Saturday) assembled in the Augusteum, intending perhaps to make a decisive assault on the palace. The conflict ended with the siege of a building in the Augusteum called the Octagon, where the rebels entrenched themselves; the soldiers, unable to expel them, set fire to it.

On Sunday morning Justinian ventured to appear in the cathisma of the hippodrome with a copy of the Gospels in his hands. It was proclaimed that the Emperor would converse in person with the people, and large crowds assembled, but with no purpose of pacification. Justinian swore that he would grant an unreserved amnesty, forget the past, and comply with the demands of his subjects. A sovereign could hardly say more than this; but all he heard in reply was, "You lie!" in conjunction with some abusive vocative; and "As you kept your oath to Vitalian, even so would you keep this oath to us". Justinian, when he returned to the palace, ordered all the senators who were present to leave it, among the rest Hypatius and Pompeius; perhaps he thought that his two rivals would be less dangerous outside. They professed to be devoted to the Emperor, and it is not clear whether their devotion was a mask or not. The insurgents were elated when they learned that Hypatius had left the palace; they met him and constrained him to take the decisive step. On Monday morning (19th January) he was crowned in the Forum of Constantine with a golden chain wreathed like a diadem, and soon afterwards he sat in the cathisma of the hippodrome, while a multitudinous assembly below called out, "Hypatie Auguste, tu vincas". They had come to the hippodrome in order to organize an attack on the adjacent palace, contrary to the judicious advice of the senator Origen, who recommended that they should first seize one of the other palaces in the city. Meanwhile Justinian strengthened the fortifications of the palace, and called a council of his ministers. This was the really decisive moment.

John of Cappadocia recommended flight to Heraclea, and Belisarius agreed with his view; but their weighty opinions were outbalanced by the short speech of the Empress Theodora:—

"The present occasion is, I think, too grave to take regard of the principle that it is not meet for a woman to speak among men. Those whose dearest interests are in the presence of extreme danger are justified in thinking only of the wisest course of action. Now in my opinion, on the present occasion, if ever, nature is an unprofitable tutor, even if her guidance bring us safety. It is impossible for a man, when he has come into the world, not to die; but for one who has reigned it is intolerable to be an exile. May I never exist without this purple robe and may I never live to see the day on which those who meet me shall not address me as 'Queen'. If you wish, 0 Emperor, to save yourself, there is no difficulty; we have ample funds. Yonder is the sea, and there are the ships. Yet reflect whether, when you have once escaped to a place of security, you will not prefer death to safety, I agree with an old saying that 'Empire is a fair winding-sheet".

From the mere words of this speech we can understand what effect it might have produced; but we can hardly realize how that effect was magnified when it proceeded from the lips of the Empress—"cette diablesse de génie attachée à l'existence de Justinien”.

In the meantime it was believed in the hippodrome that the Emperor and his court had fled. For Hypatius, not yet sure of success, had sent a messenger to Justinian, bidding him attack the people assembled in the hippodrome. Ephraem, the messenger, could not himself reach the imperial presence, but he gave the message to one of the secretaries, Thomas, who was a pagan. Thomas, ignorantly or designedly, gave him the false information that Justinian had fled, and Ephraem proclaimed the tidings in the hippodrome. It now seemed to the rebels and the perhaps unwilling usurper that they had only to take possession of the palace.

When Theodora's resolution had conquered the prudence or pusillanimity of the court, the eunuch Narses was sent forth with a well-filled purse to regain the allegiance of the Blues; and at the same time Belisarius led out his troops with the purpose of cutting the revolutionists to pieces in the crowded enclosure. Belisarius first attempted to reach Hypatius himself by the spiral stair which led up to the cathisma, but the door was kept fast by the guard on the inner side. Failing here, he entered the hippodrome by the general entrance to the west of the cathisma, and at the same moment another force under Mundus appeared at the Dead Gate on the east side. Narses’ distribution of bribes meanwhile had succeeded in producing dissension between "the friendly Greens and Blues", and this favoured the attack of the soldiers. An unsparing massacre took place, and it is said that about 35,000 persons perished in the sedition of Nika. Hypatius and Pompeius were executed.

Those who draw a line between a “Roman” and “Byzantine” history might well look on this striking sedition as the last scene in “Roman history”, for it resulted in an imperial victory which established the form of absolutism by which " Byzantine history" is generally characterized—a result perhaps partly implied in the remark of Procopius that the revolt was fatal in its consequences to both senate and people. M. Marrast describes it as “the last convulsion which marks the passage from Graeco-Roman antiquity to the Middle Age”.

The blue and green factions made themselves conspicuous on several subsequent occasions during the reign of Justinian, but they did not again shake the foundations of the throne as in the Nika revolt. Their rivalry outlived their short union, and as long as they were hostile there was no danger for Justinian; and in spite of the occasional storms that broke out their importance was really decreasing. It is recorded that a faction fight took place in 549, and there was a more serious demonstration in 556, during a great dearth at Constantinople, when common suffering seems again to have united the foes. The people cried, "Provide supplies for the city", and they pulled down the house of the prefect of the city. The factions clamored against Justinian in the circus, and as Persian ambassadors happened to be present, the Emperor felt especially indignant and mortified. In 561 a conflict of the Blues and Greens took place in the hippodrome before the Emperor arrived, but his appearance quelled it; and in 563 the Greens, who were undoubtedly connected with the conspiracy which was at that time formed against Justinian, reviled and stoned the new urban prefect Andreas, and their behaviour led to a battle with the Blues. I shall have to speak of "the colours" once or twice again in the reigns of Maurice and Phocas, but they are then far on their way to political insignificance.

The conflagration of so many important public buildings would have entailed a heavy outlay for their mere restoration, but they were rebuilt by the ambition of Justinian on a more splendid scale. We must postpone to another place some account of the new St. Sophia, and the architectural works of Anthemius, whose skill raised the city from its ashes fairer than ever. Notwithstanding these expenses, which were incurred simultaneously with the costly wars in Africa and Italy, the condition of the subjects seems to have somewhat improved, owing partly to the milder though short administration of Phocas, the new and popular praetorian prefect of the East. But in the course of little more than a year John the Cappadocian returned to office and oppression. We can hardly doubt that the Emperor, for the fulfilment of whose schemes enormous funds were necessary, found that his treasury was not so full since the degradation of this unscrupulous minister, and concluded that the only way out of his difficulties was the reappointment of John.

The enemies of Justinian might appeal to this reappointment as their best proof that the Emperor was utterly unscrupulous as to the means employed to carry out his ideas.

The overthrow of John of Cappadocia was due to the hatred of the Empress Theodora. She ruined him by a curious stratagem, contrived by her friend Antonina, the wife of the general Belisarius, who is described by Procopius, her husband's secretary, as a woman “more capable than anyone to manage the impracticable”.  Antonina cultivated the acquaintance of John's daughter Euphemia, and gave her to understand that Belisarius was highly discontented with the reigning powers, who had shown ingratitude for all his services, but that he could make no attempt to throw off the intolerable yoke without aid from some influential person in the ranks of the civil ministers. Euphemia communicated this news to her father, who was not without ambition and eagerly embraced the chance of ascending the throne with the help of the army. He arranged a secret interview with Antonina at Rufinianum, a country house of Belisarius, and the Empress took care that officials with soldiers should lurk near to overhear the implicating words and arrest the unsuspecting conspirator. It is said that Justinian, aware of the plot, sent to John a secret warning against the trap; but notwithstanding, John went, conspired, and fell. He was sent to Cyzicus (541 AD), disgraced but wealthy, where he lived for some time as a priest; but the relentless indignation of Theodora still pursued him, and he was scourged and stripped of his goods for slaying a bishop. He ended his days as a presbyter at Constantinople, whither he returned after the death of Theodora in 548.

The absolutism of Justinian provoked a strong and bitter opposition, all the bitterer because it was so unsparingly suppressed. He was accused of discouraging all liberal professions, of not only suppressing philosophers and sophists, but of depriving physicians of their allowances, and prohibiting the pay which lawyers (rhetors) had been accustomed to receive. The merchants were harassed by customs and monopolies, the soldiers were ill treated by logothetae, who cheated them of their pay, retarded their promotion, and gave them deficient rations. Taxation, pitilessly imposed, weighed heavier than ever on the landed proprietors and farmers, and no arrears were remitted. Such is the general tenor of the charges made by the dissatisfied member of the party of opposition, who has painted the agony of the Empire under “the demon Justinian” in the Secret History. On this subject something will be said in the next chapter, but we may remark here that, although the general tone of Justinian's rule was Tel est notre plaisir, he always condescends in his constitutions to give reasons, often elaborate reasons, for his acts, and that many of his laws seem really, as well as professedly, to have aimed at the wellbeing of his subjects, and not merely at the external prestige of the Empire or the replenishing of the treasury.

Two new offices instituted by Justinian seem to have been unpopular at Byzantium, that of the praetores plebis and the new quaestorship. In 535 Justinian superseded the prefect of the watch (praefectus vigilam), “night prefect”, a name which the imperial constitution derides as absurd, and appointed the praetor plebis, whose office was to keep order in the city both by night and by day. In 539 he appointed a quaestor, whose chief function was to prevent idlers and strangers who had no special business from sojourning in Constantinople; and in the constitution by which this office was instituted the legislator dwells with complacency on the fact that the institution of the praetor plebis had been found by experience “very advantageous to the inhabitants of this our imperial city”, and states that the success of that office suggested the introduction of a new one. Tribonian, the great lawyer, was the first quaestor under the new system, and he is said to have been a lover of gain, and very unpopular. Both these innovations are mentioned in the Secret History as organs of Justinianean oppression.

The imperial style adopted by Justinian in his constitutions was pompous and imposing. The preface to the second edition of the Codex (534), couched in the form of a constitution, begins thus2:

"In nomine Domini nostri Jesu Christi Imperator Caesar Flavius Justinianus Alamannicus Gothicus Francicus Germanicus Anticus Alanicus Vvandalicus Africanns pius felix inclitus victor ac triumphator semper Augustus senatm urbis Constantinopolitanae S."

In a law concerning imperial constitutions and edicts, which was read aloud “in the new consistory of Justinian's palace” in 529, the Emperor exclaims: “What is greater, what more sacred than the imperial majesty? who is puffed up with such haughty conceit as to disdain the royal judgment, when even the founders of the old law lay down clearly and distinctly that the constitutions, which have gone forth by imperial decree, are valid as law?” And, he goes on to say, the sole promulgator of the laws is the sole worthy interpreter of them likewise.

The imperial pride is always flavoured with the religious spirit of the time, and Justinian does not weary of boasting of the divine favour which has been vouchsafed to him. For example, the opening sentences of the constitution on the Digest (533), known as Tanta run thus:

“So great in our regard is the providence of the divine humanity, that it always deigns to sustain us with eternal generosities. For after the Parthian (Parthica, meaning Persian) wars had been lulled to sleep by an Everlasting Peace and the Vandal nation had been overthrown and Carthage, nay all Libya, had been united again with the Roman Empire it has enabled the ancient laws, heavy-laden with old age, to assume a new form of beauty in the shape of an abridgment of moderate size, by means of our watchful care—an achievement, which no one, before our reign ever hoped for or even deemed possible for human intellect”.

II

JUSTINIAN AND THEODORA

The sixth century may be called the age of Justinian. But of the man himself, whose works changed the history of the world, it is hard to win a distinct idea; we have only a vague glimpse of the features of that form which dominated Europe. His elusive personality hides behind meagre statements, uninstructive panegyrics, or malevolent pasquinades, and perplexes the historian. And even those who do not care for the analytical dissection of motives, who see the greatness of Justinian revealed in his works—by their fruits ye shall know them—feel nevertheless tantalized at the elusiveness of his individuality.

Beside him stands Theodora, another baffling problem, and indissolubly associated with Justinian for those who have visited San Vitale in Ravenna, as well as for those who have read the Secret History, a book of ill fame which has thrown a doubtful light or shadow on the imperial court.

We may first resume briefly Justinian’s historical position. He may be likened to a colossal Janus bestriding the way of passage between the ancient and medieval worlds.

On the one side his face was turned towards the past. His ideal, we are told, was to restore the proud aspect of the old Roman Empire, and this was chiefly realized by his conquests in Italy, Africa, and Spain. The great juristic works executed at the beginning of his reign breathe to some degree the spirit of ancient Rome. Moreover he represents the last stage in the evolution of the Roman Imperium; in him was fulfilled its ultimate absolutism. From Augustus to Diocletian there was a dualism, the "dyarchy" of the Emperor and the Senate which was abolished in the monarchy of Diocletian; and from Constantine to Justinian there was another dualism between the Church and the Imperium, which passed into Justinian’s absolutism. This second dualism reached in the latter part of the period an antagonism which was conditioned by the falling asunder of eastern and western Europe; and it was by reuniting the West that Justinian was able to overcome the dualism and assert his ecclesiastical authority. The historian Agathias expresses Justinian's absolute government by saying, “Of those who reigned at Byzantium he was the first absolute sovereign in deed as well as in name”.

On the other hand, he was a great innovator and a destroyer of old things; and this was made a ground of complaint by the disaffected. The consulate was abolished, the philosophical schools of Athens were closed, and these two events may be considered symbolic of the death of the Roman and the death of the Greek spirit. The Graeco-Roman, Romaic, or Byzantine spirit is installed in their place. He tampered with and partly changed the administrative system of Diocletian; he allowed the Greek tongue to supplant Latin in official documents; the authority of the Twelve Tables, long in disuse, was at length formally abolished; and fundamental conceptions peculiar to the Roman civil law were set aside. Justinian was thoroughly penetrated with the spirit of the Christian world; he spent his nights in theological studies; and in the erection of the great church of St. Sophia, which still remains to commemorate him, it was Solomon and not Pericles that he desired to imitate and surpass.

In four departments Justinian has won an immortal name: in warfare, in law, in architecture, and in church history. Standing on the shore of the medieval or modern period, he cast into the waters of the future great stones which created immense circles. His military achievements decided the course of the history of Italy, and affected the development of western Europe; his legal works are inextricably woven into the web of European civilization; his St. Sophia is one of the greatest monuments of the world, one of the visible signs of the continuity of history, a standing protest against the usurpation of the Turk; and his ecclesiastical authority influenced the distant future of Christendom.

But the means by which he accomplished these things rendered him unpopular. He accomplished them by an artificial system, which could be only temporary, and broke down on his death. It consisted of two parts, (1) a very severe taxation, and (2) a system of ingenious diplomatic relations with those barbarian peoples who hung on the northern frontiers of the Empire. He was not able to keep these nations, Huns, Slaves, and Germans, altogether in check; they were continually devastating the Balkan provinces, and he was obliged to oppose them with armies destined for Italy; but he succeeded, partly by money payments, partly by turning them against one another, in paralyzing their hostilities sufficiently to prevent them from foiling the prosecution of his projects in the West. Frequent and large money payments were necessary, and in so far the second part of his system depended on the first. There was one limit on his activities, which could not be entirely dealt with by this system, the power of Persia under the great king Chosroes Nushirvan. Money payments were often useful and necessary, but the defense of the Asiatic frontier was a constant and considerable check on the Italian campaigns. This is evident from the increased activity in the West which always succeeded a peace with Persia.

As to the oppressive taxation, we have no option but to conclude that for the bulk of Justinian's subjects his reign was not a blessing. Limited as he was by the circumstances of the time, the execution of his designs was inconsistent with the present prosperity of the people. But history justifies him by the event as she justifies all her true children.

There are the two sides here as elsewhere, the universal and the individual, the historical and the biographical; and on the principle of good coming out of evil, many condemn the great man, while they are forced to praise his works, both in themselves and in their historical results. History or providence, it may be said, fully justifies present evils by their effects in the future; those effects may be considered equivalent to the historical motive; but this avails not the individual at whose door those evils lie; the instrument of history is condemned.

But this theory is cancelled by a rejoinder, which is at least equally valid. Instead of attributing the good results to "providence" and blaming Justinian for the present evils, one might reply, should we not credit Justinian with elevated and far-seeing purposes, and ascribe the miseries of his subjects to the defective economical conditions of the age?

Perhaps the only value of either of these views is to cancel the other; the antinomy teaches us to refrain from introducing the biographical point of view into history, from taking the individual out of his environment and passing irrelevant moral judgments. The motives of all the actions of individuals are more or less personal, and those of prominent men are generally more or less tinged with the desire of fame. This feeling doubtless gave animation to the activity of Justinian, and it would be an anachronism to judge him by the canons of modern philanthropy. To praise Justinian's absolutism in the sixth century is not to praise absolutism. Dante, looking upon the desire of fame as a celestial quality, attributed it to Justinian, and placed him as a revolving light in the planet of Mercury. "Fui Cesare e sono Giustiniano", he says to Dante—words which we might apply in a different sense to signify that the imperial administration and its evils were transient things, now dead, a sort of accident not really appertaining to the glorified Justinian.

There was naturally a strong and virulent party of opposition to the Emperor's government, consisting of monophysites, the green faction, and others who felt the touch of his stern hand. They were interested in putting the most unfavourable construction on all imperial acts, in representing the court as a hotbed of corruption, in aspersing the ministers of the crown. The essence of this virulence has survived in the Secret History attributed to the historian Procopius, the secretary of Belisarius.

There are two distinct questions connected with this curious book: (1) Was Procopius of Caesarea the author? (2) Are its statements trustworthy, wholly or partially, or not at all?

We cannot, I think, answer either of these questions with a simple yes or no. The details of both problems are reserved for an appendix; but conclusions may be stated here. In regard to the first, I agree in the main with the opinion of Ranke, that Procopius is not the author, but that the work was nevertheless founded on a diary or ephemeris of that historian; that a member of the opposition, probably of the green faction, having obtained possession of the diary or a copy of it, worked it up into the form of the Secret History, incorporating all the calumnies which were afloat about the Emperor and the Empress.

In regard to the second question, it seems plain that, on the one hand, a historian is not entitled to make use of any particular statement resting on the unconfirmed authority of this document; but that, on the other hand, there was method in the author's madness, and there were underlying facts which gave relevancy to the inventions. We can hardly doubt that Theodora before her marriage appeared on the stage, for the author’s picture of her career would otherwise have no point; and there is some method apparent in the circumstance that he does not charge her with licentiousness after her marriage.

But setting aside these vexed questions, on which we can but barely touch here, and for the present rejecting the evidence of the Secret History on matters of fact, we must observe that the work has a considerable value not only as a product of the age, in which regard it will be spoken of in another place, but also as expressing the feelings of bitterness which the government of Justinian excited.

This book of pain and horror leaves upon the mind the impression that the enlightened spirit of Justinian, his notable projects, his high thoughts, lived in the shadow of some malignant presence; that cowering by the throne of the Emperor, lurking in the gallery of the palace where he walked in meditation at night, ever attending his steps, moved some inhuman horror, some unutterable "Dweller by the Threshold", through whose fatal power the destinies of himself and Theodora, Belisarius and Antonina, John the Cappadocian, and many other victims, were entangled in an inextricable mesh of hates and lusts and bloodshed.

That pasquinades and scandalous stories were in circulation about himself and his wife cannot have escaped the knowledge of the watchful Emperor; and, if I may make a conjecture, he caused a sort of apology to be written before he died, of which a portion is still extant. The treatise on the civil service of John the Lydian bears many traces of having been written with the purpose of defending Justinian; and the introduction of such apologies by the way would make it far more weighty and effectual than a formal panegyric. That Justinian might have employed John the Lydian in the matter may be concluded from the fact that he did at an earlier date employ him to write a panegyric of himself and a history of the Persian war. The circumstance that John was a disappointed civil servant and makes no concealment of the degeneration of the service, may be appealed to in support of the theory that he had some special inducement to speak diligently on every opportunity of Justinian's personal blamelessness.

The Empress Theodora has become, chiefly through Gibbon's reproduction of the portrait in the Secret History, a typical example of those fascinating and voluptuous women, who in their own day exercise a baleful influence in the world, and in after times allure the imagination. When we turn from the Secret History, to which this effect is due, and read what trustworthy authorities tell us of the Empress, we do not meet a tigress or a malicious demon in woman's form, but a bold and able woman with enough of the diablesse in her to explain how she might be traduced. The bold effective speech which she made on the occasion of the Nika sedition is one of the most engaging episodes in history; she was ready to stake everything for empire; and she won.

Her intervention on that occasion, her scheme to overthrow the oppressor John the Cappadocian, her interference for the wife of Artabanes, her active interest in supporting the monophysites and their doctrines, her solicitude for reclaiming abandoned women, her charity and almsgiving, are the only facts of importance that we really know about the Empress. Of these, the fact that damned her most in the eyes of Baronius and Alemannus, and made them ready to believe of her any enormity, her religious faith that Christ's nature was not dual, will certainly in the present day do her memory little harm. Had she believed in the two natures, she might have been more extravagant in lusts even than she is said to have been, and no member of the orthodox Church would have cast a stone. Her enthusiasm for religion when she was an Empress is put on a level with her alleged profligacy as a girl. She is said to have fed the geese of the devil when she was on the stage, she fed the sheep of Christ when she sat on the throne; and in the eyes of orthodox Chalcedonians the second pasture was far more offensive than the first.

John the Lydian speaks of her in high terms, when he describes how she informed her husband of the misdeeds of John the Cappadocian; a woman, he calls her, “superior in intelligence, and in sympathy for the oppressed always awake”; and the remark of Procopius, the historian, that she could not withstand the supplications of the unhappy accords with this; and the two remarks together establish the fact that she was a sympathetic and compassionate lady.

Gibbon's remark that Justinian "was never young" aptly conveys the sort of impression he gives us. There is a cold atmosphere about him—the atmosphere of inexorable Roman logic, afraid of no consequences—which is tinged also with a certain mysticism. His mode of life was severely abstemious and ascetic, his days and nights laborious. He was a man of wide education, learned in philosophy, theology, jurisprudence, music, and architecture, and a friend of his said that the time despaired of by Plato had come, when a philosopher should reign and a king philosophize. The remark suggests the reflection, how different he was from the Emperor Marcus Aurelius, of whom the same had been said before.

But if Justinian were never young, it cannot be said that he did not grow old. There is an unmistakable difference between the first part and the last part of his reign, unequally divided by the Great Plague. His great ideas were accomplished or undertaken in the earlier period, when he was, if not young, vigorous and hopeful. The plague not only injures the body but paralyses the spirit; a man or a nation that lives through such a visitation is not the same after it. We can hardly, I think, lay too much stress on its moral as well as physical effects. It was after the Plague that Justinian devoted all his energies to theological points of subordinate importance, sat without guards at the dead of night, deep in discussions with very ancient priests, and almost lost his interest in the conquest of Italy. We may say, I think, that he was touched with, dispiritedness, or with the malady of the Middle Ages.

His ascetic mode of life and nocturnal studies seemed to lend the Emperor an almost inhuman character; which, combined with his cold Roman spirit, prepared to carry out his plans at all costs, suggested to his enemies the theory that he was really an incarnate demon who took a delight in death and ruin for their own sake. This notion, it may be observed, is a curious, and perhaps one of the earliest, instances of the idea of Schadenfreude, delight in mischief for its own mere sake.

The conception of Justinian as a malicious demon, or the conception of him and Theodora as a pair of vampires sucking the blood of the Empire or fiends feasting on the misery of men, may be taken as the outcry of a sacrificed generation—sacrificed without being consulted to the realization of an idea. But such outcries do not affect the position which Justinian must always hold. The epithet "great" was not indeed permanently bestowed upon him by posterity; but then it was not bestowed on Julius Caesar nor on Augustus, and it was bestowed on Leo I. As of that Caesar who fulminated at the deep Euphrates, so it may be said of the Caesar who reconquered Italy and Africa,

                               per populos dat jura viamque affectat Olympo.

III

THE LEGAL WORKS OF JUSTINIAN

Every government, whether democratical, oligarchical, or monarchical, has two duties to perform; and it must up to a certain point perform them, if it is to exist. It may perform them very badly, but its existence ultimately depends upon their performance. These duties are to protect the community against other communities without, and to protect it against its own individual members within; and the means by which such protection is secured are arms and laws. The efficacy of each of these two instruments depends upon the other; the maintenance of the laws depends on arms, and successful warfare on the maintenance of the laws.

With this general reflection Justinian introduced to the world the first of the great legal monuments, which have immortalized his name and contributed to the welfare and progress of mankind. He states that he has kept both duties clearly before his eyes; that he has provided for the improvement both of the military defenses and legal securities of the Empire—of the latter by preserving old and passing new laws, but chiefly by his collection of the imperial constitutions into a code, called after the fortunate name of Justinian.

Written law was of two kinds, the imperial constitutions or placita, and the opinions or answers of recognized—we may say licensed—lawyers, responsa prudentium.

(1.) As the Emperor stepped into the place of the sovereign people of the republic, it was logical that the leges passed by the people in the comitia should be superseded by imperial constitutions. This process of supersession took place in the first century of the Empire; the last lex we hear of was an agrarian law of Nerva. There were collections of the constitutions before the time of Justinian; his code was not a novelty. The Gregorian and Hermogenian codes of the fourth century were supplemented by the Theodosian code published in 438, which contained all the constitutions from the time of Constantine. There were two causes which rendered a new code desirable in the reign of Justinian. In the first place, owing to lack of copies, the bulky Theodosian collection could not be always consulted in courts, and therefore the actual practice often failed to conform to the written law; in the second place, a very large number of constitutions had been issued subsequently to the Theodosian code, both by Theodosius II and by his successors, which were not collected in a convenient form, and often seriously modified the law as stated in that code.

A new collection of the constitutions, edited up to date, with the contradictions carefully eliminated, the obsolete laws expunged, superfluous preambles or explanations omitted, words altered, erased, or added for the sake of clearness, was determined on by Justinian (13th February 528), and a commission of ten men, including Tribonian and Theophilus, was appointed to execute it. Clearness, completeness, and brevity were aimed at, and we may say attained, in the Justinianean Code which was published on the 7th April 529.

(2.) Justinian's next undertaking was more difficult, more ambitious, and more novel than the code. No one had ever arranged in an official and accessible volume the responsa prudentium, or answers given by lawyers recognized as authorities, in regard to special cases and legal points, which served as precedents for future decisions. These answers were scattered about in many treatises, and not a few difficulties arose in their application, to meet which some attempts had been already made. On many points antagonists might produce two opposite opinions, and on almost any the judge was sure to be perplexed by a large number of inconsistent citations. Hadrian left the choice to the judges’ own discretion, and a feeling that certain writers were entitled to precedence in authority gradually established itself without special enactment, to which feeling the choice of authors in the course of jurisprudence for law students considerably contributed. Gaius, and the commentaries of Ulpian and Paulus on the perpetual Edict, Papinian and Modestinus, obtained paramount authority. This inconvenience led Constantine to discredit the notes of Paulus and Ulpian on Papinian, as they frequently differed from the opinions they annotated; but this only lessened, it did not abolish, the evil. Theodosius II passed a very important measure—which may be considered the precursor of the Digest just as his Codex was the precursor of the Codex Justinianeus—called the Law of Citations, which ordained that the majority of opinions should determine the decision, and that in cases where the opinions were equally divided that of Papinian should prevail.

There was such admass of legal responses that the field seemed limitless and beyond all human capacity. But it was not too great for the enterprise of Justinian, who conceived the idea of “enucleating the old law”.

On the 15th December 530 he appointed a new commission, under the direction of Tribonian the quaestor, who had assisted in compiling the code, for the purpose of reading the books pertaining to Roman law, written by those lawyers who had been licensed by imperial authority to "interpret" the law. They were to eliminate all contradictions and omit all repetitions, and when they had thus won the nucleus of the vast material, they were to arrange it in one fair work, as it were, a holy temple of justice, which was to be divided into 50 books, containing all the law of 1300 years, purged of superfluities. The undertaking was so immense that it seemed almost impossible, but the commission of seventeen specialists worked so diligently that they completed it in exactly three years. The entire work was called the Digest or Pandects, and henceforward it only was to be consulted. According to Roby's computation, a law library of 106 volumes was compressed to 5’1/3.

(3.) Justinian's third, slightest, and best known work, was a manual of the principles of Roman law, intended for students, in 4 books,—the Institutions. It is really a reproduction, with numerous additions, omissions, and changes, of the commentaries of Gaius. At the same time the Emperor made alterations in the course of legal studies to be pursued at the schools of Constantinople and Berytus.

The Digest was a more satisfactory as well as a more stupendous work than the Code, because it could be looked upon as final. The licensed lawyers, prudentes, who created the mass of case-law, had long ago ceased to exist, and thus their answers were a given quantity, which no new opinions would supersede. For Constantine had abolished the practice of the prudentes and arrogated to the Emperor alone the right of deciding between the letter of the law and the dictates of equity. The Emperor's decisions were constitutions, not responses. The Code, on the other hand, could not be final, as was patent; it must be continually re-edited up to date, and five years after its first publication, Justinian issued a new edition, containing the constitutions passed in the interval; and it is this second edition that has come down to us. But nothing could be more absurd than to insinuate that Justinian spoiled his Code by passing a large number of laws after its publication. A final code in a defective and changing world would be really undesirable; a code in its very nature cannot be final, it can only be "up to date"; and Justinian was not so unpractical as not to apprehend this patent fact. If a code were to prevent all future legislation it would be the reverse of beneficial.

It is a point of special interest, as indicating the spirit of the time, that the Pythagorean theories of number were applied to the arrangement of the Digest, which was determined on a priori principles, independently of the nature of the material. In the constitution of 530 AD (17th December), which appointed the commission, it is decreed that the work shall consist of 50 books. These were divided into 7 parts, and the divisions were defined by mystic principles: 50 = 7 x 7 + 1. The first part consists of 4 books in imitation of the Pythagorean tetractys, which also determined the number of books in the Institutions. Students were instructed in 36 of the 30 books, “in order that by reading 36 books they should become perfect youths”. The charm of perfection in the number 36 consists in the fact that it is the sum of the first 8, that is, of the first 4 odd and the first 4 even, numbers. The remaining 14 books (2 x 7) they could study afterwards by themselves.

Whether this application of Pythagorean canons to fix the dimensions of the "most holy temple of Justice" was suggested by Justinian himself or by his quaestor Tribonian, we do not know; but it seems more natural to attribute it to the latter, who was a pagan, and doubtless imbued with Greek philosophy. It is characteristic that the orthodox Emperor should have adopted the mystic numbers of the heathen philosopher. And it is characteristic of the Graeco-Roman time that a thorough mastery of the hard science of Roman jurisprudence should be combined with, or set in a frame of, Greek mysticism. Roman law, taken in doses determined by a Greek philosophy, was to make "most perfect youths."

The course of history modified Roman law considerably. Roman law consisted of two portions, the jus civile, which rested on the Twelve Tables, and the jus gentium. The latter was formed by the sentences of the praetor peregrinus in disputes between Roman citizens and foreigners or subject peoples not governed by the jus civile, and consisted of the “perpetual Edict”, to which Hadrian gave the shape of an unalterable code. As Rome passed from the humble position of a town in Italy to that of mistress of the world, the importance of the second constituent, “the law of nations”, increased. It attained greater dignity—the dignity of priority and universality— through the spread of the Stoic philosophy, which at the end of the second century BC began to influence Rome. The Stoic law of nature was identified with the jus gentium. As the Roman spirit became cosmopolitan, Roman law tended to become cosmopolitan too; and in the third century AD the Edict of Caracalla, which made all free subjects of the Empire Roman citizens, and consequently rendered the civil law universally applicable, tended not only to widen the range of the old civil law and its peculiar distinctions, but to modify it. For example's sake, cives, peregrini, and Latini ceased to be a serious distinction. But when the Empire was divided, and a separate seat of rule existed at Constantinople, it was natural that in the eastern provinces, the natural and universal law, the jus gentium, should almost completely set aside the old civil law of the Romans. Such forms as mancipatio and in jure cessio were superseded. But the Twelve Tables continued to enjoy a formal authority until Justinian finally abolished it; and this among other things indicates that his reign marks the furthest limit of the old Roman world, and therefore would be a most suitable point from which to date the so-called Byzantine period. Again, among the distinctions of Roman law, one of the most venerable and fundamental was that of res mancipi and res nec mancipi; this also Justinian set aside.

As well as by the centralization of the Roman Empire in lands not Roman, the law was influenced by the spirit of the new religion. Offences before considered only moral came to be considered legal also; and on the other hand the harshness of the cold jura Romanae was modified by considerations of humanity and equity. Christian influences might easily be, and often are, exaggerated. The disuse of the slave system is often attributed to it; but while we cannot deny that Christianity tended to discourage slavery, and to lessen the evils of slavery by humanizing the relations with masters, it is certain that the economical conditions which changed the slave system into the colonate and serf system were the chief cause. Beliefs and sentiments generally adapt themselves to facts, and facts are in turn modified by beliefs. It would be a mistake to say that the religious sentiment adapted itself to circumstances; it would be equally a mistake to say that the circumstances adapted themselves to the sentiment. The course of things is generally a simultaneous and reciprocal process of adaptation of fact to sentiment and sentiment to fact.

We can perceive that between the age of Gaius and the age of Justinian the feeling that man is naturally free has become stronger, and this feeling was in the spirit of Christianity. Florentinus said that liberty was a natural faculty, whereas servitude was a constitution contrary to nature; and this view is adopted by Justinian in his Institutes. The ways in which a slave might be manumitted were increased in number by the Emperor; and he speaks of himself as the protector of liberty.

It is interesting to observe the criticism which has been made on the legal work of Justinian by one of the greatest German writers on Roman law, Rudolf von Jhering, in his Geist des romischen Rechts. Until Justinian's time, he says, Roman legislation cannot be reproached with invading the dominion of theoretical science; but Justinian's work is altogether conditioned by the principle of blending theory with practical legislation. The Digest and the Institutions are intended to be at once compendia and lawbooks. The disastrous result of such a proceeding is that science is influenced by authority; Justinian's authority tended to cow the theorist. “The example of the schoolmaster on the throne, or the legislator on the cathedra, which Justinian set, has been only too readily imitated in modern legislation. Science should leave to Caesar the things that are the Caesar's, but he should leave to science the things that are hers”.

IV

FIRST PERSIAN WAR

(528-532 AD)

The Emperor Justin adopted the policy of conciliating minor peoples who, dwelling on the borders of the Roman and Persian realms, were ready to sell or change their friendship or allegiance. Among others the Lazic prince Tzath, who had been the vassal of Persia, visited Constantinople, and became the vassal of New Rome. But Kobad was old, and he did not immediately declare war against the successor of Anastasius. On the contrary, he made the strange proposal—which recalls Arcadius' relations with Isdigerd—that Justin should adopt his son Chosroes. The request was refused, through the influence of the minister Proclus, who pointed out that by Roman law the adopted son would have a legal right to the father's inheritance, and that Persia might claim the Roman Empire. This literal deduction may strike us as amusingly far-fetched, but it is an instance of the ancient habit of pushing things to their extreme logical consequences. The refusal was resented by Kobad, but hostilities did not begin in Justin's lifetime, as a conspiracy of the Mazdakites, which led to their massacre, and an Iberian war occupied Kobad's attention.

When Justinian came to the throne he determined to found a new fortress close to Nisibis, and gave Belisarius, commandant in Daras, directions to that effect. As the building operations were progressing, a Persian army, 30,000 strong, under the command of Prince Xerxes, invaded Mesopotamia. The Romans, under several commanders who had joined forces, advanced against them, and were defeated in a disastrous battle. Tapharas, the commander of the Saracen auxiliaries, and Proclianus, duke of Phoenicia, were slain; Sebastian, the general of the Isaurian troops, Kutzis, the duke of Damascus, and the Count Basilius, were taken prisoners. Belisarius escaped, and the beginnings of the new fortress were left in the hands of the enemy. The victors had themselves experienced grievous losses, and soon retreated into their own territory; while Justinian, undismayed, sent garrisons and new captains to the fortresses of Amida, Constantina, Edessa, Suron, and Berrhoea. A new army was formed, consisting of Illyrians and Thracians, Scythians and Isaurians, and entrusted to Pompeius, perhaps the nephew of Anastasius. But nothing more occurred in the year 528, which closed with a severe winter.

The hostilities of 529 began in March with a plundering expedition of Persian and Saracen forces combined, under the guidance of the Saracen king Alamundar, who penetrated into Syria, almost to the walls of Antioch, and retreated so swiftly that the Romans could not reach him and force him to disgorge his booty. The only thing that was left for them to do was to make reprisals, and in the following month a corps of Phrygians plundered in the territories of the Persians and their Saracen allies. Belisarius was appointed at this time master of soldiers in the East (instead of Hypatius), but the rest of the year was drawn out in ineffectual negotiations.

The following year (530) was a year of glory for the Roman name, and for the general Belisarius, who, at the early age of twenty-five, won his first laurels by a victory at Daras. There was much talk of peace, but the great king did not really desire it, and the ambassador Rufinus waited in vain at Hierapolis. Belisarius, with the help of Hermogenes, who acted as a sort of informal coadjutor, collected at Daras an army of 25,000 mixed and undisciplined troops, largely consisting of Huns and Heruls; while Perozes, who had been appointed the mirran, or sole commander of the Persian army, arrived at Nisibis in June at the head of 40,000 soldiers, confident of victory. They advanced within twenty stadia of Daras, and the mirran sent to Belisarius a message redolent of oriental insolence—that, as he intended to bathe in the city on the morrow, a bath should be prepared for his pleasure.

The Romans did not intend to submit to the indignity or tediousness of a siege; they made preparations for battle, just outside the walls of the town. The Persians arrived punctually as their general signified, and stood for a whole day in line of battle without venturing to attack the Romans, who were drawn up in carefully arranged positions. In the evening they retired to their camp, but returned next morning, resolved not to let another clay pass without a decisive action, and found their enemy occupying the same positions as on the preceding day. For the apprehension of the details of the battle, the dispositions which the inventive genius of Belisarius had adopted must be explained.

About a stone's throw from the crate of Daras that looks toward Nisibis a deep trench was dug, interrupted by frequent ways for crossing. This trench, however, was not in a continuous right line; in fact, we may say that it consisted of five separate trenches. At either end of the central trench, which was parallel to the opposite wall of the city, a trench ran outwards almost at right angles; and where each of these perpendicular trenches or “horns” terminated, two other trenches were dug in opposite directions at right angles, and consequently almost parallel to the first trench. Between the central trench and the town Belisarius and Hermogenes were posted with the main body of their troops. On the left, behind the main ditch and near the left “horn”, a regiment of cavalry under Buzes, and 300 Heruls under their leader Pharas, were stationed close to a rising ground, which the Heruls occupied in the morning, at the suggestion of Pharas and with the approval of Belisarius. Outside the angle made by the outermost ditch and the horn were placed 600 Hunnic cavalry, under the Huns Sunicas and Aigan. The disposition on the right wing was exactly symmetrical. Troops under John (the son of Nicetas), Cyril, and Marcellus occupied the position corresponding to that occupied by Buzes on the left, while other squadrons of Hunnic cavalry, led by Simas and Askan, were posted on the extreme right.

Half of the Persian forces stood in a long line opposite to the Roman dispositions, the other half was kept in reserve at some distance in the rear, to replace the soldiers in front when they felt weary. Two generals, subordinate to the mirran, commanded the Persians, Baresmanas on the left wing and Pityazes on the right. The corps of Immortals, the flower of the army, was reserved for a supreme occasion. The details of the battle have been described so lucidly by a competent eye-witness that I cannot do better than reproduce the account of the secretary of Belisarius in a loose translation:

“Neither began the battle till midday. As soon as noon was past the barbarians began the action. They had reserved the engagement for this hour of the day because they were themselves in the habit of eating only in the eyeing, while the Romans ate at noontide, so that they counted on their offering a less vigorous resistance if they were attacked fasting. At first each side discharged volleys of arrows and the air was obscured with them; the barbarians shot more darts, but a great number of soldiers fell on both sides. Fresh relays of the barbarians were always coming up to the front, unperceived by their adversaries; yet the Romans had by no means the worst of it. For a wind blew in the faces of the Persians and hindered to a considerable degree their missiles from operating with effect. When both sides had expended all their arrows, they used their spears, hand to band. The left wing of the Romans was pressed most hardly. For the Cadisenes, who fought on the Persian right with Pityazes, had advanced suddenly in large numbers, and having routed their opponents, pressed on them valiantly as they fled, and slew many. When Sunicas and Aigan with their Huns saw this they rushed on the Cadisenes at full gallop. But Pharas and his Heruls, who were posted on the hill, were before them (the Huns) in falling on the rear of the enemy and performing marvellous exploits against the Cadisenes and the other troops. But when the Cadisenes saw the cavalry of Sunicas also coming against them from the side, they turned and fled. When the rout was conspicuous the Romans joined together and inflicted a great slaughter on the enemy.

“The mirran [meanwhile] secretly sent the Immortals with other regiments to the left wing. When Belisarius and Hermogenes saw them, they commanded Sunicas, Aigan, and their Huns, to go to the angle on the right where Simas and Askan were stationed, and placed behind them many of the troops that were under Belisarius’ special command. Then the left wing of the Persians, led by Baresmanas, along with the Immortals, attacked the Roman right wing at full speed. And the Romans, unable to withstand the onset, fled. Then those who were stationed in the angle (the Huns, etc.) attacked the pursuers with great ardor. And coming athwart the side of the Persians they cleft their line in two unequal portions, the larger number on the right and a few on the left. Among the latter was the standard-bearer of Baresmanas, whom Sunicas killed with his lance. The foremost of the Persian pursuers, apprehending their danger, turned from their pursuit of the fugitives to oppose the attackers. But this movement placed them between enemies on both sides, for the fugitive party perceived what was occurring and rallied. Then the other Persians and the corps of the Immortals, seeing their standard lowered and on the ground, rushed with Baresmanas against the Romans in that quarter. The Romans met them, and Sunicas slew Baresmanas, hurling him to earth from his horse. Hence the barbarians fell into great panic, and forgot their valor, and fled in utter disorder. And the Romans closed them in and slew about five thousand. And thus both armies were entirely set in motion; that of the Persians for retreat and that of the Romans for pursuit. All the infantry of the defeated army threw away their shields, and were caught and slain pell-mell. Yet the Romans pursued only for a short distance, for Belisarius and Hermogenes would not permit them to go further, lest the Persians, compelled by necessity, should turn and rout them if they followed rashly; and they deemed it sufficient to keep the victory untarnished, this being the first defeat experienced by the Persians for a long time past”.

About the same time the Roman arms were also successful in Persarmenia, where a victory was gained over an army of Persarmenians and Huns, which, if it had not been overshadowed by the success of Daras, would have probably been made more of by Byzantine historians.

After the conspicuous defeat which his army had experienced, Kobad was not disinclined to negotiate a peace, and embassies passed between the Persian and Roman courts; but at the last moment the persuasions and promises of fifty thousand Samaritans induced him to break off the negotiations on a trifling pretext. The Samaritans had revolted in 529, and the fifty thousand, who had escaped the massacre which attended the suppression of the rebellion, actuated by the desire of revenge, engaged to betray Jerusalem and Palestine to the foe of the Empire. Accordingly, in the year 531 hostilities were resumed, and at the suggestion of the Saracen Alamundar fifteen thousand Persian cavalry under Azareth, instead of invading Mesopotamia, crossed the Euphrates at Circesium, with a view to invading Syria. They proceeded along the banks of the river in a north-westerly direction to Callinicum, and, pitching their camp near Gabbulon, harried the surrounding districts.

Meanwhile Belisarius arrived from Daras with eight thousand men and took up his position at Chalcis, but did not attempt to hinder the devastations of the enemy. One of his captains, the Hun Sunicas, ventured to evade the general’s orders, and attacking a party of Persians, not only defeated them, but learned from the prisoners whom he took the Persian plan of campaign, and the intention of the foe to strike a blow at Antioch itself. Yet the success of Sunicas did not in the eyes of Belisarius atone for his disobedience, and Hermogenes, who arrived at this moment on the scene of action from Constantinople, arranged with difficulty the quarrel between the general and the captain. At length Belisarius ordered an advance against the enemy, who had meanwhile taken the fortress of Gabbulon and other places in the neighbourhood. Laden with booty, the Persians retreated and reached the point of the right Euphrates bank opposite to the city of Callinicum, where they were overtaken by the Romans. A battle was unavoidable, and on the 19th of April the armies engaged. What really took place on this unfortunate day was a matter of doubt even for contemporaries; some cast the blame on Belisarius, others accused the subordinate commanders of cowardice.

At Callinicum the course of the Euphrates is from west to east. The battle took place on the bank of the river, and as the Persians were stationed to the east of the Romans, their right wing and the Roman left were on the river. Belisarius and his cavalry occupied the centre; on the left were the infantry and the Hunnic cavalry under Sunicas and Simas; on the right were Phrygians and Isaurians and the Saracen auxiliaries under their king Arethas. The Persians began the action by a feigned retreat, which had the effect of drawing from their position the Hunnic cavalry on the left wing; they then attacked the Roman infantry, left unprotected, and tried to ride them down and press them into the river. But they were not as successful as they hoped, and on this side the battle was drawn. On the right Roman wing the fall of Apskal, the captain of the Phrygian troops, was followed by the flight of his soldiers; a panic ensued, and the Saracens acted like the Phrygians; then the Isaurians made for the river and swam over to an opposite island. How Belisarius acted, and what the Hun leaders Sunicas and Simas were doing in the meantime, we cannot determine. It was said, on the one hand, that Belisarius dismounted from his horse, rallied his soldiers, and made for a long time a brave stand against the charges of the Persian cavalry. On the other hand, this valiant behavior was attributed to Sunicas and Simas, and the general himself was accused of fleeing with the cowards and crossing to Callinicum. There is no sure evidence to make it probable that the defeat was due to Belisarius; it was hardly possible for him to cope against vastly greater numbers in a field where he had no natural or artificial defenses to support the bravery of his soldiers or his own skill; and perhaps an over-confident spirit in his army prevailed on him to risk a battle against his better judgment. But the rights and wrongs of the case are enveloped in obscurity, because the facts are known to us from writers whom we cannot acquit of the opposite tendencies to exonerate and inculpate Belisarius; yet it must be confessed that the adverse witness seems the more credible and is generally the more trustworthy of the two.

The Persians retreated, and the remnant of the Roman army was conveyed across the river to Callinicum. Hermogenes sent the news of the defeat to Justinian without delay, and the Emperor despatched Constantiolus to investigate the details of the battle and discover on whom the blame, if any, rested. The conclusions at which Constantiolus arrived resulted in the recall of Belisarius and the appointment of Mundus to the command of the eastern armies. During the interval of delay, Sittas, the general who was commanding in Armenia, provisionally commanded in Mesopotamia.

The arms of Mundus were attended with success. Two attempts of the Persians to take Martyropolis were thwarted, and they experienced a considerable defeat. But the death of the old king Kobad and the accession of his son Chosroes (September 531) led to the conclusion of “the endless peace” which was finally ratified in spring 532. The provisions were that New Rome should pay 11,000 lbs. of gold for the defense of the Caucasian passes; that the Roman headquarters were no longer to be at Daras but at Constantina, and that certain places were to be restored.

V

THE RECONQUEST OF AFRICA AND ITALY

Justinian's ideal, we are told by a contemporary, was to restore the grandeur of the old Roman Empire, and accordingly lie formed the project of reconquering the western lands, Africa and Italy, which had passed into the hands of German kings; a reconquest of Gaul can hardly have been thought of. The kingdom of Africa and the kingdom of Italy did not bear by any means the same relation to the Empire. The former was openly hostile, and connected by no tie, while the latter was nominally dependent. Before we give a brief account of the campaigns in which the Emperor's generals recovered Africa and made Italy really as well as nominally part of the Empire, we must take a glance at the condition of the Ostrogothic kingdom.

The whole policy of Theodoric was marked by a peculiar deference to things Roman; he combined the independence of a German king with a love of Roman civilization, and we can see this twofold spirit reflected in the letters written by his secretary Cassiodorus. He said in so many words to Anastasius that his kingdom was an imitation of the Roman polity, and his treatment of the Italians was a strong contrast to the conduct of the Vandals in Africa; it was a contrast even to that of the Visigoths in Spain. The Vandals took possession of all the land, the Visigoths seized two-thirds, the Ostrogoths reserved only one-third. Theodoric published an Edict (like the Breviarium of Alaric II), which was to determine the legal affairs of Roman subjects. His attitude to the Church was in the highest degree conciliatory. He did not, like Odovacar, attempt to interfere in ecclesiastical matters, but left to the Church the things of the Church. The schism that existed during the greater part of his reign between the bishops of Rome and the patriarchs of Constantinople rendered this policy successful; the Arian Theodoric’s abstention from interference contrasted with the ecclesiastical dictation of the Emperors, and the western Church was well contented with Ostrogothic rule. Here again Italy differed from Africa, where conflicts raged between the Catholics and their Arian conquerors. Theodoric's league with the Church favoured both those tendencies, which we pointed out as characterizing his policy; it brought him into friendly relation with the most enlightened and “civil” portions of his community, and it promoted the security and independence of his German kingdom. During his reign Italy enjoyed peace. He executed works for the material good of the country, repaired the Via Appia, drained the Pontine Marshes, and restored the walls of Rome.

His position really assumed a European importance. He not only conceived the idea of a Romano-German civilization in an independent Italy, but he conceived the idea of a system of German states in the West. He was connected by marriage with the royal houses of the Vandals, the Visigoths, the Burgundians, the Thuringians, and the Franks; he watched diligently the course of their mutual relations, and made it his object to preserve a balance of power. His judgment carried great weight at all the Teutonic courts, and he used to intervene to prevent the encroachments of the aggressive Franks. “He was an excellent observer of justice”, says Procopius, “and asserted the authority of the laws. He secured his provinces from the attacks of neighbouring barbarians, and achieved the culmination not only of prudence, but of bravery. He inflicted no injury on his subjects himself, and allowed no other to do so with impunity. In name Theodoric was a tyrant, in reality a true Emperor, second to none who shone in that position since the beginning of the Empire. Italians and Goths alike had the greatest affection for him”.

But everything depended on the personal ascendency of Theodoric, not only peace with foreign powers, but harmonious unity within the limits of Italy. The Roman and Gothic spirits were, as we have seen, united in the king himself, and his study was to impress this unity on his kingdom, to blend Gothic vigour with Roman culture, combining, in Platonic phrase, the gymnastical and musical elements which the two nations represented. But this process of amalgamation would have required a longer time than Theodoric could expect to live, and while it was yet in its initial stage an external force was necessary to prevent the yet unharmonised elements from violently conflicting. The will of Theodoric was such a force. But after his death, in 526, there was no adequate successor. His daughter Amalasuntha assumed the government as regent for her son Athalaric, and we soon behold the discordant elements flying asunder.

Amalasuntha, a woman of remarkable vigour and intelligence, was thoroughly Roman in her ideas and sympathies, and she displayed these tendencies both in political administration and in the education of the young prince, whom she caused to be carefully trained in mental studies. On the other hand, the Gothic nobles were exceedingly discontented; they wished their future king to be a true Goth like themselves, one who would not constrain them to act with over-punctilious justice towards their Roman fellow-subjects, and they despised the effeminate education chosen by his mother for Athalaric. They regarded gymnastic and music as inconsistent, freedom and civilization as discordant, and were able to appeal to the fact that Theodoric himself had never been educated. Amalasuntha was obliged to yield to their clamor, and Athalaric, glad to be freed from the restraints of school discipline, soon became devoted to the pleasures of sensuality. The position of Amalasuntha was critical, and although she steered her course through the perils that beset her with great dexterity, she was soon obliged to beg the Emperor Justinian to grant her a refuge at Constantinople, in case it should become necessary for her safety to leave Italy (533 AD)

From the position of affairs in 527 AD it might have seemed that no occasion would have been likely to arise for the serious interference of the Emperor in the affairs of the West, for Hilderic, a Catholic Christian and a friend of Justinian, with the blood of the Theodosian family in his veins, sat on the throne of Africa, and Amalasuntha governed Italy with marked favour to her Roman subjects. But this was only the external and momentary aspect of affairs. In Africa the Arian Vandals were not content with their king, and in Italy the barbarian nobles were not content with their queen. The Catholics in Africa, who had long suffered from the persecution of their Arian conquerors, would have been ready to embrace with open arms the protection of eastern Rome; and in Italy the conclusion of the schism between the Churches of the East and the West, which was brought about by the accession of the orthodox Justin, created a new element of danger to the Ostrogothic kingdom, as Theodoric soon became aware. This schism had been a sort of security that the Roman Church and the Italian subjects would not incline to desert their allegiance to Ostrogothic sovereigns and place themselves again under the Roman Emperor. Justin subjected to persecutions the Arian community in the East, which had strong Gothic proclivities, and Theodoric sent Pope John to Constantinople on a mission of threatening remonstrance. The embassy proved unsuccessful, and the Pope, when he returned to Ravenna, was cast into prison.

There was another element in the situation which must not be forgotten—an element which is a more efficient cause in producing wars than any superficial dispute. The Empire was not the same as it had been in the days of Zeno. Then it was involved in financial difficulties, which were increased by the ravages of the Ostrogoths; but through the prudent policy of the wise Anastasius it had recovered wealth, the sinews of power in a large empire. It was now in a position to assert in the West those rights which it had been obliged to waive in 476, and at the same time a sovereign acceded with the courage and ability to make the attempt.

All things instinctively tended to bring about the restoration of the Empire in the western Mediterranean. Justinian was to do for the German nations what the German nations had clone for the Roman Empire; he was to abolish those who were least fitted to survive, the Vandals and Ostrogoths, just as the Germans had reduced the extent of the Empire to those countries where it was best fitted to survive.

VANDALIC WAR.—The crisis which led to Justinian's first westward step occurred in 531 AD, when the throne of the unwarlike Hilderic was usurped by the warrior Gelimer, and Hilderic himself cast into prison. The Emperor addressed to Gelimer a letter of remonstrance on this act, appealing to the testament of Gaiseric, but Gelimer returned an insulting reply. Justinian was at this time engaged in a war with Persia, but peace was made before the end of the year, and the general Belisarius was recalled from Mesopotamia for the purpose of leading an expedition against the Vandals. The opposition of ministers, who enlarged on the dangers of the design—they had not forgotten the disastrous enterprise of Leo I—delayed the undertaking and it was not until June 533 AD that a fleet of five hundred ships set sail for Africa. The army consisted of 10,000 foot-soldiers and 5000 horse-soldiers, of whom many were federate barbarians. Belisarius was accompanied by his wife Antonina; and Procopius, his secretary, who kept a diary of his experiences, commemorates her foresight in storing a large number of jars of water, covered with sand, in the hold of the general's ship, and tells how this provision stood them in good stead in the long voyage from Zacynthus to Catania.

The Vandalic war was brief, and can be briefly related. It was decided by two battles, both of which were fought before the end of the year. Amalasuntha assisted the expedition by granting harbourage in Sicily to the fleet on its outward journey. Tripolis revolted on the arrival of the Romans, and Gelimer was completely unprepared for the attack. The power of the Vandals had waned since the days of Gaiseric, and they possessed no naval forces to annihilate the armament of Justinian, as they had once destroyed the doubly great fleet of Leo. Belisarius having landed at Caputvada, advanced slowly by land to Carthage, without opposition, taking care to maintain the strictest discipline in his army, while Gelimer, as soon as he heard of the proximity of the enemy, hastened to put Hilderic to death. The first battle was fought at ten miles from Carthage (Ad Decimum) in September, and it might have proved a defeat for the invaders but for the amiable imprudence of the Vandal king. Ammatas, the brother of Gelimer, was slain, and Gelimer’s affectionate grief made him forget the duties of a commander while he lamented and buried his brother. Belisarius took advantage of the delay, and the Vandals were put to rout. Two days later he entered Carthage, and his prudent discipline so strictly prohibited all pillage and violence that the city presented the same appearance as on an ordinary day.

Another brother of Gelimer, named Tzazo, had been sent some time previously to Sardinia, which had revolted from the Vandals. Gelimer, who had retreated to Bulla Regia, west of Carthage, now recalled him, and the letter of the king shows the despondent mood into which he had fallen: “All the old valor of the Vandals seems to have vanished, and all our old luck therewith ... Our only hope is you ... It will be some consolation at least in our misfortunes to feel that we endure them together”. The brothers marched towards Carthage together, and at Tricamaron, not far from the city, the decisive battle was fought. Gelimer lost a second brother, and the Vandals were utterly defeated. The king fled to the Numidian highlands and found refuge in a cave among the filthy Moors, where he remained with sorry cheer for a while, but soon surrendered at discretion and adorned the triumph of Belisarius at Constantinople. When he beheld the splendour of the imperial court he merely said, “Vanity of vanities, all is vanity”, a remark which, as Ranke notices, had a sort of historical signification. For along with Gelimer, Belisarius brought to Constantinople those vessels of gold of which Gaiseric had robbed Rome, and of which Titus had despoiled Jerusalem. They were part of the riches of the king to whom the words “Vanity of vanities” are traditionally attributed.

EVENTS IN AFRICA AFTER IMPERIAL RESTORATION.—It will be convenient to add here a short account of the troubles which agitated Africa after the re-establishment of Roman rule. The eunuch Solomon, who had been left as general by Belisarius to keep the Moors in check, was embarrassed not only by these troublesome invaders, whom he defeated in the battles of Mammas and Burgam, but by the mutinous behaviour of the Roman soldiers, who, dissatisfied with their condition in the newly conquered provinces where they had married the widows and daughters of the Vandals, and intolerant of the burdens of taxation which Justinian imposed upon them, conspired to murder Solomon. The plot failed, but the mutiny continued, and Solomon was obliged to flee to Sicily and seek the assistance of Belisarius, who had just completed the conquest of that island (March 536).

When Belisarius arrived at Carthage it was beleaguered by the rebels, who were led by Stutzas, and numbered 9000 in all, 1000& of these being Vandals. A few hundred Vandals seem to have escaped the sword and& chains of the Romans in the year of the conquest; and four hundred, who were being shipped to Syria for military duty there, succeeded in obtaining possession of a ship at Lesbos and returned to Africa, where they found circumstances in a favourable condition for adventurers. The arrival of Belisarius struck terror into the besiegers. They retired from the walls, and were pursued by the Roman general, who overtook them beyond the river Bagradas. A battle was fought in which the rebels were utterly defeated, and Belisarius, deeming his presence no longer necessary, returned to Sicily. But the rebellion was not extinguished, and soon after his departure five Roman generals were treacherously murdered by Stutzas. It was reserved for Germanus, the nephew of Justinian, to quell the revolt by the decisive victory of Scalae Veteres. From this time until the death of Solomon in 543, the African provinces, delivered from the presence of the Moors, who during the insurrection had taken up their abode in the land, were tolerably prosperous. During the prefecture of Sergius, who succeeded Solomon, the extinct rebellion came to life again under the old leader Stutzas, and was supported by the Moors; and this revival seems to have been chiefly due to the incompetence of the prefect. Areobindus, the husband of Promota, Justinian's niece, and John, the son of Sisinniolus, commanded the imperial army, and the rebels were routed at Sicca Venerea, Stutzas himself being slain by John (545). In the same year Areobindus succeeded Sergius as prefect, and was slain by Gontharis, the Roman duke of Numidia, who made himself tyrant of Africa. The death of Areobindus was avenged by the Armenian Artabanes, who was then appointed governor, but soon returned to Constantinople, with the hope of marrying Promota, his predecessor's widow, as will be related in another place.

GOTHIC WAR.—In countenancing and assisting the overthrow of the Vandals, Amalasuntha was really smoothing the way for the conquest of Sicily and Italy. Africa was the natural basis of operations for an Italian war, and the troubled course of events in Italy soon gave Justinian a good opportunity of beginning it. Amalasuntha had a cousin Theodabad, a man of liberal education but of avaricious character, who owned large estates in Etruria and regarded his neighbours’ possession of land as a personal injury to himself. He hated Queen Amalasuntha for keeping his greed within limits, and she entertained no high opinion of him, but a circumstance soon occurred which induced her to adopt the course of sharing with him the royal prerogative. This circumstance was the death of her son Athalaric. Such a division of power, which in the language of Cassiodorus was to be “a perfect harmony”, meant conflict and could not endure; in April 535 the queen was imprisoned by her colleague in an island of Lake Bolsena and soon afterwards murdered. As she was the friend and ally of Justinian, the moment for decisive action seemed to have come, and the Emperor’s envoy Peter declared against Theodabad a war without truce.

In the summer of 535 AD an army of 7500 men, under the command of Belisarius, sole consul for the year, to whom the fullest powers were committed, set sail from Constantinople for Sicily. Of this army three thousand, that is two-fifths, were Isaurians. The towns in Sicily, to the great chagrin of the Goths, joyfully opened their gates to the imperialists, with the exception of Palermo, which was besieged and taken, so that by the end of the year the island was entirely in the hands of the Romans, or, as their enemies called them, the Greeks. Theodabad was so impressed with these successes that he opened negotiations with Justinian, which were conducted by the ambassador Peter, who was still at the court of Ravenna. The king undertook to abdicate the crown if landed property, producing a certain annual revenue, were secured to him, and this offer, we need hardly say, Justinian gladly accepted. In these negotiations Theodabad adopted the part of a philosopher who deemed royalty of little worth, and who desired to avoid the loss of human life which a war would involve, while Justinian assumed the attitude of an emperor claiming his own. But the negotiations came to nothing for while the envoys were at Constantinople, the Roman general Mundus, who had occupied Dalmatia and taken Salona, was defeated and slain in a disastrous battle with an invading army of Goths, who retook the city of the Jader. This success renewed the confidence and changed the plans of Theodabad. When the envoys arrived in Ravenna, the king, supported by his Gothic nobles, drew back from his engagements, and the war began in earnest (536 AD). As for Dalmatia, its position was soon reversed again; Salona, the city of Diocletian, which had passed from the Romans in the days of Odovacar, was recovered by them, and the province became permanently part of the Empire.

Belisarius took Rhegium and marched on Naples. When that city refused to surrender, he might have been tempted to leave it for a time in order to advance to Rome, but an Isaurian discovered an unguarded ingress through an aqueduct, which rendered it possible to surprise the garrison by night. This success was of the utmost importance, and has even been considered by some historians to have decided the result of the whole undertaking. Belisarius was now master of southern Italy.

Having placed a garrison in Naples, he proceeded without delay to Rome, which he entered unopposed in December; though the inhabitants were too content with the Gothic rule, under which they had suffered little or no religious persecution, to give the newcomers a very enthusiastic welcome.

Theodabad had shown no activity, he had made no attempt to save Neapolis, so that the Goths were highly discontented with him; and when Witigis, whom he had appointed general, joined the army, the soldiers insisted that their leader should be also their king. Witigis was not unwilling. He was proclaimed thiudans, and his first act was to put Theodabad to death. In this election the principle of heredity, which the incapacity of Theodabad seemed to discredit, was disregarded by the soldiers, who declared that Theodoric's true kinsman was he who could imitate his deeds; but Witigis took the precaution of confirming his position by coercing Matasuntha, the daughter of Amalasuntha, to marry him, thereby connecting himself with the royal family. The new king was an elderly man, and would have made a good sergeant; but he was destitute of originality, destitute of genius. As the historian of Italy and her Invaders has well remarked, his election was due to the error of supposing “that respectability will serve instead of genius”.

At this time (the beginning of the war) the position of the Goths was complicated by the attitude of the Franks, who threatened to invade the northern provinces of the peninsula; and the presence of a part of the Gothic army was required to defend Provincia. Witigis made up his mind to avert the danger in the north first, and then devote all his resources to the war with the Roman invaders. Leaving Leudaris with 4000 soldiers to hold Rome, he marched with the main body of the army to Ravenna. There he married Matasuntha, he sent to Justinian an embassy treating for peace, and he arranged matters with the Franks by ceding the Ostrogothic possessions in southern Gaul (Provence and Dauphine) and paying the sum of £80,000. It was evident that the new king was guilty of a most imprudent surrender of opportunity by his expedition to Ravenna. This movement involved the loss of Rome, and we cannot perceive what compensatory advantage he gained thereby. It was not necessary for the army, or even for Witigis himself, to be present at Ravenna, either for the settlement with the Franks, or for the embassy to New Rome, or for his marriage. As far as we can judge of the situation, the thing that Witigis ought to have clone was to make the defenses of Rome sure.

Belisarius entered the city on the Tiber by one gate (porta Asinaria) on the 10th December, as the Goths of Leudaris went out by another (porta Flaminia); Leudaris himself remained and was taken prisoner. The evacuation by the Goths, without opposition to the Roman occupation, was due to two causes  the prestige which Belisarius had won by his former successes, and the fact that the Pope Silverius had invited him to Rome.

The second cause depended on the first, for it was not with any warm enthusiasm that the "Romans”, who had never suffered religious persecution from the Goths, welcomed the “Greeks”, but rather from fear. In spite of their veneration for the Roman Emperor, they looked upon his subjects rather as Greeks than as Romans, and the Goths were careful to speak of them as “Greeks”. The “Greeks”, on the other hand, called the Romans of Italy “Italians”.

Belisarius garrisoned three towns to the north of Rome, Narnia, Spoletium, and Perusia, and prepared Rome herself to sustain a siege. In this siege, which began in March 537 and lasted for a year and nine days, two circumstances stood him in good stead,—the strength of the Aurelian wall and his command of Sicily, the granary of Italy. The garrison amounted to five thousand men; the army of Witigis numbered fifteen thousand, and was divided in seven camps around the city. The first act of the besiegers was to cut off the city's supply of water by destroying all the aqueducts, eleven (according to Procopius, fourteen) in number. This was one of the greatest disasters that the Ostrogothic war brought upon Rome, which from having been one of the best supplied cities in the world, became one of the worst supplied, until, in the sixteenth century, Sixtus V provided for the convenience and health of Rome by renewing the aqueducts.

When the aqueducts were cut, there was no water to turn the corn mills which supplied the garrison with food. The inventive brain of Belisarius devised a curious and effective expedient. Close to a bridge (probably the Pons Aelius) through whose arch the stream bore down with considerable force, he stretched across the river tense ropes to which he attached two boats, separated by a space of two feet. Two mills were placed on each boat, and between the skiffs was suspended the water-wheel, which the current easily turned. A line of such boats was formed and a series of water-mills in the bed of the Tiber ground all the corn that was required. The endeavours of the Goths to disconcert this ingenious device and break the machines by throwing trees and corpses into the river were easily thwarted by Belisarius; he stretched across the stream chains of iron which formed an impassable barrier to all dangerous obstacles that might harm his boats or wheels.

In their first assaults the Goths were defeated with great loss, and in April a reinforcement of 1600 Slaves and Huns, who arrived from Constantinople, encouraged the defenders to organize a series of sallies. But after some successes they experienced a signal defeat, and acted thenceforth chiefly on the defensive. During the long blockade that followed, the Romans suffered from famine, and both parties from pestilence. The siege was varied by a truce of three months, and the inexplicable negligence of the Goths enabled the garrison to introduce provisions into the city.

At length, in March 538, the Goths raised the siege, and as they departed were pursued by the soldiers of Belisarius and utterly defeated at the Milvian bridge. The cause of the departure of the Goths was the capture of Rimini by John, the nephew of Vitalian, who had arrived four months before with troops from Byzantium, and had succeeded in entering Rome. During the truce Belisarius despatched him to Alba in the Apennines, whence, if the truce were broken, he was ordered to ravage the land and assault the cities of Picenum. The Goths violated the truce by forming two unsuccessful schemes to capture the city. The light of their torches as they attempted to penetrate the Aqua Virgo was observed by a watchful sentinel, and a Roman whom they hired to drug the sentries at the Flaminian Gate with a sleeping potion revealed the treachery to Belisarius. The operations of John in Picenum were a reply to this Gothic perfidy. It is interesting to note that, when he took Rimini, Matasuntha, the wife of Witigis, opened treasonable communications with him. Her sympathies, like her mother's, were more with the Romans than with the Goths; they were least of all with her husband, who, although he had slain Theodabad, represented his policy.

The siege and relief of Ariminum (Rimini) may be considered the third scene of the war, the sieges of Naples and Rome being the first and second. Belisarius sent two officers to John bearing the mandate that he was to withdraw with his band of two thousand Isaurians from Ariminum, and leave in it a nominal garrison taken from Ancona. John refused to obey, and Witigis soon afterwards appeared before the walls.

At this juncture a new element, of which John’s insubordinate refusal had been a sign, was introduced into the situation. Fresh troops arrived from Constantinople under the command of Narses the eunuch, a person of great ability and large influence at the Byzantine court. His instructions were to obey Belisarius in all things, so far as seemed consistent with the public weal. The exception, though it might read as a mere formality, was practically as comprehensive as an exception could be, and was an undisguised expression of doubt or mistrust in Belisarius’ conduct of the war. The meaning of Narses’ appointment was that the Emperor desired to have in Italy a check on Belisarius; the accrediting formula of Narses’ papers was an ingenious but patent way of putting it; the eunuch was really independent.

The affair of Ariminum offered to Narses an occasion to assert himself. Owing to want of provisions, John must soon surrender to the besiegers, and the question for Belisarius was whether he should relieve the place or not. An immediate march to Ariminum, while Auximum (Osimo) was still in the hands of the Goths, was a hazardous enterprise, and John's insubordination was not calculated to hasten the steps of the general. Belisarius and Narses met at Firmum, where Narses convinced the council of officers that circumstances demanded the relief of Ariminum, his chief argument being that the reduction of that important town would have a vast effect on the temper of the Goths, who were now thoroughly dispirited.

Belisarius, by adroit movements, succeeded in dispersing the Gothic beleaguerers and saving the city; but the affair had a prejudicial effect on the imperialists themselves. John said pointedly to Belisarius that he thanked Narses for the deliverance—an expression of the discord that divided the camp.

The result of this discord was the loss of Milan and the massacre of its inhabitants by the Goths. At the request of Datius, bishop of Mediolanum, who visited Rome during the last month of the siege, Belisarius had sent Mundilas to Liguria, and that officer had occupied Mediolanum and other cities with small garrisons. The Goths and a large body of Burgundians, sent by Theudebert, king of the Franks of Austrasia, invested Milan. Belisarius ordered John to relieve it, but John refused to move without the order of Narses, and Narses gave the order too late. Milan and Liguria were lost to the Goths in the early months of 539 AD.

Justinian was wise enough to see the disadvantages that were involved in the independent and antagonistic position of Narses, and to apprehend that the conquest of Italy depended on his placing implicit confidence in Belisarius. He remedied the mistake that he had committed, and recalled Narses; we may say that this step decided the result of the undertaking.

The latter part of the year 539 was marked by the sieges of Faesulae (Fiesole) and Auximum, and by the sanguinary invasion of the Franks, who were supposed to be at peace with both parties, but now, under King Theudibert, inflicted terrible slaughter on the Goths, and put the Romans to rout. A disease broke out in their army, and this, joined with the menaces and remonstrances of Belisarius, induced them to retire. Italy had long presented the appearance of a wilderness, waste and uncultivated in consequence of the war, and famine was decimating the Goths. Witigis began to look for foreign assistance. He not only entered into communication with Wacis, king of the Lombards, but sent two Ligurians to Chosroes Nushirvan to induce him to vex the eastern frontier of the Empire; for the Goths saw that the effectiveness of Justinian’s operations in the West was conditioned by the maintenance of peaceful relations in the East, as arranged by the treaty of 532. This attempt to negotiate with Persia, and the menace of hostility in that quarter, had the effect of disposing Justinian to conclude the war in Italy as speedily as possible.

The surrender of Faesulae and Auximum at the close of 539 prepared the way for the fall of Ravenna, which Belisarius immediately invested. At this juncture the situation at Ravenna was complicated, though not really determined, by various other interests in distant places. The first problem was whether Italy should be divided between Franks and Goths or between Goths and Romans. An embassy of the Franks waited on Witigis, making the former proposal; but this was counteracted by an embassy from Belisarius, to whose offer Witigis inclined. In the second place, the attitude of Chosroes, who was preparing to invade Syria, and the dangers of the Haemus peninsula, which was threatened by Hunnic inroads, affected the disposition of the Emperor, who proposed to Witigis the very moderate terms that he should reign as king in trans-Padane Italy, that the rest of the peninsula should be Roman, and that the royal treasure of the Goths should be equally divided. But Belisarius was dissatisfied with these terms, which seemed disproportionate to his success. A remarkable proposal of the Goths themselves made it possible for him to set them aside and convert the entire land of Italy into an imperial prefecture. This proposal was that Belisarius should himself assume the dignity of Emperor, and govern both the Goths and Romans. He did not reject the proposal, and the Goths surrendered on that understanding (spring 540). But the general's acquiescence was only a ruse to obtain unconditional mastery of the king and the capital of the Goths, and the idea of a revival of a separate dynasty in western Europe was not carried out. Witigis, the second king who had been vanquished by Belisarius, was conducted in triumph to Constantinople, and the treasures of the Ostrogothic palace were laid at the feet of Justinian.

We have seen that the attitude of the Franks was an element in Italian politics, and it seems desirable to say something in this place of the relations of the Franks and their Merovingian kings to the Empire. Though Gaul was really independent of the Empire in all respects, there were still theoretical ties which bound her to New Rome, and these theoretical ties influenced to some extent practical politics. Chlodwig, as we saw, was created honorary consul, and probably Patrician; he thus held a place in the hierarchy of the Empire, and one might almost look on him as the Catholic champion of Anastasius in the West against Arian Theodoric. The Merovingian sovereigns placed the word Vir inluster after their names, thus acknowledging that they belonged to the Roman system. Theudebert, the grandson of Chlodwig, was adopted by Justinian, and addresses him as father in two extant letters, just as Childebert in later days was the son of Maurice. In a contemporary Life of a certain Saint Trevirius we read of Gaul as “under the legal sway of the Empire” in the consulship of Justin (519 or 524); the theory of imperial Gaul was not yet a thing of the past.

From the consulate of Chlodwig until the year 539 the relations of the Empire with Gaul were friendly, but in that year Theudebert, the lord of Austrasia, and "son" of the Emperor, assumed a hostile attitude. He seems to have formed the idea of a confederacy of Teutonic nations against the Empire, but the execution of his plans was cut short by his death in 547. But neither the action of Theudebert nor that of his son Theudsbald some years later dissolved the ties of theoretical connection which bound the Frankish kingdoms of Gaul with the Bomana Empire.

SAINT BENEDICT.—It is appropriate to mention here that while Justinian and Belisarius were carrying on a war in Italy which was to affect profoundly the future of that country, Saint Benedict was founding his monastery at Monte Cassino, which in the Middle Ages was to be an important factor in medieval civilization. Benedict was born at Nursia, in the province of Valeria. Sent as a boy to study at Rome, he found his school companions sunk in corruption, and was so deeply disgusted at the presence and prevalence of vice that he fled from the world, at the age of fourteen. He went eastward, accompanied by his nurse, to the lakes at the sources of the Anio. Near Subiaco, having obtained a monk’s garment from a holy man, he set up his abode in a cave at the foot of a mountain. The temptations which he underwent, the perils which he escaped, his conflicts with the Ancient Enemy, and the legends which in the course of a few years had encompassed his name, may be read in the biography which was written of him by his admirer Pope Gregory the Great. In 510 he was made abbot of Vicovano, but the monks could not endure his severe principle of obedience; in other matters he was not over strict. In 528 he went southwards to Campania, and founded the cloister of Monte Cassino, midway between Rome and Naples. He died on 21st March 543. His monastic regula, supported by the authority of Pope Gregory the Great, ultimately became the recognized rule of all monastic institutions. This, however, did not immediately come to pass. It appears that it was in the pontificate of Gregory II, in the beginning of the eighth century, that it decidedly obtained the ascendency over the rules of other monastic reformers. For there were other monastic reformers even in the time of Benedict himself, for example, Aurelian and Caesarius at Arelate. The movement which Benedict represented in Italy was general and widespread, but the rules which he prescribed were more reasonable, mild, and moderate, notwithstanding his excessive personal austerity, than those of others.

VI

THE GREAT PLAGUE

At various periods of the world's history mankind has been visited by plagues on a great scale. It is noteworthy that they generally attend some moral change in the races which they visit—that they generally mark roughly a historical period. Thus the pestilence in the reign of Marcus Aurelius may be said to have accompanied the inauguration of a new epoch of the Roman Empire. The continuity of history is not broken, but in the last years of the second as in the third century we feel that we have passed into an atmosphere totally different from that of the earlier Empire. The Black Death of 1346 accompanied the inauguration of the Renaissance, and if a single date is desirable to mark the close of the Middle Ages, perhaps 1346 is the most suitable. The great pestilence of 747 AD was the concomitant of an important transition from the early semi-antique medievalism to medievalism proper in the Roman Empire, as I hope to show in its due place. The plague at Athens in the fifth century BC likewise accompanied the change from an old to a new spirit, from the old spirit which Aristophanes praises to the new spirit which he ridicules and breathes, from the old spirit of Herodotus, Aeschylus, and Pindar to the new spirit of Thucydides, Euripides, and Agathon.

The great plague of 542 AD similarly defines the beginning of a new period. If we may speak of watersheds in history, this plague marks the watershed of what we call the ancient and what we call the medieval age. The whole period from Constantine to Justinian was a preparation for the Middle Ages, but its character was more ancient than medieval; the period from Justinian to Constantine V was also a preparation for the Middle Ages, but it was far more medieval than ancient. The four centuries elapsing between Constantine I and Constantine V might be well considered a separate period, neither the ancient nor the medieval, and yet partaking of both characters, the twilight between the day and the night. But it is more convenient to divide it, and assign part of it to ancient history and part of it to medieval history. The question being at what point we are to divide it, I venture to say that the most natural point of division is the great plague in the sixth century.

For really nothing is more striking than the difference between the first half and the latter half of Justinian’s reign. We feel in 550 that we are moving in a completely other world than that of 540. The hope and cheerfulness with which his reign opened have vanished, and though the tasks willed in hours of insight are not surrendered, it is veritably in hours of gloom that they are fulfilled, and the Emperor himself, quite a changed man, seems to have forgotten his interest in them. Contemporaries noticed this change that had come upon Justinian, and it has been mentioned in a previous chapter.

The peculiarity of great plagues—that they are concomitants of moral or psychical changes—naturally suggests a problem, the data necessary for whose solution are veiled in obscurity. Are these pestilences to be placed in the same category as earthquakes, for example, which may destroy a city and thereby modify history, although there is no conceivable intrinsic connection between their own causes and the societies which they affect? In this case two alternatives are possible. Either the moral and spiritual change is in the first instance quite independent of the plague, and the synchronism is a pure accident, though when the plague has set in it may facilitate the changes by removing the old generation and transforming the population; or else the plague is the cause of the moral and spiritual revolution. The second alternative must be rejected, because in all cases we see the change at work before the appearance of the disease; and perhaps the first theory will recommend itself as reasonable.

Yet we must not ignore another possibility, which cannot be proved, but does not seem improbable, the possibility that the rise and spread of the plague may be intrinsically connected with the moral and spiritual changes which it so often accompanies. In the present century it is not necessary to remind the reader that, though we reject the unreasonable formula that mind is a mere function of matter, we cannot reject the physiological fact that all processes of the individual consciousness are accompanied by corresponding physical processes of cerebration, and that there is a continual action and reaction between the psychical and physical operations. We can hardly help concluding from this that great psychological—moral and spiritual—changes which transmute societies must be accompanied by biological changes, modifications in the adjustments of the functions of the various parts of the brain, and morphological changes in its configuration. Such cerebral modifications would be naturally and necessarily attended by changes of an imperceptible but actual kind in the whole organism. Now, as the spread of a disease must depend on the state of each patient's organism as well as on the germs which are propagated in the atmosphere, it is quite conceivable that the circumstance that the organisms of a people were undergoing a process of transformation might condition and determine the diffusion, if not the appearance, of a pestilence.

The great plague ravaged the Empire for four years. It began at Pelusium, whence it spread in two directions, throughout Egypt and into Palestine. Its presence in Persia caused Chosroes to retire prematurely from his campaign in 542, and in the spring of the same year it reached Constantinople, where it raged for four months. Procopius, the historian, an eye­witness of its course, has left us an account of it, which one sets beside the description of the plague at Athens by Thucydides, or that of the Black Death by Boccaccio. Procopius does not hesitate to reject all attempts to account for it by natural causes and to attribute its origin directly to the Deity. His reason for this scepticism or faith was that the visitation was universal, and therefore excluded a special cause. This circumstance especially impressed Procopius; the plague did not assail any particular race or class of men, nor prevail in any particular region, nor at any particular season of the year. Summer or winter, north or south, Greek or Arabian, washed or unwashed—of these distinctions the plague took no account; it pervaded the whole world. A man might climb to the top of a hill, it was there; or retire to the depth of a cavern, it was there also. If it passed by a spot, it was sure to return there again; and one condition at least it seemed to obey in the line of its route, for Procopius tells us that it spread from the coast inlandwards. The chief symptom of the disease was the swelling of the groin, whence it is called by Gregory of Tours lues inguinaria. Some of those who were attacked were warned by the sight of demon specters in human forms and by a feeling as if they were struck by an invisible hand. This feature was also characteristic of the plague of 747; it is a medieval trait. The plague of the age of Pericles was not accompanied by spectral apparitions, or at least the rational Thucydides does not condescend to record such puerilities. When the plague reached its height, 5000, it is said, perished daily, sometimes even 10,000. Justinian himself caught the infection, but recovered. Constantinople was in a pitiable condition. In many houses none remained to bury the dead, and Justinian appointed Theodoras, a referendarius, to provide for the interment of the neglected corpses. The feuds of the Blues and Greens were quenched in the common woe. The attitude of the light and dissolute to religion deserves mention. With the prospect of death before them, they cleansed their ways and piously frequented churches; but when they recovered and felt secure, they plunged headlong into their old amusements, and their last state was worse than the first. Procopius made the generalization that “this pestilence, whether by chance or providential design, strictly spared the most wicked”.

The plague aggravated the disastrous condition of the population, which had suffered from the pressure of taxation. It produced a stagnation of trade and a cessation of work. All customary occupations were broken off, and the market-places were empty save of corpse-bearers. The consequence was that Constantinople, always richly supplied, was in a state of famine, and bread was a great luxury.

In 558 there was another outbreak of this pestilential scourge in the East; it lurked and lingered in Europe long after the first grand visitation. In the last years of Justinian it produced a desolation in Liguria which was graphically described by Paul, the historian of the Lombards. The country seemed plunged in a primeval silence.

VII

THE FINAL CONQUEST OF ITALY AND THE CONQUEST OF SOUTH-EASTERN SPAIN

By the fall of Witigis and the capture of Ravenna the conquest of Italy was not completed. There were still germs of patriotism among the Ostrogoths, which the hasty departure of Belisarius left unstifled, to revive and cause many more years of labour to the Roman armies.

The town of Ticinum (Pavia) was still in the possession of the Goths, being held by Ildibad, whom they elected as their new king. The Roman command was divided among several generals, whom Belisarius, destined himself to conduct the Persian war, had left behind. A third factor in the situation was the introduction of the stringent financial system of the Empire, under the direction of a logothete. It cannot be said that annexation to the Empire was a blessing to the inhabitants of Italy; it entailed the desolations and miseries of five years of war, followed by the imposition of grinding taxes. These two circumstances, the divided command and the financial system, combined with the dissatisfaction of the Roman soldiers at not receiving the promotions and higher pay to which they were entitled, rendered a revival of Gothic hopes far from impossible. Alexander, the first logothete, who was called “Scissors” from his practice of clipping coins, “alienated the minds of the Italians from Justinian Augustus; and none of the soldiers were willing to undergo the hazard of war, but they advanced the cause of the enemy by intentional laziness”.  The attitude of the soldiers led to the inactivity of the generals; and in the meantime the power of Ildibad, who had been collecting the relics of the Goths and enlisting many dissatisfied Italians, was extending over Liguria and Venetia. The only general who tried to oppose him suffered a severe defeat.

In the following year Ildibad was murdered on account of a private quarrel, and after the short reign of a Rugian, named Eraric, who entered into negotiations with Justinian and dissatisfied his subjects, the hero of the second part of the Gothic war, Baduila or Totila, a nephew of Ildibad, was elected king of the Goths. In the history of this war the names of Witigis and Totila stand out, while that of Ildibad remains in obscurity—is read, and forgotten; but it should be remembered that at a critical juncture he sustained the life of the Ostrogothic nationality and energetically took advantage of the circumstances which favoured such a hope, to revive the cause of his people.

Within a year of Totila’s accession the position of Romans and Goths in Italy was reversed. An unsuccessful attempt to take Verona, made by the Roman generals, whom the rebukes of Justinian had stimulated to action, was followed by a Roman defeat in the battle of Faenza, in which a remarkable single combat is said to have taken place between a gigantic Goth and Artabazes, a Persian conspicuous for bravery. Another victory, achieved at Mugillo over John the nephew of Vitalian, laid the centre and south of Italy open to Totila’s attack. By the middle of 542 AD he had reduced and imposed taxes on Bruttii, Calabria, Apulia, Lucania, and he had begun the siege of Naples. That city surrendered in 543, and was treated with a spirit of humanity which Totila adopted as a principle of warfare. He put to death one of his praetorian guards (for the Goths had "praetorians") who had violated the daughter of a Calabrian. The criminal was a brave and popular man, and a number of distinguished Goths pleaded with Totila to save his life; but the king answered the deputation in a speech in which he laid down that the general policy and principles whereon the Gothic cause depended were involved in this particular case. The behaviour of Totila was all the more conspicuous, as it contrasted with the rapacity and incontinence in which the Roman leaders were at this time indulging.

After his success at Naples Totila undertook the siege of Hydruntum, or Otranto, and prepared also to besiege John, who had shut himself up in Rome. He addressed a sort of manifesto to the Roman senate, in which he appealed to the actual contrast between the government of Theodoric and Amalasuntha and that of the Greek logothetes; copies of this were posted up in Rome, and in consequence thereof John expelled the Arian clergy from the city.

The hold of the Empire on Italy had thus become extremely precarious. Totila’s star was in the ascendant. There was no ability, no energy, no unity on the side of the imperialists. Constantine, the commander at Ravenna, wrote to the Emperor a letter representing the situation, and it was resolved to permit Belisarius to return to the scene of his successes. But Belisarius had changed as well as the situation in Italy. It seems that he had fallen into disgrace at court, and had been saved from punishment by the influence of his wife Antonina with the Empress; but for these transactions we have only the dubious authority of the Secret History. A cloud at all events had fallen over him; he was not allowed to command in the Persian war, as he would have chosen. This personal experience had probably a considerable effect on his spirits; but we must chiefly notice that Justinian did not support him when he set out. The army, including his own special troops, were in Asia, and not permitted to accompany him; he was obliged to scour Thrace to collect, at his own expense, soldiers, whom he afterwards described as a “miserable squad”.

When we start with Belisarius on his second expedition to the West, the brightness of his day seems to have gone; in fact, after his departure from Ravenna in 540 we feel that the darkness is upon us, and that the Middle Ages have begun. Belisarius, in the period of his glory, as the champion of the Bomana Empire, threw a light as of the ancient world on the scene; but the gloom of his return to Italy, the appearance of Totila, who was a sort of “knight”, that king’s visit to Benedict, bringing us into contact with the saint whose shadow dominates the medieval centuries—all this gives the impression that the dim ages are beginning.

Belisarius was not invested with the highest rank; he was only comes stabuli, count of the stable. He arrived in Italy in the middle of 544, along with Vitalian, the master of soldiers in Illyricum, and took up his quarters at Ravenna. This was a mistake. Everything was adverse to him, and he did not possess his old energy. In May 545—during the whole intervening year all that had been done was to relieve the besieged garrisons of Hydruntum and Auximum, and to fortify Bisaurum (Besaro)—he was obliged to write to Justinian. His letter is a model of conciseness and directness, with a certain tinge of irony. He asked for three things, if the Emperor wished to affirm Roman dominion in Italy, (1) his own mounted lancers and foot-guards; (2) a large body of Huns and other barbarians; (3) money to pay the troops.

He sent John, the nephew of Vitalian, with this letter, binding him by solemn oath to hasten his return. It will be remembered that John had disobeyed Belisarius in the affair of Ariminum, and had acted on the side of Narses; he is a man who cannot be neglected in the history of the time, for ho played a considerable though subordinate part. On this occasion his visit to Byzantium brought him again into close connection with a party politically opposed to Belisarius. He married the daughter of the Emperor's nephew Germanus, and thus allied himself to the interests of the kin of Justinian. Belisarius, on the other hand, had attached himself to the directly opposed interests of Theodora and her relations by the arrangement of a marriage between his daughter Joannina and Anastasius, the grandson of the Empress.

Towards the end of the year, Totila, having taken several important towns in central Italy, including Spoletium, invested Rome, where Bessas was in command, and in the course of a few months reduced it to such extremities of hunger that the chief food of the inhabitants was cooked nettles. At last Bessas, after much importunity, allowed those inhabitants who were useless for fighting to depart.

Meanwhile John had returned from his nuptial festivities with a considerable army and joined Belisarius at Dyrrhachium. The new marriage connection emphasized the opposition of the generals, which was immediately displayed in diverging plans of warfare. The question at issue was the relief of Rome, Belisarius urging immediate action, and John insisting on the preliminary reduction of Calabria and Lucania. A compromise was made; each was to execute his own plan. John recovered the southern provinces without much difficulty, but the undertaking of Belisarius was more difficult, and proved unsuccessful.

The town of Portus, at the mouth of the Tiber, situated on the right bank and facing the fort of Ostia, was occupied by Belisarius, who was accompanied by his wife Antonina. It was all-important to supply the distressed garrison with food as soon as possible, and for this purpose it was necessary to break the boom which Totila had thrown across the Tiber. This boom consisted of long beams connecting, like a bridge, the two banks of the river at a narrow part of the stream. On each bank a wooden tower, manned with brave warriors, was erected to defend the boom. To overcome this obstacle Belisarius invented the following device. Two wide boats were firmly joined together and surmounted by a wooden tower considerably higher than those which dominated Totila’s fortification. On the top of the tower was placed a boat filled with pitch, sulphur, rosin, and other combustible substances. Two hundred fast vessels, protected by plank-walls pierced with holes for the discharge of missiles, were laden with corn and manned with brave men. Belisarius embarked himself in one of the vessels, having committed the care of Portus and his wife Antonina to his captain Isaac of Ameria, whom he enjoined not to stir from the place on any pretext. Portus was the only friendly position, on which, in case of need, he could fall back. The Roman ships, tugging the tower with them, sailed up the Tiber without opposition, until, not far from the bridge, they were met by an iron chain, which spanned the river, and some Goths set there to defend it. The Goths were easily scattered and the chain was removed. A firmer resistance was offered at the bridge, but the boat of inflammable materials was dexterously dropped on the tower of the right bank; the structure was enveloped in flames and almost 200 Goths were burnt alive. The arrows of the Romans completed the discomfiture of the enemy.

But the envy of fortune did not permit to Belisarius the success which seemed within his grasp. As he prepared to break the boom, the alarming news arrived that Isaac was taken. It appears that Isaac, hearing a rumour of the success of Belisarius, and desirous of emulating his glory, had disobeyed his orders, attacked Ostia, and been taken prisoner. Belisarius “thinking that all was over with Portus, his wife, and his cause, and that no place of refuge was left to fall back on, lost his presence of mind, a thing which had never befallen him before”. He issued orders for a hasty retreat, and when he reached Portus was relieved and exasperated to find that it was a false alarm. The excitement led to a fever which proved almost fatal to the disappointed general.

The blame of the capture of the city, which was achieved through the treachery of some Isaurian soldiers, seems partly to rest with the commandant Bessas, who was so avaricious as to enrich himself by trading in corn with the famished garrison and, engrossed in these practices, forgot his duty. Totila took Rome in the last month of 546 AD.

The behaviour of the Gothic soldiers in the captured city is a curious illustration of the nascent medieval feelings of the time. They were allowed by their king to plunder property and massacre men, but they were strictly prohibited from ravishing women. This prohibition did not rest on feelings of humanity, which would have prevented the worse evil of butchery, it rested on a religious feeling which regarded the interests of the Goths themselves and not those of the possible victims.

The speeches attributed to Totila on the occasion are also noteworthy. In his address to the Goths he repeats a point which he had insisted on before, the contrast between their present position and their position at the beginning of the war; then the Ostrogoths were numerous and rich, now they are few and poor; but then they suffered disaster on disaster, now they gain success after success. The cause of this contrast is that then they had acted unrighteously, while now their conduct is void of reproach; hence a change has taken place in the regard of the Deity. In his address to the Roman senators Totila contrasted in the usual manner the oppression of the “Greeks” with the mild government of the Goths, and doomed them to slavery in return for their deafness to his appeals.

Another notable feature in connection with this capture of Rome was Totila’s intention to destroy it, and the argument by which Belisarius, who was then lying ill at Portus, dissuaded him from his design. Belisarius appealed to the judgment that posterity and mankind would pass on the destruction of the Eternal City. He also urged the alternative: if you conquer, Rome preserved will be your best possession; if you are conquered, by the destruction of Rome your claims to clemency will be forfeited.

Totila and all his troops went southward to Lucania, and for forty days Rome was uninhabited. Then the Roman general re-occupied it and repaired the walls and fortifications, which Totila had partially dismantled. Totila had not anticipated this movement, and when he heard the news returned to retake the city. His attack, however, was unsuccessful, and he was obliged to withdraw to the citadel of Tibur.

But the position of Belisarius became untenable, and he was unable to cope with the Goths in the open field. He sailed to Tarentum, and made one last attempt to unite his forces with those of John in order to make a joint attack on the foe, but the attempt miscarried, and Belisarius desired nothing better than to be recalled to Constantinople. He had sent thither his wife, Antonina, to beg for further assistance in men and money; but on the 1st July 548 she lost an advocate by the death of Theodora, and then she requested that her husband should be recalled. Although Belisarius had not been able to conquer Totila, he was, nevertheless, a check on the Gothic operations; and after his recall the power of the Goths began to rise to its highest point. Totila besieged Rome again, and it was again delivered to him by Isaurian treachery; this was the third siege during the war. He occupied and ravaged Sicily, and built a large fleet with which he pillaged the coasts of Sardinia and Epirus. Thus he was now undisputed king of Italy, and possessed a naval power.

During the preceding years Justinian's heart had not been centred on the conquest of Italy ; all his thoughts and attention were engrossed in the theological controversy of the “three articles”. Nothing was done in 549 and 550, but in 550 an idea was conceived which, if it had been carried out, might have altered to some extent Italian history. Justinian surrendered the design, which Belisarius had momentarily accomplished, of making Italy a province or prefecture governed from New Rome, and formed a new plan—a sort of compromise—to unite the house of Theodoric with his own, so that Gotho-Roman Italy should be governed by a Gotho-Roman line. He appointed his nephew Germanus, who, now that Theodora was no longer alive, was in higher favour, general commander of the Italian armies, with full powers; and Germanus married Matasuntha, the widow of Witigis, and granddaughter of Theodoric. Great enthusiasm prevailed for the expedition of Germanus. The news thereof made the Goths waver in their allegiance to Totila, and the Italians were prepared to welcome him cordially. Numbers of recruits nocked to his standard.

But Germanus was not destined to rule in Italy as a colleague of Justinian. Efficient action in the Italian war was at this time seriously impeded by the ruinous invasions of Slaves and Huns, who depopulated the provinces of Illyricum and threatened the capital. In the early part of 550, while Germanus was making preparations for his Italian expedition, one of these incursions took place, and he received orders to turn aside to protect Thessalonica. He caught fever, and died; and with him perished the prospects of a restoration of the Amal line. After his death a son was born to Matasuntha, Germanus Posthumus, on whom Romanising Goths seem to have built hopes for the future; at least the Gothic history of Jordanes must be placed in the year 551, and it has been most plausibly argued by Schirren that it is a work with a tendency, written to induce Justinian to recognize the infant Germanus as Emperor and ruler of Italy.

In the same year Justinian decided to make a great final effort to reduce Italy and exterminate the Goths, whose very name, we are told, he hated. The problem was to find a general whom all would obey, and Justinian solved it well by the strange choice of a eunuch, seventy-five years old, his grand-chamberlain Narses, the same whose presence in Italy had sown dissensions among Belisarius’ officers in 538. By his high position at court and his influence with the Emperor he had immense authority, whereby he could secure united action in the warfare, and he was not stinted, as Belisarius had been, in the matter of funds.

Before Narses arrived two blows had been dealt to Totila, which so damped his spirits that he treated for peace. The Romans held only four places on the eastern coast of Italy, Ravenna, Ancona, Hydruntum, and Crotona. The Goths were besieging Ancona, but when it was already hard pressed, John, the nephew of Vitalian, and Valerian forced them to raise the siege by completely defeating the Gothic fleet off Sinigaglia. This was a severe blow to the naval power of the Goths, the deficiencies of whose sea craft were evident in the battle. The second misfortune was the loss of Sicily, from which they were driven by the Persarmenian Artabanes, and this was followed by the relief of Crotona early in the following year (552). Justinian would not listen to the Gothic proposals for peace. The situation was further perplexed by the attitude of the Franks, who held nearly all northern Italy, and invariably considered the difficulty of the Goths their own opportunity.

Narses’ army was chiefly composed of barbarians—Heruls, Lombards, Gepids, Huns, and Persians. His march into Italy, along the coast of Venetia, was opposed by both the Franks, who hated Lombards, and a band of Gothic troops under Teias; but it was successfully accomplished with the help of the ships which coasted slowly round, attending the progress of the army. Narses marched southward without delay, and Totila marched northward to meet him. The scene of the final battle (July or August 552) which decided the fate of Italy is disputed, some placing it near Sassoferrato, on the east side of the Via Flaminia, others near Scheggia, on the west side. Procopius, who was not present, is not sufficiently precise. Two circumstances may be noticed which helped to determine the result. The Romans anticipated the Goths in occupying a small hill which commanded the battle­field, and Totila, who trusted to his cavalry chiefly, made the mistake of enjoining on them to use no weapons but spears. Narses’ tactics consisted in strengthening his wings, on which he relied for the victory. The Gothic army was routed, and Totila received a mortal wound, from which he expired at about thirteen miles from the field. In the month of August the bloodstained garments of Totila arrived at New Rome, as a trophy of Narses' success.

After the victory the Lombard auxiliaries displayed their nature by acts of barbarous violence and licence, and it was found necessary to pay them their hire and conduct them out of Italy.

This victory decided the war, but Narses’ position was not yet firm. The imperialists in the meantime had taken Rome, and almost all the fortresses had been surrendered by the Gothic commandants. But the remnant of those who were defeated in the battle reunited under the general Teias. Him they elected king, and Narses was forced to fight once more near the Draco, in south Italy. Teias was slain (553), but the battle did not end with his death; it was renewed on the following day. Finally, however, the Goths proposed to conclude the war on condition that they should be allowed to leave Italy, and the proposal was agreed to. A thousand of the vanquished escaped to Pavia.

At this point the Ostrogothic war and the history of Procopius come to an end; but opposition was raised to the establishment of the imperial authority in Italy from another quarter.

Teias had in vain begged the king of the Franks, Theudebald, for assistance in the death-conflict, and had tried to bribe him by presenting him with a large part of the Gothic treasures; but Theudebald had given no succour. Now, however, he intervened, though not directly, by countenancing the Italian expedition of Leutharis and Bucelin, two Alemanni who were at his court. They entered Italy with 75,000 men to oppose the arms of Narses, and many Goths throughout Italy regarded them as deliverers. But others deemed the Romans preferable, as masters, to the Franks, and among those who held this view was Aligern, Teias’ brother, who was commander of the still uncaptured fortress of Cumae. He presented the keys of that town to Narses, who had withdrawn to Ravenna. Leutharis and his army were destroyed by a disease due to the climate, and Bucelin was completely defeated near Capua in an engagement, remarkable for a curious incident which threatened Narses with defeat, and, as it turned out, led to his victory. The eunuch punished with death a noble Herul for killing one of his own servants, and the act inflamed all the Heruls with indignation, as they claimed the right of dealing with their servants as they thought tit, without interference. They announced that they would take no part in the battle. This report induced the enemy, feeling assured of an easy victory, to attack their opponents with a careless and imprudent haste. But when Narses, who was quite prepared, called his troops to battle, the Heruls could not bring themselves to persist in executing their threat, and the strong-minded independence of Narses signally triumphed.

Thus the whole land of Italy, including the islands and the Istrian and Illyrian regions, which were connected with it under the old imperial administration, became once more part of the Roman Empire; and Narses was the first exarch or governor of the reconquered peninsula.

CONQUEST OF SOUTH-EASTERN SPAIN. — When he had conquered the Ostrogoths, Justinian proceeded to undertake hostilities against the Visigoths, and attempt to win back Spain as he had won back Italy. Theodoric, the king of the Visigoths, had held aloof from the struggle in the neighbouring-peninsula, and lent no aid to the East Goths, but Theudis, his successor, supported his nephew Ildibad, the Ostrogothic king, and fomented a rising against the Romans in Africa. He saw that the Teutonic kingdoms of the West were threatened by the reviving power of the Empire.

Of the operations of the Romans in Spain we have unluckily no consecutive account; we have only the scattered notices in the Chronicles of Isidore of Seville and John of Biclaro. It seems that, as in the case of the war in Africa and as in the case of the war in Italy, internal dissensions afforded a pretext for Roman interference. Athanagild headed a party which was opposed to King Agila, and this party called in the aid of the Patrician Liberius from Africa. Liberius crossed the straits and subdued the coast of Spain, as the Carthaginians had done in ancient times, and as the Saracens were to do at a later period. Corduba, Spanish Carthage—New Carthage, Carthagena, or Carthago Spartaria, as it was variously called,—Malaga, and Assidonia, with many places on the coast, passed once more into the hands of the Romans.

But the Goths were alarmed at the advance of the Romans in the south; the adherents of Agila patriotically slew him and joined the abler Athanagild, to make common cause against the invader. It was a somewhat parallel case to that of the Romans themselves in Africa in the year 429: there were then two parties in Africa, the party of Boniface and the party of Sigisvult, the general of Placidia; one or both of them called in the Vandal, and then they joined together to make common cause against the stranger. But the stand of the Goths against the Romans was more effectual than that of the Romans against the Vandals. After their first successes the imperialists do not seem to have acquired much more territory; they never penetrated really into the centre of Spain; and the reason was that the Roman Spaniards found the yoke of the Teuton king-lighter than the yoke of the Roman Emperor had formerly been. The heavy taxation, which was always imposed by New Rome, had given her a bad name among the provincials who had passed from under imperial domination and become subjects of Teutonic rulers.

When sixteen years, during which we lose the Spanish provinces from sight, had passed away, and when Justinian no longer reigned, there arose a great king among the Visigoths, by name Leovigild. He set it before him to drive the Romans from the Iberian peninsula, and, though he did not entirely succeed, he materially weakened their power. He recovered Malaga, Assidonia, and even Corduba.

The struggles of the Arian with the Catholic party in the Visigothic kingdom, the discord of Arian Leovigild with his Catholic son Hermenigild, the husband of the Frankish princess Ingundis, led to new hostilities with the Romans; for even as Athanagild had called in the help of Liberius, Hermenigild called in the help of “the Greeks”, as the historian of the Franks calls them. Leovigild, however, paralyzed this combination; Hermenigild surrendered, and was sent in exile to Valencia. This happened in 584; and in the same year the arms of the Visigoths were successful against the third power in the Peninsula, that of the Suevians, whose kingdom embraced Lusitania and Galicia. Suevia was made a province of the Gothic kingdom.

I am here anticipating the chronological order of events; but our knowledge of this chapter of Roman or Spanish history—for it has the two sides—is so small, and the events in this corner are so far removed from the general current of the history of the Empire, that I think it will be more convenient for the reader to have this episode of Baetica presented to him in continuity than in disconnected parcels.

At the beginning of the seventh century King Witterich, “a man strenuous in the art of arms, but nevertheless generally unsuccessful”, renewed the policy of Leovigild and the war against the Romans, with whom his predecessor, Reccared, famous in ecclesiastical history, had for the most part preserved peace. Witterich recovered Segontia, a town a little to the west of Gades; and Sisibut fought successfully against the Patrician Caesarius. All the towns which the Romans held to the east of the straits were recovered by the Goths, and the fact was recognized by Heraclius (615). Svinthila completed the work of Leovigild, Witterich, and Sisibut; all the other cities which were still imperial were taken (623), and thus the whole peninsula for the first time became Visigothic, for before Baetica was lost the existence of the Suevian kingdom curtailed the dominion of the Goths in Spain.

VIII

SECOND PERSIAN WAR

(540-545 A.D.)

When Chosroes Nushirvan, after his accession to the Persian throne, contracted the “endless peace” with Justinian, he had little idea what manner of man the Emperor was soon to prove himself to be. Within seven years from that time (532-539) Justinian had overthrown the Vandal kingdom of Africa, he had reduced the Moors, the subjection of the Ostrogothic lords of Italy was in prospect, Bosporus and the Crimean Goths were included in the circle of Roman sway, while the Homerites of southern Arabia acknowledged the supremacy of New Rome. Both his friends and his enemies said, with hate or admiration, “The whole earth cannot contain him; he is already scrutinizing the aether and the retreats beyond the ocean, if he may win some new world”. The eastern potentate might well apprehend danger to his own kingdom in the expansion of the Roman Empire by the reconquest of its lost provinces; and the interests of the German kings in the west and the Persian king in the east coincided, in so far as the aggrandizement of the Empire was inexpedient for both. We can consider it only natural that Chosroes should have seized or invented a pretext to renew hostilities, when it seemed but too possible that if Justinian were allowed to continue his career of conquest undisturbed the Romans might come with larger armies and increased might to extend their dominions in the East at the expense of the Sassanid empire.

Hostilities between the Persian Saracens of Hirah and the Roman Saracens of Ghassan supplied the desired pretext; it may be that Chosroes himself instigated the hostilities. The cause of contention between the Saracen tribes was a tract of land called Strata, to the south of Palmyra, a region barren of trees and fruit, scorched dry by the sun, and used as a pasture for sheep. Arethas the Ghassanide could appeal to the fact that the name Strata was Latin, and could adduce the testimony of the most venerable elders that the sheep-walk belonged to his tribe. Alamundar, the rival sheikh, contented himself with the more practical argument that for years back the shepherds had paid him tribute. Two arbitrators were sent by the Emperor, Strategius, minister of finances, and Summus, the duke of Palestine. This arbitration supplied Chosroes with a pretext, true or false, for breaking the peace. He alleged that Summus made treasonable offers to Alamundar, attempting to shake his allegiance to Persia; and he also professed to have in his possession a letter of Justinian to the Huns, urging them to invade his dominions.

About the same time pressure from without confirmed the thoughts of Chosroes in the direction which they had already taken. An embassy arrived from Witigis, king of the Goths, now hard pressed by Belisarius, and pleaded with Chosroes to act against the common enemy. The embassy consisted not of Goths, but of two Ligurians, one of whom pretended to be a bishop; they obtained an interpreter in Thrace, and succeeded in eluding the vigilance of the Romans on the frontiers. Another embassy arrived from Armenia making similar representations, deploring and execrating the Endless Peace, and denouncing the tyranny and exactions of Justinian, against whom they had revolted. The history of Armenia had been certainly unfortunate during the years that followed the peace. The first governor, Amazaspes, was accused by one Acacius of treachery, and, with the Emperor's consent, was slain by the accuser, who was himself appointed to succeed his victim.

Acacius was relentless in exacting a tribute of unprecedented magnitude (£18,000); and some Armenians, intolerant of his cruelty, slew him, and fled, when they had committed the deed, to a fortress called Pharangion. The Emperor immediately despatched Sittas, the master of soldiers per Armeniam, to recall the Armenians to a sense of obedience, and, when Sittas showed himself inclined to use the softer methods of persuasion, insisted that he should act with sterner vigour. A numerous tribe of the Armenians, called Apetiani, professed themselves ready to submit, if the safety of their property were guaranteed, and Sittas sent them a promise to that effect in writing. But unluckily the letter-carrier, not knowing the exact position of the territory of the Apetiani, lost his way in the intricate Armenian highlands; and while Sittas advanced with his troops to receive their submission, the Apetiani were ignorant that their proposal had been accepted, and looked with suspicion on the approaching army. Some of their number fell in by chance with Roman soldiers and were treated as enemies. Sittas, unaware that his communication had miscarried, was indignant that the promised submission was delayed; the Apetiani were put to the sword and their wives and children were slain in a cave. This severity, which might seem almost a breach of faith, exasperated the other tribes and confirmed them in their recalcitrant temper. But though Sittas was accidentally killed in an engagement soon afterwards, they found themselves unequal to cope with the Roman forces, which were then placed under the command of Buzes, and they decided to appeal to the Persian monarch. The servitude of their neighbours the Tzani and the imposition of a Roman duke over the Lazi of Colchis seemed to stamp the policy of Justinian as one of odious enormity.

Accordingly Chosroes, in the autumn of 539, decided to begin hostilities in the following spring, and did not deign to answer a pacific letter from the Roman Emperor, conveyed by the hand of a certain Anastasius, whom he retained an unwilling guest at the Persian court. The war which thus began lasted five years (540-545), and in each year the king himself took the field. He invaded Syria in 540, Colchis in 541, Commagene in 542; in 543 he began but did not carry out an expedition against the northern provinces; in 544 he invaded Mesopotamia; in 545 a peace for five years was concluded.

I. Chosroes Invasion of Syria, 540 AD

Avoiding Mesopotamia, Chosroes advanced northwards with a large army along the left bank of the Euphrates. He passed the triangle-shaped city of Circesium, but did not care to assault it, because it was too strong; while he disdained to delay at the town of Zenobia, named after the queen of Palmyra, because it was too insignificant. But when he approached Sura or Suron, situated on the Euphrates in that part of its course which flows from west to east, his horse neighed and stamped the ground; and the magi, who attended the credulous king, seized the incident as an omen that the city would be taken. On the first day of the siege the governor was slain, and on the second the bishop of the place visited the Persian camp in the name of the dispirited inhabitants, and implored Chosroes with tears to spare the town. He tried to appease the implacable foe with an offering of birds, wine, and bread, and engaged that the men of Sura would pay a sufficient ransom. Chosroes dissimulated the wrath he felt against the Surenes because they had not submitted immediately; he received the gifts and said that he would consult with the Persian nobles regarding the ransom; and he dismissed the bishop, who was well pleased with the interview, under the honourable escort of Persian notables, to whom the monarch had given secret instructions.

“Having given his directions to the escort, Chosroes ordered his army to stand in readiness, and to run at full speed to the city when he gave the signal. When they reached the walls the Persians saluted the bishop and stood outside; but the men of Sura, seeing him in high spirits and observing how he was escorted with great honour by the Persians, put aside all thoughts of suspicion, and, opening the gate wide, received their priest with clapping of hands and acclamation. And when all had passed within, the porters pushed the gate to shut it, but the Persians placed a stone, which they had provided, between the threshold and the gate. The porters pushed harder, but for all their violent exertions they could not succeed in forcing the gate into the threshold-groove. And they did not venture to throw it open again, as they apprehended that it was held by the enemy. Some say that it was a log of wood, not a stone, that was inserted by the Persians. The men of Sura had hardly discovered the guile, ere Chosroes had come with all his army and the Persians had forced open the gate. In a few moments the city was in the power of the enemy”. The houses were plundered; many of the inhabitants were slain, the rest were carried into slavery, and the city was burnt down to the ground. Then the Persian king dismissed Anastasius, bidding him inform the Emperor in what place he had left Chosroes the son of Kobad.

Perhaps it was merely avarice, perhaps it was the prayers of a captive named Euphemia, whose beauty attracted the desires of the conqueror, that induced Chosroes to treat with unexpected leniency the prisoners of Sura. He sent a message to Candidus, the bishop of Sergiopolis, suggesting that he should ransom the 12,000 captives for 200 lbs. of gold (15s. a head). As Candidus had not, and could not immediately obtain, the sum, he was allowed to stipulate in writing that he would pay it within a year's time, under penalty of paying double and resigning his bishopric. Few of the redeemed prisoners survived long the agitations and tortures they had undergone.

Meanwhile the Roman general Buzes was at Hierapolis. Nominally the command in the East was divided between Buzes and Belisarius; the Roman provinces beyond the Euphrates being assigned to the former, Syria and Asia Minor to the latter. But as Belisarius had not yet returned from Italy, the entire army was at the disposal of Buzes, the magister militum per Armeniam.

If we are to believe the account of a writer who was probably prejudiced, this general behaved in the most extraordinary manner. He collected the chief citizens of Hierapolis and pointed out to them that in case of a siege, which seemed imminent, the city would be less efficiently protected if all the forces remained within the walls, than if a small garrison defended it, and the main body of the troops, posted on the neighbouring heights, harassed the besiegers. Following up this plausible counsel, Buzes took the larger part of the army with him and vanished; and neither the inhabitants of Hierapolis nor the enemy could divine where he had hidden himself.

Informed of the presence of Chosroes in the Roman pro­vinces, Justinian despatched Germanus to Antioch, at the head of a small body of three hundred soldiers. The fortifications of the “Queen of the East” did not satisfy the careful inspection of Germanus, for although the lower parts of the city were adequately protected by the Orontes, which washed the bases of the houses, and the higher regions seemed secure on impregnable heights, there rose outside the walls adjacent to the citadel a broad rock, almost as lofty as the wall, which would inevitably present to the besiegers a fatal point of vantage. Competent engineers said that there would not be sufficient time before Chosroes’ arrival to remedy this defect by removing the rock or enclosing it within the walls. Accordingly Germanus, despairing of resistance, sent Megas, the bishop of Beroea, to divert the advance of Chosroes from Antioch by the influence of money or entreaties. Megas reached the Persian army as it was approaching Hierapolis, the city abandoned by Buzes, and was informed by the great king that it was his unalterable intention to subdue Syria and Cilicia. The bishop was constrained or induced to accompany the army to Hierapolis, which was strong enough to defy a siege, and was content to purchase immunity from the attempt by a payment equivalent to £90,000. Chosroes then consented to retire without assaulting Antioch on the receipt of 1000 lbs. of gold (£45,000), and Megas returned speedily with the good news, while the enemy proceeded more leisurely to Beroea. From this city the avarice of the Sassanid demanded double the amount he had exacted at Hierapolis; the Beroeans gave him half the sum, affirming that it was all they had; but the extortioner refused to be satisfied, and proceeded to demolish the city.

From Beroea he advanced to Antioch, and demanded the 1000 lbs. with which Megas had undertaken to redeem that city; and it is said that he would have been contented to receive a smaller sum. All the Antiochenes would probably have followed the example of a few prudent or timid persons, who left the city in good time, taking their belongings with them, had not the arrival of six thousand soldiers from Lebanon, led by Theoctistus and Molatzes, infused into their hearts a rash and unfortunate confidence. Julian, the private secretary of the Emperor, who had arrived at Antioch, bade the inhabitants resist the extortion; and Paul, the interpreter of Chosroes, who with friendly intentions counseled them to pay the money, was almost slain. Not content with defying the enemy by a refusal, the men of Antioch stood on their walls and loaded Chosroes with torrents of scurrilous abuse, which would have inflamed less intolerant monarchs than he.

The siege which ensued was short, but the defense at first was brave. Between the towers, which crowned the walls at intervals, platforms of wooden beams were suspended by ropes attached to the towers, that a greater number of defenders might man the walls at once. But during the fighting the ropes gave way and the suspended soldiers were precipitated, some without, some within the walls; the men in the towers were seized with panic and left their posts; and the defense of the city was abandoned except by a few young men, whom an honourable rivalry in the hippodrome had trained in vigour and bravery. The confusion was increased by a rush made to the gates, occasioned by a false report that Buzes was coming to the rescue; and a multitude of women and children were crushed or trampled to death. But the gate leading to the remote suburb of Daphne was purposely left unblocked by the Persians; it was Chosroes' prudent desire that the Roman soldiers and their officers should be allowed to leave the city unmolested; and some of the inhabitants escaped with the departing army. But the young men of the Circus factions made a valiant and hopeless stand against superior numbers; and the city was not entered without a considerable loss of life, which Chosroes pretended to deplore. It is said that two illustrious ladies cast themselves into the Orontes, to escape the cruelties of oriental licentiousness.

It was nearly three hundred years since Antioch had experienced the presence of a human foe, though it suffered frequently and grievously from the malignity of nature. The Sassanid Sapor had taken the city in the ill-starred reign of Valerian, but it was kindly dealt with then in comparison with its treatment by Chosroes. The cathedral was stripped of its wealth in gold and silver and its splendid marbles; all the other churches, many richly endowed, met the same fate, except that of St. Julian, which was exempted owing to the accident that it was honoured by the proximity of the ambassadors’ residences. Orders were given that the whole town should be burnt, and the sentence of the relentless conqueror was executed as far as was practicable.

While the work of demolition was being carried out, Chosroes was treating with the ambassadors of Justinian, and expressed himself ready to make peace, on condition that he received 5000 lbs. of gold, paid immediately, and an annual sum of 500 lbs. for the defense of the Caspian gates. While the ambassadors returned with this answer to Byzantium, Chosroes advanced to Seleucia, the port of Antioch, and looked upon the waters of the Mediterranean; it is related that he took a solitary bath in the sea and sacrificed to the sun. In returning he visited Daphne, which was not included in the fate of Antioch, and thence proceeded to Apamea, whose gates he was invited to enter with a guard of 200 soldiers. All the gold and silver in the town was collected to satisfy his greed, even to the jeweled case in which a piece of the true cross was reverently preserved. He was clement enough to spare the precious relic itself, which for him was devoid of value. The city of Chalcis purchased its safety by a sum of 200 lbs. of gold; and having exhausted the provinces to the west of the Euphrates, Chosroes decided to continue his campaign of extortion in Mesopotamia, and crossed the river at Obbane by a bridge of boats. Edessa, the great stronghold of western Mesopotamia, was too secure itself to fear a siege, but paid 200 lbs. of gold for the immunity of the surrounding territory from devastation.1 At Edessa, ambassadors arrived from Justinian, bearing his consent to the terms proposed by Chosroes; but, in spite of this, according to the Roman historian, the unscrupulous Persian did not shrink from making an attempt to take Daras on his homeward march.

The fortress of Daras, which Anastasius had erected to replace the long-lost Nisibis as an outpost in eastern Mesopotamia, was girt with two walls, between which stretched a space of fifty feet, devoted by the inhabitants to the pasture of domestic animals. The inner wall reached the marvellous elevation of sixty feet, while the towers superimposed at intervals were forty feet higher. A river, descending in a winding and rocky bed, and exempted by nature from all danger of diversion, flowed into the city; and not long before the arrival of Chosroes some physical disturbance of the ground had concealed its point of egress in a newly-formed whirlpool and buried its waters in the mazes of a subterranean passage. Thus, in case of a siege, while the beleaguered were well supplied, the beleaguerers stood in sore need of water.

Chosroes attacked the city on the western side, and burned the gates of the outer wall, but no Persian was bold enough to enter the interspace. He then began operations on the eastern side, the only side of the rock-bound city where digging was possible, and ran a mine under the outer wall. The vigilance of the besiegers was baffled until the subterranean passage had reached the foundations of the outer wall; but then, according to the story—which we must relegate to that region of history to which the visions of Alaric at Athens belong—a human or superhuman form in the guise of a Persian soldier advanced near the wall under the pretext of collecting discharged missiles, and while to the besiegers he seemed to be mocking the men on the battlements, he was really informing the besieged of the danger that was creeping upon them unawares. The Romans then, by the counsel of Theodoras, a clever engineer, dug a deep transverse trench between the two walls so as to intersect the line of the enemy's excavation; the Persian burrowers suddenly ran or fell into the Roman pit; those in front were slain, and the rest fled back unpursued through the dark passage. Disgusted at this failure, Chosroes raised the siege on receiving from the men of Daras 1000 lbs. of silver.

When he returned to Ctesiphon the victorious monarch erected a new city near his capital, on the model of Antioch, with whose spoils it was beautified, and settled therein the captive inhabitants of the original city, the remainder of whose days was perhaps more happily spent than if the generosity of the Edessenes had achieved its intention. The name of the new town, according to Persian authorities, was Rumia (Rome); according to Procopius it was called by the joint names of Chosroes and Antioch (Chosro-Antiocheia).

II. Chosroes invasion of Colchis, and Belisarius' campaign in Mesopotamia, 541 AD

From this time forth the kingdom of Lazica or Colchis was destined to play an important and tedious part in the wars between the Romans and Persians. This country seems to have been in those days far poorer than it is at present; the Lazi depended for corn, salt, and other necessary articles of consumption on Roman merchants, and gave in exchange skins and slaves; while “at present Mingrelia, though wretchedly cultivated, produces maize, millet, and barley in abundance; the trees are everywhere festooned with vines, which grow naturally, and yield a very tolerable wine; while salt is one of the main products of the neighbouring Georgia”. The Lazi were dependent on the Roman Empire, but the dependence consisted not in paying tribute but in committing the choice of their kings to the wisdom of the Roman Emperor. The nobles were in the habit of choosing wives among the Romans: Gobazes, the sovereign who invited Chosroes to enter his country, was the son of a Roman lady, and had served as a silentiary in the Byzantine palace. The Lazic kingdom was a useful barrier against the trans-Caucasian Scythian races, and the inhabitants defended the mountain passes without causing any outlay of men or money to the Empire.

But when the Persians seized Iberia it was considered necessary to secure the country which barred them from the sea by the protection of Roman soldiers, and the unpopular general Peter, originally a Persian slave, was not one to make the natives rejoice at the presence of their defenders. Peter's successor was Johannes Tzibos, a man of obscure station, whose unprincipled skill in raising money made him a useful tool to the Emperor. He was certainly an able man, for it was by his advice that Justinian built the maritime town of Petra, at a point of the Colchian coast considerably to the south of the mouth of the Phasis. Here he established a monopoly and oppressed the natives. It was no longer possible for the Lazi to deal directly with the traders and buy their corn and salt at a reasonable price; John Tzibos, perched in the fortress of Petra, acted as a sort of retail dealer, to whom both buyers and sellers were obliged to resort, and pay the highest or receive the lowest prices. In justification of this monopoly it may be remarked that it was the only practicable way of imposing a tax on the Lazi; and the imposition of a tax might have been deemed a necessary and just compensation for the defense of the country, notwithstanding the facts that it was garrisoned solely in Roman interests, and that the garrison itself was unwelcome to the natives.

Exasperated by these grievances, Gobazes, the king of Lazica, sent an embassy to Chosroes, inviting him to recover a venerable kingdom, and pointing out that if he expelled the Romans from Lazica he would have access to the Euxine, whose waters could convey his forces against the palace at Byzantium, while he would have an opportunity of establishing a connection with those other enemies of Rome, the Huns of Europe. Chosroes consented to the proposals of the ambassadors; and keeping his real intention secret, pretended that pressing affairs required his presence in Iberia.

Under the guidance of the envoys, Chosroes and his army passed into the devious woods and difficult hill-passes of Colchis, cutting down as they went lofty and leafy trees, which hung in dense array on the steep acclivities, and using the trunks to smooth or render passable rugged or dangerous places. When they had penetrated to the middle of the country, they were met by Gobazes, who paid oriental homage to the great king. The chief object was to capture Petra, the stronghold of Roman power, and dislodge the retail dealer, as Chosroes contemptuously termed the monopolist, Johannes Tzibos. A detachment of the army under Aniabedes was sent on in advance to attack the fortress; and when this officer arrived before the walls he found indeed the rates shut, but the place seemed totally deserted, and not a trace of an inhabitant was visible. A messenger was sent to inform Chosroes of this surprise; the rest of the army hastened to the spot; a battering-ram was applied to the gate, while the monarch watched the proceedings from the top of an adjacent hill. Suddenly the gate flew open, and a multitude of Roman soldiers rushing forth overwhelmed those Persians who were applying the engine, and, having killed many others who were drawn up hard by, speedily retreated and closed the gate. The unfortunate Aniabedes (according to others, the officer who was charged with the operation of the battering-ram) was crucified for the crime of being vanquished by a retail dealer.

A regular siege now began. It was inevitable that Petra should be captured, says our historian Procopius, displaying a curious idea of causes and effects, and therefore Johannes, the governor, was slain by an accidental missile, and the garrison, deprived of their commander, became careless and lax. On one side Petra is protected by the sea, landwards inaccessible cliffs defy the skill or bravery of an assailant, save only where one narrow entrance divides the line of steep cliffs and admits of access from the plain. This gap between the rocks was filled by a long wall, the ends of which were dominated by towers constructed in an unusual manner, for instead of being hollow all the way up, they were made of solid stone to a considerable height, so that they could not be shaken by the most powerful engine. But oriental inventiveness undermined these wonders of solidity. A mine was bored under the base of one of the towers, the lower stones were removed and replaced by wood, the demolishing force of fire loosened the upper layers of stones, and the tower fell, the Romans stationed in it escaping just in time. This success was decisive, as the besieged recognized; they readily capitulated, and the victors did not lay hands on any property in the fortress save the possessions of the defunct governor. Having placed a Persian garrison in Petra, Chosroes remained no longer in Lazica, for the news had reached him that Belisarius was about to invade Assyria, and he hurried back to defend his dominions.

Belisarius, accompanied by all the Goths whom he had led in triumph from Italy, except the Gothic king himself, had proceeded in the spring to take command of the eastern army in Mesopotamia. Having found out by spies that no invasion was meditated by Chosroes, whose presence was demanded in Iberia—the design on Lazica was kept effectually concealed— the Roman general determined to lead the whole army, along with the auxiliary Saracens of Arethas, into the confines of Persian territory. What strikes us about the campaign is that although Belisarius was chief in command he never seems to have ventured or cared to execute his strategic plans with­out consulting the advice of the other officers. It is difficult to say whether this was due to distrust of his own judgment and the reflection that many of the subordinate generals were more experienced in Mesopotamian geography and Persian warfare than himself,2 or to a fear that some of the leaders in an army composed of soldiers of many races might prove refractory and impatient of too peremptory orders. At Daras a council of war was held; all the officers declared for an immediate invasion except Theoctistus and Ehecithancus, the captains of contingents from Lebanon, who apprehended that the Saracen Alamundar might take advantage of their absence to invade Syria and Phoenicia; but when Belisarius reminded them that it was now the summer solstice, and that it was the Saracen custom to spend sixty days from that date in religious devotion, they withdrew their objection on condition that they were to return to Syria two months thence.

The army marched towards Nisibis, and some murmurs arose when Belisarius, instead of advancing to the walls, halted at a distance of about five miles away. Having justified his action in a speech, he sent forward Peter, and John the duke of Mesopotamia, ordering them to approach within about a mile of the city. He reminded them that the Persian garrison, commanded by the able general Nabedes, would be more likely to attack them at noonday than at any other hour, as the Romans were wont to dine then, and the Persians in the evening. But under the heat of the meridian sun, the soldiers of Peter, yielding to a natural lassitude, laid aside their arms and carelessly employed themselves in eating the cucumbers which grew around. The watchful garrison sallied forth from the city, but as there was more than a mile's distance to traverse, the Romans had time to assume their arms, though not to form in an orderly array. The Persian onslaught was successful, the standard of John was taken, and fifty Romans were slain. But all was not yet lost. Belisarius was hastening to the scene before Peter's messenger had time to reach him; the long lances of the Goths retrieved the slender loss, and 150 Persians strewed the ground. But Nisibis was too strong to be attacked, and the army moved forward to the fortress of Sisaurani, where its assault was at first repulsed with loss. Belisarius decided to invest the place, but as the Saracens were useless for siege warfare, he sent Arethas and his troops, accompanied by 1200 guardsmen, to invade and harry Assyria, intending to cross the Tigris himself when he had taken the fort. The siege was of short duration, for the garrison was not supplied with provisions, and soon consented to surrender; all the Christians were dismissed free, the fire-worshippers were sent to Byzantium to await the Emperor's pleasure, and the fort was leveled to the ground.

Meanwhile the plundering expedition of Arethas was successful, but he played his allies false. Desiring to retain all the spoils for himself, he invented a story to rid himself of the Roman guardsmen who accompanied him, and he sent no information to Belisarius. This was not the only cause of anxiety that vexed that general's mind. The Roman, especially the Thracian, soldiers were not inured to and could not endure the intense heat of the dry Mesopotamian climate in mid­summer, and disease broke out in the army, demoralized by physical exhaustion. All the soldiers were anxious to return to more clement districts, and as it was already August, the captains of the troops of Lebanon were uneasy, fancying that Alamundar might be advancing to plunder their homes. There was nothing to be done but yield to the prevailing wish, which was shared by all the generals. It cannot be said that the campaign of Belisarius accomplished much to set off against the acquisition of Petra by the Persians.

III.

Chosroes Invasion of Commagene, 542 AD

The first act of Chosroes when he crossed the Euphrates in spring was to send 6000 soldiers to besiege the town of Sergiopolis because the bishop Candidus, who had undertaken to pay the ransom of the Surene captives two years before, was unable to collect the amount, and found Justinian deaf to his appeals for aid. But the town lay in a desert, and the besiegers were soon obliged to abandon the attempt in consequence of the drought. It was not the Persian's intention to waste his time in despoiling the province Euphratensis or Commagene; he purposed to invade Palestine, and plunder the treasures of Jerusalem. But this exploit was reserved for his grandson of the same name, and the invader returned to his kingdom having accomplished almost nothing. This speedy retreat was probably due to the outbreak of the plague in Persia, though the Roman historian attributes it to the address of Belisarius.

Belisarius travelled by post-horses (veredi) from Constantinople to the Euphratesian province, and taking up his quarters at Europus on the Euphrates, close to Carchemish, the ancient capital of the Hittites, he collected there the bulk of the troops who were dispersed throughout the province in its various cities. Chosroes was curious about the personality of Belisarius, of whom he had heard so much—the conqueror of the Vandals, the conqueror of the Goths, who had led two fallen monarchs in triumph to the feet of Justinian. Accordingly he sent Abandanes as an envoy to the Roman general, on the pretext of learning why Justinian had not sent ambassadors to negotiate a peace.

Belisarius did not mistake the true nature of Abandanes’ mission, and determined to make an impression. Having sent a body of one thousand cavalry to the left bank of the river, to harass the enemy if they attempted to cross, he selected six thousand tall and comely men from his army and proceeded with them to a place at some distance from his camp, as if on a hunting expedition. He had constructed for himself a pavilion of thick canvas, which he set up, as in a desert spot, and when he knew that the ambassador was approaching, he arranged his soldiers with careful negligence. On either side of him stood Thracians and Illyrians, a little farther off the Goths, then Heruls, Vandals, and Moors; all were arrayed in close-fitting linen tunics and drawers, without a cloak or epomis to disguise the symmetry of their forms, and, like hunters, each carried a whip as well as some weapon, a sword, an axe, or a bow. They did not stand still, as men on duty, but moved carelessly about, glancing idly and indifferently at the Persian envoy, who soon arrived and marveled.

To Abandanes' complaint that "the Caesar" had not sent an embassy to his master, Belisarius answered, as one amused, "It is not the habit of men to transact their affairs as Chosroes has transacted his. Others, when aggrieved, send an embassy first, and if they fail in obtaining satisfaction, resort to war; but he attacks and then talks of peace". The presence and bearing of the Roman general, and the appearance of his followers, hunting indifferently at a short distance from the Persian camp without any precautions, made a profound impression on Abandanes, and he persuaded his master to abandon the proposed expedition; Chosroes may have reflected that the triumph of a king over a general would be no humiliation for the general, while the triumph of a mere general over a king would be very humiliating for the king; such at least is the colouring that the general's historian put on the king's retreat. According to the same authority, Chosroes hesitated to risk the passage of the Euphrates while the enemy were so near, but Belisarius, with his smaller numbers, did not entertain the intention of obstructing him, and a truce was made, Johannes, son of Basil, being delivered, an unwilling hostage, to Chosroes. Having reached the other bank, the Persians turned aside to take and demolish Callinicum, the Coblenz of the Euphrates, which fell an easy prey to their assault, as the walls were in process of renovation at the time. This retreat of Chosroes, according to Procopius, procured for Belisarius greater glory than he had won by his victories in Africa and Italy.

But the account of Procopius, which coming from a less illustrious historian would be rejected on account of internal improbability, cannot be accepted with confidence. It displays such a marked tendency to glorify his favorite and friend Belisarius, that it can hardly be received as a candid unvarnished account of the actual transactions. Besides, there is a certain inconsistency. If Chosroes retired for fear of Belisarius, as Procopius would have us believe, why was it he who received the hostage, and how did he venture to take Callinicum? It might be said that these were devices, connived at by Belisarius, to keep up the dignity of a king; but as there actually existed a potent cause, unconnected with the Romans, to induce his return to Persia, namely the outbreak of the plague, we can hardly hesitate to assume that this was its true motive.

IV

The Roman Invasion of Persarmenia, 543 AD

In spite of the plague Chosroes set forth in the following spring to invade Roman Armenia. He advanced into the district of Azerbiyan (Atropatene), and halted at the great shrine of Persian fire-worship, where the magi kept alive an eternal flame, which Procopius wishes to identify with the fire of Roman Vesta. Here the Persian monarch waited for some time, having received a message that two ambassadors were on their way to him, with instructions from "the Caesar". But the ambassadors did not arrive, because one of them fell ill by the road; and Chosroes did not pursue his northward journey, because a plague broke out in his army. The Persian general Nabedes sent a Christian bishop named Eudubius to Valerian, the Roman general in Armenia, with complaints that the expected embassy had not appeared. Eudubius was accompanied by his brother, who secretly communicated to Valerian the valuable information that Chosroes was just then encompassed by perplexities, the spread of the plague, and the revolt of one of his sons. It was a favourable opportunity for the Romans, and Justinian gave command that all the generals stationed in the East should combine to invade Persarmenia.

Martin was the master of soldiers in the East; he does not appear, however, to have possessed much actual authority over the other commanders. They at first encamped in the same district, but did not unite their forces, which in all amounted to about thirty thousand men. Martin himself, with Ildiger and Theoctistus, encamped at Kitharizon, about four days' march from Theodosiopolis; the troops of Peter and Adolios took up their quarters in the vicinity; while Valerian, the general of Armenia, stationed himself close to Theodosiopolis and was joined there by Narses and a regiment of Heruls and Armenians. The Emperor's nephew Justus and some other commanders remained during the campaign far to the south in the neighbourhood of Martyropolis, where they made incursions of no great importance.

At first the various generals made separate inroads, but they ultimately united their regiments in the spacious plain of Dubis, eight days from Theodosiopolis. This plain, well suited for equestrian exercise, and richly populated, was a famous rendezvous for traders of all nations, Indian, Iberian, Persian, and Roman. About fifteen miles from Dubis there was a steep mountain, on whose side was perched a village called Anglon, protected by a strong fortress. Here the Persian general Nabedes, with four thousand soldiers, had taken up an almost impregnable position, blocking the precipitous streets of the village with stones and wagons. The ranks of the Roman army, as it marched to Anglon, fell into disorder; the want of union among the generals, who acknowledged no supreme leader, led to confusion in the line of march; mixed bodies of soldiers and sutlers turned aside to plunder; and the security which they displayed might have warranted a spectator in prophesying a speedy reverse. As they drew near to the fortress, an attempt was made to marshal the somewhat demoralized troops in the form of two wings and a centre. The centre was commanded by the Master of Soldiers, the right wing by Peter, the left by Valerian; and all advanced in irregular and wavering line, on account of the roughness of the ground. The best course for the Persians was obviously to act on the defensive. Narses and his Heruls, who were probably on the left wing with Valerian, were the first to attack the foes and to press them back into the fort. Drawn on by the retreating enemy through the narrow village streets, they were suddenly attacked on the flank and in the rear by an ambush of Persians who had concealed themselves in the houses. The valiant Narses was wounded in the temple; his brother succeeded in carrying him from the fray, but the wound proved mortal. This repulse of the foremost spread the alarm to the regiments that were coming up behind; Nabedes comprehended that the moment had arrived to take the offensive and let loose his soldiers on the panic-stricken ranks of the assailants; and all the Heruls, who fought according to their wont without helmets or breast­plates, fell before the charge of the Persians. The Romans did not tarry; they cast their arms away and fled in wild confusion, and the mounted soldiers galloped so fast that few horses survived the flight; but the Persians, apprehensive of an ambush, did not pursue.

Never, says Procopius, did the Romans experience such a great disaster. This exaggeration makes us seriously inclined to suspect the accuracy of Procopius' account of this campaign. We can hardly avoid detecting in his narrative a desire to place the generals in as bad a light as possible, just as in his description of the hostilities of the preceding year he manifested a marked tendency to place the behaviour of his hero Belisarius in as fair a light as possible. In fact he seems to wish to draw a strong and striking contrast between a brilliant campaign in 542 and a miserable failure in 543. We have seen reason to doubt the exceptional brilliancy of Belisarius achievement; and we may be disposed to question the statement that the defeat at Anglon was overwhelming, and the insinuation that the generals were incompetent.

V.

Chosroes Invasion of Mesopotamia; Siege of Edessa— 544 AD

His failure at Edessa in 540 rankled in the mind of the Sassanid monarch; he determined to retrieve it in 544. The siege of this important fortress, the key to Roman Mesopotamia, is one of the most interesting in the siege warfare of the sixth century. The place was so strong that Chosroes would have been glad to avoid the risk of a second failure, and he proposed to the inhabitants that they should pay him an immense sum or allow him to take all the riches in the city. His proposal was refused, though if he had made a reasonable demand it would have been agreed to; and the Persian army encamped at somewhat less than a mile from the walls. Three experienced generals, Peter, Martin, and Peranius, were stationed in Edessa at this time.

On the eighth day from the beginning of the siege, Chosroes caused a large number of hewn trees to be strewn on the ground in the shape of an immense square, at about a stone's throw from the city; earth was heaped over the trees, so as to form a flat mound, and stones, not cut smooth and regular as for building, but rough hewn, were piled on the top, additional strength being secured by a layer of wooden beams placed between the stones and the earth. It required many clays to raise this mound to a height sufficient to overtop the walls. At first the workmen were harassed by a sally of Huns, one of whom, named Argek, slew twenty-seven with his own hand. This could not be repeated, as henceforward a guard of Persians stood by to protect the builders. As the work went on, the mound seems to have been extended in breadth as well as in height, and to have approached closer to the walls, so that the workmen came within range of the archers who manned the battlements, but they protected themselves by thick and long strips of canvas, woven of goat hair, which were hung on poles, and proved an adequate shield. Foiled in their attempts to obstruct the progress of the threatening pile, which they saw rising daily higher and higher, the besieged sent an embassy to Chosroes. The spokesman of the ambassadors was the physician Stephen, a native of Edessa, who had enjoyed the friendship and favour of Kobad, whom he had healed of a disease, and had superintended the education of Chosroes himself. But even he, influential though he was, could not obtain more than the choice of three alternatives—the surrender of Peter and Peranius, who, originally Persian subjects, had presumed to make war against their master's son; the payment of 50,000 lbs. of gold (two million and a quarter pounds sterling); or the reception of Persian deputies, who should ransack the city for treasures and bring all to the Persian camp. All these proposals were too extravagant to be entertained for an instant; the ambassadors returned in dejection, and the erection of the mound advanced. A new embassy was sent, but was not even admitted to an audience; and when the plan of raising the city wall was tried, the besiegers found no difficulty in elevating their construction also.

At length the Romans resorted to the plan of undermining the mound, but when their excavation had reached the middle of the pile the noise of the subterranean digging was heard by the Persian builders, who immediately dug or hewed a hole in their own structure in order to discover the miners. These, knowing that they were detected, filled up the remotest part of the excavated passage and adopted a new device. Beneath the end of the mound nearest to the city they formed a small subterranean chamber with stones, boards, and earth. Into this room they threw piles of wood of the most inflammable kind, which had been smeared over with sulphur, bitumen, and oil of cedar. As soon as the mound was completed, they kindled the logs, and kept the fire replenished with fresh fuel. A considerable time was required for the fire to penetrate the entire extent of the mound, and smoke began to issue prematurely from that part where the foundations were first inflamed. The besieged adopted a cunning device to mislead the besiegers. They cast burning arrows and hurled vessels filled with burning embers on various parts of the mound; the Persian soldiers ran to and fro to extinguish them, believing that the smoke, which really came from beneath, was caused by the flaming missiles; and some thus employed were pierced by arrows from the walls. Next morning Chosroes himself visited the mound and was the first to discover the true cause of the smoke, which now issued in denser volume. The whole army was summoned to the scene amid the jeers of the Romans, who surveyed from the walls the consternation of their foe. The torrents of water with which the stones were flooded increased the vapor instead of quenching it and caused the sulphurous flames to operate more violently. In the evening the volume of smoke was so immense that it could be seen as far away to the south as at the city of Carrhae; and the fire, which had been gradually working upwards as well as spreading beneath, at length gained the air and overtopped the surface. Then the Persians desisted from their futile endeavours.

Six days later an attack was made on the walls at early dawn, and but for a farmer who chanced to be awake and gave the alarm, the garrison might have been surprised. The assailants were repulsed; and another assault on the great gate at midday was likewise unsuccessful. One final effort was made by the baffled beleaguerers. The ruins of the half-demolished mound were covered with a floor of bricks, and from this elevation a grand attack was made. At first the Persians seemed to be superior, but the enthusiasm which prevailed in the city was ultimately crowned with victory. The peasants, even the women and the children, ascended the walls and took a part in the combat; cauldrons of oil were kept continually boiling, that the burning liquid might be poured on the heads of the assailants; and the Persians, unable to endure the fury of their enemies, fell back and confessed to Chosroes that they were vanquished. The enraged despot drove them back to the encounter; they made yet one supreme effort, and were yet once more discomfited. Edessa was saved, and the siege unwillingly abandoned by the disappointed king, who, however, had the satisfaction of receiving 5000 lbs. of gold from the weary though victorious Edessenes.

In the following year, 545 AD, a peace or truce was concluded for five years, Justinian consenting to pay 2000 lbs. of gold and to permit a certain Greek physician, named Tribunus, to remain at the Persian court for a year. Tribunus of Palestine, the best medical doctor of the age, was, we are told, a man of distinguished virtue and piety, and highly valued by Chosroes, whose constitution was delicate and constantly required the services of a physician. At the end of the year the king permitted him to ask a boon, and instead of proposing remuneration for himself he begged for the freedom of some Roman prisoners. Chosroes not only liberated those whom he named, but others also to the number of three thousand, and Tribunus won the blessings of those whom his word had ransomed and great glory among men.

IX

THE LAZIC WAR (549-556 AD)

The Lazi soon found that the despotism of the Persian fire-worshipper was less tolerable than the oppression of the Christian monopolists, and repented that they had taught the armies of the great king to penetrate the defiles of Colchis. It was not long before the magi attempted to convert the new province to a faith which was odious to the Christianized natives, and it became known that Chosroes entertained the intention of removing the inhabitants and colonizing the land with Persians. Gobazes, who learned that Chosroes was plotting against his life, hastened to ask for the pardon and seek for the protection of Justinian, whose name seemed appropriate to his character when compared with a tyrant whose title, "the Just" (like that of Haroun Al Raschid), seemed the expression of a prudent irony. In 549 AD 7000 Romans were sent to Lazica, under the command of Dagisthaeus, to recover the fortress of Petra, which was the most important position in that country. Their forces were strengthened by the addition of a thousand Tzanic auxiliaries. Procopius has warned us against identifying the Tzani with the Colchians, apparently a common mistake in his time. The Tzani were an inland people living on the borders of Pontus and Armenia, and separated from the sea by precipitous mountains and vast solitudes, impassable torrent-beds and yawning chasms.

The acquisition of Colchis pleased Chosroes so highly, and the province appeared to him of such eminent importance, that he took every precaution to secure its retention. A highway was constructed from the Iberian confines through the country's hilly and woody passes, so that not only cavalry but elephants could traverse it. The fortress of Petra was supplied with sufficient stores of provisions, consisting of salted meat and corn, to last for five years; no wine was provided, but vinegar and a sort of grain from which a spirituous liquor could be distilled. The armour and weapons which were stored in the magazines would, as was afterwards found, have accoutred five times the number of the besiegers; and a cunning device was adopted to supply the city with water, while the enemy should delude themselves with the idea that they had cut off the supply.

When Dagisthaeus laid siege to the town the garrison consisted of 1500 Persians. The besieging party numbered 7000 Roman soldiers and 1000 Tzani, who were assisted by the Colchians under Gobazes. Dagisthaeus committed the mistake of not occupying the clisurae or passes from Iberia into Colchis, and thereby preventing the arrival of Persian reinforcements. The siege was protracted for a long time, and the small garrison was ultimately reduced to 150 men capable of fighting and 350 wounded or disabled. The Romans had dug a mine under the wall and loosened the foundations; a part of the wall actually collapsed, and John the Armenian with fifty men rushed through the breach, but when their leader received a wound they retired. It appears that nothing would have been easier than to enter the city and overpower the miserably small number of defenders, but Dagisthaeus purposely delayed, waiting for letters from Justinian. The commander of the garrison protracted the delay by promising to surrender in a few days, for he knew that Mermeroes was approaching to relieve him. Mermeroes, allowed to enter Colchis unopposed with large forces of cavalry and infantry, soon arrived at the pass which commands the plain of Petra. Here his progress was withstood by a hundred Romans, but after a long and bloody battle the weary guards gave way, and the Persians reached the summit. When Dagisthaeus learned this he raised the siege, and marched northwards to the Phasis.

Mermeroes left 3000 men in Petra and provisioned it for a short time. Directing the garrison to repair the walls, he departed himself with the rest of the army on a plundering expedition in order to obtain more supplies. He finally left 5000 men under Phabrigus in Colchis, instructing them to keep Petra supplied with food, and withdrew to Persarmenia. Disaster soon befell these 5000; they were surprised in their camp by Dagisthaeus and Gobazes in the early morning, and but few escaped. All the provisions brought from Iberia for the use of Petra were destroyed, and the passes which admitted the stranger to Colchis were garrisoned.

In the spring of 550 Chorianes entered Colchis with a Persian army, and encamped by the river Hippis, where a battle was fought in which the Romans, under Dagisthaeus, were triumphantly victorious, and Chorianes lost his life. The engagement was notable for the curious behavior of the Lazi and the bravery of a Persarmenian who fought under the Roman standard. The Lazi protested against associating themselves with their allies in the battle, and insisted on facing the foe foremost and alone, on the ground that they had a greater stake in the event than their protectors, and perhaps thinking that the stress of a graver danger would increase their defective courage. They were allowed to have their way in so far that the Lazic cavalry led the van, but at the very sight of the enemy they turned and fled for refuge to those with whom they had disdained to march in company. The Persarmenian Artabanes, a deserter who had proved his fidelity to the Romans by slaying twenty Persians, exhibited his courage in a conspicuous place between the adverse armies by dismounting and despatching a mighty Persian. These single combats were perhaps a feature in many of the battles of the sixth century; they are certainly a feature in the pages of the historians.

Meanwhile Dagisthaeus was accused of misconducting the siege of Petra, through disloyalty or culpable negligence. Justinian ordered that he should be arrested, and appointed Bessas, who had recently returned from Italy, in his stead. Men wondered at this appointment, and thought that the Emperor was foolish to entrust the command to a general who was far advanced in years, and whose career in the West had been inglorious; but the choice, as we shall see, was justified by the result. The subordinate commanders were Wilgang, a Herul, Benilus the brother of Buzes, Babas a Thracian, and Odonachus (all of whom preceded Bessas to Lazica); and John the Armenian, who had shown his valor at the battle of Hippis.

The first labour that devolved on Bessas was to suppress the revolt of the Abasgi. The territory of this nation extended along the eastern coast of the Euxine, and was separated from Colchis by the country of the Apsilians, who inhabited that ambiguous district between the western spurs of Caucasus and the sea, a district which belongs to Asia, and might be claimed by Europe. The Apsilians had long been Christians, and submitted to the lordship of their Lazic neighbours, who had at one time also held sway over the Abasgi. Like the Roman Empire in the fourth and fifth centuries, Abasgia was governed by two princes, of whom one ruled in the west and the other in the east. These potentates increased their revenue by the sale of beautiful boys, whom they tore in early childhood from the arms of their reluctant parents and made eunuchs; for in the Roman Empire these comely and useful slaves were in constant demand, and secured a high price from the opulent and luxurious nobles. It was the glory of Justinian to compass the abolition of this unnatural practice; the subjects supported the remonstrances which the Emperor's envoy, himself an Abasgian eunuch, made to their kings; the monarchy, or tyranny, was abolished, and a people which had worshipped trees embraced Christianity, to enjoy, as they thought, a long period of freedom under the protection of the Roman Augustus. But the mildest protectorate tends insensibly to become domination. Roman soldiers entered the country, and taxes were imposed on the new friends of the Emperor. The Abasgi preferred being tyrannized over by men of their own blood to being the slaves of a foreign master, and accordingly they elected two new kings, Opsites in the east and Sceparnas in the west. But it would have been rash to brave the jealous anger of Justinian without the support of some stronger power, and when Xabedes, after the great defeat of the Persians at Hippis, visited Lazica, he received sixty noble hostages from the Abasgi, who craved the protection of Chosroes. They had not taken warning from the repentance of the Lazi, that it was a hazardous measure to invoke the Persian. The king, Sceparnas, was soon afterwards summoned to the Sassanid court, and his colleague Opsites prepared to resist the Roman forces which Bessas despatched against him under the command of Wilgang and John the Armenian.

In the southern borders of Abasgia, close to the Apsilian frontier, an extreme mountain of the Caucasian chain descends in the form of a staircase to the waters of the Euxine. Here, on one of the lower spurs, the Abasgi had built a strong and roomy fastness in which they hoped to defy the pursuit of an invader. A rough and difficult glen separated it from the sea, while the ingress was so narrow that two persons could not enter abreast, and so low that it was necessary to crawl. The Romans, who had sailed from the Phasis, or perhaps from Trapezus, landed on the Apsilian borders, and proceeded by land to Trachea, as the glen was appropriately called, where they found the whole Abasgic nation arrayed to defend a pass which it would have been easy to hold against far larger numbers. Wilgang remained with half the army at the foot of the glen, while John and the other half embarked in the boats which had accompanied the coast march of the soldiers. They landed at no great distance, and by a circuitous route were able to approach the unsuspecting foe in the rear. The Abasgi fled in consternation towards their fortress; fugitives and pursuers, mingled together, strove to penetrate the narrow aperture, and those inside could not prevent enemies from entering with friends. But the Romans when they were within the walls found a new labor awaiting them. The Abasgi fortified themselves in their houses, and vexed their adversaries by showering missiles from above. At length the Romans conceived the idea of employing the aid of fire, and the dwellings were soon reduced to ashes. Some of the people were burnt, others, including the wives of the kings, were taken alive, while Opsites escaped to the Huns. But it must not be thought that the nation was exterminated, as the words of Procopius might lead us to infer. We shall meet the Abasgi again, one hundred and fifty years later, in the days of another Justinian.

Shortly before or shortly after this episode in Abasgia, another episode was enacted in the neighboring country of Apsilia. Terdetes, a Lazic noble, quarreled with King Gobazes, and entered into correspondence with the Persians to betray a strong fort called Tzibilon, in Apsilia. When the garrison saw foreign troops approaching under a Lazic convoy they admitted them unhesitatingly, and for a moment it seemed that Apsilia was a Persian dependency. But the Persian leader, seized with a passion for the beautiful wife of the governor, compelled her by force to his embraces. The enraged husband slew the violator and all his soldiers; the Apsilians were fain to reject the supremacy of the Colchians, who had not protected them against the risk of slavery; but the bland words of John the Armenian restored them to their old allegiance.

The truce of five years had now elapsed (April 550), and while new negotiations began between the courts of Byzantium and Ctesiphon, the Romans in Lazica, under the command of Bessas, made another attempt to recover Petra. A new garrison, three thousand strong, had been placed in the fort; the breaches which had been made by Dagisthaeus in the foundations of the wall were filled up with bags of sand, over which thick planed beams were placed to form the basis of a new wall. Bessas bored a mine, as Dagisthaeus had done, under the wall, which was shaken by the removal of the earth beneath; but the layers of the stones were not disarranged, the whole mass supported by the smooth beams sank regularly as if it were purposely lowered by a machine, and the only effect was that the height was reduced. The sinking of the wall overwhelmed the mine; and as the approach to this, the only expugnable, part of the city was an inclined plane, it was impossible to apply the battering-rams, whose heavy frames could only be impelled along a horizontal surface.

It happened that at this time three nobles of the Sabiric Huns visited the Roman camp, in order to receive a sum of money from an envoy of Justinian, who feared to continue his journey to their homes in the Caucasus through a country beset with foes. The cunning of the barbarians profited the Romans in their perplexity and surpassed the skill of civilized engineers. "They constructed such a machine", says the marvelling Procopius, "as within the memory of man never entered into the mind of a Roman or Persian, though in both realms there has never been, nor is now, lacking a plentiful number of engineers, and though in all ages a machine of the kind has been wanted by both peoples for battering fortifications in steep places". The simplicity of the Hunnic invention might have put the engineers to shame. Instead of the perpendicular and transverse beams, which made the regular machine so heavy, a light frame was constructed of woven osier twigs, and covered with skins, so that in appearance it did not differ from the ordinary ram, while its lightness was such that forty men, placed inside, could advance supporting it on their shoulders without inconvenience. The battering beam itself, hung in loose chains and pointed with iron, was of normal construction; in fact the old machines supplied the new frames with their beams.

At each side of these engines, when they were applied to the walls, stood men protected with helmets and cuirasses, and provided with long poles, whose iron hooks removed the stones which the rams had loosened. The besieged hurled from a wooden tower, which they placed on the wall, vessels of sulphur, pitch, and naphtha ("oil of Medea") upon the roofs of the machines, and it required all the agility of the men with the poles to remove the flaming missiles before the frames caught tire.

When an appreciable breach had been made in the wall, Bessas, with all his forces, advanced to scale it. The general himself, in spite of his seventy years, was the first to place his foot on the ladder, and in the combat that ensued, of the 2300 Persians who resisted and the 6000 Romans who attacked, there were many slain and very few unwounded. Suddenly a shout was raised, and both sides rushed to the spot, where Bessas lay prostrate on the ground. The Persians attempted to pierce him with their darts, but the guardsmen formed a dense array around their general in the form of a testudo, and protected him from hurt. The Romans had paused for a moment and held their breath when they witnessed the fall of Bessas, but soon comprehending that he was not injured they renewed the fray and redoubled their efforts. The master of soldiers, who found himself unable to raise his obese and aged body, weighed down by armour, was dragged slowly to a safe place, and the incident so little affected him that, once more erect, he again essayed to scale the wall. At length the Persians declared themselves ready to surrender, and begged for a short space of time to pack up their belongings; but Bessas, suspecting their intentions, refused to check the assault, and indicated another place under the walls where he would entertain the proposals of those who desired to capitulate. His caution was justified by the fact that the Persians continued to fight.

The situation was changed when another portion of the wall, which had been previously undermined by the besiegers, collapsed. Both the Persians and Romans were obliged to divide their forces, and the superiority of the latter in point of numbers began to tell. At this point John the Armenian, with a few of his countrymen, succeeded in climbing up a precipitous ascent of rock, where the beleaguerers could not have hoped and the beleaguered could not have feared that it would prove possible to gain the battlements. The Persian guards were killed, and the venturous Armenians entered the fort. Meanwhile the battering-rams had continued to play on the walls, and the defenders in their wooden tower had continued to shower inflammable substances from above; but a violent south wind suddenly began to blow, and the tower caught fire from the dangerous materials which were handled by its inmates. These, along with the structure, were consumed in the flames, and their burning corpses fell among their comrades or their adversaries. The Persians were fast giving way; at length the Romans penetrated the breaches, and Petra was taken. Five hundred of the garrison fled to the citadel, seven hundred and thirty were captured alive. Among the Romans who fell in the final assault was John the Armenian, who, as it seems, when he had scaled the wall, attacked the enemy in the rear.

Attempts were made to induce the soldiers who had shut themselves up in the citadel to surrender, but they proved deaf to arguments and menaces. In the pages of Procopius a military orator persuades the reader that it was foolish and culpable in these inflexible men to court an unnecessary death; but the 500 fire-worshippers, if they heard these Christian remonstrances, were not convinced of their cogency. The citadel was fired by the order of Bessas, who expected that at the eleventh hour, with a painful death imminent, the head­strong Persians would yield. He was disappointed; they did not hesitate, before the wondering gaze of the Roman victors, to perish in the flames. "Then", says the historian, "it appeared how clear Lazica was to Chosroes, in that he had sent the most excellent of all his soldiers to garrison Petra."

One of the first acts of the Romans had been to destroy the aqueduct, but in the course of the siege a Persian prisoner informed them that there was a second pipe invisible to the eye, because it was concealed by stones and earth. This duct was also destroyed, and yet to their astonishment the Romans found when they entered the fortress that it was supplied with water. Chosroes had dug a deep ditch, in which he placed two pipes, one above the other, separated by a layer of clay and stones, and above them a third pipe, which he made no attempt to conceal. The two superior ducts were cut off by the besiegers, to whom the thought never occurred that there might be yet a third channel.

The news of the capture of Petra, which took place in the early spring of 551 AD, reached Mermeroes as he was approaching with a Persian army to relieve it. As there was no other important place south of the Phasis, he retraced his steps in order to cross the river by a ford, and attack Archaeopolis and other fortresses on the right bank, which were occupied by the Romans or the Lazi. The total number of Roman soldiers in Lazica amounted to 12,000. Of these, 3000 were stationed at Archaeopolis, under the command of Babas and Odonachus; the remaining 9000 were entrenched in a camp at the mouth of the Phasis, with the generals Benilus and Wilgang, and an auxiliary corps of 800 Tzani. The commander-in-chief, Bessas, thinking that he had clone enough by capturing Petra, occupied himself in Armenia and Pontus with collecting tribute, instead of following up his success and securing the Iberian frontier.

Of Mermeroes' troops the greater part were cavalry. Eight elephants accompanied the march, and of 12,000 Caucasian Huns who proffered their services, the general, fearing that such a large number might prove unmanageable, accepted the aid of 4000. Having halted on the borders of Iberia to re-erect the fort of Scanda, which the Lazi had demolished, Mermeroes marched towards Archaeopolis; but when he learned that a large division of the enemy was encamped at the mouth of the Phasis, he decided to attack it first, and afterwards storm the city. His way led him past the city walls, and he jeeringly informed the inhabitants that when he had paid a visit to their friends in the camp he would return to them. "If you meet those Romans", they replied, "you will never return to us". But those Romans did not await his approach. Having packed up all the provisions they could take with them, and destroyed the rest, they rowed across to the left bank of the river; the Persians, unable to follow, destroyed their camp, and returned to besiege Archaeopolis.

The chief city of Lazica is situated on a steep hill; mountains impend above it, and the river that descends from their heights flows near its gates. Protected by a wall on either side of a narrow path which runs down to the river-bank, the inhabitants could draw water securely in time of siege. The approaches to the gates in the higher parts of the town were precipitous and obstructed with wood and bramble; but the wall at the base of the hill was easily accessible, though the ground sloped. Mermeroes' plan of action was to attack both the higher and lower places at the same time, and divide the attention of the defenders. There was a corps of auxiliary soldiers in his army called Dilimnites, men who dwelt in the interior parts of Persia, but had never been forced to be the thralls of a Persian monarch. The steep and pathless mountains, which were their homes since remote antiquity, secured them their liberty, but they deigned to serve for pay in the army of the great king. They fought on foot, armed each with a sword, a shield, and three javelins; and they could run as nimbly on the rugged acclivities of a mountain as on a level plain. These mercenaries were told off to harass the besieged on the steep sides of the hill; while the Sabiric Huns were employed to construct light battering-rams, such as their tribesmen had provided for the Romans at Petra. "With these engines and the eight elephants, the Persians and Huns exerted all their strength to make an impression on the lower gate, and a thick cloud of arrows almost expelled the Roman defenders from the battlements; while in another place the javelins of the Dilimnites, who fought from behind the bushes, increased the discomfiture of the garrison.

But by a happy inspiration the commanders apprehended in what their sole chance of safety lay, and decided to make a sudden sally on the enemy with all their forces. Just as they were on the point of executing this design, to which they had stimulated the soldiers by an oration, the cry was raised that the corn magazine was on fire. Some of the garrison hastened to the spot and succeeded with difficulty in extinguishing the flames, while the rest, undisturbed by the alarm, poured forth through the opened gate upon their unprepared and astonished antagonists. The Persians had been building on the hope that when a Lazic traitor, who had communicated with Mermeroes, should have set fire to the stores, the Romans would either desert the defense in order to save their corn or submit to the loss of their corn in order to continue the defence. Never imagining that such a small number would have the heart to leave the protection of their walls in the face of an army so superior, the besiegers were scattered in small groups here and there in front of the city; some had only bows, which were useless in hand-to-hand fight, others totally unarmed were carrying battering engines; so that the sudden onslaught of the Romans met with almost no resistance. The confusion was increased when one of the elephants, perhaps wounded, broke into the Persian ranks. The front rows retreated, and the soldiers in the rear, ignorant of the cause, caught the alarm; while the Dilimnites, beholding from above the consternation that prevailed below, fled in panic. In all, four thousand of the enemy fell, including three captains, and four Persian standards were sent to the Emperor. It was said that not less than twenty thousand horses perished in the flight, not from wounds, but from the effects of mere fatigue and want of adequate food.

Having thus failed at Archaeopolis, Mermeroes and his army proceeded to Muchiresis, the most fertile district of Colchis, watered by the river Rheon. Winter was now approaching, and the Persians took up their quarters in the ruins of an old fort called Cutatisium (originally Cotiaeum), which they roughly restored; here they commanded the roads to Suania and Scymnia, and could prevent the Lazi from supplying with provisions the neighbouring fort of Uchimerium. But this stronghold was soon delivered into the hands of Mermeroes by the treachery and guile of a Colchian named Theophobius, and having left both in this place and in Cutatisium sufficient garrisons, the general of Chosroes established himself in another fort on the Lazic frontier called Serapanin. During the winter the Persians dominated the land; the Romans skulked in Archaeopolis and near the mouths of the Phasis, while Gobazes and many of the Lazi endured the untold hardships of a Colchian winter's severity in the recesses of inaccessible mountains, where they were scantily supplied with food. Mermeroes tried to seduce the Lazic king to desert the Romans, but Gobazes had not forgotten that Chosroes had plotted against his life.

Meanwhile, ambassadors had gone to and fro between the Roman and Persian courts; the negotiations had been protracted for eighteen months, and Chosroes' delegate, the arrogant Isdigunas, had enjoyed the generosity of Justinian's court and excited the disgust of his courtiers. At length a new truce of five years was concluded, the terms being that the Romans were to pay two thousand six hundred pounds of gold; but this peace was not to necessitate the cessation of hostilities in Colchis. A contemporary states that there was considerable popular indignation that Chosroes should have exacted from the Empire no less than four thousand six hundred pounds of gold in the space of eleven years; and the Byzantines murmured at the unprecedented respect shown to Isdigunas and his retinue, who were permitted to move about in the city, without a Roman escort, as if it belonged to them.

Nothing of striking importance took place in the campaign of 552. The Persians were successful. Mermeroes expelled Martin and his troops from the strong fort of Telephis by a ruse; the dissemination of a false rumor of his own death, which even the Persian army believed, caused the Romans to relax their vigilance. Both Martin, and Justin (the son of Germanus) who was encamped at Ollaria, about a mile from Telephis, were forced to flee in the confusion of a nocturnal surprise and take up their quarters in the "Island", where the prudence of Mermeroes permitted them to remain in peace. The Island was a tract of ground formed by two rivers and an artificial canal. The Phasis and the less famous Doconus, flowing from widely different quarters of the mountains, gradually approximate their courses, and at length unite their waters about twenty miles from the Euxine. At some distance to the east of their point of union, the Romans had dug a channel connecting them, and thus formed an island, which would have been a triangle but for the irregular curves and twists of the streams.

Mermeroes retired to Iberia to winter, but died in the autumn of disease. His death was a serious loss to Chosroes, for though old and lame, and unable even to ride, he was not only a prudent and brave general, but as unwearying in activity as a youth. Nachoragan was sent to succeed him.

Meanwhile Gobazes, the Lazic king, who had been involved in constant quarrels and recriminations with the Roman commanders, sent a complaint of their conduct to Justinian, giving an account of their recent defeat, and attributing it to their negligence; Bessas, Martin, and Rusticus were specially named. The Emperor deposed Bessas from his command, and banished him temporarily to Abasgia, but he consigned the chief command to Martin, and did not recall Rusticus. This Rusticus was not a general, but an imperial finance official, who had been sent to bestow rewards on soldiers who distinguished themselves in battle. The complaints which the Lazic king had lodged made him more obnoxious to the persons whom he had ventured to accuse; and Martin and Rusticus resolved to remove an inconvenient and jealous critic. To secure themselves from blame, they despatched John, Rusticus' brother, to Byzantium, with the false message that Gobazes was "Medising",—was this ancient term really used in the sixth century outside the pages of the historians? Justinian was surprised and alarmed, but reserved his judgment, and commanded that Gobazes should come to Constantinople. "What", asked John, "is to be done if he refuses?" "Compel him to come", replied the Emperor ; "he is our subject". "But if he resist our compulsion", urged the conspirator. "Then treat him as a tyrant". "And will he who slays him have nought to fear?" "Nought, if he act disobediently and be slain as an enemy". Justinian signed a letter to the same effect, armed with which John returned to Lazica, and the conspirators carried out their intention. Gobazes was invited to assist in an attack on the Persian fortress of Onoguris; and with a few attendants he met the Roman army at the river Chobus. An altercation arose between the king and Rusticus, and on the pretext that the gainsayer of a Roman general must necessarily be a friend of the Persians, John drew his dagger and stabbed Gobazes in the breast. The wound was not mortal, but it was dealt so unexpectedly that it unhorsed the king, who was sitting with his legs round the neck of his steed, and when he attempted to rise from the ground, a blow from the squire of Rusticus killed him outright.

The unfortunate Lazi, not strong enough to revenge the death of their monarch, silently buried him according to their customs, and turned away in mute reproach from their Roman protectors. They no longer took part in the military operations, but hid themselves away as men who had lost their hereditary glory. The indignation which Justin and Buzes felt at the outrage was prudently concealed, as they thought it had been commanded by the Emperor's wisdom. Some months later, when winter had commenced, the Lazi assembled a secret council in some remote and wild Caucasian ravine, and considered the question whether they, should abandon their Roman allies and seek once more the protection and oppression of Chosroes. They fortunately decided not to take the fatal step, and it is worthy of note that the chief motive which induced them to adhere to the Romans was their attachment to the Christian religion. They determined to appeal for justice and satisfaction to the fountain of justice in the Roman Empire, the Emperor himself; and at the same time supplicate him to nominate Tzathes, the younger brother of Gobazes, as the new king of the Lazi. Justinian promptly complied with their demands. Athanasius, one of the most illustrious senators, was immediately sent to Lazica to investigate the circumstances of Gobazes' assassination; and when he arrived he incarcerated both Rusticus and John in the city of Apsarus, pending a trial. In the beginning of spring (553) Tzathes arrived with all the state of a Lazic monarch; and when the Colchians saw the Roman army saluting him as he rode in the splendour of his royal apparel, a tunic embroidered with gold reaching to the feet, a plain white mantle with a gold stripe, purple shoes, a turban adorned with gold and gems, and a golden crown set with precious stones, they forgot their sorrow and escorted him in a gay and brilliant procession. It was not till the ensuing winter that the authors of the death of the late king were brought to justice and the natives witnessed the solemn procedure of a Roman trial. John and Rusticus were executed, but the implication of Martin in the affair was not quite so clear, and his case was referred to the Emperor, who in 555 deposed him from the command in favor of his own nephew Justin. The secret of Martin's acquittal probably was that he was highly popular with the army and a very skil­ful general.

Meanwhile the hostilities between the Bemoans and Persians had continued without a pause. The few months that intervened between the death of Gobazes and the inactivity of winter (552 AD) were occupied with the siege of Onoguris, or Stephanopolis—apparently its new name, from a church erected there in honour of the first martyr—which had been fortified by Mermeroes about the time of his unsuccessful siege of the neighbouring Archaeopolis. The Romans were preparing their spalions to shake the foundations of the towers, when a Persian was captured, who disclosed, under the compulsion of the lash, the design of his compatriots. Nachoragan, he said, had already arrived in Iberia, and the troops stationed in Muchiresis and Cotaisis were on their way to relieve Onoguris. Buzes and Wilgang the Herul were in favour of proceeding with all the forces (about 50,000) against the advancing Persians before they attempted to besiege the fort: "First frighten away the bees", said Wilgang, "and then gather the honey." But the opposite opinion of Rusticus carried the day; the siege operations began, and a small body of six hundred horse was sent to obstruct the march of the party of relief.

The commanders of the corps of cavalry were Dabragezas, a Wend, and Wiscard or Wisgard, whose name shows that he was a Teuton. It is one of the curious things of history to meet in the sixth century by the banks of the Phasis a general bearing the celebrated name which was borne in the eleventh century by the great Norman, Robert of Apulia; and we are reminded that the mission of the great duke and the task of the obscure captain were essentially of the same kind, to repel the enemies of Christianity and of occidental development from the limits of European Christendom. Robert's chief work was to organize a power, which waged war against the Mohammedan in the Mediterranean; Wisgard helped in his degree to beat back the Fire-worshipper from the coasts of the Euxine.

The horsemen with Wisgard and Dabragezas fell suddenly on the three thousand Persians who had ridden to relieve the fortress and were already near at hand. At first the larger number were confused by the surprise and fled; the announcement of their flight reached the besiegers, who were encouraged to assail the walls with greater boldness and less order; but when the Persians comprehended that a very small division of the whole army of their opponents had advanced against them, they turned suddenly and reversed the position. The Romans fled and the Persians pursued; pursuers and fugitives rushed together into the Roman entrenchments; the besiegers, overwhelmed with astonishment and terror, thought no more of the fortress, and, hardly waiting to discover what had happened, abandoned their camp in haste and disorder. Thus fifty thousand were routed by three thousand.

In the following spring Nachoragan (553) advanced with sixty thousand men to the Island, where Martin and Justin were stationed with their forces. The Romans had placed two thousand federate Sabiric Huns in the neighbourhood of Archaeopolis to harass the enemy; and by a fortunate stratagem they succeeded in slaughtering an immense number of Dilimnites who were sent to surprise them. When he arrived at the Island, the Persian commander, after a short and futile conference with Martin, determined not to remain there, but to march westward and besiege the city of Phasis, the great sea­port of Colchis, situated at the mouth of the like-named river. Before the Romans were aware, he had crossed the stream by a bridge of boats, for he purposed to march along the left bank and attack Phasis on the southern side. The Bemoans, having been thwarted in an attempt to send some vessels down the river to the city, left in the Island a small garrison under the charge of Buzes and marched to the defence of Phasis by a different route from that which the enemy had taken.

The walls of Phasis, which were wooden and in some places dilapidated through age, were protected by a palisade and a foss, which was filled with water to the brim. The garrison was thus arranged: at the extreme west, close to the river, Justin, the son of Germanus, was in command; the battlements at the south-western point were occupied by the regiments of Martin; Angilas with Moorish peltasts and lancers, Theodore with his Tzanic infantry, Philomathius with his Isaurian slingers and javelin-men were placed due south; Lombard and Herul troops under Gibros were posted south-east; and in the extreme east, where the river washes the walls, were stationed the forces of the oriental prefecture under Valerian. At both extremities, in close proximity to the stations of Justin and Valerian, were moored large ships, from whose masts huge boats were securely swung; these boats supported large towers manned with soldiers and some bold sailors, who were equipped with bows, with divers sorts of missiles and engines to hurl them. Dabragezas the Wend, and Elmingir, a Hun, sailed to and fro in small double-sterned boats to prevent the ships from receiving any hurt.

The operations began with volleys of arrows, discharged by the Persian archers. Martin had given strict orders that the defenders should not leave their posts; but Angilas and Philomathius, in spite of the protests of Theodore, were provoked into making a sally on the enemy. The Diliimiites, who happened to be posted opposite to the southern point of the wall, quietly awaited the approach of the Isaurians and Moors, whom Theodore with his Tzani reluctantly accompanied; the small number of the rash defenders was easily surrounded; and it only remained for them to retrieve their temerity and win an ambiguous glory by cutting their way, valiantly and hardly, back to the gates.

Meanwhile men had been busily engaged in filling up the foss, so that the battering-ram and the assailants might advance against the walls over level ground. The process was a slow one, although numberless hands were busy, for they had not sufficient earth and stones to fill the ditch completely, and the Romans had previously destroyed all the wood for miles around, so that they could only obtain that material by cutting it in a distant glen. It was not till the fall of evening that the foss had disappeared.

On the ensuing day Martin adopted a felicitous stratagem, by which he succeeded both in confirming the spirits of his soldiers and in spreading apprehensions among the enemy. He convoked the army for the purpose of consulting on measures for the defense of the city. When all were assembled, an unknown person, covered with dust and having the marks of travel about him, burst into the midst, and stating that he had come from Constantinople with an imperial message presented a letter to the general. Martin received it eagerly, but instead of reserving it for private perusal, and without even glancing over it, he read aloud so that all could hear. Perhaps, says the historian, the contents of the document were really different, but at all events the words recited were as follows:

"We send you yet another army, not smaller than that which you have. It is true that if the enemy are more numerous, they do not surpass you in numbers so much as you surpass them in valour; so that the disproportion does not render you unequal. Nevertheless, that they may not be able to boast of superiority even in this one respect, we send you another army, for the sake of honour and display, not because it is necessary. Be of good courage and continue in your work with zeal; for we will not neglect any requisite measures."

Being asked where the army was, the messenger said that he had left it at the river Neocnus, about ten miles away. Martin feigned indignation, and said that he would never receive the new forces, nor permit that soldiers who had come at the last moment should share the glory and spoil with those who had borne the burden and heat. These sentiments were received with acclamation, and the garrison was animated to exertions more strenuous than ever. The report of the presence of Roman troops at Neocnus reached the Persian camp, and the besiegers trembled at the thought of facing a fresh and unwearied army. A large reconnoitring detachment was sent in that direction on the futile errand of watching for hostile forces that were never destined to come, because they did not exist.

Meanwhile Nachoragan, desiring to anticipate the arrival of the fictitious reinforcements, organized without delay a general attack on the walls, boasting that he would burn the city with all its inmates. The servants and workmen who attended the camp were despatched to the wood to cut timber, and were ordered, when they saw a smoke ascending to heaven in the distance, to learn that Phasis was in flames, and to return without delay that they might assist in hastening the progress of the conflagration. While the Persians were making these preparations, Justin, ignorant of the intended attack, was prompted by a pious inspiration—which, as it happened, proved fortunate in the event—to visit a holy church in the neighbourhood. Thither he rode to worship with 5000 soldiers, and his departure was unperceived by the besiegers, even as their operations were unperceived by him.

The attack began, and the air was soon obscured with arrows and darts, that rained like hail or snow. The wooden walls were hewn with axes wielded by the men in the spalions; but the defenders cast from the battlements huge blocks of stone, which broke the sutures of those slender engines, while stones, less immense, hurled from slings, shattered the helmets of the soldiers; and the missiles discharged by the men, who were suspended aloft in the towers attached to the ship-masts, descended with tremendous effect. When the excitement of battle had reached its intensest point, the troops of Justin returned from their pious errand. Perceiving the situation, and convinced that his excursion to the church had been the direct inspiration of God, the general formed his cavalry in order, and raised aloft the standards. The Persians were absorbed in fighting in close proximity to the wall, and Justin's forces, attacking them on the west side, close to the sea, broke their line, and wrought great havoc among them. Filled with alarm, and supposing that their new assailants were the expected army from Neocnus, the enemy began to fall back from their position, and the Dilimnites, who were attacking (as on the previous day) the southern portion of the wall, seeing the confusion from afar off, rushed to the spot, leaving a few of their number behind. Angilas and Theodorus, who on the preceding day had made the unsuccessful excursion, seized the occasion to rush out and put to flight the small remnant of the Dilimnites; but on observing this their companions, who had run westward to assist the hard-pressed Persians, returned to support their fugitive countrymen. The spectacle of the Dilimnites rushing to and fro in this uncertain and disorderly manner communicated alarm to the Persians who were stationed near (in the south-west). Deeming that the behaviour of the bellicose Dilimnites presupposed a real and present danger, they bethought themselves of flight, and their panic reacted on the Dilimnites, unaware that their own conduct was its cause. When all these troops were seen fleeing over the plain, the Romans opened the gates, rushed in pursuit, and harassed the rear of the fugitives. Some of the enemy turned and formed a line, and an irregular battle was fought, in which the left wing of the Persians was completely routed, while the right wing forced the Romans at first to retreat; but the accident of an infuriated elephant turning against the ranks of its masters and maddening their horses, secured for the defenders of Phasis a full victory, and the Persian army was scattered. Nachoragan, stupefied by the unexpected course of events, gave the unnecessary command that all should flee. The loss incurred by his army was estimated at 10,000 men.

Returning from the pursuit, the victors burned the engines of the Persians and all the relics of their leaguer. The unfortunate woodcutters (about two thousand in number), ignorant of all that had passed, when they saw the smoke of the conflagration, returned in haste, as they thought, to share the triumph, and, as they found, to be butchered by the Romans. The corpses of the fallen soldiers yielded a considerable spoil, not only of arms, but of golden necklets and earrings.

The discomfited Nachoragan retreated to Muchiresis, where he left the greater part of his army, and wintered himself in Iberia. All the western districts of Colchis now remained, undisputed, in the hands of the Romans.

The chief event of the following year (554 AD) was the expedition against the Misimiani, a people who lived to the north-east of the Apsilians. They had committed an outrage, which had excited the indignation of the Romans, in the previous spring, but the advance of Nachoragan had necessitated the postponement of revenge. Soterichus, accompanied by his two sons, had travelled from Byzantium with the new Lazic king, Tzathes, in order to distribute sums of money to allied tribes in the vicinity of Mount Caucasus. The Misimiani conceived the idea that the envoy intended to "betray to the Alans" one of their forts, and make it a centre for receiving the ambassadors of the more distant nations, so that he might not have to undergo the trouble and risk of traversing the Caucasian passes himself. They consequently sent two delegates to complain of the intention which they imputed to him, as he was bivouacking near the fort in question. Soterichus, who looked upon the barbarians with all the disdain of a ruling race, would not tolerate their impertinent remonstrances, and ordered his attendants to chastise them. Beaten with staves, they returned in a half-dead condition to their countrymen, while the Roman lord, thinking no more of the matter, composed himself carelessly to rest, and his sons and all his servants slept without posting a sentry or taking any precautions. The Misimiani, infuriated by the treatment of their representatives, stole to the tents in the middle of the night and slew Soterichus, his children, and almost all the rest; for even after the first alarm had spread, very few of them, heavy as they were with slumber and impeded with blankets, succeeded in escaping.

After this outrage—it can hardly be called anything but an outrage, as it so far exceeded its provocation—the Misimiani felt that they had taken an irretrievable step, and saw that nothing was left but to seek the protection of the great enemy of the Empire. Nachoragan honoured their emissaries with a gratifying reception when they repaired to him in Iberia after his signal defeat at Phasis.

In spring the Romans determined to avenge the death of Soterichus and those who shared his fate. Buzes and Justin were left in the Island to protect Lazica, while four thousand soldiers were sent to the land of the Misimiani. Martin himself was soon to follow them. But when they reached the friendly country of Apsilia, through which their way lay, they found that the Persians had anticipated them, and sent troops to defend the land of their new allies. Not wishing to face the combined forces of the Misimiani and the Persians, the Romans spent the summer in the Apsilian fortresses, waiting until the Persians should retire. They retired on the approach of winter to Iberia and Cotaisis, and as Martin was hindered by illness from assuming the command, the Romans entered the borders of the Misimiani under two leaders of less note. Before proceeding to hostilities they sent an embassy of Apsilians, if perchance the renegade people would consent to submit themselves and restore the money they had taken from the tent of Soterichus. The reply of the Misimiani was the commission of a new outrage; they slaughtered the ambassadors. It might have been thought that after the departure of their allies they would have been glad to avoid the risks of waging war with a superior enemy; but the secret of their confidence lay in the wildness and difficulty of their territory, whose approach was protected by a mountain, which, though not high, was almost perpendicular and provided with only one narrow pass. The Romans, however, crossed it and entered the wide plains, before the dilatory barbarians had taken precautions to defend it. The Misimiani then retreated into a strong fort called Tzachar, or, from its impregnable strength, the "iron" fort.

About forty of the Roman cavalry, who happened to be riding apart from the main body, were suddenly attacked by six hundred of the enemy. The few horse soldiers, all of whom were picked men, ascended a small hill, and performed wonderful deeds of valour, suddenly rushing down on the barbarians and reascending as swiftly to their position on the summit. On the appearance of the rest of the Roman troops on the top of a neighbouring hill, the Misimiani, supposing that the apparent accident was a concerted plan, took flight. The whole army pursued, and only eighty of the six hundred reached the secure refuge of Tzachar.

The Roman commanders, however, were neither harmonious nor energetic; they encamped in the vicinity of the fort, but not near enough to beleaguer it. Martin, on receiving tidings of the state of affairs, sent John Dacnas (who succeeded Rusticus as the distributer of imperial rewards to brave soldiers) to take the supreme command, and he, on his arrival, immediately instituted a strict blockade of the fortress.

Outside the actual walls of Tzachar, on a neighbouring-rock perched amid precipitous ravines, were some dwellings, accessible only by a secret path. The inhabitants used to descend at night to draw water from a spring at the foot of the hill; and a certain Illus, who, it is hardly necessary to add, was an Isaurian, concealed himself close to the spot, and when the water-drawers ascended followed in their tracks. He noted carefully the direction of the path, and observed that only eight men were set to guard it. The general was informed of the discovery, and on the ensuing night a body of one hundred men made the steep ascent. Illus led the way, and was followed by Ziper, the squire of Marcellinus, after whom came Leontius the son of Dabragezas, and Theodore the captain of the Tzani:

"When they had advanced more than half-way, the foremost saw distinctly the watch-fire burning, and the guards themselves reclining very close to it; seven of them were clearly asleep, and snored as they lay. Only one, leaning on his arm, had the attitude of one awake, and he too was overcome by sleepiness, and his head was heavy; nor was it yet evident what the result would be, as he was constantly nodding and then shaking himself up. At this juncture Leontius slipped in a miry place and fell; the fall broke his shield. At the loud clatter caused thereby all the watch leaped up in a state of terror and sat on their pallets; having drawn their swords they looked about everywhere, craning their necks, but they could not conjecture what it was that had happened. Illuminated themselves by the fire, they could not see the men who were standing in the gloom, and the noise, having fallen on their ears in sleep, was not quite clear or distinct enough to betray its cause, the fall of arms. The Romans, on the other hand, could see every detail of the scene. They halted, and stood as noiseless as if they were rooted to the earth; not the sound of a whisper passed their lips, not the slightest motion agitated their feet; they stood firm and fixed on whatever spot whether a sharp stone or a bramble, they had chanced to step. Had they not done so, and had the sentinels received the least intimation of their presence, a huge stone would certainly have been dislodged and rolled down the steep to crush the advancing party. So they stood without motion of voice or body, even holding in and husbanding their breath ... The barbarians, perceiving no sign of danger, soon returned again to the pleasant occupation of slumber. 

"Then the Romans advanced on them in their sleep and slew all, including the half-waking man, as one might call him in jest. Then they proceeded fearlessly and scattered themselves about the streets of the village and the trumpet sounded the battle-call. When the Misimiam heard this they were dumbfounded, and, not comprehending the situation, they arose and prepared to go into their neighbours’ houses and assemble together. The Romans met them at the doors of their houses and received them with the salutation of the sword; the slaughter was enormous. Some had already emerged and been despatched, others were just on the thresholds, and others yet were to follow and meet the same doom. The horror had no pause, for all pressed on to reach the street. Even the women, who had risen from their beds and rushed shrieking to the doors, were not spared by the Romans in their anger, but were ruthlessly slaughtered in retribution for the outrage committed by the men. Conspicuous among them was one comely woman, who came with a lighted torch, but even she was pierced in the stomach with a lance and perished pitiably, while one of the Romans seized the brand and set fire to the dwellings, which, built of straw and wood, were soon consumed. The flames mounted so high that the Apsilian nation, and tribes still further oft, saw it and learned what had happened" (Agathias, iv. 18, 19).

We need not follow the distressing scene further. It is enough to remark that the historian expresses strong indignation at the massacre of the infants, who had no participation in the iniquities of their parents, and regards the reverse which a few hours later befell the invaders as a retribution of this cruelty. 

About dawn the victorious party, stained with the blood of their enemies, rested amid the smouldering ruins of the village, thinking it superfluous to set a watch. Five hundred well-armed Misimiani issued from the fort and surprised them in their security; some Romans were slain, and all the rest, rushing in wild consternation down the steep and stony ascent reached the camp with wounds and bruises. After this all thought of holding the rock was abandoned, and the forces of the army were concentrated against the wall of the fort. The foss was filled up, siege machines were set in operation and the garrison was hard pressed. A diversion was caused by an attack on the palisades of the Roman camp; the enemy moved a spalion against it, but a javelin cast by a Slavonic soldier, Svarunes, inflicted a mortal wound on the foremost assailant, and caused the collapse of the engine.

Despairing of receiving any assistance from the Persians, and unable to cope with the superior skill and power of the Romans, the Misimiani decided to yield. Their ambassadors implored John Dacnas not to exterminate their race, reminding him that they were Christians, and confessing in accents of repentance their "uncivilized folly"; they had now been punished with more than adequate severity for their transgression. John gladly acceded to their supplication, their hostages were accepted, the money of which the tent of Soterichus had been rifled was restored, and the penitent nation was pardoned. Only thirty men of the Roman army, which immediately returned to Colchis, were killed in this campaign.

Soon after this, apparently in the spring of 555, Martin was superseded in his command in Armenia and Colchis, and Justin appointed in his stead. The term of Justin's command was marked by no hostilities, for Chosroes, who, in consequence of the defeat at Phasis, had flayed alive the general Nachoragan, decided that it would be inexpedient to continue the war in a distant country which the enemy, being masters of the sea, could reach without difficulty, while his own armies were obliged to accomplish a long journey through desert regions. Isdigunas, also called Zich, was sent to Constantinople, and a provisional treaty was concluded on the terms that things were to remain in statu quo, the two parties retaining their respective possessions, cities or forts, in Lazica,

I have dwelt on the details of these wars at some length, partly because Gibbon has passed over them lightly as undeserving of the attention of posterity. But the idea of writing history for its own sake was strange to Gibbon, and in any case the operations in Lazica concerned serious interests. The question was at stake whether the great Asiatic power was to have access to the Euxine, and these operations decided that on the waters of that sea the Romans were to remain without rivals.

The conclusion of a fifty years' peace in 562 between Rome and Persia forms the natural termination of this chapter. Peter the Patrician, as the delegate of Justinian, and Isdigunas, as the delegate of Chosroes, met on the frontiers of the realm to arrange conditions of peace. The Persian monarch desired that the term of its duration should be long, and that the Romans should pay at once a sum of money equivalent to the total amount of large annual payments for thirty or forty years; the Romans, on the other hand, wished to fix a shorter term. The result of the negotiations was a compromise. A treaty was made for fifty years, the Roman government undertaking to pay the Persians at the rate of 30,000 aurei (£18,750) annually. The total amount due during the first seven years was to be paid at once, and at the beginning of the eighth year the Persian claim for the three ensuing years was to be satisfied. From the tenth year forward the payments were to be annual. The inscription of the Persian document, which ratified the compact, was as follows

"The divine, good, pacific, ancient Chosroes, king of kings, fortunate, pious, beneficent, to whom the gods have given great fortune and great empire, the giant of giants, who is formed in the image of the gods, to Justinian Caesar our brother."

The style of this address, compared with the most imposing list of Justinian's titles, illustrates the difference between the oriental insanity of an Asiatic despot and the vanity of a Roman Emperor, which, even when it becomes intemperate, remains sane.

It will be instructive to enumerate the articles of the treaty, as they show the sort of questions that arose between the two powers:

(1.) The Persians were bound to prevent Huns, Alans, and other barbarians from traversing the pass of Chorutzon (or Tzur) or that of the Caspian gates with a view to depredation in Roman territory; while the Romans were bound not to send an army to those regions or to any other parts of the Persian territory. (2.) The Saracen allies of both States were included in this peace. (3.) Roman and Persian merchants, whatever their wares, were to carry on their traffic by certain prescribed routes, where custom-houses were stationed, and by no others. (4.) Ambassadors between the two States were to have the privilege of making use of the public posts, and their baggage was not to be subjected to custom duties. (5.) Provision was made that Saracen or other traders should not smuggle goods into either Empire by out-of-the-way roads; Daras and Nisibis were named as the two great emporia where these barbarians were to sell their wares. (6.) Henceforward the migration of individuals from the territory of one State into that of the other was not to be permitted; but such as had deserted during the war were allowed to return if they wished. (7.) Disputes between Romans and Persians were to be settled—if the accused failed to satisfy the claim of the plaintiff—by a committee of men who were to meet on the frontiers in the presence of both a Roman and a Persian governor. (8.) To prevent dissension, both States bound themselves to refrain from fortifying towns in proximity to the frontier. (9.) Neither State was to harry or attack any of the subject tribes or nations of its neighbour. (10.) The Romans engaged not to place a large garrison in Daras, and also that the magister militum of the East  should not be stationed there; if any injury in the neighbourhood of that city were inflicted on Persian soil, the governor of Daras was to pay the costs. (11.) In the case of any treacherous dealing, as distinct from open violence, which threatened to disturb the peace, the judges on the frontier were to investigate the matter, and if their decision was insufficient, it was to be referred to the master of soldiers in the East; the final appeal was to be made to the sovereign of the injured person. (12.) Curses were imprecated on the party that should violate the peace. (13.) The term of the peace was fixed for fifty years.

A codicil to the treaty provided for the toleration of the Christians and their rites of burial in the Persian kingdom. They were to enjoy immunity from the persecution of the magi, and, on the other hand, they were to refrain from proselytizing. One small question remained still undecided, the question of Suania, which both Persians and Romans claimed as a dependency; but, although it continued to form the subject of tedious negotiations, it was not allowed to interfere with the concluding of the peace.

X

THE LATER YEARS OF JUSTINIAN'S REIGN

Justinian's policy aimed not only at extending the limits of the Empire in the West at the cost of German nations, but also at diffusing his influence among minor peoples and tribes on other frontiers. In fact he pursued an imperial policy, in the modern sense of the term. Lazica became dependent on the Empire, and the appointment of a Lazic king rested with his suzerain the Emperor. The Tzani and the Apsilians occupied a similar position. Conversion to Christianity usually attended the establishment of such relations. Justinian had the glory of superintending the baptism of Gretes, king of the Heruls, and Gordas, king of the Huns, who lived near Bosporus; he had the privilege of converting the Abassians and the Nobadae to the true religion, and of sending a bishop and clergy to the king of the Axumites. It is recorded that Zamanarzus, the king of the Iberians, came to Constantinople and was admitted to Justinian's friendship, and Theodora presented his wife with pearl ornaments.

An event occurred which increased Roman influence in southern Arabia. Roman merchants bound for the land of Abyssinia were obliged to pass through the kingdom of the Homerites or Himyarites, which was ruled by Damian in the early part of Justinian's reign. Damian adopted the imprudent policy of plundering and slaying the traders who passed through his dominions, and the consequence was that the commerce between the Empire and Abyssinia ceased. Then Adad, the king of Axum (as Abyssinia was called), said to Damian, "You have injured my kingdom"; and they made war. And Adad said, "If I defeat the Homerites, I will become a Christian." He took Damian alive, and subdued the land of Yemen. True to his promise, he besought Justinian to send him a bishop and clergy, and an Abyssinian church was founded.

Less promising converts to Christianity were the Heruls, proverbially notorious for brutish habits and stupidity, who had first sought an asylum with the Gepids, but were soon driven away on account of their intolerable manners. Then admitted into the Empire by Anastasius, they incurred his resentment and chastisement. Justinian made corps of Heruls a standing-part of his army.

In the year 548 four envoys arrived at Constantinople from the Goths of Crimea, who are known as the Tetraxite Goths, to request Justinian to send them a new bishop, as their bishop had died. These Goths were presumably converted in the fourth century, and not joining in the westward movement of the other tribes of their nationality, lived quietly in a secluded nook in the peninsula of Bosporus and Cherson. Their religion no longer possessed the distinctive marks of Arianism, though originally they were Arians. Procopius says that their religion was simple and pious. Thus in the Crimea, where Justinian had already made the city of Bosporus an imperial dependency, the Tetraxite Goths acknowledged his supremacy.

There was some reason for the fears of Chosroes, and for the words which Procopius puts into the mouth of the Armenian ambassadors concerning Justinian, "The whole world does not contain him"—and that was in 539. At that time, as the ambassadors said, besides having subdued Africa and Sicily and almost subdued Italy, he had imposed the yoke of servitude on the Tzani and the yoke of tribute on the Armenians; he had set a Roman dux over "the king of the wretched Lazi"; he had sent military governors to the Bosporites, who were formerly subject to the Huns, and had added a city to his sway; he had made an alliance with the Ethiopians; the Homerites and the Red Sea were included in his rule, and the land of palms. Before he died he had completely reduced Italy, as well as the islands of Corsica and Sardinia, and he had recovered a portion of Spain for the Roman Empire. The Franks, however, ceased to revere the Empire as they had been wont, and began to coin their own gold money without the Emperor's image, although no other barbarian king, not even the Sassanid, was permitted, according to Procopius, by the conditions of commerce, to impress his own effigy on gold coins.

It has already been noticed that a medieval gloom pervades the second period of this reign, and affects the Emperor, who applies himself more and more to the ecclesiastical side of his policy. The observations of Agathias on this later character, with special reference to military affairs, are instructive:

"When the Emperor conquered all Italy and Libya, and waged successfully those mighty wars, and of the princes who reigned at Constantinople was the first to show himself an absolute sovereign in fact as well as in name—after these things had been achieved by him in his youth and vigour, and when he entered on the last stage of life, he seemed to be weary of labours, and preferred to create discord among his foes or to mollify them with gifts, and so keep off their hostilities, instead of trusting in his own forces and shrinking from no danger. He consequently allowed the troops to decline in strength, because he expected that he would not require their services. And those who were second to himself in authority, on whom it was incumbent to collect the taxes and supply the army with necessary provisions, were infected with the same indifference, and either openly kept back the rations altogether or paid them long after they were due; and when the debt was paid at last, persons skilled in the rascally science of arithmetic demanded back from the soldiers what had been given them. It was their privilege to bring various charges against the soldiers, and deprive them of their food ... Thus the army was neglected, and the soldiers, pressed by hunger, left their profession to embrace other modes of life."

Thus the decay of the army was one of the chief characteristics of this period. The Asiatic provinces were slowly recovering after the plague; the Balkan provinces were subject to the constant irruptions of barbarians; and all were oppressed by the severe fiscal system, which the execution of Justinian's designs in the West did not permit him to relax. The establishment of monopolies, which was a feature of his policy, aimed at increasing his revenues, without regard to their effects on trade; nevertheless he encouraged commerce, and the wars which were carried on in Persia probably concerned mercantile interests a great deal more than historians indicate. Although John of Cappadocia partially did away with the cursus imblicus, the Emperor was active in improving roads and constructing bridges in the provinces, thereby facilitating commerce; but he seems to have made the custom duties at Abydos and at the entrance to the Euxine heavier, and perhaps even farmed this source of revenue.

Justinian's reign is notable in the history of industry for the introduction of silk manufacture into Europe. Certain monks arrived from India and sought an interview with the Emperor. They informed him that, having lived long in Serinda (China), they had learned a method by which silk could be made in the Roman Empire, so that the Romans would no longer be obliged to obtain the precious material through their enemies the Persians. The liberal promises of Justinian induced them to return to "India", and they succeeded in bringing back safely eggs of silkworms. Some years later, when the Turks came to the court of Justinian's successor, they were surprised when they were shown the silk manufactories, "for at that time they possessed all the markets and harbours of the Chinese."

There has probably never been a period in which more public works were executed than the reign of Justinian. New towns were founded, innumerable churches were erected, aqueducts were constructed, bridges were built; cities were fortified, extended, or restored and enriched with new baths and palaces; the mere enumeration of these results of Justinian's activity would fill pages. It may be doubted whether the expenses which he thus incurred would be justified by the rules of a prudent economy; his "mania" for building certainly furnished a ground of complaint for the party of opposition to use against him. Yet his works, both secular and sacred, were useful, and under ordinary conditions should have contributed to the prosperity of the Empire. New roads and secure bridges facilitated commerce, aqueducts and fortifications provided for the health and the safety of the inhabitants, while the erection of churches by the Emperor tended to strengthen the ties between the provinces and the central government, The enormous outlay on the building of St. Sophia, the creation of Anthemius, needs no justification.

Earthquakes were frequent in the days of Justinian, who did his utmost to alleviate their effects. Antioch suffered in 526, Pompeiopolis in 536, Cyzicus in 543. In 551 there were great physical disturbances in Greece; 4000 inhabitants were engulfed at Patrae. Three years later an earthquake destroyed many cities both in the islands and on the mainland, causing great loss of life. Among the rest, it reduced to ruin Berytus, then "the pride of Phoenicia", and hardly a trace of that city's splendid buildings was left. Berytus was the seat of a law school, and many educated strangers who had gone thither to study law perished; so that the misfortune was unusually tragic. While the city was being rebuilt, the professors of law lectured in Sidon. This earthquake was so severe that a slight shock was felt even at Alexandria, where the historian Agathias was sojourning at the time. All the inhabitants were terrified at the unwonted sensation, and none remained in the houses. Although the shock was slight, there was some reason for their terror, as the houses at Alexandria were of very unsubstantial structure. The island of Cos suffered more than any other tract of land. Agathias visited it in returning from Alexandria to Constantinople, and found it in a state of utter desolation. Three years later another earthquake visited the region of Byzantium and threatened to destroy the whole city. It was peculiarly severe both in violence and duration, and Agathias gives us a vivid account of its horrors and moral effects. The only victim of distinction was the curator of the palace, Anatolius, who perished by the fall of a marble slab fixed in the wall close to his bed. I mention this for the sake of Agathias' comment. Many people said that it was a providential punishment of Anatolius for acts of injustice and oppression. "I doubt it", said Agathias, "for an earthquake would be a most desirable and excellent thing if it knew how to discriminate the bad from the good, slaying those and passing these by. But, even granting that he was unjust, there were many more like him, and worse, who escaped unharmed. And besides", he adds, "if Plato is right, the man who is punished in this life is more fortunate than he who is allowed to live in his sins."

As Justinian grew old and weak and had no issue, an element which affected political life in Constantinople was the question of the succession to the throne. It led to a sort of party rivalry between the relations of Theodora and the relations of Justinian; and the difficulty was ultimately solved by the marriage of Sophia, Theodora's niece, with Justin, Justinian's nephew. While she was alive Theodora had looked with disfavor on Justinian's kin. She died in 548 (27th June), and perhaps it was the loss of her that clouded the spirits and depressed the energy of the Emperor in his later years.

The conspiracy which was formed against the life of the Emperor in 548 was of no serious political importance; it was organized by a pair of dissatisfied Armenians, who owed Justinian a personal grudge. Artabanes, the commander in Africa, had overthrown the usurper Gontharis and delivered from his hands the Emperor's niece Praejecta, whose husband Areobindus had been put to death by the tyrant. From gratitude, not from love, Praejecta consented to become the wife of Artabanes, who aspired to an alliance with the imperial house; and the count of Africa hastened to surrender the newly conferred dignity and obtain his recall from Justinian, that he might return to Constantinople, whither Praejecta had preceded him, and celebrate the marriage. He was received with open arms in the capital; he became magister militum in praesenti and captain of the foederati; his tall and dignified stature, his concise speech, and his generosity won the admiration of all. But an unexpected obstacle to the proposed marriage occurred in the person of a previous wife, whom he had put away many years before. As long as Artabanes was an obscure individual, the lady was contented to leave him in peace and give no sign of her existence; but when he suddenly rose to fame, she determined to assert her conjugal rights, and, as a wronged woman, she implored the aid of Theodora. The Empress, "whose nature it was to undertake the cause of injured women", compelled the unwilling master of soldiers to take his wife once more to his bosom, and Praejecta became the bride of John, the son of Pompeius and grand­son of the Emperor Anastasius. Shortly after this the Empress died, and Artabanes immediately put away for the second time his unwelcome wife, but Praejecta was lost to him, and he nourished a grudge against the Emperor.

Had it depended only on himself, Artabanes would never have undertaken any sinister design, but a countryman of his, named Arsaces, a descendant of the Parthian Arsacidae, was animated with a bitter desire of revenge upon Justinian, who had inflicted a comparatively light punishment on him for treacherous correspondence with Chosroes; and he diligently fanned into flame the less eager feelings of Artabanes. He reminded him that he had lost the bride he desired and been obliged to submit to the presence of the wife he hated; he urged the facility of despatching Justinian, "who is accustomed to sit without guards in the Museum, in the company of old priests, till late hours of the night, deep in the study of the holy books of the Christians." Above all, he expressed his conviction that Germanus would readily take part in such a conspiracy. For Boraides, the brother of Germanus, had on his death left almost all his property to his brother, allowing his wife and daughter to receive only as much as was legally necessary. But Justinian had altered the will so as to favour the daughter, and this was felt by Germanus, her uncle, as a grievance.

When he had won Artabanes to his plan, Arsaces opened communications with Justin, the eldest son of Germanus. Having bound him by oath not to reveal the conversation to any person except his father, he enlarged on the manner in which the Emperor ill treated and passed over his relations, and expressed his conviction that it would go still harder with them when Belisarius arrived. He did not hesitate to reveal the plan of assassination which he had formed in conjunction with Artabanes and Chanaranges, a young and frivolous Armenian who had been admitted to their counsels.

Justin, terrified at this revelation, laid it before his father, who immediately consulted with Marcellus, the prefect of the palatine guards, as to whether it would be wise to inform the Emperor immediately. Marcellus, an honourable, austere, and wary man, dissuaded Germanus from taking that course, on the ground that such a communication, necessitating a private interview with the Emperor, would inevitably become known to the conspirators and lead to Arsaces' escape. He proposed to investigate the matter himself beforehand, and it was arranged that Arsaces should be lured to speak in the presence of a concealed witness. Justin appointed a day and hour for an interview between Germanus and Arsaces, and the compromising revelations were overheard by Leontius, a friend of Marcellus, who was hidden behind a cloth screen. The programme of the matured plot was to wait for the arrival of Belisarius and slay the Emperor and his general at the same time; for if Justinian were slain beforehand, the revolutionists might not be able to contend against the military forces of Belisarius. When the deed was done, Germanus was to be proclaimed Emperor.

Marcellus still hesitated to reveal the plot to the Emperor, out of friendship or pity for Artabanes. But when Belisarius was drawing nigh to the capital, he could hesitate no longer, and Justinian ordered the conspirators to be arrested. Germanus and Justin were at first not exempted from suspicion, but when the senate inquired into the case, the testimony of Marcellus and Leontius, and two other officers to whom Germanus had prudently disclosed the affair, completely cleared them. Even then Justinian was still indignant that they had concealed the treason so long, and was not mollified until the candid Marcellus took all the blame of the delay upon himself. The conspirators were treated with clemency, being confined in the palace and not in the public prison. It is to be concluded from the words of Procopius, which are not express, that they were ultimately pardoned.

The policy of Justinian in playing off one barbarian people against another is well exemplified in his dealings with the Cotrigur and Utrigur Huns, who dwelt on the northern shores of the Euxine. It appears that the Gepids called in the help of the former against their neighbours and rivals the Lombards. Twelve thousand Cotrigurs, under the warrior Chinialus, answered the call, and arrived a year before the truce which existed between the Gepids and their foes had expired. The Gepids persuaded their guests to occupy the interval by invading the provinces of the Empire. Justinian, who was in the habit of allowing large donations both to the Cotriguri and Utriguri, sent a message to Sandichl, the chief of the latter, and chid him for his supineness in allowing his neighbours to advance against the Empire. New gifts induced the Utriguri to march against the land of the invaders, and the Roman allies were reinforced by two thousand Tetraxite Goths. The Cotrigur Huns were defeated with great slaughter in their own territory; their wives and children were led captive beyond the river Tanais, which separated the two countries, and many thousand prisoners, who languished in slavery, were enabled to escape. The invaders then withdrew beyond the Roman borders, having received a sum of money from the Roman captain Aratius; but two thousand Huns, who had fled before the Utrigurs, threw themselves on the mercy of the Emperor and were graciously allowed to settle in a district of Thrace. The news of this clemency exasperated the Utrigurs; Sandichl sent envoys to remonstrate, but the gifts and soft words of Justinian appeased their resentment.

A great invasion of the Cotrigur Huns, under Zabergan, took place in the last months of 558. The real motive, as Agathias remarks, was the greed of an uncivilized barbarian, though Zabergan cloaked it with the complaint that the Emperor had been friendly with Sandichl, the king of the Utrigur Huns. The invader crossed the frozen Danube, and, passing unopposed through Scythia and Moesia, entered Thrace, where he divided his hordes into three armies. One was sent westward to Greece, to ravage the unprotected country, the second was sent into the Thracian Chersonese to capture the towns of Aphrodisias, Theseus, Ciberis, Sestos, and the ugly little Gallipolis, which belied its name, and to seize ships and cross to Abydos; the third army, consisting of seven thousand cavalry, marched under Zabergan himself to Constantinople.

The terrible ravages and cruelties committed by the third and main body are thus described by the contemporary writer Agathias:

"As no resistance was offered to their course, they overran and plundered everything mercilessly, obtaining a great booty and large numbers of captives. Among the rest, well-born women of chaste life were most cruelly carried off to undergo the worst of all misfortunes, and minister to the unbridled lust of the barbarians; some who in early youth had renounced marriage and the cares and pleasures of this life, and had immured themselves in some religious retreat, deeming it of the highest importance to be free from cohabitation with men, were dragged from the chambers of their virginity and violated. Many married women who happened to be pregnant were dragged away, and when their hour was come brought forth children on the march, unable to conceal their throes, or to take up and swaddle the new-born babes; they were hauled along, in spite of all, hardly allowed even time to suffer, and the wretched infants were left where they fell, a prey for dogs and birds, as though this were the purpose of their appearance in the world.

"To such a pass had the Roman Empire come that, even within the precincts of the districts surrounding the imperial city, a very small number of barbarians committed such enormities. Their audacity went so far as to pass the long walls and approach the inner fortifications. For time and neglect had in many places dilapidated the great wall, and other parts were easily thrown down by the barbarians, as there was nought to repel them—no military garrison, no engines of defense, nor persons to employ such. Not even the bark of a dog was to be heard; the wall was less efficiently protected than a pig-sty or sheep-cot. For the Roman armies had not continued so numerous as in the days of ancient Emperors, but had dwindled to a small number, and no longer were sufficient for the size of the State. The whole force should have been six hundred and forty-five thousand fighting men, but actually it hardly amounted to one hundred and fifty thousand. And of these, some were in Italy, others in Africa, others in Spain, others in Colchis, others at Alexandria and in the Thebaid, a few on the Persian frontier (where only a few were needed on account of the peace)."

The Huns encamped at Melantias, a village on the small river Athyras, which flows into the Propontis. Their proximity created a panic in Constantinople, whose inhabitants saw imminent the horrors of sieges, conflagrations, and famine. The terror was not confined to the lower classes; the nobles trembled in their palaces, the Emperor was alarmed on his throne. All the treasures of the churches, which were scattered in the tract of country included between the Euxine and the Golden Horn, were either carted into the city or shipped to the Asiatic side of the Bosphorus. The undisciplined corps of the Scholarian guards, ignorant of real warfare, who were supposed to defend the gates, did not inspire the citizens with much confidence.

On this critical occasion Justinian appealed to his veteran general Belisarius to save the seat of empire. In spite of his years and feebleness Belisarius put on his helmet and cuirass once more, and he won greater glory among the men of his time by saving New Rome on the Bosphorus than he had won by recovering Old Rome on the Tiber. He relied chiefly on a small body of three hundred men who had fought with him in Italy; the other troops that he mustered knew nothing of war, and they were more for appearance than for action. The peasants who had fled before the barbarians from their ravaged homesteads in Thrace accompanied the little army. He encamped at the village of Chettus, and employed the peasants in the congenial work of digging a wide trench round the camp. Spies were sent out to discover the numbers of the enemy, and at night a large number of beacons were kindled in the plain with the purpose of misleading the Huns as to the number of the forces sent out against them. For a while they were misled, but it was soon known that the Roman army was small, and two thousand cavalry selected by Zabergan rode forth to annihilate it. The spies informed Belisarius of the enemy's approach, and he made a skilful disposition of his troops. He concealed two hundred peltasts and javelin-men in the woods on either side of the plain, close to the place where he expected the attack of the barbarians; the ambuscaders, at a given signal, were to shower their missiles on the hostile ranks. The object of this was to compel the lines of the enemy to close in, in order to avoid the javelins on the flank, and thus to render their superior numbers useless through inability to deploy. Belisarius himself headed the rest of the army; in the rear followed the rustics, who were not to engage in the battle, but were to accompany it with loud shouts and cause a clatter with wooden beams, which they carried for that purpose.

All fell out as Belisarius had planned. The Huns, pressed by the peltasts, thronged together, and were hindered both from using their bows and arrows with effect, and from circumventing the Roman wings. The noise of the rustics in the rear, combined with the attack on the flanks, gave the foe the impression that the Roman army was immense, and that they were being-surrounded; clouds of dust obscured the real situation, and the barbarians turned and fled. Four hundred perished before they reached their camp at Melantias, while not a single Roman was mortally wounded. The camp was immediately abandoned, and all the Huns hurried away, imagining that the victors were still on their track. But by the Emperor's orders Belisarius did not pursue them.

We must now follow the fortunes of the Hunnic troops who were sent against the Chersonese. Germanus, the son of Dorotheus, a native of Prima Justiniana, had been appointed some time previously commandant in that peninsula, and he now proved himself a capable officer. As the Huns could make no breach in the great wall, which shut in the peninsula, and was skillfully defended by the dispositions of Germanus, they resorted to the expedient of manufacturing boats of reeds fastened together in sheaves; each boat was large enough to hold four men; one hundred and fifty were constructed, and six hundred fully armed soldiers embarked secretly in the bay of Aenus (near the mouth of the Hebrus), in order to land on the south-western coast of the Chersonese. Germanus learned the news of their enterprise with delight, and immediately manned twenty galleys with armed men.

The armament of reed-built boats was easily annihilated, not a single barbarian escaping. This success was followed up by an excursion of the Romans from the wall against the army of the dispirited besiegers; the latter abandoned their enterprise and joined Zabergan, who was also retreating after the defeat at Chettus.

Soon after this the other division of the Huns, which had been sent in the direction of Greece, returned without having achieved any signal success. They had not penetrated farther than Thermopylae, where the garrison of the fort that commanded the pass prevented their advance.

Thus, although Thrace, and presumably also Macedonia and Thessaly, suffered terribly from this invasion, Zabergan was unsuccessful in all three points of attack, owing to the ability of Belisarius, Germanus, and the garrison of Thermopylae. Justinian redeemed the captives for a considerable sum of money, and the Cotrigurs retreated beyond the Danube. But the wily Emperor laid a trap for their destruction. He despatched a characteristic letter to Sandichl, the friendly king of the Utrigurs, whose friendship he had cultivated by periodical presents of money. He informed Sandichl that the Cotrigurs had invaded Thrace and carried off all the gold that was destined to enrich the treasury of the Utriguric monarch. "It would have been easy for us", ran the imperial letter, "to have destroyed them utterly, or at least to have sent them empty away. But we did neither one thing nor the other, because we wished to test your sentiments. For if you are really valiant and wise, and not disposed to tolerate the appropriation by others of what belongs to you, you are not losers; for you have nothing to do but punish the enemy and receive from them your money at the sword's point, as though we had sent it to you by their hands". The Emperor further threatened that, if Sandichl proved himself craven enough to let the insult pass, he would transfer his amity to the Cotrigurs. The letter had the desired effect; the seeds of discord were sown; the Utrigurs were stirred up against their neighbors, and a series of ceaseless hostilities wasted the strength of the two nations.

After the repulse of the Huns, Belisarius lived in high honor at Constantinople, but was perhaps an object of suspicion to Justinian. A conspiracy to murder the Emperor was discovered in November 562, and one of the names mentioned by a culprit who confessed was that of the general, now nearly seventy years old. His age did not serve to acquit him of treasonable designs, and he remained in disgrace for eight months, until July 563, when he was restored to favor. The great Patrician died in March 565,2 his wife, Antonina, who had already passed the age of eighty, surviving him; but his riches passed to Justinian, who died in the following November.

CHAPTER XI

JUSTINIAN’S CAESAROPAPISM

The absolutism of Justinian extended to the ecclesiastical world, and in church as well as in state history he occupies a position of ecumenical importance. He was a sort of imperial pontiff, and this Caesaropapism, as it has been called, represents the fulfilment of the policy which Constantius tried and failed to realize.

Justinian's ecclesiastical policy rested on his support of the council of Chalcedon, and thus accorded in principle with the policy by which his uncle Justin had restored unity to Christendom. But this unity was only a unity of the western Church with the chief Church in the East; whereas the East itself was divided. The monophysites were a large and important body, and the Emperor was not content not to make an effort to reconcile this difference, especially as the Empress Theodora was an adherent of the heretical creed. His object was to secure a unity in the Church, which should exclude all sectarianism, and embrace both East and West. Consequently he did not rest in the policy of his uncle Justin; he tried to accomplish what Zeno and Anastasius had failed to accomplish, a conciliation of the Chalcedonians and monophysites.

One of his first acts was to deal a final blow to paganism. He shut up the philosophical schools at Athens, with which Theodosius II had not interfered when he founded the university of Constantinople. The abolition of the Athenian university has two aspects. In the first place, it was the last blow dealt by Christianity to the ancient philosophers and their doctrines, and was one of the acts which mark the reign of Justinian as the terminus of the ancient world. In the second place, it was a measure in which Justinian's design of establishing a unity of belief and thought in the Empire was manifested; and it is to be taken closely with the law that pagans and heretical Christians were not to hold office in either the civil service or the army. His general principle is laid down clearly in a constitution (published shortly before his uncle's death): “All will be able to perceive that from those who do not worship God rightly, human goods also are withheld”,—a most concise expression of religious intolerance. It may be observed that in this constitution the Manichaeans are mentioned with special acrimony, and rendered liable to the extreme penalties of the law. It was the instinct of Christianity, which was essentially monistic, though not with Semitic monism, to fight against all forms of dualism as the most odious kind of heresy.

The monophysites held a peculiar position. They were very numerous, and they were supported by the sympathy of the Empress Theodora, who shared their creed. Justinian considered it an important political object to unite them with the orthodox Church, and it was a theological problem to accomplish this—to make concessions to the heretics without abandoning the basis of Chalcedon.

Justinian might have carried this out in the East without much difficulty, if he had been content to sacrifice union with the western Church. But that would have been to undo what Justin had done and he himself had confirmed; and the union of the eastern and western Churches was of primary importance for the restorer of Roman rule in Italy and Africa. His political designs exercised a perceptible control on his ecclesiastical measures.

This was the dilemma that beset every Roman Emperor—quite apart from his personal opinions—ever since the council of Chalcedon. If he chose to attempt to establish unity in the East, he must sacrifice unity with the West, as Zeno and Anastasius had done. If he chose to seek unity with the West, like Justin, he must be satisfied to see his dominions distracted by the bitter opposition of synodites and monophysites. The imperial throne shared by the orthodox Justinian and the Eutychian Theodora was symbolic of the division of the Empire in the matter of theological beliefs.

Justinian’s achievement was to overcome this dilemma. He was powerful enough to carry a measure which tended to unity by modifying the synod of Chalcedon without breaking with the Church of Rome.

Apart from their personal opinions—which, while we admit that they co-operated, we must set aside in order to observe the influence of circumstances—the policies of Zeno, Anastasius, and Justin in regard to this problem were natural. To Zeno and Anastasius, who had no thought of recovering power in Italy, the opposition of the bishop of Rome was a matter of smaller importance than division in the Empire. Justin’s policy was naturally anti-monophysitic, because it was a reaction against Anastasius; and such a policy implied a renewal of relations with Rome. Justinian’s intervention in the political world of western Europe altered the position of the bishop of Rome, and in the fifth Council of Constantinople the Emperor exercised an unprecedented authority, which would have pleased Constantius II.

In 536 AD, by the influence of Theodora, Anthimus, a man of monophysitic opinions, was appointed Patriarch of Constantinople. In the following year Pope Agapetus visited that city on political business, to treat for peace on behalf of Theodabad; it was the second time that an Ostrogothic king had despatched a Pope on a message to an Emperor. Agapetus Succeeded in obtaining the deposition of Anthimus, and the election of an orthodox successor, Mennas. That Justinian was not aware of the real opinions of Anthimus, before Agapetus unveiled his heterodoxy, is unlikely, but the supporter of orthodoxy could not refuse to oppose him, once it was made public, and that by the bishop of Rome. Dante represents Justinian as originally holding monophysitic opinions, and owing his conversion to Agapetus.

The controversy of the “three articles”, a long chapter in the ecclesiastical history of the sixth century, began in 544, and lasted for eight years. We need not follow its details, but the elements that were involved in it as well as its consequences must be briefly explained. Three points to be noticed are—(1) that it was externally connected with an Origenistic controversy which had disturbed Palestine for some years past; (2) that the difficulty of concluding the question depended on the wavering position of Pope Vigilius; (3) that Justinian's desire to carry his point was at first quickened by the monophysitic leanings of his consort, who died before the dispute was decided.

At Justinian’s desire the Patriarch Mennas held a local synod, at which the writings of Origen were condemned. Theodore Ascidas, bishop of Caesarea, a monophysite who believed in the Origenistic theology, did not oppose this sentence, but made a fruitful suggestion to Justinian, of which the apparently exclusive aim was to reunite the monophysites, but which really contained a blow at a prominent opponent of Origen’s methods, Theodore of Mopsuestia. The import of this suggestion was that what really repelled the monophysites was not any point of doctrine, but the countenance given by the council of Chalcedon to certain Nestorians.

Accordingly in 544 Justinian promulgated an edict, wherein the Three Articles, which gave the name to the controversy, were enunciated—(1) Theodore of Mopsuestia and his works were condemned; (2) certain writings of Theodoret against Cyril were condemned; and (3) a letter of Ibas, addressed to a Persian and censuring Cyril, was condemned. The council of Chalcedon had expressly acknowledged the orthodoxy of these writings and their authors, and thus the authority of that council seemed called in question, though the edict expressly professed to respect it.

The bishops of the East, including Mennas, signed the edict; but Mennas made his adhesion conditional on the approval of the bishop of Rome, and it is just the attitude of the bishop of Rome that lends an interest to the controversy.

Vigilius had been elevated to the papal see of Rome under circumstances which appear at least unusual. He was at Constantinople when Agapetus died in 537, and his election rested on the support of Theodora, with whom he is said to have made a sort of bargain not to act against the monophysite Anthimus, the deposed Patriarch. Before he arrived at Rome, Silverius had been elected Pope in Italy, and the deposition and banishment of the latter, on the charge of treason, by Belisarius, give room for suspicion that corrupt dealings were practiced for the benefit of Vigilius.

When Vigilius was called upon to sign the edict of the “three articles” he felt himself in a dilemma. The western Church, especially the Church of Africa, cried out loudly against the document, while Vigilius felt himself under obligations to Theodora and the Emperor. A synod at Carthage went so far as to excommunicate the Pope (549).

At first he refused to sign. When he was at Rome, at a safe distance from the Caesar-Pope, resistance did not seem hard. But Justinian summoned him to Constantinople, where he remained until 554. During this time he wavered between the two forces in whose conflict he was involved—the ecclesiastical opinion of the West and the imperial authority. The latter finally conquered, but not until the Pope had been condemned in the fifth general Council, held at Constantinople in 553, after which he retracted his condemnation of the articles, attributing it to the arts of the devil.

The fifth general Council, it should be observed, has an importance beyond the rather trivial subjects, discussed. Its basis, its agenda, was an edict drawn up by the Emperor; it adopted theological tenets formulated by the Emperor. This is the most characteristic manifestation of Justinianean Caesaropapism.

The election of Pelagius as the successor of Vigilius to the see of Rome is noteworthy, because the Roman Emperor exercised the right of confirming the election, which had belonged to the Ostrogothic monarch. This right gave Justinian an ecclesiastical power of European extent, and introduced an important theory into Christendom. “According to the Liber Diurnus (a collection of forms which represents the state of things in those days or shortly after), the death of a Roman bishop was to be notified to the exarch of Ravenna; the successor was to be chosen by the clergy, the nobles of Rome, the soldiery, and the citizens; and the ratification of the election was to be requested in very submissive terms both of the Emperor and of his deputy the exarch”.

Pelagius upheld the three articles of the council, but the unity of the East and the consent of the Pope were purchased at the expense of the unity of the West. Milan and Aquileia would know nothing of the fifth Council, and although the invasion of the Lombards soon drove Milan into the arms of Rome, the see of Aquileia and the bishop of Istria seceded from the Roman Church for more than a hundred and forty years.

In Egypt monophysitism was ineradicable. Alexandria “the Great” was a scene of continual religious quarrels between the Eutychians and the Melchites, as they called the orthodox Catholics. In Syria monophysitism continued under the name of Jacobitism—a name derived from its propagator in the sixth century, Jacob al Baradai, a travelling monk.

The Armenian Church also adopted the Eutychian heresy, and in the ultra-Eutychian form of aphthartodocetism, the doctrine that Christ's body was incorruptible. It is curious that the same cause favoured the survival of the two opposite doctrines, Eutychianism and Nestorianism, in Armenia and Persia respectively. The Persian government tolerated Nestorian Christianity in its dominions, and looked with favour on a monophysitic Armenian Church, because both creeds were opposed to the State religion of Byzantium.

I have mentioned aphthartodocetism. It obtained a certain notoriety in the last years of Justinian's reign, for the old Emperor adopted the doctrine himself, and enforced it on his subjects by an edict. His death cut short the full execution his last and least Caesaropapistic undertaking.

Among his acts of ecclesiastical autocracy we must mention the edict which raised the see of Prima Justiniana, in his own native province of Dacia Mediterranea, to the rank of an arch­bishopric (535 ad). “Desiring”, this document begins, “to increase in many and divers ways our native land, in which God first granted us to come into this world, which He himself founded, we wish to augment it and make it very great in ecclesiastical rank”. This decree was confirmed in another decree ten years later (545 ad). I do not consider it justifiable to say, as ecclesiastical historians sometimes do, that Justinian desired to found a sixth patriarchate; on the contrary, the new archbishop, as I understand the second edict, was to depend on the Pope of Rome, and to hold the same position, for example, as the archbishop of Ravenna.

In regard to the missionary activity which Justinian encouraged for the conversion of heathen nations, I cannot do better than quote the following little-known account of the conversion of the Nobadae:

“Among the clergy in attendance on the Patriarch Theodosius was a proselyte named Julianus, an old man of great worth, who conceived an earnest spiritual desire to Christianize the wandering people who dwell on the eastern borders of the Thebais beyond Egypt, and who are not only not subject to the authority of the Roman Empire, but even receive a subsidy on condition that they do not enter nor pillage Egypt. The blessed Julianus, therefore, being full of anxiety for this people, went and spoke about them to the late Queen Theodora, in the hope of awakening in her a similar desire for their conversion; and as the queen was fervent in zeal for God, she received the proposal with joy, and promised to do everything in her power for the conversion of these tribes from the errors of idolatry. In her joy, therefore, she informed the victorious King Justinian of the purposed undertaking, and promised and anxiously desired to send the blessed Julian thither. But when the king [Emperor] heard that the person she intended to send was opposed to the council of Chalcedon, he was not pleased, and determined to write to the bishops of his own side in the Thebais, with orders for them to proceed thither and instruct the Nobadae, and plant among them the name of synod. And as he entered upon the matter with great zeal, he sent thither, without a moment’s delay, ambassadors with gold and baptismal robes, and gifts of honor for the king of that people, and letters for the duke of the Thebais, enjoining him to take every care of the embassy and escort them to the territories of the Nobadae. When, however, the queen learnt these things, she quickly, with much cunning, wrote letters to the duke of the Thebais, and sent a mandatory of her court to carry them to him; and which were as follows: ‘Inasmuch as both his majesty and myself have purposed to send an embassy to the people of the Nobadae, and I am now dispatching a blessed man named Julian; and further my will is that my ambassador should arrive at the aforesaid people before his majesty’s; be warned, that if you permit his ambassador to arrive there before mine, and do not hinder him by various pretexts until mine shall have reached you and shall have passed through your province and arrived at his destination, your life shall answer for it; for I shall immediately send and take off your head’. Soon after the receipt of this letter the king’s ambassador also came, and the duke said to him: ‘You must wait a little while we look out and procure beasts of burden and men who know the deserts, and then you will be able to proceed’. And thus he delayed him until the arrival of the merciful queen’s embassy, who found horses and guides in waiting, and the same day, without loss of time, under a show of doing it by violence, they laid hands upon him, and were the first to proceed. As for the duke, he made his excuses to the king’s ambassador, saying: ‘Lo! when I had made my preparations and was desirous of sending you onward, ambassadors from the queen arrived and fell upon me with violence, and took away the beasts of burden I had got ready, and have passed onward; and I am too well acquainted with the fear in which the queen is held to venture to oppose them. But abide still with me until I can make fresh preparations for you, and then you also shall go in peace’. And when he heard these things he rent his garments, and threatened him terribly and reviled him; and after some time he also was able to proceed, and followed the other’s track without being aware of the fraud which had been practiced upon him”.

“The blessed Julian meanwhile and the ambassadors who accompanied him had arrived at the confines of the Nobadae, whence they sent to the king and his princes informing him of their coming; upon which an armed escort set out, who received them joyfully, and brought them into their land unto the king. And he too received them with pleasure, and her majesty's letter was presented and read to him, and the purport of it explained. They accepted also the magnificent honours sent them, and the numerous baptismal robes, and everything else richly provided for their use. And immediately with joy they yielded themselves up and utterly abjured the errors of their forefathers, and confessed the God of the Christians, saying, ‘He is the one true God, and there is no other beside Him’. And after Julian had given them much instruction, and taught them, he further told them about the council of Chalcedon, saying that inasmuch as certain disputes had sprung up among Christians touching the faith, and the blessed Theodosius being required to receive the council and having refused was ejected by the king [Emperor] from his throne, whereas the queen received him and rejoiced in him because he stood firm in the right faith and left his throne for its sake, on this account her majesty has sent us to you, that ye also may walk in the ways of Pope Theodosius, and stand in his faith and imitate his constancy. And moreover the king has sent unto you ambassadors, who are already on their way, in our footsteps”.

The Emperor’s emissaries arrived soon afterwards, and were dismissed by the king of the Nobadae, who told them that if his people embraced Christianity at all it would be the doctrine of the holy Theodosius of Alexandria, and not the ‘wicked faith’ of the Emperor.

In his own dominions too the activity of Christian missionaries was necessary, for in the devious recesses of Asia Minor there were many spots, pagi, where heathenism survived. It is remarkable that for the conversion of his heathen subjects Justinian employed a monophysitic priest, John of Ephesus, who afterwards wrote an ecclesiastical history in Syriac from the monophysitic point of view. We shall see how the monophysites were persecuted by a zealous Patriarch and an unwise Emperor after Justinian’s death. Towards the close of the century, when the heresy was almost exterminated from the Empire, it was revived, as has been already mentioned, by one Jacob al Baradai, who, dressed as a beggar—hence his name “the Ragged”—travelled about in the provinces of Syria and Mesopotamia and organized anew the monophysitic Church. To the renascent monophysites was attached the name of the second founder of the sect; they were called Jacobites.

CHAPTER XII

THE SLAVS

In one respect the history of Byzantium, as the capital of the Roman world, differed little from its history as a Greek republic. Both as the mercantile commonwealth and as the imperial city, it was exposed, with its adjoining territory, to the hostilities of the barbarians of various races who infested the wild and ill-known lands of the Balkan mountains or dwelled on the shores of the Danube. In fact, Polybius’ remarks on the favourable site of Byzantium seawards and its unfavourable aspect landwards hold good of its subsequent experiences, and the following passage might be taken as a short summary of one side of Byzantine history:

“As Thrace surrounds the territory of the Byzantines on all sides, reaching from sea to sea, they are involved in an endless and troublesome war against the Thracians, for it is not feasible, by making preparations on a grand scale and winning one decisive victory over them, to get rid once for all of their hostilities; the barbarous nations and dynasts are too numerous. If they overcome one, three more worse than the first arise and advance against their country. Nor can they gain any advantage by submitting to pay tribute and making definite contracts; for if they make any concession to one prince, such a concession raises up against them five times as many foes. For these reasons they are involved in a neverending and troublesome war. For what is more dangerous than a bad neighbour, and what more dreadful than a war with barbarians? And besides the other evils that attend on war, they have to undergo (to speak poetically) a sort of Tantalean punishment, for when they have diligently tilled their land, which is very fertile, and have been rewarded by the production of an abundant and surpassingly fine crop, then come the barbarians, and having reaped part of the fruits to carry off with them, destroy what they cannot take away. The Byzantines can only murmur indignantly, and endure”.

This passage might have been written of the depredations of the Huns, the Ostrogoths, the Avars, or the Slaves.

Of these four peoples, the first three were only comets of ruin in the Balkan peninsula, while the Slavonic peoples, to whose early history this chapter is devoted, probably began to filter into the provinces of Illyricum and Thrace as settlers before the invasions of Attila, and in later times pouring in as formidable invaders, gradually converted those provinces into Slavonic principalities, which, according to the tide of war, were sometimes dependent on, sometimes independent of, the government of Constantinople.

To understand the history of the Haemus countries, the extension of the Slavonic races there, and the campaigns of the Roman armies against the invaders, a general notion of the very difficult and still imperfectly explored geography of Thrace is indispensable.

We may consider Mount Vitos, and the town of Sardica, now Sofia, which lies at its base as the central point of the peninsula. Rising in the shape of an immense cone to a height of 2300 metres, Vitos affords to the climber who ascends it a splendid view of the various complicated mountain chains which diversify the surrounding lands—a view which has been pronounced finer than that at Tempe or that at Vodena. In the group of which this mountain and another named Ryl, to southward, are the highest peaks, two rivers of the lower Danube system, the Oescus (Isker) and the Nisava have their sources, as well as the two chief rivers of the Aegean system, the Hebrus (Maritsa) and the Strymon (Struma).

From this central region stretches in a south-easterly direction the double chain of Rhodope, cleft in twain by the valley of the Nestos (Mesta). The easterly range, Rhodope proper, forms the western boundary of the great plain of Thrace, while the range of Orbelos separates the Nestos’ valley from the Strymon valley.

The great Haemus or Balkan chain which runs from east to west is also double, like Rhodope, but is not in the same way divided by a large river. The Haemus’ mountains begin near the sources of the Timacus and Margus, from which they stretch to the shores of the Euxine. To a traveler approaching them from the northern or Danubian side they do not present an impressive appearance, for the ascent is very gradual; plateau rises above plateau, or the transition is accomplished by gentle slopes, and the height of the highest parts is lost by the number of intervening degrees. But on the southern side the descent is precipitous, and the aspect is imposing and sublime. This capital difference between the two sides of the Haemus range is closely connected with the existence of the second and lower parallel range, called the Sredna Gora, which runs through Roumelia (region of S. Bulgaria, between the Balkan and Rhodope) from Sofia to Sliven. It seems as if a convulsion of the earth had cloven asunder an original and large chain by a sudden rent, which gave its abrupt and sheer character to the southern side of the Haemus mountains, and interrupted the gradual incline upwards from the low plain of Thrace.

The important chain of Sredna Gora, which is often confounded with the northern chain of Haemus, is divided into three parts, which, following Hochstetter, we may call the Karadza Dagh, the Sredna Gora, and the Ichtimaner. The Karadza Dagh mountains are the most easterly, and are separated from Sredna Gora by the river Strema (a tributary of the Maritsa), while the valley of the Tundza (Tainaros), with its fields of roses and pleasantly situated towns, divides it from Mount Haemus. Sredna Gora reaches a greater height than the mountains to east or to west, and is separated by the river Topolnitsa from the most westerly portion, the Ichtimaner mountains, which form a sort of transition connecting the Balkan system with the Rhodope system, whilst at the same time they are the watershed between the tributaries of the Hebrus and those of the Danube. It is in this range too that the important pass of Succi is situated, through which the road led from Constantinople to Singidunum, Sirmium, and Italy.

The river Isker divides the Balkan chain into a western and an eastern half. Of the western mountains, which command a view of the middle Danube, we need only mention the strange region which Kanitz, the Austrian traveller, discovered near the fort of Belgradcik. “Gigantic pillars of dark red sandstone, crowned by groups of trees, rise in fantastic shapes to heights above 200 metres, and, separated by rivulets and surrounded by luxuriant green, they form remarkable groups and alleys, as it were a city changed to stone, with towers, burgs, houses, bridges, obelisks, and ships, men and beasts”.

In the central part of the eastern Haemus mountains is the now celebrated pass of Sipka, which connects the valley of the Tundza with the valley of the Jantra (Jatrus), and is the chief route from Thrace into Lower Moesia. Between this spot and the pass of Sliven farther east extend the wildest and most impervious regions of the Balkans, regions which have always been the favorite homes of scamars and klephts, who could defy the justice of civilization in thick forests and inaccessible ravines—regions echoing with the wild songs and romances of outlaw life. Beyond the pass of the Iron Gates (Demir Kapu), connecting Sliven with Trnovo, the range splits itself into three prongs; the north prong touching the river of the Great Kamcija, the middle touching the meeting of the Great and the Little Kamcija, and the southern touching the sea. In this part there are three passes, one of which is reached from Sliven, the other two from Karnabad.

The east side of the great Thracian plain is bounded by the Strandza range, which separates it from the Euxine, and throws out in a south-westerly direction the Tekir Dagh, which stretches along the west of the Propontis, shooting into the Thracian Chersonese and extending along the north Aegean coast as far as the Strymon. The Thracian plain is a flat wilderness, only good for poor pasture.

The oldest inhabitants, of whose existence in the peninsula we know, were a branch of the Indo-European family, which is generally called the Thraco-Illyrian branch, falling as it does into two main divisions, the Thracian and the Illyrian. The Thracians occupied the eastern, the Illyrians the western side of the peninsula, the boundary between them being roughly the courses of the Drave and the Strymon. Any descendants of the Thracians who still survive are to be found among the Roumanians, while the Albanians represent the Illyrians and Epirotes. The Epirotes stood in much the same relation to the Illyrians as the Macedonians stood to the Thracians. Of the numerous Thracian tribes (Odrysians, Triballi, Getae, Mysians, Bessi, etc.), the Bessi or Satri, in the region of Rhodope, remained longest a corporate nation in the presence of Roman influences; they were converted to Christianity in the fourth century, and in the fifth century they still held the church service in their own tongue. The Noropians, a subdivision of the Paeonians, whose lake dwellings are described by Herodotus, deserve mention, because the name survived in the Middle Ages (nerop'ch, merop'ch) as the name of a class of serfs in the Serbian kingdom. Of the Illyrian tribes the most important were the Autariats, Dardanians, Dalmatians, Istrians, Liburnians. As to the Thracian and Illyrian languages, a general but vague idea can be formed of them by the help of modern Albanese, whence Dalmatia has been explained to mean “shepherd land”; Skodra, “hill”; Bora, “snow” (a mountain in Macedonia); Bessi, “the faithful” (originally the name of priests); Dardania, “land of pears”, etc. The difficulty experienced by the Romans in subduing and incorporating in their Empire all these brave mountain tribes is well known.

It must be clearly understood that Latin became the general language of the peninsula when the Roman conquests were consolidated, except on the south and east coast­lines of the Aegean, Propontis, and Euxine, where the towns, many of them Greek colonies and all long familiar with Greek, continued to speak that language. That Latin was the language of the greater part of the peninsula there are many proofs. Priscus tells us expressly, in speaking of his expedition to the country of the Huns, that Latin was the language everywhere. The bishops of Marcianopolis used Latin in their correspondence with the council of Chalcedon. At the end of the sixth century words used by a peasant are recorded, which are the first trace of the Roumanian language, which developed in these regions and was born of the union of Latin with old Thracian. The Emperor Justinian, a native of Dardania, speaks of Latin as his own language.

We need not discuss here the wild theories, resting chiefly on accidental similarity of names which may be made to prove anything, that Slavonic races dwelled along with the Thraco-Illyrian from time immemorial; they have been refuted by Jiricek. The pedantic Byzantine custom of calling contemporary peoples by the name of ancient peoples who had dwelt in the same lands led to a misunderstanding, and originated the idea that the Slavonic races were autochthonous.

But if this theory assigns to the presence of the Slaves a too early period, we must beware of falling into the opposite mistake of setting their advent too late. The arguments of Drinov, which are accepted by the historian of the Bulgarians, make it possible that the infiltration of Slavonic elements into the cis-Danubian lands began about 300 ad, before the so-called wandering of the nations.

It is probable enough that there were Slaves in the great Dacian kingdom of Decebalus, which was subverted by Trajan. At all events, the Roman occupation of Dacia beyond the Danube for a century and a half between Trajan and Aurelian, left its traces in that country, and also among Slavonic races; for Trajan or Trojan figured prominently in Slavonic legend as the deliverer from the Dacian oppressor, and was even deified. “Bulgarian songs at the present day celebrate the Tzar Trojan, the lord of inexhaustible treasures, for whom burning gold and pure silver flow from seventy wells”. Slavonic tradition called the Romans Vlachians, and the first appearance of the Vlachians beyond the Danube was long remembered.

The Slaves doubtless played a considerable part in the frontier wars of the third century, but whether the Carpi, whom Galerius settled along with the Bastarnae in the provinces of Moesia and Thrace (298) were a Slavonic race, as some authorities believe, we cannot be certain. It is possible, however, that Slaves formed part of the large mass of barbarians, 200,000, to whom the Emperor Carus assigned habitations in the peninsula; and there are certainly distinct traces of the existence of Slavonic communities in itineraries composed in the fourth century. There were many generals of Slavonic origin in Roman service in the fifth century, and in the sixth century Procopius has preserved to us many names of Slavonic towns.

We are then, I think, justified in assuming that in the fifth century there was a considerable Slavonic element in the lands south of the Ister, holding the position of Roman coloni. They formed a layer of population which would give security and permanence to the settlements of future invaders of kindred race. And here we touch upon what seems a strong confirmation of the conclusion to which stray vestiges lead us, regarding an early Slavonic colonization. The Ostrogoths, who invaded and settled in Italy, held but there but a short time; the duration of Lombard influence in Italy was longer, but not long; the Vandals were soon dislodged from Africa. On the other hand, the Franks held permanent sway in the lands in which they settled, just as Slavonic nations still dominate the countries between the Adriatic and the Euxine. Now the main difference between the conquest of Gaul by the Franks and the conquest of Italy by the Ostrogoths was, that the former had been preceded by centuries of gradual infiltration of Frank elements in the countries to the west of the Ehine, whereas for Theodoric there was no such basis on which to consolidate a Gothic kingdom. The natural induction is that the cause whose presence secured the permanence of the Frank kingdom in Gaul, and whose absence facilitated the disappearance of the Gothic race from Italy, co-operated to render permanent the Slavonic conquests. This induction, of course, is not strict; we have not excluded the possibility of like effects resulting from different causes, and the case of the Visigoths in Spain is an obvious, though explicable, exception. But the fact that we have distinct traces of early Slavonic settlements supplements the defect of the a priori induction. The circumstance that there is no direct mention of such settlements by writers of the time can have little weight in the opposite scale; such things often escape the notice of contemporaries.

The great political characteristic of the Slavonic races was their independence, in which they resembled the Arabs. They could not endure the idea of a monarch, and the communes, independent of, and constantly at discord with, one another, united only in the presence of a dangerous enemy. Owing to this characteristic their invasions cannot have been efficiently organized, and an able general should have been able to cut them off in detachments. The family, governed and represented by the oldest member, was the unit of the commune or tribe; the chiefs of the community, whose territory was called a zupa, were selected from certain leading families which thus formed an aristocracy.

The character of the Slaves is described by a Greek Emperor as artless and hospitable; but it was often, no doubt, the artlessness of a heathen barbarian. They practised both agriculture and pasture. Physically they were tall and strong, and of blond complexion. Women occupied an honorable position, and the patriarchal character of their social life, by which the family was the proprietor and every individual belonged to a family, excluded poverty. Only an excommunicated person could be poor, and therefore to be poor meant to be bad, and was expressed by the same word. In the sixth century their abodes were wretched hovels, and their chief food was millet.

The Emperor Maurice, in his treatise on the art of war, gives us an account of the Slavonic methods of warfare. They were unable to fight well in regular battle on open ground, and thus they were fain to choose mountains and morasses, ravines and thickets, in which they could arrange ambuscades and surprises, and bring into play their experience of forest and mountain life. In this kind of warfare skill in archery was serviceable, and they used poisoned arrows. Their weapons in hand-to-hand fight were battle-axes and battle-mallets. Maurice advises that campaigns against them should be undertaken in the winter, because then the trees are leafless and the forests less impenetrable to the view, while the snow betrays the steps of the foe, and the frozen rivers give no advantage to their swimming powers. It was a common device of a hard-pressed Slovene to dive into a river and not emerge, breathing through a reed whose extremity was just above the surface. It required long experience and sharp eyes to see the end of the reed and detect the fugitive.

The Slaves believed in a supreme God, Svarog, the lord of lightning, who created the world out of the sand of the sea; in lesser gods, among whom was reckoned Trajan; and in all sorts of supernatural beings, good and bad (Bogy and Besy); for instance, in vlkodlaks or vampires, from which the modern Greek Vroukolakas is borrowed, in lake nymphs (judi) a sort of long-haired mermaids who draw down fishermen entangled in their locks to the depths below. The most interesting of these beings are the Samovili or Samodivi, who live and dance in the mountains. “They hasten swiftly through the air; they ride on earth on stags, using adders as bridles and yellow snakes as girdles. Their hair is of light color. They are generally hostile to men, whose black eyes they blind and quaff”, but they are friends of great heroes, and live with them as sworn sisters.

Until the last years of the fourth century, when the Visigothic soldiers took up their quarters in the land and exhausted it, the Balkan peninsula had enjoyed a long peace; and after the final departure of Alaric for Italy, it was allowed almost forty years of comparative freedom from the invasions of foes to recover its prosperity. But the rise of the Hunnic monarchy under Attila in the countries north of the Danube meant that evil days were in store for it; and the invasions of the barbarian Attila, a scourge far worse than the raids of Alaric, reduced the plains and valleys of Thrace and Illyricum to uncultivated and desert solitudes, the inhabitants fleeing to the mountains. And when the Hunnic empire, that transitory phenomenon which united many nations loosely for a moment without any real bonds of law or interest, was dissipated, the races which had belonged to it, Germans and Slaves and Huns, hovered on the Danube watching their chance of plunder. The chief of these were the Ostrogoths, who, while they were a check on the Huns and on Germans more uncivilized than themselves, infested the lands of the Haemus, Illyria, and Epirus, until in 588 Theodoric, like Alaric, went westwards to a new home. The departure of the Ostrogoths was like the opening of a sluice; the Slaves and Bulgarians, whom their presence had kept back, were let loose on the Empire, and began periodical invasions. It must be noted that, beside the Ostrogoths, some non-German nations had settled in corners; the Satages and Alans in Lower Moesia, and Huns in the Dobrudza.

I have already mentioned what is known of these invasions in the reign of Anastasius, and how that Emperor built the Long Wall to protect the capital. The invasions continued in the reign of Justinian and throughout the sixth century, but the Bulgarians soon cease to be mentioned, and it appears probable that they were subjugated by the neighbouring Slaves.

No real opposition was offered to the invasions of the barbarians, until Mundus the Gepid, who afterwards assisted in quelling the Nika insurgents, defeated and repelled the Bulgarians in 530. For the following years, until 534, the Haemus provinces enjoyed immunity from the plunderers, owing to the ability of Chilbudius, master of soldiers in Thrace, who was appointed to defend the Danube frontier, and to the measures which were taken for strengthening the fortifications.

Besides the outer line of strong places on the river, an inner line of defence was made in 530, connecting Ulpiana and Sardica. But, in 534 the death of Chilbudius in a battle with the Slaves left the frontier without a capable defender, and the old ravages were renewed. A grand expedition in 540 penetrated to Greece, but the Peloponnesus was saved by the fortifications of the isthmus. Cassandrea, however, was taken, and the invaders crossed from Sestos to the coast of Asia Minor. The havoc wrought in this year throughout Thrace, Illyricum, and northern Greece was so serious that Justinian set about making new lines of defence on an extensive scale, which will presently be described.

Two Slavonic tribes are mentioned at this period, the Slovenes and the Antai or Wends. They did not differ from each other in either language or physical traits; both enjoyed kingless government of a popular nature, both worshipped one God, both were intolerant of the Greek and oriental conception of fate. Procopius relates that about this time hostilities arose between the two tribes, and the Slovenes conquered the Antai; but it has been conjectured that this is an ill-informed foreigner’s account of a totally different transaction, namely the reduction of the Slavonic tribes by the Bulgarians. However this may be, it is certain that the Bulgarians (whom Procopius calls Huns), the Slovenes, and the Antai were in the habit of invading the Empire together, and that some bond must have united the two different races. It is to be observed, however, that it is the Slaves who are always in the foreground from this time forth, and that the Bulgarians are almost never mentioned; whence the reverse relation, namely the conquest of the Bulgarians by the Slaves, might seem more probable. Those Bulgarians of the sixth century had, it must be remembered, nothing to do with the foundation of the Bulgarian kingdom, which took place in the seventh century.

In 546 another Slavonic incursion took place, but on this occasion Justinian's principle of “barbarian cut barbarian” came into operation, and they were repulsed by the Heruls. Two years later the Slaves overran Illyricum with a numerous army, and appeared before Dyrrhachium, and in 551 a band of three thousand crossed the Danube unopposed and divided into two parties, of which one ravaged Thrace and the other Illyricum. Both were victorious over Roman generals; the maritime city of Toperus was taken; and the massacres and cruelties committed by the barbarians make the readers of Procopius shudder. In 552 the Slaves crossed the Danube again, intent on attacking Thessalonica, but the terror of the name of Germanus, who was then at Sardica preparing for an expedition to Italy, caused them to abandon the project and invade Dalmatia. At the beginning of Justinian’s reign Germanus had inflicted such an annihilating defeat on the Antai that the Slaves looked upon him with fear and awe. The great expedition of Zabergan and the Cotrigur Huns (whom Boesler calls Bulgarians) in 558 was probably accompanied by Slavonic forces.

It is at this point that the Avars, whose empire considerably influenced the fortunes of the Slaves, appear on the political horizon of the West. But as their presence did not affect the Roman Empire until after the death of Justinian, we may reserve what is to be said of them for a future chapter.

The wall of Anastasius had been the first step to a system of fortifications for defending the peninsula. Justinian carried out the idea on an extensive scale by strengthening old and building new forts in Thrace, Epirus, Dardania, Macedonia, Thessaly, and southern Greece.

To protect Thrace there was first of all a line of fifty-two fortresses along the Danube, of which Securisma (or Securisca) and others were founded by Justinian, while the rest were strengthened and improved. South of the Danube, in Moesia, there were twenty-seven strong fortresses. On the Sea of Marmora Rhoedestus was built, a steep and large sea-washed town, while Perinthus (Heraclea) was provided with new walls. The walls that hedged in the Thracian Chersonese were restored. Sestos was made impregnable, and a high tower was erected at Elaius. Further west Aenus, near the mouth of the Hebrus, was surrounded with walls; while north-westward, in the regions of Rhodope and the Thracian plain, one hundred and three castles were restored. Trajanopolis (on Hebrus), Maximianopolis, and Doriscus were secured with new walls; Ballurus was converted into a fortified town; Philippopolis and Plotinopolis, on the Hebrus, were restored and strengthened; while Anastasiopolis was secured by a cross wall.

The middle Danube was in the same way lined with castles and fortified towns, protecting the frontier of Illyricum; the most important were Singidon (Singidunum, now Belgrade), Octavum, eight miles to the west, Pincum, Margus, Viminacium, Capus, and Novae. In Dardania, Justinian’s native province, eight new castles were built, and sixty-one of older date restored. When invaders had penetrated this second line of fortresses they entered Macedonia, where a third system of strong defenses obstructed their path. We are told that forty-six forts and towers were restored or built in this district. Among those which were restored may be mentioned Cassandrea, which had been taken by the Slovenes, and among those which were newly built we may note Artemisium in the neighborhoods of Thessalonica.

From Macedonia an invader might pass either southwards into Thessaly or westwards into Epirus. In Thessaly the fortified towns of Demetrias (the “fetter of Greece”), Thebae, Pharsalus, Metropolis, Gomphi, and Tricca formed a line of works across the country. The walls of Larissa were restored by Justinian, and new towns, Centauropolis, on Mount Pelion, Eurymene, and Caesarea (probably new), testified to the Emperor’s anxiety to protect his subjects. If an enemy wished to proceed into Greece, supposing that he had succeeded in entering the Thessalian plains, it was necessary for him to overpower or elude the garrison of two thousand men who were stationed in the fortresses that guarded the memorable defile of Thermopylae. These fortresses were restored and strengthened, the walls were made higher and more solid, the bastions and battlements were doubled, and cisterns were provided for the use of the garrison. The town of Heraclea, not far from Thermopylae, was also the object of imperial solicitude; the Euripus was protected by castles; the walls of Plataea, Athens, and Corinth were renewed, and the wall across the isthmus was solidified and improved by watch-towers. If, on the other hand, the foe turned his course westward, Justinian had secured those regions by erecting thirty-two new forts in the New Epirus, twelve new forts in the Old Epirus, and rehabilitating about twenty-five in each province.

In regard to this elaborate system of fortification, which was a conspicuous and not dishonourable feature of Justinian’s reign, we must notice that he adopted an architectural innovation. Old-fashioned fortresses had been content with single towers, the new erections of Justinian were on a larger scale, and were crowned with many towers. It was probably found that the barbarians, who had learned a little about the art of besieging since they came into contact with the Empire, were not baffled by the one-towered battlements, and that stronger forts were necessary.

We cannot hesitate to assume that these measures of Justinian were of great service for resisting the Slavonic and subsequent Avaric invasions. But it must be observed that some of them were intended as barriers not only against external invaders, but also against barbarians who had settled within the boundaries of the Empire. This, we are told expressly, was the case with the renovation of Philippopolis and Plotinopolis. We cannot doubt that these barbarian settlers were Slaves.

CHAPTER XIII

CHANGES IN THE PROVINCIAL ADMINISTRATION

The changes which were made by Justinian in the provincial administration were only of a partial nature, but they are nevertheless important, because they form a stage of transition between the arrangement of Diocletian and the later Thematic system which was developed in the seventh and eighth centuries.

In the earlier system, instituted by Diocletian and Constantine, three points are especially prominent—(1) the separation of the civil from the military administration; (2) the hierarchical or ladder-like principle by which not only the praetorian prefect intervened between the Emperor and the provincial governors, but vicarii or diocesan presidents intervened between the provincial governors and the praetorian prefect; (3) the tendency to break up provinces into smaller divisions.

On the other hand, the Thematic system, of which I shall speak in a future chapter, was characterized by features exactly the reverse. Civil and military administration are combined in the hands of the same governor; the principle of intermediate dioceses has disappeared, as well as the principle of praetorian prefectures; and the districts of the governors are comparatively large.

It is then instructive to observe that, though Justinian made no thoroughgoing change in the system that had prevailed during the fourth and fifth centuries, almost all the particular changes which he did introduce tended in the direction of the later system. In certain provinces he invested the same persons with military, civil, and fiscal powers; he did away with some of the diocesan governors, and he combined some of the small divisions to form larger provinces. These changes were made in the years 535 and 536 ad.

(1.) “In certain of our provinces, in which both a civil and a military governor are stationed, they are continually conflicting and quarrelling with each other, not with a view to the benefit, but with a view to the greater oppression of the subjects; so we have thought it right in these cases to combine the two separate charges to form one office, and to give the old name of praetor to the new governor”.

This principle was applied in three cases at the same time (18th May 535). The praeses of Pisidia was invested with authority over the military forces stationed in the province, and so likewise the praeses of Lycaonia. Each of these officers ceased to be called praeses, and assumed the more glorious title of praetor Justinianus, which was accompanied with the rank of spectabilis. The vicarius Thraciarum, or governor of the Thracian diocese, and the master of soldiers in Thrace (officers whose spheres, as experience proved, tended to conflict) were abolished and superseded by a praetor Justinianus per Thraciam invested with civil, military, and fiscal powers.

The same principle had been adopted just a month before in the case of the new Justinianean counts of Phrygia Pacatiana and First Galatia. It was adopted two months later in the case of the new Justinianean moderator of Helenopontus and the new Justinianean praetor of Paphlagonia; and in the following year (536) it was applied to the new proconsul of Cappadocia and the proconsul of the recently formed province of Third Armenia.

In Egypt this principle had been practically operative under the old system; in the turbulent district of Isauria the governor (count of Isauria) was invested with both military and civil powers; the duke of Arabia also held the double office. But the point is that these exceptions were recognized as opposed to the general principle, and it was attempted to bring them into accordance with that general principle by the fiction that the count of Isauria, for example, represented two separate persons; he held, as it were, the civil power in his right hand and the military power in his left, and his right hand was not supposed to know what his left hand was doing. Justinian introduced a new principle and a new kind of governor, in whose hands the two functions were not merely put side by side but were organically united. The truth of this is distinctly demonstrated by the fact that he was obliged to reorganize the office of count of Isauria so that the military and civil powers should cohere. It should be noticed that the epithet Justinianus is only connected with the titles of such new governors as were vested with the double function. The new moderator of Arabia, who was purely a civil officer, did not receive the imperial name.

(2.) In 535 ad (15th April) three diocesan governors were abolished. The vicar of Asiana became the comes Justinianus of Phrygia Pacatiana, invested with civil and military powers and enjoying the rank of a “respectable”. On the same conditions the vicar of the Pontic diocese became the comes Justinianus of Galatia Prima. The count of the East was deprived of his authority over the Orient diocese and, retaining his “respectable” rank, became the civil governor of Syria Prima.

The first change and the third change were permanent, but the abolition of the vicar of Pontica was revoked in 548 AD.

(3.) Justinian united the praesidial provinces of Helenopontus and Pontus Polemoniacus to form one large province, under the command of a governor entitled moderator Justinianus. The new province was called Helenopontus, in preference to the other name, because it seemed fitter to continue to commemorate the name of St. Helen than to adopt a title which not only preserved the memory of a “tyrant” but also suggested war.

In the same way the province of Honorias, which had obeyed a praeses, and the province of Paphlagonia, which had obeyed a corrector, were welded together; the new province was called Paphlagonia, and the new governor was a praetor Justinianus.

These changes were made 16th July 535. In the following year, 18th March, the two provinces of Cappadocia (prima and secunda) were incorporated under the rule of a proconsul entrusted with the civil, fiscal, and military administration.

A curious combination of provinces under a single governor was the so-called prefecture of the Five Provinces. Cyprus and Rhodes, the Cyclades, Caria, Moesia, and Scythia were placed under the administration of a quaestor exercitui, who resided at Odessus. It would be very interesting to know the reasons for this strange arrangement, but unfortunately we do not possess an original document on the subject.

In 535 Justinian made a redistribution of the most easterly districts of the old diocese of Pontica. No change had taken place in the two provinces of Armenia, which were marked in the Notitia up to this year, except that First Armenia, which had been a praesidial, had become a consular province. Justinian formed four provinces in Armenia, partly by rearranging the two old provinces, partly by mutilating the province of Helenopontus, partly by incorporating new territory in the provincial system.

The new First Armenia, which had the privilege of being governed by a proconsul, included four towns of the old First Armenia, namely Theodosiopolis, Satala, Nicopolis, and Colonea, and two towns of the old Pontus Polemoniacus, Trapezus and Cerasus. The once important town of Bazanis or Leontopolis received the name of the Emperor, and was elevated to the rank of the metropolis.

The new Second Armenia, placed under a praeses, corresponded to the old First Armenia, and included its towns Sebastea and Sebastopolis. But in lieu of the towns which had been handed over to the new First Armenia, it received Komana, Zela, and Brisa from the new province of Helenopontus.

The province of Third Armenia, governed by a comes Justinianus with military as well as civil authority, corresponded to the old Second Armenia, and included Melitene, Arca, Arabissus, Cucusus, Ariarathea, and Comana (Chryse).

Fourth Armenia was a province new in fact as well as in name; it consisted of the Roman district beyond the Euphrates to the east of Third Armenia. It was governed by a consular, and the metropolis was Martyropolis.

One may at first think that Justinian unnecessarily altered the names, and that he might have continued to call the old Second Armenia, whose form he did not change, by the same name. His principle was geographical order. The new trans-Euphratesian province went naturally with the district of Melitene, and therefore the Second Armenia became the Third, because it was connected with what it was most natural to call the Fourth. This connection was real, because the consular of Fourth Armenia was to be in a certain way dependent on the count of Third Armenia, who was to hear appeals from the less important province. In the same way the new First and Second Armenias naturally went together, and therefore it was convenient that the numbers should be consecutive. The praeses of Second was dependent to a certain extent on the proconsul of First Armenia.

The elevation of the praeses of Phoenicia Libanesia to the rank of a moderator and that of the praeses of Palestine Salutaris to the rank of a proconsul, with authority to supervise and intervene in the affairs of Second Palestine, illustrate the tendency, which is apparent in most of Justinian's innovations, to raise the rank and powers of minor governments. This went along with the tendency to detract from the powers of the greater governors, like the praetorian prefect of the East, whose office was destined before long to die a natural death, or the count of the East, who had already been degraded to the position of a provincial governor.

In all these reforms the double aspect of Justinian’s policy strikes us. He is a great innovator, and yet throughout he professes to revoke ancient names and restore ancient offices. In his constitution on the new praetor of Pisidia he appeals to the existence of the old praetors under the Roman Republic, of Sicily, Sardinia, Spain, etc., and asserts that he is “introducing antiquity with greater splendor into the Republic, and venerating the name of the Romans”. He discourses on the antiquity of the Pisidian and Paphlagonian peoples, and does not disdain to introduce mythical traditions. And when he establishes a proconsul in Palestine he defends his constitution not only by the fact that this land was in early time a proconsular province, but by the circumstance that it had ancient memories. Reference is made to the connection of Vespasian and Titus with it, and above all to the fact that there “the Creator of the universe, our Lord Jesus Christ, the Word of God and salvation of the human race, was seen on earth and deigned to dwell in our lands”.

The general import of the details which I have given in this chapter is sufficiently clear. From the beginning of the Empire up to the sixth century the tendencies had been to differentiate the civil from the military administration, to break up large into lesser provinces, and to create an official hierarchy. These three tendencies might all be considered modes of a more general tendency to decrease the power and dignity of the individual provincial governor; and though, as a matter of fact, this motive did not historically determine them, yet such was their effect. The reaction began in the reign of Justinian, and an opposite movement set in to integrate the provinces and increase the powers of the governors. The organization of the newly recovered provinces in the West conformed to this principle; the praetor of Sicily and the exarch of Italy were invested with military as well as civil and fiscal powers, and were directly responsible to the Emperor; and the principle was also, though not at first, adopted in Africa. This tendency continued till about the ninth century, about which time some of the large districts, which had been formed in the meantime, began to break up into smaller unities.

XIV

THE GEOGRAPHY OF EUROPE AND THE END OF JUSTINIAN’S REIGN

The events which occurred in the reign of Justinian produced considerable changes in the map of Europe. The kingdom of the Ostrogoths in Italy disappeared, and the kingdom of the Vandals in northern Africa, which though not strictly European was distinctly within the sphere of European politics and may be regarded as European, had also disappeared; Africa and Italy were once more provinces of the Roman Empire. In Spain too the Romans had again set foot, and some cities both east and west of the Straits of Gibraltar, including Malaga, Carthago, and Corduba, acknowledged the sovereignty of Justinian and his successors.

This phenomenon, the recovery by the Roman Empire of lands which it had lost, was repeated again in later times. In each case we may observe three stages. At the beginning of the fifth century, under the dynasty of Theodosius, the Empire was weakened and lost half its territory to Teutonic nations; then under the dynasty of Leo I the reduced Empire strengthened itself internally; and this consolidation was followed by a period of expansion under the dynasty of Justin. Again, in the seventh century the limits of the Empire were further reduced by Saracens and Bulgarians under the dynasty of Heraclius, and internally its strength became enfeebled; then under the house of the Isaurian Leo it regained its vigour in the eighth century; and in the ninth and tenth centuries, under the Macedonian dynasty of Basil, lost territory was reconquered and the Empire expanded. In neither case were all the lost provinces won back, and in both cases the new limits very soon began to retreat again.

If we compare the map of Europe in 565 with the map of Europe in 395 we see that the Romans may be said to have won back the lands which constituted the prefecture of Italy; but this general statement requires two modifications. In the north-east corner provinces which had been included in that prefecture, Pannonia, Noricum, and Rhaetia, remained practically in the possession of barbarians; and in the south-east districts were recovered which had belonged, not to the prefecture of Italy, but to the prefecture of Gaul, namely south-eastern Spain, the province of Tingitana which faces it, and the Balearic islands. It might have seemed that the charm of the Roman name and the might of Roman arms, issuing no longer from the city of the Tuscan Tiber but from the city of the Thracian Bosphorus, were destined to enthral Europe again, and that the career of conquest begun by Belisarius would be continued by his successors in the lands once known as “the Gauls” against the Visigoths, the Suevi, the Franks, and the Saxons; but Belisarius and Justinian had no successors. North-western Europe was destined, indeed, to become part once more of a Roman Empire, but a bishop of Old Rome, not an Emperor of New Rome, was to bring this about, two hundred and thirty-five years hence.

The new acquisitions of the Roman Empire were not the only new facts which appear on the face of a historical map. There were other new acquisitions made by the Frank kingdom, the very power which was in future years to erect a rival Roman Empire. During the reign of Justinian the kingdom of the Thuringians, the kingdom of the Burgundians, and the kingdom of the Bavarians were incorporated in the kingdom of the Franks. The once Roman island of Britain, now the scene of wars between its Anglo-Saxon conquerors and the old Britons, had so completely passed out of the sphere of the Empire’s consciousness, if I may use the expression, that Procopius relates a supernatural legend of it, as of a mystic land. He calls it Brittia, reserving the old name Britannia for Brittany, and mentions that the king of the Franks claimed some sort of suzerainty over it, and on one occasion attached Angles to an embassy which he sent to Byzantium, in order to show that he was lord of the island. According to the strange and picturesque legend, which Procopius records but does not believe, the fishermen and farmers who live on the northern coast of Gaul pay no tribute to the Frank kings, because they have another service to perform. At the door of each in turn, when he has lain down to sleep, a knock is heard, and the voice of an unseen visitant summons him to a nocturnal labor. He goes down to the beach, as in the constraint of a dream, and finds boats heavily laden with invisible forms, wherein he and those others who have received the supernatural summons embark and ply the oars. The voyage to the shore of Brittia is accomplished in the space of an hour in these ghostly skiffs, though the boats of mortals hardly reach it by force of both sailing and rowing in a day and a night. The unseen passengers disembark in Brittia, and the oarsmen return in the lightened boats, hearing as they depart a voice speaking to the souls.

Two other changes must be noticed which took place in that region of wandering and shifting barbarians on the banks of the Ister. The Lombards dwelled on the left bank of the Ister when Justinian ascended the throne; when Justin II acceded their habitations were in Pannonia, the land of the Drave and the Save. The kingdom of the Gepids, which was bounded on both the south and the west side by the Ister, remained tolerably stationary during the whole reign. But in the latter years of Justinian a new people had established itself to the east of the Gepids, on the lower Ister—the Avars, a Hunnic people who were destined to influence the fortunes of the Balkan peninsula and the Danube countries for the space of less than a hundred years, then to sink into insignificance, and finally to disappear. Their arrival was fatal for the short-lived kingdom of the Gepids, which was crushed, two years after Justinian’s death, by the united forces of the Lombards and the Avars.

We may now consider some special points respecting the western conquests of Justinian.

Immediately after the overthrow of the Vandal kingdom Africa was placed under the jurisdiction of a praetorian prefect, and thus rendered co-ordinate with Illyricum and the Orient. The act by which this administrative arrangement was made is preserved in the Codex, and possesses extreme importance for students of the history of the Roman civil service.

The new prefecture included the four provinces which composed the vicariate of Africa in the fourth century, and the privileged province, which was governed then by a proconsul. But in addition to these five provinces it comprised Tingitana, which in old days belonged to the vicariate of Spain, and Sardinia, which belonged to the vicariate of Urbs Roma. Of the seven provinces four were governed by consulars by the new arrangement, Byzacium, Tripolis, Carthago (that is Africa), and Tingitana; of these Tripolis and Tingitana had formerly been under praesides, while Africa had been governed by a proconsul who was independent of the vicarius. The other three provinces were placed under praesides; for Numidia, formerly a consular province, this was a degradation in rank.

The praetorian prefect, whose residence was fixed at Carthago, was to have a bureau of 396 officials. Another constitution which was passed at the same time established military dukes in various provinces.

When the troubles which immediately resulted from the circumstances attending the conquest of Africa had been allayed, the prosperity of the Libyan provinces seems to have revived. The praetorian prefects were endowed with military authority, contrary to the original intention, and afterwards received, vulgarly if not officially, the appellation of exarch; and they were successful in defending their territory against the inroads of the Moors. John, the brother of Pappus, gained such brilliant victories over the Moorish chiefs, two of whom were compelled to attend on him as slaves, that the African poet of the imperial restoration, Flavius Cresconius Corippus, thought himself justified in making him the hero of an eponymous poem, the Johannis. Paulus was praetorian prefect of Africa in 552, John (presumably the brother of Pappus) in 558, and Areobindus in 563, but we hear little more of Africa until the reign of Maurice, when the Exarch Gennadius dealt treacherously with the Moors, who had been harassing the provinces, and paralyzed their hostilities.

The new connection of Sardinia with Africa was not unnatural. Like Sicily, it had generally played a part in the dealings of Rome with her enemies in Africa. It had played a part seven hundred and fifty years ago in the Punic wars; it had been connected with the war against the Moor Gildo in the reign of Honorius; recently it had been involved in the fortunes or misfortunes of Africa, and included in the kingdom of the Vandals. It was therefore natural to include it in the new prefecture which was raised on the ruins of that kingdom.

The German power which had established itself in northern Africa had passed away, as the German power which had established itself on the middle Danube was soon to pass away, without leaving any permanent trace of its existence; neither the Gepids nor the Vandals left a historical name or monument behind them, except indeed the old and improbable derivation of Andalusia from Vandalusia prove to be really correct. In this respect the Gepids and the Vandals contrast with the Burgundians and the Thuringians, whose kingdoms were overthrown, but whose names still survive.

It is a common remark that the extermination of the Vandal power by the Romans is a thing to be regretted rather than rejoiced in, and that Justinian removed what might have proved a barrier to the westward advance of the Saracens at the end of the seventh century. I think that this view can be shown to rest on a misconception. In the first place, it is hard to believe that the Vandals would have been able to present any serious resistance to the Arabs; at the end of the fifth century their kingdom was in a state of decline, and it seems probable that it could never have lasted until the end of the seventh century. It seems more probable that if it had not fallen a prey to the Romans it would have fallen a prey to a worse enemy, the Moors; and it seems certain that, even had it escaped Moors as well as Romans, it would have collapsed when the first Saracens set foot on the land. For the domestic condition of the Vandal state must have absolutely precluded all chance of a revival of strength. The kingdom was divided against itself, the native provincials hated their conquerors, who were daily growing more supine and less war­like, and there is no likelihood that an amalgamation would ever have taken place. And, secondly, even granting—what seems utterly improbable—that the Vandals could have held Africa even as effectually as the Romans, it was far more in the interests of European civilization that the Romans should occupy it, for Africa proved the safety of the Empire at one of its most critical moments—the occasion of the dethronement of Phocas; and on the Empire mainly depended the cause of European civilization. But, thirdly, if we entertain the still wilder supposition that the Vandals would really have been able to stem the tide of the Asiatic wave which rolled through Africa to Spain, it is very doubtful whether that would have promoted the interests of Europe; for though the Saracen lords of Cordova were Mohammedans and Asiatics, it cannot be denied that their sojourn in Spain was conducive in a marked degree to the spread of culture in the West.

If we are to indulge in speculations of what might have been had something else not been, we might suppose that no Imperial revival of an expansive nature took place, that the Vandals continued to live at their ease and persecute the Catholics in Africa, and that Ostrogothic kings continued to be the “lords of things”, domini rerum, in Italy. Starting with this supposition, it would be natural enough to imagine further that the events of the Punic wars might be repeated; that the Goths of Italy might invade Africa and overthrow the effete Vandal kingdom just as the Romans had overthrown the Carthaginian republic; and that so the Ostrogoths, who were already in southern Gaul neighbours of their kinsmen the Visigoths, might become their neighbours also at the Pillars of Hercules. And thus,—Italy, Sicily, Africa, Spain, and southern Gaul belonging to Visigoths and Ostrogoths,—we can form the conception of a Gothic empire round the western Mediterranean basin, an empire which might have spread northward and eastward like the Roman Empire of old. Such imaginary displacements of fact sometimes serve to illustrate the import of the events which actually took place.

Sicily, which performed the double function of being a stepping-stone to Africa and a stepping-stone to Italy for the “Roman” invaders, was placed soon after its conquest under the government of a praetor, who was endowed with both civil and military authority. Its administration remained, even after the conquest of Italy, independent of the governor, who resided at Ravenna. According to the old order which existed in the fifth century before the reign of Odovacar, Sicily was governed by a consular who was responsible to the vicar of Urbs Roma.

After the partial conquest of Italy by Belisarius the new acquisitions seem to have been placed under a praetorian prefect, on the same basis as Africa, the military and the civil functions being kept distinct. But this arrangement was only temporary, and after the complete and final conquest of the land by Narses the system was adopted of combining the controls of civil, fiscal, and military affairs in the hands of one supreme governor. This principle had already been introduced in many provinces in the East, and had been adopted in Sicily. It is a little strange that it was not immediately adopted in Africa, where, however, the disturbed state of the country soon led to its introduction.

It is evident that a new name was required for the new governor. The title prefect, , from being originally purely military, had come to be associated with purely civil functions, while the title magister militum was, on the face of it, purely military. The new, or revived, names which Justinian had given to the governors of provinces in whose hands he united the two authorities, praetor, proconsul or moderator, were manifestly unsuitable for the governor-general of Italy. Italy was a large aggregate of provinces, as large as the prefecture of Illyricum, and it would have been absurd to place its governor on a level in point of title with the praetor of Sicily, the proconsul of Cappadocia, or the moderator of Helenopontus. It was eminently a case for a new name, and accordingly a nondescript Greek name, which was applied to various kinds of officers, was chosen, and the governor of Italy was called the exarch; but as he was always a patrician, it was common to speak of him in Italy as the Patrician.

We are not informed into what provinces the exarchate of Italy was divided during the fifteen years of its existence before the Lombard invasion. The praetor of Sicily probably remained independent of the exarch, while on the other hand it is possible that the administration of Sardinia may have been separated from Africa, and, like her sister island Corsica, connected with Italy. We may say that the district governed by the exarch corresponded very closely to the joint dioceses of Italy and Illyricum; and we may suppose that, as in Africa, the old distribution of provinces was in the main adopted. In regard to these provinces, it is important to observe that the signification of the word Campania had altered as long ago as the fourth century, and now comprised Latium. Rome herself, however, was perhaps even at this time, as she certainly was in the eighth century, included not in Campania, but in Tuscia, as Etruria was now called. In old days men spoke of the Tuscan Tiber; in the Middle Ages men could speak of Tuscan Rome.

The circumstance that Romans not living at Latin Rome and regarded by the Italians as strangers should have conquered Italy is one of the curiosities of history. The Romans, Romaioi, who came with Belisarius were looked upon as Greeks, and spoken of with a certain contempt by the provincials as well as by the Goths. They were not, however, all Greek-speaking soldiers, a very large number were barbarians; but it is probable that very few spoke Latin. Nevertheless it might be said that they represented a Latin power, for the native language of the Emperor Justinian was Latin. He often opposes “our native tongue” to the “common Hellenic speech”, and laws were promulgated in Latin as well as in Greek. Latin Italy was not yet out of touch with the Roman Empire. Yet nothing illustrates more clearly the fact that the Empire was becoming every year more Greek in character than the history of its Italian dependencies. It succeeded in Hellenizing the southern provinces, and it was just these provinces that remained longest subject to its authority.

The Greek characteristics of the Empire under Justinian are calculated to suggest vividly the process of ebb and flow which is always going on in the course of history. Just ten centuries before, Greek Athens was the bright centre of European civilization. Then the torch was passed westward from the cities of Hellenism, where it had burned for a while, to shine in Latin Rome; soon the rivers of the world, to adapt an expression of Juvenal, poured into the Tiber. Once more the brand changed hands; it was transmitted from the temple of Capitoline Jupiter, once more eastward, to a city of the Greek world—a world, however, which now disdained the impious name “Hellenic”, and was called “Romaic”. By the shores of the Bosphorus, on the acropolis of Graeco-Roman Constantinople, the light of civilization lived, pale but steady, for many hundred years, longer than it had shone by the Ilissus, longer than it had gleamed by the Nile or the Orontes, longer than it had blazed by the Tiber; and the church of St. Sophia was the visible symbol of as great a historical idea as those which the Parthenon and the temple of Jupiter had represented, the idea of European Christendom. The Empire, at once Greek and Roman, the ultimate result to which ancient history, both Greek history and Roman, had been leading up, was for nine centuries to be the bulwark of Europe against Asia, and to render possible the growth of the nascent civilization of the Teutonic nations in the West by preserving the heritage of the old world.

XV

BYZANTINE ART

An account of the reign of Justinian would be incomplete without a chapter on the architectural works of his reign and the school of the Christian Ictinus, Anthemius of Tralles; and this leads us to speak of “Byzantine” art in general. “Romaic” art, one might think, would be a more suitable name to distinguish it from “Romanesque”, which developed in the West on parallel lines and out of the same elements; for so-called Byzantine art was not confined to Byzantium, and “Byzantine” has no right to a wider signification.

In the first place, it may be observed that the antagonism of Christians to ancient art has often been misrepresented. Christians, like pagans, loved to decorate their houses with statues; the Christian city of Constantine was a museum of Greek art. In the fourth century, at all events, little trace is left of the earlier prejudice against pictures and images which was derived from the Semitic cradle of the new religion. Christians adopted old mythological ideas, and gave them an interpretation agreeing with the conceptions of their creed. The representations of Christ as the Good Shepherd, which were so common, were closely connected with the Greek type of Hermes Kriophoros; and in the catacombs we find an Orpheus-Christ. The nimbus that surrounds the head of a saint in Christian paintings was derived from the pictures of heathen gods of light; the rape of Proserpine is portrayed on the tomb of Vibia. With such symbolism we may compare the habit of dedicating churches on the sites of temples to some Christian saint who offered some similitude in name or attribute to the god who had been worshipped in the old temple. A. church of St. Elias often replaced a sanctuary of Apollo the sun-god, on account of the Greek name Helios; and temples of Pallas Athene might be converted into shrines of the Virgin. It was the same clinging to old forms, in spite of their inconsistency with the new faith, that induced the Phrygians to pall themselves Chrestianoi instead of Christianoi, and to speak of Chrestos instead of Christos. In architecture and all branches of art the Christians had to accept and modify pagan forms; just as they employed the materials of Greek and Roman temples, especially the columns, in building their churches.

The two kinds of art which come before us at this period pre architecture and mosaic. Sculpture had practically died out with the old Greek spirit itself. For in the first place there was no longer any comprehension of the beauty of the human form; the days of the gymnasia had passed away; and in the second place taste had degenerated, and men sought and admired splendor of effect rather than beauty of form. So it was that colossal pillars like that of Marcian, which seem imposing because they are monstrous, bad become popular; and for the statues of Emperors and others, which were still executed, precious metals or showy substances like porphyry were selected in preference to marble. In addition to these circumstances there was another reason which tended to render sculpture obsolete. Christians had adopted the basilica as the most usual form of their places of worship, and it was evident that plaques or mosaics could fill the walls better. Work in mosaic was more permanent, more costly, and more brilliant than painting, and many splendid specimens are still preserved, especially in the churches of Ravenna and Thessalonica.

The basilica and the rotunda were the chief forms of Christian churches in the fourth and fifth centuries. In each case there were problems to be solved. In the basilica the architect was met by the difficulty of combining the Roman arch with the Greek column. In the case of the rotunda it seemed desirable to associate the dome with other than circular buildings; and of this problem two solutions were attempted. In the tomb of Gala Placidia at Ravenna we see the circular surrendered for a cruciform plan, and the cupola rising from the four corners. On the other hand the Byzantines enclosed the circular building in a square one, leaving a recess in each of the four angles, as in the church of SS. Sergius and Bacchus in Constantinople, and the church of San Vitale at Ravenna. The dome was ultimately to be united with rectangular buildings, but this union was peculiarly Byzantine. The practice of placing a dome over part of a rectangular edifice was seldom adopted in the western architecture of those days.

The problem of uniting the arch with the column weighed especially upon the architect of basilicas. It was solved first at Salona in the peristyle of Diocletian’s palace, as has been shown by Mr. Freeman, whose own words it will be well to quote. “To reach anything like a really consistent and harmonious style the problem was to find some means by which the real Roman system of construction might be preserved and made prominent, without casting aside a feature of such exquisite beauty as the Greek column, especially in the stately and sumptuous form into which it had grown in Roman hands. The problem was to bring the arch and column into union—in other words, to teach the column to support the arch. It strikes us that in the palace at Spalato we may see a series of attempts at so doing, a series of strivings, of experiments, one of which was at last crowned with complete success. Of these experiments some would seem to have been already tried elsewhere; of the successful one we know of no example earlier than Diocletian ... The arch was set over the column, but it was made to spring from the continuous entablature or from the broken entablature, or, as in the case of the Venetian windows, the entablature itself was made to take the form of an arch. All these attempts were more or less awkward ... but in the peristyle the right thing was hit upon; the arch was made to spring bodily from the capital of the column, and was moulded, not with the fine mouldings of the entablature, but with those of the architrave only ... The germ of Pisa and Durham and Westminster had been called into life”.

The method by which the architects at Ravenna endeavoured to mediate between the column and the arch constitutes a special feature of early Byzantine architecture. It was evident that the entablature was but an awkward link between arch and capital, and the Ravennate architects relinquished it for a new form, a kind of super-capital called by the French dosseret. This is a reversed blunted pyramid with sides either convex or concave, the decoration generally consisting of monograms, crosses, or acanthus leaves in very low relief. It is seldom found as a plain block. In Ravenna one pillar in the church of Sta. Agatha has a plain square block between arch and capital, and we find similar blocks represented in the mosaics of San Apollinare Nuovo on the pillars of the palace of Theodoric. This new feature is a distinct step on the development of art called Byzantine; the horizontal structure and all its connections are being abandoned in favor of arches. This link between arch and column is a special feature of Ravenna, but we find it in the churches of St. Demetrius, the Holy Apostles, and Eski Djouma at Thessalonica, and elsewhere.

The architecture of Ravenna falls naturally into three periods, the age of Galla Placidia, the age of Theodoric the Ostrogoth, and the age of Justinian. San Giovanni in Fonte remains as an exquisite relic of the Ucclesia Ursiana built before the age of Placidia. Two churches built by Placidia herself were San Giovanni Evangelista and Sta. Croce. The former building now consists almost entirely of restorations; of the original work, executed to fulfil a vow made by the Empress when saved from a storm at sea, nothing remains but the pillars in the nave. Opposite Sta. Croce is the small dark church of SS. Nazario e Celso, built as a mausoleum by Placidia, and containing her own tomb. This building is in the form of a cross with neither nave nor pillars, adorned with arches and cylindrical vaults, and lined with mosaics. The walls outside are crowned by pediments with antique horizontal cornices. We see here an interesting example of the antique and Byzantine styles blended, and for the first time a cupola placed upon a four-cornered building. The palace of the Laurelwood (Lauretum), built by Placidia and her son Valentinian, in which Theodoric slew Odovacar, no longer exists.

In the second period, the reign of Theodoric, was built one of the finest Byzantine basilicas, San Martino in Caelo Aureo, now called San Apollinare Nuovo. The date of the “Rotunda of Theodoric” is not unchallenged, and the remains of his palace, now the front of the Franciscan cloister, have perhaps some claim to be considered genuine, although the palace represented in the mosaics of San Apollinare points to a more antique style. Of the original San Martino only the nave remains, and in its gorgeous mosaics may be seen a further development of Byzantine art. Traces of the antique survive in some parts of the ornamentation and in the quasi-Corinthian capitals. No entirely new type of capital is seen in Byzantine architecture before the reign of Justinian; and until then the new art continued to use with more or less modification the old forms. In San Martino the Corinthian form is changed by a considerable widening at the top, and resembles the funnel shape of later Byzantine capitals. The wall veil of both sides of the nave is covered with mosaics; on one side is represented a line of martyrs going forth from Ravenna to the presence of Christ, and on the Mother a procession of virgins, clad in white, with palms in their hands, issuing from Classis, to offer adoration to the Virgin, who is waiting to receive them. In the representation of Ravenna the palace of Theodoric is conspicuous.

Two large and beautiful buildings erected in the reign of Justinian make that period remarkable in Ravennate architecture, the famous octagon San Vitale, the model of Charles the Great for the cathedral of Aachen, and San Apollinare in Classe, one of the most important basilicas in existence. The church of San Vitale was begun under the archbishop Ecclesius before Italy had been reconquered by the Romans; the building was executed by Julian Argehtarius, the Anthemius of Ravenna; and the church, completed after the imperial restoration, was dedicated by bishop Maximianus in 546. It is octagon in shape, and covered with a dome. To the east stretches a long choir, and seven semicircular niches break the walls of the seven other sides. A large portion of the interior is cased in elabs of veined marble of various colours. The apse, which is adorned with fine mosaics, is Byzantine in shape, semicircular within and three-sided without, and on either side is a semicircular chapel. The central mosaic represents the sacrifice of Isaac, while on either side is a picture, most suitable to decorate a building which may be considered the monument of the imperial restoration in Italy. On one side is represented Justinian in gorgeous apparel accompanied by the archbishop Maximianus, and attended by priests and officers; and on the opposite side another mosaic shows the Empress Theodora, also in magnificent attire, glittering with pearls and gems, and surrounded by her maidens. Justinian carries a casket and Theodora a goblet, probably containing thank-offerings to be placed on the altar. The original entrance to the building was on the west, but is now walled up, and the narthex, or, as it was called in Ravenna, the “ardica”, is enclosed in the cloister. The columns have capitals of a new form, some funnel shaped, resembling the impost blocks, others basket shaped and adorned with network.

San Apollinare in Classe was begun under bishop Ursicinus, 534 ad, and completed and consecrated by Maximian in 549. In plan this great church is like the other basilicas of Ravenna. It has three naves, spanned on each side by arches supported by twelve columns. The pillars, now deep sunken in the floor, many standing in water, rest on Attic bases, very various in form. Their basket-shaped capitals are decorated with acanthus. The narthex is a striking feature of the building, being remarkably high and broad. On the wall veil of the naves above the arches are mosaic medallions representing the archbishops of Ravenna.

A few years before the foundations of the church of San Vitale were laid, a cathedral was built at Parentium, on the peninsula of Pola, by Euphrasius. To the artistic interest of this edifice is joined an historical association, derived from the fact that Euphrasius was appointed bishop of Parentium by Theodoric but built his cathedral after the city had passed into the hands of the Romans. Thus the stately building and its founder suggest the transition from the Ostrogothic to the Justinianean period. The cathedral is thus described by Mr. Jackson: “The church of Euphrasius is a specimen of the Byzantine style at its best. Classic tradition survives in the basilica plan, the long drawn ranks of serried marble pillars, and in the horizontal direction of the leading lines. But the capitals with their crisply raffled foliage, emphasized by dark holes pierced with a drill which recall the fragility and brilliance of the shell of the sea echinus, belong to a new school of sculpture, and the massive basket capitals which are found among them as well as the second capital or impost block which surmounts them all, were novelties in architecture at the time of their erection. These buildings belong to the best school of Byzantine art, and were erected at the same period as those at Ravenna and Constantinople, which they resemble in every detail; and in the church of Parenzo especially one might imagine oneself in the ancient capital of the exarchs”.

In the churches of Thessalonica we find the new art in tits perfection, especially in its most original and peculiar development, the adorning of the domes with mosaic. The date of many of the churches of Thessalonica is uncertain, and modern specialists are much at variance on the subject. In some cases the buildings themselves afford evidence of great antiquity; for example, the atrium in the nave of St. Demetrius once contained a fountain, which points to the custom of ablution practised by Christians only in the earliest times, and the mosaic pictures in St. George’s church of saints who lived before the time of Constantine suggest an early period. The theory, too easily adopted by travellers, that many of these churches were built on the sites of heathen temples has been contradicted and almost disproved by recent research.

Of the more ancient buildings in Thessalonica the churches of St. Demetrius and St. George are the most remarkable. The church of St. Demetrius is a basilica erected in honor of the saint early in the fifth century. The columns of the nave, of verde antico marble, are Ionic, and the carefully executed capitals might be called Corinthian but for the eagles with which they are adorned. The dosserets, which surmount the capitals, are marked with crosses, sometimes in the middle of foliage. The only decoration of this church consists of coloured marbles, and the effect is more temperate than if it were also embellished with mosaics.

The ancient church of St. George belongs to the class of circular buildings called “tholi”, most of which are supposed to have been erected in the early part of the fourth century. It is probable that the dome, which even in the time of Constantine was used in Christian architecture, was adopted from Persian and other oriental buildings. The opening at the top of the dome was convenient as an issue for the smoke of the fire-worshippers, while the followers of a mystic cult appreciated the gloom; for originally the cupola was lit from the top, as in the Pantheon at Rome. The octagon built by Constantine at Antioch was the model for numerous churches in the East. The entire decoration of the church of St. George consists of mosaics, and the eight pictures in the dome are perhaps the greatest work of the kind in existence. In these eight pictures are represented rich palaces, in a fantastic style, resembling those painted on the walls of Pompeii; columns ornamented with precious stones; pavilions closed by purple curtains floating in the wind, upheld by rods and rings; arcades without number, friezes decorated with dolphins, birds, palm-trees; and modillions supporting cornices of azure and emerald. In the centre of each of these compositions is a little octagonal or circular house, surrounded by columns and covered by a cupola; it is screened off by low barriers, and veils conceal the interior. A lamp suspended from the ceiling indicates its character; it is the new tabernacle or sanctum sanctorum of the Christians. A remarkable feature of this church are the eight quadrilateral chapels formed in the thickness of the walls at equal distances from one another. Some of these niches are ornamented with mosaic pictures of birds, flowers, and baskets of fruit.

The era of Justinian was the golden age of Christian art, and St. Sophia, its most perfect achievement, still remains, a wonder displaying all the resources of the new art, and a perpetual monument of the greatness of the Emperor and of the genius of Anthemius of Tralles. Of this master Agathias gives the following account:

“The city of Tralles was the birthplace of Anthemius, and he practised the art of inventions, by which mechanicians, applying the abstract theory of lines to materials, fabricate imitations and, as it were, images of real things. In this art he excelled greatly and reached the highest point of mathematical science, even as his brother Metrodorus in so-called philology. I would certainly felicitate their mother on having brought into the world a progeny replete with such various learning, for she was also the mother of Olympius, who studied law and practised in the courts, and of Dioscorus and Alexander, both skilful physicians. Dioscorus lived in his native city, where he gave many remarkable proofs of his skill, and Alexander dwelt in Rome, having received an honourable call thither. But the fame of Anthemius and Metrodorus spread everywhere and reached the Emperor himself, on whose invitation they came to Byzantium and spent the rest of their lives there, and gave remarkable proofs of their respective talent. Metrodorus educated many noble youths, instructing them in his honorable branch of learning, and instilling diligently a love of literature in all. But Anthemius contrived wonderful works both in the city and in many other places which, I think, even if nothing were said about them, would suffice of themselves to win for him an everlasting glory in the memory of man as long as they stand and endure”.

The church dedicated by Constantine to the Divine Wisdom (Ayia Sophia) was twice burnt down, first in the reign of Arcadius, and again in the reign of Justinian during the Nika revolt. Forty days after the tumult had subsided the ruins were cleared away by order of the Emperor, and space was provided for a new church to be built on a much larger scale than the old. To Anthemius was entrusted the great work, and Isidore of Miletus and Ignatius were his assistants. The ancient temples of Asia and Greece were robbed of their most beautiful columns, and costly marbles, granite, and porphyry were brought from distant places, from Egypt, Athens, land the Cyclades, as well as from Proconnesus, Cyzicus, and the Troad. The length of the building is 241 feet, the breadth 224 feet; the ground plan represents a Greek cross, and the crowning glory of the work, the aerial dome, rises 179 feet above the floor of the church. Thus here, for the first time, the cupola is united on a large scale with a cruciform building. The dome is lit by forty windows built into the hemisphere itself, and rests lightly on four strong arches supported by massive pillars; its weight is lessened as much as possible by the use of light materials. On the east and west are two large half-domes, each lit by five windows. The oval shape of the nave is determined by these half-domes. At either side of the apse there is a smaller side-apse, and on the west, where the narthex corresponds to the apse, there are similar recesses. Two contemporary writers, Paul the Silentiary and Procopius the historian, were impressed with the marvelous brilliance of the interior owing to the skilful arrangement of the windows. “It is wonderfully filled with light and sun rays, you would say the sunlight grew in it”. The enclosing walls of the building are built of brick concealed under a coating of marble, and the interior presents a brilliant spectacle of costly marbles, porphyry, jasper, and mosaics, which adorn the walls and cupolas.

In the apse, between four silver columns, were placed the seats of the Patriarch and the priests, also of silver, and a barrier, 14 feet high, of the same metal, separated the bema from the nave of the church. This barrier contained the three sacred doors, and, resting on twelve columns, was a frieze, with medallions, on which amidst adoring angels were represented the Virgin, the Apostles, and the Prophets. A circular shield in the centre bore a cross and the united monograms of the Emperor and Empress. Before the barrier stood the golden altar supported by golden pillars, and over it the silver ciborium. The solea, immediately in front of the bema, and occupying the eastern extremity of the nave, contained seats for the lesser clergy: and in front of the solea was the ambo, a semicircular tribune approached by marble steps and covered with a pyramidal roof, borne by eight pillars and decorated with gems and precious metals. This tribune, under the eastern side of the central dome, was reserved for the singers and readers, and contained the coronation chair of the Emperor.

The aisles are separated from the nave and the four side-apses by arcade of pillars, and the upper rooms are domed. Of the hundred columns which adorn St. Sophia and form its stately arcades, the greater number are of green Thessalian marble (verde antico), and were the spoil of pagan temples. The eight large green columns in the nave were taken from the temple of Diana at Ephesus, and the eight columns of dark red Theban porphyry in the four side-apses originally stood in the temple at Heliopolis, whence Aurelian brought them to Rome; but, as the gift of a Roman lady, they were destined, with other spoils of paganism, to adorn a Christian church. Their capitals present an infinite variety of form. They are of Proconnesian marble, and were manufactured in Byzantine workshops; they transgress in shape and execution the traditions of classic art. They lack, however, a characteristic feature of earlier Christian architecture, the dosseret or impost block; Anthemius discarded the stilt. The larger and richer capitals are decorated with acanthus, palm leaves, or monograms, deeply cut, and, like the marble friezes, are generally gilt; the smaller capitals are plain, and in shape like a die blunted at the corners. The bases of the pillars (of the usual Attic form) the capitals and the cornices are of marble, chiefly white, but sometimes light gray. The pavement is of dark gray veined marble, chosen no doubt by the architect in pleasing contrast to the rich and varied color of the interior, with its slabs of many-tinted marbles, its profuse gilding, and brilliant mosaics.

There are nine entrances to the body of the church from the narthex, a narrow hall running across the whole extent of the building, and having at each end lofty vaulted halls. The space under the western semicupola communicates with the narthex by three doors, of which the largest in the centre was called the “king’s door”; the west front of the narthex is coated with Proconnesian marble, and its upper story, connected with the rooms above the broad side-aisles, forms the gynaikitis, or women’s gallery. Seven doors lead from the narthex into the outer narthex(exonarthex), a space enclosed by halls open from within, and vaulted and adorned with mosaic. In this court, where now stands a Turkish fountain and marble basin, stood a covered phiale (fountain), and in the niches of the walls were twelve lions’ heads from which flowed a continuous stream of pure water.

Five years and eleven months after the laying of the foundations, St. Sophia was completed and consecrated by the Patriarch (26th December 237). Procopius thus describes it: “The church turned out a beautiful sight, colossal to spectators, and quite incredible to hearers; it was raised to a heavenly altitude, and like a ship at anchor, was eminent above the other edifices, overhanging the city”.

When Anthemius saw his own handiwork in its stately strength towering over the city, or lingered under the mysterious firmament of the dome, he may have gloried in the success of his labors. One would think that the words used of Giotto in the cathedral at Florence might well have been said of Anthemius by a Politian of the Justinianean age: “His name shall be as a song in the mouths of men”; and yet how unfamiliar nowadays is the name of Anthemius.

St. Sophia became a model for the whole Christian world, and was copied in all large towns during the sixth and following centuries. Among these lesser churches dedicated to the Divine Wisdom the cathedral of Thessalonica holds the first rank. It is certainly of the school of Anthemius, and was probably contemporary with the great St. Sophia. The mosaics in the dome are of the very best school, and preserve to some extent the traditions of Roman art. The hemisphere of the apse is adorned with a mosaic picture of the Virgin, seated and holding the infant Christ. Either this design or a colossal figure of Christ was invariably chosen to decorate, the hemisphere of Byzantine apses.

It has been already mentioned that sculpture in its classical form had died out, but smaller branches of the art were practised by the Byzantines. The reliefs on the Golden Gate and on the Pillars of Theodosius and Arcadius were not contemptible, and until the end of the fourth century gems were carved and coins struck in the antique style. After that period the workmanship of coins is inartistic and roughly-executed, and the art of carving gems declines. Chief among the smaller branches of sculpture was ivory carving, especially in the form of diptychs, which it was customary to present to the senate and the consuls, also to churches, and they were much used as new year’s gifts. Their value was sometimes increased by the name of some celebrated divine carved upon them, or by the consecration of an inscribed prayer. The bishop’s chair in the cathedral at Ravenna is a beautiful example of carved ivory.

Painting, however, had superseded all other forms of decorative art, and even in the sculptured adornments and reliefs of the new style the influence and features of painting may be traced in the grouping and general execution of the designs. The writers of this period make frequent mention of paintings in molten wax, a method described in the famous handbook of Mount Athos.

The illumination of manuscripts was a branch of art much cultivated by the Byzantines. M. Lenormant thus describes the famous Codex Rossanensis:

“Rossano possesses in the archives of its cathedral one of the most precious and incontestably genuine monuments of Byzantine art of the period before the Iconoclasts, and probably of the age of Justinian. I mean the manuscript known to the learned by the name of Codex Rossanensis, and whose existence MM. Oscar von Gebhardt and Adolf Harnack have recently been the first to discover. It is a magnificent volume, composed of 188 leaves of purple-tinted vellum, a foot long, on which the gospels of St. Matthew and St. Mark are written in large silver letters in the form of rounded uncials ... But what lends to the Greek gospels of Rossano such great interest is the twelve large miniatures, which are still preserved, a last relic of rich illustrations which have been for the most part unhappily destroyed. Each of these miniatures occupies a whole page and is divided in two parts, the upper containing a subject from the gospels, and the lower four half-length figures of the prophets who foretold the event, each accompanied by the words of his prophecy. The paintings are certainly of the same date as the text, namely the sixth century. The execution is remarkable, the drawing compact, the composition clear and simple, the design exquisite, and the style antique”.

In the use of symbols, a striking feature in Christian art, we observe the most frequent blending of pagan and Christian ideas. The Byzantines adopted the Greek custom of personifying nature, and in many instances classical forms were introduced, even in church paintings. In a Ravenna mosaic of the baptism of Christ, the Jordan is personified, and Theodoric represented himself on the gate of his palace, standing between two figures symbolizing Ravenna and Rome. The personifications of Victory and Fortune, Nike and Tyche, are frequent and familiar, and the gnostic sects employed a more intricate symbolism of abstract ideas on their engraved gems and inscriptions on metal. Numerous symbols were used for Christ and God the Father, and display a curious adoption of antique forms; and the resemblance borne by the representations of Christ on early Christian tombs to Sol Invictus and Serapis is remarkable. On Christian gravestones we find the letters D. M., D. M. S., and T. K., which suggest the Dis manibus sacrum of the ancients. Perhaps the consecrated ground hallowed the pagan words, just as gems with images of heathen gods were sanctified by a Christian inscription or the monogram of Christ, and were countenanced by the Church.

Thus in the development of Christian art the old classic traditions had been gradually abandoned, or remained only in allegory and mixed symbolism. The models of Greece and Rome became relics of the old world, curiosities to adorn museums. A new religion had displaced pagan mythology and philosophy, and naturally found an expression in new forms of art. And this new art, born in the atmosphere of triumphant Christianity, reached its perfection in Justinian’s church of the Divine Wisdom, which still looks across the Bosphorus upon the sands of Chalcedon.

XVI

NOTES ON THE MANNERS, INDUSTRIES, AND COMMERCE IN THE AGE OF JUSTINIAN

The population of Constantinople at the beginning of the sixth century has been calculated at about a million. The greatest city in Europe, as it continued to be throughout the Middle Ages, and at the same time situated on the borders of Asia, it was full of Gepids, Goths, Lombards, Slaves, and Huns, as well as orientals; Abasgian eunuchs and Colchian guards might be seen in the streets. The money-changers in this mercantile metropolis were numerous, and probably lived in the Chalkoprateia, which in later times at least was a Jews’ quarter. But the provincial subjects were not encouraged to repair to the capital except for strict purposes of business; and their visits were looked upon with such jealous eyes that as soon as their business was completed they were obliged to return home with all haste.

In the urban arrangements of Constantinople, for the comfort of whose inhabitants the Emperors were always solicitous, the law of Zeno, which provided for a sea prospect, is noteworthy. The height of the houses built on the hills overlooking the sea was regulated in such a way that the buildings in front should not interfere with the view from the houses behind. Besides the corn, imported from Egypt, which was publicly distributed to the citizens in the form of bread, the chief food of the Byzantines was salted provisions of various kinds—fish, cheese, or ham. Wine was grown in the surrounding district, and there was a good vegetable market. Of public amusements there was no lack. As well as the horse-races in the hippodrome, there were theatrical representations and ballets; and it is probable that troupes of acrobats and tight-rope dancers often came from Asia. A theatre, called by the suggestive name of “Harlots”, is mentioned and recognized by the pious Justinian without a censure or a blush. Combats of men with wild animals, which had been abolished by the mild and heterodox Anastasius, were once more permitted under the orthodox and severer dynasty of Justin. Curious animals and prodigies were exhibited and attracted crowds; we hear, for example, of a wonderful dog which had the power of distinguishing the characters and conditions of human beings. This animal, whose inspiration was more formidable than if it had been mad with hydrophobia, singled out the courtesan, the adulterer, the miser, or the woman with child; and when the rings of a multitude of spectators were collected and cast before it in a heap, it returned each to the owner without making a mistake.

The conversation which took place in the hippodrome on the eve of the Nika sedition, while it illustrates the political life of the time, is also interesting and important as an example of the language then spoken at Byzantium, and altogether is sufficiently noteworthy and curious to deserve reproduction. In many places, however, the meaning is obscure. It was customary to permit the factions on special occasions to state their grievances to the Emperor. The demarch was the mouth­piece of the deme, and a mandator or herald replied for the sovereign.

Demarch of Greens. Long may you live, Justinian Augustus! Tu vincas. I am aggrieved, fair lord, and cannot endure the oppression, God knows. I fear to name the oppressor, lest he be increased and I endanger my own safety.

Mandator. Who is he? I know him not.

Demarch of Greens. My oppressor, 0 thrice august! is to be found in the quarter of the shoemakers.

Mandator. No one does you wrong.

Demarch of Greens. One man and one only does me wrong. Mother of God, let him never raise his head!

Mandator. Who is he? We know him not.

Demarch of Greens. Nay, you know best, 0 thrice august! who it is that oppresses me this day.

Mandator. We know not that any one oppresses you.

Demarch of Greens. It is Calapodius, the spathar (guardsman), who wrongs me, 0 lord of all!

Mandator. Calapodius is not in power.

Demarch of Greens. My oppressor will perish like Judas; God will requite him quickly.

Mandator. You come, not to see the games, but to insult your rulers.

Demarch of Greens. My oppressor shall perish like Judas.

Mandator. Silence, Jews, Manichaeans, and Samaritans!

Demarch of Greens. Do you disparage us with the name of Jews and samaritans. The Mother of God is with all of us.

Mandator. When will ye cease cursing yourselves.

Demarch of Greens. If any one denies that our lord the Emperor is orthodox, let him be anathema, as Judas.

Mandator. I would have you all baptized in the name of one God.

The Greens (tumultuously). I am baptized in One God.

Mandator. Really, if you won't be silent, I shall have you beheaded.

Demarch of Greens. Every person is anxious to be in authority, to secure his personal safety. Your Majesty must not be indignant at what we say in our tribulation, for the Deity listens to all complaints. We have good reason, 0 Emperor! to mention all things now. For we do not even know where the palace is, nor where to find any public office. I come into the city by one street only, sitting on a mule; and I wish I had not to come then, your Majesty.

Mandator. Everyone is free to move in public, where he wishes, without danger.

Demarch of Greens. I am told I am free, yet I am not allowed to exhibit my freedom. If a man is free but is suspected as a Green, he is sure to be publicly punished.

Mandator. Have ye no care for your lives that ye thus brave death?

Demarch of Greens. Let this (green) colour be once uplifted—then justice disappears. Put an end to the scenes of murder, and let us be lawfully punished. Behold, the fountain is overflowing; punish as many as you like. Verily, human nature cannot tolerate the two things together (to be murdered by the Blues and to be punished by the laws). Would that Sabbates had never been born, to have a son who is a murderer. The sixth murder has taken place in the Zeugma; the victim was a spectator in the morning, in the afternoon, 0 lord of all! he was butchered.

Demarch of Blues. Yourselves are the only party in the hippodrome that has murderers among their number.

Demarch of Greens. When ye commit murder ye leave the city in flight.

Demarch of Blues. Ye shed blood for no reason. Ye are the only party here with murderers among them.

Demarch of Greens. 0 lord Justinian! they challenge us and yet no one slays them. Who slew the woodseller in the Zeugma, 0 Emperor?

Mandator. Ye slew him.

Demarch of Greens. Who slew the son of Epagathus, Emperor?

Mandator. Ye slew him too, and ye throw the blame on the Blues.

Demarch of Greens. Now have pity, 0 Lord God! The truth is in jeopardy. I should like to argue with them who say that affairs are managed by God. Whence comes this misery?

Mandator. God is incapable of causing evils.

Demarch of Greens. God, you say, is incapable of causing evils? Who is it then who wrongs me? Let some philosopher or hermit explain the distinction.

Mandator. Accursed blasphemers, when will ye hold your peace?

Demarch of Greens. If it is the pleasure of your Majesty, I am content, albeit unwillingly. I know all—all, but I say nothing. Goodbye, Justice! you are no longer in fashion. I shall turn and become a Jew. Better to be a “Greek” than a Blue, God knows.

Demarch of Blues. I hate you, I can't abide the sight of you,—your enmity harasses me.

Demarch of Greens. Let the bones of the spectators be exhumed!

[Exeunt the Greens.

It will be noticed that in this dialogue the spokesman of the oppressed faction began with humble complaints; and the scene ended with open defiance. When the Greens marched out of the hippodrome, the Emperor sitting in the cathisma was left for a few moments alone with the Blues; but they quickly followed their enemies, and street conflicts ensued.

If we pass from these stray details of external life to consider the morality of the age, we are confronted on the one hand by the stern laws of Justinian for the repression of what he considered immorality, and his clement laws for the encouragement of reformation; on the other hand by a remarkable picture, painted by a secret hand, of the vice that prevailed in all classes of society. These data are not in opposition, for moral legislation presupposes the prevalence of immorality.

Two laws testify to the solicitude of Justinian for the liberty and protection of women. The earliest of them, issued in 534, made it illegitimate for any person to constrain a female, whether a freewoman or a slave, to appear against her will in a dramatic or orchestric performance. By the same act it was illegal for a lessee to prevent an actress from throwing up her theatrical engagement at any moment she pleased, and he was not even entitled to demand from her securities the money pledged for the fulfilment of her broken engagement. The duty or privilege of seeing that this law was carried out was assigned to the bishops as well as to the civil governors, against whose collusion with the managers of theatres episcopal protests may have been often necessary. It was also enacted that the profession of the stage, which in this age was almost synonymous with the trade of prostitution, should form no let or hindrance to the contraction of a legal marriage with the highest in the land. This liberation from disabilities of a degraded but necessary class is generally supposed to have been prompted by a personal episode in the life of the Emperor himself, whose wife Theodora seems to have been once an actress at Antioch.

The other law was published in the following year, and addressed to the citizens of Constantinople. It deals with the practice of enticing young girls away from their homes in order to hire them out for immoral purposes. It is best to quote a portion of Justinian’s constitution on the subject:

“The ancient laws and former Emperors have regarded with extreme abhorrence the name and the trade of a brothel-keeper, and many laws have consequently been enacted against such. We have increased the penalties already defined, and in other laws have supplied the omissions of our predecessors. But we have been lately informed of iniquities of this kind which are being carried on in this great city, and we have not overlooked the matter. For we discovered that some persons live and maintain themselves in an outrageous manner, making accursed gain by abominable means. They travel about many countries and districts, and entice poor young girls by promising them shoes and clothes, and thus entrapping them, carry them off to this fortunate city, where they keep them shut up in their dens, supplying them with a miserable allowance of food and raiment, and place their bodies at the service of the public and keep the wretched fees themselves. And they draw up bonds by which girls bind themselves to this occupation for a specified time, nay, they even sometimes ask the money back from the securities [if a girl escapes]. This practice has become so outrageous, that throughout almost the whole of this imperial city and its suburbs over the water [at Chalcedon and Pera], and, worst of all, in close proximity to churches and saintly houses, dens of such a kind exist; and acts so iniquitous and illegal are perpetrated in our times that some persons, pitying the girls, desired to deliver them from this occupation and place them in a position of legal cohabitation, but the procurers did not permit it. Some of these men are so unholy as to corrupt girls under ten years old, and large sums of money have been given to buy off the unfortunate children and unite them in a respectable marriage. This evil, which was formerly confined to a small part of the city, has spread throughout its whole extent and the circumjacent regions. We were secretly informed of this some time ago, and as our most magnificent praetors, whom we commissioned to investigate the matter, confirmed the information, we immediately determined to deliver the city from such pollution”.

This preamble is followed by prohibition of these abuses; procurers are banished from the Empire, and especially from the imperial city. It would appear from this law that all disorderly houses were rendered absolutely illegal, and that the only form of prostitution countenanced by law was that of women who practised it on their own account.

Another constitution of the same year, also addressed to the people of Constantinople, deals with the “heavier” or “diabolical” forms of licentiousness, and with the crime of blasphemy. Two bishops who rashly tasted of the Dead Sea fruit were subjected to a painful and shameful punishment by the inexorable Justinian, who adopted the principle that according to the scriptures whole cities as well as guilty individuals were reduced to ruin by the wrath of God in consequence of similar transgressions. The use of blasphemous expressions and imprecations is forbidden with equal severity, and the imperial notion of the law of causation is illustrated by the remark that on account of crimes of this kind “famines and earthquakes and plagues” visit mankind. We may finally mention the enactment of Justinian which suppressed gambling with dice, and other games of hazard.

It is hardly possible to say much here of the curious evidence afforded by the Secret History on the subject of contemporary morals. The delicacy or affectation of the present age would refuse to admit the authority and example of Gibbon as a sufficient reason or valid excuse for rehearsing the licentious vagaries ascribed to Theodora in the indecent pages of an audacious and libellous pamphlet. If the words and acts which the writer attributes to Theodora were drawn, as doubtless is the case, from real life—from the green-rooms of Antioch or the bagnios of Byzantium—it can only be remarked that the morals of those cities in the sixth century did not differ very much from the morals of Paris, Vienna, Naples, or London at the present day. The story of Antonina’s intrigue with Theodosius, which is quite credible and was probably derived from back-stair gossip, contains nothing more enormous than might be told of exalted personages in any court at any period of history.

There is no side of the history of societies in the remote past on which we are left so much in the dark by extant records as their industry, their commerce, and their economy; and as these departments of life were continually affecting politics, their neglect by contemporary writers renders a reconstruction of political history always defective and often impossible. The chief technical industries carried on at Constantinople seem to have been as follows:—(1) The manufacture of silk fabrics was practised on a large scale before the production of the material was introduced by the two monks, as narrated in a previous chapter. Once the Romans were no longer dependent on the oriental nations for its production and importation, it is to be presumed that the manufacture of the fabric, which must have become considerably cheaper, was carried on on a much more extensive scale. (2) The domestic utensils used by the Byzantine citizens were of glazed pottery, of black or gray colour, and were made at Byzantium. Glass was imported from Egypt, which in old days used to supply Rome. (3) The extensive use of mosaics in the decoration of Christian churches and rich men’s palaces made the manufacture of the coloured pebbles quite a lucrative trade. (4) The symbolism of the Christian religion gave rise to a new art, and the shops of crucifix-makers were probably a feature of Constantinople. Crosses were made of all sorts of materials, gold, silver, precious stones, lychnites, or ivory. The carving of religious subjects in ivory was an associated branch of this trade. (5) The art of the jeweller was doubtless in great requisition in the luxurious capital, and the pearls which decorate Theodora in the mosaic portrait in San Vitale at Ravenna indicate the style of the imperial court. (6) The implements of war, the arms of the soldiers, and the engines used in siege warfare were manufactured at Constantinople, and stored in a public building called the Mangana.

All these arts flourished in the imperial city, and made it an active industrial centre. In regard to the commercial relations of the Empire, it will be well to quote the words of Finlay, who made a special study of this side of its history:

“Several circumstances, however, during the reign of Justinian contributed to augment the commercial transactions of the Greeks, and to give them a decided preponderance in the Eastern trade. The long war with Persia cut off all those routes by which the Syrian and Egyptian population had maintained their ordinary communications with Persia; and it was from Persia that they had always drawn their silk and great part of their Indian commodities, such as muslins and jewels. This trade now began to seek two different channels, by both of which it avoided the dominions of Chosroes; the one was to the north of the Caspian Sea, and the other by the Red Sea. This ancient route through Egypt still continued to be that of the ordinary trade. But the importance of the northern route, and the extent of the trade carried on by it through different ports on the Black Sea are authenticated by the numerous colony of the inhabitants of central Asia established at Constantinople in the reign of Justin II. Six hundred Turks availed themselves, at one time, of the security offered by the journey of a Roman ambassador to the Great Khan of the Turks, and joined his train. This fact affords the strongest evidence of the great importance of this route, as there can be no question that the great number of the inhabitants of central Asia who visited Constantinople were attracted to it by their commercial occupations.

The Indian commerce through Arabia and by the Red Sea was still more important; much more so, indeed, than the mere mention of Justinian’s failure to establish a regular importation of silk by this route might lead us to suppose.

 The immense number of trading vessels which habitually frequented the Red Sea shows that it was very great.

Finlay goes on to make some instructive observations on the decline of Egypt and the importance of the Jews.

“In the reign of Augustus, Egypt furnished Rome with a tribute of twenty millions of modii of grain annually, and it was garrisoned by a force rather exceeding twelve thousand regular troops. Under Justinian the tribute in grain was reduced to about five millions and a half modii, that is eight hundred thousand artabas; and the Roman troops, to a cohort of six hundred men. Egypt was prevented from sinking still lower by the exportation of its grain to supply the trading population on the shores of the Red Sea. The canal connecting the Nile with the Red Sea afforded the means of exporting an immense quantity of inferior grain to the arid coasts of Arabia, and formed a great artery for civilization and commerce”. The Jews seem to have increased in numbers about the beginning of the sixth century. Finlay accounts for this increase “by the decline of the rest of the population in the countries round the Mediterranean, and by the general decay of civilization in consequence of the severity of the Roman fiscal system, which trammelled every class of society with regulations restricting the industry of the people ... The Jews, too, at this period, were the only neutral nation who could carry on their trade equally with the Persians, Ethiopians, Arabs, and Goths; for, though they were hated everywhere, the universal dislike was a reason for tolerating a people never likely to form common cause with any other”.

As for the Greeks, they “maintained their superiority over the other people in the Empire only by their commercial enterprise, which preserved that civilization in the trading cities which was rapidly disappearing among the agricultural population”. Barbarian monarchs, like Theodoric, used often to support the Jews in order to “render their country independent of the wealth and commerce of the Greeks”.

A writer at the beginning of the seventh century, Theophylactus Simocatta, gives a description of the empire of Taugast, which has been identified with China; the intercourse with the Turks, which began in the reign of Justin II, brought the far East closer to the Roman Empire. He praises the wise laws which prevail in Taugast, and mentally contrasts the luxury of Byzantium with the law which forbids the Taugastians to wear silver or gold, while he attributes to Alexander the Great the foundation of the two chief towns of their realm. Syrian missionaries seem also to have kept up a connection between China and the West; we read that “in the seventeenth year of the period Cheng kuan (=643) the king of Fulin, Po-to-li [Po-to-li = the Nestorian Patriarch of Syria, Pulin = the countries in the East once under Roman sway], sent an embassy offering red glass and other articles. Tai-tsung favoured them with a message under his imperial seal, and graciously granted them presents of silk”.