HISTORY OF THE BYZANTINE EMPIRE FROM

A.D. 717 TO 1453

BOOK FOURTH

GREEK EMPIRE OF NICAEA AND CONSTANTINPLE

A.D.1204-145

 

CHAPTER XI.

EMPIRE OF NICAEA, AD. 1204-1261

 

Sect. I

REIGN OF THEODORE I. (LASCARIS), A.D. 1204-1222.

 

 

The taking of Constantinople filled the Greek population in all the provinces of the Byzantine Empire with wonder and alarm. The national existence was bound up with the central government, so that a vacancy on the throne seemed to imply the ruin of all the institutions under which they had hitherto lived. The future threatened them with individual ruin as well as political anarchy, even if they escaped foreign conquest. Yet even at this crisis of the national fate the people made no exertions to reform the vices which degraded their character and paralysed their exertions. No attempt was made to circumscribe the arbitrary conduct of the court, and restore vigour to the old scheme of systematic administration; nothing was done to correct ecclesiastical abuses in the church, to improve the courts of law, to abolish the monopolies that ruined native industry, or to invigorate the municipal institutions which could alone give energy to the mass of the population. The news that a Belgian emperor ruled in Constantinople spread from Dyrrachium to Trebizond without rousing a single Greek citizen to step forward as the defender of the rights of the nation. Much political disorder was caused by the avarice and ambition of the Greek nobles, but no anarchy occurred from the populace endeavouring to deprive the official agents of the central government of any of the powers which for several generations these agents had grossly abused. So completely had the court, the administration, the clergy, and the lawyers perverted the judgment and feelings of the whole Greek population, that the fabric of the imperial government continued to stand though its foundations were destroyed, its vitality decayed, and its judicial efficacy corrupted. The civil and military governors of provinces, the judges, intendants, and collectors of taxes in cities, continued to pursue their ordinary course of action, in alliance with the bishops and clergy, until they were driven from their posts by the conquering Latins, or summoned to yield their places to the representatives of a new emperor. Never was the national imbecility which arises from the want of municipal institutions and executive activity in local spheres more apparent. Had the towns, cities, corporations, districts, and provinces, inhabited by a Greek population, possessed magistrates responsible both to the people and the emperor, but accustomed to independent action, there can be no doubt that thousands of Greek citizens would have rushed forward to defend their country against the Crusaders and the Venetians; and that they would have soon reformed the abuses which rendered the empires of Constantinople and Trebizond fearful examples of the degraded condition into which a civilized Christian society may sink. A sense of national independence and spirit of liberty might have infused themselves into the hearts of the Greek people, and the empire of Constantinople might then have shared with the Western nations the task of advancing the progress of Christian civilization. But the Greeks at this critical conjuncture proved incapable of making any intellectual exertion; their municipal institutions had been rendered so subservient to the central power that they had long ceased to reason on politics; national feeling and political intelligence were dormant in their souls, and they submitted blindly to any sovereign who seized the reins of government, whether a foreigner or a native.

The great catastrophe, which had fallen alike on every class of society, ought certainly to have suggested to the Greek statesmen of the period the importance of identifying the feelings and interests of the whole free population with the cause of the government. We know that these men were in the habit of reading Thucydides and Plato. In the works they have left us, we find them so often aping the style of the ancients that we feel disgusted when we discover they paid little attention to their thoughts. The value of the study of the classics to form or even to improve the mind was then, as it is now, very much overrated. Experience shows that it is almost as likely to produce learned pedants as accomplished scholars; for unless there be a basis of mental education very different from that which is acquired through books, learning cannot produce statesmen. The Greeks are not the only people among whom the study of classical literature has produced no practical improvement in political knowledge. Yet everyone must admit that the study of the republican literature of the ancients bears that deep impression of truth which cannot fail to enlarge the intellectual vision and purify the taste of those who examine its records with minds already familiar with the principles of civil liberty and political order. Men who might have distinguished themselves in official life only as useful labourers at the task of the hour, attain to higher views by classical studies. New combinations of free principles of government in various conditions of society, differing from everything around them, are presented to their view, and give them a profounder experience of human nature. England certainly ought never to forget that many of her best patriots and greatest statesmen have been indebted to the study of classic literature for those liberal and philanthropic ideas which enabled them to improve the prospects of the human race while they served their country's cause; and their names, whether they belong to the seventeenth or the nineteenth century, will go down to future ages with as pure and as great a fame as the greatest in the annals of Greece and Rome. But the minds of these men were formed by their domestic education and native institutions; they were only improved and matured by classic studies.

Unfortunately for the Greek race, their teachers and their rulers never felt that the people had an inalienable right to the impartial administration of justice. The government of the Byzantine Empire considered that the very basis of its existence was the absolute submission of the people; it regarded all popular rights and municipal authority as incompatible with a strong central power.

There was also a material obstacle to any general action of the Greek nation at the time of the conquest of Constantinople. Civilization had already declined to such a degree that communications between distant portions of the nation were becoming rare. Monopolies and privileges had thrown commerce into the hands of strangers. No ties of common interests or feelings bound distant localities together, unless with 1the fetters of political despotism and ecclesiastical bigotry. Little was to be gained or hoped for by the people beyond the narrow sphere in which they lived, so that local prejudices and individual interests outweighed national patriotism. The emperors were prompt to avail themselves of this state of things, and easily attached the wealthiest members of the aristocracy in each separate district to their service. The profits of imperial oppression were shared with these provincial nobles and archons, while the clergy gave to every patriotic aspiration the form of orthodox bigotry. Such was the state of society when the foundations of the empire of Nicaea were laid; and they explain in some degree how the weakest despotism the world ever saw could succeed in expanding itself into the Greek empire of Constantinople.

The rebellion of powerful nobles was a chronic disease of the Byzantine empire. It is not surprising, therefore, that the members of the aristocracy, even amidst the calamities of their country, thought more of their own habitual projects of ambition than of their duties to their country. The provinces were consequently soon filled with pretenders to the empire. The two fugitive emperors, whose fates have been recorded at the close of the preceding book, Alexius III and Alexius V, attempted to preserve some power in Macedonia. Theodore Lascaris, who had been acknowledged emperor after the flight of Alexius V, escaped to Bithynia, where he assumed the direction of the central government, contenting himself for the moment with the title of Despot, and appearing as the representative or colleague of his worthless father-in-law Alexius III. As the news of the taking of Constantinople spread, fresh pretenders to the throne appeared, and many nobles who had been preparing to render themselves independent from the first appearance of the Crusaders, assumed the rank of sovereign princes without claiming the title of Emperor. In Europe, Leo Sguros, the governor of Nauplia and Argos, endeavoured to render himself master of all Greece; but his career of ambition was soon terminated by the conquests of the Crusaders. On the other hand, Michael Angelos Comnenos laid the foundations of an independent principality in Epirus, which successfully resisted the Crusaders, and defended its independence against the Greek emperors of Nicaea and Constantinople for several generations. In Asia Minor, Theodore Mankaphas, who had assumed the title of Emperor during the reign of Isaac II, again claimed the empire at Philadelphia, and Manuel Maurozomes rendered himself master of the upper valley of the Meander. But the great rival who disputed the empire of the East with Theodore Lascaris was Alexios Comnenos, the founder of the empire of Trebizond. He claimed the throne as the legal heir of the house of Comnenos. The tyranny of his grandfather, Andronicus I., was perhaps forgotten in the provinces. His father’s life had been sacrificed to confer the throne on the worthless family of Angelos, and the memory of Manuel’s moderation and orthodoxy had doubtless been loudly celebrated by the partisans of his son. The calamities of the empire afforded the young Alexios a fair opportunity for stepping forward in its defence, as no one could advance a more legitimate claim to the vacant throne. With the assistance of a corps of Iberian mercenaries he occupied Trebizond, and all the coast of Pontus and Paphlagonia soon acknowledged his authority.

Future events could alone determine to whom the empire would ultimately fall. The good fortune of Theodore I, joined to his prudence and valour, contributed much more than his election in the Church of St Sophia to fix the crown on his head. When he fled from Constantinople, he presented himself at the gates of Nicaea, into which he demanded admittance as the representative of his father-in-law, the dethroned Emperor Alexius III. The inhabitants, who hated Alexius, refused to admit Theodore within their walls, but allowed his wife Anna to seek shelter in their city. They were perhaps doubtful whether it would not be more for their advantage to submit to the Crusaders than to acknowledge a cowardly and rapacious emperor like Alexius III. Theodore retired to the fastnesses of Mount Olympus, where he assembled a considerable body of troops, and rallied many of the fugitives who had fled from Constantinople. Several fortified towns in Bithynia submitted to his authority; and when the extent of the confiscations of Greek property by the Latins became known, the inhabitants of Asia Minor willingly placed themselves under his protection.

Theodore I fought his way to the crown by his indefatigable exertions in opposing the progress of the Latins in Asia Minor. Before the end of the year 1204, Louis, count of Blois, who had been created Duke of Nicaea, and received Bithynia as his share in the partition of the empire, sent an army, headed by one hundred knights, to take possession of his duchy. This force landed at Peges, occupied Panormus, and marched into the interior until it encountered the troops of Theodore at Poimanenos. The Greeks, however, were still incapable of sustaining the charge of the Western cavalry, and the Crusaders gained a complete victory. Poimanenos and Lopadion were taken, and Prusa was besieged. The position of Prusa (of which the walls may still be seen on a rocky ridge overlooking the romantic Turkish city of Brusa) was then strong; and as it was defended with constancy, the assailants were compelled to retire with loss. But another division of the Crusaders occupied the strong, rich, and important city of Nicomedia, which the Greeks did not attempt to defend, but of which their active enemies immediately repaired the ruined and dismantled fortifications.

During the same autumn, Henry of Flanders, the Emperor Baldwin’s brother, landed with his Belgian knights at Abydos, and occupied all the Troad. In this operation he was assisted by a colony of Armenians, established in this district by the Byzantine emperors. These Armenians were treated by the Greek civil and military authorities with that spirit of bigotry and oppression which had driven most of the subjects of the Byzantine Empire, not of the Greek race, into open rebellion. They now submitted to the Crusaders, in the hope of escaping from the sufferings under which they had long groaned. From Abydos, Henry marched to Adramyttum, where he met with no resistance, and the conquest of the Troad and the whole of the rich province between the Hellespont and the Adramyttum gulf was completed without loss. Theodore Mankaphas, who had assumed the imperial title at Philadelphia, however, deemed it his duty to oppose the progress of the Belgian chiefs. He led a body of Asiatic troops to encounter the lances of the Crusaders, but he was easily defeated by Henry of Flanders.

Henry’s career of conquest was suddenly cut short by an order to join his brother, the Emperor Baldwin, at Adrianople, with all his disposable force, in order to encounter Joannice, king of Bulgaria. The Armenians of the Troad, fearing the vengeance of the Greeks after the departure of the Belgian troops, emigrated, under the protection of Henry's army, with the intention of settling among their countrymen who were established at Philippopolis. A colony of twenty thousand souls crossed the Hellespont; but Henry, receiving the news of his brother's defeat and captivity, hastened forward with his cavalry to assemble and protect the fugitives who had escaped from the battle of Adrianople. A body of Armenian infantry remained to escort the long train of waggons, loaded with the families and goods of the emigrants. The Greek troops and the armed bands of countrymen, who were kept in constant agitation by the disturbed condition of the district on the line of march, soon found themselves sufficiently numerous to form a plan for plundering the property of the Armenians. A general attack was made on the colonists; the escort was separated from the baggage, and the waggons were pillaged. The women and children were reduced to slavery, the unarmed emigrants were slaughtered, and this industrious colony was utterly exterminated, sharing the fate of everything practically useful in the Eastern Empire. Thus the Greeks and Crusaders emulated one another in exterminating the inhabitants of the country they aspired to rule; and the numbers of mankind in all the provinces they governed diminished as rapidly as the wealth and civilization of the people declined.

The valour and prudence displayed by Theodore Lascaris induced the authorities of Nicaea to acknowledge him as their sovereign, and that city became the point where all the most eminent of the Greek aristocracy and clergy assembled to oppose the progress of the Latin domination. The primary step towards re-establishing the unity of the imperial administration was to ratify the election of Theodore in the most solemn manner, and thus give him a decided pre-eminence over all his rivals. To do this, it was necessary that he should be the first to receive the imperial crown from the hands of the Patriarch. Alexius V had been slain by the Crusaders; Alexius III was a prisoner in the kingdom of Thessalonica. The Patriarch John Kamateros, who retired with Nicetas to Selymbria, had settled at Didymoteichos; and when he was now requested to visit Nicaea, in order to resume his patriarchal functions, and place the crown on the head of Theodore Lascaris, he preferred resigning his office to quitting his retirement. A new patriarch, Michael Autorianos, was elected his successor about two years after the taking of Constantinople, and one of his first public acts was to place the imperial crown on the head of Theodore I with as much pomp and ceremony as if the scene had been acted in St Sophia’s, (A.D. 1206).

The enemies of Theodore continued to attack his little empire with vigour, though the victory of the King of Bulgaria over the Emperor of Constantinople had relieved him for a time from his greatest danger. David Comnenos, the brother of Alexius, emperor of Trebizond, invaded Bithynia, captured Heracleia, and was so elated with his success that he sent forward his army under Synadenos to occupy Nicaea and drive Theodore from the throne. Lascaris encountered Synadenos on the banks of the Sangarius, and completely defeated the Iberians of Comnenos. He was equally successful in the south-west. Gaiaseddin Kaikhosrou, who was under great obligations to Alexius III, had recovered possession of the throne of Iconium; and while Lascaris acted only as despot in the name of his father-in-law, the sultan favoured his progress. The power of the Seljouks, indeed, appeared to be threatened both by the conquests of the Crusaders and the rapid progress of the young Emperor of Trebizond. But as soon as Theodore was firmly established on the throne, Kaikhosrou sought for a weaker ally among the Greeks. He gave his daughter in marriage to Manuel Maurozomes, and supplied him with Turkish auxiliaries to attack Lascaris. The Turks of Maurozomes were defeated as well as the Iberians of Comnenos. Theodore Mankaphas was also compelled to lay aside the imperial title for the second time, and Sabas, the governor of Amisos, who had defended his independence against the Emperor of Trebizond, acknowledged the nominal supremacy of the Emperor of Nicaea. Theodore I was consequently enabled to re-establish the administration of the whole country, from the mouth of the Sangarius to the sources of the Rhyndacus and the Maeander, on the old imperial system.

The difficulties in which the empire of Nicaea was placed by its geographical position were very great. It was open to the invasion of all its enemies; hostile princes occupied all its frontiers, and its friends and allies were far distant. David Comnenos, after the defeat of his army on the banks of the Sangarius, concluded a treaty of alliance with Henry, the Latin Emperor of Constantinople, from whom he received a body of knights and men-at-arms. For this succour he engaged to become a vassal of the Latin empire for a part of the territory he had previously governed in the name of his brother Alexios, the Emperor of Trebizond. No step could have proved more advantageous to Theodore than this close alliance of his principal rival with the detested Latins. Nicaea was now the residence of the Greek Patriarch, and all the most distinguished members of the Greek Church had already attached themselves to the cause of Theodore I. The whole of the clergy in the western part of Asia Minor were driven, from fear of the extension of the Latin power through the desertion of David Comnenos, to rally round their Patriarch; and the authority of the bishops, which was not inconsiderable in civil affairs, was universally employed to maintain a political connection with the empire of Nicaea as the centre of orthodoxy. The auxiliary force sent to the aid of David enabled him to take the offensive; but Theodore proved again victorious. A chosen body of three hundred Latin cavalry, with all its followers, was cut to pieces in the forests near the Sangarius, and David was compelled to shut himself up in Heracleia. Theodore even hoped to revenge himself on the Latins, for the assistance they had granted to Comnenos, by conquering Peges. He gained possession of that fortress; but it was recovered by the Latins, who then invaded Bithynia at several points, in order to complete the subjugation of the fiefs which had been assigned to them in that province at the partition of the Byzantine empire. Their forces were led by one hundred and forty knights, each of whom expected to gain a barony. One division occupied Cyzicus, and, by repairing its ruined walls, converted it into a citadel for storing provisions and plunder. Another division fortified the Church of St Sophia, built by Constantine the Great near Nicomedia, in order that it might serve as a fort to command the rich adjacent plain; from which we may infer that the citadel and town could not be rendered defensible on account of their extent. A third division seized the castle of Charax, on the southern coast of the Gulf of Nicomedia, from which there was a direct road to Nicaea; while the remainder of the expedition established itself at Kivotos, a port which afforded easy communications both with Nicaea and Prusa. (Kivotos, the ancient Kios or Cius, is called Givitot by the Latin historians of the Crusaders. Its modern name is Ghiumlek. It was repaired by Alexius I, who established in it a colony of Anglo-Danes, driven from England by the Normans). Theodore, alarmed at these preparations for assailing his power at its centre simultaneously from various points of attack, concluded an alliance with the King of Bulgaria, who, as soon as he was informed that the greater part of the Latin troops had passed over into Asia, laid siege to Adrianople, while his allies, the Romans, ravaged the open country to the neighbourhood of Constantinople.

This invasion compelled Henry to recall a strong body of troops from Asia, and Theodore availed himself of the weakness of the garrisons of Cyzicus and Kivotos to attack both places at the same time. He already possessed a fleet of sixty vessels, so that he was able to press the attack on Kivotos with vigour both by sea and land. The place was defended by forty knights, with their followers, but its walls were in a ruinous condition, and it was ill supplied with provisions. The Emperor Henry was sitting at dinner in the great hall of the palace of Blachern, when a courier suddenly entered, and exclaimed—“Sire, unless the knights at Kivotos receive immediate assistance, the place will be taken, and they will all be slain!” The Belgian emperor, with that promptitude which enabled him to sustain with glory the ill-constructed fabric of the Latin empire of Constantinople, rose from table and instantly embarked with all the troops who were ready, and put to sea. Heralds were left to proclaim that Kivotos required immediate succour, and that every vassal of the empire must follow the emperor’s banner. When the sun rose, Henry was sailing up the gulf to Kivotos, attended by the Marshal Villehardouin, Miles of Brabant, and seventeen Venetian and Pisan galleys. The Greek fleet was more numerous, but the Latins advanced to attack it; and the Greeks manoeuvred so long, in order to gain an advantage of wind which would enable them to prevent their enemy reaching Kivotos, that fresh ships joined the emperor, and they at last declined an engagement. Henry, however, found the fortifications of Kivotos in such a dilapidated condition that he thought it prudent to dismantle the place entirely, and carry off the garrison.

Theodore, having thus driven the Latins from Kivotos, distracted their attention by attacking Cyzicus and Nicomedia. Thierry de Los, a knight of high reputation, was defeated and taken prisoner near Nicomedia by Constantine Lascaris, the emperor's brother; and Henry was again compelled to appear in person in the field, though his presence was equally necessary in the north in order to save Adrianople from the Bulgarians. Four times he had been on the eve of his departure for that city, and four times his march had been adjourned by disasters of the Latin arms in different quarters. Theodore, well informed of all his enemy’s difficulties, proposed to conclude a truce for two years, on condition that the fortifications of Cyzicus and St Sophia’s of Nicomedia should be destroyed, and in return he offered to release all his prisoners, among whom were some knights of high rank. The necessity of hastening with all his troops to save Adrianople compelled Henry and his barons to accept these terms, and Theodore was put in possession of Cyzicus and Nicomedia, (AD 1207)

Theodore had still much to complain of and much to fear from the valour and restlessness of the Western nations. It was therefore for his interest to obtain a treaty of peace of a permanent and general character, and such a treaty could only be obtained by the influence of the Pope. Theodore addressed a letter to Pope Innocent III for this purpose, and it contains as strong a proof of the power enjoyed by that celebrated pontiff as any of the acts of arbitration he exercised in the West. Many Latin adventurers paid no attention to the truce concluded with the Emperor Henry. They arrogated to themselves the right of private war, and plundered the Greek territories wherever the country offered a defenceless prey to their avarice. The Latin emperor had no power to restrain these disorders, for all the Greeks who adhered to their national church had been declared to be in a state of perpetual vassalage by papal authority, so that every adventurer was entitled to constitute himself their immediate superior under the Pope as lord paramount. In this state of things, Theodore invited the Pope to conclude a permanent peace, on the basis that the Latins should possess all the European provinces of the Byzantine Empire, and recognise the right of the Greeks to the undisturbed dominion over those in Asia.

The Emperor Henry refused to conclude a permanent treaty on this basis, as it would have given the Emperor of Nicaea a decided superiority over all his Greek rivals; and there could be no doubt that, as soon as he had consolidated a strong power, no stipulations would have any effect in preventing the Greeks from attempting to regain possession of all the country conquered by the Crusaders. Henry considered, likewise, that it was a duty he owed to the Catholic faith, to the Pope as the spiritual suzerain of the Christian world, to his own fame, and to his position as Emperor of Constantinople, to complete the conquest of the Eastern Empire. Theodore must, consequently, have been well aware of the small chance of deriving any assistance from the Pope, as the conclusion of a permanent treaty could not fail to oppose a barrier against the extension of the papal power in the East. The reply of Innocent informed Theodore that the Pope was more hostile than he had supposed. The letter was addressed to the honourable Theodore Lascaris, and thus commenced with a denial of his claim to the title of Emperor. It is a curious document, inasmuch as it proves how little influence pure morality and true religion exercised on the political views of this celebrated Pope. Innocent does not pretend to deny the atrocities committed by his Crusaders at Constantinople; and as he felt it was his duty to establish peace, he promised to send a legate into the East for that purpose; but he requires Theodore to take the cross and join the Crusaders in Palestine, while he insults him with the demand that he should acknowledge himself the vassal of the Latin empire of Romania. The great Pope continues, in a style of bigotry which it is the fashion to ridicule when employed by more vulgar fanatics: “The Greeks having rent asunder the garment of Christ, God has doubtless made use of the Latins as an instrument to punish them for their crime. The judgments of God are always just, and he frequently punishes evil by the agency of wicked men”. The solicitations of the Greek emperor to obtain peace through the mediation of the high priest of the Western Christians produced no result but a recommendation to become the vassal of a Belgian count.

Theodore employed the leisure afforded him by the truce more profitably in extending his dominions in Asia, where his prudence gave his subjects a degree of security which induced many voluntarily to acknowledge his authority, and enabled him to extend his empire from Paphlagonia to Caria. His prosperity excited the jealousy of Kaikhosrou, the sultan of Iconium, whose court was visited by Alexius III, as has been already noticed; and that envious and restless prince was as eager to dethrone his son-in-law as the sultan was to gain possession of the Greek dominions. The truce with the Latin empire had expired; and the sultan, who feared the energy and activity of Theodore, strengthened himself by an alliance with the Catholic Emperor of Constantinople. Though the Latins made it a standing reproach to the Greeks, that the Eastern Christians were ever ready to become the allies of the Turks, they showed no aversion to the practice themselves whenever it served their interest. We owe our knowledge of the present treaty between the Crusaders and the Mohammedans to the Emperor Henry, who, in a public manifesto addressed to the Christian world, speaks of his alliance with the Turkish sultan against the Christian Emperor of Nicaea as an act honourable to a good Catholic.

The sultan, before declaring war, sent an embassy to require Theodore to yield the empire to his father-in-law, threatening, in case of refusal, to place Alexius III on the throne by force of arms. The threat was despised, and the sultan invaded the Greek territory, accompanied by his friend and tool Alexius. Theodore was prepared to meet his enemy. He had engaged a chosen corps of eight hundred Latin cavalry in his service; and after placing a garrison in Philadelphia, he crossed the Gaister on the eleventh day of his march. He pushed rapidly forward into the valley of the Meander, hoping to surprise the Turkish army while it was occupied in besieging the city of Antiocheia. The rashness of the Latin cavalry favoured his plan, though it nearly caused his defeat. They hurried forward and attacked the Turks without counting the numbers of their enemy; but in spite of the fury of their charge and the weight of their armour, they were overpowered and broken by the squadrons that assailed them on the flanks and in the rear. The greater part were slain, and their defeat spread terror through the ranks of the Greeks. Theodore was compelled in this crisis to cover the retreat of his army at the head of his best soldiers. He was attacked by the sultan in person; and if we can credit the romantic description of the Byzantine historians, a single combat took place between the two sovereigns. Kaikhosrou galloped up to Theodore, and gave him a blow with his sabre on the helmet, which struck him from his saddle to the earth, though it failed to wound him. The sultan shouted to his followers to secure the prisoner; but the emperor, springing up, cut the legs of the sultan's horse so severely that it fell, and threw its master at Theodore’s feet, who instantly stabbed him to the heart. The Greek officers who rushed forward to save their sovereign cut off the sultan's head, and exposed it to the view of the Turkish army, while the retreat of the sultan’s guard at the same time spread the news of his death through its ranks. The Turks abandoned the contest, and the emperor entered Antiocheia in triumph, A.D. 1210. Alexius, who fell into the hands of his son-in-law, was confined for the remainder of his life in a monastery, as we have already mentioned. The Empress Euphrosyne, whom he had left behind in Epirus, died shortly after at Arta.

Fortunately for Theodore, the Latin empire of Constantinople was disturbed by the violent conduct of the papal legate Pelagius, who commenced a persecution of all the Greeks who refused to acknowledge the papal supremacy. The Emperor Henry interfered to protect those who had entered his service; but many of the clergy and some men of rank fled to Nicaea, where they were kindly received by the Greek emperor, and the animosity of the two churches was greatly increased.

In the year 1214, the war between Henry and Theodore was renewed. Henry crossed the Hellespont at the head of a numerous army, and occupied Poimanenos without resistance; but he was compelled to besiege Lentianes with his whole force, which was courageously defended by the inhabitants, as well as by a regular garrison. The defence was conducted by one of the emperor's brothers, by his son-in-law Andronicos Paleologos, and by Dermokaites, the commander of the garrison. The place was closely invested for forty days, and repeated assaults were made under the eye of Henry. It was not until the water was cut off and a breach effected in the walls that the besiegers were able to force their entrance into the town. Henry was so enraged at the delay he had met with, and the loss he had suffered before this insignificant fortress, that he disgraced himself by an act of infamous cruelty. After taking Lentianes, he ordered its brave defenders, Lascaris, Paleologos, and Dermokaites to be put to death. He persuaded the garrison to enter his service, and united it with the corps of George Theophilopoulos, a Greek general who had joined the Latins. Henry then advanced as far as Nymphaeum; but Theodore, who was sensible of the inferiority of the Greeks in a regular battle, carefully declined an engagement and confined his operations to the defensive. The campaign ended without any great success on the part of the Latins; and the Greek emperor, hearing that the Despot of Epirus was assailing the European possessions of the Crusaders with great vigour, sent an embassy to Henry to propose a treaty of peace. As the Latin emperor considered his presence necessary in Europe, the terms were easily arranged. The peninsula opposite Constantinople, bounded by a line drawn from the head of the gulf of Nicomedia to the Black Sea, and all the country from the Hellespont as far as the district of Kamina, were to remain in possession of the Latins. The town of Kalamos, which lay between the territory of the Crusaders and the theme of Neokastron, was to remain uninhabited, to mark the frontier of the two empires. The boundaries of the empire of Nicaea now extended from Heracleia on the Black Sea to the head of the Gulf of Nicomedia; from thence it embraced the coast of the Opsikian theme as far as Cyzicus; and then descending to the south, included Pergamus, and joined the coast of the Aegean. Theodore had already extended his power over the valleys of the Hermus, the Caister, and the Meander.

The bad success of all attempts to force the Greeks to conform to the Latin church induced Innocent III to change his policy. The fourth Lateran council was held in the year 1215, and by it the Latin bishops in the East were authorized to appoint Greek priests to celebrate Divine service and administer the sacraments in the Greek language; but these priests were to teach the doctrines of the Church of Rome, and to inculcate the papal supremacy. This concession produced more effect than the previous persecution. Many Greeks, who probably considered both the Patriarch and the Pope as having arrogated to themselves a degree of power in ecclesiastical affairs to which they had no valid title, conformed to the Latin rites when they heard the liturgy in Greek; but, on the other hand, the opposition and hatred of the Greek clergy were greatly increased by this insidious attack on their authority. Whenever they regained possession of a church in which a Latin priest had performed mass, they washed the altar and purified the building; and before they would admit a Latin Christian into their church, they required that he should be baptized a second time. There is an act of the fourth council of the Lateran which reveals the ruinous effect of the feudal government introduced by the Crusaders into a society so differently organized as that in the Byzantine empire. When Richard I of England conquered the rich island of Cyprus, and converted it into a feudal kingdom, it contained fourteen cities, which were bishops' sees; but so many of these had already fallen into decay during the short space of four-and-twenty years, and the position of a Latin bishop was so much more aristocratic than that of a Greek, that the number was now reduced to four.

The peace between the Greek and Latin empires lasted several years. After the death of Henry in 1216, the Empress Yolande, wife of Peter of Courtenay, acting as regent, gave her third daughter Maria in marriage to the Emperor Theodore, hoping to secure a permanent peace by this close alliance. But when the death of Peter of Courtenay, followed by that of Yolande, threw the affairs of Constantinople into disorder, Theodore laid claim to a portion of the Latin empire as the heritage of his wife. This pretension served as a pretext for attacking the Latin possessions in Asia, but the arrival of Robert with fresh forces caused the peace to be renewed. Theodore offered his daughter Eudocia to the Emperor Robert in marriage, though they were already brothers-in-law. In vain the Greek Patriarch and the majority of the Greeks reprobated the marriage, both on religious and political ground; the emperors seemed determined to celebrate it, when a sudden illness put an end to the life of Theodore, in the year 1222, after he had reigned eighteen years. All thoughts of the marriage were then laid aside.

Theodore Lascaris, the saviour of the Greek empire, though not a man of enlarged political views or of great capacity, seems to have far exceeded in activity and courage the rest of the Byzantine aristocracy. He was passionate, and addicted to gallantry, but he had many qualities which suited him for a popular leader in difficult circumstances. Though of small stature, he was skilful in the use of arms, and he was rash, generous, and lavish of money even to imprudence. We must recollect that it required no ordinary valour and perseverance to arrest the progress of so accomplished a warrior as Henry of Flanders at the head of his redoubted Belgian cavalry, and that the overthrow of Theodore would, in all probability, have enabled the Crusaders to complete the subjugation of the whole Greek race.

 

Sect. II

REIGN OF JOHN III (DUKAS VATATZES) A.D. 1222-1254.

 

Theodore I left no son. It was, therefore, necessary to elect a new emperor; for though the feeling in favour of hereditary succession was gaining ground among the Greeks, still the constitution of the empire recognized no rule of succession which would create a positive title to the crown without some form of election. The eminent qualities of John Dukas Vatatzes, who married Irene, the eldest daughter of Theodore I, after her first husband, Andronicus Paleologos, had been put to death by the Emperor Henry, united the suffrages of the civil and military authorities as well as the clergy in his favour; and though the late emperor left four brothers who had served with distinction in the army, John III was saluted emperor without any opposition. But his coronation excited the jealousy of Alexis and Isaac Lascaris to such a degree that they not only retired from Nicaea, but even attempted to carry off their niece Eudocia, who had been promised to the Latin emperor Robert. Failing in this attempt, they deserted to the Latins, and distinguished themselves at the court of Constantinople by their eagerness to commence hostilities against their countrymen.

The military power of the Latin empire was constantly declining. The army which effected its conquest was soon dispersed over its surface with the feudal chiefs among whom it had been partitioned, or its warriors proceeded to Palestine to complete their vows, in order to return to their hereditary possessions in their native lands. No Latin army of equal strength could ever again be assembled under the walls of Constantinople. Nevertheless, for a short time, the reports which spread through Western Europe of the immense plunder and rich fiefs which the conquerors of the Byzantine Empire had acquired, attracted an ample supply of fresh recruits to the East. But in a few years, defeats and misfortunes on one side, and the improving condition of European society on the other, arrested emigration. The prudence and valour of the Emperor Henry could with difficulty efface the impression produced by the terrible and romantic tales that were circulated concerning the murder of Baldwin by the King of Bulgaria; and before the melancholy end of the first Belgian emperor was forgotten, men were appalled by the news that his brother-in-law, Peter of Courtenay, the third emperor, had perished by a similar untimely end. In attempting to march from Dyrrachium to Constantinople, Peter of Courtenay was defeated and taken prisoner by Theodore, the despot of Epirus, and for some time his fate was shrouded in the same mystery as that of Baldwin. The world was long unwilling to believe that both the imperial brothers-in-law had perished in prison. Yolande, the wife of Peter, who had administered the government of Constantinople as regent with great prudence, did not long survive her husband; and Robert, the second son of Peter, who succeeded to the throne of the Latin empire, was a weak and incapable prince. The kingdom of Saloniki was governed by an Italian regency, acting in the name of Demetrius, the second son of the king, Marquess Boniface of Montferrat. It was soon evident that neither the empire nor the kingdom could resist the attacks of the Greeks, Epirots, and Bulgarians, without assistance from Western Europe. The solicitations for aid were generally addressed to the popes, who possessed the power of rendering the contest a holy war, by granting indulgences to every Catholic who attacked the Greek heretics. The popes consequently became the arbiters of the Latin empire, and supported its cause with fervour. As a matter of course, they regarded the Greeks as more dangerous enemies of papal influence than the Mohammedans. Pope Honorius III was so eager to establish the predominance of the Latins in the East (as it appeared to him the only means of placing the supremacy of the popes on a firm foundation), that he invited the princes of Europe to undertake a crusade, for the purpose of delivering Peter of Courtenay from captivity. The threat of a crusade was then no idle menace, and Theodore, the despot of Epirus, employed every art to pacify Honorius, and turn aside the storm. He released the papal legate, who had fallen into his hands with the Emperor Peter, with the most solemn assurances that he was willing to acknowledge the supremacy of the Pope, and to labour to convert his subjects. The legate, who informed the Pope that Peter of Courtenay was really dead, appears to have convinced the Court of Rome that there was little chance of compelling the Greeks and Albanians to change their religion by force. The wily despot persuaded both the legate and the Pope of his sincere desire to join the Catholic Church; and Honorius, hoping to gain a new and powerful vassal, began to forbid the crusade he had lately preached. He prohibited the Venetians from attacking the territories of Theodore under pain of excommunication. The fate of Peter of Courtenay, who died of grief and ill-usage in the prisons of the despot, was no longer mentioned. The republic of Venice concluded a truce for five years with Theodore. Goffrey, prince of Achaia, and Otho, sovereign of Athens, quarrelled with the Pope, and incurred excommunication by appropriating to their own use a portion of the estates of the Greek Church which were claimed by the papal clergy, and the confederacy against the Greeks was completely broken up.

This change in the affairs of the Latins rendered it unnecessary for Theodore to persevere in his hypocritical negotiations. He invaded the kingdom of Saloniki, and soon conquered it, for the officers of the young King Demetrius possessed no army capable of resisting his attack. The Pope, enraged at finding he had been used as a political tool by the cunning Greek, fulminated his excommunications against Theodore; but as Honorius had himself dissolved the confederation of the Latin powers, the despot laughed at the thunders of the Vatican. The success of Theodore now opened to him a more extensive field of ambition. He aspired at the honour of restoring the Greek empire in Europe, and declared himself the rival of the Emperor of Nicaea by assuming the imperial crown at Thessalonica, which was placed on his head by the Patriarch of Bulgaria, who, as he possessed an independent ecclesiastical jurisdiction, had the power of anointing sovereigns, (AD 1222.)

Fortunately for the Greeks, the temporal policy of the Court of Rome often placed the popes in direct opposition to the interests of the Latin princes, nobles, and proprietors, who had settled in the Eastern Empire, and thus all its endeavours to gain the same degree of power in the East which it enjoyed in the West proved vain. At this time, however, the hope of compelling the Greeks to acknowledge the papal supremacy by force of arms was strong; and Honorius III exerted himself with so much vigour to furnish the emperor, Robert of Courtenay, with troops and money, that a considerable army accompanied the young emperor to Constantinople. Theodore I was still emperor of Nicaea when Robert arrived in the East; but, as has been already mentioned, the Latin and Greek emperors concluded a treaty of peace, which enabled Robert to employ all his forces against Theodore of Epirus, whose rapid progress alarmed the Latins. The armies of Constantinople and Epirus met before the walls of Serres. The Latins were defeated in their attempt to take the city; their generals, Valincourt, and Mainvaut, the marshal of Romania, were both taken prisoners during their retreat; and the Emperor of Thessalonica was enabled to pursue his conquests and organize his new dominions without opposition.

Such was the state of affairs at the commencement of the reign of John III. The warlike Latins soon reassembled a force which they considered sufficient to protect the immediate domain of the Emperor of Constantinople from any encroachment on the part of Theodore of Thessalonica; and as they were eager to increase their territories and gain new fiefs, the Emperor of Nicaea felt that his dominions offered too many assailable points for the peace concluded by his predecessor to be of long duration. John III, therefore, devoted his attention to preparing for war without imposing any additional burdens on his subjects. All the Greeks felt that, unless the Latins were expelled from Constantinople, there could be no permanent peace; and it was now evident that if any other orthodox prince gained possession of the imperial city, the Emperor of Nicaea would be unable to maintain his position as the political head of the Greek nation. While John III increased the numbers and improved the discipline of his army, he attached his subjects to his government by the economy he introduced into the financial administration, and by his strict attention to the administration of justice.

The Emperor Robert at last declared war; and the Latins invaded the territory of Nicaea, where they found John III prepared to receive them. Their army debarked at Lampsacus. It was commanded by St Menehould, who was assisted by the two Lascaris. A decisive battle was fought near Poimanenos, in which the victory was well contested. St Menehould was one of the first conquerors of Constantinople, and the Latin knights had hitherto proved victorious wherever they could manfully assert the prowess of the lance. But the Greek emperor was a skilful general as well as a valiant soldier; and when his cavalry yielded to the shock of the Frank chivalry, he rallied them, and renewed the combat by a series of well-combined attacks, which at length broke the line of his enemies. The cavalry, once broken, was in destroying the rest of the army. St Menehould, and many noble knights, perished on the field; the two Lascaris were taken prisoners, and lost their sight as a punishment for their treason. John III followed up his victory with indefatigable energy. During the winter of 1224 he captured Poimanenos, Lentianes, Charioros, Veerveniakon, and every other fortress the Latins possessed on the Asiatic side of the Hellespont, except Peges. He sent a part of his army into Europe to lay waste the country round Madytos and Callipolis, while his fleet expelled the Latins from the island of Lesbos.

These successes roused the Greeks of Adrianople to attempt delivering themselves from the Latin domination. They solicited aid from John III; and as soon as a body of Greek troops approached their neighbourhood they flew to arms and expelled the Frank garrison. But Theodore, emperor of Thessalonica, advancing shortly after to Didymoteichos, placed himself between Adrianople and the empire of Nicaea, and effectually cut off the troops of John III from receiving any reinforcements. Theodore was eager to gain possession of Adrianople, as an important step to the conquest of Constantinople, and to securing his ultimate supremacy as orthodox Emperor of the East. By means of bribes and promises he persuaded the leading men in Adrianople to espouse his cause, for he really seemed better able to defend them against the Bulgarians on one side, and the Latins on the other, than the Emperor of Nicaea, whose resources were far distant. The general of John III, unable to resist the army of Theodore and the wishes of the inhabitants, agreed to evacuate the place on being allowed to march out with the honours of war. The Emperor of Thessalonica attempted to take advantage of the retreat of the troops of Nicaea to arrogate a superiority to which he was not entitled. He ordered the garrison, in marching out of Adrianople, to defile before him, and placed himself, with the imperial ensigns, to receive their salute. But John Kamytzes, the Nicaean general, was a man of sense and firmness, and when he rode past the rival of his sovereign he affected to watch the proceedings of his own troops, and never turned his head to regard Theodore. The Epirot emperor was furious at the slight, and lost all command of his temper. At first he was with difficulty withheld from arresting, and even from striking Kamytzes, but he afterwards allowed him to continue his march. The Emperor John rewarded the cool intrepidity of his general by appointing Kamytzes Grand Heteriarch. Though the possession of Adrianople enabled Theodore to lay waste the Latin territory as far as Bizya, he was unable to make any attempt on Constantinople. In the year 1230 his restless ambition involved him in war with John Asan, king of Bulgaria, by whom he was defeated and taken prisoner. Engaging in a conspiracy, he was punished by his conqueror with the loss of sight. In the meantime, the King of Bulgaria had conquered a considerable number of the cities which Theodore had governed. He gained possession of Didymoteichos, Boleros, Serres, Pelagonia, and Prilapos, and extended his conquests as far as Albanopolis to the west, and to the frontier of Great Vlachia to the south.

The Franks, finding that their possessions in the vicinity of Constantinople were ravaged by the troops of Theodore, became anxious to conclude peace with the Emperor of Nicaea, in order to concentrate all their forces for their defence; and John III, displeased at the insolent and hostile disposition which the Emperor 1of Thessalonica had displayed in the affair of Adrianople, was willing that the Latins and Theodore should exhaust their strength, while he remained a calm spectator of their contest. The terms of peace were soon arranged; the Latins withdrew their garrison from Peges, which they surrendered to the Greek emperor, and they retained possession of no spot on the Asiatic coast, except the peninsula opposite Constantinople as far as Nicomedia, (AD 1225). This peace was observed by both parties for several years—1225 to 1233.

The aristocratic element of Greek society was as little inclined to respect political order and established law, while living in exile in the petty empire of Nicaea, as the proud Byzantine nobles, who boasted a Roman or Armenian origin, had ever been to weigh the interests of the people against their own schemes of personal ambition during the period of their greatest power and splendour at Constantinople. The throne of John III, and all his schemes for the improvement of the Greek empire, were at this time placed in considerable danger by a conspiracy of his own cousin, Andronicus Nestongos, who engaged many men of rank in a plot to place the crown on his own head. The conspiracy was fortunately discovered, and the traitors were punished. Nestongos escaped from confinement, and passed the remainder of his life among the Seljouk Turks. The emperor, having established order and insured submission at court, pursued his plans for improving the condition of his subjects and augmenting the efficiency of his military establishments with steady perseverance for several years. In his civil government, and especially in strengthening the moral influence of the imperial authority over every rank of society, he was assisted by the great talents and singular prudence of his wife, the Empress Irene, whose authority was the greater in consequence of her never laying aside her modest domestic manner of life, or appearing eager to exert political influence.

In the year 1233, John III was engaged in hostilities with a rebellious subject, in order to secure his dominion over Rhodes. The government of that rich island was held by Leo Gavalas, whom John III had honoured with the rank of Caesar. Gavalas raised the standard of revolt, and a number of the emperor’s bravest troops were slain in civil war before the rebel could be compelled even to acknowledge the imperial supremacy; and peace was not re-established until John consented to confirm Gavalas in the government of the island, a command he retained until his death. The authority of the central administration of the Greek empire being no longer systematically exerted to protect and advance the material interests of the population at a distance from the capital, a general tendency towards local independence began to be formed in the outlying provincial communities in the empires of Nicaea, Thessalonica, and Trebizond, which was in some degree strengthened by the principles of feudal society, which the great vassals of the Latin empire of Romania introduced among their Greek subjects. The decline in the numbers, wealth, and intelligence of the middle classes, which followed the ruin of intercommunications and the decay of commerce, enabled the aristocracy to turn this tendency of society to their own exclusive profit. Examples of aristocratic rapacity become gradually more and more prominent as one of the evils that demoralized Greek society. The history of Rhodes illustrates these observations. The brother of Gavalas succeeded to his power as if it had been a family inheritance; and though he only pretended to act as the emperor’s representative, John was compelled to confirm him in his vice-royalty to avoid recommencing a civil war.

The Emperor Robert of Courtenay died in the Peloponnesus in the year 1228, as he was returning from Rome, which he had visited to solicit succours from the Pope. His brother, Baldwin II, who was only eleven years of age, was recognized as his successor; but the exigencies of the administration required a chief capable of directing the counsels and leading the armies of the empire. John de Brienne, titular king of Jerusalem, and commander-in-chief of the papal army, was supposed by all having an interest in the prosperity of the Latin empire to be a man capable of restoring its glory and re-establishing its power. He was elected the guardian and colleague of Baldwin II, and crowned emperor for life. A treaty was concluded between John de Brienne and the ambassadors of Romania, in which it was stipulated that the young emperor, Baldwin II, was to marry Agnes, the daughter of his guardian; and that, on his attaining the age of twenty, he was to be invested with the sovereignty of Nicaea, and the Latin possessions in Asia beyond Nicomedia as an independent kingdom. After the death of John de Brienne, the empire reverted to Baldwin as his hereditary dominion. This treaty was confirmed by the Pope, Gregory IX, at Perugia in 1229; but John de Brienne was detained in Italy for two years before he could collect a sufficient force to visit his empire. During this time the regency was directed by Narjot de Toucy.

The treaty of Perugia, which disposed of the empire Nicaea as a Latin possession, was an insult which policy induced the Emperor John III to overlook; but he feared that a vigorous attack on the Latin empire might enable Theodore, emperor of Thessalonica, or John Asan, king of Bulgaria, to gain possession of Constantinople before he could prevent them. The war which broke out between these two princes in the following year, 1230, delivered him from this danger, yet he was still willing to gain time; and when John de Brienne arrived at Constantinople in 1231, he entered into negotiations for a union of the Greek and Latin Churches, which was conducted with wisdom and moderation on the part of the Greek Patriarch, Germanos Nauplios, but was rendered abortive by the servile submission required by the Papal Court. In the month of April 1233 the Emperor of Nicaea assembled a council of the Greek church at Nymphaeum, in which, as usual, nothing could be determined. The negotiations were broken off, and the Latin emperor invaded the Greek territory, expecting to profit by the rebellion of Gavalas in Rhodes. A powerful army landed at Lampsacus; and the Greek emperor, having formed a fortified camp at Sigrenes, watched the operations of his enemy, and circumscribed his movements. John de Brienne was now upwards of eighty years of age, his military reputation stood high, and his force was superior to that of his opponent; but age rendered him inactive. All his plans of conquest were foiled by the superior tactics of the Greek emperor; and a four months’ campaign was terminated by the Latins gaining possession of Keramidi, a fort near Cyzicus, and by their recovering Peges.

Alarm at the number of the recruits who about this time arrived at Constantinople from western Europe, induced the Emperor of Nicaea and the King of Bulgaria to form a close alliance. Theodore, the son of John III, who was only eleven years of age, was betrothed to Helen, the daughter of John Asan, who was in her ninth year; and the young princess was committed to the charge of the Empress Irene to be educated. The two sovereigns prosecuted the war in concert. The emperor took Lampsacus, crossed the Hellespont, and captured Gallipolis, and all the cities of the Thracian Chersonesus. He then extended his conquests to the westward as far as the Hebrus, and to the north as far as Tzurulos, which he secured by a strong garrison. The king pushed his incursions almost to the very walls of Constantinople, and ravaged the possessions of the Latin seigneurs. The united armies even approached the imperial city; and if we believe the Latin writers, they suffered severely from a well-arranged sortie led by John de Brienne in person. About the same time the Greeks sustained a defeat at sea, A.D. 1235. In the following year, Constantinople was relieved from all danger by the succours it received from the Venetians and from Goffrey, prince of Achaia. But the death of John de Brienne in 1237, and the absence of the young Emperor Baldwin II, who was wandering about to solicit aid from the Catholic princes, placed Constantinople suddenly in such danger of falling into the hands of the Emperor of Nicaea, that the King of Bulgaria resolved to prolong the existence of an empire from which he had now nothing to fear. He suddenly concluded a separate peace, and formed an alliance with the Latins. Sound policy certainly required John Asan at this moment to keep all his forces ready for action on his northern frontier. The conquests of Genghis Khan and his sons alarmed all the princes of the East with reasonable apprehension of calamity, though the ignorance of the Latins prevented the nations of Western Europe from perceiving the greatness of the danger which then threatened the whole civilized world. From the shores of the Atlantic to the Chinese seas, every country seemed on the eve of being reduced to serve as pasture-grounds for tribes of nomads, and hunting-fields for Mogul princes.

About the time John Asan abandoned the Greek alliance, the Romans were driven over the Danube by the Moguls who had invaded Russia. The King of Bulgaria allowed these fugitives to pass through his dominions in order to enter the service of the Latin empire, and joined them in attacking the Greek possessions in Thrace. John III had now to defend his recent conquests against an overwhelming force composed of the heavy cavalry of the Franks, the light horse of the Romans, and the organized infantry of the Bulgarians. The united army besieged Tzurulos, which was bravely defended by Nicephorus Tarchaniotes. It was saved by John Asan receiving the news of the sudden death of his wife and son. This double misfortune presented itself to his mind as a judgment of Heaven for violating his faith with the Greek emperor. He withdrew his army, hastened back to Bulgaria, a. d. broke off his alliance with the Latins, and renewed his treaty with John III.

 

AFFAIRS OF THESSALONICA.

 

The death of Asan’s wife produced important changes in the government of the Greeks in Macedonia. John Asan married Irene, the daughter of his prisoner Theodore, emperor of Thessalonica, whom he had deprived of sight for his plots. He now released her father. Theodore repaired secretly to Thessalonica, from which he soon contrived to expel his brother Manuel, who had usurped the imperial title; and he then caused his own son John to be elected emperor, for the loss of his sight rendered it impossible for him to direct the details of the administration. Manuel escaped to Attalia, and visited the court of Nicaea. The Emperor John III furnished him with a naval force of six galleys, and money to enrol troops; for he feared the restless ambition of Theodore, and was anxious to find employment for him at home. Manuel landed at Demetrias, and rendered himself master of the country from Pharsalus and Larissa to Platamona. A third brother, named Constantine, had already gained possession of that part of Thessaly called Great Wlachia. The blind Theodore, who guided the counsels of his son John, the Emperor of Thessalonica, immediately entered into communications with his brothers, and convinced them of the necessity of forming a close family alliance, in order to preserve their independence. Manuel abandoned the cause of John III, and the three brothers, with the Emperor of Thessalonica, concluded a treaty for mutual defence and offence with the Latin princes of Athens, Euboea, and Achaia. John III was too much occupied with other affairs to bestow particular attention on these hostile demonstrations at the time, (AD 1238).

The wealth, resources, and population of the Latin empire of Constantinople were now rapidly declining. No taxes could be levied, for the Greeks, who had cultivated the fields and acted as traders in the towns, finding their pursuits interrupted by hostile invasions, had emigrated into the empire of Nicaea, which enjoyed uninterrupted internal tranquillity. The Latin government was reduced to such financial difficulties that it was obliged to strip the copper roofs from the public buildings, and melt down every ornament of bronze that remained in Constantinople, in order to coin money. The precious metals were borrowed from the churches, and the relics of the saints were pledged or sold. Still the supplies of warriors, whom the influence of the Pope diverted from the legitimate object of the Crusades, which was to recover possession of the Holy Sepulchre, in order to war against the Greek heretics, often rendered the armies of the Latins for a time superior to any force the Emperor of Nicaea could bring into the field. The zeal of Pope Gregory IX, and the pecuniary assistance furnished by Louis IX of France, enabled Baldwin II to return to Constantinople in the year 1239 at the head of a considerable army, which the Greeks magnified to sixty thousand men. This force he increased by engaging in his service the whole military population of the Roman tribes who had settled within the limits of the Latin territory.

Baldwin II opened the campaign of 1240 by besieging Tzurulos, which was compelled to surrender at discretion. The governor Petraliphas and the garrison were carried to Constantinople, in order to raise money by the ransom of those who had wealth or wealthy friends. The Greek emperor, unable to relieve Tzurulos, attacked the Latin possessions between Nicomedia and the Bosphorus, and took Charax and Dakibyza; so that nothing was left them in Asia except Chalcedon, Skutarion, the shores of the Bosphorus, and Daskyllium. After the end of this campaign the Latin auxiliaries, being left without regular pay, soon retired from Constantinople; and John Asan, king of Bulgaria, dying in the following year (1241), the Emperor of Nicaea considered it most advantageous for his political interests to establish his supremacy over Thessalonica.

John, emperor of Thessalonica, was a pious and just prince, not destitute of ability, but submitting entirely to the guidance of his father, the unquiet and ambitious Theodore. Manuel was already dead, and his dominions were occupied by Michael, son of Michael, the elder brother of Theodore, and founder of the despotat of Epirus. The Emperor of Nicaea felt that his title to the sovereignty of the Eastern Empire would not be recognized by the European Greeks until he gained possession of Thessalonica, and he knew that this would prove a difficult task as long as the various princes of the house of Angelos Comnenos maintained a strict alliance. His first step, in preparing for war, was to gain over the Roman light cavalry, as, by commanding a considerable extent of country round his army, they secured him from surprise, and enabled him to conceal his movements. He found the Roman cavalry so useful in Europe that he transported colonies of this people into Asia Minor, where he settled them in Phrygia, and in the valley of the Meander; but the similarity of their nomadic habits and of their language probably induced them very soon to form connections with the Seljouk Turks. To insure still further the success of his plans, John III committed one of those acts of the basest treachery which Byzantine political morality considered as a venial display of diplomatic ability. He invited the blind Theodore to visit his court for the purpose of consulting him on a common plan of action among the Greek princes against the Franks and Bulgarians; but when Theodore visited the imperial camp, he was detained as a prisoner, and the Emperor of Nicaea marched forward with his army from the shores of the Hellespont to form the siege of Thessalonica. His treachery was apparently useless, for while he was pressing the siege with every prospect of a speedy surrender, a courier arrived from his son, Theodore Lascaris, informing him that the Moguls had gained a great victory over Gaiaseddin, sultan of Iconium, and were overrunning all Asia Minor. The immediate return of the emperor with the whole army was therefore necessary to protect the Greek dominions. John III had treated his prisoner Theodore with all the honour due to his high rank, and had carefully sought to gain his goodwill. He now proposed to him the office of mediating a treaty of peace with his son. John III engaged to restore Theodore to liberty, and to raise the siege of Thessalonica, on condition that John, the son of Theodore, should lay aside the title of Emperor, but that he should retain the sovereignty of Thessalonica, with the title of Despot, on acknowledging the imperial supremacy of the throne of Nicaea as the true representative of the empire of Constantinople. These terms were accepted; for old Theodore had seen that the power of the Emperor of Nicaea was based on a well-filled treasury, a prosperous country, and a well-disciplined army, so that resistance was hopeless; while his own power was likely to remain equally great, whether his son was styled despot or emperor. As soon as the treaty was concluded, John III hastened back to Asia, where he found all the Greeks in the greatest alarm. The Moguls seemed on the eve of completing the conquest of the world. One division of their mighty army had subdued Russia and laid waste Poland and Hungary; another had now destroyed the Seljouk Empire in Asia. As soon as the emperor returned to Nymphaeum, he sent to the Sultan of Iconium, who had collected some troops from the relics of his army, and the terms of an offensive and defensive alliance were arranged between the Greek and Turkish empires. John III then devoted all his energies to make the preparations necessary for resisting the overwhelming armies of the Moguls; but, fortunately for the Christians, the attention of these conquerors was at this time diverted to other enterprises.

When no further danger was to be apprehended in Asia, the Emperor of Nicaea again recommenced his conquests in Europe. The young Caloman, king of Bulgaria, died or was poisoned in the year 1245, leaving an infant brother, Michael, as his successor. John III availed himself of the opportunity to reconquer the ancient dominions of the Byzantine emperors in Thrace. Serres soon fell into his hands; the fortress of Melenikon was betrayed to him by the Greek inhabitants, and he then subdued in succession Skupes, Prosakon, and Pelagonia. About this time an opportunity presented itself of gaining possession of Thessalonica. The Despot John died in 1244, and was succeeded by his brother Demetrius, a debauched youth. His own folly, and the treachery of his counsellors, involved him in war with the emperor, who, in the year 1246, took possession of Thessalonica, and sent Demetrius a prisoner to Lentianes. In the same year while Baldwin II, the Latin emperor of Constantinople, was begging aid from the courts of France and England to enable him to attack the Greeks, John III weakened the resources of the Franks by capturing their frontier fortresses of Tzurulos and Bizya.

This career of success was interrupted by the danger of losing the valuable island of Rhodes. While John Gavalas was absent from the city on some temporary business, a Genoese fleet which happened to be cruising in the Archipelago treacherously surprised the place, though the republic of Genoa was then an ally of the Emperor of Nicaea, and enjoyed some commercial privileges in his dominions. Soon after the Genoese gained possession of Rhodes, it was visited by William, prince of Achaia, and the Duke of Burgundy, who were on their way to join the crusade of St Louis in Cyprus. These princes left one hundred knights with their followers to assist in defending the place against the Greek emperor, on condition that they were to share in the profits to be obtained by the piracy of the Genoese. The Emperor John III invested Rhodes without delay; and three hundred Asiatic cavalry having defeated the Frank knights before the walls of the city, the Genoese were compelled to surrender the place on being allowed to quit the island. The dissatisfaction of the Genoese, which led to this act of hostility, was caused by some regulations of the Emperor John III, which circumscribed the privileges conceded to the Genoese merchants by Theodore I. Though the existence of these privileges was found to be injurious to the trade of his Greek subjects, the emperor was compelled to cancel his new regulations in order to avoid the danger of being involved at the same time in war with both Genoa and Venice.

 

WAR WITH MICHAEL II OF EPIRUS, A.D. 1251.

 

The active career of John III was drawing to a close. His last military expedition was against Michael II, despot of Epirus. This prince had concluded a treaty with the empire, and his eldest son, Nicephorus, was engaged to marry Maria, the emperor’s grand-daughter. The intrigues of Michael's uncle, the blind Theodore, disturbed this arrangement. After the death of his son John, the emperor of Thessalonica, Theodore resided at Vodhena, which he had made the capital of a small semi-independent principality. He now induced Michael to break off his connection with John III, and attack the possessions of the Greek emperor in Macedonia. The emperor hastened to Thessalonica, and Theodore flying at his approach, the imperial army occupied Vodhena, and advanced to the lake of Astrovos. The army was put into winter-quarters in the plain of Sarighioli. Its supplies were drawn in great part from Berrhoea, and long trains of mules and camels were incessantly employed to fill the magazines formed to facilitate its future movements. In the meantime, Petraliphas, who commanded the troops of Epirus at Kastoria, deserted to the emperor, and placed him in possession of the upper valley of the Haliacmon, now called Anaselitzas, by which he was able to render himself master of the passes over Mount Pindus at Deabolis, and secure an entry into Epirus by the valley of the Apsus.

The Despot Michael, seeing the heart of his dominions laid open to invasion, purchased peace by ceding to the emperor the fortress of Prilapos, which he still held, as well as Velesos and Albanopolis (Croia), with all the country he possessed north of the road between Dyrrachium and Thessalonica. Nicephorus, the despot’s eldest son, was also delivered up as a hostage, but was honoured with the title of Despot. The blind Theodore, whose restless intrigues had caused the ruin of his family and relations, was confined to a monastery for the rest of his life.

A man destined to occupy an important place in the history 0f the decline of the Greek race now makes his first appearance in the annals of the empire. The Emperor John, after passing the winter at Vodhena, spent the following summer moving about in order to establish regularity in the administration of his new conquests. While in the camp at Astrovos, Michael Paleologos, a young and distinguished officer, high in the emperor’s favour, and connected with several of the great Byzantine families, was accused of treason by Nikolas Manglabites, a noble of Melenikon. The emperor remitted the investigation of the affair until he reached Philippi. A court of inquiry, composed of the ablest judges in the senate and the courts of law, was then formed to examine the evidence produced by the accuser. Two officers of the imperial army were examined as witnesses: one declared that the other had made treasonable overtures to him on the part of Paleologos; the other admitted that he had held some conversation on the subject with the first witness, but declared that he had never communicated with Paleologos. As no further evidence could be procured, a duel was ordered. The first witness was victorious, but the vanquished persisted in denying all communication with Paleologos, even at the block where he was decapitated. The court now called on Paleologos to prove his innocence by the ordeal, and receive in his hands a red-hot globe of iron. To this proposal he replied that he was willing to meet his accuser in battle, but as he could not expect Heaven to work a miracle for a sinner like himself, he had no doubt hot iron would burn his hands. The Bishop of Philadelphia reproved his levity, and preached confidence in faith and innocence. Paleologos listened with great deference to his sermon, and meekly observed, at its conclusion, “Holy father, as you know so well the power of faith and innocence in a holy trial, I pray you to take the glowing iron from the furnace, and will receive it in my hands with faith and submission”. This judicious rebuke produced a favourable impression both on the judges and the emperor. Paleologos was restored to favour, and John endeavoured to attach him sincerely to the throne by marrying him in the following year to his niece Theodora. Michael Paleologos may have been innocent on this occasion, but when we consider that he was already twenty-seven years old, and that unbounded ambition and profound hypocrisy were the prominent features of his character, it is enough to praise his ability when accused, while the honourable conduct of the emperor excites a feeling of respect.

The personal character of John Vatatzes is so intimately connected with the prosperity of his reign that every trait of his private life has a historical interest. He had a noble simplicity of mind, and a degree of candour rarely found in union with great talents among the Byzantine Greeks. He was attentive to every branch of the public administration, and viewed with deep regret the neglected state of agriculture throughout his dominions. He felt that to increase the productions of the earth was the surest basis of national prosperity; and though his attainments in political science were too limited to enable him to see that increased production can only be sustained by increased facilities of transport and more extended markets, he nevertheless did much to encourage agriculture. Instead of wasting the public money on theoretical lectures and model farms, he devoted his private revenues to the improvement of his estates, and thus set an example to the large landed proprietors in the empire. He fought bravely as a soldier in the field of battle; but in times of peace, instead of amusing himself with tournaments and festivities, he overlooked his farms, examined his flocks and herds, improved the cultivation of his fields and the dwellings of his farmers. His example soon brought agriculture into fashion, for it was seen that it was not only a way to gain the emperor's approbation, but also to augment the value of property. The economy of John III was entirely free from avarice, for when he was able to restrict the expenditure of the imperial household to the sum yielded by his private property, he relieved the public treasure from the burden, without in any degree diminishing the splendour of his establishments. His liberality was further attested by the foundation of hospitals and alms-houses, and his piety by the endowment of monasteries and the decoration of churches.

A popular story, current during his lifetime, deserves to be recorded. He ordered the money collected exclusively by the sale of eggs on his property to be employed in purchasing a coronet, ornamented with jewels, which he presented to the empress, as a testimony of the effects produced by prudent economy in trifling matters. The general attention which the Greeks paid to agriculture in consequence of the emperor's exhortations and example proved extremely profitable, from the extensive demand for cattle and provisions which prevailed for several years in the territories of the Seljouk Turks—the empire of Nicaea being almost the only portion of Asia Minor that escaped all injury from the invasions of the Moguls.

Some of the emperor’s commercial laws, though at variance with the true principles of political science, may have been of temporary advantage when all commercial intercourse was misdirected by restrictions, protections, and monopolies. A government which cannot venture to force its nobles to abandon a life of idleness and luxury may nevertheless turn a considerable portion of their expenditure into the public treasury, when it is possible, from the aristocratic constitution of society, to tax those articles of luxury which are only consumed by the wealthy. But when the luxuries of the rich are consumed even in a small quantity by the poorer classes, then both financial science and political prudence command nations to make the truths of economical science the guide of their commercial legislation, and to adopt free trade as far as it is practicable. From these considerations it is possible that the sumptuary laws of John III were productive of more good in restraining the extravagance of the nobility, and in filling the treasury, than they produced evil by diminishing trade. He promulgated a law prohibiting his subjects from wearing Persian, Syrian, and Italian silks and brocades, compelling them to use only the produce of Greek industry, under the pain of being dismissed from all honourable employments, excluded from court, and deprived of every social distinction. It must be observed that various treaties regulated the import duties on foreign silk, which the emperor could not increase, while taxation fell heavy on the mulberry trees and on the raw silk of the Greek manufacturers. The anxiety of John to banish extravagance from his court is attested by a severe rebuke which he gave his son Theodore, forgoing out hunting in a magnificent dress. He told him that the expenditure of a prince was too closely connected with the blood of his subjects to allow him to waste his wealth in idle pomp.

The popularity of John III was greatly increased by the amiable character, domestic virtues, and great talents of the Empress Irene. John Asan, king of Bulgaria, sent his daughter Helena, who was betrothed to her son Theodore, to be educated under her care; but when he determined to break off his alliance with the empire, he sent for his daughter. The king’s object was evident, but the emperor scorned to retain his son's bride as a hostage; and the Princess Helena, who was only ten years old, was sent back to her father. As soon as all the Greeks who escorted her to her father's camp departed, and she understood that she was not to return to her dear mother, the empress, she was inconsolable. Her tears, lamentations, and praises at last excited her father's displeasure. As the court was crossing Mount Haemus on horseback, the king lost his usual good temper, and, taking his daughter in his arms, seated her on his riding-cloak in front of his saddle, and threatened her with punishment if she did not cease to weep and praise her Greek mother. But the love of Irene was stronger than the fear of punishment; the little Helena continued her lamentations, and it was remarked with amaze that her affectionate father became so angry as to give the child a slap on the cheek.

The Empress Irene died in 1241, and, two years after her death, the emperor married Anna, the natural daughter of the Emperor Frederic II of Germany. Anna was extremely young; and an Italian lady, called Marchesina, accompanied her as directress of her court and mistress of the robes, according to our English phraseology. The Emperor John fell passionately in love with this lady, who soon received the honours conferred in courts on the mistress of the sovereign, and was allowed to wear the dress reserved for members of the imperial family. The emperor was severely blamed for his conduct; and the force of public opinion supporting the religious authority of the Greek clergy, enabled Nicephorus Blemmidas to give Marchesina a severe rebuke. Blemmidas had decorated the church of the monastery of which he was abbot so richly that it was generally visited by the courtiers. One day, while the abbot was performing divine service, the imperial mistress passed with her attendants and resolved to view the church; but Blemmidas, informed of her approach, ordered the doors to be closed, declaring that with his permission an adulteress should never enter the church. Marchesina, enraged at so severe a rebuke, inflicted so publicly, hastened to the palace, threw herself at her lover’s feet, and begged him to avenge the insult. John’s love had not obscured his reason, and he felt the reproof was deserved: his only reply was, “The abbot would have respected me had I respected myself”. Blemmidas was the tutor of Theodore, the emperor’s son; and to the unfortunate connection with Marchesina we may perhaps attribute the circumstance that Theodore, contrary to the usual custom in the Eastern Empire, did not receive the imperial title during his father’s life.

The character of John, and his political administration, deserve much praise; but his public administration was marked with some defects as well as his conduct. The gold coinage of the Byzantine empire, as we have had occasion to observe, presents the longest series of coins, possessing the same weight and purity, which the world has yet beheld; and the degradation of the political institutions of the empire, the corruption of society, and adulteration of the coinage, are contemporary events. John III, had fallen on a debased age, in which the faith due by the sovereign to the public was neither understood nor appreciated He found the standard of the imperial mint already debased, and he carried the adulteration of the coin still further, issuing money of which only two parts were of pure gold, and the remaining third of alloy. His son persevered in the same standard; but Michael VIII, after the reconquest of Constantinople, coined money of which fifteen parts only were gold and nine alloy. At last, Andronicus II, after issuing a coinage of fourteen parts of gold and ten of alloy, carried the depreciation of the standard so far as to make the gold byzant consist of equal parts of gold and alloy.

John III died at Nymphaeum on the 30th October 1254, after a reign of thirty-three years.

 

Sect. III

FROM THE DEATH OF JOHN III TO THE RECOVERY OF CONSTANTINOPLE BY THE GREEKS. A.D. 1254-1261.

 

 

Theodore Lascaris II, the only son of John III and Irene, was thirty-three years old at his father’s death. His first care was to hasten the election of a patriarch; and when Nicephorus Blemmidas declined the honour, the dignity was conferred on Arsenios, who, at the time of his election, was a lay brother in a monastery near the lake Apolloniades. In a single week he was consecrated deacon, priest, and patriarch. The coronation of Theodore was performed in the city of Nicaea, the new Patriarch placing the imperial crown on his head.

Theodore II was a man of considerable talent, and of a cultivated mind; but his health was ruined, and his intellect affected, by repeated attacks of epilepsy. Participating in the common opinions of his age, the emperor sometimes believed that his malady was a Divine judgment, and at others considered that it was the effect of the incantations of his enemies. At times he sunk into profound melancholy; at times he broke out in uncontrollable fits of anger. But his public conduct was generally marked by judgment and determination. He commanded his armies with ability; and he filled the administration with men of talent, in defiance of the nobility, who pretended an exclusive tittle to all offices which conferred profit and patronage.

The historian George Acropolita, who held the high charge of grand logothet or chancellor, has been induced, by wounded pride and affection, to record an anecdote which offers a truer and more graphic picture of the Emperor Theodore II than is usually found in the pedantic pages of the Byzantine writers. The conditions of a treaty with Bulgaria had been arranged by the intermediation of Ouros, a Russian prince, father-in-law of Michael, king of Bulgaria. Theodore had bestowed on the Russian presents to the value of twenty thousand byzants. Before the ratification of the treaty was exchanged, a report prevailed that it would not be ratified; and the emperor was induced to distrust the Russian by the insinuations of some intriguing courtiers, who said that the negotiations had been entered into to gain time, and would of course be disavowed.

On the Feast of the Transfiguration (6th August 1256), after the short sleep which invariably follows dinner during the summer heats throughout the East, the emperor mounted his horse to ride round his camp, which embraced a circumference of five miles. Theodore prided himself on the discipline of his army, and called his camp the movable city, which was the guardian of all the immovable cities of the empire. As he galloped off at a rapid pace, attended by his military staff, the chancellor, spurring his mule, attempted to keep his post of honour at his master's side; but neither his own flowing robes, nor the amble of his well-fed mule, were suited to the rapid movements of the emperor, and Theodore turned to the panting Acropolita and said, “Moderate your pace, and join us at your leisure”.

The inspection of the camp terminated at a level eminence, to which Acropolita hastened by a direct road, in order to take his place in the circle round the emperor. The malicious suggestions of the discontented courtiers dwelt on the mind of Theodore; and he soon asked several of the great officers of his court if they had received information that the Russian was a deceiver, and that the treaty would not be ratified. The ministers of state replied that no such news had reached them, and it seemed to them impossible, for no Christian prince could be guilty of such baseness. But to this the emperor observed, that Christian princes had often been found capable of performing strange actions to obtain large presents. He then turned to Acropolita, and asked him what he had to say.

The chancellor replied, “I agree with my colleagues in thinking the report destitute of all foundation; but if Ouros has deceived us, and perjured himself, then Heaven will avenge the just cause by giving us the victory”.

This reply satisfied the emperor, who shortly after mounted his horse and returned towards his tent. The moon had already risen, and as Theodore rode slowly on, he renewed the conversation. Observing that Acropolita kept silence, he called to him. “Well, grand logothet! tell us your opinion; the business concerns you especially”.

To this the chancellor, with some display of dissatisfaction, answered, “How does it concern me particularly? If I had neglected to see the treaty properly drawn up, or omitted any requisite formality in receiving the oath of the Russian, it would be a criminal neglect; but as this was done in due form, I cannot see how the business concerns me especially”.

The emperor was falling into one of his fits of ill-humour. The demure aspect of the chancellor on his sleek mule contrasting with the parade of armed nobles and prancing war-horses, and perhaps the pedantic manner and dogmatic tone of his reply, exercised more influence on his master's uncertain temper than the historian suspected. The emperor repeated, “Tell us what you think about the matter”.

The chancellor replied, “I believe there is more falsehood than truth in the report that the treaty will not be ratified; but I cannot pretend to form a decided opinion on a matter that is uncertain”.

Theodore angrily exclaimed, “It is precisely in uncertain matters that a correct judgment is wanted; every ass can give a decided opinion about what is evident”.

To this Acropolita testily replied, “So I have lived to be ranked as an ass”.

Theodore then added, “Yes, you were always a fool, and now you are doating”.

The luckless chancellor, not yet sensible of his danger in bandying words with a passionate despot, or recollecting only his habits of intercourse with his youthful playfellow, again replied, “Then it is better for a fool to be silent : let the wise speak”.

Here the emperor lost all command over his temper. Acropolita says he put his hand to his sword; at all events, he turned to Andronicus Muzalon, the grand domestikos, and said, “Dismount him”. Muzalon approached Acropolita, who immediately dismounted, and was seized by two of the club-bearers of the guard, and bastinadoed with the rods they carried in their hands for the punishment of meaner offenders. The chancellor endured the blows for some time in silence, while the emperor and the great officers of state sat on their horses round; but at last, moved by the pain and the disgrace, he said aloud, “Lord Christ, why hast thou preserved my life in the hour of sickness to suffer this misery?”. The tones of a voice so long endeared to him by friendship restored the emperor’s judgment. Acropolita had been one of the few friends who displayed a sincere attachment to Theodore, when the influence of Marchesina had brought him into trouble with his father. The emperor now turned away, saying to one of his officers, “Take him with you”.

This officer asked the chancellor where he wished to go; but considering himself a prisoner, he recommended the officer to carry him to the tents of the Vardariot guards. When it appeared that the primikerios of the Vardariots received no orders to retain him prisoner, Acropolita retired to his own tent, where he shut himself up in the closest seclusion. He pretends that the emperor placed a guard to watch his movements, privately fearing that he might desert to Bulgaria, or fly to the Despot of Epirus. He remained in his tent a month, resisting the suggestions of his friends, and of many prelates and dignitaries of the court, that he should ask a private audience of the emperor. He had determined not to serve a prince who could treat his most devoted servants in such an unworthy manner. In the meantime, the treaty was ratified by the King of Bulgaria, the imperial camp was removed to Thessalonica, and negotiations were opened with the Despot of Epirus. Manuel Lascaris, the emperor's grand-uncle, and George Muzalon, the protovestiarios, now visited Acropolita, and carried him, by the emperor’s order, to a council of ministers. When the emperor arrived to take his place on the throne, Acropolita saluted him in the usual form, but stood behind the members of the council. The emperor, observing this, said to him, “Take your place as usual”; and as Acropolita had neither resigned the office of chancellor, nor been removed from it, he placed himself by the emperor’s side. Theodore then stated the relations of the empire with the Despot of Epirus, and gave his official orders to the chancellor as if nothing had occurred. Both shut up their feelings in their own breasts, and our interest in the personal relations of Theodore Lascaris and George Acropolita is lost in the stream of history.

The military administration of Theodore II was able and successful. His wars with Bulgaria and Epirus extended the power of the empire, and prepared the Greeks for the recovery of Constantinople. He was hardly seated on the throne when Michael, king of Bulgaria, thinking that his seclusion from public business during the latter years of his father's reign would paralyse his activity, invaded Thrace, and overran all the country inhabited by a Bulgarian, Sclavonian, and Vallachian population. The colonists were all willing to throw off the Greek yoke, and unite with their independent countrymen. The fortresses of Stenimachos, Prestitza, Krytzimos, and Tzepaina, with all the forts in the province called Achridos, on Mount Rhodope, were captured almost without resistance.

At the commencement of the year 1255, in the middle of winter, when the Bulgarians thought no Greek army would take the field, the Emperor Theodore II marched to Adrianople, and after remaining a single night pushed forward to attack the Bulgarian camp on the banks of the Hebrus. The enemy, apprised of his approach, abandoned their entrenchments, and left all their stores to the Greeks. A heavy fall of snow, rendering the passage of Mount Haemus impracticable, compelled the emperor to lead his army back to Adrianople. From thence he detached a considerable force to clear the province of Achridos of the enemy’s troops. This corps was ordered to join another body advancing from Serres, and then to effect a junction with the main army at Tzepaina. The body of troops which had been sent to Serres, under the command of Alexius Strategopoulos, suffered a disgraceful defeat from a small body of Bulgarians; and the news of this disaster caused Dragotas, who had previously betrayed Melenikon to the Greeks, to surrender that important fortress to the Bulgarians. But the emperor had in the meantime, with wonderful rapidity, retaken Pristitza, Stenimachos, Krytzimos, and the towns on the northern slopes of Rhodope, between the valleys of the Hebrus and the Mestos; so that, on hearing of the defeat at Serres, he was able, without a moment’s delay, to march on that place. He continued his advance to the pass of Roupelion, where the Strymon forces its way between precipitous rocks. The Bulgarians had fortified this strong position, but as soon as they were assailed by a corps of light troops, which occupied the summits overlooking the pass, they retreated. Their main body was overtaken and defeated. Dragotas was slain, and the emperor entered Melenikon in triumph on the following day. From Melenikon, Theodore removed his headquarters to Thessalonica, and subsequently to Vodhena, where he was detained some time by illness. On his recovery, he again placed himself at the head of the army, and took Prilapos and Velesos, after which he returned by Nevstapolis through an arid and rocky district, in which the horses of the cavalry passed two days without water, to Strumitza, Melenikon, and Serres, where he encamped. All the conquests of the Bulgarians had been recovered in this long campaign, except the small fort of Patmon, in Achridos, and the frontier fortress of Tzepaina. Patmon was taken by one of the imperial generals; but at Makrolivada, about four days' march from Adrianople, the emperor, who proposed to besiege Tzepaina in person, was overtaken by a snow-storm, and compelled to put his army into winter-quarters.

Theodore returned to Asia, and passed the winter at Nymphaion, directing the civil administration of the empire with the same activity he had displayed in the conduct of its military affairs. The headquarters of the army was at Didymoteichos, and the chief command was intrusted to Manuel Lascaris and Constantinos Margarites. These generals, in the spring of 1256, allowed themselves to be drawn into an engagement by the Bulgarians, who had enrolled in their service a strong body of Romans, and the Greeks were defeated. Margarites was taken prisoner, but Lascaris escaped to Adrianople. Theodore immediately hastened to Europe, and his presence soon restored discipline and confidence among the troops. The Romans were defeated with great loss, and the Bulgarian king, astonished at the ease with which the emperor converted his defeated soldiers into an attacking army, sent his father-in-law, the Russian prince Ouros, to treat for peace, as has been already mentioned. The treaty was concluded on the condition that the king of Bulgaria should withdraw all his troops to the north of Mount Haemus, and cede to the emperor the fortress of Tzepaina.

As soon as the affairs of Bulgaria were settled, the Emperor Theodore directed his attention to Epirus. The Despot Michael II, who had violated the treaty by which his son Nicephorus had engaged to marry the emperor’s daughter Maria, now sent his wife and son Nicephorus to sue for peace on such terms as Theodore might think fit to dictate. The marriage of Nicephorus and Maria was celebrated at Thessalonica; but the emperor insisted on the cession of the city of Servia on the Haliacmon, and of Dyrrachium, before he would conclude a treaty of peace. Michael, finding that his wife and son were retained as hostages at the imperial court, consented to the cession of these valuable frontier fortresses.

The emperor returned to Asia with his army, leaving only small garrisons in a few fortresses in Europe. The inspection of the civil and military administration in the country between Berrhoea and Dyrrachium was intrusted to George Acropolita who, the emperor observed, had laid aside the frankness of their former intercourse. He hoped that a short absence would efface entirely the memory of the chancellor’s punishment; but Acropolita and Theodore never met again. Acropolita left Berrhoea on his tour of inspection in the month of December 1256. When he reached Prilapos, he found that the Albanian chiefs had revolted in the neighbouring mountains, and he was soon closely besieged, for the troops of the Despot Michael joined the insurgents; and the despot, having declared war with the empire, took Berrhoea and Vodhena, and shut up Michael Lascaris in Thessalonica.

Michael Paleologos, a restless intriguer, but an able officer, was now sent to take the command at Dyrrachium. He had been governor of Nicaea during the Bulgarian war; but, hearing that his uncle had been arrested on a charge of treason, he abandoned his high office, and fled to the Turks. This conduct might have been considered a proof that he had been connected with treasonable intrigues by a sovereign less suspicious than Theodore; but Paleologos contrived to produce a feeling in his favour, by despatching a circular before his flight to all the officers under his orders, ordering them to pay the strictest attention to their duty, for he had only withdrawn himself to gain time, and he hoped to be able to prove to the emperor the injustice of the accusations which had been brought against him by his enemies. These letters, and the good offices of the Bishop of Iconium, obtained his pardon. On returning to court, he took a solemn oath, confirmed by terrible imprecations, that he would preserve inviolable fidelity to the emperor and his infant son. He was then sent to command the troops at Dyrrachium.

The arrival of Paleologos at Thessalonica revived the courage of the Greeks. He led the troops out to meet the enemy; and in a skirmish near Vodhena dismounted Theodore, the natural son of the Despot Michael, who commanded the Epirots. The young Theodore was slain by a Turk in the imperial service before he was recognised. This success opened the road to Dyrrachium, to which Paleologos marched with the greatest haste, visiting Prilapos, and affording Acropolita some temporary relief on his way. But as soon as he quitted the neighbourhood, the Despot Michael again occupied the passes; and the inhabitants of Prilapos, cut off from all communication with Thessalonica and Dyrrachium, became tired of a war in which they had no direct interest, and opened their gates to the Epirot troops. Acropolita, unable to defend the citadel, capitulated on condition that he should be allowed to retire with the garrison to Thessalonica; but the despot, in violation of this capitulation, detained him a prisoner, and even confined him for some time chained in a dungeon. The campaign of 1257 proved extremely unfavourable to the Greeks; and the illness of the emperor prevented his taking the field in person, in the year 1258, to recover the ground lost by his generals.

The latter days of Theodore were afflicted by fearful attacks of epilepsy, which produced such an effect on his temper that he appeared at times to be affected with temporary insanity. Participating in the prejudices of his age, he suspected that his malady was increased by the sortileges of his enemies; and this suspicion opened a door for many intrigues at his court, and for the most iniquitous accusations. The only way to escape condemnation, when a charge of this nature was made, consisted in undergoing the ordeal of holding red-hot iron in the hand; and the historian Pachymeres declares that he saw this trial undergone without injury. At this time, Michael Paleologos was the most popular man among the nobility. The failing health of the emperor, and the youth of the emperor’s son, prepared men for a revolution in the order of succession; and many already spoke of the title of Paleologos to the imperial crown as better founded than that of the reigning family, for Michael was descended from the eldest daughter of Alexius III. It was fortunate for Michael Paleologos that he was absent from the court. He was an accomplished hypocrite, and his apparent frankness of manner seemed so incompatible with the falsehood and dissimulation which formed the basis of his character, that he deceived the prudence of John III, and concealed his unprincipled ambition even from the suspicious Theodore. But had Michael Paleologos been near the court, he would in all probability have lost his eyesight during one of the emperor’s fits of passion. As it was, the emperor committed an unpardonable outrage on his family. Martha, the sister of Michael, had a beautiful daughter, whom the emperor ordered the family to bestow in marriage on one of his pages, named Valanidiotes. The young man gained the affections of the high-born damsel, when the emperor, changing his mind, forced her to marry a man of her own rank. A report that this marriage was not consummated, induced Theodore to suspect that both this event and a violent attack of his disease was caused by some charm the mother had used. He became furious, and ordered Martha, though she was allied to the imperial family, to be enclosed in a sack with a number of cats, which were pricked with javelins, that they might torture the unfortunate lady. She was brought into court with the sack fastened at her neck, and examined concerning her supposed incantations, but nothing could be extracted from her by this infamous tyranny. The emperor, however, fearing that Michael Paleologos, on hearing how his sister had been treated, might join the Despot of Epirus, or raise the standard of revolt, sent an officer to arrest him before the news could reach Dyrrachium. Michael was brought to Magnesia as a prisoner; but he contrived, by his insinuating manners, again to allay the suspicions of Theodore, who, finding that his end was fast approaching, was anxious to secure the services of Michael for his infant son. The emperor believed that he had destroyed the most dangerous enemies of his house by depriving Constantine Strategopoulos and Theodore Philes of sight, and cutting out the tongue of Nicephorus Alyattes.

Theodore Lascaris II died at Magnesia in the month of August 1258, in the thirty-seventh year of his age, and was buried in the monastery of Sosander by the side of his father. With all his faults, Theodore II had many generous feelings, and he was a liberal prince to his people. Though he accumulated a considerable treasure in the fort of Astyza on the Scamander, as his father had done in the citadel of Magnesia, his government was nevertheless more free from financial oppression than that of the Greek emperors generally. His military arrangements for the protection of his dominions were extremely judicious. The mountain fortresses that covered the plains of Asia from the incursions of the Turks and Turkmans were carefully garrisoned, and the highland population that furnished the local guards for the mountain passes was freed from the payment of the land-tax. Theodore also displayed a sincere love of learning, though his attention was exclusively directed to theology and legendary history. He was unpopular among the Greek nobility, because he conferred official appointments with reference to the merits of the candidates, making small account of the aristocratic pretensions of the Byzantine families, who would fain have reserved every place of honour and emolument in the court and public administration to themselves and their connections. This pretension of the Constantinopolitan nobles naturally became more offensive to the other Greeks when the capital was removed from Byzantium. The piety of Theodore was irreproachable, but he steadily excluded the patriarch and clergy from all interference in politics; and this circumstance generally marks a period of prosperity in the administration of the Eastern Empire.

John IV was eight years old at his father’s death. George Muzalon, his father’s prime-minister, was appointed tutor to the young emperor, and regent during his minority. The Patriarch Arsenios was joined with him as a colleague. Muzalon, knowing that a powerful party among the nobility was hostile to his administration, feared an insurrection; he therefore assembled a council of all the officers of state and leading nobles, and offered to resign the regency, proposing that the assembly should immediately elect his successor. Muzalon appears not to have fathomed the ambition or suspected the hypocrisy of Michael Paleologos, who was his wife’s uncle; but Michael had already determined to make the unpopularity of Muzalon the means for usurping the throne; and he perceived that if another regent should be named, and Muzalon remain tutor to the young emperor, all immediate hope of effecting a revolution would be annihilated for the time. He therefore used all his influence to induce the council to ratify the choice of the late emperor, and Muzalon was easily persuaded to assume the office of regent when he saw his authority thus confirmed.

In the meantime, a powerful party was plotting the ruin of the regent, whom the nobles regarded as the principal author of the cruelties of Theodore. The immense wealth and numerous households of a few families enabled them to make the people of Magnesia their partisans. The troops alone were exempt from their influence, but the military were in general attached to Michael Paleologos, and hostile to Muzalon. Numerous predictions were circulated, which foretold that Michael Paleologos was destined to reign. As grand constable he commanded the foreign auxiliaries, and these troops displayed a seditious spirit, on the ground that they were deprived of a donative which the late emperor was about to confer on them. The conspirators also spread a report that Muzalon had caused the death of Theodore II by his sortileges, in order to act as regent. The memory of Theodore was popular both among the soldiers and the citizens, and it was therefore necessary to separate the cause of the regent from that of the young emperor in order to secure success. The plan of a revolution was soon organized, and the regent was assassinated by the nobles, under the cover of a popular tumult. While the clergy, the officers of state, and the ladies of the court were performing the funeral ceremonies appropriated to the ninth day after Theodore’s death, at the monastery of Sosander, a band of soldiers burst into the church and murdered Muzalon, his two brothers, his son-in-law, and his secretary. The regent was stabbed at the altar; the dead bodies were hewed in pieces by the mob; the palace of the Muzalons was burned, and their property plundered; yet no civil or military authority attempted to check the disorders of the mob until its fury was satiated.

Michael Paleologos was only one of the conspirators who had plotted the murder of Muzalon, but he resolved to be the principal gainer by the crime. The pretensions that might have been advanced to the regency by the families of Lascaris, Vatatzes, Nestongos, Tornikes, Strategopoulos, Philes, Kavallarios, Philanthropenos, Cantacuzenos, Aprenos, and Livadarios, were withdrawn. The popularity of Paleologos with the military, and his superior talents, pointed him out as the fittest man to conduct the government; but he declined the office until he had secured the approbation of the Patriarch Arsenios, the surviving tutor of the young emperor, and the Patriarch was then absent at Nicaea. In the meantime, Paleologos was named Grand-duke, an office which gave him no direct control over the finances. The treasury was under the guard of a special body of Varangians and could only be opened by certain officers on the presentation of warrants duly countersigned by the heads of the various departments in the imperial administration. Paleologos, nevertheless, contrived by his intrigues and frauds to obtain the issue of money, unauthorized by the strict rules and immediate exigencies of the public service; and this money was employed in gaining the nobility, the military, and the clergy to support his party. His liberality to others, and his personal indifference to money, greatly increased his popularity. While others were enriched by his favour, his own fortune remained small, and his household was conducted with the greatest simplicity, and its expense was limited to three byzants a-day. When the Patriarch returned to Magnesia, Michael Paleologos was, by universal consent, and at the particular suggestion of the clergy, invested with the office of tutor to the Emperor John IV. He was soon after honoured with the rank of Despot, second only to that of Basileus, and became invested with absolute control over every branch of the administration.

But the throne was always considered the only safe resting-place for political intriguers of the highest rank in the Eastern Empire, and Paleologos was determined to keep the power he had obtained. His partisans were therefore instructed to declaim in favour of an elective monarchy, and of the necessity of giving the young emperor an able colleague, as the only chance of avoiding, or, at all events, of crushing rebellion. The plans of Paleologos were also furthered by the news of a coalition, formed by the Despot of Epirus, the King of Sicily, and the Prince of Achaia, for the conquest of Thessalonica and the European provinces of the empire. The military and the partisans of Paleologos loudly demanded the election of an emperor capable of averting the danger, and succeeded in obtaining the proclamation of Michael VIII on the 1st January 1259. The election was conducted with unusual formalities. Michael was publicly raised on a shield, supported on one side by bishops, and on the other by nobles; while the people, the native legions, and the Latin and Sclavonian mercenaries, hailed him with acclamations. Before the ceremony he had signed a written certificate of his having sworn, in presence of the Patriarch, to restore the full sovereignty to the young emperor, John IV, on his attaining his majority, and not to advance any claim to the imperial dignity in favour of his heirs. In consequence of this oath, the prelates of the Greek Church, who were generally servile instruments of the court, pronounced a sentence declaring that Michael Paleologos did not violate the oaths he had taken to John III and Theodore II by accepting the crown on these conditions. The Patriarch Arsenios disapproved of this evasion, and refused to take any part in the election; but his suspicions and distrust were allayed by the hypocritical assurances and modest demeanour of Michael.

At the coronation the usurper dropped his mask, and yet the Patriarch was weak enough to betray the trust imposed on him as tutor to the Emperor John IV. It was understood that the ceremony of the coronation of the two emperors was to take place at the same time in the cathedral of Nicaea. The coronation of the young emperor must in that case have preceded that of his colleague. To avoid this, Michael concerted with a number of bishops that the coronation of John IV should be deferred, but without allowing the Patriarch to hear anything of their plan. When the moment arrived to receive the crown, Michael stepped forward alone. The Patriarch called for John IV, and refused to proceed with the ceremony: but neither law, honour, morality, nor religion were then predominant in the Greek mind; and the majority of the bishops present having been previously gained, the Patriarch, finding himself unsupported by the clergy, was so compliant as to perform the ceremony. The only prelate who made a long resistance was the Archbishop of Thessalonica. He refused to sign the coronation act, though he was reproached with having predicted that Michael was destined to reign, and he only yielded when the tumultuous cries of the populace and the threats of the Varangian guards backed the instances of the senators, and made him fear that little respect would be shown for his episcopal sanctity by an assembly engaged in violating the law and constitution of the empire.

The first orders given by Michael VIII, after his coronation, were intended to allay all suspicions concerning his ulterior intentions. A clause was inserted in the oath of allegiance which was administered to all the subjects of the empire, binding them to take up arms against either of the emperors who should attempt any enterprise against the other. This measure was probably forced on Michael by the Patriarch's opposition. But he purchased supporters of his usurpation by lavishing the public money. To gain new friends and reward his partisans, the pay of the senators was increased, large donations were bestowed on the troops, great promotions were made among the officers, the state debtors were released, and many new pensions were granted. The mob was bribed by largesses, the people were flattered by public harangues, and the nobles were entertained by festivals. In short, Michael Paleologos commenced his reign by wasting the public wealth, corrupting the people, and weakening both the national character and the national resources; by acting the part of an unprincipled demagogue, he became a successful usurper. He lived to reap the bitter fruits of his criminal conduct. The lavish expenditure by which he had gained the nobles, the clergy, and the populace, became a permanent burden on the finances; to defend his crown he was compelled to oppress his subjects with new exactions, and the powerful armies which the popularity of John III and Theodore II had enabled them to bring into the field against foreign enemies, were, during the latter years of the reign of Michael, dispersed to repress the rebellious disposition of the Greeks.

The position of the empire at the period of Michael's election was extremely favourable to the extension of the power of the Greeks; and had the new emperor been able to diminish the weight of the public burdens, and pursue the domestic policy traced out by his two predecessors, a great increase in the population and resources of the Greeks in Asia Minor must have followed. The imperial armies were numerous and well organized, the inhabitants of the mountainous districts of Phrygia and Bithynia formed a bold and active militia, which not only garrisoned a line of forts that commanded all the roads, bridges, and mountain passes, but also furnished an efficient body of infantry for foreign service. The bowmen from the country round Nicaea occupied at this time a prominent place in the Greek armies, and in general the courage and quality of the native troops showed great improvement. This arose in part from the advance which had taken place in the social position of the Greek peasantry after the conquest of Constantinople by the Crusaders. The cultivators of the soil were now the proprietors of the lands they tilled, and they fought like men who possessed rights and privileges which they would sacrifice their lives to defend.

While the Greek empire had been gradually recovering strength, the neighbouring states had rapidly declined. The empires of the Seljouk Turks of Iconium, and of the Belgians at Constantinople, which had successively threatened the Greek nation with extinction, were both humbled. The Turkish Empire was rent into fragments by civil wars, in which fathers, sons, and brothers of the line of Seljouk were arrayed in arms against one another. Tyranny ruined its resources, and the invasions of the Moguls completed its ruin. Gsuaseddin Kaikhosrou II, who died in 1247, was a weak and luxurious prince. His son, Azeddin Kaikous II, after sustaining several defeats from the Tartar armies, was driven from his dominions by his brother, Rokneddin Kilidy-Arslan IV, and sought safety from the fraternal discord which seemed the inheritance of his race, by retiring into the Greek empire.

Baldwin II, emperor of Constantinople, after begging succours over all Europe, and wasting the supplies he received from the ambition of the Pope and the generosity of St Louis in maintaining an imperial court, lived by tearing the copper from the domes of the public buildings erected by the Byzantine emperors, which he coined into money, and by borrowing gold from Venetian bankers, in whose hands he placed his eldest son Philip as a pledge. To such a miserable condition was the empire of the Crusaders now reduced, and so great was the diminution of the military class in the Latin population, that the only efficient guard at Constantinople was maintained by Venetian merchants, and the existence of the empire was dependent on foreign succours.

 

BULGARIA

 

The kingdom of Bulgaria was a principal object of attention in conducting the foreign affairs of the Greek empire, both on account of its power and the contiguity of its frontier. A considerable part of the imperial territory in Europe was, moreover, inhabited by Bulgarians and Sclavonians, who were now almost amalgamated into one people. While John Asan reigned in Bulgaria, he had maintained the balance between the Latin and Greek empires; but his death, the youth of his sons, the independent position of the great Bulgarian nobles, and the low state of civilization in the country, combined to render the kingdom a scene of anarchy, and to destroy its influence abroad. Constantine Tech at length rendered himself master of the throne, by expelling Mytzes, the last sovereign of the family of Asan. Constantine had allied himself with Theodore II, and espoused his daughter Irene, but he was not in condition to engage in war with Michael VIII. But as Michael was anxious to secure peace on the northern frontier in order to direct his forces against the Latins, he sent Acropolita, who had been released from his captivity in Epirus, as ambassador to the court of Constantine, king of Bulgaria, in 1260.

The only frontier power that possessed the internal strength and energy necessary for disputing the progress of the Greek empire, at this time, was Epirus. But the territories ruled by the Despot Michael were inhabited by a population consisting of various races, which showed no disposition to amalgamate into one nation. Sclavonians, Vallachians, Albanians, and Greeks occupied considerable territories, in which they were separately governed by their respective usages, institutions, and laws, and each defended its local administration both against its neighbours and the prince. The power of the Despot of Epirus was consequently less despotic than that of most contemporary princes; but the warlike disposition of a great portion of his subjects rendered him a dangerous neighbour.

Michael VIII, as soon as he acquired the direction of the government, had endeavoured to conclude peace with the Despot of Epirus, who had already extended his conquests to the banks of the Vardar. The emperor offered to allow him to retain his conquests, on condition that he released his two prisoners, Acropolita and Chavaron; but the despot, having formed an alliance with Manfred, king of Sicily, and William, prince of Achaia, expected by their assistance to become master of Thessalonica, and indulged in the hope of expelling the emperor’s troops from Europe. When Michael Paleologos found that war was inevitable, he sent his brother John with a considerable army to oppose the despot, (A.D. 1259). The Epirot camp was established at Kastoria; but John Paleologos, penetrating suddenly into upper Macedonia by the pass of Vodhena, compelled the despot to abandon his position in great haste. The Greeks regained possession of Achrida, Deavolis, Prespa, Pelagonia, and Soskos, while the despot, retiring behind the chain of Pindus, waited for the arrival of four hundred knights, who had been sent to his aid by Manfred, king of Sicily, and of a considerable body of Latin troops under the command of William, prince of Achaia. When he was joined by these auxiliaries, his army was much stronger than that of the Greeks, and he resumed the offensive. Advancing by the pass of Vorilas, he recovered possession of Stanou, Soskos, and Molykos, and pressed forward to relieve Prilapos, which the Greeks had invested. The best troops in the army of John Paleologos consisted of light cavalry from the Turkish tribes at the mouth of the Danube, and from the nomad hordes in Asia Minor. This cavalry was supported by a body of the famous archers of Bithynia, and both were under the command of experienced officers, trained under the firm discipline of the Emperors John III and Theodore II. This force retired before the Despot Michael in perfect order, cutting off the foraging parties, and harassing the advance of the Latin heavy-armed cavalry, until an opportunity presented itself of attacking the main body of the Epirot army in the plain of Pelagonia. The attack was said to have been favoured by secret communications with John Dukas, the natural son of the Despot Michael, who, in right of his wife, was Prince of the Wallachians of Thessaly. John Dukas is said to have been grossly insulted by some French knights. It is certain that, whether there was treachery or not, the Epirot army was completely defeated, and William, prince of Achaia, with many Latin nobles, was taken prisoner. John Paleologos, with one division of the victorious army, advanced into Greece and plundered Livadea; the other, under Alexius Strategopoulos, took Joannina and Arta, and delivered Acropolita.

The Despot of Epirus fled to Leucadia, where he assembled new forces. The imperial generals hastened to pass the winter at the court of Michael VIII, in order to secure their portion of the rewards which were there distributed with a lavish hand. In the following year (1260) Alexis Strategopoulos, who remained in Epirus to conduct the war, was defeated and taken prisoner at Tricorythos by Nicephorus, the eldest son of the Despot Michael. The best part of the Bithynian archers perished in this battle; but Strategopoulos was fortunate enough to be soon released from captivity, and he was immediately intrusted with the command of the army in Thrace, where accident gave him the glory of being the conqueror of Constantinople. The war continued in Epirus, sustained by the national aversion of the Albanians and Wallachians to the imperial government, but without being productive of any important results.

The successful campaign of 1259, and the captivity of the Prince of Achaia, deprived the Latin empire of its most useful allies. Michael VIII resolved to avail himself of the moment to make an attempt for the reconquest of Constantinople. The Emperor Baldwin II was too weak to defend his capital, if left to his own resources; and the Venetians no longer possessed that command of the sea which insured their being able to introduce succours into the place during a siege, for the republics of Venice and Genoa were then engaged in a war remarkable for the fierce animosity of the combatants, and distinguished by a succession of well-contested and bloody naval battles. The Emperor Michael, in the year 1260, took the command of the Greek army in Thrace, and, after storming Selymbria, advanced to the walls of Constantinople. As he advanced without a sufficiency of military stores for forming a permanent camp, and without engines for commencing a regular siege, there seems no doubt that he counted on aid from secret friends within the walls. The traitor was said to be a French noble named Anseau; but he proved apparently unable or unwilling to complete his treason; and Michael, after waiting in vain for the concerted aid, made several attempts to carry the suburb of Galata by storm. These attacks being repulsed, he concluded a truce for a year with the Emperor Baldwin.

Michael determined to renew his attack on Constantinople as soon as the truce expired. He felt that the conquest of the imperial city could alone throw a veil over his usurpation; and that, as the restorer of the Byzantine Empire, he might pretend a new claim to the homage of the Greeks. In the spring of 1261 he signed a treaty with the republic of Genoa, by which he granted the Genoese various commercial privileges, and renewed all the concessions made to them by the Emperor Manuel. Both parties bound themselves to carry on war with Venice, and not to conclude either truce or peace, unless by mutual consent. The emperor, in the event of his conquering Constantinople, promised to put the Genoese in possession of the palace, castle, church, and domain, held by the Venetians; and the Genoese promised to furnish the emperor with a fleet to aid his conquest. By this treaty the convention—concluded under the auspices of Pope Gregory IX in 1238, binding the republics of Genoa and Venice not to ally themselves with the Greek emperor, except by mutual consent—was annulled, and the foundation was laid of the great commercial ascendancy which the Genoese acquired in the Black Sea.

While the Emperor Michael was waiting for the expiry of the truce and the arrival of the Genoese fleet, he sent Alexis Strategopoulos, who had just returned from his captivity in Epirus, to take the command of the troops in Thrace, ordering him to collect a force on the Latin frontier, and enter their territory as soon as the truce expired, in order that no time might be lost in forming the siege of Constantinople on the arrival of the Genoese fleet, when Michael proposed assuming the command of his army in person.

The Latin seigneurs had found their property, even in the immediate vicinity of Constantinople, so insecure, that they had sold it to the Greek cultivators of the soil. The Greeks had also established themselves as farmers of the imperial possessions confiscated at the foundation of the Latin empire. They were thus the only inhabitants of the district protected by the vicinity of Constantinople from the ravages of the Greek and Bulgarian armies; and their position had enabled them, during the increasing weakness of the Latin government, to acquire a certain independence in their communal organization. In a feudal empire, they lived exempt from feudal ties; and in order to defend their property, they formed themselves into an armed militia, called Voluntaries, which pretended to maintain a kind of neutrality in the war between the Latins and the Greeks. Strategopoulos opened communications with the chiefs of the voluntaries, whose national feelings induced them to favour the Greek cause, and he found them willing to aid in gaining immediate possession of Constantinople. Their daily communications with the city enabled them to give him accurate information of all that passed among the Latins.

As soon as the truce expired, Strategopoulos led the troops under his command into the neighbourhood of Constantinople; but the Latins took no immediate precautions for defence, knowing that the force under his command was inadequate to besiege the city. Elated by their successful resistance during the preceding year, and by the arrival of Marc Gradenigo, a new Venetian podestat, with a few galleys, they determined to mark the expiry of the trace by striking the first blow; and their object was to recover possession of Daphnusia or Sozopolis on the Black Sea. Marc Gradenigo was anxious to secure a port of refuge for the Venetian vessels when pursued by the Genoese, and cut off by adverse winds from entering the Bosphorus. He persuaded the Emperor Baldwin to allow him to embark the best part of the garrison in the fleet, which consisted of thirty galleys and a Sicilian galleon of great size; so that the force embarked may have exceeded six thousand men. The moment was now considered favourable for executing the plan which had been formed by the Greeks for surprising Constantinople. A leader of the voluntaries, named Koutritzakes, had secured the assistance of some Greeks within the walls; Strategopoulos gradually brought his army close to the city, and everything was prepared for the execution of the enterprise. As soon as it was midnight, Strategopoulos and Koutritzakes, with a chosen body of soldiers, approached the walls at a spot concerted with their friends in the city. The scaling-ladders were planted, and the enemy entered Constantinople without opposition. The guard at the Gate of the Fountain was surprised, and the gate, which had been built up for greater security, was broken open before any alarm could be given. The imperial troops then marched into the city, and took possession of the land wall. In this position things remained until the dawn of day enabled the Greek general to advance. The troops who attempted to dispute his passage to the imperial palace were defeated; and the Emperor Baldwin, finding that the enemy was rapidly approaching, instead of seizing some post near the port, which he could have defended until the expedition returned from Daphnusia, basely abandoned his empire, embarked in a vessel at anchor in the port, and fled to Euboea. His crown, sceptre, and sword, all equally useless to such a mean-spirited coward, were found by the Greek soldiers who entered his deserted palace, and carried in triumph through the streets.

The Frank and Venetian inhabitants were numerous and brave. They soon formed a force capable of defending that portion of the city in which their ware-houses were situated, and of preserving the command of the port. Strategopoulos saw their preparations for defence with some anxiety, for the sudden return of the fleet from Daphnusia might have exposed him to be driven from his conquest, or have entailed on him the necessity of destroying the city. By the advice of a Greek, named Phylax, who had served in the household of Baldwin, he now set fire to the houses in the Frank and Venetian quarters, leaving their communications with their ships unmolested. By this manoeuvre they were compelled to turn all their attention to embarking their wives and children, with their jewels and money, leaving the Greeks to occupy the whole line of the fortifications, and secure every post of strength.

When the news that the Greeks had entered Constantinople reached the troops at Daphnusia, they returned with all speed to the capital; but they found the ramparts manned by the Greek army, with the exception of a small portion towards the port, which was separated from the city by a mass of burning houses or impassable ruins. Only a small part of the Latin families had embarked, so that both sides were ready to conclude a truce. Under the guarantee of this cessation of hostilities, the Latins carried their families and much of their wealth on board the ships in the ships in the port; but the crowd was so great that, before they could reach Euboea or the islands in the Archipelago, many perished from want of food and water.

 

CHAPTER XII.

GREEK EMPIRE OF CONSTANTINOPLE UNDER THE DYNASTY OF PALEOLOGOS, A.D. 1261-1453.