Download PDF | Marios Philippides - Byzantium, Europe, and the Early Ottoman Sultans, 1373-1513. An Anonymous Greek Chronicle of the Seventeenth Century (Codex Barberinus Graecus 111)-A.D. Caratzas (1990).
235 Pages
Introduction
The Palaeologan Era Until 1204 the Byzantine or Eastern Roman Empire had been one of the most stable states in the history of mankind; it possessed a rich culture, whose roots reached all the way to the Hellenistic and Roman past. Byzantium's influence in the shape of the rising cultures of south- eastern Europe had been immense. To the west Byzantium had seemed an extremely wealthy empire, which had further acquired a legendary aura about it. Its civilization and traditions were viewed with respect. To cite one trivial, though indicative example, Byzantium had been re sponsible for the introduction of the fork to Venice and to Europe in the eleventh century.
In the eastern Mediterranean and in southern Europe the commanding presence of Byzantine culture may still be evidenced in material remains and in the survival of political institutions, ranging from fortifications and innumerable churches in the Balkan peninsula and Asia Minor to the structure of imperial Russia, the organization of the Ottoman Empire, and the rites and theology of non-Catholic Churches On April 13, 1204, Constantinople, the capital of Byzantium, which was also known as New or Second Rome, Queen of Cities, and most frequently the City, fell to the crusading armies from the west, which had postponed their goal of reaching Egypt and the Holy Land for the express purpose of seizing this Christian capital Constantinople was then subjected to three days of unprecedented, savage pillage.
A Latin emperor was then enthroned and he ruled this Byzantine city for almost sixty years. On July 15, 1261, Nicene troops gained entrance into Con- stantinople and Baldwin, its Latin emperor, was compelled to flee aboard a Venetian vessel. On August 15 Michael (VIII) Palaeologus of Nicaea, subsequently styled "New Constantine," made a triumphal entry through the Golden Gate, which had traditionally received the return of conquering emperors. Michael VIII became the founder of the Palacologan dynasty, which, in conjunction with the powerful family of the Kantakouzenoi, was destined to dominate the "new empire" and to preside over its decline until the coup de grace was finally delivered by the Ottoman Turks shortly after the middle of the fifteenth century.
In spite of the triumphal procession of August 15, 1261, and the optimism that surrounded the recovery of the imperial capital, it soon became evident that Byzantium was experiencing a slow death. The traditional ways of life in this theocratic state were slowly changing; the main, central provinces of the millennial empire were being irrevocably lost, the Christian population of Anatolia, which had in the past pro- vided the best soldiers to the empire, was being rapidly converted to Islam and was undergoing Turkification, the important centers of the empire, the ancient cities in the east, began to abandon their Hellenic- Roman and Christian heritage, some cities were impoverished; others were falling victim to castern invaders and gazis, the countryside was in ruins, burned and plundered.
Thus the old empire was being gradually fragmented, not only by the western crusaders, who had carved fiefs and dominions in mainland Greece and the islands of the Aegean but by civil strife also. Revolt, usurpation, and murder had become the rule in this late period. In addition to the threat presented by the expanding Ottoman Turks, internal problems, such as social injustice and crip- pling taxation, were harassing the state. Moreover, the plague was steadily decreasing the number of Byzantine subjects. Inflation had run amok, the Byzantine gold coin, which had served as the standard in Europe for so long was not in existence, the coinage of the Palacologan period is a sad commentary on the slow decay of the state.
Religious issues did not alleviate this depressing situation. Chris- tianity proved unable to create a unified front against Islam. Christians quarreled with each other in a manner strongly reminiscent of the early period of heresies. Papist Europe demanded the return of the Byz- antine, Orthodox Church to the fold and an end to the schism. Most of the Byzantine emperors were ready to comply but the majority of the Greek population was determined to resist. Great personalities emerged and fought in this chaos. Some were competent, like Manuel II, and others were desperate, like Constantine XI.
The empire was generally viewed as a tired old man. Yet in this depression, there emerged a virtual renaissance in literature, philosophy, and art, which was, in many ways, Byzantium's counterpart of western humanism, This era produced one of the most ambitious Byzantine thinkers, thesneoplatonist George Gemistos Plethon, who had found inspiration in the example of ancient Hellas. By military standards, however, the empire had reached its nadir and was about to expire." Thus Michael VIII's "new empire" was only a shadow of its former self, at best, and could not hope to recreate the past glories of Byzantium, let alone the grandeur of Rome, its predecessor.
Throughout his reign, Michael VIII dealt successfully with potential threats from the west by discreet intervention through diplomacy and use of state funds; his efforts in Europe culminated in the notorious massacre of the Sicilian Vespers, which disarmed his western enemies. Furthermore, his policies in the Balkans neutralized the hostile intentions of Bulgaria and Serbia, allowing him to concentrate on the recovery of Byzantine terri- tories under Latin rule His successor, Andronikos II, inherited nu- merous problems, including a religious crisis and the rise of the Ot- toman Turks. In response to the latter threat, Andronikos II invited the Catalan Company to the east. After a number of sucesses against the Turks, the Catalans turned their skill and expertise to the devastation of Byzantine regions.
As Andronikos II failed to check Serbia's rise, his popularity at home was steadily waning. A civil war followed, in which he was deposed by his grandson, Andronikos III, who enjoyed the support of an able minister, John VI Kantakouzenos. At Andronikos III's death, the "empire" had been reduced to a small state with two principal cities, Constantinople in the east and Thessalonica in the west. The civil strife between grandfather and grandson had also presented an ideal situation for the ( Ottoman Turks and for Serbia. Andronikos III was succeeded by his son, John V, who presided over Byzantium in a period of disasters marked by civil war and accented by social up- heavals. In the course of his reign. John V was repeatedly removed from office by his father-in-law, his son, and even his grandson, while early on he had been compelled to recognize John VI Kantakouzenos as the senior emperor.
The social problems in Byzantium are evident in the violent strife between the landed nobility and the lower, underprivileged classes. This struggle between aristocrat and poor further assumed religious dimensions. In its extreme form the upheaval can be seen in Thes- salonica, where, after a bloody confrontation with the rich and the authorities, the local rebels known as Zealots seized lower in 1342 and established a new order, which included self-government, they re mained in control of this important city until 1349. John VI was de posed in 1354 and spent his last years in a monastery, his prestige, however, did not suffer and he continued to exercise considerable influence in the court.
To complicate matters further, the Black Death visited Constantinople in 1347 and claimed the lives of over half of the population. In the midst of all this, the Ottoman Turks established themselves securely not only in Asia Minor but in Thrace also. More over, no effective weapon could be found to slow down the expansion of Serbia or the infiltration of Allsamans into Macedonia, Thessaly, and southern Greece. By the end of the fourteenth century the Albanians had penetrated and settled in the Morea, partly through their own efforts and partly through the official policies of the local rulers" In the last years of Byzantium's independent existence, the emperors of the Palacologan dynasty displayed unique talents and unprece- dented energy in diplomacy, administration, and warfare; but it was too late for the empire.
The disintegration of the millennial empire could not be prevented. Manuel II made effective use of diplomacy in the first quarter of the fifteenth century, his travels to Paris and London illus- trate his conviction that only the west could save Byzantium from its Oriental foe. Manuel 11 went on to challenge Ottoman authority with his foreign policy after the battle of Ankara (1402) and established control over the numerous contenders for the Ottoman throne. This capable emperor was eventually removed from office by his son, John VIII in a major disagreement over foreign policy." The reign of John VIII witnessed the declaration of the union of the Orthodox and Catholic Churches during the Council of Florence; it also witnessed the European disaster at Varna.
John VIII's acceptance of the union of the churches created discontent in the capital and divided the population into pro-unionists and anti-unionists. To the majority of Byzantine subjects the advocates for union seemed traitors, who were eager to place the Orthodox Church and faith at the mercy of the pope and of the European Christians, the descendants of the cru- saders of 1204. The fact that the west could supply the only practical means of survival against the onslaught of the Ottomarr Turks was overlooked and, eventually, the fall of Constantinople in 1453 was interpreted within anti-union circles as divine punishment for the betrayal of the ancestral faith. In many respects the anti-union position can be regarded as a pro-Turkish attitude; the Ottoman Turks allowed their Orthodox subjects the privilege of worshipping in their traditional rites.
Moreover, as the sultans were extremely suspicious of all at- tempts to promote Christian unity, which could result in a crusade, they discouraged all Byzantine efforts to come to terms with the west." Thus the anti-unionists found a supporter, if not an ally and champion, in the enemies of Byzantium. The dissatisfaction of the Constantinopolitans with their leadership is evidenced in the violent demonstrations that occurred in 1453, while the Ottoman Turks were besieging the Byz- antine capital, certain elements of the population went so far as to preach openly submission to the sultan and passive resistance."
The Byzantine subjects were not alone in their discontent with the Greek imperial court. Other Orthodox states failed to render practical assistance to Constantinople in her last struggle the lack of support from some originated in the fact that their rulers were vassals of the sultan. But the lack of support from others was partly due to the fact that the old Byzantine myth of one undivided Roman-Christian empire under the Constantinopolitan Caesar could not be maintained in all seriousness any longer." Thus the old client states came to challenge the cornerstone of Byzantine political theory.
Consequently, the Palaeo- logan dynasty was confronted with a dilemma: formal recognition of the rising position of the west and, by extension, of Byzantine decline, impotence, and dependence on foreign, western skills, technology, trade, and finance, implied that the myth of the single empire was dead; in addition, the price for western support assumed the return of the schismatic Orthodox Church to the fold. Thus European aid implied the alienation of the emperor's subjects and of the old client, Orthodox states; the absence of western aid implied the subjection of Byzantium to the Ottomans. When the union of the Churches was proclaimed, a climate of apathy, resignation, and doom materialized in the capital of Byzantium. In the Palaeologan era, especially in the fifteenth century.
Byzantine influence over Russia seems to have declined, especially as the last three emperors of Constantinople had turned their attention to the west. Even though Tsarigrad, the City of the Caesars, as Constantinople was known to the Russians, had occupied an important place in Russian history and was also destined to assist in the formation of the myth of the Third Rome," the perils of Constantinople in this later pernod did not bring forth any spontaneous, substantial assistance from Russia. which was emerging from its Tatar-Mongol period under the vigorous leadership of the Muscovite princes. In fact, during the last years of the fourteenth century Russia directly challenged the myth of Byzantium's Christian, undivided empire. C. 1395 Vassily 1.
the grand prince of Moscow, attempted to omit the name of the Byzantine emperor from the liturgy and pointed out the undeniable fact of Byzantine imperial weakness and impotence. Vassily I was promptly rebuked by the Pa- triarch of Constantinople who provided, in a letter, one of the last expressions of the theoretical imperium of the Byzantine state." Thus the collapse was total; the empire amounted to no more than its beleaguered capital and the distant despotate of the Morea; both were under the shadow of a powerful, infidel enemy. The population of Constantinople, the hearth and heart of the empire, had been alienated. Confusion reigned, as survival depended directly on western, heretical support. As the myth of the millennial empire had collapsed, no aid could be expected from other Orthodox states, which, in any case, were facing their own problems. The acquisition of a new master seemed inevitable: West or east, pope or sultan, heretic or infidel.
To the Byz- antine population the world must have been coming to an end; proph- ecies of doom were circulating, demonstrating that the citizens were resigned to their fate. The dilemma had destroyed the will for survival The millennial empire was grinding to a halt. In numerous ways the decline and fall of Byzantium resemble those of its predecessor, Rome. In late antiquity barbarians had surrounded the Romans; wars had to be waged on many fronts; social injustice had been acute; inflation had escalated and coins had been debased; plague and usurpation had been common. As Byzantium was born out of the death throes of Rome, the Ottoman Empire was about to emerge from the decaying corpse of the Eastern Roman Empire.
Link
Press Here
0 التعليقات :
إرسال تعليق