صور الصفحة
PDF
النشر الإلكتروني

ties from one place to another; for example, the Slavs to Asia Minor and Armenians to the Balkan peninsula. The Paulicians also had been transported in great numbers from the eastern border to Thrace, in the eighth century, by Constantine V Copronymus, as well as in the tenth century by John Tzimisces. The city of Philippopolis in the Balkan peninsula became the centre of the Paulicians. Tzimisces, by settling the eastern colony in the vicinity of that city, succeeded, on the one hand, in removing the stubborn sectarians from their strongholds and castles on the eastern border, where it was very difficult to manage them; and, on the other hand, he hoped that in their new settlement the Paulicians would serve as a strong bulwark against the frequent invasions of the northern "Scythian" barbarians. In the tenth century the Paulician doctrine had been carried into Bulgaria by the reformer of that doctrine, Pope Bogomile, after whom the Byzantine writers name his followers Bogomiles. From Bulgaria the Bogomile doctrine, later on, passed into Serbia and Bosnia, and then into Western Europe, where the followers of the eastern dualistic doctrine bore different names: Patarins in Italy, Cathari in Germany and Italy, Poblicans (i. e. Paulicians) and Albigensians in France.

The Byzantine government was disappointed in its expectations from Eastern sectarians settled in the Balkan peninsula. First of all, the speedy and wide spreading of the heresy was unexpected. Secondly, the followers of the Bogomile doctrine had become the spokesmen for the national Slavonic and political opposition against the severe Byzantine administration in both ecclesiastical and secular matters, especially within Bulgaria, which had been conquered by Basil II. Therefore, instead of defending the Byzantine territory from the northern barbarians, the Bogomiles called on the Patzinaks to fight against Byzantium. The Cumans (Polovtzi) joined the Patzinaks.

The struggle with the Patzinaks, in spite of some temporary successes, taxed all the strength of Byzantium. At the end of the ninth decade Alexius Comnenus suffered a terrific defeat at Dristra (Durostolus, Silistria), on the lower Danube, and was nearly

captured himself. Only the quarrel resulting from the division of the spoil, which had broken out between the Patzinaks and Cumans, prevented the former from taking full advantage of their victory.

After a short relief obtained from the Patzinaks by payment, Byzantium had to live through the terrible time of 1090-1091. The Patzinaks came, after a stubborn struggle, up to Constantinople itself. Anna Comnena relates that, on the day of the commemoration of the martyr Theodore Tyron, the inhabitants of the capital, who usually went to visit in great numbers the church of the martyr in a suburb beyond the city wall, could not do so in 1091, because it was impossible to open the city gates, the Patzinaks standing under the walls.22

The situation of the Empire became still more critical when a Turkish pirate, Tzachas, began to menace the capital from the south. He had spent his youth in Constantinople at the court of Nicephorus Botaniates, had received a high Byzantine title, and on the accession of Alexius Comnenus, had fled to Asia Minor. Having taken possession, by means of his fleet, of Smyrna and some other cities of the western coast of Asia Minor and some islands of the Aegean, Tzachas boldly set himself the goal of dealing a blow to Constantinople from the sea and thereby cutting off all means of supply from the capital. To assure the effectiveness of his plan, he entered into negotiations with the Patzinaks in the north and the Seljuqs of Asia Minor in the east. Secure of success, Tzachas already called himself emperor (basileus), put on the insignia of imperial rank, and dreamt of making Constantinople the centre of his state. We must not lose sight of the fact that both the Patzinaks and Seljuqs were Turks who, thanks to their military and political relations, now came to realize their ethnographic kinship. To quote a Russian scholar (V. Vasilievsky), "in the person of Tzachas there appeared a foe of Byzantium who combined with the enterprising boldness of a barbarian the refinement of a Byzantine education and an excellent knowledge of all the political relations of eastern Europe

Anna Commena, VIII, 3 (vol. II, 6-7).

of that time; he planned to become the soul of the general Turkish movement and would and could give a reasonable and definite goal and general plan to the senseless wanderings and robberies of the Patzinaks".23

It seemed that on the ruins of the Eastern Empire a new Turkish state of the Seljuqs and Patzinaks would now be founded. "The Byzantine Empire", as the same scholar says, "was drowning in the Turkish invasion".24

Another Russian historian (Th. Uspensky) writes to this effect: "in the winter of 1090-91 the condition of Alexius Comnenus can be compared only with that of the last years of the Empire, when the Ottoman Turks surrounded Constantinople on all sides and cut it off from outward relations."25

Realizing the whole horror of the condition of the Empire, Alexius followed the usual Byzantine diplomatic tactics of rousing one barbarian against the others: he appealed to the Khans (princes) of the Cumans (Polovtzi), those "allies in despair", asking them to help him against the Patzinaks. The savage and ferocious Cuman Khans, Tugorkhan and Boniak, very well known in the Russian chronicles,26 had been invited to Constantinople, where they were received in the most flattering way and sumptuously entertained. The Byzantine Emperor humbly solicited the aid of the barbarians, who were very proud to be on an equal footing with the Emperor. The Cuman Khans gave Alexius their word and kept it. On the twenty-ninth of April of the year 1091 a bloody battle took place; in all probability, the Russians also along with the Cumans took part in it. The Patzinaks were crushed and mercilessly annihilated. Anna Comnena notes: "One could see an extraordinary spectacle: the whole people, reckoning not in ten thousands but surpassing any number, entirely perished on that day with wives and children." The battle just mentioned

23 Vasilievsky, Byzantium and the Patzinaks, in his Works (St. Petersburg, 1908), I, 76 (in Russian).

24 Idem, I, 77.

25 Th. Uspensky, The History of the Crusades (St. Petersburg, 1900), p. 8 (in Russian).

26 In Anna Comnena, VIII, 4 (II, 9): ¿ Toyoрrák, ỏ Marák. See thereupon Vasilievsky, op. cit., I, 98, note 2.

left its trace in a Byzantine song composed at that time: "The Scythians" (so Anna Comnena calls the Patzinaks) "because of one day did not see May."

1927

By their interference in favor of Byzantium the Cumans did an enormous service to the Christian world. "Their chiefs, Boniak and Tugorkhan, must be justly reckoned among the saviors of the Byzantine Empire."28

Alexius returned to the capital in triumph. Only a small part of the captured Patzinaks was left alive; this remnant of the terrific horde settled in the Balkan peninsula, east of the Vardar river, and later on entered the Byzantine army, in which they formed a special contingent. The Patzinaks who had succeeded in escaping beyond the Balkans were so weakened that for thirty years they could undertake nothing against Byzantium.

Tzachas, who had terrified Byzantium but had not succeeded in supporting the Patzinaks with his fleet, lost a part of his conquests in the conflict with the Greek maritime forces. Then the Emperor stirred up against him the Sultan of Nicaea, who invited Tzachas to a festival and killed him with his own hand; thereupon the Sultan came to a peaceful agreement with Alexius. Thus the critical situation of 1091 was successfully settled for the Empire, and the following year, 1092, seemed to go on under quite different conditions.

In the desperate days of 1091 Alexius had sought allies not only among the Cuman barbarians, but, apparently, also among the western Latins. Anna Comnena writes that Alexius "was anxious to dispatch messages calling on mercenaries from all sides.' And that such messages were dispatched also to the West is shown from another passage of the same authoress who states that, soon afterwards, Alexius "was expecting the mercenaries from Rome."30

1929

Anna Comnena, VIII, 5 (vol. II, 15). The battle took place Apr. 29, 1091, just one day before May. In her translation of the Alexiad Elizabeth Dawes renders this song as follows: "Just by one day the Scythians missed seeing the month of May." The Alexiad of the Princess Anna Comnena, translated by E. A. S. Dawes (London, 1928), p. 205.

23 Vasilievsky, I, 107 (in Russian). 29 Anna Comnena, VIII, 3 (II, 7). 20 Ibidem, VIII, 5 (II, 12).

In connection with the above events, historians usually discuss the problem of a message of Alexius Comnenus to his old friend, Count Robert of Flanders, who some years before had passed through Constantinople on his way back from the Holy Land. In his letter the Emperor depicts the desperate situation "of the most Holy Empire of the Greek Christians which is oppressed by the Patzinaks and Turks", tells about the insulting and murdering of the Christians, children, youths, women, and girls, as well as of the almost complete occupation of the Empire's territory by enemies; "there is left almost nothing but Constantinople, which the enemies threaten to take away from us in the very near future, unless speedy help from God and from the faithful Latin Christians reach us"; the Emperor "is running before the Turks and Patzinaks" from one city to another and prefers to deliver Constantinople into the hands of the Latins rather than those of the pagans. In order to stimulate the ardor of the Latins, the message gives a long list of relics of the capital and reminds the Count of the uncounted wealth and treasure accumulated there. "Therefore, hasten with all your people; strain all your forces, lest such treasures fall into the hands of the Turks and Patzinaks. . . . Endeavor, so long as you have time, that the Christian Empire and, which is still more important, the Holy Sepulcre be not lost to you and that you may have in heaven no doom, but reward. Amen!"31

V. Vasilievsky, who referred this message to the year 1091, wrote: "In 1091, from the shores of the Bosphorus, there broke upon western Europe a real wail of despair, a real cry of a drowning man who already was uncertain whether a friendly or unfriendly hand would be lent for his salvation. The Byzantine Emperor did not hesitate now to reveal before the eyes of the foreigners the whole depth of shame, dishonor, and humiliation, into which the Empire of the Greek Christians had been precipitated."'32

This document depicting in such vivid colors the critical

31 Riant, Alexii 1 Comneni ad Robertum I Flandriae comitem epistola spuria (Geneva, 1879), pp. 10-20. Hagenmeyer, Die Kreuzzugsbriefe aus den Jahren 10881100 (Innsbruck, 1901), pp. 130-36.

* Vasilievsky, I, 90 (in Russian).

« السابقةمتابعة »