صور الصفحة
PDF
النشر الإلكتروني

ried his son and heir, Henry, to the heiress of the Kingdom of Sicily, Constance; the betrothal had been announced in Germany in 1184, that is to say, a year before Andronicus' death. It was a very important event, because after Frederick's death his successor could annex Naples and Sicily to the possessions of the King of Germany. Hereby, of two separate enemies there would be created against Byzantium one single terrible enemy whose political interests could not be reconciled with those of the Eastern Empire.

It is even very probable that the above mentioned matrimonial alliance with the Norman royal house had in view the establishment of a point of departure in the Sicilian Kingdom for the plans of the Western Emperor against Byzantium, in order to conquer more easily, with the help of the Normans, "the Kingdom" of the Greeks. At least, a western mediaeval historian remarks: "The Emperor hostile to the Kingdom of the Greeks (regno Grecorum infestus) endeavors to unite the daughter of Roger with his son."173

The King of Siciliy, William II, a contemporary of Andronicus, taking advantage of the internal troubles in Byzantium, had set on foot a great expedition against the latter, the purpose of which was, certainly, not only the desire of taking revenge for the massacre of 1182 or of supporting a possible claimant to the Byzantine throne, but a wish to take possession of the Byzantine throne for himself.

In such circumstances Andronicus decided to enter into negotiations both with the West and with the East.

He made a treaty with Venice before the beginning of 1185.174 In coming to terms with the Republic of St. Mark "in order to support the Empire" (pro firmatione Imperii) Andronicus is said to have released the Venetians still imprisoned in Constantinople after the massacre of 1182 and to have promised com

173 Annales Colonienses Maximi, s. a. 1185, in Pertz, Mon. Germ. Historica, Scriptores, XVII, 791.

174 See Cognasso, op. cit., pp. 294-95 (82-83). Bréhier, Andronic (Comnène), col. 1781.

pensation for loss, in annual payments. He actually began to discharge these obligations, and the first installment was paid in 1185.1

175

Then, on the other hand, Andronicus attempted to draw closer to the Pope of Rome; evidently he hoped to get support from him and pledged himself to grant some privileges to the Catholic church. At any rate, by the end of 1182 Pope Lucius III had sent a legate to Constantinople.176 Furthermore, a western chronicle affords very interesting evidence that in 1185 Andronicus, against the will of the Patriarch, constructed a church in Constantinople upon which he bestowed an ample revenue, where the Latin Catholic priests officiated according to their rite; "up to this day that church is called the Latin church."177

Finally, a short time before he died, Andronicus made a formal alliance with the Sultan of Egypt, Saladin. As a western chronicler reports: "urged by grief and distress (Andronicus) has recourse to the advice and succor of Saladin."178 The conditions of that alliance sealed by oath run as follows: if Saladin succeeds, with the advice and aid of the Emperor, in occupying Jerusalem, Saladin himself should keep any other country they might take for himself, Jerusalem and the whole sea coast, except Ascalon, becoming free; but he should hold this territory under the suzerainty of Andronicus; the Emperor should take possession of all the conquered territories of the Sultan of Iconium as far as Antioch and Armenia Minor, if the new allies are able to annex them. But "prevented by death, Andronicus could not carry that plan

175 Andreae Danduli, Chronicon. Muratori, Rerum italicarum scriptores, XII, 309 (s. a. 1182). See also H. F. Brown, "The Venetians and the Venetian Quarter in Constantinople to the close of the twelfth century", The Journal of Hellenic Studies, vol. XL (1920), 86.

116 Cognasso, op. cit., 298-99 (86-87). Bréhier, op. cit., col. 1781.

1 Gesta regis Henrici Secundi Benedicti Abbatis, ed. W. Stubbs (London, 1867), I, 257 (Rerum britannicarum medii aevi scriptores, vol. 49): construxerat ecclesiam quandam nobilem in civitate Constantinopolis, et eam honore et redditibus multis ditaverat, et clericos Latinos in ea instituit secundum consuetudinem Latinorum, quae usque hodie dicitur Latina. See the same story also in Chronica Magistri Rogeri de Houedene, ed. W. Stubbs (London, 1869), II, 205 (Rer. brit. med. aevi scriptores, vol. 51).

118 Chronicon Magni Presbiteri (Annales Reicherspergenses), Mon. Germ. Hist. Scr., XVII, 511.

into effect."179 Thus according to that treaty Andronicus was ready to cede Palestine to Saladin on condition that the latter should recognize the suzerainty of the Empire.

But neither the treaty with Venice, nor the overtures to the Pope, nor the alliance with the famous Saladin could save the situation or preserve the power in the hands of Andronicus.

In the eastern portion of the Mediterranean the governor of the island of Cyprus, Isaac Comnenus, seceded from the Empire and proclaimed the independence of the island under his rule. Having no good fleet, Andronicus failed to put down the revolt. Cyprus was lost. The loss of Cyprus was a very severe blow to the Empire, for Byzantium had had therein an important strategic and commercial point which had brought large revenues to the treasury, especially because of the trade with the Latin states in the East.

But the chief and decisive blow was struck upon Andronicus from the west, when the well organized expedition of William II, of Sicily, sailed against the Empire. As usual, hostilities opened at Durazzo which at once passed into the hands of the Normans, who then, following the military Egnatian road (via Egnatia), marched towards Thessalonica. The powerful Norman fleet also arrived there. In this war Venice seems to have been strictly neutral.

The well known ten days' siege of Thessalonica by land and sea began. A narrative of this siege, rather rhetorical but nevertheless valuable, was written by an eye-witness, the archbishop of Thessalonica, Eustathius. In August, 1185, Thessalonica, which ranked next to Constantinople, was captured by the Normans, who effected there an appalling destruction and massacre. It was the revenge of the Latins for the massacre of 1182. On this subject we find the following remarkable words in the work of a Byzantine historian of that time, (Nicetas Choniates): "Thus, between us and them (the Latins) a bottomless gulf of enmity has established itself; we cannot unite our souls and we entirely dis

179 Ibidem, XVII, 511. See R. Röhricht, Geschichte des Königreichs Jerusalem (1100– 1291). Innsbruck, 1898, p. 494 (ein förmliches Bündniss). N. Radojčić, Dva posljednja Komnena na carigradskom prijestolju (Zagreb, 1907), p. 85 (in Croatian). Cognasso, op. cit., p. 297 (85). Dölger, op. cit., II, 91 (no. 1563). Bréhier, op. cit., col. 1781.

agree with each other, although we keep up our external relations and often live in the same house."180

After some days of pillage and murder the Norman troops advanced farther to the east, towards Constantinople.

When the news of the capture of Thessalonica and of the approach of the Norman troops to the capital had reached Constantinople, the population of the city burst out into revolt, accusing Andronicus of making no preparations for resisting the enemy. With unexpected rapidity Isaac Angelus was proclaimed Emperor. Andronicus was dethroned and died under atrocious tortures. With the revolution of 1185 the epoch of the Byzantine Comneni ended.

The short reign of Andronicus I, who on his accession to the throne had set himself the goal of protecting the agricultural class, or peasants, against the arbitrary domination of the large landowners, and of freeing the state from the foreign Latin preponderance, strikingly differs in character from the rule of all other Comneni. For this reason alone the reign of Andronicus deserves intense and strictly scientific investigation. In some respects, particularly in the sphere of social problems and interests, the time of Andronicus, which has not yet been satisfactorily elucidated, presents a fascinating field for further researches.

II. THE EXTERNAL HISTORY OF THE TIME OF THE ANGELI

Characteristics of the Emperors of the House of the Angeli.The dynasty of the Angeli, elevated to the throne by the revolution of 1185, sprang from a contemporary of Alexius Comnenus, Constantine Angelus, of the city of Philadelphia in Asia Minor, a man of low birth, who was married to a daughter of the Emperor Alexius; he was the grandfather of Isaac II Angelus, the first Emperor from this house, who was therefore related by the female side to the Comneni.

We know that one of the aims of the late Andronicus had been to establish a national government; obviously he had failed in this task and, as we have already seen, at the close of his reign he had begun to incline to the West. In any case, after his death,

180 Nicetas Choniates, pp. 391-92.

the need of a national government became thoroughly felt, so that, as a recent Italian historian of the rule of Isaac II Angelus, Cognasso, writes, "The revolution of the twelfth of September (1185) became especially nationalistic and aristocratic in its plans; thus, from the advantages derived from the revolution all classes were excluded except the Byzantine aristocracy."'181

Isaac II (1185-1195) who represented, to quote Gelzer, "the embodied evil conscience which sat now upon the rotten throne of the Caesars",182 possessed no administrative talents at all. The excessive luxury and foolish lavishness of the court together with arbitary and unendurable extortions and violence; lack of willpower and of any definite plan in ruling the state in its external relations, especially in the Balkan peninsula, where a new danger to the Empire appeared in the second Bulgarian Kingdom, and in Asia Minor, where the Turks continued their successful advance unchecked by the fruitless Third Crusade,-all this created an atmosphere of discontent and agitation in the country. From time to time revolts burst out in favor of one or another claimant to the throne. But perhaps the chief cause of general discontent was "the fatigue of the population at enduring the two evils well recognized by Andronicus: the insatiability of the fiscal administration and the arrogance of the rich."183 Finally, in 1195, a plot against Isaac was formed by his brother Alexius, who, with the help of a certain part of the nobility and troops, dethroned the Emperor. Isaac was blinded and imprisoned, and his brother Alexius became Emperor. He is known as Alexius III Angelus (1195– 1203), or Angelus Comnenus, sometimes surnamed Bambacoratius (Βαμβακοράβδης).144

In his qualities and capacities the new Emperor scarcely differed from his brother. The same foolish lavishness, the same lack of any political talent or interest in government, the same military

181 F. Cognasso, "Un imperatore Bizantino della decadenza Isacco II Angelo", Bessarione, anno XIX, vol. XXXI (1915), 44; separate edition (Roma, 1915), p. 18. 182 Gelzer, Abriss der byzantinischen Kaisergeschichte, p. 1032.

183 Cognasso, op. cit., p. 59; sep. ed., p. 33.

184 See Nikos A. Bees, "Bambacoratius, ein Beiname des Kaisers Alexios III. Angelos (1195-1203)", in the Byzantinisch-neugriechische Jahrbücher, III (1922), 285-86.

« السابقةمتابعة »