In these circumstances the aged Muawiya negotiated a peace agreement with the Byzantine Emperor on the condition of paying him a definite annual tribute.42a

By the successful repulse of the Arabs from Constantinople and by the favorable and advantageous peace treaty, Constantine performed a great service, not only for his own empire, but also for entire Western Europe, which was thus shielded from the serious Muslim menace. It is interesting to note that the success of Constantine made a strong impression in the West. According to one chronicler, when the news of Constantine's accomplishments reached the Khagan of the Avars and other Western rulers, "They sent ambassadors with gifts to the Emperor and begged him to establish peaceful and loving relations with them . . . . and there came a time of great peace in the East and in the West."48

During the first reign of Justinian II (685-95), the successor of Constantine IV, an event which was of considerable significance in the further development of Arabo-Byzantine relations occurred on the eastern Arabian border. The mountains of the Syrian Lebanon were inhabited for a long time by the so-called Mardaites, which may be translated "rebels," "apostates," or "bandits." They were organized as an army and served as the rampart of the Byzantine authorities in this district. After the Arabian conquest of Syria the Mardaites retreated northward to the Arabo-Byzantine border and caused the Arabs much trouble and anxiety by their constant raids upon the neighboring districts. According to a chronicle, the Mardaites formed "a brass wall" which protected Asia Minor from Arabian irruptions. By the peace treaty negotiated under Justinian II the Emperor agreed to force the Mardaites to settle in the inner provinces of the Empire, and for this favor the Caliph promised to pay a certain tribute. This step on the part of the Emperor "destroyed the brass wall." In later times the Mardaites are found as seafarers in Pamphylia (Southern Asia Minor), in the Peloponnesus, on the island of Cephalonia (Cephallenia) and in several

42a See M. Canard, "Les expéditions des Arabes contre Constantinople dans l'histoire et dans la légende," Journal Asiatique, CCVIII (1926), 63-80.

"Theophanis, Chronographia (ed. De Boor, p. 356).

44 Theophanes, p. 364.

other districts. Their removal from the Arabian border unquestionably strengthened the position of the Arabs in the newly conquered provinces and facilitated their subsequent offensive movement into the depth of Asia Minor. It seems to me that there is no sufficient ground for viewing this event, as does Professor Kulakovsky, as an act prompted by "the emperor's consideration for the Christians who were ruled by men of an alien faith."45 The basis for this transmigration of the Mardaites was a purely political one.

In the sixties of the seventh century, simultaneously with the attempts to seize Constantinople in the East, the Arabian army began its westward movement in North Africa. At the close of the seventh century the Arabs took Carthage, the capital of the African exarchate, and at the beginning of the eighth century they occupied Septem (now the Spanish fortress, Ceuta) near the Pillars of Hercules. About the same time the Arabs, under the leadership of their general, Tarik, crossed from Africa to Spain and rapidly conquered from the Visigoths the larger part of the peninsula. From the name of Tarik came the modern Arabic name of Gibraltar, meaning "the mountain of Tarik." Thus in the early part of the eighth century the Muhammedan menace to Western Europe appeared from a different direction, namely, from the Pyrenean peninsula.

The relations established between the Arabs and the population of Syria, Palestine, and Egypt differed greatly from those created in North Africa, in the territories of modern Tripoli, Tunis, Algeria, and Morocco. In Syria, Palestine, and Egypt the Arabs did not meet any strong resistance on the part of the population, but rather commanded the support and sympathy of the conquered people. In response to this attitude the Arabs treated their new subjects with great tolerance. With a few exceptions, they left the Christians their temples and the right to perform religious services, demanding in return only the regular payment of a definite tax and the assured political loyalty of the Christians to the Arabian rulers. Jerusalem, as one of the most revered places of Christendom, remained open to pilgrims who came to Palestine from distant points of Western Europe to worship the holy places. Jerusalem still kept its hostelries and hospitals for these pilgrims. It must also be remembered that 45 Kulakovsky, History of the Byzantine Empire, III, 255 (in Russian)

in Syria, Palestine, and Egypt the Arabs came in contact with Byzantine civilization, whose influence soon became apparent among the conquerors. Briefly, in Syria and Palestine the conquerors and the conquered had established peaceful relations which lasted for a considerable period of time. Somewhat less satisfactory was the state of affairs in Egypt; but even there the attitude to the Christians was quite tolerant, at least during the early years of the Arabian sway.

After the Arabian conquest the patriarchates of the occupied provinces fell into the hands of the Monophysites. In spite of this, the Muslim rulers granted certain privileges to the orthodox population of Syria, Palestine, and Egypt, and after a certain lapse of time the orthodox patriarchates of Antioch and Alexandria were also restored. These patriarchates still exist in our own times. The Arabian historian and geographer of the tenth century, Masudi, says that under the Arabian domination all four sacred mountainsMount Sinai, Horeb, the Mount of Olives near Jerusalem, and "the Mount of Jordan" (Mount Thabor), remained in the hands of the orthodox. Only gradually did the Monophysites and other "heretics," including the Muslims, borrow from the orthodox the cult of Jerusalem and the holy places. Along with Mecca and Medina, Jerusalem was later recognized as a sacred Muslim city. For the Muhammedans the sacred significance of the city was established by the fact that Muawiyah assumed the rank of Caliph in Jerusalem.46

Quite different was the state of affairs in North Africa. Here the great majority of the Berber tribes, in spite of the official adoption of Christianity, still remained in the former state of barbarism and offered a very strong resistance to the Arabian armies, which repaid this opposition by terrible raids and devastation in the Berber districts. Thousands of captives were taken East and sold there into slavery. "In the dead cities of Tunis," says Diehl, "which are today in most cases in the same condition in which they were left by the Arabian invasion, one still finds at every turn some traces of

46 See J. Wellhausen, Das Arabische Reich und sein Sturz (Berlin, 1902), p. 133; V. Barthold, in the Zapiski Kollegii Vostokovedov, I, 468–69.

these formidable raids."4" When the Arabians finally succeeded in conquering the North African provinces, many of the natives migrated to Italy and Gaul. The African church, once so famous in the annals of Christian history, suffered a very heavy blow. Here is what Diehl says with regard to the events of this period: "For two centuries the Byzantine Empire had conserved in these districts the difficult heritage of Rome; for two centuries the empire made the great and steady progress of these provinces possible by the strong defence of their fortresses; for two centuries it upheld in this part of North Africa the traditions of classical civilization and converted the Berbers to a higher culture by means of religious propaganda. In fifty years the Arabian invasion undid all these achievements."48

In spite of the rapid spread of Islam among the Berbers, Christianity still continued to exist among them, and even in the fourteenth century we hear of "some small Christian islands" in North Africa.49

The Slavonic advance in the Balkan Peninsula and in Asia Minor. The origin of the Bulgarian kingdom.-We saw that from the second half of the sixth century the Slavs not only continually attacked and pillaged the Balkan possessions of the Byzantine Empire, but, reaching as far as the Hellespont, Thessalonica, southern Greece, and the shores of the Adriatic Sea, settled there in large numbers. We have already spoken of the Avaro-Slavonic attack on the capital in the year 626, during the reign of Heraclius. In the period of the Heraclian dynasty the Slavs persistently advanced into the peninsula and began to populate it very densely. Thessalonica became surrounded by Slavonic tribes and found it difficult to seek protection against their attacks even within its strong city walls.

On their vessels the Slavs descended to the Aegean Sea, attacking the Byzantine fleet and frequently cutting off the supply of provisions to the capital. The emperor, Constantine III (Constans II),

47 Diehl, L'Afrique byzantine (Paris, 1896), p. 590.

48 Diehl, op. cit., p. 592; E. Mercier, Histoire de l'Afrique Septentrionale (Paris, 1888), I, 218.

49 See Dom H. Leclercq, L'Afrique chrétienne (Paris, 1904), II, 321-23. R. Basset says that the last native Christians, among the Berbers, disappeared in the twelfth century (Encyclopédie de l'Islam, I, 721).

was forced to undertake a campaign "against Sclavinia."50 From this time we begin to hear of the migration of large masses of Slavs to Asia Minor and Syria. Under Justinian II a horde of Slavs numbering no less than 80,000 (according to V. I. Lamansky) 51 were transported to Opsikion, one of the themes of Asia Minor. One part of them (about 30,000) was mobilized by the Emperor and later took part in the struggle with the Arabs, during which they deserted the Emperor and sided with the Muhammedans. For this terrible offense the remaining Slavs of Opsikion were subjected to formidable massacres. We have a seal of the Slavonic military colony of Bithynia, as Opsikion was sometimes called in the seventh century, which has survived from the period we are now considering. It is a monument of great value, "a new fragment of Slavonic tribal history," which affords "a ray of light in the twilight of the great migrations," as B. A. Panchenko, who published and interpreted this seal, puts it.52 Beginning with the seventh century, the problem of Slavonic settlements in Asia Minor assumes a very profound significance.

The second half of the seventh century was marked also by the formation of the new Bulgarian kingdom on the northern border of the Byzantine Empire along the shore of the lower Danube. The subsequent history of this state was later of extreme importance to the fate of the Empire. During this early period we still have in mind the old Bulgarians, a people of Hunnic (Turkish) origin. Under Constantine III (Constans II) a Bulgarian horde headed by Asparuch (Isperich) forced by the Khazars to move westward from the steppes bordering the Sea of Azov, settled at the mouth of the Danube, and later moved farther south, entering that part of Byzantine territory which is now known as Dobrudja. These Bulgarians, as is asserted by V. N. Zlatarsky, had previously formed an agreement with the Byzantine Empire by which, as allies of the Empire, they were supposed to protect the Danubian border against

50 Theophanes (ed. De Boor, p. 347).

51 V. I. Lamansky, The Slavs in Asia Minor, Africa, and Spain (St. Petersburg, 1859), p. 3 (in Russian).

52 B. A. Panchenko, "The Slavonic Monument in Bithynia of the Seventh Century," Transactions of the Russian Archeological Institute in Constantinople, VIII, Nos. 1-2 (Sofia, 1902), 15 (in Russian).