and the resulting agreement, concluded for three years, was very humiliating for the Empire. The Empress assumed the obligation of paying the Arabs a yearly tribute of ninety or seventy thousand dinars (denarii) in semiannual instalments. It is very likely that the troops sent by Irene to Macedonia, Greece, and the Peloponnesus in the same year (783) for the quelling of the Slavonic revolt were taken from the eastern front, thus weakening the Byzantine position in Asia Minor. In the year 798, after the successful operations of the Arab army under the Caliph Harun-ar-Rashid, a new peace agreement.was concluded with the Byzantine Empire, which was to pay a tribute, as in the time of al-Mahdi.

Very animated relations existed between the emperors of the Isaurian dynasty and the Bulgarians. The latter, having recently gained a stronghold on the Lower Danube, were forced, above all, to defend their political existence against the Byzantine attempts to destroy the achievements of Asparuch. The conditions of internal life in the Bulgarian kingdom of the eighth century were very intricate. On the one hand, the Bulgarian hordes and their chiefs competed with each other for the supreme rank of khan and initiated many dynastic disturbances; on the other hand, as new conquerors, the Bulgarians were forced to struggle with the conquered Slavs of the peninsula. The Bulgarian khans of the late seventh and early eighth centuries showed much ingenuity in handling their relations with their most dangerous enemy, the Byzantine Empire. We have already pointed out that the Bulgarians had aided Justinian II in reclaiming the throne and rendered active assistance to Leo III in his drive to force the Arabs away from Constantinople. After this, for a period of over thirty years, the Byzantine writers say nothing about the Bulgarians. During the reign of Leo III the Bulgarians succeeded in maintaining peace with the Empire.

In the reign of Constantine V the relations with the Byzantine Empire became strained. With the aid of the Syrians and Armenians, who had been transported from the eastern border and made to settle in Thrace, the Emperor constructed a number of fortifications along the Bulgarian border. The Bulgarian ambassador to Constantinople was treated with contempt by Constantine. Following this the Bulgarians began military operations. Constantine

conducted eight or nine campaigns against the Bulgarians, both on land and on sea, whose final aim was the annihilation of the Bulgarian kingdom. These expeditions continued with alternating results, and in the end Constantine did not attain his goal. Still, some historians call Constantine "the first Bulgar-slayer (Bulgaroctonus)," ," because of his energetic struggle and the construction of numerous fortresses against the Bulgarians.

Within Bulgaria the dynastic troubles ceased at the end of the eighth century, and the sharp antagonism between the Bulgarians and the Slavs became less pronounced. In short, there came about the gradual formation of the Bulgaria of the ninth century, slavonized and transformed into a powerful state with definite offensive projects as regards the Byzantine Empire. This offensive policy of the Bulgarians became evident in the late eighth century, in the time of Constantine VI and his mother Irene, when the Byzantine Empire, after its military failures, was forced to agree to pay tribute to the Bulgarians.

When we speak of the military collisions between the Empire and the Bulgarians of the eighth century, we must keep in mind that the Bulgarian forces included also the Slavs, who formed part of their kingdom. The occupation of the Balkan peninsula by the Slavs continued also in the eighth century. One western pilgrim to the Holy Places, a contemporary of Leo III, visited the Peloponnesian city of Monembasia and wrote that it was situated in Slavonic (Slavinian) land (in Slawinia terrae).15 There are references to the presence of Slavs in Dyrrachium and in Athens in the eighth century.16 The following well-known lines (quoted also in an earlier part of this work) in the work of Constantine Porphyrogenitus, On the Themes, refer also to the days of Constantine V: "The whole of the Peloponnesus became slavonized and barbarian when the plague spread through the entire universe." The reference here is to the formidable epidemic of 746-47, imported from Italy, which especially devastated the south of Greece and Constanti14 A. Lombard, Constantin V, empereur des Romains (Paris, 1902), p. 59.

15 Willibaldi, Vita; Pertz, Monumenta Germaniae historica, XV, 93.

16 See A. Vasiliev, The Slavs in Greece. Viz. Vrem., V (1898), 416-17 (in Russian). 17 Constantini Porphyrogeniti, De Thematibus, pp. 53-54.

nople. In an attempt to rehabilitate the capital after the epidemic, Constantine transported to Constantinople people from various provinces. Even in the opinion of the population, the Peloponnesus was slavonized as early as the middle of the eighth century; to the same period must be referred the influx of new settlements in Greece established in place of those communities whose population was either extinguished by the epidemic or taken to the capital when the effort was being made to rehabilitate it. At the end of the eighth century the Empress Irene sent a special expedition "against the Slavonic tribes," to Greece, Thessalonica, and the Peloponnesus.18 Later these Greek Slavs took an active part in the plot against Irene. This indicates clearly that in the eighth century the Slavs in the Balkan peninsula, including all of Greece, were not only definitely and strongly established, but participated even in the political life of the Empire. By the ninth century the Bulgarians and the Slavs became two very serious enemies of the Byzantine Empire.

The internal activities of the emperors of the Isaurian or Syrian dynasty. Legislation. Themes.-Leo III was not only a gifted leader and energetic defender of his Empire against external enemies, but also a wise and capable legislator. Even in the time of Justinian the Great, in the sixth century, the Latin text of his Code, Digest, and Institutes was little, or not at all, understood in the majority of provinces. In many districts, in the east particularly, old local customs were used in preference to official statutes, as was clearly evidenced by the popularity of the Syrian Lawbook of the fifth century. The Novels (Novellae) issued in Greek dealt only with current legislation. Meanwhile, in the seventh century, as the Empire was gradually losing Syria, Palestine, and Egypt in the east, North Africa in the south, and the northern parts of the Balkan peninsula in the north, it was becoming more and more "Greek," by language. For wide and general use it became necessary to create a lawbook in Greek which would reflect all the changes in living conditions since the time of Justinian the Great.

Fully realizing the need for such a code, Leo III intrusted the task of compiling it to a commission whose members were chosen by him. The efforts of this body resulted in the publication of a code

18 Theophanes, pp. 456-57.

entitled the Ecloga, and issued in the name of the "wise and pious emperors, Leo and Constantine." The exact time of its publication is not known, and while western scholars refer the Ecloga to the end of Leo's reign (739-40),19 the Russian Byzantinist, V. G. Vasilievsky, is inclined to place the date nearer the beginning of Leo's reign (about the year 726).20 Recently there has even been some doubt as to whether the Ecloga may at all be referred to the time of Leo III and Constantine V.21 At present the most modern students of this question set the date of the publication of the Ecloga as March, 726,22

The title of the Ecloga (meaning "selection" or "extract") is indicative of its sources. It runs as follows: "An abridged selection of laws, arranged by Leo and Constantine, the wise and pious kings, from the Institutes, Digest, Code, Novels of the Great Justinian, and corrected with a view to greater humanity" (in Greek, els rò piλavlρwπóтEрov), or, as others translate this, "with a view to improve

"23 The introduction to the Ecloga states definitely that the decrees issued by the preceding emperors were written in various books and that their meaning, grasped with difficulty by some, was entirely incomprehensible for others, especially for those who do not live in the "God-guarded" imperial city.24 Under "various books" mentioned here we are to understand the Greek translations and various commentaries of Justinian's lawbooks which were used in actual practice, replacing frequently the Latin originals. There were only very few people who could understand these Greek translations and commentaries. The profusion of books and the variations and contradictions found in them produced considerable confusion in the civil law of the Byzantine Empire. Leo III saw clearly the 19 Zach. von Lingenthal, Geschichte des griechisch-römischen Rechts, 3. Aufl., p. 16. 20 Vasilievsky, "The Legislation of the Iconoclasts," Jour. Min. Public Instruction, CXCIX (1878), 279-80 (in Russian).

21 See K. N. Uspensky, Outlines in Byzantine History (Moscow, 1917), I, 216–18 (in Russian).

22 D. Ginis, "Das promulgationsjahr der Isaurischen Ecloge," Byz. Zeitsch., XXIV (1924), 356-57. But in the fourth volume of the Cambridge Medieval History (1923), P. Collinet gives March, 740, as the year of the promulgation of the Ecloga (p. 708).

23 Zach. von Lingenthal, Collectio librorum juris graeco-romani ineditorum. Ecloga Leonis et Constantini (Lipsiae, 1852).

24 Ecloga, par. 11.

existing state of affairs and made it his aim to relieve these conditions. The principles of the Ecloga, laid down in its introduction, are imbued with ideas of justice and righteousness. They maintain that judges must "refrain from all human passions and make decisions of true justice, developed by clear reasoning; they must not scorn the needy, or leave unpunished the strong man guilty of offense. . . They must justly refrain from accepting gifts." All the officials in judicial service must receive definite salaries from the imperial "pious treasury," so that "they take nothing from any person who might come under their jurisdiction, in order that the prediction of the Prophet, "They sold the righteous for silver' (Amos, 2:6), should not come true and that we should not be visited by the wrath of God for becoming transgressors of his commandments."25

The contents of the Ecloga, subdivided into eighteen titles, deal mainly with civil law, and only to a slight extent with criminal law. They treat of marriage, betrothal, dowry, testaments, and intestacies, of wardship, enfranchisement of slaves, witnesses, various liabilities connected with sale, purchase, rent, etc. Only one title contains a chapter of criminal law on punishments.

The Ecloga differed in many respects from the Justinianian Code, and even contradicted it at times by accepting the decisions of customary law and judicial practices which existed parallel with the official legislative works of Justinian. When compared with the latter, the Ecloga represents a considerable step in advance in many respects. For instance, in its marriage laws we notice the introduction of higher Christian conceptions. True, the chapter on penalties abounds in punishments which prescribe the maiming of the body, such as cutting off a hand, tongue, or nose, or blinding the convict. But this fact does not permit us to consider the Ecloga a barbarian law, because in most cases these punishments were intended to take the place of the penalty of death. In this sense the Isaurian emperors were right in claiming that their legal accomplishments were "greater in their humanity" than the work of the preceding emperors. We must not forget also that the Ecloga prescribed equal

25 Ecloga, par. 11, 13; the Russian translation by Vasilievsky, in his Legislation of the Iconoclasts, pp. 283-85.