General Summary
Context
Important Terms, People, and Events
Timeline
Post-Roman Europe I: Italy and Southern Gaul From Theodoric to the Lombards (488-600)
Eastern Rome from Marcian to Justin: Doorstep of Byzantium (450-527)
From Eastern Roman Revanche to Byzantium under Siege I: Justinian I (527-565)
From Eastern Roman Revanche to Byzantium under Siege II: Justin II to Heraclius (565-641)
Islamic Expansion and Political Evolution, 632-1000
From Roman Gaul to the Merovingian Kingdom of the Franks (450-511)
Clovis' Sons and Creeping Merovingian Anarchy (511-640)
Charlemagne and the Carolingian State(s) to 843
End of the First European Order: Foreign Invasions, Carolingian Obsolescence, and Doorstep of the High Middle Ages (840s-950s)
Political Arrangements in Europe towards the Second Millennium
Christianity, 325-650s: Conversion, the Papacy, and Monasticism I
Christianity, 650s-950s: Conversion, the Papacy, and Monasticism II
Review Test
Further Reading
|
◄
PREVIOUS
From Eastern Roman Revanche to Byzantium under Siege I: Justinian I (527-565)
|
NEXT
► Islamic Expansion and Political Evolution, 632-1000
|
Early Middle Ages (475-1000)
From Eastern Roman Revanche to Byzantium
under Siege II: Justin II to Heraclius (565-641)
Summary
Justinian's successor was his nephew Justin II, who ruled
from 565-574, becoming progressively insane. He started his reign
by refusing subsidies to the Avars. This was Turco-Mongol tribal
confederacy (khanate), which swept from southern Russia to Bohemia
and the Balkans. Westward expansion had been stopped in Thuringia by
Meorvingian Sigibert, but they then moved to the Hungarian plains,
destroying the Eastern Roman-allied Gepids by 564-6. When the
Lombards went west in 565, they settled farther south in Hungary,
using it as a base to organize raids with Slavs to Byzantine areas.
Emperors had bought them off, but Justin II refused. The Avar
reaction was a decisive thrust into Dalmatia, where they destroyed
or plundered all in their path. In 571, Justin sought a truce,
whereby he paid 80,000 pieces of silver, much more than the original
subsidy. This Avar threat emerged during the same years as the
Lombard descent upon Italy, so Byzantine forces could do nothing
to stop it. Also in 571, Christian Armenia had rebelled against Sassanian
rule, and requested Byzantine protection as a Christian power.
Justin agreed, even stopping tribute payments to Shah Chrosroes.
War ensued in the East. Persians took the important bishopric
of Dara on the Tigris with more than 250,000 captives. Justin
went rapidly insane, openly persecuting Monophysites. His wife
Sophia was able to buy a year's cease-fire in the East, and got her
husband to raise the Palace Guard general Tiberius as her co-regent.
Tiberius became Emperor in 578. The situation was dire.
In 575-7, Turks had appeared for the first time as Byzantine enemies, taking
a fortress in the Crimea. More pressing were the Avars and their
Slav raiders. Though Tiberius tried to hold them back with payments,
from 577, they had begun to infiltrate in large numbers into Thrace
and Illyricum, actually over bridges that Greek engineers had built
as part of the subsidies. In 580, the Avars laid siege to Sirmium
on the Sava river near Belgrade, which fell in 582. In that same
year a Cappadocian officer named Maurice succeeded to the throne
when Tiberius died of poison. He tried to follow the policy of
his predecessors--paying off the Avars and fighting the Persians.
The Avars continued to raid, occupying more of the Upper Balkans.
Money to fight in the East was also lacking.
Byzantium was blessed temporarily in 590. When Chosroes
of Persia died in 579, he was succeeded by the shah Hormisdas.
A coup took his life eleven years later, and his son Chosroes
II fled to Greek territory. Maurice granted his request for aid,
which Chosroes used to gain power. The latter had promised Maurice
a peace treaty along with restoration to Byzantium of Armenia and
eastern Mesopotamia. Miraculously, Chosroes II kept his promise
until 603, when Maurice was deposed. For the remainder of his
rule, the Emperor focused on three issues. 1) He organized what
was left of Justinian's acquisitions. In North Africa at Carthage,
and Italy at Ravenna, he established exarchates as Imperial command
posts. Totally military in nature, an exarch ruled them with absolute
control over both military and civil matters. This was a new consolidation
of power, and was effective as long as forces were available. 2)
From the 590s on the Emperor sent repeated expeditions against
the Avars in the Danube region and beyond. None were decisive
given lack of troop discipline. 3) Maurice tried to be as frugal
as possible. He reduced military rations, and declined to ransom
prisoners of the Avars. This ultimately led to his downfall; when
he ordered the army to stay in the Balkans for the winter, they
mutinied, and in the tangle of imperial aspirants, a certain general
Phocas became ruler, massacring Maurice's family.
Phocas' rule was a disaster. Several senators, provincial
governors, and generals did not recognize him; "his eight-year
reign brought the Empire to the nadir of its fortunes." It began
with Chosroes II invading Byzantine lands as Maurice's avenger.
By 607 they had taken western Mesopotamia, Syria, Armenia as well
as central Asia Minor. By 608 they had streamed as far west as
Chalcedon, within sight of Constantinople. During the same years,
Avar-Slav incursions increased, with few troops available to stop
them. Phocas' response was a campaign to forcibly convert the
Empire's Jews. Many of them lived in areas threatened by Persians;
their natural response was to welcome Persian conquest. In Antioch
persecuted Jews went to so far as to turn on the Christians, massacring
them, triggering a total flight from the city. Soon, Blues and
Greens rampaged in the capital.
Byzantium was saved from Phocas by the military governor
system Maurice had established. The exarch of Carthage and his
second-in-command brother were too old to claim power, but they prepared
an army and fleet under their sons. The army proceeded to capture
Alexandria in 609, moving on towards the capital. The fleet under
Heraclius went to Thessaloniki, where it augmented its numbers,
leaving for Constantinople in 610. On 5 October, Heraclius was
welcomed as emperor by a population disgusted with the past decade
of turmoil.
Heraclius is early Byzantium's tragic hero, and his reign
can be divided into two parts, the first lasting until 628. He
was occupied incessantly with the Persians and Avars. Until 620,
the situation appeared hopeless. The Avars were disbursed throughout
the Balkans, where their Slav partners began to remain during the
winters. From the East, the Persians made repeated advances. The
Persian general Shahr-Baraz took Antioch and Damascus in 613, moving
to Jerusalem by 614, plundering it, destroying the Church of the
Holy Sepulchre, and carrying off the True Cross. Having Occupied Armenia
already, in 619, Persians extended as far as Egypt, cutting off
food supplies to Constantinople, causing famine and disease in Byzantium,
which was now reduced to the capital and small parts of Asia Minor
and the lower Balkans. By 620, Heraclius was preparing to flee
to Carthage, when the Patriarch Sergius implored him to stay, telling
him that the entire people would support him, and the Church would
open its coffers to him. In the next two years, Heraclius reorganized
Western Anatolia. Divided into four Themes, each region was provided
with a strategos, an all-powerful military ruler
on the exarch model. In these themes, army-age males were settled
on inalienable grants of land held in return for military service.
These Theme Armies were further provisioned by taxation, forced
loans, and church contributions.
By 622, Heraclius was ready to campaign. He led his forces
in person, the first ruler to do so since the 390s. He led the
army behind the Persians to Armenia, causing Shahr-Baraz to withdraw from
Asia Minor, after which the Persians suffered their first defeat.
Heraclius returned to Constantinople to make a truce with the Avars,
leaving his army in the field, which did not mutiny.
In 623 he returned to the offensive, going through Armenia and
Azerbaijan to burn the Shah's castle at Ganzak. Leaving a trail
of destroyed Sassanian outposts, he almost made it to their capital
Ctesiphon before winter. In 625, he moved past Ararat to capture
Martyropolis and Amida. In southeastern Anatolia, the two armies
met in frontal battle. Though Shahr-Baraz ambushed Byzantine forces
inflicting heavy loss, Heraclius' personal courage and advances
spurred his reserves to defeat the Persians again. The odyssey
continued, however, when Chosroes II ordered a huge conscription
and had his army march west, to implement an attack on Constantinople
in alliance with the Avars. Heraclius did not come west, but remained
to ravage Persian Azerbaijan with new Khazar allies. He left the defense
to Sergius and his generals. The Persians got all the way to Nicomedia,
and began sending small harassing flotillas to the capital, while
the Avars laid active siege to the western walls. Though only
possessing a small cavalry garrison of 12,000, Constantinople was
ably defended by the walls and its populace, themselves encouraged
by Sergius' daily processions with an icon of Mary. When in the
first dew days of August Greek vessels destroyed flotillas of Persian
and then Avar craft, the two allies panicked, and struck their
camps. This marks the beginning of Avar decline. As for the Sassanians,
Heraclius renewed the offensive in early 627, marching on the Shah's
palace at Dastagird near Ctesiphon. Razates, the new Sassanian
commander, avoided battle as long as he could. When they did meet
near Nineveh, a daylong battle resulted in Greek victory. Dastagird
was burned. Humiliated, Chosroes was murdered by his son Kava
Siroe. The new Shah surrendered unconditionally, returning all
conquered lands and captives, together with an indemnity and the
True Cross. Heraclius entered Constantinople with the Cross in
September 628, to the triumphal acclamation of his people, secure
in the knowledge that Persia would never re-emerge as a threat.
After an interlude of six peaceful years when Byzantium appeared
restored, Heraclius endured a disastrous epilogue to his rule from
634-38. In 622, the Arabian Muhammad had begun to preach Islam.
By his death in 632, his new religion had gained a foothold in
Arabia. In 634, as an extension of his successors' efforts to
prevent decomposition of what was really a new super-tribe, Arab
Muslim forces expanded into Byzantine Syria. A small Byzantine
garrison was destroyed, and Heraclius, in Palestine to return the
True Cross to Jerusalem, gathered an army of 80,000 men to meet
the new threat near Antioch. The Muslim forces then fell back,
awed by numbers, and the two armies met again on the Yarmuk river
south of the Galilee in August. When a sandstorm emerged from
the south and disoriented the Byzantines, the Muslim general Khalid
charged. Byzantines gave way, and were massacred. By 637, Jerusalem
had surrendered along with all of Syria, while Muslim armies were
moving into Iraq and Egypt. Sickened physically and emotionally,
Heraclius retired in 638, dying three years later.
As a footnote, Heraclius too was unable to escape theological problems
with the West. In 634, his Patriarch Sergius had articulated a
new formula to please Monophysites and Orthodox. It was that while
Christ had two natures, they possessed a single motive force, or energy.
It was still controversial. In particular, the monk Sophronius
condemned it, and when he became Patriarch of Jerusalem, his opposition
may have eased Muslim entry. Finally, in 638 Sergius made another
pronouncement, again under Heraclius' orders. Monotheletism, it
was that Christ was of two natures, and did not have a single energy,
but possessed a single will. All Eastern Patriarchs
agreed, but now the Western Pope John IV condemned it in 641, shortly
after Arab armies arrived in Alexandria Egypt.
Commentary
The century from 550-650 in the East could be called the
'hundred years disaster', 'the fall of the Dark Ages curtain',
or, most charitably, the transition from Eastern Rome to the Byzantine
Empire. Symbolic of this, by Heralius' death, the language of
law, administration, and government was Greek, which had already
become the language of art and intellectualism. Beyond this, though,
the essential components of the Byzantine system were in place:
separation from the West; Barbarians raids and settlement south
of the Danube, even in states; and Islam as an ever-present threat
in the Middle East and Anatolia. Out of this crucible emerged
a state and society with a new political glue.
Mentioned earlier was the third wave of Barbarian invasions, consisting
of Avars and Slavs. In terms of demographic and ecological effects,
their impact is similar to that of the Lombards in Italy, such
that they should be considered part of the same grouping. By the
time of Phocas, there was large-scale Slav settlement beneath the Danube,
as far south as Moesia and Thrace in Central Greece. It was a
demographic and cultural disaster for the region. During the Slavic
settlement, Greeks became frantic, large numbers of them fleeing
for the coast. The great majority of old towns and settlements
ceased to exist, with traditional Roman culture all but disappearing.
Like Italy, the terrace system decayed as well, opening the way
for youngerfill erosion and the contraction of agricultural yields.
By the 610s, Byzantine possessions here had been reduced to coastal
strips, and just like in Lombard Italy, the Dark Ages of irreversible
natural and human decline had set in. As well, a slavicization
of Byzantium would allow later Bulgar encroachment to proceed more
thoroughly
We should, then, locate the onset of the general European
Dark Ages from the 550-650 period. It is not entirely clear what
set off this third wave of Barbarians, why the plague emerged with
such consequences, why settled society proved so non-resilient,
and why during the same years, Arab Bedouin proved unwilling to
remain in the Arabian peninsula. Aside from fortuitous conjuncture,
satisfactory explanations are elusive. One that has been offered
lately to explain European, Asian, and even Meso-American changes
during these century is a climatic mega-event somewhere in central
Asia. An earthquake followed by a series of volcanoes spurred
frantic migrations of all sorts of tribes, Avars included, into
more settled areas. Also on the move was the plague. More settled
areas, in turn, witnessed worsening agricultural conditions and
poorer weather, perhaps set off by the seismic event. In Arabia,
the event's impact on international trade was reflected in comparative
impoverishment of local trade oligarchies as well as a growing
gap between rich and poor both within clans and between tribes.
It also made booty-oriented beduin restless, so that many would
be more receptive to Muhammad's message of social justice and political
expansion. Until geological historians do more research, however,
this must remain conjecture.
Beyond a more Grecophile culture and language, what made Heraclius'
state Byzantine upon his death? A) Geographically, the loss of
the West, as well as Egypt (and soon North Africa), Arabia, Palestine,
Syria, Mesopotamia--all historically Roman lands--gave Byzantium
the territorial parameters it was to maintain more or less for
the next 800 years. The demographic basis of the Empire now became
the lower Balkans, Greece, and Western as well as at times Central
Anatolia. B) The geopolitical rhythm from here on consisted of
yearly campaigns to fend off Muslim offensives and Barbarian plundering/occupation
in the Danube region. Twice--in 687 and 717--this took the form
of Arab Muslim sieges of the capital, but in the East, it was mostly
confined to yearly Muslim thrusts as far as Nicaea, halted only
during times of internal unrest in the Islamic state. In the west,
Barbarian hordes would often lay siege to cities, causing loss
of life and an eventual sacking. Often, Avars or Bulgars could
be bought off with tribute. C) The way that Byzantine leaders
began to meet the threat was characteristic of the new state.
Perhaps even from the time of Heraclius, the Themes, and their
peasant armies, provided closer military control of threatened districts,
as well as vast pools of mobilizable soldiers, in addition to agricultural
surpluses. While Theme armies would at times revolt under strategos, they
could effectively deny long-term Anatolian conquests to the Arabs
(and later Turks), providing the basis for a tenth- century partial
Byzantine reassertion.
D) Finally, an enduring, identifying characteristic of
Byzantine society came to the fore as early as the Persian wars
of Heraclius. During this conflict, the entire people had united
behind him, taking the Patriarch Sergius' cue, who had opened the
coffers of the church to him. Miraculously, Heraclius was able
to leave Constantinople to defend itself in 626, and the people
did not revolt, proclaiming an anti-emperor. Further, during the
course of the war, the population in the thoroughly Christianized
Greek and Armenian regions began to identify the religion with
the state's survival. Thus, Christian conviction motivated a Byzantine
quasi-patriotism. Though not causing it, Heraclius recognized
it and made good, earnest use of it. The campaigns against the
Persians became proto-crusades, and the religious element provided
a previously unseen political cohesion. This cohesion would only
grow when Byzantium was challenged by an opponent whose sole basis
of identity, and legitimacy of conquest, was based on religion:
Islam. Thus, by the middle of the seventh century, Byzantium had
crystallized as a state and society socially and ideologically
mobilized for war and defensive retrenchment.
  Help |
Feedback |
Make a request |
Report an error |
Send to a friend
◄
PREVIOUS
From Eastern Roman Revanche to Byzantium under Siege I: Justinian I (527-565)
|
NEXT
► Islamic Expansion and Political Evolution, 632-1000
|
|
|