As is known, the power of the Byzantine emperors (basileus) was not legally hereditary. In fact, anyone could be on the throne. The most famous Byzantine emperors were not of high birth.
Justinian I the Great (482 or 483=565), one of the greatest Byzantine emperors, codifier of Roman law and builder of St. Sofia. Justinian was probably an Illyrian, born in Tauresia (province of Dardania, near modern Skopje) into a peasant family, but raised in Constantinople. At birth he received the name Peter Savvatius, to which Flavius (as a sign of belonging to the imperial family) and Justinian (in honor of his maternal uncle, Emperor Justin I, ruled in 518=527) were later added.
Justinian, a favorite of his uncle the emperor, who had no children of his own, became an extremely influential figure under him and, gradually rising through the ranks, rose to the post of commander of the capital's military garrison (magister equitum et peditum praesentalis). Justin adopted him and made him his co-ruler in the last few months of his reign, so that when on August 1, 527, Justin died. Justinian ascended the throne.
Justinian "considered his primary task to be strengthening the military and political power of Byzantium. He set himself an ambitious goal - to restore the Roman Empire within its former borders - and, it must be said, he achieved this goal quite successfully. At that time, the main threat to the empire came from the east, from powerful Sasanian Iran, wars with which formed the core of Justinian’s eastern policy until the conclusion of the “eternal peace” in 532. According to the peace treaty, the borders between Byzantium and Iran remained the same, but the empire achieved the inclusion of Lazika, Armenia, Crimea and Arabia in its sphere of influence, where the dominance of Christianity was established.During the campaigns of conquest, Justinian conquered the Vandals in North Africa (533-534).
The purpose of this work is to review and study the foreign policy of Justinian.
Let us consider the reign of Justinian in several aspects: 1) war; 2) internal affairs and private life; 3) religious policy; 4) codification of law.
For the Byzantine Empire in the 6th century. became one of the most striking periods in its history. The flowering of its greatness was associated primarily with the name of Emperor Justinian. During his time, Roman legislation was codified and the Code of Civil Law (Corpus Juris Civilis) was compiled, the Temple of Sophia of Constantinople was built, and the borders of the state for some time began to resemble the borders of the former Roman Empire. The official language of the state and Justinian’s native language was still Latin, the country was being reborn as a Christian Roman Empire, but it was during this period that it became clear that this was no longer Rome, but Byzantium.
Chapter 1. The Byzantine state in the era of Justinian
1.1. Accession to the throne of Emperor Justinian
In 518, Emperor Anastasius died. He was succeeded by Justin I, whose reign was not particularly outstanding, but perhaps he simply found himself in the shadow of his great nephew Justinian. Justin's biography is one of the best examples of Byzantine “vertical mobility,” since the future emperor came from simple Illyrian peasants. Associated with his semi-barbarian Balkan origins is the legend of Slavic roots of Justin and Justinian, although in reality they could more likely be representatives of Latinized Albanian tribes. The emperor could not boast of his learning, and even putting his own signature was, according to contemporaries, beyond his strength. Justin achieved the imperial throne through his professional military career. Thus, the Byzantine concept of “vertical mobility” was the implementation for that time of the words of Alexander the Great that power in the state should go to the strongest.
Perhaps the most striking event of Justin's reign lay in the religious sphere, but church affairs went far beyond the walls of churches in importance and had a serious impact on all public life. Byzantine Christianity will be discussed in more detail below, but the main thing is worth noting here: at that time, the schism that for the first time divided the eastern and western parts of the Christian Church - the Roman and Constantinople patriarchates - was ended. On Maundy Thursday, March 28, 519, representatives of the throne of Constantinople and the legates of Pope Hormizda condemned the Henotikon, that is, the act of unity with the Monophysites, adopted in 482 by Emperor Zeno and Patriarch Acacius. This meant a return to the decisions of the IV Ecumenical Council (451) and the restoration of communion with the Roman Church. The so-called “Akakian schism”, which for the first time in church history divided the two centers of the Christian world from 482 to 519, ended. In social terms, this meant unity with Rome and the West of the Empire and conflict with its eastern provinces. Some researchers (for example, the Russian Byzantineist A.A. Vasiliev, 1867-1953) saw in this the political shortsightedness of Justin, and then Justinian, since the anti-Monophysite policy greatly contributed to the loss of Byzantium’s possessions in the Middle East, while the West increasingly it turned out to be unpromising for the empire. But at the same time, Byzantium remained faithful to Christian orthodoxy and did not leave Europe. So, during the reign of Justin, a rejection of the Monophysite policy of his predecessors and a return to the Chalcedonian decisions took place.
An interesting letter was written by the young Justinian to Pope Hormizda shortly after the reconciliation of Constantinople and Rome. This message concerned bringing the Monophysites to agreement: “You will be able,” the future emperor wrote in 520, “to bring the people of our Lord to peace not through persecution and bloodshed, but through patience, so that, wanting to win souls, we would not lose the bodies of many people, like souls. It is proper to correct long-standing mistakes with gentleness and forbearance. That doctor is rightly praised who passionately strives to cure old diseases in such a way that new wounds do not arise from them.” It must be said that Orthodox emperors (including Justinian himself), unfortunately, did not always follow such a policy. Was this not one of the reasons for the easy separation of its eastern provinces from the Empire at the beginning of the 7th century? and the still ongoing church division?
At the same time as he was fighting against heresies in the empire itself, Justin still sought to support all Christians outside its borders. The name of this emperor is associated with the assistance that Byzantium provided to the Monophysite king of the Ethiopian principality of Aksum against Yemen, whose authorities adhered to Judaism. For Byzantium, this was both a strengthening of its own influence abroad and a struggle to support Christianity in southwest Arabia. It seems that in Christian Ethiopia this support left a deep imprint: in the work of the 14th century. Kebra Nagast (Glory of Kings)) reports a meeting in Jerusalem between Emperor Justin and the Ethiopian king Kaleb, during which they divided the land between themselves. In reality, such a meeting did not take place, but the presence of such a legend indicates the significance of Byzantine support for Ethiopian Christians.
At the beginning of 527, Justinian became co-ruler of Emperor Justin. The custom of choosing a successor was widespread in the Roman Empire. Since the dynastic principle did not yet exist, such an election of a co-ruler was a certain guarantee of the succession of power and saved the successor from the otherwise inevitable struggle for power. Justinian's influence was significant even before he officially became co-emperor. First of all, this was due to the fact that he was much more educated than his uncle, so Justin objectively needed the support of his younger relative.
In August 527, the already very old Emperor Justin died, and the bright and long reign of Justinian began, which lasted almost forty years.
1.2. Rise of Byzantium
Under Justinian, Byzantium became not only the largest and richest state in Europe, but also the most cultural. Justinian strengthened law and order in the country. In his time, Constantinople turned into the famous artistic center of the medieval world, into the “palladium of sciences and arts,” followed by Ravenna, Rome, Nicaea, Thessalonica, which also became the focus of the Byzantine artistic style. Under Justinian, “wonderful temples were built that have survived to this day - and.
Created under Justinian, the Code of Civil Law is the pinnacle of Byzantine legal thought. It consisted of four parts (Code of Justinian, Digest, Institute, Novella). The Code reflects the changes that took place in the economic and social life of the empire, incl. improving the legal status of women, manumission of slaves, etc. For the first time, the theory of natural law was legally recognized, according to which all people are equal by nature, and slavery is incompatible with human nature. Thanks to the careful development of such institutions of Roman-Byzantine legislation as the principle of private property, inheritance rights, family law, regulation of trade and usury transactions, the Code of Justinian has not lost its significance even for lawyers of modern times.
The most important part of the codification of Emperor Justinian, distinguished by the wealth of legal material used, consists of digests, or pandects. The latter term is borrowed from the Greek, which means "containing everything."
According to Justinian's plan, set out in the special Constitution of December 12, 530, his digests were to become a comprehensive collection covering the legal heritage of the classical era. The preparation of the digest was entrusted to a special commission under the leadership of Tribonian, which included, in addition to prominent officials and practitioners, famous professors of Constantinople (Theophilus, Gratian) and Beirut (Dorotheus and Anatolius) legal schools. The compilers of digests (later they became known as compilers) were given broad powers to select and shorten the texts of classical jurists (“ancient jurists”), to eliminate contradictions, repetitions and outdated provisions in them, and to make other changes to them, taking into account the imperial constitutions.
In the process of working on the digests, the commission reviewed and used 2 thousand essays and processed 3 million lines. In case of controversial issues, she turned for clarification to Justinian, who issued the corresponding constitutions, which amounted to “50 decisions”. The digests, given the scale of the material used in them, were prepared in an extremely short period of time and published on December 16, 533 by a special Constitution.
The Digests are a unique legal monument, numbering about 150 thousand lines, including more than 9 thousand texts taken from the books of Roman jurists who lived from the 1st century. BC e. to the 4th century n. e. More than others in the Digest, Ulpian, Paul, Papinian, Julian, Pomponius, Modestine are quoted. Thus, the texts of Ulpian make up 1/3, Paul - 1/6, Papinian - 1/18.
Structurally, the Digests are divided into seven parts (there is no such section in the text itself) and into 50 books, which in turn (except for books 30-32 on legates and fideicommissae) are divided into titles with names. Titles consist of fragments, the number and size of which are not the same. Each fragment contains text from the work of a lawyer. The fragment is given with an indication of the author and the title of the work from which the quotation was taken.
The contents of the Digest are very wide and varied. They examine some general issues of justice and law, justify the division of law into public and private, give an outline of the emergence and development of Roman law, outline the understanding of law, etc. Relatively little space is devoted to public law, mainly in the last books (47-50 ), which talks about crimes and punishments, the process, the rights of the fiscus, city government, military peculia, etc. Issues related to the field of international law are also presented here: waging war, receiving and sending embassies, the status of foreigners, etc. .
Private law is presented most fully in the Digests. Particular attention is paid to inheritance (by law and will), marital relations, property law, and various types of contracts. This reflected many new trends characteristic of post-classical Roman law: the merging of praetorian and civil law and the elimination of many formalities of the latter (for example, the division of things into mancipated and unmancipated), the softening of paternal authority, the erasing of the distinctions between legates and fideicommissae, etc. In an effort to adapt Roman classical jurisprudence to Byzantine reality in the 6th century. commentators often distorted the original text and included new provisions, and doing this on behalf of the quoted author (interpolation). Probably, a number of changes in classical texts were carried out not directly by the compilers, but by the compilers of the copies of the works that they used and in which insertions and corrections had previously been made in the margins of the manuscript and between the lines. The identification of interpolations and glosses, which makes it possible to distinguish between classical and postclassical law, is one of the most important directions in modern novelistics.
The digests are written in Latin, but many terms, and sometimes entire extracts (from Marcian, Papinian and Modestine) are given in Greek. Having given the Digests the force of law, Justinian prohibited commenting on them, as well as references to old laws and writings of lawyers.
The original text of Justinian's Digest has not survived. The oldest and most complete copy (Florentine manuscript) dates back to the 6th or 7th centuries. A number of copies of Justinian's Digest, compiled in the 11th-12th centuries, have also been preserved, but significant cuts were made in them, as well as significant distortions of the text (the so-called “vulgate”).
A peculiar part of Justinian's codification is the Institutes - an elementary textbook of law, addressed by the emperor to "youth who love laws." To draw up the Institutes, at the direction of Justinian in 530, a special commission was formed from Tribonian (chairman) and law professors Theophilus and Dorotheus. The latter are the actual authors of Justinian's Institutes, since Tribonian was at that time busy preparing the Digest. The institutions were published on November 21, 533 and in the same year (simultaneously with the publication of the Digest) received the force of imperial law and began to be used as an official source of law.
The Institutes of Justinian were based on the writings of Gaius (Institutions and "Everyday Affairs"), as well as the Institutes of Florentinus, Marcian, Ulpian and Paul. Digests, as well as a number of imperial constitutions, had a certain influence on them. Justinian's institutions, although to a lesser extent than the Digest, reflected the features of postclassical (late Roman, Byzantine) law. Many outdated legal institutions were excluded from them (for example, obsolete forms of marriage, legislation and formulary process, etc.). On the other hand, a number of new provisions were included relating to a legal entity, concubinate, colonate, codicil, etc. Some issues in the Institutes of Justinian were developed in more detail than in the Institutes of Gaius, in particular, the classification of real rights was further developed, the range of grounds was expanded emergence of obligations (quasi-delicts added).
Like the Institutes of Gaius, the Institutes of Justinian consist of 4 books. Under the influence of the Digest, they were divided into titles, which consist of separate fragments. Although the taxonomy of Justinian's Institutes is borrowed from Gaius's Institutes, the arrangement of the material (especially in the last book) has some differences.
The first book provides general information about justice and law, about the legal status of persons, about freedmen, about marriage, about paternal authority, about guardianship and trusteeship. The second book is devoted to property law. It examines in detail new ways of dividing and properties of things, and provides for new ways of acquiring them. It also talks about wills and legacies.
The third book includes titles related to inheritance without a will, degree of cognatian relationship, etc. The same book sets out general provisions on obligations and covers in detail certain types of contracts. In contrast to the Institutes of Gaius, obligations from torts are included in the fourth book, where Aquilius’ law on compensation for harm is discussed in particular detail. Next, the issues of protecting rights (different types of claims and interdicts) are discussed. In the final part of Justinian's Institutes, two titles are added, which list the duties of people and various types of crimes, especially developed in imperial legislation (lese majeste, adultery, parricide, forgery, etc.).
As a historical source, the Institutes of Justinian are of less value than the Digests and the Justinian Code, but they also have undoubted merits - a systematic, concise and clear presentation of legal material on a wide range of issues. The original text of Justinian's Institutes has not survived; the oldest copy dates back to the 9th century.
The Roman Empire gradually abandoned its former rigidity and inflexibility, so that the norms of the law of peoples and even natural law began to be taken into account on a larger (perhaps even excessive) scale. Justinian decided to summarize and systematize this extensive material. The work was carried out by the outstanding lawyer Tribonian with numerous assistants. As a result, the famous Corpus iuris civilis (Code of Civil Law) was born, consisting of three parts: 1) Codex Iustinianus (Code of Justinian). It was first published in 529, but it was soon significantly revised and in 534 it received the force of law in exactly the form in which we now know it. This included all the imperial decrees (constitutiones) that seemed important and remained relevant, starting with the Emperor Hadrian, who ruled at the beginning of the 2nd century, including 50 decrees of Justinian himself. 2) Pandectae or Digesta (= Digests), a compilation of the views of the best jurists (mainly 2nd and 3rd centuries), prepared in 530-533, equipped with amendments. The Justinian Commission undertook the task of reconciling the different approaches of the jurists. The legal rules described in these authoritative texts became binding on all courts. 3) Institutiones (-Institutions, i.e. - Fundamentals), a law textbook for students. Textbook of Guy, a lawyer who lived in the 2nd century. AD, was modernized and corrected, and since December 533 this text has been included in the curriculum.
After Justinian's death, Novellae (Short stories), an addition to the Code, were published, which contained 174 new imperial decrees, and after the death of Tribonian (546) Justinian published only 18 documents. Most documents are written in Greek, which has acquired the status of an official language.
Reputation and achievements. In assessing Justinian's personality and achievements, we must take into account the role played by his contemporary and chief historian Procopius in shaping our understanding of him. A well-informed and competent scientist, for reasons unknown to us, Procopius experienced a persistent hostility towards the emperor, which he did not deny himself the pleasure of pouring out on secret history (Anecdota), especially regarding Theodora.
History did not appreciate the merits of Justinian as a great codifier of law; only for this one act did Dante assign him a place in Paradise. In the religious struggle, Justinian played a contradictory role: first he tried to reconcile rivals and reach a compromise, then he unleashed persecution and ended up almost completely abandoning what he initially professed. He should not be underestimated as a statesman and strategist. In relation to Persia, he pursued a traditional policy, achieving certain successes. Justinian conceived a grandiose program for the return of the western possessions of the Roman Empire and almost completely implemented it. However, in doing so, he upset the balance of power in the empire, and, perhaps, Byzantium subsequently was sorely lacking in energy and resources that were wasted in the West. Justinian died in Constantinople on November 14, 565.
Justinian's codification drew a peculiar line under the centuries-old development of Roman law, representing a concentrated summary of its entire previous history. Therefore, the Code of Laws of Justinian, although it reflected some post-classical and purely Byzantine features, is fundamentally the source of Roman law.
In 535-555 the above three collections of Roman law were supplemented by collections of constitutions (novels) of Justinian himself, which to a greater extent reflected the features not of Roman law, but of Byzantine society and law. However, these collections were compiled by private individuals and were not of an official nature. The largest of them included 168 short stories, of which 153 belong to Justinian. Much later (in the Middle Ages), collections of Justinian's short stories began to be included in the Corpus juris civilis as his fourth book.
Chapter 2. Domestic and foreign policy of Justinian
2.1. Justinian's domestic policy
Both the domestic and foreign policies of Justinian were aimed at the comprehensive strengthening of the Byzantine state. His ideal was the restoration of the former greatness of the Roman Empire, but on a new, Christian basis. An integral part of the program for restoring former greatness was the reunification of possessions in the West.
One of the important levers of state consolidation at that time was religious policy. If its importance is great in modern states, then in the Middle Ages it was even higher due to almost total religiosity and the presence state religion. In 529, an imperial decree was issued that infringed the civil rights of non-Christians and heretics. The road to high government positions was closed for them, first of all. Only the Monophysites, who at that time were the most significant and numerous part of the followers of heretical teachings, were not subject to the decree, but they enjoyed the support of Empress Theodora. It is likely that this law primarily had in mind the pagans who still remained both in the countryside and among the educated elite. In 529, the pagan Platonic Academy in Athens was closed, which, although it did not have its former splendor, still remained a stronghold of pagan thought and non-Christianized classical education. Interestingly, in the same year in the West, St. Benedict of Nursia cut down the grove of Apollo on Monte Cassino, which was the last pagan sanctuary in Italy, where this did not require powerful state support, so it seems that Greco-Roman paganism objectively lived out its last days in that era
In 529, the Samaritan uprising began in Palestine, which lasted until 532 and was suppressed with great cruelty. The uprising was a response to religious pressure from the authorities (the religion of the Samaritans is a type of Judaism).
In 528, a grandiose work began that perpetuated the name of Justinian - work began on the codification of Roman law. “The emperor,” he believed, “must not only be adorned with weapons, but also armed with laws in order to be able to rule both in war and in peacetime; he must be both a firm defender of the right and a triumphant over vanquished enemies.” In the Roman Empire, legislation consisted of both laws ( legs), published by emperors, and republican law developed by jurists of the classical period. It was called ancient law (jus vetus or jus antiquum). The laws were not subject to repeal (this will be the case in canon law, that is, church legislation), however, new laws could well invalidate the previous ones. This created great difficulties in applying the laws. Even before Justinian, three codes were compiled, i.e. collection, Roman law - Codex Gregorianus, Codex Hermogenianus And Codex Theodosianus. In February 528, a commission of ten jurists, headed by Tribonian and Theophilus, began to operate in Constantinople, who were supposed to review these codes, as well as the laws that came out after their compilation, and create a single collection from this entire legislative body. In April 529, Justinian's code was published ( Codex Justinianus), which became a mandatory set of laws for the entire Empire.
In 530, the same Tribonian created a commission to process the “ancient law”. In a short time, Justinian's lawyers read and revised about two thousand books and more than three million lines. As a result of this work, in 533 they published a code called digesta or pandect (Pandectae). In addition to the legislative significance, this collection had one more thing - it preserved a huge number of statements and texts of the great Roman jurists, which otherwise might not have reached us. In the digests, the opinions of many of them acquired the force of law. In the same 533 they published institutions in four books that served as a textbook on the codex and digests. Formally, they were a manual on civil law and intended for students, but in essence they were a brief guide to all Roman law in force during the era of Justinian.
After all this grandiose work, a need arose for a revision of Justinian’s code, which was nevertheless completed in haste. In 534, the second edition of the code was published, taking into account the legislative activity of the previous years. However, even after this, the emperor continued to issue many laws called novellae leges-new laws, or briefly short stories. It is interesting that if all the previous cataloging of Roman law was done by Justinian in Latin, then the novellas were published in Greek, i.e. in the language of the majority of the population of the Empire, which gradually replaced the official language of the state even in the areas of legislation, public administration and military service.
All four parts of Justinian's legislation: code, digests, institutions and novellas, represented a single whole - a code of Roman law that was in force during the era of the early Byzantine Empire. In the 12th century. in Western Europe, a revival of interest in Roman law began, the so-called reception of Roman law. And this happened precisely on the basis of Justinian’s grandiose lawmaking, which European lawyers called Code of Civil Law- Corpus Juris Civilis. So, in addition to their great role in Byzantine legislation itself, Justinian’s jurists preserved Roman law for the world: most of everything that is known about it has come down to us and has been preserved thanks to them.
In January 532, an event occurred in Constantinople that shocked the entire city society and almost deprived Justinian and his wife Theodora of royal power: on January 14, an uprising began in the city, called Nika(in Greek - “conquer”). In Byzantium, the role of its capital, Constantinople, was much greater than in most modern states. Just as the Roman Empire was a state created by one city and its citizens, so Byzantium was largely an empire of one city - New Rome (Constantinople). People of Rome formally was the ruler of the empire, and the Senate was the main government institution. The election of the emperor had to receive mandatory approval of this act by the people. By the 6th century there was little left of the former polis democracy, but the opinion of the Constantinople demos was still a very significant force.
The urban population was divided into social parties with their own interests, leaders, and budget. The parties had certain religious preferences, and also represented the interests of certain classes. The formal representatives of these various interests of city residents were, oddly enough, the groups at the hippodrome - circus party. The hippodrome was not just a place for horse racing, but also the main place of communication for the capital's demos. The emperor came to the competition, so you could put forward your demands or show disapproval. Circus parties ( Dima) differed in the colors of the clothes the charioteers wore. So, at the Constantinople hippodrome there were green, blue, white and red dimas. In the VI century. the most influential were Veneti(blue) and prasins(green). The Veneti represented supporters of Chalcedonian Orthodoxy, and at the same time they were supported by wealthy sections of the townspeople; The Prasins were Monophysites and enjoyed the sympathy of the poor strata of society. It is interesting that at the beginning of the 6th century. Theodoric the Great in Rome social the differences between the circus parties were the same.
Even at the end of the reign of Anastasius, who, being a Monophysite, supported the Greens, a rebellion occurred in the capital, during which the Blues proclaimed their emperor. The humiliated emperor went out to the rebels at the hippodrome, thereby managing to pacify their anger. Under Justinian, social discontent and division became widespread. On the one hand, Justinian, as an Orthodox Christian, supported the Veneti, while his wife Theodora supported the Prasinians. Thus, both parties found support at court. However, the main conflict was not between different groups of the urban population, but between city government and imperial power. Both the Veneti and the Prasins acted as a united front during the uprising.
The main demand of the rebels was the deposition of Justinian and the resignation of several senior officials disliked by the people, primarily the cruel praetorian prefect John of Cappadocia and Tribonian. The banner of the uprising was raised by the nephews of the late Emperor Anastasius - Hypatius and Pompey. The rioters destroyed the capital's prisons, and for several days in a row fires raged in the capital and atrocities were committed. During these same days, the Basilica of Hagia Sophia burned down, on the site of which Justinian later built his majestic temple. After failed negotiations with Justinian, Hypatius was proclaimed emperor at the hippodrome. Justinian himself took refuge in the palace and was already thinking about fleeing the capital. According to Procopius of Caesarea, the official historian of that era, the only decisive and courageous person was the empress. It was she who was able to convince the emperor not to flee, but to brutally suppress the rebellion. Procopius put the following words into her mouth: “A person who has been born must die, but being a fugitive for someone who was an emperor is unbearable... If you, sir, want to be saved, it is not at all difficult. We have a lot of resources: here is the sea, here are the ships. However, think about how, after escaping, you would not prefer death to salvation. I like the ancient saying that royal dignity is a beautiful funeral attire.”
The emperor decided to stay in the capital and began decisive action, especially since the unrest had already lasted six days. The pacification of the rebels was entrusted to Belisarius, in the future the most famous commander of Justinian in his wars in the West. Belisarius and his soldiers managed to drive the rebellious crowd to the hippodrome, where, according to historians, they killed at least 30 thousand rebels. After these bloody events, Justinian's victory was certain, and the conflict between Dimami and the emperor finally decided in favor of the latter. The social and political influence of the parties became a thing of the past, and they remained, in essence, simple associations of horse racing fans. Nika's rebellion was an important stage in Justinian's struggle for control over all levers of the state mechanism.
As often happens, the onset of a new stage in the life of a city or country is marked by intensive monumental construction, which clearly indicates the beginning of a new period. Justinian's reign was no exception. Immediately after the suppression of the Nika uprising, the emperor began to restore the capital, which was significantly damaged by fires during the unrest. Justinian's most famous building is the Temple of Hagia Sophia - the Wisdom of God, which until the Turkish conquest was the main temple of the Eastern Christian world and was called the Great Church by the Byzantines. The basilica, previously built by Constantine, was destroyed during the uprising, so the emperor built the cathedral virtually from scratch; therefore, this cathedral was able to become a complete expression of the main trends of Byzantine architecture of that era.
Widespread construction throughout the state - secular, church, civil, military - required incredible financial costs. The shortage of money was a constant companion of the reign of the Byzantine emperors, and, as already mentioned, only two emperors left behind a full treasury.
One of the important features of Justinian's domestic policy was the constant struggle against large private property. In many parts of the state (in Egypt, in Cappadocia) land magnates had more power than the state. “State land property,” we read in one of Justinian’s short stories, “almost completely passed into private hands, for it was stolen and plundered, including all the herds of horses, and not a single person spoke out, for the lips of everyone were stopped by gold.” Justinian tried by all means to return to the treasury both state land and what had long belonged to large local landowners. It should be noted that Justinian was not entirely successful in his struggle against large landownership: it remained a distinctive feature of the Byzantine economy for all centuries of its existence.
2.2. Foreign policy
The foreign policy of the Empire during the decades of Justinian's reign was characterized by incredible activity. As for wars, during this time they were fought on at least three fronts: with German tribes in the west, with Persia on the eastern border and with the Slavs in the Balkans. As for Persia, during the change of rulers a peace was concluded with it in 532, which seemed very humiliating for Byzantium: it had to pay a large tribute annually. Thus, she bought off her long-time neighbor and enemy, with whom there were constant border conflicts that did not lead to any major changes on the map. It seems that Justinian chose to abandon this direction, which was unpromising at that time, but to free his hands in the West.
It was there, in the West, that the main interest of Justinian's foreign policy lay. The basis of all his multifaceted activities was the desire to restore the former power of the Roman Empire, but with Christian content. For this reason, the forces of the entire state were directed to recapture the territories of the former western part of the empire. There were two main directions - North Africa and Italy. The Emperor decided to start with Africa.
The enterprise turned out to be quite risky, since it was necessary to transport a large army across the Mediterranean Sea on ships, despite the fact that the Vandals themselves, who then owned Roman Africa, had a serious fleet. But perhaps the calculation was made on the fact that the Vandals were cut off from other Germanic tribes, and because of this they could hardly count on the necessary support. In 533, the commander Belisarius landed with his army on the territory of former Roman Africa - and the war against vandals. It was to Belisarius that Justinian was indebted for the recent suppression of the Nika uprising. Most of the victories in the West were also associated with his name. The main literary source on the wars of that time is the writings of Procopius of Caesarea, who was the secretary and friend of Belisarius and accompanied him during military campaigns. The beginning of the war was very successful, but it lasted for 15 years, ending only in 548. It took the Byzantines less than a year to conquer the Vandal state and capture their king Gelimer. Conflicts between the Vandals and the local population, both Roman and Berber, contributed to such rapid success. And they themselves were no longer the same enemy that destroyed the Western Roman Empire in the 5th century. In the publication of the codex of 534, Justinian was able to declare that “God, in His mercy, gave us not only Africa and all its provinces, but also returned the imperial insignia, which, after the capture of Rome [by the Vandals], were carried away by them.”
According to the official version, the Vandal War was victoriously completed, and Belisarius was recalled with his army to the capital. Immediately after this, it became clear that Byzantine power in Africa did not have a significant social base. The imperial garrison was defeated, and Solomon - its commander and nephew of Belisarius - was killed. Skirmishes and even soldier mutinies continued until 548, when Byzantine power was firmly entrenched after the diplomatic and military victories of the commander John Troglita.
When the war with the Vandals seemed over, Justinian's Italian campaign, or war with the Ostrogoths, began in the summer of 536. One army led by Mundus conquered Dalmatia from the Ostrogoths, and the army of Belisarius, accustomed to sea movements, easily landed in Sicily, after which it was captured and moved to the south of Italy proper. Belisarius was able to capture Naples, and in December 536 - Rome. in 540, the capital of the Ostrogoths, Ravenna, opened its gates to him, which from now on turned into the center of Byzantine influence in Italy. The captive king of the Ostrogoths was taken to Constantinople.
Despite the successful capture of Ravenna, 540 proved difficult for the Empire. This year, the Huns attacked Byzantium, and Persia, for its part, violated the peace treaty and captured a significant part of the province of Syria (along with the city of Antioch). The Empire had to wage war on all fronts. From 541 to 545, the Goths, having found a new leader in the person of Totila, the last defender of Ostrogothic independence, conquered a significant part of Italy from the Byzantines. The position of the army was complicated by the fact that during these years Belisarius was not in Italy: in 540 he was recalled to Constantinople (perhaps Justinian was afraid that the defeated Goths had offered Belisarius the crown), and then to the Persian front. in 545 peace was concluded with Persia, and Belisarius was given the opportunity to return to Italy. From 546 to 550, Rome passed from the hands of the Byzantines to the hands of Totila several times and vice versa. By 550, only Ravenna, Ancona, Croton and Otranto remained under imperial rule.
Successes in the Italian campaign of the early 50s. were associated with the name of the Byzantine commander Narses. In 552 he defeated Totila and the remnants of his army, and in 554 he defeated the Franks and Alemanni. In 554, all of Italy was returned to the Empire, as well as southeast Spain. It is believed that by 554 Justinian's wars in the West were over. in the same year the so-called Pragmatic sanction, which returned large Roman landowners in Italy their lands, once taken by the Ostrogoths. If in “mainland” Byzantium Justinian fought with large private owners, then in newly conquered Italy the Byzantine government saw them as a pillar of its influence. The document was also supposed to contribute to the economic restoration of Italy, whose economy had fallen into disrepair during the 20 years of the Ostrogothic campaign.
As for Rome, it has long lost its status as a big city and its significance was rather symbolic. However, repeated assaults and captures during the Ostrogothic War further contributed to its desolation. Now it has finally turned into a city of monasteries and the residence of the Roman bishop, and Ravenna became the center of Byzantine Italy for a long time. However, this was nothing new. The city in the northeast of the peninsula, located among swamps and protected by them from stray barbarian raids, was the real capital of the late Western Roman Empire. The center of the Ostrogothic state was located in Ravenna, and the Byzantines settled there. During Byzantine rule, it found a new life and, in addition to performing political and military functions, became the focus of Byzantine culture in Italy. When in the middle of the 8th century. Byzantines ( Romans) had to be evacuated from Ravenna, the influence of Byzantine culture affected its northern neighbor, Venice, for several centuries.
At the end of the 550s. The Empire had to once again face serious dangers in the Balkans. In 558, Avars appeared for the first time at the Byzantine border on the Danube. Apparently, the forces of the Avar Kaganate were quite limited, since instead of immediate military action they preferred to send an embassy to Constantinople. The ambassadors of the Avar Kagan Bayan asked Justinian for permission to resettle his people within the Byzantine borders on the condition of protecting the Empire from the invasion of other barbarians - the same nomadic hordes as the Avars themselves - who continued their movement across Eurasia, moving to the West from a kind of “ethnic volcano” , the epicenter of which was probably in northern China.
Before the Empire had time to come to an agreement with the Avars, a year later, in 559, the Bulgarians and Slavs found themselves at its borders. The Bulgarian Khan Zabergan captured all of Thrace and ended up at the walls of Constantinople. Belisarius led the defense of the capital, and the nomads were unable to storm the perfectly fortified city. After an unsuccessful assault, the Bulgarians and Slavs fell into a trap set for them by the Byzantine army, but Justinian decided to generously spare them, probably to avoid a capricious turn of military fortune. This time the danger was over. The Empire faced the most serious problems of the Slavic invasion and their settlement in the Balkans in the 7th century, a crisis for it in all respects. But already here the vulnerability of Byzantine power was revealed: Justinian led victorious wars in northern Africa and Spain, and at this time the heart of the Empire - Constantinople - could have been in mortal danger. This was due both to its vulnerable geographical position and to demographic pressure and migrations of nomadic peoples. The empire was not stable; this forced its rulers, political elite and people to be in a state of constant concentration of forces, which allowed the state to survive for more than a millennium.
In 562, the Empire made a 50-year peace with Persia, which ended an era of long conflicts that began in 540, when the Persian king Khusrow Anushirvan took advantage of Justinian's problems in the West and broke the "eternal peace" of 532. In 540, Persia captured Syria and devastated Antioch, but thanks to the intervention of the same Belisarius, the Empire managed to regain the lost province. The conflict, one way or another, dragged on until the early 560s, when both sides had already lost the opportunity to continue it. Thanks to the historian Menander, we know the details of the negotiations and the peace treaty of 562. Byzantium again committed itself to paying a serious annual tribute to Persia. At the same time, Justinian obtained from Khosrow religious tolerance for Persian Christians, although with a ban on further Christian mission in his country. What was very important for the Byzantines was the Persians' agreement to clear Lazika, an area in the southeast of the Black Sea coast. Thus, Persia was deprived of the right to participate in the political and commercial affairs of Byzantium on the Black Sea.
The brilliant and controversial era of Justinian the Great (as his contemporaries flatteringly titled it) was ending. In March 565, Belisarius died, with whose name many military successes of that era were associated. And at the end of the same 565, at the age of more than 80 years, Justinian died, whose reliable assistant and inspirer, Empress Theodora, died back in 548
Chapter 3. Byzantium after the death of Justinian
In November 565, without making any orders regarding the inheritance, he died at a ripe old age. The Byzantine state, for the expansion and exaltation of which he used so much effort and the integrity of which he tried to consolidate with enormous sacrifices, spiritual and material, was dying in a desperate situation, close to destruction and bankruptcy. The weakest aspect of Justinian's system was finance. Huge taxes, terrible extortion by their collectors, wastefulness of the court and chronic lack of money, for the acquisition of which any means seemed acceptable; bribing the barbarians with cash and ceding imperial lands to them; brutal exploitation of people's property, confiscation of private lands for offenses in matters of faith and denunciations of a large army of spies - this whole system kept the population of the empire numb and seemed ready to strangle any manifestation of free ideas. The bleak view of financial policy left by contemporary historians is shared by new writers. “If it were necessary,” says Gfrerer, “a more brief description of Justinian’s system, I would say that he adhered to the following program: “I own the income from all land holdings, I am the master of landed property. My cities and houses, I own the labor performed by my subjects, and my money, which is in their pockets. I alone have the right, all other people have duties towards me and must unquestioningly carry out my orders.” Theodora, as is known, had no children. The imperial family consisted of numerous nephews of the king, descended from his brother Herman and sister Vigilantia, among whom the king enjoyed the greatest favor, elevated to the rank of curopalate and who was in Constantinople in the last years of his life; the inheritance of power passed to him. was already in mature years when he assumed the throne, but his personal qualities as a ruler recede into the background in front of his energetic and ambitious wife Sophia, who inherited to a certain extent the traits of the imperious character of her aunt, Queen Theodora. First of all, it was necessary to reckon with the devastated treasury and the extremely frustrated army, which was insufficient to protect the borders threatened by the barbarian invasion. The inner peace was disturbed by conspiracies and intrigues of members of the imperial house, who tried to react against the new order of things. The king's cousin, the son of Herman's nephew, also named Justin, who seemed dangerous due to his influence in the army, was deprived of military command and exiled to Alexandria, where he was killed by order of the king. The administration is distinguished by a complete break with the previous policies of the Byzantine Empire. There was a serious danger brewing in the north and east that needed to be prevented; the Slavs and Avars in Europe, the Persians in Asia focused attention on themselves and demanded the exertion of the empire's forces. Upon his accession to the throne, he solemnly promised the Senate and the people a just and speedy trial, and through personal frugality, as well as through generous distributions for public needs from his own treasury, he made his name popular. But the misfortune was that he suffered from insanity, which became more and more noticeable over time and which prompted Queen Sophia to support the idea of appointing a successor. According to the customs of the Roman Empire, he adopted Tiberius, a committee of the Excuvites, in 574 and appointed him Caesar; Thus, from this time until the death of the king in 578, Tiberius ruled together with Sophia, and then became for a short time (578-582) the sole administrator of the empire. During his reign, most attention was devoted to events on the Persian border as a result of the war with the Persians that had begun in the previous reign. Tiberius can be credited with the fact that he chose a capable general for the Persian war in the person of the Committee of the Excubites of Mauritius, whom, shortly before his death, he married his daughter Constance and declared as his heir.
Although the twenty-year reign of Mauritius (582-602) differs little from the colorless period of Justinian’s immediate successors, it must be admitted beyond doubt that this reign marked a complete break with the old Roman influences and traditions and revealed an influx of new elements into the life of the Byzantine Empire. Despite good intentions and military abilities that could have placed the name of Mauritius highly in any other calmer time, he did not achieve positive results either in internal government or in wars with the Persians and Slavs. In Constantinople they were dissatisfied with him for his frugality in spending public funds; in external wars he was not always happy and therefore did not enjoy wide popularity. The disaster that occurred in 602 destroyed Mauritius and was accompanied by the brutal extermination of the entire royal family and its many followers in the service and wealthy class. After the eight-year reign of Phocas (602-610), with which no reign can compare in cruelty and rudeness, we are entering a new period. Amartol has an anecdote that when Phocas appeared in St. Sophia, the voice of one monk was heard: “Lord! What kind of king have you sent us!” This was followed by an invisible voice: “I could not find a worse one that would completely suit you for your sins!” Recently, even in our times, the judgment first expressed in the 18th century has been repeated: “The Slavs occupy more space on earth than in history.” This aphorism is intended to show the lack of cultural elements in the history of the Slavs; it also contains a hint of the political situation of the Slavic world, which is far from being as favorable as one might wish.
Throughout the 6th century, huge masses of Slavs concentrated and moved on the banks of the Danube. From the half of the 5th century. The Slavs send significant armed detachments from across the Danube to the Byzantine regions and devastate the southern parts of the Balkan Peninsula. In the VI century. we are already faced with an accomplished fact, with the predominance of the Slavs on the Balkan Peninsula.
Conclusion
Summing up the general results of Justinian's entire foreign policy, we have to say that his endless and intense wars, which as a result did not correspond to his hopes and plans, had a disastrous effect on the general state of the state. First of all, these gigantic enterprises required enormous amounts of money. According to the probably exaggerated estimate of Procopius in his “Secret History”, i.e. a source that must be treated with caution, Anastasius left in the treasury a huge amount of cash for that time in the amount of 320,000 pounds of gold (about 130-140 million gold rubles) , which Justinian allegedly quickly spent even during the reign of his uncle.
But, according to another source of the 6th century, the Syrian John of Ephesus, Anastasia’s treasury was finally spent only under Justin II, that is, after the death of Justinian. In any case, the Anastasian fund, which we accepted even in smaller amounts than that of Procopius, should have turned out to be very useful to Justinian in his military enterprises. But nevertheless, this was not enough. The new taxes did not correspond to the country's payment forces. The emperor’s attempts to reduce the cost of maintaining troops affected their numbers, and the decrease in the latter made all his Western conquests precarious.
From the point of view of Justinian's Roman ideology, his Western wars are understandable and natural. But from the point of view of the real interests of the country, they must be recognized as unnecessary and harmful. The difference between East and West in the 6th century was already so great that the very idea of the West joining the Eastern empire was an anachronism; there could no longer be a lasting merger. The conquered countries could only be held by force; but, as noted above, the empire had neither the strength nor the money for this. Carried away by his pipe dreams, Justinian did not understand the significance of the eastern border and the eastern provinces, where Byzantium's real vital interest lay. Western campaigns, being the result of the emperor's personal will, could not have lasting results, and the plan to restore a unified Roman Empire died with Justinian. Thanks to his general foreign policy, the empire had to endure a severe internal economic crisis.
Bibliography
1. Uspensky F.I. History of the Byzantine Empire; M.: Astrel Publishing House LLC; LLC "AST Publishing House", 2001
2. Vasiliev A. A. The question of the Slavic origin of Justinian. - Byzantine temporary book. T. 1. 1894.
3. Kulakovsky Yu.A. History of Byzantium. St. Petersburg, "Aletheia" 1996. T. II.
4. Pokrovsky I.A. History of Roman law. Pg., 1915.
5. Dyakonov A. John of Ephesus and his church-historical works St. Petersburg, 1908.
6. Gibbon E. Historical review of Roman law. - St. Petersburg, 1935.
7. Iering R. The Spirit of Roman Law. - St. Petersburg, 1975.
8. Khvostov V. M. History of Roman law. - M., 1992.
9. Duvernois N. The importance of Roman law for Russian lawyers. -Yaroslavl, 1972.
10. Muromtsev S. Civil law of Ancient Rome. - M., 1983.
11. History of the state and law of foreign countries. - M., 1988.
I. Beginning of the dynasty of Justinian.- II. The character, politics and environment of Justinian. - III. Justinian's foreign policy.- IV. Internal rule of Justinian.- V. Byzantine culture in the VI century.- VI. Destruction of Justinian's cause (565-610)
I. THE BEGINNING OF JUSTINIAN'S DYNASTY
In 518, after the death of Anastasius, a rather dark intrigue brought the chief of the guard, Justin, to the throne. He was a peasant from Macedonia, who about fifty years ago came to Constantinople in search of his fortune, brave, but completely illiterate and a soldier who had no experience in state affairs. That is why this upstart, who became the founder of a dynasty at the age of about 70, would have been very difficult with the power entrusted to him if he had not had an adviser in the person of his nephew Justinian.
A native of Macedonia like Justin - the romantic tradition that makes him a Slav arose at a much later time and has no historical value - Justinian, at the invitation of his uncle, came to Constantinople as a youth, where he received a full Roman and Christian education. He (29) had experience in business, had a mature mind, an established character - everything necessary to become an assistant to the new ruler. Indeed, from 518 to 527 he effectively ruled on behalf of Justin, awaiting an independent reign that lasted from 527 to 565.
Thus, Justinian controlled the destinies of the Eastern Roman Empire for almost half a century; he left a deep mark on the era dominated by his majestic appearance, for his will alone was enough to stop the natural evolution that carried the empire towards the East.
Under his influence, from the very beginning of Justin's reign, a new political orientation was determined. The first concern of the Constantinople government was to reconcile with Rome and put an end to the schism; In order to cement the alliance and give the pope a pledge of his zeal in orthodoxy, Justinian for three years (518-521) fiercely persecuted the Monophysites throughout the East. This rapprochement with Rome strengthened the new dynasty. In addition, Justinian very far-sightedly managed to take the necessary measures to ensure the strength of the regime. He freed himself from Vitalian, his most terrible enemy; He gained particular popularity thanks to his generosity and love of luxury. From now on, Justinian began to dream of more: he perfectly understood the significance that an alliance with the papacy could have for his future ambitious plans; That is why, when Pope John, the first Roman high priest to visit the new Rome, appeared in Constantinople in 525, he was given a solemn reception in the capital; Justinian felt how the West liked such behavior, how it inevitably led to comparisons between the pious emperors who ruled in Constantinople and the Arian barbarian kings who dominated Africa and Italy. Thus Justinian cherished great plans when, after the death of Justin, which followed in 527, he became the sole ruler of Byzantium. (thirty)
II CHARACTER, POLITICS AND ENVIRONMENT OF JUSTINIAN
Justinian is completely different from his predecessors, the sovereigns of the 5th century. This upstart, who sat on the throne of the Caesars, wanted to be a Roman emperor, and indeed he was the last great emperor of Rome. However, despite his undeniable diligence and hard work - one of the courtiers spoke of him: “the emperor who never sleeps” - despite his genuine concern for order and sincere concern for good administration, Justinian, due to his suspicious and jealous despotism, naive ambition, restless activity, combined with an unsteady and weak will, could seem on the whole to be a very mediocre and unbalanced ruler if he did not have a great mind. This Macedonian peasant was a noble representative of two great ideas: the idea of empire and the idea of Christianity; and because he had these two ideas, his name remains immortal in history.
Filled with memories of the greatness of Rome, Justinian dreamed of restoring the Roman Empire to what it had once been, strengthening the inviolable rights that Byzantium, the heir of Rome, retained over the western barbarian kingdoms, and restoring the unity of the Roman world. Heir to the Caesars, he wanted, like them, to be a living law, the most complete embodiment of absolute power and at the same time an infallible legislator and reformer, caring for order in the empire. Finally, proud of his imperial rank, he wanted to decorate it with all the pomp and splendor; the splendor of his buildings, the splendor of his court, the somewhat childish way of calling by his name (“Justinian’s”) the fortresses he built, the cities he restored, the magistrates he established; he wanted to perpetuate the glory of his reign and make his subjects, as he said, feel the incomparable happiness of being born in his time. He dreamed of more. The chosen one of God, the representative and vicegerent of God on earth, he took upon himself the task (31) of being a champion of Orthodoxy, be it in the wars he undertook, the religious character of which is undeniable, be it in the enormous effort that he made to spread Orthodoxy throughout the world, whether in the manner in which he governed the church and destroyed heresies. He devoted his whole life to the realization of this magnificent and proud dream, and was fortunate to find intelligent ministers such as the legal advisor Tribonianus and the praetorian prefect John of Cappadocia, brave generals like Belisarius and Narses, and especially, an excellent adviser in the person of “the most honorable, God-given wife ”, the one whom he liked to call “his most tender charm”, in the Empress Theodora.
Theodora also came from the people. The daughter of a bear keeper from the hippodrome, she, according to the gossip of Procopius in The Secret History, infuriated her contemporaries with her life as a fashionable actress, the noise of her adventures, and most of all, because she won the heart of Justinian, forced him to marry her and with him took the throne.
There is no doubt that while she was alive - Theodora died in 548 - she exercised enormous influence on the emperor and ruled the empire to the same extent as he did, and perhaps even more. This happened because despite her shortcomings - she loved money, power and, in order to maintain the throne, often acted treacherously, cruelly and was adamant in her hatred - this ambitious woman had excellent qualities - energy, firmness, decisive and strong will, a cautious and clear political mind and, perhaps, saw many things more correctly than her royal husband. While Justinian dreamed of reconquering the West and restoring the Roman Empire in alliance with the papacy, she, a native of the East, turned her gaze to the East with a more accurate understanding of the situation and the needs of the time. She wanted to put an end to the religious quarrels there that were harming the peace and power of the empire, to return the apostate peoples of Syria and Egypt through various concessions and a policy of broad religious tolerance, and, at least at the cost of a break with Rome, to recreate the strong unity of the eastern monarchy. And one can ask (32) oneself whether the empire she dreamed of would not have been better able to resist the onslaught of the Persians and Arabs - more compact, more homogeneous and stronger? Be that as it may, Theodora made her hand felt everywhere - in administration, in diplomacy, in religious politics; still to this day in the church of St. Vitaliy in Ravenna, among the mosaics decorating the apse, her image in all the splendor of royal grandeur flaunts as an equal to the image of Justinian.
III FOREIGN POLICY OF JUSTINIAN
At the moment when Justinian came to power, the empire had not yet recovered from the serious crisis that had gripped it since the end of the 5th century. In the last months of Justin's reign, the Persians, dissatisfied with the penetration of imperial policy into the Caucasus, Armenia, and the borders of Syria, again started a war, and the best part of the Byzantine army found itself chained in the East. Within the state, the struggle between green and blue maintained an extremely dangerous political excitement, which was further aggravated by the deplorable corruption of the administration, which caused general discontent. Justinian's urgent concern was to remove these difficulties which were delaying the fulfillment of his ambitious dreams for the West. Not seeing or not wanting to see the extent of the eastern danger, at the cost of significant concessions, he signed peace with the “great king” in 532, which gave him the opportunity to freely dispose of his military forces. On the other hand, he mercilessly suppressed internal unrest. But in January 532, a formidable uprising, which retained the name “Nike” from the rebels’ cry, filled Constantinople with fires and blood for a week. During this uprising, when it seemed that the throne was about to collapse, Justinian found himself owing his salvation mainly to the courage of Theodora and the energy of Belisarius. But in any case, the brutal suppression of the uprising, which covered the hippodrome with thirty thousand corpses, resulted in the establishment of lasting order in the capital and the transformation (33) of imperial power into more absolute than ever before.
In 532, Justinian's hands were untied.
Rebuilding the Empire in the West. The situation in the West was favorable to his projects. Both in Africa and in Italy, the inhabitants under the rule of heretical barbarians had long called for the restoration of imperial power; the prestige of the empire was still so great that even the Vandals and Ostrogoths recognized the legitimacy of the Byzantine claims. That is why the rapid decline of these barbarian kingdoms made them powerless against the advance of Justinian's troops, and their differences did not give them the opportunity to unite against a common enemy. When, in 531, the seizure of power by Gelimer gave Byzantine diplomacy a reason to intervene in African affairs, Justinian, relying on the formidable strength of his army, did not hesitate, seeking at one blow to liberate the African Orthodox population from “Arian captivity” and force the Vandal kingdom to enter the fold. imperial unity. In 533, Belisarius sailed from Constantinople with an army consisting of 10 thousand infantry and 5-6 thousand cavalry; the campaign was swift and brilliant. Gelimer, defeated at Decimus and Tricamara, surrounded during the retreat on Mount Pappua, was forced to surrender (534). Within a few months, several cavalry regiments - for it was they who played the decisive role - destroyed the kingdom of Genseric against all expectations. The victorious Belisarius was given triumphal honors in Constantinople. And although it took another fifteen years (534-548) to suppress the Berber uprisings and the riots of the dissolute mercenaries of the empire, Justinian could still be proud of the conquest of most of Africa and arrogantly appropriated the title of Emperor of the Vandals and Africans.
The Ostrogoths of Italy did not move during the defeat of the Vandal kingdom. Soon it was their turn. The murder of Amalasuntha, daughter of the great Theodoric, by her husband Theodagatus (534) gave Justinian the occasion to intervene; this time, however, the war was more difficult and prolonged; despite the success (34) of Belisarius, who conquered Sicily (535), captured Naples, then Rome, where he1 besieged the new Ostrogothic king Vitiges for a whole year (March 537-March 538), and then captured Ravenna (540) and brought a prisoner Vitiges at the feet of the emperor, the Goths recovered again under the leadership of the clever and energetic Totilla, Belisarius, sent with insufficient forces to Italy, was defeated (544-548); it took the energy of Narses to suppress the resistance of the Ostrogoths at Tagina (552), crush the last remnants of the barbarians in Campania (553) and liberate the peninsula from the Frankish hordes of Leutaris and Butilinus (554). It took twenty years to reconquer Italy. Again, Justinian, with his characteristic optimism, too quickly believed in the final victory, and perhaps that is why he did not make the necessary effort in time to break the power of the Ostrogoths with one blow. After all, the subjugation of Italy to imperial influence was begun with a completely insufficient army - with twenty-five or barely thirty thousand soldiers. As a result, the war dragged on hopelessly.
Likewise, in Spain, Justinian took advantage of the circumstances to intervene in the dynastic feuds of the Visigothic kingdom (554) and reconquer the southeast of the country.
As a result of these successful campaigns, Justinian could flatter himself with the thought that he had succeeded in realizing his dream. Thanks to his persistent ambition, Dalmatia, Italy, all of East Africa, southern Spain, the islands of the western Mediterranean - Sicily, Corsica, Sardinia, the Balearic Islands - again became parts of a single Roman Empire; The territory of the monarchy almost doubled. As a result of the capture of Ceuta, the power of the emperor extended all the way to the Pillars of Hercules and, if we exclude the part of the coast preserved by the Visigoths in Spain and Septimania and the Franks in Provence, it can be said that the Mediterranean Sea again became a Roman lake. Without a doubt, neither Africa nor Italy entered the empire in its former size; Moreover, they were already exhausted and devastated by long years of war. Nevertheless, as a result of these (35) victories, the influence and glory of the empire undeniably increased, and Justinian took every opportunity to consolidate his successes. Africa and Italy formed, as once upon a time, two praetorian prefectures, and the emperor tried to return to the population their former idea of \u200b\u200bthe empire. Restoration measures partially smoothed over the war devastation. The organization of defense - the creation of large military commands, the formation of border marks (limites), occupied by special border troops (limitanei), the construction of a powerful network of fortresses - all this guaranteed the security of the country. Justinian could be proud that he had restored that perfect peace, that “perfect order” in the West, which seemed to him the sign of a truly civilized state.
Wars in the East. Unfortunately, these large enterprises exhausted the empire and caused it to neglect the East. The East took revenge for itself in the most terrible way.
The First Persian War (527-532) was only a harbinger of the danger that threatened. Since neither opponent went very far, the issue of the struggle remained undecided; Belisarius's victory at Dara (530) was offset by his defeat at Callinicus (531), and both sides were forced to conclude an unstable peace (532). But the new Persian king Khosroy Anushirvan (531-579), active and ambitious, was not one of those who could be satisfied with such results. Seeing that Byzantium was busy in the West, especially concerned about the projects of world domination, which Justinian did not hide, he rushed to Syria in 540 and took Antioch; in 541, he invaded the Laz country and captured Petra; in 542 he destroyed Commagene; in 543 he defeated the Greeks in Armenia; in 544 he devastated Mesopotamia. Belisarius himself was unable to defeat him. It was necessary to conclude a truce (545), which was renewed many times, and in 562 a peace was signed for fifty years, according to which Justinian undertook to pay tribute to the “great king” and abandoned any attempt to preach Christianity on Persian territory; but although at this price he preserved the country of the Laz, ancient Colchis, the Persian threat (36) after this long and devastating war did not become less terrifying for the future.
At the same time, in Europe, the border on the Danube succumbed to the pressure of the barbarians. In 540, the Huns put Thrace, Illyria, Greece to fire and sword up to the Isthmus of Corinth and reached the approaches to Constantinople; in 547 and 551. the Slavs devastated Illyria, and in 552 they threatened Thessalonica; in 559 the Huns again appeared before the capital, saved with great difficulty thanks to the courage of old Belisarius.
In addition, Avars appear on the stage. Of course, none of these invasions established lasting foreign domination of the empire. But still, the Balkan Peninsula was brutally devastated. The Empire paid dearly in the east for Justinian's triumphs in the west.
Protection measures and diplomacy. Nevertheless, Justinian sought to ensure the protection and security of the territory in both the west and the east. By organizing large military commands entrusted to the masters of the army (magist ri militum), creating military lines (limites) on all borders, occupied by special troops (l imitanei), in the face of the barbarians, he restored what was once called the “cover of the empire” (praetentura imperii). . But chiefly he erected on all the frontiers a long line of fortresses, which occupied all important strategic points and formed several successive barriers against invasion; The entire territory behind them was covered with fortified castles for greater security. To this day, in many places one can see the majestic ruins of the towers, which rose in hundreds in all the imperial provinces; they serve as magnificent evidence of the colossal effort by which, in the words of Procopius, Justinian truly “saved the empire.”
Finally, Byzantine diplomacy, in addition to military action, sought to secure the prestige and influence of the empire throughout the outside world. Thanks to the deft distribution of favors and money and the skillful ability to sow discord among the enemies of the empire, she brought the barbarian peoples who wandered on the borders of the monarchy under Byzantine rule and made them safe. She (37) included them in the sphere of influence of Byzantium by preaching Christianity. The activities of missionaries who spread Christianity from the shores of the Black Sea to the plateaus of Abyssinia and the oases of the Sahara were one of the most characteristic features of Byzantine politics in the Middle Ages.
In this way the empire created for itself a clientele of vassals; among them were Arabs from Syria and Yemen, Berbers from North Africa, Laz and Tsani on the borders of Armenia, Heruli, Gepids, Lombards, Huns on the Danube, right up to the Frankish sovereigns of distant Gaul, in whose churches they prayed for the Roman emperor. Constantinople, where Justinian solemnly received the barbarian sovereigns, seemed to be the capital of the world. And although the aged emperor, in the last years of his reign, indeed allowed the military institutions to decline and was too carried away by the practice of ruinous diplomacy, which, due to the distribution of money to the barbarians, aroused their dangerous lusts, it is nevertheless certain that as long as the empire was strong enough to defend itself, its diplomacy , operating with the support of weapons, seemed to contemporaries a miracle of prudence, subtlety and insight; Despite the heavy sacrifices that Justinian's enormous ambition cost the empire, even his detractors admitted that “the natural desire of an emperor with a great soul is the desire to expand the boundaries of the empire and make it more glorious” (Procopius).
IV INTERNAL RULE OF JUSTINIAN
The internal administration of the empire gave Justinian no less concern than the defense of the territory. His attention was occupied by urgent administrative reform. A terrible religious crisis insistently demanded his intervention.
Legislative and administrative reform. Troubles continued in the empire. The administration was corrupt and corrupt; disorder and poverty reigned in the provinces; the legal proceedings, due to the uncertainty of the laws, were arbitrary and biased. (38) One of the most serious consequences of this state of affairs was the very poor collection of taxes. Justinian's love of order, desire for administrative centralization, and concern for the public good were too developed for him to tolerate such a state of affairs. Besides this, he constantly needed money for his great endeavors.
So he undertook a double reform. To give the empire “firm and immutable laws,” he entrusted his minister Tribonian with great legislative work. A commission convened in 528 to reform the code collected and classified into a single body the main imperial regulations promulgated since the era of Hadrian. This was the Code of Justinian, published in 529 and reprinted in 534. It was followed by the Digests or Pandects, in which a new commission appointed in 530 collected and classified the most important extracts from the works of the great jurists of the second and third centuries, - a huge work completed in 533, the Institutions - a manual intended for students - summarized the principles of the new law. Finally, the collection of new decrees published by Justinian between 534 and 565 was supplemented by an impressive monument known as the Corpus juris civilis.
Justinian was so proud of this great legislative creation that he forbade it to be touched in the future or altered by any comments, and in the schools of law reorganized at Constantinople, Beirut and Rome, he made it the inviolable basis for legal education. And indeed, despite some shortcomings, despite the haste in work, which caused repetitions and contradictions, despite the pitiful appearance of the excerpts from the most beautiful monuments of Roman law included in the code, it was a truly great creation, one of the most fruitful for the progress of mankind. If Justinian's law provided the rationale for the absolute power of the emperor, it later preserved and recreated the idea of state and social organization in the medieval world. In addition, it infused into the harsh old Roman law a new spirit of Christianity and thus (39) introduced into the law a hitherto unknown concern for social justice, morality and humanity.
In order to transform the administration and court, Justinian promulgated two important decrees in 535, establishing new duties for all officials and requiring them, above all, to be scrupulously honest in governing their subjects. At the same time, the emperor abolished the sale of positions, increased salaries, destroyed useless institutions, and united a number of provinces in order to better ensure order and civil and military authority there. This was the beginning of a reform that was to have significant consequences for the administrative history of the empire. He reorganized the judicial administration and police in the capital; throughout the empire he carried out extensive public works, forced the construction of roads, bridges, aqueducts, baths, theaters, churches, and with unheard-of luxury he rebuilt Constantinople, partially destroyed by the uprising of 532. Finally, through skillful economic policies, Justinian achieved the development of rich industry and trade in the empire and, as was his habit, he boasted that “with his magnificent undertakings he gave the state a new flourishing.” However, in reality, despite the good intentions of the emperor, the administrative reform failed. The enormous burden of expenditure and the resulting constant need for money established a cruel fiscal tyranny that exhausted the empire and reduced it to poverty. Of all the great transformations, only one succeeded: in 541, for reasons of economy, the consulate was destroyed.
Religious politics. Like all the emperors who succeeded Constantine to the throne, Justinian was involved in the church as much because the interests of the state required it as because of his personal inclination to theological disputes. To better emphasize his pious zeal, he severely persecuted heretics, in 529 ordered the closure of the Athenian university, where several pagan teachers still secretly remained, and fiercely persecuted schismatics. In addition, he knew how to rule the church like a master, and in exchange for the patronage and favors with which he showered it, he despotically and rudely prescribed his will to it, openly calling himself “emperor and priest.” Nevertheless, he repeatedly found himself in difficulty, not knowing what line of conduct he should follow. For the success of his Western enterprises it was necessary for him to maintain the established harmony with the papacy; in order to restore political and moral unity in the East, it was necessary to spare the Monophysites, very numerous and influential in Egypt, Syria, Mesopotamia, and Armenia. Often the emperor did not know what to decide in the face of Rome, which demanded the condemnation of dissenters, and Theodora, who advised a return to the policy of unity between Zinon and Anastasius, and his wavering will tried, despite all the contradictions, to find the basis for mutual understanding and find a means to reconcile these contradictions. Gradually, to please Rome, he allowed the Council of Constantinople in 536 to anathematize dissidents, began to persecute them (537-538), attacked their stronghold - Egypt, and to please Theodora, he gave the Monophysites the opportunity to restore their church (543) and tried to Council of 553 to obtain from the Pope an indirect condemnation of the decisions of the Council of Chalcedon. For over twenty years (543-565), the so-called “case of the three heads” worried the empire and gave rise to schism in the Western Church, without establishing peace in the East. Justinian's rage and arbitrariness directed at his opponents (his most famous victim was Pope Vigilius) did not bring any useful results. The policy of unity and toleration that Theodora advised was, without a doubt, (41) cautious and reasonable; The indecision of Justinian, who wavered between the disputing parties, led, despite his good intentions, only to the growth of the separatist tendencies of Egypt and Syria and to the exacerbation of their national hatred of the empire.
V BYZANTINE CULTURE IN THE VI CENTURY
In the history of Byzantine art, the reign of Justinian marks an entire era. Talented writers, historians such as Procopius and Agathius, John of Ephesus or Evagrius, poets such as Paul the Silentiary, such theologians as Leontius of Byzantium, brilliantly continued the traditions of classical Greek literature, and it was at the dawn of the 6th century. Roman Sladkopevets, “the king of melodies,” created religious poetry - perhaps the most beautiful and most original manifestation of the Byzantine spirit. Even more remarkable was the splendor of the visual arts. At this time, a slow process that had been prepared for two centuries in the local schools of the East was being completed in Constantinople. And since Justinian loved buildings, since he was able to find outstanding craftsmen to carry out his intentions and put inexhaustible resources at their disposal, the result was that the monuments of this century - miracles of knowledge, courage and splendor - marked the pinnacle of Byzantine art in perfect creations.
Never has art been more varied, more mature, more free; in the 6th century all architectural styles, all types of buildings are found - basilicas, for example St. Apollinaria in Ravenna or St. Demetrius of Thessalonica; churches that represent polygons in plan, for example the Church of St. Sergius and Bacchus in Constantinople or St. Vitaliy in Ravenna; buildings in the shape of a cross, topped with five domes, like the Church of St. Apostles; churches such as Hagia Sophia, built by Anthemius of Tralles and Isidore of Miletus in 532-537; Thanks to its original plan, light, bold and precisely calculated structure, (42) skillful solution of problems of balance, harmonious combination of parts, this temple remains an unsurpassed masterpiece of Byzantine art to this day. The skillful selection of multi-colored marble, the fine sculpting of sculptures, and the mosaic decorations on a blue and gold background inside the temple represent incomparable splendor, an idea of which can still be obtained today, in the absence of the mosaic destroyed in the church of St. Apostles or barely visible under the Turkish painting of St. Sofia, - from the mosaics in the churches of Parenzo and Ravenna, as well as from the remains of the wonderful decorations of the church of St. Demetrius of Thessalonica. Everywhere - in jewelry, in fabrics, in ivory, in manuscripts - the same character of dazzling luxury and solemn grandeur is manifested, which marks the birth of a new style. Under the combined influence of the East and ancient tradition, Byzantine art entered its golden age in the era of Justinian.
VI THE DESTRUCTION OF JUSTINIAN'S CASE (565 - 610)
If we consider Justinian's reign as a whole, it is impossible not to admit that he was able to return the empire to its former greatness for a short period of time. However, the question arises whether this greatness was not more apparent than real, and whether, on the whole, these great conquests did not do more harm than good, stopping the natural development of the Eastern empire and exhausting it in favor of the extreme ambition of one man. In all of Justinian's enterprises, there was always a discrepancy between the goal pursued and the means for its implementation; lack of money was a constant ulcer that corroded the most brilliant projects and the most laudable intentions! Therefore, it was necessary to increase fiscal oppression to the extreme limit, and since in the last years of his reign the aging Justinian increasingly left the course of affairs to the mercy of fate, the position of the Byzantine Empire when he died - in 565, at the age of 87 years - was absolutely deplorable. Financially and militarily (43) the empire was exhausted; a formidable danger was approaching from all borders; in the empire itself, state power weakened - in the provinces due to the development of large feudal property, in the capital as a result of the constant struggle between green and blue; Deep poverty reigned everywhere, and contemporaries asked themselves in bewilderment: “Where did the wealth of the Romans disappear?” Policy change has become an urgent need; it was a difficult undertaking, fraught with many disasters. It fell to the lot of Justinian's successors - his nephew Justin II (565-578), Tiberius (578-582) and Mauritius (582-602).
They decisively initiated a new policy. Turning away from the West, where, moreover, the Lombard invasion (568) took half of Italy from the empire, Justinian's successors limited themselves to organizing a solid defense, founding the African and Ravenna exarchates. At this price, they again gained the opportunity to take care of the situation in the East and take a more independent position in relation to the enemies of the empire. Thanks to the measures they took to reorganize the army, the Persian war, renewed in 572 and lasting until 591, ended with a favorable peace, according to which Persian Armenia was ceded to Byzantium.
And in Europe, despite the fact that the Avars and Slavs brutally devastated the Balkan Peninsula, capturing fortresses on the Danube, besieging Thessalonica, threatening Constantinople (591) and even beginning to settle on the peninsula for a long time, nevertheless, as a result of a series of brilliant successes, the war was transferred to that side of the borders, and the Byzantine armies reached Tissa (601).
But the internal crisis ruined everything. Justinian too firmly pursued the policy of absolute rule; When he died, the aristocracy raised its head, the separatist tendencies of the provinces began to appear again, and the circus parties became agitated. And since the government was unable to restore the financial situation, discontent grew, facilitated by administrative collapse and military rebellions. Religious politics further aggravated the general confusion. After a brief attempt at toleration (44) the fierce persecution of heretics began again; and although Mauritius put an end to these persecutions, the conflict that broke out between the Patriarch of Constantinople, who claimed the title of ecumenical patriarch, and Pope Gregory the Great, increased the ancient hatred between West and East. Despite its undoubted merits, Mauritius was extremely unpopular. The weakening of political authority facilitated the success of the military coup, which placed Phocas on the throne (602).
The new sovereign, a rude soldier, could only hold on through terror (602 - 610); with this he completed the ruin of the monarchy. Khosroes II, taking upon himself the role of avenger of Mauritius, renewed the war; the Persians conquered Mesopotamia, Syria, and Asia Minor. In 608 they found themselves in Chalcedon, at the gates of Constantinople. Within the country, uprisings, conspiracies, and rebellions succeeded each other; the entire empire was calling for a savior. He came from Africa. In 610, Heraclius, the son of the Carthaginian exarch, deposed Phocas and founded a new dynasty. After almost half a century of unrest, Byzantium again found a leader capable of leading its destiny. But during this half-century, Byzantium gradually returned to the East. The transformation in the Eastern spirit, interrupted by the long reign of Justinian, was now to be accelerated and completed. (45)
It was during the reign of Justinian that two monks brought the secret of breeding silkworms from China around 557, which allowed the industry of Syria to produce silk, partially freeing Byzantium from foreign imports.
This name is due to the fact that the dispute was based on excerpts from the works of three theologians - Theodore of Mopsuestia, Theodoret of Cyrus and Willow of Edessa, whose teaching was approved by the Council of Chalcedon, and Justinian, to please the Monophysites, forced them to condemn.
Its main direction is known: to restore the Roman Empire. The main stages can be clearly identified. To free his hands in the West, Justinian hastily ended the Persian War. Then he conquered Africa from the Vandals, Italy from the Ostrogoths, and part of Spain from the Visigoths. Although he never reached the former borders of Rome, he at least succeeded in turning the Mediterranean Sea into a “Roman lake” again. But then the East wakes up: again there is a war with the Persians, the empire is threatened by invasions of the Huns and Slavs. Exhausted, Justinian no longer fights, he pays tribute. With the help of deft diplomacy, he keeps the barbarians at a distance, and by building a complex and deep defensive system, he turns the empire into a “huge fortified camp” (S. Diehl).
Conquests in the West
The Roman Empire was unable to solve either the German problem or the Persian one. Trajan's enormous efforts were in vain. Julian died on the battlefield, and his successor Jovian left the left bank of the Tigris. Military campaigns 521-531 under the leadership of one of the best commanders, Justinian Belisarius, did not produce decisive results. In a hurry to finish them, Justinian concluded in 532 with the new Persian king Khosroy, despite very harsh conditions, “eternal peace” (in fact, it was nothing more than a truce). And immediately his aspirations turned to the West.
The Roman Orthodox population, who had not come to terms with the rule of the barbarian Arians, dreamed of conquering the West. The offensive began in Africa - against the kingdom of the Vandals, founded by Geiseric. The pretext was the usurpation of power by Gelimer in 531. The brilliant campaign of Belisarius, which began in 533, forced Gelimer to capitulate a year later. True, the Berber uprisings cast doubt on this victory: Belisarius's successor in Africa, Solomon, was defeated and killed. But in 548 John Troglita finally restored order. With the exception of western Morocco, North Africa became Roman again.
The campaign against the Ostrogoths was more difficult and lengthy. It began in 535, immediately after the victory in Africa, ostensibly in response to the murder of Theodoric the Great's heir-daughter Amalasunta by her husband Theodatus. Belisarius conquered Dalmatia, Sicily, Naples, Rome and the capital of the Ostrogoths, Ravenna. In 540, he pushed the captured Ostrogoth king Witigis at the feet of Justinian in Constantinople. But everything was again called into question due to the vigorous resistance of the new Gothic king Totila. Belisarius, who had a small army at his disposal, was defeated. His successor Narses was more successful and, after a long and skillful campaign, won a decisive victory in 552.
Finally, in 550-554, Justinian captured several strongholds in southeastern Spain. The Emperor took many measures designed to restore the previous organization in the returned territories, divided into two prefectures - Italy and Africa. However, he was able to carry out only part of his plans. He never got West Africa, three-quarters of Spain, all of Gaul with Provence, Noricum and Raetia (that is, the cover of Italy). The conquered territories were in a dire economic situation. There were not enough military forces to occupy them. The barbarians, driven back from the borders but not defeated, still posed a threat.
Threat from the East. Nevertheless, these incomplete and fragile results cost the empire very great efforts. This was confirmed when Khosroes, taking advantage of the fact that Justinian was exhausted by battles in the West, terminated the “perpetual peace” treaty of 532. Despite all the efforts of Belisarius, the Persians won victories for a long time, they reached the Mediterranean Sea and devastated Syria (Antioch was razed to the ground in 540). Justinian more than once had to buy a truce for two thousand pounds of gold a year. Finally, in 562, peace was signed for fifty years. Justinian undertook to pay the Persians a very large indemnity and not to preach Christianity in their country. However, the Persians withdrew from Lazica, or the country of the Laz (ancient Colchis), a territory on the eastern coast of the Pontus Euxine, which they had long disputed with the Romans. They did not gain a foothold either in the Mediterranean or in the Black Sea, where their presence would also have been dangerous for Byzantium. But a threat immediately arose on the Danube border. It came from the Huns and Slavs. The Huns periodically crossed the Danube and captured Thrace, then descended to the south and plundered Greece or headed east, reaching as far as Constantinople. They were always driven back to the borders, but these raids ravaged the provinces.
The Slavs were even more worried. Perhaps their troops invaded the empire several times already under Anastasia, but during the time of Justinian the Slavic danger, henceforth inseparable from the history of Byzantium, first appeared in all seriousness. The more or less conscious intentions of the Slavs boiled down to the desire to gain access to the Mediterranean Sea. From the very beginning, they chose Thessalonica as their goal, which already under Justinian enjoyed the reputation of the second city of the empire. Almost every year, detachments of Slavs crossed the Danube and raided the interior of Byzantium. In Greece they reached the Peloponnese, in Thrace - to the outskirts of Constantinople, in the west - to the Adriatic. Byzantine commanders always forced the Slavs to retreat, but never defeated them; the next year even more numerous detachments of Slavs appeared again. The era of Justinian “laid the foundation for the Slavic question in the Balkans” (A. Vasiliev).
Defense of the Empire
Unfinished conquests in the West, painful defense in the East: it was obvious that the empire was recklessly relying only on military force. The army had excellent fighting units (for example, cavalry), but its number did not exceed 150 thousand people, it lacked internal unity (too many barbarian “federates”) and, finally, it had the disadvantages of any mercenary army, greedy and undisciplined . To reduce the burden on the soldiers, Justinian covered the entire territory of the empire with fortifications. This was one of the most significant and most useful deeds of his reign, which aroused the admiration and surprise of the historian Procopius of Caesarea. In his treatise “On Buildings,” Procopius lists the emperor’s military buildings and notes that those who see them with their own eyes will find it difficult to believe that they were created by the will of one person. In all the provinces, Justinian ordered the repair or construction of hundreds of buildings, from fortresses to simple castles. Naturally, there were much more of them near the border and they were located closer to each other, but fortifications were also erected in the internal regions, forming several defensive lines: all strategic points were guarded, all cities of any significance were protected.
The barbarian detachments, if they still had enough strength for frequent devastating raids, had to bypass fortifications, which they did not know how to capture, that is, they could not stay in the country. The skillful organization was complemented by skillful diplomacy, rightly called “the science of managing barbarians.” In accordance with this science, the Byzantines, generously distributing honorary titles or command positions to the leaders of the barbarians, solemnly received at court, took advantage of the vanity characteristic of the barbarians and the authority that the empire and the emperor enjoyed in their eyes. The Christianization of barbarian countries was also encouraged, where the influence of Byzantium penetrated simultaneously with religion. Numerous and usually successful missions reached the northern shores of the Black Sea and Abyssinia. Finally, subsidies and peace payments were distributed among the barbarians.
However, the last technique only revealed the weakness of the others. Procopius noted that it was extremely reckless to ruin the treasury by paying compensation - this only aroused in their recipients the desire to seek new ones. However, this is the inevitable consequence of the mistake made by Justinian from the very beginning. He exhausted his strength in the West for illusory results. They came at too high a price for forced, grueling defense in the East.
In Byzantine society in the 6th century. The ideological and political role of the Orthodox Church grew. Its influence on all aspects of public life - ideology, politics, legislation, everyday life, morals - was unusually great.
Justinian's government was well aware of the power of the church and tried by all means to strengthen its alliance with it 1 . Obsessed with the idea of creating a single empire in which a single Orthodox religion would dominate, Justinian throughout his reign cared about the unity of the church no less than the unity of the state. A single state, a single law, a single Orthodox Church - these were the three pillars on which Justinian’s domestic and foreign policy rested.
Even Emperor Justin, in contrast to his predecessor, the Monophysite Anastasius, restored Orthodoxy and recognized the Nicene Creed 2. Continuing the policy of his uncle, although with some deviations, Justinian acted as a defender of Orthodoxy against any other faiths. Justinian was pushed into an alliance with the Orthodox clergy primarily by the fact that his relations with the old senatorial aristocracy were very tense and therefore he especially needed such a powerful ally as the church: after all, it had many adherents both in the central regions of the empire and in the capital itself. Justinian's broad plans of conquest in the West forced him to constantly think about an alliance with Rome and seek support from the papal throne.
Justinian's policy towards the church is characterized by two main features. On the one hand, he fully patronized the Orthodox clergy, showered them with various privileges, generous land grants and rich gifts, and took care of the construction of many churches, monasteries and charitable institutions throughout the country. On the other hand, autocratic tendencies are extremely clearly revealed in Justinian’s church policy, sometimes even considered as a manifestation of Caesar-papism. Justinian was not only a zealous defender and merciful patron of the Christian church, but also a despotic ruler, forcefully imposing his will on it 3. He always and everywhere most resolutely defended the primacy of secular power over church power, emphasizing that the emperor is the head of not only the state, but also the church, considering patriarchs and popes as his servants, sometimes cruelly treating them. Justinian demanded recognition of his supreme power over the church in all areas, including in the field of doctrine: he believed that “for the church, the emperor is the supreme teacher of the faith.” Even in matters of dogmatics and liturgics, Justinian retained the rights of the supreme arbiter. He directed the activities of church councils at his discretion, wrote theological treatises and composed religious hymns. Realizing the danger for the state of church discord, he established religious dogmas with an imperious hand, intervened in theological disputes, dictating his will where it was necessary to reconcile warring parties; however, very often his intervention only intensified theological divisions.
The primary concern of Justinian's government was to increase the wealth of the church and expand its influence over the masses. In this regard, Justinian did as much as any other Byzantine emperor of the early Middle Ages.
An important factor in strengthening the economic power of the church was the prohibition on the alienation of church property, sanctioned by the Novellas of Justinian 4. The clergy subsequently used this ban to create excised church landownership. Particularly indicative is the famous VII Novella of Justinian from 535. Its area of action was very wide: it included both the capital and neighboring cities, as well as provinces - the East, Illyricum, Egypt, Lycaonia, Lycia, Africa, as well as the western regions - “from ancient Rome to the limits of the ocean." The law also applied to churches under the authority of bishops and other patriarchs, i.e., it was comprehensive. This is what forced Justinian to publish it not in the “domestic” (i.e. Latin), but in Greek, understandable to all subjects of the empire. According to Novella VII, it was forbidden to alienate real estate that belonged to church institutions: houses, fields, gardens, as well as slaves employed in cultivating the land and state grain distributions. A ban was imposed on all types of alienation: sale, donation, exchange, long-term lease (emphyteusis), pledging property to creditors. An exception was made only in favor of the emperor 5. The law allowed him, if necessary, in the interests of the state, to exchange state property for church property.
The law contains significant provisions regarding the relationship between secular and ecclesiastical authorities. Justinian defends the idea of the supremacy of the emperor over the church. According to him, “the source of all the wealth of the churches is the generosity of the emperor.” It was he, as the supreme owner of all property in the empire, who could bestow all the benefits on the church, but for him “giving to churches without measure is the best measure” 6 . Concern for increasing the wealth of the church is the primary concern of the emperor, but the church itself must constantly remember his benefits.
Justinian also did a lot to raise the prestige of church institutions 7 . His legislation recognized local church communities as corporations for the first time; they were endowed with the rights of a legal entity and could have their own property. The clergy achieved the provision of serious privileges to church organizations 8 . In terms of its socio-economic consequences, the most important was the privilege of the church to act as the heir of any person - in accordance with his will. It was this right that subsequently ensured the rapid growth of church property through donations from believers. Until that time, only the state and urban communities enjoyed such a privilege. The ability to acquire property under a will had especially large consequences for monasteries 9 . At the same time, Justinian's legislation recognized the status of legal entity for institutions founded for charitable purposes. From now on, hospitals, almshouses, orphanages and hospices received the right to own property, albeit under the supervision of the local bishop.
All these rescripts of the emperor, published at the request of church hierarchs, testify to the persistent desire of the church to expand its privileges. They laid the foundation for its economic prosperity in subsequent centuries.
The growth of the land wealth of the Byzantine church gave rise to discontent among representatives of secular landowners, in particular the senatorial aristocracy. Procopius, the ideologist of the latter, sharply condemns Justinian for patronizing church land ownership to the detriment of secular land ownership. According to him, Justinian in every possible way condoned the fact that the clergy robbed their neighbors, seizing their lands. In trials regarding the seizure of property by the church, the government invariably sided with the clergy. “Justice,” writes Procopius, “he (Justinian) saw in the fact that the clergy always turned out to be victorious over their opponents” 10. The emperor himself, illegally confiscating property from senators and other representatives of the aristocracy, donated lands to the church, “covering his crimes with a veil of piety” 11 .
Justinian's measures to strengthen the rights of church land ownership were no less condemned by Procopius. Thus, the old Roman nobility was greatly indignant at the law, according to which the statute of limitations for filing lawsuits for the return of church lands was increased to 100 years 12 .
All this shows that under Justinian the struggle between representatives of secular and church landownership intensified significantly, and in this struggle Justinian, as a rule, was on the side of the church.
In the VI century. The church also achieved serious political concessions from the central government. The most important of them was the granting of special ecclesiastical jurisdiction to the clergy. The supreme judge of every ecclesiastic in the empire was his bishop; secular judges could not consider cases of clergy. Church hierarchs, especially bishops, were given the right to control the civil administration. In the diocese under his control, in his city, the bishop received broad judicial and administrative powers; he controlled the secular magistrates and was supposed to act as a defender of the interests of all residents of the diocese 13. True, by giving the bishops the right to supervise the local administration, the emperor reserved the opportunity for himself to intervene not only in dogmatic disputes, but also in establishing the internal routine of the life of the clergy, especially monasticism . The emperor regulated the rules for electing a new bishop and ordaining clergy, the procedure for electing abbots of monasteries and managers of “god-pleasing” institutions. Justinian took care of the strict morals of the clergy and monks, and authorized the constant supervision of the highest hierarchs over the clergy subordinate to them 14.
At the same time, the church achieved full support from the state in its clashes with political and religious opponents. Fighting against dissidents, the church introduced the spirit of religious intolerance into the legislation of the empire and established legal restrictions depending on religion. Although in words the Orthodox clergy, after the victory of Christianity, proclaimed religious tolerance as the main principle of state policy, 15 in reality, however, they soon began brutal persecution of all heretics, pagans, Jews, and apostates. Justinian's legislation gives an idea of the extremely complex atmosphere of religious contradictions in the 30s and 40s of the 6th century. Under the cover of dogmatic disputes between adherents of different faiths, socio-political clashes can be clearly traced, sometimes turning into acute class conflicts.
Justinian's dream of creating a unified empire based on a single Orthodox faith was very far from being realized. In the huge state, religious struggle was literally in full swing; there were many heretical movements that were at war with each other and disagreed with the dogmas of Orthodoxy.
Arianism took firm roots in the West of the empire. In the barbarian kingdoms of the Ostrogoths, Visigoths and Vandals, the Arian Church for a long time enjoyed the privileges of the dominant church. The Arian clergy possessed enormous wealth and many followers. In North Africa, despite persecution, the Donatists and other, more radical, religious sects retained influence. But the most fierce religious, political and social struggle unfolded in the East, where the democratic religious sects were the most dangerous for the Byzantine government; their beliefs were openly rebellious and hostile to both the dominant church and the state as a whole. Extremely revolutionary-minded sectarians were the Manichaeans, who had numerous supporters among the masses of Asia Minor, and the Montanists, whose teachings found proselytes among the poorest peasantry of Phrygia.
The Jews, very numerous in the East of the Empire, were also divided into sects, among which the most widespread was the Samaritan sect in Palestine.
A somewhat more moderate position in socio-political terms was occupied by the Nestorians, whose teachings had adherents in Armenia, Mesopotamia, Osroene, and the Monophysites - the strongest and most numerous opponents of the Council of Chalcedon, who created influential church organizations in Egypt, Syria, Palestine, Mesopotamia, Armenia, and even in Constantinople. The Monophysites here enjoyed the patronage of Empress Theodora and her entourage. The Nestorian and especially the Monophysite heresies united not only the democratic strata of the population. Among the Monophysites, rich merchants and other wealthy citizens of large cities in the East, separatist-minded land magnates of the eastern provinces, and numerous Monophysite clergy and monastics enjoyed great influence.
Having set himself the task of creating a strong centralized empire, united by a single religion, Justinian from the very first steps of his reign was faced with the acute problem of internal church struggle. The eradication of heresies became one of the central issues of his domestic policy 16 . It essentially meant a struggle not only against religious, but also against class and political opponents of the empire and the ruling church.
Under the influence of the highest orthodox clergy, Justinian elevated religious intolerance to state doctrine. He proclaimed the merciless extermination of heresies as a duty of conscience of all Orthodox subjects of the Byzantine state 17 . In 527-528 Imperial laws were issued against heretics, pagans, Jews, and apostates. Persecution extended to all non-Orthodox people, with an exception made only for the Aryan Goths who served the empire as federal warriors. Justinian's government was too in need of the services of the Gothic warriors to prohibit them from freely practicing their faith 18 . In addition, Constantinople had to reckon with the powerful Ostrogothic king Theodoric, who opposed the persecution of the Arians.
Since the time of Diocletian, the legislation of the Roman Empire has not known persecution of dissidents so severe and so grandiose in scale. First of all, all heretical cults were outlawed. Heretics were forbidden to have their own church organization and hierarchy, to perform the sacraments of baptism, marriage, and ordination to the clergy 19. “It would be absurd to allow the wicked to perform sacred rites,” 20 read one of Justinian’s Novels. The order was given to close Arian temples, Jewish and Samaritan synagogues, destroy them or turn them into Orthodox churches. All sorts of “secret gatherings” of heretics were especially cruelly persecuted.
Heretics were infringed upon in their political and property rights and excluded from participation in public life. Justinian's doctrine, according to which “it is fair to deprive those who do not worship the true God of earthly goods” 21, has found wide application in legislation and life practice. By order of the emperor, all heretics were deprived of the right to occupy public, state, military and even some municipal positions. Strict control was introduced over the composition of the bureaucracy: in order to enter the civil service, it was necessary that three respected citizens swear on the gospel and certify that the applicant was not a heretic, but professed an orthodox religion. Heretics who held any positions at the time the law was issued were immediately dismissed. They retained only the least profitable positions of curials and cohorts associated with performing duties and incurring expenses. Being forced to bear onerous responsibilities, the heretics did not dare to lay claim to any advantages 22 .
Heretics were also prohibited from engaging in free professions: they were excluded from the legal profession and professorship. The government was afraid “that by their teaching they would not draw simple souls into their own delusions” 23 . These instructions clearly show the fear that the government and clergy experienced before the ideas of free thought and disobedience to authority that were spreading among young people.
But Justinian's legislation was not limited to the infringement of the political rights of heretics. Limitations were introduced on the civil legal capacity of all persons who did not adhere to the tenets of the ruling church. The emperor declared: “It is fair that the Orthodox should enjoy greater advantages in society than heretics” 24 . The latter were severely constrained in the sphere of civil law; the law interfered with their private lives and family relationships, sowing discord between relatives. Heretics were limited in the rights of inheritance and receiving gifts under a will - the so-called legates. If among the children of a heretic father there were children who were heretics and children who were Orthodox, then the law gave the Orthodox preferential rights of inheritance over heretics. If the sons were suspected of heresy, then the inheritance passed to more distant relatives, as long as they were Orthodox. In the case where there were no Orthodox relatives, the heretic’s inheritance became the property of the state 25 . The heretics themselves could bequeath legacies and make gifts only to the Orthodox. According to the law, the heretic mother was obliged, even against her own wishes, to allocate from her property a dowry for her daughter, who adhered to the tenets of the Orthodox Church. If disagreements arose between parents regarding the upbringing of children, the law always protected the parent who adhered to Orthodoxy and wanted to raise their children in the spirit of the Orthodox religion 26 . Heretics were deprived of the right to give evidence in court against the Orthodox. Apostates, i.e. persons who apostatized from the Orthodox religion and converted to paganism or Judaism, were deprived of the right to make wills and inherit. In addition, they also could not act as witnesses in court. Even if heretics accepted Orthodoxy, they were nevertheless subject to the strict supervision of the church all their lives, and for a second fall into heresy and apostasy they faced the death penalty 27 .
Heretics, like pagans and Jews, could not own Christian slaves. In case of violation of this law, the slave received freedom 28.
Speaking against heretics, that is, everyone who did not profess the “true” faith and did not submit to the dogmas of the dominant universal church, Justinian, however, made significant distinctions in relation to various sects and creeds. Heretical sects, which were democratic in nature and threatened the very existing system, were not only limited in their rights by law, but were also persecuted. The greatest hatred of Justinian's government was caused by the Manichaeans and Montanists. The legislation shows extreme cruelty towards them.
For adherence to the Manichaean heresy, everyone faced the death penalty; only death, according to the legislator, could atone for the crimes of these “madmen cursed by God.” Everywhere it was ordered to drive out the Manichaeans, wipe out their wicked temples from the face of the earth, eradicate their very name, and put them themselves to shameful and painful execution. Anyone who provided refuge to the Manichaeans and who did not hand them over to the authorities was also punished with the death penalty. The spread of Manichaean ideas was strictly persecuted; Manichaean books were ordered to be burned. The Manichaeans were not only removed from all positions, but they were not even given the right to own property, so that, “deprived of everything, they would perish in poverty” 29.
The Phrygian Montanists were subjected to no less persecution. Temples where they practiced their cult were destroyed 30, secret meetings of sectarians were dispersed, representatives of their clergy were sent into exile or executed. All Christians, under pain of severe punishment, were forbidden to have any contact with the Montanists. Followers of the teachings of Montanus were not allowed to participate in court cases, even those concerning only the heretics themselves, and to testify not only against Orthodox Christians, but also against dissidents. They were deprived of all civil rights and could not enter into any legal transactions 31.
Government agents were sent to all corners of the empire, who, relying on military detachments, forcibly forced heretics to convert to Orthodoxy or subjected them to painful execution. Many heretics were beaten; some committed suicide 32 . In 527, a large number of Manichaeans, men and women, were burned at the stake with the greatest cruelty 33 .
The response to the persecution of the Manichaeans and Montanists was a mass flight of heretics outside the empire. Procopius writes that since the beginning of the persecution of heretics, “... the entire Roman Empire was filled with beatings and people fled from it” 34. According to the same author, “people of a rural mentality” showed especially stubborn resistance to persecution. Indeed, the teachings of Mani and Montana were widespread primarily among the poor peasantry, colons and slaves of Asia Minor and other regions of the East. Not wanting to submit to the government, the Manichaeans and Montanists in Asia Minor sometimes took up arms against their persecutors. During the bloody suppression of the Montanist rebellion in Phrygia, there were frequent cases of self-immolation of heretics. Preferring death by fire to submission to the authorities, the Montanists burned themselves alive in their temples 35 .
The flight and mass suicides of heretics were a form of manifestation of social protest of the broad masses against the oppression of the ruling church and state.
The persecution of heretics either subsided or resumed with renewed vigor. In the 40s of the 6th century. By order of the government, John of Amida, who later became the Bishop of Ephesus and wrote a world chronicle, conducted a special punitive expedition to Asia Minor: the purpose of the expedition was to eradicate heresy. In 542, he was tasked with converting all apostates in Asia Minor, especially in Lydia and Caria, to Orthodoxy. John managed to baptize about 70 thousand heretics by violent means. At the same time, according to legend, he founded 200 Orthodox monasteries and built about 100 churches 36. Thus, by fighting the Manichaeans and Montanists, the government was essentially dealing with the dangerous enemies of the ruling classes.
The persecution of quite numerous people back in the 6th century was of a somewhat different nature. pagans 37. Unlike the Manichaeans and Montanists, whose sects were plebeian in their social composition, supporters of paganism at this time were found mainly among the old Roman aristocracy. Cases of secret worship of pagan gods were not uncommon in the very closest circle of Emperor Justinian. Procopius, condemning him for limiting the rights of the senatorial nobility, at the same time attributes to the emperor selfish considerations that prompted him to begin persecuting pagans and some other heretics. “In the complete absence of any guilt,” writes Procopius, “he condemned those who were reputed to be rich in Byzantium and in every other city, accusing some of polytheism, others of heresies and the wrong profession of the Christian faith” 38. The pagan cult was prohibited by law, pagans were deprived of the right to hold any positions in the state and public service. An exception was made only for municipal positions, the occupation of which was more of a burden than a privilege. Pagans who converted to Christianity and then again retreated from the “right” faith faced the death penalty 39 .
Judging by the legislation of Justinian, the stories of Procopius and other contemporaries, it can be assumed that the struggle against the pagans reflected not so much social contradictions as the clash of various groups within the ruling class, primarily the old Roman aristocracy and the new, secular and spiritual nobility, which had achieved the establishment of its political and ideological influence in the country.
Certain shades of Justinian's religious policy are characterized by his attitude towards the Jews. Constituting a significant part of the population of Palestine, they were not subject to official persecution. However, like pagans, Jews could not hold government positions and were not allowed to have Christian slaves. In addition, Jews (as well as the barbarians who lived in the empire) were strictly forbidden to marry Christians. Such a marriage was considered an illegal relationship 40.
A more inflexible policy was pursued by the government of Justinian in relation to the Jewish sect of the Samaritans, whose teachings had many proselytes in Palestine and other eastern provinces. The Samaritans were subject to the full force of the general laws against heretics. And in 528, Justinian issued a special edict ordering the immediate closure of Samaritan synagogues and prohibiting their restoration in the future 41 . According to Procopius, this law caused “extraordinary excitement” 42. Cruel tax and national oppression, disregard for the culture, religion and customs of the Samaritans, oppression by the local nobility and the “true” clergy - all this aggravated popular discontent in Palestine. The outbreak of persecution against the Samaritans served as a signal for an open popular uprising against the Byzantine government and the church that supported it.
This uprising left such a deep mark in the memory of Byzantine society that it was described by many both contemporary to this event and by later historians and chroniclers: Procopius, John Malala, Zechariah of Mytilene, Cyril of Scythopolis, the author of the Easter Chronicle, in Theophanes’ “Chronography”, and also by Michael the Syrian 43.
The reason for the uprising was the events in Scythopolis, where, during a clash with Christians, the Samaritans burned a significant part of the city. Having learned about this, the emperor executed Archon Bass, who failed to prevent the unrest. Fearing reprisals, the Samaritans rebelled. It began in the spring of 529 and soon covered all of Palestine. The movement was given particular scope by the fact that the rebel Samaritans were very quickly joined by the Manichaean and pagan population of the province, who also suffered grievously from religious persecution 44 .
Having begun due to religious differences, the uprising immediately took on a social character: together with churches, the rebels burned estates and committed “robbery” on the roads 45 . They destroyed Orthodox churches and burned them, killed the hated clergy and nobility.
The social composition of the participants in the uprising was very heterogeneous. According to Procopius, the bulk of them were rural people, apparently the poorest, free and dependent peasants. “The inhabitants of the villages,” writes Procopius, “gathered together, decided to take up arms against the emperor and chose as their leader one of the robbers, named Julian, son of Savar” 46.
If the devastated peasantry of Palestine as a whole went under the banner of Julian, then in the cities the situation was more complicated. According to the same Procopius, the townspeople, including residents of his native Caesarea, after the publication of the law against the Samaritans, split into two groups: one belonged to wealthier people, in the words of Procopius, “reasonable and respectable”: they first compromised with the government and accepted Christianity. The majority of the trade and craft population, baptized forcibly, soon again joined the heretics, including such radical ones as the Manichaeans 47 . It can be assumed that the uprising was primarily attended by the poorest strata of the urban demos, the plebeian masses, small traders and artisans, among whom heretical teachings had particular success.
The leader of the uprising, Julian, was one of those “robbers,” as Procopius calls him, whose troops struck fear into wealthy landowners throughout the empire. The rebels proclaimed Julian king and solemnly crowned him. Thus, open war was declared on the emperor himself, and the uprising took on a socio-political character, going far beyond the scope of a clash on purely religious grounds. Julian and his troops captured the large center of Palestine, Naples, destroyed all the Christian churches there and killed the bishop of this city, Sammon. At the same time, several priests were cut into pieces and burned along with the relics kept in the churches. John Malala relates a curious story that Julian and many of his followers, celebrating their victory in Naples, staged a horse race on this occasion at the city hippodrome. The famous charioteer Nikias won the first race. When the winner came to Julian for his reward, he asked him what faith he adhered to. Having learned that Nicias was a Christian, Julian immediately ordered his head to be cut off with a sword right there, at the hippodrome, in front of numerous spectators 48 . Malala's story shows how great the enmity was then between the Samaritans and Christians.
The uprising in Palestine gradually developed into a real civil war.
In terms of its scale, the tenacity and resilience of the rebels, it was one of the most ambitious popular movements of all that took place in the 6th century. under religious slogans.
The uprising posed a danger to the Byzantine government also because the developments in Palestine were closely monitored by the constant enemy of Byzantium - Sasanian Iran. The unrest of the Samaritans began just during the peace negotiations between Justinian and Shah Kavad. The Shah of Persia immediately broke off negotiations, awaiting the outcome of the Palestinian uprising. The rebels, in turn, sent an embassy to the Persians, who were offered to enter into an alliance against Constantinople. On the contrary, the archon of Palestine and the dux of this province, Theodore Snub-nosed, reported to Justinian about the insolence of the “tyrant” Julian and asked for help 49 . Justinian, extremely concerned about the uprising in Palestine, sent large military forces to suppress it, entrusting command to Theodore, the Dux of Palestine. However, these forces were not enough to pacify the rebellious province, and Theodore had to enter into an alliance against the Samaritans with the Arab sheikhs hostile to them 50. With the help of the Arab leader Abu-Karib, the suppression of the uprising began. According to Procopius, the rebels, “having entered into open battle with detachments of the emperor’s troops, held out for some time, but then, defeated in the battle, they died along with their leader” 51 .
John Malala reports that Julian was captured by the victors, beheaded, and his bloody head, crowned, was sent as a trophy to Constantinople to Emperor Justinian 52. Terrible reprisals against the rebels immediately followed. According to Malala, 20 thousand Samaritans were killed, 20 thousand, including children and young girls, became slaves of the Arabs of Abu Kariba, who then sold them to Iran and Ethiopia 53. Procopius gives a clearly exaggerated figure of those killed during the uprising - 100 thousand people 54.
Many of the residents of Palestine fled to Iran to escape the massacre. During the negotiations that the rebels conducted with the Persians, about 50 thousand people promised to voluntarily come under the rule of the Persians, preferring their domination to the oppression of the Byzantine state. The Shah of Persia clearly wanted to use this uprising to disrupt peace negotiations with Byzantium. According to Theophanes, he allegedly intended, with the help of the Samaritans and Jews, to capture all of Palestine and take possession of Jerusalem itself, where fabulous riches were kept 55. Even after the defeat on the battlefield, the remnants of the rebel troops did not surrender: they fled to the mountains, where they continued to resist. Only at the end of 530 were the last detachments of the Samaritans surrounded in the mountains, their leaders executed, and the surviving participants in the uprising forcefully converted to Christianity.
As a result of the civil war, Palestine, devoted to fire and sword, was brutally devastated. Justinian's government, with even greater severity, continued to demand that the inhabitants of this province - both heretics and Christians - pay taxes, which had a serious impact on the situation of the entire population of the devastated country 56. Soon after the suppression of the uprising in Palestine, new, even more severe laws were issued against the Samaritans, depriving them of all civil rights 57 . Outwardly, calm temporarily established in the province, and the Samaritans, under threat of death, began to convert to Orthodoxy. But discontent in Palestine continued unabated. In 551, at the request of the Bishop of Caesarea Sergius, Justinian even somewhat softened the laws against the Samaritans 58 .
These concessions by the Constantinople government could no longer prevent a new uprising of the Samaritans, which broke out in July 555. This time the uprising began in the largest city of Palestine - Caesarea. Unlike the first Samaritan uprising, it was attended primarily by the urban population of this province. According to contemporaries, the uprising was associated with the movement of city dims and circus parties. The Samaritans and Jews of Caesarea Palestine united into the Prasino-Veneti party and took up arms against the government 59. Such a union of warring parties was fraught with especially dangerous consequences for the government. The rebellious townspeople burned churches and killed Christians. They attacked the residence of the eparch of the city (praetorium) and destroyed it. During the uprising, Stephen, the eparch of Caesarea and proconsul of all Palestine, was killed. The wife of the murdered nobleman fled to Constantinople and told Justinian about the death of her husband. Having learned about the uprising, the emperor immediately sent the commander Amantius with a large army to Palestine to pacify it. The movement was drowned in blood. According to Theophanes' story, Amantius, having found the rebels, hanged some, beheaded others, cut off the limbs of others or confiscated property. “And there was great fear in all the eastern provinces” 60.
The unrest in Palestine, however, did not stop even after the suppression of the second Samaritan uprising, and the Samaritans, who were forcibly converted to Christianity, again returned to the old faith. In order to finally pacify the population of the rebellious province, Justinian's successor Justin II in 572 again restored all the harsh laws against the Samaritans 61 .
With regard to such a widespread doctrine as Arianism, the policy of the Byzantine government was contradictory and inconsistent: it largely depended on changes in the general political and military situation. During the years of the conquest of North Africa and Italy, Justinian more than once tried to compromise with the influential Arian clergy. However, after the victory over the Vandals and Ostrogoths, Constantinople, yielding to the persistent demands of the local Orthodox clergy, openly broke with the Arians. The orthodox clergy in these conquered provinces showed complete intransigence towards their Aryan rivals. In 535, in North Africa, under pressure from the Orthodox clergy, who took revenge on them for the persecution that occurred against the Orthodox during the reign of the Vandals, a special novel was published about the restoration of all the rights and privileges of the Orthodox churches. The latter were returned to all the lands, church wealth, objects of worship seized by the Arians. Arian temples were destroyed, their property was confiscated and transferred to the Orthodox clergy, Arian priests were expelled, and the cult was strictly prohibited. According to the law, Arians were not only excluded, like other heretics, from government positions, but even their conversion to Orthodoxy did not give them access to government or public activities. According to Justinian, the Arians should have been pleased that their lives were preserved 62.
The Byzantine government and the Orthodox clergy pursued a similar policy in conquered Italy. According to the Pragmatic Sanction of 554, all the property taken from it during the rule of the Ostrogoths was returned to the Orthodox Church. In addition, the wealth of the Arian churches was confiscated on a large scale: their lands, slaves, temples and all property were transferred to the orthodox clergy 63. The confiscation of Aryan lands was carried out, according to Procopius, in the empire itself.
Procopius says that a lot of gold and jewelry were collected in the Arian temples, and the Arian clergy itself owned a large number of houses and villages, huge estates in all parts of the Byzantine state. The confiscation of these riches by Justinian, according to the historian, had a heavy impact not only on the Arians themselves, but also led to the ruin of Orthodox artisans who received work on the estates of the Arian clergy 64 .
In its religious policy in the East, the Byzantine government always had to reckon with the rich and powerful Nestorian and especially Monophysite clergy. And if Justinian at first did not want to make concessions to the Monophysites in the field of dogma and condemned the teachings of Nestorius and Eutyches 65, then in the field of politics he was forced to be much more careful. The Nestorians and Monophysites were classified as heretics only by the law of 541. True, after that all the laws against heretics were extended to them. The Monophysites were prohibited from worshiping and their churches were closed. Monophysites were subjected to infringement of their civil rights; they were prohibited from acquiring land property and even renting land plots. The wives of the Monophysites were deprived of the right to a dowry 66.
In response to persecution, the Monophysites rallied even more closely and gradually began to rebuild their church. A big role in this was played by a fanatical monk who enjoyed the patronage of Theodora, a courageous and energetic preacher of the Monophysite teaching - Bishop of Edessa Jacob Baradeus. In the 40s of the 6th century. dressed as a beggar, he walked around many eastern provinces on foot: Jacob Baradei visited Syria, Armenia, Asia Minor, and the islands of the Aegean Sea; everywhere he not only converted the population to his faith, but also revived the Monophysite church organization, ordaining Monophysite bishops and priests. Persecution by the Orthodox hierarchs proved futile, and Jacob Baradei remained elusive. In 550, he even elevated the Monophysite Paul to the Patriarchal throne of Antioch. Thus, the restoration of the Monophysite church was completed, which was called Jacobite after the name of its restorer. The strengthening of the Monophysites in the East forced Justinian's government to make concessions to them, despite the fact that this step was fraught with serious church troubles in the West.
In the 40-50s of the 6th century. relations with the Monophysites, on the one hand, and with the papal throne, on the other, turned into the most difficult problem of church politics for the Byzantine government. Conquests in the West required an alliance with Rome and, as a consequence of this alliance, the implementation of an anti-Monophysite policy: the West was sharply hostile to the Monophysites 67.
But a break with them could lead to the secession of the eastern provinces, primarily Egypt and Syria, where dissatisfaction with the world-power policy of Constantinople was increasingly maturing, where separatist sentiments were growing among the Copts and Syrians. If peace with the Western Church could be purchased only at the cost of strengthening religious antagonism with the East, then rapprochement with the Egyptian and Syrian Monophysites could only be achieved at the cost of a break with the West, with the population of the central regions and the capital of the empire, which supported Orthodoxy. Therefore, Justinian in his church policy was forced to maneuver between East and West.
As the position of the Monophysite church in the East strengthened, the need for some kind of compromise with the Monophysites became increasingly urgent for him. Justinian considered the means to make peace with them and establish unity within the church to be the condemnation of the so-called “Three Chapters” - the theological works of Theodore of Mopsuestia, Theodoret of Cyrrhus and Willow of Edessa. The works of these theologians were hated by the Monophysites, who accused them of adhering to the Nestorian heresy. After all, the Council of Chalcedon was conciliatory towards the mentioned theologians and thereby compromised itself even more in the eyes of the Monophysites. The condemnation of the “Three Chapters” was an indirect condemnation of the conciliatory policy of the Council of Chalcedon on this issue68.
Despite the protests of Pope Vigilius and the Western clergy (North Africa, Sardinia, Italy and Illyricum), Justinian achieved the condemnation of the “Three Chapters” at the fifth ecumenical council in Constantinople in 553. However, the struggle on this issue, fruitless and fierce, did not die down: it lasted for a total of about 10 years (544-554) and actually did not bring any positive results to the Byzantine government.
Although Justinian used such means of religious “persuasion” as torture, prison and execution to pacify the rebellious Western clergy, especially North Africa and Illyricum, and subjected Pope Vigilius to all sorts of humiliations and violence 69, the West actually refused to compromise with the Monophysites.
At the same time, the condemnation of the “Three Chapters” did not satisfy the Monophysites, and the East remained deaf to the emperor’s concessions. The Monophysites categorically refused to unite with the Orthodox, and instead of the unity of churches desired by Justinian, religious strife continued with the same bitterness.
So, the search by Justinian’s government for a compromise, first with the top of the Arian and then the Monophysite clergy, once again shows that they were divided not so much by social as by political and, to a lesser extent, religious differences. In the same way, the struggle of the orthodox clergy against the Arians and Monophysites was a clash of various factions within the ruling class, a struggle within a single universal church for supremacy, power, political influence and wealth. This, of course, does not mean that among the Arians and Monophysites themselves there were no oppositional and even democratic elements: on the contrary, they resolutely opposed the ruling church and government, and their participation in the religious struggle sometimes gave it a social overtones. In any case, Justinian's church policy was ultimately determined by the extremely volatile socio-political and ideological struggle in the empire, which most often took place in the form of religious clashes. Justinian's government acted completely mercilessly in relation to those heretical movements that, to one degree or another, expressed the social protest of the oppressed masses. At the same time, it was much softer in relation to other religious movements that did not have such a pronounced social character.
The consequences of Justinian's religious policy were very disastrous for the empire. The persecution of heretics gave rise not only to enormous discontent in the country, but also to a mass flight of the persecuted, especially from among urban artisans and peasants. As if summing up the results of Justinian’s religious policy, Procopius wrote in his “Secret History”: “Therefore, the people fled in large crowds not only to the barbarians, but also to everyone living far from the Roman borders” 70. And although no other period in the history of Byzantium provides such a clear example of the unlimited power of the emperor over the church as the reign of Justinian, his efforts to eradicate heresies, reconcile the Orthodox and Monophysites, and establish unity within the church essentially remained fruitless 71 .
Moreover, Justinian's authoritarian policy towards the clergy and futile attempts to rapprochement with the Monophysites caused such strong indignation, especially in the central and western regions of the empire, that after the death of this emperor his successors were forced to return to unconditional support of Orthodoxy and to the defense of the dogmas of the Council of Chalcedon .
Justinian sought to restore to the empire, which he believed would last for a long time, the order, prosperity and good governance that characterized it in the best days of Rome. The measures taken can be summarized in two main areas: legislation and administrative reform.
Rome became the founder of legal science. Thanks to her, the state gained order and unity, and the emperor gained the basis of his absolute power. Justinian appreciated the significance of this heritage, the role it could still play, and realized the need to preserve it. Justinian's legislative activity - successful thanks to the correct vision of the task and sufficient will to solve it completely, as well as the ability to find people capable of bringing the ruler's ideas to life - is the most famous and indeed the most remarkable part of his actions. What was later called the Corpus juris civilis (“Code of Civil Law”) consists of four parts: the “Code of Justinian” itself, that is, a set of all imperial regulations from Hadrian to 534; "Digest", or "Pandect" - a collection of works by famous lawyers and a summary of all Roman jurisprudence; "Institutions" - a practical textbook of law for students, and, finally, "Novels" - 154 laws passed by Justinian after 534. It is interesting to note that the "Code", "Pandects" and "Institutions" were written in Latin, at that time like most of the Novellas in Greek, so that, according to Justinian himself, they could be read by everyone - a confession that must have cost a lot in the mouth of an emperor who did not like Hellenism and was reluctant to use the Greek language.
It is impossible to overestimate the importance of everything done in this area, first of all, for Byzantium, which assimilated the most important of what constituted the civilizational heritage of Rome. But it is also enduring for the history of mankind, because in the 12th century. The Justinian Code, often used as written and still the basis of civil law, returned to the West knowledge of the principles of social life and the activities of the state. At that time, thanks to the wise guardian, which was Byzantium, “Roman law was resurrected for a new life and united the world for the second time” (I. Pokrovsky, quoted by A. Vasiliev).
Administrative reform
In a narrow sense, Justinian's administrative reform boils down to two decrees of 535, in which the emperor gave general instructions to his officials. In a broad sense, this is the whole range of measures taken by Justinian to improve the internal life of the country.
The terrible rebellion that broke out in Constantinople in 532 and known as “Nike” (the Greek word meaning “victory” or “conquer”, which the rebels shouted), clearly demonstrated the need for reforms, that the arbitrariness of officials and the policies of the emperor in general, the patience of the people has been filled. Since ancient times, people in each Byzantine city were divided into groups - “dimas”, the most numerous of which were “blue” and “green”, but now they were something like political parties. Both of them gathered at the hippodrome, the only place where it was possible to express public opinion. However, this did not go beyond the established custom: when the emperor wanted to speak to the people, he did it in the circus from the height of his box; historians have brought to us some very interesting dialogues between the emperor’s heralds and the rebels. The rebellion, which began in the circus, spread throughout the city. For six days, the rebels robbed and burned everything they could get their hands on. Promises to dismiss Tribonian and John of Cappadocia, two ministers especially hated due to the brutality of their administration, were not enough to calm the rebels. Belisarius had to resort to force - he locked the rebels in the hippodrome and committed a terrible massacre, during which at least 30 thousand people died. The bloody massacre quelled the rebellion, but Justinian learned his lesson.
Two novellas of 535, supplemented in subsequent years by special decrees, concerned the reform of the bureaucratic machine. Measures such as the abolition of useless posts, the abolition of the system of sale of hereditary positions, an increase in salaries, a mandatory oath for those taking office, the establishment of the positions of special representatives, or “Justinians”, vested with the powers of civil and military authorities, were supposed to make officials more independent from those whom they ruled, and more dependent on the emperor.
Justinian added to this persistent calls for a just court (he also reformed the judicial administration), for justice, honesty, and benevolence. Another series of measures is perhaps even more significant, since with its help Justinian tried to eliminate the abuses of large landowners. He felt that among the landed nobility, who boasted of their privileges and were independent of the central government, his opponents were hiding. By directing the blow against them, he punished not only the most dangerous enemies of the middle class, but also the worst taxpayers, which generally protected the well-being of the entire state. Justinian was right to persecute unscrupulous officials and rebellious nobles. But how did his efforts turn out? A complete failure, the main culprit of which was himself, forced to break his own laws and set an example of poor management due to the constant and increasing need for money. Justinian's expenses for the war and especially for construction were enormous. As soon as in one decree he took the side of the people strangled by taxes, in the next he already gave orders to his authorized representatives to collect as much gold as possible by any means. Justinian sold positions, introduced new taxes, and reduced the weight of coins. He made officials personally responsible for collecting taxes, which freed their hands to excesses that had recently been severely condemned. The official again turned into a ruthless and dishonest “publican”, and taxpayers, in order to avoid this disaster, replenished the clientele of large nobles, whose power the emperor was trying to weaken.
Religious politics
Striving for the revival of the Roman Empire, Justinian naturally needed agreement with the papacy. This was noticeable even at the beginning of the reign of Justin, when in 518, under the influence of Justinian, he reconciled with Rome, put an end to the schism of Acacius* and, accepting the conditions of the pope, crossed out the names of the patriarch and his successors, as well as Zeno and Anastasius, from the diptychs - two emperors who were inclined towards Monophysitism. In the first two years of his reign (527 and 528), Justinian issued extremely harsh decrees, which in a certain sense outlawed heretics, and in 529 he ordered the closure of the Athenian Academy, the last refuge of paganism. Victories in the West were accompanied by persecution of the Arians and numerous manifestations of deference to the papacy.
However, Theodora, unlike the emperor, was not at all blinded by the mirage of the West. She understood that the empire remained primarily eastern and that its strength lay in the eastern provinces. And they (Egypt and Syria - the richest of them) were decisively on the side of the Monophysites. For political reasons, as well as out of conviction, Theodora spent her entire life as a defender of the Monophysites. Under her influence, Justinian pursued a policy of tolerance towards them, received their representatives in Constantinople and allowed Bishop Anthimus, who shared their views, to ascend the patriarchal throne in 535. Pope Agapit's answer was not long in coming: he dismissed Anthimus, forced the Council of Constantinople to anathematize the Monophysites (536) and got Justinian to carry out these decisions. Terrible persecution fell upon the Monophysites everywhere, right up to Egypt.
Theodora took revenge. Despite reprisals and the most severe measures, the heresy did not disappear, its inspirers
were in Constantinople, and even lived in the palace of the empress. Thanks to ardent propaganda,
to which the emperor turned a blind eye, the dispersed communities again spread throughout
East. In 543, trying to discredit the Council of Chalcedon, Justinian even went so far as to
forced the so-called “Cathedral of Three Chapters” to stigmatize the definitions it adopted. To obtain the consent of Pope Vigilius, the emperor ordered him to be kidnapped from Rome and brought to
Constantinople, where through requests and threats he obtained a statement confirming the decisions of the “Council on
three chapters."
It seemed that the Monophysites had won a final victory, but in 548 Theodora died. The stormy protest of the West against the weakness shown by the pope left him no choice but to withdraw his statement. Justinian, once again resorting to violence, forced the new council to confirm the resolution of the “Council on Three Chapters” and, also by force, to force the implementation of these decisions, but achieved only that it caused a split in the West between his supporters and those who could not reconcile with his position. Moreover, he did not satisfy the demands of the Monophysites in the East. The defeat was complete, and again its main reason was the Western policy of the emperor. It was because of her that Justinian did not have enough strength to resist the enemy attacking from the East. It was because of this policy, which drained the country's finances, that the administrative reform failed. And again, because of it, the last opportunity to come to religious unity in the Christian East, a huge need for which would arise a century later - in the face of the Arab invasion, was lost.
Economic life
I will talk about it briefly, noting only some new aspects. One of the most significant, not only economic, but also social, factors of that time was the widespread development of monasticism, which was favored, as if competing with each other, by Justinian and Theodora, who sincerely admired the hermits of Egypt and Palestine. Many characteristic features of the Byzantine state are associated with monasticism, including those that undermined its foundations. The monks behaved too freely and occupied too large a place in the political life of the country, right up to the imperial court. They were too numerous and thereby reduced the number of recruits for the military; subsequently they began to talk about these figures themselves as “three heads,” which is not entirely true, since in the end only Theodore was convicted, and in the case of Theodoret and Iva, only some of them were condemned service essays.
Particularly dangerous were donations to monasteries - entire fortunes, almost never taxed. Lands also passed into the hands of the monks, and along with large landed lordships a new category of privileged property arose. The scale of construction and the importance attached to this type of activity is another characteristic feature of Justinian's economy, especially in the first years of his reign: roads, bridges, fortifications, aqueducts, and churches were built throughout the empire. At times, at the cost of enormous expenses, prosperity seemed to be achieved, but then financial adversity stopped this rise and taxes again fell heavily on the population.
As for large-scale trade, it was surprisingly active in several privileged centers (such as Constantinople), through which goods were exchanged between East and West. But trade relations with the Far East have become a big problem - we are talking about goods from India and China (primarily silk). They were delivered by land to Sogdiana or by sea to Ceylon, where they came into the possession of the Persians, who took them to the Byzantine border. Justinian, hoping to get rid of the costly and burdensome Persian intermediary, sought a route north of Persia through the Caspian and Black Seas, but was unsuccessful. He tried to bypass Persia from the south, instructing the Christian inhabitants of Yemen and Abyssinia to get directly to India and China, but even here he was disappointed - the empire was never able to get rid of economic dependence on Persia.
Justinian civilization
But legislative activity alone testifies to posterity in favor of the emperor, nicknamed “great”? Let us not forget that Justinian truly possessed a truly imperial sense of greatness and his influence on the era was profound enough that the civilization of the 6th century, one of the most brilliant in the history of Byzantium, rightly bore the name “Justinian”. The powerful personality of the emperor and his activities are reflected not only in any manifestations of spiritual life, but also in two examples scattered throughout.
In Ravenna, the churches of San Vitale (St. Vitali) and St. Apollinaris, striking with the most beautiful mosaics of the 6th century, should be noted. Thus, in the magnificent mosaic compositions of San Vitale, depicting the emperor and empress among the highest courtiers, all the greatness and all the splendor of the imperial court under Justinian vividly appears. There were many creations from the era of Justinian in Constantinople, but only one has survived in almost its original form: we are talking about the symbol of his entire reign - St. Sophia. The first basilica built by Constantine was destroyed in 532 during the Nika revolt. Restoring it, Justinian decided to give the new church unprecedented size and grandeur and turn it into the cathedral of the entire empire. The architects Anfimius of Trallia and Isidore of Miletus, whom he invited from Asia Minor, built the church on the foundation of the basilica, crowned by a dome with a diameter of almost 31 meters, raised 50 meters above the ground.
The Emperor allocated huge funds for decorations, sculptures, mosaics, paving floors and covering walls with marble. It was said that on the day of the grand opening - December 25, 537, which marked the apogee of his reign, Justinian, entering the new church, exclaimed, hinting at the great Temple of Jerusalem: “I have defeated you, Solomon!” In the Middle Ages, St. Sophia began to be called the Great Church, which distinguished it from all the others. It is truly a masterpiece and at the same time a synthesis of the art of the empire, which took shape in the 6th century, harmoniously combining elements borrowed from Rome, Greece, the East, and Christianity. Although Justinian often acted incorrectly and in a certain sense his entire reign was a great mistake for the fate of the empire, it must be admitted that greatness was still inherent in him. The beginning of Byzantine civilization proper should be dated to the time of Justinian.
Justinian's successors
Justinian died in 565. The years of his reign, which was always short of money, were so difficult, fatigue and poverty so great, that the people accepted the death of the emperor with relief. The subsequent period, during which Justin II (565-578), Tiberius (578-582), Mauritius (582-602) and Phocas (602-610) replaced the throne one after another, clearly revealed everything that
was artificial and excessive in the activities of Justinian. In foreign policy, Byzantium abandoned its Western orientation. Almost all of Italy was conquered by the Lombards. Left to its own devices, Rome could only rely on the energy of Pope Gregory the Great. In order to save what could still be saved, Mauritius created an exarchate in Italy with its center in Ravenna, and in Africa - the Carthaginian Exarchate, where all civil and military power was concentrated in the hands of one person, the exarch.
In the East, conflicts resumed on the Persian and Danube borders. The Persian War, catastrophic for the empire under Justinian, ended at Mauritius with a treaty favorable to Byzantium, but under Phocas the battles began again. Detachments of Slavs, united with the Avars, a tribe apparently of Turkic origin, constantly violated the Danube border. The Slavs failed to take Thessalonica, but they devastated the country and reached the Peloponnese. Some of them, of course, settled in these places, which gave rise to the famous and extremely exaggerated theory of Fallmerayer, according to which all of Greece at the end of the 6th - beginning of the 7th century. was "Slavicized".
Domestic politics continued to focus on financial problems, which no emperor ever resolved. In addition, after the death of Justinian, opposition to imperial absolutism sharply increased - both in Constantinople, where the conspirators sowed trouble, and in the provinces, where the landed nobility was worried. In religious life, contradictions suddenly intensified between Pope Gregory the Great and the Patriarch of Constantinople, provoked by the claims of Patriarch John the Faster to the title of ecumenical patriarch. All this ended with the scandalous reign of Phocas, a junior officer who received the throne thanks to the support of the rebellious people and army. Phocas ruled as a bloody and incompetent tyrant: the Persian army reached Constantinople without interference. When in 610 a small fleet under the command of the son of the Carthaginian exarch Heraclius dropped anchor off the walls of the capital, the people who had raised Phocas to the throne put him to death and proclaimed Heraclius emperor.