THE FALL OF CONSTANTINOPLE BEING THE ST0RY OF THE FOURTH CRUSADE BY EDWIN PEARS, LL.B. BARRISTER-AT-LAW LATE PRESIDENT OP THE EUROPEAN BAR AT CONSTANTINOPLE, AND KNIGHT OP THE GREEK ORDER, OP THE SAVIOUR "Der Geschkhtechreiber ist ein umgehelirter Prophet."—HEGEL NEW HARPER YORK & BROTHERS, F R A N K L I N 1886 SQUARE THE STORY OF THE FOURTH CRUSADE PREFACE. No historical subject has attracted more attention in France and Germany during the last twenty years than the Latin conquest of Constantinople. No other historical question has had devoted to it during the same period the labors of an equal number of illustrious historical students. A literary controversy has been waged, and is still waging, about several of the important questions which have arisen in connection with the subject. The larger question of the history of Constantinople and of the Eastern Empire in the Middle Ages has likewise, during the last quarter of a century, occupied the attention of a considerable number of Continental scholars, whose labors have added much to our stock of knowledge on the subject. Among the most important of their contributions a few may be here noticed. Muralt's " Chronography of Byzantine History," 2 between 1057 and 1453, is an immense aid to all students of the period treated of. It is hardly possible to mention any statement respecting any event, however trifling, within the period dealt with, for which all the authorities are not cited. Heyd's " History of Trade in the Levant during the Middle Ages " i s also a monument of careful research.2 1 " Essai de Chronographie Byzantine, 1057 & 1453." Par Edouard Muralt. Bale et GenSve, 1871. 2 " Geschichte des Levantehandels im Mittelalter." Von Dr. William Heyd. Stuttgard, 1879. PREFACE. vi Hurter, though belonging to a somewhat earlier period, has given a singularly vivid and impartial sketch of the dealings of Innocent the Third with the Eastern Empire, perhaps the more remarkable that he was himself a Protestant pastor.1 The labors of Charles Hopf and of Tafel and Thomas have thrown light on much which was obscure in the dealings of Venice with the New Rome. Krause's examination of Byzantine manners, customs, court and domestic history, gives a useful and interesting account of the social life of Constantinople.2 The valuable histories of Finlay were written before most of the works to which I allude in this preface appeared, but still show considerable insight into Byzantine history. On the influence of the Saracens and the Turks invaluable suggestions are found in Professor Freeman's " History and Conquest of the Saracens," his " History of the Ottoman Power in Europe," and in his " Historical Essays." The labors of a considerable number of other wrriters to whom I allude have been mainly occupied in elucidating the story of the Fourth Crusade, to which the second part of this volume is exclusively devoted. Contemporary authors have been carefully edited. The great work of Nicetas and those of other Greek authors have been diligently compared with the narratives of Yillehardouin and others belonging to the West. Forgotten manuscripts have been brought to light. Incidental references in charters, bulls, and other documents have been carefully collected to control, confirm, or condemn the statements in the usually accepted narratives of this por^ tion of my subject. I am indebted for many valuable suggestions to Klimke's essay on the " Sources of the History 1 " Histoire du Pape Innocent III. et de ses Contemporains." Par Fr&leric Hurter. Paris, 1867. 2 " Die Byzantiner des Mittelalters in ihrem Staats-, Hof- und Privatleben." By Professor Dr. Johann Heinrich Krause. Halle, 1869. PREFACE. 2 vii 2 of the Fourth Crusade," to Krause's History, and to Dr. Mordtmann's history of the two captures of Constantinople. 3 The latter work, as well as the " Meletai" of Dr. Paspati, are especially useful for the topography of Constantinople during the Middle Ages. Dr. Paspati and Dr. Mordtmann, the son of the author of the work just quoted, the Rev. Canon Curtis, and a number of archaeologists in Constantinople, have worked very successfully at the topography of the city, and by means of the excellent Greek Syllogos have brought to light much interesting information on the subject, and have especially produced a map of the ancient walls, embodying all the recent discoveries, which is extremely valuable. Most of the writers I have named have occupied themselves more or less with the conduct of Venice. This is a subject of controversy as old as the crusade itself. A contemporary of the Fourth Crusade, a Franco-Syrian named Ernouil, was the first to charge Venice with treason to Christendom. Other contemporary authors are quoted in the following pages who took, speaking generally, the s^me side. Gunther, a Cistercian monk belonging to Pairis in Alsace, and who died about 1210, has given us in his " Historia Constantinopolitana" many facts which are not to be found elsewhere, and was one of the few contemporaries of the crusade who appears to have understood that there was an understanding between the Sultan of Cairo and Venice.* Light has been thrown on the question by the " Devastatio *" Die Quellen zur Gesehichte des Yierten Kreuzzuges." Yon Dr. C. Klimke. Breslau, 1875. 2 " Die Eroberungen von Constantinopel im dreizehnten im funfzehnten Jahrhundert." By Professor Johann Heinricli Krause. 3 " Die Eroberungen von Constantinopel." 4 See both the text of Gunther and a notice of his life in "Exuvise Sacrae." viii PREFACE. Constantinopolitana," the discovery of which is due to recent research. This work was written, according to Charles Hopf,1 by a clerk from Germany; according to Klimke, by one from what is now Austria; according to Tessier, by a Lombard, possibly writing under the orders of Boniface himself. Robert de Clari's valuable book, " L a Prise de Constantinople," mentioned on page 250, is the most valuable contemporary account which modern research has brought to light on the Latin conquest. Indications of great value upon the conduct of Venice, and upon various other points in the history of the event in question, are contained in many of the MSS. collected together in the " Exuviae Sacrse" 2 of Count Riant, a writer who has done more than any other to elucidate the questions raised during the last few years regarding the Fourth Crusade. La Soci£t£ de l'Orient Latin, the foundation of which was, I believe, due to Count Riant, is engaged in the publication of every scrap of evidence which bears on the Latin occupation of Constantinople and other places in the Levant. Until within our own times the controversy as to the Fourth Crusade was allowed to sleep. The narrative of Villehardouin, clear, flattering to France, and singularly interesting, was taken from Gibbon to Finlay almost as a conclusive statement upon all which related to the conquest of the city. As his account coincided with others which are aptly classified by Dr. Klimke as official versions, those of more or less independent observers were forgotten or overlooked. M. de Mas-Latrie, in his " History of Cyprus," was probably the first to call attention to the untrustworthy character of Yillehar1 " Chroniques Greco-Romanes ingdites ou peu connues." Par Charles Hopf. Berlin, 1873. 2 "Exuviae Saerae Constantinopolitanse." Par Comte Riant. Geneva, 1867. PREFACE. ix douin's narrative, and to charge Dandolo with the failure of the Fourth Crusade.1 His conclusion is that the Marshal of Champagne was insufficiently informed, and was not able to penetrate the designs of Venice. This position was attacked with great ability by M. de Wailly, Member of the Institut, the learned editor of Villehardouin, who maintains that there were no secret designs to penetrate. He insisted " that the abandonment of the route for Syria by the crusading fleet was the unforeseen and accidental result of the journey of young Alexis to Venice, and that among the actors who took part in the conquest of Constantinople there were neither dupes nor traitors." Thereupon a controversy arose in which the last word has certainly not yet been uttered. This controversy has, in the main, taken the form of a discussion as to the authenticity of the narrative of Villehardouin. A great number of incidental questions have been raised which are now being hotly debated upon the Continent. On one side are M. de Wailly, M. Streit,2 and M. Jules Tessier,3 whose able examination of the causes which led to the diversion only came into my hands a few weeks ago, when the present work was already in the press. On the other side is Count Uiant, whose papers on the Fourth Crusade 4 and whose "Exuviae Sacrse" are models of careful research worthy of the study to which Du Cange devoted the exuberance of his energy and the deluge of his learning. M. Hanoteaux 6 writes on the same side. I t will 1 " Histoire de Chypre," vol. i. pp. 161,164, " Venedig und die Wendung des Vierten Kreuzzuges gegen Konstantinopel." Von Ludwig Streit. 3 " La Diversion sur Zara et Constantinople." Paris, 1884. 4 "Revue des Questions Historiques," vols, xvii., xviii., and xxiii. 5 Revue Historiqiie, Mai, Juin, 1877. 2 X PREFACE. be seen that on the whole I agree with the conclusions of Count Riant. Each of the following questions has been and is still the subject of controversy: (1.) The conduct of Venice; as to which the questions to be settled are: a. Was there a treaty with Malek Adel like that described by Charles Hopf, by which, in return for benefits conferred on the republic, Venice undertook not to convey the Crusaders to Egypt ? b. Did Dandolo intentionally make difficulties while the Crusaders were on the Island of Lido, in order to carry out his part in such treaty ? c. Was the expedition to Zara part of Dandolo's design for a diversion of the crusade, or was it due to accidental circumstances, without premeditation on the part either of Dandolo or Boniface ? Count Riant maintains that the treason of Venice was premeditated even before the arrival of the Crusaders at the Lido. Against this hypothesis M. Tessier has presented what is un- , doubtedly an argument worth attention, derived from a letter , of Innocent, calling upon the Venetian clergy to emulate the devotion of their own laymen to the cause of the Holy Land. Hurter doubts whether there was premeditation. (2.) The design and conduct of the Crusaders: a. What was the destination desired by the Crusaders, and were they agreed that this should be Egypt ? b. Were the Crusaders duped into violating their vows by acquiescing in the diversion upon Zara, or did they willingly accept the proposal as the best under the circumstances? PREFACE. XI 1190, according to one account, from cold Frederic. caught while bathing in the Calycadnus, near Seleucia. Nicetas, however, affirms that he was drowned in that river. The Greek historian, like the Western writers, does justice to his ability, his burning zeal for Christianity, his bravery, and his disinterestedness. After his death his son, also named Frederic, became the leader of the German Crusaders. Their success was, however, slight, and six months after his father's death the son perished with a good many of his followers. A hundred thousand Crusaders had left Europe. Only five thousand arrived in Palestine. Battle and disease had worked havoc among them. In all the country of North Syria, says an xlrab writer, there was not a family which had not three or four German slaves. The German army, in the words of Michaud, overcame every enemy which it met, and disappeared at the moment when its obstacles and its dangers had been overcome. Saladin was for a time everywhere suc^ cessful. While Eichard of England was on his way to Palestine, 9 130 THE FALL OF CONSTANTINOPLE. Conrad, the son of the Marquis of Montferrat, who, as we have Conrad in seen, after the defence of Isaac Angelos in ConstanJerusalem. t i n o p ] e i ia( } re fused to follow the emperor to Adrianople, had gone to the Holy Land. In the year 1191 he was at Tyre, which he saved from an attack of the Saracens. His aged father had surrendered on his parole, and was prisoner in the hands of the Saracens at Damascus. Saladin promised to release him and to give him rich possessions in Syria if Conrad would open to him the gates of Tyre. If the son refused, Saladin threatened to place the old man in the forefront of the battle. Conrad replied that he despised the gifts which Saladin offered, that the life of his father was less dear to him than the cause for which the Christians were fighting, and that if the sultan was sufficiently barbarous to kill an old man who had given himself up on parole, he would glory in being the son of a martyr. The city wTas saved. Conrad, like most of the members of his house, was full of ambition, and conceived the idea of making himself King of Jerusalem. On the death of Sybilla, the wife of Guy de Lusignan, the heir to the sacred throne was her sister Isabella, who was wife of Humphrey of Thoron. Conrad determined to marry her, but there were two obstacles in the way: each party was already married. Conrad persuaded Isabella to apply for a divorce on the ground that she had married Humphrey against her will. Conrad possessed, says Geoffrey de Vinsauf, the eloquence of Ulysses. He bribed the court and corrupted the clergy. In vain did the Archbishop of Canterbury protest against the divorce as a bigamous or, as Geoffrey says, a trigamous marriage, and threaten the thunders of the Church. A council of churchmen declared Isabella's marriage null, and Conrad, who had already been married in Constantinople, where his wife was still living, took to himself a second wife.1 1 Conrad, who succeeded to the title of Marquis of Montferrat, is said to have been thrice married. Of his first wife nothing is known. His second was Theodora, sister of the Emperor Isaac Angelos, whom he married in 1186, at the time when he was present in Constantinople and gave aid in suppressing the rebellion of Branas. The story of the mar- WEAKENING OF THE EMPIRE BY THE CRUSADES. 131 The archbishop excommunicated those who had contracted and those who had agreed to the marriage. The scandal increased the discord which already existed among the Crusaders. Guy de Lusignan still claimed that the throne of Jerusalem was his. After considerable difficulty the Crusaders agreed to leave the choice to Kichard and Philip. The two kings, however, were themselves at enmity. Each accused the other of treason, and their subjects naturally took the part of their sovereigns. In April, Kichard of England left Messina, in Sicily, with a England con- hundred and fifty galleys for the Holy Land. It weakening w a s * n connection with this enterprise that England the empire, contributed her share towards the weakening of the Byzantine empire. Isaac Comnenos had seized Cyprus and riage, as told by Nicetas, is that Isaac had sent to propose marriage between his sister and Boniface of Montferrat, that when the messengers found that Boniface was already married and that Conrad was a widower, they considered that the proposal might be made to the latter, and that it would be more advantageous, since he was the elder brother. Their promises were large. Conrad accepted, and came to Constantinople and married Theodora. After defeating Branas he refused to follow the emperor to Adrianople, alleging that he had not received sufficient honors, that the privilege of being caesar only conferred upon him the doubtful honor of wearing different colored buskins from ordinary mortals, and that he had married Theodora incidentally and attached no importance to the marriage (napepyov 6dov, Nicetas, p. 516 ; " obiter imperatoris sororem duxerat"). The account of Nicetas is in conformity with that of other historians. Robert de Clari, however (pp. 24-26), states that Conrad escaped because he learned that Isaac had meditated treachery against him, that he had sent him out to fight Branas and had shut the gate of the city behind him, and that after his success he was warned that it was not safe for him to remain. The question whether Conrad's wife was living when he rnarried Theodora is doubtful. Geoffrey is contradicted by Nicetas (p. 498) in saying that his first wife was alive. The subject is examined in the " Recueil des Historiens Grecs," ii. 421. It appears to me that the balance of evidence is in favor of,the opinion that Theodora wTas living at the time of the second marriage. See the u Itinerary of Richard I.," Bonn's Translation^. 141. The part played by the family of Montferrat in connection with the fall of Constantinople was more important than that played by any other family. 132 THE FALL OF CONSTANTINOPLE. declared himself emperor of the island. He might have continued to reign had he not attacked Englishmen. Richard's fleet was scattered in a storm. Three ships belonging to it wTere wrecked on the coast of Cyprus. The Englishmen who escaped from the wreck were imprisoned, put in irons, and their property confiscated. The act was done probably to convince Saladin that Isaac was his friend. Not content with this outrage, he ventured on an insult which a high-spirited man like Richard was not likely to forgive. Richard's sister and Berengaria of Navarre, to whom he was betrothed, sought shelter from a storm in the port of Limasol. The rebel emperor refused to allow them to remain in his dominions. The ship proceeded to Rhodes, where Richard was then residing. He sailed at once for Cyprus, demanded the surrender of the English prisoners, and, when Isaac refused, landed his army. His attacks upon the emperor ended with the conquest of the whole island and the capture of Isaac himself. He carried the usurper with him to Palestine, and gave him as a slave to one of his followers. H e ruled the island in Western fashion, established the feudal system, and soon changed a rich into a poor province. Subsequently he gave Cyprus to the Knights of the Temple. In the year 1192, Conrad, while still at Tyre, was assassinated, as I have already mentioned, by an emissary of Khasis, the Old Man of the Mountain. There were suspicions at the time that the murder was done at the instigation of Richard, but, according to the Arab writers, the suspicions were unfounded. The leadership of the Crusaders was now in Richard's hands, but his hasty temper, and the same wTant of statesmanship which characterized his reign in England, caused the victories which he gained by his valor to be fruitless. In the beginning of 1193 the pope wrote to the English clergy that, on account of the dissensions of its leaders, the crusade had not answered his expectations, and almost immediately after Richard left Palestine. With the truce signed between Saladin and Richard the Failure of the third crusade came to an end. The united forces thudcmsade, 0 £ E n g] a n ( ] ? Erance, and Germany had been com- WEAKENING OF THE EMPIRE BY THE CRUSADES. 133 pletely defeated. No expedition so numerous or so well equipped had either before or has since left Europe, and none has more signally failed. The Germans had lost a magnificent army and their emperor. The French and English had lost the flower of their chivalry. The disasters which had befallen the armies of the "West had been of a crushing character. Germans, Frenchmen, and Englishmen alike had learned, by a terrible experience, with what a persistent, unrelenting, and dangerous enemy the Byzantine empire had to deal. It is, in fact, in reading the history of so gigantic a failure, that we realize what the strength of that empire had been which had been able to hold its own against the Turks. The Crusaders in their dealings with the same enemy had had a similar experience. The imperial troops had also won almost every battle, had inflicted crushing defeats upon the Turks, had reconquered the country again and again, but new hordes, ever pressing into Asia Minor from Central Asia, had enabled the enemy to fight successfully for Islam and to drain away the strength of the empire by ever-renewed struggles. Two years after the departure of Richard, namely, in 1195, the truce which he had concluded was broken. Saladin died suddenly in 1195, and his empire was at once divided. One of his sons, named Aziz, took Egypt; the eldest, named Afdal, became possessed of Palestine and Damascus; and a third, Dahir, of Aleppo. Saladin's brother, Malek-Adel, seized Mesopotamia. When Aziz and Afdal quarrelled, Malek-Adel took advantage of their differences to make himself sultan, and became master of Egypt, where, as we shall see, he played an important part in the outrage of the fourth crusade. At the end of 1196, Henry the Sixth, the Swabian successor of Frederic, determined to undertake a crusade, and and of supple- „ , , , mentaryei- . ior this purpose sent an embassy to Constantinople to make exorbitant demands on the new emperor, Alexis. This crusade, which may be regarded as supplementary to the third, lasted but a few months and was a miserable failure. The emperor of the New Home dreaded the passage of the Crusaders through his territory, and for the first time in Byzantine history, says Nicetas, the emperor determined to 134: THE FALL OF CONSTANTINOPLE. buy peace. Five thousand pounds of gold were promised to Henry as an annual contribution towards the crusade. The emperor levied a "German tax" on the people in order to raise this sum, and for this purpose assembled what we may describe as the three estates of the realm—the senate, the clergy, and the guilds which represented the artisans. The people, however, refused to pay the new tax, and the emperor wras reduced to the necessity of raising what he could from the treasures of the churches. In 1197, Henry died at Messina, much to the relief of the population of the Two Sicilies and of Constantinople, and before the money which had been collected was remitted. The failure of the third crusade and of the supplementary increase of expedition increased the bitter feeling in the West towards the towards the Empire of the East. Again was the empire c r y r a j s e ( j that the heterodox empire had betrayed Christendom. Instead of assisting the soldiers of the West, Alexis was accused of giving aid and support to the Saracens and the Turks. The failures which were due to the division of the Crusaders themselves, to the quarrels between Philip and Richard, and, later on, to those between Richard and Conrad, and to the opposition of the Turks and Saracens, were set down to the intrigues of the Byzantine emperors. Even the dreadful mortality among the Army of the Cross in Asia Minor and in Syria was charged to the same account. The Greeks had poisoned the wells, had infected the provisions, had diverted the watercourses. No crime was too monstrous to attribute to those who had, for the most part, been passive spectators of the sufferings of the Cross. " Those who were not with us were against us," says one of the chroniclers. It must not be forgotten that during the whole period of the crusades, and to the last, this sentiment of hosecciesiasticai tility was increased by the great importance which the popes attached to the schism of the Orthodox Church. The history of the century had been one long effort to endeavor to persuade or to frighten the rulers of Constantinople into acknowledging the supremacy of the Bishop- of Rome. As these failed many attempts were made, and espe- WEAKENING OF THE EMPIRE BY THE CRUSADES. 135 cially during the last twenty years of the twelfth century, to detach from Constantinople the various churches which had hitherto acknowledged the authority of its patriarch. Considerable success had rewarded these efforts so far as the Armenians were concerned. Innocent the Third continued them with the energy which he threw into everything which he undertook. In 1199 he had induced a provincial council in Dalmatia to accept the Roman rite by promising aid against the King of Hungary. In the same year he had sent a legate to Constantinople and an agent to John of Bulgaria, to negotiate the establishment of a patriarchate, and to give that pretender the crown which the emperor denied. Two years later he sent an embassy to Servia to detach the Servians from Constantinople. Like his predecessors, he too made many attempts at Constantinople to persuade its rulers to accept the authority of the Elder Rome. All these various attempts show how great was the importance attached to this question by the popes. The feeling of irritation at their non-success found expression among the Crusaders in bitter hatred for the schismatics. It would be easy to give illustrations of this bitterness. No acts done by Protestants against Roman Catholics, or vice versa, exceed in barbarity the treatment of the Greek priests and their worship as described by Eustathius of Salonica, and these acts can only be attributed to religious hatred. Thus it came about that having in the third crusade begun by cordially hating the members of an heretical church, they ended by attributing their own blunders, failures, and crimes to the interference of those whom they thus hated. This feeling bore bitter fruit when almost immediately afterwards the fourth crusade was organized, and was undoubtedly one of the principal causes which, as we shall see, enabled its leaders to divert the expeditiorTfrom its lawful and intended purpose into an attack upon a Christian city. In another manifer the crusades contributed directly to the capture of Constantinople. They had shown to the West how greatly the power of the Byzantine empire had been lessened. Constantinople was still a city which had never been captured, but the weakness of its emperors, the ease with 136 THE FALL OF CONSTANTINOPLE. which dynastic changes had been made, and the continual troubles which existed within the city, led the military leaders of the West to believe that she would be unable to resist a combined attack by land and sea. The crusades had thus not only largely contributed to the weakening of the empire, but they had shown that weakness to the West in a way which directly invited invasion. CHAPTER YL WEAKENING OF THE EMPIRE BY ATTACKS FROM THE WEST. 1. From Normans of Sicily. AMONG the troubles of the last century and a half preceding the capture of Constantinople which came from the side of Europe the most serious were those which were caused by the inhabitants of Italy. At the very time that our fathers were feeling the heavy hand of the Normans from France, the Byzantine empire was being weakened by their kinsmen in Italy, and that at the moment when it had need of all its strength to resist the Asiatic hordes who were pouring into it. The population of the Two Sicilies was during the eleventh . century still mainly Greek. The language, except Progress of Normans in ' i * i i . ^ i © » > r among the Arab - speaking Mahometans, was not Italian, but Greek. Several cities in Southern Italy still admitted the rule of the New "Rome. The Normans had, however, conquered and settled many portions of Southern Italy, and in 1062 had won the island of Sicily from its Saracen conquerors. Robert Wiscard, and under him his son Bohemund, led the Normans into Epirus and Thessaly, and waged war upon the Emperor Alexis with considerable success until 1085, when, with the death of Robert, the Norman projects of conquest in the Byzantine empire came, for a time, to an end. The war had been costly to the empire. Durazzo had been captured by the Sicilian Normans after a long siege, in which the enemy had been once severely defeated by the Greek commander. After its capture, owing to the jealousy of Alexis of his own general, Robert had pushed across to Larissa, and the empire had been hard pressed to recapture that city. Alexis had been in such straits that he had obtained seven thousand light cavalry from Suliman, Sultan of Nicsea, to assist him. In 1107, Bohe- THE FALL OF CONSTANTINOPLE. 138 mund again invaded the empire. His army, as Finlay 1 remarks, resembled that with which William the Norman conquered England. It was composed of experienced military adventurers who joined Bohemund in the hope of plunder. The Adriatic was crossed nearly at its narrowest part, and siege was again laid to Dyrrachium, the modern Durazzo. Alexis concluded a treaty with Faliero, the Doge of Venice, by which the republic was to aid in the war against Bohemund. By the energy of Alexis and the assistance of the Waring guard the enemy was worn out, and Bohemund had, in 1108, to sue for peace and to accept it on humiliating terms. In the treaty 2 the invader declares that he repents him of what he has done; that he wishes to become for the future the liegeman, the servant, and the subject of the empire ; that he will fight all enemies of the emperor; that, in regard to cities which the emperor may choose to give him, he will receive the oath of fidelity from no one, and will take it to no one but the emperor. All these promises he swears to observe by the passion of Christ who is now passionless, by the cross which is invincible, by the gospels which have conquered the world, and by the crown of thorns, the nails, and the holy lance. In 1130, when Boger the Norman became king of the Two Sicilies, his investiture was made by a legate of the pope. This was in itself a denial of the suzerainty of, and a formal and successful attempt to detach the kingdoms from, the New Borne, and was so regarded on both sides. The power and title of the Eoman emperor was in the West held at this time by a German king. Boger made an alliance with Conrad against the Eoman emperor in the East. A desultory war followed, which was continued by William, the son of Boger, who conducted it with an energy and thoroughness which would have done credit to his namesake in England. William captured Corfu, sent his fleets into the ^Egean, pillaged Corinth and several islands of the Archipelago. In 1 2 Finlay, ii. 145, " Byzantine and Greek Empires." Given in full by Anna Comnena, book xl. ATTACKS FKOM SICILY. 139 1156 a fleet of forty vessels sailed ostentatiously to Constantinople itself, to proclaim William lord of Sicily, Aquila, Capua, Calabria, and the neighboring isles. The vessels, or some of them, worked their way up to the Bosphorus and into the Golden Horn as far as the imperial palace of Blachern. The crews discharged gilded arrows against the palace walls, and pompously proclaimed the praises of their sovereign to the assembled inhabitants. During the next twenty years the Sicilians gave little trou• ,. ble to the empire. When Andronicos seized the William at- , r tacks the em- throne in 1180, Alexis, a nephew of Manuel, who had been attached to that emperor as cup-bearer, was banished by the usurper. He fled to Sicily, and, in the language of Nicetas, discharged upon his country the venom he had amassed against Andronicos. He succeeded, probably without difficulty, in persuading the Norman king, William the Second, to turn his arms once more against the empire. Roger had done his best to plunder the southern portion of the Balkan peninsula, which lay immediately across the Adriatic. The subjects of his successors still looked in the same direction with envious eyes to the prosperous lands under the rule of Constantinople. They would probably in no case have been troubled to find excuses to justify them in their own sight in allying themselves with Alexis and in invading the country of the schismatics, who had cut themselves off from the rule of the pope and the real emperor. But they had now a fair pretext for the invasion. The Emperor Manuel had long been accused by his subjects of sacrificing their interests to benefit the Latin colonists. The Amalfians, Venetians, Pisans, and Genoese had all been the objects of his favor. They were accounted rich, and were naturally believed to have enriched themselves at the expense of the Greeks. The emperor himself had been twice married, and each time to a Frank wife. His son Alexis had espoused a daughter of Philip of France, and his daughter a Marquis of Montferrat. During the crusading troubles he had asked the pope to send a legate with the army, and had expressed a wish to Alexander the Third, the reigning pope, that Greeks and Latins 140 THE FALL OF CONSTANTINOPLE. might be united as one flock under one shepherd. All this leaning towards the West tended to make the Latin colonists, as I have already pointed out, unpopular with the other inhabitants of Constantinople. On the other hand, Manuel was a favorite with the Latins, and, on the whole, deservedly so.1 The Latins were, however, regarded by his subjects as intruders, as professors of a hostile faith, as countrymen of the enemies of Romania and as court favorites. They were accused of having monopolized nearly all the wharves on the Golden Horn, and of having persuaded the emperor to dispossess the Greeks of the best business quarters in the city. On the death of Manuel, in 1180, the struggle took place which I have already described. On the approach of Andronicos the party of the protosebastos — which was largely increased from the Latin colonists — melted quickly away. The leader was arrested by the Waring guard, armed, as Nicetas is careful to tell us, with their double-edged axes, and imprisoned.2 A few days afterwards his eyes were put out. . His death was the signal for a massacre of the on pretext of . " # massacres of Latins, who numbered at this time no less than 11S2 60,000.3 They had committed the blunder of taking sides in the quarrel between the two rival claimants for the throne, and, unfortunately for them, the candidate whom they favored had lost. They were attacked on the one side by the fleet sent across the Bosphorus by Andronicos under the command of Contostephanos, and on the other by the mob of the capital. The Greek historian tells us only that the Latins, being unable to resist, abandoned their houses, full of silver and wealth, to pillage; that some escaped by sea, but that those who were taken were killed. The Latin historian adds details which show the attack to have been much more serious in character than the account of Nicetas 1 " H avoit este li plus dons prince delmonde" " Defuncto enim domino Manuele, inclytae recordationis imperatore felicissimo," says William of Tyre, " Western Historians," " Recueil," vol. ii. 1079. 2 Nicetas, p. 323, ed. Bonn. 3 So says Eustathius of Thessalonica, who speaks of the Sicilian expedition as a war of vengeance for the massacre of 1182/ ATTACKS FROM SICILY. 141 would lead us to believe. Hatred of rich foreigners and favorites; hostility to those who had been alternately threatening and coaxing them to betray their religion, by acknowledging the supremacy of the Bishop of the Elder Rome, led to savage and brutal outrages. The Latins expected or feared an attack as soon as they learned that the protosebastos had been captured. Some knew, says William of Tyre, that there was a plot. But it is unnecessary to assume the existence of any organized scheme for plunder. They belonged to a defeated party, at a time when " t h e spoils to the victors" was the universally recognized rule. Most tried to escape from the capital. A band of Latins seized forty-four galleys which they found in the harbor, while another took possession of ships, of which there were a great number in the Golden Horn, and fled. The sick, the aged, and those who did not believe that a massacre was likely, remained behind. Of these some fought in the defence of their property, but were soon overpowered. Four thousand of both sexes, says William of Tyre, wrere sold by the Greeks to the Turks and to other infidel peoples.1 Few were spared. Women and children fell victims to an indiscriminate and reckless fury. The forces of Andronicos joined the mob and took part in a general pillage of the Latin quarter. The priests were struck down in the churches which Manuel had allowed them to build. The sick in the hospital of St. John were dragged from their beds or were burned in the building. The Latin quarters, after being pillaged, were destroyed. Cardinal John, who had been sent to negotiate for the union of the churches, was beheaded. His head was tied to a dog's tail and sent spinning about the streets. The reports of the Western writers are doubtless exaggerated, but it is evident that the massacre was an insensate outbreak of mob violence, and caused a great amount of just anger in Italy and Sicily, and it was natural that the countrymen of the sufferers should be ready to avenge their death. 1 William of Tyre, xxii. c. 12,1083, " Recueil," vol. ii.; and Eust. c. 2830, ed. Migne. THE FALL OF CONSTANTINOPLE. 142 Tancred, the cousin of King William, was appointed leader of an expedition against the empire, having: among: Tancred ap- pointed . r ° . i & its objects that of avenging the outrages of 1182. In 1185 he seized Durazzo, which wTe have already seen attacked by the grandfathers of the present invaders. More successful than Bohemund, he captured it, and then pushed boldly across the peninsula to Salonica. Aided by sack of saio- m s ^-Ge^ n e took the city by assault after a siege of nica. T I ^ slaughter of the Greeks was great, n j n e (jayg# while the loss of the Sicilians was not more than 3000. The city was sacked in the fashion for which the Normans had obtained an unenviable renown. Great numbers of the inhabitants were put to the sword. The churches were robbed and defiled with every indignity that a brutal soldiery could devise against a people of a different religion. The sacred vessels were used by the soldiers for the ordinary purposes of life, or destroyed for the sake of their metal. The wealth of the city and the neighboring country made them regard the occasion, says a contemporary, as Paradise open for them to loot. Every form of insult and torture was used to compel the inhabitants to discover their wealth, and the most gross and wanton cruelties were inflicted upon the Romans simply for the sake of insult. The soldiers polluted the wells, and in pure wantonness mixed filth with the food of those whom they met. When the Greek priests intoned the liturgy of their Church, the Sicilian soldiers howled in mockery. The hymns of the Church were sung down by indecent songs. The impression created by the account of the two Greek historians of these events is, that the barbarous soldiers took a malicious pleasure in outraging a people whom they felt to be superior to themselves in civilization and inferior in physique. The sack was followed by the ravaging of Macedonia and Thrace. Andronicos, driven to his wits' end to meet the attacks just then made upon the empire from all sides, entered into an arrangement with Saladin, by which the latter was to be allowed to conquer Palestine on condition that the Saracen should hold it as a fief of the empire. Saladin, on the other hand, was to aid the emperor in capturing Iconium from the Turks. ATTACKS FROM SICILY. 143 Meantime the emperor had prepared a fleet of one hundred vessels to send against the Sicilians. But his brief reign was nearly at an end. He was succeeded by Isaac. The war was continued under the new sovereign with fresh vigor. The Sicilians were attacked at Mosynopolis and on the plains of Demetriza, and were defeated. Salonica was retaken and the fleet in the iEgean nearly destroyed. Durazzo itself was abandoned by the King of Sicily, and the Norman fleet in the Adriatic was shattered by a tempest. In the short space of a few months the Sicilian expedition was thus utterly defeated. The rough vigor and genius for war possessed by the Normans had failed as completely before the disciplined troops of the New Rome as the Turks had always done when they had been met on anything like equal terms. The expedition, however, had weakened the hold of Constantinople over the southern portion of the peninsula, and had shown the Italians that the empire was not invulnerable. The Sicilians continued to hanker after possessions in Romania, and in 1194, in the midst of the dynastic struggles of the empire and towards the end of the weak reign of Isaac, Henry, king of Sicily, claimed from the empire the restitution of all the country between Durazzo and Salonica. Irene, daughter of Isaac, was detained in Sicily as a hostage for the satisfaction of this claim*. Isaac, fully occupied with other troubles, entered into negotiation with Henry, with the object of putting an end to the difficulty by paying an indemnity. The death of the Sicilian king, however, in 1197, before the conclusion of these negotiations, relieved Isaac of the Sicilian claims. The Normans of Sicily had thus been for more than a century a thorn in the side of the empire. The troubles which they gave arose partly out of the desire for adventure, partly out of the desire to acquire new territory, and in the most important expedition from the wish to punish the authors of the massacre of 1182. The Norsemen were tempted to invade Romania much as their fathers had been tempted into Normandy and their brethren into England. They had succeeded in diverting a considerable amount of force from the empire which would otherwise have been employed in fighting the 144 THE FALL OF CONSTANTINOPLE. Turks. Hitherto the south of the Balkan peninsula had been regarded as the portion of the empire which was least open to attack. From the moment of the appearance of the Normans in Sicily a considerable body of troops had to be continually on the spot to prevent new invasions. In this way the Normans contributed their part to the weakening of the empire. In Constantinople were many Italian colonies, whose rivalries during the last years of the twelfth century contributed not a little to the same result. Before, however, speaking of these colonies and of the troubles of which they were the cause, I propose to call attention to the conditions under which foreigners lived in the empire. The subject is one which I venture to think has been overlooked, notwithstanding the fact that in its main features the system under which Italians and others lived during the middle ages has survived down to the present day. 2. The Foreign Colonies in Constantinople and the Conditions under which Foreigners in the Empire Lived. The population of the New Rome, at almost every period of its history, has been composed of people of widely different races, religions, and tongues. Its geographical position causes it even now to have the most diversified population in the world. It is still the meeting-place of the East and West. I t contains an English colony with its own courts and ments among its own judges, who administer English law. Gerpopnlation of ^ _ & ' . . ° . . . Constantino- man and Jbrench colonies in Constantinople, similarly under their own rulers, aim at reproducing the institutions of their respective countries. No nation in Europe is unrepresented. There is also a colony of Persians, with its own laws, its Shiah observances, and its national government, transplanted on the Bosphorus. A Bokhariot bey rules over Bokhariot subjects in Stamboul. Mervians and Kurds, Cabulese and Hindoos, jostle against Montenegrins, Epirots, and Albanians. In no other city do the people of the various races which inhabit it keep so distinct from each other as they do in Constantinople. In no other European city is the CAPITULATIONS AND FOREIGNERS. 145 foreign element, taken altogether, so alien and so incapable of entering into the feelings of the governing race as in the Constantinople of to-day. Yet in no other city has the foreign element played—and the remark is true of modern Constantinople—so important a part in its history. Constantinople, indeed, can hardly be said ever to have had a population belonging almost exclusively to one race. It is a seaport, and has derived its importance from that fact, and from its having been chosen, on account of its commanding position, to be the seat of government. Like all large seaports, it attracted foreigners, but unlike other cities somewhat similarly circumstanced, it attracted them in greater numbers than it was able to absorb. Modern observers who note how readily the United States and our own colonies convert English, Irish, German, and other immigrants into American citizens or English subjects, may require to be reminded how long it was before the colonies of Huguenots who were received into England became merged into the general population, and that the Welsh still retain their ancient language. The Greek-speaking races, like the English and the French, possess through their language and religion a great power of absorbing peoples who come within their influence. But while they succeeded in the south of the Balkan peninsula in making races, who, according to Fallmerayer and his school, wTere alien in race, religion, and language, more Greek than the Greeks themselves, the capital wTas unable to assimilate the masses of people who poured into it during each century after it had been chosen by Constantine. The marvel is, not that the people of the capital failed, but that they succeeded to the extent they did during the eleventh and twelfth centuries. The people of Byzantium were not Greek in race, or exclusively Greek-speaking, at any time. The transfer of the imperial government to the New Home made it appear likely for a while that Latin might become the dominant language. The immigrants from Italy spoke Latin. Those from the north of the Balkan peninsula spoke a language more akin to Latin than to Greek. Latin was the language of the court. Greek ultimately triumphed, but it was only after a struggle analo10 14:6 THE FALL OF CONSTANTINOPLE. gous to that which took place in England, after the conquest in 1066, between Norman-French and English. During such time the Italian, or, to use the older and more appropriate term, the Latin, element in Constantinople was continually being recruited by settlers and merchants from Italy. Asiatic Greeks, that is, Greek-speaking inhabitants from Syria and Asia Minor, likewise flocked in large numbers into the capital. Armenians always constituted an important element in its population. Many of them rose to high office in the empire. From the time of Nerses, the famous successor of Belisarius, to our own day, when another of the same name has been the patriarch of his Church, and, as the Armenians express it, chief of his nation, there is no time in Constantinopolitan history wThen they have not had a considerable share in its making. Waring or Russians and other races from the North or from Central Asia have never been, during many centuries, without colonies on the shores of the Bosphorus. So long as the empire remained strong the existence of these various colonies was completely overshadowed by the rule of the emperor. When, however, the empire became weak, and especially when, during the twelfth century- the drain of men and money necessary to fight the Seljukian Turks and the other enemies who were attacking the empire increased, the part played by foreigners became more important. The proportion of foreigners to the subjects of the empire became larger. Their power from various causes increased even more than their numerical proportion would lead one to suppose. Towards the latter part of the twelfth century they formed a more important element in the population of the capital than they had ever done before. Against the 60,000 Latins of whom Eustathius speaks in 1182, there might be put, perhaps, in our own day, at the outside 25,000. Foreigners had been admitted to settle in Constantinople from a very early period. Let me attempt to trace ersweremW how they were ruled. The laws of the Elder Rome had at first made a great distinction between the jus civile, or law applicable to those who had the privileges of Roman citizenship, and the jus gentium, which was the prod- CAPITULATIONS AND FOREIGNERS. 147 uct of the law of the market, evolved by finding what observances and elements of law were common to all nations. But the jus gentium applied mainly to matters in dispute between Romans and foreigners, and not to questions between foreigners themselves. The Roman was unwilling to give the privilege of his law to a foreigner except where it was to the interest of the Roman so to do. The law of the New Rome, however, which is what jurists usually think of when the term Roman law is used, had, from the time of Justinian, two centuries after Constantine, merged the two systems of law into one in much the same way that our own Judicature Acts have merged the systems of common law and equity. There was no time, however, either in the history of Rome or Constantinople, when foreigners had the full rights possessed by Roman citizens. Privileges were conceded to them for the purpose of trade. Commercial treaties were made with the nations to which they belonged. Strangers were invited and inducements held out to them to settle in the country. In every case, however, they were to be under their own government, and they were never permitted to have all or most of the benefits conferred on subjects of the empire. They might come to the country and trade with its inhabitants, and would be protected in so doing, but they must govern themselves and expect nothing but protection and the right to trade on certain conditions imposed by the state. This condition of things existed only to a modified extent Rnie as to *n t n e c a s e °f nations which had been brought into subject races. su bjection to the empire. The emperors had to take in hand the administration of law to people of widely different customs, religions, races, and countries. Ultimately the rights and obligations imposed by a portion of Roman law were conferred and imposed upon all subjects of the empire, though, of course, not upon resident foreigners. Caracalla, for the sake of increasing the revenues, had made all subjects of the empire into Roman citizens. But the most convenient way of administering Roman law even to Roman citizens was, in the words of Cassiodorus, the secretary of Theodoric the Great, to allow the Roman to be a judge for the Roman, the 148 THE FALL OF CONSTANTINOPLE. Goth for the Goth, and thus under a diversity of judges to have equal justice administered to all.1 Each subject of the empire under such a system had the benefit or the burden of the laws of the people to which he belonged. H e was bound by the laws which were common to all Eoman subjects, but in addition the courts took notice of the law and customs of the race of which lie was a member. The foreigner was in a different position. Eoman law afforded him protection. For the rest, foreigners might settle their own disputes and regulate their own affairs as they liked. The Armenian in Constantinople had, as an occupant of Eoman territory, to obey the laws which had been imposed for the preservation of public order, and to pay certain taxes. But questions of marriage, succession to property, of personal status generally, were left to be settled either by the Armenians themselves or by a magistrate named by the emperor to administer Armenian law.2 This condition of things was known to other cities, but received its largest development in Constantinople, Treaties or ° , • i -i . i i capitulations where the system winch created it has always ex,/ respecting . ~ . . , foreign resi- isted, and still exists, under the treaties or capitulations with the P o r t e ; a system which is a striking illustration of the continuity of history; In other words, the system of capitulations under which foreigners to-day reside 1 "Romanis Romanus judex erat, Gothis Gothus, et siib diversitate judicium una justitia complectebatur." 2 Justinian granted the occupants of the Armenian regio, or quarter, the benefit of the same laws on certain subjects as those by which his own subjects were ruled. This was " a grant, or concession, or capitulation,1' to use the words of our own Foreign Jurisdiction Acts. Such a concession was, no doubt, of value to the Armenians. Without it they remained subject to their own laws. Of course, concessions from the Sublime Porte to Europeans, in order to be of value, are the reverse of the one mentioned— that is, the stranger has to be permitted to retain his own laws. But this simply arises from the fact that the Europeans are more advanced in civilization than the Turks, and thus cannot see any benefit in being under Turkish law. The capitulation granted by Justinian was to grant the foreigner a right which he could not possess without such permission. " Novella Constit." xxi.; Just. " Corpus Juris : De Armeniis." CAPITULATIONS AND FOREIGNERS. 149 in Turkey is the one under which they have always resided there. As no writer with whom I am acquainted has called attention to this fact, I may be excused for sketching briefly the history of the capitulations. The first treaty granting the right of exterritoriality which I have been able to find was made with the Warings, a people who have left is ory. ^ i e j r n a m e j n E n gl a n d 5 and of whom I shall have more to say later on. In 905 and 945, when these treaties were made, the Warings were more usually called Russians, though one has only to read in Leo the Deacon and other Greek authors the accounts of their appearance, to recognize them as relations. From that date we have an unbroken series of capitulations down to the time of the Moslem conquest in 1453. The Venetians obtained such concessions early in the eleventh century. The Amalfians followed in 1056. The Genoese were not far behind, and obtained the rights of exterritoriality in 1098.1 The Pisans, if they had not previously had such rights, gained them in 1110. Henceforward capitulations became so general, and granted so many exclusive rights to territory, that during the last quarter of the twelfth century the long shore of Constantinople on the Golden Horn was so occupied by foreigners that the Greeks complained that there were no wharves left to them. For our purpose we may pass at a bound to the Moslem conquest in 1453, when the Genoese had obtained capitulations which allowed them to occupy the fortified town of Galata, and thus enabled them to become a dangerous ally of the invader. On the conquest the capitulations of the Genoese were confirmed by Mahomet the Conqueror. During the next century the Venetians succeeded in obtaining perhaps the clearest definition which had yet been made of the privileges and exterritoriality granted by capitulations. These expressly included the 1 1 have serious doubts whether the right of exterritoriality was regarded at this time as a privilege. The impression I have gathered from reading many of the earlier treaties with the Italian states is that their rulers were quite content to submit questions in dispute to the imperial courts. See, for example, the treaties in Sauli's " Colonia di Genovese," and Gatteschi's u Manuale di Diritto Publico et Privato Ottomano." 150 THE FALL OF CONSTANTINOPLE. r i g h t of h a v i n g disputes w i t h their fellow-Yenetians decided only by their own authorities, t h e r i g h t to have questions between Y e n e t i a n s and O t t o m a n subjects decided only in presence of a Y e n e t i a n dragoman or interpreter, exemption from harach, the tax imposed on Christians in lieu of military service, and t h e right of t h e republic to n a m e its own baily or magistrate in Constantinople. These privileges wTere embodied in t h e capitulations with Their mod- F r a n c e in 1536, and t h o u g h this treaty has been em form. often redrawn and embodied in m a n y treaties With each E u r o p e a n power, its provisions still remain t h e essential articles of t h e capitulations u n d e r which foreigners now live in t h e O t t o m a n empire. T h e system which was t h u s formulated in the F r e n c h capitulations has not materially changed from t h a t day to this. E a c h nation has now its treaty with t h e P o r t e . B u t as each treaty contains a most-favored-nation clause, t h e whole of t h e treaties or capitulations form a body of law which constitutes t h e capitulations u n d e r which foreigners live, and under which t h e i r g o v e r n m e n t s exercise jurisdiction in the O t t o m a n empire. 1 I n t h e best days of t h e B y z a n t i n e empire something apReasonswhy proaching a fusion or welding together of the vaiaseted ?neTur- r i ° u s races into one people had taken place. B u t key t h e influx of new-comers into t h e empire d u r i n g t h e c e n t u r y immediately preceding t h e Latin conquest formed a population of so m a n y different races, languages, and manners, that t h e process of fusion stopped. A s soon as t h e city came u n d e r Moslem rule, fusion became impossible, and has been so ever since. T h e M a h o m e t a n is forbidden by his religion to g r a n t equality to unbelievers. Christian subjects are rayahs, or sheep. H e n c e , as m i g h t have been expected, 1 The treaties under which foreigners reside in the Turkish empire are usually called capitulations, because their contents are arranged under heads. They assume sometimes the form of letters patent or concessions, by which the sovereign has granted certain rights to the subjects of another power. At other times, and more usually, they are in the form of treaties, by which the sovereign of each country grants certain privileges to the subjects of the other. ORIGIN OF "CAPITULATIONS. 151 there has never been a serious attempt to weld the various races under the rule of the sultan into one people. But if it be impossible for the Moslem to grant equal rights to Christian and Moslem subjects, it is none the less impossible to extend similar rights to Christian foreigners. On the other hand, foreigners could not consent to live in a country where by law the Christian can hardly be said to have legal rights against a Mahometan. Hence the preservation of the system of capitulations became a necessity, if Christian foreigners were to be induced to remain or to settle in the empire. The Turks were compelled to recognize this, and, as they found capitulations in full vigor—Galata being, as we have seen, a fortified city in the hands of foreigners at the time of the capture of the city in 1453—they continued the system. The history of the last four and a half centuries in Constantinople has been the history of the development of the system of capitulations. Such a juridical anomaly is only now possible or tolerable in a country where foreigners have, and are entitled to have, no confidence in the administration of the government as the protector of life and property. Other nations have outgrown this system. The Turks have not done so ; but, though other European nations have progressed beyond the legal conception of a former time, there are many traces of the old system in their laws. The exterritoriality of ambassadors and the privileges of their retainers is a survival of this system. In Turkey also all the rights of jurisdiction enjoyed by foreigners are grouped round and closely connected with the rights conferred on ambassadors. But it is to be noted that in Constantinople the existing system is the direct lineal representative in unbroken succession of a wider exterritoriality which existed during the middle ages and had been continued from Koman times. Englishmen residing in France or other European states are properly left to seek redress in the courts of the country where they are dwelling. It is worth remembering, however, that Englishmen have had to fall back upon the early type of a colony in a strange country in several instances. The factories of India, of Lisbon, and of St. Petersburg during 152 THE FALL OF CONSTANTINOPLE. the last century, and the consular courts of China and Japan, all owed their judicial system to a conception of law resembling that which led to the establishment of the capitulations in Constantinople, and all ultimately develop the legal fiction that the territory in the foreign country is a portion of the empire from whose shores they have been planted. I have said that the idea in Constantinople was that foreigners should not be entitled to the privileges of the citizen, but should be allowed the advantages of their own laws. Mahometans have never advanced sufficiently far to outgrow this conception. All Christians are, in a sense, foreigners to Mahometans, and cannot have the advantages of Moslem law. Still, neither in the case of the foreign colonies under the Byzantine empire, nor in those which were found by the Turks, nor in those actually existing in Constantinople, wTas there any considerable sense of hardship. The colonists had their own predilections in favor of their own laws. The native was equally convinced that his system was the best. I repeat that there has existed no period in the history of They are a Constantinople in which foreigners have not ennotVanalliven- J o v e ( i t n e advantages, and been subject to the disauou. bilities, of exterritoriality. The existing system of capitulations is a survival rather than, as it is generally represented, a new invention specially adapted to Turkey. Still less is it a system, as it is often said to be, of magnanimous concessions made by far-sighted sultans of Turkey in order to encourage foreigners to trade with and reside in the empire. The capitulations were neither badges of inferiority imposed on foreigners, as they have often been described, nor proofs of exceptional wisdom peculiar to the sultans. As a fact, foreigners have never held so important a position in the capital under Ottoman rule as under that of the Christian emperors, and especially at the close of the twelfth century. While the native population has probably remained stationary during the last six centuries, the foreign population was probably never so large as at that period. I now propose to point out what were the principal colonies of foreigners which existed in Constantinople, and in other of THE WARINGS. 153 the important cities of the empire, at the time immediately preceding the Latin conquest. 3. The Warings. Among the foreigners who had been longest established in Constantinople in 1204 were the Warings, or Yarangia»STThey were kinsmen of our own, and on this account Warings re- hued to Eug- may be allowed a fuller description than the immediate object in hand wTould justify. Tacitus speaks of " Angli et Varini," 1 the English and the Warings. Both were, in his time, the inhabitants of the country south of the Baltic, or, as it came to be called at a later period, the Waring Sea. When the great movement began which caused the English to emigrate to Britain, some of the Warings took part in it. With them also were others whom Bede speaks of as Rugians or Russians.2 At a later period the name Waring and Russian appears to have been applied indifferently to the same people, the truth possibly being, as the Russian monk Nestor says, that some of the Warings were called Russians. Many traces of Waring emigration into England exist, of which the names of Warwick or Waeringwick, Warnford, and Warington are examples. The record of their history shows them to be closely akin to the English, though whether through the Teutonic or the Norse element of our people may be open to doubt. 3 Their appearance was like that of Englishmen or Danes. Their language was virtually the same. Their exploits at sea, their legends, their habits, their very names, all convey the irresistible impression that we are reading of the kinsmen of our ancestors. While the English went westward., the Warings spread themselves alon^ the eastern shores of the Baltic, Their prog- i 1 mi i ' i ress from the or went southward, lliey levied tribute from the neighboring tribes, and especially from the Slavs. The Dwina and the Dniester wTere the great highways for 1 2 " Germania," vii. c. 40. " Hist. Eccles." ii. 9. Professor Rafn, in his "Antiquite*s Russes et Orientales," maintains that they were Norsemen. " Royal Society of Northern Antiquaries,1' vols. 1850-52. 3 154 THE FALL OF CONSTANTINOPLE. their commerce, and for their plundering expeditions. Historians have in their case, as in so many others, occupied themselves so much with the latter expeditions as to leave the impression—altogether false—that plunder rather than commerce was the business of their lives. Slaves formed one of their principal articles of export to Constantinople, while they carried back into Waringia silk, spices, and other Eastern produce, and Byzantine gold. The Slavs at Kiev and Novgorod came at an early period under their rule, and the process began by which they were to be gradually absorbed into the conquered race, as the Normans were at a subsequent period in England. Between 863 and 869 they were engaged in plundering the remote provinces of the Eastern empire. Within a century they made four attempts upon Constantinople, and in the boldness of these undertakings showed a spirit akin to that of their countrymen, with whose exploits as emigrants, explorers, and sea-rovers the world is familiar. It was the Waring Olaf who hung his shield either on the topmost turret of one of the chief gates of Constantinople, or, as the Russians assert, on the dome of Hagia Sophia itself. In 904 Olaf, or Oleg, made an attempt against the imperial city, at the head of a band of Warings, Englishmen, Norsemen, and Slavs, and proceeded to the city in 2000 boats. A treaty of peace was concluded between the emperor and the invaders, which I have already mentioned as an example of the capitulations which have so long existed in Constantinople, and under which foreigners are still allowed to enjoy the benefit of their own laws, and to be exempt, under certain restrictions, from the jurisdiction of the rulers of the land. This treaty, made in 907, was followed by another in 912, and a third in' 945. All are given in the chronicle of Nestor. 1 Among those signing on behalf of the Warings are Sigiborn, Adun, Adolf, Antiwald, Furst, Brumwald, Ingeld, Alden, and Swain, names which sufficiently indicate their origin. One of the signers is named as a merchant. The Warings were to have 1 "La Chronique de Nestor, traduite en Frai^ais par Louis Paris," 1834, vol. i. 36-44 and 57-64. See also Zonaras, ii. 173. THE WAKINGS. 155 free trade throughout the empire, but were to take passports; subject to this provision the Grand Prince of Russia and his boyards were to be allowed to send as many ships and cargoes, as many deputies and guests, as they liked. The Waring merchants were to receive a monthly allowance. Waring offenders were to be punished by Waring law. Waring officers were to be named to take possession of testamentary and intestate successions. The treaties were duly ratified by Christian oaths on the part of the Greeks and on the part of those of the Russians who had become Christians, and by placing' on the ground their swords, shields, and other arms on the part of those Russians who had not yet been baptized. An interesting account is given of the Warings, a little later, swendosiav's by Leo the Deacon, a contemporary of the events expedition. j i e describe The description he gives clearly shows that the Warings are meant, though he calls them Russians.1 He does justice to their valor, but also to their cruelty. Like all the Greek writers, he makes mention of the fact that their distinctive weapon was the battle-axe. They never, says Leo, surrendered in battle, and rather than be taken prisoners would kill themselves. They had flaxen or reddish hair, and blue eyes. One of the most striking incidents of the Waring war, which he describes, relates to a leader named Swendoslav. He had led a host into the empire on a plundering expedition, and had occupied Dorystolon or Silistria, which commands the Derwend pass through the Balkans. He had fought bravely and held his own against great numbers, but found himself at length unequal to the task of breaking through the lines which the imperial troops, under the Emperor John Zemiskes (969-976), had drawn round Dorystolon. Eight thousand of his followers had been killed, and he was compelled to accept terms. He stipulated that he should be allowed to leave the empire, and bound himself to send back 1 'Pug. The Septuagint quoted by Leo used the same word, Ezekiel xxxix. 1 and 2, which there reads: "Prophesy against Gog, and say, Thus saith the Lord God. Behold I am against thee, O Gog, chief prince of the Russians, Meshech and Tubal."--Leo, " Dia." p. 93, ed. Reg. 156 THE FALL OF CONSTANTINOPLE. the captives he had taken. On the other hand, the Romans promised to give the Eussians safe-conducts for the purpose of trade in Constantinople, as they had had before. After the Waring chief, who had led his sea-rovers across the Black Sea into the Danube, had signed peace with the emperor, he expressed his wish to see his great and brave enemy. The interview took place on the banks of the Danube. Few more picturesque and characteristic scenes are recorded by the Byzantine historians. Each of the leaders appeared in a manner characteristic of the nation to which he belonged. The emperor, clothed in magnificent armor decked with gold and jewels, rode down to the river-side at the head of a body of mounted guards glittering in gold and arms, but evidently well-disciplined and capable of rendering splendid service. On the other hand, Swendoslav came to the meeting-place in a boat propelled by his soldiers, he himself rowing like one of the crew. His dress was a simple white garment, and in no way different from that of the rest except that it was cleaner. The two brave leaders and their followers represented respectively the spirit of the old time and the new: on the one side the stern imperial discipline, the sacrifice of the many for the glory of the few, and the machine-like order and regularity which was produced at the bidding of one man and had made Eome the mistress of the world; on the other, the equality and the self-reliance which recognizes that all citizens have an interest in the well-being of the state, and which was especially destined to characterize the great modern nations descended from their kinsmen. The imperial leader saw a man of middle height, with thick eyebrows, light blue eyes, thick nose, thin beard, but with long and heavy mustache. His hair was cut short, except that two long locks hung down on each side of his face, declaring him to belong to the Varangian nobility. His neck was firm, his chest broad, his expression stern and fierce. From each ear there hung an earring ornamented with two pearls and a carbuncle between them. A few words passed between the two leaders, the emperor sitting on horseback, the Varangian seated on one of the thwarts of his boat. Swendoslav looked long and carefully at the THE WARINGS. 157 great emperor, and the interview finished with mutual respect. Many of the Warings, and probably of the English, also, had taken military service at an early period under military ser- the Byzantine emperors.1 They formed a bodyguard for the emperor, and soon gained for themselves a renown greater than that possessed by the earlier imperial guard of the Immortals. The Byzantine writers usualTheWarhK* ly speak of them as the barbarian guard or as the guard. axe-bearers. Their weapon was the Danish battleaxe, or rather bill, and seems not to have had two blades turning different ways like those of a halberd, but to have had one with a sharp steel spike projecting so that the weapon could be used either to strike or to thrust. 3 Anna, the daughter of Alexis the First, calls them Warings or Varangians. 3 Nicetas speaks of them as Germans. 4 The Western writers call them usually Danes, or "English and Danes." 5 The conquest of England by William the Norman caused 1 Two Arab writers, Mabsoudi and Abul-feda, assert that Russians, as the Warings bad come to be called, bad also enlisted in the service of the Mussulman rulers of the East. They were highly prized everywhere as soldiers. Muratori quotes two edicts, by different Lombard kings, which confer rights upon them and allow tbem to settle in their territory. The whole subject of the Warings is well worth examination. Mr. Hyde Clarke has collected a great many interesting and important facts relating to them. 8 oi KariojJiadbv TOVQ trepoaTo/JiovQ TTEXEKEIQ avixovaw. Nicetas, p . 323, ed. Bonn. Dr. Mordtmann has given an illustration from the seal of the chief interpreter of the Waring guard, which shows an axe with only one blade. The bayonet is curved somewhat less than a reaping-hook, with the edge turned in the opposite direction from that of tbe axe. Dr. Mordtmann says it is not Mpennis, as the Warings7 axes are always described. I am inclined to think, however, that the curved bayonet, which was intended for cutting as well as thrusting, may have given it its ordinary name of double-edged. See a Archives de FOrient Latin" (1881), i. 698r 3 IK rrjg eovXrjg (3apayyovg. "Ann." i. 120, ed. Bonn. • Nicetas, p. 323. * s "Les Anglais et Danois mult Men combattaient avec leurs haches."— Villehardouin. 158 THE FALL OF CONSTANTINOPLE. many of the English to emigrate to Russia and so to Constantinople, where they joined the Waring guard. 1 While there can be no doubt that there was a large acces, sion to the ^uard in consequence of the Norman Influence of . . , , , Norman con- conquest, it is also clear that there was a Wanna: quest. ° # guard in Constantinople before that event. In 1034 and 1035 this guard wintered in the western part of Asia Minor.2 Romanos Diogenes, emperor between 106S and 1071, reorganized the Waring troops, and formed them into the body-guard of the emperor. That they retained, amid their Eastern surroundings, their respect for women as well as their valor is shown by many circumstances, and is illustrated by a story told by Cedrenus. A peasant woman had respectfor sisted the violence of one of their number, and had women. , . . stabbed him with his own sword. His companions, when they had learned the truth of the matter, not only parJ Orclericus Vitalis says: " When, therefore, the English had lost their liberty, they turned themselves with zeal to discover the means of throwing off the unaccustomed yoke. Some tied to Sueno, King of the Danes, to excite him to the recovery of the inheritance of his grandfather Canute. Not a few fled into exile in other regions, either from the mere desire of escaping from under the Norman rule, or in the hope of acquiring wealth, and so being one day in a condition to renew the struggle at home. Some of these, in the bloom of youth, penetrated into a far-distant land, and offered themselves to the military service of the Constantinopolitan emperor, that wise prince against whom Robert Wiscard, Duke of Apulia, had then raised all his forces. The English exiles were favorably received, and opposed in battle to the Normans, for whose encounter the Greeks themselves were too weak." The Greek writers believed them to be of English origin. Du Cange collects the authorities (see vol. ii. Ann. Com., p. 462 of his notes), and concludes that English and Danes is a correct description of the Warings (" Observations on Villeliardouin "). The same conclusion is adopted by the learned editor of the "Recueil des Croisades" (vol. iv. p. 518), who seems disposed to believe that they were almost exclusively fugitives from England, who had fled either on the accession of Edward the Confessor or at the Norman Conquest. 2 Professor Rafn thinks that Harold, King of Norway, defeated at Stamford Brig, was chief of the Varangian guard when he left Constantinople in 1043. THE WAKINGS. 159 doned her, but presented her with his property, and left his body without burial, as if he had committed suicide.1 The "Warings, who had been converted to Christianity by the Greek priests, belonged to the Orthodox Church. The English who joined them acknowledged the spiritual rule of Rome, and had their church in the New Rome dedicated to St. Augustine of Canterbury. 2 "Warings and English, while occupants of the Greek palace, still spoke their own language, had their own laws, and chose, with certain exceptions, their own officers.3 The one in command was called the acolyth,4 or follower, because his place was immediately behind the emperor. No Deserving of body-guard in any country was ever more completetrust. ]y trusted than the Yarangians. None more completely deserved such trust. They retained their sturdy northern independence in the midst of a corrupt court. They were 1 Cedrenus, p. 735. Their church was dedicated to SS. Nicolas and Augustine of Canterbury, and is said by Gotselinus to have been built by an English exile who arrived in Constantinople after the battle of Hastings. It was converted into a mosque after 1453, and wTas situated between the palace and the Adrianople Gate. Dr. Paspati found upon one of the towers near this gate many funeral inscriptions relating to Warings. The English ambassador, about 1865, endeavored to have them removed to the English cemetery at Scutari, but, unfortunately, without success. The stones were used by the Turkish government for building. StUl more unfortunately, the only two copies which were taken were burned in the great fire of Pera in 1870. See " Histoire de l'Eglise Latine de Constantinople," par M. Belin, pp. 4 and 20. Also " Constantinop. Christ." p. 130. Also Dr. Paspati's "Meletai," p. 308. 3 Cedrenus. Readers will remember that Sir Walter Scott has given a vivid picture of the Waring guard in Constantinople in " Count Robert of Paris." His local color and a considerable part of his plot are taken from Anna Comnena. His descriptions of the prisons in the Blachern, as well as of the life in Constantinople, are singularly exact, though occasionally he falls into error, as when he makes the Crusaders wait before crossing a bay on the Bosphorus until the tide has ebbed. There is no tide in either the Bosphorus or the Marmora. * Anna Comnena, however, calls him 7raXeKV(j)6piov l%dpxo>v. Codinus gives the following description of the acolyth: 'O CLKOXOVQOQ evptoKErat fikv 2 ivoxog T&V fiapayywv, CLKOXOVOSX Se rip /SaaiXei i^irpoadw leal CLKOXOVQOQ Xeyerai. avr&v. dice, TOL TOVTO 160 THE FALL OF CONSTANTINOPLE. barbarous in the eyes of Anna Comnena and of her father and the effeminate creatures about him ; but they were barbarians as English soldiers at a native court in India may be regarded now by the degenerate representatives of a warlike race. They did their duty as soldiers, despised the men on whose side they had to fight, and the English, at least, among their number kept their resentment for the Normans, against whom they were shortly destined to fight on imperial territory. In the fourth crusade, as we shall see, they did their best to resist the attack on the royal city.1 We may well feel satisfied that the Greek writers repeatedly point out that the emperors found their greatest safety in the spotless loyalty of those among our kinsmen who guarded them, and among whom were so many who had left England rather than accept a foreign rule.2 It is difficult to determine whether Waring, English, or Russian traders continued to settle in Constantinople. It is, however, certain that they soon ceased to be of importance in comparison with the colonists belonging to other races who had found their way to the New Eome. 4. Italian Colonies in Constantinople. The most important of these colonies consisted of Italians. 1 After the conquest there are several traces of the Waringsin the empire. Nikephorus Greg. pp. 187 and 243, ed. Reg. There is a curious mention in Busbeck of what was probably an isolated Waring tribe in the Crimea. Busbeck gives a list of words spoken by these men which are nearly all English, or, as he considered them, German. This wTas in 1557. The English or Waring guard was probably kept up by constant emigration from Northern Europe. The question of the national weapon, with which the Waring guard was armed, is discussed vol. iv. 518, "Recueil." The Western writers generally speak of it as a Danish battle-axe. 2 Page 120, Ann. Com., ed. Bonn. Ueiae 8k rovg BK rrjg QovXrjg fiapdyyovg (rovTovg 8)) Xeyw rovg TreXacvtyopovg j3apf3dpovg) . . . ol fikv yap avroxOovsg ovreg rtfi j3affiXeX, 7roXXrjv TTJV elg avrbv t% avayKi\g txovreG tvvoiav, Oarrov av rag \pvx<*g irapadoiEv ij Trovrjpov TL KCLT avrov ixeXerrjffaL 7rEi bk. ii. c. 13, " De Gest. Angl.," calls them English. Saxo Grammaticus and many others call them Danes. THE ITALIAN COLONIES. 161 There had probably always been a large Italian element in Constantinople. Latin had never ceased to be unLatin always * . « . , . . understood in derstood by some portion ot the population ot the seaports. . % *• mi -r • capital and other seaport towns, l h e Lingua Franca which the Crusaders were able to understand was closely allied to the dialect of Latin spoken in Italy, and was probably a compound of the Latin imported with Constantine and his successors, of the Italian introduced by the colonists, and of a kindred dialect more nearly related to Latin than to Greek, which had been spoken in the Balkan peninsula long before the time of Constantine. The people of Romania continue to our own time the dialect of Latin, which I believe to have been the language of a portion of the wider Romania which was under the rule of New Rome. Whether the modern language is a corruption of the Latin of Dacian colonists, or, as I have already suggested and as there seems more reason to conclude, an independent branch from the common Aryan stem, closely related to that which was developed in Rome, the readiness with which a Latin dialect could be "understood throughout at least the littoral of the empire, as well as in isolated communities in the interior of the Balkan peninsula, can be satisfactorily established, and greatly facilitated trade. During the latter half of the twelfth century the Latins had Latin settle- obtained possession of a large part of the commerce ments They had important colonies in 0 £ foe empire. most of the great towns. Many Venetians were settled at Sardis and at other places along the west coast of Asia Minor, as far north as the Dardanelles, where at Abydos their colonists were found. Others were at Rodosto, on the north coast of the Marmora. During Isaac's reign they had settled at Adrianople, while an older colony of Latins was established at Philippopolis. The chief city and natural port of Macedonia then as now was Salonica. It was the terminus of many roads, which immediately before and after the great fair of St. Demetrius were crowded with traders. The furs and salt fish of Russia for winter supply were exchanged for the 11 162 THE FALL OF CONSTANTINOPLE. grain of the country, for the silks of the Peloponnesus, or the embroidered cloths of Spain. Syrian, Egyptian, Italian, and even Spanish merchants attended this famous fair, and met Eussians, Bulgarians, Greeks, and Arabs. Venetians, Pisans, and other Franks had a large and wealthy quarter in the city. A little to the south of Salonica, Yolo possessed also^a large settlement of Latin colonists, mostly Yenetians, who had occupied a considerable number of towns in the Greek peninsula to the south of Yolo. At Almyro and at Corinth the Latins had settled, the Arab merchants bringing their goods to one side of the isthmus, the Latins to the other. The islands of Eubcea, Andros (which produced silk), and Lemnos had permanent settlements of Yenetians. .Rhodes, Chios, and Crete had also admitted Latins to the benefit of their commerce. In all the great trading cities the native population found serious rivals in men who had now become hostile to the empire. It was, however, to the capital that most foreign merchants in constants flocked. There each Italian state had its own khans, nopie. known to the population as emboloi, buildings looking like fortifications, and each surrounding a square courtyard upon which the shops fronted. These emboloi, as well as many of the streets in the city, were provided with arcades for protection alike from sun and rain. The Genoese occupied a position near the present Seraglio Point. To the west of them and around the former arsenal gate or Neorion were the Pisans. Still farther west, and adjoining the site of the Stamboul end of the present bridge, around the Porta Peramaris, then as for centuries afterwards the principal place of entrance and exit to the city from Galata, were the favored Yenetians. Between them and the Pisans the colony of Amalfians still retained possession of their e?nboloV There were probably both Genoese and Yene1 The topography of Constantinople at the period of the fourth crusade has been carefully studied by Dr. A. Paspati (see " Meletai"), and also by Dr. Mordtmann. I may mention here that I am greatly indebted to Dr. THE ITALIAN COLONIES. 163 tians already settled at Galata. We have already seen that the people of Constantinople complained that the Latins had become possessed of the best business sites in the city, and those who know the localities I have mentioned will recognize that this complaint was not made without reason. Besides the Latin colonies already named, there was one of Anconians sufficiently numerous to possess its own church. Another, consisting of Ragusans, who were probably mostly Slavs, had acquired the privileges of citizenship in Constantinople in return for aid which they had rendered against Venice. We have already seen how these foreign colonies were governed. I may add here that the ambassador was usually the ruler of the colony from the state which he represented, that he took counsel on all important matters with the prudenies viri of the community, and that when the century closed each such community had, in addition to its political minister, officers who acted under various names as judges and governors. Each colony was regarded as so far prosperous that it had to send revenues home to the parent state, the Amalfians sending also tribute to St. Mark's at Venice. Italian commerce in Constantinople had during the twelfth century become of great importance both to the among the Italian states, to the empire, and to Europe. But during the second half of that century there existed a considerable amount of jealousy between the empire and the rising commercial states of Italy. Constantinople, during many years, was the battle-ground of the vigorous Italian states, much as India was between the English and other European peoples during the last century. These states were now nearly independent of all external control, and made war and treaties with each other like the cities of old Greece. The traders of Constantinople were naturally impatient of commercial rivals who were rapidly depriving them of business which had been exclusively in their own hands, and were Paspati for many hints on the topography of the city. Heycl's " Geschichte des Levante-Handels im Mittelalter," 1879, is the great authority on trade during the period with which I am concerned. 164 THE FALL OF CONSTANTINOPLE. not careful to inquire to what particular Italian state their rivals belonged. The jealousy of the Greeks was increased by many causes. There was a traditional sentiment against the Eastern emperors, which was fully returned by the rulers of the New Rome against the portion of the Roman empire not under their control. These rulers were suffering the smart of recent losses inflicted by upstart states, the Norman kingdom in the south of Italy, the powerful republic in the north. The Roman emperor in the West claimed to be the only living successor of the Roman csesars in things temporal. The pope claimed even more positively to be the ruler of the world in things spiritual. Both claims were denied in the East. The Latin colonists were always united in condemning the Greeks because they refused to recognize the suunited against premacy of the Pope of Rome. Although divided empire. ^ home, they were generally united against the Byzantines. The common bond of religion, race, and language tended to make them live together as neighbors on a foreign soil. But the Latin colonists, while generally united by their common interests against the Byzantines, wrere jealous of each other's influence. The Venetians resented any grant of privileges to the Pisans or Amalfians. The Genoese were usually ready to intrigue against the Venetians. These internal quarrels continually brought trouble to the empire. A concession granted to one Italian state made the others at once hostile to the grantor unless they also obtained like advantages. The first of the Italian states which obtained privileges Venice and from the empire was the republic of Venice, though the empire. ^Q c j t y 0f Amalfi had sent traders to the capital at an earlier date. The policy of Venice had long been one of friendliness to the New Rome. She had obtained the largest share of the commerce of the Eastern capital, and had, in turn, been more influenced by its civilization than any other Italian city. As she was the first of the Italian states to exercise considerable influence in Constantinople, so also her influence survived that of all others. As her people did more to bring about the ruin of the New Rome than those of any other city THE VENETIANS. 165 or state, so also she remains the one city of Europe where the impress of the New Home's civilization has left deep traces. From the time that the lagoons had become the seat of the Venetian government the trade with Constantinople had been one of her greatest interests. The amount of commerce between the two cities was very great. The Bosphorus was the chief highway between Persia, Central Asia, Kussia, and eastern Europe to the west. The good government and the security for life and property which existed under the rule of Constantinople was an additional inducement for the trader to try his ventures with the imperial city. The islands of the Archipelago were charged with the furnishing and equipment of ships for keeping order on the seas and preventing piracy. The arrangements made by treaties with the Venetians for the administration of justice show the existence of a higher degree of civilization than prevailed elsewhere in Europe. The standard of gold coinage created by the empire remained the same until the capture of the city, and its fixedness of value gave great confidence to merchants. Though two or three emperors, notably Nicephoras (963-976), were guilty of tampering with the money in circulation throughout the empire, yet so long as the gold coinage remained undebased the Venetians, in common with other foreigners, were no more affected by the change than foreign merchants have been by the issue of paper money, and the many similar forms of public robbery by which the Turkish government in our own time has deprived its own subjects of many millions of pounds. Moreover, the outcry which was made when the emperors tampered with the coinage shows the importance which was attached by the people to a measure so injurious to trade, and is in favorable contrast with the acquiescence which was made in similar attempts at public robbery in the West and in subsequent times. These advantages made the Venetians estimate at a high value their connection with Constantinople, and had caused them, even as early as the time of Charles the Great, and in spite of his threats, to remain faithful to the Emperor of the New Eome. 166 THE FALL OF CONSTANTINOPLE. They had obtained a treaty of commerce as early as 1056.1 Henceforward, until near the end of the twelfth century, they had made common cause with the Byzantine empire. The enemies of New Rome were the enemies of Yenice. The Saracen pirates from Spain and Africa who had invaded Sicily were attacked alike by the imperial and republican fleets. But it was in the time of Alexis the First, who reigned between 1081 and 1118, that the ties between the Venetians and the emperor became the closest. When Eobert Wiscard, the leader of the Normans, who had obtained possession of the Two Sicilies, invaded the empire, the Venetians became at once alarmed lest their* trade should be placed at the mercy of these daring pirates. If the attack upon Durazzo had been successful, the Normans would have commanded the narrowest part of the Adriatic. Hence they readily made the treaty, which has already been mentioned, by which they pledged themselves to oppose Eobert. The Norman fleet under Bohemund was defeated, and the communications of the army which was besieging Durazzo were cut off. While Bohemund was harassing the imperial array on the mainland, capturing Durazzo, ravaging Epirus and Thessaly, and taking Larissa, his father, Eobert, had driven the Western emperor out of Eome and had plundered the city. This done, he again turned his attention to the empire of the New Eome. Again the Venetians were found aiding the Greeks. A fleet belonging to the two states besieged Corfu. Eobert succeeded in defeating both. The Venetians, however, soon recovered and attacked Eobert at Butrotis, where he was entirely beaten.2 He died shortly after at Cephalonia. The Venetians were so disgusted with their doge who had commanded in the naval action at Corfu that he was replaced by another, on whom the emperor conferred the title of protosebastos, accompanying it with a pension. On the same occasion he recognized the title of the republic to the sovereignty of Dalmatia and Croatia. The emperor ordered the Amalfian colonists in Constantinople to pay an annual ^ u r . p. 81. 2 Ann. Com. THE VENETIANS. 167 revenue to the Church of St. Mark in Venice, and gave the Venetians a quarter with shops and bazaars in Constantinople in the choicest part of the Golden Horn, with considerable land, both in Constantinople and Durazzo. But these presents, though of great value, were not to be compared, says Anna Comnena, and rightly, with the privilege he conceded to them of free trade in all kinds of merchandise throughout the empire, with the exception of the Black Sea, without any payment whatever. 1 The concession was so great that it was soon resented both by the merchants of Constantinople and by the other Italian states. Venice was sufficiently strong at sea to afford safer convoy to her merchant ships than any other state. To allow her merchandise to enter duty free and her ships to export what they liked without payment of duty was to give her almost a monopoly of trade. Hence, on the death of Alexis, it is not surprising to find that his son, John Comnenos (1118 to 1143), refused to confirm what was virtually the Venetian monopoly.2 Other influences, however, were at work, which caused the Venetians to be less anxious to preserve friendship with Constantinople than they had been. The Holy War against the infidels had been proclaimed by Pope Urban in 1095. Jerusalem had been captured in 1099, and Godfrey proclaimed king. The trade with Syria had become of great importance, and already commerce was beginning to take the direction of its ancient route through Egypt rather than through the Bosphorus. In 1124 John expelled the Venetians from the empire. In revenge they attacked Chios, Samos, and Rhodes, 3 plundered them and captured many youths and maidens, whom they sold into slavery. A desultory war continued during two years, in the course of which each of the combatants inflicted serious injury on the other. In 1126 the war was brought to an end. The emperor declared himself willing to forget the wrongs which the republic had inflicted upon him in return for the promise given to 1 2 Ann. Com. p. 287, Bonn. Dandolo, p. 269. Cimn. vi. 10; Fulcher, p. 470," Recueil." Fulcher is inclined to blame the Venetians, though he preaches against both the emperor and the Venetians. 3 168 THE FALL OF CONSTANTINOPLE. aid in the defence of the empire. The doge was formally confirmed in his title of protosebastos. The Amalfian colonists in Constantinople were compelled to contribute three pounds' weight of gold annually to the Church of St. Mark at Venice, and free trade was to be permitted to the Venetians in the capital and in all the important ports of the empire south of the Black Sea, which was here, as in every other treaty, exempted from access to foreigners. With the reign of Manuel (1143-1180) there was a distinct change of policy. The Venetians had obtained a position in the empire far superior to that possessed by any other foreign colony; they had exclusive rights of trade in some cities; they had less taxes to pay than any other foreigners in others; they had the best position in Constantinople and the best wharves; but they had shown that they were not in all cases to be depended upon as the friends of the empire. Moreover, the other Italian states were becoming formidable rivals in spite of the privileges which had been granted to the rulers of the Adriatic. Manuel probably thought that it was in the interest of the empire to encourage all foreigners to trade with Constantinople; that such a policy would enable him to obtain better terms from the Venetians, would allow him to play off one foreign colony against another, and had the additional advantage of increasing the imperial revenue, which had already become seriously reduced through the wars with the Turks and Sicilians. The Pisans and the Genoese came next in importance to the Venetians, and Manuel directed his attention towards obtaining their good-will. The Pisans had obtained an important treaty in 1111, after and in spite of the assistance they had given to Bohemund. 1 They were, however, always troublesome colonists. The Genoese, who had likewise opposed the Greeks at the time of the struggle with Bohemund, do not appear to have obtained a treaty until the reign of Manuel. Seeing, however, the great benefits obtained by Venice, they consented to appear as the liegemen and vassals 1 Buchon, "Nouvelles Reclierches." THE PISANS AND GENOESE. 169 of that emperor in order to obtain similar privileges. In 1154 Manuel granted them a golden bull, which set out the concessions that had been granted to them. The Genoese were to pay an export and import duty of four per cent, instead of ten, which was the rate paid by other traders, except, of course, the favored Venetians. 1 They were to have a khan assigned them in the City of Constantinople and a quarter on the opposite shore, where afterwards arose their important city of Galata. In 1157, however, they complained that the khan and the wharf had not been given them. 2 During*the next four or five years the friendly relations between the empire and the Genoese and Pisans alike were several times disturbed. The Genoese had allied themselves with Frederic Barbarossa, while the Venetians and the Pisans supported Manuel. Henceforward the history of the Latin colonists in Constantinople is the story of a series of quarrels and Partial failure . , . ,, , i / » T• i i of Manuel's rivalries among themselves and ot combined hosDolicv tility towards the empire. The emperor's wish was probably to keep at peace with all the Latin colonies. Nicetas tells us that he sought to bind them to him in friendship. H e aided Pope Alexander the Third and the Italian cities against Frederic Barbarossa. He invited Italian settlers, and promised to protect their commerce. But the citizens of the rival Italian states could not keep from quarrelling together in Constantinople, and hence Manuel's policy met with imperfect success. In 1169 we find Manuel making a new alliance with the Genoese. They obtained another treaty with Manuel in 1178, which gave them liberty to trade with all parts of the empire except Eussia.3 On the death of Manuel, in 1180, Genoa, Venice, and Pisa were all at peace with the empire. Manuel's policy had been so far successful that, according to the statement of 1 Sauli, " Storia della Colonia dei Genovesi in Galata." " Pro exigendis scalis et embolo promissis." — Caflfarus, " Annates Januenses.n 3 Sauli, " Docuinenti," ii. 192. 9 170 THE FALL OF CONSTANTINOPLE. Eustathius already referred to, there were upwards of 60,000 Latins living in Constantinople in 1180, of whom by far the greater number were Venetians, Pisans, and Genoese. It was on the death of this emperor that the dynastic struggles commenced which so greatly weakened the empire. The mutual jealousies of the Latin colonists soon broke out. The colonists, as we have seen, joined the protosebastos Alexis, who opposed the usurper Andronicos. Indeed, the army of Alexis was largely composed of Latins. In the words of Nicetas, which sound familiar, Alexis had the ships, the men, and money too. The treasury of the empire was in his hands. He had galleys and Latin soldiers clad in mail. It was in 1182, on the triumph of Andronicos, that the inhabitants of Constantinople rose against the Latins, murdered a great number, and committed the outrages already described. Three years later the Latins had apparently fallen upon better times. The new emperor, the weak Isaac Angelos, had been raised to the purple by a popular revolution. We have seen that Branas, after he had suppressed the Wallach and Bulgarian rising, took the opportunity, seeing the unpopularity of the sovereign, of declaring himself emperor, and that, being an able man, he would probably have succeeded if Conrad, Marquis of Montferrat, had not happened to be in Constantinople. With the assistance of a hundred and fifty Latin knights and a body of Latin adventurers, mostly Pisans, found in Constantinople, Conrad put the army of Branas to flight. As the country immediately round Constantinople had been generally on the side of the rebel, the emperor gave the Latins and those who had been on his side permission to pillage and plunder it, as well as the houses of Greek nobles whose loyalty was suspected. But these nobles were naturally not without supporters. The Latins, who boasted they had saved the emperor, were attacked by the Greeks. Many were killed, and the Latin quarters were attacked and plundered. Isaac was probably glad to be able to make his peace with Venice, and confirm the former privileges of the Venetians on condition that they should come to his aid with THE ITALIAN COLONIES. 171 a hundred galleys. Before the year was out similar privileges were granted to the Genoese. They were to have their own quarter of the city, their own wharves, churches, and freedom of trade. The obtention of privileges was, however, by no means prized as it had been a generation previously. The commerce of the capital had already fallen off. The dynastic rebellions had weakened the empire, and had injured it still more by showing how greatly it had been weakened by its struggles with the Turks and other enemies. During the last twenty years of the century the members of each Italian colony had had troubles with the empire, had been expelled, and had then been allowed to return. A spirit of distrust had arisen on both sides. Merchants and citizens had alike taken in hand the redress of their own wrongs even in Constantinople, while Attacks upon t n e l ° w condition of the Byzantine marine enabled itaifa™ p\r-e by t n e Latins to ravage the coasts and the islands whenrates. During e v e r they, were at war with the empire. the last few years of the century they were nearly always at war. In 1192 the Pisans and the Genoese were confirmed in their old privileges, or had new ones granted them, although at the very time Pisan and Genoese pirates were ravaging the iEgean Sea. These pirates, in ships belonging respectively to the two states, captured a Venetian vessel on its way to Constantinople. There was on board of it an ambassador from Isaac who was returning from Egypt, and another from Saladin who was bringing gifts of horses, wrild animals, amber, and other valuable presents to the emperor. The ambassadors were murdered. Isaac resented their murder and the theft of the presents intended for him. He made complaints to Genoa and Pisa, seized merchant ships, and asked for indemnity. After some time the Genoese consented to give it, but the Pisans gave no satisfaction. The government of Pisa was either unable or unwilling to control its citizens, who took to piracy with impunity. In 1194 a fleet of vessels belonging to similar freebooters virtually blockaded the Dardanelles and plundered imperial vessels. The emperor was powerless to capture them. The Council of Pisa took no 172 THE FALL OF CONSTANTINOPLE. step to oppose them. One of these pirates, in 1198, defeated the imperial admiral with thirty ships. The emperor only succeeded in putting an end to his ravages by proposing terms to him through the Genoese, and then setting the Pisans to attack him. The Genoese had, however, become equally troublesome. A Genoese pirate, named Caffario, had, after great difficulty, been captured and killed. On his death the emperor requested Genoa to send an ambassador to his court with a view to negotiations. This was done, and arrangements were made for the restoration of the buildings and wharves that the Genoese had possessed in Constantinople, but the negotiations can hardly be said to have been concluded when the city was captured by the Crusaders. The weakness of the empire, and particularly at sea, from the accession of Isaac the Second, had become clear to every Italian state. The imperial shores had become the prej^ of every pirate who chose to attack them. Pisans and Venetians, though during the last fifteen years of the century almost constantly fighting against each other, occasionally united in piratical attacks upon the empire, while they regarded Constantinople as neutral ground. But while the hostility which had been growing between the empire and the Italian states generally greatly weakened the former, that displayed by Venice was the strongest, and contributed most largely to the capture of Constantinople. The ill-feeling between the Greeks and Venetians had gained great strength with the grant' of concessions to Pisans and other Italian states in the time of Manuel. It had been increased by several events in the same reign, until, in 1171, in a moment of irritation, all the Venetians in the empire were arrested and their property placed under sequester. A short war with but hotly contested war followed. In the followvenice. j n g y e a r t j i e r e p U bHc sent a fleet of a hundred vessels to attack the imperial forces in Dalmatia. Ragusa surrendered on the second day of the siege. Dalmatia was conquered. Negropont, Chios, Scyros, and other places were pillaged. For a while everything seemed to be going in VENICE AND CONSTANTINOPLE. 173 favor of the republic. Everywhere, however, the Venetians were opposed by the inhabitants. A portion of the Venetian fleet was destroyed by that of the empire, but the rest occupied itself during the next three years in piratical attacks on the islands of the iEgean. Aid was given on every hand to the enemies of the empire. The Serbians were subsidized. The Archbishop of Mayence, who, on behalf of Frederic Barbarossa, was besieging Ancona, which was occupied by Manuel's troops, received a detachment of men to aid him, and the city was blockaded by a Venetian fleet. An alliance was concluded with William of Sicily. Yet, in spite of all its efforts, the republic was unsuccessful. Weakened by sickness, which they attributed to drinking water which had been poiveniceisde- soned by the Greeks, and opposed everywhere, the feated. Venetians were driven to sue for peace. Manuel rejected their proposals. The imperial fleet, which had made an unsuccessful attack upon Egypt in 1170, was yet able to provide a hundred and fifty galleys. The fleet of the republic had to retire before it, and of the one hundred and twenty ships which had left Venice, only seventeen returned, the rest having been either captured, abandoned, or destroyed. The Venetians, in their rage at his failure, assassinated the doge, Vitali Michieli, who had conducted the expedition. Before leaving the Archipelago a second embassy had been sent to Constantinople to sue for peace. On this mission Henry Dandolo went to the capital, and Henry Dan- during this period he lost his eyesight. Whether dol °such loss was partial or total; whether it was due to the terrible epidemic which in the first year of the war had carried off three or four thousand of the Venetians in the islands of the ^Egean; whether, as Villehardouin asserts, he was blind from a wound in the head; or whether he was blinded in Constantinople with a burning-glass, at the command of the emperor, as his descendant affirms, it is certain that from this time until his death Dandolo was filled with a passionate desire for vengeance against the empire. His mission, like that of his predecessors, proved a failure. In 1175 the Venetians found that success had eluded them 174 THE FALL OF CONSTANTINOPLE. everywhere except in Dalmatia. Ancona had been relieved. The Serbians had been driven back. Their own fleet had been shattered. They accordingly sued once more for peace. Manuel, who was being hard pressed by the Turks, was, on his side, willing to make terms. H e agreed to restore the republic to its privileges as they existed in 1171, and to pay fifteen hundred pounds' weight of gold as compensation for the Venetian property which he had seized. It is doubtful whether any considerable portion of this sum was ever paid. Certain buildings in Constantinople were delivered to the Venetians in 1189, probably in part payment. As the century closed, the relations of the republic with Relations be- Constantinople appeared to have improved. In 1198 audec a n d t h a t w h i c h existed in the twelfth spiritual. century, is to be found in the results which arose from the facts, first, that the teaching of the Orthodox Church was unquestioned, and, second, that the emperor was head alike of Church and State. The first weakened the intellectual side of the Church; the second welded religious observ- THE CONDITION OF CONSTANTINOPLE IN 1200. 203 ances into the national life. Nominally we have and have had in England the theory of a head of the State in things spiritual as well as in things temporal. Actually the sovereign has never been generally regarded as possessing such predominance as is accorded to the czar or was accorded to the emperors in Constantinople. As I have already pointed out, the emperor, when he ceased to be officially recognized as divine, had acquired a position over the Christian Church which gave him very nearly divine attributes. If it be said that such a regard was incompatible with his being in theory an elected sovereign, I may point to the fact that the pope's position certainly loses nothing by the fact that he too is elected. The ruler of the East was emperor and pope in one. That the head of the State was at once the head of the Church explains also what in the West would be regarded as the strange mixture of things temporal and spiritual in Constantinople. The churches were the great treasure-houses and the great depositories of merchandise. The markets were usually about their doors. Hagia Sophia, in the capital, was not merely the greatest church in Christendom, but was the centre of the life of the city. I do not forget how great a part our own parish churches and cathedrals played during the Middle Ages in the social and municipal life of the people. But in the New Rome Hagia Sophia was at once the minster and the town-hall—the patriarchal church and the chamber for the election of the emperor, the meeting-place for councils of the Church and for the inhabitants who wished to depose an unpopular emperor. Amid the marvels of its luxury, its spacious narthex and yet outer courts and outbuildings were applied to the purposes of commerce and the ordinary requirements of a great city. The priests, who, it must be remembered, are always married, and the churches were both largely employed in the secular life of the city. Contracts were registered by the priests. The sanctions of the Church were employed to enforce fair dealing, and an amount of honesty was thus secured in trade which, for the period, was remarkable. For those who sought a more severe religious practice the 204 THE FALL OF CONSTANTINOPLE. monasteries were open and existed in great numbers. In the capital the district of the Petrion contained x . l Monasteries. . 1 1 n T i . -i several, while outside the walls and on the neighboring hills were others, the ruins of which show that at one time the number of monks must have been very great. In the Eastern Church, however, monasticism has never assumed the strict and gloomy forms which the great Western orders of monks have given to it. Wealth such as I have attempted to describe, luxuries which were almost unknown unless by name in Western Europe, a city which was the storehouse of art and of learning, all imply an amount of civilization which, when compared with that which prevailed during the time of Richard the First and John in England, may justly be called high. Nor must it be forgotten that that which constituted the most essential element in the civilization of the Sense of se- , . . . curityinthe capital and its neighborhood was its security. We read in Benjamin of Tudela, and in other Western as well as in Greek writers, of the abundance of which he saw the signs as he passed through the empire, of the confidence which, in spite of invasions on all the frontiers, the population had in the power of the government to protect it. At a time when feudalism had organized the great masses of the West into armed populations, and looked upon commerce and the exercise of handicraft with the contempt of ignorance, the inhabitants of the empire were freely carrying on trade or tilling the ground. There were within the empire no feudal towers, with serfs and retainers ready at any moment to engage in private warfare, but a country full of farms, prosperous and secure. The pax Romana had been well maintained within the empire, and around the capital had hardly yet been disturbed. More fortunate than its elder rival, the New Rome had never seen a hostile army within its walls. The shores of the Marmora were dotted with the pleasant villas of merchants and nobles, for the roads were good, and the capital to the last provided security for life and property. I n the foregoing pages I have endeavored to describe the THE CONDITION OF CONSTANTINOPLE IN 1200. 205 wealth and luxury of the city as it existed in 1200. The Crusaders were amazed at the many forms in which this luxurious wealth was displayed. To the inhabitants of Constantinople this luxury was the outward form in which civilization showed itself—was, in fact, the natural result and the proof of civilization. To the Crusader it was no more the sign of civilization than was the display of a somewhat similar luxury to the English soldiers who in our own days entered Pekin. The countrymen of Richard the Lion-hearted, the contemporaries of the barons who secured our great charter, no less than the countrymen of Philip of France and Frederic Barbarossa, marvelled at what they saw; but they felt that all the luxury was associated with much that was mean, debasing, and effeminate. They saw wrealth, and with it cowardice, luxurious habits of life, lying and treachery, the glorification of the few at the expense of the many, and the absence of public spirit, with its corresponding results in the administration of government. Side by side with the gorgeous pageantry of the court there „« . . was an amount of effeminacy which rightly impressed 1 j r N the miing the Crusaders with a low opinion of the state into classes. ., ., , J Effeminacy of . . ^ , . •• * which the empire had fallen. Native writers, as well as travellers from Western Europe, abound with stories showing to what a degree this effeminacy had been developed. It seemed to the men of the West, who counted courage as the highest virtue, as the virtue which implied almost all others, that the manliness had gone out of the race in consequence of its wealth. At times, no doubt, they were led into the mistake of under-estimating the valor of their enemies, and of supposing that because they were luxurious they were cowards; as when the Germans, who, under Conrad, King of Swabia, with a more numerous force had attacked the Roman army in 1147, were defeated by the superior strategy of the enemy they had despised. What the Crusaders found fault with were the results of a The influence l ° n g period of decadence in social manners and life, Boctety inp?he t a e history of which it is not difficult to trace. The capital. success of the New Rome in Asia had been the principal cause of its weakness, and largely contributed to its 206 THE FALL OF CONSTANTINOPLE. downfall. So long as the country had been able to keep its democratic organization of municipalities—so long, that is, as the Greek idea of local government had continued, so long the empire had been in little danger. After its conquests had been extended far eastward, its wealth caused the emperors to be independent of the European provinces, and enabled them gradually to deprive the provincial towns and cities of their independence. The nobles of Constantinople governed the provinces of Syria and Asia Minor as sovereigns in everything but their subjection to the emperor. The government in the capital fell gradually into the hands of men who had been used to these Asiatic modes of rule. The traditions which the Greek race had preserved of independent municipal rule were forgotten- All government was centralized in the capital, until the people in the provinces began to forget that the interest of Constantinople was also theirs. There were, as we have seen, new influences at work, the tendency of which was to make the government Venetian in character, but of these the Crusaders knew nothing. Even in the capital itself the influences of Asia were altogether baneful. The rulers had but few occasions when it was necessary to consult the wishes of the citizens. Wealth poured into the imperial treasury in such abundance that an appeal to the popular will for new taxes was rarely necessary. The citizens lost their interest in politics worthy of the name, and confined themselves to taking part in the many dynastic changes with which the later history of the empire abounds. Even from the foundation of the New Rome its imperial government had been possessed with the ideas of luxury which had already weakened the elder city on the banks of the Tiber. A new government had been imported into Byzantium, a government which was Caesarian and absolute in character, and which had even in Italy absorbed much of the effeminacy, extravagance, and luxury of the East. The position, however, of the city of Constantine rendered it more liable than its predecessor had been to be affected by the influences averse to progress which have usually surrounded Asiatic princes. The gorgeousness of the Persian and Indian courts came to be reproduced on the Bos- THE CONDITION OF CONSTANTINOPLE IN 1200. 207 phorus, just as they were in the cities even of the Mahometan caliphates on the Tigris and the Euphrates. And as the New Rome claimed something like universal dominion, it seemed natural to her citizens that her splendor should eclipse theirs. Her conquests enabled her to succeed in doing so. Without attempting to trace how this result was brought about, and especially without attempting to trace the long series of events by which the ideas of absolutism and centralization gradually undermined the systems of local government which had been preserved in the villages and towns, it is necessary, in order to understand the position of the imperial government at the end of the twelfth century, to see what were the results of the influence of Asia on the social life of the New Rome. The first and most noxious of these results was the bringing Position of * n t o Europe of the Asiatic conception of the position woman. j have ventured to express my opinion 0£ w o m a n # already that the fatal curse of Mahometanism is that the position it assigns to woman renders progress beyond a certain point impossible. Family life in the European sense cannot exist. Woman holds, and has everywhere held, under Moslem rule an inferior position, and the inevitable result ensues after a few generations that the whole race has become less moral, less manly, and less intelligent. An observer ready to examine all systems of religion with academical impartiality would find a difficulty in pointing out any doctrine or practice taught or permitted by the religion of Islam which should prevent its followers from growing in civilization, except it were in the position universally assigned in practice among Mahometans to women. To regard her as existing only for the purposes of pleasure or of propagation, and as necessarily degraded in thought, and therefore requiring to be watched lest she should be unfaithful, is to degrade her, and implies keeping her in ignorance, and shutting her off from the education obtained by contact with the world. But to degrade generations of mothers means also to degrade the race itself. The New Rome, by her proximity to Asia, had acquired far too much of this Asiatic conception of the position due to 208 THE FALL OF CONSTANTINOPLE. woman. During lon^g centuries the notion of her degradation had been spreading downwards from the court and the capital, and this in spite of the position which Roman law had assigned her. Fortunately for the descendants of the inhabitants of the lower empire, they were saved by their religion from the lowest depth which the Asiatic creed had permitted or caused. Christianity had never permitted polygamy, and the spectacle of hundreds of women kept together in luxurious imprisonment in Constantinople was reserved for later times and Asiatic courts. But allowing for the absence of polygamy, the estimate of woman in the capital was altogether Asiatic in character. Nicetas, who as a monk regarded woman from a monkish point of view, finds fault with the wife of Alexis the Third, and incidentally gives an indication of the position of woman a few years before the time of the Latin conquest. He says that he does not complain of her insensate luxury nor of her prodigal extravagance, but of her immodesty (which he explains to mean that she was shameless enough to wish to take a part in the government); that she gave her orders without waiting to see whether they were in accord with the wishes of the emperor; that when the latter received foreign ambassadors her throne was as high as his, and she took her seat covered with diamonds and precious stones. The nearest relations of the emperor would carry her litter on their shoulders as if they wTere her slaves. The real cause of complaint against her is that she did not live in retirement at the palace, but that she allowed herself to be seen in public places and on public occasions, sometimes even unaccompanied by her husband. A life very like harem life had been introduced at court and among the nobles. Women were secluded and like harem treated in much the same manner as women in Asia. life. Above all, one of the worst institutions of Asia, that of eunuchs, had been introduced. If there be an institution which more than all others tends to degrade both man and woman, and to prevent the progress of a race, it is the one in question. The eunuch not unusually rises to be the chief THE CONDITION OF CONSTANTINOPLE IN 1200. 209 confidant, and sometimes the chief adviser, of his master, and, if he does not attain so high a position, is pretty certain to be a person of great consequence in the household. He is the chief channel for intrigue, the principal instrument of corruption. A savage usually in origin, he is elevated to a position which enables him, if in the imperial court, to sway the fate of a state. His power and influence act on the community like leaven. The continual renewal of relays of these savage or barbarian servants is the continual renewal in the body of a community of the virus and corruption of savage or barbarian morality, and each eunuch is a centre of malign influence. At the opening of the thirteenth century eunuchs had long been known in the imperial city. Wherever they are mentioned we see that their influence was very considerable. In the attack upon Prosacus by Alexis the Third in 1199, the generals of the army strongly advised that the city should not be attacked. This advice was, however, overruled by that of the eunuchs.1 They rose to be ambassadors; 2 they were named senators; and within five years of the Latin conquest one had been appointed prefect of Constantinople. At the displays in the hippodrome they took part with the nobles. When Alexis heard the news of the departure of the crusade for Constantinople, which was destined to destroy the city, his preparations against attack wTere of the feeblest. He had given himself over to luxury, and had left the government of the empire in great part to his eunuchs. "These creatures," says Nicetas, " who guard the mountains and the forests for the emperor's hunting with as great care as the old pagans guarded the groves sacred to the gods, or with a fidelity like that with which the destroying angel guards the gates of Paradise, threatened to kill any who attempted to cut timber for the fleet."3 When this prince fled on the first victory of the expedition, it was a eunuch who assembled the troops, seized Euphrosyne, the empress, and her friends, took the blind Isaac out of prison, placed him on the throne, and sent across to Galata to inform the enemy of what had 1 Nicetas," Alex." Book III. 2 Cinn. VII. ii. p. 296. 14 3 Nicetas, p. 716. 210 THE FALL OF CONSTANTINOPLE. been done for the father of the young Alexis, who was with them. The court was filled with eunuchs, comedians, clowns, musicians, and mistresses. Nicetas incidentally mentions that the mistresses sat at the imperial tables with the empress.1 The shortest road to success or to employment in the State was through the influence of these court favorites. In the Church alone were learning and character aids to promotion, but even subservience ^n the Church the influence of the court was so of the church. g r e a t i y superior to that of the patriarch that the prelate of holy life, respectable character and attainments, was too often postponed to the favorite of a court mistress, buffoon, or eunuch. Indeed, one of the worst results of the Asiatic influences which had overwhelmed the court was the subserviency into which, as an institution, the Church had fallen. The bishops of the Elder Rome had succeeded in becoming lords of the West in all that related to things spiritual as completely, perhaps even more completely, than the emperors had succeeded in retaining their power as lords in things temporal. In the New Rome the emperors had been more powerful. From the moment when Constantine had declared Christianity to be the religion of the empire he and his successors had never relaxed their hold over the rule of the Church. The Church had become much more than in the West the reflection of the State. But the abuses which had infected the one had stricken also the other. Just as the emperor changed his ministers when he liked, so also he endeavored to change the rulers of the Church. H e never succeeded to the same extent, but the success to which he attained shows how subservient the Church had become. Nicetas mentions, for example, that Isaac Angelos in his short reign dismissed four patriarchs in succession: the first under the pretext that he had allowed certain ladies to leave a monastery whom Andronicos had forced to become nuns; the second, although named by him, because he was old and feeble; the third, although the emperor had named him, on 1 Nicetas, " Isaac," Book III. THE CONDITION OF CONSTANTINOPLE IN 1200. 211 pretence that the nomination had been revealed by the Virgin, he dismissed in order to place the favorite of the hour on the patriarchal throne. The latter, however, was violently opposed, and in his turn had to give way to a new favorite.1 The history of the twenty years preceding 1200 is full of illustrations of the effeminacy and corruption of the the later em- times. The boy emperor, Alexis Comnenos, passed his life, says Nicetas, at play and in hunting, while the courtiers who were about the empress were decked out, curled, and scented like women. The treasury was robbed to support the debauchery of the palace. Andronicos Comnenos, his successor, although, as we have seen, an old man, devoted himself largely to the s' * the hippodrome and to horseracing. His orgies in h\ wintry palace on the shores of the Marmora, where he was accompanied by a number of mistresses, and spent days in drunken debauchery, were alternated with journeys to the city, where his visits were more dreaded than his absence, because it had come to be remarked by experience that each visit was attended by some act of striking cruelty. A feminine love of display was the characteristic of his successor, Isaac Angelos. H e appeared every day in new robes. His table was a daily show of wasteful profusion. There were, says Nicetas, " forests of game, seas of fishes, rivers of wine, and mountains of bread." He went every other day to the Eastern, or, as it is now called, the Turkish, bath, making use there of the most exquisite perfumes. He went about glorious as a peacock, was fond of songs, and his gates were ever open to actors, buffoons, and jugglers. Though the revenues of the empire had been for many years constantly decreasing, the palace expenditure had not been diminished, and the emperor was forced to fall back on the usual resources of Eastern despots in order to provide for it. The coinage was debased. Taxes were largely increased. Officers were sent to administer the government or to dispense what ought to have been justice without any means to pay their own ex1 Nicetas, " Isaac," Book II. 212 THE FALL OF CONSTANTINOPLE. penses. They wTent forth, says Nicetas, like the apostles, " without scrip or purse," the emperor knowing they could not afford to be honest, but that they would bring tribute to the palace. Churches were robbed. The sacred vessels were taken for the use of the palace. The rich ornaments and precious stones let into the binding of the Gospels were despoiled. Liturgies and crosses were stripped in order to supply necklaces and bracelets. When the ostentatious Isaac was replaced by Alexis the Third, it was found that the new emperor gave himself up to idleness, under the impression that work was inconsistent with the dignity of an emperor. The organization for administering the government throughout the empire, including that of the administration of justice, borrowed from Old Rome, remained almost unaltered as to form. The law was still almost as excellent as ever, but its administration was too often corrupt. The situation had become very much as if English law were to be transferred to the people of an Asiatic state, and left to them alone to develop. There would be subtleness and ability enough to work out any number of legal problems, but it is, to say the least, doubtful whether such securities as habeas corpus and trial by jury, which are spontaneous growths due to the determination of the race to secure individual liberty, could continue without the ever-jealous spirit of Englishmen, continually on the watch to prevent violations of the rights of which they are the safeguard. The race which has created thqm may be trusted to guard them. It is questionable whether another race would be either likely to appreciate or to show the spirit necessary to preserve them. So in the East, the administrative system of the Elder Rome was being worked in the empire under the New Rome by rulers w7hose later history, at least, had been far different from that of its creators. So long as there were a sufficient number of men wrho had come under Latin influence, or wrho retained the old Greek spirit, the system worked well. But the Latin spirit had gone out of the ruling race, as the Greek municipal spirit had also been to a great extent crushed out in the provinces. I t looks at times as if nothing but the forms of the old organization THE CONDITION OF CONSTANTINOPLE IN 1200. 213 had remained. The courts of law were no longer unreservedly trusted. The administration of every department of the government, as well as that of the courts of justice, was at times tainted with corruption. The imperial family itself shared directly in the profits of this corruption. We have seen how one emperor sent out his emissaries without scrip or purse to plunder his subjects, and how another emperor is charged with taking a share in the profits, if he did not actually fit out six vessels to engage in piracy upon the ships of his own people. Prisoners were let out of jail to work, and no doubt on occasions to steal, for the jailer. Judges purchased their offices, and as a consequence sold their judgments. Alexis the Third, who came to the throne in 1195, published an edict to the effect that public offices would no longer be sold, but would be given free to the fittest men; but his historian, while adding that such a reform would be one of the most praiseworthy that could be conceived, is careful to add that his good intentions were not seconded by those nearest to him. The ring of Byzantine nobles rendered him for the time as powerless as the ring of pashas would to-day render a reforming sultan. Nicetas states that the men who formed this ring became immensely rich from the presents of those who wished to obtain any concessions from the government through their intervention. The highest offices both in the cities and in the provinces were publicly sold. Moneychangers, ignorant men, and even Scythians, were allowed to buy the title of csesar. Creditors were paid by delegations— or, to employ the word too well known in Constantinople now, havales—upon the provinces. The population which would tolerate such a government and such humiliation was as far from the manliness of the barons who, a few years later, were to figure at Eunnymede as they were from the virtue of the Roman legions of the republic during its best period, or from that of the Greek republics. In truth, it wras not only the spirit which would resent a national injury which had disappeared from the Byzantine nobles, but the virtues of self-respect, patriotism, and courage. The ruling classes had lost all trace of either 214 THE FALL OF CONSTANTINOPLE. Roman or Greek spirit. Cunning and intrigue had come to be recognized as the highest statesmanship. Treaties had been made with foreign states in order to put them off their guard and make them more easy to be attacked. Diplomacy meant dissimulation, and perfidy was substituted for courage. Government existed as machinery for squeezing money out of the provinces. The natural results ensued among the people. The old ideal of Borne as existing for the good of the public had disappeared. Reverence for law and equity as synonymous with justice had perished. The Greek ideal of compact states seeking the benefit of the whole community had been lost. Asiatic influences had filled the governing classes with the same lying and vainglorious spirit which has ever been the fault of all Eastern courts, and made the people regard such classes as the public enemy. With the effeminacy which may fairly be attributed to AsiPrevaience of a ^ c influences there existed an amount of superstisuperstition. j . j o n w hi c h 5 w itli some hesitation, I should attribute in great part to the same source. Talismans were almost universally used. No important expedition of state was undertaken without reference to the astrologers. If their predictions turned out correct, they were held in honor; if they failed, recourse was had to others, but the belief in the possibility of discerning future events by reading the stars remained unshaken. Faith in magic was yet strong; the statues about the city were all regarded as exercising an occult influence on persons or events. The figure of Minerva, which appeared to be beckoning towards the West, was destroyed by the mob on the approach of the Crusaders under the belief that it had exercised some kind of influence in bringing them to Constantinople. The Empress Euphrosyne, the wife of Alexis the Third, ordered the bronze statue of the boar struggling with the lion, one of the most famous groups in the city, to be mutilated in order to secure the success of her divinations. During the reign of Manuel a statue on the Arch of Triumph in Constantinople, representing a Roman, fell down just after the declaration of war against Hungary, while another near it, representing a Magyar, remained standing. Manuel was proof against THE CONDITION OF CONSTANTINOPLE IN 1200. 215 the superstition of his people, and insisted upon reversing the position, believing, says JSTicetas, that by so doing he could change the fate of the two nations. The same writer tells us that even Manuel never failed to consult the astrologers in all his enterprises. Madmen were held in honor, and believed to be divinely inspired. Every church had its relics, and the belief in their intercession, or in that of the saint to which they had belonged, was of the most implicit kind. Certain pictures wept. The famous representation of the Virgin in the chapel of Blachern was only one among hundreds of miracle-working pictures. Each person had his charm, his relic, or some particular object of wTorship in which he trusted. Isaac Angelos had special confidence in the intercession of the Virgin, and went into ecstasies when he saw her portrait. Superstition saturated the life of the period. Certain days were sure to bring good luck, others to cause disaster. The stars had their meaning, and governed or showed the lives of individuals or of states. Eclipses and exceptional darkness portended events which the astrologers pretended to read. Nicetas notes with amazement that the conquest of the city was not attended by any prodigy, and appears to think that the absence of such an event was an additional proof of the judgment of Heaven against the capital. In spite of the horrible punishment which had been decreed by successive emperors against the practice of demonology and divination—which, it must be remembered, did not mean an attempt to defraud, but the actual consulting with devils—there were still recognized professors of the mystery. The Emperor Andronicos consulted one of them, who, says Nicetas, had been initiated in these detestable mysteries from his earliest youth, and who had been punished as a sorcerer in the time of Manuel. His act of divination appears to have been the childish one, which still lingers as an amusement among us, of whirling round an infusion in a basin, and observing what letters are made by the sediment. The historian, while expressing his horror of the practice, has no doubt of its efficacy. The demon gave an answer, and the answer was necessarily right. 216 THE FALL OF CONSTANTINOPLE. The luxury of the court, the degeneracy and effeminacy of Destruction of t n e ruling class, were nowhere so disastrous in their the peasantry. e ff e c t s a s on the means of defence. Indirectly the accumulation of wealth in the hands of the nobles and governing classes in Constantinople contributed greatly to the loss of Asia Minor. During the tenth and eleventh centuries the cultivation of that portion of the empire had been in the hands of a Greek-speaking peasantry. The nobles during the century which preceded the incursions of the Seljukian Turks had rapidly accumulated land. Peasant owners had almost ceased to exist. The estates were cultivated by slaves, whom successful wars enabled the nobles to capture or their wealth to purchase. The peasants had been both able and willing to fight for their hearths and homes. Serfs or slaves had, however, no wish to risk their lives for their masters. The result was that, when the hour of trial came, the enemy had to be met with the regular forces of the empire. The means of meeting him by a peasantry which would harass his every movement, which would be continually on the watch to resist every settlement of a Turk or Tartar in the country, which wTould be as persistently and tenaciously hostile as the Montenegrins have been during five centuries, did not exist. The inroads of a barbarian host had no terrors to men who had been reduced to serfdom or to abject poverty, who had nothing to lose, and whose soil was possessed by nobles who were hard taskmasters. So far, indeed, from the enemy being greatly feared by the peasants, there were, as we have seen, many examples of whole villages submitting themselves to the Turkish rulers, alien in race, religion, and language, in order to escape the oppression of their own countrymen. The corruption of the capital left the navy in a disastrous weakening condition. The hardy sailors of the Marmora and of the navy; Qf ^Q islands of the JEgean supplied a body of men who were always ready to make admirable crews for the imperial fleets. But the ruling classes had been so long accustomed to meet the enemy on land that the navy had come to be gradually neglected, and at the time of the Latin conquest was so weak that it took no part in the defence of the city. THE CONDITION OF CONSTANTINOPLE IN 1200. 217 The power which possesses the Bosphorus and the Dardanelles ought always to be strong at sea if it possesses also the islands of the Archipelago. Nowhere in the world has there been, or is there, a nursery of seamen which produces more sailors. Their quality, from the days of the heroes of Salamis down to those of the exploits of Kanaris, has always been excellent. And yet, in spite of such a resource, the empire had for a century and a half previous to 1200 hired most of its fleets from the Venetians, and done its naval fighting in large part by deputy. The fiction of keeping up a fleet continued, indeed, until the attack upon the city, but it was improbable that the fleet of an empire which had done its fighting by deputy could cope with that which had been employed to do the actual work. When the hour of danger came it was found that the admiral, Michael Struphnos, brother-in-law1 of the Emperor Alexis the Third, had sold the stores, and had appropriated to his own use the supplies that should have enabled the fleet to put to sea. The effeminacy produced by Asiatic influences was conspicuously and lamentably shown also in connection e army. ^ . ^ ^ army. During long centuries the New Home had preserved the traditions and the discipline of Boman army organization, and even in 1204 these had not been altogether lost. But the spirit which made the Greek phalanx and the Boman legion victorious had disappeared. The breaking up of the Boman system of administration in the army, and, indeed, in the government generally, dates from the time of the Basilian dynasty, and especially from the reign of Leo the Sixth. The period is one of great external success and military glory, but this very success and prosperity facilitated the destruction of the municipal spirit which gave life to the empire. It is at this time that we find the degeneracy of the empire really beginning. The emperors had become so powerful, and had been so influenced by the success of their Asiatic conquests, that they commenced for the first time to rule as Asiatic despots. The emperors had found it so convenient to hire mercenaries, and so inconvenient to force their own 218 THE FALL OF CONSTANTINOPLE. subjects to take the field, that they had come to do a large part of their fighting by means of foreign substitutes. The Immortals, or 'AQavaroi, remind us at once of their Asiatic origin. The Waring guard had held a deservedly honored position during two centuries before the Latin attack on Constantinople. Italian and other mercenaries also hired their services to the emperors. The Spanish Jew, Benjamin of Tudela, saj^s: " The Greeks hire soldiers of all nations whom they call barbarians. They have no martial spirit themselves, and, like women, are unfit for military enterprises." The judgment is too severe, but, even with a large allowance for exaggeration, it shows what was the opinion of an independent observer from the West of the decay of martial spirit. When the later emperors went themselves to war they encamped in palaces of canvas, which recall the appliances of a Darius or other Eastern monarchs. Emperors alien in blood, commanding soldiers hired from foreign nations, became at times the slaves of their own mercenaries, and had to buy their allegiance by large donatives. The dynastic struggles of the quarter of a century preceding the Latin conquest caused the foreign mercenaries to become yet more powerful and to be yet more petted than they had been before. When, in 1195, Alexis threw Isaac into prison and ascended the throne, he scattered money and honors among his supporters with a lavishness which not only made the public honors cheap, but which emptied the public treasury. But even this prodigality was not enough, and the emperor had to distribute a part of the public domain among the troops in order to assure himself of their good-will. As wTe approach 1200 we find the weakness of the empire from effeminacy and luxury continually increasing. Even Manuel, in 1175, was suspected of having bought off the opposition of the Venetians. Nicetas notes with something like horror that the Emperor Alexis the Third wished to buy peace; that instead of fighting Henry, the successor of Frederic Barbarossa, he endeavored to dazzle his ambassadors by the splendors of the court and by robes which were one mass of pearls and precious stones; that the ambassadors bluntly THE CONDITION OF CONSTANTINOPLE IN 1200. 219 replied that neither they nor their countrymen valued such things, but regarded them rather as suited to women ; that the emperor levied a duty called the German tax in order to buy off the enemy; and that when the senate, the clergy, and the commons refused to help him, he robbed churches and tombs of their treasures in order to raise the amount necessary. In truth, the martial spirit had gone out of the race. The period with which we are immediately concerned, namely, the latter portion of the twelfth century, Period is one of mental « . 1 . .• • -»r • • i was one ox mental stagnation. Men were occupied with matters of such political and immediate interest that they had little time for literature or thought. The nation had to meet foreign enemies on every side, and the soldier rather than the man of letters was the man to be honored. It was a transition period between the time when scholars had poured out their floods of learning in the development and the definition of Christian theology, and the period of the new movement which led to reformation in religion and to the revolution in politics. Men were resting on the labors of their predecessors, and during the twelfth century made few valuable contributions to human knowledge. There were indeed signs of a better time, but the dawn was hardly yet at but also of hand. The appreciation of works of art was still menSfcu^6 h i g h > a n d w a s probably growing in strength. Byure * zantine architecture was taking more and more the beautiful forms under which it wTas to become known to the world as Gothic. The internal decoration of churches, and probably also of private dwellings, had attained a high development. The mosaics and frescoes of the churches of Constantinople wTere already renowned in Italy, whither artists had gone, and had already prepared the way for the rapid progress in these forms of mural decoration which was made in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries. The Church was represented by a fairly educated and married priesthood, wThose influence tended to the education of the whole people. The very frequent references to Homer, the constant classical allusions, the quotations from Scripture, show not merely comparatively widespread reading on the part of the Greek writ- 220 THE FALL OF CONSTANTINOPLE. ers of this period, but imply a corresponding amount of knowledge on the part of those whom they hoped to find as readers. But it was in the great body of the people that the most hopeful signs were to be found. The municipal spirit developed among the Greek race had leavened the populations of Constantinople and the chief cities under Byzantine rule. The government of the municipalities had never been altogether surrendered by the people. The education given by the widespread commercial habits of the merchants was developing the intelligence of the people, with the result that they were never so intolerant in religious matters as the people of the West, and would never have tolerated among them a feudal system. Commerce, indeed, was the great glory of the Byzantine Empire. Commerce, writh all its advantages and velopment of all its drawbacks, was the characteristic feature of e empire. j$ew | £ o m e # The wealth, the luxury, the tolerance, the development of household and of ecclesiastical art wTere largely due to commerce. The neglect of the public weal, the lessening of interest in the management of public affairs, the abandonment of the wealthier classes to effeminacy and idleness, and the low ideal which was thus presented to the poorer classes, was largely due to the enormous increase of wealthy families which commerce had enriched. Had the external foes of the New Rome been fewer or had she been able to overcome them, there is reason to believe that Europe might have seen the development of a State in which there would have been an amount of material comfort associated with family life such as is hardly yet to be found in any European country. Side by side with this there would have been an intellectual activity which wrould have enabled the empire to preserve the foremost rank among European nations. On the Bosphorus would have been the capital of an empire which for twelve centuries after Christ had preserved an unbroken tradition of order, of good government, of knowledge of Greek literature, of commercial prosperity, of literary and artistic development. The imperial city had bridged over the dark centuries of turmoil which intervened between the pagan civilizations and those of Christianity. While the na- THE CONDITION OF CONSTANTINOPLE IN 1200. 221 tions of the West had been in course of formation, the-Roman Empire had, in the East, been continuing its history in almost unbroken prosperity. We may probably gain the best idea of the forms into which that prosperity would have developed by recalling what her great rival subsequently became. Venice, I repeat, was in her later history the reproduction on the Adriatic of what her former patron had been on the Bosphorus. The rule of the New Rome was over a wider area and under more difficult conditions than that of Yenice, but the resemblance is not the less remarkable. The condition of things in Constantinople at the moment comparison ^ w a s attacked by the army of the West presents diSueofe™r many resemblances, but with some all-important Sreek" atfd differences, to that which exists in the same city at under Turks, ^Q p r e s e n t moment. Then, as now, the people were oppressed, and in the practice of the government seemed to exist mainly for the purpose of paying taxes. Corruption had honeycombed every department of the State. Offices were bought and sold. The influence of the eunuchs was greater than that of ministers of state. Public debts were paid by delegations upon the provinces—a mode which then, as now, allowed the local government to share the plunder of the people. Money collected for the State was seized by the palace and diverted from its legitimate purpose. Effeminacy had taken possession of the ruling classes, and had done much to demoralize them. It would be easy to multiply the resemblance between the Constantinople of the twelfth century and the same city under the rule of the Ottoman Turks. The danger would be to make the pictures too closely resemble each other. The essential differences between them were of a vital character. There existed a public spirit in the capital which jealously protected private interests, and which was Bingularly unlike the apathy towards private wrongs which now exists. The people of Constantinople never forgot that they were the ultimate source of authority, that they could make and unmake emperors. They allowed the members of the royal family to fight out their differences, to intrigue against each other, to pay for the support of their followers 222 THE FALL OF CONSTANTINOPLE. within the city, though even here they interfered upon occasion, when a ruler became altogether bad. In political affairs there was a public opinion which was in marked contrast to the absolute indifference of the Turkish population of the city in our own time. The frequent insurrections were at least a mark of public interest in politics. But public spirit was especially strong where it has been under Ottoman rule the most strikingly weak. The populace was disposed to take too little interest in political changes. Touch, however, a private individual, and the corporation or guild to which he belonged would at once claim redress. The plunder of private persons by arbitrary exactions was what the population would never submit to. It had the trading instinct, the respect for property, the feeling of the necessity for solidarity, which the great trading communities of Europe have always possessed—the feeling which made the Venetians and the Genoese regard the robbery of one of their merchants as the business of state; but to this in the minds of the dweller in the New Rome was added a wider sentiment, since he remembered with pride that he wras a Roman citizen. Nicetas records an incident, happening within the last two or three years of the twelfth century, which shows how completely the popular feeling was opposed to arbitrary dealing with citizens. There dwelt in the capital a banker named Kalomodios, who during long years and under difficult circumstances had acquired great riches, to which he greedily clung. His reputation for wealth was widespread, and had exposed him to the wiles of some of the nobles, who wished to share it. A number of these seized Kalomodios. When the merchants heard of what had been done, they went in a body to the Great Church, found the patriarch, and threatened to throw him out of the window if he did not take steps to release the banker. The patriarch sympathized with the mob, promised to do his best, and succeeded in snatching this sheep with the fleece of gold from the teeth of the wolves who would have stripped him. The voluminous annals of Constantinople under the empire are singularly free from attempts against the property of private individuals. So long as the merchant did not take part in conspiracy or revolution, THE CONDITION OF CONSTANTINOPLE IN 1200. 223 his property within the city was safe. The explanation of the fact is to be found partly in the deep-seated respect for law—a respect which made even tyrants like Andronicos go through the form of a trial before he sent his victims to death or to blindness—partly in the remains of a healthy municipal spirit, which made the people act together against any unusual act of injustice to one of their number, but, above all, in the instinct developed by trade that the security of private property is the first necessity for commercial success. This latter is a feeling which the Turk never shares or has shared. He himself rarely engages in trade. In the capital a Turk is almost certain to be in the employ of the State, and he is almost as certain to regard traders as persons to be plundered. The Turkish attitude towards commerce has had much to do with the impoverishment of one of the most fruitful countries in Europe. In this respect the history of the city at its worst period before 1200 presents a favorable contrast to that which it has always presented under Turkish rule. To squeeze a wealthy rayah or a pasha has for centuries been the readiest resource of a sultan or a favorite in pecuniary difficulties. The practice is not yet forgotten, although the publicity which is afforded by foreign journals, and especially the fact that as soon as a man begins to amass wealth he takes care to obtain the protection of a foreign power in order to avoid such squeezing, has largely lessened the practice. Nor does the fall of the empire resemble that of the Ottoman Turks. The rule of the first fell after long The fall of the . . ' *? two empires centuries of struggles with external enemies, and respectively. . after a long period of success which had helped to demoralize the conquerors. Its rule had been weakened by dynastic struggles, due in part to the fact that the people were progressive, and that a more modern form of government —that of oligarchy—was being evolved from the older one of an absolute sovereign with divine attributes. The Ottoman Empire has lost successively its possessions in South Russia, in Hungary, in Eoumania, Servia, Greece, Bulgaria, Asia Minor, and Africa in consequence of the incapacity of its rulers to govern, and, above all, of their powerlessness to absorb con- 224: THE FALL OF CONSTANTINOPLE. quered races or acquire the habits of commerce, manufacture, or civilization. One empire fell, after an honorable existence of eleven centuries, the most civilized power in Europe; the other, inheriting such civilization, has been powerful only to destroy, and will leave its territories far in the rear of the least progressive country in Europe, and Constantinople the most backward of European capitals. So long as the armies of the present rulers were fed from the boundless supplies of men in Central Asia, so long as the harems were filled with European captives, and the supply of rulers kept up from Christian sources on the female side, so long was their military triumph secure, and their government at least better than organized brigandage. When these supplies were cut off and the Turkish race and religion were left to their own resources, decline immediately commenced, and is rapidly bringing the rule of the Ottoman Turk to its end. The essential difference between the condition of the Emsigns of bet- P* re e v e n under the Comneni and that of the Turkter things. j g } a E m p j r e j s t0 k e found in the results produced respectively by the religion of Christ and of Mahomet. The Christianity of the empire would have provided a means of regeneration, or would not have prevented the natural spirit of the population from developing itself. The religion of the Ottoman Turks is a hinderance to advancement. I am fully alive to the low condition into which the Orthodox Church has now fallen, though it was by no means so low seven hundred years ago. But I repeat, that if that Church had fallen as low as that of Abyssinia, it would still, as a philosophical system accepted and entirely believed in by the people, be superior as a civilizing force to Mahometanism, because at least it would not have been a hinderance to progress. As a fact, however, the Greek Church was still the preacher of morality, the torch-bearer of civilization, and the faithful guardian of the treasures of ancient Greece. The monks of Mount Athos were already multiplying the manuscripts which were to bring about a revival of learning in the West. Amidst the general indifference to public morality, priests and monks could be found whose lives and teaching were long protests THE CONDITION OF CONSTANTINOPLE IN 1200. 225 against the general corruption. The work of Nicetas Choniate, our principal Greek authority on the history of the Latin conquest, is imbued with a religious spirit—religious in the sense that he believed that God rules the world and will punish national immorality, that morality implies progress and immorality the reverse. He and others with him protested in the strongest manner against the corruption in government, the dissoluteness of the court, the absence of morality in statesmanship. In reading the history of his own times we are apt sometimes to forget that these protests were written in the thirteenth and not in the nineteenth century. The abuses in the State and the cruelty of the emperors were hateful to him. But for the fact that we meet with passages showing that his religion partook of the superstition of his age, we should hardly remember that he was the contemporary of what he records. The very discontent, amounting to querulousness, which runs through the whole of his narrative, and which' is found in other contemporary, or nearly contemporary, wTriters, is one of the most hopeful signs of his time. That he and so many of his contemporaries were profoundly dissatisfied with the condition of the empire gives reasonable hope that, had the Latin invasion turned out otherwise than it did, there would have been a national movement towards reform or revolution. This movement, as in Western Europe, would probably have first been felt in religion, and the Eastern Church might again have taken the lead in shaping the creecl of Western Europe. For, in spite of the subserviency into which the Church had fallen, its nominal masters were obliged to respect the opinion of its governing bodies. The disgust felt by Nicetas over the frequent change of patriarchs made by Isaac Angelos, and the excuses which that emperor had to make use of in order to justify his action, show that the influence of the Church was still great. The lethargy was already passing away; discontent at the prevailing corruption was widespread, both in Church and State. We, who have seen an Italy resurgent and Greece and Bulgaria re-entered among civilized nations, may well refuse to believe that an intelligent people, who were at that time the first in civilization, would not have shaken off 15 226 THE FALL OF CONSTANTINOPLE. their religious and political apathy, would not have recovered the strength which they had expended in resisting external attacks, and would not have had their reformation in religion and their democratic revolution in politics. CHAPTEK VIII. THE PREPARATIONS FOR A CRUSADE. T H E fourth crusade began to be preached in 1197. The earlier successes of the third crusade, notwithstanding the quarrels of its leaders, had led the Christians of the West to believe that the progress of Mahometanism might yet be checked. In 1187 Saladin had captured Jerusalem. Guy of Lusignan had been taken prisoner. Many brave Templars and Hospitallers, with many a nameless soldier of the West, had suffered martyrdom rather than renounce the faith. The fall of Jerusalem had been the immediate cause of the third crusade. Our own Richard the Lion-hearted, whose sole claim to be remembered is his skill as a captain of Crusaders, Philip of France, one of the ablest of French kings, and Frederic Barbarossa, the Swabian Emperor of Western Rome, had, as we have seen, united to reconquer Christian territory in Syria. Acre had been besieged, and after a two years' resistance, which had cost the Crusaders 300,000 men, had surrendered to Richard and Philip. Saladin had been defeated at Ascalon. Other places had been captured. But the victories and the results of the expedition fell far short of what might reasonably have been hoped for from the preparations which had been made by the three great sovereigns of the West. Jaffa had been taken by storm, but had been recaptured, and its Christian garrison massacred. Frederic wras drowned in 1190. The quarrel between Philip and Richard had been espoused by their followers. In 1192 the English king quitted Syria, wras shipwrecked, imprisoned, and went through some, at least, of the adventures which have associated the name of that sovereign with poetry and romance. Philip had returned home the same year. The victories which the Crusaders had gained would be altogether barren if help 228 THE FALL OF CONSTANTINOPLE. were not shortly sent to the Christians in Palestine. The supplementary expedition had been a failure. The Crusaders who had remained behind, aided by the Armenian, Greek, and Syrian Christians, were doing their best to hold the territory which had been conquered, but every year saw that territory decreasing. Every traveller returning from Syria brought a prayer for immediate help from the survivors of the third crusade. It was necessary to act at once if any portion even of the wreck of the kingdom of Jerusalem were to be saved. Innocent the Third and some, at least, of the statesmen of the West were fully alive to the progress which Islam had made since the departure of the Western kings. In 1197, however, after five jTears of weary waiting, the time seemed opportune for striking a new blow for Christendom. Saladin, the great sultan, had died in 1193, and his two sons were already quarrelling about the partition of his empire. The contending divisions of the Arab Moslems were at this moment each bidding for the support of the Christians of Syria. The other great race of Mahometans which had threatened Europe—the Seljukian Turks—had made a halt in their progress through Asia Minor. We have seen that their empire was also divided against itself. Moreover, the great Asiatic horde which was shortly, under Genghis Khan — perhaps the Prester John of the Middle Ages—to threaten the empire which the Seljukians had carved out of the eastern dominions of the New Borne, was already approaching, and the Seljukians were compelled to turn their attention to the formidable enemy of their own race which was threatening their rear. Other special circumstances which rendered the moment favorable for a new crusade, combined with the profound conviction of the statesmen of the West of the danger to Christendom from the progress of Islam, urged Western Europe to take part in the new enterprise. The reigning pope, Innocent the Third, was the great movinnocentthe ^US spirit of the fourth crusade. H e came to the Third. pontificate in 1198, when he was thirty-seven years old. Innocent was a man versed in the learning of his age, THE PREPARATIONS EOR A CRUSADE. 229 and of unceasing and untiring energy. His restless activity forced him to take interest in every question of the day. To be interested in a question meant for him to be actively engaged in its solution. There was not a country in Europe in whose affairs he did not take a prominent part. Quarrels between kings, between barons; disputes, as in the case of our own John, between kings and their subjects; differences between abbeys and monasteries in the most remote countries, were examined personally and decided upon finally by him. The decision once taken, he took care to have it obeyed. Nothing escaped his vigilance. No question was too large or too small to engage his attention. His vast correspondence is one of the marvels of the Middle Ages. His negotiations, not only with European sovereigns and their subjects, but with Leo the Great, King of Armenia, with the Bulgarians, and with the Wallachs, were unceasing. His legates and cardinals were in every country, laying down the law of the sovereign pontiff, scattering interdicts, issuing anathemas. 1 He, perhaps, more than any other pope, secured that the occupant of the pontifical chair should be listened to throughout Europe as one speaking with authority, that the pope should be an independent sovereign, that the Church should owe obedience to the pope alone among earthly sovereigns, and that the ruler of Rome should own no superior but God. I t is probably right to call the determination to carry out these designs ambition; but to understand the energy with which they were executed, one is forced to give Innocent credit for having believed that they were objects which it was desirable in the interests of mankind to attain. In his opinion he was called upon by divine right to govern Europe, to repress disorder, to put down civil war, to divert the fierce energy of Northern warriors away from anarchy into useful channels. The world was turned upside down. The Holy Roman Empire was divided against itself. What is now Germany was the scene of constant and bloody wars. Italy was divided. Everywhere there was anarchy and confusion. Our 1 " Hist, de Philippe Auguste IL," by M. Capefigue. 230 THE FALL OF CONSTANTINOPLE. fathers were right, no doubt, in opposing Innocent's designs in England, in seeing principally in his policy towards King John an attempt to advance the claims of the papal see against the rights of Englishmen. Matthew Paris says that John knew the pope as the most ambitious and proudest of men, a man insatiable after money and capable of every crime to obtain it; 1 but history does not bear out his judgment. Two schools of historians have discussed the character of Innocent. He stands before one as a clever Italian, an intriguing, ambitious priest, meddling in every business to advance the interests of the Church; and before the other party—that, namely, which believes in the Roman Catholic Church as the divine institution of the world—as the priest full of supernatural energy, of ability, and of success, the model pontiff, the type pre-eminently of the Vicar of God.2 Judging the man by the circumstances of his time, and putting aside his trivial weaknesses, one sees a clear-headed statesman who knew his own purpose, and was tenacious of its realization— one of the men who stamp their character upon the world's history in unmistakable outlines. It is in considering the amount of useful work done and the beneficial influence exerted by such popes as Innocent, that we, who are outside the Church of Rome, come to understand how the belief in the inspired character of the pope's official conduct has grown up. The character given of Innocent by a contemporary is borne out by his conduct during the fourth crusade—"a man of much discretion and kindliness, young indeed in years (he was thirty-seven when made pope), but old in prudence, ripe in judgment, adorned by the uprightness of his character, of a noble race and commanding presence, a lover of what was right and good, a hater of iniquity and vice, so 1 "Eccles. Hist." bk. lxxvii. " Cet homme dans la force de Tage, qui devait, sous le nom d'lnnocent III., lutter avec un invincible courage contre tous les adversaires de la justice et de l'Eglise, et donner au monde peut-^tre le modele le plus accompli d'un souverain pontife, le type par excellence du vicaire de Dieu."—Montalembert's " Hist, de Sainte Elisabeth." 8 THE PREPARATIONS EOR A CRUSADE. 231 that he was called Innocent rather from his merit than from chance."l But for us the important point is that during the eighteen The deliver- years of his reign the most absorbing thought of Hoiy^ml Innocent, the purpose to which he most constantly SSecthofghf8at adhered, was the deliverance of the Holy Land.2 llfe His first act, after he had ascended the pontifical throne, was to announce to Monaco, the Patriarch of Jerusalem, his intention of proclaiming a crusade. Six months later he ordered the crusade to be preached, first in Italy, and then throughout the rest of Europe. He sent letters to all princes, announcing to them his firm resolution to consecrate all his energy to this object. " Who is there," said he, " who would wish to shrink from the danger of the Cross when he remembers him who bound himself to the Cross to deliver us from the enemy? Arise, therefore, ye faithful; arise, gird on the sword and the buckler. Arise, and hasten to the help of Jesus Christ. H e himself will lead your banner to victory." 3 As an inducement to those who were ready to join in the holy war he promised pardon for past sins. H e placed the lands of the princes and the goods of the Crusaders under the protection of the Holy See during their absence; he declared that those who borrowed money for the expedition should be exempted from the payment of interest. Princes were invited to compel the Jews, who were the principal money-lenders, to remit the payment of interest to intending Crusaders. Rulers were urged to forbid the Jews to engage in any business in case of their refusal. Those who could not themselves take up the Cross were asked to provide substitutes, or at least to contribute to the expense. All who refused to give were warned that they incurred a grave responsibility. He ordered the clergy peremptorily to contribute a fixed portion of their revenue. He forbade the Venetians to furnish the Saracens with iron, ropes, wood, arms, galleys, ships, or any munitions of war whatever. Richard of Eng1 2 8 Gunther, c. vii. Hurter's " Hist, de Inno. III." i. 218, and elsewhere. Epist. i. 302. 232 THE FALL OF CONSTANTINOPLE. land had made war on Philip of France. Innocent sent a cardinal to France to conclude a treaty for five years between the two sovereigns, and wrote himself to his legate in France: " If men perish, if the churches are weakened, if the poor are oppressed, if the French and the English incur danger on account of their kings—all this is of less consequence than the loss of Palestine, than the extermination of the Christian name; and yet this is what will happen if these kings prevent their warriors from going to reconquer what has been lost, from protecting those who have been threatened." If the treaty were not accepted by the two kings, his firm resolution and that of his cardinals was to place the kingdom of the offender under an interdict, and to forbid, with the utmost rigor and severity, without regard to privileges and indulgences, the celebration of divine worship. Innocent pointed out that the time was opportune. " By the dissensions which divide the Saracens, the Lord gives to Christian people the signal for the crusade." * Innocent, in his determination to leave no stone unturned for the accomplishment of his purpose, wrote also to Alexis, the Emperor in the New Home, asking for his aid. " Who," he asked, "can do more than you, seeing your nearness to the field where the battle must be fought, your riches and your power? Will your majesty put all other considerations on one side, £hd come to the help of Jesus Christ and of the country which he has won by his blood? The Pagans will flee before you, before your army, and you—yon will share with the others in the pontifical favors." The assumption of an authority was not likely to be welcome at Constantinople, but the letter shows at least how strong was the determination of the pope to make the expedition a success. Legates were sent to the New Rome to negotiate with the emperor and the patriarch on the subject of the expedition and of the union of the two churches. The letter and the legates were treated with the utmost respect. The haugh1 Hurter, " Inno. III." p. 315. The same idea appears repeatedly in many of the epistles of Innocent. THE PREPARATIONS FOR A CRUSADE. 233 ty tone of the pope's letter, and the experience which the Greeks had had of the last crusade, were not likely, however, to produce a favorable reply. The Emperor Alexis, in his answer, recalled that when Frederic, a few years earlier, had promised upon oath to pass through the empire peaceably, he had violated his promise. He had done great injury; he had fought Christians as well as Pagans, and yet, in spite of this, Alexis claimed that the Greeks, out of veneration for the object of the expedition, had furnished him with all that was necessary. Notwithstanding this just cause of complaint, Alexis concluded this part of his letter by promising that if the empire were able to preserve its tranquillity, he would favor the efforts which should be made for the delivery of the Holy Sepulchre. As to the old question of the union of the two churches, the reply was that the best union would be brought about by each giving up its own will and submitting to the divine will. If the pope wished to submit the doctrines in controversy to the examination of a council, the Orthodox Church would take part in it. While admitting the zeal of the pope for the glory of God, Alexis could not conceal his astonishment at hearing the pope call the Roman Church the Universal Church, and the common mother of all the churches. That title belonged to the Church of Jerusalem. The old jealousy between the two Pomes was not to be overcome, and, as usual, found vent in the religious questions which divided the two churches. Little aid was to be hoped for Constantinople; but only little had been expected. Meanwhile in "Western Europe the efforts of Innocent had met with more success. In every church a box had been placed to receive the gifts of those who had the holy cause at heart, and a mass was ordered to be said weekly for the givers. Innocent again addressed himself to Philip of France. Christ himself, he repeated, had given the signal for the crusade. Philip ought not only to permit his subjects to leave, but to force them to quit their homes on so important a mission. Innocent did all that he could in every European country, in order that the effort about to be made might prove successful. 234 THE FALL OF CONSTANTINOPLE. The preacher of the new crusade, the Peter the Hermit who made known the pope's wishes to the people of preacher of France and of Flanders, was a priest named Fulk, of Neuilly. If we can imagine a Wesley or a Whitefield with middle-age surroundings, we may obtain a glimpse of his character and of the secret of his influence. If, as Gibbon alleges, he was illiterate, his ignorance was not observed by his contemporaries. It is true that after his ordination he had been reproached with ignorance; but in consequence of this reproach, or of his desire for knowledge, he went to the University of Paris, and returned to his parish to become a distinguished preacher. H e was full of zeal and enthusiasm. Like many of the great preachers of the churches, he regarded his own time as especially given over to wickedness. Contemporaries of his, monks and priests, had persuaded themselves that the world was shortly to come to an end, and that the mad confusion and anarchy of the time was one of the signs of the end. Fulk found in this belief the greater reason for putting right that which was wrong. H e denounced iniquity in high places with the utmost fearlessness. Clergy and prelates felt the bitterness of his speech. In spite of ignominious treatment, threats, and imprisonment, he warned nobles and kings alike that they were travelling rapidly on the broad way to hell. He denounced the new custom of lending money, which the Lombards had introduced into France, and spoke fiercely against avarice and sensuality. No danger could terrify him, no threat r._ v e him keep silence. His fervor made him popular with the people. At times his audience became so excited that men threw off their garments and offered their belts to the preacher, publicly confessing their sins and asking for public punishment. The people, rich and poor, came at last to hear him gladly. His fame had already reached Rome. Here, then, was the man whom Innocent had need of. His enthusiasm, his energy, his fearlessness, his apparent disinterestedness, were to be made use of, as the Church of Rome has so often utilized the undisciplined enthusiasm which other churches have driven into opposition. The pope commissioned him to preach the Cross in France, THE PREPARATIONS FOR A CRUSADE. 235 " to use the gift of eloquence which God had given him for the good of the Holy Land." Fulk executed his commission in Normandy, Flanders, and Burgundy. His reputation as a preacher, a healer of the sick, and a worker of miracles had preceded him, and crowds everywhere went out to hear him and to be influenced by his teaching. According to the popular belief, virtue went out of him, and his clothes were sometimes torn to rags from the struggles of the masses to touch them in order that sickness might be healed. It is easy to say that Fulk lent himself to the imposture, but it is more probable that he, like other middle-age revivalists, believed himself to be a divine instrument, and the marvels attributed to him to be proofs of his mission. It must be said in favor of Fulk that he was willing to turn the popular enthusiasm into a useful channel. " M y garments," said he, when the crowd pressed upon him, " are not blessed, and have no charm about them; but look, I am going to bless and give virtue to this man's cloak." At the same time, seizing upon one belonging to a bystander, he made the sign of the Cross upon it, in token that the wearer would join the crusade, and each one hastened to snatch a portion as a relic. His influence was marvellous and at times strangely exercised. If the crowd were too noisy, he obtained silence by solemnly cursing the noisiest. Sometimes he would lay about him lustily with his stick, while those who were wounded would kiss their wounds or the blood as sanctified by the man of God. Wherever he preached great numbers took the Cross, or contributed to the expenses of the crusade. His greatest success was in the conversion of Theobald of Theobald of Champagne. This nobleman, a nephew of Eichard champagne. 0 f j ; n g ] a i l ( j a n ( j 0 f Philip of France, a young man of twenty-two, was already renowned in arms and in song. Eighteen hundred knights did homage as his vassals. During the truce between the kings of England and France he had called together a brilliant assemblage to engage in or witness a tournament. Fulk invited the knights to gain a more lasting glory by joining in the crusade. Theobald, Count Louis of Blois, and Simon de Montfort, father of our English hero 236 THE FALL OP CONSTANTINOPLE. of the same name, with a host of others, accepted the Cross. Theobald, Earl of Champagne, was selected, from his rank and ability, to be the leader of the expedition. In his train were Geoffrey of Villehardouin, with many others of high rank. Under Theobald, the leaders were Baldwin of Flanders, whose wife was the sister of Theobald, Baldwin's brother Henry, Louis Earl of Blois, Simon de Montfort, and Count Hughes de St. Paul. I t may be mentioned here that the intention of the Crusaders, and probably also of Innocent, was that Eichard of England should be the leader of the expedition. His death, however, in April, 1199, put an end to this design. In one respect, however, his death contributed an element of success. Many of the French barons had joined him against Philip of France, and there can hardly be a doubt that but for his untimely death he would have defeated Philip. The hostility between the two sovereigns had been bitter. " The devil is loose; take care of yourself," had been Philip's warning to John when Eichard had been released. The French barons who had fought on the side of Eichard were glad, on his death, to escape the vengeance of Philip by joining the crusade. Among those who had been detached from the side of Philip by Eichard, and had joined the revolt of the Bretons against him, was Theobald of Champagne himself, the appointed leader of the crusade. Baldwin of Flanders had in like manner declared for Eichard, and probably joined the crusade the more readily on account of his death. At the opening of the year 1200 a considerable number of nobles and others had undertaken to join the crusade. France and Flanders contributed the largest share, but Germany also furnished a considerable contingent. During the year many meetings or parliaments of the leaders of the expedition had been held, but they had been adjourned because the number of Crusaders was not judged to be sufficiently large to justify the leaders in making arrangements for the transport of the army beyond sea. Towards the end of the year, however, a parliament was held at Soissons, in THE PREPARATIONS FOR A CRUSADE. 237 which it was agreed that the time had come when preliminary arrangements might be undertaken for the chartering of a fleet. The decision arrived at was that six messengers should be sent to treat with Venice, with full powers to make such agreements for the transport of the army as they deemed necessary. Shortly after, the messengers set out on their journey. Venice was chosen as being the city which was likeliest to furnish, if not the only city which could furnish, the Choice of Ven- , J *. £ . . i ice as port of large neet ot transports and convoys necessary. epai me. . ^ ^ ^ e choice was in many respects an unfortunate one, and ultimately led to the failure of the fourth crusade. W e have seen that Venice had occupied a neutral position between the East and the "West. On many occasions she had owned allegiance to the New instead of the Old Eome, and although at the end of the twelfth century she had her special reasons for hostility towards her former protector, she was as little inclined as ever to render obedience either to the pope in spiritual things, or to either of the rival claimants for the empire in the West in temporal things. The thunders of Innocent, which shook every other Western state, fell harmlessly upon Venice. The struggles between Guelfs and Ghibelins, whether in Germany or Italy, aroused comparatively slight attention among her people. Innocent, early in 1201, had declared for Otho, a nephew of Richard of England, the Guelphic claimant for the empire of the West, and had declared against Philip of Swabia, whom he had threatened with the penalties of the Church. But Venice cared little for such threats, and was ready to ally herself with Philip. Her great interest was to have a monopoly of the carrying trade by sea, and in order to preserve this she was ready, with equal indifference, to supply Crusaders and Infidels with contraband of war, or to transport the one or the other and their property whither they would. Venice was now in the first springtime of her splendor. The islands, which had themselves been constructed on the marshes, were already covered with stately buildings. The city had increased in wealth as Constantinople had declined. 238 THE FALL OF CONSTANTINOPLE. The monopoly over the seas once possessed by Constantinople had long since been shared by the republic, which recognized in the annual ceremony of the Bucentaur that her wealth was derived from commerce. She had been, as we have seen, specially favored in the New Rome. The tone of her civilization was that of Constantinople rather than that of any Western city. Her wealth, her distinction as a city whose civilization was more advanced than that of any Western rival, were derived from her intercourse with the New Eome. The very aspect of her streets wTere a reproduction of what had been seen on the Golden Horn. Her famous church, dedicated to St. Mark, was but a reproduction on a smaller scale of the still more famous church of the Divine Wisdom of the Incarnate Word which existed in Constantinople. The Crusaders of this and of former expeditions were profoundly impressed with the prosperity and magnificence of Venice. The New Eome was still the royal or imperial city; but both cities evidently opened to the Crusaders new worlds of wealth, luxury, and civilization. They marvelled much, says Eobert de Clari, at the great riches they found in Yenice,1 and numbers of contemporary writers bear testimony to the astonishment which her civilization excited. Of late years the Venetians had had difficulties with the Hostility of New Eome. We have seen that these difficulties JrTs^n-^" arose, in great measure, from the fact that the instantinopie. fluence 0 f Venice in Constantinople was no longer sufficient to exclude that of the other Italian republics. Isaac Angelos had, in 1187, and again in 1189, as we have also seen, concluded a new alliance, assuring to Venice her old privileges, together with the payment of a considerable indemnity. The consideration for the valuable concessions offered by the emperor was that the Venetians should place their fleet at the disposition of the empire, even in the case of a war against the emperor in the West. This treaty was confirmed in 1199 by Alexis the Third. In the spring of 1200 a quarrel took place at Constantinople between the Venetians and their great 1 Rob. de Clari, c. x. THE PKEPABATIONS FOR A CRUSADE. 239 rivals the Pisans. The Venetians complained that their treaties had been violated; that the subsidies promised by the emperor had not been paid ; above all, that the Pisans had been favored at their expense.1 The doge, during the summer of the same year, sent an embassy to Alexis to demand the payment of arrears and the renewal of commercial privileges. Another embassy was sent six months later, and, indeed, the whole year was occupied with negotiations, which served only to show that it was improbable that the republic should regain her supreme influence on the Bosphorus. But the hostility to Constantinople reached its height when the Venetians learned that Alexis had, in May, 1201, received an embassy from Genoa, and was negotiating with Ottobono della Croce, its leader, for the concession of privileges for trade in Komania which Venice had hitherto regarded as exclusively her own. From this time the doge appears to have determined to avenge the wrongs of his state on the ruler who had ventured to favor his rivals. The Doge of Venice at this time was the famous Henry Dandolo. H e was already a very old man,2 but full of energy, greedy of glory, exasperated against the empire, and devoted to the interests of the republic. He was able to command with equal success an army or a fleet. Though he was nearly, if not quite, blind, he devoted an amount of attention and ability to the cares of government which places him in the first rank of Venetian administrators. The New Eome was the special object of his hatred. The general belief after his death was that his eyes had been put out by order of the Emperor Alexis during his visit in 1172 or 1173 to Constantinople. 3 What is certain is that he 1 Nicetas, p. 712. Du Cange makes Dandolo ninety-two in 1201; but neither Villehardouin nor Andrea Dandolo use terms which would imply so great an age. 3 Daru, " Hist, of Venice," i. 201. Authorities are divided as to whether he was blind or only of weak sight. " Visu debilis et visu aliqualiter obtenebratus," says Dandolo. Sanutus, Villehardouin, and Gunther say that he was altogether blind. The "Chron. of Novgorod" says that he was blinded with a burning-glass by Manuel. 2 240 THE FALL OF CONSTANTINOPLE. bore against the empire an inextinguishable hatred, which made him willing to embrace any project directed against its capital city. He possessed the entire confidence of his fellow-citizens. His influence in Venice was so great that when he subsequently embarked with the Crusaders his son was appointed regent during the absence of his father. The six messengers chosen by the Crusaders at Soissons arrived at Venice in February, 1201. Four days amfein after their arrival they were introduced to the Venice council and the doge, in a palace which was bie?i riche et ~beau. "Sire," said their spokesman, "we are come to thee on behalf of the noble barons of France, who have taken the sign of the Cross to avenge the shame of Jesus Christ, and to reconquer Jerusalem if God wills it. And because they know that no men can help them so well as you and your men, they pray that for God's sake you will have pity on the Land of Outre-mer, and on the shame of Jesus Christ, and that you will labor that they may have ships of war and transports." The council took a week to consider what should be their reply. At the end of that time the delegates of the Crusaders were informed that the Venetians were willing to provide ships to carry 4500 horses, 9000 esquires, 4500 knights, and 20,000 infantry, together writh provisions for nine months, in consideration of a payment of four marks per horse and two per man. The total sum therefore to be paid, reckoning the Venetian mark at a little over two pounds sterling, was about iilSOjOOO.1 This contract was to hold good for a year. Besides this the Venetians promised to add, for the love of God, fifty armed galleys, in consideration that half transport ac- of the money captured should belong to them. The cepte ' terms were accepted by the delegates, were again submitted by Dandolo to the council, and were approved. A solemn service was held in St. Mark's, and much enthusiasm displayed at the conclusion of what each believed a good bar1 M. de Wailly estimates the mark at fifty-two francs. So also does Sismondi. See also Heid. THE PREPARATIONS FOR A CRUSADE. 241 gain. Villehardouin, whose narrative of the crusade has long been the chief authority on the subject, was himself the spokesman of the delegates, and thanked the Venetians, on behalf of his brethren, that they had taken pit}7 on Jerusalem, which was in slavery to the Turks, and that they were ready to aid in avenging the shame of Jesus Christ. The contract was signed early in April, 1201, and was referred to the barons, and was ratified at Corbie in the middle of May. It had been decided from the first that the expedition should Destination, be directed towards Egypt as the best base of operaEgypt, tions against the Mahometans in the Holy Land, though the plans and contract signed by the Venetians and the delegates contained the statement simply that the destination should be "for the deliverance of the Holy Land." The, decision taken in the council was kept secret from the army, to whom it was simply announced that the Crusaders would go beyond the sea.1 Charts of the route were prepared and sealed, and it was agreed that the Crusaders should be in Venice by St. John's Day, 1201. The doge and his council on the one side, and the delegates on the other, swore solemnly to observe the terms of the arrangements entered into. The contract was then sent to the pope, who approved it conditionally. Innocent could not see without distrust the contract made innocent ac- w ^ u those who had shown their readiness to serve raEgemln^1" either Christians or Moslems, provided they paid, conditionally. H e w o u l d j i a v e p r e ferred that the Pisans or the Genoese had been selected, and it was only on finding that no such arrangement could be made that he consented to accept the Venetians. 2 The conditions upon which he insisted showed the distrust which he entertained. He stipulated that there should be no attack made against a Christian state, and that a legate should accompany the army and watch over the expedition, in order to see that this article was complied with.3 1 2 Villehardouin, c. 4. " Inno." Epist. ix. " Conventiones illas ita duceret confirmandas ut videlicet ipsi Christianos non laederent, apostolicae sedis legati consilio accedente."—u Gesta Inno." No. 84. 3 16 242 THE FALL OF CONSTANTINOPLE. The leaders of the crusade had decided, as we have seen, that their operations should be directed against Egypt, choosing Many considerations induced them to arrive at this gyp " conclusion. The passage through Romania had been found during previous crusades to be long and costly. Even wrhen the Dardanelles had been passed, there remained the terrible march through Asia Minor, where the Turks hindered the progress of the Christians at every step, and where fever had rapidly thinned their ranks. The terrible experience of the last crusade had been that the great German army, after winning every battle it had fought, had, by the time it reached the Holy Land, melted away. The leaders wished to avoid this long and fatal route, and desired to be landed at some place where they could strike at the enemy before the army had been weakened by repeated contests, and wearied and demoralized by long marches through an unhealthy country. No place offered so many advantages from this point of view as Egypt. A short sail over a pleasant sea and the Crusaders could be landed fresh and vigorous and prepared for battle. The cost of transporting an army to Alexandria would be far less than that of taking it to any other part of paynimrie. The sea was the safest and most easily guarded road to keep open between the invading army and Europe. Alexandria was a base of operations which might be kept with surety against the enemy, while its port would always be open to supplies of men and means of warfare from the West. A footing once obtained, Egypt could better support the army of Christendom than any other country. Its perennial wealth had been the mainstay of the Arabs in their marvellous conquests over Syria and Northern Africa. Moreover, while the renown of Egypt was spread throughout Islam and Christendom alike, the enemy could be more advantageously fought in the densely populated delta than in the wide and thinly peopled regions of Syria. Probably, too, it was known in Europe that the Egyptian Arabs had lost their early vigor, that the climate had told upon them, and that they were already becoming an unwarlike race. The occasion, however, THE PREPARATIONS FOR A CRUSADE. 243 in 1201 was peculiarly favorable for an attack on that country. Saladin had conquered it, had abolished the Egyptian caliphate in 1171, and had done all that he could to exhaust its resources. On his death, in 1193, his two sons had quarrelled about the division of his empire. The one ruling in Egypt asked the aid of the Christians in Syria against his brother. The civil war which followed had still further weakened Egypt. But an exceptional and remarkable circumstance rendered an attack upon Egypt still more opportune. During five successive years the Nile had ceased to fertilize the country. 1 The result of this unprecedented calamity had been famine and distress. The population had been largely reduced. The wealth and strength of the country had been greatly diminished. To these considerations have to be added the fact that if Egypt were once in the hands of a crusading army it could be held against all invaders, and its wealth turned against Islam. Every Mahometan country would feel the loss of Egypt. A wedge would have been driven into the long stretch of Moslem territory between the Atlantic and India. Islam would have been cut in two and its wealth used to reconquer and hold Syria. The desirability of striking at Islam through Egypt, the very centre and fulcrum of Moslem power, had been recognized from the time of Godfrey by a succession of warriors and statesmen. Innocent the Third was especially impressed with the necessity of making the attack through Egypt. He called particular attention to the exceptional opportunity which the time presented from the accidental or, as he believed it, the providential impoverishment of the richest country in Islam, from the failure of the Nile to overflow, and from the division of its rulers. Even without these ac1 " Quod utique si fecissent" (L e., take Alexandria), " sperabile satis erat tarn ipsam magnificam civitatem quam et maximam ipsius totius Egypti partem, facile compendio, in eoruni potestatem posse transferri, eo quod totus fere populus terrse vel consumptus fame perierat, vel squalebat penuria propter sterilitatem eiusdein videlicet terrsB, cui Nilus frugiferas aquas, quibus earn rigare solet, annis, ut aiunt, jam quinque subtraxerat."—Gunther, "Exuv. Sac." i. 71. 244 THE FALL OF CONSTANTINOPLE. cidental advantages, no other spot offered so many opportunities for the attack. No other country, if conquered, would be so great a loss to Islam. These considerations, in fact, seem to have been so generally recognized that it is doubtful whether any other plan was seriously considered. It was to Babylon, as the Crusaders generally called Egypt, that the expedition was to go, because, says Villehardouin, " one could more easily destroy the Turks there than in any other country." 1 The choice having been made, it will become necessary to ask why the original plan was abandoned. How did it happen that an expedition prepared with great care, and proposing under such favorable circumstances to strike at the heart of Moslem power, turned away from its object and attacked the capital of Eastern Christendom ? The question is one which was asked by all Europe at the time and has never been altogether satisfactorily answered, although in our own time the laborious industry of German and French scholars has succeeded in bringing to light a mass of evidence hitherto unknown, bearing on the question. The conclusion to which this evidence appears to me to point will, I hope, become clear in subsequent pages. The agreement between the delegates of the Crusaders and the Venetians was ratified, as we have seen, in May, 1201.2 The crusading army was to arrive in Venice not later than the 24th of June, 1202. In the interval between these dates Death of many events happened. Theobald, Earl of ChamTheobaid. pagne, the young noble who had taken the Cross on the preaching of Fulk—who had probably been induced to do so partly in order to escape the vengeance of Philip of France—who had been elected leader of the expedition, and in whom all had confidence, died in May, 1201. His loss was the more serious that his great wealth was no longer available for the purposes of the crusade. A payment in advance which had Villehardouin, sec. 30. In the same month Innocent had invited the dignitaries of the Venetian Church to contribute towards the crusade from the Church revenues. See "Archives de FOrient Latin, i. 383. 2 THE PREPARATIONS FOR A CRUSADE. 245 been promised to Venice could not be met. The leaders were divided as to the course to be adopted for the conduct of the expedition. None among them possessed either position or ability sufficient to indicate him as the leader. After considerable delay the leadership was offered to the Duke of Burgundy, and, on his refusal, to Count Theobald of Bar, who also refused. Then a parliament of the Crusaders met at Soissons, and Villehardouin proposed Boniface, office! 11. Marquis of Montferrat. The proposal was finally, Montferrat as though reluctantly, accepted. From the first it was evident that Boniface had not the confidence of the Crusaders, and his election was the first severe blow given to the success of the expedition. Fulk himself affixed the cross to the shoulders of Boniface in the Church of Our Lady at Soissons, and, as the great preacher died in May, 1202, he disappears from this history. 1 The appointment of Boniface was in August, 1201. Two months later he was at the court of Philip of Swabia,2 on the invitation of that sovereign. "What was the object of his visit may never be accurately known; His visit to but subsequent events raise the presumption that Philip. Philip either had the design of an attack upon Constantinople before this visit, or formed such a design at, and in consequence of, his interview with Boniface. Philip, the head of the house of the Waiblings, or, as the name was now beginning to be spelled in Italy, Ghibelins, had married the daughter of Isaac Angalos, the emperor of the New Rome, who was at this moment a prisoner in Constantinople, deprived of his eyesight, though allowed to go about the city of which he had once been the ruler. 3 The son of Isaac and heir to the throne—whom we may conveniently call, after the fashion of the time, young Alexis, to distinguish him from the reigning usurper Alexis in Constantinople—had made his escape 4 from the capital. H e left the imperial city in the spring of 1201, arrived in Sicily, and sent messengers to Germany an1 2 Villehardouin, c. 9. " Gesta Inno. III." c. 84. 3 Nicetas, p. 712. One author states that the wife of the Emperor Alexis pitied the young man, and gave him notice that her husband had determined to kill him. Anon. Caietanus, "Exuv. Sac." p. 152. 4 24:6 THE FALL OF CONSTANTINOPLE. nouncing his safe arrival. Allowing three months for the news to reach Philip, there was ample time for the messengers of Philip to reach the Marquis of Montferrat,and for the latter to have been at the Swabian court in October. Boniface remained with Philip until January or February, 1202, and then left with an embassy for Rome, sent thither in order to induce Innocent the Third to take up the cause of young Alexis. 1 In the spring of the year the latter received letters of recommendation to the Crusaders from Philip. 2 It therefore appears clear that, from the beginning of 1202, the leader of the expedition had become aware of the facts connected with the claims of Alexis. Subsequent evidence indicates that even at this time he had promised Philip to aid him. A t the time appointed—namely, the 24th of June—most of the leaders of the expedition had arrived, according to the arrangement, in Venice. Baldwin of Flanders, Hugo Count of St. Paul, Geoffrey of Villehardouin, perhaps Boniface, and many also from Germany, were present, while the Abbot Martin and others from that country were on their way thither. 3 1 2 " Gesta Inno. III." Nicetas says (p. 715) "from Philip and the pope," but the latter is d o u b t f u l ; f r o m Tlcnca Pwfiijg TT}Q 7rpe(rfivrepag icai TOV prjybg 'AWa/jiaviag \iinrov. 4u- 3 M. Jules Tessier contends that the Crusaders could never agree upon the destination of the expedition. He admits that the most intelligent of its leaders proposed to attack Egypt, but he insists that the majority of the army were in favor of going to Syria. In support of this contention he (1) calls attention to the fact that the charter-party made with the Venetians makes no mention of either Syria or Egypt; (2) he quotes Villehardouin (par. 49) and claims that the "grant peril" of which the Flemings stood in fear was of going to Egypt/and (3) he quotes the reply given to the speech of the Abbot of Citeaux (Villehardouin, par. 96), "In Syria you can do nothing." The first of these arguments is inapplicable if the contention is well founded, that it was intended to conceal the destination of the expedition. Later on I give a different interpretation to the " grant peril" phrase, while the argument founded on the reply to the abbot appears to me to fall when connected with the surrounding circumstances. Gunther's statement that the resolution to attack Egypt was adopted unanimously (" Hii quidem omnes uno consensu in hoc convenerant, ut petentes Alexandriam") is probably too sweeping. See " La Diversion sur Zara et Constantinople," par Jules Tessier. (Paris, 1884.) CHAPTER IX. AREIVAL IN VENICE. MANY of the pilgrims had only left home between Easter and Whitsuntide, 1202. The ordinary road taken was over the Mont Cenis and through Lombardy to Venice. Meantime a fleet had left Flanders for the Mediterranean Non-arrivai ^ h a great number of Crusaders. The leaders of abfeCi?umblr" this detachment had sworn to Baldwin that they 8adei?siiirven- would join the division coming from Venice at the ice * first convenient place after hearing of its whereabouts. Baldwin and the other leaders of the crusade who had already arrived at Venice soon learned with dismay that many pilgrims had gone by other routes to other ports, and that thus it would be impossible to provide the number for whose passage the delegates had undertaken to pay the Venetians. Those present were unable to raise the amount agreed upon. They did their best, by sending messengers here and there, to persuade the pilgrims to come to Venice, and to point out to them that Venice was the only port from which they could start with a fair prospect of success. Villehardouin was himself sent on such an expedition, and succeeded in persuading Count Louis with a great number of knights and men-at-arms to come to Venice from Padua, where they had been encountered. Others were also brought in to Venice; but a considerable number had already left by other routes before they could be overtaken. Never, says Villehardouin, has a finer army collected than that which was at length gathered at St. Nicolo di Lido, the island where the Crusaders were lodged by the Venetians. No man had seen a finer fleet than the Venetians had prepared. The only fault to be found with it was that it could take an army three times as large as that which 248 THE FALL OF CONSTANTINOPLE. had assembled. The Venetians had kept their part of the bargain. " W h a t a misfortune," exclaims the marshal, "that so large a portion of the Crusaders had sought other ports! Had they come to Venice the Turks would have been put down ; Christendom would have been exalted." The Venetians, having done their part, now asked for paycnisadersun- m e n t of the passage money according to the terms able to pay. 0 £ ^\Q con tract. This, however, could not be raised. Many pilgrims had come without money; others were already sick of the enterprise, and, according to Villehardouin, hoped that the money would not be found. Baldwin of Flanders, Earl Louis, and the Marquis and the Earl of St. Paul did their utmost, by borrowing, to raise the amount promised. But when all was done, when many a beautiful vessel of silver and of gold had been taken to the doge's palace, when two collections had been made, 34,000 marks out of the 85,000 stipulated for were still wanting. So far we are on safe ground. All contemporary accounts agree that the contract with the Venetians was broken; that a.large amount was wanting to complete the sum agreed upon to be paid as freight; and that, even after every effort had been made to raise this sum, about 35,000 marks still remained due. From this time forward we are upon doubtful ground. official and The authorities upon whom we have to rely differ vertiofscof widely. The account given by Geoffrey of Villetue crusade. i iarc [ 0l rin 5 Marshal of Champagne, may be taken as the type of what has been aptly called the official versions of the expedition, and of these it ranks undoubtedly the first. Besides these versions, the labors of a number of historians, from Du Cange in the seventeenth century down to Count Riant, who has ransacked, and is ransacking, the libraries of Europe in search of evidence relating to the fourth crusade, have brought a large amount of evidence to light which may be conveniently classed as that of the unofficial versions. The official version of what passed in Venice is that which has been generally received by modern historians until our own time. Villehardouin states in few words that the doge, when it had become clear that the Crusaders could not pay the stipu- ARRIVAL IN VENICE. 249 lated sum, proposed that they should agree to assist the Venetians in recapturing Zara, in Dalmatia, from the King of Hungary; that the Crusaders were divided as to whether this proposition should be accepted; that those who were tired of the enterprise opposed, but that the majority accepted it. So far the oflScial account given by Villehardouin and followed by others. The diversion of the enterprise was due solely, according to these writers, to the simple fact that the Crusaders could not pay 34,000 marks. Villehardouin, whose history of the crusade is much longer than that of any other contemporary writer, skips over, in a few short paragraphs, the events which happened between the arrival in June and the alliance to attack Zara. The transaction was, according to him, the simplest possible. The Venetians had completed their part of the contract; the Crusaders were unable to pay their fare; the doge made a proposal which was accepted. A t this point it becomes necessary to examine such other testimony as exists, in order to learn whether the diversion was due to the simple cause which is assigned for it by the great apologist for the crusade. The intention was, as we have seen, to go to Alexandria. " But this praiseworthy design," says Gnnther, " was hindered by the fraud and malice of the Venetians." " The Crusaders were received treacherously," says Rostangus," by those to whom they had come, who would not allow them for a long time to pass beyond sea. They refused to carry them beyond sea or to allow them to leave St. Nicolo di Lido unless they paid the uttermost farthing." The leaders and the Crusaders generally appear, as we have seen, to have done their best to pay. But the number for which the city had furnished transport was largely in excess of that which had been brought together by the end of June. Out of 4000 knights and their attendants, only 1000 had assembled. Of the 100,000 foot soldiers provided for, there were not more than 50,000 or 60,000 on the Lido. The Crusaders argued that those who had come and were ready to pay ought not to be forced to pay for those who had not come. The Venetians claimed their pound of flesh. Resistance was useless; the Crusaders were prisoners. The doge, according to Robert de 250 THE FALL OF CONSTANTINOPLE. Clari,1 told the Crusaders plainly, " If you do not pay, understand well that you will not move from this island, nor will you find any one who will furnish you meat and drink." I t was upon this threat that the leaders had borrowed what they could to pay their jailers. It was after a second collection for payment, in July, 1202, that there was still about one third of the freight, or, according to Robert de Clari, 36,000 marks, unpaid. Shortly afterwards the Crusaders were persuaded to accept a compromise, which, on the whole, could not be considered as unfair. Dandolo was understood to have proposed that out of the share of the first spoil which fell to the Crusaders in fighting the common enemy—that is, the Moslems —the sum due to the Venetians should be deducted. This proposition was gladly accepted. Subsequently this promise was changed into a proposal for an attack upon Zara. This city lies on the oppomadetothe site coast of the Adriatic to Venice, was the capital of Dalmatia, and belonged to the King of Hungary, wTho had himself sent aid to the Crusaders. It had been rising in importance for many years. The Venetians alleged that its inhabitants had often of late made piratical attacks upon their ships. Possibly the charge was true, but the real reason of the hostility felt towards it was a jealousy of its commercial prosperity. The non-official versions represent the Zara expedition as forced on the Crusaders. The official versions represent the Crusaders as gladly consenting to pay the Venetians out of the spoils taken at Zara falling to their share. The story of Villehardouin is not at variance generally with those of other contemporary writers. Its chief fault is a suppression of disagreeable facts. His object in writing the story of the crusade was to show that the expedition had not been 1 "La Prise de Constantinople," by Robert de Clary, or Clari, is by far the most valuable contemporary account which modern research has brought to light on the Latin conquest. The MS. was printed in 1868 by Count Riant, but only for private circulation. It was not really published until 1873, when Charles Hopf brought out his "Chroniques Greco-Romanes." Robert de Clari was present at the conquest of Constantinople. ARRIVAL IN VENICE. 251 so complete a failure as a crusade as the world had taken it to be. We must look to others for the unpleasant facts. The author of the " Devastatio ? * l states that the troubles of the Crusaders began even before their arrival in Venice. The Lombards charged them heavy prices for victuals. When they reached the city they were cast out of the houses and compelled to go to Lido. The Crusaders were there treated in every respect as captives. Provisions were sold to them at famine prices. A sistarius of corn cost 50 soldi. The Venetian rulers gave orders that no one should ferry any of the foreigners out of the island. The want of provisions and the sense of their helplessness created a panic among them. Those who could escaped. Some went home; some hastened to other ports in the hope of finding ships for Egypt or Syria. The summer heats caused a terrible mortality among the crowded host, so that, according to the same author, the living could scarcely be found to bury the dead. According to Robert de Clari, the doge himself came to recognize that the Venetian policy of pushing the Crusaders in their distress too far was mischievous. " Sirs," said he, addressing his council, "if we let these men go home we shall be looked on as rogues and tricksters. Let us propose to them that, if they will pay us the 36,000 marks out of their share of the first conquest they make, we will transport them beyond^ea." There was no proposal here to take Zara or to attack Constantinople. The Qutre-mer to which they were to be transported was understood to be the land of the infidel. The conquests they were to make were to be the lawful spoils of a crusading war. There was nothing whatever in the suggestion to make it unacceptable to the Crusaders who gave heed to their vow. Hence, when the doge, having obtained the consent of the Venetian council, submitted the proposal to them, they accepted it gladly. A way had been found out of their difficulty. They wrere to leave the fever grounds of 1 " Devastatio Constantinopolitana." This is another MS. brought to light by recent research, though its existence has been long known. See " Chroniques Greco-Romanes," par Charles Hopf. 252 THE FALL OF CONSTANTINOPLE. the Lido, were to go over the sea to fight the infidel and to fulfil their vow. On the announcement of the proposal their camp was illuminated, and there were other manifestations of It is difficult to determine precisely when this proposition was made. Probably it was in the last week of July, 1202. The 24th of June was the latest time appointed for the arrival of the pilgrims. The second attempt to collect the balance due had been made probably in the middle of July. Shortly afterwards came this proposal, which was joyfully accepted. Villehardonin speaks only of one proposal, namely, that to help the Venetians to capture Zara. If his account is to be reconciled with that of the non-official writers, the explanation is that the attack upon the Christian city wras at the time carefully concealed from the mass of the Crusaders, a policy which was continually pursued throughout the expedition. Robert de Clari, as we have seen, represents the proposal quite otherwise, and the fact that it was joyfully welcomed shows that the Crusaders were told nothing of an attack upon a Christian city as part of it. Another writer 3 states that the Venetians kept the Crusaders prisoners for three months, and would not allow them to return home, and when, after that time, their substance was nearly consumed, then they were compelled to go to Zara. We learn from a German writer 3 that after much complaint, both on the side of the Venetians and on that of the Crusaders, it was at length agreed that the Venetians should go with the pilgrims, and that whatever was gained should be equally divided, but that from the part going to the pilgrims the balance due for freight should be deducted for the Venetians. We may rest assured that the pilgrims did not accept joyfully the promise to go to Zara, because, as we shall see, the crusading spirit was far too strong in the army for them yet to tolerate the idea of an attack upon a Christian city. The conclusion at which I arrive after a comparison of the authorities is either that there were two distinct proposals, 1 Rob&tf; de Clari. * a Anon. Suessionensis. 3 Anon. Halberstadt. ARRIVAL IN VENICE. 253 one made in July for the payment out of the proceeds of lawful spoil, and a subsequent one, made some weeks later, for payment out of the spoil to be taken at Zara; or that,if the proposal to attack Zara were made in July, it was made only to the leaders, and was carefully concealed at first from the mass of the Crusaders. Robert de Clari's account points to the existence of two proposals. After speaking of the illuminations on the Lido when the doge's first proposal was made and accepted, he states that the doge afterwards went to the camp and declared that the winter was lost, and that it was too late to go to Outre-mer. Then the secret was let out. " Let us do the next best thing. There is a city near here called Zara, which has often defied us, and which wre are going to punish if we can. If yon will listen to me we will pass the winter there until Easter, and then wre will go to Outre-mer at Lady Day. Zara is full of provisions and riches." Then this author adds: " T h e barons and leaders of the Crusaders assented to the doge's proposal. But this proposal was not known to all the army.1 Eobert probably believed that there were two proposals, and that even the last was kept secret from the host. The account of Eobert is borne out by the evidence to which I have already called attention. Assuming that the portion of the proposal made during the last week of July, referring to an attack on Zara, was kept secret, as to which there can be little doubt if it be admitted that Zara was mentioned in July, the next month was spent in negotiations, opposition to There was a party opposed to its acceptance as soon toeattrS)sal a s the attack was mentioned. Here again we are zara. Villehardouin tells us that discord o n ^ J J J groun(j# sprang up as soon as the Venetians refused to carry them beyond sea until they paid. He says that those who declared they wanted to leave Venice to go to other ports did so because in reality they desired that the army should break up, and therefore struggled against the acceptance of the proposition. The unofficial writers tells us why they did so. " I n 1 Robert de Clari, c. 18. THE FALL OF CONSTANTINOPLE. 254: truth," says Gunther," the proposal to attack Zara seemed to our princes cruel and iniquitous, both because the city was Christian and because it belonged to the King of Hungary, who, having himself taken the Cross, had placed himself and his, as the custom is, under the protection of the pope. While the Venetians were constantly urging us to accept the proposal, and we, on the other hand, were earnestly refusing, much time was lost." Why was time lost % The same writer answers, " Because our men thought it altogether detestable and a thing forbidden to Christian men that soldiers of the Cross of Christ should march to pillage Christian men with slaughter and rapine and fire, such as usually happen when a city is attacked,1 and therefore refused their consent." There was no idea of abandoning the crusade. The expedition to Zara was probably, though by no means certainly, regarded even by the leaders who were in the secret merely as a means of payment, in order that when it had been captured the Crusaders might go about their proper business. The third great mistake of the campaign had, however, been made; the second being the failure to bring sufficient men to comply with the terms of the charter-party entered into with the Venetians. The third blunder was the more serious. The leaders of the first great crusade had declared under the walls of ancient Nicsea that it was no part of their business to fight Christian princes, that their work was to fight the infidel, and they had readily given that city into the hands of Alexis. The enthusiasts of the fourth crusade, who had left their homes in order to fight against Christ's enemies, had no heart for the new undertaking; and though they did not know all the adventures it would lead them into, we can see from Villehardouin himself that they would have preferred to return home rather than violate their vow. On the 22d of July, 2 Cardinal Peter Capuano, the pope's legate, arrived in Venice from Home. Bishop ConPeter Capurad, and probably others, required that the propositions of Dandolo should be referred to him. He at 1 Gunther, c. 6. a " Devastation ARRIVAL IN VENICE. 255 1 first protested against the proposal, because, as Gunther says, he thought the attack upon Zara " a lesser evil than the abandonment of the crusade, the vow of the Cross unfulfilled, and the return home with ignominy and sin." 2 Cardinal Peter sent away all the sick, the useless hangers-on, and the women.3 The dissatisfaction among the Crusaders was at that time daily increasing. Some were for abandoning the expedition altogether. Many poor men who had brought but little with them, and had nothing left for the journey, quitted the army and went home. " Certain powerful and rich men, not influenced by poverty," says Gunther, " so much as frightened by the horror of committing such a crime (as attacking a Christian city belonging to a crusading king), hesitated and, much against their will, turned back." Some of these went to Home in order that they might be absolved from their vow or have its execution postponed. Others wished to leave Venice in order that they might embark for Alexandria or Syria from other ports. Cardinal Peter's protest was followed by an earnest request that the expedition should be sent off as early as possible to Alexandria. His mission as legate was to accompany the army, to urge it to leave for Alexandria, to prevent it from going to Zara, to settle the differences between the Crusaders and Venetians, and generally to represent Innocent the Third. The Venetians, however, received him coldly. The doge and the council told him that if he wished to accompany the Crusaders in order to preach to them he could do so: if he wished to go as envoy of the pope he had better stay behind.4 News of what had been done in Venice reached the pilgrims who had not yet arrived in that city, and created consternation among them. Many of the German pilgrims in particular declared the expedition against Zara iniquitous and went home, and all further supply of Crusaders was thus cut off.6 1 4 2 " Gesta Inn." i. c. 86. Gunther, c. 6. " Ep." vii. 203; « Gesta," p. 85. 3 " Devastatio." Gunther. 5 256 THE FALL OF CONSTANTINOPLE. Meantime the leader of the expedition, the Marquis Boniface of Montferrat, who had left Venice during July, returned to the city. Probably the treaty with the Venetians was concluded in the middle of August. The cardinal again protested, and, having committed the German pilgrims to the care of Bishop Conrad and thb Abbot Martin, the latter of whom had avoided Venice when he learned the proposal of the doge, left for Eome. The cardinal, however, seems to The cardinal n a v e vacillated. He protested, but yielded. When yields. j i e f o u n ( j that the Venetians would not give way unless the Crusaders would go to Zara, he seems, according to Gunther, to have considered it more venial and less inexpedient to accept the Zara proposal than to allow the expedition to be abandoned.1 He, therefore, insisted on the promise that the Venetians would not only transport the army to Alexandria after the Zara expedition, but would themselves join in the crusade. The author of the Halberstadt MS. confirms the version of the cardinal's conduct. The cardinal, in reply to Bishop Conrad, declared that the pope would rather the terms of the Venetians were accepted than the expedition should be abandoned. He advised Conrad to bear with the insolence of the Venetians, and appointed him, together with four Cistercian abbots, to go with the army to represent the pope. In the same way Abbot Martin was advised by the cardinal to remain with the army. Gunther says that when the abbot saw that the expedition would necessitate the shedding of Christian blood, he was at a loss what to do. He begged the cardinal to absolve him from his vow and to allow him to retire to the quiet of his cloister. The cardinal, however, flatly refused, and ordered him, in the pope's name, to take charge of the German pilgrims. He was further enjoined by the cardinal to go with the army wherever it went, and to use his influence, with that of the other religious leaders, to prevent all attacks upon Christians and their territory. On Sunday, the 25th of August there was an imposing 1 Gunther. ARRIVAL IN VENICE. 257 ceremony in Saint Mark's, the object of which was probably partly to delude the pilgrims into the belief in the tians join the good faith of Dandolo and the Venetians, and partly crusade. f , . . . . ' f. . to give a pretence to them to join the expedition. At the mass, which was of unusual solemnity, Henry Dandolo ascended the pulpit and addressed the Venetians: " You are allied with the bravest men on earth. I am old, and weak, and infirm ; as you see, I have need of rest; still, I know of no one more capable of taking command of your undertaking than I. If you wish that I should take the Cross, and that my son should remain here to replace me, I will go with you and the pilgrims for life or death." The assembly cried, " Come with us, for God's sake." Many in the congregation, both Venetians and pilgrims, shed tears as the old man was led to the altar, and a cross, made especially large so that it might be Henry Dan- s e e n by all, was affixed to his breast. Dandolo from dolo# this time became, perhaps, the most conspicuous actor in the fourth crusade. His personal influence was immense. "We have already seen that his hatred of the New Rome was intense, that he had to revenge private injuries as well as the wrongs of Venice. From the moment when he took the Cross he towers above all the leaders in the great host which his fleet was shortly to transport to the Bosphorus. The venerable figure of the old man at the altar pledging himself to go wTith the Crusaders and to share their fortunes imposed on many. Others, however, reflected that he had not entertained the idea of going with the army until the proposal to attack Zara had been accepted, and such distrusted his newborn enthusiasm for Christianity. A brave man—"de bien grand coeur," says Villehardouin—but one also who knew the interests of Venice and cared for nothing else; a statesman of the Italian type before Mazzini and Cavour had taught or shown a more excellent model. Capable of venturing upon bold and dangerous enterprises, he had all the ability necessary to carry them through. Self-reliant to the last day of his long life, he was yet able to avoid arousing the easily awakened jealousy of the Venetian oligarchs. H e was virtually dictator of Venice, and possessed the entire confidence of the republic 17 258 THE FALL OF CONSTANTINOPLE. through his successful management of its affairs. H e intrigued, kept his plans secret from his countrymen, deceived the Crusaders, and yet always succeeded in his designs. Lying and intrigue were indeed held to be fair by the rules of that Italian statesmanship which Machiavel reduced to a science. The best Italian statesman was the one who could best succeed in the purpose he had taken in hand. That faith should be broken, that craftiness should be continually necessary, were merely the incidents necessary to success. In Venetian politics right or wrong had no meaning, except in the sense that everything which advanced Venetian interests was right, everything which made against them was wrong. Dandolo never appears to have felt himself under any obligation to tell the truth, or to respect either his oath as a Crusader or his pledged word to the pilgrims. Provided the republic could be benefited, all means were lawful. If a man " de bien grand coeur," yet also a statesman without conscience and an unscrupulous man. The arrangements having been definitely made in conformity with which the Crusaders and the Venetians were to attack Zara, the preparations for sailing were rapidly pushed forward. For the moment discontent appears to have been hushed. The Crusaders even, who had objected to making war upon a Christian city, were delighted at any change which would get them out of the steaming and fever swamps of the Lido. C H A P T E E X. DEPAKTUEE TO, CONQUEST OF, AND STAY IN ZAEA. T H E expedition against Zara left Venice in two divisions, one which started on the 1st and the other on the 8th of October. The whole fleet consisted of four hundred and eighty sail. The departure of the second and great division, containing the army of Crusaders, was one of the most picturesque sights which even Venice can ever have seen. The republic of the lagoons has always cherished a love of artistic display, and nowhere can any spectacle be set amid surroundings which more completely enhance its beauty than amid the waters where the Queen of the Adriatic rises from the sea. The time had not yet come when her rulers thought it necessary to check lavish display of color and undue extravagance. The dwellings and storehouses of her people were already palaces. Her citizens had already grouped themselves into guilds, each with its own characteristic dress, so that brilliancy of color was already a striking feature of a Venetian crowd. The silks and velvets of the East were set off with precious stones and jewelry, while over all the Southern sun shed a light which, reflected from the waters, did not make their gorgeousness seem out of place. Robert de Clari describes with evident enjoyment the scene as Dandolo and the Crusaders left. Each of the nobles had a ship for himself and his esquires, while attending it was the sailing barge for the horses. Each ship was girt around by the bucklers of the knights, and looked as if it had a belt of steel. The doge had fifty galleys, which had been fitted out at his own cost or at that of the city. The one in which Dandolo voyaged was vermilion colored, like that of an emperor. Four trumpeters with trumpets of silver attended him from his vermilion tent to his galley, and with the bearers of cymbals contributed to 260 THE FALL OF CONSTANTINOPLE. the popular demonstration on the departure of the expedition. The priests and monks were stationed in the castles at the cross-trees of the vessels, and solemnly chanted the Veni, Creator Sjpiritus. So beautiful a sight as this departure, says Robert, had never surely been seen. A hundred trumpets with many other instruments of music gave the signal for sailing. When the vessels were in the open sea and had spread their sails, when the rich banners and gonfalons of so many earls and nobles were unfurled by the wind, while as far as the eye could reach the Adriatic was covered with ships, the beauty of the spectacle was at its greatest. It was remarked, and truly, says Robert, that never were there so many such beautiful ships assembled together. 1 Even here, however, he is careful to point out a jarring note. Very many, both great and small, deplored the sin which was being committed and the great joy which prevailed.2 They crossed the sea, says another writer, with great speed but with sad hearts. 3 On the 20th of October Dandolo made a triumphal entry Arrival at * n t o Trieste. Both divisions united a few days afzara. terwards at Pola. The united fleet arrived off Zara on November 11. On the same day the harbor was captured and the army landed. The city was the wealthiest on the eastern shores of the Adriatic, and the metropolis of Dalmatia and Croatia. It is situated on a peninsula, and was well fortified. It had formerly owned allegiance to Venice, but had shaken off her rule, and was now under the protection of the King of Hungary. On the 12th a deputation proposed to surrender everything to Dandolo if the lives of the citizens were spared. While the proposal was being considered some of the Crusaders, at the head of whom was Simon de Mont1 Rhamnusius estimated the fleet to consist of 480 vessels, composed of 50 galleys, 240 transports for troops, 70 for provisions, and 120 huissiers for the horses. Nicetas says 240, composed of 110 huissiers, 60 galleys, and 70 transports for provisions. I suspect the larger estimate is obtained on the fair supposition that there must have been an equal number of transports for the troops. 2 3 Robert de Clari, c. 13. Gunther, i. ZARA. 261 fort, told some of the deputation that they had only to fear the Venetians. " I am not here," said he, " to do harm to Christians. I wish you no ill, and, on the contrary, would rather protect you against those who would hurt you." : The well-meant interference proved mischievous. The deputation returned to the city. The negotiations were interrupted, and the terms on which the people of Zara had proposed to surrender were withdrawn. The Venetians proposed to attack the city, and lest the Crusaders should make further delays in what Gunther calls this hateful and detestable business, the Venetians commenced the siege at once. The people of Zara, in anticipation, probably, of this attack, had obtained letters from the pope, excommunicating any who should do them damage. These they sent to the doge and the leaders of the army. The doge declared his intention to disregard the threat, and most of the barons expressed their determination to follow his example. The discontent and indignation of the better part of the Crusaders found at length a mouthpiece. A council was held. The Abbot of Vaux, a Cistercian monk, could no longer control his indignation. In the council held in Dandolo's tent he suddenly rose, and, in a bold, clear voice, said, " I forbid you in the name of the pope to attack this city. It is a city of Christian men, and you are Crusaders. You have another destination." The Venetians would have murdered him if he had not been protected by Simon de Montfort and by other nobles. Dandolo was greatly annoyed. He charged the Crusaders with having prevented him from taking possession of the city, and claimed the fulfilment of their promise to aid him in conquering it. The majority of them thought themselves bound to help Dandolo, and promised to do so. Simon de Montfort, however, and many other pilgrims declared that they would not act against the apostolic command, and that they had no intention of being excommunicated. Notwithstanding these protests, the letters of the pope, and the threats of the pope's representatives, the city was attacked. 1 Petri, " Val. Cera. Hist. Albig." c. 19. 262 THE FALL OF CONSTANTINOPLE. I t was captured in five days, namely, on the 24th of Nocaptureof veinber, 1202. The pilgrims and the Venetians Zara * entered into it, and Zara was mercilessly plundered. Its churches were pillaged and many houses destroyed. The inhabitants were barbarously treated. Some were beheaded, others were banished, while a great number fled to the mountains to save their lives. Dandolo was not content with punishing the citizens of Zara. His intention was to bring it again under the rule of the republic, and for this purpose considerable time was necessary. Hence, shortly after the conquest, he proposed that the army should winter in Zara. " T h e winter," said he to the leaders, " i s coming on. W e cannot budge from here until Easter, because we shall not be able to find provisions in any other place. The city is rich and well supplied with everything. Let us divide it." * The proposition was accepted; the spoil was shared, and the Venetians and Crusaders took up their quarters for the winter in different portions of the city, the Venetians near the harbor, the Crusaders inland. Meantime the dissatisfaction between the Venetians and the leaders on the one side and the great body of Crution ofthe saders on the other was daily increasing. The latter had persuaded themselves that when Zara was taken they would at once be permitted to go on their pilgrimage. They had violated their vow, and had fallen under the sentence of excommunication. The religious portion of the army in particular was greatly embittered against Dandolo and their own leaders. Within three days of the capture of the city the Venetians and the Crusaders were fighting against each other in a quarrel which lasted several hours,2 and in which a hundred persons were killed and many were wounded. There was not a street where the fight wras not going on. As fast as the leaders stopped the fighting in one quarter their attention was called for in another. Everywhere the Venetians had the worst of it. All the authority 1 2 Villehardouin, c. 18. A day and a night, says Robert de Clari. ZARA. 263 of the leaders of both sides was required to put an end to this quarrel. What was its immediate cause it is perhaps impossible to learn. The author of the "Devastatio " says that the barons kept the spoil to themselves, and did not share it with the poor men of the army. The explanation is possible, and is in accordance with the policy which was followed throughout the expedition until its end. The leaders were in league with the Venetians, while the mass of the Crusaders, who had set their minds on pilgrimage, saw only that they were being made use of to benefit the Venetians and their own leaders. What Is certain is that the army was already considerably demoralized, and that some at least of the leaders joined with a .large body of the pilgrims in distrusting the Venetians. The quarrel increased the bitterness of feeling between the opposing sections. A large number of the Crusaders were anxious to leave for Egypt or Syria; a large number, Villehardouin says, were tired of the expedition and wished to return home. During the weeks which followed there was great and continual dissatisfaction between the Venetians and the Crusaders. Possibly there is truth in the statement of Villehardouin that many wished the army to break up, and were anxious to return home. They had not come out to fight either the King of Hungary or the Emperor of Romania, as it began to be whispered they were to be called upon to do. They had no desire to give their services to the traders of Venice. The great French chronicler wishes to leave the impression that the disaffection was merely wanton and without just cause. The narrative, however, of every independent contemporary, and especially of the " poor knight," Robert de Clari, shows that abundant cause existed. The expedition had already fallen under the expressed censure of the Church. Each man knew, without such official censure, that in taking part against a Christian city he had violated his oath, and had been untrue to the pledges he had given and the convictions which had led him to join the enterprise. The treatment the Crusaders had received on the Lido, their loss of the autumn, their journey across the Adriatic, " with great speed but with sad 264 THE FALL OF CONSTANTINOPLE. hearts," in the interests of Venice, had been borne in the hopes that on the capture of Zara a way might be found for a speedy departure outre-mer. But the pilgrims now saw that their allies cared nothing for the object of the pilgrimage, and were mainly bent on recovering territory and destroying a rival, while they believed that their own leaders were bent upon amassing the largest possible amount of spoil from a Christian people. They themselves were suffering much from cold and hunger, 1 and would have been content so to suffer if it were in the execution of their vow. Now, however, both their spiritual and their temporal interests were being sacrificed. Those who thought most of the first found themselves under the ban of excommunication, and those who might have been disposed to disregard spiritual censure found that they were being used to benefit the Venetians while others obtained the spoil. Hence there were daily desertions. The strictest orders were given that none should leave the camp. These orders, however, were insufficient to check the evil. A thousand went without leave. The clamor for permission to go away was so great that the leaders judged it well to give permission to another thousand. Many merchant ships went away filled with soldiers. One had five hundred on board, who were all drowned. Another detachment tried to return home through "Slavonia" — that is, through Dalmatia and Styria—but, after being badly assailed by the peasants, had to return to the army. I t should be noted also that this anxiety to leave the army was mainly caused by the desire of the deserters to be about the business for which they had left home. The object of most of those who left the camp was to get to Syria or Egypt. 1 " Devastatio." CHAPTER XI. THE PLOT. PART I. THUS the winter of 1202-3 passed slowly away—in discontent among the Crusaders, in smouldering suspicion against their chiefs, and in animosity towards the Venetians. Suspicion was in the air—suspicion by the Crusaders that they were to be made the tools of Venice in the future as they had already been in the immediate past—a new suspicion also that Philip of Swabia, King of the Romans, was about to unite with Dandolo against the Pope of Rome; that their own leader, Boniface, had already betrayed them, sold them as an army to assist his kinsman Philip in fighting against the head of the Church. The proof of treachery was not complete, but sufficient was known to justify the suspicion and to account for the uneasiness. The soldiers who had been carried away from their native countries on a wave of religious enthusiasm, who had come out to fight for God and his cause, had already violated their oaths, and felt themselves powerless to get out of theJrap,into which they had been led. Leaving the Crusaders at Zara, I propose now to narrate the facts which justified the suspicion of the army, and to attempt to point out what was the plot against the object which the Crusaders had in hand. Before doing so it is necessary to call attention to the reasons which are assigned by contemporary writers for the two circumstances which marked the diversion of the fourth crusade from its intended purpose. The two circumstances were, first, the attack upon Zara, and, second, the expedition to Constantinople. These circumstances are described, as we have already seen, by two sets of contemporary historians, who may be classified 266 THE FALL OF CONSTANTINOPLE. roughly as official and non-official writers. In the first class I have already stated that the graphic and singularly interesting account written, dictated, or revised by Villehardouin takes the highest rank. The writer describes what he saw or heard. All the official accounts are open to the objection that they are the work of men who were either themselves leaders or were under the influence either of the leaders of the expedition or of Philip of Swabia. They are all pleas of men writing for the defence. Their testimony is therefore not impartial, and may fairly be examined with suspicion. When they wrote, the crusade from which Europe had hoped so much had failed miserably in its object, had begun by destroying a Christian city, and had ended by destroying a Christian instead of a Moslem state. The pope had indignantly condemned the conduct of the Crusaders, and in doing so had probably expressed the opinion of the conscience of Western Europe. The writers in question had to explain the change of a crusade into a buccaneering expedition as best they could. The reason they assign for the diversion of the crusade to Zara, is, as we have seen, that many of the Crusaders having taken ship elsewhere or having refused to leave home, the number of those who reached Venice was far below that which the delegates had contracted for; that the Venetians insisted upon their bargain, until at length they made a fair proposal by means of which the Crusaders would be able to pay the 34,000 marks which were still due to the republic under the contract for transport. These writers add that those who opposed this proposal did so because they wished to break up the enterprise. The chief of them, Villehardouin, begins his excuses for the failure of the expedition with the departure of the Flemish fleet already mentioned. He tells us that this fleet was a very fine one, was very well provided, and contained a great number of well-armed men. Baldwin of Flanders, however, did not go with it, but went overland to Venice. The command of the fleet was given to Jan de Neele and two others.1 The pilgrims had great confidence in the 1 Villehardouin, x. THE PLOT. 267 fleet,because, says Villehardouin, the greatest number of their sergeants-at-arms were on board. Jan de Neele and the other officers in command had promised Baldwin that after they had passed the Straits of Gibraltar they would join the army which had collected at Venice in whatever place they learned it had gone. Villehardouin says that they had broken their word to their lord " because they were afraid of the great peril in which those at Venice were engaged." The meaning of the phrase is doubtful. I t probably signifies that those in the fleet deserted the enterprise in order to avoid the peril to which those in Venice seem to have exposed themselves.1 If the writer meant the peril or danger of being delayed in Venice, then a comparison of the dates at which the troubles in Venice began with that of the arrival of this fleet at Marseilles will show that no such fear could have influenced the fleet. The messengers announcing the arrival of the fleet in Marseilles reached Venice probably in January, 1203. They declared that the fleet proposed to winter at Marseilles and asked for orders. Baldwin, after consultation with the doge, sent word to them to leave at the end of March and to proceed to Methroni, at the southeast of the Peloponnesus, to meet the Venetian fleet. "Alas!" says Villehardouin, "they acted so ill that they did not keep their word, but went away to Syria, where they knew that they could do no good." 2 The truth probably is that they had heard how the Crusaders had been tricked and turned away from their purpose, and therefore decided that they at least would go forward to fight the Moslem. If they were not strong enough to make an attempt on Egypt, they could at least give aid to the Christians who were in Syria. If Villehardouin's suggestion means that the Flemish fleet could have been of use to the army for the purposes of the crusade, it is dishonest. The bargain for the attack on Zara was concluded before the fleet reached Marseilles. The capture of Zara had been made in November. The contract to attack Constantinople was made at latest before the fleet 1 This is the meaning which Du Cange gives. See " Observations on 2 Villehardouin." Villehardouin, c. 21. 268 THE FALL OF CONSTANTINOPLE. reached the Adriatic. The fact is that Villehardouin seizes upon the very slightest shadow of evidence to afford proof of the necessity of abandoning the expedition to Egypt. The story of Villehardouin and his school, which attributes the diversion of the crusade to the want of men and to the pressure of the Venetians, is in the main true, but it is not the whole truth. We have to turn to the non-official historians of the expedition in order to supplement and check the narrative of the official writers. The former are less open to suspicion than the latter. They had fewer motives for misrepresentation. But even they were disposed to make the best of a bad business. They had no sympathy either with the Zarans or the Venetians. At the same time they were themselves Crusaders, or derived their information from Crusaders, and were desirous of showing that the crusade had done something useful, if it were only the punishment of a nation which had refused to recognize the supremacy of the pope. One advantage, however, they undoubtedly possess over the official writers. They do not consider themselves bound to conceal the conduct of Venice. The explanation they give of the diversion of the enterprise is that it was due solely to the conduct of the republic. Enough might have been gathered from a careful search of the authorities known to exist even in the time of Gibbon to raise a strong presumption against the good faith of Dandolo, Boniface, and Philip of Swabia. But it has been reserved to our own time to complete the evidence against them; to prove almost to demonstration that the expedition was diverted from its purpose through the cupidity and treason of Venice, and that from this cause the army was converted into a band of robbers, who were to commit the great crime of the Middle Ages by the destruction of the citadel against which the hitherto irresistible wave of Moslem invasion had beaten and had been broken. Bearing in mind the difference in weight to be attached to the two classes of witnesses, it becomes necessary to put together their evidence. The messengers of the Crusaders arrived in Venice in the THE PLOT. 269 1 middle of February, 1201. Their treaty with the Venetians for the transport of an army to Egypt was made in the midNegotiations die °f March.2 News of the signature of this treaty veSand reached Malek-Adel, the Sultan of Egypt, very Egypt shortly afterwards, and filled him with alarm. The weakened condition of his country, due to natural causes and to the divisions in his own family, made it of the utmost importance that the crusading army should be diverted from Egypt. An army very much inferior to the great hosts of the last expedition would inevitably conquer Egypt. Accordingly, Malek-Adel set to work not only to repair his defences, but to buy over the Venetians. In the autumn of the same year two envoys were sent from Venice to this sultan, possibly at his request, were received by him with great distinction, and occupied themselves at once with framing terms of peace, which later on took the form of a commercial treaty. Meantime the Crusaders had been collecting. According to their contract with Venice they were to be in that city and the transports were to be ready by St. John's Day, the 24th of June, 1202. On the 13th of May, 1202, the envoys of Venice had concluded their treaty with Malek-Adel. This Treaty witu treaty assured to the Venetians, in addition to many Maiek-Adei. 0 t i i e r privileges, a district or quarter in Alexandria, and to the pilgrims who visited the Holy Sepulchre under Venetian protection safety for their lives and goods. The sultan sent an emir, named Sead Eddin, to Venice to secure its confirmation. His mission was successful, and the treaty was secretly ratified in July, 1202.3 The signature of this treaty gives the explanation of the diversion of the fourth crusade from Egypt and of its subsequent failure. Venice was henceforward playing a double game." She had signed her agreement of March, 1201, with the Crusaders, in accordance with which she was to transport the army of the West to 1 " La premiere semaine de caresme."—Villehardouin. Villehardouin, c. 6. 8 Carl Hopf. See the very able examination of the date assigned by Carl Hopf in " Innocent III., Philippe de Souabe, et Boniface," par le Comte Riant, p. 124. Extracted from the " Revue des Questions Historique." 3 270 THE FALL OF CONSTANTINOPLE. Egypt. She now signs a secret treaty with the enemy who was to be attacked. The successes which Pisa and Genoa had obtained over her in Constantinople were to be compensated by her successes over them in Egypt. The price of her triumph was the betrayal of Christendom. It was impossible to keep faith both with the Crusaders and with the Arabs. The signature of the treaty with the Sultan of Egypt meant that faith was to be broken with the followers of the Cross, and wras therefore the immediate cause of the diversion of the enterprise from Egypt. The Crusaders at the time and for years afterwards suspected treachery, and some of the contemporary writers did not hesitate to accuse Venice of betraying the expedition. But there is no evidence to prove that even any of the leaders had any certain knowledge that a treaty had been signed, by which the services of the Venetians in carrying the army to Egypt had become impossible; The presence of Sead Eddin in Venice, in July, 1202, possibly gave rise to doubts as to the good faith of the republic, though the presence of an envoy from the sultan may have been concealed or may have been disregarded amid the multitude of visitors to the great centre of Eastern trade in Western Europe. If such doubts arose, the conduct of the Venetians to the Crusaders while at Lido increased them, while the attack upon Zara brought conviction into the minds of a large body of the army that they were not being fairly dealt with by the Venetians. It is probable that the belief that Venice was not acting fairly was one of the causes of the ill-feeling which showed itself in the riot between the Venetians and the Crusaders within a week after the occupation of the city. But the secret of the treaty was well kept. The interest of Dandolo was, on the one hand, not to allow its provisions to transpire, and, on the other, to take advantage of every circumstance in order to divert the attention of the Crusaders from Egypt. Henceforward, and without any explanation being suggested, we find that the Crusaders speak rather of going to Syria than to Egypt. The arrival of a smaller number of Crusaders in Venice than had been contracted for gave a plausible excuse to Dandolo, first, to delay THE PLOT. 271 the departure of the expedition, then to divert it towards Zara, and afterwards to keep it there during the winter. We have seen that he entirely succeeded. From the ratification of the treaty with the Sultan of Egypt, in July, 1202, the intention was to divert the expedition from its intended attack upon Egypt, the weakest and at the same time the most important point under Moslem sway. The evidence in support of an understanding between Venice and the sultan, by which Venice was to prevent an attack upon Egypt, is already weighty, and will probably be conclusive when a more careful examination has been made of the Venetian archives. Charles Hopf, the greatest of German authorities on all that relates to the history of the East during the Middle Ages, and who had amassed large stores of materials for his historical works, appears to have had a copy of this treaty in his possession.1 The treaty is mentioned by one of the earliest historians of the crusade. Arnold of Ibelino, the probable author of the " Continuation of the History of William of Tyre," 8 gives an account which is full of detail and which there is no reason to regard as seriously inaccurate. H e says that when the Sultan of Babylon, as the ruler of Egypt was then generally called, from the fortified town on the Nile which he usually occupied, heard that a great fleet had been chartered by the Christians to proceed to Egypt, he sent for the cadis and priests to take counsel wTith him how he should save his country from the Christians who were coming. He made various proposals for the defence of the country. Then he sent messengers to Venice with rich presents to the doge and the inhabitants. The messengers were charged to ask for the friendship of the 1 He gives an analysis of it in vol. lxxxv. of the " Encyclopgdie d'Ersch et Gruber " (Leipzig, 1867), p. 188. Unfortunately on his death his collection was either dispersed or, at any rate, has not been made available to historical students. See a very valuable examination of the whole subject in the appendix to Comte Kiant's " Innocent III., Philippe de Souabe, et Boniface," Paris, 1875. 2 Known as " L'Estoire de Eracles Empereur," pp. 250-252. " Rec. des Croisades," ii. 272 THE FALL OF CONSTANTINOPLE. Venetians, and to promise that if the Christians were diverted from their plan of an attack upon Egypt the Venetians should receive great treasures and large privileges in the port of Alexandria. The messengers went to Venice, and, as we have seen, succeeded.1 The explanation, therefor©, of the diversion of the crusading army from Egypt is to be found first and mainly in the treason of Venice. In order to obtain advantages of trade over her Italian rivals she had accepted a treaty which made it impossible for her to conduct the army of the Cross of Egypt. The Crusaders grumbled, suspected treachery, and 1 One MS. of Ernoul or Arnold says," et lor manda que se il povent tant faire que il n'alassent mie en la terre d'Egypte il lor donroit granz tresorz et granz franchises on port d'Alissandre." Another, " En nulle maniere qu'il destornassent les Chrestiens qu'il n'alassent." All the MSS. quoted in the " Recueil" agree generally on these points. Two MSS. given by Buchon in " Le Livre de la Conqueste " (Paris, 1845) give additional details, though one is probably only a variation of the above. One of them says, " La nouvelle de ceste emprinse, dit-il, s'espandi moult loins. Quant li soudan d'Egypte, qui avoit este fre're Salehadin et qui avoit son neveu de Damas deshirete* entendi ces choses, il s'en ala en Egypte et fist moult bien garnir les forteresses; puis envoia en Yenisse et manda aux Yenissiens que, se il povoient tant faire que il destournassent les crestiens d'aler en Egypte, il leur donroit dou sien largement; et grans franchises averoient en ses pors. Avec ce leur envoia biaux dons " (MS. Supp. 34, quoted in Buchon). The other says, " Or vous dirai du soudan de Babilone, quifreres avoit este" Salehadin qui le te*re d'Egypte avoit saisie apres sen neveu quant il fut mors et qui sen autre neveu avoit desherite' de la tere de Damas et de la tere de Jherusalem qu'il fist. Quant il o'i dire que li Crestien avoient leve* estoire pour venir en le tere Egypte, il fit mettre boines garnisons en le tere de Damas et de Jherusalem pour son neveu que il avoit desherite". Et a dont s'en ala li soudans de Babilone en Egypte, pour prendre conseil coment il porroit mix le tere garnir encontre les Crestiens vaillans qui venoient en se tere. . . . Puis fist appareillier messages; et si lor carqua grant avoir, et si les envoia en Venisse. Et si manda au due de Yenise et as Yenisiens salut et arnistie*—et si lor envoia moult grans presens. Et si lor manda que—s'il pooient tant faire as Franchois que il n'alaissent mie en le tere de' Egypte, que il lor donroit grant avoir, et si lor donroit grant franquise el port d'Alixandre. Li message alerent en Yenise et si fisent moult bien che qu'il quisent as Yenissiens—et puis si s'en repairierent arriere en Egypte."—MS. No. 74885 (quoted also from Buchon). THE PLOT. 273 did all they could to fulfil their vows, but all in vain. Venice had a fixed and definite purpose. Circumstances enabled her to force the Crusaders to go to Zara, and the winter once lost it became easier to divert the expedition from its original purpose than it had been a year previously. We shall now have to examine how it came about that Dandolo was enabled again to prevent the Crusaders leaving for Egypt, and in so doing to carry out at once his part of the treaty with Egypt and to revenge his own wrongs and those of Venice against Constantinople. PART II. It now becomes necessary to examine one of the most interesting intrigues that has ever influenced the course of European history. During the winter at Zara the discontent of the Crusaders increased daily. The pilgrims saw their chance of being landed in Syria or Egypt rapidly diminishing. Apart even from the suspicion of Venetian treachery, they remembered that their contract with the republic was only for a year, and expired in June. They had already seen that the Venetians adhered to the strict letter of their agreement in regard to payment. They would be equally exacting in regard to time. The expenses of the expedition had moreover exhausted the provisions and money they had brought with them. Even the money which the barons had been able to borrow was nearly spent. It was already difficult to obtain provisions.1 If a further demand should be made for extra payment after June the army would be unable to meet it. Villehardouin insists that many attempts were made in presence of these difficulties to break up the expedition. Many of the Crusaders wished to return home; many more wished to leave for Syria in order to accomplish the vow which they believed would be impossible of execution if they remained with the Venetians. But while Dandolo was well content that the attack upon Egypt had been temporarily avoided, he had his own reasons for preventing the break-up J Robert de Clari, c. 16. . 18 274 THE FALL OF CONSTANTINOPLE. of the army. So far he had been successful. But his own Expedition work was only half done. The expedition had been polarifydi- diverted from Egypt. Venice had gained time. verted. Still, if the Venetians kept their part of the bargain, it was quite possible that the army should be landed in Egypt, and should be able to fight its way to sustenance and victory. If the army broke up, the Crusaders might reunite, and, with the aid of the Genoese and Pisans, the great rivals of the Venetians, still attack Egypt. Such a result wTould be the humiliation of Venice and the discomfiture of Dandolo. The great doge had long since provided against any such mishap. There is reason to believe that even before the expedition left Venice he had determined to make use of the crusading host against Constantinople. A conspiracy had already been formed between Dandolo, Boniface, the commander-inchief, and Philip of Swabia, which was to result in the greatest blow yet given to Christendom. In order to understand how this conspiracy had been formed, Eventsincoii- w e must recall briefly what had been passing in the Btantinopie. imperial city. The reigning emperor was Alexis the Third. He had deposed his brother Isaac in 1195, and, after putting out his eyes, had imprisoned him in the dungeons of the Diplokionion, or in the Tower of Anema. Isaac's son, Alexis, was allowed his liberty. At a time when Alexis the Third had apparently determined to kill young Alexis, his nephew and the lawful heir to the throne, the wife of the usurper warned Isaac of the contemplated crime. Isaac, according to the same authority, counselled his son to leave the city at once, and to escape to his sister, the wife of Philip of Swabia. Young Alexis, either disguised as a common sailor or hidden in a box carefully disguised,1 fled from Constantinople in a Pisan ship, and escaped the diligent search which was made for him by the imperial police. This was in the spring of 1201. Contemporary Western- writers, who have been followed in this respect by all historians until the pres1 " Chron. Novgorod." p. 93: "Conductus est in navem ibique dolio tribus fundis instructo reconditus." The story of Nicetas is different. THE PLOT. 275 ent day, speak of young Alexis as the son of Isaac by Margaret, daughter of Bela of Hungary, his second wife. This marriage took place in 1185. Alexis, therefore, in 1200, could not be older than fourteen or fifteen.1 H e had sent messengers to his sister (or more probably his half-sister), the wife of Philip, imploring the help of her husband. H e made his way, according to Villehardouin, to Ancona,2 in Italy. His movements, however, after leaving Constantinople, are doubtful. The balance of the evidence of contemporary writers seems to show that he went direct to Philip of Swabia,3 after calling at Sicily, and possibly taking Ancona, on the way. According to one writer, he was in July at Warzburg, where Philip held his court.4 Apparently he continued with Philip until the end of the year, where, as I have already mentioned, lie would have seen Boniface. In the summer of 1202 he was in Hungary, 6 probably on his way to the pope with a request for aid. In August, or the beginning of September, he was at Verona.6 In order to understand why he had returned to Italy, we must trace the events which had happened in the interval between his flight from Constantinople and his arrival in Hungary. Young Alexis had appealed, as we have seen, to.his sister and her husband Philip. The Swabian king wished for many reasons to help him. Philip, who claimed to be King of the Romans, was the head of the party opposed to the pope. On the death of the Emperor Henry the Sixth, the pope and other princes had refused to recognize his infant son Fred1 Two facts are opposed to the accepted statement that Margaret was the mother of Alexis: (1) that the reigning Emperor wrote to Innocent the Third that the youth was not porphyrogenetos ; and (2) that, according to Nicetas (p. 481), Margaret was only ten years old in 1145; rbv fidpaica r/drj afisipiov, " G e o . A c r o p . " p . 6. 2 Villehardouin, xv. c. 70. Gunther, viii.; "Chronique de Morge," P- 10, and "Chronaca di Morea," p. 416; "Chroniques Greco-Romanes" of Charles Hopf; Rigord, p. 55; "Chron. Novgorod/' p. 93; "Chron. Gr.-Rorn." of Hopf; and others. 5 * Bohmer, " Register Imperii," p. 12. " Continuatio," 28. 6 Villehardouin, xv. c. 70. 3 276 THE FALL OF CONSTANTINOPLE. eric as his successor. Philip, brother of Henry, on failing to nave pwiip of his nephew recognized, had succeeded in havSwabia. j n g hi m s e if elected emperor by one party, while Otho of Brunswick had been selected by the Guelfs. The pope opposed the pretensions of Philip, and had carried his opposition to such an extent that in March, 1201, Philip had been excommunicated. The result to the pretender had been very serious. His subjects wrere absolved from their obedience. Many nobles and ecclesiastical princes had withdrawn from or were wavering in their allegiance. Others, like the Bishop of Halberstadt, had joined the crusade in order to avoid the necessity of choosing between their temporal and their spiritual lord. Philip was a delicate, fragile-looking man of the blond German type, whose appearance suggested weakness. The physical weakness, at least, was more apparent than real. H e could hold his own in the manly pursuits of his time. H e had been brought up by his father for the Church, and had been carefully trained in the monastery of Adelsburg, founded by a vassal of the house of Hohenstaufen. His education or natural temper made him a narrow churchman, a man ready for intrigue and for persistent petty opposition —a man, too, full of ambition. His great chance of recovering influence was to show that, notwithstanding the pope, he could hold his own. If in so doing he could thwart the great object of the pontiff's life, not only would he have succeeded in triumphing over his rival, but he might expect that those who had deserted him would return to their allegiance. The arrival of messengers from Alexis corresponding with the collection of the crusading army appears at a His ambition. . & J \ r very early period to have suggested the idea to Philip that the crusade might be made use of, under the pretext at least of assisting his brother-in-law. Philip had, however, selfish reasons which disposed him to help young Alexis. H e seems to have persuaded himself that he had a right to the imperial throne of the East through his wife, and one of his dreams was that it might be possible to unite the two em- THE PLOT. 277 pires of the New and the Elder Bome in his own person. Thus the indignation which he had a right to feel at the deposition and imprisonment of his wife's father urged him to a course which coincided with that which his own ambition would dictate. Add to this that the disastrous result of the last crusade had been most keenly felt in Germany, and that any movement against the empire in the East was sure to be popular with his own subjects, and we see that the motives which urged Philip to assist young Alexis were exceedingly strong. If he could help him by turning the crusade into a weapon against the reigning emperor in Constantinople, he would at the same time succeed in recovering the allegiance of those of his own subjects whom the pope's excommunication had caused to waver. H e could let the pope see that he was more powerful than his rival, and even Innocent might think it well to side with the stronger claimant. His own power would be enormously increased. He might be not only the triumphant leader of the Ghibelin party, but lord of the East and of the West. Impelled by such motives, the appointment of Boniface, Marquis of Montferrat, to the command of the crusading army on the death, in May, 1201, of Theobald of Champagne, supplied the instrument he required. If Boniface could be induced to act wTith him, a successful attack might be made on Constantinople, and his plans appeared assured of success. Boniface, as Bobert de Clari is careful to xpoint out, Boniface, . . _. _ .„,..,,. n Marquis of was a relative of Philip. His father was William Montferrat, * -%r ir I I - I - I -i and the con- ot Montterrat, who had played an important part nectionofhis family with , * .^ f x , on the Uhibelin side, l h i s William had married Sophia, daughter of Frederic Barbarossa, and sister or half-sister of Philip. 1 In the contest for the imperial throne, which had commenced on the death of Henry the Sixth, in 1197, between Philip and Otho of Brunswick, Innocent himself had sent Boniface with the Archbishop of Mayence to try to arrange their differences. The mission had, 1 See genealogical table of the family of Montferrat, " Du Cange," p. 309, Paris ed. 278 THE FALL 0 F CONSTANTINOPLE. however, failed. Not only was Boniface acquainted with the affairs of Philip, but he had occasion to be well versed in what was passing at Constantinople. The family of Montferrat was well acquainted with the East. Six of its members had contracted marriages with the imperial family. William, the father of Boniface, had four sons, each of whom connected his name with the history of the crusades, and three of them very closely with that of Constantinople. These sons were William, surnamed Longsword, Conrad, Eeynier, and Boniface. The eldest was for a time the hope of the Crusaders. The family was related to the families of the Roman emperor in the West, the King of France, and other powerful princes. He married, in 1175, the daughter of Baldwin the Fourth, the King of Jerusalem, and received in dowry the earldoms of Jaffa and Ascalon, but died two months afterwards. The second son, who became Marquis of Montferrat on the death of William, was that Conrad whom we have seen in Constantinople, aiding the emperor to resist the attack upon the city by Branas. We have seen also that after his marriage with Theodora, sister of Isaac, he refused to follow the emperor to Adrianople, was dissatisfied with his honors, and went to Palestine in 1187, wrhere he played a most important part during the next four years, and especially distinguished himself in the siege of Tyre. After marrying Isabella, to the disgust of the Archbishop of Canterbury and other churchmen, and after having quarrelled with Eichard, and having been named King of Jerusalem, he was killed by one of the assassins in 1192. Robert de Clari alleges that Isaac behaved treacherously to Conrad even when he had organized an army of Latins to oppose Branas; that when the marquis went out of the city to meet the rebel the emperor shut the gate upon him instead of following with his own troops. Nicetas distinctly contradicts this statement, and states that the emperor himself commanded the right wing and Manuel Camyzes the left wing. I t is not improbable that the story of Clari is one which only passed into circulation about the time of the capture of Constantinople, when the family and partisans of THE PLOT. 279 Montferrat found it convenient to find grievances against that of Isaac. Reynier, the third son of William of Montferrat, younger brother of Conrad and elder brother of Boniface, had married Maria, daughter of the Emperor Manuel. H e was at the time a beardless boy, and she a woman remarkably robust, and thirty years of age.1 The Western writers declare that he received as dowry the kingdom of Salonica, though no Greek writer mentions a fact so important. He died without children after the murder of Conrad, and his only surviving brother was Boniface.8 Thus the leader of the expedition, if we are to judge by narratives which were written by men whose object was in most cases to find an excuse for the conduct of Boniface, had family grievances which made him hostile to Constantinople. H e considered himself dejure King of Salonica as inheritor of the dowry of Reynier. He had also, if Clari is to be believed, to revenge the attempt upon the life of his other brother, Conrad. Philip and he had therefore each his own reason for wishing to attack the Emperor Alexis. I t is by no means improbable that they had discussed and decided upon a plan of attacking the empire during the time that Theobald of Champagne was still alive.3 The election of Boniface had taken place in June, 1201. In August he took the Cross and was solemnly invested with the title of Captain of the Christian Army. Shortly afterwards, as we have already seen, he left Burgundy for the court of Philip of Swabia, which was then at Hagenau, where he arrived at the » Nicetas, p. 222. A charter of 1204 states that Boniface sold to the Venetians his rights to the fiefs given by Manuel to his father, probably a mistake for his brother ("Tafel et Thomas," i. 513). 3 See on this point the examination by Count Riant in " Inno. III., Phil., et Boniface," pp. 36, 37. This author believes Boniface to have been the secret agent of Philip, even before he was appointed to the command of the crusading army. See, however, the arguments on the other side in M. Jules Tessier's " Diversion sur Zara et Constantinople," Paris, 1884. 2 280 THE FALL OF CONSTANTINOPLE. end of the year, and where he probably found young Alexis, I t is in the highest degree probable that he had taken this long journey on the invitation of Philip, and it is equally probable that the object of Philip was to urge him to make use of the crusade to restore the Emperor Isaac, or to place his son Alexis on the throne. I t is, however, impossible to do more than surmise what passed during the weeks which Boniface spent at the court of Philip. The " G e s t a " of Innocent the Third state that a treaty was concluded between them by which the crusading army was bound to place young Alexis on the throne at Constantinople. 1 The existence of such a treaty is not improbable, but as no mention is made of it by other contemporary writers, such an agreement either never existed or was kept secret, or, what is more probable, was merely an understanding which it was unnecessary and undesirable either to disclose or to reduce to definite form in writing. While there is nothing in the subsequent story of the crusade to indicate that Philip and Boniface had not a complete understanding, there is a large amount of evidence to suggest that they had. It is especially noteworthy that several contemporary writers speak of Philip having assumed the direction of the expedition from the time he was visited by Boniface. The struggle between the pope and Philip in regard to the Young Alexis l l s e *° be * n a de of the fourth crusade began with visits Rome. t h e o p e n j n g 0 f t he year 1202. Well knowing that the object dearest to the heart of Innocent after the success of the expedition was the union of the Eastern and Western churches, Philip sent Alexis to Eome 2 to ask for aid, and to put this union now, as always in these and all subsequent negotiations, in the front as the chief advantage to be gained in return for such aid. In January or February, 1202, Boniface himself left the court of Philip with an embassy for Eome. His mission from the King of the Romans was twofold, to urge the pope to assist Alexis and to present the protest of the German no1 " Gesta Inno. III." No. 83. 3 " Chron. di Morea." THE PLOT. 281 bles against the pontiff's support of Otho. By putting in the front the promise of young Alexis to aid in bringing about the union of the churches, the pope might be induced to support him. If he did so he could hardly continue to support Otho, since Philip's influence with the army would then be too powerful to be disregarded. If the pope refused, it remained to be seen what could be done through Boniface with the Venetians and the Crusaders. Boniface reached Home early in March, 1202.1 Alexis had Boniface already been received in solemn audience by the visits Kome. p 0 p e ? the cardinals, and the Koman nobility. He had asked for justice against his uncle. H e urged that the whole city desired that he should become emperor, and he insisted much upon his power to bring about a union of the two churches. The pope seems to have hesitated as to the answer which he should give. The offer was tempting, and especially perhaps because Alexis insisted that he had a large party devoted to his interests in the New Borne which would be ready to rise on his approach.2 The pope concluded by distinctly refusing to promise any aid to Alexis. On the arrival of Boniface the proposals were again submitted, but with a like result. Shortly afterwards the latter left Kome in deep disappointment, having altogether failed in the accomplishment of his and Philip's designs. From the moment of the failure in Bome, Boniface turned his attention to the execution of his designs by means of the army under his command. After a short visit made by himself and Alexis to Boniface's domains at Montferrat, we find the pretender at Verona, the city which commands the Brenner Pass, by which the German pilgrims came, as well as the road through Lombardy along which the Crusaders coming from France must needs travel. On August 15,1202, Boniface arrived in Venice. He found He < os to ^ n e a rm y> a® we have already seen, on the Lido in a *e Venice. state of the greatest distress. Forbidden to leave the island, plague-stricken, in need of provisions, wishing to 1 March 11, Winkleinan, p. 256. 8 " Chron. Novgorod." 282 THE FALL OF CONSTANTINOPLE. be about their sacred business, they regarded the Venetians as the cause of all their ills. But they could hardly look upon Boniface with great affection or confidence. He had been chosen only after the command had been refused by several others. He had seen less of the army than Baldwin of Flatoders and others who had done their best to lessen the troubles of the Crusaders, and who had at least shared them. Early in September an embassy arrived in Venice from proposals Alexis in Verona. A meeting took place between from Alexis. t j i e m e ssengers of Alexis and the leaders of the army. The proposals of Alexis were submitted. A reply was given that a message should be sent to Philip with Alexis, who had sent word that he was going to his uncle. The message to Philip was in these words: " If Philip will aid us to recover the land Woutre-mer^ we will help Alexis to recover his own land." 1 It is clear that the mass of the Crusaders knew little or nothing of this embassy or of this message. Probably Dandolo on the part of the Venetians, Boniface the commanderin-chief, and three or four of the leaders, including Villehardouin himself, were alone in the secret. It did not suit the conspirators yet to reveal their project, and we shall see that when it was made known to the army it was made to appear that the proposal to go to Constantinople was a quite recent suggestion, due to the necessities in which the Crusaders found themselves after wintering at Zara, instead of part of a wellplanned conspiracy. Still no definite agreement with the Crusaders and with Venice was yet arrived at. The project of Alexis had been favorably received; had been accepted in principle by the leaders. Almost immediately afterwards, and probably in September, Boniface again left the army, and remained absent until after the conquest of Zara. During a part at least of this time he was at Home, wrhere also was Cardinal Peter Capuano. Thus, while the crusading army was leaving Venice, 1 Villehardouin, sec. 72. 283 THE PLOT. its two chiefs, one in temporal and the other in spiritual things, were absent. Boniface appears to have won over the cardinal entirely to his views. In spite of the way in which Peter Innocent mged to ac- Capuano had been treated by the Venetians, he apceptthem, r , . . _ J ,r I pears on this visit to Innocent to nave made light of the expedition to Zara; to have spoken of it as a merely temporary incident, the punishment of a half-heretical people by the occupation of their city, and as a punishment which would not entail the shedding of Christian blood. What is perhaps more remarkable is that in this visit to the pope the cardinal rather than Boniface seems to have been the chief advocate in favor of the proposal to help Alexis.1 I t is easy to see wrhat would be the arguments used. The Crusaders were short of money: had spent what they had, had been unable to borrow more, and had been compelled to agree to the Zara arrangement in order to get rid of their obligations to the Venetians. Boniface would be careful to point out that the arrangement with Venice expired in June, and to urge that an expedition to Constantinople, with the object merely of restoring young Alexis, would be the only means of supplying money for the expedition; the only means of buying over the aid of the Venetians, without whom it could never reach either Egypt or Syria, and, in short, the only means of preventing the crusade from absolute failure. Innocent remained firm; refused to give any approval to the Zaran expedition, disavowed the legate's apand refuses. . * 7 . . . probation, and sent to the army an injunction to restrain them from accomplishing their unrighteous purpose. In reference, however, to the project for giving aid to young Alexis the arguments of Cardinal Peter and of Boniface made more impression. The pope, indeed, formally refused to sanction the proposal. He did more. Knowing that the cardinal agreed with Boniface, he forbade him to return to the army. But, notwithstanding this attitude of opposition, he appears to have thought it desirable at this time to keep the question in 1 Inno.m."Epist." viii. suspense. An embassy had been sent to Venice by the Em- 284 THE FALL OF CONSTANTINOPLE. peror Alexis the Third to endeavor to bring about an alliance with the republic. It was, however, too late, and was treated with ignominy. From Venice it appears to have gone to Home. The emperor seems from the first to have suspected the designs of Philip, of Boniface, and of Dandolo, and his embassy was the bearer of a golden bull asking for the aid of the pope against these designs. Innocent regarded the opportunity as favorable to his own plans. The great inducement which the young Alexis had offered to obtain the pontiff's support was the union of the churches, an object only less dear to Innocent than the success of the crusade. While promising aid to Alexis, the reigning emperor, he did so conditionally upon this union being brought about. A t the same time he sent word to the army, distinctly forbidding the Crusaders to attack Komania. The messengers sent to Philip by the Crusaders in Yenice during September, to submit the proposition for reaches assisting Alexis, arrived in Germany in October. Probably about the same time Philip would hear of the failure of the negotiations at Rome. This ill news would, however, be more than counterbalanced by the tidings of the great obstacle put in the way of the crusade by Venice. If the republic could thus divert the expedition from its object, there was every reason to hope that, with Dandolo's help, he would be able to turn its energy to the accomplishment of his purpose. Henceforward Philip acted more boldly, and was recognized by all as taking the leading part in the direction of the crusade. H e negotiated the agreement that was to be made for aiding young Alexis. He acted at once as his guardian and guarantor. H e sealed on his own behalf the treaty when concluded. In November the messengers of the Crusaders left Philip, accompanied by German plenipotentiaries. They arrived at Venice in the middle of December, and on the 1st of January, 1203, made their appearance at Zara, whither they had followed the army. Alexis left the court of Philip probably at the same time as the messengers for Zara, but appears to have diverged in order to visit his uncle Emeric, King of Hungary. THE PLOT. 285 In the middle of December Boniface had arrived at Zara. Boniface If t n e account of Robert de Clari is to be trusted, reaches zara. s o m e t h i n g like a comedy was arranged between him and Dandolo. The latter saw that the pilgrims were uneasy. The leaders were aware that they had not provisions enough for an expedition to Egypt or to Syria, and they had given out that even if they had they could do nothing when they reached either of these two countries. Dandolo, therefore, said to them: " Sirs, in Greece 1 there is a bountiful supply of all things. If we can find a reasonable occasion to go there and to take provisions and other things, then we can easily manage to go outre-merP Then uprose Boniface, Marquis of Montferrat, and explained that at Christmas time he had been in Germany at the court of Philip, where he had seen young Alexis, whose father had been treacherously driven from his throne. " Whoever," said Boniface, " has this young man can go into the land of Constantinople and take provisions and what is needed." 8 Hence, according to Robert, the messengers were sent to Alexis in order that by inducing him to come the Crusaders might have hoine acoison, rasnauvle ocai-, sion, to go to Constantinople. On New Year's Day, 1203, the messengers returned from Philip, accompanied by those whom that king had sent. Henceforward it was impossible to keep the object of their mission secret. The organization of the Crusaders for the purpose of taking a decision wTas not unlike that which prevailed throughout most European states.3 Substitute the leaders and the great barons for the king, the lesser barons of the army and the knights for the lords, and the whole army for the commons, and the parallel will be complete. The leaders took the initiative. Then the parliament of lesser barons and knights had the proposition submitted to them, and lastly the commons of the army had to give their approval. The leaders had been 1 Greece and Romania are used as synonymous terms by many of the 2 Western wiiters. Robert de Clari, c. 17. 3u Eclaircissements & Villehardouin," p. 463, par M. de Wailly. This writer suggests that the form was specially copied from that of Venice. 286 THE FALL OF CONSTANTINOPLE. consulted at Yenice, and had accepted in principle the proposal to aid Alexis in return for his subsequently assisting the army. At Zara the proposition in a definite shape had to be submitted to the parliament of lesser barons and knights. The day after the arrival of the two embassies from GerProposais are m any, namely, on the 2d of January, this parliament paSiInt^f w a s n e ^ j t o consider the proposals of Philip. The barons. leaders of the expedition and their great barons— French, Flemish, German, and Lombard — were present. There were also, as of right, the bishops and abbots who were with the army. It is probable, too, that Dandolo and his council also attended, since they, too, had taken the cross. The five bishops were, with one exception, likely to be favorable to the plans of Philip. Of the four Cistercian abbots two were partisans of the King of the Romans, and two believed that it was shameful to divert the crusade from its lawful object; one of the latter, the Abbot of Vaux and Cernay, as we have seen, had had the courage, at the risk of his life, to read the letters announcing excommunication against those .who had taken part in the capture of Zara. The French barons were divided. The most important, Baldwin of Flanders, Louis of Blois, and Hugues of St. Paul, were under the influence of Philip. The barons of Lombardy, as might be expected, were under the same influence through Boniface. The leader of those who were in favor of loyally carrying out the expedition as Innocent intended was Simon de Montfort, who appears to have exercised a considerable influence, but wTho was intemperate and rash. The German barons were divided. Those who had taken the side of Otho in his dispute with Philip were probably among the pilgrims who had gone to the Holy Land by other routes. Those who had left Germany for the purpose of avoiding the excommunication which the pope had pronounced against Philip, and had left, in most instances, against his wish, were unwilling to excite his anger by opposition to his designs. Those who were not under his suzerainty, like the great barons of Belgium, and of FraneheComte, were more independent. The Venetians, under Dandolo, no doubt went into the parliament to accept a foregone 287 THE PLOT. conclusion. The expedition to Romania would require an extension of time for the employment of the fleet chartered from Venice, and would therefore greatly enrich the republic. Dandolo knew that its great advantage would lie in its enabling him to keep his promise towards the Sultan of Egypt, since, if the Crusaders ever fought against the infidel, it would be in Syria and not in Egypt. All the Venetians hoped that the republic would thus be enabled to punish Constantinople, and at least to obtain better concessions from the empire than any other Italian state; while, finally, the desire of Dandolo to be revenged upon the empire would be gratified. The place of meeting was a palace occupied by Dandolo. The messengers were introduced, and explained Definite pro- posaisare submitted. ° ' that they had come from Philip. * . l A Villehardouin . professes to give the words ot their message: " M y lords, says the king, I shall send yon my wife's brother. I put him in the hand of God and in yours. Since you are fighting for God, for right, and for justice, you ought, if you can, to restore to their inheritance those who have been wrongfully dispossessed. If you are willing, he, Alexis, will make with you the best agreement that anybody ever made, and will give you the most powerful aid for conquering the Holy Land. In the first place, if God allows you to restore him, he will place the whole of Komania under obedience to Rome. Moreover, he knows that you have exhausted your substance and are poor. He will give you, therefore, two hundred thousand silver marks and provisions to all in the army, small and great. He will personally go with you into the land of Babylon, or, if you prefer it, will send there ten thousand men at his expense, and will keep them there for a year; and for the rest of his life he will maintain, at his own expense, five hundred knights in the Holy Land as a guard. My lords, we have full powers to conclude an agreement on these terms, provided you are also willing. And remember that so good an arrangement was never offered, and he who refuses it will show that he has no wish for conquest." These are the terms of the proposal as given by Villehardouin. There were other conditions which regarded the Venetians, and which may on 288 THE FALL OF CONSTANTINOPLE. that account have been omitted by the marshal. The advances made to the republic were to be repaid. The contract for the freight of the Venetiau transports was to be renewed for another year on its expiration in June, and the republic was to receive one hundred thousand marks. 1 The messengers had brought with them letters from Philip, ordering the Germans under his rule, under strict injunctions, 2 to support the proposal for the restoration of Alexis. H e promised the French and Flemings that, if Alexis should come to his own, he would always keep open a road through Eomania safe and free.3 The meeting was adjourned until the next day. When it took place the division of opinion among the barons became at once evident. The Abbot of Vaux, who represented the party which Villehardouin insists was desirous of breaking up the army, declared that he and his friends would not agree to the proposal, though even this writer tells us that they gave as their reason that they had not left their homes for such work as that proposed, and that they wished to go to Syria. Those, says iGunther, who wTere anxious for the success of the Cross earnestly dissuaded the rest from accepting the proposals of Philip. They urged that the restoration could not be effected without bloodshed. The plan, says this writer, seemed foolish and dishonest; foolish, because a few foreigners were not likely to take a city so well fortified and so populous, and where there wTas sure to be much slaughter; dishonest, 1 Ernoul, " Chron.," Halberstadt. Robert de Clari and others mention the ships and victuals for another year. 2 " Theothonicis autera, pro eo quod sui juris esse videbantur, hanc rem securiosius et imperiosius injungebat; marchionem, cognatum suum, ejus, quae inter eos erat, commonebat propinquitatis; Flandrenses atque Franeigenas et Yenetos, et aliarum regionum homines, omni precum molimine sedulus exorabat, certissime promittens, si ille, auxilio ipsoruin, sedem suam reciperet, peregrinis omnibus, tam per Theothoniam quam per totam Grseciam, tutam ac liberam in perpetuum patere viam. Accedebat etiara ad hoc quod idem juvenis certissime pollicebatur, si viribus eorum restitutus foret, eis in commune argenti trecenta marcarum millia se daturuni.'1—Gunther, c. 8, " Exuv. Sacr." 3 Gunther, p. 77, ibid. THE PLOT. 289 because they were departing from the holy purpose to which they had pledged themselves. I give the answer of the Venetian party in Villehardouin's own words: " Beaux seigneurs, you can do nothing in Syria, and you can see that by those who have left us and gone to other ports. Remember that it is either by the land of Babylon or by Greece that the Holy Land will be recovered if it ever be recovered. And if we refuse this proposal we shall be disgraced forever." Feeling ran high. As I have already said, the Cistercians or White Friars were themselves divided. The Abbot of Loos and others spoke in favor of accepting the agreement in order to keep the army together, and as a means by which the expedition might best succeed in obtaining its object. The Proposals are Abbot of Vaux replied that all this was wrong, accepted. Whether they succeeded or not, they were at least bound to do what was right. Boniface, Baldwin of Flanders, and others, declared that they would be ashamed to reject the offer. Their influence overwhelmed all opposition, and the result was that the agreement was accepted upon the conditions already mentioned. 1 The two leaders mentioned, together with the Earl of St. Paul, swore to observe the treaty, and did their best to induce the French barons to do the same. Only eight, however, consented to sign. Among the whole of the leaders only the seals of sixteen could be obtained.2 Upon the signature of this agreement the messengers from Philip left Zara. They were accompanied on their journey homewards by two Crusaders, who were to bring young Alexis to the camp. Part of the arrangement was that the pretender should join the crusading army writhin a fortnight after Easter, that is, not later than the 20th of April. The news of this arrangement could not be altogether concealed from the Crusaders, and increased the dissatisfaction already felt. Only the barons, however, had any definite knowledge of the agreement. The project, which had been approved in principle at Venice by the leaders, had now been 1 2 Villehardouin, c. 19 and 20. 19 Ibid. 99. 290 THE FALL OF CONSTANTINOPLE. advanced a great step further by its acceptance in the parliament of the barons and knights. I t had not, however, been submitted or even published to the army, whose approval was nevertheless necessary. Such particulars as had leaked out increased the number of deserters and raised a bitter opposition. Many of the people, says the author of the "Devastatio," assembled and conspired together and swore they would not go into Romania. 1 The most notable opponent wds again Simon de Montfort. He and his followers determined to refuse to follow Boniface, and when, a little later, the expedition left Zara, they went to Hungary, where they were well received by the king. 2 Meantime the leaders of the crusade had become anxious to make their peace with Innocent. They had allowed Attitude of . . r . . . , , T ; , innocent the themselves to be persuaded by the Venetians into Third. r J an attack upon a Christian army. They had violated their oaths, and had incurred the terrible penalties of excommunication. The strong party in the army which had protested against the attack upon Zara would naturally represent the facts in their own light to the pope, while the King of Hungary would claim restitution of his territory, compensation for the injury done to him, and the punishment of the offenders. Accordingly, during the last days of December, the leaders of the expedition sent Nivelon, Bishop of Soissons, and John de Noyon to Rome to represent their case to the Holy See, and to ask for absolution. They were authorized to speak on behalf of the Crusaders only—not on behalf of the Venetians. They were accompanied by the German abbot Martin, whose object was to obtain the pope's permission to return home. Innocent had been put on his guard, and could not be unprepared for the tidings which they were charged to convey to him. He knew enough of what had gone on at Venice to suspect Dandolo. The propositions which had been submitted to him in November by Boniface had warned him that the leader of the army would be ready to play into the hands 8 1 Guntlier, p. 13. " Devast." p. 88. THE PLOT. 291 of the Venetians, in return for their support of Philip's designs in favor of young Alexis. It is probable that the proposals for a truce among the Western princes mkde by Innocent at this time were due to his desire to place difficulties in the way of the execution of these designs. If Otho could gain time by means of such a truce, he could form a league which might be sufficiently strong to occupy all the energy of Philip. Accordingly, when Bishop Nivelon and John de Noyon arrived in Eome, in the early part of February, the pope was ready to hear their news. Before their arrival he had sent to Peter Capuano, who was in the neighborhood of Zara, a solemn bull of excommunication against the Venetians, together with a letter which he was directed to forward to the army. " Satan," said he, " has pushed you to flesh your swords upon a Christian people. You have offered to the devil the firstfruits of your pilgrimage. You have not directed your expedition against Jerusalem or against Egypt. Loyalty to the Cross you bear, respect for the King of Hungary and his brother, and to the authority of the apostolic see, which gave you on this subject precise orders, ought to have prevented you from doing such wickedness. We exhort you to put a stop to the destruction, and to restore all the plunder to the envoys of the King of Hungary. Unless this be done you will be liable to the excommunication which you have incurred, and you will be deprived of all the benefits of the crusade which have been promised you." The letter further required that the Crusaders should give written declarations under seal that they would not again attack Christian nations. The pardon granted to them was to be conditional on such declarations being made and observed. In particular they were to pledge themselves not to attack Greece, either under pretext that they would thus be able to bring about the union of the churches or to punish the crimes committed by Alexis the Third. When the messengers arrived from the army, they did their Report made best t o excuse the conduct of the Crusaders, but they to innocent. S p 0 k e t 0 a man who was their superior in intelligence, and who probably was to a considerable extent behind 292 THE FALL OF CONSTANTINOPLE. the scenes. One of the knights who accompanied Nivelon and John de Noyon refused to explain the matter as the majority wished ; in doing which, says Villehardouin, he perjured himself. The others excused themselves to the pope by saying that the Crusaders had done the best they could under the circumstances. They laid all the blame on those who had not come to Venice, and had thus placed the army at the mercy of the republic. They declared that to help the Venetians against Zara was the only way of keeping the army together, and that in so doing they believed they had been acting in conformity with the pope's wish.1 Innocent expressed to the deputies his deep grief at the conduct of the Crusaders. Probably there were many interviews and much long and He appeals to anxious consideration on the part of the pope during the army. They had t^e ^ & w } 1 j c } 1 followed their arrival. left Zara, as we have seen, before the signature of the agreement for the restoration of Alexis (January 2), but they were probably aware that such a convention was contemplated. The conditional form of the absolution shows that the pope had either heard from some other source of this pact, or believed it to be probable. After some time he addressed to the barons a second letter. This was especially intended to influence the great body of the army. The pope attempted indirectly t to appeal to the rank and file against the leaders. The soldiers were not to be led away by any excuses. Innocent knew that they were not in the secret of the leaders. They at least had little to gain by the execution of Philip's projects, and cared nothing for political intrigues. Hence the pope's policy of making the absolution conditional upon their not again attacking a Christian country was likely to have, as we shall see that it had, a considerable measure of success. Pardon was to be granted provided they did not attack the Greeks. The pope, addressing the leaders, did not offer them the usual salutations. H e was perforce compelled to grant them abso1u Epist." vi. 100: " Reminiscens de consilio vestro multa dissimulanda fore loco et tempore si Veneti ad dissolutionem stolii aspirarent." THE PLOT. 293 lution if the expedition to which he had attached so much importance, and from which he hoped so much, were to have any chance of success. But, even in doing so, he did not spare his reproaches. He admitted the excuse of necessity which the deputies had pleaded. But, reparation was necessary, and this could only be made by restoring the whole of the booty. He declared that the absolution given by the bishops was not valid. Cardinal Peter was instructed to receive their oaths to be obedient henceforward to the pope's orders, and Innocent again declared that it was only on such an oath being sworn and kept that the excommunication could be raised. Those who had offended must show their intention not again to invade a Christian country unless they were resisted, and must ask pardon from the King of Hungary for the wrong they had done him. The sole concession which the pope would grant was that, in case of need, the army might take provisions from the territory of the Greek emperor. Alexis was, however, to be requested to give permission.1 At the end of March, Nivelon, Bishop of Soissons, left Rome, the bearer of this conditional absolution. Meantime Boniface and the leaders became anxious to explain to the pope why they had concealed from the army his bull condemning their conduct. The messengers who had gone to Home to ask for absolution would soon return, and 1 " Nullus itaque vestrum sibi teinere blandiatur, quod terram Graecorum oceupare sibi liceat vel praedari, tanquam minus sit apostolicae sedi subjecta, et quod . . . imperator Constantinopolitanus, deposito fratre suo, et etiam excaecato, imperium usurpavit. Sane, qnantumcunqne in hoc vel aliis idem imperator et homines ejus jurisdiction! commissi, delinquant non est tamen vestrum de ipsorum judicare delictis, nee ad hoc crucis signaculum assumpsistis, ut hanc vindicated injuriam, sed opprobrium potius crucifixi cujus vos obsequio specialiter deputastis. Monemus igitur nobilitatem vestram . . . quatenus nee decipiatis vos ipsos, nee ab aliis decipi permittatis, ut, sub specie pietatis agatis ilia, quod absit! quae redundent in vestrarum perniciem animarum . . . In Terrae Sanctae transeatis subsidium, et crucis injuriam vindicetis, aceepturi de hostium spoliis quae vos, si moram feceretis in partibus Romaniae, oporteret forsitan a fratribus extorquere."—" Epist." vi. 101. 294: THE FALL OF CONSTANTINOPLE. would no doubt be aware of what the pope had written. It would no longer be possible to conceal from the army the decision of the pope, nor from the pope the fact that his former letter had not been published. The barons had argued, no doubt, that to have published it would have greatly strengthened the malcontents; that with daily desertions, with a desire openly expressed by many to break up the expedition, with the bitter feelings existing between the pilgrims and the Venetians, a statement of the pope's solemn and formal condemnation would have put an end to the expedition. In the communication which Boniface and the other leaders sent to Rome they urged, by way of excuse, that everything had been done with the object of still carrying out the lawful designs of a crusade, and they protested that it was their intention to be obedient in the future to the pontifical orders. When this communication reached Rome the pope knew innocent's t n e particulars of the plan to divert the crusade into decision. He knew a n expedition against the New Home. that young Alexis had been sent for, and that his bull of excommunication had been intercepted. Instead of the deeds under seal he had asked for, he received but vague promises. For the moment he was bewildered. 1 Both he and his council saw the danger in which the crusade was placed of failing altogether. 2 The hesitation of Innocent was, however, of short duration. He declared that the Crusaders had no right to interfere in the internal affairs of Constantinople. 3 He warned them once more against being induced to attack Romania on the pretence of necessity.4 The messengers from the army were sent back 1 " Coepit vehementissime dubitare quid in tanto negotio esset agendum."—" Gesta Inno." p. 93. 2 "Dominus papa cum omni clero suo, nunciisque nostris, aliisque quamplurimis, vehementer expavit, metuens ne maiigni hostis invidia, hac occasione, vel totius nostri exercitus machinaretur interitum, vel saltern crucis negotium impediret."—Gunther, viii. 3 " Vos nullam in Graecos jurisdictionem habentes."—" Epist." viii. * " Cessantibus potius occasionibus frivolis et necessitatibus simulatis." —"Epist." vi. THE PLOT. 295 with letters from Innocent, in which the Crusaders were ordered to swear to be obedient, and were again warned that, if they refused, the absolution granted to them for their attack upon Zara was de facto null. A special clause in the oath to be taken contained a pledge that those who took it would not attack Greece. Cardinal Peter Capuano was deprived of his post as papal representative with the expedition. The letters of the pope to the army were given into the charge of John Faicete and John de Friaise. Among them was one ordering that the bull which had formally excommunicated the Venetians should at once be published. John Faicete persuaded some of the leaders to send their written promises under oath to Eome. The influence of Boniface appears, however, to have been sufficient to prevent these promises from being generally made. A few were forwarded in an incomplete form during April. Innocent was yet sanguine that the crusade would soon leave for Egypt. Though he had abundant evidence which showed him that influences were at work to prevent the crusade accomplishing its legitimate object, he did not know how strong these influences were. Though he had a profound distrust of Venice, and would not grant the Venetians his absolution, he could hardly have believed that she had become a traitor to Christendom. He had seen an army collected together with the utmost care, its plan of action carefully considered, submitted to himself, and adopted; and he knew of no reason why this plan should be abandoned. "We have now to see the last step which had to be taken in order to divert the expedition from its purpose. CHAPTEE XII. FROM ZARA TO CORFU. IN the beginning of April, 1203, the bearers of the pope's message arrived at Zara. That message consisted of two parts: first, a confirmation of the absolution which had been granted by the bishop; and, second, the formal order that the Crusaders were not to attack the Greeks except in case they refused to sell them provisions.1 The first part of the message was communicated to the army. There is no evidence to show that the second was, and there is much to suggest that it was not. It had been arranged that Alexis should join the army on the 20th of April. He might arrive at any day, and it would then be no longer possible to conceal from the great host the secret arrangement which had been concluded in January. His arrival would, therefore, be extremely inopportune. The disaffection in the army was great. The example of Simon de Montfort and others, whose departure I have already mentioned, had been largely followed by many who were unwilling to violate their oaths. The pope's order not to attack Greece, if, as I have suggested, it were kept secret, might become known. The ill-feeling between the army and the Venetians, which had shown itself by the rioting immediately after the capture, 1 " Quod si forsan ea vobis contingeret denegari . . . possitis et vos cum timore Domini sub satisfaciendi proposito, ad necessitatem tantum, ea sine personarum accipere lsesione" ("Epist." vi. 102). "Permittebat etiam eis ut, de maritimis locis Komaniae, quam alluit id mare, cibos inemptos, id est, absque pretio, moderate tollerent, qui eis ad annum et dimidium possent sufficere " (Gunther, No. 8). " Ne autem victualia vobis desint, charissimo in Christo filio nostro, Imperatori Constantinopolitano scribirnus, ut . . . victualia vobis faciat exhiberi" ("Epist." vi. 102). FROM ZARA TO CORFU. 297 still existed. All were weary of inaction, and wished to be on their way to fight the common enemy. If Alexis should arrive the army would then learn that the leaders proposed to divert the enterprise from its lawful purpose. Accordingly, every effort was made to send the Crusaders a stage farther before his arrival. On the 7th of April the army left zara de^ i e C^J °f 2ara and prepared to embark. The YeBtroyed. netians destroyed its walls, towers, and palaces, and razed the city to the ground. 1 The army and its convoy set sail from Zara for Corfu on Army leaves the 20th of April. Dandolo and Boniface had arfor Corfu. ranged to remain behind to await the arrival of Alexis. Two galleys were left for their use. The pretender arrived on the 25th of April, five days after the date which had been appointed. Without loss of time the two leaders and their charge embarked to follow the expedition. On their way they called at Durazzo, where a demonstration was made in favor of young Alexis. The inhabitants surrendered the city and swore fealty to him. On May 4 they arrived at Corfu. They found the army already encamped before the town. Every opportunity was taken to impress the Crusaders with the importance of having with them the "lawTful heir," as Boniface called Alexis. Every possible honor and mark of respect was shown to him. His tent was pitched in the midst of the army, near to that of Boniface, who assumed from this time forward the part of his protector and guardian. The arrival of Alexis rendered all further attempts at concealment useless, because it was now necessary formally to submit the change of plan to the approval of the host. It was clear to every man that the leaders intended that the expedition to Egypt should be postponed till the young man now among them was placed upon the throne of the New Koine. The pretence was still kept up that after this was accomplished the army would go upon its appointed mission. The great mass even of those who approved, and even perhaps some of the leaders themselves, believed that such a 1 Anon. Halberstadt, p. 14. Exuv. Sac. i. " Devastatio," p. 88. 298 THE FALL OF CONSTANTINOPLE. course was possible. What was certain was that they must go first to Constantinople. The barons and Dandolo assembled, and before them Alexis solemnly ratified the convention of Zara. H e promised them 200,000 marks. H e would pay the cost of the navy for a year, would himself accompany them on their pilgrimage as far as he could, would maintain for a year an army of 10,000 men in the Holy Land, and would provision the army of pilgrims during his life.1 The convention had, however, now to be submitted to the The conven- army, which had hitherto been kept as far as possiSdnto,ttSit" b l e i n t h e d a r k - W n e n t n i s w a s < 3 o n e t h e dissatisarmy, faction among a large portion immediately broke out. There were many men, no doubt, in so large a host who were willing to go in search of adventure or of plunder, and who cared little whether this were to be found in Syria or in the rich capital of the world. T h e majority of the Crusaders had, however, left their homes in no such spirit, and were righteously indignant when they found they had been duped by their leaders and t h e Venetians. T h e y had been duped in many ways. T h e y had taken u p t h e cross at the call of Innocent. T h e pope, as they knew, believed t h e moment opportune for striking at Islam, and had thrown all his exceptional energy into t h e fulfilment of this t h e great design of his life. Innocent's influence had been cast against Philip of Swabia, and in favor of Otho. Y e t from the moment of the election of Boniface they suspected that they had been duped into opposing t h e pontiff's great design, and into supporting Philip's cause in Western E u r o p e against t h e pope. T h e y recalled that immediately after his appointment Boniface had visited his relation Philip, an excommunicated prince, t h e avowed enemy of Innocent, and had remained with h i m for many weeks. I n t h e army were many partisans of Otho, t h e rival of Philip, and they could not b u t see that in t h e subsequent conduct of Boniface h e was doing that which wTould be looked on favorably by P h i l i p as well as severely condemned by the 1 Robert de Clari, xxxii. 299 FKOM ZARA TO CORFU. pope. Others had been wiser than they. Many Crusaders, as we have seen, had taken ship at Marseilles rather than trust themselves to the Venetians and to Boniface. Some of their German fellow-pilgrims had refused to leave home, or had returned, because they foresaw that antagonism between Philip and the pope was certain from the moment that Alexis was in Lombardy and Boniface in command. They recalled the treatment of the army while on the Lido, by which they were duped into consenting to fight for Venice; the constant and ever-increasing rumor of an expedition into Romania, which was to be for the profit of the leaders and of Philip; the destruction of Zara; the fight between the Venetians and the Crusaders after the city was captured; the pope's censures, which could not be altogether unknown; his absolution, strictly conditional upon their not repeating the offence; the opposition of Simon de Montfort and so many of the army, who were determined to find their way to the Holy Land by other routes, because they were convinced that Boniface and Dandolo had no intention of carrying out the great plan which Innocent had approved. All their recollections showed them how completely they had been deceived, increased the discontent, and caused it now to culminate when all disguise was abandoned, and it became known to everybody that a convention had been entered into, by which, in spite of the pope's express command, their destination had been changed from Egypt or Syria to Constantinople. In the short time which passed between the arrival of Alexis with Boniface and Dandolo in Corfu and the agreeand arouses * *i great opposi- ment subsequently arrived at, probably many meetings and much discussion took place. The doge insisted much upon the necessity of obtaining the help which Alexis had promised, and pointed out that they had now a lawful excuse, a "raisnauvle acoison" to go to Constantinople, because they had the rightful heir. The leaders of the opposition, however, took the view they had adopted from the beginning. " Bah!" said they, " what have we to do in Constantinople ? We have to make our pilgrimage, and purpose to go to Babylon or Alexandria. Our transports are only 300 THE FALL OF CONSTANTINOPLE. chartered for a year, and half of that is already past." 1 Their duty was clear; they had not left home for plunder but for pilgrimage, and upon pilgrimage they would go. The same author gives the reply of the party of Philip: " What shall we do in Babylon or in Alexandria, when we have no provisions or means of getting them ? Surely it is better to take the raisnauvle acoison to obtain meat and means for our journey than to go there and die of hunger." The bishops were asked whether it would be a sin to go to Constantinople, and, as they were on the side of the marquis, replied that it would not, because, as they had the lawful heir, they could help him to conquer his own and to be avenged of his enemies.2 Nothing was said at Corfu of the union of the churches. This pretext had only been put forward so long as it was hoped that the pope might be won over. The malcontents, however, united together, and decided to leave the army and join Count Gautier de Brienne, who then held Brindisi. Villehardouin mentions by name twelve great chiefs who joined the popular party, and he asserts that there were many others who had secretly agreed to join them, and that they had with them more than half the army. 3 The malcontents had formed a parliament of their own, had separated from their brethren, and occupied a valley at some distance from the rest of the army. Their cry was "Ire Accaron"4 a cry which probably indicates that the leaders of the dissentients recognized that with their diminished numbers it might be safer to go to Syria than to Egypt. The danger was great. There was every appearance that the expedition would be broken up. The Marquis of Montferrat and the barons who were in his counsels were greatly troubled. " If," said the marquis, " these men leave us, after those who have already gone on many occasions, our army will be ruined and we can conquer nothing. Let us go to 1 2 Robert de Clari, xxxiii. Ibid, xxxiii. and xxxix. Villehardouin, xxiv. 4 " Inter nos fuit magna dissensio etingens tumultus: omnes enim clamabant Ire Accaron."—' a n ( l suspected treachery. Boniface expedition. 0 £ ;ftfontferrat called a council. The news had been brought during the night, and the leaders immediately armed themselves, as Villehardouin says, " parcequ'els ne croyent pas beaucoup les Grecs." Boniface and the Venetians had apparently never contemplated that such a step as a restoration of Isaac would have been taken. In the negotiations directly with Philip, in the pact of Zara, in the proceedings at Corfu, no writer gives the slightest indication that a thought had ever been given to the possibility of the restoration of the old emperor. If the design of Philip and of Boniface had not been to join the imperial dominions of the East and West, as I venture to think that it was, the Swabian king at least intended to keep his hold over Constantinople through the young Alexis. The desertion of the Emperor Alexis was a gain to the party of Philip, but the resurrection of Isaac from the tombs of the Blachern was a severe blow. This party had posed before their deluded followers as the asserters of right. They had dwelt on the justice of punishing a usurper who had deposed and blinded the anointed of God. They had pointed to young Alexis as the exile deprived of his rights and fleeing for his life; the bishops had expressly authorized the siege on the ground that the Crusaders might punish a wrong and 1 Nicetas, p. 723. 320 THE FALL OF CONSTANTINOPLE. defend the right. Boniface and Dandoltf had urged the importance of having with them " the rightful heir." The very existence of Isaac seems to have been ignored. Perhaps even there were doubts whether he still lived. If he did he was blind, and by a well-recognized practice could not be emperor. The sentiment of chivalry to help the weak against the strong, the oppressed against the oppressor, had been roused, but always in favor of Alexis and not of his father. In a night all this was changed. The oppressor had fled. The Crusaders learned that one who had been oppressed far more than the youth among them had been brought out from his dungeon, and was now occupying the throne of which he had been wrongfully deprived. The first order was to arm, the first thought probably to snatch the prize out of the hands of Isaac. Reflection, however, soon convinced the party of Philip that this could not be done at once. For the moment they would have to acquiesce in the settlement which had been arrived at. The simple-minded Crusaders would be unable to find fault with the citizens for placing the father of Alexis on the throne, of which he undoubtedly was, according to Western notions, the rightful occupant. The only pretext for remaining in Constantinople would henceforward be that they wished to be paid according to their bargain. Isaac had sent word, says Yillehardouin, that he was willing to ratify the promises that had been made by his son. Boniface was probably unwilling to allow Alexis to escape Deputation from liis influence, but replied that the heir to the tloTemerf" throne would not be permitted to enter the city unthecity. -^11 these promises had been formally confirmed by the father. Accordingly Villehardouin himself and Matthew of Montmorency, chosen to represent the Crusaders, with two Venetians, were sent to convey a reply to this effect to Isaac. At the gate of the city the messengers dismounted, and passed through a lane guarded on each side by Warings, les Anglois et les Danois, with their axes, to the palace of Blachern. When they entered they saw before them Isaac and his wife, the sister of the King of Hungary. The messengers, after being received with every honor, told the emperor that they wished to RESTORATION OF ISAAC. 321 speak to him in private on behalf of his son and the leaders of the array. Accordingly the emperor, his wife, the chancellor, and the interpreter, with the four messengers, passed into a private room. I t had previously been arranged that Villehardouin should speak on behalf of the messengers, and he gives us the substance of what he said. H e called attention to the service which the army and the Crusaders had rendered to the emperor's son, and to the fact that they had kept their part of the bargain. As to his son, he would not be allowed to enter the city until he had given security for the execution of the obligations he had undertaken. Young Alexis now asked through them that Isaac should confirm the contract which the youth had made, both as to substance and manner of execution. " What is the contract ?" said the emperor. " I will tell you," said Yillehardouin. " First and foremost, there is the promise to put the Empire of Romania under obedience to the pope; afterwards to give 200,000 silver marks to the army, and provisions for a year to small and great; to transport 10,000 infantry and cavalry in the proportion that we shall designate in his vessels, and at his expense, into Egypt, and to keep them there for a year; and to maintain in the Holy Land, and at his expense, during his life, 500 knights to protect it. This is the contract which your son has made. He has confirmed it on oath by charters with pendent seals, and by the guarantee of King Philip of Germany, your son-in-law; we now ask contract of y o u t o confirm it." " Of a surety," replied the emflrnSi by1" peror, " the convention is very hard, and I don't see Isaac. how it can be carried out; bat still, you have done so much for him and me, that if one gave you the whole of the empire you would have deserved it." The result of the interview was that the father confirmed his son's agreement by oath, and by letters-patent with the gold seal or imperial bull. The messengers returned to the camp bearing the precious document. Probably the same day young Alexis was conducted by the chief barons into the presence of his father. The Greeks received him and his friends with great feasting and rejoicing, and with every mark of respect. The revolution had been accomplished rapidly. Alexis the 21 322 THE FALL OF CONSTANTINOPLE. Third had fled on the night of the 18th of July. Next day Isaac had been placed on the throne, and had again been allowed to see his son. During the next ten or eleven days there appear to have been many negotiations between the emperor and his son on the one side, and the leaders of the expedition on the other. The great result which Boniface obtained wras that Alexis should be associated with his father as emperor, and as a joint occupant l of the throne. Apparently, before this decision wras accepted by Isaac, and probably as a condition precedent, it was arranged that the Crusaders and Venetians should retire across the Golden Horn. On the 1st of August, 1203, young Alexis was crowned emperor, together with his father Isaac, in the Great Church with the usual pomp. He at once set about the payment of the 200,000 marks promised to the Venetians w and Crusaders. Enough was received to enable each Crusader \o pay back the price that had been paid for his passage at Venice. 2 The treasury, howev-er, was empty. The drain upon the resources of the population in order to pay the foreign army was naturally unpopular. The young emperor was not secure of his throne, itisfoundim- He accordingly proposed to the barons a new arpayS e pa; the expe- rangement. The agreement between the Venetians dit ^^tipuui1" a n ( i the army was to terminate at Michaelmas. The time ed ' new emperor declared with simple truth that he could not pay within so short a term ; that he would lose his throne if the Crusaders left him, and would be killed by his own subjects; and that the Greeks hated him on account of his friends, the Crusaders. If they wrould stay till the following Easter he would bear their expenses up to that time, and would pay the Venetians their freight for the fleet for a year. If these terms were accepted, his revenues, after harvest, would have come in from the provinces, he wTould be able to pay what he had promised, to preserve his throne, and to go with them, or, at least, to send an army. Then the old trouble once more broke out. The party of the marquis recognized, says Villehardouin, that the emper1 Villehardouin, sec. 193. 2 Ibid. ISAAC AND ALEXIS JOINT EMPERORS. 323 or's statement was true, and that his proposal was the most Differences in advantageous one possible under the circumstances, the army. Q Q ^.j i e 0 t ] i e r hand, the bargain at Corfu had been that after Michaelmas those who had come out for Holy War, and had no wish to join in an expedition against a Christian city, should be free to go, and should have a fleet provided for their transport to Syria. The compromise had been confirmed by the most solemn oaths. This party now claimed its fulfilment. " Baillez-nous les vaisseaux, ainsi que vous nous I'avez j u r e ; car nous voulons aller en Syrie." Dandolo and Boniface readily accepted the imperial proposal. The first, because of the treaty with Malek Adel, not to introduce the Crusaders to Egypt, for, though Syria was spoken of, it was by no means clear that the original plan would not be adhered t o ; the second, with the object of serving Philip and himself. They could now use stronger arguments than at Corfu; they had begun the business and must finish it. It was dangerous to go down to Syria or to Egypt in winter. They could do nothing at that season if they were there. The cause of the Lord would be lost. " Wait till March, and we can then leave the emperor in a good position. We can then go with plenty of money and of provisions." Again and again Villehardouin insists that the aim of the malcontents was to break up the army. " T h e y cared," says he, "neither for better nor for worse, provided that the army should be divided." Once more it is worth recalling that his object is to explain why the army of Crusaders did not accomplish its object. The Venetians accepted the proposal, and bound ment decided themselves to hold the fleet in readiness for a year on. , J from Michaelmas. T h e opposition, feeble now in comparison with w h a t it had been at Corfu, found itself in far too small a minority to prolong its resistance, and thus the proposal of Alexis was accepted by t h e Crusaders also. I n t r u t h the position of t h e y o u n g emperor was exceedingly Position of critical. H e had gone himself to Galata to m a k e Alexis. kjg p r o p o s a l and, although he probably wished that it should not be published, it is p r e t t y certain that its tenor would be k n o w n within the city. If he, indeed, stated that 324: THE FALL OF CONSTANTINOPLE. his subjects hated him on account of his having been brought there by the Crusaders, and would kill him if he were left without their help, he probably told the truth. jtSTicetas says that the new emperor had changed the ancient faith, and had renounced the ancient rites of the Eomans to follow the new laws of the pope. The Crusaders had probably been cajoled into the belief that to bring the Greeks into subjection to Eome would be a success which would insure for them the pope's absolution. The hint of such an intention had become known, and was of itself sufficient to arouse the hostility of every member of a Church as jealous of foreign interference as that of Eome. But the great cause of hatred towards Alexis was, no doubt, because he was associated with the enemy. So long as the question had been merely one of a change of ruler, public opinion had hardly existed. There is no reason to suppose that the citizens had known of the agreement which had been made by Alexis. Now, however, that he was on the throne, and had made unheard-of demands for money with which to pay his supporters, now that the process of robbing the churches and extorting large sums from the wealthy citizens had commenced, and now that one of the conditions which this youth had accepted was that he was to place the Church of the New under that of the Elder Eome, popular sentiment was altogether against him. If the invaders were to be bought off at once, it would have to be with money raised in the city itself. If the payment could be postponed, a large portion might be raised in the provinces. It is possible, also, that Boniface saw that he had blundered Boniface and *n consenting to allow Alexis to enter the city. ^ S r i a n ^ The latter was a weak youth, who, so long as he had opie. b e e n w j^.| 1 f.jie O u s t e r s , had been under the influence of his guardian. Now that he had become emperor, Mourtzouphlos and a few others, who took the lead among the citizens, became his advisers. From them he soon learned how difficult was the execution of the contract which he had signed. It became important to Boniface to place the young emperor again under his own guardianship and influence. After all, Isaac wras weak, blind, and old. He could not last THE SECOND EIRE. 325 long. He might, probably, easily be deposed. Provided that young Alexis would do what was wanted, the designs of Boniface and of Philip might yet not miscarry. With the object partly of recovering his lost influence and partly of preventing his falling under that of the popular leaders within the city, Boniface and a portion of the army agreed to go with Alexis to Adrianople, in order to pursue the late emperor, Alexis the Third, who had fled to that city, and to help, also, young Alexis to reduce his subjects to submission. Boniface probably recalled the influence which he had obtained at Corfu and in the islands of the iEgean, while accompanying Alexis as guardian. It might be hoped that again he would have the youth entirely in his power, and that thus the design of Philip to obtain either direct sovereignty over the empire, immediately or at some later period, could be carried into effect. Accordingly the proposition to accompany Alexis was accepted, by the advice, says Villehardouin, of the Greeks and the French. Baldwin of Flanders remained behind in command of the remainder of the army. During the absence of Alexis a second fire, more destructive than the first, broke out within the city. The A second fire 7 \ in constants tire deserves to take rank among the great historical conflagrations of the world. Even Constantinople, which has always been particularly liable to great fires, never saw its like. In the value of the wealth consumed, in the influence of the fire in striking terror into the population and exasperating them against the invaders, and in thus influencing the fate of the empire, few similar disasters can compare with it in interest. The circumstances attending it are also remarkable, as throwing light on the relations existing during the joint reign of Isaac and Alexis the Fourth between the citizens and foreign invaders. Shortly after the arrival of the Crusaders, the mob attacked the wealthy Pisan quarter within Constantinople and on the shores of the Horn. I t wTas not surprising that they should have done so. Nicetas says that the untaught masses did not distinguish between friend and foe. They knew that the invaders were all Latins—that is, members of the Western Church—that the fleet which was 326 THE FALL OF CONSTANTINOPLE. in the harbor was from Yenice; and it was natural that a mob should not make the distinction between the inhabitants of one or another Italian city. Many houses belonging to the Pisans were destroyed. The wealthier portion of the population did what they could to assist the Pisans to save their property, and to explain to the mob that though Italians they were not allies of the Yenetians. On the other hand, it is, to say the least, highly probable that a considerable number of the Pisans had fraternized with the Yenetians, and had thus awakened the hostility of the Constantinopolitans. Greek and Frank writers agree in saying that Crusaders and Yenetians went over in considerable numbers from Galata 1 to see the rich palaces, the richer churches, and the other marvels of the imperial city. The Italians and Burgundians in the army spoke the same language as the Pisans; and it is probable that even the Frenchmen did not find much difficulty in making themselves understood by them. This alone would tend to make them sympathize with the Italians; and when it is remembered that they were all of the Church of the Elder Home, and that the people among whom they were living had long been jealous of their commerce, it is easy to see that there were many common sentiments and interests which worked towards bringing the Latin inhabitants and the invaders together. Nicetas tells us expressly that the Pisans and Yenetians were reconciled, and adds that the reconciliation was the work of Isaac.2 The consequences of the attack made upon the Pisan quarter were twofold: first, this understanding with the Crusaders was improved; and, second, many of the Pisans were so alarmed that they fled across the Golden Horn to Galata, and took up their residence with their fellow-countrymen and coreligionists. Meantime, while constant and daily visits were paid by the foreigners to the Great Church and the marvels at the east end of the city, the old emperor was receiving daily visits from the Italian and crusading 1 Pera and Galata are always confused by the Western writers, or rather the present distinction did not exist. All was Pera across the Horn. 2 The immediate slope was Galata. Nicetas, p. 731. THE SECOND FIRE. 327 chiefs at the Blachern palace in the west. They were received, to the disgust of the Romans, says Nicetas, as saviours of the empire and as ben' .actors. The emperor melted down the statues, and even the sacred vessels of the churches, in order to supply their insatiable greed. For a few days the growing hostility between the citizens and the invaders was restrained; but on the 19th of August an incident occurred which gave the spark necessary to cause an explosion. Some of the Flemish soldiers, accompanied by Venetians and Pisans, crossed the harbor in order to pillage the Saracens. Under the system of capitulations, which has always prevailed in Constantinople, these Arab and other Moslem traders were allowed to have their own quarters and their own mosque even within the city. This building Attack upon i i T>i i i a Saracen stood near the risan quarter, on the northern slope, TQ08QU.6 and between the Church of the Divine Peace 1 and the sea. Probably the Crusaders regarded the existence of such a building as a cause of offence, just as a London mob in the seventeenth century so regarded the existence of a Roman Catholic chapel in their midst. We may fairly conjecture, also, that the Pisans regarded it as a special object of detestation, because it had been built in the neighborhood of their khans for the use of rival traders as well as miscreants. The Flemings and Crusaders looked upon the wealth of the Moslems as their lawful prey. The Saracens were found in their mosque and were surprised. The Christian mob rushed in upon them, and at once, at the point of their swords, made them give up all the property that could be found. Their Roman neighbors came, however, to their assistance. A disgraceful riot took place, in the course of which the robbers set fire to the city in several places. The fire commenced near the mosque, and was carried by a strong north wind 3 across the peninsula to the Marmora. Then the wind changed, and a new district was devastated. The fire lasted two days and nights. 3 A large portion of the richest and most thickly pop1 3 a Nicetas, p. 733. Ibid. So says Villehardouin. Others say eight days, and the continuator 328 THE FALL OF CONSTANTINOPLE. ulated quarters of the city was entirely destroyed. A wide belt across the peninsula, from the harbor to the Marmora, was left a heap of ruins. The width of the fire was at one time, according to Villehardouin, half a league. The inhabitants of this burned strip lost everything they had. The houses, says Nicetas, were enriched with many precious ornaments, and were full of various kinds of valuable property. No one, says the marshal, can estimate the amount of the wealth which was destroyed, while many men and women perished in the flames.1 The barons and leaders regretted the fire, " furent bien tristes et eurent grand pitie," 2 when they saw these beautiful churches and splendid palaces being consumed and the great commercial streets burning, but they could do nothing. The natural result of the fire was to intensify the ill-feeling which existed between the Latins and the citizens. The brutal soldiery of the West had caused the fire, and had been brought into the city by Italian colonists. I t was not surprising that the citizens no longer cared to protect any Italians writhin their walls. None of the Latins, says Villehardouin, dared remain any longer in the city. They escaped with their families and such property as they could save from the fire, and, crossing the harbor, took up their abode with the Crusaders. Fifteen thousand thus fled. On the 11th of November the Emperor Alexis returned to Eetum of Constantinople, and was welcomed by the CrusadAlexis from Adrianopie. ers, and, according to Yillehardouin, by his own of William of Tyre nine days. All accounts agree that the fire was of a terrible character. Nicetas implies that it occurred before the departure of Alexis with Boniface. This may be so, but he is always so violent against the emperor that it is impossible to trust his statement. For example, in this place he affirms that while Isaac was greatly troubled at this sad accident, Alexis, 6 rrjs TrarpiSog da\6g, who had a face like that of the greatest incendiary, the Destroying Angel himself, would have liked to see the whole of the city reduced to ashes (p. 734). The statement of Villehardouin that the fire was during the absence of Alexis is confirmed by the u Chronique de Munic " (Tafel and Thomas). See also Eracles, " Kecueil," p. 270. s > Villehardouin, sec. 204. Ibid. sec. 203. ISAAC AND ALEXIS. 329 subjects. The old friendly relations between the young emperor and the host which had accompanied him from Corfu continued for a time. Alexis, however, soon lost the respect of both his own subjects and the pilgrims. He had come into his empire. His one idea was to enjoy it. But the condition of the city made this impossible within its walls, and for enjoyment he had to return to his old comrades. He passed days and nights in drinking-bouts with the invaders and at play. He was " hail-fellow, well m e t " with all. He allowed those who were at the gaming-table with him to take off his imperial diadem, and to replace it by one of their own woollen caps. He soon became despised, says ISTicetas, by every honest man, both among the Romans and among the Crusaders. Meantime his wretched father was tilled with jealousy at condition of the honors accorded to his son. Isaac appears to Isaac. have been almost entirely ignored by the Western host—partly, no doubt, because of his feeble condition, and partly because Boniface and Dandolo found a readier instrument in Alexis. He complained that he was not treated with sufficient respect, that his son was intriguing against him. Probably his long imprisonment, his sufferings as a common prisoner, and the loss of his eyesight combined to make him ill-tempered, and had injured his health. He became more than ever the victim of superstitious fears. The monks, by whom he was surrounded, promised that he would become the lord of a great empire, that he would recover his eyesight, that he would be cured of gout or rheumatism, to which he was a martyr; and Isaac was weak enough to believe them. 1 The astrologers persuaded him to transport into the Great Palace from the hippodrome a statue of the Calydonian boar, under the belief that by so doing his enemies would be destroyed, as the enemies whom the original boar was sent to attack had been rent in pieces. Since the fire the condition of the city had been one of conconfusionin fusion. The Romans hated Crusaders and Venetne city. t j a n g a g t j i e c a u s e 0 f a ]i t i i e j r iji s? especially of the 1 Nicetas, p. 737. 330 THE FALL OF CONSTANTINOPLE. heavy taxation and of the two fires. A trivial incident, mentioned by Nicetas, shows how great was the irritation. The mob broke up one of the finest statues in the city—a representation of Minerva in bronze, which stood in the great square of Constantine. The statue faced to the west, and in the imagination of the people appeared to be beckoning the natives of the West towards New Rome. The Crusaders were still encamped in Galata, and after the crnsadersand flight of ^ i e foreign residents do not appear to have presfforpay- entered the city. They were becoming impatient ment. Alexis let them have what he could. t o ^Q ^{^ But the money only came in driblets, "pauvre petits pavements," as Villehardouin calls them. Alexis was doing his best to satisfy his former friends. Their protection had become as dangerous as their enmity, and Alexis would probably now have been glad to get rid of them. The two emperors endeavored again to levy a tax upon the city, but the people rose against it. They therefore did their best to raise the sum necessary from the wealthy class of the population, and by melting down the gold and silver vessels, chandeliers, and other valuable metallic furniture of the churches. Meantime the Crusaders were helping themselves. They were naturally, says Nicetas, the enemies of every kind of beauty. They went about in bands, and plundered the beautiful villas of the wealthy nobles and the rich churches which were on the neighboring shores of the Marmora. It pleased them even to burn and destroy many of the villas. The inhabitants resisted, and sent to the city for soldiers to defend their homes. No help was, however, there to be obtained. The monk-ridden and imbecile old emperor was powerless. The worthless and inexperienced youth was unable or unwilling to assist them. Reproaches were addressed almost daily by the Crusaders to the emperors, but without effect, except to bring in new " pauvre petits payements."* Indeed, during November 1 Villehardouin, xlv. Villehardouin says Alexis commenced to pay immediately after the coronation (1st August, 1203). The payments to the army enabled those who had not paid to repay what had been paid for them at Venice (xl.). THE INVADERS IN GALATA. 331 and December, 1203, and January, 1204, the confusion within the city and the anxiety without were of a kind which we, who have seen Paris besieged, may fairly realize. The rule of the city was rapidly slipping out of the feeble hands of Isaac and those of his son. The imperial orders were disobeyed. The demoralization of the populace, caused by taxation, by the interruption of commerce, though the city was not yet besieged, and by the fires, had ruined half the traders, and increased daily. The foreign residents had left. The ordinary business of life was at a standstill. The troops were divided in their allegiance; the Warings remaining faithful to the emperors, the Greek troops being some on the side of those who were clamoring for the deposition of Isaac and Alexis, some probably willing to recall Alexis the Third, and some few willing to remain faithful to the reigning sovereigns. Across the Golden Horn the condition of the invaders was one of extreme anxiety. The opposition wanted to Dissension . J ,ri and anxiety be gone about their lawful business, in the army. . ° , . lheir provix , sions were running short, and had to be replenished by raids upon the surrounding country. Dissension and dissatisfaction were increasing daily. Alexis had declared that it was impossible for him to execute his promises, and the Crusaders knew that what he said wTas true. The citizens dared, Robert de Clari states that 100,000 marks were paid, of which half went to the Venetians, together with 34,000, balance of unpaid freight, while the rest—i. e., 16,000 marks—repaid the Crusaders who had advanced money to the Venetians for their poorer brethren's passage. Gunther declares that half of the promised sum was ordered to be paid: "Dimidiam promissae pecuniae partem principibus nostris benevolo ac liberaliter numerari jussit" (xiii). Mcetas says that, in conference between Dandolo and Mourtzouphlos in St. Cosma, the doge demanded immediate payment of fifty centenaria of gold, or about 120,000 marks (p. 751). One fourth, therefore, of the promised sum of 400,000 marks agreed to at Zara appears to have been paid almost immediately after the coronation (1st August). Then came in the "pauvre petits payements" during September, October, and December. Probably in all there was little, if anything, short of 200,000 paid by the end of the year. 332 THE FALL OF CONSTANTINOPLE. says Gunther, to forbid the emperor to take from his own property and give it to foreigners. The Crusaders, on the other hand, he declares, were loath to attack the city because they had no hope of success. They were in such danger that they were not safe around the city, nor could they leave without great risk. Hence it came to pass, says this writer, that " our men determined to besiege the city from which they could not flee."1 Another author describes the situation of the army in equally striking terms. The Franks were between the hammer and the anvil.3 The invaders, however, had the great advantage over the citizens that they had two leaders who knew precisely what they wanted, and who intended to make every sacrifice in order to succeed. Though the chiefs and the soldiery might be restive, there was yet a military and a feudal discipline. There never appears to have been a murmur of discontent among the Venetians. Gunther again and again insists on the determination of the Venetians, " who drove us earnestly this way, partly because of the promised reward, and partly from their desire to obtain the dominion of the sea." The expedition, which, he adds, had been undertaken to please King Philip, was now solely directed by Boniface and Dandolo. The brave old leader, whose tenacity of purpose it is impossible not to admire, ruled the host by his nod, and, in spite of want of provisions, of secret disaffection among the troops, and of open opposition, was neither to be frightened nor wearied out of the accomplishment of his purpose. Boniface had blundered, had lost his hold over Alexis, and seems, since his return in the beginning of November from Adrianople, to have been gradually losing ground. Still he, too, had his object, for which he was prepared to make every sacrifice, and so long as Dandolo was willing to hold out he, too, would defy disaffection and opposition. Ostensibly, all that Boniface wanted was to be paid. In reality, nothing was further from his desire. No other 1 2 Gunther, x.-xv. Rostangnus of Clugny, p. 133, " Exuv, Sac." THE INVADERS IN GAL ATA. 333 1 grievance remained. No other pretence is alleged by any Doubtful writer. The great chance of making payment immenthwasdye- possible was to insist upon its being made at once. shed. rpj^ e m p e r o r s W ere doing their utmost, and Isaac had scandalized the Greeks by selling church ornaments to raise money.2 The revolution within the city might result in the substitution of a strong man in lieu of the two feeble occupants of the throne. In such case, not merely would the great conspiracy of Philip and Boniface fail, but payment itself might be altogether lost, or terms might be offered to the Crusaders wThich the malcontents would have sufficient influence with the army to cause to be accepted. Whether payment were made or the latter alternative adopted, the invaders would have no pretence to remain longer before the city. There were, therefore, many reasons, some of which weighed with the army, while others had especial influence with Boniface, in favor of demanding immediate payment and of precipitating a struggle. The barons, therefore, held a parliament, at which Dandolo A struggle is w a s present, and determined to send a deputation precipitated. t o ^ e e m p e r o r j i n order to bid him pay or to publicly insult him by defying him to battle. The Venetians and the barons each chose three of their number for this bold mission. Among the latter was Villehardouin himself. The six rode round the harbor to the palace of Blachern girded with their swords. The marshal points out that they adventured much and went in great peril on this enterprise. They descended at the palace gate, and were admitted into the imperial chamber. The emperors, seated on their respective thrones, side by side, together with the empress, Isaac's wife, and a large assembly of nobles, received them. The messengers reminded the emperors of their oaths. " W e come," said Conon de Bethune, addressing apparently only Alexis, " to summon you in the presence of your barons to 1 This reason is assigned in Villehardouin, Gunther, the " Halberstadt Chron." and Eostangnus. 2 Mcetas and " Chron. Novgorod." 334 THE FALL OF CONSTANTINOFLE. fulfil the agreement made between you and us. If you fulfil it, well; if not, take note that the barons will recognize you neither as lord nor as friend, but they will consider themselves free to take that which belongs to them in any way in which they can get it. They give you notice that they will do you no harm till they have defied you. They will not betray you; it is not the custom in their country so to do. You have heard what we have said, and you will take counsel upon the matter as you like." The noise which this public challenge made in the city was great, as no doubt Boniface and Dandolo intended that it should be. The messengers returned to the camp, thinking themselves fortunate, as Villehardouin admits, that they had escaped with their lives. I t is hardly necessary for him to add that the Greeks took this defiance as a great insult, and remarked that no one had hitherto dared to challenge the Emperor of Constantinople in his own palace. There was now open hostility between the inhabitants and the invaders, and each side prepared to oppose ties comthe other. The Greeks made a night attempt to IX16HC6 ^^ burn the Venetian fleet. They prepared seventeen boats, set fire to the wood and various combustibles with which they had been loaded, and at midnight on New Year's Day, when a strong southerly wind was blowing, turned them adrift. The attempt, however, failed., A few persons were injured, and a Pisan merchantman was burned, with her cargo; but the Venetians with their boat-hooks managed to push the burning ships away from them to the mouth of the harbor, where the strong current which is always running soon carried them out of the way of doing harm. A week after the Greeks made a sortie with their cavalry, but were repulsed. Within the city the confusion increased daily. The people Revolution in w e r e convinced that they had nothing to hope the city. from either emperor. They had at length awakened to a sense of danger. The question was no longer one of a mere change of rulers, but one of fulfilling a contract to which they were no party, of paying a band of robbers who REVOLUTION WITHIN THE CITY. 335 were without the walls for a service which their young emperor had requested, but which they had not desired, and for which they certainly had no reason to be grateful. What they wanted was a ruler who would not allow them to be plundered. They saw an enemy which had already done them grievous wrong, and were burning to be delivered from him. The policy of Alexis seemed to the citizens to be to sacrifice everything in order to keep on good terms with their enemies. Even the Crusaders admitted that he was doing what he could for them. He was divided between loyalty to his own subjects and fear of displeasing Philip of Swabia and his late companions.1 The leaders of the citizens had asked the emperors to take the offensive, to attack the Crusaders, and make an end of the matter, but these emperors were either unwilling or afraid to do so. The attempt on the ships was apparently the result of a popular impulse. The same popular sentiment urged the party to get rid of their imbecile rulers. The impulse seems to have been general, for amid the popular movement no attempt appears to have been made to suppress the rising which took place against the government. During some time the people were undecided as to the course they ought to adopt. Meetings were held in the Great Church, and each day saw the confusion increase. As day by day passed, however, one man was steadily coming to the front. A certain Alexis Ducas, a member of the imperial family, and nicknamed Mourtzouphlos, on account of his meeting eyebrows, headed the discontented party, and became the leader of the revolution. He had for a long time been known as the bitterest opponent of the Latins.2 1 Gunther (c. xv.) says: " Videres eum graviter anxiari, quasi medium inter suorum nequitiam et amorem nostrorum, et gratiam Philippi regis, quern si nostros vel falleret vel laederet, graviter metuebat offendere. Cum ergo ad tantum facinus non facile posset impelli Murciflo ille, cujus superius fecimus mentionem, cujus consilio pater ejus cgecatus, et ipse in carcerem retrusus fuerat, eum propria manu suffocavit, dicens: ' Minus esse malum, si solus ipse presenti vitas foret exemptus, quam si totius Greciae opes ad ignotos quosdam homines ejus stultitia transferrentur'" a (c. xiii.). Villehardouin, p. 221. 336 THE FALL OF CONSTANTINOPLE. On the 25th of January, 1204, an extraordinary meeting of the inhabitants was held in Hagia Sophia. The senators were there, and the members of the college of pontiffs and other high dignitaries of the Church. The senate was a survival of the early days of the New Rome, and had long since ceased to exercise any real authority. In the midst of the anarchy which now prevailed public opinion turned for support to its mere semblance of power, and senators and pontiffs were forced by the threats of the multitude to deliberate on the election of a new emperor. They wished to temporize, but the multitude protested that they could not and would not live under the actual government. The names of the members of the reigning family and of other nobles were gone through, and apparently submitted to the public assembly of the citizens. The meeting, however, could not agree upon a choice. Those who were selected refused to act. Some of the magistrates present were themselves asked to become emperor. A second and a third day were spent in these meetings. Finally the choice fell upon a young man named Nicolas Kanabos, who was, however, chosen against his will. Alexis and Isaac knew what was going on, but were powerless. Isaac was ill. Alexis, alarmed for himself, seeing that whoever the next emperor might be the citizens were at least determined that he should no longer reign, feeling that power was rapidly slipping away from him, and that but for the presence of his foreign guards his own life would be in immediate danger, took what under the circumstances was perhaps a natural act, but what was nevertheless justly regarded by the citizens as an act of treason. He sent to the Marquis of Montferrat, and invited him to fill the palace of Blachern with Frenchmen and Italians, in order to defend his life and maintain him on the throne. This treason to the city cost him both his throne and his life. On hearing of what Alexis had done, Mourtzouphlos deAiexisis de- cided that the time had come for him to act. The newemperor minister of finance was in his favor, but the improciaimed. p e r i a i guard of the Warings, who knew that their duty was to defend the emperor, constituted a serious obstacle REVOLUTION WITHIN THE CITY. 337 to any attack on the occupant of the throne. It is probable that, as foreign mercenaries, they were by no means favorably regarded by the people. The very fidelity for which, as we have seen, they were so justly esteemed by the imperial family, even in the time of Anna, made their opposition on the present occasion the more probable. The object of Mourtzouphlos was now to secure the person of Alexis, either by inducing him to leave the palace or by withdrawing the Warings themselves. The latter course was found to be the easier. The Warings were therefore deceived, and led to believe that in leaving the palace they were to fight for Alexis. The guards being thus withdrawn, Mourtzouphlos undertook to secure Alexis. As JProtovestiarios, he had the right of entrance to the palace. This he made use of, entered, and, according to the narrative of Nicetas, told the young emperor that there was a mob coming to the palace and ready to tear him in pieces on account of his proposal to introduce the Crusaders into the city. Alexis fell into the trap. His only thought was to save himself, and instead of remaining in his palace and awaiting the return of the Warings, he wrapped himself up so as not to be recognized, and followed Mourtzouphlos out of the palace walls. When he reached the tent of the leader he was immediately put in irons and sent to prison. Mourtzouphlos seized the imperial insignia, assumed the vermilion 1 buskins, and was saluted as emperor. Kanabos was abandoned, and the elect of the citizens was Mourtzon- crowned with the usual formalities in Hagia Socrowned, phia. Isaac, already very weak, died on hearing the news of his son's arrest. Alexis did not survive him Death of beyond a few days. H e was imprisoned, and on Alexis. the 1st of February he also died. Whether--his death was a natural one, as his successor affirmed, or whether, 1 Vermilion and not purple was the imperial color in the New Home. The oecumenical patriarch still signs with vermilion ink, maintaining in this as in several other matters the traditions of the empire. The Western writers generally speak of vermilion, though sometimes also of scarlet, tents, etc., as if no distinction were made between the two colors. 22 338 THE FALL OF CONSTANTINOPLE. as Nicetas and Yillehardouin declare, he was strangled, it is impossible and immaterial to say. The new emperor, Mourtzouphlos, had an impossible task Preparations t o perform, but he set himself to work in a vigorfor defence. o u s m a n n e r to organize the defence. The treasury was empty. Everything was in confusion. The army was disorganized. Such navy as had existed had already been destroyed. A large portion of the city was in ruins from the fires. H e at once ordered a heavy contribution from the wealthy classes, and insisted upon the money being paid. He immediately set energetically to work to improve the defences. Men worked day and night in heightening the walls on the harbor side, and in fortifying the gates on the landward side. The emperor encouraged citizens and soldiers by his presence, now at the works, now in leading the attacks that he organized upon the foraging parties of the enemy. His conduct confirmed him in the confidence of the people. He was hampered, however, by the old aristocratic spirit of the wealthy nobles. To them he was objectionable because in such a time he refused to recognize their privileges. He insisted on their help, and subjected them, together with the rest of the inhabitants, to the severity of discipline of a city in a state of siege. They feared his voice, says Nicetas, like death. His energy seems to have entirely won the confidence of the imperial guard. They probably resented his conduct in withdrawing them from the palace while he obtained possession of Alexis; but when they subsequently learned that the emperor had proposed to bring in the enemy, they consented to join Mourtzouphlos. 1 There were doubtless men among them who had left England rather than endure Norman tyranny, and such men had now no wish to treat Normans and Frenchmen as friends. Had the Gambetta of this revolution been able to have delayed the attack upon the city, it is possible, and even prob1 The author of the " Chronicle of N ovgorod " charges Alexis, when the Greeks sent their fire-ships against the Venetians, with having given notice to the Franks beforehand. " Chron. Novgorod." p. 96. KEVOLUTION COMPLETED. 339 able, that he would have saved it. The writers on the side of the Crusaders and Venetians speak of the new emperor in a manner which shows that they believed they had now a much more formidable opponent to deal with. His great object was to save time. The enemy also saw, however, that in their interest no time should be given him. The deposition of Isaac and Alexis gave Boniface and Dandolo the excuse they wanted. So long as the lution upon " right heir " and his father were reigning within invaders. . the city, the only pretext which the leaders could put forward for remaining before it was the merely mercenary one that they were waiting to be paid. Now, however, that they were deposed, that Isaac was dead, and Alexis, their late guest, a prisoner, and now murdered, as they believed, the leaders could again pose as the defenders of the right, as the avengers of the injured. " Never," says Villehardouin, " was so horrible a treason committed by any persons as the deposition and imprisonment of young Alexis." All agreed, he adds, that the murderer had no right to reign, and that all who had consented to the deposition were accomplices in the murder. The clergy once more used their influence at the bidding of Boniface, and preached to the Crusaders that war in such a case was lawful and right; and added that if they intended to conquer the land and place it in obedience to the pope, they would have the pontiff's indulgence. Crusaders and Venetians alike appear to have been content with this assurance. W e shall see presently that, while some were appealed to on the ground that it was their duty to punish murderers, a more substantial inducement was held out to all by the prospect of a rich harvest of plunder. The city was divided. To understand its division it must be remembered that the citizens knew little or nothing of the plans of the enemy. Boniface appears, on the death of young Alexis, to have been regarded in the city as a candidate for the imperial throne which his ward had lost. The death of the latter would probably increase the resentment of his friends; and the nobles, who formed the bulk of his party in the city, never worked heartily for Mourtzouphlos. This was, 340 THE FALL OF CONSTANTINOPLE. no doubt, the party which, as we shall see later, hailed Boniface as king. Mourtzouphlos had had as yet insufficient time to organize his forces, but meantime was acting bravely, was superintending and pushing on the repairs, and was harassing the enemy. The Crusaders and Venetians, on their side, were equally active. During the days which followed the accession of the new emperor, and before the death of Alexis, an incident occurred which is worthy of note. 1 Fighting was going on daily. The neighboring country was scoured in order to lay in a stock of provisions preparatory to the attack and the siege. One of these raids was made during the end of January as far as Philies, 2 near the Black Sea entrance of the Bosphorus, where Henry, the brother of Baldwin, Earl of Flanders, l6d an expedition and captured great quantities of cattle and provisions. Mourtzouphlos, hearing of their departure, endeavored to surprise them. A sharp skirmish took place, in which he was defeated and narrowly escaped being taken prisoner. The imperial gonfalon3 was captured, and a banner which represented the Virgin, by which the Greeks set great store.4 Profiting by the occasion presented by this defeat, Boniface appears to have entered into negotiations with the beetw°eenl°ns emperor in order to save the life of Alexis.6 All Chios and" hope of carrying out the design of Philip of Swabia was not lost so long as the life of Alexis was safe. 1 Gunther says that Mourtzouphlos did his utmost to conceal the death of Alexis, and sent messengers continually, in the name of the young emperor, asking the leaders of the army to enter the city, but that Dandolo persuaded them not to go. 2 Possibly Kilios. 3 Codinus says that the emperors had twelve ensigns which were used in public ceremonials, one or two only of which were employed when the emperor took the field. The emblem of the city has always been the crescent, probably derived from the horns of a bull (fiovg), which was the symbol of the Turanian race, as that of the lion was of the Arian. Each regiment had its own flag or fiavdov, whence we still speak of a band of soldiers. 4 Villehardouin, p. 227-8, and Nicetas, p. 751. 8 " Chron. Novgorod." p. 95 ; " Chron, Grec.-Rom.," Hopf. NEGOTIATIONS. 341 The message may even have been given in the form in which the Eussian monk reports it: " Give us Alexis, and we will depart and allow you to remain emperor. "We have been forced to come here through necessity." The answer was that the application was too late. Alexis was dead.1 It is impossible to tell what was the full signification of this message, but, read in the light of the surrounding circumstances, it appears to me to point to a distinct divergence between the Crusaders and the Venetians. Boniface and Dandolo found themselves forced to work together, but each distrusted the other, and was jealous of him. At this moment the great object of the first was to save the life of his pupil; that of the second was to make an arrangement with Mourtzouphlos impossible. A mission had arrived from the Holy Land, with which was Abbot Martin, urging the Crusaders to lose no time in going to the aid of those who were fighting the Saracens. The old spirit of dissatisfaction was once more showing itself. Possibly already some news of the intention of the pope, as shown by a letter ordering them to leave for the business of the crusade, had reached them. 8 The design of placing Alexis on the throne was at an end with the death of the young man, and even if Boniface had knowledge of the arrangement made between the Venetians and the Sultan of Egypt, he had no interest in prolonging the stay before Constantinople. The failure of the object of the expedition had added largely to the number of the malcontents, and it may well be that Boniface felt inclined to give way to them. If this were so we can well understand the jealousy which undoubtedly soon displayed itself towards Dandolo. But the latter was now master of the situation. The Crusaders were almost as much at the mercy of the Venetians as when they were on the Lido. Provisions were short. January and February are in Constantinople cold and stormy months. The Venetians could urge the necessity of waiting for fine weather before they embarked. Their money 1 " Iste obiit; venite et videte," " Chron. Novgorod." p. 95. Epist. Baldwin, " Cron. Altinat," p. 192. 2 Inn. III. " Epist." vi. January 23. See also 342 THE FALL OF CONSTANTINOPLE. was spent. They were, to some extent, as one writer says, " between the hammer and the anvil," and were compelled to follow as Dandolo led. The next negotiation was therefore one in which there is no evidence that Boniface took any part, just as in the one already mentioned there is nothing to show that Dandolo had any share. Each leader was playing for his own hand. The common bond of union had not yet been found. A meeting took place between the Emperor Mourtzouphlos and Dandolo in order, professedly, to discuss condicapturethe tions of peace. The meeting was held at the monastery of St. Cosma, which was about half a mile without the walls of Blachern. 1 The doge asked for immediate payment of fifty centenaria of gold,2 and imposed other conditions which were exceedingly hard, among which, probably, was obedience to the Komish Church. Dandolo must have known that his conditions were certain to be refused. While the two leaders were together, a detachment of the Crusaders' cavalry made a descent from an adjoining hill with the object of capturing the emperor, and would have succeeded if he had not fled. Some of his body-guard were, indeed, captured.3 "No further attempt at negotiation appears to have been made either by the Venetians or the Crusaders. Boniface had Difficulties of failed, and had probably no wish to come to an arBomface. rangement when he learned that Alexis was really dead. He could no longer carry out the design of Philip to unite the two empires. Two courses were open to him : to go with the Crusaders to Egypt or to Palestine, or to throw 1 The monastery of St. Cosma is repeatedly mentioned by the Byzantine writers. Du Cange, " Cos. Christ." p. 127, discusses with his usual deluge of learning where it was situated, and arrives at the conclusion I have adopted. The position agrees with that given by Nicetas, who says that Dandolo crossed in a galley, while the emperor rode thither. 2 Nicetas, p. 751. 3 Nicetas (p. 752) is the authority for this statement. It is not improbable, and indeed is likely enough, if Gunther's story is true that the emperor had tried to decoy the leaders into the city. NEGOTIATIONS ABANDONED. 343 in his lot with Dandolo. His oath, the wishes of the better portion of his troops, the command of the pope, the call from the messengers who had come from the Holy Land, urged him in one direction. But to leave Constantinople was to admit himself beaten, and to be submitted to the reproaches of the Crusaders for the failure of the expedition up to the present. The chances of success against the infidels were now far less than they had been. Even supposing that Boniface knew nothing of the treaty between Venice and the Sultan of Egypt, the difficulties before a crusading host were largely increased. The expedition organized with so much care by Innocent had been divided, and all who had taken part in it had up to the present time been unfortunate. The messengers with whom Abbot Martin had arrived told how the Flanders fleet, which had wintered in Marseilles, and which had more Crusaders on board than those who were before Constantinople, had failed in Syria. Great numbers had been stricken down with country fever and had died. The rest had returned home. They related also how those who had gone to Prince Bohemund, in Antioch, who was fighting for the Armenians against the Turks, had been slaughtered or captured to a man. The Venetians, moreover, were not yet paid, and would never consent to transport the army. It would be necessary, if Boniface wished to lead his army against the infidels, either to pay the Venetians or to fight them. To do the one was impossible. To do the other was inexpedient. If the Crusaders defeated Dandolo, his army would be at the mercy of the Greeks. If Dandolo should succeed, he was equally ruined. The Crusaders, at least, were between the hammer and the anvil. The second course, on the other hand, to throw in his lot with Dandolo, offered innumerable advantages. The of Jctuiggwith richest city in the world was before them. Its inm °°' habitants were divided. Its defences had already been proved to be vulnerable. Its soldiers had shown themselves less valiant than his own host. The Crusaders and Venetians alike would fight heartily in order to have the loot- 344 THE FALL OF CONSTANTINOPLE. ing of such undreamed-of wealth as they had already seen. The disaffected in the army, who were uninfluenced by the bait of plunder, could be brought over under the plea that the dearest object of Innocent, after the defeat of the miscreants, was the union of the two churches, and that in attacking the Greeks they were punishing them generally for their schism, and specially for their share in the deposition of their lawful ruler. The temptation of plunder, added to the excuse that they were in the path of duty and of obedience, would overcome the most scrupulous. And then, the greatest inducement of all to Boniface presented itself. If the city were captured a new emperor would have to be chosen. Who so certain of success as he? He was the chosen leader of the crusading army. Baldwin of Flanders and the other princes of the army had never pretended to dispute his supremacy. He had hitherto carried everything before him. The malcontents at Venice, at Zara, at Corfu, and before the city had been powerless. He had but to triumph once more, and he would be emperor of the New Rome. H e had done his best, as even Philip must admit, for young Alexis. The Swabian king could not blame him if, after all his loyal efforts, he should now fight for himself. The prospect was too dazzling to admit of indecision. He threw in his lot heartily with Dandolo, and declared for the siege. In conformity with the practice followed throughout the An attack is expedition it became necessary to assemble a pardecided on. i i a m e n t to decide on the next step. This met probably in the early days of March. We have no information as to what went on in reference to the proposal to attack the city. What is certain is that the parliament agreed to it. We know also that the meeting was long and stormy. " On y parla assez, en avant et en arriere," says the marshal. The result arrived at confirms the natural presumption that there were two, and probably even three, parties. The interest of the Crusaders was opposed to that of the Venetians. But the Crusaders were still, as they had always been, divided. The malcontents who had been opposed to the expedition to Constantinople distrusted and were disgusted with Boniface, and, PROSPECTIVE ARRANGEMENTS. 345 though they were not able to have their own way, were sufficiently powerful at least to thwart his plans. It was decided that if the city were taken six Venetians and six division of Crusaders should be elected to form a committee to were capt-y choose an emperor. 1 A proviso was, however, added, that all the twelve delegates should solemnly swear on holy relics that they would elect the candidate whom they believed to be the best in the interest of the world. The other provisions show that the parties were pretty equally balanced. It was agreed that if a Frank 2 should be elected emperor the patriarch should be chosen by the Venetians, and vice versa. The emperor was to receive one fourth of all that should be captured within the city and throughout the empire, together with the two imperial palaces of Blachern and the Lion's Mouth. The remaining three fourths were to be divided equally between the Venetians and the Crusaders. The gold and silver, the cloth, the silk, and all the rest of the booty captured were to be abandoned to the host, and to be collected together for the sake of a fair division. When this should have been accomplished a new committee of twentyfour, chosen by the Venetians and the Crusaders, was to be named to divide the empire into fiefs, and to define the feudal service which the holders should render to the new emperor. I t was further resolved that no one should lay hands on priest or monk nor plunder the churches or monasteries. The division of the spoils of the empire, including the carving out of the fiefs, was to be finished within a year, and therefore to be completed before the end of March, 1205. After the capture of the city all were to be free to leave it who wished to do so up to that date. After it, however, all who remained were to be bound to accept the suzerainty of the emperor. 3 1 Robert de Clari says twenty were chosen, ten from each (clxviii.). The term " Franchois " is used by all the contemporary writers to designate Frenchmen, Flemings, Germans, and Burgundians. The term " Frank," which is still used in the Balkan peninsula in much the same sense, is, therefore, a convenient one. 3 The agreement is given in Tafel and Thomas, pp. 444 and 452; Villehardouin, pp. 234-5 ; Rhamnusius, iii.; Innocent, " Gesta," p. 90. 2 346 THE FALL OF CONSTANTINOPLE. The bear's skin having thus been divided, it only remained to capture the bear. The Crusaders and Venetians had been pressing on their works for the attack upon the city with all their might. Rewards were offered to those whose scaling-ladders and covered gangways, to be thrown out from the ships' cross-trees to the walls, were first ready. The machines were prepared for hurling stones. Battering-rams, ballistse, mangonels, and all the engines known to the military science of the time for attacking a walled city were got ready. There was no longer any question of leaving for the Holy Land. The lust of gain had fallen upon the whole of the army, and while they were making preparations for the attack they were already planning out the best course for a division of the spoil. CHAPTER XV. THE ASSAULT, CAPTURE, AND PLUNDER OF THE CITY. T H E preparations which the leaders had been pushing on preparations during several weeks were completed by the 8th of for the attack. April, and that day was chosen for an assault upon the city. A noteworthy change of plan had been made from that which had been acted upon nine months before. Instead of attacking simultaneously a portion of the harbor walls and a portion of the landward walls, Yenetians and Crusaders alike directed their efforts against the defences on the side of the harbor. The horses were embarked once more in the huissiers. The line of battle was drawn u p ; the huissiers and galleys in front, the transports a little behind, and alternating between the huissiers and the galleys. The whole length of the line of battle was upwards of half a league,1 and stretched from the Blachern to beyond the Petrion. 2 The emperor's vermilion tent had been pitched on the hill just beyond the district of the Petrion, where he could see the ships when they came immediately under the walls. Before him was the district 1 Robert de Clari says it was a league long (lxx.)—a statement which cannot be true. 2 The Petrion, which is repeatedly mentioned by contemporary writers, was a district built on the slope of a hill running parallel to the Golden Horn for about one third of the length of the harbor walls eastward from Blachern. It had apparently been a neglected spot during the early centuries of the history of Constantinople, but had lately come to be the residence of numerous hermits, and the site of several monasteries and convents. A great part is now occupied by the Jewish colony of Galata. —Du Cange," Cons. Ch." Dr. Mordtmann, of Constantinople, has carefully examined the question, and has published the result of his inquiry in Constantinople. Nicetas says that the ships reached from Blachern to the monastery of Everyetis. This monastery was near and below the present mosque of Sultan Selim. 348 THE FALL OF CONSTANTINOPLE. which had been devastated by the fire. On the morning of An assault is the 9th the ships, drawn up in the order I have demade, scribed, passed over from the north to the south side of the harbor. The Crusaders landed in many places, and attacked from a narrow strip of the land between the walls and the water. Then the assault began in terrible earnest along the whole line. Amid the din of the imperial trumpets and drums the attackers endeavored to undermine the walls, while others kept up a continual rain of arrows, bolts, and stones. The ships had been covered with planks and skins so as to defend them from the stones and from the famous Greek fire, and, thus protected, pushed boldly up to the walls. The transports soon advanced to the front, and were able to get so near the walls that the attacking parties on the gangways or platforms, flung out once more from the ships' tops, were able to cross lances with the defenders of the walls and towers.1 The attack took place at upwards of a hundred points until noon, or, according to Nicetas, until evening. Both parties fought well. The invaders were repulsed. Those who had landed were driven back, and amid the shower of stones were unable to remain on shore. The invaders lost more than the defenders. The heightening of the walls had made their capture more difficult than at the previous attack. Before night a portion of the vessels had retired out of range of the mangonels, while another portion remained at anchor and continued to keep up a continual fire against those on the walls. The first day's attack had failed. The leaders of both Crusaders and Venetians withdrew Retreat to their forces to the Galata side. The assault had Gaiata. failed, and it became necessary at once to determine upon their next step. The same evening a parliament was hastily called together. Once more, in the presence of defeat, the old differences showed themselves. Some advised that the 1 The author of the " Devastatio " and Robert de Clari speak enthusiastically of the ingenuity of the Venetians, as shown in the construction of these platforms or scalas, and of the other machinery for attack. ASSAULT UPON THE CITY. 349 next attack should be made on the walls on the Marmora side, which'were not so strong as those facing the Golden Horn. The Venetians, however, immediately took an exception, which every one who knew Constantinople would at once recognize as unanswerable. On that side the current is always much too strong to allow vessels to be anchored with any amount of steadiness, or even safety. Villehardouin's irritation at the suggestion shows how bitter the opposition still continued. There were some present, he says, who would have been very well content that the current or a wind—no matter what—should have dispersed the vessels, provided that they themselves could have left the country and have gone on their way. It was at length decided that the two following days, the 10th and 11th, should be devoted to repairing their sault decided damages, and that a second assault should be delivupou * ered on the 12th. The previous day was a Sunday, and Boniface and Dandolo made use of it to appease the discontent in the rank and file of the army. Once more, as at Corfu and before the first attack upon the city, the bishops and abbots were set to work to preach against the Greeks. They urged that the war was just, because Mourtzouphlos was a traitor and a murderer, a man more disloyal than Judas; that the Greeks had been disobedient to Home, and had perversely been guilty of schism in refusing to recognize the supremacy of the Pope, and that Innocent himself desired the union of the two churches. They saw in the defeat the vengeance of God on account of the sins of the Crusaders. The loose women were ordered out of the camp, and for better security were shipped and sent far away. Confession and communion were enjoined, and, in short, all that the clergy could do was done to prove that the cause was just, to quiet the discontented, and to occupy them until the attack next day.1 The warriors had in the meantime been industriously repairing their ships and their machines of war. A slight, but not 1 Robert de Clari, Ixxii. 350 THE FALL OF CONSTANTINOPLE. unimportant, change of tactics had been suggested by the assault on the 9th. Each transport had been assigned to a separate tower. The number of men who could fight from the gangways or platforms thrown out from the tops had been found insufficient to hold their own against the defenders. The modified plan was, therefore, to lash together, opposite each tower to be attacked, two ships, containing gangways to be thrown out from their tops, and thus concentrate a greater force against each tower. Probably, also, the line of attack was considerably shorter than at the first assault. On Monday morning, the 12th, the assault was renewed. The second The tent of the emperor had been pitched near the assault. monastery of Pantepoptis, 1 one of many which were in the district of the Petrion, extending along the Golden Horn from the palace of Blachern, about one fourth of its length. From this position he could see all the movements of the fleet. The walls were covered with men who were ready again to fight under the eye of their emperor. The assault commenced at dawn, and continued with the utmost fierceness. Every available Crusader and Venetian took part in it. Each little group of ships had its own special portion of the walls, with its towers, to attack. The besiegers during the first portion of the day made little progress, but a strong north wind sprang up, which enabled the vessels to get nearer the land than they had previously been. Two of the transports, the Pilgrim and the Parvis, lashed together, succeeded in throwing one of their gangways across to a tower in the Petrion, and opposite the position occupied by the emperor.2 A Venetian, and a French knight, Andre d'Urboise, immediately rushed across and obtained a foothold. They were at once followed by others, who fought so well that the defenders of the tower were either killed or fled. The example gave new courage to the invaders. The knights who 1 The remarkable church of this monastery still exists as a mosque, and is known as " Eski imaret Mahallasse." It still bears witness to its having been arranged for both monks and nuns. It is on the Fourth 2 Hill, just above the Phanar. Nicetas, p. 753. THE SECOND ASSAULT. 351 were in the huissiers, as soon as they saw what had been done, leaped on shore, placed their ladders against the wall, and shortly captured four towers. Those on board the fleet concentrated their efforts on the gates, broke in three of them, and entered the city, while others landed their horses from the huissiers. As soon as a company of knights was formed, they entered the city through one of these gates, and charged for the emperor's camp. Mourtzouphlos had drawn up his troops before his tents, but they were unused to contend with men in heavy armor, and after a fairly obstinate resistance the imperial troops fled. The emperor, says Nicetas—who is certainly not inclined to unduly praise the emperor, who had deprived him of his post of Grand Logothete—did his best to rally his troops, but all in vain, and he had to retreat towards the palace of the Lion's Mouth. The number of the wounded and dead was " sans fin et sans mesure." An indiscriminate slaughter commenced. The invaders spared neither age nor The third s e x - ^ n order to render themselves safe they set fire fire to the city lying to the east of them, and burned everything between the monastery of Everyetis and the quarter known as Droungarios. 1 So extensive was the fire, which burned all night and until the next evening, that, according to the marshal, more houses were destroyed than there were in the three largest cities of France. The tents of the emperor and the imperial palace of Blachern were pillaged, the conquerors making their headquarters on the same site at Pantepoptis. I t was evening, and already late, when the Crusaders had entered the city, and it was impossible for them to continue their work of destruction through the night. They therefore encamped near the walls and towers which they had captured. Baldwin of Flanders spent the night in the vermilion tent of the emperor, his brother Henry in front of the palace of Blachern, Boniface, the Marquis of Montferrat, on the other side of the imperial tents in the heart of the city. 1 It was the quarter about the gate in the harbor walls, now known as Zindan Capou, near the dried-fruit market. 352 THE FALL OF CONSTANTINOPLE. The city was already taken. The inhabitants were at length The city capt- awakened out of the dream of security into which ured. seventeen unsuccessful attempts to capture the New Kome had lulled them. Every charm, pagan and Christian, had been without avail. The easy sloth into which the possession of innumerable relics, and the consciousness of being under the protection of an army of saints and martyrs, had plunged a large part of the inhabitants, had been rudely dispelled. The Panhagia of the Blachern, with its relic of the Virgin's robe, the host of heads, arms, bodies, and vestments of saints and of portions of the holy Cross,, had been of no more use than the palladium which lay buried then, as now, under the great column which Constantine had built. The rough energy of the Westerns had disregarded the talismans of the Greek Church as completely as those of paganism. In vain had the believers in these charms destroyed during the siege the statues which were believed to be of ill-omen or unlucky. The invaders had a superstition as deep as their own, but with the difference that they could not believe that a people in schism could have the protection of the hierarchy of heaven, or be regarded as the rightful possessors of so many relics. During the night following its capture the Golden Gate, which was at the Marmora side of the landward walls, had been opened, and already an affrighted crowd was pressing forward to make its escape from the captured city. Others were doing their best to bury their treasures. The emperFiiep the land conquered by the judgment of God; but its people must be governed with justice, must be maintained in peaue and made to conform to religion. The property of the Church must be restored; restitution and repentance must be shown for what was past, and the vow which the Crusaders had taken must yet be fulfilled. I have insisted that the great object of Innocent's pontificate was to strike a blow at Mahometan ism. He hoped against hope that by the conquest cf Constantinople the cause of the Crusades might be advanced Hence, in claiming from the Crusaders, after the conquest o:: the city, that they should fulfil their vow, he pointed out that " t h e conquest of Greece would facilitate the conquest of the Holy Land," and he reminded them that they themselves had made use of the argument that the shortest way to Palestine was through Constantinople rather than through Alexandria. Again and again he returns to the same idea, and, beyond the union of the churches, the great practical benefit which Innocent sought to derive from what he elsewhere describes as " an act of justice where wicked men have been mad 3 use of by God to punish other wicked men," is that by means of Greece a heavier blow might yet be struck against the Mahometans. Baldwin had summoned the two legates from Palestine. Innocent could not approve of their conduct in obeying the summons. " I f you have left in order to obtain aid for the Holy Land, we approve of what you have done; if you have done so to assist in organizing the Church of Greece, you have acted too hastily. We authorize you to remain at Constantinople on condition that you do not lose sight of Jerusalem, to which you were sent." As the Venetians, had been the instruments against the of diverting the expedit on to Constantinople, InVenetians. nocent's opposition to them was greater than it was to the Crusaders. By the former his wishes had been disregarded to the last. In accordance with the agreement for the division of the spoil, the Venetians named one of their own countrymen, Thomas Morosini, as patriarch. The arrangements for his appointment, and for naming Latin priests to the ATTITUDE OF INNOCENT. 393 churches in Constantinople, had been made, not only without consulting Innocent, but in a way which Dandolo knew would be in defiance of what the pope regarded as his rights. Innocent rejected Morosini, and declared his election by the Venetian canons of Hagia Sophia null and void, on the ground that laymen had no right to appoint an ecclesiastic to so high an office, and that the canons had not themselves been regularly appointed. The objection was not to the person, for Innocent at once named Morosini to the patriarchal see. Innocent declared that they had added to their offence the pillage of the temples and the iniquitous diversion of the ecclesiastical possessions. He continued even to refuse the request made by the Venetians to appoint the archbishop they had named to Zara. " It is you," he wrote, " who have led the army of the Lord into a wicked path. Instead of fighting the Saracens, you have made war on Christians. You have despised the legate, treated the excommunication with contempt, broken the vow of the Cross, sacked the treasures and the Church possessions at Constantinople. You have done your best to appropriate and make hereditary among you the Lord's Church by means of lawless treaties. Tell me yourselves how you can make up for the harm you have done to the Holy Land, since you have turned to your profit an army of Christians, so great, so noble, and so numerous, which had been brought together with so much pain and expense, and wTith which not only Jerusalem, but even a part of Babylon might have been conquered. For if it succeeded in taking possession of Constantinople and Greece, a fortiori it could have snatched Alexandria and the Holy Land from the pagans. . . . Not only earthly might, but the will of Heaven, would have placed the two cities in your power. . . . Christianity was scandalized by your conduct towards Zara, and we cannot scandalize the whole Church by giving the pallium to the archbishop without having received satisfaction from you." l As late as 1213 he reproached them with the crime of Zara. Innocent refused the request made to him to exclude DanEp. Irmo." ix. p. 139. 394 THE FALL OF CON STANTINOPLE. dolo, on account of his great age, from the performance of the vow to make the crusade. When he learned that Cardinal Peter had actually arrived in Constantinople to aid in the reorganization of the Orthodox Church, he reproached him bitterly for his continual misconduct. H e had removed the excommunication for the sack o:: Zara; he had allowed the first siege of Constantinople; he bad absolved the Crusaders from their vow. Innocent formally charged him with having known, and even having formed, the plot in 1202 for the restoration of young Alexis.1 " When the Crusaders, after having consecrated themselves to tl e Saviour, have abandoned their route, drawn away by earth y attractions, were you free to change so holy and so solemn a vow, and to permit them to take another destination ? Think on it yourself. Disappointment, shame, and anxiety weaken us when we ask whether the Greek Church can enter into urion with the Apostolic See when that Church has seen only the works of darkness among the Latins." Innocent had heard that after a year the pilgrims in Constantinople were to be at literty to return home. " The Saracens," he declares, "who trembled after the fall of Constantinople, will they not throw themselves on yon, like wolves on an abandoned flock, when they learn that the Crusaders will return during the year to their homes? And we, how can we ask the people of the West to come to the aid of Palestine, even to the help of Constar tinople, if they reproach us who are guiltless for what you have done, because the Crusaders have abandoned their vowi;, and have returned to their homes loaded with the booty of an empire which they cannot even defend. . . . We do not wish to blame you further for the absolution which you ha\e granted to the Venetians; that will be the subject of a special letter. But we order you to return without delay to the Holy Land." Boniface, who had been the leader of the expec ition and its evil spirit, was in like manner not spared by Innocent. He was mean enough to endeavor to throw all the blame of the deviation of the expedition on Cardinal Peter, and \ long letter endeavoring to ^Inno. " E p . " v i i . p. 133. ATTITUDE OF INNOCENT. 395 justify himself in this manner was carried to Home by a special messenger.1 His arguments and excuses were answered by Innocent, who holds him responsible as the leader of the expedition for the horrors of the plunder of Constantinople, and refuses to absolve him from his vow to make the pilgrimage to the Holy Land. In truth, the designs of Innocent had completely failed. His long and careful preparations had been defeated by Philip, Boniface, and Dandolo. All the efforts he had made to strike a deadly blow at Islam had come to nought. The preparations made at so much cost had resulted in an attack upon Christians, and not upon Moslems. Constantinople had been captured instead of Jerusalem. The opportunity, so favorable from many causes, had been lost, and no other presenting equal advantages was ever to occur again. The internal quarrel between the Saracen leaders, and the weakening of Egypt by the non-rising of the Nile during a succession of years, were accidental circumstances which were never repeated. The supreme moment for striking a blow at the Saracens at a time when it could have been struck with effect had passed. Innocent's energy was too great to allow him to sit idle under the failure, but all his efforts were unable to create an expedition equal in strength to that of 1202. Innocent had been humiliated by Philip, and in order to accomplish the design of his life was compelled to accept his humiliation, and, by declaring for Philip, to acknowledge that he had been defeated. On the other hand, the Duke of Swabia had failed in the principal object of his intrigues, and had only succeeded in defeating the plans of the pontiff. But, though his design of becoming Emperor of East and West had failed, he never ceased until his assassination in 1208, by Otho of Wittelsbach, to intrigue against Baldwin and his successor on the throne. H e claimed the booty collected in Constantinople as belonging to him, and took possession of a considerable portion which had been taken into Germany. When the short reign of Baldwin was terminated in 1205 by his capture before Adrianople ^nno. "Ep." viii. p. 133. 396 THE FALL OF CONS TANTINOPLE. by an army of Bulgarians, Wallac lians, and Comans, and his subsequent death or murder, Philip still hoped that he might be named to the imperial throne. When Henry, the brother of Baldwin, was named as his successor, Philip treated him as a usurper, continually spoke of l i s own rights through his wife, and appears to the last to lave hoped that all Europe might again be brought under his rule, as the csesar universally recognized. The great consolation of Innoceit was that the union of the two churches had been effected; but, as we have stroyed aii seen, he doubted whether even this could be brought union of about effectually, since t i e conduct of the Latins had chiirclics outraged the members of the Orthodox Church. Subsequent events showed that l e was entirely right. The Latin conquest of Constantinople caused so deep a hatred to the Church of the West that there was never a chance again of a union between the two being accomplished. Upwards of two centuries later futile attempts were made at Ferrara and Florence to bring about such a union in presence of the ever-constant danger of the Mahometan progress, but the events of 1203-1204 made the erdeavor a ridiculous failure. Nor was the anticipation of the difficulties of union in the mind of Innocent without justification for other branches of the Orthodox Church. Pussia was the great convert of the Greek Church. Innocent sent a mission to that country to invite its archbishops and bishops to submit themselves to Pome, in order that their Church might not be left out of his fold, and called attention to the fact that the Greek Church, from which they had hitherto derived their aid, had now become united under him. The mission obtained no satisfactory result. The Kussian remained loyal to the Orthodox Church. Its aversion to that of the Elder Pome appears even to have been increased by this mission, and in a short time it placed itself under allegiance to the Patriarch of Nicsea, who soon took the position which had been occupied by the Patriarch of Constantinople. It is beyond my purpose to giv3 an account of the rule of the Latin emperors of Constantinople. The events which fol- ATTITUDE OF INNOCENT. 397 lowed the capture of the city in rapid succession proved that the Crusaders liad undertaken a task far beyond ness of their powers, even if they had been united. But govern Rodissatisfaction at once began to show itself, and the struggles among the captors themselves greatly weakened their power. Boniface and his friends seem to have believed themselves outwitted by Dandolo and the partisans of Baldwin. Within a few days of the coronation of the new emperor a tumult was raised between the rival factions.1 1 " Chron. of Romania," edition Buchon, p. 73. The Greek in which this is written is one of the most curious specimens existing of the mediaeval form of that language. The Marquis of Montferrat becomes 6 papicsZrjg rov MovQepa : he becomes king or 'Prjyag rrjg HaXoviKrjg ir6\i]g. The French are $pavr&Zoi. Baldwin is MiraXdovfiivog, just as in modern Greek the sound of d is always represented by Mir. The language of Nicetas contains many words of Western origin. I had prepared a long note on the subject of the Greek language of the twelfth century; but Professor Freeman's paper on " Some Points in the Later History of the Greek Language " in the Journal of Hellenic Studies of Oct., 1882, says all, and more, than I could say on the subject, and says it much better. I am inclined, however, to doubt whether his assertion (p. 390) that Anna and Nicetas " are always using words which could never have been the first words that came into their heads " is true. To this day islanders in the Archipelago, Greeks around Trebizond and other places in Asia Minor, have preserved in their dialects great numbers of words which even those well acquainted w7ith modern Greek do not recognize, although they are words which will be found in Liddell and Scott. Many, also, of the words used in modern Greek, though not usually found in a classical dictionary, are old, and had already come into general use in the time of Nicetas. Thus, he -writes Kpaaiov for wine, Qeyyapiov for moon, vspov for water. The pages of Nicetas show that the Latin court of the early emperors had left a great number of words in the language, and that Nicetas and his readers were quite familiar with the sight of Romance words in a Greek form. Some of these are very curious. Thus, (ppspiog for brother, frere, used of the brethren or friars of Jerusalem; rdjSXiov for table, K says it was formerly Maximianopolis, and places it at the mouth of the Maritza or Hebrus. QUARREL BETWEEN BALDWIN AND BONIFACE. 399 subject. On his arrival the latter begged Baldwin to allow him to leave at once for Salonica, in order to take possession of his signiory, and requested the emperor not to ruin him by going there himself. Baldwin, however, refused. A defiance followed. Boniface declared that if the emperor went into his country when he, Boniface, was quite able to conquer it for himself, it could not be for his benefit. " If you go, understand clearly that I shall not go with you, and that I shall separate myself from you." x The emperor replied that even on such terms he would go to Salonica. The breach was a serious one. Boniface, through his marriage, was supported by many of the Greeks. H e declared that Baldwin wras more perjured than the Greeks. H e gave to his wife's eldest son the name and the imperial ornaments of the emperor. The marshal shows his estimate of the danger by the statement that if God had not taken pity on them they would have lost all that they had gained. The rival leaders, each with an army behind him, were on the verge of wTar. Baldwin remained firm, and marched towards Salonica. Boniface, with his own followers, and with nearly all the German Crusaders, went on their way back, apparently towards Constantinople. The latter reached and entered Didymotica on the Maritza, and a day's journey south of Adrianople. The Greeks submitted, and, indeed, the inhabitants of the country flocked in wherever he passed with offers of support. Boniface pushed on to and besieged Adrianople, in which Baldwin had left a garrison. The Crusader in command immediately sent messengers, who rode day and night, to the capital, to inform Dandolo of the rupture, and that Boniface, after having occupied Didymotica, one of the strongest forts in Romania, was supported by the Greeks, and was now laying siege to Adrianople. Boniface then played a bold stroke to detach the Venetians Boniface from the side of Baldwin. In the beginning of Aumake withbthe g u s ^ n e m a ( l e a bargain with their representatives earn i Venetians. in Adrianople, by which he was to receive 1000 1 Villekardouin, p. 277. 400 THE FALL OF CONSTANTINOPLE. marks and lands in the west of the Balkan peninsula, which produced annually 10,000 golden aspers, and which he was to hold in fee from the republic and not from the emperor. In return Boniface sold to the Venetians his rights over Crete, his claim to 100,000 golden aspers due from the empire on account of Alexis the Fourth, his late pupil, and the rights over the fiefs with which Manuel had invested Eeynier in Salonica. As the Venetians, in vimie of the agreement for the division of the empire, were under no obligation to do homage for the territory which they received in Komania, Boniface, by this agreement, withdrew himself from vassalage to Baldwin. The trick was worthy of Boniface, and it entirely succeeded in detaching Dandolo irom the side of Baldwin. 1 Meantime Baldwin had marched on Salonica. The intervening towns and fortresses had surrendered to him, and Salonica itself—then, as Villehariouin says, one of the best and richest cities of Christendom—surrendered on condition of retaining the privileges the city had enjoyed under the Greek emperors. Dandolo in Constantinople was still master of the situation, and appears to have had powers which made him something like a dictator. After taking comsel with the chief barons, lie sent Villehardouin, who is caieful to inform us on several occasions that he had great influence with Boniface, to Adrianople. When he approached that city, Boniface, with the chiefs of his army, met him. In 'he interview the marshal reproached the marquis with havi ig attacked the territory of the emperor, and especially with having laid siege to Adrianople without having submitted his grievances to Dandolo. Boniface laid all the blame on the emperor, but at length agreed to a truce. Boniface was to retire from Adrianople to Didymotica and place his case in ;he hands of Dandolo, Count Louis of Blois, Conon de Bethune, and the marshal. Boniface proposals for withdrew to Didymot ca, where his wife had rearbiuation. n ^ i n e ^ a n ( j the marshal returned to Constantinople. The next object was to obtain the consent of the emperor to 1 "Refutatio Cretse," Aug. 12; Taf. et Thorn, c. xxiii.p. 512; Phrantzer, p. 106. QUARREL BETWEEN BALDWIN AND BONIFACE. 401 place his case also in the hands of Dandolo. Messengers were sent to inform Baldwin of what had taken place. The emperor, in the meantime, had heard of the siege laid to Adrianople by Boniface, and had hastened to its relief. He was, however, in considerable difficulties. Then, as now, the neighborhood of Salonica was highly feverish. Some of his best followers had died, and many more were disabled with fever. Hence the army which followed him was weak and almost unfit for service. While he was on his way to the relief of Adrianople the messengers from Dandolo met him and formally requested him to submit the matters in difficulty with Boniface to the four arbitrators already mentioned, adding the distinct threat that they would on no account allow a resort to force between him and his late chief. The emperor was irritated and angry. He consulted his council, in which, says the marshal, who is throughout the partisan of Boniface, there were many who had helped to cause the broil. Many hard words — grosses paroles—were used. The emperor made a compromise. His army was too weak to resist Boniface with his Greek allies. He dared not openly break with Dandolo, who was master of the capital, but he would not consent, until he knew the situation better, to place himself in the hands of the self-constituted tribunal. He replied that he would not pledge himself to submit the difficulty, but he would proceed at once to his capital, and in the meantime would promise not to attack Boniface. On his arrival in Constantinople Baldwin recognized before Arbitration the fourth day that the course proposed wTas the accepted. ^e&t ^^Jiicli, under the circumstances, he could adopt. Boniface was sent for, and he also, after some hesitation, consented to come to the capital. On his arrival the arbitrators decided that the emperor wTas wrong. Salonica was to be given to Boniface, and as a pledge that this should be done the marshal was ordered to take possession of Didymotica, and to hold it until he should be assured that Boniface was safely installed in Salonica. This decision was carried out, and the principality or kingdom of Salonica was surrendered to Boniface, Marquis of Montferrat. 26 402 THE FALL OF CONSTANTINOPLE. While the first of the grave internal differences of the Crusaders was thus brought temporarily to an end, three leaders others of an equally serious character, which it is o expe i ion. | ) e y Q n ( j m^ p l i r p 0 S e to describe, presented themselves. Innocent's anticipation of misfortune was soon justified by events. There was, as he iiad foreseen, little hope of aid in the crusade from the conquerors of an empire which they were not able to defend. Within eighteen months of the capture of the city three of the principal actors and a crowd of those only second to them in rank had died, and most of them by violent deaths. We have already seen that Baldwin fell into the hands of his enemies and was succeeded by his brother. Dandolo ended his long life in June, 1205, and lies buried in or near the Great Church of the Divine Wisdom. 1 Two years afterwards Boniface, who had continued to be of doubtful loyalty until he appears to have been contented by the marriage of his daughter to the new emperor Henry, met with a violent death. He was caught in a defile in the Rhodope Mountains by the Bulgarians, and was mortally wounded. The years that followed the conquest were of wild disorder and confusion. The government of the country throughout was a task to which the Crusaders were unequal. empne. ^ j ^ a {. t e m p|. t o r u ] e t j i e a n c i e n t empire under the forms of the Western feudal system utterly broke down. The land was divided into fiefs among the barons and knights, but the division caused much disaffection and wrangling. Few were satisfied in the general scramble which followed. In spite of an attempt to decide differences by lot, the rule was that each should keep what he could take. Western titles and dignities were introduced, and we read in the empire of the New Eome for the first and last time of grand constables, seneschals, cup-bearers, marshals, grand butlers, masters of the 1 A slab in the women's gallery, inscribed " Henrico Dandolo," commemorates liim. This, after having long been forgotten, was discovered a few years ago, and though some of the archaeologists of Constantinople whose opinions are entitled to respect be lieve it to be comparatively modern, I see no reason to doubt that it w is placed in its present position shortly after Dandolo's death. EMPIRE UTTERLY DISORGANIZED. 403 stables, and the like. The Crusaders knew their own fanciful law of honor, but despised the ordinary law by which mortals are governed. The assize of Jerusalem became law for the empire, though an attempt was made to preserve a portion at least of the old Eoman administration, including the application of the Eoman law of Justinian as preserved in his capital. There was, however, little chance that the new "Western system of organization could work harmoniously with the ancient Eoman administration which had lasted in Eomania. Such chance as there might otherwise have been was destroyed by forces outside the empire. The same causes which had weakened the dominion of the Byzantine rulers began to operate against the Crusaders, and rendered them so feeble that instead of being able, as they had fondly believed, to use the strength of Eomania against the Saracens, they had to implore aid from the West to enable them to hold what they had conquered. The deposed emperor, Alexis the Third, and Alexis the Fifth, or Mourtzouphlos, were, at the time of the occupation, still at large. The latter was captured by the Latins at Mosynopolis, was brought to Constantinople, and was thrown from the column of Theodosios. Alexis the Third was captured and sent to Boniface, who held him as a prisoner, and gave to Philip the satisfaction of stating how he should be disposed of. The Moslems were at first greatly alarmed at the capture of the city which to them was still the world's capital, was still Eome. In their first alarm even Malek A del hastened to conclude a truce of six years with Cardinals Peter Capuane and Soffred; but he and his so-called religionists soon recovered from the shock of the conquest. Constantinople had drawn away Crusaders from Palestine instead of adding to their number. The Western soldiers, including even many of the Templars, took the opportunity of leaving Syria in order to share in the wealth which was offered them in Constantinople. The natural result followed. The truce was broken, and Islamism soon came into possession of territory which had been held for many years by the Christians. Though Innocent pro- 404 THE FALL OF CONSTANTINOPLE. foundly regretted this result, he was forced to acquiesce in it, and even to authorize Baldwin to retain t h e Crusaders in Constantinople whom h e had previously ordered to leave for t h e H o l y Land. In t h e spring of 1205 t h e new emperor was attacked by Greeks, Bulgarians, and Comans, and it was in one of these attacks that the latter succeeded in luring a considerable body of Crusaders into an ambuscade, where they killed three h u n d r e d knights, captured t h e emperor, and took him prisoner to Tirnova. I t was at this very time that the great body of Venetians, a m o u n t i n g to 7000, left Constantinople. T h e Crusaders were obliged to withdraw to t h e capital, and nearly the whole of the country was abandoned to the enemy. Still less success awaited t h e m in Asia Minor, where the Greeks were able to hold their own after t h e first surprise caused by the capture of the capital, and where the invaders found themselves glad, in 1206, to make a truce with Theodore Lascaris. T h e story of the following years is one of struggle with the people w h o m they had conquered, of reckless disregard of their rights, of raids over t h e country in search of plunder, of attacks from t h e Bulgarians and Comans, and of almost incessant warfare until, sixty years after t h e conquest, the Greeks again obtained possession of the capital, and the Latin E m p i r e of t h e East came to an ignominious end. V e n i c e obtained the richest rewards and t h e fullest payThe gains of ment for her share in the conquest of Constantinovemce. ^e. H e r acquisition of territory and of commerce made her for a time the undisputed mistress of t h e Mediterranean. Dandolo had stipulated that she should receive three out of the eight portions into which it had been agreed t h a t R o m a n i a should be divided. H e appears to have been allowed to take his choice of t h e portions of territory which were to be allotted as the share of the republic. H o naturally chose lands adjacent to those already possessed by Venice on t h e Adriatic, and such ports, islands, or sea-boards as she could readily defend with her fleet. Dandolo retained t h e rank which had already been given him of Despot, and was allowed to wear the imperial buskins. I n addition, he took t h e cu- THE GAINS OF VENICE. 405 rious title of Lord of one quarter and a half of the Eoman Empire. 1 On the death of Dandolo his successor obtained a concession from the emperor authorizing any Venetian citizen or ally to take possession of any of the islands in the JEgean or places on its coasts which were not already occupied by the republic, and to hold it for him and his heirs. The granting of this concession was followed by a series of buccaneering expeditions, which speedily captured and occupied a number of important positions. Gallipoli, on the Dardanelles, was seized by Marc Dandolo and another prominent citizen, and with the Thracian Chersonese was erected into a duchy. Another band, under Sanuto, occupied Naxos, Paros, and other isles, which were held by him and his descendants for four centuries. Chios was occupied by the great chiefs, Justiniani and Michaeli. A part of Euboea and the Cyclades, the islands of Lemnos and Zante, were captured by others. The republic itself took possession of Corfu. The great power of Yenice over the Adriatic, the iEgean, and especially over the islands mentioned, and over a portion of the Morea, dates from the Latin conquest—a power which was used on the whole well and wisely, which introduced or continued fairly good government, and which has left traces in well-constructed roads and fortresses in every place I have mentioned. But, as was natural, the results of the Latin conquest were more markedly visible in Yenice herself than in any of the possessions which she obtained. Her marts were filled with merchandise. Her ships crowded the great canals and her harbor with the spoils of Asia and the products of the Levant. Her architecture reproduced and improved upon that of Constantinople. The spoils of the New Eome were her proudest ornaments. Her wealth rapidly increased. The magnificence of the New Eome was transferred to Yenice, which was during the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries the most splendid of Christian cities. 1 " Henricus Dandolus, D. G. Venetiarum, Dalrnatiae atque Croatise dux, dominus quartee partis et dimidise totius imperii romani."—" Yite de' Duclri di Venez," in Muratori. 406 THE FALL OF CONSTANTINOPLE. The Venetians continued to be opposed to the designs of Innocent, and years afterwards were reproached by him for sending wood, arms, and other munitions of war 2 to the Saracens in Alexandria. At a later period Innocent reproached them for mocking the Holy See, and injuring the cause in the Holy Land by inducing pilgrims who were able to fight to go to Crete and assist the republic instead of combating the Saracens. In the next crusade, which was also due to the indomitable energy of the same pontiff, the Venetians were, as far as possible, excluded from all participation in it. Innocent named Ancona and Brindisi as the ports of embarkation for Outre-mer. I t was impossible that an event so important as the conquest of the city could have been without beneficial suits of the results to Western Europe. Against the destrucWesteni tion of so much that is valuable we may set off a p ' knowledge of the comforts of a civilized and comparatively luxurious life conveyed to the West by men who, as we gather from all contemporary accounts, had been profoundly affected by the signs of wealth with which they were surrounded. Many small but valuable advances in Western civilization are due to the conquest. Silk-weaving had been better understood in Constantinople than in any Western city, but Venice was soon able to rival her ancient enemy. Various seeds and plants found their way to the West. The diversion of the trade of Constantinople from the Bosphorus to the Adriatic or into overland routes probably benefited and helped to develop the civilization of Western Europe. The commerce of the empire passed into the hands of foreigners and rivals, and of these Venice naturally obtained the largest share. The valuable products of Central Asia which found their way into the ports of the Azof and the Euxine, and which had been reserved jealously by the citizens of Constantinople for themselves, even at the time when the emperors were granting capitulations for trade in every other part of the empire, all these now wTent to Venice. Most of this trade 1 Inno. " Ep." xii. p. 142. CONCLUSION. 407 was carried on by sea; but the dangers which beset maritime commerce now that the shadow of the pax Romana had passed away caused a considerable portion of the valuable and less bulky products of India and Central Asia to be taken up the Indus, thence by camels to the Caspian, and then partly overland and partly by rivers to Venice or other European states. The great bulk of the trade between Asia and Europe was diverted from the Bosphorus into the Adriatic. Venetian ships for a time replaced in the Black Sea, not only those of Constantinople, but even those of Genoa. The Tartar races in the Euxine, as well as the Saracens in Egypt and Syria, traded almost exclusively with the citizens of Venice. Innocent continued to condemn the conduct of the Crusaders Evil results of a n d ^ n e Venetians in terms which show that they the conquest. a r e ^1Q expression of his deliberately formed opinion and that of the great churchmen by whom he was surrounded. We have seen that at times his language is that of profound indignation at the iniquities which have been committed; at other times it is that of expostulation and of calm reasoning. But throughout the many letters in which he addresses the actors in this huge fiasco or alludes to their conduct, the sentiment most predominant is one of sadness that the Crusaders should have abandoned the object for which they were brought together. His letters leave the impression that he never ceased to regret the failure of the crusade, which had been so carefully organized and from which so much might reasonably have been expected. He appears on many occasions to feel that it is impossible to make those whom he addresses understand what is the greatness of the opportunity which they had missed. In the comprehension of the Eastern question of his day and of what statesmanship required for the interests of Europe and civilization, he seems to stand at the opening of the thirteenth century head and shoulders above all other kings and potentates. The tone of his letters, their gloom, when speaking of the prospects of Romania, of Asia Minor, and of Syria, almost appear as if he alone in his generation foresaw how disastrous the conquest of the imperial city would b e ; as if he alone recognized that it was the 408 THE FALL OF CONSTANTINOPLE. interest of Europe to make a supreme effort to strike a blow at Mahometanism, which should make its further advance upon Christian territory impossible. He tried and, no doubt, to a certain extent succeeded in finding consolation in the union of the churches, which he fondly hoped was to be brought about by the conquest; and though,as we have seen, he recognized that the manner of the conquest had placed a great obstacle in the way of union, he yet hoped that the "loathing" felt by the Greeks towards the Latins would in time be softened down or entirely removed. H e hoped that the conquest of the city might still be of use in reducing Jerusalem under Christian rule. He believed that its capture during Easter week might possibly be regarded as a token that Christ intended to make use of the wicked act of the Crusaders by leading to a new entry into the Holy City, and that the Greeks had been justly punished for their refusal to help the Crusaders and for their toleration of a mosque within their city. In these facts he found consolation. The existence of this consolation and of this rejoicing in the union which so many pontiffs had labored fruitlessly to effect brings out into stronger relief the intensity of his conviction that the destruction of the rival empire was a blunder and a crime. He was profoundly sad at the failure of his expedition, at the conquest of an empire whose preservation would absorb all the force of Christendom, and at the necessary diversion of Christian troops from Palestine. "We who can be wise after the event can see even more distinctly than Innocent how disastrous the conquest of Constantinople had been. The city had spent its strength in fighting against the hordes of Asia. Her outposts in Asia Minor had been carried by successive waves of barbarian invasion from the great plains of Central Asia. These waves had come flowing on multitudinously and overwhelmingly during a century and a half, pushed by the mighty movement of a Tartar emigration westward. Her powers had been exhausted in thus defending the first lines of Europe against a host whose deficiencies were immediately supplied by newcomers. We have seen in our recent small war in the Soudan CONCLUSION. 409 what is the force which the spring-tide of fanaticism may supply to a horde of barbarians. The Seljukian Turks and the other Mahometan tribes against which the strength of the New Rome had been spent wTere still drunk with the new wine of their conversion to Islam, and fought with the same confidence of victory, recklessness of life, and even desire for death, with which the half-naked and ill-armed followers of an African Mahdi threw themselves on English bayonets. The legions of the New Eome withstood the rush of the Asiatic fanatics as steadily as did our own countrymen those of Africa. Again and again they succeeded in inflicting what was apparently a crushing defeat on the Mahometan armies. But the battle had to be fought again after the lapse of a few years, when new fanatics had come to take the place of those who had fallen. The flow of savage or barbarian hordes had, during the two centuries which preceded the disaster of 1204, been as constant on the north of the Black Sea as it had been on the south. Bulgarians, Comans, Patehinaks, Uzes, and other non-Christian peoples had attacked the imperial eity in the rear while she was defending European civilization in Asia Minor. The Sicilian expedition and internal troubles, arising partly from dynastic rivalries, partly from the weakness which had come upon her owing to Asiatic influences, and especially to the weakening of the despotic forms of government before the oligarchical had become sufficiently strong to take its place, had lessened her strength, so that she was not able to offer the resistance which she had done two centuries earlier. But she gained breathing-time from the divisions of the Seljukian Turks and from her victories over the Bulgarians and the Comans, and there appears good reason to believe that had she not been destroyed by the people of the "West and her organization put an end to during a period of sixty years, she would have been able at a later period to have made a stouter, and probably a successful, resistance to the Ottoman Turks. That this new body of Mahometan invaders was able a century and a half later to occupy several important positions in what they called, as their descendants still call it, Eoumelia, or the territory of Eome, 410 THE FALL OF CONSTANTINOPLE. and that two centuries and a half later they were able to capture the New Rome itself, was due to the fatal blow which had been inflicted by Philip of Swabia, by Boniface of Montferrat, and by Henry Dandolo. That blow had been struck at the moment when the resources of the empire had been expended. We ought not, however, to forget that its strength had been spent in stemming the torrent of barbarism, in fighting the battle of Europe against Asia, of Christianity against Moslemism. The empire had maintained this struggle not altogether single-handed, for the efforts of the Crusaders had been on behalf of the same cause. But the Saracens were the special object of their attack, and the fact that the deliverance of the Holy Land was the peculiar aim set before them prevented anything like hearty co-operation with the empire in attacking the Turks, even had there not been other reasons which made such cooperation impossible. Thus the great brunt of the struggle fell upon the empire alone, and, in spite of the efforts of rulers like Manuel to persuade the Western nations to come to their aid, Latin and German Europe preferred to fight Islam in its own way rather than to make common cause against the common enemy. The traditional feeling in the West against those who recognized the sway of the Emperor of the New Eome has affected Western historians of this period of Constantinopolitan history. As the descendants of peoples who acknowledged the rule of the Latin Church, we have taken our ideas and our prejudices from our fathers, and are in this sense all of us the sons of the Crusaders. Western Europe has been only too ready to find evidence of the corruption and the effeminacy of the Eastern capital, to recognize that Asiatic influences had lessened the vigor which had characterized its government during the centuries preceding the Crusade, and to regret that its Church had less power in arousing enthusiasm than had the sister Church of our fathers. Hence it is that justice has not been done to the unceasing struggle of a century and a half previous to 1204, made by the Greek-speaking Roman empire and by the Christians of Armenia and Georgia. The facts that have been remembered CONCLUSION. 411 are that the Eastern Church had refused to accept the supremacy of the pope; that Constantinople was taken by the Crusaders ; that her population was powerless to prevent the capture of the city in 1453 by the Ottoman Turks. The facts that are forgotten are that if the Turks were unable to find a footing in Europe until one hundred and fifty years after 1204, it was because the Eastern empire had made so gallant a resistance during a like period before 1204; that she received a fatal blow from the huge expedition called the Fourth Crusade, but that, recovering for a while from this blow, she was yet able, unaided, to prolong the struggle long enough to pour forth a stream of learning and literature over the West; and that the time gained while she kept back the Turks greatly diminished their strength, delayed their arrival in Europe, and enabled the West to grow strong enough to resist the Ottoman Turks when, two centuries after they had made good their hold upon Europe, they attained the period of their greatest strength, barely more than two centuries ago. That John Sobieski h was able to drive back the Turks who wrere besieging Vienna in 1683 was due to the fact that the Eastern empire had sacrificed itself as the vanguard of Europe. Nor must it be forgotten that the resistance of the empire had had a great effect upon the Seljukian Turks. The terrible blows inflicted on them had diminished their strength. They had already begun to show signs of weakness. During the latter years of the century Chengiz Khan, the great leader of a Tartar tribe which had adopted the name of Mongol,1 had commenced his terrible career, and the attention of the Turks was, in 1204, already turned away from the empire to that of the more serious danger which threatened them in their rear. The capture of Constantinople by the Western Crusaders enabled the Turks to survive that danger. Had the empire not been destroyed there is good reason to believe that it would have shortly recovered its strength, have con1 The soldiers of Chengiz Khan repudiated the name Tartars as that of a people they had conquered, and called themselves Mongols. Notwithstanding the repudiation, they were of Tartar origin.—Osbornfs "Islam under the Khalifs of Baghdad," p. 372. 412 THE FALL OF CONSTANTINOPLE. tinued its struggle, and that the Turks, with Chengiz Khan on one side and the imperial troops on the other, would have been annihilated. The continual attacks of the Seljuks, while they had weakened the empire, yet enable us to see how great had been its strength. The marches of Pizarro in the New World, of the Ten Thousand of Alexander, and at this very time of Chengiz Khan into China and subsequently into Transoxiana, were all easy, since they were through states which had become demoralized. No such demoralization existed, and consequently no such march was possible under the rule of the New Rome. The Turks had to fight their way inch by inch, to hold what they captured against continual harassment, and, as I have so often repeated, were only able to maintain a settlement in Asia Minor because their numbers were continually recruited by fresh bands of immigrants into the country they had captured. The results of the Fourth Crusade upon European civilization were altogether disastrous. The light of Greek civilization, which Byzantium had kept burning for nearly nine centuries after Constantine had chosen it as his capital, was suddenly extinguished. The hardness, the narrowness, and the Hebraicism of Western civilization were left to develop themselves with little admixture from the joyousness and the beauty of Greek life. Every one knows that the Turkish conquest of Constantinople dispersed throughout the West a knowledge of Greek literature, and that such knowledge contributed largely to the bringing about of the Reformation and of modern ways of thought. One cannot but regret that the knowledge of Greek literature was so dearly bought. If the dispersion of a few Greeks, members of a conquered and therefore despised race, but yet carrying their precious manuscripts and knowledge among hostile peoples, could produce so important a result, what effect might not reasonably have been hoped for if the great crime against which Innocent protested had not been committed ? Western Europe saw the sparks of learning dispersed among its people. The light which had been continuously burning in a never-forgotten and, among CONCLUSION. 413 the literary class, a scarcely changed language, had been put out. The crime of the Fourth Crusade handed over Constantinople and the Balkan peninsula to six centuries of barbarism, and rendered futile the attempts of Innocent and subsequent statesmen to recover Syria and Asia Minor to Christendom and civilization. If we would understand the full significance of the Latin conquest of Constantinople, we must try to realize what might now be the civilization of Western Europe if the Romania of six centuries ago had not been destroyed. One may picture not only the Black Sea, the Bosphorus, and the Marmora surrounded by progressive and civilized nations, but even the eastern and southern shores of the Mediterranean given back again to good government and a religion which is not a barrier to civilization. INDEX. ALEXIS, natural son of Manuel I., blinded by Andronicos I., 85. Alexis, nephew of Manuel I., blinded by Isaac Angelos, 92. Alexis, pretenders, 101, 102, 106. Alexis Contostephanos, a pretender, 105. Alexis, protosebastos, shares the government with the Empress Maria, 68; plot to assassinate him, 68; deprived of his sight by Andronicos Comnenos, 78. Alexis I. defeats Suliman and Wiscard, 36. Alexis II., accession of, 68; betrothed to the daughter of Andronicos, 80; crowned a second time, 80; put to death by Andronicos, 82. Alexis III. deposes his brother Isaac, 104; assumes the throne and takes the name of Comnenos, 105; his troubles with the Wallachs, 106,107; with the Patchinaks, 107 ; with the Comans, 107; with the Bulgarians, 107; pretenders to his throne, 109; his wars with the Turks, 110, 111; demoralization of the empire during his reign, 113; alleged to have been in league with a pirate, 114; buys peace from Henry the Sixth's Crusaders, 134; petitions Innocent III., 284; sends a deputation to Boniface's Crusaders, 305; his character, 317; flees from Constantinople, 318; captured by the Latins, 403. Alexis IV. escapes from Alexis III., 274; appeals for help to his brother-in-law, Philip of Swabia, 275; visits Kome, 280; sends an embassy to Venice, 282; his restoration agreed to at Zara, 287289; joins the Crusaders, 297; ratifies the convention of Zara, 298; shown to the citizens of Constantinople, 306; his contract with the Crusaders, 321; associated with his father on the throne, 822; his difficulty in paying the money promised to the expedition, 322, 330; excites popular hatred, 324; leaves with Boniface for Adrianople, 325; falls into contempt, 329; asks Boniface for a household guard, 336; made prisoner by Mourtzouphlos, 337. Alexis V., see Mourtzouphlos. Alparslan, conquests of, in Georgia and Armenia, 27; invades Asia Minor, 27, 28. Andronicos I. makes a treaty of alliance with Saladin, 47, 142; character of, 71,211; amour with his cousin Eudocia, 72; escapes from prison, 72; refuses to recognize Manuel's nomination to the succession, 73; escapes from the Empire, 74; amour with Queen Theodora, 74 ; assists the Turks to plunder the empire, 75; returns to Constantinople, and is pardoned, 75; intrigues for the throne, 76 ; deprives the protosebastos Alexis of his eyesight, 78; makes himself master of the capital, 78; his cruelties towards his opponents, 79, 85; determines to marry Alexis II. to his daughter Irene, 80; has the ex-empress tried and executed, 8 1 ; crowned emperor, 82; murders Alexis II., 82; lays siege to Nicsea, 82; attacks Broussa, 83 ; murders the sureties of his nephew Isaac, 84; public feeling turns against him, 84; his reforms, 85; revolt against him, 87; offers to abdicate, 88; his flight and capture, 90; outraged and killed by the populace, 90, 91. Andronicos, a pretender, 101. Anema, Tower of, 90. Ani, capture of, 27. Antioch captured by the Crusaders, 40. Armenia attacked by Togrul, 26; conquered by Alparslan, 27. Armenians in Constantinople, 146; Justinian's " capitulation " to, 148 note. 416 INI)EX. Array, deterioration of the, 217. 376; obtains a concession of territory Arnold of Ibelino, his account of the in case of non-election, 380; reEgypto-Venetian alliance, 271. proached by Innocent III., 895; quarArsen, Armenian city, burned bv Togrul, rels with Baldwin, 399 ; besieges Adri26. anople, 399 ; his manoeuvre to alienate Asan, a Wallachian leader, defeats John the Venetians from Baldwin, 400; obCantacuzenos, 9 1 ; assassinated, 106. tains possession of Salonica, 401; his Asia Minor, present and former condideath, 402. tion of, 27, 28; ravaged by the Selju- Bosphorus, towers built by Manuel I. on kian Turks, 28 ; Turkish settlement in, the, 78; the name, 95 note; passage 33; a source of weakness to the emof, by the Crusaders, 308. pire, 51, 206, 399. Branas, Alexis, revolt of, 94, 95 ; invests Asiatic conquests, baneful influence of, the capital, 95; his defeat and death, on society in the capital, 206. 97. Avars, first appearance of, in the em- Bromholm becomes possessed of a relic pire, 55. from Constantinople, 370. Broussa sacked by Andronicos I., 83. Bulgarians, first appearance of, in the BALDWIN, COUNT, brought prisoner before Empire, 55; second irruption, 56; Isaac II., 92, 93. ally themselves with the Wallachs and Baldwin, Earl of Flanders, joins the establish a Wallach-Bulgarian state, fourth crusade, 236; candidature of, 61; capture Varna, 108. for the throne of Constantinople, 378; Byzantine empire, the term, 3. supported by Dandolo, 382; declared emperor and crowned, 385,386; writes to the pope, 388; offends Boniface by CAESAR, the title, 102 note. marching to Salonica, 399; surrenders Camyzes, Manuel, 108, 109. Salonica to Boniface, 401; captured Cantacuzenos, John, blinded by Andronby the Bulgarians, 404. icos, 76; defeated by the Wallachs, Balkan peninsula, former inhabitants of 94. the, 52. Cantacuzenos, Theodore, defends Nicaea Balliol, Russell, scheme of, against the against Andronicos I., 83. empire, 33. Capitulations, history of, 148, 149 ; their Basil II., Bulgaroctone, 57. modern form, 150; why they have Bela, King of Hungary, invades the emlasted in Turkey, 150, 151; the existpire, 54. ing system a survival from the days Benjamin of Tudela, his impressions of of the empire, 152. Constantinople, 185. Chenghiz Khan, 411, 412. Bethune, Conon de, his reply to the Clari, Robert de, his account of the Latin messenger of Alexis III., 305 ; delivers conquest of Constantinople, 250 note. an insolent message to Isaac II., 333, Clement, St., head of, 365, 366. 334. Comans, the, attack the empire, 58, 107. Blachern, palace of Manuel I. at, 186. Comnenos, John, campaigns of, against the Turks, 43 ; nominates Manuel heir Bohemund attacks the empire, 137, 166. to the crown, 70; claims the places Boniface of Montferrat appointed leader captured by crusaders, 117. of the fourth crusade, 245; his visit to Philip of Swabia, 245, 279; con- Comnenos, John, his sons blinded, 80. nection of his family with the East, Comnenos, John, the Fat, a pretender, 278; his hostility to Constantinople, 109. 279; goes on an embassy to Rome, Conquest, the, beneficial results of, to 280; revisits Rome, 282; goes to Zara, Western Europe, 406 ; its evil results, 285; takes Alexis IV. to Adrianople, 408. 325; asks Mourtzouphlos to surrender Conrad, King, crusade of, 44, 122. Alexis IV., 341; becomes jealous of Conrad of Montferrat aids Isaac II. to Dandolo, 341; declares for the siege quell the revolt of Branas, 96 ; refuses of Constantinople, 344 ; hailed as king to go with Isaac to Adrianople, 99; in Constantinople, 353; his candidaassassinated in Palestine, 99, 132; ture for the throne of Constantinople, saves Tyre from the Saracens, 130; INDEX. 417 claims the throne of Jerusalem, 130; I zeal in its behalf, 231; preached by Fulk, 234; the command offered to story of his marriages, 130, 131 note; Theobald, 236; choice of Venice as the alleged treachery of Isaac IL to him, port of departure, 237; terms made 278. with the doge, 240; destined for Egypt, Constantine, churches built by, 187; col241; the command transferred to Boniumn of, 191. face of Montferrat, 245; breach of the Constantine Angelos, design of, upon the contract with Venice, 248; diversion throne, 100. of the enterprise proposed, 249; VeConstantinople reproduced in Venice, 11, netians to take part in the crusade, 405 ; position of, in regard to the pop257; influence of Dandolo, 257; captulations of the Balkan peninsula, 52; ure of Zara, 262; quarrel of Crusaders diverse nationalities among the populawith Venetians, 262; reasons assigned tion of, 144; did not assimilate foreign by contemporary writers for the diverimmigrants, 145; the chief city of the sion, 265; treachery of Venice, 268; Western world in 1200, 180; advanstory of the conspiracy against Contages of its situation, 180; advantages stantinople, 273; attack of the city derived from its being the capital, and agreed on at Zara, 286; deputation from commerce, 181; the treasuresent to Innocent III., 290; arrival of house of the East, 185 ; its wealth comthe expedition at Corfu, 297; feeling pared with Western cities, 186; its of the army at the convention of Zara, principal buildings, 187; its wealth in 298; arrival before Constantinople, relics, 193, 364; its walls and cisterns, 303 ; reply to the messenger of Alexis 195; dwellings of the poorer class, III., 305; passage of the Bosphorus, 195 ; a city of pleasure, 196; learning 808; Galata occupied, 308; the imnot neglected there, 200; absence of perial fleet surprised, 309 ; general atinterest in religious questions in the tack on the city, 309; a deputation twelfth century, 201; monasteries, 204; sense of security of its inhabi- I sent to Isaac II., 320; the contract with Alexis IV., 321; Saracen mosque tants, 204; effeminacy of the ruling attacked and the city set fire to, 327; classes, 205; influence of Asia upon marauding expeditions, 330; insolent its social life, 206; administration of demand on Isaac II. for payment, 334; the government and of justice, 212; superstition of the people, 214; com-1 siege of Constantinople agreed on, 344; prospective arrangements for the diviparison with Turkish Constantinople, 221; the plots of the crusade leaders i sion of the spoil, 345 ; conquest of the city, 348-352 ; election of a Latin emagainst it, 265; its defences, 310; atperor, 377-385. tacked by the Crusaders, 312; fires in, 325,327; assaulted and captured, 348- Cyprus, seized by Isaac Comnenos, 84; expedition of Isaac II. to, 98; con352; sacked, 353-355. Contostephanos deserts with the fleet to : quered by Richard I., 98, 132. Andronicos Comnenos, 77; deprived! of sight, 81. \ DADYBRA. capitulates to the Turks, 111. Corfu, the Crusaders at, 297. Crusades, disorganization wrought in the Dalmatia Slavicized, 55. empire by, 36, 37; difficulties in the Dalmatius de Sergy obtains the head of way of co-operation with the empire, St. Clement, 366, 367. 117; decline of the religious spirit Damascus, failure of the Crusaders' atamong the Crusaders, 119; influence tack on, 125. of, on the capture of Constantinople, Dandolo, Henry, his mission to Constan136. tinople, 173; his feelings towards the Crusade, first, 37. empire, 239; becomes one of the second, 44; its failme attributed to leaders of the crusade, 257; his charthe empire, 121. acter, 257; directs the seaward attack upon Constantinople, 312; has an authird, 48,125; in alliance with the dience with Mourtzouphlos, 342; reTurks, 4 8 ; its failure embitters the feeling of the West against the emfuses to become a candidate for the pire, 125. throne of Constantinople, 376, 382; fourth, origin of, 227; the pope's declares in favor of Baldwin, 373; 418 INI arbitrates between Boniface and Baldhis victories, 49; his destructive march win, 400, 4 0 1 ; his death, 402. through the empire, 5 4 ; comes into Demetriza, battle of, 92. conflict with Isaac's troops, 1 2 8 ; his Despot, the title of, 102 note. death, 129. Dorvleon, defeat of the Turks at, 4 0 ; re- Fulk preaches the fourth crusade, 234. fortified, 46. Durazzo captured by the Normans, 137; besieged by Bohemund, 138. GALATA, derivation of the name, 183 note; occupied by the Crusaders, 3 0 1 ; confused with Pera, 326 note. EASTERN Church, the Romish differences Genoese, treaties af Manuel I. with the, with, 118, 134; its subserviency to the 169. Court, 2 1 0 ; relics in, 193, 3*72, 3 7 3 ; George, King of Georgia, wars against embittered against the Western Church the Turks, 46. by the Conquest, 396. Georgia, conquest of, by Alparslan, 27. Eastern Empire, its extent at the end of Gibbon, error of, as to the meeting-place the twelfth century, 1 ; Roman, if of the first Nicene Council, 37 note. often called Byzantine, 3 ; its prosper- Godfrey de Bouillon, crusade of, 36. ity under the Basilian dynasty, 3 ; Greek Christians, character of their reweakened by centralization, 5 ; posigard for relics, 372. tion of its ruler, 6 ; power of the mer- Greek language, 3, 145, 397 note. chant nobles, 1 0 ; began to decline Greeks, municipal spirit of the, 4 ; its inafter the Basilian period, 12, 2 1 7 ; fluence on the duration of the empire, weakened by attacks of the Seljukian 5 ; their mercantile tendencies, 9 ; their Turks, 13 ; by attacks from the north, theory of government, 9. 5 2 ; by dynastic troubles, 6 5 ; by the Gregory VII., Pope, his appeals on behalf crusades, 1 1 7 ; by the action of Engof the Eastern emperor, 35. land in seizing Cyprus, 1 3 1 ; by attacks Gyrolemna, the camping-ground of the from the West, 137; summary of the Crusaders, 310, 311. causes by which it had been weakened, 175 ; disorders under the government of the Crusaders, 402. HAGIA SOPHIA, 188, 360, 3 6 1 ; plundered Egypt, choice of, as the destination of by the Crusaders, 361. the fourth crusade, 2 4 1 ; causes of its Hagiochristophorides, a creature of Anabandonment, 244, 2 4 5 ; concludes a dronicos I., 84, 86 ; killed by Isaac Antreaty with Venice, 269. gelos, 87. Emperor, Byzantine, position of the, 6 ; Henry VI. of Germany, crusade of, 133. the popular conception compared with Henry of Sicily claims imperial territory, the theory of divine right, 7; decay of 143. the popular respect for the, 1 0 1 ; ef- Hippodrome, the, 191. feminacy of the later emperors, 211. Hopf, Charles, historical collection of, 271. Englishmen in the W a r i n g guard, 1 5 8 ; their church in Constantinople, 159. Huns, the, 53; attack the empire, 54. Erzeroum, the name, 3. Eudocia, intimacy of, with Andronicos ICONIFM, origin of the sultans of, 3 1 ; reComnenos, 72. covered by Manuel I., 47 ; captured by Eunuchs, 208, 209. Frederic Barbarossa, 49,128. Euphrosyne, mother of Isaac Angelos, tied to a battering-ram, 83. Innocent III., Pope, endeavors to imEyoub mosque, 311. pose Roman authority on the Eastern Church, 1 3 5 ; character of, 228, 2 2 9 ; his zeal for the deliverance of the Holy Land, 2 3 1 ; appeals to Alexis III., 2 3 2 ; FLEMISH fleet separates from the crusading force, 266. agrees conditionally to the contract beForeigners, conditions under which they tween the Crusaders and the Venetians, lived in the empire, 144. 2 4 1 ; declines to aid Alexis IV., 281, Francopolous, piracy of, 114. 284; excommunicates the Venetians, Frederic Barbarossa, crusade of, 4 8 , 1 2 6 ; 2 9 1 ; grants a conditional absolution INDEX. 419 to the crusading army, 291; appeals I Jesus Christ contrasted with Mahomet, to the army, 292 ; condemns the expe18, 19 ; letters of, to Abgarus, 89. dition to Constantinople, 294 ; his in- Jews, condition of, in Constantinople, dignation at the first attack on Constan184, 185. tinople, 388; replies to the Emperor John, King of Bulgaria, seeks coronation Baldwin's letter, 390; denounces the from Pope Innocent III., 61. conduct of the conquerors, 391; his anger against the Venetians, 392 ; reprimands Cardinal Peter Capuano, 394 ; i KAIKHOSRO, Sultan of Iconium, allures reproaches Boniface, 395; asks the emigrants from Greece, 111; becomes Russians to submit to the Roman See, i a citizen of Constantinople, 112. 396 ; tone of his letters relative to the Kalomodios, a banker, 222. conquest, 407. Kanabos, Nicolas, chosen emperor, 336. Iran, the term, 15 note. Kars attacked by Togrul, 26; ceded to Isaac, a pretender, 101. Alparslan, 27. Isaac Comnenos, Sebastocrator, in posses- Kilidji Arslan L, Sultan, 37. sion of Cyprus, 84, 92; murder of his Kilidji Arslan II., led prisoner to Consureties by Andronicos I., 84; refuses stantinople, 45; offers assistance to submission to Isaac II., 98; imprisoned Barbarossa's Crusaders, 48,127; plunby Richard I., 98,132; attempts to obders Thrace, 93. tain the imperial throne, 110; his offences against the English king, 132. Isaac II. makes an alliance with Saladin, LAPARDAS, general, deprived of sight, 82. 47, 128; his war with the Wallachs, Lascaris, Theodore, 318; tries to rally the citizens after the capture of the 60, 93, 94; defends Nicrea against Ancity, 352. dronicos I., 83; supposed prediction of a soothsayer concerning him, 86, 87; Latins, settlements of, in the empire, 161; their number in Constantinople kills Hagiochristophorides, 87; proin 1180,140; their quarters in the citv, claimed emperor by the people, 87; 183. yields Andronicos to popular fury, 91; his character, 91, 102; his difficulties Latin colonists, attacks upon the, 78, 97, 140, 170; take sides in the dynastic with the Sicilians, 92 ; his conversation struggles, 78, 170; their violence towwith his prisoner Count Baldwin, 92, ards the Greeks on the capture of the 93; defeat of his army by the Walcity, 353. lachs, 94 ; quells the revolt of Branas, 95-97; despatches an expedition to Latin language, 3, 145; always understood in seaports, 161. Cyprus against Isaac Comnenos, 98; marches against the revolted Wallachs Leo the Deacon, his account of Swendoslav's freebooting expedition, 155. and Bulgarians, 99,103; attempts upon the throne during his reign, 100, 101 ; Leo II., King, revival of Armenian national life under, 2; helps Frederic his misgovernment, 102, 103 ; deposed Barbarossa's Crusaders, 49. and imprisoned by his brother Alexis, 104; his treaties with the Venetians, Lingua Franca, the, 161. 254, 256 ; restored to the throne, 319 ; Louis VII., crusade of, 123. confirms the contract between his son Louis IX., his punning allusion to the Tartars, 15 note. Alexis and the Crusaders, 321; his condition after the restoration, 329; his death, 337. [ MACEDONIA, settlement of Wallachs in, Isabella, wife of Humphrey of Thoron, 58. married to Conrad of Montferrat, 130, Mahomet, character of, more attractive 131 note. to barbarous men than that of Jesus, 19. Italian colonies in Constantinople, 161; jealousies among them, 164. Mahometanism, early successes of, 17, 18 ; explanation of its founder's influItalian pirates, ravages by, 171. ence, 18, 19; its teaching contrasted Ivan, a Wallachian, revolt of, 107. with that of Christianitj, 20,21; makes its converts fighters, 20; destructive of JERUSALEM captured by the Crusaders, 41; by Saladin, 47. I family life, 23. 420 INDEX. Mahsoud, Sultan of Iconium, victories of,! saders, 340; narrowly escapes capture, 45. 342; flees from the city before the Mahsud, Sultan of Angora, reduces DaCrusaders, 352; captured and execudybra, 110. ted by the Latins, 403. Malek-Adel, Sultan of Egypt, effects a treaty with Venice, 269. Malek Shah, son of Alparslan, reign of, NAVY, neglect of the, 178, 179, 216. 29. Nicaea captured by the Seljukian Turks, Malek Shah (Saison), Sultan of Iconium, 34 ; siege of, by Godfrey de Bouillon, defeated by Alexis I., 42. 88; taken possession of by Alexis, 39; Mankaphas, Theodore, revolt of, 100. reconquered by the Turks, 42; besieged Manuel I., accession of, 44 ; brings Eil-1 by Andronicos I., 82. idji Arslan to Constantinople, 45 ; de- Nicephorus III., 33. feated by the Turks, 46, 66; unpopu- Nicetas accompanies Isaac II. on an exlar with his subjects, 65; his Latin pedition against the Wallachians and tendencies, 65, 66; neglects the mainBulgarians, 99; tone of his annals, tenance of the fleet, 66 ; his successes 225 ; denounces the crimes committed in war, 67; how he succeeded to the by the Crusaders, 355; his escape with crown, 70; quarrel between him and his family, 357,, 358 ; Greek of, 397 his cousin Andronicos, 7 1 ; his rela- [ note. tions with Kilidji Arslan resented by Nivelon, Bishop, declares Baldwin elected the Crusaders, 124; his policy towards emperor, 385. the Latin colonists, 168 ; his palace of Blachern, 186. Manuel, son of Andronicos I., frustrates a OLAF, freebooting expedition of, against Constantinople, 154. cruel sentence of his father, 86. Manzikert, defeat of Togrul at, 26; cap- Osmanli, the term, 14 note. tured by Alparslan, 27. Maria, widow of Manuel I., assumes the regency, 68 ; brought to trial and ex- PALESTINE conquered by Saladin, 47. Patchinaks, the, 57 ; their attacks on the ecuted, 81. empire, 58 ; invade Macedonia, 107. Maria Porphyrogenita, unsuccessful plot of, against the protosebastos Alexis, Peasantry, destruction of the, 216. 68; fight of her partisans in her de- Pera, confusion of, with Galata, 326 note. fence, 69; poisoned by Andronicos Peter Capuano, Cardinal, protests against the attack of Zara, 255 ; advocates the Comnenos, 79. cause of Alexis IV. with Innocent III., Martin, Abbot, theft of relics by, 365. 283 ; rebuked by the pope, 394. Meander, Turks defeated by King ConPetrion, the, 192, 341 note. rad on the, 41. Mercenaries, employment of, 217, 218. j Philip of Swabia married to the daughter of Isaac II., 245 ; his reasons for supMichael VII. makes a suicidal treaty with porting the cause of Alexis IV., 276 ; Suliman, Sultan of Iconium, 33. assumes a leading part in the direction Michael, a pretender, 109. of the crusade, 284; his proposals subMogul, the term, 15 note. mitted to a parliament of Crusaders at Montferrat family, its connection with the Zara, 286 ; was he proposed as EmEast, 278. peror of the New Rome ? 382. AJontfort, Simon de, sympathizes with the Zara deputation, 261; refuses to accom- Philippa, daughter of Raymond of Anpany the Crusaders to Constantinople, [ tioch, enamoured of Andronicos Com290*. I nenos, 74. Morosini, Thomas, elected Patriarch of Philomelium, capture of, by Alexis I., 42. the Eastern Church, 392. Pisan colonists, 168; attacked by the Constantinople mob, 326. Mosynopolis, 399 note. Mourtzouphlos (Alexis V. Ducas), 335 ; Protosebastos, the title, 102 note. entraps Alexis IV. into his power, 337 ; crowned emperor, 337 ; his preparations for defending the city, 338 ; his RAYAH, signification of, 31 note. rencontre with a foraging party of Cru- Relics, wealth of Constantinople in, 193; EX. 421 pillage of, by the Crusaders, 364; the I against the empire, 6 1 ; achieve independence, 6 1 ; defeated by Isaac IL, Greek Christians' view of, 372, 373. 100. Religious tolerance in Constantinople, Sicily, wars of, against the Eastern Em184, 185. pire, 91, 137. Reliquaries, Greek, valuable nature of, Slavs, early settlement of, in the Balkan 89. peninsula, 53; driven into Dalmatia Reynier of Montferrat, his marriage with I and Illyria by the Avars, 53. the daughter of Manuel I., 279. Spyridonaces, John, a pretender, 110. Richard I. conquers Cyprus, 98, 132. Roger II. of Sicily makes war on the em- i Stamboul, derivation of the name, 182 note. pire, 138. Strumnitza ceded to Ivan, 107. Romaic language, the term, 3. Roman Church, its differences with the Stryphnos, Michael, admiral, 113. Succession, lax law of, 91. Eastern, 118, 134. Romania, the name, 3. , Suliman, the first Sultan of Iconium, 3 1 ; allures the Greek peasants by abolishRomanian language, 161. ing landlordism, 32 ; his treaty with Romanos, a Russian commander, 108. Michael VII., 33; extent of his kingRome, survival of the name in the East, dom, 34 ; his progress checked by 3 ; how foreigners were ruled under, Alexis I., 36. 146. Rome, New, the name still acknowl- Sultans often the sons of Christian slaves, edged by the Patriarch of the Ortho112 note. dox Church, 3. Swendoslav, expedition of, against the empire, 156 ; his interview with John Roum, origin of the sultans of, 3 1 ; exZemiskes, 156. tent of the kingdom, 35. Roumania, the name, 56. Roumelia, the name, 3. Roux, Nicholas, his mission to the Cru- TANCRED, expedition of, against the emsaders, 305. pire, 142; sacks Salonica, 142; defeated by Isaac II., 143. Russia, mission sent by Innocent III. to, 396. Tanisman, invasion of the empire by, 43. Russian czar an analogue of a Byzantiue Tartar, the term, 15 note. emperor, 6. Theobald of Champagne appointed leader Russians help Alexis III. against the Coof the fourth crusade, 236 ; his death, mans, 107 ; often called Warings, 153. 244. Theodora, widow of King Baldwin, her amour with Andronicos Comnenos, 74. SAISON defeated by Alexis I., 42. j Theodora, sister of Isaac IL, married to Saladin, alliance of, with the empire, 47, Conrad of Montferrat, 130 note. 48,142. I Theodore Angelos deprived of sight, 83. Salonica sacked by the Sicilians, 91,142; Theodore Castamonites, 102. recaptured by Isaac Angelos, 92, 142; Thessaly, how named in the chronicles, Latin settlements at, 162; demanded 59. of Baldwin by Boniface, 398; surren-, Thrace harassed by the Comans, 58,107; ders to Baldwin, 400; handed over to by the Wallachs, 60, 93 ; by the Turks, Boniface, 401. I 93. Saracens allowed freedom of worship in Togrul attacks Armenia, 26 ; invades the Constantinople, 184; their mosque atempire, 26 ; becomes caliph, 26. tacked by Crusaders, 327. Turan, the term, 15 note. Scott, Sir Walter, his descriptions of Con- Turcoman, derivation of the word, 15 stantinople, 159 note. note. Scythians, probable identity of the Turks Turcomans, the, compared with the anwith the, 14. cient Turks, 14. Sebastocrator, the title, 102 note. Turkish Empire compared with the Greek, Seljukian empire, successive divisions of, 221. 30, 31, 49. Turks, origin of the, 14; obscurity of Seljuks, the, 16, see Turks. their early history, 15 ; the Seljuks, 16 ; Servians, early settlements of, 56; revolt | embrace Mahometanism, 2 5 ; invade 422 INDEX. Asia Minor, 27, 2 8 ; divide their empire between Malek and Suliman, 3 0 ; settle in Asia Minor, S3 ; obtain possession of Kiccea, 3 4 ; reach the Marmora, 3 4 ; their successes a+ :act the attention of Pope Gregory VII., 35 ; their struggles with the Crusaders, 37, 4 4 ; renewal of their numbers after defeat, 4 1 ; defeat the Emperor Manuel, 46, 6 6 ; make a further division of their empire, 49 ; effects of their invasion on the condition of the empire, 50 ; their wars with Alexis III., 110; their sultans often the sons of Christian slaves, 112 note ; stupendous character of their conflict with the empire, 177. UZES, the, a Turkish people, 57, 409. tinople, 312; charged with taking an undue share of spoil, 368 ; purchases the rights of Boniface, 4 0 0 ; her gains by the conquest of Constantinople, 404. Vermilion, the imperial color, 337 note. Villehardouin, his account of the fourth crusade, 2 4 8 - 2 5 0 ; his interview with Isaac II., 321. WALLACES, the, 5 9 ; their successes against the empire, 60, 9 4 ; establish with the Bulgarians a Wallachio-Bulgarian state, 6 1 ; revolt against Isaac II., 93, 9 9 ; give trouble to Alexis III., 106, 107. Warings or Varangians, connection of, with England, 153 ; successive treaties made with them by t h e empire, 154; furnish a body-guard for the emperor, 157; their weapon, 1 5 7 ; their respect for women, 158, 159; fidelity of the guard, 160. William I. of Sicily, his war against the empire, 138. William II. of Sicily makes war on the empire, 139. William of Tyre, his account of the Turks, 16 note; preaches the third Crusade, 126. Wiscard, Robert, attacks the empire, 34, 137, 166. Woman, social position of, in Constantinople, 207. VARANGIANS, see Warings. Vaux, Abbot of, forbids the attack upon Zara, 261. Venice, reproduction of Byzantine life in, 1 1 ; helps the empire against Robert Wiscard, 138, 1 6 6 ; commerce of, with the empire, 165 ; Venetians make common cause with the empire, 166; extraordinary commercial privilege granted them by Alexis I , 167; expelled by J o h n Comnenos, 1 6 7 ; policy of Manuel I. towards them, 168 ; jealous of other Latin colonists, 172; makes war against the empire, 172; growth of her hostility to Constanti- ZARA, attack of, proposed by the Venetians to the Crusaders, 2 5 0 ; offer of its nople, 174, 2 3 9 ; chosen as the port of citizens to surrender withdrawn, 2 6 1 ; departure of the fourth crusade, 2 3 7 ; her contract with the Crusaders, 2 4 0 ; captured, 262 ; explanations of the exthe Crusaders in, 2 4 7 ; propose the atpedition to, given by contemporary tack of Zara, 250; joins the crusade, writers, 2 6 6 ; destroyed by the Vene257, concludes a treaty with Egypt, tians, 2 9 7 ; convention of, submitted 269; excommunicated by Innocent to the crusading army, 298. I I I , 2 9 1 ; her fleet attacks Constan- Zemiskes, John, defeats Swendoslav, 155. THE END. VALUABLE HISTORICAL WORKS PUBLISHED BY HARPER & BROTHERS, FRANKLIN SQUARE, N. Y. G£F" HARPER & BROTHERS will send any of the following works by mail, postage prepaid, to any part of the United States or Canada, on receipt of the price. %W For a full list of HISTORICAL WORKS published by HARPER & BROTIIEKS, see their New and Enlarged Catalogue, which will be sent to any address on receipt of Ten Cents. A LARGER HISTORY $ F THE UNITED STATES. President Jackson's Administration. To the Close of By Col. THOMAS WENTWORTH HIGGIN- SON. Illustrated by Plans, Portraits, and Engravings. 8vo, Cloth, $3.50. WRITINGS AND SPEECHES OF SAMUEL J. TILDEN. Edited by JOHN BIGELOW. 2 vols., 8vo, Cloth, Gilt Tops and Uncut Edges, $6.00. AMERICAN POLITICAL IDEAS. Viewed from the Standpoint of Universal History. By JOHN FISKE. 12mo, Cloth, $1.00. THE LIFE OF JAMES BUCHANAN, Fifteenth President of the United States. By GEORGE TICKNOR CURTIS. With Two Steel-plate Portraits. 2 vols., 8vo, Cloth, Gilt Tops and Uncut Edges, $6.00. CURTIS'S CONSTITUTIONAL HISTORY. Constitutional History of the United States, from their Declaration of Independence to the Close of their Civil War. By GEORGE TICKNOR CURTIS. (Jn Press.") HARPER'S POPULAR CYCLOPAEDIA OF UNITED STATES HISTORY. From the Aboriginal Period to 1876. Containing Brief Sketches of Important Events and Conspicuous Actors. By BENSON J . LOSSING, LL.D. Illustrated by Two Steel-plate Portraits and over 1000 Engravings. 2 vols., Royal 8vo, Cloth, $10.00 ; Sheep, $12.00; Half Morocco, $15.00. (Sold by Subsc?iption only.) PICTORIAL FIELD-BOOK OF THE REVOLUTION; or, Illustrations by Pen and Pencil of the History, Biography, Scenery, Relics, and Traditions of the War for Independence. By BENSON J. LOSSING, LL.D. 2 vols., 8vo, Cloth, $14.00 ; Sheep, $15.00; Half Calf,. $18.00. PICTORIAL FIELD-BOOK OF T H E W A R OF 1812; or, Illustrations by Pen and Pencil of the History, Biography, Scenery, Relics, and Traditions of the Last War for American Independence. By BENSON J. LOSSING, LL.D. With 882 Illustrations. Complete in One Volume, large 8vo. Price, in Cloth, $7.00; Sheep, $8.50; Half Calf, $10.00. % Valuable Historical Works. THE HISTORY OF THE LATE CIVIL WAR. By JOHN W. DRAPER, M.D., LL.D. In Three Volumes. 8vo, Cloth, $10.50; Sheep, $12.00 ; Half Calf, $17.25. GENERAL BEAUREGARD'S MILITARY OPERATIONS. The Military Operations of General Beauregard in the War between tie States, 1861 to 1865; including a Brief Personal Sketch and a Narrative of his Services in the War with Mexico, 1846-8. By ALFRED ROMAN, formerly Colonel of the 18th Louisiana Volunteers, afterwards Aide-de-Camp and Inspector-General on tho Staff of General Beauregard. In Two Volumes. With Portraits, &c. Vol. I., pages xx., 594; Vol. II., pages xvi., 692. 8vo, Cloth. Sold (in Sets only) exclusively by subscription, at the following prices: Cloth, $7.00 ; Sheep, $9.00; Half Morocco, $11.00; Full Morocco, $15.00—payable on delivery. ANECDOTES OF PUBLIC MEN. Cloth, $2.00 per vol. By JOHN W. FORNEY. 2 vols., 12mo, BOOTS AND SADDLES; or, Life in Dakota with General Custer. By Mrs. ELIZABETH B. CUSTER. New Edition, with Portrait and Map. 12mo, Cloth, $1.50. GREEN'S HISTORY OF T H E ENGLISH PEOPLE. History of the English People. By JOHN RICHARD GREEN, M.A. With Maps. Complete in Four Volumes, 8vo, Cloth, $10.00 ; Sheep, $12.00 ; Half Calf, $19.00. A SHORT HISTORY OF T H E ENGLISH PEOPLE. GREEN. With Maps and Tables. 8vo, Cloth, $1.20. By JOHN RICHARD GREEN'S MAKING OF ENGLAND. The Making of England. By JOHN RICHARD GREEN, M. A. With Maps, 8vo, Cloth, $2.50 ; Sheep, $3.00 ; Half Calf, $4.75; 4to, Paper, 20 cents, GREEN'S CONQUEST OF ENGLAND. The Conquest of England. By JOHN RICHARD GREEN, M.A. With Portrait and Colored Maps. Crown 8YO, Cloth, $2.50 ; Sheep, $3.00 ; Half Calf, $4.75. GREEN'S READINGS FROM ENGLISH HISTORY. Readings from English History, Selected and Edited by JOHN RICHARD GREEN. M.A. Three Parts in One Volume. Part I. From Hengest to Cressy.—Part II. From Cressy to CromwelL—Part III. From Cromwell to Balaclava. 12mo, Cloth, $1.50. Valuable Historical Works. MACAULAY'S ENGLAND. James II. 3 The History of England from the Accession of By THOMAS BABINGTON MACAULAT. New and Elegant Library Edition, from New Electrotype Plates. 8vo, Cloth, Gilt Tops, Eive Volumes in a Box, $10.00 per set; Sheep, $12.50; Half Calf, $21.25. (Sold only in Sets.) 12mo; Cloth, 5 vols., $2.50 ; Sheep, $5.00 ; 8vo, Paper, 5 vols., $1.00 ; 8vo, Cloth, in 1 vol., $1.25. MACAULAY'S MISCELLANEOUS WORKS. The Miscellaneous Works of Lord Macaulay. In Five Volumes, 8vo, Cloth, with Paper Labels and Uncut Edges, in a Box, $10.00; Sheep, $12.50; Half Calf, $21.25. MACAULAY'S LIEE AND LETTERS. The Life and Letters of Lord Macaulay. By his Nephew, GEORGE OTTO TREVELYAN, M.P. With Portrait on Steel. Complete in 2 vols., 8vo, Cloth, Uncut Edges and Gilt Tops, $5.00 ; Sheep, $6.00 ; Half Calf, $9.50; Tree Calf, $15.00 ; Popular Edition, 1 vol., 12mo, Cloth, $1.75. A HISTORY OF OUR OWN TIMES. From the Accession of Queen Victoria to the General Election of 1880. By JUSTIN MCCARTHY, M.P. 2 vols., 12mo, Cloth, $2.50 ; Half Calf, $6.00; Cheap Edition, 2 vols., 4to, Paper, 40 cents. A SHORT HISTORY OF OUR OWN TIMES, from the Accession of Queen Victoria to the General Election of 1880. By JUSTIN MCCARTHY, M.P. 12mo, Cloth, $1.50 ; 4to, Paper, 25 cents. HALLAM'S CONSTITUTIONAL HISTORY OF ENGLAND. The Constitutional History of England, from the Accession of Henry VII. to the Death of George IL By HENRY HALLAM, LL.D, F.R.A.S. 8vo, Cloth, $2.00; Sheep, $2.50. THE STUDENT'S HALLAM'S CONSTITUTIONAL HISTORY OF ENGLAND. By HENRY HALLAM, LL.D., F.R.A.S. Incorporating the Author's Latest Additions and Corrections, and Adapted to the Use of Students. By W M . SMITH, D.C.L., LL.D. 12mo, Cloth, $1.25. HUME'S ENGLAND. History of England, from the Invasion of Julius Caesar to the Abdication of James II., 1688. By DAVID HUME. New and Elegant Library Edition, from New Electrotype Plates. Six Volumes in a Box, 8vo, Cloth, with Paper Labels, Uncut Edges and Gilt Tops, $12.00 ; Sheep, $15.00 ; Half Calf, $25.50. (Sold only in Sets.) 6 vols., 12mo, Cloth, $3.00. 4 Valuable Historical Works. CARLYLE'S OLIVER CROMWELL. Letters and Speeches of Oliver Cromwell, including the Supplements to the First Edition. With Elucidations. By THOMAS CARLTLE. 2 vols., 12mo, Cloth, $2.50. CARLYLE'S FRENCH REVOLUTION. History of the French Revolution. By THOMAS CARLTLE. 2 vols., 12mo, Cloth, $2.50. CARLYLE'S FREDERICK THE GREAT. History of Friedrich II., called Frederick the Great. By THOMAS CARLTLE. Portraits, Maps, Plans, &c. 6 vols., 12mo, Cloth, $7.50. A HISTORY OF THE FOUR GEORGES. By JUSTIN MCCARTHY, M.P. Vol. I., 12mo, Cloth, $1.25 ; 4to, Paper, 20 cents. KINGLAKE'S CRIMEAN WAR. The Invasion of the Crimea: its Origin, and an Account of its Progress down to the Death of Lord Raglan. By A. W. KINGLAKE. Maps and Plans. Four vols, now ready. 12mo, Cloth, $8.00; Half Calf, $15.00. SMILES'S HUGUENOTS. The Huguenots : their Settlements, Churches, and Industries in England and Ireland. By SAMUEL SMILES. With an Appendix relating to the Huguenots in America. Crown 8vo, Cloth, $2.00. SMILES'S HUGUENOTS AFTER THE REVOCATION. The Huguenots in France after the Revocation of the Edict of Nantes. By SAMUEL SMILES. Crown 8vo, Cloth, $2.00. MULLER'S POLITICAL HISTORY tory of Recent Times (1816-1875). By WILHELM MULLER. Translated, from 1876 to 1881, by the Rev. JOHN OF RECENT TIMES. Political HisWith Special Reference to Crermany. with an Appendix covering the Period P . PETERS, Ph.D. 12mo, Cloth, $3.00. GROTE'S HISTORY OF GREECE. A History of Greece, from the Earliest Period to the Close of the Generation Contemporary with Alexander the Great. By GEORGE GROTE. 12 vols., 12mo, Cloth, $18.00 ; Sheep, $22.80 ; Half Calf, $39.00. GIBBON'S ROME. pire. The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Em- By EDWARD GIBBON. With Notes by Dean MILMAN, M. GUIZOT, and Dr. WILLIAM SMITH. New Edition, from New Electrotype Plates. Six Volumes in a Box, 8vo, Cloth, with Paper Labels, Uncut Edges and Gilt Tops, $12.00; Sheep, $15.00; Half Calf, $25.50. (Sold onbj in Sets.) 6 vols., 12mo, Cloth, $3.00. Valuable Historical Works. 5 MOTLEY'S DUTCH REPUBLIC. The Rise of the Dutch Republic. A History. By JOHN LOTHROP MOTLEY, LL.D., D.C.L. With a Portrait of William of Orange. New Library Edition. Three Volumes in a Box, 8vo, Cloth, with Paper Labels, Uncut Edges and Gilt Tops, $6.00 ; Sheep, $7.50 ; Half Calf, $12.75. {Sold only in Sets.) MOTLEY'S UNITED NETHERLANDS. History of the United Netherlands from the Death of William the Silent to the Twelve Years' Truce. By JOHN LOTHROP MOTLEY, LL.D., D.C.L. With Portraits. New Library Edition. Four Volumes in a Box, 8vo, Cloth, with Paper Labels, Uncut Edges and Gilt Tops, $8.00 ; Sheep, $10.00 ; Half Calf, $17.00. (Sold only in Sets.) MOTLEY'S LIFE AND DEATH OF JOHN OF BARNEVELD, Advocate of Holland. With a View of the Primary Causes and Movements of the " Thirty-Years' War." By JOHN LOTHROP MOTLEY, LL.D., D.C.L. Illustrated. New Library Edition. Two Volumes in a Box, 8vo, Cloth, with Paper Labels, Uncut Edges and Gilt Tops, $4.00; Sheep, $5.00 ; Half Calf, $8.50. (Sold only in Sets.) RAWLINSON'S MANUAL OF ANCIENT HISTORY, from the Earliest Times to the Fall of the Western Empire. Comprising the History of Chaldaea, Assyria, Media, Babylonia, Lydia, Phoenicia, Syria, Judaea, Egypt, Carthage, Persia, Greece, Macedonia, Parthia, and Rome. By GEORGE RAWLINSON, M.A. 12mo, Cloth, $1.25. ROLLIN'S ANCIENT HISTORY. Ancient History of the Egyptians, Carthaginians, Assyrians, Babylonians, Medes and Persians, Grecians and Macedonians. By CHARLES ROLLIN. With a Life of the Author, by JAMES BELL. Numerous Maps and Illustrations. In 2 vols., 8vo, Cloth, $3.50; Sheep, $4 50. In 1 vol., Cloth, $3.00; Sheep, $3.50. SMITH'S MOHAMMED AND MOHAMMEDANISM. Lectures delivered at the Royal Institution of Great Britain in February and March, 1874. By R. BOSWORTH SMITH, M.A. With an Appendix containing Emanuel Deutsch's Article on " Islam." 12mo, Cloth, $1.50. MOSHEIM'S ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. Ancient and Modern Ecclesiastical History, in which the Rise, Progress, and Variation of Church Power are Considered. Translated, with Notes, &c, by A. MACLAINE, D.D. Continued to 1826, by C. COOTE, LL.D. 2 vols., 8vo, Cloth, $4.00 ; Sheep, $5.00. MILMAN'S HISTORY OF CHRISTIANITY, from the Birth of Christ to the Abolition of Paganism in the Roman Empire. By Rev. H. H. MILMAN. With Notes, &c, by JAMES MURDOCH, D.D. 8vo, Cloth, $2.00; Half Calf, $4.25. 6 Valuable Historical Works. GIESELER'S ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. A Text-Book of Church History. By Dr. JOHN C. L. GIESELER, Translated from the Fourth Revised German Edition. By SAMUEL DAVIDSON, LL.D., aid Rev. JOHN WINSTAN- LET HULL, M.A. A New American Edition, Revised and Edited by Rev. HENRY B. SMITH, D.D. 8VO, Cloth, Vols. L, II., III., and IV., per vol. $2.25 ; VoL V., $3.00. Complete Sets, 5 vols,, Sheep, $14.50 : Half Calf, $23.25. PERRY'S ENGLISH CHURCH HISTORY. A History of the Church of England. From the Accession of Henry VIII. to the Silencing of Convocation in the 18th Century. By Rev. G. G. PERRY, M.A., Canon of Lincoln. With an Appendix, containing a Sketch of the History of the Protestant Episcopal Church in the United States of America. By J . A. SPENCER, S.T.D. Crown 8vo, Cloth, $2.50. RANKE'S UNIVERSAL HISTORY. Volume I. (The Oldest Historical Group of Nations and the Greeks.) By LEOPOLD VON RANKE. Edited by G. W. PROTHERO, Fellow and Tutor of King's College, Cambridge. 8vo, Cloth, $2.50. HALLAM'S MIDDLE AGES. View of the State of Europe during the Middle Ages. By HENRY HALLAM, LL.D., F.R.A.S. 8vo, Cloth, $2.00; Sheep, $2.50. SCHLIEMANN'S ILIOS. The Results of Researches and Discoveries on the Site of Troy and throughout the Troad. By Dr. HENRY SCHLIEMANN, F.S.A. With Maps, Plans, and about 1800 Illustrations. Imperial 8vo, Cloth, $12.00 ; Half Morocco, $15.00. SCHLIEMANN'S TROJA. Results of the Latest Researches and Discoveries on the Site of Homer's Troy in the Year 1882, and a Narrative of a Journey in the Troad in 1881. By Dr. HENRY SCHLIEMANN, F.S.A. With 150 Woodcuts and 4 Maps and Plans. 8vo, Cloth, $7.50 ; Half Morocco $10.00. GRIFFIS'S T H E MIKADO'S EMPIRE. History of Japan, from 660 B.C< to 1872 A.D. New Edition, with a Supplementary Chapter on Japan in 1883. By WILLIAM E. GRIFFIS, A.M., late of the Imperial University of Tokio, Japan. Copiously Illustrated. 8vo, Cloth, $4.00; Half Calf, $6.25. ADAMS'S MANUAL OF HISTORICAL LITERATURE. Comprising Brief Descriptions of the most Important Histories in English, French, and German. For the Use of Students, General Readers, and Collectors of Books. By CHARLES KENDALL ADAMS, LL.D. Crown 8vo, Cloth, $2.50.