Εγκυκλοπαίδεια Μείζονος Ελληνισμού, Μ. Ασία

αναλυτική αναζήτηση

 ΙΔΡΥΜΑ ΜΕΙΖΟΝΟΣ ΕΛΛΗΝΙΣΜΟΥ
z
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Αναζήτηση με το γράμμα ΑΑναζήτηση με το γράμμα ΒΑναζήτηση με το γράμμα ΓΑναζήτηση με το γράμμα ΔΑναζήτηση με το γράμμα ΕΑναζήτηση με το γράμμα ΖΑναζήτηση με το γράμμα ΗΑναζήτηση με το γράμμα ΘΑναζήτηση με το γράμμα ΙΑναζήτηση με το γράμμα ΚΑναζήτηση με το γράμμα ΛΑναζήτηση με το γράμμα ΜΑναζήτηση με το γράμμα ΝΑναζήτηση με το γράμμα ΞΑναζήτηση με το γράμμα ΟΑναζήτηση με το γράμμα ΠΑναζήτηση με το γράμμα ΡΑναζήτηση με το γράμμα ΣΑναζήτηση με το γράμμα ΤΑναζήτηση με το γράμμα ΥΑναζήτηση με το γράμμα ΦΑναζήτηση με το γράμμα ΧΑναζήτηση με το γράμμα ΨΑναζήτηση με το γράμμα Ω

Rebellion of the Opsikion Theme, 715

Συγγραφή : Makripoulias Christos (10/10/2003)
Μετάφραση : Chrysanthopoulos Dimitrios

Για παραπομπή: Makripoulias Christos, "Rebellion of the Opsikion Theme, 715",
Εγκυκλοπαίδεια Μείζονος Ελληνισμού, Μ. Ασία
URL: <http://www.ehw.gr/l.aspx?id=10028>
Στάση Στρατευμάτων Θέματος Οψικίου, 715 (15/2/2010 v.1) Rebellion of the Opsikion Theme, 715 (21/2/2010 v.1) 
 

1. Historical context

The end of the 7th and the beginning of the 8th century was a period of anarchy in Byzantium. The series of the emperors who ascended on the throne following several army rebellions lost control of the state. The crisis caused by the expansion of the Arabs had also caused turmoil in the ranks of the army, the political role of which had been strengthened. At the same time, the need for military campaigns against the Arabs and the Bulgarians demanded the gathering of a large number of troops and prepared the ground for new rebellions, especially when the campaigns were naval, since an fleet gave direct access to Constantinople, the centre of political power. The interventions of the army in the succession of the emperors had increased due to the lack of legitimate successors following the end of the Heracleian dynasty in 711.1

The Arabs, having solved similar problems, took advantage of the situation and gathered forces for a new attack on Constantinople in order to overthrow the Byzantine Empire.

In 715, the emperor of Byzantium was Anastasios II (713-715). He had ascended on the throne in June 713, when the army of the Opsikiontheme overthrew Philippikos. He immediately took measures for the reinforcement of the defence of the capital and the building of an fleet, foreseeing the Arab threat. Anastasios was proved the most efficient of the short-lived emperors of the beginning of the 8th century.

In the spring of 715, the emperor was informed of an Arab fleet from Alexandria sailing towards Phoenix of Caria, in southwestern Asia Minor, in order to cut down cypresses as timber for shipbuilding. He decided to strike first and sent his fleet with a part of the troops of the Opsikion theme, the reserve force of the empire. With logothetes tou genikou (higher official responsible for the state finance) and deacon of the church John as its leader, the fleet with the troops of the Opsikion theme gathered in Rhodes, united with other naval forces and prepared to attack the Arabs at Phoenix.

The troops of the Opsikion theme, however, disobeyed the orders of John and rebelled against emperor Anastasios in May 715.

2. Presentation and analysis of the event

2.1. First phase of the rebellion

In May 715,2 the troops of the Opsikion theme rebelled against emperor Anastasios II in Rhodes. They refused to carry out the orders of logothetes tou genikou John, who had the general command of the campaign, denounced the emperor, attacked John and assassinated him.

The lack of discipline of the troops of the Opsikion theme was attributed by the sources to their fear of the oncoming campaign. The reasons, however, must have been different, since the troops from the other units did not react to the prospect of a campaign against the Arabs. It is possible that the troops of the Opsikion theme reacted to the loss of political power and influence they had attempted to gain when they dethroned emperor Philippikos in 713, taking advantage of the anarchy prevailing in Byzantium due to the Arab threat. Another reason must have been their displeasure towards Anastasios, the first act of whom when he ascended on the throne was to execute the leaders of the Opsikion theme, even though their rebellion had given him the throne.3

Following the death of its leader, the Byzantine force dissolved. The ships which remained loyal to the emperor sailed towards their base. The fleet of the Opsikion theme sailed northwards, also returning to its base. When they arrived at Adramyttion, the rebels spotted a local tax collector named Theodosios and decided to proclaim him emperor.4 Theodosios fled to the mountains, not willing to involve in politics. The rebels, however, brought him back and proclaimed him emperor on 1 June 715.5

When the news about the rebellion and the proclamation of Theodosios reached Constantinople, emperor Anastasios handed the administration of Constantinople over to loyal officials (one of whom might have been the comes of Opsikion)6 and the newly-elected (August 715) patriarch of Constantinople Germanos.7 He also handed them over the new fleet, built upon his orders in order to confront the Arab attack on Constantinople. Anastasios, along with a few members of his personal guard, fled to Nicaea of Bithynia and waited.8

2.2. Second phase of the rebellion

The rebels with Theodosios reached the Sea of Marmara. They had already united with the troops of the Opsikion theme who had not been sent to the campaign. Along with them, there were several Gotthograikoi, the hellenised descendants of Optimatoi/Optimates, the Goth troops who had been recruited during the 2nd half of the 6th century and had settled in Bithynia.9

The rebels confiscated as many commercial ships as possible and advanced by land and sea to Chrysoupolis, opposite Constantinople. Their fleet, with Chrysoupolis as its base, clashed daily with the fleet of Anastasios, with the bay of St. Mamas, in the European shore of Bosporos, as its base. The conflicts lasted six months.

In November 715,10 the fleet of Anastasios moved to the harbour of Neorion in Constantinople due to the oncoming winter. The rebels took the chance to land on the opposite shore and occupy Thrace. A few days later, following a betrayal which led them to an open gate at the wall of Blachernai, the rebels managed to enter Constantinople at night and looted the residences of the people of Constantinople.

The internal conflict ended when the imprisoned officials who remained loyal to Anastasios and patriarch Germanos were transferred to Nicaea and convinced Anastasios to surrender. The former emperor, after asking assurances about his life, surrendered to Theodosios III, who made him a monk and exiled him to Thessaloniki.

3. Consequences

The rebellion of the Opsikion theme had direct political consequences on Byzantium. The anarchy prevailing since 695 continued, with short-lived emperors who used the forces of the empire in internal conflicts.

The consequences on the external policy of the empire were more important than the short-term political developments in the internal affairs. The rebellion broke out in the middle of a campaign against the Arabs, which remained incomplete. As a result, the Arabs established their position in Asia Minor and were able to gather greater forces for their final campaign against Constantinople, which started the following year. The removal of Anastasios, who had taken the appropriate measures against the oncoming threat, and his replacement by the inert Theodosios III, impaired the defensive preparations of the Byzantines whereas the six-month internal conflict weakened the already turbulent state. Furthermore, the anarchy continued in Asia Minor where the loyal (by name only) to Anastasios strategoi (generals) of the theme of Armeniakon and the theme of Anatolikon, Artabasdos and Leo respectively, continued their struggle against Theodosios and the troops of the Opsikion theme. Leo the Isaurian managed to defeat Theodosios and enter Constantinople in 717, a few months before the siege of Constantinople by the Arabs. The abilities of the new emperor saved the state from the negative consequences of the military anarchy, a characteristic example of which was the rebellion of the Opsikion theme in 715.

1. Kaegi, W.E., Byzantine Military Unrest 471-843. An Interpretation (Amsterdam 1981), pp. 195-208.

2. Threadgold, W.T., “Seven Byzantine Revolutions and the Chronology of Theophanes”, Greek, Roman and Byzantine Studies 31 (1990), p. 221, places the rebellion in May counting backwards six months from the surrender of Anastasios, which he places in October-November. Sumner, G.V., “Philippicus, Anastasius II and Theodosius III”, Greek, Roman and Byzantine Studies 17 (1976), pp. 290-291, places the rebellion in the spring of 715.

3. Threadgold, W.T., “Seven Byzantine Revolutions and the Chronology of Theophanes”, Greek, Roman and Byzantine Studies 31 (1990), p. 219, supports the view that the rebellion of the troops of the Opsikion theme was a result of their displeasure towards Anastasios following the events of 713.

4. According to the sources, the selection of Theodosius from the rebels was random. Sumner, G.V., “Philippicus, Anastasius II and Theodosius III”, Greek, Roman and Byzantine Studies 17 (1976), pp. 291-292, claims that Theodosius was in fact the son of former emperor Tiberius III Apsimaros (698-705). Threadgold, W.T., “Seven Byzantine Revolutions and the Chronology of Theophanes”, Greek, Roman and Byzantine Studies 31 (1990), pp. 213-215, disagrees with Sumner’s theory and claims that tax collector Theodosius was not related to bishop Theodosius of Ephesus, the son of former emperor Apsimaros.

5. Sumner, G.V., “Philippicus, Anastasius II and Theodosius III”, Greek, Roman and Byzantine Studies 17 (1976), pp. 290-291, 292 places the proclamation of Theodosius as emperor on 1 June, based on a passage of Chronicon Altinate, which places the fall of Anastasios (therefore, the proclamation of Theodosius as emperor) on that date. Sumner, G.V., “Philippicus, Anastasius II and Theodosius III”, Greek, Roman and Byzantine Studies 17 (1976), pp. 290-291, 292, erroneously places the death of Anastasios in 719 on 1 June. He places the proclamation of Theodosius as emperor in May 715.

6. Haldon, J.F., Byzantine Praetorians. An Administrative, Institutional and Social History of the Opsikion and Tagmata, c. 580-900 (ΠΟΙΚΙΛΑ ΒΥΖΑΝΤΙΝΑ 3, Bonn 1984), p. 203.

7. Sumner, G.V., “Philippicus, Anastasius II and Theodosius III”, Greek, Roman and Byzantine Studies 17 (1976), pp. 290-291, places the election of Germanos as patriarch on 11 August 714, in contrast to Theophanes, who explicitly mentions the year 715. He claims that it was difficult for Germanos to move from Kyzikos and be proclaimed patriarch in Constantinople at a time when the emperor was absent and the city was under siege. Threadgold, W.T., “Seven Byzantine Revolutions and the Chronology of Theophanes”, Greek, Roman and Byzantine Studies 31 (1990), p. 222, disagrees with Sumner’s views.

8. Haldon, J.F., Byzantine Praetorians. An Administrative, Institutional and Social History of the Opsikion and Tagmata, c. 580-900 (ΠΟΙΚΙΛΑ ΒΥΖΑΝΤΙΝΑ 3, Bonn 1984), p. 202-203, claims that Anastasios fled to Bithynia in an attempt to win over the troops of the Opsikion theme who had not been sent to Rhodes.

9. Haldon, J.F., Byzantine Praetorians. An Administrative, Institutional and Social History of the Opsikion and Tagmata, c. 580-900 (ΠΟΙΚΙΛΑ ΒΥΖΑΝΤΙΝΑ 3, Bonn 1984), pp. 96-97, 201-202.

10. Sumner, G.V., “Philippicus, Anastasius II and Theodosius III”, Greek, Roman and Byzantine Studies 17 (1976), pp. 290-291, places the conquest of Constantinople in November. Threadgold, W.T., “Seven Byzantine Revolutions and the Chronology of Theophanes”, Greek, Roman and Byzantine Studies 31 (1990), pp. 220-222, erroneously places the conquest of Constantinople at the end of August. Lamza, L., Patriarch Germanos I von Konstantinopel (715-730) (Würzburg 1975), places the beginning of the siege in September 715 and the surrender of Anastasios in February-March 716.
     
 
 
 
 
 

Δελτίο λήμματος
 
press image to open photo library
 

>>>
 
 
 
 
 
 

copyright © 2008, ΙΔΡΥΜΑ ΜΕΙΖΟΝΟΣ ΕΛΛΗΝΙΣΜΟΥ

Το έργο Μεγάλη Δικτυακή «Εγκυκλοπαίδεια Ελληνικού Πολιτισμού» - Μέρος Α΄ συγχρηματοδοτήθηκε σε ποσοστό 80% από το Ευρωπαϊκό Ταμείο Περιφερειακής Ανάπτυξης (ΕΤΠΑ) και κατά 20% από εθνικούς πόρους στο πλαίσιο του Επιχειρησιακού Προγράμματος "Κοινωνία της Πληροφορίας" του Γ΄ ΚΠΣ.

Το έργο ΕΓΚΥΚΛΟΠΑΙΔΕΙΑ ΜΕΙΖΟΝΟΣ ΕΛΛΗΝΙΣΜΟΥ συγχρηματοδοτήθηκε σε ποσοστό 80% από το Ευρωπαϊκό Ταμείο Περιφερειακής Ανάπτυξης (ΕΤΠΑ) και κατά 20% από εθνικούς πόρους στο πλαίσιο του Επιχειρησιακού Προγράμματος "Κοινωνία της Πληροφορίας" του Γ΄ ΚΠΣ.