History of the Byzantine Empire of Academician F and Uspensky. Audiobook Assumption Fyodor - History of the Byzantine Empire
F.I.Uspensky
History of the Byzantine Empire. Volume I
Period I (before 527)
Period II (518–610)
Foreword
I very much regret that I started late in printing a work that I conceived at least 25 years ago. Often there is a doubt whether it will be possible to bring the matter to the end, as I am approaching the limit of life. In the course of forty years of study of different departments of Byzantium, I had the opportunity to dwell on many issues, and many departments were processed at different times and for different purposes. But when the time came to sum up what had been prepared so far, the difference in mood and the dissimilarity of the general idea made itself felt in different departments. Does this come from the conditions of age, or from the conditions of gradual broadening of one's horizons? Unfortunately, I do not dare to answer this question; I'm afraid to err against the case. Undoubtedly, 20 years ago I spoke more boldly, made more generalizations and conclusions, was not so careful in sentences: now I often had to soften expressions, smooth out the sharpness of thought, redo entire chapters to fit them to a new mood. Is it good for business? Again, I can't speak positively. There are, however, some details which should be usefully reflected in the fact that my work has been too slow to appear in print.
Since 1895, living in Constantinople, I had the opportunity to study the people whose ancestors created the history of Byzantium, directly get acquainted with the monuments and delve into the psychology of the Patriarchate of Constantinople, which is largely responsible for the fact that most of the peoples subject to the cultural influence of Byzantium are still in such miserable position. Since the clergy and monasticism have always occupied a leading place in the history of Byzantium, then, of course, the circumstance in which the coverage of church matters is presented is of no small importance. Perhaps, without living so much time among the Greeks and without directly studying the life of the patriarchy, it would be impossible for me to renounce the theoretical constructions and fictions with which we are so abundantly endowed in school. Meanwhile real look on the ecumenical patriarchy, which throws excommunications on the Slavic peoples, violating its phyletic policy, in the highest degree to establish in time for us both for Russian church politics and for our popular self-determination, if only in view of the consideration that the moment is not far off when, by the political course of things and the successes of Catholic and Protestant propaganda, it will be brought to the position of the Alexandrian or Jerusalem Patriarchate, t .e. when it loses almost the entire Balkan Peninsula and a significant part of the eastern sees. Then only a long sojourn in the East and travels connected with it through Asia Minor, Syria and Palestine could clarify for me historical destinies The Byzantine Empire, which for its existence is connected more with the East than with the West. I mean not only that both the Empire of Constantinople and the Turkish Empire that replaced it owe their main material forces (military people and income) to the East and have always depended on the loyalty of the eastern provinces, but also real traditions and historical facts. Not one of the Slavic sovereigns could cope with the tempting idea of founding an empire in Europe in place of the Greco-Byzantine one; none of the European principalities founded in Europe after IV crusade- whether it was led by the Franks or local Greeks - did not have a long history and did not attract popular sympathy, but meanwhile, in the Nicaean Empire, the idea of restoring the Byzantine Empire in the 13th century was preserved and matured. The lesson of history must be strictly tested and weighed by those who are currently awaiting the division of the inheritance after the "dangerously ill" on the Bosphorus.
Since this publication cannot be regarded as a commercial enterprise and is not caused by either official or career goals, I find it appropriate to explain here that the Brockhaus-Efron firm, by its agreement to publish the History of the Byzantine Empire, in the form in which it appears in front of the public at the present time, influenced my final decision to start preparing the text for publication, i.e. to decide on an enterprise, for the implementation of which there were always intractable difficulties.
The book that comes into the hands of the reader is not intended to replace the existing old and new histories of Byzantium. This is not an exhaustive account of all the events that make up the circle of more than a thousand years of empire - it therefore does not contain six or seven volumes, but three. Not competing and not trying to replace the published histories of Byzantium, however, I have a cherished idea to give my compatriots an integral system in such an area, which I consider the most important after national history for the national self-consciousness of the cultural Russian inhabitant. For this purpose, and in the desire to be publicly available, I did not consider it necessary to give a large scientific apparatus either in footnotes or at the end of chapters. References to manuals and citations of sources were allowed to the extent that it was considered necessary so that the inquisitive reader was not deprived of the opportunity, if desired, to master the material that was at the author's disposal: sources are indicated where original conclusions are given on the basis of their special study; manuals are shown guides, for which it is easy to find references to the literature of the subject. Not to give large footnotes - this was a condition on the part of the publisher, which I found justified. Perhaps I have cited many passages in Russian translation from documents and literary works described time, but it always seemed to me that this is the best introduction to the era and conveys the mood of society.
The author has tried to make every effort to ensure that this work, the result of a long, persistent and - let it be allowed to add - not unsuccessful scientific activity Russian professor, was worthy of his goal and subject. I was born in 1845 and can complete this last scientific enterprise by the age of seventy, when it is natural for a person to sum up everything experienced and summarize the results of his activities. It is easy to understand that I wanted to put such a reading into the hands of the Russian reader, which, on the one hand, with its rigor and seriousness, would give him the idea of a well-thought-out and carefully balanced system, and on the other hand, would leave a good memory of the author, who, daring to publish in the light of the history of Byzantium compiled by him, obeyed an inner attraction, proceeding from the conviction that the assertion of knowledge about Byzantium and the clarification of our relations with it is extremely necessary for the Russian scientist and no less useful both for education and for directing the Russian to the right path. political and national identity. Let the reader ponder over the content of the chapters devoted to the southern Slavs and look for illustrations there for the sad events now going through on the Balkan Peninsula!
F.I.Uspensky
History of the Byzantine Empire. Volume I
Period I (before 527)
Period II (518–610)
Foreword
I very much regret that I started late in printing a work that I conceived at least 25 years ago. Often there is a doubt whether it will be possible to bring the matter to the end, as I am approaching the limit of life. In the course of forty years of study of different departments of Byzantium, I had the opportunity to dwell on many issues, and many departments were processed at different times and for different purposes. But when the time came to sum up what had been prepared so far, the difference in mood and the dissimilarity of the general idea made itself felt in different departments. Does this come from the conditions of age, or from the conditions of gradual broadening of one's horizons? Unfortunately, I do not dare to answer this question; I'm afraid to err against the case. Undoubtedly, 20 years ago I spoke more boldly, made more generalizations and conclusions, was not so careful in sentences: now I often had to soften expressions, smooth out the sharpness of thought, redo entire chapters to fit them to a new mood. Is it good for business? Again, I can't speak positively. There are, however, some details which should be usefully reflected in the fact that my work has been too slow to appear in print.
Since 1895, living in Constantinople, I had the opportunity to study the people whose ancestors created the history of Byzantium, directly get acquainted with the monuments and delve into the psychology of the Patriarchate of Constantinople, which is largely responsible for the fact that most of the peoples subject to the cultural influence of Byzantium are still in such miserable position. Since the clergy and monasticism have always occupied a leading place in the history of Byzantium, then, of course, the circumstance in which the coverage of church affairs is presented is of no small importance. Perhaps, without living so much time among the Greeks and not directly studying the life of the patriarchy, it would be impossible for me to renounce the theoretical constructions and fictions with which we are so abundantly endowed in school. Meanwhile, a real look at the ecumenical patriarchy, throwing excommunications on the Slavic peoples, violating its phyletic policy, is highly timely to establish for us both for Russian church policy and for our national self-determination, if only in view of the consideration that that moment is not far off. when, by the political course of things and the successes of Catholic and Protestant propaganda, he will be brought to the position of the Alexandrian or Jerusalem Patriarchate, i.e. when it loses almost the entire Balkan Peninsula and a significant part of the eastern sees. Then only a long sojourn in the East and travels in Asia Minor, Syria and Palestine connected with it could clarify for me the historical destinies of the Byzantine Empire, which for its existence is connected more with the East than with the West. I mean not only that both the Empire of Constantinople and the Turkish Empire that replaced it owe their main material forces (military people and income) to the East and have always depended on the loyalty of the eastern provinces, but also real traditions and historical facts. Not one of the Slavic sovereigns could cope with the tempting idea of founding an empire in Europe in place of the Greco-Byzantine one; none of the European principalities founded in Europe after the IV Crusade - whether it was led by the Franks or local Greeks - had a long history and did not attract popular sympathy, but meanwhile, in the Nicaean Empire, the idea of restoring the Byzantine Empire in XIII v. The lesson of history must be strictly tested and weighed by those who are currently awaiting the division of the inheritance after the "dangerously ill" on the Bosphorus.
Since this publication cannot be regarded as a commercial enterprise and is not caused by either official or career goals, I find it appropriate to explain here that the Brockhaus-Efron firm, by its agreement to publish the History of the Byzantine Empire, in the form in which it appears in front of the public at the present time, influenced my final decision to start preparing the text for publication, i.e. to decide on an enterprise, for the implementation of which there were always intractable difficulties.
The book that comes into the hands of the reader is not intended to replace the existing old and new histories of Byzantium. This is not an exhaustive account of all the events that make up the circle of more than a thousand years of empire - it therefore does not contain six or seven volumes, but three. Not competing and not trying to replace the published histories of Byzantium, however, I have a cherished idea to give our compatriots a whole system in such an area, which I consider the most important after national history for the national self-consciousness of a cultural Russian layman. For this purpose, and in the desire to be publicly available, I did not consider it necessary to give a large scientific apparatus either in footnotes or at the end of chapters. References to manuals and citations of sources were allowed to the extent that it was considered necessary so that the inquisitive reader was not deprived of the opportunity, if desired, to master the material that was at the author's disposal: sources are indicated where original conclusions are given on the basis of their special study; manuals are shown guides, for which it is easy to find references to the literature of the subject. Not to give large footnotes - this was a condition on the part of the publisher, which I found justified. Maybe I have cited many passages in Russian translation from documents and literary works of the time described, but it always seemed to me that this is the best introduction to the era and conveys the mood of society.
The author tried to make every effort so that this work, the result of a long, persistent and - let it be allowed to add - not unsuccessful scientific activity of a Russian professor, was worthy of its goal and subject. I was born in 1845 and can complete this last scientific enterprise by the age of seventy, when it is natural for a person to sum up everything experienced and summarize the results of his activities. It is easy to understand that I wanted to put such a reading into the hands of the Russian reader, which, on the one hand, with its rigor and seriousness, would give him the idea of a well-thought-out and carefully balanced system, and on the other hand, would leave a good memory of the author, who, daring to publish in the light of the history of Byzantium compiled by him, obeyed an inner attraction, proceeding from the conviction that the assertion of knowledge about Byzantium and the clarification of our relations with it is extremely necessary for the Russian scientist and no less useful both for education and for directing the Russian to the right path. political and national identity. Let the reader ponder over the content of the chapters devoted to the southern Slavs and look for illustrations there for the sad events now going through on the Balkan Peninsula!
F. Uspensky
Constantinople. October 1912
Introduction
Similarities and differences in the historical development of the West and East
In science, there has long been a need to express in simple and generally accessible forms the diversity of historical phenomena. This is caused not only by the well-known property of the mind to find similarities and differences in the observed facts and place them in certain categories, but also the historical material that grows to colossal proportions strongly encourages this.
One can be horrified at the thought of the depressing amount of facts with which our descendants will have to deal. Historical material grows with each generation, inventing new means to increase and develop it, but it develops even more in terms of internal content and volume, capturing lost civilizations and discovering historical monuments buried underground. Therefore, there is a serious need to produce a kind of household equipment in the historical heritage received from our ancestors, to free our warehouses from dilapidated items and distribute usable things into departments and groups.
This need is recognized in science, and many are now busy grouping material according to its value and inner significance. There are numerous attempts to explain the meaning historical facts, find causality between events, indicate the general patterns of development of peoples. These attempts were accompanied by a very important and reassuring acquisition, which makes it possible to look at the multiplication of historical material without fear and apprehension; they showed: 1) that in the field of immensely accumulated facts and observations on the life of human societies, there is a certain kind of consistency and regularity, which makes one think about general laws that govern world history; 2) that the colossal accumulation of historical facts does not obscure, but clarifies the essence of these general laws. Thus there is full foundation to hope that the number of facts, no matter how it may increase in the future, will not enslave the human mind, for science is gradually acquiring the means to distinguish between essential and non-essential in a variety of phenomena, to give a price to one and discard other facts, to use those that serve as a manifestation of general laws of historical development, and only note the rest. In a word, we get the reassuring conclusion that, although history expands to infinity in its scope, at the same time it shrinks in its content in the sense of bringing diverse facts to the unity of the idea.
Support the project Comments
vienya Read-aloud preface.
Hidden text
vienya
astrad wrote:
62985911 Is the layout of the second volume expected?
Yes, there is material. Should I re-upload it here or post it separately?
vienya
qwerty5 wrote:
History of the Byzantine Empire. Volume II [Makarov Mikhail (LI), 2012, 192 kbps, MP3]
Uspensky Fedor - History of the Byzantine Empire. Volume II Makarov Dmitry 192kb/s
This audiobook is a continuation of the previously "laid out" audiobook of Volume I "History of the Byzantine Empire" by Fyodor Ivanovich Uspensky, a famous Byzantinist of the 19th - 20th centuries. In the first half of the 2nd volume Uspensky F.I. revealed two p Uspensky Fedor - History of the Byzantine Empire. Volume IIUspensky Fedor - History of the Byzantine Empire. Volume I Makarov Dmitry 192kb/s
"History of the Byzantine Empire" - the main work of the outstanding Russian scientist, the largest Byzantine scholar of world renown, Academician Fyodor Ivanovich Uspensky (1845-1928). Ouspensky's study is distinguished by the author's point of view onChapter I
General characteristics. Military preparations. Origin of the Fem Device
With the beginning of the 7th c. in the history of Byzantium, one can outline not only certain facts that serve as an indicator of the final break with Roman traditions and ideals, but at the same time in the character and mood statesmen and societies to meet new features brought by new people and new attitudes. The reign of Heraclius opens a new era in the history of Byzantium, which marks the boundary between the old and the newly born historical movement. But it is extremely difficult to present in proper coverage the nature of Heraclius's activities both by the scarcity of information that has come down to us about his internal activities, and by the fact that the new elements of statehood, gradually entering life from that time, have not found either a proper assessment or a specific place in historical presentations.
The Byzantium of the time of Heraclius is not like the empire of the time of Justinian. The extraordinary tension of forces under Justinian aimed to resurrect the idea of the Roman Empire and bind the various nationalities that make up the empire with the unity of faith and law; this idea was practically realized thanks to the extraordinary energy of Justinian, as well as his art to evaluate people and give them assignments according to their abilities. But there was no vitality in the very idea of a world empire, and the creation of Justinian was not politically durable. On the contrary, the task of Heraclius was definite and concrete, it was not about new conquests, but about the means to preserve what could be saved from destruction. The previous era of military indignation, as a result of which the throne of emperors was often random people, who reached the highest power by the whim of fate, was accompanied by an extreme breakdown of economic means, a decline in well-being, a reduction in the army and the extermination of an enormous number of people, especially from the sufficient and ruling classes. There is news that Heraclius, making a census of his army, found that only two of the total available number served under Fock, and the entire composition belonged to a new set. This observation applies to other states as well. The first time after his accession, Heraclius is in doubt. The government does not take decisive measures, does not dare to enter into a decisive struggle with the enemies of the empire, and negotiates for peace and alliance, which, however, did not have success. Only in 622, when Asia Minor, Syria, Palestine and Egypt were already under the rule of the Persians, did Heraclius come out with a certain foreign policy and becomes the head of the newly organized and trained by him army. So, for us, the preliminary period of preparation for military activity remains poorly understood.
About where Heraclius got the funds for the war and how he prepared an army capable of enduring the incredible hardships of service in the war with the Persians, the best page is given by the writer Theophanes: “In 622, April 4, having celebrated Easter, on Monday evening Heraclius spoke in campaign against the Persians. Being in dire need, he borrowed money from churches and monasteries, from the Great Church he ordered the chandeliers and other church vessels to be taken away and minted gold and small change from them. To manage affairs in his absence, he appointed a regency, which included, in addition to his son, Patriarch Sergius and Patrician Vaughn, a man of a subtle mind and wise in reason and experience. Having sent a letter to the Avar kagan, he asked him to pay attention to the Romani kingdom, with which he concluded an alliance of friendship, and appointed him the guardian of his son. From the capital, Heraclius made his way by sea to a place called Pyla , from where you came to the areas that received the Fem device , gathered an army in the camp and began to teach him military service according to the new system, exercising him in gymnastics and in the art of war. Dividing the detachment into two parts, he ordered them to make exemplary bloodless skirmishes among themselves and accustomed them to military cries, and paeans, and exclamations, and movements, with the goal that when they come war time, did not seem to be newcomers, but boldly, as if in jest, went to the enemy. Finding the army brought to a state of great licentiousness and cowardice, a decline in discipline and order, and scattered in different places, he soon united everyone together. .
The writer once again returns to the description of military exercises in two formations with exemplary battles with the sounds of trumpets and blows with shields, from which it can be concluded that he had at his disposal significant material for this side of Heraclius's activity. But in the above excerpt, the most interesting is the passage about themes, a term that appears for the first time in historiography and denotes a major reform relating to civil and military administration. The division of the empire into themes is, under Heraclius, already a well-defined fact and operating in practice. It is also very curious that the reforms in military science, with which Theophanes introduces us, are put in relation to themes. This is an absolutely correct view, since the organization of the themes achieved primarily military goals, and the reorganization of the army was conditioned by the special structure of the civilian population in those administrative-military districts that were called the themes. So, we outline here one of the important moments of the preparatory activity of Heraclius, to which the first ten years of his reign were devoted; this is a military and civil reform, expressed in the structure of fem. Regardless, Theophanes has a hint of a number of other activities by which Heraclius tried to ensure success in the military enterprises that constituted the goal of his life. Such, by the way, is the question of the regency and, in particular, of the succession to the throne.
Not only a natural feeling of affection for relatives led Heraclius in the distribution of higher titles and positions, but also a lack of people, since most of the well-born and wealthy people were either destroyed or weakened by torture, confiscation of property, imprisonment and murder. So, around the throne we see the relatives of Heraclius. The dignity of a curopalate was granted to his brother Theodore, his cousin Nikita was the main support of the kingdom. Only Priscus, the son-in-law of Phocas, remained in favor with Heraclius from outsiders, and even then for a short time. With special attention, he attended to the arrangement of the fate of his family. He appointed his daughter Epiphany, born of his first wife, August, in the same way he crowned the kingdom in the first years after the accession of his young son Constantine. Perhaps the same motive for strengthening his own dynasty explains his marriage to his own niece Marina, the daughter of Mary's sister, which made a big noise. Queen Marina, however, was not at the height of the situation. In a difficult moment in the life of Heraclius, she far from supported him, as before Theodore Justinian, but, on the contrary, according to her suggestions, Heraclius made a cowardly decision to transfer his capital to Carthage in 618, when circumstances in Constantinople were extremely unfavorable, and only perseverance Patriarch Sergius prevented the implementation of this decision.
When Heraclius came to the throne, the political situation of the empire was desperate. The northern provinces of the empire were overrun by Slavs and Avars. Heraclius immediately assessed the situation here and took a number of measures that were of capital importance for the coming centuries on the Balkan Peninsula. First of all, he realized that the empire should not waste its strength on fighting Slavic immigration; abandoning the areas occupied by the Slavs, Heraclius found in himself enough statesmanship to leave the Slavs alone until the time when the empire gathered its strength and could begin a cultural and political struggle with them.
The main attention was paid to the East, where, under the rule of Chosroes II, the Persian Empire revealed enormous tension and conquering power, having taken Syria, Palestine and Egypt from Byzantium over the course of several years and inflicting an incredible moral defeat on the Christian empire by the fact that the fire-worshippers took possession of the Life-Giving Tree of the Cross of Christ. In the period from 622 to 628, Heraclius, in several campaigns to the East, achieved such success that the Persians abandoned their conquests in Egypt, Syria and Palestine and received such a blow from which they never recovered. Among the successors of Justinian, Heraclius stands above all.
Even at the end of the 4th century, when the imperial army was overrun by barbarian detachments and when the Germanic-Goths threatened to flood the capital itself, patriotic voices began to rise in favor of the nationalization of the army. “War for the defense of the state,” Bishop Sinesius of Ptolemaida said in his speech to Arcadius, “cannot be successfully waged by foreign troops. Take the defenders of the fatherland from their own fields and from subject cities, for in them you will find the real protection of that state order and those laws in which they themselves were born and brought up. Is it not seen as an extreme danger that those alien military people who are entrusted with the defense of our country may want to impose their power on an unarmed population? Try to multiply your own regiments, along with this, the national spirit will also rise, which will successfully withstand the struggle against the barbarian invasion.
However, the Byzantine government failed to move from the system of hiring foreign troops to the national army either in the 5th or 6th century. Under Justinian, when the empire had developed its military force, brilliant military deeds were carried out under the leadership of Belisarius, Narses and other generals not by the national army, but by mercenaries from different peoples, who entered into a special agreement with the empire and bore the name of the federates. Almost every leader of the Justinian time had his own squad of hired foreigners, who, as a personal retinue, as squires, served as the core of the army. Last hired in military service a large foreign detachment refers to the reign of Tiberius (578–582), who made up a special corps of 15 thousand people, which he entrusted to Mauritius, a committee of federates, who was subsequently proclaimed king.
Consciousness of the unsatisfactoriness of this system and the enormous danger to the empire from the Persians and Slavs prompted the government to make attempts to change the military system. This issue was resolved, however, not immediately. On the path along which the reform of military affairs was being prepared, the Byzantine government had to reckon with two circumstances: the lack of population, especially on the borders threatened by enemy invasions, and the abundance of empty, unoccupied and uncultivated lands. In administrative terms, the central government had to abandon the system of separation of civil and military power that had prevailed since the reforms of Diocletian and Constantine and strengthen its organs in the provinces by combining in one person the military command over local military people and civil power over the population of a certain territory. In this regard, it is very interesting to trace the preparatory measures for the new system, noted even before the time of Heraclius.
Signs of new views are found partly in the isolated attempts of Justinian I to reform military affairs. Such a conclusion is led by consideration of his measures for the organization of the province of Armenia, which are reported by the historians Malala, Feofan and Kedrin. Comparing with each other the three versions of the named writers about the orders of Justinian in Armenia, we can imagine the matter in the following form.
In the province of Armenia, which was of particular importance for the sake of neighboring Persia, Justinian concentrated military power in one person with the title of stratilate. But as there were few settled population in the province who would participate in military service, because the Armenians “differed in vagrancy and inconstancy”, the composition of the military units was strengthened by four regiments called from Anatoliq. The most significant, however, must be recognized as those measures that provided for the involvement of local elements in military service, the importance of which was determined by knowledge of the means of communication in Armenia. In addition, civil officials of the region were included in the military service or on the military lists. No matter how dry the news about the military organization of Armenia, the following conclusions can be drawn from it: Justinian or, perhaps, his successors made an attempt to concentrate military power in one hand, the native population was involved in military service, the civil power partly became subordinate to the military, part some civilian ranks were renamed into military ones. The same goal of strengthening provincial power in case of exceptional circumstances dictated to the Byzantine government another measure, which unusually strengthened civil power by imposing military powers on it. This measure was carried out in Egypt by strengthening the power of the governor of Alexandria with the title of Augustal, who was granted military power "for the sake of the large population of Alexandria" with the subordination of all military forces both in the city of Alexandria and in two Egypts to him.
At the very end of the sixth century, precisely under Mauritius (582-602), the noted tendency to depart from the Roman system spreads in a different direction with more consistency than in the Justinian era. It was in two provinces, distant from the center and placed in an exceptional position due to the fact that the population of these provinces was completely alien to Byzantine culture, that governorships were organized with the name of exarchates. Such administrative reform was carried out in Italy and Africa. On the occasion of the invasion of Italy by the Lombards, almost two-thirds of the Italian territory departed from the empire, and the remaining big cities the garrisons could barely hold out under the protection of the walls. In order to strengthen and centralize military power in Italy, an exarchate was created with its capital at Ravenna to replace the former magister militum. With the same motives and almost at the same time, an exarchate was formed in Africa with a central administration in Carthage. The military resources that Heraclius had at his disposal in 610 during his campaign in Constantinople sufficiently explain to what extent the power of the exarch was independent and independent. It must be admitted that the establishment of the exarchate was influenced by the great practicality and administrative experience of the government, which managed to put civil and military power in the exarchate within the proper limits, giving the military power a decisive role, but without depriving civil ranks of proper competence. In the organization of the exarchate, it is important to note the excellent experience of creating an independent and self-sufficient administrative unit in which all parts are subordinate and which performs military and civil functions at the expense of material resources extracted in a given province. Before proceeding with the indicated observations to the time of Heraclius, let us recall that the original role of Phocas in the military camp on the Danube was apparently also aimed at the formation of an exarchate, unless Theophanes, speaking about the election of his army as exarchs, did not make a mistake.
When Heraclius undertook a campaign in Persia in 622, he stopped for quite a long time in the regions that had already received a thematic device, and trained recruits here in a new system of military art. Here for the first time we meet the term "theme" with a very special technical meaning in relation to the civil and military administration of the Byzantine state. It is thought that the thematic organization owes its beginnings to the reforms of Justinian and that in the organization of the exarchates one can find some elements of the same thematic system, although this opinion can hardly be defended in all details. Unfortunately, positive evidence of writers in relation to the theme device, so characteristic of Byzantium, has not been preserved. When Emperor Constantine Porphyrogenic (911-947) began to collect information on the issue of the thematic structure in the archives of the empire, he found very little accurate and reliable and therefore limited himself to designating the contemporary administrative division of the empire into themes. To what extent the information found by Constantine was insufficient is evident from the uncertainty and extreme caution with which he supposedly raises this institution to the name of Heraclius. Thus, he expresses himself about the Armenian theme as follows. “It seems that one can think that she received such a name during the reign of Heraclius and in the near future after him.” In the same way, in the preface to the essay on themes, he brings Heraclius and his successors to the time with greater certainty new system femme device.
Although the question of themes from the point of view of their origin has most recently been carefully studied by professors Diehl and Geltzer, there are still quite a few unexplained sides to it. Researchers of the Byzantine thematic structure proceeded from the idea that a theme means a military detachment - a division or corps stationed in a certain territory and consisting of a certain military organization and subordination of units under the command of a military leader with the rank of strategos. Meanwhile, with a closer study of the sources, one cannot help but conclude that although the theme denotes a corps or division in a narrow sense, but, on the other hand, this term has never lost its original broader meaning. The original meaning of the theme denotes civil administrative District, which includes residents of cities and villages, controlled by civil officials and serving a variety of public duties, including military tax. The relationship of the theme as a military term to the theme - the administrative district with its administrative, judicial and financial system - remained little affected, which is why the study of the theme structure itself lost a significant share of its general historical interest. In the sense of an institution that arose in the 7th century. and developed under the Isaurians, the theme device denotes a special organization of the civilian population of the province, adapted specifically for serving military service. Thus, to reveal the history of the theme system means to find out the government's measures in relation to land ownership and to the land organization of the peasant population, since the military tax system, after all, was based on the organization of military tax land.
Without going into details here, we confine ourselves to analyzing one passage [from the work] of Constantine Porphyrogenous, which introduces the very essence of the thematic device: “Protospafarius Theodore Pankrati takes a contract to recruit in an Anatolian theme in the village of Plataniaty and in the nearest villages 500 warriors capable of shooting and fit for horse service. If the warriors turn out to be in possession of a full allotment of land, they are obliged to make cavalry equipment at their own expense, but if their allotment is insufficient, then they have the right to receive horses from state horse bases or take them from singles - co-payers of the Anatolian theme " . This passage, in which there are several technical expressions, reveals a phenomenon, hitherto unnoticed, that the essence of the theme system lies not in military detachments located in cities and villages, but in the very nature of the economic and land structure of the rural population. So, the protospafarius named above was to carry out a property census in a certain area and make a military recruitment of 500 warriors. If it turned out that, due to its property status, the village of Plataniaty was not in a position to put up the required number of recruits, then other villages should have been censused. Further, since the task was to enroll some warriors in the infantry, others in the cavalry regiments, then here arose some special conditions that had to be accommodating.
Service in the infantry was cheaper, therefore, a more modest property status was required for the infantryman; service in the cavalry was more expensive, and therefore the one who had the most land allotment was appointed to the cavalry. Thus, if a recruit had a full allotment, corresponding to the equestrian service, he was obliged to prepare cavalry equipment at his own expense; otherwise, the horse was given to him from a state-owned horse setup or from single co-payers, by which one should mean singles by marital status, serving military service according to the clubbing system - one warrior from several peasants.
The main merit of the Byzantine government was that with the introduction of the theme organization, it made military service dependent on land ownership, which determined the stability and vitality of the theme organization. The service was laid from the ground, and the inhabitant served in such a department of the army, which corresponded to the land plot that was in his use. Accordingly, there were areas for infantry service, for cavalry and naval service. These are the main features of the theme device, which dates back to the time of Heraclius with its rudiments.
It is impossible for us to judge in what locality the theme device was first of all used. One thing is certain, that in 622, when he set out on the first Persian campaign, Heraclius from Nicomedia went to the regions with a thematic device and trained recruits here. Subsequently, there was the Opsiky Theme, which served as the guard of the capital and adjacent areas, and therefore it would be possible with some reason to attribute the first orders in relation to the thematic organization to the region closest to the capital on the Asian side. But later, under the closest successors of Heraclius, the theme of Anatolicus acquired special significance. About the organization and origin of this theme, moreover, more extensive information has been preserved. Already under Mauritius we find here the first measures to strengthen military power. The strategist of Anatolica, in what rank we see Philippicus, married to the sister of Mauritius Gordia, were subordinate to the provinces of Asia and Lydia and parts of Caria, Phrygia, Lycaonia, Pisidia, Cappadocia and Isauria. This was the most important theme, and its strategos in the rank of patrician occupied one of the highest places in the table of ranks. The military corps subordinate to him, according to an approximate calculation of 10 thousand people, often played a role in the political fate of Constantinople.
Another theme, also formed before Heraclius, is the theme of Armenian. military organization these themes gradually grew in the 7th century. under the pressure of circumstances, since Anatolika and Armeniak were in a permanent state of war due to the increase in the power of the Arabs and their raids on Byzantium. As for the European provinces, Thrace was first of all organized into the theme, which included the Diocletian provinces: Europe, Rhodopes, Thrace, Emimont, Scythia and Mysia. Although under Heraclius great changes took place on the Balkan Peninsula as a result of the weakening of the Avars and the establishment of peaceful relations with the Slavs, to whom the territories occupied by them were ceded under certain conditions, nevertheless, the strategist of the theme of Thrace with military forces subordinate to him was of great importance, because the place of the Avars in 7th century the power and influence of the Bulgarian Khan begins to grow on the Balkan Peninsula. With the full development of the theme system in the empire, there were 26 military districts with the same device.
Chapter II
Completion of Slavic immigration. The legend of the settlements of the Croats-Serbs. Of course. General scheme of the ancient history of the Slavs
As we saw in one of the previous chapters, the reign of Heraclius should include the completion of the immigration of the Slavs to the empire, their final establishment on the Balkan Peninsula and their initial forms of political and civil organization both within the Byzantine Empire and in its immediate neighborhood. The most expressive evidence to characterize the political state of affairs in the first half of the 7th century. is the news of Isidore of Seville from 615: “The Slavs took Greece from the Romans, and the Persians took Syria, Egypt and many other areas.” In particular, with regard to the Balkan Peninsula, a number of events of paramount importance took place here, which for a long time determined the course of Slavic history and which are so important for the history of Byzantium that they necessarily require a prominent place in the presentation of the events of the described era.
Assessing the main sources for the original history of the Slavs, one should come to the conclusion that the news of Procopius, Mauritius and the author of the legends about the miracles of St. Demetrius cannot belong to the same tribe, i.e. that the Antes and Slavs of ancient sources had a significant difference not only in place of residence, but also in terms of life. It is very likely that the features of the Slavs in the description of Mauritius, indicating the habit of living in forests and swamps, refer to those Slavs who lived in the northeast; they should also include a sentimental description of the three harpists brought to the camp of Mauritius, and the people from which they came. Here, of course, we have in front of us echoes of the legend and traces of legends brought to Constantinople by service people of Slavic origin who entered the service either of the Byzantine military people, or of the government as a mercenary squad, or federates. These are stories about distant Slavs, with whom Byzantium hardly came into direct contact. Regardless of such legends, which later will find a place for themselves in the work of Constantine Porphyrogenic, Byzantine historiography has preserved information, although not as detailed and verified by criticism as it would be desirable at the present time, but quite real and related specifically to those Slavic tribes, with which the Byzantine government most often had to deal with in the Balkan Peninsula. Our information about the tribes that formed the Bulgarian people remains the most satisfactory. Placed both by geographical and historical conditions in a position that attracted it to the south and northeast, the Bulgarian people naturally submitted to the cultural influence of Byzantium and, with the help of the conquering Turkic element, developed in itself those principles that the Slavs lacked: the military estate, the central power of the khan and national church.
Current page: 1 (total book has 42 pages) [accessible reading excerpt: 10 pages]
Fyodor Ivanovich Uspensky
History of the Byzantine Empire VI-IX centuries. Volume 2. Period III (610–716) Heraclius and his successors. Iconoclastic period (717–867)
(History of the Byzantine Empire - 2)
PERIOD III (610–716) Heraclius and his successors
Chapter I
General characteristics. military preparations,
Origin of the Fem Device
With the beginning of the 7th c. in the history of Byzantium, one can outline not only certain facts that serve as an indicator of the final break with Roman traditions and ideals, but at the same time, in the character and mood of statesmen and society, one can meet new features brought by new people and new views. The reign of Heraclius opens a new era in the history of Byzantium, which marks the boundary between the old and the newly born historical movement. But it is extremely difficult to present in proper coverage the nature of Heraclius's activities both by the scarcity of information that has come down to us about his internal activities, and by the fact that the new elements of statehood, gradually entering life from that time, have not found either a proper assessment or a specific place in historical presentations.
The Byzantium of the time of Heraclius is not like the empire of the time of Justinian. The extraordinary tension of forces under Justinian aimed to resurrect the idea of the Roman Empire and bind the various nationalities that make up the empire with the unity of faith and law; this idea was practically realized thanks to the extraordinary energy of Justinian, as well as his art to evaluate people and give them assignments according to their abilities. But there was no vitality in the very idea of a world empire, and the creation of Justinian was not politically durable. On the contrary, the task of Heraclius was definite and concrete, it was not about new conquests, but about the means to preserve what could be saved from destruction. The previous era of military indignation, as a result of which on the throne of emperors there were often random people who reached the highest power by the whim of fate, was accompanied by an extreme breakdown of economic means, a decline in prosperity, a reduction in the army and the extermination of an enormous number of people, especially from the sufficient and ruling classes. There is news that Heraclius, making a census of his army, found that only two of the total available number served under Fock, and the entire composition belonged to a new set. This observation applies to other states as well. The first time after his accession, Heraclius is in doubt. The government does not take decisive measures, does not dare to enter into a decisive struggle with the enemies of the empire, and negotiates for peace and alliance, which, however, did not have success. Only in 622, when Asia Minor, Syria, Palestine and Egypt were already under the rule of the Persians, Heraclius comes up with a certain foreign policy and becomes the head of the newly organized and trained by himself army. So, for us, the preliminary period of preparation for military activity remains poorly understood.
About where Heraclius got the funds for the war and how he prepared an army capable of enduring the incredible hardships of service in the war with the Persians, the best page is given by the writer Theophanes: “In 622, April 4, having celebrated Easter, on Monday evening Heraclius spoke in campaign against the Persians. Being in dire need, he borrowed money from churches and monasteries, from the Great Church he ordered the chandeliers and other church vessels to be taken away and minted gold and small change from them. To manage affairs in his absence, he appointed a regency, which included, in addition to his son, Patriarch Sergius and Patrician Vaughn, a man of a subtle mind and wise in reason and experience. Having sent a letter to the Avar kagan, he asked him to pay attention to the Romani kingdom, with which he concluded an alliance of friendship, and appointed him the guardian of his son. From the capital, Heraclius made his way by sea to a place called Pyla 1
Bithynian city in the Gulf of Astakos near Nicomedia.
Where did you come from to the areas that received the Fem device 2
έντεϋ9εν δε επί τάς των δεμάτων χώρας άφικόμενος. To what extent ideas about that time are vague, the Latin translation of this place proves. Illinc vero per ceteras regiones sibi subiectas profectus.
Gathered the army in the camp and began to teach him military service according to the new system, exercising him in gymnastics and in the art of war. Dividing the detachment into two parts, he ordered them to make exemplary bloodless skirmishes among themselves and accustomed them to military cries, and paeans, and exclamations, and movements, with the goal that when wartime comes, they would not seem like beginners, but boldly, as it were. jokingly, went to the enemy. Finding the army brought to a state of great licentiousness and cowardice, a decline in discipline and order, and dispersed in different places, he soon united everyone together. The writer once again returns to the description of military exercises in two formations with exemplary battles with the sounds of trumpets and blows with shields, from which it can be concluded that he had at his disposal significant material for this side of Heraclius's activity. But in the above excerpt, the most interesting is the passage about themes, a term that appears for the first time in historiography and denotes a major reform relating to civil and military administration. The division of the empire into themes is, under Heraclius, already a well-defined fact and operating in practice. It is also very curious that the reforms in military science, with which Feofan acquaints us, are put in relation to the themes. This is an absolutely correct view, since the organization of the themes achieved primarily military goals, and the reorganization of the army was conditioned by the special structure of the civilian population in those administrative-military districts that were called the themes. So, we outline here one of the important moments of the preparatory activity of Heraclius, to which the first ten years of his reign were devoted; this is a military and civil reform, expressed in the structure of fem. Regardless, Theophanes has a hint of a number of other activities by which Heraclius tried to ensure success in the military enterprises that constituted the goal of his life. Such, by the way, is the question of the regency and, in particular, of the succession to the throne.
Not only a natural feeling of affection for relatives led Heraclius in the distribution of higher titles and positions, but also a lack of people, since most of the well-born and wealthy people were either destroyed or weakened by torture, confiscation of property, imprisonment and murder. So, around the throne we see the relatives of Heraclius. The dignity of a curopalate was granted to his brother Theodore, his cousin Nikita was the main support of the kingdom. Only Priscus, the son-in-law of Phocas, remained in favor with Heraclius from outsiders, and even then for a short time. With special attention, he attended to the arrangement of the fate of his family. He appointed his daughter Epiphany, born of his first wife, August, in the same way he crowned the kingdom in the first years after the accession of his young son Constantine. Perhaps the same motive for strengthening his own dynasty explains his marriage to his own niece Marina, the daughter of Mary's sister, which made a big noise. Queen Marina, however, was not at the height of the situation. In a difficult moment in the life of Heraclius, she far from supported him, as before Theodore Justinian, but, on the contrary, according to her suggestions, Heraclius made a cowardly decision to transfer his capital to Carthage in 618, when circumstances in Constantinople were extremely unfavorable, and only perseverance Patriarch Sergius prevented the implementation of this decision.
When Heraclius came to the throne, the political situation of the empire was desperate. The northern provinces of the empire were overrun by Slavs and Avars. Heraclius immediately assessed the situation here and took a number of measures that were of capital importance for the coming centuries on the Balkan Peninsula. First of all, he realized that the empire should not waste its strength on fighting Slavic immigration; abandoning the areas occupied by the Slavs, Heraclius found in himself enough statesmanship to leave the Slavs alone until the time when the empire gathered its strength and could begin a cultural and political struggle with them.
The main attention was paid to the East, where, under the rule of Chosroes II, the Persian Empire revealed enormous tension and conquering power, having taken Syria, Palestine and Egypt from Byzantium over the course of several years and inflicting an incredible moral defeat on the Christian empire by the fact that the fire-worshippers took possession of the Life-Giving Tree of the Cross of Christ. In the period from 622 to 628, Heraclius, in several campaigns to the East, achieved such success that the Persians abandoned their conquests in Egypt, Syria and Palestine and received such a blow from which they never recovered. Among the successors of Justinian, Heraclius stands above all.
Even at the end of the 4th century, when the imperial army was overrun by barbarian detachments, and when the Germanic Goths threatened to flood the capital itself, patriotic voices began to rise in favor of the nationalization of the army. “War for the defense of the state,” Bishop Sinesius of Ptolemaida said in his speech to Arcadius, “cannot be successfully waged by foreign troops. Take the defenders of the fatherland from their own fields and from subject cities, for in them you will find the real protection of that state order and those laws in which they themselves were born and brought up. Is it not seen as an extreme danger that those alien military people who are entrusted with the defense of our country may want to impose their power on an unarmed population? Try to multiply your own regiments, along with this the national spirit will rise, which will successfully withstand the struggle against the barbarian invasion.
However, the Byzantine government failed to move from the system of hiring foreign troops to the national army either in the 5th or 6th century. Under Justinian, when the empire developed its military strength to its extreme limits, brilliant military deeds were carried out under the leadership of Belisarius, Narses and other commanders not by a national army, but by mercenaries from eye peoples who entered into a special treaty with the empire and bore the name of federates. Almost every leader of the Justinian time had his own squad of hired foreigners, who, as a personal retinue, as squires, served as the core of the army. The last case of hiring a large foreign detachment into military service dates back to the reign of Tiberius (578-582), who made up a special corps of 15,000 people, which he entrusted to Mauritius, a committee of federates, subsequently proclaimed king.
Consciousness of the unsatisfactoriness of this system and the enormous danger to the empire from the Persians and Slavs prompted the government to make attempts to change the military system. This issue was resolved, however, not immediately. On the path along which the reform of military affairs was being prepared, the Byzantine government had to reckon with two circumstances: the lack of population, especially on the borders threatened by enemy invasions, and the abundance of empty, unoccupied and uncultivated lands. In administrative terms, the central government had to abandon the system of separation of civil and military power that had prevailed since the reforms of Diocletian and Constantine and strengthen its organs in the provinces by combining in one person the military command over local military people and civil power over the population of a certain territory. In this regard, it is very interesting to trace the preparatory measures for the new system, noted even before the time of Heraclius.
Signs of new views are found partly in the isolated attempts of Justinian I to reform military affairs. Such a conclusion is led by consideration of his measures for the organization of the province of Armenia, which are reported by the historians Malala, Feofan and Kedrin 3 . Comparing with each other the three versions of the named writers about the orders of Justinian in Armenia, we can imagine the matter in the following form.
In the province of Armenia, which was of particular importance for the sake of neighboring Persia, Justinian concentrated military power in one person with the title of stratilate. But as there were few settled population in the province, I who would participate in military service, because the Armenians "differed in vagrancy and inconstancy" 4 , the composition of the military units was strengthened by four regiments called from Anatolik. The most significant, however, must be recognized as those measures that provided for the involvement of local elements in military service, the importance of which was determined by knowledge of the means of communication in Armenia. In addition, civil officials of the region were included in the military service or on the military lists. No matter how dry the news about the military organization of Armenia, the following conclusions can be drawn from it: Justinian or, perhaps, his successors made an attempt to concentrate military power in one hand, the native population was involved in military service, the civil power partly became subordinate to the military, part some civilian ranks were renamed into military ones. The same goal of strengthening provincial power in case of exceptional circumstances dictated to the Byzantine government another measure, which unusually strengthened civil power by imposing military powers on it. This measure was carried out in Egypt by strengthening the power of the governor of Alexandria with the title of Augustal, who was given military power "for the sake of the large population of Alexandria" with the subordination of all military forces both in the city of Alexandria and in two Egypt 5 to him.
At the very end of the sixth century, precisely under Mauritius (582-602), the noted tendency to depart from the Roman system spreads in a different direction with more consistency than in the Justinian era. It was in two provinces, distant from the center and placed in an exceptional position due to the fact that the population of these provinces was completely alien to Byzantine culture, that governorships were organized with the name of exarchates. Such administrative reform was carried out in Italy and Africa. On the occasion of the invasion of Italy by the Lombards, almost two-thirds of the Italian territory withdrew from the empire, and the remaining garrisons in large cities could hardly keep under the protection of the walls. In order to strengthen and centralize military power in Italy, an exarchate was created with its capital at Ravenna to replace the former magister militum. With the same motives and almost at the same time, an exarchate was formed in Africa with a central administration in Carthage. The military resources that Heraclius had at his disposal in 610 during his campaign in Constantinople sufficiently explain to what extent the power of the exarch was independent and independent 6 . It must be admitted that the establishment of the exarchate was influenced by the great practicality and administrative experience of the government, which managed to put civil and military power in the exarchate within the proper limits, giving the military power a decisive role, but without depriving civil ranks of proper competence. In the organization of the exarchate, it is important to note the excellent experience of creating an independent and self-sufficient administrative unit in which all parts are subordinate and which performs military and civil functions at the expense of material resources extracted in a given province. Before proceeding with the indicated observations to the time of Heraclius, let us recall that the initial role of Phocas in the military camp on the Danube was apparently also aimed at the formation of an exarchate, unless Theophanes, speaking about his election by the army as exarchs, did not make a mistake 7.
When Heraclius undertook a campaign in Persia in 622, he stopped for quite a long time in the regions that had already received a thematic device, and trained recruits here in a new system of military art. Here for the first time we meet the term "theme" with a very special technical meaning in relation to the civil and military administration of the Byzantine state. It is thought that the thematic organization owes its beginnings to the reforms of Justinian, and that in the organization of the exarchates one can find some elements of the same thematic system, although this opinion can hardly be defended in all details. Unfortunately, positive evidence of writers in relation to the theme device, so characteristic of Byzantium, has not been preserved. When Emperor Constantine Porphyrogenic (911-947) began to collect information on the issue of the thematic structure in the archives of the empire, he found very little accurate and reliable and therefore limited himself to designating the contemporary administrative division of the empire into themes. To what extent the information found by Constantine was insufficient is evident from the uncertainty and extreme caution with which he supposedly raises this institution to the name of Heraclius. Thus, he expresses himself about the Armenian theme as follows: “It seems that one can think that it received such a name during the reign of King Heraclius and in the near future after him” 8 . In the same way, in the preface to the essay on themes, he brings with greater certainty to the time of Heraclius and his successors a new system of thematic organization 9 .
Although the question of themes from the point of view of their origin has most recently been carefully studied by Professors Diehl and Geltzer, 10 still there are still quite a few obscure sides to it. Researchers of the Byzantine thematic structure proceeded from the idea that a theme means a military detachment-division or corps stationed in a certain territory and consisting in a certain military organization and subordination of units under the command of a military leader with the rank of strategos. Meanwhile, with a closer study of the sources, one cannot help but conclude that although the theme denotes a corps or division in a narrow sense, but, on the other hand, this term has never lost its original broader meaning. The original meaning of the theme denotes a civil administrative district, which includes residents of cities and villages, governed by civil officials and serving a variety of state duties, including military tax. The relationship of the theme as a military term to the theme - the administrative district with its administrative, judicial and financial system - remained little affected, which is why the study of the theme structure itself lost a significant share of its general historical interest. In the sense of an institution that arose in the 7th century. and developed under the Isaurians, the theme device denotes a special organization of the civilian population of the province, adapted specifically for serving military service. Thus, to reveal the history of the theme system means to find out the measures of the government in relation to land ownership and to the land organization of the peasant population, since the military-tax system, in the end, was based on the organization of military-tax land 11 .
Without going into details here, we confine ourselves to analyzing one passage [from the work] of Constantine Porphyrogenous, which introduces the very essence of the thematic device: “Protospafarius Theodore Pankrati takes a contract to recruit in an Anatolian theme in the village of Plataniaty and in the nearest villages 500 warriors capable of shooting and fit for horse service. If the warriors turn out to be in possession of a full allotment of land, they are obliged to make cavalry equipment at their own expense; if their allotment is insufficient, then they have the right to receive horses from state horse bases or take them from loners - fellow Anatolian themes” 12 . This passage, in which there are several technical expressions, reveals a phenomenon, hitherto unnoticed, that the essence of the theme system lies not in military detachments located in cities and villages, but in the very nature of the economic and land structure of the rural population. So, the protospafarius named above was to carry out a property census in a certain area and make a military recruitment of 500 warriors. If it turned out that, due to its property status, the village of Plataniaty was not in a position to put up the required number of recruits, then other villages should have been censused. Further, since the task was to enroll some warriors in the infantry, others in the cavalry regiments, then here arose some special conditions that had to be accommodating.
Service in the infantry was cheaper; consequently, a more modest property position was required for an infantryman; service in the cavalry was more expensive, and therefore the one who had the most land allotment was appointed to the cavalry. Thus, if a recruit had a full allotment, corresponding to the equestrian service, he was obliged to prepare cavalry equipment at his own expense; otherwise, the horse was given to him from a state-owned horse setup or from single co-payers, by which one should mean singles by marital status, serving military service according to the clubbing system - one warrior from several peasants.
The main merit of the Byzantine government was that with the introduction of the theme organization, it made military service dependent on land ownership, which determined the stability and vitality of the theme organization. The service was laid from the ground, and the inhabitant served in such a department of the army, which corresponded to the land plot that was in his use. Accordingly, there were areas for infantry service, for cavalry and naval service. These are the main features of the theme device, which dates back to the time of Heraclius with its rudiments.
It is impossible for us to judge in what locality the theme device was first of all used. One thing is certain, that in 622, when he set out on the first Persian campaign, Heraclius from Nicomedia went to the regions with a thematic device and trained recruits here. Subsequently, there was the Opsiky Theme, which served as the guard of the capital and adjacent areas, and therefore it would be possible with some reason to attribute the first orders in relation to the thematic organization to the region closest to the capital on the Asian side. But later, under the closest successors of Heraclius, the theme of Anatolicus acquired special significance. About the organization and origin of this theme, moreover, more extensive information has been preserved. Already under Mauritius we find here the first measures to strengthen military power. The strategist of Anatolia, in what rank we see Philippicus, married to the sister of Mauritius Gordia, were subordinate to the provinces of Asia and Lydia and parts of Caria, Phrygia, Lycaonia, Pisidia, Cappadocia and Isauria. This was the most important theme, and its strategos in the rank of patrician occupied one of the highest places in the table of ranks ... The military corps subordinate to him, according to an approximate calculation of 10 thousand people, often played a role in the political fate of Constantinople.
Another theme, also formed before Heraclius, is the theme of Armenian. The military organization of these themes gradually grew in the 7th century. under the pressure of circumstances, since Anatolika and Armeniak were in a permanent state of war due to the increase in the power of the Arabs and their raids on Byzantium. As for the European provinces, Thrace was first of all organized into the theme, which included the Diocletian provinces: Europe, Rhodopes, Thrace, Emimont, Scythia and Mysia. Although under Heraclius great changes took place on the Balkan Peninsula as a result of the weakening of the Avars and the establishment of peaceful relations with the Slavs, to whom the territories occupied by them were ceded under certain conditions, nevertheless, the strategist of the theme of Thrace with military forces subordinate to him was of great importance, because in place of the Avars in the 7th century the power and influence of the Bulgarian Khan begins to grow on the Balkan Peninsula. With the full development of the theme system in the empire, there were 26 military districts with the same device.
