In the strong city of Demotica, his peculiar domain, the emperor John

Cantacuzenus was invested with the purple buskins: his right leg was

clothed by his noble kinsmen, the left by the Latin chiefs, on whom he

conferred the order of knighthood. But even in this act of revolt, he

was still studious of loyalty; and the titles of John PalÊologus and

Anne of Savoy were proclaimed before his own name and that of his wife

Irene. Such vain ceremony is a thin disguise of rebellion, nor are there

perhaps any personal wrongs that can authorize a subject to take arms

against his sovereign: but the want of preparation and success may

confirm the assurance of the usurper, that this decisive step was the

effect of necessity rather than of choice. Constantinople adhered to

the young emperor; the king of Bulgaria was invited to the relief of

Adrianople: the principal cities of Thrace and Macedonia, after some

hesitation, renounced their obedience to the great domestic; and the

leaders of the troops and provinces were induced, by their private

interest, to prefer the loose dominion of a woman and a priest. [271] The

army of Cantacuzene, in sixteen divisions, was stationed on the banks

of the Melas to tempt or to intimidate the capital: it was dispersed

by treachery or fear; and the officers, more especially the mercenary

Latins, accepted the bribes, and embraced the service, of the Byzantine

court. After this loss, the rebel emperor (he fluctuated between the two

characters) took the road of Thessalonica with a chosen remnant; but

he failed in his enterprise on that important place; and he was closely

pursued by the great duke, his enemy Apocaucus, at the head of a

superior power by sea and land. Driven from the coast, in his march, or

rather flight, into the mountains of Servia, Cantacuzene assembled his

troops to scrutinize those who were worthy and willing to accompany his

broken fortunes. A base majority bowed and retired; and his trusty band

was diminished to two thousand, and at last to five hundred, volunteers.

The _cral_, [28] or despot of the Servians received him with general

hospitality; but the ally was insensibly degraded to a suppliant, a

hostage, a captive; and in this miserable dependence, he waited at the

door of the Barbarian, who could dispose of the life and liberty of a

Roman emperor. The most tempting offers could not persuade the cral to

violate his trust; but he soon inclined to the stronger side; and his

friend was dismissed without injury to a new vicissitude of hopes and

perils. Near six years the flame of discord burnt with various success

and unabated rage: the cities were distracted by the faction of the

nobles and the plebeians; the Cantacuzeni and PalÊologi: and the

Bulgarians, the Servians, and the Turks, were invoked on both sides

as the instruments of private ambition and the common ruin. The regent

deplored the calamities, of which he was the author and victim: and his

own experience might dictate a just and lively remark on the different

nature of foreign and civil war. "The former," said he, "is the external

warmth of summer, always tolerable, and often beneficial; the latter is

the deadly heat of a fever, which consumes without a remedy the vitals

of the constitution." [29]

[Footnote 271: Cantacuzene asserts, that in all the cities, the populace

were on the side of the emperor, the aristocracy on his. The

populace took the opportunity of rising and plundering the wealthy as

Cantacuzenites, vol. iii. c. 29 Ages of common oppression and ruin had

not extinguished these republican factions.--M.]

[Footnote 28: The princes of Servia (Ducange, Famil. DalmaticÊ, &c.,

c. 2, 3, 4, 9) were styled Despots in Greek, and Cral in their native

idiom, (Ducange, Gloss. GrÊc. p. 751.) That title, the equivalent

of king, appears to be of Sclavonic origin, from whence it has been

borrowed by the Hungarians, the modern Greeks, and even by the Turks,

(Leunclavius, Pandect. Turc. p. 422,) who reserve the name of Padishah

for the emperor. To obtain the latter instead of the former is the

ambition of the French at Constantinople, (Aversissement ‡ l'Histoire de

Timur Bec, p. 39.)]

[Footnote 29: Nic. Gregoras, l. xii. c. 14. It is surprising that

Cantacuzene has not inserted this just and lively image in his own

writings.]

The introduction of barbarians and savages into the contests of

civilized nations, is a measure pregnant with shame and mischief; which

the interest of the moment may compel, but which is reprobated by the

best principles of humanity and reason. It is the practice of both sides

to accuse their enemies of the guilt of the first alliances; and those

who fail in their negotiations are loudest in their censure of the

example which they envy and would gladly imitate. The Turks of Asia were

less barbarous perhaps than the shepherds of Bulgaria and Servia; but

their religion rendered them implacable foes of Rome and Christianity.

To acquire the friendship of their emirs, the two factions vied with

each other in baseness and profusion: the dexterity of Cantacuzene

obtained the preference: but the succor and victory were dearly

purchased by the marriage of his daughter with an infidel, the captivity

of many thousand Christians, and the passage of the Ottomans into

Europe, the last and fatal stroke in the fall of the Roman empire. The

inclining scale was decided in his favor by the death of Apocaucus, the

just though singular retribution of his crimes. A crowd of nobles or

plebeians, whom he feared or hated, had been seized by his orders in

the capital and the provinces; and the old palace of Constantine was

assigned as the place of their confinement. Some alterations in raising

the walls, and narrowing the cells, had been ingeniously contrived

to prevent their escape, and aggravate their misery; and the work

was incessantly pressed by the daily visits of the tyrant. His guards

watched at the gate, and as he stood in the inner court to overlook

the architects, without fear or suspicion, he was assaulted and

laid breathless on the ground, by two [291] resolute prisoners of the

PalÊologian race, [30] who were armed with sticks, and animated by

despair. On the rumor of revenge and liberty, the captive multitude

broke their fetters, fortified their prison, and exposed from the

battlements the tyrant's head, presuming on the favor of the people and

the clemency of the empress. Anne of Savoy might rejoice in the fall of

a haughty and ambitious minister, but while she delayed to resolve or

to act, the populace, more especially the mariners, were excited by the

widow of the great duke to a sedition, an assault, and a massacre. The

prisoners (of whom the far greater part were guiltless or inglorious of

the deed) escaped to a neighboring church: they were slaughtered at the

foot of the altar; and in his death the monster was not less bloody and

venomous than in his life. Yet his talents alone upheld the cause of the

young emperor; and his surviving associates, suspicious of each other,

abandoned the conduct of the war, and rejected the fairest terms of

accommodation. In the beginning of the dispute, the empress felt, and

complained, that she was deceived by the enemies of Cantacuzene: the

patriarch was employed to preach against the forgiveness of injuries;

and her promise of immortal hatred was sealed by an oath, under the

penalty of excommunication. [31] But Anne soon learned to hate without a

teacher: she beheld the misfortunes of the empire with the indifference

of a stranger: her jealousy was exasperated by the competition of a

rival empress; and on the first symptoms of a more yielding temper, she

threatened the patriarch to convene a synod, and degrade him from

his office. Their incapacity and discord would have afforded the most

decisive advantage; but the civil war was protracted by the weakness

of both parties; and the moderation of Cantacuzene has not escaped

the reproach of timidity and indolence. He successively recovered the

provinces and cities; and the realm of his pupil was measured by the

walls of Constantinople; but the metropolis alone counterbalanced the

rest of the empire; nor could he attempt that important conquest till he

had secured in his favor the public voice and a private correspondence.

An Italian, of the name of Facciolati, [32] had succeeded to the office

of great duke: the ships, the guards, and the golden gate, were subject

to his command; but his humble ambition was bribed to become the

instrument of treachery; and the revolution was accomplished without

danger or bloodshed. Destitute of the powers of resistance, or the hope

of relief, the inflexible Anne would have still defended the palace,

and have smiled to behold the capital in flames, rather than in the

possession of a rival. She yielded to the prayers of her friends and

enemies; and the treaty was dictated by the conqueror, who professed a

loyal and zealous attachment to the son of his benefactor. The marriage

of his daughter with John PalÊologus was at length consummated:

the hereditary right of the pupil was acknowledged; but the sole

administration during ten years was vested in the guardian. Two emperors

and three empresses were seated on the Byzantine throne; and a general

amnesty quieted the apprehensions, and confirmed the property, of the

most guilty subjects. The festival of the coronation and nuptials was

celebrated with the appearances of concord and magnificence, and both

were equally fallacious. During the late troubles, the treasures of

the state, and even the furniture of the palace, had been alienated or

embezzled; the royal banquet was served in pewter or earthenware; and

such was the proud poverty of the times, that the absence of gold and

jewels was supplied by the paltry artifices of glass and gilt-leather.

[33]

[Footnote 291: Nicephorus says four, p.734.]

[Footnote 30: The two avengers were both PalÊologi, who might resent,

with royal indignation, the shame of their chains. The tragedy of

Apocaucus may deserve a peculiar reference to Cantacuzene (l. iii. c.

86) and Nic. Gregoras, (l. xiv. c. 10.)]

[Footnote 31: Cantacuzene accuses the patriarch, and spares the empress,

the mother of his sovereign, (l. iii. 33, 34,) against whom Nic.

Gregoras expresses a particular animosity, (l. xiv. 10, 11, xv. 5.) It

is true that they do not speak exactly of the same time.]

[Footnote 32: The traitor and treason are revealed by Nic. Gregoras,

(l. xv. c. 8;) but the name is more discreetly suppressed by his great

accomplice, (Cantacuzen. l. iii. c. 99.)]

[Footnote 33: Nic. Greg. l. xv. 11. There were, however, some true

pearls, but very thinly sprinkled. The rest of the stones had only

pantodaphn croian proV to diaugeV.]

I hasten to conclude the personal history of John Cantacuzene. [34] He

triumphed and reigned; but his reign and triumph were clouded by the

discontent of his own and the adverse faction. His followers might style

the general amnesty an act of pardon for his enemies, and of oblivion

for his friends: [35] in his cause their estates had been forfeited or

plundered; and as they wandered naked and hungry through the streets,

they cursed the selfish generosity of a leader, who, on the throne of

the empire, might relinquish without merit his private inheritance. The

adherents of the empress blushed to hold their lives and fortunes by the

precarious favor of a usurper; and the thirst of revenge was concealed

by a tender concern for the succession, and even the safety, of her son.

They were justly alarmed by a petition of the friends of Cantacuzene,

that they might be released from their oath of allegiance to the

PalÊologi, and intrusted with the defence of some cautionary towns; a

measure supported with argument and eloquence; and which was rejected

(says the Imperial historian) "by _my_ sublime, and almost incredible

virtue." His repose was disturbed by the sound of plots and seditions;

and he trembled lest the lawful prince should be stolen away by some

foreign or domestic enemy, who would inscribe his name and his wrongs in

the banners of rebellion. As the son of Andronicus advanced in the years

of manhood, he began to feel and to act for himself; and his rising

ambition was rather stimulated than checked by the imitation of his

father's vices. If we may trust his own professions, Cantacuzene labored

with honest industry to correct these sordid and sensual appetites, and

to raise the mind of the young prince to a level with his fortune. In

the Servian expedition, the two emperors showed themselves in cordial

harmony to the troops and provinces; and the younger colleague was

initiated by the elder in the mysteries of war and government. After the

conclusion of the peace, PalÊologus was left at Thessalonica, a royal

residence, and a frontier station, to secure by his absence the peace

of Constantinople, and to withdraw his youth from the temptations of a

luxurious capital. But the distance weakened the powers of control,

and the son of Andronicus was surrounded with artful or unthinking

companions, who taught him to hate his guardian, to deplore his exile,

and to vindicate his rights. A private treaty with the cral or despot

of Servia was soon followed by an open revolt; and Cantacuzene, on

the throne of the elder Andronicus, defended the cause of age and

prerogative, which in his youth he had so vigorously attacked. At his

request the empress-mother undertook the voyage of Thessalonica, and the

office of mediation: she returned without success; and unless Anne of

Savoy was instructed by adversity, we may doubt the sincerity, or at

least the fervor, of her zeal. While the regent grasped the sceptre with

a firm and vigorous hand, she had been instructed to declare, that the

ten years of his legal administration would soon elapse; and that, after

a full trial of the vanity of the world, the emperor Cantacuzene sighed

for the repose of a cloister, and was ambitious only of a heavenly

crown. Had these sentiments been genuine, his voluntary abdication would

have restored the peace of the empire, and his conscience would have

been relieved by an act of justice. PalÊologus alone was responsible for

his future government; and whatever might be his vices, they were

surely less formidable than the calamities of a civil war, in which the

Barbarians and infidels were again invited to assist the Greeks in their

mutual destruction. By the arms of the Turks, who now struck a deep and

everlasting root in Europe, Cantacuzene prevailed in the third contest

in which he had been involved; and the young emperor, driven from the

sea and land, was compelled to take shelter among the Latins of the Isle

of Tenedos. His insolence and obstinacy provoked the victor to a step

which must render the quarrel irreconcilable; and the association of

his son Matthew, whom he invested with the purple, established the

succession in the family of the Cantacuzeni. But Constantinople was

still attached to the blood of her ancient princes; and this last

injury accelerated the restoration of the rightful heir. A noble Genoese

espoused the cause of PalÊologus, obtained a promise of his sister, and

achieved the revolution with two galleys and two thousand five hundred

auxiliaries. Under the pretence of distress, they were admitted into the

lesser port; a gate was opened, and the Latin shout of, "Long life and

victory to the emperor, John PalÊologus!" was answered by a general

rising in his favor. A numerous and loyal party yet adhered to the

standard of Cantacuzene: but he asserts in his history (does he hope for

belief?) that his tender conscience rejected the assurance of conquest;

that, in free obedience to the voice of religion and philosophy, he

descended from the throne and embraced with pleasure the monastic habit

and profession. [36] So soon as he ceased to be a prince, his successor

was not unwilling that he should be a saint: the remainder of his life

was devoted to piety and learning; in the cells of Constantinople

and Mount Athos, the monk Joasaph was respected as the temporal and

spiritual father of the emperor; and if he issued from his retreat, it

was as the minister of peace, to subdue the obstinacy, and solicit the

pardon, of his rebellious son. [37]

[Footnote 34: From his return to Constantinople, Cantacuzene continues

his history and that of the empire, one year beyond the abdication of

his son Matthew, A.D. 1357, (l. iv. c. l--50, p. 705--911.) Nicephorus

Gregoras ends with the synod of Constantinople, in the year 1351, (l.

xxii. c. 3, p. 660; the rest, to the conclusion of the xxivth book, p.

717, is all controversy;) and his fourteen last books are still MSS. in

the king of France's library.]

[Footnote 35: The emperor (Cantacuzen. l. iv. c. 1) represents his own

virtues, and Nic. Gregoras (l. xv. c. 11) the complaints of his friends,

who suffered by its effects. I have lent them the words of our poor

cavaliers after the Restoration.]

[Footnote 36: The awkward apology of Cantacuzene, (l. iv. c. 39--42,)

who relates, with visible confusion, his own downfall, may be supplied

by the less accurate, but more honest, narratives of Matthew Villani (l.

iv. c. 46, in the Script. Rerum Ital. tom. xiv. p. 268) and Ducas, (c

10, 11.)]

[Footnote 37: Cantacuzene, in the year 1375, was honored with a letter

from the pope, (Fleury, Hist. EcclÈs. tom. xx. p. 250.) His death

is placed by a respectable authority on the 20th of November, 1411,

(Ducange, Fam. Byzant. p. 260.) But if he were of the age of his

companion Andronicus the Younger, he must have lived 116 years; a rare

instance of longevity, which in so illustrious a person would have

attracted universal notice.]

Yet in the cloister, the mind of Cantacuzene was still exercised by

theological war. He sharpened a controversial pen against the Jews

and Mahometans; [38] and in every state he defended with equal zeal the

divine light of Mount Thabor, a memorable question which consummates the

religious follies of the Greeks. The fakirs of India, [39] and the

monks of the Oriental church, were alike persuaded, that in the total

abstraction of the faculties of the mind and body, the purer spirit

may ascend to the enjoyment and vision of the Deity. The opinion and

practice of the monasteries of Mount Athos [40] will be best represented

in the words of an abbot, who flourished in the eleventh century. "When

thou art alone in thy cell," says the ascetic teacher, "shut thy door,

and seat thyself in a corner: raise thy mind above all things vain and

transitory; recline thy beard and chin on thy breast; turn thy eyes and

thy thoughts toward the middle of thy belly, the region of the navel;

and search the place of the heart, the seat of the soul. At first, all

will be dark and comfortless; but if you persevere day and night, you

will feel an ineffable joy; and no sooner has the soul discovered the

place of the heart, than it is involved in a mystic and ethereal light."

This light, the production of a distempered fancy, the creature of an

empty stomach and an empty brain, was adored by the Quietists as the

pure and perfect essence of God himself; and as long as the folly was

confined to Mount Athos, the simple solitaries were not inquisitive

how the divine essence could be a _material_ substance, or how an

_immaterial_ substance could be perceived by the eyes of the body. But

in the reign of the younger Andronicus, these monasteries were visited

by Barlaam, [41] a Calabrian monk, who was equally skilled in philosophy

and theology; who possessed the language of the Greeks and Latins; and

whose versatile genius could maintain their opposite creeds, according

to the interest of the moment. The indiscretion of an ascetic revealed

to the curious traveller the secrets of mental prayer and Barlaam

embraced the opportunity of ridiculing the Quietists, who placed the

soul in the navel; of accusing the monks of Mount Athos of heresy

and blasphemy. His attack compelled the more learned to renounce or

dissemble the simple devotion of their brethren; and Gregory Palamas

introduced a scholastic distinction between the essence and operation

of God. His inaccessible essence dwells in the midst of an uncreated

and eternal light; and this beatific vision of the saints had been

manifested to the disciples on Mount Thabor, in the transfiguration

of Christ. Yet this distinction could not escape the reproach of

polytheism; the eternity of the light of Thabor was fiercely denied; and

Barlaam still charged the Palamites with holding two eternal substances,

a visible and an invisible God. From the rage of the monks of Mount

Athos, who threatened his life, the Calabrian retired to Constantinople,

where his smooth and specious manners introduced him to the favor of the

great domestic and the emperor. The court and the city were involved

in this theological dispute, which flamed amidst the civil war; but

the doctrine of Barlaam was disgraced by his flight and apostasy: the

Palamites triumphed; and their adversary, the patriarch John of Apri,

was deposed by the consent of the adverse factions of the state. In the

character of emperor and theologian, Cantacuzene presided in the synod

of the Greek church, which established, as an article of faith, the

uncreated light of Mount Thabor; and, after so many insults, the reason

of mankind was slightly wounded by the addition of a single absurdity.

Many rolls of paper or parchment have been blotted; and the impenitent

sectaries, who refused to subscribe the orthodox creed, were deprived

of the honors of Christian burial; but in the next age the question was

forgotten; nor can I learn that the axe or the fagot were employed for

the extirpation of the Barlaamite heresy. [42]

[Footnote 38: His four discourses, or books, were printed at Basil,

1543, (Fabric Bibliot. GrÊc. tom. vi. p. 473.) He composed them to

satisfy a proselyte who was assaulted with letters from his friends of

Ispahan. Cantacuzene had read the Koran; but I understand from Maracci

that he adopts the vulgar prejudices and fables against Mahomet and his

religion.]

[Footnote 39: See the Voyage de Bernier, tom. i. p. 127.]

[Footnote 40: Mosheim, Institut. Hist. EcclÈs. p. 522, 523. Fleury,

Hist. EcclÈs. tom. xx. p. 22, 24, 107--114, &c. The former unfolds the

causes with the judgment of a philosopher, the latter transcribes and

transcribes and translates with the prejudices of a Catholic priest.]

[Footnote 41: Basnage (in Canisii Antiq. Lectiones, tom. iv. p.

363--368) has investigated the character and story of Barlaam. The

duplicity of his opinions had inspired some doubts of the identity

of his person. See likewise Fabricius, (Bibliot. GrÊc. tom. x. p.

427--432.)]

[Footnote 42: See Cantacuzene (l. ii. c. 39, 40, l. iv. c. 3, 23, 24,

25) and Nic. Gregoras, (l. xi. c. 10, l. xv. 3, 7, &c.,) whose last

books, from the xixth to xxivth, are almost confined to a subject so

interesting to the authors. Boivin, (in Vit. Nic. GregorÊ,) from the

unpublished books, and Fabricius, (Bibliot. GrÊc. tom. x. p. 462--473,)

or rather Montfaucon, from the MSS. of the Coislin library, have added

some facts and documents.]

History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire — Volume 6(#895) · 第 20 / 58 段