ATTACKS IN OTHER PARTS OF THE CITY: BY ZAGAN AND CARAJA; BY
FLEET; THE BROTHERS BOCCHIARDI HOLD THEIR OWN; PANIC WHEN
ENTRY OF TURKS BECAME KNOWN; INCIDENT OF SAINT THEODOSIA’S
CHURCH; MASSACRE AND SUBSEQUENT PILLAGE; CROWD IN SAINT
SOPHIA CAPTURED; HORRORS OF SACK; NUMBERS KILLED OR CAPTURED;
ENDEAVOURS TO ESCAPE FROM CITY; PANIC IN GALATA; MAHOMET’S
ENTRY; SAINT SOPHIA BECOMES A MOSQUE; FATE OF LEADING
PRISONERS: ATTEMPTS TO REPEOPLE CAPITAL.
[Sidenote: Entry of Turkish army.]
The author of the Turkish Taj-ut-Tavarikh or ‘Crown of History,’
written by Khodja Sad-ud-din, states that after the sultan’s troops had
forced a way into the city--not, as he is careful to explain, through
any of the gates, but across the broken wall between Top Capou and the
Adrianople Gate--they went round and opened the neighbouring gates from
the inside, and that the first so opened was the Adrianople Gate. Then
the army entered through these gates in regular order, division by
division.[458]
While the principal assault was that made under the sultan’s own
eyes in the Lycus valley, the city had been elsewhere simultaneously
attacked. Though all other attacks sink into insignificance beside
this, yet they are deserving of notice. The most important were those
made by Zagan Pasha from one or more large and specially constructed
pontoons which had been brought as close as possible to the walls at
the western end of the Golden Horn and by Caraja Pasha between the
Adrianople Gate and Tekfour Serai.
[Sidenote: Attacks by Zagan and Caraja fail.]
Zagan had brought all his division across the bridge near Aivan Serai,
and his soldiers, during the early morning, had made a continuous
series of attempts to scale the walls from the narrow strip of land
between them and the water, while his archers and fusiliers attempted
to cover the attacking parties from the pontoons. His efforts
were aided by the crews on board the seventy ships which had been
transported across Pera Hill and which were now stationed at intervals
extending from the pontoons to the Phanar. They were stoutly and
successfully opposed by Gabriel Trevisano, who had charge of the walls
upon the Horn as far as the Phanar.[459]
Caraja’s vigorous assault, as has been already mentioned, was at one
of the three places where Mahomet boasted that his cannon had made a
way into the city. It was probably a part of his division which had
followed the discoverers of the open Kerkoporta into the city. Zagan
and Caraja were, however, defeated.[460]
[Sidenote: By fleet also.]
The Turkish fleet under Hamoud had done its part elsewhere. During the
night it had come in force to the boom and had taken up a position
parallel to it. When, however, the admiral saw that there were against
him ten great and other smaller ships, all ready for the defence, he
carried out the orders which had been given on the previous evening,
passed round Seraglio Point, and took up a position opposite the walls
on the side of the Marmora, where the caloyers or monks were among
the defenders. But all the efforts of the Turks in the fleet on the
side of the Marmora failed to effect an entrance. Small as was the
number of the men dispersed along the walls, they held their own and
repulsed all attempts to scale them. It was only when they saw the
Turks in their rear that they recognised that their struggle had been
in vain. Then, indeed, some flung themselves in despair from the
walls; others surrendered in hope of saving their lives. The walls were
abandoned.[461] Once the Turks had succeeded in effecting their entry
through the stockade in the Lycus valley, followed as such entry was
by the marching in of the divisions through the ordinary gates, the
defence of the city was hopeless.
Probably among the earliest from the fleet to effect an entry were men
who appear to have landed at the Jews’ quarter, which was near the
Horaia Gate on the side of the Golden Horn.[462]
The two brothers Paul and Troilus Bocchiardi in the highest part of the
Myriandrion, near the Adrianople Gate, maintained their resistance for
some time after they had observed that the Turks were pouring in on
their left. Seeing that further resistance was useless, they determined
to look after their own safety and to make for the ships. In doing
so they were surrounded, but fought their way through the enemy and
escaped to Galata.[463] Greeks and Latins alike, who were defending the
walls on the Marmora and Golden Horn, judged that it was now impossible
to hold them. From the latter position they could see that the Venetian
and imperial flags which had waved over the towers from the Adrianople
Gate down to the sea had been replaced by the Turkish ensigns. They
were, indeed, soon attacked in the rear. The crews of the Turkish
ships, likewise learning from the hoisting of the Turkish flags in lieu
of those of St. Mark and the empire that their comrades were already
within the city, made more strenuous efforts than before to scale the
walls, and in doing so met with little resistance when the defenders
saw the Turks on their rear.[464]
The church of St. Theodosia--now known as Gul Jami, or the Mosque of
the Bose, still a prominent building a short distance to the west of
the present inner bridge--was crowded with worshippers who had passed
the night in prayers to the Saint for the safety of the city. The 29th
of May was her feast, and a procession of worshippers was met and
attacked by a band of Turks, who had made their way to the Plateia,
probably the present Vefa. Those who took part in the procession,
mostly women, were apparently among the first victims after the capture
of the city.
[Sidenote: General panic throughout city.]
The Greek and Italian ships had for some time, with the aid of the
defenders, prevented the men from the Turkish vessels from scaling
the walls. When, however, the Turkish sailors succeeded in making
their entry into the city, the Christian ships began to take measures
for their own safety. The neighbouring gates had been thrown open,
and the Turkish sailors joined their countrymen in the plunder and
slaughter. Their ships both in the Horn and on the side of the Marmora
were, according to Barbaro, absolutely deserted by their crews in
their eagerness after loot. The defenders fled to their homes, and
Ducas regretfully observes that in so doing some were captured; others
found neither wife, child, nor possessions, but were themselves made
prisoners and marched off. The old men and women who could not walk
with the other captives were killed and their babes thrown into the
streets. From the moment it was known that the Turkish troops had
entered there was a general and well-founded panic. The Moscovite says
that there was fighting in the streets, that the people threw down upon
the invaders tiles and any available missiles, and that the opposition
was so severe that the pashas became afraid and persuaded the sultan
to issue an amnesty. But the story is improbable. There were few men
within the city capable of fighting except those who had been at the
walls. When there became a ‘Sauve qui peut!’ these men hastened, as
Ducas reports, to their homes. That many of the fugitives, even old
men and women, knowing the fate before them and their children, may
have fought in desperation, willing to die rather than be captured
by an enemy who spared neither men in his cruelty nor women in his
lust, is likely enough, but that there was anything like an organised
resistance in the streets is incredible.[465]
[Sidenote: General slaughter during half the day.]
The Turks seem, indeed, to have anticipated greater resistance than
they met with. They could not believe that the city was without more
defenders than those who had been at the walls. This, indeed, is
their sole excuse for beginning what several writers describe as a
general slaughter. From the entry of the army and camp-followers until
midday this slaughter went on. The Turks, says Critobulus,[466] had
been taunted by the besieged with their powerlessness to capture the
city and were enraged at the sufferings they had undergone. During
the forenoon all whom they encountered were put to the sword, women
and men, old and young, of every condition.[467] The Turks slew all
throughout the city whom they met in their first onslaught.[468]
The statements made by the spectators of such scenes as they themselves
witnessed are apt to be exaggerations, but a Turkish massacre without
elements of the grossest brutality has never taken place. The
declaration of Phrantzes that in some places the earth could no longer
be seen on account of the multitude of dead bodies is sufficiently
rhetorical to convey its own corrective.[469] So, too, is the account
by Barbaro of the numbers of heads of dead Christians and Turks in
the Golden Horn and the Marmora being so great as to remind him of
melons floating in his own Venetian canals, and of the waters being
coloured with blood.[470] That many nuns and other women preferred to
throw themselves into the wells rather than fall into the hands of
the Turks may be true. Their glorious successors in the Greek War of
Independence, and many Armenian women during the massacres in 1895–6,
chose a similar fate in preference to surrendering to Turkish captors.
Probably the truth is that an indiscriminate slaughter went on only
till midday. For the love of slaughter was tempered by the desire for
gain. The young of both sexes, and especially the strong and beautiful,
could be held as slaves or sold or ransomed. The statement of Leonard
is therefore probably correct, that all who resisted were killed, that
the Turks slew the weak, the decrepit and sick persons generally, but
that they spared the lives of others who surrendered.
The Turkish historian Sad-ud-din says, ‘Having received permission to
loot, they thronged into the city with joyous heart, and there, seizing
their possessions and families, they made the wretched misbelievers
weep. They acted in accordance with the precept, “Slaughter their aged
and capture their youth.”’[471]
The brave Cretan sailors, who were defending the walls near the Horaia
Gate, took refuge in certain towers named Basil, Leo, and Alexis. They
could not be captured, and would not surrender. In the afternoon,
however, their stubborn resistance being reported to the sultan, he
consented to allow them to leave the city with all their belongings, an
offer which they reluctantly accepted.[472] The Cretans seem to have
been the last Christians who quitted their posts as defenders of the
city.
[Sidenote: Flight towards ships.]
The panic caused by the morning’s massacre was general. Men, women,
and children sought to get outside the city, to escape into the
neighbouring country, or to reach the ships in the harbour. Some were
struck down on their way; others were drowned before they could get on
board. The foreigners naturally made for their own ships. Some of them
have placed on record the manner of their escape. Tetaldi says that
‘the great galleys of Romania remained[473] till midday trying to save
what Christians they could, and receiving four hundred on board,’ among
whom was one named Tetaldi, who had been on guard very far from the
place where the Turks entered.’ He stripped himself and swam to one of
these vessels, where he was taken on board. Barbaro relates that when
the cry was raised that the Turks had entered the city everybody took
to flight and ran to the sea in order to seek refuge in the Greek and
foreign ships.
[Sidenote: Plunder organised.]
It was a pitiable sight, says Ducas, to see the shore outside the walls
all full of men and women, monks and nuns, shouting to the ships and
praying to be taken on board. The ships took as many as they could,
but the greater number had to be left behind. The wretched inhabitants
expected no mercy, nor was any shown to them. Happily, the Turks had
now become keener after plunder than after blood. When they found
that there was no organised force to resist them, they turned their
attention solely to loot. They set about the pillage of the city with
something like system. One body devoted its attention to the wealthy
mansions, dividing themselves for this purpose into companies; another
undertook the plunder of the churches; a third robbed the smaller
houses and shops. These various bands overran the city, killing in
case of resistance, and taking as slaves men, women and children,
priests and laymen, regardless of age or condition. No tragedy, says
Critobulus, could equal it in horror. Women, young and well educated;
beautiful maidens of noble family, who had never been exposed to the
eye of man, were torn from their chaste chambers with brutal violence
and publicly treated in horrible fashion. Virgins consecrated to God
were dragged by their hair from the churches and were ruthlessly
stripped of every ornament they possessed. A horde of savage brutes
committed unnameable atrocities, and hell was let loose.[474]
The conquering horde had spread themselves all over the city. For,
while the regular troops had probably been kept in hand on the chance
of resistance, there were others who could not be restrained from
going in search of loot. Some even among the first who had entered
by the Kerkoporta had rushed to plunder the famous monastery of the
Virgin, the small chapel of which, known as the Kahriè mosque, still
attests by its exquisite mosaics the wealth and artistic appreciation
of its former occupants. The famous picture attributed to St. Luke
was cut into strips. Others among them rushed off towards the many
churches in Petra. These were, however, only a small number. It was
in the afternoon of the day when the horde had entered across the
broken walls and through the gates that they swept like a torrent over
the city. Soon the organised bands, which had divided the city among
them in order to capture the population and to seize all the gold and
silver ornaments which they could lay hands on, began to amass their
treasures. Old men and women, children, young men and maidens were tied
together in order to mark to whom they belonged.
The loot from private houses and churches was put on one side for
subsequent division and the partition was made with considerable
method. Small flags were hoisted to indicate to other companies the
houses plundered, and everywhere throughout the city these signals were
waving, sometimes a single house having as many as ten.[475]
[Sidenote: St. Sophia crowded with refugees.]
A body of troops more amenable to discipline than we may suppose the
Bashi-bazouks to have been hastened across the city towards Saint
Sophia. Many inhabitants took refuge in the churches, some probably
with the idea that the Turks would recognise that the sacred buildings
should afford sanctuary; others in the hope or possible belief of some
kind of miraculous interference on their behalf. Ducas relates that a
crowd of affrighted citizens ran to the great church of Holy Wisdom
because they believed in a prophecy that the Turks would be allowed to
enter the city and slaughter the Romans until they reached the column
of Constantine--the present Burnt Column--but that then an angel would
descend from heaven with a sword and place it and the government of
the city in the hands of one whom he would select, calling upon him to
avenge the people of the Lord, and that thereupon the Turks would be
driven from the West. It was on this account, he declares, that the
Great Church was, within an hour from the tidings of the entry of the
Turks becoming known, filled with a great crowd who believed themselves
to be safe. By so doing they had only rendered their capture more easy.
The first detachment of Turks who arrived and found the doors closed
soon succeeded in breaking in. The great crowd were taken as in a
drag-net, says Critobulus. The miserable refugees thus made prisoners
were tied or chained together and any resistance offered was at once
overcome. Some were taken to the Turkish ships, others to the camp, and
the loot collected was dealt with in the same manner. The scene was
terrible, but, unhappily, one which was destined to be reproduced with
many even worse features in Turkish history, because, while the chief
object of the Turkish hordes in 1453 was mainly to capture slaves and
other plunder, the attacks on many congregations in later years, down
to the time of the holocaust of Armenians at Ourfa on December 28 and
29, 1895, were mainly for the sake of slaughter. In the Great Church
itself the Turks struggled with each other for the possession of the
most beautiful women. Damsels who had been brought up in luxury among
the remnants of Byzantine nobility, nuns who had been shut off from
the world, became the subjects of violence among their captors. Their
garments were torn from them by men who would not relinquish their
prizes to others. Masters and mistresses were tied to their servants;
dignitaries of the Church with the lowest menials. The captors drove
their flocks of victims before them in order to lodge them in safety
under charge of their comrades and to return as quickly as possible
to take a new batch. Ropes, ribbons, handkerchiefs were requisitioned
to bind them. The sacred eikons were torn down and burnt, the altar
cloths, chandeliers, chalices, carpets, ornaments--indeed everything
that was valuable and portable--were carried off. The greatest
misfortune of all, says Phrantzes, was to see the Temple of the Holy
Wisdom, the Earthly Heaven, the Throne of the Glory of God, defiled
by these miscreants. One would hope that his story of its defilement
and of the scenes of open profligacy is exaggerated.[476] The other
churches were plundered in like manner. They furnished a plentiful
harvest. The richly embroidered robes, chasubles woven with gold and
ornamented with pearls and precious stones, and church furniture, were
greedily seized, the ornaments being torn from many of the objects and
the rest thrown aside. A crucifix was carried in mock solemnity in
procession surmounted by a Janissary’s cap.
[Sidenote: Wanton destruction of books.]
While we can understand the indignation of the devout believers at the
contemptuous destruction of sacred relics for the sake of the caskets
in which they were contained, we can hardly regret the disappearance
of the so-called sacred objects themselves. But it is otherwise with
the destruction of books. The professors of Islam, whatever may have
been their conduct in regard to particular libraries, have usually
held the all-sufficiency of the Koran. That which contradicts its
teaching ought to be destroyed; that which is in accordance with it is
superfluous. The libraries of the churches, whatever Mahomet himself
may have believed, were to the ignorant fanatical masses which followed
him anti-Islamic. The only value of books was the amount for which they
could be sold. Critobulus says that not only the holy and religious
books, but also those treating of profane sciences and of philosophy,
were either thrown into the fire or trampled irreverently under foot,
but that the greater part were sold--not for the sake of the price but
in mockery--for two or three pence or even farthings.[477]
The ships of the Turkish fleet had among their cargo, says Ducas, an
innumerable quantity of books.[478] In the booty collected by the Turks
they were so plentiful and cheap, that for a nummus--probably worth
sixpence--ten volumes were sold containing the works of Plato and
Aristotle, treatises on theology and other sciences.
Christian and Moslem writers agree in stating that the sack of the
city continued, as Mahomet had promised, for three days. Khodja
Sad-ud-din, after affirming that the soldiers of Islam ‘acted in
accordance with the precept, “Slaughter their aged and capture their
youth,”’ adds, with the Oriental imagery of Turkish historians: ‘For
three days and nights there was, with the imperial permission, a
general sack, and the victorious troops, through the richness of the
spoil, entwined the arm of possession round the neck of their desires,
and by binding the lustre of their hearts to the locks of the damsels,
beautiful as houris, and by the sight of the sweetly smiling fair
ones, they made the eye of their hopes the participator in their good
fortune.’[479]
It must, however, not be forgotten that although those who took the
principal part in the sack were Mahometans, yet there were also no
small numbers of Christian renegades.[480]
[Sidenote: Numbers killed or captured.]
As to the number of persons captured or killed, the estimates do not
greatly differ.
Leonard states that sixty thousand captives were bound together
preparatory to their final distribution. In such circumstances
exaggeration is usual and almost unavoidable. But Critobulus, writing
some years afterwards, estimates that the number of Greeks and Italians
killed during the siege and after the capture was four thousand, that
five hundred of the army and upwards of fifty thousand of the rest of
the population were reduced to slavery.[481]
Such of the Genoese and Venetians as had succeeded in escaping from
the city were preparing to get away to sea with all haste. Happily the
Turkish ships had been deserted by their crews, who were busy looking
after their share of plunder on shore.[482] In their absence a large
number of combatants, mostly foreigners, contrived to take refuge
either on board some of the various ships in the harbour or in Galata.
The Venetian Diedo, who had been appointed captain of the harbour, when
he saw that the city was taken, went over to the podestà of Galata,
says Barbaro, to consult whether he should get his ships away or give
battle. The advice of the podestà was that he should remain until he
received an answer from Mahomet by which they would learn whether the
conqueror wanted war or peace with Venice and Genoa.
[Sidenote: Panic among foreigners.]
Meantime, the gates of Galata were closed, much to the disgust of
Barbaro himself, who was one of the Venetians thus locked in.[483]
When, however, the Genoese saw that the galleys were preparing to make
sail, Diedo and his men were allowed to leave. They went on board the
captain’s galley and pulled out to the boom, which had not yet been
opened. Two strong sailors leapt upon it with their axes and cut or
broke the chain in two.
The boom was apparently very strong, for, according to Barbaro, the
Turkish captains and crews, when they went ashore to plunder, believed
that the Christian vessels within the harbour could not escape, because
they would not be able to pass through it.[484] The ships passed
outside and went to the Double Columns, where the Turkish fleet had
been anchored, but which was now deserted. There they waited until
noon to see whether the Venetian merchant vessels would join them.
They had, however, been captured by the Turks.[485] Diedo, on learning
this, left with his galleys. Other Venetians hastened to follow. Some
of the vessels had lost a great part of their crews, and one regrets to
read that the brave Trevisano was left a prisoner in the hands of the
Turks. Happily for those who had reached the ships, there was a strong
north wind blowing; for, says Barbaro, ‘if there had been a head wind
we should have all been made prisoners.’ Seven Genoese galleys also got
outside the boom and escaped.[486] The remaining fifteen ships, which
belonged to Genoa, and four galleys of the emperor, were taken by the
Turks.
[Sidenote: In Galata.]
The alarm had spread to Galata, and many of its inhabitants crowded to
the shore, praying to be taken on board the Genoese ships. They were
ready to barter all they possessed for a passage. Some were captured
on their way to the ships: among them, mothers who had deserted their
children, children who had been left behind by their parents. Household
goods, and even jewels, were abandoned in the mad haste to escape from
the terror. The number of fugitives was far in excess of the carrying
capacity of the vessels which were hastily preparing to put to sea.
Mahomet, according to Ducas, knew of the preparations and flight of
many, and ground his teeth with rage because he could do nothing to
prevent their escape. Zagan Pasha, to whom the Genoese, when they saw
that Constantinople was captured, opened the gates of Galata,[487]
seeing the struggling crowd of men, women, and children attempting to
get away, and probably fearing that their flight would bring war not
only with Genoa but with other Western powers, went among the fugitives
and begged them to remain. He swore by the head of the Prophet that
they were safe, that Galata would not be attacked, and that they had
nothing to fear, since they had been friendly to Mahomet. If they went
away, he declared the sultan would be dangerous in his anger; whereas
if they remained their capitulations would be renewed on even more
favourable conditions than they had received from the emperors.
In spite of these promises, as many left the city as could. They were
hardly in time, because Hamoud, the Turkish admiral, had by this time
got his sailors in hand again and, the boom being already opened,
entered the harbour and destroyed the Greek ships which remained.[488]
The podestà and his council went to Mahomet and presented him with
the keys of Galata. He received them graciously and gave them specious
promises. The report of the podestà himself, written less than a month
after the capture of the city, confirms in its essential features
the accounts given by Ducas, Leonard, and others of the panic which
seized the population under his rule. The Turks, he says, captured
many of the burgesses who had been sent to fight at the stockade. A
few managed to escape across the water and returned to their families,
while others got on board the ships and left the country. He himself
was disposed to sacrifice his life rather than abandon his charge. If
he also had left, Galata would have been sacked, and he remained to
secure its safety. ‘I therefore sent ambassadors to my lord Mahomet,
making submission and asking for the conditions of peace.’ No answer
was sent on the first day to this request, during which the ships were
getting away as fast as possible. The podestà begged their captains for
the love of God and their kindred to remain at least another day, as
he felt confident that he would be able to make peace. They, however,
refused, and sailed during the night. The statement regarding the
sultan’s anger was confirmed, for the podestà relates that Mahomet
told his ambassadors, when he learned the news of the general flight,
that he wanted to be rid of them all. Thereupon the podestà himself
went to Mahomet, who either on the same day or shortly afterwards came
into Galata and insisted that the fortifications should be so changed
that the city would be at his mercy. The walls on the sea front were
to be in great part destroyed: so also was the Tower of Galata--called
sometimes the Tower of the Holy Cross--to which one end of the boom
had been attached, and other strong portions of the defences.[489] All
the cannon were taken away from Galata and the arms and ammunition
belonging to the burgesses who had fled. Mahomet promised that these
should be returned to those who came back. Accordingly, the podestà
sent word to Chios to the merchants and other refugees that if they
returned they would receive their property.[490] Mahomet, as a pledge
of his sincerity and as the best means of convincing the Genoese
of his desire to be at peace with them, granted ‘capitulations’ by
which they were to retain most of the customs and privileges which
they had previously obtained from the empire. They were to retain the
fortress of Galata and their own laws and government; to elect their
own podestà; to have freedom of trade throughout the empire, and
keep their own churches and accustomed worship--but subject to the
prohibition of bells--and their private property and churches were to
be respected.[491]
[Sidenote: Mahomet’s entry into Constantinople.]
The massacre had been limited to the first day. The permission to
pillage had been granted for three days. On the afternoon of the day
of the capture, or possibly on the following day, Mahomet made his
triumphal entry into the city. He was surrounded by his viziers and
pashas and by a detachment of Janissaries. He came into the city
through the gate now called Top Capou, rode on horseback to the Great
Church, descended and entered. As he passed up the church he observed
a Turk who was forcing out a morsel of marble from the pavement, and
asked why he was thus damaging the building. The Turk pleaded that it
was only a building of the infidels and that he was a believer. Mahomet
had a sufficiently high opinion of the value of St. Sophia to be angry
with him. He drew his sword and struck the man, telling him at the same
time that, while he had given the prisoners and the plunder of the city
to his followers, he had reserved the buildings for himself.
[Sidenote: Hagia Sophia becomes a mosque.]
Mahomet called for an imaum, who by his orders ascended the pulpit
and made the declaration of Mahometan faith. From that time to the
present, the Temple of the Holy Wisdom of the Incarnate Word has been a
Mahometan mosque.
On the same day[492] Mahomet entered the Imperial Palace, and it is
said that as he passed through the deserted rooms in all the desolation
resulting from the plunder of a barbarous army, he quoted a Persian
couplet on the vicissitudes of mortal greatness: ‘The spider has become
watchman in the imperial palace, and has woven a curtain before the
doorway; the owl makes the royal tombs of Efrasaib re-echo with its
mournful song.’[493] The statement rests on the authority of Cantemir,
and, whether historically correct or not, such a reflection under the
circumstances is not in disaccord with what we know of the character of
the young sovereign.
[Sidenote: Fate of defenders after capture. Venetian bailey and other
leading Venetians beheaded.]
[Sidenote: Cardinal Isidore.]
The fate of the men of most eminence among the defenders of
Constantinople is illustrative of Mahomet’s methods. The bailey of the
Venetians, with his son and seven of his countrymen, was beheaded.
Among them was Contarino, the most distinguished among the Venetian
nobles, who had already been ransomed and who in breach of faith was
killed because his friends were unable to find the enormous sum of
seven thousand gold pieces for his second ransom. The consul of Spain
or the Catalans, with five or six of his companions, met with the same
fate.[494] Cardinal Isidore in his flight abandoned his clerical
robes, and, after having been captured in the disguise of a beggar and
sold into slavery, was ransomed for a few aspers.[495]
[Sidenote: Phrantzes.]
Phrantzes, the friend of the emperor and the historian of his reign,
had an even less happy experience. He suffered the hard lot of slavery
during a period of fifteen months. His wife and children were captured
and sold to the Master of the Sultan’s Horse, who had bought many other
ladies belonging to the Greek nobility. A year later he was able to
redeem his wife. But the sultan hearing of the beauty of his daughter
Thamar took her into his seraglio. She was then but fourteen years old,
and died in 1454, shortly after her captivity.[496] In December of 1453
his son John, in the fifteenth year of his age, preferring death to
infamy, was killed by the sultan’s own hand.[497]
[Sidenote: Notaras.]
Most unhappy of all was the Grand Duke Notaras. He was the most
illustrious prisoner, and was indeed next in rank to the emperor
himself. He may be taken as a type of the old Byzantine nobility. We
have seen that he had been the leader of the party which had resisted
union with Rome. On account of this opposition Notaras had incurred
the hostility of those who had accepted it, and as our sources of
information come almost exclusively from men of the Roman faith or from
those who had accepted the Union, he is not usually spoken of with
favour. Phrantzes was his rival and enemy. Ducas gives two reports
regarding his treatment by Mahomet. According to one, he was betrayed
by a captive who purchased his own liberty by the betrayal of the Grand
Duke and Orchan. At first the illustrious captive was looked upon
favourably by the sultan, who condoled with him and ordered a search
for his wife and daughters. When they were found, the sultan made them
presents and sent them to their house, declaring to the Grand Duke
that it was his intention to make him governor of the city and allow
him the same rank that he had held under the emperor. This version
is confirmed by Critobulus,[498] who adds that Mahomet was dissuaded
from appointing him governor of the city by the remonstrances of the
leading Turks, who represented that it would be dangerous. According
to the other report, Mahomet charged him with not having surrendered
the city. Notaras is represented as replying that it was neither in his
power nor in that of the emperor to do so, and to have made some remark
which increased the suspicion and hatred which the sultan felt for
his grand vizier, Halil Pasha. Whichever of these reports is correct,
no hesitation is expressed by Ducas as to what followed. On the day
following the interview, the sultan, after a drinking bout, sent for
the youngest of the sons of the Grand Duke. Notaras replied that the
Christian religion forbade a father to comply with such a request. When
the answer was reported, Mahomet ordered the eunuch to return, to take
the executioner with him, and to bring the youngest son together with
the Grand Duke and his other son. The order was obeyed and was followed
by another to put all three to death. The father asked the headsman to
allow the execution of his sons to precede his own. His reason for this
request, says Critobulus, was, lest his lads, being perhaps afraid to
die, might be tempted to save their lives by renouncing their faith.
Drawing himself up to his full height, firmly and unflinchingly, with
the stateliness of an ancient aristocrat, the old noble witnessed the
beheading of his two sons without shedding a tear or moving a muscle.
Then, having given thanks to God that he had seen them die in the faith
of Christ, Notaras bent his head to the executioner’s sword and died
like a worthy representative of the proud Roman nobility. ‘For this
man,’ says the same writer, ‘was pious and renowned for his knowledge
of spiritual things, for the loftiness of his soul and the nobility of
his life.’[499]
Including Notaras and his two sons, nine nobles of high rank were put
to death, all invincible in their faith. The heads were taken by the
executioner into the hall to show says Ducas, to the beast greedy of
blood that his commands had been obeyed.[500]
Phrantzes tells the story somewhat differently. He begins his version
by stating that the sultan, though elated with the great victory,
nevertheless showed himself to be merciless. He makes the Grand Duke
offer his wealth of pearls, precious stones, and other valuables to
Mahomet, begging him to accept them and pretending that he had kept
them to offer to his captor. In reply to the sultan’s question, Who had
given to Notaras his wealth and to the sultan the city? the captive
answered that each was the gift of God. To this the sultan retorted,
‘Then, why do you pretend that you have kept your wealth for me? Why
did you not send it to me, so that I might have rewarded you? Notaras
was thrown into prison, but was sent for next day and reproached for
not having persuaded the emperor to accept the conditions of peace
which had been submitted. Thereupon, the sultan gave the order that
on the following day he and his two sons should be put to death. They
were taken to the forum of the Xerolophon and the order was carried
out.[501] Gibbon justly remarks that neither time nor death nor his
own retreat to a monastery could extort a feeling of sympathy or
forgiveness from Phrantzes towards his personal enemy the Grand Duke.
The version given by Leonard is marked with the same personal hostility
towards Notaras which characterises that of Phrantzes. Leonard
accuses his old rival of having thrown blame both on Halil Pasha,
who had always been friendly towards the emperor, and on the Genoese
and Venetians. In the account given by both these writers they were
reporting a version spread and probably believed by the Unionist party,
as to which it is improbable that they could have had direct evidence.
What is important in the narrative of Leonard is that he confirms
the ghastly story of Ducas as to the demand for the youngest son by
the sultan.[502] The fate of the Grand Duke and his family was that
which befell all the nobles and the chief officers of the empire.
Their wives and children were generally saved, Mahomet himself taking
possession for his own harem of the fairest and distributing the rest
among his followers.[503]
[Sidenote: Orchan.]
The end of Orchan was attended by fewer circumstances of ignominy.
He had defended a part of the walls near Seraglio Point. Orchan must
always have anticipated death if he were captured. It was believed
that the sultan had determined to kill him, as an elderly member of
the reigning house, in accordance with the custom that was common in
the governing family of the Turks, not only at the time in question
but for at least three centuries later. Orchan, who was either the
son or the grandson of Suliman the brother of Mahomet the First, had
fled for safety to the emperor, who had refused to give him up and had
treated him with kindness. When it was no longer possible to hold the
towers which had been placed under his charge, he and the rest of their
defenders surrendered. Among them was a monk, with whom Orchan changed
clothes. He joined the Grand Duke, and the two lowered themselves
outside the walls, but were caught by the Turks and taken on shipboard.
Unfortunately, the rest of the defenders of the towers, who had been
taken prisoners, were brought on board the same Turkish ship. A Greek
offered to reveal Orchan and the Grand Duke if he were promised his
liberty, and, having received the assurance, pointed to the man dressed
as a monk and to Notaras. Orchan was at once beheaded and his head
taken to Mahomet.[504]
The city was made a desolation. The followers of Mahomet, soldiers and
sailors, left nothing of value except the buildings. Constantinople,
says Critobulus, was as if it had been visited by a hurricane or
had been burnt. It was as silent as a tomb. The sailors especially
were active in destruction. The churches, crypts, coffins, cellars,
every place and every thing was ransacked or broken into in search of
plunder.[505] Mahomet, according to the same writer, wept as he saw the
ravages his soldiers had wrought, and expressed his amazement at the
ruins of the city which had been given over to plunder and had been
made a desert.[506]
All the Turks who first entered the city became rich, says the Superior
of the Franciscans.[507] Captives were sent in great numbers to Asia
Minor either for sale or to the homes of the armed population who
had taken part in the siege. Only a miserable remnant remained in
Constantinople.
[Sidenote: Affection of Constantinopolitans for their city.]
The reader of the accounts of the siege, and indeed of its history
generally before 1453, cannot but be struck with the attachment shown
by its inhabitants towards their city. For them it is the Queen of
Cities, the most beautiful, the most wealthy, the most orderly, and
the most civilised in the world. There the merchant could find all the
produce of the East, and could trade with buyers from all countries.
There the student had access to the great libraries of philosophy, law,
and theology, the rich storehouse of the writings of the Christian
Fathers, and of the great classics of ancient Greece. In quietness and
security, generations of monks had copied the manuscripts of earlier
days free from the alarms which in Western and Eastern countries
alike disturbed the scholar. The Church, the lawyers and scholars had
kept alive a knowledge of the ancient language in a form in all its
essential features like that which existed in the days of Pericles.
Priests and laymen were proud to be inheritors and guardians of the
writings of classical times and to consider themselves of the same
blood as their authors. Though often almost as intolerant towards
heretics as the great sister Church of the West, they did not and could
not regard Aristotle and Plato, Leonidas and Pericles, and the rest
of their glorious predecessors as eternally lost because they had not
known Christ, and their sense of relationship with them helped to
develop a conviction of the continuity of their history, not only with
Constantine and the Roman empire, but with the more remote peoples who
had given them their language. The New Rome had for a thousand years
been towards all Eastern Christians all that the Elder Rome was to
those in the West, and their pride in its stability and security was
great. Once, and once alone, had it been captured. But the unfortunate
attack made by the West in 1204, the results of which had been so
correctly foreseen and foretold by Innocent the Third, had been in
part overcome. This new capture was infinitely more serious. The
essential difference between the two is commented on by Critobulus. By
the first the city sustained a foreign domination for sixty years and
lost much of its wealth. A great number of beautiful statues and other
works of art, coveted by the whole world, were taken away and many
more destroyed. But there the mischief stopped. The city did not lose
all its inhabitants. Wives and children were not taken away. When the
tyranny was past, the city recovered and once more it figured as the
renowned capital of an empire, though only a simulacrum of what it had
once been. It was still in the eyes of all Greek-speaking people the
leader and example of all that was good, the home of philosophy and of
every kind of learning, of science, of virtue, and in truth of all that
is best.[508] Now, all was changed: the new conquerors were Asiatics. A
false religion replaced Christianity. The capital was a desert.
The city’s situation of picturesque beauty, as well as its Christian
and historical associations, increased the love for it of its
inhabitants and made them as proud of Constantinople as ever were the
Italian citizens of Florence or Venice. It is therefore not surprising
to find that, on its conquest, the grief and the rage of those who had
lived in it are almost too great for words. She, says Critobulus, who
had formerly reigned over many people with honour, glory, and renown,
is now ruled by others and has sunk into poverty, ignominy, dishonour,
and shameful slavery. The lamentations of Ducas are as sincere as
those of Jeremiah. Its inhabitants gone; its womanhood destined to
dishonourable servitude; its nobles massacred; the very babes at the
breast butchered; the temples of God defiled: all present a spectacle
on which he enlarges with the expression of a hope that the anger
of God will be appeased and that His people will yet find favour.
Unhappily, the Greek race had entered upon the darkness of the blackest
night, and nearly four centuries had to pass before the dawn of their
new day was at hand.
[Sidenote: Mahomet’s attempts to repeople the capital.]
At a later date Mahomet himself recognised that it was necessary to
do something towards the repeopling of Constantinople. He gave orders
that five thousand families should be sent from the provinces to the
capital, and commanded the repair of the walls.[509] It does not
appear, however, that they were repaired in an efficient manner. It
is generally easy to distinguish between Turkish repairs and those
effected at an earlier date. Critobulus states that Mahomet ordered
the renewal of those parts which had been overthrown by the cannon and
of both the sea and the landward walls, which had suffered by time
and weather.[510] The sea walls were probably thoroughly repaired; of
those on the landward side probably only the Inner Wall. Experience
had shown that more than one strong wall was a disadvantage rather
than otherwise. Ducas states that the five thousand families sent to
Constantinople by Mahomet from Trebizond, Sinope, and Asprocastron
under pain of death included masons and lime-burners for repairing the
walls.[511]
[Sidenote: Attempts to induce Greeks to settle in capital.]
In order to attract population to the capital, Mahomet recognised
that it was necessary to conciliate the Greeks. It may be, as
Critobulus asserts, that he felt a genuine pity for the sufferings
of the captives. As a young man, with, for a Turk, quite exceptional
knowledge of the literary possessions of the old world, it is easy to
believe that he was desirous of satisfying the Christians, while his
general intelligence must have convinced him that trade and commerce,
from which a revenue was to be derived, would be much more likely to
flourish with them than with men of his own race. Critobulus insists
that his first intention was to employ Notaras and others of the
leading Greeks in the public service, and that he recognised when it
was too late that he had been misled into the blunder of putting them
to death, and sent away from his court some of those who had counselled
their executions, and even condemned some others to death.[512] A few
days after the conquest, he ordered the captives who formed part of his
own share in the booty to be established in houses on the slope towards
the Golden Horn. From among the noble families he selected the young
men for himself. Some of these he placed in the corps of Janissaries;
others, who were distinguished by their education, he kept near him as
pages.[513]
It was during these days that Critobulus the historian sent envoys to
the city, who took with them the submission of the islands of Imbros,
where he was living, of Lemnos and Thasos. The archons had learned
of the capture of the city. Most of them fled, fearing that admiral
Hamoud, who had returned with the fleet to Gallipoli, would attack
the inhabitants of the islands and treat them as he had done those of
Prinkipo. Critobulus, however, sent a large bakshish to Hamoud and
arranged that if the inhabitants submitted there should be no attack.
Thereupon Critobulus had sent the envoys to Constantinople, with rich
presents for the sultan, to make submission. The islanders were ordered
to pay the same taxes to the sultan as they had formerly paid to the
emperor, and thus, says the historian, were preserved from the great
danger which threatened them.[514]
Mahomet published an edict within a few weeks of the capture of the
city, that all of the former inhabitants who had paid ransom, or who
were ready to enter into an agreement with their masters to pay it
within a fixed period, should be considered free, be allowed to live
in the city, and should for a time be exempt from taxes. Phrantzes
states[515] that even on the third day after the capture an order was
issued allowing those to return who had fled from the city and who
were in hiding, promising that they should not be molested. Upon the
question whether on such return they would, as Critobulus relates, have
to pay ransom Phrantzes is silent. A few weeks later, after his visit
to Adrianople, Mahomet sent orders to various parts of his empire to
despatch families of Christians, Jews, and Turks to repeople the city.
He endeavoured to allure Greeks and other workmen by employing them
on public works, notably in the construction of a palace--for which,
Critobulus rightly says, he had chosen the most beautiful site in the
city, namely, at Seraglio Point--on the construction of the fortress
of the Seven Towers around the Golden Gate, and at the repairs of the
Inner Wall. He ordered the Turks to allow their slaves to take part in
this work, so that they might earn money not only to live but to save
enough for their ransom.[516]
[Sidenote: Toleration of Christianity decreed.]
Mahomet’s most important step towards conciliation was to decree the
toleration of Christian worship and to allow the Church to retain its
organisation. As George Scholarius had been the favourite of the Greeks
who had refused to accept the Union with Rome, Mahomet ordered search
for him. After much difficulty, he was found at Adrianople, a slave in
the house of a pasha, kept under confinement as a prisoner, but treated
with distinction. His master had recognised, or had learned, that his
captive was a man of exceptional talent. He was sent to the sultan,
who was already well disposed towards him on account of his renown in
philosophy. Scholarius made a favourable impression in the interview
by his intelligence and manners. Mahomet ordered that he should have
access to the palace when he wished, begged him always to speak freely
in their intercourse, and sent him away with valuable presents.[517]
A Record of the ecclesiastical affairs of the Orthodox Church, written
within ten years after the capture, states that Mahomet, desiring to
increase the number of the inhabitants of Constantinople, gave to the
Christians permission to follow the customs of their Churches, and,
having learned that they had no patriarch, ordered them to choose whom
they would. He promised to accept their choice and that the patriarch
should enjoy very nearly the same privileges as his predecessors. A
local synod having been called, George Scholarius was elected, and
became known as Gennadius. The sultan received him at his seraglio,
and with his own hands presented him with a valuable pastoral cross of
silver and gold, saying to him, ‘Be patriarch and be at peace. Count
upon our friendship as long as thou desirest it, and thou shalt enjoy
all the privileges of thy predecessors.’
After the interview the sultan caused him to be mounted upon a richly
caparisoned horse and conducted to the Church of the Holy Apostles,
which he presented to him as the church of the patriarchate as it had
formerly been.[518]
After the election of Gennadius, the sultan, according to Critobulus,
continued his intercourse with the new patriarch and discussed with
him questions relating to Christianity, urging him to speak his mind
freely. Mahomet even paid him visits and took with him the most learned
men whom he had persuaded to be present at his court.[519]
[Sidenote: Later attempts to repeople capital.]
During the long reign of Mahomet his attention was again and again
directed to the repeopling of his capital, In addition to the attempts
already mentioned, Critobulus recounts many other efforts made with the
same object. But the sultan’s inducements mostly failed. The Christians
mistrusted his promises, and experience showed that they were justified
in so doing. Mahomet addressed himself to the Greek noble families
and endeavoured to persuade them to return to the city. He publicly
promised that all who came back and could prove their nobility and
descent should be treated with even more distinction than had been
shown to them under the emperor and should continue to enjoy the same
rank as before. Relying on this promise, a number of them returned, on
the feast of St. Peter. They, however, paid dearly for their credulity.
Either the promise which had been given was of the hasty, spasmodic
kind which has often characterised the orders of most of the Ottoman
sultans and was repented of, or it had been given treacherously with no
idea of its being kept. The heads of the nobles soon sullied the steps
of Mahomet’s court.[520] The repeopling which could not be done by
persuasion was attempted more successfully by force.
In 1458, while Mahomet was attacking Corinth his army made a raid
in the neighbouring country and brought in more than three thousand
prisoners, men, women and children. These were sent to settle outside
the walls of Constantinople, on the lands which had been devastated
before the siege. In the following year the sultan returned from the
Peloponnesus. The artisans whom he had captured were settled in the
capital; the remainder in the neighbourhood. In the same year he
ordered that the most well-to-do inhabitants of Amastris on the Black
Sea, including all the Armenian merchants, should be sent to the
capital. It was partly to employ the workmen thus brought together that
he ordered the construction of the mosque which bears his name.
In 1460 he published an Iradè inviting all who had ever lived in the
capital to return. There were many fugitives, says Critobulus, at
Adrianople, Philippopolis, Brousa, and elsewhere, who had been sold
as slaves or had left the city before the siege: learned, noble, and
industrious men who by their ability had already gained positions of
comfort and even of wealth. All these, therefore, he transported to
the capital, giving some of them honour, others permission to build
where they liked, and to others again all that was needed to establish
themselves. He transported to the capital all the inhabitants of the
two Phocaeas. He sent his admiral in chief with forty ships into
the Archipelago for the same purpose. The people of Thasos and of
Samothracia were carried _en masse_ to the capital.[521]