BYZANTINE CONSTANTINOPLE
[Illustration: Map of Constantinople in 1422.]
BYZANTINE CONSTANTINOPLE
THE WALLS OF THE CITY AND ADJOINING HISTORICAL SITES
BY
ALEXANDER VAN MILLINGEN, M.A.
PROFESSOR OF HISTORY, ROBERT COLLEGE, CONSTANTINOPLE
WITH MAPS, PLANS, AND ILLUSTRATIONS
LONDON
JOHN MURRAY, ALBEMARLE STREET
1899
_All rights reserved_
Ἐγὼ δὲ ὧς μητέρα φιλῶ καὶ γὰρ ἐγενόμην πὰρ᾽ αὐτῇ καὶ ἐτράφην ἐκεῖσε,
καὶ οὐ δύναμαι περὶ αὐτὴν ἀγνωμονῆσαι.
EMPEROR JULIAN, _Epistle 58_.
PREFACE.
In the following pages I venture to take part in the task of identifying
the historical sites of Byzantine or Roman Constantinople, with the view
of making the events of which that city was the theatre more
intelligible and vivid. The new interest now taken in all related to the
Byzantine world demands a work of this character.
The attention I have devoted, for many years, to the subject has been
sustained by the conviction that the Empire of which New Rome was the
capital defended the higher life of mankind against the attacks of
formidable antagonists, and rendered eminent service to the cause of
human welfare. This is what gives to the archæological study of the city
its dignity and importance.
Only a portion of my subject is dealt with in the present volume—the
walls of the city, which were the bulwarks of civilization for more than
a thousand years, and the adjoining sites and monuments memorable in
history.
While availing myself, as the reader will find, of the results obtained
by my predecessors in this field of research, I have endeavoured to make
my work a fresh and independent investigation of the subject, by
constant appeals to the original authorities, and by direct examination
of the localities concerned. The difficult questions which must be
decided, in order that our knowledge of the old city may be more
satisfactory, have been made prominent. Some of them, however, cannot be
answered once for all, until excavations are permitted.
By the frequent quotations and references which occur in the course of
the following discussions, the student will find himself placed in a
position to verify the statements and to weigh the arguments submitted
to his consideration. All difference of opinion leading nearer to the
truth in the case will be welcomed.
My best thanks are due to the friends and the photographers who have
enabled me to provide the book with illustrations, maps, and plans, thus
making the study of the subject clearer and more interesting. The plan
of the so-called Prisons of Anemas by Hanford W. Edson, Esq., the
sketches by Mrs. Walker, the photographs taken by Professor Ormiston,
and the maps and plans drawn by Arthur E. Henderson, Esq., are
particularly valuable. I wish to express my gratitude also to the many
friends who accompanied me on my explorations of the city, thereby
facilitating the accomplishment of my work, and associating it with
delightful memories.
ALEXANDER VAN MILLINGEN.
Robert College,
Constantinople,
_September, 1899_.
CONTENTS
I. THE SITE OF CONSTANTINOPLE—THE LIMITS OF BYZANTIUM 1
II. THE CITY OF CONSTANTINE—ITS LIMITS—FORTIFICATIONS—INTERIOR
ARRANGEMENT 15
III. THE THEODOSIAN WALLS 40
IV. THE GATES IN THE THEODOSIAN WALLS—THE GOLDEN GATE 59
V. THE GATES IN THE THEODOSIAN WALLS—_continued_ 74
VI. REPAIRS ON THE THEODOSIAN WALLS 95
VII. THE PALACE OF THE PORPHYROGENITUS (TEKFOUR SERAI) 109
VIII. THE FORTIFICATIONS ON THE NORTH-WESTERN SIDE OF THE CITY, BEFORE
THE SEVENTH CENTURY 115
IX. THE WALL OF THE EMPEROR MANUEL COMNENUS 122
X. THE TOWER OF ANEMAS: THE TOWER OF ISAAC ANGELUS 131
XI. INMATES OF THE PRISON OF ANEMAS 154
XII. THE WALL OF THE EMPEROR HERACLIUS: THE WALL OF THE EMPEROR LEO THE
ARMENIAN 164
XIII. THE SEAWARD WALLS 178
XIV. THE WALLS ALONG THE GOLDEN HORN 194
XV. THE WALLS ALONG THE GOLDEN HORN—_continued_ 212
XVI. THE WALLS ALONG THE SEA OF MARMORA 248
XVII. THE HARBOURS ON THE SEA OF MARMORA 268
XVIII. THE HARBOURS ON THE SEA OF MARMORA—_continued_ 288
XIX. THE HEBDOMON 316
XX. THE ANASTASIAN WALL 342
TABLE OF EMPERORS 344
INDEX 349
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS.
MAP OF CONSTANTINOPLE IN 1422. (_By Bondelmontius_) _Frontispiece_
BUST OVER THE GATE OF GYROLIMNÈ xi
INSCRIPTION FROM THE STADIUM OF BYZANTIUM _To face_ 14
MAP OF BYZANTINE CONSTANTINOPLE “ 19
MAP OF THE LAND WALLS OF CONSTANTINOPLE “ 41
PORTION OF THE THEODOSIAN WALLS (BETWEEN THE GATE OF THE DEUTERON AND
YEDI KOULÈ KAPOUSSI) _To face_ 46
PORTION OF THE THEODOSIAN WALLS (FROM WITHIN THE CITY) “ 52
AQUEDUCT ACROSS THE MOAT OF THE THEODOSIAN WALLS “ 56
COIN OF THE EMPEROR THEODOSIUS II. “ 56
PLAN OF THE GOLDEN GATE “ 60
THE GOLDEN GATE (INNER) “ 64
THE GOLDEN GATE (OUTER) “ 68
YEDI KOULÈ KAPOUSSI “ 72
THE GATE OF THE PEGÈ “ 76
THE GATE OF RHEGIUM “ 78
THE GATE OF ST. ROMANUS 80
THE GATE OF CHARISIUS 80
VIEW ACROSS THE VALLEY OF THE LYCUS (LOOKING NORTH) 86
THE (SO-CALLED) KERKO PORTA 93
INSCRIPTIONS ON THE GATE OF RHEGIUM _To face_ 96
TOWER OF THE THEODOSIAN WALLS (WITH INSCRIPTION IN HONOUR OF THE
EMPERORS LEO III. AND CONSTANTINE V.) _To face_ 98
INSCRIPTION IN HONOUR OF THE EMPERORS LEO III. AND CONSTANTINE V. 99
MONOGRAMS ON NINTH TOWER, NORTH OF THE GATE OF PEGÈ 100
INSCRIPTION IN HONOUR OF THE EMPERORS BASIL II. AND CONSTANTINE IX. 101
INSCRIPTION IN HONOUR OF THE EMPEROR CONSTANTINE IX. 102
INSCRIPTION IN HONOUR OF THE EMPEROR ROMANUS 102
DIAGRAM SHOWING THE INTERIOR OF A TOWER IN THE THEODOSIAN WALLS _To
face_ 102
INSCRIPTION IN HONOUR OF THE EMPEROR JOHN VII. PALÆOLOGUS 105
DIAGRAM SHOWING APPROXIMATE SECTION AND RESTORATION OF THE THEODOSIAN
WALLS _Facing_ 106
DIAGRAM SHOWING APPROXIMATE ELEVATION AND RESTORATION OF THE THEODOSIAN
WALLS _Facing_ 107
SKETCH-PLAN OF THE BLACHERNÆ QUARTER _To face_ 115
THE PALACE OF THE PORPHYROGENITUS (SOUTHERN FAÇADE) _To face_ 110 THE
PALACE OF THE PORPHYROGENITUS (NORTHERN FAÇADE) _To face_ 111
MONOGRAM OF THE PALÆOLOGI 112
THE PALACE OF THE PORPHYROGENITUS (VIEW OF INTERIOR) _To face_ 112
MONOGRAM FOUND IN THE PALACE OF THE PORPHYROGENITUS 113
PLAN OF THE PALACE OF PORPHYROGENITUS, AND ADJOINING WALLS _To face_ 115
THE PALACE OF THE PORPHYROGENITUS (FROM THE WEST) 118
BALCONY IN THE SOUTHERN FAÇADE OF THE PALACE OF THE PORPHYROGENITUS _To
face_ 118
TOWER OF THE WALL OF THE EMPEROR MANUEL COMNENUS 122
THE PALÆOLOGIAN WALL, NORTH OF THE WALL OF THE EMPEROR MANUEL COMNENUS
_To face_ 126
THE GATE OF GYROLIMNÈ 126
GENERAL VIEW OF THE WALL OF THE EMPEROR MANUEL COMNENUS 128
PLAN OF THE SO-CALLED PRISON OF ANEMAS 131
THE L-SHAPED CHAMBER IN UPPER STORY OF “THE TOWER OF ANEMAS” 137
“THE TOWER OF ANEMAS” AND “THE TOWER OF ISAAC ANGELUS” (FROM THE
SOUTH-WEST) _To face_ 138
“THE TOWER OF ANEMAS” AND “THE TOWER OF ISAAC ANGELUS” (FROM THE
NORTH-WEST) _To face_ 144
VIEW OF THE INTERIOR OF “THE PRISON OF ANEMAS” (BEING THE SUB-STRUCTURES
WHICH SUPPORTED THE PALACE OF BLACHERNÆ) _To face_ 150
CHAMBER IN “THE PRISON OF ANEMAS” 156
ENTRANCE OF PASSAGE FROM THE STAIRWAY IN “THE TOWER OF ANEMAS” TO
CHAMBER D IN “THE TOWER OF ISAAC ANGELUS” _To face_ 162
CORRIDOR IN THE ORIGINAL WESTERN TERRACE WALL OF THE PALACE OF BLACHERNÆ
(LOOKING SOUTH-WEST) _To face_ 162
GENERAL VIEW OF THE WALLS OF THE CITY FROM THE HILL ON WHICH THE
CRUSADERS ENCAMPED IN 1203 _To face_ 166
INSCRIPTION IN HONOUR OF THE EMPEROR ROMANUS 169
INSCRIPTION IN HONOUR OF THE EMPEROR MICHAEL III. _To face_ 184
INSCRIPTION IN HONOUR OF THE EMPEROR MANUEL COMNENUS 187
COAT-OF-ARMS OF ANDRONICUS II. PALÆOLOGUS 189
BAS-RELIEF, ON THE TOWER EAST OF DJUBALI KAPOUSSI, REPRESENTING THE
THREE HEBREW YOUTHS CAST INTO THE FIERY FURNACE OF BABYLON, AS DESCRIBED
IN THE BOOK OF DANIEL 191
NIKÈ (FORMERLY NEAR BALAT KAPOUSSI) _To face_ 198
PORTION OF THE CHAIN STRETCHED ACROSS THE ENTRANCE OF THE GOLDEN HORN IN
1453 _To face_ 228
INSCRIPTION IN HONOUR OF THEODOSIUS II. AND THE PREFECT CONSTANTINE;_TO
FACE_ 248 INSCRIPTION IN HONOUR OF THE EMPEROR THEOPHILUS; _TO FACE_ 248
INSCRIPTION IN HONOUR OF THE EMPEROR ISAAC ANGELUS _To face_ 248
PORTION OF WALLS BESIDE THE SEA OF MARMORA 262
CHATEAU AND MARBLE TOWER NEAR THE WESTERN EXTREMITY OF THE WALLS BESIDE
THE SEA OF MARMORA _To face_ 266
MAP OF THE SHORE OF CONSTANTINOPLE BETWEEN THE SERAGLIO LIGHT-HOUSE AND
DAOUD PASHA KAPOUSSI _To face_ 269
MARBLE FIGURES OF LIONS ATTACHED TO THE BALCONY IN THE PALACE OF THE
BUCOLEON _To face_ 272
RUINS OF THE PALACE OF THE BUCOLEON 274
PORTION OF THE PALACE OF HORMISDAS 277
RUINS OF THE PALACE OF HORMISDAS _To face_ 282
TOWER GUARDING THE HARBOUR OF ELEUTHERIUS AND THEODOSIUS 297
PORTION OF THE WALL AROUND THE HARBOUR OF ELEUTHERIUS AND THEODOSIUS 299
MAP OF THE TERRITORY BETWEEN THE HEBDOMON AND THE CITY WALLS _To face_
316
TRIUMPHUS THEODOSII 330
TRIUMPHUS HERACLII 334
[Illustration: Bust Over the Gate of Gyrolimne.]
BYZANTINE CONSTANTINOPLE.
CHAPTER I.
THE SITE OF CONSTANTINOPLE—THE LIMITS OF BYZANTIUM.
Without attempting any elaborate description of the site occupied by
Constantinople, such as we have in Gyllius’ valuable work on the
topography of the city,[1] it is necessary to indicate to the reader,
now invited to wander among the ruins of New Rome, the most salient
features of the territory he is to explore.
The city is situated at the south-western end of the Bosporus, upon a
promontory that shoots out from the European shore of the straits, with
its apex up stream, as though to stem the waters that rush from the
Black Sea into the Sea of Marmora. To the north, the narrow bay of the
Golden Horn runs inland, between steep banks, for some six or seven
miles, and forms one of the finest harbours in the world. The Sea of
Marmora spreads southwards like a lake, its Asiatic coast bounded by
hills and mountains, and fringed with islands. Upon the shore of Asia,
facing the eastern side of the promontory, stand the historic towns of
Chrysopolis (Scutari) and Chalcedon (Kadikeui). The mainland to the west
is an undulating plain that soon meets the horizon. It offers little to
attract the eye in the way of natural beauty, but in the palmy days of
the city it, doubtless, presented a pleasing landscape of villas and
gardens.
The promontory, though strictly speaking a trapezium, is commonly
described as a triangle, on account of the comparative shortness of its
eastern side. It is about four miles long, and from one to four miles
wide, with a surface broken up into hills and plains. The higher ground,
which reaches an elevation of some 250 feet, is massed in two
divisions—a large isolated hill at the south-western corner of the
promontory, and a long ridge, divided, more or less completely, by five
cross valleys into six distinct eminences, overhanging the Golden Horn.
Thus, New Rome boasted of being enthroned upon as many hills beside the
Bosporus, as her elder sister beside the Tiber.
The two masses of elevated land just described are separated by a broad
meadow, through which the stream of the Lycus flows athwart the
promontory into the Sea of Marmora; and there is, moreover, a
considerable extent of level land along the shores of the promontory,
and in the valleys between the northern hills.
Few of the hills of Constantinople were known by special names, and
accordingly, as a convenient mode of reference, they are usually
distinguished by numerals.
The First Hill is the one nearest the promontory’s apex, having upon it
the Seraglio, St. Irene, St. Sophia, and the Hippodrome. The Second
Hill, divided from the First by the valley descending from St. Sophia to
the Golden Horn, bears upon its summit the porphyry Column of
Constantine the Great, popularly known as the Burnt Column and
Tchemberli Tash. The Third Hill is separated from the preceding by the
valley of the Grand Bazaar, and is marked by the War Office and adjacent
Fire-Signal Tower, the Mosque of Sultan Bajazet, and the Mosque of
Sultan Suleiman the Magnificent. The Fourth Hill stands farther back
from the water than the five other hills beside the Golden Horn, and is
parted from the Third Hill by the valley which descends from the
aqueduct of Valens to the harbour. It is surmounted by the Mosque of
Sultan Mehemet the Conqueror. The Fifth Hill is really a long
precipitous spur of the Fourth Hill, protruding almost to the shore of
the Golden Horn in the quarter of the Phanar. Its summit is crowned by
the Mosque of Sultan Selim. Between it and the Third Hill spreads a
broad plain, bounded by the Fourth Hill on the south, and the Golden
Horn on the north. The Sixth Hill is divided from the Fifth by the
valley which ascends southwards from the Golden Horn at Balat Kapoussi
to the large Byzantine reservoir (Tchoukour Bostan), on the ridge that
runs from the Mosque of Sultan Mehemet to the Gate of Adrianople. It is
distinguished by the ruins of the Palace of the Porphyrogenitus (Tekfour
Serai) and the quarter of Egri Kapou. Nicetas Choniates styles it the
Hill of Blachernae (βουνὸς τῶν Βλαχερνῶν),[2] and upon it stood the
famous Imperial residence of that name. The Seventh Hill, occupying the
south-western angle of the city, was known, on account of its arid soil,
as the Xerolophos—the Dry Hill.[3] Upon it are found Avret Bazaar, the
pedestal of the Column of Arcadius, and the quarters of Alti Mermer and
Psamathia.
Here, then, was a situation where men could build a noble city in the
midst of some of the fairest scenery on earth.
But the history of Constantinople cannot be understood unless the
extraordinary character of the geographical position of the place is
present to the mind. No city owes so much to its site. The vitality and
power of Constantinople are rooted in a unique location. Nowhere is the
influence of geography upon history more strikingly marked. Here, to a
degree that is marvellous, the possibilities of the freest and widest
intercourse blend with the possibilities of complete isolation. No city
can be more in the world and out of the world. It is the meeting-point
of some of the most important highways on the globe, whether by sea or
land; the centre around which diverse, vast, and wealthy countries lie
within easy reach, inviting intimate commercial relations, and
permitting extended political control. Here the peninsula of Asia Minor,
stretching like a bridge across the seas that sunder Asia and Europe,
narrows the waters between the two great continents to a stream only
half a mile across. Hither the Mediterranean ascends, through the
avenues of the Ægean and the Marmora, from the regions of the south;
while the Euxine and the Azoff spread a pathway to the regions of the
north. Here is a harbour within which the largest and richest fleets can
find a perfect shelter.
But no less remarkable is the facility with which the great world, so
near at hand, can be excluded. Access to this point by sea is possible
only through the straits of the Hellespont on the one side, and through
the straits of the Bosporus on the other—defiles which, when properly
guarded, no hostile navy could penetrate. These channels, with the Sea
of Marmora between them, formed, moreover, a natural moat which
prevented an Asiatic foe from coming within striking distance of the
city; while the narrow breadth of the promontory on which the city
stands allowed the erection of fortifications, along the west, which
could be held against immense armies by a comparatively small force.
As Dean Stanley, alluding to the selection of this site for the new
capital of the Empire, has observed: “Of all the events of Constantine’s
life, this choice is the most convincing and enduring proof of his real
genius.”
Although it does not fall within the scope of this work to discuss the
topography of Byzantium before the time of Constantine, it will not be
inappropriate to glance at the circuits of the fortifications which
successively brought more and more of this historic promontory within
their widening compass, until the stronghold of a small band of
colonists from Megara became the most splendid city and the mightiest
bulwark of the Roman world.
Four such circuits demand notice.
First came the fortifications which constituted the Acropolis of
Byzantium.[4] They are represented by the walls, partly Byzantine and
partly Turkish, which cling to the steep sides of the Seraglio plateau
at the eastern extremity of the First Hill, and support the Imperial
Museum, the Kiosk of Sultan Abdul Medjid, and the Imperial Kitchens.
That the Acropolis occupied this point may be inferred from the natural
fitness of the rocky eminence at the head of the promontory to form the
kind of stronghold around which ancient cities gathered as their
nucleus. And this inference is confirmed by the allusions to the
Acropolis in Xenophon’s graphic account of the visit of the Ten Thousand
to Byzantium, on their return from Persia. According to the historian,
when those troops, after their expulsion from the city, forced their way
back through the western gates, Anaxibius, the Spartan commander of the
place, found himself obliged to seek refuge in the Acropolis from the
fury of the intruders. The soldiers of Xenophon had, however, cut off
all access to the fortress from within the city, so that Anaxibius was
compelled to reach it by taking a fishing-boat in the harbour, and
rowing round the head of the promontory to the side of the city opposite
Chalcedon. From that point also he sent to Chalcedon for
reinforcements.[5] These movements imply that the Acropolis was near the
eastern end of the promontory.
In further support of this conclusion, it may be added that during the
excavations made in 1871 for the construction of the Roumelian railroad,
an ancient wall was unearthed at a short distance south of Seraglio
Point. It ran from east to west, and was built of blocks measuring, in
some cases, 7 feet in length, 3 feet 9 inches in width, and over 2 feet
in thickness.[6] Judging from its position and character, the wall
formed part of the fortifications around the Acropolis.
The second circuit of walls around Byzantium is that described by the
Anonymus of the eleventh century and his follower Codinus.[7] Starting
from the Tower of the Acropolis at the apex of the promontory, the wall
proceeded along the Golden Horn as far west as the Tower of Eugenius,
which must have stood beside the gate of that name—the modern Yali Kiosk
Kapoussi.[8] There the wall left the shore and made for the Strategion
and the Thermæ of Achilles. The former was a level tract of ground
devoted to military exercises—the _Champ de Mars_ of Byzantium—and
occupied a portion of the plain at the foot of the Second Hill, between
Yali Kiosk Kapoussi and Sirkedji Iskelessi.[9] The Thermæ of Achilles
stood near the Strategion; and there also was a gate of the city, known
in later days as the Arch of Urbicius. The wall then ascended the slope
of the hill to the Chalcoprateia, or Brass Market, which extended from
the neighbourhood of the site now occupied by the Sublime Porte to the
vicinity of Yeri Batan Serai, the ancient Cisterna Basilica.[10]
The ridge of the promontory was reached at the Milion, the milestone
from which distances from Constantinople were measured. It stood to the
south-west of St. Sophia, and marked the site of one of the gates of
Byzantium. Thence the line of the fortifications proceeded to the
twisted columns of the Tzycalarii, which, judging from the subsequent
course of the wall, were on the plateau beside St. Irene. Then, the wall
descended to the Sea of Marmora at Topi,[11] somewhere near the present
Seraglio Lighthouse, and, turning northwards, ran along the shore to the
apex of the promontory, past the sites occupied, subsequently, by the
Thermae of Arcadius and the Mangana.
If we are to believe the Anonymus and Codinus, this was the circuit of
Byzantium from the foundation of the city by Byzas to the time of
Constantine the Great. On the latter point, however, these writers were
certainly mistaken; for the circuit of Byzantium was much larger than
the one just indicated, not only in the reign of that emperor, but as
far back as the year 196 of our era, and even before that date.[12] The
statements of the Anonymus and Codinus can therefore be correct only if
they refer to the size of the city at a very early period.
One is, indeed, strongly tempted to reject the whole account of this
wall as legendary, or as a conjecture based upon the idea that the Arch
of Urbicius and the Arch of the Milion represented gates in an old line
of bulwarks. But, on the other hand, it is more than probable that
Byzantium was not as large, originally, as it became during its most
flourishing days, and accordingly the two arches above mentioned may
have marked the course of the first walls built beyond the bounds of the
Acropolis.
We pass next to the third line of walls which guarded the city, the
walls which made Byzantium one of the great fortresses of the ancient
world. These fortifications described a circuit of thirty-five
stadia,[13] which would bring within the compass of the city most of the
territory occupied by the first two hills of the promontory. Along the
Golden Horn, the line of the walls extended from the head of the
promontory to the western side of the bay that fronts the valley between
the Second and Third Hills, the valley of the Grand Bazaar. Three ports,
more or less artificial,[14] were found in that bay for the
accommodation of the shipping that frequented the busy mart of commerce,
one of them being, unquestionably, at the Neorion.[15]
These bulwarks, renowned in antiquity for their strength, were faced
with squared blocks of hard stone, bound together with metal clamps, and
so closely fitted as to seem a wall of solid rock around the city. One
tower was named the Tower of Hercules, on account of its superior size
and strength, and seven towers were credited with the ability to echo
the slightest sound made by the movements of an enemy, and thus secure
the garrison against surprise. From the style of their construction, one
would infer that these fortifications were built soon after Pausanias
followed up his victory on the field of Platæa by the expulsion of the
Persians from Byzantium.
These splendid ramparts were torn down in 196 by Septimius Severus to
punish the city for its loyalty to the cause of his rival, Pescennius
Niger. In their ruin they presented a scene that made Herodianus[16]
hesitate whether to wonder more at the skill of their constructors, or
the strength of their destroyers. But the blunder of leaving unguarded
the water-way, along which barbarous tribes could descend from the
shores of the Euxine to ravage some of the fairest provinces of the
Empire, was too glaring not to be speedily recognized and repaired. Even
the ruthless destroyer of the city perceived his mistake, and ere long,
at the solicitation of his son Caracalla, ordered the reconstruction of
the strategic stronghold.
It is with Byzantium as restored by Severus that we are specially
concerned, for in that form the city was the immediate predecessor of
Constantinople, and affected the character of the new capital to a
considerable extent. According to Zosimus, the principal gate in the new
walls of Severus stood at the extremity of a line of porticoes erected
by that emperor for the embellishment of the city.[17] There Constantine
subsequently placed the Forum known by his name, so that from the Forum
one entered the porticoes in question, and passed beyond the limits of
Byzantium.[18] Now, the site of the Forum of Constantine is one of the
points in the topography of the capital of the Eastern Roman Empire
concerning which there can be no difference of opinion. The porphyry
column (Burnt Column) which surmounts the Second Hill was the principal
ornament of that public place. Therefore the gate of Byzantium must have
stood at a short distance from that column. According to the clearest
statements on the subject, the gate was to the east of the column, the
Forum standing immediately beyond the boundary of the old city.[19]
The language of Zosimus, taken alone, suggests, indeed, the idea that
the gate of Byzantium had occupied a site to the west of the Forum; in
other words, that the Forum was constructed to the east of the gate,
within the line of the wall of Severus. For, according to the historian,
one entered the porticoes of Severus and left the old town, after
passing through the arches (δι᾽ ὧν) which stood, respectively, at the
eastern and western extremities of the Forum of Constantine. This was
possible, however, only if these various structures, in proceeding from
east to west, came in the following order: Forum of Constantine;
porticoes of Severus; gate of Byzantium. On this view, the statement
that the Forum was “at the place where the gate had stood” would be held
to imply that the porticoes between the Forum and the gate were too
short to be taken into account in a general indication of the Forum’s
position. But to interpret Zosimus thus puts him in contradiction,
first, with Theophanes, as cited above; secondly, with Hesychius
Milesius,[20] who says that the wall of Byzantium did not go beyond the
Forum of Constantine (οὐκ ἔξω τῆς ἐπωνύμου ἀγορᾶς τοῦ βασιλέως);
thirdly, though that is of less moment, with the Anonymus[21] and
Codinus,[22] who explain the circular shape of the Forum as derived from
the shape of Constantine’s tent when he besieged the city.
Lethaby and Swainson[23] place the Forum between the porticoes of
Severus on the east and the gate of Byzantium on the west, putting the
western arch of the Forum on the site of the latter. They understand the
statement of Zosimus to mean that a person in the Forum could either
enter the porticoes _or_ leave the old town according as he proceeded
eastwards or westwards.
From that gate the wall descended the northern slope of the hill to the
Neorion, and thence went eastwards to the head of the promontory.[24] In
descending to the Golden Horn the wall kept, probably, to the eastern
bank of the valley of the Grand Bazaar, to secure a natural escarpment
which would render assault more difficult.
Upon the side towards the Sea of Marmora the wall proceeded from the
main gate of the city to the point occupied by the temple of Aphrodite,
and to the shore facing Chrysopolis.[25] The temple of the Goddess of
Beauty was one of the oldest sanctuaries in Byzantium,[26] and did not
entirely disappear until the reign of Theodosius the Great, by whom it
was converted into a carriage-house for the Prætorian Prefect.[27] It
was, consequently, a landmark that would long be remembered. Malalas[28]
places it within the ancient Acropolis of the city. Other authorities
likewise put it there, adding that it stood higher up the hill of the
Acropolis than the neighbouring temple of Poseidon,[29] where it
overlooked one of the theatres built against the Marmora side of the
citadel,[30] and faced Chrysopolis.[31] From these indications it is
clear that the temple lay to the north-east of the site of St. Sophia,
and therefore not far from the site of St. Irene on the Seraglio
plateau.
Accordingly, the wall of Severus, upon leaving the western gate of the
city, did not descend to the shore of the Sea of Marmora, but after
proceeding in that direction for some distance turned south-eastwards,
keeping well up the south-western slopes of the First Hill, until the
Seraglio plateau was reached.[32] As these slopes were for the most part
very steep, the city, when viewed from the Sea of Marmora, presented the
appearance of a great Acropolis upon a hill.
Where precisely the wall reached the Sea of Marmora opposite Chrysopolis
is not stated, but it could not have been far from the point now
occupied by the Seraglio Lighthouse, for the break in the steep
declivity of the First Hill above that point offered the easiest line of
descent from the temple of Aphrodite to the shore. Thus it appears that
the circuit of the walls erected by Severus followed, substantially, the
course of the fortifications which he had overthrown. It is a
corroboration of this conclusion to find that the ground outside the
wall constructed by Severus—the valley of the Grand Bazaar—answers to
the description of the ground outside the wall which he destroyed; a
smooth tract, sloping gently to the water: “Primus post mœnia campus
erat peninsulæ cervicis sensim descendentis ad litus, et ne urbs esset
insula prohibentis.”[33]
To this account of the successive circuits of Byzantium until the time
of Constantine, may be added a rapid survey of the internal arrangements
and public buildings of the city after its restoration by Severus.[34]
A large portion of the Hippodrome, so famous in the history of
Constantinople, was erected by Severus, who left the edifice unfinished
owing to his departure for the West. Between the northern end of the
Hippodrome and the subsequent site of St. Sophia was the Tetrastoon, a
public square surrounded by porticoes, having the Thermæ of Zeuxippus
upon its southern side.
In the Acropolis were placed, as usual, the principal sanctuaries of the
city; the Temples of Artemis, Aphrodite, Apollo, Zeus, Poseidon, and
Demeter. Against the steep eastern side of the citadel, Severus
constructed a theatre and a Kynegion for the exhibition of wild animals,
as the Theatre of Dionysius and the Odeon were built against the
Acropolis of Athens.
At a short distance from the apex of the promontory rose the column,
still found there, bearing the inscription _Fortunæ Reduci ob devictos
Gothos_, in honour of Claudius Gothicus for his victories over the
Goths. To the north of the Acropolis was the Stadium;[35] then came the
ports of the Prosphorion and the Neorion, and in their vicinity the
Strategion, the public prison,[36] and the shrine of Achilles and
Ajax.[37] The aqueduct which the Emperor Hadrian erected for Byzantium
continued to supply the city of Severus.[38]
Nor was the territory without the walls entirely unoccupied. From
statements found in Dionysius Byzantius, and from allusions which later
writers make to ruined temples in different quarters of Constantinople,
it is evident that many hamlets and public edifices existed along the
shore of the Golden Horn, and in the valleys and on the hills beyond the
city limits. Blachernæ was already established beside the Sixth Hill;
Sycæ, famous for its figs, occupied the site of Galata; and the
Xerolophos was a sacred hill, crowned with a temple of Zeus.[39]
Footnote 1:
Petrus Gyllius, _De Topographia Constantinopoleos et De illius
Antiquitatibus_, liber i. c. 4-18.
Footnote 2:
Page 722. All references in this work to the Byzantine Authors, unless
otherwise stated, are to the Bonn Edition of the _Corpus Scriptorum
Historiæ Byzantinæ_.
Footnote 3:
Anonymus, lib. i. p. 20, in Banduri’s _Imperium Orientale_;
Constantine Porphyrogenitus, _De Cerimoniis Aulæ Byzantinæ_, p. 501.
Footnote 4:
Xenophon, _Anabasis_, vii. c. 1.
Footnote 5:
_Anabasis_, vii. c. 1.
Footnote 6:
Paspates, Βυζαντιναὶ Μελέται, p. 103. Mordtmann, _Esquisse
Topographique de Constantinople_, p. 5. All references to these
writers, unless otherwise stated, are to the works here mentioned.
Footnote 7:
Lib. i. p. 2; Codinus, pp. 24, 25. Ἤρχετο δὲ τὸ τεῖχος, καθὰ καὶ νῶν,
ἐπὶ τοῦ Βύζαντος ἀπὸ τοῦ πύργου τῆς Ἀκροπόλεως, καὶ διήρχετο εἰς τὸν
τοῦ Εὐγενίου πύργον, καὶ ἀνέβαινε μέχρι τοῦ Στρατηγίου, καὶ ἤρχετο εἰς
τὸ τοῦ Ἀχιλλέως λουτρόν. Ἡ δὲ ἐκεῖσε ἁψὶς, ἡ λεγομένη τοῦ Οὐρβικίου,
πόρτα ἦν χερσαία τῶν Βυζαντίων: καὶ ἀνέβαινεν εἰς τὰ Χαλκοπρατεῖα τὸ
τεῖχος ἕως τοῦ λεγομένου Μιλίου· ἦν δὲ κἀκεῖσε πόρτα τῶν Βυζαντίων
χερσαία: καὶ διήρχετο εἰς τοὺς πλεκτοὺς κίονας τῶν Τζυκαλαρίων, καὶ
κατέβαινεν εἰς Τόπους, καὶ ἀπέκαμπτε πάλιν διὰ τῶν Μαγγάνων καὶ
Ἀρκαδιανῶν εἰς τὴν Ἀκρόπολιν.
Footnote 8:
See below, p. 227.
Footnote 9:
The site of the Strategion may be determined thus: It was in the Fifth
Region of the city (_Notitia, ad Reg. V._); therefore, either on the
northern slope or at the foot of the Second Hill. Its character as the
ground for military exercises required it to be on the plain at the
foot of the hill. In the Strategion were found the granaries beside
the harbour of the Prosphorion (Constant. Porphyr., _De Cerim_, p.
699), near Sirkidji Iskelessi. At the same time, these granaries were
near the Neorion (_Bagtchè Kapoussi_), for they were destroyed by a
fire which started in the Neorion (_Paschal Chron._, p. 582).
Footnote 10:
The Chalcoprateia was near the Basilica, or Great Law Courts, the site
of which is marked by the Cistern of Yeri Batan Serai (Cedrenus, vol.
i. p. 616; cf. Gyllius, _De Top. CP._, lib. ii. c. 20, 21). Zonaras,
xiv. p. 1212 (Migne Edition), ἐν τῇ καλουμένῃ βασιλικῇ ἔγγιστα τῶν
Χαλκοπρατείων.
Footnote 11:
See below, p. 256.
Footnote 12:
See below, the size of city as given by Dionysius Byzantius.
Footnote 13:
_Anaplus_ of Dionysius Byzantius. Edition of C. Wescher, Paris, 1874.
Footnote 14:
Dion Cassius, lxxiv. 14; Herodianus, iii. 6.
Footnote 15:
Beside Bagtchè Kapoussi. See below, p. 220.
Footnote 16:
I. 1.
Footnote 17:
Page 96: Καὶ τὸ μὲν παλαιὸν εἶχε τὴν πύλην ἐν τῇ συμπληρώσει τῶν στοῶν
ἅς Σεβῆρος ὁ βασιλεὺς ᾠκοδομήσατο.
Footnote 18:
Zosimus, p. 96: Ἀγορὰν δὲ ἐν τῶ τόπῳ καθ᾽ ὅν ἡ πύλη τὸ ἀρχαῖον ἦν
οἰκοδομήσας, ... ἁψίδας δύο μαρμάρου προικοννησίου μεγίστας ἀλλήλων
ἀντίας ἀπέτυπωσε, δι᾽ ὧν ἔνεστιν εἰσιέναι εἰς τὰς Σεβῆρου στοὰς, καὶ
τῆς πάλαι πόλεως ἐξιέναι.
Footnote 19:
Theophanes, p. 42, speaking of the column, says it was set up ἀπὸ τοῦ
τόπου οὗ ἤρξατο οἰκοδομεῖν τὴν πόλιν, ἐπὶ τὸ δυτικὸν μέρος τῆς ἐπὶ
Ῥώμην ἐξιούσης πύλης.
Footnote 20:
_Fragm. Hist. Græc._, iv. p. 49.
Footnote 21:
I. p. 14.
Footnote 22:
Page 41.
Footnote 23:
_The Church of Sancta Sophia_, pp. 5, 9.
Footnote 24:
Zosimus, p. 96, Ἀπὸ δὲ τοῦ βορείου λόφου κατὰ τὸν ἴσον τρόπον, κατιὸν
ἄχρι τοῦ λιμένος ὅ καλοῦσι νεώριον, καὶ ἐπέκεινα μέχρι θαλάσσης ἥ
κατευθὺ κεῖται τοῦ στόματος δι᾽ οὗ πρὸς τὸν Εὔξεινον ἀνάγονται Πόντον.
Footnote 25:
_Ibid._, Τὸ δὲ τεῖχος διὰ τοῦ λόφου καθιέμενον ἦν ἀπὸ τοῦ δυτικοῦ
μέρους ἄχρι τοῦ τῆς Ἀφροδίτης ναοῦ, καὶ θαλάσσης τῆς ἀντικρὺ
Χρυσόπολεως.
Footnote 26:
_Paschal Chron._, p. 495.
Footnote 27:
Malalas, p. 345.
Footnote 28:
Page 292.
Footnote 29:
Hesychius Milesius, _Fragm. Hist. Græc._, iv. p. 149; Codinus, p. 6.
Footnote 30:
_Notitia, ad Reg. II._; _Paschal Chron._, p. 495.
Footnote 31:
Zosimus, p. 96.
Footnote 32:
As the Sphendonè of the Hippodrome was a construction of Constantine
the Great, the wall of Severus may, near that point, have stood higher
up the hill than is indicated on the Map of Byzantine Constantinople,
facing page 19.
Footnote 33:
Dionysius Byzantius. See Gyllius, _De Bosporo Thracio_, ii. c. 2; cf.
_ibid._, _De Top. CP._, i. c. 10.
Footnote 34:
_Paschal Chron._, pp. 494, 495; cf. Malalas, p. 345; _Notitia, ad Reg.
II._
Footnote 35:
_Notitia, ad Regiones, IV., V., VI._ In the first tower south of Saouk
Tchesmè Kapoussi, in the land wall of the Seraglio, is built a stone,
inscribed with archaic Greek letters, which probably came from the
Stadium. See _Proceedings of the Greek Literary Syllogos of
Constantinople_, vol. xvi., 1885, _Archæological Supplement_, p. 3.
Ἀπομά(χων) αἰχματ(ᾶν), σταδιοδ(ρόμων), ὁ τόπος ἄ(ρχεται).
Footnote 36:
Codinus, p. 76.
Footnote 37:
Hesychius Milesius, _Fragm. Hist. Græc._, iv. p. 149.
Footnote 38:
_Paschal Chron._, p. 619.
Footnote 39:
For buildings, etc., outside the limits of Byzantium, see _Anaplus_ of
Dionysius Byzantius; Gyllius, _De Bosporo Thracio_, ii. c. 2, c. 5;
Codinus, p. 30; Anonymus, iii. p 51.
[Illustration: Inscription from the Stadium of Byzantium. (From _Broken
Bits of Byzantium_, by kind permission of Mrs. Walker.)]