INMATES OF THE PRISON OF ANEMAS.
Michael Anemas, the first to occupy the prison, and from whom it
obtained its name,[542] was a descendant of Emir Abd-el-Aziz ben Omar
ben Choaib, known in Byzantine history as Courapas, and famous as the
defender of Crete, when Nicephoras Phocas wrested that island from the
Saracens, in the reign of Romanus II.[543]
Upon the return of the victorious troops to the capital, the Emir and
his family were carried to Constantinople to grace the triumph with
which the success of Nicephorus was celebrated. And as the vanquished
chief, his wives, his eldest son Anemas, and other members of his
family, all clothed in long white robes, passed along the triumphal way
in chains, the dignity of their demeanour attracted universal attention,
and produced a most favourable impression. To the credit of the
conquerors, be it said, the Emir was, thereafter, treated with all due
regard and generosity. He received a large estate in the neighbourhood
of the capital, and was allowed to end his days in peace, surrounded by
his friends, and unmolested on account of his faith. Had he seen his way
to renounce the creed of his fathers he would have been created a
senator.
His son Anemas embraced Christianity, entered the army of the Empire,
and took part in the war against the Russians during the reign of
Zimisces, when he distinguished himself by his bravery, and fell in
battle in personal encounter with Swiatoslaf, the Russian king.
A martial spirit continued to characterize the family in subsequent
generations, and was not least conspicuous in Michael Anemas and his
three brothers, the representatives of the race under Alexius Comnenus.
But they allowed themselves to become involved in a conspiracy against
that emperor, and upon the discovery of the plot were condemned to
imprisonment and the loss of their eyes.
To accompany the infliction of punishment with every circumstance that
could humiliate the criminal, and excite popular contempt and derision
was after the heart of those times. Accordingly, Michael Anemas and his
companions, attired in sacking, with their beards plucked out, their
heads shorn and crowned with the horns and the intestines of oxen and
sheep, were led forth, mounted sideways on oxen, and in this guise,
conducted first around the court of the Great Palace, and then along the
Mesè of the city, crowded with excited spectators. But the appearance of
the guilty men excited commiseration rather than ridicule. The agony of
Michael, as he implored to be put to death rather than to suffer
blindness, touched all hearts. Even Anna Comnena, who witnessed the
scene, and whose filial sentiments might have hardened her heart against
the conspirators, was so deeply affected that she determined to do all
in her power to save Michael from the cruel loss of his eyes. Finding
her mother, Anna brought her to the harrowing spectacle, certain it
would have the desired effect. The empress was overwhelmed to tears, and
hastening back to the palace, prevailed upon Alexius to spare the
prisoners’ sight. By this time the unhappy men were approaching the
Amastrianon, a public place where stood an arch on which was a
bas-relief representing two hands pierced by a spear. Once a criminal on
his way to execution passed that point he was beyond the reach of the
Imperial clemency. A few moments more, and the messenger of mercy sent
by Alexius would have been too late. But just before the doomed men
reached the fatal point, the order for the mitigation of their sentence
was delivered, and Anemas was simply imprisoned in the tower which was
to perpetuate his name. There he remained for a considerable period; but
at length was pardoned and set free.[544]
Before Anemas was released, another notable personage was committed to
the tower, Georgius, Duke of Trebizond, who attempted, in 1107, to
establish the independence of his province; as though to anticipate the
creation of the Empire of Trebizond in the thirteenth century.
He proved a refractory prisoner, venting his rage in unceasing
imprecations upon the head of his Imperial master. With the hope of
conciliating the rebel, he was repeatedly visited by his old friend, the
Cæsar Nicephorus Bryennius, the husband of Anna Comnena. For a long
time, however, all friendly overtures proved unavailing. But at last the
tedium of protracted confinement broke the prisoner’s spirit, and
induced him to submit; upon which he was liberated, and loaded with
wealth and honours.[545]
[Illustration: Chamber in “The Prison of Anemas.”]
The next inmate of the tower was the Emperor Andronicus Comnenus, of
infamous memory, upon his capture after his flight from the insurrection
which his vices and tyranny had provoked in the capital, in 1185. To
Andronicus imprisonment was no new experience, for already, during the
reign of Manuel Comnenus, he had been imprisoned twice elsewhere. On
both these occasions, however, he had succeeded in effecting his escape.
But the prison of Anemas was to prove his last, and he quitted it, only
to die at the hands of his infuriated subjects. On the eve of his
execution he was bound with chains about the neck and feet, like some
wild animal, and dragged into the presence of his successor, Isaac
Angelus, to be subjected to every indignity. He was reviled, beaten,
struck on the mouth; he had his hair and beard plucked, his teeth
knocked out, his right hand struck off with an axe, and then was sent
back to his cell, and left there without food or water or attention of
any kind for several days. When brought forth for execution, he was
dressed like a slave, blinded of one eye, mounted upon a mangy camel,
and led in mock triumph through the streets of the city to the
Hippodrome, amidst a storm of hatred and insult, seldom, if ever,
witnessed under similar circumstances in a civilized community. At the
Hippodrome he was hung by the feet on the architrave of two short
columns which stood beside the figures of a wolf and a hyena, his
natural associates. But neither his pitiable condition, nor his quiet
endurance of pain, nor his pathetic cry, “Kyrie Eleison, Why dost Thou
break the bruised reed?” excited the slightest commiseration. Additional
and indescribable insults were heaped upon the fallen tyrant, until his
agony was brought to an end by three men who plunged their swords into
his body, to exhibit their dexterity in the use of arms.[546]
In the course of the following century a different personage figured in
the history of the prison. This was Veccus, Chartophylax of St. Sophia
at the time of his confinement, and subsequently Patriarch of
Constantinople.[547] He incurred the displeasure of Michael Palæologus
by opposing the union of the Eastern and Western Churches, through which
the emperor hoped to secure the goodwill and assistance of the Pope in
maintaining the newly recovered throne of Constantinople. Before an
assembly convened to discuss the question in the presence of Michael,
Veccus, who had been appointed the spokesman of the opponents of the
Imperial policy on account of his abilities, denounced the Latins as
heretics with whom ecclesiastical communion was simply impossible. The
emperor resented the affront, but, unwilling to make it the official
ground of proceedings against the popular champion of orthodoxy, sought
other reasons for punishing him. Accordingly, he accused Veccus of
having thwarted the marriage which had been arranged between the
Princess Anna and the second son of the Kral of Servia; another of
Michael’s measures to make his position secure.
The charge had some foundation. For upon the completion of the
negotiations for the marriage, the bride-elect had started for her
destined home under the care of Veccus and of the Patriarch of
Constantinople. But when the party reached Berœa, Veccus, acting on the
private instructions of the empress, left Anna and the patriarch, and
pushed forward to investigate the character and manners of the people
among whom the princess was to cast her lot. The primitive and boorish
ways of the Servian Court did not commend themselves to Veccus, as a
suitable environment for a lady brought up in the palaces of
Constantinople. The splendour of the tent which Veccus occupied was lost
upon the Kral; while the eunuchs in the household of the Byzantine
princess shocked the sovereign’s unsophisticated mind. Pointing to the
wife of his elder son, simply attired, and busy spinning wool, the rough
monarch exclaimed, “That is how we treat our brides!” Nor was Veccus
more favourably impressed by other experiences. The embassy which the
Kral sent to welcome the bride-elect was robbed on the journey by
brigands; and the Byzantine envoys awoke one morning to find that all
their fine horses had been stolen during the night. Under these
circumstances, Veccus thought the wisest course was to conduct Anna back
to Constantinople;[548] and for this action Michael now saw fit to
prosecute him.
But the court which was appointed to try Veccus declined to judge a
priest in the service of the patriarch without that prelate’s orders;
and as such orders were not forthcoming, the trial could not proceed. At
this juncture, Veccus had an interview with the emperor and proposed,
for the sake of peace, to resign office and emoluments, and to go into
exile. Michael did not condescend a reply. Whereupon the Chartophylax,
fearing the worst, sought asylum in the Church of St. Sophia, and there
awaited the Imperial decision. He was soon summoned to appear again
before the emperor, the order being written in vermilion ink, as a mark
of esteem and a pledge of personal safety. But on the road to the palace
he was treacherously arrested, and carried off to the prison of Anemas
under charge of the Varangian guards.
With Veccus out of the way, Michael pushed the matter of the union of
the churches more hopefully, and in furtherance of the Imperial policy
caused a list of passages favourable to the orthodox character of the
Latin Church to be compiled from the writings of theologians of repute,
and submitted to the patriarch and his clergy for consideration. The
patriarch replied by presenting a list of counter passages, and the
situation remained what it had been before Veccus was imprisoned.
Thereupon the suggestion was made that the first list should be
forwarded to the cell of the Chartophylax. Such a man, it was urged,
would never alter his views unless convinced by reason. The suggestion
was adopted, and after reading the extracts, Veccus acknowledged that
the argument for the union of the Churches was stronger than he had
hitherto believed. His mind, however, he added, could not be satisfied
on the point at issue by the perusal of isolated passages, torn from
their connection, and he therefore begged permission to study the works
from which the extracts submitted to him had been taken, pleading as an
excuse that he was more versed in the writings of classic authors than
in patristic learning. Upon this he was released, and provided with the
books necessary for the full prosecution of his inquiries.
The result was that, ere long, he found himself in agreement with the
emperor, and the scheme for the union of the Churches was pursued with
renewed ardour. Delegates proceeded from Constantinople to the Council
assembled at Lyons, and there on June 29, 1274, the two great divisions
of Christendom were formally united. On the second day of June in the
following year Veccus was elevated to the patriarchal throne.[549]
It is natural to suspect that the prison of Anemas had a share in the
conversion of Veccus. But the historian Pachymeres ascribes the change
to candour of judgment and sincere love of the truth. Certain it is that
Veccus suffered for the views he adopted, and died twenty-five years
later in the prison of the Castle of St. Gregorius, near Helenopolis
(Yalova), a martyr to his convictions.[550]
The Tower of Anemas was probably also the prison to which the Despot
Michael was committed by Andronicus II. on the charge of treason. He had
been created Despot by Michael Palæologus, and was married to the
Princess Anna, above mentioned, after the failure of the Servian
marriage to which reference has been made. Upon her death, he fell into
disgrace at the Court for marrying a daughter of the Bulgarian king
Terter, the repudiated wife of the King of Servia. To this he added
treasonable offences, and was, therefore, confined with his wife and
children in the prison attached to the Great Palace. On attempting to
escape, he was removed to the prison at Blachernæ[551] for greater
security.
Another inmate of the prison of Anemas was Syrghiannes, a political
adventurer conspicuous for his intrigues during the struggle between
Andronicus II. and Andronicus III., taking sometimes the one side and
sometimes the other.
He had been immured elsewhere for five years on the charge of conspiracy
to assassinate the elder emperor, but in 1322, at the instance of John
Cantacuzene, then Grand Domestic, he was transferred to the Tower of
Anemas as a more tolerable place of confinement, in the hope of
conciliating him; and there he was permitted to receive visits from his
mother, and even to have his wife and children with him.[552] Ultimately
he was released, but the old spirit was too strong to be vanquished by
suffering or by kindness. He returned to a life of intrigue and
rebellion, and his career was closed by the hands of assassins.
Later in the century, members of the Imperial family were once more
imprisoned in the Tower of Anemas, under circumstances which afford a
vivid picture of an empire weakened by domestic feuds, and distracted by
the rival ambitions of foreign powers that were awaiting its
dissolution, and ready to appropriate its territories.
There John VI. Palæologus imprisoned his eldest son Andronicus, and
there, upon the escape of the latter, he was himself imprisoned with his
two younger sons, Manuel and Theodore.
Andronicus had been excluded from the succession to the throne, on
account, it is said, of his indifference to the financial straits of his
father, when the latter was detained at Venice for inability to meet the
demands of creditors. The disinherited prince, seeking an opportunity
for revenge, found a kindred spirit in a son of Amurath I., Saoudji, who
was jealous of his younger brother Bajazet, because he was the Sultan’s
favourite child. The two princes, bound by a common grievance, joined
forces to supplant their respective parents on the throne, and raised
the standard of revolt. Amurath crushed the rebellion with remorseless
severity, and after putting out the eyes of his own son, called upon the
emperor to punish Andronicus in the same manner. Andronicus was
consequently committed to the Tower of Anemas, along with his wife and
his son John, a child only five years old, and there he and his little
boy underwent the operation of being blinded. The cruel deed was,
however, performed so imperfectly that Andronicus recovered the use of
one eye, while his son suffered only from a squint. Two years were thus
passed in the tower, after which the prisoners were released, either
through the intervention of the Genoese, at the price of the concession
to them of the island of Tenedos, or in compliance with the demand of
Bajazet.
[Illustration: Entrance of Passage From The Stairway in “The Tower of
Anemas” To Chamber D In “The Tower of Isaac Angelus.” (For this view I
am indebted to the late Dr. Ledyard.)]
Free to act, Andronicus made terms both with the Sultan and the Genoese,
and relying upon their favour, suddenly appeared before the capital. As
the emperor and his son Manuel happened to be staying at the Palace of
the Pegè, outside the walls, they were easily captured, and upon the
surrender of the city they were, in their turn, sent, along with
Theodore, to the Tower of Anemas, “as Zeus cast his father Chronos and
his brothers Pluto and Poseidon into the nether world.”
[Illustration: Corridor in the Original Western Terrace Wall of the
Palace of Blachernæ (Looking South-West).]
Bajazet advised Andronicus to establish his position by putting the
prisoners to death, but to that depth of inhumanity the rebellious son
would not descend. Matters remained in this condition for two years, and
then the captives managed to escape. Precisely how they found their way
out of the tower is a question upon which authorities differ. According
to Phrantzes, it was by some deception practised on their Bulgarian
guards. Ducas ascribes the escape to the skill of a certain Angelus,
surnamed Diabolus, and known by the soubriquet of Diabol-angelus; but
whether the deliverance was effected through the angelic power or the
satanic cunning of the man, the historian is unable to decide.
Chalcocondylas says that the Imperial captives broke through the walls
of their dungeon with an iron tool, furnished by the servant who brought
their food. According to Venetian authorities, two ineffectual attempts
to save the emperor were made by Carlo Zen, on the condition that the
island of Tenedos would be granted to the Republic of Venice, thus
rescinding the concession of the island to the Genoese by Andronicus.
The first attempt, it is said, failed because the emperor refused to
escape without his sons; the second, owing to the detection of the plot
to deliver him.[553] Once out of prison, John Palæologus and his son
Manuel repaired to the Court of Bajazet, prevailed upon him to espouse
their cause, and so compelled Andronicus to surrender the throne.[554]
Thus the history of the Tower of Anemas reflects the civil broils, the
tyranny, the ecclesiastical dissensions, the political feebleness, and
the inability to withstand foreign aggression, which marked the decline
and fall of the Byzantine Empire.
Footnote 543:
Anna Comn., xii. pp. 161, 162.
Footnote 544:
See Schlumberger, _Un Empereur Byzantin au Dixième Siècle_, chap. ii.,
for a brilliant account of the conquest of Crete by Nicephoras Phocas
in 962; cf. Leo Diaconus, _Historia_, lib. i. et ii.
Footnote 545:
Anna Comn., xii. pp. 153-161.
Footnote 546:
_Ibid._, pp. 161-164.
Footnote 547:
Nicetas Chon., pp. 452-458.
Footnote 548:
Pachymeres, vol. i. pp. 374-403.
Footnote 549:
For the account of the mission to Servia, see Pachymeres, vol. i. pp.
350-355.
Footnote 550:
For the circumstances attending the imprisonment of Veccus, see
Pachymeres, vol. i. pp. 374-403.
Footnote 551:
Pachymeres, vol. ii. p. 270.
Footnote 552:
Pachymeres, vol. ii. pp. 304, 396, 408, 409, where the prison is
styled ταῖς κατὰ τὰς Βλαχέρνας εἱρκταις.
Footnote 553:
Cantacuzene, i. pp. 171, 172; ii. pp. 329-332, 457.
Footnote 554:
Langier, _Histoire de la République de Venise_, vol. iv. pp. 251, 253.
Footnote 555:
The history of the imprisonment of these Imperial personages is found
in Phrantzes, pp. 49-57: Ducas, pp. 43-46: Chalcocondylas, pp. 40-46,
51, 60-64.