BYZANTINE
111
BYZANTINE
Sicily. In 1185, at the command of King William II
of Si.ily. Thessalonica was reduced to ashes. To the
north, the outlook was no brighter. The Byzantine
State was successful, it is true, in keeping the Serbs
in nominal subjection, and in entering into diplomatic
and family relations with the royal family of Hun-
gary, but the Bulgarians finally broke loose from
Byzantine control. In HS(i they established their
new kingdom at Tirnovo, with an autocephalous
archbishopric. Soon after this they began once more
to push farther to the west and thus laid the founda-
tion of their present ethnographic homes in Thrace
and Macedonia.
These heavy reverses, however, were counter- balanced by successes; at the same time it was of great moment that this period marked the beginning of that great movement of the West towards the East, the Crusades. The Byzantine Empire derived great advantage from this', and in some respects fully realized the fact. Even the First Crusade brought about two important results: the victory of the cm saders at Dorykcum 1 1 097) brought "the western part of Asia Minor directly under Byzantine control, and Antioch indirectly, through the oath of fealty exacted of Bohemund (1108); the Second Crusade, during which the Emperor Manuel allied himself with the Emperor Conrad III (1149). neutralized the power of the Italian Normans, Manuel now conceived far-reaching plans. He avenged King Roger's incursion into central Greece (1147) by the recapture of Corfu (1149i and the occupation of Aneona (1151), in this way becoming a factor in Italo-German complications. He actually dreamed, as Justinian and Constans II had, of re-establishing the Roman Empire of the West. These ambitious demands found no favour with the popes, with whom, since the quarrel about the Norman possessions in South Italy, under the Patriarch Michael Cerularius (10.54), a final rupture had taken place. Thus the urn lei taking resulted in failure. Great offence had been given to the emperor Frederick Barbarossa, which became manifest when he allied himself with the Seljuk Turks and the Sultan of Egypt.
Byzantium also reaped great advantage from the lishment of the principalities of the crusaders in Syria. The invasion of the East by the rm also brought n . inch grew constantly more
menacing. Even before this the constant and mani- fold intercourse be! ipire and tin- Italian maritime states, a- well as the settlement of the Amal- fians, Pisans. Genoese, anil Venetians in Byzantine cities, had involved many inconveniences. It is true that the victory over the Normans in the campaign of 1081-85 was gained with the aid of the Veni
1126 war was in progress with Venice. The commercial republics of Italy grew constantly more arrogant, demanding trading privileges as payment for aid rendered bj them, and ret iliating tor any slights by hostile invasions. It was only the rivalries
Ol the Italian Cities that enabled the Byzantn
maintain their supremacy in their own country. As a matter of fact, the Italians had Ions; regarded the empire merely and SO it was in-
bli ili it the hatred of the Greek nation should be slowly gathering strength. Even the spirit of
dministration had long since become Western - ■ in Emperor Manuel lived like a Western knight
twice married European princesses -when it became ' the pent-up hatred must
break forth. The crisis cam" after the death of
. during thi cond wife.
Maria of Antioch. and with frightful results. At tin head of the movement was a man wholly devoid of principle, but of great personal charm and m ism. This was Vadronicus the Liberator [Hi I
at that time about sixty-seven years of age. The movement began (1182) with the appalling slaughter
of the Latins; Andronicus was placed on the throne
(1183), and in 1184 the young Emperor Alexin- was
assassinated. The Latins, however, took a terrible
vengeance. In 11S5 Dyrrachium and soon after-
wards Thessalonica were captured amid frightful
cruelties. These disasters reacted on the capital.
The Byzantines were no longer able to uphold their
independence, and a counter-revolution was inau-
gurated. The aged Andronicus was beheaded, and
the first of the Angeli, Isaac II (11S5-95. and again
1203-04), ascended the throne. We know how the
difficulties between Isaac and his elder brother
Alexius III (1195-1203) resulted in an appeal by
the dethroned emperor to his brother-in-law. Philip
of Swabia, and how, owing to various circumstances,
the Fourth Crusade was turned against Constanti-
nople. The Fourth Crusade ended this period of
Byzantine history; the empire was in ruins, out of
which, however, deft hands contrived to build up a
new Byzantine State, and a feeble reproduction of
the former magnificence.
(6) The D, , . I iSS.
Theodore I. Lascaris Frederick II of Hohenstaufen
Constantino Irene John III, Ducas Vatatzes Anna
Theodore II, Lascaris
John IV. Lascaris
Michael VIII, Palxologus
Andronicus II
I
Michael I
John '\ I, Cantacuzene Andronicus III Anne of Savoy
John V
Andronicus IV Manuel II
I I
John VII John VIII
I Constantine XI
The fact that there had been no regular order of succession made the Byzantine throne the focus of numerous dissensions. It is undeniable, however, that this often redounded to the advantage of the inasmuch as military and palace revolutions frequently brought tin' most capable men to the head of affairs at a decisive' moment. The sentiment in favour of dynastic succession, however, had been gaining ground under the so-called Macedonian dynasty. The views of Constantine Porphyrogenitus furnish clear evidence of thi-: a prool even stronger
is the touching devotion exhibited by the people
towards Zoe and Theodora, t'ne last representatives of that dynasty. Still the last period of Byzantine history thrice witnessed the accession of men outside the regular line of succession. John III, Vatatzes (1222 his brother-in-law, Constantine,
thus becoming tic immedi i of Theodore
1 .in- \ military revolution placed Michael VIII,
PabeologUS (1259 82), at the head of the State, in place iii tiie child John IV, I i- 59).
John VI, Cantacuzene (1341 55) contrived to obtain
ion of the sovereign power under similar
circumstances. It m oi John Vatatzes and
'i el Palajologus that event e I the
interruption of the order of succession. But the elevation of John Cantacuzene must be counted, like
